210

ROYAL AND BARONIAL MANORS.

[1085.

expected, no mention of that peculiar architecture of Chester called the "Rows," which has so puzzled antiquarian writers. The probability is, that in a place so exposed to the attacks of the Welsh they were intended for defence. The low streets in which the Rows are situated have the road considerably beneath them, like the cutting of a railway; and from the covered-way of the Rows an enemy in the road beneath might be assailed with great advantage. In the civil wars of Charles I. the possession of the Rows by the Royalists, or Parliamentary troops, was fiercely contested. Of their antiquity there is no doubt. They probably belong to the same period as the Castle. The wall of Chester and the bridge were kept in repair, according to the Survey, by the service of one labourer for every hide of land in the county. It is to be remarked, that in all the cities and burghs the inhabitants are described as belonging to the king, or a bishop, or a baron. Many, even in the most privileged places, were attached to particular manors.

The Domesday Survey shows, that in some towns there was an admixture of Norman and English burgesses; and it is clear that they were so settled after the Conquest, for a distinction is made between the old customary dues of the place, and those the foreigner should pay. The foreigner had to bear a small addition to the ancient charge. No doubt the Norman clung to many of the habits of his own land; and the Saxon unwillingly parted with those of the locality in which his fathers had lived. But their manners were gradually assimilated. The Normans grew fond of the English beer, and the English adopted the Norman dress.

The Survey of 1085 affords the most complete evidence of the extent to which the Normans had possessed themselves of the landed property of the country. The ancient demesnes of the Crown consisted of fourteen hundred

and twenty-two manors. But the king had confiscated the properties of Godwin, Harold, Algar, Edwin, Morcar, and other great Saxon earls; and his revenues thus became enormous. Ordericus Vitalis states, with a minuteness that seems to imply the possession of official information, that "the king himself received daily one and sixty pounds thirty thousand pence and three farthings sterling money, from his regular revenues in England alone, independently of presents, fines for offences, and many other matters which constantly enrich a royal treasury." The numbers of manors held by the favourites of the Conqueror would appear incredible, if we did not know that these great nobles were grasping and unscrupulous; indulging the grossest sensuality with a pretence of refinement; limited in their perpetration of injustice only by the extent of their power; and so blinded by their pride as to call their plunder their inheritance. Ten Norman chiefs

1085.1

CASTLES.

211

who held under the Crown are enumerated in the Survey, as possessing two thousand eight hundred and twenty manors.*

take place without the But when a period of The Saxons had their

That this enormous transfer of property did not most formidable resistance, has been already shown. tranquillity arrived came the era of castle-building. rude fortresses, and entrenched earth-works. But solid walls of stone, for defence and residence, were to become the local seats of regal and baronial

domination. Domesday contains notices of forty-nine castles; but only one is mentioned as having existed in the time of Edward the Confessor. Some which the Conqueror is known to have built are not noticed in the Survey. Amongst these is the White Tower of London. The site of Rochester Castle is mentioned. These two buildings are associated by our old antiquaries as being erected by the same architect. Stow says, "I find in a fair register-book of the acts of the bishops of Rochester, set down by Edmund of Hadenham, that William I., surnamed Conqueror, builded the Tower of London, to wit, the great white and square tower there, about the year of Christ 1078, appointing Gundulph, then Bishop of Rochester, to be

See the detailed number in Introduction to Domesday, p. lxxii.

212

CASTLES

[1085.

principal surveyor and overseer of that work, who was for that time lodged in the house of Edmere, a burghess of London." The chapel in the White Tower is a remarkable specimen of early Norman architecture. The Keep of

upon

the

Rochester Castle, so picturesquely situated on the Medway, was not a mere fortress without domestic convenience. Here we still look remains of sculptured columns and arches. We see where there were spacious fire-places in the walls, and how each of four floors was served with water by a well. The third story contains the most ornamental portions of the building. In the Domesday enumeration of castles, we have repeated mention of houses destroyed, and lands wasted, for their erection. At Cambridge, twenty-seven houses are recorded to have been thus demolished. This was the fortress to overawe the fen districts. At Lincoln a hundred and sixty-six mansions were destroyed, "on account of the castle." In the ruins of all these castles, we may trace their general plan. There was an outer court, an inner court, and a keep. Round the whole area was a wall, with parapets and loop-holes. The entrance was defended by an outwork, or barbican. The prodigious strength of the keep is the most remarkable characteristic of these fortresses; and thus many of these towers remain, stript of every interior fitting by time, but as untouched in their solid construction as the mounts upon which they stand. We ascend the steep steps which lead to the ruined keep of Carisbrook, with all our historical associ ations directed to the confinement of Charles I. in this castle. But this fortress was registered in Domesday Book. Two centuries and a half had elapsed between William I. and James I. The Norman keep was out of

1085.]

