No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 January 2012
It is now seven years since my paper on this subject appeared in Archaeologia. I now have to add an account of certain discoveries which excavation and the stripping of modern plaster from the walls of the transepts have disclosed, together with some notes on the tower and the bells. I have already shown in Archaeologia that Roger de Berkeley, the second of that name and of the more ancient stock, had founded this priory for Austin canons in or about the year 1125, and how and why in 1146 his son and successor Roger had granted it to the Benedictine monks of Gloucester, so that from that date it ranked merely as a Benedictine cell.
page 13 note 1 lxxi, 199.
page 13 note 2 These entries, having been closed and plastered over, have naturally escaped the attention of posterity.
page 16 note 1 Augmentation Miscell., P.R.O., no. 2, 1. The Sandfords, as chief tenants, would of course be in receipt of their own rent from the mesne tenant. Be it noted that Richard Partridge's grandfather Richard was also churchwarden, temp. Hen. VII (Archaeologia, lxxi, 212).
page 18 note 1 It was not Sir William who received the grant in fee but his son. I have had the original documents before me.—C. S.
page 18 note 2 The original deed is in the possession of Messrs. Smith, Bale, and Playne, solicitors, of Stroud, who kindly gave me both a view and a copy of the original.
page 19 note 1 For a full account of these interesting bells see Transactions Bris. & Glouc. Arch. Soc., v, 119–32.
page 20 note 1 A close examination of the two documents shows, I think, that the Chancellor of the time cannot be acquitted of carelessness for issuing a faculty which did not explicitly state that the impaired tenor bell alone might be recast, though even that might well have been spared.
page 22 note 1 See Archaeologia, lxxi, 216.