Page:English Historical Review Volume 35.djvu/198

 190 BARONY AND THANAGE April that of the barony of Wigton, which was held by cornage, ' forinsec ', and pannage,^ by little more than the relief due from Clifton but not from Wigton.^ And this, Littleton tells us, was just the difference between cornage as a mesne tenure and cornage as a tenure-in-chief ; for the latter was accounted a grand serjeanty whence no relief but a fine of one year's value was due, but the former was accounted knight-service and was subject to all the feudal burdens.^ (3) We have the direct evidence of the charter by which Henry I, shortly before 1130,^ gave to Hildred and Odard of Carlisle the lands of Gamel, son of Bern, and Glassa, son of Brictric, * for the gafol of animals and such other service as other free men, French and English, are wont to do to the king for their lands ' ; for in it the king calls the former owners his drengs.^ As there is no evidence that the service for Gamelsby and Glassanby, one of the cornage baronies, was ever changed,* we can only conclude that tenure by cornage was just a form of drengage, renamed from its most characteristic service when the other services that once accompanied it had fallen into desuetude. In that case, the barons who paid cornage and went in the king's army of Scotland but paid neither * fine of court ' nor ' blanchfarm ', were an important link between the barons who held by thanage,- paying a ' farm ', cornage, and ' fine of court ' but no military service other than common array, and the barons who held by knight-service, paying castle-ward, cornage, and ' fine of court '. If we add to the Cumbrian and Northumbrian barons the Lancashire and Cheshire barons, who held by knight-service, paying castle-ward and * sacfee ',' and the Yorkshire barons, who likewise held by knight-service, paying castle-ward and * fine of the county ', we have, in wha-t may be ' Bain, ii, no. 64. Note-book, pi. 1270) ; so, too, was Newton Beigny (Testa dc XcviU, ii. 703). Gamel, son of Ber (sic) (Pijie Roll). not a free tenure, suggests that by this charter Henry I changed the tenure of Gamelsby and Glassanby from drengage to cornage. But in 1292 Odard's successors claimed infangthef ab antiquo by virtue of this very confirmation of Henry's charter (Plac. de Quo Warr., p. 124), although there is in it no mention of infangthef or any soc. So either all free men who held of the king in Cumberland had infangthef, which was not the case — e. g. John de Reigny had not infangthef — or infangthef was already attached to the lands when the grant was made, in which case Gamel and Glassa, the king's drengs, had it. Now, no lands to which infangthef was attached can have been held otherwise than by a free tenure ; so the sole ground for assuming that Gamel and Glassa did not hold their lands by the same tenure as Hildred and Odard, who certainly held them by cornage, disappears. ' Mamecestre, . 274.
 * Wigton was accounted a grand serjeanty because held by cornage (Bracton^s
 * Tenures, a. 156.
 * In 1130 Hildred and Odard rendered account of 40». for the grant of the lands of
 * Ck)nfirmed by John in 1210 (Bain, i, no. 470).
 * Mr. Wilson (Vict. County Hist., Cumberland, i. 316), deeming that drengage was