^{page 51 note 1} This is more especially true of the district north of the present railway from Beverley to Market Weighton. South of this line, the churches generally have been much more altered—Newbald being a notable exception.

^{page 51 note 2} De Cestis Rcgmn Anglorutn, ed. Stubbs, (Rolls Series), ii, 309Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 1} The Domesday evidence for these statements is analysed in detail in the Appendix (p. 69 below).

^{page 52 note 2} Cf.Dr. Beddoe, in Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, xix, 58Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 3} A north aisle was added to the nave in the fourteenth century. The chancel was rebuilt about 1862 (Assoc. Architectural Societies' Reports, vi, cxvi), and the south wall of the nave has also been rebuilt.

^{page 52 note 4} I think that the original church cannot be attributed to an earlier period than the last years of the eleventh century.

^{page 52 note 5} Domesday Book (Rec. Com.), i, 303a, 307a.

^{page 52 note 6} Early Yorkshire Charters, ed. Farrer, W., ii, no. 1012Google Scholar.

^{page 54 note 1} Although it is now twenty-six years since I measured the plan of Weaverthorpe church, solely for its architectural interest, it was only after revisiting the church last autumn with my friend Mr. S. D. Kitson, that the identification of its actual builder suggested itself.

^{page 54 note 2} Described in V. C. H. Yorkshire, ii, 19.

^{page 54 note 3} The church is described, with plan and other illustrations, in Four Churches in the Deanery of Buckrose, by Bayly, James (1894), pp. 1–5Google Scholar and pls. i to v. The description and illustrations include minor details not forming part of the original structure, and not therefore mentioned in this paper.

^{page 54 note 4} There are a few blocks of fossiliferous limestone, of the local coralline oolite type. The west doorway of the nearly contemporary tower of Kirkby Grindalythe church is largely built of this stone.

^{page 54 note 5} For building-stone from Brig, Filey, see Mon. Angl. vi, 288, no. 14Google Scholar; Chartulary of Bridlington, ed. Lancaster, W. T., 80Google Scholar; Farrer, , Early Yorkshire Charters, ii, no. 1176Google Scholar.

^{page 54 note 6} The jambs and lintel, square-edged originally, have been chamfered later.

^{page 56 note 1} Few of the early towers on the Wolds have stone stairs, but the tower of Garton-on-the-Wolds has one in the same position, forming a square projection externally.

^{page 56 note 2} The tower of Wharram-le-Street has a semicircular-arched doorway in this position.

^{page 56 note 3} So also in the towers of Wharram-le-Street and Kirkby Grindalythe, which are of similar size and proportion. The tower of Wharram has no plinth.

^{page 57 note 1} The nave of Garton-on-the-Wolds, a later example obviously influenced by Weaverthorpe, has the same simple windows set high in the walls, but the bays are divided by pilaster buttresses stopping into the usual corbel-table. The tower of Garton has pilaster buttresses, and its broad and low proportion (15 ft. square internally) strongly contrasts with the tall proportion of the towers of Weaver-thorpe, Wharram-le-Street, and Kirkby Grindalythe.

^{page 57 note 2} Trans. East Riding Antiq. Soc, x, 109, and pl. vii.

^{page 58 note 1} Mr. James Bayly has kindly informed me that, when he first went to Weaverthorpe after the restoration had been completed, he was told that the end of a beam of the lowered roof of the porch had been let into the tympanum immediately above the dial-stone. The stone above would thus appear to have been inserted to fill the beam-hole, when the church was restored and the existing roof of the porch took the place of the lowered roof.

^{page 58 note 2} The Æ is almost but not quite certain. There is space for something between the two E's, and there seems to be the start of a sloping incision at the top of the second E. The face of the stone has been chipped here, but the lower right-hand edge of the chip follows the sloping stroke of the A. There seems also to be some trace of the middle horizontal stroke of the A.

^{page 59 note 1} Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, xxi, 275,Google Scholar where Mr. Collingwood has described the stone and illustrated it by a very careful drawing. I have to thank Mr. Collingwood for his kindness in placing his drawing at my disposal, to be reproduced here (fig. 3). The dial-stone at Great Edston is described and illustrated by Mr. Collingwood in Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, xix, 329Google Scholar.

^{page 59 note 2} Ibid., xix, 344 (drawing by Mr. Collingwood).

^{page 59 note 3} Blair, C. H. Hunter, ‘Durham Seals,’ in Archaeologia Aeliana, 3rd sen, xiv, 440,Google Scholar and photograph 3110.

