Page 25 2.The Ecclesiastical Parish of Cropredy. The central town in the large ecclesiastical parish was Cropredy. The bishop of Lincoln who had to surrender the estate to the crown, in 1547, had once held the eleven parishes not only as landlord, but also as their rector, putting in a priest to see to the souls of all the parishioners. The ecclesiastical parish was too large for one man and while the vicar could reside in Cropredy near the mother church, he must put curates in other parts of the greater parish. Richard Gabell M.A. who had been the rector of Aynho from 1555 came to Cropredy to be instituted on the 17th of February 1561/2. He was the vicar when Thomas Holloway married Elizabeth Briggs on November 2nd 1571 at Cropredy. Which one of them had connections with the parish, unless Thomas was acting curate while still a student at Oxford university? Where did the young wife live? Thomas was instituted to Cropredy by a representative of the Crown in March 1572/3, while he was still working for his M.A. Thomas having first been ordained on the 27th of February by the Bishop of Gloucester (p547 for refs). Four weeks later they buried their former vicar Richard Gabell. The vicarage [21] accommodation did not cater for a married family and a new stone building was going to be necessary. This was at a time when the rebuilding activities were just beginning in the parish. The young couple with nine month old George began their lifelong residence in the town. Elizabeth died after only eight years of marriage having had two sons and a daughter. Thomas was to marry again in 1581. Elizabeth Gardner, who came from Thorpe Mandeville, and Thomas had nine children (p547). Married clergymen formed perhaps two thirds of all clergy. The first were married in Edward VI reign, but suffered during catholic Queen Mary's reign, some losing their church. Queen Elizabeth was not an advocate of married clergy, but their numbers went on increasing. Many parishioners watched with misgivings for it was their hard earned pence which went to support them, leaving little over for the poor. A protestant vicar, brought up in a catholic church for six of his formative years, had not lessened his determination to become ordained and to further the education of the next generation. Holloway's first allegiance had to be to the Crown, for the Queen was the supreme governor of the realm and in practice, if not in name, the head of the church. Individualism was not encouraged although Holloway must have been well aware of the customs and beliefs, the fears and superstitions that his flock had had to struggle with. While overcoming his own disquiets he had to present a well disciplined and authoritative attitude to gain their attention. The church was the State's only propaganda tool and when Thomas Holloway announced the latest proclamation, or on visiting the houses pronouncing on this and that, he had a powerful influence over the inhabitants. He like few others could visit every house in the parish and in his surrounding parishes if he had no curate there. From baptism to schooling, to catechism classes to sick visiting, marriage celebration, tithe paying, will making and burial ceremonies Thomas was there. As he grew older he had had constant contact with every parishioner, more so than any other person in the town. The State could not wish for a better agent. Page 26 The townsmen grew accustomed to a married resident vicar and reported, as ordered by the dean, that "Mr Holloway who precheth every sabboth unlesse by greate occassions of bysynees he be from home" [Oxon Archd papers b 52. 161 in O.A]. This and other quotations are taken from the Ecclesiastical Court which met sometimes twice a year at Cropredy. The Archbishop Richard Bancroft of Canterbury (1604-10) insisted on the relicensing of all preachers in 1606. Thomas had his licence renewed so he must have accepted the canons of 1604. He continued to wear the surplus and hood which the more puritanical protestants thought of as the bishop's livery and believed it still represented the catholic church. Thomas was not one of those who refused to wear them or genuflect in church, but neither was he a catholic. Over the following years he baptised the children, married many of them and in turn christened their children. Thomas encouraged the brighter ones and watched those chosen by lot achieve their schooling with his own sons. He knew everything about them from their newest lamb to the number of loads coming into their barns (for he "farmed" a moiety of the rectorial tithes for the lay owner p709), and finally helped them compose their last wishes and bequests, as well as sometimes acting as overseer for their widows. In the last quarter of the sixteenth century and up to 1619, when Thomas died, the congregation's lives were controlled by rules and regulations from three separate and very different authorities. The manor courts governed all agrarian pursuits and the renewal of copyhold leases for land and cottages. The civil court under the local Justice of the Peace settled wages and appointed some of the parish