THE DOMESDAY SURVEY exacted from them for their mints. 1 Another form of vouching to warranty is that in which a former sheriff is vouched by the occupant of land as having given him livery of seisin. On the king's manor of Lawford two instances will be found in which Suain was so vouched. 1 Of the three eastern counties Essex is the first with the Domesday of which I have dealt for the Victoria History. The peculiar character of the volume containing the survey of those counties is largely respon- sible for the length of this, the first and possibly the only introduction to a portion of its contents. Discussing the relationship of the ' second,' the eastern counties volume to that which contains the rest of the Domesday Survey, I argued in Feudal England (pp. 138-42) that the former was really the first to be compiled. As this conclusion has been accepted by the Deputy- Keeper of the Public Records, 3 I may here repeat in part the argu- ment : I have never seen any attempt at a real explanation of the great difference both in scope and in excellence between the two volumes, or indeed any reason given why the eastern counties should have had a volume to themselves. For a full appreciation of the contrast presented by the two volumes, the originals ought to be examined. Such differences as that the leaves of one are half as large again as those of the other, and that the former is drawn up in double, but the latter in single column, dwarf the comparatively minor contrasts of material and of handwriting. So too the fulness of the details in the second volume may obscure the fact of its workmanship being greatly inferior to that of the first. . . . The muddled order of the tenants-in-chief for Norfolk and for Suffolk where laymen precede the church is another proof of inferiority, but only minute investigation could show the hurry or ignorance of the scribes. Now all this might, I think, be explained if we took the so-called second volume to be really a first attempt at the codification of the returns. Its unsatisfactory character must have demonstrated the need for a better system, which indeed its un- wieldy proportions must have rendered imperative. I am now prepared to go further and to say that this hypothesis explains and is supported by a feature in the portion devoted to Essex which appears to be unique in Domesday. On fos. 8^ and 1 6b the text ends for the time, and fos. 9 and 17 are blank save for lists of the head- ings, six and ten respectively, to certain church fiefs. These lists have been deleted by lines drawn across them. The occurrence of these extraordi- nary breaks right in the middle of the text obviously calls for some ex- planation, but it proved difficult to account for. We find however that the headings grouped on fo. 9 are those which occur on fos. 9^16^, and that those similarly grouped on fo. 17 occur on fos. 17^24^. But after the second of these lists (fo. 17) there is no further break; the text proceeds continuously. I now suggest that this is the result of a change of plan as the work proceeded, Essex representing the first portion of the first volume under- 1 ' Advocant regem adturtorem ' (fo. 107). The phrase should run, 'ad turtorem,' and even then the ' turtor ' is a corrupt form of ' tutor.' In a case of vouching to warranty at Boreham the word 'defensor' is used instead of 'tutor' (fo. 31^) ; and at Notley Geoffrey 'clamat regem ad warant' (fo. 60). At Hertford 'protector' is employed: 'de quibus advocat Harduinus regem ad protectorem' (i. 13*)- 1 ' inde vocat liberatorem Suanum . . . inde revocat liberatorem Suanum ' (fo. 66). Compare the Tollesbury case on p. 449 below.
- See Catalogue to the Muieum of the Pubfu Record Office (i9oz).
413
