544
��COVENTRY AND LICHFIELD.
��1 1 29 Roger de Clinton, archdeacon of Bucks^, was conse- 30 Hen. I. crated at Canterbury 22nd Dec. 11 29, and enthroned at Coventry 9th Jan. following. Having assumed the Cross, he set out for the Holy Land, and died at An- tioch 16th April 1148, and was there buried. 1 149 Walter DuRDENT, ^no/" c/'Cawfer^wry, having been 14 Steph. elected bishop of Coventry and Liciifield 72, was con- secrated by archbishop Theobald 2nd Oct. 1149. He died 7th Dec. 11597-^, and was buried at Coventry.
��71 Rot. Profess. Autogr. 2. If Simeon is to be credited, he paid the King a fine of 3000 marks for this bishopric.
72 Gerv. Chron.
7"^ I have been favoured with the following communication from the Rev. Robert W. Eyton, of Ryton :
The death of this bishop is placed by Thomas Chesterfield on 7th Dec. 1161, (Angl. Sacra, pars i. 434); a date confirmed by Wharton (Ibid.) in a note which quotes the obituaries of Canterbury and Salop as autho- rities. The English chronicles are generally silent on the sub- ject of this prelate's decease; but the Annals of Burton, which ought to be a good authority (that house being within the dio- cese of Coventry), mention it, and date it as 1161. Sir H. Ni- colas in his Synopsis, Willis, and Le Neve, each in his time, followed the date thus apparent- ly authenticated. Nevertheless it is quite erroneous. N^. 287, in Madox's FormulareAnglicanum, (p. 177,) is a grant by this bi- shop. No. 70 (in the same) is a confirmation by T. abp. Cant, of Walter Durdent's said grant, (Madox. Formul. Angl. p. 40); but this confirmation passed af- ter the death of Walter, for it
��speaks of him as "bonse memo- riae." No. 80 (in the same) is king Henry II. 's confirmation of both the above, and is here quoted merely to prove that Abp. T. (of No. 70) was Theo- bald, and not his successor Tho- mas. It follows that Walter Durdent predeceased Theobald archbishop of Canterbury. Now archbishop Theobald (though often and erroneously stated to have died in 1160) died, on the best authorities, in 11 61, on i8th April. Therefore Walter Dur- dent died before 1 8th April 1161. The days given for the obits of bishops, &c., are generally taken to be correct, and therefore the day of Walter Durdent's death would (as far as the joint evidence given above can prove) be 7th Dec. 1 160. But it may be doubted whether that date is not still erroneous, for, as will pre- sently be shown, Walter Dur- dent died at Rome; and if on 7th Dec. in any year, the news would not probably reach Eng- land till February following. Then would follow the royal license to elect a new bishop, which in this case would be at- tended with some delay (as the King was in Normandy); then the royal assent (similarly a mat- ter of some unavoidable delay);
�� �
