John Horace Round (1854-1928) published Feudal England in 1895. The volume is a collection of Round's articles on feudalism, most of which had been previously published in the English Historical Review. The essays cover the period 1050-1200. They are linked by Round's overarching argument that it was the Norman Conquest that transplanted feudalism to England and that during the Anglo-Saxon period England had no real feudal institutions. The volume includes Round's groundbreaking article 'The Introduction of Knight Service into England', first published in the English Historical Review for 1891-1892; a number of his important essays on the Domesday Book, a topic on which he was long regarded as the leading expert; and several essays challenging the historical methods of Professor Freeman, the main opponent of Round's ideas. Feudal England was highly influential in medieval scholarship, and is still an important resource for researchers.

The present work is the outcome of a wish expressed to me from more than one quarter that I would reprint in a collected form, for the convenience of historical students, some more results of my researches in the history of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. But to these I have added, especially on Domesday, so much which has not yet seen the light, that the greater portion of the work is new, while the rest has been in part re-written. The object I have set before myself throughout is either to add to or correct our existing knowledge of facts. And for this I have gone in the main to records, whether in manuscript or in print. It is my hope that the papers in this volume may further illustrate the value of such evidence as supplementing and checking the chroniclers for what is still, in many respects, an obscure period of our history. To those in search of new light on our early mediaeval history, I commend the first portion of this work, as setting forth, for their careful consideration, views as evolutionary on the Domesday hide and the whole system of land assessment as on the actual introduction of the feudal system into England. Although I have here brought into conjunction my discovery that the assessment of knight-service was based on a five-knights unit, irrespective of area or value, and my theory that the original assessment of land was based on a five-hides unit, not calculated on area or value, yet the two, one need hardly add, are, of course, unconnected. The one was an Anglo-Saxon system, and, as I maintain, of early date; the other was of Norman introduction, and of independent origin. My theories were formed at different times, as the result of wholly separate investigations. That of the five-hides unit was arrived at several years ago, but was kept back in the hope that I might light on some really satisfactory explanation of the phenomena presented. The solution I now propound can only be deemed tentative. I would hope, however, that the theories I advance may stimulate others to approach the subject, and, above all, that they may indicate to local students, in the future, the lines on which they should work and the absolute need of their assistance. Perhaps the most important conclusion to which my researches point is that Domesday reveals the existence of two separate systems in England, co-extensive with two nationalities, the originalfive hides of the 'Anglo-Saxon' in the south, and the later six carucates of the 'Danish' invaders in the north.Ê

These collected essays contain Round's lasting contribution to medieval scholarship: his argument that the Norman Conquest transplanted feudalism to England.

A new perspective on lordship in England between the Norman Conquest and Magna Carta. Multiple lordship- that is, holding land or owing allegiance to more than one lord simultaneously- was long regarded under the western European "feudal" model as a potentially dangerous aberration, and a sign of decline in the structure of lordship. Through an analysis of the minor lords of Leicestershire, Derbyshire, and Staffordshire during the long twelfth century, this study demonstrates, conversely, that multiple lordship was at least as common as single lordship in this period and regarded as a normal practice, and explores how these minor lords used the flexibility of lordship structures to construct localised centres of authority in the landscape and become important actors in their own right. Lordship was, moreover, only one of several forces which minor lords had to navigate. Regional society in this period was profoundly shaped by overlapping ties of lordship, kinship, and locality, each of which could have a fundamental impact on relationships and behaviour. These issues are studied within and across lords' honours, around religious houses and urban areas, and in a close case study of the abbey of Burton-upon-Trent. This book thus contextualises lordship within a wider landscape of power and influence.

Battles have long featured prominently in historical consciousness, as moments when the balance of power was seen to have tipped, or when aspects of collective identity were shaped. But how have perspectives on warfare changed? How similar are present day ideologies of warfare to those of the medieval period? Looking back over a thousand years of British, Irish and Scandinavian battles, this significant collection of essays examines how different times and cultures have reacted to war, considering the changing roles of religion and technology in the experience and memorialisation of conflict. While fighting and killing have been deplored, glorified and everything in between across the ages, Writing Battles reminds us of the visceral impact left on those who come after.