CHAPTER I.

Ealing or Pllynges.

Probable Derivation of Name.-Lords of the Manor.-Domesday Book and the Churches.-Ealing supposed to have been included with Fulham.-Ealing Forest Land.--The Bishop's Rights.-Curious claims by the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's.-A singular Grant to the County.—Some Ancient Divisions.—Boundaries and Extent. "Soyle and Fertilitie."-Supposed Saxon Settlement.Traces of earlier Roman Occupation.-Notes on a rare Gold Coin.

HE manner of spelling the name of Ealing varies much in the old records. We find Yelling, Yelynge, Yeling, Yelinge, Yelynne, Yellynge, Villinges, Yllynges, Yilling, Ylling, Yllyng, Gelling, Yling, Ylings, Gilling, Ylinge, Gillyng, Yelding, Xlings, Xling, Zealing— where Z is a mere substitution for the Middle-English character for Y, which was ludicrously misunderstoodElinge, Eling, Elings. Newcourt, who wrote in 1708, calls it "Great Yealing, to distinguish it from Little Yealing, a hamlet thereto belonging". In the old parish books of the seventeenth century, it is occasionally written Elyng, but more often Yeeling or Yealing. Finally there is the modern Ealing. The origin and sense of the name is uncertain, though conjectures have been many. It has been absurdly supposed that as in the case of Eaton, Eton, lit. "stream-town", the Anglo-Saxon prefix ea, “a stream", may have referred to the stream running through

B

it; and that this could be combined with the word ling, of Scandinavian origin, thus producing a hybrid word signifying "stream-heather", also containing a local reference. Quite recently a historic house, anciently known as Hicks-on-the-Heath, has been demolished, and this was adduced as helping the suggestion. Again, as Ealing abounds with little ground-springs, the name has often been associated with the existence of these, and actually rendered as signifying a "place of little waters", whereas the translation of the imaginary form ea-ling would be "babe-stream" or "stream not fully grown up". No known force can make it a plural.

Probably the earliest form of spelling in existence, though this is not the earliest record of the parish, is that which occurs in the following copy of a grant (12th century) which is preserved in St. Paul's Cathedral Library.-Grant by [G]ilbert Bishop of London, to Richard de Lichefeld, his servant, of a virgate of land at Yllynge, lately belonging to Alfwin de Yllynges, in consideration of a yearly payment of 5s., and a fine of three besants. Witnesses: Robert Archdeacon' of Essex, Robert Folet, Gilbert Banastre, Master Walter de Witteneia, canons of St. Paul's, and seventeen others named. A.D. 1163–1188.

1 "As to the Title of Archdeacon, it is of no less antiquity than the primitive times of Christianity; the Use then being: that the Deacons did elect out of themselves one whom they knew the most eminent for his Industry, and gave him that Title. Howbeit of late years, he that was more grave and prudent than the rest has commonly been advanced to that place. As to his office, he is bound yearly to visit all his archdeaconry throughout, then to enquire of all crimes and misgovernment of the people, as well the Clergy as the Laity, by the Churchwardens and others, and to reform whatsoever they find otherwise than well, either committed heinously against the laws of God or the ordinance of the Prince, for a quiet commonweal dissonant to God's Laws, to man's laws, and politick order of the world, to reform the same, either by Godly persuasion or good advice, or by Pains and Penalties according to the Humility and humble subjection of the offender, and Repentance of his offence."--NEWCOURT'S Repertorium.

The undoubtedly older forms of spelling, Yelling, Yelynge, Yeling, Yealing, etc., disprove either of the above poetical derivations. "That ling is here Scandinavian, is out of the question", writes Professor Skeat, a high authority on etymological subjects, and to whose kindly courtesy we are indebted for what he terms a possible guess as to the origin of the name Ealing. Dr. Skeat supposes the word to be Anglo-Saxon throughout, and, from the old spellings, originally to have begun with a G. "There was", he says, "an initial sound of Y in many AngloSaxon words, but it is seldom original; it usually means that an old hard g, when it happened to precede an e or an i, passed into the sound of y. The suffix ing is usually the mark of a tribal settlement. The loss of y and the lengthening of e into ea make no difficulty; there are plenty of such examples. This Yelling is possibly the mark of a tribal settlement of Yellings. The chief's name would be Yella, written Gella in Anglo-Saxon. It is not only not absurd, but highly probable, that Yella meant one who yells or shouts a mere nickname. A large number of names turn out to be nicknames of the most trivial character. There is a name Gellir in the Icelandic Landnamabōk (Book of Landnames), and that name is known to mean 'Yeller', neither more nor less. The verb to yell is of great antiquity, as it was once a 'strong' verb, with the past tense he yall or he yoll, of which there are many examples as late as A.D. 1400. It is a possible guess that Ealing Yelling, and that Yelling denoted a settlement of

