{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f2\fmodern\fcharset0\fprq1{\*\panose 02070309020205020404}Courier New;}{\f3\froman\fcharset2\fprq2{\*\panose 05050102010706020507}Symbol;}{\f36\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020404030301010803}Garamond;}
{\f37\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f38\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f40\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f41\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f42\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f43\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f44\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f45\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f57\fmodern\fcharset238\fprq1 Courier New CE;}
{\f58\fmodern\fcharset204\fprq1 Courier New Cyr;}{\f60\fmodern\fcharset161\fprq1 Courier New Greek;}{\f61\fmodern\fcharset162\fprq1 Courier New Tur;}{\f62\fmodern\fcharset177\fprq1 Courier New (Hebrew);}
{\f63\fmodern\fcharset178\fprq1 Courier New (Arabic);}{\f64\fmodern\fcharset186\fprq1 Courier New Baltic;}{\f65\fmodern\fcharset163\fprq1 Courier New (Vietnamese);}{\f397\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Garamond CE;}{\f398\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Garamond Cyr;}
{\f400\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Garamond Greek;}{\f401\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Garamond Tur;}{\f404\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Garamond Baltic;}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;
\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;
\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 \styrsid15359826 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden 
Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid15359826 Plain Text;}{\*\ts16\tsrowd\trbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrh\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrv
\brdrs\brdrw10 \trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \sbasedon11 \snext16 \styrsid15359826 Table Grid;}}{\*\listtable{\list\listtemplateid-75888638\listhybrid{\listlevel\levelnfc23\levelnfcn23\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0
\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698689\'01\u-3913 ?;}{\levelnumbers;}\f3\fbias0 \fi-360\li720\jclisttab\tx720\lin720 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext
\leveltemplateid67698691\'02\'01.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li1440\jclisttab\tx1440\lin1440 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698693
\'02\'02.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li2160\jclisttab\tx2160\lin2160 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698689\'02\'03.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li2880
\jclisttab\tx2880\lin2880 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698691\'02\'04.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li3600\jclisttab\tx3600\lin3600 }{\listlevel
\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698693\'02\'05.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li4320\jclisttab\tx4320\lin4320 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0
\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698689\'02\'06.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li5040\jclisttab\tx5040\lin5040 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0
\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698691\'02\'07.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li5760\jclisttab\tx5760\lin5760 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext
\leveltemplateid67698693\'02\'08.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li6480\jclisttab\tx6480\lin6480 }{\listname ;}\listid842354449}{\list\listtemplateid-294508044\listhybrid{\listlevel\levelnfc23\levelnfcn23\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1
\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698689\'01\u-3913 ?;}{\levelnumbers;}\f3\fbias0 \fi-360\li720\jclisttab\tx720\lin720 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext
\leveltemplateid67698691\'02\'01.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li1440\jclisttab\tx1440\lin1440 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698693
\'02\'02.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li2160\jclisttab\tx2160\lin2160 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698689\'02\'03.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li2880
\jclisttab\tx2880\lin2880 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698691\'02\'04.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li3600\jclisttab\tx3600\lin3600 }{\listlevel
\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698693\'02\'05.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li4320\jclisttab\tx4320\lin4320 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0
\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698689\'02\'06.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li5040\jclisttab\tx5040\lin5040 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0
\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698691\'02\'07.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li5760\jclisttab\tx5760\lin5760 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext
\leveltemplateid67698693\'02\'08.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li6480\jclisttab\tx6480\lin6480 }{\listname ;}\listid1598632094}}{\*\listoverridetable{\listoverride\listid842354449\listoverridecount9{\lfolevel}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}
{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat
\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}\ls1}{\listoverride\listid1598632094\listoverridecount9{\lfolevel}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat
\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\levelstartat1}\ls2}}{\*\revtbl {Unknown;}}
{\*\pgptbl {\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp
\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}{\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid73317\rsid90653\rsid97572\rsid154958\rsid329164\rsid403740\rsid551282\rsid555085\rsid557003\rsid594875\rsid599346\rsid665263\rsid665751
\rsid666473\rsid669177\rsid791723\rsid868449\rsid918616\rsid936051\rsid938881\rsid940344\rsid942406\rsid950203\rsid991603\rsid1058555\rsid1120747\rsid1124007\rsid1125958\rsid1130831\rsid1253165\rsid1314349\rsid1321187\rsid1322698\rsid1461892\rsid1640797
\rsid1735997\rsid1783398\rsid1793039\rsid1844005\rsid1853272\rsid1864460\rsid1866448\rsid1912693\rsid1969005\rsid1980117\rsid1991961\rsid1995466\rsid2166798\rsid2170890\rsid2171725\rsid2182201\rsid2234814\rsid2243508\rsid2303055\rsid2306151\rsid2314821
\rsid2367334\rsid2445258\rsid2451581\rsid2569267\rsid2574182\rsid2581116\rsid2651478\rsid2697756\rsid2706379\rsid2717005\rsid2833011\rsid2950367\rsid2950622\rsid2972582\rsid2972700\rsid2974695\rsid3031534\rsid3110084\rsid3110900\rsid3151390\rsid3158418
\rsid3220575\rsid3223305\rsid3282113\rsid3294143\rsid3298047\rsid3356539\rsid3369360\rsid3424148\rsid3424901\rsid3438714\rsid3488788\rsid3497064\rsid3498479\rsid3543806\rsid3605855\rsid3614997\rsid3619169\rsid3702688\rsid3737785\rsid3739150\rsid3760241
\rsid3824364\rsid3827431\rsid3934538\rsid4006892\rsid4069965\rsid4083864\rsid4131934\rsid4132361\rsid4214880\rsid4218615\rsid4225553\rsid4342543\rsid4393354\rsid4395717\rsid4411314\rsid4413767\rsid4416824\rsid4478294\rsid4543915\rsid4599995\rsid4619343
\rsid4654446\rsid4660736\rsid4673913\rsid4673945\rsid4735974\rsid4803480\rsid4805514\rsid4806598\rsid4807469\rsid4927128\rsid5007632\rsid5118327\rsid5121240\rsid5189294\rsid5259339\rsid5389549\rsid5398439\rsid5464266\rsid5468415\rsid5506381\rsid5525375
\rsid5535137\rsid5571399\rsid5598343\rsid5723112\rsid5732183\rsid5785959\rsid5792076\rsid5796643\rsid5844178\rsid5909124\rsid5911171\rsid5922904\rsid5930135\rsid6034525\rsid6175126\rsid6179722\rsid6258006\rsid6293914\rsid6295247\rsid6446395\rsid6512263
\rsid6574534\rsid6637360\rsid6698644\rsid6753149\rsid6762632\rsid6841963\rsid6899169\rsid6902083\rsid6903835\rsid6949295\rsid6955159\rsid6955388\rsid7017285\rsid7024317\rsid7034286\rsid7078577\rsid7092398\rsid7097363\rsid7103948\rsid7109034\rsid7152570
\rsid7219534\rsid7226879\rsid7240755\rsid7306281\rsid7341112\rsid7410806\rsid7414728\rsid7480611\rsid7615647\rsid7624539\rsid7668038\rsid7680563\rsid7756454\rsid7820644\rsid7827745\rsid7959613\rsid7998081\rsid8004641\rsid8018463\rsid8074947\rsid8087445
\rsid8092650\rsid8130406\rsid8135087\rsid8139907\rsid8157106\rsid8217101\rsid8325391\rsid8343950\rsid8354065\rsid8401719\rsid8405532\rsid8412558\rsid8463404\rsid8467824\rsid8482543\rsid8599041\rsid8672447\rsid8675721\rsid8676751\rsid8731825\rsid8734413
\rsid8785421\rsid8806031\rsid8814106\rsid8923905\rsid8986529\rsid9005822\rsid9075006\rsid9115532\rsid9130449\rsid9338571\rsid9392358\rsid9466612\rsid9507156\rsid9510091\rsid9510552\rsid9570784\rsid9573050\rsid9579227\rsid9704213\rsid9792906\rsid9833020
\rsid9905413\rsid9916258\rsid9978573\rsid10118668\rsid10170514\rsid10289911\rsid10309185\rsid10320384\rsid10363915\rsid10422940\rsid10447386\rsid10450520\rsid10515543\rsid10625906\rsid10630312\rsid10701946\rsid10707632\rsid10766470\rsid10887762
\rsid10910014\rsid10911163\rsid10974305\rsid11033180\rsid11076288\rsid11102208\rsid11234367\rsid11238599\rsid11293761\rsid11295508\rsid11369218\rsid11407830\rsid11494636\rsid11498323\rsid11535092\rsid11552681\rsid11614014\rsid11678250\rsid11685154
\rsid11692013\rsid11761958\rsid11801082\rsid11803874\rsid11875131\rsid11877646\rsid11932724\rsid11958535\rsid12072169\rsid12074914\rsid12081114\rsid12083327\rsid12086058\rsid12140306\rsid12153081\rsid12331932\rsid12341788\rsid12393562\rsid12401952
\rsid12464380\rsid12479719\rsid12533938\rsid12613640\rsid12672449\rsid12736511\rsid12847771\rsid12866531\rsid12917826\rsid12923215\rsid13000006\rsid13054325\rsid13110728\rsid13245059\rsid13257149\rsid13334270\rsid13334998\rsid13378816\rsid13385764
\rsid13391453\rsid13452326\rsid13509740\rsid13840414\rsid13895394\rsid13902916\rsid13909103\rsid13984074\rsid13986590\rsid13989383\rsid14038898\rsid14168764\rsid14185188\rsid14228593\rsid14248768\rsid14504760\rsid14508171\rsid14571921\rsid14624820
\rsid14681444\rsid14702359\rsid14777817\rsid14838336\rsid14900363\rsid14956834\rsid15009427\rsid15036959\rsid15084156\rsid15148612\rsid15171039\rsid15219436\rsid15235890\rsid15359826\rsid15407534\rsid15421569\rsid15540757\rsid15557732\rsid15559855
\rsid15609111\rsid15687577\rsid15738329\rsid15811525\rsid15882194\rsid15888011\rsid15933927\rsid15992186\rsid16002338\rsid16006929\rsid16013655\rsid16058155\rsid16066460\rsid16206465\rsid16337729\rsid16340003\rsid16344506\rsid16388881\rsid16404828
\rsid16407959\rsid16455828\rsid16471330\rsid16536365\rsid16542427\rsid16734915\rsid16736606}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6612;}{\info{\title NOTTINGHAMSHIRE INTRODUCTION}{\author Caroline Thorn}{\operator John Palmer}
{\creatim\yr2007\mo6\dy29\hr20\min21}{\revtim\yr2007\mo7\dy15\hr22\min9}{\printim\yr2006\mo5\dy19\hr8\min14}{\version11}{\edmins42}{\nofpages48}{\nofwords24909}{\nofchars141984}{\*\company  }{\nofcharsws166560}{\vern16389}}
\deftab284\widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow1\dgvshow1
\jexpand\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct\asianbrkrule\rsidroot15359826 \fet0\sectd 
\linex0\headery708\footery708\colsx708\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang
{\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7
\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \s15\qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar
\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12923215 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid6258006 NOTTINGHAMSHIRE
\par }\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\tx8647\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6753149 \cbpat8 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cf2\insrsid6753149 (version 1a)
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3824364 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid6258006 
\par INTRODUCTION
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 HISTORY
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottinghamshire is first mentioned (in the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) in the year 1016, but the shire's history cannot be separated from that of the adjacent counties of Lincolnshire }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 first mentioned in the same year and in the same context}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 ), }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Derbyshire }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 (first mentioned in 1048)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and Yorkshire }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 first mentioned in 1050 when 
its archbishop died}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Lincolnshire, together with Leicestershire and Northamptonshire, seem to have arisen from the successive defeat of individual Danish armies that had occupied their respective areas. They had no individu
al identities before th}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3498479 e Danish settlement of the late }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ninth century and it is not certain when they became shires in the sense of acquiring a central administration of tax and justice, a county court and a sheriff. 
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid13902916 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid15359826 \tab The territory that became Nottinghamsh
ire was probably settled by the Middle Angles, who may have approached along the rivers Humber and Trent. They wer}{\insrsid13902916 e once a distinct people (Bede,}{\i\insrsid15359826  Ecclesiastical History}{\insrsid15359826 , i. 15}{\insrsid8139907 
: Colgrave and Mynors,}{\insrsid15359826  pp. 51-}{\insrsid8139907 5}{\insrsid15359826 2), who became subject to the kings of Mercia in t
he mid-seventh century when King Penda (died 655) set his son Peada (died 657) over them. This people is no doubt included in the }{\i\insrsid15359826 Myrcenes Landes}{\insrsid15359826  ('Mercian Lands') in which 300,000 households are}{\insrsid1991961 
 assessed }{\insrsid8139907 by the Tribal Hidage}{\insrsid15359826 . To the north-west in the highland zone of what became Derbyshire dwelt a separate group, the }{\i\insrsid15359826 Pecsaetna}{\insrsid15359826 
 ('the Peak dwellers') with 1200 households and to the north lay the }{\i\insrsid15359826 Elmedsaetna}{\insrsid15359826  with 600 households. They named, or were named from, the area of Elmet lying to the east of Leeds. The
ir inclusion in the Tribal Hidage shows that they then lay in Mercia or were tributary to it. They were later in Northumbria and later still their area was included in Yorkshire.}{\b\fs28\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826\charrsid13902916 

\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab 
By the early ninth century, the northern boundary of what became Derbyshire appears to have been the same as the northern limit of Mercia for }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1991961 in 829 it is recorded,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in the }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , that King Egbert [of Wessex] having 'conquered the kingdom of
 the Mercians and everything south of the [River] Humber ... led an army to Dore against the Northumbrians' (translation from Whitelock and others, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 40-41)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1991961 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  The River Humber was long the boundary between Lindsey and Northumbria an
d later between Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. Dore lay at SK3081 close to the later boundary with Derbyshire. There would be less of a gap between the River Humber and Dore if by 'Humber' the chronicler included its tributary, the River Don. Certainly in th
is undescribed gap it seems probable that the boundary between Mercia and Northumbria was much as it was later between Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire. 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx360\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab In the latter half of the ninth century Danish invaders had begun to maraud freely in northern Mercia. Ac
cording to the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, in 867 the raiders went from East Anglia to York. In 878 they 'went into Mercia to Nottingham and took up winter quarters there'. The Mercian King Burgred asked for help from the West Saxons, but the siege of Nottingha
m led to no military result: the Wessex chronicler reported that 'the Mercians made peace with the enemy'. It is unlikely that the raiding army settled in Nottinghamshire at this time. In 869 they returned to York 'and stayed there one year'. In 870 they 
took up winter quarte}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1991961 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
s at Thetford (in Norfolk). In 871 they were at Reading (in Berkshire); in 872 they overwintered at London. However, in 873 the army went to Northumbria and spent the winter at Torksey (Lincolnshire). They spent the winter of 873-874 a
t Repton close to the future Derbyshire/ Leicestershire border. In the following spring the army split, part going from Repton into Northumbria, where they camped for the winter beside the River Tyne, part going to Cambridge 'where they stayed a year'. It
 
is not stated if any men remained at Repton, but they had probably already devastated the royal estate and the important monastery which was there. Then in 877 'in the harvest season the army went into Mercia and shared out some of it and gave some to Ceo
lwulf'. Ceolwulf was a pro-Danish Mercian king put on the throne in 874 and his portion of Mercia seems to have lain }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11692013 largely }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
south-west of the Foss Way; the rest was ceded to the Danes. This was the beginning of the Danish settlement which occupied territor
y that was later to become the counties of Northamptonshire (north-east of Watling Street), Rutland, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire. In 879 Ceolwulf died and the rump of Mercia passed to Aethelred, their ealdorman, who accepted th
e overlordship of Alfred, King of Wessex}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1991961 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 and married his daughter Aethelflaed. Aethelred and Aethelflaed began a series of measures to counter the Danes, mainly the construction of a series of fortified }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
s, and their work was continued after Aethelred's death by Aethelflaed alone and then by King Edward the Elder, King Alfred's son and her brother. In Wessex, which had not been settled by the Danes, the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Burghal Hidage}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  shows that land surrounding these }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s was laid under contribution for the upkeep of the defences. However, in the areas occupied by the Danes, or on their borders, the }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s seem to have been hastily constructed by the armies of Wessex and Mercia, often for individual campaigns and it is not certain that any territorial arrangements were m
ade, or could be, for their maintenance. In their turn, the Danish armies constructed fortified sites, perhaps from the beginning of their settlement, perhaps only after the Danish army from Northumbria, which had broken the peace, was defeated at Tettenh
all (in Staffordshire) in 910.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab The Danish }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
s seem to have been the headquarters of a series of separate armies and the future shire of Nottingham was probably in essence the territory that had been occupied by the army based on the borough. In 913 Danis
h armies 'from Northampton and from Leicester rode out after Easter and broke the peace, and killed many men at Hook Norton (Oxfordshire) and round about there'. Again, in 917, Danish armies from Northampton, Leicester and north of there broke the peace a
n
d laid siege to Towcester (Northamptonshire), which had been occupied and fortified by the English earlier in the year. But King Edward the Elder recaptured it, fortified it with a stone wall and in that same year accepted the submission of the Danish arm
y from Northampton 'as far north as the [River] Welland'. In that year also Aethelflaed 'obtained the borough which is called Derby, with all that belongs to it'. It is not certain where the Danish }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  was in Derby and whether Aethelflaed constructed one o
f her own before attacking the Danes. The Danes or the English may have refortified the Roman camp at Little Chester. In 918 Aethelflaed 'recovered by peaceful means the borough of Leicester for the English, the greater part of its Danish army becoming su
bject to her' and in that same year King Edward the Elder had a }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  built at Stamford (Lincolnshire) on the south side of the River Welland and captured the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  of Nottingham 'and ordered it to be repaired and manned both with Englishmen and Danes. And al
l the people who had settled in Mercia, both Danish and English, submitted to him'. This appears to have brought an end to that particular Danish occupation of a great swathe of territory in what was formerly northern Mercia. However, operations continued
: in 919, King Edward the Elder had a }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 built at Thelwall (Cheshire) and had a Mercian army 'occupy [the fortress at] Manchester in Northumbria and repair and man it.' The area that became Nottinghamshire was now secure in the south. The operations of 92
0 appear to have cleared its whole surface of resistance, for King Edward had a second }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 built at Nottingham on the south side of the river, opposite the other, the two linked by a bridge and then went into the Peak District to Bakewell (Derbyshire) where he had a }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 built. The result was, allegedly, incredible, for the king of the Scots and all his people 'and Ragnald, and the sons of Eadwulf and all who live in Northumbria, both English and Danish, Norsemen and others' as well as the king of the 'Str
athclyde Welsh' and all his people chose Edward as 'father and lord' (quotations from the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  are from the translation is}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 D. Whitelock and others}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1991961 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  pp. 66-69). There is some hagiography in this chronicle based on Wessex sources, but it doe
s appear that King Edward pacified the Danes, secured the northern border of the former Mercia and began the process of its incorporation into a united England.
\par \tab Scarcely had these areas been freed from Danish armies, however, and begun to return to peaceful cultivation than they were oppressed by the 'Norsemen' who had already taken York. They were liberated in 942 by King Edmund and formed an alliance}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2166798  known as the territory or the C}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 onfederation of the Five Boroughs. The }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2574182 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  for 942 recor
ds: 'In this year, King Edmund, lord of the English, protector of men, the beloved performer of mighty deeds, overran Mercia, as bounded by the Dore, Whitwell Gate and the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid950203  broad stream, the River Humber,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid950203  by}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 five boroughs, Leicester and Lincoln, Nottingham and likewise Stamford and also Derby. The Danes were previously subjected by force under the Norsemen, for a long time in the bonds of captivity to the heathens, until the defender of warriors, the son of 
Edward, King Edmund, redeemed them, to his glory (translation by Whitelock and others, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, p. 71); see Mawer, 'Redemption of the Five Boroughs'. Of the boundary points, Dore also appears in the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  for 829, showing that 
the boundary between Northumbria and Mercia, which was presumably also the boundary between two groups of 'Northmen' had remained remarkably stable through all the upheavals of Danish and Viking arrival and settlement. Whitwell is at SK5276 }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5785959 and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 also, like Dore, close to the later Derbyshire-Yorkshire border.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2166798 \tab This C}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
onfederation was no doubt created so that the men of these boroughs and the territory around them could act quickly and jointly against the Vikings of York, but it also formed as a buffer zone to
 protect southern Mercia and even Wessex and was probably intended to attract the Danes who had settled in the East Midlands away from those of York.
