ECONOMIC HISTORY
AGRICULTURE
In 1066 the two-hide manor of Chelsea was valued at £9,
considerably more than the much larger manor of
Kensington at £6, and had land for five ploughs. The five
ploughs are appropriate for the 780 acres of the parish
and suggest that the manor and parish were roughly
coterminous, but the assessment of the Domesday
manor at 2 hides seems low, perhaps the result of a
concession to a pre-Conquest holder by the king. (fn. 1) The
value remained the same in 1086. The demesne was
assessed at one hide and had two ploughs, while the
remaining hide with one plough was shared between six
villeins, three serfs, and three bordars, with land available for two more ploughs. There was enough meadow
and pasture for the cattle of the vill, and woodland worth
52d. a year; there were also 60 pigs kept on the manor. (fn. 2)
As there is no trace of woodland in later records for the
main parish, the Domesday woodland may have been in
Chelsea detached, sometimes called Kingsholt, which
means king's wood. Another possibility is the area in the
north-east corner of the parish, known from the Middle
Ages as Blacklands, which was not part of the open field
system and may therefore have been cleared from woodland before the earliest extant records.
THE MANOR AND ITS TENANTS
In 1214 a tenant acknowledged he held 20 acres in
villeinage of the lord of Chelsea, (fn. 3) and heriot is
mentioned in 1350 and 1367, (fn. 4) but by the later 14th
century the surviving manorial court records show no
trace of villein or copyhold tenure in Chelsea. According
to 16th-century records, the manorial tenants held freely
for a fixed money payment (assized rent), suit of court
held every 3 weeks, and relief. (fn. 5) In 1453 there were 20
tenants paying the assized rents; in 1536 there were 13,
and the changes in the rent suggest that division and
amalgamation of holdings frequently took place. Four of
the holdings were cottages in Fulham, some or all at
Wanden (Walham) Green. It seems likely that the 11
properties which had commoning rights on Chelsea
common in the 17th century were successors to the
freeholdings: some can certainly be traced from estates
paying assized rents in the 16th century.
DEMESNE AGRICULTURE IN THE MIDDLE AGES
In 1453 the manorial demesne comprised 173 a. plus
three unspecified closes in Landmedes. By far the greater
part, 160 a., was arable, of which 28 a. lay in Westfield,
24 a. in Blacklands, 20 a. in Landmedes, and the rest in
Eastfield: 38 a. in Gospelshot, 24 a. in Medshot, 16 a. in
Crosshot, and 10 a. next to the manor close. Of the
meadow, 1 a. and 3 lots lay in Westfield, and 12 a. lay in
three pieces in Eastmead. (fn. 6) By 1587 some demesne had
been taken to form the new manor house and its
gardens, as well as the sites for other buildings, and many
closes mentioned have unspecified areas: nevertheless,
taking quantities given in later sources, the demesne
included 242 a., excluding additional land bought by
Henry VIII. (fn. 7)
In the mid 14th century nearly all the manorial
demesne was apparently managed directly by the lord of
the manor. A note of the income from Chelsea manor
shows that only a few small parcels were let: a pightle, or
small field, at Sandfordbridge (Stamford Bridge) was
leased for 6s.; 1 a. 3 r. and a little garden were leased to
Robert Shepherd for 4s. 4d.; two other small parcels
were let at 2s. and 3s. 4d.; and Richard Est held some
meadow valued at 13s. 6d. Other income from the
manor consisted of the rents of assize totalling £7 6s. 6d.
and from cottages £2 7s. 6d.; profits from customary
works were valued at 8s.; profits from the courts 10s.; 2
mowings of the meadow were valued at £8; a close of
pasture was valued at 26s. 8d., a croft at 8d., and pasture
opposite the manor 6s. 8d. (fn. 8) However, no accounts
survive for the medieval manor except for two brief
periods when Westminster Abbey administered it. The
first of these was 1367-70, when the lord of the manor,
Richard de Heyle, granted it to the abbey for his lifetime
on condition that they did not farm it out. The four
surviving accounts show the abbey, which lay only a
couple of miles from Chelsea, setting up a short-term
farming system, presumably mainly for their domestic
needs at Westminster in conjunction with one or two of
their other manors in the region, principally Battersea.
