SAVILLE, Sir Thomas

The Savilles had been established in the West Riding from at least the mid twelfth century. They added progressively to their estates through marriage. The most significant of these marriages was that of our MP’s grandparents, Sir John Saville† (d.c.1399) and Isabel Elland, who brought the family the manors of Elland and Tankersley (both in the West Riding and held of the duchy of Lancaster honour of Pontefract). Sir John, a noted soldier, represented Yorkshire in five Parliaments between 1376 and 1390 and developed very close ties with the house of Lancaster. In 1374, ‘pur un grant somme’, he purchased from John of Gaunt the wardship and marriage of the heiress of the senior branch of the Thornhill family. He married her to his younger son, Henry.6 S.K. Walker, Lancastrian Affinity, 90; Reg. Gaunt, ii (Cam. Soc. ser. 3, lvii), 1436. As it transpired, this match provided something more than a significant endowment for a younger branch of the family. On the childless death in about 1409 of Henry’s niece, Isabel, wife of Thomas, younger brother of John, Lord Darcy, the main family patrimony became united with the Thornhill inheritance to the benefit of our MP as Henry’s son and heir.7 In 1408 our MP’s father had confirmed Isabel’s estate in the ancient Saville estates, principally the manor of Golcar, and in the reversion of her grandmother’s Elland inheritance. She was to hold these lands to herself in tail with remainder to Henry in tail: Savile of Rufford mss, DD/SR/26/73. For her marriage to Darcy, who is not mentioned in this deed: Yorks. Arch. Jnl. xxv. 5. Darcy survived until 1442 but with only a small interest in his late wife’s estates: S.J. Payling, Political Society in Lancastrian Eng. 142n.; Savile of Rufford mss, DD/SR/12/63. The combined inheritance, almost entirely confined to the West Riding but also including property in Lancashire at Rochdale and Inchfield (once of the Ellands) and at Foulridge (once of the Thornhills), made the Savilles one of the richest gentry families in Yorkshire.8 VCH Lancs. v. 192, 229; vi. 545.

Thomas Saville had begun his adult career even before the extent of his expectations became apparent. He benefited from the forfeitures after the Scrope rebellion, probably because he had played an active part in its suppression. On 28 May 1405 the rebels murdered Sir Thomas Colville† of Coxwold (Yorkshire), as a supporter of their principal opponent, Ralph Neville, earl of Westmorland. Ironically, Colville left one of the ringleaders of the rebels as his heir, namely a distant cousin, John Percy of Kildare (Yorkshire), and as a consequence of Percy’s forfeiture, Saville shared a grant of the keeping of the Colville manor of Nunwick in the North Riding in the following November.9 CFR, xiii. 21. At this date both his parents, his grandmother, Isabel, the heiress of Elland, and his cousin, Isabel Darcy, were still alive, and he was to realize his expectations in full only over a long period.10 His uncle, Sir John Saville, was also only recently dead. He died between 2 May and 10 Aug. 1405: CPR, 1405-8, pp. 15, 56; Yorks. Arch. Jnl. xxviii. 412. His cousin seems to have died in about 1409 and his father does not appear in the records after witnessing a deed in February 1411.11 Yorks. Deeds, iv (Yorks. Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. lxv), 123. Yet the most substantial part of his inheritance – the Elland lands of his grandmother and the Thornhill lands of his mother – remained out of his hands. His mother died in about 1416 but his grandmother lived until at least as late as 1423. This helps to explain the obscurity of the first part of his adult career.

