64 Cerne had to provide 'ten' knights ad wardam at Corfe Castle, or 'two' ad exercitum (vide cartam).
65 This indeed is proved by an extract quoted by Madox (Exchequer) from the Roll of 22 Hen. II (rot. 10a).
66 The effect of all the changes of assessment we have traced under Henry II would only be the reduction of this total to 774.]
67 Roll of 11 Hen. II. (This was, of course, the son of Henry I by Edith.)
68 The custos of his fief paid scutage for eighty knights in 1159, but he speaks 'de meis lx. militibus' in his carta.
69 The undoubted assessment in 1162. Afterwards it is found paying on sixty and a fraction.
70 'Lx. milites ... habere solebat pater meus' (carta).
71 This figure is given in the Liber Niger, but is really derived from his recorded payments.
72 Tot habuit milites feodatos ... scilicet lx. de antiquo feodo (carta).
73 In Yorkshire alone. In all England, many more.
74 This figure is taken from the payments in 1161 and 1172.
75 Roll of 11 Hen. II.
76 Ibid. It is impossible, within the compass of a note, to discuss the two consecutive and most important entries on the Roll (pp. 37-8), which represent a payment by the Earl of Chester on 20 fees, 'pro feodo Turoldi vicecomitis', and by Richard de Camville on 40 fees, 'pro feodo Willelmi de Romara'. I called attention to the former entry in the Academy (April 21, 1888), but did not at that time explain it. Mr R. E. G. Kirk undertook to explain 'its real meaning' (Genealogist, v. 141), which, however, he completely mistook (Ibid., July 1891). The two entries, I think, should be read together as relating to the estates of the famous Lucy, the common ancestress of the earl and of William. If so, they may refer to a fief with an original servitium of 60 knights, of which one-third was in the hands of the Earl of Chester, and two-thirds in that of his cousin. Independently of the light they throw on the obscure history of this divided and contested fief, they are of value for the unique reference (in this Roll) to 'noviter feffati' (vide infra). The total (including these) for the two fiefs is 6631⁄80. There is no return for the earl's Lindsey fief in 1166, but William de Roumare's return acknowledges 57 fees. If to these we add the 9½ fees which, it says, had formerly existed in addition, we obtain 66½. This suggests that the one fief of 1166 represents the two of 1165. It should be added that the Hampshire fief of William de Roumare is paid for as 20 fees in 1159 and 1162, and was similarly accounted for by Richard de Camville in both these years.
77 Roll of 11 Hen. II.
78 He omitted to send in a carta in 1166; but, both before and after, he paid on 30 fees.
79 He twice pays on 30 fees before 1166, in which year his fief was held by Gerbert de Percy. Subsequently, as the honour of Poerstoke (Poorstock), it always pays on 30.
80 This is a very difficult case. Walter's carta might easily be read as implying a servitium debitum of 20 fees, and his fief paid on 29 de veteri and 1½ de novo. But careful scrutiny reveals that the words 'hos iiijor. milites qui has predictas terras tenent' are preceded by six names. If they refer, either to the four names immediately preceding, or (which is more probable) to the four knights who held his lands but rendered him no service, the total of his servitium debitum would, in either case, be 30.
81 Roll of 11 Hen. II.
82 He paid on 25 fees in 1162.
83 'Feodum xx. militum de rege de veteri feffamento quod pater suus tenuit' (carta).
84 He paid on 20 fees in 1161, but the subsequent assessment of the fief varies considerably.
85 He paid on 20 fees in 1162 and 1165, and returned his fees in 1166 as 20 de veteri and ¾ de novo.
86 The scutages record him as paying always on 15 knights quos recognoscit—the formula for servitium debitum.
87 His payment on 15 fees in 1161 probably represents his servitium debitum. His total enfeoffments were 23.
88 Hugh and Stephen de Scalers are the names given in the cartae, but Henry and William de Scalers held the fiefs at the time.
89 He paid 10 marcs in 1168, though his carta only records 9-5/6 fees.
90 A difficult fief to deal with, but almost certainly the half of an original Reimes fief owing 20 knights (vide supra).
