[538] Testa, 268 _b_; Liber Rubeus, 499. [539] Compare the wording of the writ of 1212: “Inquiri facias ... de tenementis ... que sint data vel alienata,” etc. (see p. 266, above). [540] ‘Liber Rubeus,’ p. 466. I have specially examined the Pipe Rolls for evidence on this tenure, and find that Sewal received the rents up to Easter, 1210, and Philip de Ulcote after that date. [541] Would it, in any country but England, be possible for an editor who prints, without correcting, these gems to lecture before a university on the treatment of mediæval MSS.? [542] The ‘Red Book’ lists, though so inferior, are more in number than those in the ‘Testa.’ [543] For instance, that which relates to Winchester (p. 236 _a_) would elude all but close investigation. It records _inter alia_ the interesting gift, by Henry II., of land there “Wassall’ cantatori.” This would seem to be the earliest occurrence of the word “Wassail” (in a slightly corrupt form). [544] Mr. Hall himself admits that their heading in the ‘Red Book’ “can be verified neither from the external evidence of Records, nor ... on the authority of the original Returns, no single specimen of which is known to have been preserved” (pp. ccxxii.). [545] It might be added that, as in 1166 and 27 Hen. III., the returns on such Inquests were made at one time, and did not extend (as the ‘Red Book’ date implies) over two or three years. [546] This, as its grave and alarming feature, is the one selected for mention in the Waverley Annals. [547] “Omnimodis tenementis infra burgum sive extra,” ran the writ. The elaborate returns for Stamford and Wallingford in the ‘Testa’ illustrate this side of the Inquest. Reference should also be made to the interesting return for Yarmouth (‘Testa,’ p. 296): “Nullum tenementum est in Jernemuth’ quod antiquitus no’ (_sic_) tenebatur de domino Rege aut de progenitoribus domini Regis, regibus Angl[iæ] quod sit datum vel alienatum aliquo modo quo minus de domino Rege teneatur in capite et illi quibus tenementa sunt data faciunt plenar[ie] servicium domino Regi de tenementis illis,” etc. The close concordance of this return with the king’s writ ordering it (see p. 226) is remarkable. [548] See p. 265 above. [549] Testa de Nevill, p. 361. [550] Salop only. [551] Honour of Wallingford. [552] Begins with twelfth entry on page 128_a_, though there is no break there in printed text; the ‘Liber Rubeus’ (p. 513) has entries for Berkshire. [553] Borough of Wallingford. [554] Including town of Oxford. [555] The Chichester Inquest at least. [556] 15 entries. [557] Hyde Abbey. [558] Beginning at “Abbas de Sancto Walerico.” [559] Ending with entry for ‘Uggel.’ A special Inquest for Writtle is comprised. [560] Beginning with “Candeleshou Wap’n’.” [561] Including a special Inquest for Stamford. [562] Beginning at “Carissimis.” [563] Ending with an Inquest for Newcastle-on-Tyne.