Nevertheless, the abbey apparently carried on much the
same agriculture as that under the lay lord. When their
occupation began in July 1367, the monks bought from
Heyle for £38 10s. all the corn growing on the demesne-
wheat, rye, barley, dredge, and oats - and all the stock:
farm horses, bulls, cows, boars, sheep and ewes, young
sheep and lambs. Further stock costing £21 was bought
by Michaelmas: 2 carthorses, 6 farm horses (affri), 9
oxen including 4 from Heyle, and 11 cows in addition to
11 cows and a bull bought 'in the manor'. Another bull,
an ox, and 3 bullocks were received from another
manor, and a pig as a heriot. (fn. 1) More stock was bought in
the following 12 months: a boar, sow, 14 piglets, a ram,
39 young sheep, 58 ewes and their lambs, 21 young ewes,
an ox, and 14 calves. The sergeant also bought hay for
the horses and additional grain to top up the manor's
needs: wheat and rye mainly to pay to servants, dredge
(barley and oats) for the pigs. (fn. 2)
About 145 a. of arable were sown each year, and an
unknown acreage lay fallow annually. (fn. 3) Over half the
acreage in 1367-8 was sown with barley (78 a.), about 27
a. with rye, and 21 a. with wheat. The remainder
consisted of oats (11 a.), a little vetch, and mixed crops
such as maslin (wheat and rye), and haras (oats and
vetch). The following year barley was still the largest
crop but only 53 a. was sown, while 16 a. of dredge was
added. A high proportion of the grain produced each
year was used for next year's sowing: nearly two-fifths of
the barley, most of the wheat and maslin, and half the
oats. Of the remainder of the harvest, three-fifths of the
barley, some of the wheat, and all the dredge were sent to
the Westminster granary or to Battersea. Small quantities of barley were used for brewing for the harvest or fed
to the pigs; a little wheat was used for harvest expenses;
the oats were used to feed servants, or the oxen and
horses. Over three-quarters of the rye was used within
the manor as payment to the servants and for bread for
tenants doing customary work.
The manor was worked by a combination of servants,
customary or boon work by manorial tenants, and paid
piece work. The sergeant, who kept the manor's
accounts, a carter, roofer, reaper, two herdsmen, a shepherd, dairymaid, and swineherd all received money
wages, as did a named individual for carrying dung with
his cart. A servant was also employed to cart dung and
cultivate at sowing time. Food and dues were also paid at
Christmas and Easter to eight servants, and food was
paid during the year to a carter, two ploughmen, the
shepherd, the farmer of the cows, and a reaper. The
sergeant received a bushel of wheat each week, and oats
were used for flour and pottage for the servants. In addition, all those working in the harvest received their food
and drink, as did manorial tenants. The lord benefited
from several customary works by the tenants. At least 12
boon ploughmen worked and received wheat and rye
bread for customary ploughing; the manor provided 4
ploughs, made or repaired, but customary work in
winter and at Lent involved 11 ploughs. The 24 men and
12 ploughmen who ploughed for winter sowing received
wheaten bread. The manor had the use of customary
work to reap and lift 14 a. of hay but two or more extra
mowers had to be brought in to assist; customary
mowers received rye bread and drink. The second hay
crop was cut by paid labour for 6 days. During the
harvest 69 men and 5 servants of the manor were used
for 1 day each to reap and bind. It is not clear how many
of the 69 were doing customary work and how many
were employed at piece rate: only 18-20 a. were reaped
by customary work; the remaining 125 a. were reaped by
paid labour, at 1s. an acre. The customary tenants
received bread and cheese during the day and ale and
meat for supper. The servants, carters, two loaders, a
binder, and a reaper received money payment for 4
weeks and 2 days work, as well as bread and ale. The
manor also employed 2 carters and 4 other men at piece
work during the harvest, plus a cook to provide for them.
