^ 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive 
 
 in 2007 witii funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 littp://www.arcliive.org/details/domesdayborouglisOOballiala 
 
THE 
 DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 BY 
 
 ADOLPHUS BALLARD, B.A, LL.B. 
 
 TOWN CLERK OF WOODSTOCK 
 
 CLERK TO THE GUARDIANS OF THE OXFORD INCORPORATION 
 
 AUTHOR OF HISTORIES OF CHIPPING NORTON, WOODSTOCK AND CHICHESTER 
 
 OXFORD 
 
 AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
 
 1904 
 
crr4 
 
 HENRY FROWDE, M.A. 
 
 PUBUSHBR TO THE DNIVERSITT OF OXFORD 
 LONDON, EDINBURGH 
 NEW YORK 
 
PREFACE 
 
 This essay is based on the section on the Boroughs in 
 Professor Maitland's Domesday Book and Beyond {pp. 172 to 
 219) : it was he who first saw the difference between the 
 boroughs of heterogeneous and homogeneous tenure — a diflfer- 
 ence which had escaped such shrewd observers as Professors 
 Freeman and Stubbs. Building on his foundation, I have 
 endeavoured, by an independent collation of the Domesday 
 evidence, to ascertain the municipal customs of the latter half 
 of the eleventh century, and to find out what was in the mind 
 of the Domesday valuers when they spoke of a borough. 
 But their ideas appear so confused that I cannot claim any 
 great measure of success : I shall be satisfied if I have col- 
 lected material of which other students can make use. 
 Meanwhile I would suggest that my conclusions throw doubts 
 on several points that have hitherto been regarded as settled : 
 I can find no evidence in Domesday Book that, except in 
 a few isolated cases, the borough was a hundred of itself, 
 nor that, at that time, there was a separate borough court 
 which excluded the jurisdiction of the hundred court. Domes- 
 day Book shows the constant interference of the sheriffs in 
 the boroughs, and consequently proves that the latter were 
 then included in the Corpus Comitatus. The little I have 
 seen of the records of the twelfth century suggests that the 
 exclusion of the sheriff from the boroughs, and the establish- 
 ment of a separate exclusive borough court, originates in 
 that period. 
 
 My indebtedness to Professor Maitland's and Mr. Round's 
 writings are very inadequately expressed by the direct refer- 
 
iv PREFACE 
 
 ences in the footnotes ; my use of ' fitz ' I would justify by 
 the example of the latter. My map of Sussex is based on 
 that prefixed to the Sussex Archaeological Society's edition 
 of the Sussex Domesday ; to the same authority I owe my 
 identification of the Sussex villages, but, owing to the lack 
 of similar editions for other counties, some few villages are 
 mentioned without being identified. 
 
 My very best thanks are due to Professor York Powell for 
 his great kindness and help, both while these pages were in 
 manuscript and while they were passing through the press: 
 although I was previously unknown to him, he could not have 
 treated me with greater kindness if I had been an old pupil 
 of his. 
 
 I would also express my thanks to the Delegates, Secretary, 
 and Controller of the University Press for their consistent 
 kindness to me. 
 
 A. B. 
 
 Woodstock : 
 
 March 21, 1 904. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAP. PAGE 
 
 I. Introductory : 
 
 1. The Limitations of Domesday Book ... i 
 
 2. Distribution and Classification .... 4 
 
 II. The Tenurial Organization of the Composite Boroughs : 
 
 1 . The Contributory Properties . . . . 11 
 
 2. The Contributory Lords . . . . . 20 
 
 3. The Duties of the Contributories . . . . 31 
 
 4. The Demesne 36 
 
 III. The Internal Organization of the Composite Boroughs : 
 
 1. The King and the Earl . . . . . 41 
 
 2. The Sheriff 44 
 
 3. The Praepositus . 45 
 
 4. Sac and Soc ....... 47 
 
 5. The Lawmen. The Borough Court . . . 51 
 
 6. The Burgesses 54 
 
 IV. The Financial Organization of the Composite Boroughs ; 
 
 1. The Customs 
 
 2. The Geld . 
 
 3. The Gablum 
 
 4. Markets and Tolls 
 
 5. The Mint . 
 
 6. Renders in Kind 
 
 7. Military and other Services 
 
 8. Amends and Forfeitures 
 
 9. Borough Property 
 
 10. Values and Renders 
 
 1 1. The Firma Burgi 
 
 63 
 64 
 
 71 
 73 
 
 75 
 77 
 80 
 82 
 
 87 
 89 
 
 91 
 
 V. The Simple Boroughs 
 
 94 
 
vi CONTENTS 
 
 PAGR 
 
 APPENDIX. — The Prk-Domesday Boroughs . . . 104 
 
 1. The Borough as a Stronghold . . . . 104 
 
 2. The Earl, the SheriflF and the Portreeve . . no 
 
 3. The Burgesses 112 
 
 4. The Market 115 
 
 5. The Mint 118 
 
 6. The Borough Court lao 
 
 7. The Borough as a Source of Income . . . 122 
 
 INDEX 
 
 125 
 
 MAPS 
 
 Sussex, showing the Contributories to Chichester and 
 
 Lewes to face p. 14 
 
 Arundel and its suggested Contributories . . . „ „ 22 
 
 Leicester and its Contributories . . . . „ „ 22 
 
 Wallingford and its Contributories . . . . „ „ 28 
 
ADDENDA 
 
 Page 67, note 3. The text of this passage is as follows : — 
 
 'In eodem burgo habet Ricardus 13 burgenses quos tenuit Phin 
 T. R. E. Super 4 ex eis habebat sacam et socam et commendationem. 
 Unus eorum est servus: et super 12 commendationem tantum sed 
 manebant in propria terra, et reddebant in burgo totum censum.' 
 
 Page 61, line 23, add 
 
 In only one case do the burgesses of a borough appear in the list 
 of landowners of a county. Under the rubric 'terra burgensium 
 DE BEDEFORD ' are found the names of eight burgesses holding lands 
 in Biddenham and other villages in the immediate neighbourhood of 
 Bedford : of these, two held more than one hide, two held less than 
 a virgate, while the holdings of the others lay between these extremes 
 {D.B.i. 2\ob, i). 
 
 Page 77, 1. 29, add 
 
 The borough of Ilchester was also situate in the manor of Milbourne, 
 and rendered its share of the three-quarters of one night's farm. 
 
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 
 
 D. B. = Domesday Book. 
 D. B. and B. = Domesday Book and Beyond. 
 T. R. E. = Tempore Regis Edwardi. 
 
 K. = Kemble, Codex Diplomaticus Aevi Saxonici. 
 B. s= Birch, Cartularium Saxonicum. 
 E. = Earle, Land Charters and Saxonic Documents. 
 V. H. = Victoria Series of County Histories. 
 E. H. R. = English Historical Review. 
 
 L. = Liebermann, Gesetze der Angelsachsen. 
 
 N.B. — The references to K. and B. are to the numbers of the 
 documents. 
 
THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 INTRODUCTORY 
 
 I. The Limitations of Domesday Book. 
 
 Professor Maitland has taught us that Domesday Book 
 is a geld book ^ ; the Conqueror wished to know exactly what 
 would be the produce of the Danegeld, and accordingly he 
 sent his commissioners through the land to ascertain the 
 actual assessments of the various properties in the possession 
 of himself and his tenants, and to find out, amongst other 
 things, whether these assessments could be raised. The result 
 of their labours is probably the greatest valuation-list in 
 existence ; and in studying Domesday Book we must bear 
 in mind that it is primarily a valuation-list, and not a census- 
 return, a gazetteer, or a Post Office Directory ; and we must 
 not be disappointed if we do not find in it the information 
 which would be contained in documents of the latter class. 
 An enumeration of the population, a description of the streets 
 and houses and a statistical abstract of the trades carried 
 on would be entirely out of place in a valuation-list, and 
 must not be expected in Domesday Book. 
 
 But although Domesday Book is primarily a valuation-list, 
 it contains much information that would not be found in 
 a valuation-list to-day : such a list contains only the names 
 of the occupier and owner of the property, its situation and 
 area, its gross estimated rental and rateable value after allow- 
 ing a deduction for repairs. Domesday Book gives all this, 
 the rateable value being expressed in terms of the hide, the 
 basis upon which the geld levied on the property ^ was to be 
 
 1 D. B. and B. 3. 
 
 ' I advisedly use the term ' property ' ; Professor Maitland suggests 
 
a THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 calculated ; but it also makes suggestions for a new valuation. 
 The extent of the demesne or home farm, the number of the 
 cultivating tenants, and the area they cultivate, the number of 
 the small holders and cottagers, the mills, meadows and woods, 
 the actual values and renders, and in East Anglia even the 
 cattle, sheep, horses, pigs and hives of bees, are all set out, 
 so that the authorities may be in a position to judge whether 
 the assessment of any property should be varied. 
 
 For the sake of those who are unacquainted with valuation- 
 lists, I give a copy of a few entries in the valuation-list of one 
 of the parishes in the borough of Woodstock. 
 
 No. of 
 assess- 
 ment. 
 
 Name of 
 occupier. 
 
 Name of 
 owner. 
 
 Descrip- 
 tion of 
 property. 
 
 Name or 
 
 situation of 
 
 property. 
 
 Esti- 
 mated 
 
 area. 
 A. R. P. 
 
 Gross 
 
 estd. 
 
 rental. 
 
 Rate- 
 able 
 value. 
 
 I. 
 
 2. 
 
 lO. 
 
 12. 
 16. 
 
 A. B. 
 
 E. F. 
 
 Railway Co. 
 
 Burial Board 
 
 J. K. 
 
 C. D. 
 
 G. H. 
 
 Themselves 
 
 Themselves 
 
 L. M. 
 
 Land 
 
 Factory 
 and land 
 
 Station 
 
 Cemetery 
 
 Cottage 
 
 Kensington 
 Within 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 Do. 
 Do. 
 
 24124 
 400 
 
 13 5 
 
 22 
 
 6 
 6 
 
 ;^86 
 17 12 
 
 40 10 
 
 5M 
 4 
 
 Compare the above with the entry in Domesday Book 
 relating to a portion of the vill of which a part of the present 
 urban portion is thus described at the present day : 
 
 Land of Roger of Ivry. 
 
 William holds of Roger 2| hides in Hansitone. There is land for 
 2| ploughs. In demesne are 2 ploughs and 2 slaves and 4 villains have 
 ^ a plough : meadow i furlong in length and ^ in breadth ; 5 acres of 
 underwood. It was and is worth 40 j.^ 
 
 Here the property was assessed at (i. e. its rateable value 
 was) a J hides, and, when the * Danegeld ' was 6s. a hide, would 
 
 that every holding separately assessed for geld was a * manor,' but his 
 suggestion has not been universally accepted ; and accordingly I prefer to 
 use the neutral term employed in our valuation-lists, and regard every 
 holding separately assessed as a separate * property.' 
 » D.B.I 158 <J, 2. 
 
THE LIMITATIONS OF DOMESDAY BOOK 3 
 
 pay 15^-. ; its actual value (corresponding with the gross 
 estimated rental) was 40s. William was the occupier, and 
 Roger of Ivry the owner. The other particulars are given 
 as evidence on which a new assessment might be based. 
 
 Every one who has been engaged in preparing a new 
 valuation-list or concerned in assessment appeals knows that 
 every item of information is of importance in arriving at 
 the proper assessment ; in the vast majority of cases the 
 actual rent or estimated letting value is taken as the basis 
 of assessment, but in other cases evidence must be collected : 
 the cost of a new building \ the gross receipts of a railway ^, 
 the trade done in a public-house ^ may all be taken into 
 account. 
 
 The same principles which were applied by the Domesday 
 Commissioners to rural properties were also applied to the 
 boroughs ; in those most carefully described the actual 
 number of the inhabited and uninhabited houses belonging 
 to the king are first set out, and then those belonging to other 
 persons ; the estimated values and the rents actually paid, 
 the mills, markets and mints, the military and other services 
 of the burgesses, all find a place, and are compared with the 
 former rents and services. The peculiar by-laws relating to 
 the borough are often set out at length, principally, as it seems, 
 as a statement of possible income than otherwise, murder, theft 
 and incontinence being regarded in this document rather as 
 sources of profit to the king than as moral offences *. Every- 
 thing that justified the actual assessment or an increase or a 
 diminution thereof was stated : but unfortunately the several 
 surveys were not all carried out with the same degree of 
 accuracy, or the compilers of Domesday Book did not, for some 
 reason, always make full use of the returns before them, so that 
 about some boroughs our information is very scanty. There 
 are many points indeed on which we may desire further 
 information, but what we have is still of considerable value. 
 
 * R. V. School Board for London, 55 L. J. M. C. 33. 
 ' Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888, § 48. 
 
 ' Cartwright v. Sculcoates Union, 1899, I Q. B. 667. 
 
 * See post, ch. iv. § 8. 
 
 B3 
 
4 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 From a valuation-list some information may be gained ; much 
 more may be derived from the evidence on which a new assess- 
 ment is to be based. 
 
 a. Distribution and Classification. 
 
 A glance at a modem map of England showing the 
 counties will show a marked difference between the counties 
 lying north and south of the Thames. On the north all the 
 shires, with only a few exceptions, bear the name of one of 
 the towns within their borders, and the affix must always be 
 used in speaking of them ; on the south it is necessary to 
 use the affix only in speaking of the county of Southampton. 
 Mr. Freeman has pointed out that the latter counties represent 
 ancient, sometimes 'tribal,' divisions, while the former are 
 artificial divisions ^ Now if we begin our study of the boroughs 
 in Domesday Book with the counties north of the Thames 
 we find that, with the exception of Derby, all those towns that 
 give their names to the shires in which they are situate are 
 described at the very beginning of the survey of the county, 
 and even before the list of the landowners within that county ; 
 and from this it is argued that they stand in some peculiar 
 relation to that county ; they are not stated to be holden 
 by any one, nor to stand on the king's land nor on that belong- 
 ing to any particular individual, but they stand completely 
 apart from the rest of the county ^ ; and a few other towns 
 are partners of this isolation of theirs. Passing now to the 
 survey of England south of the Thames, we find that the 
 surveys of certain counties are preceded by the surveys of 
 certain towns, but that in other cases the space that would 
 be thus occupied is left blank. Thus the survey of Kent 
 is preceded by descriptions of Dover ^, Canterbury and 
 Rochester*, that of Berks, by Wallingford^ of Wilts, by 
 Malmesbury^, of Dorset by Dorchester, Bridport, Wareham 
 and Shaftesbury '', and of Devon by Exeter ^ ; but the lists 
 
 * English Towns and Places, pp. 103-33. ' D. B. and B. 176-9. 
 
 ' D. B. i. I a, I. * Id. 2 a, I. * Id. 56 a, 2. 
 
 ' Id. 64^, I. '' Id. 75 a, I. ' Id. 100 a, I. 
 
DISTRIBUTION AND CLASSIFICATION 5 
 
 of landholders in Sussex, Hampshire, Somerset and Corn- 
 wall are preceded by a blank space. All the southern 
 boroughs above mentioned appear to have a peculiar con- 
 nexion with the counties in which they are situate, similar to 
 that of Hertford to Hertfordshire ; and we may therefore 
 for convenience sake give the style of county boroughs to 
 those boroughs standing by themselves at the head of their 
 counties ^ ; and the same term may be applied to Southampton 
 as it gives its name to the shire in which it stands. 
 
 If we now look at the surveys of these county boroughs we 
 find that they are described at great length, and that the 
 evidence on which a new valuation might be based is, in some 
 cases, very voluminous. Take Warwick as an example ^ ; 
 its survey occupies more than half a column of Domesday 
 Book and begins thus : 
 
 In the Borough of Warwick the King has in his demesne 113 houses 
 and the King's barons have 112 houses from which the King has his geld. 
 
 Then follows a long list of twenty-seven persons holding 
 houses within the borough and the number of houses they 
 each hold, and a statement as to the conditions of their 
 tenure. The survey continues : 
 
 Besides the aforesaid masures, there are in the same borough 19 bur- 
 gesses who have 19 masures with sac and soc and all customs and so had 
 them in the time of King Edward. 
 
 And, after stating the money render of the borough and 
 county, the survey concludes with a statement as to the 
 military services of the burgesses. Some of the county 
 boroughs are more fully described than Warwick, and of some 
 the description is much slighter ; at Hereford ^, Shrewsbury * 
 
 ^ Professor Maitland calls them ' county towns ' and notices that many 
 of them are styled cities. D. B. and B. 178. The term ' civitas ' is applied 
 in Domesday Book to Canterbury, Chester, Chichester, Colchester, Exeter, 
 Gloucester, Hereford, Leicester, Lincoln, Rochester, Shrewsbury, Stafford, 
 Wallingford, Winchester, Worcester and York. All of these, except 
 Chichester, Colchester and Winchester, are described at the head of the 
 respective counties in which they are situate. On the pre-conquest coins 
 only Bath, Canterbury, Chester, Winchester are styled cities ; Oxford is 
 styled ' urbs.' — Eng. Hist. Rev. xi. 765. 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 238 fl, I. * Id. 179 a, I. * Id. 252 a, I. 
 
6 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 and Chester ^ the special customs of the borough are set out 
 at great length ; but Warwick may be taken as a fair sample 
 of the county boroughs : as Professor Maitland has pointed 
 out, they are characterized by tenurial heterogeneity ^, that is 
 to say, others besides the king hold houses therein. 
 
 At the other end of the scale of development are the 
 boroughs standing on and forming part of an agricultural 
 property, of which Steyning may be taken as a type ^. 
 
 In Steyning Hundred. 
 The Abbot [of Fecamp] himself holds Steyning : Harold held it at the 
 end of the reign of King Edward, and then it vouched for 8i hides. . . . 
 There are 41 ploughlands in the whole manor: in demesne are 7 ploughs 
 and 178 villains with 63 bordars have 48 ploughs. ... In the borough were 
 118 masures ; they rendered ;^4 2J. Now there are 123 and they render 
 loof. and \ood. and have a plough and a half. They worked at the Court 
 as the villains T. R. E. T. R. E. it was worth ;^86 : afterwards ;^5o. 
 Now ;^ioo and yet it is at farm at £,\2\ i8j. 
 
 But sometimes, instead of stating in so many words that 
 a borough is situate on the property in question, the record 
 leaves it to be inferred ; as at Pershore * : 
 
 There 28 burgesses render 30J., and the toll renders \is. 
 
 I propose to give to these boroughs the style of simple 
 boroughs, and it will at once be seen that they are characterized 
 by tenurial homogeneity. Care, however, must be taken with 
 these properties containing burgesses ; for instance, Domesday 
 Book records the existence of forty-six burgesses belonging 
 to the property of Westminster Abbey at Staines ^ ; but Pro- 
 fessor Maitland has referred us to the gift by the Confessor to 
 the Abbey of 'that cotlif Stane and tham lande Staning- 
 hagam withinne Lundune ^,' and has suggested that the 
 Domesday entry relates to burgesses living in London but 
 appurtenant to the manor of Staines. Similarly it may be 
 suggested that the twenty burgesses at Bollinton "^ (in Bexhill 
 hundred) were resident in Hastings, as in later years certain 
 houses at Hastings were held of the manor of Bexhill. 
 
 » D. B. i. 262 b. « D. B. and B. 178. ' D. B. i. 17 a, 2. 
 
 * Id. 174*, I. » Id. 128 <J, I. • D. B. and B. 181. 
 
 ^ D.B.I 18 a, 2. 
 
DISTRIBUTION AND CLASSIFICATION 7 
 
 We have now to consider the large intermediate class of 
 boroughs which are not described at the head of the counties, 
 and yet are not simple boroughs ; with scarcely any exception 
 they are characterized by tenurial heterogeneity and would 
 therefore appear to be more akin to the county than to the 
 simple boroughs, and I therefore propose to style them quasi- 
 county boroughs^ and to group both the county and quasi- 
 county boroughs into one class of composite boroughs. A 
 good example of the quasi-county boroughs is found at Bath. 
 
 The King holds Bath. T. R. E. it gelded for 20 hides when the shire 
 gelded. There the King has 64 burgesses rendering £,^ and 90 burgesses 
 of other men render dos} 
 
 Some of the Wilts and Somerset boroughs form part of 
 agricultural properties, and yet contain houses or burgesses 
 belonging to outside owners ; and, on the other hand, Lidford 
 and Totnes contain no foreign burgesses and yet are not situate 
 on agricultural properties. Sussex has four boroughs which 
 appear to have been peculiarly connected with the rest of the 
 county ; but while the four county boroughs in Dorset stand 
 at the head of the description of the county of Dorset, the 
 four Sussex boroughs stand at the head of the various proper- 
 ties of their several lords. Pevensey ^ is the first of the 104 
 properties belonging to the Earl of Mortain, Chichester and 
 Arundel ^ head the list of the properties of Earl Roger, and 
 Lewes * is first of the properties of William of Warenne. 
 May it not be suggested that these four boroughs were the 
 county boroughs of Sussex in the reign of the Confessor, and 
 that but for their grant by the Conqueror to these various lords 
 they would have stood at the head of the survey of Sussex, as 
 the four boroughs stand at the head of the Dorset survey ? 
 
 In this class of quasi-county boroughs may be included 
 Guildford ^ and Southwark ^ in Surrey, Sandwich in Kent '', 
 Axbridge ^, Bath ^, Bruton ^°, Ilchester ^^, Langport ^^ and 
 Milbourne ^^ in Somerset, and Wilton ^*, Cricklade ^^ and 
 
 ^ D.B.I 870,2. * Id. 20 (5,1. 'Id. 23 a, I. *Id. 26^,1. 
 
 " Id. 30a, I. • Id. 32 a, I. "^ Id. 3 a, I. ' Id. 86 a, 2. 
 
 » Id. 87 a, 2. 1" Id. 87 a, 2. " Id. 86^, I. " Id. 86 a, 2. 
 
 " Id. 86 d, I. " Id. 64 d, i. » Id. 64 ^, i. 
 
8 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Calne * in Wilts. Totnes ^ stands in the same relation to the 
 property of Judhael of Totnes in Devon as Lewes does to the 
 property of William of Warenne in Sussex, and Barnstaple * 
 and Lidford ^ are closely associated with Totnes, so that these 
 three may be considered as quasi-county boroughs of Devon, 
 giving that county a quaternion like Kent, Sussex, Wilts, and 
 Dorset. We must always bear in mind that we have no 
 detailed surveys of London, Winchester, Bristol or Tamworth, 
 nor of Hastings, Romney or Hythe (three of the later Cinque 
 Ports) ; but from scattered details we see that all these towns 
 possessed the same characteristics as those we have styled 
 composite boroughs^ and may therefore be considered along 
 with them. 
 
 The boroughs in the three counties contained in the second 
 volume of Domesday Book, Essex, Norfolk and Suffolk, are 
 distinguished by no peculiarities of position, and must there- 
 fore be classified according to their organization ; Cornwall 
 and Rutland alone among the counties described in Domesday 
 Book had no boroughs within their boundaries. 
 
 It has been suggested that the Domesday boroughs might 
 be classified according to their ownership into royal and 
 mediatized ^, but on the whole it appears better to make their 
 organization rather than their ownership the criterion of their 
 classification. Thus, the profits of the majority of our county 
 boroughs were received by the king and the earl, but two — 
 Shrewsbury and Chester — were in the hands of the earls 
 alone ; of our quasi-county boroughs eight were mediatized, 
 but sixteen can be stated with certainty to have been in the 
 hands of the king, while of the others no definite statement 
 can be made ^ ; of our simple boroughs, six were royal, and 
 twenty-two mediatized. 
 
 To recapitulate, if the boroughs be divided according to 
 their tenurial organization, they fall into two classes — (a) the 
 composite boroughs, those of heterogeneous tenure, and (b) the 
 simple boroughs, those of homogeneous tenure : the former 
 
 * D. B. \. 64 <5, 2. 2 Id. 108^, I. ' Id. 100 a, 2. * Id. 100 a, 2. 
 
 ° D. B. and B. 212-18. Prof. Tait in Historical Atlas of Modem Europe. 
 
 * See ch. iii. § i. 
 
DISTRIBUTION AND CLASSIFICATION 9 
 
 class can again be divided into two, according to their position 
 in Domesday Book — (i) county boroughs, and (2) quasi-county 
 boroughs; but it would appear that some of the latter — 
 Reading, Twineham and Rhuddlan — fall within that class only 
 because they are subdivided simple boroughs; they would 
 therefore be considered better with these simple boroughs. 
 Appended is a list of all those places which either are expressly 
 styled boroughs or are stated to contain burgesses, classified 
 according to the above scheme, those known to be mediatized 
 being distinguished by the letter [w]. 
 
 Kent: (a) i. Dover, Canterbury, Rochester ; 2. Sandwich 
 [w], Romney, Hythe, Fordwich [m] ; (b) Seasalter [w]. 
 Sussex : (a) 3. Chichester [m], Arundel [m], Lewes [w], 
 Pevensey [m], Hastings; (b) Steyning [w],Rye^[w]. 
 Surrey : (a) 2. Guildford, Southwark. 
 Hampshire : (a) i. Southampton ; 2. Winchester, Twine- 
 ham. 
 Berks.: (a) i. Wallingford; 2. Reading. 
 Wilts.: (a) i. Malmesbury ; 2. Wilton, Cricklade, Calne ; 
 (b) Devizes (Theodulveside), Bedwyn, Warminster, 
 Bradford [m]. 
 Dorset: (a) i. Dorchester, Bridport, Shaftesbury, Ware- 
 ham ; 2. Wimbourn. 
 Somerset: (a) 2. Axbridge, Bath, Bruton, Ilchester, 
 
 Milbourne, Langport ; (b) Taunton [w]. 
 Devon: (a) 1. Exeter; a. Totnes[w],Lidford, Barnstaple; 
 
 (b) Okehampton [w]. 
 Middlesex : ((a) 2. London ^). 
 Hertford : (a) i. Hertford ; (b) Ashwell [m], St. Albans 
 
 [m], Berkhampstead [m\, Stanstead [m]. 
 Bucks. : (a) i. Buckingham. 
 
 ^ Mr. Round {Feudal England) has shown that the ' new borough ' 
 of D. B. I. 17 a, 2, must be either Winchelsea or Rye. But Winchelsea 
 was the seat of a pre-conquest mint (p. 120), and by Athelstan's law, all 
 mints were to be in boroughs. So that if Winchelsea were a borough at 
 the time of Domesday Book, its borough rights must have dated back 
 to the days of Edgar, and therefore it cannot have been a ' new borough.' 
 
 * See p. 8. There is a blank space of considerable length at the head 
 of the survey of Middlesex. 
 
lo THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 OXON. : (a) 1. Oxford. 
 
 Gloucestershire: (a) i. Gloucester, Winchcombe ; 2. 
 
 Bristol ; (b) Tewkesbury. 
 Worcestershire: (a) i. Worcester; 2. Droitwich; (b) 
 
 Pershore [m]. 
 Herefordshire : (a) i. Hereford ; (b) Castle Clifford [m], 
 
 Wigmore [w]. 
 Cambridgeshire: (a) i. Cambridge. 
 Huntingdonshire : (a) i. Huntingdon. 
 Beds. : (a) i. Bedford. 
 Northants : (a) I. Northampton. 
 Leicestershire: (a) i. Leicester. 
 Warwickshire: (a) i. Warwick; 2. Tamworth. 
 Staffs. : (a) i. Stafford ; (b) Totbury [m]. 
 Shropshire : (a) i. Shrewsbury [w] ; (b) Quatford [w]. 
 Cheshire: (a) 1. Chester [;«] ; 2. Rhuddlan [w] ; (b) 
 
 Penwortham (Peneverdant) [m]. 
 Derbyshire : (a) i. Derby. 
 Notts.: (a) i. Nottingham; (b) Newark [m]. 
 Yorkshire: (a) i. York; (b) Bridlington, Pocklington, 
 
 [w], Pontefract (Tateshalle) [w]. 
 Lincolnshire: (a) i. Lincoln, Stamford, Torksey; 2. 
 
 Grantham ; (b) Louth [in] . 
 ESSEX: (a) I. Colchester; 2. Maldon. 
 Norfolk: (a) i. Norwich; 2. Thetford. 
 Suffolk : (a) i. Ipswich ; 2. Sudbury, Dunwich [w], 
 
 Yarmouth ; (b) Clare [m], Eye, Beccles [ni]. 
 It will be noticed that from this list are omitted the names 
 of several places marked as boroughs in Professor Tait's map 
 in the recently published Historical A tlas of Modern Europe ; 
 he reckons Windsor, Marlborough and Salisbury as boroughs : 
 I venture to disagree on the ground that these places are not 
 stated by the Domesday valuers to be boroughs ; neither 
 Windsor nor Marlborough is stated to contain burgesses, and 
 the burgesses appurtenant to Salisbury are definitely stated to 
 be resident at Wilton ^ Staines is omitted from my list for 
 the reasons stated above. 
 
 ^ Z>. ^. i. 66 a, I. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE TENURIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE 
 COMPOSITE BOROUGHS 
 
 I. The Contributory Properties. 
 
 If any one thinks that he is going to learn all about the 
 boroughs in Domesday Book by merely studying their separate 
 descriptions he is vastly mistaken ; every page of the record 
 must be examined, or many incidental references will be over- 
 looked. For these incidental references are hidden away in 
 descriptions of agricultural properties, and show the existence 
 in the neighbouring borough of a house, or houses, belonging 
 to that property. Here, as an example, is a survey of an 
 agricultural property in Sussex : 
 
 Earl Roger holds Singleton in demesne. Earl Godwin held it. It then 
 vouched for 97^ hides ; now for 47 hides. There is land for 40 ploughs ; 
 in demesne are 7 ploughs and 86 villains and 52 bordars have 33 ploughs. 
 There are 17 slaves, and two mills of 12s. yd., and 40 acres of meadow 
 and wood for 150 pigs. There is a church in which lie 3 hides and 
 I virgate of this land. . . . To this manor pertain 9 haws ^ in Chichester 
 rendering ys. 4^., and one mill of 40^., and i$s. from herbage. ... It is 
 valued at £gs ^-nd a mark of gold and yet renders ;^ioo and a mark of 
 gold which belongs to the Earl ^ 
 
 There are between seventy and eighty entries of this kind 
 in the survey of Sussex alone, showing that in that county, 
 at all events, it frequently happened that agricultural pro- 
 perties had one or more town houses appertaining to them, 
 and forming as integral a part of the estate as the meadow, 
 
 ^ The word ' haga ' means primarily a hedge, and as ' haia ' appears 
 frequently in the Herefordshire survey as a hedge for hunting purposes ; 
 e.g. '3 haiae capreolis capiendis ' (260 a, 2) ; and so it comes to mean 
 a piece of land surrounded by a hedge, and (in towns) a house standing 
 in a close. 
 
 » D. B. i. 23 a, I. 
 
la THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 the mill, or the wood. Sometimes, however, the entry is 
 baldly ' in Chichester 6 haws of 38 pence \' And similar 
 entries are to be found in all the counties south of the Thames 
 and in some of the northern counties. Sometimes the actual 
 situation of the haws is omitted ; in two or three cases other 
 portions of the same vill have haws which are specifically 
 attributed to a certain borough, and in other cases other vills 
 in the same hundred have haws which are specifically attributed 
 to a certain borough. With this Singleton entry must be 
 compared the Old English conveyances of rural properties 
 with their appurtenant haws in the neighbouring county 
 boroughs, to be found in the ' Codex Diplomaticus ^ ' ; and 
 also the Domesday entry relative to the manor of Birley, 
 which, although situate in Worcestershire, was included in the 
 survey of Herefordshire : 
 
 Brictric held it and bought it of Lewin Bishop of Worcester for three 
 marks of gold, together with a house in the city of Worcester which 
 renders one mark of silver per annum '. 
 
 Let us now collect from Domesday Book all the entries of 
 houses which, although actually situate in Canterbury, were 
 appurtenant to and valued in the neighbouring rural pro- 
 perties : 
 
 Faversham. In the city of Canterbury 3 haws of 2od. pertain to this 
 manor *. 
 
 Estursete [Westgate]. To this manor pertained T. R. E. 52 masures in 
 the city of Canterbury, and now there are only 25 because the others have 
 been destroyed ^ 
 
 St. Martin. To this land pertain 7 burgesses in Canterbury rendering 
 8s. 4^.« 
 
 Nordeude [Little Burton]. To this manor pertain 97 burgesses in the 
 city of Canterbury rendering £8 4s.'' 
 
 Otringdene [Otterden]. To this manor pertain 2 masures of land in 
 Canterbury of 12^.* 
 
 Westselve [West Shelve near Lenham]. To this manor pertained in 
 Canterbury T. R, E. one house rendering 25^?.' 
 
 Winchelesmere [Wichling]. T. R. E. in Canterbury 3 houses pertained 
 to this manor rendering 40^.^° 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 17 a, I. « See Appendix, § I. ' Z>. ^. i. 180^, 2. 
 
 *Id. 2/J, 2. Md. 3<5, I. Md. 4a, I. Md. 5 a, I. 
 
 ■ Id. 8a, I. » Id. 8 a, i. " Id. 8 a, 2. 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY PROPERTIES 13 
 
 Wicheham [West Wickham]. To this manor pertain in Canterbury 3 
 
 masures rendering 6s. Sd.^ 
 
 Cilleham [Chilham]. In the city of Canterbury 13 masures pertain to 
 
 this manor rendering 15J.* 
 
 Ospringes. To this manor pertains one masure in Canterbury of 30^/.' 
 Emoltun [Elverton]. And in the city of Canterbury one masure of 2id.* 
 Perie [Perry Court]. And one masure in the city of i6d?.* 
 Trevelai [Throwley]. And in the city three haws of 32<// 
 Dodeham [Doddington]. And in the city of Canterbury 5 haws 
 
 of 7J. lodj 
 
 Lamport [Langport]. There were 70 burgesses in Canterbury pertaining 
 
 to this manor *. 
 
 Newton [Newington near Sittingboume]. To this manor pertain in 
 
 the city of Canterbury 4 haws, and two in Rochester '. 
 
 The terms ' masura,' ' haga ' and ' domus ' appear to be 
 practically synonymous ; and there would seem to be no real 
 difference between the entries at Nordeude and Otringdene ; 
 though the former regards the rent as proceeding from the 
 tenants, and the latter regards it as proceeding from the 
 houses they inhabit. This is shown by reference to the Oxford 
 and Exeter surveys : the survey of the city of Oxford speaks 
 of a house appurtenant to Risborough in Bucks ^°, but the 
 Risborough survey speaks of a certain burgess of Oxford " ; 
 again the survey of the Devonshire property belonging to 
 Baldwin the sheriff speaks of * 12 houses in the city per- 
 taining to Chenth his manor ^^,' but the Chenth survey mentions 
 ' II burgesses in Exeter ^^.' 'In the second ward (of Cam- 
 bridge) there were 48 masures ... of these Earl Alan has 5 
 burgesses ^*.' Domesday Book says that there were in 
 Chichester 3 burgesses appurtenant to Halnaker ^^ ; at the 
 beginning of the last century there were in the parish of 
 St. Pancras in that city certain houses which were held under 
 that manor ^®. In speaking of Colchester ", Mr. Round explains 
 the difference between ' holding houses ' and 'holding burgesses' 
 by saying that the latter implies jurisdiction over their persons. 
 
 * D.B. i. 9<2, 2. "^ Id. 10 a, l. ' Id. 10a, l. * Id. loa, 2. 
 
 ' Id. 10a, 2. ' Id. 10a, 2. ' Id. 10 <5, I. ' Id. 12a, I. 
 
 » Id. 14^, I. " Id. 154 «, I. " Id. 143^, I. " Id. 105 d, 2. 
 
 " Id. io6^, 2. ^* Id. 189 a, I. " Id. 25^, I. 
 
 ^' Hay's Chichester^ p. 220. " Antiquary^ vi. 99. 
 
H 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 From reasons which will appear later we shall see that juris- 
 diction was equally implied by either expression, and that 
 this distinction cannot be maintained ^ 
 
 Nowadays, when any unit of local government joins with 
 others for a specific purpose to be carried out in combina- 
 tion, we call each of these units a contributory place to that 
 combination ; for example, every parish in a poor law union 
 is a contributory place to that union. I propose therefore to 
 give the name of contributory properties to Faversham and 
 other properties having houses or burgesses in Canterbury, 
 and to style their houses or burgesses the contributed houses 
 or burgesses^ and to reckon all the contributions together, 
 whether they be haws, masures, houses or burgesses. 
 
 That Canterbury may fairly be taken as a type of a certain 
 class of boroughs will be at once seen from a glance at the 
 Domesday survey of certain boroughs selected from all parts 
 of the country. 
 
 Thus : 
 
 
 CHICHESTER. 
 
 
 
 Bosham ' 
 
 II haws. 
 
 Linch 
 
 
 haw. 
 
 Pagham 
 
 I church. 
 
 Selham 
 
 
 » 
 
 Tangmere 
 
 4 haws. 
 
 Bepton 
 
 
 » 
 
 Aldingboume 
 
 1 6 haws. 
 
 Petworth 
 
 
 » 
 
 Selsey 
 
 6 „ 
 
 Tillington 
 
 
 »» 
 
 Wittering 
 
 13 » 
 
 Duncton 
 
 
 >> 
 
 Bosham 
 
 I » 
 
 Stopham 
 
 
 » 
 
 Donnington 
 
 I „ 
 
 Westboume 
 
 
 j> 
 
 Felpham 
 
 6 burgesses. 
 
 Warbleton 
 
 
 » 
 
 Lavant 
 
 I haw 
 
 Up Harden 
 
 
 » 
 
 Singleton 
 
 9 » 
 
 Racton 
 
 
 » 
 
 Lavington 
 
 I » 
 
 West Harden 
 
 
 »> 
 
 Harting 
 
 II » 
 
 North Harden 
 
 3 
 
 >» 
 
 Chithurst 
 
 I « 
 
 Compton 
 
 2 
 
 » 
 
 Stedham 
 
 I » 
 
 Stoughton ' 
 
 15 
 
 >» 
 
 Cocking 
 
 I » 
 
 Fishboume 
 
 2 
 
 j> 
 
 ^ See post, ch. 
 
 iii. § 4. 
 
 
 
 
 ' Even at the 
 
 end of the eighteen 
 
 th century the lord of the manor of 
 
 Stoughton collected quit-rents from 
 
 some houses in the North Street of 
 
 Chichester, and 
 
 other houses in t] 
 
 le West Street were 
 
 holden of the 
 
 manor of Bosham. (Hay's Chichestt 
 
 r, p. 220.) 
 
 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY PROPERTIES 
 
 15 
 
 Hunston 
 
 I haw. 
 
 Strettingfton 
 
 I haw. 
 
 Wittering 
 
 I » 
 
 Merston 
 
 2 „ 
 
 Halnaker 
 
 3 burgesses. 
 
 Runcton 
 
 2 » 
 
 Westhampnett 
 
 I haw 
 
 Waltham 
 
 I ,. 
 
 Strettington 
 
 3 » 
 
 » 
 
 1 » 
 
 a 
 
 I » 
 
 Iping 
 
 I „ 
 
 
 WINCHESTER. 
 
 
 WaUop 
 
 2 haws. 
 
 Corhampton 
 
 I house. 
 
 Clatford 
 
 7 » 
 
 Worthy 
 
 8 haws. 
 
 Basingstoke 
 
 4 suburban!. 
 
 >» 
 
 I masure. 
 
 Faccombe 
 
 6 houses. 
 
 Stratfieldsaye 
 
 I haw. 
 
 West Meon 
 
 8 haws. 
 
 Norton 
 
 5 » 
 
 Eversley 
 
 I » 
 
 Dummer 
 
 3 » 
 
 Romsey 
 
 14 burgesses. 
 
 M instead 
 
 I n 
 
 Bramley 
 
 3 
 
 WARE 
 
 :ham. 
 
 
 Charminster 
 
 2 burgesses. 
 
 Lychet Maltra 
 
 • 2 gardens and 
 
 Creech 
 
 I house. 
 
 vers 
 
 I bordar. 
 
 Povington 
 
 I burgess. 
 
 Horton 
 
 I church 
 
 
 
 j> 
 
 5 houses 
 
 
 CRICK 
 
 LADE. 
 
 
 Aldboum 
 
 6 burgesses. 
 
 Liddington 
 
 I burgess. 
 
 Ramsbury 
 
 5 
 
 Liddiard 
 
 7 » 
 
 Badbury 
 
 I 
 
 CliflFe Pypard 
 
 3 » 
 
 Purton 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 I house. 
 
 Chisledon 
 
 6 „ 
 
 EXE 
 
 Colicote 
 TER. 
 
 3 burgesses. 
 
 Tavistock 
 
 5 houses. 
 
 Chent 
 
 12 houses. 
 
 Tawton 
 
 9 „ 
 
 GLOUC 
 
 ESTER. 
 
 
 Tewkesbury 
 
 8 burgesses 
 
 Quennington 
 
 I burgess. 
 
 
 (T.R.E.). 
 
 » 
 
 I smith. 
 
 Condicote 
 
 4 
 
 Rissington 
 
 I burgess. 
 
 Pucklechurch 
 
 8 
 
 Horsley 
 
 I house. 
 
 Broadwell 
 
 4 » 
 
 Bisley 
 
 II burgesses. 
 
 The property 
 
 
 Brimsfield 
 
 5 
 
 of St. Denys 
 
 
 Frampton 
 
 6 „ 
 
 in Deerhurst 
 
 
 Bulky 
 
 I 
 
 Hundred 
 
 30 „ 
 
 Lechlade 
 
 I 
 
 Horsenehai 
 
 3 
 
 Kempsford 
 
 7 » 
 
 Guiting 
 
 2 
 
 Widecestre 
 
 I 
 
i5 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 CHESTER. 
 
 Weaverham 
 
 lo 
 
 burgesses. 
 
 Claverton 
 
 8 
 
 burgesses. 
 
 Hawarden 
 
 2 waste masures. 
 
 Dodecestre 
 
 IS 
 
 »> 
 
 
 
 COLCHESTER. 
 
 
 
 Clacton 
 
 14 
 
 houses. 
 
 Terling 
 
 7 
 
 houses. 
 
 Peering 
 
 2 
 
 >f 
 
 Shalford 
 
 3 
 
 >i 
 
 Wigborough 
 
 2 
 
 »> 
 
 Elmstead 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 Mersea 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 (T.R.E.). 
 
 
 
 (T.R.E.). 
 
 Tolleshunt 
 
 I 
 
 »> 
 
 Great Tey 
 
 I 
 
 *> 
 
 Ardleigh 
 
 2 
 
 >» 
 
 Great Birch 
 
 2 
 
 » 
 
 Rivenhall 
 
 I 
 
 burgess 
 
 It will have been noticed that some of the above-quoted 
 references to Canterbury speak of the state of things existing 
 T. R. E., and imply that at the time of Domesday Book those 
 manors no longer had appurtenant houses in Canterbury. 
 A probable explanation is given in certain entries relating to 
 Rochester : 
 
 Aiglessa [Eccles]. And in Rochester, the Bishop of Bayeux had 3 
 houses of 31^., which he took from this manor into his own hands \ 
 
 Ledestune [Luddesdown]. The Bishop (of Bayeux) holds in his own 
 hands within the city of Rochester 4 houses pertaining to this manor, 
 from which he has gs. lodJ^ 
 
 Hou [Hoo]. To this manor pertained 9 houses in the city of Rochester 
 rendering 6s. Now they are taken away '. 
 
