The Kings and Their Hawks: Falconry in Medieval England 9780300130386

In medieval Europe, falconry was perhaps the most popular form of hunting among the aristocracy. Owning a falcon, and th

223 45 1MB

English Pages 282 [267] Year 2008

Report DMCA / Copyright


Table of contents :
1. The Sources
2. The Birds, Their Training, and the Sport of Falconry
3. Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England
4. English Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II
5. English Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III
6. Falconry in the Reign of Edward I
7. Falconry in Medieval Life
Appendix: Royal Falconry Expenditures, 1234–1307
Recommend Papers

The Kings and Their Hawks: Falconry in Medieval England

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

The Kings and Their Hawks


The Kings and Their Hawks FA L C O N RY I N M E D I E VA L E N G L A N D

Yale University Press New Haven & London

Frontispiece: Owner, falconer, and groom, Flemish, end of fifteenth century, Hours; Add. MS 35315, fol. 4; London: British Library. By permission of the British Library.

Copyright ∫ 2004 by Yale University. All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press), without written permission from the publishers. Set in Sabon type by Keystone Typesetting, Inc. Printed in the United States of America by Sheridan Books. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Oggins, Robin S., 1931– The kings and their hawks : falconry in medieval England / Robin S. Oggins. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0-300-10058-2 (alk. paper) 1. Falconry—England—History—To 1500. 2. Great Britain—Kings and rulers—Recreation. I. Title. sk321.o44 2004 799.2%32%09420902—dc22 2004046950 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. The paper in this book meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

To Ginny and Jimmy


List of Illustrations ix Acknowledgments xi Introduction xv 1

The Sources 1


The Birds, Their Training, and the Sport of Falconry 10


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England 36


English Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II 50


English Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III 64


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I 82


Falconry in Medieval Life 109 Appendix: Royal Falconry Expenditures, 1234–1307 139 List of Abbreviations 145 Notes 149 Bibliography 199 Index 239 vii


Frontispiece: Owner, falconer, and groom.

Figures in text Fig. 1: Fig. 2: Fig. 3: Fig. 4: Fig. 5: Fig. 6: Fig. 7: Fig. 8: Fig. 9: Fig. 10: Fig. 11: Fig. 12: Fig. 13: Fig. 14: Fig. 15:

Falconer swimming to aid his bird. 19 Taking young birds from an eyrie. 20 Preparing food for and feeding a young bird. 23 Seeling a falcon. 24 Spraying and bathing hooded falcons. 26 Training a falcon to the lure. 28 Recalling a falcon. 29 Hawking at duck. 31 Two women crane hawking. 33 Falconry as the occupation of October, English. 45 Duke William carrying a hawk brought by Harold. 48 Thanking St. Nicholas for his gift of dowries: the first bridegroom. 113 A physician leaves for a hawking holiday. 114 The gentleman. 116 Angel feeding a falcon. 134




Color Plates follow page 112 Plate 1: Plate 2A: Plate 2B: Plate 3: Plate 4: Plate 5: Plate 6: Plate 7A: Plate 7B: Plate 7C: Plate 7D: Plate 8:

Familiarizing the falcon indoors. Familiarizing the falcon outdoors: riding across the Grand Pont. Flying a falcon at a duck. A courtly picnic with falcons. A falconry party. Leaving for a solitary hunt. Man carrying a falcon. Falconer-monkey carrying an owl and riding a goat. Sinners and sinning bishops with falcons. Falconry as the occupation of May, 12th century. Falconry as the occupation of May, 14th century. The Three Living and the Three Dead.


Over the years many people have contributed to this work, particularly in sending me references and, in some cases, reading and making comments. My thanks to Baudouin Van den Abeele, Gunilla Åkerström-Hougen, George Anastaplo, Mary-Jo Arn, Erich Awender, M.D., Ilana Ben-Abend, Steven Blowney, Daniel Boorstin, Lewis Braithwaite, Norman Cantor, Kent Carnie, Justin Clegg, Carroll Coates, Virginia Cole, Bob Crofoot, Kay Crofoot, Evangelos Dousmanis, Juliana Dranichak, Mrs. J. R. Drury, Robert Dunning, John Ertle, Katherine Ertle, Hans Fellner, Walter Fontane, José Manuel Fradejas Rueda, Mira Friedman, Ernst Gamillscheg, Robert Halliday, Bert Hansen, W. O. Hassall, Michelle Hearne, Rosalind Hill, Steven Hobbs, Grace Houghton, Judith Jesch, Gail Kaliss, Edward Kaplan, Martin Kauffmann, Anne Marshall, Brendan McConville, Heinz Meng, Jan Norris, Cy Oggins, Jean Oggins, Ruthie Oggins, Zoja Pavlovskis-Petit, Christopher Pickles, James Ramsey, Eleanor Schiefele, Deborah Schmidle, Jim Seed, Ted Silverstein, Helen Smith, George Stein, Kristy Stonell, Jim Sullivan, Paul Szarmach, Linda Voigts, and Irving Zupnick. My thanks also to the following institutions: the Binghamton University Libraries; the Bodleian Library; the British Library; the Canons’ Library, Durham; the University of Chicago Libraries; the Cleveland Museum of Art; the Cornell University Libraries; the University of Durham Library; the Hampshire




Record Office; the Institute for Historical Research, London; the Library of King’s College, London; the University of London Library; the Pierpont Morgan Library; the Public Record Office, London; the Library of Sion College; the Library of University College, London; the office of the Victoria County History of Somerset; and the Widener Library. I am grateful for permission to reprint material from the following copyrighted works: Excerpts from Adelard of Bath, Conversations with His Nephew: On the Same and the Different, Questions on Natural Science, and On Birds, edited and translated by Charles Burnett, with the collaboration of Italo Ronca, Pedro Mantas España, and Baudouin van den Abeele, reprinted with the permission of Cambridge University Press. Earlier versions of chapter 3 and of part of chapter 7, published as Robin S. Oggins, ‘‘Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England, Mediaevalia 7 (1981): 173–208, and Robin S. Oggins, ‘‘Falconry and Medieval Social Status,’’ Mediaevalia 12 (1989 for 1986): 43–55, permission by courtesy of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies (successor to Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies), Binghamton University, State University of New York. Excerpts from Mira Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes in the Art of the Middle Ages and Renaissance’’: English Summary of Hebrew Text, vol. 2 (Ph.D. dissertation, Tel Aviv University, 1978), reprinted by permission of Mira Friedman. Excerpts from Robin S. Oggins and Virginia Darrow Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers: The Prosopography of a Branch of the English Royal Household,’’ Medieval Prosopography 3:1 (Spring, 1982): 63–94, reprinted by permission of Medieval Institute Publications. Excerpt from Richard Fitz Nigel, Dialogus de scaccario: The Course of the Exchequer, edited and translated by Charles Johnson, with corrections by F. E. L. Carter and D. E. Greenaway, copyright 1983 by the Clarendon Press, reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press. Excerpt from ‘‘The Parliament of the Three Ages,’’ in John Gardner, The Alliterative Morte Arthure, copyright 1971 by Southern Illinois University Press, reprinted by permission. Excerpts from Frederick II of Hohenstaufen, The Art of Falconry, translated and edited by Casey A. Wood and F. Marjorie Fyfe, ∫ 1943 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University, renewed 1970. Used with the permission of Stanford University Press, Excerpts from The Poems of the Troubadour Bertran de Born, edited by William D. Paden Jr., Tilde Sankovitch, and Patricia H. Stäblein, copyright



1986 The Regents of the University of California, reprinted by courtesy of the University of California Press. My travel has been facilitated by grants from the Binghamton Faculty Awards Committee, from the State University of New York, and by two United-University-Professions-sponsored awards. My thanks also to Dean Jean-Pierre Mileur for a grant to help subsidize the cost of illustrations and to the Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies at Binghamton for a variety of different kinds of assistance. A special note of thanks to my editors, Lara Heimert, Keith Condon, Margaret Otzel, and Julie DuSablon for their unfailing assistance, and to Yale University Press’s two readers, for their helpful and perceptive comments. My greatest obligations are to the dedicatees: to the late James Lea Cate, who provided me with the topic, and to my wife Virginia—collaborator, traveling companion, computer guru, editor, proofreader, and muse.


This work began as a doctoral dissertation under the late James Lea Cate at the University of Chicago. About a week before my preliminary orals I met with Mr. Cate and he asked me, ‘‘Well, boy’’ (I was thirty), ‘‘have you picked a dissertation topic yet?’’ I answered, ‘‘No sir, but I’d like to do something on twelfth- or thirteenth-century England.’’ ‘‘Well,’’ he said, ‘‘about twenty years ago I started to do work on English royal falconry, but there was too much to do for an article, so I’ve been saving it as a dissertation topic for some student with an imagination.’’ I left his office stunned. I had only the vaguest ideas about falconry at the time and couldn’t tell a falcon from a hawk or, for that matter, a hawk from a handsaw. Time has shown just how good a topic I had been given. I began by focusing on the birds and the sport but soon found that the men who flew and cared for the kings’ birds were also important and interesting. From there the topic expanded to include social attitudes, religious symbolism, and artistic imagery. In a way the study of falconry has provided me with a series of windows into the medieval world. The main subjects of this book are the sports of falconry and hawking and the men who kept, trained, carried, and (often) flew the royal falcons and hawks. The kings enter into the picture because our main sources are royal records and because the personal tastes in sport of individual kings were




manifested in royal expenditure. This is not a book about hunting except insofar as falconry and hawking are considered branches of hunting. In falconry and hawking, the training of the bird is an essential feature of the sport. Hunting dogs also have to be trained, but a successful hunt can occur with imperfectly trained dogs; a successful falcon hunt, at least to the expert eye, requires a well-trained bird. In hunting the hunter often kills the prey; in falconry and hawking, the bird does. Contemporaries were certainly aware of the differences, as can be seen from a number of literary debates between falconers and hawkers as to which was the nobler sport. On the other hand medieval kings probably did not reflect much on the differences. When they felt like hunting, and the season and conditions were right, they hunted; when they felt like hawking, they hawked. There was even some overlap between members of the hunting and falconry establishments. However, to try to sort out the similarities and differences would require an altogether different kind of book. My own feeling is that falconry and hunting were based on the same human desires and instincts, followed roughly similar patterns of development, and were manifested in generally comparable ways. But, like all other human activities, each developed its own techniques and rituals; and to lump falconry and hunting together is to obscure some of the essential characteristics of each. The dissertation was based on printed sources, but a year working at the Public Record Office (PRO) and the British Library made me realize how rich the surviving manuscript sources were. The section on royal falconry effectively ends with the reign of Edward I. While I was working at the PRO there was no completed itinerary for Edward II, and hence many records of the latter’s reign were undated. I did look at the dated records, however, and found that the essential aspects of English royal falconry were fully developed under Edward I and that later material added little to the overall picture.


The Sources

Primary sources for the history of medieval English falconry fall into two main categories: literature devoted to falconry and governmental records. Falconry literature provides information on the birds used and their training, while governmental records supply material on actual practice. A wide range of additional sources supplement English records and the literature of falconry and supply fuller information on the role the sport played in medieval life. Such auxiliary material includes literary works, works of art, and ecclesiastical records—sources too varied to be reviewed in a systematic way. In this chapter I shall discuss contemporary treatises on falconry and English governmental records in which material on falconry can be found. Other sources of information will be noted in the course of subsequent chapters.

The Literature of Falconry No tradition of writings on falconry existed in the ancient Western world because falconry as such was unknown in antiquity.∞ This lack of a literary tradition may well explain why early writings on falconry are practical, concerned largely with treatments for ailments of hawks. The earliest manuscript identified so far, the ‘‘Anonymous of Vercelli,’’ dates from the mid-tenth century. A second eleventh-century text, Grimaldus’s Liber accipitrum, probably



The Sources

harks back to a Carolingian original. The number of extant works from the twelfth century increases substantially. Baudouin Van den Abeele suggests this increase is due to greater contact with the Islamic world. He lists eight surviving texts of the time connected with falconry. Two are by men identified as falconers, Guillelmus Falconarius and Gerardus Falconarius; two are attributed to doctors, Grisofus Medicus and Alexander Medicus, and another was credited to Hippocrates. Of the remaining works, one was supposedly written by a legendary King Dancus of Armenia; a second took the form of an apocryphal letter written by Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion to a King Ptolemy of Egypt; and the last was by the only author in the group identifiable historically, the Englishman Adelard of Bath.≤ While some of these twelfth-century treatises contain valuable material on falconry in general, others are largely veterinary in content. Some of the cures recommended in these compilations border on the fanciful. Adelard of Bath, for example, proposes as a cure for rheum feeding a hawk meat soaked in the excrement of an unweaned boy, and for mites, the powdered tooth of a hanged man. Daude de Pradas, writing in the next century, suggests feeding a weak hawk the flesh of a blind puppy, sprinkling it with baked lizard dust to speed up moulting, and, to stop a hawk’s shrieking, feeding it a bat stuffed with pepper.≥ Gerardus Falconarius favors spells to keep the bird safe: ‘‘When the bird’s first feathers appear, the falconer is to say, ‘The birds are under Thy feet.’ When the falconer lifts the bird from the perch in the morning he says, ‘The evil man binds; the Lord, by his coming, loosens.’ To ward off eagles one says, ‘The lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, conquers; Hallelujah.’ ’’∂ Even when remedies seem straightforward—herbs, spices, the flesh of various animals—their application was sometimes determined by the then current philosophy of humors: Dancus Rex, for example, suggests different remedies for black falcons, which are melancholic, white falcons, which are phlegmatic and dry, and red falcons, which are sanguine. This is not to criticize medieval veterinary medicine as a whole—or even the works in which the more extreme nostrums appear. At their worst, contemporary remedies have been characterized by Hans Epstein as ‘‘obviously nonsensical abracadabra methods of exquisite torture and blatant quackery.’’∑ But some of the proposed remedies are still being used by modern falconers, and, as Van den Abeele observes, ‘‘very little research has been made on the effectiveness of the plants and therapeutical substances prescribed.’’∏ In any case, it is impossible to determine whether remedies suggested in the treatises were actually used by English royal falconers, though a few of the recommended substances, bought presumably to treat sick birds, do appear in governmental accounts. A number of significant developments in the literature of falconry occur

The Sources


in the thirteenth century. The first surviving vernacular work on falconry— Daude de Pradas’s Dels auzels cassadors—is written at that time, and several earlier Latin works on falconry are translated into the vernacular. These include an anonymous Anglo-Norman poem that is a partial translation of Adelard’s ‘‘De avibus tractatus.’’π The first recorded translations were made of Arabic works on falconry—those attributed to ‘‘the Arab Moamin’’ and ‘‘the Persian Ghatrif.’’ The thirteenth-century encyclopedists Alexander Neckam, Bartholomaeus Anglicus, Thomas of Cantimpré, Vincent of Beauvais, Albertus Magnus, and Brunetto Latini included sections on falcons in their works. Last, the emperor Frederick II wrote his monumental De arte venandi cum avibus—‘‘The Art of Hunting with Birds.’’∫ The encyclopedists put falconry into a broader perspective than earlier writers—generally as part of a larger section on birds. Thomas of Cantimpré, Vincent of Beauvais, Albertus Magnus, and Brunetto Latini all drew on material from the twelfth-century treatises, particularly the letter of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion that contained a section on various kinds (‘‘genera’’) of hawks and falcons.Ω Some birds mentioned by thirteenth-century authors clearly correspond to modern varieties; others are more difficult to identify. Several of the authors also included information on the training and diet of hawks and on the skills needed by the falconer. Early in the fourteenth century the Bolognese jurist Pietro Crescenzi wrote about falconry in a narrower context, including a book on hunting and fishing in his treatise on agriculture Ruralium commodorum libri XII.∞≠ In general during the later Middle Ages works on falconry were oriented practically— representing aspects of what Hugh of St. Victor called the mechanical sciences rather than the liberal arts.∞∞ The number of works on falconry written in vernacular languages increased greatly, together with a broadening of the audience for such works. Several works on falconry were written by or credited to nobles, for example, the Libro de la caza of Prince Juan Manuel and ‘‘Prince Edward’s Book of Hawking.’’ But in the same period (ca. 1394) a prosperous middle-class Parisian writing a book of instruction for his recently married young bride included within it a section on hawking.∞≤ In this chapter I shall discuss mainly those pre-fourteenth-century authors whose works have been particularly helpful, either because their works have some connection with England—as in the cases of Adelard of Bath, Alexander Neckam, Bartholomaeus Anglicus, and Daude de Pradas—or because the works represent attempts based on observation rather than authority to describe the hawks and falcons of Europe or the art of falconry as practiced throughout the West. In this second category fall Frederick II’s De arte venandi and the section on falcons in Albertus Magnus’s De animalibus.


The Sources

Adelard of Bath (b. ca. 1080) traveled in Spain, North Africa, and the Norman Kingdom of Sicily before he settled in England and wrote his work on falconry. Among his other works were treatises on the abacus and the astrolabe; a translation of Euclid from the Arabic; and the ‘‘Quaestiones naturales,’’ a dialogue between Adelard and his nephew in seventy-six chapters, each of which treats a scientific question, the whole purporting to expound Arabic knowledge on these questions. Adelard’s treatise on falconry is in the same dialogue form as the ‘‘Quaestiones.’’ It is short and in the main is concerned with diseases of goshawks and their cures. It contains a description of the proper characteristics of the falconer; mentions in passing the perch, mews, and hawker’s glove; and tells how a hawk should be taken from the perch. Adelard cites as one of his sources ‘‘the books of King Harold,’’ raising the possibility of a still earlier English falconry treatise.∞≥ Other twelfth-century treatises on falconry include the works of Dancus Rex, Guillelmus Falconarius, and Gerardus Falconarius, all of whom may have been associated with the Norman court in Sicily. Like Adelard’s work, all three treatises deal mainly with diseases of falcons and hawks. Dancus and Guillelmus also list different ‘‘kinds’’ of falcons and include material on contemporary falconry, not all of it practical. Guillelmus, for example, describes how to train lanners to hunt cranes, a procedure involving keeping four lanners in a ditch, letting them see light only when they feed, bathing them in wine, and flying them before daybreak.∞∂ The works according to Epstein constitute a possible bridge between Adelard and Frederick II: ‘‘It seems probable, therefore, that all three treatises belong to an Anglo-Norman tradition of falconry (exemplified by Adelard of Bath’s work . . . ), which in turn harks back to a more primitive, indigenous Germanic hawking tradition as illustrated by some of the early Germanic laws. In Sicily this earlier Norman tradition, gradually infused by Arabian and Persian influences, then led to the unique flowering of the art of falconry under Frederick II.’’∞∑ By far the most important work written on falconry in the Middle Ages was the De arte venandi cum avibus of Frederick II of Hohenstaufen. Frederick II (1194–1250) was emperor of Germany and king of the Norman kingdom of Sicily: he conducted the first successful crusade since the First Crusade, achieving his aims by negotiation rather than by conquest. He was an excellent administrator, lawgiver, soldier, and diplomat, a major patron of learning and the arts, an early practitioner of the experimental method, and, as can be seen in the De arte venandi, a first-rate naturalist. It is no wonder that contemporaries called him ‘‘stupor mundi’’—‘‘the wonder of the world.’’∞∏ Frederick states that he had considered writing a work on falconry for thirty years, ‘‘to correct the many errors made by our predecessors who, when writing on the

The Sources


subject, degraded the noble art of falconry by slavishly copying the misleading and often insufficient statements to be found in the works of certain hackneyed authors.’’∞π Because of the length of time in its preparation, the De arte venandi is assigned to the last part of Frederick’s life (ca. 1244–48). In writing his work Frederick consulted the standard classical authorities, had the works of several Arabic falconers translated for his use, and (in his own words), ‘‘at great expense, summoned from the four quarters of the earth masters in the practice of the art of falconry. We entertained these experts in our own domains, meantime seeking their opinions, weighing the importance of their knowledge, and endeavoring to retain in memory the more valuable of their words and deeds.’’ But despite this extensive use of both literary and practical sources, the De arte venandi was primarily based on Frederick’s own observations and experiments: ‘‘We have investigated and studied with the greatest solicitude and in minute detail all that relates to this art [falconry], exercising both mind and body so that we might eventually be qualified to describe and interpret the fruits of knowledge acquired from our own experiences or gleaned from others. . . . We discovered by hard-won experience that the deductions of Aristotle . . . were not entirely to be relied upon, more particularly in his descriptions of the characters of certain birds.’’∞∫ The Arab falconers whom Frederick invited to Sicily brought with them the falcon’s hood. Frederick not only adopted it, but improved it. Other customs, such as the use of live birds for luring, he did not adopt; but in the De arte venandi he describes such customs and gives his reasons for not using them. In Haskins’s words, his work ‘‘is a book of the open air, not of the closet.’’∞Ω Frederick was clearly familiar with English falconry practices. One of his falconers was named Walter Anglicus; another, Master Lambert, was in England in 1228; and when Frederick married the sister of Henry III of England, two of Henry’s falconers took falcons to Frederick. In one section of the De arte venandi Frederick notes a peculiarly English way of recalling falcons to the lure. One can only regret that he did not live to finish his work.≤≠ Frederick’s contemporary Daude de Pradas was a Provençal poet and churchman who wrote a long treatise on falconry in the form of a poem. While much of Daude’s work was based on works of others, some sections, particularly those on hawks, merlins, and kestrels, contain material not found elsewhere. Daude mentions using a book ‘‘of King Henry of England who loved hawks and dogs more than any other Christian did.’’ Haskins suggested that Daude’s Henry might have been Henry II; and this appears reasonable both chronologically and in terms of Henry’s character—particularly since the book may have belonged to Henry rather than have been written by him.≤∞ The last authors to be considered here are the encyclopedists Alexander


The Sources

Neckam, Bartholomaeus Anglicus, and Albertus Magnus. Alexander Neckam (1157?–1217) was born in England, studied at Paris, returned to England in the 1180s, taught at Dunstable and St. Albans, was associated with Oxford, and late in life became abbot of Cirencester. His works include an encyclopedia, the De naturis rerum, in which the section on falcons contains allusions to Isidore of Seville, Hector, Ajax, and Alexander the Great and is of almost no value. However, his treatise De utensilibus includes information on the keeping of birds of prey on a perch in a bedroom and therefore is worthy of note.≤≤ Bartholomaeus Anglicus (fl. 1230–50) was a Franciscan friar who was born in England and lived at Oxford, Paris, and Magdeburg. Much of Bartholomaeus’s work is said to be out of date by thirteenth-century standards. He himself described his De proprietatibus rerum as ‘‘a simple and rude compilation’’ written for ‘‘young scholars and the general reader.’’ Some of the treatise, however, was based on his own observation. This is evident in Bartholomaeus’s short chapter on the hawk, which is part of a book on the creatures of the air. The chapter is concise and accurate and contains information on the natural behavior and training of hawks and on the social aspects of hawking; it concludes with a wry but appropriate comment: ‘‘All the while they are alive and are strong and mighty to take their prey, they are beloved of their lords, and borne on hands, and set on perches, and stroked on the breast and on the tail, and made plain and smooth, and are nourished with great business and diligence. But when they are dead, all men hold them unprofitable and nothing worth, and be not eaten, but rather thrown out on dunghills.’’≤≥ Albertus Magnus (1193?–1280) was a Dominican whose scholarly objective was to write commentaries on all of Aristotle’s works and to write works of his own on a number of subjects Aristotle did not cover. The result was a tremendous outpouring of work, filling thirty-eight volumes in the Borgnet edition. Albertus’s discussion of falcons makes up roughly half of a book describing birds. Much of the material on falconry is drawn from other authors, particularly Symmachus, Dancus Rex, and Gerardus Falconarius. As a result, Albertus’s work tends to be underrated: Harting, for example, calls it a ‘‘crude compilation’’ that ‘‘shows the author to have been but imperfectly acquainted with the subject.’’ While this may be true of Albertus’s sections on hawk medicine, it is not true of his descriptions of falcons, which are far more detailed than those in the works he cites and appear to be based largely on Albertus’s own observations. Rather than a ‘‘crude compilation,’’ therefore, his descriptions constitute an important account of the birds used in falconry in thirteenth-century Europe.≤∂

The Sources


Governmental Records The governmental records of England (the ‘‘public records’’) that relate to falconry include such diverse materials as Anglo-Saxon charters, laws, Domesday Book, and Edward I’s letters to one of his falconers. These records go back to around the beginning of the seventh century, though the first surviving records to provide a year-by-year account of English royal administration—the Pipe Rolls—appear only in the twelfth century. The Pipe Rolls were the records of the Exchequer, one of three royal financial organizations in the twelfth century, along with the Treasury and the Camera Curie. The Exchequer’s main business was to audit accounts of royal financial agents. The most important of these agents were the sheriffs, but others included bailiffs, stewards, and men in charge of vacant bishoprics or lands that had reverted to the crown. But while a good deal of royal income was audited at the Exchequer, by no means all was; and an even smaller proportion of total expenditure was paid out by those who accounted. If, for example, a sheriff was ordered to pay wages to royal falconers, the amount appeared in that year’s Pipe Roll, but if the falconers were paid out of the king’s household accounts (the Camera Curie), the payment would not have been recorded in any source that has survived.≤∑ The earliest surviving Pipe Roll is that of 31 Henry I, covering the period from Michaelmas (September 29) 1129 to Michaelmas 1130. The next roll we have is that of 2 Henry II (1155–56); after which, with one or two gaps, the Pipe Rolls continue down to the nineteenth century. The Pipe Rolls are virtually our only sources of information for royal expenditure on falconry for the reigns of Henry II and Richard. Corresponding to the English Exchequer was a Norman Exchequer that issued its own Pipe Rolls. Henry II and Richard I both spent a good deal of time in France, and substantial falconry expenses were recorded on the Norman Pipe Rolls. Unfortunately few of these rolls have survived.≤∏ At the beginning of John’s reign a major development in royal record keeping occurred. As far back as Anglo-Saxon times English kings had issued written commands and charters, but the royal chancery made no systematic effort to keep records of the ‘‘writs’’ it sent out. ‘‘In the twelfth century it became necessary to make duplicate copies of many of these writs called contra brevia, which were kept on files. Finally, in the first year of King John, by a change which was in effect a revolution, the occasional procedure of making contra brevia was superseded by the making of systematic copies of all out-letters of importance.’’≤π Such copies were preserved in several different


The Sources

series. The Charter Rolls contained royal grants of lands and privileges and confirmations of previous grants. The Patent Rolls contained copies of royal letters patent—formal letters (though less formal than royal charters) issued unfolded with a wax impression of the royal seal pendant from the document. These letters included some grants, royal letters of protection, and other documents that might have to be shown to officials and others: for example, the man who summoned keepers of royal hawks was issued a letter patent. The Close Rolls were enrollments of copies of letters close—letters folded and ‘‘closed’’ by the Great Seal: in Galbraith’s words, ‘‘the routine orders of the central government to local officials.’’≤∫ The Liberate Rolls contained royal orders to the Treasurer involving expenditure issued under the Great Seal: they included orders to make payments, such as wages to falconers, and orders to allow for payments made by royal officials, such as payments by sheriffs for birds bought for the king. The Fine or Oblata Rolls recorded payments tendered to the king in the hope of receiving privileges or grants. Such payments might include offerings of hawks and falcons. Finally, two other types of record give important information about the royal household during John’s reign. The Misae Rolls provide almost a day-to-day record of household expenditure for periods for which they are extant, while the Praestita Rolls record payments made to various royal servants. Both Exchequer and Chancery were originally administrative branches of the king’s household that gradually developed into separate departments. While this expansion was going on, the Household developed new branches to handle its own work. The most important of these during the thirteenth century was the Wardrobe, which Tout has called ‘‘the chief administrative, directive, financial, secretarial and sealing department of the household.’’≤Ω The Wardrobe received payments from the Exchequer, collected some revenues, and negotiated loans. It was responsible for payments of household expenses and hence for most payments made for royal falconry. As in the case of other departments, the Wardrobe produced its own records. From early in the reign of Henry III (with some gaps), totals of Wardrobe expenditure for household departments were kept in accounts enrolled in various records—generally Pipe Rolls or Chancellor’s Rolls. During Henry’s reign the number of original Household and Wardrobe records increases, and there is a virtual explosion of such records in the reign of Edward I. Surviving Household and Wardrobe records increase from 3 in John’s reign, to around 125 for Henry III, and to over 3,000 for Edward. These records include orders for payment, journals of expenditure, and yearly accounts for various departments, including expenses for falconry and hunting. By the last decade of Edward I’s reign, the Wardrobe was typically producing an annual volume for accounting at the Exchequer

The Sources


that reported in detail its expenditures during the regnal year. The main impetus for the increase in number of surviving records was no doubt a desire for more accurate accounting procedures, but a new form of record—the book, in addition to the roll—also was a factor, as was the general financial confusion of Edward’s last years. In those years Edward was fighting an expensive war in Scotland and was deeply in debt. In some years the record-keeping process was unfinished, and consequently many intermediate internal documents, some marked with cancellation lines, have survived. Many of these documents are fragmentary, some have not been dated, and gaps exist. Nevertheless, the surviving records provide the fullest records of royal falconry for the reign of any medieval English king.≥≠ The most important sources of information about the landholdings and obligations of royal hawkers≥∞ and falconers are the various inquests taken by English kings. These include Domesday Book and the Book of Fees, which contains inquests, dating from 1198 to 1293, into fees and serjeanties held of the king. Another inquest with useful information on falconry serjeanties is the Rotuli de dominabus (1185), a survey of assets of widows and wards in Henry II’s hands. The Hundred Rolls provide a fourth source of information: they derive from an inquest taken in 1274–75 ‘‘concerning certain rights, liberties, and other matters affecting us and our estates’’ in the course of which information was compiled about the holdings and duties of a number of royal hawkers and falconers. From the reign of Henry III on, inquests called Inquisitions post mortem were made into the holdings of the king’s deceased tenantsin-chief. These tenants included falconers and hawkers holding land by serjeanty tenure, and the inquests not only provide essential information about the holdings and relationships of royal falconers and hawkers but contain material on the practice of falconry and the organization of the royal falconry establishment. So much for the major sources on which the following chapters will be based. Let us now turn to the sport of falconry itself.


The Birds, Their Training, and the Sport of Falconry

Many kinds of birds of prey have been trained and used in sport, but relatively few of these were used by English kings. The main varieties used before 1307 were the gyrfalcon, peregrine, lanner, goshawk, and sparrowhawk; the saker, hobby, and merlin were used far less frequently. The birds flown fell into two groups, falcons and hawks—a distinction fundamental among raptors. As Frederick II wrote, ‘‘Every bird utilized by the falconer in hunting should be classified as either a falcon or a hawk.’’∞ The differentiation was based on three interrelated sets of factors: physical differences, particularly the length and shape of wings; differences in normal styles of flight; and differences in how falcons and hawks capture prey.≤ These differences were reflected in the kinds of sport the birds provided, in training methods, and in differences in the care of birds. The basic physical difference between falcons and hawks lies in the length and shape of their wings and tails. Falcons have narrow pointed wings and narrow tapering tails. The wing- beats of the falcon are moderately rapid and regular—the French call falcons ramiers, or rowers, because of the resemblance of their flight to sculling. The hawks used in medieval Europe— goshawks and sparrowhawks—have shorter, rounder wings than falcons, and a relatively longer tail. They have a gliding flight broken at intervals by three or


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


four wing beats, and they frequently soar with wings spread and tail fanned out—hence their French name of voiliers, or sailors.≥ As a result of these physical differences, the hunting styles of falcons and hawks vary considerably. Falcons typically attack by diving or ‘‘stooping’’ from a considerable height. If the stoop is successful, the falcon hits its prey with tremendous speed: in the case of the peregrine, this may reach over two hundred miles per hour. The prey is struck with a blow from the talons and the first blow alone is often fatal. As Albertus Magnus wrote: The characteristic act of a falcon among raptorial birds is to fall with force on its prey. . . . When it wishes to take game, it is in the nature of the falcon to ascend with a swift flight and with its talons held close to its breast, to fall with force on the bird with so powerful an effort that in descending it sounds like a raging wind, and it makes this attack not by descending directly or perpendicularly, but at an angle: because striking after such a descent it inflicts a long wound with its claws so that sometimes a bird falls split from head to tail, and sometimes it is found with its whole head torn off.

Hawks, on the other hand, usually approach their quarry at a low altitude and fly it down with a quick burst of speed. ‘‘In fact, the hawk is called accipiter, and also astur from its natural adroitness [astus], because it almost always stays hidden and flies close to the ground, contrary to the manner of falcons, and when it takes a bird, it seizes it [accipit] from below as if whirling around on itself.’’∂ Rather than hitting the prey and returning to pick it up, as falcons do, hawks grab or clutch their prey, usually killing by driving their talons into the victim’s body and holding on until the creature is dead, though they may also kill with a stroke of the beak. While both falcons and hawks have strong feet, the feet of hawks are particularly well developed for holding and killing. As Fuertes noted, ‘‘The feet of the goshawk are veritable engines of death, with enormous talons and great strength. Whereas a falcon’s foot is more like a fist to deliver a terrible blow, the short-wing’s feet are like great ice-tongs with semicircular claws nearly an inch long, which enter the very vitals of the quarry and kill as tough a creature as a rat or hare in a few seconds and take the life of any bird almost instantly.’’∑ The differences between falcons and hawks in structure and mode of attack lead to differences in the types of sport they provide. Because of their style of attack, falcons hunt most effectively in open country. Hawks, on the other hand, can be flown in brush or wooded country where falcons cannot, since the broad wings and long tails of hawks allow them to cruise at low altitudes and maneuver quickly.∏


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

Among both falcons and hawks the female is generally larger and stronger than the male. Consequently the female is more frequently used in hunting, since she can bring down larger, more active prey. Male birds are called ‘‘tiercels,’’ possibly because they were believed to be one-third smaller than females. The male sparrowhawk is a ‘‘musket.’’ Other special names are given to hunting birds at different stages of development. The nestling is called an ‘‘eyas’’ or ‘‘nyas.’’ The young bird that has left its nest and taken to nearby branches is called a ‘‘brancher’’ or ‘‘ramage’’ hawk or falcon. A hawk of the first year—before its first moult in the following year—is a ‘‘sore hawk’’ or ‘‘sore falcon,’’ from the French sor or saure, meaning red or sorrel-colored, since the feathers before the moult usually have a reddish tinge. Hawks or falcons caught on migration before their first moult are ‘‘passage’’ hawks or falcons; wild hawks or falcons caught after their first migration are called ‘‘haggards.’’π The gyrfalcon was the most highly valued falcon flown by English kings. According to Frederick II, gyrfalcons were the best birds for hunting and took first place among falcons ‘‘out of respect for their size, strength, audacity and swiftness.’’ Daude de Pradas considered the gyrfalcon the fastest and most resourceful bird of its size, and Guillelmus Falconarius called it the boldest falcon and the one that fought best against large birds such as cranes and wild geese. Albertus Magnus thought the gyrfalcon had ‘‘the perfect nature of the falcon in appearance, color, action and voice,’’ but ranked it after the saker in his list of ‘‘noble falcons.’’∫ The gyrfalcon, Falco rusticolus, ranges in length from 50 to 63 cm, with a wingspan of 105–31 cm; the weight of the female ranges from 1.13 to 2.1 kg, that of the tiercel from 800 g to 1.32 kg.Ω Gyrfalcons, particularly white and gray birds, were sent and received as royal gifts.∞≠ By and large gyrfalcons commanded the highest prices paid for birds of prey. Four of the five most expensive English royal purchases were gyrfalcons, and almost two-thirds of recorded purchases of gyrfalcons were for more than £2, at a time when a knight’s annual income could be as low as £20. Gyrfalcons also received the highest food and light allowances of any falcons—normally 2d. a day when away from court.∞∞ When medieval writers used the word ‘‘gyrfalcon’’ without qualifying it further they were probably referring to what was formerly called the ‘‘Norway’’ gyrfalcon, the smallest, darkest, and most common of the three European phases of gyrfalcon—the other two being the gray or ‘‘Iceland’’ and the white or ‘‘Greenland’’ gyrfalcon. Of these, the white was considered most valuable—Frederick II noted that among gyrfalcons ‘‘the rare white varieties from remote regions are the best.’’ In Henry I’s reign Outi of Lincoln owed the king one hundred gyrfalcons of which six were to be white; and when Edward

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


I sent four gray gyrfalcons to his brother-in-law Alfonso X of Castile in 1282, he felt it necessary to explain that he had at present no white gyrfalcons to send. When both white and gray gyrfalcons were received in royal gifts, there were invariably fewer white birds and white gyrfalcons were always mentioned first.∞≤ Though the white gyrfalcon has been called the ‘‘Greenland’’ gyrfalcon, the white gyrfalcons that came to England probably were not brought directly from Greenland. When Haakon IV of Norway sent Henry III three white and ten gray gyrfalcons in 1225, he wrote that his fowlers had spent two years in Iceland searching for birds for Henry. In another letter Haakon wrote that he was sending Henry some gyrfalcons (color unspecified) and would send him more when Haakon’s messenger returned with birds from Iceland. When Edward I wanted white gyrfalcons for his brother-in-law he sent messengers to Norway.∞≥ Indeed, Greenlanders may not have been aware of the value of their white gyrfalcons. The thirteenth-century Konungs Skuggsjá contains a description of the animal life of Greenland in which white falcons are mentioned: ‘‘There are also many large hawks in the land, which in other countries would be counted very precious,—white falcons, and they are more numerous there than in any other country; but the natives do not know how to make any use of them.’’ English records do not mention falcons from Greenland: they refer only to ‘‘white gyrfalcons.’’ It is possible that the white gyrfalcons sent to England did not come from Greenland at all. As Swann points out, ‘‘The Greenland Falcon . . . as a straggler in winter . . . is familiar in many sections in the northern parts of the Old and New Worlds,’’ and it may have been such stragglers to Iceland and Norway that were caught and sent to England.∞∂ Frederick II writes, ‘‘Gerfalcons are fledged in or near the most distant parts of the seventh climatic zone. . . . Some of them are brooded on the high cliffs of the Hyperborean territory, particularly on a certain island lying between Norway and Greenland, called in Teutonic speech Iceland (Yslandia). The name indicates that it is covered often by ice. These falcons are the best birds for hunting.’’ Gyrfalcons from Iceland appear several times in English records, but their color is not specified. The gray gyrfalcons recorded were probably ‘‘Iceland’’ gyrfalcons.∞∑ Gyrfalcons were most frequently used to hunt cranes and herons, though they were also flown at duck. Frederick II calls the gyrfalcon ‘‘the crane falcon par excellence,’’ but goes on to note that ‘‘she is very easily taught to hunt everything that any other falcon can chase and with greater facility and swiftness since she excels in courage, power, and speed.’’ On three recorded occasions gyrfalcons were flown at hares, probably as part of their training.∞∏ The peregrine falcon was also frequently used by English kings, though it is


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

called ‘‘falcon gentle’’ or sometimes simply ‘‘falcon’’ in the records. Frederick II rated the peregrine with the best of the gyrfalcons, but other writers on falconry place it somewhat lower: Albertus Magnus ranks the peregrine fourth after the saker, gyrfalcon, and ‘‘mountain falcon,’’ and Daude de Pradas calls the peregrine ‘‘a noble bird worth training,’’ but finds it superior only to the lanner among the larger birds.∞π The peregrine falcon, Falco peregrinus, ranges in length from 35 to 51 cm, with a wingspan of 79–114 cm; females weigh from 740 g to 1.3 kg, males from 550 to 750 g. English kings seem to have valued the peregrine below the gyrfalcon and the best of the goshawks, but above the lanner. The highest price I have found paid for a peregrine is £5, with most birds costing between £1 and £2. In Edward I’s reign the food allowance for ‘‘falcons gentle’’ was generally a penny a day. In John’s reign the fee for mewing a falcon gentle was one mark (13s. 4d.), the same for mewing a gyrfalcon.∞∫ While peregrines nested in England and young falcons were taken for the kings’ use, birds were also bought abroad, generally in Flanders. Frederick II found the special preserve of the peregrine to be hunting shore birds or water fowl (especially duck) and devoted an entire book to ‘‘Hunting at the Brook with the Peregrine Falcon.’’ The English kings used peregrines most frequently to hunt herons, but they were also flown at cranes, duck, and rooks.∞Ω The third species of falcon used fairly extensively in England was the lanner, a bird some contemporaries called ‘‘ignoble.’’ Frederick II finds the lanner not as strong, swift, or bold as the other falcons he compares it to; lanners require longer training and ‘‘more easily become shirkers and more readily acquire other bad habits.’’ He notes, however, that the lanner’s flight at heron is very similar to that of the gyrfalcon, and in some respects the lanner is more skilled in attacking heron than the peregrine. Albertus states that the lanner, by good training, can be taught to hunt and catch powerful birds.≤≠ The lanner, Falco biarmicus, ranges in length from 39 to 48 cm, with a wingspan of 88–113 cm; females weigh 970 g to 1.3 kg, males, 730–950 g. Lanners were clearly the least valued falcons regularly used by English kings. Lanners received only ∞⁄≤d. as a daily food allowance, and the fee for mewing a lanner in John’s reign was only 10s. When price comparisons can be made, lanners invariably cost less than falcons gentle.≤∞ Today the lanner is a Mediterranean bird, but in the thirteenth century its range extended much farther north. According to Frederick II, lanners bred in climate zones from northern Germany to North Africa. In the second half of the fourteenth century Pero López de Ayala writes of lanners breeding in Norway, Germany, France, and Spain, and in 1405 John Gerveys was given a license to buy lanners and lannerets in Ireland. Indeed, in the thirteenth cen-

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


tury the lanner seems to have nested in Britain: an entry in the Close Rolls for 1236 mentions the lanner falcons of Windsor Forest; an extent of 1275 records a brood of lanners on Lundy Island, in the mouth of Bristol Channel; in 1285 two falconers sent to Wales to capture lanners brought back seven birds, and there is a 1304–5 record of nets used in Norfolk and Suffolk to capture lanners and falcons gentle. The shift in range was probably due to the major climate change that occurred in Europe around 1300, with the coming of a little ice age. It could be significant that a second inquest of Lundy taken in 1322 does not mention lanners.≤≤ Lanners were generally used to hunt herons, but were also flown at cranes, partridges, rooks, crows, and magpies, and were flown at least once a riveare.≤≥ Of other falcons mentioned above, I have found only one reference to the saker in England before 1307, though it was highly thought of by Frederick II, who believed that the saker nested in Britain. The saker, Falco cherrug, ranges in length from 47 to 57 cm, with a wingspan of 97–126 cm; the female weighs 970 g to –1.3 kg, the male, 730–950 g.≤∂ Hobbies are mentioned several times: William de Bréause sent Edward I two hobbies for larks, and Edward sent a falconer to capture hobbies for his use. The Northern or Eurasian hobby, Falco subbuteo, ranges in length from 28 to 34 cm and has a wingspan of 68– 84 cm; females weigh 141–340 g, males, 131–232 g.≤∑ The merlin is described as nesting both in Britain and Ireland, but royal use of this bird is recorded only once. The merlin, Falco columbarius, ranges in length from 24 to 32 cm and has a wingspan of 53–73 cm; the female weighs 164–300 g, the male, 125–234 g.≤∏ At the top levels of society, in England as in the Empire, the merlin and the hobby may (in Frederick’s words) have been used ‘‘rarely and only for amusement.’’ This was probably not the case farther down the social scale. Both the hobby and the merlin are mentioned in sections on hawk medicine in a commonplace book written between 1272 and 1282 by or for a member of a Worcestershire gentry family and in a late-thirteenth-century treatise on hawk medicine that Paul Meyer identifies as having been written in England. Gace de la Buigne writes of hobbies, merlins, and muskets as birds with which children may learn falconry.≤π Both goshawks and sparrowhawks were flown by English kings. The Northern goshawk, Accipiter gentilis, ranges in length from 46 to 63 cm and has a wingspan of 89–122 cm; females weigh 820 g to 2.2 kg, males, 517 g to 1.11 kg. The Northern or Eurasian sparrowhawk, Accipiter nisus, ranges in length from 28 to 40 cm and has a wingspan of 56 to 78 cm; the female weighs 185–350 g, the male, 105–96 g. Symmachus ranked the goshawk higher, while Daude de Pradas described the relationship between the two birds in chivalrous terms: ‘‘Goshawks and sparrowhawks are, as it were, princes and


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

knights.’’≤∫ In England, goshawks were more highly valued. Prices for goshawks were higher than those for sparrowhawks; goshawks received greater provision and lighting allowances; and men who mewed goshawks for a fee in Edward I’s reign received 20s. per year, while those who mewed sparrowhawks received only 10s.≤Ω White goshawks were particularly esteemed, and a premium may have been placed on goshawks from Scandinavia. Such a premium would seem to bear out Frederick II’s view: ‘‘As a rule, all rapacious birds born in the seventh climatic zone and still farther north are larger, stronger, more fearless, more beautiful, and swifter than the southern species.’’ Goshawks were flown mainly at duck, though pheasants, partridges, and rooks were also hunted, and there is non-English evidence for goshawks being flown at herons and even at cranes.≥≠ In some medieval romances the sparrowhawk is given a higher status than the goshawk. The chivalric sparrowhawk was considered the truer representative of a ‘‘noble sport,’’ and the sparrowhawk appears as a prize for valor on a number of occasions. Dalby notes that in Germany ‘‘the goshawk was used principally by the lower classes [lower gentry and burghers], with a view to obtaining food as well as sport, [though] not altogether shunned by the nobility.’’ Sparrowhawks were especially used to hunt teal.≥∞ The main prey of falcons and hawks were cranes, herons, and duck. The common crane, Grus grus, ranges from 110 to 120 cm long with a wingspan of 220 to 245 cm. It bred in England until around 1600, but large-scale draining of marshland and possibly climate change led to its disappearance.≥≤ Today it is an occasional migrant. Frederick II wrote ‘‘Regions preferable for crane hunting are wide, open plains or, as a second choice, low hilly country that is free of the obstacles mentioned.’’ These obstacles include ‘‘Land that is broken by ditches or channels. . . . Regions covered with shallow but wide stretches of water, or that have many and dense thickets, much long grass, or willows. . . . [and] Large rivers, deep water, groves, swamps and canebreaks are additional obstacles feared by falcons and form impediments that neither man nor dog can overcome.’’≥≥ The heron most likely to have been hunted was the gray heron, Ardea cinerea, which is 90–98 cm long with a wingspan of 160–75 cm. It continues to breed in England. Gace de la Buigne lists white herons and egrets among the birds hunted by hawks, though he indicates that gray herons should be falcons’ prey.≥∂ Frederick describes a number of ‘‘localities that are best suited to flying young falcons at herons.’’ The best are ‘‘natural or artificial basins that are free of trees.’’ ‘‘Small winding rivers’’ are also good, ‘‘But if the course of the river lies between woods, or if trees grow thick along the shores of the

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


stream, the locality is not an appropriate one.’’ He notes that ‘‘large bodies of water and wide rivers do not offer good opportunities for flying young falcons at herons,’’ because the difficulty in putting up the quarry might lead to the falcons’ exhaustion and subsequent cowardice. The implication seems to be that mature falcons can be flown in such places.≥∑ Although remains of at least a dozen varieties of duck have been identified in medieval excavations, only two are mentioned specifically in early English records: the mallard, Anas platyrhynchos, and the common teal, Anas crecca. The former is 50–65 cm long with a wingspan of 81–98 cm; the latter, 34–38 cm long with a wingspan of 58–64 cm.≥∏ According to Frederick, suitable terrain for hawking at the brook (particularly for duck) included ‘‘small pools of still water, called basins, also ponds and areas called by some falconers fens; as well as courses of flowing water, i.e., streams or brooks.’’≥π Numbers of birds caught could be substantial. In 1212–13 King John’s falcons bagged seven cranes in one day and nine in another; one of Edward I’s gyrfalcons brought down twelve cranes in 2 ∞⁄≤ months; a falconer of Sir William Stormy brought Richard Mitford, Bishop of Salisbury, a gift of six herons and four mallards, and the vicar of Watford’s goshawk caught some sixty fen birds and mallards in a season.≥∫ All three kinds of bird were eaten, with crane probably the most choice followed by heron and duck. According to the Northumberland Household Book of 1512 ‘‘cranes must be had at Christmas as other principal feasts for my Lord’s own mess [i.e., reserved for the high table] so that they be bought at xvjd. a piece.’’ ‘‘Hearonsewys’’ [young herons?] were also to be bought at principal feasts but for 12d., while mallards were to be bought monthly at 2d. and teal were to ‘‘be bought . . . [if ] other wildfowl cannot be gotten and to be at jd. a piece.’’≥Ω No doubt English kings, after a successful hunt, ate the birds their falcons or hawks had caught, as Gace de la Buigne describes the aftermath of a falcon hunt by King John of France. But when the king wasn’t present, what happened to the prey? We have a record of the bodies of six cranes sent to Edward I’s mother, Eleanor of Provence, then a nun at Amesbury. On another occasion, three cranes caught by Geoffrey de Hauville II’s gyrfalcon were sent to the king, and once a woman pauper was given a crane caught by Corbet’s gyrfalcon. But other than those there are records of only a few crane, heron, and duck heads brought to the king—generally trophies of the first catch of the season for particular birds.∂≠ The royal hawkers and falconers probably ate what their birds caught. Under the circumstances it is extremely unlikely that royal hawkers and falconers contributed anything more than an occasional token to the king’s table, though royal partridgers and fowlers undoubt-


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

edly provided game. As Terence Scully put it, ‘‘Hawking allowed the aristocrat and his lady to play at doing what their game keepers and fowlers did in earnest in order to set food on their master’s table.’’∂∞ Both cranes and herons appear as gifts to the king in royal food accounts, but when Henry III wanted cranes or herons for feasts at Whitsun, St. Edmund’s day, or Christmas, he generally had them bought, sometimes in substantial quantities. For example, on November 29, 1240, among the enormous quantities of game, birds, and fish ordered for the coming Christmas, were fifty cranes—‘‘more if possible’’—and sixty ‘‘either of herons or bitterns.’’∂≤ While birds with differing characteristics were flown to provide different kinds of sport, the type of character thought appropriate for a falconer or hawker remained constant. Several medieval writers began their treatises with discussions of the qualities proper to a falconer. Adelard wrote that the falconer must be ‘‘Sober, patient, chaste, pleasant smelling, free from preoccupations. . . . Drunkenness is the mother of forgetfulness, anger causes injuries [in his birds], visiting prostitutes transmits parasites to birds when they are touched, a bad breath makes them haters of men and fills them with bad air, so that they suffer rheum. Moreover, a preoccupation that is not under control will result in the birds being carried through the midst of rain or gales, or treated with excessive violence, or not being carried enough.’’∂≥ Frederick II states that a falconer should be ‘‘of medium size,’’ ‘‘moderately fleshy,’’ ingenious, and have a ‘‘daring spirit,’’ ‘‘a retentive memory,’’ ‘‘good eyesight,’’ acute hearing, ‘‘a good carrying voice,’’ and should be able to swim ‘‘in order to cross unfordable water and follow his bird when she has flown over and requires assistance’’ (see fig. 1).∂∂ Two miracles in the Cantigas de Santa Maria demonstrate the importance of swimming and some of the risks falconers faced. In one, a man who tried to retrieve a dead heron was submerged by a rapid current; in the other, two falconers seeking to retrieve duck caught under ice on a stream had the ice break under them and were trapped for a time under the ice sheet. As the last lines of the fifteenth-century Percy Poem on Falconry put it, ‘‘I pray to God both night and day / All falconers he save from drowning.’’∂∑ To be a good falconer also required a proper attitude: ‘‘The falconer must not be one who belittles his art and dislikes the labor involved in his calling. He must be diligent and persevering, so much so that as old age approaches he will still pursue the sport out of pure love of it. For, as the cultivation of an art is long and new methods are constantly introduced, a man should never desist in his efforts but persist in its practice while he lives, so that he may bring the art itself nearer to perfection.’’ Beyond this, learning to be a good falconer was a matter of much time and experience: ‘‘By using his hearing and eyesight alone

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


Fig. 1: Falconer swimming to aid his bird, Italian, second third of 13th century, det. of Frederick II, De arte venandi cum avibus; ∫ Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Vatican), MS Pal. Lat. 1071, fol. 69.

an ignoramus may learn something about other kinds of hunting in a short time; but without an experienced teacher and frequent exercise of the art properly directed no one, noble or ignoble, can hope to gain in a short time an expert or even an ordinary knowledge of falconry.’’ Frederick lists the following objectives for falconers: ‘‘The falconer’s primary aspiration should be to possess hunting birds that he has trained through his own ingenuity to capture the quarry he desires in the manner he prefers.’’ Frederick feels that falconers should not be concerned with the food their falcons catch, or with fine flights, or with success in hunting. They should ‘‘aspire to have only fine falcons, better trained than those of others, that have gained honor and preeminence in the chase.’’ ‘‘A falconer in this class secures the best hunting birds available; he does not abuse them, but preserves them in good health and in proper training. He does not overwork his falcons, and yet keeps them up to the mark in all respects. He is one who realizes the essentials of a noble art.’’∂∏ To achieve the objectives listed by Frederick, two kinds of bird are particularly desirable—those that are untrained or those unusually well-trained. Many of the birds received by English kings were in the former category.∂π


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

Fig. 2: Taking young birds from an eyrie, Italian, second third of 13th century, det. of Frederick II, De arte venandi cum avibus; ∫ Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Vatican), MS Pal. Lat. 1071, fol. 58.

Untrained birds included nestlings from royal eyries (see fig. 2); birds captured by royal falconers; sore hawks received as fines, oblations, or gifts; and some of the birds purchased for the kings. Eyries of hawks and falcons were recorded in a number of royal forests and parks, and young birds were watched from the time they were hatched. The forester of Lonsdale in Lancashire was to keep the king’s goshawks until they were strong enough to be delivered to the sheriff, and one of the duties of Adam Harpin, Bishop Swinfield of Hereford’s fowler, was to watch in the woods to take young falcons when they were ready to leave their nests. Young falcons and hawks were generally delivered to royal falconers and hawkers in May.∂∫ Falconers and hawkers were also sent to capture birds. Two birds given to the king are mentioned in Edward I’s letters to his falconer Robert de Bavent: in both cases the birds were sent to

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


Bavent to be trained. A writ of 1237 ordered the sheriff of Norfolk ‘‘to cause any untrained gerfalcon or falcon gentle found in his bailiwick that Matthew de Renham shall buy for the king’s use to be paid for.’’∂Ω English kings also purchased birds in significant numbers. The Pipe Rolls record purchases in nineteen of the thirty-four-and-a-half years of Henry II’s reign, in three of Richard’s ten-year reign, and in nine of John’s seventeen-anda-half years. After Richard, the smallest number of purchases (given the length of his reign) was recorded by Henry III, but Henry also probably bought the largest number of birds purchased during a short period: on November 26/27, 1240, he ordered the sheriffs of Lincolnshire, Herefordshire, Yorkshire, Norfolk, and London to buy a total of thirty-four goshawks and thirteen gyrfalcons.∑≠ We do not know how many of these birds were actually obtained. In a number of other cases men were sent to buy hawks or falcons ‘‘if good ones can be found.’’∑∞ Birds purchased for English kings were mostly bought by royal hawkers and falconers, and falcons were usually selected by members of the Hauville family. The Hauvilles (from the reign of Henry II on), received the port duty of ‘‘lastage’’ from the towns of Boston, Lynn, Yarmouth, and Ipswich in return for falconry service. On occasion, however, other men bought birds for the kings: for example, William Giffard, sheriff of Norfolk, bought birds in 1260, and William Frankes, a merchant of Grimsby, in 1276.∑≤ Sometimes purchasers exercised ‘‘the king’s prise’’—the right to purchase specified items before anyone else was allowed to buy—and wardens of fairs and bailiffs of towns in which hawks were offered for sale were ordered to reserve the birds until the king’s representatives had looked them over.∑≥ At other times, though the prize was not specified, the right may in fact have been invoked. This may have been the case in 1304 when William de Tudenham accounted for two gyrfalcons bought at Lynn from ‘‘diverse merchants of Estland’’ for £4 6s. 8d, for in the next year a warrant was recorded in which the treasurer and chancellor were asked to investigate a seized Swabian cog and ‘‘to make grace as well as possible for Herewyn Osthousne of Estland, from whom two gerfalcons were lately taken for the king’s use for which he has not been fully satisfied.’’∑∂ Hawks and falcons were most frequently purchased at eastern ports, particularly (King’s) Lynn, Boston, and Yarmouth, but also Grimsby, Holland (Lincolnshire), (Kingston-upon-) Hull, Ipswich, and Ravenser Odd (Yorkshire). Birds were also bought or the prize was taken in London, Westminster, Derby, Nottingham, and Oxford.∑∑ Outside England, the kings purchased birds in Scandinavia, Flanders (especially Bruges), and Lorraine. Henry III had a hawk called ‘‘Lespaynol’’ that may have come from Spain, and Fitz Nigel refers to possible payments of Irish, Spanish, or Norway hawks. Henry II,


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

John, Henry III, and Edward I all sent falconers to Scandinavia to buy hawks and falcons and on several occasions sent ships to Norway (most frequently), Denmark, and Sweden.∑∏ Adult birds, whether caught or purchased, were put in mews. In England, royal mews were generally made of timber and wattle, though turf was used at least once, and sometimes the roof was shingled.∑π Inside the mews were various perches, and there was usually a place close by where the hawks could bathe. The mews were surrounded by walls, fences, or hedges and might be guarded by mastiffs. Nearby would be stables, kennels, and some provision for housing the falconers as well as a dovecote and occasionally a crane house.∑∫ The most elaborate royal mews was built by Edward I after his return from Crusade in 1274. The mews was built at old Charing on the high ground where the National Gallery now stands, around an existing chapel to St. Eustace (a patron saint of hunting). It was constructed of timber, wattle, and daub on a stone foundation. In addition to the mews proper and the chapel, a house for the janitor and a hall for the falconers were constructed within the complex, and a kitchen and storeroom, stables for the falconers’ horses, a dovecot, and a crane house were built near by. Money was spent for plaster of paris and colors for a painting on one wall of the mews, for curtains for the mews and iron rings to hold them, and for frontals for the chapel altar. Solars were built for the chaplains and for the falconers, and a small solar was built over the adjacent kennel where the dogs used in falconry were kept. H. M. Colvin describes the general setting of the Charing mews: ‘‘A wall was erected between the mews and the road. It was made of earth and thatched with reeds. Inside there was a turfed garden in which stood a lead bath for the birds with a metal image of a falcon in the middle. . . . The water was conveyed to the mews by means of an aqueduct (conductus), and poured into the bath through four brass spouts (clavi) made in the form of leopards’ heads.’’ The number of birds kept at the mews varied, but more than twenty-five might be housed there during the moulting season.∑Ω Birds taken from the nest would initially be fed and cared for imitating the natural routine as closely as possible. Adelard recommended taking young birds from the nest seven days after they were hatched, in the morning when their stomachs were empty and it was cool; keeping them in a covered shed strewn with rushes; and feeding them little birds, hen’s flesh, and hearts of mutton chopped fine and served on a board (see fig. 3) as well as with hardboiled eggs mashed and mixed with sweet milk served in a silver dish. The thirteenth-century Anglo-Norman translation of Adelard adds, ‘‘Be careful that they do not become hungry . . . [feed them] good food, in moderation.’’ When the feathers were fully grown the bird should be provided with higher

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


Fig. 3: Preparing food for and feeding a young bird, Italian, second third of 13th century, det. of Frederick II, De arte venandi cum avibus; ∫ Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Vatican), MS Pal. Lat. 1071, fol. 59v.

and higher perches and, according to the treatise, should learn to fly in the shed because if she were taken out a man might break one of her feathers. Frederick II, however, believed that young birds should be left in the nest as long as possible and after capture should be allowed to fly free for a time before any attempt to tame and train them. He writes: ‘‘Do not be afraid that they will fly away, for they are certain to return for their food’’; ‘‘young falcons, like other birds, as long as they continue to feel weak and unreliant and are fed by others, always return to their feeding ground after flying off for a short time.’’ This procedure, known as ‘‘flying at hack,’’ allowed the birds to develop strength until strong enough to hunt on their own.∏≠ When the time came to train the falcon, it was ‘‘taken up.’’ According to Adelard, the English had their own characteristic method of handling the bird: ‘‘As to the manner of taking him, different practices are followed amongst different peoples. Some take him by the legs, placing the fingers between them


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

Fig. 4: Seeling a falcon, Italian, second third of 13th century, det. of Frederick II, De arte venandi cum avibus; ∫ Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Vatican), MS Pal. Lat. 1071, fol. 61v.

from the front. But the English take him from the back, putting their hands over the wings, saying that in this task their feathers should be protected rather than men’s hands.’’∏∞ The falcon was then ‘‘seeled’’: she was blinded by sewing up her eyelids so she would not be startled by seeing strange objects (see fig. 4). As Michael Woodford notes, ‘‘The reason for hooding [or seeling] a falcon is to blindfold her and so render her impervious to external visual stimuli. These visual stimuli are of overwhelming importance to a hawk, for it is through them that all her actions and reactions are governed. Once hooded [or seeled] she immediately becomes immobile. . . . All her fears are allayed and shocks to her delicate nervous system are reduced to a minimum.’’∏≤ At the same time, her talons were blunted and she was equipped with jesses—leather thongs attached to her feet by which she was held. Adelard writes that jesses should be ‘‘fashioned in such a way that they are neither too tight nor too loose, but are broader underneath at the place where they meet the feet. Let them be made of such a kind of leather that it does not become hard after being wet.’’ The jesses may be attached to a single flat metal ring called a ‘‘varvel’’ or to one end of two rings shaped like a figure eight and called a ‘‘swivel.’’ A leash can be attached to the varvel or to the other ring of the swivel.∏≥ A bell was also put on one foot. The bell was more than simply a device for finding a lost bird. ‘‘These bells have several uses. The falconer knows at once from their ringing that the falcon has fallen down from, or fallen off, the perch and can hurry to her

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


assistance. . . . From the character of the bell notes the expert knows whether his bird has sprung off the perch, is scratching herself, or is biting her jess or the bell near it.’’∏∂ Next, the bird had to be trained to stand on her keeper’s gloved fist and generally habituated to human contact—a procedure called ‘‘manning.’’ The falcon was put into a darkened room and gently carried around for as long (if possible) as a day and a night, during which the falcon was kept awake and not fed. At the end of this time she was given ‘‘a chicken leg, or similar suitable portion of food.’’ While feeding her, the falconer was to make some ‘‘caressing vocal appeal . . . a phrase or bar of song,’’ which was repeated whenever the falcon was fed until she had become conditioned to associate it with food.∏∑ When the bird had grown accustomed to being handled, she was moved into a lighter room and carried around until she was no longer alarmed by the normal sounds of the mews. She then had her eyesight partially restored by loosening the stitches. After this, the half-seeled bird was again carried around for a night and a day in a darkened room. When she was used to this situation, she was moved to a lighter room, then taken outdoors and carried on foot, and finally carried on horseback. Throughout the falconer carried an emergency food ration or ‘‘tiring,’’ which was given the falcon when she grew alarmed, to quiet her. Other methods of calming the bird were to spray her with a mouthful of water or to bathe her (see fig. 5). Frederick II writes, ‘‘Not only is the bath one of the best remedies for the unrest and bating of the falcon but it also assists in taming her and familiarizing her with human beings.’’ When the halfseeled falcon had passed all her tests, she was unseeled. She was given a reduced meal in the morning and was unseeled by candlelight, the candle was quickly taken away, and the falconer, repeating the familiar food call, offered her food. If she took the food, the candle was brought back, so the bird could grow used to her surroundings. Before dawn the falconer returned, put her on his fist, and carried her around in a darkened room. Then the same steps were followed as before. The falcon was carried in a lighter room, then outdoors on foot, and finally on horseback. In every stage of training the bird was kept hungry and was rewarded with food when she performed as the falconer wished (see plate 1).∏∏ An important objective was to expose the bird to different sights, sounds, and circumstances. As the Ménagier instructed his wife about training a musket: ‘‘At this stage of training your hawk, you must keep him on your fist more than ever before, taking him to law-courts and among folk assembled in church or elsewhere, and into the streets (see plate 2A). Keep him thus as long as you can, by day or night; and sometimes perch him in the streets, that he may see and accustom himself to men, horses, carts, hounds, and all other things.’’∏π


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

Fig. 5: Spraying and bathing hooded falcons, Italian, second third of 13th century, det. of Frederick II, De arte venandi cum avibus; ∫ Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Vatican), MS Pal. Lat. 1071, fol. 108v.

Frederick introduced into this procedure a new element, the hood, which he brought to the West from the Arab world. The hood was put on the falcon while she was still fully seeled, and it was put on and taken off repeatedly until the bird had become accustomed to it. Hooding now became a regular part of the training process, and at each stage the falconer had again to get the falcon used to being hooded. The hood permitted a greater degree of control over the bird than had been possible before—even more than when she was still seeled, for the hood shut out all light while seeling did not. The hood must have come into use in England not long after Frederick introduced it into the West, for by 1264 a tenant on the manor of Wolcomestowe held land by service of a falcon’s hood.∏∫ The initial training of hawks paralleled that of falcons, as can be seen from the description of the training of the goshawk given by Frederick’s English contemporary Bartholomaeus Anglicus: ‘‘the eyes of such birds should be seeled and closed, or hid, so she bate [attempt to fly off ] not too often from

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


[the] hand that bears her, when she sees a bird that she desires to take; and also her legs must be fastened with jesses, that she shall not fly freely to every bird.’’∏Ω A difference in training might come after the birds had been manned, for while falcons were trained to return by means of a lure, hawks could be trained to return to the fist—Daude de Pradas writes: ‘‘A goshawk or sparrowhawk should not be coaxed to the wrist by a lure.’’π≠ The lure was a dummy constructed to simulate a bird. It was made of the wings of whatever bird the falcon was to be trained to hunt, bound together by leather straps so that meat could be tied to both sides of the lure where the wings met. A third, longer strap, also used to help tie the meat, was placed between the other two and was used by the falconer to swing the lure. The falcon was introduced to the lure before she had been fully manned. She was put on short rations until ‘‘eager for food, then pieces of her favorite food were tied to the lure, and she was called to it and fed on it for several days until she had ‘‘become fond of the lure.’’ The falcon was then taken outdoors and a long line, or creance, was attached to her leash.π∞ She was called by the food call and fed from the lure, in order both to associate the lure with food and to transform the food call into a lure call. The lure was then handed to an assistant who carried it a short distance away, never letting the falcon lose sight of the lure. The falcon was released from the fist, though still held by the creance (see fig. 6). As soon as she started for the lure, the assistant put it on the ground and withdrew, and, if everything worked out, the falcon flew to the lure and fed from it. While the falcon was feeding, the assistant slowly approached her, walking in circles around her while holding out a piece of meat. When the falcon seized the meat, she was taken up on his fist and the lure was removed. When the falcon was flying well to the lure, the falconer would feed her an entire meal while she was standing on the lure. The falcon could then be taken outdoors, where she was called first to a lure on the ground and then to a lure that, in Frederick’s system of training, was whirled a few times to catch the bird’s attention and ‘‘thrown out to the accompaniment of recall cries.’’ When the falcon was ready, the creance was removed, and she was lured at increasingly greater distances on foot, and then on horseback.π≤ According to Frederick, a somewhat different method of training to the lure was used in Britain. Instead of calling the falcon and whirling the lure, the falconer threw the lure high into the air, without calling, and threw it again and again until the falcon saw it and flew to it (see fig. 7). Luring was done on foot, because of the difficulty of dismounting to pick up the thrown lure. Frederick attributed this method to the fact that the English hunted mostly for cranes and herons—birds that are shouted at to cause them to rise from the


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

Fig. 6: Training a falcon to the lure, French, 1379, det. of Le livre du Modus et de la royne ratio; Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, MS fr. 12399, fol. 59. Cliché Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris.

ground. Falcons were not trained to answer to a call, because shouts at cranes or herons might cause a falcon to leave her quarry, thinking she was being recalled to the lure.π≥ At this point, several possible paths could be taken in the training of the falcon. If the falcon was to be trained to fly in a ‘‘cast’’—to fly with another falcon and cooperate with her in the capture of prey, a highly desirable characteristic—she was tested by being flown with another falcon at a single lure. If one or both of the falcons was suitable for flying in a cast, their further training would be somewhat different from that of a bird flown singly.π∂ A falcon or hawk that was to be flown at duck was taught to circle above the falconer’s head waiting for her quarry to be driven into the air. When the falcon or hawk had learned to ‘‘wait on,’’ her training ended.π∑ A falcon that was to be flown at cranes had to be taught to hunt after she had been trained to the lure. She was first reduced in weight (enseamed) and then flown at hares. If she would not initially fly at live hares, a dummy (or hare-train) was used. The skin of a hare was stuffed with straw, meat was attached to the dummy, and it was dragged around by a groom who went first on foot, then on horseback. Initially the falcon was simply allowed to seize the dummy and then was fed. Later the dummy was jerked as the falcon was about to seize it, so that she missed it. This was done to teach the bird to react quickly to sudden moves by her prey. When the falcon was flying well to the train, she was flown at live hares. As Frederick II notes: ‘‘The hare is preferable to any other animal for this purpose, since few if any falcons are unwilling to fly at them,’’ and ‘‘No other flight is more beautiful or more resembles the flight of a crane than that learned with a hare.’’ After she had learned to fly at hares, the

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


Fig. 7: Recalling a falcon, Netherlands, 1477–90, det. of the Hours of Engelbert of Nassau; Ms Douce 219–20, fol. 55v, Bodleian Library, University of Oxford.

falcon might be flown at snipe or partridge—‘‘birds that are no hindrance to her flight at other quarry.’’ Catching such birds was no doubt the reason fowlers accompanied parties training falcons on several occasions in Edward I’s reign.π∏ In the next stage of training, the falcon was introduced to cranes by means of the crane-train. A live crane, preferably a weak one, was made as harmless as possible by blunting its claws, tying up its beak, and blindfolding. The crane was then bound to a stake so that it could easily be pulled to the ground by means of a long rope. Meat was attached to the crane’s back and the falcon (which had been put on reduced rations) was unhooded. When she flew to the crane, the crane was pulled down so as not to injure or frighten the falcon. The procedure was repeated daily, and when the falcon’s confidence had increased, the meat was removed from the crane’s back. When the falcon attacked the


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

crane, she was allowed to kill it and was fed its heart. The falcon was next introduced to a weak walking crane and again was allowed to kill it. The falcon then moved to a stronger walking crane, to a running crane, to a blindfolded flying crane, and finally to free-flying cranes.ππ The method by which a falcon was taught to fly at herons was similar to that by which she was trained to fly at cranes, but instead of flying the falcon at a hare-train and hares, the heron falcon was ordinarily flown at small birds, and a heron-train was used rather than a crane-train.π∫ The training of falcons in England followed the methods described by Frederick quite closely, as can be seen by reading Edward I’s letters to his falconer Robert de Bavent. These letters reveal Edward following the progress of his falcons as they were tamed and trained, taught to strike at a lure, taught to fly in a cast, flown with a train, trained with live cranes, and finally ‘‘entered’’— flown for their first kill. Such training of birds of prey could be strenuous. In 1243 Gilbert de Hauville lost two horses while training a gyrfalcon.πΩ While untrained falcons were on occasion trained during the summer, trained falcons and hawks spent the moulting season in their mews. As Heidenreich points out: ‘‘The primary goal of keeping the bird [in the mews] is the prevention of injury to the developing feathers. Only perfect plumage will permit the bird to hunt successfully the next season.’’∫≠ While the hawks were growing their new feathers in the mews, they were inactive and well fed. The Boke of St. Albans recommends that mews be vermin, noise, and draft free, neither overhot or too cold, and set so the sun can shine in most of the day. The hawk should be approached only by the man who feeds her and bathed every three days. She should be fed fresh meat: kid, young swan, chicken, and pork are all recommended.∫∞ Such a regimen strengthened the hawk’s feathers, but left the bird overheavy. Before the hawk began to be flown again she had to lose the excess weight, through the process of enseaming. At the end of the summer the birds were reduced in weight to bring them into condition for the hunting season. In enseaming too, diet was important. Daude notes that ‘‘Beef, hare, and young pullet do not dispose toward fat. So, too, hens, when fed moist,’’ but one should avoid ‘‘small birds, . . . kitten or mouse, fat chicken and goat,’’ and ‘‘pork is bad when given too often.’’∫≤ Daude, Dancus, The Boke of St. Albans, and ‘‘The Percy Poem’’ also recommend washing the meat to reduce nutrients, and Daude adds ‘‘If you want to reduce [the hawk’s] weight by waking, put vinegar into its eyes on retiring. In the morning it will be as if it had been carried around all night.’’∫≥ After enseaming, the birds might be taken to various parts of England to be flown at prey, or they might be brought directly to the court.

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


Fig. 8: Hawking at duck, English, c. 1310–20, det. of Queen Mary’s Psalter; Royal MS 2 B. vii, fol. 151; London: British Library. By permission of the British Library.

When the falconer went hunting, he carried the heavy leather glove on which he held his bird, the lure (if the bird was so trained), and a wallet to hold pieces of meat. When the falcon or hawk had brought down her prey, she was recalled to the lure or fist and rewarded by being fed from the wallet.∫∂ The different kinds of hawking engaged in by English kings required different kinds of preparation. Preparation for duck hunting seems to have been most elaborate. When the king went hawking along a river for duck and other waterfowl it was important that bridges be handy and in good repair. A sufficient number of bridges made it easier and more comfortable for the king to travel from one side of the river to the other. It was advantageous to have falconers on both banks, since hawking at duck required careful timing. The hawk or falcon was released and flew above the hawker’s or falconer’s head waiting for duck to be flushed. If the duck were flushed too soon, they might fly away, while if too much time was spent in flushing the hawk or falcon might fly off. Duck were flushed with drums and horns (see fig. 8), but these did not always work. Frederick advised, ‘‘If the duck will not leave the water because it is afraid of the falcon, and if the surface of the water is so great that one man cannot alone accomplish the task of driving off the quarry, the falconer’s companion must ride to the opposite shore, and then both men, by striking with their gloves on the necks of shoulders of their horses, can force the ducks to rise and leave the water.’’ Having men on both sides of a river not only made it more likely that the duck would leave the water at the right time, but meant that men were nearby if a hawk or falcon required assistance or flew off.∫∑ In addition to building and repairing bridges, boats and guides might be provided, and one man, the contraripator, had the special duty of staying on


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

the opposite bank of a river when hawking was taking place. At least once, an area where the king was to hawk was stocked with duck before his coming.∫∏ In all varieties of hawking and falconry dogs were used to assist in the hunt. Gaston Phébus, writing between 1387 and 1389, described five kinds of dog used in hunting: alaunts, greyhounds, running hounds, spaniels, and mastiffs. Of these, greyhounds and spaniels were used in falconry and hawking (see plate 4). Phébus called spaniels ‘‘chienz d’oisel,’’ noted that spaniels were particularly useful in hunting partridge and quail, and observed that when spaniels are taught to swim they are good in pursuing birds that have dived.∫π Frederick II provides the rationale for the use of dogs: When the gerfalcon is to be taught to capture the larger birds whose size and strength greatly exceed her own, she should be given every possible assistance; and even this is barely effective against the size and power of big birds, for the help of man is not sufficient or prompt enough to contend with the speed of the quarry and the distance they can fly. When human aid is delayed, the crane, for example, may wound the falcon or drive her off. She will then no longer be keen to capture her prey. It is therefore necessary to devise some more rapid means of succoring her.

Frederick believed greyhounds ‘‘should be used, mainly because of their speed, in assisting falcons’’ and specified that ‘‘the hound must be brave and have no fear of wading or swimming through water or of running over difficult ground across which the falcon has flown.’’ Elsewhere he described the advantages of having a hound make heron rise.∫∫ While most English kings hawked at duck, crane and heron hawking seem to have been more popular. Unlike duck, cranes and herons could fight back, creating a form of aerial combat with an element of risk for the falcon (see fig. 9).∫Ω The differences between the latter two kinds of sport can be seen from the following comparison by Frederick: Cranes are generally hunted in the open fields and herons by the waterside. Although cranes and herons are made to rise by either men or dogs, it is . . . not done in the same manner. The heron starts flying the minute it sees the falcon coming toward it, and often turns of its own accord toward her and drives her off with its beak. The crane, however, will not do this. The heron, in making its escape, turns and twists frequently, but not the crane. The heron at times rings up high as a means of defense. The crane, on the other hand, escapes by means of long straight flights. The heron’s most frequent refuge is water, and in flight she sometimes strikes with her beak. The crane, however, uses its talons and feet to lash out in the air at the attacking falcon.Ω≠

Actual falcon hunts must have varied a great deal. At one extreme were ceremonial or festive hunts, such as those portrayed in the fresco depicting

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


Fig. 9: Two women crane hawking, English, c. 1310–20, det. of Queen Mary’s Psalter; Royal MS 2 B. vii, fol. 178; London: British Library. By permission of the British Library.

Bartolomeo Colleoni and Christian I of Denmark hunting with falcons attributed to Girolamo Romanino in the Castello di Malpaga and in the later copy of the lost painting ‘‘A Hawking Party at the Court of Philip the Good’’ at the Château de Versailles (see plate 3).Ω∞ This formal kind of hunt is described in the early fourteenth-century Middle English poem Sir Orfeo: Again it chanced that he saw one day Sixty ladies, who rode their way Gracious and gay as the bird on the tree, And never a knight in that company. Falcon on hand those ladies ride, On hawking bent, by the river side; Full well they know it as right good haunt Of mallard, of heron, and cormorant. But now hath the waterfowl taken flight, And each falcon chooseth his prey aright, And never a one but hath slain its bird.Ω≤

A less elaborate kind of falconry is portrayed in the illustration for August in the Grimani Breviary and in the duck hunt pictured in a margin of Queen Mary’s Psalter. In the first of these, a company of five men and a woman attended by two falconers and six dogs and carrying a single hooded falcon set out (see plate 4). In the second, two women and a man on horseback, preceded by a beater on foot, watch a hawk taking a duck (see fig. 8).