officers, such as the Surveyor of the Highways and the parish Constable. They also allowed Rates to be collected for the Poor and perhaps this rate set in progress the change over from having a church ale to provide money for the church fabric to a church rate. The nonpayment of which soon saw them presented at the third court, the church court. Although the church court dealt with the congregation's wills and morals it was no longer conducted by the clergy, but by lay lawyers and their staff whose livelihoods were dependent upon the fines payable for offences. The Peculiar Court. In the province of Canterbury wills could be proved in the Archbishop's Prerogative court, or at the lesser Archdeacon's church court. In between was a third court belonging to the Bishop who held a Consistery court to deal with diocesan matters. The Archdeacon was not always allowed to hold courts throughout the diocese as several areas were exempt from his jurisdiction and for a variety of reasons held a Peculiar court instead. Banbury and Cropredy had one under the jurisdiction of the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln cathedral. When they surrendered the prebendaries of Cropredy to the Crown in 1547 they held onto the possession of this court [cf VCH p168]. The Peculiar court of Banbury and Cropredy included all the parishes north of Banbury in Oxfordshire, as well as Horley, Hornton and Kings Sutton, the last being in Northamptonshire. Cropredy held theirs in the nave of the church and later at an Inn, though which one is not recorded, until by the end of the seventeenth century the Brasenose Inn [13] had been enlarged from two dwellings and a smithy, and was able to hold the 1702 court there. Page 27 Each court was run by an Official. Letters place Dr Olivery Lloyde as one from at least 1610 to 1616. He wrote to Claydon to ask them to send their presentments to his apparitor, Harry Smith at Banbury in 1610 and a William Wackton in 1616. An apparitor must collect up the presentments and order those named to attend the next court. They also observed any deaths to make sure the family presented their wills. The Official could not seek out and collect all the information himself and neither could his staff, they had to rely upon each parishes two church wardens and sidesmen. To help them in their year of office and to present their accounts at the end the church wardens used a Book of Articles. Their answers to the questions in 1619 show the book had put them under several headings. They dealt with the church fabric, the services, their vicar's conduct and also his parishioners. The vicars had to help their church wardens for many were "loath to trouble our consciencies with such uncertentyes" as the gossip and hints of fame that reached their ears [1619 Cropredy b52 176 and Kings Sutton b52 238: Oxon Archd papers]. If they reported under oath and were then presented at the following court for wrongful evidence the churchwardens could be excommunicated. If they left well alone they would be presented for not taking the matter up. Small wonder those in Kings Sutton and elsewhere were loath to fulfill their duties. Husbandmen, but not widows, in Cropredy took their turn to be a church warden about every ten or eleven years, if there were twentytwo men leasing land. They were always on duty with a fellow warden. In the church court records some of these sidesmen and wardens are named. Elderson [38], Tanner [39] and Cross [51] were tradesmen leasing land so that they had to take a turn. It was not as some said just "the better sort." Parish duties were inescapable once a townsman had land to till. They resisted calling in the farming widows, though the sons may have had to catch up on their share later. In 1619 the vicar wrote "our churchwardens do at all tymes dilegently frequent the church and gyve upp ther accompts at the yeres end [Easter] when new church wardens are chosen." The idea was to make presentations for the "glory of god, the good of the parties having offended" and to be an example to others [22 Feb 1606 Banbury 9. Oxon Archd Papers. Oxon b 52. 9. canon 116]. Oaths were never taken lightly and many lived in real fear of perjury and the consequences of the disgrace and excommunication. Sometimes they presented only those who might cost the parish money by having a bastard, or an obvious case where baptism closely followed marriage. Only a few girls were presented (p122). Their penance was to stand on a stool in the nave with bare head and feet, covered only in a white sheet, during the service, while waiting to confess the intimate details for the whole town to hear. As the courts were apt to ignore extenuating circumstances the church wardens may have left well alone rather than expose their neighbours to the court. The hardest task was presenting according to the canons of 1604: incest, drunkeness, swearing, ribaldry,and usuary. Adultery, whoredom and such wickednesses all required proof, but sometimes all they had was hearsay. Only a few cases of swearing or drunkeness came up in Cropredy's court. One was an unsigned memorandum.
