A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



the inscription, ' S. Hartlepoole Mem. de P. N. Castri 

 s Tyne.' *" Several cases relating to the prisage of 

 wines took place in the 17th century.'" In 1664 a 

 report on the town mentions the poverty of the 

 corporation, due to the coal trade of Newcastle, as 

 Hartlepool had no manufactures of its own. It 

 was stated that there were ' Norway merchants ' settled 

 in the town for purposes of trade and they, with 

 the fishermen and tradesmen, formed its chief 

 inhabitants.''^ In 1680 the port had declined so 

 much that the principal custom establishment was 

 removed to Stockton, leaving only inferior officials at 

 Hartlepool. ^^ 



In consequence of the great increase of trade after 

 the building of the railway and docks, Hartlepool was 

 constituted a separate port, extending for three miles 

 from the so'.ith side of Seaton to the promontory on 

 the north of Castle Eden, with a customs house of itJ 

 own on 6 January 1845.** 



The principal export at the present day is coal. 



The right of wreck at Hartlepool belonged to the 

 Bishop of Durham. His claim was disputed be- 

 tween 1232 and 1240 by Peter dc Brus, who 

 seized a ship which had been wrecked on the coast 

 of Hartness ; for this he was fined 50/. at the bishop's 

 court of Sadberge. Indignant at this judgement, 

 Peter senthis servants to Hartlepool to carry ofFGerard 

 de Seton, a burgess, who had given evidence in 

 favour of the bishop's right. Gerard was imprisoned 

 in Skelton Castle, until the bishop solemnly excom- 

 municated all those who had taken and held him 

 prisoner. This forced the captors to let their prisoner 

 go, and Peter de Brus was fined £zo. In the end 

 the Earls of Albemarle and Lincoln negotiated a 

 compromise between the bishop and Peter de Brus. 

 The bishop forgave Peter the fines, and Peter 

 acknowledged the bishop's right of wreck. ^* When 

 the power of the bishops waned, however, the lord 

 of the manor claimed the right of wreck unopposed. 

 On I December 1631 Lord Lumley leased certain 

 dues to the mayor and burgesses of H.irtlepool, but 

 reserved ' wrecks of all kinds, '''^ and in 1802 arbi- 

 trators determined that ' all wrecks of the sea cast on 

 shore in any part of the manor of Hart, including 

 the township of Hartlepool, belong to G. Pocock 

 (the lord of the manor), and all wrecks of the sea 

 floating within the liberties of the port of Hartlepool, 

 belong to the mayor.' *^* 



The church oi ST. HILDA stands 

 CHURCHES in a fine position near the head of 

 the crescent-shaped limestone pro- 

 montory on which the town of Hartlepool was 

 originally built. Nothing now remains above ground 

 of the buildings of Hilda's monastery, but there can 

 be little doubt that they stood in close proximity to 

 the ancient cemetery before alluded to and thus at 

 some little distance from the existing church. 



The church ■" consists of a clearstoried chancel 



(37 ft. by 22 ft.) and nave (83 ft. 6 in. by 21 ft. 6 in.) 

 with north and south aisles overlapping the chancel 

 (about 8 ft. 6 in. wide), south porch, and engaged 

 west tower (18 ft. by 20 ft.), with transeptal cham- 

 bers (20 ft. 6 in. by 10 ft. on the north and 19 ft. 

 6 in. by 8 ft. 6 in. on the south). With the exception 

 of an earlier south doorway, the church was erected 

 about I I 89 to 1 2 1 5, and completed probably in i 2 3 7." 

 The earlier building, to which the south doorway 

 belonged, was probably the first church on the present 

 site, and may have been erected during the life- 

 time of Robert Brus I, the founder of Guisborough 

 Priory, who died in II 41. However that may be, 

 it is evident that when Robert Brus II gave the 

 church of Hart and the chapel of Hartlepool to 

 Guisborough Priory some sort of building was then 

 standing. Its complete rebuilding at the end of 

 about half a century may perhaps be attributed to 

 the desire of the Brus family for a place of sepulture 

 worthy of their importance. A ruined tomb stand- 

 ing in the churchyard to the east of the quire, but 

 within the lines of the destroyed chancel,^' is prob- 

 ably that of Robert III, or his brother William, 

 who died about 121;.''' The idea of the 

 new building may have originated with Robert II, 

 and its erection was perhaps begun by his son 

 Robert III ; but the latter's short tenure of the pro- 

 perty makes anything more than a beginning out of 

 the question, and the evidence of the fabric would 

 seem to show that it is substantially the work of 

 William de Brus, lord of Hartlepool about 1194- 

 121 5. Beginning with the east end and proceeding 

 westwards the nave arcade was probably begun by 

 I 200, the aisles (including the south doorway) having 

 been first set out and perhaps built up to a certain 

 height. There then seems to have been an interval 

 of some years before the arcade was proceeded with, 

 the clearstory and tower not being built till about 

 1230-40. The interdict of 121 5 may account for 

 this suspension, and thus for the discrepancies of 

 detail in what is otherwise a complete and uniform 

 design. In the interior, while there is a general 

 harmony between the details of the nave arcade and 

 the ground stage of the tower, the soffit mouldings 

 and shafts of the eastern arch of the tower are more 

 delicate in design than those of the nave piers, and 

 while the nave piers have large disk-shaped abaci, 

 the abaci of the tower piers are divided in keeping 

 with the shafts and capitals. As completed before 

 the middle of the 13th century the church consisted 

 of a clearstoried chancel and nave of equal width and 

 height and nearly equal in length, both with north 

 and south aisles, and western tower. This is so 

 abnormal a plan for the date, that it is probable that 

 it was at first set out with a tower between nave 

 and chancel, which was shortly abandoned and its 

 area thrown into the chancel. Nearly the whole of 

 the eastern half of the building has, however, now 



*" Sharp, Hilt, of Hartltpool, Supp. 61 ; 

 cf. Proc. Soc. Ant, Nevicaiile (Ser. 3), iii, 

 156, 169. 



" S. P. Dom. Ch.li. II, cii, 73. " Ibid. 



*' Brewster, W/jr. j'lt/ ^nr;y. of Stockton- 

 upon-Trti {1796), 64; Sharp, Hisi. of 

 HartUftool, 108. 



" Sharp, Hist. ofHartU^ooi, Supp, 62-3 ; 

 Exch. Spec. Com. no. 7147. 



" Reg. Palat. Duntlm. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 

 46-8; ct. Lansd. MS. 902, fol. 119 d. 



The king claimed wreck at Hartlepool in 

 1360 (Cat. Pai. 1358-61, f. 517). 



*' Sharp, Hist, oj Hdriltpool, p. 81 n. 



«a Ibid. p. 9S. 



^' For the architectural history of the 

 church see Rev. J. F. Hodgson in Arch, 

 All. xvii, 201-43, ^""i J.Tavernor Perry 

 in Anri^. (New Ser.), viii, S-II, 97-105, 

 169-74. Both of these have been used 

 in the following description. There are 

 measured drawings in Perry and Henman, 



278 



MeJ. Antip of Co. Dur, (1867), plates 

 32-43 inclusive ; and see platei in Billtng8| 

 Arch. Antip of Co. of Dur. 42, 44. 



** Sec advowson, below. 



** Arch. Ael. xvii, 212. 



^*^ The tomb is covered with a slab of 

 black marble 9 ft. 2 in. long, 4 ft. 8 in. 

 wide, and 8^ in. thick. It stands 1 5 ft. 8 in. 

 to the east cf the existing chancel. The 

 sides, according to Billings, were charged 

 with the Brus lion. 