 Evidently the bishop, in granting these manors to his 
 mesne tenants, reserved the city houses which had been 
 appurtenant to them, in the same manner as a man may sell 
 land to-day, reserving the mines thereunder. Similarly Waleran 
 took away from Mersea the house in Colchester which formerly 
 belonged to it*. On the other hand, we have two examples of 
 the ' conversion ' of two independent town houses into appur- 
 tenances to a rural manor. In the survey of Guildford we 
 read : 
 
 A second house is that which the praepositus of the Bishop of Bayeux 
 holds of the manor of Bromley. Of this, the men of the county say that 
 he has no other right here except that the praepositus of the town married 
 a certain widow whose house it was and the Bishop sent it into his manor ; 
 and hitherto the King has lost his customs but the Bishop has them ". 
 
 ^n.jB.i.7a,2. 'ld.73,1. 8Id.8/J,i. *D.B.u.22a. <> Z>. ^. i. 30 a, I. 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY PROPERTIES 17 
 
 Of another house the jurors say that it lies in Bromley only because it 
 belonged to a friend of the praepositus, and at his death it was converted 
 into the manor of Bromley. 
 
 Evidently a town house was regarded as a necessary 
 appurtenance to a rural manor ; and, as the manor of Bromley 
 had no such town house, the praepositus robbed a poor widow 
 and the estate of his dead friend to supply the needed appur- 
 tenances. There is a similar case at Reading, where Rainbald 
 ' drew ' [trahebat) into his manor of Earley a haw situate in 
 the borough of Reading ^. 
 
 If we add up the contributed houses (masures, haws and 
 burgesses) at Canterbury, we find that at the time of Domesday 
 Book there were in the city 161 houses contributed by eleven 
 properties ; T. R. E. there had been 259 houses contributed 
 by thirteen properties. Similarly we find that there were at 
 
 Rochester 6 properties contributing 19 houses or burgesses. 
 
 Romney 
 
 3 
 
 Hythe 
 
 2 
 
 Chichester 
 
 44 
 
 Lewes 
 
 35 
 
 South wark 
 
 II 
 
 Winchester 
 
 13 
 
 Dorchester 
 
 2 
 
 Exeter 
 
 3 
 
 Gloucester 
 
 17 
 
 Worcester 
 
 12 
 
 Chester 
 
 4 
 
 Colchester 
 
 12 
 
 156 
 
 »> 
 
 11 
 
 232 
 
 » 
 
 II 
 
 142 
 
 » 
 
 „ and a church, 
 
 258 
 
 H 
 
 II 
 
 47 
 
 l» 
 
 »> 
 
 65 
 
 M 
 
 II 
 
 2 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 26 
 
 II 
 
 11 
 
 95 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 108 
 
 >l 
 
 II 
 
 35 
 
 n 
 
 II 
 
 32 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 This list is by no means exhaustive, and reference should be 
 made to the tables at the end of this chapter. 
 
 The above examples deal only with those contributory 
 properties which were situate in the same county as the town 
 to which they contributed ; but we find that often the con- 
 tributory properties were situate in other counties : thus 
 Oxford contained houses or burgesses contributed by Ste- 
 venton ^ and Streatley^ in Berks, and by Risborough* and 
 Twyford ^ in Bucks ; Tamworth had contributions from Coles- 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 58 fl, I. « Id. 57 b, 2. » Id. 62a, I. * Id. 154 a, i. 
 "> Id. 154 a, I. 
 
 BALLARD ^ 
 
i8 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 hill * in Warwick, and Wigton ^ and Drayton ' in Stafford- 
 shire. There were several Herefordshire properties which 
 contributed to Worcester ; and London had contributions from 
 Bermondsey* (13), Mortlake '^ (17), Binstead ^ (i), Walk- 
 hampstead '^, Chivington * (2), Blachingley ^ and Beddington ^° 
 in Surrey, Staines in Middlesex ^\ and Waltham" (12), 
 Barking ^^ (28) and Thurrock ^* (7) in Essex ; and Wallingford 
 had contributions from seventeen properties in Oxfordshire 
 and ten in Berkshire. The Canterbury examples have shown 
 that a single manor might contribute to two boroughs, and 
 this is also shown by six manors in Surrey which contributed 
 to both London and Southwark. For example, 
 
 Walkhampstead ''. To this manor pertain 15 masures in London and 
 Southwark of 6s. 
 
 Blachingley *. In Southwark and London 7 masures of 5J. 4//. 
 
 Similarly Broadwell, Deerhurst hundred, Guiting and Lech- 
 lade contributed to both Gloucester and Winchcombe. 
 
 Another point must be noticed : the number of houses or 
 burgesses contributed to a borough by any property seems to 
 bear no relation to its area or assessment : thus the bishop's 
 property at Wittering^' and Earl Roger's property at 
 Stedham^' were each assessed at fourteen hides, but the 
 former contributed thirteen houses to Chichester and the 
 latter only one ; Chithurst ", Selham ^^, Bepton ^', Hunston ^°, 
 and Marden^^ were each assessed at four hides, but Marden had 
 three houses in Chichester, and the other properties only one 
 each. There were three properties at Marden ^^ one of five 
 hides with one house in Chichester, the second of three hides 
 with one house, and the third of four hides with three houses. 
 Stoughton 2^ had fifteen houses at Chichester for fifteen hides, 
 
 * D. B. i. 238 a, 2. * Id. 246a, 2. ' Id. 246 ^, 2. 
 
 * Id. 30 a, 2. ' Id. 30 <5, 2. ' Id. 31 6, I. ' Id. 34 a, 2. 
 "Id. 34^, I. Md. 34^, I. "Id. 36*, I. 
 
 " Id. 128 6, I. Z>. B. and B. 181. " Z>. B. ii. 15 *. 
 
 " Id. ii. 17 b. " Id. ii. 63 a. " D. B. i. 17 a, i. " Id. 23 a, 2. 
 
 " Id. 23 fl, 2. " Id. 23 b, I. " Id. 23 b, I. «° Id. 24 a, 2. 
 
 ^ Id. 24 a, I. ^ Id. 24 a, I. *■ Id. 240, I. 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY PROPERTIES 19 
 
 and Earl Roger's property at Wittering ^ had one house for 
 one hide. To Lewes, Winterbourne ^ contributed three and 
 one-third houses for one hide, and West Meston ^ only one 
 house for twelve hides. The forty-four properties contributing 
 142 houses to Chichester were assessed at 560 hides, and the 
 thirty-five properties contributing 258 houses to Lewes were 
 assessed at 630 i hides, giving an approximate average of one 
 house to four hides for Chichester, and one house to two and 
 a half hides for Lewes. At Dorchester the average was one 
 house to eight and a half hides, and at Exeter twenty-one 
 houses were contributed by properties assessed at twenty-nine 
 hides. Apparently to both Chichester and Lewes thirteen 
 hundreds were contributory, but the Domesday hundreds 
 of Sussex are so wonderful and mysterious that little or no 
 value can be attached to this calculation*. To Cricklade, 
 Aldbourn ^ and Chisledon ^ each contributed six burgesses 
 for forty hides; but Ramsbury'' with ninety hides contributed 
 five burgesses only ; and while Liddington ^ with thirty-eight 
 hides contributed only one burgess, Liddiard' with seven hides 
 contributed seven burgesses. As thirty-four burgesses were 
 contributed to Cricklade by ten properties assessed at 2y^i 
 hides, the average works out at one burgess for every eight 
 and one-third hides. 
 
 Before passing away from the boroughs of this class, let us 
 arrange their contributed houses or burgesses, not under the 
 properties to which they belonged, but under the owners of 
 
 ^ Z?. B. i. 24 a, 2. ' Id. 263, 2. ^ Id. 27 a, 2. 
 
 * I have found it impossible by any calculation to obtain 100 hides in 
 any one of the fifty-eight Domesday hundreds of Sussex : Ifield hundred 
 had two villa, one vouching for one hide, and the other for half a hide, 
 not gelding ; Latille hundred had two hides ; thirteen hundreds had less 
 than ten hides each, eight had more than 100 each, and the hundred of 
 Steyning had 258 hides and three virgates. Then, the hundred of 
 Somerley included not only the bishop's property at Selsey and Wittering, 
 but also his estates at Preston (near Brighton) and Filsham (near Bexhill). 
 The vills of Alciston, Willingdon and Laughton were each divided into 
 three portions ; and each portion lay in a different hundred. 
 
 » D. B. i. 65 a, I. « Id. 676,1. ' Id. 66 a, i. 
 
 ' Id. 67 d, 2. ' Id. 70 a, 2. 
 
 ca 
 
20 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 these properties, i. e. under the names of the tenants in capite : 
 thus — 
 
 Romney. The Archbishop has 85 burgesses K 
 
 Robert of Romney has of the fee of the Archbishop, 2i 
 burgesses ', and of the fee of the Bishop of Bayeux, 
 50 burgesses '. 
 Chichester. The Archbishop has 4 haws and a Church *. 
 
 The Bishop of Chichester has 35 haws ®. 
 
 The Church of St. Edward of Shaftesbury has 6 burgesses *. 
 
 Earl Roger and his mesne tenants have 79 haws ''. 
 Gloucester. The Church of St. Mary at Worcester has 4 burgesses '. 
 
 The Abbot of Evesham has 4 burgesses®. 
 
 The Church of St. Denys at Paris has 30 burgesses ", 
 
 The Abbot of Troarz has i house ^\ 
 
 Earl Hugh has il burgesses ^^ 
 
 Roger of Laici has 6 burgesses ". 
 
 Robert of Todeni has l burgess ". 
 
 Osbem Gifard has 5 burgesses ". 
 
 Drogo fitz Pons has I burgess ". 
 
 Walter the Artilleryman has I burgess ". 
 
 Henry of Ferrers has I burgess *'. 
 
 Amulf of Hesdin has 7 burgesses ^'. 
 
 Brictric has I burgess ^. 
 
 And we shall find that this is the formula adopted in the class 
 of boroughs considered in the next section. 
 
 3. The Contributory Lords. 
 
 In the last chapter the survey of Warwick was quoted as 
 that of a typical county borough ; but as Hertford is the first 
 borough in Domesday Book which gives its name to the 
 county in which it stands, let us take its survey as an example 
 of what we may expect to find in the surveys of the boroughs 
 of the second class. The following is slightly abbreviated from 
 Domesday Book ^^ : 
 
 * Z>. ^. i. 4a, I. 2 Id. 4<5, I. 
 
 " Id. 16^, 2 ; 17 a, I. 
 ^ Id. 23 a, 1-24 a, 2; 25 ^, I and 2, 
 1° Id. 166 a, 2. " Id. 166^, I. 
 " Id. 168 a, 2. " Id. 168 d, I. 
 » Id. 169 a, I. " Id. 169 a, I. 
 
 s Id. 10^,2. * Id. 16 3, I. 
 « Id. 17^ (foot). 
 
 « Id. 165 a, I. » Id. 166 a, I. 
 " Id. 166^, I. " Id. 167 ^, 2 (3). 
 « Id. 168^,2. " Id. 169 a, I. 
 ^ Id. 170 d, I. " Id. 132 a, I. 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY LORDS 21 
 
 The borough of Hertford was assessed at lo hides T.R.E., but is not so 
 assessed now. 
 
 There were 146 burgesses in the soc of King Edward. 
 
 Of these Earl Alan has 3 houses which then and now render custom. 
 
 Eudo the Steward (Dapifer) has 2, formerly of Algar of Cockenhatch, 
 both rendering custom ; and a third formerly of Ulmar. 
 
 Geoffrey of Bee has 3 rendering custom. 
 
 Humphrey of Ansleville holds two houses and a garden under Eudo. 
 One of these was lent to a certain prefect of the King and the other with 
 the garden belonged to a certain burgess ; now these same burgesses 
 claim that they are unjustly taken from them. 
 
 King William has 18 other burgesses who were men of Earls Harold 
 and Lewin, and pay custom. 
 
 Peter of Valonges has 2 churches and i house (which he bought of 
 Ulwi of Hatfield) rendering all custom. Ulwi could assign or sell them. 
 
 Geoffrey of Mandeville has l which belonged to Esgar the Staller, 
 and 7 others which paid no custom except King's geld when it was 
 collected. 
 
 Ralph Bainard has two houses paying custom. 
 
 Hardwin of Scalers has 14 houses which Achi held T. R. E. and 
 rendered no custom except King's geld. For these he invokes the King 
 as protector. In addition to these he has one house of the King's gift 
 formerly of a certain burgess which renders all custom. 
 
 This suburb (hoc suburbium) renders ^20 assayed and weighed ; 
 & 3 mills render ;^io by tale. 
 
 When Peter the sheriff received it, it rendered ^15 by tale ; T. R. E. it 
 rendered J[,^ \os. by tale. 
 
 Now of these eight persons, other than the king, who are 
 returned as owners of houses in the borough of Hertford, no 
 less than seven — Earl Alan, Eudo the Steward, Geoffrey of 
 Bee, Peter of Valonges, Geoffrey of Mandeville, Ralph Bainard 
 and Hardwin of Scalers — can be identified as tenants in capite 
 of lands in the county of Hertford ; and the eighth — Humphrey 
 of Ansleville — was tenant of Knebworth under Eudo ^ At 
 Stafford all eight owners of houses in the city were also 
 tenants in capite in the county ^. 
 Similarly, at 
 
 Buckingham out of 10 owners in the borough 8 were tenants in capite 
 
 in the county. 
 Oxford ,,65 „ „ 23 „ „ 
 
 Gloucester „ 16 „ „ 4 j, ,> 
 
 * D. B. i. 139 fl, I. ' Id. 246 a, I. 
 
22 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Warwick out of 46 owners in the borough 25 were tenants in capite 
 
 in the county. 
 
 Northampton 
 
 »> 
 
 34 
 
 Malmesbury 
 
 » 
 
 16 
 
 Wallingford 
 
 » 
 
 45 
 
 24 
 
 n n 
 
 13 
 
 V »> 
 
 17 
 
 „ in Oxfordshire, 
 
 15 
 
 „ in Berkshire ^ 
 
 At Worcester the Bishop of Worcester owned ninety houses 
 appurtenant to his manor of Northwich : of these forty-five 
 were in demesne, Urso held twenty-four, Osbern fitz Richcird 
 held eight, Walter Ponther eleven, and Robert the Steward 
 held one ^ ; but all these four were tenants of rural properties 
 under the bishop. 
 
 And what is true of the county boroughs is also true of the 
 quasi-county boroughs: all seven owners of houses or burgesses 
 in the borough of Arundel ^ can be identified as mesne tenants 
 of Earl Roger, on whose land the borough was stated to be 
 situate. Robert fitz Tetbald had two haws in Arundel, but he 
 also owned Toddington in Lyminster * ; in the hundred of 
 Binstead, adjoining the borough, Morin (two burgesses) held 
 Barnham °, Emald (one burgess) was tenant of Stoke ^, the 
 Abbey of St. Martin of Seez (one burgess) of Eastergate ', and 
 William (five haws) of Walberton, Barnham and Middleton ®. 
 Nigel (five haws) held Warningcamp ^, and Ralph (five haws) 
 held Bignor^°; and all held other properties than those named ^^. 
 In Pevensey there were T. R. E. twenty-four burgesses in 
 
 ^ The owners of town houses who can be identified as mesne tenants of 
 land in the county are as follows : Oxford, 3 ; Warwick, I ; Northampton, 5. 
 
 * D.B.I 1733, I. ' Id. 23 a, I. 
 
 * Id. 24 6, 2. See also Calendar of Documents, France, 918-1216, p. 233. 
 ^ D. B. i. 25 a, 2. « lb. "> Id. 25 b, i. 
 
 ' Id. 25 a, I and 2. • Id. 24*, 2. " Id. 25 a, I. 
 
 " To substantiate the argument that the haws and burgesses in Arundel 
 were appurtenant to the rural properties in the neighbourhood, reference 
 may be made to the documents relating to the Abbey of St. Martin of 
 Seez. Among these is contained a memorandum, signed by the Conqueror 
 and his son William, stating that Earl Roger had given to the abbey two 
 villulas at Fishboume and Gath (Eastergate), and certain tithes, but not 
 mentioning houses in Chichester or Arundel. Domesday Book tells us 
 that there were in Chichester two haws appurtenant to Fishboume, but they 
 are naturally not mentioned in the memorandum as they are included among 
 
BignorO 
 
 EastergatB 
 
 Walberton 
 O 
 
 Bamliam 
 O 
 
 O^rran^camp 
 LUNDEL 
 
 O Toddm^toiv 
 
 ARUNDEL and its suggested Contributaries. 
 
 
 
 r, 
 
 
 
 
 / > 
 
 
 
 
 f } 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■> \ 
 
 
 
 
 r <-r 
 
 
 
 
 1 ^-..^ t 
 
 1 
 \ 
 
 V 
 
 ' v*"-. 
 
 Shrepsht-a 
 O 
 
 O Ol<ou^hbofou§h 
 
 O Barrow xipon Soar 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 OSUeby G.i,alby ,r>..- 
 
 -.--■'" 
 
 
 '^-'>0 0Bir,.all p,^,„^K, 
 
 LEICESTER (»°'''""^ing-t.y ,; °i-"^'«- 
 
 S 
 
 
 O Stou^tou / 
 
 
 
 
 ^ G- V,«si.„^ Burton Oxery 
 Thu,.a.s..m ^^J{^,? O^..^^^ ',^ 
 
 
 \ 
 
 Earl .ShiUoaO 
 
 
 
 'n 
 
 Broti6luoii Armisby ° Saddm^ton 
 Asiftv o j^ 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 Brunungthotpe / 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 <^ 
 
 
 
 
 \.-..-' 
 
 
 LEICESTER and Us Contrilmtories. 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY LORDS 23 
 
 demesne, and the Bishop of Chichester had five burgesses, 
 Edmer the priest had five burgesses, Doda the priest had three 
 burgesses, and Ormer the priest had five burgesses \ But the 
 bishop then held Bishopstone ^ Edmer the priest, Hurstmon- 
 ceaux^, and Doda the priest, Exceat*; Ormer was apparently 
 not an owner in Sussex. In like manner, of the sixteen 
 persons possessing burgesses in Pevensey in 1086, the names 
 of all but three can be found among the mesne tenants of the 
 Earl of Mortain in the neighbourhood of Pevensey. Gilbert 
 the sheriff had one burgess in Pevensey, but a Gilbert held 
 lands at Firle^ and elsewhere in the rape of Pevensey ; William 
 of Cahainges had two burgesses, but he also had lands at 
 Beverington, Tilton and Sherrington • ; William had four 
 burgesses, but a William is recorded as a landowner at Litling- 
 ton', Firle ^, and many other places ; Ansfrid (four burgesses) 
 held lands in Ratton ^ ; Girold had two burgesses, but Ceroid 
 had one hide at Sessingham ^°; Ansgot (three burgesses) held 
 two hides in Willingdon^^; Alan (six burgesses) held four hides 
 at Firle ^'^; Azelin (three burgesses) held one hide in Ratton ^^; 
 Walter (two burgesses) succeeded Doda at Exceat ; Roger 
 (two burgesses) held lands at Charleston^*, and Hugh (one 
 burgess) had three hides at Ratton ^°. There were two Ralphs 
 possessing burgesses in Pevensey, one with two and the other 
 with three ; but there were no less than sixteen properties 
 held by a Ralph in the rape of Pevensey, at Preston, East 
 Dean^^, Ratton and elsewhere, so that these two Ralphs may 
 with confidence be assumed to have been landowners. So 
 much for the identifications which may be regarded as certain. 
 But there are others whose identification may be suggested: 
 
 the appurtenances of the manor of Fishboume ; and if— as is suggested — 
 the burgess at Arundel belonging to the abbey was appurtenant to the 
 manor of Eastergate, all mention of his house would be as naturally 
 omitted from the memorandum. See Calendar of Documents , France, 918- 
 1216, p. 234. 
 
 ^ D.B.\.2ob,\. Md. 16^, 2. » Id. 18a, I. *Id. 21a, i. 
 
 ' Id. 21 a, I. ' Id. 20 <5, 2. ' lb. ' Id. 21 a, i. 
 
 •Id. 21 a, 2. i°Id. 21*, 2. "Id. 21 a, I. " Id. 21 ^, I. 
 
 " Id. 21 o, 2. " Id. 20*, 2. " Id. 21 a, 2. " Id. 21 a, 2. 
 
ft4 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 if Boselin and Gozelin are variae lectiones of the same name, 
 the former, who had five burgesses in Pevensey, may be 
 identified with the latter, who held lands at Willingdon^, Firle* 
 and Ratton. Although Domesday Book does not mention 
 the monks of Mortain as rural landowners in Sussex, yet one 
 of the charters of the Abbey of Marmoutier at Tours ^ speaks 
 of certain land at Blacheham and Wideham (both places 
 which cannot be identified, but which were stated to be in 
 the honour of Pevensey), which had been given by Earl 
 Robert of Mortain to the monks of Mortain ; so that it is not 
 impossible that the monks of Mortain also were landowners 
 in the rape of Pevensey. If these two latter identifications 
 be admitted, we shcill have only one person (Bernard, two 
 burgesses) of whom it cannot be suggested that he was a 
 landowner in Sussex. 
 
 A reference to the table at the end of this chapter will show 
 the universality of the rule that many of the tenants in capite 
 in a county were owners of houses in the county borough, 
 and it is needless to multiply examples. 
 
 The fact that a large proportion of the houses within 
 a borough were owned by persons who were also owners of 
 rural properties in the county in which that borough was 
 situate, naturally suggests that there must have been some 
 connexion between the rural and urban properties ; and a con- 
 nexion of some kind is clearly shown at several places : for 
 instance, at Buckingham ^, the predecessors in title of the 
 Domesday owners of the town houses are given ; in eight cases 
 out of ten they were also the predecessors in title of their 
 rural properties, showing that in eight cases out of ten the 
 same person succeeded to both the urban and rural properties 
 of the evicted Saxon. Here is the list of the Domesday 
 and pre-Domesday owners at Buckingham. The Bishop of 
 Coutances succeeded to the three burgesses formerly held by 
 Ulward fitz Edith, and to the property at Stewkley formerly 
 held by Ulward cild ^. Similarly — 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 21 a, 1. * lb. ' Cat. Documents, France, p. 434. 
 
 * D.B. i. 143 a, I. Id. 145 a, 2. 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY LORDS 25 
 
 Earl Hugh succeeded Burcard of Shenley in I burgess & in his property 
 at Shenley ^. 
 
 Robert of Ouilly succeeded Azor fitz Toti in I burgess & in his 
 property at Shalston * & Water Stratford ', both of which he sublet. 
 
 Roger of Ivry succeeded the same Azor in 3 burgesses & in his property 
 at Lesa *, Radclive ' & Thornton ", all of which he sublet 
 
 Hascoius Musart succeeded Azor fitz Toti in 8 burgesses & in his 
 property at Chentone '. 
 
 Arnulf of Hesdin succeeded Wilaf in I burgess & in his property at 
 Lenborough ', & Barton Hartshorn ®. 
 
 William of Castellon had two burgesses of the fee of the 
 Bishop of Bayeux, formerly of Earl Lewin ; and the bishop 
 succeeded Earl Lewin in his properties at Dodinton^°, Dile- 
 hurst^^ and Celsunde^^, but had sublet these estates to others 
 than William. Lewin of Newham held five burgesses whom 
 he held T. R. E. ; and at both times he held five estates in the 
 county^'. The only burgesses who cannot be attributed to a 
 rural property are the four held by Hugh of Bolebec, formerly 
 of Alric, the four held by Manno Brit, formerly of Edith the 
 wife of Syred, and the single burgess held by William of Cas- 
 tellon of the fee of Earl Alberic, whose former possessor is 
 not recorded. 
 
 Other examples of succession by the same man to both the 
 urban and rural properties of his predecessor can be cited in 
 abundance : at Canterbury, Ralph of Curbespine succeeded to 
 the eleven houses formerly belonging to Osbern Biga ^*, and 
 also to his rural properties at Thurnham ^^ and West Farborn ^* ; 
 at Cambridge, the Earl of Mortain succeeded to the houses of 
 Judichel ^''j and to his estates at Berton ^^, Granteseta ^^ and 
 Gretone 2°. 
 
 At Colchester, Hamo the steward succeeded to the burgesses 
 of Thurburn ^^ and to his estates at Faulkboum ^^ &c. ; Earl 
 Eustace succeeded to a house which Engelric had seized 
 
 1 £>. B. i. 146 ^ 2. » Id. 149^, I. » lb. « Id. 151 b, 2. 
 
 ' Id. 151 ^, 2. ' Id. 151 b, 2. ' Id. 152^, I. ' Id. 144 (J, 2. 
 
 • Id. 145 a, I. ^° Id. 144 *, 2. " Id. 144a, 2. ^^ Id. 144 a. 2. 
 " Id. 153 a, I. " Id. 2 a, I. " Id. 8 a, 2. " Id. 8 a, 2. 
 
 " Id. 189 a, I. " Id. 193 a, 2. " lb. »° lb. 
 
 ^ Id. ii. 106 a. " Id. ii. 54^. 
 
z6 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 {occupavity, and also to two hides of the land of Harold's reeve 
 at Writtle ^, of which Engelric had obtained possession [pre- 
 occupavit)\ Aubrey de Vere succeeded to the houses of Ulwin' 
 and to his estates at Canfield * ; William, the nephew of the 
 bishop, succeeded to the houses of Turchil ^ and to his estate 
 at Peldon^. At Derby, Geoffrey Alselin succeeded to the 
 church belonging to Tochi ' and to his estates at Alvaston ^ ; 
 Ralph fitz Hubert succeeded to the church of Leuric ^, 
 and to his estate at Stratton ^°. At Stamford, Gunfride 
 de Cioches succeeded to the houses of Azor^^ and to his 
 estate at Casvic ^^ ; Countess Judith succeeded to the houses 
 of Edward Cild^^ and to his estate at Widne^*; the King suc- 
 ceeded to the houses of Queen Edith which lay in Rutland ^^ 
 and to her estate at Hameldune in Rutland ^'. 
 
 Similarly at Hertford : King William succeeded to the bur- 
 gesses of Earl Harold, and to his rural properties at Hitchin 
 and elsewhere"; Geoffrey of Mandeville succeeded to the 
 house of Esgar the Staller, and to his rural property at 
 Shenley ^^ ; Hardwin of Scalers succeeded to the town house 
 of Achi, and to his rural property at Bramfield ^^. Ulwi of 
 Hatfield, who could sell or assign his house, may be identified 
 with Ulwi who formerly held two hides at Pelham, which he 
 could sell ^^ T. R. E. Algar held one hide and 13 acres at 
 Cockenhatch 2^ and a house at Hertford ; but while Earl Alan 
 succeeded to the house, Geoffrey of Bee succeeded to the land. 
 The same connexion is shown at Lincoln ^^: seven persons 
 besides the bishop are recorded in the separate account 
 of the city as having houses in Lincoln ; in six cases the 
 predecessor in title of their town house is the man who 
 preceded them in one of their country estates. Geoffrey 
 Alselin succeeded to the house of Tochi in Lincoln, and also 
 
 * D. B. ii. 106 b. " Id. it 5 *. ' Id. ii. 107 a. * Id. ii. 76 a. 
 ' Id. ii. 106 b. • Id. ii. 94 3 : see V. H., Essex, i. 418. 
 
 ' D. B. i. 280 a, 2. ' Id. 276 b, 2. » Id. 280 a, 2. 
 
 w Id. 277 a, I. " Id. 336^, 2. " Id. 366 b, I. " Id. 336 b, 2. 
 
 " Id. 366 <J, 2. " Id. 336^, 2. " Id. 293 b, 2. " Id. 132^, I. 
 
 " Id. 139 /J, I. » Id. 142 a, I. '« Id. 134a, I. " Id. 140a, 2. 
 *> Id. 336 a, I. 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY LORDS a; 
 
 to his estates at Reschinton ^ and elsewhere. Ralph Pagenel 
 succeeded to the town house of Merleswegen, and to his estate 
 at Burton ^. Gilbert of Ghent succeeded to the town house 
 of Ulf, and to his estate at Scantone^; he also succeeded 
 Siward in his town house and in his property at Aschebi * ; 
 Earl Hugh succeeded to the town house of Earl Harold, and 
 to his property at Granham ^ ; Countess Judith succeeded 
 Stori in his town house, and in his property at Hacham " ; 
 Roger of Busli succeeded to the town house of Swen fitz 
 Suane, and to his property at Greetwell '^. So that it is clear 
 that, both before and after the Conquest, there was some con- 
 nexion between the urban and rural properties in Buckingham, 
 Cambridge, Canterbury, Colchester, Derby, Hertford and 
 Lincoln. 
 
 It must also be noticed that in the Devon survey, the houses 
 in Exeter owned by each tenant in capite appear not in the 
 separate survey of the city, but at either the beginning or the 
 end of the list of his rural properties — as if the commissioners 
 had noted them down when entering the rural properties, 
 added them up, and then entered them in one total. 
 
 We are not, therefore, surprised to find that at Warwick ', 
 after a list of twenty-seven owners of houses within the 
 borough, twenty-five of whom were tenants in capite, the 
 statement that 'these masures belong to the lands which 
 these barons hold without the borough, and are valued there.' 
 
 At Wallingford, it is definitely stated that the houses in the 
 borough belonging to seventeen owners are appurtenant to 
 certain Oxfordshire manors of theirs, all of which, except in 
 four cases, are named : 
 
 Milo Crispin has 20 masures of 12s. lod. lying in Nuneham ; 
 
 and again one acre in which are 6 haws of 18^. 
 
 in Hasely 6 masures of 44</. ; 
 
 in Stoke i masure of I2d. ; 
 
 in Chalgrove I masure of 4^. ; 
 
 in Sutton l acre in which are 6 masures of I2d.\ 
 
 in Bray i acre in which are 1 1 masures of 3^. 
 All this land pertains to Oxfordshire and yet is in Wallingford. 
 
 » D.B. i. 369 b, 2. 2 Id. 362 b, i. " Id. 354 b, i. * Id. 355 b, i. 
 ' Id. 349 u, I. • Id. 366 b, 2. ' Id. 352 b, 2. * Id. 238 a, I. 
 
a8 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Rainald has i acre in which are ii masures pertaining to Albury which 
 is in Oxfordshire . . . 
 The under written thegns of Oxfordshire had land in Wallingford : 
 Archbishop Lanfranc, 4 houses in Newington. 
 
 Bishop Remigius 
 
 I 
 
 >» 
 
 „ Dorchester. 
 
 Abbot of St. Alban's 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 
 Abbot R 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 „ Ewelme. 
 
 Earl Hugh 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 „ Pyrton. 
 
 Walter Gifard 
 
 3 
 
 » 
 
 „ Caversham. 
 
 Robert of Ouilly 
 
 2 
 
 >> 
 
 „ Watlington. 
 
 n 
 
 I 
 
 »> 
 
 „ Perie. 
 
 Ilbert of Laici, Roger fitz Sefrid and Ongar, 3 houses. 
 
 Hugh of Bolebec, 3 houses in Crem. 
 
 Hugo grandis de Scoca, I house. 
 
 Drogo in Shirburn and Weston, 3 houses. 
 
 Robert Armenteres in Ewelme, i house. 
 
 Wazo in Ewelme, i house \ 
 
 But the survey of Leicester ^ goes further even than that of 
 Wallingford ; there the urban houses belonging to each of the 
 tenants in capite are definitely stated to pertain to certain 
 named rural properties ; here is the schedule of the property 
 of one of the largest owners : 
 
 Hugh of Grentmesnil has 1 10 houses and 2 churches ; besides these 
 he has in common with the king 34 houses in the same borough. 
 
 These were apparently some of the king's demesne houses 
 which he had granted to Hugh, who was also in receipt of 
 the third penny of the borough. 
 
 The same Hugh also has in Leicester : 
 
 24 burgesses pertaining to Ansty (Hanstigie). 
 
 13 
 
 » 
 
 Sileby (Siglesbie). 
 
 4 houses 
 
 
 Ingaresby (Inwaresbie). 
 
 10 „ 
 
 » 
 
 Belgrave (Merdegrave). 
 
 4 M 
 
 
 Broughton (Brohtone). 
 
 9 „ 
 
 
 Stoughton (Stotone). 
 
 4 M 
 
 
 Wigston (Wichingestone). 
 
 7 „ 
 
 » 
 
 Amesby (Andretesbie). 
 
 3 » 
 
 i> 
 
 Shilton (Sceltune). 
 
 10 „ 
 
 >> 
 
 Birstall (Burstelle). 
 
 3 ,, 
 
 
 Burton (Burtone). 
 
 I „ 
 
 » 
 
 Bruntingthorpe (Brunestinestorp). 
 
 2 » 
 
 »> 
 
 Desford (Diresford). 
 
 n.£.i.S6a,2. 
 
 
 ' Id. 230 a, I ; see map facing p. 22. 
 

 
 
 
 <^'---.. 
 
 
 
 \ \ 
 
 
 
 _5 ~ ^ 2 
 
 
 
 \ ^ 
 
 
 
 ,.-, } \ "" \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ( s i|--^ / V? '' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■;>. 4- OiO^, i O - ^ / 
 
 
 
 / ? £ ^ O o\ 5 It ? '^ ) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "^ tieifWrd~j^ V'\ 
 
 
 
 ' i# 1 " 7 
 
 
 
 _ /-~ /'^ \ / - Cf > 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^^■'^ 0=0 / 
 
 
 
 1 5 i =^ ■• 
 
 
 
 OV^ t i i \ 
 
 
 
 ^ i ^ / 
 
 
 
 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^') 
 
 
 
 y -*"■' 
 
 
 
 1 ^^ .••^ ■;.... •■ -^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ f-.y 
 
 
 
 o X 
 
 
 
 ^... ^...-•■/ _/-■■'"•••-.. '■•• 
 
 
 
 /■ " N/(*' 
 
 
 
 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY LORDS ag 
 
 3 burgesses pertaining to Langham (Legham). 
 
 I }, „ Little Thorp (Letitone). 
 
 I )) „ Thurlestone (Turchililestone). 
 
 And there were other houses pertaining to Carlton 
 (Cherlintone), Barrow (Barhou), Kegworth (Cacheuuorde), 
 Loughborough (Locteburne), Newton (Niuueton), Chiborne 
 (Chiburne), Dalby, Pickwell, Sheepshead (Scepehefde), Sad- 
 dington (Sadintone), and Thorpe. There are similar entries 
 stating that certain town houses are appurtenant to certain 
 named rural properties at Oxford ^, Northampton ^ Stafford ^ 
 and Colchester*. 
 
 To sum up, we have seen that the houses contributed by the 
 contributory properties to boroughs of the Canterbury type 
 may be arranged under their various owners, in the same manner 
 as the list of owners is compiled in boroughs of the Hertford 
 type : that in the latter class of boroughs there is some 
 connexion between the rural and the urban properties of 
 many of the tenants in capite : that at Warwick and Leicester 
 the urban properties of the tenants in capite are stated to 
 pertain to certain of their rural properties ; and that similar 
 statements are made in isolated cases in a few other boroughs. 
 From these conclusions it may be fairly deduced that the sole 
 difference between the boroughs of the Canterbury type and 
 those of the Hertford type is, that in the former the con- 
 tributed houses were entered under the various rural properties 
 to which they were appurtenant, and that in the latter they 
 were entered in the boroughs in which they were actually 
 situate, and stated to belong to the owners of the rural 
 property to which they were appurtenant. 
 
 And this deduction may in more than one case be sub- 
 stantiated by direct evidence: in 1032 Canute confirmed to 
 the Abbey at Abingdon the devise by Ethelwin of two hides 
 at Linford, ' and the haw in Oxford that he himself built * ' : 
 Domesday Book gives Linford as one of the properties of 
 the Abbey in Berkshire^, but mentions no appurtenant 
 haw in Oxford ; but in the survey of Oxford the Abbot of 
 
 ^ D. B. i, 154 <z, I. ' Id. 219 a, I. ^ Id. 246 a, I. 
 
 * Z?. ^. ii. io6a, &c. "^ AT. 746. ^ D. B.\, S9a,i. 
 
3© THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Abingdon is returned as owning fourteen mansions in that 
 city^. In 985 Archbishop Oswald granted out of the lands 
 of Worcester Abbey a lease for three lives of one hide at 
 Clopton with one haw * on porte ^ ' : Domesday Book states 
 that Urso held one hide at Clopton of the Bishop of Worcester ^ 
 and also that he held of him twenty-five houses in the market- 
 place of the city *. Some few years earlier the same prelate 
 also granted a lease of three hides at Bradingcote * with the 
 haw that he had before the Gate ^ ' ; Domesday Book shows 
 that Walter Ponther held three hides at Bradecote of the 
 Bishop of Worcester as parcel of the manor of Northwich ' ; 
 but in right of this manor the bishop had ninety houses in 
 the city of which Walter Ponther held eleven '^. In all these 
 cases the owners of town houses are shown to be owners of 
 country properties, to which there were appurtenant haws 
 in these towns not a century earlier. 
 
 One objection to this theory is that there were many 
 boroughs which appear to belong to both classes, and to 
 have both contributory lords and contributory properties. 
 Leicester, Oxford, Wallingford, Northampton and Stafford 
 have already been mentioned ; in the separate survey of 
 Malmesbury ^ we find that there were twenty-two and a half 
 houses owned by sixteen persons, thirteen of whom were 
 tenants in capite ; from the surveys of the rural properties 
 it appears that there were twelve properties contributing 
 twelve and a half burgesses or houses; but a comparison 
 of the records shows that although there were four persons 
 who appeared on both lists (as urban owners and as owners 
 of contributory properties), yet they were assessed in each 
 list for different properties ; thus — 
 
 The Abbot of Malmesbury had 4^ masures and outside the borough 
 9 coscez who gelded with the burgesses ; 
 
 he also held Little Somerford ' contributing one burgess. 
 The Abbot of Glastonbury had 2 masures ; 
 
 but he also held Langley ^° contributing one burgess. 
 
 » See p. 32. 2 ^ 645 3 J) ^ i ,72 ^^ 2 4 Id. 173 ^^ I. 
 
 » K. 683. « D. B. i. 173 b, 2. '' Id. 173 b, I. « Id. 64 b, I. 
 
 » Id. 67 a, I. 10 Id. 66*, 2. 
 
THE CONTRIBUTORY LORDS 31 
 
 Humphrey of the Isle (of Wight) owned i house ; 
 
 but he also held Come ^ contributing 2 burgesses rendering iSd. 
 Drogo fitz Pons owned ^ house in the borough ; 
 
 but he also held Segrie * contributing i house. 
 
 On the other hand there are a few cases where it is clear 
 that a person is entered on both lists for the same property ; 
 in the description of Wallingford it is stated that 
 
 Bishop Walchelin has 27 haws of 2^s. which are valued in his manor of 
 Brightwell '. 
 
 And on turning to Brightwell we find 
 
 Of the pleas of the land in Wallingford pertaining to this manor, 25^.* 
 
 But such cases are rare, and in the majority of the examples 
 of apparent duplication, examination will show that the parties 
 are really entered on the two lists for two separate properties. 
 Finally, a comparison of the list of owners in the county 
 town with the list of landowners in the county will show 
 that it was not every landowner who had a house in the town. 
 Thus in 
 
 Buckinghamshire out of 57 landowners, only 8 had town houses. 
 
 Warwickshire „ 45 „ 25 „ 
 
 Northamptonshire „ 60 „ 24 „ 
 
 Hertfordshire „ 44 „ 8 „ 
 
 Staffordshire » I7 a 5 » 
 
 Wiltshire „ 68 „ 13 „ 
 
 Devon „ 53 „ 16 „ 
 
 3. The Duties of the Contributories. 
 
 We have now come to the conclusion that in all the county 
 boroughs, and in certain others which we have agreed to call 
 quasi-county boroughs, there was a certain connexion between 
 some of the rural properties in the county and certain houses 
 within that borough, in such manner that those houses, 
 although physically situate within the borough, were appur- 
 tenant to, and were valued as integral parts of, the rural 
 properties ; in other words, that certain rural properties coq- 
 
 ^ n. B. i. 71 a, I. ^ Id. 7Z a, I. ^ Id. 56a, 2. * Id. 58a, 2. 
 
32 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 tributed houses to the county and quasi-county boroughs. 
 For a universal rule like this there must have been some 
 reason, and some duty to be performed by the contributed 
 houses or their occupiers ; and it is suggested that this 
 reason and this duty can be explained by the description 
 of Oxford K 
 
 The King has 20 mural mansions formerly of Earl Algar T. R. E. 
 „ I mansion pertaining to Shipton, 
 
 „ 1 „ „ Bloxham. 
 
 „ I » » Risborough. 
 
 „ 2 „ „ Twyford. (I)* 
 
 These are called mural mansions because, if need be and the King 
 command, they repair the wall. 
 
 To the lands which Earl Alberic held pertain i church and 3 mansions : 
 of these two lie at the Church of St. Mary, and one lies at Burford. 
 
 (XVIII) 
 To the lands which Earl William (fitz Osbem) held pertain 9 mansions. 
 
 (LIX) 
 
 The Archbishop of Canterbury 
 
 has 
 
 7 mansions 
 
 
 (11) 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester 
 
 »» 
 
 9 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 (HI) 
 
 „ Bayeux 
 
 »» 
 
 18 
 
 ft 
 
 
 
 (VII) 
 
 „ Lincoln 
 
 » 
 
 30 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 (VI) 
 
 „ Coutances 
 
 i> 
 
 2 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 
 „ Hereford 
 
 it 
 
 3 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 
 The Abbot of St. Edmund's 
 
 >» 
 
 I 
 
 tt 
 
 pertaining 
 
 to Taynton. 
 
 „ Eynsham 
 
 » 
 
 13 
 
 It 
 
 and 2 
 
 Churches '. 
 
 „ Abingdon 
 
 » 
 
 14 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 (IX) 
 
 The Earl of Mortain 
 
 »> 
 
 10 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 (XVI) 
 
 Earl Hugh 
 
 t> 
 
 7 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 (XV) 
 
 The Earl of Evreux 
 
 >> 
 
 I 
 
 >i 
 
 
 
 (XVII) 
 
 Henry of Ferrers 
 
 » 
 
 2 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 (XXIV) 
 
 William Peverel 
 
 » 
 
 4 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 (XXIII) 
 
 Edward the sheriff 
 
 » 
 
 2 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 (XLI) 
 
 Amulf of Hesdin 
 
 » 
 
 3 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 (XL) 
 
 Berenger of Todeni 
 
 »» 
 
 I 
 
 l> 
 
 
 
 (XXXIV) 
 
 Milo Crispin 
 
 »> 
 
 2 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 (XXXV) 
 
 Richard of Curci 
 
 n 
 
 2 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 (XXXII) 
 
 * B. B. i. 154 a, I. 
 
