Published online by Rochester Cathedral Research Guild Homepage: www.rochestercathedralresearchguild.org The dispute between bishop Godwine and Leofwine over the estate of Snodland, Textus Roffensis, ff. 155r–156v Translated from Old English and edited Dr Chris Monk Abstract: ‘It is made known here in this document how Godwine, Bishop of Rochester, and Leofwine, son of Ælfheah, became reconciled at Canterbury in regard to the land at Snodland…’ To cite this report: Monk, C. (2018) The dispute between Bishop Godwine and Leofwine over the estate of Snodland: Textus Roffensis, ff. 155r-156v; Translated from Old English. Rochester: Rochester Cathedral Research Guild. To link to this article: https://rochestercathedralresearchguild.org/bibliography/2018-15 Published online: 6 th April 2018 General Queries: [email protected]Produced by permission of Dr Chris Monk. All rights reserved to the author. Any views and opinions expressed in this work are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of either the Research Guild or the Dean and Chapter.
Transcript
Published online by
Rochester Cathedral
Research Guild
Homepage: www.rochestercathedralresearchguild.org
The dispute between bishop Godwine and Leofwine over the estate of Snodland, Textus Roffensis, ff. 155r–156v Translated from Old English and edited Dr Chris Monk
Abstract: ‘It is made known here in this document how Godwine, Bishop of Rochester, and Leofwine, son of Ælfheah, became reconciled at Canterbury in regard to the land at Snodland…’
To cite this report: Monk, C. (2018) The dispute between Bishop Godwine and Leofwine over the estate of Snodland: Textus Roffensis, ff. 155r-156v; Translated from Old English. Rochester: Rochester Cathedral Research Guild.
To link to this article: https://rochestercathedralresearchguild.org/bibliography/2018-15 Published online: 6th April 2018
Produced by permission of Dr Chris Monk. All rights reserved to the author. Any views and opinions expressed in this work are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of either the Research Guild or the Dean and Chapter.
IT IS MADE KNOWN HERE IN THIS DOCUMENT HOW GODWINE,2 BISHOP OF ROCHESTER, AND
LEOFWINE, SON OF ÆLFHEAH, BECAME RECONCILED AT CANTERBURY IN REGARD TO THE LAND
AT SNODLAND.3
When bishop Godwine came to the episcopal see at the behest of his sovereign lord, King
Æthelred,4 after the death of bishop Ælfstan,5 then he discovered in the cathedral the very same
written testimony which his predecessor had,6 and who had therewith made a claim on that land.7
Then [Godwine] attempted to lay claim to that land – for the fear of God he durst not do otherwise
– until the suit became known to the king. When the claim was known to him, then [the king] sent
a letter and his seal to the archbishop, Ælfric, and commanded him that he and his thegns, in both
East and West Kent, should settle matters justly, be the verdict for or against the claim.
Then it was that bishop Godwine came to Canterbury to the archbishop; then thither came Leofric
the sheriff,8 and with him abbot Ælfun and the thegns of both East and West Kent, the entire
body of noblemen. And there they deliberated over the claim, after the bishop had revealed his
written testimony, until finally they all respectfully bade the bishop that he should grant that
[Leofwine] might, with his blessing, have use of the land at Snodland during his lifetime. And the
bishop then permitted this to the satisfaction of all the witan, which was gathered there.9 And
[Leofwine] pledged his troth that after his lifetime the land should thereafter revert to the place
from which it was leased out.10 And he gave up the written testimony he had related to the land,
which previously had been alienated from that place,11 and all the hagas which he had west of the
church to the holy place.12 And the mediators of this agreement were abbot Ælfun, abbot Wulfric,
1 The date range corresponds to the reign of the first witness listed in the document: Ælfric, archbishop of Canterbury; see www.abingdon.gov.uk/history/people/aelfric-abingdon [accessed 15.03.18]. See also A. Campbell, Charters of Rochester (Oxford University Press, 1973), p. xxvii. The original document was copied into Textus Roffensis by the principal scribe about 1123. 2 Godwine, bishop of Rochester, r. 994/5–c.1013. 3 Snodland lies along the river Medway between Rochester and Maidstone. 4 King Æthelred (Ethelred) the ‘Unready’, r. 978–1016. 5 Ælfstan, bishop of Rochester, r. before 964–994/5. 6 ‘written testimony’, translating swutelunga, a rather vague term, most likely alluding to the written land grant, i.e. the charter, or land-book, for Snodland. 7 i.e. Snodland. 8 Sheriff of Kent, presumably. 9 Witan, ‘wise men’, the king’s council in Anglo-Saxon England. 10 That is, to Rochester Cathedral. 11 This seems to be alluding to the land being alienated from Rochester Cathedral. 12 Haga, either a plot of land or a piece of enclosed land (possibly with a house and other buildings) within a town; in this case the land was within the city walls of Rochester. It seems that Leofwine gave up land he owned near the cathedral in exchange for the estate in Snodland.