^{page 59 note 4} Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, v, 144Google Scholar.

^{page 59 note 5} Compare the ‘Scs Gregorivs Minster’ of the Kirkdale inscription, which also records the building of the church there.

^{page 59 note 6} In his description of the church, the Rev. T. Bayly (who was vicar of Weaverthorpe in Father Haigh's time) suggested that the Herbert of Winchester of the inscription might perhaps be identified with St. William himself (Assoc. Arch. Societies' Reports, xiv, xxviii). Cf. James Bayly, op. cit., 3.

^{page 59 note 7} The archbishop's holding in Birdsall is given as 2½ carucates in Domesday (i, 303 a).

^{page 60 note 1} The holdings from Helperthorpe to Croom inclusive are described in Domesday as berewicks or soke of Weaverthorpe.

^{page 60 note 2} The Domesday assessment of these East Riding lands (with the three carucates in Birdsall) amounts to a total of 66 carucates. Cf. Dr. Round's ‘six-carucate unit’ (Feudal England, 69).

^{page 60 note 3} Mon. Angl. vi, 1196, no. 109. Farrer, Early Yorkshire Charters, i, no. 25. The suggestion by Mr. Ellis, A. S. (Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, iv. 118)Google Scholar that Herbert the chamberlain might possibly be identified with Herbert son of Aubri, the archbishop's tenant in Lincolnshire (one of the witnesses to this feoffment), cannot be accepted. The descent from Herbert son of Aubri has been worked out by Mr. Bird, W. H. B. (Genealogist, N.S. xxxiii, 145),Google Scholar and is entirely different from that from the chamberlain. Another suggested identification with a Herbert, Gloucestershire (Trans. Bristol and Glouc. Arch. Soc, iv, 166)Google Scholar must also be rejected.

^{page 60 note 4} For the chamberlains of William I, see Regesta regum Anglo-Normannorutn, ed. Davis, H. W. C., i p. xxivGoogle Scholar. For the chamberlains in the Hampshire Domesday, see Round, J. H., V. C. H. Hampshire, i, 425Google Scholar.

^{page 60 note 5} Domesday, i, 42 b, 45b, and 48b.

^{page 60 note 6} Davis, , Regesta, i, p. xxvGoogle Scholar.

^{page 60 note 7} Robinson, J. Armitage, Gilbert Crispin, 146, no. 27Google Scholar.

^{page 60 note 8} The late twelfth-century chroniclers call him Herbert of Winchester. See p. 66, n. 1 infra.

^{page 60 note 9} Citron, of Abingdon, ii, 43.

^{page 60 note 10} Round, J. H., The Kings Serjeants, 68, 121.Google ScholarTout, T. F., Chapters in the Administrative History of Mediaeval England, i, 72Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 1} See p. 66, n. 1 infra.

^{page 61 note 2} Tout, T. F., op. cit., i, 74 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 61 note 3} Robinson, J. A., Gilbert Crispin, 141, no. 18Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 4} Round, J. H., The King's Serjeants, 324Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 5} Mon. Angl. iv, 15 (no. 3), 16 (no. 5). Farrer, W., Outline Itinerary of King Henry I (1919), nos. 25 and 26Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 6} Two Chartularies of Bath Priory (Somerset Record Society, vii), no. 40, p. 43.Google ScholarFarrer, , Itinerary, no. 28Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 7} Chron. of Abingdon, ii. 52. Farrer, , Itinerary, no. 41Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 8} The limits of date indicated within square brackets are those assigned by Dr. Farrer in his Itinerary.

^{page 61 note 9} Chron. of Abingdon, ii, 113. Farrer, , Itinerary, no. 274Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 10} Cal. of Charter Rolls, iii, 351. Farrer, , Itinerary, no. 262Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 11} Eng. Hist. Rev., xxxv, 393 [1107-1123].Google Scholar

^{page 61 note 12} Reg. of St. Osmund, i, 208. Farrer, , Itinerary, no. 429Google Scholar.

^{page 62 note 1} Either between July 1108 and the end of May nog, or between August ni l and the summer of 1113 (Round, Feudal England, 142). Dr. Farrer's indication is Aug. mi-July 1113.

^{page 62 note 2} Orderic (iv, 87) speaks of Henry in 1100 hastening ‘ad arcem Guentoniae, ubi regalis thesaurus continebatur’.