\par \tab The Five Boroughs were still a distinct grouping early in the eleventh century (Stenton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, pp. 385, 508-513) but far from being loyal to the south of the country when Swein invaded in 1013, these boroughs accepted him}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5118327 , and gave him hostages }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5118327\charrsid14228593 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2574182 the }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5118327\charrsid2574182 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5118327\charrsid14228593  under 1013)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and the confederacy seems to have collapsed or been terminated
 soon after, when he was expelled. However long they survived as a separate legal entity within the Danelaw, these boroughs' need to be in a defensive confederation came to an end in 954 with the death of Eric Bloodaxe, ruler of the Viking kingdom of York
.
 This allowed the unification of England under a single monarch. From that time, the need of each of the Five Boroughs to have territory contributing to the maintenance of their fortifications will have begun to weaken. Four of the five towns (Derby, Nott
i
ngham, Leicester, Lincoln) became the capitals of shires named after them. The exception was Stamford, which, probably shorn of some of its territory to the north and west (which ultimately became Rutland), was incorporated into Lincolnshire. Nottingham i
s first named as a shire in 1016 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2574182 the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2574182 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
) and it is likely that by this date all the four shires (Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire and Lincolnshire) were in existence, although the others are only evidenced later. The process b
y which these areas became shires in the sense of having a central administration of taxation and justice, a county court and a sheriff is unclear, but it is quite possible that these shires or proto-shires were in existence in the middle of the tenth cen
tury. The Nottinghamshire forest of Sherwood, meaning 'wood belonging to the shire', is mentioned in a copy of a genuine charter of 956 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, no. 659) by which land was granted to Southwell in Nottinghamshire (NTT 5,1 Southwell note). If the name Sherwood is not an updating or an incorporated marginal gloss, this suggests that shiring had taken place by that time.
\par \tab Certainly the land of all Five Boroughs had been divided into wapentakes probably by the middle of the tenth century, an
d there are reasons to think that this was done on a county by county basis, rather than by treating the territory of the Five Boroughs as a unit. The word wapentake is first found in the laws of King Edgar in 962 (Stenton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Anglo-Saxon England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 505). The Wantage Code of King Ethelred II (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  997) makes them fundamental to the administration of justice in this area of England}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3827431 : }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 English Historical Documents}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 , vol. i. pp. 439-442 no. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2574182 43. For the text, which is }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2574182  both}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431  Old English and Latin, see Liebermann, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 , i. p. 228}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3827431 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431  and Robertson, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 Laws of the Kings of England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 
, pp. 64-65, 318-19. See also Stenton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 Anglo-Saxon England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 , pp. 509-10.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3827431 
 In effect, the wapentakes, like the hundreds of Wessex and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  southern Mercia, assumed responsibility f
or peace and justice that had formerly been discharged by the multiple (usually royal) estates which were then beginning to break up. The Code makes each borough subordinate to the will of the other four. Breach of the peace, given in the assembly of the 
Five Boroughs, is ame}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2574182 nded by 12 hundred [silver "orae}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 "], peace given in an individual borough by 6 hundred and in a wapentake by one hundred. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2574182 These 'hundreds' of silver "orae}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 " do not prove the existence at that time of the territorial small hundreds that are bound up with carucation, although the latter may have become the territory responsible for providing the fine; see \{
Introduction: Small Hundreds\}}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 and S1 hundreds note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3827431 . In fact it is not certain at what point these wapentakes assumed re}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 sponsibility for taxation and whether a carucation (which is a fiscal measure) was imposed on them from the start, or whether in the beginning they adopted or continued to use a previous hidation; see \{Introduction: Carucation\}.

\par \tab For an individual or army going to or from the north, it was most convenient to pass through Nottinghamshire. Thus in 1016 Cnut, on his way to York passed through the shire, which, it is implied by the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , he ravaged along with the other shires through which he passed. Similarly in 1065 when the Northumbrians had ousted Tosti, their earl, and chosen Morcar in his place, the latter }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3827431 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 went south with all the people of the shire (i.e. principally of Yorkshire) and of Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Lincolnshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11494636  until he came t}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 o Northampton. Here he met his brother Earl Edwin with men from his earldom (of Mercia) and many Welsh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3827431 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. On their journey and while they waited in Northampton, these 'northerners' did much damage 'so that that shire (Northamptonshire) and other neighbouring shires were the worse for it for many years' (translation from Whitelock and others, }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon-Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ).
\par \tab In 1067, just after Queen Matilda's coronation, King William was informed that there was a revolt brewing in the north. He went to Nottingham and built a
 castle there, then on to York where he built two castles. He is also credited with building castles 'in Lincoln and everwhere in that district'. William evidently recogn}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 ize}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
d the strategic importance of Nottingham as the 'gateway to the north' and this finds an echo in Domesday Book in the provisions for protecting routes by land and water (B20).
\par \tab By 1086 Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire were closely related. They appear to have had the same number of wapentakes, a very similar carucation and to have shared the same shire customs, court and shire-reeve (sheriff); see }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3827431 
DBY }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3827431 B15 shires note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . They also differ in these respects from Leicestershire and Lincolnshire. It is therefore pos
sible that they were conceived at the same time and had once formed a single shire. 
\par }{\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 It seems that the Nottinghamshire that emerged from the disarming of a Danish host and later from the Confederation of the Five Boroughs was largely a new unit: like Derb
yshire it was an accretion of territory of diverse history around a single }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 
The one internal boundary of Mercia that is known from historical sources - the River Trent - was only intermittently used to mark off the new shires formed from Mercia. It had once, according to Bede (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 
Ecclesiastical History}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 , iii. 24}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8139907 : }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8139907\charrsid8139907 Colgrave and Mynors}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 , pp. 294-95)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3827431 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431  divided North Mercia from South Mercia. Moreover, although the tribes that constituted Mercia seem to have had some continuing importance even into the tenth century, no shire cor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2697756 
responded to what is known to have been}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431  their territory and the shire boundaries often cut through tribal areas: the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 Magonsaete}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431  appear in a Herefordshire charter of 958 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 ,  no. 677), but their area was partly in
 Herefordshire, partly in Gloucestershire and partly in Shropshire; the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 Wreocensaete}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431  are mentioned in a Shropshire grant of 963 (Sawyer, }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 ,  no. 723) and they were divided between Shropshire and Cheshire; the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 Pecsaete}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431  appear in a charter of the same year relating to Ballidon (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2697756 DBY }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 10,22) in Derbyshire (Brooks, Gelling and Johnson, \lquote 
New Charter of King Edgar\rquote ), but they were not the only tribe in Derbyshire; see Gelling, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 West Midlands}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599\charrsid3827431 , p. 145. However,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11238599  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottinghamshire possessed several natural boundaries, no doubt chosen to delimit the territories of the adjacent Danish armies based on Leicester, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid14228593 Derby}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14228593 , Yor}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 k, and Lincoln. Only part of the boundary between Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire seems to have been m}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2166798 ore ancient, having earlier bee}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
n the line of demarcation between the kingdoms of Mercia and Northumbria; see \{Introduction: County Boundary\}.
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 (On the origins of }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7414728\charrsid14228593 Nottingham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid14228593 shire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , ii. pp. 317-21; }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. xiii-xxi; Stafford, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 East Midlands in the Early Middle Ages}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 109-43; Roffe, 'Introduction', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
The Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 21-24}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13984074 ; }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13984074\charrsid2697756 Crook, 'Notinghamshire and the Crown'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. On the extent of Scandinavian settlement, see Cameron, 'Scandinavian Settlement of the Five Boroughs'.)
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid2166798 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 CARUCATION}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  
\par In common with the other shires that emerged from the territory of the Five Boroughs as well as Yorkshire, Notting}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16736606 ham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
shire was assessed in 1066 as in 1086 not in the hides and virgates that are particularly associated with Wessex, East Anglia and southern and western Mercia but in carucates and bovates. As to the origins of this assessment, there are many obscurities. I
t
 is not certain when carucation took place nor is it known if it was imposed jointly across the territory of the Five Boroughs or evolved separately within each of the four shires that emerged from it (the lands of Stamford and Lincoln having merged to fo
rm the single county of Lincolnshire).}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 In the hidated counties of England, the existence of estates assessed in 5, 10, 15 or 20 hides, and of adjacent holdings that, however fragmented their own figures are, nonetheless, in aggregate, add up to five hides 
or other 'decimal' figures, suggests that hidation was imposed from above and round assessments were applied to or split between estates. This phenomenon was first analysed by Round, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Feudal England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, pp.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16736606  47-76,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  who saw the assessment of the hidated counties
 as based on multiples of five and that of the Danelaw counties as based on multiples of six. The essential difference is between decimal and duodecimal methods of reckoning. Neither notion will stand as baldly as it was stated by Round, although he was f
undamentally correct in his view. In Nottinghamshire, as in Derbyshire, the a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16736606 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 sessment is duodecimal, though the basic units seem rather to be one and a half or three than six. 
\par \tab The whole subject of this assessment as well as the three-way relationship between the numbers of carucates on an estate}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13110728 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 the number of ploughlands and the number of ploughs actually in use has been clearly and fully treated by F.M. Stenton in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , i. pp. 208-213}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13110728 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and only the salient points need to be noticed here:
\par \tab Firstly}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13110728 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  it is notable that both Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire bear a much lighter assessment than Leicetershire and Lincolnshire, as if 1\'bd
 carucates and three carucates in the first two counties corresponded to an assessment of 6 carucates or 12 carucates in the second two. This is not to say necessarily that Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire had had their assessments reduced by fifty per}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2314821  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 cent, since this apparently favourable treatment, which could have taken account of the nature of the soil and of the terrain, could have been applied at the beginning of carucation.
\par \tab Secondly, there are many assessments that either individually or in combination make 3 or 6 or 9 or 12 or more carucates. Even apparent fragments combine}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13110728  to make duodecimal numbers. F}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 or exampl
e, the four estates at Trowell (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13110728 29,2. 30,30;50-51) consist of one}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  estate of 1\'bd
 carucates and three of half a carucate, making 3 carucates in all. The three estates at Strelley (10,27-28. 30,31) are respectively of 6 bovates, 3 bovates and 3 bovates, making 1\'bd carucates b}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13110728 etwen them. The three apparentl}
{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 y fragmentary assessments at Sutton-on-Trent (2,4. 9,63;67) at 2 carucates and 6 bovates, 1 bovate and 1 bovate respectively make a unit of three carucates. Some of these smaller units may have combined into la
rger ones. This is illustrated by }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , i. p. 211}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13110728 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  where it is shown that the five estates }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11803874\charrsid14228593 and one Jurisdict}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7414728\charrsid14228593 ion, amounting to six }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11803874\charrsid14228593 entries}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14228593 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11803874  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 at North Muskham (5,2. 8,2. 12,11-13. 30,7) totalling 6\'bd carucates combined with the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13840414  estate at South Muskham }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4805514\charrsid3605855 (5,5}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13840414 )}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4805514  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14228593 at 4 carucate}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4805514 s and 5 bovates and a further estate at South Muskham (30,46) amounting to 6 bovates, added to}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  the 1 bovat}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11803874 
e of Little Carlton (12,14), a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction of North Muskham, make a unit of 12 carucates. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13840414 
It should be noted that in the case of the estate at South Muskham (5,5) Stenton did not mention that the 4 carucates and 5 bovates were the assessment of South Muskham and }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid13840414 Carleton}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13840414 
, which he identified in the translation, p. 255, as Carlton-on-Trent. This latter has been tentatively identified here as Little Carlton (5,5 Carlton note). }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11803874 It is possible that 12 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
carucates was in fact the basic unit of assessment of an area, and that all the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11803874  lower figures are sub}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 divisions between villages and estates. These 12-
carucate units may have formed the so-called 'small hundreds'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11803874 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  although they are only casually evidenced in Nottinghamshire; see \{Introduction: Small Hundreds\}.
\par \tab Thirdly, estates in Thu}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11803874 rgarton W}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 apentake are an exception to this assessment. They seem to be 
based on units of 9 bovates, rather than of twelve. Thus the total for the three estates at Rolleston (5,6. 7,5. 11,18) is 4 carucates and 4 bovates (half of nine carucates) and the thr}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2314821 ee at Oxton (5,11. 9,7}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 6. 11,11) }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4805514\charrsid4805514 is}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4805514  2 carucates }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2314821\charrsid4805514 and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4805514 2 bovates. This sort of asse}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2314821\charrsid4805514 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4805514 sment, whose hig}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2314821\charrsid4805514 h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4805514 est common facto}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
r is 9 bovates is replicated across the wapentake and might suggest a 25 per cent reduction on original assessments based on 12 bovates.
\par \tab Finally, as in Derbyshire, overall the number of ploughlands exceeds the num
ber of carucates, and the number of ploughs actually at work exceeds the number of ploughlands. The comparative figures for Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire, based on Maitland's figures (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Domesday Book and Beyond}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 400-401) are:
\par }{\f0\insrsid4805514\charrsid7959613 
\par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\ts16\trgaph108\trleft-108\trbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrh\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrv\brdrs\brdrw10 
\trftsWidth1\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1548\clshdrawnil \cellx1440\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1620\clshdrawnil \cellx3060\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 
\clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1980\clshdrawnil \cellx5040\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1828\clshdrawnil \cellx6868\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1880\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\pard\plain 
\s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\yts16 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 \cell }{\b\f0\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 Derbyshire\cell 
Nottinghamshire\cell Leicestershire\cell Lincolnshire\cell }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs20\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 
\trowd \irow0\irowband0\ts16\trgaph108\trleft-108\trbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrh\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrv\brdrs\brdrw10 
\trftsWidth1\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1548\clshdrawnil \cellx1440\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1620\clshdrawnil \cellx3060\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 
\clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1980\clshdrawnil \cellx5040\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1828\clshdrawnil \cellx6868\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1880\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\row }\pard\plain 
\s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\yts16 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 Carucates
\par Ploughlands
\par Ploughs\cell }{\f0\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 679
\par 762
\par 862\cell 567
\par 1255
\par 1991\cell 2500?
\par }{\f0\insrsid12464380\charrsid7959613 no }{\f0\insrsid7959613 figure\'86}{\f0\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 
\par 1817 \cell 4188
\par 5043
\par 4712\cell }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs20\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 \trowd \irow1\irowband1\lastrow \ts16\trgaph108\trleft-108
\trbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrh\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrv\brdrs\brdrw10 
\trftsWidth1\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1548\clshdrawnil \cellx1440\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1620\clshdrawnil \cellx3060\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 
\clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1980\clshdrawnil \cellx5040\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1828\clshdrawnil \cellx6868\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1880\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\row }\pard\plain 
\s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\insrsid7959613 \'86  }{\f0\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 
Maitland appears to have excluded from consideration the various other formulae used in Leicestershire to assess ploughlands and therefore did not count them. Moreover, in a considerable number of fiefs and individual entries, there is no reference of any
 type to ploughlands; see Darby, }{\i\f0\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 Domesday England}{\f0\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 , Appendix 6, pp. 348-49.}{\f0\insrsid12464380\charrsid12464380 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid10447386 Ther}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16058155 e will be differences of computation in arriving at the exact totals of each of these figures}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid10447386 
, but the proportions are likely to be correct. The extent of the differences between the three}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7959613  figures for Nottinghamshire is}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid10447386  remarkable.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2314821\charrsid10447386  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 In particular, it will be seen that, compared to Derbyshire, the Notti}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10447386\charrsid10447386 nghamshire ploughlands exceed the number of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 
 carucates by a ratio of 2 to 1. This is not universal in the shire however, and on a number of estates, especially, but not exclusively}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3737785\charrsid10447386 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 
 in Broxtowe Wapentake, the carucates and the ploug}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10447386\charrsid10447386 h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 lands are the same. On this, see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 VCH Nottinghamshire}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386 , i. p. 212, and p. 265 note 1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3737785\charrsid10447386 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386  and, on it}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10447386\charrsid10447386 s}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12464380\charrsid10447386  doubtful value in reconstructing some Nottinghamshire hundreds, see \{Introduction: Small Hundreds\}}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3737785\charrsid10447386 .
\par }{\f0\fs24\highlight7\insrsid3737785 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 In seeing the ploughland as an 'obsolete fiscal term' which recorded the arable capacity of an estate at some time in the past
 and which would allow a yardstick by which to calculate subsequent down-ratings for tax, Stenton was following Round who argued thus in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Northamptonshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, i. pp. 266-68. There are, however, grounds for thinking that these ploughlands were a much more recent assessment.
\par \tab The date of carucation has been much discussed, for the evidence provided by Domesday is both tantalising and insufficient. The terms 'carucate' and 'bovate' are particularly associated with the Danelaw counties, though they are not in o
rigin Scandinavian terms; they are Medieval Latin terms derived respectively from }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 car}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 )}{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 uca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  ('plough') and }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 bos }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ('ox'). The duodecimality of the assessment might suggest that carucation originated during th}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3498479 
e Danish occupation of the late }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ninth century or after the ensuing peace with the English or following the liberation of the Five Boroughs in 942. Even if this is so, it is not clear how far it began from the conversion of much older hidage fi}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3498479 
gures. As to a date in the late }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ninth century
 or at the beginning of the tenth century, it is not evident that conditions were sufficiently settled nor an administrative apparatus available for a carucation (in the sense of a new assessment) to have taken place. Had carucation been a joint enterpris
e
 by the Five Boroughs, it might have been expected to be more uniformly applied, whereas the carucation of Lincolnshire and Leicestershire, as has been seen, is greatly in excess of that for the adjacent Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. This argument could
 be discounted if it could be shown, or thought likely, that there had been subsequent increases or reductions that had made the shires appear different. Moreover}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 Yorkshire was incorporated into the system, even though it was not a member of the Confederation of the Five Boroughs, which was in origin}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11801082  an organization}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  hostile to it.
\par \tab Any attempt t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3498479 o assign carucation to the late }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ninth century or to the tenth century has to surmount two difficulties, one minor and one major. The minor difficulty is that the reg
ularity of carucation, most evident in Domesday }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and in the later }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid11801082 Lindsey Survey}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and the }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid11801082 Leicestershire Survey}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11801082  (see }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343\charrsid11801082 LEC }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11801082\charrsid11801082 \{}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343\charrsid11801082 Introductio}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11801082 n: The Leicestershire Survey\}}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid11801082 ),}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  but partly recoverable from Domesday itself for the Danelaw counties, suggests a p
rocess that was the result of a single administrative decision (even if the actual assessment was applied more or less heavily county by county) and one that was carried out at a comparatively late date, though before 1066. It also seems artificial, dicta
t
ed essentially by duodecimal assessments and grouping vills which are not always adjacent and often ignoring older relationships between estates and cutting through tenurial links. In terms of regularity it has as its parallel the shiring of Southern Merc
i
a (divided into regular multiples of hides and virgates, allotted to hundreds) which appears to have taken place in the early eleventh century and contrasts markedly with the complex process of growth and change which produced the pattern of estates, hide
s and hundreds in Wessex.
\par \tab The seco}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343 nd difficulty is important: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
there are no tenth-century or pre-Conquest eleventh-century charter grants for Nottinghamshire that mention carucates and bovates, but several which continue to make grants in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 mansae}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  or }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 manentes}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  or }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 cassatae }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 (alternatively}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  cassati)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
; these terms are generally assumed to be the equivalents of 'households' that is, of hides. }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Mansae}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  are granted in a charter assigned to the year 956 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , no}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  659 = }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Early Charters of Northern England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 111 no. 114) and }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
cassatae}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in one dated to 958 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , no 679 = }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Early Charters of Northern England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, p. 112 no. 115). 