With the minister's help the churchwardens and sidesmen drew up a "bill of detection" naming those to be presented who must attend the next court. This was sent to the court Ordinary who checked them. He or his notary wrote out citations to those parishioners who were to be presented. One of his officials, an apparitor, must then deliver them to the offender asking them to attend the next court. In church all the summonses were read out. Each was guilty until proved innocent at their own expense by persuading four or six neighbours to swear their innocence. If still found guilty they had to perform a penance in the church and often a public one in the market as well. Rich people were able to pay a fine which led totales of corruption. Page 28 Many of the poor even after doing their penance could not afford the fine and remained excommunicated. As such no-one could entertain them, they could not sue or renew their copyhold as oaths were forbidden them. Likewise no will could be written or witnessed. Legacies could not be recovered or debts collected. Burial in the churchyard was not for the excommunicated if they had not received a pardon and paid a fine. The churchwardens attended to answer the many questions given in articles which covered the church canons. Those which concerned the vicar were the easiest providing their attitudes towards Thomas Holloway were acceptable and safe to swear an oath on. A careful answering of questions which they had no way of avoiding. From these responses to the Church court's demands comes our only portrait of the absent Doctor Edward Brouncker (until a more intensive search has been made). Very few quarrels had arisen over tithes during Holloway's long stay. Somehow apart from a few problems their "minister ys knowen to be a modest man in all things and maker of peace not cawsinge dissension" [1619. b 52. 176]. He was neither apparently a "frequenter of ale house or taverne" which was forbidden to ministers, or encouraging "dauncinge nor other sports uppon sabboth days before eueninge prayer be redd." Instead he devoted a great deal of his leisure time to reading the scriptures. Altogether a peaceable minister trying to set a reasonable standard. A man who dressed according to his work. A coat with sleeves for a journey and a scholar's cloak about the town as he went to say prayers with the sick. At home they had no more staff than was necessary and these did all the servile labour necessary which again would be unseemly for him to undertake as a vicar and a gentleman. As to his church services his great fault according to some was his failure to catechise the young every Sunday for half an hour or so before evensong, "but onely at such tyme as they are to receve comunyon." Rather than allowing the "common sort" to read and discuss the bible themselves it was thought better that they were taught their catechism by their minister. For the rest of the queries Thomas followed the common prayer book as required and dressed in surplus and Oxford hood he called them all to celebrate communion three times a year. It would appear that this married vicar kept closely to the bishop's guidelines and attended to his parish in the prescribed way. What of his parishioners? Here many were educated thinkers themselves? No small country place of only sixty households can thrive without everyone knowing everyone else's business almost as well as their own and again they would turn a blind eye if necessary, though risking presentment themselves for doing so. One yearly task "Our minister or his substytute kepeth the perambulations in the rogation weeke in singinge phalmes and Redinge accordinge to the artycle without eny superstycious order" [1 July 1619 Oxon. Archd. papers, Oxon b 52. 176]. To many these were too catholic but providing there were no prayers to wells and "holy" places they continued as it was important for everyone to get to "know" their parish. Processing around the parish gave each husbandman, together with the rest of the male members of his household, a collective memory. This could be called upon in the case of disputes, any filching of another's strips, erection of illegal boundaries, or putting up of gates, and they took tools to remove such obstacles enroute, always using collective memory to guide them towards the correct solution. The theme of the day being to impress on his congregation the idea of God as the bountiful provider and society ordered by God's divine intentions [cf Homily for Rogation]. "The ancient bounds and limits" of the parish and the rights and customs binding the people for their "commodity and comfort." Page 29 In 1607 the vicar accompanied by some young scholars, usually the eldest son who would inherit the lease, and several leaseholders of the town set off in the festive manner fully expecting to have drink supplied by the millers as was the custom. The way was long and rough and the singing made them thirsty and all must have kept going in anticipation of the good things to come. Cropredy had three mills. Arthur Coldwell's at the bottom of Church Street run by Cross the miller [51], Joseph Palmer's at the lower mill [1] and Bourton's Slat mill run by Robert Mansell. The first two were well educated men. The last two had a son each who became clergymen. One of Mansells sons was to become chaplain to King Charles at Oxford where he lost his life. Most millers became prominent townsmen. At which mill did they arrive hot and tired to be confronted by a pious miller declaring that instead of drinking the vicar should rather "reade some parte of the scripture" to them? Imagine Mr Holloway's indignation. They had sung the relevant psalms and hymns at prescribed intervals all day and now by tradition they were due some refreshment. He replied apparently, this peace loving man, perhaps more forcefully than was his usual tone saying "What, shall we saie praiers to a mill" [Oxon. Archd. papers Oxon c 175 f8]. The lack of refreshment due from the millers was defying the set homilies Thomas had taken the trouble to read