^{page 127 note 1} Stubbs, W., Constitutional History of England, 2nd ed., i. 344Google Scholar; Haskins, C. H., Norman Institutions, pp. 49–51Google Scholar; Valin, L., Le due de Normandie et sa cour, pp. 141–51Google Scholar. For the duke's stewards see also Harcourt, L. W. V., His Grace the Steward, pp. 7–8Google Scholar; for his chamberlains, see The Complete Peerage, x, Appendix F, and for his marshals, see ibid., xi, Appendix E.

^{page 127 note 2} Cf. Deville, A., Château et Sires de Tancarville, p. 113Google Scholar.

^{page 127 note 3} Complete Peerage, x. Appendix F, pp. 53–5.

^{page 127 note 4} Stapleton, T., Mag. Rot. Scacc. Norm., i, p. xviiGoogle Scholar; Stubbs, , op. cit., i. 344Google Scholar; Round, J. H., King's Serjeants and Officers of State, p. 63Google Scholar(hereinafter referred to as K.S.). For England see L. M. Larson, The King's Household in England before the Norman Conquest.

^{page 127 note 5} Harcourt, , op. cit., pp. 6–7Google Scholar; Haskins, , op. cit., p. 49Google Scholar. In Anjou a steward appears before 1060, chamberlains between 1060 and 1068, a constable in 1085 (Halphen, L., Le comté d' Anjou au XI^e siècle, pp. 102–4, 192 n. 2. 193 n. 2.Google Scholar).

^{page 128 note 1} They first appear together in 1060, but the order in which they attest varies from time to time (Luchaire, A., Histoire des institutions monarchiques, i. 167, 170 n. i)Google Scholar.

^{page 128 note 2} Harcourt, , op. cit., pp. 7–8Google Scholar.

^{page 128 note 3} Ibid., p. 21, n. 1. The prelates and earls and great barons also had their stewards, butlers, chamberlains, constables and other household officers, who are found on occasion attesting their lords' charters (Stenton, F. M., First Century of English Feudalism, pp. 69–82Google Scholar; hereinafter referred to as English Feudalism).

^{page 128 note 4} Dialogus de Scaccario (ed. Hughes, A., Crump, C. G. and Johnson, C.), p. 24Google Scholar(hereinafter referred to as Dialogus).

^{page 128 note 5} Luchaire, , op. cit., i. 179Google Scholar, and Manuel des institutions franchises, p. 521; Harcourt, , op. cit., pp. 22–3Google Scholar; Viollet, P., Histoire des institutions politiques et administratives de la France, ii. 109–10Google Scholar.

^{page 128 note 6} Luchaire, , Manuel, p. 526Google Scholar.

^{page 129 note 1} Complete Peerage, vii. 534; ix. 588, note (f).

^{page 129 note 2} After Whitsun (Henry of Huntingdon, Rolls Ser., p. 253).

^{page 129 note 3} Poole, R. L., Exchequer in the Twelfth Century, p. 185Google Scholar.

^{page 129 note 4} Stubbs, , op. cit., i. 353Google Scholar.

^{page 129 note 5} Farrer, W., Outline Itinerary of Henry I, p. 3Google Scholar.

^{page 129 note 6} Ordericus Vitalis (ed. A. le Prévost), v. 123; John of Worcester (ed. Weaver, in Anecdota Oxoniensia), p. 61Google Scholar.

^{page 129 note 7} Annales Monastici, Rolls Ser., ii. 228.

^{page 129 note 8} Cf. White, G. H. in N. and Q., 12th Ser., x. 126Google Scholar.

^{page 129 note 9} Harcourt, , op. cit., pp. 13–18Google Scholar.

^{page 129 note 10} Haskins, , op. cit., p. 58Google Scholar, n. 289.

^{page 130 note 1} Copies of the Constitutio are preserved in the Little Black Book of the Exchequer, printed by T. Hearne (2nd edition, 1774), and the Red Book of the Exchequer, edited by H. Hall for the Rolls Series (1896); hereinafter referred to respectively as B.B. and R.B. For a discussion of the date when, and the place where, the Constitutio was drawn up, see White, , in N. and Q, cli. 363–4Google Scholar.

^{page 130 note 2} Coulanges, N. D. Fustel de, Les transformations de la royauté pendant l'époque carolingienne, p. 322Google Scholar.

^{page 130 note 3} ‘Frusta candelarum’ (B.B.); the R.B. always reads ‘frustra’.

^{page 130 note 4} Walter Map, De Nugis Curialium (ed. James, M. R. in Anecdota Oxoniensia), p. 219Google Scholar; cf. Will, . Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum (Rolls Ser.), p. 487Google Scholar; Eadmer (Rolls Ser.), pp. 192–3.

^{page 130 note 5} Haskins, , op. cit., p. 114, n. 142Google Scholar.

^{page 130 note 6} That Robert Pecche ‘domino regi in cura panum ac potus strenue ministrare solebat’, before he was appointed bishop of Chester in that year (Eadmer, pp. 290–1; John of Worcester, pp. 15–16); but Robert may just as well have executed such duties before the reorganization.

^{page 130 note 7} Under the Confessor the chamberlains (hraeglthegns) had charge of the royal treasure (Stenton, F. M., Anglo-Saxon England, p. 635)Google Scholar, at least part of which seems still to have been kept in the king's bedchamber (Lives of Edward the Confessor, Rolls Ser., p. 207).

