A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



restoration, and died 3 March, 131 i, the last years of his Hfe being occupied 

 in renewing his quarrel with the convent. 



The episcopate of Richard Kellaw, Bek's successor, was one of the most 

 disastrous in the annals of Durham. Owing to the supineness of the 

 central authority, the men of the bishopric were left to a large extent to 

 their own resources in dealing with the Scottish inroads. In August, 13 12, 

 the Scots under Robert Bruce, after burning Hexham and Corbridge, marched 

 with such secrecy and rapidity into the bishopric that the city of Durham 

 itself was surprised and burnt, and a large part of the bishopric was ravaged. 



The prior of Durham (in Kellaw's absence at London) purchased a truce 

 — a practice which became not uncommon — and called forth the king's disap- 

 proval.'*'' Two years later 800 marks were paid for a similar truce when 

 the Palatinate was invaded after the defeat of Bannockburn."* The year i 3 i 5 

 witnessed a further raid, in the course of which the prior of Durham, who 

 was residing at his summer residence at Bearpark, was surprised and only just 

 escaped capture. His equipage, horses and furniture, and many of his servants 

 fell into the Scots' hands. On this occasion Hartlepool, then the great 

 seaport of the Palatinate, and the eastern districts, were ravaged by James 

 Douglas, and the usual truce was purchased for 800 marks.'*" It is some- 

 what difficult to distinguish the various Scotch raids during Kellaw's 

 episcopate.'*^ The meek and pious Kellaw was not the man to grapple 

 effisctively with the difficulties of the military situation, accentuated as they 

 were by the defeat of Bannockburn, and the condition of the Palatinate at 

 this period, when famine aggravated the evils of war.'*^ 



A letter written by Edward II to Lewis Beaumont, Kellaw's successor, 

 gives some idea of the hardly ecclesiastical qualities which a bishop of 

 Durham then required. 



We bear in mind that during the lifetime of Richard, your predecessor of good 

 memory, it was frequently said of him reproachfully by our beloved and faithful Cousin, 

 Henry of Beaumont, your brother, that it was through the negligence and lukewarmness 

 of your said predecessor that portions of your Bishopric had so often been wasted by the 

 Scots, our enemies and rebels, and that if you or any of your noble kinsmen had had the 

 government of the same church of Durham, you would have safely defended those parts, 

 like a stone wall, against aggression of our said enemies by the power of yourself or others 

 of your noble race. 



Beaumont however — a cripple, and a man of no ability — proved but a 

 broken reed, for the letter proceeds — 



But behold ! We now positively know that, through your default, negligence, aiid 

 lukewarmness, greater damage has happened and still daily happens in parts of your 

 bishopric and the other neighbouring places than in the time of your aforesaid predecessor, 

 notwithstanding the promises of advice and assistance offered by you, your kinsmen and 

 friends."' 



Two incidents early in Beaumont's episcopate throw light on the 

 disturbed condition of the Palatinate at this period. Travelling northwards 

 in September, 13 17, to Durham, after his confirmation at Westminster, 



'" Script. Tres (Surt. Soc), 94 ; Kellaw's Reg. (Rolls Ser.), i, 204 ; ii, p. xcvi. 

 '" Script. Tres (Surt. See), App. xciv. '" Script. Tres (Surt. Soc), 96. 



'" Full particulars of the state of the borders at this period will be found in Ridpath, Border Hist, 

 of Engl, and Scotland, 240-51. 



'" See Notices collected in Introd. Kellaw's Reg. iii, p. xcviii. 



"' Rymer, Foed. iii, 94 ; Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, p. Ixxix. 



156 