Most of the crops were threshed in the manor by named
grangers, paid at piece work plus a bushel or two of
wheat or maslin. Other work carried out concerned the
manorial buildings: the sergeant paid for removing and
stacking straw from the grange and cleaning it out as well
as re-roofing it over 3 weeks. Roofing of buildings was a
regular expense; the sheephouse was walled, and the
piggery mended.
The main produce exported from the manor was wool
and barley, and neither were valued in the accounts. In
the first full year 116 fleeces were produced and 135 in
the second; after a tenth had been given to the rector the
rest were sent to Westminster. Nearly three-quarters of
the barley crop was sent to Westminster, and a quarter of
the wheat was sold, to the manor of Battersea. Sales of
grain accounted for were small, and probably all at the
barn door in the manor; a small quantity of straw and a
larger amount of hay were also sold. Similarly, a few sales
of surplus or unproductive animals were made each
year, including 12 hens out of 18 obtained as rent at
Christmas. Dairying was also a main source of income
but was farmed: the manor received £6 13s. 4d. a year for
dairy produce and calves from 20 cows, paid by the
farmer of the cows at 6s. 8d. a head. In the final year of
the abbey's possession, 1370-1, most of the barley,
maslin, rye, wheat, vetch, dredge, and oats produced was
removed from the manor and was either sent to Westminster or to other Westminster manors such as
Battersea, Finchley, or Hendon; some oats and rye were
sold.
In the mid 15th century, when Westminster again
had temporary possession, the manor was farmed out in
several parcels: some of the parcels are described as
short leases for that year, but it seems likely that most of
the manor was already farmed out before Westminster
took possession for the years 1453-55. Assized rents
were £9 1s. 6d., but neither cottage rents nor customary
works were mentioned: the latter had probably been
commuted when the demesne was farmed out. The site
of the manor with 54 a. arable, and 4 a. and 3 lots of
meadow were let to Simon Bayley, who also leased 3 a.
next to the close of the manor and two other small
parcels out of the remaining 15 parcels of the demesne
land; the total rental for the demesne was £15 17s. 8d. in
1454 and £16 7s. 7d. in 1455. The lord also received
60s. a year from Richard Hurlock, the farmer at 'Westbourne', presumably Chelsea detached. A stipend of
20s. a year was paid to the collector of the rents and
farms of the manor; other annual payments included
the £4 chief rent to Westminster Abbey and 7s. 10d. to
the manor of Knightsbridge for the Westbourne land.
In 1455 nearly £36 was paid for 'repairs to the manor',
presumably the manor house or manorial buildings.
Overall, in the two and a half years the manor was held
by Westminster the income of £71 was exceeded by
expenses of £75. (fn. 1)
THE TENANTS AND THEIR HUSBANDRY
There were about 60 men listed in the tithing in 1389. (fn. 2)
The chief pledges of the manor in the late 14th century
included William Cotes, John Stoket, William Est, John
Passour, William of Chikewell (Chigwell) and Richard
Est, and tithing-men included Thomas Partrich, John
Carter, Richard North junior, Richard Titegrove, John
Couper, John Partrich, Edward Smith, and William
Helder. John atte Water, John Stoket, Richard North
and Thomas Churchman were presented for ploughing
up markers or highways, and other tenants for
encroaching on highways with dung heaps, straw stacks,
and pigsties. Chief pledges in 1396 were Stephen
Wilkyn, Richard Est, John Est, Hugh Hunt, Thomas
Churchman, and John Partrich. Several women were
presented for illegally mowing the meadow of other
tenants or taking sheaves of corn. (fn. 3)
In 1340 the rector's tithes of corn, wool, and lambs
produced within the parish was valued at £6 13s. 4d.:
40s. had been deducted because 30 a. arable and 2 a.
