Cownie, E. (1998). Conquest, Lordship and Religious Patronage in the Sussex Rapes, 1066-1135. Sussex Archaeological Collections 136. Vol 136, Sussex Archaeological Society. pp. 111-122. https://doi.org/10.5284/1085031. Cite this via datacite
 Title The title of the publication or report |
Conquest, Lordship and Religious Patronage in the Sussex Rapes, 1066-1135 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Issue The name of the volume or issue |
Sussex Archaeological Collections 136 | ||
Series The series the publication or report is included in |
Sussex Archaeological Collections | ||
Volume Volume number and part |
136 | ||
Page Start/End The start and end page numbers. |
111 - 122 | ||
Downloads Any files associated with the publication or report that can be downloaded from the ADS |
|
||
Licence Type ADS, CC-BY 4.0 or CC-BY 4.0 NC. |
ADS Terms of Use and Access
|
||
DOI The DOI (digital object identifier) for the publication or report. |
|
||
Publication Type The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book |
Journal | ||
Abstract The abstract describing the content of the publication or report |
Post-Conquest Sussex had an exceptional structure of lordship; five semiindependent compact power-bases. It is the aim of this article to investigate whether this structure affected the strength of the tenants' allegiance to their lord and lordship and was reflected in their donations to honorial foundations. The Sussex overlords focused their generosity primarily on their favourite continental houses and their foundations in and near their castles at Arundel, Bramber, Lewes and Hastings and only the tenants of the lords of Arundel and Pevensey chose to follow their lords' example and give to continental houses. William the Conqueror also founded St Martin's, at Battle, which failed to attract patronage on any significant scale from outside Hastings Rape. It was William de Warenne's foundation at Lewes, the first Cluniac house in England, which dominated the picture of gift-giving in Sussex. Tenants of the Rape of Lewes almost exclusively supported St Pancras and it was also supported by those of neighbouring Pevensey and more distant Hastings. Geographical proximity was not the important factor at play here; the tenants of William de Braose's Rape of Bramber, to the west of Lewes, ignored it completely. The only other foundation to draw benefactors in any number was Robert Count of Eu's foundation at Hastings. To understand the different behaviour of the Sussex tenants one needs to consider the wider national and international context. It is apparent that there was tension between the localized interests of these tenants of the compact lordships and the far-flung interests and lands of their very wealthy overlords. This was compounded by discontinuities in lordship as at one time or another each Sussex rape was deprived of its lord, either temporarily, or permanently - but undoubtedly the greatest continuity of lordship was to be found in Lewes. The cross-honorial patterns of religious patronage that grew up after 1066 make it clear that an 'enclosed' society such as Sir Frank Stenton envisaged did not exist in Sussex. Yet, the shire's unique tenurial configuration in 1086 did produce a political society which was unquestionably focused on Sussex. | ||
Year of Publication The year the book, article or report was published |
1998 | ||
Locations Any locations covered by the publication or report. This is not the place the book or report was published. |
|
||
Source Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in. |
ADS Archive
(ADS Archive)
|
||
Relations Other resources which are relevant to this publication or report |
|
||
Created Date The date the record of the pubication was first entered |
20 Jan 2002 |
