Michi et comparibus Michi et ceteris Michi et aliis meis mandastis ut comparibus meis comparibus meis per vobis per breve qui de vobis litteras vestras nostrum pendens tenemus in capite innotuistis ut per extra sigillum, per litteras fidem et ligantiam mandaremus (1) quot vestras mandastis quam vobis debemus milites antiquitus ut vobis per breve per breve nostrum feodatos de tempore nostrum pendens pendens extra Regis Henrici avi extra sigillum sigillum mandaremus vestri habeamus et mandaremus (1) quot milites (2) quot de novo (1) quot milites haberemus de veteri feodamento.... Et habeamus de veteri feodamento de tempore hii omnes ligantiam feodamento de Henrici Regis avi et homagium vobis tempore Henrici vestri, et (2) quot fecerunt (pp. 275-6). Regis avi vestri, milites haberemus de et (2) quot novo feodamento post habeamus de novo tempus Regis Henrici feodamento (p. 276). avi vestri, et (3) quot milites habeamus super dominium nostrum.... Et vobis quidem et filio vestro ligantiam et homagium fecerunt (p. 277).[44] Let me here break off for a moment to consider one of the most important points suggested by this great inquest, namely, the issue of the writs under which it was held. It has been generally assumed that each tenant received his writ direct from the crown; and a casual reading of the _cartae_ might, perhaps, favour such a view. I have, however, been led to the conclusion that a general writ was issued to the sheriff of each county, and that its terms were communicated by him to the several tenants-in-chief, whose _capita baroniæ_ lay within his jurisdiction. Baderun of Monmouth has heard the writ read out in the county court;[45] Earl Patrick also has heard the writ read out.[46] William fitz Siward derives from the sheriff, he tells us, his knowledge of the writ:[47] even the bishop of Chester has received his instructions from the sheriff.[48] But more especially do I rely upon the return of the Archbishop of York because he recites the tenor of the writ in terms which can leave no doubt that it was addressed, through the sheriff, to the whole shire collectively.[49] If the Archbishop of York did not receive a special writ, we may fairly infer that no other tenant can have done so.