LONDON:

HARRISON AND SONS, PRINTERS IN ORDINARY TO HER MAJESTY,

ST. MARTIN'S LANE,

PREFACE.

HAT the affairs of one's neighbours are of no little interest to men of every class of life has perhaps never been more strongly proved than by the production of and great demand for "The Modern Domesday Book." Not only have Mr. Frederick Purdy and others analyzed it, Mr. Lyulph Stanley abused it, Mr. John Bright moved its digestion in the House, and the "Spectator" and other London journals scathingly criticised it, but the immense herd of country newspapers have actually reproduced it, as far as their own neighbourhoods are concerned, in their columns, much, probably, to the satisfaction of the bulk of readers, to whom twenty-six shillings (the price of the English volumes alone) is prohibitory. As an example of this, I may mention, that having a small party in my house during one of those dubious weeks which come in 'twixt the close of the hunting and the beginning of the London season, I was saved all Marthean cares as to the amusement of my guests simply by leaving about on the table the two huge volumes of "The Modern Domesday," over which I found bowed with the utmost constancy two or more heads.

I heard from one of my guests that the copy of the work at the "Ultratorium" was reduced to rags and tatters within a fortnight of its arrival-a lesson which was not

b

wasted on the library committee of my own club, who caused the book to be so bound as to defy anything short of a twelve-year-old school-boy.

Mr. Lyulph Stanley finds great fault with the carelessness of some of the entries in " Domesday,"-faults which, it must be admitted, are most perplexing to the compilerfaults in spelling, faults in description of residence, gross faults as to the initialling of names, not infrequent double entries of the same man, first as John, then as J., and in the same fashion through the alphabet; and not least, the almost invariable mixing up of a parson's glebe land, or possession in his public capacity of parish priest, with his private acreage, as what Sidney Smith dubbed a squarson." One huge stumbling-block in the way of the work's perfection is the large number of doublebarrelled (if I may use the term) names in England, such as Hart-Dyke, Leveson-Gower, and Vernon-Harcourt, to say nought of such perfect "mitrailleuses" as RouseBoughton-Knight and Butler-Clarke-Southwell-Wandesforde. This necessitates a search for acres under every one of the bracketed family names.

66

In Wales the difficulty lies in a very different direction, i.e., in the almost desperate simplicity of names; in fact, it may be taken for granted that two-thirds of Wales is owned by the families of Jones, Davies, Evans, and Williams.

Would that for the wretched compiler's sake there had been a few more "Sir Watkins " in existence!

In a compilation of the sort I have attempted, mistakes must occur, but I have tried to minimize them by noting the most glaring and oft-recurring errors in the return, in

order to be on guard against them. I may class these errors as follows:—

I. Mixture of Vowels.-Vowels I find in the return mean next to nothing. For instance, Sir H. SelwinIbbetson is returned as himself properly spelt, and in the same county as "Sir H. Ebbetson"; in the far north, the name of Lindow is spelt with the most perfect impartiality "Lindow," "Lindon," and "London"; in a Midland county, my good friend John Levett and his kinsfolk are put in as "Levitt," "Lovett," and "Lovatt," and unless a man knew or found out that no Lovett was ever squire of Wichnor and guardian of the hereditary flitch, he would grievously fail in judging the Levett acreage aright. In Derbyshire, again, the considerable family of Turbutt of Ogston is robbed of its entire patrimony (except a beggarly four acres), which is given to the mythical house of "Tinbutt," while to add further insult to the first injury, some property in Notts is said to appertain to one Tarbutt. of "Hogstar"—a heavenly body till now unknown.

In Somerset one "Troate" usurps a goodly share of Mr. Troyte's domains. I might multiply these cases a hundredfold.

II. Variation of Consonants.-Even consonants, though not so bad as vowels, are muddled in a most arbitrary fashion; one main object of the rural authority who furnished the materials for "Domesday" being to spell his local landowners phonetically, the family possessions of the house of "Fazakerley" are Fazakerley" are distributed among the "Fazackerleys," "Fizackleas," "Phizackarleys," and

"Phizackleas."

The half-educated Briton, especially the South Saxon,

6 2

is fond of adding to the length, if not to the dignity of a name, by adding a final "s"; the London mob invariably cheered the late champion of popular rights as "Odgers." This final "s" is in the "Domesday Book" very frequently added, so much so that in a similar compilation to the present for England alone, somewhat hastily done, I altogether failed to recognize as one and the same owner the head of the Bucks and Essex family of "Tower," who figures under the fourfold spellings of "Tower," "Towers," "Trower," and "Trowers." It is possible he may even be entered for a few acres as Trousers," on some page which I have overlooked.

Mr. Pochin would probably hardly care to own an estate were the ownership coupled with the condition that he should change his name to "Poctim," yet so "Domesday has it. Mr. Ellis Nanney perhaps thinks the return a most incorrect piece of work, and his estate lamentably understated, in which case I would advise him to look for his missing lands under "Vanney." Col. Gunter, of shorthorn celebrity, might have been acquitted of any special proclivity for swine; he nevertheless figures as "Col. Grunter."

A small estate in Sussex is returned as belonging to one "Burdfmak"; what this appalling name is meant for quite outreaches all conjecture.

III. Titles. Titles are a great trial. Englishmen are said to "love a lord," but that is hardly an excuse for giving two steps in the peerage, as is done in Lord Stafford's case, and some others, or for making the widows of knights into Lady Janes, Lady Bettys, and Lady Marys. I may mention that a Viscount seems to be a hopeless