The “most conclusive document” (as I termed it) which I cited in my favour is a charter of the time of Stephen, which I printed in full in my treatise (pp. 8–9). Of this I need scarcely say more than that the authorities of the British Museum have now selected it for special exhibition among the most interesting of their charters, and have drawn particular attention to its important mention of scutage (see the official guide to the MSS., p. 40).
The value of Mr. Hall’s assertions, and the futility of his attempted reply, could hardly be more effectively exposed. I may add that I have still a few copies of my treatise available for presentation to libraries used by scholars.
[9] See Index.
[10] Archæological Review, iv. 235.
[11] Prefixed to the Domesday volume published by the Sussex Archæological Society.
[12] A generation later than Domesday we find lands at Broadhurst (in Horsted Keynes) given to Lewes Priory, which “usque ad modernum tempus silve fuerunt” (Cott. MS. Nero c. iii. fo. 217).
[13] Anglo-Saxon Britain, p. 30.
[14] Ibid. Dr. Guest suggested of Ælle, at the battle of Mercred’s Burn (485), that “on this occasion he may have met Ambrosius and a national army; for Huntingdon tells us that the ‘reges et tyranni Brittanum’ were his opponents.” But if the Saxon advance was eastwards, it could not well have brought them face to face with the main force of the Britons.
[15] English Village Community, pp. 126, 127, etc.
[16] Social England, i. 122 et seq.