91 Apparently 15 at first, and 10 later.
92 i.e. the Peverel Honour of Bourne, Cambridgeshire (held in Domesday by Picot, the Sheriff), not Bourne, Lincolnshire, held by the Wakes.
93 He only pays on 5 fees in 1162, and the excess de novo in his carta is accounted for, he says, by the necessities of his position.
94 This is not proved for the latter fief.
95 Compare with these allusions to a traditional servitium debitum the significant words of Wace (Roman de Rou):
'Ne ke jamez d'ore en avant,
Ço lor a miz en covenant,
N'ierent de servise requis,
Forz tel ke solt estre al paiz,
E tel come lor ancessor
Soleient fere a lor Seignor,'—
which are the reply to the fears of the barons (Norm. Conq., iii. 298):
'Li servise ki est doblez
Creiment k'il seit en feu tornez,
Et en costume seit tenu
Et par costume seit rendu (lines 11272 et seq.).'
96 It can be shown that the 'service' in Normandy was based on precisely the same five-knight unit.
97 'The estates of the twenty greatest feodaries in Domesday Book contain, according to the ordinary computation, 793, 439, 442, 298, 280, 222, 171, 164, 132, 130, 123, 119, 118, 107, 81, 47, 46 and 33 knights' fees.'—Gneist (Const. Hist., i. 334).
98 servitia, i. 289.
99 For instance, the Abbot of St Edmund's 'quinquaginta milites' are spoken of as 'milites de quatuor constabiliis' with 'decem miles de quinta constabilia' (Memorials of St Edmunds, Ed. Arnold, i. 269, 271).
100 Robert fitz Stephen lands with 30 knights, Maurice de Prendergast with 10, Maurice fitz Gerald with 10, Strongbow with 200, Raymond the Fat with 10, Henry himself with either 400 or 500, etc.
101 See my Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 103.
102 Lines 11253 et seq. The figures, however, are far too large, and savour of poetic licence.
103 N.C., v. 368.
104 Meath with a servitium debitum of 100, Limerick of 60, Cork with two servitia of 30 each.
105 N.C., v. 378.
106 Gneist, C.H., i. 129, 156.
107 Freeman, N.C., v. 372, 371.
108 Stubbs, C.H., i. 261.
109 Mr Hall informs me that is the name of the official referred to.
110 'Prout rumor ex rotulis ad me devenit.'
112 'Et nota quod quandocumque assidentur scutagia, licet eodem anno solvantur, annotantur tamen in annali anni sequentis' (Red Book, ed. Hall, p. 8).
113 It is just possible that the source of his error is to be found in a solitary entry on the roll of 1163: 'Advocatus de Betuna reddit compotum de vi. li. xiii. s. iiii. d. de auxilio exercitus de Tolusa' (p. 9)—which refers to the levy of 1161.
114 'Temporibus enim regis Henrici primi ... nec inspexi vel audivi fuisse scutagia assisa' (p. 5).
115 vide supra, p. 118 note.
116 'Illud commune verbum in ore singulorum tunc temporis divulgatum.'
117 See Red Book of the Exchequer, pp. 5, 8.
118 See list of church fiefs.
119 His carta is corrupt.
120 'Abbas Gloucestrie tenet omnes terras in libera elemosina.'—Testa, p. 77.
121 'A new impost specially levied (1156) upon some of the ecclesiastical estates, under the name of scutage' (Norgate's Angevin Kings, i. 433). 'The famous scutage, the acceptance of a money composition for military service, alike for the old English service of the fyrd' [this, of course, is a misconception], 'and for the newer military tenures, dates from this (1159) time' (Freeman's Norman Conquest, v. 674). 'The term scutage now (1156) first employed.... As early as his second year (1156) we find him collecting a scutage, a new form of taxation' (Stubbs' Const. Hist., i. 454, 458, 581, 590).
122 The phrase 'debet scutagium quando currit' is of course, a normal one.
123 'Teste Gaufrido Cancellario et Willelmo de Albineio Pincerna et Gaufrido de Clintona et Pagano fil Johannis. Apud Sanctum Petrum desuper Divam.'
