[459] “Resaisina vicecomitatus Lincolnie _fiet_ Girardo de Camvilla: et eadem die dies ei conveniens _præfigetur_ standi in curia domini regis ad judicium. Quod si contra eum monstrari poterit quod judicio curiæ domini regis vicecomitatum vel castellum Lincolnie perdere debuerit, perdat; sin minus retineat; nisi interim alio modo pax inde fieri poterit.” [460] “Girardo de Camvilla in gratiam cancellarii recepto, remansit illi in bono et pace custodia castri de Lincolnia.” [461] Compare Rog. Hov., III. lxiv., _ut supra_, and the ‘Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal,’ ll. 11,888–11,882: “Je entent e vei Que par dreit, si’n sui aseiir, Le [rei] devom nos faire de Artur.” [462] Compare my article on “Historical Research” in ‘Nineteenth Century,’ December, 1898. [463] Archæological Journal, L. 247–263. [464] Const. Hist., iii. 568. [465] Mr. Loftie writes, in his ‘London,’ that “in the reign of Henry I. we find the guild in full possession of the governing rights which are elsewhere attributed to a guild merchant” (p. 30). See also p. 103 above. In the same series, Dean Kitchin applies this assumption to Winchester, and observes of the “Knights,” who possessed a ‘hall’ there under Henry I., that “if we may argue from the parallel of the London Knights’ Guild, the body had the charge of the city, and was in fact the original civic corporation of Winchester,” (‘Historic Towns: Winchester,’ p. 74). [466] See ‘Geoffrey de Mandeville.’ [467] “Nunc primum in sibi indulta conjuratione regno regem deesse cognovit Londonia, quam nec rex ipse Ricardus, nec prædecessor et p. ter ejus Henricus pro mille millibus marcarum argenti fieri permisisset” (Richard of Devizes, p. 416). [468] “Facta conjuratione adversus eam quam cum honore susceperunt cum dedecore apprehendere statuerunt” (See ‘Geoffrey de Mandeville,’ p. 115). [469] See note above. [470] Const. Hist., i. 407. [471] “Facta conspiratione quam communionem vocabant sese omnes pariter sacramentis adstringunt et ... ejusdem regionis proceres, quamvis invitos, sacramentis suae conspirationis obligari compellunt.” [472] See my paper in ‘Academy’ of 12th November, 1887. [473] Transactions of the London and Middlesex Arch. Soc., v. 286. [474] Ibid. p. 286–7. [475] Mr. Loftie’s argument (‘London,’ p. 53) that Glanville’s words prove that London, if not other towns as well, had already a ‘Commune’ under Henry II. is disposed of by Dr. Gross (‘The Gild Merchant,’ i. 102). [476] £125 and £5 10_s._ respectively for a quarter in 19 Hen. II. p. 183, and £375 and £16 10_s._ respectively for three-quarters in 20 Hen. II. (p 7). [477] ‘Geoffrey de Mandeville,’ p. 297. [478] 20 Hen. II., p. 9. The official list (Deputy Keeper’s 31st Report) omits to mention that they answered “ut custodes” for this quarter. [479] ‘Geoffrey de Mandeville,’ pp. 297–8. [480] On the _firma burgi_ see Stubbs, ‘Const. Hist.’ (1874), p. 410; and Maitland, ‘Domesday Book and Beyond,’ pp. 204–5.