meadow belonged to the rectory. There were 30 a. of
titheable meadow; 100 a. lay fallow or waste. (fn. 4) Little
detail is available concerning the type of farming by
Chelsea's inhabitants, but the animals who died of
murrain in 1369-a cart-horse, 3 cows, 3 young ewes,
and 10 lambs - suggest the range of animal husbandry
was similar to the demesne, as do the strays found within
the manor between 1369 and 1399: horses, steers, a
boar, wethers, piglets, chickens, and geese. (fn. 5)
FIELD SYSTEM AND INCLOSURE
Inclosure and Common Rights
Although Blacklands and Landmedes were in closes by
the 15th century, (fn. 6) and possibly always had been, land in
the two large arable fields of Eastfield and Westfield was
in open parcels, confirmed by the fines for ploughing
over the markers of the strips and field paths. (fn. 7) By the 15th
century there is some indication of piecemeal inclosure
of parts of Eastfield: although listed in four pieces, 24 a.
of Medshot was farmed out as pasture by 1453. (fn. 8) Any
inclosure took place slowly, however, and on a piecemeal basis, with some parts, such as on the south side of
Chelsea common, remaining open until built on.
Despite this, however, there are no indications of a
common agricultural system, such as organized rotations, nor of common management of the fields except
for the Lammas rights. (fn. 9) This may partly be because few
court proceedings survive, but equally the lack of court
rolls, even when Westminster Abbey managed the
manor, suggests that there was no need of such records
because any common management had long since
disappeared.
Lammas rights became a source of conflict between
landowners and parishioners by the late 16th century
with the gradual enclosure of parts of the open fields,
particularly Westfield. The freeholders and tenants of
the manor of Chelsea had the right to graze the open
arable fields with any stock except temporary sheep
flocks between Lammas day (1 August) and Candlemas
(2 February), and were prevented from doing so on
about 50 a. in Westfield belonging to the earl of Lincoln
when he inclosed it c. 1607. Lincoln's successor, Sir
Arthur Gorges, opened up most of the land by 1619, but
was challenged by inhabitants over Brickbarn close,
which he claimed had never been open. The commoners
maintained that the close had formerly had one side left
open until the earl had inclosed it; after a suit in 1612 he
had left a gate into the close open for the exercise of
common rights, but the gate was kept closed after the
earl's death (in 1616). (fn. 10)
In 1631 a report was made for the Privy Council after
complaints about inclosure in Chelsea. In Eastfield an
inclosure near Stonebridge had been reversed, and c. 20
a. of Sir William Blake's estate had been inclosed and
partially hedged, but was still laid open at Lammas. The
meadow in the detached part of Kensington by the
Thames which was ditched and banked had also usually
been commoned at Lammas over the bank. In Westfield,
however, inclosures seem to have become permanent.
The five acres on which Richard Stocke's house and
garden had been built by 1619, and 14 a. adjoining it
behind the houses at Little Chelsea was inclosed, with
another 31 a. in Westfield belonging to Lady Elizabeth
Gorges, probably including the grounds of Stanley
House, and 3 a. meadow of Lady Elizabeth's in the open
field had also been ditched and common rights
prevented. (fn. 1) Prior to that Lady Elizabeth and her
daughter Lady Lane had been allowed to inclose 4 acres
in return for a payment to the parish poor. (fn. 2)
Lammas rights presumably became less of an issue as
Chelsea's agriculture changed, but even in 1834 the
parish officers and inhabitants repossessed the Lots
meadow after the bankruptcy of the Kensington Canal
Company on the grounds that it was Lammas lands on
which they had a right to put their cattle, with Lord
Cadogan having the right to let it for the other six
months. (fn. 3) However the status of the Lots is unclear. It was
divided into portions called lots, about a quarter of an
acre each, and in extant sources individual lots were held
in severalty and passed with other land holdings.