 ' The Roman numerals show the numbers prefixed to each tenant's 
 name in the list of tenants in capite in Oxfordshire. 
 
 ' Columban, Abbot of Eynsham, held Eynsham, &c., under the Bishop 
 of Lincoln, D. B. i. 155 a, 2. 
 
THE DUTIES OF THE CONTRIBUTORIES 33 
 
 Robert of Ouilly holds 12 mansions (XXVIII) 
 
 Roger of Ivry „ 15 „ (XXIX) 
 
 Ralph Flambard ^ » I » 
 
 Wido of Reinbodcurth „ 2 „ (XXXVI) 
 
 Walter Gifard » i? „ (XX) 
 
 The predecessor of Walter Gifard held one of these of the gift of 
 King Edward from 8 virgates which were customary T. R. E. 
 
 Jernio holds i mansion pertaining to Hampton *. 
 
 The son of Manasses holds one mansion rendering 4^. to Bletchingdon '. 
 
 All the above written hold the aforesaid mansions free on account of the 
 reparation of the wall. 
 
 All mansions called mural T. R. E. were free of all custom except 
 expedition and wall repair. . . . 
 
 Ulvric holds i mansion waste, and yet if need be he repaired the 
 wall*. . . . 
 
 Swetman has 2 mural mansions. 
 
 Another Swetman has i free for the same service. . . . 
 
 Lodowin has I house in which he resides free for wall (repair) . . . 
 Alwin has I house free for repairing the wall ". 
 
 And if the wall has need of repair, and he whose duty it is, does not 
 repair it, he shall either forfeit to the King 40s., or lose his house. 
 
 Now twenty-seven of these thirty-four owners of mural 
 mansions in Oxford can be identified as follows: 
 
 The King I 
 
 Tenants in capite in Oxfordshire 23 
 
 Mesne tenant in Oxfordshire I 
 
 Owning contributed houses but not tenants in Oxfordshire 2 
 
 27 
 
 It is, therefore, perfectly clear that all the houses contributed 
 by the landlords of the county were charged with the repair 
 of the walls of Oxford. But it has just been proved that 
 the landlords of the county held their town houses in respect 
 of -their rural properties ; therefore it was upon the houses 
 contributed by the rural properties that the duty fell of 
 keeping the city walls in repair. 
 
 * Ralph Flambard held Middleton of the king (157 a, l). 
 ' Jernio held Hampton of the king (160^, 2). 
 
 ' Alwin the sheriff held Bletchingdon of the king (160^, 2) ; but his 
 predecessor in title had sold the estate to Manasses without license. 
 
 * An Ulvric was predecessor of Milo Crispin at Rotherfeld (159 a, 2). 
 ' An Alwin was predecessor of Milo Crispin at Whitchurch (1590, 2). 
 
 BALLAKO X) 
 
34 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 The Abbot of St. Edmund's possessed the house contributed 
 by Taynton, although the manor of Taynton belonged to the 
 church of St. Denys of Paris ; but we can easily understand 
 this when we remember that at Rochester the Bishop of 
 Bayeux retained in his own hands certain houses contributed 
 by some of his rural properties when he granted the latter 
 to his mesne tenants. Is it unreasonable to suppose that 
 the mural mansions belonging to the Bishop of Coutances 
 and others were also originally contributed to Oxford by 
 some rural property, and were granted to their Domesday 
 owners away from the properties to which they were originally 
 appurtenant ? If so, the contributed houses alone were liable 
 for the repair of the walls. Ex uno disce omnes; and as 
 the tenurial organization of Oxford differed in no way 
 from that of Canterbury, Chichester, Exeter, Buckingham, 
 Lincoln, York and Colchester, nor indeed from that of any 
 of the composite boroughs, we may well conclude that on the 
 contributed houses in these boroughs fell the liability for repair 
 of the borough walls. 
 
 The distinction at Nottingham between ' merchants' houses ' 
 and ' knights' houses ' ^ [equitum domus) looks like additional 
 evidence that there at all events some of the burgesses were 
 of a military character : and the record calls special attention 
 to the fact that one of the knights' houses was occupied by 
 a merchant, as if to imply that thereby the force for the defence 
 of the borough was diminished. And possibly the cnihten 
 gilds in London, Winchester and Canterbury are further evi- 
 dence that some of the burgesses were military men ^. 
 
 As a further proof of this contention, reference may be 
 made to a document in the Register of Malmesbury Abbey, 
 apparently of the year 1283, which gives the names of those 
 who were then liable for the repair of the king's wall at 
 Malmesbury ^ ; the greater part of this liability fell on the 
 abbey itself; but certain portions of the wall were to be 
 repaired ' de feudo de Combe, de feudo de Wrokeshalle ' by 
 the lord of Foxley and by the prior of Hundlavintone : 
 
 * /?. 5, i. 280 a, I. 2 Z). ^. and ^. 191. 
 
 ^ Registrum Malmesburiense, i. 136. 
 
THE DUTIES OF THE CONTRIBUTORIES S5 
 
 Domesday Book shows that Come^, Werocheshalle ^, Foxlege^ 
 and Hundlavintone* were all contributory to the borough of 
 Malmesbury ; and thus the two records show that it was the 
 duty of the contributories to repair the walls of Malmesbury 
 at the end of the thirteenth century. 
 
 The rule in Cheshire was — 
 
 To repair the wall of the city and the bridge, the praepositus ordered 
 a man to come from every hide in the county : the lord of the man who 
 did not come made amends in 40s. to the King and Earl*. 
 
 But to the city of Chester thirty-five burgesses and two 
 waste masures were contributed by four properties assessed 
 at twenty hides : the Oxford evidence would lead us to think 
 that these four properties kept their men in the city in order 
 that they might always be ready when required. Notice, too, 
 that the penalty for neglect at both Oxford and Chester is 
 forty shillings. In addition to Chester, Domesday Book men- 
 tions the walls of Colchester, Hereford, Leicester, Lincoln and 
 Oxford, and the ditches of Canterbury, Nottingham and York. 
 
 The tenth-century regulations for the repair of Rochester 
 bridge ^, give the names of the persons and properties on whom 
 this duty devolved : and of these properties, five — Borstal!, 
 Frindsbury, Eccles, Chalk and Hoo — are stated by Domesday 
 Book to have had contributed houses in that city either in 
 1066 or 1086 ; so that in this case it would appear that it 
 was brig-bot rather than burh-bot that was performed by the 
 contributed houses ; or, perhaps we should say, as all pro- 
 perties were alike liable for both brig-bot and burh-bot, that 
 the contributed houses repaired both the bridge and the wall 
 at Rochester. 
 
 It thus appears that the evidence of Domesday Book 
 supports Professor Maitland's 'garrison theory,' with a slight 
 modification, and proves that many of the rural magnates 
 performed their duty of fortifying the boroughs by keeping 
 houses in those boroughs and burgesses in those houses'' — 
 and that too, not only in the newer Midland boroughs, 
 such as Oxford, Buckingham, Tamworth, Warwick and 
 
 ^ D. B.i.jia,!. Md. 69^, 2. Md. 72^, I. Md. 72a, 2. 
 
 "> Id. 262^, 2. « B. 1321. ' D. £. and B. 189. 
 
 D 2 
 
36 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Stafford, but in those also that were inhabited in Roman 
 times — London, Pevensey, Chichester, Exeter, Gloucester, 
 Chester and Colchester. 
 
 4. The Demesne. 
 
 Now that we have considered the intricate questions of the 
 contributory properties and the contributory lords, we need 
 not spend much time over the demesne houses. At the very 
 beginning of the description of Warwick we find a statement 
 that ' in Warwick the King has in demesne 113 houses^', and 
 a similar statement is made in connexion with almost all the 
 county and quasi-county boroughs. At Wallingford King 
 Edward had 276 houses, but at the time of Domesday Book 
 their number was diminished by thirteen ^ ; at Hereford there 
 were T. R, E. 103 men dwelling within and without the walls ^ ; 
 at Norwich there were T. R. E. 1338 burgesses of whom 
 the king and earl had soc and sac and custom * ; at 
 Colchester there were 276 king's burgesses (a list of whose 
 names is given) who paid custom ° ; and at Canterbury 
 King Edward had fifty-one burgesses paying gablum, and 
 ai2 over whom he had sac and soc^. The king had 
 sixty-four burgesses at Bath '^, and 1 1 1 at Grantham ^. A 
 comparison of the descriptions of boroughs in all parts of 
 the kingdom will show that over his demesne houses the king 
 had the most extensive powers: from them he received the 
 gablum, and over them he had sac and soc ; they were his 
 men, and owed service to none but his officers. But the 
 king was not the only owner of property within a borough 
 that was not connected with rural properties : at Wareham 
 the king had seventy houses in his demesne, on the part of 
 St. Wandregisilius there were forty-five houses standing, and 
 on the part of the other barons there were twenty houses 
 standing ^ ; at the time of Domesday Book the king had 
 at Leicester thirty-nine houses, and Hugh of Grentmesnil 
 had no houses, in addition to the houses which Hugh and 
 
 * D. B. i. 238 a, I. » Id. 56 a, 2. » Id. 179 a, I. 
 
 * D. B. ii. 116 a. ' Id. ii. 104 a, &c. " D. B. i. 7. a, i. 
 ■? Id. 87a, 2. « Id. 337*5, 2. » Id. 75 a, i. 
 
THE DEMESNE -37 
 
 others had as appurtenant to their rural properties *. It would 
 appear as though the houses belonging to the saint at 
 Wareham were originally part of the king's demesne, which 
 he or his predecessors had granted to St. Wandregisilius. 
 At Wallingford^ and Warwick^ we read of burgesses pos- 
 sessing their own houses and having sac and soc over them, 
 and possibly these too were grants out of the demesne*. 
 Whether this be so or no it must always be remembered that 
 there were some houses in every borough that had no con- 
 nexion with any rural property. 
 
 In some cases the earl of the county in which the 
 borough was situate appears to have owned some houses 
 within the borough in virtue of his position as earl : at 
 Stafford ^ the king had in his demesne twenty-three houses of 
 the honour of the earl ; and probably some of the no houses 
 above mentioned as belonging, at Leicester, to Hugh of 
 Grentmesnil may have belonged to the earl's honour, as 
 it is stated that he had the third penny of the minters ; but 
 a distinction is drawn at Leicester between Hugh of Grent- 
 mesnil and Earl Hugh (of Chester) ^. Possibly in other cases 
 no distinction is made in Domesday Book between the houses 
 contributed by the earl's rural properties and those belonging 
 to him by virtue of his office. 
 
 The Norwich extract quoted above shows that the king 
 was not always absolute sole owner of his demesne houses ; 
 for, as we shall see later, it was the general rule T. R. E. that 
 the earl received the third penny of the county boroughs ; 
 luckily in another part of the Norwich survey we can see 
 a borough in the making: 
 
 Franci de Norwic ''. In the new borough there were 36 burgesses & 
 6 English, and of their annual custom they rendered each \d. besides 
 forfeitures. Of all this the King had two parts and the Earl the third. 
 Now there are 41 French burgesses in the demesne of the King and Earl. 
 
 > D. B. i. 230 a I. 2 Id. 56 b, l. " Id. 238 a, i. 
 
 * But another explanation is possible : see post, p. 59. 
 
 ' D. B. i. 246 a, I. 
 
 ' Miss Bateson says that Hugh of Grentmesnil was never referred to 
 as Earl of Leicester, but was sheriff of the county. Leicester Records, I. 
 xiii. See also Freeman's Nonnan Conquest, iv. 252. "^ D.B. ii. 118 a. 
 
38 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Roger Bigot has 50 burgesses. (IX) 
 
 Ralph de Bellafago has 14 burgesses. (XX) 
 
 Hermer has 8 burgesses. (XIII) 
 
 Robert Arbalister has 5 burgesses. (LIV) 
 
 Fulcher, a man of the Abbot has 1 burgess. 
 
 Isaac has i burgess. (XLVII) 
 
 Ralph viso lupi has I burgess. 
 
 In the Earl's mill Robert Blund has 3 burgesses. 
 
 Wimer has i house waste. 
 
 All this land of the burgesses was in the demesne of Earl Ralph, and 
 he granted it to the King in common to make a borough between himself 
 and the King as the Sheriff testifies ; and all these men both of the 
 knights and the burgesses render to the King his custom. . . . 
 
 And so long as Robert Blund held the county, he had thence every year 
 an ounce of gold. 
 
 From this it would appear that the soil of one county 
 borough at least was vested in the king and the earl in common. 
 
 And we have already noticed that the county boroughs 
 (i. e. those at the head of the descriptions of the counties) were 
 not stated to be hoi den by any one ; the same is true of the 
 four quasi-county boroughs of Sussex ; Chichester was said to 
 be ' in the hands of Earl Roger ^.' Neither Guildford ^ nor 
 Southwark ^ was holden by any one : the king was said to 
 *have,' not to 'hold,' Barnstaple* and Lidford^, but he 
 'holds' Bath 6, and Judhael 'holds' Totnes^ Guildford, 
 Barnstaple, Lidford, Calne \ Bath and the Wiltshire boroughs 
 were under the rubric ' Terra Regis,' and the East Anglian 
 boroughs, except Colchester, were under the same rubric. 
 
 It is possible that the demesne houses were not liable for the 
 repair of the walls : at Oxford it is distinctly stated that the 
 king's ' mural mansions ' formerly belonged to Earl Algar, and 
 were contributed by Shipton, Bloxham, Risborough and Twy- 
 ford ; and at Hertford a distinction is drawn between the king's 
 146 burgesses who were formerly in the soc of King Edward, 
 and his 18 burgesses who were formerly the men of Earl Harold. 
 
 The question of the financial relations of the king and the earl 
 to the composite boroughs will be discussed in the next chapter. 
 
 * D. B. i. 23 a, I. * Id. 30 a, I. ' Id. yia, i. 
 
 * Id. 100 «, 2. * Id. 100 a, 2. * Id. 87 a, 2. 
 
 ^ Id. 108 a, 2. Md. 64 bf 2. 
 
STATISTICAL TABLE 
 
 39 
 
 
 
 
 m.9 
 
 Contributory 
 Properties. 
 
 Contributory Lords. 
 
 
 BOROUGHS. 
 
 
 2 
 
 i? 
 
 a 
 
 3 
 
 a 
 U 
 
 .a 
 
 i3 
 
 is 
 
 1 
 
 Anmdel .... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 17 
 
 7 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 Barnstaple , 
 
 
 
 49 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 17 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 Bath . . . 
 
 
 
 64 
 
 18 
 
 5 
 
 34 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 Bristol . 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Breton 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 12 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Buckingham 
 
 
 
 a6 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 26 
 
 10 
 
 8 
 
 I 
 
 
 Calne . . . 
 
 
 
 45 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 25 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 Cambridge . 
 
 
 
 301 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 20 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 
 Canterbury (1066) . 
 
 366 
 
 291 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (1086) . 
 
 231 
 
 165 
 
 13 
 
 64 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 
 Chester .... 
 
 236 
 
 35 
 
 4 
 
 67 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 Chichester . 
 
 
 
 1572 
 
 143 
 
 44 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 Colchester . 
 
 
 
 276 
 
 32 
 
 13 
 
 50 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 Cricklade 
 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 10 
 
 ... 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 Derby . . 
 
 
 
 140 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 Dorchester 
 
 
 
 88 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dover . . 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 29 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 Droitwich 
 
 
 
 II 
 
 46 
 
 9 
 
 69 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 Dimwich . 
 
 
 
 236 
 
 80 
 
 I 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 Exeter 
 
 
 
 E. 285 
 
 26 
 
 3 
 
 99 
 
 17 
 
 16 
 
 I 
 
 
 Gloucester 
 
 
 
 
 95 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 16 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 Grantham 
 
 
 
 III 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 77 
 
 
 
 
 
 Guildford 
 
 
 
 175 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 Hastings . 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hereford . 
 
 
 
 E. 103 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 Hertford . 
 
 
 
 E. 146 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 35 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 I 
 
 
 Huntingdon 
 
 
 
 256 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 37 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 Hythe. . 
 
 
 
 '" 
 
 232 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ilchester . 
 
 
 
 107 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ipswich . 
 
 
 
 no 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 71 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 Langport . 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Leicester . 
 
 
 
 39 
 
 126 
 
 26 
 
 161 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 Lewes . . 
 
 
 
 166 
 
 358 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Lincoln . 
 
 
 
 900 
 
 ... 
 
 
 117 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 London . 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 150 
 
 II 
 
 
 
 
 
 
40 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 
 « S 
 
 is 
 
 Contributory 
 Properties. 
 
 Contributory Lords. 
 
 
 BOROUGHS. 
 
 1 
 
 .a 
 
 !■ 
 
 
 i 
 
 eii 
 
 
 to 
 
 t2 
 
 Malmesbury . . . 
 
 26 
 
 I2| 
 
 II 
 
 3I| 
 
 16 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 Milboorne . . • 
 
 56 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Northampton . . 
 
 87 
 
 
 ... 
 
 191 
 
 34 
 
 24 
 
 5 
 
 
 Norwich . . . . 
 
 665 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 „ New borough 
 
 41 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 84 
 
 9 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 Nottingham . . . 
 
 120 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 118 
 
 8 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 Oxford .... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 65 
 
 23 
 
 I 
 
 
 Pevensey .... 
 
 60 
 
 
 
 6° 
 
 16 
 
 ... 
 
 13 
 
 
 Rochester {j"^^ 
 
 
 35 
 19 
 
 "t} 
 
 80 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 Romney .... 
 
 
 XS6 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Sandwich . . . 
 
 383 
 
 32 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Shaftesbury . . . 
 
 66 
 
 ... 
 
 
 III 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 Shrewsbury . . . 
 
 E. 252 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 39 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 Southampton . . 
 
 76 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 46 
 
 24 
 
 II 
 
 
 
 Southwark . . . 
 
 ... 
 
 47 
 
 II 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Stafford .... 
 
 40 
 
 18 
 
 2 
 
 91 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 
 [coin. 
 
 Stamford . . . 
 
 269 
 
 
 
 64 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 ... 
 
 in Lin- 
 
 >> .... 
 Sudbury .... 
 
 55 
 
 15 
 
 I 
 
 72 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 ... 
 
 in Rut- 
 land. 
 
 Tamworth . . . 
 
 
 22 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Thetford .... 
 
 720 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 38 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 Torksey .... 
 
 103 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Totnes .... 
 
 no 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wallingford . . . 
 Wareham . . . 
 
 285 
 73 
 
 1-84 
 
 I65 
 
 9 
 
 17 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 |ii7 
 60 
 
 47 
 ? 
 
 Vs 
 
 
 Oxon. 
 
 Berks. 
 
 Warwick. . . . 
 
 "3 
 
 23 
 
 9 
 
 131 
 
 46 
 
 25 
 
 I 
 
 
 Wilton .... 
 
 ... 
 
 23 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wimboum . . . 
 
 • •• 
 
 22 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Winchcombe . . 
 
 
 36 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Winchester . . . 
 
 • •• 
 
 65 
 
 13 
 
 31 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Worcester . . . 
 
 • •• 
 
 108 
 
 12 
 
 28 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 Yarmouth . . . 
 
 70 
 
 • •• 
 
 ... 
 
 12 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 York 
 
 936 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 141I 
 
 22 
 
 9 
 
 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATION OF THE 
 COMPOSITE BOROUGHS 
 
 I. The King and the Earl. 
 
 The position of the king and the earl in the county 
 boroughs with respect to their houses in demesne has already 
 been discussed ; and it has been ascertained that, with respect 
 to these houses, they occupied the same position as any other 
 house-owner. But the earl had also an important financial 
 connexion with these boroughs. An analysis of the Hunting- 
 don accounts shows that there the earl received one-third 
 of the receipts ^ ; and we find that it was a general rule before 
 the Conquest that the earl received the third penny of the 
 renders of the county and quasi-county boroughs. This 
 payment from the boroughs must not be confused with a 
 payment which the earls received from the counties ; they 
 received the third penny of the pleas of the counties, but from 
 the boroughs they received one-third of the whole receipts ^ : 
 the Chester survey again and again points out that the various 
 payments are divided between the king and the earl. 
 
 The first page of Domesday Book shows that King Edward 
 received two-thirds of the render of Dover, and Earl Godwin 
 the other third ^ ; from Oxford, the king then received ;^20, and 
 Earl Algar ;^io * : and similarly also at Barnstaple ^ Chester •, 
 Chichester '', Derby ^, Droitwich^ Fordwich^", Hereford ^^ Ips- 
 wich ^'^j Lewes^", Lincoln^*, Norwich^^,Southwark^^, Stafford", 
 
 * D. B. i. 203 a, 2. * Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville^ p. 287. 
 
 ' D. B. i. I a, I. * Id. 154a, I. ' Id. looa, 2. * Id. 262^, 2. 
 
 ' Id. 23 a, I. « Id. 280 a, 2. " Id. 172 a, 2. " Id. 12 a, 2. 
 " Id. 179 a, I. 12 2). ^. ii. 290 (5. " Z?. ^. i. 26 a, I. 
 " Id. 336 b, I. " D. B. ii. 1 17 a. " D. B. i. 32 a, I. 
 
 " Id. 246a, I. 
 
4% THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Thetford\ Torksey^, Totnes ^ Winchcombe*, Worcester", 
 and Yarmouth ^ the third penny of the borough was paid 
 T. R. E. to the earl ; but at Exeter '', Leicester ^ and 
 Shrewsbury ^ the sheriff had the third penny ; and at Wor- 
 cester^ the king, the earl and the bishop had each one-third 
 of the receipts. In part of Lewes the king and earl equally 
 divided the profits both before and after the Conquest. 
 
 After the Conquest the king in some cases ousted the 
 earl from all share in the borough ; at Worcester ^ and 
 Droitwich ^° the king had then in demesne both his own 
 and the earl's parts ; at Stafford ^^ the king had the whole 
 render of both his own and the earl's shares, and was 
 definitely stated to hold certain houses of the earl's honour, 
 but he had granted one half of his own two-thirds to Robert 
 of Stafford; and at Hereford ^^ he had the city in demesne 
 and received the whole render. 
 
 Vice versa, there were a few cases where the earl had 
 obtained the king's share ; Chichester ^^ and Shrewsbury ^ 
 were entirely in the hands of Earl Roger : the king had no 
 houses in either of these cities nor any share in the profits ; 
 and Earl Hugh received the farm of Chester ^*. Occasionally 
 the Conqueror made grants of the earl's third penny: thus 
 the Bishop of Coutances received the third penny of 
 Barnstaple ^^ and Westminster Abbey that of Cricklade ^^ : 
 before the Conquest, the third penny of Totnes had been 
 annexed to the manor of Langford, which belonged to 
 Earl Lewin, but King William granted it to Judhael to whom 
 he had already given his share of that borough ". Edward the 
 Confessor had given two-thirds of the borough of Fordwich to 
 the monks of St. Augustine's at Canterbury : after the Con- 
 quest the Bishop of Bayeux, who had been made Earl of 
 Kent, gave them the third penny, with the consent of King 
 
 * D. B. ii. 119 a. ' D. B. i. 337 a, I. ' Id. 102 a, 2. 
 
 * Id. 162 b, I. « Id. 172 a, I. « D. B. ii. 118 a. 
 ^ D. B. i. 100 a, I. ' Id. 230 a, i : see p. 37 n. 2. ' Id. 252 a, 2. 
 
 " Id. 172^, I. ^ Id. 246 a, I. " Id. 179a, I. " Id.23fl, I. 
 ** Id. 262 b, I. " Id. 100 a, 2 and 102 a, i. " Id. 67 a, 2. 
 " Id. loi a, 2. 
 
THE KING AND THE EARL 43 
 
 William^. The sheriffs of Wilts and Somerset accounted 
 to King William for the third pennies of the boroughs in 
 those counties ^ : this may mean, either that the king received 
 no more than one-third of the profits of these boroughs or, 
 more probably, that these third pennies had ceased to be 
 payable to earls, as the Conqueror had appointed no earls 
 for these counties. 
 
 It is not unlikely that the facts we have just learnt about 
 the renders of the boroughs will account for the difference 
 between the county and quasi-county boroughs : as a general 
 rule, if the render of a composite borough was divided between 
 the king and the earl or the sheriff, this borough was placed 
 at the head of the survey of the county in which it was situate; 
 if the whole of the render was received by the king, it was 
 valued with the Terra Regis; if the whole was received by 
 a subject, it was valued along with the lands of that subject. 
 To the first of these rules Chester, Hereford, Shrewsbury, 
 and probably Malmesbury, were exceptions ; (of course it will 
 be remembered that we are without information as to the 
 third penny of many boroughs) ; the second rule would 
 account for the Wilts and Somerset boroughs being valued 
 with the Terra Regis ; the third rule accounts for Fordwich, 
 Chichester and Totnes being valued with the lands of their 
 respective lords. 
 
 In connexion with the discussion of the third penny, we 
 must learn to distinguish between two similar phrases : * in 
 the borough of Warwick the king has in his demesne 
 113 houses^;' 'now the king has in demesne both his own 
 share [of the city of Worcester] and that of the earl *.' The 
 king was said to have in demesne those houses of which 
 he received the gablum or rent, but he had a borough in 
 demesne only when the earl had no share of the profits; 
 so that he could have houses in demesne in a borough which 
 was not in his demesne. 
 
 • D.B. i. 12 a, 2. 
 
 ' And also of Marlborough and Salisbury, which are not styled boroughs : 
 D. B. i. 64^. ^ D. B. i. 238 a, I. * Id. 172 a, i. 
 
44 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 2. The Sheriff. 
 
 It is obvious that neither the king nor the earl could 
 personally collect the dues arising from the various boroughs ; 
 that duty must have been entrusted to some one, and accord- 
 ingly we find that it was the sheriff who accounted for the 
 renders of Malmesbury ^, Worcester ^ and Droitwich ^, and that 
 the surveys of Canterbury * and Hertford ^ refer to the times 
 when the sheriffs received those towns. The separate renders 
 of the boroughs of Leicester ^ and Warwick '' are not given, 
 but are included with the renders of the counties, and were 
 therefore accounted for by the sheriff. It is expressly stated 
 that the sheriff of Northamptonshire received the sum of 
 ^^30 JOS. from the burgesses of Northampton, 'which belongs 
 to his farm^,' and that the penalty of 100^. for breaking into 
 the city of Wallingford by night was paid to the king and 
 not to the sheriff, and was therefore not a portion of his farm ^. 
 Durand the sheriff increased the render {apposuit) of Winch- 
 combe by \oos}^ ; Baldwin the sheriff received the third penny 
 of Exeter ^^, and Hugh of Grentmesnil that of Leicester ^2. 
 At Hereford ^^ and Shrewsbury ^*, it was the sheriff who 
 headed the citizens when he made a raid into Wales ; and 
 at the latter place he called on them to go hunting with the 
 king and to find horses for his journey, and received the third 
 penny for himself. It was the sheriff who granted Ipswich '"^ 
 and perhaps Colchester ^^ to farm ; of the new borough at 
 Norwich we read that ' as long as Robert Blund held the 
 county (i. e. was sheriff), he received thence a mark of gold ^''.' 
 Edward of Salisbury, the sheriff of Wiltshire, rendered to the 
 king the third penny of Bath ^^, and William Moion, the 
 sheriff of Somerset, accounted for the third penny of the 
 Somerset boroughs ^^. We find the sheriffs disposing of 
 houses in the old portion of Norwich 2*^, and at York ^^, where 
 
 > D. B. \. 64^. 2 i^^ j^y^a, I. " Id. 172^, I. « Id. 2 a, I. 
 
 " Id. 132a, I. ' Id. 230a, I. ' Id, 238(2, I. * Id. 219a, I. 
 
 » Id. s^b, 1. " Id. 162^, I. " Id. 100 a, I. " Id. 230 a, I. 
 " Id. 179 a, I. " Id. 252 a, I. " D. B. ii, 290*5. " Id. ii. 107^. 
 " Id. ii. 1 18 a. " D. B. i. 64 b, 2 and 87 a, 2. " Id. 87 a, 2. 
 
 =^° D. B. ii. 1 17 b. " D. B. i. 298 a, I. 
 
THE SHERIFF 45 
 
 he was responsible for taking a house into the castle; and 
 sheriff Hugh built thirteen houses at Nottingham \ 
 
 Reference will be made to the exactions of Picot the sheriff 
 at Cambridge 2, and to the destruction of houses at Dorchester, 
 Wareham and Shaftesbury in the days of Hugh the sheriff 3. 
 Eustace the sheriff of Huntingdonshire had complaints made 
 against him because he had appropriated ten burgesses from 
 the abbot of Ramsey, and twelve from Borred and Turchil, 
 and also a mansion which King William had granted to the 
 widow and children of Alvric a former sheriff*. Of Lincoln, it 
 is stated, 
 
 166 waste houses were destroyed on account of the castle, and 74 
 others were destroyed not on account of the oppression of the sheriffs 
 and their ministers but on account of poverty and misfortune and fire '. 
 
 Evidently the sheriff was by reputation quite capable of 
 oppressing the burgesses, and was therefore a man to be 
 propitiated : accordingly we find the burgesses of Yarmouth 
 giving him a hawk and paying him £4 de gersuma 'voluntarily 
 and of friendship " ' ; he also received looj. as a present {de 
 gersuma) out of the revenues of Colchester', and iio^. out 
 of the revenues of Canterbury ^. 
 
 All the evidence contained in Domesday Book concerning 
 the relationship between the sheriff and the county and quasi- 
 county boroughs implies that he was accountable to the king 
 and the earl for the renders of those boroughs. 
 
 3. The Praepositus. 
 
 The extract from the Lincoln survey quoted in the last 
 section shows that the sheriff employed officers to do his 
 work for him ; and Domesday Book introduces us to certain 
 subordinate officials known as the praepositi ; but whether 
 these were the subordinates of the sheriff or not remains 
 to be seen. 
 
 In the first place, there were more than one praepositus 
 in certain boroughs : the Guildford record mentions the 
 
 * D. B. i. 280 a, I. 2 Id. 189 a, i. » Id. 75 a, I. 
 
 * Id. 203a, I. Md. 336^5, I. « D. B. ii. 118 a. 
 
 ' Id. ii. 107a. ^ D.B.i.2a^ I. 
 
46 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 praepositus of the Bishop of Bayeux and also the praepositus 
 of the king^; and we read of the praepositi of the king 
 and earl at Chester *. But only one praepositus is mentioned 
 at Dover^, Canterbury*, Lewes °, Wallingford ® and Hereford '; 
 and at Dover, Canterbury and Wallingford he is expressly 
 called the king's praepositus, and the same name is given 
 to one of the praepositi at Chester. 
 
 The praepositus collected the common fines for breaches 
 of the peace at Dover, and there it is distinctly stated that 
 'the praepositus renders £SA' At Canterbury he sued the 
 obstructors of the highways, and received the forfeitures for 
 the use of the king, and he also collected the market-toll. 
 At Lewes also he collected the toll, and at Guildford and 
 Wallingford he collected the forfeitures. At Hereford it was 
 his duty to see that the services due to the king were properly 
 rendered by the burgesses, and he paid King Edward £12, and 
 £6 to Earl Harold : he had on his own account {in suo censu) 
 all the receipts except those from the three forfeitures, pre- 
 sumably so that he might be able to meet these demands. 
 At . Chester he was, as well as the earl's minister, autho- 
 rized to grant the king's peace. Leofchild and Alfred, two 
 portreeves of Bath, witnessed manumissions by ^Isig who 
 was abbot at the time of Domesday Book ^ ; the prae- 
 positus and whole city of Gloucester were witnesses to a 
 deed of 1022 * ; the portreeves of Oxford and Canterbury 
 were witnesses to conveyances in the reign of the Confessor ^°, 
 and in a deed of exchange between the convent and the 
 Chapman gild of Canterbury, the portreeve appears to hold 
 the same position with regard to the gild as Archbishop 
 Anselm (1093-1 109) held with regard to the convent ^^ 
 The fact that at Hereford the praepositus accounted to the 
 king and earl for the renders shows that in that borough 
 he held the same position as the sheriff held in the counties ; 
 yet even at Hereford it was the sheriff who led the citizens 
 in their raids into Wales. The praepositus at Dover held 
 
 * D. B. i. 30a, I. 2 Id. 262^, I. ' Id. la, I. * Id. 2 a, I. 
 
 • Id. 26a, I. « Id. 56a, 2. '' Id. 179a, I. * K. 934 and 1531. 
 
 ^ Id. 1317. " Id. 950 and 789. " Gross, ii. 37. 
 
THE PRAEPOSITUS 47 
 
 a similar position, and it is definitely stated that he paid ;£"24 
 to the king, and £^0 to the earl. It must, however, be noticed 
 that except at Canterbury, Wallingford, Torksey ^ and Here- 
 ford the sheriff and the praepositus are never mentioned in 
 connexion with the same borough. The earliest Gloucester 
 rental also speaks of the sheriff and praepositus as both 
 receiving certain sums out of the city^. 
 
 A comparison of the functions of the sheriff in the county 
 boroughs with the duties of the praepositus at Dover and the 
 other places just mentioned shows that the latter were all 
 menial duties, such as would naturally be performed by the 
 sheriff's subordinates ; and since at Canterbury we find that 
 the sheriff appropriated iioj. out of the renders, and the 
 praepositus collected them, it may be suggested that the 
 latter was the subordinate officer of the sheriff, and was not 
 accountable to the king and earl, except at Hereford and 
 Dover. This suggestion is supported by a consideration 
 of the large number of county boroughs^ in connexion 
 with which the sheriff alone is mentioned or implied, with 
 the small number of those in which the praepositus alone 
 is mentioned*. 
 
 4. Sac and Soc. 
 
 The survey of Canterbury begins with the statement that 
 * King Edward had 51 burgesses rendering gablum, and 
 212 over whom he had sac and soc^' We shall see that 
 gablum means rent; but what is the meaning of *sac and soc'? 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 337 a, I. ' Gloucester Rental (Stevenson), xv. 
 
 ' Dorchester,/?. ^. i. 75 a, 1 ; Bridport, Id. 75 a, i ; Shaftesbury, Id. 75 a, i 
 Exeter, Id. 100 a, i; Hertford, Id. 132 a, l; Cambridge, Id. 189 a, i 
 Huntingdon, Id. 203^, 1 ; Winchcombe, Id. i62<5, 1 ; Worcester, Id. 172a, i 
 Droitwich, Id. 172 a, 2 ; Warwick, Id. 238 a, I ; Leicester, Id. 230 a, i 
 Northampton, Id. 219 a, i ; Shrewsbury, Id. 252 a, i ; York, Id. 298 a, i 
 Lincoln, Id. 336^, i; Colchester, D. B. ii. 107 a; Yarmouth, Id. ii. 118 a 
 Norwich, Id. ii. 117 b. 
 
 * Dover, D. B.\.ia,\\ Lewes, Id. 26a, I ; Chester, Id. 262 b, i; Guild 
 ford. Id. 30a, i; Torksey, Id. 337 a, i. See App. § 2. 
 
 " D. B. i. 2 a, I. 
 
48 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Let us turn to three other boroughs : 
 
 SOUTHWARK. The men of Southwark testify that ... if any one 
 in the act of committing an offence was there accused, he amended 
 to the King. But if he was not there accused and departed into the 
 house of a man who had sac and soc, the latter had the amends of the 
 culprit \ 
 
 Guildford. Ralph has 3 haws where remain 6 men whence he has 
 sac and soc. If his man in the town commits an offence and escapes, 
 after being attached, the King's praepositus has nothing : but if he is 
 accused and attached there, the King has the amends *. 
 
 Wallingford. ^Imer the priest (and others) have gablum from 
 their own houses : if any one shed blood there and was captured before 
 he was accused by the King's praepositus (except on Saturday because 
 that was the market day when the King had the forfeiture), and of larceny 
 and adultery in their own houses, they had the forfeitures ; but the other 
 forfeitures went to the King ^ 
 
 So that it is clear that the man who had sac and soc over 
 a house had the forfeitures of those who dwelt therein or 
 committed offences therein. Hence we can understand the 
 position of the nineteen burgesses of Warwick who had 
 nineteen masures with sac and soc *, and of the seven minters 
 of Hereford who had sac and soc^. It appears from the 
 Leicester ^ and Stafford "^ surveys that the lords of the con- 
 tributed houses in a borough had sac and soc over those 
 houses as well as the rent arising from them ; this is 
 also shown by the description of Wallingford, where we 
 read — 
 
 Bishop Walchelin has 27 haws of 25^. which are valued in Brightwell*. 
 
 Turning to Brightwell, we read — 
 
 Of the pleas of the land in Wallingford there pertain to this manor 
 2SS. 9 : 
 
 showing that the haws in the town produced what may be 
 termed profits of justice. The king had the soc of nine of 
 the thirty-seven houses belonging to the Earl of Mortain at 
 Northampton ^° : why should this statement be made if the 
 earl had not the soc of the other houses ? Possibly these nine 
 
 * Z>. B. i. 32a, I. 2 Id. 30a, I. » Id. 56*5, 1. * Id. 238a, I. 
 
 ' Id. 179a, I. ^ Id. 230a, I. '' Id. 246 a, I. ^ Id. 56 a, 2. 
 
 » Id. 58 a, 2, " Id. 219 a, I. 
 
SAC AND SOC 49 
 
 houses were originally part of the king's demesne, and had 
 been granted to the earl, as it has been suggested were some 
 of the I lo houses of Hugh of Grentmesnil at Leicester ^. 
 
 At Norwich Archbishop Stigand had the sac and soc and 
 commendation of fifty burgesses, and Harold of thirty-eight ^ ; 
 but Stigand had the soc of the half-hundred of Hersham with 
 some exceptions ^ ; so that it may conversely be argued that 
 these fifty burgesses were contributed by Stigand for the 
 defence of the city. The twenty-one burgesses of Romney 
 contributed by Langport had all their forfeitures except 
 larceny {latrocinium), peace-breach [pacem infr octant) and 
 forestel, and so apparently had sac and soc in their houses *. 
 The lawmen at Stamford had * sac and soc within their own 
 houses and over their own men, except geld and heriot, and 
 the forfeitures of their own bodies of forty ores of silver, and 
 larceny [latrocinitim)^' As in latter years it was a maxim 
 that no man could have his own forfeiture these apparent 
 exceptions to their sac and soc can be easily understood. 
 
 The sokemen at Stamford ' who sought lords where they 
 would ' must be compared with the burgesses at Thetford : 
 
 In the borough were 943 burgesses T. R. E. of whom the King had 
 all custom. Of these men, 36 were so dominical of King Edward that they 
 could not be whose men they wished without the King's licence. All the 
 others could be the men of any one they wished, yet all custom remained 
 to the King except heriot '. 
 
 At Ipswich 
 
 Robert had T. R. E. 41 burgesses with sac and soc and commendation, 
 and the King had the other customs. 15 of these are dead. He has lost 
 the commendation but had the sac and soc, and of the others likewise ; 
 but the King has all customs ''. 
 
 At Norwich T. R. E. there was also ' one burgess so 
 
 ^ But a general conclusion that the contributory lords had sac and soc over 
 their houses is contradicted by the Gloucester Rental (1096-I101), where, 
 after a list of magnates possessing burgesses in the city, it is stated 
 ' and over all these, the King has sac and soc' Rental of Gloucester 
 (Stevenson), xv. 
 
 « D. B. ii. Ii6a. ' D. B. and B. 93. * D. B. i. 4 b, i. 
 
 ^ Id. 336^, 2. ' D. B. ii. 119 <J. ' Id. ii. 402 b. 
 
50 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 dominical of the king that he could not recede nor pay- 
 homage without his licence ^.' 
 
 It is evident that the sokemen of Stamford and the majority 
 of the burgesses of Thetford could commend themselves to 
 whatever lord they wished, in the same manner as the forty- 
 one burgesses at Ipswich had commended themselves to 
 Robert ; it is possible that at Canterbury ^ and Dover ^ we 
 see the effects of a case of commendation ; Ralph of 
 Columbels had seized certain houses and lands at Canterbury, 
 ' and for all these he invokes the Bishop of Bayeux as 
 protector ' ; and similarly certain house-owners at Dover in- 
 voked the same bishop as protector. If these be cases of 
 commendation, the result would be that the bishop became 
 the guarantor of Ralph's title. 
 
 From all these considerations it is clear that it was not for 
 every offence that the fines and forfeitures went to the king ; 
 the contributory lords and the owners of sac and soc had 
 immunities, and took the fines and forfeitures for some 
 offences from their tenants ; but it is expressly stated in 
 the Shrewsbury survey that throughout England the three 
 forfeitures — peace-breach, forestel and heinfare — belonged to 
 the king*. 
 
 It must not, however, be supposed that each owner of sac 
 and soc held a separate court for his own tenants : the 
 extracts from the surveys of Guildford, Southwark and 
 Wallingford suggest that the penalties had to be claimed, 
 possibly from the court where justice was administered — in 
 the same way as to-day the clerk to the guardians has to 
 apply to the city justices, for the payment to the overseers 
 of the parish where the offence has been committed, of half 
 the fine under the Betting and Gaming Houses Acts, for the 
 relief of the poor-rates of that parish **. 
 
 One more point remains to be noticed : the burgesses of 
 Dover bargained with King Edward * that they might have 
 sac and soc ' ; and later it is said that the king's praepositus 
 collected certain forfeitures for the king^. So it would 
 
 ^ n.B.'n.ii6a. ^ D.B.\.2a,i. 'Id.ia,i. Md.252a,i. 
 " i6 and 17 Vict. c. 134 ; 17 and 18 Vict. c. 38. ' D. B. i. i a, i. 
 
SAC AND SOC 51 
 
 appear that the burgesses had individually sac and soc in 
 their own houses only, like the burgesses of Romney, and 
 that the whole body of burgesses did not have jurisdiction 
 over the whole borough. 
 
 5. The Lawmen. The Borough Court. 
 
 If it were not that the lawmen of Domesday Book have 
 been regarded as the nucleus of a corporation and of a govern- 
 ing body ^ it would be unnecessary to consider them except 
 in connexion with the preceding section. They are men- 
 tioned in connexion with three boroughs only — Cambridge ^, 
 Stamford ^ and Lincoln ^: the only evidence of their existence 
 at Cambridge is the statement of the heriots paid by their 
 estates ; but the Lincoln and Stamford surveys are much 
 fuller, and must be quoted in full : 
 
 Lincoln. In the same city were 12 Lawmen, that is, having sac and 
 soc. (l) Hardecnut; (2) Suartinc fitz Gribold ; (3) Ulf fitz Swertebrand 
 who had thol and team ; (4) Walraven ; (5) Alwold ; (6) Brictric ; (7) 
 Guret; (8) Ulbert; (9) Godric fitz Edith; (10) Siward the priest; (ll) 
 Lewin the priest ; (12) Aldene the priest. 
 
