soke with their land. No doubt we are accusing Domesday Book of being
very obscure, of using a single word to express some three or four
different ideas. In some degree the obscurity may be due to the fact
that French justiciars and French clerks have become the exponents of
English law. But we may gravely doubt whether Englishmen would have
produced a result more intelligible to us. One cause of difficulty we
may perhaps remove. In accordance with common wont we have from time to
time spoken of seignorial jurisdiction. But if the word _jurisdiction_
be strictly construed, then in all likelihood there never has been in
this country any seignorial jurisdiction. It is not the part of the lord
to declare the law (_ius dicere_); 'curia domini debet facere iudicia et
non dominus[404].' From first to last this seems to be so, unless we
take account of theories that come to us from a time when the lord's
court was fast becoming an obsolete institution[405]. So it is in
Domesday Book. In the hundred court the sheriff presides; it is he that
appoints a day for the litigation, but the men of the hundred, the men
who come together 'to give and receive right,' make the judgments[406].
The tenants of the Bishop of Winchester 'hold the bishops' pleas' at
Taunton; Earl Roger borrows sokemen 'to hold his pleas[407].' Thus the
erection of a new court is no very revolutionary proceeding; it passes
unnoticed. If once it be granted that all the justiciary profits arising
from a certain group of men or tract of land are to go to a certain
lord, it is very much a matter of indifference to kings and sheriffs
whether the lord holds a court of his own or exacts this money in the
hundred court. Indeed, a sheriff may be inclined to say 'I am not going
to do your justice for nothing; do it yourself.' So long as every lord
will come to the hundred court himself or send his steward, the sheriff
will have no lack of capable doomsmen. Then the men of the lord's
precinct may well wish for a court at their doors; they will be spared
the long journey to the hundred court; they will settle their own
affairs and be a law unto themselves. Thus we ought not to say that the
lax use of the word _soke_ covers a confusion between 'jurisdiction' and
the profits of 'jurisdiction,' and if we say that the confusion is
between justice and the profits of justice, we are pointing to a
distinction which the men of the Confessor's time might regard as
somewhat shadowy. In any case their lord is to have their wites; in any
case they will get the judgment of their peers; what is left to dispute
about is mere geography, the number of the courts, the demarcation of
justiciary areas. We may say, if we will, that far-sighted men would not
have argued in this manner, for seignorial justice was a force mighty
for good and for ill; but it has not been proved to our satisfaction
that the men who ruled England in the age before the Conquest were
far-sighted. Their work ended in a stupendous failure.
[Soke and commendation.]
To the sake and soke of the old English law we shall have to return once
more in our next essay. Our discussion of the sake and soke of Domesday
Book was induced by a consideration of the various bonds which may bind
a man to a lord. And now we ought to understand that in the eastern
counties it is extremely common for a man to be bound to one lord by
commendation and to another lord by soke. Very often indeed a man is
commended to one lord, while the soke over him and over his land 'lies
in' some hundred court which belongs to another lord or is still in the
hands of the king and the earl. How to draw with any exactness the line
between the rights given to the one lord by the commendation and to the
other lord by the soke we can not tell. For instance, we find many men
who can not sell their land without the consent of a lord. This we may
usually regard as the result of some term in the bargain of
commendation; but in some cases it may well be the outcome of soke. Thus
at Sturston in Norfolk we see a free man of St Etheldreda of Ely; his
sake and soke belong to Archbishop Stigand's manor of Earsham (Sturston
and Earsham lie some five miles apart); now this man if he wishes to
give or sell his land must obtain the licence both of St Etheldreda and
of Stigand[408]. And so as regards the forfeiture of land. We are
perhaps accustomed to think of the escheat _propter delictum tenentis_
as having its origin in the ideas of homage and tenure rather than in
the justiciary rights of the lord. Howbeit there is much to make us
think that the right to take the land of one who has forfeited that land
by crime was closely connected with the right to other wites or
_forisfacturae_. 'Of all the thegns who hold land in the Well wapentake
of Lincolnshire, St Mary of Lincoln had two-thirds of every
_forisfactura_ and the earl the other third; and so of their heriots;
and so if they forfeited their land, two-thirds went to St Mary and the
remainder to the earl[409].' St Mary has not enfeoffed these thegns; but
by some royal grant she has two-thirds of the soke over them. In
Suffolk one Brungar held a small manor with soke. He was a 'free man'
commended to Robert Wimarc's son; but the sake and soke over him
belonged to St Edmund. Unfortunately for Brungar, stolen horses were
found in his house, and we fear that he came to a bad end. At any rate
he drops out of the story. Then St Edmund's Abbot, who had the sake and
soke, and Robert, who had the commendation, went to law, and right
gladly would we have heard the plea; but they came to some compromise
and to all seeming Robert got the land[410]. If we are puzzled by this
labyrinthine web of legal relationships, we may console ourselves with
the reflection that the Normans also were puzzled by it. They seem to
have felt the necessity of attributing the lordship of land to one lord
and one only (though of course that lord might have another lord above
him), of consolidating soke with commendation, homage with justice, and
in the end they brought out a simple and symmetrical result, albeit to
the last the relation of seignorial to hundredal justice is not to be
explained by any elegant theory of feudalism.