The Birds and the Sport of Falconry

Finally would come the more-or-less solitary hunt (see plate 2B), as described in an anonymous fifteenth-century English poem: In a time of a summer’s day, The sun shone full merrily that tide, I took my hawk, me for to play, My spaniel running by my side. A pheasant hen than gan I see; My houndë put her soon to flight; I let my hawk unto her flee, To me it was a dainty sight.Ω≥

A constant in most medieval depictions of falconry is the contrast between nobles and falconers. The nobles are often riding, the falconers generally on foot. Sometimes the falconer is depicted as smaller than the nobles, and of course there is a clear difference in kind of dress (see frontispiece).Ω∂ I have found no better contemporary English description of the overall atmosphere of the falcon hunt than that contained in the late-fourteenthcentury poem The Parliament of the Three Ages. In it the exemplification of youth says: . . . I’d rather quickly ride to the river later with mettelsome hawks that ring and hurl on high, And when game fowl are found, and the falconers hurry To let their leashes out and release them swiftly: They snatch off their hoods and cast them up by hand, And then the hottest in haste hurls up and soars And all their bright bells gaily ring, And there they hover on high like heavenly angels! Then fiercely down to the streams the falconers rush, Down to the river, to beat out the birds with their rods, And one by one they serve them up to their hawks. Nimbly then the tercelets strike down ducks, And lanners and lannerets swoop down to the kill; They meet the mallards, and many a one goes down; The falcons swiftly, freely, fall to light, And soon with a ho! and a huff! they strike down herons, Buffet them and beat them and bring them to siege, And keenly they assail them; then they seize them. Then eagerly the falconers come running To help the hawks who’ve hustled faithfully And with their sharp beaks sharply they strike. They kneel down on their knees and creep in low, Catch the wings of the prey and cross them together,

The Birds and the Sport of Falconry


Bursting the bones and breaking them asunder; He picks the marrow out on his glove with a quill And whoops them down to the quarry they crushed to death: He quarries them and gluts them, praises them aloud, Encourages them gaily to leave the checks, Then holds them on his hand, puts hoods on them, Draws the leather thongs to hold the hoods And loops into their leashes rings of silver; Then he picks up the lure and looks to his horse, And he leaps up on the left, according to rule. Then quickly carriers put up the game, Enduring the tercelets and all their harassment, For some hold to the check, though some do better, And speedily the spaniels spring about, Muddy from splashing when ducks were driven to water; And then I return again to the court I came from, With lovely ladies to take in my two arms, And there I embrace and kiss them and comfort my heart . . . .Ω∑

Perhaps this summarizes the essence of falconry: not only did falconry include fine flights, but it also involved the exhilaration of the kill, the energy expended in retrieving the game, the gusto of the successful venture, and the well-earned posthunt repose. It is no wonder that falconry was portrayed as preeminently a young man’s sport.Ω∏


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England

The history of falconry in England begins as the history of a royal sport. Anglo-Saxon kings from Ethelbald of Mercia to Edward the Confessor flew hawks and falcons. By the tenth century (if not earlier) the sport was practiced by other groups in society, and by the Norman Conquest falconry was avidly pursued by nobles and clergy as well as by kings. At the same time, however, hawking had a more plebeian and functional side: hawks were used by fowlers to catch game for the pot. Because falconry was a royal sport, its early history is an aspect of the history of an expanding royal administration. The growth of royal interest in falconry led to requirements that localities provide the kings with hunting birds, and since men were needed to train and exercise the birds, this necessitated the development of a system by which falconers or hawkers could be fed and put up while in the field and resulted in the provision of lands and privileges for the kings’ falconers and hawkers. However, royal falconry is only part of the story, and falconry must be viewed in the overall context of life in Anglo-Saxon England. As the antiquary Joseph Strutt pointed out, ‘‘In order to form a just estimation of the character of any particular people, it is absolutely necessary to investigate the Sports and Pastimes most generally prevalent among them.’’∞ These pastimes are reflected in the literature and art of Anglo-Saxon England, and just as that literature and art help develop a picture


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England


of falconry as practiced by the Anglo-Saxons, so understanding the sport can assist our comprehension of particular literary and artistic works. Falconry in England begins with the Anglo-Saxons. While falconry was known in the late Empire, there is no evidence that the Romans brought it to Britain. Indeed, as Hans Epstein has noted, ‘‘[Hawking] was neither widely known nor commonly practiced in the ancient European world.’’ Epstein differentiates between falconry, in which hawks take the game, and fowling, in which ‘‘snares, nets, and limed branches were used’’ to capture small birds and hawks were used to frighten the prey and keep it from flying away—a practice described by Aristotle. Epstein’s criterion for differentiation in literary references is ‘‘the mention of a dog or a hound next to that of a falcon’’; ‘‘[hounds] would only be an annoyance in fowling, while they are essential to flush the game in falconry.’’≤ Later the essential distinction comes to be between catching birds with a hawk (or falcon) for sport, or using a hawk to take game— Edward I’s partridger, with his hawk and dogs, is not a royal hawker. From the fifth century AD on, there are a growing number of mentions of falconry in Western Europe—suggesting that the increase of interest may have been due to barbarian influence.≥ Epstein finds the first genuine reference to falconry in the late Empire, in the Eucharisticos of Paulinus of Pella, written about AD 459, when Paulinus was eighty: ‘‘The author, a Christian, born in Macedonia but passing most of his life in his ancestral home in Bordeaux, recalls . . . his youthful wish to possess, besides a horse with fine trappings, ‘a swift dog and a splendid hawk’.’’∂ Not long after, the Gallic bishop Sidonius Apollinaris (431–89) mentions hawking in two letters. Writing about 472, he describes the accomplishments of his friend Vectius—‘‘second to none in training horses, judging dogs, and carrying around hawks.’’ Two years later he asks his brother-in-law to return to Clermont, where the latter ‘‘first played with ball, dice, hawk, dog, horse and bow.’’∑ In roughly the same period, hawking scenes are depicted on mosaics in places as distant as Argos and Tunisia.∏ A number of barbarian law codes contain material on falconry— generally fines for killing or stealing hawks used in hunting. These codes include the Salic, Burgundian, Alemannic, Ripuarian, Lombard, Bavarian, and Frisian laws, and their common concern for hawks as property is evidence for the extent of falconry in the west in the sixth to eighth centuries.π In general one can say that at this time dogs were used with hawks, that distinctions were made among hawks used to hunt various kinds of bird and between hawks and sparrowhawks, and that hawks had a relatively high value.∫ By the early sixth century the church had begun to legislate against clergy owning falcons. The fourth canon of the Council of Epaon (517) provided three months’ exclusion from communion for a bishop who owned a hunting


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England

dog or a falcon, two months’ exclusion for a priest, and one month’s exclusion for a deacon. Bishops were also forbidden to have falcons by the thirteenth canon of the second Council of Mâcon (585).Ω One of the earliest written references to hawks in England is in the Penitential of Theodore of 668–90: ‘‘Birds and other animals that are strangled in nets are not to be eaten by men, nor if they are found dead after having been struck down by a hawk, since it is commanded in the fourth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles to abstain from fornication, blood, that which has been strangled, and from idolatry.’’∞≠ There is nothing to show whether the hawk mentioned is wild or tame, so the passage cannot be used as evidence for the practice of falconry in seventh-century England, but the placement of this phrase directly after one referring to fowling is suggestive.∞∞ The earliest dated record of falconry in England is found in the correspondence of St. Boniface, the Anglo-Saxon missionary to the Continent. In a letter to King Ethelbald of Mercia written about AD 745–46 Boniface wrote, ‘‘Meanwhile, as a sign of our true love and devoted friendship, we have sent you a hawk and two falcons, two shields and two lances.’’∞≤ Not long after (ca. 748–55), Boniface received a letter from King Ethelbert of Kent, who wrote: . . . one thing in addition I wish you to procure for me—something which (from what is told me) it will not be especially difficult for you to obtain: that is, two falcons, whose particular skill and daring in [their] art it shall be to capture cranes, taking them eagerly, and, having caught them, to bring them down alone. We ask you to acquire such birds and send them to us for this reason—because it is clear that very few hawks of this kind are to be found in our lands (that is to say, in Kent), producing young sufficiently fine and agile, and bold enough in spirit, that they may be reared, and tamed, and trained to the skill mentioned above.∞≥

Further evidence for the practice of falconry in Britain in the same general period is found in sculpture and on coins. The figure of a falconer is carved on the monumental stone cross at Bewcastle, Cumberland. The falconer holds a bird of prey on his left hand; below the bird is a T-shaped perch. The range of possible dates for the cross is from about 685 to the mid-eighth century.∞∂ Two sceattas of the first half of the eighth century portray respectively a hawk on a perch and a man holding a hawk in front of what may be a T-shaped perch. Finally there are three Pictish depictions of men on horseback carrying hawks: on an eighth-century cross-slab at Elgin Cathedral, on a cross-slab at Fowlis Wester, and on a sarcophagus at St. Andrews.∞∑ The Elgin cross-slab is unique in portraying an actual falcon hunt, as Isabel Henderson observes: ‘‘[O]ne bird has been flown while the other is poised for flight on the raised wrist of the principal rider. The rider stretches back to give a sop to a hound to prevent it

Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England


from competing with the falcon. This hound, at the rear, and the one dashing ahead of the horse, belong to the falconer, not to the deer-hunters depicted below, and must represent hounds trained for the purpose.’’∞∏ Several of these images have been associated with kingship, and in all falconry is associated with high status. Ann Carrington concludes: The representations of hunting, falconry, and riding reflected the interests of the ruling class. Images of these practices reinforced the social and political position of the aristocracy. These motifs reflected their power and status. Hunt, riding, and falconry motifs were also acceptable to the ecclesiastical milieu as they could be interpreted in a Christian manner. The social standing of kings and nobles was reinforced by patronizing publicly displayed works of art like the cross-slabs, reminding all of the wealth and power of the elite through images depicting activities exclusive to the nobility.∞π

Some archaeological evidence exists, but its meaning is unclear. The remains of a sparrowhawk were found in a site at North Elmham, Norfolk, dated AD 650 to 850. While the mere presence of a hawk or falcon does not necessarily indicate the practice of falconry, the sparrowhawk was a native species and the kind of bird one might expect a nonnoble member of society to catch and train.∞∫ By the late eighth century hawkers were members of the Mercian royal household. In 792 King Offa confirmed privileges granted Kentish churches and monasteries by Kings Wihtred and Ethelbald; he went on to grant immunity from having to put up the king’s hounds, hawks, horses, or the men who cared for them. Similar charters were granted by Ceolwulf (I) of Mercia in 822; by Berhtwulf of Mercia in 843–44 and 845 (for 848); by Burgred of Mercia in 855; and by Edward the Elder in 904. Some of these grants were freely given; others were part of land purchases.∞Ω In one case, the immunities themselves were bought: in 855 Burgred of Mercia conceded to Bishop Alhhun (or Alhwine) of Worcester, on behalf of the minster at Blockley, Gloucestershire, freedom from maintaining the king’s huntsmen and falconers and their animals and birds. In return the bishop paid three hundred silver shillings.≤≠ In Edward’s grant to the monastery of Taunton, Somerset in 904, it is stated that the monastery had previously furnished ‘‘provision for one night to the King, provision for eight dogs and one keeper, and nine nights’ provision for the hawkers of the king. . . .’’≤∞ Another arrangement by which localities contributed to the king’s sport is reflected in Domesday Book. Wiltshire, Oxfordshire, Northamptonshire, Warwickshire, and the city of Leicester each owed the king £10 yearly for a hawk. The county of Worcester owed £10 or a Norway hawk. All these obligations accompanied payments for a packhorse; three are associated with


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England

payments ‘‘for dogs.’’ The payment for Northamptonshire also included 20s. for a horse for the huntsman.≤≤ The payments appear to be commutations of earlier obligations. To quote Frank Stenton: ‘‘Although some of its details are obscure, the series as a whole gives an impression of high antiquity, with its insistence on the duty of the shires to provide hawks and hounds for the king’s sport, and its hint of a time when the king had been maintained by his subjects as he passed over the country.’’≤≥ English kings continued to enjoy falconry during the ninth and tenth centuries. Asser, in his life of Alfred (872–99), writes: ‘‘the king, amidst the wars and the numerous interruptions of this present life—not to mention the Viking attacks and his continual bodily infirmities—did not refrain from directing the government of the kingdom, pursuing all manner of hunting; giving instruction to all his goldsmiths and craftsmen as well as to his falconers, hawk-trainers and dog-keepers. . . .’’≤∂ This shows that Alfred was interested in and skilled in falconry and that as early as the ninth century a distinction was made between the men in charge of the king’s falcons ( falconarii) and those who took care of his hawks (accipitrarii). Alfred is also credited with having written a book on hawking—an entry in the catalog of the library of Christ Church, Canterbury, drawn up between 1284 and 1331, mentions a ‘‘Liber Aluredi Regis custodiendis accipitribus’’—but this is probably a later attribution.≤∑ In the tenth century Athelstan (924–39) enjoyed falconry enough to include falcons or hawks in his diplomatic arrangements. He forced the rulers of North Wales to pay him an annual tribute of ‘‘20 pounds of gold, 300 of silver, to add 25,000 oxen, besides as many dogs as he chose, which could discover with their keen scent the dens and lurking-places of wild beasts, and birds which were trained to make a prey of other birds in the air.’’≤∏ Not only did Athelstan receive tribute from the Welsh, but the leading Welsh prince, Hywel the Good, attended the English court, witnessed Athelstan’s charters for some twenty years, and is credited with the oldest extant Welsh lawbook. While the earliest surviving manuscripts of the ‘‘Law of Hywel the Good’’ date from the thirteenth century, they incorporate material that may be contemporary with or even predate Hywel.≤π One such section, ‘‘The Laws of the Court,’’ contains information on falconry in Wales that supplements available English material: 1. The fourth is the chief falconer.≤∫ 2. He is to have his horse in attendance; and his clothing three times in the year, his woollen clothing from the king, and his linen clothing from the queen; and his land free. 3. His place in the palace is that of the fourth man from the king, at mess with him.

Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England


4. His lodging is the king’s barn, lest smoke should affect his birds. 5. He is to bring a vessel to the palace, to hold his liquor; for he ought only to quench his thirst while in the palace, lest his birds should be injured by neglect.≤Ω 6. He is to have a hand-breadth of wax candle from the steward, for feeding his birds and making his bed. 7. He is not to pay silver to the chief groom; for the king serves him on three occasions, when he flies his hawk, by holding his horse: the time he is to hold his horse is, when he alights, and when he mounts to hold the stirrup; and to hold his horse while he performs his necessary duty. 8. He is to have the hearts and lungs of the wild animals killed in the kitchen, to feed his hawks. 9. He is to have a crone [old sheep], or four pence, from the king’s villains. Once a year he is to have a progress among the villains. 10. He is to have a third of the dirwy of the falconers [compensation for wrongdoing paid to the king], and the ‘‘amobyr’’ [‘‘maiden fee’’] of their daughters. 11. He is to have the skin of a hart in autumn, and the skin of a hind in the spring, to make gloves for bearing his hawks, and for making jesses. 12. He is to be honoured with three presents on the day his hawk shall kill one of the three birds; a bittern, a heron, or a crane. 13. He is to have the mantle in which the king shall ride, at the three principal festivals. 14. His protection is, unto the queen: others say, that it is unto the farthest place where he shall fly his hawk at a bird. 15. He is to have the male hawks, and the nests of the falcons and of the sparrow-hawks, that are on the king’s demesne. 16. From the time he shall place his hawk in the mew until he shall take it out, he is not to answer any claim; except it be to one of his fellow officers. 17. His saraad [compensation for insult] is six kine, and six score of silver, subject to augmentation. 18. His worth is six score and six kine, to be augmented.≥≠

The ‘‘Gwentian Code’’ provides additional information: 1. What day soever the falconer shall take a heron, or a bittern, or a curlew, with his hawk, the king performs three services for him: hold his horse while he shall mount; and hold his horse while he shall dismount; and hold his horse while he shall secure the birds. 2. Three times the king presents him on that night with food with his own hands; for, by his messenger he sends presents to him daily, except on the three principal festivals, and the day that he shall kill a notable bird. 8. If the falconer kill his horse in hunting, or if it die by chance, he shall have another horse from the king.


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England 16. The day on which the falconer shall take a notable bird, and the king be not present when the falconer returns to the palace with the bird, the king is to rise to receive him; and, if he do not then rise, let him give the garment he may have on to the falconer.≥∞

According to the section ‘‘The Worth of Hawks,’’ a hawk’s nest and a falcon belonging to the king after moulting were worth a pound, a hawk before its first moult half a pound, while falcons belonging ‘‘to an uchelwr’’ (‘‘a high man’’—freeman? noble?) were worth half of what a king’s were. Tiercels, moulted sparrowhawks, and sparrowhawks’ nests were valued at two shillings, unmoulted sparrowhawks at a shilling, and all birds belonging to a villein were worth only a penny.≥≤ There is no assurance that Welsh practices were also found in England at this time.≥≥ But some of the details—deerskin for gloves, the separate residence for the falconer, and the replacement of horses lost in royal service—are practices recorded later in England and may well date there from at least as early as the tenth century.≥∂ By the late tenth century there is evidence that falconry was enjoyed by wellto-do laymen and some of the clergy. Between 973 and 987, Brihtric, the holder of several estates in Kent, and his wife Ælfswith drew up a will in which they left the king ‘‘an armlet of eighty mancuses of gold and a short sword of the same value, and four horses, two with harness, and two swords with sheaths, and two hawks and all his staghounds.’’≥∑ This payment resembles the death duties mentioned among the customs of Berkshire in Domesday Book: ‘‘At his death, a thane or a King’s household man-at-arms sent to the King as death-duty all his arms and horse, one with a saddle, another without a saddle; but if he had dogs or hawks, they were presented to the King, to accept if he wished.’’≥∏ At the beginning of the Anglo-Saxon poem on the battle of Maldon (AD 991), a young follower of ‘‘Earl’’ Byrhtnoth is described as releasing his hawk before fighting the Danes: ‘‘Then Offa’s kinsman first perceived that the earl would suffer no faintness of heart; he let his loved hawk fly from his hand to the wood and advanced to the fight. By this it might be seen that the lad would not waver in the strife now that he had taken up his arms.’’≥π The passage suggests that the poet assumed a knowledge of falconry on the part of his audience. The young man was noble, as shown not only by his relationship to Offa, but by his owning and carrying a hawk. His freeing the hawk would be understood to parallel and reinforce that of Byrhtnoth in driving off the horses—as a gesture of defiance and a declaration that he was prepared to die in the coming battle: he ‘‘let his loved hawk fly . . . to the wood’’ so that she might fend for herself should he be killed and no longer able to care for her.≥∫ As for the clergy, in an angry speech made around 971 King Edgar reproved

Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England


bishops and heads of monasteries for—among other things—permitting the clergy to own dogs and hawks: Was it for this, then, that our fathers exhausted their treasuries? Was it for this that the king’s fisc shrank, with so many revenues drawn off from it? Was it for this that the munificence of our kings conferred fields and possessions upon the churches of Christ?—so that whores might be decked out for the delight of the clergy? So that luxurious banquets might be prepared? So that dogs and birds and such toys might be bought? Knights shout these things aloud; the people whisper them; players sing of them and dance them out: . . . and you pretend they do not happen?≥Ω

According to the early-eleventh-century ‘‘Injunctions on Behaviour of Bishops,’’ ‘‘It befits bishops that they be not too fond of sport, nor care too much for dogs or hawks, or worldly display or vain pride.’’ While the ‘‘Canons of King Edgar’’ stated: ‘‘And we enjoin, that a priest be not a hunter, nor a hawker, nor a dicer, but apply to his books, as becomes his order.’’∂≠ Despite such admonitions some churchmen continued to fly hawks. Eadmer, writing about the monks of Christ Church, Canterbury, before the Conquest, spoke of those ‘‘who lived in all the glory of the world, that is, [concerned] with gold, with silver, with fur-trimmed clothing, and with banquets made elegant by precious things; not to speak of the divers musical instruments by which they were often entertained, and the horses, dogs, and hawks with which they sometimes went riding about, more in the manner of counts than of those who followed the life of monks.’’∂∞ Whether or not this passage may be taken literally as to the extent of hawking on the part of the clergy, it shows that falconry was an accepted pastime of the Anglo-Saxon nobility. Additional information about falconry is found in Anglo-Saxon literature, but not all of it can be dated with any certainty. The last guardian of treasure in Beowulf, lamenting the death of his people, says: ‘‘There is no harp-delight, no mirth of the singing wood, no good hawk flies through the hall, no swift horse stamps in the castle court. Baleful death has sent away many races of men.’’∂≤ Two poems which refer to hawking appear in Exeter Book, a book of Anglo-Saxon poetry given to Exeter Cathedral by Leofric, its first bishop, who died in 1072. The manuscript has been assigned to the second half of the tenth century, but some of its contents are believed to be considerably older.∂≥ Whatever its date, Exeter Book shows that by the latter half of the tenth century hawking was not only established as a sport, but had become a recognized profession. In the ‘‘Gifts of Men,’’ a list of some forty talents and occupations found in Anglo-Saxon society, ‘‘the fowler skilled with the hawk’’ is mentioned.∂∂ A fuller description of the hawker and the training of a hawk appears in the ‘‘Fortunes of Men’’: ‘‘One shall tame the wild bird in its pride, the hawk


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England

on the hand, till the falcon grows gentle. He puts footrings upon it, feeds it thus in fetters, proud of its plumage, wearies the swift flier with little food, till the foreign bird grows subject to his food-giver in garb and act, and trained to the youth’s hand.’’∂∑ As Edwin J. Howard notes, ‘‘The fact that both Arts [‘‘The Gifts of Men’’] and Fates [‘‘The Fortunes of Men’’] mention hawking as an employment of mankind indicates that the falconer was a relatively important member of Old English society. . . . Unless the author of Fates was a falconer himself, his devoting eight of the ninety-eight lines of the poem to the care of hawks is significant.’’∂∏ Exeter Book also includes two riddles that mention hawks. Riddle 17 contains the word ‘‘hawk’’ in runic characters, while Riddle 62 describes a man riding carrying a hawk: ‘‘I saw a horse (WIcg) going over the plain, carrying a man (BEorn). A hawk (HAfoc) was for both on that journey the lifter’s joy and also a share of the power. The warrior (ªEgn) rejoiced; the hawk (FÆlca) flew over the watertrack (ESAPor) of the whole company.’’∂π The fowler, with his hawk, is one of the twelve occupations described in Ælfric’s ‘‘Colloquy’’—a set of dialogues written in English and Latin around the year 1000 by Ælfric, Abbot of Eynsham, to teach his novices Latin through conversation. [Master] What do you say, fowler? How do you catch birds? [Fowler] I catch birds in many ways: sometimes with nets, [sometimes] with snares, with bird-lime,; with bird-calls [lit., by whistling], with a hawk, with traps. [M.] Have you a hawk? [F.] Yes, I have. [M.] Can you tame them? [F.] Yes, I can. How would they be useful to me if I did not know how to tame them? [Huntsman] Give me a hawk? [F.] I shall, gladly, if you first give me a swift hound. What sort of hawk do you want, large or small? [H.] Give me a large one. [M.] How do you feed your hawks? [F.] They feed themselves and me in the winter, and in spring I let them fly off to the wood, and I catch the young hawks in autumn and tame them. [M.] And why do you let the tamed hawks fly away from you? [F.] Because I don’t want to feed them in the summer, since then they eat too much. [M.] Many do feed the tamed ones over summer, so they may have them ready again. [F.] Yes, so they do, but I don’t want to work so much over them, since I can catch others—not just one, but many of them.∂∫

Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England


Fig. 10: Falconry as the occupation of October, English, middle of the eleventh century, det. of calendar; Cotton MS Tiberius B. v, fol. 7; London: British Library. By permission of the British Library.

The fowler does not work for someone else, as Ælfric’s huntsman does, but uses his hawk to catch food for himself. It is suggestive that the upper-class master, when told of the fowler’s many techniques for catching birds, questions him only about hawking.∂Ω While Ælfric’s fowler flew his hawks in winter, the opening of the hawking season came in the fall, and two eleventh-century calendars show hawking as the occupation for the month of October—an indication of its popularity (see fig. 10). It is one of the four leisure activities portrayed in these calendars, along with warming at the fire, feasting, and hunting.∑≠ Still one more hawking detail is provided in a maxim found in an eleventhcentury manuscript but probably written down ‘‘at some time in the tenth century, or perhaps a little earlier.’’ The maxim says the hawk, though wild, shall abide on the glove—the first mention in England of the falconer’s glove.∑∞ The Vikings who invaded and settled in England from the ninth to the eleventh century also practiced hawking, but there is little connecting Scandinavia, falconry, and England before the twelfth century.∑≤ The thirteenthcentury English historian Roger of Wendover tells a lively story in which the ninth-century adventurer Ragnar Lodbrok, while hawking along the Danish coast in a small boat, was blown by a storm to England. Ragnar landed in Norfolk, and, because of his skill at hawking and hunting, soon became a favorite of King Edmund of East Anglia. The king’s huntsman, Berne, grew jealous and murdered Ragnar. Berne hid the body, but Ragnar’s faithful greyhound kept watch over his master’s corpse, and the crime was discovered. Berne was put to sea in the same open boat in which Ragnar had come to England. The boat was blown to Denmark, where it was recognized, and Berne was taken before Ragnar’s sons. He accused the king of the murder, and Ragnar’s sons swore revenge, invaded England, and martyred King [Saint] Edmund. However, the story, while colorful, is almost certainly untrue.∑≥


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England

Hawks from Norway did get to England before the twelfth century; according to Domesday Book the county of Worcester owed the king £10 or a Norway hawk. This is the earliest evidence that Scandinavian hawks and falcons were imported into England, though the absence of references may be due to record survival rather than lack of trade.∑∂ Edward the Confessor (1042–66) seems to have been an avid falconer. According to a contemporary biographer: ‘‘After divine service, which he gladly and devoutly attended every day, he took much pleasure in hawks and birds of that kind which were brought before him, and was really delighted by the baying and scrambling of the hounds. In these and such like activities he sometimes spent the day, and it was in these alone that he seemed naturally inclined to snatch some worldly pleasure.’’∑∑ Four men specifically described as hawkers in Domesday Book and contemporary inquests may have been in Edward’s service. Because Domesday was compiled some twenty years after Edward’s death (1086–87), one cannot always tell whether hawkers identified in Domesday Book and its satellites were hawkers for Edward or came into royal service under William I. It is probable that William provided himself with hawkers and huntsmen already familiar with his newly won lands by taking over the services of Edward’s hawkers and huntsmen, leaving them in possession of at least some of their earlier holdings.∑∏ Two men are specifically identified in Domesday inquests as hawkers for Edward, and two others probably were. Three of these men seem to have entered William’s service after the Conquest. The two hawkers identified in the Exchequer revision of Domesday Book as serving under Edward were William, who held sixty-three acres (valued at £3) in Kent and probably died in or before 1066, and Godwin, who held half a hide (valued at 4s.) in Hampshire.∑π A third man who was probably a hawker for Edward but was not identified as such in Domesday Book was Toli of Sandiacre. In King Edward’s time Toli, Cnut, and Gladwin held four carucates at Sandiacre, Derbyshire; by 1086 Toli held these four carucates alone and was listed among the king’s thegns. Toli’s holding in Sandiacre was held in demesne of the king and so was free of geld: that is, Toli was holding his land by what would later be considered serjeanty tenure. This land in Sandiacre was subsequently held by his descendants as a hawking serjeanty.∑∫ A fourth man, Siward Accipitrarius, held land in Somerset and was identified as a hawker in Exon Domesday, a transcription of some of the original Domesday circuit returns for the southwestern counties of England. Siward was most likely one of Edward’s hawkers; he held £7 of land from the king by what under the Normans became serjeanty tenure. This land was probably granted to Siward because of its geographical location: it lay on

Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England


fertile land between the rivers Parret and Isle, adjacent to large tracts of woodland, moor, and marshland. Such an area, close to riverbanks along which hawkers have traditionally found their best sport, provided a habitat for the small game and water birds hunted with hawks.∑Ω While information on the location of hawkers’ holdings comes for the most part from later records, Domesday Book makes it clear that hawkers’ lands were granted on the basis of proximity to a water habitat even before the Norman Conquest. William Accipitrarius held land at Woolwich on the Thames near what were then river marshes; Godwin’s land was at Steventon, near the headwaters of the Test and within twelve miles (roughly half a day’s ride) of Winchester. Toli’s land in Sandiacre lay between the rivers Trent and Derwent on the Erewash, a tributary of the Trent; and as noted above, Siward’s land lay between the Parret and the Isle in Somerset.∏≠ While hawkers are listed, no falconers are recorded as such in Domesday Book or its satellites. One of the servientes regis in Wiltshire may have been a royal falconer. Ralph de Halvile has been identified as Ralph de Hauville, and if this identification is correct, Ralph is the earliest known member of the Hauville family of England, many of whom were falconers under later English kings. Unfortunately, we cannot be sure that the service involved in Ralph’s case was falconry. It seems likely that other hawkers or falconers were among those listed in Exchequer Domesday among the king’s thegns or ministri, but in most cases we have no certain way of knowing who they were, since the Exchequer revision of the Domesday inquests seems in many cases to have eliminated references to occupation.∏∞ The last Anglo-Saxon king, Harold Godwinson, has traditionally been considered to have been a falconer because he is portrayed in the Bayeux Tapestry carrying a hawk. Moreover ‘‘the books of King Harold’’ are cited among the sources of Adelard of Bath’s early-twelfth-century treatise on falconry, but several Harolds reigned in the eleventh century, and even if Adelard’s king was Harold II of England, the books could merely have been owned by him or dedicated to him. As C. H. Haskins suggested, ‘‘It is, perhaps, simplest to assume that the reference is to books possessed by Harold Godwin’s son, whose devotion to falconry is well known from the Bayeux Tapestry.’’∏≤ But does the tapestry really show this devotion? Harold is portrayed riding to Bosham with hounds and bearing a hawk. The hawk and hounds are carried aboard ship, and Harold sails across the Channel to France, where he is met by Count Guy of Ponthieu, a vassal of Duke William of Normandy, the future Conqueror. Harold and Guy, both carrying hawks, set out for Guy’s seat at Beaurain. From there, again carrying the hawks, they ride to meet Duke William. Harold, in front but without a hawk, and William, carrying a hawk,


Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England

Fig. 11: Duke William carrying a hawk brought by Harold, French School, before 1082, det. of Bayeux Tapestry. Musée de la Tapisserie, Bayeux, France/With special authorization of the city of Bayeux/Giraudon-Bridgeman Art Library.

then follow the dogs back to the ducal palace at Rouen (see fig. 11).∏≥ The tapestry clearly supports the accounts of William of Jumièges and William of Poitiers, which say that Harold had been sent to William on a diplomatic mission, and the tapestry provides the additional detail that Harold was bringing the hawk and hounds as gifts to William.∏∂ We know William practiced falconry,∏∑ and it is clear from the tapestry that the gifts brought by Harold were quite acceptable. Harold’s devotion to falconry, therefore, cannot be deduced from the tapestry. However, it does show Harold carrying a bird of prey. It seems safe to assume that by the time of the Bayeux Tapestry every nobleman, Anglo-Saxon as well as Norman, knew the basic techniques of falconry and that Harold was no exception. What, then, can one say about the development of falconry in Anglo-Saxon England? Two factors make accurate generalization difficult. First, the sources may distort our overall picture of the sport. Surviving documentary sources are largely associated with kings, so most of our earliest information involves royal falconry. Second, there is the problem of dating literary sources. The poems and riddles in Exeter Book, for instance, could reflect customs far earlier than the period to which I have assigned them. One can, however, give some picture of falconry as practiced in England in

Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England


the century before the Norman Conquest. It may be said that falconry was a sport for the well-to-do and a way of making a living for humbler members of society.∏∏ A distinction was made between hawks and falcons; the kings, at least, had hawkers for the former and falconers for the latter. These no doubt represented the specialists of the profession, as distinguished from men such as Ælfric’s fowler who, in addition to training hawks, caught birds with nets, snares, and bird-lime. Some hawks were imported, others may have been caught during migration, and still others were taken from the nest and raised, the latter sometimes being set free at the end of the hawking season. A hawk was trained by semistarvation, little food being given the bird until it did what its trainer wanted. The ‘‘foot-rings’’ used to confine the hawk may have been made of leather, like jesses, but there is no way of telling this: certainly at the time of the Bayeux Tapestry jesses were in use.∏π Hawking was often done on horseback, and swift dogs were used with the hawks. The birds used included the goshawk, sparrowhawk, and peregrine and possibly the gyrfalcon.∏∫ Beyond the details of the sport are the insights it gives us into several aspects of Anglo-Saxon society. Falconry appears to begin as a royal sport and then spreads to other social classes. Yet the continued association with royalty gives the sport a special character even after it comes to be practiced by other groups, and falconry becomes one of the signs of nobility. The distinction between falconry and fowling is significant here. The falconer hunts for sport, not for practical reasons, and falconry, as a kind of conspicuous consumption, is therefore more noble than fowling. So far as English kings are concerned, the development of falconry is much like that of other royal household departments. It begins simply, expands over time, and becomes more specialized and differentiated. Later still more differentiation takes place, and other kinds of birds and new equipment (such as the hood) are introduced.∏Ω On the whole, however, the basic outlines of the sport remain unchanged, and one can say that by 1066 the essential characteristics of falconry as it was to be practiced in the later Middle Ages were well established in England.


English Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II

Far more material on falconry is available after the Norman Conquest than before. During the period from the accession of William I in 1066 to the death of Henry II in 1189 it is possible for the first time to discover how English kings organized their hawking—where they bought their birds and kept them and how their falconers were paid. The earliest source for such information is Domesday Book, which provides names of professional hawkers and falconers (royal and otherwise) and gives details of their holdings and some indication of their social status. It indicates that both eyries and hawks were valuable, that the latter were used for some rents and payments in lieu of money, and that money was sometimes paid in lieu of hawks. It provides possible evidence on the importation of hawks from Norway and on the use of sparrowhawks in hunting. Finally, Domesday tells us something about the practice of falconry by Edward the Confessor and William the Conqueror.∞ Domesday and its satellites name six of King William’s hawkers (ancipitrarii) as landholders: Godwin and Osbern, who held lands in Hampshire; Bernard, who held in Berkshire; Siward, holding in Somerset; Sawin in Huntingdon and Cambridgeshire; and Edric of Norfolk. Godwin and probably Siward had been hawkers to King Edward, as had William the hawker of Kent, who held land in 1066 but not in 1086. Domesday also names Judikell the hawker of Earl Ralf of Norfolk, and Godric the hawker of the abbot of Ram-


Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II


sey is identified as such in the Inquisitio Comitatis Cantabrigiensis. Judged in terms of the sizes of their holdings and their positions in the lists of tenants, the royal hawkers seen to have been relatively far down on the social scale. Siward Accipitrarius held seven hides three virgates, with a total annual value of £6 13s. 2d. Bernard and William each had tenures appraised at £3. Osbern’s hide was valued at 17s., Godwin’s half hide at 4s., while Edric’s fifteen acres were worth only 2s. Bernard ranked sixtieth of sixty-three Berkshire tenants, and while he ranked above a goldsmith, the goldsmith held land worth seven times as much. Osbern was last in a miscellaneous category of royal servants, while Edric was placed sixty-third of sixty-six. Judikell, the earl’s falconer, is noted among other freemen because ‘‘he was quit of the hall because he was the earl’s falconer.’’≤ William’s hawkers and falconers and their successors over the next hundred plus years were what came to be called serjeanty tenants. As Austin Lane Poole notes, ‘‘Serjeanty reflects a time when land was plentiful and money was scarce. It was easier to pay for the various services which the king or his great barons required by a grant of land than by a cash payment. It was in this way that the king provided for his household and administrative staff, for the multitude of servants needed for his pastimes of hunting and falconry, and in part for his army.’’≥ The serjeants were a motley and wide-ranging group. They included some of the great officers of state (e.g., the chief marshal and butler), holders of ceremonial offices performed at coronations (the royal champion), and men with miscellaneous duties (such as Ralph de Picheford who held a rent ‘‘by service of finding coal for the king’s stove when he shall come in person to [Bridgenorth]’’)∂ as well as the kings’ cooks, bakers, ushers, foresters, huntsmen, falconers, hawkers, and the like. Pollock and Maitland characterized the ‘‘central notion’’ of the tenure as ‘‘servantship.’’ ‘‘In many cases the tenant by serjeanty . . . is more or less of a menial servant bound to obey orders within the scope of his employment.’’∑ As we shall see, even among hawkers and falconers, there was a broad range of duties and of rewards. Some families throve, others barely scraped by. It would be useful to compare general social trends among hawkers and falconers with those of other serjeants, but until studies of other occupations are done, comparisons will not be possible.∏ Eyries of hawks are among the assets listed in Domesday. Eyries are noted in Surrey, Buckinghamshire, Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire, Cheshire, and in the lands between the Ribble and the Mersey.π Just as hawks’ nests were valuable, so were the hawks. A number of rents and other payments recorded in Domesday were payable in hawks. The king received 50s. blanch∫ and a hawk from Kingstone, Herefordshire. Kirkby


Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II

Fleetham, Yorkshire, was valued at 40s. and a sore hawk, and Hampton, Cheshire, was worth 2s. and a sparrowhawk.Ω Wheathill, Shropshire, was valued at 60s. and paid a hawk, as did Calverhall, Shropshire, valued at 20s. At the Bage (Bach), Herefordshire, and Kinnerley, Shropshire, Welshmen rendered hawks for their holdings. The king annually received two marks of gold (£12) or two hawks from the land of Oswald in ‘‘Pechingeorde,’’ Surrey.’’∞≠ The city of Norwich paid a hawk to the earl; Great Yarmouth paid the sheriff of Norfolk £4 and a ‘‘hawk of the land.’’∞∞ In addition to payments in hawks, a number of Domesday entries record cash payments in lieu of hawks. Five of these payments, from Wiltshire, Oxfordshire, Northamptonshire, and Warwickshire and the city of Leicester, consist of £10 for a hawk. The city of Worcester owes £10 or a Norway hawk,∞≤ and the men of Wales in Gloucestershire render 28s. for hawks.∞≥ The entry for Leicester would seem to indicate that in at least one case the commutation was made during William’s reign.∞∂ Domesday suggests that the king had commuted broad hunting obligations when he could realize a substantial profit while continuing to receive some payments in hawks. It is interesting to note that five of the counties (including Leicestershire) which paid money in lieu of hawks did not record eyries, while in the sixth case, where the money payment was optional, a Norway hawk was specified. On the other hand, of the six counties where hawks were paid as rents, four reported eyries, and the fifth, Norfolk, was the home of two of the Domesday falconers. This might suggest a geographical motive for the commutations: where hawks were hard to get, money was paid instead. It seems likely, however, that the basic factors involved were the size and the nature of the obligations. Large-scale (perhaps somewhat indefinite) obligations to provide hawks were turned into money: after all, the king might not want to hawk in Warwickshire, and unless he did so he would have nothing to show for that county’s obligation. At the same time, hawks continued to be rendered as payments, particularly from those areas where they were plentiful. The systematic transfer of customary renders-in-kind into money payments seems to have occurred in the reign of Henry I.∞∑ In addition to granting lands to his falconers, William provided for them in other ways. William rewarded Arnulf the falconer by granting him certain prebends, which Arnulf later gave to the Church of St. Mary, Salisbury.∞∏ In what may have been another such case, the abbot of Ramsey gave a hide of land in Hemingford, Huntingdonshire, to Sawin the hawker ‘‘for love of the King.’’∞π There are few notices of falconers during the reign of William II (1087– 1100). When William gave Abbot Godfrey of Malmesbury the custody of his

Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II


(the abbot’s) own woods, Ared the falconer was one of those notified. Ared stayed on in royal service after William’s death, and early in Henry I’s reign (1100–35) he was ordered, along with the royal foresters, to let Abbot Faritius of Abingdon transport ‘‘all the timber and brushwood which has been given or sold to him for his building operations.’’ These two entries suggest that at this time royal falconers had some jurisdiction over woods—presumably those in which there were eyries.∞∫ In 1104 Ared is recorded holding the manor of Chelworth, Wiltshire, and he can be identified as the Aretius who also held lands from the king at Lew and Yelford, Oxfordshire that are later held by falconry serjeanty. Ared witnessed several of Henry I’s charters,∞Ω and may well have been Henry’s favorite, if not his chief, falconer. He certainly was a greater personage than Alfere the hawker, mentioned in a Patent Roll in 1246: ‘‘Grant to the infirm of the hospital of Rochester of a livery of 1d. a day and 10s. a year for cloths, which livery Alfere the Hawker (accipiturius) used to have at Middelton, receivable by the hands of the sheriff of Kent from his farm at the same four terms as Alfere used to receive it, as a charter of Henry I, which the said infirm have thereof, testifies.’’≤≠ Alfere’s livery corresponds to that of the lowest category of the hunting staff mentioned in the Constitutio Domus Regis—the twenty serjeants who received 1d. a day.≤∞ For royal falconry between Domesday Book and the reign of Henry II, the only substantial source of information is the single Pipe Roll that has survived from Henry I’s reign—covering September 30, 1129, to September 29, 1130. One falconry entry on this roll, Outi of Lincoln’s accounting for one hundred Norway hawks and one hundred gyrfalcons has already been discussed. Outi was able to deliver twenty-five gray gyrfalcons and eight Norse hawks. A number of hawkers and falconers are mentioned on the roll, but only Rumfarus, who was given 40s. to buy a hawk for the king, is specifically connected with hawking, and he is elsewhere described as a fowler.≤≤ In addition to the payment to Rumfarus, £12 was paid for hawks by the sheriff of Nottingham and Derby, and £66 13s. 4d. was charged on the London account for hawks from Lorraine.≤≥ Hawks were also owed to the king for a variety of reasons: for the right to inherit paternal lands, for a plea of assart, as a penalty for having killed a man, for a concession of land, and for the right of a son to have the same acquittance his father had.≤∂ The total due comes to nineteen hawks (including two Norway hawks) and eight gyrfalcons, not counting Outi’s transaction. However, the King did not receive any of these birds—in that year, at any rate—though he did forgive one of the hawks. If one considers the amount spent for hawks and assumes that hawks owed to the king were for use and were supposed eventually to be paid, one gets the impression of a substantial falconry establishment.≤∑


Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II

There is very little information about royal falconry during the reign of Stephen (1135–54). Walter Map tells a story indicating that Stephen’s rival Matilda had a working knowledge of falconry. Writing about Henry II, Walter relates: ‘‘I have heard that his mother’s teaching was to this effect, that he should spin out all the affairs of everyone, hold long in his own hand all posts that fell in, take the revenues of them, and keep the aspirants to them hanging on in hope: and she supported this advice by this unkind parable: an unruly hawk, if meat is often offered to it and then snatched away or hid, becomes keener and more inclinably obedient and attentive.’’≤∏ Stephen is portrayed with a falcon on his wrist in four fourteenth-century English drawings, but it is likely that this was an iconographic convention rather than an indication that Stephen was a dedicated falconer.≤π Henry II’s reign (1154–89) opens a new phase in the history of English falconry. From Henry’s reign on there are records of royal expenditure that, though not as detailed as later records, provide much information about the royal sport. Henry was an ardent falconer—a fact noted by several contemporaries. Peter of Blois wrote of him: ‘‘He was an avid lover of the woods; when he ceased from warfare, he occupied himself with birds and dogs,’’≤∫ and according to Walter Map the king was ‘‘a great connoisseur of hounds and hawks, and most greedy of that vain sport.’’≤Ω Giraldus Cambrensis noted that Henry ‘‘derived a great deal of pleasure from the flights of birds of prey’’ and recounted two stories involving the king and his birds. In the first, while in Wales, Henry launched a Norse hawk against a falcon ‘‘perched on a crag,’’ only to have the falcon kill the royal bird. ‘‘So from that time on, each year about nesting time the king used to send for the falcons of that area, which are hatched on those sea cliffs. And in all his realm he found none more noble or more excellent than these.’’≥≠ The second story, a ‘‘well-known example . . . from our time against blasphemers . . . ,’’ is more of a cautionary tale: Henry II, the English king, or his son Richard (I name both but do not identify which one it was, because things made public can cause harm), in the early part of his reign thrust his best hawk at a heron, as much for hunting as for enjoyment. When the hawk with its fleet wings had almost reached the heron striving for the heights, the king, as if certain of the capture, said ‘‘ . . . that heron will not escape even if God himself should command it.’’ . . . When the king had spoken . . . , the heron immediately turned round, and almost miraculously, from the prey became the predator, and with its beak broke open the hawk’s head, causing its brain to be cast out. The heron, completely unharmed, threw the dying hawk down at the king’s feet.≥∞

Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II


Henry’s birds were not always so unlucky; when unknown to the king a prize royal falcon named Wiscard was wounded by a crane, its falconer, Ralph [de Hauville?] appealed to St. Thomas Becket. The saint appeared to Ralph in a dream and told him to find twelve ulcers in the bird and open them. The falconer did and ‘‘the bird opened its eyes and called for its food. When the King was told the story, he thanked the Martyr for saving the favourite companion of his sporting hours.’’≥≤ When Henry traveled his hawks often went with him. Walter Map, describing the ghostly household of ‘‘Herlethingus,’’ comments, ‘‘They travelled as we do, with carts and sumpter horses, pack-saddles and panniers, hawks and hounds, and a concourse of men and women.’’≥≥ On numerous occasions Henry’s hawkers and falconers traveled to France to accompany him, and he had hawks and falcons sent from England to him in France.≥∂ At several key moments in Henry’s reign he went hawking. When Archbishop Thomas à Becket was summoned to the royal court at Northampton on October 6, 1164, to answer a charge of contempt, he was forced to wait a day because Henry had stopped to hawk at a riverbank along the way.≥∑ Three years later, on November 29, 1167, Henry went hawking while the papal legates met with his bishops trying to settle the quarrel between the king and Becket.≥∏ When the great revolt of Henry’s sons, in alliance with the kings of France and Scotland and others, broke out in 1173, Jordan Fantosme records: ‘‘Although all come to him threatening, he swears by his head that he will not cease to hawk by the river nor to chase his beast.’’≥π Ralph de Diceto notes that at this time Henry was seen ‘‘indulging frequently, in his usual way, in all forms of hunting.’’≥∫ When on October 6, 1175, Henry received the allegiance of Roderick, King of Connaught, the treaty drawn up provided that ‘‘the King of Connaught is to take hostages from among all those whom the Lord King of England sent him . . . and he himself [Roderick] shall give hostages at the will of the Lord King of England . . . and they shall serve the Lord King each year with their dogs and birds, in their own persons.’’≥Ω Like other English kings Henry both received and gave presents of birds of prey, though given the nature of the records of his reign many (if not most) of the presents must not have been recorded. Those that were were the twenty falcons Henry received from his son-in-law Henry the Lion, duke of Saxony, in 1178–79; the four gyrfalcons Henry sent Frederick Barbarossa in 1157–58; the two hawks Henry gave his son Henry in 1170 (the year of the latter’s coronation), and the hawk given in the same time to William I, king of Scotland, who did homage to the Young King after the coronation.∂≠


Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II

Henry’s fondness for falconry was also manifested in substantial amounts spent on the sport, and in the size and extent of his falconry establishment. Early in Henry’s reign, between 1156 and 1158, he spent a total of £80 8s. and in twelve other years spent between £20 16s. and £52 6s. 8d. on purveyance, plus £43 5s. 1d. in 1162–63 for a ship sent to Norway to buy hawks and gyrfalcons.∂∞ While one can’t determine how many birds he bought, the highest price recorded during his reign was the £12 6s. 8d. paid for the four gyrfalcons sent to Barbarossa. Two white gyrfalcons were bought for £4 13s. 4d., while seven other gyrfalcons cost £1 each and two falcons were bought for 26s. 8d. and 33s. 4d., respectively. Prices paid for goshawks ranged from 12s. to £2 13s. 4d.∂≤ Even at the high end of the price scale an expenditure of £20 would probably have represented at least ten to fifteen birds. Another indicator of the number of royal birds are the fifty-two hutches made for the king’s hawks sent across the Channel in 1166–67.∂≥ Perhaps the large number of birds was the reason that in the 1170s Henry began repairing and expanding the mews at Winchester. In 1174–75 5s. was spent for timber to build mews in the castle at Winchester, and five years later a total of £17 17s. 5d. was spent for work on the kitchen and mews. In 1181–82 the king paid £4 19s. for an enclosed messuage at Winchester for his birds. The plot, outside the West Gate north of the castle, became known as the New Close and later as ‘‘La Parroc.’’ On this land were built a mews, a chapel, a chamber, upper-story rooms, presumably for the falconers, with a stone staircase for access, a stable, and dovecotes. At the same time, mews continued to be built at Winchester Castle itself, where hawks, falcons, and sparrowhawks were kept.∂∂ It is impossible to determine how many royal falconers there were at any one time. Not all Henry’s falconers would necessarily be mentioned in the records of his reign—let alone often enough to date their service with accuracy. A second problem is that of overlapping names. Among the men mentioned in Henry II’s records are Henry Falconarius, Henry Accipitrarius, and Henry de Cornhill, the last of whom purchased hawks for the king. Are we dealing with three Henrys, or two, or one? Is the William Austricarius noted between 3 Henry II and 13 Henry II the same as the William Austricarius mentioned from 27 Henry II to 1 Richard? Two further problems are scribal carelessness and modification in the transcription of names. Medieval clerks sometimes transcribed names as they sounded rather than as they were usually spelled. Again, the medieval clerk might Latinize the more familiar Norman or English names: thus ‘‘Cauz’’ at times is rendered as ‘‘de Calceto,’’ and ‘‘Hauville’’ as ‘‘Alta Villa.’’ Still, when all allowances are made, well over two dozen names of men

Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II


associated with the king’s birds appear in the Pipe Rolls of Henry’s reign, and a number of falconry serjeanties were established by Henry.∂∑ Henry’s falconers fall into several categories. At the top are the men in charge of various branches of the royal falconry establishment whose names occur frequently in the Pipe Polls—William de Gernemue (Yarmouth), the two Ralph de Hauvilles, Peter de Sandiacre, David de Rumenel and William de Jarpenville. William de Gernemue first appears in the king’s service in 1165–66, when he vouches for the wages of hawkers charged to the Honor of Earl Walter Giffard of Buckingham, which had recently reverted to the crown.∂∏ In 1169– 70 William and Ralph de Hauville vouched for the cost of sending birds to Normandy, and from 1170–71 through 1174–75 William bought birds for Henry II, frequently in the company of Ralph de Hauville.∂π William may have been a falconer for Earl Walter. He had held land in Middleton, Norfolk, from the earl at an annual rental of £20, which was reduced to £4 a year in return for his service to the king.∂∫ William also farmed the port duty of lastage of Norfolk and Suffolk from 1170–71 to 1173–74, supposedly paying the king £6 yearly for this privilege. In practice, William seems never to have paid for the lastage: in 1173–74 he was forgiven his arrears of £24, and from that time he was freed of both the rent for Middleton and the amount due for the lastage.∂Ω The Hauville family provided falconers for the English kings from Henry II to Edward III.∑≠ Ralph I first appears in the Pipe Rolls in 1163–64. From then through the reign of Richard I a Ralph de Hauville (either father or son) bought most of the hawks purchased for the kings.∑∞ The Hauvilles also made sure that hawks due to the king were whole and sound. Both Ralph I and Ralph II probably also served in the field.∑≤ In return for his services Ralph I was given land in Dunton, Doketon, and Kettleston, Norfolk, by Henry II.∑≥ Ralph II was put in charge of the king’s house at Brigstock, Northamptonshire, for which he was paid 1d. daily, and once he took birds across the Channel to the king.∑∂ When William de Gernemue died about 1182, Ralph, or his son, was allowed to buy for £16 the wardship of William’s daughter Maud. This purchase represented in effect a partial royal gift, for William’s land (in Middleton, Norfolk) was valued at £20 a year, £21 10s. with the stock. Ralph received with Maud, perhaps for a further payment, the right to farm the lastages of Norfolk, Suffolk, and Lincolnshire that had formerly been farmed by William.∑∑ Ralph II was later given the manor of Haconby, Lincolnshire, with its advowson, to hold by serjeanty of serving the gyrfalcons of the king, at the king’s costs.∑∏


Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II

Of the king’s hawkers, Peter de Sandiacre is referred to most often in the early Pipe Rolls of Henry II’s reign and may have been in Henry’s service before Henry came to the throne. In 1155–56 Peter Fitz Toli was pardoned 24s. of danegeld on the Pipe Roll for Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire and was sent one of the king’s hawks to care for, and in 1156–57 Peter de Sandiacre was pardoned 8s. 2d. of danegeld. Since Peter de Sandiacre was the only king’s hawker named Peter holding in Derbyshire at that time, it is clear that Peter Fitz Toli and Peter de Sandiacre were one and the same and that Peter was holding as a hawking serjeanty the land that had been held by Toli his father or grandfather. In 1158–59 Peter received a hawk paid on account. In 1170–71, with William de Gernemue and Ralph de Hauville I, he bought birds in Norfolk; in 1171–72 he received, with Robert Mauduit, money to pay hawkers and falconers; in 1172–73 he vouched for his cost and that of other royal hawkers crossing the Channel to join the king; and in 1176–77 he received 20s. of his livery at Westminster. In return for his service, he held land valued at £7 10s. in Sandiacre, Derbyshire.∑π David de Rumenel is the first hawker to be called marshal of the king’s hawks. David’s daughter was married to William de Jarpenville, and William thereby acquired the title of marshal.∑∫ From 1179–80 to 1182–83, and again in 1184–85, William vouched for the cost of passage and wages of hawkers and falconers of the king who went overseas. In at least three of these years, William himself crossed over, and his appearance as a witness on several royal charters shows that he was in attendance on the king.∑Ω William’s duties included seeing hutches were made to transport the birds and finding boats to carry the birds across the Channel. In 1186–87 William received two hawks due the king.∏≠ The serjeanty of marshal of the hawks carried with it the manors of Aston (Mullins) and Ilmer, Buckinghamshire, valued at £15 per annum in 1232, and of Effeton, Kent, worth £3 yearly. William also received (ca. 1180) the wardship of Gilbert de Bolbec, whose land in Kingseye, Buckinghamshire was worth £10 yearly (£11 with stock; though two-thirds of the land was in the hands of two dowered widows).∏∞ A second group of falconers is composed of keepers of the various royal mews. Two such keepers are recorded during Henry II’s reign. The first, Richard de Ystlape (or Islip), was keeper of the mews at Winchester Castle from 1180 to the end of Richard’s reign.∏≤ The second, Walter de Hauville, brother of Ralph (II), was keeper of the mews in the New Close at Winchester from 1181–82 to 1188–89 and perhaps as late as 1195–96. Later he returned to serving in the field.∏≥ Richard was paid 3d. a day, and received £1 a year as bread allowance.∏∂ In three of the four years in which we have records for both men, Walter was taking care of more birds (thirty-five in 1189–90), indicating

Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II


that more birds were generally kept at the New Close than at the castle and that the numbers in both changed considerably from year to year.∏∑ Besides keeping hawks, both men performed a variety of other tasks. These included having hedges planted, supervising building operations (repairing bridges, building mews, and overseeing the construction of a dovecote), buying grain for the doves, sand for the mews, and drums to flush game and keeping poultry, presumably to feed the hawks.∏∏ Richard is not recorded as receiving any land in serjeanty, but Walter was granted 60s. worth in Hallingbury de la Walle (Wallbury), Essex, by Richard I, in 1190.∏π The third group of falconers is made up of men whose names appear infrequently in the Pipe Rolls. Presumably these men were ordinarily included among the associates of the head falconers, and they appear in the records only when acting for their superiors or when sent on a special mission.∏∫ Some of these men buy birds for the king or perform various supervisory duties, several keep the king’s hawks, and two receive hawks due the king. Most, however, are recorded only as receiving wages or as carrying hawks from place to place. One of these men, Anastasius Falconarius, was paid 3d. a day, and Gervasius Falconarius received 4d. daily, but in most cases it is impossible to determine wage rates. The one bread allowance recorded for these men was 20s., the same amount Richard de Ystlape received.∏Ω Some of the men in this group held serjeanties, and others probably did. While the records of Henry II’s reign do not specify duties of these serjeanties, later records sometimes do; therefore, one can get some idea of the internal organization of Henry’s falconry establishment.π≠ If the Jarpenville and Hauville holdings are excluded, the duties of eight serjeanties are described. The Gatesdens held the manor of Stanbridge, Bedfordshire, valued at £8, by service of keeping two falcons and paying the priory of Newham £4 yearly. William de Cauz’s land in Eton, Buckinghamshire, was worth £9 (£11 6s. with stock) and was held by service of ‘‘watching the birds of the king.’’ In 1212 Roger de Cauz was recorded as holding £20 worth of land in Berkshire, by service of keeping one falcon. Robert Mauduit, who had married an heiress of Ralph Murdac, held £10 worth of land in Broughton Poggs, Oxfordshire, by service of mewing a hawk at his own cost and carrying it in season at the cost of the king. The Picots held two serjeanties. One, at Saling, Essex, was held by service of keeping a sparrowhawk. The second, £9 worth of land at Radecliffe and Kingston, Nottinghamshire, was held by carrying two goshawks in season, from September 29 to February 3, and mewing one. Robert Falconer of Hurst in Kent carried a falcon every year from September 29 to February 3 at the king’s cost, while the Wades held Stanton, Oxfordshire, by carrying a gyrfalcon in the winter, at the cost of the king.π∞


Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II

The king thus appears to have been farming out his hawks during moulting season and so reducing the cost of operating his own mews. He also provided himself in this way with a group of trained men whom he could call on if he chose. There was no guarantee that these men would be summoned: in October 1242, for example, John de Frethorn picked up hawks from Thomas Picot, Richard de Hertrugg, Robert de Redenhall, and Adam de Beysin. Redenhall’s obligation was merely to mew his hawk, but the other three owed carrying service, at the king’s cost, and in this year the king chose to take the hawks but not the service. However, as men who mewed particular hawks would be familiar with them, probably more often than not they were summoned to carry hawks they had mewed.π≤ In Henry II’s reign there are only two recorded instances of falconers who do not perform their services. Thomas Fitz Brand of Lincoln pays 40s. yearly for four consecutive years for his service in keeping a hawk for the whole year, and Gervasius Falconarius ‘‘pays 5 shillings which he owes every year to Earl Simon when he does not mew a hawk for him.’’ Gervasius’s obligation would seem to have been that of rendering a hawk, rather than a true hawking service.π≥ Besides the royal hawkers and falconers, there were men who took care of royal eyries. Adam de Torkington received 4s. yearly in Cheshire for taking care of the king’s birds in the forest, and similar services were recorded for the forests of Hexham and Ripon. For the most part, however, the royal foresters seem to have been in charge of the eyries in their jurisdictions. The forest laws of Henry II and Richard state: ‘‘It must be seen, with respect to the eyries of hawks and sparrowhawks, whether they are in the forest; who has them; and who should have them, whether the king or another.’’π∂ Loss of a royal eyrie (brood) was a punishable offense; and the Norman Roll of 1180 records that Philip de Champ-Segré owes two mewed hawks for having lost a brood of the king.π∑ In addition to raising and buying hawks, Henry II at least once took over the hawks (and hounds) of one of his tenants, those of William de Vesci, who died in 1183, leaving a minor heir. Henry may have done much the same sort of thing following the death of Earl Walter Giffard.π∏ During the vacancy in the See of York at the end of Henry’s reign (1181–89), when the archiepiscopal estates were in the king’s hands, a payment to David de Cawude and other servants of 7s. 6d. is recorded, for care of hawks of the king (which may previously have belonged to the late Archbishop Roger de Pont L’Evêque).ππ During Henry’s reign growing numbers of hawks and falcons are owed the king for various reasons. Henry’s first Pipe Roll, for example, records that he was owed ten hawks, four Norway hawks, and twelve gyrfalcons. By 1177 the number of birds owed the king had grown to ninety-seven hawks, ten Norway

Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II


hawks, seven sparrowhawks, and eight gyrfalcons, including one from Iceland. Then the number seems to level off. A major source of this debt was an increase in the farm of the counties of Buckingham and Bedford by £10 and four hawks—an item that first appears in the Pipe Roll for 1167–68. While the money increment was paid by successive sheriffs, the total number of hawks owed piled up, until in 1196–97 Richard finally valued 110 of them at £1 each and managed to collect roughly half of what was owed in the two years before his death.π∫ On the whole, Henry does not seem to have been too lucky in receiving hawks at the Exchequer. In his thirty-five-year reign he received fourteen hawks, seven Norway hawks, and six gyrfalcons, plus eighty marks (£53 6s. 8d.) owed in lieu of forty hawks, but he forgave fifty-two hawks, fourteen Norway hawks, two gyrfalcons (one from Iceland), and seven sparrowhawks, and some birds simply vanish from the records. At the end of the last full Exchequer year of his reign he was still owed one hundred eighteen hawks, six Norway hawks, and six gyrfalcons.πΩ Richard Fitz Nigel described the procedure involved in receiving these payments of birds: Sometimes royal birds are promised to the King for various reasons: that is, hawks or falcons. But if the person promising specifies ‘‘a hawk of this year’’ [a ‘‘sore’’ hawk] or ‘‘mewed,’’ or names the place of origin, ‘‘I will give an Irish, Spanish or Norway’’ hawk, he must make his promise good. But if neither the giver nor the receiver of the promise has settled the point, the giver may please himself whether he is to pay a mewed hawk or not. But if it is passed by the King’s ostringers as perfect and sound, it will be accepted wherever hatched. Again, if the debtor, being summoned, brings an acceptable hawk to the Exchequer, and there is nobody there to receive it, even though the summons be put off for a year or two, he need only pay which he prefers, a mewed hawk or a ‘‘sore’’ one. But if the payment is deferred at the request of the person summoned, he must pay according to the number of years during which it is put off, a mewed hawk two years or three years old, and so on. But hawks are never summoned for the Easter term, because there is so little use for them in summer. For they are then carefully shut up in mews, that they may moult their old feathers and recover their beauty, and their ‘‘youth’’ may be ‘‘renewed like the eagle’s.’’ [Psalms 103:5] But the hawks owing to the King are summoned for Michaelmas term, to be fit for the King’s service in the coming winter. And in compelling those who promise but do not pay, the same rule is to be followed as for voluntary offerings.∫≠

This was the theory: if it had been strictly followed, some of the birds due would have been very old indeed.∫∞ Of the birds that Henry did receive in England, most probably wound up in


Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II

the two sets of mews at Winchester. Some no doubt were sent to the royal mews at Clarendon, Salisbury Castle, or Nottingham Castle. There must have been at least temporary mews at Southampton and Dover to keep the birds while they were waiting to cross the Channel.∫≤ In Normandy there were mews at Argentan, Caen, Bur-le-Roy, and Rouen during Henry’s reign, and the records of Richard’s reign indicate that there were mews at Chamboy and Valognes as well.∫≥ Henry also seems to have hawked or kept birds at Brampton, Huntingdonshire, at Stanstead, Sussex, at Dorchester, Dorset, at the Castle of the Peak, Derby, and at Silverstone and Brigstock, Northamptonshire.∫∂ There were probably also facilities for the king’s birds at Westminster and at the Tower of London. In 1162–63 the sheriffs of London and Middlesex paid for perches for the king’s birds, in three different years birds bought for the king were credited to the London and Middlesex accounts, and in 1165–66 Richard Vetule (Velie) and William de Hauville II were paid by the sheriffs of London and Middlesex for hawks purchased for the king.∫∑ Like their father, Henry II’s sons were avid falconers. The Young King Henry had his own falconry establishment, and in 1170–71 eight mews were built for his birds at Salisbury Castle. In June 1181, after returning to England, Henry II sent sparrowhawks to the young Henry, who had remained in France.∫∏ Henry’s sons spent much time in the lands of their mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine. One can get a sense of the importance of falconry in the lives of the Poitevin nobility in the era of Henry’s sons through the poetry of the troubadour Bertran de Born.∫π Bertran uses falconry images when he writes of love, in social commentary, and to magnify his friends and belittle his enemies: I know a young moulted hawk, noble and graceful and swift, who has never taken a bird. . . . [S]he has taken me for a lover and given me more riches than if I were king of Palermo (332–33). May I lose my sparrowhawk at first throw, or may lanners kill him on my wrist and drag him away, may I watch them plucking him, if I don’t love thinking of you more than having my desire of any other who would give me her love and take me with her to bed (144–45). And Sir Richard [Lionheart] hunts lions with rabbits, so not a one remains on the plain or in the woods; effortlessly he lines them up, two by two, so they don’t dare budge; and, from now on, he counts on capturing great eagles with kites and putting the goshawk to scorn with a harrier. King Philip [Augustus] is hunting sparrows and tiny birdies here with falcons, and his men don’t dare tell him the truth—that, little by little, they are going down hill, for this year Count Richard has taken Angoulême and is becoming powerful there, and also Toulouse, which he snatched despite Philip’s protest (378–81).

Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II


When Bertran wants King Philip to go on crusade, he writes: If only the lord of Mantes and Moreuil would turn into the first tiercel, and not linger here! If he went there Edessa would be his. . . . (392–93).

Bertran reminds Duke Geoffrey of Brittany, Henry II’s third surviving son: [A] mighty man who does not tire of war, or give it up for a threat before his enemies cease to harm him, is worth more than the falconer on the riverbank or the hunter, for he gains good fame and piles it up (200–201).

Nevertheless Geoffrey submitted, and during the peace that followed the unhappy Bertran wrote: Goshawks and crane falcons, horns and a leather-covered drum, hunting dogs and bloodhounds, bows with barbed arrows, a large lined overcoat and Salisbury hose—these will form the lords’ retinue from now on (246–47).

In Poitou, when nobles were not fighting or making love, they hawked or hunted.


English Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

Like his father, Richard was a dedicated falconer. However, as Richard spent over nine years of his reign (1189–99) outside England,∞ there was less royal falconry activity in England during Richard’s reign than in that of Henry II, and recorded instances of Richard’s hawking activity all take place abroad. Several stories mention Richard in connection with falconry while he was on Crusade. In September 1190, Richard rode south from Salerno to join his fleet at Messina, spending the night of September 21–22 at Mileto in Calabria. On the next day, as he passed through a nameless small town accompanied by a single knight, he heard a hawk cry in a nearby house. Entering the house, he seized the hawk, whereupon he was attacked by the local villagers and barely managed to get away. According to an Arab historian, Richard took his hawks and falcons with him to the Holy Land, and his envoys, on presenting gifts to Saladin, asked for chickens for the birds, which had suffered from the voyage. On one occasion Richard’s falconry almost led to his capture: while out hawking with a small party near Joppa, he was surprised by a group of Saracens, who would have taken Richard prisoner if William de Préaux had not diverted the attackers by pretending to be the king and allowing himself to be captured instead.≤ During Richard’s return from Crusade he was taken by the Duke of Austria’s men on December 20, 1192, and imprisoned in Durenstein Castle soon after. During his captivity Henry Falconarius brought him hawks.≥ Richard 64

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


returned to England on March 13, 1194, but was there only a short time. He landed in France on May 12, 1194, and remained there until his death almost five years later. In at least four of those years Richard’s falconers, hawkers, and birds came from England to join him.∂ At the beginning of Richard’s reign the mews at both Winchester Castle and the New Close were repaired, and some work at these sites was done subsequently. Near the end of his reign Richard had mews and a house for his birds’ keepers built at the castle of Caen.∑ Several of the falconers of Richard’s reign who appear most frequently in the records were men who served Henry II. Ralph and Walter de Hauville appear again, joined by Ralph de Erlham, another member of the Hauville family.∏ William de Jarpenville was no longer active; but Walter Fitz Bernard, who took hawks across the Channel in 1193–94, was very likely a kinsman of William’s son-in-law Thomas Fitz Bernard, acting for William’s widow, Albreda.π Richard’s falconers also included Roger de Cauz, William de Gatesden, Gilbert de Merk, and Henry de la Wade, and Richard de Ystlape continued to keep the king’s birds. The most active new falconer is Henry Falconarius.∫ Fourteen falconry serjeanties are listed in the records of the tallage of 1198. Seven of these may have been new.Ω Under Richard, a significant change in the organization of the falconers seems to have taken place. On the Norman Roll for 1195, five separate groups of falconers are listed as receiving wages—including Ralph de Hauville with the gyrfalcons of the king. On the Norman Roll of 1198, four separate groups of falconers are listed on the Caen account.∞≠ It would seem that the royal falconry establishment had become too large, and perhaps too diversified, to be supervised by a single man. A number of small groups of falconers are recorded, each supervised by a chief who accounted for the group’s wages. During the reign of King John (1199–1216) new kinds of financial records appear, some of which provide details of royal activity of a kind previously unavailable. As a result we have for several years of John’s reign an almost day-by-day record of royal falconry expenditures. Another development was the systematic recording of royal letters. Some of these letters involved falconry, providing a better picture of how the royal falconry establishment operated, and giving direct evidence of John’s own interest in falconry.∞∞ Several contemporaries noted John’s hawking. The author of the ‘‘Histoire des Ducs de Normandie et des Rois d’Angleterre’’ wrote: ‘‘He haunted woods and streams and greatly delighted in the pleasure of them,’’∞≤ while Bertran de Born composed a song in which he said of John, ‘‘He loves better [playing] and hunting,—[brachets], greyhounds, and hawks—and repose, wherefore he loses his property,—and his fief escapes out of his hand.’’∞≥ Perhaps the most dramatic instance of John’s ardor for falconry was his


Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

command at Christmas 1208 that forbade the taking of birds throughout England.∞∂ A chapter in Magna Carta also indicates that John’s hawking sometimes involved the sacrifice of his subjects’ rights. The chapter is concerned with royal hawking along rivers, where the preferred prey—cranes, herons, and duck—were to be found. As in the case of hunting, English kings sought to enhance and protect their sport. From before the Conquest English kings deliberately chose: ‘‘[L]ands along rivers and beside fens and estuaries to grant to their hawkers and falconers. Such areas provided the conditions and game needed to train the king’s falcons and hawks and to bring them into condition before the hawking season started; and serjeanties in such locations provided the king with hawkers who were familiar with local geography whenever the king chose to hawk in the area.’’∞∑ From at least the time of Henry II, when the king decided to hawk along a river, he prohibited other people from hawking there until he arrived—a practice called putting the river in defence. Evidently John had prohibited hawking on many rivers where such bans had not been customary. Moreover he seems to have vigorously enforced his prohibitions. In 1213 he ordered the release of fowlers who were in prison for taking birds ‘‘on our rivers,’’ on condition that they swear not to take birds henceforth within five leagues ‘‘of our rivers.’’∞∏ These practices led to a clause in chapter forty-seven of Magna Carta that provided that ‘‘[A]ll forests that have been made such in our time shall be disafforested at once; and riverbanks that we have put in defence in our time shall be treated similarly.’’∞π Rivers previously in defence, however, could remain so. In 1238 Henry III wrote to the sheriff of Worcester: ‘‘We order you to proclaim without delay that no one may go hawking on our river of Avon or on other rivers in your bailiwick which were customarily in defense in the time of King Henry our grandfather, and we order you on our authority firmly to prohibit [such hawking].’’∞∫ When the king went hawking for duck along a river it was highly desirable to have sufficient bridges in good repair.∞Ω A number of letters of Henry III command various sheriffs to build and repair bridges, because the king was coming to hawk along the riverbanks.≤≠ Chapter twenty-three of Magna Carta prohibited the compelling of villages or men to make bridges at riverbanks unless legally required to do so. W. S. McKechnie suggested this was because John had been conscripting people to build bridges so he could hawk, but Natalie Fryde believes ‘‘the purpose was dual military and mercantile.’’≤∞ Clause thirteen of the 1217 Charter of the Forest may also have been a reaction to arbitrary procedures during John’s reign. This provided that ‘‘Every freeman may in his own woods have eyries of hawks, sparrowhawks, falcons,

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


eagles, and herons.’’ However, it seems likely that unwarranted seizures of eyries (broods) had been initiated not by the king, but by individual foresters. As Lady Stenton notes: ‘‘In every list of articles or chapters of the regard—the points about which forest judges were charged to inquire—the question about the ownership of eyries of hawks was always put.’’≤≤ Some aspects of John’s foreign policy also reveal his fondness for falconry. When in 1211 he invaded Wales and captured the bishop of Bangor, John ransomed him for two hundred hawks. In the same year John forced his sonin-law, Llywelyn ap Iorwerth, ruler of Gwynned, to submit and pay a tribute of cattle, horses, dogs, and birds. In 1212, when John granted three cantreds in Ross to Owen son of David and Griffin son of Roderick, part of their rent was to consist of all hawks, falcons gentle, and sparrowhawks found in the three cantreds.≤≥ It is going a little far to say that John ‘‘kept on good terms with King Sverrir Birkibein of Norway, sending him a shipload of corn occasionally, so as to ensure a good supply of the favoured Norwegian birds.’’≤∂ But John did send an envoy to Scandinavia to buy birds and received gifts of hawks and falcons gentle from the king of Norway, hawks and gyrfalcons from the bishop of Oslo, and gyrfalcons and falcons gentle from the king of Scotland—gifts he evidently accepted with pleasure.≤∑ John’s liking for hawks seems to have been as well known to Englishmen as to foreign kings. This is shown not so much by the number of birds offered John as by the kind promised to (or demanded by) him.≤∏ Offerings of falcons and hawks for privileges go back at least as far as Henry I’s reign. In the reigns of Henry I, Henry II, and Richard the type of bird, where it came from, and whether it was sore or moulted were noted. Under John, however, there are not only many more such payments for a much greater range of privileges, but one finds such oblations as ‘‘one good gyrfalcon for cranes’’; ‘‘a moulted sparrowhawk good at hunting teal’’; ‘‘a hawk that flies well’’; and ‘‘a well-seated, beautiful, and well-trained hawk.’’ Clearly these were prize birds, more expensive than the usual offerings. John’s taste for fine birds is also reflected in a mandate sent in 1205 to the bailiffs of all his ports that required them to see that no hawks and gyrfalcons coming into England were sold until Hugh and Henry de Hauville had looked at them.≤π Sometimes birds promised or owed the king were additional obligations accompanying payments of money. The men of Dunwich, Suffolk, promised the king £200, ten hawks, and five gyrfalcons for a charter of liberties; the widow of Ralph de Cornhill offered two hundred marks (£133 6s. 8d.), three palfreys, and two hawks that she might marry whom she wished; and Luke de Michewal was charged one hundred marks (£66 13s. 4d.), two warhorses, and ten hawks for his release from prison. Hugh de Normanvill provided virtually


Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

a full fowler’s equipage for a writ—a horse, a hawk, a sparrowhawk, and two dogs for hunting partridges.≤∫ Birds were owed, and sometimes paid, for judicial procedures such as writs, quittances, confirmations of charters, and inquests; for commercial privileges—licenses to hold markets and/or fairs and for transactions involving shipments of grain to or merchandise from Scandinavia; for cases involving inheritance or possession of land; and to gain the king’s good will. The nuns of Carrow, Norfolk, offered the king a sparrowhawk to have a phrase in their charter altered. The justiciar Geoffrey Fitz Peter promised the king five sore hawks to have all the timber blown down in the park of Cawston, Norfolk; in another year Geoffrey offered ten palfreys and ten hawks not to have custody of the daughters of the king of Scotland.≤Ω As one would expect, sometimes the hawks were paid, and sometimes they continued to be entered on successive Pipe Rolls as owed to the king.≥≠ While it is impossible to determine how many birds John had, in 1201–2 at least eleven falcons, one gyrfalcon, and eight hawks were sent to the king in France.≥∞ On January 15, 1213, payments were made to eight royal falconers whose birds included twenty-one gyrfalcons, three falcons gentle, four ‘‘poignatores’’ (hawks of the fist), and five lanners. In July 1214 Ralph Fitz Bernard II was keeping twelve royal hawks, and merlins and sparrowhawks were also sent to the king.≥≤ The number of birds John received as oblations, plus those acquired in his dealings with Scandinavia, may explain why amounts spent on the purchase of birds were substantially lower during John’s reign than during that of his father.≥≥ John also received birds from Poitou and Ireland, and at least once, men were sent to Devon to catch falcons.≥∂ John took a personal interest in the training of his birds. Occasionally he sent his own instructions about their care. He ordered the sheriff of Dorset to find, for the three gyrfalcons he was sending, young pigeons and swine’s flesh and chicken flesh once a week. John Fitz Hugh was told he was being sent three gyrfalcons, a falcon gentle, and Gibbun—‘‘the gyrfalcon than which we have no better’’—to provide them with plump goats, sometimes with good hens, and rabbit meat once a week and to get good mastiffs to guard the mews. The king also ordered a man taking five greyhounds into Wales to travel no more than six leagues (eighteen miles) a day—a limitation that could also apply to falconers and hawkers and their greyhounds.≥∑ Failure to take good care of a royal hawk could prove an expensive error, as Simon de Diniton found when he was amerced fifty marks (£33 6s. 8d.) for not keeping one of the king’s hawks properly.≥∏ John commemorated his good sporting days. When his falcons captured seven cranes on Holy Innocents’ Day (December 28) in 1212, John had fifty

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


paupers fed for each crane taken. On February 13, 1213, after his gyrfalcons captured nine cranes, John sent alms to one hundred paupers. John also had one hundred paupers fed on St. Nicholas’s Day (December 6), 1212, because he had gone hawking by the river.≥π Hilda Johnstone believed that the first gift cited should be seen in terms of ‘‘the compensatory aspect of almsgiving,’’ to make up for having hawked on a feast day.≥∫ Even if one accepts her analysis, John would seem to have been not only compensating God but thanking Him for the falcons’ success. The first two payments also show us what constituted a memorable day in the field. The most striking thing about John’s falconry establishment is the comparatively large number of people employed in it. The increase in number of those known is due in part to changes in record keeping—more falconers (and their assistants) were recorded. But even when this is taken into account, there seem to be many more falconers under John than there were under Henry II or Richard. Eleven different men are named in connection with hawking in the Pipe Roll of 1212–13, and on January 16, 1213, payments were made to eight falconers in Yorkshire. These men had almost certainly been with the court over the Christmas season and had likely accompanied the king on the successful Holy Innocents’ day hunt.≥Ω Another measure of the increased number of falconers and hawkers is the greater number of recorded serjeanties. Twentytwo falconry serjeanties are listed in the Book of Fees for 1212, as compared to fourteen in 1198—though six of the serjeanties listed in 1198, all of which continue, are not recorded in 1212. The number of Hauvilles serving as royal falconers also increased. Eleven members of the family appear in the records of John’s reign, including six of the falconers paid in Yorkshire, with two more turning up less than six months after John’s death.∂≠ John also either compelled or persuaded Ranulf III, earl of Chester, to grant him the falconry service of Walter de Bavent, so that Walter and his heirs did homage to the earl and his heirs for the Bavents’ holdings in Bilsby and Winceby, Lincolnshire, but the service due was attorned to the king.∂∞ Several trends noted in Richard’s reign continue under John. Members of the Fitz Bernard family, acting as marshals of the king’s hawks, generally vouched for wages of hawkers, though sometimes individual hawkers were paid separately. The falconry accounting, however, was done in terms of individual falconers or pairs of falconers in charge of small contingents of men, birds, horses, and dogs. These groups ranged in size from the one falcon, one horse, and one groom who accompanied Richard Russell in 1213, to the group led in 1215 by William de Merk to Berkshire to catch cranes that consisted of four gyrfalcons, one falcon gentle, five men, four grooms, six horses, and four greyhounds.∂≤


Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

The ‘‘men,’’ or ‘‘valets,’’ and the ‘‘grooms’’ represent, to some extent, new groups as far as the records are concerned. Some of the ‘‘men’’ may have been holders of smaller serjeanties, responsible for mewing or carrying individual birds. Others seem to have been recruited by the falconers they accompanied (see frontispiece), and when they appear in the records they are referred to as the ‘‘valets’’ or ‘‘men’’ of a particular falconer. Some valets were probably younger sons or brothers of royal falconers, and some of the Hauvilles whose names no longer appear when a less detailed system of accounting is introduced were perhaps in this category. Other valets were probably subtenants of the falconers, holding in effect sub-serjeanties.∂≥ For some men, serving as a valet constituted a form of apprenticeship; at least one man in this group, without apparent family connections, rose to be a royal falconer in his own right.∂∂ This process may explain the number of marriages between falconers and daughters of other falconers—the apprentice marrying his master’s daughter. Such a marriage would be particularly attractive to a man holding a falconry serjeanty who had no male heirs.∂∑ The grooms were probably responsible for cleaning the cages, scattering sand around the mews, and performing other menial tasks. The wages of falconers in John’s reign cannot be calculated with any degree of certainty,∂∏ but hawkers (when their wages are recorded) received 5 ∞⁄≤d. a day plus board.∂π The keeper of the mews at Winchester still received 3d. a day, and in Henry III’s reign grooms were paid 1 ∞⁄≤d. a day, though this may not have included board.∂∫ It is possible that John paid his falconers more than his hawkers. Besides his obvious preference for hunting cranes with falcons, John paid more for keeping falcons than for hawks. An entry on the Misae Roll for 14 John shows that John paid one mark (13s. d.) for keeping a gyrfalcon or falcon gentle, 10s. for a lanner, and only 8s. for a hawk. From May 1212 to May 1213 John gave his falconers £14 13s. in gifts, while his hawkers received nothing. John seems to have shortchanged his hawkers in other ways as well. While the standard payment for replacing a falconer’s horse was two marks (26s. 8d.), on one occasion William Grun the hawker was given only one mark (13s. 4d.) to buy a horse. In the same way, the two robes of green or brown cloth with rabbit-fur hoods that Walter and Hugh de Hauville received in 1208 cost 52s., while the robes given to Simon Ostricarius in 1213–14 cost only 20s.∂Ω Those men who were favored, mostly falconers, did very well. Roger de Cauz III received the marriage of Nicholaa de la Legh, with her inheritance in Huntingdonshire, Buckinghamshire, Bedfordshire, and Sussex; was given permission to hold a market; and received gifts of five marks (£3 6s. 8d.) on one occasion and £2 on another.∑≠ In 1202 the King promised Geoffrey de Hau-

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


ville II £20 worth of land in provision of marriage out of the first available escheat and provided an annual payment of £10 until he received the land. In the next year Geoffrey received twenty quarters of grain (160 bushels). In 1200 Gilbert de Hauville was promised £5 worth of land. Gilbert also received the marriage of the heiress of Richard de le Malle—not however as an outright gift—and later was given a cap costing half a mark (6s. 8d.). Between December 1215 and October 1216 Walter de Hauville was given £30 5s. worth of land; William de Hauville III received £15 worth of land in Somerset plus an unspecified amount in or near Bristol; Ralph de Erlham received two grants of land; and Ralph de Hauville IV was given half a carucate of land in Takeley, Essex.∑∞ The one hawker who was favored, Thomas Fitz Bernard, who became marshal of the king’s hawks, was given fifty bucks and £12 worth of land in Bradwell-on-Sea, Essex.∑≤ However, not all John’s gifts to his men were so generous. In return for the custody of the jail at Winchester and its appurtenances, confirmation of land at Woodcote and a hide of land at Candover (both in Hampshire), and the marriage of the son of John Tortesmains for his daughter, Matthew Wallop had to pay fifty marks (£33 6s. 8d.), mew the king’s birds at Winchester Castle at his own cost in perpetuity, and provide one servant and three greyhounds at his own cost during the mewing season.∑≥ Gilbert de Hauville’s marriage is a good example both of marriage as a significant factor in falconers’ and hawkers’ advancement and of the importance of family connections in getting ahead. Gilbert was almost certainly a younger son, possibly of William II son of Gilbert de Hauville, and in 1200 Gilbert’s uncle Ralph III gave the king a gyrfalcon trained to catch cranes to have the marriage of Avis, daughter of the falconer Richard de la Malle (Masle), with her inheritance, for Ralph’s nephew Gilbert. Though family connections may have arranged the marriage, their resources do not seem to have been sufficient for Gilbert to keep all of what he thought was Avis’s inheritance. In 1201 Richard de Heriet claimed that Richard de la Masle did not have possession of Southrope, Hampshire, on the day he died. In 1205 Gilbert promised the king ten marks (£6 13s. 4d.) and a cast of lanners for seisin, but in the same year Richard de Heriet promised one hundred marks (£66 13s. 4d.) and the service of a knight to have the case heard in the king’s court. Not surprisingly Richard won. Gilbert’s debt was carried on the Pipe Rolls for four years and was then dropped, while Richard and his heirs eventually paid the one hundred marks. When an inquest was taken on Southrope in 1246, it was listed as the estate of the late Maud de Heryerd.∑∂ But while Gilbert did not receive all the lands he hoped to get by his marriage, he did receive some. The Book of Fees records that in 1212 Gilbert held


Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

in chief by falconry service a vill in Northumberland. When Gilbert’s wife Avis died in 1244 the inheritance was specified as ‘‘Brotherwick town . . . held of the king in chief for one sparrowhawk (niso) or half a mark [6s. 8d.].’’∑∑ Avis also held fourteen bovates in Repton from the lord of Workworth for service of one-tenth of a knight’s fee, and the whole was valued at £6 2s.∑∏ In 1218 Henry III ordered the sheriff of Norfolk to give plenary seisin to Gilbert of his land in Swafham (Saham Toney).∑π At some time between 1219 and 1227 Henry III gave Gilbert £5 of land in Wallbury (Hallingbury de la Wall), Essex, by service of keeping the king’s gyrfalcons. The grant was at the king’s will, but in 1240 the king gave it to Gilbert for life ‘‘in compassion for his infirmity’’ for a yearly render of 6s. 8d. to the king’s tailor, Robert de Ros, to whom Henry had granted the land in fee.∑∫ Three court cases indicate that a Gilbert de Hauville was holding lands in Saltfleetby, Lincolnshire, and in Stokes, Rutland, and that he claimed the advowson of the church of Brigstock∑Ω —in all, a goodly accumulation for a younger son. One result of the substantial endowments of land granted to some falconers and hawkers was that some of these men came to hold knights’ fees as well as their serjeanty holdings. In Henry II’s reign (1184–85) Reginaldus Falcun owed £2 for the right to a knight’s fee, but we do not know whether he was a royal falconer or whether he received the fee. In 1194–95 Henry Falconarius paid £1 toward the scutage and Richard’s ransom; by the time of John’s third scutage in 1201–2 Henry was holding knights’ fees in Warwickshire and Leicestershire and in Lancashire and paid seven marks (£4 13s. 4d.) for his two fees. In the same scutage Ralph de Hauville III owed for one knight’s fee and Geoffrey de Hauville II for two, but Geoffrey’s debt was later forgiven. According to the Book of Fees, Peter de Sandiacre held 1 ∞⁄≥ knights fees while holding a falconry serjeanty worth £10 per year. In 1213 Robert Falconarius was excused from military service because he was serving with the king’s falcons.∏≠ Serjeanty holdings had been unequal to begin with: the value of the holdings recorded in the Book of Fees specifically in connection with falconry or hawking services during Richard’s reign ranged from £16 (Ralph de Hauville II) to 13s. 4d.∏∞ In John’s reign the highest valued serjeanty, that of Roger de Cauz III, was worth £20, but not all holdings were valued in monetary terms. The amounts of land held ranged from Walter de Hauville’s seven hides to Ralph Falconarius’ three bovates ( ≥⁄∂ of a hide?).∏≤ While in some cases those favored by the king added other serjeanty holdings (generally through marriage), in most cases royal rewards seem to have involved no additional falconry or hawking service. During John’s reign most falconry and hawking serjeants seem to have performed the services due. The only real exception to this was Albreda de

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


Jarpenville. As early as Richard’s reign Albreda had secured to her son-in-law Thomas Fitz Bernard the inheritance of her late husband William’s marshalcy of the king’s hawks. A charter to this effect was issued to her in 1203. However, Thomas died before Albreda, and in 1210–11 she gave two palfreys that her grandsons Ralph II and John Fitz Bernard I might take her place for that year in her hawking serjeanty.∏≥ In another case, the service due from the Velie (Vetule) serjeanty was changed from a hawking service to a quarter part of a knight’s fee. John’s insistence on receiving services due him can be seen in his confiscation of the lands of Henry Falconarius and Roger Picot because of failure to perform services owed. Henry, however, was allowed to regain his lands for a payment of ten marks (£6 13s. 4d.).∏∂ Like his father, Henry III (1216–72) enjoyed hawking, though he did not pursue it with the passion of his father or his son.∏∑ Henry was nine when he succeeded to the crown, and early in his reign he seems to have been flying his own falcons. Letters written in the fall of 1219 mention two pet gyrfalcons, Blakeman and Refuse. Other royal favorites included the gyrfalcon Blanchpenny, mentioned in 1225, and hawks named Pilgrim and Lespaynol, noted in 1231 and 1241. In 1251 Henry allowed his half-brother Geoffrey of Lusignan to pick a hawk from among those in John Fitz Bernard II’s custody, but he excepted from those Geoffrey could choose the ‘‘old hawk of the king.’’∏∏ Several times Henry sent particular instructions to his hawkers. In 1237 Hamo de Crevecoeur was told to take the sort of care of the hawk he was being sent that would merit the king’s special thanks. In 1243 Bartholomew Huse was told to fly his charge no more than once or twice a week. In November 1251 Gilbert de Hauville was warned that ‘‘the king will take severe measures if [the royal gyrfalcons] perish by [Gilbert’s] default.’’∏π Henry’s fondness for hawking along rivers, mentioned earlier, is further demonstrated by his gift of five marks (£3 6s. 8d.) to John de Bikenore, early in 1272, ‘‘because the king’s goshawk, which is in John’s keeping, took a duck in its first flight from the king’s hand last season.’’∏∫ Henry was extremely liberal in his gifts of falcons and hawks. When his sister Isabella married Frederick II in 1235, Thomas de Erlham and Henry de Hauville went with her, taking gyrfalcons. In 1236 Henry sent Frederick one white and three gray gyrfalcons, and four more gyrfalcons were sent Frederick in 1248. Henry also gave numerous gifts of hawks and falcons to people ranging from the papal legate to the bishop-elect of Winchester.∏Ω On occasion Henry was given birds. William de Ferrers left him a hawk in his will, and there were a number of gifts of birds from the king of Norway, from Llywelyn of Wales, and from the king of Sweden and his nephew.π≠ Besides receiving hawks as presents from Norway, Henry sent his falconers


Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

there to buy birds. Hawks were also sent from Ireland, and Henry continued his father’s policy of taking the royal prize of hawks and falcons.π∞ Early in his reign Henry had the mews at the New Close in Winchester repaired, but in 1232 he gave the buildings to Hubert de Burgh, and by 1249 they had been abandoned.π≤ From the 1230s on, most of the royal falcons were mewed at the king’s houses at Brigstock and Geddington, both in Northamptonshire. At various times royal hawks were kept at the castles of Devizes (Wiltshire), Nottingham, and Reigate (Surrey), and two royal hawks spent the summer of 1235 boarded at the Priory of Spalding. Hawks also continued to be farmed out to individuals for mewing, as they had been in John’s reign.π≥ During Henry III’s reign a regular procedure was developed for summoning men keeping royal hawks to bring the hawks for service. The man who performed this office in Henry’s reign, Walter Wobode, is sometimes called a king’s messenger, but in the final account of hawkers and falconers for 1271– 72 he is listed among the hawkers, and he buys leather to make tabors for the hawkers. By Edward I’s reign Wobode’s name had become attached to the office, and his successor, John des Arches, is called the king’s wobodus, or ‘‘le Wobode.’’ In the Wardrobe Book of 1299–1300 John is listed among the hawkers, and in addition to summoning, he makes perches for the king’s hawks.π∂ Henry III’s reign sees the first totals for hunting and falconry expenses— found in Enrolled Wardrobe Accounts on the Pipe Rolls. Evidence exists for a separate roll of hunting and falconry expenditure as early as 1234–35, but that roll has not survived.π∑ The totals we have show an annual expenditure of between £100 and £175 for most years.π∏ There is no information as to what was spent on falconry proper. The first two extant final accounts for hawking and falconry come from late in Henry’s reign.ππ Both appear to be incomplete and provide more information about the king’s hawkers than about his falconers. According to these accounts the marshal of the king’s hawks is paid 12d. a day and the hawkers 5d.—though one of the hawkers was supposed to be paid 5 ∞⁄≤d. according to the terms of his serjeanty. In the second account the marshal and hawkers each received a pair of shoes costing 8d. However the Liberate Rolls record several hawkers paid 8d. per day. The extra 3d. a day may be because they had two horses instead of the (then) more usual one.π∫ Hugh de Erlham, the one falconer mentioned by name in both final accounts, was paid 12d. daily; his two porters received 5 ∞⁄≤d.; and according to the earlier account all three were given shoes. In other accounts, Ralph de Erlham was paid 4 ∞⁄≤d. a day, while grooms received 1 ∞⁄≤d. a day. For mewing the king’s falcons at Brigstock, Henry de Hauville received an annual fee of £10.πΩ As to numbers, the final

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


account for the last year of Henry’s reign lists eight hawkers (including the contraripator and the wobode) in addition to the marshal. An account of around 1250 listing ‘‘persons to whom robes are to be issued’’ names eleven falconers.∫≠ Besides wages and grants of land, royal hawkers and falconers might receive fringe benefits. John de Bikenore was given a yearly fee of twenty marks (£13 6s. 8d.), ‘‘pending ampler provision in wards or escheats.’’ From 1239 to 1259 John de Frethorn received gifts of a wardship, £15 worth of land, ten marks (£6 13s. 4d.), fourteen oaks, five deer, nine robes for himself and two for his wife, and fourteen tuns of wine. Other hawkers and falconers sometimes received wine, deer, or oaks. Men who were injured or became ill had their expenses provided for, and some were granted pensions or offices.∫∞ The pattern of falconry and hawking families serving the king continued during Henry III’s reign. For almost forty years the Hauvilles dominated the falconry establishment, while the falconers mentioned most frequently from the mid-1250s to Henry’s death in 1272 were members of the collateral Erlham family. A Fitz Bernard served, for a time, as marshal of the king’s hawks; Henry de Lincoln carried a goshawk across the sea, and Robert de Redenhall and Thomas Picot received wages as king’s hawkers. Among those men recorded as keeping royal birds are members of the Merk, Huse, Beysin, and Mauduit families.∫≤ But other hawking and falconry serjeanties were being performed by deputies, had been alienated, or had been transformed either into knight service or into money rents.∫≥ For the three years for which there are detailed accounts about royal hawkers there are three different marshals: John Fitz Bernard II by fee in 1257–58; Robert de la Mare in 1264–65; and John de Bikenore, acting for Ralph Fitz Bernard III marshal by fee, in 1271–72. Of the six other hawkers (plus the contraripator and the wobode) listed in 1257–58, four were described as hawkers by fee—John Mauduit, John de Peckham, Peter Picot, and Robert de Redenhall. The other two, Richard de Hertrugg and Adam de ‘‘Bescy’’ (Beysin), were also serjeants, though not designated as such. In 1264–65 however, of four hawkers only Philip de Hertrugg was performing his service: John de Peckham’s service was being performed by John de la Mare (a relative of the marshal’s), John Mauduit’s by Gilbert Morin, and John de la Huse’s by Geoffrey de Romesye. The situation was much more complicated in 1271–72. In the winter of 1271–72, of seven hawkers, Robert de Redenhall and Philip de Hertrugg performed their services; John Mauduits’s service was performed by Nicholas Halliwell; Hawisa de London’s by Elie Cockerel; and three of John de Bikenore’s relatives acted as hawkers by precept of the king. In the following fall only Robert de Redenhall performed his service: Philip Hertrugg’s


Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

service was performed by the younger John de Bikenore; John Mauduit had a new deputy, Ralph Sauvage; John de Peckham’s service (not mentioned for the previous winter) was performed by Thomas de Crevecoeur; Elie Cockerel again acted for Hawisa de London; Thomas de Bikenore carried a hawk given to the king; and Roger de Bikenore no longer appeared.∫∂ Although it is tempting to conclude that these accounts show a steady decline in people performing the duties of their serjeanties, evidence for Edward I’s reign shows that this is an oversimplification.∫∑ There had been a general decline, but the proportion of people serving as deputies varied from year to year. One can conclude that there was some variation as to which hawking serjeants were summoned and that family connections continued to be important. When a man was put in a position of authority, such as marshal of the king’s hawks, he used his position to reward his family. The period covered by this chapter sees a significant change in types of reward for service. Both Richard and John continued to create serjeanties, but by Henry III’s reign the situation had changed. As we have seen, some of the old serjeants continued to serve, but the Fitz Bernards and the Hauvilles were joined, and in some cases replaced by, new hawkers and falconers. These new men, such as John de Frethorn, were paid, and while they may also have been rewarded with grants of lands, they do not seem to be holding these lands by serjeanty tenure. Such new arrangements are characteristic of the king’s household generally.∫∏ At the same time new serjeanties were no longer being created, some old ones were disappearing. In theory serjeanties had been impartible and inalienable, but in fact some serjeanties had been divided due to inheritance; others were alienated, some by substitution, others by subinfeudation. Consequently Henry III launched a number of investigations into alienated serjeanties. Kimball believes that these surveys mark a fundamental change in royal attitude toward serjeanty: Alienated land was confiscated and returned to its owner only after he had agreed to pay an annual rent. Such payments came to mean more to the crown than the services formerly due from the serjeanties. Many services, having lost their usefulness, were commuted, or became merged in the rents. The adoption of this policy was made possible by a change in the attitude of the crown towards serjeanties and their tenants. The idea that had determined the twelfth-century conception of the tenure, the idea that a serjeanty was inalienable and impartible, because its tenant performed a special service for the king and enjoyed a special relationship with him, was breaking down before the newer ideas of the thirteenth century. Like other lands, serjeanties became partible and alienable; their services were commutable. In spite of these

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


changes, the tenure continued to exist, but it had lost most of the attributes that had distinguished it from the other tenures in the twelfth century.∫π

Until further studies are made, one cannot make comparisons with other serjeanties, but one gets the impression that more falconry and (especially) hawking serjeanties continued to exist than other serjeanties, at least to the end of the thirteenth century. Perhaps Edward I’s taste in sport was a factor in this, but one has the feeling that, unlike many other serjeants, hawkers and falconers continued to perform ‘‘a special service for the king and enjoyed a special relationship with him.’’ Two sets of sources, the Book of Fees and the Inquisitions post mortem, allow one to generalize about hawking and falconry serjeanties. One striking thing is the broad geographical distribution of both types of serjeanty. If one considers only those holdings that are specifically noted as hawking or falconry serjeanties, one finds a total of thirty-three falconry serjeanties in twenty different counties and twenty-seven hawking serjeanties in nineteen counties. In all, twenty-seven counties had at least one royal falconry or hawking serjeanty.∫∫ Seven falconry serjeanties were in Lincolnshire, four in Oxfordshire, and three in Norfolk. The hawking serjeanties were less concentrated, with three in Lancashire and no more than two in any other county. A number of the holders of these serjeanties do not appear elsewhere in the royal records.∫Ω It seems evident that not only had kings placed serjeants on land suitable for royal sport, but they had scattered serjeanties throughout the kingdom so that falconers and hawkers knowledgeable about each area were available wherever and whenever the king chose to hawk. For the twenty-one falconry serjeanties for which values are given in the Book of Fees, the average value was £7 6d.; for the nineteen hawking serjeanties, the average value was £5 12s. 8d. The difference may reflect John’s preference for falconry. The distribution of falconers is one serjeanty valued at £20, five between £15 and £10, nine between £9 and £5, three at £4 to £3, and three at 30s. or less. The distribution of hawkers is also one serjeanty valued at £20, with four at £10, four between £9 and £5, six between £3 and £2, and four at two marks (26s. 8d.) or less. Christopher Dyer has proposed social categories below that of the knight. If one uses his categories, one finds twenty-four hawkers and falconers in the ‘‘lesser gentry’’ bracket, nine in the range of incomes of a wellto-do peasant, and seven below even that level.Ω≠ The Inquisitions post mortem provide information about the overall holdings of hawkers and falconers, including lands held by nonserjeanty tenure and those held from lords other than the king. The earliest Inquisitions post mortem date from 1235–36. I have looked at the published volumes (and in


Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

many cases at manuscript materials) through the reign of Edward II, a period covering some ninety years. During this time inquests were held on twenty-six royal serjeanties—thirteen held by falconers and thirteen by hawkers. There is wide variation in the sizes of the estates. At the top are two men holding falconry serjeanties, Robert de Tattershall, a baron with more than fifty subinfeudated knights’ fees, and Reginald de Grey who, at his death in 1308 held 16 ≤⁄≥ knights’ fees (7 ∞⁄≥ of which were nonroyal), two other serjeanties, plus other assets.Ω∞ Next came a group of six hawkers and four falconers who had accumulated knights’ fees or their equivalents. Ralph Fitz Bernard IV held 5 ≥⁄∑ths knights’ fees (all nonroyal) and two manors. Ilmer and Aston, Kent, were valued at £19 19s. 4 ∞⁄≤d. in the 1306 inquest, and the total value of Ralph’s holdings was set at £72 9s. 10 ≥⁄∂d. When Ralph’s father John Fitz Bernard II died in 1271 Robert Kokefeud gave two hundred marks (£133 6s. 8d.) for Ralph’s marriage. Of the other hawkers, Phillip de Hertrugg held 4 ∞⁄≤ knights’ fees plus two manors: his manor of Hartridge and Titcombe, Berkshire, was valued at £10 yearly in 1279. John Mauduit held 2 ∞⁄≥ knights’ fees and his manor of Broughton, Oxfordshire, was valued at £10 9s. 4d. in 1302. Adam de Beysin held 3 ∞⁄≤ manors, 1/6th of a knight’s fee and additional lands, including two townships, by rent; his manor of Wrickton and Walkerslow, Shropshire, was valued at £18 4s. in 1243. Peter Picot held two manors by two serjeanties plus ≥⁄∂ of a knight’s fee, his manor of Ratcliff upon Soar, Nottinghamshire, was valued at £24 8s. 8d. in 1283. Hawisa de London held two manors and an advowson by two serjeanties as well as half a knight’s fee; her goshawk serjeanty at Inglesham, Wiltshire, was valued at 70s. 5 ∞⁄≤d. in 1274. Of the falconers Henry de Hauville held two manors, Haconby, Lincolnshire, and Dunton and Kettleston, Norfolk, which were valued in 1253 at £15 8s. 8d. and £24 4s. 8 ∞⁄∂d., respectively, plus various additional lands and the lastages of Boston (said to be worth £12), Ipswich, Lynn (valued at £10), and Yarmouth. Godfrey le Faukoner held 1 ≥⁄∂ knights’ fees and the manor of Hurst, Kent, valued at £12 11s. 10d. at his death in 1279. Jolland de Bavent (d. 1286) held the manors of Bilsby and Winceby, valued at £6, and the town of Mareham le Fen, Lincolnshire (valued at £6 13s. 4d.) plus yearly rents of £7 15s. in three other places. Ralph le ‘‘Fauconer’’ (d. 1273) held Keelby and Humberstone, Lincolnshire, the former valued at £4 2s., the latter held by a second falconry serjeanty of Sir Henry de Lacy, valued at £4 10s., plus seven bovates elsewhere in Lincolnshire—the wardship was worth £10 12s. 5d.Ω≤ The third category consists of the three falconers who, while not accumulating lands equivalent to a knight’s fee or more, had been able to add significant amounts of land to augment their serjeanty holdings. Henry de la Wade’s

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


serjeanty at Stanton, Oxfordshire, was valued at £8 in 1238. He held an additional carucate of land (valued at £2 in 1247) by a second serjeanty. Hugh de Stredleye (Strelley) held a watermill in Brough by service of carrying a lanner; he also held a manor at Hasselbach and six bovates of land at Athlestre, all in Derbyshire. Hugh held Hasselbach by service of ∞⁄∂ knight’s fee and the rent of Milnehay by service of 2d. per year, both of a presumed kinsman, Sir Robert de Stredely. Robert de Eleford held four virgates at Lewe, Oxfordshire, valued at £1, by mewing a lanner falcon. He held a second nonfalconry serjeanty valued at £2, plus a capital messuage, some additional lands, and two cottages by money services.Ω≥ The fourth group includes the six hawkers and two falconers who essentially maintained their families’ serjeanty holdings. The most valuable hawking serjeanty in this category was that of Robert de Redenhall whose land in Redenhall, Norfolk, was said to be worth £15 14s. 3d. in 1281. John de Stokes held the alienated Sandiacre serjeanty in Derbyshire, which had been valued at £10 in 1226–28. John de Peckham’s manor of West Pecham, Kent, was valued at £9 10s. 5 ∞⁄≤d. in 1283. William de Hauville III’s holding at Brotherwyk, Northumberland, was said to be worth £6 2s. in 1252. William Picot’s manor at Salling, Essex, was valued at £5 6s. 10d. in 1283. Last among hawkers came Thomas Hamelyn whose holding in Babraham, Cambridgeshire, was said to be worth £3 3s. 8d. The two falconers were Robert Cauce (Cauz?) who held a messuage, two tofts, and four bovates in Hedon, Yorkshire, and Peter de Cusancia who held the serjeanty of White Roding, Essex (valued at £10 in 1235) during the lifetime of Marie, widow of John de Merk.Ω∂ Finally come a single hawker and two falconers whose holdings had declined. The hawker was Simon le ‘‘Hauekere’’ who held a messuage and a carucate in St. Ives, Huntingdonshire, valued at £2 3s. 8d. plus a parcel of meadow held of the abbot of Ramsey. Both Simon’s predecessors had held additional land. The two falconers were William son of Godfrey de Clixby (d. 1276), who held half of the serjeanty of Clixby, Lincolnshire, the whole of which had been valued at £4 in 1244, and Walter de Baggeridge, who held a third of a serjeanty in Baggeridge, Dorset.Ω∑ Roughly half the falconry and hawking serjeants then had increased their original holdings, some very substantially. Another third had maintained their estates, and only the three in the last group had clearly slipped. It may be noted that nine of thirteen falconers had increased their holdings as compared to six of thirteen hawkers. Five of the serjeants also held a total of six nonfalconry serjeanties, though none of these was a regular household serjeanty.Ω∏ In addition to the Bavents, two other falconers held nonroyal falconry serjeanties: Robert Cauce served as king’s falconer by feoffment of William earl of


Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III

Aumale, while Ralph le ‘‘Faukener,’’ in addition to his royal service, kept a falcon for Sir Henry de Lacy.Ωπ In an age in which status could be measured by the dowry one’s wife brought to a marriage, it is interesting to note that John de Hertrugg’s wife Nicholaa brought him three knight’s fees, Jolland de Bavent’s wife Amabel’s inheritance was £3 in rent, and Ralph III de Hauville’s wife Cecily de Neville brought with her 18 ∞⁄≤ virgates of land worth a little over £5.Ω∫ Why did some serjeants thrive while others declined? The answer to the first part of the question is largely royal favor, particularly exemplified through marriage. The de Grey and Tattershall serjeanties are both instances in which several profitable marriages led to a dramatic rise in family status. Roger de Cauz (III), an active falconer, [who] held over £25 in inherited land by sergeanty tenure in Berkshire, Wiltshire, Buckinghamshire, and Northamptonshire . . . married Nicholaa de la Legh, an heiress with lands in Bedfordshire and Huntingdonshire—a marriage arranged with the help of [Roger’s] brother Geoffrey, one of King John’s clerks, who obtained from the king in 1214 the promise of ‘the first marriage worth £10 or £15 in land in England’ for Roger. . . . . . . Emma de Cauz (II), daughter of Roger . . . and Nicholaa . . . [married] John de Grey, younger son of the Henry de Grey who held Codnor in Derbyshire and land in Thurrock, Essex, in John’s reign. Emma inherited Roger’s entire estate as well as that of her mother. She [had been] married first to John de Segrave, son of Stephen de Segrave the king’s justice, but when John died without issue, her marriage was sold by Stephen to John de Grey. The king’s approval of this marriage was probably granted to some extent as a reward for John’s activity in the king’s service. John’s and Emma’s son Reginald de Grey retained the Cauz falconry sergeanties in Water Eaton, Bucks and Easton Grey, Wilts, while the £20 [Cauz] sergeanty in Shalbourn, Wilts, went to a daughter who was married to Robert de Tattershall (son of Robert f. Walter f. Robert de Tattershall who held a butlery sergeanty in Essex). Reginald de Grey married the heiress of Wilton Matilda de Longchamp and subsequently became first Lord Grey of Wilton, raising the family into the peerage.ΩΩ

The Hauvilles, as we have seen, benefited from direct royal grants of land, and it is not surprising that the Fitz Bernards, hereditary marshals of the king’s hawks, had the richest accumulation of lands of any hawkers in the inquests examined. A second factor in success seems to have been the ability to acquire holdings from nonroyal sources, though whether this was due indirectly to royal favor, to the desire of grantors to please the king, or to the hawker or falconer’s own initiative or ability is impossible to tell. Investments by the serjeants may have also played a part. John de Hertrugg purchased the manor

Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III


of Weston, Berkshire, and the four smallholdings held jointly by John and his wife Nicholaa in Haselwyk, Berkshire, may also have been purchases.∞≠≠ The single most important reason why some serjeanty families did not increase in prosperity and why others declined was probably inheritance, although improvidence no doubt was important as well.∞≠∞ At the beginning of the thirteenth century it was held that in theory the duty of a serjeant could not be divided among co-heiresses, but starting from early in the reign of Henry III partitions became the norm.∞≠≤ The smallest in value of the twenty-six serjeanties I have considered, that of Baggeridge, Dorset, would seem to have been a divided serjeanty. According to the Inquisition post mortem, Walter’s serjeanty of mewing a falcon was shared with two partners, and Walter’s entire holding consisted of a messuage, twenty acres of arable, an acre of meadow, and two cottars—an ‘‘estate’’ hardly distinguishable from that of a villein.∞≠≥ But while the service of a serjeant was theoretically indivisible, his lands were not, and hawkers and falconers without male heirs often left divided inheritances and serjeanties reduced in size. An extreme case was that of Adam atte Broke of West Pecham, Kent, whose substantial manor was divided after his death in 1318 among his seven daughters, ranging in age from nine years to fifteen days.∞≠∂ At the same time some holders of falconry serjeanties were accumulating lands and becoming knights, a number of younger sons of knights, and even the nephew of an earl, were becoming falconers and hawkers. The most notable of these was Warin de Lancaster, nephew of Earl William of Lancaster, who became a falconer (Warin Falconarius) with holdings in Lancashire. Robert Mauduit the hawker also seems to have been a younger son and William (Gulafre) Ostricarius was the third son of a knightly family.∞≠∑ Not only did falconry (and hawking) provide the possibility of financial rewards, but it was seen as a sport closely identified with the nobility. Consequently, falconry and hawking also seem to have been socially nondisparaging occupations for younger sons of baronial or knightly families.∞≠∏


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

The reign of Edward I (1272–1307) was one of the greatest periods in medieval English royal falconry, as can be seen from the large amounts of money spent on the sport. Between November 20, 1284, and November 19, 1294, the Enrolled Wardrobe Accounts show that Edward spent over £660 on falconry and hunting in every year but one. A peak of £1002 10s. 1 ∞⁄≤d. was spent in 1285–86 alone: when hunting expenses are subtracted, the total spent in that year directly credited to falconry and hawking comes to £864 6s. 1d.∞ Edward’s preferences in sport can be seen in changes of style in the headings of the hunting sections in the Enrolled Wardrobe Accounts. Under Henry III the title of the hunting entry was ‘‘payments made to huntsmen, hawkers, falconers . . . ,’’ in that order. Under Edward the heading was changed several times, but falconers were always listed first, hawkers generally second (though not mentioned once), and huntsmen were last.≤ Edward’s penchant for falconry was noted by his contemporaries. The chronicler Nicholas Trivet wrote of him, ‘‘When he took time out from arms, he indulged in the hunting of birds and of wild beasts.’’ Trivet describes Edward’s behavior on one occasion when he was hawking along a riverbank and saw that a companion across the river had neglected to help a falcon that had captured a duck among some willows. Edward first reproved the man, and


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


when the man was slow to act Edward lost his temper and began to berate him. The river was between them, there was no bridge or ford nearby, and the man made the mistake of pointing this out. Edward promptly drove his horse into the water, mounted the overhanging bank on the other side with some difficulty, and with drawn sword set off after the fugitive. The man, unable to get away, bared his head waiting for the blow—whereupon Edward sheathed his sword, and the two men returned to take care of the falcon.≥ Trivet tells this story to illustrate Edward’s bold spirit, but it also demonstrates the seriousness with which Edward took falconry. Like his father, Edward began hawking at an early age. Before he was nine he had his own heron falcons, three of which were sent to Northampton in February 1248, and four were mewed at Geddington in the following year.∂ Edward’s falconer Gilletto probably did not accompany his master on Crusade in 1270, having broken his leg not long before, but among those who did go was Thomas Mauduit, perhaps a member of the branch of that family that held by falconry service.∑ On his return from Crusade in August 1274∏ Edward took an active role in the management of his birds. Work was begun on a new royal mews at Charing, and by July 1275, £140 8s. 7 ∞⁄≤d. had been spent. Over the next two years £219 11d. more was spent on the mews, and between 1280 and 1281 further expenditures of £164 13s. 4 ∞⁄≤d. brought the total to almost £525.π In 1276 Edward sent envoys to Norway to buy falcons and gyrfalcons, and in 1278 two men were sent to Denmark, Sweden, and Norway to buy birds. In 1278 ten gyrfalcons and seven hawks were purchased at a cost of £50 16s. 8d.∫ The amounts spent on royal falconry and hunting also demonstrate a steady increase in royal sporting activity. In 1274–75 the total was £233 19s. 6d.— more than any recorded year’s expenditure by Henry III. Then came three years of annual expenditures of over £300 and two of over £400, and in 1280– 81 £565 5s. 2d. was spent. The final account of 1277–78 makes possible the first detailed breakdown of falconry and hunting expenses, and in that year twice as much was spent on falconry and hawking than on hunting. Falconry and hunting expenditure dropped off between 1281 and 1283, years in which Edward was campaigning in Wales. Then came eleven years in which over £500 was spent annually on royal sport, and in which, for the five years in which falconry expenditures can be isolated, falconry and hawking made up from 76 percent to 91 percent of falconry and hunting expenditures. In 1294– 95, a year in which Edward was at war with France and faced rebellion in Wales, expenditure on sport fell to £254. In the remaining years of Edward’s reign, years characterized by warfare in Scotland, increasing royal debt, old


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

age, and irregular bookkeeping, sporting expenditure, with one notable exception, remained fairly modest, in the £200 range for most of the years for which we have complete records.Ω In the spring after his return, Edward ordered the abbot of Thorney to see who was taking ‘‘the eggs of ducks and other fowl from the nests in his marsh of Thorneye, and eyries of herons . . . in his wood of Thorney . . . so that the king and his magnates cannot have their sport as in past times, and to do justice upon all who shall have taken such eggs or eyries.’’∞≠ The depredations continued, for the next year Edward told the abbot ‘‘to arrest the persons who . . . are bold enough to steal, take and destroy the young herons, to the destruction of the king’s sport, whereat the king is moved. . . . The abbot is to arrest those who have taken or carried away young herons . . . and to cause them [the thieves] to be brought to the king wherever he may be in England, so that he may cause them to be punished in such a way as to strike terror (terrorem prebeat) into others.’’∞∞ On several other occasions Edward acted vigorously to preserve the quality of his hawking. In August 1286 he sent the following order to six sheriffs: Although the king, by reason of his stay in parts beyond sea, does not believe that he will have his sport by the rivers within the realm this coming winter, he nevertheless orders the sheriff to put into defence all the preserved (vetitas) rivers within his bailiwick, and to cause in addition proclamation to be made that no one shall presume to hawk (riviare) in the same with goshawks, falcons or other birds while the king is without the realm, and to so punish any persons found thus transgressing that their punishment shall cause to others terror of offending.∞≤

Destruction of eyries in the royal forest was another punishable offense. In 1290, after Richard of Dolfineleye the miller ‘‘cut down alders in a sparrowhawk’s eyrie in the forest of Quernemor, and destroyed the said eyrie,’’ he was ‘‘delivered into prison.’’ In the next year Adam son of Agnes of Ellale and John of Crively, servant of William of Crockhawe, similarly cut down alders in which were sparrowhawks’s eyries. Only Adam was recorded as destroying the eyrie, but both were attached.∞≥ When it came to the theft of falcons, Edward was also severe. In 1275 Ralph Morin was imprisoned in Oxford Castle merely on suspicion of having taken the king’s gyrfalcon, which was later found. In 1293, John de Foleville, John Tok, and Roger Somerville were accused of having detained for a time a falcon of the king’s son-in-law, John de Brabant, to the damage of one thousand marks (£666 13s. 4d.). John de Foleville was pardoned and eventually John

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


Tok and Roger Somerville were able to settle for fines of £5 and £2 respectively, but the suit must have been such as ‘‘to strike terror into others.’’∞∂ Edward’s interest and skill in falconry can be seen in the eighteen letters he wrote his falconer Robert de Bavent between 1302 and 1305.∞∑ The letters are concerned with practical, day-to-day matters. Some falcons have been wounded by a heron, preventing Bavent from joining Edward; the king writes Bavent to stay with the falcons until they are completely cured. The king is sending Bavent a lanner and wants him to train it to fly at herons with the other two lanners in his custody, because Edward thinks it would be a good idea to train three lanners to fly together at herons. The king has sent letters to the seneschal of the earl of Lancaster in the matter of Bavent’s uncle John. The king is glad to hear that two of his gyrfalcons are willing to be flown together at herons, and he instructs Bavent not to fly these falcons at herons any more, but to train them for cranes. Since Bavent needs cranes, the king notifies him that Sir Philip Kyme has three that fly well and that he has kept for the king’s purposes, and Edward has ordered Sir Philip to let Bavent have them. Bavent is not to buy any more falcons or gyrfalcons because Edward has enough, but if Bavent should find a marvelously large hawk, he should receive it for the king, even if it has broken feathers.∞∏ Bavent must send quickly the gyrfalcon and the two lanners that are flying at herons; Edward has forgotten to send a messenger, so Bavent should send the birds with any man who knows well how to carry and use them—‘‘but not Thomas your brother.’’∞π Edward repeatedly asks for information on the condition of his birds or thanks Bavent for having sent him news. Edward is portrayed in these letters as a man familiar with every aspect of his falconry establishment, down to the strengths and weaknesses of individual birds and individual men. While Edward allowed his falconers a certain amount of discretion, it is clear that he himself determined the program according to which the birds were to be trained.∞∫ Edward’s passion for falconry was demonstrated in many small ways as well. Messengers who brought him the first heads of cranes taken by his falcons were rewarded, generally by gifts of half a mark (6s. 8d.). Other hawking achievements led to similar gifts or to gifts of alms.∞Ω Edward so appreciated the good care the widow of Sir John de Merk had given his falcon Marmaduke that he mentioned it in the royal letter recalling the bird.≤≠ As in earlier reigns, falconry and gifts of birds were aspects of royal diplomacy as well as ways of trying to obtain royal favor. When John Balliol, king of Scotland, submitted to Edward in 1296, Edward had him brought to London, where an area within a twenty-mile radius was assigned to Balliol for hunting and hawking.≤∞ The usual gifts of falcons were received from abroad.


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

King Magnus VI of Norway sent Edward two white and six gray gyrfalcons in 1276 and 1279, probably by the envoys Edward had sent to Norway to buy falcons. Magnus also sent Edward three white and six gray gyrfalcons in 1280, when in Magnus’s last illness he begged Edward’s protection for his children. Other gifts of birds came from Alexander III of Scotland (one white and three gray gyrfalcons); from Peter Algot, clerk of the king of Norway; from Edward’s in-law the duke of Brabant; and from the countess of Blois (a white gyrfalcon).≤≤ In turn Edward sent white and gray gyrfalcons to his brother-in-law Alfonso X of Castile, gyrfalcons to the margrave d’Este, and two falcons gentle to John de Brabant, among others.≤≥ But the most unusual of Edward’s gifts of birds, so far as the circumstances of the gift were concerned, were the gyrfalcons sent to the Mongol khan in 1291. When Edward was on Crusade he wrote to the Mongols for help. The khan sent ten thousand horsemen, though they accomplished only a temporary diversion. But in the 1280s the Mongols became increasingly concerned with trying to defeat the Moslems, and Khan Arghun (1284–91) sent four embassies to the West attempting to bring about an alliance and a joint expedition to the Holy Land. One embassy reached England in January 1290, bringing among other things a request by the khan for gyrfalcons. The next year an English embassy including three falconers among its twenty-odd members left for Tabriz with the gyrfalcons. It was two years before the embassy returned, bringing back with it the gift of a leopard for the king.≤∂ Falcons (and hawks) were not the only presents Edward or other English kings gave or received. Henry III was given an elephant by Louis IX of France and a polar bear presumably by Haakon IV of Norway. In addition to birds of prey and the khan’s leopard, Edward received, among other gifts, a ‘‘noble shield of steel adorned with various devices’’ from King Charles of Sicily and a set of crystal and jasper chessmen from the Visitor of the Order of the Temple. In 1307 Pope Clement V’s envoy to England, Cardinal Pedro of Spain, was given a gold cup and pitcher, a pair of gilt-silver basins, and two palfreys; while, in what appears to be a quid pro quo, Prince Edward, upon receiving two falcons in 1300 from the ‘‘Count of Albemarle,’’ gave the count’s falconer a silver cup worth £20 15s. 8d. It is evident that falcons, particularly gyrfalcons, ranked with these precious objects as gifts suitable for a king both to give and to receive.≤∑ Closer to home, Edward received at various times a gyrfalcon and two lanners from the queen and a falcon and two lanners from Prince Edward; in 1304, in an echo of a much earlier practice, John de Warenne, earl of Surrey sent the king a falcon that had belonged to his recently deceased father. Over

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


one hundred birds from a great range of other donors are recorded. These included thirteen white and thirty-one gray gyrfalcons, thirty-eight other gyrfalcons, thirteen peregrines, and seven goshawks. There were also three gifts of gyrfalcons and two of goshawks for which the numbers of birds sent were not recorded.≤∏ The dates of some of these gifts provide insights into the motives behind them. In 1289–90, at a time when William Fraser, bishop of St. Andrews, was actively promoting John Balliol as king of Scotland, the bishop sent Edward two gyrfalcons and sent a third to the queen, who gave it to her husband.≤π When Antony Bek, bishop of Durham, was Edward’s counselor and companion he is recorded as giving Edward only a sore hawk; but after Bek’s relations cooled with the king in the early 1300s the bishop sent the king two gyrfalcons and a hawk.≤∫ Clearly contemporaries were aware of Edward’s tastes and sought to exploit his interests to their own advantage. Edward gave far fewer birds of prey than he received, around twenty-five in all, and even more rarely granted hawking privileges. In 1280, Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester and Hereford, was given ‘‘Licence . . . to sport during the present season of sport (riveandi) along all forbidden rivers in the counties of Somerset and Dorset and along the whole river of the Kenet.’’ In 1293, Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln, was also granted a license, but with a curious limitation: ‘‘Licence, until a fortnight after Easter, . . . to sport (riveare) along the rivers wherever he happens to be passing throughout the realm, and to take birds and to carry them away; providing that in sporting (in riveando) he let no falcon fly.’’ Both earls, in different years, were also granted the royal prize of hawks and falcons at various ports.≤Ω Because of the great increase in the quantity and kinds of royal records, we have a good deal of information about Edward’s falconry establishment, though (as noted earlier) while we have substantial information for some years we have very little for others. Nevertheless, we have a much better idea of Edward’s falconers’ and hawkers’ wages, allowances, fringe benefits, and routines than we have for those of any of Edward’s predecessors.

Wages In November 1279 Edward I issued a household ordinance—the earliest such document to have survived since the Constitutio Domus Regis. In these regulations, members of the royal household were assigned to various categories, each of which had fixed wages, food allowances when away from court (when those involved didn’t eat in the king’s hall), and allowances for robes.≥≠ Hawkers and falconers are not explicitly mentioned in the ordinance, but their wages and robe allowances can be found in other documents of Edward’s


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

reign. In part wages were based on rank: knights received 1s. a day when in court and 2s. when away, and squires received 7 ∞⁄≤d. in court and 12d. when away. In part the wage was based on the size of the entourage: hawkers and falconers with two horses and one groom were paid at the same rate as squires; hawkers and falconers with one horse and one groom were paid 4 ∞⁄≤d. a day in court and 9d. while away. The men with two horses were generally those to whom hawks or falcons were assigned. The men with one horse, such as the wobode, served as auxiliaries, built and repaired bridges, and, on occasion, went ahead of the group to find lodging for the hawkers.≥∞ Nonroyal hawkers and falconers who came to court and went out with the royal servants were paid at equivalent rates and might be given robes or payments in lieu of robes. Wages could vary: in 1285 William Spencer (‘‘Lespentri’’) received 4 ∞⁄≤d. a day as a valet on foot. In the next year, as valet keeper of the mews, his wages fell to 3d. a day. His next recorded wages came in 1290 when as keeper of the mews he again received 4 ∞⁄≤d. Later, after he had become Prince Edward’s falconer, his wages were increased to 9d. Hanekin, a later keeper of the mews, received 3d. per day, while the clerk and janitor of the mews were paid 2d. The janitor, however, had a house provided for him at the mews.≥≤ Dogkeepers generally received 2d. a day, as did partridgers and the slingers sent to capture duck for hawks in 1297. Some porters and grooms received 2d. a day, others 1 ∞⁄≤d. This last group received payments only when away from court.≥≥ William Spencer was not the only falconer who rose in status. Men who were knighted, such as John de Bikenore II, Thomas de Bikenore, and Thomas de Hauville II, had their wages and entourages increased accordingly.≥∂ Some men, after serving for a time, were given greater responsibilities: put in charge of a bird, allocated a second horse, and raised in pay. A number of such men were members of falconry or hawking families—e.g., Ralph de Bavent, Thomas Corbet, Thomas de Erlham, Gilkino fil Giletti, Geoffrey de Hauville III, and Thomas de Wedon. However, with Georgino Falconarius and Thomas Gurdon no family connections are evident.≥∑ Three men—Alexander Coo, Norman Beaufiz, and Peter de Somerset—rose from dogkeeper to falconer.≥∏ By modern standards, methods of payment seem haphazard. Hawkers and falconers (and other members of the household) would on occasion be given advances on their wages (prests) or might be paid for some portion of their wages or expenses by a sheriff or other royal accountant. Occasionally payment might be in cloth, wine, or grain.≥π ‘‘Periodically an account was made with each member of the household for the amount due to him for wages according to the marshalsea roll, deducting any sums which he might have received as imprests; he was given a wardrobe debenture for the balance, which he could then draw from the exchequer.’’≥∫ The uncertainty of practice

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


can be seen in the slightly altered phrasing of the last clause in another modern summary: ‘‘Wardrobe debentures (bills) were then issued for the outstanding balances and the recipients could next try to get payment on them from the exchequer.’’≥Ω To illustrate the process: On October 31, 1305, Walter de Wedon was assigned a sparrowhawk given to the king by Sir Hugh Despenser. Walter was in royal service that season for 109 days—eighty-five in court—before delivering the bird to the mews of Sir John de Clinton and returning home on February 16, 1306. Walter’s total wages due amounted to 49s. 10 ∞⁄≤d. On November 23 he received a prest of 6s., followed by prests of 5s. each on November 29, December 7, December 24, and January 12, with a final prest of 3s. on February 14, for a total of 29s. At the end of the season Walter was owed £1 10 ∞⁄≤d. There is nothing to indicate when (or even if) he received the balance due.∂≠ From 1295 on there are records of growing royal indebtedness to members of the household. Debts due to several royal hawkers and falconers for the years 1295–98 were not settled until 1300 or even 1305, and William Spencer, Prince Edward’s falconer, who was owed £15 3s. was paid only £11 19s. 2d. in various prests made between 1299 and 1302. On May 1, 1306, the sheriff of Lincoln was ordered to pay ‘‘Robert de Bavent, king’s falconer £10 due to him for the arrears of his wages,’’ and on the same day various sheriffs were ordered to pay thirty ‘‘keepers of goshawks’’ a total of £134 3s. 7d., in arrears. In the final account for Edward’s last full year (1305–6), falconry and hawking expenses amount to an adjusted total of £716 19s. 5d, but almost a third of that (£227 1s. 6d.) was accounted for in arrears from previous years—in some cases as far back as 1299–1300.∂∞ On the other side of the ledger there is only a declaration by Geoffrey de Hauville III that he is ill, pledging his wages for payment of a horse.∂≤ A single entry in a book of prests for 1305–6 suggests that on occasion falconer’s wives may have accompanied their husbands at court. In the entry John de Lovel receives a prest from his wife Christine.∂≥

Robes In addition to wages and food allowances, members of the royal court received allowances for robes—if they served sufficient time in a year—and some lesser people had seasonal allowances for shoes as well. Knights might receive winter and summer robes (or cash allowances in lieu of robes) valued at a total of eight marks (£5 6s. 8d.); esquires and hawkers and falconers with two horses could receive winter and summer robes worth a total of £2;


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

hawkers and falconers with one horse received one robe for the entire year, valued at £1; while dogkeepers, partridgers, and the janitor and keeper of the mews received single robes valued at a mark (13s. 4d.) and winter and/or summer shoes (2s. 4d. each).∂∂ On several occasions (mostly late in Edward’s reign) hawkers and falconers were given prests of cloth in lieu of robes. At times colors and types of cloth are specified. In 1300–1301 seven falconers received green and ray (striped) cloth; Thomas de Wedon, serving as marshal of the hawks, received 3 ∞⁄≤ ells of scarlet and 3 ∞⁄∂ ells of camlet (a fine mixed wool fabric), while five other hawkers and falconers received seven ells of ray. In 1301–2 the falconer Elie Spot received 3 ∞⁄≤ ells of yellow cloth and 3 ∞⁄≤ ells of green. Compared to such colors, the cloth of russet and lambskin for hoods received by two falconers in 1305 seem rather subdued, though probably more practical. In 1286 3 ∞⁄≤ ells of bluett were used to make a tabard that was lined with Irish blanket for a royal falconer. Edward I had a robe of black say (a kind of wool) made for hawking in 1279–80, and a similar robe is noted in 1302–3. There are also records of royal purchases of cloth for saddlecloths and of gloves, some of deerskin, for hawkers and falconers.∂∑ At the court of Edward III: The more senior royal falconers rode on horseback and received annually a ‘cotam’ and ‘cloca’ of 5 ∞⁄≤ ells of striped cloth and a lambskin. Those who went on foot received only 3 ells of striped cloth. All received strong leather gloves. Additional clothing seems to have been supplied to these servants, not unnaturally, in winter: senior falconers having a length of russet cloth and a black sheepskin, whilst the remainder received 5 ∞⁄≤ ells of striped cloths and a lambskin. Striped cloth was widely distributed for livery at court, possibly because it was distinctive in itself, identifying in a large and changing community the servants and their masters. Striped cloth was probably also much cheaper as it could disguise poor dyeing.∂∏

Gifts and Favors Besides wages and robes, men performing falconry and hawking services were compensated for lost horses, might be excused from other duties,∂π and might receive royal gifts. Some falconers received money when leaving royal service: William Doye was given £25 to buy land in his country (probably Guyenne); Georgino Falconarius, £10; Saero, falconer of the count of Flanders, £5; and Matthew le Vox, £2 10s.; on the other hand, an unnamed falconer of Sir Arnold de Vely was given only a mark (13s. 4d.).∂∫ Gifts might be made to hawkers and falconers who had fallen on hard times: William Bartholomew received £25 to repair his house in Edinburgh, which had been

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


burned by the Scots. Page Falconarius was given £10 for an unspecified reason. Falconers received expenses when sick, and £5 was allocated to Simon Corbet who was ill and subsequently died. When Sir John de Merk died in Scotland a cloth of gold was supplied to be put over the tomb of his viscera in Scone Abbey and another to put over his bones in England. Wax for candles and ‘‘other offices’’ were provided for Tassino Falconarius who died on Edward’s embassy to Tartary; a purple cloth and fifty pounds of wax were provided for the funeral of the wife of Sir Ralph de Bavent, and a prest of 30s. was made for a cloth of gold to put over the body of Geoffrey de Hauville III’s wife.∂Ω Other gifts were more directly related to the sport itself. Grants of £5 and £4 were made to repair mews at Redenhall and Bicknor, respectively; both falconers and hawkers on occasion received tuns of wine.∑≠ When Edward received gifts of birds of prey he invariably rewarded the men who brought them. Gunsalvo Martini, bringing two gyrfalcons from Sancho IV of Castile, received £25 for his expenses and those of his two falconers; two valets of the Earl of Ross bringing falcons gentle were given ten marks (£6 13s. 4d.) each. Rewards were generally more modest, most frequently £2. There seems to have been no correspondence between the kinds of the birds given and the amount of the gifts. Servants of givers with high status appear to have gotten greater rewards.∑∞ Gifts were also made to men bringing lost falcons, to men who captured cranes and herons for the king’s gyrfalcons, to a man who brought the king a flying crane, and to another who brought a dog pro riparia.∑≤ When Edward’s hawkers and falconers sent him trophies of the hunt, particularly cranes’ heads, the men who brought them were usually given half a mark (6s. 8d.). John de Bikenore was given five marks (£3 6s. 8d.) when one of his hawks took a duck on its first flight, and the king gave alms of 13d. when a gyrfalcon took a crane on its first flight and of 3d. to a female pauper when another gyrfalcon killed a crane on its last flight (of the season?).∑≥ Most gifts were in cash, but gifts of clothing were also made. These gifts included robes assigned to visiting hawkers or falconers as part of the general household distribution of robes.∑∂ On some occasions, specific grants of clothing were made. In 1305 Bartholomew le Poitevin received cloth for a tunic, closed supertunic and open supertunic, while his wife was given cloth for the same three garments plus a mantle. In the same year John de Bikenore II received cloth for similar robes consisting of four garments. William Bishop (falconer of Sir Henry Sinclair), who brought a falcon gentle to the king, was given eight ells of motley to make a robe, a lambskin for a supertunic, a hood, a pair of boots, and a pair of shoes. Matthew, falconer of Piers Gaveston, received nine ells of ray for a robe and cloak from Prince Edward. Hanekin,


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

who brought the king good news about the health of one of his falcons, received lambskin for a surcoat and a hood, while Thomas, one of the dogkeepers, was given 4s. for a supertunic.∑∑ Besides gifts there were royal grants and pardons that can best be called favors. In this category fell grants to Geoffrey III and John de Hauville and corrodies for Gilbert le Braconer and John des Arches, the wobode. In 1282 Geoffrey de Hauville was granted for life twenty-eight acres of meadow and pasture in Drusestock within Rockingham Forest (Northaptonshire) for a rent every three years of 7s. In August 1290 Geoffrey was granted for life the bailiwick of Bolax, also in Rockingham Forest. In November 1290 he was pardoned a fine of 34s. for a number of pleas of the forest. In 1294 he was granted for life the wood of Fermes within Rockingham Forest. In the Pipe Roll of 31 Edward I (1302–3), Geoffrey, described as the forester of Rockingham Forest, was fined £40 for deterioration of his bailiwick through selling oak and underwood without license. In 1304 Geoffrey was pardoned for taking a stag in Rockingham Forest. Geoffrey died in 1306. On June 1st his son and heir John was pardoned two hundred marks (£133 6s. 8d.) that his father had been amerced ‘‘for divers trespasses in the forest of Rokingham, when he was keeper thereof,’’ and on June 4 John was pardoned a further £38 4s. 4d. of the earlier £40 fine.∑∏ In the latter years of his reign, perhaps as a consequence of his financial difficulties, Edward I began what has been characterized as a thorough exploitation of his monasteries to provide lodging and maintenance for both his ‘‘decrepit servants’’ and some of his ‘‘able-bodied’’ retainers.∑π In the former category was Gilbert le Braconer (Gilbert Cut) who first appears in 1284 in connection with dogs for falconry and is next noted in a falconry connection in 1295. He was last active, in nonfalconry capacities, in 1300. On June 30 of that year he was presented to the abbey of Selby (Yorkshire) and subsequently to Eynsham (Oxfordshire) on August 4, to Keynesham (Somerset) on September 24, and finally, on March 11, 1301, to Southwick (Hampshire). Gilbert was described as having ‘‘long and faithfully served the king,’’ and the houses were asked to ‘‘find him necessaries of life and food and clothing in accordance with the requirements of his estate.’’ It is unclear why four requests were made, especially since the second and third abbeys were asked to provide the necessaries ‘‘for life.’’ Perhaps the first three abbeys were able to refuse the king.∑∫ The situation of John des Arches, the wobode, was different in several ways. The wobode was of higher status than Gilbert, and he continued to serve the king actively. In late January 1296 the wobode was sent to Abingdon Abbey until Michaelmas, and during the last five years of Edward’s reign he was

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


annually sent to a different religious house in February or March with two horses and two grooms. The monasteries were required to admit him and his entourage and find all necessaries for them until Michaelmas. It is interesting to note that that elsewhere the wobode is referred to as the king’s serjeant, though there is no record of his holding any land, and he was paid a fee for his service of summoning as well as receiving wages.∑Ω

Hawkers and Hawking Significant differences can be seen in the arrangements Edward I made for hawking and falconry respectively. Hawking continued to follow earlier forms of organization more closely than falconry. More of the hawkers still served as serjeants, and most hawks were kept by hawkers instead of at the royal mews. During Edward’s reign there were also fewer royal hawkers than falconers. For 5–6 Edward I (September 1277–September 1278), the first year of Edward’s reign for which extensive hawking and falconry references are available, only ten hawkers were in royal service. Five of these were paid for the full hawking season (September to February), while the other five were each paid for less than a month, one hawker for only four days. The ten hawkers may be compared to forty-seven men paid for falconry services during the same year. In six other years for which we have records, the number of hawkers who served for most of the hawking season ranged from eight to sixteen.∏≠ The two periods of greatest recorded hawking activity were 1289– 90 and 1305–6. In the former season twenty-two hawkers, including four of Anthony Bek, bishop of Durham, and two of Sir John de Berwick, served for most of the period; one served for two months; and one, a valet of Sir Norman Darcy, was paid for thirty-six days. This activity is reflected in the fact that twenty-one men were given robes. Of the royal hawkers, three were given both winter and summer robes, six received winter robes, and six (with one horse) received robes for the entire year. In 1305–6 thirty hawkers served for all or most of the season, three others served for around two months, and fifteen more men are noted in connection with hawks or hawking. In that year twenty-four men were given robes. The largest number of hawks flown in one season also occurred in 1305–6, when twenty-five hawks and nine sparrowhawks were recorded.∏∞ By Edward I’s reign few hawks were kept in royal mews.∏≤ Some hawks were kept by serjeanty tenants and others by men who received fees instead of land for service—20s. for mewing a hawk, 10s. for a sparrowhawk. In years for which we have records, the man serving as marshal of the hawks mewed from seven to ten hawks; other hawkers generally mewed one or two.∏≥


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

The Hawking Year Before the hawking year began, the wobode was sent on his rounds. In 1304, for example, Edward’s writ to the wobode, dated on July 30 at Stirling, reads: ‘‘Whereas the king proposes to hawk (riveare) with his goshawks and sparrow-hawks by the rivers (riparias) in cos. Essex, Hertford and Middlesex, he orders him to cause to be summoned forthwith all those who have the king’s goshawks and sparrow-hawks in their custody in England to be with the king with the said goshawks and sparrow-hawks who are mewed (mutati) at St. Albans at Michaelmas [September 29] next.’’∏∂ On the day the king sent out the wobode, he also instructed the sheriffs of Essex, Hertford, and Middlesex: ‘‘Whereas the king proposes to hawk as above, he orders [the respective sheriffs] to cause the bridges over (ultra) the river (ripariam) of La Luye [the Lea] between the towns of Hertford and Stratford to be well and sufficiently repaired ( fieri), as Thomas de Wedon, the king’s yeoman, whom the king is specially sending to [them], shall make known to [them] on the king’s behalf.’’∏∑ However, when Michaelmas came the king was in Yorkshire, and he didn’t reach Essex and Hertfordshire until February 1305.∏∏ We do not know what the hawkers did in the interim. The wobode summoned both those who mewed hawks by serjeanty and those who received payment for mewing. In 1305 Thomas de Multon, acting as wobode, was sent to summon twelve hawkers, six of whom were knights. None of the six knights came in person, though at least four sent hawks. Of the six who were not knights, five came themselves, bearing their hawks, and the sixth sent a substitute.∏π After delivering his letters, the wobode would usually go to the mews of the man acting as marshal (during Edward’s reign this mews was usually at Bicknor, Kent) to help with enseaming the hawks that had been mewed there. At Bicknor the wobode was joined by a number of royal hawkers. The totals varied somewhat from year to year, but there was a close correspondence between the number of hawkers with two horses (including the marshal) and the number of hawks enseamed. Enseaming the hawks took four weeks, during which time the hawkers were paid as if in court, with food and drink provided by the man who received the fee for enseaming—generally the marshal of the hawks. After enseaming their hawks, the hawkers at the mews might be joined by others, some of whom would be royal hawkers in fee who had enseamed their own birds, and some hawkers for nobles or clergy who accompanied the king. All hawkers would spend time flying their birds, bringing them into top condition. During this period the hawkers might be joined by sparrowhawkers as well. Before Christ-

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


Table 1. Enseaming



Hawkers with 2 horses

Hawkers with 1 horse

1283 1284 1285 1288 1290 1297

Sir John Bikenore Sir John Bikenore John de Bikenore John de Bikenore John de Bikenore John de Bikenore

6 6 6 6 9 6

2 2 5 5

No. of hawks

Dates of enseaming

7 7 7 7 10 5+1 sphawk

9/28–10/25 9/28–10/25 9/14–10/11 9/8–10/5 9/8–10/6 9/9–10/6

mas the hawkers joined the royal court.∏∫ In several years they spent most of the remaining season with the court. This may have been because of the relative abundance of prey, making it possible to fly hawks regularly in most places the court went, as well as the fact that hawks could be flown in a greater variety of terrain than falcons. The king’s itinerary, however, was probably the major factor in determining how long hawkers or falconers might accompany him. During the 1284–85 hawking season, for example, when Edward was consolidating his hold on Wales, nine royal hawkers were in court only between December 24 and January 8, when the king was at Bristol and Bath. In the following year, seven hawkers remained at court for all but three days (in an eighth case, nine) between December 2 and February 13, after which they returned their hawks to their respective mews.∏Ω When the king planned to hawk, not only would men be sent in advance to repair bridges, but some hawkers and their birds might be sent ahead to await the king’s coming. In 1285, for example, nine hawkers with seven birds that had been mewed and enseamed at Bicknor were sent to Lyndhurst and Ringwood, Hampshire, from October 30 to November 22, while the king was on the Isle of Wight and in other parts of Hampshire. The court arrived at Lyndhurst on November 20 and stayed in the area until the 25th. On November 23 twelve hawkers with nine birds were sent on to Bindon and Wareham, Dorset, to hawk along the River Frome. From November 26 on, the king was in Dorset, and the hawkers there joined the royal court on December 1. On December 3 and 4 the court was at Bindon. That year most of the hawkers remained at court for all but a few days of the season, until February 16, when all left to take their hawks back to their respective mews. The only specific reference to Edward’s hawking came on February 21 when guides were paid to show the king the way and lead him across fords on the Thames near Latimer


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

in Chesham, Buckinghamshire, where he went to see his hawks fly.π≠ Unlike the falconers, most of the hawkers tended to travel together, though they might be split up into smaller groups on occasion. In most years for which we have records the men who enseamed hawks together by and large stayed together, while hawkers bearing hawks mewed in other mews or given to the king were more likely to be on their own.π∞ In 1305–6, of twelve goshawks recorded with the court more than seventy-five days, the earliest to be sent back to its mews left on January 30, the last on February 25. Of five sparrowhawks recorded with the court more than eighty days, two left on February 16 and 18, respectively, the other three between March 10 and March 13. Two hawks were not sent to their mews until April, but neither seems to have been at court during this time: they may have been young hawks in training. While dates on which individual hawks returned to their mews varied from year to year, the hawking season generally ended in February or March, although in 1306 fifteen hawkers were subsequently summoned to Westminster to make their accounts in late April.π≤ In general only the marshal of the hawks and perhaps one or two other hawkers would be active past mid-April. During the summer the marshal might buy hawks or train newly acquired hawks as well as mew the hawks in his custody and prepare for the next hawking season.π≥

Falcons and Falconry in the Royal Court It is not possible to determine precise numbers of people engaged in royal falconry at any given time for several reasons. The number of robes granted to falconers is not an accurate indicator, since some people who performed falconry services received robes as members of other categories of royal servant, ranging from knights banneret to messenger. Knights paid for falconry services included not only members of such long-term royal falconry families as Sir Jolland and Sir Robert de Bavent, Sir Thomas de Erlham, Sir John de Merk, and the two Sir Thomas de Hauvilles, but men who appear as falconers in one year only, such as Sir Gerard de Busellard and Sir Henry de Tyeys.π∂ Before becoming a knight Robert de Bavent served as a falconer for five years, but received robes as a squire. Michael de Stourton similarly was active as a falconer, and once as a hawker, for more than a decade, but he too received robes as a squire. At least fifteen other men performed falconry or hawking services while receiving robes as squires.π∑ Clerics might also perform falconry services. Robert de Kertlingstock, parson of Aston, while serving as falconer received robes as a cleric in two years but as a falconer in a third.

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


Richard Wolaston, clerk of Sir John de Merk, served as a falconer for two years; late in Edward’s reign ‘‘Masters’’ William de Monyngton and William de Passavant performed falconry services, and Master Richard Havering was identified as a falconer. Farther down the social scale Baldekin, usher of the hall, had custody of a gyrfalcon for eight days in 1284, and Thomas Wyght, a messenger, carried a gyrfalcon from the mews to the king in 1302.π∏ This use of men nominally in different occupations to serve the king’s sport demonstrates not only Edward’s flexibility in his hunting arrangements, but a widespread knowledge of the essentials of falconry both among the upper ranks of society and within the royal household. Other difficulties are caused by variations in record-keeping procedures. Some entries record ranks, not names: for example, the records mention the ‘‘commiliton’’ (fellow knight) of John de Bohun, the squires of John de Merk and of Thomas de Hauville II, and the falconer of the earl of Warenne.ππ Can one be sure that these men are not mentioned by name in other places in the records, and so are liable to be counted twice? In some years records exist only for periods during which falconers were out of court, that is, not on the Marshal’s Roll, so it is impossible to tell for how long these men acted as falconers. Finally, there are incomplete records and years for which almost no records for falconry exist at all. Nevertheless one can come up with bottom-line figures for a limited number of years. In six years between 1277–78 and 1305–6 for which reasonably full records exist, the number of men performing falconry services in each year ranged from forty-three to seventy-two, and the number of men who served as falconers for a minimum of three months ranged from twenty-three to thirtyeight—exclusive of grooms and of keepers of dogs accompanying hawkers and falconers.π∫ The normal number of men paid in a given year for both falconry and hawking services, including dogkeepers, probably lay between seventy-five and one hundred, while the number of men who served for most of the season was between forty and sixty. If one adds in grooms, the totals would approximately double. In view of the numbers of men engaged, it is easy to see why total expenditure for the king’s sport mounted up as it did. Edward seems to have enjoyed falconry more than hawking, as shown both by numbers of men employed and amounts spent. Changes in numbers of types of hawks and falcons flown in different years may also reflect changes in Edward’s taste in sport. While early in Edward’s reign relatively few sparrowhawks are recorded, in 1305–6 sparrowhawks made up more than a quarter of the hawks noted.πΩ While hawks were generally mewed by their keepers, Edward had his main


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

Table 2. Royal Falcons Flown Year


Falcons gentle


1277–78 1283–84 1284–85 1285–86 1288–89 1289–90 1296–97 1297–98 1303–4 1305–6

12 14 17 19 6 19 4 3 5 5

4 4 3 5 5 6 4 11 4 16

5 7 10 8 5 7 0 0 7 6

Note: These are minimal figures, cases in which one can trace particular falcons through an entire season.

falconry mews built at Charing and, while occasionally falcons were sent to other mews and the Bavents continued to mew lanners, most of Edward’s falcons were mewed at Charing.∫≠ As in earlier reigns, many separate, smaller groups of falconers were sent to different parts of England to fly their birds—unlike the hawkers, one main group of which traveled together, with a few separate men or groups breaking off from the main group. The falconers sent to hunt cranes and herons were generally accompanied by dogs and dogkeepers and individual falconers were responsible for both pay and provisions for their retinues; the marshal of the hawks was responsible for provisioning hawks and hawkers. Unlike the hawkers, falconers tended to spend more time away from court than at it, again probably due both to kinds of terrain in which falcons could be flown and to the location of the falcons’ prey.

The Falconry Year The falconry year lasted longer than the hawking year, and a much higher proportion of falconers served year round. The falconry year may be said to have begun at the end of August, when falconers began to be sent to the mews at Charing to join a few falconers already there.∫∞ There was generally no formal summoning of falconers as there was of hawkers, but letters might be sent out to individuals, and on one occasion men were sent out to summon or look for four of Edward’s falconers who lived in France.∫≤ Like hawks, falcons, too, were enseamed, but unlike the hawks, no formal period was set

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


aside for enseaming. When falconers withdrew their birds shortly after arriving at the mews, the birds had presumably already been enseamed. In other cases the falconers might stay on and enseam the birds themselves.∫≥ During September, contingents of falconers and their grooms, birds, and dogs would begin to leave for various parts of England, to keep their birds in trim or, in some cases, to train them. In 1285, for example, four falconers were sent to Charing on August 30, followed on September 10 by five dogkeepers and twenty dogs, and on September 12th by two falconers who had been with the court at Winchester. They joined four falconers who had been at Charing since July. On September 17 William Doye, accompanied by his gyrfalcon, a dogkeeper, and four dogs, set out for Norfolk to fly at cranes. On September 29 four groups left Charing: one falconer with a gyrfalcon, dogkeeper, and four dogs was sent to join William Doye; a second falconer with his gyrfalcon was sent to join Sir Jolland de Bavent who, with his sons Robert and Ralph, three lanners, two dogkeepers, and ten dogs went to Lindsey in Lincolnshire to fly at cranes; three other falconers with a single gyrfalcon left for Norfolk; and another falconer with a gyrfalcon, a dogkeeper, and four dogs left for an unspecified location. On October 18 two more falconers left for Norfolk. On November 1 two falconers, two gyrfalcons, a dogkeeper, and four dogs left for Lindsey to fly at cranes. All these groups remained out of court at least into the following February or March. In October Simon Corbet and his son were sent to John de Brabant with seven lanners caught over the summer, four dogs and a dogkeeper. They remained with John and rejoined the court with him during the Christmas season. Shorter expeditions included those of Sir John de Merk and two unnamed falconers sent to an unspecified location for three weeks starting in late October to fly a gyrfalcon and two falcons gentle at duck and of a falconer, with two squires and another aide, three dogkeepers, and ten dogs who went to the Isle of Wight between October 24 and 29 to fly a gyrfalcon at herons. Both groups probably returned to court; the records do not specify. On September 19, at least sixteen falconers were at the mews at Charing. Six were gone by the end of the month, two left in mid-October, three at the beginning of November; three, in addition to the mews staff, stayed on until December 24. There is no information about the remaining two.∫∂ Contingents might go out for very short periods of time or for the entire falconry season. A group, for example, consisting of Sir Gerard de Busellard, nine squires, and three falconers was sent to Fairford in Gloucestershire between February 27 and March 1, 1278, to fly at cranes. The court arrived in Gloucestershire on March 3, so this group may have been sent in advance to try out the falconry. In the same season, William de Britannia, Gilletto, and Simon Corbet with two gyrfalcons, three greyhounds, and a dogkeeper were


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

sent to hunt cranes in Somerset from January 17 to April 16. Edward did not arrive in Somerset until April 8, and, as all three men continued to be paid as if out of court, if the king flew any of their falcons, he went to them rather than the falconers coming to him.∫∑ Trying to determine falconry and hawking destinations can be difficult. One can get some indication as to where the king intended to hawk from commands to sheriffs to put rivers in defense or through payments for building bridges. Sometimes hawkers or falconers were sent out ahead of the royal court and presumably the king took his sport when the court caught up with the advance party. Beyond that there are only notations that the king went to see his falconers or hawkers (no doubt to fly their birds) or that a guide had been hired to show the king the way. When falconers or hawkers were sent out of court, their destinations or intended prey were often unrecorded. Even when they were, there could be problems with locations: which of the nine rivers Avon, the five rivers Frome, or the five rivers Stour was intended? Nevertheless, a general idea of where the king’s hawkers and falconers sought particular prey can be ascertained. The most frequently named locations to which hawkers were sent were in southern England: Kent, Hampshire, Surrey, Somerset, and Dorset. Winchester and Guilford are named as destinations a number of times, as are the rivers Kennet, Wey, Avon (in Wiltshire), Thames, Lea, Frome, Stour, and Test. The only northern river mentioned more than once is the Trent. Falconers were sent most often for cranes to Norfolk and to Lindsey in Lincolnshire, and Canterbury, other parts of Lincolnshire, and Gloucestershire were less frequent locations. Lindsey was also a favored location for herons, but in 1283– 84, when Edward spent much time in western and northern England and in Wales, falconers were on three occasions sent to hunt herons in Cheshire. Both hawkers and falconers tended to be sent to locations in the vicinity of the court: when Edward was in Scotland late in his reign, Yorkshire became a more frequent falconry destination. Falconers were sent to Dunbar and Heddington in East Lothian, and Elie Spot was delayed at Berwick-on-Tweed and hawked on rivers near Edinburgh.∫∏ However, individual parties might be sent almost anywhere in England: recorded locations to which falconry or hawking parties were sent throughout Edward’s reign include places in twenty-nine counties and the Isle of Wight. During the year groups would rejoin the court and then might leave again. Because of accounting practices, it is not always possible to know when particular falconers were in court. But it is certain that in 1289–90, and no doubt in most if not all other years as well, at least one falconer and one royal gyrfalcon were present at court at all times during the falconry season. Non-

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


royal falconers arrived at various times: some brought gifts, and others served members of or visitors to the court. The gift birds might be reassigned to Edward’s falconers or might be carried by the falconers who brought them, who would thereafter be paid by the king. As with his hawking, the king might send ahead to have preparations made for falconry. Such preparations could include building bridges, stocking an area with duck and other waterbirds, or recalling falconers to court.∫π Such comings and goings allowed Edward to supervise his falcons, his falconers, and his sport in general. He wrote to and received letters from his falconers and hawkers, saw them regularly as they came to court (or as the court came to them), and received reports from grooms bringing cranes’ heads and other trophies of the hunt. He also sent men out to inform him of the status of his birds, and in April 1286 he had Ralph de Bavent come from Lincolnshire to the court at Langley, Hertfordshire, to tell him about his gyrfalcons.∫∫ The end of the falconry season was generally later than the end of the hawking season and was not so well defined. In years for which there are records, only four falcons (including one gyrfalcon) were sent to the mews in February, while in 1284 nine of thirteen falcons were sent to the mews in March, seven early in the month. Two years later seven of fourteen gyrfalcons were sent to the mews in April, and in 1290 seventeen of nineteen gyrfalcons were sent to the mews between April 29 and June 1. In general, lanners seem to have been sent home at earlier dates, while some gyrfalcons and falcons continued to be flown through much of the summer.∫Ω The season for cranes seems to have ended earlier than that for herons. On March 11, 1305, Edward wrote Robert de Bavent noting that the crane season was almost over. Two subsequent letters dated April 4 and April 12 dealt solely with flying at herons.Ω≠ Frederick II had observed that ‘‘spring is even a poorer season than autumn for crane hunting, because the hawking season is short’’; and ‘‘in regions where herons nest it is wise to begin the education of falcons to hunt them during the nesting season.’’Ω∞ In the context of the latter statement, it is interesting to note that Edward’s letter of April 4 discusses training a falcon to fly at herons. In general, falconers sent out to fly falcons at cranes finished in April, while those whose falcons flew at herons might continue on into May, June, and sometimes even beyond.Ω≤ This fact, plus the fact that some falconers stayed on to assist or to care for their birds at the Charing mews, helps to explain why so many more falconers than hawkers received summer robes.Ω≥ When the king was in France his sporting arrangements changed. Edward was in France for more than three years between 1286 and 1289 and for sixand-a-half months during the fall and winter of 1297–98, but substantial records exist only for the last part of 1286 and for most of 1288–89. These


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

records show that ten of Edward’s regular falconers and four of his hawkers were in France at some time during 1286. Several made trips back to England, presumably to put their birds back in their proper mews (the six identifiable birds were all gyrfalcons). The king also had pigeons sent from England for his falcons.Ω∂ Only one man employed in royal falconry had not previously appeared in English records—Wilmot, falconer of the Lord de la Plaunche, probably the William de la Nove Rue who was sent to Saintes and other parts with a royal falcon on September 13 and who died on November 18.Ω∑ In 1288–89 things were rather different. Of the fourteen men engaged in the royal sport during that period, seven were falconers and seven hawkers. Of those men, four of the hawkers and one falconer appear only in the falconry records for that year. Of the six falcons flown only one was a gyrfalcon, two of the three falcons gentle were returned to French mews, and three of the four hawks were sparrowhawks.Ω∏ Clearly Edward had modified his sporting arrangements to take advantage of local resources and local terrain. As noted, Edward’s falconry arrangements centered on the mews at Charing. A surviving account for the year 1289–90 gives a good idea of its general operations.Ωπ On November 20, 1289, when the account begins, four royal gyrfalcons and four falcons belonging to John de Brabant were in the mews.Ω∫ All these birds left during December and January. Between January 10 and February 17 and February 19 and March 20 only one gyrfalcon remained in the mews—the old gyrfalcon formerly assigned to Peter de Crohun. Expenses during this first part of the year (148 days—corresponding essentially to the hunting season) were fairly small—a total of £2 4s. 3d. for food for the birds (ninety-three chickens, 226 pigeons, and 16s. 3d. worth of beef and pork) plus 7s. for light for the birds and for the chapel. On April 15, when the first part of the account ends, only two gyrfalcons were at the mews. On April 16, three gyrfalcons returned to Charing, and on April 29, four more; one came back on April 30, and eight more on the first of May. By the end of May the mews held eighteen royal gyrfalcons (three recent gifts), a tiercel gyrfalcon belonging to John de Brabant, five falcons (four of which belonged to John de Brabant), and three lanners—a total of twenty-seven birds. Between June 30 and September 13 five gyrfalcons died, John de Brabant removed two of his falcons, and the king gave away one gyrfalcon and all three lanners. Then the fall exodus began. Three gyrfalcons left for the field on September 13, two more at the end of the month, and six between October 7 and 15. By the end of the account on November 19 only two gyrfalcons remained in the mews, one the old gyrfalcon of Peter de Crohun. During the second part of the year food for the birds cost £13 2s. 9d. (1164 chickens and

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


78s. 9d. worth of beef and pork), and light for the mews cost an additional 10s. 4d.ΩΩ Wages for the entire year at 2d. a day each for Hugh, clerk of the mews, and Hamo, the janitor, came to £6 1s. 8d. Incidental purchases included five cartloads of sand, no doubt to scatter on the floor of the mews; orpiment to treat sick birds; vinegar, perhaps to bathe the birds’ feet∞≠≠; a key to the gyrfalcons’ bath; a deer hide and twenty rings to make leashes and jesses; and canvas to make aprons for the falconers. Total mews expenditure came to £22 14s. 3d.—a relatively small fraction of the £591 14s. 9d. spent on falconry in that year. The cost per bird would compare roughly to the £1 fee for mewing a goshawk.∞≠∞ Along with falcons and occasionally hawks, the keeper at Charing might have to provide for other birds as well. Between September 29 and December 24, 1283, for example, the mews held at various times fourteen gyrfalcons, an albino lanner, six cranes, and a hoopoe.∞≠≤ Cranes (and sometimes herons) used to train the falcons were fed grain. Food for the falcons would vary according to availability. While no pigeons are recorded for the second half of 1289–90, 824 were purchased (along with 222 chickens) between June 24 and September of the previous year, and several times small birds were caught to feed the falcons.∞≠≥ Other payments were made at different times for felt (perhaps for training-hoods), lime (probably to purge the mews), soap, and litter for dogs. Medicinal purchases included charcoal, diauté, orpiment, saundragon, and stavesacre.∞≠∂ A further substance bought for the gyrfalcons was recorded as ‘‘dent’’ with an abbreviation mark over the last two letters. The Byerlys render this as ‘‘dentalione’’ (dandelion). Another possibility would be ‘‘denteria,’’ which Tony Hunt tentatively identifies as being either feverfew (Chrysanthemum parthenium [L.] Bernh.) or pellitory (Anacyclus pyrethrum D.C.). However none of the three plants is mentioned in medieval falconry treatises. One herb that is mentioned is rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis), or ‘‘dendrolibanum’’ sometimes rendered as ‘‘dentrolibanum.’’ Albertus lists rosemary as an element in mixtures for general health and to prevent constipation, as a cure for ‘‘fellera’’ (a kind of jaundice) and for head colds. Alexander Medicus and Daude also recommend a mixture containing rosemary for general health, and a late-fifteenth-century English text includes rosemary as an ingredient in a ‘‘salve for hawks.’’∞≠∑ Birds of prey are subject to a great range of maladies—Van den Abeele lists 111 different kinds compiled from fifteen medieval sources. Such problems included parasites, fever, diseases of the digestive and respiratory tracts,


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

infections of the eyes, arthritis, and foot problems,∞≠∏ while birds might also be wounded in the course of taking their prey. As we have seen, a number of deaths of both hawks and falcons were recorded. The public records, however, give almost no information about causes or symptoms of illness. The only specific information we have is that in March 1290 one gyrfalcon was recorded as ‘‘not flying.’’∞≠π Another contemporary source of information on the kinds of mishap experienced by hawks and falcons are recorded miracles performed by various ‘‘saints.’’ I have found twenty-three relevant miracles.∞≠∫ The cases involving sick or ‘‘dead’’ birds do not always provide descriptions, although one hawk is said to have thrown up everything for two days, another had an inflamed leg, and a third was suffocated.∞≠Ω Accounts of miracles involving accidents are generally more informative: two hawks were wounded—one run through the eye by the bill of a crane, and a branch caused the other to lose an eye; a hawk suffered a broken leg while underwater after catching a duck; a falcon was trampled by a horse, a sparrowhawk by a dog; and one falcon fell from its perch and was suspended for ten leucarum.∞∞≠ Two lost goshawks and two sparrowhawks were recovered, all after appeals to Becket. One of the goshawks was chased back by two eagles, and the other was found at the exact moment the penny offered reached the saint’s shrine.∞∞∞ One can’t really draw conclusions about the particular maladies Edward’s birds may have suffered by looking at medications purchased. As Van den Abeele shows, many medicines recommended in falconry treatises were natural substances of a kind that could be obtained from the kitchen or in other ways not involving purchase. There were substitutes even for exotic substances.∞∞≤ It is also likely that falconers kept small quantities of their favorite cures on hand and replenished these ‘‘off the record.’’ Finally, several of the different items purchased were used for a variety of complaints. Charcoal was used as an ingredient in cures of liver disease and against lice and long worms.∞∞≥ Orpiment (yellow or red arsenic) was used for a variety of pulmonary diseases, for infirm eyes, as a purgative, in cases of putrefaction, against tedium, for birds that did not fly high, to prevent losing a bird, and against lice in particular and vermin in general.∞∞∂ Saundragon (a resinous material extracted from Calamus draco willd.) was used for sickness of the throat and to cure wounds.∞∞∑ Stavesacre (the ripe seed of a southern European larkspur, Delphinium staphisagria) was used as a purgative, for the pip (scale or crust on the tongue of a bird), against sickness in the head and phlegm in the throat, when a falcon sneezes and sprays nasal mucus, to treat infirm or inflamed eyes, to cure polyps, in cases when a falcon cried often and strongly, for a hawk that wouldn’t cast, against lice and vermin, and for general debility.∞∞∏ The only

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


medicine purchased that seems to have had only one kind of recorded use was diaute (an ointment with a base of marshmallow—Althaea officinalis), used for inflammation of the feet and for gout.∞∞π It seems likely that the medications recorded in the accounts were for general conditions such as lice, rather than remedies to cure particular birds. The one probable exception, saundragon, is notable because it was obtained on one occasion from the royal surgeon and on the other sent directly to the mews by the king—another instance of Edward’s concern for and involvement with the management of his birds. It should be noted that, except for stavesacre, all these medications appear in thirteenthcentury English medical texts to treat humans.∞∞∫ Some men may have been particularly skilled in caring for sick birds. In the spring of 1285 John de Bikenore II, son of the marshal of the hawks, took care of a wounded hawk for 104 days. In the following year, his father having died in the interim, he was sent to London for two weeks to tend a sick gyrfalcon.∞∞Ω An important part of both protective and curative procedures seems to have involved appeals to God. Both sick and well falcons and hawks had pennies bent over their heads∞≤≠ and oblations made in their names at shrines.∞≤∞ In one case a wax image of a sick gyrfalcon was presented at Becket’s shrine at Canterbury, and a sick gyrfalcon was taken on pilgrimage to the shrine of St. Thomas Cantilupe at Hereford. The choice of shrines is interesting: as we have seen, in the miracula for both Becket and Cantilupe cures of hawks and falcons are recorded.∞≤≤ A further source of expense was depredations by falconers’ dogs, several of which killed sheep in the course of their hunting.∞≤≥ There no doubt were additional payments for damages done by and to the hawkers and falconers themselves. In 1276 some royal falconers mortally wounded a chaplain at Dunstable, and in 1305 justices had to be appointed to hear a case of trespass brought against four royal falconers at Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire. In the same year two parsons and another man assaulted a king’s serjeant who was ‘‘seeking quarry for one of the king’s falcons’’ at Haddenham in the Isle of Ely, and there were trespasses by seven men ‘‘upon Geoffrey de Hauvile [III], the king’s falconer’’ at Dumbelton, Gloucestershire, in 1282 and against the king’s falconers at Melbourne, Derbyshire, in 1290.∞≤∂ As previously noted, the middle years of Edward’s reign, from 1283 to 1294, were the most active years for royal falconry. In 1294–95, a year in which the English were fighting in France and Wales and Edward faced political as well as financial difficulties, the money spent on falconry and hunting dropped by almost two-thirds, from just over £700 to not quite £255. For the remaining years for which we have expenditure totals, only once (in 1305–6) was a substantial amount spent on royal falconry.∞≤∑ Several possible explanations


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

for this decline can be suggested. The king was older and preoccupied with war in Scotland. In a time of financial stringency he may have tried to cut his nonmilitary household expenses—for the sake of appearances if nothing else. General confusion in the records may also explain the lower totals. The last Enrolled Wardrobe Account for Edward’s reign is that for 1297–98. During Edward’s final eight-and-a-half years, the only surviving totals come from the incomplete Wardrobe Book of 1299–1300, the Wardrobe Book of 1300– 1301 (which also greatly understates falconry expenses), and the Wardrobe Books of 1303–4 and 1305–6. In the last of these accounts the amount spent on falconry and hunting was the highest total for Edward’s reign—£1155 3s. 1 ∞⁄≤d. But this sum is misleading; indeed the account itself is perhaps the best single example of the financial chaos of Edward’s last years. The Wardrobe Book is filled with arrears and was not proved until the reign of Edward III in 1334. As Tout notes, ‘‘The most casual inspection shows that the account could hardly have satisfied the most perfunctory auditor.’’∞≤∏ When one excludes hunting expenses, the total recorded on falconry and hawking amounts to £716 19s. 5d., but of this, £227 1s. 6d. were arrears going as far back as 1299–1300. So the net expenditure credited directly to falconry and hawking for 1305–6 comes out to £489 17s. 11d.∞≤π To put this information in a broader perspective, while Edward no doubt spent less on his sport in the last thirteen years of his reign, the annual amounts still were generally greater than those spent by either his father or his son.∞≤∫ In February 1306 Robert Bruce murdered his chief rival, John Comyn, and six weeks later was crowned king of Scotland. Edward, then in his sixtyseventh year and in poor health, raised an army and marched north. In late September, on the way to the Cistercian monastery of Holmcultram near Carlisle, the king’s entourage arrived at Lanercost Priory, some twenty-five miles from its intended destination. Because of the king’s illness, what was supposed to be a short stay lasted until March 1307.∞≤Ω We don’t know exactly what was wrong with the king, but Prestwich notes that ‘‘he was clearly having trouble with his legs, for a special ointment was made for them on six occasions, and some leather leggings were also provided for him.’’∞≥≠ An account listing drugs provided for the king includes such ominous entries as payments for thirty-eight enemas and for spices used in embalming.∞≥∞ Under the circumstances it is extremely unlikely that Edward engaged in falconry to any great degree. Nonetheless, royal hawking and falconry continued. Edward’s last year is not well recorded: surviving wardrobe records are largely prests—records of payments, often without explanation. However, at least fifteen falconers and seven hawkers came to Lanercost during the king’s stay; the king received two

Falconry in the Reign of Edward I


birds as gifts; and in February Edward wrote to Robert Bavent about a gyrfalcon and a falcon gentle Bavent was keeping.∞≥≤ On March 4 Edward left Lanercost for Carlisle, where he met with Parliament and entered his sixty-eighth year. On July 3, suffering from dysentery, he left Carlisle. He died four days later.∞≥≥ To a large extent the history of the kings and their hawks has also been a history of the kings’ hawkers. By the reign of Edward I the organization of the royal falconry establishment had changed considerably since the reign of Henry II. Increasingly, falconers cease to hold hereditary positions and are serving on an individual basis for wages. In this connection, for example, the fact that André de Chanceaux was paid £1 for mewing two sparrowhawks in 1299–1300∞≥∂ is significant: a century earlier he would have been given a serjeanty. Of the men who still held serjeanties in Edward’s reign, some were no longer performing their services personally: the inquest held after the death of Ralph Fitz Bernard IV in 1306 found that he held the manor of Ilmer ‘‘by service of being marshal of the king’s hawks or finding another in his place to execute the said office.’’∞≥∑ In part, these tendencies were tendencies of the time: Once it began to give way, serjeanty disintegrated more quickly and easily than the other tenures as the feudal conception of society lost its hold. The tenure had little reason for existing in the beginning; as time went on, there was nothing to weld together the diverse elements composing it. Its miscellaneous services had not one fate, like military service, but many fates. A large number soon became obsolete; others were commuted to money payments or changed to knight’s service; a few that were honourable or ornamental were retained in their original form as part of the coronation ceremony. Some being still useful were performed by deputy, or absorbed into the regular administrative system.∞≥∏

Yet despite this in Edward’s reign one still finds falconers named Bavent, Erlham, and Hauville and men named Hertrugg, Mauduit, Picot, and Redenhall cared for the king’s hawks.∞≥π Perhaps the explanation is that falconry had become more than an occupation; it had become a craft, or even an art. Whole families took up falconry as a career. In Edward’s time ten Hauvilles, eight Bavents, six Bikenores, six Erlhams, six Corbets, five Clintons, five Lovels, and five Picots performed hawking or falconry services.∞≥∫ Being a royal falconer meant being paid for doing something people liked to do. It was a well-paying occupation, with a potentially long term of service and provision for retirement. It might even provide a springboard to greater things for one’s children—as in the case of Sir Elias de Hauville, marshal of Edward’s Household.∞≥Ω By being a royal falconer one could move on a par with kings and other


Falconry in the Reign of Edward I

great men, for, as Frederick II wrote, ‘‘Since many nobles and but few of the lower rank learn and carefully pursue this art, one may properly conclude that it is intrinsically an aristocratic sport; and one may once more add that it is nobler, more worthy than, and superior to other kinds of venery.’’∞∂≠ Royal falconry did not end with Edward I’s death. While falconry declined under Edward II, it revived under Edward III, and into the seventeenth century English sovereigns continued to fly hawks and falcons.∞∂∞ However, records of the royal sport were never again as detailed as they had been under Edward I. The general pattern of royal falconry activities as developed through Edward’s reign remained by and large the norm.∞∂≤ On the other hand, information on nonroyal falconry increases tremendously during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Using sources from that period, we can put together an extended general account of falconry in medieval life.