\par \tab It is true that there are very few pre-Conquest charters from the Danelaw, that some only survive in later copies or their authenticity is suspect and in some case}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 the identification of the places they contain is not certain. However, the broad picture th
at emerges from the material that does survive is that there are no pre-Conquest mentions of carucates or of bovates in Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire or Rutland. Carucates first appear in a Yorkshire charter of 1031 (}{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Early Charters of Northern England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 127 no. 132) and then in one of 1042}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7959613  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 x}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7959613  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1056 (}{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Early Charters of Northern England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 129 no. 135). In both these charters there are also carucated places that lay in county Durham. They are first mentioned in Durham (possibly a s
pecial case as it was never hidated and was not included in Domesday) in 1003}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7959613  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 x}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7959613  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1016 (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Early Charters of Northern England
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 126 no. 130). The last mentions of the older assessments are }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 mansae}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in Derbyshire in 1012 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , no. 928, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 cassata}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 e in Nottinghamshire in 958 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , no. 679), }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
cassati}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in Yorkshire in 1033 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , no. 968) and in Rutland in 1046 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , no. 1014) and of a hide in Leicestershire in 1002x1004 (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , no}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 1536). There appear to be no land measures at all in cha}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ters from the tenth and eleventh cenuries relating to Lincolnshire.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \fi284\li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 It is ingenious, though not convincing, to argue that the carucate is merely a fiscal assessment an
d that the hide is the 'whole agricultural package' and that therefore the two could co-exist: }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Phythian-Adams, }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Norman Conquest of Leicestershire and Rutland}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 
, pp. 32-33}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . By this time, in Wessex and southern and western Mercia the hide was capable of being b
oth a measure of land and a unit of taxation. Moreover, after 1086, grants in these counties are often expressed in carucates and bovates and never in hides and virgates suggesting that one assessment had entirely replaced another. 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab Some form of assessmen
t of land would need to have been in place for the levying of Danegeld under King Ethelred (978x979-1016), if that applied to the Danelaw counties, and might have been needed earlier in the lands of the Five Boroughs for the upkeep of these }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s from the time of their confederation (from 942). However, a pre-existing hidation, fragments of which are visible in charters, would have served the purpose. 
\par \tab Taken at face value, the existence of hides or their equivalents in charters suggests that these shires were still hidated at their particular dates; see, for example RUT 1,20 Outliers note; RUT \{Introduction: Carucation\}
. Because the carucation of Nottinghamshire is linked to that of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , its dating for Nottinghamshire and probably (because of their s
imilarities) for Derbyshire, depends on when }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  was detached from Northamptonshire and incorporated fiscally into Nottinghamshire; see RUT \{Introduction: History\}
. Certainly carucation is pre-Conquest (in some entries it is explicitly a }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 T.R.E.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  meas
ure), but it could date, at least for Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Rutland, from late in the Confessor's reign. If a reassessment were carried out, it could have been expressed in 'Saxon' hides, but it is likely that new terms were adopted for those pe
ople who were used to counting in twelves rather than in tens.
\par 
\par (On the interrelated questions of hides, carucates, bovates, ploughlands and ploughs, see Round, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Feudal England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5598343 79-82}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; Maitland, }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Domesday Book and Beyond}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 420-21; Stenton in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Leicestershire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , i. pp. 278-82; Stenton in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamrshire}
{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , i. pp. 208-13; Lennar}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9466612 d, 'Origin of the F}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 iscal Carucate'; Moore, 'Domesday Ploughland in Leicestershire'; Harvey, 'Taxation and the Ploughland in Domesday Book'; Hart, }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Danelaw}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 289-336; Cain, 'Introduction', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Leicestershire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, pp. 3-4, 8-16. The case for a tenth-century date for carucation is argued by Hart, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Danelaw}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 310-315}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9466612 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and Roffe, 'Introduction', }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Derbyshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 15-18. A}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9466612 n}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  eleventh-century date is proposed by Stenton (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Types of Manorial Structure}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 87-90).
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid9466612 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid5121240 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 THE COUNTY BOUNDARY
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 It appears that Nottinghamshire arose from the land occupied by a single Danish army. Most of the bounds of Nottinghamshire probably have no earlier history than this. However, in the nor
th, the shire seems to have inherited, more or less, the boundary between Mercia and Lindsey and Mercia and Northumbria. The junction between Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire now lies in the boggy ground near Finningley at SE7001. The straightn
e
ss of the lines, apparently drawn by a ruler on a map, here clearly indicates a recent definition of boundary. The precise line no doubt took many generations to define in an area that must long have been marshland, drained by the rivers Trent, Don, Aire 
and Ouse. To the east lay the Isle of Axholme. At first, there had probably been a purely notional junction in this then undrained fenland.
\par \tab The boundary between Mercia and Northumbria may once have been the River Don, but the later boundary while following
 that general line is a few miles south of it and looks as if it runs through debatable territory where the men of York had managed to establish estates south of that river. However, the general run of this boundary, especially between Yorkshire and Derby
shire appears to be ancient (see \{Introduction: History\}), though the exact tenth or eleventh-century bounda}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1461892 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 y is artificial until its junction with Derbyshire, west of Worksop at SK5378.
\par \tab From its junction with Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, the Nottinghamshi
re boundary ran down the River Idle and into the River Trent which it followed southwards, only to depart from that river north of Newark-on-Trent (at SK8172) so as to incorporate Newark Wapentake into Nottinghamshire, though it lay on the Lincolnshire si
d
e of that river. It is possible that Newark Wapentake had once been a part of Lindsey, but if so it poses the question as to how far southwards the Trent formed the boundary and whether the land of Bingham and Rushcliffe Wapentakes and an area of northern
 
Leicestershire had formerly been in Lindsey. However, the 1086 and later boundary between Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire from the point at which the boundary leaves the River Trent is artificial and this continues to be the case where Nottinghamshire an
d Leicestershire meet (at Three Shire Bush SK8242) and then march with each other until the River Soar (from SK5421) takes the boundary back to the River Trent (at SK4930).
\par \tab From its junction with the River Trent at (SK5133) the River Erewash provides a nat
ural boundary with Derbyshire, but further north where it leaves the small brook (at SK5646) that joins the River Erewash at SK 5446 the boundary runs from the river to the junction with Yorkshire by snaking between estates, seemingly passing between the 
land dependent on Mansfield in Nottinghamshire and on Newbold (of which Chesterfield became the most important member) in Derbyshire.
\par \tab Once established as a shire, Nottinghamshire has been unusual in virtually preserving its eleventh-century boundaries unti
l the present. A small number of minor changes have seen parishes gain or lose a few fields. For example, in the extreme south of the county the curious sword-like peninsula of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16013655 the Ancient Parish of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Willoug}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16013655 hby-on-the Wolds}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  that jutted into Leicestershire, was transferred to the latter county (to }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16013655 the Civil Parish of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Burton-on-the-Wolds) in 1965: Youngs, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Local Administrative Units}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , ii. p. 370. In the north, the Ancient Parish of Blyth (in Nottinghamshire) had chapelries at Austerfield and Bawtry in Yorkshire,
 an anomaly only removed with the creation of separate Civil Parishes in 1866 which left Blyth entirely in Nottinghamshire. Similarly the Ancient Parish of Finningley included the township of Auckley in Yorkshire, which became a separate Civil Parish in 1
866, leaving Finningley entirely in Nottinghamshire thereafter; see Youngs, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Local Administrative Units}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, ii. pp. 356, 360. Moreover, Misson had, until 1886 a portion in Lincolnshire. However, no Domesday settlement has been transferred into or gained from the surrounding counties of Yorkshire, Lincolnshire, Leicestershire and Derbyshire. 
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid15359826 \tab 
In 1086, the county boundary cut through the land-unit of 'Broughton'. Nether Broughton was in Leicestershire (LEC 1,2); Upper Broughton was in Nottinghamshire (1,59)}{\insrsid16013655 .}{\insrsid15359826  They
 have remained in their respective counties, with no boundary change.
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab 
In later times at least, Auckley was partly in Nottinghamshire, partly in the West Riding of Yorkshire: }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lay Subsidy Roll (1334)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 228, 392; Youngs, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Local Administrative Units}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , ii. p. 508}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16013655 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16013655 {\f0\fs24\insrsid16013655 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The two wapentakes of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  (Alstoe and 'Martinsley'), which formed two-thirds of the later county of Rutland, were appended to the Nottinghamshire Domesday. Though separated from Nottinghamshire by the breadth of Leicestershire, }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  was integrated fiscally with Nottinghams}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13909103 hire, for one of Alstoe's 12}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
-carucate hundreds contributed to the revenue of Broxtowe Wapentake and the other to that of Thurgarton Wapentake. 'Martinsley' Wapentake, consisting of one 12-carucate hundred, was also 
attached to Nottinghamshire for purposes of tax, but it is not said to which wapentake. However, although the earlier history of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 is obscure, it seems probable that this link between }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and Nottinghamshire dated only from the reign of Edw
ard the Confessor and may have been a result of carucation, which was itself probably connected with the detachment of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 from Northamptonshire. The link was fiscal, the wapentakes of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  making the carucage of the Nottinghamshire wapentakes
 more regular. This computational device was not unique: 'Fishborough' Hundred in Worcestershire is an example of a hundred where discrete elements are brought together to make up a hundred for accounting purposes (WOR 10,2). 'Hurstingstone' Hundred in Hu
ntingdonshire was brought up to 200 hides by the addition of 50 hides of the borough of Huntingdon (HUN B15). The link between }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 and Nottinghamshire was also jurisdictional, since the sheriff of Nottingham was several times addressed as responsible for }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 until the twelfth century when it was expanded into a 'county' of its own by the addition of Witchley Wapentake from Northamptonshire. However, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 was never 'in' Nottinghamshire in any full sense of being an integral part of the county for all purposes. See RUT \{Introduction: History\}.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid13909103 {\f0\fs24\insrsid13909103 \tab D}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
espite the stability of the county boundary, some Nottinghamshire villages were related to others in adjacent counties. Broadholme (21,3) lay in Nottinghamshire and belonged to Newar}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid11369218 k}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid13909103\charrsid11369218 -on-Trent}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , but its villagers' service belonged to Saxilby, nearby in Lincolnshire. Saxilby (SK 8976) is not named in the Lincolnshire folios.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13909103 \tab T}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695 wo}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  out of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695 four}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  portions of Misson in the extreme north of the county were involved with Lincolnshire, }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695 one of them (1,65, an entry duplicated in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13909103  30,44}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695 ) was a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13909103  J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695 urisdiction of Kirton-in-Lindsey, the other}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  (1,66) is said }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2974695 to }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695\charrsid2974695 be 'an adjunct of' }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11369218  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Laughton. Of the remaining parts}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11369218  of Misson, that at 9,21 was }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695 belonged to}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Eaton}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 (9,20) and the portion at 3}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11369218 
0,43 was a manor. For Kirton-in-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lindsey (SK 9398), see LIN 1,38; for Laughton (SK 8497), see LIN 57,7.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11369218 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11369218 {\f0\fs24\insrsid11369218 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Both the lands of Hugh of Grandmesnil's small fief (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 NTT}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  23) were administered from beyond the county: Edwalton (23,1) with Stockerston in Leicestershire (LEC 13,15) and Thrumpton (23,2) with Sandiacre in Derbyshire (DBY 17,15-17).}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11958535 {\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 \tab I}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 t is difficult to be sure how ancient such arrangements were. Edwalton may ha}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695 ve been made a dependency of a }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 manor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2974695  in another county}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  by Hugh himself to suit his management of h
is estates, but in the case of the others, they may reflect arrangements that pre-dated the division of the territory into shires, or demonstrate the uncertainty of county boundaries in fenland districts, where several villages shared a vital resource.

\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ADMINISTRATION OF THE SHIRE
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Before th}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 e Danish incursions of the late }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ninth century, the area that became Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire will have formed the northern edge of Mercia, facing Northumbria. After the expulsion and pacification of the Danes earl
y in the tenth century and the defeat of the Vikings of York in the middle of the same century, the proto- Nottinghamshire was transfer}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ed ecclesiastically to the diocese of York; see \{
Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organ}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 iza}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 tion). At that time it was a membe
r of the Confederation of the Five Boroughs, but when that union dissolved and on the creation of the great earldoms, in the early eleventh century, it is not clear to which earldom Nottinghamshire was initially attached. It may have been part of the 'Ear
l
dom of the Middle English' held by Beorn, nephew of Earl Godwin. Following Beorn's murder in 1049-1050, the earldom was joined to that of Mercia held by Earl Leofric and it would be natural to assume that Nottinghamshire went with it. Certainly the posses
sion by Countess Godiva, wife of Earl Leofric, of the wapentake of Newark before the Conquest might suggest that Leofric himself had held it in his capacity as earl. Derbyshire too was subject to the earls of Mercia. However}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  there is a suspicion that Notti
nghamshire was, for a time, attached to the earldom of Northumbria, for Domesday records Earl Tosti as having a carucate in the borough of Nottingham and receiving the third penny of its revenue (B2); this was normally the prerogative of the earl. Further
, Tosti is apparently ad}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 dressed as E}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 arl of Northumbria and of Nottinghamshire in a writ of Edward the Confessor dating from }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535\charrsid2974695 1060x1065}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; see 5,1 Southwell note. Moreover, he is possibly the Tosti who }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11958535 had }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 held Bingham (9,97) the head manor of a wapentake; see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , i. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8806031\charrsid8806031 p.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8806031  224;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Kapelle, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Norman Conquest of the North}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, pp. 99, 261. Tosti ruled from 1055-1065. Before him Siward was Earl of Northumbria }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 1041-1055, but it is unclear whether Nottinghamshire was also part of his earldom.
\par \tab In 1086 Nottinghamshire and Derby}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10170514 shire apparently shared a shire-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
court; see DBY B15 shires note. Unless this was convened especially for the Domesday hearing, it is also likely that they shared a sheriff, as they did thereafter until 1256. How ancient this
 arrangement was and whether Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire were originally one shire just as the lands dependent on Lincoln and Stamford were merged to form Lincolnshire, is uncertain. It is therefore difficult to be sure how to assign sheriffs mentioned
 in connection with one of these shires in the immediate post-Conquest period. A Harding is attested as a sheriff in the period between 1066 and 1086: }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 
, p. 194 no. 33. An Earnwig was probably sheriff of Nottinghamshire between 1070 and 1072: }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 , pp. 831-32 no. 276. If he was the sheriff }{
\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 E}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 ., who was addressed in 1093 (}{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 
, i. p. 87 no. 337), he may have laid down his office then resumed it, for Hugh son of Baldric is named
 as a sheriff in Domesday (B3) and was still alive in 1089. 'William Peverel and all of Nottinghamshire' are addressed in a writ of William II (1086x1100), but his title is not given: }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum}{
\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 , i. p. 108 no. 438. Around 1100 Richard son of Gotse appears as sheriff of both shires: }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 
, ii. pp. 21, 23, 24, 47 nos. 588, 598, 600, 723. On the sheriffs, see Green, }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 English Sheriffs}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid10170514 , pp. 34, 67;}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Crook, 'Establishment of the Derbyshire County Court, 1256'.
\par \tab The fir
st separate Earl of Nottingham was created in 1377 with the elevation of John of Mowbray. There was also no Earl of Derby until 1138, when, following the 'battle of the standard' against the Scots at Northallerton, Robert of Ferrers, third son of Henry of
 Ferrers, the Domesday tenant-in-chief, was given that title. There is some suggestion that Nottinghamshire belonged to the Ferrers earldom and the foundation charter of Breedon Priory in Leicestershire (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Monasticon Anglicanum}
{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , vi. p. 97), if genuine and correctly transcribed, contains the name }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Robert comes de Notingham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Handbook of British Chronology}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 442; Round, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Geoffrey de Mandeville}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 193; }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , i. p. 235.
\par 
\par 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10170514 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 WAPENTAKES
\par The Names of the Wapentakes 
\par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\ts16\trgaph108\trleft-108\trbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrh\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrv\brdrs\brdrw10 
\trftsWidth1\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth2808\clshdrawnil \cellx2700\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth6048\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\pard\plain 
\s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\tx284\faauto\rin0\lin0\yts16 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 Name used in this edition\cell Form(s) found in Domesday Book\cell }\pard\plain 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs20\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\ts16\trgaph108\trleft-108\trbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrl
\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrh\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrv\brdrs\brdrw10 \trftsWidth1\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt
\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth2808\clshdrawnil \cellx2700\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth6048\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\row }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\tx284\faauto\rin0\lin0\yts16 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\fs20\lang2057\langfe2057\langnp2057\langfenp2057\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 'Bassetlaw'
\par Bingham
\par Broxtowe
\par 'Lythe'
\par Newark
\par Oswaldbeck
\par Rushcliffe
\par Thurgarton}{\b\fs20\lang2057\langfe2057\langnp2057\langfenp2057\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 \cell }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\tx284\faauto\rin0\lin0\yts16 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {
\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 Bernedelawe}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 ,}{\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613  Bernedeselawe}{
\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 ,}{\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613  Bernesedelau}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 ,}{
\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613  Bernesedelawe
\par Bingameshou}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 , }{\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 Bingehamhou
\par Brochelestou}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 ,}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid10170514\charrsid7959613 *}{\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613  Brocoluestou}{
\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 ,}{\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613  Broluestou
\par Lide
\par Newerca}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 , }{\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 Newerce
\par Oswardebec}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 ,}{\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613  Wardebec
\par Riseclive
\par Torgartone}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 ,}{\i\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613  Turgastune}{\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid7959613 \'86}{
\f0\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 \cell }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs20\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 
\trowd \irow1\irowband1\lastrow \ts16\trgaph108\trleft-108\trbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrh\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrv\brdrs\brdrw10 
\trftsWidth1\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth2808\clshdrawnil \cellx2700\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw10 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth6048\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\row }\pard\plain 
\s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\insrsid7959613 \'86  }{\f0\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613 
This form is found only in the Survey of }{\f0\insrsid15171039\charrsid7959613 'Roteland'}{\f0\insrsid15359826\charrsid7959613  (RUT R1)
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid10170514 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Identifying and Reconstructing the Wapentakes}{\b\f0\insrsid15359826  
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Like the land dependent on the remaining four of the Five Boroughs, Nottinghamshire together with }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
(the nucleus of the future Rutland) and all of Yorkshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10170514 , apart from the East Riding, wa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s divided into wapentakes. The word wapentake is Scandinavian (Old Norse }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 vapnatak}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ), but it is only in England that it is used as the name of a territorial di
vision. It means 'a vote of consent expressed by waving or brandishing weapons', and hence probably 'a vote or resolution of a deliberative assembly', then perhaps came to be used of the assembly itself and of the area that it represented; see Anderson, }
{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, p. xxi. The institution itself may have established by the Danes; once their armies had settled, some form of administration would have been needed and one based on units of territory would have suggested itself. The word wapentake is 
first found in the laws of King Edgar in 962 (Stenton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 505) and the institution was cer}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10170514 tainly in existence in the late }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
tenth century, when it was enshrined in the Wantage Code and given responsibilities akin to those of the hundreds in non-Danelaw counties; see \{Introduct}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8785421 i}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 on: History\}
. Within each wapentake there was probably also a number of 'small hundreds'. Rather than being a necessary subdivision of the wapentake, however, they seem to be a function of carucation which itself is
 not essential to the existence of the wapentake; see \{Introduction: Carucation\} and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \{Introduction: Small Hundreds\}.
\par \tab The Domesday folios for the county mention eight wapentakes - 'Bassetlaw', Bingham, Broxtowe, 'Lythe', Newark, Oswaldbeck, Rushcliffe and 
Thurgarton. However, the absence of any wapentake name at the beginning of several chapters indicates immediately that rubrication is defective. It is thus not possible to accept the Domesday allocation of places to wapentakes as it stands.
