A HISTORY OF BUCKINGHAMSHIRE 



ceded Winemar at three places in Northamptonshire, is his predecessor 

 in his one Buckinghamshire manor as ' Aldene the housecarl.' The 

 other two housecarls mentioned are Golnil and Alii. We thus see that 

 it is only the accident of a man being sometimes styled a housecarl in 

 the Buckinghamshire portion of the Survey that enables us to distinguish 

 him as such ; and we are consequently led to infer that there may have 

 been other landowners who were, as a matter of fact, housecarls, although 

 they are not so described. As there is nothing to distinguish these 

 housecarls from the rest of the men so styled, a new light, perhaps, is 

 thrown on the status of the whole body. 1 



It is only from incidental notices that we can recover in Domes- 

 day the names of sheriffs. That Ansculf de Picquigny, father of 

 William the Domesday baron, had acted as sheriff of Bucks one such 

 notice tells us ; 3 but it is only conjecture, though highly probable, that 

 Ralf Taillebois, who had filled the office in the adjoining counties of 

 Herts and Beds, had occupied it also here. So far as the tenure of land 

 is concerned, his widow Azelina held but one manor at the Survey ; if 

 Ralf, therefore, was connected with the county, it was in an official 

 capacity. Now of two holdings towards the end of the Survey half a 

 hide which Leofwine had held and one hide which had been held by 

 three men 3 we read that they had been added to the king's manor of 

 Wendover, to which they had not belonged before the Conquest ; and 

 it is expressly stated of the first that this had been done by ' Ralf.' 4 In 

 Bedfordshire a whole string of entries charges Ralf Taillebois with pre- 

 cisely similar action, 5 and by comparing those in the two counties we can 

 better understand its character. 



A sheriff who ' farmed ' the Crown manors could wrongfully in- 

 crease his gains by two opposite devices ; he could either, as at Wend- 

 over and in Bedfordshire, seize on small holdings and add them to the 

 king's manors thus increasing their revenue without increasing his 

 payment to the Crown for them," or he could filch portions of the 

 Crown demesne for the benefit of himself or of his friends. This would 

 seem to have been done in Buckinghamshire by Godric, an English 



1 Mr. Ragg suggests that there were differences of tenure ; that sometimes the same man held in 

 one case as ' man,' in another as ' thegn," and in a third as ' housecarl ' ; and that this saves us from 

 the alternative of supposing that practically in such instances houscarl=thegn=man in these Domesday 

 entries. 



1 See p. 21 3 above and 225 and 256 below. 3 See p. 276 below. 



4 ' Hanc terram apposuit Radulfus in Wandoure, sed non fuit ibi T.R.E. '. . . ' modo sunt in firma 

 regis in Wandoure, ubi non fuerunt T.R.E.' These passages should be compared with the statement 

 under Wendover itself that 'in hoc manerio sunt ii sochemanni ; unam hidam et dimidiam tenent ; non 

 jacuerunt ibi T.R.E.' ; for the amount of land is the same, though its tenants are differently stated. 



5 ' quas Radulfus talliebosc apposuit in Lestone, ubi non adjacebant T.R.E.' . . . ' Radulfus vero 

 Taillebosc in manerio Houstone earn apposuit.' . . . 'Hanc apposuit Radulfus talliebosc in Loitone 

 manerio regis.' 



6 This appears to be the explanation of the Bedfordshire entries on fo. 2i8b : 'Has vi terras 

 apposuit Radulfus Talgebosc in ministerio regis quando vicecomes fuit, non enim fuerunt ibi T.R.E. 

 . . . Hanc terram apposuit Radulfus in ministerio regis, ubi non fuit T.R.E.,' etc., etc. Similarly, in 

 Berkshire, to the south, Robert (d'Ouilly) had annexed the tiny holdings of two Englishwomen to the 

 royal manors of Wantage and Sutton : ' Robertus tenet in firma de Wanetinz, sed nunquam ibi 

 pertinuit.' . . . 'Robertus tenet in firma de Sudton, sed ibi non pertinuit' (fo. 57). 



220 