None the less, Saville was not idle in this period of waiting. Significantly for his family’s later history, he maintained its connexion with the dukes of York, who, as lords of Wakefield, were a powerful presence in the immediate neighbourhood of the Saville estates. At some date shortly before 20 Nov. 1399 Edmund, duke of York, had appointed Thomas’s uncle, Sir John Saville (d.1405), as his chief forester in Sowerbyshire and Holmfirth and keeper of his park of Erringden.12 This appointment was said to have been made at the King’s command and was presumably intended as a reward for Sir John in the immediate aftermath of Hen. IV’s accession: CPR, 1405-8, pp. 15, 50. Thomas was to acquire the same office. On 22 May 1414, by letters patent dated at Leicester while Parliament was in session there, the duke’s son and successor, Edward, duke of York, appointed our MP, whom he described as his esquire, as master forester of his chace and park of Erringden at a fee of £10 p.a. for life. Although differently described, this was the same office as his uncle had held. Both involved the retention of five foresters: the difference was that the uncle (who was himself only to have 2d. daily) had had an allowance for their employment while Thomas had to retain them out of a larger fee. Given this connexion, it might be supposed that he served in the duke’s retinue during the Agincourt campaign, but there is no evidence that he did so. Even so, after the duke’s death at that battle, he successfully petitioned the Crown for the confirmation of his letters patent during the minority of the duke’s nephew and heir, Richard.13 CPR, 1416-22, pp. 38-39; SC8/229/11411.

It was about this date that Saville inherited his mother’s manor of Thornhill and her other estates. She was alive in 1415, but was dead in 1416 when her feoffees, headed by John Leventhorpe I* and our MP’s brother Henry Saville of Copley, conveyed her manor of Foulridge to Thomas and his wife, Margaret, and their issue.14 Savile of Rufford mss, DD/SR/28/1/36; A11/28/2. This settlement is likely to have been in implementation of an earlier marriage indenture, for, since Saville’s eldest son appears to have been of age by 1429, the couple must have been married for some years by this date. Margaret seems to have belonged to the wealthy Lancashire family of Pilkington, and it is probable that the marriage was negotiated by our MP’s father shortly before his death.

Just as Saville inherited his mother’s lands, a difficulty arose in respect of part of his grandmother’s Elland inheritance. This had earlier been divided between her, as heir general of the family, and the heir male, Thomas Elland. By an agreement of 1372 the manors of Brighouse (near Elland) and Carlinghow (in Batley) and a moiety of the manor of Tankersley had been reserved for the heir male with Isabel taking the other moiety of Tankersley, the manor of Elland and the Elland lands in Lancashire.15 Yorks. Feet of Fines, 21-51 Edw. III (Yorks. Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. lii), 157, 162. In 1419 Thomas Elland’s son, Robert, sued a writ of formedon against our MP’s grandmother for a moiety of the manor of Tankersley, either because he was attempting to claim the whole manor or, as is more likely, Isabel had disseised him of his moiety. The matter was resolved by a final concord levied in June 1423 when Elland surrendered his claim to a moiety of the manor to Saville and Isabel.16 CP40/634, rot. 331; CP25(1)/280/155/3; Yorks. Arch. Jnl. xxviii. 414. In c.1416 Isabel had complained to the chancellor that she had been disseised of her manor of Tankersley not by Elland but by her neighbour, Richard Wortley. Elland stood as a pledge for the prosecution of this petition: C1/69/383. Isabel appears to have died soon afterwards, and Saville finally found himself master of his entire estate. The precise value of that estate is hard to determine, but, in an inquisition post mortem of 1505, the Yorkshire lands were valued at as much as 259 marks p.a.17 CIPM Hen. VII, ii. 803.

Now one of the wealthiest gentry of the West Riding, Saville turned his attention to expanding his family’s connexions through marriage. On 26 Feb. 1427, by an indenture dated at Thornhill, he agreed with the guardians of John Hopton that their ward should marry his daughter, Margaret. Hopton, although the representative of an illegitimate line, stood to acquire by settlement the inheritance of one of another rich West Riding family, the Swillingtons of Swillington, should his cousin, Margaret, wife of Sir John Gra*, remain childless. By 1427 it was nearly certain that she would do so, and since Swillington lay only a few miles from Thornhill it was natural that Saville should have considered the young Hopton a suitable marriage candidate for his daughter. He probably also calculated that the match could be made on favourable terms: there was discord between the quality of Hopton’s birth and the value of his expectations. The terms of the marriage indenture reflect the singularity of Hopton’s position. It was agreed that, at ‘what time of good fortune any of the reversions falle’ (in other words, on the death of either Margaret Gra or her sister-in-law, Joan, widow of Sir John Swillington), the bride was to have a substantial jointure of 40 marks p.a. In return, Saville agreed to provide a portion of 400 marks within four years of this settlement. This appears a large sum, the sort of portion given to daughters of only the richest knightly families, but it was not, in this case, as large as it appears. From it was to be deducted all that he had spent on the maintenance of the young couple between their marriage, which was to take place at Thornhill at the close of Easter 1427, and the settlement of the jointure. As it happened this period was to be a short one, for Margaret Gra died a little over two years later.18 Lansd. 255, f. 242; C.F. Richmond, John Hopton, 14-15, 159; Savile of Rufford mss, DD/SR/209/48.

Soon after Margaret Gra’s death Saville gained a social promotion that was justified by his wealth if not by his recorded military activity. He was a knight by 20 Jan. 1430, when described as such as witness to a deed, and the most likely occasion for that promotion is the coronation of Henry VI at Westminster in the previous November. No list survives of those knighted on the coronation’s eve, but there is every reason to suppose that Saville and his West Riding neighbour, William Gascoigne*, were among them.19 Yorks. Deeds, vi (Yorks. Arch. Soc. Rec. Ser. lxxvi), 118-19. With this knighthood Saville began to play a slightly more active role in local government. He was a frequent, if not a routine, appointee to local government commissions in the West Riding during the 1430s. Yet he never served as either j.p. or sheriff, and his record of administrative activity contrasts unfavourably with that of both his grandfather and his son. Further, if he did continue to hold his master forestership of Erringden into the majority of Richard, duke of York, there is no evidence that any closer relationship developed between them. His only recorded reward from the duke was a very minor one. On 22 Apr. 1435 he leased from the duke various fishing rights in Sandal and the right to fowl for partridges in the river Calder for a term of 12 years at 24s. p.a.20 Wakefield Ct. Rolls ed. Fraser, xv. 102-3.

By far the most interesting episode in Saville’s life came towards its end. On 29 Oct. 1441, in the church of St. Mary Bishophill in York, he took as his second wife, Christine Lancaster. Materially the match was an excellent one from his point of view: she was heir to a share of the inheritance of the ancient Westmorland family of Lancaster and her brother-in-law was the influential and well-connected Thomas Haryngton I*, a substantial landholder in both Lancashire and Yorkshire. The latter had been instrumental in promoting the match. By Haryngton’s own account, he had come to York the previous day to discuss with the Savilles (our MP and his eldest son, John), the possibility of a double marriage: that of Christine to Sir Thomas and that of his own daughter, Joan, to John’s young son, another John. Discussions concluded, he then went to see Christine in her house at Bishophill and overcame her expressed reluctance to marry by threatening her with the loss of her dower and jointure in the Haryngton lands. The match was thus made with the bride making her vows, ‘moaning and weeping, with tears on her face’. Thereafter she continued her resistance. On arrival at the manor at Thornhill, she refused consummation. Saville, seemingly more reasonable and kindly than Haryngton, offered her £40 to accept their marriage before agreeing that they should live separately, he at Thornhill and she at Elland. These facts were related when, on 31 July 1443, Christine secured the annulment of the marriage before the consistory court at York.21 M. Habberjam, ‘Harrington v. Saville’, The Ricardian, viii. 50-60; A. James, ‘Men and Gentry Culture in 15th-Cent. Yorks.’ (Univ. of York D.Phil. thesis, 2012), pp. 144-57. Saville appears here, almost to the same extent as the bride, as the innocent victim of Haryngton’s machinations. He is not recorded as marrying again.