\par \tab Reconstruction
 of the contents of the 1086 wapentakes necessarily begins from the headings that Domesday does supply. These were intended to indicate where a new wapentakal group begins, but it is necessary to check each estate against other evidence, internal and exte
rnal}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 to determine if any headings have been omitted, are displaced or are erroneous. Domesday itself supplies many useful cross-references. It is also necessary to determine which of several possible arrangements}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 
 of material within the fief was}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  chosen by the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 main }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 scribe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571  of Great Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, the commonest being: (1) arrangement by hundred or wapentake; (2) separation of lordship land from subinfeudations, with the material still being entered in hundredal or wapentakal blocks within these two major divisions of the fief; (3) a divisio}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 n between lordship land and sub}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 infeudations, similar to (2),}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571  but within the subinfeudations}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 material is grouped by subtenant, not by hundred or wapentake. In many fiefs in many counties these hundredal or wapentakal blocks follow a
 standard sequence, and if this proves to be the case it can help allocate some estates whose wapentake is otherwise uncertain. Finally, reconstruction needs to take account of later additions to the text, which, if undetected, might otherwise skew the se
quence. 
\par \tab Analysis of the text for Nottinghamshire shows firstly that within the fiefs material is entered in wapentakal blocks and secondly that in most fiefs, these wapentakes are in a standard sequence. This sequential arrangement lacks any geographical 
basis and appears to be arbitrary, the order being: Newark, 'Bassetlaw', 'Lythe', Thurgarton, Rushcliffe, Broxtowe, Bingham, Oswaldbeck; see \{Introduction: Standard Order of Wapentakes\}.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4214880 {\f0\fs24\insrsid4214880 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The reasons for allocating a particular estate to an individual wape
ntake are given in the notes, but a few general points can usefully be made here to show the reasons why the restoration of the contents of wapentakes cannot be perfect. Firstly, internal cross-references can be valuable in allocating an estate to a wapen
take. Thus }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4214880 Edwalton is below a Rushcliffe w}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 apentake heading at 16,4, but begins a chapter (23,1) without any wapentake heading above it. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13984074\charrsid8806031 
A manor in Kelham is directly below a 'Lythe' wapentake head at 9,59, so it would be expected that other manors at Kelham would be in the same wapentake. This allows a 'Lythe' wapentake head to be placed above the manor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8806031 
ial parts of Kelham at 15,3. 18,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13984074\charrsid8806031 4 and 30,45 and avoids the difficulty caused by the early merging of 'Lythe' Wapentake and Thurgarton Wapentake which has obscured the division between them.}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid13984074   }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 However, it is also po}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid8806031 ssible for villages to be divided between wapentakes}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13984074\charrsid8806031 , though rare in the Danelaw counties}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid13245059 {\f0\fs24\insrsid4214880 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Secondly, while a glance at the manuscript suggests that there is abundant rubrication in the text of Nottinghamshire, and that it is clearly not as defective as }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13245059 in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Derbyshire or Oxfordshire, there are in fact only twenty-seven wapentake heads in the text}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8806031  and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10450520\charrsid8806031  there are none at all in cha}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8806031 pters 10-14, folios 287b-289d.}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  A reconstitution of the wapentakes suggests that there is need of a further eighty heads some of which must be conjectural. It can sometimes be difficult to know whether or whe
re to insert a wapentake head if the estate concerned has a name (such as Willoughby or Normanton) that is represented in several parts of the shire and where evidence for its identification is equivocal, or where a place is unidentified.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab Thirdly}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1120747 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  there i
s the difficulty inherent in the way estates are structured in this and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8325391 adjacent counties. Domesday Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  lists manors (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3356539 generally }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
distinguished by a marginal }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 M}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid13245059 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) and then their dependent outliers (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 B}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid13245059 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13245059 )}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1321187 , if any,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13245059  and J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 S}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid13245059 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1321187 
 though sometimes outliers are included in the description of the manor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3294143\charrsid1321187 ; see \{Introduction: Layout and Content of Entries\}}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. These structures cut across, or rather were largely independent of, the wapentakes, probably because the latter were imposed on exis
ting systems. Thus the dependencies of some manors evidently lay in other wapentakes. But Domesday Book, which records (imperfectly) only the wapentake in which the manor lay, only once, in the entry for th}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3294143 
e royal manor of Mansfield (1,23}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , in Broxtowe Wape
ntake), indicates by a heading at 1,31 that some of its dependencies lay in Oswaldbeck Wapentake. Other parts of Mansfield seem to have lain in 'Bassetlaw' and 'Lythe' Wapentakes but the text does not say so. In fact it appears that all the dependencies l
isted in 1,24-30 lay in 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake, a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3356539 part from Maplebeck, Beesthorpe and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  C}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3356539 arlton-on-Trent}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, which probably lay in 'Lythe' Wapentake. Internal and later evidence suggests that this pattern was not unique. Thus the manors of Sutton-cum-Lound (5,7) a
nd Laneham (5,4) themselves lay in 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake, but most of their members were in Oswaldbeck Wape}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14956834 ntake. The manor of Laxton }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 and some}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14956834  of its}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  dependencies (12,1-6) lay in 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake, but several dependencies (12,7-10) were in 'Lythe' Wapentake.
\par \tab Difficulty arises from this for the reconstruction of the 1086 wapentakes when a place only occurs as a dependent holding in the text. For example, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14956834 Mattersey is both a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdiction of Bothamsall in 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake (1,15) and of Rampton in Os
waldbeck Wapentake (9,132); it nowhere appears as a manor. It can only be tentatively assigned to 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake because it lies west of the River Idle, which appears to be the wapentake boundary at this point, and from later evidence; see 1,15 Mat
tersey note. In such cases wapentake headings which refer only to manors are no help. Even where a single entry is devoted to a joint manor, such as Gonalston and Milton (10,3), the second manor-name may not lie in the same wapentake as the first: t}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid14956834 hus Gonalston was in Thurgarton}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 Wapentake, but Milton was probably in 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake; see 10,3 Gonalston note and 10,3 Milton note. This last problem makes it difficult to allocate the respective parts of the joint manor of Kneesall and Kersall to the corre
ct wapentakes; see 17,9 Kneesall note. Further, the mai}{\f0\fs24\insrsid551282 n scribe of Great Domesday made}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  the matter more difficult by failing to indicate the status of some es}{\f0\fs24\insrsid551282 
tates. If they are assumed to have been}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  manors, further wapentake names may need to be inserted which may themselves disrupt an otherwise clear sequence. On the other hand it is risky to}{\f0\fs24\insrsid551282 
 pronounce that an estate was a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction simply because }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3356539 taking it as a manor and so inserting}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  a wapentake heading}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3356539  above it}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  would upset a notional sequence.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3356539  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid551282  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3356539 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab 
Fourthly, later evidence must be treated with caution. The most comprehensive evidence for the contents of the Nottinghamshire wapentakes dates from the fourteenth century, by which time changes had inevitably taken place. Two pairs of wapentakes ('Basset
law' and Oswaldbeck, Thurgarton and Lythe) had by then been amalgamated, and the outlying portion of Broxtowe Wapentake had been swallowed by Rushcliffe Wapentake. Moreover}{\f0\fs24\insrsid551282 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 there were several reasons why the lord of a manor in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid551282  one wapentake might have wished to }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
do suit at the court of another wapentake, especially if his estate was close to the border of the two; thus an estate could migrate to a neighbouring wapentake. Further, not all the places that are listed in Domesday appear in the later documents th
at make plain the wapentake in which they lay.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid551282 \tab Finally, t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 o these difficulties must be added the uncertainty of some place-name identifications and the comparative lack of study of parish history and the descent of manors in Nottinghamshire; see 
\{Introduction: Identification of Places\}.
\par \tab Nonetheless, despite these difficulties, it is possible to reconstruct the 1086 wapentakes with considerable accuracy and even to map them by drawing lines between vills according to the wapentake in which Domesday Book, su
pplemented where necessary by later evidence, appears to place them; this has been done by the present author (FT) for the Alecto edition. Fortunately where Domesday Book unequivocally assigns a place to a particular wapentake, later evidence is rarely in
 conflict and this suggests a considerable degree of stability in the Nottinghamshire wapentakes.
\par \tab The resulting pattern of eight wapentakes is essentially a simple}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2303055  one. Scattered ecclesiastical L}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 iberties or single-owner hundreds that are frequently found i
n southern shires would not be expected to disrupt the wapentake when the tenurial organ}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 iza}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 tion of manors was largely independent of it, and when the dissolution of multiple est}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2303055 a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 tes was less far advanced. Only Broxtowe and 'Bassetlaw' Wapentakes had detach
ed portions. The first, sandwiched between Rushcliffe Wapentake (which later absorbed it) and the county boundary, is evidenced in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16058155\charrsid16058155 five}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15235890  fiefs (NTT 9-10.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 15}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid14777817\charrsid16058155 -16.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15235890  30}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ), and probably consisted of Costock (9,94. 10,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12081114 11}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5930135 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 53. 15,5), Rempst}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2303055 one (9,94. 10,54. 15,6), Thorpe-in-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2303055 -}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Glebe (1,60. 9,91), Wysall (9,90) and parts of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4478294 Willoughby-on-the-Wolds (9,92}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4478294  16,12.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5930135  30,35). }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5930135\charrsid12081114 O}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid12081114 ther parts of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Willoughby-on-the-Wolds (}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4478294\charrsid12081114 9,93.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1124007  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4478294 10,10. 16,5}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 30,26}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1980117 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4478294  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1124007 were probably}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12081114\charrsid16058155 or possibly }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16058155 in Rush}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1124007\charrsid16058155 cliffe Wapentake}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16058155 . Moreover}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid6446395\charrsid16058155 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16058155  several of these estates consisted of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 dependencies; for example, one portion of Thorpe-in-the-Glebe (1,60) appears as an outlier of Upper Broughton (1,59) in Bingham W}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid12081114 apentake}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1980117\charrsid12081114 
 and the other part (9,91) as a Jurisdiction }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12081114 of Wysall in Broxtowe Wapentake,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6446395 a part of Costock (10,11) is a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdiction of Clifton (10,5, in Ru}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6446395 shcliffe Wapentake). It is thus}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  not possible to be certain of the wapentakes to which they belonged; see 9,90 Broxtowe note. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855 
\par \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855\charrsid14504760 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake may have had two detached parts. The first }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16058155 may have }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855\charrsid14504760 consisted of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid14504760 
Finningley (18,3) and Misson (1,65-66. 9,21. 30,43-44)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855\charrsid14504760  which }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid14504760 were seemingly cut off }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855\charrsid14504760 from the body of the wapentake }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid14504760 by Scaftworth (5,8)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7820644\charrsid14504760 , Everton (5,8. 9,117;124) and Harwell (9,117;124), which were}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid14504760  probably in Oswaldbeck Wapentake in 1086}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid16058155 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  It is possible that this detachment allowed the men of 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake access to the resourc}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7410806 es of the fen.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14504760  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9510091 Scaft}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9510091 worth only appears in Nottinghamshire Domesday }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6446395\charrsid9510091 as }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8157106\charrsid9510091 a }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6446395\charrsid9510091 J}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9510091 urisdiction of the manor of Sutton-cum-Lound }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9510091\charrsid9510091 (5,7) }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9510091 which was itself in 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake. }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid6446395\charrsid9510091 But most of Sutton-cum-Lound's J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9510091 urisdictions seem to have been in Oswaldbeck Wapentake, including those that surround }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9510091 Scaft}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9510091 worth in the text; see 5,8 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9510091 Scaft}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9510091 worth}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9510091 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7410806  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7410806\charrsid14504760 Moreover, Everton and Harwell appear in chapter 9 in a group of places that must have been in Oswaldbeck Wapentake in 1086. Conversely Misson appears in that chapter in a group of 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake places.}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid16058155  A further possibility is that Finningley was actually a detachment of 'Lythe' Wapentake; see 18,3 Finningley note. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14504760  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855\charrsid14504760 
There may have been a second detachment of 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake involving part of Cottam; see 9,18 Cottam note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab There is only one serious difficulty with the reconstruction, that is determining in which wapentakes lay Adbolton (10,12;56), Holme Pierrepont (9,80), Bassingfield (9,81. 10,13), }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16734915 
Gamston (10,14), }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Radcliffe-on-Trent (10,55. 11,33) and Lamcote (9,96. 15,7. 30,36) all of which lie just south of Nottingham where Bingham and Rushcliffe Wapentakes abut; see 10,12 Adbolton note. 
\par \tab It is not possible to give a definite total of the carucates in each wapent
ake, nor for the county as a whole: the latter number is inevitably distorted by omissions or figure errors in Domesday Book or swollen by unsuspected duplicate entries. The total for each wapentake is affected by the same problems and additionally by the
 
difficulty of allocating particular estates, especially dependencies, to the correct wapentake. Nevertheless, there is a broad pattern: Bingham and 'Bassetlaw' are close enough to ninety-six carucates for that to have been their original total; Thurgarton
 and Broxtowe with the addition to each of half of Alstoe Wapentake (from }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
) also seem to be near that total. The remaining wapentakes - 'Lythe', Newark, Rushcliffe and Oswaldbeck - are nearer to forty-eight carucates. Both F.M. Stenton }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Rut
land}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722 , i. p. 127) and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  C. Hart (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Danelaw}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, p. 409) have calculated the total carucation (rounded to the nearest half-carucate) as follows (Hart's figures are in brackets): 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake 101 (104) carucates, Bingham Wapentake 95 (94) carucates, Broxtowe
 Wapentake 84 (87) carucates (plus 12 carucates from half of Alstoe Wapentake in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
), 'Lythe' Wapentake 45 (45) carucates, Newark Wapentake 46 (48) carucates, Oswaldbeck Wapentake 42 (39) carucates, Rushcliffe Wapentake 50 (55) carucates, Thurgarton Wapentake 78 (82) carucates (plus 12 from Alstoe Wapentake in }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ). David Roffe's figures ('Introduction}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, p. 19) are broadly similar. 'Martinsley' Wapentake in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  (12 carucates) needs to be included in the Nottin
ghamshire figures, though it is uncertain to which wapentake it should be attached; see RUT R2. 'Lythe', Newark, Rushcliffe and Oswaldbeck Wapentakes were evidently half-wapentakes: all were so called in later times. For example, Newark and Oswaldbeck are
 so called in 1180, 'Lythe' and Rushcliffe in 1166 (Anderson, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 40-43) and frequently thereafter; see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Rotuli Hundredorum}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , ii. pp. 301, 309, 318. The artificiality of the system is again evident: a county of perhaps 576 carucates, di
vided into the equivalent of six wapentakes, each possibly containing eight twelve-carucate hundreds. The total given in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, i. pp. 208, 212, is 567 carucates. This is derived from Maitland, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid6179722 Domesday Book and Beyond}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 401-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722 40}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 2. David Rof
fe's total, appears to be about 580 carucates. The size may have originally been 576 carucates (6 x 96). Roffe, working on the assumption that royal land is not counted in 12-carucate hundreds postulates a number o}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722 
f 84-carucate wapentakes, with seven}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  hundreds in each, plus a total of hundreds from the half-wapentakes; Roffe, 'Introduction', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 18-20.
\par \tab It is difficult to imagine that the half-wapentakes of Nottinghamshire could ever have been directly combined with each other to form larger units, for of them only 'Lythe' Wapentake and Newark Wapentake are adjacent, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722 
though they are divided by the R}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 iver T
rent and in later times 'Lythe' Wapentake is associated with Thurgarton Wapentake. However, the shire may have been 'quartered' into four groups of one and a half wapentakes. Oswaldbeck/'Bassetlaw', Broxtowe/Rushcliffe, Thurgarton/'Lythe' and Bingham/Newa
rk could have each formed quarters containing about 144 carucates. These would have had a preponderance of natural boundaries and the existence of such a schematic division of the shire would explain why}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722  lands in}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Oswaldbeck and 'Bassetlaw'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722  Wapentakes}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  are to some ex}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722 tent intermixed, as are those in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Broxtowe and Rushcliffe}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722  Wapentakes}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , and why Oswaldbeck/'Bassetlaw' and Thurgarton/'Lythe' were single units in later times. On the quartering of shires, see Thorn, 'Hundreds and Wapentakes', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Huntingdonshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 28}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6179722 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Thorn, 'Hundreds and Wapentakes', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Cambridgeshire Domeday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13452326 , p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13452326  24}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab In Derbyshire, as in Nottinghamshire, there were the equivalent of six wapentakes. That shire was of roughly similar overall size, seems to have enjoyed the same gentler carucation as Nottinghamshire and in 1086 shared a sheriff with it.
\par }{\f0\fs24\highlight16\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par Wapentakal Boundaries 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 It seems probable that the wapentakes were drawn without much attention paid to the structure of estates. It would, anyway, have been difficult to accom}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 m}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 odate within a single wa}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 pentake all the far-flung J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions of some multiple estates; see \{Introduction: Manorial Organ}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 iza}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 tion\}
. Thus it was possible to use topographical features in many places to determine their boundaries. So in the north-east and in the south of the count}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 y the wapentake boundaries were mainly supplied by rivers.}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Newark Wapentake, Bingham Wape}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 ntake and Rushcliffe Wapentake we}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 re separated from the other wapentakes by the Riv}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 er Trent. Thurgarton Wapentake wa}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s divided from 'Lythe' Wapentake by the River Greet, and Oswaldbeck Wapentake from 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake, for much of its length, by the River Idle. In addition, part of the division between Rushcliffe W}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 
apentake and Bingham Wapentake wa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s provided by the Foss Way. Only in the centre and west of the county are the boundaries less distinct particularly where they cross and meet in Sherwood Forest.}{
\f0\fs24\highlight16\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 Small H}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 undreds}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par It is likely that, by 1086, each wapentake was su}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 bdivided into a series of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958  'small hundreds', possibly containing }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15992186 12}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
carucate}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . There are several references to these hundreds in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2182201 Nottinghamshire (11,17. 18,1;7}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 24,1). At 11,17 of the two bovates of Farnsfield, i}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2182201 t is said that: 'One is in the j}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction of Southwell and the other}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2182201  [in the jurisdiction] of the king}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, but it nevertheless belongs to the Hundred of Southwell'. At 18,1, which concerns the manor of Averham, it is reported }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2182201 that 'to this manor are appurtenant 5 F}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958 reemen in other h}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 undreds'. At 18,6 in the last line and apparently governing the manor of Staythorpe (18,7) is the heading 'Blidworth Hundred'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958 ; see 18,7 Blidworth note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. Finally, at 24,1, of the manor of Leake, Domesday says: 'To this manor is attached an}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8986529  outlier, Leake, where there ar}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 e 2 carucates of l}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8986529 and taxable. This}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  lies in Plumtree Hundred'. There is a solitary reference to one of these hundreds in Derbyshire, where the Bishop of Chester's manor of Sawley,
 with Draycott and Hopwell (DBY 2,1), is said to lie not only in 'Morleystone' Wapentake, but also in Sawley Hundred. There are many more references, though still in an unsystematic way, in Lincolnshire.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15148612  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
There is no reference to these 'small' hundreds in Leicestershire and Yorkshire, the other carucated shires, though Leicestershire was evidently divided into small hundreds (many of them containing more than twelve carucates) in the twelfth century, as is
 shown by the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid15148612 Leicestershire Survey;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  see \{LEC Introduction: The Leicestershire Survey\}
. It is probable that it was so divided in 1086. The East Riding of Yorkshire is divided into hundreds, not wapentakes, but these appear to be of a different type}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958 , the equivalent of the wapentakes in the other ridings}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .
\par \tab In the case of the Nottinghamshire references to hundreds, they appear to be odd survivals from}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958  the sources of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9573050 Great }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11761958 Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9573050  Book}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . There is reason to believe that, in the case of some or all of the non-Dane
law counties, the Domesday material was at some stage arranged within the county by (large) hundred, within the hundred by village and within the village by estate. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9573050 Great }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Domesday}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9573050  Book}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , or its predecessor, the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15148612  putative}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  circuit volume, was made by uncouplin
g each estate from its neighbours and from the village in which it lay and listing it with others which had the same 1086 holder. In those shires which had small hundreds, it would have been possible for the material to have been arranged by wapentake wit
hin the shire, by hundred within the wapentake, by village within the hundred and by estate within the village, as in the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid15148612 Leicestershire Survey}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. In converting to feudal form it would also have been possible to list the lands of each fief-holder wapentake by
 wapentake (as was largely the case) and within the wapentake hundred by hundred. But this last would have been feasible only if each estate was a manor. However}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15148612 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 the shires that have small hundreds also have a clear hierarchy of estates, m}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15148612 any manors having outliers and J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions depende}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15148612 nt on them. These outliers and J}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions rarely lay in the same village as the head manor. In listing these appurtenances under the manor to which they belonged, the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8463404  main scribe of Great Domesday }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855\charrsid8463404 (or a predecessor working on the circuit volume}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9573050  was}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  sometimes forced to list under a given manor dependencies th}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15148612 at lay in a different wapentake.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Sometimes }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9573050 he}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  marked this}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9573050  with a sub-heading as he}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  did un}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15148612 der the manor of Mansfield (1,23}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) which lay in Broxtowe Wapentake, but w}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15148612 hich also had 'Jurisdiction}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in Oswaldbeck Wa}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid13840414 pentake' (1,31). More often }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9573050\charrsid13840414 he}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid13840414  passed this dislocation over in silence, as }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855\charrsid13840414 
he was applying }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid13840414 the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15559855\charrsid13840414 wapentake headings only to manors, and even then not fully or consistently.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 Many of the small hundreds will have contained villages that consisted of manors, ou}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 tliers and Jurisdictions. When esta}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
tes in these last two categories were assigned to their head manor, the hundreds would have been disassembled and there would have been 
no point in including headings for small hundreds except to make a particular tenurial point. A few may have survived in the text of Great Domesday by accident, the result of a failure to abbreviate fully. 
\par \tab These hundreds are best understood from the Domesday Survey of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 (the nucleus of the later Rutland) attached to that of Nottinghamshire as well as from the early twelfth-century }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3223305 Leicestershire Survey}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , and from the}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3223305  Lindsey Survey}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1783398 approximately the same date}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . In the case of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , the system is explained in the first two entries (RUT R1-2): 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 \tab \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 In Alstoe Wapentake there are 2 Hundreds; in each 12 carucates taxable, and in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 
\par \tab \tab \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 each 24 ploughs possible.
\par \tab \tab In 'Martinsley Wapentake there is one Hundred, in which [are] 12 carucates of land
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 \tab \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab taxable}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and 48 ploughs possible, apart from the King's three lordship manors, in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 
\par \tab \tab \tab 1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 4 ploughs can plough'. 
\par The text of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  helpfully adds that half of Alstoe Wapentake (that is, presumably. one}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305  of the 12-carucate hundreds) i}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
s in Thurgarton Wapentake (in Nottinghamshire) and half was in Broxtowe Wapentake (also Nottinghamshire). The single hundred of which 'Martinsley}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 Wapentake was composed was also attached to Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 :}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  'These two }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 Wapentakes are attached to the s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 heriffdom of Nottingham for}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 the King's tax' (RUT R3), but the particular Nottinghamshire wapentake is not stated. It is significant that in the case of Alstoe Wapentake, th}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 e contents of its two hundreds we
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 re entered one after the other. This could}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305  have}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  be}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 en done because the text had}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  not been fully converted to feudal format}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab These small hundreds seem to }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 have }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 be}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 en}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  connected with caruca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 tion. They we}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
re subdivisions of the wapentake, and perhaps its e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 ssential building-blocks. They we}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 re therefo
re fiscal rather than administrative, and there is no evidence that they functioned in the same way as the larger hundreds of Wessex and southern Mercia which had policing and judicial obligations in addition to their responsibility for taxation.}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064\charrsid15084156 The testimony of the men of the hundred is, however, reported three times in Lincolnshire (LIN 1,9. 35,12. 68,22), but this probably means that they provided information rather than }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15084156 that }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064\charrsid15084156 such men}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8672447  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064\charrsid15084156 constituted a court.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064 
\par \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Where they are fully evidenced in later}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305  surveys, these small hundreds we}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 re usually territorially compact, but cut through villages and estates. Their variati}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 on in size between the shires wa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s probably due to the very different quotas imposed on different shires; thus }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3223305 the hundreds of Leicestershire we}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 re
 often three o}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8672447 r four times larger than the 12 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 carucates that are assumed to be the norm in Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire. 
\par  \tab This use of the word 'hundred' may be derived from a fine (of hundreds of silver "ora}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7240755 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8467824 "}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) imposed for a breach of the
 king's peace. This fine is found in the joint shire customs for Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2367334  (S1)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  which record that a fine was payable '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2367334 by 18 hundreds [of "ora}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7240755 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8467824 "}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2367334 ]'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 : 'In Nottinghamshire and in Derbyshire, if the King's peace, given by his hand or seal, is broken, a fine is paid by 18 hundreds [of "ora}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7240755 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6902083 "]}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; each hundred [of "ora}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7240755 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6902083 "}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  makes] \'a3
8. The King has two parts of this fine, the Earl the third; that is}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6902083 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  12 hundreds [of "ora}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7240755 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6902083 "}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
] are the fine paid to the King, 6 to the Earl'. The boroughs of Lincoln (LIN C32) and York (YKS C38) had very similar customs. This fine is also implicit in the provision of the Wantage Code of }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. 997; see}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8672447  S1 hundreds note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6902083  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
However, if carucation dates from the reign of King Cnut (1016-1035) or of Edward the Confessor (1042-1066), and the hundreds are related to carucation, then the fine and the fiscal unit may have no connection, the name 'hundred' perhaps being taken from 
t
he name of the unit in Wessex and southern Mercia, where it was a division of the shire (and which had largely lost its meaning of '100 men' or '100 hides'). It is possible, however, that the fine and the unit of assessment are in fact linked, with the hu
ndred being a later territorial expression of the fine.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5796643  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2367334 Nonetheless, t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5796643\charrsid2367334 here seems little doubt that the 'hundred' in the shire customs is a unit of money.}{
\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390 \tab On }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid2367334 the territorial}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  hundreds, see RUT R1-2 and RUT R1 hundreds note; Round, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Feudal England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, pp. 181-214; Foster and Longley, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lincolnshire Domesday and the Lindsey Survey}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2367334 . }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid2367334 xiv-xv}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2367334 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Stenton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Danelaw Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. lxiii-lxx; Roffe, 'Lincolnshire Hundred'.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid7827745 {\f0\fs24\insrsid7827745\charrsid7219534 \tab The pages of Nottinghamshire Domesday tempt commentators to do addition sums and arrive at the content
s of 'small hundreds'. Stenton in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid7827745\charrsid7219534 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7827745\charrsid7219534 , i. p.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7219534  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7827745\charrsid7219534 211}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7219534 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7827745\charrsid7219534  showed that the estates at North Muskham, South Muskham and Little Carlton (5,2;5. 8,2. 12,11-14. 30,7;46) formed a 12-carucate unit though he did not proceed to sugge
st that it was a hundred. John Morris, in the Phillimore printed edition listed the supposed contents of Blidworth Hundred; see 18,7 Blidworth note. He was also inclined to see the detached part of Broxtowe Wapentake, adjacent to the southern border of th
e county, as consisting of a single 12-carucate hundred; see 9,90 Broxtowe note.   
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid7827745 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 David Roffe has published ('Introduction', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11932724 p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11932724  8-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
9) a reconstruction of two 12-carucate hundreds that lay to the west of Nottingham. In north to south order his 'Hundre}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163 d A' consists of Newthorpe (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid2367334 10,6}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2367334 3}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ), Watnall (10,43), Kimberley (10,47), Nuthall (10,40. 30,32), Cossall (10,36. 13,12), Strelley (10,27-28. 30,31), Bilborough (1,50. 10,39), Broxtowe (1,4}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390 9. 2}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid8401719 8}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1322698 ,3), Trowell (29,2. 30,30;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 50-51) and Wollaton (1,47. 10,35). His 'Hund}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8401719 red B' contains Bulwell (10,66),}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 Arnold, (1,45), Old Basford (10,51-52. 30,34)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6902083 , Radford (10,15),}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177  Old}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Lenton (1,48. 10,19;24), 'Morton' (10,17) and the borough of Nottingham (B1).}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 If royal land is deducted, both Hundred A and Hundred B consist of 12 carucates each.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6955388 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6955388\charrsid7615647 R}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6955388\charrsid11932724 offe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11932724  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6955388\charrsid11932724 
identifies the contents of these two hundreds on the basis of 'a peculiarity in the record of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724 assessment}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11932724 '. He says: 'In Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724 
 the figures for ploughlands almost invariably exceed carucates to the geld, but in an area to the north and west of Nottingham, there is a group of vills in which the two figur}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3369360 es are identical in every entry}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3369360 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724  It was Stenton in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724 
, i. pp. 212, 265 note 1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11932724 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724  who first drew attention to this phenomenon. In the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3369360  first instance he wa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724 
s giving some carucates and ploughlands in a number of wapentakes to sh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3369360 ow that the assessment of both was duodecimal. He passed}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724  over, without comment}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724  five cases (out of nine) in Broxtowe Wapentake where carucates}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3369360  and ploughlands bore}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724  the s}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid8074947\charrsid11932724 ame assessment. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 However}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11932724 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724  on}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3369360  the second occasion he mentioned}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724  that the average ratio of ploughlands t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3369360 o carucates in Nottinghamshire wa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 s 2 to1 but that 'identity is very characteristic of the assessmen
t of Broxtow wapentake'. This may be overstated as on 39 holdings in Broxtowe Wapentake carucates and ploughlands are equivalent, on 25 they differ and in 23 cases there is insufficient information. This 'peculiarity' needs to be put }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 further }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 in perspective. There are cases in Nottinghamshire as a whole where carucates exceed ploughlands (3,1. 9,75;85. 10,33;62}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11076288 )}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 . One of these (10,33) is at a part of Newthorpe of which Roffe includes anot}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 er portion (10,63) in his list. }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7615647\charrsid3369360 There are also a large number of entries in Nottinghamshire where there are more ploughlands than carucates and, again, one of them is for a part of Newthorpe (4,8) }{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177\charrsid3369360 while }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7615647\charrsid3369360 other}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177\charrsid3369360 s are}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7615647\charrsid3369360  for part}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177\charrsid3369360 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7615647\charrsid3369360  of Watnall (10,46)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid669177\charrsid3369360  and Old Basford (10,22)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7615647\charrsid3369360 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7615647  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 There are also cases in wapentakes other than Broxtowe wher
e carucates and ploughlands have the same figure (9,104-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 10}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 5. 12,10}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11076288 . }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11076288\charrsid3369360 15,9}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 ). Indeed there are further ca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 es in Broxtowe Wapentake }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 itself where ca}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10911163\charrsid11932724 rucates and ploughla}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12847771 nds bore}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724  the same assessment: at Kirkby-in-Ashfield (30,27), Brinsley (10,31), Hucknall (10,49), 'Sutton Passeys' (3}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724 0,55), Bramcote (1,46. 29,1)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11076288 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 Costock}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 and Rempstone jointly (9,94)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724 , }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 Costock alone (10,53. 15,5)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724 
, Rempstone alone (10,54. 15,6), }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 Wysall }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724 (9,90), Thorpe-in-the-Glebe (1,60) and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5506381\charrsid11932724 Willoughby-in-the-Wolds (9,92. 16,12. 30,35)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724 . This last group (Costock, Rempstone, Wysall, Thorpe-in-the-Glebe and Willoughby-on-the-Wolds}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12847771 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724 
 formed a detached part of Broxtowe Wapentake and the equivalence of carucates and ploughlands is an element in reconstructing that detachment, since there are no examples of equivalence in Rushcliffe Wapentake}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12847771 
 with which Broxtowe Wapentake wa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid11932724 s interlaced}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020 . }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid12847771 
For the difficulties involved in a possible reconstruction of this outlying part of Broxtowe Wapentake which lies against the Leicestershire border, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5796643\charrsid12847771 see 9,90 Broxtowe note}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1314349\charrsid12847771 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6955388 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590 \tab At first sight }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590\charrsid7615647 Roffe's reconstruction of these two hundreds}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  is impressive. However, there are difficulties. Firstly, if a village c}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7615647 an be divided between hundreds, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 as Roffe asserts }{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177 - }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7615647 and practis}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 es by leaving out other parts of }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid669177 Newthorpe (4,8. 10,33), Kimberley (10,48), Broxtowe (10,41)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177 Watnall (1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 0,42;44-46}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177 ) and Old Basford}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid12847771 10,22}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12847771\charrsid12847771 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177  30,28) -}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 there is much flexibility available to draw the appropriate numbers of carucates and bovates from them to join others in making a round 12 carucates}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid669177 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590\charrsid669177  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064\charrsid669177 It is true that in some of these parts the carucates and plo}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590\charrsid669177 ughlands are not the same, but from his two reconstructed hundreds R}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064\charrsid669177 
offe also omits parts for which there a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177 re no ploughland estimates, yet}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3497064\charrsid669177  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590\charrsid669177 he also includes parts of vills for which the in
formation is similarly incomplete, as for Strelley (10,28), Bilborough (1,50), Broxtowe (1,49), Old Basford (10,52) and Old Lenton (1,48).}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The only }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590\charrsid669177 truly}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 persuasive reconstruction would be one of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid12847771 the hundreds in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 a whole wapentake or county }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1322698 or of an}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  area enclosed entirel}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13986590 y by natural borders}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12847771 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab Secondly}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Roffe deducts royal land, saying that it was not part o}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1322698 f the assessment of the hundred:}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 'The ten carucates and six bovates which the king held stood outside }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1322698 of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 the hundredal system an}{\f0\fs24\insrsid669177 d must therefore be sub}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1322698 tracted' (}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 'Introduction', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1322698  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 9}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1322698 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. Royal land certainly appears to be missing from the Lincolnshire hundreds as given in the Lindsey Survey, the only royal land appearing there being estates that were not in the king's hands in
 1086. However, royal land is included in hundreds in the Leicestershire Survey and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid12847771 in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid12847771 Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 
'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid669177 Furthermore, in the case of Grantham (LIN 1,9), royal land, the hundred bore witness for the Bishop of Lincoln in a dispute over seven plots of land. This could suggest t}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15421569 hat the royal estate of Grantham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid669177  was in a hundred.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Moreover, it is not a necessary interpretation of NTT 11,17}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020 
 concerning two }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid12847771 bovate}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12847771 s, one of them held by the king}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid12847771  (quoted in full at the beginning of this discussion)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12847771 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  that land belonging to the king was not in any hundred}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4416824 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Further, as land often moved in and out of royal hands, it would leave the hundreds in a }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4416824 permanent state of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid4416824 fiscal and jurisdictional }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4416824 flux.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab Thirdly, if these two proposed hundreds are integral and compact, then, geographically speaking, a further part of Broxtowe (10,41) at 5 acres must have lain in one or the other as must Hempshill (10,50) at 6\'bd
 bovates and Awsworth (10,48. 30,33) at 1 carucate. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5844178\charrsid10515543 In the holding at Hempshill the ploughland does not equal the assessment, but is more than it.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5844178 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3543806  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab Fourthly, the reconstruction of these two hundreds leaves an area of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1130831  Broxtowe Wapentake}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1130831  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid10515543 which lies to the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1130831\charrsid10515543 south-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid10515543 west of Nottingham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9833020\charrsid10515543 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid10515543  sandwiched betwe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1130831\charrsid10515543 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid10515543 n them and the border with Derbyshire. This area comprised the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid10515543 
estate or }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid10515543 es}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid10515543 tates of 'Sutton Passeys' (10,38}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid10515543 . 30,55}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid10515543 
: these are possibly duplicates; see}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3543806\charrsid10515543  30,55 entry note)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , Bramcote (1,46. 10,37. 29,1), Beeston (10,34), St}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3543806 aple}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ford (10,16), the Chilwells (10,26. 13,4-5) and Toton (10,25).}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid13895394 Of these, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13895394 only }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid13895394 in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10515543 
 'Sutton Passeys'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13895394  are carucates and ploughlands }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3151390\charrsid13895394 equivalent, as they are in two parts of Bramcote (1,46. 29,1).}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  If the royal land is included, this}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562  area }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid7109034 amounts to an awkward 19 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7109034 carucates}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid7109034  1 bovate}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7109034 ; }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid7109034 without it to an inconvenient 18 carucates and 3}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7109034  bovates}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid7109034 
; though exact totalling is complicated by the possible duplication of parts of 'Sutton Passeys' and by the correction from 8 bovates to 3 bovates in 10,26.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721\charrsid7109034  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid7109034 
The general point is that it is impossible to find one or two 12-carucate hundreds in this part of the wapentake which is isolated from the rest by Roffe's two reconstructed hundreds}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7109034\charrsid7109034 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7109034  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Finally, although it makes no difference to Roffe's figures, since it is royal land, it is unlikely that Nottingham
 was in any hundred, since its 6 carucates appear to have contributed only to the revenue of the borough. In the light of these difficulties, the more prudent course would be to accept that there is insufficient evidence to reconstruct a single Nottingham
shire small hundred.
\par \tab In seeking traces of these hundreds in the text of Domesday, Roffe alights on those cases where the same man holds two parts of a village and where the entries for these parts are not adjacent in the text. He says ('Introduction', }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 10) 'where an estate extended into a number of hundreds, it was described in a number of entries' and further ('Introduction', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 9) 'Henry of Ferrers' estate of Leake was enrolled in two entries because it was situated in two hundreds'. Of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721  Old Basford }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5007632\charrsid11877646 
he says: 'Only part of the settlement belo}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11877646\charrsid11877646 nged to one of the reconstructed hundreds (h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5007632\charrsid11877646 undred B), and in both chap
ters [10 and 30], the division of the vill is recognized, for the estates are described in two distinct groups. The one corresponds to that part of the vill in which ploughlands exceed carucates, and the other to that part in which the two assessments are
 equal'. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid11877646 He adds that the distinction }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721\charrsid11877646 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid11877646 betwe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721\charrsid11877646 en the equal and unequal ass}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid11877646 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ment}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 was evidently important as it accounts for the deletion of an entry in William Peverel's fief, and its repositioning later in his fief (10,23;52).
\par \tab A general difficulty with th
is notion is that such separations of parts of villages within the same fief occur in counties outside the Danelaw where there is no administrative subdivison of the large hundred. Such separations are usually attributed to the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721 
 main}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  scribe's repeatedl}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8675721 y searching in a schedule that was}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 territorially arranged for estates belonging to a particular fief and initially missing some, or to the fact that some of the material may have been sub-assembled at some stage in other ways, for exam}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950367 ple by 1066 holders or 108
6 sub}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 tenants. 
\par \tab On the particular cases cited by Roffe, it should be pointed out that there is only one entry for Leake (24,1) held by Henry of Ferrers, which consists of a manor and an outlier. In the case of Old Bas}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3488788 ford, 
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5007632\charrsid3488788 the 'two distinct groups' that Roff}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid3488788 e mentions appear to be 10,22}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5007632\charrsid3488788  and 10,51-52 in chapter 10 and 30,28 and 30,34 in chapt}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid3488788 er 30, hardly groups at all.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5007632\charrsid3488788  In fact, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3488788 the distinction betwe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950367\charrsid3488788 e}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3488788 n the two entries i}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950367\charrsid3488788 n the land of the king's thanes}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3488788  (30,28;34) is not due to equal or unequal assessments, as 
the first (consisting of 2 bovates) }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid3488788 has no plough estimate.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9005822\charrsid3488788  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid3488788 
The only distinction, which is probably not hundredally based, is between 10,22}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3488788 , }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid3488788 where the ploughlands exceed the carucates}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3488788 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid3488788  and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3488788\charrsid3488788  the 10,51. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562\charrsid3488788 30,34 'group'  where they are equal. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950367 As to the deleti}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
on of an early entry for Basford in William Peverel's fief (10,23) and its repositioning at 10,52, it needs to said that this bovate apparently appears again at 30,28 and its move and double inclusion is more likely to be due to repeated attempts to resol
ve a twin uncertainty: from whom was it held and t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid5922904 o which of t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid5922904 he Basford manors did it belong; see}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9905413  \{Introduction: Writing and Correction\};}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid5922904  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5922904\charrsid5922904 10,23 entry note and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid5922904 10,52 entry note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  There are two other similar deletions}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9905413 
 of duplicate material}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in the text}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950367 , one where the land of Ulfkil}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in Clifton (10}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9905413 ,6) was deleted }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5922904\charrsid9905413 probably}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950367\charrsid9905413  because a check showed it}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5922904\charrsid9905413  had been wrongly written }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9905413\charrsid9905413 there and th}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9905413 at Ulfkil in fact held in chief (as already entered }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 among }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9905413 the lands of the king's thanes at 30,25)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; secondly whe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950367 
re Ranby was entered both as a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9905413 urisdiction of Bothamsall (1,14}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) and of Mansfield (1,30), the latter being deleted. 