124 Cott. MS. Julius A., i. 6, fo. 74a.
125 These charters have an independent value for the light they throw, in conjunction with the roll, on the movements of the king. The roll itself alludes to the occasion on which the king crossed from Eling—'ex q[uo] rex mare transivit de Eilling[es]'—and as it is assigned to Michaelmas, 1130, the entry cannot refer to his departure at that very date, especially as these charters are not paid for among the nova proceedings of the year. They must therefore have been granted at his previous departure (August 1127), when he must have crossed from Eling and have gone to S. Pierre sur Dive (and Argentan) in Normandy. Pleas were heard before him at Eling on this occasion (Rot. Pip., pp. 17, 38), and are referred to in a charter of Stephen to Shaftesbury Abbey.
126 Printed in Athenæum, December 2, 1893.
127 Cf. Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 105.
128 'Abbas locum sibi commissum munita manu militum secure protegebat; et primo quidem stipendiariis in hoc utebatur' (Cart. Abingdon, ii. 3). 'Unde abbas tristis recedens conduxit milites', etc. (Historia Eliensis, p. 275). So too Bishop Wulfstan is found 'pompam militum secum ducens qui stipendiis annuis', etc. (W. Malmesb.)
129 It is singular that in his admirable work, The English Village Community, pp. 38-9, Mr Seebohm connects 'the normal acreage of the hide of 120 a., and of the virgate of 30 a., with the scutage of 40s per knight's fee', and argues that 'in choosing the acreage of the standard hide and virgate, a number of acres was probably assumed corresponding with the monetary system, so that the number of pence in the scutum should correspond with the number of acres assessed to its payment'. It need hardly be observed that the institution of scutage was, on the contrary, long posterior to that of a hide of 120 acres.
130 Walton was at the mouth of the Orwell and the Stour, and was thus an exposed port towards Flanders as Dover was towards France. It is noteworthy that when the Earl of Leicester did invade England from Flanders a few years later, it was at 'Walton' that he landed.
131 Compare Will. Pict.: 'Custodes in castellis strenuos viros collocavit ex Gallis traductos, quorum fidei pariter ac virtuti credebat, cum multitudine peditum et equitum, ipsis opulenta beneficia distribuit,' etc.
132 Should not this rather be 'from ecclesiastical tenants-in-chief holding by military service'? For it was neither collected from knights' fees, nor with reference to their existing number.
133 Preface to Gesta Henrici Regis, II. xciv. So too Const. Hist., i. 454: 'The practice was, as we learn from John of Salisbury, opposed by Archbishop Theobald'; and (i. 577) 'Archbishop Theobald had denounced the scutage of 1156'; and (Early Plant., p. 54) 'he made the bishops, notwithstanding strong objections from Archbishop Theobald, pay scutage'.
134 Preface to Gesta Henrici Regis, II. xcviii.
135 'Honori et utilitati ecclesiae tota mentis intentione studiosius invigilabit. Verum interim', etc. John of Salisbury (Ep. cxxviii). Note that 'ecclesiae' is the church at large, not the See of Canterbury.
136 Angevin Kings, i. 443.
137 Red Book, p. 6.
138 Preface to Gesta Henrici Regis, II. xcv.
139 Const. Hist., i. 454.
140 Ibid., i. 164.
141 Angevin Kings, i. 458. Both writers quote the passage from John of Salisbury (Ep. xcxviii), on which this explanation is based.
142 His servitium debitum was one knight.
143 The force for the Welsh campaign was raised, as we learn from Robert de Monte (alias de Torigni), 'by demanding that every three knights should, instead of serving in person, equip one of their number', as Dr Stubbs rightly puts it (Const. Hist., i. 589), and not, as he elsewhere writes (preface to Gesta Henrici Regis, II. xciv.), by requiring every two to add to themselves a third, 'by which means, if we are to understand it literally, 90,000 knights would appear from 60,000 knights' fees'. The real number would probably be under 2,000.
