THE DOMESDAY SURVEY 



eye rather than the hand had measured them. Where, as at Braunstone 

 (fo. 226) we read of 'one acre' of wood, we may suppose that it was 

 kept up for the requirements of the manor. It is very singular that, in 

 this instance, we find the manor, when held by the Ros family, more 

 than four centuries after Domesday, similarly returned as containing ' one 

 acre of wood.' ' 



Another point which has to be considered is the size of the perch 

 employed. As Ellis observed, ' a larger perch than that fixed by the 

 Statute of Measures is still in use for woodland ' ; ' and there is some 

 evidence to show that this perch, in mediaeval England, was twenty feet 

 in length. Such a perch, for instance, is mentioned in a grant to 

 Grosmont Priory, temp. John, in Eskdale forest, Yorkshire,' and again 

 in an Ivichurch charter, temp. Edward II. in Clarendon forest,* as also 

 in a grant to Brinkburne Priory of land in ' Evenewode.' * Agard too 

 speaks of this perch of twenty feet. Therefore, when king John, in 

 1203, granted, in Northamptonshire, to the monks of Bee forty-eight 

 acres ' of the new clearing according to his perch ' {ad perticam nostrum) ' 

 quit of essarts, he probably referred to a standard perch as distinct from 

 that in use for woodland. 



But, apart from that increase of twenty per cent, in the Domesday 

 measurements which would be involved by the use of a twenty foot 

 perch, it is surely out of the question to assume that, at the time of 

 Domesday, the woodland was either in rectangular blocks or was re- 

 duced, on paper, by elaborate calculations, to their equivalent ; yet this 

 assumption, it will be found, is involved in Mr. Eyton's calculations. 

 In Lincolnshire we find similar measurements, even where the woodland 

 is distinctly stated to be scattered (fier loco) over the estate. We must 

 therefore conclude that, in those cases where the Domesday measurements 

 are large, it is not possible to reduce them to any definite number of 

 acres ; but, broadly speaking, there was a marked difference in 1086, as 

 there is at the present time, in the distribution of forest land in the 

 county. And although in such a case as that of Oundle we must not 

 accept literally the Domesday measures, we may fairly infer that the 

 process of clearing — or as it was termed ' essarting ' — was carried on 

 extensively during the Middle Ages.' 



After surveying the manors held, at the time of its compilation, 

 by the Crown, Domesday gives us, in their order, the tenants-in-chief 

 (that is to say those who held directly from the Crown) with the lands 

 they severally held. First come the church dignitaries, bishops and so 

 forth, whether holding in their private capacity or as the official tenants 

 of church lands. These are followed by the lay holders, headed by the 



* Bridges' Northamptonshire., I. 29. ' Introduction to Domesday, I. 159. 



» Monasticon AngUcanum, VI. 1025. * Ibid., VI. 417. * Ihid., VI. 332. 



* loth Report Historical Report MSS. Commission, I. 352. 



'' It might, of course, be urged that so great a tract of woodland as Domesday here 

 suggests was largely or partially detached and at a distance from the manor. But although, 

 in some counties, there are traces of such a system, I do not find it in Northamptonshire. 



281 