^{page 131 note 1} Cf. White, , ‘Financial Administration under Henry I’, in Trans. R. Hist. Soc., 4th Ser., viii. 56–78Google Scholar.

^{page 131 note 2} Cf. Round, , K.S., p. 62Google Scholar.

^{page 131 note 3} ‘Vinum clarum’ and ‘simenellus dominicus’. ‘It is possible that by “clear” wine, Rhenish or white wine is meant, this being a more expensive vintage; but more probably red wine (“claret”), old in cask, is intended’ (Hall, H., Court Life under the Plantageneis, p. 243)Google Scholar.

^{page 131 note 4} ‘Vinum expensabile’ and ‘simenellus sal[atus]’.

^{page 131 note 5} ‘Panes de pistrino.’ See p. 139, n. 7, for the number baked.

^{page 131 note 6} See below, p. 134, n. 5.

^{page 131 note 7} See below, p. 154.

^{page 131 note 8} The exception is William FitzEudes, a constable; see p. 132, n. 8.

^{page 132 note 1} The R.B., p. 807, omits ‘grossum’.

^{page 132 note 2} Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I, p. 140.

^{page 132 note 3} Dialogus, pp. 191–2.

^{page 132 note 4} ‘Dapiferi sicut Cancellarius si extra domum commederint’ (R.B., p. 808); the B.B., p. 342, reads ‘Dapifer’, but as this is followed by the verb in the plural, the omission of the final letter is evidently a slip in copying.

^{page 132 note 5} ‘Magister Pincerna, sicut Dapifer; et j habent liberationem et eodem modo’ (R.B., p. 810). The B.B., p. 349, reads ‘sicut Dispensator Dapifer’, which makes nonsense.

^{page 132 note 6} ‘Magister Camerarius par est Dapifero in liberatione’ (R.B., p. 811). The B.B., p. 352, reads ‘libacione’.

^{page 132 note 7} ‘Thesaurarius, ut Magister Camerarius’ (R.B., p. 811). The B.B., p. 352, reads ‘Camarius’.

^{page 132 note 8} ‘Constabularii liberationes habent sicut Dapiferi et eodem modo’ (R.B., p. 812; B.B., p. 353). William FitzEudes, an extra or assistant constable, probably ranked with them.

^{page 132 note 9} Tout, T. F., Chapters in the Administrative History of Mediaeval England, i. 85, n. 5Google Scholar.

^{page 133 note 1} Stubbs, , op. cit., i. 345, n. 2Google Scholar; Poole, , op. cit., p. 98Google Scholar; Harcourt, , op. cit., p. 24Google Scholar.

^{page 133 note 2} ‘Magister Dispensator panis assiduus …’ (R.B., p. 808; B.B., p. 342). In both versions this paragraph precedes that on the stewards, which consequently separates the master dispenser from the dispensers who served in turn. This is obviously wrong; the stewards should precede the master dispensers.

^{page 133 note 3} ‘Magister Dispensator assiduus Lardarii sicut Magister Dispensator panis et vini’ (R.B., p. 809). The B.B., p. 346, reads ‘pon’ for ‘panis’. The words ‘et vini’ suggest that at an earlier date there was only one master dispenser for both the pannetry and the butlery.

^{page 133 note 4} ‘Magister Dispensator Buteleriae sicut Magister Dispensator panis’ (B.B., p. 349), adding ‘et vini’, which is absurd, as the master dispenser of the butlery was ipso facto the master dispenser of the wine; but probably the clerk copied it from the entry relating to the master dispenser of the larder. The R.B., p. 810, makes a much worse mistake, the scribe having jumped from ‘Dispensator’ to ‘Dispensatores’ in the following sentence (concerned with the subordinate dispensers who served in turn), then altered ‘Magister’ to ‘Magistri’ to agree with ‘Dispensatores’, and so obtained the sentence: ‘Magistri Dispensatores Butilariae qui per vicem serviunt sicut Dispensatores Expensae qui per vicem serviunt’. This misled Round into writing that there were ‘Master Dispensers of the Butlery’ (K.S., p. 61).

^{page 133 note 5} ‘Magister Scriptorii … Clericus expensae panis et vini … Camerarius qui vice sua servit’ (R.B., pp. 807, 808, 811; B.B., pp. 341, 342, 352).

^{page 133 note 6} ‘Henricus de la Pomerai … Rogerus de Oyli similiter. Magister Marescallus, similiter, scilicet Johannes’ (R.B., p. 812); the B.B., pp. 353–4, reads ‘… Oilli… Maresc…’ This obviously means: ‘the Master Marshal likewise, namely, John’ (Hall, , Court Life, p. 248)Google Scholar, i.e. he received the same pay and allowances as Henry de la Pomerey and Roger de Oilly (cf. Round, , K.S., p. 63Google Scholar.; Dialogus, p. 24; Stenton, , English Feudalism, p. 70)Google Scholar. Poole, (op. cit., p. 98)Google Scholar renders the passage: ‘The Master Marshal, namely John, has like payment [to the stewards and constables]’; but in the Constitutio ‘similiter’ always refers to the immediately preceding entry.

^{page 134 note 1} ‘Willelmus Maudut (sic) xiiij d. in die’ (R.B., p. 811), followed by Hall, , Court Life, p. 247Google Scholar, Round, , Commune of London, p. 82, n. 1Google Scholar, and the editors of the Dialogus, p. 18. The B.B., p. 352, reads: ‘Vills Malduit xiii d. in die,’ followed by Poole, , op. cit., p. 97Google Scholar, and Tout, , op. cit., i. 79, 89Google Scholar; but 13 pence as a rate of pay does not occur elsewhere in the Constitutio.