144 'This impost, which afterwards came to be known in English history as the "Great Scutage"' (Angevin Kings, i. 459).
145 Liber Rubeus, p. 6.
146 Angevin Kings, i. 461.
147 The abbots of Shrewsbury, Thorney, and Croyland; the abbesses of Barking, Winchester, and Romsey. The total of their dona amounted to £51 13s 4d.
148 Not, however, by Dr Stubbs (Preface to Gesta Henrici Regis, II. xciv-xcvi).
149 Dr Stubbs, independently, reckons the total payments of the church at £3,700 (Gesta Henrici Regis), which does not differ greatly from the above calculation (£3,167 6s 8d).
150 'Ille quidem gladius quem in sancte matris ecclesiae viscera vestra paulo ante manus immerserat cum ad trajiciendum in Tolosam exercitum tot ipsam marcarum millibus aporiastis.' Gilbert Foliot (Ep. cxciv).
151 'Nec permisit ut ecclesiae saltem proceribus coaequarentur in hac contributione vel magis exactione tam indebita quam injusta.' John of Salisbury (Ep. cxlv). Swereford, though confused in his account of the tax, points out that levy was made 'non solum super praelatos, verum tam super ipsos, quam super milites suos' (L.R., p. 6).
152 Gneist, for instance, writes: 'The first general imposition took place in 5 Henry II for the campaign against Toulouse, with two marcs per fee from all crown vassals' (servitia, i. 212).
153 Entered as 'Dona militum comitatus', not to be confused with the 'dona comitatus', a special levy of the following year (6 Hen. II), raised, it will be found, from the western counties, from Stafford in the north to Devonshire in the south.
154 'Rex ... nolens vexare agrarios milites ... sumptis lx. solidis Andegavensium in Normannia de feudo uniuscujusque loricae et de reliquis omnibus tam in Normannia quam in Anglia, sive etiam aliis terris suis, secundum hoc quod ei visum fuit, capitales barones suos cum paucis secum duxit, solidarios vero milites innumeros' (p. 202, ed. Howlett).
155 This was certainly the case with the fiefs of Simon de Beauchamp and the Earl Ferrers, two of the most considerable.
156 Angevin Kings, i. 462.
157 'A second scutage was raised in the seventh year, probably for payment of debts incurred for the same war, the assessment being in this, as in the former case, two marcs to the knight's fee.' (Preface to Gesta Henrici Regis, p. xcv.)
158 If it was raised for this purpose, it must have been levied either (1) from all tenants-in-chief, which it certainly was not; or (2) from the same contributors as in 1159, which a comparison of the two rolls will at once show it was not; or (3) from a new set of contributors, which was also not the case, for the prelates, the Ferrers fief, etc., are found contributing as before.
159 Const. Hist., i. 582.
160 Instead of a fief paying en bloc, it seems to have paid through the sheriffs of the counties in which it was situate.
161 'Episcopus de Heref' reddit compotum de lxxvi. libris et v. solidis de promiss[ione] c. Servientium de Wal' (p. 84).
162 'Abbas de Abendona reddit compotum de lxxvi. libris et v. solidis de promise sione servientium in Waliam' (rot. 11 Hen. II, p. 74).
163 'Abbas de Sancto Albano reddit compotum de lxxvi. libris et v. solidis de Exercitu' (Ibid., p. 19).
164 'Episcopus Lond' reddit compotum de xiii. libris et vi. sol. et viii. den. de Servicio militum.... Idem reddit compotum de cxiiii. marcis et v. sol. de promissione servientium Walie' (Ibid., p. 19).
165 'Willelmus de Siffrewast reddit compotum de lxxvi. sol. et iii. den.... Hugo de Bochelanda reddit compotum de. v. servientibus' (Ibid., p. 75). Compare the love of variety in Domesday, supra, pp. 41, 42, 77.
166 'Scutagium de ii. exercitibus' in next roll (rot. 12 Hen. II).
167 Itinerary of Henry II, p. 79 et seq. Compare also the payment from the Giffard fief 'de secundo exercitu' (p. 25).
168 Angevin Kings, ii. 180, note.
169 Liber Rubeus, p. 193.
170 This was the point on which Abbot Sampson insisted, against his knights, at St Edmund's. In the case of Canterbury, the inquest of 1163 would have ascertained the actual number of the archbishop's knights and their fees.
171 Ignorasse quidem haec [debita] servitia militaria Regis ... successores subsequentium argumento non immerito potuit dubitare: quia cum Rex Henricus ... traderet, a quolibet sui regni milite marcam unam ... exegit, publico praecipiens edicto quod quilibet praelatus et baro quot milites de eo tenerent in capite publicis suis instrumentis significarent' (Liber Rubeus, p. 4).
172 'Teneo de vobis ... feodum i. militis, unde debeo vobis facere servitium i. militis' (carta).
173 'De hoc predicto feodo debet Regi v. milites' (carta).
174 It must always be remembered that, as explained above, in cases where the requisite number of knights had not been enfeoffed by 1166, the balance de dominio was added to those actually created, as de veteri together.
175 Thus Daniel de Crevecœur pays on one fee (de veteri) more than his carta records, William de Tracy on half a fee (de veteri), Adam de Port on one, the Earl of Gloucester on two, the Earl of Warwick on two and a half, Maurice de Craon on one, the Abbot of Hulme on a quarter of a fee, William de Albini (Pincerna) on one, Henry de Lacy on one and a half, William de Vescy on one, Bertram de Bulemer on a half, and William Paynell on one (these figures are all subject to correction). The case of William de Vescy is specially conspicuous, because the nineteen fees enumerated are distinctly spoken of as twenty.
176 This brings it into relation with the Constabularia of which it thus formed just a third.
177 The same formula is found in Domesday applied to hidation in East Anglia, where the assessment of Manors is expressed not in terms of the hide, but in fractions of the pound. (vide supra, p. 89.)
178 vide supra, p. 205.
179 'Willelmus Malet tenet Cari de Domino Rege et alias terras suas per servicium viginti militum' (p. 163).
180 Ducange (1887), ii. 581.
181 Ibid., viii. 255. Ducange indeed asserts that five knights was the qualification in Normandy for barony, but the statement is based on a mistaken rendering and is elsewhere disproved.
182 Liber Rubeus, p. 4.
183 'Illud commune verbum in ore singulorum, tunc temporis divulgatum, fatuum reputans et mirabile, quod in regni conquisitione Dux Normannorum, Rex Willelmus, servitia xxxii. militum infeodavit' (Ibid.).
184 Swereford, it is clear, failed to grasp the great change of assessment in 1166.
185 Const. Hist., i. 432.
186 Ibid., i. 157. Dr Stubbs rightly rejects Mr Pearson's conjecture that the number of 32,000 applied to the hides, and that 'the number of knights' fees, calculated at five hides each, would be 6,400'.
187 'His temporibus militiam Anglici regni Rex Willelmus conscribi fecit et lx. millia militum invenit, quos omnes, dum necesse esset, paratos esse praecepit.'
188 'A whole army was by this means encamped upon the soil, and the king's summons could at any moment gather 60,000 knights to the royal standard.'
189 Const. Hist., i. 264. Compare pp. 16, 17.
190 Freeman (Norm. Conq., iv. 694).
191 Ibid., iv. 562.
192 Ibid., iii. 387. In Social England (i. 373) we read that 'William is believed to have landed in England with at least 60,000 men, 50,000 horse and 10,000 foot'. But on turning to p. 306 of that great effort of co-operative genius, we learn that only 'some of William's ships carried horses to the number of from three to eight—as well as men'. So the number of his ships (396, according to Wace) is as great a difficulty as the proportions of Noah's Ark.
193 William Rufus, i. 17.
194 Ibid., i. 313.
195 'Annui fiscales redditus ... ad sexaginta millia marcarum summam implebant.'
196 'Sexaginta millia peditum' (p. 4).
197 'Sexaginta millia silinas de frumento, sexaginta millia de hordeo, sexaginta millia de vino' (Richard of Devizes, ed. Howlett, p. 396).