^{page 62 note 3} Chron. of Abingdon, ii, 115. Farrer, , Itinerary, no. 323Google Scholar.

^{page 62 note 4} Round, J. H., The Survey of Winchester temp. Henry I, in V. C. H. Hampshire, i, 527 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 62 note 5} Domesday Book (Rec. Com.), iv (Additamentd), 531 b.

^{page 62 note 6} Ibid., 532a.

^{page 62 note 7} Ibid., 532b.

^{page 62 note 8} Ibid., 533a.

^{page 62 note 9} Ibid.,535a.

^{page 62 note 10} Ibid., 533b.

^{page 62 note 11} Ibid., 538a.

^{page 62 note 11} Ibid., 536b.

^{page 62 note 12} Ibid., 537a.

^{page 63 note 1} Domesday Book (Rec. Com.), iv (Additamenta), 536b.

^{page 63 note 2} Ibid., 534a.

^{page 63 note 3} Ibid., 542a.

^{page 63 note 4} See p. 66, n. 1 infra.

^{page 63 note 5} St. Bernard wrote to Pope Innocent II: ‘Archiepiscopus Eboracensis venit ad vos,…homo qui non posuit Deum adjutorem suum, sed speravit in multitudine divitiarum suarum’ (Ep. 346).

^{page 63 note 6} Chron. of Abingdon, ii, 42-3.

^{page 63 note 7} Ibid., ii, 86. Farrer, Itinerary, no. 17.

^{page 63 note 8} Domesday records the abbey's holding in Leckhampstead of 10 hides, which, together with 4 hides in Weston and 2 hides in Boxford (16 hides in all), were valued at £10, both T. R. E., and T. R. W, . (Domesday, i, 586).Google Scholar Little wonder that the chronicler was dissatisfied with the bargain!

^{page 63 note 9} Chron. of Abingdon, ii, 134.Google Scholar

^{page 63 note 10} Ibid., ii, 5.

^{page 64 note 1} Archbishop Gerard died 21 May 1108. Thomas was immediately elected as his successor.

^{page 64 note 2} Before August the king crossed to Normandy.

^{page 64 note 3} Eadmer, , Historia Novorum in Anglia (Rolls Series), 200Google Scholar.

^{page 64 note 4} In his carta of 1166, Roger, archbishop of York, explained the excessive number of his knights by the statement that his predecessors had in this way provided for their relatives and servants (Liber Niger, ed. Hearne, , 304.Google ScholarRed Book of the Exchequer, 413. Round, J. H., Feudal England, 301)Google Scholar.

^{page 64 note 5} Pipe Roll 31 Hen. I, p. 37.

^{page 64 note 6} Ibid., p. 25. See also pp. 32 and 104.

^{page 65 note 1} Pipe Roll 31 Hen. I, p. 125.

^{page 65 note 2} Round, J. H. in V. C. H. Hampshire, i, 431.Google ScholarThe King's Serjeants, 89.

^{page 65 note 3} Pipe Roll 31 Hen. I, p. 37.Google Scholar

^{page 65 note 4} V. C. H. Hampshire, iii, 260.Google Scholar

^{page 65 note 5} Round, J. H. in V. C. H. Hampshire, i, 529, 534.Google Scholar T. F. Tout, op. cit., i, 76.

^{page 65 note 6} Henry II's charter of 1155 to his grandson Robert fitz Herbert granted him ministerium patris sui de cameraria mea…sicut pater situs velavus suus liberius tenuerunt (Eyton, , Antiquities of Shropshire, vii, 150).Google Scholar The bishop of Winchester's carta of 1166 speaks of Herbert, son of Herbert, son of Herbert camerarii senioris (Liber Niger, 69. Red Book of the Exchequer, 205).

^{page 65 note 7} Domesday, iv, 542b, 543a, 558a, b.