However, the name suggests that the strips of meadow
had once been apportioned annually to manorial
tenants, though no hint of this survives in the medieval
court rolls or accounts. The Lots meadow was still called
Lammas land in the Chelsea Improvement Act of 1845,
when it was owned by Lord Cadogan, the West London
Railway, the Kensington Canal Company, and Chelsea
parishioners. (fn. 4)
Chelsea Common
Chelsea common or heath was referred to in 1373, (fn. 5) and
in 1386 a tenant was presented for illegally digging
there. (fn. 6) By the 1540s manorial freeholders were
presented for grazing too many cattle and sheep. (fn. 7) The
right to graze the common was limited by the 17th
century to 40 cows and 20 heifers divided in the proportion of one heifer to every two cows between 11 named
properties, apparently successors of houses or holdings
belonging to the manorial freeholders. (fn. 8) By the late 17th
century the commoners were the leading landowners in
the parish, and in 1674 they agreed to allow the
common, computed at just over 37 a., to be inclosed
temporarily and leased for 21 years to pay for rebuilding
the parish church. In 1707 the vestry decided to
approach the commoners about using the grazing rights
to support the parish charity school, but apparently
without success. In 1713, because of carting and illegal
pasturing, the commoners let their rights to John
Huggett for 3 years for proportionate payments to each
commoner of 18s. for each cow or heifer they were
entitled to graze. Huggett was also to inclose the
common with a ditch and bank at his own expense. The
lease was renewed in 1716 for 20s. an animal and
continued until Huggett withdrew from the agreement
in 1723; the commoners then proposed to seek another
tenant. (fn. 9) They also had problems with the Kensington
turnpike trust, who tried to dig gravel on the common in
1726 and 1736, but were prevented when it was shown
that the common was not a public waste belonging to the
parish but a private stinted common belonging to the
proprietors. (fn. 10) Some encroachments were made: by 1674
there were 4 small houses, presumably the 'poor houses'
mentioned in Hamilton's survey, and a pond or
water-place made for rotting dung which was ordered to
be filled. (fn. 11) The common disappeared c. 1810 when it was
laid out for building. (fn. 12)
FARMING AND TENANTS FROM THE 16TH CENTURY
In the 16th and 17th centuries the manorial demesne
continued to be leased out in parcels, as were the manorial farm buildings, but after the original manor house
was replaced by a Tudor building, the latter and its
immediate gardens and closes were usually occupied by
the Crown lessee or later by the owner of the manor. (fn. 13) Sir
Thomas More's estate was partly farmed by himself and
partly let. In 1528 he had enough barley and oats to feed
his daily household of 100, and was able to sell 20 quarters of barley and 24 quarters of oats; he also had enough
wheat until midsummer, after which he would have to
buy it. The only other resident listed with corn available
to sell was William Chamberlain, with a household of 8,
who could sell 20 quarters of barley and 4 of rye. About
16 households in the parish had no corn at all. (fn. 14) By 1537
all More's estate apart from his mansion and grounds
was let, the farmhouse in Chelsea with c. 90 a. to Thomas
Beane junior, and the remaining land and houses in
Chelsea and Kensington to 11 other tenants. (fn. 15) In 1567
the owner, Lord Winchester, let the farmhouse and all
the land, perhaps 130 a., to Nicholas Holborne, of
Lincoln's Inn, for 50 years. Holborne also leased part of
the manorial demesne and in 1587 was holding from
year to year 5 bays of the great barn, the longhouse next
to the barn, the granary, 12 a. in the common fields, and
1 a. called Wiffes acre. (fn. 16) After the death of Nicholas and
his wife Catherine, the leasehold passed to his son Nicholas, who let parts of the Winchester estate: a close called
Nine Acres near the mansion, to William Arnold of
Fulham, (fn. 17) and the Farmhouse and 3 a. to tenants
including Lodowick Briskett and Sir Robert Stapleton. (fn. 18)
Most of the third large estate in Chelsea, Hungerford's, was also let in one large farm, to William
Wrennall. (fn. 1) In 1607 it consisted of a messuage or farmhouse, which stood in Church Lane opposite the rectory,
4 closes of arable or pasture called Sandhills (32 a.), 21 a.