while about the boundaries. Mr Holloway was either prompted to encourage the churchwardens to more presentations at Dr Lloyd's next court, or he was incensed enough to start proceedings on all those who also upset him by leaving every service before it had finished. The churchwardens also presented Woodrose [8] for nonpayment of tithes and the millers for their withholding of refreshments. When had these people begun to act more openly, defying the rather rigid church laws? Was it because of a disagreement in attitudes and doctrine? The fear that they were retaining too many catholic traditions even after the gunpowder plot of 1605? The millers were each practicing sobriety and hard work as some of the chosen elect. At that court the two wardens begin by pulling up the vicar for his lack of weekly examining of the youths. Thomas did this as we saw above only in lent "at such tyme as they are to receve comunyon" [b.52. 176] and he did encourage parents and govenors to send children and servants in lent, which meant they would not get bored, but have it still fresh. Other ministers did likewise, but it was contrary to the canons. The failure to take those under sixteen every Sunday through the ten commandments, the Creed and examining them in the catechism was sometimes associated with a low standard of education in the minister, but that did not apply with the Revd Holloway M.A. Some of his parishioners believed catechisms more important than sermons, and that it was the duty of the parson to teach their teenagers and servants. Page 30 Doctor Lloyd may have asked Thomas for his opinion about the Banbury vicar who had accused his curate of neglecting the catechising. Two letters survive and the one from Mr Holloway helps to explain the atmosphere a little better. Thomas wrote to Doctor Lloyd:
Thomas's income came largely from tithes but as the courts took a long time to act he was not prepared to present his parishioners for non-payment. In canon Eighteen people could not leave the church without an urgent reason which was anyway upsetting to the minister by its very snub and rudeness. The church of Banbury had become known as a lawless church by ignoring canon Sixtytwo which required banns to be published on three Sundays and the marriage to take place only between the hours of eight and twelve a.m. in the parish church of one of the partners. This blatent ignoring of the canons was making them all "by words" because they were parishioners in an exempt jurisdiction using a Peculiar court. We know where the men who left church early lived in Cropredy. The new parishioner Mr Woodrose lived at the Brasenose manor farm [8]. The gentleman Mr Arthur Coldwell [50] who leased the larger manor's farm and Upper mill and the possible bailiff of his farm, Jhon Thompson [44] who was related by marriage to the yeoman Thomas Vaughan [23] another who left early. Vaughan lived near the vicar in Church Lane. There were three young men from second or third generation Cropredy families, each about the same age and all christened Richard: Kynd [31] in Creampot, Handley [12] opposite Woodrose on a small farm, and the weaver Hunt [5] from the south end of the town. The Church wardens whose awful task it was to present these men were Thomas Devotion [3] who lived next to Woodrose, and Henry Broughton [9] who was Richard Handleys neighbour. Henry Broughton had connections with milling and yet he and Devotion had no choice but to act. The Bourton Churchwardens also had to present those who left early from their parish, one of which was the miller Robert Mansell from Slat mill whose son moved to Cropredy [35]. Two of the Bourton families, Sherwell [or Sharman?] and Gardners had twentyone children between them and even if only some of them were at home, they must have caused quite a commotion leaving the church. All the Bourton men who left early were substantial husbandmen, except for one cottager, Toby Kely. Were these Sunday afternoon services running late. Did all these people have stock to attend to? The morning service beginning sometimes at nine a.m could last for up to two hours with the majority standing. According to Thomas's letter they continued to leave. Was he long winded? Did they not approve of his sermons which he had to keep within the Bishop's dictates whereas all who left may have had access to a Geneva Bible with its margin notes helping them to interpret the text, that they began to shuffle out while he spoke? Even the straw strewn upon the floor would not have quietened their exit. Page 31 By neglecting his tithes Mr Robert Woodrose, who shared the lease with his son, was more open than the others and allowed to be their spokesman. It cannot have been a question of lack of funds for they farmed four yardlands and his son's inventory included many items of furniture unheard of in most Cropredy homes. Robert and his wife Dyonice both had their wills proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, having land elsewhere, and each left a high donation of £2 to the poor of Cropredy. They also paid one of the highest taxes in the town in 1627. Robert objected to the new church rate preferring to contribute perhaps his bushel of malt per yardland (or whatever the contribution was). Rich men often objected to forced church rates preferring contributions over which they had some control of their use. As the College manor farm had a kiln it may have brought about a tradition of providing the malt and ale. Having only recently arrived as the College's foremost tenant on the farm where their manor court was held, did he expect some recognition for his position from those born in the parish? As to his tithes he appears to pay them eventually [c25/3]. Those who left the church early were not presented again. Either Thomas Holloway came to some agreement with them and they all agreed to stay to the end of the service, or else he shortened his sermon. In other churches people left with all manner of excuses to cover apathy, boredom or pressure of family matters [Underdown D. Fire from