[Sokemen and free men.]
Yet another problem shall be stated, though we have little hope of
solving it. The writ, or rather one of the writs, which defined the
scope of the survey seems to have spoken of _liberi homines_ and
_sochemanni_ as of two classes of men that were to be distinguished from
each other. In Essex, Suffolk and Norfolk this distinction is often
drawn. In one and the same manor we shall find both 'free men' and
sokemen[411]; we may even hear of sokemen who formerly were 'free
men[412].' But the import of this distinction evades us. Sometimes it is
said of sokemen that they 'hold freely[413].' We read that four sokemen
held this land of whom three were free, while the fourth had one hide
but could not give or sell it[414]. This may suggest that the principle
of the division is to be found in the power to alienate the land, to
'withdraw' with the land to another lord[415]. There may be truth in the
suggestion, but we can not square it with all our cases[416]. Often
enough the 'free man' can not sell without the consent of his lord[417].
We have just met with a 'free man' who had to obtain the consent both of
the lord of his commendation and of the lord of his soke[418]. On the
other hand, the sokeman who can sell without his lord's leave is no rare
being[419], and it was of a sokeman that we read how he could sell, not
only his land, but also his soke[420].
[Difference between 'free men' and sokemen.]
Again, we dare not say that while the 'free man' is the justiciable of a
national court, the soke over the sokeman belongs to his lord. Neither
side of this proposition is true. Very often the soke over the 'free
man' belongs to a church or to some other lord[421], who may or may not
be his lord by commendation[422]. Very often the lord has not the soke
over his sokemen. This may seem a paradox, but it is true. We make it
clearer by saying that you may have a man who is your man and who is a
sokeman, but yet you have no soke over him; his soke 'lies' or 'is
rendered' elsewhere. This is a common enough phenomenon, but it is apt
to escape attention. When we are told that a certain English lord had a
sokeman at a certain place, we must not jump to the conclusion that he
had soke over that man of his. Thus in Hertfordshire Æthelmær held a
manor and in it there were four sokemen; they were, we are told, his
_homines_: but over two of them the king had sake and soke[423]. Unless
we are greatly mistaken, the soke of many of the East Anglian sokemen,
no matter whose men they were, lay in the hundred courts. This prevents
our saying that a sokeman is one over whom his lord has soke, or one who
renders soke to his lord. We may doubt whether the line between the
sokemen and the 'free men' is drawn in accordance with any one
principle. Not only is freedom a matter of degree, but freedom is
measured along several different scales. At one time it is to the power
of alienation or 'withdrawal' that attention is attracted, at another to
the number or the kind of the services and 'customs' that the man must
render to his lord. When we see that in Lincolnshire there is no class
of 'free men' but that there are some eleven thousand sokemen, we shall
probably be persuaded that the distinction drawn in East Anglia was of
no very great importance to the surveyors or the king. It may have been
a matter of pure personal rank. These _liberi homines_ may have enjoyed
a wergild of more than 200 shillings, for in the Norman age we see
traces of a usage which will not allow that any one is 'free' if he is
not noble[424]. But perhaps when the Domesday of East Anglia has been
fully explored, hundred by hundred and vill by vill, we shall come to
the conclusion that the 'free men' of one district would have been
called sokemen in another district[425].
[Holdings of the sokemen.]