 Now there are the same number having sac and soc likewise; (l) 
 Suardinc in the place of Hardecnut his father ; (2) Suartinc ; (3) Sortebrand 
 in the place of Ulf his father; (4) Algemund in the place of Walraven his 
 father; (5) Alwold; (6) Godwin son of Brictric; (7) Norman the fat in 
 the place of Guret ; (8) Ulbert the brother of Ulf still lives ; (9) Peter of 
 Valonges in the place of Godric fitz Edith ; (10) Ulnod the priest in the 
 place of Siward the priest ; (11) Buruolt in the place of his father Lewin 
 who is now a monk ; (12) Lewin fitz Revene in the place of Aldene the 
 priest. 
 
 Stamford. In Stamford T. R. E. there were 12 Lawmen who had 
 sac and soc within their own houses and over their own men, except geld 
 and heriot and forfeitures of their own bodies of 40 ores of silver and 
 larceny. Now they have the same but there are only nine ; of these one 
 has 17 houses under him and half a mill of 15J.: the second has 14 houses, 
 one of which is waste ; the third 2 ; the fourth 2 J ; the fifth 5 ; the sixth 4; 
 the seventh 3 ; the eighth i ; the ninth 3 ; Hugh Musard has taken 2 
 away from him. 
 
 It will at once be noticed that at Lincoln the word is 
 defined to mean ' having sac and soc ' ; so that the lawmen 
 
 * Se/. Charters, 86. * D. B. i. 189 a, I. » Id. 336 b, 2. 
 
 * Id. 336 a, I. 
 
$a THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 must be compared with the burgesses having sac and soc in 
 other boroughs ; for instance, with the burgesses of Walling- 
 ford ^ and Warwick ^, and with the minters of Hereford ^ who 
 had sac and soc. We are told nothing of the area over which 
 the lawmen of Lincoln exercised their privilege, but at 
 Stamford the number of houses in the soc of each lawman 
 is given, and a simple addition sum shows that the nine 
 lawmen had sac and soc over fifty-one and a half houses : 
 but there were then 333 i houses in the five wards of the 
 borough that were in Lincolnshire, so that the lawmen had 
 sac and soc over less than one-sixth of the borough. With 
 regard to the Lincoln record it is noteworthy that Peter of 
 Valonges, who succeeded to the position of lawman in the 
 city formerly held by Godric, also succeeded to his rural 
 property at Burton * — so that his sac and soc in the city 
 may have been exercised over the houses which were appurte- 
 nant to Burton, in the same way as Robert of Stafford had 
 sac and soc over his houses in Stafford which were appurtenant 
 to Bradley ^ : but no connexion can be traced between the 
 other lawmanships and any rural property in the shire. 
 
 The lawmen of Lincoln disappear after Domesday Book ; 
 the burgesses took the city at a fee farm rent from Henry I *, 
 and no mention of the lawmen can be found then or in any 
 royal charter of later date; but in the Hundred Rolls of 1275 
 is found a very important reference to the lawmen of Stam- 
 ford. The jurors then swore 
 
 That there are 12 men in Stamford who are called Lawmen, because 
 their ancestors were in ancient time judges of the laws {iudices legum) in 
 the same vill, who hold of our Lord the King in capite, but they know 
 not by what service, but they so held from the time of the conquest, 
 but it may be inquired by Domesday ''. 
 
 This document would lead us to suppose that the lawmen of 
 Stamford were legal assessors at the court where the law was 
 administered, who, as a reward for their services, had sac and 
 soc over their own houses. 
 
 * D. B. i. 56 a, 2. ' Id. 238 a, I . ' Id. 179 a, i. * Id. 368 b, 2. 
 
 * Id. 246 a, I. • Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. 411. ' Hundred Rolls, i. 354. 
 
THE LAWMEN. THE BOROUGH COURT 5s 
 
 Possibly the lawmen of Lincoln and Stamford should be 
 compared with the judges of York and Chester. 
 
 York. In these houses no one else had any custom unless as a burgess, 
 except Merleswegen in one house which is below the Castle, the canons 
 wherever they dwelt, and the four judges to whom the King gave this gift 
 for their lives \ 
 
 Chester. Then (T. R. E.) there were 12 judges of the City and 
 these were of the men of the King and Bishop and Earl ; if any one 
 of them was absent from the hundred on the day it sat without manifest 
 excuse he amended in 10s. between the King and the Earl ^. 
 
 But the latter extract must be compared with the survey of 
 Dunwich, where the custom was that two or three men go to 
 the hundred if they are summoned, and if they do not they 
 forfeit two ores \ Again, at Hereford, * He who had a horse 
 went with the sheriff thrice in the year to pleas and to the 
 hundred at Urmer-lavia *.' It is perfectly clear that the 
 hundred courts which were attended by the burgesses at 
 Hereford and Dunwich were not held within those boroughs, 
 and the Chester survey will bear the interpretation that the 
 judges had to attend a hundred court without the city. 
 And it is not impossible that the Stamford court which the 
 lawmen attended was a court held for the hundred, even 
 though it was held in the town. 
 
 It is well known from the Anglo-Saxon laws that in most 
 boroughs there was a borough court, but of its nature little 
 is known ; in that little, however, there is nothing to lead 
 us to suppose that its existence excluded the jurisdiction of 
 the hundred court, otherwise we should not find so many 
 charters of later date granting that the burgesses should not 
 be impleaded without the borough: one of the earliest 
 examples of such a charter is that of Henry II to Oxford, 
 which was attested by Thomas [Becket] the chancellor, and 
 therefore cannot be later than ii6a°. 
 
 It must be remembered in this connexion that the court of 
 the Bishop of Winchester at Taunton was a court for all his 
 men, and not for the borough exclusively ®. 
 
 » D. B. i. 298 a, I. * Id. 262 b, i. » D. B. ii. 312 b. 
 
 * D. B, i. 179 a, I. " Sel. Charters, 167. * D. B. i. Z^ b, i. 
 
54 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Closely connected with the question of the borough court 
 are the wards of the borough ; and Domesday Book shows 
 only four boroughs divided into wards : Cambridge was 
 assessed as one hundred, and was divided into ten wards 
 {custodiae) ^ — and thus the theory has arisen that the typical 
 borough of the eleventh century was a hundred of itself, and 
 like the rural hundreds was divided into ten tithings ; but the 
 other evidence does not favour this theory. Shrewsbury and 
 Oxford^ were the only other boroughs assessed for a hundred 
 each, but Domesday Book says nothing of any wards in them. 
 Huntingdon was assessed at fifty hides and divided into four 
 ferlings^; Stamford was assessed at 150 hides, and divided 
 into six wards, five in Lincolnshire and the sixth in North- 
 amptonshire*; and York was divided into seven shires, one of 
 which was the archbishop's °. But of the internal organization 
 of these wards we have no information, save that, at York, the 
 archbishop had the full custom from his shire, and the third 
 penny of one of the king's shires. Similarly, the Abbot of 
 Peterborough had the gablum and toll of the sixth ward of 
 Stamford, which lay in Northamptonshire; but the other 
 customs went to the king. 
 
 6. The Burgesses. 
 
 To say that all the inhabitants of a borough at the time of 
 Domesday Book were burgesses would be no more accurate 
 than a similar statement to-day ; but in nine only of the 
 county and quasi-county boroughs do we read of inhabitants 
 who were not described as burgesses. The Norwich evidence 
 would appear to indicate that the difference between burgesses 
 and non-burgesses lay in the fact that the former paid geld 
 and the latter did not do so : in that city there were at the 
 time of Domesday Book ' 665 English burgesses who pay 
 custom and 480 bordars who on account of poverty pay no 
 custom ^' From the Ipswich record it appears that, however 
 small the contribution might be, those who paid were never- 
 
 » D. B. i. 189 a, I. ^ See p. 65. » D. B. i. 203 a, i. 
 
 * Id. 336 by 2. » Id. 298 a, I. • D. B. ii. 1 16 b. 
 
THE BURGESSES s^ 
 
 theless burgesses; here there were* no burgesses paying 
 custom and loo poor burgesses who cannot pay to the King's 
 geld except one penny for their own polls ^.' But on the 
 other hand, at Thetford, Roger Bigot had twenty bordars of 
 whom the king had nothing but scot for their own polls ^ ; 
 however, these bordars are distinguished from Roger's men in 
 the borough, and probably resided in the rural part of the 
 hundred of Thetford ; and therefore this entry cannot be con- 
 sidered as evidence against the distinction we drew from the 
 Norwich record. Again, there were loo bordars at Hunting- 
 don who were under the burgesses, and aided them in the 
 payment of their geld ^ ; but these were tenants of the bur- 
 gesses, and it would seem as if their payments were made not 
 to the collectors of the geld, but to the individual burgesses, 
 and were by them applied in the payment of their own 
 shares. 
 
 Further evidence that inability to pay geld resulted in the 
 loss of burgher rights is found at Norwich and Hereford : 
 
 Of the burgesses who dwelt in the borough of Norwich, 22 have gone away 
 and dwell in Beccles, a vill of the Abbot of St. Edmund, 6 are in Hamilgar 
 hundred and resigned their burgher rights {dimtserunt burgum\ one 
 in Thorp Regis, one with Roger Bigot, one under William of Noies, 
 one under Richard of Sent, a clerk. Those flying and others remaining 
 were entirely destroyed, partly on account of the forfeitures to the King 
 and Earl, partly on account of fire, partly on account of the King's geld 
 and partly through Waleran *. 
 
 At Hereford 
 
 If any one through poverty could not perform his due service, he 
 abandoned his house without payment to the praepositus, who took care 
 that the house did not remain vacant and that the King did not lose his 
 service '. 
 
 Probably the Lewes penalty on the recaptured fugitive 
 refers to the burgess who had fled the borough with a view of 
 escaping his geld ^. The Dover evidence shows that the 
 privilege of freedom from toll throughout the realm was con- 
 ferred only on those who were qualified by residence in that 
 
 ^ D. B. ii. 290^. » Id. ii. 173 a. ' D. B. i. 203 a, I. 
 
 * D, B. ii. 117. "* D. B. i. 179 a, I. • Id. 26 «, i. 
 
5^ THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 borough and by the payment of custom ^ ; and it was the 
 residents at Wallingford who were liable for carrying services ^. 
 The mention of the nine cottagers at Malmesbury who lived 
 outside the borough and gelded with the burgesses ^ may 
 indicate that non-residence resulted in the loss of burgher 
 rights ; but on the other hand there were nine non-resident 
 burgesses at Barnstaple *, forty-one at Lidford ^ and fifteen 
 at Totnes^, the last named being expressly stated to be 
 cultivating the land. Bordars are also mentioned at Buck- 
 ingham', Hastings^, Maldon^, Nottingham^", Southwark" 
 and Wareham^'^, and villains at Buckingham''', Droitwich^' 
 and Nottingham ^", but at Buckingham, Maldon and Notting- 
 ham all these non-burgesses are distinctly connected with the 
 agricultural land comprised in the borough assessment. 
 
 It might be suggested that the occupation of a house in 
 a borough at a fixed money rent, i. e. a burgage tenement, 
 conferred burgher rights ; certainly, with a very few excep- 
 tions, all the houses in a borough were let at fixed money 
 rents, but the rent of the bordar's house at Southwark was 
 I2d.^^ — higher than the rent of many of the masures and haws 
 in that borough. And there is plenty of evidence that in 
 many places two or more burgesses occupied the same house : 
 at Guildford ' King William has seventy-five haws in which 
 are 175 men^*'; at Chichester 'T.R.E. there were ninety- 
 seven and a half haws ; now . . . there are in the same masures 
 sixty more houses {domus) than before ^^ ' ; at Huntingdon 140 
 burgesses had eighty haws ^^ ; at Shaftesbury the abbess had 
 151 burgesses in 11 1 houses ^'^; and at Hereford there were 
 burgesses who had less than a whole masure ^^. On the other 
 hand, at Colchester, 276 burgesses had -3,^^ houses ^^ — so that 
 there were some houses that did not confer burgher rights. 
 And on the whole evidence it would appear better to define 
 the burgesses as residents in a borough who paid their shares 
 
 ^D.B.lia,!. Md. 56a, 2. Md. 64^, I. *Id. looa, 2. 
 
 ' Id. looa, 2. * Id. 108^, I. '' Id. 143a, i. " Id. 17a, i. 
 
 » D. B. ii. 75a. 1° Z>. B. i. 280^, i. " Id. 32a, 2. " Id. Zob, 2. 
 
 " Id. 176 a, 2. " Id. 30a, I. 15 Id. 23 a, I. i« Id. 203 a, I. 
 
 " Id. 75 a, I. " Id. 179a, I. i** D. B. ii. 106, &c 
 
THE BURGESSES 57 
 
 of the geld and other taxes and performed their shares of the 
 services rendered by the townsmen. For evidence on this last 
 point consult the Maldon record, where Guner held of Suen 
 half a hide, ' which aided with the other burgesses in finding 
 a horse on expeditions and providing a ship ^ '. And the 
 eighty-four carucates at York that assisted in paying the city 
 geld were associated with the citizens in the three works, i.e. 
 fyrd, brig-bot and burh-bot ^. 
 
 We are accustomed to think of a burgess as being of 
 necessity a free man, but we read of one at Ipswich who is 
 expressly stated to be a slave (servus) ^. It would seem from 
 indications at Colchester^, Oxford^ and Norwich^ that women 
 could be burgesses. 
 
 Naturally Domesday Book tells much of the burdens of the 
 burgesses, but it says very little of their privileges, except 
 that the residents of Dover were quit of toll throughout 
 England ^. Except in a few cases their money rent appears 
 to have exempted them from agricultural work on the demesne 
 farm of the manor to which they pertained. At Droitwich 
 the thirteen burgesses contributed by Wicelbold worked for 
 two days in August and March, and served the court * ; at 
 Tamworth the burgesses contributed by Drayton worked ' as 
 the other villains of the manor ^ ' ; at Shrewsbury the church 
 of St. Juliana had three burgesses working on the land ^°; and 
 at Gloucester the burgesses pertaining to Tewkesbury served 
 the court T. R. E.^^ Possibly the phrase ' served the court' 
 {servientes curiam) is equivalent to the expression ' worked at 
 the court ' {operabantur ad curiam) used of the burgesses of 
 Steyning ^^ — and if so it would imply that they performed 
 agricultural services on the demesne farm. We shall refer 
 to the house-rents in kind which were rendered by some 
 of the burgesses ; to that list we may add the house at 
 Worcester which rendered two ploughshares to the manor 
 of Halesowen ^3, and the four burgesses of Hereford who 
 
 ^ D. B. ii. 48 a. ^ D. B. i. 298 a, 2. ' D. B. ii. 392 b. 
 
 * V. H. Essex, 417. " D. B. i. 154«, i- ' D. B. ii. i i6a. 
 
 '' D. B. i. I a, I. ' Id. 176 b, 2. ' Id. 246 b, 2. 
 
 " Id. 253fl, I. " Id. 163 a, 2. " Id. 17 a, 2. " Id. 180^, i. 
 
58 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 rendered eighteen ploughshares to the manor of Merchelai ^ ; 
 while the hunting services of the citizens of Hereford and 
 Shrewsbury^ must be compared with the similar services 
 rendered by the villains on the rural estates of the Bishop of 
 Durham ^. 
 
 The burgesses of Hereford and Torksey were at liberty 
 to sell their houses ; the licence of the praepositus was 
 necessary for the sale at Hereford *, but no such licence was 
 required at Torksey, where ' if any of the burgesses wished 
 to depart elsewhere, and to sell his house, he could do so 
 without the licence and knowledge of the praepositus if he 
 wished^.' But at Lincoln the relatives of the vendor had a right 
 of pre-emption. ' But all the burgesses of Lincoln say . . . that 
 no one was at liberty to give his property to any person with- 
 out the city, and not of his family, without the King's grant V 
 
 Although Domesday Book tells us little about the privileges 
 of the burgesses, we find that some were more privileged than 
 others, and that they can be distinguished into four classes. 
 
 I. The most privileged burgesses appear to have been those 
 who had sac and soc over their own houses and all customs, of 
 whom there were nineteen at Warwick "'; similarly at Walling- 
 ford there were thirteen who had gablum and three forfeitures 
 from their own houses * ; and at Romney there were a number 
 who had all customs and forfeitures (except the three for- 
 feitures) for their sea-service^. Along with these we must 
 class the lawmen of Stamford ^° who had sac and soc in their 
 own houses and over their own men, but from whom the king 
 had (i) geld, (2) heriot, (3) forfeitures of their own bodies, and 
 (4) robbery. Possibly the thirty-four owners of non-' mural 
 mansions ' at Oxford ^^ may also have belonged to this class, 
 but of their sac and soc there is no record. 
 
 a. Then there were those * who could seek lords where they 
 would,' of whom there were at Stamford seventy-seven, called 
 sokemen ^^ : but even though they commended themselves to 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 179 b, 2. * Id. 179 a, i ; 252 a, i. ' Eng. Vill. Comtn. 71. 
 
 * D. B, i. 179 a, I. * Id. iS7 1^> !• * Id. 336a, 2. 
 
 'Id. 238 a, I. Md. 56^, I. Md. 4^, I. 
 
 " Id. 336 b, 2. " Id. 154 a. " Id. 336 b, 2. 
 
THE BURGESSES 59 
 
 other lords, their forfeitures and heriot remained to the king ; 
 those burgesses of Thetford \ who could seek lords where they 
 would, transferred only their heriot by commendation. That 
 commendation did not necessarily withdraw all customs from 
 the king is also shown at Ipswich, where Robert Malet had 
 one burgess with commendation, but the king had his 
 customs ^. Some less privileged members of this class were 
 those burgesses of Thetford ^ and Norwich *, who, although 
 they could seek lords where they would, were yet so 
 dominical of the king that they could not recede nor render 
 homage without his licence. 
 
 3. The third class is scarcely distinguishable from the 
 fourth, but a distinction appears to be drawn at Canterbury 
 between those burgesses who paid gablum to the king and 
 those over whom he had sac and soc ; and another entry in 
 the same survey also shows that the gablum might be paid to 
 one person and the sac and soc vested in another; for the bur- 
 gesses had gablum and custom from forty-five masures without 
 the city, while the king had sac and soc over these masures ^ 
 
 4. Finally, the least privileged burgesses were those who 
 rendered all customs either to the king or the lords ; these 
 are mentioned in almost every borough, but, as reference has 
 been made to the lawmen and sokemen of Stamford, it may 
 be pointed out that there were there ^ 141 burgesses who 
 rendered all customs to the king ; but, as will be seen later, 
 it was the general rule that geld was due to the king from all 
 the burgesses or from all the houses in a borough, whether 
 they belonged to the king or the lords, although frequently 
 this payment was evaded. 
 
 Possibly the first two of these classes may represent the 
 original free settlers on the site of the borough, who had 
 retained some signs of their freedom. 
 
 There are only two references in Domesday Book to the 
 gilds, which play such a prominent part in later municipal 
 history : the gildhall of the burgesses of Dover is casually 
 mentioned as one of the houses of which William fitz Geoffrey 
 
 1 D. B. ii. 118 3. ' Id. ii. 304 b. ' Id. ii. 118 b. 
 
 * Id. ii. n6 a. ' D. B. i. 2 a, I. • Id. 336 b, 2. 
 
6o THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 detained the custom from the king ^ ; but the burgesses of 
 Canterbury had ' of the king (the survey in St. Augustine's 
 cartulary says " of the gift of the king ") thirty-three acres of 
 land in their gild ^ ' : with this latter entry we should compare 
 an entry on another page, ' In the City of Canterbury, the 
 Archbishop has twelve burgesses, and thirty-two masures 
 which the clergy of the vill hold in their gild ^.' But of the 
 nature of these gilds Domesday Book affords us no informa- 
 tion ; we know, however, that within twenty years of Domes- 
 day Book there was a chapman's gild — a merchant gild — at 
 Canterbury *, and the survey in the cartulary of St. Augus- 
 tine mentions a payment from the drapers and shoemakers of 
 Canterbury °, which may perhaps be a payment from a gild. 
 
 But what were the occupations of the burgesses ? If 
 Domesday Book affords us little positive information on this 
 point, it certainly gives us not a little negative evidence. The 
 distinction at Nottingham between ' merchants' houses ' and 
 ' knights' houses ' has already been quoted to show that 
 certain of the burgesses at Nottingham were military men * ; 
 it may also be quoted to show that others were engaged in 
 trade ; similarly, we find in the simple borough of Totbury 
 ' forty-two men living from their own merchandise only '',' and 
 there were ' ten merchants dwelling before the Church ' at 
 Abingdon^ ; but the latter place was not called a borough in 
 Domesday Book. 
 
 The absence of reference to traders in other boroughs than 
 those mentioned must not, however, lead us to suppose that 
 the majority of the burgesses were agriculturists, even on a 
 small scale : at Colchester, where appears to have been the 
 largest area of land in the occupation of the burgesses, 276 
 burgesses occupied 1,296 acres between them^ — and so the 
 average holding was only about five acres. At Buckingham 
 the twenty-six burgesses on the king's demesne held eight 
 carucates ^°, but the twenty-six burgesses belonging to the 
 
 * D. B. i. I a, I. "^ Id. 2 a, I. ' Id. 3 a, I. 
 
 * Gross, Gild Merchant, ii. 37. " Larking, Domesday of Kent^ p. 34 *. 
 « p. 34. ■^ D. B. i. 248 b, I. 8 Id. 58 b, I. 
 
 » D. B. ii. 104-6 ; V. H., Essex, p. 417. " D. B. i. 143 a, I. 
 
THE BURGESSES 6i 
 
 lords had no land ; at Derby forty-one burgesses held 
 twelve carucates \ at Nottingham thirty-eight burgesses held 
 six carucates ^, and at Thetford twenty-one burgesses held six 
 carucates and sixty acres ^; but the other burgesses in each 
 of these boroughs are not recorded as holding any land. At 
 Maldon fifteen burgesses held half a hide and twenty-one 
 acres between them, but the other 165 burgesses are distinctly 
 stated to have occupied no more than their own houses *. At 
 Ipswich 538 burgesses had forty acres of land °, and at Nor- 
 wich 1,338 burgesses had eighty acres of land and twenty 
 and a half acres of meadow, of which thirty-two were occupied 
 by the sister of Stigand ". At Fordwich six burgesses held 
 twenty-four acres ', and at Southampton two burgesses held 
 sixteen and eighteen acres respectively*. In some other 
 boroughs there were lands occupied by the burgesses, but the 
 number of occupiers is not stated ; the lands of the burgesses 
 of Canterbury and Exeter will be referred to in connexion 
 with the borough property ; at Huntingdon there were two 
 hides and forty acres of land, and twenty acres of meadow ^ 
 ' which the burgesses cultivate and hire from the ministers of 
 the king and earl,' but there were 2^6 burgesses at Huntingdon ; 
 at Stamford 'the lawmen and burgesses have 372 acres quit of 
 custom ^°,' but there were nine lawmen and about 300 burgesses. 
 These figures show that it was only a minority of burgesses 
 in a minority of boroughs — Buckingham, Derby, Nottingham 
 and Thetford — who can reasonably be considered to have 
 been cultivators of a virgate or more ; as far as can be ascer- 
 tained the vast majority of the burgesses were landless men, 
 and therefore they must have had to earn their living by trade 
 or handicraft. The prominent artisan is the smith, for we 
 have already seen a number of cases where the rent of a house 
 was satisfied by the gift of ploughshares ; one of the two 
 persons contributed by Quennington to Gloucester is stated 
 to be a smith ^^ But we have other indications of manu- 
 factures: the large proportion of the render of Gloucester, 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 280 a, 2. » Id. 280 a,\. ^ D. B. ii. 1 19 a. * Id. ii. 5 b. 
 
 ' Id. ii. 290. * Id. ii. 116 a. "^ D. B. i. 12 a, 2. * Id. 52 a, i. 
 
 » Id. 203 a, 2. " Id. 336 b, 2. " Id. 167 b, 2. 
 
6» THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 which consisted of iron, may indicate iron factories in that city ^ ; 
 and mention is made of the salt-works and lead furnaces at 
 Droitwich'^; and similarly the renders of herrings at Dunwich* 
 and Sandwich * may show the existence of fishing industries 
 in those boroughs ; the inhabitants of Yarmouth contributed 
 by Gorleston ^ are expressly styled ' fishermen.' The St. 
 Augustine's survey of Canterbury ® mentions the shoemakers, 
 drapers and swineherds of that city, but apart from these 
 hints and deductions we have no information of the occupation 
 of the burgesses. 
 
 It has been suggested that the presence in the boroughs of 
 contributed artisans — the smith at Gloucester and the fisher- 
 men at Yarmouth — is evidence against the * garrison' theory, 
 and that they must be regarded rather as villagers who, on 
 payment of a head-tax to the lord of their original village, 
 were allowed to live in the boroughs, in the same way as, 
 Mackenzie Wallace tells us, Russian villagers are to-day 
 allowed to migrate into the towns, but still belong and pay 
 their dues to their native villages. But when it is remembered 
 that it is not suggested that these contributed burgesses were 
 professional soldiers as are the garrisons of to-day, but that 
 they were merely liable to repair the walls * when need be,' it 
 is obvious that they would have plenty of spare time in which 
 to follow their trades. 
 
 Another point that must be answered by those who con- 
 tend that the contributed burgesses were merely traders or 
 artisans who had emigrated from their native villages, is the 
 question why, except in the border towns Oxford, Walling- 
 ford and Tamworth, they always remained within the 
 boundaries of their native counties. Domesday Book shows 
 that only Kentish villages contributed to Canterbury and 
 Rochester, only Hampshire villages to Winchester, and only 
 Gloucester villages to Gloucester, Winchcombe and Bristol. 
 Will any one assert that only men from Middlesex, Surrey 
 and Essex inhabited London '' ? 
 
 ^ B. B. i. 162 a, I. » Id. 172 a, 2. » D. B. ii. 311 b. 
 
 * D. B. i. 3 a, I. » D. B. ii. 283 a. 
 
 ' Larking, Domesday of Kent ^ p. 34*. ' Ante, p. 18. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE FINANCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE 
 COMPOSITE BOROUGHS 
 
 I. The Customs. 
 
 In studying the valuations of the boroughs in Domesday- 
 Book we cannot help noticing the frequency with which the 
 word ' custonms ' is used : we read of houses rendering all 
 customs at Cambridge ^, Huntingdon 2, Hertford ^ and many 
 other places, and of houses withholding their customs at 
 Hertford and other places. The word was apparently used 
 as a generic term for all the dues arising from the houses or 
 the occupiers thereof: at Stamford* and Hertford^ certain 
 houses rendered all customs except king's geld ; at Lincoln ^ 
 other houses rendered all customs except ' monedagium ' ; 
 and at Wallingford ^, after the statement that T. R. E. the 
 burgesses rendered ;^ii de gablo and certain carrying ser- 
 vices, the record goes on to say — 'Now all customs as 
 before,' showing that the gablum was regarded as forming 
 part of the customs. Again, at Gloucester '^ certain houses 
 are stated to render gablum but to withhold their other 
 customs. On the other hand, at Cambridge^ the respective 
 amounts of the customs and the landgable are stated 
 separately ; but this separation is no evidence against our 
 previous contention. At Colchester ^ and other boroughs in 
 East Anglia are statements that certain burgesses do not 
 render custom except poll tax {de suis capitibus) ; but this 
 poll tax is found only in East Anglia, and at Ipswich ' it is 
 treated as a payment of the poorer burgesses towards the 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 189 a, I. » Id. 203 a, I. » Id. 132 a, I. 
 
 * Id. 336 <J, 2. » Id. 336^, I. • Id. 56 a, 2. 
 
 ■^ Id. 162 a, I. * D. B. ii. 106 b. » Id. ii. 290 a. 
 
64 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 king's geld — another proof of the contention that the geld was 
 included in the customs. At Shrewsbury^ the list of for- 
 feitures in the borough is preceded by the statement ' There 
 King Edward had the following customs ' ; while in the 
 simple boroughs frequent mention is made of the customs 
 of markets ; at Worcester ^ the payment that King Edward 
 had from the minters is stated to be a custom that he had in 
 the city ; and at Cambridge ^ an exaction by the sheriff is 
 said to be a ' custom imposed on the burgesses.* So that, in 
 different places, geld, gablum, market tolls, receipts from the 
 mints and forfeitures were all included under the generic term 
 'customs.* The only instances where the word appears to 
 be used in a sense approximating its modern sense of an 
 excise duty are at Hereford *, where ' whosesoever wife 
 brewed within and without the city gave lod. for a custom ' ; 
 and at Canterbury^, where a certain praepositus, Brumann 
 by name, acknowledged that he had illegally taken custom 
 from foreign merchants on the land of St. Augustine — but in 
 this case 'custom' is apparently the equivalent of 'toll,' as 
 would appear from the survey in St. Augustine's cartulary. 
 
 a. The Geld. 
 
 As Domesday Book is primarily a geld-book we shall 
 expect to find much information about the payment of geld 
 by the boroughs ; but, to our surprise, there is only one 
 mention of the geld as Danegeld in connexion with them, 
 and that is at Stamford, where we read 
 
 The King's borough of Stamford paid geld for 12J hundreds in army 
 and naval service and in Danegeld '. 
 
 But, as the Lincolnshire hundreds contained only twelve caru- 
 cates each, the actual assessment of Stamford was a hundred 
 and a half 
 
 Many of the other boroughs, too, appear to have been 
 assessed by hides in the same manner as rural properties ; 
 the following assessments are recorded : 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 252 a, I. ' Id. 172 a, I. » Id. 189 a, I. 
 
 ♦ Id. 179 a, I. Md. 2 a, I. 'Id. 336^5, 2. 
 
THE GELD 
 
 65 
 
 Bath 20 hides *. 
 
 Bedford .... Half a hundred '. 
 
 Bridport .... 5 hides'. 
 
 Buckingham ... I hide*. 
 
 Cambridge ... I hundred '. 
 
 Chester .... 50 hides '. 
 
 Dorchester ... 10 hides ^ 
 
 Exeter .... 5 hides '. 
 
 Fordwich . . . . j jugum '. 
 
 Hertford .... 10 hides ". 
 
 Huntingdon ... 50 hides". 
 
 Shaftesbury ... 20 hides ". 
 
 Shrewsbury . . . 100 hides ". 
 
 Wareham .... 10 hides '*. 
 
 Worcester. , , . 15 hides''. 
 
 We shall later see reason for believing that Leicester was 
 assessed at sixty hides, Malmesbury at five, Oxford at 100 
 and Warwick at fifty ^•, Mr. Round has pointed out that, 
 in Norfolk and Suffolk, Domesday Book, instead of stating 
 the number of hides at which a property was assessed, states the 
 amount it contributed to a geld of 20s. on the hundred ^^ ; Sud- 
 bury lay in the hundred of Thingoe, and paid ^s. geld '^ and 
 was therefore assessed at twenty-five hides ; Yarmouth paid 
 12^, ' de geldo,' and was therefore assessed at five hides ^^. 
 
 The fifty hides of Huntingdon, gelded as a fourth part of 
 the hundred of Hyrstehingham till a mint was established in 
 the borough by King William 2°, and Worcester's fifteen hides 
 were reckoned in the hundred of Fishborough ''^ From the 
 Northamptonshire Geld Roll we learn that the borough of 
 Northampton was assessed at twenty-five hides in the hundred 
 of Spelho ^2. Sandwich ' lies in its own hundred ^^,' and Winch- 
 combe with ' the whole hundred of the same vill ' rendered 
 ;^20^*, and there were hundreds of Canterbury, Fordwich, 
 Rochester, Pevensey, Colchester, Norwich and Thetford, 
 
 ^ D.B.i.S7a,2. «Id, 209 a, i. ' Id. 75 «, I. 
 »Id. 189a, I. Md. 262^, I. Md. 75a, I. 
 
 ' Id. 12 a, 2. " Id. 132 a, I. " Id. 2030, 2. 
 
 " Id. 252 a, I. " Id. 7Sa, I. " Id. 172 a, i. 
 
 " Feudal England, p. 98. " D. B, ii. 286^. 
 
 *» D. B. i. 203 a, 2. 21 jd 17^ i,^ i^ 
 "^ D. B. i. 3 a, I. 
 
 BALLARD J* 
 
 * Id. I43«»I« 
 ' Id. 100 a, I. 
 " Id. 75 a, I. 
 " See post, p. 80. 
 " Id. ii. 1 18 a. 
 ^^ Feudal England, p. 156. 
 " Id. 162 b, I. 
 
66 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 and half-hundreds of Ipswich and Maldon ; the hundreds of 
 Canterbury and Pevensey, however, were not coterminous 
 with the boroughs but included rural properties, and a dis- 
 tinction is drawn between the inhabitants of the hundred 
 of Thetford and of the half-hundred of Maldon and the 
 inhabitants of the boroughs. The description of the borough 
 of Pevensey is separated from that of the hundred of Pevensey 
 by six columns, which may indicate that there was no con- 
 nexion between the hundred and the borough. 
 
 But if there is only one specific mention of ' Danegeld ' in 
 connexion with the boroughs, yet there are several notices of 
 a geld that was paid by them : at Chester^ T. R. E. the geld paid 
 by 431 houses belonging to the king and fifty-six belonging to 
 the bishop amounted to ten and a half marks of silver ; at the 
 same period Dorchester^ and Wareham ^ paid one mark each, 
 Bridport'^ half a mark, and Shaftesbury ^ two marks; but these 
 payments are expressly stated to have been for the use of the 
 housecarls. On comparison with the table of assessments given 
 above it will be seen that the Dorset boroughs paid at the rate 
 of ten marks for 100 hides. Like Bridport, Exeter ^ served on 
 expeditions for five hides, and paid T. R. E. half a mark of 
 silver for geld for the use of the soldiers {ad opus militum) ; 
 but Exeter gelded only when London, York and Winchester 
 gelded, and Totnes gelded only at the same times as Exeter 
 and paid y. 4^., i.e. a quarter of a mark *. With these pay- 
 ments for the support of the housecarls and buscarls must be 
 compared a payment made at Colchester^, where, on the 
 fifteenth day after Easter, the burgesses paid the king two 
 marks of silver, and also 6d. a house from every house that 
 could pay, for the victual of the soldiers [soldariorum) or for 
 expedition by sea or land ; and this payment was due if the king 
 had soldiers [soldarios) in pay or was making an expedition, 
 and amounted T. R.E. to £11 ^s. ^d. a year. But none of 
 these payments are ever expressly called Danegeld ^. 
 
 ^ D.£.u262d,i. Md. 75 a, I. Md. looa, i. 
 
 * Id. 108 d, I. » Z>. B. ii. 107 a. 
 
 • I fail to see the necessity for Mr. Round's suggested emendation of 
 the text in this passage {Antiquary, vi 254) : instead of reading ' Propter 
 
THE GELD 67 
 
 Theoretically geld was due from all the burgesses in a 
 borough, whether they inhabited houses belonging to the 
 king or to the contributory lords : at Stafford ^ it is distinctly 
 stated that while the contributory lords had the sac and soc 
 of their houses the king had the annual geld of all, and 
 a similar statement is made at Warwick^; at Guildford no 
 one escaped the common geld, although the sac and soc might 
 be vested in a private individual^, and at Huntingdon the 
 Abbot of Ely and Gilbert of Ghent had certain houses with 
 sac and soc except the king's geld *. 
 
 Vacant or waste houses paid no geld ; at Oxford 
 
 Both within and without the wall are 243 houses rendering geld, and 
 besides these there are there 478 houses so waste and destroyed that they 
 cannot pay geld '. 
 
 At Malmesbury 
 
 The King has 26 inhabited masures and 25 masures in which are 
 houses that do not pay geld more than waste land '. 
 
 Hence we can understand the reason for the frequent mention 
 of waste houses at Cambridge, Northampton, Norwich, Stafford 
 and other places, and in the Dorset boroughs. One cause of 
 the destruction of houses was the erection of castles in the 
 towns : the houses destroyed for the castle at Cambridge 
 numbered twenty-seven '^, at Huntingdon twenty ^, at Lincoln 
 
 hoc td. tota civitas . . . reddebat T. R. E. ;^I5 5^. 3^. in unoquoque anno, 
 de quibus monetarii £6, T. R. E.,' he proposes to read ^ Praeter hoc (}d. 
 &c.,' thus making the ;i^i5 5^. 3^. an addition to the payment of 6</. a house. 
 But ^9 \Zs. yd. (that is, allowing for the £0^ paid by the minters and the 
 two marks) represents 397 houses at 6d. a house, and the number of 
 houses in Colchester, according to Domesday Book, was 435. I remember 
 no passage in Domesday Book in which the total amount of individual 
 payments is not recorded : for instance, at Malmesbury and Southampton 
 the total of the individual payments for gablum is recorded, and in each 
 of these cases the Domesday arithmetic is wrong ; and the increase from 
 ;^I5 5 J. 3^., which would appear to be the render of the borough in 1066, 
 to ;^8o, the render in 1086, is not much out of proportion to the increases 
 in other boroughs— e. g. Rochester ^^5 to ;^40, Lincoln £^0 to ;(^ioo, 
 Norwich ;^30 to ;^90, Oxford ;^30 to ;^6o. 
 
 1 Z>. ^. i. 246a, I. Md. 238a, I. Md. 300,1. 
 
 * Id. 203 a, I. " Id, ISA a, I. ' Id. 64^. 
 
 ^ Id. 189a, I. * Id. 203a, 2. 
 
 F 2 
 
68 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 1 66 ^, at Norwich 98 ^, at Stamford five ', and at Wallingford 
 eight *. A whole ward at York was destroyed for the castles *, 
 and Mr. Freeman suggests that the forty-eight houses destroyed 
 at Exeter after King William came into England were destroyed 
 to make room for the castle ®. 
 
 Yet, in spite of the destruction of houses since the Conquest, 
 the full amount of geld at which a borough was assessed had 
 to be raised from its inhabitants : hence the complaint of the 
 English burgesses at Shrewsbury'^, that, although the earl's 
 castle occupied the site of fifty-one houses, and other fifty were 
 waste, and forty-three were inhabited by French-born burgesses, 
 and thirty-nine had been given by the earl to the abbey he 
 was founding (making a total of 183 not gelding) \ yet the 
 fifty-nine remaining had to pay as much geld as the 252 
 houses in the borough in the time of King Edward. But if 
 the whole amount was due, the wind was tempered to the 
 shorn lamb — for at Ipswich there were 100 poor burgesses 
 who could not pay to the king's geld except one penny for 
 their own polls ^ ; and a similar payment was made at 
 Colchester, but there it was called a custom and nothing was 
 said about poverty^". In the new borough at Norwich one 
 penny each was paid by thirty-six Frenchmen and six English 
 burgesses, besides all their forfeitures^^. And at times the 
 payment of geld was even excused : at Bridport there were 
 • twenty houses so destitute that those who abode in them 
 could not pay geld ^^.' 
 
 The complaint of the English burgesses at Shrewsbury 
 shows that certain persons had acquired freedom from geld : 
 the Frenchmen living in England before the Conquest paid 
 geld as Englishmen ^^, but the French-born burgesses who 
 came with the Conqueror were exempt from geld, as was the 
 new monastery in the city. It was the object of all the owners 
 of property in any town (especially if they were county 
 
 » n. B. i. 336^, I. ' D. B. ii. li6i. » D. B. i. 336 1>, 2. 
 
 * Id. 56a, 2. » Id. 298a, I. * N. C. iv. 162. ^ D,B.i.2S2a, i. 
 ' The Domesday scribe makes the total 193. 
 
 • D. B. ii. 290a. " Id. ii. 106 a. " Id. ii. 118 a. 
 
 ^» D. B. L 75 a, 1. " Select Charters, p. 84. 
 
THE GELD 69 
 
 magnates) to be exempted from payment of geld. A list of 
 persons, twelve of whom were tenants in capite in Hampshire 
 or the Isle of Wight, is given at Southampton ' who have the 
 customs of their houses by grant of King William ^.' If they 
 could not obtain legal exemption, sometimes they refused to 
 pay: hence we find a long list of persons at Dover '^j Lincoln ^ 
 and Norwich * who paid no geld ; at Colchester*^ there were 
 seventeen owners of houses within the borough from whose 
 houses ' custom ' was not paid, although it had been paid in 
 the time of their predecessors in title ; the fact that some of 
 the tenants paid no custom except poll tax — which is definitely 
 stated at Ipswich to have been a payment for geld — while 
 others withheld all their custom enables us to say with certainty 
 that the custom so detained was geld. Sometimes it was only 
 the principal house of the contributory lord that was free of 
 geld. Thus 
 
 The abbess of Wharwell holds in the City ofWinchester 31 masures 
 from which she has all customs except King's geld, of which geld the 
 abbess's own house is quit ^ 
 
 Similarly, Hamo the steward's hall at Colchester was quit 
 of custom even T.R.E., but his burgesses still continued to 
 pay their poll tax "^ ; and Geoffrey Alselin's hall at Lincoln 
 was likewise quit of custom^. Some of the houses at 
 Huntingdon belonging to the Abbot of Ramsey, over which 
 he had sac and soc, paid king's geld, but from others he had 
 all custom when they gelded'. At Grantham Queen Edith 
 had twelve carucates which paid geld {ad gelduM)^ but her 
 hall and two carucates were exempt {sine geldo) ^". 
 
 On the other hand, it is expressly noted that the estates of 
 the Bishop of Chester at Shrewsbury " and Chester ^^ gelded 
 with the burgesses, and that the houses at Colchester which 
 were appurtenant to Clacton and belonged to the Bishop of 
 London, paid all their customs, except scot, to the bishop, and 
 therefore, presumably, paid their scot to the king ^^ 
 
 ^ Z?.^. i. S2a, I. «Id. la, I. " Id. 336a, I. * D.B.'u.WT. 
 
 ' Id. ii. 106 a. « D. B. i. 44 a, I. ' D. B. iL 106 a. 
 
 ' D. B. i. 336 a. » Id. 203 a, i. " Id. 337 b^ 2. 
 
 " Id. 252 a, 2. » Id. 262 b, I. " D. B. ii. 1 1 a. 
 
70 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 The burgesses of some boroughs had assistance in the 
 payment of their geld ; the borough of Torksey and the manor 
 of Hardwick paid one-fifth of the geld of Lincoln, and of this 
 fifth Torksey paid two-thirds and Hardwick the balance *. 
 At York there were eighty-four carucates of land in the geld 
 of the city, and each carucate paid as much as one house in 
 the city^. Included in the geldable area of Nottingham were 
 six carucates of arable land, a meadow and a tract of underwood, 
 six furlongs long by five broad ^ ; and at Leicester Countess 
 Judith had outside the borough six carucates of land pertaining 
 to the borough *. At Canterbury there were eight acres of 
 meadow and i,ooo acres of unfruitful wood which yielded 24s.^, 
 but these are not stated to have been in the geld of the city. The 
 Colchester burgesses claimed that five hides of land formerly 
 subject to the custom and account of the city had been annexed 
 by Godric to Lexden ", and presumably that therefore their 
 geldable area had been reduced — a complaint that must be 
 compared with that of the English burgesses at Shrewsbury. 
 Similarly, at Chester the Domesday valuers note that 
 
 The land in which St. Peter's church is situate, which Robert of Rhud- 
 dlan claimed as thegnland . . . never belonged to his manor without the 
 city, but pertains to the borough and always paid custom to the King and 
 Earl as the land of the other burgesses '. 
 
