Chapter XVIII: Part II

ON THE PROBABLE PERIOD OF THE EXTINCTION OF WOLVES IN ENGLAND. {287a}

“Cruel as death, and hungry as the grave!
Burning for blood! bony and gaunt, and grim!
Assembling wolves in raging troops descend;
And pouring o’er the country, bear along,
Keen as the north wind sweeps the glossy snow.
All is their prize. They fasten on the steed,
Press him to earth, and pierce his mighty heart,
Nor can the bull his awful front defend,
Or shake the murd’ring savages away.”

THOMSON’S _Winter_.

SEVERAL descriptions of wild animals were, at one period, inhabitants of Great Britain, which, with the increase of population and civilization, have become extinct, amongst which may be mentioned, the wolf, bear, {287b} and wild boar. {287c} We may, however, perhaps regret the extinction of other animals, which were not of a destructive kind; for example, the beaver {288a} is generally admitted by naturalists, to have been, and the roe deer certainly was, formerly, a native of England. The beaver is no longer to be found amongst us; and the roe deer is not now to be met with in any part of this country to the south of Scotland: the latter, however, remained wild in England and Wales, until the reign of King Henry VIII. {288b} The fox would probably have also disappeared ere now, if it had not been for his superior cunning, and his conducing to the sports of the field; the otter is become rather scarce; and the seal is now rarely found upon the coasts of England. The poor harmless badger, although still occasionally met with in some unenclosed or wild parts, has, notwithstanding his inoffensive and unobtrusive habits, been exterminated in several of the English counties, and is become rare in most of them.

The inquiries pursued in this paper will, however, be with reference to the wolf only.

It is admitted by all writers upon the natural history of the British Isles, that wolves once abounded in England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland; and it is an interesting circumstance, that we know with tolerable exactness, something of the dates of their extinction in Scotland and Ireland. The last wolf that is known to have been wild in Scotland, was killed about the year 1680; {288c} and the last presentment for killing wolves in Ireland, was made in the county of Cork, about the year 1710. {288d}

It is remarkable, that when Buffon wrote in the last century, he or Daubenton, who assisted him, did not believe that wolves had become extinct in Great Britain. The following remarkable passage occurs in Button’s _Natural History_:—“Les Anglais pretendent en avoir purgé leur Isle, cependant on m’a assuré, qu ’il y en avait en Ecosse. Comme il y a peu de bois, dans la partie meridionale, de la Grand Bretagne, on a eu plus de facilité pour les detruire.”—Buffon’s _Natural History_, vol. vii. p. 50, title “Du Loup”; in which work Buffon was assisted by Daubenton, the naturalist. As Buffon was born in 1707, and Daubenton in 1716, it is quite possible that one or both of them, received the information upon that point, from some person, who had lived in Scotland, before the extinction of wolves in that country; and, consequently, it might easily be believed by either of them, that wolves were to be found there, at the time when that passage was written.

Holinshed wrote his _Chronicles_ in the reign of Queen Elizabeth; and he mentions, that wolves then abounded in Scotland:—

“First of all therefore in the fields and wild places of the country,
there is great plenty of hares, red deere, fallow deere, roes, wild
horsses, wolves and foxes.”

* * *

“The wolves are most fierce and noisome to the heards and flocks, in
all parts of Scotland, saving in one parcell of Angus, called
Glennorsdale, where these beasts doo no manner of hurt unto the
domesticall catell, but preie onlie upon the wild.”—Holinshed’s
_Chronicles_, _Description of Scotland_, vol. ii. p. 14.

We also know from Camden, who likewise wrote in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, that at the time when he wrote, wolves were very common in Scotland. {289} He also informs us in another place, that Scotland was “grievously infested with fierce wolves, which not only make dreadful havoc of cattle, but even fall upon men, with such inveteracy and mischief, not only in this but in many other parts of Scotland, that by act of Parliament, the sheriffs and inhabitants in every county, are obliged to go out three times a year, to destroy the wolves and their young ones.” {290a}

We also learn from Camden, that at that time, Ireland swarmed with wolves. {290b}

Although it appears to be known with some degree of certainty, about what period they ceased to exist in Scotland and Ireland, there is a great difficulty in ascertaining, at what date they became extinct in England; and in consequence of its greater population, its not having many mountainous and wild districts, and, as suggested in Buffon’s work, its not having extensive woods, it is certain, that wolves would be much sooner exterminated in England, than in Scotland or Ireland.

