A HISTORY OF BEDFORDSHIRE 
opposite side of the county we read of Countess Judith’s manors of 
Everton and Hatley (Cockayne), both near Potton, as follows : 
M[anerium] . . . Euretone . . . Hoc M[{anerium] comes Tosti tenuit et jacuit 
in Potone Mfanerio] proprio comitisse M[anerium]... In Hatelai . . . Hoc 
M{anerium] Tosti comes tenuit et jacet in Potone manerio proprio comitisse (fo. 
217b). 
Nothing could well be clearer or less ambiguous than this; in the 
above cases we have ‘a tract of land’ entered as ‘at one and the same 
time both a manerium and also a part of another manerium. 
Again a Charlton entry is of value in this connection. Bedfordshire, 
Professor Maitland observed, is one of those counties in which ‘ the 
symbol M., which represents a manor,’ is found in the margin of the 
text. From this and from the occurrence of the phrase ‘ tenuit pro uno 
manerio’” he concludes that manerium was ‘an accurate term charged 
with legal meaning,’ that ‘ manerium has some exact meaning,’ and ‘that 
this term has a technical meaning ... we cannot doubt.’* This 
conclusion I have elsewhere traversed, arguing that the phrase ‘pro 
uno manerio’ is, on the contrary, mere surplusage, and that Domes- 
day uses indifferently the terms manerium and terra.” Now we read of 
Charlton, a manor assessed of ten hides, to which the symbol M. is pre- 
fixed :— 
Hoc manerium (sic) tenuit rex Edwardus et fuit Tosti comitis. Hec terra fuit 
Berew[ita] de Potone T.R.E.° ita quod nullus inde separare potuit (217b). 
The point of the second clause is that Charlton, though formerly an 
appurtenance of Potton, was now held by a different person ; but I cite 
it as showing the alternative use of the terms manerium and terra. A 
precisely similar entry is found on fo. 213b :— 
In Cochepol tenet Robertus de Hugone iiii hidas pro uno manerio . . . Hanc 
terram etc. 
So also on the fief of the Bishop of Coutances we read of a four-hide 
estate held of him by Geoffrey de ‘Tralgi,’ to which the symbol M. is 
prefixed :— 
Hoc Manerium tenuerunt iii soch[emann]i . . . Hanc terram tenet episcopus 
(210). 
The entry which follows it and relates to Turvey contains precisely the 
same formula. Lastly we read of Count Eustace’s estate at Odell, to 
which the symbol M. is not prefixed :— 
In Wadelle tenet Ernulfus de Arde . . . pro uno Manerio de comite Eustachio 
. . . Hanc terram tenuit Alwoldus (211). 
The danger of crediting the Domesday scribes with atechnical and 
exact use of terms is here further illustrated. 
Allegations of ‘disseisin’ are not unfrequent in the survey. Ralf 
Tallebosc is charged with having ‘ disseised’ William de Caron’s father 
* Domesday Book and Beyond, pp. 107-8, 120, 128. 
2 <The Domesday Manor’ in English Historical Review, xv. 293-5. 
3 The words ‘Manerium Judite comitisse’ are here interlined., 
210 