198 'Sexaginta accipitur indefinite de magno numero. Sexcenti saepe usurpatur pro numero ingenti et indefinito' (Forcellini, Totius Latinitatis Lexicon).
199 'Bis sex sibi millia centum' (Carmen de bello Hastingensi).
200 It must be clearly understood that these figures cannot be absolutely accurate. Some honours are omitted, it seems, in the returns from which we have to work, and for these allowance must be made.
201 '[1235] Sicut Stephanus Segrave ... asserebat et affirmabat vetus scutagium ad xxxii. millia scuta assumabatur et irrotulabatur; et ad tantundem plene et plane potuit novum scutagium de novis terris assumari' (Ann. Monast., i. 364).
202 'Nine thousand for all England would be a large estimate at any time of the twelfth century' (Early and Middle Ages, i. 375).
203 The italics represent Anglo-Saxon characters.
204 Lib. Rub., pp. 188, 214, 237, 238, 292.
205 Ibid., pp. 211, 214.
206 Ibid., pp. 214, 292.
207 Lib. Rub., p. 292.
208 Ibid., pp. 200, 210.
209 Ibid., p. 210.
210 Ibid., pp. 390, 444.
211 Ibid., p. 429.
212 Ibid., pp. 431-2.
213 M. Paris, Additamenta, p. 436. This list, which seems scarcely known, is very valuable for its early date, being, I think, about contemporaneous with the cartae of 1166.
214 L.R., pp. 229, 245, 356.
215 'Et predictus Willelmus dedit predictas tres carucatas terre Osberto vicecomiti pro servicio unius militis.'
216 Together with castle-guard of thirty knights at Newcastle.
217 'Post tempus domini Regis Willelmi Ruffi, qui eos feoffavit.'
218 Testa, p. 69.
219 'Post Conquestum Angliae' (Liber Rubeus, p. 332).
220 Const. Hist., i. 263.
221 'Et deinceps tres (milites) mihi habeat sicut antecessores sui faciebant in septentrionali parte fluminis Tamesie' (1091-1100).—Ramsey Cartulary, i. 234.
222 Compare the Ely entry (supra p. 213) for 'superplus'.
223 Could this have been Richard fitz Nigel himself?
224 Ramsey Cartulary, i. 255. Compare with this expression 'in rotulo scripti', the Conqueror's command (infra), that the number of knights 'in annalibus annotarentur'.
225 Select Pleas in Manorial Courts, p. 50.
226 It enables us to correct such an entry in the Black Book as 'Radulfus Maindeherst', by identifying him with Ralph Mowyn, the tenant at Hurst. It supplies an entry as to Henry de 'Wichetone' (Whiston) which is omitted in L.R., and entered in L.N., with wrong name and wrong holding; and, better still, it shows that Silvester of Holwell held only 2 hides, not 12, as given in error, both in L.N., and L.R. The existence of this error in both bears, of course, on their relation (cf. p. 287, supra).
227 Const. Hist., i. 357. Gneist writes that Matthew's statement 'is for good reasons called in question by Stubbs' (servitia, i. 255, note).
228 Cartulary of Abingdon, ii. 3.
229 Historia Eliensis (ed. 1848), p. 276.
230 Ibid., p. 274.
231 'Praecepit illi (i.e. abbati) ex nutu regis custodiam xl. militum habere in insulam.' Ibid., p. 275. This is the very servitium debitum that appears under Henry II.
232 Compare for the initiative of the crown, the Domesday phrase, 'miles jussu regis', and the statement that Lanfranc replaced the drengs of his See by knights at the royal command ('Rex praecepit.')
233 Madox writes (Baronia Anglica, p. 114) bitterly and unjustly: 'In process of time, several of the religious found out another piece of art. They insisted that they held all their land and tenements in frankalmoigne, and not by knight-service.' In the cases he quotes, 'this allegation' was perfectly correct, and was recognized as such by the judges.