^{page 134 note 2} ‘xii frusta’ (B.B., p. 352) . The R.B.; p. 811, reads ‘xiij frustra’.

^{page 134 note 3} ‘ij summarios cum liberationibus suis’ (R.B., p. 811); ‘iii sumarios 6 liberacionibus suis’ (B.B., p. 352).

^{page 134 note 4} ‘Sed plus habent candelae’ (R.B., p. 810); the B.B., p. 349, reads ‘Scilicet plus habent Candelam’.

_{page 134 note 5} The keeper of the butts, the chamberlain of the candle, and the four marshals who served the king's household all had wine.

^{page 135 note 1} Tout, , op. cit., i. 85, n. 5Google Scholar.

^{page 135 note 2} Under Hélie, count of Maine (1092–1110), the three chief sergeants (servientes) of his household were the master pantler, master butler and master cook (Cart, de St. Pierre-de-la-Cour, ed. S. M. d'Elbenne et L. J. Denis, no. ix).

^{page 135 note 3} Stubbs, , op. cit., i. 353Google Scholar.

^{page 135 note 4} Poole, , op. cit., p. 185Google Scholar.

^{page 135 note 5} See the discussion in ibid., p. 25, n. 2.

^{page 136 note 1} Haskins, , op. cit., pp. 52–3Google Scholar; Davis, H. W. C., Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, p. xviGoogle Scholar; Stenton, , Anglo-Saxon England, p. 634Google Scholar.

^{page 136 note 2} Hall, , Studies in English Official Historical Documents, p. 215Google Scholar.

^{page 136 note 3} Stenton, , Anglo-Saxon England, p. 349Google Scholar.

^{page 136 note 4} Stubbs, , op. cit, i. 353Google Scholar.

^{page 136 note 5} R.B., p. 807; B.B., p. 341. His predecessor, Richard of the Chapel, ‘regii sigilli sub cancellario custos erat’ (Eadmer, pp. 290–1; John of Worcester, p. 15). Clearly it was this office which later developed into that of vice-chancellor (cf. Stubbs, , op. cit., i. 353, n. 2Google Scholar).

^{page 136 note 6} After the death of Henry I, Robert was one of those who escorted his body to England (Ord. Vit., v. 52). He then lived in obscurity at Reading Abbey, where his master was buried, until Henry's daughter the empress made him bishop of London (Cont. Flor. Wig., ii. 131), apparently in March 1141 (Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 67–8)Google Scholar.

^{page 136 note 7} ‘Capellanus, Custos Capellae et Reliquiarum’ (R.B., p. 807). Probably ‘custos’ is in apposition to ‘capellanus’: the chaplain (who is) the keeper. Thus Hall reads: ‘The Chaplain, Keeper of the Chapel and Relics’ (Court Life, p. 245; cf. R.B., p. ccxc). On the other hand, one might read: ‘The chaplain (and) the keeper.’ The B.B., p. 342, reads ‘Capellani’, which could only mean ‘the chaplains (and) the keeper’. This entry is a heading in both versions, and is followed immediately by the entry of the corrody (P. 137, n. 2 below).

^{page 137 note 1} Possibly there is an omission here, due to an oversight in the First Copy, from which both the existing versions were made.

^{page 137 note 2} ‘Corridium duorum hominum et quatuor servientes Capellae unusquisque duplicem cibum.’

^{page 137 note 3} Next come details of the candles and the wine for the service of the chapel, which would be irrelevant here.

^{page 137 note 4} See above, p. 133, n. 5.

^{page 137 note 5} In 1121 Henry I elevated two of the clerks of the chapel to bishoprics, one being Richard of the Chapel (above, p. 136, n. 5), the other being Robert. Pecche (above, p. 130, n. 6). Robert is wrongly called a larderer by Haskins, , op. cit., p. 115, n. 142Google Scholar.

^{page 137 note 6} Cf. above, p. 133, n. 3 and 5.

^{page 137 note 7} They never had seats at the exchequer, as is duly noted by the editors of the Dialogus, p. 15.

^{page 137 note 8} Harcourt, , op. cit., pp. 7–18Google Scholar. His arguments were unknown to Chesnel, L'Avranchin et le Côtentin sous les ducs de Normandie, pp. 148–50. The justiciar was never a member of the household, as is proved by the fact that he is ignored in the Constitutio (cf. Poole, , op. cit., p. 99)Google Scholar. The offices of justiciar and steward might be held by the same person. So Eustace, count of Boulogne, appointed Arnold FitzElbon ‘senescalum et justitiarium’ according to Lambert of Ardres (Chron. Lamberti, ed. de Menilglaise, le Marquis, p. 245)Google Scholar.

^{page 137 note 9} Thus Hellin de Wavrin (d. 1194 at the siege of Acre) is referred to by Lambert of Ardres as ‘Flandriae dapiferi, sive senescali’ (ibid., p. 113).

^{page 138 note 1} In France in the Merovingian period two seneschals appear as subordinates of the mayor of the palace (major domus); but under the Carolingians, when the mayor has disappeared, there was a single seneschal. ‘La valeur étymologique du mot seniscalcus est celle-ci: le plus ancien esclave de la maison’ (Viollet, , op. dt., i. 233–4)Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 2} Stubbs, , op. cit., i. 343Google Scholar; cf. Denholm-Young, N., Seignorial Administration in England, pp. 66–7Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 3} Harcourt, , op. dt., pp. 21, 76, 84Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 4} Stenton, , English Feudalism, pp. 73–8Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 5} Clay, C. T., Early Yorkshire Charters, iv. 103–4Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 6} Chron. Jocelini de Brakelonda (Camden Soc), pp. 118–19; cf. Round, , in Ancestor, ii. 92–3Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 7} Round, , K.S., p. 67Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 8} B.B., pp. 342–9; R.B., pp. 808–10.