At the time of the Anglo-Saxon sway, wolves abounded in great numbers in England; and in the tenth century, in the reign of Athelstan, a place of retreat was erected at Flixton, in Yorkshire, in order to protect travellers from being devoured by wolves. {290c}

It has been said, that in the reign of Edgar, also in the tenth century, an annual tribute was imposed upon the Welsh princes, of three hundred wolves’ heads, in order to effect their destruction. If that be true, it is only reasonable to suppose, that considerable numbers would be destroyed, by the adoption of that expedient; but it is strange that some authors, copying from one another, and without giving themselves the trouble of searching into authorities, have stated, that the extinction of wolves in England and Wales was caused by it. Nothing can be further from the truth, as will be presently shown. Mr. Hume, in his _History of England_, indeed, even goes far beyond other writers, in his unqualified assertions on that subject, without any proof; and shows, as is too often the case in his work, his ignorance of the authorities relative to it; and he has not adduced, and in fact he seems to have been unable to adduce, any authority for making the following assertion, viz.:—“Another remarkable incident of this [Edgar’s] reign, was the extirpation of wolves from England. This advantage was attained by the industrious policy of Edgar. He took great pains in hunting and pursuing those ravenous animals; and when he found that all that escaped him had taken shelter in the mountains and forests of Wales, he changed the tribute of money imposed on the Welsh princes by Athelstan his predecessor, into an annual tribute of three hundred heads of wolves; which produced such diligence in hunting them, that the animal has been no more seen in this island.” {291a} It is surprising that Mr. Hume should have ventured to make an assertion so easily refuted; and it is remarkable, that his _History of England_ should find a prominent place in so many libraries, when it is now admitted, that its author is very frequently incorrect as a historian, and that the statements in it, when he omits, as he often does, to quote authorities, cannot be relied on. That work has never been regularly reviewed, which ought even yet to be done. Lord Brougham, in his _Lives of Men of Letters and Science_, who flourished in the time of George III., very properly exposes the faults and incorrectness of Mr. Hume’s _History of England_, thus:—

“There is continual proof, that he took what he found set down in
former works, without weighing the relative value of conflicting
authorities, and generally resorted to the most accessible sources of
information. There have been instances without number, adduced of
his inaccuracy in citing even the authorities to which he confined
his researches.

“Nor can we acquit him on another charge, not rarely brought against
him, and partaking of the two former: neglect or carelessness about
the truth, and infidelity in relating it.” {291b}

The Abbey of Fors, in Wensleydale, in Yorkshire, was founded in the year 1145, which is nearly two centuries after the reign of Edgar; and some time afterwards, Alan Earl of Bretagne, gave to the monks of that abbey the privilege of taking, by themselves or their servants, the remains of the deer which had been killed and partly devoured by the wolves, in the forest of Wensleydale. {292a}

In the 10th year of the reign of William I. (1075), Robert de Hurfravill, lord of Tours and Vian, otherwise called Robert with the Beard, being a kinsman to the King, obtained from him a grant of the lordship, valley, and forest of Riddesdale, in the county of Northumberland, with all the castles, manors, lands, woods, pastures, waters, pools, and royal franchises, which were formerly possessed by Mildred, the son of Akman, late lord of Riddesdale, and which came to that king upon his conquest of England, to hold, by the service of defending that part of the country, for ever, from enemies, and wolves. {292b}

In the 1st year of King John (1199), he granted to William Briwere, a license, “to hunt the hare, fox, cat, and wolf, throughout all Devonshire; and likewise the goat out of the regard [sight] of the forest; and to have free warren throughout all his own lands, for hares, pheasants, and partridges.” {292c}

In the 9th year of Edward I. (1281), wolves existed in such numbers in several parts of England, that a royal commission was issued by him, to Peter Corbet, for the destruction, by means of men, dogs, and engines, of wolves, in all forests, parks, and other places, in Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire, and Staffordshire; and all bailiffs, &c., were commanded to be aiding and assisting Peter Corbet, in the destruction of wolves in those counties.

