Research Notes:

Feb 1270

Acknowledgement by Hagin of Lincoln, for himself, his heirs and assigns, in favour of Giles de Fenes and Sibil, his wife, their heirs and assigns, of quitclaim and release of all the right &c., that he had or might have by reason of the said Giles’ and Sibil’s tenure of the lands and rents with appurtenances, in respect of a debt of £66, under the names of the said William Fyliol and Aaron, son of Abraham, which he, Hagin, has by livery of the King out of the Treasury, or in respect of any other debt owing by the said William, or his ancestors, to the said Hagin, or his ancestors, from the beginning to the end of the world. Clause providing for further acquittance. Done at the instance of the Lady Eleanor on the Wednesday next after the quindene of the Purification of Blessed Mary in the 54th year.

Calendar of the Plea Rolls of the Exchequer of the Jews, p. 1273

------------------------

Some interesting particulars concerning Sibyl Filiol may be gathered from the record in the assize rolls of our county [of Sussex] of a suit brought by her and her husband, Giles de Fienes against Richard de Pageham ; to recover forty pounds as a compensation for her violent abduction on the thirtieth of August, 1223. The brief sets forth* "that on the Morrow of the Decollation of St. John the Baptist, August 30th, 1223, Richard de Pageham did take, and cause to be taken by some persons unknown, the said Sibyl by night at Wartling, and carried her off, and led her from place to place, until he imprisoned her at Rungeton, and kept her there for three years, to the grievous harm of the said Giles and Sibyl." De Pageham defended himself by claiming her parents' licence for all that he had done, inasmuch as William Filiol her father and Cecilia his wife had granted him "the marriage, guardianship, and nourishment of Sibyl after her father's death for the sum of 200 marks, of which he had paid six marks ; and that, after her father's death, her mother gave him the nourishment of the said Sibyl, and yielded corporal possession by reason of marriage and nourishment, as before agreed on, and that he had done no harm to her nor imprisoned her."

It is difficult from the face of the brief to determine how far Sibyl and her husband were justified in the charge they brought against De Pageham, or to what extent his conduct was authorised by the agreement between him and her father. Sibyl was alive in 1296, so that she must have been very young, in all probability a mere child, in 1223, the date of the so-called abduction, which might in fact have amounted to no more than the lawful guardian taking his ward into his own keeping until she were of age to choose a natural protector for herself. At all events, it is clear that Giles felt there was little chance of obtaining the desired satisfaction, for when the day of trial arrived, and he was summoned to support the prosecution, he failed to appear, leaving himself and his bail at the mercy of the court, which ordered that the names of those who had stood his bail should be called, but eventually finding that he had licence to withdraw his brief, extended its pardon to him for his contempt. ¹