 Evidently Robert of Rhuddlan was attempting to do at 
 Chester what Godric had accomplished at Colchester. Other 
 examples of aid rendered to the burgesses in the payment of 
 their geld were at Huntingdon, where there were under the 
 burgesses ' loo bordars who aid them in the payment of their 
 geld * ' ; and at Malmesbury, where the abbot had ' without 
 the borough nine coscez who geld with the burgesses ^.' 
 
 The express mention of the annual geld at Stafford ^°, and 
 the annual payments at Colchester ^^ (which, although not 
 stated to be geld, were apparently of its nature), while we 
 know that ' Danegeld ' was an occasional war tax ^\ suggest 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 337 a, I. ' Id. 298 a, 2. ^ j^j ^^ ^^ ^ 
 
 * Id. 230a, I. ^ Id. 2 a, I. * D. B. \\. 104 a ; V. H. Essex, pp. 416, 574. 
 ^ D. B. i. 262 b, I. « Id. 203 a, I. » Id. 64 b, i. 
 
 " Id. 246 a, I. " D. B. ii. 107 a. " D. B. and B. 3. 
 
THE GELD 71 
 
 doubts whether the geld mentioned in Domesday in connexion 
 with the boroughs was * Danegeld ' after all — especially as the 
 borough geld was reckoned in units of marks, while the 
 * Danegeld ' was reckoned in units of shillings ^. 
 
 It will be noticed from these examples that the terms 
 'burgus' and * civitas ' are sometimes applied to the same 
 place, and that they are not used synonymously. The ' burgus * 
 was the fortified area, the ' civitas ' was the geldable area. The 
 eighty-four carucates at York and the five hides at Colchester 
 were in the geld of the city ; at Leicester and elsewhere the 
 lands were stated to pertain to the borough ; notice too, at 
 Gloucester, the expression ' in the borough of the city ^.' 
 
 3. The Gablum. 
 
 Another specific ' custom ' of which mention is made in 
 connexion with the boroughs is that known as the ' gablum ' 
 (OE. Gafol = rent), which was a rent paid to the king from 
 his demesne houses within the borough: but it must be 
 remembered that the gablum differed essentially from the 
 geld ; the latter was a royal * custom,* the former accrued to 
 the king merely because he was the owner of property, and 
 differed in no way from the rents other owners received from 
 their town houses. 
 
 At Malmesbury the gablum was lod. a house'; and the 
 same amount seems to have been charged at Huntingdon*, 
 where 16^. Sd. was allowed from the landgable because twenty 
 houses were wasted on account of the castle. At Southampton 
 seventy-six men were in demesne rendering ^^ 7 'de gablo'; 
 of these, twenty-seven paid 8d. each, fifty paid 6d. each and 
 two paid is.^ At Pevensey King Edward had 14s. 6d. from the 
 gablum of twenty-four burgesses in demesne : the Conqueror 
 gave the borough to the Earl of Mortain, to whom sixty 
 
 * Dialogus de Scaccarioj Select Charters .^ p. 203, In the preparation of 
 this and the next section I am greatly indebted to Mr. Round's essay on 
 the Geld in the Domesday Studies. 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 162 a, I. See Mr. Round, V. H. Essex, P.41S ; Antiquary, v. 249. 
 
 ' D. B. i. 64^. * Id. 203 a, I. 
 
 ' Id. 52 a, I. The arithmetic is that of the Domesday scribe. 
 
72 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 burgesses paid ^gs. 'de gablo^.' At Hereford the whole 
 masures within the wall paid y\d. to the king and 4^. for 
 hiring horses, but those without the wall paid only ^^d. ^ ; 
 these are clearly payments of gablum, although the word is 
 not used. The amount of the landgable at Cambridge was 
 £y 2s. ores and 2d.^, and at Huntingdon was ;^io*; and at 
 Shrewsbury 2,52 burgesses paid £y 16s. 8d. 'de gablo^.' 
 According to the St. Augustine's survey of Canterbury 
 King Edward received £^ 16s. jd. 'de gablo' of his fifty- 
 one burgesses'. At Buckingham the burgesses paid their 
 rents to their lords, and an additional payment to the 
 king; e.g, 
 
 In this borough the Bishop of Coutances has 3 burgesses whom Ulward 
 fitz Edith held ; they render 6^-. 6d., and to the King 11^. Hugh (Earl of 
 Chester) has I burgess formerly the man of Burcard of Shenley : he 
 renders 26^/., and to the King $d. ' 
 
 These payments to the king, which amounted to ^s. 4d. and 
 are peculiar to Buckingham, may have been a species of 
 gablum, but were not the true gablum, which was payable 
 only to the owners of the houses. Professor Maitland sug- 
 gests that they were commuted wall work ®. 
 
 With very few exceptions, Leicester and Warwick are the 
 most important, the money rents received by the contributory 
 lords in respect of their town houses are specified in the 
 surveys, but the term gablum is rarely applied to these rents. 
 The landgable of id. a house at Lincoln was received by 
 private persons ^ ; gablum is mentioned as being received 
 by ten burgesses of Wallingford in respect of their own 
 houses ^°, and also by certain burgesses at Canterbury ", and 
 by the Abbot of Peterborough at Stamford ^^ ; and Robert of 
 Ouilly received gablum from sixteen houses at Oxford *^ 
 But landgable was distinguished at Lincoln from locatio, 
 possibly as to-day a quit-rent is distinguished from rack-rent ^*. 
 
 ^ £>.B.i.2oa,i. ' Id. 179 a, I. ' Id. 189 a, I. * Id. 203 a, I. 
 
 ' Id. 252 a, I. " Larking's Dotnesday of Kent, p. 35 *. 
 
 ' D. B. i. 143 a, I. « D. B. and B. 220. « D. B. i. 336 a. 
 
 " Id. 56^, I. " Id. 2 a, I. " Id. 336^, 2. 
 
 " Id. 158 a, 2. " Id. 336 a, I. 
 
MARKETS AND TOLLS 73 
 
 4. Markets and Tolls. 
 
 Considering the important place that the market occupies 
 in certain theories as to the origin of the borough, we are sur- 
 prised to find so few direct references to it in the Domesday 
 descriptions of the county and quasi-county boroughs. In 
 only one instance is there any mention of specific market 
 tolls ; at Lewes ^ 
 
 He who in the borough sells a horse gives a penny [nummum] to the 
 praepositus, and the buyer [gives] another. 
 For an ox, a halfpenny. 
 For a man, 4^., wherever he may buy him within the rape. 
 
 There are only two instances — Huntingdon ^ and Lincoln *, 
 of * thol and team ' being vested in the owner of any urban 
 property as well as sac and soc. Toll is mentioned as one of 
 the sources of the king's revenue at Canterbury*, Chester*, 
 Derby ^ Oxford' and Torksey', and incidental references 
 reveal the existence of markets at Milbourne^, Sudbury ^°, 
 WalHngford " and Worcester ^^. At York the Earl of Mortain 
 is stated to have possessed two benches in the shambles 
 {macellum) ^^ Toll is also expressly mentioned at Arundel ^*, 
 Dover ^^, Southwark ^^ Stamford ^'^, Pevensey ^^ and York ^^ — in 
 each case as being received by others than the king. The 
 toll at Pevensey was received by the Earl of Mortain, and at 
 Southwark the Bishop of Bayeux appears to have usurped 
 the king's sole right of taking toll in the stream. At Arundel 
 Robert fitz Tetbald received his toll of strangers : does this 
 mean that he owned the market ? The canons of St. Martin's 
 at Dover received £2% from the toll of Dover — an increase of 
 £\\ since the Conquest. 
 
 That toll was not always connected with markets is shown 
 by the description of Torksey, the burgesses of which 
 place 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 26a, I. ' Id. 203a, I. • Id. 336fl. * Id. ia, I. 
 
 " Id. 262^, I. * Id. 280 a, 2. "^ Id. 154 a, I. * Id. 337 a, i. 
 
 9 Id. 86 b, I. ^° D. B. ii. 286 b. " D. B. i. 56 b, i. 
 
 " Id. 173^, I. " Id. 298 a, I. " Id. 23 a, I. " Id. 2 a, i. 
 " Id. 32 a, I. " Id. 336*, 2. ^ Id. 20^, I. " Id. 298 a, I. 
 
74 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 had the same customs as the men of Lincoln, and this in addition that 
 whoever of them had a mansion in the same town, neither on entrance or 
 departure, gave toll or custom ^. 
 
 The meaning is rather obscure ; but this much is certain, that 
 either at Torksey or Lincoln some travellers had to pay toll 
 both on leaving and entering the town. This interpretation 
 is confirmed by a reference to that gate in London yielding 
 20S. which belonged to the Bishop of Durham and was 
 appurtenant to his manor of Waltham in Essex; evidently 
 the income was derived from those who passed through 
 the gate'. 
 
 Perhaps this is the best place to notice that the official 
 fares for crossing the Channel from Dover are recorded in 
 Domesday Book: 
 
 The King's messengers gave for transporting a horse ^d. in winter and 
 2d. in summer ; the burgesses found a man to steer and one other : but if 
 more were required, the hirer paid for them '. 
 
 At Dover residents who paid their custom to the king 
 were quit of toll throughout England, a privilege afterwards 
 granted wholesale by John Lackland. 
 
 The survey of Canterbury in the cartulary of St. 
 Augustine's*, which appears to bear to the Exchequer 
 Domesday the same relation as is borne by the Exeter 
 Domesday, gives more information about the toll at Canter- 
 bury, but always refers to it as * theloneum panis,* the toll of 
 bread. T. R. E. the toll of bread realized 30J., when Hamo 
 received the city it was valued at 60^., and when the survey 
 was made it realized 8s. more. The religious houses of the 
 Holy Trinity and St. Augustine's received the toll of 
 the foreign merchants who sojourned on their land ; but 
 Brumann the praepositus had usurped this toll — whence arose 
 a lawsuit before the Bishop of Bayeux, Hugh of Montfort, 
 the Count D'Eu and Richard fitz Gilbert, when Brumann 
 admitted his fault. This survey also states that the shoe- 
 makers and drapers of Canterbury rendered 30J., and the 
 swineherds ^. : the latter payment would possibly be pannage 
 
 » D. B. i. 337 a, I. « D. B. ii. 15 b. 
 
 * D.B.i. la, I. * Larking's Domesday of Kent, p. 34 *. 
 
MARKETS AND TOLLS 75 
 
 for the swine they kept, but the former may have been 
 payments for permission to trade, possibly even a payment 
 for a gild. 
 
 We shall, however, later see reason to believe that the 
 markets deserved more attention than they received from 
 the Domesday valuers. 
 
 5. The Mint. 
 
 Although the references to the markets in the county 
 boroughs are slight and unimportant, more frequent mention 
 is made of the mints in those boroughs ; and in the smaller 
 places the receipts from the mint were no inconsiderable part 
 of the king's profits from the borough. In some cases the 
 minters* payments to the king were made only when new dies 
 were issued : at Worcester, 
 
 "When money was coined, each minter gave to the King 2ar. at London 
 for the new dies \ 
 
 Similar payments were made at Chester 2, Lewes ^ and 
 Shrewsbury*, but at the last mentioned place not till the 
 fifteenth day after they had received the new dies. 
 
 At other places the minter also paid the king an annual 
 sum for his privilege : at Dorchester ^ 
 
 There were two minters, each of whom paid to the King one mark 
 of silver, and 20J. when the coinage was renewed {moneta vertente). 
 
 And similar annual payments were made at Bridport, Ware- 
 ham and Shaftesbury. 
 At Hereford T. R. E. 
 
 There were 7 minters within the city ; one was the Bishop's : when the 
 coinage was renewed, they each of them gave to the King i8j. for new 
 dies, and within one month after they returned they each gave to the 
 King 20J. ; and likewise the Bishop had o-os. of his minter. 
 
 When the king came to the city, the minters made him as many pennies 
 as he wished of his own silver ; and these seven (minters) had sac 
 and sec. 
 
 When any of the King's minters died, the King had 10s. for a relief: 
 but if he died without dividing his property (i. e. intestate), the King 
 had all «. 
 
 ^ D.B. i. 172a, I. "^ Id. 262^, 2. ' Id. 26a, I. * Id. 252^, I. 
 ° Id. 75 a, I. ' Id. 179 a, I. 
 
y6 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Reference has already been made to the mint at Hunting- 
 don, where its establishment had the effect of severing (for 
 geld purposes) the tie between the borough and the hundred 
 with which it formerly gelded. At Ipswich T. R. E. 
 
 The minters rendered £4 for the mint; now they ought to render ;^20; 
 but for four years they rendered only ;^27 ^. 
 
 And similarly 
 
 The burgesses of Colchester and Maldon render ;^20 for the mint ; and 
 this (payment) was fixed by Waleran : and they invoke the King's aid 
 because he pardoned them ;^io, and yet Bishop Walchelin, the tenant 
 (i. e. firmar), seeks of them ;^4o '. 
 
 Sometimes the mints had been granted by the king to his 
 subjects: we have seen that the Bishop of Hereford had 
 a minter of his own in that city ; similarly, the Bishop of 
 Norwich could have a minter if he wished ', and the mint at 
 Pevensey yielded 20s. to the Earl of Mortain*. Although 
 Taunton was a borough on an agricultural estate, and was 
 characterized by none of the distinctive features of a county 
 borough, yet the Bishop of Winchester had a mint there 
 which yielded him ^os. a year ^ ; Rhuddlan also had a mint, 
 the render of which was divided between the Earl of Chester 
 and Robert of Rhuddlan ^. 
 
 But it must be noticed that there were two methods of 
 farming the mint: the minters could personally farm it, in 
 which case they paid a fee when they received new dies, as at 
 Shrewsbury and Worcester, with, sometimes, an additional 
 yearly payment, as in the Dorset boroughs ; or it might be 
 farmed by the burgesses, as at Maldon and Colchester, in 
 which case these paid a large annual sum for the privilege. 
 At Colchester the change was made by Waleran : T. R. E. the 
 minters paid £4 ; he let the mint to the burgesses and raised 
 the rent to ;^20. 
 
 The following is a list of the mints mentioned in Domesday 
 Book, with the renders of each ; those boroughs where the 
 minters farmed the mint are distinguished with an asterisk. 
 
 ' Z>. B. ii. 290^. ^ Id. ii. 1076. ^ Id. ii. 117^. 
 
 * D. B. i. 20^, I. « Id. 87 b, I. « Id. 269 a. 
 

 THE 
 
 MINT 
 
 77 
 
 Bath 
 
 I oar. 
 
 Malmesbury 
 
 loos. 
 
 Bridport * 
 
 20s. & I mark. 
 
 Nottingham 
 
 10/. 
 
 Chester* (7) 
 
 7/. 
 
 Pevensey 
 
 20s. 
 
 Colchester 
 Maldon 
 
 20/. 
 
 Rhuddlan. 
 
 
 Shaftesbury * (3) 
 
 20s. & I mark 
 
 Dorchester* (2) 
 
 20J. & I mark 
 
 
 each. 
 
 
 each. 
 
 Shrewsbury * (3) 
 
 60s. 
 
 Gloucester 
 
 20/. 
 
 Sudbury. 
 
 
 Hereford * (7) 
 
 iSs. & 20s. 
 
 Taunton 
 
 SOS. 
 
 Huntingdon * 
 
 40J. (T. R. E.). 
 
 Thetford 
 
 40/. 
 
 Ipswich 
 
 20/. 
 
 Wareham * (2) 
 
 20S. & I mark 
 
 Leicester 
 
 20/. 
 
 
 each. 
 
 Lewes * 
 
 20s. 
 
 Worcester * 
 
 20J. each. 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 75/. 
 
 
 
 The minters of Oxford and Wallingford are also men- 
 tioned ; and the sheriff of Oxfordshire rendered £7,0 de 
 moneta. 
 
 6. Renders in Kind. 
 
 A study of Domesday Book reveals that at the time of its 
 compilation England was in a state of transition from 
 ' barter-economy ' to * coin-economy ' ; before the Conquest 
 the kings had frequently collected their dues in kind ; many of 
 their demesne manors were liable for the farm of one night, or, 
 in other words, were obliged to find board and lodging for the 
 king and his court for one night ; and this system remained 
 in force in the south-western counties till the Conquest. 
 Thus the royal manors of Bedwyn^ Calne^, Devizes^ and 
 Warminster*, on which were situate the boroughs of the 
 same names, were each liable for one night's farm, which 
 at Devizes was valued at ;^ioo ; the manor of Milbourne ", 
 with its appurtenant boroughs of Ilchester and Milbourne, was 
 T.R.E. liable for three-quarters of one night's farm, a liability 
 which was commuted by the Conqueror for £yg los. yd. 
 In Oxfordshire the j^rma trium noctium is £1^6^. The 
 manors of Somerton "^ and Cheddar ^, with their appurtenant 
 boroughs of Langport and Axbridge, rendered T. R. E. one 
 night's farm between them, but this too was commuted by 
 the Conqueror in such a way that Somerton paid £']<) los. yd. 
 
 1 Z>. B. i. 64*, 2. ' Id. 64<5, 2. » Id. 65 a, I. * Id. 64*, 2. 
 
 Md. 86^, I. Md. 154^, 2. Md. 86 a, 2. Md. 86 a, 2. 
 
78 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 and Cheddar £21 os. 2\d. It should be noted that of all 
 these manors that rendered the night's farm is used the 
 formula ' it never gelded nor is it known how many hides are 
 there.' Similarly, from the Dorset boroughs of Dorchester, 
 Bridport and Wareham ^ were due to King William ' the 
 customs pertaining to the night's farm ' ; and Mr. Round ^ 
 suggests that they were interned in a group of royal manors 
 for that purpose (in the same way as Langport and Axbridge 
 aided in the render of the manors of Somerton and Cheddar), 
 and were not each responsible for one night's farm, as 
 Mr. Eyton thought ^. This suggestion is the more probable 
 as we read 
 
 The King holds Dorchester. ... It is unknown how many hides are 
 there because it did not geld T.R.E. . . . This manor with its appendices 
 renders one night's farm *. 
 
 With these exceptions, the greater part of the render of 
 every borough Wcis, even T. R. E., paid in money ; but from 
 very many were still due renders in kind, most of which 
 were commuted for money payments at or soon after the 
 Conquest. Thus 
 
 T.R.E. the city of Gloucester rendered to the King £2,6 by tale, 
 12 sextars of honey, 36 * dicras' of iron, 100 ductile iron bars suitable for 
 ship nails, and other small customs to the hall and chamber of the King. 
 Now, ;^6o of 20 in the ora *. 
 
 Colchester ^, Ipswich ^, Leicester *, Norwich ', Oxford ^*^ and 
 Thetford ^^, like Gloucester, rendered honey to the king as 
 part of their dues ; Chester was evidently a great fur market, 
 as is shown by its laws and by its gift to King Edward of 
 three bales of martin pelts yearly ^2. At Derby the burgesses 
 rendered to the king at Martinmas twelve loads of corn, of 
 which the Abbot of Burton had forty sheaves ^^ ; Dunwich 
 rendered 60,000 herrings as a gift ^*, and similarly Sandwich, 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 75 a, i. * Feudal England, p. 114. 
 
 ' Key to Domesday, Dorset, p. 70. * D. B. i. 75 a, 2. 
 
 * Id. 162 a, I. ' D. B. ii. 107 a. ' Id. ii. 290 3. 
 
 • D. B. i. 230a, I. 9 D. B. ii. 117 a. ^^ D. B. i. 154 a, I. 
 " D. B. ii. 119 a. " D. B. i. 262 b, i. " Id. 280 a, 2. 
 
 " D. B. ii. 311 b. 
 
RENDERS IN KIND 79 
 
 which belonged to the Archbishop of Canterbury, sent 40,000 
 herrings for the victuals of the monks \ From Droitwich the 
 king received '£65 by weight and two measures of saltV 
 and from Thetford King Edward received ten goat-skins and 
 four ox-hides^. At Arundel 20s. were derived from three 
 banquets*, which were in all probability the 'scotales' for- 
 bidden by John's charters to Northampton and other places. 
 
 And the boroughs supplied materials not only for the 
 king's necessities but also for his amusements and luxuries : 
 the city of Leicester, jointly with the county, rendered to him 
 ;£"io in lieu of a hawk, and 2,0s. for a mantle ^ ; from Norwich 
 the Confessor received a bear and six dogs for [baiting] the 
 bear, a gift commuted by the Conqueror for a racehorse 
 {asiurconem) '. The burgesses of Yarmouth gave a hawk to 
 the sheriff as a present {de gersuma) '^. 
 
 We find too that some of the contributory lords received in 
 kind the rents of their houses in the boroughs : the Church of 
 St. Peter in Gloucester received from its burgesses in that 
 city igs. ^d. in money and sixteen salmon^; a garden at 
 Langport yielded fifty eels^; and the masures in London 
 and Southwark belonging to Walkhampstead rendered a,ooo 
 herrings to Count Eustace ^°, and the Southwark masure 
 belonging to Ditton produced 500 herrings ^^. Quennington 
 contributed to Gloucester one burgess who rendered four 
 ploughshares ^2, and the Widecestre burgess in the same city 
 gave twenty horseshoes as the rent of his house ^^ The mill 
 at Arundel produced twenty bushels of corn for Earl Roger ", 
 and that of Dover produced forty-eight ferlingels of corn for 
 Hugh of Montfort ^^ ; and many of the contributory lords 
 at Droitwich received salt as part of the rents of their 
 houses ^". 
 
 * D. B. i. 3 a, I. « Id. 172 (5, I. ' D. B. ii. 119a. 
 
 * Z>. ^. i. 23 a, I. "1(1.230^,1. * D.B.'xx.W] a, 
 Md. ii. Ii8a. « Z>. ^. i. 165 <5, 2. Md. 92a, 2. 
 
 " Id. 34 a, 2. " Id. 35 a, i. " Id. 167 b, 2. 
 
 " Id. 170 (J, I. " Id. 23«, I. " Id. 1 1 a, I. 
 
 " Id. I73<5, i,&c. 
 
8o THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 7. Military and Other Services. 
 
 Although the Conqueror seems to have commuted almost 
 all the renders in kind for money payments, yet he still retained 
 the military and other services due to his predecessor. Full 
 reference has already been made to the duties of the contri- 
 butory houses, but other military services were also due from 
 burgesses ; for instance we read — 
 
 The custom of Warwick was that when the King went on an expedition 
 by land, 10 burgesses of Warwick went for all. He who was warned and 
 did not go, amended to the King in loos. But if the King went by sea 
 against his enemies, they sent him either 4 boatswains or £4 of pennies \ 
 
 From Oxford 'twenty burgesses went for all or gave the 
 king ;^20 that all might be free ^.* 
 
 At Leicester, if the expedition was by land, twelve 
 burgesses went with the king ; but if by sea, they sent him 
 four horses from the same borough as far as London, to carry 
 arms or anything else that might be necessary ^ When 
 there was an expedition by land or sea, Exeter served as five 
 hides of land *, and Barnstaple, Lidford and Totnes together 
 served as Exeter ^ At Malmesbury 
 
 When the King went in expedition by land or sea, he had of this 
 borough either 2ar. to feed his 'buzecarles' or one man for an honor of 
 five hides '. 
 
 This extract from the Malmesbury record, coupled with 
 the statement in the customs of Berkshire "^j seems to imply 
 that the recognized service was one soldier (miles) for every 
 five hides : we can therefore say that Warwick was assessed 
 at fifty hides, Leicester at sixty and Oxford as a hundred of 
 itself^. From the Malmesbury, Leicester and Oxford records 
 
 1 D. B. i. 238 a, I. 
 
 ' Id. 154a, I. Twenty soldiers were impressed at Oxford in 1523 and 
 sent to Dover [Oxford City Records, p. 43). 
 
 » D. B. i. 230a, I. * Id. 100 a, i. * Ibid. * Id. 64 3. 
 
 ' Select Charters, p. 91. 
 
 ' These figures should be compared with the 1,000 soldiers furnished by 
 Arras, 500 by Beauvais, and 400 by Corbie in the thirteenth century. 
 (Luchaire, Les Communes Francises, p. 180.) 
 
MILITARY AND OTHER SERVICES 8i 
 
 we see that this service was commutable for £i a man, but 
 that a defaulter was fined £s. 
 
 ' The burgesses of Dover gave the king twenty ships once 
 in the year for fifteen days with twenty-one men in each, in order 
 that he would give them sac and soc \' and at Sandwich the 
 service was as at Dover ^ Some of the burgesses of Romney 
 were quit of all custom, except the three forfeitures, for their 
 sea service which they rendered to the king^; but the 
 amount of the latter is not specified. At Lewes 
 
 Their custom was, that if the King wished to send his men without 
 going himself to guard the sea, 20s. were collected from all the men, 
 whosever tenants they might be, & they who in the ships took care of the 
 arms, had this money *. 
 
 At Maldon the burgesses found a horse for an expedition 
 and a ship°. From a Charter of Henry II we learn that this 
 ship served for forty days ^. At Torksey, 
 
 When the King's legates came, the men of that same village (vicus) con- 
 ducted them as far as York with ships and other instruments of navigation ', 
 
 And similarly at Shrewsbury, 
 
 When the King departed from the city, the sheriff sent him 24 horses, 
 and he took them as far as the first house in Staffordshire '. 
 
 At Wallingford 
 
 The residents did the King's service with horses or on water to Blidberie, 
 Reading, Sutton or Benson ; and to those who did this the praepositus 
 paid a wage, not from the King's revenue, but from his own {non de 
 censu regis sed de sua) '. 
 
 At Cambridge, 
 
 T. R. E. the burgesses lent their teams to the sheriff thrice in the year ; 
 now nine times ; T. R. E. they found neither carrying services nor 
 wagons, which they now find, in consequence of a custom imposed upon 
 them ". 
 
 At Hereford 
 
 There were six smiths in the city : each of them rendered id. for his 
 forge, and each of them made 120 horseshoes of the King's iron ; and to 
 each of them was given ^d. thence for custom, and these smiths were quit 
 of all other custom. 
 
 1 D. B. i. I a, I, 2 Id. 3a, I. ' Id. \ob, 2. * Id. 26a, i. 
 
 ^ D. B. ii. 48 a. « V. H., Essex, p. 386. "> D.B.'i. 337 a, i. 
 
 ' Id. 252fl, I. * Id. 56a, 2. " Id. 189 a, I. 
 
 BALLASD Q 
 
8a THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 When the King went hunting, from every house in the city went a man 
 to make a cordon {ad stabilitionem) in the wood. The other men, not 
 having whole houses, found guards {inwards) for the hall when he was in 
 the city ^. 
 
 And very similar hunting customs were in force at 
 Shrewsbury ^i 
 
 Finally at Hereford agricultural work was done by the 
 burgesses : 
 
 Those who dwelt within the wall, reaped in August for three days at 
 Maurdine, and gathered hay for one day where the sheriff wished '. 
 
 8. Amends and Forfeitures. 
 
 Again let us remind ourselves that Domesday Book is 
 a valuation-list, with notes of evidence to justify the actual 
 assessment or its reduction or increase, and therefore that the 
 laws in any borough are recorded, not from jurisprudential 
 motives, but from a financial point of view. Compare it with 
 the report of the Commissioners appointed in the reign of 
 William IV to inquire into the Municipal Corporations : the 
 latter inquiry was made with the view of determining what 
 borough customs should be retained and what should be 
 abolished ; but the Conqueror's inquiry was financial. The 
 king wanted to know what he might expect in the way of 
 income if the borough customs were broken, not what customs 
 were beneficial and what were harmful. 
 
 The laws of Chester give the fullest description of these 
 forfeitures, and will be a good basis of comparison with those 
 of other boroughs *. 
 
 (i) If the King's peace had been given under his own hand or by 
 his writ, or by his legate, and was broken by any one, the King had 
 thence loos. But if the same peace given by the Earl, by the King's 
 order, was broken, out of the loos. which were given for that (offence), 
 the Earl had the third penny. But if the same peace were given by 
 the King's praepositus or by the minister of the Earl, and were broken, 
 amends were made in 40J., and the Earl had the third penny. 
 
 (2) If any free man, breaking the King's peace that had been given, 
 slew a man in his own house, his land and all his property was the 
 
 * D. B. i. 179 a, I. * Id. 252 a, I. ' Id. 179^ I. 
 
 * Id. 262 b^ I. See Select Charters^ p. 87. 
 
AMENDS AND FORFEITURES 83 
 
 King's, and he became outlawed. The same had the Earl of his own men 
 making this forfeiture. None could return peace to any outlaw except 
 through the King. 
 
 (3) He who shed blood from Monday morning {secunda ferta) till 
 nones on Saturday, made amends in los. ; bloodshed from nones on 
 Saturday till Monday morning made amends in 20s. Similarly he paid 
 20J. who did this in the 12 days of the Nativity, and on the day of the 
 Purification of St. Mary, on the first day of Easter, the first day of 
 Pentecost, Ascension day, on the day of the Assumption or Nativity 
 of St. Mary, and the day of the Feast of All Saints. 
 
 (4) He who killed a man on these holy days amended in £^ ; but 
 on other days 40J. Similarly he who committed Heinfare or Forestel 
 [forcible entry or assault] on those feast days or on Sunday paid £^ ; on 
 other days, 40J. 
 
 (5) He who committed Hangewitham [letting a thief out of custody] in 
 the city paid loj.; the praepositus of the King or Earl doing this amended 
 in 20s. 
 
 (6) He who committed Revelach [rapine] or Robbery or Rape on a 
 woman in a house, for each of these, made amends in ^os. 
 
 (7) If a widow had unlawful intercourse with any one, she amended in 
 20s. ; but a maiden paid \os. for the like cause. 
 
 (8) Who in the city seized another's land and could not prove his claim, 
 amended in 40J. ; and likewise he who made suit that it ought to be his 
 and did not prove his claim. 
 
 (9) Who wished to relieve his own land or that of his kinsman, paid los.; 
 but if he could not or would not, the King's praepositus took his land into 
 the hands of the King. 
 
 (10) Who did not pay his gablum at the term it was due, gave los. 
 
 (11) If fire burnt the city, he, from whose house it arose, amended 
 in 3 ores, and gave 2s. to his nearest neighbour. 
 
 Of all these forfeitures, two parts were the King's and one part the 
 Earl's. 
 
 (12) If without the licence of the King, ships arrived at or departed 
 from the port of the city, from each man who was on the ships the King 
 and Earl had 40J. If against the peace of the King and in spite of his 
 prohibition, a ship arrived, the King and the Earl had both the ship and 
 the men and all that was in it. 
 
 (13) But if it came with the peace and licence of the King, those who 
 were in it quietly sold what they had : but when it departed, the King 
 and Earl had 4^. from each lading (lesth). If those who had martin 
 pelts were ordered by the King's praepositus to sell to none till he had 
 first seen and examined them, he who did not observe this amended 
 in 40J. 
 
 (14) A man or woman caught making a false measure amended in 4r. ; 
 likewise the maker of bad beer was either placed in the cucking-stool 
 
84 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 {cathedra stercorisY or gave 4j. to the praepositi. This forfeiture the 
 Ministers of the King and Earl had in the City in whosever land it was ; 
 whether of the Bishop or of another man. And likewise toll ; whoever 
 detained it beyond 3 nights amended in 40J. 
 
 The Hereford customs differ entirely from those of Chester, 
 and had therefore better be given in full ^ 
 
 (i) If any man wished to depart from the city, he could by permission 
 of the praepositus sell his house to another man who was willing to 
 perform the service thence due, and the praepositus had the third 
 penny of this sale. But if any one through poverty could not per- 
 form his due service, he abandoned his house without payment to the 
 praepositus, who took care that the house did not remain vacant and that 
 the King did not lack his service. 
 
 (2) Every whole masure within the city wall rendered ']\d. and i,d. for 
 hiring horses, and mowed for three days in August at Maurdine and 
 worked one day at gathering hay where the sheriff wished. 
 
 (3) He who had a horse went with the sheriff thrice a year to pleas and 
 to the hundred at Urmerlavia. 
 
 (4) When the King went hunting one man went from every house 
 according to custom to make a hunting cordon in the wood. 
 
 (5) The other men not having whole houses found guards at the hall 
 when the King was in the city. 
 
 (6) At the death of a burgess serving with a horse, the King had his 
 horse and arms. But from him who had no horse, at his death the King 
 had either loj. or his land and houses. If any man died intestate, the 
 King had all his property. 
 
 These customs had those who dwelt in the city, and those who lived 
 outside likewise, save that a whole masure without the wall paid only 2)\d. 
 The other customs were common. 
 
 (7) Whosever wife brewed within or without the city, paid lev/, as 
 custom. 
 
 (8) The custom of the smiths : see p. 81. 
 
 (9) The custom of the minters : see p. 75. 
 
 (10) If the sheriff went into Wales with the army these men went with 
 him. But if any man was ordered to go and went not, he amended to the 
 King in 40J. 
 
 (11) The King had in his demesne three forfeitures, that is, peace- 
 breach, heinfare and forestel. Whoever did one of these amended to the 
 King in looj., whosever man he was. 
 
 The geographical position of Shrewsbury is about midway 
 between Hereford and Chester ; the customs of Shrewsbury ^ 
 
 * Ellis, Introduction to Domesday, i. 203. ' D. B. i. 179 a, I. 
 
 ' Id. 252 a, I. 
 
AMENDS AND FORFEITURES 85 
 
 seem to be compiled from the customs of both these cities. 
 Thus numbers i, 2, 3, 4, 7 and ii of the Shrewsbury customs 
 respectively correspond with numbers 11, 5, 4, 10, 6 and 9 of 
 the Hereford customs, and numbers i, 5, 6, 8 and 9 of the 
 Shrewsbury customs respectively correspond with numbers 
 I and 2, 7, II, 10 and 3 of the Chester customs ; there is only 
 one custom common to the three cities, that relating to the 
 three forfeitures, which at Shrewsbury are expressly stated to 
 be in the king's demesne throughout England. The only 
 custom peculiar to Shrewsbury is No. 10, which relates to the 
 carrying service due from the citizens when the king left 
 the city, and has already been quoted^. 
 
 The provisions about Heinfare [ham-fare] can be paralleled 
 at Oxford ^ : 
 
 If any one violently broke into and entered a man's courtyard or house 
 to kill or wound or assault a man, he gave loos, as amends to the King. 
 
 If any one kill a man in his own courtyard or house, his body and all 
 his property are in the King's power, except his wife's dower if he have 
 dowered her. 
 
 And at Wallingford 
 
 If any one by night broke into the city, he amended in 100s. to the 
 King and not to the sheriff'. 
 
 At Canterbury 
 
 If any one commit a forfeiture in the straight streets having an entrance 
 and exit through the city, he shall pay the forfeiture to the King: and 
 similarly in the straight streets without the city for one league 3 poles and 
 3 feet : if any one dig or fix a pale in these public ways within or without 
 the city, the King's praepositus shall sue him wherever he depart and 
 receive the fine to the use of the King *. 
 
 There was a similar forfeiture at Nottingham ; where ' the 
 river Trent and the city ditch and the road to York are 
 guarded so that if any one hinders the passage of the ships, 
 or ploughs or digs a ditch within two perches of the king's 
 highway, he forfeits ;^8 ^.' 
 
 Suit of the hundred court was enforced by penalties at 
 Chester and Dunwich : at the former place, there were twelve 
 judges who, if absent without manifest excuse, amended in 
 
 > See p. 81. ^D.B.liS4^,2. Md. 56(^,1. *Id. 2a, I. 
 " Id. 280a, I. 
 
85 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 los.^ ; at the latter, two or three went to the hundred if right- 
 fully summoned, and if absent forfeited two ores ^. We have 
 also seen that the Hereford burgesses attended the hundred 
 court. 
 
 From the lawmen of Stamford the king had nothing but 
 geld and heriot and the forfeitures of their own bodies of forty 
 ores of silver {forisfacturam corporum suorum de 40 oris 
 argenti) and larceny ^. Heriots were also paid by the lawmen 
 of Cambridge, of whom Picot the sheriff received in the time 
 of King William ;^8 and a palfrey and the arms of one knight : 
 Alvric Godricson when he was sheriff received los. of each *. 
 The payments at the death of the Hereford burgesses have 
 already been noticed. ' If a stranger chose to reside in Oxford, 
 and died without relatives, but having a house, the king had 
 whatever he left^.' At Shrewsbury a burgess in the king's 
 demesne paid ioj. for a relief^ ; and the same sum was paid 
 for a relief at Chester ' ; but the burgesses of the city of York 
 paid no relief^. 
 
 The French-born burgesses of Hereford ^ and all the 
 burgesses of Rhuddlan ^° had the benefit of the laws of 
 Breteuil ^^, and therefore their forfeitures were limited to i id. 
 for each offence except for homicide, theft and heinfare. 
 The Archbishop of Canterbury had the three forfeitures at 
 Romney from the burgesses contributed by Langport ^^, but 
 the king had them from the other burgesses. The Bishop 
 of Chester had certain forfeitures in that city, principally 
 for breaches of the laws of the church ^^ : 
 
 (i) If a free man works on a holyday, the Bishop has Zs. from him. 
 {•3.) But if a slave or a woman breaks a holyday, the Bishop has 4J. 
 
 (3) If a merchant comes into the city bearing packs (trusellos) & opens 
 them without the leave of the Bishop's officer between the ninth hour 
 on Saturday and Monday, or on any feast day, the Bishop has thence 4J. 
 
 (4) If a man of the Bishop finds any man ploughing within a league of 
 the city, the Bishop has a forfeiture of 4^. or two oxen, 
 
 * Z?. 5. i. 262b, I. "^ D.B.\\.i\2a. » Z». 5. i. 366 ^, 2. 
 
 * Id. 189a, I. * Id. 154 (J, 2. * Id. 252a, I. '^ Id. 262^, I. 
 
 « Id. 298(J, 2. 9 Id. 179a, I. 1° Id. 269 a. 
 
 " Eng. Hist. Rev. xv. 302. ^* D. B. i. 4^, i. " Id. 263 a, I. 
 
AMENDS AND FORFEITURES 87 
 
 At Lewes ' the adulterer and the ravisher shall amend in 
 8j. 4/a?,, the man and the woman alike : the king has the [fine 
 from the] man, and the archbishop [that from the] woman ^.* 
 And a like sum of Ss. ^d. was exacted for bloodshed and 
 from a fugitive if he were recaptured. This latter probably 
 refers to a fugitive burgess, as we learn from the Norwich 
 survey ^ that certain burgesses had fled that town on account 
 of the exactions to which they were subject. 
 
 9. Borough Property. 
 
 There is scarcely any point raised by the descriptions of the 
 boroughs in Domesday Book which has caused more diversity 
 of opinion than the question whether the burgesses as a body 
 possessed any property as opposed to the property belonging 
 to individuals. Before discussing the matter, it will be best 
 to have before us all the evidence that may possibly bear on 
 the point. 
 
 Canterbury. (The) burgesses had 45 masures without the city of 
 which they had gablum and custom but the King had sac and soc. (The) 
 same burgesses had of the King 33 acres in their gild. 
 
 Ralph of Columbels has these acres and this land ; he has also 80 acres 
 additional which (the) burgesses held in alodium of the King . . . and 
 invokes the Bishop of Bayeux as protector'. 
 
 (The) burgesses of Canterbury held these lands T. R. E. and until the 
 Bishop of Bayeux took them from them *. 
 
 Exeter. (The) burgesses of Exeter have without the city 12 plough- 
 lands which yield no custom except to the city itself". 
 
 Oxford. All burgesses of Oxford have in common without the wall 
 a pasture yielding 6s. Zd. * 
 
 Cambridge. (The) burgesses of Cambridge claim of Picot a common 
 pasture which he took away from them ''. 
 
 Colchester. In common among the burgesses \in commune burgen- 
 sium] 80 acres of land and around the walls 8 perches of which (the) 
 burgesses have 60s. a year for the King's service if need be ; but if not 
 they divide it in common *. 
 
 Norwich. And in the borough (the) burgesses hold 43 chapels '. 
 
 ^ D.B.i.26a,i. ^ D. B. a. 117 d. * D. B.'x.ia,!. * Id. 9^,1. 
 " Id. 100 a, I. ' Id. 154a, 2. ■' Id. 189a, I. 
 
 * D. B. ii. 107 a. ' Id. ii. 117 a. 
 
88 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 In reading these extracts we must remember that the Latin 
 language knows no definite article, although, on the other 
 hand, Domesday Book usually states the number of persons 
 owning a number of houses ; e. g. 
 
 Warwick. There are in the borough 19 burgesses who have 19 houses 
 with sac and soc and all customs \ 
 
 The Exeter and Colchester evidence appears to show the 
 existence of certain land belonging to those towns, the rents 
 of which went to relieve the individual burgesses of a propor- 
 tion of their payments to the king. 
 
 Every Oxford man knows and has walked over Port Meadow, 
 a tract of land to the north-west of the city, whose soil is now 
 vested in the corporation of the city, and where all the Free- 
 men have common of pasture without stint. The common 
 pasture at Cambridge appropriated by Picot the sheriff was 
 probably a tract of land like Port Meadow : but the existence 
 of common pasture can scarcely be evidence of the existence 
 of borough property ; the inhabitants of most villages had 
 common of pasture, but could not on that account claim the 
 ownership of the land over which their beasts grazed. 
 
 The omission of the number in the other entries may indicate 
 that the properties there mentioned belonged to the burgesses 
 as a body: yet can we imagine that the whole body of 
 burgesses at Norwich (665 in number) owned forty-three 
 chapels, and jointly exercised their right of patronage ? 
 — especially as no other property is recorded there which could 
 by any method of interpretation be considered as borough 
 property. 
 
 On the other hand, we must compare with the Canterbury- 
 extracts a passage on the preceding page of Domesday Book 
 in the survey of Dover : 
 
 (The) burgesses gave the King 20 ships once a year for 15 days with 
 21 men in each in order that he would give them sac and soc ^. 
 
 No one could suggest in this case that the burgesses in- 
 dividually bargained with the king for the privilege ; this 
 must have been a collective bargain on the part of all the 
 
 » Z?. ^. i. 238a, I. " Id. la, I. 
 
BOROUGH PROPERTY 89 
 
 burgesses, and if the burgesses of Dover could make a collective 
 bargain, surely at Canterbury, only twenty miles away, they 
 could hold property collectively. 
 
 With the statement that the burgesses of Canterbury held 
 thirty-three acres in their gild must be compared the statement 
 that the archbishop had in Canterbury * thirty-two masures 
 which the clerks of the town held in their gild ^ '. 
 
 In conclusion, there appears to have been property belonging 
 to the burgesses as a body at Exeter and Colchester, but the 
 other cases are doubtful \ 
 
 10. Values and Renders. 
 
 We have now studied every source whence profit might 
 arise to the king within a borough, and are in a position to 
 ask what the Conqueror estimated he ought to receive from 
 the boroughs and what were his actual receipts. In almost 
 every case Domesday Book gives us this information : the 
 receipts of the two boroughs of Warwick ^ and Leicester * 
 were returned jointly with those of the two shires, but in other 
 cases, the borough receipts are given separately; but it is 
 when we come to ask how these receipts are made up that 
 we are at a loss. In only one case are details given which 
 correspond with the total, and that is at Huntingdon ^, whose 
 render of £;^o was made up as follows : 
 
 
 Total. 
 
