Different, again, yet no less instructive, is the case of the Earl of Sussex. There the grant runs—
"Sciatis me dedisse Willelmo Comiti Arundel castellum de Arundel cum toto honore Arundel ... et tercium denarium de placitis de Suthsex unde comes est."
This charter has been looked upon as relating to the earldom itself, whereas it is clearly nothing but a grant of the castle and honour of Arundel and of the "Tertius Denarius" of Sussex, "of which county he is earl."[740] When these two phrases are compared—"ut sit inde Comes" and "unde Comes est"—their meaning is, surely, clear. William was _already_ Earl of Sussex (_alias_ Arundel _alias_ Chichester), but his right to the "Tertius Denarius" of the county was not recognized by the king. The fact that this right required to be granted _nominatim_ confirms my view that it was not conveyed by Stephen's charter to Geoffrey.[741]
The distinction between the "dedi et concessi" of the "Tertius Denarius" clause and the "reddidi" and "concessi" of those by which the king confirms to Geoffrey his ancestral estates is one always to be noted. The terms of what one may call this general confirmation are remarkably comprehensive, going back as they do to the days of King William and of the grantee's great-grandfather; and the profusion of legal verbiage in which they are enwrapped is worthy of later times. The charter also illustrates the adaptation in Latin of the old Anglo-Saxon _formulæ_, themselves the relics of those quaint jingles which must bear witness to oral transmission in an archaic state of society.[742]
The release of the lien (upon three manors) which Henry I. had held is a very curious feature. One of these manors, Sawbridgeworth in Herts., is surveyed in Domesday at great length. Its value had then sunk from £60 to £50; but early in the reign of Henry II., Earl Geoffrey gave it in fee to Warine fitz Gerold, the chamberlain, "per (_sic_) LXXIIII libratas terræ, singulas XX libratas pro servitio unius militis."[743]
Under this charter Earl Geoffrey held the dignity till his death, at which time we find him lord of more than a hundred and fifty knights' fees. The earldom then (1166) passed to his younger brother William, and did so, as far as we know, without a fresh creation. For the limitation, it is important to observe, in this as in other early creations, is not restricted to heirs _of the body_—a much later addition. As this point is of considerable importance it may be as well here to compare the essential words of inheritance in the three successive charters:—