Falconry in Medieval Life

While one can write a history of English royal falconry based on the public records, sources for nonroyal falconry are much more diffuse. Fortunately, broader social aspects of the sport were common to Western European countries. Consequently, examples of attitudes and artistic and literary depictions of falconers and falconry from France, Germany, Italy, and Spain can supplement evidence from England. By using such material, we can examine why people flew hawks and falcons, who flew them, and how the sport was viewed. The period covered will be roughly the eleventh to the sixteenth century. Falconry pervaded medieval upper-class life. One finds references to perches for hawks in bedrooms and depictions of riders on streets (see plate 2A) and men in churches carrying falcons. Contemporary literary similes assume a society familiar with all aspects of falconry.∞

Falconry and Medieval Social Status People flew hawks and falcons for a number of reasons, including delight in the sport and catching prey. Yet another reason for owning and flying hawks was the status conferred by these activities. For those who did not engage in falconry for a living, the practice of the sport was a mark of social



Falconry in Medieval Life

prestige; and the more valuable the bird flown, the higher the prestige. In the late Middle Ages, ‘‘Everybody’s status . . . had to be constantly demonstrated at every opportunity and using all available means. . . . Lifestyle and preferences revealed a person’s position. . . . [L]iving in a castle, hunting, owning falcons, not being subject to taxes were all indicative of nobility.’’≤ It is essential to stress the upper-class character of the sport. From its earliest appearance in the West, the sport of falconry has implied the possession of wealth and status by those who pursued it. While those who flew falcons and hawks included professional falconers, and while some members of the lower classes had enough knowledge to take care of a lost falcon, falconry as a sport involved expenditures of time and money that only few people could afford. As Veblen observes: As the community passes out of the hunting stage proper, hunting gradually becomes differentiated into two distinct employments. On the one hand it is a trade, carried on chiefly for gain. . . . On the other hand, the chase is also a sport—an exercise of the predatory impulse simply. As such it does not afford any appreciable pecuniary incentive, but it contains a more or less obvious element of exploit. It is this latter development of the chase—purged of all imputation of handicraft—that alone is meritorious and fairly belongs in the scheme of life of the developed leisure class.’’≥

Consequently, upper-class owners delegated training of their hawks to others, and not all men who flew falcons knew how to tame and train them. When the twelfth-century Arabic author Usamah ¯ Ibn-Munquidh was asked, ‘‘Ye are incessantly in the chase and ye know not how to train a falcon?’’ He replied, ‘‘My lord, we never train falcons ourselves. We have falconers and attendants who train them and go before us using them for the chase.’’∂ As a late twelfthcentury English homily states: ‘‘And these are principally rich men who have this great pride in the world, that have (beautiful) fair houses and fair homes, fair wives and fair children, fair horses and fair clothes, hawks and hounds, castles and towns. . . .’’∑ The most prized falcons were expensive. The compensation for stealing a hawk, in sixth-century Burgundian law, was more than that for stealing a slave; by the tenth century falcons were included in royal tributes; and in thirteenth-century England a hawk might cost as much as half the yearly income of a knight.∏ Training and exercising the birds was a time-consuming process—as a modern book on falconry puts it, ‘‘one cannot be a part-time falconer.’’π To practice the sport, then, meant either having enough leisure to devote a proper amount of time to one’s birds or enough money to hire someone to care for them. Finally, the ideal of the sport was not essentially a

Falconry in Medieval Life


practical one. Frederick II felt that falconers should not be concerned with the food their falcons caught, or with fine flights, or with success in hunting. They should ‘‘aspire to have only fine falcons, better trained than those of others, that have gained honor and pre-eminence in the chase.’’∫ In modern sociological terms medieval falconry was an almost perfect example of conspicuous consumption: it was expensive, time-consuming, and useless.Ω By the twelfth century, if not earlier, training in falconry had become part of an upper-class education. And, as Marc Bloch suggests (citing Charlemagne’s page Garnier of Nanteuil), along with instruction might come actual practice: ‘‘When to the woods the king repairs, the child goes too; sometimes his bow he bears, sometimes his stirrup holds. If wildfowl lure the king, Garnier is by his side. Oft on his wrist the hawk or keen-eyed falcon sits.’’∞≠ Petrus Alfonsi listed the Seven Knightly Skills as ‘‘Riding, swimming, archery, boxing, hawking, chess, and verse writing,’’ and romance after romance either notes hawking as part of the hero’s education (e.g., Guy of Warwick, Ipomedon, King Horn, St. Alexius) or lists it among the hero’s accomplishments (Sir Degrevant, Floris et Lirope, William of Palerne, and of course Tristan—who is abducted, in part, because of his interest in hawks).∞∞ In the fourteenth century, Geoffroi de Charny wrote, ‘‘It befits all men of rank to enjoy the sport of hunting with hawk and hound,’’ and Nature in the Roman de la Rose speaks of reputed gentlemen who seem to be young noblemen because they have dogs and birds.∞≤ Upper-class women also flew falcons. Noblewomen’s seals portray ladies carrying hawks. Sir Orfeo sees sixty ladies riding bearing falcons, and Duchess Mary of Burgundy died in a fall from a horse while flying falcons.∞≥ Falconry became an integral part of courtly life. A young husband carrying a falcon is depicted on a twelfth-century marriage chest. Men and women holding falcons appear on luxury tableware. Lovers are shown hawking on decorative ivory objects: sometimes he holds the falcon, sometimes she.∞∂ Falconry scenes appear in castle frescoes (see plate 6), on tapestries (see plate 5), and in books of hours produced for laymen and women.∞∑ Some nobles are even portrayed in death holding their hawks.∞∏ Prizes for winning tournaments included falcons and sparrowhawks,∞π and the gifts to guests during the second course of the wedding banquet of Duke Lionel of Clarence and Violante Visconti in 1368 included ‘‘six goshawks, with as many creances’’; among the gifts in the fourth course were ‘‘twelve sparrow-hawks, with bells of gilded brass, creances and branding cords of silk,’’ followed, in the fifth course, by ‘‘six peregrine falcons, with hoods of velvet, having pearls on top, and buttons and rings . . . of silver.’’∞∫ Inability to fly falcons can indicate a serious problem. The wounded Fisher King in the story of the Grail cannot hawk or hunt, and when heroes of


Falconry in Medieval Life

romances lose interest in life, one sign of despair is that they stop hawking and hunting.∞Ω Giving up hawking can be part of a major renunciation: the king’s daughter in The Squyr of Low Degre proclaims: And, squire, for the love of thee, Fie on this world’s vanity! Farewell gold pure and fine; Farewell velvet and satin; Farewell castles and manors also; Farewell hunting and hawking too; Farewell revel, mirth and play; Farewell pleasure and garment gay. . . .≤≠

And the dying Duke of Normandy asks Roland: And if you come to Normandy, Greet well my [fair] lady, And sir Richard my son; And dub him Duke in my stead, And bid him venge his father dead, . . . . Bid him hawks and hounds forego, And to deeds of arms him do, . . . Upon the cursed Saracens . . . Venge me with dint of spear, For my life is near done.≤∞

On the other hand, as consolation for not attempting (literally) to see his invisible lady for two and a half years, Partonope of Blois is promised: This shall to you be no heavy abiding. Of me ye shall have play, speech and feeling, Hounds [and] hawks ye shall have I know, Mules and steedes also to bear you Both in forest and also in riveare. . . .≤≤

Men hurt nobles through their hawks. When Payn Peverel tried to take two villages from Ramsey Abbey, St. Ives (among other punishments) caused Payn to lose his hawk. And when the villeins of Preston, Sussex, revolted against their lord in 1280, they burned his house, maimed his horse, and killed his falcon.≤≥ Since medieval nobles flew falcons, then nobles of the past depicted in medieval works must have done so as well. Chaucer describes Troilus ‘‘in wise of courtesy with hawk on hand’’; the Greeks fly their hawks during a truce at Troy; Romans hunt with their falcons during Titus’s siege of Jerusalem; and Romulus leaves Rome carrying a hawk.≤∂

Falconry in Medieval Life


Fig. 12: Thanking St. Nicholas for his gift of dowries; the first bridegroom, Tournai, twelfth century, det. of Winchester Font; Winchester: Cathedral. Courtesy of the Dean and Chapter of Winchester.

Love of falconry came to be seen as an innate characteristic of noble blood. Gace de la Buigne (d. ca. 1384), first chaplain to King John II of France and author of a long treatise on falconry in the form of a poem, Le roman des deduis, attributed his love of falconry to his descent from four noble lines.≤∑ In the romance of Octovian, Florentine, of royal descent but unknowingly fostered by a butcher, is sent to sell two oxen but exchanges them for a sparrowhawk instead.≤∏ In the visual arts, too, falconry was a sign of high status. Early in the twelfth century the sculptor of the Winchester font portrayed the story of St. Nicholas and the three daughters of an impoverished nobleman; the saint rescued the girls from lives of prostitution by providing them with dowries. To show the dowries were sufficient to make good marriages, the artist depicted the first bridegroom as carrying a falcon (see fig. 12). Causa 29 of Gratian’s Decretum tells the story of a noblewoman deceived by a man of servile blood who claimed to be a noble, took the place of a nobleman’s son, and became her husband. A fourteenth-century illustrator encapsulated the situation by portraying the original suitor carrying a falcon and giving the imposter horns.≤π By the fifteenth century, falcons were included in Italian paintings of the cavalcade of the magi, and attendant falconers were shown at presentations of books to northern European dignitaries.≤∫ Falcon hunts became occasions for picnic lunches with musicians (see plate 3) and were part of royal and diplomatic entertainments.≤Ω


Falconry in Medieval Life

Fig. 13: A physician leaves for a hawking holiday, English, late thirteenth century, det.; MS Ashmole 399, fol. 34v. Bodleian Library, University of Oxford.

But, as in so many other cases in the later Middle Ages, the nobility lost its monopoly (if it ever had it) of this sport. Information about the status of owners is included in eighteen cases of miracle cures of falcons and hawks performed by four twelfth- and thirteenth-century English saints. The owners include a lord of Poitou, the wife of a noble, the son of a nobleman, eight knights, three clerics, a citizen of Canterbury, and three ‘‘men.’’ A commonplace book written by or for a member of a Worcestershire gentry family between 1272 and 1282 contains a section on hawk medicine. A series of latethirteenth-century drawings depicting events in the life of an English physician concludes with an illustration of the doctor about to go on vacation with his hawk, while five cured patients wave goodbye (see fig. 13).≥≠ In fourteenthcentury Spain, Jews were shown flying falcons.≥∞ In the same century a Parisian bourgeois husband drew up instructions for his young wife on how to train and care for hawks, and Gace de la Buigne wrote of how the ‘‘middle classes also amused themselves with falcons’’ and described a hunt in which the participants were ‘‘knights, canons, bourgeois, [and] squires.’’≥≤ Though nobles continued to fly falcons, at least one fifteenth-century Italian engrav-

Falconry in Medieval Life


ing portrayed the ‘‘gentleman’’ with a hawk (see fig. 14), and The Boke of St. Albans began with the phrase ‘‘Insomuch that gentle men and honest persons have great delight in hawking. . . .’’≥≥ The Decameron gives one a sense of this mixed social character of late medieval falconry. ‘‘Nicostratus, like a nobleman and a man of wealth as he was, kept many . . . hounds and hawks and took the utmost delight in the chase’’ (Seventh day, story nine). Currardo Gianfigliazzi, a ‘‘noble citizen’’ of Florence, ‘‘leading a knightly life hath ever . . . taken delight in hawks and hounds’’ (Sixth day, story four). Gentlemen and gentlemen’s sons ‘‘[keep] many and goodly horses and dogs and hawks’’ (Second day, story three), and ‘‘take delight in hawks and hounds’’ (Fifth day, story nine). In this last story, Sir Federigo makes the great sacrifice of killing and cooking his falcon for his love’s dinner. One gentleman is so skilled in training hawks that he becomes Saladin’s falconer (Tenth day, story nine). Yet at the same time, among the accomplishments of a merchant’s wife are knowing ‘‘how to ride a horse and fly a hawk’’ (Second day, story nine).≥∂ The late Middle Ages sees the promulgation of sumptuary laws and other class-defining legislation. An echo of this appears in a statute of Edward III of 1360–61 which concerns people who find lost hawks. The hawks are to be handed over to the sheriff, and if a bird is unclaimed after four months, the sheriff will keep it and compensate the finder, ‘‘if he be a simple Man.’’ But if the finder be ‘‘a Gentleman, and of Estate,’’ he is to keep the hawk.≥∑ The tract on hawking in The Boke of St. Albans, attributed to Juliana Berners and published in 1486, includes a list of falcons and hawks appropriate for different ranks: the eagle, vulture, or ‘‘melowne’’ for an emperor; the gyrfalcon for a king; the falcon gentle for a prince; the falcon of the rock for a duke; the peregrine for an earl; the bastard for a baron; the saker for a knight; the lanner for an esquire; the merlin for a lady; the hobby for a young man; the goshawk for a yeoman; the male goshawk for a poor man; the sparrowhawk for a priest; the musket for a holy water clerk; and the kestrel for a knave or servant.≥∏ The list follows a much older tradition of ranking birds of prey according to their ‘‘nobility’’—a ranking found, for example, in Albertus Magnus’s De animalibus.≥π The new feature is the assignment of hierarchically ordered birds to specific ranks of people. The list has been taken more seriously than it deserves.≥∫ There is no evidence that the ranks in question necessarily flew the specified birds. In fact, in several cases the choice of birds does not correspond to actual practice. The greatest imperial expert on falconry, Frederick II, included eagles among the birds ‘‘brought out as a novelty by men whose aim is to make a show of knowledge of falconry rather than to possess its reality.’’≥Ω Clearly that Emperor would not have found the eagle a

Falconry in Medieval Life


suitable bird for hunting, and the idea of emperors flying vultures smacks more of social criticism than of sport. Sparrowhawks were considered to be among the nobler species of raptors and were flown by higher ranks than mere priests.∂≠ On the other hand, the assignment of the kestrel (a small falcon whose diet includes insects) to the knave or servant seems quite appropriate.∂∞ What the list does tell us is that by the late Middle Ages all ranks and conditions of people might know how to fly hawks. The sport was no longer in itself a sign of status or wealth: rather, the circumstances of the sport, the kinds of birds flown, and the use of proper hawking terminology were better status determinants.∂≤ By the fifteenth century, as David Burnley observes, ‘‘[T]he language of the gentleman was to be identified with terms drawn from his presumed leisure interests: knowledge of the correct language to use in describing a horse, a greyhound, or a hawk. Malory remarks that one can discern a gentleman from a yeoman by the former’s knowledge of hunting terms,’’ and one of Juliana Berners’s objectives was that ‘‘gentlemen . . . know the gentle terms in communing of their hawks.’’∂≥ The upper classes turned their falcon hunts into outdoor spectacles and flew the most prized birds. One doubts that yeomen flew imported birds, and while knights might fly peregrines, it is unlikely they could afford white gyrfalcons. In the late Middle Ages the furniture of falconry became more expensive as well: birds were equipped with gilded accessories and enameled tags marked by the owners’ coats of arms.∂∂ Where does this all leave us? It is clear that sport can be as much a hallmark of status as more obvious developments, such as heraldry. We know that men who were not noble flew hawks throughout the Middle Ages. Ælfric’s fowler reminds us that hawking could serve a practical purpose as well as a recreational one. The important social fact is probably the literary and artistic equation of falconry with nobility—an earlier equivalent of ‘‘manners maketh man.’’ When new classes arose in the later Middle Ages they tended to assume the manners, clothing, and sports of the upper classes, and the investigation of how this was manifested in the case of falconry, and how the nobility attempted to maintain the exclusivity of the sport, reinforces and particularizes our view of social mobility in this period. One can view medieval falconry as an aspect of the eternal war between the haves and the would-bes—as one of the many ways in which people have sought to maintain or to achieve social distinction.

Fig. 14: (opposite page) Zintilomo V (The Gentleman), Unidentified artist, North Italian, fifteenth century, about 1467, the Tarocchi Cards of Mantegna, engraving touched with gold; Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Katherine E. Bullard Fund in memory of Francis Bullard; 69.963. ∫ 2003 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.


Falconry in Medieval Life

Women It is likely that some women began flying falcons and hawks if not as early as men, then shortly thereafter. In the later Middle Ages falconry provided women with opportunities to engage actively in courtly sport, in contrast to par force hunting in which their participation was rare.∂∑ Indeed, John of Salisbury wrote ‘‘the inferior sex excels in the hunting of birds.’’∂∏ However, there are no indications, in England at any rate, of women flying falcons before the twelfth century. As noted earlier, Henry II’s mother Matilda was familiar with falconry techniques. One of Becket’s miracles was the revival of a lady’s hawk. It is thought that a fresco in Touraine of a crowned woman on horseback followed by a man bearing a falcon represents Eleanor of Aquitaine departing for the hunt. Three of Eleanor’s seals, including one as queen of England, portray falcons. Two of the seals depict a woman holding a falcon; the third seal shows the queen holding a globe surmounted by a cross, with a jessed falcon atop the cross. The earliest of these seals has been dated at 1152.∂π Around the same time, one begins to find English noblewomen’s seals depicting women holding falcons, and this becomes a regular motif on ladies’ seals.∂∫ From the thirteenth century on, queens and noblewomen are recorded employing falconers. During the fourteenth century depictions of women holding or flying falcons appear in a variety of media (see figs. 8 and 9). Seven marginal illustrations of a woman hawking are part of a section in the Taymouth Hours entitled ‘‘women’s games,’’ and a comparable series occurs in the Smithfield Decretals.∂Ω Women not only flew falcons, but they cared for them. As previously noted, after the falconer John de Merk died in 1304, Edward I wrote his widow thanking her for the care she had taken of a royal falcon in John’s custody. A Scottish woman was paid for keeping James IV’s hawks in 1496. In Chaucer’s ‘‘Squire’s Tale,’’ Canace heals a sick falcon, and a section of the Ménagier de Paris’s instructions for his young bride deals with how to train, care for, and treat the illnesses of her sparrowhawk.∑≠ The Ménagier believed that sparrowhawks were the best birds for women to fly, a view shared by several fourteenth-century authors, and The Boke of St. Albans designated another small bird, the merlin, as appropriate for a lady.∑∞ But household records of thirteenth- and fourteenth-century English queens mention only larger birds. In 1252 a moulted goshawk was bought for Queen Eleanor of Provence. Queen Eleanor of Castile had two gyrfalcons with her in France in 1289. Queen Isabella’s accounts for 1311 record a falcon gentle and two lanners; and in 1358, when she was in her mid-60s, she was given a falcon by her son, Edward III. An account of Queen Phillippa for

Falconry in Medieval Life


1349–50 mentions a ramage falcon and a lanner, and an undated account lists expenses in bringing two falcons to her. On the other hand, Joan de Valence, Countess of Pembroke (d. 1307) kept sparrowhawks, and when Eleanor, Edward III’s sister, was married in 1332, she was presented with six sparrowhawks.∑≤ An idea of the problems involved in determining what birds were actually flown can be seen by looking at extant accounts of Eleanor de Burgh, Lady de Clare, for the years 1338 to 1360. The greatest number of birds recorded in a year under the heading falconry expenses was six: two falcons, two lanners, a goshawk, and a tiercel goshawk. But in various years the goshawks were used by their keepers to capture pheasants and duck, and the lanners to take partridges. Which of these birds, if any, did Lady Clare actually fly? And what about the ten sparrowhawks brought from Usk in 1350–51, noted in an account for foreign expenses?∑≥ Perhaps status determined which kind of bird was flown, and queens flew larger, more prestigious hawks, while ladies and wives of bourgeois flew smaller, but still ‘‘noble’’ birds.

Townspeople While hunting with falcons took place in the countryside, people in towns also owned hawks. We have already encountered the wife of the Ménagier de Paris, and the young man who carried a hawk across the Grand Pont.∑∂ Around 1180 William Fitz Stephen wrote ‘‘Most of the citizens [of London] amuse themselves in sporting with sparrowhawks, hawks, and other birds of that kind.’’ In October 1300 a London court case that involved the detaining of a hawk came before Sheriff Richard de Campes. In 1349 the town of Godmanchester, Huntingdonshire, with a population of perhaps three thousand, had a resident falconer.∑∑ Bones of raptors have been found at a number of English medieval urban sites: remains of a peregrine and a sparrowhawk dated around 1500 were found at the site of Baynard’s Castle, London; bones of at least two goshawks and eight sparrowhawks were found in a thirteenth- or fourteenth-century context at Nantwich, Cheshire; remains of a peregrine, goshawk, and sparrowhawk were found at Ilchester, Somerset; bones of a peregrine and goshawk were found at Lincoln; those of a goshawk at Northampton; those of two sparrowhawks were found at Exeter and of three sparrowhawks at Southampton; and those of a goshawk and two sparrowhawks at York. According to a recent survey article, bones of goshawks have been found at twenty-nine medieval British and northwestern European urban sites, bones of sparrowhawks at seventeen, bones of peregrines at six locations, and bones of merlins


Falconry in Medieval Life

at six. It is not clear what conclusions can be drawn from this archaeological evidence. Some of the towns were places where birds of prey were sold, and some of the remains might be those of birds held for sale that died or those of wild birds. The birds found could have belonged to resident nobles or to the king (at Baynard’s Castle). Nevertheless, one can say that some town dwellers kept, and no doubt flew, birds of prey, and that hawks were more common than falcons. This last point suggests that some of the birds may have been used to supply the table rather than for sport.∑∏

Peasants Adam le Bossu’s Le Jeu de Robin et Marion suggests that peasants were totally unfamiliar with falconry. Marion describes the knight bearing a falcon ‘‘as wearing a mitten, and . . . [carrying] something like a kite-bird on his fist,’’ and when Robin mistreats the knight’s falcon Marion says, ‘‘He doesn’t know the right way to do it.’’∑π Bartolus records a case in which another peasant didn’t know the right way to do it: ‘‘During a hunt Count Guido de Blanchardo lost a falcon. The rustic who found the bird gave it shelter, and furnished bread, cheese, and turnips. Upon the death of the falcon, the Count attempted to hold the rustic liable for the value of the bird.’’∑∫ On the other hand there is the hawk Richard I tried to seize from ‘‘rustics,’’ the man who was rewarded in Edward I’s reign for finding a lost royal falcon and taking good care of it, and Edward III’s statute of 1360–61 imply that ‘‘simple’’ men could be knowledgeable enough to reclaim lost hawks.∑Ω The discrepancy may be because peasants who hawked flew hawks, not falcons. In his history of English agriculture and prices, Thorold Rogers gives prices for 121 hawks in the years 1268–72—ranging from 1 ∞⁄≤d. to 3d.—but a price for only one falcon, 10s. (in 1294). One of the entries for hawks is followed by the price of two nets, and the single applicable service recorded by Rogers is ‘‘Taking conies and partridges with falcon [sic], dog and ferret.’’∏≠ Since peasants used hawks for fowling, they would not have known the finer points of falconry.

Clergy It is ironic that one of the earliest notices of falconry in the West is by a bishop∏∞ —ironic, because from the early sixth century on, Church councils repeatedly legislated against clergy flying hawks or falcons.∏≤ Sidonius was referring not to his own sport but to that of others. Nevertheless, his account helps explain why some higher clergy hunted with birds of prey. Many high Church positions were held by aristocrats, and it is not surprising that men of

Falconry in Medieval Life


a class whose youthful education included falconry should continue to fly hawks as adults.∏≥ Gaudry, bishop of Laon (1106–12) is an example of a man who continued in his secular attitudes after he became a bishop. Gaudry had been Henry I’s chancellor, and Guibert of Nogent writes of him: ‘‘He took delight in talk about military affairs, dogs, and hawks, as he had learned to do among the English.’’∏∂ Clerics also wrote works on falconry. In addition to Daude and Gace de la Buigne, Friar Egidio de Aquino wrote a treatise on falconry in the thirteenth century; Denys, bishop of Senlis (d. ca. 1354), is said to have written a book on hunting with falcons; Guillaume Crétin, a late fifteenth-century canon, composed a debate on the respective merits of hunting and hawking; and Jean de Franchières, grand prior of Aquitaine of the Hospitallers in the late fifteenth century, wrote a treatise on falconry.∏∑ The clergy most frequently associated with falconry were bishops.∏∏ Ralph Niger (ca. 1146–99) characterized fowling and hunting as ‘‘empty games of princes and prelates,’’ and at the Third Lateran Council (1179), Pope Alexander III forbade prelates to go on visitations with hawks and falcons.∏π At about the same time Nigel Wireker wrote: The bishop runs from town to throw his hawk. He spends more time in woods than sacred place, And values dogma less than sound of dogs. He’s troubled more when dogs are lost or when A bird is hurt than when a cleric dies.∏∫

Flying hawks and falcons was often used to provide examples of bishops’ worldly living. Reason in Piers Plowman says, ‘‘It is no use asking me to have mercy . . . until bishops sell . . . their hawks and hounds to help poor monks and friars.’’∏Ω In a 1388 sermon Thomas Wimbledon spoke of ‘‘fat palfreys, hounds, hawks, and worse, which [prelates] feed out of the proceeds of the church.’’ Wimbledon’s contemporary, the Dominican John Bromyard, stated that ‘‘prelates more freely lead dogs and falcons to the hunt than Christians to devotion.’’π≠ Whether a particular bishop flew falcons, however, is not always clear. A bishop could have a falconer but not fly falcons himself. This may have been true of Bishop Richard de Swinfield of Hereford (1282–1316). A roll of the bishop’s household expenses for 1289–90 has survived, and in it are recorded payments to Adam Harpin, the bishop’s falconer. Adam is not explicitly called a falconer in the account, though the modern editor once characterizes him as such. But if one checks the specific entries for Harpin, one finds he is really a fowler. He captures young falcons, but subsequently is found making nets and


Falconry in Medieval Life

presumably catching partridges.π∞ In the same way, monasteries that owned eyries of hawks or falcons did not necessarily use them for hawking.π≤ The young birds could be sold, be used to make payments of sore hawks when such were required by charter, or be given as presents. The tests for whether an individual cleric was actually hunting with falcons or hawks would include such factors as expense (hawks used for catching partridges did not cost much) and the presence of falconers or hawkers actually bearing birds. The earliest reference I have found to a specific cleric identified with falconry is to a Bishop Lanfred about whom Pope Nicholas I wrote a letter (ca. 865) to Archbishop Aldwin of Salzburg: the pope expressed the hope that Lanfred ‘‘may come out of this in reality a stranger to hunting of all beasts and birds.’’π≥ In his will drawn up in 1005, Ermengaud, archbishop of Narbonne left falcons to Count William Taillefer of Toulouse.π∂ William of Malmesbury wrote of Mauger, archbishop of Rouen (deposed 1055), as one who ‘‘was no mean scholar, but being conscious of his high birth, he used to forget his sacred calling, devoting himself more often than was right to hunting and [birds].’’π∑ When William of St. Calais, bishop of Durham, was exiled in 1088 he was allowed to take his hawks and hawkers with him.π∏ And Arnulf, bishop of Lisieux (1141–81), wrote a letter stating that he had not received a four-timesmoulted hawk that a monk had supposedly sent to him.ππ The most prominent English bishop who flew falcons was Thomas Becket. Becket’s father Gilbert was a merchant, but among those he entertained in his London house was Richer de l’Aigle, lord of Pevensey, who introduced young Thomas to hunting and hawking. One day while hawking along a river Thomas sought to rescue a falcon, fell into the river, and was almost drawn into a mill wheel.π∫ The incident did not dampen his enthusiasm for falconry. William Fitz Stephen writes that when Thomas was Henry II’s chancellor, ‘‘There [almost] never passed a day on which he did not make some large present of horses, birds, clothes, gold and silver plate, or money.’’πΩ When Thomas entered Paris in 1158 in advance of Henry, among the chancellor’s magnificent equipage were ‘‘hounds and birds of all kinds, such as kings and nobles keep’’ as well as men carrying hawks on their wrists. While Becket was recovering from illness, shortly before becoming archbishop, he was visited by the prior of Leicester, who asked him, ‘‘How is this that you wear a cape with sleeves? This is the dress rather of those who carry hawks.’’∫≠ It is likely that just as Edward I and Anthony Bek developed their friendship while hawking together, so did Henry II and Becket. There is no notice of Becket’s hawking after he became archbishop, but according to one of Thomas’s clerks, after Becket fled to Flanders in 1164 he was recognized by a knight bearing a hawk that Becket looked at with a too-knowing eye.∫∞ After Thomas’s martyrdom

Falconry in Medieval Life


ten miracles involving hawks and falcons were attributed to him. These involved the recovery of lost hawks and falcons and the cures of sick birds, one a wounded falcon belonging to Henry II. Perhaps as a result Edward I sent a wax image of a sick gyrfalcon to Becket’s shrine at Canterbury.∫≤ Other bishops who were noted hawkers included Henry II’s illegitimate son Geoffrey Plantagenet, archbishop of York, and Anthony Bek, bishop of Durham. An accusation made against Geoffrey was that ‘‘holding in contempt the oaths of his office, and having been uselessly occupied in hunting, hawking, and other knightly cares,’’ he had failed to perform his episcopal duties.∫≥ Thomas of Cantilupe, bishop of Hereford (1275–82) no doubt also flew falcons. While he was still a clerk, one of his hawks was cured at the shrine of Simon de Montfort; as bishop, he provided his falconer with a house; and Cantilupe’s nine miracles involving hawks and falcons are likely, as with Becket, to have been reflections of Cantilupe’s own sporting activities.∫∂ Scattered through the records are mentions of other bishop-hawkers. When William of Blois, archbishop of Rouen, visited Becket’s shrine in 1178 he was accompanied by falconers. In 1201 Hubert Walter, archbishop of Canterbury, was conceded the royal prize of hawks, gyrfalcons, and falcons throughout England. The Pipe Rolls of the bishopric of Winchester record payments to the falconers of Bishop Peter des Roches (1205–38). In 1231 Henry III gave the bishop a gyrfalcon, and twenty-one years later Henry gave another gyrfalcon to the bishop-elect of Winchester, his half-brother Aymer de Valence. In 1327 Gilbert Falconarius was given a safe conduct to go to Bruges to buy falcons for Stephen Gravesend, bishop of London. Five years later one of Gravesend’s falcons was stolen by one of his tenants, and five years or so after that, Simon de Montacute, bishop of Ely, had his sparrowhawk stolen at Bermondsey Priory.∫∑ Clergy other than bishops also flew hawks and falcons. Men who continued to hawk after they had become bishops almost certainly were hawkers before, as was true of Thomas of Cantilupe and Anthony Bek.∫∏ According to Coulton, the treasurers of the cathedrals of Auxerre and Nevers ‘‘had the legal right of coming to service with hawk on wrist. This was because these particular canonries were hereditary in noble families.’’∫π When Thomas de la Mare, a canon of York, drew up his will in 1358, he left a falcon to his brother, another to his cousin, and a lanner and 20s. to his falconer, and Peter of Blois reminded Reginald FitzJocelin, archdeacon of Sarum (1161?–73), of the undesirability of hawking for a churchman: ‘‘care not for your birds but for your sheep’’ and warned him of the danger if he put his birds before his sheep.∫∫ Around 1200, during a visitation, an archdeacon of Richmond arrived at one of the churches of the canons of Bridlington with an entourage of ninety-seven horses, twenty-


Falconry in Medieval Life

one dogs, and three falcons and ‘‘in a brief hour . . . consumed more than would have maintained their house for a considerable period.’’∫Ω Some prohibitions against hawking by clergy specifically mentioned deacons and priests, and Clement V issued a decree at the Council of Vienne (1311) in which he noted that ‘‘[M]any church ministers, casting away the modesty of their Order, . . . presume to say or sing the Canonical hours with undue haste, and skipping of words, and frequent intermingling of extraneous, vain, profane, and unhonest talk, coming late into choir and often leaving the church without reasonable cause before the end of service, sometimes bringing hawks with them or causing them to be brought, and leading hunting dogs.’’Ω≠ The anonymous author of ‘‘The Simonie,’’ a ‘‘poem on the evil times of Edward II,’’ writes how when ‘‘the new parson hath gathered marks and pounds, he priketh out of town with hawks and with hounds.’’Ω∞ Langland and English Wycliffite authors criticized hawking priests; Richard de Bury complained that the places of books had been seized by hounds and hawks; and John Skelton wrote a poem, ‘‘Ware the Hauke,’’ as a ‘‘reproof of ‘a lewd curate’ ‘A parson benificed’ who let his hawks fly in the ‘church of Dis.’ ’’Ω≤ One of John Myrc’s instructions for parish priests was ‘‘Thou might not use without blame, hawking, hunting, and dowsing,’’ and Robert of Brunne instructed clerks that ‘‘hawks or hounds is not granted to [thee].’’Ω≥ The twelfth-century priest Wulfric of Haselbury hunted and hawked until a talk with a beggar led him to follow a stricter life. Wulfric’s fate was better than that of the subject of an English exemplum of the second half of the thirteenth century: a ‘‘Dying clerk, devoted to sport, [who could not] speak, but only whistle for his hawks.’’Ω∂ Robert Peynreth, a chantry priest at Southwell Minster, was accused in 1484 of hawking, hunting, and catching moles during service time, and in 1537 John Baxter, vicar choral of Southwell, was warned about hunting, hawking, and shirking choir.Ω∑ As previously noted, The Boke of St. Albans’s list of birds included a sparrowhawk for a priest and a musket for a holy water clerk.Ω∏ While the correspondence between bird and rank is doubtful, the implication is that priests and holy water clerks flew hawks. However, the lower levels of clergy may have valued hawking as much for the birds caught as for the sport. Around 1478 the vicar of Watford received a goshawk from George Cely and, after a season in which the hawk caught some sixty ‘‘fenanys’’ and mallards (presumably for the vicar’s table), the vicar said he would not sell the bird for twelve nobles to any man.Ωπ When it came to clerics in the schools, students at a number of Oxford and Cambridge colleges were prohibited from keeping birds of prey. The reason given in the Peterhouse statutes of 1344 was that the ‘‘ensuing commotion [of

Falconry in Medieval Life


falcons] was said to distract from study.’’ King’s College, Cambridge, also prohibited nets for hawking, as did Henry VI’s other foundation at Eton. The Etonians were forbidden keeping ‘‘nets, ferrets, sparrow-hawks or goshawks for sport.’’ Students at St. Andrews seem to have been more fortunate than those elsewhere. They were ‘‘allowed to go ahawking, provided they went in their own clothes and not in ‘dissolute habiliments borrowed from lay cavaliers.’ ’’Ω∫ Many critics viewed hawking and hunting as inappropriate secular sports existing in an unreformed church. But sixteenth-century visitation injunctions exhibit a concern about clerical hawking that suggests that the problem continued after the Reformation. A royal injunction of 1547 provided that cathedral clergy ‘‘not . . . give themselves to . . . hunting, hawking, or any other unlawful games,’’ and hunting and hawking were among the ‘‘vain pastimes’’ and ‘‘evil example[s] of life’’ of the clergy that diocesan visitors were enjoined to inquire about.ΩΩ Falconry was also a problem for monks. In addition to the general prohibitions against clerical hawking: the Cistercians, Augustinians, Templars, and the abbot of Cluny barred their monks from hawking. Among the visitation articles drawn up after 1363 by the English Black Monks was an inquiry as to whether hunting birds were permitted; an Ely Chapter Ordinance of 1314 stated that ‘‘The brethren and those living in the precinct are not to keep hounds, or birds of prey.’’∞≠≠ Nevertheless some monks continued to fly falcons. A twelfth-century abbot of Bardney was removed for, among other things, hawking and hunting. In 1368 Abbot Litlyngton of Westminster had a wax image made for a sick falcon, and late in the fourteenth century an abbot of Shrewsbury sent an envoy to Ireland to buy hawks.∞≠∞ In 1287 Bishop Swinfield instructed the abbot of Reading to correct the conduct of Prior John Geraud of Leominster who ‘‘deserted the religious life to hunt with dogs, hawks, and dishonest persons.’’∞≠≤ In 1281 and 1282 Archbishop Peckham forbade the monks of Reading and Christ Church, Canterbury, respectively, to hunt or hawk. Bishop Grandisson issued a similar injunction to Launceston in 1342, as did Bishop Grey to Dunstable in 1432, and around 1378 the proctor of the English Black Monks at Rome reminded the Abbey of Bury St. Edmunds that monks were forbidden to hunt or hawk. Monks were accused of hawking at Dorchester in 1441, Wymondham in 1492, Walsingham in 1514, Bardney in 1519, and at Wigmore in 1537.∞≠≥ Both churchmen and church critics complained about monastic hawking. In the fourteenth-century religious encyclopedia ‘‘Omne bonum’’ the illustration to the entry ‘‘Worldly and claustral abuses’’ includes a Benedictine on horseback holding a hawk.∞≠∂ The author of ‘‘The Simonie’’ writes of abbots and


Falconry in Medieval Life

priors ‘‘riding with hawk and hound, counterfeiting knights.’’∞≠∑ ‘‘The Complaint of the Ploughman’’ notes how some monks ‘‘rideth on a courser as a knight, With hawk and with hounds,’’ and in the Mirour de l’omme Gower describes how the monk for his delight has a falcon and a moulted goshawk to hawk at the river.∞≠∏ A factor contributing to monastic hawking may have been the late medieval practice of monasteries taking in secular boarders. The boarders not only brought with them their worldly attitudes but, on at least one occasion, their secular sports as well. In 1348 Bishop Grandisson of Exeter put the Priory of Totnes under control of a commission after ‘‘a weak and worldly prior had allowed his relations to live in the priory with their horses, hounds and hawks.’’∞≠π

How Falconry Was Perceived As we have seen, different groups in society took very different views of falconry. Nobles and the ‘‘upwardly socially mobile’’ valued it for the status it conferred as well as for the sport itself. The Church condemned falconry when engaged in by the clergy, and moralists saw falconry as a manifestation of everything from the deadly sins to the inanity of those practicing it. For peasants, falconry might be helpful. Piers Plowman tells a knight, ‘‘[T]ame falcons to kill the wild birds that crop my wheat.’’∞≠∫ But falconry probably more frequently brought disaster. John Bromyard wrote of how ‘‘[the nobles] earn the curses of simple folk, whose corn they destroy by riding through it with their hawks and hounds.’’∞≠Ω Perhaps the best characterization of most peasants’ attitude toward falconry is found in the thirteenth-century poem, ‘‘The twenty-three [or twenty-two] manners of vilains:’’ ‘‘The dog-like vilain sits before his door on feast days and when he sees a gentleman carrying a sparrow hawk on his wrist says, ‘Ha! [that kite] will eat a chicken tonight which would fill my child.’ ’’∞∞≠ Because falconry was so identified with the nobility, it becomes a convenient image used to attack the class. Falconry of course is a variety of hunting. And while some advocates and critics treated falconry separately, others included it in general encomiums or condemnations of hunting. Both the Master of Game and Gaston Phébus stated that their justifications for hunting also applied to falconry. The Master of Game writes: [H]unting causeth a man to eschew the seven deadly sins. . . . [M]en are better when riding, more just and more understanding, and more alert and more at ease and more undertaking, and better knowing of all countries and all pas-

Falconry in Medieval Life


sages; in short and long all good customs and manners cometh thereof, and the health of man and of his soul. [S]ince hunters eat little and sweat always, they should live long and in health. Men desire in this world to live long in health and in joy, and after death the health of the soul. And hunters have all these things. Therefore be ye all hunters and ye shall do as wise men. Wherefore I counsel to all manner of folk of what estate or condition that they be, that they love hounds and hunting and the pleasure of hunting beasts of one kind or another, or hawking. For to be idle and to have no pleasure in either hounds or hawks is no good token. For as saith in his book Phœbus the Earl of Foix that noble hunter, he saw never a good man that had not pleasure in some of these things. . . . And also he saith in the aforesaid book, that he never saw a man that loved the work and pleasure of hounds and hawks, that had not many good qualities in him; for that comes to him of great nobleness and gentleness of heart of whatever estate the man may be, whether he be a great lord, or a little one, or a poor man or a rich one.∞∞∞

An anonymous early fifteenth-century English author echoes the Master of Game and adds, ‘‘For whosoever fleeth the seven deadly sins, as we believe, he shall be saved; then a good hunter shall be saved.’’∞∞≤ And a fable of Odo of Cheriton (d. 1247) describes how a layman tells a clerk that ‘‘[I]f dogs and [hunting] birds were in Paradise he would desire more to go there.’’∞∞≥ Frederick II was more modest in his estimate of the benefits of falconry: ‘‘The pursuit of falconry enables nobles and rulers disturbed and worried by the cares of state to find relief in the pleasures of the chase. The poor, as well as the less noble, by following this avocation may earn some of the necessities of life; and both classes will find in bird life attractive manifestations of the processes of nature.’’∞∞∂ A more practical view was taken by John Paston III when he wrote his brother Sir John Paston II in 1472, ‘‘[I]f I have not an hawk, I shall wax fat for default of labor and dead for default of company.’’∞∞∑ It would appear that one of the great advantages of falconry as an upperclass sport was that it was considered both socially acceptable and morally justifiable. As Keen points out: Great expanses of time available for leisure opened the way to the deadly sin of sloth, as medieval moralists revelled in reminding the prosperous. Sloth, says the English Mirroure of the Worlde, ‘‘causeth a man that he loveth not but idleness, rest and to sleep as an hog for to confound man and to do him shame.’’ Idle hours also opened the way to further deadly sins, to the pursuit of lust and other delights of the flesh that ‘‘do shame’’ to a man, gluttony and drunkenness. Because it would help to eschew these ills, the planning and


Falconry in Medieval Life large scale organisation of the fitting use of leisure time was deemed a worthwhile business, and a serious one: and the execution of the plans an activity that could justify the expenditure of large sums of money.∞∞∏

The moralists however took a different view. The earliest critics of falconry treated it as a branch of hunting, and falconry as such was seldom differentiated. Rudolph Willard has traced the sources of the prohibition of hunting in Gratian’s Decretum.∞∞π These sources include the Breviarium in Psalmos attributed to Jerome, Jerome’s ‘‘Commentary on Micah,’’ Ambrose’s ‘‘Expositio in Psalmum CXVIII’’ [119], and Augustine’s comments on John 16:13. The reasoning is based on the Biblical text, ‘‘[Nimrod] was a mighty hunter before the Lord.’’∞∞∫ Nimrod was a giant, hence a heathen; the builder of the Tower of Babel, hence proud; and a tyrant. The relevant section in the Breviarium in Psalmos reads: ‘‘Many are the hunters in this world who seek after our soul. In short, Nemrod that giant, he was a great hunter in the sight of God, and Esau was a hunter, because he was a sinner; and, actually, we have not found in holy scriptures any hunter that was holy.’’∞∞Ω The earliest specific condemnations of falconry by the Councils of Epaon and Mâcon do not specify why falconry is undesirable.∞≤≠ But a letter of Pope Nicholas I to Archbishop Aldwin in 865 explains the condemnation: ‘‘O wretched life for a man, and particularly for priests, who, when they ought to be vigorously pursuing the faithful who must be saved, are devoting their attention to hunting wild animals. . . . For the life of a hunter is to catch nothing beyond flesh. . . .’’∞≤∞ The St. Albans Psalter of ca. 1119–23 contains a similar message in a marginal illustration to Psalm 118 [119]. The scene symbolizes verse thirty-seven, ‘‘Turn away my eyes that may not behold vanity.’’ At the bottom left are two couples: The first group, on the left, contains a male figure holding in one hand a hawk, and in the other the same type of ornamental stole that decorates Pomp in an Anglo-Saxon Psychomachia. He clearly personifies the pomps and vanities of the world. Next to him is a woman holding a flower and an apple on which she gazes. Holding the flower, she symbolizes the ‘‘world with the flower,’’ which was the phrase used by Gregory the Great, and one current in the 12th century to sum up the delights and pleasures of the world. . . . [Eve] gazes fixedly on the apple in the illustration to remind one that to avoid sin one should turn one’s eyes from it. The second group consists of a man offering a woman a gold coin, and, at the same time, drawing her towards himself. This represents cupidity on the one hand and lust on the other. . . . . . . the picture, as a whole, illustrates how the imprudence of the eye may lead to the sins of the mind and of the flesh. From the point of view of the

Falconry in Medieval Life


monks, who painted and gazed on it, it portrays those ‘‘fleeting, earthly and perishable things,’’ which will be eschewed by the monk. . . .∞≤≤

In his March 1146 bull Quantam praedecessores, Eugenius III asked crusaders ‘‘to pay no heed to splendid clothes or the beauty of outward appearance, nor to hunting dogs or falcons or the other things that indicate wantonness.’’∞≤≥ John of Salisbury devotes an entire chapter in Book One of his Policraticus to ‘‘Hunting, Its Origin, Its Forms, and Its Practice, Lawful and Otherwise.’’∞≤∂ He describes hunting as ‘‘an activity characterized by self-indulgence and vice’’; remarks that ‘‘Rarely is [a hunter] found to be modest or dignified, rarely self-controlled, and in my opinion never temperate’’; and notes, ‘‘In our day this knowledge [of hunting jargon] constitutes the liberal studies of the higher class.’’∞≤∑ In successive passages Salisbury condemns hunting as extravagant and hunters as penurious: ‘‘Hunting is indeed a silly and very trying business and never balances the losses of its extravagance by the advantages of its success. It may be that large numbers of men engage in hunting in order that under cover of it they may cut down their expenditures, rarely dining at home, often with their acquaintances. They court solitude, wandering about forest glades and lakes clothed in coarse garments, content with cheap food’’ (17– 18). Of falconry he writes: ‘‘Those who delight in that type of hunting in which birds are taught to pursue their kind, if you think that this sort of bird-catching is to be included in the term hunting, are afflicted with a milder form of insanity but with similar levity. Hunting on the ground, as it is more dependable, is also more profitable than that in the sky’’ (16). Perhaps Salisbury’s most fundamental criticism is ‘‘[T]hat the inordinate pleasure that [hunting] causes impairs the human mind and impairs reason itself,’’ and as he reminds us, ‘‘Pleasure is indeed a spurious source for virtue’’ (23–24). The fifteenth-century humanist Poggio Bracciolini described the folly of hawking in a more amusing way. In one of his facetiae he tells of a recovering madman who, while at the threshold of his doctor’s house: [S]aw a young nobleman approach on horseback. The nobleman had a hawk on his arm, and was followed by two hunting dogs. It was a novel sight to the patient, for his madness had caused him to lose all memory of the world he had once known, so he called out to the youth and asked, ‘‘Please listen to me for a moment and answer me if you will. What is that thing you are seated on, and what good is it to you?’’ ‘‘A horse,’’ replied the young man, ‘‘and I use it to hunt birds.’’ ‘‘And the thing you carry on your wrist, what is it, and what do you use it for?’’


Falconry in Medieval Life ‘‘It is a hawk, trained to catch ducks and partridges.’’ ‘‘And the creatures following you, what are they, and of what use are they to you?’’ ‘‘They are dogs, trained to hunt down the game.’’ ‘‘Ah!’’ exclaimed the madman. ‘‘But this game, which requires so much preparedness, how much does it bring you in during the course of a year?’’ ‘‘I don’t know,’’ replied the youth. ‘‘Not more than six ducats.’’ ‘‘And how much do the horse, hawk, and dogs cost you?’’ ‘‘Fifty ducats.’’ Astounded at the young nobleman’s foolishness the madman hooted, ‘‘Ho, ho! Get away from here as fast as you can before the doctor returns! If he catches you here he will regard you as the craziest man on earth. . . .’’ Thus he illustrated the folly of hunting, unless indulged in occasionally by the rich for the purpose of bodily exercise.∞≤∏

The Parisian theologian Peter Cantor (d. 1197) called falcons ‘‘illicit superfluities’’ and asked, ‘‘Do the falconers belong to them whose work is good for nothing, who consume the bread of the poor and kill many a horse without any useful reason?’’∞≤π Falconers are also portrayed satirically, generally in marginal illuminations. Monkeys are depicted as falconers, sometimes holding a falcon or swinging a lure, sometimes carrying an owl. One ape swinging a lure rides a dog, another riding a goat has an owl on its fist (see plate 7A), and a third carrying an owl rides backward on a goat.∞≤∫ The most comprehensive visual criticism of falconry can be found in the ‘‘Bibles moralisées,’’ a group of Biblical picture books mainly made in Paris between the 1220s and the 1400s.∞≤Ω According to John Lowden, ‘‘Every page of a Bible moralisée (with a very few exceptions, such as frontispieces) has eight small images, arranged in two columns each of four images. At the top of every column is a biblical image, accompanied to one side by a more or less brief biblical text, and both are paired with a moralization text and a moralization image located beneath.’’∞≥≠ In the ‘‘Bibles moralisées’’ I have consulted, falcons are depicted over a hundred times, all but twice in the moralized images. In almost every case the falcon is a symbol of sin, worldliness, or improper clerical behavior (see plate 7B).∞≥∞ Devils carry falcons, as do Jews, an attendant of Pharoah, Absalom and one of his companions, Dives the rich man, the prodigal son, those who worship the beast, and the kings who lament Babylon in Revelation. Devils, and the serpent that deceived Adam, accompany men carrying falcons.∞≥≤ Falcons are depicted in the context of the deadly sins: they accompany moneychangers and men holding purses (avarice), are present at scenes of feasting and drinking (gluttony), and are held while men

Falconry in Medieval Life


and women embrace (lust). Men holding falcons also appear in scenes depicting idolatry, inconstancy, contumacy, greed, and pride.∞≥≥ The contrast between the worldly and the religious is presented in three basic ways. In one pattern good and evil are contrasted, with a falcon present on the side of evil. God’s separation of the waters is moralized by the separation of good and evil, with a bishop clothing a naked man in the upper part of the roundel and a bishop holding a falcon below. Tobias’s wife Anna’s refusal to return a lamb she has been given (Tobit 2:13–14) is moralized by a man holding a falcon and being embraced by a woman while a server brings a dish to an already laden table. On the other side of the roundel is a naked man being blessed by Christ. Jeremiah’s lamentation on those ‘‘that wag their heads at the Daughter of Jerusalem’’ (Lamentations 2:15) is moralized by an illustration of Christ and a monk sitting in sorrow while a second monk embraces a woman and a man holding a falcon and a purse is pulled by a devil.∞≥∂ The second pattern is characterized by renunciation. The moralization of Jacob leaving Laban (Genesis 31:23) shows three monks departing from two men, one of whom holds a falcon, the other a purse—symbols of ‘‘pleasures of the flesh.’’∞≥∑ The words of the First Epistle of John, ‘‘Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world’’ (2:15) are moralized by two clerics leaving a table at which two men drink, one holding a falcon, the other a purse. Similarly, the slaying of Nicanor’s five thousand (1 Maccabees 7:32) is moralized by two monks (‘‘relinquishing the world’’) leaving two men embraced by a devil. One man holds a falcon, the other a purse.∞≥∏ In this general category also belong what Garnier calls scenes of ‘‘conversion and penitence.’’ In several such scenes a person holding a falcon, or associated with someone holding a falcon, is shown on the left, while on the right the same(?) person, without falcon, is being blessed.∞≥π A third motif, used less frequently than the other two, is that of a cleric reproving a layman holding a falcon.∞≥∫ Falcons indicate clerical misbehavior in much the same way as they contrast worldly and religious behavior. Clerics holding falcons are contrasted to good clerics; clerics with falcons are accompanied by people engaged in the vanities of the world—manifestations of avarice, gluttony, and lust (see plate 7B); and clerics with falcons are reproved or punished.∞≥Ω Similar ideas are depicted or expressed by contemporaries. The fourteenthcentury Flemish mystic Jan van Ruusbroec wrote that the falcon represents ‘‘The bad princes of the world . . . and the prelates filled with pride who oppress the people of God. . . . Like the falcon who throws down four or five cranes they . . . throw to the earth the four cardinal virtues and a fifth virtue which is fear of God.’’∞∂≠ In one manuscript of the fourteenth-century Provençal


Falconry in Medieval Life

‘‘Breviari d’amor,’’ the worldly, including a horseman carrying a falcon, are attacked by devils; in another, falconry is one of the devil’s nine temptations of worldly vanities.∞∂∞ In his Miroir de l’omme, Gower describes pride as riding a lion and carrying an eagle, while envy carries a sparrowhawk and avarice a hawk. A similar depiction of pride is found in a late-fourteenth-century Speculum humanae salvationis, while envy is shown as a monk mounted on a dog and carrying a sparrowhawk. Pride depicted as a mounted falconer is placed next to a wheel of fortune in a late-thirteenth-century illustration to the Roman de Renart. In Hieronymus Bosch’s ‘‘Tabletop of the Seven Deadly Sins,’’ a merchant looks enviously at a man with a falcon on his fist. In a late-fourteenthcentury Italian single leaf from a treatise on the vices a falconer is in attendance on ‘‘Accidia [sloth] and her court’’; in an early-fifteenth-century manuscript of Chaucer’s poetical works, gluttony is portrayed riding a bear while feeding a bird on a lure; and in the ‘‘Lumen animae’’ of ca. 1330, wrath displays a sparrowhawk on her helmet.∞∂≤ As in the ‘‘Bibles moralisées,’’ other artworks depict carrying a falcon as a sign of dubious character. In a stained glass window in Bourges Cathedral of ca. 1210 and in two sixteenth-century tapestries, the prodigal son leaves his father’s house carrying a hawk. In a sixteenth-century altarpiece, Pontius Piate holds a hawk by its leash. St. Margaret’s suitor and later persecutor, the prefect Olybrius, is shown on horseback hawk on hand; and in several late medieval illustrations, Clement V—the pope who first settled in Avignon—is shown carrying a falcon as he leaves a distraught Ecclesia.∞∂≥ In practice, however, the church seems to have taken a more permissive view toward falconry than the moralists. The fact that bishops hawked openly would be an indication of this, and the Council of Trent’s decree ‘‘Let clerics abstain from illicit hunting and hawking’’ is a far cry from earlier prohibitions. As William Fanning notes, ‘‘The council seems to imply that not all hunting is illicit, and canonists generally make a distinction between noisy (clamorosa) and quiet (quieta) hunting, declaring the former to be unlawful but not the latter. [The eighteenth-century canonist Lucius] Ferraris . . . gives it as the general sense of canonists that hunting is allowed to clerics if it be indulged in rarely and for sufficient cause, as necessity, utility, or honest recreation, and with that moderation which is becoming to the ecclesiastical state.’’∞∂∂ One late-fifteenth-century canonist even justified hawking on holidays, provided it was ‘‘engaged in purely for recreation.’’∞∂∑ Under these circumstances it is not surprising that not all clerical associations with falconry were negative. When John of Salisbury wrote, ‘‘Question your parents and they will cite their ancestors and say that they have never read of a hunter-saint,’’ one can say that he ignored St. Eustace and St. Hubert.

Falconry in Medieval Life


But one can also interpret Salisbury’s statement to mean that the ancestors had never read of a saint who hunted after conversion.∞∂∏ The second interpretation would also apply to those saints portrayed with falcons among their attributes. Saints in the latter group can be divided into four categories. In the first category, the falcons associated with the saints have nothing to do with either the sport of falconry or the symbolic attributes of falcons. Such saints include St. Jeron (or Hieron), a Scottish missionary to the Netherlands martyred in the mid-ninth century. Milburn notes, ‘‘Jeron occurs several times on East Anglian rood-screens. He wears a robe or priest’s cassock over armour, while a falcon perches on his left arm. This is a punning allusion to his name, since Hieron suggests ‘Hierax,’ the Greek word for a falcon.’’∞∂π St. Baudry (Baldericus) is represented with a falcon because he founded the abbey of Montfaucon, on the site of a tree in which a falcon had roosted. St. Agilolf of Cologne is portrayed carrying a falcon because a knight said he would not believe in the saint’s holiness until the knight’s falcon sang, which it did. St. Julian of Brioude seems to have had no connection with falconry, but, because of a confusion with St. Julian the Hospitaller, Julian of Brioude has been depicted carrying a falcon.∞∂∫ In the second group of saints the association with a falcon is based on hunting, but with the hunting of deer. Because the saint in question was a hunter, he is sometimes depicted with a falcon. In this group are St. Julian the Hospitaller, to whom a stag he was hunting prophesied Julian would kill his parents; St. Hubert, who was about to kill a stag when he had a vision of the crucified Christ between its antlers and converted; and St. Eustace, who had a similar conversion vision.∞∂Ω Hubert and Eustace belong to a third group of saints for whom the presence of a falcon signifies conversion from a secular state to a religious one. In this group is St. Hugo, monk of Vaucelles, who, while dean of Cambrai, owned a prized falcon. After deciding to become a Cistercian he carried the bird to the gates of the abbey and then released it, saying, ‘‘My dear bird! fly away and enjoy thy liberty in peace, for I am leaving thee for ever.’’ St. Illtyd refused his king’s order to seize food from a local abbey and, while others did so, flew his falcon. When the king’s men and the stolen food were ‘‘swallowed up’’ by the earth, Illtyd gave up his worldly life and founded a monastery. St. Gorgonius was sculpted carrying a falcon while Gorgonius hovers between the secular and the religious life.∞∑≠ The last group contains saints portrayed with a falcon either because of their noble (or royal) birth or as a symbol of their worldliness before conversion. Among the nobly born are Sts. Audauctus, Bavo of Ghent, Catherine of Alexandria, Cecilia, Dentlin, Edward the Martyr, George, Oswald, Thibault


Falconry in Medieval Life

Fig. 15: Angel feeding a falcon, English, 1256–80, det. of Angel Choir, Lincoln Cathedral. Image courtesy of Lincoln Cathedral. Photograph Alison Stones, after E. S. Prior and A. Gardner, An Account of Medieval Figure-Sculpture in England, Cambridge, 1912.

of Provins, and possibly Julian the Hospitaller. The use of a falcon to symbolize worldliness is exemplified by some depictions of St. Mary Magdalene hawking, before her conversion, and by the young St. Martin of Tours, hawking with his companions.∞∑∞ In two English examples, figures with angels’ wings are depicted with falcons. One is a survival from the early-fourteenth-century tomb of St. William of York.∞∑≤ The other is found in the Angel Choir of Lincoln Cathedral where, in the spandrels of the arches, a series of angels hold scrolls and various attributes (see fig. 15). As M. D. Anderson observes: Only one figure strikes an apparently discordant note: an angel wearing a falconer’s glove and offering to the hawk on his wrist the drumstick of a large bird. It has been suggested that hawking was so important among earthly pleasures that Heavenly bliss would be incomplete without it, but a more relevant explanation is offered by a 15th-century poem preserved in the British Museum and which may record an older tradition. Here Christ is said to win back sinners to grace by showing them His Wounds, as a falconer lures back his wild-flying hawk by offering it raw meat. On the opposite side of the same bay at Lincoln, a figure of Christ wearing the Crown of Thorns points to His wounded side.∞∑≥

Falconry in Medieval Life


How Falcons and Falconry Were Depicted As we have seen, two major symbolic meanings of the falcon were high status and worldliness. A third was youth. We have noted how learning to fly falcons was part of a noble youth’s education. It is not surprising then to find youths associated with falcons in portrayals of the Ages of Man. The fullest description of these, by Elizabeth Sears, lists some seventeen examples and types in which a young man holding a falcon appears generally as the third ‘‘age’’ out of six, or the third or fourth ‘‘age’’ of seven. At least six similar depictions can be added to those she lists. The earliest examples are on the Portal of the Virgin at Notre-Dame in Paris (ca. 1210–20) and in two thirteenth-century ‘‘Bibles moralisées’’; the latest is from 1520. Three English examples should be noted: the fourth figure of ten, labeled iuvenis, in the wheel of life of the De Lisle Psalter (ca. 1310); the fourth figure in a sequence of eight illustrations in the De Lisle Hours (ca. 1320–30); and the third figure of seven on the fresco of the Ages of Man in Longthorpe Tower.∞∑∂ As Mira Friedman observes, when the three figures of the living in the Three Living and the Three Dead represent youth, maturity, and old age, the youth is (generally) the figure holding the falcon. In a French illumination (ca. 1460) of the wheel of fortune, the youth holds a falcon and a mirror, the mature man is dressed in armor, and old age holds a money bag. In the Parliament of the Three Ages, Youth speaks of hawking, while Middle Age is concerned with gain, and Age reflects on death.∞∑∑ And Sir Thomas More described how ‘‘In his youth [he had] devised in his father’s house in London a goodly hanging of fine painted cloth, with nine pageants, and verses over every [one] of those pageants; which verses expressed and declared what the images in those pageants represented; and also in those pageants were painted the things that the verses over them did (in effect) declare.’’ The pageants were Childhood, Manhood, Venus and Cupid, Age, Death, Fame, Time, Eternity, and the Poet: In the second pageant was painted a goodly fresh young man riding upon a goodly horse, having a hawk on his fist, and a brace of greyhounds following him. . . . and over this second pageant the writing was thus:— Manhod Manhod I am therefore I delight To hunt and hawk, to nourish up and feed The greyhound to the course, the hawk to the flight, And to bestride a good and lusty steed. These things become a very man in deed. . . .∞∑∏

A falcon is also sometimes an attribute of the sanguine temperament associated with youth and high spirits.∞∑π The association of falconry with youth is the basis of the most frequent


Falconry in Medieval Life

medieval image of falconry: a young man with a falcon as the occupation or labor of the month of May: ‘‘For May is a time of solace and of liking, therefore he is painted [as] a youngling, riding and bearing a fowl on his hand.’’∞∑∫ May, as we have seen, is not usually part of the falconry season; by then most birds had been put in mews.∞∑Ω In the earliest English calendars in which falconry scenes appear, they are placed in October—within the hawking season (see fig. 10). By the twelfth century, however, a man holding a hawk has come to be the occupation of May in English manuscripts. In two of the early depictions, a seated falconer seems to be lecturing the falcon—May was a time for training newly acquired birds (see plate 7C).∞∏≠ However, from the second half of the twelfth century on, the illustrations for May are usually of a man standing or on horseback bearing a falcon (see plate 7D). Down to the mid-thirteenth century, sixteen of seventeen extant English manuscript depictions of the labor of May include a man and a falcon. From ca. 1260 to 1490, falcons are shown in thirty-three of thirty-nine English manuscript calendars, but four of these illustrations are for the month of April and one is for June.∞∏∞ Far fewer stained-glass roundels with labors of the months have survived. Two of those portray men with falcons: a thirteenthcentury stained-glass roundel at Lincoln Cathedral (April) and a mid-fifteenthcentury panel from Norbury Manor, Derbyshire. There is also a drawing of an unlocated late-fifteenth, early-sixteenth-century roundel of May with a man on horseback bearing a hawk from Colville Hall, White Roding, Kent.∞∏≤ Men holding falcons are also depicted on the late-twelfth-century baptismal font at Brookland, Kent (May); in a thirteenth-century painting for March on the ceiling of the choir in Salisbury Cathedral; and in a fifteenth-century misericord at Ripple, Worcestershire (June).∞∏≥ Three depictions of falconry occur as an aspect of courtly love (between ca. 1200 and ca. 1230): two of a man with a falcon and a woman with a flower, one of ‘‘a man and woman falconing.’’ But while falconry was associated with love on ivories, on tapestries, and in literature, the only other English courtly illustration I have found is in the margin of the Ormesby Psalter, where a man holding a falcon gives a woman a ring.∞∏∂ A third frequently found image that often includes falcons is that of ‘‘The Meeting of the Three Living and the Three Dead,’’ found both in art and in poetry (see plate 8). According to this legend three men (sometimes kings, sometimes youths), often while hunting, encounter three dead men. In the version of the best-known French poem of the legend, dating from the midthirteenth century: ‘‘The first youth is so horrified that he flees in terror; the second, who is of sterner stuff, hails the apparition as sent by God; while the third dwells on the horror of decaying humanity. The youths speak to the grim visitors, and the first Death replies in words which are the keynote of the

Falconry in Medieval Life


Table 3. Falconry as the Labor of May


No. of MSS

No. with labors

No. with May as falconry

Other mos. falconry

1066–1190 1190–1250 1250–1295 1285–1385 1390–1490

106 94 94 159 140

6 11 12 24 3

6 10 8 18 2

0 0 1 4 0

whole morality. . . . ‘What you are, we were, and what we are, you will be.’ The second recalls that Death treats rich and poor alike, and the third emphasizes that there is no escape from his dread summons.’’∞∏∑ An English poem of the later thirteenth century conveys the same general message: Where are they who lived before us, who led hounds and carried hawks, and owned field and wood? The great ladies in their chambers, who wore gold in their head-bands and whose faces shone? They ate and drank and entertained themselves; their life was spent wholly in pleasure: men kneeled before them. They carried themselves most proudly, and, in the twinkling of an eye, their souls were utterly lost. Where is that laughter and that singing, that trailing of garments, and that proud gait, those hawks and those hounds? All that joy has vanished, that happiness has turned to misery and (many) hard times. They took their paradise here, and now they lie in hell together. . . .∞∏∏

The moral is clear: abandon your worldly vanities and repent. Falcons symbolize high status, youth, and the worldly vanities,∞∏π and the depiction, when found on church frescoes, represents a public statement of the messages of the images in the ‘‘Bibles moralisées.’’ E. Carlton Williams listed thirty-one ‘‘Paintings of the Three Living and the Three Dead Formerly Existing in Churches in England.’’ According to Williams, only twelve of the thirty-one were still extant, but at least fifteen more have been since located. There are pictures or records of some of the destroyed paintings, but, on the other hand, some of the surviving remains are fragmentary. Of the forty-six images, fifteen show some evidence of falconry.∞∏∫ The scene is also illustrated in five English manuscripts dating from the late


Falconry in Medieval Life

thirteenth century to ca. 1330–40, as well as in many non-English works.∞∏Ω In John Audley’s poem of 1426, ‘‘De tribus regibus mortuis,’’ the first king bears a ‘‘fair falcon.’’∞π≠ Friedman observes that the image of falconers in a number of versions of ‘‘The Triumph of Death’’ performs a function similar to that in ‘‘The Three Living and the Three Dead’’: ‘‘In both depictions it can be assumed that the . . . falconers represent characteristics of aristocracy, youth, beauty, the joy of life and the lack of care of the day of reckoning, as well as the addiction to amusement and to sin. In ‘The Triumph of Death’ they also represent lovers or those addicted to the sins of the flesh.’’∞π∞ However, I have found no English examples of falconers in the Triumph of Death. One can indicate the many aspects falconry took in the medieval world. However, a number of questions remain. To Frederick II falconry was an art, but how many falconers were merely content to take ‘‘mediocre hawks on a good hunt?’’ How many of those who owned hawks were capable of training them? Could training in falconry involve a quasi-apprenticeship of upper-class children to lower-class falconers? Given the available sources one can only guess at the answers to these questions. One can say that medieval falconry was a widely pursued sport, a mark of status, a means of earning a living, and a symbol of subjects ranging from youth and love to worldliness and the seven deadly sins. Falconry’s appeal was based on such factors as the spectacular nature of the falcon’s stoop, the drama and uncertainty of the hawk’s hunt, the power of being able to recall a freeflying wild creature, and the knowledge that mere practice of the sport was an indicator of membership in the social elite. As Shakespeare’s Henry VI says: But what a point, my lord, your falcon made, And what a pitch she flew above the rest! To see how God in all his creatures works— Yea, man and birds are fain of climbing high.∞π≤

Appendix: Royal Falconry Expenditures, 1234–1307

While some records exist for falconry expenditures before 1234, what is available is fragmentary and incomplete.∞ The only sources for such expenditure before 1199 are the Pipe Rolls.≤ The new kinds of royal records during John’s reign provide much additional information, but not until 1224 when the Enrolled Wardrobe Accounts begin is there a record of overall household expenditure, and totals spent on falconry and hunting are not recorded until ten years later.≥ Falconry expenses alone cannot be calculated before 1277–78 with the first full surviving final account for falconry and hunting. Unfortunately there are gaps in these latter accounts, and some later accounts are not fully reliable.∂ While most royal falconry expenditure was recorded under the heading for falconry and hunting, some of it was credited to ‘‘necessary expenditures,’’ ‘‘messengers,’’ ‘‘robes’’ and ‘‘gifts’’; expenses for building or repairing mews might be recorded in other accounts altogether.∑ The totals should therefore be treated as minimal figures for authorized expenditure. It is also unclear, especially in the later years of Edward I’s reign, how much money committed was actually paid.∏



Appendix: Royal Falconry Expenditures

Royal Falconry Expenditure, 1234–1307

Reference∞ E372/79 E372/79 E372/80 E372/81 E372/81 E372/83 E372/88 E372/88 E372/88 E372/88 E372/95 E352/45 E372/99 E361/1 E372/113 E372/114 E372/115 E372/116 E372/121 E372/119 E372/123

Time period 5/17/1234– 10/27/1235 10/28/1235– 5/2/1236 5/3/1236– 10/27/1236 10/28/1236– 10/27/1237 10/28/1237– 2/6/1238 2/7/1238– 10/27/1240 10/28/1240– 10/27/1241 10/28/1242– 10/27/1243 10/28/1243– 10/27/1244 10/28/1244– 10/27/1245 10/28/1245– 2/17/1252 2/18/1252– 10/28/1252 1/10/1255– 4/30/1256 7/8/1258– 7/25/1261 7/26/1261– 12/31/1264 1/1/1265– 8/6/1265 8/7/1265– 3/3/1268 3/4/1268– 11/20/1272 11/4/1272– 10/18/1274 10/18/1274– 11/19/1275 11/20/1275– 11/19/1276

Household expenditures £9423 9 11 ∞⁄≤

Falconry and hunting £147 12 4



£96 10 11 ∞⁄≤



£77 8 8 ∞⁄≤

£4028 0 6 ∞⁄≤

Falconry expenditures

£149 9 10 ∞⁄≤ £69 11 5 ∞⁄≤ £124 2 10 ∞⁄≤ £162 2 2 ∞⁄≤ £20 0 9 ∞⁄≤ £163 3 9 ∞⁄≤ £118 11 3 £1119 11 7 £116 5 4 ∞⁄≤ £174 14 8 ∞⁄≤

£7499 8 5≤

£357 6 7

£19825 2 7

£570 5 7 ∞⁄≤

£1860 4 7 ∞⁄≤

£75 14 ∞⁄≤

£13471 9 8 ∞⁄≤

£230 9 4

£23201 16 7 ∞⁄≤

£611 19 7

£15679 15 6 ∞⁄≤

£114 15 ∞⁄≤

£8046 6 11

£233 19 1 ∞⁄≤

£7408 3 10

£378 7 9 ∞⁄≤

Appendix: Royal Falconry Expenditures

Reference∞ E372/123 E372/123 E372/124 E372/124 E372/128 E372/128 E372/130 E372/130 E372/136 E372/136 E372/136 E372/136 E372/138 E101/352/26 E372/138 E372/138 E372/139 E372/144 E372/144 E372/144 E372/144

Time period 11/20/1276– 11/19/1277 11/20/1277– 11/19/1278 11/20/1278– 11/19/1279 11/20/1279– 11/19/1280 11/20/1280– 11/19/1281 11/20/1281– 11/19/1282 11/20/1282– 11/19/1283 11/20/1283– 11/19/1284 11/20/1284– 11/19/1285 11/20/1285– 11/19/1286 11/20/1286– 11/19/1287 11/20/1287– 11/19/1288 11/20/1288– 11/19/1289 1/20/1289– 11/19/1290 11/20/1290– 11/19/1291 11/20/1291– 11/19/1292 11/20/1292– 11/19/1293 11/20/1293– 11/19/1294 11/20/1294– 11/19/1295 11/20/1295– 11/19/1296 11/20/1296– 11/19/1297

Household expenditures

Falconry and hunting


Falconry expenditures

£6875 8 5 ∞⁄≤?

£324 0 1

£8006 10 9 ∞⁄≤

£358 4 6 ∞⁄≤

£244 3 2∏

£9319 9 8

£474 9 3 ∞⁄≤

£8451 16 0

£482 5 6 ∞⁄≤

£8808 10 11

£565 5 2

£8623 17 10 ∞⁄≤

£344 4 6 ∞⁄≤

£6856 10 9

£298 17 5 ∞⁄≤

£7262 9 1 ∞⁄≤

£660 10 2 ∞⁄≤

£561 11 7 ∞⁄≤∫

£10899 19 6?

£699 14 8 ∞⁄≤

£620 1 11 ∞⁄≤Ω

£12696 19 11 ∞⁄≤ £10651 0 11

£1002 10 1 ∞⁄≤

£910 6 1∞≠

£506 8 3


£12960 5 0

£852 4 11

£759 5 9∞≤


£945 8 5 £847 16 0

£733 0 4 ∞⁄≤∞≥

£759 9 8


£10621 13 5 ∞⁄≤

£851 7 8

£14033 8 8 ∞⁄≤

£730 5 11

£14382 5 5 ∞⁄≤

£700 19 10 £254 14 1 ∞⁄≤ £212 14 4 ∞⁄≤

£11194 7 11 ∞⁄≤

£339 12 11∞∑

£273 6 1∞∏


Appendix: Royal Falconry Expenditures

Reference∞ E372/144 ∞π

LQCG BL Add. MS 7966A ≤∞

E101/364/13≤≥ BL Add. MS 8835 E101/369/11 E101/365/10≤π E101/369/16≥≠

Time period 11/20/1297– 11/19/1298 11/20/1298– 11/19/1299 11/20/1299– 11/19/1300 11/20/1300– 11/19/1301 11/20/1301– 11/19/1302 11/20/1302– 11/19/1303 11/20/1303– 11/19/1304 11/20/1304– 11/19/1305 11/20/1305– 11/19/1306 11/20/1306– 7/7/1307

Household expenditures

Falconry and hunting

Falconry expenditures

£231 2 3 £115 5 3 ∞⁄≤∞∫

£9570 7 7

£77 6 11 ∞⁄≤

£97 14 7 ∞⁄≤∞Ω

£127 2 5 ∞⁄∂

£89 10 10≤≠ £122 6 2≤≤ £327 12 1 ∞⁄≤≤∂

£8756 18 7 ∞⁄≤

£247 18 9 ∞⁄≤

£246 2 0≤∑ £157 16 6 ∞⁄≤≤∏

£11269 4 6

£1155 3 1 ∞⁄≤≤∫

£622 9 4 ∞⁄≤≤Ω

£177 11 8

£148 7 10

1. Figures for household expenditure are in Tout, Chapters, 6:74–83. Falconry and hunting totals and adjusted expenditures for falconry alone are derived from records cited. 2. Household expenditures are only for 44 Henry III (10/28/1259 to 10/27/1260) (Tout, Chapters, 6:77). 3. An additional £140 8s. 7 ∞⁄≤d. was spent on the mews at Charing (PRO E403/1238, m. 1). 4. An additional £41 9s. 3d. was spent on the mews at Charing (PRO C47/3/21/45; Pat.R.E.I [1272–81], 167). 5. An additional £179 9s. 8d. was spent on the mews at Charing (PRO E372/21 [Account of Giles de Audenard]; E403/36, m. 1). 6. £222 17s. 4d. (PRO E101/350/29), plus £19 15s. for falconry gloves (C47/3/14), 23s. 10d. for necessary expenditure (BL Add. Ms. 36762), and 7s. for messengers (E101/ 508/4). 7. An additional £164 13s. 4 ∞⁄≤d. was spent on the mews at Charing (PRO E372/125 [Accounts of Giles de Audenard and of the Master of Beverley]). 8. £559 3s. 11 ∞⁄≤d. (PRO E101/351/20), plus £1 1s. 10d. for messengers (E101/308/7), 13s 4d. arrears (E101/351/17), and 12s. 6d. for necessary expenditure (E101/351/12). 9. £550 3s. 1 ∞⁄≤d. (PRO E101/351/20), plus £68 13s. 4d. for robes (E101/351/17), and £1 5s. 6d. for messengers (E101/358/8). 10. £864 6s. 1d. (PRO E101/354/24) plus £46 for robes (E101/351/26). 11. An additional £36 13s. 4d. was spent on the mews at Charing (PRO E372/134). 12. £714 15s. 5 ∞⁄≤d. (PRO E101/352/20) plus £5 for robes (E101/35/31), £1 7s. 9d.

Appendix: Royal Falconry Expenditures


for necessary expenditure (E101/352/14), 1s. 5 ∞⁄≤d. for messengers (E101/308/10), and £38 1s. 1d. for the mews at Charing (E372/134 [Account of Robert de Colebrook and Hugh clerk of the mews]). 13. £591 14s. 9d. (PRO E101/352/26), plus £72 3s. 3 ∞⁄≤d. for gifts (E101/352/21), £54 for robes (E101/352/24), 5s. 2d. for messengers (E101/308/12), and £14 17s. 2d. for building expenses for falcons at Woodstock (C62/68). 14. An additional 11s. 5 ∞⁄≤d. was spent on the mews at Charing (PRO E372/136 [Account of Gilbert de Rokesley]). 15. PRO E372/144 gives the falconry and hunting total as £329 12s. 11d. For the proper total, see BL Add. Ms. 7965, fol. 119. 16. £215 4s. 1 ∞⁄≤d. (BL Add. Ms. 7965, fols. 115–19) plus £27 13s. 4d. for robes (fols. 124, 140), £12 11s. ∞⁄≤d. for gifts (fols., 52–52v, 54–54v, 56, 57v), £10 1s. 3d. for mews expenses (fols. 32v, 41), £1 13s. for necessary expenditure (fol. 13v), 3s. for messengers (fols. 109–10, 113), £9 16s. 7d. for the mews at Charing (E101/468/8), and £6 arrears (PRO E101/354/5A). 17. Prests from PRO E101/356/21/10, E101/355/4, E101/370/24/12, E101/355/10/ 2, E101/356/8, E101/356/1, E101/357/27, E101/355/18, E101/356/4, E101/356/5, E101/355/10/3B, E101/353/25, E101/356/6, E101/370/24/1, E101/356/7. 18. Includes £5 2s. 2 ∞⁄≤d. arrears from PRO E101/357/15. 19. £53 14s. 10 ∞⁄≤d. (LQCG, 304–9), plus £2 5s. 6d. for falconry and hunting (BL Add. Ms. 35291, fols. 161, 163), £20 15s. 8d. for gifts (LQCG, 340), £10 13s. 4d. for robes (317), £4 1s. 6d. for necessary expenditure (54, 89), 12s. 4d. for messengers (103, 301), and £5 11s. 5d. arrears (PRO E101/369/11, fol. 121v). 20. £61 18s. 5d. (BL Add. Ms. 7966A, fols. 142–44), plus £13 for robes (fol. 150), £8 11s. 8d. for gifts (fols. 66, 67, 68, 78v), 1s. 6d. for messengers (fols. 125v-26) and £5 19s. 3d. arrears (PRO E101/369/11, fol. 121v). 21. Prests from PRO E101/23/10, E101/357/11/19, E101/357/22/12, E101/360/ 23/13–14, E101/360/23/11, E101/36/13, E101/361/15, E101/361/14, E101/357/ 23/9–10, E101/361/16, E101/360/23/8–9, E101/10/14. 22. Including £4 8s. 3d. arrears (PRO E101/369/11, fol. 121v). 23. Prests. 24. Including £17 1s. 7 ∞⁄≤d. for expenses at Charing (PRO E101/364/22, m. 2; E468/9) and £100 5s. 8 ∞⁄≤d. arrears (E101/369/11, fols. 125v-27). 25. £191 16s. 4d. (BL Add. Ms. 8835, fols. 69–71), plus £6 3s. 1d. for gifts (fols. 42v, 43v-44), £6 for robes (fols. 113, 114v, 119v), £1 16s. 6d. for messengers (fols. 104v-6v, 107–8v, 109v), and £40 6s. 1d. arrears (PRO E101/369/11, fols. 127–28). 26. Including £70 10s. 9 ∞⁄≤d. arrears (PRO E101/369/11, fols. 128, 131) 27. Prests. 28. See the total at PRO E101/369/11, fol. 135v. A substantial amount is for arrears for previous years. The falconry arrears amount to £227 1s. 6d. (Appendix, nn. 19–20, 22, 24–26). I have not calculated arrears for hunting expenses. 29. £716 19s. 5d. (PRO E101/369/11, fols. 116–23v, 131–35v) less £227 1s. 6d. arrears, plus £67 13s. 4d. in gifts (fols. 95v, 96v, 98v-101), £26 for robes (fols. 157, 159), £3 15s. 6d. for miscellaneous expenses (fols. 40v, 42v, 44v, 45), and £35 2s. 7 ∞⁄≤d. for building at Charing (fol. 49). 30. Prests.


Adelard Albertus Becket Mat. BL BNat. Bodl. CCh.R. CCl.R.E.I CCl.R.E.II CCl.R.E.III CCl.R.R.II CCSL CIMisc. CIPM Cl.R.H.III

Adelard of Bath, ‘‘De avibus tractatus.’’ Albertus Magnus, De animalibus libri XXVI. Materials for the History of Thomas Becket. British Library, London. Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris. Bodleian Library, Oxford. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Charter Rolls. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Close Rolls: Edward I. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Close Rolls: Edward II. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Close Rolls: Edward III. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Close Rolls: Richard II. Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous (Chancery). Great Britain PRO, Calendar of Inquisitions post mortem. Great Britain PRO, Close Rolls of the Reign of Henry III.




Cole CRR CS CY Daude DB DB, Phillimore EETS EHR Ex. e r. fin. Exon D. Fees Foedera Frederick Frederick facs. Gace LQCG Laborde Lib.R. MGH NR Pat.R.E.I Pat.R.E.II Pat.R.E.III Pat.R.H.III Pat.R.H.IV Pat.R.R.II PL PM PR 31 H.I

Great Britain RC, Documents Illustrative of English History, ed. Henry Cole. PRO, Curia Regis Rolls. Walter de Gray Birch, Cartularium Saxonicum. Canterbury and York Society. Daude de Pradas, The Romance of Daude de Pradas. Great Britain RC, Domesday Book. Domesday Book, ed. John Morris. Early English Text Society. English Historical Review. Great Britain RC, Excerpta e rotulis finium. Great Britain RC, Libri censualis vocati DomesdayBook. . . . Exon’ Domesday Great Britain PRO, Liber feodorum. Foedera, conventiones, litterae, et cujuscunque generis acta publica. Frederick II, The Art of Falconry. Frederick II, De arte venandi cum avibus. Gace de la Buigne, Le roman des deduis. Liber Quotidianus Contrarotulatoris Garderobae. La Bible moralisée. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Liberate Rolls: Henry III. Monumenta Germaniae historica. Great Britain RC, Rotuli Normanniae. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Patent Rolls: Edward I. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Patent Rolls: Edward II. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Patent Rolls: Edward III. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Patent Rolls: Henry III. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Patent Rolls: Henry IV. Great Britain PRO, Calendar of the Patent Rolls: Richard II. Patrologia latina. Pierpont Morgan Library, New York. Great Britain RC, Magnum rotulum scaccarii. . . de anno tricesimo-primo regni Henrici primi


PR 2,3,4 H.II



Tanquerey TRHS VCH


Great Britain RC, The Great Rolls of the Pipe for the Second, Third, and Fourth Years of the Reign of King Henry the Second. Great Britain RC, The Great Roll of the Pipe for the First Year of the Reign of King Richard the First. The Great Rolls of the Pipe . . . for the Reigns of Henry II, Richard I, John, and Henry III. Pipe Rolls published by the Pipe Roll Society are cited as PR with (abbreviated) name of ruler and regnal year. Public Record Office, London. Publications of the Pipe Roll Society. Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der Jagd. Record Commission, London. Great Britain RC, Rotuli chartarum. Great Britain RC, Rotuli hundredorum. Great Britain RC, Rotuli litterarum clausarum. Great Britain RC, Rotuli litterarum patentium. Great Britain RC, Rotuli de liberate ac de misis et praestitis. Great Britain RC, Rotuli de oblatis. Rolls Series [Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland During the Middle Ages—Rerum britannicarum medii aevi scriptores]. Tanquerey, ‘‘Lettres du roi Edward I à Robert de Bavent.’’ Transactions of the Royal Historical Society. Victoria County History.


Chapter 1: The Sources 1. For the early literature of falconry, see Van den Abeele, La littérature cynégétique, 75; Harting, Bibliotheca Accipitraria; Werth, ‘‘Altfranzösische Jagdlehrbücher nebst Handschriftenbibliographie der abendländischen Jagdlitteratur überhaupt’’; Haskins, Mediaeval Science, 346–55; Smets and Van den Abeele, ‘‘Manuscrits et traités de chasse français du Moyen Age.’’ For the origins of falconry in the West, see chap. 3. 2. Bischoff, ‘‘Die älteste europäische Falkenmedizin (Mitte des zehnten Jahrhunderts)’’; Grimaldus, Le ‘‘Liber Accipitrum’’ de Grimaldus, esp. 25–26, 35–39. For contacts with the Islamic world, see Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie au Moyen Age, 21, and, for Latin treatises on falconry, 15–37. 3. Adelard, 248–51, 254–57; Daude, 103, 122, 139. 4. ‘‘Gerardus Falconarius,’’ in Dancus Rex, ‘‘Dancus Rex,’’ 228–29. See also Daude, 37, and Albertus, 1478, 1481. 5. Dancus Rex, ‘‘Dancus Rex,’’ 86–88; Epstein, Review of Dancus Rex. 6. Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie au Moyen Age, esp. 173–266; correspondence of May 2002. 7. Adelard, xxxvi; Tilander, ‘‘Fragment d’un traité de fauconnerie Anglo-Normand en vers.’’ 8. Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie au Moyen Age, 26–30, 38–41; Moamin et Ghatrif. 9. Van den Abeele, ‘‘Encyclopédies médiévales et savoir technique’’; Oggins, ‘‘Albertus Magnus on Falcons and Hawks,’’ 443 and n. 9, 444 and n. 17. For the letter to Ptolemy, see Symmachus, Rei accipitrariæ scriptores nunc primum editi. 10. Santa Eugenia, ‘‘Ottave quattrocentesche sugli uccelli di caccia.’’



Notes to Pages 3–9

11. Hugh of St. Victor, The Didascalicon of Hugh of St. Victor, 74–75, 77. 12. Van den Abeele, La littérature cynégétique, 40–56; Le ménagier de Paris, ed. Brereton and Ferrier, xxi-xxiii. 13. Cochrane, Adelard of Bath; Burnett, Adelard of Bath, esp. 25–27; Haskins, Mediaeval Science, 20–42; Adelard, xxxiii–xxxvii; Haskins, ‘‘King Harold’s Books.’’ 14. Guillelmus Falconarius, ‘‘Guillelmus Falconarius,’’ 164–67. 15. Epstein, Review, 759. 16. For Frederick, see Willemsen, Bibliographie zur Geschichte Kaiser Friedrichs II. und der letzten Staufer; Stürner, Friedrich II. For the De arte venandi cum avibus, see Frederick; Frederick II, Frederici Romanorum Imperatoris Secundi De arte venandi cum avibus; Frederick facs.; and Frédéric II de Hohenstaufen. 17. Frederick, 3. 18. Haskins, Mediaeval Science, 310–11, 314–15, 318–20; Frederick, 3–4. 19. Frederick, 205–6, 227–29; Van den Abeele, ‘‘Aux origines du chaperon’’; Haskins, Mediaeval Science, 320. 20. Haskins, Mediaeval Science, 324; Lib.R., 1:69, 6:246. Frederick promised works on the goshawk, on moulting, and on the diseases of falcons, all of which were either unwritten or have been lost (Frederick, 110, 252, 381). 21. Daude, 7–10, 136; Smets and Van den Abeele, ‘‘Manuscrits et traités,’’ 343; Haskins, Mediaeval Science, 348. 22. Hunt, The Schools and the Cloister. 23. Bartholomaeus Anglicus, Mediæval Lore from Bartholomew Anglicus, 120–21; On the Properties of Things, 607–9. A similar view is expressed in a sermon of ca. 1400: ‘‘When predatory birds die, they are cast away; but the birds upon which they preyed are brought to lords’ tables’’ (Middle English Sermons Edited from British Museum MS Royal 18 B. xxiii, 239). For archaeological confirmation, see Prummel, ‘‘Evidence of Hawking (Falconry) from Bird and Mammal Bones,’’ 336. 24. Harting, Bibliotheca Accipitraria, 162. For Albertus, see Albertus; Albert the Great, Man and the Beasts, 197–99, 222–88, 304, 306–7; Albertus Magnus, On Animals, 2:1553–54, 1572–1623, 1637, 1639; Lindner, Von Falken, Hunden und Pferden. For identification of falcons Albertus describes, see Oggins, ‘‘Albertus Magnus,’’ 441–62, and ‘‘The English Kings,’’ 95–111. 25. Tout, Chapters in the Administrative History of Mediaeval England, 1:82–85; Introduction to the Study of the Pipe Rolls, PRS; Poole, The Exchequer in the Twelfth Century. For general information, see Great Britain PRO, Guide to the Contents of the Public Record Office. 26. Cheney, A Handbook of Dates, 12–13. Other Exchequer and some Wardrobe records were also kept on a Michaelmas-to-Michaelmas basis, while still other annual records used the regnal year. 27. Galbraith, An Introduction to the Use of the Public Records, 20. 28. Ibid., 21. 29. Tout, Chapters, 1:19. 30. Tout, Chapters, vols. 1 and 2; Byerly and Ridder Byerly, Records of the Wardrobe and Household 1285–1286, ix-xliv; introduction, Book of Prests of the King’s Wardrobe for 1294–5.

Notes to Pages 9–13


31. My wife and I have been taken to task for using the term ‘‘hawker’’ to describe one who trains or carries hawks: ‘‘The term ‘hawker’ means a street pedlar and should never be used to describe an austringer’’ (Grassby, ‘‘The Decline of Falconry in Early Modern England,’’ 41, n. 25). However, the term ‘‘hawker’’ as the name of a keeper of hawks is used from 1205 on (ROF, 283; Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Some Hawkers of Somerset’’; for subsequent examples, see The Middle English Dictionary, 7:526–27. ‘‘Hawker’’ as a peddler or huckster, on the other hand, dates from the sixteenth century (ibid., 527). Moreover, the first entry for ‘‘hawker’’ in the OED still is ‘‘one who hawks, or engages in the sport of hawking’’ (The Oxford English Dictionary, 7:25); and one would guess that to most general readers ‘‘hawker’’ would be more comprehensible than ‘‘austringer.’’ Consequently there seems no reason to abandon a word which is perfectly acceptable both in medieval and in modern usage.

Chapter 2: The Birds, Their Training, and the Sport of Falconry 1. Frederick, 110. However, in modern English usage, ‘‘in falconer’s phraseology, every falcon is a hawk, although every hawk may not properly be called a falcon’’ (Michell, Art and Practice of Hawking, 11). 2. Frederick, 70, 110. 3. Michell, Art and Practice of Hawking, 11. 4. Albertus, 2:1455, 1438; translations mine. On the peregrine’s stoop, see Cade, Falcons of the World, 62–66, and Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors of the World, 915, who state the speed is ‘‘probably seldom more than 250 km/h’’—about 156 miles per hour. 5. Fuertes, ‘‘Falconry, the Sport of Kings,’’ 458. 6. Ibid. 7. Harting, Bibliotheca accipitraria, 219–39; Michell, Art and Practice of Hawking, 18–19. 8. Frederick, 111; Daude, 80; Guillelmus Falconarius, 173; Albertus, 2:1457–58. 9. Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors, 296, 911. 10. For royal gifts of birds, see chap. 4, n. 40; chap. 5, nn. 25, 69–70; chap. 6, nn. 22– 24, 26–28; and associated texts. On royal gifts generally, see chap. 6, n. 25, and associated text. 11. The highest price I have found was £10 for a goshawk (Lib.R., 4:346). In 1242 £20 was the annual income from freehold land at which a man could be required to become a knight (Coss, The Knight in Medieval England, 61). The highest price paid for a gyrfalcon was £8 13s. 4d. (PRO E101/351/11, m. 2), but of twenty-three recorded purchases of gyrfalcons, seven cost £5 or more and another eight cost more than £2. For some comparative prices, see chap. 4, n. 42. 12. E.g., Bannerman, The Birds of the British Isles, 5:2, 13, 20; Michell, Art and Practice of Hawking, 12–13. Leslie Brown and Dean Amadon hold there is only one species of gyrfalcon and ‘‘racial varieties are not very well marked or consistent, darker or paler individuals occurring to a varying extent in all except possibly those from north Greenland’’ (Eagles, Hawks and Falcons of the World, 2:844); see also Cade, Falcons, 76. I have used the terms for identification, since medieval falconers did distinguish between


Notes to Pages 13–15

the three phases (Frederick, 121). On white gyrfalcons, e.g., PR 31 H.I, 111; Foedera, 1, pt. 2:620, 573, 579; Great Britain PRO, Diplomatic Documents I, 125–26; Great Britain, Scottish Record Office, Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland Preserved in Her Majesty’s Public Record Office, 2:74. 13. Diplomatic Documents, 1:125–26, 94; Foedera, 1, pt. 2:620. 14. The King’s Mirror, 144; Vaughan, ‘‘The Arctic in the Middle Ages,’’ 332; Swann, A Monograph of the Birds of Prey, 2:421. 15. Frederick, 111; PR 15 H.II, 16; PR 12 J., 181; RLC, 1:510–11. 16. Frederick, 252, 255. A count of times gyrfalcons were recorded flown at specific prey shows cranes hunted seventy times, herons thirty-one; gyrfalcons were flown ‘‘along the river’’ four times; and once a gyrfalcon killed a duck. The term riveare (to hunt along a river) generally refers to hunting with hawks, particularly duck hawking, though other birds were also so hunted. For hares used in training, see below, n. 76 and associated text. 17. Frederick, 122; Albertus, 2:1460–61; on the ‘‘mountain falcon,’’ see Oggins, ‘‘Albertus Magnus,’’ 454; Daude, 27, 78–81. For identification of the ‘‘falcon gentle’’ as the peregrine, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ 52–54. 18. Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors, 300, 919; PRO E101/352/20, m. 2; Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 251. 19. Frederick, 363–414. Herons were hunted with peregrines twenty-two times, cranes nine, duck four, and rooks once. 20. Giraldus Cambrensis, Opera, 5:56; Frederick, 354–56; Albertus, 2:1468–69. See also Evans, Lanier. 21. Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors, 292, 903. For food allowance, e.g., PRO E101/351/11, mm. 2, 3, 4; E101/351/20, m. 2; for mewing, Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 251. In the customs accounts for 1304 three lanners are valued at 6s. 8d. each (E122/ 55/16, m. 1). This corresponds to schedules of prices during Edward III’s reign: 20s. for a falcon gentle, 10s. for a tiercel gentle, and half a mark (6s. 8d.) for a lanner (e.g., Pat.R.E.III [1350–54], 466). According to Yapp, birds called ‘‘lanners’’ and ‘‘sakers’’ in England were peregrines (‘‘Birds in Captivity in the Middle Ages,’’ 489). Apart from Frederick’s identification and differentiation of the species, it is clear that English falconers distinguished between peregrines (‘‘falcons gentle’’) and lanners. Provision allowances were different, prices and fees for mewing falcons gentle were higher than for lanners, and lanners were flown at partridges, crows, and magpies, birds that peregrines are not recorded as hunting. 22. Frederick, 111, 356–57; López de Ayala, Libro de la Caça de las Aves, 76; Pat.R.H.IV (1401–5), 500; Cl.R.H.III (1234–37), 265; Sharpe, ‘‘Geoffrey Le Baker’s ‘Aves Ganymedis,’ 34–35; CIMisc., 1:298–99; PRO E101/351/20, mm. 3, 4; Fagan, The Little Ice Age, esp. chap. 3. 23. RLC, 1:248; PRO E101/352/20, m. 1, E101/99/15; E101/352/20, m. 2, E101/ 352/26, m. 5; E101/352/26, m. 5; Tanquerey, 497 (letter 13); E101/364/13, fol. 64v. 24. Frederick, 111. The only pre-1307 reference to sakers in England is a 1236 order to John de Erlham to deliver sakers to Thomas de Erlham (Cl.R.H.III [1234–37], 319). Thomas took gyrfalcons to Frederick II in 1235 (Lib.R., 6:246), and the sakers may represent a return gift. Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors, 294, 906.

Notes to Pages 15–17


25. PRO E101/369/11, fol. 100v; E101/369/16, fol. 33; Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors, 280, 884. 26. Cox, The Royal Forests of England, 38; Giraldus Cambrensis, Opera, 5:37; PRO E101/369/11, fol. 130v; Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors, 290, 880. 27. Frederick, 110; Facsimile of Oxford, xi, lvii-lviii, fol. 50v; Meyer, ‘‘Les manuscrits français de Cambridge, 277–81; Gace, 120–21. See also Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie dans les lettres françaises, n. 2 on p. 12 and 22–23, and Benoist, ‘‘La chasse au vol en Europe occidentale du XIe au XIVe siècle,’’ 116. 28. Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors, 156, 600, 153, 581; Symmachus, ‘‘Epistola,’’ 205–6; Daude, 28, 81–82. 29. Besides the goshawk bought for £10, several goshawks cost £5 or more. The official price for a sore goshawk set at the Exchequer in 1224–25 was 20s., while a moulted goshawk was valued at 40s. (The Red Book of the Exchequer, 3:840). Sparrowhawks were generally valued at 6s. 8d. or under, and sore sparrowhawks usually at 2s. (CIPM, 1:97, 102–3, 117, etc.). Under Edward I goshawks were allocated 1d. a day for provision and 1d. for light when away from court, but there are few records of sparrowhawks receiving either a food or a light allowance. On payments for mewing, see chap. 6, n. 63 and associated text. 30. The fact that northern goshawks are specified as ‘‘Norse’’ would suggest a higher valuation than placed on mere ‘‘hawks,’’ and one of John’s debtors had the option of paying one good Norse hawk or two good hawks (PR 14 J., 15), see also Frederick, 112. For duck, see Lib.R., 6:206; for hawking a riveare, PRO E101/352/20, m. 3; for pheasants, Cl.R.H.III (1261–64), 19; for partridges, Cl.R.H.III (1261–64), 19; for rooks, Tanquerey, 500 (letter 16); for other prey, Gace, 122, Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie dans les lettres françaises, 218. For goshawks used to hunt herons in Spain, see Cummins, The Hound and the Hawk, 193. 31. Dalby, Lexicon of the Mediæval German Hunt, 75, 213; for class distinctions, see xxvii and xxxvi. For prizes of sparrowhawks in medieval romances, see Nitze, ‘‘The Romance of Erec, Son of Lac,’’ 6–7, n. 1. For teal, e.g., PR 10 J., 49; ROF, 92. 32. Beaman and Madge, Handbook, 274; Harrison, The History of the Birds of Britain, 21–22, 96. 33. Frederick, 279, 278. 34. Beaman and Madge, Handbook, 95; Gace, 122. The egret, identified by Woolgar as the lesser white heron, is recorded in several contemporary diet accounts (Household Accounts from Medieval England, 1:81, 121, 132–36, etc.). According to Witteveen, of the two species of heron, grey and white, ‘‘The grey heron tasted best’’ (‘‘On Swans, Cranes and Herons,’’ 66). 35. Frederick, 325. 36. Beaman and Madge, Handbook, 135, 134. 37. Frederick, 385, 387. 38. Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 250, 253; PRO E101/351/24, m. 4; Household Accounts from Medieval England, 1:419; chap. 7, n. 97 and associated text. 39. The Regulations and Establishment of the Household of Henry Algernon Percy, 103–4; Lockwood, Oxford Dictionary of British Bird Names, 81–82.


Notes to Pages 17–22

40. Gace, 444; chap. 6, n. 19; BL Add. MS 7965, fols. 13v, 52; PRO C47/4/4, fol. 38v. 41. For partridgers, see chap. 6, n. 33; for a fowler catching swans, cranes, pheasants, partridges, and other birds with nets for the king, Cl.R.H.III (1247–51), 327; Pat.R.E.I [1301–7], 155. See also The Art of Cookery, 77. 42. PRO E101/371/8/107, E101/357/9, m. 2, Lib.R., 2:11–12; for orders for other feasts, Lib.R., 2:95–96; 3:12, 51, etc. On three occasions Henry ordered various fenland abbeys and priories to send him cranes, swans, and, once, herons (Cl.R.H.III [1247–51], 222–23, 524; Cl.R.H.III [1251–53], 474). 43. Adelard, 240–41; Daude, 83–84; Van den Abeele, Fauconnerie, 158–59. 44. Frederick, 150–51. 45. Songs of Holy Mary of Alfonso X, 175, 294; Danielsson, ‘‘The Percy Poem on Falconry,’’ 31. 46. Frederick, 150, 6, 105, 151–52. 47. For some exceptions during John’s reign, see chap. 5, n. 27 and associated text. 48. E.g., Fees, 1:197–98; Cl.R.H.III (1237–42), 43; Cl.R.H.III (1242–47), 422; for fines and oblations, see chap. 4, nn. 78–80; chap. 5, nn. 27–29; and associated texts. Eyries were recorded in Domesday and inquired after by the forest judges (see chap. 4, n. 7; chap. 5, n. 22; and associated texts). See also A Roll of the Household Expenses of Richard de Swinfield, 1:93. Of thirteen orders concerning deliveries of young birds, four are dated in April, eight in May, and one in July. 49. E.g., PR 1 J., 188; PRO E101/574/18, Pat.R.E.I (1301–7), 155; Frederick, 128– 29, 144–45; Tanquerey, 491, 499–500 (letters 2 and 16); Lib.R., 1:297. 50. Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ 250–54, 259–68, 272–74; Lib.R., 2:10. 51. Lib.R., 1:428; 2:185; 3:65. 52. Round, The King’s Serjeants and Officers of State, 311–13. On lastage, see Gras, The Early English Customs System, 28–32. In a 1288 court case the duties the Hauvilles were to receive were specified to be on hides, herring, wool, millstones, and hand-mills. Thomas de Hauville II was accused of having taken lastage on twenty-four other commodities (Hall, Select Cases Concerning the Law Merchant, 148–49). For Giffard, see Lib.R., 4:533; for Frankes, Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 137; Rigby, Medieval Grimsby, 9. 53. RLC, 1:20, 462; Pat.R.H.III (1216–25), 332; Pat.R.H.III (1247–58), 86, 175; etc. 54. BL Add. MS 8835, fol. 69; Great Britain PRO, Calendar of Chancery Warrants, 249. 55. For Pipe Roll references through John, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ 272–74, 259– 68. In 1380 four falcons were bought for John of Gaunt at Nottingham ( John of Gaunt’s Register, 2:183). I have found no record of birds of prey bought at or imported into Bristol before 1307, but such birds certainly were imported later: Richard II had three hawks bought for him there in 1390 (PRO E364/29, m. H). 56. For hawks from Lorraine, see PR 31 H.I, 145, PR 22 H.II, 11; for Lespaynol, Cl.R.H.III (1237–42), 363; and see Nigel, Dialogus de scaccario, 121. For men sent to Scandinavia, see PR 9 H.II, 28; RLC, 1:132; Pat.R.H.III (1247–58), 152; Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 137, 263. For Flanders, e.g., PRO E101/350/29, m. 2, C62/57, m. 9, E101/ 352/20, m. 2; for Bruges, e.g., E101/350/29, m. 2, E101/351/11, m. 3, E101/354/24, m. 4; for Ireland, e.g., RLMP, 234–35, 238, Lib.R., 1:429. 57. The term ‘‘mews’’ was used in two senses: for an establishment where birds of prey

Notes to Pages 22–25


were kept (e.g., the Mews at Charing) and for houses for individual birds (e.g., the four mews built and twenty-six mews repaired at Charing [PRO E101/369/11, fol. 49]). As an indication of the size of mews in the former sense, the chamber for gyrfalcons and falcons built at Woodstock in 1290 was sixty by twenty feet (C62/68, m. 2). For timber and withies, e.g., PR 21 H.III, 198; RLC, 1:191, 358–59; E101/352/26, m. 4; for turf, E101/468/8. In 1238 nine birds were kept in Nottingham Castle ‘‘in a place in the rock’’ (E372/82, Nottingham and Derby). On shingling the roof of a mews, see Lib.R., 4:21. 58. For perches, see PR 9 H.II, 71, Lib.R., 1:55; PRO E101/468/21, fol. 108v. In 1247 the bailiff of Silverstone was ordered to repair ‘‘the two fountains in which the king’s goshawks used to bathe’’ (Lib.R., 3:136). Walls were built around royal mews at Geddington and Charing (e.g., E372/80, Northampton; E101/468/21, fols. 101v, 103); a fence with palings at Winchester (RLC, 1:343); while hedges were used at Clarendon (PR 2,3,4 H.II, 115), Nottingham Castle (E372/66, Nottingham and Derby), and in mews within Winchester Castle and in the New Close at Winchester (PR 1 R.I, 204; PR 5 R.I, 139). For mastiffs, see RLC, 1:192; for stables, PR 33 H.II, 200, E101/468/21, fol. 103; for kennels, PR 6 J., 129, E101/468/21, fol. 103; PR 32 H.II, 177–78, NR, 2:350, Lib.R., 6:163; PR 31 H.II, 214–15, RLC, 1:15, Cl.R.H.III (1231–34), 56–57; E101/ 351/11, mm. 2, 4, E101/351/20, m. 4. 59. Colvin, The History of the King’s Works, 1:550–51; PRO E101/468/21, fols. 103, 108v; for muslin curtains and curtain rings for the mews at Charing, see E101/361/17, m. 3, E101/364/22, m. 2. At the end of May 1290 twenty-seven falcons were being kept at Charing: see chap. 6, n. 99 and associated text. 60. Adelard, 240–45; Tilander, ‘‘Fragment d’un traité,’’ 37; Frederick, 136, 130. 61. Adelard, 246–47. 62. Frederick, 137–38; Woodford, A Manual of Falconry, 67. 63. Adelard, 244–45; Frederick, 138–40, 628. Varvels might also be inscribed with the coat of arms and sometimes the name of the owner. See Vincent, ‘‘Heur et malheur de la vervelle à faucon ou l’erreur de Schlegel et Wulverhorst,’’ 72–94. Geoffrey le Falconer held nine acres and a messuage in Great Linton, Cambridgeshire, by rendering yearly six pairs of jesses with varvels and a leash for hounds (RH, 2:416). For purchase of jesses and leashes, see PRO E101/352/20, m. 4, E101/99/15, m. 2v. 64. Frederick, 143. In the later Middle Ages bells from Milan were prized, though The Boke of St. Albans also commends bells from Dordrecht. Various items in Henry VIII’s inventory show how elaborate falconry accessories had become by the sixteenth century. One finds jesses with gilt rings (no. 16615); varvels of silver and gold (nos. 2599, 2816, 2894, 3479); silver and gold bells (nos. 2814–15, 14429); hawks’ hoods embroidered with gold and silver (nos. 10498, 15860, 16625, 16691) and with gold and pearls (no. 17801); hawking and falconers’ gloves embroidered or with tassels of gold (nos. 10498, 14563, 15860, 16625, 16691); and even a lure of cloth of gold embroidered with roses (no. 9612) (The Inventory of King Henry VIII). 65. For feeding the hawk during manning, see Frederick, 158, 143–44, 157; PRO E101/352/20, m. 4. 66. Frederick, 159, 170–75, 184, 189–93. López de Ayala says it will take thirty days to tame and train a falcon (Libro de la Caça de las Aves, 87). For a gyrfalcon carried to Charing to bathe, see PRO E101/351/24, m. 4, and see C47/4/1, fol. 47.


Notes to Pages 25–31

67. Le ménagier de Paris (1846), 152; translated in Coulton, Social Life in Britain, 396. 68. Frederick, 205–6, 213–14, 216, 219; Frederick facs., fols. 105–9. See also Van den Abeele, ‘‘Aux origines du chaperon,’’ 279–90. For service of a falcon’s hood, see CIPM, 1:189. 69. Bartholomeus Anglicus, Mediæval Lore, 120. 70. Daude, 31. See also Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 251, where hawks are called poignatores—‘‘birds of the fist.’’ However, hawks might be trained to return to the lure (Hands, English Hawking and Hunting, 22 and n. on pp. 104–5). A letter of 1293 requests a lure be sent to the wobodus, who always served as a hawker, because he is more familiar with it (PRO SC1/26/83). 71. Frederick, 225–26, 317, 363. See also BL Royal MS 10 E iv (English, c. 1330–40), fol. 78v, where a woman is shown whirling a lure. For the creance, see Frederick, 230 and n. 1; 241, n. 2. The creance was twenty Roman paces long, i.e., almost one hundred feet. For purchases of lines for training gyrfalcons, see PRO E101/351/20, m. 5; E101/352/ 20, m. 1. 72. Frederick, 230–40. Edward I instructed Robert de Bavent to make one of the gyrfalcons he was training strike at the lure (Tanquerey, 491 [letter 31]). 73. Frederick, 243–44. By the fourteenth century the English seem to have adopted the practice of whirling the lure. 74. Frederick, 246–50; RLC, 1:174, 401; Tanquerey, 492, 496–98 (letters 4, 11, and 13). 75. Frederick, 369, 384–85. 76. For purchases of hares and rabbits, see PRO E101/350/29, m. 2, E101/351/11, m. 1; for a royal ferreter catching rabbits, m. 5; for flying at small birds, Frederick, 256. Edward I writes of a gyrfalcon trained to this stage flying at rooks (Tanquerey, 499–500, letter no. 16). For fowlers, see E101/350/29, m. 2; E101/351/11, m. 2. 77. Frederick, 256–57; PRO E101/350/29, m. 2; Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 137, E101/ 352/21, m. 1; Lib.R., 4:2. For Bavent’s use of cranes in training, see Tanquerey, 494, 497 (letters 6 and 11). 78. Frederick, 317–18; PRO E101/350/6, m. 1; E101/351/11, m. 3; E101/350/24, m. 4. 79. Tanquerey, 491, 497–98, 500 (letters 3, 13 and 16); Lib.R., 2:178. 80. Heidenreich, Birds of Prey, 10. 81. Hands, Boke of St. Albans, 32–35; Dancus Rex, ‘‘Dancus Rex,’’ 100–103. For a serjeanty that owed yearly eighteen geese for mewing the king’s falcons, see RH, 2:9 82. Daude, 37; see also Danielsson, ‘‘Percy Poem,’’ ll. 238–39. 83. For washed meat, see Daude, 37; Dancus Rex, ‘‘Dancus Rex,’’ 102–5; Hands, Boke of St. Albans, 35; and Danielsson, ‘‘Percy Poem,’’ l. 175 and p. 59, s.v. ‘‘wessche’’; for reducing by waking, see Daude, 37. 84. Frederick, 151, 281, 293; PRO C47/3/14, m. 2, E101/352/6. 85. Frederick, 404, 400–401, 391–93. For purchases of drums (tabors), e.g., PR 29 H.II, 147; Lib.R., 1:410; PRO E101/349/29, m. 2. Richard de Sandiacre’s service consisted of keeping a hawk, finding two men to carry it, and himself bearing a tabor (Fees, 1:374). In the will of John le Deneys (who held land in Huntingdonshire by hawking serjeanty), two hawks and two tabors were given or returned to the king (Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers Along the Ouse,’’ 14, 16 [CRR, 16:378–79]).

Notes to Pages 32–37


86. Cl.R.H.III (1237–42), 147, 245, etc., PRO E101/369/11, fol. 117; E101/353/12, m. 2; C47/4/3, fol. 5v; E101/349/27, m. 1; E101/349/30/1; C47/3/43/15, m. 1; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 13. 87. Gaston Phébus, Livre de chasse, 125–38, esp. 135–36. Perhaps such spaniels were the leporarii aquaticii noted in PRO E101/351/20, mm. 1–5. 88. Frederick, 267–68, 328. Frederick recommends that geese be used to train crane hounds (269–70). For training greyhounds in hunting cranes, see PRO E101/352/26, m. 4. The Merks held Comberton, Cambridgeshire, by service of bearing two lanner falcons and providing a heron-hound (RH, 2:554); the Bavents held land in Bilsby, Lincolnshire, by keeping three lanner falcons and three greyhounds (CIPM, 2:472–73). 89. John and Edward I seem to have preferred hunting cranes, while Henry III did a good deal of hawking at duck and herons. For cranes on their backs fighting off falcons with beak and claws, see Queen Mary’s Psalter, plates 191, 204, 210. For a crane killing one of Henry II’s falcons, see Becket Mat., 1:528. 90. Frederick, 357. 91. Mullally does not believe a hawking scene is represented (‘‘The So-Called Hawking Party’’), but hawking at waterfowl is in progress at the upper right, a falconer carrying two birds and leading two dogs is at bottom right, above him is a mounted couple each holding a hawk, and the duke holds a hawk. 92. ‘‘Sir Orfeo,’’ 137. 93. The Penguin Book of Bird Poetry, 135. 94. Queen Mary’s Psalter, 188; Digby, The Devonshire Hunting Tapestries, plate II. 95. The Parlement of the Thre Ages, xxxvi, 6–9; translated by John Gardner in The Alliterative Morte Arthure, 138–39. 96. See chap. 7, nn. 154–58 and associated texts. See also ‘‘Le Regret de Maximian,’’ in Brown, English Lyrics of the Thirteenth Century, 95. This is not to say that older men, or even the physically disabled, did not continue to fly hawks and falcons. Froissart relates that Count Guy of Blois, although too fat to ride a horse, continued to hawk while transported in a cart (Froissart, Oeuvres de Froissart, 14:368).

Chapter 3: Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England 1. Strutt, The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England, xv. 2. Epstein, ‘‘Origin,’’ 501, 504–5. 3. Lindner, ‘‘Beizjagd,’’ 2:164–65. 4. Epstein, ‘‘Origin,’’ 505. 5. Sidonius Apollinaris, MGH, 41, 61. 6. Åkerström-Hougen, The Calendar and Hunting Mosaics of the Villa of the Falconer in Argos, 28, 30, 44–45, 93–94; Blanchard-Lemée et al., Mosaics of Roman Africa, 182, where it is noted that ‘‘this type of hunting with falcons . . . is found depicted especially on the mosaics of the fifth and sixth centuries A.D. from Carthage, Hergla, and Tabarka.’’ 7. MGH: Legum Sectio I, 38–41; MGH: Leges, 3:39, 82, 117, 331, 572, 662; 4:73–74, 376; 5:231–32. 8. On dogs, see MGH: Leges, 3:330 and n. 79, and 662. The Bavarian laws distinguished between hawks used to take cranes, geese, and duck, the penalties for theft being


Notes to Pages 38–39

6s., 3s., and 1s. respectively, plus restitution of a similar bird (ibid., 3:331). Distinctions were also made between goshawks and sparrowhawks (ibid., 3:331; MGH: Legum Sectio I, 4:39–40). According to the Ripuarian Code an untamed hawk was valued at 3s.; a hawk trained to hunt cranes 6s.; and a moulted hawk 12s. These values compare to 3s. for a mare and either 7s. (Codex B) or 12s. (Codex A) for a stallion (MGH: Leges, 5:231– 32). Under Burgundian law a thief could owe 6s. compensation to the falcon’s owner plus a 2s. fine. This compares to 5s. compensation for a slave, 3s. for a horse, and 2s. for the best kind of ox (ibid., 3:571–72). 9. Concilia Galliae, A. 511-A. 695, 25, 245. A canon of the Council of Agde (506) is similar to that of Epaon, but the canon of Agde is thought to be a later interpolation (Concilia Galliae, A. 314-A. 506, 226, 225). 10. McNeill and Gamer, Medieval Handbooks of Penance, 207. 11. The same exclusionary logic can be applied to the images of a hawk attacking a duck on the Sutton Hoo purse plaques. Hicks suggests that these images ‘‘depict an act of falconry’’ (‘‘The Birds on the Sutton Hoo Purse,’’ 161 and passim). But while this is certainly possible, wild hawks also attack duck, and the plaques cannot therefore be taken as evidence for falconry. Huff has proposed ‘‘a chronology which sees the introduction of falconry to England in the late sixth or seventh century from Francia and Scandinavia, originally in the shape of high-status gifts from one king to another’’ (‘‘The Introduction of Falconry to the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms,’’ 12). Huff cites Hicks on the Sutton Hoo purse plaques and notes several representations of hawks on sixth- and seventh-century Kentish artefacts. Otherwise he presents no English material not already discussed in my ‘‘Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England.’’ I have no quarrel with Huff’s ‘‘proposed chronology,’’ so long as it is placed in the context of when falconry may have come to England; noting, however, that he provides no evidence for a specific source for English falconry or for ‘‘high-status gifts.’’ My own concern is with verifiable evidence as to when falconry was actually practiced in England. 12. ‘‘S. Bonifatii et Lulli epistolae.’’ 1:337. Translations mine unless otherwise noted. 13. Ibid., 392. 14. Cramp, Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture, 19–22, 61–72. 15. Karkov, ‘‘The Bewcastle Cross,’’ 16–18; Henderson, ‘‘Primus Inter Pares,’’ 108–9; Carrington, ‘‘The Horseman and the Falcon.’’ 16. Henderson, ‘‘Primus Inter Pares,’’ 158. 17. Carrington, ‘‘The Horseman and the Falcon,’’ 466. 18. Clutton-Brock, ‘‘The Animal Resources,’’ 376, 387–88. Bones of goshawks have been found in an early-eleventh-century site in York (O’Connor, ‘‘Bones from AngloScandinavian Levels at 16–22 Coppergate,’’ 194); in a site dated between 980 and 1070 at Faccombe, Hampshire (Sadler, ‘‘Faunal Remains,’’ 2:505); and in a ‘‘Saxo-Norman’’ site at Fennings Wharf, London (Rielly, ‘‘Animal Bones,’’ 214–15, 217). 19. CS, 2: no. 848 (S 134 in the enumeration of Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters). For other charters, see CS, 1, no. 370 (S 186) [Ceolwulf ]; 2, nos. 443 (S 1271), and 450 (S 198) [Berhtwulf ]; nos. 488–89 (S 207) [Burgred]; and no. 612 (S 373) [Edward]. A number of similar charters have been called spurious or suspect. These consist of ‘‘grants’’ by Cenwulf of Mercia in 821, by Egbert of the West Saxons in 823 and 835, and by Berhtwulf of Mercia in 848 (CS, 1, no. 366 [S 183], no. 395 [S 271], no. 413 [S 278]; 2:

Notes to Pages 39–42


no. 454 [S 197]). On the authenticity of the charters cited, see Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, and ‘‘The Electronic Sawyer.’’ Hart considers Berhtwulf’s charter of 848 authentic (The Early Charters, 68–69, 76–77). 20. CS, 2, no. 489; trans. Whitelock, English Historical Documents, 527–28. According to Chadwick the Mercian shilling was a unit of account equated with one sheep (Studies on Anglo-Saxon Institutions, 12–20, 51–63). 21. CS, 2, no. 612. 22. DB, 1, fols. 64b, 154b, 219, 238, 230, 172. 23. Stenton, ‘‘Domesday Survey,’’ 376. 24. Asser, ‘‘Asser’s Life of King Alfred,’’ 91. 25. Wilson, The Lost Literature of Medieval England, 74–75. 26. William of Malmesbury, Willelmi Malmesbiriensis monachi de gestis regum Anglorum libri quinque, 1:48; trans. Whitelock, English Historical Documents, 307. 27. Williams, An Introduction to the History of Wales, 161–65; Loyn, ¿‘‘Wales and England in the Tenth Century’’; Jenkins, ‘‘The Lawbooks of Medieval Wales,’’ 1–15, esp. 12. 28. Jenkins translates the Welsh word ‘‘hebogydd’’ (literally ‘‘hawksman’’) as ‘‘falconer’’ and ‘‘hebog’’ as ‘‘falcon.’’ See The Law of Hywel Dda, 343, and ‘‘gwalch: Welsh,’’ esp. 61. 29. See chap. 2, n. 43 and associated text. Domesday Book mentions Judikell, hawker to Ralph Guader, earl of Norfolk (fl. 1069), who ‘‘was exempt from the hall because he was the Earl’s hawker’’ (2, fol. 125b). 30. Great Britain RC, Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales, 1:24–27, from the Vendotian Code. See also Jenkins, The Law of Hywel Dda, 14–16, for a composite translation (xxix). 31. Great Britain RC, Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales, 650–55; Jenkins, The Law of Hywel Dda, 15, 16. 32. Great Britain RC, Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales, 282–85; Jenkins, The Law of Hywel Dda, 182–83; 389, 320. 33. Jenkins, arguing from linguistic evidence, writes: ‘‘With this background, it does not seem unduly fantastic to connect the Welsh use of [the word] hebog for the falcon with the visits of Hywel Dda to the court of Athelstan. During such visits Hywel could have seen falconry as a sport, which he then introduced to his own court; perhaps he even brought a falconer from England to train Welsh men as well as Welsh birds’’ (‘‘Hawk and Hound,’’ 261). If this were certain, one could make a much stronger case for using the Welsh Laws as evidence for English hawking practice. But Jenkins’ statement is, as he admits, supposition, and must be treated accordingly. 34. See chap. 2, n. 58; chap. 6, nn. 45, 47; and associated texts. 35. Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon Wills, 26–27, and see 28–29 and 128–32. See also CS, 3, nos. 1132, 1133 (S 1511). Two sections of the Anomalous or Welsh Laws may well be relevant here. One states that a lord, an atheling, and the chief of a household owe as heriots their steeds, greyhounds, arms, and hawks. The other states that a lord is lawfully entitled to the hawk of his man (Great Britain RC, Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales, 2:17, 327, 263). While these laws are of later date, they incorporate earlier material. 36. DB, 1, fol. 56b.


Notes to Pages 42–46

37. The Battle of Maldon, 41–42; translated in Ashdown, English and Norse Documents, 23. 38. The Battle of Maldon, 41, n. on line 2. See also Owen-Crocker, ‘‘Hawks and HorseTrappings,’’ 226. 39. CS, 3, no. 1276. 40. Whitelock, Brett, and Brooke, Councils and Synods, 1, pt. 1:411; Wulfstan’s Canons of Edgar, 14–15; translation from Great Britain RC, Ancient Laws and Institutes of England, 2:259. The Canons are thought to be dated ca. 1005–7. Owen-Crocker notes that Ælfric, in a letter to Wulfstan, also warns against falconry, but cautions that this warning, as well as Wulfstan’s, ‘‘may be stock admonitory material’’ (‘‘Hawks and Hawk Trappings,’’ 222). For the letter, see Whitelock et al., Councils and Synods, 1, pt. 1:300. 41. Eadmer, ‘‘Miracula Sancti Dunstani, auctore Eadmero,’’ 237–38. In his history of the Abbots of St. Albans, Walsingham states that St. Albans’ fourth abbot, Wulnoth (ninth century) hunted with birds and dogs (Gesta Abbatum Monasterii S. Albani, 1:11). 42. Donaldson, ‘‘The Text of Beowulf,’’ 39–40. 43. Exeter Book, ix, xiii-xiv; Greenfield, A Critical History, 78–79. 44. Exeter Book, 139. 45. Exeter Book, 56; trans. Gordon, Anglo-Saxon Poetry, 351. Writing about ‘‘The Gifts of Men’’ and ‘‘The Fortunes of Men,’’ Krapp and Dobbie say, ‘‘Meter and language point to a fairly early date, the end of the eighth century, or, at the latest, the beginning of the ninth century’’ (Exeter Book, xiii). 46. Howard, ‘‘Old English Tree Climbing,’’ 154. 47. The Old English Riddles of the Exeter Book, 78, 186–88, 192; 105, 325–27. 48. Ælfric’s Colloquy, 1, 7–8, 11–15. Fox notes that in Arabia today ‘‘many of the wild-caught sakers are released to the wild [at the end of the falconry season]’’ (Understanding the Bird of Prey, 165). 49. The huntsman is the king’s huntsman (Ælfric’s Colloquy, 23). His mode of payment may have paralleled that of royal hawkers and falconers: ‘‘What does he give thee? He clothes me well and feeds me and sometimes gives me a horse or bracelet that I may follow my art more joyfully’’ (25–26). 50. Fowler, ‘‘On Mediaeval Representations of the Months and Seasons,’’ 137–39. 51. Dobbie, The Anglo-Saxon Minor Poems, 56 and see lxvii and lx. Greenfield characterizes the author as ‘‘ninth-tenth century?’’ (A Critical History, 196). 52. See Hofmann, ‘‘Falkenjagd und Falkenhandel in den nordischen Ländern während des Mittelalters’’; Åkerström-Hougen, ‘‘Falconry as a Motif in Early Swedish Art’’; Sten and Vretemark, ‘‘Storgravsprojektet.’’ 53. Roger of Wendover, Rogeri de Wendover chronica, sive Flores historiarum, 1:303– 12. See also Loomis, ‘‘The Growth of the Saint Edmund Legend’’ and ‘‘Saint Edmund and the Lodbrok (Lothbroc) Legend.’’ 54. DB, 1, fol. 172. According to Bö, ‘‘only from about 1160 onwards was the sending of falcons to England [from Norway and Iceland] carried out in earnest’’ (Falcon Catching in Norway, 6). However, the one surviving Pipe Roll of Henry I’s reign has two entries that mention Norse hawks: Ralph Havoc owes the king two gyrfalcons and two Norse hawks, and Outi of Lincoln renders account for one hundred Norway hawks of which four are to be white (PR 31 H.I, 111). While Outi was able to produce only eight Norway

Notes to Pages 46–47


hawks, this would still indicate that hawks were being sent (or brought) ‘‘in earnest’’ from Norway to England at least as early as 1130. 55. The Life of King Edward, 40. 56. The term ‘‘accipitrarius’’ in Domesday is generally translated as ‘‘falconer.’’ Literally the word means ‘‘keeper of hawks’’ (Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources, 1:25). As we have seen, as far back as Asser a distinction was made between keepers of hawks and falcons. Moreover, where land holdings exhibit continuity of service, every one of Domesday’s ‘‘accipitrarii’’ are succeeded by hawkers. Consequently I have translated the term as ‘‘hawker.’’ For hawkers listed in Domesday Book, see DB, Phillimore, 37:285. For a discussion of problems involved in identification of hawkers and falconers in Domesday Book and other sources, see Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers,’’ 65–67. For William’s taking over Edward’s hawkers, see Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Some Hawkers of Somerset,’’ 53. 57. DB, 1, fols. 14b, 50b. William Accipitrarius is stated to have held his land from King Edward. Godwin’s holding, according to a thirteenth-century document, was subsequently granted to him (or to a successor) by Henry I for life only. He (or his successor) served William I, William II, and Henry I as well as Edward, but at some time during Henry’s reign the service and land were granted by the king to Hugh de Brayboeuf (CIPM, 2:310–11; Farrer, Honors and Knights’ Fees, 2:186–87). 58. DB, 1, fol. 278b. Toli also held three bovates at Ilkeston (‘‘Tilchestune’’) that belonged to Sandiacre, and held the land in Ilkeston ‘‘ad geld.’’ His son or grandson Peter de Sandiacre, alias Peter f. Toli, is found on the Pipe Rolls for Derbyshire in 1155–56 and 1156–57: he is excused danegeld and receives a hawk from the king—probably to be cared for during the moulting season (PR 2,3,4 H.II, 39, 46, 153). It appears that Peter was holding as a hawking serjeanty the land that had been held by his ancestor Toli. For a discussion of the Sandiacre family, see The Cartulary of Darley Abbey, 1:xxvi–xxviii, xxx–xxxii. One may infer that Toli was one of William’s hawkers, though he was not named as such in Exchequer Domesday, and it is likely that he was a hawker for Edward as well. For serjeanty, see p. 51. 59. Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Some Hawkers of Somerset,’’ 51–53. Siward, listed in both Exon and Exchequer Domesdays among the king’s thegns, held in demesne of King William seven hides 1 ∞⁄≤ virgates on which he paid no geld, and may have held other land under Edward. His descendants continued to hold part of this land by hawking serjeanty. 60. In cases too numerous to mention, hawkers and falconers held land along rivers, at the edges of the fens, on the seacoast, or along the banks of estuaries: see Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers,’’ 73. Of pre-Conquest hawkers who did not serve the king, Godric Accipitrarius, ‘‘a man of the abbot of Ramsey,’’ held land on the Ouse in Cambridgeshire (DB, 1, fols. 201, 204b, 208; Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers Along the Ouse,’’ 9–10). Judikell, hawker for Earl Ralf of Norfolk, held land at Redenhall, Norfolk, along the river Waveney (DB, 2, fol. 125b). 61. DB, 1, fol. 74b; ‘‘Radulfus de Halsuilla’’ in the Geld Inquest account for Wiltshire (Exon D., 11, 18). ‘‘Hals villa’’ (AD 1014) and ‘‘Alsvilla’’ (1046–66) have been identified as Hauville-en-Roumois (Eure) (Fauroux, Recueil des actes des ducs de Normandie de 911 à 1066, nos. 15 and 188 and see no. 140 and p. 506). Ralph is listed as one of the servants of the king in the Wiltshire survey and paid no geld on land he held in demesne,


Notes to Pages 47–51

so he could have been serving as a falconer. However, Ralph’s Domesday holdings are not held subsequently by falconry service, and the identification is not supported by evidence on the later descent of the fee. For Round’s discussion of the Hauville family, see King’s Serjeants, 310–17. One can only guess at the reasons why falconers and hawkers such as Toli may not have been specifically identified as such. For a discussion of this problem, see Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers,’’ 65–67. 62. Adelard, 238–41; Haskins, ‘‘King Harold’s Books,’’ 399. 63. The Bayeux Tapestry, 175–78 and plates 2, II, 5, 10, 15 and 17. 64. The Gesta Normannorum Ducum, 2:158–61; William of Poitiers, The Gesta Gvillelmi, 68–69. See also Dodwell, ‘‘The Bayeux Tapestry and the French Secular Epic,’’ 554 and n. 33. 65. William of Poitiers wrote of William while he besieged Domfort (c. 1050), ‘‘Often he delighted in flying his falcons, or more often his hawks’’ (William of Poitiers, The Gesta Gvillelmi, 24–25, where ‘‘accipitrum’’ has been improperly translated as ‘‘sparrowhawks’’). See also chap. 4. 66. From at least the tenth century on, the sport of falconry seems to have been a sign of aristocratic differentiation—an example of the phenomenon noted by Marrus: ‘‘One of the distinguishing features of the life-style of the European aristocracy ever since the tenth or eleventh century was the indulgence in leisure practices. . . . These practices did not occur in a communal context, and were not a part of an intricate structure of obligation. Such pastimes served in part to differentiate a tiny privileged sector from the rest of society’’ (The Emergence of Leisure, 7). 67. The Bayeux Tapestry, plates II, 5, 10, and see the note on plate 10, p. 176. 68. Wright, Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies, 2, s.v. goshafoc, goshafuc, spearhafoc, spearhafuc, wealhhafeca, wealhhafuc, walhhabuc, hwealhafoc. Presumably the goshawk was the ‘‘hawk’’ generally mentioned: in the glosses it is equivalent to accipiter (ibid., 1, cols. 259, 285, 351) and to aucarius (1, cols. 131, 285). In one glossary ‘‘accipiter, uel raptor’’ is defined as spearhofoc (ibid., col. 132). Wealhhafoc appears in the glossaries as equivalent both to herodius, i.e., gyrfalcon (ibid., cols. 259, 285, 318, 417) and to falconum—probably the peregrine (ibid., cols. 21, 132, 285, etc.). Jenkins thinks ‘‘wealhhafoc is best understood as an equivalent of falco peregrinus’’ (‘‘gwalch: Welsh,’’ 65). 69. Frederick, 121, 124–27, 205–6.

Chapter 4: English Royal Falconry, William I to Henry II 1. See chap. 3, nn. 55–57, 59 and associated texts, and see below. 2. For William’s hawkers, see DB, 1, fols. 49b, 50b, 63, 2:272; for Edward’s hawkers, DB, 1, fols. 50b, 14; for nonroyal hawkers, DB, 2, fol. 125; for land values and social positions, DB, 1, fols. 63, 14, 49b, 50b; 2:109, 272, 125b. See also Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Some Hawkers of Somerset,’’ 52–53. 3. Poole, Obligations of Society in the XII and XIII Centuries, 61. 4. CIPM, 1:74–75. 5. Pollock and Maitland, The History of English Law Before the Time of Edward I, 1:287.

Notes to Pages 51–53


6. Round in King’s Serjeants traces a number of serjeanty families, but does not systematically examine any occupation. Neither does Kimball (Serjeanty Tenure in Medieval England). The one published study of a household group, Hill’s The King’s Messengers, 1199–1377, is of a wage-earning, not a serjeanty occupation. 7. ‘‘Occasionally woods were valuable for other reasons: the hawks’ nests therein are always noted’’ (Ballard, The Domesday Inquest, 167). See DB, 1, fols. 34, 144, 151b, 163b, 172, 180, 180b, 252b, 256b, 257, 264, 265, 265b, 266b-270; DB, Phillimore, 38:87. 8. DB, 1, fol. 179b. ‘‘The fineness of money paid in by the King’s farmers was tested by Combustion, or trial by fire. This combustion was either real or nominal. Real when either a sample or the whole was melted down; nominal when, in lieu of the actual test by melting, one shilling extra was paid for every twenty shillings. In the former case the payment was said to be in blank, or blanched money’’ (Introduction to the Study of the Pipe Rolls, 74). 9. DB, 1, fols. 310b, 264, 256b, 259, 187, 239. 10. DB, 1, fol. 36b. No trace of ‘‘Pitchingworth’’ has been found since Domesday (Gover, Mawer, and Stenton, The Place-Names of Surrey, 99, n. 1). Brooke, English Coins, 80. 11. DB, 2, fols. 117b, 118b. ‘‘Accipiter terrae,’’ presumably a local hawk as opposed to a foreign bird (e.g., one from Norway). 12. DB, 1: fols. 64b, 154b, 219, 238, 230, 172. In the twelfth century the county of Worcester pays annually £13 for a hawk and a sumpter horse (PR 2,3,4 H.II, 91, 155, etc.). 13. DB, 1, fol. 162. 14. In Edward’s time Leicester paid £30 and fifteen sesters of honey yearly. William received £42 10s. rent, £10 for a hawk, 20s. for a packhorse, and £20 from moneyers (DB, 1, fol. 230). 15. For other renders-in-kind in Domesday Book, see Finn, An Introduction to Domesday Book, 183–84, 237–38, 269, 277–78. The Dialogus de scaccario notes the reason Henry I converted payments in victuals to money payments but also records the continued receipt of hawks and falcons (Richard Fitz Nigel, 40–41, 121). These however are not customary payments, but ‘‘birds promised to the king for various reasons.’’ 16. Vetus registrum Sarisberiense, 1:383. 17. DB, 1, fol. 208. For the later history of this holding, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ n. 2 on pp. 172–73. 18. The Malmesbury charter reads ‘‘A. falconario’’ (Registrum Malmesburiense, 330). He is identified as Ared by Davis (Regesta regum Anglo-Normannorum, 1:90). For the notification about wood for Abingdon, see ibid., 2:75. Henry I established at least one serjeanty concerned solely with eyries—that of Edwin of Racton, who had custody of eyries of hawks in the forest of Carlisle (Fees, 1:197–98). 19. Regesta regum Anglo-Normannorum, 2:38. For Lew, see DB, 1, fol. 160b; Fees, 1:11, 103, 251, 344, 589; for the history of the holding, Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers,’’ 71–72; for Ared as witness, Regesta regum Anglo-Normannorum, 2, nos. 854, 856; 956; and 961. 20. Pat.R.H.III (1232–1247), 480.


Notes to Pages 53–55

21. Dialogus de scaccario, 135. These wages compare to those of knights-huntsmen who received 8d. a day, huntsmen and archers who got 5d., and keepers of greyhounds who were paid 3d. daily. For the absence of falconry entries in the Constitutio, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ n. 1 on p. 163. The range of payments of the hunting staff may indicate the range of pay of men engaged in falconry and may also provide evidence of the declining position of the huntsman, if not of the chief falconer. The top wage of 8d. a day in the hunting staff compares to wages of 5s. a day for the chancellor and 3s. 6d. a day for the master butler, the master chamberlain, the constable, and the master marshal (Dialogus de scaccario, 129–35). 22. PR 31 H.I, 111; PR 31 H.I, 47; The Langley Cartulary, 11. On the Pipe Roll four falconers and two hawkers, none of whom had any stated connection with falconry, make or are forgiven various payments to the king; other records reveal these men to have been falconers or hawkers. 23. PR 31 H.I, 8, 145; Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ Appendix B. 24. PR 31 H.I, 113, 121, 59, 75, 91, 148. 25. PR 31 H.I, 59. 26. Walter Map, De nugis curialium, 479. 27. Bodl. MS Ashmole Rolls 38, skin 5; Birch and Jenner, Early Drawings and Illuminations, 277. The reference to Vit. B XIII, fol. 3b, should be Vit. A XIII (8). While Stephen is most frequently depicted holding a falcon, other kings are also so shown: Athelstan and Henry I on the Ashmole Roll; Edward the Martyr on BL MS Royal 14 B V; Edgar and John on BL MS Royal 14 B VI; Ethelred on BL Add. MS 47170; and Wiglaf in vol. 251 of the Egmont Papers. Contemporary chroniclers (who do not mention Stephen’s hawking) would seem to be better sources than artists two centuries later. 28. Peter of Blois, ‘‘Epistola 66,’’ in Petri Blesensis, 198, translation mine. 29. Walter Map, De nugis curialium, 477. 30. Giraldus Cambrensis, Expugnatio Hibernica, 128–29, 90. 31. Gerald of Wales, The Jewel of the Church, 124. 32. Abbott, St. Thomas of Canterbury, 2:67. The falconer was asked to bring down a crane when the king was not present. ‘‘But Radulph had misgivings, for the weather was unfavourable, and . . . the king did not allow Radulph to trifle with Wiscard as with the other birds. However, he risked it’’ (66). 33. Walter Map, De nugis curialium, 207. 34. E.g., PR 2,3,4 H.II, 53; PR 6 H.II, 23; PR 8 H.II, 39; e.g., PR 16 H.II, 2; PR 24 H.II, 112; PR 30 H.II, 87. 35. Becket Mat., 3:50. For Becket’s love of hawking, see chap. 7, nn. 78–81 and associated texts. 36. Becket Mat., 6:269–70. 37. Fantosme, ‘‘Chronicle of the War,’’ 3:212–13. 38. Ralph de Diceto, Radulfi de Diceto decani Lundoniensis opera historica, 1:373– 74. 39. Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici secundi Benedicti abbatis, 1:103; Roger of Hoveden, Chronica magistri Rogeri de Houedene, 2:85. 40. PR 26 H.II, 150; PR 2,3,4 H.II, 112; PR 16 H.II, 15–16; Eyton, Court, Household and Itinerary, 138. Henry II had previously sent Henry the Lion a gift of ten hauberks (PR 25 H.II, 94). For royal gifts in general, see chap. 6, n. 25 and associated text.

Notes to Pages 56–57


41. Henry spent £32 for birds in 1156–57 and £48 8s. in 1157–58 (PR 2,3,4 H.II, 76, 136). For Henry’s recorded expenditures for falconry, including purveyance, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ Appendix B. 42. For prices for gyrfalcons, see PR 25 H.II, 94, PR 17 H.II, 131, 147, PR 18 H.II, 89, 96; for falcons, PR 9 H.II, 66, PR 12 H.II, 130; for goshawks, PR 9 H.II, 130, 131, PR 16 H.II, 15–16, PR 22 H.II, 11. To compare prices of birds with some other prices: in 1184–85 one royal accountant paid 2s. 4d. per quarter of wheat (7d. a bushel), 2s. 2d. per quarter of barley, 1s. 6d. per quarter of oats, and 8d. per sheep. Another paid 6d. per sheep, 4d. per pig, and 3s. each for cows (PR 31 H.II, 43, 155). 43. PR 13 H.II, 194. 44. PR 21 H.II, 198; PR 25 H.II, 102; PR 28 H.II, 146; PR 31 H.II, 214–15; PR 32 H.II, 177–78; PR 33 H.II, 200; PR 34 H.II, 178. For the location of the New Close, see Winchester in the Early Middle Ages, fig. 32. Frank Barlow writes of the adjoining ‘‘tenement of Havoc’’ recorded in the Winton Domesday of 1110: ‘‘Ralph Havoc appears to have succeeded his father as a royal falconer by 1130: Pipe Roll 31 Henry I, p. 148. By 1180–1 the royal hawk mews at Winchester stood outside West Gate on the W. side of this property. It is possible that this was the establishment of the royal falconers of Winchester from at least the latter part of the eleventh century’’ (52, n. 1 to no. 123). However, Keene notes that there is ‘‘no discernible connection’’ between the Domus Havoc ‘‘and the messuage which in 1181 or 1182 the king purchased and had converted into a mews for his falcons’’ (Survey of Medieval Winchester, 2:937). See also Colvin, The History of the King’s Works, 2:1006. 45. PR 5 H.II, 64; PR 15 H.II, 130; PR 22 H.II, 13. For a fuller discussion of problems of names, see Introduction to Pipe Rolls, 5–6. 46. PR 12 H.II, 15; Sanders, English Baronies, 62. 47. PR 16 H.II, 2; Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ Appendix C. 48. Rotuli de dominabus, 51. Another royal falconer, Henricus Falconarius, had been the falconer of Earl Ranulf II of Chester (Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, 843). 49. PR 17 H.II, 2; PR 18 H.II, 24; PR 19 H.II, 118; PR 20 H.II, 38, 87. For lastage, see chap. 2, n. 52. 50. For some other Hauvilles who were royal falconers, see chap. 5, nn. 6, 54, 79; chap. 6, nn. 34–35, and associated texts. In 1338 the sheriff of Northampton was ordered to pay ‘‘John de Hauvyll, the king’s falconer,’’ his wages (CCl.R.E.III [1337–39], 502). Barrow states that a Ralph de Hauville was a falconer of Alexander III of Scotland (Kingship and Unity, 134). For an excellent summary of falconry in medieval Scotland, see Gilbert, Hunting and Hunting Reserves in Medieval Scotland, 68–79. 51. PR 10 H.II, 34; Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ Appendix C. For the two Ralphs, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ n. 2 on p. 181. 52. PR 12 H.II, 4, 83, PR 14 H.II, 20, etc. 53. Fees, 1:10; 2:1329. The holding was valued at £13 in 1198. Doketon is first mentioned in 1226–28, but it was clearly included in the appurtenances of Dunton before then (1:387). 54. PR 31 H.II, 46; PR 7 R.I, 205. 55. PR 29 H.II, 86; Rotuli de dominabus, 51, 52. Maud may have been married to Ralph II (CRR, 12:427). 56. RH, 1:252.


Notes to Pages 58–60

57. For Toli de Sandiacre, see Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers,’’ 65; and chap. 3, n. 58 and associated text. See also PR 5 H.II, 59; PR 17 H.II, 99; PR 18 H.II, 4; PR 19 H.II, 55; PR 23 H.II, 198; Fees, 1:8. The valuation was made in 1198. 58. Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ 162–63, n. 4; Round, King’s Serjeants, 303–9; Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers,’’ 76–77. 59. PR 26 H.II, 148; PR 27 H.lI, 160; PR 28 H.II, 115; etc. 60. PR 27 H.II, 160; PR 29 H.II, 160; PR 33 H.II, 102, 131. 61. Fees, 1:13, 2:1358. The valuation was made in 1198. See also Rotuli de dominabus, 43. 62. PR 26 H.II, 136; PR 27 H.II, 129; etc.; PR 10 R.I, 21. 63. PR 31 H.II, 214–15; PR 32 H.II, 177–78; PR 33 H.II, 200. 64. The Chancellor’s Roll, 60; PR 5 J., 139; etc. Walter received an annual livery of £4 11s. 6d. (PR 27 H.II, 129; PR 28 H.II, 139; PR 29 H.II, 147; etc.). 65. In 1184–85, Richard received 40s. 11d. for feeding the king’s birds, Walter got 25s. 6d.; in 1185–86, Richard received 10s. 9d., Walter 61s. 7d.; in 1186–87, Richard received 26s. 9d., Walter 111s. 3d.; in 1188–89, Richard received 19s. 6d., Walter 53s. 8d. (PR 31 H.II, 214–15; PR 32 H.II, 177–78; PR 33 H.II, 200; PR 1 R.I, 204–5). 66. PR 7 R.I, 205; PR 33 H.II, 200; PR 30 H.II, 85; PR 32 H.II, 178; PR 31 H.II, 214– 15; PR 29 H.II, 147; PR 1 R.I, 204–5. 67. PR 2 R.I, 104. 68. A special case is William de Hauville II, who appears three times in the Pipe Rolls— caring for the king’s hawks (PR 12 H.II, 131); buying hawks for young King Henry and the King of Scotland (PR 16 H.II, 15); and receiving his livery (PR 18 H.II, 78–79). While William is not recorded often enough to be put in the first group of falconers, he appears more often than falconers in the third group. See Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ n. 3 on p. 187. 69. For other men performing hawking and falconry services, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ n. 4 on p. 187 and nn. 1–4 on p. 188. Anastasius Falconarius was paid £4 11s. 3d. in 1155–56, and £4 8s. 6d. in the next year (PR 2,3,4 H.II, 57, 77). The first payment works out to 3d. a day for 365 days, the second to 3d. a day for 354 days. Gervasius received £7s. 7s. 6d., or 4 ∞⁄≤d. a day for 354 days (PR 2,3,4 H.II, 77). While Anastasius, Gervasius, and the two mewskeepers received wages for the entire year (or for a year less eleven days), men who carried falcons at the king’s cost presumably were paid either a flat rate or a wage for days worked. Payments recorded vary considerably (Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ n. 7 on pp. 188–89). 70. For falconry serjeanties from Henry II’s time, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ n. 2 on pp. 189–90. 71. Fees, 2:1403; RH, 1:1 (Gatesden); Rotuli de dominabus, 39–40; RH, 1:35; Fees, 1:106 (Cauz); CIPM, 1:219; Fees, 1:103, 251, 2:1173, 1376; RH, 2:698 (Mauduit); Rotuli de dominabus, 71–73; Fees, 2:1348; CIPM, 1:305; Fees, 1:8; CIPM, 2:358–59 (Picot); Fees, 1:270; CIPM, 2:182 (Robert Falconarius of Hurst); Fees, 1:253; RH, 2:34, 46 (Wade). In CIPM, 2:376 the phrase ‘‘in the winter’’ is changed to ‘‘when the king wishes.’’ 72. Pat.R.H.III (1232–47), 304; CIPM, 2:510; 1:142–43; 2:186–87. 73. PR 23 H.II, 106; PR 24 H.II, 2; PR 25 H.II, 43; PR 26 H.II, 48; Simon of St. Liz III, earl of Northampton, d.s.p.s. June 1184 (Fryde, Handbook, 474); PR 30 H.II, 109.

Notes to Pages 60–65


74. PR 28 H.II, 148; PR 29 H.II, 151; PR 30 H.II, 28; PR 33 H.II, 98; Roger de Hoveden, Chronica, 2:244. 75. NR, 1:28. 76. PR 30 H.II, 154–55; Sanders, English Baronies, 103. This would seem to be a survival of a much older custom, see chap. 3, nn. 35–36 and associated texts. For the reversion of the honor of Walter Giffard, see above. 77. PR 28 H.II, xxiii; Fryde, Handbook, 281; PR 30 H.II, 40. By the late twelfth century falconers were not an unusual part of an archiepiscopal household; see chap. 7, nn. 83, 85, and associated texts. 78. PR 2,3,4 H.II, 11, 25, 31, etc. Two hawks and one gyrfalcon were actually paid (PR 23 H.II, 53, 59, 73, etc.), as well as two Norway hawks (PR 14 H.II, 7; PR 9 R.I, 65, 82, 91, 198). Richard collected £54 8s. 8d. from William Ruffus, who owed forty-eight hawks and £46 4s. 11d. in cash (PR 9 R.I, 82, 91, 198; PR 10 R.I, 8, 103, 127). Richard also received £30 13s. 4d. for thirty-nine other hawks owed him. 79. PR 18 H.II, 6; PR 20 H.II, 49; PR 21 H.II, 4; PR 22 H.II, 122. 80. Dialogus de scaccario, 121–22, reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press. A charter of Henry II’s grants land to Robert de Insula for a yearly rent of a sore sparrowhawk, to be delivered within eight days after Michaelmas (Foedera, 1, pt. 1, 42). 81. Walter Cnot, for example, owed three hawks and three gyrfalcons for twenty-nine years, before they disappeared fron the records (PR 11 H.II, 7, to PR 6 R.I, 48). 82. Both the expenses for building mews at Winchester (see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ Appendix B) and the recorded expenses for keeping birds there far exceed those recorded for all other places put together. For other mews, see PR 2,3,4 H.II, 115; PR 32 H.II, 178; PR 17 H.II, 23; PR 26 H.II, 137. 83. NR, 1 (1180), 1–2, 17; NR, 2 (1198), 350, 371. 84. PR 2,3,4 H.II, 13; PR 25 H.II, 38; PR 27 H.II, 145; PR 24 H.II, 107; PR 27 H.II, 10. The birds were probably kept in mews attached to the king’s houses and within the Castle. 85. PR 9 H.II, 71; PR 10 H.II, 21, PR 11 H.II, 31, PR 22 H.II, 13; PR 12 H.II, 131. 86. PR 17 H.II, 23. Bigot, who kept the king’s birds at Salisbury Castle in 1170–71, was styled ‘‘keeper of the birds of the king son of the king’’ in the next year (PR 17 H.II, 23–24; PR 18 H.II, 124). For both Henry’s travels, see Eyton, Court, Household and Itinerary, 240; PR 27 H.II, 345–46. Henry II’s eldest son, Henry (1155–83) was crowned in 1170 (Fryde, Handbook, 36). 87. For Bertran and his times, see the introduction to Bertran de Born, The Poems of the Troubadour Bertran de Born.

Chapter 5: English Royal Falconry, Richard I to Henry III 1. Fryde, Handbook, 36–37. 2. Landon, Itinerary, 40–41, 55; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici secundi, 2:125; Roger of Hoveden, Chronica, 3:54–55; Dunoyer de Noirmont, Histoire de la chasse en France, 3:79; Itinerarium peregrinorum et gesta regis Ricardi, 286–87. 3. Landon, Itinerary, 71–83; PR 5 R.I, 2. 4. Landon, Itinerary, 85, 93–145; PR 6 R.I, 213, etc. 5. PR 1 R.I, 204; PR 3 R.I, 91; PR 5 R.I, 139; PR 7 R.I, 205; NR, 2 (1198), 350.


Notes to Pages 65–66

6. For Ralph de Hauville II, see Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ Appendix C; PR 5 R.I, 28– 29; PR 6 R.I, 62; PR 7 R.I, 71, etc. Richard gave Ralph the manor of Haconby, Lincolnshire, with the advowson, for service with the royal gyrfalcons: Haconby was valued at £6 13s. 4d. in 1219 (RH, 1:252; Fees, 1:286). For Ralph’s service under Henry II, see chap. 4, nn. 52, 54, and associated texts; for Walter de Hauville, PR 1 R.I, 204; PR 7 R.I, 205; The Chancellor’s Roll, 60; and chap. 4, n. 63, and associated text. Ralph de Erlham took falcons across the Channel in 1195/96 (The Chancellor’s Roll, 60). Ralph de Erlham was the brother of Hugh de Hauville (see Cl.R.H.III [1231–34], 54; Cl.R.H.III [1234– 37], 213; PR 6 R.I, xxvi, 213). 7. In the same year, Albreda de Jarpenville paid two hundred marks (£133 6s. 8d.) that Thomas Fitz Bernard might be marshal of the king’s hawks (PR 6 R.I, 250). 8. The Chancellor’s Roll, 18; NR, 2 (1198), 350. Henry de la Wade is recorded once keeping birds of Henry II (PR 32 H.II, 178), but his greatest activity occurs under Richard (PR 2 R.I, 132; PR 4 R.I, 294; PR 5 R.I, 133, etc.). For Richard de Ystlape, see chap. 4, n. 62, and associated text; for Henry Falconarius, e.g., PR 5 R.I, 2; NR, 1 (1195), 210–11, NR, 2 (1198), 350. 9. In 1198 Richard levied a tallage on land held by knights and serjeants, and transcripts of records of the serjeants have survived (Fees, 1:1, 4–13). Two of the fourteen serjeanties are listed as held by Ralph de Hauville. The first Ralph is probably Ralph de Erlham. His recorded holdings include three parts of a carucate in homage in the vill of Erlham in custody with the heir of Richard de Werstede (Fees, 1:10). In 1219 Ralph de Erlham held the land of Robert de Wurthested in Erlham (Fees, 1:281). Five serjeanties—those of Peter Picot, Ralph de Hauville, Roger de Vetule (Velie), Roger de Cauz, and Albreda de Jarpenville—date back to Henry II’s reign (see chap. 4, nn. 53, 61, 71, 85, and associated texts). Sarra de Bendeville held land in Peckham, Kent, for carrying a hawk across the sea at the king’s cost (Fees, 1:13). She was probably not the first holder of this serjeanty (see RH, 1:205). William Fitz Coste’s holding in Hucknall, Nottinghamshire, was held by Costus Falconarius in Henry II’s reign (PR 8 H.II, 32, etc.), but Costus is not recorded performing falconry service. Of the seven other serjeants— William Falconarius, Adam de Beysin, Peter de Sandiacre, Ralph de Erlham, Roger Ostricer, Robert de Liddinton, and Godfrey de la Huse—only Ralph de Erlham is recorded serving as a falconer. Richard also gave land to Adam de la Mora for falconry service (PR 1 J., 229). Adam carried the king’s birds overseas in 1196–97 (The Chancellor’s Roll, 290). 10. NR, 1 (1195), 210–11; NR, 2 (1198), 350. 11. See chap. 1, nn. 27–28, and associated texts. 12. Warren, King John, 140. 13. The Political Songs of England, 4. 14. Roger of Wendover, Rogeri de Wendover liber qui dicitur Flores historiarum, 2:49. 15. Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers Along the Ouse,’’ 9. 16. RLP, 1:100. 17. Stubbs, Select Charters, 290. 18. Cl.R.H.III (1237–42), 147. 19. See chap. 2, n. 85 and associated text. 20. Cl.R.H.III (1234–37), 9, 33; Cl.R.H.III (1237–42), 147, etc.

Notes to Pages 66–68


21. Stubbs, Select Charters, 296; McKechnie, Magna Carta, 299–304; Fryde, Why Magna Carta? 154. 22. McKechnie, Magna Carta, 510–11; PR 11 J., xxvi. 23. Brut y Tywysogion, 269. Llywelyn married John’s illegitimate daughter Joan (Fryde, Handbook, 37). In 1210, while Llywelyn was still in John’s good graces, John sent him a present of falcons (RLMP, 145; RCh, 188). 24. Warren, King John, 140—an extension of a remark by Lady Stenton, who notes that ‘‘John’s personal interest in Norway can hardly have extended further than the securing of a regular supply of Norway hawks’’—but then goes on to discuss John’s diplomatic reasons for aiding the king of Norway (PR 3 J., xviii). Whatever the reason for the shipment of grain in 1200/1201 (PR 3 J., 128), a shipment of five hundred quarters of grain to Norway in 1201/2 seems directly tied to falconry (PR 4 J., 104). The man in charge of this shipment, Brian Ostiarius, was sent to Scandinavia in 1212 to buy falcons (RLC, 1:132). This likely was his task on the earlier trip as well: in 1202–3, after his return, Brian and Richard de la Wade stayed with the king’s birds at Mildenhall (PR 5 J., 235), and in the next year Brian and Richard were paid 60s. ‘‘for the sustenance of the birds which came from Norway’’ (PR 6 J., 219). The birds may well have been brought back by Brian. 25. RLC, 1:132; Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 239; RLC, 1:182. In 1223, after the envoy of the king of Norway brought hawks to Henry III, five hundred quarters of wheat and the same amount of malt were sent to Norway (RLC, 1:562). For other gifts, see RLC, 156; RLMP, 136; and Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 238, 256. 26. This is not to imply that John was not promised many birds. The Oblata Roll of 1 John, for example, records pledges of thirty hawks, nine gyrfalcons, and a falcon gentle (ROF, 6, 14, etc.). 27. See chap. 4, n. 80 and associated text; for premium birds promised to John, ROF, 150; PR 16 J., 18; PR 13 J., 29; for similar promises as to the quality of horses to be given John, PR 12 J., xxxv; for the mandate, see RLC, 1:20. 28. ROF, 14, 37; PR 14 J., 140; PR 13 J., 210. 29. For writs, see ROF, 35; PR 14 J., 15; for quittances, PR 4 J., 176; ROF, 242; for confirmations of charters, ROF, 36, 375; and for inquisitions, ROF, 17, 92. In 1209/10 Robert de Braibroc paid a sore sparrowhawk to have a letter patent enrolled on the Pipe Roll (PR 12 J., 214). For markets, see PR 4 J., 142, 238, PR 6 J., 32, etc.; for fairs, PR 11 J., 91, PR 16 J., 32, 94; for licenses to ship grain to Norway, PR 1 J., 289, PR 2 J., 253. Nicholas the Dane offered the king a hawk every time Nicholas came to England in return for letters of protection and freedom from toll (ROF, 266). For inheritance or possession of land, see ROF, 19, 35, 41, etc.; for gifts to gain the king’s good will, PR 4 J., 215, ROF, 574, 600; for the nuns of Carrow, PR 2 J., 148; for Geoffrey Fitz Peter, PR 9 J., 177, PR 10 J., 198. 30. The hawks and gyrfalcons owed by the men of Dunwich from 1199 (ROF, 14) were carried as debts until 1211/12 (PR 14 J., 177), after which they disappear from the Pipe Rolls. 31. PR 4 J., 85, 139; PR 5 J., 145. 32. Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 251; RLC, 1:209; RLMP, 116, 118. 33. In only three years for which there are recorded purchases did John spend above


Notes to Pages 68–70

£10, with a maximum of £13 13s. 4d. in 1208/9. See Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ Appendices B and C. 34. Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 143, 234–35, 238, etc. 35. RLC, 1:118, 192. 36. PR 13 J., 168. 37. Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 250, 251, 253. 38. Johnstone, ‘‘Poor-Relief in the Royal Households of Thirteenth-Century England,’’ 153. She does not mention the other two entries. February 13th was St. Ermenhilda’s day, but, as Cheney notes, she was an Ely (i.e., a local) saint (Handbook of Dates, 72). If hawking had been banned on all saints’ days, there would not have been any hawking. 39. See PR 14 J., 11, 27, 46, etc. 40. Fees, 1:72–231. The six serjeanties not noted in 1212 are the Bendevill, Erlham, Gatesden, Merk, de la Mora, and Wade serjeanties. For later listings, see Fees, 1:253, 270, 277; 2:913, 1403; for Hauvilles, Oggins, ‘‘English Kings,’’ n. 5 on pp. 209–10. 41. Fees, 161; CIPM, 1:68; 2:472–73. 42. Cole, ‘‘Praestita Roll 7 John,’’ 273, 274, 275, etc.; Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 249, 255; RLC, 1:154, etc. 43. Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 245, 246, 248. Hubert and Wylekin Hauville are only mentioned once in the records of John’s reign, and I have found no later references to them in connection with falconry. In 1232 Milcote and Dorsinton, Warwickshire, which King John had granted to Geoffrey de Hauville, was said to be held by Geoffrey, Ralph the Porter, and Sylvester Falconarius (Fees, 1340, 1352). In 1221 Geoffrey the Porter was recorded as holding half a virgate in Dorsinton as a yearly tenant, at will, of Geoffrey de Hauville II, while an undated inquest of Henry III’s reign stated that Silvester le Faukener held (unspecified land in Warwickshire) in villeinage (!) of Geoffrey de Hauville III by service of carrying Geoffrey’s falcons (Rolls of the Justices in Eyre, no. 620; CIMisc., 1, no. 2161). Sir John Mauduit, who held land in Broughton Poggs, Oxfordshire, by service of mewing and carrying a hawk, had a subtenant, Geoffrey Murdac, who held by service of mewing a hawk (RH, 2:698). One subtenant on the partially alienated Picot serjeanty of Ratcliff upon Soar was John le Hostricer, another was Elyas Pikot (Fees, 2:1296); Adam le Faucuner and Peter de Gatesden were subtenants of John de Gatesden’s serjeanty of Stanbridge, Bedfordshire (Fees, 2:1228–29). 44. In 1212 Thomas de Weston was the valet of Hugh de Hauville (Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 245). By Henry III’s reign he was a full-fledged royal falconer (RLC, 1:305–6, 348, 357, etc.). ln 1222 Peter de Lincoln was Henry de Hauville’s valet (RLC, 486); within a few years he holds a falconry serjeanty (Cl.R.H.III [1227–31], 325). Since many valets are listed only by their first names, it is impossible to tell whether they were related to falconers or if they eventually became falconers. 45. Thomas Fitz Bernard married the daughter of William de Jarpenville, and Robert Mauduit married Ralph Murdac’s daughter (Fees, 1:103). Henry Falconarius married a member of the de la Mora family, and Gilbert de Hauville married the daughter of Richard de la Malle (RLMP, 91; CIPM, 1:15–16). As maiden names of falconers’ wives are not likely to be recorded unless they were heiresses, intermarriage among falconry families may have been even more prevalent than these cases indicate.

Notes to Pages 70–73


46. The payments made to falconers in which numbers of days are noted generally include expenses for men, birds, horses, and sometimes dogs; the number of each is not always mentioned. Adam de la Mora and William de Merk were paid £7 14d. for 126 days in 1210–11, and if 126 is an error for 121, their wages work out to exactly 7d. daily (PR 13 J., 178). 47. Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 249, 255; CIPM, 1:142–43. 48. PR 3 J., 102–3; Lib.R., 1:316, 451, etc. These wages may be compared to the 2s. to 3s. a day knights received during John’s reign (Round, Feudal England, 530–33); wages of 5d. a day for the keeper of the London jail (PR 13 J., 131), 3d. a day for John the goldsmith (PR 16 J., 79), 2d. daily for a tailor, a janitor, and for the nurses of John’s children Richard and Joan (PR 13 J., 183; PR 16 J., 1, 79, 127); and 1d. a day for the chaplain at the Castle of Southhampton (PR 16 J., 126). 49. Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 251, 236–60. If gifts made for specific purposes—to buy a horse, etc.—are added, the totals come to £26 17s. 6d. to falconers and 5s. to a single hawker. 50. Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers along the Ouse,’’ 18 and n. 43; RLMP, 81, 142, 147. 51. RLMP, 26, 67; RLMP, 69, Cole ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 243; RLC, 1:243, 263, 259, etc. 52. RLMP, 43, 59. 53. PR 6 J., 129. 54. Gilbert was a brother of Hugh and Ralph III de Hauville (PR 14 H.III, 350; PRO E372/72, Northamptonshire). One surmises that Gilbert was a younger son since he didn’t inherit any property. For Ralph’s gift and the subsequent actions of Richard de Heriet and Gilbert, see ROF, 104; CRR, 1:390; ROF, 264–65, 287. Gilbert’s debt last appears in PR 10 J., 121, while Richard de Heriet’s heirs’ final payment is recorded in PR 13 J., 180. For the 1246 inquest, see CIPM, 1, no. 66. 55. Fees, 1:204; CIPM, 1, no. 232. 56. When Avis died her heir, William de Hauville III, paid ten marks (£6 13s. 4d.) for relief (PRO C/132/12/7/2; Ex. e r. fin., 2:137). 57. RLC, 1:367. 58. Fees, 2:1347, 1361; Pat.R.H.III (1232–47), 240; CRR, 16:291; CCh.R., 1:255. 59. CRR, 9:103–4; CRR, 16, no. 2225; CRR, 9:218. It is possibile that this could be still another Gilbert de Hauville, but if so the conclusion holds. 60. PR 31 H.II, 41; PR 6 R.I, 125; PR 4 J., 39, 164; PR 4 J., 239, 282; PR 6 J., 231; Fees, 1:151; RLC, 1:129. 61. Fees, 1:6–13. 62. Fees, 1:72–228, and see 106, 103, and 155. 63. PR 6 R.I, 250; Cartae Antiquae, 135; PR 13 J., 240. 64. Cartae Antiquae, 82; Fees, 1:130; ROF, 43–44; RLC, 1:96. 65. A late-fourteenth-century (?) wooden statue of a king from the Bristol High Cross, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum, is thought to represent Henry III. He holds a hawk or falcon by its jesses on his gloved left hand while the bird eats a tiring held in his right hand.


Notes to Pages 73–75

66. Fryde, Handbook, 37. Gilbert de Hauville was told to fly Refuse with Blakeman ‘‘and to pay such diligent attention thereto as to merit the king’s thanks’’ (RLC, 1:401; Cl.R.H.III [1231–34], 111; Cl.R.H.III [1237–42], 363; Cl.R.H.III [1251–53], 278). 67. Cl.R.H.III (1234–37), 415; Cl.R.H.III (1242–47), 73; Lib.R., 4:4. Gilbert is first recorded as a royal falconer in 1212 (Cole, ‘‘Misae Roll 14 John,’’ 243). Thus by 1252 he would have been in royal service for some forty years. Evidently Gilbert was either ill or weakened by age, for in February 1252 the king sent him to Peterborough Abbey ‘‘so that he might be provided for in the necessities of life’’ (Cl.R.H.III [1251–53], 197). 68. Lib.R., 6:206. A similar gift was made to Robert Mauduit in 1267, ‘‘for the first taking of the king’s goshawk’’ (RLC, 5:25). 69. Lib.R, 6:246; Fryde, Handbook, 33; Cl.R.H.III (1234–37), 296; Cl.R.H.III (1247–51), 88. For the legate, see Cl.R.H.III (1237–42), 36. Aymer de Valence, Henry III’s half-brother and bishop-elect of Winchester, was given ‘‘one sore gerfalcon, which is not to be one of the better birds nor one of the worse, but nevertheless is to be good’’ (Cl.R.H.III [1251–53], 155–56). For other gifts, see RLC, 1:627; Cl.R.H.III (1227–31), 553, 554, etc. 70. Cl.R.H.III (1253–54), 96. William de Ferrers had twice received gifts of hawks from the king (RLC, 1:627; Cl.R.H.III [1227–31], 554). See also RLC, 1:562; Cl.R.H.III (1227–31), 80; RLC, 2:47; Cl.R.H.III (1227–31), 540. 71. Pat.R.H.III (1247–58), 157; Lib.R, 1:429. 72. RLC, 1:539, 553; Cl.R.H.III (1231–34), 22; CIMisc, 1:24–25. 73. For Brigstock, see RLC, 1:358–59; 2:84; Cl.R.H.III (1234–37), 138, etc.; for Geddington, Cl.R.H.III (1227–31), 517; Cl.R.H.III (1231–34), 56–57; Cl.R.H.III (1237–42), 186, etc.; for royal castles, RLC, 1:353, 506; Lib.R., 2:88; Cl.R.H.III (1234– 37), 145; for individuals, Cl.R.H.III (1237–42), 102, 363; Cl.R.H.III (1242–47), 155, 357; Pat.R.H.III (1232–47), 304. 74. Pat.R.H.III (1232–47), 231, 258, 723; Lib.R., 2:145, 190, etc. He first appears in the records in 1238, and by 1248 his job had become an annual affair. See also LQCG, 307. 75. The entry in PRO E372/79 mentions ‘‘the roll of huntsmen, dogs, and falconers.’’ 76. See Appendix. 77. Great Britain PRO, List of Documents, 74. 78. PRO E101/349/30/1; C47/3/43/15. 79. PRO E101/349/30/1; C47/3/43/15; Lib.R., 4:491; 6:62; etc. These wages compare to liveries of 2s. a day for knights; 12d. for a serjeant with a barded horse (6:83); 7 ∞⁄≤d. for a royal fisherman (6:207); 6d. for esquires and for the king’s painter (6:83, 11); 3d. for the king’s chaplain at Shamwell, Kent (6:83, 90); 2 ∞⁄≤d. for gardeners (6:224); and 2d. for unmounted archers (6:83). For Henry de Hauville, see Lib.R., 1:176, 259, 320, etc. Henry also farmed the manor and was custodian of the king’s house at Brigstock (RLC, 2:84). For payments to injured or ill falconers, see C47/3/43/15; C47/3/43/3. 80. PRO C47/3/43/15; C47/3/43/3. 81. For John de Bikenore, see Lib.R., 6:214; for John de Frethorn, Pat.R.H.III (1232– 47), 420; Cl.R.H.III (1251–53), 403; Lib.R., 2:208, 3:14, etc. John de Frethorn was also pardoned a fine of half a mark (6s. 8d.) (Cl.R.H.III [1237–42], 339); was excused from the summons to the eyre in Oxford and Berkshire (Cl.R.H.III [1251–53], 260, 263); and

Notes to Pages 75–77


in 1256 was allowed for the rest of his life ‘‘to hunt with his own dogs the hare, the fox, the badger and the cat throughout the forest of Windsor’’ (Pat.R.H.III [1247–58], 489). For gifts to other falconers or hawkers, see Cl.R.H.III (1227–31), 14; Cl.R.H.III (1234– 37), 50, 89, etc.; for payments to sick falconers, Lib.R., 4:136, 423; 6:131; PRO E372/ 102 (Norfolk and Suffolk). Richard le Faucuner received a pension of 2d. a day before his death in 1229 (Cl.R.H.III [1227–31], 276–77) and the Hauvilles continued to receive the lastages of various ports in the thirteenth century (CIPM, 1:72, 97–98). 82. Lib.R., 1–6 passim (Hauvilles, Erlham); Pat.R.H.III (1247–58), 175 (Fitz Bernard); Lib.R., 1:295 (Lincoln); Lib.R., 2:149; 4:491 (Redenhall, Picot). Robert de Redenhall was descended from the Roger Ostricer who held a hawking serjeanty in Richard’s reign (Fees, 1:10, 130; 2:913). For other families, see, Lib.R., 3:108; Pat.R.H.III (1232–47), 301, 304; Lib.R., 5:258. 83. It is unlikely that Robert Burnel, bishop of Bath and Wells, who held the manor of Langley by the ‘‘serjeanty of receiving a goshawk at the gate of Shrewsbury castle and carrying it to Stebbenheth, co. Essex’’ (Pat.R.E.I [1292–1301], 291–92), ever performed his service in person. See also CIPM, 3:101; 4:254. Among largely or completely alienated falconry serjeanties were the Sandiacre serjeanty, the Picot holding in Radecliffe, the Racton serjeanty in Cumberland, and Maud de Lincoln’s holding in Clixby (Fees, 2:1194–1205; CIMisc., 1:307–8). For a full discussion of the alienation of serjeanties, see Kimball, Serjeanty Tenure, 208–41. Walter Wobode’s summonses to the men keeping hawks are addressed ‘‘to knights and others who owe the king’s service of goshawk’’ (Pat.R.H.III [1232–47], 231, 258, 723) and to ‘‘knights and serjeants deputed to keep the king’s goshawks’’ (Pat.R.H.III [1247–58], 24, 47, 73, etc.); CIPM, 1:126. 84. PRO E101/349/27; E101/349/30/1; C47/3/43/15. 85. See chap. 6, n. 67 and associated text. 86. For example, John de Frethorn was granted the manor of Tottenham worth £15 in 1253 to be held by a money rent (Ex. e r. fin., 2:175; Cl.R.H.III [1251–53], 408); and in 1255 he and his wife were given the robes of a knight and lady (Cl.R.H.III [l254–56], 23). 87. Kimball, Serjeanty Tenure, 241 and chap. 9 generally. 88. The numbers given do not represent the total number of falconry or hawking serjeanties. Some serjeanties are not recorded in either the Book of Fees or the Inquisitions post mortem—e.g., the Merk serjeanty of Comberton, Cambridgeshire (RH, 2:554), other serjeanties had been converted earlier to other tenures (the Velie serjeanty), and still other serjeanties had been merged (e.g., Haconby). Moreover lands held by rents of a mewed falcon or hawk might in actuality mask mewing service, but unless such lands are recorded elsewhere as serjeanties there is no way of telling this. Consequently I have excluded such entries from my calculations. 89. Serjeants not mentioned elsewhere include Thomas Hamelyn, Hugh de Stredleye, and Robert Cauce (CIPM, 2:583, 3:10, 5:365). 90. Where several values are given I have used the earliest. Christopher Dyer notes that until 1292 ‘‘the lowest knightly income was often set at £20 or £30 per annum’’ and that ‘‘The government seemed to attach some importance to an annual income of £5 as marking a significant social bench-mark.’’ He estimates that ‘‘about 10,000 families were in receipt of incomes between £5 and £40. In reality most of them received considerably


Notes to Pages 78–81

more than £5, because of the usual evasions and underassessments. A high proportion of the 10,000 can be regarded as ‘lesser gentry.’ ’’ Elsewhere Dyer analyzes the income of Robert le Kyng, one of the better-off tenants on the bishop of Worcester’s manor of Bishop’s Cleeve, Gloucestershire. Dyer estimates that Kyng’s money income, rent, and tithes would range from £1 18s. to £2 11s. per annum (Standards of Living, 30, 110, 115). One should remember that the hawkers’ and falconers’ incomes listed in the Book of Fees were for a period from fifty to ninety years earlier than Dyer’s estimates and, owing to inflation, represented higher real incomes than identical amounts in the later period. Further, many falconers and hawkers may have had other sources of income in addition to their serjeanties. Nevertheless, the categories are useful in broad terms. 91. CIPM, 4, no. 163; 5, no. 53. The de Grey serjeanty of Eton, Buckinghamshire, was valued at £30 in 1247 (Fees, 2:1403); the Tattershall serjeanty of Shalburne, Berkshire, was valued at 9s. 2d. in the 1303 inquest (PRO C133/109, m. 8). 92. CIPM, 4, no. 387, PRO C133/123/8/2, Ex. e r. fin., 2:321; CIPM, 2, no. 319; C133/108/6/2, CIPM, 4, no. 161; CIPM, 1, no. 503, C132/28/12/2; CIPM, 2, no. 602, C133/4/8/8; CIPM, 2, no. 51, C133/4/11/2; CIPM, 1, no. 281, C132/14/16/4, CIPM, 1, no. 361, C132/14/16/8, Ex. e r. fin., 2:169; CIPM, 2, no. 311, C133/22/6/2; CIPM, 2, no. 777, C132/14/1; CIPM, 2, no. 36, C133/14/6, CIPM, 2, no. 189. 93. CIPM, 2, no. 620; Fees, 2:1375, 1397; CIPM, 3, no. 10; CIPM, 2, no. 96. 94. CIPM, 2, no. 449, PRO E152/1, m. 7d.; CIPM, 3, no. 113, Fees, 1:374; CIPM, 3, no. 103, C133/65/4/2, C133/65/4/4; CIPM, 1, no. 232, C132/12/7/2; CIPM, 2, no. 449, C133/33/2/2; CIPM, 2: 583, C133/42/13/2; CIPM, 5, no. 365; CIPM, 6, no. 107. 95. CIPM, 4, no. 176, 1, no. 878, 2, no. 46, PRO C133/107/18/2; CIPM, 2, no. 162; Fees, 2:1147; CIPM, 2, no. 558. 96. Reginald de Grey held Le Waterhall in Buckinghamshire ‘‘by serjeanty of finding a man armed with hauberk and lance only in Wales’’ and thirty acres of land in Hemingford, Huntingdonshire, by ‘‘finding a spindle full of thread for sewing the king’s pavilions in time of war’’ (CIPM, 5, no. 53); Peter Picot held Heydon, Essex, by ‘‘service of holding a basin before the king at his coronation’’ (CIPM, 2, no. 602); Robert de Eleford held three virgates in Eston, Oxfordshire, by ‘‘finding a man for 40 days with bow and arrows at his own cost with the king in his army in England and Wales’’ (CIPM, 3, no. 96); Hawisa de London held Garston, Berkshire, and its advowson ‘‘to lead the vanguard of the king’s army whenever he shall go into West Wales with his army, and the rearguard in returning’’ (CIPM, 2, no. 51); and Henry de la Wade held a carucate in Blecchesdon, Oxfordshire, ‘‘by service of bringing before the king a roast price 4 ∞⁄≤d., viz.—a loin of pork, whenever he shall hunt in [Cornbury Park, Oxfordshire]’’ (CIPM, 2, no. 620). 97. CIPM, 5, no. 365; 2, no. 36. 98. CIPM, 5, no. 212; 2, no. 777; 1, no. 405; PRO C132/20/20. 99. Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers,’’ 76–77 and see references in nn. 39 and 42 on pp. 89–90, 92. 100. CIPM, 5, no. 212. 101. For a case in which a falconer, John de Burgo, had pawned seventeen of his customary tenants and two acres of meadow, see chap. 6, n. 138. Improvidence may also have been a factor in the alienation of some serjeanties. 102. Kimball, Serjeanty Tenure, 200–206.

Notes to Pages 81–85


103. CIPM, 2, no. 558. The second poorest, that of William son of Godfrey de Clixby, was also a divided serjeanty. 104. Kimball, Serjeanty Tenure, 199–200. Another divided serjeanty was Clixby, Lincolnshire, which was divided among three sisters but later, presumably after the death without issue of one of the heirs, was found to be divided in two (CIPM, 1, no. 620; 2, no. 162). For Adam atte Broke, see CIPM, 6, no. 112. 105. Oggins and Oggins, ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers,’’ 77–78 and see references in nn. 43–45 on pp. 91–94. 106. Ibid., 78—‘‘If such was the case, marriage into falconry and hawking families would not have been considered disparaging either; and this, as well as the wealth of the heiress, would explain why marriages to the heiresses to falconry/hawking sergeanties appeared attractive.’’ For the association of falconry with nobility, see chap. 7.

Chapter 6: Falconry in the Reign of Edward I 1. An additional £46 was spent on robes; see Appendix. Using Prestwich’s figures for Edward’s expenses, the £910 6s. 1d. spent on falconry in 1285–86 amounted to more than 2 percent of the £40,090 spent in that year and more than 7 percent of recorded household expenses (Edward I, 570). 2. For Henry III, see PRO E372/79, E372/88, E352/45; for Edward, E372/121, E372/ 136, E372/144, BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 115, LQCG, 304. 3. Trivet, F. Nicholas Triveti, 282. It has been suggested that a marginal figure in a late thirteenth-century illuminated French manuscript is a cariacature of Edward I. The naked man is crowned, bears a tail (a probable reference to the ‘‘tailed English’’), and holds a bird of prey on his gloved left hand and a chicken leg in his right (Jones, The Secret Middle Ages, 67). 4. Lib.R., 3:168, 219. Edward was born in June 1239 (Fryde, Handbook, 38). 5. For Gillett see Lib.R., 6:131. Mauduit died in the Holy Land (Cl.R.H.III [1268–72], 500); for other members of the family, see chap. 4, n. 71; chap. 5, nn. 43, 68, 92, 105; and chap. 6, n. 137; and associated texts. 6. Henry III died in 1272, before Edward returned from Crusade (Fryde, Handbook, 38). 7. In all Edward spent at least £690 8s. 9 ∞⁄≤d. on the mews at Charing. See Appendix, nn. 3–5, 7, 11–12, 14, 16, 24, 29. 8. Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 137, 263; PRO E101/350/29, m. 2. 9. See Appendix. 10. Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 118. For a 1294 order prohibiting taking duck’s eggs, see CCl.R.E.I (1288–96), 346. 11. Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 142–43. 12. CCl.R.E.I (1279–88), 432. For orders to three sheriffs in 1296 banning hawking on rivers because the king ‘‘intends shortly to hawk,’’ see CCl.R.E.I (1288–96), 518. 13. Shaw, The Royal Forest of Lancaster, 139. 14. CCl.R.E.I (1272–79), 142; Great Britain RC, Placitorum, 289; Fryde, Handbook, 38. 15. Tanquerey, 490–501.


Notes to Pages 85–88

16. Tanquerey, 490 (letter no. 1); 492 (letter no. 4); 494 (letter no. 7, which also tells Bavent to try to have three of the king’s gyrfalcons trained by Christmas); 496–97 (letter no. 11); 499 (letter no. 15). 17. Tanquerey, 500–501 (letter no. 18). 18. Tanquerey, passim, esp. letters nos. 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16; PRO E101/ 371/21/14. 19. See below, n. 53 and associated text. This custom led Edward’s mother to make a mild joke in a letter in which she thanked him for a gift of headless cranes that she had enjoyed. ‘‘In regard that you desire us to let you know which we prefer, the bodies of the cranes without the heads or the heads without the birds; we tell you that for us . . . the bodies are more suitable, but for you . . . the heads, because . . . your payments for cranes’ heads cause them to be too highly seasoned’’ (Salzman, More Medieval Byways, 176; the original is PRO SC1/16/172). See also E101/350/6. For a gift of 6s. 8d. to a groom bringing heads of a heron and a duck caught by a royal gyrfalcon, see C47/4/5, fol. 44v. 20. PRO SC1/13/147. 21. The Chronicle of Bury St Edmunds, 133. 22. Foedera, 1, pt. 2: 533, 569, 579; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, 2:74; Foedera, 1, pt. 2, 786; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 57v; PRO E36/201, 51. Of 102 recorded birds given to Edward throughout his reign, thirteen were white gyrfalcons, thirty-one were gray, thirty-eight were gyrfalcons, thirteen were falcons (peregrines), and seven were goshawks. There were also three gifts of gyrfalcons and two of goshawks for which numbers of birds were not recorded. 23. Foedera, 1, pt. 2: 620; PRO E101/352/14, m. 9; E101/352/21, m. 1. 24. CCl.R.E.I (1288–96), 145; PRO E101/308/13–15. 25. Paris, Chronica Majora, 5:489; Vaughan, ‘‘Arctic in the Middle Ages,’’ 330–31; Salzman, Edward I, 191, 188; Chaplais, English Medieval Diplomatic Practice, 2:819, 815–30; PRO E101/357/10/1. 26. PRO E101/350/20, m. 2, E101/352/26, m. 5; E101/361/14, m. 2, E101/364/25, fol. 119; BL Add. MS 8835, fol. 44. 27. Prestwich, Edward I, 362; PRO E101/352/26, mm. 2, 4. 28. Fraser, A History of Antony Bek Bishop of Durham, 176–210; BL Add. MS 35292, fol. 67, PRO E101/369/11, fol. 101; BL Add. MS 8835, fol. 44. 29. Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 404; Pat.R.E.I (1292–1301), 3; Pat.R.H.III (1258–66), 593, 669; Pat.R.H.III (1266–72), 601. 30. Tout, Chapters, 2:27 and see 158–63. 31. The exceptions involve men either serving as or in place of the marshal of the hawks, who received 1s. a day both in and out of court (PRO E101/352/26, m. 2; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 115). Knights also received a fee of eight marks (£5 6s. 8d.). On payment according to size of entourage, e.g., C47/4/4, fols. 9, 10; E101/370/28/14; for finding lodgings, E101/369/11, fol. 117. Fowlers accompanying falconers received 6d. per day (E101/350/29, m. 2; E101/351/11, mm. 2–3). 32. PRO E101/351/20, m. 5, E101/351/24, m. 2, E101/352/26, m. 3, E101/354/5A, fol. 10; E101/7/11, m. 15, E101/369/11, fol. 121v; E101/352/20, m. 4, E101/352/26, m. 6; E101/468/21, fol. 103. 33. E.g., PRO E101/352/20; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 116v, ‘‘The Ordinance of York,

Notes to Pages 88–90


1318,’’ in Tout, The Place of the Reign of Edward II in English History, 271–72; BL Add. MS 7965, fols. 13, 116v; E101/352/20, m. 2; E101/351/24, m. 2, E101/351/20, mm, 1, 3, etc. The partridgers used hawks to catch partridges for the royal larder, and their lower wages and less expensive robes indicate their status was below that of hawkers who flew birds for the king’s sport. A similar distinction was made between the valkenares and the vogelers mentioned in the Marienburger Tresslerbuch of around 1400 (Dalby, Lexicon, 273). 34. John de Bikenore II took over his father’s duties after the latter died in 1284–85 (PRO E101/4/13, E 101/351/17, m. 5) and was paid 1s. a day until at least 1296–97 (C47/4/6, fol. 7). By 1299–1300 he had been knighted and was paid 2s. a day when away from court (LQCG, 190). His brother, Thomas de Bikenore, received wages for a time for one horse (E101/350/29, mm. 1–2). From 1283–84 he received 1s. a day when out of court (E101/351/20, mm. 3, 5) and was knighted in 1297–98 (E101/6/37, m. 6). Thomas de Hauville II received 1s. a day until he was knighted in April 1286 (E101/351/ 26, mm. 1, 4). 35. By falconry or hawking families I mean that other family members were in royal service. 36. BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 124, PRO E101/12/39; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 124, E101/369/11, fol. 128; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 124, BL Add. MS 35293, fol. 25v. 37. E.g., PRO E101/684/30, no. 39, no. 48; E101/359/4. 38. Johnson, ‘‘The King’s Wardrobe and Household,’’ 239. 39. Book of Prests, xxii. 40. PRO E101/369/11, fols. 117v, 133v, 208v. 41. PRO E101/354/5A-B; CCl.R.E.I (1302–7), 379, 385–86; Appendix; E101/369/ 11, fol. 121v. 42. PRO E101/684/55/1. 43. PRO E101/368/27, fol. 74. 44. Lachaud, ‘‘Liveries and Robes in England,’’ 279–98. For shoe allowances, see PRO E101/351/30, mm. 9, 10, BL Add. MS 7965, fols. 41–44; for other examples of clothing allowances, E101/351/17, mm. 1, 2, E101/352/24, mm. 1, 3. In 1289 Thomelinus Corbet’s dogkeeper Robert Corbet was given 10s. for a robe (E101/352/20, m. 2). 45. PRO E101/359/4, mm. 2–5; E101/361/18, m. 4; C47/4/1, fol. 47v; E101/366/ 16/12, no. 20; E101/370/26/3, m. 3. In August 1302 André de Chanceaux received a robe of ray lined with lambskin (E101/361/19, no. 9). For the tabard, see C47/4/3, fol. 5v; for camlet, Middle English Dictionary: 2:27 (‘‘camelin’’) and 2:149 (‘‘chamelet’’). Russet was ‘‘undyed cloth in natural greys and browns’’ (Walton, ‘‘Textiles,’’ 338). For the king’s falconry costume, see C47/3/11; E101/364/22, m. 10; for saddlecloths, C47/ 4/1, fol. 47v; E101/370/36/3, m. 4; E101/368/6, m. 20; etc.; for gloves, C47/3/14, E101/352/6, E101/359/20. 46. Staniland, ‘‘Clothing and Textiles at the Court of Edward III,’’ 230. See also Newton, Fashion in the Age of the Black Prince, 68. 47. In 1276–77, for example, ten falconers’s horses were replaced at a cost of £20 (PRO E101/350/24, m. 1). Sir Robert de Bavent received a remission of military service in Scotland in 1300–1301 to fly the king’s falcons (BL Add. MS 7966A, fol. 143); John de


Notes to Pages 90–93

Bikenore was quit of common summons [of the eyre] in Kent in 1278 (CCl.R.E.I [1272– 79], 549), and Geoffrey de Hauville III was quit of the summons of the forest eyre in Rutland (1288–90) at the instance of the falconers of the London mews (SC1/10/134 [i]). For an earlier quittance, see CCl.R.E.I (1279–88), 407. 48. PRO E101/352/21, m. 2; E101/365/7, m. 5; E101/350/24, m. 1; E36/20, 54; C47/4/1, fol. 47. 49. BL Add. MS 8835, fol. 43; PRO C47/4/1, fol. 47; E101/351/20, m.4, E36/201, 58, 61; E101/352/21, m. 1; E101/364/13, fol. 92v; E101/308/15, m. 6; E101/366/5, E101/368/7. 50. PRO E101/369/11, fol. 95v, E101/352/26, m. 4; CCl.R.E.I (1272–79), 270, E101/77/4, m. 2, BL Add. MS 7966A, fol. 78v, etc. In a number of years Edward sent the master of hawks a tun of wine during the enseaming period. Other gifts were the grants to Geoffrey de Hauville III of six oaks (CCl.R.E.I [1279–88], 26), to Thomas de Hauville III of five live bucks and ten live does (CCl.R.E.I [1279–88], 307), and to Sir John de Merk of six bucks (CCl.R.E.I [1288–96], 487). 51. PRO E101/351/24, m. 1; E101/369/11, fol. 96v. Of forty-three other gifts to men bringing birds to the king, two were of ten marks (£6 13s. 4d.), three of £5, fifteen of £2, eleven of £1, and one of only half a mark (6s. 8d.). 52. Royal rewards to finders of lost falcons range from £2 to 5s. John de Brabant paid 36s. to a man who brought back a lost falcon that the man had bought from another man (PRO E101/353/4/4, m. 1). For gifts to a crane catcher, see E101/352/21, m. 1; to a man who captures herons, E101/350/24, m. 1; to a man bringing a flying crane, E101/350/ 24, m. 1; to a man bringing a dog, BL Add. MS 8835, fol. 44. Michael de Weston was repaid the 6d. he gave to a ‘‘certain man’’ who helped a royal falcon capture a crane (C47/4/1, fol. 2v). 53. E.g., PRO C47/3/46/29; E101/352/21, m. 1; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 52; and E101/369/11, fol. 99v, where Ralph de Kertlingstock is given £2 for bringing the king three cranes’ heads taken by three different gyrfalcons. Presumably the money went to the falconers, not to the grooms who brought the heads. For the gift to John de Bikenore, see E372/119, Worcestershire; for alms, C47/4/1, fol. 38v, C47/4/7, p. 7. 54. E.g., PRO E101/352/24, m. 1. 55. PRO E101/366/16/16; E101/368/16; BL Add. MS 8835, fol. 43v; E101/370/ 26/3, m. 4; C47/4/5, f. 21; E101/350/24. 56. CCl.R.E.I (1279–88), 159; Pat.R.E.I (1281–92), 381; CCl.R.E.I (1288–96), 154; etc. The king’s hunting lodges at Brigstock and Geddington lay within Rockingham Forest, see Bellamy, ‘‘The Rockingham Forest Perambulation of 1299.’’ 57. Usilton, ‘‘Edward I’s Exploitation of the Corrody System,’’ 224. 58. PRO E101/351/11, m. 2; E36/202, fol. 49; LQCG, 160, etc. For the corrodies, see CCl.R.E.I (1296–1302), 402, 405, 406, 483. 59. CCl.R.E.I. (1288–96), 507; CCl.R.E.I (1302–7), 75 (Cirencester), 198 (St. Swithun’s), 207 (Malmesbury), 318 (St. Albans), 428 (Chertsey), 525 (Abingdon). A mandate of February 1304 indicates that the wobode chose the abbey at which he would stay (Great Britain PRO, Calendar of Chancery Warrants, 203), though there may have been an understanding that he would choose a different house each year. For the wobode’s service during this period see PRO E101/364/13, fols. 86–87v; BL Add. MS 8835, fol.

Notes to Pages 93–95


69; etc.; for corrodies for the wobode during Edward II’s reign, CCl.R.E.II (1307–19), 141 (Ely), 250 (Reading); for the reference to the wobode as king’s serjeant, CCl.R.E.I (1302–7), 217; for hawkers and falconers in 1277–78, E101/350/29, passim. 60. In 1283–84, nine hawkers served for the full season, seven for limited periods (PRO E101/351/11, passim); in 1284–85 the numbers were eleven and nine (E101/351/ 20, passim); in 1285–86, eleven and ten (E101/351/24, passim); in 1296–97, sixteen and eight (BL Add. MS 7965, fols. 115–19); in 1299–1300 nine men served most of the season, two for two months (LQCG, 304–9); in 1300–1301 eight men served most of the season (BL Add. MS 7966A, fols. 142–43), another received a robe as a hawker (fol. 150), and Thomas de Wedon served as marshal but is not recorded as receiving wages. Clearly the last two accounts are incomplete. 61. For 1289–90, see PRO E101/352/26 passim; E101/352/24, m. 2. In the latter record Stephen of Bedford and Geoffrey Attemore are called hawkers of the bishop of Durham, but in E101/352/26, m. 2 and C47/4/4, fol. 50v they are correctly identified as valets of Sir John de Berwick. For 1305–6, see E101/369/11, fols. 116–35v. In that year twenty-four men, including two valets of Sir John de Clinton, were given robes as ‘‘hawkers’’; four other men who served as hawkers for most of the year also received robes, and Sir John de Bikenore II and Sir John de Grymstede were given robes as knights (fols. 155v–65v). Of hawks at court in 1305–6, six hawks and three sparrowhawks were given to the king at various times during the season. One hawk was given away by the king, and a hawk and a sparrowhawk died (E101/369/11, fols. 116–23v). 62. For mews for sparrowhawks at Charing, see PRO E101/351/24, m. 3; E101/369/ 11, fol. 49. Between June 10 and September 28, 1285, of nineteen birds in the royal mews, two were sparrowhawks and one a musket (E101/351/20, m. 4). The only reference I have found to a goshawk mewed at Charing is for February 1303 when a hawk called ‘‘Durham’’ was placed there (E101/369/11, fol. 121). However, at least one other hawk was kept there for a time in 1298 (BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 118). In 1300 a hawk was mewed at Lincoln by the sheriff (BL Add. MS 7966A, fol. 142v). 63. The Bikenores usually received a fee of £8 for mewing the king’s hawks, but in 1286 John de Bikenore II received an additional £2 because he had more hawks to mew than in any previous year (PRO E101/351/24, m. 4). 64. CCl.R.E.I (1302–7), 217. 65. CCl.R.E.I (1302–7), 217. 66. Itinerary of Edward I, 2:233–40. 67. PRO E101/368/27, fol. 75 and fols. 116–35v. 68. Royal gifts of wine to the marshal were probably for use during enseaming. As Pero López de Ayala recommended, ‘‘forget not some wine for the falconer and his assistant’’ (Cummins, Hound and the Hawk, 203). For conditions of enseaming, see PRO E101/ 352/20, m. 3. John de Kekingswick was paid out-of-court wages in 1305 while he enseamed a hawk kept in his own mews (E101/369/11, fol. 116v). The king might send letters to the hawkers to indicate where to go and when to come to court—e.g., the letter sent to John de Bikenore II during the enseaming period in 1285 (E101/308/8, m. 2). The time spent between enseaming and coming to court was twelve days in 1293, when the king was in Oxfordshire (E101/353/12, m. 2); sixteen days in 1283, when Edward was in Shropshire and Herefordshire (E101/351/11, m. 1); more than forty-three days in 1297,


Notes to Pages 95–97

when Edward was at Ghent (BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 118v); fifty-one days in 1285, when the king was in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight (E101/351/24, m. 1); and fifty-nine days in 1284 when the king was in Wales (E101/350/20, m. 1). Twelve days would be a minimal flying period, but beyond that the amount of time away from court would be a function of the king’s plans. 69. PRO E101/351/20 passim; E101/351/24 passim. In 1284 the hawkers left on January 8, in 1289 on January 23, and in 1278 and 1290 on January 25. 70. PRO E101/351/24, mm. 1–3, Itinerary of Edward I, 1:214–15; E101/351/28, m. 3. 71. Between November 20 and December 25, 1289, John de Bikenore II was responsible for provision for seventeen hawks, and between December 26 and January 13, 1290, for thirteen (PRO E101/352/26, m. 2). 72. PRO E101/369/11, fols. 116–35v. Several serjeanties were held by service of carrying a hawk from Michaelmas (September 29) to the Purification of the Virgin (February 2) or of mewing a hawk from the Purification to Michaelmas. See Fees, 1:270, 339 (Bendevill); Fees, 2:1379 (Fulk Peyforer); CIPM, 2:186 (Hertrugg); 358–59 (Picot). Godfrey le Fauconer held by service of keeping a lanner for the same period, CIPM, 2:182. 73. PRO C47/4/1, fols. 17v, 30v; E101/351/24, m. 4; E101/352/26, m. 4; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 118. 74. PRO C47/4/1, fols. 5v, 10, 48; E101/369/11, fols. 134v-35. 75. E.g., PRO E101/351/17, m. 2, E101/351/20, m. 2, E101/351/26, m. 1; E101/ 351/17, m. 2, E101/351/20, m. 1, E101/351/26, m. 1. 76. PRO E101/351/17, m. 1, E101/351/20, m. 2, E101/351/26, m. 1, etc.; E101/363/ 1, BL Add. MS 35293, fol. 72, E101/365/10, fol. 48; E101/367/16, fol. 22v, E101/370/ 16, fols. 11, 11v; E101/369/16, fol. 32; E101/357/15, fol. 12v; E101/351/11, m. 3; E101/361/13, fol. 3v. Anthony Bek’s harper carried a hawk to the king for the bishop (BL Add. MS 8835, fol. 44). ‘‘It was not uncommon for those in service in royal and aristocratic households to hold a variety of positions or occupations, sometimes in what are ostensibly different trades’’ (Reader’s report, Yale University Press). While this is undoubtedly true, my point is that the men engaged in falconry were actually participating in the activity, not merely serving in a supervisory role. 77. All appear in the book of prests for 1289–90—PRO C47/4/4, fols. 53 (commiliton), 47v (squires), and 51 (falconer). Similar entries appear throughout records of Edward I’s reign. 78. In 1277–78 forty-eight men were paid for performing falconry services: twentyfive served for at least three months. In 1283–84 the totals are 43/28; in 1284–85, 45/29; in 1285–86, 59/30; in 1289–90, 61/38; in 1305–6, 72/23. Bryce Lyon has analyzed the Wardrobe Book of 25 Edward I (1297–98), which contains incomplete information about royal falconers and hence has not been noted above. He finds a total of sixty-five ‘‘fauconniers’’ (including hawkers)—I find forty-one: twenty-five hawkers and sixteen falconers plus Hanekin, keeper of the mews. Lyon also states in one place that fifty-six different birds were mentioned, and lists twenty falcons, seven gyrfalcons, one tiercel falcon, and one sore falcon in another (Lyon, ‘‘Coup d’œil sur l’infrastructure de la chasse au Moyen Âge,’’ 218, 226, 218). I count between twenty-eight and thirty-four birds: fourteen falcons and fourteen to twenty hawks (depending on how many of the five hawks and one sparrowhawk enseamed in the fall of 1298 had been flown the previous

Notes to Pages 97–102


season). Clearly Lyon has counted the times birds are mentioned, not the number of actual birds. 79. PRO E101/369/11, fols. 116–35v. 80. The great majority of Edward’s gyrfalcons were mewed at Charing. I have found only three references to gyrfalcons sent to other mews: e.g., BL Add. MS 8835, fols. 69, 70v; PRO E101/368/27, fol. 75; E101/369/11, fol. 119v. Compare this to the nineteen gyrfalcons mewed at Charing in the summer of 1290 alone (C47/4/4, fols. 60v-61). Falcons gentle seem to have been mewed more frequently in nonroyal mews, especially late in Edward’s reign. In 1306 William de Tudenham had five falcons gentle in his mews (E101/369/11, fol. 120); of named birds noted in the final account for 34 Edward I, ‘‘Strabolgy’’ and ‘‘Ros’’ went to the mews of John Sturmy in Frytton, Norfolk; ‘‘Berewyck’’ went to the mews of Richard Felton in Norfolk; and only ‘‘Erlham’’ went to Charing. All six named lanners are recorded as going to Charing. In 1299 three royal falcons were mewed at the castle of York in a house newly built for them (E372/149, Yorkshire), no doubt a result of Edward’s spending more time in the north. 81. PRO E101/351/20, m. 4, E101/369/11, fols. 116–35v. 82. On March 19, 1304, when Edward was at St. Andrews, Hugh Dovedale was sent to England with letters patent to cause all falconers to come to court with their birds (BL Add. MS 35292, fol. 34). Royal letters to individual falconers and hawkers are noted in all Edward’s extant final accounts of messengers (PRO E101/308/3, etc.). For two grooms sent to France to seek four of Edward’s falconers, see E101/351/20, m. 5. 83. For enseaming gyrfalcons, see RLC, 1:400, 470; for lanners, see PRO E101/371/ 21/21, C47/3/52/3. 84. PRO E101/351/20, mm. 4–5. 85. PRO E101/350/29, m. 1; Itinerary of Edward I, 1:90. 86. BL Add. MS 35292, fols. 39, 42v, BL Add. MS 8835, fols. 69v, 70. 87. PRO E101/352/26, m. 1, E101/365/10, fol. 42v; BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 13; E101/369/11, fol. 208. 88. PRO E101/352/20, m. 4; E101/352/26, m. 5; E101/351/24, m. 4. 89. PRO E101/351/11, mm. 2–3; E101/351/24, mm. 3–4; E101/352/26, mm. 3–4; C47/4/4, fol. 60v. 90. Tanquerey, 497–98 (letters nos. 12, 13, and 14). 91. Frederick, 276, 323. 92. Of eighteen instances of crane hawking early in the year, one ended in March, thirteen in April, and two in the first week of May. The terminal dates include the time carrying the birds back to Charing. Both cases of crane hawking after early May were falcons being trained (PRO E101/365/8, m. 7; E101/352/26, m. 4). Compare these numbers to eleven instances of heron hawking in May or later, only one of which was described as training (E101/351/17, m. 2). Witteveen states that ‘‘In English 15th century menus listed by month, the crane is mentioned from the middle of September to midOctober, which coincides with its period of winter migration,’’ while between mid-March and mid-April cranes migrate north (‘‘On Swans, Cranes and Herons,’’ 50). Young ‘‘edible herons were available from early May until the end of July’’ (ibid., 66). 93. On summer robes, e.g., PRO E101/356/26, m. 2 (thirteen falconers of nineteen received summer robes as compared to three hawkers of ten). 94. PRO E101/351/24, mm. 4–6.


Notes to Pages 102–104

95. PRO E101/351/24, mm. 5–6. The Byerlys identify the Lord de la Plaunche as a kinsman of the queen (Records of the Wardrobe and Household 1285–1286, 283). 96. PRO E101/352/20, mm. 1–2. 97. PRO C47/4/4, fols. 60v-61. 98. A fifth gyrfalcon, given to the king by the Earl of Warenne, was in the mews only for six unspecified days (PRO C47/4/4, fol. 60v). John de Brabant married Princess Margaret on July 8, 1290 (Fryde, Handbook, 38). 99. PRO C47/4/4, fols. 60v-61. Albertus recommends ‘‘leaving a lighted lamp before the bird for the entire night’’ (Albertus, 2:1489); Pero López de Ayala specifies a candle (Libro de la Caça, 99). Light for Edward’s birds might be provided by oil lamps (E101/ 350/29, m. 1; BL Add. MS 35293, fol. 73), by candles (C47/4/1, fol. 47v), or by burning charcoal (E101/352/26, m. 2). At the mews at Charing light was provided in an adjacent lit chapel in which mass was celebrated (E101/377/4, p. 2). 100. For vinegar, white wine, and spices bought to wash the feet of a gyrfalcon, see PRO E101/351/24, m. 2. Both white wine and vinegar were used in mixtures to treat a variety of hawks’ ailments. White wine was used as a purgative (Tratado de las enfermedades de las aves de caza, 30; Albertus, 2:1486) and to treat irritated eyes (Albertus, 2:1486). Albertus recommended vinegar, often as a marinade, for deficiency of the cold humor, for unusually warm or swollen feet, for gout, for sluggishness, for reluctance to hunt, for itch, and against mites (ibid., 2:1473; 1476; 1487; 1472, 1484; 1477; 1476). Van den Abeele lists vinegar among the most commonly mentioned substances in Latin falconry treatises, Fauconnerie au Moyen Age, 222, 228, 255, 312–15. 101. PRO C47/4/4, fols. 60v-61; Appendix. 102. PRO E101/351/11, m. 5. 103. For grain for cranes and herons, see PRO E101/351/11, m. 5, and E101/352/20, m. 4, where barley is specified and the 824 pigeons are noted; for small birds, E101/352/ 13, m. 1, and E101/358/27/13, m. 5. In the latter case the birds were caught at the specific order of the king. 104. For felt and soap, see PRO E101/352/20, m. 4; for felt used for training hoods, Albert the Great, Man and the Beasts, 248 and n. 74.1; for lime, E101/351/24; for purging a falcon house, E101/352/6, m. 3; for litter E101/351/20, m. 4; for charcoal for a sick gyrfalcon, E101/352/26, m. 2; for diauté, E101/352/20, m. 4; for orpiment, E101/351/11, m. 3, E101/352/20, m. 4, E101/352/26, m. 5, etc.; for saundragon, E101/ 351/28, m. 1 (bought by Master Peter the Surgeon), E101/363/15/25 (sent by the king); for stavesacre, C47/4/1, fol. 3. 105. E101/352/20, m.4; Byerly and Byerly, Records of the Wardrobe and Household 1286–1289, 336; Hunt, Plant Names of Medieval England, 99–100; Mowat, Alphita, 49, 211; Tilander, Glanures lexicographiques, 107–8; Albertus, 2:1482–83, 1485, 1486; Alexander Medicus, Sources inédites, 40–41; Daude, 162; W. L. Braekman, Of Hawks and Horses, 41 (text II). 106. Van den Abeele, Fauconnerie au Moyen Age, 183–209, 289–91. See also Heidenreich, Birds of Prey. 107. PRO E101/352/20, m. 2, E101/352/26, m. 3, E101/351/24, m. 4. In two other cases pennies were bent over a falcon gentle and a hawk when they stopped flying— possibly at the end of the season (E101/352/20, m. 2). There is no way of estimating the

Notes to Pages 104–105


life expectancy or longevity of medieval birds in captivity. Brown and Amadon give summary figures from selected studies for the greatest age for wild birds that have been ringed. These ages range from eight years (merlin) to fourteen (peregine) (Eagles, 133– 35). Usamah ¯ Ibn-Munquidh states that one favorite falcon ‘‘lived long and molted in our house during thirteen years’’ (An Arab-Syrian Gentleman and Warrior in the Period of the Crusades, 232). For other references and general discussion, see Van den Abeele, Fauconnerie au Moyen Age, 142–44. 108. For ten miracles involving hawks and falcons attributed to Becket, see Becket Mat., 1:388, 389, 389–90, 466–67, 502, 528–29; 2:157; Thómas Saga Erkibyskups, 2:141–43; for nine similar miracles credited to St. Thomas Cantilupe, Acta Sanctorum: October, 1:654, 655, 662 (a virtual duplicate of the entry on p. 654 and hence not counted), 671, 674–75, 675, 685, 695; Exeter College MS 158, fol. 43—the last cited in Finucane, ‘‘Cantilupe as Thaumaturge,’’ 143; for three further curative miracles, ‘‘Miracles of Simon de Montfort,’’ 71, 79, 98; for a miracle of William of Norwich, Thomas of Monmouth, Life and Miracles, 258–60. 109. ‘‘Miracles of Simon de Montfort,’’ 71, 98; Acta Sanctorum: October, 1:685. 110. Becket Mat., 1:528–29; Acta Sanctorum: October, 1:671; Thómas Saga, 2:141– 43; Becket Mat., 1:388; Finucane, ‘‘Cantilupe as Thaumaturge,’’ 143; Acta Sanctorum: October, 1:675, 695. The Dictionary of Medieval Latin defines ‘‘leucarum’’ as the time it takes to travel a league (usually three miles) (1589). 111. Becket Mat., 1:466–67; 2:157; 1:388, 388–89. 112. Van den Abeele, Fauconnerie au Moyen Age, 224, 222, 228, 255, 312–15; for substitutes, 227. 113. Albertus, 2:1479–80 (Scanlan identifies anguillae as nematodes [Albert the Great, Man and the Beasts, 246, n. 86.2]); ‘‘Gerardus falconarius,’’ 214–15, 222–23. 114. Adelard, 255; Alexander Medicus, ‘‘Alexander Medicus,’’ 40–41, Albertus, 2:1479, ‘‘Le livre de Moamin,’’ 186–87, Maler, Tratado de las enfermedades, 73; Moamin, 169–70; Maler, 30–31; ‘‘Le livre de Ghatrif,’’ 289–90; Maler, 38; Moamin, 122–23; Grisofus Medicus, ‘‘Grisofus Medicus,’’ 14–15, Ghatrif, 292; Ghatrif, 286–87; Moamin, 211, Modus, 206–7, Danielsson, ‘‘The Durham Treatise of Falconry,’’ 32–33, Hands, Boke of St. Albans, 25; Braekman, 27–28 (text I). 115. Dancus Rex, ‘‘Dancus Rex,’’ 67; Moamin, 199; Braekman, 43 (text II). 116. Gerardus Falconarius, 202–3, Daude, 125, Gandolfo Persiano, Libro del Gandolfo Persiano, 78, 83, 102; Grimaldus, 68; Moamin, 160, 166–67, Daude, 143; Albertus, 2:1475, Hands, Boke of St. Albans, 45–46; Moamin, 151, 169–70; Thomas Cantimpratensis, Liber de natura rerum, 200; Moamin, 150, 158; Braekman, 36 (text I); Adelard, 255 and n. 44 on p. 271; Albertus, 2:1475, Moamin, 211–12, 227, Modus, 206, Braekman, 28 (text I); Grimaldus, 61. 117. Tilander, Glanures Lexicographiques, 71, Danielsson, ‘‘The Durham Treatise of Falconry,’’ 16; Braekman, 43 (text II). According to Van den Abeele, ‘‘ ‘Podagra’ (’gout’) in human medicine corresponds in treatises on falconry to ‘bumblefoot’ . . . an inflamed and infected wound on the side of the foot’’ (Adelard, n. 67 on p. 273). 118. Hunt, Popular Medicine in Thirteenth-Century England, 114 (charcoal); 75, 176, 177, etc. (orpiment); 71, 327, 328–29 (saundragon); 108, 258, 259–60, etc. (diauté).


Notes to Pages 105–107

119. PRO E101/351/20, m. 3, E101/351/24, m. 3. Nicholas Henlegh was sent to Leominster in 1284 to tend two sick hawks (E101/351/11, m. 1). For the death of Sir John de Bikenore, see E101/4/13. 120. PRO E101/351/20, mm. 2, 3; E101/352/20, mm. 1, 2, etc. Edward also had pennies bent over his horses and two pennies were bent over his own head during his final illness (Salzman, Edward I, 188). Four birds cured by St. Thomas Cantilupe had pennies bent over them (Acta Sanctorum: October, 1:654, 675; Finucane, ‘‘Cantilupe as Thaumaturge,’’ 149); a Fleming who had lost a hawk offered a penny to Becket, but it is not described as bent (Becket Mat., 2:159). On bending pennies generally, see Merrifield, The Archaeology of Ritual and Magic, 91–92; and Finucane, Miracles and Pilgrims, 94–95. 121. PRO E101/350/6, m. 1 (for a gyrfalcon at Canterbury); E101/351/24, m. 3 (for eight hawks at the shrine of St. Richard at Chichester and for a gyrfalcon at divers places); E101/352/26, m. 2 (for a sick gyrfalcon at the shrines of St. Thomas at Hereford and St. Thomas at Canterbury); E101/370/24/12 (for hawks at Walsingham); and E101/361/ 14, m. 2 (for a gyrfalcon at diverse places). On Ash Wednesday 1284 Edward gave alms to the poor in the name of his gyrfalcons (E101/351/15, m. 2). 122. For the wax image of a gyrfalcon sent to Becket’s shrine at Canterbury, see E101/352/26, m. 3. In four miracles in the Cantigas of Santa Maria three lost goshawks were restored and a sick goshawk was cured after wax images of the birds were presented to the Virgin (Songs of Holy Mary, 59, 278, 427–28, 445–46). For Thomelinus Corbet’s pilgrimage to Hereford with a sick gyrfalcon, see E101/352/26, m. 4. A hawk that had lost its eye was taken to Becket’s shrine at Canterbury (Thómas Saga, 2:141–47). Thomas de Cantilupe sent a candle with a measure of the length of his sick hawk to the shrine of Simon de Montfort (‘‘Miracles of Simon de Montfort,’’ 71). On the measurement of someone who is ill with a piece of string or thread and including the measure in a candle presented at a shrine, see Finucane, ‘‘Miracles and Pilgrims,’’ 95. 123. PRO E101/352/26, mm. 1, 4. For a lost dog, see E101/351/11/7; for a dog that died, C47/4/4, fol. 48. 124. ‘‘Annales de prioratus de Dunstaplia,’’ 273–74; PRO SC1/2/35; Pat.R.E.I (1301– 7), 403; CCl.R.E.I (1279–88), 155; CCl.R.E.I (1288–96), 74. 125. See Appendix; Prestwich, Edward I, 401–9. 126. Tout, Chapters, 2:128–29, 126–27; Prestwich, War, Politics and Finance Under Edward I, chap. 9. 127. PRO E101/369/11, fols. 116–35v. With adjustments the total spent on falconry comes to £622 9s. 4 ∞⁄≤d. (Appendix, n. 29). 128. Appendix; chap. 6, n. 141. 129. Barrow, Robert Bruce and the Community of the Realm in Scotland, 205–16; Prestwich, Edward I, 505–7. 130. Prestwich, Edward I, 556. 131. Moorman, ‘‘Edward I at Lanercost,’’ 173–74. 132. PRO E101/369/11, fol. 212, E101/369/16, fols. 32–33, E101/370/16, fol. 4; E101/371/21/14. While at Lanercost Edward was given a hawk by Sir John de Swinburn and a falcon gentle by Alexander Comyn (E101/368/27, fol. 75v, E101/370/16, fol. 4). 133. Prestwich, Edward I, 557.

Notes to Pages 107–108


134. LQCG, 306. 135. CIPM, 4:254. 136. Kimball, Serjeanty Tenure, 250. 137. For Bavents, Erlhams, Hauvilles, and Picots, see above. Sir John de Merk, steward of the Household, is recorded as actively engaged in falconry between 1285 and 1303 (e.g., PRO E101/351/20, m. 5). Philip de Hertrugg is paid as a hawker early in Edward’s reign (C47/4/1, fol. 5), and John de Hertrugg is recorded mewing a royal hawk late in the reign (BL Add. MS 7966A, fol. 142v). Sir John Mauduit mewed one of the king’s hawks (BL Add. MS 7965, fol. 115). Peter de Redenhall both mewed a royal hawk and served as royal hawker for at least eighteen years (e.g., E101/352/20, m. 3; E101/369/11, fols. 95v, 133v). It has been suggested that ‘‘what is said about falconers is also true about royal servants in general’’ (Reader’s report, Yale University Press). I hope to investigate to what extent this was the case at some future date. 138. One finds in Edward’s reign a different example of the kind of cooperation we have seen earlier as manifested in marriages between falconers and hawkers and daughters of the same. When the royal falconer John de Burgo died in 1280 the inquest on his lands found seventeen of his customary tenants mortgaged to Geoffrey Hovyl (sic) and Ralph de Hauville for thirty marks (£20) and one hundred marks (£66 13s. 4d.), respectively, and Geoffrey also held in mortgage two acres of meadow in Walkeslawe, Hertfordshire, as security for an additional £3 (CIPM, 2, no. 349; CCl.R.E.I. [1279–88], 128– 29). We do not know the terms of the loans, but it is significant that members of a falconry family were lending to another falconer and that Ralph de Hauville would have sufficient resources to lend such a substantial sum. 139. Tout, Chapters, 2:158. 140. Frederick, 6. 141. Extant Enrolled Wardrobe Accounts for Edward II show annual expenditures for falconry and hunting ranging from £88 1 ∞⁄≤d. to £170 16d. (PRO E372/168, m. 50; E372/166, m. 29; E361/2, mm. 1v, 18, 20), while Edward III spent over £800 on hunting and falconry in two years and over £600 on falconry alone in a third (E361/4, mm. 1v, 3v, 10v). See also Given-Wilson, Royal Household, 61–62. Froissart states that Edward had thirty falconers with him on his 1359 campaign in France (Oeuvres, 6:257). For evidence of Henry VIII’s hawking, see chap. 2, n. 64. For other instances of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century English royal falconry, see Grassby, ‘‘The Decline of Falconry in Early Modern England,’’ 41, 51. 142. Changes in organization of royal falconry in the later middle ages parallel other household developments. From Edward II’s reign onward some men were appointed to falconry offices for life (e.g., Pat.R.E.II [1307–13], 271; CCl.R.E.III [1333–37], 629), and others received lifetime annuities (Pat.R.E.III [1364–67], 59, 222, 229, etc.). Another development was to make the office of master of the king’s falcons and keeper of his mews honorific, see Given-Wilson, Royal Household, 62—who omits Henry IV’s appointment of his uncle Edmund, duke of York (Pat.R.H.IV [1399–1401], 127). As Veblen notes, ‘‘Whenever . . . [a] menial service . . . has to do directly with the primary leisure employments of fighting and hunting, it easily acquires a reflected honorific character. In this way great honour may come to attach to an employment which in its own nature belongs to the baser sort’’ (The Theory of the Leisure Class, 79).


Notes to Pages 109–111 Chapter 7: Falconry in Medieval Life

1. For perches in bedrooms, see Neckam, ‘‘The Treatise De utensilibus,’’ 100, and Cummins, Hound and the Hawk, 202. In Chaucer’s ‘‘Knight’s Tale,’’ ‘‘hawks sit on the perch above’’ in Theseus’s palace (The Riverside Chaucer, 55). For a man bearing a hawk in church, see Bodl. MS Astor A 5, fol. 130. Brant writes of the fool who brings a hawk to church (The Ship of Fools, 162–63). For a particular case of evidently some duration of a layman bringing hawks into a collegiate church, see Visitations in the Diocese of Lincoln, 3:123–28, esp. 131, 144–145, and 175. 2. Blockmans, ‘‘To Appear or To Be,’’ 484–86. See also Janse, ‘‘Marriage and Noble Lifestyle,’’ 117 and n. 17: ‘‘A man was noble or knightly . . . if he possessed a warhorse, hawks and hounds. . . .’’ On aristocratic display generally, see Keen, ‘‘Nobles’ Leisure,’’ 307–8. 3. Veblen, Theory of the Leisure Class, 40–41. 4. Usãmah Ibn-Munquidh, Memoirs of An Arab-Syrian Gentleman, 227. 5. Old English Homilies, 48–49. 6. See chap. 3, nn. 8 and 26 and associated texts; chap. 2, n. 11. 7. Woodford, Manual of Falconry, 29–30. 8. Frederick, 151–52. On the importance of flying fine falcons, the troubadour Monk of Montaudon (ca. 1180–1215) comments: ‘‘And what gives me an honest pain in the tit/is mediocre hawks on a good hunt . . .’’ (Proensa, 178). 9. Veblen observed that in all leisure activities, including games and sports, ‘‘[T]he greater the degree of proficiency and the more patent the evidence of a high degree of habituation to observances which serve no lucrative or other directly useful purpose, the greater the consumption of time and substance impliedly involved in their acquisition, and the greater the resultant good repute’’ (Theory of the Leisure Class, 50). 10. Bloch, Feudal Society, 225. 11. Petrus Alfonsi, The Disciplina Clericalis, 115. For falconry as part of an upper-class education, e.g., The Romance of Guy of Warwick, 11–12; Hugh de Rutland, Ipomedon, 70; King Horn, 7. For falconry as an accomplishment, e.g., The Romance of Sir Degrevant, 4–5; Robert de Blois, Floris et Liriope, 8; The Romance of William of Palerne, 21; Thomas, Le Roman de Tristan, 1:29, 32–33. For further references, see Oggins, ‘‘Falconry and Medieval Social Status,’’ 44; Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie dans les lettres françaises, 12–14. 12. Geoffroi de Charny, The Book of Chivalry of Geoffroi de Charny, 114–15; Lorris and de Meun, Le Roman de la Rose, 3:65–66. Bertran de Born writes of ‘‘Rich men [who] show off their wealth by clinging to the empty custom of the hunt, pretending to love dogs and goshawks’’ (Poems of the Troubadour, 260–61). For other attempts by nonnobles to ape the nobility by flying falcons, see Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie dans les lettres françaises, 68–69. 13. Harvey and McGuiness, A Guide to British Medieval Seals, 48; for Sir Orfeo, see chap. 2; for Mary of Burgundy, see Bruges à Beaune, frontispiece, 37, 94. 14. Mussat, Arts et cultures de Bretagne, 52. For gemellions (basins used to wash hands at meals) on which falconers are portrayed, see Marquet de Vasselot, Les gémellions limousins du XIIIe siècle, nos. 9, 20, 21, etc. ‘‘King John’s Cup,’’ a gilded and

Notes to Pages 111–113


enamelled loving cup, probably English, of ca. 1325–40 has figures of men and women holding hawks on its exterior and interior (Penzer, ‘‘The King’s Lynn Cup,’’ 12–16, 64, 79–84). A woman holding a hawk is depicted on a fourteenth-century English ivory knife handle at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (1886.13.2). For a bone knife handle in the form of a man holding a falcon and for a discussion of similar bone or ivory knife handles dated ca. 1250–ca. 1400, see Howe, ‘‘A Medieval Knife Handle’’; for courtly ivories, Koechlin, Les ivoires gothiques français, 2:365–67, 371–82, 384–85, etc.; for a rebec on which a falconer and his lady are depicted, The Secular Spirit, 234, 238. The portrayal of falconry scenes on such luxury objects further emphasized the connection between falconry and high social status. 15. For scenes of falconry in frescoes in the Castello del Buonconsiglio, Trento and in the Palazzo di Schifanoia, Ferrara, see Chamerlat, Falconry and Art, 124–25, 127. A fourteenth-century fresco of the Seven Ages of Man in the Great Chamber of Longthorpe Tower depicts a young man carrying a jessed hawk and lure (Rouse and Baker, ‘‘The Wall-Paintings at Longthorpe Tower,’’ 7–10); for another fresco of a falconer at Longthorpe, see plate 6. For tapestries, see Joubert, La tapisserie médiévale au musée de Cluny, 54, 111, 122, etc.; Souchal, Masterpieces of Tapestry, 80–85, 97–99, etc.; and Digby, Devonshire Hunting Tapestries, 51–55; for books of hours and other religious works produced for lay patrons, Chamerlat, Falconry and Art, 98, 106–7. Such depictions emphasize the patrons’ own noble characteristics. 16. Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ 10, figs. 111–15. 17. E.g., Gui de Warewic, 1:24; Froissart, Méliador, 2:114, 308; von Holle, Demantin, 7, 29; von Eschenbach, Parzifal, 114, 150. In the Lybeaus Desconus a knight promises a gyrfalcon to anyone who brings a woman fairer than his leman (120–21). A falcon was offered as a prize at a tournament held at Smithfield in 1390 (Froissart, Oeuvres, 14:254). See also Nitze, ‘‘The Romance of Erec,’’ nn. on pp. 6–7; and Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie dans les lettres françaises, 95–100. 18. Cook, ‘‘The Last Months of Chaucer’s Earliest Patron,’’ 66–68. 19. Chrétien de Troyes, Perceval le Gallois, 82; Caxton, Paris and Vienne, 20: Paris’s depression is caused by love. When Sir Isumbras chooses suffering in youth rather than in old age, his hawks fly away (‘‘Sir Isumbras,’’ 127). 20. The Squyr of Lowe Degre, 40. In ‘‘The Alliterative Morte Arthure,’’ Arthur swears to forgo hawking until he avenges Gawain’s death (228). 21. ‘‘The Sege off Melayne,’’ 10. 22. The Middle-English Versions of Partonope of Blois, 50. 23. ‘‘Goscelini Miracula S. Ivonis,’’ in Chronicon abbatiae Rameseiensis, 2:185. 24. Chaucer, ‘‘Troilus and Criseyde,’’ in The Riverside Chaucer, 561; The Laud Troy Book, 2:400; The Siege of Jerusalem, 51; Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, MS 9006, fol. 161v. 25. Gace, 288. 26. Octovian, 112–14. 27. Melnikas, The Corpus of the Miniatures, 3, plate II. 28. Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ figs. 206, 218, 219. For falconers in book presentation scenes, e.g., BL Burney MS 169, fol. 11; Brussels: Bibliothèque Royale, MS 9392, fol. 1; BNat. MS lat. 6067, fol. 3v. Falconers also appear in depictions of such events as the


Notes to Pages 113–118

‘‘coronation’’ of Charles Martel (Brussels: Bibliothèque Royale, MS 6, fol. 298v), and the marriage of Fulk of Anjou to Melisande (BL Royal MS 15 E I, fol. 224v). 29. For a description of a falcon hunt by King John of France, see Gace, 422–45. 30. Becket Mat., 1:388–89, 502; Acta Sanctorum: October, 1:654–55, 671, 675, 685, 695; Finucane, ‘‘Cantilupe as Thaumaturge,’’ 143; ‘‘Miracles of Simon de Montfort,’’ 71, 98; Thomas of Monmouth, Life and Miracles, 258–60. Two owners’ status was unspecified (‘‘Miracles of Simon de Montfort,’’ 79; Becket Mat., 2:157). Two men bringing birds were falconers (Becket Mat., 1:528–29; Thómas Saga, 2:141–43). For the commonplace book, see Facsimile of MS Digby 86, fols. 49–62, and Miller, ‘‘The Early History of Bodleian MS Digby 86’’; for the physician, see MacKinney and Bober, ‘‘A ThirteenthCentury Medical Case History in Miniatures.’’ 31. BNat. MS hébr. 1203, fol. 45v. 32. Le ménagier de Paris, ed. Brereton and Ferrier, 2:279–326; Gace, 445–46. 33. Hands, Boke of St. Albans, 3. 34. Boccaccio, The Decameron, 556, 475, 94, 444–47, 797, 179. 35. Great Britain RC, The Statutes of the Realm, 1:369. In a similar vein, a statute of Richard II of 1389–90 ordained ‘‘That no Manner of Artificer, Labourer, nor any other Layman, which hath not Lands or Tenements to the Value of xl. s. by Year, nor any Priest nor other Clerk, if he not be advanced to the Value of x. l. by Year, shall have or keep from henceforth any Greyhound, [Hound, nor other Dog] to hunt. . . .’’ (ibid., 2:65). 36. Hands, Boke of St. Albans, 54–55. 37. Albertus, 2:1457–71; Oggins, ‘‘Albertus Magnus,’’ esp. 450–51. For a Scottish poem with birds of prey given ranks: the eagle as emperor, the gyrfalcon as duke, etc., see ‘‘The Houlate,’’ 4:876–77, 886–87. Gilbert assigns the poem to the fifteenth century (Hunting and Hunting Reserves, 74). 38. E.g., McLean, The English at Play, 53; Reeves, Pleasures and Pastimes in Medieval England, 113–14; and even Dalby’s admirable Lexicon, xxvi–xxvii. For a different view, see Hands, ‘‘The Names of All Manner of Hawks.’’ 39. Frederick, 110. 40. Dalby, Lexicon, 210–13. 41. Ferguson-Lees and Christie, Raptors, 843–48. 42. This is not to say that earlier writers didn’t differentiate between different levels of hawking performance—e.g., the Monk of Montaudon and Bertran de Born. 43. Burnley, Courtliness and Literature in Medieval England, 106; Hands, Boke of St. Albans, 3. For reasons for this formalization, see Orme, ‘‘Medieval Hunting,’’ 141. 44. See chap. 2, nn. 63–64. 45. Niedermann, ‘‘ ‘Je ne fois que chassiers,’ ’’ 181–82. Cummins states ‘‘Women themselves sometimes engaged actively in hunting,’’ but also observes ‘‘It was common for ladies to watch the hunting from a vantage point’’ (Hound and the Hawk, 7). 46. John of Salisbury, Frivolities, 17. 47. For Matilda, see chap. 4, n. 26 and associated text; Becket Mat., 1:389; for the fresco, Lelong, Touraine Romane, 330–31; for Eleanor’s seals, Eygun, Sigillographie du Poitou jusqu’en 1515, 159–60. 48. See Birch, Catalogue of Seals, 2:374–404. Of 133 seals with ‘‘figures of noble and

Notes to Pages 118–120


other ladies,’’ thirty-eight include hawks or falcons. Of those, five are twelfth century, thirty from the thirteenth, and three of the fourteenth century. 49. BL Yates Thompson MS 13, fols. 72v-75v (the rubric is on fol. 68); BL Royal MS 10 E IV, fols. 77v-80. The Countess of Devon also had a falconer (CIPM, 2, no. 573). For a ca. 1225–50 English illumination of a woman holding a hawk, see Bodl. MS Bodley 764, fol. 76v. A chapterhouse tile from Westminster Abbey portrays a queen holding a hawk. Other fourteenth-century English depictions of ladies flying falcons include that in Queen Mary’s Psalter (p. 188), BL Add. MS 61887, fol. 3, Oxford: MS Christ Church 92, fol. 50v; and on a misericord in Lincoln Cathedral (Remnant, Catalogue of Misericords, 87–92). See also Chamerlat, Falconry and Art, 83, 114, 115, 119, 126, for women holding falcons, and 101, 107, 117, for women accompanying hawking parties. In an illustration to a French version of Justinian’s Digest of ca. 1280 a husband and wife are depicted holding goods in common. They hold a purse jointly; on their other hands they hold hawks (BNat. MS fr. 20118, fol. 266). 50. For Marie de Merk, see chap. 6, n. 20 and associated text; for the Scottish ‘‘wife that keeps the King’s hawks,’’ Cummins, Hound and the Hawk, 222; see also Chaucer, ‘‘The Squire’s Tale,’’ in The Riverside Chaucer, 176; Le ménagier de Paris, ed. Brereton and Ferrier, 143–69. Juliana Berners would seem to be another woman knowledgeable about hawks. But, although the Boke of St. Albans has been attributed to her since the sixteenth century, it is not certain that the author of the Boke was in fact a woman. However, the attribution suggests it was not surprising that a woman would have a good knowledge of falconry. 51. Le ménagier de Paris, ed. Brereton and Ferrier, 151; see the references in Benoist, ‘‘La chasse au vol,’’ 117, and in Dalby, Lexicon, 213. See also the list of hawks in the Boke of St. Albans. 52. For Eleanor of Provence, see PRO E101/349/18; for Eleanor of Castile, E101/352/ 13, C62/57; for Isabella, BL Cotton MS Nero C VIII, fol. 138v, Bond, ‘‘Notices of the Last Days,’’ 468; for Philippa, E36/205, fols. 7, 12, E101/399/12; for Joan de Valence, Woolgar, Great Household, 194; and see Safford, ‘‘An Account of the Expenses of Eleanor,’’ 134. 53. PRO E101/92/9, E101/92/11, E101/92/13, E101/92/27, E101/93/8, E101/94/2. For sparrowhawks, see E101/93/8, m. 11, and E101/92/9, m. 10. 54. See chap 1, n. 12 and associated text; and text to chap. 7, n. 1. For literary references to birds of prey in towns, see Van den Abeele, La fauconnerie dans les lettres françaises, 6–8. 55. Becket Mat., 3:12; Calendar of Early Mayor’s Court Rolls, 127–28; Raftis, A Small Town in Late Medieval England, 165, 139—a second falconer is listed for 1385. 56. Bramwell, ‘‘Bird Remains from Medieval London,’’ 16; Fisher, ‘‘Bird Bones from the Excavation at Crown Car Park,’’ 57–58, 61; Levitan, ‘‘The Faunal Remains,’’ 280– 81; O’Connor, Animal Bones from Flaxengate, 44; Bramwell, ‘‘The Bird Bones,’’ in St. Peter’s Street, 333; Bramwell, ‘‘The Bird Bones,’’ in Excavations, 1:340; Maltby, Faunal Studies, 73; Bond and O’Connor, Bones from Medieval Deposits, 392–93, 395. See also Mulkeen and O’Connor, ‘‘Raptors in Towns,’’ 444–45. My totals and theirs vary somewhat as I have excluded remains from ‘‘Roman’’ sites and because the peregrine remains


Notes to Pages 120–122

they count at King’s Lynn are postmedieval (see D. Bramwell, ‘‘Bird Bone,’’ in Excavations in King’s Lynn, 402). Mulkeen and O’Connor do not include the finds at Nantwich. 57. Adam de la Halle, Le Jeu de Robin et Marion, 7, 15, 33, 35; Van den Abeele, ‘‘Aux origines du chaperon.’’ 58. ‘‘The rustic claimed that not only should he incur no liability, but he was entitled to recover his expenses in caring for the falcon,’’ but the judge found for the count (Sheedy, Bartolus on Social Conditions, 114–15. 59. See chap. 5, n. 2 and associated text; PRO E101/352/21, m.1; chap. 7, n. 35 and associated text. 60. Rogers, A History of Agriculture and Prices in England, 2:566, 568, 576. 61. See chap. 3, n. 5 and associated text. 62. See chap. 3, n. 9 and associated text. For church legislation, see Thomassin, Ancienne et nouvelle discipline de l’Eglise, 839–43; Szabó, ‘‘Die Kritik der Jagd,’’ 167–229. 63. Southern notes, ‘‘The majority of [European bishops] were related to the most powerful families in their countries’’ (Western Society and the Church, 171). 64. Guibert of Nogent, Self and Society in Medieval France, 156. 65. Daude, 9; Haskins, Mediaeval Science, 353; Garnier, ‘‘Les significations symboliques,’’ 135; Harting, Bibliotheca accipitraria, 73–76; Richard, ‘‘La fauconnerie de Jean de Francières.’’ 66. While the type of men who became bishops and the social position of the bishop were contributing factors, the main reason for the relative notoriety of hawking bishops was that bishops were more likely to be mentioned in contemporary accounts than lesser clergy. Bishops are also prominent in the illustrations of Bibles moralisée (see plate 7B). Of seventy illustrations containing falcons reproduced in Laborde, twenty-seven are carried by clergy: thirteen bishops, eight clerics, and six monks. In a late thirteenthcentury English Bible moralisée not reproduced in the volume (BL Add. MS 18719), of twenty-five illustrations containing falcons, two are carried by bishops, six by clerics, and one by a monk. See also the fresco of a bishop carrying a falcon by Nicolo Miretto and Stefano da Ferrara in the Palazzo della Ragione, Padua. 67. Radulfus Niger, De re militari et triplici via peregrinationis ierosolimitane, 219– 20; Roger of Howden, Chronica, 2:174. Hubert Walter restated the prohibition in 1200 at a general council at Westminster (A Collection of the Laws and Canons of the Church of England, 2:86–87). 68. The Book of Daun Burnel the Ass, 128. 69. Langland, Piers the Ploughman, 58. 70. Owst, Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England, 279, 264, 269, 270, 327; Owst, Preaching in Medieval England, 38. Bishops could also set an example of worldly living through the conduct of their households: see Laurence of Durham, Dialogi Laurentii Dunelmensis Monachi ac Prioris, 67. When Eudes, archbishop of Rouen, visited the bishop of Lisieux in 1249, he found that one of the bishop’s nephews frequented prostitutes while another kept birds and dogs (The Register of Eudes of Rouen, 69–71). 71. A Roll of the Household Expenses of Richard de Swinfield, 1:168–70; 2:xxxi, cviii, 258; 1:15, 141, 2:cvii, 93. 72. For the theft of seven sparrowhawks from an eyrie belonging to the Abbey of Robertsbridge, see Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 291.

Notes to Pages 122–124


73. Willard, ‘‘Chaucer’s ‘Text,’ ’’ 228–30. 74. Devic and Vaissete, Histoire Générale de Languedoc, 5, no. 164. 75. William of Malmesbury, Gesta regum anglorvm, 1:494–95. The translators have rendered ‘‘venationibus et auium’’ as ‘‘hunting and cockfighting.’’ The correct translation should be ‘‘hunting and hawks’’ or ‘‘hunting and hawking.’’ 76. Simeon of Durham, ‘‘Historia ecclesiæ Dunelmensis,’’ 1:177. 77. Arnulf of Lisieux, The Letters of Arnulf of Lisieux, 118. 78. Abbott, St. Thomas of Canterbury, 1:216–19. 79. St. Thomas of Canterbury, ed. Hutton, 15; Becket Mat., 3:23. On Becket’s love of hawking generally, see Becket Mat., 1:20, 25–26, 30–31; 2:361; 3:176, 183; 4:6, 56. 80. St. Thomas of Canterbury, ed. Hutton, 24–25, 17. 81. Fraser, History of Antony Bek, 58–59, 231; Becket Mat., 2:335. 82. Becket Mat., 1:388–91, 466–67, 502, 528–29. 83. Roger of Howden, Chronica, 3:279, 3:230, 313. For Bek, see chap. 6, nn. 28, 61, and associated text. Robert of Graystanes, the fourteenth-century historian, characterized Bek as a hunter and falconer and described how, when he went to Rome, he played with his hawks even in the Pope’s presence, (‘‘Historia de statu ecclesiæ Dunelmensis,’’ 64, 80). 84. ‘‘Miracles of Simon de Montfort,’’ 71; A Roll of the Household Expenses of Richard Swinfield, 2:xxxi. 85. PR 24 H.II, 121; RCh, 102; The Pipe Roll of the Bishopric of Winchester, 17, 18, 38; Cl.R.H.III (1227–31), 559; Cl.R.H.III (1251–53), 155–56; Pat.R.E.III (1327–30), 34; Literæ Cantuarienses, 1:472–75; Haines, ‘‘Adam Orleton and the Diocese of Winchester,’’ 5. 86. For Becket’s hawking before he became bishop, see nn. 78–80 and associated texts; for Cantilupe, n. 84 and associated text. A falcon belonging to Anthony Bek, king’s clerk, is noted in Pat.R.E.I (1272–81), 149. For clerics portrayed with falcons in the ‘‘Bibles moralisées,’’ see n. 66. and associated text. 87. Coulton,Life in the Middle Ages, 2:154, n. 1. 88. Testamenta Eboracensia, 68–69; Peter of Blois, Petrus Blesensis, cols. 181–83. 89. VCH: York, 199–200. 90. Coulton, Life in the Middle Ages, 1:205. In 1287 Bishop Peter Quinel (or Quivel) of Exeter prohibited clerics in his diocese from hawking (Powicke and Cheney, Councils and Synods, 1013). 91. ‘‘The Simonie,’’ 326–27. 92. Langland, Piers the Ploughman, 53; Wycliff, The English Works of Wycliff, 23, 121, 151, etc.; Richard de Bury, The Philobiblon, 31, 176; Scattergood, ‘‘Skelton and Traditional Satire.’’ 93. Myrc, Instructions for Parish Priests, 2; Robert of Brunne, Robert of Brunne’s Handlyng Synne, 108. 94. John, Abbott of Ford, Wulfric of Haselbury, 13; Herbert, Catalogue of Romances, 3:490. 95. Visitations and Memorials of Southwell Minster, 51, 93; Visitations in the Diocese of Lincoln, 1:128, 131, 145, etc. 96. See chap. 7, n. 36 and associated text.


Notes to Pages 124–128

97. Hanham, The Celys and Their World, 52. She glosses ‘‘fenanys’’ as ‘‘fen birds’’ ‘‘pheasants?’’ Another possibility might be fen geese. In September 1482 William Cely wrote that the price of hawks at Calais ‘‘be so dear that no man buyeth them but my Lord [Chamberlain]—they be at iiij nobles, v nobles a hawk’’ (The Cely Letters, 175). A noble was then worth 8s. 4d. (328). 98. For prohibitions in eight Oxford and Cambridge colleges and the Oxford halls, see Cobban, The Medieval English Universities, 361–62. See also Lyte, A History of Eton College, 595; and Rashdall, The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, 3:425. 99. Visitation Articles and Injunctions of the Period of the Reformation, 2:135, 273; 3:211, 262, 281, 309. 100. Statuta Capitulorum Generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis, 3:229; Chapters of the Augustinian Canons, 263; The Rule of the Templars, 32; Bibliotheca Cluniacensis, col. 1567; Documents Illustrating the Activities of the General and Provincial Chapters of the English Black Monks, 2:87; ‘‘Ely Chapter Ordinances and Visitation Records,’’ 42. 101. Giraldus Cambrensis, ‘‘Speculum Ecclesiæ,’’ 92; Robinson, The Abbot’s House at Westminster, 10; Woolgar, Great Household, 195. Among the virtues recorded of Abbot Thomas de la Mare of St. Albans (1349–96) was his hatred of hawking and hunting (Walsingham, Gesta Abbatum Monasterii Sancti Albani, 3:401). 102. Registrum Ricardi de Swinfeld, 149–50. 103. Peckham, Registrum Epistolarum, 1:225, 343; The Register of John de Grandisson, 2:955; Visitations of Religious Houses in the Diocese of Lincoln, 1:47; Documents Illustrating the Activities . . . of the English Black Monks, 3:79; Visitations of Religious Houses in the Diocese of Lincoln, 2:70–73; Visitations of the Diocese of Norwich, 21, 121; Visitations in the Diocese of Lincoln, 2:77; ‘‘Registrum Edwardi Foxe,’’ 374. Gilles li Muisis suggests that monastic cellarers had a propensity to falconry (Gilles li Muisis, Poésies, 1:165). While a dozen or so instances of monastic hawking across a period of five centuries does not seem like a great amount, both the presumed unrecorded cases and the relative scarcity of visitation records suggest that hawking among both regular and secular clergy was significantly more widespread. 104. Omne bonum, 2:15. 105. ‘‘The Simonie,’’ 329. 106. ‘‘The Complaint of the Ploughman,’’ 1:334; Gower, ‘‘Miroir de l’omme,’’ 237. 107. Knowles, The Religious Orders in England, 1:102–3. The relatives were the prior’s brother and nephew (Register of John de Grandisson, 2:1074). 108. Langland, Piers the Ploughman, 117. 109. Coulton, The Medieval Village, 118. 110. Faral, ‘‘Des vilains,’’ 251. 111. Master of Game, 4, 11, 12–13. 112. Danielsson, ‘‘The Kerdeston ‘Library of Hunting and Hawking Literature,’ ’’54. 113. Hervieux, Les fabulistes latins, 4:205. 114. Frederick, 4. 115. The Paston Letters, 3:56. 116. Keen, ‘‘Nobles’ Leisure,’’ 308; and see 310: ‘‘Jousting, hunting and hawking, sports that demanded organised planning and extensive back up, could all in consequence be expensive, which made them the more distinctively aristocratic.’’

Notes to Pages 128–131


117. Willard, ‘‘Chaucer’s ‘Text,’ ’’ 209–51; Szabó, ‘‘Die kritik der Jagd,’’ 170–75. 118. Genesis 10:9. 119. Willard, ‘‘Chaucer’s ‘Text,’ ’’ 217–18. 120. See chap. 3, n. 9 and associated text. 121. Willard, ‘‘Chaucer’s ‘Text,’ ’’ 244, 228–30. 122. Pächt, Dodwell, and Wormald, The St. Albans Psalter, 250–51 and plate 77. 123. Caspar, ‘‘Die Kreuzzugsbullen Eugens III,’’ 284, 304. Eugenius’s ‘‘prohibition’’ was repeated in Gregory VIII’s crusading bull of 1187, Audita tremendi (291). 124. John of Salisbury, Frivolities, 13–26. 125. Ibid., 14, 18, 16. 126. Bracciolini, The Facetiae of Giovanni Francesco Poggio Bracciolini, 25–26. See also Brant, Ship of Fools, 246–47; Petrarch, Petrarch’s Remedies, 97–99. 127. Baldwin, Masters, Princes, and Merchants, 2:162, n. 146. 128. For an ape holding a falcon and another swinging a lure, see BL Yates Thompson MS 8, fol. 269v; for an ape swinging a lure, BL Arundel MS 83, fol. 40v; for apes carrying owls, BL Add. MS 42555, fol. 35v, BL Royal MS 14 E III, fol. 140, BL Royal MS 10 E IV, fol. 51v; for an ape swinging a lure, riding a dog and pursuing an owl riding backwards on a hare, Bodl. MS Douce 366, fol. 147v; for an ape riding a goat and carrying an owl, London: Lambeth Palace Library, MS 75, fol. 2. The ape is a symbol of Satan and ‘‘Goat and owl . . . [are] devilish creatures associated, respectively, with lechery and paganism. . . .’’ (Janson, Apes and Ape Lore, 166). 129. See Lowden, Making of the Bibles Moralisées. The fullest set of reproductions is in Laborde. See also the facsimile of Bible Moralisée: Codex Vindobonensis 2554; Friedman ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ figs. 226–90; Friedmann [sic], ‘‘Sünde, Sünder,’’ 157–71, 253– 60; Garnier,’’Les significations symboliques,’’ 135–42. 130. Lowden, Making of the Bibles Moralisées, 1:1. 131. I have found falcons depicted seventy-three times in Laborde, twice in Codex Vindobonensis 2554, twenty-five times in BL Add. MS 18719, and once in an illustration from the Toledo Cathedral ‘‘Bible moralisée’’ reproduced in Sears, Ages of Man, fig. 20. The two scenes in which falcons appear in the nonmoralized illustrations are Laborde, plate 294, in which the lover of the Song of Songs holds a falcon, and plate 578, in which a cleric in a group being lectured to by St. Paul (Ephesians 5:4) holds a falcon. The four occasions in which a falcon does not carry a negative connotation are the lover of the Song of Songs, two depictions of the Ages of Man in which youths hold falcons (Laborde, plate 476; and Sears, Ages of Man, plate 20) and the moralization to God creating the fishes in Codex Vindobonensis 2554, fol. 1v: ‘‘That God filled the sea with a different type of fish signifies Jesus Christ who filled the world with different types of people’’ (54). Nobility is represented by a man riding a horse carrying a falcon. 132. For devils carrying falcons, see Laborde, plates 459, 691, BL Add MS 18719, fol. 233v; for Jews: Laborde, plate 476, BL Add MS 18719, fol. 241v; for Pharoah’s attendant: Laborde, plate 44; for Absalom and his companion, plates 801, 800; for Dives, plate 636; for the prodigal son, plate 505; for the examples from Revelation, plates 614, 615; for devils accompanying men carrying falcons, plates 20, 206, 218, 390, 453, 690; and for the serpent, Codex Vindobonensis 2554, fol. 8v. 133. For moneychangers, see Laborde, plates 15, 476, 496, 509, BL Add. MS 18719,


Notes to Pages 131–132

fols. 241v and 252. Among the twenty-four roundels including men holding purses are those in Laborde, plates 19, 29, and 39. The twenty-eight scenes of eating and drinking include those in plates 12, 130, and 452. For some of the twenty-eight scenes including women, see plates 190, 204, and 206; plates 20, 394, 690 and BL Add. MS 18719 depict women holding mirrors, identified by Garnier as prostitutes (‘‘Les significations symboliques,’’ 137). For idolatry, see Laborde, plate 505, BL Add. MS 18719, fol. 257v; for inconstancy, Laborde, plate 15; for contumacy, plate 389; for arguments supporting these interpretations, Friedmann, ‘‘Sünde, Sünder,’’ 165, 168. Friedman interprets images of men holding buildings as symbolizing greed, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ 43. Such images appear in scenes with men holding falcons at least five times (Laborde, plates 20, 74, 187, 382, 482). In one illustration that includes a bishop holding a falcon, the legend designates him as prideful (Laborde, plate 669). According to Friedman, ‘‘[T]he image of arrogance or pride—superbia—is depicted in the Bible Moralisée manuscripts by the figure of the bishop who displays symbols of class to which he has no right, or those who demand from their subordinates expensive tributes to which they are not entitled’’ (‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ 43). She cites as examples Laborde, plates 123, 465, 614 (Friedmann, ‘‘Sünde, Sünder,’’ 167–68), to which Garnier adds Codex Vindobonensis 2554, fol. 8v. See also BL Add. MS 18719, fol. 80. Garnier states that the offering of a large fish becomes, in a monastic context, a symbol of pride: see Le langue de l’image au Moyen Age, 245–46. Three times in the ‘‘Bibles moralisées’’ large fish are offered to bishops holding falcons (Laborde, plates 2, 626, 661), once to a king holding a falcon (plate 615), and once a king is offered both a falcon and a fish (plate 160). 134. Laborde, plates 2, 190, 390. 135. BL Add. MS 18719, fol. 65. 136. Laborde, plates 2, 19, 190, 656, 453. 137. Garnier, ‘‘Les significations symboliques,’’ 141–42; Laborde, plates 96, 509. 138. Laborde, plate 389, BL Add. MS 18719, fol. 67v; Laborde, plates 442, 571. 139. Images of clerics with falcons contrasted with good clerics appear fifteen times. Clerics holding falcons are shown with people eating or drinking twelve times, in the company of women nine times, and with those holding symbols of avarice fifteen times. Twice clerics appear with manifestations of all three vices (Laborde, plates 387, 524), and eight times with manifestations of two vices. There are ten scenes of clerics being reproved: once by St. Paul (plate 578), twice by Ecclesia (plates 382, 384), four times by a bishop (plates 135, 428, 527; BL Add. MS 18719, fol. 67v), and three times by a monk (Laborde, plates 211, 571, 581). Once a bishop holding a falcon is deposed (plate 123), and twice clerics (one a bishop) hold falcons with devils in close proximity while other devils force other clerics into hell mouths (plates 206, 218). 140. Ruusbroec, ‘‘Le livre du tabernacle spirituel,’’ 210. 141. St. Petersburg: National Library, MS Prov. F. v. xiv. 1, fol. 205v; BL Royal MS 19 C I, fol. 204. 142. Gower, ‘‘Miroir de l’omme,’’ 13; for the Speculum humanae salvationis, see BNat. MS fr. 400, fols. 53–53v; for the Roman de Renart, BNat. MS fr. 1581, fol. 57; for envy, Bosch’s ‘‘Tabletop of the Seven Deadly Sins’’ at the Prado, Madrid; ‘‘Accidia and her court’’ is at the Cleveland Museum of Art; for Chaucer’s works, see Cambridge, UK: University Library, MS Gg. 4. 27, fol. 432; for the Lumen anima, Bloomfield, The Seven

Notes to Pages 132–134


Deadly Sins, 138; for two tapestries showing a falcon as an attribute of gluttony, Tervarent, Attributs et symboles dans l’art profane, col. 162. 143. The panel of the prodigal son is reproduced in The Art of Gothic, 469; for the tapestries, see Joubert, La tapisserie médiévale, 155–61 and fig. 148, Bruges à Beaune, 186; for Pilate, the Herrenberger Altarpiece by Jerg Ratgeb (ca. 1518–19), Stuttgart, Staatsgalerie; for Olybrius, PM M. 155, fol. 13v; for Clement V, e.g., PM M. 272, fol. 3v, M. 402, fol. 5., Malacarne, Le cacce del Principe, 49. 144. Fanning, ‘‘Hunting, Canons on,’’ 7:563–64. 145. Rodgers, Discussion of Holidays in the Later Middle Ages, 47, citing Baptista de Salis. 146. John of Salisbury, Frivolities, 20. 147. Milburn, Saints and Their Emblems, 140. Nichols lists five screen panels, four still extant, on which St. Jeron appears with either a hawk or a falcon (Early Art of Norfolk, 204). 148. For St. Baudry, see Cahier, Caractéristiques des saints dans l’art populaire, 1:406– 7; for St. Agilulf, 2:548, Réau, Iconographie, 32–33; for St. Julian of Brioude, Réau, Iconographie, 771–72, Kirschbaum, Lexikon, 7:231–32. 149. For a screen panel from Suffield, Norfolk, of St. Julian the Hospitaller holding a hawk, see Nichols, Early Art of Norfolk, 208; see also Réau, Iconographie, 766–69; and Kirschbaum, Lexikon, 7:234–37; for St. Hubert, Réau, Iconographie, 658–63; Kirschbaum, Lexikon, 6:547–51; and Karlsson, Medieval Ironwork in Sweden, 2:416–19; for St. Eustace, the fresco by Vitale da Bologna reproduced in Iacopo da Varazze, Legenda Aurea, 2:241. 150. For St. Hugo, see Baring-Gould, Lives of the Saints, 3:502, and for St. Illtyd, 16:249; and Doble, Lives of the Welsh Saints, 102–5; for St. Gorgonius, Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ figs. 189–90. 151. For St. Audauctus, see Peters, ‘‘Falke, Falkenjagd, Falkner, und Falkenbuch,’’ 6: col. 1307; for St. Bavo, Réau, Iconographie, 189; Kirschbaum, Lexikon, 5:344–45; Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ figs. 182–86; and Chamerlat, Falconry and Art, 105; for St. Catherine of Alexandria, Williamson, Netherlandish Sculpture, 142; for St. Cecilia, Kirschbaum, Lexikon, 5:459; Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ figs. 191–94; and Réau, Iconographie, 278. See also plate 151 of The Hours of Catherine of Cleves, where Cecilia holds a hawk and falcons’ lures are in the borders. Cecilia was patron saint of music, and the symbolism may be that of her luring the faithful with music as a falconer lures a hawk. For St. Dentlin (martyred as a young child but portrayed holding a hawk on the shrine of his father St. Vincent Madelgar, count of Hainault), see Baring-Gould, Lives of the Saints, 7:321–23; for St. Edward the Martyr, Drake and Drake, Saints and Their Emblems, 88; for St. George, Zarnecki, Later English Romanesque Sculpture, 12–13 and fig. 31; for St. Oswald, Kaftal, Iconography of the Saints, cols. 801–4 and fig. 1045; for St. Thibault, Réau, Iconographie, 1264–65; Kirschbaum, Lexikon, 8:437–39; and Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ fig. 188; for St. Mary Magdalene, Réau, Iconographie, 854; and Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ fig. 298; for St. Martin of Tours, BL Add. MS 15219, fol. 11v— Martin is also one nobly born. Réau also lists falcons among the attributes of St. Gengoult and St. Symphorien of Autun without citing examples (Iconographie, 1513, 1242– 43).


Notes to Pages 134–136

152. Wilson, The Shrines of St William of York (York, 1977), 16 and fig. 7. 153. Anderson, History and Imagery in British Churches, 99. For the poem, see Ross, ‘‘Five Fifteenth-Century ‘Emblem’ Verses,’’ 278–79. A similar idea was expressed by the thirteenth-century Dominican Étienne de Bourbon (Anecdotes historiques, 85–86). In a late medieval manuscript at Lincoln Cathedral the falcon is said to desire ‘‘only the heart of its prey—just as Christ wants only the heart of man’’ (Fischer, ‘‘Handlist of Animal References,’’ 76). 154. Sears, Ages of Man, 75, 76–77, 78–79, etc. For additional examples, see Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ fig. 134; Jones, ‘‘Observations,’’ 180 and plate VI, 186–88 and plate VII; Bodl. MS Douce 12, fol. 16; BNat. MS fr. 134, fol. 42v; Rome: Vatican Library, Cod. Pal. lat. 871, fol. 21. For English examples, see Sears, Ages of Man, 137, 146–48, and figs. 78, 87, 138–39; for the De Lisle Psalter, see also Sandler, The Psalter of Robert De Lisle, plate 5; and for Longthorpe Tower, n. 15 above. 155. Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ 26; BNat. MS fr. 809, fol. 40; Gardner, ‘‘Parliament of the Three Ages,’’ 133–51. There are English examples of the youngest king as the only falcon bearer in frescoes at Widford, Oxfordshire, and Wickhampton, Norfolk (Williams, ‘‘Mural Paintings,’’ 33, 36). However, in the illustration of the Three Living and the Three Dead in the Taymouth Hours the oldest king bears the falcon (BL Yates Thompson MS 13, fols. 179v-80). 156. Jones, ‘‘Observations,’’ 183–84. 157. Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ 26–27 and figs. 138–42. For falconers among the children of Jupiter (under whose influence the sanguine temperament was placed), see figs. 146–51. 158. Bartholomaeus Anglicus, John Trevisa’s Translation, 1:531. 159. See chap. 6, nn. 72, 89, and associated texts. 160. See chap. 3, n. 50 and associated text. For a second falconer lecturing, see Pächt et al., St. Albans Psalter, plate 6, and see also chap. 2, n. 48. The illustration for May in the Bardolf-Vaux Psalter of ca. 1300–10 shows a rider pointing a finger at a hawk he holds that is facing him (London: Lambeth Palace Library, MS 233, fol. 5v). 161. My figures are drawn from volumes 3–6 of A Survey of Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles: Kauffmann, Romanesque Manuscripts; Morgan, Early Gothic Manuscripts; Sandler, Gothic Manuscripts,; and Scott, Later Gothic Manuscripts. Illustrations for May are missing in one calendar from 1190–1250 and in two from 1250–1295. They are not included in the column of months with labors. Morgan describes the illustration for May in the Psalter of Simon of Meopham (London: Sion College Library, MS Arc. L. 40.2/L.2, fol. 3) as ‘‘a man riding’’ (Morgan, Early Gothic Manuscripts, 2:117 [no. 134]), but the manuscript shows the man beating a tabor while farther along the top border a hawk pursues a fleeing bird. In the same manuscript the sign of the zodiac for August (Virgo) is a woman in a fur-lined cloak holding a hawk (fol. 4v). One manuscript, Bodl. MS Rawl. D. 939, an English agricultural almanac of the second half of the fourteenth century, seems to have fallen between the cracks. While Scott mentions it several times, neither she nor Sandler has a listing for it. The manuscript includes occupations of the months, and that for May is a king on horseback holding a hawk (see plate 7D). I have therefore added one to each of the first three columns of the 1285–1385 entry.

