sent a circuit of the southern portion of the county from north-east to north-west, followed by an inquest on the district to its north, the "two Hundreds " of Ely.

The third list, on the other hand, misplaces the Hundreds of Triplow and Erningford altogether, and wholly omits that of Childeford. The transposition and omission are both notable evidence that the B and C texts, as I shall urge, were derived from some common original which contained these defects.

The essential point, however, is that a circuit was made of the county whether merely by the sheriff, or, as seems most probable, by the Domesday Commissioners themselves -the "barones regis" of the record-who must have attended the several Hundred-courts in succession.

But when we speak of the Hundred-court it is necessary to explain at once that the body which gave evidence for the Domesday Inquest was of a special and most interesting character. It combined the old centuriatus-deputations of the priest, reeve, and six villeins from each township (villa)—with the new settlers in the hundred, the francigenæ. A careful investigation of the lists will prove that half the juratores were selected from the former and half from the latter. This fact, which would seem to have been hitherto overlooked, throws a flood of light on the compilation of the Survey, and admirably illustrates the King's policy of combining the old with the new, and fusing his subjects, their rights and institutions, into one harmonious whole. Conquerors and conquered were alike bound by their common sworn verdicts.209

We have the lists, in all, for eighteen Hundreds, fifteen in Cambridgeshire and three in Herts, of which two were

209 Compare Wilkins, 125 (quoted by Palgrave, English Commonwealth, i. 464) on English and "Welsh" in Devon :-" Disputes arising between the plaintiffs and defendants of the two nations were to be decided by a court of twelve 'lawmen'-six English and six Welshthe representatives of the respective communities. And it may be observed that the principle which suggested this dimidiated tribunal was generally adopted in our border law."

Composition of the Juries

121

"double." There were, practically, for each Hundred exactly eight juratores, half of them "French" and half "English." But the two "double" Hundreds had sixteen each, half of them "French" and half "English." Although it is recorded that "alii omnes franci et angli de hoc hundredo juraverunt," it is obvious that the eight men always specially mentioned were, in a special degree, responsible for the verdict. Their position is illustrated, I think, by the record of a Cambridgeshire placitum found in the Rochester chronicles. This is the famous suit of Bishop Gundulf against Picot the sheriff in the County Court of Cambridgeshire,210 which affords a valuable instance of a jury being elected to confirm by their oaths the (unsworn) verdict of the whole court:—

Cum illis (ie. omnes illius comitatus homines) Baiocensis episcopus, qui placito præerat, non bene crederet; præcepit ut, si verum esse quod dicebant scirent, ex seipsis duodecim eligerent, qui quod omnes dixerant jure jurando confirmarent.

Now we read of this jury:—

Hi autem fuerunt Edwardus de Cipenham, Heruldus et Leofwine saca de Exninge, Eadric de Giselham, Wlfwine de Landwade, Ordmer de Berlincham, et alii sex de melioribus comitatus.

Investigation shows that the names mentioned are local. The land in dispute was a holding in Isleham in the Hundred of Staplehoe. One juror, Eadric, came from Isleham itself, two from Exning, one from Chippenham, one from Landwade, while the sixth, Ordmer, was an undertenant of Count Alan, in the Manor from which he took his name (Badlingham), and was a Domesday juror for the Hundred. These six, then, were clearly natives chosen for their local knowledge. The other six, chosen "de melioribus comitatus," were probably, as at the Domesday inquest, Normans (Franci). Thus the double character of the jury would be here too preserved, and the principle of testimony from personal knowledge upheld.

10 Wharton's Anglia Sacra, i. 339.

211

So again in the Dorset suit of St. Stephen's, Caen (1122),21 the men of seven Hundreds are convened, but the suit is to be decided "in affirmatione virorum de quatuor partibus vicinitatis illius villæ." 212 Accordingly, "sexdecim homines, tres videlicet de Brideport, et tres de Bridetona, et decem de vicinis, juraverunt se veram affirmationem facturos de inquisitione terræ illius." The names of the jurors are carefully given: "Nomina vero illorum qui juraverunt, haec sunt.” Again, in the same Abbey's suit for lands in London, "per commune consilium de Hustingo, secundum præceptum regis, elegerunt quatuordecim viros de civibus civitatis Londoniæ qui juraverunt." And in this case also we read: "Hæc sunt nomina illorum qui juraverunt. . . . Et haec sunt nomina eorum in quorum præsentia juraverunt." 218

This corresponds, it will be seen, exactly with the writ to which the Inquisitio Eliensis was, I hold, the return: ،، Inquire qui eas (terras) juraverunt et qui jura

tionem audierunt " (infra, p. 133).

