KENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY  -- RESEARCH    Studying and sharing Kent's past      Homepage


Victoria County History of Kent Vol. 3  1932 - Introduction to the Kent Domesday Survey - Page 200

the division of the maintenance of the bridge amongst various lordships, pier by pier, the king, the archbishop, the bishop, and the men of certain vills, and, interestingly enough, of the men of two lests also, one of which, Hollingbourne, is not elsewhere called a lest, being responsible each for a share. Later documents show some of these same vills still liable. Thus, for example, an inquest in 1340 99 shows that the vills anciently liable for the support of the fifth pier, the archbishop’s, were still liable for fixed amounts contributed to that support’ by reason of their lands and tenements in the town.’ If the Domesday list of contributory boroughs be examined in connection with these earlier and later documents it will be found that while there is no mention of brigbot, yet many of the contributing rural properties are the same as in the other lists, and also the same lordships are indicated. There is, however, no indication of the liability of a lest or of vills as such in the Saxon document. It seems certain, however, that maintenance of the bridge was one of the duties of the contributory houses in Rochester, whether that maintenance was the cause of the appearance of such houses or the result of it. Other documents of late times show nothing unique in the system used for Rochester bridge.
   For completeness the contributory houses and the rural connections of other Kentish towns, the quasi—county boroughs, may be added.

   It is clear, in conclusion, that Domesday raises as many questions again as it answers, and that a study like this follows only certain lines of interest out of many that are possible. The chief feeling of the student of Kentish customs of somewhat later times is one of disappointment that the Survey has been made to disclose so little peculiar to the county, and of hope that others will be more successful in finding and following obscure clues. Reverence for the great record necessarily brings a realization that it might yield much more that is valuable to more skilful interpretation.
   99  Flower, Medieval Public Works (Selden Soc.), i, 203.

Previous Page          Page 200          Next Page 

For details about the advantages of membership of the Kent Archaeological Society   click here

To Introduction to the Kent Domesday Survey page listings      To Contents Page     To Research      To Homepage

Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382
© Kent Archaeological Society June 2006

This website is constructed by enthusiastic amateurs.  Any errors noticed by other researchers will be to gratefully received so
 that we can amend our pages to give as accurate a record as possible. Please send details to research@kentarchaeology.org.uk