86 Domesday and Feudal Statistics 



and Leicester (p. 97) in 1242 follows; in 1166 

 he had y| of old and 2-J fees in demesne : the 

 King's advocates either could not or would not 

 answer the Prior's argument which appears to be 

 entirely misapprehended by both the distinguished 

 authors citing the case what the Prior pleads is 

 that he and his tenants paid on 10 fees to two aids 

 to marry, and that his certificate of 1166 duly 

 acknowledges 10 fees as by him and his tenants, 

 but that he held by the service of 2 fees only, and 

 challenges any recorded proof to the contrary 

 none produced. This probably refers to the 

 i\ fees in demesne, for which the Prior fined (/'.*., 

 2 as above), or in other words his service was 10, 

 two of which he recognised in exercitu (e.g., a 

 Marshal's Roll showing the Prior had sent 10 

 knights would have shown the Crown to be seized 

 of the "service" of 10 fees in the Prior's sense, 

 but seemingly was not so found), noting that the 

 defendant used the term u service " with a different 

 meaning than that which is attached to it in modern 

 writings (including this chapter). Now if the lord 

 could compel his men always to do corporal service 

 at their or even his own costs, he would not have 

 paid exemplary fines, and it is certain that nothing 

 Escuage more than scutage could be had (and that sometimes 



tenants. ^^ Difficulty Qr not at a ]J) f rom SQme Q f t ^ e 



mesne tenants ; but I have not found that it was 

 the more usual practice both to fine and concede 

 scutage to the Crown. From the Church often 

 something more than her service seems to have 

 been expected, but from Hen. II. to i Ed. III. 

 many lay capital tenants appear to have escaped by 



