In 1439 Robert Neville, Bishop of Durham, took possession of the barony of Barnard Castle. This was no simple transfer of land rights. Instead, in the words of Professor A J Pollard, he had entered the castle and adjoining town ‘with a great multitude, in the manner of riot and war’ [1]. In doing so, Bishop Neville reignited a long running dispute over the rights to the barony. And did so at a time when the barony was held by a child, Henry Beauchamp, the future Duke of Warwick, with supervision of the estate and inheritance being conducted by none other than the bishop’s elder brother, Richard, 5th Earl of Salisbury.
The scenario led to a legal dispute that, in court terms, was brother versus brother. They were disputing lands inherited by the heir of Richard Beauchamp, who had been one of the most significant and powerful magnates of the early 15th century. Not only was this the heir to the powerful Earldom of Warwick, but by also young man who was one of the closest associates of the young King Henry VI [2]. This was an unusual and highly charged situation: but, not unique for the barony of Barnard Castle, and far from straightforward in terms of the legality of any claim to the estates.
The historic dispute over land rights at Barnard Castle
The dispute over the ownership of the Castle and Estates at Barnard Castle were long-standing. Edward I had seized Barnard Castle from John Baliol as a result of the latter exerting Scottish rights. Edward I had aided Baliol in becoming King of Scotland and expected him to be supportive, when he wasn’t, Edward acted. Barnard Castle was then occupied, with the King’s approval, by Bishop Bek, the bishop of Durham. In turn, Edward I later took the castle and estates from the bishop – as the result of an unrelated dispute – and granted it as a barony to Guy Beauchamp, the Earl of Warwick, on 2 February 1307.
Upon the death of Guy Beauchamp, the See of Durham, now led by Bishop Beaumont, secured a writ of restoration of the barony to the palantine. This, however, was not executed and the matter lay relatively dormant until 1333 when Edward III‘s ally, Richard Bury, as Bishop of Durham, seems to have acknowledged the rights of Thomas Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick. Thomas’ death, in disgrace, saw no resumption of the claims of the Prince-Bishops, perhaps as the Inquisition into his estate was supervised directly by the King.
It was not then until the death of Richard Beauchamp in 1439 that the Bishops of Durham opted to reassert the claim.
Bishop Neville’s Seizure of Barnard Castle, 1439
In 1439 the death of Richard Beauchamp Earl of Warwick prompted the resumption of the dispute over the ownership of Barnard Castle. Notwithstanding the Royal action of determining the Castle’s immediate future, the Prince-Bishop of Durham opted to take advantage of the minority of Henry Beauchamp to resume the longstanding claim of the See of Durham to Barnard Castle.
The Bishop of Durham was Robert Neville. Robert was born at Raby Castle and was a son of Ralph Neville 1st Earl of Westmorland and Joan Beaufort. He was translated [transferred] from his role as bishop of Salisbury to the more senior role as bishop of Durham on 27 January 1438. The following year, Richard Beauchamp Earl of Warwick died, leaving his son, the 14 year old Henry, as heir. This provided Robert with an opportunity to assert the rights of the church.
The bishop’s elder brother, Richard Neville 5th Earl of Salisbury, was the father-in-law of the new Earl of Warwick [3]. He had been made the custodian of his estates until Henry came of age, including oversight of the interim arrangement of Barnard Castle stated by the Crown.
Despite his families direct interest in the estates of the barony at Barnard Castle, the bishop of Durham took action.
Professor A. J. Pollard noted that Bishop Neville seized Barnard Castle:
…with a great multitude, in manner of riot and war
Pollard, A. J. North Eastern England during the Wars of the Roses.
Bishop Neville did not retain control of Barnard Castle for long. His brother acted, through legal channels, to protect the interests of the Earl of Warwick. By December of the same year, the Earl of Salisbury had been commissioned to lead an inquiry into the situation at Barnard Castle. King Henry VI‘s Council quite literally placed the Earl who raised the matter as a concern in charge of dealing with it. The outcome was a foregone conclusion, his brothers attempt to recover Barnard Castle for the See of Durham had failed. See below for the Commission to the Earl of Salisbury in relation to this case.
