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


Victoria County History of Kent Vol. 3  1932 - Text of the Domesday Monachorum - Page 254

concerning the history of the church at the end of the volume, which are here printed only in abstract, are probably in a somewhat later handwriting. The date of the compilation of the Domesday Monachorum, Dr. Ballard places’ in the year after the Domesday Commissioners visited Kent’ basing his conclusion on a passage occurring in the description of Sandwich (but see note 38 on p. 261). The Survey proper is an ‘independent compilation from the original Domesday returns,’—to quote Dr. Ballard again. The differences in content between the Exchequer and the Monks’ Domesday will appear quickly from an examination of the translations of the two documents. It will be seen that they consist largely in variations in spelling and phraseology, and, with more significance, in differences in the figures for assessments and values, and in additional information supplied by the Domesday Monachorum with regard especially to pre-Conquest and Domesday sitting tenants and conditions in the boroughs.
   The document ‘opens with a list of the customs paid at Easter by priests and churches to the archbishop, which is followed by a list of apparently minster churches with the churches subordinate to them. Upon this list follows an Institute, showing the food-rents from the various manors in sheep, honey, and bread, and in money before Lanfranc’s day, a document evidently added after Lanfranc’s death in 1090. The Romescot of East Kent follows next, and a list of manors ; those of the archbishopric, those of the church of Rochester, and those of the monks. At folio five begins the Survey itself, followed by that of the Rochester manors.3   The manors of the archbishopric are entered first, those of the monks follow,—those belonging to the knights of the archbishop, which Domesday keeps separate, being included for the most part under those of the archbishop,—and, thereafter, the manors of Rochester. A list of the farm, gafol, and customs paid by the manors follows; then lists Of the king’s holdings in Kent very briefly stated, and also brief statements of the lands held of St. Augustine, St. Martin of Battle, St. Wandregisil of Ghent, and of the tenants of the bishop of Bayeux. These lists agree in the main with the Domesday lists, but should undoubtedly be carefully examined and compared. A list of the knights of the archbishop with the number of their fees is the next document, and thereafter, and in conclusion, some interesting and curious documents referring to the relations of archbishop and prior, of Canterbury and Rochester, and of the grant of the church of Eynsford. The most important document is undoubtedly the Survey itself, but all will repay careful study. As evidence of conditions in Kent at the time of Domesday and soon thereafter, the Domesday Monachorum is clearly of first rate importance.
   These entries should be compared with those almost similar in Domesday Book. The Domesday Monachorum Version contains several ancient Saxon letters. See Somner, Antiquities of Canterbury, by Batteley, pt. i., app. No. 40.

Previous Page         Page 254         Next Page

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

To Text of the Domesday Monachorum 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