Whately

THIS LORDSHIP lies in Kingsbury, a large parish, measuring some 8,000 acres. Whateley lies on the border of Warwickshire and Staffordshire, three miles south of Tamworth and ten miles from Birmingham. The River Tame runs through the area which it is noted for its hills, woods, brickfields and collieries.

First in the prior in the correction of the brothers and rebuking the

excesses of the same should take care to have more discretion than

he was wont lest the lukewarmness of his discipline should in the

future increase the reason for laxity; also that none of the brothers

in the frater distribute or send out of the monastery any of the

remains of their food to anyone, without the knowledge of the

president, tot he prejudice of alms, nor do anything to the

detriment of alms; also that the time of religious services

should be more properly observed by more strictly keeping silence

than is wont, according to the rule of St Augustine and to the

approved custom of the place; also the same prior of Worcester

at his visitation absolved brother Thomas de Watelye of his, who

for his disobedience and other excesses had for a long time been kept

in prison, he having shown signs of contrition.

It is interesting to wonder who Thomas of Wateleye was. He obviously had been a resident of the Lordship and was perhaps a younger son of the Bracebridge family, which continued to hold Kingsbury during this period. Wyke’s findings, that the canons were slovenly, sold food to locals and had to be physically restrained is by no means an unusual description of a 14th century priory. Not for nothing had the term ‘merry monk’ been earned. Six years later, Wyke was forced to threaten with excommunication, the cellerer, Adam Wyberd, for selling beer brewed for the canons.

Another inquiry was carried out at Studley in 1350, this time under the auspices of the bishop of Worcester and it was found that there was a great deal of waste goods produced by the canons which was not given to the poor. In 1364 John de Evesham, the prior of Worcester visited Studley but on his arrival was confronted by a group of armed canons. Eventually through threat of excommunication he was allowed to enter and allowed to exercise his jurisdiction. Why he was resisted it is, unfortunately, not recorded. For the next 175 there is little record of the canons but there seems to have been a slow decline, both in their numbers and the size and importance of their estates. They did remain as Lords of the Manor of Whateley and when the Commissioners for the Dissolution visited Studley in 1536 they valued the priory as a yearly income of £141. They found that the house contains the prior and eight canons and that ‘all priests have good conversation and lyvyng’.

After the demise of Studley Priory the Lordship of the Manor of Whateley was granted by Henry VIII (1509-1547) to John Beaumont. Within a few months he had alienated it to Nicholas Wylson and his wife Eleanor. In 1553 they sold it on again, this time to Thomas Overton, alias, Orton, who died in 1590. From him to came down to his son Nicholas, who is recorded as holding Whateley for a fortieth of a knights fee from Queen Elizabeth. In 1604 the Lordship was settled on his son Thomas and his wife Dorothy. It then seems to have remained in this family for some time before coming into the hands of the Chetwynd’s, who were related to the Earls of Shrewsbury. The present Lord of Whateley is the current Earl, the 14th.

Whateley was held by Studley Priory before the Dissolution. Following the dissolution of Studley Priory, Henry VIII granted the lordship of the manor of Whateley to John Beaumont. Beaumont alienated it within a few months to Nicholas Wylson and his wife Eleanor. In 1553 Nicholas Wylson and Eleanor sold it to Thomas Overton, also called Orton. Thomas Overton died in 1590, after which Whateley descended to his son Nicholas, who held it from Queen Elizabeth for a fortieth part of a knight's fee. In 1604 the lordship was settled on Nicholas's son Thomas and Thomas's wife Dorothy. It subsequently passed to the Chetwynd family; the supplied account associates the later lordship with the Earl of Shrewsbury's family but does not establish a sufficiently precise current holder identity.