THE DOMESDAY BOOK 
to do the endemot which was their duty at the Border court or meet- 
ing. In fact the lord of the manor made himself responsible for all the 
civil and military liability due to the king.’ In this institution we find 
supplementary evidence that the defence of the frontier was the royal 
obligation inherent in Border tenure as the equivalent of foreign service 
in other counties. ‘The fact cannot be overlooked that those who dis- 
charged this liability were excused from contributing to the scutages. 
In 1201 John de Reinni held two carucates of land in ‘ Newinton’ 
by (fer) suit of the county and of (de) hendemot whereof (unde) scutage 
ought not to be given.” From this entry in the Pipe Roll we see at 
a glance the military character of the term. If we turn to the ‘Testa 
de Nevill’ for the history of the tenure of Newton, we find that the vill 
had been granted by Henry I. to Turstan de Reigny by the serjeanty of 
going in the army of Scotland with a hauberk, and that John de Reigny 
his descendant held it by the same tenure in 1212. When serjeanties 
came to be arrented by Robert Passelewe about the middle of the reign 
of Henry III.,* John de Reigny’s, though alienated in part, was returned 
as owing unum servientem equitem armatum in the king’s army for forty 
days at his own cost. All this is very interesting in view of ‘endemot’ 
and of the general burden on cornage tenants of marching in the van- 
guard or the rearguard of the army according to the requirements of the 
king’s service. Freedom from scutage was the common privilege of all 
these phases of military obligation. What then was endemot? It can 
scarcely have been anything else than the Border meeting,’ to which 
cornage tenants were obliged to repair when summoned to arrange a 
viz. eightpence of neoutegeld pertaining to the said land, the money payment discharging all obligation 
due to the king—‘salvo servicio domini Regis, scilicet, viij denariis de neoutegeld predicte terre pertinen- 
tibus’ (Reg. of Lanercost, MS. ii. 11, 12, 13 5 xX. 13). Exemption from foreign service was implied in 
cornage tenure. This view was expressed by a jury in 1274, when they found that Robert de Ros of 
Werk held the manor of Cargou from Sapientia widow of William de Carlisle, by paying her yearly a 
hawk or a silver mark, and doing foreign service for her to the king, viz. 32d. of cornage to the 
exchequer of Carlisle (Ing. p. m. 2 Edw. I. No. 26; Bain, Calendar of Documents, ii. 24). 
1 Religious men were not exempt from military service unless their lands had been in the first 
instance granted to them free of the liability. For instance, earl Gospatric, in making a gift to the 
house of Coldingham about the year 1147, while David I. was king of Scotland, did not discharge the 
monks of military obligation—‘ excepto exercitu Regis unde monachi erunt attendentes ipsi Regi et ipse 
Gospatricus de exercitu erit quietus inperpetuum’ (Raine, North Durham, App. No. 21). 
2 «Johannes de Reinni debet ij marcas et tenet ij carrucatas terre in Newinton per sectam Comitatus 
et de Hendemot unde Scutagium dari non debet’ (Pipe Roll, 3 John). ‘This entry is repeated on the 
Chancellor’s Roll of the same date (Rotuli Cancellarii, p. 70, ed. Hardy, 1833). 
3 Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law before Edward I. i. 334, second edition. 
4 The Border meeting is found as an institution at a date soon after John de Reigny’s time. 
Ancient march law and custom was the subject of investigation in 1248 by six English and six Scottish 
knights, who reported that no one of either kingdom, although holding lands in both, was liable by 
march law to be impleaded anywhere dur at the march—‘Quia nullus de regno Anglie vel de regno 
Scoccie, licet terras habet hinc vel inde, per leges dicte Marchie debet alibi implacitari quam ad 
Marchiam pro aliquo facto per homines morantes in Anglia illato in Scoccia, vel pro aliquo facto per 
homines suos manentes in Scoccia illato in Anglia’ (ug. p. m. 33 Hen. III. No. 65; Bain, Calendar of 
Documents, i. No. 1749, pp- 559-60). The first document of the Leges Marchiarum, printed by bishop 
Nicolson, is dated 1249, and was the outcome of this preliminary investigation (Border Laws, pp. 1-9, 
ed. 1705). The law of Manus de Wardsheil of the seventh section should be compared with the ‘Hand- 
warcelle’ of the inquisition of 1280 (Bain, Calendar of Documents, ti. 183, p. 59). The last clause of 
the Leges of 1249 is sufficient to clear up the doubts that seem to exist about the meaning of ‘inburghe’ 
and ‘outburghe’ so often occurring in Border matters. 
325 