Heaven 1993]. After the death of Thomas Holloway in November 1619 they seldom had a preacher which may have brought shorter services and an end to people leaving early? The chance was taken by the church wardens to demand the churchyard walls be put in repair by those who lived around them. This included the Coldwell farm [50] and cottages down Church Street [45-9], Suffolks [60] and Thomas Pare's [58] by Hello all of whose properties faced or backed onto the churchyard. When the church walls needed repairing, stray stock could get in and eat the vicar's grass. His horse could also get out. Had Thomas allowed his temper to show? Instead of asking the individuals concerned to carry out repairs, he had presented them at the court. There were many ways in which a parishioner could irritate the minister enough to send him to seek help from the court. Very few heads of household were uninvolved in that court's presentments. Did any retaliate? If they did it was not found in the court records. At the next session John Suffolk and Thomas Vaughan presented nothing and the Bourtons just two wills to be proved. The catholics had kept fortythree days apart from Sundays as holy days and festivals. It was unlawful to work on saint's days before the end of the afternoon service, still celebrated by the church, much to the annoyance of busy protestants who preferred a holier sabboth and no saint's days. The bishops were keen to enforce the church laws and curb the laxness which was spreading. Most men out every day on the land or business and the women about their endless tasks looked forward to such days which brought everyone together and promoted the feeling of belonging to their own parish. Working often in isolation it was necessary to do things together, to grow responsive to all the townsmen and therefore important rituals had grown up, some of which became unique to that place. The husbandmen as employers objected to these holy days when the weather demanded urgent carrying in of the hay or corn. The church law still insisted they must attend the afternoon service before the carts could go out. The vicar decided to act in 1610 when he knew many had been working on Saint James day. The church wardens may have resisted the vicar's request to search out the culprits, especially if they were not in agreement with that church law and Suffolk and Vaughan who were apparently now the sidesmen at the August Court had not named the culprits. Page 32 Thomas Holloway wrote to the official:
The matter seemed to end there although his son-in-law followed his example in Wardington when it was his turn to be a church warden. Richard Timcocke and his fellow warden present those who leave the parish church early. One of these was Thomas Gubbin. In 1610 another of Holloway's son-in-laws John Clarson was his preaching minister at Wardington and he and Timcocke presented Crescent White for working on St Bartholomew's day. When John Clarson becomes the minister at Horley he again presents a townsman for carrying corn on that holy day in 1619. Amongst the whole of the Dorchester, Thame and Banbury Peculiar records only two other villages mention work taking place on a saint's day. Was it "conceled" by unwilling husbandmen? The matter deteriorated in Wardington as the industrious Gubbins became more irritated by the system. A few educated villagers could now write their own wills and need no longer rely upon a clergyman. In fact after 1619 with no resident vicar there were always one or two who disliked the curate's lifestyle or attitude and demanded a stricter more puritanical minister. It was always a bone of contention that they paid tithes to the clergy yet could not choose their own preaching minister. The church and state were linked as one and to even question the choice of minister could be seen to be critising the state and an offence. One of the homilies read out in church stated that "injustice from those higher than them must be suffered quietly." The educated clergy might follow their queen or king and believe that English men and women were there to be ruled, not to question. Many still continued to wish for fewer saints' days and a holier sabbath instead. Ratepayers all had to take a turn as church warden and as we saw one difficult task was to present a fellow husbandman who mowed or carted on a saints day. It could have led to some using their position to take revenge. The protestant church still with its outdated catholic traditions was crying out for reform. Just before and after Thomas Holloway's death quite a few local quarrels erupted in the Bourtons and Wardington. In Upper End Wardington lived one of the more prominent husbandmen Thomas Gubbin who may still have been smarting from his own presentment. The Gubbins by this time had one of the larger farms in the parish, one of over four yardlands. The following Michaelmas day young Gubbin and two others were so busy carting they had no time for church. The father joined them after the service, so he did not break the church law, but all were presented and a penance demanded for the second Sunday after the 30th of April 1621 [Oxon c 157 f 204]. Such a penance to be made in public for such a prominent man who had actually attended church was too much. What happened to the congregation? Did they side with them or not? Thomas was unable to contain his anger one Sunday which led to him again being presented. "Thomas Gubbin the elder for disgracing our minister openlie in church afore all the parish at morninge prayer upon a sabboth daye without anie lawfull cause at all." "... for slandering the ministers which served heretofore at our parish in saying that some of them were Drunkards and whore masters. "Wee present him alsoe for calling the churchmen base fellowes for dischardging there conscience in presenting things amisse.
It did not end there for the minister John Parry and his church wardens had to present him again that year in September for not paying his church rate. The church warden was yet another Thomas Gubbin of Williamscote.
