Murders most foul
© Maxwell Adams 2003-2006
Version 1 April 2005
There is nothing new under the
sun says the Bible, kicking away the ground from under moral
panic and nostalgia. Here is a scandalous addendum to the human
frailty, devilment, and villainy in Lelant that I described in my
earlier article O call back yesterday in which I tried to show
that there never was a golden, utopian past. The first story begins with
boozing in Lelant. The record of 1284, seven hundred years ago,
is brief but we can flesh it out with experience and imagination.
Richard and Odo, who were brothers, and Elger, had been drinking
at Michael the Gascon's in Lelant. The record says they had been
at Michael's "taberna" and that means an inn in
medieval Latin but can also mean a drinking bout. I don't know
which it means here, but if it was an inn then Michael the Gascon
is perhaps our village's earliest named innkeeper. So we have
three men drinking very well. Nothing new there. The three men left Michael's and
went off towards Ludgvan. Their progress through Lelant, then a
very small place and not a village, was probably noisy and merry
and silly. Perhaps they were singing as merry drinkers often do
everywhere though we cannot know what, alas. Perhaps they were
talking inconsequentially as merry drinkers do everywhere.
However, at some point along their unsure way there was a change.
The merriment turned sour, something was said or done that
changed the mood. The laughter and merriment turned into a row.
They fell into quarrelling and fighting, and Elger pulled out a
knife and stabbed Richard in the stomach. The actual murder took
place in the "tithing" of Ludgvan. Richard took two days to die.
With no effective treatment or painkillers, he must have died
miserably. Immediately after the stabbing, Elger raced back to
Lelant and dashed into the church where he was safe since in
those days sanctuary from the law was real. Even though it might
not be the identical building, next time you are in St Uny's
think of Elger there, probably breathless from running, sobering
up fast, scared at what he had done, wondering what would happen
now. The itinerant judges at the
Assize (called an eyre) at Launceston, which tried events that
had happened over the preceding years, and sometimes many years
before, met just after Easter in 1284 and we do not know exactly
how long before 1284 that the murder of Richard took place. The
previous Assize had been in 1269 so all we can say is that
Richard was murdered by Elger between those dates. The judges at
the Assize looked at what had happened in Lelant and Ludgvan and
how the authorities had dealt with it. Put very briefly and
therefore a little misleadingly, the prevention and punishment of
crime was the responsibility of the people, well, actually the
men, in the locality. They had the duty of pursuing and catching
the criminal and bringing him to trial and were fined if they
failed or got it wrong. They were organised in tithings, broadly
precursors of the parish. What happened to Elger, the
murderer? These were harsh times and perhaps you expect Elger
himself to have been killed brutally by the authorities. After
all, who can forget that supposed law of William the Conqueror
with the most astounding of stings in the tail, No one shall be
hanged or killed for any crime, but put out his eyes or
castrate him (Henderson 1896). And actually they did hang people. In fact, Elger the murderer did
not die. He had gained sanctuary and chose a process called
abjuration of the realm. The coroner, John le Petit, came to the
church and, with the 'villagers' present, heard Elger confess his
crime and swear an oath to leave country for ever. He forfeited
all his belongings and wearing sackcloth and probably carrying a
cross had to travel to a port named by the coroner and catch the
first available boat. It was semi-voluntary, lifelong
transportation. His only chance of later returning to England
would be an unlikely pardon from the king. The coroner wrote it
all down and his record was produced for the Assize judges when
they came in 1284. After the murder there had been
an inquiry with John le Petit, the coroner. Later the Assize
judges came to judge the case and review how the coroner and jury
had dealt with it. I am afraid that these Assizes, which
travelled around the counties of England and which dealt with
cases from all over Cornwall, were not so much about ensuring
that justice rolled down like waters but more about getting money
for the king by fining practically everybody for failing to
follow the rules exactly. The office of coroner had been created
largely to curb the corruption of sheriffs. We are not here
dealing with high principles of inquiry and justice. As I have
said, the coroner had written a record of Richard's killing and
this was given to the judges. A jury of twelve were required to
present their record. It is hard to see how they did this. The
'villagers' would not have written it down at the time and so
perhaps they relied on memory when the Assize judges eventually
came to Cornwall. Of course some of the 'villagers' who knew
about it would probably have died since the murder. In these
circumstances the accounts of juries and coroners were likely to
differ. The Assize judges looked at the
jury's presentment and found that the jury had failed to say as
they should have whether Odo, who was present at the murder, was
guilty or not, though as he did not hide we can deduce that he
was probably not. His exact part in the quarrel and fight is
unknown to us. The judges also found that the jury had
undervalued Elger's goods compared to the value that the coroner
had placed on them, the value of the goods being important
because they were forfeit. As a result the jury was fined by the
Assize judges for undervaluation. This fine would be paid by the
villagers through a regular rate that was levied. Finding
discrepancies between coroner's and jury's valuations of
forfeited goods was a surefire way the Assize judges had of
getting money for the king through a fine. The judges, having got
money for the king out of the villagers, turned to the coroner.