The commission is alluded to by Bingley, the Naturalist; but it is remarkable that he has altogether omitted to give the date or any reference, where an account of it was to be found. Dr. Whitaker does not notice it, although he more than once, in his _History of Craven_, adverts to the existence of wolves in England after the reign of Edgar. As the mandate is a curiosity, it is given here precisely as it appears in the _Fædera_.—

A.D. 1281. _An_: 9 _Edwd._ I. Pat. 9 Edw. I. m 20 in _Turr_:
_Lond_:

“Rex omnibus Ballivis etc: Sciatis quod injunximus dilecto & fideli
nostro Petro Corbet, quod in omnibus forestis, & parcis, & aliis
locis, infra comitatus nostros Gloucestr’ Wygorn’ Hereford’ Salop’ et
Stafford’ in quibus lupi poterunt inveniri, lupos, cum hominibus,
canibus & ingeniis suis, capiat, & destruat, modis omnibus quibus
viderit expedire.

“Et ideo vobis mandamus quod eidem Petro in omnibus, quæ ad captionem
luporum in comitatibus prædictis, pertinet, intendentes sitis &
auxiliantes, quotiens opus fuerit, & prædictus Petrus vobis scire
faciet ex parte nostra.

“In cujus &c. duratur’ quamdin nobis placuerit. Teste Rege apud
Westm’ decimo quarto die Maii.” {293}

(TRANSLATION.)

The King, to all bailiffs, &c. Know ye, that we have enjoined our
dear and faithful Peter Corbet, that in all forests, parks, and other
places, within our counties of Gloucester, Worcester, Hereford,
Salop, and Stafford, in which wolves may be found, that he take and
destroy wolves, with his men, dogs, and engines, in all ways, in
which it shall seem expedient; and we command you therefore that you
be aiding and assisting the said Peter, in all things that relate to
the capture of wolves, in the aforesaid counties, as often as
occasion may require, and the said Peter may make known to you on our
part.

In witness, &c., so long as it shall be our pleasure. Witness the
King, at Westminster, the 14th day of May.

Enough has now been stated, for the purpose of showing that it was an idle tale to assert that the extinction of these animals occurred in the reign of Edgar. Evidence has been already adduced to show that they existed here, in a wild state, a considerable period after the Conquest; but it is the intention of the author of this paper to go much further, and some proofs will be brought forward of their being in existence for centuries after that event; and some conjectures will be hazarded, respecting the probable period of their final extinction in England.

In the 25th year of Edward I. (1296), John de Engaine, Lord of Blatherwic, died, seized of lands in Pightesse, or Pytesse, in Northamptonshire, found to be held of the King, by service of hunting the wolf, fox, and badger. {294a}

In the reign of Edward II. (1820), John le Wolfhunt, or Wolfhurt, son and heir of John le Wolfhunt, or Wolfhurt, held lands at Wormhill, in Derbyshire, by the service of chasing and taking all wolves that might come into the King’s Forest of the Peak, in that county. {294b}

In the 11th year of Edward III. (1336), John Lord Roos, of Hamlake, had a charter granted to him, by the King, of free warren in lands in Nottinghamshire and Oxfordshire, and also to hunt the fox, wolf, hare, and cat, throughout the King’s forest of Nottinghamshire. {294c}

In the 33rd year of Edward III. (1358), Vitalis Engaine died, seized of part of the lordships of Laxton and Pichesse, in Northamptonshire, held by petit serjeanty, to hunt the wolf whensoever the King should command. {294d}

