49 



(Continued from vol. xxx., p. 337. ) 



|j^!||HE document " of great length and extraordinary interest " 

 Slllf already mentioned (vol. xxx., p. 307) as presented by 

 Mr. Mullings, has proved, with all due respect to the donor, a 

 " damnosa hereditas " to the editor ; but the text of it is printed 

 below, and we must endeavour, as briefly as possible, to explain 

 the value we attach to it. We have previously (vol. xxx., pp. 40 — 

 41) sketched the descent of the manor of Dray cot Folyot from the 

 family of Tyes through de Lisle, Berkeley and Beauchamp to the 

 family of de Eoos. Thomas, lord de Eoos, was attainted; the 

 attainder was subsequently reversed, but, " why or wherefore we are 

 unable as yet to say," we confessed, " Dray cot continued in the 

 King's hands." The document we have now to deal with explains 

 why, but itself requires not a little explanation. 



The competent antiquary who hereafter shall compile the history 

 of Draycot will find it an excellent test of his qualifications. It 

 will involve the study of the Domesday tenant of the lands in 

 Wilts, Berks, and Oxford, subsequently vested in the family of 

 Folio t ; and tracking " Eainulfus Canutus " of that record through 

 " aliases," he may succeed in re-constituting the original holding 

 of that family, and their descent. For our present purpose it will 

 suffice to say that at the commencement of the reign of King 

 Edward I. one Sampson Foliot was seised of Draycot and Chilton 

 in this county, both since distinguished by the suffix " Folyot." 

 Then occurred a tragedy ; by mischance, though this is not stated, 

 in the street of Draycot, he slew his own son. The assize roll is 

 preserved which records the fact. On the 30th May, 9th Edward L, 

 as appears by the patent roll of that year, he was pardoned for the 

 manslaughter of Roger Folyot, his son, at the instance of Alianor, 



VOL. XXXI. NO. XCIII. E 