CHURCHES.

213

harmony with the principles of the seventeenth century, as much as the feudal prerogatives to which Charles unhappily clung.

We have thus enumerated, as briefly as possible, some of the more prominent statistics of this ancient Survey, which are truly as much matter of history as the events of this beginning of the Norman period. There is one

more feature of this Domesday-book, which we cannot pass over. The number of parish churches in England in the eleventh century will, in some degree, furnish an indication of the amount of religious instruction. By some most extraordinary exaggeration, the number of these churches has been stated to be above forty-five thousand. In Domesday, the number enumerated is a little above seventeen hundred. No doubt this enumeration is extremely imperfect. Very nearly half of all the churches put down are found in Lincolnshire, Norfolk, and Suffolk. The Register, in some cases, gives the amount of land with which the Church was endowed. Bosham, in

214

KNIGHT-SERVICE.

[1085.

Sussex, the estate of Harold, had, in the time of King Edward, a hundred and twelve hides of land. At the date of the Survey it had sixty-five hides. This was an enormous endowment. Some churches had five acres only; some fifty; some a hundred. Some are without land altogether. But, whether the endowment be large or small, here is the evidence of a Church planted upon the same foundation as the Monarchy, that of territorial possessions.

The politic ruler of England had, in the completion of Domesday Book, possessed himself of the most perfect instrument for the profitable administration of his government. He was no longer working in the dark, whether he called out soldiers or levied taxes. He had carried through a great measure, rapidly, and with a minuteness which puts to shame some of our clumsy modern statistics. We were guessing at the number of our popula tion until the beginning of this century. We are still guessing how much corn is grown upon our lands, what is pasture, what is wood, and how many sheep and oxen are maintained. In the Chapter-House at Westminster, the two vellum books of eight centuries ago presented to the administrators for whom they were prepared a more complete view of the material condition of the country than we have at this hour. But the Conqueror did not want his vellum books for the gratification of official curiosity. He went to work when he knew how many tenants-in-chief he could command, and how many men they could bring into the field. He instituted the great feudal principle of Knight-Service. His ordinance is in these words :-" We command that all earls, barons, knights, sergeants, and freemen be always provided with horses and arms as they ought, and that they be always ready to perform to us their whole service, in manner as they owe it to us of right for their fees and tenements, and as we have appointed to them by the common council of our whole kingdom, and as we have granted to them in fee with right of inheritance." These words, "in fee, with right of inheritance," leave no doubt that the great vassals of the crown were absolute proprietors, and that all their subvassals had the same right of holding in perpetuity. The estate, however, reverted to the crown, if the race of the original feoffee became extinct, and in cases, also, of felony and treason. When Alain of Bretagne, who commanded the rear of the army at the battle of Hastings, and who had received four hundred and forty-two manors, bowed before the king at Salisbury, at the great council in 1085, and swore to be true to him against all manner of men, he also brought with him his principal land-sittende men (land-owners) who also bowed before the king, and became his men. They had previously taken the oath of fealty to Alain of Bretagne, and engaged to perform all the customs and services due to him for their lands and tenements. Alain, and his men, were proprietors, but with very unequal rights. Alain, by his tenure, was bound to provide for the king as many armed horsemen as the vast extent of his estates demanded. But all those whom he had enfeoffed, or made proprietors, upon his four hundred and forty-two manors, were each bound to contribute a proportionate number. When the free service of forty days was to be enforced, the great earl had only to send round to his vassals, and the men were at his command. By this organisation, which was universal throughout the kingdom, sixty thousand cavalry could, with little delay, be called into the field. Those who held by this military service had their