\par 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3424901\charrsid3424901 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Wapentakal Courts}{\b\f0\insrsid15359826  
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 There is a single reference in Nottinghamshire to evidence provided by men of the wapentake. In a dispute between Ilbert of Lacy and Roger of Poitou about the tenure of Cropwell Butler (20,7), 'the Wapentake' testified }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9905413 that Ilbert had held it}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; see 20,7 wapentake note.
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid2717005 Wapentakal N}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ames and Moot-Sites
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid2717005 The w}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 apentake of Newark was named from the estate held in 1066 by Count
ess Godiva and in 1086 by the Bishop of Lincoln (6,1). The moot-site is unknown, but, since the holders both }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4131934 in 1066}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 and in 1086 had all the profits and forfeitures of the wapentake, including the earl's and the king's, the wapentake may have met in the manorial hall of Newark}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934\charrsid12672449 [-on-Trent]}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .
\par \tab The names of the wapentakes of Bingham (9,97-98), Broxtowe (1,49. 10,41. 28,3) and Thurgarton (11,12) are connected with settlements that appear in the Domesday Survey. Bingham was held by Roger of Bully in 1086, but by Tosti (possib}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2717005 ly the earl of that name) in 106}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 6. The wapentake name (}{\i\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826 Bingameshou}{\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826 , }{
\i\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826 Bingehamhou}{\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826 ) contains an additional element}{\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid2717005 :}{
\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826  Old Norse }{\i\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826 haugr}{\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826  or Old English }{
\i\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826 hoh}{\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826  ('hill-spur', 'hill'). The meeting-place appears to have been at Moot-House Pit }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
which is marked at SK693391 on the Ordnance Survey six-inch map sheet 43SW (surveyed 1882-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 8}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 3, published 1891) }{\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826 beside the Foss Way. }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The name is also found in the adjacent Moothill Farm (at SK 685393 on Ordnance Survey six-inch map sheet 43NE (surveyed 1883, published 1891). The place is called Foss Farm on modern large-scale maps. This is }{
\f0\fs24\lang1036\langfe1033\langnp1036\insrsid15359826 
just to the south of the point where the Foss Way crosses the road from Bingham to Nottingham (SK687397). The site, which is still identifiable, 'is marked by a shallow depression on the north-west side of the Fosse Way at 
the top of the hill above the Saxondale cross-roads': }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anderson, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 42; see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 219. There is also a Spellow Hill and Spellow Farm (at SK 6640) in the parish of Radcliffe-on-Trent close to the junction of that parish with those of Saxondale and Cropwell Butler. This appears to derive from Old English }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 spel}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 hoh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  ('hill' or 'hill-spur where there are speeches').
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab Broxtowe contains the element 'stow' ('meeting-place') that is found in several hundred or wa
pentake names, for example Alstoe Wapentake in Rutland}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5118327\charrsid16206465 . The moot-site may have been }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16206465 at Broxtowe Hall in Bilborough (SK 533428)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5118327\charrsid16206465 , though this is only a guess.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16206465  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5118327\charrsid16206465 The hall is }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16206465 
marked on the first edition Ordnance Survey one-inch map (s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 heet 71 of 1836, reprint sheet 35 of 1970); see Anderson, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 38-39}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 , pp. 111-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
12, 140. It is possible that the village was named from the meeting-place rather than }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 vice versa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab The moot-site of Thurgart
on Wapentake may have been in Thurgarton itself. However, in the twelfth-century, the court of the wapentake was held at }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Iverishaghe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 in Oxton, that is, at the site of the tumulus and fort on Robin Hood Hill (SK635532); it appears }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 1180 as the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Wappent' de Thurgerton apud Iverishaghe}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  ... }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 existens}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  ('The wapentake of Thurgarton ... being at }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Iverishaghe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
'). It is not clear whether this site (which is six kilometres from Thurgarton) was the ancestral moot of the wapentake or an alternative site or only came into
 use for meetings of the two wapentakes of Thurgarton and Lythe which were subsequently combined. The putative border of 'Lythe' Wapentak}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  was five kilometres away at its nearest point; see Anderson, }
{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp.40-41}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, p. 154. It is tempting to connect the adjacent name Loath Hill (SK 6353) on which the earthwork stands with 'Lythe', but the earliest form of Loath cited in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid11498323 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 173, dates from }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16455828 840 and the m}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 edieval forms of Lythe (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lide}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lie}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lye}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Leghye}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
) do not show the vowel change needed for the evolution to Loath. Moreover}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  this place would never have bee}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 n the meeting-place of 'Lythe' W}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
apentake alone, since it lay outside it.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171 \tab The }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid16404828 names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828  'Bas}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid16404828 setlaw' and 'Lythe' have now disappeared from the map}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, although bot}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828 h lasted into the Middle Ages. For 'Bas}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid16404828 setlaw' possible connections were suggested}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828  with the }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828 pratum de Bersebrigge}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828  ('the meadow of }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828 Bersebrigge}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid16404828 
') near Worksop assuming that }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828  Old English }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828 brycg}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828  ('bridge') has been substituted for }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828 hlaw}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828  ('mound', 'hill')}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid16404828  and that the first elements represent the same word}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828 
, or with Blyth Law Hill (SK6484) about six kilometres north-east of Worksop, but in Blyth Ancient Parish. This name preserves the element }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828 hlaw}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16404828 , 
but there is no other connection. It is unlikely that both these names refer}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  to the same place; if they did, it seem}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16404828 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 more probable that the meadow would have been said to be 'of Blyth'; see Anderson, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 39-40}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 23.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171\charrsid16404828 
The issue has now been resolved by David Crook's demonstration that 'Bassetlaw' is Beacon Hill (SK726734) in East Markham; see Crook, 'Location of 'Bassetlaw'.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5911171  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  The meeting-place of 'Lythe}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Wapentake may have lain close to Normanton-on-Trent where there was a place of that name in 1316. However, the name is Old Norse }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 hlid}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 ('slope') and might have been applied to other sites in the wapentake.; see Anderson, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 40}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 154.  
\par \tab Oswaldbeck Wapentake was named from the Oswald Beck or from a lost s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 ettlement ('Oswaldbeck') about eight}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 kilometres north-east of Retford. That settlement itself was named from the brook which is a short stream that starts at SK7684, then flows past North Wheatley an
d South Wheatley to join the old course of the River Trent (which was also then the county boundary) near Bole (at SK7986); see Thoroton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Antiquities of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , iii. p. 334; Anderson, }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 39}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 24. The Oswald B}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16206465 eck is crossed by the Roman road just south-east of South Wheatley at SK 7785.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5118327\charrsid16206465 
 This may have been the moot-site, but meetings also took place at Gringley Beacon (SK 7490) in Gringley-on-the-Hill; see Crook, 'Nottinghamshire and the Crown', p. 23}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1864460 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab Rushcliffe is an alternative general name for the East and West Leake Hills and specifically names a moated site in Gotham parish; see Anderson, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Hundred Names}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 42-43}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 243. The moat is at SK545280 
and is named Rushcliff on the first edition Ordnance Survey map (sheet 71 of 1836, reprint sheet 35 of 1970) and Rushcliffe Moat on the six-inch revised edition (sheet 50NW, surveyed 1899, published 1901). Nearby, at SK 538286, is a Court Hill. 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid11498323 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Links to royal manors
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
In the shires of Wessex it seems probable that the hundreds as found in Domesday Book were the result of the dividing up and granting out of lands that had once been part of large }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 regiones}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, each administered by a royal vill. As a result many 
hundreds are named from royal vills or dominated by royal manors; some are in the hands of a single lord, often the king or a church, in others the 'lordship of the hundred', a notion frequently encountered in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid938881 
records from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , is attached to a particular manor; for the fundamental work on this subject}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  see Cam, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Liberties and Communities}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 64-90. If manors such as Dunham-on-Trent (1,1), Mansfield}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934  (1,23}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ), Arnold (1,45) and Orston (1,51), held }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 T.R.E}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  by King Edward, had l
ain in Wessex, they would probably have dominated hundreds and might once have jointly administered a shire. Of these it is possible that Mansfield with its large number of dependencies had been just such an administrative centre (for the northern quarter
 of Nottinghamshire) that had survived the Danish incursions. Newark-on-Trent might have had a similar role in administering the portion of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934 the shire that lay east of the R}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
iver Trent; see Bishop, 'Multiple Estates', p. 42. One looks in vain for other such m
ultiple estates in Nottinghamshire. The difference is that in Wessex estates had evolved without interruption whereas in the Danelaw, the English reconstruction from 942 onwards after the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid938881 expulsion or}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid938881  pacification}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  of the Danes and the defeat of the Vikings of York was much more of a new }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934 beginning. The wapentakes here we}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
re largely self-contained units (the outlying part of Broxtowe Wapentake being an exception) and they generally appear not to have been drawn to tak
e account of tenure. They seem mostly to be new units, rather than subdivisions of existing ones and because their names so rarely coincide with the names of important manors, the obligations owed to them appear to be separate from those due to the manor.
 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934 \tab Only one wapentake wa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s clearly attached to a manor: to the manor of Newark-on-Trent}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934  '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 all the customary dues o}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934 
f the king and the earl from this wapentake are attached}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ' (6,1). The wapentake was named Newark from the manor and this was the situation in 1086
 when it was held by the Bishop of Lincoln, but it appears to have continued more or less from 1066 when Countess Godiva had }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 full jurisdiction and market rights and the k}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934 
ing's customary due of 2 pennies'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  over Newark Wapentake}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934  (S5)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; see Cam, 'Liberties and Communities', pp. 59, 82}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4131934 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 and 6,1 Newark note. The details suggest that this was more than a wapentake with a named lord, rather it was a Liberty in all but name. 
\par \tab Ne}{\f0\fs24\insrsid90653 w}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ark-on-Trent was probably a comital manor, held by Godiva's husband}{\f0\fs24\insrsid90653\charrsid938881 , Leofric,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  as Earl o
f Mercia (1023x1032-1057) before Nottinghamshire was transferred to the earldom of Northumbria, or the wapentake to Nottinghamshire; see \{Intro}{\f0\fs24\insrsid90653 duction: Administration of the S}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 hire\} and\{
Introduction: County Boundary\}. However, what arrangements (if any) applied to the other wapentakes are tantalisingly unclear. Were they also appurtenant to manors? 
\par \tab Three other wapentakes - Bing}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4083864 ham, Broxtowe and Thurgarton - we}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 re named from Domesday estates. The manor of Bingham (9,97-98) was held by Tosti in 1066 and by Ro
ger of Bully in 1086. If Tosti was the Earl of Northumbria of that name it is possible that he also 'held' the wapentake by virtue of his office. In terms of estates, Roger of Bully was the most important man in the shire, and although he was neither earl
 nor sheriff, it is possible that he inherited Tosti's rights (if he had any) over the wapentake.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid90653  Part of Broxtowe (1,49) was a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdiction of the important royal manor of Arnold (1,45), so it is conceivable that the wapentake was linked to that manor. However, Thurgarton (11,12) was held in 1066 by one Swein and in 1086 by Walter of Aincourt. Although Walter is said (S5) to have 
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid90653 'full jurisdiction and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  market rights and the king's}{\f0\fs24\insrsid938881  customary du}{\f0\fs24\insrsid90653 es of 2 pennies'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , tha}{\f0\fs24\insrsid90653 
t is only over Granby (11,26), M}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 orton (11,16) and Pilsley (DBY 8,3). There is no mention of this wapentake.
\par \tab The names of many wapentakes throughout England were not those of manors. These were places of assembly, often central to the wapentake, which had probably been used for other purposes well b
efore the creation of hundreds or wapentakes. However, even some of these have }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4083864 alternative manorial names, and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  even those that have not, may be found to lie within }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3220575 the bounds of an important manor. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8018463\charrsid3220575 'Bassetlaw' falls into this last category. It lay in East Markham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8157106\charrsid3220575  (1,3) which was a J}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid8018463\charrsid3220575 urisdiction of Dunham-on-Trent, itself a major royal estate (1,1). It has the characteristics of many other moot-sites: it is on a hill close to a major road junction (on the Great North Road
), although it is not central to the wapentake.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16337729  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8018463 
\par \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8018463\charrsid938881 T}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid938881 here}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 are no compelling links between the remaining names of the Nottinghamshire wapentakes and any manor. The moot of 'Lythe' Wapentake might}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4083864  have}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  be}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4083864 en}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 near or in Normanton-on-Trent held in three portions in 1086 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14168764 (6,14. 9,68-69), one of them a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction of Fledborough in 'Bass}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14168764 etlaw' Wapentake, the second a J}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction of Skegby, the third being a manor held }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 T.R.E}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  by five thanes. There is nothing here to suggest a link between manor and moot, though the 
location of 'Lythe', which is tentative, may be erroneous. 
\par \tab It has been s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 uggested above that Oswaldbeck}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  may }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 have been }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 linked with Mansfield}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14168764  (1,23}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
), rather than with any nearby manor, though the short beck flowed close to North and South Wheatley (1,36. 5,4. 9,115) and to Bole (5,4. 9,118;125). There is nothing in the details of these estates that suggests that they could have }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2569267 been head of a wapentake.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1864460\charrsid2569267  However, the alternative moot-site, Gringley Beacon, lay within a royal estate, Gringley-on-the-Hill (1,43)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2569267\charrsid2569267 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1864460\charrsid2569267  which was a member of Mansfield (1,23).}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab Finally, although the site of Rushcliffe Wapentake was known to be in Gotham, Gotham itself (4,3. 30,24) is unremarkable}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2445258 .
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par Lordship of the Wapentake
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The notion that a wapentake or hundred should have a lord who benefited from the profits of justice, is on
ly fully elaborated in later times; by the fourteenth century every hundred or wapentake was 'owned' by someone and increasingly the hundred or wapentake was granted as an appurtenance of a manor. There are few indications in Domesday Book of any such arr
angements. In the case of only one wapentake is the 'lord' evident; the wapentake of Newark was appu}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 tenant to Co}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 u}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ntess Godiva's manor of Newark-on-Trent and this arrangement appears to have continued for the benefit of her successor, the Bishop of Lincoln. The wapentake was still in the bishop's hands in 1255 and 1275 (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Rotuli Hundredorum
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , ii. pp}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  301, 318). 
\par \tab As to the other wapentakes, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Feudal Aids}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , iv. pp. 103-111}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  suggest}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  that the ki}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 ng was lord of 'Bassetlaw' Wape}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ntake, Rushcliffe Wapentake and the combined wapentake of Thurgarton and Lythe; of the other wapentakes }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Feudal Aids}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 says nothing either way. The }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Rotuli Hundredorum}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  are more explicit: it appears that 'Bassetlaw' was held by the king, but that his rights had been considerab}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8157106 
ly reduced by the lords of the h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
onours of Tickhill, Lancaster and Lincoln in that wapentake. Oswaldbeck Wapentake, which was stated to have been a royal jurisdiction was in the hands of Henry of Hastings by exchange. The king also held Bingha}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 
m Wapentake, Broxtowe Wapentake and Rushcliffe Wap}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 entake, in other words, all except Newark and Oswaldbeck. See }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Rotuli Hundredorum}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2170890 , ii. pp. 3}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 00- }
{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2170890 3}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 01, 309, 314, 318.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  
\par \tab Neither from Domesday, nor from later evidence is it possible to allocate a lo}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 rd to any wapentake in 1086 exc}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ept Newark, although there is a hint that Roger of Bully might have held Bingham Wapentake and the king the wapentake of Broxtowe; see \{Introduction: Links to Royal Manors\}.}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 Relation to L}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ater Wapentakes 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The relationship of the 1086 wapentakes to those of the thirteenth and fourteen}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15882194 
th centuries is straightforward.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  'Bassetlaw' Wapentake absorbed most of Oswaldbeck Wapentake, apart from the members of the manor of Mansfield which became a separat}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2170890 e soke}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3220575 . Still}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2170890  later}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12393562  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3220575 this soke was}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2170890\charrsid2170890  designated as}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2170890 
 the North Clay division of 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2170890 , p. 24}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . However}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lay Subsidy Roll (1334)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 227-29, 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake stands for both, although the majority of places formerly in Oswaldbeck Wapentake were entered as a si
ngle block at the beginning of the schedule}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  By that time, Thurgarton and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lythe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 had been combined into a si
ngle wapentake bearing their joint names. Otherwise the 1086 wapentakes retained their names and generally their extents, with the exception that Rushcliffe Wapentake absorbed the detached portion of Broxtowe Wapentake. A few individual manors, however, a
re later found in different wapentakes. Such is the case with Fledborough and Ossington which were in 'Bassetlaw' }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14702359 Wapentake }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 in 1086, but transferred subsequently to }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14702359 
the combined wapentake of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Thurgarton and Lythe; see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Lay Subsidy Roll (1334)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 231.
\par \tab In recent times a number of these wapentake names, such as Rushcliffe and 'Bassetlaw', have been transferred to administrative districts.
\par 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par 
\par MANORIAL ORGANIZATION 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 In 1086 Nottinghamshire had a considerable number of multiple estates, that is, estates with a central }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 caput}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and a number of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14702359\charrsid14702359 
outlying }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14702359 dependencies}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436  and J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions tied to it more or less closely by tenure, dues and services. Those estates which had at least}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 
 two dependencies (outliers or J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions) were: Dunham-on-Trent (1,1), Bothamsall}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14702359  (1,9), possibly Grimston (1,17;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 see 1,17 Grimston note), Mansfield (1,23), Arnold (1,45), Orston (1,51), Southwell (5,1), Laneham (5,4), Sutton-cum-Lound (5,7), Norwell (5,13), Newark-on-Trent (6,1), Tuxford (9,12), Skegby (9,66), Weston (9,70), Normanton-on-the-Wo
lds (9,84), Gringley-on-the-Hill (9,122), Clifton (10,5), Wollaton (10,35), Staunton (11,2), Granby (11,26), Laxton (12,1), Barton-in-Fabis (13,1), Hawton (14,1), Rufford (17,4), Kneesall and Kersall (17,9), Whatton (17,16) and Sibthorpe (20,1). Of these 
Dunham-on-Trent, Bothamsall, Mansfield, Arnold, Orston, Southwell, Laneham, Newark-on-Trent, Clifton and Laxton were major estates.  Useful comparative figures (from Bishop, 'Multiple Estates in late Anglo-Saxon Nottinghamshire', p. 41) are that }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 in 1086 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 there were in Nottinghamshire 199 single manors and 80 manors with one or more dependencies. The geographical distribution of these multiple estates is uneven, there being more in the highla}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid666473 nd zone than on the lower and more fertile lands}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8018463\charrsid666473 , suggesting, perhaps
, that if multiple estates had once been the norm, they had broken up more quickly in one area than the other}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid666473 .
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid666473 \tab However, t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid666473 he evidence is lackin}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 g to perceive the pattern of estates at a time earlier than that presented by Domesday. Even the differences betw
een 1066 and 1086 are not fully described, though generally the number of manors that were on a single Domesday estate }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 T.R.E}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. is given and there are occasional indications that one estate was part of another at that date, but had been alienated from it. The mention of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid666473  estates that contained two or more }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 manors (marginal }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 II}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 M}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , even }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 10M}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
) and the frequent statement that each of several holders 'had his own hall' }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 T.R.E}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . might suggest that the Normans had c
onsolidated numerous small manors into a smaller number of larger ones. If this applied to multiple estates as well}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  then these would not be ancient units but recent agglomeratio}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid666473 ns. However, in the case of estates that consisted of a number of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 T.R.E}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . manors }{\f0\fs24\insrsid666473 that formed a single 1086 unit}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  it should be emphas}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 ize}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
d that in virtually every case the estate had a single name and it is more probable that a one-time single estate had, by 1066, been divided among heirs or among an extended family, or parts leased or 
sold to newcomers, than that the trend was from fragmentation towards singleness. That is not to say that there were not cases of manor-making, where several estates were put together to form one. Examples are fou}{\f0\fs24\insrsid666473 
nd in Domesday (see, for instance,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  MDX 7,5 Colham note)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid666473 , a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 lthough in these ca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 ses the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid666473  members of the estate}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436  have separate na}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 mes. Moreover, the process continued; throughout England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15219436 , a number of Domesday estates were subsequently merged, or beca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
me members of others.
\par \tab In the case of the multiple estates evidenced in 1086, while the outliers (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 berewicae}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) appear to be and to have been integral to the estates (as detached portions of the lordship) the in}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7097363 terpretation of the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions or sokelands (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 soca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) is more difficult. It is significant that the gran
t of Sutton-cum-Lound and Scrooby to the Archbishop of York in 958 (5,7 Sutton note) does not m}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7097363 ention and has no room for the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions listed in Domesday. It would be theoretically possible for}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7097363  a piece of land to become the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction of another, if
 the tenant of the former had commended himself with his land to the lord of the latter. The statement 'He was free to go where he wished with his land' which}{\f0\fs24\insrsid666473  is frequent in several}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7097363 Domesday }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 counties appears to mean precisely this. Some would explain the v
ery scattered nature of the multiple estates on the grounds that the tenant of a piece of land had sometimes commended himself to a lord whose manor was distant. On the other hand, there are no examples of this statement concerning freedom of movement in 
Nottinghamshire, nor is any land said to be held 'freely'. Moreover, it is unclear just how free an individual was to exerc}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7097363 is}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 this liberty. Even if there were such cases in Nottinghamshire, they would not necessarily be the rule. It may well be that }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 soca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  n
ormally defines a relationship between an estate and its capital manor that was primordial and perhaps once even stronger. If t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16407959 hat is so, then the majority of Jurisdictions we}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 re former memb}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid16407959 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 rs of a great estate, but in 1086 were only tied to it by a series of obligations. In other respects they are free-standing and represent the manors of the future.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16407959 \tab If a multiple estate and its J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions are plotted on a map of Nottinghamshire, it will be found}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16407959  that the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdictions are often remote from the chief m
anor. It has not been proposed that the reason for this distance is that the chief estates need access to particular resources that can only be found some way from them. There are examples in other counties where this seems to be the case, and in the case
 
of Nottinghamshire, the fenland in the extreme north of the shire may have been exploited in this way. Sherwood was no doubt a shared resource, but there is no sign that outlying dependencies of manors were established near it solely to exploit it. It is 
not obvious that this is the right and only }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16407959 explanation of these scattered J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions. An extreme example of this scattering is the manor of Mansfield (1,23-44; see map in }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Domesday Geography of Northern England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 234) which was itself situated in Br}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 oxtowe Wapentake but which had J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdictions spread across the whole of northern Nottinghamshire and extending into the wapentakes of 'Bassetlaw', 'Lythe' and Oswaldbeck whose boundaries were no doubt drawn considerably later than the estate was e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 
stablished. On the ground, the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions of Mansfield were}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 , in 1086, interlaced with the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions of other estates which were similarly far-flung. Not only that, b}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 ut sometimes major estates had J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions in the same place. Thus Normanton (1,8) belonged half to Dunham-on-Trent (1,1) and half to }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 Bothamsall (1,9). Two of three J}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions in Ordsal}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 l (1,5;12) were respectively a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction of Dunham-on-Trent (1,1) and of Bothamsall (1,9). In}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563  the case of}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Hodsock }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 (9,47-48}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563 , }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563\charrsid7680563 assuming the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563\charrsid7680563 Ibidem}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563\charrsid7680563  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 of 9,48 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563\charrsid7680563 refers to}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563  it}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 ) there was a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdic}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563 tion both of Mansfield (1,23) and of }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Bothamsall (1,9). F}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 uthermore, Sutton-cum-Lound (5,7}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) and Mansfiel}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 d (1,23) were linked by having J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdictions in Tiln (1,31;41. 5,8) and in Welham and }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Simenton}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) (1,42. 5,8). Sout
hwell (5,1) and Grimston (1,17) shared Farnsfield (1,22. 11,17), and Grimston apparently co}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1969005 ntained both a manor (1,17), a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563 urisdiction of that same manor }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 (1,18) and}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563  at least one dependency}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  of Mansfield (1,24;27}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7680563 ; see 1,17 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9978573 outlier note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9978573 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  

\par \tab A possible explanation for this, which has far-reaching implications, is that these multiple est}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 at}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
es (Mansfield, Bothamsall, Dunham-on-Trent, Grimston, Sutton-cum-Lound and Southwell) were actually once part of a single even larger one. If that is so, then the four royal ma
nors represent a partial dissolution of a formerly single complex estate and Sutton-cum-Lound and Southwell will have been distinct grants (to the Archbishop of York in the mid-tenth century) from this complex. One could go furth}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 
er: Ordsall not only contained J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions of Dunham-on-Trent and Bothamsall (1,5;12), but also had a separate man}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 or in 1066 (9,19). There was a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction of Both
amsall at Elkersley (1,10), but also manors there at 9,32 and 30,41. It is likely that these manors too were originally part of the Mansfield/ Bothamsall/ Gringley-on-the-Hill/ Dunham-on-Trent complex but had been alienated from it or granted out of it. 

\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2569267 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 In the places where there were J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdictions of Dunham-on-Trent, Bothamsall and Mansfield, there were also other estates, especially held in 1086 by Roger of Bully}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and it is likely that all these originated as grants from this }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9978573 same }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 multi}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 ple royal complex. Many of the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions of the royal manor of Arnold (1,45) were shared with William Pe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9978573 
verel. Moreover, t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 here were parts of Headon and Upton }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9978573 (1,6-7)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  that }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 were J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions of }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9978573\charrsid9978573 Dunham-on-Trent (1,1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9978573 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9978573 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169  but there were also J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions of East Markham (9,6
) in these two places }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9978573 (9,7-8)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . Thus East Markham, whic}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 h itself does not feature as a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdiction of any of these royal manors, nonetheless had probably belonged to the compl}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169 ex estate. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169\charrsid6295247 [Old]}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169  Lenton (1,48) was a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdiction of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6899169  Arnold, but there was another J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction there (10,19) that}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598  belonged to Newbound (10,18); t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
his probably gives Newbound an origin in this royal complex. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 Ordsall, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Ranby and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598\charrsid6295247 'South}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598\charrsid6295247 
 Ordsall}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 are}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247  linked}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in 1,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 12-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 13 a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598 s J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 
urisdictions of Bothamsall,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  but anot}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598 her part of Ranby (9,24) was a Jurisdiction of Grove (9,22}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598 a }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 further }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598 part of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 Ranby}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598\charrsid6295247  (9,25)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598  was a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdiction of Eaton (9,20)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 , while}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598  a }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247 further }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598\charrsid6295247 part}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6295247  of Ordsall (1,5) was}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598  a J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 uri}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2569267 sdiction of Dunham-on-Trent mentioned above.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2569267\charrsid2569267  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945\charrsid2569267 In Eaton there was also a Jurisdiction of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 Sutton-cum-Lound (5,8). }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 This complex interlacing of manors and Jurisdictions could have a simpler origin: that they had all once been part of the same large estate. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab It is quite possible that one multiple estate could be grante}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598 d out of another. 
Seven of the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions of Laxton (12,1) were shared with Mansfield (1,23). They were at Kirton, Willoughby, Walesby, Eakring, Ompton, Beesthorpe and Carlton-on-Trent. They occur at 12,2-6;9-10 and, not in the same order}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  at 1,19-21;24. Laxton (12,1) was held by Toki}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598  (the son of Auti) in 1066 and he i}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s among that small and important group who are me}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598 ntioned (in S}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5) as having }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598 had }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 full jurisdiction and market -rights and the k}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598 ing's customary due}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 s}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4806598  of 2 pennies}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . It seems probable that Laxton was granted out of Mansfield}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945  to him or to a predecessor. Two}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  manor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 s in}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Granby}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945  (11,26. 27,1) were held in 1066 by}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Hemming an}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 d Earl Algar and in 1086 by}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 Walter of Aincourt and Osbern son of Richard. Like Toki, Walter is among those privilege}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7341112 d people who are mentioned (in S}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5) as having full jurisdiction and market-rights and the k}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7341112 ing's customary due}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7341112  of 2 pennies}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7341112\charrsid4673945 over Granby}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945  (as well as over Morton and Pilsley)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . It is possible that the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 se}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  manor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7341112  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
of Granby originated in the royal estate of Orston (1,51) and that some or all of the man}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7341112 ors in places where Granby had J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdictions (Barnstone, Langar, Wiverton, Hickling, Kinoulton, Cropwell Butler, 11,27-32) had the same origin.
\par \tab The lands of the king's thanes}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945  that occur at the end of the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7341112\charrsid4673945 accounts}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 of most shires, may in many cases 
have been granted by kings to their retainers from royal estates. Certainly Carlton-on-Trent}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945  (1,21;24. 30,2), }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7341112\charrsid4673945 "Odestorp"}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 (1,12. 3}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 0,12),}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Aslockton (1,57. 30,37), Clarborough (1,41. 30,39;54), Elkesley (1,10. 30,41), Misson (1,65-66. 30,43}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4673945 -44, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12072169\charrsid4673945 though 30,44 a
nd 1,65 are duplicates}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4673945 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and Ordsall (1,5. 30,56}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8814106 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 share their names with royal manors or dependencies of them and it may be that many of the other holdings had the same origin, the difference being that they were those parts of estates that had separate names. 
\par \tab I}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241 f this is so, i}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
t may be that most of Nottinghamshire was once occupied by a few enormous estates, the majority of them in origin royal but some of them given by kings to churches, ealdormen or earls. Among the 1086 estates it is difficult to perceiv
e those that might once have dominated the area, and, before the arrival of wapentakes, administered it. From the Mansfield/ Bothamsall/ Gringley-on-the-Hill/ Dunham-on-Trent complex, it has been suggested that Sutton-cum-Lound and Southwell were granted 
out to the Archbishop of York. Bothamsall also, held by Earl Tosti in 1066, might have been the granting of a portion of the Mansfield estate to an earl; see \{Introduction: Administration of the Shire\}. It is possible that Newark-on-Trent}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12072169  (6,1) held by Countes}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 s Godiva in 1066 and perhaps ea}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12072169 rlier given to her husband }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Leofric as Earl of Mercia, had once been even more important. Arnold (1,45), held by King Edward and close to Nottingham, may have been an important estate and larger. Orston (1,51) had also been
 held by King Edward and it is possible that it had once dominated the south-eastern corner of the shire and that Bingham had been granted out of it to (Earl}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12072169\charrsid3760241 ?}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241 ) }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Tosti. Clifton (10,5) held by Countess Gytha in 1066, may also once have been a key royal manor. 
\par \tab There is no evidence as}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12072169  to whether the major estates o}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 f Nottinghamshire were in exi}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12072169 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 tence before the Danish settlement}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3498479  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 of the late}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3498479  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ninth century, for the earliest Nottinghamshire charters date from the tenth century. Either the kings reconstituted their estates in that ce}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241 ntury or they divided the newly }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
liberated land between several royal manors and based justice and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241 administration on them. From an example given}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Liber Eliensis}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{
\f36\fs24\insrsid15359826 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 pp. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3760241 xi}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241\charrsid3760241 , 98-99}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241  it appears }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
that after an area was liberated from the Danes, the former holders had to petition the king for their lands. It is not clear how many former holders there were and whether the p
rocess of reclaiming left the king in a position of being their overlord, or whether some had full rights to land restored. In the first case, the king would have}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10707632  had}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  much more power to }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241 parcel out land of what was, in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  effect}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  a vast royal estate that had fallen to him by re}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10707632 -}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
conquest.
\par \tab The argument developed above is that the 1086 pattern of estates is essentially the result of the fission, that is of the successive diminution}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  of large estates. However, there i
s a place for fusion as well, perhaps at the outset, more probably among the fragments, possibly because a number of free tenants had commended themselves to the lord of a particular estate or because several adjacent estates came into the same hands. It 
is also possible that, particularly in the remoter corners of Nottinghamshire, there were small estates that had been created and owned by their holders probably because of the exploitation of new land}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10707632 .}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  This whole topic would repay further detailed research.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab There is a consid}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10707632 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
rable literature on the multiple estate which, used in a general sense}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10707632 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 is a convenient, but elastic term for estates that share certain obvious characteristics; they may, however, be of very different size, antiquity and origin, and at different stages of development. There are those who regard the Welsh }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 maenor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and commote, the Northum}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10707632 brian 'shire'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, and the English soke or lathe or rape, as parts of a particular form of social and territorial organization that was once widespread in Britain. Such remote origins and general}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 iza}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
tions have been avoided here. On this topic, among his many contributions, see Jones, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10707632 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Pattern of Settlement on the Welsh Border'; Jones, 'Multipl
e Estate as a Model Framework'; Jones, 'Multiple Estates and Early Settlement'. There is criticism in Gregson, 'The Multiple Estate Model'; for Jones' reply, see Jones, 'Multiple Estates Perceived'. See also Stenton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Anglo-Saxon England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 518-19; Taylor and Fowler, 'Roman Fields into Medieval Furlongs'; Taylor, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Village and Farmstead}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; Faull, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Late Anglo-Saxon Settlement}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . For the particular structures in the Danelaw, see Stenton, 'Types of Manorial Structure'. For Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3760241 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Domesday Geography of Northern England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 233-36; Bishop, 'Multiple Estates in late Anglo-Saxon Nottinghamshire'; Roffe, 'Introduction', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, pp. 10-17}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10707632 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Unwin, 'Settlement in eleventh-century Nottinghamshire'.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\highlight16\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\highlight16\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\f0\fs24\highlight16\insrsid10707632 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ECCLESIASTICAL ORGANIZATION
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5792076 {\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 Diuma, one of 
the monks whom Peada, son of King Penda of Mercia, brought back with him from Northumberland after his conversion there to Christianity,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317\charrsid7024317  was consecrated}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317  b}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 ishop of the Mercians, the Middle Angles and the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 Lindisfari }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 (the people of Lindsey) and held office }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 . 656}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317\charrsid7024317  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 -}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317\charrsid7024317  }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110900\charrsid7024317 . 658}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 
. Like many early bishops, he was itinerant and had yet to establish a seat. He was succeeded by Ceollach (658-659), Trumhere (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 . 659}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317\charrsid7024317  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 -}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317\charrsid7024317  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 
. 662) and by Jaruman (662-667). This information and sequence is given in Bede, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 Ecclesiastical History}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 , iii. 21}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8139907 : }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid8139907\charrsid8139907 Colgrave and Mynors}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 , pp. 278-81; the dates are from the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 Handbook of British Chronology}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 
. Jaruman's successor Ceadda (St Chad) established his seat at Lichfield }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317\charrsid7024317 in Staffordshire }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 (Bede, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 Ecclesiastical History}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317 , iv. 3}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8139907 : }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8139907\charrsid8139907 Colgrave and Mynors}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8139907 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid7024317  pp. 326-27) 
and was succeeded by Wynfrith (?675) and Seaxwulf (675-691). This last was Bishop of the Mercians only, for a separate Bishop of Lindsey (Eadhaeth) was appointed in 678 and one for the Middle Angles (Cuthwine), based at Leicester in 679. The sees of Leice
ster and Lichfield were held jointly between 691 and 737.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076\charrsid5464266  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5792076 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab It is possible that when Nottinghamshire became defined as an administrative unit in the tenth }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3498479 century or early in the eleventh century}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , it contained areas that had once belonged to Northumbria or to Lindsey; see \{Introduction: History\}
. If so, parts may well have been under the care of the bishops of Lindsey or of York; the first bishop of th}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7103948 e latter was Paulinus, who acce}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ded in 625. However, it is likely that th
e bulk of the later Nottinghamshire lay in the diocese of Lichfield and remained there until the Danish incursions of the late ninth century interrupted the work of the diocese.
\par \tab Bishops of Lichfield are recorded throughout the period of Danish and Viking 
settlement, but it is unlikely that they were able to minister either to the future Derbyshire or to Nottinghamshire after the partition of Mercia between English and Danes. When the church began to recover in the mid-tenth century after the pacification 
o
f the Danes and the defeat of the Vikings of York, the territory dependent on Nottingham was subject to the diocese of York. The exact date and circumstances are unknown, but it could be that the new arrangements only just pre-dated or coincided with the 
g
rant in 956 by King Edwy to Oskytel, Archbishop of York, of the multiple estate of Southwell with its 12 outliers, followed two years later by the grant of Sutton-cum-Lound, the core of the soke of Sutton and Scrooby, itself part of the later Liberty of S
outhwell; see 5,1 Southwell note and 5,7 Sutton note. The gift of these estates will have given the Archbishops of York an additional patrimony, a source of income and a safer haven in the south in the case of renewed trouble in Northumbria}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2972700 . The transfer of allegia}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 nce to York seems to have been complete: in 1086 the church of Lichfield, by then installed at Chester, held nothing. On all this}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972700 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , ii. pp 37-38; Stenton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 436.
\par \tab Bishops of Lindsey were active at times during the period of Danish settlement, though to what effect is not known. The last, Sigefrith, ceased to hold office in 1004 or 1005. However}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972700 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 in 1067 Bishop Remigius transferred his seat from Dorchester-on-Thames (Oxfor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7024317 d}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972700\charrsid7024317 shire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) to Lincoln. Since the bis
hopric of Dorchester-on-Thames did not seem to hold land in these parts, the new bishopric at Lincoln was endowed with lands in several nearby counties including Nottingham, where it received in pa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972700 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ticular the rich and important manor of Newark-on-Trent (6,1) formerly held by Countess Godiva.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317 \tab There appear to be 79}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  churches listed in Domesday Nottinghamsh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317 ire, plus a number of half or quarter churches, amounting to 5 \'bc, and 64}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 priests}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7024317  (discounting individuals called 'the priest')}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . The majority are appurtenan
ces of particular estates, but even so, the record is almost certainly incomplete. This can be seen where the entry is for a fraction (a half or a quarter) of a church, but the complementary parts do not appear in the record. It would be expected that the
re would be a church at Cropwell Bishop (5,3), held by the Archbishop of York}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15811525 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7306281 dedication or }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
construction of some churches, including carved stones (as f}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15811525 or example at Farndon, Hickling - an outlier of Cropwell Bishop -}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and Shelford) suggests a pre-Conquest origin. In the cases where two chur}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7306281 ches are given, (Collingham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7306281  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 8,1; Hawton, 14,1; Mansfield, 1,23), one was probably in an outlier of the manor. 
\par \tab It seems very probable that before the establishment of manorial churches (from the eleventh century
) the gospel was spread and souls cared for by secular priests living in communities which are often called secular colleges or minster churches. Evidence from other counties suggests a strong link between the administrative centre (usually a royal manor)
 and the ecclesiastical centre (a minster church). These churches are not specifically categor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 ize}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
d by Domesday, but can often be identified because they have more than one priest, or appurtenant land. In Nottinghamshire Southwell (5,1) certainly }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6637360\charrsid2569267 had}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6637360  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
a minster church}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570  evidenced before 1086, although no church is actually recorded in Domesday, but t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 here were three clerics there with 1\'bd
 carucates of which 2 bovates were in prebend. These clerics also owned ploughs, villagers and smallholders.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The one chur
ch at Nottingham, held by the king and identified in other sources as the church of St Mary (B4;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15811525\charrsid7152570 15}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ), was also no doubt a minster church. It had a  priest, 5 bovates}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570 , }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15811525\charrsid7152570 3 messuages and 5 \'bd acres}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 attached to it as well as possessing a '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7152570 priest}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570\charrsid7152570 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7152570 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  croft' with 65 houses.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1125958  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
At Orston (1,51) there was a church and 2 priests. At Flintham (1,61) there was a church and a priest who had \'bd plough. At Sibthorpe (2,1) a quarter of the 'land' was said to belong to the church and the statement is repeated at 20,1. At Barnby-in-
the-Willows (7,2) the church possessed \'bd bovate. At Danethorpe 14,4, there was a church with a priest and 1 plough.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570  In addition to this, it has been suggested that a minster church at Thurga}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570\charrsid14508171 rton preceded the priory there; see}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7959613  Foulds,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570\charrsid14508171  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570\charrsid14508171 Thurgarton Cartulary}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570\charrsid14508171 , pp. xvii-xviii.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950622\charrsid14508171  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14508171\charrsid14508171 Domesday mentions a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950622\charrsid14508171 
 church there (11,12), but there is no sign from the text that it had superior status}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14508171\charrsid14508171 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7152570  Even so, t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
his is meagre evidence for a network of minster churches and for their supposed link with royal centres of administration. In particular, the last three mentioned if they were decayed minsters, appear to have had no past or future in other sources, althou
gh a secular college was founded at Sibthorpe in 1335; see }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Knowles }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid4619343 and}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826  Hadcock, }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Medieval Religious Houses}{
\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 , }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 pp. 418, 439.
