Mr Webb's discovery was known to Kelham, and duly referred to by him in his _Domesday Book Illustrated_ (1788). It was also known to Sir Francis Palgrave, strong in his acquaintance with manuscript authorities, who alluded (1832) to the fact that 'fragments of the original inquisitions have been preserved',[1] and described the MS. Tib. A. VI, of which 'the first portion consists of the _Inquisitio Eliensis_, extending, as above mentioned, into five counties; it is followed by the inedited _Inquisitio_', etc.[2] It is, however, undoubtedly ignored in Ellis's _Introduction to Domesday Book_ (1833), and 'even the indefatigable Sir Thomas Duffus Hardy', writes Mr Birch,[3] 'has omitted all notice of this manuscript in his _Descriptive Catalogue of Manuscripts relating to the History of Great Britain and Ireland_, vol. ii. (1865)'. This, however, is not strictly the case, for in his notice of the Domesday MSS. he observes in a footnote:
The Cottonian MS. [Tib. A. VI] has also a second and unique portion of this survey, which was not printed in the edition published by the Record Commission in 1816. It commences 'in Grantebriggesira, in Staplehouhund', and ends imperfectly 'et vicecomiti regis v. auras'.
These words prove that Sir Thomas had inspected the MS., which duly begins and ends with the words here given.
It is certain, however, that Mr Freeman, most ardent of Domesday students, knew nothing of this precious evidence, and remained therefore virtually unacquainted with the _modus operandi_ of the Great Survey. The pages, we shall find, of the _Inquisitio_ afford information that no one would have welcomed more eagerly than himself. Perhaps, therefore, it is not surprising that Mr N. E. S. A. Hamilton, when editing this document for the Royal Society of Literature (1876), should have supposed that it had been overlooked till then, or that he was 'the first to bring its importance to light' (p. vi). It is, however, much to be regretted that Mr De Gray Birch should have strenuously insisted that Webb (whose paper he actually names) and Kelham 'appear to have been strangely ignorant of the true and important nature of this manuscript',[4] and should have repeated this assertion[5] after I had shown at the Domesday Commemoration (1886) that the honour of the discovery really belonged to Mr P. C. Webb. One may claim that Webb should have his due, while gladly expressing gratitude to Mr Hamilton for his noble edition of the _Inquisitio_, which has conferred on Domesday students an inestimable boon.[6]