Page:VCH Bedfordshire 1.djvu/249

THE DOMESDAY SURVEY For a parallel to such action we must turn to Hitchin, not far away, in Hertfordshire. As held by King William in 1086 it had been swollen by the action of Norman sheriffs of that county ; but of one at least of its additions we read that it was Earl Harold who had annexed it to Hitchin, 1 ' by violence and wrongfully as the shire testifies.' The importance of such evidence lies in its suggestion that there may have been similar changes effected in the days before the Conquest in places where Domesday does not make any mention of the fact. Of Bedford itself the account in the Survey is singularly short and unsatisfying. As the county town it is entered apart from the rest of the shire, and is not even treated as included in the royal demesne 3 ; but it differs from the chief towns of the shires surrounding in the singular brevity of its description. Cambridge, for instance, fills a whole column of Domesday, and the account of Northampton is nearly as long ; to Huntingdon is assigned a column and a half, and to Buckingham and Hertford respectively the greater part of a column. Why the entry on Bedford should be restricted to seven lines it seems impossible to explain. Even of this terse entry more than half is occupied with an act of agres- sion on the part of the Bishop of Lincoln. We are left in ignorance of so important a matter as the annual value of Bedford to the Crown, and the only fact, indeed, on which we obtain information is the assessment of the town (villa) ; for it is not styled a borough (burgus), although we read, towards the end of the Survey, of its ' burgesses.' This assessment is akin to that of Cambridge and of Huntingdon ; for while Cambridge is assessed at a whole Hundred, and Huntingdon at 50 hides, Bedford is assessed at half a Hundred, that is, presumably, at 50 hides. So too Shrewsbury was assessed at 100 hides and Chester at 50. 3 But the peculiarity in the case of Bedford is that its assessment was only for land and sea service, and implied probably a contribution of ten men to either. 4 It would seem from this that the town was not assessed to the ' geld,' and that such is the meaning of Domesday when it says that it was never apportioned into ' hides ' (hidata) with the exception of one ' hide ' with which St. Paul's was endowed. In its regular and stately course the great Survey proceeds from the lands of the king himself to those of the spiritual lords. At the head of these are those alien magnates, the Bishops of Coutances and Bayeux, who held their great fiefs, extending over many counties, in a personal, not an official capacity. The former was a trusted friend of the Con- queror ; the latter was William's half-brother. In Bedfordshire as in Northamptonshire Geoffrey, Bishop of Coutances, held the bulk of his estates as successor to an English landowner, Borgeret, Borgret, Borred, Borret, Burgret, Burred or Burret, ' thegn of King Edward.' These estates lay largely along the Northamptonshire border, namely at Knot- 1 ' Apposuit Heraldus comes in Hiz ' (fo. 133). 2 For the importance and the implication of this separate treatment see Maidand's Domesday Book and Beyond, pp. 176-80, 212. 3 Compare Feudal England, p. 156 ; and my paper in Domesday Studies, pp. 1 17-21. 4 Ibid. 195