Enough has now been said to show that the names of the Domesday jurors recorded for each Hundred represent a jury of eight, elected to swear on behalf of the whole Hundred, and composed of four foreigners and four Englishmen, in accordance with the principle that the conflicting interests ought to be equally represented.214

We may take, as a typical set of juratores, those for the Hundred of Erningford, the survey of which, in Mr.

211 Palgrave's Commonwealth, ii. 183.

212 This seems of great importance as a very early instance of the quatuor villata system, on which see Gross's "The Early History and Influence of the Office of Coroner" (Political Science Quarterly, vol. vii., No. 4), where the researches of Prof. Maitland and others are summarised.

218 Only four, however, of the fourteen actually swore: "reliquos vero decem quietavit Willelmus abbas, qui parati erant jurare."

214 The number eight, perhaps, is unusual for the jury of a hundred, but we have an instance in 1222, of a "jurata per octo legales cives Lincolniæ et præterea per octo legales homines de visneto Lincolnie " (Bracton's Note-Book, ii. 121); and see Addenda.

"Juratores" Identified

123

Hamilton's book, occupies pp. 51-68. I give them in their

All four francigena can be identified in the Hundred. Walter held a hide and a quarter in "Hatelai" from the wife of Ralf Tailbois; Humfrey, a hide and a quarter in "Hatelai," from Eudo dapifer; 215 Hugh, a hide and a half in "Melrede," from Hardwin de Scalers; and Richard, three virgates in "Mordune," from Geoffrey de Mandeville. Of the Angli, Colsuenus was clearly Count Alan's undertenant at three townships within the Hundred, holding in all two hides; "Ailmarus," his son, was, just possibly, the "Almarus de Bronna," who was a tenant of Count Alan in two adjacent townships, holding two hides and three-eighths; "Turolfus" and "Alfuuinus" cannot be identified, and were probably lower in the social scale.

It will be observed that Colsweyn belongs to a special class, the English under-tenants. He is thus distinct at once from the Francigena, and from the villeins of the township. He and his peers, however, are classed with the latter as jurors, because they are both of English nationality. In the great majority of cases the English juratores cannot be identified as under-tenants, and may therefore be presumed to have belonged to the township deputations.

XVII. THE "INQUISITIO ELIENSIS."

The record known by this name has long been familiar to Domesday students, but no one, so far as I know, has ever approached the questions: Why was it compiled? When was it compiled? From what sources was it com

215 His surname is there omitted, but his identity is proved by Humphrey "de Anslevilla" occurring elsewhere as an under-tenant of Eudo.

piled? These three questions I shall now endeavour to

answer.

First printed by the Record Commission in their "Additamenta" volume of Domesday (1816), its editor, Sir Henry Ellis, selected for his text the most familiar, but, as I shall show, the worst of its three transcripts (Cott. MS., Tib. A. VI.), though he knew of what I believe to be the best, the Trin. Coll. MS., O. 2, 1, which seems to be the one styled by him 68 B. 2.216 In his introduction he thus described it :

The Inquisitio Eliensis is a document of the same kind with the Exeter Domesday; relating to the property of the Monastery of Ely recorded afterwards in the two volumes of the Domesday Survey (p. xiv.)

From this it would seem that Ellis believed the Inquisitio, at any rate, to be previous to Domesday Book, but he practically left its origin altogether in doubt.

Sixty years later (1876) the Inquisitio was published anew, but without any further solution of the points in question being offered.217 For this edition three MSS. were collated, with praiseworthy and infinite pains, by Mr. N. E. S. A. Hamilton. Taking for his text, like Ellis, the Cottonian MS. Tib. A. VI., which he distinguished as A, he gave in footnotes the variants found in the MSS. at Trinity College, Cambridge, viz.: O. 2, 41 (which he termed B), and O. 2, I (which he distinguished as C). In Mr. Hamilton's opinion (p. xiv.) the "C" text "appears to have been derived from the 'B' MS. rather than the Cottonian " ("A"). From this opinion, it will be seen, I differ wholly.

A careful analysis of the three texts has satisfied me beyond question that while C is the most accurate in detail, it is marred by a peculiar tendency to omission on the part of its scribe. This, indeed, is its distinctive feature. Now B cannot be derived from C, because it supplies the latter's omissions. On the other hand, C can

216 So I conclude from his Introduction to Domesday, i. 22, note 2. 217 Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis, pp. 97 et seq.