64 



a question I find of growing interest and importance in the minds 

 of the workers dealing with it. I had a long talk with one of those 

 writers last night, and I am iii correspondence with the editor of 

 perhaps tlie most important recent book on certain branches of 

 the subject, and on all hands I am asked to continue my own 

 local part of the enquiry. Mrs. J. R. Green last night was most 

 emphatic on the subject, and I shall, I hope, be able to go on 

 after my return to Danby next week. . . Camisedale comes in 

 as subsidiary to other and clearer cases affecting the theory of 

 the ancient manor." Writing under date December 9th, 1889, 

 Atkinson said, "The Camisedale enquiry is one that has occupied 

 my mind for these twenty-five or thirty years, and I was in 

 correspondence with Sir Henry James about the perplexing 

 entries — or rather one of them — which involve the name among 

 those under the heading of ' Terra Hugonis filii Baldrici ' as long 

 ago as January, 1863. Why there should be two entries instead 

 of one is a mystery ; and it is a great misfortune that the last 

 of them cannot be exactly read by reason of what Sir Henry 

 calls ' a blotch of scattered ink.' I do not think the accepted 

 reading is right, and the authority just quoted speaks of it as 

 ' doubtful by reason of the blotch.' My impression very strong- 

 ly is that the name which has been read Broctun is not perhaps 

 meant for Broctun, but that it involves a mistaken entry of the 

 Kemesdayll three carucates as to their being in Fitz Baldric's 

 fee ; and that consequent on this mistake arose the necessity for 

 a second notice of the same lands, and, of course, a corrected 

 one. On this theory I can make all things harmonise save only 

 two bovates, and I can see where that disctepancy originates ; at 

 least it appears so to me." Two days later he writes, '' Touching 

 Camisedale : — nine carucates have to be accounted for, and the 

 Kemesdayll is juxta not in Greneowe. . . Compare, too, the 

 carucateage of Camisedale, Ingleby, Broctun, and Broctun alia 

 or magna. Compare also the areas of Ingleby. Greenhow and 

 Battersby inter se, and with Kirby and Broughion. The compo- 

 sition of the relative fees of Meinill and Eure, and necessarily of 

 Baliol, all have to be considered ; and the connection betw-en 

 Baliol and a — if not the — great jDredecessor in the tenancy of the 

 fees afterwards held by Baliol and Eure, wants sadly to be cleared 

 up. None of these old pedigrees hold water when examined. 

 Most of them are sheer romance in perhaps the majority of the 

 earlier generations, and I am sure that there is a great addition 

 to be made to our information as to the earlier tenentes — or one 

 of them — of the fees in Cleveland afterwards held by the 

 Baliols. I have in my possession the seal of one such lord, Guido 

 de Bovincourt, or, as the name is spelt on the seal, Bovencorh. 