A flawed claim on behalf of the Duke of Warwick?
Upon the death of Henry Beauchamp Duke of Warwick statements relating to Barnard Castle in his inquisition appear to have been deliberately stated inaccurately. Rather than the barony being tied to Durham, it was stated as being within Northumberland. A subtle, yet significant, difference. Had Barnard Castle been noted as being within Durham it would have been possible for a 1433 inquiry into Royal and Episcopal Rights within Durham and the Palantine to have been referenced in a manner that would provide the Bishops of Durham with a clear claim to rightful possession of the barony. By placing it within Northumberland, the matter was circumnavigated, as it had been in the 1433 commissions of inquiry. The stating of Barnard Castle as being in Northumberland countermanded writs to the See of Durham. In short, the Commission altered evidence to deny Bishop Neville his claim.
The Commission to Richard 5th Earl of Salisbury in respect of Bishop Neville’s seizing of Barnard Castle in 1439
Commission to Richard, earl of Salisbury, John Nevyll, knight, Ralph Westminster. Greystok, knight, Thomas Fulthorp, William Hoton of Hardewyk, William Hoton of Houuewyk and the sheriff of Northumberland to make inquisition in the said county touching the entry which Robert, bishop of Durham is reported to have made into the castle of Bernard and manor of Gaynford; since it was found by inquisition before John Fenwyk, late escheator in the said county, that Richard de Bello Campo, late earl of Warwick, held the premises in tail male on the day of his death by virtue of a fine levied in the octave of Trinity, 18 Edward III, by licence of that king, before John de Stonore and his fellows, then justices of the Bench, between Thomas de Bello Campo, then earl, and Guy, his son, plaintiffs, and John Melbourn, clerk, and Roger de Ledebury, clerk, deforciants, whereby the said late earl, among other things, acknowledged the premises to be the right of the said John and Roger, who, in return, granted them to the said late earl and Guy, and the heirs male of the body of the latter, to hold of the king and his heirs by the services thereto pertaining, with remainder in tail male to Thomas, Guy’s brother; and afterwards the said Thomas, the party to the fine, died, as also the said Guy, without heir male of his body, whereupon the said Thomas, Guy’s brother, became seised in fee tail, and had issue the said Richard, late earl, and died; whereupon the said Richard became seised in like manner and died seised leaving issue, to wit, Henry, the present earl, his heir, of the age of 14 years; and further that the premises are held of the king as a whole barony, and they were accordingly taken into the king’s hands, and so remained, until the intrusion of the said bishop, who has occupied them with an armed force to keep them to his use, and taken the issues and profits, without any due process of law.
Calendar of the patent rolls preserved in the Public record office / prepared under the superintendence of the deputy keeper of the records 1436-1441 Henry VI v.3 Membrane 8d. Pages 371 – 372. Via The Hathi Trust.
References and Notes
[1]. Pollard, A. J. North Eastern England during the Wars of the Roses. Lay Society, War, and Politics 1450 – 1500. Clarendon Press (Oxford), 1990 (2011 Reprint). Page 148.
[2]. After the death of King Henry V, it was Richard Beauchamp Earl of Warwick who was chosen to take on the role of overseeing the infant King Henry VI’s tuition. As a result, the King had incredibly close ties to the household of the Earl(s) of Warwick. And Henry Beauchamp, the young heir who had Barnard Castle seized from him, was just a few years younger than the King. Consequently, Henry Beauchamp by 1439 was one of Henry VI’s closest friends. [Henry Beauchamp was later created the only ever Duke of Warwick and bestowed the title King of the Isle of Wight by his friend, King Henry VI].
[3] Richard Neville Earl of Salisbury was the new Earl of Warwick’s father-in-law. Henry Beauchamp had married Cecily Neville a daughter of the Earl of Salisbury, in 1435. [Disambiguation: the better known Cecily Neville Duchess of York was a sister of the Earl of Salisbury and aunt to the Cecily noted in the article]
Featured Image
Barnard Castle, County Durham. View from the Silver Bridge over the River Tees – upstream of the Castle and town. Photography by D Moorhouse, author of this website.