^{page 138 note 9} Round, , K.S., p. 73, n. 2Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 10} R.B., p. 759. Cf. a reference to the dapifer as ‘princeps coquorum’ in the Carolingian period (de Coulanges, Fustel, op. dt., p. 327, n. 1)Google Scholar.

^{page 138 note 11} Stenton, , English Feudalism, pp. 72–3Google Scholar. The steward of the kings of Jerusalem supervised the arrangements for the coronation banquet and other feasts (Denholm-Young, , op. dt., p. 71)Google Scholar.

^{page 139 note 1} ‘Napparius’ (R.B.); ‘Maparius’ (B.B.). He was allowed a penny a day for a sumpter horse and a penny a month for shoeing him. For napery services, see Round, , K.S., pp. 222–7Google Scholar.

^{page 139 note 2} ‘Hostiarius expensae … Nebularius … Bordarius.’ The last had a sumpter horse with his allowance; the R.B. reads ‘ligatione’ for ‘liberatione.’ For the waferer serjeanty, see Round, , K.S., pp. 227–31Google Scholar.

^{page 139 note 3} ‘Computator panis’ (R.B.); the B.B. omits the initial ‘C’.

^{page 139 note 4} ‘Portator Scutellae Elem’ (B.B.). The R.B. omits ‘Elem’. Probably a tray or scuttle in which broken victuals were put (Hall, , in R.B., p. ccxcix)Google Scholar.

^{page 139 note 5} ‘De quatuor pistoribus simul una vice servientibus’ (R.B.): the B.B. reads ‘sua vice’. If the latter reading is correct, there must have been eight (or more) bakers, who served in sets of four in rotation.

^{page 139 note 6} ‘Et duo pereuntes’ (R.B.). The B.B. has ‘peuntes’.

^{page 139 note 7} ‘xl siminellos dominicos et cl sal[atos] et cclx panes de pistrino’ (R.B.). The B.B. reads ‘xl Simenellos Dominicos et c et xl sal[atos] et cc et lxx panes de pistrino’ .

^{page 139 note 8} The R.B. omits ‘panis 1 homini’.

^{page 139 note 9} Cf. Round, , K.S., p. 201Google Scholar.

^{page 139 note 10} ‘De mala Palude’ is rendered ‘de Malpalet’ by Farrer (Itin. Hen. I, no. 628), but Delisle and Round are certainly right in giving the name as ‘de Malpalu’. It appears as ‘Malpalus’ in the aveu of the seigneur of Gouy in 1565 (Belbeuf, Le Marquis de, Histoire des Grands Panetiers de Normandie, p. 101)Google Scholar. In 1924 the writer noticed in the Musée des Antiquités at Rouen an ‘Inscription de la maison démolie dite le “Four Banal”’ in the Rue Malpalu.

^{page 139 note 11} L. Delisle, Cart. Normand, no. 14; on the date cf. Delisle, , Mémoire sur la chronologie des chartes de Henri II, p. 35Google Scholar, and Recueil des Actes de Henri II, Introduction, pp. 34, 553; Round, , Cal. Docs. France, p. xxviiGoogle Scholar, and Arch. Jrl., lx. 269 and lxiv. 73–8; K.S., p. 200; Farrer, op. cit., no. 628; Complete Peerage, x, Appendix G, p. 93, note (d).

^{page 139 note 12} Cf. Haskins, , op. cit., p. 118Google Scholar. In a French royal charter of 1256 to Laurent Chambellan, the office is called: ‘panetarium nostrum de Rothomago’ (Belbeuf, De, op. cit., p. 20)Google Scholar.

^{page 139 note 13} Ibid., pp. 137–9.

^{page 140 note 1} ‘Lardarii’ (R.B.); ‘Lardenarii’ (B.B.). This office might be held by a clerk, for in 1102 Roger, the king's larderer, was appointed bishop of Hereford (Eadmer, p. 141). For larderer serjeanties and claims to execute the office of larderer at coronations, see Round, , K.S., pp. 233–43Google Scholar.

^{page 140 note 2} ‘Cocus Dominicae Coqninae … Vasarius … Sumularius’ (R.B.); the B.B., for the last, reads ‘Sumelarius’. The two last had a sumpter horse with his allowance.

^{page 140 note 3} ‘Hostiarius coquinae ejusdem … Serviens Coquinae … Cocus privatorum Regis et Dispensatores’ (R.B.). The B.B, in the last clause, reads ‘Socus … dispensator’.

^{page 140 note 4} ‘Oinus Polchehart’ (B.B.), but Hearne misread ‘Oinus’ as ‘Oms’, which he took to be ‘omnis’ or ‘omnes’; the R.B. reads ‘Polcheardus’; cf. Round, , Studies in the Red Booh of the Exchequer, p. 29Google Scholar (hereinafter referred to as Studies R.B.). Hall, , R.B., p. ccxcixGoogle Scholar, points out that in 1130 he was holding a hide in Berks (Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I, p. 126); and Round, , K.S., p. 59Google Scholar, adds that in 1086 Polcehard held a hide in that county. Hearne took his name to mean ‘the poulterer’, and was followed by Hall, , Court Life, p. 246Google Scholar; R.B., ut supra; which is certainly a mistake (Round, , K.S., p. 58)Google Scholar.