With no resident Cropredy vicar to try and smooth the problems between his curates and their congregations, the situation exploded. Thomas Gubbin senior was about to become involved in civil action. The government's failure to bring out a bill to make the sabbath more holy and prevent trading on holy days, did not help the curate. In 1606 the bill failed in the Lords. The king considered the sabbatarians would deprive the poor of recreation and leave them with nothing better to do than drinking with discussion. Far better to allow sport and keep them healthy, strong and occupied practicing at the butts, after the service. In 1621 another bill aimed more against King James's Book of Sports (1618) was passed, but naturally failed to receive the Royal assent. The same thing happened in 1624. The Gubbins must have known about all this and the fact that there was no civil law forbidding them from holy day carting, just the churchs. The situation was to get worse. In 1625 the bill was passed with the Royal consent, but only in regard to sport. Nothing was said about labour. The church in Thomas Holloway's time was quite different from to-day. From birth to death practically everyone, but the very poor, were involved. It was the supreme influence in educating their children, providing practically all the outside information coming down from the government which used this useful method of communicating. They learnt what to believe as children from the catechism, homilies and vital sermons. Since the middle ages entertainment had traditionally taken place on saints' days often in the churchyard itself after the evening service. This was slowly being eroded as the catholic inheritance was replaced by protestant dislike of drunkenness and resultant relaxing of moral standards, though little evidence of this appeared in the church court records for Cropredy. Teaching was mainly by the clergy from learning to read right up to obtaining a degree. There was often little to read except the bible and almanacs (p150), which were turned to at every occasion. No newspapers with daily news. The pulpit was the source of information. Those who wanted reform within the church would find this monopoly irksome. The bishop's instructions went to all ministers. Non preaching clergymen must rely upon the Book of Homilies to be read out instead of a sermon. A list in the Prayer Book of Homilies shows they covered most of the aspects needed to ensure an obedient congregation. The clergy were the bishop's mouth pieces and the bishops were there to obey the Royal wishes. Any attempt to question political ideas came up against the church with dire consequences. Men of property, merchants and smaller tradesmen were anxious to advance, but the crown kept a feudal hold over it all. Some towns like Banbury decided to pay for a market preacher. The Revd William Wheatley, a puritan, gave lectures in the market place on market days for six years, before becoming the vicar there. How many of Cropredy's congregation heard him when they went to sell corn, cheese or cattle? It had its negative side, for many of the fun and frolic lovers must have gone to another market with their stock and avoided the puritanical Banbury. Some from Cropredy would discuss the sermons over a penny meal at market.There they met brothers, sisters and other friends which gave them a chance to catch up on local gossip, sermons and news from afar. Page 34 The Vicar's Tithes. The folios saved from the Holloway era show just how important to the successful collection of the small tithes they could be. There was also the Easter offerings of twopence per person, except for a man and his wife who were treated as one person. This was usually agreed between the parishioners and the vicar as a recompense for his ecclesiastical duties. Holloway wrote:
The attention to yearly detail left everyone certain of how they stood, while the farm accounts provide an equally important reference for the family who were sharing leased yardlands. These give some insight into the parish from the vicar's side in contrast to the church warden's presentments which reveal another side of the minister. The farming world that the Holloway's lived in left few of its own records. The manorial court papers on their agricultural customs are lost. Fortunately Thomas kept accounts of purchases and sales, of rents and wages and of the loads of corn coming into his barn. The rest concerned his income which had to be collected by a penny here and twopence there. The gaps are far from ideal, but what remains is of great importance and more so for its rarity. The collection of loose folios dealing with poultry tithes, cottage commons, sheep, wool, cows and the Easter Offerings help to supplement the wills and inventories. The next vicar contributed a little, and may have destroyed many of Holloway's folios which he did not need. Holloway's records are used throughout this book, but Brouncker's are used here to bring this chapter up to 1640.Edward Brouncker lived in Ladbroke and from then until he died the parish must be content with a curate. Brouncker was thirty when he took over the ecclesiastical parish of Cropredy in 1619. Widow Elizabeth Holloway calls him Mr Drew Brouncker in her will asking him to preach her funeral sermon and leaving him a generous twentytwo shillings. Edward having obtained his doctorate obviously had a licence to preach, but instead of the weekly one Cropredy was used to when her husband Thomas was alive (though not Wardington, Claydon and Mollington), they would now be