Some of these sokemen and 'free men' had very small tenements. Let us
look at a list of tenants in Norfolk. 'In Carleton were 2 free men with
7 acres. In Kicklington were 2 free men with 2 acres. In Forncett 1 free
man with 2 acres. In Tanaton 4 free men with 4 acres. In Wacton 2 free
men with 1-1/2 acres. In Stratton 1 free man with 4 acres. In Moulton 3
free men with 5 acres. In Tibenham 2 free men with 7 acres. In Aslacton
1 free man with 1 acre[426].' These eighteen free men had but sixteen
oxen among them. We think it highly probable that in the survey of East
Anglia one and the same free man is sometimes mentioned several times;
he holds a little land under one lord, and a little under another lord;
but in all he holds little. Then again, we see that these small freemen
often have a few bordiers or even a few free men 'below them[427].' And
then we observe that, while some of them are spoken of as having
belonged to the manors of their lords, others are reported to have had
manors of their own.
FOOTNOTES:
[304] Hist. Eng. Law, i. 558. The terms here used were adopted when
the Introduction to the Selden Society's Select Pleas in
Manorial Courts (1888) was being written. M. Esmein in his
Cours d'histoire du droit français, ed. 2 (1895), p. 259, has
insisted on the same distinction but has used other and
perhaps apter terms. According to him 'la justice rendue par
les seigneurs' (my seignorial justice) is either 'la justice
seigneuriale' (my franchisal justice) or 'la justice féodale'
(my feudal justice).
[305] See Liebermann, Leges Edwardi, p. 88.
[306] Leg. Hen. 9, § 9.
[307] Leg. Henr. 20 § 2.
[308] Leg. Henr. 27.
[309] Hist. Eng. Law, i. 532.
[310] Leg. Henr. 57 § 8. Cf. 59 § 19.
[311] Leg. Henr. 55.
[312] Leg. Henr. 10 § 1.
[313] Leg. Henr. 11 § 1. This explains the 'participatio' of 9 § 9.
[314] Leg. Henr. 19.
[315] Leg. Henr. 20 § 2.
[316] Leg. Henr. 9 § 4; 20 § 2; 57 § 8; 78 § 2.
[317] Hist. Eng. Law, i. 574.
[318] Hist. Eng. Law, i. 571.
[319] See e.g. Geoffrey Clinton for Kenilworth, Monast. vi. 221:
'Concedo ... ut habeant curiam suam ... ita libere ... sicut
ego meam curiam ... ex concessu regis melius et firmius
habeo.' Robert of Ouilly for Osney, ibid. p. 251: 'Volo ...
quod habeant curiam ipsorum liberam de suis hominibus de
omnimodis transgressionibus et defaltis, et quieti sint tam
ipsi quam eorum tenentes de omnimodis curiae meae sectis.'
[320] See Liebermann, Leg. Edw. p. 91.
[321] Thus in D.B. ii. 409 we find two successive entries, the 'in
_saca_ regis et comitis' of the one, being to all seeming an
equivalent for the 'in _soca_ regis et comitis' of the other.
D. B. ii. 416: 'de omnibus habuit antecessor Rannulfi
commendationem et _sacam_ excepto uno qui est in _soca_ S.
Edmundi.' Ibid. ii. 391 b: 'liberi homines Wisgari cum _saca_
... liber homo ... sub Witgaro cum _soca_.' In the Inquisitio
Eliensis (e.g. Hamilton, p. 109) _saca_ is sometimes used
instead of _soca_ in the common formula 'sed soca remansit
abbati.' In D. B. ii. 264 b, a scribe having written 'sed
habet s_a_cam' has afterwards substituted an _o_ for the _a_;
we have noted no other instance of such care.
[322] Hist. Eng. Law, i. 566.
[323] D. B. i. 184, Ewias.
[324] Leg. Henr. 20 § 1. The author of Leg. Edw. Conf., c. 22, also
attempts to connect soke with seeking, but his words are
exceedingly obscure: 'Soche est quod si aliquis quaerit
aliquid in terra sua, etiam furtum, sua est iustitia, si
inventum sit an non.' On the whole we take this nonsense to
mean that my right of soke is my right to do justice in case
any one seeks (by way of legal proceedings) anything in my
land, even though the accusation that he brings be one of
theft, and even though the stolen goods have not been found on
the thief. Already the word is a prey to the etymologist.
[325] D. B. ii. 256.