 To the King. 
 
 To the Earl. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ s- d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Landgable 
 
 10 
 
 6 13 4 
 
 368 
 
 The firma burgi 
 
 30 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 
 3 Minters 
 
 2 
 
 I 6 8 
 
 13 4 
 
 The Mill 
 
 3 
 
 200 
 
 100 
 
 £m £2,0 00 £is o o 
 
 After the Conquest the landgable was diminished by 16s. Sd. 
 on account of the houses destroyed for the castle, and the 
 minters ceased to make any payment — and yet £^0 was 
 rendered as before. 
 
 » D. B. i. 3 a, I. * See App. § 3. » Z>. B. i. 238a, i. 
 
 * Id. 230a, I. ° Id. 203a, 2. 
 
9© THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Shrewsbury, too, rendered £^o T. R. E., but the only item of 
 this amount which is given in Domesday Book is £y j6s. 8d. 
 from landgable — but here the forfeitures are given and are 
 apparently very heavy ^. 
 
 Earl Hugh received for the city of Chester from a man 
 named Mundret £yo and a mark of gold ; yet the only 
 specific items given in the survey are ten and a half marks of 
 silver for geld, and £'j from the minters ; but here again the 
 forfeitures are numerous and heavy ^. Lewes was worth £;^ 
 and 1 1 2s. for new coin ; yet all the information we have about 
 its revenues, other than specific market-tolls and forfeitures, 
 is that ' T. R. E. it rendered £6 4s. i\d. from gablum and toll 
 and now 38^. more,' and that each minter paid 20s. when the 
 coinage was renewed ^. How were the balances of £2% ^s. 4d. 
 at Shrewsbury and £^6 at Chester made up ? The forfeitures 
 and fines would probably account for a fair sum, but not for 
 all this amount. 
 
 Attention has already been called to the absence of in- 
 formation about the borough market in most of the county 
 boroughs: is it not possible that the markets were so essential 
 to the existence of a borough that it was deemed unnecessary 
 to mention them ? and that the market-tolls at Shrewsbury 
 and Chester returned a considerable proportion of the un- 
 specified balances ? 
 
 There are several instances where the respective amounts 
 of gablum and toll are given: at Pevensey the gablum realized 
 39J. and the toll £4 * ; at Taunton the burgesses rendered 
 32J. and the market 50^.^ ; at Ilchester the burgesses rendered 
 20s. and the market with its appendages £11^ ; at Tewkes- 
 bury the burgesses rendered 20s. and the market realized 
 only I IS. 8d? ; at Pershore twenty-eight burgesses rendered 
 30J. and the toll amounted to 12^.^; at Bradford-on-Avon 
 thirty-three burgesses rendered '^^s. gd. and the market 4^s.^ 
 Many of these boroughs are not composite boroughs, but the 
 render of the burgesses in the simple boroughs was similar 
 
 * D.B. i. 252a, I. * Id. 262b, 2. ' Id. 26a, I. * Id. 20b, i. 
 
 » Id. 87^, I. * Id. 86^, I. ' Id. 163^, I. 
 
 « Id, 174^, 1. » Id. 67*, I. 
 
VALUES AND RENDERS 91 
 
 to the gablum paid by the burgesses in demesne in the 
 composite boroughs. From these figures we are led to 
 believe that the receipts from the market were at least double 
 the rent paid by the burgesses ; and if the market tolls at 
 Shrewsbury can be reckoned on this scale we can account for 
 at least £1^ i^s. ^d. of the balance, leaving only £6 los. to 
 be realized from the fines and forfeitures. 
 
 In whatever manner the amounts were made up, the renders 
 of the boroughs had substantially increased after the Conquest ; 
 in many cases the king received more than his expectations 
 or the valuation. Thus T. R. E. Wallingford was valued at £^0, 
 later at ;^40, at the time when Domesday Book was compiled 
 at £60, and yet it rendered ;^8o ^ ; Hertford rendered £7 10s. 
 T. R. E., when sheriff Peter received it, £1$, at the time of the 
 survey, ;^ao burnt and weighed^; Rochester was worth loos. 
 T. R. E. ; at the time of the survey it was valued at ;^2o, and 
 yet the tenant rendered ;^40 ^. The renders of Shrewsbury 
 had increased from £^0 to ;^40*; of Lincoln from £^0 to ;{^ioo^; 
 of Norwich from ^30 to ;^90 ^, and of Sandwich from ;^40 to 
 £^0 ''. Although there were in Oxford '478 houses so waste 
 and destroyed that they could not pay geld,* yet the render 
 of the city had increased from £^0 to £60 ^. The renders of 
 the Dorset boroughs are not recorded in Domesday Book, but 
 each of the four had decreased in size since the times of King 
 Edward : in Dorchester there were 100 houses destroyed, in 
 Wareham 150, in Shaftesbury eighty, and in Bridport twenty ; 
 and the destruction of the houses in the three former boroughs 
 is dated from the time of Hugh the sheriff^. 
 
 II. The Firma Burgi. 
 
 The fact that the values and renders are calculated in good 
 round sums, most of them in multiples of ;iCio, suggests that 
 the actual sums received by the collectors were not paid to the 
 king, but that the collectors agreed to pay him a fixed sum, 
 
 ^ D.B.I $6 i, I. Md. 132a, I. Md. 2a, I. * Id. 252a, i. 
 " Id. 336 d, I. * £>. B. ii. 117 a & d. '' D. B. i. 3 a, i. 
 
 » Id. I54«>i- ' Id. 7S«. I- 
 
9% THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 and, jf ^he receipts from the borough exceeded this sum, made 
 a profit for themselves ; this fixed sum was called the jirtna 
 burgi, a term well known to students of later municipal history, 
 when it was the ambition of every borough to obtain a grant 
 of the firma burgi, so that there should be no financial inter- 
 mediary between it and the king. 
 
 Mention is made of the firmars (« qui tenent) of Canter- 
 bury ^, Rochester ^, Colchester ^ and Reading * ; and of Ipswich 
 we read : 
 
 Roger the sheriff gave the whole to fann at ^Sfi (to be paid) at Michael- 
 mas. Afterwards he could not have the cess {censum) and of this he 
 pardoned 6oj. ; now it renders £2)7 '• 
 
 Stamford ' gives £^o at farm * ' : and we have already noticed 
 that Chester was farmed of the earl by Mundret for £']0 and 
 a mark of gold '. When the archbishop received Sandwich 
 it rendered £40 de firma, and 40,000 herrings *; and similarly 
 Wallingford rendered ;^8o de firma ^. The Huntingdon 
 evidence quoted above ^° shows that part only of the revenues 
 of a borough could be farmed, for there the firma burgi was 
 calculated T. R. E. separately from the landgable and the 
 receipts from the mill and the mint, but the fisheries were 
 included in the farm ; and at Chester ^^ and Shrewsbury ^- we 
 find payments extra Jirmam. 
 
 We have already seen that for many boroughs the sheriff 
 was accountable, and this would show that he farmed these 
 boroughs ; he or his officers collected the dues from which 
 he paid the firma burgi to the king, and presumably made 
 a profit. But at Hereford the praepositus farmed the city 
 direct from King Edward ^^; the praepositus was the farmer 
 at Dover also^*, and paid ;^24 to the king and £y:> to 
 the earl. 
 
 In one case only do the burgesses appear to have farmed 
 the borough at the time of Domesday Book : at Northampton 
 
 ^ D.B.\.^a,\. »Id. 2a, I. » Z>. 5. ii. 107 3. * Z>. ^. i. 58a, I. 
 
 " D. B. ii. 290 <J. « D. B. i. 336-5, 2. '' Id. 262 b, 2. 
 
 « Id. 3 a, I. » Id. 56 a, 2. "* Id. 203 a, 2. " Id. 262^, 2. 
 
 " Id. 2S2a, I. " Id. 179a, I. " Id. I a, i. 
 
THE FIRMA BURGI 93 
 
 * the burgesses render to the sheriff ;^30 los. per annum, and 
 this belongs to his farm ^ ' ; so that they were accountable to 
 the sheriff, and did not farm the borough directly of the king. 
 
 One of the earliest instances of an agreement between the 
 burgesses of any borough and the king for the farm of that 
 borough was at Lincoln, where in 11 30 'the citizens gave to 
 the king 200 marks of silver and a mark of gold, that they 
 might hold the city in chief V 
 
 In the twelfth-century Pipe Rolls the word gersuma 
 signifies the premium paid by a firmar for the privilege of 
 farming a manor or a borough ; Domesday Book, in the 
 majority of cases, uses the word in the same significance. 
 Hence we see that the gersuma of looj. from Colchester was 
 the premium paid to the sheriff by Bishop Walchelin for the 
 privilege of farming that borough ^ ; and similarly the farmer 
 of Canterbury paid a premium of wos. to the sheriff of 
 Kent *, although in this case the word gersuma is not used. 
 Possibly the gersu7na of £4. paid by the burgesses of Yar- 
 mouth to the sheriff was also a premium paid for the farm of 
 the borough, although the statement that ' the burgesses pay 
 these £4. voluntarily and of friendship' may be inserted to 
 show that the word is not used in its ordinary signification ^ 
 Two gersumae were paid out of the revenues of Norwich — one 
 of 10s. by tale, of which the recipient is not stated, and the 
 other of looj-. by tale to the queen ^ ; and similar payments 
 to the queen were made out of the revenues of Oxfordshire "^ 
 and Warwickshire ^. 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 219 a, I. ^ Stubbs's Con. Hist. \. 411. 
 
 ^ D.B.W.ioTb. * D.B.\.2a,i. " D.B.ii.iiSd. 
 
 « Id. ii. ii7<J. ■' Z?. ^. i. 154^, 2. »Id. 238a, I. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 THE SIMPLE BOROUGHS 
 
 Before passing on to the consideration of the simple 
 boroughs let us sum up the characteristics of the composite, 
 and especially of the county boroughs, at the time of the 
 Conquest. 
 
 (i) They were not said to be holden by any one, neither by 
 the king nor the earl ^. 
 
 (2) They were characterized by teniirial heterogeneity, that 
 is to say, that while many of the houses were in the kings 
 demesne, yet a larger or smaller proportion belonged to the 
 landowners as appurtenances to their rural estates ^. 
 
 (3) These contributed houses contained burgesses who 
 performed the duties of their lords as regards the fortifica- 
 tion of the borough ^. 
 
 (4) Some of these boroughs were subject to a special geld 
 which was reckoned in units of marks * 
 
 (5) Their renders were accounted for by the sheriff*, 
 except at Hereford and Dover, where the praepositus 
 accounted for them^. 
 
 (6) T. R. E. the earl received the third penny of their 
 renders '. 
 
 (7) Their burgesses rendered military services, and other 
 services of a somewhat similar nature ^. 
 
 (8) There were many immunities within their walls ; some 
 of the county landowners and burgesses had sac and soc in 
 their own houses and over their tenants^. 
 
 The quasi-county boroughs differed from the county 
 boroughs in one or another of these points : the majority 
 of them were characterized by tenurial heterogeneity, but 
 
 * See p. 4. 'Seepp. 11-31. ' See pp. 31-5. * See pp. 66, 70. 
 » See p. 45. « See p. 46. "^ See p. 41. 
 
 * See pp. 80-2. ' See pp. 47-51. 
 
THE SIMPLE BOROUGHS 95 
 
 some of them were said to be holden by the king or one 
 of his barons : those that were not characterized by tenuricd 
 heterogeneity are placed in this class because they possessed 
 one or another of the distinguishing marks of the county 
 boroughs; thus Fordwich^, Totnes^ and Axbridge^ paid 
 the third penny of their renders to the earl before the 
 Conquest; and Lidford* and Totnes* joined Barnstaple in 
 performing specific military services; Totnes also paid the 
 special geld in units of marks. 
 
 Now if we refer back to the valuation of Steyning on 
 page 6 we shall see that it differs in every respect from the 
 typical county borough, and in most respects from the quasi- 
 county boroughs. In the first place it was entirely holden 
 by the Abbot of Fecamp ; all the burgesses were his men, 
 and no other county magnate had any part or lot in the 
 borough, nor did the earl receive the third penny of its 
 render ; the burgesses did not pay the special geld which 
 was reckoned in units of marks, and, instead of performing 
 military services, worked at the Court T. R. E. as the other 
 villains. And, finally, it is valued in the hundred of which 
 it forms part, and the value of the whole property is returned 
 in a lump sum of which the render of the burgesses is only 
 a part. 
 
 That Steyning may be fairly taken as a typical simple 
 borough will be seen if we compare it with other boroughs of 
 the same class in other parts of the country. 
 
 First, take four small boroughs in Hertfordshire : 
 
 In Odsey Hundred. 
 
 (i) The Abbot of Westminster holds Ashwell: it vouches for 6 hides: 
 there is land for 12 ploughs. . . . (Then follows the usual description 
 of an agricultural property.) . . . There are 14 burgesses and 9 cottars. 
 Of the toll and other customs of the borough 49J. 4^. ... In the whole it 
 was and is worth ^20. T. R. E. ;i^22 *. 
 
 In St. Albans Hundred. 
 
 (2) The vill of St. Albans vouches for 10 hides. . . . There are 46 
 burgesses. Of the toll and other rents of the vill £\\ 14J. In the whole 
 it is worth ;^20. The aforesaid burgesses hold half a hide '^. 
 
 ^ Z>. ^. i. 12 a, 2. *Id. loia, 2. 'Id. 87 a, 2. * Id. 100 a, 2. 
 
 » Id. \oZb, I. « Id. 135^ I. •^ Id. 135^, I. 
 
95 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 In Tring Hundred. 
 
 (3) The Earl of Mortain holds Berkhampstead. It vouches for 13 
 hides : there is land for 26 ploughs. ... In the little borough {burbtum) 
 of this vill 52 burgesses render of toll £^, and have half a hide. ... In the 
 whole it is worth ;^i6'. 
 
 In Braughing Hundred. 
 
 (4) Ralph, brother of Ilger, holds in Stanstead 17 hides and half 
 a virgate. . . . There are 4 villains with the priest and the praepositus of 
 the vill. . . . There are also 7 burgesses who render with other customs 
 of the meadow and wood 23^'. In the whole it is worth ^17. 
 
 Similarly in Suffolk : 
 
 (5) Land of Richard son of Earl Gilbert. 
 
 Riseburge Hundred.— Alvric held Clare for a manor of 24 plough- 
 lands T. R. E. . . . Always a market ; now 47 burgesses. ... (It pays) 
 l^d. towards geld (15^?. de geldo)^. 
 
 (6) Land of the Abbot of St. Edmund's. 
 
 Wanneford Hundred.— St. Edmund holds Beccles. . . . And 
 one market and 26 burgesses. The Abbot has three parts of the market 
 and the King the fourth part. . . . Then the manor rendered 30,000 
 herrings ; now 60,000 herrings *. 
 
 Go north into Yorkshire : 
 
 (7) In Pocklington with three berewicks are . . . among all 55^ 
 geldpaying carucates and there can be 30 ploughs there. , . . Now there 
 are in the King's hands 15 burgesses having 7 ploughs, and a mill render- 
 ing 2^." 
 
 SiRACHES Wapentake. 
 
 (8) In Pontefract (Tateshalle) are 16 carucates quit of geld where 
 there can be 9 ploughs. The King had this manor ; now Ilbert de Lacy 
 has there 4 ploughs and 60 minute burgesses and 16 cottagers and 16 
 villains and 8 bordars having 18 ploughs. . . . T. R. E. it was worth ^20. 
 Now ^15'. 
 
 In Lincolnshire : 
 
 (9) In Louth the Bishop of Lincoln has 12 geldpaying carucates. 
 There is land for 12 ploughs. The Bishop now has in demesne 3 ploughs 
 and 80 burgesses and one market of 29^., and 40 sokemen and 2 villains. 
 Among all they have 13 ploughs and 13 mills rendering 60s. . . . T. R.E. 
 it was worth ^12. Now ^22'. Tailla^3. 
 
 In Nottinghamshire : 
 
 (10) In Newark with 2 berewicks. . . . Countess Godiva had 7 geld- 
 paying carucates and 2 bovates. Land for 26 ploughs. There Bishop 
 
 ^ D.B.I 1366, 1. Md.1383,1. 5 Z>. 5. ii. 389 3. Md.ii,369^. 
 " £>. B. i. 299^, I. « Id. 316*, I. ' Id. 345 a, i. 
 
THE SIMPLE BOROUGHS 97 
 
 Remigius has in demesne 7 ploughs and 56 burgesses and 42 villains and 
 21 bordars having 20J ploughs. . . . T. R. E. it was worth ^^50 : now £34^. 
 
 Take our last three examples from Worcestershire, Wiltshire 
 and Devon respectively : 
 
 (11) The Church of St. Peter at Westminster holds Pershore. There 
 are 200 hides. . . . There 28 burgesses render 3or. and the toll renders 
 1 2 J.* 
 
 (12) The King holds Warminster ; King Edward held it. It did 
 not geld nor is it hided. There is land for 40 ploughs. In demesne are 
 6 ploughs and 24 slaves and 13 swineherds. There are 15 villains and 
 8 cottagers and 14 coliberti with 36 ploughs. . . . There are 30 burgesses. 
 This manor renders the farm of one night with all its customs'. 
 
 (13) Baldwin the sheriff holds of the King Okehampton, and there is 
 his castle. It gelded for three virgates and i ferling. . . . There are 
 4 burgesses and a market rendering 4^.* 
 
 It will be at once noticed that none of these differs in any 
 material respect from Steyning : every one of them is owned 
 by a single person ; and neither the earl nor the sheriff has 
 any interest in them. The burgesses rendered no special 
 military services ; at Pocklington, Louth and Newark they 
 appear to have been agriculturists, and possibly ' worked at 
 the court,' as the burgesses oi Steyning : but at St. Albans and 
 Berkhampstead they each held little more land than would be 
 held by a cottager. 
 
 Of these fourteen examples (including Steyning), taken at 
 random from all parts of the kingdom, eight are stated to have 
 markets — that is, if the mention of toll implies a market, as 
 was previously assumed : and this proportion might suggest 
 that the establishment of a market raised a village to the 
 rank of a borough ; and the evidence of Tewkesbury points 
 in the same direction. 
 
 The Land of the King. 
 
 In Tewkesbury were T. R. E. 95 hides. ... In Gloucester there were 
 8 burgesses rendering $s. ^d. and serving at the Court. ... At Tewkes- 
 bury now are 1 3 burgesses rendering 10s. per annum : a market which 
 the Queen established there renders \\s. Zd.^ 
 
 Thus it would seem as if the establishment of a market 
 at Tewkesbury had converted Tewkesbury into a borough, 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 2833, 2. » Id. 17 Ab, I. • Id. 64^, 2. 
 
 * Id. 105^, 2. ^ Id. 163*, I. 
 
 BALLAKD pj 
 
98 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 and had recalled its contributed burgesses from Gloucester. 
 On examination we find that markets are specifically men- 
 tioned at Beccles ^, Bradford-on- Avon ^, Clare *, Eye *, Louth ^, 
 Okehampton^, Taunton^, Totbury® and Tewkesbury^, and that 
 toll was a source of income at Ash well ^^ Berkhampstead ^^ , 
 Pershore^'^ and St Albans ^^, and that no markets are recorded 
 at Bedwyn^*, Bridlington^^, Castle Clifford ^^, Newark", Pen- 
 wortham^*, Pocklington ^®, Quatford'^", Rye^\ Seasalter-^, 
 Stanstead^^, Steyning^*, Pontefract^^ Devizes^^, Warminster^'' 
 and Wigmore ^^ But, on the other hand, there were many 
 market towns that were not boroughs. 
 
 Berkeley (Glos.). There is a market-place in which remain 17 men 
 who pay censum infimia ^'. 
 
 Berton (Berks.). The Abbot of Abingdon holds Berton in demesne 
 . . . And 10 merchants remaining before the gates of the Church 
 rendering 40^.'° 
 
 Cheshunt (Herts.). Earl Alan holds Cheshunt. It vouches for 
 20 hides. . . . There are 10 merchants rendering loj. of custom ^. 
 
 We have already noticed that, according to Domesday Book, 
 there were no boroughs in Cornwall, and yet there were five 
 market towns in the county — St. Germains^^, Bodmin^^, Laun- 
 ceston ^, Liskeard ^^ and Trematon ^^. The index to the 
 Record Commission edition of Domesday Book mentions 
 markets in forty-two places, of which thirty-one are not 
 called boroughs. So we must conclude that, while a market 
 was possibly an appurtenance of a borough, its establish- 
 ment did not convert a village into a borough or confer 
 borough rights. 
 
 Like Calne, Reading was a borough on an agricultural 
 
 » D, B. ii. 369 b. « D. B. I 676,1. » Z>. B. ii. 389 6. 
 
 * Id. ii. 319 6. ' D. B. i. 345 a, i. « Id, 105 b, 2. 
 
 ' Id. 87^, I. « Id. 248^, I. 9 Id. 163^, I. 
 
 1° Id. 135^, I. " Id. 136^, I. " Id. 1743, I. « Id. 135^, i. 
 
 " Id. 64^, 2. " Id. 299^, I. ^« Id. 183 a, 2. " Id. 283, <5, 2. 
 
 " Id. 270a, I. " Id. 299(J, I. 20 Id. 254a, I. 2' Id. 170, 2. 
 
 "^Id. 5a, I. '^ Id. 138/5, I. «*Id. 17a, 2. »Id. 316/J. 
 
 «• Id. 65 a, I. 27 IjJ 6_^^^ 2. 28 Id. 183^, I. ?9 Id. 163 a, I. 
 
 «> Id. 58^, I. "^ Id. 137 a, I. "2 Id. 120^, I. »» Id. 120 <5, 2. 
 
 '* Id. 120^, I. ^ Id. 121 b, I. ^ Id. 122 a, I. 
 
THE SIMPLE BOROUGHS 
 
 99 
 
 estate, which contained houses belonging to others than the 
 owner of the estate. 
 
 The King holds READING in demesne. . . . Then and now it vouched 
 for 43 hides. . . . T. R. E. and afterwards it was worth j£40. Now ;^48. 
 
 In the borough of Reading the King has 28 haws rendering £4 ^s. for 
 all customs. Yet he who holds it pays 100s. 
 
 Henry of Ferrers has there I haw and half a virgate of land in which 
 are 3 acres of meadow. They are worth 6s. Godric the sheriff held this 
 land oii hospitiitm. Henry holds it in this manner. 
 
 Rainbald the son of Peter the Bishop held I haw which he drew into 
 his manor of Earley. Now it is in the hands of the King and is 
 worth \6d. ^ 
 
 The King holds Earley in demesne. ... I haw in Reading '. 
 
 The Abbot of Battle holds in Reading a church with 8 hides there 
 pertaining to it. . . . In Reading 29 masures of %Zs. M. and 12 acres of 
 meadow '. 
 
 We are thus enabled to see how it probably came to 
 pass that Reading developed from a simple into a quasi- 
 county borough, or rather, from a homogeneous into a hetero- 
 geneous borough. Rainbald the son of Peter the Bishop 
 owned the estate of Earley : one of his tenants on that estate 
 was also tenant of a house in the borough of Reading under 
 King Edward, and Rainbald ' drew ' that house into his manor 
 of Earley in the same way as the praepositus of the Bishop 
 of Bayeux converted the houses at Guildford into the 
 manor of Bromley ; possibly his methods were an assertion 
 of a claim to the rent of the house, or to sac and soc 
 over it. Eventually King William obtained possession of the 
 manor of Earley, and the house in Reading again became 
 royal property, but it evidently did not cease to be an 
 appurtenance of Earley. With regard to the church which 
 belonged to Battle Abbey, we know from the Chronicle of the 
 abbey that it was part of the Conqueror's endowment of 
 the abbey * : so that it would seem that one method of trans- 
 forming a simple into a composite borough was for the king 
 or its owner to give some of the houses therein to a second 
 party. Royal gifts to the church of portions of the royal 
 
 ^ Z?. ^. i. 58a, I. Md. 57a, 2. »Id. 60a, I. 
 
 * Chron. Battle Abbey, p. 35. 
 H 1 
 
loo THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 property in certain boroughs may account for the hetero- 
 geneity of many of the smaller and less important boroughs, 
 such as Twineham. 
 
 Taunton was a simple borough, but the enumeration of the 
 customs pertaining to Taunton is very lengthy, and therefore 
 deserves quotation in full : 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester holds Taunton, and it gelded T. R. E. for 
 54 hides and 2j virgates. There is land for loo ploughs. Besides these, the 
 Bishop has in demesne land for 20 ploughs which never gelded. There 
 he has 13 ploughs. There are 80 villains and 82 bordars and 70 slaves 
 and 16 coliberti and 17 swineherds rendering £"] \os. Between them 
 all, they have 60 ploughs. There are there 64 burgesses rendering 
 32J., and three mills rendering 95J., and a market rendering 50J. : 
 from the mint 50J. . . . When Bishop Walchelin received it, it rendered 
 £,^0: now it renders ;^I54 and 13^. with all its appurtenances and 
 customs. 
 
 These customs pertain to Taunton : burgheristh, larceny, peacebreach, 
 heinfare, hundred's pence, Peter's pence, churchshot. Thrice in the 
 year the Bishop's pleas are held without a summons. Service in 
 expeditions with the men of the Bishop. These aforesaid customs 
 are rendered unto Taunton by these lands. (Here follows a list of 16 
 properties.) The men of Bauueburge owe the same customs except 
 militia \_fyrd\ and burial. From all these lands those who wish to take 
 an oath or go to law come to Taunton. When the lords of these lands 
 die, they are buried in Taunton ^. 
 
 Taunton is the only simple borough mentioned in Domes- 
 day Book as having a mint, though we shall see that 
 some of the boroughs of this type had mints before the 
 Conquest ; and it is the only borough of this class in con- 
 nexion with which a court of law is mentioned. Of the customs 
 which pertain to Taunton, burgheristh is probably the French 
 scribe's mistake for burh-geriht, the borough right "^-j but as 
 this borough right was said to be rendered to Taunton by 
 rural properties, it is possible that it was merely burh-bot, 
 and that it was the duty of these specified properties to repair 
 the walls of the town, which we know from the Chronicle was 
 an ancient border fortress against the Welsh of Cornwall : 
 we already know * larceny, peacebreach, and heinfare,' the 
 three forfeitures which the Archbishop of Canterbury received 
 
 ^ D. B. i. 87 b, I. « D. B. and B. p. 88, n. I. 
 
THE SIMPLE BOROUGHS loi 
 
 from his burgesses at Romney * : Peter's pence are to-day 
 paid by all good Roman Catholics, and Church-shot was 
 a due in kind payable to the Church at Martinmas. But 
 it must be remembered that these customs, with the possible 
 exception of burgkerisik, belonged to the manor and not to 
 the borough exclusively ; the Bishop of Winchester had 
 secured a grant of jurisdiction of the highest type for his 
 manor ^, and if he enjoyed certain rights over his borough 
 they would appear to be a corollary of his rights over the 
 manor rather than intrinsic appurtenances of the borough. 
 In connexion with no other simple borough do we find 
 traces of any of them, and we must therefore regard Taunton 
 as abnormal. 
 
 The Reading survey might suggest that the occupation 
 of a house at a fixed money rent, as opposed to a service 
 rent (i. e. the occupancy of a burgage tenement) made a 
 man a burgess, and distinguished him from the villains and 
 bordars ; but this generalization is contradicted by the 
 Windsor evidence: 
 
 The King holds Windsor in demesne. . . . (for an agriculture estate) 
 . . . Now there are in the vill 95 haws. Of these 26 are quit of gablum, 
 and from the others arise 30^'.' 
 
 Here we have a vill that is not styled a borough, and yet 
 contains houses yielding gablum — in other words, houses that 
 in a borough would be burgage tenements: so that, unless 
 this is the exception that proves the rule, a tenement at 
 a money rent does not necessarily imply a borough. 
 
 Differing from Steyning only in the fact that they are not 
 definitely stated to be situate in some agricultural manor are 
 the little boroughs which had grown up under the walls of 
 some baron's castle. The castles of Clifford *, Okehampton *, 
 Penwortham^, Rhuddlan'^, Totbury^ and Wigmore^ are 
 expressly mentioned in connexion with the boroughs of the 
 same names, and of these, Clifford, Rhuddlan and Wigmore 
 were said to have been built on land that was waste before 
 
 » See p. 86. "^ D. B. and B. p. 87. ' D. B. i. 56^, I. 
 
 * Id. 183 a, 2. ** Id. 105 <5, 2. * Id. 270a, I. 
 
 ' Id. 269a. « Id. 248^, I. ' Id. 183 ^ I. 
 
102 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 the Conquest ; and therefore the boroughs were of the creation 
 of Wilh'am I. Although Totbury is styled a borough, yet its 
 inhabitants are not styled burgesses : 
 
 In Pireholle Hundred, 
 Henry of Ferrers has the castle of Totbury. In the borough about 
 the castle are 42 men living from their own merchandise only, and yield- 
 ing with the market-place £4 los. ^ 
 
 Evidently there was a great difference between them and 
 the agricultural burgesses of Pocklington, Louth and Newark. 
 From other evidence we know that along with Totbury and 
 the others before mentioned should be classed Clare and 
 Berkhampstead. 
 
 Another example of a borough containing no burgesses 
 is Seasalter: 
 
 In the same Borowart Lest lies a small borough by name Seasalter, 
 which belongs to the kitchen of the Archbishop. A certain man by 
 name Blize holds it of the monks. In demesne is one plough and 
 48 bordars with one plough. There is a church and 8 fisheries with 
 gablum of 25J. Wood for 10 pigs. T. R. E. and afterwards it was 
 worth 2 5 J. ^ 
 
 It is useless to attempt from the evidence afforded by 
 Domesday Book to define the difference between a borough 
 on an agricultural estate and a village : neither the existence 
 of a market or of haws nor the mention of gablum are the 
 infallible signs of a borough. One thing is clear — that the 
 elevation of a village to the rank of a borough did not sever 
 its connexion with the hundred in which it lay. It will be 
 noticed that most of the descriptions of the simple boroughs 
 above quoted begin by stating the hundred to which they 
 belonged ; the only exceptions are in the counties where the 
 Domesday commissioners do not mention the hundreds ; 
 and this corroborates our previous contention that the 
 existence of a burg-mote did not oust the jurisdiction of 
 the hundred-mote. 
 
 This study of the simple boroughs may throw some light 
 on the general question of the origin of boroughs : of our 
 thirty-two simple boroughs, only one — Steyning — is definitely 
 
 ^ £>. B. i. 248 b, I. « Id. S «, I. 
 
THE SIMPLE BOROUGHS 103 
 
 stated by Domesday Book to have had the status of a borough 
 before the Conquest : from other sources we know that 
 Taunton was in the possession of borough-right from the 
 reign of Edward the Elder onwards; and we shall see that 
 these two boroughs with Bedwyn were the only simple 
 boroughs (styled boroughs in Domesday Book) that had 
 mints before the Conquest. All these simple boroughs had 
 apparently grown up on the demesne land of the king or 
 some landowner ; and, if our arguments are correct as to the 
 share of the earl in a composite borough ^, they are the only 
 boroughs of which this can be said with certainty ^. Possibly 
 these facts may indicate that the majority of the simple 
 boroughs were post-conquest creations ; if so, it would appear 
 that the code of municipal customs (if such a term may be 
 applied to the ill-assorted array we have been considering) 
 must have grown up in the older county boroughs, and that 
 such portions thereof as were applicable to the newer boroughs 
 were, by a stroke of the Conqueror's pen, granted to them — 
 in the same manner as a grant of royal letters patent will 
 to-day confer on the mushroom manufacturing towns of the 
 North of England the benefit of that code of municipal 
 experience which we in the older boroughs have gained only 
 in the course of centuries. 
 
 » Ante, pp. 38, 41-43- 
 
 ^ But this statement must be modified as regards some of the Wilts and 
 Somerset boroughs : Axbridge was situate on the manor of Cheddar 
 (D. B. i. 86 a, 2), Langport on Somerton (Z>. ^. i. 86 a, 2), Milboume 
 and Ilchester on Milboume {D. B. i. 86 ^, i), and Calne on the manor of 
 the same name {D. B. i. 64 b, 2) ; so that these boroughs would appear to 
 have grown up on the royal demesne : and, as at Steyning, the render of 
 the whole property is stated as a lump sum, of which the render of the 
 burgesses forms only a part (pp. 6, 95). On the other hand, as in the 
 composite boroughs, the third penny of all is separately accounted for, 
 and all, except Axbridge, contained burgesses belonging to other lords. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Now that the descriptions of the boroughs in Domesday 
 Book have been analysed, we may pass on to consider the 
 evidence afforded by the Old-English conveyances and laws, 
 and by the incidental references in the Chronicle, concerning 
 the condition of the boroughs before the Norman Conquest ; 
 and it must be premised that, although we have felt inclined 
 to complain of the lack of material in Domesday Book, the 
 pre-Domesday evidence is still more scanty. There are less 
 than a hundred conveyances relating to urban properties, and 
 the whole of the laws relating to the boroughs would not fill 
 half a dozen pages of this book ; but, such as it is, that scanty 
 evidence may be treated in somewhat the same way as the 
 Domesday evidence. 
 
 I. The Borough as a Stronghold. 
 
 That our Old-English ancestors were lovers of the country, 
 and, like the Bedawin of to-day, hated to be cooped up in 
 towns, is a truism for which no authority need be quoted ; 
 and yet, within a very few years of their landing in Britain, 
 some of them became town-dwellers ; the present cathedral 
 city of Sussex may have been inhabited before the end of the 
 fifth century. Nor would the reason for its occupation be 
 hard to seek : till the power of the Britons had been broken 
 by the fall of Anderida they could raid the lowlands from 
 the downs, which even now are fringed on their southern 
 slopes with extensive woods. As a refuge from the raiders 
 some fortifications were necessary for the wives, children and 
 cattle of the settlers, and they would find these fortifications 
 ready to hand in the old walls of the Roman city. Possibly 
 in the Britain of the fifth, sixth and seventh centuries, as 
 
THE BOROUGH AS A STRONGHOLD 105 
 
 Professor George Adam Smith says of the Hauran of to-day, 
 ' the great towns have become shells in which little clans 
 huddle for shelter ^.' 
 
 But it is in Kent that we find the earliest and most trust- 
 worthy records of the town-dwelling English ; the first con- 
 veyance printed by Kemble in the Codex Diplomaticus is a 
 conveyance of a plot of land in Rochester, of which the 
 boundaries were 'from Southgate west along the wall, on 
 the north lane to the street, and so east from the street along 
 Doddinghyrnan to Bradgate ^ ' : this is dated 604, and shows 
 that before that time (i. e. within a century and a half of their 
 settlement in Kent) the invaders had kept up (or repaired) the 
 Roman walls. The next two conveyances in the Codex are 
 dated the following year, and relate to similar plots of land 
 in Canterbury, one of which ran up to the Burhgate ^. It is 
 not, however, till the end of the next century that there is any 
 large number of conveyances dealing with urban properties ; 
 most of them relate merely to plots within the walls of Canter- 
 bury and Rochester, which were described similarly to those 
 already quoted, but some of them relate not only to houses 
 within the walls but also to lands belonging to these houses 
 without the walls ; thus we find 
 
 A.D. 765. Grant of a viculus within the fortifications of the castle of 
 
 Rochester {intra castelH moenia , . . 
 Hrofecestri) with two jugera of land *. 
 
 781. Grant of land within the fortifications of Rochester with four 
 
 acres of meadow by the western island'. 
 
 823. Grant of land within the walls of Canterbury 60ft. by 30ft., with 
 
 25 acres in arido campo and 5 acres of 
 meadow ®. 
 
 832. Devise of a mansion in the Northern part of the wall of Canter- 
 bury, with the close pertaining to it ^ 
 
 832. Grant of a villa in the City of Canterbury and 5 jugera and 
 
 2 meadows *. 
 
 839. Grant of a villa within the city of Canterbury with 34 acres 
 
 pertaining to it*. 
 
 ^ Hist. Geography of the Holy Land, p. 638. "^ K.\. ' K. 2, 3. 
 
 * K. 113. » K. 144. • K. 217. ' K. 230. 
 
 8 K. 1041. » K. 241. 
 
io6 THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 855. Grant of a villam quam nos Saxonice an haga dicimus in the 
 
 south of the castle of Rochester, with 
 ID acres of land, 2 acres of meadow, 10 
 loads of wood, and common of marsh '. 
 
 904. Grant of a haw in Worcester with 120 acres of land at Bar- 
 bourn '. 
 
 These conveyances would appear to show that in the ninth 
 century there were houses in Canterbury, Rochester and 
 Worcester to which certain lands were appurtenant, and are 
 additional reason for doubting whether the Domesday entries 
 of land belonging to the burgesses are evidence of borough 
 property ; but, on the other hand, the lands in two convey- 
 ances are said to be bounded by the 'burgesses meadows/ 
 which may be evidence of certain meadows occupied by the 
 burgesses in common ^. If it were not stated that the 1 20 
 acres of land conveyed along with the Worcester house were 
 situate at Barbourn, a place closely adjoining the city, we 
 might be tempted to see at Worcester a typical village com- 
 munity settled within the walls of the deserted Roman city. 
 
 From the end of the seventh century onwards we find 
 evidence that rural properties were charged with the trinoda 
 necessitas, burhbot, brigbot and fyrd^ a liability to repair the 
 walls of the boroughs and the bridges, and to serve in the 
 militia ; hence we gather that the walls of Canterbury and 
 Rochester, and of the other boroughs in the kingdom, were 
 kept up by the villagers of the neighbourhood : we have seen 
 that as late as the reign of Edward the Confessor one man 
 went from each hide of land in Cheshire to repair the walls of 
 Chester *, and a law of Athelstan prescribes that these repairs 
 shall be carried out within a fortnight of Rogationtide ". One 
 would naturally argue that, if the repair of the walls was a 
 common charge upon the villagers of a district, the stronghold 
 formed by those walls would be available for them in times 
 of peril : the English name of the capital of Kent is evidence 
 of this — Cant-wara-Burh = the stronghold of the inhabitants 
 of Kent. Hence we are not surprised to find a conveyance 
 dated 814 by which Coenwulf, King of the Mercians, gave to 
 K. 276. » K. 339. » K. 259-82. 
 
 *Ante, p. 35- ' ^. 157- 
 
THE BOROUGH AS A STRONGHOLD 107 
 
 the Abbess of Lyminge 'a portion of land in the City of 
 Canterbury for a refuge in case of necessity [ad necessitatis 
 refugiuni), that is to say, six acres pertaining to the church of 
 the Blessed Mary ' ^. Evidently the Abbey of Lyminge was 
 exposed to the ravages of pirates, and a retreat in a stronghold 
 was necessary for the safety of the nuns. Along with this 
 charter should be read two others of about the same date. 
 
 811. Grant of 2 hides at Southhunningland at Graveney and 2 J haws 
 
 in Canterbury ^. 
 838. „ 4 „ Snoddingland and a house in Rochester '. 
 
 Possibly in both these cases we have grants of rural properties 
 with town houses for places of refuge. 
 
 With the reign of Alfred, however, there begins a new phase 
 in the history of the boroughs. According to the Chronicle 
 it was in the year 894 that he made his famous tripartite 
 division of the ^^^, the national militia: one part was to take 
 the field, a second to be on furlough, while the others were to 
 hold the ' burhs.' Five years later the king held a conference 
 at Chelsea about the repair of London {de instauratione Lun- 
 doniae), and at that conference granted two several acres of 
 land in the city to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the 
 Bishop of Worcester *. And from the year 940 there is a great 
 change in the forms of conveyance of town houses; there may 
 be one or two conveyances of town houses merely, but the 
 majority of these conveyances relate to town houses which are 
 appurtenant to rural properties. These may be scheduled as 
 follows : 
 
 A. D. 940. Grant of 10 hides at Wiley with a haw in Wilton ". 
 
 943, „ 7 „ Ticstead with a haw in Winchester*. 
 
 945" » 30 » Brightwell with land in Wallingford^ 
 945. „ 5 „ Mackney with land in Wallingford *. 
 
 956. „ 7 „ Millbrook with a haw in Southampton '. 
 
 961. Lease of 10 „ Kilmiston with a haw in Winchester ^". 
 961. Grant of 50 „ Hurstbourn and 13 'praedia' in Win- 
 chester ^^ 
 963. Lease of 2$ „ Oddingley and a haw in Worcester". 
 
 1 K. 188. ^ K. 196. ' K. 239. * K. 1074. 
 
 » K. 379, App. « /r. 1144. ' K.iiSA- ' K. 1 161. 
 
 » K. 450, App. '" K. 1231. " K. 1235. " K. 507. 
 
io8 THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 978-82. Lease of I hide at Battenhall with the haw by the south side? 
 
 of St. Peter's Church at Worcester \ 
 „ 3 hides at Bradingcote and the haw that he hath 
 
 before the gate at Worcester *. 
 985* „ I hide at Clopton and the haw within the minster 
 
 on parte that Wulfric mass priest be- 
 queathed to Wulfward his relation '. 
 988. Grant of 4 hides at Colworth and a haw in Chichester*. 
 990. „ 15 „ Wootton and 9 haws in Tanner Street, 
 
 Winchester ^ 
 996. „ 4 „ Byrston and 4 hides at Wincelfield with 
 
 nine haws in St. Albans '. 
 1001. „ 25 „ Itchington and a haw in Warwick'. 
 1008. „ 20 „ Mordun with a haw in Cricklade*. 
 I016. Lease of i hide at Bishopston and a haw in Warwick '. 
 1032. Devise of 2 hides at Linford and i haw in Oxford ^**. 
 1042. Lease of 6 „ Bentley and i haw in Worcester". 
 1045. Grant of 7 „ Millbrook with a haw in Southampton". 
 1044. „ lands at Stouting and Milton with a haw ' binnan 
 
 porte ' (? Canterbury) ". 
 1046-60. „ 3 hides at Teddington with the ' curtem ' pertaining in 
 
 Worcester ^*. 
 1042-66. „ ' that cotlif Stane mid tham lande Staeninghaga 
 
 withinne Lundene ' by Edward the 
 Confessor to Westminster Abbey ^'. 
 1040-57. „ 5 hides at Wolverley and 2 hides at Blackwell and one 
 
 haw in Worcester". 
 
 Now we have seen that at the time of Domesday Book urban 
 houses appurtenant to rural properties were charged with the 
 repair of the walls in the towns where they were situate, and 
 therefore we may argue that, in every one of the cases above 
 quoted, the town houses were charged with the repair of the 
 walls, probably in exoneration of the rural properties to which 
 they were appurtenant. In other words, some lords commuted 
 their burhbot^ by building houses in the towns to which they 
 owed burhbot; and by keeping burgesses in these houses to 
 repair the walls when necessary. Hence we can see how the 
 gifts of land in the City of London to the Archbishop of 
 
 » K. 559. 2 ^ 683. ' K. 649. ♦ K. 663. 
 
 » K. 673. « K. 696. ' K. 705. » K. 1305. 
 
 « K. 724. " K. 746. " K. 765. '^ K. 781. 
 
 " A'. 774. » K. 805. " K. 855. " K. 766. 
 
THE BOROUGH AS A STRONGHOLD 109 
 
 Canterbury and the Bishop of Worcester would secure its 
 restoration ; these prelates would have to build houses on 
 these plots, and send men from their rural properties to dwell 
 therein and repair the wall when necessary \ But such com- 
 mutation was not universal ; the Cheshire custom shows that 
 the older system existed side by side with the newer, and we 
 have also seen that it was not every tenant in capite who at the 
 time of Domesday Book had a house in the county borough. 
 A comparison of any of my maps with a Domesday map of 
 the county will show that it was not every village that had 
 an appurtenant house in the neighbouring borough. More- 
 over, the laws of Ethelred H and Canute both regard the 
 burhhot as being still a charge on the rural properties, and the 
 latter monarch fixed the penalty in default at laoj.^; while 
 according to the Rectitudines Singularum Personarum one 
 of the differences between the thegn and the villain was 
 that the former did three things for his land — ' fyrdfaereld, 
 burhbot and brigbot' — while the latter was exempt from 
 these burdens^. 
 
 Readers of the Chronicle will remember how Edward the 
 Elder secured his conquests from the Danes by the erection 
 of burhs at various places, among which Hertford, Tamworth, 
 Stafford, Warwick, Buckingham, Maldon, Wigmore and Stam- 
 ford are styled boroughs in Domesday Book ; and a document 
 of 904 records how .Ethelred the ealdorman of the Mercians 
 and ^thelflaed his wife, Edward's sister, built a burh at 
 Worcester ' for the shelter of the folk *.' The traditional 
 reason for the existence of boroughs is shown by a singular 
 passage in a document of ^. 1210 styled ' Articuli Willelmi I 
 Lundoniis retractati,' as follows : ' And for this reason are 
 castles and cities and boroughs both founded and built, 
 forsooth for the protection of the nations and peoples and 
 for the defence of the realm ; and therefore they ought to be 
 maintained with every liberty and integrity and reason ^* 
 That the burgesses were military from the days of Alfred is 
 shown by the repulse of the Danish raiders by the bur- 
 
 * D. B. and B. p. 189. ' L. 255, 353. » L. 444. 
 
 * K. 1075. ' L. 491. 
 
no THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 gesses {burh-ward) of Chichester after the siege of Exeter 
 in 895, a century before the burgesses of London ' thrashed 
 Swegen ^.' 
 
 To the late mention of burhhot in connexion with the shires 
 that owed work to London^ may be added Professor Freeman's 
 reference to the erection of a castle at Ely by the men of 
 Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire ^ Further 
 evidence that boroughs in later days were often founded with 
 a view to the establishment of fortresses is afforded by the 
 charters granted by Henry H and John Lackland to the 
 towns in their French dominions, and by those granted by 
 Philip Augustus to the communes he founded in his border 
 provinces *. 
 
 A precedent for the contributory system, which was possibly 
 in the minds of both Alfred the Great and Henry the Fowler, 
 is the record of the arrangements made by Nehemiah for 
 garrisoning Jerusalem in the fifth century before the Christian 
 era: 'The rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of 
 ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts in the 
 other cities ^.' 
 
 a. The Earl, the Sheriff and the Portreeve. 
 
 Save for one deed, dated 904, by which ^Ethelred the alder- 
 man of the Mercians and ^Ethelflaed his wife granted to Bishop 
 Waerfrith one half of their rights in the borough of Worcester^, 
 we have no pre-Domesday evidence of that financial interest 
 of the earl in the county borough of which Domesday Book 
 is so full ; nor have I found any evidence of any action of the 
 sheriff in relation to the boroughs. But when we pass on to 
 the portreeves, the pre-Domesday evidence is for once more 
 valuable than that of Domesday Book. Many of the deeds 
 printed in the Codex Diplomaiicus and the Cartularium Anglo- 
 Saxonicum mention the portreeves of various boroughs, most 
 frequently as witnessing conveyances and manumissions : the 
 
 * This is Professor Maitland's expression, D. B. and B. p. 190. 
 
 * D. B. and B. p. 192. ^ Norman Conquest, iv. 48 1. 
 
 * Luchaire, Communes fran^aises, pp. 177-90, 279-83. 
 ' Nehemiah, xi, i. * K. 1075. 
 
THE EARL, SHERIFF AND PORTREEVE iii 
 
 portreeves of Canterbury ^, Oxford ^, Buckingham ^ and 
 Exeter * thus appear as witnesses, and again and again it is 
 stated that the portreeve of Exeter 'took the toll for the 
 king's hand ^,' in the same way as Domesday Book repre- 
 sents the praepositus of Dover as collecting fines for the king. 
 The legislation of Hlothaire and Eadric provides that the 
 king's ' wic-gerefa ' of Lundenwic should be a witness to all 
 purchases of goods by a Kentish man in London ^, and 
 Edward the Elder extends this requisite to all sales in any 
 borough '. The Chronicle relates the death of the ' wic- 
 gerefa' of Winchester in the year 897, and a Scandinavian 
 poem of ^. 1 015 tells how the ' portgreifar ' of Canterbury 
 could not keep that town against St. Olaf^. So that the 
 portreeve would appear to be the chief executive officer in 
 the borough both in financial and military matters. But 
 the St. Petroc's Book incidentally shows his relative pre- 
 cedence as regards other officials. A manumission contained 
 in that book shows that 'iElsig the portreeve and Maccos 
 the hundred's man took 4//. as toll for the king ^* Domesday 
 Book shows the portreeve as a subordinate of the sheriff; 
 this entry would appear to show that he did not exclude 
 the hundred's man from the borough. 
 
 But to this generalization there is one startling exception — 
 the portreeve of London appears to have held in that borough 
 the same position as the sheriff held in his county. The 
 Confessor addressed many writs to his burgesses in London, 
 and in these writs the bishop and the portreeve are associated 
 in the same way as the bishop and the earl and the sheriff 
 of any county. Thus two consecutive writs in the Codex 
 Diplomaticus begin as follows: 
 
 Edward King greets William Bishop and Leofstan and ^Isi portreeves 
 and all my burh-thegns in London friendly^**. 
 
 Edward King greets William Bishop and Leofwin Earl and ^Elfget 
 Sheriff friendly". 
 
 ^ K. 789. 2 K. 950. » K. 1289. < Earle, p. 258, &c. 
 
 ^ lb. 259. * Z. II. ' Z. 139. 
 
 * I am indebted to Professor York Powell for this reference to Corpus 
 Poeticum Boreale, ii. 126. ' E. 273. ° K. 857. " K. 858. 
 
112 THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 A previous writ runs : 
 
 Edward King greets William Bishop and Harold Earl and Esgar 
 Staller and all my thegns and my firm friends in Middlesex friendly *. 
 
 And Mr. Round has shown how in the reign of Henry I the 
 portreeve of London became the sheriff 2. 
 
 3. The Burgesses. 
 
 In analysing the Domesday evidence as to the condition of 
 the burgesses, we have fancied that we have seen some traces 
 of two ranks of society, one of which was less privileged than 
 the other, because it was too poor to bear all the burghal 
 burdens ; but the pre-Domesday documents give no evidence 
 of any such classification. The Chronicle mentions the 
 burgesses of certain towns — Chichester, Canterbury, Oxford, 
 London and Winchester, among others — but both it and 
 the Old- English deeds apply to them the term burhwara 
 (borough dwellers), which can be paralleled by the use of 
 the term Cantwara for the inhabitants of Kent, and by the 
 mention of the Weo-wara-get^ the street of the dwellers 
 at Wye, at Canterbury. There are a few deeds stating that 
 the burhwara of Canterbury were witnesses to certain trans- 
 actions of which these deeds are the written evidence ^, but 
 here again there is no evidence of an inferior caste ; and 
 the document known as the ' Articuli Willelmi I Lundoniis 
 retractati ' says : * If any serfs remain without claim for a 
 year and a day within our cities, or our walled boroughs, or 
 our castles, they shall become free men, and shall be free 
 from the yoke of serfdom for ever * ' ; but as Professor Lieber- 
 mann attributes this document to the year 1310, this is only 
 traditional evidence, at best, for the period before the Conquest, 
 especially as we have seen that in 1086 a burgess at Ipswich 
 was a slave. Kemble prints four writs addressed by the 
 Confessor to London ; one of these is addressed to the burh- 
 wara, but three are addressed to the burhthegns ^, and so may 
 indicate the existence of a superior class in that city. 
 
 * ^.855. ' Geoflfrey de Manderitte, p. 353. ' K. 241, 293, 477. 
 « L. 491. " JC. 857, 861, 872. 
 
THE BURGESSES 113 
 
 The lawmen of Cambridge were of thegnly rank^ as is shown 
 by their heriot^; may not the burh-thegns of London have been 
 the lawmen of that city — the possessors of sac and soc ? 
 
 Mention has been made of the grants of houses in Canter- 
 bury with their appurtenant lands ; in two instances the 
 specific lands so granted are stated to be bounded by the 
 burgesses' meadows: one document speaks of the 'urbanorum 
 pratorum,' and the other of the 'burhwara mede' ^; is it too 
 much to see here the common pasture of the burgesses of 
 Canterbury ? 
 
 One Canterbury document of 860-6 is stated to have been 
 witnessed by the in-burgesses (ingan burkwara), and by the 
 knights-gild*; and another, of 958, was witnessed by the three 
 fellowships of in-burgesses and out-burgesses [geferscipas innan 
 burkwara and utan burkwara) ^ : but of the nature of these 
 three fellowships we know nothing, unless perchance one of 
 them survived as the chapman's gild of the time of Anselm. 
 Dr. Gross points out that a later version of this deed explains 
 the three fellowships as the three conventual bodies at Christ 
 Church, St. Augustine's, and St. Gregory's ^ ; but in view of 
 the expressions innan burkwara and utan burkwara I would 
 suggest that the latter gloss is untrustworthy, especially as 
 St. Gregory's priory was not founded till 1084'. 
 
 But though we have no information about the nature of the 
 three fellowships at Canterbury, there are in print the regula- 
 tions of gilds at Exeter, Abbotsbury, Woodbury and Cam- 
 bridge : the three former were principally of a religious nature, 
 to secure the due celebration of masses for the good of the 
 brethren, although at Exeter provision was made for mutual 
 assistance in case the property of any of the brethren was 
 destroyed by fire ; the main object of the regulations of the 
 thegn-gild at Cambridge appears to have been the securing 
 of good order at the convivial meetings of the brethren ', 
 
 The ' ludicia civitatis Lundoniae ' have been sometimes 
 
 * D. B. and B. 211. ' Ante, p. 86. ' K. 259, 282. 
 
 * K. 293. ' K. 477 
 
 * Gross, Gild Merchant, i. 189: see B. loil. ' B. ill. 214. 
 ' Gross, ib. 181-3. 
 
114 THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 taken to be rules of the frith-gilds of London for securing the 
 pursuit and arrest of thieves ; but Dr. Gross points out that 
 they are royal dooms enacted with the consent of the bishops 
 and reeves, and not the rules of a voluntary organization, and 
 further that they bind all the inhabitants and suburbs, and not 
 merely a select few ^. True there are a few provisions, espe- 
 cially those of a rdigious and convivial nature, which appear 
 to show the influence of gild -laws, but these are subordinated 
 to the main purpose — the regulations for the pursuit and arrest 
 of thieves ^. 
 
 ^ Gross, Gild Merchant, i. 178-81, 
 
 * Among the pre-Domesday documents is only one which purports to 
 be a charter of privileges to any borough ; and Kemble prints, although 
 he stars as suspicious, an alleged charter of Athelstan to the burgesses 
 of Malmesbury, as follows : 
 
 iEthelstanus rex Anglorum do pro me et meis successoribus burgensibus 
 meis et eorum omnibus successoribus Meldufuensis Burgi quod habeant 
 et teneant semper omnes functiones et liberas consuetudines suas sicut 
 tenuerunt tempore Edwardi patris mei illibate et honorifice. Et praecipio 
 omnibus subter imperio meo quod non faciant eis iniuriam et sint quieti 
 absque calumpnia et scot. Et do et concedo eis illam brueriam regiam 
 quinque hydarum terrae iuxta villunculam meam de Nortona propter auxi- 
 lium eorum in conflictu meo contra Danos. Confecta est huius donationis 
 cartula cum signo meo per testimonium Eadmundi fratris mei et per 
 consilium magistri Wolsini \sic\ cancellarii mei et Odonis thesaurarii mei 
 et Godwyny. 
 
 Godwyny \sic\ qui fert vexillum regis perquisivit hoc pro biu-gensibus *. 
 
 If this document be compared with the other charters of this monarch 
 it will appear very suspicious : neither Master Wolsinus [?] the chan- 
 cellor, nor Odo the treasurer, nor Godwyn appears as witness to any 
 other charter of Athelstan's, although an Odo, minister, is witness to 
 B. 699 of the year 933. And the legal phrases are those of the twelfth, 
 and not of the tenth century : there are four expressions in this charter 
 which I cannot find in any other of Athelstan's charters printed in the 
 Cartulariuni Saxonicum (658-746) — 'functiones et liberas consuetudines,' 
 * absque calumpnia et scot,' and ' habeant et teneant ' ; when ' habere ' 
 appears, it is used alone ; ' tenere ' is never used : nor is there any other 
 charter of Athelstan's which speaks of the * successores ' of the grantees. 
 ' Magister ' is also far too late in sense to be used here as in the tenth 
 century. Two expressions are found in only one other charter ^ — * do et 
 concedo ' and ' pro me et meis successoribus.' And so we must conclude 
 that this document is a pious fraud of later centuries. 
 
 * B. 720; K. 1 128. ^ B. 739. 
 
THE MARKET 115 
 
 4. The Market. 
 
 If the idea of the borough as a stronghold is prominent 
 in the Old- English charters, it is hard set in the laws by the 
 idea of the borough as a market. From Edward the Elder 
 to William the Conqueror we find king after king legislating 
 against extra-urban commerce. ' Let no man bargain out of 
 port,' says Edward the Elder, ' but let him have the witness 
 of the portreeve or of some other truthful man who can be 
 trusted \' Athelstan repeats this, but allows an alternative in 
 the testimony of the folkmoot, and adds, * Let every market 
 be within port ' (the Latin version of his laws says ' within a 
 city^'). Edgar specifies the manner in which sales are to be 
 conducted: 'And there shall be witnesses to each borough, 
 and each hundred ; to each borough thirty-six shall be chosen 
 to witness, and to small boroughs and each hundred twelve : 
 and every man shall with their witness buy and sell all his 
 goods that he buy or sell, either in borough or in wapen- 
 take V The Conqueror forbids 'that any live cattle shall 
 be bought or sold except within cities, and that before three 
 faithful witnesses * ' ; and in another series of laws he is made 
 to say : ' There shall be no market or market-place except 
 in cities of our realm and in boroughs closed and fortified by a 
 wall and in castles and in very safe places, where the customs of 
 our realm and our common law, and the dignities of our crown 
 which were constituted by our good predecessors cannot be 
 lost or defrauded or violated : but all things ought to be done 
 rightfully, and in the open, and by judgement and justice ^' 
 
 So that the lawgiver had two objects in view when he pro- 
 hibited sales outside boroughs : he wished to prevent traffic 
 in stolen goods, and so insisted that all sales should take place 
 in the presence of witnesses, but he also wished to secure the 
 payment of his toll ^. 
 
 Except for a document of Ethelred II which gives the specific 
 tolls charged at Billingsgate, we have still less information 
 about the pre-Domesday tolls than of those charged at the 
 
 ^ L. 139. « L. 157. '' L. 210. * L. 487. 
 
 " L. 491. • D. B. and B. p. 194. 
 
 I 2 
 
ii6 THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 time of Domesday Book. The only specific toll that I can 
 find in any Old-English document is the toll of 4^/. charged 
 on the manumission of a serf at Bodmin \ which is the same 
 sum as was stated by Domesday Book to be the toll at Lewes 
 on the sale of a man ^. The tolls authorized by Ethelred to 
 be charged at Billingsgate are as follows : 
 
 If a small vessel {navicula) should come to Billingsgate, one half- 
 penny is paid as toll : but if a larger vessel comes having sails, one penny. 
 
 If a keel or a hulk {ceol vel hulcus) should arrive and lie there (it pays) 
 4^/. for toll. 
 
 From a ship full of logs {lignoruni), one log as toll. 
 
 On three days in the week is toll charged on cloth, on Sunday, Tuesday 
 and Thursday. 
 
 The dealer {mango) coming to the bridge with a boat {bato) in which Is 
 fish, pays one halfpenny for toll, and for a larger ship, one penny. 
 
 The men of Rouen coming with wine or craspice (porpoise) paid a due 
 of six shillings from a large ship, and the twentieth portion {frustum) of 
 the same craspice (porpoise). 
 
 The men of Flanders and Poitou and Normandy and France showed 
 their goods and paid toll {extolneabant). The men of Huy and Luttich and 
 Nivelles who passed through {pertransibanf) gave ostensionem and toll. 
 
 And the Emperor's men, who came in their own ships, were held worthy 
 of good laws in like manner as ourselves. 
 
 Besides discharged {discarcatum) wool and melted (dissutum) fat, they 
 were at liberty to buy three live pigs into their own ships. 
 
 And they were not allowed to forestall {forceapum facere) the burghers, 
 but must pay their toll, and at Christmas two grey skins and one brown 
 skin and lo pounds of pepper and gloves for five men, and two breakers 
 {caballinos tonellos) full of vinegar, and the same at Easter. 
 
 From baskets {dossera) with poultry, one chicken as toll, and from 
 a basket with eggs, five eggs as toll, if they came to the market. 
 
 Sm^remangestre (butterwomen), who dealt in butter and cheese, paid 
 one penny 14 days before Christmas, and another penny seven days before 
 Christmas '. 
 
 These citations show that at the end of the tenth century the 
 port of London was already frequented by foreigners, some of 
 whom had obtained the right to more favoured treatment than 
 others. 
 
 As early as the year 733 Ethelbald, King of the Mercians, 
 granted to the Abbess of Minster the toll {exactionem) of one 
 ship in the port of London *, and also * the dues {transvectionis 
 * E. 273. « p. 73. » L. 233. * B. 149. 
 
THE MARKET 117 
 
 censtim) which are demanded by our tax-gatherers ' from one 
 ship, wherever it might be in the realm ^, and the next year 
 he granted a similar privilege to the Bishop of Rochester in 
 the port of London, only in this charter the dues are styled 
 vectigal^. In 747 Eadbert, King of Kent, granted to the 
 Abbot of Reculver the tax and tribute {vectigal et tribututn) 
 of one ship at Fordwich ^, and in the following year King 
 Ethelbald granted to Abbess Eadburga one half of * the tax 
 and tribute that is mine of the ship she had bought of Leu- 
 bucus *.' These gifts were confirmed by Ofifa ' and Eadbert *, 
 but either later kings were chary of such grants or the evidence 
 has been lost, until in 962 Edgar granted to Abingdon Abbey 
 {inter alia) 'the royal dues {censunt) to the abbey aforesaid 
 every year at Southampton, and the fishery and royal tax 
 {vectigal) of one ship at Hwitan Clife, and of another at Port- 
 monna-hythe,' which would appear to mean a grant of freedom 
 from duty or toll of all goods imported by the Abbey at 
 Southampton, and on the goods imported in one ship at each 
 of the other places '^. 
 
 Occasionally urban properties were freed from toll : in 889 
 King Alfred gave to the Bishop of Worcester a stone building in 
 London at Hwaetmunde Stone, with a further grant that, while 
 the toll of goods sold outside should go to the king, the bishop 
 should have the toll of all goods sold within the courtyard * ; 
 and in 904 Edward the Elder gave the toll of Taunton to the 
 Bishop of Winchester. One of the characteristics of a market 
 was the possession of public weights and measures ^ : this 
 privilege was purchased for 60s. by Bishop Alhun of Wor- 
 cester from Burgred, King of the Mercians, in respect of 
 a property called Cedmund's haw, not far from Westgate, in 
 the streets of London, in the year 857 1° ; and a similar privilege 
 was granted by King Alfred in respect of the above-mentioned 
 property at Hwaetmunde Stone". 
 
 The grant by Edgar to Dunstan and the monks of Christ 
 Church, Canterbury, of * the port and vill of Sandwich . . . with 
 
 » B. 150. 
 
 « B. 152. » B. 173. 
 
 * B. 177. " B. 188. 
 
 • B. 189. 
 
 ' B. 1094. 8 K. 316. 
 
 » D. B. and B. p. 196. 
 
 
 " K. 280. 
 
 " K. 316. 
 
ii8 THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 all the liberties and royal customs which I ever had there, or 
 any of my predecessors, on either side of the water, whoseso- 
 ever the land might be,' is followed by a confirmation to them 
 of * all the mansions they had in the vill which were given 
 them in alms of the faithful ^ ' ; and would appear to show 
 that they received from the king not the soil of the whole 
 vill, otherwise the confirmation of their houses would be 
 unnecessary, but merely an overlordship, or a right to 
 receive the income of the place. This charter, however, is 
 starred by Kemble as being suspicious ; but a charter of 
 Canute (A.D. 1023) makes the same gift to the monks of 
 the port of Sandwich ' and all proceeds (exitus) of the same 
 water on each bank, whosesoever the land might be, from 
 Pipemesse to Mearcesfleote ' ; and specifies the distance to 
 which this right was to extend as the furthest point to which 
 a man standing in a ship in the river at high water could 
 throw a * taper axe '^ ' : he also gave them the ferry-boat 
 and the ferry of the port and the toll of all ships, and the 
 shore to some distance below low-water mark, and one half of 
 the wreck found within these limits ; the other half was to go 
 to the finders of the wreck ^. 
 
 5. The Mint. 
 On page 77 is a list of all the mints mentioned in Domesday 
 Book ; but before the Conquest there were mints in sixty- 
 one of the 10a boroughs on our list, and it should be noticed 
 that mints were established before the Conquest in all but two 
 of our county boroughs. The following is a list of the pre- 
 Conquest mints, the name of the king, in whose reign the mint 
 was established, or whose coins are the earliest surviving from 
 that mint, being given in brackets : 
 
 COUNTY BOROUGHS. 
 
 Bedford (Edwy). 
 Buckingham (Edgar). 
 Cambridge (Edgar). 
 Canterbury (before Alfred). 
 
 ^ K. 519. 
 
 * This is a small hand-axe for throwing as well as hacking with. 
 
 Chester (Athelstan). 
 Colchester (Ethelred). 
 Derby (Athelstan). 
 Dorchester (Canute). 
 
THE MINT 
 
 119 
 
 Dover (Athelstan). 
 Exeter (Alfred). 
 Gloucester (Alfred). 
 Hereford (Athelstan). 
 Hertford (Athelstan). 
 Huntingdon (Edwy). 
 Ipswich (Edgar). 
 Leicester (Edmund). 
 Lincoln (before Alfred). 
 Malmesbury (? Ethelred). 
 Norwich (Athelstan). 
 Nottingham (Athelstan). 
 Oxford (Alfred). 
 
 QUASI-COUNTY 
 Bath (Alfred). 
 Bristol (Canute). 
 Bruton (Canute). 
 Chichester (Edgar). 
 Cricklade (Ethelred). 
 Guildford (Canute). 
 Hastings (Ethelred). 
 Hythe (Canute). 
 Ilchester (Edgar). 
 Langport (Athelstan). 
 Lewes (Edgar). 
 London (before Alfred). 
 
 Rochester (Edgar). 
 Shaftesbury (Athelstan). 
 Shrewsbury (Athelstan). 
 Southampton (Edgar). 
 Stafford (Athelstan). 
 Stamford (Edgar). 
 Torksey (Ethelred). 
 Wallingford (Athelstan). 
 Wareham (Athelstan). 
 Warwick (Athelstan). 
 Winchcombe (Canute). 
 Worcester (Ethelred). 
 York (before Alfred). 
 
 BOROUGHS. 
 
 Maldon (Athelstan). 
 Reading (Ethelred). 
 Romney (Ethelred). 
 Sandwich (Ethelred). 
 Southwark (Ethelred). 
 Sudbury (Ethelred). 
 Tamworth (Athelstan). 
 Thetford (Edgar). 
 Totnes (Edgar). 
 Wilton (Edgar). 
 Winchester (Alfred). 
 
 The two county boroughs of Domesday Book, which are 
 not included in this list are Bridport and Northampton ; we 
 have seen that there was a mint in the former borough after 
 the Conquest, and the earliest coins of that mint that have 
 been found date from the reigns of William I and II ; the 
 earliest Northampton coins are of the reign of Henry I ^. 
 
 There were also pre-Conquest mints in the following places, 
 which are not styled boroughs in Domesday Book : 
 
 Aylesbury (Ethelred). 
 Ashdown (Ethelred). 
 Bardney (Ethelred). 
 Berkeley (Edward the Confessor). 
 Bridgnorth (Ethelred). 
 Cadbury (Ethelred). 
 Corhridge (Ethelred). 
 
 Crewkeme (Canute). 
 Dartford (Athelstan). 
 Dereham (Edward the Confessor). 
 Greenwich (Ethelred). 
 Homdon (Edward the Confessor). 
 Idbury (Ethelred). 
 Lancaster (Harold I). 
 
 ^ Hawker's Silver Coins of England^ pp. 170, 177. 
 
lao THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Lymne (Edgar). 
 
 Newport (Edward the Confessor). 
 
 Offord (Ethelred). 
 
 Richborough (Canute). 
 
 Sarum (Canute). 
 
 Somerton (Edgar). 
 
 Sl Edmundsbury (Alfred). 
 Tempsford (Edgar). 
 Warborough (Athelstan). 
 Watchet (Ethelred). 
 Winchelsey (Edgar). 
 Witham (Hardicanute). 
 
 So that either Athelstan's law \ that there should be no 
 mint but within a borough, was ignored even by himself, or 
 these places had lost their borough rights before the 
 Conquest. 
 
 These lists prove, too, that a mint was a necessary factor in 
 the making of a borough ; the following places which are 
 styled boroughs in Domesday Book were not the seats of 
 pre-Domesday mints ^ 
 
 QUASI-COUNTY Boroughs.— Arundel, Axbridge, Barn- 
 staple, Calne, Droitwich, Dunwich, Fordwich, Grantham, Mil- 
 bourne, Pevensey, Twineham, Wimbourne, Yarmouth. 
 
 Simple Boroughs. — Ashwell, Beccles, Bedwyn, Berk- 
 hampstead, Bradford, Bridlington, Castle Clifford, Clare, 
 Eye, Louth, Newark, Okehampton, Penwortham, Pershore, 
 Pocklington, Quatford, Rhuddlan Rye, St. Albans, Stanstead, 
 Tewkesbury, Pontefract, Totbury, Warminster, Wigmore. 
 
 Some of the boroughs mentioned in the latter class were 
 founded after the Conquest ; and the Conqueror licensed the 
 establishment of mints at Pevensey and Rhuddlan. 
 
 6. The Borough Court. 
 
 To-day one of the main practical differences between 
 a borough and an urban district is that the former is neces- 
 sarily a petty-sessional area, while the latter is not so — that 
 is to say, the borough is a jurisdictional area for minor criminal 
 offences; in earlier centuries the jurisdiction of the borough 
 court was far more extensive, to the exclusion of the county 
 justices. But we must not think that because for centuries 
 the borough has been differentiated from the village by its 
 
 1 L. 159. 
 
 ' There were also a number of mints which have not yet been identified. 
 This section is merely a summary of Prof. York Powell's article in E,H.R. 
 xi. 759. 
 
THE BOROUGH COURT 121 
 
 being a separate jurisdictional area, and by possessing a 
 separate court of its own, that therefore this distinction has 
 always existed. We have already seen that there is nothing 
 in Domesday Book to lead us to suppose that the existence 
 of a burg-mote excluded the jurisdiction of the hundred court, 
 and the pre-Domesday evidence confirms our doubts. 
 
 The earliest legislation on the burg-mote is that of Edgar 
 in the year 962, which lays down that the burg-mote was to be 
 held thrice, and the shire-mote twice in every year ^, while the 
 hundred-mote was to be held as formerly constituted — that is, 
 once in every four weeks. Now, when we bear in mind what 
 has been said about the borough as a market-place, and 
 therefore a place where disputes would naturally be frequent, 
 it is obvious that the burgesses would be at a disadvantage 
 compared with their rural neighbours, if the burg-mote, which 
 was held only once in four months, excluded the hundred- 
 mote, which was held every four weeks. Still more disadvan- 
 tageous would have been their position if, as Professor Maitland 
 appears to suggest^, the borough court was established to 
 keep the peace between the warriors who garrisoned the town ; 
 martial law is notoriously short and sharp, and must therefore 
 have been administered at a court that met more frequently 
 than once in four months. 
 
 Edgar's law is repeated by Canute ', but Henry I assimilated 
 the burg-mote to the shire-mote * by requiring that it should 
 be held only twice a year. Another paragraph of Canute's 
 law seems to prohibit boroughs from having peculiar customs 
 of their own by providing that there should be 'between 
 boroughs an laga cet Icedunge^' or, according to the Latin 
 version, ' una lex in purgationibus *.' But Ethelred's treaty 
 with Olaf Tryggvesson (a.D. 991) provides a summary method 
 of dealing with breaches of the peace : ' If within a borough 
 there be a breach of the king's peace, the burgesses shall 
 go and arrest the wrongdoer, alive or dead . . . : if they decline, 
 the alderman shall go ; if he declines, the king ; if he declines, 
 that part shall be outside the king's peace «.' Probably the 
 
 1 L. 203. ' D. B. and B. 192. ' L. 321. 
 
 * Z. SS3. " ^- 337' ' L. 222. 
 
laa THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 wrongdoer, when arrested, would remain in custody till he 
 had paid the appointed fine. 
 
 Domesday Book tells us much about the persons who had 
 sac and soc in the boroughs : we see the origin of one of these 
 immunities in the grant by the Confessor that the Abbot 
 of Chertsey should have sac and soc in his hagan-land in 
 London — that is, in his haws in that city ^. 
 
 7. The Borough as a Source of Income. 
 
 Seeing that Domesday Book was primarily a geld-book, 
 it was but to be expected that it would be full of information 
 about the income which the king might expect to derive from 
 all sources in a borough; but the pre-Domesday evidence 
 on this point is very scanty. The market and its tolls have 
 already been referred to, but in all the charters and laws there 
 is no mention of any payment to be made by the minters ; 
 there are, however, a few charters which give information 
 about dues in kind being derived from the boroughs, and of 
 services being rendered by the burgesses. 
 
 In 814 Coenwulf, King of the Mercians, granted to Bishop 
 Deneberht of Worcester of 'the victuals {pastum) of those 
 twelve men which rightfully pertains to the said City^': this is 
 evidently a food-rent similar to those paid to the Welsh princes, 
 and is a species oifirma unius noctis, but was apparently com- 
 muted before Domesday Book. In 904 Edward the Elder gave 
 to the Bishop of Winchester a charter of privileges relating to 
 Taunton, for which the bishop gave him sixty hides of land ^ : 
 inter alia the bishop was to receive the toll {mercimonium, 
 Anglice, thaes tunes cyping) and all the civil dues {census 
 civilis), which latter were specified as ' the victual for one night 
 {pastum unius noctis) for the king, and the victuals for eight 
 hounds and the king's kennelman {canicularius), and victuals 
 for nine nights for the king's hawkers, and carriage as the king 
 might require to Cury or Willeton with wagons and horses ' ; 
 and * if strangers came from other regions, they were entitled 
 to have conduct to the nearest royal vill on their way ' ; but 
 
 » K. 856. " K. 203. » K, 1084. 
 
THE BOROUGH AS A SOURCE OF INCOME 123 
 
 these customs were due not merely from the borough but from 
 the whole vill of Taunton, as we have previously seen. A third 
 document is that already quoted ^, by which iEthelred and 
 iEthelflaed, Alderman and Lady of the Mercians, gave to God 
 and St. Peter, at the request of Bishop Werfrith of Worcester, 
 one-half of the rights that belonged to their lordship, either in 
 the market or in the street or within the borough or without — 
 namely, in land-feoh, Jiht-wita, theft, woh-ceapung, borough- 
 wall-scotting, and of every one of those wers which were 
 incident to any bot, as it was settled for the market-place and 
 the streets — except that the wain-shilHng and the load-penny 
 should go into the hands of the king as they always did at 
 Saltwich : so that, in addition to the rent, the bishop was 
 entitled to receive half of the earl's share of the forfeitures 
 for fighting, for theft, for selling contrary to the regulations 
 of the market, and for neglect on the part of rural landowners 
 to repair the borough walls. Domesday Book, however, tells 
 us that the bishop had the third penny of Worcester ^ : hence 
 it would appear that, unless some intermediate grant has been 
 lost, the earl was, at the beginning of the tenth century, 
 entitled to two-thirds of the revenue of Worcester. 
 
 It would appear that the income arising from the boroughs 
 accrued to the king as regalia, and not as incidents of tenure, 
 in the same way as, we have seen, the geld differed from the 
 gablum. Coenwulf's grant to the Bishop of Worcester was 
 stated to be made with the consent of his optimates ^ and the 
 charter of Edward the Elder to the Bishop of Winchester in 
 which he conferred certain privileges as regards Taunton, was 
 also made with the consent of his counsellors*: but the above- 
 mentioned gift by the Alderman and Lady of the Mercians 
 was only witnessed by the wise men of Mercia. Similarly, 
 Eadbert's grants of tolls were made with the consent of his 
 optimates ^ and the consent of the senators was expressed in 
 Alfred's charter granting tolls and weights at Hweatmunde 
 Stone ^ : apparently no grant of the regalia was valid without 
 the consent of the witan. But on the other hand, no such 
 
 » /s'. 1075. 2 Ante, p. 42. ' K. 203. * K. 1075. 
 
 ^ B. 173, 179- See p. 117. * ^. 3i6. 
 
124 THE PRE-DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 consent was given to the earlier grants of tolls by King 
 Ethelbald ^, but this may be explained if these gifts were to 
 enure only for the life of the king. The formal consent of 
 the witan was not expressed in the body of Ethelbald's grant 
 of tolls to the Abbess Eadburga ^, but is possibly implied by 
 the attestation by the archbishop, two bishops, and others, 
 including the toll-collector, and Offa's gift is similarly attested ^. 
 In like manner, the consent of the bishops and principes 
 was given to many of the earlier royal grants of property in 
 Canterbury and Rochester*, and others were attested and 
 consented to by the archbishop and other grandees whose 
 names are given ^ ; possibly this consent may indicate that 
 the deserted Roman cities were originally regarded as part 
 of the folc-land, and that therefore no portion thereof could 
 be alienated without the consent of the witan. 
 
 ^ B. 149, 150, 152. « B. 189. » B. 188. 
 
 * K. I, 2, 113, 196, 217. See pp. 105-6. 
 » K. 3, 144, 188, 241, 276. 
 
INDEX 
 
 {The names of the Boroughs are printed in Capitals.) 
 
 Abbotsbury, gild at, 113. 
 
 Abingdon, p. 60. 
 
 Abbot of, 29, 32, 98, 117, 
 
 Abstraction of contributed houses, 
 16. 
 
 Achi (of Hertford), 21, 26. 
 
 Adultery, 48, 87. 
 
 iClfget, III. 
 
 ^Isig, Portreeve of London, III ; 
 of Bodmin, lii. 
 
 ^thelflaed, 109, no, 123. 
 
 yEthelred, Alderman of the Mer- 
 cians, 109, no, 123. 
 
 Agricultural services of burgesses, 
 57, 82, 84, 95- 
 
 Alan, Earl, 13, 21, 26. 
 (of Pevensey), 23. 
 
 Alberic, Earl, 25, 32. 
 
 Albury (Oxon.), 28. 
 
 Alciston (Sussex), 19. 
 
 Aldboume (Wilts.), 15, 19. 
 
 Aldene the Priest, Lawman of Lin- 
 coln, 51. 
 
 Aldingboume (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Alfred, King, 107, no, 117, 123. 
 
 Algar, Earl, 32, 41. 
 
 of Cockenhatch, 21, 26. 
 
 Algemund, Lawman of Lincoln, 51. 
 
 Alric (of Buckingham), 25. 
 
 Alselin, Geoffrey, 26, 69. 
 
 Alvaston (Derby), 26. 
 
 Alvric (of Huntingdon), 45. 
 (of Clare), 96. 
 Godricson, 86. 
 
 Alwin (of Oxford), 33. 
 
 Alwold (of Lincoln), 51. 
 
 Amends and Forfeitures, 47-51, 
 82-7. 
 
 Anderida, 104. 
 
 Ansfrid (of Pevensey), 23. 
 
 Ansgot (of Pevensey), 23. 
 
 Ansty (Leic), 28. 
 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, 20, 28, 
 32, 79, 86, 87, 89, I02, 107, 109, 124. 
 
 Archbishop of York, 30, 54. 
 
 Ardleigh (Essex), 16. 
 
 Amesby (Leic), 28. 
 
 Amulf of Hesdin, 20, 25, 32. 
 
 Articuli Willelmi I Lundoniis re- 
 
 tractati, 109, 112, 115. 
 ARUNDEL, 7, 9, 22, 39, 73, 79, 
 
 120. 
 Aschebi (Line.), 27. 
 Ashdown, 119. 
 ASHWELL, 9, 95, 98, 120. 
 Assessment by hides, i, 64, 65. 
 Athelstan, 106, 114^ 115. 
 Aubrey de Vere, 26. 
 AXBRIDGE, 7, 9, 77, 95, io3 «•, 
 
 120. 
 Aylesbury, 119. 
 Azelin (of Pevensey), 23. 
 Azor fitz Toti, 25. 
 (of Stamford), 26. 
 
 Badbury (Wilts.), 15. 
 
 Baldwin, sherifFof Devon, 13, 44, 97. 
 
 Bardney, 119. 
 
 Barking, 18. 
 
 Bamham (Sussex), 22. 
 
 BARNSTAPLE, 8, 9, 38, 39, 41, 42, 
 
 56, 80, 95, 120. 
 Barrow (Leic), 29. 
 Barton Hartshorn (Bucks.), 25. 
 Basingstoke, 15. 
 BATH, 5 «., 7, 9, 36, 38, 39, 44, 46, 
 
 65,77, 119. 
 
 Battenhall (Wore), 108. 
 Battle Abbey, 99. 
 Bayeux, Bishop of, 16, 20, 25, 32, 
 
 34, 42, 46, 50. 73, 74, 87. 
 Bear-baiting at Norwich, 79. 
 BECCLES, 10, 55, 96, 98, 120. 
 Beddington (Surrey), 18. 
 BEDFORD, ID, 65, n8. 
 BEDWYN, 9, 77, 98, 103, 120. 
 Beer, 64, 83, 84. 
 Belgrave (Leic), 28. 
 
126 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Bellafago, Ralph de, 38. 
 Bentley (Wore), 108. 
 Bepton (Sussex), 14, 18. 
 Berenger of Todeni, 32. 
 Berkeley, 98, 119. 
 BERKHAMPSTEAD, 9, 96, 98, 
 
 120. 
 Bermondsey, 18. 
 Bernard (of Pevensey), 24. 
 Berton (Berks.), 98. 
 
 (Cambs.), 25. 
 Beverington (Sussex), 23. 
 Biga, Osbem, 25. 
 Bignor (Sussex), 22. 
 Bigot, Roger, 38. 
 Billingsgate, 115. 
 Binstead (Surrey), 18. 
 
 hundred of Sussex, 22. 
 Birch, Great (Essex), 16. 
 Birley (Wore), 12. 
 Birstall (Leic), 28. 
 Bishopstone (Sussex), 23. 
 
 (Warwick), 108. 
 Bisley (Glouc), 15. 
 Blacheham (Sussex), 24. 
 Blachingley (Surrey), 18. 
 Blackwell (Wore), 108. 
 Bletchingdon (Oxon,), 33. 
 Blize, 102. 
 Bloodshed, 48, 83. 
 Bloxham (Oxon.), 32. 
 Blund, Robert, 38, 44. 
 Boatswains, 80. 
 Bodmin, 98, ill, 116. 
 Bolebec, Hugh of, 25, 28. 
 Bollinton (Sussex), 6. 
 Bordars, 54. 
 Borough Court, 53, 102, 120-2. 
 
 Property, 87-9, 106, 113. 
 Boroughs in Domesday Book, 4-10. 
 Borred (of Huntingdon), 45. 
 Borstall (Kent), 35. 
 Boselin (of Pevensey), 24. 
 Bosham (Sussex), 14. 
 BRADFORD-ON-AVON, 9, 90, 
 98, 120. 
 
 Bradingcote (Wore), 30, 108. 
 Bradley (Staffs.), 52. 
 Bramfield (Herts.), 26. 
 Bramley (Hants), 15. 
 Bray, 27. 
 
 Breteuil, Laws of, 86. 
 Brictric of Gloucestershire, 20. 
 
 of Birley, 12. 
 
 Lawman of Lincoln, 51. 
 
 Bridgenorth, 119. 
 
 BRIDLINGTON, 10, 98, 120. 
 
 BRIDPORT, 4, 9, 47, 65, 66, 75. 
 77,78,91. 119. 
 
 Brigbot, 35, 57, 106, 109. 
 
 Brightwell (Berks.), 31, 48, 107. 
 
 Brimsfield (Glouc), 15. 
 
 BRISTOL, 8, 10, 39, 62, 119. 
 
 Broad well (Glouc), 15, 18. 
 
 Bromley (Surrey), 16, 17. 
 
 Broughton (Leic), 28. 
 
 Brumann praepositus of Canter- 
 bury, 64, 74. 
 
 Bruntingthorpe (Leic), 28. 
 
 BRUTON, 7, 9, 39, 119. 
 
 BUCKINGHAM, 9, 21, 24, 25, 34, 
 35, 39. 56, 60, 65, 72, 109, III, 118. 
 
 BuUey (Glouc), 15. 
 
 Burcard of Shenley, 25, 72. 
 
 Burford (Oxon.), 32. 
 
 Burgage tenements, 56, loi. 
 
 Burgheristh = burhgeriht, 100. 
 
 Burgesses, 5, 13, 54-62, 112-14. 
 
 Burgred, King of the Mercians, 117. 
 
 'Burgus,' as opposed to ' civitas,' 71. 
 
 Burhbot, 35, 57, 100, 106, I08, 109, 
 no. 
 
 Burial at Taunton, loo. 
 
 Burton, Abbot of, 78. 
 (Leic), 28. 
 (Lines.), 27, 52. 
 Little (Kent), 12. 
 
 Buruolt fitz Lewin, 51. 
 
 Bury St. Edmunds, 120. 
 
 Byrston, 108. 
 
 Cadbury, 119. 
 Cahainges, William of, 23. 
 CALNE, 8, 9, 38, 39, yT, io3«., 120. 
 CAMBRIDGE, 10, 13, 25, 39, 45, 
 47, 51, 54, 63, 64, 65, 67, 72, 81, 
 
 86, 87, 88, 113, 118. 
 Canfield (Essex), 26. 
 CANTERBURY, 4, 5 «., 9, 12, 17, 
 
 25, 34, 35, 36, 39, 44, 45, 46, 5°. 
 59, 60, 62, 64, 65, 70, 72, 73, 74, 
 85, 87, 88, 89, 92, 105, 106, 107, 
 108, 112, 113, 118, 124. 
 
 Archbishop of, 20, 28, 32, 79, 86, 
 
 87, 89. 92, 107, 109, 124. 
 Christ Church, 113, 117. 
 
 Canute, King, 29, 109, 118, 121. 
 Carlton (Leic), 29. 
 Carrying services, 81, 122. 
 Castellon, William of, 25. 
 
INDEX 
 
 127 
 
 CASTLE CLIFFORD, lo, 98, loi, 
 120. 
 
 Castles, 45, 67, loi. 
 
 Casvic (Lines.), 26. 
 
 Caversham (Oxon.), 28. 
 
 Celsunde (Bucks.), 25. 
 
 Chalgrove (Oxon.), 27. 
 
 Chalk (Kent), 35, 
 
 Chapman Gild at Canterbury, 46, 
 60. 
 
 Charleston (Sussex), 33. 
 
 Charminster (Dorset), 15. 
 
 Cheddar, 77, 103 n. 
 
 Chelsea, conference at, 107. 
 
 Chenth (Devon), 13, 15. 
 
 Chentone (Bucks.), 25. 
 
 Cheshunt (Herts.), 98. 
 
 CHESTER, 5«., 6, 8, 10, 16, 17, 
 35, 36, 39> 41, 42, 46, 47, 53> 65, 
 66, 69, 70, 73, 75, 77, 78, 82-3, 85, 
 86, 90, 92, 106, 118. 
 Bishop of, 69, 86. 
 
 Chibume (Leic), 29. 
 
 CHICHESTER, 5 «., 7, 9, ll, 12, 
 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 34, 36, 38, 
 39, 41, 42, 56, 104, 108, no, 112, 
 119. 
 Bishop of, 18, 19, 20, 23. 
 
 Chilham (Kent), 13. 
 
 Chisledon (Wilts.), 15, 19. 
 
 Chithurst (Sussex), 14, 18. 
 
 Chivington (Surrey), 18. 
 
 Church Shot, 100, lol. 
 
 'Civitas,' 5«., 71. 
 
 Clacton (Essex), 16, 69. 
 
 CLARE, 10, 96, 98, 120. 
 
 Classification of Boroughs, 4-10. 
 Burgesses, 58-9. 
 
 Clatford (Hants), 15. 
 
 Claverton (Cheshire), 16. 
 
 Cliffe Pypard (Wilts.), 15. 
 
 Clopton (Wore), 30, 108. 
 
 Cnighten gilds, 34. 
 
 Cockenhatch (Herts.), 21, 26. 
 
 Cocking (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Coenwulf, King of the Mercians, 
 106, 122, 123. 
 
 COLCHESTER, 5 «., 10, 13, 16, 
 17, 25, 29, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 44, 
 45, 47, 56, 57, 60, 63, 65, 66, 68, 
 69, 70, 71, n, 78, 87, 88, 92, 118. 
 
 Coleshill (Warwick), 17. 
 
 Colicote (Wilts.), 15. 
 
 Columban, Abbot of Eynsham, 32. 
 
 Columbels, Ralph of, 50, 87. 
 
 Colworth (Sussex), 108. 
 
 Combe (Wilts.), 31, 34. 
 
 Commendation, 50, 58. 
 
 Composite Boroughs, the term ex- 
 plained, 7, 94. 
 
 Compton (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Condicote (Glouc), 15. 
 
 Contributory property, explained, 
 14. 
 
 Conversion into contributed house, 
 16, 17, 99. 
 
 Corbridge, 119. 
 
 Corhampton (Hants), 15. 
 
 Corn-rent at Derby, 78. 
 
 Cornwall, no boroughs in, 8, 98. 
 
 Coscez, 30, 56. 
 
 Counties, difference between North- 
 ern and Southern, 4. 
 
 County Boroughs, 5, 43. 
 
 Coutances, Bishop of, 24, 33, 34, 
 42, 72. 
 
 Creech (Dorset), 15. 
 
 Crem (Oxon.), 28. 
 
 Crewkeme, 119. 
 
 CRICKLADE, 7, 9, IS, 19. 39, 42, 
 108, 119. 
 
 Cucking Stool, 83. 
 
 Curbespine, Ralph of, 25. 
 
 Curci, Richard of, 32. 
 
 Customs, 21, 63-4. 
 
 Dalby (Leic), 29. 
 
 Danegeld, i, 2, 64, 70. 
 
 Dartford, 119. 
 
 Dean East (Sussex), 23. 
 
 Deerhurst Hundred (Glouc), 15, 
 
 18. 
 Demesne Houses, 36-8, 43, 49. 
 
 Boroughs in, 43. 
 DERBY, ID, 36, 39, 41, 61, 73, 78, 
 
 118. 
 Dereham, 119. 
 Desford (Leic), 28. 
 DEVIZES, 9, n, 98. 
 Dilehurst (Bucks.), 25. 
 Ditton (Surrey), 79. 
 Doda the Priest, 23. 
 Doddington (Kent), 13. 
 Dodecestre (Cheshire), 16. 
 Dodinton (Bucks.), 25. 
 Dominical Burgesses, 49. 
 Donnington (Sussex), 14. 
 DORCHESTER, 4, 9, I7, I9, 39, 
 
 45,47,65,66,75,77,78,91, "8- 
 Dorchester (Oxon.), 28. 
 
128 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 DOVER, 4, 9, 39, 41, 46, 47, 5°, 55. 
 
 57, 69, 73, 74, 81, 88, 92, 94, III, 
 
 119. 
 Drapers of Canterbury, 60, 62, 74. 
 Drayton (Staffs.), 18, 57. 
 Drogo, of Oxen., 28. 
 fitz Pons, 20, 31. 
 DROITWICH, 10, 39, 41, 44, 56, 
 .57, 62, 120. 
 Dummer (Hants), 1 5. 
 Duncton (Sussex), 14. 
 DUNWICH, 10, 39, S3, 62, 78, 85, 
 
 ISO. 
 
 Durand, Sheriff of Gloucestershire, 
 
 44. 
 Durham, Bishop of, 74, 
 Duties of contributed houses, 3I-6, 
 
 94. 
 
 Eadbert, King of Kent, 117, 123. 
 Earl's Honour, 37. 
 
 Third Penny, 37, 41-3, 89, 94. 
 Earley (Berks.), 17, 99. 
 East Anglian Boroughs, 8, 38. 
 East Dean (Sussex), 23. 
 Eastergate (Sussex), 22. 
 Eccles (Kent), 16, 35. 
 Eckington (Derby), 26. 
 Edgar, King, 115, 117, 123. 
 Edith, Queen, 26, 69. 
 
 wife of Syred, 25. 
 Edmer the Priest, 23. 
 Edward the Confessor, King, 21, 
 33, 41, 42, SO, 71, 72, 108, III, 112, 
 122. 
 
 the Elder, King, 103, 109, ill, 
 
 115, 122. 
 
 of Salisbury, 32, 44. 
 
 (cild) of Stamford, 26. 
 Elmstead (Essex), 16. 
 Elverton (Kent), 13. 
 Ely, Abbot of, 67. 
 Engelric, 25. 
 Emald (of Arundel), 22. 
 Esgar the Staller, 21, 26, 112. 
 Estursete (Kent). See Westgate. 
 Ethelbald, King of the Mercians, 
 
 116, 117, 124. 
 
 Ethelred II, King, 109, 115, 121. 
 Ethelwin, 29. 
 Eu, Count d', 74. 
 Eudo the Steward, 21. 
 Eustace, Earl, 25, 79. 
 
 Sheriff of Hunts., 45. 
 Eversley (Hants), 15. 
 
 Evesham, Abbot of, 20. 
 Evreux, Earl of, 32. 
 Ewelme (Oxon.), 28. 
 Exceat (Sussex), 23. 
 Exemption from geld, 67, 68, 69. 
 EXETER, 4, 5 «., 9, 13, 15, 17, 27, 
 
 34, 36, 39, 42, 44, 47, 65, 66, 68, 
 
 80, III, 113, 119. 
 Expedition. See Fyrd. 
 EYE, ID, 98, 120. 
 Eynsham, 32. 
 Abbot of, 32. 
 
 Faccombe (Hants), 15. 
 False Measure, 83. 
 Farborn West (Kent), 25. 
 Faulkbourne (Essex), 25. 
 Faversham, 12. 
 Fecamp, Abbot of, 6, 95. 
 Feering (Essex), 16. 
 Felpham (Sussex), 14. 
 Female Burgesses, 57. 
 Ferrers, Henry of, 20, 32, 99. 
 Filsham (Sussex), 19. 
 Fire, penalty for, 83. 
 Firle (Sussex), 23, 24. 
 Firma Burgi, 89, 91-3. 
 
 unius nociis, TJ, 97, 122. 
 Firmar, 92-3. 
 Fishborough,Hundred ofWorcester- 
 
 shire, 65. 
 
 Fishbourne (Sussex), 14, 23. 
 Flambard, Ralph, 33, 48. 
 FORDWICH, 9, 41, 42, 61, 6S, 95, 
 
 117, 120. 
 
 Hundred of, 65. 
 Forestel, 50, 83, 84. 
 Forfeitures, 50, 59, 64, 82-7. 
 Foxleigh (Wilts.), 34. 
 Frampton (Glouc), 15. 
 Freedom from Toll, 5 5, 74. 
 Freeman, Professor, quoted, 4, yj, 
 
 68, no. 
 
 French-bom Burgesses, 37, 68, 86. 
 Frendsbury (Kent), 35. 
 Fugitive Burgess, 55, 87, 
 Fulcher (of Norwich), 38. 
 Fyrd, 57, 66, 100, io6, 107, 109. 
 
 Gablum, 47, 54, 63, 71, 72, 83, 87, 
 
 90, 102. 
 
 Gate in London, 74. 
 Geld, 49, 51, 54, 55, 58, 63, 64-71, 
 
 76, 86, 90, 94, 123. 
 
INDEX 
 
 129 
 
 Geoffrey Alselin, 26, 69. 
 
 of Bee, 21, 26. 
 
 of Mandevillej 21, 26. 
 Gersuma, 45, 79, 93. 
 Gifard, Osbem, 20. 
 
 Walter, 28, 33. 
 Gilbert the Sheriff, 23. 
 
 of Ghent, 27, 67. 
 
 Richard fitz, 74, 96. 
 Gild, 59,87,89, 113. 
 Gildhall at Dover, 59. 
 Girold (of Pevensey), 23. 
 Glastonbury, Abbot of, 30. 
 GLOUCESTER, 5«., 10,15,17,20, 
 21, 36, 39, 47. 49, 57, 61, 62, 63, 
 71, 77,78,79,97, 119- 
 Godiva, Countess, 96. 
 Godric (of Lexden), 70. 
 
 fitz Edith (Lawman of Lincoln), 
 
 51- 
 
 Sheriff of Berks., 99. 
 Godwin, Earl, 11. 
 
 fitz Brictric, Lawman of Lincoln, 
 
 51. 
 
 Gorleston, 62. 
 Gozelin (of Sussex), 24. 
 Granteseta (Cambs.), 25. 
 GRANTHAM, 10, 36, 39, 69, I2a 
 
 (Line), 27. 
 Graveney (Kent), 107. 
 Greenwich, 119. 
 Greetwell (Line), 27. 
 Grentmesnil, Hugh of, 28, 36, 37, 
 
 44. 
 
 Gretone f Cambs.), 25. 
 Guards, 82, 84. 
 GUILDFORD, 7, 9, 38, 39, 45, 47, 
 
 48, 56,67, 119. 
 Guiting (Glouc), 15, 1 8. 
 Guner, 57. 
 
 Gunfride de Cioches, 26. 
 Guret, Lawman of Lincoln, 5 1. 
 
 Hacham (Line), 27. 
 
 Halesowen (Wore), 57- 
 
 Halnaker (Sussex), 13, 15. 
 
 Hamilgar Hundred, 55. 
 
 Hamo, Sheriff of Kent, 74. 
 
 Hamo the Steward (dapifer), 25, 
 
 69. 
 
 Hampton (Oxon.), 33. 
 Hangewitham, 83. 
 Hardecnut, Lawman of Lincoln, $1. 
 Hardwick (Line), 70. 
 Hardwin, of Scalers, 2 1, 26. 
 
 Harold, Earl, afterwards King, 6, 
 21,26,27,38,49, 112. 
 
 Harting (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Hascoius Musart, 25. 
 
 Haseley (Oxon.), 27. 
 
 HASTINGS, 6, 8, 9, 39, 119. 
 
 Hatfield, Ulwi of, 21, 26. 
 
 Haw, II, 106. 
 
 Hawarden, 15. 
 
 Hawk, render of, 79. 
 
 Heinfare (O.E. hamfare), house- 
 breaking, 50, 83, 84, 85, 100. 
 
 Hemeldune (Rutland), 26. 
 
 Henry of Ferrers, 20, 32, 99. 
 
 Hensington (Oxon.), 2. 
 
 HEREFORD, 5, 5«., 10, 35, 36, 39, 
 41, 42, 44, 46, 48, 52, 53, 55, 56, 
 57, 58, 64, 72, 75, 76, 77, 81, 82, 
 84,86,92,94, 119. 
 Bishop of, 32, 75, 76. 
 
 Heriot, 49, 51,58,59,86. 
 
 Hermer, 38. 
 
 Herrings, 78, 79, 96. 
 
 Hersham, Half-hundred of Norfolk, 
 
 49- 
 
 HERTFORD, 9, 21, 26, 38, 39, 44, 
 47,63,65,91, 109, 119. 
 Hesdin, Amulf of, 20, 25, 32. 
 Hitchin, 26. 
 
 Hlothaire and Eadric, Laws of, III. 
 Homicide, 82, 85, 86. 
 Honey-dues, 78. 
 Hoo (Kent), 16, 35. 
 Homdon, 119. 
 Horsenehai (Gloue), 15. 
 Horsley (Gloue), 15. 
 Horton (Dorset), 15. 
 Housecarls, 66. 
 Hugh, of Bolebec, 25, 28. 
 
 Earl of Chester, 20, 25, 27, 28, 
 32, 42, 72, 90. 
 
 of Grentmesnil, 28, 36, ^7, 44. 
 
 grandis de scoca, 28. 
 
 Montfort, 74. 
 
 Musard, 51. 
 
 of Pevensey, 23. 
 
 Sheriff of Dorset, 45, 91. 
 
 Sheriff of Notts., 45. 
 Humphrey of Ansleville, 21. 
 
 of the Isle of Wight, 31. 
 Hundlavington (Wilts.), 34. 
 Hundred-moot, 53, 84, 85, I02, 121. 
 Hundred's man, iii. 
 Hundreds of Sussex, 19 «. 
 Hundred's pence, 100. 
 
130 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Hunston (Sussex), 15, 18. 
 HUNTINGDON, 10, 39, 41, 45, 47. 
 
 54, 56, 61, 63, 65, 67, 70, 71, 72, 
 
 73.76, 89,92, 119. 
 Hunting-services, 44, 58, 82, 84. 
 Hurstboume (Hants), 107. 
 Hurstmonceaux (Sussex), 23. 
 Hyrstehingham, Hundred of Hunts., 
 
 65. 
 HYTHE, 8,9, 17,39. 119- 
 
 Idbury, 119. 
 
 Ifield (Hundred of Sussex), 19. 
 Ilbert of Laici, 28, 96. 
 ILCHESTER, 7. 9. 39. 77, 9©, 
 
 103 «,, 119. 
 Incontinence, fine for, 3, 83. 
 Ingaresby (Leic), 28. 
 Intestacy, 75, 84, 86. 
 Iping (Sussex), 15. 
 IPSWICH, 10, 39, 41, 44, 49. 54. 
 
 57, 59. 61, 63, 66, 68, 76, 77, 78, 
 
 92, 119. 
 Ironworks, 62, 78. 
 Isaac (of Norwich), 38. 
 Itchington (Warwick), 108. 
 Indicia civitatis Lundoniae, 1 13. 
 Ivry, Roger of, 2, 25, 33. 
 
 Jemio (of Oxford), 33. 
 Jerusalem, garrison of, no. 
 Judges, 53, 85. 
 Judhael of Totnes, 8, 38, 42. 
 Judichel of Cambridge, 25. 
 Judith, Countess, 26, 27, 70. 
 
 Kegworth (Leic), ^9. 
 Kempsford (Glouc), 15. 
 Kilmiston (Hants), 107. 
 Kneb worth (Herts.), 21. 
 Knights' houses at Nottingham, 34, 
 60. 
 
 Laici, Roger of, 20. 
 
 Ilbert, 28, 96. 
 Lancaster, 119. 
 Landgable, 63, 72, 89. 
 Lanfranc, Archbishop, 28. 
 Langford (Devon), 42. 
 Langham (Leic), 29. 
 Langley (Wilts.), 30. 
 LANGPORT, 7, 9, 39, 77, 79, 
 
 103 «., 119. 
 Langport (Kent), 13, 49, 86, 
 Larceny, 48, 49, 51, 58, 83, 86, 100. 
 
 Latille, Hundred of Sussex, 19. 
 
 Laughton (Sussex), 19. 
 
 Launceston, 98. 
 
 Lavant (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Lavington (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Lawmen, 49, 51, 52, 58, 86. 
 
 Leadworks at Droitwich, 62. 
 
 Lechlade (Glouc), 15, 18. 
 
 LEICESTER, 5 «., 10, 28, 35, 36, 
 37. 39. 42, 44, 47. 48, 65, 70, 71. 
 72, 77, 78, 79, 80, 89, 119. 
 
 Lenborough (Bucks.), 25. 
 
 Lesa (Bucks.), 25. 
 
 Leuric of Derbyshire, 26. 
 
 LEWES, 8, 9, 17, 19, 39, 41, 42, 
 46,47. 55.73,75, 77, 81, 87, 90, 
 116, 119. 
 
 Lewin, Earl (Leofwin, son of God- 
 win), 21, 25, 42, III. 
 fitz Revene, 51. 
 of Newham, 25. 
 the Priest, Lawman of Lincoln, 
 
 51- 
 
 (Lyfing), Bishop of Worcester, 
 
 12. 
 Lexden (Essex), 70. 
 Liddiard (Wilts.), 15, 19. 
 Liddington (Wilts.), 15, 19. 
 LID FORD, 7, 8, 9, 38, 56, 80, 95. 
 Linch (Sussex), 14. 
 LINCOLN, 5 «., 10, 26, 34, 35, 39, 
 
 41, 45, 47. 51, 58, 63, 67, 69, 70, 
 
 72, 73, 74,77.91.93. 119- 
 
 Bishop Remigius of, 28, 32, 96. 
 Linford (Berks.), 29, 108. 
 Liskeard (Cornwall), 98. 
 Litlington (Sussex), 23. 
 Little Burton (Kent), C2. 
 Little Thorp (Leic), 29. 
 Locatio, 72. 
 Lodowin of Oxford, 33. 
 LONDON, 6, 8, 9, 18, 34, 36, 39, 62, 
 
 74, 79, 107, 108, no, ni, n2, n3, 
 
 116, 117, 119, 122. 
 Bishop of, 69, III, 112. 
 Loughborough, 29. 
 LOUTH, 10, 96, 98, 120. 
 Luddesdown (Kent), 16. 
 Lychet Maltravers (Dorset), 15. 
 Lyminge, Abbess of, 107. 
 Lymne, 120. 
 
 Maccos, III. 
 Macellum at York, 7"^. 
 Mackney (Berks.), 107. 
 
INDEX 
 
 131 
 
 Maitland, Professor, quoted, i , 4, 6, 
 8, 35.72, loi, no, 113, 115, 121. 
 
 MALDON, 10, 56, 57, 61, 66, 76, ^^, 
 81, 109, 119. 
 
 Half-hundred of, 66. 
 
 MALMESBURY, 4, 9, 22, 30, 34, 
 
 40, 43, 44, 56, 65, 67, 70, 71, ^^, 80, 
 
 119. 
 Abbot of, 30. 
 Manasses, son of, of Oxford, 33. 
 Mandeville, Geoffrey of, 21, 26. 
 Manno Brit, 25. 
 Marden (Sussex), 14, 18. 
 Markets and Tolls, 73-5, 90, 96-8, 
 
 102, 1 1 5-1 8. 
 Marlborough, 10, 43. 
 Marmoutier, Abbey of, 24. 
 Martin pelts at Chester, 78, 83. 
 Martin, St., of Seez, 22. 
 Masura, 13. 
 
 Mediatized Boroughs, 8. 
 Meon West (Hants), 15. 
 Merchants, 60, 98. 
 Merchants' houses at Nottingham, 
 
 34, 60. 
 Merchelai (Herefordshire), 58. 
 Merleswegen of Lincoln, 27. 
 
 of York, 53. 
 Mersea (Essex), 16. 
 Merston (Sussex), 15. 
 Middleton (Sussex), 22. 
 MILBOURNE, 7, 9, 40, 73. 11^ 
 
 103 «., 120. 
 Military Services, 80-2, 94. 
 Millbrook (Hants), 107, 108. 
 Milo Crispin, 27, 32, 33. 
 Milton (Kent), 108. 
 Minstead (Hants), 15. 
 Minster, Abbess of, 116, 117. 
 Mint, 65, 75-7, 89, 90, 100, 118- 
 
 20. 
 Moion, William, Sheriff of Somerset, 
 
 44. 
 Montfort, Hugh of, 74. 
 Montgomery, Earl Roger of, 7, ii, 
 
 20, 22, 42, 79. 
 Mordun (Wilts.), 108. 
 Morin (of Arundel), 22. 
 Mortain, Earl of, 7, 23, 24, 25, 33, 
 
 48, 71, 73, 76, 96. 
 
 Monks of, 24. 
 Mortlake, 18. 
 
 Mundret of Chester, 90, 92. 
 Mural Mansions at Oxford, 32. 
 Musart, Hascoius, 25. 
 
 Naval Services, 81. 
 
 Nehemiah's garrison for Jerusalem, 
 
 no. 
 NEWARK, 10, 96, 98, 102, 120. 
 Newington (Kent), 13. 
 
 (Oxon.), 28. 
 Newport, 120. 
 Newton (Leic), 29. 
 Nigel (of Arundel), 22. 
 Nordeude(Kent). See Little Burton. 
 Norman the Fat, Lawman of 
 
 Lincoln, 51. 
 NORTHAMPTON, 10, 22, 29, 40, 
 
 44,47,48,65,67,93, n9. 
 Northwich, 22, 30. 
 Norton (Hants), 15. 
 NORWICH, ID, 37, 40, 41, 44, 47, 
 
 49, 54, 55, 57, 61, 65, 67, 68, 69, 76, 
 
 78,87,88, 09. 
 Bishop of, 76. 
 Hundred of, 65. 
 NOTTINGHAM, 10, 34,35,40,45, 
 
 56,60,61, 70,77,85, n9. 
 Nuneham (Oxon.), 27. 
 
 Oddingley (Wore), 107. 
 
 Offa, King, \\T. 
 
 Offord, 120. 
 
 OKEHAMPTON, 9, 97, 98, loi, 
 120. 
 
 Ongar of Wallingford, 28. 
 
 Ormer the Priest, 23. 
 
 Osbem Biga, 25. 
 fitz Richard, 22. 
 Gifard, 20. 
 
 Ospringe (Kent), 13. 
 
 Oswald, Archbishop of York, 30. 
 
 Otterden (Kent), 12. 
 
 Ouilly, Robert of, 25, 28, 33, 72. 
 
 Outlaw, 82. 
 
 OXFORD, 5 «., 10, 13, 17, 21, 29, 
 32-4, 35, 38, 40, 41, 46, 53, 54, 57, 
 62, 65, 67, 72, 73, n, 78, 80, 85, 86, 
 87, 88, 91, 108, III, 112, 119. 
 
 Pagenel, Ralph, 27. 
 
 Pagham (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Peace Breach, 49, 50, 82, 84, 100. 
 
 Peldon (Essex), 26. 
 
 Pelham (Herts.), 26. 
 
 PENWORTHAM, 10, 98, loi, 120. 
 
 Perie (Oxon.), 28. 
 
 Perry Court (Kent), 13. 
 
 PERSHORE, 6, 10, 90, 97, 98, 120. 
 
132 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Peterborough, Abbot of, 54, 72. 
 Peter of Valonges, 21, 51, 52. 
 
 Sheriff of Herts., 21. 
 Peter's pence, 100, loi. 
 Petroc's Book, St., in. 
 Petworth (Sussex), 14. 
 PEVENSEY, 7, 9, 23, 36, 40, 65, 
 
 71. 73> 76, 77, 90, 120. 
 Pevensey, Hundred of, 6$. 
 
 Rape of, 23. 
 Peverel, William, 32. 
 Pickwell (Leic), 29. 
 Picot, Sheriff of Cambs., 45, 86, 87, 
 
 88 
 POCKLINGTON, 10, 96, 98, 102, 
 
 120. 
 Poll-tax, 55, 63, 69. 
 PONTEFRACT, 10, 96, 98, 120. 
 Port Meadow at Oxford, 88. 
 Portreeve, 1 10-12, 115. See Prae- 
 
 positus. 
 
 Povington (Dorset), 15. 
 Praepositus, 16, 45-7, 50, 55, 73, 
 
 82, 83, 84, 85, 92, 94, 96. See 
 
 Portreeve. 
 Pre-emption by relatives, 58. 
 Preston (Sussex), 19, 23. 
 Property, why this term is used in 
 
 preference to Manor, i. 
 Property of Boroughs, 87-9, 106, 
 
 "3- 
 Pucklechurch (Glouc), 15. 
 Purton (Wilts.), 15. 
 
 Quasi-county Boroughs, term ex- 
 plained, 7, 43. 
 QUATFORD, 10, 98, 120. 
 Quennington (Glouc), 1 5, 62, 79. 
 
 Racehorse, 79. 
 
 Racton (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Radclive (Bucks.), 25. 
 
 Rainbald, fitz Peter the Bishop, 17, 
 
 99. 
 Rainbald of Wallingford, 38. 
 Ralph of Arundel, 22. 
 
 Bainard, 21. 
 
 de Bellafago, 38. 
 
 of Columbels, 50, 87. 
 
 of Curbespine, 25. 
 
 Earl, 38. 
 
 Flambard, 33, 48. 
 
 fitz Hubert, 26. 
 
 brother of Ilger, 96. 
 
 Pagenel, 27. 
 
 Ralph of Pevensey, 23. 
 
 Viso Lupi, 38. 
 Ramsbury (Wilts.), 15, 19. 
 Ramsey, Abbot of, 45, 69. 
 Rape, 83, 87. 
 Ratton (Sussex), 23, 24. 
 READING, 9, 17, 92, 99, 119. 
 Reculver, Abbot of, 117. 
 Reinbodcurth, Wido of, 33. 
 Relief, 75, 83, 84, 86. 
 Remigius, Bishop of Lincoln, 28, 
 
 33, 96, 97- 
 Renders in kind, 77-9. 
 Reschinton (Lines.), 27. 
 Revelach, 83. 
 
 RHUDDLAN, 9, 10, 76, 77, 86, 
 101, 120. 
 
 Robert of, 70, 76. 
 Richard of Curci, 32. 
 
 fitz Gilbert, 74, 96. 
 
 of Sent, 55. 
 Risborough (Bucks.), 13, 17, 32. 
 Rissington (Glouc), 15. 
 Rivenhall (Essex), 16. 
 Robert Armenteres, 28. 
 
 the Artilleryman, 38. 
 
 Blund, 38, 44. 
 
 Malet, 49, 59. 
 
 of Ouilly, 25, 28, 33, 72. 
 
 of Rhuddlan, 70, 76. 
 
 of Romney, 20. 
 
 of Stafford, 42, 52. 
 
 the Steward, 22. 
 
 fitz Tetbald, 22, 7-^. 
 
 of Todeni, 20. 
 ROCHESTER, 4, 5 «., 9, 13, 16, 
 17. 34, 35, 40, 62, 65, 67, 91, 92, 
 105, 106, 107, 119. 
 
 Bishop of, 117. 
 Roger Bigot, 2,^, 55. 
 
 of Busli, 27. 
 
 of Ivry, 2, 25, 33. 
 
 of Laici, 20. 
 
 Earl of Montgomery, 7, li, 20, 
 22, 42, 79. 
 
 of Pevensey, 23. 
 
 fitz Sefrid, 28. 
 
 Sheriff of Suffolk, 92. 
 ROMNEY, 8, 9, 17, 20, 40, 49, 58, 
 81, 86, loi, 119. 
 
 Robert of, 20. 
 Romsey (Hants), 15. 
 Rotherfield (Oxon.), 33. 
 Round, Mr. J. H., quoted, 9, 13,41, 
 65,66,71,78, 112. 
 
INDEX 
 
 ^33 
 
 Royal Boroughs, 8. 
 Runcton (Sussex), 15. 
 Rutland, no boroughs in, 8. 
 
 houses at Stamford lying in, 26. 
 RYE, 9, 98, 120. 
 
 Sac and Soc, 47-51, 52, 58, 75. 87, 
 94, 122. 
 Sadington (Leic), 29. 
 ST. ALBANS, 9, 95, 108, 120. 
 Abbot of, 28. 
 
 Augustine's, Canterbury, 42, 60, 
 62, 64, 74. 
 
 Denys of Paris, 1$, 20, 34. 
 
 Edmunds, Bury, 120, 
 
 Abbot of, 32, 34, 55, 96. 
 
 Germains, 98. 
 
 Juliana (Shrewsbury), 57. 
 
 Martin of Seez, 22. 
 (Kent), 12. 
 
 Mary of Worcester, 20. 
 
 Pancras, Chichester, 13. 
 
 Peter (Gloucester), 79. 
 
 Wandregisilius (Wareham), 36, 
 37. 
 Salisbury, 10, 43, 120. 
 Salmon, 79. 
 
 Saltworks at Droitwich, 62. 
 SANDWICH, 7, 9, 40, 65, 78, 81, 
 91, 92, 117-18, 119. 
 
 Hundred, 65. 
 Scalers, Hardwin of, 21, 26. 
 Scantone (Line), 27. 
 Scot (geld), 55. 
 Scotale, 79. 
 
 SEASALTER, 9, 98, 102. 
 Seez, Abbey of St. Martin, 22. 
 Segrie (Wilts.), 31. 
 Selham (Sussex), 14, 18. 
 Selsey (Sussex), 14, 19. 
 Services, 57, 80-2. 
 Sessingham (Sussex), 23. 
 SHAFTESBURY, 4, 9, 40, 45, 47, 
 
 56,65,66,75,77,91, 119- 
 St. Edward of, 20. 
 Shalford (Essex), 16. 
 Shalston (Bucks.), 25. 
 Sheepstead (Leic), 29. 
 Shenley (Herts.), 26. 
 
 (Bucks.), 25. 
 Sheriff, 44, 45, 47, 84, 85, 92, 93, 
 
 94, 112. 
 
 Sherrington (Sussex), 23. 
 Shilton (Leic), 28. 
 Shipton (Oxon.), 32. 
 
 Shirbum (Oxon.), 28. 
 Shoemakers of Canterbury, 60, 62, 
 
 74- 
 SHREWSBURY, 5, 5 «., 8, 10, 40, 
 
 42, 44, 47, 54, 57, 58, 64, 65, 68, 
 
 69, 72, 75, 76, 77y 81, 82, 85, 86, 
 
 90,91,92, 119. 
 Sileby (Leic), 28. 
 Simple Boroughs, term explained, 
 
 6, 94-103. 
 
 Singleton (Sussex), 1 1, 14. 
 Siward of Lincoln, 27. 
 
 the Priest, Lawman of Lincoln, 
 
 51. 
 
 Slave Burgess, 57. 
 Smiths, 62, 81. 
 Snoddingland (Kent), 107. 
 Soc of King Edward, 21. 
 Sokemen, 49, 58. 
 Somerford Little (Wilts.), 30. 
 Somerley, Hundred of Sussex, 19. 
 Somerset Boroughs, 7, 43, 44. 
 Somerton (Somerset), 77, 123 «. 
 Sortebrand, Lawman of Lincoln, 51. / 
 SOUTHAMPTON, 5, 9, 40, 61, 
 
 71, 107, 108, 117, 119. 
 Southhunningland (Kent), 107. 
 SOUTH WARK, 7, 9, 17, 18, 38,40, 
 
 41,48,56,73,79, 119. 
 Spelho, Hundred of Northampton, 
 
 65. 
 STAFFORD, 5«., 10, 21, 29,. 36, 
 
 37, 40, 41, 42, 48, 52, 67, 70, 109, 
 
 119. 
 Robert of, 42, 52. 
 Staines, 6, 18, 108. 
 Staller, Esgar the, 21, 26, 112. 
 STAMFORD, 10, 26, 40, 49, 51, 
 
 52, 54, 58, 59, 61, 63, 64, 68, 73, 
 
 73, 86, 92, 109, 119. 
 STANSTEAD, 9, 96, 98, 12a 
 Stedham (Sussex), 14, 18. 
 Steventon (Berks.), 17. 
 Stewkley (Bucks.), 24. 
 STEYNING, 6, 9, 57, 95, 98, 102. 
 
 Hundred, 6, 19, 95. 
 Stigand, Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 
 49. 
 Stoke (Sussex), 22. 
 
 (Oxon.), 27. 
 Stopham (Sussex), 14. 
 Stori of Lincoln, 27. 
 Stoughton (Leic), 28. 
 
 (Sussex), 14, 18. 
 Stouting (Kent), 108. 
 
134 
 
 THE DOMESDAY BOROUGHS 
 
 Stradfieldsaye (Hants), 15. 
 Stratford Water (Bucks.), 25. 
 Stratton (Derby), 26. 
 Streatley (Berks.), i/- 
 Strettington (Sussex), 15. 
 Suardinc fitz Hardecnut, Lawman 
 of Lincoln, 51. 
 
 Suartinc, Lawman of Lincoln, 51. 
 SUDBURY, 10,40, 65, 73, ^^, 119. 
 Sutton (Oxon.), 27. 
 Swen fitz Swane, of Lincoln, 27. 
 Swertebrand, Lawman of Lincoln, 
 
 51- 
 Swetman of Oxford, 33. 
 Swineherds of Canterbury, 62, 74. 
 of Taunton, 100. 
 
 TAMWORTH, 8, 10, 17, 35, 40, 
 57,62, 109, 119. 
 
 Tangmere (Sussex), 14. 
 
 Tanner Street, Winchester, 108. 
 
 TATESHALLE. See PONTE- 
 FRACT. 
 
 TAUNTON, 9, 53, 76, V, 90, 98, 
 100, 103, 117, 122, 123. 
 
 Tavistock, 15. 
 
 Tawton (Devon), 15. 
 
 Taynton (Oxon.), 32, 34. 
 
 Teddington (Wore), 108. 
 
 Tempsford, 120. 
 
 Tenurial heterogeneity, 6, 94. 
 homogeneity, 6, 95. 
 
 Terling (Essex), 16. 
 
 Terra Regis, Boroughs on, 38, 43. 
 
 Tetbald, Robert fitz, 22, 73. 
 
 TEWKESBURY, 10, 15, 57, 90, 97, 
 98, 120. 
 
 Tey Great (Essex), 16. 
 
 Theft, 123. See Larceny. 
 
 Theloneum Panis, 74. 
 
 THEODULVESIDE. See DE- 
 VIZES. 
 
 THETFORD, 10, 40, 42, 49, 55, 
 
 59,61,65,77,78,79, 119- 
 Thingoe Hundred, 65. 
 Third Penny, yj, 41-3, 89, 94. 
 Thol and team, 51, 'j^,. 
 Thornton (Bucks.), 25. 
 Thorpe (Leic), 29. 
 
 Regis (Norf.), 55. 
 Three forfeitures, 50, 85, 86. 
 Throwley (Kent), 13. 
 Thurburn of Essex, 25. 
 Thurlestone (Leic), 29. 
 Thurnham (Kent), 25. 
 
 Thurrock (Essex), 18. 
 Ticstead (Hants), 107. 
 Tillington (Sussex), 14. 
 Tilton (Sussex), 23. 
 Tochi of Derby, 26. 
 
 Lincoln, 26. 
 Toddington (Sussex), 22. 
 Todeni, Berenger of, 32. 
 
 Robert of, 20. 
 Tolls, 64, 73-5, 84, 90, 95, 97, III, 
 
 116, 117. 
 TORKSEY, 10, 40, 42, 47, 58, 70, 
 
 73. 81, 119. 
 TOTBURY, 10, 60, 98, loi, 102, 
 
 120. 
 TOTNES, 8, 9, 38, 40, 42, 56, 66, 
 
 80, 95, 1 19. 
 Judhael of, 7, 38, 42. 
 Trematon (Cornwall), 98. 
 Trinoda necessitas, 57, 106. 
 Troarz, Abbey of, 20. 
 Turchil of Essex, 26. 
 
 of Hunts., 45. 
 TWINEHAM (Christchurch), 9, 
 
 120. 
 Twyford (Bucks.), 17, 32. 
 
 Ulbert, Lawman of Lincoln, 51. 
 
 Ulf of Lincoln, 27, 51. 
 
 Ulmar, 21. 
 
 Ulnod the Priest Lawman of Lincoln, 
 
 51. 
 Ulvric of Oxford, 33. 
 Ulward fitz Edith, 24, 72. 
 Ulwi of Hatfield, 21, 26. 
 Ulwin of Colchester, 26. 
 Urmerlavia, 53, 84. 
 Urso, 22, 30. 
 
 Vacant Houses exempt from Geld, 
 
 67. 
 Valonges, Peter of, 21, 51. 
 Valuation List, Example of Poor- 
 
 Law, 2, 
 Values and Renders, 89-91. 
 
 Walberton (Sussex), 22. 
 Walchelin, Bishop of Winchester, 
 
 31, 32, 48, 53, 76, 100. 
 Waleran, 16, 55, 76. 
 Wales, raids into, 44, 46, 84. 
 Walkhampstead, 18, 79. 
 WALLINGFORD, 4, 5 «., 18, 22, 
 
 27, 28, 31, 36, 37, 40, 44, 46, 48, 
 
INDEX 
 
 135 
 
 52, 56, 58, 62, 63, 68, 72, 73, ^^, 
 81,85,91,92, 107, 119, 
 
 Wallop (Hants), 15. 
 
 Walraven, Lawman of Lincoln, 51. 
 
 Walter the Artilleryman, 20. 
 
 Gifard, 28, 33. 
 
 of Pevensey, 23. 
 
 Ponther, 22, 30. 
 Waltham (Sussex), 15. 
 
 (Essex), 18, 74. 
 Warbleton (Hants), 14. 
 Warborough (Oxon.), 120. 
 Wards, 54. 
 WAREHAM, 4, 9, 15, 36, 37, 40, 
 
 45, 56,65,66,75,77,78,91, 119. 
 Warenne, William of, 7. 
 WARMINSTER, 9, ^^, 97, 98. 
 Warningcamp (Sussex), 22. 
 WARWICK, 5, ID, 22, 27, 35, 36, 
 37, 40, 43, 44, 47, 48, 52, 58, 65, 
 67, 72, 80, 88, 89, 108, 109, 119. 
 Watchet, 120. 
 Watlington (Oxon.), 28. 
 Wazo of Ewelme, 28. 
 Weaverham (Cheshire), 16. . 
 Weights and Measures, 117. 
 Weowaraget (Canterbury), 112. 
 Westbourne (Sussex), 14. 
 West Farbom (Kent), 25. 
 Westgate (Kent), 12, 
 Westhampnett (Sussex), 15. 
 West Meon (Hants), 15. 
 West Meston (Sussex), 19. 
 Westminster Abbey, 6, 42, 95, 97, 
 
 108. 
 Weston (Oxon.), 28. 
 West Shelve (Kent), 12. 
 West Wickham (Kent), 13. 
 Wharwell, Abbess of, 69. 
 Whitchurch (Oxon.), 33. 
 Wicelbold (Wore), 57. 
 Wic-gerefa, in. 
 Wichling (Kent), 12. 
 Widecestre (Glouc), 15, 79. 
 Wideham (Sussex), 24. 
 Widne (Lines.), 26. 
 Wido of Reinbudcurth, 33. 
 Wigborough (Essex), 16. 
 WIGMORE, 10, 98, loi, 109, 120. 
 Wigston (Leic), 28. 
 Wigton (Staffs.), 18. 
 Wilaf, 25. 
 
 Wiley, 107. 
 
 William of Arundel, 22. 
 
 Bishop of London, in, 112. 
 
 of Cahainges, 23. 
 
 of Castellon, 25. 
 
 fitz Geoffrey, 60. 
 
 of Hensington, 2. 
 
 King, I, 21, 22, 26, 32, 42, 68, 
 115. 
 
 Moion, 44. 
 
 nephew of Bishop, 26. 
 
 of Noies, 55. 
 
 Earl, fitz Osbem, 32. 
 
 of Pevensey, 23. 
 
 Peverel, 32. 
 
 of Warenne, 8. 
 Willingdon (Sussex), 19, 23, 24. 
 WILTON, 7, 9, 10, 40, 107, 119. 
 Wiltshire Boroughs, 7, 43, 44. 
 WIMBOURN, 9, 40. 
 Wimer, 38. 
 WINCHCOMBE, 10, 18, 40, 42, 
 
 44,47,62,65, 119. 
 Winchelsea, 9«., 120. 
 WINCHESTER, 5 «., 8, 9, 15, 17, 
 34, 40, 62, 69, 107, III, 112, 119. 
 
 Bishop of, 31, 32, 48, 53, 76, 100, 
 117, 122. 
 Windsor, 10, loi. 
 Winterboume (Sussex), 19. 
 Witham, 120. 
 
 Wittering (Sussex), 14, 18, 19. 
 Wolverley (Wore), 108. 
 Woodbury, gild at, 113. 
 Wootton (Hants), 108. 
 WORCESTER, 5 «., 10, 12, 17, 18, 
 22, 30, 40, 42, 43, 47, 57, 64, 65, 
 73, 75> 76, n, 106, 107, 108, 109, 
 no, 119, 122, 123. 
 
 Bishop of, 12, 22, 107, 109, 117, 
 122, 123. 
 
 St, Mary of, 20, 30. 
 
 St. Peter's Church in, 108. 
 Worthy (Hants), 15. 
 W^rittle (Essex), 26. 
 Wroxhall (Wilts,), 34- 
 
 YARMOUTH, 10, 40, 42, 45, 47, 
 
 62, 65, 79, 120. 
 YORK, 5 «., 10, 34, 35, 40, 44, 47i 
 
 53, 54, 57, 68, 70, 71, 73, 86, 119. 
 Ajchbishop of, 54. 
 
OXFORD 
 PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
 
 BY HORACE HART, M>A. 
 rRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYLORD 
 
 
 
 PRINTEDIN U.S.A. 
 
"""""'"""""■llllllliir- - 
 
 ''"''i'""lllillllllj||„„„|,|| 
 
 A 000 546 195