THE DOMESDAY BOOK 
this concession Gilbert gave the king twenty marks of silver.’ There is 
no attempt in these instances to engraft military service on tenure by 
cornage. The two cannot run together. If one is adopted the other 
must be abolished. They are analogous tenures, embodying kindred 
obligations in the evolution of feudal ideas. 
What then do we suggest as a clue for the disentanglement of this 
obscure problem? The only reasonable inference which will satisfy the 
conditions of the case, when we find a tenure or a payment peculiar to 
one portion of the kingdom and embracing so large a zone on its 
frontier, is that it must have had a local and restricted signification. 
There appears to be no other hypothesis than this, that when we touch 
on tenure by cornage or the payment of noutgeld we are at the roots of 
that historic burden on the Border counties which afterwards grew into 
the Border service, that is to say, that the military liability of freeholders 
in Cumberland was confined to the defence of their own lands. How 
does this hypothesis agree with known facts about noutgeld? The 
question cannot be answered off-hand without raising subsidiary phases 
of the same tenure. In the twelfth century, Gospatric son of Orm, the 
‘old grey-headed Englishman’ who was fined so heavily for surrendering 
the castle of Appleby® to William the Lion in 1174, in a most interest- 
ing grant to the abbey of Holmcultram, undertook to discharge all the 
services due from the land both to the king and the lord of ‘Alredale.’ 
We shall do for the monks, so the charter runs, all foreign and terrene 
service, viz. noutegeld and endemot, and whatever else belonged to the 
king’s service. The dues pertaining to the lord of the fee, which he 
also undertook to discharge, are enumerated as sewake and castelwerke, 
all pleas and aids, and every other terrene custom and exaction.* The 
service due to the Crown, therefore, was of a twofold character, foreign 
and terrene, and was represented by the respective obligations of rendering 
noutgeld and endemot. It will not be questioned that we have in this 
charter a statement of the royal burdens upon the land. But it may 
be desirable to supplement it with additional evidence in order to form a 
clear estimate of the royal services. It matters little what words are 
used, as long as we obtain a correct impression of the obligations they are 
designed to represent. A few instances will suffice. Richard son of 
Richard son of Trute, in confirming his father’s gift of Neuby to Reginald 
1 Chancery, Carte Antique, C, Nos. 9, 10, 11, 12; Hist. MSS. Com. Levens Hall MSS. p. 325 
(Tenth Report, App. pt. iv.). The first charter of exemption is dated at Evreux, April 15, 1 Richard I. 
See also king John’s confirmation in the first year of his reign (Rotuéi Chartarum, 1 John, m. Q, p. 50, 
ed. Hardy). 
2 Fordan Fantosme, line 1467, Surtees Society. 
3 ‘Ita quod faciemus pro Monachis omne forense et terrenum servicium, quodcumque ad Dominum 
Regem pertinet, scilicet, de Noutegeld et Endemot, et siquid aliud pertinet ad eius servicium ; et quod- 
cumque servicium pertinet ad Dominum de Alredal’, scilicet, de Sewake et Castelwerke, et de placitis 
et de auxiliis et de omni aliena terrena exactione et consuetudine’ (Reg. of Holmcultram, MS. f. 34). 
This extract, which is taken from the manuscript in the custody of the dean and chapter of Carlisle, is 
very interesting on account of its vernacular terminology. The service of ‘endemot’ is given as 
‘cudemot’ in a later copy of the Register, c. 1300 (Harleian MS. 3911). Dugdale has read the 
word as ‘ondemot’ (Monasticon, v.609). ‘Aliena’ is evidently an error for ‘alia,’ as the latter is found 
in the three British Museum copies (Hariian MSS. 3911, 3891, 1881). 
I 321 Y 