On 8 Jan. 1442, in the midst of this unfortunate affair, Saville was elected to Parliament. He was eminently well qualified by wealth and rank for election, but, as less prominent and active than most of Yorkshire’s MPs, he was still a slightly strange choice. Haryngton’s return for Lancashire to the same assembly suggests that their desire to sit was related to the disputed marriage. However, the main interest of Saville’s election, if not the explanation for it, lies elsewhere. The indenture witnessing his election in company with that of a much more important man, Sir William Euer*, lists as many as 451 attestors. No previous indenture for any county had named more. It is usually assumed that long indentures denote a contested election, but in this case an alternative explanation is to be preferred. The point at issue may have been the mode of election rather than the identity of the elected. Until the electoral statute of 1429 it had been the tradition in Yorkshire that the indentures named only the attorneys of the more important suitors of the county court, and it may be that in 1442 the wider county community sought to exploit the statute, which established the 40s. franchise, to break the monopoly of the greater suitors. On this reading the abnormally long indenture marks their victory. Such an argument is persuasive, but it does not preclude the possibility that Saville had taken particular measures to secure his own election. He certainly chose a favourable opportunity in that the presiding sheriff, Sir William Gascoigne, was his son and heir’s father-in-law. Further, the attestors included both his son, Sir John, and another John Saville, presumably of the Copley branch of the family (Sir John’s own son, another John, was probably too young to attest), together with his son-in-law, John Hopton, and other men known to have been associated with him.22 C219/15/2; C.E. Arnold, ‘Political Study of the W. Riding 1437-1509’ (Manchester Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 1984), i. 221-2; ii. 98-100.

This election to Parliament marked the apogee of Saville’s public career, and it also stood very near its end. Although he was included on the pricked list for appointment as the Yorkshire sheriff in both 1442 and 1443, he was not chosen, and he was not appointed to any further commissions of local government after the tax distribution and loan commissions issued immediately after his Parliament.23 Arnold, i. 273. In fact, his place in local affairs had already been assumed by his son Sir John, who was to have a much more active and successful career than his own. Knighted in 1441, John was by then acting in the important offices of the duke of York’s steward and master-forester of Wakefield and steward of Somerby and he went on to enjoy a long and successful career.

Little more is known of the aging Sir Thomas. Late in his life he was involved in an interesting suit. In Michaelmas term 1449 a prominent lawyer, John Gargrave*, who had been among those present at our MP’s abortive wedding in 1441, sued him for failing to pay him his fee as retained counsel. Gargrave claimed that, as long before as 1418, when he was just embarking on his career, Saville had retained him for the extraordinarily long term of 60 years with an annual fee of 26s. 8d. and that this fee was now in arrears by 48 marks. The court gave Saville licence to negotiate, and deferred the case to Hilary term, but by then the knight was dead.24 CP40/755, rot. 624d.

Although Saville’s career was largely colourless, he has left a surviving memorial. He was responsible for adding the north chapel to the church of Thornhill: the inscription on one of its windows still proclaims, ‘Orate pro anima Thome Savill militis qui hanc capellam fieri fecit anno Domini MCCCCXLVII’.25 James, 122-8. His patronage of the church is probably to be seen as an assertion of lordship over the manor of Thornhill, which had only become the family home in his father’s lifetime. It was in his new chapel that he wanted to be buried. In his will made on 16 Nov. 1449 he left four marks for the costs of his funeral and the construction of a suitable tomb for himself and his late wife, Margaret (unfortunately, this tomb does not survive, seemingly lost in the seventeenth century). He also left as much as £24 for a chaplain to say prayers at the altar next to this tomb for six years after his death. His other charitable bequests were modest, the most notable of them being 40s. to the repair of the bridge of Horbury over the river Calder near Thornhill. His son, Sir John, was named as his sole executor. No mention is made of any of his other children. The will was proved on 16 Dec.26 Borthwick Inst., Univ. of York, York registry wills, prob. reg. 2, f. 204; Halifax Wills, i. ed. Caley, 9-10.