234 Turoldus vero sexaginta et duo hidas terrae de terra ecclesiae Burgi dedit stipendiariis militibus' (John of Peterborough, ed. Giles).
235 Cart. Abingdon, ii. 3.
236 Liber Eliensis, p. 275.
237 'De militibus Archiepiscopis.' 8th Report on Historical MSS., i. 316.
238 Ibid.
239 A charter of Henry I (Mon. Ang., vi. 496) addressed 'Willelmo Episcopo Exoniensi et Ricardo filio Baldwini vicecomiti' (see p. 25637) contains the clause: 'Prohibeo ne aliquis præter monachos ipsas terras amplius teneat vel alias aliquas quæ de dominio ecclesie fuerunt, exceptis illis quas Gaufridus abbas dedit ad servicium militare.' Abbot Geoffrey is said to have died in 1088. A curious difficulty has been raised about the words in italics. It is argued in Alford's Abbots of Tavistock (p. 68) that as, according to Mr Freeman, military tenures did not exist in Abbot Geoffrey's day, there was perhaps a second abbot of that name to whom that charter refers. But he is only introduced by Mr Alford under protest; and we see now that there is no need for him. Henry's charter being witnessed by Ralph, Archbishop of Canterbury, William, the King's son, and the Count of Meulan, at Odiham, belongs, I may observe to 1114-16.
240 'Quis stipendii annuis quotidianisque cibis immane quantum populabantur' (Will. Malmesb., Gesta Pontificum).
241 Liber Eliensis, p. 275.
242 Cart. Abingdon, ii. 3.
243 Ibid., p. 2331: 'misit ... in Normanniam pro cognatis suis, quibus multas possessiones ecclesiae dedit et feoffavit, ita ut in anno lxx. de possessionibus ecclesiae eis conferret.'
244 Cott. MS. Vesp. B. xxiv. f. 8, 'Randulfus frater abbatis Walterii habet in Withelega iii. hidas de dominio, etc., etc. ... dono Walterii Abbatis contradicente capitulo'. This was the 'Rannulfum [sic] fratrem ejusdem Walteri abbatis ... qui cum fratre suo tenebat illud placitum' (temp. Will. I), whom the Bishop of Worcester's knights challenged to trial by battle (Heming's Chart. Wig., ed. Hearne, p. 82). His holding was represented in 1166 by the fees of Randulf de Kinwarton and Randulf de Coughton. Other cases of contested enfeoffment by Abbots Walter and Robert are those of Hugh Travers and Hugh de Bretfertun.
245 See the carta of 1166, which explains how this holding became half a fee.
246 'Miles quidam, Odo nomine, dono praedecessoris mei Sifridi abbatis, ob graciam cusjusdam consobrinae suae, quam idem Odo conjugem duxerat ... tria maneria de dominio sibi astrinxerat ... invitis fratribus. Alius quidam ... dono abbatis ... tamen absque fratrum consensu manerium possidebat' (Domerham, p. 306).
247 ' De his terris quas, ut diximus, suo tempore acquisivit, quibusdam bonis hominibus pro magna necessitate et honore ecclesiae dedit, et inde Deo et sibi fideliter quamdiu vixit serviebant' (Chronicon Evesh., p. 96). His successor, Walter (1077-86), incited by his own young relatives, 'noluit homagium a pluribus bonis hominibus quos praedecessor suus habuerat suscipere eo quod terras omnium, si posset, decrevit auferre' (Ibid., p. 98). In the result, 'dicitur quod fere omnes milites hujus abbatiae haereditavit' (Ibid., p. 91).
248 He begged Anselm that 'terras ecclesiae quas ipse rex, defuncto Lanfranco, suis dederat pro statuto servicio, illis ipsis haereditario jure tenendas, causa sui amoris, condonaret' (Eadmer).
249 Foundation charter of Alcester Priory.
250 Three other documents are found on the same folio. Of these the first is addressed to Lanfranc, Odo of Bayeux, Bishop Wulfstan, and Urse d'Abetot, and witnessed by Bishop Geoffrey (of Coutances) and (like our writ) by Eudo Dapifer, being also witnessed, like it, at Winchester. It is noteworthy that it grants Æthelwig the Hundred of Fishborough 'in potestate et justitia sua'.