^{page 140 note 5} ‘Duo Coqui, uterque’ (R.B.); the B.B. reads ‘utque’.

^{page 140 note 6} ‘Servientes ejusdem Coquinae … Host[arius] hastelariae’ (B.B.); the R.B. reads ‘Hast[elarius] Hastalariae’.

^{page 140 note 7} ‘Hastelarius similiter’ (R.B.); the B.B. reads ‘Hastalarius’ and omits ‘similiter’.

^{page 140 note 8} ‘Scutellarius similiter’ (B.B.); the R.B. transposes the two words, contrary to the custom of the Constitutio. He had a sumpter horse.

^{page 140 note 9} Each received a fair allowance for his horse: ‘justam liberationem’ (R.B.); ‘justam libacionem’ (B.B.).

^{page 140 note 10} ‘Serviens qui recipit venationem.’ Here ‘recipit’ must have the sense of ‘accipit’ (receives).

^{page 140 note 11} See, e.g., Cal. Charter Rolls, ii. 373.

^{page 141 note 1} The B.B. inserts a heading ‘De Buteleria’. The relevant entries are printed in the R.B., pp. 810–11, and the B.B., pp. 349–51.

^{page 141 note 2} ‘Pincerna’ was used in France in the Merovingian period; ‘buticularius’ appears in the Carolingian (Viollet, , op. cit., i. 234–5)Google Scholar.

^{page 141 note 3} A charter, ante 1056, of Mauger, archbishop of Rouen, bears the signum ‘Gerardi, pincernarum magister comitis Willelmi’ (Cartulaire de St. Père de Chartres, ed. Guérard, B., p. 176)Google Scholar. Gerard had previously, in the year of William's marriage, attested a charter for Préaux as Gerard the count's butler (Prévost, A. Le, Notes sur l'Eure, iii. 324)Google Scholar; and the ‘signum Girardi pincerne’ is appended to a charter (of doubtful authenticity) of William, duke of the Normans, for Jumièges (Chartes de l'abbaye de Jumièges, Soc. de l'Hist. de Normandie, no. xxxi, wroftgly identified by the editor with Round, Cat. Docs. France, no. 152 and dated ‘avant 1079’). In France a ‘princeps pincernarum’ occurs so early as the Merovingian period (Viollet, , op. cit, i. 235)Google Scholar.

^{page 141 note 4} Round, Cat. Docs. France, nos. 73, 81, 1167. Although not styled ‘magister pincerna’, there can be no doubt that he was the master butler; cf. Round, , K.S., pp. 140–1Google Scholar.

^{page 141 note 5} Davis, op. cit., no. 150.

^{page 141 note 6} ‘He was certainly the Hugh d'lvry who held Ambrosden (Oxon) in 1086, and probably the Hugh “Pincerna” who then held some lands in Beds’ (Round, , K.S., p. 141)Google Scholar.

^{page 141 note 7} That Hugh and Roger were brothers is assumed by Davis, , op. cit., p. xxviiGoogle Scholar, and considered probable by Round, , K.S., p. 140, n. 3Google Scholar. However, D. C. Douglas suggests that this Hugh may have been the uncle (avunculus) named Hugh to whom Roger seems to have become heir within the years 1081–96 (Domesday Monachorum of Christchwch Canterbury, p. 56).

^{page 141 note 8} Davis, op. cit., no. 23.

^{page 141 note 9} Davis says that ‘Hugh was Butler in the Norman household’ (ibid., p. xxvii); Douglas calls Roger ‘butler of Normandy’ (op. cit., p. 56); but it is a fallacy to suppose the king had separate households for England and Normandy.

^{page 141 note 10} Davis, op. cit., no. 308.

^{page 142 note 1} Round, , K.S., p. 141Google Scholar.

^{page 142 note 2} Stenton, , English Feudalism, pp. 69–70, 266–7Google Scholar.

^{page 142 note 3} Luchaire, , Manuel, p. 525Google Scholar. In England the master butler had no seat at the exchequer, as is noted by the editors of the Dialogus, p. 15.

^{page 142 note 4} Prévost, Le, Notes sur l'Eure, i. 164Google Scholar; ii. 180. In the sixteenth century the Norman vineyards began to be abandoned owing to the ravages of wild boar and deer (Sauvage, R. N., L'Abbaye de St. Martin de Troarn, p. 276, n. 6Google Scholar); and they were killed by a heavy tax under Louis XIII (De Belbeuf, , op. cit., p. 126Google Scholar).

^{page 142 note 5} It is true that the record of the coronation of Queen Eleanor in 1236 speaks of the earl butler (comes pincerna), but this was only because the holder of the office was an earl.

^{page 142 note 6} Round, Cal. Docs. France, no. 112.

^{page 142 note 7} Round, , Family Origins, pp. 237–51Google Scholar.

^{page 142 note 8} Map, , op. cit., pp. 245–6Google Scholar; apparently in 1158 (Round, , K.S., p. 143)Google Scholar. The master chamberlain of Normandy displaced the acting chamberlain in the same way at Caen in 1182 (Map, , op. cit., pp. 244–5Google Scholar).