Notes to Pages 136–139


162. Morgan, The Medieval Painted Glass of Lincoln Cathedral, 9, 11, and plate 12b; Ayre, Medieval English Figurative Roundels, 20–21, 158–60. 163. Zarnecki, English Romanesque Lead Sculpture, 17–18 and plate 60. A huntsman with a hawk is also depicted on an early fourteenth-century font at Lostwithiel (Pevsner, Cornwall, 107 and fig. 28); see also Borenius, ‘‘ Cycle of Images,’’ 44 and plate 11; Remnant, Catalogue of Misericords, 168–69. 164. Morgan, Early Gothic Manuscripts, 1:68, 72, 98; Bodl. MS Douce 366, fol. 131. See also Friedman, ‘‘The Falcon and the Hunt,’’ 157–75. 165. Williams, ‘‘Mural Paintings,’’ 31. See also Les cinq Poèmes des Trois morts et des trois vifs. Falcons are mentioned in only two of the five poems (85, 94), but they appear in illuminations from four of the five works (plates 2–4). 166. ‘‘Contempt of the World,’’ in Medieval English Lyrics, 58–59. 167. ‘‘In all the literary versions of the poem, the beauty, youth and pride of the living are emphasized, and specially their aristocratic standing. The dogs and falcons are enumerated in the poem as class possessions, evidence of wealth and luxury, of the amusements of this world, and thus of the nobility’s addiction to them’’ (Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ 18). 168. Williams, ‘‘Mural Paintings,’’ passim. Eight additional examples are listed by Tristram, (English Wall Painting, 133, 137, 160, 176, 233–36, 255, 262–65, 278, 303, and see 112–14). Four more, some recently discovered, can be found at ‘‘The Three Living and the Three Dead,’’ which reproduces some of the frescoes in color. See also Nichols, Early Art of Norfolk, 259; and Davidson and Alexander, The Early Art of Coventry, 166. 169. Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery, MS W. 51, fols. 1v-2; BL Arundel MS 83, fol. 127 (plate 8); PM MS G. 50, fol. 6v (the image of the three dead is lost); BL Yates Thompson MS 13, fols. 179v-180; and BL Royal MS 10 E. IV, fols. 258v–259. For a Wynkyn de Worde woodcut of 1499 to ‘‘The Contemplacyon of Sinners,’’ of the three living with a hawk overhead, see Storck, ‘‘Aspects of Death in English Art and Poetry,’’ plate 2 (L), facing p. 255. See also Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ figs. 61–64, 66–82. 170. Storck and Jordan, ‘‘John Awdelays gedicht De tribus regibus mortuis,’’ 184. 171. Friedman, ‘‘Hunting Scenes,’’ 20. 172. Henry IV, part II, Act II, scene i.

Appendix: Royal Falconry Expenditures, 1234–1307 1. Oggins, ‘‘The English Kings,’’ Appendix B. 2. Including Norman Rolls for 1179–80, 1194–95, and 1197–98. 3. See chap. 5, n. 75 and associated text. 4. Great Britain PRO, List of Documents Relating to the Household and Wardrobe, 74; chap. 6, n. 126 and associated text. 5. See table notes 3–14, 16, 18–20, 22, 24–25, 27, 29. 6. See chap. 6, nn. 39–41 and associated texts.


Manuscript Sources Public Record Office, Kew Chancery C. 47 (Chancery Miscellanea) C. 60 (Liberate Rolls) C. 132 (Chancery Inquisitions Post Mortem) C. 133 (Chancery Inquisitions Post Mortem) Court of King’s (Queen’s) Bench, Crown side K.B. 26 (Curia Regis Rolls) K.B. 27 (Coram Rege Rolls) Exchequer, King’s Remembrancer E. 101 (Accounts, Various) E. 122 (Customs Accounts) E. 152 (Enrolments of Inquisitions) Exchequer, Lord Treasurer’s Remembrancer E. 352 (Chancellor’s Rolls—Pipe Office) E. 361 (Wardrobe and Household Accounts) E. 364 (Rolls of Foreign Accounts—Pipe Office) E. 372 (Pipe Rolls) Exchequer, Treasury of the Receipt E. 36 (Books) Exchequer of Receipt E. 403 (Issue Rolls)




Special Collections S.C. 1 (Ancient Correspondence) British Library, London Additional Manuscripts 7965 (Wardrobe Accounts 25 Edward I—1296–97) 7966A (Wardrobe Accounts 29 Edward I—1300–1301) 8835 (Wardrobe Book 32 Edward I—1303–4) 18719 (Bible moralisée—end of 13th century) 35291 (Wardrobe Book 28 Edward I—1299–1300) 35292 (Journal of the Wardrobe 31–33 Edward I—1303–5) 35293 (Wardrobe Account Book 32 Edward I—1303–4) 36762 (Roll of Necessary Expenses 6 Edward I—1277–78) Harleian Manuscript 152 (Book of Unde Respondebit 34 Edward I—1305–6)

Printed Sources Abbon. Le siège de Paris par les Normands: Poème du IXe siècle. Ed. and trans. Henri Waquet. Paris, 1942. Abbott, Edwin A. St. Thomas of Canterbury: His Death and Miracles. 2 vols. London, 1898; reprint, New York, n.d. Acta sanctorum quotquot toto orbe coluntur, vel á catholicis scriptoribus celebrantur quae ex Latin & Graecis, aliarumque gentium antiquis monumentis/collegit, digessit, notis illustravit Joannes Bollandus . . . ; operam et studium contulit Godefridus Henschenius. 69 vols. Brussels, 1965–71. Adam de la Halle. Le Jeu de Robin et Marion. Ed. and trans. Shira I. Schwam-Baird. Music ed. Milton G. Scheuermann Jr. New York, 1994. Adelard of Bath. ‘‘De avibus tractatis (Treatise on Birds).’’ In Adelard of Bath: Conversations With His Nephew: On the Same and the Different, Questions on Natural Science, and On Birds. Ed. and trans. Charles Burnet, with Italo Ronca, Pedro Mantas España, and Baudouin Van den Abeele, 238–65. Cambridge, UK, 1998. Ælfric’s Colloquy. Ed. G. N. Garmonsway. 2d ed. London, 1947. Albert the Great. Man and the Beasts: De animalibus (Books 22–26). Trans. James J. Scanlan. Binghamton, 1987. Albertus Magnus. De animalibus libri XXVI: nach der Cölner Urschrift. Ed. Hermann Stadler. 2 vols. Münster in Westphalia, 1920. ———. On Animals: A Medieval Summa Zoologica. Trans. Kenneth F. Kitchell Jr. and Irven Michael Resnick. 2 vols. Baltimore, 1999. Alexander Medicus. ‘‘Alexander Medicus.’’ In Sources inédites des Auzels cassadors de Daude de Pradas: Grisofus Medicus; Alexander Medicus; Deux traités Latins de fauconnerie du XIIe siècle publiés avec des traductions en vieil Italien de Grisofus et une traduction en vieux Français d’Alexander. Ed. Gunnar Tilander, 33–49. Cynegetica, vol. 10. Lund, 1964.



‘‘The Alliterative Morte Arthure.’’ In King Arthur’s Death: The Middle English Stanzaic Morte Arthur and Alliterative Morte Arthure. Ed. Larry D. Benson, 115–238. Indianapolis, 1974. Amadis et Ydoine: Roman du XIIIe siècle. Ed. John R. Reinhard. Les Classiques français du Moyen Age, 51. Paris, 1926. Ancient Charters, Royal and Private, Prior to A.D. 1200. Ed. and annot. John Horace Round. PRS, vol. 10. London, 1888. Andreas Capellanus. The Art of Courtly Love. Trans. John Jay Parry. New York, 1941. Anglo-Saxon Riddles of the Exeter Book. Ed. Paull F. Baum. Durham, N.C. 1963. ‘‘Annales prioratus de Dunstaplia (A.D. 1–1297).’’ In Annales monastici. Ed. Henry Richards Luard, vol. 3, xl–lxi, 3–420. RS [no. 36]. London, 1866. Arab Historians of the Crusades. Ed. Francesco Gabrieli. Trans. E. J. Costello. London, 1969. Arnulf of Lisieux. The Letters of Arnulf of Lisieux. Ed. Frank Barlow. Camden Society, 3d ser., 61. London, 1939. Ashdown, Margaret, ed. English and Norse Documents Relating to the Reign of Ethelred the Unready. Cambridge, UK, 1930. Asser. ‘‘Asser’s Life of King Alfred.’’ In Alfred the Great: Asser’s Life of King Alfred and Other Contemporary Sources. Trans. Simon Keynes and Michael Lapidge, 66–110. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1983. ———. Asser’s Life of King Alfred: Together with the Annals of Saint Neot’s, Erroneously Ascribed to Asser. Ed. William Henry Stevenson. Oxford, 1904. The Babees Book. Ed. Frederick J. Furnivall. EETS, o.s., 32. London, 1868. Barnes, Juliana. Boke of Hunting. Ed. and trans. Gunnar Tilander. Cynegetica, vol. 11. Karlshamn, 1964. Bartholomeus Anglicus. De rerum proprietatibus. Frankfurt, 1601; reprint, Frankfurt am Main, 1964. ———. Mediæval Lore from Bartholomew Anglicus. Ed. Robert Steele. London, 1924. ———. On the Properties of Things: John Trevisa’s Translation of Bartholomaeus Anglicus De Proprietatibus Rerum: A Critical Text. Ed. M. C. Seymour. 3 vols. Oxford, 1975–88. The Battle of Maldon. Ed. E. V. Gordon. London, 1937. The Bayeux Tapestry: A Comprehensive Survey. Ed. and annot. Sir Frank Stenton, 2d rev. ed. London, 1965. Benedict of Peterborough. Gesta regis Henrici secundi Benedicti abbatis: The Chronicle of the Reigns of Henry II. and Richard I., A.D. 1169–1192; Known Commonly under the Name of Benedict of Peterborough. Ed. William Stubbs. 2 vols. RS [no. 49]. London, 1867. ———. ‘‘Miracula Sancti Thomæ Cantuariensis auctore Benedicto Abbate Petriburgensi.’’ In Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, vol. 2. Ed. James Craigie Robertson, 21–298. RS [no. 67]. London, 1876. Beowulf. Ed. Joseph F. Tuso; trans. E. Talbot Donaldson. New York, 1975. Beowulf and the Fight at Finnsburg. Ed. Friedrich Klaeber. 3d ed. Boston, 1941. Berthold von Holle. Demantin. Ed. Karl Bartsch. Tübingen, 1875.



Bertran de Born. The Poems of the Troubadour Bertran de Born. Ed. William D. Paden Jr., Tilde Sankovitch, and Patricia H. Stäblein. Berkeley, 1986. Bible Moralisée: Codex Vindobonensis 2554; Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek. Trans. Gerald B. Guest. London, 1995. La bible moralisée conservée a Oxford, Paris et Londres: Reproduction intégrale du manuscrit du XIII siècle accompagnée d’une notice par le comte A. de Laborde. 5 vols. Paris, 1911–27. Bibliotheca Cluniacensis, in qva ss. patrum abb. clvn. vitæ, Miracula, Scripta, Statua, Priuilegia Chronologiaey duplex. Ed. Martin Marrier and André Du Chesne. Reprint ed. Macon, 1915. Birch, Walter de Gray, ed. Cartularium Saxonicum: A Collection of Charters Relating to Anglo-Saxon History. 3 vols. London, 1885–99. Bischoff, Bernhard. ‘‘Die älteste europäische Falkenmedizin (Mitte des zehnten Jahrhunderts).’’ In Anecdota Novissima: Texte des vierten bis sechzehnten Jahrhunderts, 171–82. Stuttgart, 1984. Boccaccio, Giovanni. The Decameron. Trans. John Payne. New York, n.d. Boniface [St.] ‘‘S. Bonifatii et Lulli epistolae.’’ In MGH: Epistolarum Tomus III: Merowingici et Karolini Aeui, 1:215–433. 2d ed. Berlin, 1957. ‘‘The Boke of Kervynge.’’ In Furnivall, The Babees Book, 265–88. The Book of Daun Burnel the Ass: Nigellus Wireker’s Speculum stultorum. Trans. Graydon W. Regenos. Austin, 1959. Book of Prests of the King’s Wardrobe for 1294–5, Presented to John Goronwy Edwards. Ed. E. B. Fryde. Oxford, 1962. Bracciolini, Giovanni Francesco Poggio. The Facetiae of Giovanni Francesco Poggio Bracciolini. Trans. Bernhard J. Hurwood. New York, 1968. Braekman, W. L., ed. Of Hawks and Horses: Four Late Middle English Prose Treatises. Brussels, 1986. Brant, Sebastian. The Ship of Fools. Trans. Edwin H. Zeydel. New York, 1944. Breviario Grimani. 2d ed. Milan, 1979. Brown, Carleton, ed. English Lyrics of the Thirteenth Century. Oxford, 1932. Brut y Tywysogion; or, The Chronicle of the Princes. Ed. John Williams ab Ithel. RS [no. 17]. London, 1860. Byerly, Benjamin F., and Catherine Ridder Byerly, eds. Records of the Wardrobe and Household, 1285–1286. London, 1977. ———. Records of the Wardrobe and Household, 1286–1289. London, 1986. Calendar of Early Mayor’s Court Rolls Preserved Among the Archives of the Corporation of London at the Guildhall, A.D. 1298–1307. Ed. A. H. Thomas. Cambridge, UK, 1924. The Cartae Antiquae, Rolls 1–10. Ed. Lionel Landon. PRS, vol. 55. London, 1939. The Cartulary of Darley Abbey. Ed. Reginald R. Darlington. 2 vols. Kendal, 1945. Caxton, William. Paris and Vienne. Ed. MacEdward Leach. EETS, o.s., 234. London, 1957. Caxton’s Blanchardyn and Eglantine. Ed. Leon Kellner. EETS, o.s., 58. London, 1890. The Cely Letters, 1472–1488. Ed. Alison Hanham. EETS, o.s., 273. London, 1975.



The Chancellor’s Roll for the Eighth Year of the Reign of King Richard the First, Michaelmas 1196. Ed. Doris M. Stenton. PRS, vol. 45. London, 1930. La Chanson d’Aspremont: Chanson de Geste du XIIe siècle. Ed. Louis Brandin. 2d ed. rev. 2 vols. Paris, 1923–24. La Chanson de Roland. Ed. Léon Gautier. Tours, 1897. Chaplais, Pierre. ‘‘Some Private Letters of Edward I.’’ English Historical Review 77 (1962): 79–86. ———. English Medieval Diplomatic Practice: Part I: Documents and Interpretation, 2 vols. London, 1982. Chapters of the Augustinian Canons. Ed. H. E. Salter. CY, vol. 29. London, 1922. Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Riverside Chaucer. Ed. Larry D. Benson. 3d ed. Boston, 1987. Chrétien de Troyes. Perceval le Gallois ou le Conte du Graal. Ed. and trans. Lucien Foulet. Paris, 1970. The Chronicle of Bury St. Edmunds, 1212–1301. Ed. Antonia Gransden. London, 1964. Chronicon abbatiae Rameseiensis: a saec. X. usque ad an. circiter 1200: in quatuor partibus. Ed. W. Dunn Macray. RS [no. 83]. London, 1886. Les cinq poèmes des Trois morts et des trois vifs. Ed. and trans. Stefan Glixelli. Paris, 1914. A Collection of the Laws and Canons of the Church of England, from Its First Foundation to the Conquest, and from the Conquest to the Reign of King Henry VIII. Trans. John Jonson. New ed. 2 vols. Oxford, 1850–51. ‘‘The Complaint of the Ploughman.’’ In Political Poems and Songs Relating to English History, Composed During the Period from the Accession of Edw. III to that of Ric. III. Ed. Thomas Wright, 1:304–46. RS [no. 14]. 2 vols. London, 1859–61. Concilia Galliae, A. 314-A. 506. Ed. C. Munier. In CCSL, vol. 148. Turnhout, 1963. Concilia Galliae, A. 511-A. 695. Ed. Charles de Clercq. In CCSL, vol. 148A. Turnhout, 1963. Coulton, G. G., ed. and trans. Life in the Middle Ages. 2d ed. 2 vols. Cambridge, UK, 1929. ———, trans. Social Life in Britain: From the Conquest to the Reformation. Cambridge, UK, 1918. Courtauld Institute of Art. The Conway Library. Haslemere, Surrey, 1987–94. Microfiche. Crescenzi, Pietro de. ‘‘Liber ruralium commodorum.’’ In Arte della caccia: Testi di falconeria uccellagione e altre cacce. Ed. Giuliano Innamorati, 127–93. Milan, 1965. Curye on Inglysch: English Culinary Manuscripts of the Fourteenth Century. Ed. Constance B. Hieatt and Sharon Butler. EETS, s.s., 8. London, 1985. The Customs Accounts of Newcastle Upon Tyne, 1424–1500. Ed. J. F. Wade. Surtees Society, 202. Gateshead. Durham, 1995. Dancus Rex. ‘‘Dancus Rex.’’ In Dancus Rex, Guillelmus Falconarius, Gerardus Falconarius: Les plus anciens traités de fauconnerie de l’occident, publiés d’après tous les manuscrits connus. Ed. Gunnar Tilander. Cynegetica, vol. 9. Lund, 1963. Danielsson, Bror, ed. ‘‘The Durham Treatise of Falconry.’’ Studier i modern spräkventenskap, n.s., 4 (1972): 21–37.



———. ‘‘The Percy Poem on Falconry.’’ Studier i modern spräkvetenskap, n.s., 3 (1970): 5–60. Daude de Pradas. The Romance of Daude de Pradas, Called Dels auzels cassadors. Ed. Alexander Herman Schutz. Columbus, OH, 1945. Daurel et Beton: Chanson de Geste Provençale. Ed. Paul Meyer. Paris, 1880. Depositions and Other Ecclesiastical Proceedings from the Courts of Durham, Extending from 1311 to the Reign of Elizabeth. Surtees Society, vol. 21. London, 1845. Documents Illustrating the Activities of the General and Provincial Chapters of the English Black Monks, 1215–1540. Ed. William Abel Pantin. Camden Society, 3d ser., 45, 47, 54. 3 vols. London, 1931–37. Documents Illustrating the Overseas Trade of Bristol in the Sixteenth Century. Ed. Jean Vanes. Bristol Record Society Publications, 31. Bristol, 1979. Dobbie, Elliott Van Kirk, ed. The Anglo-Saxon Minor Poems.Vol. 6 of The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records. New York, 1942. Domesday Book. Ed. John Morris. 38 vols. in 43. Chichester, 1975–92. ———. Vol. 1, Kent. Ed. Philip Morgan. From a draft translation by Veronica Sankaran. Chichester, 1983. ———. Vol. 3, Surrey. Ed. John Morris. From a draft translation by Sara Wood. Chichester, 1975. ———. Vol. 4, Hampshire. Ed. Julian Munby. From a draft translation by Janet Mothersill, Peter Osmund, and Joy Jenkins (née Hubble). Chichester, 1982. ———. Vol. 5, Berkshire. Ed. Philip Morgan. From a draft translation by Alison Hawkins. Chichester, 1979. ———. Vol. 6, Wiltshire. Ed. Caroline and Frank Thorn. From a draft translation by Caroline Thorn. Chichester, 1979. ———. Vol. 8, Somerset. Ed. Caroline and Frank Thorn. From a draft translation by Caroline Thorn. Chichester, 1980. ———. Vol. 13, Buckinghamshire. Ed. John Morris. From a draft translation by Elizabeth Teague and Veronica Sankaran. Chichester, 1978. ———. Vol. 14, Oxfordshire. Ed. John Morris. From a draft translation by Clare Caldwell. Chichester, 1978. ———. Vol. 15, Gloucestershire. Ed. and trans. John S. Moore. Chichester, 1982. ———. Vol. 16, Worcestershire. Ed. Frank and Caroline Thorn. From a draft translation by Elizabeth Whitelaw and Sara Wood. Chichester, 1982. ———. Vol. 17, Herefordshire. Ed. Frank and Caroline Thorn. From a draft translation by Veronica Sankaran. Chichester, 1983. ———. Vol. 18, Cambridgeshire. Ed. Alexandra Rumble. From a draft translation by Jennifer Fellows and Simon Keynes. Chichester, 1981. ———. Vol. 19, Huntingdonshire. Edited from a draft translation prepared by Sally Harvey. Chichester, 1975. ———. Vol. 21, Northamptonshire. Ed. Frank and Caroline Thorn. From a draft translation by Margaret Jones, Philip Morgan, and Judith Plaister. Chichester, 1979. ———. Vol. 22, Leicestershire. Ed. Philip Morgan. From a draft translation by Michael Griffin. Chichester, 1979.



———. Vol. 23, Warwickshire. Ed. John Morris. From a draft translation by Judy Plaister. Chichester, 1976. ———. Vol. 25, Shropshire. Ed. Frank and Caroline Thorn. From a draft translation by Celia Parker. Chichester, 1986. ———. Vol. 26, Cheshire. Ed. Philip Morgan. From a draft translation by Alexander Rumble. Chichester, 1978. ———. Vol. 27, Derbyshire. Ed. Philip Morgan. From a draft translation by Sara Wood. Chichester, 1978. ———. Vol. 30, Yorkshire. Ed. Margaret L. Faull and Marie Stinson. Chichester, 1986. ———. Vol. 33, Norfolk. Ed. Philippa Brown. From a draft translation by Marian Hepplestone, Janet Mothersill, and Margaret Newman. Chichester, 1984. ———. Vol. 37, Index of Persons. Compiled by J. McN. Dodgson and J. J. N. Palmer. Chichester, 1992. ———. Vol. 38, Index of Subjects. Compiled by J. D. Foy. Chichester, 1992. Donaldson, E. Talbot, trans. ‘‘The Text of Beowulf.’’ In Beowulf, Ed. Joseph F. Tuso. New York, 1975. Eadmer. ‘‘Miracula Sancti Dunstani, auctore Eadmero.’’ In Memorials of Saint Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury. Ed. William Stubbs, 223–49. RS [no. 63]. London, 1874. ‘‘Ely Chapter Ordinances and Visitation Records, 1241–1515.’’ Ed. Seiriol J. A. Evans. Camden Miscellany, vol. 17. Camden Society, 3d ser., 64. London, 1940. Emanuel, Hywel David, ed. The Latin Texts of the Welsh Laws. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1967. Étienne de Bourbon. Anecdotes historiques: Légendes et apologues. Ed. A. Lecoy de la Marche. Paris, 1877. The Exeter Book. Ed. George Philip Krapp and Elliott Van Kirk Dobbie. Vol. 3 of The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records. New York, 1936. Expeditions to Prussia and the Holy Land Made by Henry Earl of Derby [Afterwards King Henry IV] in the Years 1390–1 and 1392–3: Being the Accounts Kept by His Treasurer During Two Years. Ed. Lucy Toulmin Smith. Camden Society, n.s., 52. London, 1894. Facsimile of Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 86. With an introduction by Judith Tschann and M. B. Parkes. EETS, s.s., 16. Oxford, 1996. Fantosme, Jordan. ‘‘Chronicle of the War between the English and the Scotch in 1173 and 1174.’’ In Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II., and Richard I. Ed. Richard Howlett, vol. 3, 202–377. RS [no. 82]. London, 1886. Faral, E. ‘‘Des vilains, ou des XXII manieries de vilains.’’ Romania 48 (1922): 243–64. Fauroux, Marie. Recueil des actes des ducs de Normandie de 911 à 1066. Indexed by Lucien Musset. Caen, 1961. Finberg, H. P. R. The Early Charters of Wessex. Leicester, 1964. Floriant et Florette. Ed. Harry F. Williams. Ann Arbor, 1947. Frederick II. The Art of Falconry, Being the De arte venandi cum avibus of Frederick II of Hohenstaufen. Trans. and ed. Casey A. Wood and F. Marjorie Fyfe. Stanford, 1943. ———. Frédéric II de Hohenstaufen, ‘‘L’art de chasse avec les oiseaux.’’ Le traité de fauconnerie, De arte venandi cum avibus. Ed. and trans. Anne Paulus and Baudouin Van den Abeele. Nogent-le-Roi, 2000.



———. Frederici Romanorum Imperatoris Secundi De arte venandi cum avibus. Ed. Carl A. Willemsen. Leipzig, 1942. ———. De arte venandi cum avibus: Ms. Pal. lat. 1071, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana. Graz, Austria, 1969. Froissart, Jean. Méliador. Ed. Auguste Longnon. 3 vols. Paris, 1895–99. ———. Oeuvres de Froissart. Ed. Joseph Marie Bruno Constantine Baron Kervyn de Lettenhove. 25 vols. in 26. Brussels, 1867–77. Gace de la Buigne. Le Roman des deduis. Ed. Ake Blomqvist. Karlshamn, 1951. Gandolfo Persiano. Libro del Gandolfo Persiano delle medesine de falconi. Ed. Giuseppe Ferraro. Bologna, 1877; reprint, Bologna, 1968. Gaston Phébus. The Hunting Book of Gaston Phébus: Manuscrit français 616 Paris, Biblithèque nationale. London, 1998. ———. Livre de chasse. Ed. Gunnar Tilander. Cynegetica, vol. 18. Karlshamn, 1971. Geoffroi de Charny. The Book of Chivalry of Geoffroi de Charny. Trans. Richard W. Kaeuper and Elspeth Kennedy. Philadelphia, 1996. Gerald of Wales [Giraldus Cambrensis]. The Jewel of the Church: A Translation of Gemma Ecclesiastica by Giraldus Cambrensis. Trans. John J. Hagen. Davis Medieval Texts and Studies, 2. Leiden, 1979. Gerardus Falconarius. ‘‘Gerardus falconarius.’’ In Dancus Rex, Guillelmus Falconarius, Gerardus Falconarius: Les plus anciens traités de fauconnerie de l’occident, publiés d’après tous les manuscrits connus. Ed. Gunnar Tilander, 176–229. Cynegetica, vol. 9. Lund, 1963. Gervase of Tilbury. ‘‘E Gervasii Tilleberiensis otiis imperialibus.’’ Ed. R. Pauli. In MGH: Scriptores, vol. 28, Ex scriptoribus rerum Anglicarum saec. XII et XIII, 359–94. Hanover, 1885. The Gesta Normannorum Ducum of William of Jumièges, Orderic Vitalis, and Robert of Torigny. Ed. and trans. Elizabeth M. C. Van Houts. 2 vols. Oxford, 1992–95. Gilbert Foliot. The Letters and Charters of Gilbert Foliot. Ed. Adrian Morey and C. N. L. Brooke. Cambridge, UK, 1967. Gilles li Muisis. Poésies de Gillis li Muisis. Ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove. 2 vols. Louvain, 1882. Giraldus Cambrensis [Gerald of Wales]. Expugnatio Hibernica: The Conquest of Ireland. Ed. and trans. A. B. Scott and F. X. Martin. Dublin, 1978. ———. Gemma Ecclesiastica. Ed. J. S. Brewer. Vol. 2 of Giraldi Cambrensis opera. RS [no. 21]. London, 1862. ———. ‘‘Speculum Ecclesiæ.’’ Ed. J. S. Brewer. In vol. 4 of Giraldi Cambrensis opera, 3– 354. RS [no. 21]. London, 1873. ———. Topographia Hibernica et Expugnatio Hibernica. Ed. James F. Dimock. Vol. 5 of Giraldi Cambrensis opera. RS [no. 21]. London, 1867. Gordon, R. K. Anglo-Saxon Poetry. London, 1926. Gower, John. ‘‘Miroir de l’omme.’’ In The Complete Works of John Gower. Ed. G. C. Macaulay. Vol. 1, The French Works, 1–334. Oxford, 1899. Great Britain. Public Record Office. Calendar of Chancery Warrants Preserved in the Public Record Office, A.D. 1244–1326. London, 1927. ———. Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous (Chancery) Preserved in the Public Record Office. Vol. 1, Henry III and Edward I. London, 1916.



———. Calendar of Inquisitions post mortem and Other Analogous Documents Preserved in the Public Record Office. Vols. 1–6 [Henry III–Edward II]. London, 1904– 10. ———. Calendar of the Charter Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office. 6 vols. London, 1903–27. ———. Calendar of the Close Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward I. 5 vols. London, 1900–8. ———. Calendar of the Close Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward II. 4 vols. London, 1892–98. ———. Calendar of the Close Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward III. 14 vols. London, 1896–1913. ———. Calendar of the Close Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Richard II. 6 vols. London, 1914–27. ———. Calendar of the Liberate Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Henry III. 6 vols. London, 1916–64. ———. Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Henry III. 6 vols. London, 1901–13. ———. Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward I. 4 vols. London, 1893–1901. ———. Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward II. 5 vols. London, 1894–1904. ———. Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward III. 16 vols. London, 1891–1916. ———. Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Richard II. 7 vols. London, 1895–1976. ———. Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Henry IV. 4 vols. London, 1903–9. ———. Close Rolls of the Reign of Henry III Preserved in the Public Record Office. 14 vols. London, 1902–38. ———. Curia Regis Rolls [Vols. I–VII: of the Reigns of Richard I and John; vols. VIII onward: of the Reign of Henry III] Preserved in the Public Record Office. 19 vols. to date. London, 1922–. ———. Diplomatic Documents Preserved in the Public Record Office, vol. 1 (1101– 1272). Ed. Pierre Chaplais. London, 1964. ———. Liber feodorum; The Book of Fees, Commonly Called Testa de Nevill. Reformed from the earliest MSS. by the Deputy Keeper of the Records [H. C. Maxwell Lyte]. 2 vols. London, 1920–31. Great Britain. Record Commission. Ancient Laws and Institutes of England; Comprising Laws Enacted under the Anglo-Saxon Kings from Æthelbirht to Cnut, with an English Translation of the Saxon; the Laws Called Edward the Confessor’s; the Laws of William the Conqueror, and Those Ascribed to Henry the First; also, Monumenta ecclesiastica Anglicana, from the Seventh to the Tenth Century; and the Ancient Latin Version of the Anglo-Saxon Laws. [Ed. Benjamin Thorpe.] 2 vols. London, 1840. ———. Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales; Comprising Laws Supposed to be Enacted by Howel the Good, Modified by Subsequent Regulations Under the Native Princes Prior to the Conquest by Edward the First: and Anomalous Laws, Consisting Prin-



cipally of Institutions Which by the Statute of Ruddlan Were Admitted To Continue in Force. . . . [Ed. Aneurin Owen.] 2 vols. London, 1841. ———. Documents Illustrative of English History in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries. Ed. Henry Cole. London, 1844. ———. Domesday Book, seu liber censualis Willelmi primi regis Angliae, inter archivos regni in domo capitulari Westmonasterii asservatus: jubente rege augustissimo Georgio tertio praelo mandatus typis . . . . [Ed. Abraham Farley.] 2 vols. [London], 1783. [The 1783 edition of Domesday Book had no title pages: this is the form of the title page as given in the L.C. Catalogue.] ———. Excerpta e rotulis finium in Turri Londinensi asservatis Henrico Tertio rege, A.D. 1216–1272. Ed. Charles Roberts. 2 vols. London, 1835–36. ———. Foedera, conventiones, litterae, et cujuscunque generis acta publica, inter reges Angliae et alios quosvis Imperatores, Reges, Pontifices, Principes, vel Communitates: ab ingressu Gulielmi I. in Angliam, A.D. 1066. ad nostra usque tempora habita aut tractata: ex autographis, infra secretiores archivorum regiorum thesaurarias, asservatis; aliisque summae vetustatis instrumentis, ad historiam anglicanam spectantibus, fideliter exscripta. Ed. Thomas Rymer and Robert Sanderson. Revised by Adam Clarke and Fred. Holbrooke. New rev. ed. (1069–1383)4 vols. in 7 parts. London, 1816–69. ———. The Great Rolls of the Pipe for the Second, Third, and Fourth Years of the Reign of King Henry the Second, A.D. 1155, 1156, 1157, 1158. Ed. Joseph Hunter. London, 1844. ———. The Great Roll of the Pipe for the First Year of the Reign of King Richard the First, A.D. 1189–1190. Ed. Joseph Hunter. London, 1844. ———. Libri censualis vocati Domesday-Book, additamenta ex codic. antiquiss. Exon’ Domesday, inquisitio Eliensis, liber Winton’, Boldon Book. [Ed. Henry Ellis]. London, 1816. ———. Magnum rotulum scaccarii, vel magnum rotulum pipae, de anno tricesimo-primo regni Henrici primi (ut videtur;) quem plurimi hactenus laudarunt pro rotulo quinti anni Stephani regis. Ed. Joseph Hunter. London, 1833. ———. ‘‘Misae Roll, 14 John.’’ In Documents Illustrative of English History in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries. Ed. Henry Cole. London, 1844. ———. Placitorum in domo capitulari Westmonasteriensi asservatorum abbreviatio, temporibus regum Ric. I, Johann., Henr. III, Edw. I, Edw. II. [Ed. W. Illingworth.] London, 1811. ———. Rotuli chartarum in turri Londinensi asservati. Vol. 1, Part I: Ab anno MCXCIX ad annum MCCXVI. Ed. Thomas Duffus Hardy. 1 vol. published. London, 1837. ———. Rotuli de liberate ac de misis et praestitis, regnante Johanne. Ed. T. Duffus Hardy. London, 1844. ———. Rotuli de oblatis et finibus in turri Londinensi asservati, tempore regis Johannis. Ed. Thomas Duffus Hardy. London, 1835. ———. Rotuli hundredorum temp. Hen. III. & Edw. I. in turr’ Lond’ et in curia receptae scaccarij Westm. asservati. [Ed. W. Illingworth.] 2 vols. London, 1812–18. ———. Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi asservati. Ed. Thomas Duffus Hardy. 2 vols. London, 1833–44. ———. Rotuli litterarum patentium in turri Londinensi asservati. Vol. 1, Part I: Ab anno



MCCI. ad annum MCCXVI. Ed. Thomas Duffus Hardy. 1 vol. published. London, 1835. ———. Rotuli Normanniae in turri Londinensi asservati, Johanne et Henrico quinto Angliae regibus. Ed. T. Duffus Hardy. London, 1835. [Referred to in text as Norman Rolls.] ———. The Statutes of the Realm, from Original Records and Authentic Manuscripts. 11 vols. in 12. London, 1810–28; reprint, London, 1963. Great Britain. Scottish Record Office. Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland Preserved in Her Majesty’s Public Record Office, London. Ed. Joseph Bain. 4 vols. Edinburgh, 1881–88. The Great Rolls of the Pipe for the Fifth through the Thirty-fourth Years of the Reign of King Henry II (1158–1188). PRS, vols. 1, 2, 4–9, 11–13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25– 34, 36–38. London, 1884–1925. The Great Rolls of the Pipe for the Second–Seventh, Ninth, and Tenth Years of the Reign of King Richard the First, Michaelmas 1190–Michaelmas 1198. Ed. Doris M. Stenton. PRS, vols. 39–41, 43, 44, 46, 47. London, 1925–32. The Great Rolls of the Pipe for the First–Fourteenth and Sixteenth Years of the Reign of King John, Michaelmas 1199–1215. Ed. Doris M. Stenton et al. PRS, vols. 48, 50, 52– 54, 56–58, 60–62, 64, 66, 68, 73. London, 1933–62. Grim, Edward. ‘‘Vita Sancti Thomae, auctore Edwardo Grim.’’ In Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, vol. 2, Benedict of Peterborough, John of Salisbury, Alan of Tewkesbury, Edward Grim. Ed. James Craigie Robertson, 353–450. RS [no. 67]. London, 1876. Grimaldus. Le ‘‘Liber Accipitrum’’ de Grimaldus: Un Traité d‘Autourserie du haut moyen âge. Ed. and trans. An Smets. Bibliotheca Cynegetica, 2. Nogent-le-Roi, 1999. Grisofus Medicus. ‘‘Grisofus Medicus.’’ In Sources inédites des Auzels cassadors de Daude de Pradas: Grisofus Medicus; Alexander Medicus; Deux traités Latins de fauconnerie du XIIe siècle publiés avec des traductions en vieil Italien de Grisofus et une traduction en vieux Français d’Alexander. Ed. Gunnar Tilander, 4–32. Cynegetica, vol. 10. Lund, 1964. Gui de Warewic: Roman du XIIIe siècle. Ed. Alfred Ewert. 2 vols. Paris, 1932–33. Guibert of Nogent. Autobiographie. Ed. and trans. Edmond-René Labande. Paris, 1981. ———. Self and Society in Medieval France: The Memoirs of Abbot Guibert of Nogent (1064?-c. 1125). Ed. John F. Benton. Trans. C. C. Swinton Bland. New York, 1970. Guillelmus Falconarius. ‘‘Guillelmus Falconarius.’’ In Dancus Rex, Guillelmus Falconarius, Gerardus Falconarius: Les plus anciens traités de fauconnerie de l’occident, publiés d’après tous les manuscrits connus. Ed. Gunnar Tilander, 118–75. Cynegetica, vol. 9. Lund, 1963. Haddan, Arthur West, and William Stubbs, eds. Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents Relating to Great Britain and Ireland. 3 vols. Oxford, 1869–78. Hall, Hubert. Select Cases Concerning the Law Merchant, A.D. 1251–1779. Vol. 3, Supplementary: Central Courts. Selden Society, 49. London, 1932. Hands, Rachel. English Hawking and Hunting in The Boke of St. Albans: A Facsimile Edition of sigs. a2–f8 ofThe Boke of St. Albans (1486). London, 1975.



Hart, C. R. The Early Charters of Northern England and the North Midlands. Leicester, 1975. Hervieux, Léopold. Les fabulistes latins: Depuis le siècle d’Auguste jusqu’a la fin du moyen Age. 5 vols. in 4. Paris, 1893–99. Histoire des Ducs de Normandie et des Rois d’Angleterre. Ed. Francisque Michel. Paris, 1840. The History of the Valiant Knight Arthur of Little Britain. Trans. John Bourchier, Lord Berners. London, 1814. ‘‘The Houlate.’’ The Bannatyne Manuscript 4:867–97, 4 vols. Reprint, New York, 1966. The Hours of Catherine of Cleves. Ed. John Plummer. New York, n.d. Household Accounts from Medieval England. Ed. C. M. Woolgar. British Academy Records of Social and Economic History, n.s., 17–18. 2 vols. Oxford, 1992. The Household Book of Dame Alice de Bryene, of Acton Hall, Suffolk, Sept. 1412–Sept. 1413. Trans. M. K. Dale. Ed. Vincent B. Redstone. Ipswich, 1931. Hugh de Rutland. Ipomedon: Poème de Hue de Rotelande (fin de XIIe siècle). Ed. A. J. Holden. Paris, 1979. Hugh of St. Victor. The Didascalicon of Hugh of St. Victor: A Medieval Guide to the Arts. Ed. and trans. Jerome Taylor. New York, 1961. Hunt, Tony. Popular Medicine in Thirteenth-Century England: Introduction and Texts. Cambridge, UK, 1990. Iacopo da Varazze. Legenda Aurea. Ed. Arrigo Levasti. 2 vols. Florence, 2000. Idley, Peter. Peter Idley’s Instructions to His Son. Ed. Charlotte D’Evelyn. Boston, 1935. Innocent III. The Letters of Pope Innocent III (1198–1216) Concerning England and Wales: A Calendar with an Appendix of Texts. Ed. C. R. Cheney and Mary G. Cheney. Oxford, 1967. The Inventory of King Henry VIII: Society of Antiquaries MS 129 and British Library MS Harley 1419, vol. 1, The Transcript. Ed. David Starkey. London, 1998. Ioannis Saresberiensis [ John of Salisbury]. Policraticus, I-IV. Ed. K. S. B. Keats-Rohan. Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis, 118. Turnhout, 1993. Itinerarium peregrinorum et gesta regis Ricardi: Auctore, ut videtur, Ricardo, canonico Sanctæ Trinitatis Londoniensis. Vol. 1 of Chronicles and Memorials of the Reign of Richard I. Ed. William Stubbs. RS [no. 38]. London, 1864–65. Jean Renart. L’Escoufle: Roman d’aventure. Ed. Franklin Sweetser. Geneva, 1974. ———. Galeran de Bretagne. Ed. Lucien Foulet. Paris, 1966. Jenkins, Daffyd. The Law of Hywel Dda: Texts from Medieval Wales Translated and Edited. Landysul, Dyfed, 1986. John, Abbott of Ford. Wulfric of Haselbury. Ed. Maurice Bell. Somerset Record Society, vol. 47. London, 1933. John of Gaunt’s Register, 1379–83. Ed. Eleanor C. Lodge and Robert Somerville. Camden Society, 3d ser., 56–57. 2 vols. London, 1937. John of London. ‘‘Commendatio lamentabilis in transitu magni regis Edwardi.’’ In vol. 2 of the Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I. and Edward II. Ed. William Stubbs, 3–21. RS [no. 76]. London, 1883. John of Salerno. ‘‘The Life of St. Odo of Cluny.’’ In St. Odo of Cluny. Ed. and trans. Dom Gerard Sitwell, 3–87. London, 1958.



John of Salisbury [Ioannis Saresberiensis]. Frivolities of Courtiers and Footprints of Philosophers. Trans. Joseph B. Pike. Minneapolis, 1938. ‘‘John Russell’s Boke of Nurture.’’ In Furnivall, The Babees Book, 117–259. King Horn, with Fragments of Floriz and Blauncheflur . . . . Ed. J. Rawson Lumby. EETS, o.s., 14. London, 1866. The King’s Mirror (Speculum Regale—Konungs Skuggsjá). Trans. Laurence Marcellus Larson. New York, 1917. Lancashire Inquests, Extents, and Feudal Aids. Vol. 1, A.D. 1205–A.D. 1307. Ed. William Farrer. Lancashire and Cheshire Record Society, vol. 48. Liverpool, 1903. Langland, William. Piers Plowman: The B Version: Will’s Visions of Piers Plowman, DoWell, Do-Better and Do-Best. Ed. George Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson. Rev. ed. London, 1988. ———. Piers the Ploughman. Trans. J. F. Goodridge. Rev. ed. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1966. The Langley Cartulary. Ed. Peter Coss. Dugdale Society, vol. 32. Stratford-upon-Avon, 1980. The Laud Troy Book. Ed. J. Ernst Wülfing. EETS, o.s., 121, 122. 2 vols. London, 1902–3. Laurence of Durham. Dialogi Laurentii Dunelmensis Monachi ac Prioris. Surtees Society, vol. 70. Durham, 1880. Liber exemplorum ad usum praedicantium saeculo XIII compositus a quodam fratre minore Anglico de provincia Hiberniae. Ed. A. G. Little. Aberdeen, 1908. Liber Quotidianus Contrarotulatoris Garderobae: Anno Regni Regis Edwardi Primi Vicesimo Octavo, A.D. MCCXCIX & MCCC. London, 1787. The Life of King Edward Who Rests at Westminster, Attributed to a Monk of St. Bertin. Ed. and trans. Frank Barlow. London: 1962. ‘‘The Life of St. Alexius.’’ In F. J. Furnivall, ed., Adam Davy’s 5 Dreams about Edward II . . . from the Laud MS. 622 in the Bodleian Library. EETS, o.s., 69. London, 1878. Literæ Cantuarienses: The Letter Books of the Monastery of Christ Church, Canterbury. Ed. J. Brigstocke Sheppard. RS [no. 85]. 3 vols. London, 1887–89. ‘‘Le Livre de Ghatrif.’’ In Moamin et Ghatrif: Traités de fauconnerie et des chiens de chasse. Ed. Håkan Tjerneld, 257–99. Stockholm, 1945. ‘‘Le Livre de Moamin.’’ In Moamin et Ghatrif: Traités de fauconnerie et des chiens de chasse. Ed. Håkan Tjerneld, 87–254. Stockholm, 1945. Le livre des amours du Chastellain de Coucy et de la Dame de Fayel. Ed. Aimé Petit and François Suard. Lille, 1994. Les livres du roy Modus et de la royne Ratio. Edited by Gunnar Tilander. 2 vols. Paris, 1932. López de Ayala, Pero. Libro de la Caça de las Aves. Ed. John G. Cummins. London, 1986. Lorris, Guillaume, and Jean de Meun. Le Roman de la Rose par Guillaume de Lorris et Jean de Meun. Ed. Felix Lecoy. 3 vols. Paris, 1965–70. Lupis, A. ‘‘La ‘Pistola a Tolomeu emperador d’Egipte’ en la tradició venatòria medieval romànica i l’estructura epistolar del gènere venatori.’’ In Miscellània Antoni M. Badia i Margarit, 13–54. Montserrat, 1985. The Luttrell Psalter: Two Plates in Colour and Eighty-three in Monochrome, from the



Additional Manuscript 42130 in the British Museum. Introduction by Eric George Millar. London, 1932. Lybeaus Desconus. Ed. M. Mills. EETS, o.s., 261. London, 1969. MGH: Leges. 5 vols. Hanover, 1835–89. MGH: Legum Sectio I: Leges Nationum Germanicarum, vol. 4, pt. 1, Pactus Legis Salicae. Ed. Karl August Eckhardt. Hanover, 1962. Magni rotuli scaccarii Normanniae sub regibus Angliae. Ed. Thomas Stapleton. 2 vols. London, 1840–44. Malory, Sir Thomas. The Works of Sir Thomas Malory. Ed. Eugène Vinaver. Revised by P. J. C. Field. 3d ed. 3 vols. Oxford, 1990. Mansi, Johannes Dominicus, ed. Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova, et Amplissima Collectio. 53 vols. in 59. Florence and Venice, 1759–98; reprint, Paris, 1901–27. The Master of Game, by Edward, Second Duke of York: The Oldest English Book on Hunting. Ed. Wm. A. Baillie-Grohman and F. Baillie-Grohman. London, 1909. The Master of Mary of Burgundy: A Book of Hours for Engelbert of Nassau. Ed. J. J. G. Alexander. London, 1970. Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury. Ed. James Craigie Robertson and J. E. Sheppard. 7 vols. RS [no. 67]. London, 1875–85. McNeill, John T., and Helena M. Gamer, ed. and trans. Medieval Handbooks of Penance. New York, 1938. Medieval English Lyrics: A Critical Anthology. Ed. R. T. Davies. Evanston, IL, 1964. The Medieval French Roman d’Alexandre. 4 vols. Princeton, 1937–49. Memorials of London Life in the XIIth, XIVth, and XVth Centuries. Ed. Henry Thomas Riley. London, 1868. Memorials of St. Edmund’s Abbey. Ed. Thomas Arnold. 3 vols. RS [no. 96]. London, 1890–96. Le ménagier de Paris. Ed. Georgine E. Brereton and Janet M. Ferrier. Oxford, 1981. Le ménagier de Paris: Traité de morale et d’économie domestique composé vers 1393 par un bourgeois parisien . . . . 2 vols. Paris, 1846. Meyer, Paul. ‘‘Les manuscrits français de Cambridge: II.—Bibliothèque de l’université.’’ Romania 15 (1886): 236–357. Middle English Sermons Edited from British Museum MS. Royal 18 B. xxiii. Ed. Woodburn O. Ross. EETS, o.s. 209. London, 1960. The Middle-English Versions of Partonope of Blois. Ed. A. Trampe Bodtker. EETS, e.s., 109. London, 1912 [for 1911]. ‘‘The Miracles of Simon de Montfort.’’ In The Chronicle of William de Rishanger of the Barons’ Wars. Ed. James Orchard Halliwell, 67–110. Camden Society, o.s., 15. London, 1840. Moamin and Ghatrif. Moamin et Ghatrif, Traités de fauconnerie et des chiens de chasse: Édition princeps de la version franco-italienne. Ed. Håkan Tjerneld. Lund, 1945. Monks, Peter Rolfe. The Brussels Horloge de Sapience: Iconography and Text of Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, MS IV. 111, with an Edition of the Déclaration des Hystoires. Trans. K. V. Sinclair. Leiden, 1990. Mowat, J. L. G., ed. Alphita: A Medico-Botanical Glossary from the Bodleian Manuscript, Selden B. 35. Oxford, 1887.



Myrc, John. Instructions for Parish Priests. Ed. Edward Peacock. EETS, o.s., 31. London, 1868. Neckam, Alexander. ‘‘The Treatise De utensilibus.’’ In A Volume of Vocabularies, Illustrating the Condition and Manners of our Forefathers, . . . From the Tenth Century to the Fifteenth. Ed. Thomas Wright, 96–119. [London], 1857. Nigel Longchamp. A Mirror for Fools: The Book of Burnel the Ass. Trans. J. H. Mozley. Notre Dame, 1963. Octovian. Ed. Frances McSparron. EETS, o.s., 289. London, 1986. Odo of Cluny. ‘‘De Vita Sancti Geraldi Auriliacensis Comitis Libri Quatour.’’ In Opera Omnia, cols. 639–710. PL, t. 133. Paris, 1881. Old English Homilies and Homiletic Treatises of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries. First ser., pt. 1. Ed. and Trans. Richard Morris. EETS, o.s., 29. London, 1867. The Old English Riddles of the Exeter Book. Ed. Craig Williamson. Chapel Hill, 1977. Omne bonum: A Fourteenth-Century Encyclopedia of Universal Knowledge. Ed. Lucy Freeman Sandler. 2 vols. London, 1996. Owen, Dorothy M. The Making of King’s Lynn: A Documentary Survey. British Academy Records of Social and Economic History, n.s., 9. London, 1984. Pächt, Otto, C. R. Dodwell, and Francis Wormald. The St. Albans Psalter (Albani Psalter). London, 1960. Paris, Matthew. Mattaei Parisiensis, Monachi Sancti Albani, Chronica majora. Ed. Henry Richards Luard. RS [no. 57]. 7 vols. London, 1872–83. The Parlement of the Thre Ages. Ed. M. Y. Offord. EETS, o.s., 246. London, 1959. ‘‘The Parliament of the Three Ages.’’ In John Gardner, The Alliterative Morte Arthure, The Owl and the Nightingale, and Five Other Middle English Poems in a Modernized Version with Comments on the Poems and Notes, 133–51. Carbondale, IL, 1971. Parsons, John Carmi. The Court and Household of Eleanor of Castile in 1290: An Edition of British Library Additional Manuscript 35294 with Introduction and Notes. Toronto, 1977. The Paston Letters, 1422–1509 A.D.: A Reprint of the Edition of 1872–5 . . . To Which Are Now Added [Other Letters] in a Supplement . . . . Ed. James Gairdner. 4 vols. Edinburgh, 1810. Paulinus of Pella. ‘‘Paulini Pellaei Eucharisticos.’’ Ed. Wilhelm Brandes. In Poetae Christiani Minores: Pars I, vol. 16 of Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum [CSEL], 263–334. Vienna, 1888. Peckham, John. Registrum Epistolarum Fratris Johannis Peckham, Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis. Ed. Charles Trice Martin. RS [no. 77]. 3 vols. London, 1882–86. The Penguin Book of Bird Poetry. Ed. Peggy Munsterberg. London, 1980. Peter of Blois. Petrus Blesensis, Bathioniensis in Anglia archidiaconi: Opera Omnia. PL, t. 207. Paris, 1855. Petrarch, Francesco. Petrarch’s Remedies for Fortune Fair and Foul: Book I, Remedies for Prosperity—Translation. Trans. Conrad H. Rawski. Bloomington, 1991. Petrus Alfonsi. The Disciplina Clericalis of Petrus Alfonsi. Ed. and trans. Eberhard Hermes. Berkeley, 1977. ‘‘Pipe Roll 17 John.’’ Ed. R. A. Brown. In Pipe Roll 17 John and Praestita Roll 14–18 John, 1–67. PRS, n.s., vol. 37. London, 1964.



The Pipe Roll of the Bishopric of Winchester For the Fourth Year of the Pontificate of Peter des Roches, 1208–1209. Ed. Hubert Hall. London, 1903. The Political Songs of England: From the Reign of John to that of Edward II. Ed. and trans. Thomas Wright. Camden Society, o.s., 6. London, 1839. Powicke, F. M., and C. R. Cheney, eds. Councils and Synods with Other Documents Relating to the English Church, Vol. 2, A.D. 1205–1313. Oxford, 1964. Proensa: An Anthology of Troubadour Poetry. Trans. Paul Blackburn. Berkeley, 1978. Queen Mary’s Psalter: Miniatures and Drawings by an English Artist of the Fourteenth Century, Reproduced from Royal MS. 2 B. VII in the British Museum. Introduction by Sir George Warner. London, 1912. Radulfus Niger. De re militari et triplici via peregrinationis ierosolimitane. Ed. Ludwig Schmugge. Berlin, 1977. Ralph de Diceto. Radulfi de Diceto decani Lundoniensis opera historica: The Historical Works of Master Ralph de Diceto, Dean of London. Ed. William Stubbs. 2 vols. RS [no. 68]. London, 1876. The Red Book of the Exchequer. Ed. Hubert Hall. 3 vols. RS [no. 99]. London, 1896. Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, 1066–1154. Vol. 1, Regesta Willelmi Conquestoris et Willelmi Rufi, 1066–1100. Edited by H. W. C. Davis with the assistance of R. J. Whitwell. Vol. 2, Regesta Henrici Primi, 1100–1135. Ed. Charles Johnson and H. A. Cronne from the collections of the late H. W. C. Davis. 4 vols. [in all]. Oxford, 1913–69. The Register of Eudes of Rouen. Ed. Jeremiah F. O’Sullivan. Trans. Sydney M. Brown. New York, 1964. The Register of Gilbert Welton Bishop of Carlisle, 1353–1362. Ed. R. L. Storey. CY, vol. 88. Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1999. The Register of John de Grandisson, Bishop of Exeter, (A.D. 1327–1369). Ed. Rev. F. C. Hingston-Randolph. 3 vols. London, 1894–99. The Registrum Antiquissimum of the Cathedral Church of Lincoln, vol. 1. Ed. C. W. Foster. Lincoln Record Society, vol. 27. Hereford, 1931. ‘‘Registrum Edwardi Foxe, Episcopi Herefordensis.’’ In Registrum Caroli Bothe, Episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MDXVI–MDXXXV. Ed. Arthur Thomas Bannister, 361– 80. CY, vol. 28. London, 1921. Registrum Malmesburiense; The Register of Malmesbury Abbey, Preserved in the Public Record Office. Vol. 1, ed. J. S. Brewer. Vol. 2, ed. J. S. Brewer and Charles Trice Martin. RS [no. 72]. London, 1879–80. Registrum Ricardi de Swinfeld Episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MCCLXXXIII– MCCCXVII. Ed. William W. Capes. CY, vol. 6. London, 1909. The Regulations and Establishment of the Household of Henry Algernon Percy, the Fifth Earl of Northumberland, at his Castles of Wressle and Leckonfield in Yorkshire, Begun Anno Domino MDXII. New ed. London, 1905. ‘‘Revertere.’’ In Hymns to the Virgin and Christ, The Parliament of Devils, and Other Religious Poems . . . . , 91–94. Ed. Frederick J. Furnivall. EETS, o.s., 24. London, 1867. Richard de Bury. The Philobiblon of Richard de Bury: Bishop of Durham Treasurer and Chancellor of Edward III. Ed. and trans. Ernest C. Thomas. New York, 1889.



Richard Fitz Nigel. Dialogus de scaccario: The Course of the Exchequer. Ed. and trans. Charles Johnson, with corrections by F. E. L. Carter and D. E. Greenway. Oxford, 1983. Robert de Blois. Floris et Liriope. Ed. Wolfram van Zingerle. Leipzig, 1891. Robert of Brunne. Robert of Brunne’s Handlyng Synne. Ed. Frederick J. Furnivall. EETS, o.s., 119. London, 1901. Robert of Graystanes. ‘‘Historia de statu ecclesiæ Dunelmensis.’’ In Historiæ de Dunelmensis scriptores tres, 33–123. Surtees Society, vol. 9. London, 1839. Roger of Howden [Hoveden]. Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Houedene. Ed. William Stubbs. 4 vols. RS [no. 51]. London, 1868–71. Roger of Wendover. Rogeri de Wendover chronica, sive Flores historiarum. Ed. Henry O. Coxe. 4 vols. and appendix. London, 1841–42. ———. Rogeri de Wendover liber qui dicitur Flores historiarum, ab anno domini MCLIV annoque Henrici Anglorum regis secundi primo; The Flowers of History, by Roger of Wendover, from the Year of Our Lord 1154 and the First of Henry the Second, King of the English. Ed. Henry G. Hewlett. 3 vols. RS [no. 84]. London, 1866–69. A Roll of the Household Expenses of Richard de Swinfield, Bishop of Hereford, During Part of the Years 1289 and 1290. Ed. John Webb. 2 vols. Camden Society, o.s., nos. 59 and 62. London, 1854–55. Rolls of the Justices in Eyre: Being the Rolls of Pleas and Assizes for Gloucestershire, Warwickshire, and Staffordshire, 1221, 1222. Ed. Doris Mary Stenton. Selden Society, 59. London, 1940. The Romance of Sir Degrevant. Ed. L. F. Casson. EETS, o.s., 221. London, 1949. The Romance of Guy of Warwick. Ed. Julius Zupitza. Vol. 1. EETS, e.s., 42. London, 1883. The Romance of William of Palerne: (Otherwise Known as the Romance of ‘‘William and the Werewolf’’). Ed. Walter W. Skeat. EETS, e.s., 1. London, 1867. Ross, Thomas W. ‘‘Five Fifteenth-Century ‘Emblem’ Verses from Brit. Mus. Addit. MS. 37049.’’ Speculum 32 (1957): 274–82. Rotuli de dominabus et pueris et puellis de XII comitatibus [1185]. Ed. John Horace Round. PRS, vol. 35. London, 1913. The Rule of the Templars: The French Text of the Rule of the Order of the Knights Templar. Trans. J. M. Upton-Ward. Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1992. Ruusbroec, Jan van. ‘‘Le livre du tabernacle spirituel [IIe partie].’’ Œuvres de Ruysbroeck L’Admirable. Trans. Bénédictins de St.-Paul d’Oosterhout. Brussels, 1930. St. Thomas of Canterbury: An Account of His Life and Fame from the Contemporary Biographers and Other Chroniclers. Ed. and trans. W. H. Hutton. London, 1889. Salimbene de Adam. Cronica. Ed. Giuseppe Scalia. Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis, 125. 2 vols. Turnhout, 1998–99. Sandler, Lucy Freeman. The Psalter of Robert De Lisle in the British Library. London, 1983. Santa Eugenia, F. J. ‘‘Ottave quattrocentesche sugli uccelli di caccia.’’ Studi di filologia italiana 54 (1996): 221–60. ‘‘The Sege off Melayne.’’ In The Sege off Melayne and The Romance of Duke Rowland and Sir Otuell of Spayne. Ed. Sidney J. Herrtage, 1–52. EETS, e.s., 35. London, 1880.



Sidonius Apollinaris. MGH: Auctores Antiquissimi, vol. 8, Gai Sollii Apollinaris Sidonii Epistulae et Carmina. Ed. Christian Luetjohann. Berlin, 1887. The Siege of Jerusalem. Ed. E. Kölbing and Mabel Day. EETS, o.s., 188. London, 1932. Simeon of Durham, ‘‘Historia ecclesiæ Dunelmensis.’’ In Symeonis monachi opera omnia, ed. Thomas Arnold, 1: 7–261. RS [no. 75]. 2 vols. London, 1882–85. ‘‘The Simonie.’’ In The Political Songs of England, from the Reign of John to That of Edward II. Ed. and trans. Thomas Wright, 323–45. Camden Society, o.s., 6. London, 1839. Sir Christopher Hatton’s Book of Seals: To Which Is Appended a Select List of the Works of Frank Merry Stenton. Ed. Lewis C. Loyd and Doris Mary Stenton. Northamptonshire Record Society Publications, no. 15. Oxford, 1950. ‘‘Sir Isumbras.’’ In Six Middle English Romances. Ed. Maldwyn Mills, 125–47. London, 1973. Sir Orfeo. Ed. A. J. Bliss. Oxford, 1954. Songs of Holy Mary of Alfonso X, The Wise: A Translation of the Cantigas de Santa Maria. Trans. Kathleen Kulp-Hill. Tempe,AZ, 2000. The Squyr of Lowe Degre. Ed. William Edward Mead. Boston, 1904. Statuta Capitulorum Generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis ab anno 1116 ad annum 1786. Ed. Joseph-Marie Canivez. 8 vols. Louvain, 1933–41. Storck, Willy F., and Richard Jordan. ‘‘John Awdelays gedicht De tribus regibus mortuis.’’ Englische Studien 43 (1910–11): 177–88. Stubbs, William, ed. Select Charters and Other Illustrations of English Constitutional History: From the Earliest Times to the Reign of Edward the First. 9th ed. Revised by H. W. C. Davis. Oxford, 1921. Symmachus. ‘‘Epistola Aquilæ Symmachi & Theodotionis ad Ptolemæum regem Ægypti, de re accipitraria, Catalanica lingua’’; ‘‘Excerpta ex libro incerti auctoris de natura rerum: De diversis generibus falconum siue accipitrum, infirmitatibus & medicinis eorum; & hoc secundum Aquilam Symmachum & Theodotionem in epistola directa ad Ptolemæum regem Ægypti.’’ In Rei Accipitrariæ scriptores nunc primum editi, 183– 211. Paris, 1612. Tanquerey, Frédéric J., ed. ‘‘Lettres du roi Edward I à Robert de Bavent, king’s yeoman, sur des questions de vènerie.’’ Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 23 (1939): 487–503. Testamenta Eboracensia or Wills Registered at York. Surtees Society, vol. 4. London, 1836. Thomas. Le Roman de Tristan. Ed. Joseph Bédier. 2 vols. Paris, 1902–5. Thomas Cantimpratensis. Liber de natura rerum. Ed. Helmut Boese. Berlin, 1973. Thomas of Monmouth. The Life and Miracles of St William of Norwich. Ed. and trans. Augustus Jessopp and Montague Rhodes James. Cambridge, UK, 1896. Thómas Saga Erkibyskups: A Life of Archbishop Thomas in Icelandic. Ed. and trans. Eiríkr Magnusson. RS [no. 65]. 2 vols. London, 1875–83. Tilander, Gunnar, ed. ‘‘Fragment d’un traité de fauconnerie Anglo-Normand en vers.’’ Studier i Modern Språkvetenskap 15 (1943): 26–44. Tratado de las enfermedades de las aves de caza. Ed. Bertil Maler. Stockholm, 1957. Trivet, Nicholas. F. Nicholai Triveti, de ordine frat. Prædicatorum, Annales, sex regum



Angliæ, qui a comitibus Andegavensibus originem traxerunt (A.D. M.C.XXXVI.– M.CCC.VII.) . . . . Ed. Thomas Hog. Publications of the English Historical Society. London, 1845. Turner, T. Hudson. ‘‘Unpublished Notices of the Times of Edward I., Especially of His Relations with the Moghul Sovereigns of Persia.’’ Archaeological Journal 8 (1851): 45–51. Two Fifteenth-Century Cookery-Books. Ed. Thomas Austin. EETS, o.s., 91. London, 1888. Usamah ¯ Ibn-Munqidh. An Arab-Syrian Gentleman and Warrior in the Period of the Crusades: Memoirs of Usamah ¯ ibn-Munqidh, (Kitab ¯ Al-I’tibar). ¯ Trans. Philip K. Hitti. New York, 2000. Vetus registrum Sarisberiense, alias dictum Registrum S. Osmundi episcopi; The Register of S. Osmund. Ed. W. H. Rich Jones. 2 vols. RS [no. 78]. London, 1883–84. Visitation Articles and Injunctions of the Period of the Reformation. Ed. Walter Howard Frere with the assistance of William McClure Kennedy. 3 vols. London, 1910. Visitations and Memorials of Southwell Minster. Ed. Arthur Francis Leach. Camden Society, n.s., 48. London, 1891. Visitations in the Diocese of Lincoln, 1517–1531. Ed. A. Hamilton Thompson. Lincoln Record Society, vols. 33, 35, 37. 3 vols. Hereford, 1940–47. Visitations of Religious Houses in the Diocese of Lincoln. Ed. A. Hamilton Thompson. CY, nos. 17, 24, 33. 3 vols. London, 1915–27. Visitations of the Diocese of Norwich, A.D. 1492–1532. Edited by A. Jessopp. Camden Society, n.s. 43. London, 1888. Wace. Wace’s Roman de Brut: A History of the British. Trans. Judith Weiss. Exeter, 1999. Wade-Evans, A. W., ed. Welsh Medieval Law: Being a Text of the Laws of Howel the Good, Namely the British Museum Harleian MS. 4353 of the 13th Century . . . . Oxford, 1909. Walsingham, Thomas. Gesta Abbatum Monasterii S. Albani a Thoma Walsingham, regnante Ricardo Secundo, ejusdem ecclesiae Praecentore, compilata. Part 4 of Chronica Monasterii s. Albani. Ed. Henry Thomas Riley. RS [no. 28]. 3 vols. London, 1867–69. Walter Map. De nugis curialium: Courtiers Trifles. Ed. and trans. Montague R. James. Revised by C. N. L. Brooke and R. A. B. Mynors. Oxford, 1983. Walther, Ingo F., and Gisela Siebert Insel, eds. Codex Manesse: Die Miniaturen der Grossen Heidelberger Liederhandschrift. Frankfurt am Main, 1988. Whitelock, Dorothy, ed. Anglo-Saxon Wills. Cambridge Studies in English Legal History. Cambridge, UK, 1930. ———. English Historical Documents: c. 500–1042. Vol. 1 of English Historical Documents. Ed. David C. Douglas. London, 1955. Whitelock, Dorothy, M. Brett, and C. N. L. Brooke, eds. Councils and Synods, with Other Documents Relating to the Engish Church. Vol. 1, A.D. 871–1214, 2 parts. Oxford, 1981. Willan, T. S., ed. A Tudor Book of Rates. Manchester, 1962. William, Archbishop of Tyre. A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea. Trans. Emily Atwater and A. C. Krey. 2 vols. New York, 1943. William of Canterbury. ‘‘Miraculorum gloriosi martyris Thomæ Cantuariensis archi-



episcopi.’’ In Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, vol. 1. Ed. James Craigie Robertson, 137–546. RS [no. 67]. London, 1875. William of Malmesbury. Gesta regvm anglorvm: The History of the English Kings. Ed. and trans. R. A. B. Mynors. Completed by R. M. Thomson and M. Winterbottom. 2 vols. Oxford, 1998. ———. Willelmi Malmesbiriensis monachi de gestis pontificum Anglorum libri quinque. Ed. N. E. S. A. Hamilton. RS [no. 52]. London, 1870. ———. Willelmi Malmesbiriensis monachi de gestis regum Anglorum libri quinque; Historiae novellae libri tres. Ed. William Stubbs. 2 vols. RS [no. 90]. London, 1887–89. ———. William of Malmesbury’s Chronicle of the Kings of England: From the Earliest Period to the Reign of King Stephen. Trans. J. A. Giles. London, 1895. William of Poitiers. The Gesta Gvillelmi of William of Poitiers. Ed. and trans. R. H. C. Davis and Marjorie Chibnall. Oxford, 1998. Winchester in the Early Middle Ages: An Edition and Discussion of the Winton Domesday. Ed. Martin Biddle. Oxford, 1976. Wolfram von Eschenbach. Parzifal. Ed. Gottfried Weber. Darmstadt, 1963. Wright, Thomas. Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies. Ed. Richard Paul Wülcker. 2d ed. 2 vols. London, 1884. Wulfstan’s Canons of Edgar. Ed. Roger Fowler. EETS, o.s. 266. London, 1972. Wycliff, John. The English Works of Wycliff Hitherto Unpublished. Ed. F. D. Mathew. EETS, o.s., 74. London, 1880.

Modern Works Åkerström-Hougen, Gunilla. The Calendar and Hunting Mosaics of the Villa of the Falconer in Argos: A Study in Byzantine Iconography. Stockholm, 1974. ———. ‘‘Falconry as a Motif in Early Swedish Art: Its Historical and Art Historical Significance.’’ In Les pays du nord et Byzance (Scandinavie et Byzance): Actes du colloque nordique et international de byzantinologie tenu à Upsal 20–22 avril 1979. Ed. Rudolf Zeitler, 263–93. Stockholm, 1981. Albarella, U., M. Beech, and J. Mulville. ‘‘The Saxon, Medieval and Post-Medieval Mammal and Bird Bones Excavated 1989–91 from Castle Mall, Norwich, Norfolk.’’ Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 72/97. Alcock, Leslie. ‘‘Image and Icon in Pictish Sculpture.’’ In The Age of Migrating Ideas: Early Medieval Art in Northern Britain and Ireland. Ed. R. Michael Spearman and John Higgitt, 230–36. Edinburgh, 1993. Anderson, M. D. History and Imagery in British Churches. London, 1971. ‘‘Archaeological Findings.’’ Skalk, 1986, no. 2, 3ff.≈ccc 12787/hist/archaol.html. Armstrong, C. A. J. ‘‘The Golden Age of Burgundy: Dukes That Outdid Kings.’’ In The Courts of Europe: Politics, Patronage, and Royalty, 1400–1800. Ed. A. G. Dickens, 55–75. New York, 1977. The Art of Cookery in the Middle Ages. Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1995. The Art of Gothic: Architecture, Sculpture, Painting. Ed. Rolf Toman. Cologne, 1998.



Avagnina, Maria Elise. ‘‘Un inedito affresco di sogetto cortese a Bassano del Grappa: Federico II e la corte dei da Romano.’’ In Federico II: Immagine e potere. Ed. Maria Stella Calò Mariani and Raffaella Cassano, 104–11. Venice, 1995. Ayre, Kerry. Medieval English Figurative Roundels. London, 2002. Baldwin, Marshall. Masters, Princes, and Merchants: The Social Views of Peter the Chanter and His Circle. 2 vols. Princeton, 1970. Ballard, Adolphus. The Domesday Inquest. London, 1906. Bannerman, D. A. The Birds of the British Isles. 12 vols. Edinburgh, 1956. Baring-Gould, S. The Lives of the Saints. New and rev. ed. 16 vols. Edinburgh: 1914. Barlow, Frank. Thomas Becket. London,1980. Barrow, G. W. S. Robert Bruce and the Community of the Realm in Scotland. Berkeley, 1965. ———. Kingship and Unity: Scotland 1000–1306. Toronto, 1981. Bartlett, Robert. England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 1075–1225. Oxford, 2000. Basilque Sainte Cécile: Une Visite guidée. Milan, n.d. Bates, David. A Bibliography of Domesday Book. Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1986. Baudoin, Jacques. La sculpture flamboyante en Bourgogne et Franche-Conté. Nonette, Pays-de-Calais, 1996. Beaman, Mark, and Steve Madge. The Handbook of Bird Identification for Europe and the Western Palearctic. Princeton, 1998. Bellamy, B. ‘‘The Rockingham Forest Perambulation of 1299.’’ Northamptonshire Past and Present 6 (1982–83): 303–8. Benoist, J. O. ‘‘La chasse au vol en Europe occidentale du XIe au XIVe siècle.’’ Ph.D. dissertation, University of Poitiers, 1971. ———. ‘‘Le gibier dans l’alimentation seigneuriale (XIème-XVème siècles). In Manger et Boire au Moyen Age: Actes du Colloque de Nice (15–17 Octobre 1982), t. 1, Aliments et Société, 75–87. [Paris], 1984. Birch, W[alter] de G[ray]. Catalogue of Seals in the Department of Manuscripts in the British Museum. 6 vols. London, 1887–1900. Birch, W[alter] de G[ray], and Henry Jenner. Early Drawings and Illuminations: An Introduction to the Study of Illustrated Manuscripts; with a Dictionary of Subjects in the British Museum. London, 1879. Blanchard-Lemée, Michèle, Mongi Ennaïfer, Hédi Slim, and Latifa Slim. Mosaics of Roman Africa: Floor Mosaics from Tunisia. New York, 1996. Bloch, Marc. Feudal Society. Trans. L. A. Manyon. Chicago, 1961. Blockmans, Wim. ‘‘To Appear or To Be.’’ In Blockmans and Janse, Showing Status, 483– 88. Blockmans, Wim, and Antheun Janse, eds. Showing Status: Representation of Social Positions in the Late Middle Ages. Turnhout, 1999. Blomefield, Francis. An Essay towards a Topographical History of the County of Norfolk . . . . Ed. Charles Parkin. 11 vols. Rev. ed. London, 1805–10. Bloom, J. Harvey. English Seals. London, 1906.



Bloomfield, Morton W. The Seven Deadly Sins: An Introduction to the History of a Religious Concept, With Special Reference to Medieval English Literature. [East Lansing, MI], 1952. Bö, Olav. Falcon Catching in Norway: With Emphasis on the Post- Reformation Period. Studia Norvegica, no. 11. Oslo, 1962. Bond, Edw[ard]. A. ‘‘Notices of the Last Days of Isabella, Queen of Edward the Second, Drawn From an Account of the Expenses of Her Household.’’ Archaeologia 35 (1853): 453–69. Bond, J. M., and T. P. O’Connor. Bones from Medieval Deposits at 16–22 Coppergate and Other Sites in York. In The Archaeology of York, ed. P. V. Addyman, vol. 15, The Animal Bones, pt. 5. London, 1991. Borenius, Tancred. ‘‘The Cycle of Images in the Palaces and Castles of Henry III.’’ Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 6 (1943): 40–50. Bosworth, Joseph. An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary: Based on the Manuscript Collections of the Late Joseph Bosworth. Edited and enlarged by T. Northcote Toller. Oxford, 1882– 98. Bramwell, D. ‘‘Bird Bone.’’ In Excavations in King’s Lynn 1963–1970. Ed. Helen Clarke and Alan Carter, 399–402. London, 1977. ———. ‘‘Bird Bones.’’ In Llantrithyd: A Ringwork in South Glamorgan, 70–71. Cardiff, 1977. ———. ‘‘The Bird Bones.’’ In Excavations in Medieval Southampton, 1953–1969. Ed. Colin Platt and Richard Coleman-Smith, 1:340–41. 2 vols. Leicester, 1975. ———. ‘‘The Bird Bones.’’ In St. Peter’s Street, Northampton: Excavations 1973–1976. Ed. John H. Williams, 333. Northampton, 1979. ———. ‘‘Bird Remains from Medieval London.’’ London Naturalist 54 (1975): 15–20. Brewster, T. C. M. ‘‘An Excavation at Weaverthorpe Manor, East Riding, 1960.’’ Yorkshire Archaeological Journal 44 (1972): 114–33. Brooke, George C. English Coins: From the Seventh Century to the Present Day. 3d ed. rev. London, 1950. Brown, G. Baldwin. The Arts in Early England. Vol. 5. London, 1921. Brown, Leslie, and Dean Amadon. Eagles, Hawks and Falcons of the World. 2 vols. Feltham, 1968. Bruges à Beaune: Marie, l’héritage de Bourgogne. Paris, 2000. Bryer, Anthony. ‘‘Edward I and the Mongols.’’ History Today 14 (1964): 696–704. Bumke, Joachim. Courtly Culture: Literature and Society in the High Middle Ages. Trans. Thomas Dunlap. Woodstock, NY, 2000. Burnett, Charles, ed. Adelard of Bath: An English Scientist and Arabist of the Early Twelfth Century. London, 1987. ———. The Introduction of Arabic Learning into England. The Panizzi Lectures, 1996. London, 1997. Burnley, David. Courtliness and Literature in Medieval England. London, 1998. Cade, Tom J. The Falcons of the World. Ithaca, NY, 1982. Cahier, Ch. Caractéristiques des saints dans l’art populaire. Reprint ed. Paris, 1867. Cam, Helen M. The Hundred and the Hundred Rolls: An Outline of Local Government in Medieval England. London, 1930.



Carrington, Ann. ‘‘The Horseman and the Falcon: Mounted Falconers in Pictish Sculpture.’’ Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 126 (1996): 459–68. Carus-Wilson, E. M. The Overseas Trade of Bristol in the Later Middle Ages. Reprint ed. New York, 1967. Caspar, E. ‘‘Die Kreuzzugsbullen Eugens III.’’ Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde 45 (1924): 285–305. Castelot, André, Alain Decaux, Marcel Jullian, and Jacques Levron. Histoire de la France et les Français. Vol. 2, 987–1270, la jeunesse de la France. Paris, 1970. Cave, C. J. P., and Tancred Borenius. ‘‘The Painted Ceiling in the Nave of Peterborough Cathedral.’’ Archaeologia 87 (1937): 297–309. Cazalis de Fondouce, P. Vervelles pour les faucons et pour les chiens Montpellier, 1909. Chadwick, H. Munro. Studies on Anglo-Saxon Institutions. Cambridge, UK, 1905. Chamerlat, Christian Antoine de. Falconry and Art. London, 1987. Charles-Edwards, T. M. The Welsh Laws. Cardiff, 1989. Cheney, C. R., ed. A Handbook of Dates: For Students of British History. Rev. Michael Jones. New ed. Royal Historical Society Guides and Handbooks, no. 4. London, 2000. Clemoes, P. A. M. ‘‘The Chronology of Ælfric’s Works.’’ In The Anglo-Saxons: Studies in Some Aspects of Their History and Culture Presented to Bruce Dickins. Ed. Peter Clemoes, 212–47. London, 1959. Clutton-Brock, Juliet. ‘‘The Animal Resources.’’ In The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England. Ed. David M. Wilson, 373–92. London, 1976. Cobban, Alan B. The Medieval English Universities: Oxford and Cambridge to c. 1500. Berkeley, 1988. Cochrane, Louise. Adelard of Bath: The First English Scientist. London, 1994. Collingwood, W. G. Northumbrian Crosses of the Pre-Norman Age. London, 1927. Collon, Dominique, ed. 7000 Years of Seals. London, 1977. Colvin, H. M. The History of the King’s Works: The Middle Ages. Ed. R. Allen Brown, H. M. Colvin, and A. J. Taylor. 2 vols. and plans. London, 1963. Colvin, H. M, John Summerson, Martin Biddle, J. R. Hale, and Marcus Merriman. The History of the King’s Works, vol. 4, 1485–1660, part 2. London, 1982. Cook, Albert Stanburrough. ‘‘The Last Months of Chaucer’s Earliest Patron.’’ Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences 21 (1916): 1–144. Coss, Peter. The Knight in Medieval England, 1000–1400. Stroud, Gloucestershire, 1993. Coulton, G. G. The Medieval Village. Cambridge, UK, 1928. Cowie, Frederick Joseph. ‘‘Boniface (ca. 675–754) and His Friends: A Communion of Saints.’’ Ph.D. dissertation, St. Louis University, 1975. Cox, J. Charles. The Royal Forests of England. London, 1905. Cramp, Rosemary. Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture, vol. 1, County Durham and Northumberland. Oxford, 1984. Cummins, John. The Hound and the Hawk: The Art of Medieval Hunting. New York, 1988. Dalby, David. Lexicon of the Mediæval German Hunt: A Lexicon of Middle High German Terms (1050–1500), Associated with the Chase, Hunting with Bows, Falconry, Trapping and Fowling. Berlin, 1965.



Danielsson, Bror. ‘‘The Kerdeston ‘Library of Hunting and Hawking Literature’ (Early Fifteenth Century Fragments).’’ In Et Multum et Multa: Beiträge zur Literatur, Geschichte und Kultur der Jagd, Festgabe für Kurt Lindner zum 27, November 1971. Ed. Sigrid Schwenk, Gunnar Tilander, and Carl Arnold Willemsen, 47–59. Berlin, 1971. Darby, H. C., and I. B. Terrett, eds. The Domesday Geography of Midland England. Cambridge, UK, 1954. Darlington, R. R. ‘‘Introduction to the Wiltshire Domesday.’’ In VCH Wiltshire. Ed. R. B. Pugh and Elizabeth Crittall. Vol. 2:42–112. London, 1955. Davidson, Clifford, and Jennifer Alexander. The Early Art of Coventry, Stratford-uponAvon, Warwick and Lesser Sites in Warwickshire: A Subject List of Extant and Lost Art Including Items Relevant to Early Drama. Kalamazoo, 1985. Devic, Cl., and J. Vaissete. Histoire Générale de Languedoc: Avec les notes et les pièces justicatives. 15 vols. Toulouse, 1872–93. Dewa, Robert J. ‘‘The Runic Riddles of the Exeter Book: Language, Games and AngloSaxon Scholarship.’’ Nottingham Medieval Studies 39 (1995): 26–36. Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources. Prepared by R. E. Latham. London, 1975–. Digby, George Wingfield, assisted by Wendy Hefford. The Devonshire Hunting Tapestries. London, 1971. Dizionario Letterario Bompiani degli Autori: Di Tutti i Tempi e di Tutti le Letterature. 3 vols. Milan, 1956–57. Doble, G. H. Lives of the Welsh Saints. Ed. D. Simon Evans. Cardiff, 1971. Dobney, Keith. ‘‘Ancient Falconry.’’ Dodwell, C. R. ‘‘The Bayeux Tapestry and the French Secular Epic.’’ Burlington Magazine 108 (1966): 549–60. Drake, Maurice, and Wilfred Drake. Saints and their Emblems. Reprint ed. New York, 1971. Drewett, P. L. ‘‘Excavations at Hadleigh Castle, Essex, 1971–1972.’’ Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 3d ser., 38 (1975): 90–154. Du Cange, Charles du Fresne, Dominus. Glossarium Mediæ et Infimæ Latinitatis. With supplementary material by D. P. Carpenter and G. A. L. Henschel. Ed. and rev. Léopold Favre. 10 vols. in 11. Reprint, Paris, 1937–38. Dunbabin, Katherine M. D. The Mosaics of Roman North Africa: Studies in Iconography and Patronage. Oxford, 1978. Dunoyer de Noirmont, Joseph Anne Emile Edouard. Histoire de la chasse en France, depuis les temps les plus reculés jusqu’à la Révolution. 3 vols. Paris, 1867–1868. Dyer, Christopher. Standards of Living in the Later Middle Ages: Social Change in England, c. 1200–1500. Cambridge, UK, 1989. Eastham, Anne. ‘‘Birds,’’ in Excavations at Portchester Castle, vol. 3, Medieval, the Outer Bailey and its Defences. Ed. Barry Cunliffe, 233–38. London, 1977. Edwards, John. ‘‘The Morality of the Three Living and the Three Dead: Medieval Wall Paintings at St Mary’s Church, Raunds.’’ Northamptonshire Archaeology 16 (1981): 148–52. Egbert, Virginia Wylie. On the Bridges of Mediaeval Paris: A Record of Early FourteenthCentury Life. Princeton, 1974.



Ekwall, Eilert. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names. 4th ed. Oxford, 1960. ‘‘The Electronic Sawyer.’’ Sawyer2.html. Epstein, Hans J. ‘‘The Origin and Earliest History of Falconry.’’ Isis 34, pt. 6 (Autumn 1943): 497–509. ———. Review of Dancus Rex, Guillelmus Falconarius, Gerardus Falconarius: Les plus anciens traités de fauconnerie de l’occident, publiés d’après les manuscrits connus, edited by Gunnar Tilander. Speculum 40 (1965): 756–60. Erhardt-Siebold, Erika von. ‘‘The Old English Hunt Riddles.’’ PLMA 63, no. 1, pt. 1 (March 1948): 3–6. Evans, Dafydd. ‘‘Adelard on Falconry.’’ In Burnett, Adelard of Bath, 25–27. ———. Lanier: Histoire d’un mot. Geneva, 1967. ———. ‘‘The Nobility of Knight and Falcon.’’ In The Ideals and Practice of Medieval Knighthood III: Papers from the Fourth Strawberry Hill Conference, 1988. Ed. Christopher Harper-Bill and Ruth Harvey, 79–99. Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1990. ———. ‘‘Le traité de fauconnerie en vers provençaux: Dels auzels cassadors, son intéret culturel.’’ In La chasse au Moyen Age: Actes du Colloque de Nice (22–24 juin 1979), 9–17. Nice, 1980. Everett, A. W. ‘‘Unvarnished Oak Carving.’’ Letter to the editor, Country Life (August 19, 1971): 450. Eygun, François. Sigillographie du Poitou jusqu’en 1515: Étude d’histoire provinciale sur les institutions, les arts et la civilisation d’après les sceaux. Poitiers, 1938. Eyton, R. W. Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II: Instancing Also the Chief Agents and Adversaries of the King in His Government, Diplomacy, and Strategy. London, 1878. Fagan, B. The Little Ice Age: How Climate Made History, 1300–1850. New York, 2000. Fanning, William, H. W. ‘‘Hunting, Canons On.’’ In The Catholic Encyclopedia: An International Work of Reference on the Constitution, Doctrine, Discipline and History of the Catholic Church, 7:563–64. New York [c. 1907–12]. Farmer, David Hugh. The Oxford Dictionary of Saints. 3d ed. Oxford, 1992. Farrer, William. Honors and Knights’ Fees. 3 vols. London and Manchester, 1923–25. Ferguson-Lees, James, and David A. Christie. Raptors of the World. Boston, 2001. Finn, R. Weldon. An Introduction to Domesday Book. London, 1963. Finucane, R[onald]. C. ‘‘Cantilupe as Thaumaturge: Pilgrims and Their Miracles.’’ In St Thomas Cantilupe Bishop of Hereford: Miracles in His Honour. Ed. Meryl Jancey, 137–44. Hereford, 1982. ———. Miracles and Pilgrims: Popular Beliefs in Medieval England. London, 1977. Fischer, Nancy. ‘‘Handlist of Animal References in Middle English Religious Prose.’’ Leeds Studies in English, n.s. 4 (1970): 49–110. Fisher, C. T. ‘‘Bird Bones from the Excavation at Crown Car Park, Nantwich, Cheshire.’’ Circaea 4 (1986): 55–64. Flint, Valerie I. J. ‘‘The Hereford Map: Its Author(s), Two Scenes and a Border.’’ TRHS 6th ser., 8 (1998): 19–44.