arable in two parcels in Eastfield adjoining Upper
Church Lane, 9 a. arable on the south side of King's
Road, 6 a. arable in Eastfield in same area, two parcels of
2 a. each on the north side of King's Road, parcels of 1½
a. and ½ a. arable in Eastfield between the road to Westminster and the Thames. In the West meadow he had
two separate parcels containing 11 lots in all, 7 long and
4 short, and another 1 a. None of the arable is described
as being in closes, and its description suggests it was still
in open parcels in Eastfield and Westfield. (fn. 2) From the
deeds, reference to Wrennall's crops in Sandhills, and
from Wrennall's involvement with Lammas rights, it
seems likely that Wrennall was farming his leasehold
himself, together with land he rented from others. This
included 6½ a. described as arable, meadow or pasture
in Westfield on the north side of the Lots, and 14½ a.
arable in Westfield on the north side of the King's Road,
all leased from William Arnold of Fulham. (fn. 3) In 1630,
when Sir William Blake sold Wrennall's farm to Massie,
it consisted of the farmhouse in Chelsea and 7 parcels of
arable in Eastfield totalling 43 a. all occupied by
Wrennall, another 3 a. arable and 10 a. meadow in
Eastfield, 11 lots and 1 a. of meadow, 21 a. arable, three 1
a. parcels of arable, a close of 5 a. all in Westfield, 2
parcels in Westfield called the two long lots (½ a.), and 3
roods called three lots in Westfield, a messuage or tenement in the tenure of Nicholas Harman (or Herne), and
1½ a. meadow in Fulham. (fn. 4)
Like the neighbouring parishes of Kensington and
Fulham, agriculture in Chelsea was transformed during
the 17th century as land was increasingly turned over to
growing vegetables for the London market, and where
traditional arable crops were still grown it was apparently in conjunction with vegetables. (fn. 5) The other
influence on Chelsea's agriculture from the 17th century
was the growth of residences for gentlemen and
noblemen, with substantial parts of the open fields being
inclosed to create pleasure gardens and parkland. Ten
acres of Westfield, which had been enclosed in 1605 by
the earl of Lincoln to make Brickbarn close, was with the
adjoining 32 acres called Sandhills turned into Chelsea
Park attached to Sir Lionel Cranfield's great house
c. 1620, and other parts of Westfield were inclosed for
gardens to the houses at Little Chelsea by 1631: (fn. 6) William
Arnold's 10 a. arable, which had been partially inclosed
and built on by 1618, (fn. 7) was apparently all inclosed by
1631 as gardens for houses along Fulham Road. (fn. 8) In the
south-east corner of the parish some demesne farmland
was taken for the site of Chelsea College, and later much
more was taken for the Royal Hospital. Although part
remained farmland until required for building, by 1700
land not used for the Hospital and its grounds had been
leased to create Ranelagh House and gardens and
Walpole House. The remaining strips between the
highway and the Thames were soon afterwards being
used for non-agricultural purposes and the Apothecaries' Physic Garden.
Pastoral farming in the form of grazing animals and
making hay was also limited, though in 1800 substantial
areas of enclosed meadow or pasture were dotted
around the parish, generally as closes attached to the
larger houses. (fn. 9) Some grazing was used for dairy cattle,
though increasingly during the 19th century cowkeepers
kept their animals in sheds and did not have any land. By
1851 there were at least 25 registered cowkeepers in the
parish, as well as those in related occupations, such as
dairymen. (fn. 10) In 1867 the parish recorded 17 farmers who
kept 308 cows and heifers for milking; as only one of the
farmers had any land, with 6 a. of grass, (fn. 11) most of the
cattle were being kept in sheds by cowkeepers. In 1877
18 cowkeepers kept 382 cows in sheds, (fn. 12) in 1882 20 had
stock but no land with 340 cows in milk or in calf, (fn. 13) and
in 1885 14 had stock only with 327 cows in milk, 3
horses were kept for agriculture or market gardening, 4
unbroken horses, and 44 hens. (fn. 14) As late as the 1890s
cows were kept in premises on King's Road. (fn. 15) Chelsea
still had 1 cow shed just before the First World War, but
by 1918 there were none. (fn. 16)