^{page 143 note 1} ‘Buttarius’ (R.B.); ‘Butarius’ (B.B.). ‘Buttarius’ is used by Lambert, of Ardres in another sense: a navvy or earth-worker (Chron. Lamberti, p. 379)Google Scholar; ‘bucharii’ (ibid., p. 383) is clearly a variant with the same meaning (cf. pp. 460, 474), not a ‘bûcheron’, as Du Cange supposed.

^{page 143 note 2} ‘Et iii d.’ (B.B.); the R.B. omits ‘et’ and reads ‘ij d.’

^{page 143 note 3} ‘Operarii Buttariae’ (R.B.); ‘Oparii Butar.’ (B.B.).

^{page 143 note 4} ‘Sereius praeter hoc …’ Hearne was probably right in taking ‘Sereius’ to be an abbreviation for ‘Sereiantius’ or ‘Seriantus’, i.e. ‘serviens’. Hall first followed Hearne, (Court Life, p. 247)Google Scholar, but later (R.B., p. ccxcix) suggested that he was the ‘Saretus serviens’ living in 1130 (Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I, p. 47).

^{page 143 note 5} The office of usher of the butlery was vested as hereditary in the family of Kivilli before the death of Henry I (Round, , K.S., pp. 183–5)Google Scholar.

^{page 143 note 6} ‘Et hominibus suis unicuique iij d.’ (R.B.); the B.B. reads ‘unusquisque tres domar’.

^{page 143 note 7} Hall, , Court Life, pp. 244, 247Google Scholar.

^{page 143 note 8} R.B., p. ccxcix.

^{page 143 note 9} Round, , K.S., pp. 177–83Google Scholar. In Normandy Martin de Hosa was a minister of Henry II (Delisle-Berger, , Recueil des actes de Henri II, Introduction, p. 404Google Scholar); who granted him, as pincerne meo, 300 acres in the forest of Eawy, afterwards the fief of Heuse, La (Bulletin de la Soc. de l'Hist. de Normandie, xvi. 44–54)Google Scholar.

^{page 143 note 10} ‘De Escantionibus’ (a heading in both versions). Their office seems to have lapsed at an early date; cf. Round, , K.S., p. 61Google Scholar.

^{page 143 note 11} ‘Mazenarii duplicem cibum tantum’ (B.B.). The R.B. omits this entry.

^{page 144 note 1} ‘De Fructuar.’ (B.B.); ‘De Fructuariis’ (R.B.); but after this heading both versions read ‘Fructuarius’ followed by the verb in the singular.

^{page 144 note 2} Hearne in B.B.

^{page 144 note 3} Mélanges, 4^e Série (Soc. de l'Hist. de Nonnandie), pp. 121–81; which surprised the editor (p. 119).

^{page 144 note 4} ‘Caretarius … et equis suis liberationem’ (R.B.); ‘Carettarius … et equo suam libacionem’ (B.B.).

^{page 144 note 5} Neither version inserts a heading for the master chamberlain. The entries relating to his department are printed in the R.B., pp. 811–12, and the B.B., pp. 352–3.

^{page 144 note 6} de Coulanges, Fustel, op. dt., pp. 327–8Google Scholar. The camera was a chamber in the palace; cf. Fachan, J. M., Finances féodales, pp. 97–8Google Scholar.

^{page 144 note 7} Cf. above, p. 130, n. 7.

^{page 144 note 8} The word cubicularius is never used in the Constitutio.

^{page 144 note 9} Complete Peerage, x, Appendix F.

^{page 145 note 1} ‘Camerarius qui vice sua servit’; i.e. the chamberlain who serves in his turn (Hall, , Court Life, p. 247Google Scholar). Poole, op. cit., p. 97Google Scholar, has ‘The chamberlain who serves in the chamberlain's place’, apparently taking ‘vice sua’ as equivalent to ‘vice ejus’. Tout, , op. cit., i. 89Google Scholar, reads ‘Camerariusque’, which destroys the sense of the passage, and describes him as ‘a chamberlain who seemed to be acting as the deputy of the master chamberlain’.

^{page 145 note 2} If the chamberlains off duty had received the pay and allowances, the formula would have been ‘Camerarii qui per vicem serviunt’ or ‘Camerarii per vicem servientes’.

^{page 145 note 3} ‘Camerarii sine liberatione in domo comedent, si voluerint’ (B.B.); the R.B. reads ‘Camerarius sine liberatione in Domo commedet, si voluerit’; which would imply that there was only one chamberlain off duty, and so that there were only two altogether, which cannot be right. This entry has baffled all the authorities, not one of whom connected the chamberlains without an allowance with the chamberlains who served in turn. See Hall, , Court Life, p. 248Google Scholar; Dialogus, p. 18; Poole, , op. cit., p. 97Google Scholar; Tout, , op. cit., i. 89Google Scholar.

^{page 145 note 4} See above, p. 134, n. 1. Probably he received the usual household wine, but this was omitted in the First Copy.

^{page 145 note 5} Tout, , op. cit., i. 88Google Scholar, says that he ‘is doubtless not called a chamberlain because everybody knew that he was one as well as we do’; but this does not explain why William is named.

^{page 145 note 6} Cf. Round, , in V.C.H. Hants, i. 432Google Scholar. Tout, , op. cit., i. 75Google Scholar, thinks that he may be the ‘Willelmus camerarius regis’ of some contemporary charters. He probably died in or before 1106 (Round, , in Ancestor, v. 208Google Scholar).

^{page 145 note 7} Round, , Commune of London, p. 82Google Scholar.

^{page 145 note 8} Of which he had paid only 100 marks (Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I, p. 37).

