Unfortunately the town of Tonbridge does not have a distinct and separate entry in the Domesday Book of 1086 as this would have given historians clues as to the style and size of the settlement, its wealth and status as well as importantly its pre-Norman Saxon overlords. It should not come us too much of a surprise to historians that there is no entry as many important towns and manors were not included in the Domesday Book if they were of no tax raising benefit to the crown. Tonbridge was just such a place as it was a high ranking Liberty and as a result free from interference from not only the county but also the crown. The granting of Liberty status to the area round a castle after the Norman conquest was quite a widespread practice as it enabled the overlord of the castle to both fund the building of the castle but also once built the ability to maintain it.
We know Tonbridge was a Liberty at the time of The Domesday Book as it is referenced many times for the land holdings of its overlord Richard in other parts of the county which he was holding within his Liberty at Tonbridge. These are described in the Domesday Book as being in the "Leuua Ricardæ de Tonebriga" even though some were many miles away from the town. The Domesday Book also shows that Richard who is described in the book as Ricardæ de Tonebriga was by 1086 an important land owner with clusters of land holdings not only around Tonbridge in Kent but also nearby in Surrey and around Clare in Suffolk. The family were eventually to drop the "de Tonbridge" and be simply known as "de Clare" after their Suffolk land holdings.
The powers and exemptions the liberty status of the land around Tonbridge gave the de Clare family were important, so much so they were often subject to dispute particularly by the Archbishop of Canterbury who had the most to lose. One of the privilege's of being the Archbishop was the ward ship of orphaned minors who resided in Kent and this in practice meant plundering their inheritance and the Liberty prevented them from having access to such orphans within the Lowy. One Archbishop after another also claimed the Lowy was held from the church and not from the crown due to its Pre-Norman Saxon control of the land. This is something the de Clare's vigorously disputed and the crown appears to have on more than one occasion backed them up. This is something the Domesday Book might have been able to resolve or shed more light on if Tonbridge had in fact had a proper entry.
One thing is certain over the next two hundred years the de Clare family did everything in their power to expand the influence of the Lowy over more and more land in West Kent. By the thirteenth century it included all the land in the hundreds of Littlefield and Watchlingstone as these two hundreds ceased to appear on any official assizes rolls meaning they were no longer sending any jurors. We also know the jurors from other hundreds were moaning to the "Justices of the Eyres" at the county assizes that the de Clares had withdrawn their land within those hundreds into the Lowy "by whose authority they did not know". The Lowy was beginning to become a large distinctive jurisdiction in its own right, a kind of mini county where the de Clares had full control.
The dispute lead to at least two recorded perambulations two establish the extent of the Lowy one during Henry III reign and the other in reign of Edward I. During the second perambulation powers, freedoms and exemptions the de Clare's claimed for the Lowy are recorded as follows:
"To appoint a coroner out of his own tenants, or by their election in the court of Tunbridge; that his tenants should not make presentments before any justices in eyre, either of assize or of gaol delivery, but only when they should come into the lowy; which they ought to do before their departure out of Kent, and there to hold their oyer assizes, or gaol delivery for the lowy. That the ministers of the king, or of the archbishop, should not bear up their rods in the lowy, nor make any summons or distresses for any pleas out of it. That his tenants should be free of toll over all England".
As are the powers, freedoms and exemptions for some of the de Clare's Kentish land holdings outside the Lowy:
"view of frank-pledge, and assize of bread and beer, within his lands in the parishes of Eltham, Keston, Mereworth, Netelstede, Chekeshall, Tremworth, Hardress, Stelling, Natyngden, Blean, and Sheldewyke, and that his tenants in them should be free of all suit and service in the hundreds of the county".
This second list excludes a number of manors such as Yalding where the de Clares were already very much in full control and did not need to re assert their power.
The power of the liberty status the Lowy gave the de Clares can be seen by the second to last sentence of their claim "That the ministers of the king, or of the archbishop, should not bear up their rods in the lowy, nor make any summons or distresses for any pleas out of it". During the reign of Henry III during the second barons war the king seized the castle by force as the de Clares had sided with Simon de Montfort and it was only at the Battle of Evesham that de Clares chose to change elegances and back the king again. After the Battle of Evesham the de Clares exacted their revenge on all the men the king had used to assist him in the siege of the castle by fining them by force in a well documented rampage of the county of Kent. Those who chose to resist and refuse to pay the fines found themselves imprisoned in the castle until they did finally pay up.
So what did Tonbridge look like in medieval times. One thing for sure it would have been dominated by its castle which would have very much more impressive than the ruins look today. The only other two impressive stone built buildings would have been the parish church and immediately to the south of the town the priory accessed by a bridged causeway across the five Medway steams (this was situated where the railway line runs through the town today). The other feature that would have struck a visitor would have been the large deer parks that surrounded the town and castle these were known as the Cage Park to the north and the Postern Park to the east. The town itself would have been made up entirely of timber buildings which have been situated entirely within the ramparts of the 900 metre pentagon shaped defensive fosse. The buildings would have surrounded a large market place and were known as burgages and were reserved for traders and high ranking employees of the de Clares. The remainder of the population would have been forced to reside in the Lowy's three boroughs of Hilden, South and Hadlow. The other feature of the Lowy were its two pailed (fenced)forests called the North Frith and the South Frith.
The de Clares were given the right to build walls on the fosse in 1259 and send two representatives to parliament. The only other two towns in Kent to have these rights at this time were Canterbury and Rochester. We do not know if walls were ever built but this does give some insight into the importance of the town of Tonbridge in medieval times. It's importance primarily came about from the town's connectivity with the important medieval cross channel ports of Winchelsea, Rye, Hastings, Pevensey and Lewes. The taxing of movement of goods through the town to and from these ports would have also been an important revenue source for the town. 1318 when Hugh D'Audley who had married Margaret de Clare became custodian of the castle he applied to the king the right to tax goods. This is recorded in the King's papers as: "Grant for three years, at the request of Hugh Daudele, the younger, to the bailiffs and good men of the town of Tunbrugge of murage and pavage, upon all wares for sale brought into their town.