In the 41st year of Edward III. (1366), Thomas de Engaine, Lord of Blatherwic, died, seized of lands, meadows, and rent, in Pightesse, in Northamptonshire, held by the service of “finding, at his own proper costs, certain dogs, for the destruction of wolves, foxes, martrons [marten cats], cats [wild cats], and other vermine,” within the counties of Northampton, Rutland, Oxford, Essex, and Buckingham. {295a}

Of course it is not pretended, that upon the deaths of any of the before-mentioned personages, who died seized of lands, held by the tenure of hunting or destroying wolves, such a tenure is conclusive evidence that those animals existed at the times of the deaths of those personages respectively, because it may have happened that the lands may have descended from father to son, several times, after the dates of the original royal grants or charters creating such tenures; still, even in that case, enough has been shown to prove that they were not extinct until centuries after the time of King Edgar. Besides which, it must not be forgotten, that the charter before mentioned, of the 11th year of Edward III. (1836), to John Lord Roos, of Hamlake, then gave him a license to hunt the wolf in the King’s Forest of Nottinghamshire, &c., which would have been useless if there had not then been any such animal to hunt. We therefore have some evidence that wolves existed in England in the fourteenth century; but it is very probable that they had been destroyed in the more populous and cultivated counties, although for more than a century longer they might continue to be occasionally met with, in the wild and thinly peopled parts of England, especially in the northern counties.

In the fifteenth century they probably became scarce.

In the 14th year of Edward IV. (1474), that monarch invaded France, and negotiations for a truce were commenced between Louis XI. and Edward, and we learn, from Baker’s _Chronicles_, that King Louis then presented Edward with the handsomest horse which Louis had in his stable, and an ass, and also “a wolf and a wild boar, beasts at that time rare in England.”{295b} Those are the exact words of Baker, and are very interesting, and, with reference to the objects of this paper, very valuable. It will be remarked, that he does not state or insinuate that wolves had been exterminated, or had ceased to exist in England, but merely that they had then become rare. We therefore have got so far towards the latter part of the fifteenth century, and appear not yet to have reached the period of their extinction. I have read somewhere, that it is traditionally stated that they were to be found either in the Forest of Dean or in the Forest of Dartmoor, as late as in the time of Queen Elizabeth; but unfortunately I omitted to take a note of the publication in which it was mentioned; and, although I have since devoted some time in endeavouring to discover it, I have not yet succeeded.

Shakespeare wrote in the reign of Queen Elizabeth; and his allusion to England, and also to wolves, is worthy of notice, as showing his impression of their having at one period abounded in England, viz.:—

“O, thou wilt be a wilderness again,
Peopled with wolves, thy old inhabitants.”

SHAKESPEARE’S _Henry IV._ 2nd part, act 4, sc. 4.

Some passages in a very learned and celebrated work—the _Institutes of the Law of England_—by Sir Edward Coke (afterwards Lord Chief Justice of England, from that circumstance often called Lord Coke), who was a lawyer of great talents, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, will perhaps excite surprise, and are very important with reference to the subject of this inquiry.

He was born in 1551; was made Solicitor General by Queen Elizabeth in 1592, and Attorney General in 1594. He was appointed Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas by James I. in 1606, and Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench in 1613. His celebrated works—the _Commentary upon Sir Thomas Littleton’s Treatise_, and _the Institutes of the Laws of England_—required vast time and labour; and it is almost incredible that they could have been written after he became a judge; and consequently, it may be admitted, as is generally believed, that they were written whilst he was at the bar, and in the reign of Elizabeth.

It is well known that the precincts of the forests in England had courts of their own, and were governed by different laws from the rest of England; and of course, in treating upon the laws of this country, so learned and so accurate a writer, as Coke is admitted to have been, could not avoid noticing them. In the part of his _Institutes_ upon the Forest Courts, he describes the jurisdiction and functions of those tribunals, and the animals to be met with in the forests of England; and, in the quaint and peculiar language incident to writers of the time of Queen Elizabeth, he proceeds to mention the beasts of chase and of the forest. The following are extracts from his work upon that subject:—

“There be many beasts of the forest by the laws of the forests of
England. The hart in summer, the hinde in winter, and all that
proceed as of them: the buck in summer, the doe in winter, and the
proceed of them; the hare, male and female, and their proceed; the
wild boar, male and female, and their proceed; and the wolf, male and
female, and their proceed; the fox, male and female, and their
proceed; the martin, male and female; capreolus the roe, as it
appeareth before, is no beast of the forest, but it is a beast of
chase.”