[326] Heming Cart. i. 75-6: 'quod illae 15 hidae inste pertinent ad
Osuualdeslaue hundredum episcopi et debent cum ipso episcopo
censum regis solvere et omnia alia servitia ad regem
pertinentia et inde idem requirere ad placitandum.' Another
account of the same transaction, ibid. 77, says 'et
[episcopus] deraciocinavit socam et sacam de Hamtona ad suum
hundred Osuualdeslauue quod ibi debent placitare et geldum et
expeditionem et cetera legis servitia de illis 15 hidis secum
debent persolvere.'
[327] Schmid, Glossar. s. v. _sócen_. The word, it would seem, first
makes its way into the vocabulary of the law as describing the
act of seeking a sanctuary and the protection that a criminal
gains by that act. A forged charter of Edgar for Thorney
Abbey, Red Book of Thorney, Camb. Univ. Lib., f. 4, says that
the word is a Danish word--'Regi vero pro consensu et eiusdem
mercimonii licentia ac pro reatus emendatione quam Dani
_socne_ nsitato nominant vocabulo, centum dedit splendidissimi
auri mancusas.'
[328] Leg. Henr. 9 § 4.
[329] Ibid.
[330] Ibid. 22.
[331] Ibid. 20 § 3.
[332] Ibid. 24.
[333] Selden's Eadmer, p. 197; Bigelow, Placita Anglo-Norman. p. 7.
[334] D. B. i. 238 b, Alvestone.
[335] Cnut, II. 12. We may construe these terms by breach of the
king's special peace, attacks on houses, ambush, neglect of
the summons to the host. In Hereford, D. B. i. 179, the king
is accounted to have three pleas, breach of his peace,
hámfare, which is the same as hámsócn, and forsteal; and
besides this he receives the penalty from a man who makes
default in military service.
[336] D. B. i. 298 b.
[337] D. B. i. 87 b: 'Istae consuetudines pertinent ad Tantone,
burgheristh, latrones, pacis infractio, hainfare, denarii de
hundret, et denarii S. Petri; ter in anno teneri placita
episcopi sine ammonitione; profectio in exercitum cum
hominibus episcopi.' See also the English document, Kemble,
Cod. Dipl. iv. p. 233. The odd word _burgheristh_ looks like a
corrupt form of _burhgrið_ (the peace of the _burh_), or of
_burhgerihta_ (burh-rights, borough-dues), which word occurs
in the English document.
[338] D. B. i. 172, 175.
[339] Cnut II. 12, 13, 14. Perhaps when in other parts of England
the pleas of the crown are reckoned to be but four, it is
treated as self-evident that the outlaw falls into the king's
hand, as also the man who harbours an outlaw. If _fihtwíte_ is
the right word, we must suppose with Schmid (p. 586) that a
_fihtwíte_ was only paid when there was homicide. A fine for
mere fighting or drawing blood would not have been a reserved
plea.
[340] D. B. ii. 179 b: 'Et iste Withri habebat sacham et socam super
istam terram et rex et comes 6 forisfacturas.' Ibid. 223: 'In
Cheiunchala soca de 6 forisfacturis.'
[341] D. B. ii. 413 b: 'socam et sacam praeter 6 forisfacturas S.
Eadmundi.' Ibid. 373: 'S. Eadmundus 6 forisfacturas.' Ibid.
384 b: 'Tota hec terra iacebat in dominio Abbatiae [de Eli] T.
R. E. cum omni consuetudine praeter sex forisfacturas S.
Eadmundi.'
[342] D. B. ii. 244: 'sex liberi homines ... ex his habet S.
Benedictus socam et de uno commendationem et de 24 tres
forisfacturas.'
[343] D. B. i. 336 b: 'praeter geld et heriete et forisfacturam
corporum suorum de 40 oris argenti et praeter latronem.' Such
a phrase as 'geld, heriot and thief' is instructive.
[344] D. B. i. 4 b.
[345] William I. for Ely, Hamilton, Inquisitio, p. xviii.: 'omnes
alias forisfacturas quae emendabiles sunt.'
[346] D. B. ii. 195: 'Super hos habuit T. R. E. Episcopus 6
forisfacturas sed hundret nec vidit breve nec sigillum nec
concessum Regis.'
[347] D. B. ii. 34 b.
[348] See e.g. D. B. i. 220.
