are equivalent terms appears from their being used interchangeably in various entries of Domesday. Nor is there any good reason to suppose that the Normans made any violent change in the values of these several denominations, although they might adopt more convenient subdivisions of the larger sums. They did just the same thing in respect to the Saxon money. Besides, as it was from the Saxons that they derived the information which the Survey contains, it is reasonable to believe that the Saxon values were generally adopted, at least as far as the híd was concerned. The minute subdivision of land consequent upon the Conquest probably rendered it necessary to pay especial attention to the smaller units, and I can conceive nothing more likely than a slight change in the value of the acre, while the híd and virgate remained unaltered. Then where an estate comprised only one Saxon acre, it might readily be considered equal to half a ferling, or 14 Norman measure, for it would have been difficult and complicated to express it in other terms. In fact where small fractional parcels of land were to be subtracted, the Commissioners were generally glad to avoid details, and enter "A. has so much in demesne, and the Villani have aliam terram, the rest of the land." If the Saxon ager paid for half a ferling in the time of the Confessor, it was likely to be taken at that value in the Survey; for the law, quæ de minimis non curat, could hardly notice so trifling a deviation. The approximate value of the Saxon acre, however, I have given; it was one day's work for a plough and oxen, in other words very nearly our own statute-acre.

That the value of the hide became gradually indistinct, when reckonings ceased to be made in it, and the calculation was taken upon knights' fees, is very intelligible. We consequently find surprising variations in the amount of hides counted to a knight's fee, as well as the acres contained in this last measure. In the time of Edward the Third it was computed that there were 60,215 knight's fees in England, which taking the present acreage of 31,770,615 gives rather more than 527 acres to a fee: hence those who believed a hide to contain 100 acres, calculated five hides to a knight's fee, in accordance with the Saxon law which made that

amount the minimum of a thane's estate, and also to the entries in Domesday, from which it appeared that one miles went from five hides: but here it was overlooked that the hide was exclusively arable land. To such erroneous modes of calculation we owe such entries as the following:

"Decem acrae faciunt fardellum, iv fardelli faciunt virgatam, quatuor virgatae faciunt hydam, quatuor hydae faciunt unum feodum." MS. Harl. 464. fol. 17, b.

4 fardels 40 acres 16 fardels = 160 acres

64 fardels 640 acres =

=

1 virgate.

4 virgates=1 hide.

=

16 virgates 4 hides = 1 knight's fee.

Again we are told (Regist. Burgi Sci. Petri, fol. 81, b.) that

Quinque feoda fuerunt antiquitus una baronia; et quinque hydae unum feodum; et quinque virgatae terrae una hyda, quaelibet virgata de viginti acris."

25 virgates = 500 acres 5 hides = 1 knight's fee.

125 virgates=2500 acres = 25 hides = 5 fees = 1 barony.

which results neither coincide with the last, nor with those of Domesday, nor with those derived from Saxon authorities.

The hidage of various ancient Gás which has been given in Chapter III. could naturally not be sufficient guide under the new shire divisions. Unfortunately we have not a complete account of the hidage in the shires; nor does what we have coincide with the conclusions arrived at in the course of the fourth chapter.

In the Cotton. MS. Claud. B. vii. (fol. 204, b.), which appears to have been written in the time of Henry III., we have the following entries:

Hydae.

The Cotton MS. Vesp. A. xviii. fol. 112, b., written in the reign of Edward I., gives a different list of counties, among which the following variations occur :—

If we pursue the plan heretofore adopted, we shall have these

results:

County. Acreage. Hidage. H. at 30. H. at 40.

Wilts. .868,060 4800
Bedf... 297,632 | 1200
Camb..536,313 2500
Hunt. .242,250 800
Nrhm.. 646,810 3200
Glouc.. 790,470 2400
Worc. .459,710 1200
Heref.. 543,800 1500
Warw.. 567,930 1200

144,000 |192,000 724,060 676,000 1 : 5
36,000 48,000 261,632 249,632 1:7
75,000 100,000 461,313 436,313 1:6
24,015 32,020 218,235 210,230 1:9
96,000 128,000 550,810 518,810 1:5.77
72,000 96,000 718,470 694,470 1: 10

1:4

Oxf....467,230 2400
Salop. .864,360 2300
Chesh. 649,050 1300
Staff...736,290 500

1:7.25 36,000 48,000 423,700 411,710 1: 11-75 1:8.5 45,000 60,000 502,800 483,800 1:11 1:8 36,000 48,000 531,930 519,930 1: 14-75 1: 10-75 72,000 96,000 395,230 371,230 1:55 1:4 69,000 92,000 795,360 772,360 1:115 1: 8:4 39,000 52,000 610,050 597,050 1: 15-621:11:5 15,000 20,000 721,290 716,290 1:48

1:36-8

If we

Now either these figures cannot be relied on, or we must carry the hide in this calculation to a very different amount. take it at 100 acres, we shall find the whole hidage of these thirteen counties amounts to 25,300 × 100 or 2,530,000, while the whole

acreage is 7,669,905; giving an excess of 5,139,905, and consequently a ratio of 25: 51 nearly, or 1:2. This would a little exceed the present ratio, which is 5:11, a result which appears very improbable indeed in the reign of Henry III. But when we consider the numberless errors of transcription, so unavoidable where merely numbers, and not words, are given, and the totally inconsistent accounts contained in different manuscripts, we can hardly rest satisfied that the figures themselves are trustworthy. Even on the hypothesis that in the time of Henry III. or Edward I. the hide was calculated on the new footing of 100 acres, we yet could not reconcile the conflicting amounts assigned to the counties themselves.

496

APPENDIX C.

MANUMISSION OF SERFS.

THE following examples of Manumission are illustrative of the assertions in the text.

Dimidiam vero partem hominum qui in memorata terra sub servitute degunt libertate donavimus.-Cod. Dipl. No. 919.