^{page 65 note 8} Eyton, , op. cit., vii, 145, 181.Google Scholar

^{page 65 note 9} See the pedigree and account of the family in Eyton, op. cit., vii, 146 ff. Herbert fitz Herbert II (the grandson of ‘Herbert of Winchester’), who married the daughter of Milo of Hereford, held the three knights' fees under the archbishop of York (Liber Niger, 304. Red Book of the Exchequer, 413), in addition to his holdings in Hampshire, Wiltshire, Berkshire, and Gloucestershire. The Great Inquest of Service of 1212 shows his son Peter fitz Herbert as holding the three knights' fees (Red Book of the Exchequer, 492), which his son Reginald fitz Peter is also recorded as holding (Kirkby's Inquest (Surtees Soc. xlix), pp. 79, 389. Yorkshire Inquisitions (Y. A. S. Rec. ser. xxiii), ii, 46). His son John fitz Reginald did homage to archbishops Newark and Corbridge for the three fees, and his son Herbert fitz John to archbishop Greenfield (Kirkby's Inquest volume, pp. 400, 404, 410). Herbert's son Matthew fitz Herbert did homage to archbishop Melton for three and a half fees (ibid., 414). Matthew died in 1356 (Cal. Inq., x, 267), and Weaverthorpe and Londesbrough passed to Edward St. John, and through him to the Bromfletes and Cliffords. It will be noticed that the members of this family did not use ‘Fitzherbert’ as a surname. Their chief interests did not lie in Yorkshire, where they held little if anything more than archbishop Thomas granted to Herbert, until they acquired the manor of (Market) Weighton by the marriage of Reginald fitz Peter with Joan de Vivonia.

^{page 66 note 1} ‘Fuerat enim filius Herberti Wintoniensis camerarii et thesaurarii Henrici regis. Enutritus est semper in deliciis et divitiis, et raro labori assuetus, benignitate tamen animi innocentis et liberalitate [plebi, J. of H.] valde carus’ (Historians of the Church of York, ed. Raine, , ii, 223).Google Scholar The same passage occurs in John of Hexham (in Symeon of Durham, ed. Arnold, , ii, 317),Google Scholar except that Herbert is there called thesaurarius only.

^{page 66 note 2} ‘Willelmus eiusdem ecclesiae thesaurarius; vir plane et secundum carnem nobilis, et morum ingenua lenitate amabilis’ (Historia Rerutn Anglicarum, i, 55Google Scholar).

^{page 66 note 3} T. F. Tout, in D. N. B., under Fitzherbert, William.

^{page 66 note 4} Gervase (ed. Stubbs, ), i, 123Google Scholar.

^{page 66 note 5} Annales Monastici (ed. Luard, ), ii, 54Google Scholar.

^{page 66 note 6} ‘Beatus igitur Willelmus ex spectabili prosapia regis illustris Anglorum Stephani ortus, praeclaris natalium titulis fuerat insignitus. Erat enim filius strenuissimi comitis Herberti, viri secundum caducos huius mundi honores potentissimi, ex Emma sorore praedicti regis’ (Historians of the Church of York, ii, 270). This is copied by the late chroniclers, Bromton (X Scriplt. col. 1029, 1040) and Stubbs, Thomas (Hist. Ch. York, ii, 389),Google Scholar who can scarcely be regarded as reliable authorities for the twelfth century.

^{page 67 note 1} Archbishop Thomas and William the treasurer attest a grant to Selby, and William the treasurer attests the archbishop's confirmation of the same grant (Chartul. of Selby, i, 290,299. Farrer, , Early Yorkshire Charters, i, nos. 45 and 46)Google Scholar.

^{page 67 note 2} Farrer, , Early Yorkshire Charters, ii, nos. 1151 and 1153Google Scholar.

^{page 67 note 3} Ibid., i, no. 26.

^{page 67 note 4} Ibid., i, no. 27.

^{page 67 note 5} Ibid., iii, no. 1439.

^{page 67 note 6} Ibid., i, no. 31 [1136-9]. Mon.Angl. vi, 1196, no. no. Eyton's, date is 1136 (Ant. of Shropshire, vii, 147)Google Scholar.

^{page 67 note 7} Farrer, , Early Yorkshire Charters, i, no. 28.Google Scholar In the thirteenth century the church of Weaverthorpe passed from Nostell priory to the church of York.

^{page 68 note 1} Ep. 235.

^{page 68 note 2} Memorials of Fountains (Surtees Soc. xlii), i, 80.

^{page 68 note 3} Annales Monastici, ii, 54.

^{page 68 note 4} ‘In Paschali solennitate alumpnam suam Wintoniensem ecclesiam visitavit’ (Gervase, i, 158).

^{page 68 note 5} Historians of the Church of York, iii, 127.

^{page 69 note 1} See the table of statistics in V. C. H. Yorkshire, ii, 189.

^{page 69 note 2} The first of the figures within brackets represents the recorded population, and the second the actual ploughs.

^{page 70 note 1} Dr. Fairer, in V. C. II. Yorks., ii, 146, 185Google Scholar.