251 Cott. MS. Vesp. B. xxvi. f. 15[18].
252 'Rex commisit ei curam istarum partium terrae ... ita ut omnium hujus patriae consilia atque judicia fere in eo penderent' (Hist. Evesham).]
253 Florence of Worcester.
254 'Cernens itaque rex grande sibi periculum imminere, debitum servitium ... exigit' (Liber Eliensis, p. 276).
255 'Rex Henricus contra fratrem suum Robertum, Normanniae comitem, super se in Anglia cum exercitu venientem, totius regni sui expeditionem dirigit' (Cart. Abingdon, ii. 121).
256 In the former case, between the crown and its tenant; in the latter, between the tenant and his under-tenant.
257 'Idem [Godcelinus de Riveria] dicebat se non debere facere servitium, nisi duorum militum, pro feudo quem tenebat de ecclesia, et abbas et sui dicebant eum debere servitium trium militum' (Cart. Abingdon, ii. 129). 'Cum a quodam duos milites ad servicium regis exigerem (tantum enim inde deberi ab olim a commilitonibus didiceram) ipse toto conatu obstitit, unius dumtaxat se militis servicio obnoxium obtestans.'—Henry, Abbot of Glastonbury (Domerham, p. 318).
258 Thus undermining Mr Freeman's argument: 'We hear of nothing in Domesday which can be called knight-service or military tenure in the later sense; the old obligations would remain; the primeval duty of military service, due, not to a lord as lord, but to the state and to the king as its head, went on,' etc. (Norm. Conq., v. 371).
259 Norm. Conq., v. 865.
260 Cartulary of Abingdon, ii. 3-7.
261 'In Winteham tenet Hubertus de Abbate v. hidas de terra villanorum' (i. 58b).
262 'Hubertus i. militem pro v. hidis in Witham' (p. 4).
263 'In Wichtham de terra villanorum curiae Cumenore obsequi solitorum, illo ab abbate cuidam militi nomine Huberto v. hidarum portio distributa est' (p. 7).
264 See Cart. Ab., ii. 138. Cf. Domesday, i. 58b: 'Willelmus tenet de abbate Leie.'
266 This distinction, it will be found, is preserved in Henry's Charter of Liberties (1101): 'nec ... aliquid accipiam [1] de dominico ecclesiae vel [2] de hominibus ejus'.]
267 See my paper on 'The Knights of Peterborough', supra, p. 131.
268 In the transcript of the original return it is: 'habet hugo de bolebech ... de waltero giffard'.
269 Inquisitio Eliensis (O. 2. 1), f. 210, et seq. (see below, page 349).
271 Hemingi Chartularium (ed. Hearne), 1723.
272 Norman Conquest, vol. v.
273 Interlineation.
274 Dapifer to Bishop Wulfstan.
275 He witnessed, as 'Ordric Niger', the conventio between Bishop Wulfstan and Abbot Walter of Evesham, and was perhaps Bishop Wulfstan's reeve (Heming, p. 420).
276 Probably Bishop Wulfstan's chancellor.
277 Although, from his ignorance of this document, Dr Stubbs was not aware of Ranulf's modus operandi, its evidence affords a fresh illustration of his unfailing insight, and of his perfect grasp of the problem even in the absence of proof. 'The analogy', he writes, 'of lay fiefs was applied to the churches with as much minuteness as possible.... Ranulf Flambard saw no other difference between an ecclesiastical and a lay fief than the superior facilities which the first gave for extortion.... The church was open to these claims because she furnished no opportunity for reliefs, wardships, marriage, escheats, or forfeiture' (Const. Hist., pp. 298-300).
278 It has been urged to me that relief on mutatio domini was a recognized practice, but I cannot find proof of it in English feudalism.
279 'Nec mortuo archiepiscopo, sive episcopo, sive abbate, aliquid accipiam de dominico ecclesiae vel de hominibus ejus donec successor in eam ingrediatur.'