A Green, a Common or a Tye?

From a copy of the 15th century Thorney Manor Rentals of the Court of John Hotot {HAL/CC2/1/3 – retreived by Neil Langridge, 2022}.

John Belle – for that piece of land lying between the land of John Golding on the one part and the common way tp Pynyggyscroft, one head on land of the said John and other on Thorneyty. .. Henry IV primo (1399 -1499) at Michaelmas.

Richard Schitte for one piece of pasture lying between the tenement of John Kyng on the one part and the tenement of the said Richard on the other & one head abuts on land of the said Richard on the one part & the other head on Thorneyty.

1783 map

At the heart of Stowupland is a green open space known from ancient times as Thorney Green. In the 1960s, for a variety of reasons, it became important to define the difference between a green and a common and who had the ‘right’ to access it.  This resulted in some interesting research that might otherwise have not found its way into our archives. (Image from a section of an 18th century map, Dagger House is now known as Elm Farm, on the corner near the Co-op)

In brief – On 13th February 1979 there was a public inquiry regarding the status of THORNEY GREEN. It was subsequently registered as “a Green with Common Rights.

Here are 3 Latin terms that can be used to describe “a green” or “common Land”:

  • Via(m) Comm (unis) – a common way
  • Via Viridis(em) – a green way
  • Vastum – empty or waste land.

Also from the medieval era a ‘dole’ could be used to describe a strip of common meadow, and in the north of Suffolk greens are often known as Tyes. These open spaces or ‘wastes’ were usually places were local people might graze their animals.

There are 2 important terms relating to grazing rights:

STINTING refers to the number of cattle etc. allowed on a common by right.

GOINGS is the number of cattle etc. allowed on a common by auction, and let yearly.

 

In the 1950s and 60s a Royal Commission was set up to look into the ownership and usage of common land. Thorny Green, Stowupland was described as having 30 acres, the condition of the land was grass and gorse and under a section asking about the ‘nature of common rights & extent used” it was simply described as ‘grazing rights.’

According to a letter in our archive from ‘The Central Committee on Common registration’ dated 10th March 1969 ;

  • The fact that Professor Thorpe had listed Thorney Green indicated that he had found evidence that a ‘village green existed there in medieval times or earlier’.
  • Local People have no right of access to common land.
  • Registration as a green does give the local inhabitants a right of access and a right to indulge in games, etc. on the land.
  • Rights of common can be registered and exercised over a green as over a common so it is difficult to see why people object to registration as a greem.
  • Thorney Green was rather large for registration as a green

In February 1980, Telstar carried a report, ‘Some may recall that a year ago a public inquiry was held in Bury St Edmunds to determine whether our village green was in fact a green or a common. Your parish council wanted a village green with common rights. The Commons Commissioners in London have confirmed that this is the decision they have made. I can only hope that everyone concerned with the outcome of this inquiry, agrees with the findings.’