THE DOMESDAY SURVEY 



exacted from them for their mints. 1 Another form of vouching to 

 warranty is that in which a former sheriff is vouched by the occupant 

 of land as having given him livery of seisin. On the king's manor of 

 Lawford two instances will be found in which Suain was so vouched. 1 



Of the three eastern counties Essex is the first with the Domesday 

 of which I have dealt for the Victoria History. The peculiar character 

 of the volume containing the survey of those counties is largely respon- 

 sible for the length of this, the first and possibly the only introduction 

 to a portion of its contents. 



Discussing the relationship of the ' second,' the eastern counties 

 volume to that which contains the rest of the Domesday Survey, I 

 argued in Feudal England (pp. 138-42) that the former was really the 

 first to be compiled. As this conclusion has been accepted by the Deputy- 

 Keeper of the Public Records, 3 I may here repeat in part the argu- 

 ment : 



I have never seen any attempt at a real explanation of the great difference both 

 in scope and in excellence between the two volumes, or indeed any reason given why 

 the eastern counties should have had a volume to themselves. For a full appreciation 

 of the contrast presented by the two volumes, the originals ought to be examined. 

 Such differences as that the leaves of one are half as large again as those of the other, 

 and that the former is drawn up in double, but the latter in single column, dwarf the 

 comparatively minor contrasts of material and of handwriting. So too the fulness of 

 the details in the second volume may obscure the fact of its workmanship being 

 greatly inferior to that of the first. . . . The muddled order of the tenants-in-chief 

 for Norfolk and for Suffolk where laymen precede the church is another proof of 

 inferiority, but only minute investigation could show the hurry or ignorance of the 

 scribes. 



Now all this might, I think, be explained if we took the so-called second volume 

 to be really a first attempt at the codification of the returns. Its unsatisfactory 

 character must have demonstrated the need for a better system, which indeed its un- 

 wieldy proportions must have rendered imperative. 



I am now prepared to go further and to say that this hypothesis 

 explains and is supported by a feature in the portion devoted to Essex 

 which appears to be unique in Domesday. On fos. 8^ and 1 6b the text 

 ends for the time, and fos. 9 and 17 are blank save for lists of the head- 

 ings, six and ten respectively, to certain church fiefs. These lists have been 

 deleted by lines drawn across them. The occurrence of these extraordi- 

 nary breaks right in the middle of the text obviously calls for some ex- 

 planation, but it proved difficult to account for. We find however that 

 the headings grouped on fo. 9 are those which occur on fos. 9^16^, and 

 that those similarly grouped on fo. 17 occur on fos. 17^24^. But after 

 the second of these lists (fo. 17) there is no further break; the text 

 proceeds continuously. 



I now suggest that this is the result of a change of plan as the work 

 proceeded, Essex representing the first portion of the first volume under- 



1 ' Advocant regem adturtorem ' (fo. 107). The phrase should run, 'ad turtorem,' and even then 

 the ' turtor ' is a corrupt form of ' tutor.' In a case of vouching to warranty at Boreham the word 

 'defensor' is used instead of 'tutor' (fo. 31^) ; and at Notley Geoffrey 'clamat regem ad warant' (fo. 60). 

 At Hertford 'protector' is employed: 'de quibus advocat Harduinus regem ad protectorem' (i. 13*)- 



1 ' inde vocat liberatorem Suanum . . . inde revocat liberatorem Suanum ' (fo. 66). Compare the 

 Tollesbury case on p. 449 below. 



* See Catalogue to the Muieum of the Pubfu Record Office (i9oz). 



413 



