NOTE
As the term “Domesday Book” has
been frequently applied to the present [1873] Return, it may not be out of
place to refer briefly to the celebrated Survey of the Kingdom which was made
by the Conqueror, in order to show the difference in character of the two
undertakings, and the different means resorted to in their compilation.
In
the year 1085 serious apprehensions appear to have been entertained of an
invasion of the kingdom by the Danes, and the difficulty which the King then
experienced in putting the country into a satisfactory state of defence led him
to form the notion of having a general survey made of the whole Kingdom, so, as
Sir Martin Wright observes, “to discover the quantity of every man’s fee, and
to fix his homage,” or, in other words, to ascertain the quantity of land held
by each person, and the quota of military aid which he was bound to furnish in
proportion to the extent of his holding.
To
secure accuracy of results, Commissioners or King’s Justiciares (Legati Regis)
were appointed with ample powers to ascertain :-
“upon the oaths of the several
Sheriffs, Lords of Manors, Presbyters, Reeves, Bailiffs, or Villans, according
to the nature of the place, what was the name of the place, who held it in the
time of the Confessor, who was the present holder, how many hides of land there
were in the manor, how many carrucates in the desmesne, how many homagers, how
many villans, how many cotarii, how many servi, what freemen, how many tenants
in socage, what quantity of wood, how much meadow and pasture, what mills and
fish-ponds, how much added or taken away, what was the gross value in King
Edward’s time, what the present value, and how much each free-man or soc-man
had or has.” All this was estimated –
1st
as the estate was held in the time of the Confessor, 2nd ly, as it
was bestowed by the King himself ; and
3rd ly, as its value stood at the time of the survey.
All
these particulars were ascertained for each county, the Commissioners sending
in Returns (breviates) for each county separately, and from these Returns,
Domesday Book, or the General Register for the whole kingdom, was compiled.
It
will be seen, therefore, that the object of the Conqueror’s survey was to
ascertain the amount of military service and other assistance upon which he
could depend ; and for this purpose he instituted an inquiry of a very
searching and inquisitorial character into the nature and extent of the landed
possessions of his subjects, sending special Commissioners into every locality,
with power to summon the inhabitants and compel them to make a full disclosure
of their property on oath.
Notwithstanding,
however, these stringent measures for insuring accuracy, ther is no doubt that the
Commissioners did not always obtain or furnish correct information, and that
sometimes, as in the case of the present Return, the statements of what we
should now designate as the “Gross Estimated Rental,” and the “Estimated
Extent,”are not altogether reliable.
Ingulph, the historian of Croyland, in referring to the survey of that
abbey, expressly says, “Isti” (taxatores) “penes nostrum monasterium benevoli
et amantes non ad verum pretium nec ad verum spatium nostrum monasterium
librabant, misericorditer praecaventes in futurum exactionibus et aliis
oneribus, piisima nobis benevolentia providentes.” – Oxford edition, p. 79
With
respect to the result of this inquiry, so far as it discloses the number of
landowners existing at that time, it must be observed that although the
Domesday Book may be considered as a fair record of the number of persons
having a direct interest in land, it is almost impossible, owing to the
different designations under which they are classified, to distinguish those
who may properly be considered as owners from those who were in the possession
of land as mere occupiers only.
The following estimate, which is
extracted from the work of Sir H. Ellis, may perhaps be taken as showing
proximately the number of persons who can properly be regarded as having claim
to be considered as holders of land upon some legally recognised tenure:-
Tenants in capite, or persons
holding directly from the Crown 1,400
Subfeudatarii, or under-tenants
holding their estates from some mesne Lord 7,871
Liberi homines, or free holders
under the Lord of a manor, usually by military service 12,400
Sochemanni or Socmen, holding on
some fixed or determined rent service 23,072
Homines, or feudatory tenants
holding on homage 1,300
Cotarii,
and Coscets, or cottagers holding small parcels of land
7,000
Presbyteri, or clergy 1,000
Radmanni, a species of tenants
in socage 370
Milites, or persons holding
under mesne Lords in respect of military service 140
Aloarii, or absolute hereditary
owners 12
Other owners, viz. Angli
andAnglici, Beures or Coliberti, Censarii or Censores, &c. 248
Total
of Recorded Landowners 54,813
The Burgenses,or Burgesses,
who were returned as 7,968, are not included in the above list, as it is
impossible to distinguish those who held lands in their individual from those
who held land in a corporate capacity, and many of them were evidently not
owners in any sense of the term.
Moreover
the Villeins, of whom there were 108,407, are omitted, because it is quite
certain that, when they occupied small portions of land, they did so on
sufferance only. In fact they were
regarded as mere chattels, which could be bought or sold, and they were not
allowed by law to aquire any property, either in land or goods.
It should be added that the present
counties of Northumberland, Cumberland, Westmoreland, and Durham, were not
included in the survey.
1873 Return for Cheshire (Living Locally), A - B
Border Villages Frontpage (Shrops./Staffs)
with
some 1873 Return for those counties