BOLDON BOOK 



however, to undertake this without disregarding the limitations of the present 

 work, which confine one to problems arising within a single county. 



We return now to our Durham evidence only to find that we may not 

 yet congratulate ourselves that we have reached the whole truth about cornage. 

 Some disconcerting texts remain to be examined. In the first place, Boldon 

 Book affords several instances of freemen paying cornage, a fact which appar- 

 ently traverses our theory that cornage was distinctively an incident of unfree 

 or villein-tenure. But if we suppose that, like many other such incidents, 

 this charge had by the twelfth century got itself fastened to the soil, and in 

 such a way, indeed, that every bovate in any vill was answerable for a fixed 

 portion of the cornage of that vill, then the difficulty disappears. If a free 

 tenant held several bovates in a corn age-pay ing vill he would naturally not be 

 grouped for the purpose of cornage with the villeins, nor, on the other hand, 

 would the bishop be deprived of his due by reason of his tenant's status. 

 Again, the same reasoning would hold in case the whole or the fraction of a 

 cornage-paying vill was granted to a freeman. With this hypothesis in mind, 

 we may examine the passages referred to. At Heighington there are sixteen 

 villeins, each of whom holds two bovates ; these render among other things 

 * %6s. de cornagio ' and one milch cow. Now follow two striking passages : 

 ' Hugo Brunne tenet, quamdiu uxor ejus vixerit, ii. bovatas pro iis., quos 

 reddit ad cornagium . . . Simon hostiarius ibidem tenet terram quae fuit 

 Utredi, cum incrementis quas Dominus Episcopus ei fecit usque ad Ix. acras, 

 et reddit pro omnibus i. besancium 1 ad Penthecostem.' Now the first of these 

 gives us the cornage rate at Heighington. It was is. on the bovate, and the 

 words ' reddit ad cornagium ' certainly suggest a contribution to some larger 

 sum. Further, the phrasing of the text suggests a beneficial rating. Simon 

 held as much as 60 acres, but he paid only zs. for Utred's holding and the 

 addition which the bishop had made. Utred no doubt made the same 

 render for the smaller tenement which contained, of course, less than Simon's 

 60 acres. Let us suppose that it contained (or was rated at) just half, that 

 would be 30 acres, or to put it otherwise, 2 bovates. We are somewhat 

 justified in this assumption because it tallies with the render of zs, which were 

 paid as a contribution, we can scarcely doubt, to the cornage of the vill. For 

 observe that at the rate of is. on the bovate the sixteen villeins would pay 

 only 32.*., 4_r. short of the recorded cornage of the vill. Now if you add the 

 4_r. from the two free tenants you have exactly the sum, 36^. A similar case 

 occurs as Escomb, where our formula may again be tested. There are 

 fourteen villeins, ' quorum unusquisque habet i. bovatam, et reddit et operatur 

 omnibus modis sicut villani de North Aclet.' At North Auckland each 

 villein rendered iqd. cornage. Now at Escomb 'Elzibrid tenet dimidiam 

 bovatam, et reddit . . . yd. de cornagio'; that is, at the rate of igJ. per 

 bovate he is one penny short. The case of Herrington is very instructive. 

 The entry reads as follows : ' Duae partes de Heringtona, quas Hugo de 

 Hermas tenet, reddit (sic) zos. de cornagio et ii. partes i. vacca? de metride,' 



1 i.e. 21. See the entries under Grindon, Heighington, Stanhope, and Farnacrcs. At Stanhope the best 

 texts give the value of the bcsant as 4/.,t>ut this is a slip. At Farnacres we get 'besancium vel iis.' The Liber 

 Pit* affords a similar proof, ' Aernisius de Aluertone . . . unum bisantium ... vel ii. solidos,' p. 107, cf. 82, 

 83. In 1227 the dean and canons of Chichester were paying an annual due of 1 besant or zi., Cal.of Chart. R. 

 i. 34. I am indebted to Prof. Gross for this reference ; cf. BoIJtm Bk., App. p. liii. ; Trice Martin, Record 

 Interpreter, 180. 



275 



