It seems to be quite clear that in saying that the twelve-hyndeman’s oath was an oath of 120 hides, and the ceorl’s presumably of 20 hides, we have not yet necessarily struck the real train of thought underlying the connection between oaths and hides. For it is absurd to think that the twelve-hyndeman could pretend to the occupation or possession of 120 hides or family holdings, or the ceorl to 20 hides. They could do no such thing. The ceorl, in later times at all events, who had the twy-hynde wergeld was ‘the ceorl who sits on gafol land’--a gafol-gelda on some one else’s land. And to the great-grandson of the ceorl who had risen to five hides, the continued possession of five hides was sufficient to qualify him for a _sithcund_ status worth a wergeld of 1200 shillings or 2000 _thrymsas_. The question, therefore, needs closer examination if we would rightly understand the meaning underlying the distinction between the twy-hynde and twelve-hynde social status. Let us then in the first place try to understand the meaning of the word _hynde_ which gives to the distinction between twy-hynde and twelve-hynde its important significance. [Sidenote: The meaning of ‘hynden.’] The word separated from its prefix apparently occurs in only two places in the Laws. It occurs for the first time in an important clause of the Laws of Ine. And once more it occurs in the Laws of Athelstan, in the ‘Judicia Civitatis Londoniæ.’ A word which occurs again in Anglo-Saxon laws after an interval of more than two centuries may and perhaps must have had a well-known original significance as a legal term though found nowhere else in Anglo-Saxon literature. [Sidenote: The set of oath-helpers.] In Ine s. 54 the word is used twice. The first part of the clause, which has already been quoted, is as follows:-- (54) He who is charged with werfæhthe [man-slaying] and is willing to deny the slaying on oath, then shall there be _in the hynden_ one King’s oath of xxx hides as well for a gesithcund man as for a ceorlisc man whichsoever it may be. In this first mention of the _hynden_ the word must mean the set of oath-helpers supporting their kinsman with their oaths, and the clause lays down the rule that in every such set of oath-helpers in the case of ‘slaying’ there must be a ‘King’s oath of thirty hides.’ But what is this King’s oath of thirty hides which is to be in the _hynden_ of oath-helpers of both the twy-hynde and twelve-hynde man in case of man-slaying? [Sidenote: The 30 hides oath of the King’s thane.] In the Compact between Alfred and Guthrum is a clause, already quoted, immediately following the statement of the wergelds of Dane and English, and the declaration that they were to be ‘equally dear,’ which seems to be almost a repetition of the clause in Ine’s Laws, but without using the word _hynden_.