Page:English Historical Review Volume 37.djvu/77

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
1922
SHERIFFS IN PIPE ROLL OF 31 HENRY I
69

original indebtedness was more than £521, and represented, therefore, a term of service of two years rather than one year. Yet Baldwin in the present year paid nothing at all, and the presumption is created that in the preceding years his payments were slight. This presumption is strengthened when it is noted that he still owes for his lease of the county and for a remnant of the danegeld which he carried off with him. The probability is, therefore, not that Baldwin had held the office for two years, but that he was, to say the least, an inefficient and negligent sheriff for one year only. Since Anselm's term began at least by Michaelmas 1127, Baldwin's tenure of office cannot have been later than 1126–7, and may have been earlier.

The evidence relating to Baldwin's predecessor, John Belet, occurs in two entries isolated alike from each other and the successive entries already referred to in connexion with his three successors. One entry occurs in the Berkshire accounts, the other in those of Dorset. The former entry runs as follows: 'John Belet owes £34 … for the past danegeld on account of the land of the abbot. But he is placed in Surrey.' In the Dorset entry John is debited fifty marks of silver pro foris facturis comitatus Berchescirae.[1] Since both items for which John is held responsible are characteristic elements of sheriffs' accounts, it is clear that at one time John had been sheriff of Berkshire. His tenure of office must have been earlier than Baldwin's.

Cambridgeshire

Fulcoin Michaelmas 1128–9.
Richard Basset (joint sheriffs) Michaelmas 1129–30.
Aubrey de Vere

In the List Fulcoin is given as sheriff of Surrey only, but the evidence shows clearly that he held Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire as well. Under the heading 'Surrey, Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire' first occur the names of 'Richard Basset and Aubrey de Vere' as jointly accounting for the combined farms of these counties. Immediately following the entries dealing with the accounts of these joint sheriffs occurs this entry:

Fulcoius qui fuit vicecomes reddit compotum de .cc. et quater .xx. l. … de veteri firma. … Et idem Fulcoius debet quater .xx. l. … de Gersoma pro comitatibus habendis.

Then follow the separate accounts of the three counties, that of Cambridge coming first.[2] It is thus apparent that Fulcoin preceded Richard Basset and Aubrey de Vere in the administration of this combination of the three counties.

  1. Ibid. pp. 123, 13.
  2. Ibid. pp. 43, 44.