^{page 145 note 9} Nevertheless, that is the view held by Haskins, , op. cit., p. 113Google Scholar; Poole, , op. cit., p. 99Google Scholar; and Round, , Commune of London, p. 82, n. 1Google Scholar.

^{page 145 note 10} For a full discussion of the question, see White, , in Trans. R. Hist. Soc., 4 Ser., viii. 72–8Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 1} Dialogus, p. 18, citing Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I, p. 134.

^{page 146 note 2} Ibid., p. 37; cf. White, in Trans. R. Hist. Soc., 4 Ser., viii. 73–4Google Scholar. William Mauduit attests as Chamberlain in 1131 (Haskins, , op. cit., p. 113Google Scholar).

^{page 146 note 3} Note that a very minor official is styled a chamberlain.

^{page 146 note 4} ‘Portator lecti Regis.’ Hearne took ‘lecti’ to mean ‘litter’, and was followed by Hall, , Court Life, p. 247Google Scholar, and Poole, , op. cit., p. 97Google Scholar, who both read ‘The porter of the king's litter’; but Round, , K.S., p. 257Google Scholar, and Tout, , op. cit., i. 84Google Scholar, regard him as the man who ‘carried the king's bed’. He had a sumpter horse with allowance.

^{page 146 note 5} The editors of the Dialogus, p. 18, quote the rate as 3½d.

^{page 146 note 6} Hall, , Court Life, p. 244Google Scholar; R.B., p. ccxcix.

^{page 146 note 7} Round, , Studies R.B., p. 33Google Scholar; K.S., pp. 257–60.

^{page 146 note 8} Poole, , op. cit., p. 97Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 9} Dialogus, p. 18, citing Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I, pp. 41, 17.

^{page 147 note 1} Round, , K.S., p. 260Google Scholar. Similarly ‘talea’ was the correct form for a tally (Jenkinson, H., in Archaeologia, lxii. 367Google Scholar).

^{page 147 note 2} Round, , K.S., pp. 258–60Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 3} Ibid., pp. 123, 131, 319. The R.B. reads ‘iijd’ for ‘iiijd.’

^{page 147 note 4} Tout, , op. cit., i. 84, n. 2Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 5} ‘De Lavatrice in dubio est’ (R.B.); the B.B. reads ‘Lavatore’.

^{page 147 note 6} R.B., p. 811.

^{page 147 note 7} B.B., p. 352, which reads ‘Camarius’.

^{page 147 note 8} Perhaps early in the eleventh century (Stenton, , Anglo-Saxon England, p. 635)Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 9} Poole, , op. cit., pp. 97–8Google Scholar.

^{page 148 note 1} Tout, , op., cit., i. 86Google Scholar.

^{page 148 note 2} Ibid., loc. cit.; Dialogus, p. 18.

^{page 148 note 3} Apparently a deduction from the fact that the treasurer is entered after the master chamberlain in the Constitutio.

^{page 148 note 4} Poole, , op. cit., pp. 25–6Google Scholar.

^{page 148 note 5} Tout, , op. cit., i. 91–2Google Scholar.

^{page 149 note 1} White, , in Trans. R. Hist. Soc., 4 Ser., viii. 64–72Google Scholar.

^{page 149 note 2} Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I, p. 131.

^{page 149 note 3} Haskins, , op. cit., p. 115, n. 146Google Scholar, and p. 119.

^{page 149 note 4} Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I, pp. 37, 131, 63.

^{page 149 note 5} Haskins, , op. cit., pp. 106–7Google Scholar.

^{page 149 note 6} Ibid., pp. 106–9.

^{page 149 note 7} White, , ‘Treasurers in Normandy under Henry I’, in N. and Q., cl. 59–60Google Scholar.

^{page 149 note 8} Neither version inserts a heading for the constables. The entries relating to their department are printed in the R.B., pp. 812–13, and the B.B., pp. 353–9.

^{page 149 note 9} de Montfort, Hugh, a royal constable, is styled ‘Hugo stabulariorum comes’ by Orderic, ii. 148Google Scholar. The original form was ‘comes stabuli’ (Viollet, , op. cit., i. 234)Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 1} Dialogus, pp. 71–2; cf. pp. 24–5.

^{page 150 note 2} Cf. White, , in Genealogists' Mag., vi. 508Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 3} R.B., pp. 755–60.

^{page 150 note 4} Le PréVost's note in Ord. Vit., iv. 240, n. 1; Valin, , op. cit., p. 149Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 5} Ord. Vit., iv. 50; ii. 265, 223. This misled T. Madox into supposing that FitzOsbern, William was a constable (History of the Exchequer, i. 40)Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 6} Stubbs, , op. cit., i. 401Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 7} For the descent of these offices see White, , in Genealogist, N.S., xxxviii. 113–27Google Scholar; but the Montfort descent should be corrected in accordance with Douglas, , op. cit., pp. 67–78Google Scholar, and White, , in Genealogists' Mag., vii. 255–6Google Scholar; ix. 465–6.

^{page 150 note 8} For de Vere, Robert see Complete Peerage, x, Appendix J, pp. 111–12Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 9} Stubbs, , op. cit., i. 355Google Scholar; Ellis, A. S., Landholders of Gloucestershire in Domesday Book, p. 79Google Scholar. The editors of the Dialogus, pp. 25–6, are mistaken in thinking that the Bohuns did not derive the office of constable from the Gloucester family by inheritance.

^{page 151 note 1} Hist, et Cart. S. Petri Gloucestriae (Rolls Ser.), i. 188.

