Aspects of Kentish Local History

and festivals in the parish church of Reculver and the four dependent chapels, instructing the parishioners to withold their tithes from any other person than the rightful rector. They should be told not to set aside the tenth part at harvest time, but to reckon the quantity and store the whole crop until Thomas of Chartham could claim it. On August 6th the Archbishop cited John de Langton to appear in person or by proxy before his court on September 18th. Worse news came to the Archbishop. John de Langton's men shot rabbits and hares on the Archbishop's warren at Reculver, terrorized his bailiff and servants and taken what they wanted for themselves. On August 13th Master Martin received a mandate to summon these evildoers to appear before the Archbishop's court, and to forbid the vicar and his chaplains to celebrate mass if any of them were present. The Archbishop concluded, "If it happens that you cannot get safely to Reculver and the chapels, send for the vicar and chaplains to meet you in a safe place and give them these instructions."
   There was more unwelcome news for the Archbishop. He learnt that on June 28th, at the King's request, and in accordance with the Canon Law, Pope Boniface VIII had provided John de Langton to the archdeaconry of Canterbury which fell vacant at the Curia when the late archdeacon, Richard Fering, was preferred to the archbishopric of Dublin.¹ On September 23rd Winchelsey formally notified the clergy and laity of the

diocese that he had admitted John de Langton to the office of archdeacon and told them to obey him in all matters relating to his office.² The parish of Reculver, however, like others in the diocese of Canterbury in the Archbishop's collation, was exempt from the jurisdiction of the archdeacon.³
   The Archbishop's summons to John de Langton to appear before his court was sent to the deans of the cathedral churches of Lincoln, Chichester and Salisbury to be read in choir and chapter, as well as to Master Martin; if the chancellor should be hindered from coming by business in the King's service, he was bidden to send a proctor with instructions to answer the charges of which the deans were to furnish him with sealed copies.⁴
   John de Langton failed to appear, but eventually sent a proctor who made appeals which were declared frivolous and intended to set aside the law.⁵ On January 22nd, 1300, the Archbishop gave sentence that the chancellor or his agents should be removed and compelled to
  ¹ C.P.L., I, p. 583, cf. Corpus juris canonici, ed. Friedberg, II, p. 1021.
   ²  Winchelsey, I, p. 360.
   ³  I. J. Churchill, Canterbury Administration, I, pp. 85-7.
   ⁴  Winchelsey, I, pp. 354-6.
   ⁵  Ibid., I, pp. 373-5.