THE RAPE OF CHICHESTER
There are very good reasons for believing that immediately after the
Conquest King William gave to Earl Roger of Montgomery the
whole of West Sussex, (fn. 1) that is to say the half of the county west of
the River of Shoreham (the Adur, to use its modern name), corresponding to the ecclesiastical division of the Archdeaconry of Chichester. This
constituted 'the Rape of Earl Roger' and centred upon Arundel where he
established his castle. The term 'Rape', applied to the divisions of Sussex in
and after 1086, is usually presumed to be derived from the Anglo-Saxon rap, (fn. 2)
a (measuring or delimiting) rope, and it is just possible that this word was
already in use for some kind of territorial division, perhaps for East and West
Sussex, though there is absolutely no evidence of this. At some date before
1086 an additional Rape had been formed for William de Braose, with its
centre at his castle of Bramber, at the expense of Earl Roger to the west of the
Adur and of William de Warenne to the east. (fn. 3) At the time of the Domesday
Survey (1086) the Rape of Earl Roger covered what formed later the Rapes
of Arundel and Chichester. In the Survey there is no trace of any castle at
Chichester, the first known reference to one being in 1142; (fn. 4) so it is probable
that this castle (an essential feature of a Rape as originally constituted, apparently) was built by Henry I after Earl Roger's son Robert de Bellesme forfeited his estates in 1102. Nor does the Survey suggest any jurisdictional
division between the two later Rapes: the order in which the Hundreds (fn. 5) are
entered being—Singleton (C), Dumpford (C), Easebourne (C), Rotherbridge
(A), Westbourne (C), Stockbridge (C), Manhood (C), Easwrith (A), Poling
(A), Bury (A), Avisford (A), Box (C). William de Aubigny, who acquired
the honor of Arundel by his marriage with Adelize, widow of King Henry I,
was styled indiscriminately Earl of Arundel or Chichester, or of Sussex after
1156, when Henry II gave him the 'third penny' of the issues of the county
and confirmed to him the franchises belonging to 'the honor and castelry
(or Rape) of Arundel', (fn. 6) of which the knights' fees were scattered over West
Sussex.
As late as 1248 when the Justices on circuit held the 'Pleas of the Crown', (fn. 7)
which were recorded under Hundreds, while these were duly grouped under
their several eastern Rapes, the Hundreds in the (later) Rapes of Arundel and
Chichester are jumbled together. Moreover, in 1237 a return was made that
William de Picheford held 'in the Rape of Arundel in the Hundred of Box'
land called la Grave [Groves in Oving] of the king's gift. (fn. 8)
It seems, therefore, that before 1250 there was no such entity as the Rape
of Chichester. For the 'Pleas of the Crown' in the Eyre of 1262 the Hundreds
are definitely grouped according to the Rapes of Arundel and Chichester, the
latter group being headed 'Bailiwick (Balliua) of Chichester'; (fn. 9) and in the
Hundred Rolls of 1275 the Rape of Chichester makes its first appearance by
name. It would seem likely that the creation of this new division was connected
with the partition of the estates of Hugh de Aubigny, the last Earl of Arundel
of his line, between his coheirs after his death in 1243. While John FitzAlan
acquired Arundel, Robert de Mohaut obtained the overlordship of the twelve
fees constituting the honor of Halnaker, and certain other estates in the neighbourhood. The unity of overlordship being thus lost, it may have appeared
convenient to divide this district into two separate Rapes more consonant with
those in the eastern parts of the county. Of any orders given or measures taken
to bring this about no trace has been found.
The boundary between the Rapes of Chichester and Arundel started on
the coast at the small stream dividing the parish of Pagham from that of Felpham; it ran roughly due north, except for a divagation eastwards to include the
parish of Slindon, which was a peculiar of the Archbishop of Canterbury and
therefore attached to his Hundred of Pagham. Once established it remained
unaltered, the only change in the contents of the Rape being in 1844, when
the long narrow strip constituting North and South Ambersham, till then a
detached part of the parish of Steep and county of Hampshire, was annexed
to Sussex. (fn. 10)