^{page 151 note 2} On the constables of the great barons see Stenton, , English Feudalism, pp. 78–80Google Scholar; on the Flemish, castellans see Complete Peerage, x, Appendix J, p. 120Google Scholar.

^{page 151 note 3} Will. Newburgh (Rolls Ser.), i. 108; Gerv. Cant. (Rolls Ser.), i. 165.

^{page 151 note 4} Brunei, C., Recueil des actes des comtes de Pontieu, p. lvGoogle Scholar. Henry the signifer also attests a charter of 1101 (sic; ? 1100) in Recueil de documents pour servir à l'histoire de Montreuil, ed. de Lhomel, no. iii.

^{page 151 note 5} ‘Willelmus filius Odonis’ (R.B.); the B.B. reads ‘Vills’.

^{page 151 note 6} Round, Cal. Docs. France, no. 373; Farrer, op. cit., nos. 648, 653.

^{page 151 note 7} Henry de la Pomerey and William FitzEudes are bracketed together as constables by Haskins, , op. cit., p. 89Google Scholar; but a charter witnessed by William as constable is attested by Henry without that addition (Farrer, op. cit., no. 648).

^{page 152 note 1} Round, , Feudal England, p. 487Google Scholar.

^{page 152 note 2} Gesta Stephani (Rolls Ser.), p. 52.

^{page 152 note 3} Round, Cal. Docs. France, nos. 1455, 1456; Ord. Vit., iv. 453–4; Round, , Feudal England, pp. 486–7Google Scholar. See E. B. Powley, The House of de la Pomerai, for this family.

^{page 152 note 4} Ord. Vit., iv. 453–6; v. 77.

^{page 152 note 5} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 124–5Google Scholar.

^{page 152 note 6} The R.B. interpolates the heading ‘De Mareschaucia’, which may be disregarded; cf. Round, , K.S., p. 63Google Scholar.

^{page 152 note 7} The B.B. reads ‘duas’ for the first ‘dicas’ and the R.B. reads ‘et reges’ for ‘Regis’.

^{page 152 note 8} Dialogus, p. 72.

^{page 152 note 9} R.B., p. ccc.

^{page 152 note 10} Round, , Studies R.B., p. 33Google Scholar.

^{page 152 note 11} Round, , K.S., p. 63Google Scholar.

^{page 152 note 12} Hall, , in R.B., p. cccGoogle Scholar; Round, , Studies R.B., p. 33Google Scholar.

^{page 153 note 1} Round, , K.S., pp. 84–5, 371Google Scholar; Complete Peerage, x. Appendix G, p. 92, note (d), and xi, Appendix E.

^{page 153 note 2} Dialogus, pp. 24, 72.

^{page 153 note 3} As at Queen Eleanor's coronation in 1236 (R.B., p. 759).

^{page 153 note 4} For an instance under Henry I, see Farrer, W., Early Yorkshire Charters, i. no. 128Google Scholar; cf. Complete Peerage, x, Appendix G, p. 99, note (e).

^{page 153 note 5} ‘Si intra iii denarios in die hominibus suis in die’ (B.B.); ‘si extra iijd. in die homini suo’ (R.B.).

^{page 153 note 6} Round, , Studies R.B., p. 61Google Scholar.

^{page 153 note 7} ‘Pro qualibet dieta ad brevia portanda iijd.’ (R.B. pp. 835–7).

^{page 153 note 8} ‘Hostiarii milites ipsi’ (B.B.); the R.B. reads ‘epi’ (for ‘ipsi’), which Hall took to be an abbreviation of ‘episcopi’, supposing the ‘milites’ to be servants of Roger, bishop of Salisbury, at the treasury (Court Life, pp. 224, 248; R.B., pp. ccxcii, ccc); but here the B.B. is certainly right (cf. Round, , Studies R.B., pp. 31–2Google Scholar).

^{page 153 note 9} ‘Gilebertus bonus homo et Ranulfus in domo comedent, et iii ob. hominibus suis. Alii hostiarii non milites in domo comedent sine alia liberacione’ (B.B.). The R.B. copyist has jumped from the first ‘commedent’ to the second, omitting all intervening words; which has misled Hall (R.B., p. ccc; cf. Round, , Studies R.B., pp. 31–2Google Scholar). Either Ranulfus (B.B.) or Radulfus (R.B.) may be right, and there may have been occasional confusion between the names; cf. Stevenson, W. H., cited by Round, , in Ancestor, xii. 53Google Scholar.

^{page 154 note 1} R.B., p. 759. The usher of the chamber is confused by Tout, (op. cit., i. 84)Google Scholar with the bearer of the king's bed.

^{page 154 note 2} R.B., p. ccci, referring to the Dialogus, p. 65.

^{page 154 note 3} Round, , Commune of London, p. 80Google Scholar, also referring to the Dialogus.

^{page 154 note 4} Will. Malmesbury, , Gesta Regum (Rolls Ser.), p. 488Google Scholar.

^{page 154 note 5} Suger, , Vita Ludovici Grossi, ed. Molinier, A., p. 88Google Scholar.

^{page 154 note 6} This is the only entry in the Constitutio in which the usual ‘in die’ is replaced by ‘cotidie’.

^{page 155 note 1} R.B., p. 810; B.B., p. 348. It may be suggested tentatively that instead of ‘mortuus est’ we should read ‘erat’ or ‘Regis erat’:— ‘who was the (king's) cook before the king's death’.