[36] Ibid., i. 432.
[37] 'The growth of the system of knights' fees out of the older system of hides is traced by Stubbs. The old service of a man from each five hides of land would go on, only it would take a new name and a new spirit' (N.C., v. 866).
[38] This argument, of course, applies, mutatis mutandis, to a five-hide unit as well.
[39] servitia, i. 265.
[40] Henry of Huntingdon (p. 207) speaks of the Domesday returns by the same name (cartae).
[41] Domesday Book occupies a medial position, being arranged under counties, but within each county, under fiefs.
[42] Compare the carta of the bishop of Exeter, Præcepistis mihi quod mandarem vobis non quod servitia militum vobis debeam, etc. Dr Stubbs writes: 'The king issued a writ to all the tenants-in-chief of the crown, lay and clerical, directing each of them to send in a cartel or report of the number of knights' fees for the service of which he was legally liable.'—Const. Hist., i. 584.
[43] The bishop of 'Coventry' expresses it: 'numerum ... eorum si quos in dominio tenemus, et eorum nomina' (p. 263).
[44] These references are to the pages of the forthcoming edition of the Liber Rubeus. It will be observed that the second three returns are too closely alike for accidental coincidence; the three Shropshire 'barons' who made them must have been in some communication. Note here the remarkable use of the term 'compares'.
[45] Audivi praeceptum vestrum in consulatu Herefordiae.