[349] D. B. i. 336: 'Rogerius de Busli habet unum mansum Sueni filii
Suaue cum saca et soca. Judita comitissa habet unum mansum
Stori sine saca et soca.'
[350] D. B. i. 2.
[351] D. B. i. 1 b.
[352] D. B. i. 337.
[353] D. B. i. 280 b.
[354] D. B. ii. 185: 'Super omnes liberos istius hundreti [de
Northerpingeham] habet Rex sacam et socam.' Ibid. 188 b: 'Rex
et comes de omnibus istis liberis hominibus socam.' Ibid. 203:
'Et de omnibus his liberis [Episcopi Osberni] soca in
hundreto.'
[355] D. B. ii. 210: 'Super omnes istos liberos homines habuit Rex
Eadwardus socam et sacam, et postea Guert accepit per vim, sed
Rex Willelmus dedit [S. Eadmundo] cum manerio socam et sacam
de omnibus liberis Guert sicut ipse tenebat; hoc reclamant
monachi.'
[356] Below, p. 105.
[357] D. B. ii. 425 b.
[358] D. B. ii. 287, 287 b: 'Sanfort Hund. et dim.... Supradictum
manerium scilicet Bercolt ... cum soca de hundreto et dimidio
reddebat T. R. E. 24 lib.' On subsequent pages it is often
said that the soke of certain persons or lands is in Bergholt.
[359] D. B. ii. 408 b: 'Hagala tenuit Gutmundus sub Rege Edwardo pro
manerio 8 car[ucatarum] terrae cum soca et saca super dominium
hallae tantum. Tunc 32 villani ... 8 bordarii ... 10 servi.
Semper 4 carucae in dominio. Tunc et post 24 carucae
hominum.... Sex sochemanni eiusdem Gutmundi de quibus soca est
in hundreto.'
[360] D. B. ii. 216: 'De Redeham habebat Abbas socam super hos qui
sequebantur faldam, et de aliis soca in hundreto.' Ibid. 129
b: 'Super omnes istos qui faldam Comitis requirebant habebat
Comes socam et sacam, super alios omnes Rex et Comes.' Ibid.
194 b: 'In Begetuna tenuit Episcopus Almarus per emptionem T.
R. E. cum soca et saca de Comite Algaro de bor[dariis] et
sequentibus faldam 3 carucatas terrae.' Ibid. 350 b: 'habebat
socam et sacam super hallam et bordarios.'
[361] D. B. ii. 130 b.
[362] D. B. i. 265 b: 'Hoc manerium habet suum placitum in aula
domini sui.'
[363] Above, p. 88.
[364] D. B. ii. 385 b.
[365] D. B. ii. 46 b.
[366] D. B. i. 283 b.
[367] D. B. i. 11 b.; Chron. de Bello (Anglia Christiana Soc.) p.
28; Battle Custumals (Camd. Soc.), p. 126.
[368] D. B. i. 154 b.
[369] D. B. 39 b, Hants: 'Huic manerio pertinet soca duorum
hundredorum.' Ibid. 64 b, Wilts: 'In hac firma erant placita
hundretorum de Cicementone et Sutelesberg quae regi
pertinebant.' Ibid. ii. 185: 'Super omnes liberos istius
hundreti habet rex sacam et socam.' Ibid. ii. 113 b.: 'Soca et
sacha de Grenehou hundreto pertinet ad Wistune manerium Regis,
quicunque ibi teneat, et habent Rex et Comes.'
[370] See above, note 367.
[371] Above, p. 88.
[372] D. B. ii. 379: 'Super ferting de Almeham habet W. Episcopus
socam et sacam.'
[373] D. B. i. 184: 'Haec terra non pertinet ... ad hundredum. De
hac terra habet Rogerius 15 sextarios mellis et 15 porcos
quando homines sunt ibi et placita super eos.'
[374] D. B. ii. 139 b.
[375] D. B. ii. 114.
[376] D. B. i. 340, 346, 357 b, 366, 368 b (ter). See also on f.
344, 344 b, the symbol fð in the margin. The word friðsócn
occurs in Æthelr. VIII. 1 and Cnut I. 2 § 3, where it seems to
stand for a sanctuary, an asylum.
