The History of England, Volume I · David Hume
NOTE [H]
There is a paper or record of the family of Sharneborn, which pretends, that that family, which was Saxon, was restored upon proving their innocence, as well as other Saxon families which were in the same situation. Though this paper was able to impose on such great antiquaries as Spellman (see Gloss. in verbo DRENGES) and Dugdale, (see Baron. vol. i. p. 118,) it is proved by Dr. Brady (see Answ. to Petyt, p. 11, 12) to have been a forgery; and is allowed as such by Tyrrel, though a pertinacious defender of his party notions (see his Hist. vol. ii. introd. p. 51, 73). Ingulf, p. 70, tells us, that very early, Hereward, though absent during the time of the Conquest, was turned out of all his estate, and could not obtain redress. William even plundered the monasteries. Flor. Wigorn. p. 636. Chron. Abb. St. Petri de Burgo, p. 48. M. Paris, p. 5. Sim. Dun. p. 200. Diceto, p. 482. Brompton, p. 967. Knyghton, p. 2344. Alur. Beverl. p. 130. We are told by Ingulf, that Ivo de Taillebois plundered the monastery of Croyland of a great part of its land, and no redress could be obtained. The obliging of all the inhabitants to put out their fires and lights at certain hours, upon the sounding of a bell called the COURFEU, is represented by Polydore Vergil, lib. 9, as a mark of the servitude of the English. But this was a law of police, which William had previously established in Normandy. See Du Moulin, Hist. de Normandie, p. 160. The same law had place in Scotland. LL. Burgor cap. 86.
Text from Project Gutenberg, public domain in the United States.