getting just one a quarter or less. Dr Edward Brouncker did not trouble to come and witness the husbandmen's wills, though he was there when Mrs Dyonice Woodrose asked him in 1623. Cropredy had plenty of adequate townsmen to fulfill this task (Ch.10) and could manage without him. He may have suffered from poor health, though one instance would hardly prove this. In 1632 Edward had been ill for on the 10th of March heasked John Battie the curate of Mollington to give him a licence to eat meat in lent. Battie gave it because of "Doctor Brouncker, being weake and sicklie..." When he first moved to Ladbroke Edward began to find out the sources of his income and not living in the central parish he had to collect up Holloway's folios and start his own lists of tithes due to him. No orderly accounts survive just "A note of such moneyes as I have/ received" in 1619" [c25/10 f6v]. Page 35 Five years later he wrote "A note of what tythes & consideration/ for tithes I now have this very year 1624/ Looke Mr Hollowayes bookes wh. I have by me" [f4]. Some confusion must still exist, but most of the following notes deal with the tithes of the whole ecclesiastical parish as Brouncker struggles to obtain his tithes. On [f1] he included his church offerings which came to £5. On folio one, though they are not in order, he has a long list of the main sums due from all the parish. Apart from the tithe of 6s-8d per yardland from each parish, which was collected for him and cost twenty pence a quarter to gather in, he had to arrange with tenants of larger leases to pay him in a lump sum, as Holloway had done before him [f2]. For example the £11 from Mrs Holloway for land in Prescote, which must be for the enclosed meads near the High furlong brook [f1]. It was not always easy for Brouncker wrote "Look into certain bother at lease turned downe" [f2]. Like Holloway he had had to visit all the civil parishes in his ecclesiastical care and sometimes agreements between him and the larger farmers were entered into his account book. These give some insight into the extent of trouble he had gathering in tithes. In Claydon a small area had been taken out of the Open Common Field. "Besides I have 26s-8d p annum /of Mr Vivers of Banbury for the tithe/ of 4 yardland taken out of Cledon field called/ Silvermans grounds/." He went on to mention "Item I have £4 p. annum fore the tithe of Lawne/ Hill it is a ground un was once taken out/ of Cleidon field together with the Spellows/ adjoininge" [f4]. There must have been other books for Claydon and Mollington which were not returned to the Cropredy church chest from which he found these details. A case was brought in the Star Chamber about this land. It has been suggested that Silverman's was about 118 acres [Star Chamber 2/6/20]. If Claydon was complicated, Clattercote was hopeless. Edward was not satisfied when the widow Corbet attended Cropredy church as all residents of Clattercote Priory had done, and yet she declared that they had a papal Bull releasing them from any payment of tithes. "I am now in Suite with the Lady Corbett for her/ tithe of Clattercott as she denyes me saing/ it never payd any" [f4]. He lost. He grew very frustrated in his dealings with Calcott Chambres of Williamscote manor
Chambres of Williamscote had borrowed money from his late father-in-law which was now being withdrawn. He was selling his inheritance piece by piece and he may have let the manor house, at any rate he was not paying Easter offerings after 1616 and in 1619 Holloway found him at Palmer's house [1] (p136). Why then did he purchase property in Ireland sold by the crown? When his wife died in 1624 her father's estate were still pressing for repayment. Not surprising Brouncker found it hard to get Chambres to pay his tithes, especially if he insulted Chambres the parson by calling him a puritan [f4]. Brouncker was also sure he was due hay from Chambres' closes, and certainly from the town closes. Hay was really a rectorial tithe and yet for some reason Mollington's tithe hay was allowed to go to the vicar? He knew he was entitled to a tithe from the rents. "Millclose" in Williamscote rented out at £11 per annum gained him a tithe of 19s-4d from William Plant. He also collected the tithes from other tenants such as Robert Lord [1a], a fuller, who rented a meadow down by the mill for £6, but this time Dr Brouncker only had 2s "because they never payd anything before" [c25/10 f4]. Page 36 Wardington's boundary came right up to the river Cherwell. The meadow by the upper mill was mentioned in 1637 when John Haslewood [14] agreed to pay Dr Brouncker "for the/ Mill Ham £3 for all the benefitt/ arising from it untill our Lady/ day next" £2-6s-8d [c25/4 f31]. The name of part of the land has remained as Haslewood's Ham, situated between the mill race and the river ever since, though the river bed has been filled in leaving just the upper mill race alongside the drive to Prescote Manor (Fig.29.1 p464). Brouncker must set his glebe land. Holloways daughter Dorete had married Richard Timcocks who lived at the Nether End of Wardington and between 1604 and 1620 they had eight children [c25/5 1614-16]. Timcocks farmed the two glebe yardlands in Wardington. His sheep must have been above average for in 1616 he sold twenty sheroggs to Holloway for £11-10s which was a good price (p261) [c25/2 f22]. Richard died leaving a widow and eight children who had no rights to remain as tenants. Whatever became of the Timcoke family when Brouncker put in Hirons and Cole as tenants and the house had to be vacated?
