no general law or custom as yet recognised, which entitled landlords to hold such courts, but in all cases, where hallmoots had sprung up, the right to hold them rested on some special grant from the Crown and was in the nature of a franchise or special privilege. The conclusion, that hallmoots had become fairly common institutions by 1050, is not really open to question, being based on the collective evidence of hundreds of passages scattered up and down the Domesday Survey, which tell us that some church magnate or some fairly important layman had enjoyed the privilege of "sake and soke" (saca et soca) over this or that estate, or over this or that group of men, in the days of King Edward. But this technical term, which stands for the Anglo-Saxon saca and socne, is only a pleonastic phrase for sócn; and as we have already seen sóen is the Anglo-Saxon term for jurisdiction and implies the right to do justice and, if need be, to hold a court for the purpose.
As it is only possible here to give a few examples of these passages, we must content ourselves with observing that there are very few sections of the survey from which they are entirely lacking, though in different counties they assume different forms. It is clear too that they imply several different types of hallmoots, according as the jurisdiction granted had been extensive or restricted. The simplest but least instructive references to sake and soke are found in certain schedules, which merely record the names of persons who had been entitled to sake and soke under King Edward. For example, we have a list of fifteen persons who had enjoyed the franchise in Kent, a list of nineteen who had enjoyed it in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, and a list of thirty-five who had enjoyed it in Lincolnshire. But we cannot from such lists infer with any certainty that these privileged persons had exercised the right over all their lands lying in these counties and still less over their lands in other districts. Elsewhere the information as to sake and soke is more often given in respect of particular places. We read for example under Essex, that Robert, son of Wimare, the king's staller, had sake and soke over the half-hundred of Clavering; under Suffolk, that Ulwyn of Hedingham had sake and soke over his estates at Lavenham, Burgate and Waldingfield, and under Warwickshire, that Ealdred, the Bishop of Worcester, had sake and soke over seven and a half hides of land at Alveston near Stratford-on-Avon. Or again we are told that the soke was restricted and only applied to some particular class of tenant. For example, at Reedham in Norfolk the Abbot of Holme had sake and soke but only over those who were bound to use his sheepfold (super hos qui sequebantur faldam). At Buxhall in Suffolk Leswin Croe had sake and soke but only over his hall and his cottage tenants (super hallam et bordarios). In some cases again the soke is attributed not to the immediate landlord but to his overlord. For example, Uggeshall near Dunwich is entered as owned by Osketel Presbyter, but the survey goes on to say "Ralf the Staller had sake and soke over this estate, and over all other estates owned by Osketel."