[377] If one of _A_'s tenants is sued in a personal action in the
hundred court he will have to answer there unless _A_ appears
and 'claims his court.' This comes out plainly in certain
rolls of the court of Wisbeach Hundred, which by the kind
permission of the Bishop of Ely, I have examined. On a roll of
33 Edw. I. we find Stephen Hamond sued for a debt; 'et super
hoc venit Prior Elyensis et petit curiam suam; et Thomas
Doreward petit curiam suam de dicto Stephano residente suo et
tenente suo.' The prior's petition is refused on the ground
that Stephen is not his tenant, and Doreward's petition is
refused on the ground that it is unprecedented.
[378] D. B. ii. 291: 'Et fuit in soca Regis. Postquam Briennus
habuit, nullam consuetudinem reddidit in hundreto.' Ibid. 240:
'Hoc totum tenuit Lisius pro uno manerio; modo tenet Eudo
successor illius et in T. R. E. soca et saca fuit in hundreto;
set modo tenet Eudo.'--Ibid. 240 b: 'Soca istius terre T. R.
E. iacuit in Folsa Regis; modo habet Walterius
[Giffardus].'--Ibid. 285 b: the hundred testified that in
truth the King and Earl had the soke and sake in the
Confessor's day, but the men of the vill say that Burchard
likewise (_similiter_) had the soke of his free men as well as
of his villeins.
[379] D. B. i. 35 b: 'Duo fratres tenuerunt T. R. E.; unusquisque
habuit domum suam et tamen manserunt in una curia.' Ibid. 103
b: 'Ibi molendinum serviens curiae.' Ibid. 103: 'arabant et
herciabant ad curiam domini.'
[380] D. B. i. 87 b. Kemble, Cod. Dip., iv. p. 233: 'and þriwa secan
gemot on 12 monðum.'
[381] D. B. i. 193 b; Hamilton, Inquisitio, 77-8.
[382] D. B. i. 75.
[383] D. B. i. 238.
[384] D. B. i. 186.
[385] D. B. i. 38 b.
[386] D. B. i. 101.
[387] D. B. i. 280 b: 'Hic notantur qui habuerunt socam et sacam et
thol et thaim et consuetudinem Regis 2 denariorum.... Horum
omnium nemo habere potuit tercium denarium comitis nisi eius
concessu et hoc quamdiu viveret, preter Archiepiscopum et Ulf
Ferisc et Godeue Comitissam.'
[388] See above, p. 92, note 367.
[389] D. B. ii. 123 b: 'De istis est soca in hundreto ad tercium
denarium.'
[390] D. B. ii. 282.
[391] D. B. ii. 312: 'Rex habet in Duneuuic consuetudinem hanc quod
duo vel tres ibunt ad hundret si recte moniti fuerint, et si
hoc non faciunt, forisfacti sunt de 2 oris, et si latro _ibi_
fuerit captus _ibi_ judicabitur, et corporalis iusticia in
Blieburc capietur, et sua pecunia remanebit dominio de
Duneuuic.' It seems to us that the first _ibi_ must refer to
Dunwich and therefore that the second does so likewise. Still
the passage is ambiguous enough.
[392] See above, p. 91.
[393] Battle Custumals (Camden Soc.) 136. This is an interesting
example, for it suggests an explanation of the common claim to
hold a court 'outside' the hundred court (_petit curiam suam
extra hundredum_). The claimant's men will go apart and hold a
little court by themselves outside 'the four benches' of the
hundred.
[394] D. B. i. 32: 'et si quis forisfaciens ibi calumpniatus
fuisset, Regi emendabat; si vero non calumpniatus abisset sub
eo qui sacam et socam habuisset, ille emendam de reo haberet.'
Compare with this the account of Guildford, Ibid. 30.
[395] D. B. i. 56 b.
[396] D. B. i. 336 b.
[397] D. B. i. 238.
[398] The passages from the dooms are collected by Schmid s. v.
_Hausfriede_, _Feohtan_.
[399] Ine, 6 § 3: 'If he fight in the house of a gavel-payer or
boor, let him give 30 shillings by way of wite and 6 shillings
to the boor.'
[400] D. B. i. 204.
[401] D. B. ii. 419 b: 'Cercesfort tenuit Scapius teinnus
Haroldi.... Scapius habuit socam sub Haroldo.'--Ibid. 313:
'Heroldus socam habuit et Stanuuinus de eo.... Idem Stanuuinus
socam habuit de Heroldo.'