Each of the families who followed the Timcocks remained for several generations in the parish. Did they renew and get their dues at the end? Brouncker had the same profits from the sheep as Holloway had (Ch.18) [c25/10 f2]. From the orchards and small live stock he had tithe apples, warrens, eggs and pigs. The water mills owed two strike of millcorn quarterly for "they plead custom for it," preferring to give corn rather than cash. Holloway had already arranged with fuller Lord to have 4s a quarter for the fulling mill [1], but Brouncker discovered that Thomas had never negotiated with the tenants of the new windmills for tithes. "The windmills lately builded the vicar hath/ forborne to take or sue for corne wanting/ the real composition" [f2]. There were several windmills according to various deeds which had terriers describing land near them. The first known college terrier mentions Cropredy's Windmill furlong in 1609 (p304). Dr Edward Brouncker put in curates, and Cropredy for the first time for well over half a century had no resident vicar. Mrs Holloway continued to live in the vicarage until she died in 1623. Living with the family was her new son-in-law Ambrose Holbech, a lawyer, who had married the last daughter Joanne and perhaps they found room for the poorly paid curate who could not afford to keep up a vicarage household? What would happen to the curate after the Holbech's moved to Mollington in 1627 (p551)? Curates without a licence must swear they would not preach in public: "I shall interpret, but only read that which is appointed by public authority." The authorities insisted that each church must provide a book in which to write the names of any strangers preaching on a Sunday. Cropredy had parishioners who had gone to university and had their Master of Arts which was necessary for a licence. The countrymen often objected to curates as they were wage earners (nicknaming them "hedge or hireling" priests) complaining that these men were not skilled enough to take care of the souls of their wives and children. Page 37 In 1641 Cropredy, Wardington and Claydon protested that the curates were underpaid for the cost of living had risen sharply since 1619 and presumably they could not manage on the money. To make matters worse Mr Andrews whom they had paid to preach had been turned away by their absent pluralist vicar. Discussion amongst the congregation was again discouraged, books had been suppressed by the clergy and there were obviously many opposed to bishops who in some parishes acted as patrons forcing upon them an unwanted vicar. The three Cropredy parishes took their complaints to the House of Commons. Anyone needing to get round the matter and achieve a hearing would accuse the minister concerned saying he was "a man of scandalous life." The vicar had then to defend himself. Whether the experience was too much for Edward the records do not say, but Brouncker is known to have died on June 7th 1642. His sister Catherine put up a memorial to Edward in Ladbroke church. Her feelings reflected in the latin inscription indicate that his parishioners had betrayed him [Hist. MSS. Com. House of Lords, iv.97]. Tithes were always upsetting some parishioners who disliked paying for an absent vicar. Archbishop Laud who took over in 1633 had been suggesting that tithes should be increased, something which was hardly likely to make the clergy popular, especially the bishops, and undermined the loyalty to their King when discussions erupted after our period. Many believed that ministers should receive voluntary contributions but no tithes. If these fell short then the minister could work like the rest. Lay improprietors having invested heavily when purchasing rectorial tithes did not want to lose their property and in the end property won. When Brouncker first arrived he was responsible, as the tenant, for what went on in the churchyards. He had also to pay the new church rates and saw no reason to continue church ales, which needed his permission to take place in the churchyards. He began to refuse permission for them. "Cleidon my/ not allowing any drinking as at Mollington." The traditional custom of ales with their dancing to the accompaniment of local musicians, and perhaps some wrestling which would be watched by the older men as they sat drinking their ale, all came to an end, having been disapproved of by strict protestants in their determined effort to set a higher moral tone. Festivals brought everyone together as a community with their maypoles, dancing and travelling showmen. They provided relief from toil and at the same time the ale helped to provide money for the church and poor. What happened to their wooden pipes which played for the children round the maypole? Too small in value to be mentioned in an inventory, or hidden in the chimney along with the ballad sheets? All this came to an end in the 1620's. Puritan Banbury being one of the first. Their Sundays were strict and caused Richard Braithwait to write in 1616:
[Barnabae Itincrarium (1638) copy in Bodleian. Douce B255]. The protestants encouraged forward thinking and hard diligent work. They punished drunkards, swearing and disapproved of masterless men and women whom they set to work. The catholic church may have suited the more old fashioned amongst the laity. If they believed firmly in catholicism they would find that within the old church the priest and lay fraternity could look after their own souls and the family, past and present. They had hired a priest to say mass for their dear ones. This had a double purpose for it drew in the poor to help pray in return for bread. The parish duties such as the repair of bridges, roads and the church gained revenues from indulgences given to sinners in return for money. All this was now illegal and besides many catholic priests were in hiding, or in prison. Page 38 The processions around the town and boundaries were again a day of joining together and feasting afterwards. Entertainment provided essential funds to run the parish. A rate gave no amusement or relaxation. Not only had the enjoyment been gradually taken away, but also anything that reminded the protestants of catholicism, so piece by piece, saint's feast by feast they were stopped. What of the bell at the height of the mass? Gone. Their three bells which spoke up full of meaning, and the bells which tolled away a neighbour so that all offered up a prayer, were only rescued when the Bell Land was retrieved from the crown. They may no longer leave money for lights and masses, but at least the upkeep and ringing of their bells was assured. Pilgrimages to Saint Fremund's shrine ceased in Queen Elizabeth's time, if not in Edward VI's. Money collected from the pilgrims which was put to good use along with money for indulgences stopped with the cessation of all these "superstitious practices." Who was Saint Fremund and how did the change over from being catholics to protestants affect Saint Mary's church? |