He had failed to attach Odo, the witness. The coroner does not
mention Odo in his record so he is fined. Ludgvan also was fined
by the Assize judges because the murder took place in their area
and they failed to apprehend the murderer. The nearby tithings of
Treeve and Drannack had not come to the inquest so they too were
fined. All in all, the king did well out of Richard's murder. Incidentally, the record shows
how medieval scribes adapted Latin for their purposes and got up
a hybrid language. For example, the scribe writes "attachiavit,"
not a classical Latin word but a French/English word which he
then conjugates according to Latin rules. Inventive hybridisation
became increasingly common as the years went by. The next Cornwall Assize was not
until 1302 and the judges looked at another case of murder here.
The account that I have so far seen is brief. At Lelant in broad
daylight Roger Playz struck Henry Sauvage with a buckler, a
small, round shield, and Henry died instantly. It must have been
a hefty blow. Again we are not told what the quarrel was about
but we can imagine an angry exchange of words, rising voices,
physical sparring, and then the buckler swung hard against Henry.
Again the murderer immediately
fled, this time to Ludgvan. It looks as though he was a member of
the tithing of William Prych at Ludgvan. Henry was found by Joan,
the wife of John Sauvage, presumably a relative, but Joan did not
go to the inquiry as she should have done so was fined by the
judges. Prych also was fined. Because Lelant failed to seize
Roger, the murderer, though the murder had happened during
daytime, it was fined too. And other locals who failed to pursue
Roger, the nearby tithings of Collorian, Ludgvan, Trevethoe, and
Gurlyn, were also fined. Again, murder paid well for the king. But there was more to this
murder than first appears. Gwydo of Lelant, brother of the dead
Henry, accused Richard, vicar of Lelant, in the county court of
involvement in Henry's murder. The exact nature of involvement is
unknown to me. Richard, after arguing that as he was a priest he
could not be judged by the court, was eventually found not guilty.
What Richard's role had been in Henry's death will be forever
unknown to us but I do not suppose any other vicar of Lelant has
been accused of murdering one of his congregation. Not lately
anyway. Of course, I have looked only at
two cases involving Lelant. The Assize courts of 1284 and 1302
looked at many case from all over Cornwall involving murders,
rapes, stealing, land disputes, everything it seems except
speeding along the A30. It is strangely reassuring that seven
hundred years ago our fellows were the mix of saints and sinners
that we are today, muddling along through life, getting it right,
getting it wrong. Sources These murder cases are recorded
in the Assize Rolls 111 and 118 at the Public Record Office, Kew.
Some details can be found in Charles Henderson's papers, numbers
36 and 40, at the Royal Institution of Cornwall, Truro, which is
where I first came across them. The law of William I is in
HENDERSON Ernest F (1896) 'Statutes of William the Conqueror' in
Select historical documents of the middle ages George Bell
and Sons, London.