1 In a book lately issued, Dr. Skeat says:-"One of the queerest crazes in English etymology is the love of paradox which is often carried to such an extent that it is considered mean, if not despicable, to accept an etymology that is obvious. It is of no use to prove to some people by the clearest evidence that beêf-eater is derived from beef and eater, or fox-glove from fox and glove, or offal from off and fall. ... All this is to them but food for babes, and they crave for strong meat."

a tribe of Gellings, named from a chief Gella, whatever that name may have meant."1

Ealing is not mentioned in Domesday; but the omission does not stand as evidence that it had no parochial existence at that time. Old writers have always concluded that Ealing was returned with the manor of Fulham. The Bishops of London, to whom the manor of Fulham has constantly belonged from the year 6912—except during the great Rebellion, when it was sold in 1647 to Colonel Edmund Harvey for the sum of £6,717 8s. 10d., but given back to the see at the Restoration-have also been lords of the manor of Ealing from earliest times, or as the quaint law term phrases it, “so that the mind of man runneth not to the contrary." Sir Henry Ellis' says: "The precept which directed the formation of the Domesday survey, laid no injunction on the jurors to make a return of the churches." Nor were the lands held by the Church, in all cases so minutely described, as the indignant Saxon chronicler sets forth in the following remarkable passage*:"A.D. MLXXXV. In this year men declared and forsooth said that Cnut, King of Denmark, son of King Svein, was bound hitherward, and would win this land with the aid of Robert, Count of Flanders, because Cnut had Robert's daughter to wife. When William, King of England, who was then residing in Normandy was apprised of

this, he went into England with so large an army of horsemen and foot from France and Brittany, as never before had sought this land, so that men wondered how this land could feed all that army. But the king caused the army

1 There actually is a place called Yelling in Huntingdonshire. There is no special reason why it may not be the same name. Indeed, it is likely that it is so.

2 Newcourt says Fullonham was granted to Erkenwald, Bishop of London, Anno 675-697, by Tyrhtilus, Bishop of Hereford. Erkenwald was the son of Offa, King of the East Saxons.

3 General Introduction to Domesday.

4 Ibid.

to be distributed through all the land among his vassals, and they fed the army, each according to the measure of his land. And men had great affliction this year.

But when the king was informed insooth that his foes were hindered and could not further their expedition, he let some of the army go to their own land, and some he held in this land over the winter. Then at mid-winter the king was at Gloucester with his 'witan', and there held his court five days; and afterwards the archbishop and clergy had a synod three days. Then was Maurice chosen Bishop of London, and William to Norfolk, and Robert to Chester. They were all the king's clerks. After this the king had a great council and very deep speech with his 'witan' about this land, how it was peopled, or by what men: then sent his men over all England into every shire, and caused to be ascertained how many hundred hides were in the shire, or what land the king himself had, and cattle within the land, or what dues he ought to have in twelve months from the shire. Also, he caused to be written how much land his archbishops had, and his suffragan bishops, and his abbots and his earls; and though I may narrate somewhat prolixly— what or how much each man had, who was a holder of land in England, in land or in cattle, and how much money it might be worth, so, very narrowly, he caused it to be traced out that there was not one single hide, nor one yard of land, nor even, it is a shame to tell, though it seemed to him no shame to do, an ox, nor a cow, nor a swine was left that was not set down in his writ. And all the writings were brought to him afterwards."

In spite of this alleged minuteness of the survey, unexceptional evidence exists of churches not mentioned, and Sir Henry Ellis points out the wide divergence between Sir Henry Spelman's figures, which give 4,511 parish churches in the kingdom at this time, whereas those returned in the survey amount to but little over 1,700. He observes: