[175] Thus Daniel de Crevecœur pays on one fee (de veteri) more than his carta records, William de Tracy on half a fee (de veteri), Adam de Port on one, the Earl of Gloucester on two, the Earl of Warwick on two and a half, Maurice de Craon on one, the Abbot of Hulme on a quarter of a fee, William de Albini (Pincerna) on one, Henry de Lacy on one and a half, William de Vescy on one, Bertram de Bulemer on a half, and William Paynell on one (these figures are all subject to correction). The case of William de Vescy is specially conspicuous, because the nineteen fees enumerated are distinctly spoken of as twenty.
[176] This brings it into relation with the Constabularia of which it thus formed just a third.
[177] The same formula is found in Domesday applied to hidation in East Anglia, where the assessment of Manors is expressed not in terms of the hide, but in fractions of the pound. (vide supra, p. 89.)
[178] vide supra, p. 205.
[179] 'Willelmus Malet tenet Cari de Domino Rege et alias terras suas per servicium viginti militum' (p. 163).
[180] Ducange (1887), ii. 581.
[181] Ibid., viii. 255. Ducange indeed asserts that five knights was the qualification in Normandy for barony, but the statement is based on a mistaken rendering and is elsewhere disproved.
[182] Liber Rubeus, p. 4.
[183] 'Illud commune verbum in ore singulorum, tunc temporis divulgatum, fatuum reputans et mirabile, quod in regni conquisitione Dux Normannorum, Rex Willelmus, servitia xxxii. militum infeodavit' (Ibid.).
[184] Swereford, it is clear, failed to grasp the great change of assessment in 1166.