“The proceads of the hare, the first year a leveret, the second a
hare, the third a great hare. Of a wilde boar: a pig, a hogge, a
hog-stear, a boar, and after a sanglier.”

“No beast of the forest that is _solivagum et nocivum_, is venison,
as the fox, the wolf, the martin, because they be no meat, but _caro
eorum est nociva_.”

“So as the red deer, the fallow deer, the wilde boar, and the hare,
are venison. Whereupon these two conclusions in the law of the
forest do follow: first, whatsoever beast of the forest is for the
food of man is venison, and therewith agreeth Virgil, describing a
feast:—

“‘Implentur veteris bacchi pinguisq: ferinæ.’” {297}

It is to be presumed, that a writer, whose works are so accurate as Coke’s are admitted to be, would not have stated that the wolf was an animal of chase in England, at the time when he wrote, in the sixteenth century, in the reign of Elizabeth, if it had then been extinct; and it must be borne in mind, that he has used the present tense in writing of it; which it is not likely that he would have done, if he had intended to write respecting an animal which had formerly been a beast of chase, but which had ceased to exist in England. We have, therefore, got to the point, that the wolf may fairly be believed not to have become extinct in England until at least some time in, or perhaps soon after, the reign of Elizabeth. I am, however, far from contending that it then existed in the southern or midland counties. On the contrary, it appears probable, that when Coke wrote, it had become extinct in all parts of England, except in some few of the most northern counties, of which two are contiguous to Scotland. In the southern parts, it may perhaps be presumed to have ceased to exist about, or soon after, the period of the accession of the Tudors to the throne; and it will be borne in mind that only seventy-three years elapsed between the accession of the first of that family, Henry VII. in 1485, and that of Elizabeth, who was the last of them, in 1558; and that no very extraordinary change took place in the cultivation or population of England, during that period. As we have the clear evidence of writers of such authenticity as Holinshed and Camden, that in the time of Elizabeth, all parts of Scotland abounded with wolves, and as there was nothing to prevent those animals from rambling across the Border, either in search of prey, or for bringing forth their young, or in consequence of any other natural instinct, it would be impossible, at that time, with a scanty population, and with the desolation incident to the unsettled state of the Borders, to keep the northern counties of England always free from them, and to prevent their breeding there. {298} Those parts of England were exposed to the incursions of Borderers and freebooters from Scotland, whose lawless and dangerous habits were almost as intolerable to their own countrymen as to the English, and who principally subsisted by pillage, and rendered life and property insecure, and, as a natural consequence, those parts were very thinly inhabited. Many very large districts in the northern counties consisted of wild wastes, forests, hills, woody valleys, and swamps, with a very scanty and semi-barbarous population: disadvantages which militated very much against the early extermination of savage animals. A change for the better, however, took place in the population, the civilization, and the appearance of the country, about the close of the reign of Elizabeth. I, however, am not aware that any English writer, since the time of Coke, has given us any reason to suppose that wolves were to be found in England after the termination of her reign. We can scarcely suppose that Coke was incorrect in mentioning wolves as beasts of chase in England at the time when he wrote; it seems, however, only reasonable to believe, under all the circumstances, that they were at that time extinct in all the southern parts; but that a few then remained in their fastnesses and retreats in forests, hills, and wild districts, in some of the northern counties of England, and especially in the parts adjacent to Scotland, and furnished employment and sport to the hunters, and that, with the increase of population and cultivation, the clearing away of woods and forests, and the more general use of firearms, they at last became extinct in the northern counties, about the commencement of the seventeenth century, which was near the period of the close of the reign of Elizabeth.