Page:History of Norfolk 5.djvu/144



Which took its name also from its owners; in 1279, Robert de Bukenham died seized, leaving it to Isolda his wife, who claimed the guardianship of their son, against John de Hastyngs, Roger Bigot, William Ross, and Maud his wife, William de Nerford and Petronel his wife, and Robert de Caston, all claiming the same, on account of lands held of them by the heir. It appears that this manor had then two acres of meadow in demean, 100 acres of wood, four hens paid for rent, 64 days work in harvest, done by the tenants, pannage for 84 hogs, and liberty for 80 men, and two servants appointed by the lord to look after them, to gather nuts for six days together in the woods belonging to the manor of Lopham. In 1404, Agnes wife of ''Tho. de Lye, had a third part of it, and conveyed it to John de Colby; and afterwards all the parts were bought in by John Heydon, Esq. and in 1479, Henry Heydon his son, held these manors joined as aforesaid at the death of John, together with Bosevile's manor in Bunwell'', to which I refer you.

In 1544, I find a fine levied of the third part of the manor of Beauchamp's or Beacham's, which was settled by ''Rob. Newport, Esq. and Margaret'' his wife (in whose right he had it) on Sir John Clere, Knt. This belongs to Beacham's manor in Wimondham, which extended hither. (See vol. ii. p. 506.)

The lords of the honour of Clare, had lands here held of them. In 1438, John Duke of Bedford died seized of two courts called Turns, and one court called Lete, to be held yearly in the village of Carleton-Rode. (Esch. No. 36, 14 H. VI.) and the whole lands held of that honour were extended or valued at half a fee.

In 1570, return was made that Thomas Knyvet, junior, James Hubbard, Gent. Anthony Denny, Gent. ''Robert Grey, Rob. Jexe, and John Randolf'' were lords here, and that the honour of Richmond and the Earl of Arundel were chief lords of the commons.

In 1699, the manor of Richemond's, formerly the Talbot's, is mentioned, and said to belong to Mr. William Jubbs, and then to Mr. Martin; but finding this never named elsewhere, am apt to think, that they only hired the property of Richmond honour.

The religious concerned here were, the prior of Norwich, whose temporals were taxed at 4s. those of the Prior of Bukenham at 2s. 9d. and those of the Prior of Wangford, at 6''d. ob. q''.

BUNWELL
This