Fowler, James. ‘‘On Mediaeval Representations of the Months and Seasons.’’ Archaeologia 44 (1873): 137–224. Fox, Nick. Understanding the Bird of Prey. Surrey, BC, 1995. Fraser, C. M. A History of Antony Bek Bishop of Durham, 1283–1311. Oxford, 1957. Friedman, John B. ‘‘Albert the Great’s Topoi of Direct Observation and His Debt to Thomas of Cantimpré.’’ In Pre-Modern Encyclopaedic Texts: Proceedings of the Second COMERS Congress, Groningen, 1–4 July 1996, 379–92. Ed. Peter Binkley. Leiden, 1997. Friedman, Mira. ‘‘The Falcon and the Hunt: Symbolic Love Imagery in Medieval and Renaissance Art.’’ In Poetics of Love in the Middle Ages: Texts and Contexts. Ed. Moshe Lazar and Norris J. Lacy, 157–75. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press, 1989. ———. ‘‘Hunting Scenes in the Art of the Middle Ages and Renaissance’’: English Summary of Hebrew Text. Vol. 2. Ph.D. dissertation, Tel Aviv University, 1978. Friedmann, Mira. ‘‘Sünde, Sünder und die Darstellungen der Laster in den Bildern zur ‘Bible moralisée.’’’ Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 37 (1984): 157–71, 253–60. Fryde, E. B., D. E. Greenway, S. Porter, and I. Roy, eds. Handbook of British Chronology. 3d ed. London, 1986. Fryde, Natalie. Why Magna Carta? Angevin England Revisited. Münster, 2001. Fuertes, Louis Agassiz. ‘‘Falconry, the Sport of Kings.’’ National Geographic Magazine 38 (1920): 429–60. Galbraith, V. H. An Introduction to the Use of the Public Records. Rev. ed. London, 1952. ———. Studies in the Public Records. London, 1948. Gameson, Richard. ‘‘The Origin of the Exeter Book of Old English Poetry.’’ Anglo-Saxon England 25 (1996): 135–85. Garnier, François. Le langue de l’Image au Moyen Age, II: Grammaire des gestes. [Paris, 1989]. ———. ‘‘Les significations symboliques du faucon dans l’illustration des bibles moralisées de la première moitié du 13e siècle.’’ In La chasse au vol au fil des temps, 135–42. Gien, 1994. Gilbert, John M. Hunting and Hunting Reserves in Medieval Scotland. Edinburgh, 1979. Given-Wilson, Chris. The Royal Household and the King’s Affinity: Service, Politics and Finance in England, 1360–1413. New Haven, 1986. Gover, J. E. B., A. Mawer, and F. M. Stenton, in collaboration with Arthur Bonner. The Place-Names of Surrey. English Place-Name Society, vol. 11. Cambridge, 1934. Grand, Roger, with the collaboration of Raymond Delatouche. L’agriculture au Moyen Age de la fin de l’Empire romain au XVIe siècle. Paris, 1950. Gransden, Antonia. Historical Writing in England c. 550–c. 1307. London, 1974. Grant, Annie. ‘‘Animal Resources.’’ In The Countryside of Medieval England. Ed. Grenville Astill and Annie Grant, 149–87. Oxford, 1988. Gras, N. S. B. The Early English Customs System: A Documentary Study of the Institutions and Economic History of the Customs from the Thirteenth to the Sixteenth Century. Cambridge, MA, 1918.



Grassby, Richard. ‘‘The Decline of Falconry in Early Modern England.’’ Past and Present 175 (Nov. 1997): 37–62. Graves, Edgar B. A Bibliography of English History to 1485: Based on The Sources and Literature of English History From the Earliest Times to About 1485 by Charles Gross. Oxford, 1975. Great Britain. Public Record Office. Guide to the Contents of the Public Record Office. 3 vols. London, 1963–68. ———. List of Documents Relating to the Household and Wardrobe: John-Edward I. Public Record Office Handbooks, no. 7. London, 1964. ———. List of Sheriffs for England and Wales: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1831, Compiled from Documents in the Public Records Office. Lists and Indexes, 9. Reprint ed. New York, 1963. Green, Judith A. English Sheriffs to 1154. Public Record Office Handbooks, no. 24. London, 1990. Greenfield, Stanley B. A Critical History of Old English Literature. New York, 1965. Greswell, William H. P. The Forests and Deer Parks of the County of Somerset. Taunton, 1905. Gross, Charles. The Sources and Literature of English History, from the Earliest Times to about 1485. London, 1900. Grove, Jean M. The Little Ice Age. London, 1988. Grove, Jean M, and Roy Switsur, ‘‘Glacial Geological Evidence for the Medieval Warm Period.’’ Climatic Change 26 (1994): 143–69. Haggard, H. The Doctor in History. New Haven: 1934. Haines, Roy M. ‘‘Adam Orleton and the Diocese of Winchester.’’ Journal of Ecclesiastical History 23 (1972): 1–30. Hall, Hubert. ‘‘The ‘Dot’ System of the Exchequer.’’ In The Great Roll of the Pipe for the Tenth Year of the Reign of King Henry the Second, A.D. 1163–1164, viii-xix. PRS, vol. 7. London, 1886. Hands, Rachel. ‘‘Juliana Berners and The Boke of St. Albans.’’ Review of English Studies, n.s., 18 (1967): 373–86. ———. ‘‘The Names of All Manner of Hawks, and to Whom They Belong.’’ Notes and Queries, n.s., 18 (1971): 85–88. Hanham, Alison. The Celys and their World: An English Merchant Family of the Fifteenth Century. Cambridge, UK, 1985. Haring, N. M. ‘‘Peter Cantor’s View on Ecclesiastical Excommunication and Its Practical Consequences.’’ Mediaeval Studies 11 (1949): 100–112. Harrison, Colin. The History of the Birds of Britain. London, 1988. Harting, James Edmund. Bibliotheca accipitraria: A Catalogue of Books Ancient and Modern Relating to Falconry, with Notes, Glossary, and Vocabulary. London, 1891. Harvey, P. D. A., and Andrew McGuiness. A Guide to British Medieval Seals. London, 1996. Haskins, Charles Homer. ‘‘King Harold’s Books.’’ EHR 37 (1922): 398–400. ———. Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science. 2d ed. rev. Cambridge, MA, 1927. Hatto, Arthur T. ‘‘Wolfram von Eschenbach and the Chase.’’ In Et Multum et Multa:



Beiträge zur Literatur, Geschichte und Kultur der Jagd, Festgabe für Kurt Lindner zum 27, November 1971. Ed. Sigrid Schwenk, Gunnar Tilander, and Carl Arnold Willemsen, 101–12. Berlin, 1971. Hawkes, A. J. ‘‘Symbolic Lives: The Visual Experience.’’ In The Anglo-Saxons from the Migration Period to the Eighth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective. Ed. John Hines, 311–38. Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1997. Heidenreich, Manfred. Birds of Prey: Medicine and Management. Trans. Yvonne Oppenheim. Oxford, 1997. Helle, Knut. ‘‘Anglo-Norwegian Relations in the Reign of Håkon Håkonsson (1217– 63).’’ Mediaeval Scandinavia 1 (1968): 101–14. Henderson, Isabel. ‘‘Primus inter Pares The St Andrews Sarcophagus and Pictish Sculpture.’’ In The St Andrews Sarcophagus: A Pictish Masterpiece and its International Connections. Ed. Sally M. Foster. Dublin, 1998. Henricks, Thomas S. ‘‘Sport and Social Hierarchy in Medieval England.’’ Journal of Sport History 9, no. 2 (Summer 1982): 20–37. Herbert, J. A. Catalogue of Romances in the Department of Manuscripts in the British Museum. 3 vols. London, 1883–1910. Hicks, Carola. ‘‘The Birds on the Sutton Hoo Purse.’’ Anglo-Saxon England 15 (1986): 153–65. Hill, Mary C. The King’s Messengers, 1199–1377: A Contribution to the History of the Royal Household. London, 1961. Hill, Rosalind. The Labourer in the Vineyard: The Visitations of Archbishop Melton in the Archdeaconry of Richmond. Borthwick Papers, no. 35. York, 1968. ———. ‘‘The Theory and Practice of Excommunication in Medieval England.’’ History 42 (1957): 1–11. Hillen, Henry J. History of the Borough of King’s Lynn. Norwich, 1907. Hodnett, Edward. English Woodcuts 1480–1535. Oxford, 1973. Hofmann, Gisela. ‘‘Falkenjagd und Falkenhandel in den nordischen Ländern während des Mittelalters.’’ Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 88 (1957– 58): 115–49. Horne, E. ‘‘The Falconry, Farleigh Hungerford.’’ Proceedings of the Somerset Archaeological and Natural History Society 87 (1942 for 1941): 106–7. Howard, Edwin J. ‘‘Old English Tree Climbing: Christ vv. 678–79.’’ Journal of English and Germanic Philology 30 (1931): 152–54. Howe, M. D. ‘‘A Medieval Knife Handle from Crowland, Lincolnshire.’’ Medieval Archaeology 27 (1983): 146–50. Huff, Chris. ‘‘The Introduction of Falconry to the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms: A Consideration of the Evidence from Anglo-Saxon and Continental Sources.’’ Medieval Life 10 (Autumn 1998): 7–12. Hughes, Malcolm K., and Henry F. Diaz, ‘‘Was There a ‘Medieval Warm Period’, and If So, Where and When?’’ Climatic Change 26 (1994): 109–42. Hunt, R. W. The Schools and the Cloister: The Life and Writings of Alexander Nequam (1157–1217). Ed. and rev. Margaret Gibson. Oxford, 1984. Hunt, Tony. Plant Names of Medieval England. Cambridge, UK, 1989.



Ingamells, Ruth Louise. ‘‘The Household Knights Of Edward I.’’ 2 vols. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Durham, 1992. Introduction to the Study of the Pipe Rolls. PRS, vol. 3. London, 1884. Itinerary of Edward I. Compiled by E. W. Safford. List and Index Society, vols. 103, 132, and 135. 3 parts. London, 1974–77. Ivens, R. J. ‘‘De Arte Venandi cum Avibus: An Archaeological and Historical Introduction.’’ Cake & Cockhorse 9 (1984): 130–37. James, Montague Rhodes, ed. The Ancient Libraries of Canterbury and Dover: The Catalogues of the Libraries of Christ Church Priory and St Augustine’s Abbey at Canterbury and of St Martin’s Priory at Dover . . . . Cambridge, UK, 1903. Jankuhn, Herbert. ‘‘Archäologisches zur frühen Falkenbeize im Norden.’’ In Indogermanica: Festschrift für Wolfgang Krause, 31–37. Heidelberg, 1960. Janse, Antheun. ‘‘Marriage and Noble Lifestyle.’’ In Blockmans and Janse, Showing Status, 113–38. Janson, H. W. Apes and Ape Lore in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. London, 1952. Jenkins, Daffyd. ‘‘gwalch: Welsh.’’ Cambridge Medieval Studies 19 (1990): 55–67. ———. ‘‘Hawk and Hound: Hunting in the Laws of Court.’’ In The Welsh King and His Court. Ed. T. M. Charles-Edwards, Morfydd E. Owen, and Paul Russell, 255–80. Cardiff, 2000. ———. ‘‘The Lawbooks of Medieval Wales.’’ In The Political Context of Law: Proceedings of the Seventh British Legal History Conference, Canterbury 1985. Ed. Richard Eales and David Sullivan, 1–15. London, 1987. Jenkinson, Hilary. ‘‘Financial Records of the Reign of King John.’’ In Magna Carta Commemoration Essays. Ed. Henry Elliot Malden, 244–300. London, 1917. Johnson, Charles, and Hilary Jenkinson. English Court Hand, A. D. 1066 to 1500: Illustrated Chiefly from the Public Records. 2 vols. Oxford, 1915. Johnson, J. H. ‘‘The King’s Wardrobe and Household.’’ In The English Government at Work, 1327–1336, vol. 1, Central and Prerogative Administration. Ed. J. F. Willard and W. A. Morris, 206–49. Mediaeval Academy of America, Publication no. 37. Cambridge, MA, 1940. Johnstone, Hilda. ‘‘Poor-Relief in the Royal Households of Thirteenth-Century England.’’ Speculum 4 (1929), 149–67. Jones, John Winter. ‘‘Observations of the Origin of the Division of Man’s Life into Stages.’’ Archaeologia 35 (1853): 167–89. Jones, Malcolm. The Secret Middle Ages. Stroud, 2002. Joubert, Fabienne. La tapisserie médiévale au musée de Cluny. Paris, 1987. Kaeuper, Richard W. Bankers to the Crown: The Riccardi of Lucca and Edward I. Princeton, 1973. Kaftal, George. Iconography of the Saints in Central and South Italian Schools of Painting. Florence, 1965. ———. Iconography of the Saints in the Painting of North East Italy. Florence, 1978. Kaminsky, Howard. ‘‘Estate, Nobility, and the Exhibition of Estate in the Later Middle Ages.’’ Speculum 68 (1993): 684–709.



Karkov, Catherine E. ‘‘The Bewcastle Cross: Some Iconographic Problems.’’ In The Insular Tradition. Ed. Catherine E. Karkov, Michael Ryan, and Robert T. Farrell, 9–26. Albany, 1997. Karlsson, Lennart. Medieval Ironwork in Sweden. 2 vols. Stockholm, 1988. Kauffmann, C. M. Romanesque Manuscripts, 1066–1190. Vol. 3 of A Survey of Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles. Ed. J. J. G. Alexander. London, 1975. Keats-Rohan, K. S. B. Domesday Descendants: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066–1166. II. Pipe Rolls to Cartae Baronum. Woodbridge, Suffolk, 2002. Keen, Maurice. ‘‘Nobles’ Leisure: Jousting, Hunting and Hawking.’’ In Il tempo libero economia e società (Loisirs, Leisure, Tiemo Libre, Freizeit) Secc. XIII-XVIII: Atti della ‘‘Ventiseiesima Settimana di Studi’’ 18–23 aprile 1994. Ed. Simonetta Cavaciocchi, 307–22. Florence, 1995. Keene, Derek. Survey of Medieval Winchester. Winchester Studies, 2. 2 vols. Oxford, 1985. Keiser, George R. Works of Science and Invention. Vol. 10 of A Manual of the Writings in Middle English, 1050–1500. New Haven, 1998. Keller, John E., and Richard P. Kinkade. Iconography in Medieval Spanish Literature. Lexington, KY, 1984. Kenaan-Kedar, Nurith. ‘‘Aliénor d’Aquitaine conduite en captivité: Les peintures murales commémoratives de Sainte-Radegonde de Chinon.’’ Cahiers de civilisation mediévale 41 (1998): 317–30. Kendrick, T. D. Anglo-Saxon Art to A.D. 900. London, 1938. Ker, N. R. Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon. Oxford, 1957. Kimball, Elisabeth Guernsey. Serjeanty Tenure in Medieval England. New Haven, 1936. Kirschbaum, Engelbert. Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie. Vols. 5–8. Ikonographie der Heiligen. Compiled by Wolfgang Braunfels. Rome, 1973. Knoop, Douglas, and Jones, G. P. The Mediaeval Mason: An Economic History of English Stone Building in the Later Middle Ages and Early Modern Times. Manchester, 1949. Knowles, Dom David. The Evolution of Medieval Thought. London, 1962. ———. The Monastic Order in England: A History of Its Development from the Times of St Dunstan to the Fourth Lateran Council, 943–1216. 2d ed. Cambridge, UK, 1966. ———. The Religious Orders in England. 3 vols. Cambridge, UK, 1948–59. Koechlin, Raymond. Les ivoires gothiques français. 3 vols. Paris, 1924. Lachaud, Frédérique. ‘‘Liveries and Robes in England, c. 1200–c. 1330.’’ EHR 111 (1996): 279–98. Landon, Lionel. The Itinerary of King Richard I: With Studies on Certain Matters of Interest Connected with His Reign. PRS, vol. 51. London, 1935. Larson, Laurence Marcellus. The King’s Household in England Before the Norman Conquest. Madison, WI, 1904. Latham, R. E., ed. Revised Medieval Latin Word-List from British and Irish Sources. London, 1965. Laurioux, Bruno. ‘‘Table et hiérarchie sociale à la fin du Moyen Âge.’’ In Du manuscrit à



la table: Essais sur la cuisine au Moyen Âge et répertoire des manuscrits médiévaux contenant des recettes culinaires. Ed. Carole Lambert, 87–108. Montreal, 1992. Lelong, Charles. Touraine Romane. 3d ed. La-Pierre-qui-Vire, Yonne, 1977. Levitan, B. ‘‘The Faunal Remains.’’ In Ilchester, vol. 1, Excavations, 1974–1975. Ed. Peter Leach, 269–85. Bristol, 1982. Lewis, C. P. ‘‘The French in England before the Norman Conquest.’’ Anglo-Norman Studies 17 (1994): 123–44. Lewis, Suzanne. The Rhetoric of Power in the Bayeux Tapestry. Cambridge, UK, 1999. Lindner, Kurt. Beiträge zu Vogelfang und Falknerei im Altertum. Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der Jagd, vol. 12. Berlin, 1973. ———. ‘‘Beizjagd.’’ In Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde. Ed. Johannes Hoops, 163–71. 2d ed. Berlin, 1968–. ———. Von Falken, Hunden und Pferden: Deutsche Albertus-Magnus-Übersetzungen aus der ersten Hälfte des 15. Jahrhunderts. Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der Jagd, vol. 7. Berlin, 1962. Liuzza, Roy Michael. ‘‘On the Dating of Beowulf.’’ In Beowulf: Basic Readings. Ed. Peter S. Baker, 281–303. New York, 1995. Lloyd, John Edward. A History of Wales: From the Earliest Times to the Edwardian Conquest. 3d ed. 2 vols. London, 1939. Lloyd, Simon. English Society and the Crusade. Oxford, 1988. Lockwood, W. B. The Oxford Dictionary of British Bird Names. Oxford, 1993. Loomis, Grant. ‘‘The Growth of the Saint Edmund Legend.’’ Harvard Studies and Notes in Philology and Literature 14 (1932): 83–113. ———. ‘‘Saint Edmund and the Lodbrok (Lothbroc) Legend.’’ Harvard Studies and Notes in Philology and Literature 15 (1933), 1–23. Lowden, John. The Making of the Bibles Moralisées 2 vols. University Park, PA, 2000. Loyn, H. R. Anglo-Saxon England and the Norman Conquest. London, 1962. ———. ‘‘Wales and England in the Tenth Century: The Context of the Athelstan Charters.’’ Welsh History Review 10 (1980–81): 283–301. Luborsky, Ruth Samson, and Elizabeth Morley Ingram. A Guide to English Illustrated Books: 1536–1603. Tempe, AZ, 1998. Lyon, Bryce. ‘‘Coup d’œil sur l’infrastructure de la chasse au Moyen Âge.’’ Le Moyen Age 104 (1998): 211–27. Lyte, H. C. Maxwell. A History of Eton College (1440–1898). 3d ed. London, 1899. Mackinney, Loren. Early Medieval Medicine with Special Reference to France and Chartres. Baltimore, 1937. Mackinney, Loren, and Harry Bober. ‘‘A Thirteenth-Century Medical Case History in Miniatures.’’ Speculum 35 (1960): 251–59. Madox, Thomas. The History and Antiquities of the Exchequer of the Kings of England, in Two Periods: To Wit, from the Norman Conquest, to the End of the Reign of K. John; and from the End of the Reign of K. John, to the End of the Reign of K. Edward II., Taken from Records . . . . 2 vols. 2d ed. London, 1769. Maitland, F. W. Domesday Book and Beyond: Three Essays in the Early History of England. Cambridge, UK, 1897.



Malacarne, Giancarlo. La cacce del Principe: l’ars venandi nella terra dei Gonzago. Modena, 1998. Maltby, Mark. Faunal Studies in Urban Sites: The Animal Bones from Exeter 1971– 1975. Sheffield, 1979. Marquet de Vasselot, J. J. Les gémellions limousins du XIIIe siècle. Paris, 1952. Marrus, Michael R. The Emergence of Leisure. New York, 1974. McKechnie, William Sharp. Magna Carta: A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John. 2d ed. rev. Glasgow, 1914. McLean, Teresa. The English at Play in the Middle Ages. Windsor Forest, Berkshire, n.d. Melnikas, Anthony. The Corpus of the Miniatures in the Manuscripts of Decretum Gratiani 3 vols. Rome, 1975. Mercer, Eric. ‘‘The Ruthwell and Bewcastle Crosses.’’ Antiquity 38 (1964): 268–76. Merrifield, Ralph. The Archaeology of Ritual and Magic. New York, 1988. Metzger, Thérèse, and Mendel Metzger. Jewish Life in the Middle Ages. New York, 1982. Michell, E. B. The Art and Practice of Hawking. London, 1959. The Middle English Dictionary. Ed. Hans Kurath, Sherman M. Kuhn, John A. Reidy, and Robert E. Lewis. Ann Arbor, 1952–. Midmer, Roy. English Mediaeval Monasteries (1066–1540): A Summary. Athens, GA, 1979. Milburn, Robert. Saints and Their Emblems in English Churches. 3d ed. Malvern, Worcestershire, 1991. Miller, Brian D. H. ‘‘The Early History of Bodleian MS Digby 86.’’ Annuale Medievale 4 (1963): 23–56. Moor, C. Knights of Edward I. Harleian Society, vols. 80–84. 5 vols. London, 1929–32. Moorman, J. R. H. Church Life in England in the Thirteenth Century. Cambridge, UK, 1955. ———. ‘‘Edward I at Lanercost Priory, 1306–7.’’ English Historical Review 67 (1952): 161–74. Morgan, Nigel. Early Gothic Manuscripts. 2 vols. Vol. 4 of A Survey of Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles. Ed. J. J. G. Alexander. London, 1982–88. ———. The Medieval Painted Glass of Lincoln Cathedral. Corpus Vitrearum Medii Aevi, Great Britain: Occasional Papers, 3. London, 1983. Morris, William Alfred. The Medieval English Sheriff to 1300. Manchester, 1927. Mulkeen, S., and T. P. O’Connor. ‘‘Raptors in Towns: Towards an Ecological Model.’’ International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 7 (1997): 440–49. Mullally, Robert. ‘‘The So-Called Hawking Party at the Court of Philip the Good: A Study of a Burgundian Primitive of 1431.’’ Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 6th ser., 90 (1977): 109–12. Mussat, Andre. Arts et cultures de Bretagne: Un Millénaire. Paris, 1979. Neilson, N. Customary Rents. Vol. 2, no. 4 of Oxford Studies in Social and Legal History. Ed. Paul Vinogradoff. Oxford, 1910. Newman, John. North East and East Kent, 2d ed. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1976. Newton, Stella Mary. Fashion in the Age of the Black Prince: A Study of the Years 1340– 1365. Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1980. Nichols, Ann Eljenholm. The Early Art of Norfolk: A Subject List of Extant and Lost Art Including Items Relevant to Early Drama. Kalamazoo, 2002.



Nicklasson, Påvel. ‘‘Late Iron Age Barrows at Lyckås, Skärstad Parish, Småland, Southern Sweden.’’ In Grave Matters: Eight Studies of First Millenium AD Burials in Crimea, England, and Southern Scandinavia: Papers from a Session Held at the European Association of Archaeologists Fourth Annual Meeting in Göteborg 1998. Ed. Martin Rundkvist, 97–106. BAR International Series, 781. Oxford, 1999. Niedermann, Christoph. ‘‘ ‘Je ne fois que chassiers’: La chasse à la cour de Phillipe le Bon, duc de Bourgogne.’’ In La Chasse au Moyen Age: Société, traités, symboles. Ed. Agostino Paravicini Bagliani and Baoudouin Van den Abeele. Florence, 2000. Nitze, W. A. ‘‘The Romance of Erec, Son of Lac.’’ Modern Philology 11 (1913–14): 445– 89. O’Connor, Terry. Animal Bones from Flaxengate, Lincoln, c. 870–1500. The Archaeology of Lincoln, vol. 18, pt. 1. London, 1982. ———. ‘‘Bones from Anglo-Scandinavian Levels at 16–22 Coppergate.’’ In The Archaeology of York, ed. P. V. Addyman, vol. 15, The Animal Bones, 137–201. London, 1991. Ogilve, Astrid, and Graham Farmer. ‘‘Documenting the Medieval Climate.’’ In Climates of the British Isles: Present, Past and Future. Ed. Mike Hulme and Elaine Barrow, 112– 33. New York, 1997. Oggins, Robin S. ‘‘Albertus Magnus on Falcons and Hawks.’’ In Albertus Magnus and the Sciences: Commemorative Essays, 1980. Ed. James A. Weisheipl, 441–62. Toronto, 1980. ———. ‘‘The English Kings and Their Hawks: Falconry in Medieval England to the Time of Edward I.’’ Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1967. ———. ‘‘Falconry and Medieval Social Status.’’ Mediaevalia 12 (1989 for 1986): 43–55. ———. ‘‘Falconry and Medieval Views of Nature.’’ In The Medieval World of Nature. Ed. Joyce E. Salisbury, 47–60. New York, 1993. ———. ‘‘Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England.’’ Mediaevalia 7 (1981): 173–208. Oggins, Robin S., and Virginia Darrow Oggins. ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers: The Prosopography of a Branch of the English Royal Household.’’ Medieval Prosopography 3, no. 1 (Spring 1982): 63–94. Oggins, Virginia Darrow, and Robin S. Oggins. ‘‘Hawkers and Falconers Along the Ouse: A Geographic Principle of Location in Some Serjeanty and Related Holdings.’’ Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society 80 (1992 for 1991): 7–20. ———. ‘‘Some Hawkers of Somerset.’’ Somerset Archaeology and Natural History 124 (1980): 51–60. O’Neill, Timothy. Merchants and Mariners in Medieval Ireland. Blackrock, CO. Dublin, 1987. Orme, Nicholas. ‘‘Medieval Hunting: Fact and Fancy.’’ In Chaucer’s England: Literature in Historical Context. Ed. Barbara Hanawalt, 133–53. Minneapolis, 1992. Owen-Crocker, Gale R. ‘‘Hawks and Horse-Trappings: The Insignia of Rank.’’ In The Battle of Maldon AD 991. Ed. Donald Scragg, 220–37. Oxford, 1991. Owst, G. R. Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England. 2d ed. Oxford, 1961. ———. Preaching in Medieval England: An Introduction to Sermon Manuscripts of the Period c. 1350–1450. Cambridge, UK, 1926. The Oxford English Dictionary. 2d ed. Prep. J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner. 20 vols. Oxford, 1989.



Penzer, N. M. ‘‘The King’s Lynn Cup: The Oldest Secular Cup in England.’’ Connoisseur 117 (1946): 12–16, 64, 79–84. Peters, Heinz. ‘‘Falke, Falkenjagd, Falkner, und Falkenbuch.’’ In Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte 6: cols. 1251–1366. Stuttgart, 1937–. Pevsner, Nikolaus. Cornwall. Rev. Enid Radcliffe. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1951. Pfändler, Wilhelm. ‘‘Die Vergnügungen der Angelsachsen.’’ Anglia: Zeitschrift für Englische Philologie 29 (1906): 417–526. Piccirillo, Michele. The Mosaics of Jordan. Ed. Patricia M. Bikai and Thomas A. Dailey. Amman, Jordan, 1993. Platt, Colin, and Richard Coleman-Smith. Excavations in Medieval Southampton, 1953– 1969, vol. 1: The Excavation Reports. Leicester, 1975. Pollock, Frederick, and Frederic William Maitland. The History of English Law Before the Time of Edward I. 2 vols. 2d ed. Cambridge, UK, 1898. Poole, Austin Lane. Obligations of Society in the XII and XIII Centuries. Oxford, 1946. Poole, Reginald L. The Exchequer in the Twelfth Century. Oxford, 1912. Powicke, F. M[aurice]. King Henry III and the Lord Edward: The Community of the Realm in the Thirteenth Century. 2 vols. Oxford, 1947. Prestwich, Michael. Edward I. Berkeley, 1988. ———. War, Politics and Finance Under Edward I. London, 1972. Prummel, Wietske. ‘‘Evidence of Hawking (Falconry) from Bird and Mammal Bones.’’ International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 7 (1997): 333–38. Raftis, J. A. A Small Town in Late Medieval England: Godmanchester 1278–1400. Toronto, 1982. Randall, Lilian M. C. Images in the Margins of Gothic Manuscripts. Berkeley, 1966. Rashdall, Hastings. The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages. Ed. F. M. Powicke and A. B. Emden. New ed. 3 vols. Oxford, 1936. Réau, Louis. Iconographie de l’Art chrétien. Vol. 3, Iconographie des saints. In 3 parts. Paris, 1958. Reeves, Compton. Pleasures and Pastimes in Medieval England. New York, 1998. ———. Purveyors and Purveyance. Notre Dame, 1983. Remnant, G. L. A Catalogue of Misericords in Great Britain. Oxford, 1969. Richard, Jean. ‘‘La fauconnerie de Jean de Francières et ses sources.’’ Le Moyen Age 69 (1963): 893–902. Richardson, H. G. ‘‘The Exchequer Year.’’ TRHS, 4th ser., 8 (1925): 171–90. Rielly, Kevin. ‘‘Animal Bones.’’ In London Bridge: 2000 Years of a River Crossing. Ed. Bruce Watson, Trevor Bingham, and Tony Dyson. London, 2001. Rigby, S. H. Medieval Grimsby: Growth and Decline. Hull, 1993. Robinson, J. Armitage. The Abbot’s House at Westminster. Cambridge, UK, 1911. Rodgers, Edith Cooperrider. Discussion of Holidays in the Later Middle Ages. New York, 1940. Rogers, James E. Thorold. A History of Agriculture and Prices in England: From the Year after the Oxford Parliament (1259) to the Commencement of the Continental War (1793). 7 vols. in 8. Oxford, 1866–1902. Round, J. H[orace]. Feudal England: Historical Studies on the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries. London, 1909.



———. The King’s Serjeants and Officers of State: With Their Coronation Services. London, 1911. Rouse, E. Clive. ‘‘Wall Paintings in St. Andrew’s Church, Pickworth, Lincolnshire.’’ Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 3d ser., 13 (1950): 24–33. Rouse, E. Clive, and Audrey Baker. ‘‘The Wall-Paintings at Longthorpe Tower near Peterborough, Northants.’’ Archaeologia 96 (1955): 1–57. Royal Historical Society. Annual Bibliography of British and Irish History. 1975–. The Ruthwell Cross: Papers from the Colloquium Sponsored by the Index of Christian Art, December 1989. Ed. Brendan Cassidy. Princeton, 1992. Sadler, Peta. ‘‘Faunal Remains,’’ in J. R. Fairbrother, Faccombe Netherton: Excavations of a Saxon and Medieval Manorial Complex, 2 vols. London, 1990. Safford, E. W. ‘‘An Account of the Expenses of Eleanor, Sister of Edward III, on the Occasion of Her Marriage to Reynald, Count of Guelders.’’ Archaeologia 77 (1927): 111–40. ———. Descriptive List of Wardrobe Books (Public Record Office and British Library): Edward I-Edward IV. List and Index Society, vol. 168. London, 1980. Salzman, L. F. Building in England Down to 1540: A Documentary History. Oxford, 1952. ———. Edward I. London, 1968. ———. Mediaeval Byways. Boston, 1913. ———. More Medieval Byways. London, 1926. Sanders, I. J. English Baronies: A Study of Their Origin and Descent, 1086–1327. Oxford, 1960. Sandler, Lucy Freeman. Gothic Manuscripts, 1285–1385. 2 vols. Vol 5 of A Survey of Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles. Ed. J. J. G. Alexander. London, 1986. Sarton, George. Introduction to the History of Science. 3 vols. in 5. Baltimore, 1927–48. Sawyer, P. H. Anglo-Saxon Charters: An Annotated List and Bibliography. London, 1968. Scattergood, John. ‘‘Skelton and Traditional Satire: Ware the Hauke.’’ Medium Ævum 55 (1986): 203–16. Schultz, James A. The Knowledge of Childhood in the German Middle Ages, 1100– 1350. Philadelphia, 1995. Scott, Kathleen L. Later Gothic Manuscripts, 1390–1490. 2 vols. Vol. 6 of A Survey of Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles. Ed. J. J. G. Alexander. London, 1996. Sears, Elizabeth. The Ages of Man: Medieval Interpretations of the Life Cycle. Princeton, 1986. The Secular Spirit: Life and Art at the End of the Middle Ages. New York, 1975. Seymour, M. C., and Colleagues. Bartholomaeus Anglicus and His Encyclopedia. Aldershot, Hampshire, 1992. Sharpe, Richard. ‘‘Geoffrey Le Baker’s ‘Aves Ganymedis’ Lundy Island and Alexander Neckam.’’ Notes and Queries 31 (1984): 34–35. Shaw, R. Cunliffe. The Royal Forest of Lancaster. Preston, Lancashire, 1956. Sheedy, Anna Toole. Bartolus on Social Conditions in the Fourteenth Century. New York, 1942. Le siècle de Saint Louis. [Paris], 1970.



Sinor, Denis. ‘‘The Mongols and Western Europe.’’ In Kenneth M. Setton, A History of the Crusades. Vol. 3. The Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries. Ed. Harry W. Hazard, 513–44. Madison, WI, 1975. Sjösvärd, Lars, Maria Vretemark, and Helmer Gustavson. ‘‘A Vendel Warrior from Vallentua.’’ In Vendel Period Studies: Transactions of the Boat-grave Symposium in Stockholm, February 2–3, 1981. Ed. J. P. Lamm and H.-Å. Nordström, 133–50. Stockholm, 1983. Smets, An, and Baudouin Van den Abeele. ‘‘Manuscrits et traités de chasse français du Moyen Age: Recensement et perspectives de recherche.’’ Romania 116 (1998): 316–67. Souchal, Geneviève. Masterpieces of Tapestry from the Fourteenth to the Sixteenth Century. New York, 1973. Southern, R. W. Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1970. Staniland, Kay. ‘‘Clothing and Textiles at the Court of Edward III.’’ In Collectanea Londiniensia: Studies in London Archaeology and History Presented to Ralph Merrifield. Ed. Joanna Bird, Hugh Chapman, and John Clark, 223–34. London, 1978. Staunton, Michael. ‘‘Thomas Becket’s Conversion.’’ Anglo-Norman Studies 21 (1998): 193–211. Steane, John. The Archaeology of the Medieval English Monarchy. London, 1993. Sten, Sabine, and Maria Vretemark. ‘‘Storgravsprojektet: Osteologiska analyser av yngre järnålderns benrika brangravar.’’ Fornvännen 83 (1988): 145–56. Stenton, Doris Mary. The English Woman in History. London, 1957. Stenton, F. M. Anglo-Saxon England. Vol. 2 of The Oxford History of England. Ed. Sir George Clark. 3d ed. Oxford, 1971. ———. ‘‘Domesday Survey: Introduction.’’ In vol. 1 of The Victoria History of the County of Oxford. Ed. L. F. Salzman, 372–95. London, 1939. Stone, Lawrence. Sculpture in Britain: The Middle Ages. 2d ed. Pelican History of Art. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1977. Storck, Willy F. ‘‘Aspects of Death in English Art and Poetry.’’ Burlington Magazine 21 (1912): 249–56, 314–19. Strutt, Joseph. The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England: Including the Rural and Domestic Recreations, May Games, Mummeries, Shows, Processions, Pageants, and Pompous Spectacles from the Earliest Period to the Present Time. Rev. J. Charles Cox. London, 1845. Stürner, Wolfgang. Friedrich II. 2 vols. Darmstadt, 1992–2000. Swaen, A. E. H. ‘‘Some Old English Birdnames.’’ Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen, Jahrgang 61, Band 118 (1907): 387–89. Swann, H. Kirke. A Monograph of the Birds of Prey [Order Accipitres]. Ed. Alexander Wetmore. 2 vols. London, 1930–1945. Szabó, Thomas. ‘‘Die kritik der Jagd: Von der Antike zum Mittelalter.’’ In Jagd und höfische kultur im Mittelalter. Ed. Werner Rösener, 167–229. Göttingen, 1997. Tanis, James R., with the assistance of Jennifer A. Thompson. Leaves of Gold: Manuscript Illuminations from Philadelphia Collections. Philadelphia, 2001. Taylor, Arnold. ‘‘Royal Alms and Oblations in the Later Thirteenth Century: An Analysis



of the Alms Roll of 12 Edward I (1283–4).’’ In Tribute to An Antiquary: Essays Presented to Marc Fitch by Some of His Friends. Ed. Frederick Emmison and Roy Stephens, 92–125. London, 1976. Temple, El˙zbieta. Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts, 900–1600. Vol. 2 of A Survey of Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles. Ed. J. J. G. Alexander. London, 1976. Tervarent, Guy de. Attributs et symboles dans l’art profane, 1450–1600: Dictionnaire d’un langage perdu. Geneva, 1958. Thomassin, Louis. Ancienne et nouvelle discipline de l’Eglise touchant les benefices et les beneficiers, . . . . Paris, 1702. Thorndike, Lynn. A History of Magic and Experimental Science During the First Thirteen Centuries of Our Era. 2 vols. New York, 1923. ‘‘The Three Living and the Three Dead: A Medieval Morality.’’ http://www.painted Tilander, Gunnar. Glanures lexicographiques. Lund, 1932. Tout, T. F. Chapters in the Administrative History of Mediaeval England: The Wardrobe, the Chamber, and the Small Seals. 6 vols. Manchester and London, 1920–33. ———. The Place of the Reign of Edward II in English History. 2d rev ed. by Hilda Johnstone. Manchester, 1914; reprint, Westport, CT, 1976. Tristram, E. W. English Wall Painting of the Fourteenth Century. Ed. Eileen Tristram with a catalogue compiled by E. W. Tristram and Monica Bardswell. London, 1955. Trombetta, Jean-Paul. ‘‘Restes de la fauconnerie royale de Philippe VI de Valois.’’ In L’Ilede-France médiévale, 2:110–11. 2 vols. Paris, 2001. Usilton, Larry W. ‘‘Edward I’s Exploitation of the Corrody System.’’ American Benedictine Review 31 (1980): 222–36. Valente, Claire. ‘‘Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, and the Utility of Sanctity in Thirteenth-Century England.’’ Journal of Medieval History 21 (1995): 27–49. Van den Abeele, Baudouin. ‘‘Aux origines du chaperon: Les instruments du fauconnier d’après les traités médiévaux.’’ In L’Homme, l’animal domestique, et l’environnement du Moyen Age au XVIII siècle. Ed. Robert Durand, 279–90. Nantes, 1993. ———. ‘‘Du faucon au passerau: La connaissance du comportement des oiseaux selon les traités de fauconnerie latine (Xe-XIVe s.).’’ In L’histoire de la connaissance du comportement animal: Actes du colloque international, Université de Liège, 11–14 mars 1992. Ed. Liliane Bodson, 215–28. Liège, 1993. ———. ‘‘Encyclopédies médiévales et savoir technique: Le cas des informations cynégétiques.’’ In Nouvelles tendances en histoire et philosophie des sciences. Ed. Robert Halleux and Anne-Catherine Bernès, 103–21. Brussels, 1993. ———. La fauconnerie au Moyen Âge: Connaissance, affeitage et médecine des oiseaux de chasse d’après les traités latins. [Paris], 1994. ———. La fauconnerie dans les lettres françaises du XIIe au XIVe siècle. Mediaevalia Lovaniensia, ser. 1, studia 18. Louvain, 1990. ———. ‘‘Federico II falconiere: Il destino del ‘De arte venandi cum avibus’ ’’ In Federico II: Immagine e potere. Ed. Maria Stella Calò and Raffaella Cassano, 377–83. Venice, 1995. ———. ‘‘Il ‘De arte venandi cum avibus’ e i trattati latini di falconeria.’’ In Federico II e le scienze. Ed. Pierre Toubert and Agostino Paravicini Bagliani, 395–409. Palermo, 1994.



———. ‘‘Illustrer une thérapeutique des oiseaux de chasse: Les manuscrits enlumines du Moamin Latin.’’ In Comprendre et maîtriser la nature au moyen age: Mélanges d’histoire des sciences offerts à Guy Beaujouan, 557–77. Geneva, 1994. ———. La littérature cynégétique. Typologie des Sources du Moyen Age Occidental, 75. Turnhout, 1996. ———. ‘‘Les traités de fauconnerie latins de XIIe siècle: Manuscrits et perspectives.’’ Scriptorium 49 (1990): 276–86. Vaughan, Richard. ‘‘The Arctic in the Middle Ages.’’ Journal of Medieval History 8 (1982): 313–42. Vaurie, Charles. ‘‘Systematic Notes on Palearctic Birds, no. 44; Falconidae: The Genus Falco (Part I, Falco peregrinus and Falco pelegrinoides).’’ American Museum Novitates, no. 2035 (July 7, 1961): 1–19. Veblen, Thorstein. The Theory of the Leisure Class. Boston, 1973. The Victoria History of the County of Cumberland. Ed. James Wilson. 2 vols. to date. London, 1901–. The Victoria History of the County of Durham. Vol. 1. Ed. William Page. London, 1905. The Victoria History of the County of Huntingdon. Vol. 1. Ed. William Page and Granville Proby, assisted by H. E. Norris. London, 1926. The Victoria History of the County of York. Vol. 3. Ed. William Page. London, 1925. Vincent, Th. ‘‘Heur et malheur de la vervelle à faucon ou l’erreur de Schlegel et Wulverhorst.’’ In La chasse au vol au fil des temps, 72–94. Gien, 1994. Walton, Penelope. ‘‘Textiles.’’ In English Medieval Industries: Craftsmen, Techniques, Products. Ed. John Blair and Nigel Ramsay, 319–54. London, 1991. Warren, W. L. King John. New York, 1961. Washburn, Gordon. ‘‘Notes on the St. Gorgon Statue.’’ In Frederick II. The Art of Falconry, Being the De arte venandi cum avibus of Frederick II of Hohenstaufen. Trans. and ed. Casey A. Wood and F. Marjorie Fyfe, 473–74. Stanford, 1943. Watson, Andrew G. Catalogue of Dated and Datable Manuscripts c. 700–1600 in the Department of Manuscripts, The British Library. 2 vols. London, 1979. Werth, Hermann. Altfranzösische Jagdlehrbücher nebst Handschriftenbibliographie der abendländischen Jagdlitteratur überhaupt. Halle an Saale, 1889; reprinted from Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 12 (1888): 146–91, 381–415; 13 (1889): 1–34. White, Geoffrey H. ‘‘Financial Administration under Henry I.’’ TRHS, 4th ser., 8 (1925): 56–78. Wiesflecker, Hermann. ‘‘Kaiser Maximilian I, Seine Persönlichkeit und Politik.’’ In Ausstellung Maximilian I, Innsbruck: Beiträge, 1–32. Innsbruck, 1969. Willard, Rudolph. ‘‘Chaucer’s ‘Text That Seith That Hunters Ben Nat Hooly Men.’ ’’ Texas Studies in English 26 (1947): 209–51. Willemsen, Carl A. Bibliographie zur Geschichte Kaiser Friedrichs II. und der letzten Staufer. MGH Hilfsmittel, 8. Munich, 1986. Williams, A. H. An Introduction to the History of Wales: vol. 1, Prehistoric Times to 1063 A.D. Cardiff, 1941. Williams, E. Carleton. ‘‘Mural Paintings of the Three Living and the Three Dead in England.’’ Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 3d ser., 7 (1942): 31–40. Williamson, Paul. Netherlandish Sculpture, 1450–1550. London, 2002.



Wilson, C. Anne. Food and Drink in Britain: From the Stone Age to Recent Times. London, 1973. Wilson, Christopher. The Shrines of St William of York. York, 1977. Wilson, R. M. The Lost Literature of Medieval England. London, 1952. Witherby, H. F., F. C. R. Jourdain, Norman F. Ticehurst, and Bernard W. Tucker. The Handbook of British Birds. Vol. 3, Hawks to Ducks. London, 1939. Witteveen, Joop. ‘‘On Swans, Cranes and Herons: Part 3, Herons.’’ Petits propos culinaires 26 (July 1987). Woodford, Michael. A Manual of Falconry. London, 1960. Woolgar, C. M. The Great Household in Late Medieval England. New Haven, 1999. Yapp, W. Brunsdon. ‘‘Animals in Medieval Art: The Bayeux Tapestry as an Example.’’ Journal of Medieval History 13 (1987): 15–73. ———. ‘‘Birds in Captivity in the Middle Ages.’’ Archives of Natural History 10 [1982]: 479–500. Young, Alan. ‘‘The Comyns and Anglo-Scottish Relations (1286–1314).’’ Thirteenth Century England 7 (1997): 207–22. ———. Robert the Bruce’s Rivals: The Comyns, 1212–1314. East Linton, East Lothian, 1997. Zarnecki, George. English Romanesque Lead Sculpture: Lead Fonts of the Twelfth Century. London, 1957. ———. Later English Romanesque Sculpture, 1140–1210. London, 1953. Zupko, Ronald Edward. A Dictionary of English Weights and Measures: From AngloSaxon Times to the Nineteenth Century. Madison, WI, 1968.


Adam de Torkington, 60 Adam le Faucuner, 170 Adelard of Bath, 2, 4, 18, 22–24, 47 Ages of Man, 135, 193 Albertus Magnus, 3, 6, 11–12, 14, 103, 115, 182 Aldwin, Archbishop of Salzburg, 122, 128 Alexander III, King of Scotland, 86 Alexander III, Pope, 121 Alexander Medicus, 2, 103 Alexander Neckam, 3, 6 Alfere the hawker, 53 Alfonso X, King of Castile, 13, 86 Alfred, King of the West Saxons, 40 Algot, Peter, 86 Alhhun, Bishop of Worcester, 39 Alliterative Morte Arthure, 187 alms, 17, 68–69, 91, 184 Ambrose, St., 128 Anastasius Falconarius, 59, 166 angels, 134, fig. 15 Anglo-Norman Anonymous, 3, 22

Anomalous or Welsh Laws, 159 Anonymous of Vercelli, 1 Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, 2, 3, 6, 15 Aquino, Egidio de, 121 Arches, John des, the wobode, 74, 92–93 Ared the falconer, 53 Arghun, Khan, 86 Aristotle, 5, 6, 37 Arnulf, Bishop of Lisieux, 122 Arnulf the falconer, 52 Asser, 40 Athelstan, King of England, 40, 159, 164 Audley, John, 138 Augustine, St., 128 Ælfric, Abbot of Evesham, 44, 160 Ælfric’s Colloquy, 44–45 Ælfswith, 42 Baggeridge, Walter de, 79, 81 Baggeridge serjeanty at Baggeridge, Dorset, 79, 81




Baldekin, usher of the hall, 97 Balliol, John, King of Scotland, 85 barbarian law codes, 37, 157–58 Bardolf-Vaux Psalter, 196 Bartholomaeus Anglicus, 3, 6, 26–27 Bartholomew, William, 90–91 Bartholomew le Poitevin, 91 Bartolus, 120 Bavent, Amabel de, 80 Bavent, Jolland de, 78, 80, 96, 99 Bavent, Ralph de, 88, 99, 101 Bavent, Ralph de, wife of, 91 Bavent, Robert de, 85, 89, 96, 99, 101, 107, 156, 177 Bavent, Thomas de, 85 Bavent, Walter de, 69 Bavent serjeanty at Bilsby, Winceby, and Mareham le Fen, Lincolnshire, 69, 78, 157 Baxter, John, 124 Bayeux Tapestry, 47–49, fig. 11 Beaufiz, Norman, 88 Becket, St. Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury, 55, 104, 118, 122–23 Becket, St. Thomas, shrine at Canterbury, 104, 105, 123, 184 Bek, Anthony, Bishop of Durham, 87, 122, 123, 191 Bek, Anthony, harper of, 180 Bek, Anthony, hawkers of, 93 bells, 24–25, 111, 155 Bendeville, Sarra de, 168 Bendeville serjeanty at West Peckham, Kent, 168, 180 bending pennies, 105, 108, 182, 184 Beowulf, 43 Berhtwulf, king of Mercia, 39, 158 Berkshire, customs of, 42 Bernard Accipitrarius, 50–51 Berners, Julianna, 115, 117, 189 Bertran de Born, 62–63, 65, 186 Berwick, Sir John, hawkers of, 93 Bewcastle Cross, 38 Beysin, Adam de, 60, 75, 78, 168

Beysin serjeanty at Wrickton and Walkerslow, Shropshire, 78 Bibles moralisées, 130–31, 135, 190, 193–94 Bigot, 167 Bikenore, John de, I, 73, 75, 95, 177 Bikenore, John de, II, 76, 88, 91, 95, 105, 177–80 Bikenore, Roger de, 76 Bikenore, Thomas de, 76, 88, 177 birds of prey. See also falcons; hawks birds of prey, accidents, 104 birds of prey, ailments, 103–4 birds of prey, archaeological remains, 39, 119–20, 158 birds of prey, as prizes, 111, 187 birds of prey, as symbols of worldliness or the vices, 129–32, 134, 194–95, 197, plate 7B birds of prey, as symbols of youth, 135– 36, plates 7C-D birds of prey, diet, 22, 25, 30, 64, 68, 102–3, 156 birds of prey, eyries, 20, 41–42, 51, 53, 60, 66–67, 84, 163, fig. 2 birds of prey, furniture. See bells; creance; glove; hood; jesses; lure; varvels birds of prey, general characteristics, 10–12 birds of prey, gifts, non-royal, 111, 123 birds of prey, gifts from kings, 55, 73, 86, 123, 152, 172, 179 birds of prey, gifts to kings, 42, 55, 67, 73, 86–87, 91, 106–7, 179 birds of prey, in schools, prohibitions against, 124–25 birds of prey, in tributes, 40, 55, 67 birds of prey, life expectancy, 183 birds of prey, medications, 2, 103–5, 182 birds of prey, mewing and enseaming, 22, 30, 94–95, 98–99, 102–3, 179, 182 birds of prey, miracles, 18, 54–55, 184 birds of prey, named, 21, 55, 68, 73, 85, 172, 179, 181

Index birds of prey, northern, general, 16, 21– 22, 56, 67, 73–74, 169. See also falcons, northern; hawks, northern birds of prey, numbers of royal birds, 58, 68, 95–96, 98, 102–3, 179–80 birds of prey, owed, 53, 60–61, 67–68, 163, 167, 169 birds of prey, pilgrimages and wax images, 105, 123, 125, 184. See also bending pennies birds of prey, prices paid and valuations, 12, 14, 42, 56, 120, 151–53, 192 birds of prey, purveyance, 14, 21–22, 53, 56, 62, 139, 154, 169–70 birds of prey, terminology, 12, 152, 156 birds of prey, training and care, general, 22–30, 68, 94, 156, 186, figs. 3–7, plates 1–2A birds of prey, young birds, 19–20, 22– 23, 154, fig. 2 Bishop, William, falconer of Sir Henry Sinclair, 91 Blockley, Gloucestershire, minster, 39 Blois, Countess of, 86 Bohun, John de, 97 Boke of St. Albans, 30, 115, 155 Boniface, St., 38 Book of Fees, 9, 69 Book of King Henry of England, 5 Books of King Harold, 4, 47 Bosch, Hieronymus, 132 Bourges Cathedral, 132 Brabant, Duke of, 86 Brabant, John de, 84, 86, 99, 102, 178, 182 Bracciolini, Poggio, 129–30 Brant, Sebastian, 186 Breviari d’amor, 131–32 Brian Ostiarius, 169 bridges, building and repairing for hawking, 31, 59, 66, 88, 94, 101 Bridlington, canons, church of, 123–24 Brigstock, Northamptonshire, king’s house, 57, 62, 74, 172, 178


Brihtric, 42 Britannia, William de, 99 Broke, Adam atte, 81 Broke serjeanty at West Peckham, Kent, 81 Bromyard, John, 121, 126 Bruce, Robert, 106 Brunetto Latini, 3 Brunne, Robert of, 124 Burgh, Eleanor de, Lady de Clare, 119 Burgo, John de, 174, 185 Burgred, King of Mercia, 39, 158 Burnel, Robert, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 173 Burnel serjeanty at Langley, Shropshire, 173 Bury, Richard de, Bishop of Durham, 124 Busellard, Sir Gerard de, 96, 99 Byrhtnoth, 42 Camera Curie, 7 Canons of King Edgar, 43 Cantigas de Santa Maria, 18, 184 Cantilupe, St. Thomas, Bishop of Hereford, 105, 123, 184 Cantilupe, St. Thomas, shrine at Hereford, 105, 184 Cauce, Robert, 79–80, 173 Cauce serjeanty at Hedon, Yorkshire, 79 Cauz, Emma de, II, 80 Cauz, Geoffrey de, 80 Cauz, Roger de, III, 59, 65, 70, 72 Cauz, William de, 59 Cauz serjeanty at Eton, Buckinghamshire, 59 Cauz serjeanty at Shalburne, Berkshire, 80 Cauz serjeanty at Water Eaton, Berkshire, 59 Cawude, David de, 60 Cely, George, 124 Cely, William, 192 Cenwulf, King of Mercia, 158 Ceolwulf I, King of Mercia, 39



Champ-Segré, Philip de, 60 Chanceaux, André de, 107, 177 Charing Cross, royal mews at, 22, 83, 98–99, 101–3, 155, 179, 181–82 Charles I, King of Naples and Sicily, 86 Charny, Geoffroi de, 111 Charter of the Forest, 66–67 Charter Rolls, 8 Chaucer, Geoffrey, 112, 118, 132, 186 Christian I, King of Denmark, 33 Clare, Gilbert de, Earl of Gloucester and Hereford, 87 Clement V, Pope, 86, 124, 132 Clergy, hawking by, 42–43, 120–26, 190, 192 Clergy, prohibitions against hawking, 37– 38, 43, 121, 124, 125, 158, 190, 191 climate change, 15, 16 Clinton, John de, 89, 179 Clixby, William son of Godfrey de, 79 Clixby serjeanty at Clixby, Lincolnshire, 79 Close Rolls, 8 Cockerel, Elie, 75 Colleoni, Bartolomeo, 33 commiliton of John de Bohun, 97 Complaint of the Ploughman, 126 Comyn, Alexander, 184 Comyn, John, 106 Constitutio Domus Regis, 53 contraripator, 31–32, 75 Coo, Alexander, 88 Corbet, Robert, dogkeeper, 177 Corbet, Simon, I, 91, 99 Corbet, Simon, II, 99 Corbet, Thomas, 17, 88 Corbet, Thomelinus, 177, 184 corrodies, 53, 92–93, 172, 178–79 Costus Falconarius, 168 Count of Albemarle, 86 Countess of Devon, 189 cranes, 16, 17–18, 181 cranes, hawking at, 13–14, 16, 32, 101, 157, 181, fig. 9

creance, 27, 111, 156 Crétin, Guillaume, 121 Crevecoeur, Hamo de, 73 Crevecoeur, Thomas de, 76 Crohun, Peter de, 102 Cusancia, Peter de, 79 Dancus Rex, 2, 4, 6, 30 Darcy, Sir Norman, valet of, 93 Daude de Pradas, 2–3, 5, 12, 14, 15–16, 27, 103 De arte venandi cum avibus, figs. 1–5. See Frederick II De Lisle Hours, 135 De Lisle Psalter, 135 Decameron, 115 defence, putting rivers in, 66, 84, 175 Deneys, John le, 156 Denys, Bishop of Senlis, 121 Despenser, Sir Hugh, 89 destruction of eyries, 60, 84 Dialogus de scaccario, 61, 163 Diniton, Simon de, 68 dogkeepers, 88, 90, 99, 164 dogs, 22, 32, 37, 38–39, 99, 105, 157, 184 Domesday Book, 42, 46–47, 50–51, 161–62 Domesday Book, eyries of hawks, 51 Domesday Book, renders for or of hawks, 39–40, 46, 52 Dovedale, Hugh, 181 Doye, William, 90, 99 duck, 17, 175 duck, hawking at 17, 28, 31–32, fig. 8, plate 2B Eadmer, 43 Edgar, King of England, 42–43, 164 Edmund, Duke of York, 185 Edmund, King of East Anglia, 45 Edric of Norfolk, 50–51 Edward I, King of England, ch. 6 passim 175, 182

Index Edward I, King of England, indebtedness, 9, 89, 105–6 Edward I, King of England, letters to Robert Bavent, 20–21, 30, 85, 101, 107, 156, 176 Edward II, King of England, 86, 89, 91, 185 Edward III, King of England, 118, 185 Edward the Confessor, King of England, 46, 50 Edward the Elder, King of the West Saxons, 39 Edward the Martyr, King of England, 133, 164 Edwin of Racton, 163 Eleanor, Edward III’s sister, 119 Eleanor of Aquitaine, Queen, 118 Eleanor of Castile, Queen, 86–87, 118 Eleanor of Provence, Queen, 17, 118, 176 Eleford, Robert de, 79, 174 Eleford serjeanty at Lewe, Oxfordshire, 79 Elgin Cathedral, cross-slab, 38–39 Enrolled Wardrobe Accounts, 14, 74, 82, 106, 140–42, 185 Erlham, Hugh de, 74 Erlham, John de, 152 Erlham, Ralph de, I, 65, 71, 168 Erlham, Ralph de, II, 74 Erlham, Thomas de, 73, 88, 96, 152 Erlham serjeanty at Erlham, Norfolk, 168 Ermengaud, Archbishop of Narbonne, 122 Este, Margrave d’, 86 Estland, merchants of, 21 Ethelbald, King of Mercia, 38, 39 Ethelbert, King of Kent, 38 Ethelred, King of England, 164 Eudes, Archbishop of Rouen, 190 Eugenius III, Pope, 129 Eustace, St., 22, 133 Exchequer, 7, 8


Exeter Book, 43–44, 48 Exon Domesday, 46 falcon hunts, types of, 32–35, plates 3–5 Falconer, Falconarius. See Adam; Anastasius; Ared; Arnulf; Costus; Geoffrey; Georgino; Gerardus; Gervasius; Gilbert; Gilletto; Godfrey; Guillelmus; Henry; Page; Ralph; Reginaldus; Richard; Robert; Sylvester; Tassino; Warin; William falconer of Sir Arnold de Vely, 90 falconer of the earl of Warenne, 97 falconers, conflicts and damages caused, 105 falconers, number, 56–57, 69, 75, 97, 99, 102, 180, 185 falconers and hawkers, appropriate character, 18–19, fig. 1 falconers and hawkers, benefits, 41–42, 72, 92–93, 172–73, 177–78 falconers and hawkers, families, 57, 58, 72–73, 75–76, 107, 173. See also individual names falconers and hawkers, marriages, 57, 58, 70–72, 80, 170 falconers and hawkers, rewards, 40–41, 52, 57–59, 70–75, 85, 90–93, 173, 185 falconers and hawkers, robes and clothing, 40, 70, 74–75, 89–93, 177, 179, 181 falconers and hawkers, satirical portraits, 129–30, 175, 193, plate 7A falconers and hawkers, social status, 51, 72, 77–81, 88, 173, 175, 177 falconers and hawkers, valets (grooms), 70, 88, 97, 170, frontispiece falconers and hawkers, wages, 58–60, 70, 74, 87–89, 166, 171, 176 falconry, and social status, 43, 109–19, 133, 162, 185, 186, 192, figs. 12–14 falconry, as part of an upper-class education, 111



falconry, in courtly life, 111, 136 falconry, locations, 100 falconry year, 98–103, 181 falcons. See also birds of prey falcons, gyrfalcon, 12–13, 152, 156 falcons, hobby, 15 falcons, lanner, 14–15, 152 falcons, merlin, 15, 118 falcons, northern, 12–13, 21, 86 falcons, peregrine, 13–14, 151, 152 falcons, saker, 15, 152 falcons, training to hunt cranes and herons, 28–30 falcons, training to the lure, 27–28, 156, fig. 6 Fauconer serjeanty at Herst, Kent, 59, 78, 180 Fauconer serjeanty at Keelby and Humberstone, Lincolnshire, 78 Felton, Richard, 181 Ferraris, Lucius, 132 Fine Rolls, 8 Fisher King, 111 Fitz Bernard, John, I, 73 Fitz Bernard, John, II, 73, 75, 78 Fitz Bernard, Ralph, II, 68, 73 Fitz Bernard, Ralph, III, 75 Fitz Bernard, Ralph, IV, 78, 107 Fitz Bernard, Thomas, III, 65, 71, 73, 168 Fitz Bernard, Walter, 65 Fitz Bernard serjeanty at Aston Mullins and Ilmer, Buckinghamshire, 78. See also Rumenel serjeanty Fitz Brand, Thomas, 60 Fitz Coste, William, 168 Fitz Coste serjeanty at Hucknall Torcard, Nottinghamshire, 168. See also Costus Falconarius Fitz Hugh, John, 68 Fitz Nigel, Richard, 61, 163 Fitz Peter, Geoffrey, 68 Fitz Stephen, William, 119, 122 FitzJocelin, Reginald, archdeacon of Sarum, 123

Floris et Lirope, 111 Fortunes of Men, 43–44, 160 fowling and fowlers, 17–18, 37, 38, 44– 45, 49, 154, 176, 177. See also Harpin, Adam Fowlis Wester, Perthshire, cross-slab, 38 Franchières, Jean de, 121 Frankes, William, merchant of Grimsby, 21 Fraser, William, Bishop of St. Andrews, 87 Frederick I Barbarossa, Emperor, 55 Frederick II, Emperor, 4–5, 26, 73, 150 Frederick II, Emperor, quoted, 10–32 passim, 101, 108, 111, 115, 127 Frederick II, Emperor, views, 14, 157 Frethorn, John de, 60, 75, 76, 172, 173 Froissart, Jean, 157, 185, 187 Gace de la Buigne, 15, 16, 17, 113, 114 game, 17–18, 68–69, 152, 154 Garnier of Nanteuil, 111 Gaston III Phébus, Count of Foix, 32, 126 Gatesden, John de, 170 Gatesden, Peter de, 170 Gatesden, William de, 65 Gatesden serjeanty at Stanbridge, Bedfordshire, 59, 170 Gaudry, Bishop of Laon, 121 Geddington, Northamptonshire, king’s house, 74, 83, 155, 178 geese for mewing falcons, 156 Geoffrey de Romesye, 75 Geoffrey le Falconer of Great Linton, Cambridgeshire, 155 Geoffrey le Falconer of Hurst, 78 Geoffrey of Brittany, Duke, 63 Geoffrey of Lusignan, 73 Geoffrey Plantagenet, Archbishop of York, 123 Geoffrey the Porter, 170 Georgino Falconarius, 88, 90 Gerardus Falconarius, 2, 4, 6

Index Geraud, John, Prior of Leominster, 125 Gernemue, William de, 57–58 Gernemue serjeanty at Middleton, Norfolk, 57 Gervasius Falconarius, 59, 60, 166 Gerveys, John, 14 Ghatrif, 3 Giffard, Earl Walter, 57, 60 Giffard, William, sheriff of Norfolk, 21 gifts, royal, general, 86 Gifts of Men, 43–44, 160 Gilbert Falconarius, 123 Gilbert le Braconer (Gilbert Cut), 92 Gilkino fil Giletti, 88 Gilletto Falconarius, 83, 99–100 Giraldus Cambrensis, 54–55 glove, 31, 41, 45, 90, 155 Godfrey, Abbot of Malmesbury, 52–53 Godfrey de Clixby, 79 Godfrey le Fauconer, 78, 180 Godmanchester, Huntingdonshire, 119, 189 Godric Accipitrarius, hawker of the abbot of Ramsey, 50–51, 161 Godwin Accipitrarius, 46–47, 50–51, 161 Gower, John, 126, 132 Grandisson, John, Bishop of Exeter, 125 Gratian’s Decretum, 113, 128 Gravesend, Stephen, Bishop of London, 123 Gregory VIII, Pope, 193 Grey, Henry de, 80 Grey, John de, 80 Grey, John de, wife of. See Cauz, Emma de, II Grey, Reginald de, 78, 80, 174 Grey, William, Bishop of Lincoln, 125 [de] Grey serjeanty at Water Eaton Buckinghamshire 174. See also Cauz serjeanty Grimaldus, 1–2 Grimani Breviary, 33, plate 4 Grisofus Medicus, 2


Grun, William, 70 Grymstede, Sir John de, 179 Guibert of Nogent, 121 Guillelmus Falconarius, 2, 4, 12 Gulafre, William. See William Ostricarius. Gurdon, Thomas, 88 Guy, Count of Blois, 157 Guy of Ponthieu, 47 Guy of Warwick, 111 Haakon IV, King of Norway, 13, 86 Halliwell, Nicholas, 75 Halvile, Ralph de, 47 Hamelyn, Thomas, 79, 173 Hamelyn serjeanty at Babraham, Cambridgeshire, 79 Hamo, janitor of the mews, 103 Hanekin, keeper of the mews, 88, 91–92, 180 Harold II, King of England, 47–48 Harpin, Adam, 20, 121–22 Hauekere serjeanty at St. Ives, Huntingdonshire, 79 Hauville, Elias de, 107 Hauville, Geoffrey de, II, 17, 70–71, 72, 170 Hauville, Geoffrey de, III, 88–89, 91–92, 105, 170, 178 Hauville, Gilbert de, I, 71 Hauville, Gilbert de, II, 30, 71–72, 73, 172 Hauville, Gilbert, II, wife of. See Malle, Avis de la Hauville, Henry de, 67, 73, 74, 78, 170, 172 Hauville, Hubert de, 170 Hauville, Hugh de, 67, 70, 168, 170, 171 Hauville, John de, 92 Hauville, John de, royal falconer temp. Edward III, 165 Hauville, Ralph de, I, 57–58, 161–62 Hauville, Ralph de, II, 57, 65, 72, 168 Hauville, Ralph de, III, 71, 72, 80, 171



Hauville, Ralph de, III, wife of. See Neville, Cecily de Hauville, Ralph de, IV, 71 Hauville, Ralph de, temp. Edward I, 185 Hauville, Thomas de, II, 88, 96, 97, 154, 177, 178 Hauville, Thomas de, III, 96 Hauville, Walter de, 58–59, 65, 70–72 Hauville, William de, II, 62, 166 Hauville, William de, III, 71, 79, 171 Hauville, Wylekin de, 170 Hauville family, 57–58, 69 Hauville serjeanty at Brotherwyk, Northumberland, 79 Hauville serjeanty at Dunton, Doketon, and Kettleston, Norfolk, 57, 78, 165, 168 Hauville serjeanty at Haconby, Lincolnshire, 57, 78, 168 Hauville serjeanty at Milcote and Dorsinton, Warwickshire, 170 Hauville serjeanty at Wallbury (Hallingbury de la Walle), Essex, 59, 72 Havering, Richard, master, 97 Havoc, Ralph, 160, 165 Hawker, Accipitrarius, Ostricer, etc. See Alfere; Bernard; Godric; Godwin; Henry; Osbern; Sawin; Siward; William; Hauekere serjeanty hawkers, number, 30, 75, 93, 95–96, 102, 179, 180 hawking, locations, 100 hawking year, 94–96, 179–80 hawks. See also birds of prey hawks, goshawk, 15–16 hawks, musket, 12, 15 hawks, northern, 16, 46, 52, 54, 153, 160–61 hawks, sparrowhawk, 15–16, 118, 153 Henlegh, Nicholas, 184 Henry, the Young King, 55, 62, 166, 167 Henry I, King of England, 53, 67, 163, 164 Henry II, King of England, 5, 21, 54–56, 60, 66, 67

Henry III, King of England, 21, 66, 73– 74, 76, 82, 157, 171, 175 Henry IV, King of England, 185 Henry VIII, King of England, 155 Henry Accipitrarius, 56 Henry de Cornhill, 56 Henry Falconarius, 56, 64–65, 72, 73, 165, 170 Henry the Lion, Duke of Saxony, 55, 164 herons, 16–17, 101, 153 herons, hawking at, 16, 101, 181 Hertrugg, John de, 80–81, 185 Hertrugg, Nicholaa de (John de Hertrugg’s wife), 80–81 Hertrugg, Philip de, 75–76, 78, 185 Hertrugg, Richard de, 60, 75 Hertrugg serjeanty at Hartridge and Titcomb, Berkshire, 78, 180 Hippocrates, 2 Histoire des Ducs de Normandie et des Rois d’Angleterre, 65 hood and hooding, 5, 24, 26, 103, 111, 155–56 Household, 8 Household expenditures, Henry III and Edward I, 140–42 Household Ordinance of 1279, 87–88 Hugh, clerk of the mews, 103 Hundred Rolls, 9 hunting, 39, 82, 110, 118, 126–29, 133, 188 hunting expenditure, 83, Appendix passim huntsmen, 44, 160, 164 Huse, Bartholomew, 73 Huse, Godfrey de la, 168 Huse, John de la, 75 Hywel (Howel) the Good, Prince of Deheubarth and Gwynned, 40, 159 Injunctions on Behaviour of Bishops, 43 Inquisitio Comitatis Cantabrigiensis, 51 Inquisitions post mortem, 9, 77–78

Index Insula, Robert de, 167 Ipomedon, 111 Isabella of England, Frederick II’s queen, 5, 73 Isabella of France, Queen of England, 118 James IV, King of Scotland, 118 Jarpenville, Albreda de, 65, 72–73, 168 Jarpenville, William de, 57–58, 65, 170 Jerome, St., 128 jesses, 24, 27, 41, 49, 103, 155 John, King of England, 21, 65–71, 73, 153, 157, 164, 169 John II, King of France, 17 John le Hostricer, 170 John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, 154 John of Salisbury, Bishop of Chartres, 118, 129, 132–33 Jordan Fantosme, 55 Judikell, hawker of Earl Ralf of Norfolk, 51, 159, 161 Justinian’s Digest, 189 Kekingswick, John de, 179 Kertlingstock, Ralph de, 178 Kertlingstock, Robert de, parson of Aston, 96 King Horn, 111 King John’s Cup, 186–87 Konungs Skuggsjá, 13 Lacy, Sir Henry de, later Earl of Lincoln, 78, 80, 87 Lanercost Priory, Cumberland, 106–7 Lanfred, Bishop, 122 Langland, William, 124. See also Piers Plowman lastage, 21, 57, 78, 154, 173 Laws of Hywel the Good, 40–42, 159 Le Jeu de Robin et Marion, 120 Legh, Nicholaa de la, 70, 80 Liberate Rolls, 8 Liddinton, Robert de, 168


Lincoln, Henry de, 75 Lincoln, Maud de, 173 Lincoln, Peter de, 170 Lincoln Cathedral, 134, 136, 189, 196 Lincoln serjeanty at Clixby, Lincolnshire, 173 Lionel of Clarence, Duke, 111 Litlyngton, Nicholas, Abbot of Westminster, 125 Llywelyn ap Iorwerth, Prince of Gwynned, 67, 73, 169 London, Hawisa de, 75–76, 78, 174 London serjeanty at Inglesham, Wiltshire, 78 Longthorpe Tower, Northamptonshire, 135, 187, plate 6 Lonsdale Forest, Lancashire, 20 López de Ayala, Pero, 14, 155, 179, 182 Louis IX, King of France, 86 Lovel, Christine de, 89 Lovel, John de, 89 Lumen animae, 132 Lundy Island, 15 lure, 27–28, 31, 155–56 Lybeaus Desconus, 187 Magna Carta, 66 Magnus VI, King of Norway, 86 Maldon, battle of, 42 Malle, Avis de la, wife of Gilbert de Hauville II, 71–72, 171 Malle, Richard de la, 71 Malory, Sir Thomas, 117 Mare, John de la, 75 Mare, Robert de la, 75 Mare, Thomas de la, Abbot of St. Albans, 192 Mare, Thomas de la, canon of York, 123 marshal of the king’s hawks, 58, 69, 73, 75–76, 94–96, 98, 107, 179 Marshal’s Roll, 97 Martini, Gunsalvo, 91 Mary, Duchess of Burgundy, 111 Master Lambert, 5



Master of Game, 126–127 Matilda, Queen, 54 Matthew, falconer of Piers Gaveston, 91 Mauduit, John, 75–76, 170, 185 Mauduit, Robert, 58, 81, 172 Mauduit, Thomas, 83, 175 Mauduit serjeanty at Broughton Poggs, Oxfordshire, 59, 78, 170 Mauger, Archbishop of Rouen, 122 May. See occupations of the months Ménagier de Paris, 3, 25, 118 Merk, Gilbert de, 65 Merk, Sir John de, 91, 96–97, 99, 118, 178, 185 Merk, Marie de, wife of Sir John de Merk, 79, 85, 118 Merk, William de, 69, 171 Merk serjeanty at Comberton, Cambridgeshire, 157 Merk serjeanty at White Roding, Essex, 79 mews, general, 22, 30, 68, 154–55. See also Brigstock; Charing Cross; Geddington; Winchester mews, locations, 61–62, 65, 74, 91, 155, 181 Mirroure of the Worlde, 127 Misae Rolls, 8 Mitford, Richard, Bishop of Salisbury, 17 Moamin, 3 Monk of Montaudon, 186 Montacute, Simon de, Bishop of Ely, 123 Montfort, Simon de, Earl of Leicester, 183 Montfort, Simon de, shrine of, 123, 184 Monyngton, William de, Master, 97 Mora, Adam de la, 168, 171 More, Sir Thomas, 135 Morin, Gilbert, 75 mosaics with hawking scenes, 37, 157 Muisis, Gilles li, 192 Multon, Thomas de, wobode, 94 Murdac, Geoffrey, 170 Murdac, Ralph 59 Myrc, John, 124

Neville, Cecily de, wife of Ralph de Hauville III, 80 Nicholas I, Pope, 122, 128 Nimrod, 128 Norman exchequer, 7 Norman Pipe Rolls, 7 North Elmham, Norfolk, 39 Northumberland Household Book, 17 Notre-Dame, Paris, 135 Nova Rua, William de la, 102 occupations of the months, 45, 136–37, 196, fig. 10, plates 7C-7D Octovian, 113 Odo of Cheriton, 127 Offa II, King of Mercia, 39 Omne bonum, 125 Ormesby Psalter, 136 Osbern Accipitrarius, 50–51 Outi of Lincoln, 12, 53, 160–61 Oxford, 21 Page Falconarius, 91 Paris and Vienne, 187 Parliament of the Three Ages, 34–35, 135 Partonope of Blois, 112 partridgers, 17–18, 37, 88, 90, 177 Passavant, William de, master, 97 Paston family, 127 Patent Rolls, 8 Paulinus of Pella, 37 peasants, 120, 126 Peckham, John de, Archbishop of Canterbury, 125 Peckham, John de, hawker, 75–76, 79 Peckham serjeanty at West Peckham, Kent, 79 Pedro of Spain, Cardinal, 86 Penitential of Theodore, 38 perch, 6, 22–24, 74, 104 Percy Poem on Falconry, 18, 30 Peter Cantor, 130 Peter of Blois, 54, 123

Index Peter the Surgeon, master, 182 Petrus Alfonsi, 111 Peyforer, Fulk, 180 Peyforer serjeanty at West Peckham, Kent, 180 Peynreth, Robert, 124 Phillippa, Queen, 118–19 Picot, Elyas, 170 Picot, Peter, 75, 78, 168, 174 Picot, Roger, 73 Picot, Thomas, 60, 75 Picot, William, 79 Picot serjeanty at Radcliffe and Kingston, Nottinghamshire, 59, 78, 170, 173, 180 Picot serjeanty at Saling, Essex, 59, 79 Piers Plowman, 121, 126 Pipe Rolls, 7 Pont de l’Arche, William, Bishop of Lisieux, 190 Pont l’Evêque, Roger de, Archbishop of York, 60 Praestita Rolls, 8 prests, 88–89, 106 prices, comparative, 165 prise, royal, 21 Psalter of Simon of Meopham, 196 Queen Mary’s Psalter, 33, 157, figs. 8–9 Quinel (Quivel), Peter, Bishop of Exeter, 191 Racton serjeanty at Racton, Cumberland, 163, 173 Ragnar Lodbrok, 45 Ralf Guader, Earl of Norfolk, 50, 159, 161 Ralph de Diceto, 55 Ralph de Picheford, 51 Ralph Falconarius, 72 Ralph Havoc, 160, 165 Ralph le Falconer, 78, 80 Ralph Niger, 121 Ranulf II, Earl of Chester, 165


Ranulf III, Earl of Chester, 69 Redenhall, Peter de, 185 Redenhall, Robert de, 60, 75, 79, 173 Redenhall serjeanty at Redenhall, Norfolk, 79 Reginaldus Falcun, 72 Renham, Matthew de, 21 Richard, St., shrine at Chichester, 184 Richard I, King of England, 21, 62, 64– 65, 67, 168 Richard II, King of England, 154, 188 Richard le Faucuner, 173 Richer de l’Aigle, Lord of Pevensey, 122 Robert de Insula, 167 Robert Falconarius, 72 Robert Falconer of Hurst, 59 Robert of Graystanes, 191 Roches, Peter des, Bishop of Winchester, 123 Rockingham Forest, 92, 178 Roderick, King of Connaught, 55 Roger of Wendover, 45 Roger Ostricer, 168, 173 Roland, 112 Roman de la Rose, 111 Roman de Renart, 132 Romanino, Girolamo, 33 Ross, Earl of, 91 Rotuli de dominabus, 9 Rumenel, David de, 57–58 Rumenel serjeanty at Aston Mullins and Ilmer, Berkshire, 58 Rumfarus, 53 Russell, Richard, 69 Ruusbroec, Jan van, 131 Saero, falconer of the count of Flanders, 90 St. Albans Psalter, 128–29 St. Alexius, 111 St. Andrews, sarcophagus, 38 saints associated with falconry, 133–34 Sancho IV, King of Castile, 91 Sandiacre, Peter de, II, 57–58, 161, 168



Sandiacre, Peter de, III, 72 Sandiacre, Richard de, 156, 161 Sandiacre, Toli de, 46–47, 161 Sandiacre serjeanty at Sandiacre, Derbyshire, 58, 79, 156, 161, 173 Sauvage, Ralph, 76 Sawin Accipitrarius, 50, 52 sceattas, 38 serjeanties, alienations, 75–77, 79, 170, 173, 174 serjeanties, geographical distribution, 46–47, 77, 161 serjeanties, non-performance of service, 60, 72–73 serjeanties, partibility, 76–77, 81, 175 serjeanties, service by deputy, 75–76, 107 serjeanties, values, 46, 50–51, 58–59, 72, 77–79. See also individual serjeanties serjeants who became knights, 72, 78, 96, 173 serjeanty tenure, 31, 76–77 Shakespeare, William, 138 Sidonius Apollinaris, 37, 120 Simon le Hauekere, 79 Simon of St. Liz III, Earl of Northampton, 166 Simon Ostricarius, 70 Simonie, 124, 125–26 Sir Degrevant, 111 Sir Isumbras, 187 Sir Orfeo, 33, 111 Siward Accipitrarius, 46–47, 50–51, 161 Skelton, John, 124 Somerset, Peter de, 88 Smithfield Decretals, 196 Speculum humanae salvationis, 132 spells, 2 Spencer, William, 88–89 Spot, Elie, 90, 199 squires of Sir John de Merk, 97 squires of Sir Thomas de Hauville II, 97 Squyr of Low Degre, 112 Stephen, King of England, 54, 164

Stokes, John de, 79 Stormy, Sir William, 17 Stourton, Michael de, 96 Stredleye (Strelley), Hugh de, 79, 173 Stredleye serjeanty at Brough, Derbyshire, 79 Sturmy, John, 181 Sutton Hoo purse plaques, 158 Swinburn, Sir John de, 184 Swinfield, Richard de, Bishop of Hereford, 20, 121, 125 Sylvester Falconarius, 170 Tassino Falconarius, 91 Tattershall, Robert de, 78, 80 Tattershall serjeanty at Shalburne, Berkshire 174. See also Cauz serjeanty Taunton, Somerset, monastery, 39 Taymouth Hours, 118, 196 thefts of birds, 84, 123, 157–58, 190 Thomas, dogkeeper, 92 Thomas of Cantimpré, 3 Thorney, Abbot of, 84 Three Living and the Three Dead, 135– 138, 196–97, plate 8 tomb of St. William of York, 134 townspeople flying hawks and falcons, 119–20 treasurers of the cathedrals of Auxerre and Nevers, 123 Tristan, 111 Trivet, Nicholas, 82–83 Tudenham, William de, 21, 181 Twenty-three manners of vilains, 126 Tyeys, Sir Henry de, 96 Usamah ¯ Ibn-Munquidh, 110, 183 Valence, Aymer de, Bishop of Winchester, 123, 172 Valence, Joan de, Countess of Pembroke, 119 varvels, 24, 111, 117, 155 Vesci, William de, 60

Index Vetule (Velie), Richard, 62 Vetule, Roger de, 168 Vincent of Beauvais, 3 Visconti, Violante, 111 Visitor of the Order of the Temple, 86 Vox, Matthew le, 90 Wade, Henry de la, 65, 78–79, 166, 168, 174 Wade, Richard de la, 169 Wade serjeanty at Stanton, Oxfordshire, 59, 78–79, 166, 170 wages, comparative, 166, 171, 172 Wallop, Matthew, 71 Walsingham, Thomas, 160, 192 Walter, Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, 123, 190 Walter Anglicus, 5 Walter Map, 54, 55 Wardrobe, 8–9, 88–89, 150. See also Enrolled Wardrobe Accounts; prests Wardrobe Books, 8–9, 106, 180 Warenne, John de, Earl of Surrey, 86, 97 Warin Falconarius (Warin de Lancaster), 81 Watford, Vicar of, 17, 124 Wedon, Thomas de, 88, 90, 94, 179 Wedon, Walter de, 89 Weston, Michael de, 178 Weston, Thomas de, 170 Wiglaf, King of Mercia, 164 Wihtred, King of Mercia, 39 William I, King of England, 46, 47–48, 50–52, 161, 162, fig. 11 William I, King of Scotland, 55 William II, King of England, 52–53, 161


William Accipitrarius, 46–47, 50–51, 161 William Austricarius, 56 William de Bréause, 15 William de Britannia, 99–100 William Falconarius, 168 William of Blois, Archbishop of Rouen, 123 William of Jumièges, 48 William of Malmesbury, 122, 191 William of Norwich, St., 183 William of Palerne, 111 William of Poitiers, 48, 162 William of St. Calais, Bishop of Durham, 122 William Ostricarius, 81 William Taillefer, Count of Toulouse, 122 Wilmot, falconer of the Lord de la Plaunche. See Nova Rua, William de la. Wimbledon, Thomas, 121 Winchester, royal mews at, 56, 58–59, 61–62, 66, 71, 74, 155, 165 Winchester font, 113, fig. 12 Windsor Forest, 15 Wireker, Nigel, 121 wobode, office, 74, 88, 92–94, 173 Wobode, Walter, 74, 173 Wolaston, Richard, clerk of Sir John de Merk, 97 women flying hawks and falcons, general, 111, 118–19 Wulfric of Haselbury, 124 Wulnoth, Abbot of St. Albans, 160 Wyght, Thomas, messenger, 97 Ystlape, Richard de, 58–59, 65