Published online by the Rochester Cathedral Research Guild Page 7 of 10
sheriff Leofric, Siweard, Wulfstan of Saltwood, and Ælfhelm son of Ordhelm.13 And here is the
list of witnesses to this agreement: namely, first, the archbishop Ælfric,14 then the bishop Godwine,
abbot Wulfric, abbot Ælfun, Ælfnoth of Orpington, the brethren at Christ Church,15 the brethren
at St Augustine’s,16 the citizens of Canterbury, sheriff Leofric, Lifing of Malling, Siweard and Sired
his brother, Leofstan of Mersham,17 Godwine son of Wulfheah,18 Wulfstan of Saltwood,19
Wulfstan the Young,20 Leofwine of Ditton,21 Leofric son of Ealdred, Goda son of Wulfsige,
Ælfhelm son of Ordhelm, Sidewine of Paddlesworth, Wærhelm,22 Æthelred the town port-reeve,23
and Guthwold.
If anyone attempts to turn from or break these terms, God will turn his face from him at the great
judgement, so that he be cut off from the joy of the kingdom of heaven and be handed over to all
the devils in Hell. Amen.
13 Spelt ‘Ælfelm’ and ‘Ordelm’ in the document. The ‘-helm’ element of Old English names signifies ‘protector’. 14 Ælfric of Abingdon, archbishop of Canterbury 995–1005. 15 Christ Church, the monastery at Canterbury Cathedral. 16 St Augustine’s Abbey, Canterbury. 17 Misspelt as ‘Leostan’ in the document. The ‘Leof-’ element in Old English names means ‘friend’ or ‘beloved’. 18 Spelt ‘Wulfeag’ in the document. 19 Misspelt as ‘Wulstan’ in the document. The Wulf- element in Old English names means ‘wolf’. 20 Misspelt as ‘Wulstan’ in the document. See n. 19 above. 21 Misspelt as ‘Leoswine’ in the document. See n. 17 above. 22 Spelt ‘Wærelm’ in the document. See n. 13 above. 23 Reeve of Canterbury.
Textus Roffensis, ff. 155r-156v Dr Chris Monk
Published online by the Rochester Cathedral Research Guild Page 8 of 10
The Old English text, directly from Textus Roffensis
N.B. The digital facsimile of this text can be found by going to:
Then type ‘n317’ into the page search box; the text begins at the rubric (red ink) towards the bottom of the right-hand
folio and continues for a further three pages, finishing on the first line of the last of these.
Editorial notes: The layout approximates that of the manuscript: display and coloured letters have been represented; and single words which are split over two lines are hyphenated. Punctuation has been modernised. Word-division and capital letters have been normalised. Editorial insertions are indicated by [ ]. Scribal insertions are indicated by > <. Scribal abbreviations have been expanded and are indicated by italics, except I have preserved the Tironian nota for the Old
English word and (‘and’), which is represented by ‘⁊’. The Old English letters ash ‘æ’, eth ‘ð’, and thorn ‘þ’ (and their upper-case equivalents) have been preserved, though the letter ‘w’ has been substituted for the Old English letter wynn
‘ ’, thus avoiding confusion with the letter ‘p’.
[f. 155r]
24Her cyð on ðysum gewrite, hu Godwine biscop
on Hrofeceastre, ⁊ Leofwine Ælfeages
sunu ( )25 wurðon gesybsumode ymbe þæt land
æt Snoddinglande, on Cantwarabyrig.
a26 ða se biscop Godwine com to ðam biscopstole
[f. 155v]
þurh hæse his cynehlafordes Æðelredes cynges
æfter Ælfstanes forðsiþe biscopes, þa gemetæ he on
ðam mynstre þa ylcan swutelunga þe his fore-
genga hæfde, ⁊ þærmid on þæt land spæc, ongan
ða to specenne on ðæt land, ⁊ elles for Godes
ege ne dorste, oððæt seo spræc wearð þam
cynge cuð. Þa ða him seo talu cuð wæs, þa sende
he gewrit ⁊ his insegl27 to þam arcebisceope Æl-
frice, ⁊ bead him þæt he ⁊ hys þegenas on East28
Cent, ⁊ on West Cent,29 hy onriht gesemdon,
be ontale, ⁊ be oftale. Þa þæt wæs þæt se bisceop Godwi-
ne com to Cantwarabyrig to ðam arcebiscope, þa
com ðider se scyresman30 Leofric, ⁊ mid him Ælfun
24 A Chi-Rho symbol marks the beginning of the text. I’ve represented it with the Greek letters separated. 25 There is a hole in the manuscript at this point. 26 ‘Þa…’ 27 ‘insegl’ (‘seal’), underlined by a later hand. 28 ‘on East’ (‘in East’), underlined by a later hand. 29 ‘on West Cent’ (‘in West Kent’), underlined by a later hand. 30 ‘scyresman’ (‘sheriff’), underlined by a later hand.
31 ‘oft’ in the document. 32 ‘East Cent ge of West Cent’ (‘East Kent and of West Kent’), underlined by a later hand. 33 There is a hole in the manuscript at this point, also affecting the line below. 34 ‘f’ omitted by mistake. 35 ‘f’ omitted by mistake. 36 ‘f’ omitted by mistake. 37 ‘s’ for ‘f’ by mistake. 38 ‘⁊ Æþelred portgerefa on byrig’ (‘and Æthelred the port-reeve in the town’), underlined by a later hand.
Textus Roffensis, ff. 155r-156v Dr Chris Monk
Published online by the Rochester Cathedral Research Guild Page 10 of 10