\par \tab It might be expected that there would have been an important church at Newark-on-Trent, held by the Bishop of Lincoln, although it had only been acquired by that bishopric during the Conqueror's reign}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1125958  (6,1)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . Domesday allots to Newark-on-Trent '10 chur}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1125958 ches and 8 priests who have 5}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  ploughs'. The ten churches no doubt included one at Newark-on-Trent}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1125958 
 itself and nine}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in its d}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1125958 ependencies (2 outliers and 16 J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 urisdictions).
\par \tab In 1066 there was no monastery in Nottinghamshire and no evidence that there had ever been one. The monastery at Repton, close by in Derbyshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1125958 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 was old (founded before 697), important and the mausoleum for early Mercian kings; see DBY 1,20 Repton note. However}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1125958 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 from the time of Domesday Book onwards, there was a steady growth of monastic life in the county. Two priories were founded by Domesday tenants-in-chief. Roger of Bully founded a priory at Blyth for Benedictine monks in
 1088 as a dependency of Holy Trinity, Rouen. He had already, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. 1060 granted the tithes of Bully itself, his place of origin, to that same Norman church; see 9,49 Blyth note. William Peverel founded Lenton Priory at some time before 1108 for Cluniac monks; see 10,24 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1125958\charrsid4619343 
William's}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4619343  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 note. 
\par \tab Other establishments followed in the twelfth century. Wallingwells Priory, also known as the Priory of St Mary }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 de Parco}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  was founded for Benedictine nuns by Ralph of Chevrolcourt (}{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 de Caprecuria}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) in his park at Carlton-in Lindrick, probably }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. 1140-44. Worksop Priory was founded after 1119 by William of Louvetot for Augustine canons; see 9,43 Worksop note. Rufford Abbey for Cistercian monks was establis}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ed towards the end of the reign of King Stephen by Gilbert of Gaunt, Earl of Lincoln.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4619343  The first steps towards the founding of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Thurgarton Priory for Augustine canons}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4619343  were made}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  between 1119 and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4619343\charrsid4619343 113}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4619343 3 by}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Ralph of Aincourt, the son of the 1086 holder, Walter of Aincourt; see 11,12 Thurgarton note. Anoth
er priory for Augustine canons was Felley, founded in 1156 by Ralph Brito }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4006892 of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Annesley (13,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3739150 11), and a further Augustinian p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
riory was begun at Shelford in the time if Henry II by Ralph Haunselyn or Hauselin. Also f}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11685154 or Augustine canons was the p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 riory of Newstead (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 de novo loco}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) founded in Sherwood Forest by Henry II about 1163. Welbeck Abbey for Premonstratensian canons }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3739150 was probably founded by Richard}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  son of Joceus in 1153; see 9,36 Cuckney note}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid11685154 . The p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 rior}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11685154\charrsid4218615 y}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11685154  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 of Mattersey was established by Roger son of Ralph of Mattersey for Gilbertine canons }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 1185 o}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11685154 n an island in the River Idle. Alt}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
hough not a monastic institution, it is worth mentioning that the knights hospitallers established a preceptory at Ossington given them late in the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950622  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950622\charrsid4218615 twelfth}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 century by Ralph of Buron. 
\par \tab The stock of monast}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11685154 eries continued to grow with a p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 rio}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11685154 ry for Premonstratensian canons}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 established at Broadholme in or before the reign of Edward II (1154-1189) as an offshoot of Newhouse in Lincolnshire. Nicholas de Cauntlow, lord of Ilkeston in Derbyshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11295508 , established the p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
riory of Beauvale for Carthusian monks in 1343. This brief survey takes no account of other religious establishments such as hospitals, friaries and colleges. On the history of all these establishments, see }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , i. pp. 83-152}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11295508 ; }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Knowles }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid11685154 and}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826  Hadcock, }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 
Medieval Religious Houses}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 ,}{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826  passim}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 .
\par \tab Ecclesiastically, Nottinghamshire form}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid11295508 e}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 d a single arc}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid11295508 h}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 
deaconry containing the deaneries of Retford and Laneham, Nottingham, Newark and Bingham as well as the pecu
liar of Southwell. Retford and Laneham deanery corresponded to the later combined wapentake of Oswaldbeck and 'Bassetlaw'; Nottingham deanery to the wapentakes of Broxtowe and Thurgarton, and Newark and Bingham deanery to the wapentakes of those names.}{
\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Th}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid11295508 e peculiar jurisdiction of the A}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 rchbishops of York at Southwell lasted for many centuries until Southwell finally became a see in its own right in 1884.}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cf1\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\insrsid15359826 (On the Domesday churches that have disappeared. see Wilkinson, 'Ruined and Lost Churches of Nottinghamshire'}{\insrsid11295508 .}{\insrsid15359826 )
\par 
\par }{\cf1\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\cf1\insrsid10450520 
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 THE DOMESDAY FORMAT
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid2833011 
\par Circuit and Ruling Pattern}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2833011 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid10630312 {\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 It is generally agreed that Nottinghamshire was part of circuit VI, which also included Derbyshire, }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10309185 Huntingdonshire, Lincolnshire and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 Yorkshire. These five counties have a common layout and content: \{Introduction: Layout and Content}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12533938  of Entries}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 \}
. Circuit VI was also the circuit with the most correc}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10309185 tions and additions and this together with}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312  the evidence of the ruling patterns used and othe
r aspects have led to the assumption that it was the first circuit to have been written by the main scribe of Great Domesday: Thorn }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312\charrsid11033180 and Thorn}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 
, 'The Writing of Great Domesday Book', p. 42; Roffe, 'Domesday Book and Northern Society: a reassessment'; and Thorn}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312\charrsid11033180 , Thorn}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312  and Gullick}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10309185 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 The Scribal History of Great Domesday Book}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312  (forthcoming). The order in which the countie}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10309185 s in this circuit were written wa}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 s almost certainly Yorkshire, followed by Lincolnshire (which shares a quire with it), then Nottinghamshire with the section entitled }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 Roteland}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 
 at its end, Derbyshire and finally Huntingdonshire. This is not the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10309185  order in which these counties were}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 
 foliated and bound; thus, Derbyshire now precedes Nottinghamshire, but is still closely linked to it through their shared sheriff and shire customs.    }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312\charrsid5723112 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 The quire containing Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10309185 , including an}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11102208  inserted half-sheet (folio 282),}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 
 was ruled with ruling pattern 1, that is, a set of eight vertical score-lines (forming four tramlines) delimit}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4132361 ing each of the two columns and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 
forty-four lines ruled horizontally to accommodate the text.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762  The use of tramlines may have been connected wi}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10309185 th the decision to include within them}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 
 the marginal letters giving the status of the adjacent holding: }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 M}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 [}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 anerium}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 ], }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 B}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 [}{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 er}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid16542427 e}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 wica}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 ] or }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 S}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 [}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 oca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 
] ('manor', 'outlier' or 'Jurisdiction').}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4132361 One folio in Nottinghamshire was ruled with forty-five lines (folio 290)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8354065 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4132361  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 
All of circuit VI (with the exception o}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1640797 f the second quire of Yorkshire and the quire containing }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 the Yorkshire and Lincolnshire }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 Clamores}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1640797 
 and the Yorkshire Summary, folios 307-314, 373-382 respectively}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 ) was written using ruling pattern 1, as were circuit III (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1640797 Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire and }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 Middlesex}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1640797 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312  and the second quire of Kent (see KEN \{Introduction: Circuit and Ruling Patterns\}
); circuit III was probably the next circuit to be written up. However, because template B was used to prick the guide holes at the fore-edge of each folio in Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8354065  (except folio 282)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 , Huntingdonshire and all of circuit III except for Hertfordshire, ruling pattern 1 has been divided into 1a and 1b; on the various ruling patterns used in Great Domesday, see \{Ruling Patterns\}. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 
The half-sheet in Nottinghamshire }{\f0\fs24\insrsid73317 (folio 282}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8354065 ) }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 was not ruled using template B, but with ruling pattern 1b }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15407534 which was }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10887762 
used for Lincolnshire and almost all of Yorkshire in this circuit; this use of a damaged or rejected sheet provides evidence that Nottinghamshire was written after those counties. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2243508 Some of the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11102208 
 prick-marks are no longer visible in the manuscript because they were trimmed off during the various bindings.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid10630312 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8412558 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid8412558\charrsid5464266 Layout}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid8412558  and Content}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid8412558\charrsid5464266  of Entries

\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6903835 {\f0\fs24\insrsid8412558 The whole of circuit VI, of which Nottinghamshire was part (\{Introduction: Circuit and Ruling Pattern\}), was
 laid out with little regard for the amount of parchment being used: the scribe left large spaces between fiefs and even between entries in the first folios of Yorkshire, began a new column (occasionally a new folio) for each major tenant-in-chief and wro
te larger than he did later on. Thus in Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16388881 , he left a whole column after the end of chapter 5 (the fief of the Archbishop of York) and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15407534 a further whole column}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12533938  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid16388881 (plus 10 lines) before the account of the lands of the thanes (NTT 30) and about half a column after chapters 6,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8412558  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16388881 9-11, 17. Smaller spaces, ranging from one to eight}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9507156  lines}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16388881  were left between other fiefs.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9507156  The notes at the end of most chapters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15407534  in this edition}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9507156  give the precise amount of space 
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15407534 that he }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9507156 left.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16388881  Many of these spaces were later found useful when he came to check his work and discovered a large number of entries that he had initial}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid8731825 ly omitted; see \{Introduction: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16388881 Writing and Correction\}.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9507156  He also left }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8412558 spaces between entries in a few fiefs, which might
 sometimes have been for the later i}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835 nclusion of a wapentake head and}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8412558  sometimes apparently after the description of a multiple estate}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4654446 , perhaps}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835 
 for the later inclusion of more members of it}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8412558 ; see }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9507156 NTT}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4654446  1,44 after note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12533938 
\par \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835 The text of Nottinghamshire}{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835 occupies one and a half quires, each regular ones comprising four}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12533938  full sheets or}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835 
 bifolia. The account of }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835 ROTELAND}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835  was written immediately after it (folios 293c-294a; see \{Introduction: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835 \}
), but the remaining two and three-quarter folios of the second quire were left blank (folios 294-296). Into the first quire the scribe later inserted a half-sheet (folio 282) because he had ini}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14624820 
tially omitted the fiefs of Count Alan, Earl Hugh and the Count of Mortain;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10118668  on the disruption caused to the usual order of fiefs in the county,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14624820  see NTT 2 fief note. He wrote these f}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2243508 iefs on the verso of this folio, which was the smooth, flesh side of the parchment, so that the hair side of its recto would face the hair side of folio 281}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10118668  (its verso)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2243508 
, as was his practice in Great Domesday Book.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14624820  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10118668 Apart }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15407534 from this dislocation, the order}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10118668 
 of the fiefs, starting with the king, followed by those of the ecclesiastical tenants, then the lay tenants (beginning }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9916258 in Nottinghamshire }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10118668 with Roger of Bully, who held the
 most land) and culminating in the land of the thanes, is common to almost all }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 the counties of Great Domesday.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6903835 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5525375 {\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 \tab 
In common also with a large part of Great Domesday and certainly with the rest of circuit VI, the arrangement of the entries within each fief wa
s by wapentake in Nottinghamshire, the places in each wapentake almost always being entered together in discrete groups, though the late addition of material and a few other factors }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9916258 occasionally }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 
disrupt this pattern. There is also evidence in Domesday Nott
inghamshire that the scribe wrote these groups of places in a standard order of wapentakes, as he also did in some other counties. This arrangement is discussed in detail in the first note for each fief; see also \{
Introduction: Standard Order of Wapentakes\}.
\par 
\par In Nottinghamshire the majority of manorial entries are laid out thus: 
\par \tab In }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 A}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  (the place-name) }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375\charrsid6512263 B}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  (the holder in 1066) had }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 
 (carucates or bovates or carucates and bovates) taxable. Land for }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 d}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  ploughs.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12341788 \'b1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375\charrsid5525375 C}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  (the tenant-in-chief) has }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  ploughs (or }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  ploughs in lordship)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4807469 
 OR, if there is a subtenant he is mentioned at this point. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 f }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 villagers and }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 g}{\f0\fs24\insrsid665751  smallholders}{
\f0\fs24\super\insrsid665751\charrsid665751 \'86}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  have}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4807469 /who have }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  ploughs. Resources, including mills (almost all with a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6293914  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid8217101 money render}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 ) and/or a mill-site,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6293914  fisheries (sometimes with a money render,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid665751  twice with eels and once sharing its render with a mill),}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  meadow (measured in acres}{\f0\fs24\insrsid991603 , less often with}{\f0\fs24\insrsid665751  two linear dimensions}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6698644 ), woodland (almost invariably}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375  described as pastura}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid5732183 ble woodland and underwood and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6698644 generally }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5732183 provided}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950622  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 with two linear dimensions}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375\charrsid15738329 )}{
\f0\fs24\super\insrsid97572\charrsid97572 \'87}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 . Value 'before }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12866531 1066' and 'now', both in \'a3 s d.\u8800\'3f}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 
\par }{\f0\insrsid12341788 
\par }{\f0\insrsid12341788\charrsid12341788 \'b1 }{\f0\insrsid12866531  }{\f0\insrsid12341788\charrsid12341788 The}{\f0\insrsid12341788 
 plough estimate is recorded for the majority of the entries in this county, though sometimes it was lacking in very brief entries or members of a multiple estate and/or which in 1086 were waste. For 
where the main scribe of Great Domesday failed to include the estimate in otherwise full entries, see 9,120 plough note, and for where it was added, see 1,59 land note.}{\f0\insrsid5525375\charrsid12341788 
\par }{\f0\super\insrsid665751\charrsid9570784 \'86 }{\f0\super\insrsid12866531  }{\f0\insrsid665751\charrsid9570784 Also recorded are Freemen}{\f0\insrsid5259339\charrsid9570784  (usually with ploughs or sharing in them and/or with }{\f0\insrsid9916258 the s
ize of }{\f0\insrsid5259339\charrsid9570784 their land holding)}{\f0\insrsid8923905\charrsid9570784 , priests (almost always with a church}{\f0\insrsid10450520 ; see \{Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization\}}{\f0\insrsid8923905\charrsid9570784 )}{
\f0\insrsid5259339\charrsid9570784  and, unusually for this circuit, slaves (see 10,1 slaves note)}{\f0\insrsid10766470\charrsid9570784 ; tributaries are mentioned only once (10,3)}{\f0\insrsid4411314\charrsid9570784 .}{\f0\insrsid3438714\charrsid9570784 
 Apart from in the borough section, burgesses are only recorded in Newark}{\f0\insrsid2581116\charrsid9570784 -on-Trent}{\f0\insrsid3438714\charrsid9570784  (6,1)}{\f0\insrsid14248768 , where freemen (}{\i\f0\insrsid14248768 franci homines}{
\f0\insrsid14248768 ) are also mentioned}{\f0\insrsid594875 , as one also is in 10,59}{\f0\insrsid3438714\charrsid9570784 . }{\f0\insrsid5259339\charrsid9570784  }{\f0\insrsid5525375\charrsid9570784 
\par }{\f0\insrsid97572\charrsid9570784 \'87 }{\f0\insrsid12866531  }{\f0\insrsid14681444 There are three references to a garden (1,44 garden note). }{\f0\insrsid1253165 Willow-beds are mentioned for two places (10.25 willow-bed note),}{\f0\insrsid14681444  }{
\f0\insrsid1253165 a}{\f0\insrsid97572\charrsid9570784  ferr}{\f0\insrsid14681444 y is recorded twice (5,1. 11,20), a boat once (9,74)}{\f0\insrsid97572\charrsid9570784  and a millstone quarry appears in 17,16.}{\f0\insrsid97572 
\par }{\f0\insrsid12866531 \u8800\'3f}{\f0\insrsid9916258  }{\f0\insrsid12866531  }{\i\f0\insrsid9916258 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\insrsid9916258 , i. p}{\f0\insrsid5389549 p}{\f0\insrsid9916258 . 24}{\f0\insrsid5389549 0-4}{\f0\insrsid9916258 
1, points out that many of the values}{\f0\insrsid5389549  of estates (as also the renders of mills)}{\f0\insrsid9916258  with seemingly odd amounts (}{\f0\insrsid5389549  e.g. }{\f0\insrsid9916258 1s 4d. }{\f0\insrsid5389549 5s 4d. \'a31 10s 8d. \'a3
2 6s 8d) are in fact based on the Danish "ora" of 16d.}{\f0\insrsid9916258\charrsid9916258 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid97572 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8325391 Pasture }{\f0\fs24\insrsid936051 is not recorded at all, except as described in 'pasturable woodland' (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid936051 silua pastilis}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16002338 );}{\f0\fs24\insrsid936051  on }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16002338 
this and the lack of a separate mention of pasture in circuit VI,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid936051  see 1,1 woodland note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16002338  About sixty holdings}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12153081 , or part-holdings,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16002338 
 are stated to be waste in 1086, and once in 1066 as well (5,12)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16471330 ; for almost all of the manorial entries a value is given. A plough estimate is recorded for almost all of these}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7998081  'waste' holdings}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid8087445  (a space was left for one in 9,112 and 10,32)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16471330  and so}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8087445 me manorial resources, while}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12479719  on three estates population is}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8087445 
 specifically mentioned (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16471330 1,12}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7998081  waste}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12479719  note)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8087445 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12479719 \tab There are a }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15933927 couple of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12479719  references to}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15933927  a claim and a court case (20,4;7)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3614997  and a detail on the 1066 tenure in 18,5}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15933927 , but apart from these there are few of the interesting 'extras' that in several counties in Great Domesday are recorded after the value statement}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3031534 , though see }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3614997 7,5 Freemen note}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15933927 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6949295  Most of the few instances of details}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3031534  recorded}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6949295 
 after the value statement are for items probably briefly omitted from earlier in the entry, such as subtenants (6,5;8;10. 9,28. 10,1. 11,6;24. 13,8;11 etc.), the plough estimate in 9,130 and the meadow in 6,7.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15933927 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6903835 {\f0\fs24\insrsid16006929 The layout of the twenty-six or so multiple estates (see \{Introduction: Manorial Organization\}
) is different. In some of them the outliers (where they are recorded as such) are given with the manorial }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid16006929 caput}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16006929 
, merely named (though not for the twelve outliers of Southwell, 5,1), but in Laneham (5,4) combined details}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7998081  of the population for}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16006929 
 the seven outliers listed at the beginning of the entry are given at the end of it. In others the details of outliers are listed in separate entries after the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7998081  head manor in the same way as}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16006929 
 the Jurisdictions are}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784  generally (though the details of the latter}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1844005 
 are combined in 5,8 and 6,3). In Nottinghamshire, as in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, the scribe was still uncertain how and where to list the members of multiple estates and, especially in Nottinghamshire, this led 
to the initial omission of some of them; see \{Introduction: Writing and Correction\}.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784  He was usually careful to indicate the status of each holding, writing }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 M}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784\charrsid9570784 
[}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid8325391 an}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 erium}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784\charrsid9570784 ]}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 B}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 [}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 erewica}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 
] or }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 S}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 [}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784\charrsid9570784 oca}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 
] beside most of them if they were manors, outliers or Jurisdictions. Where one or more outliers were detailed with the manorial }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 caput}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 , }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084 he sometimes put }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084 M' 7 B' }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084  in the tramlines next to them, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9570784 as in}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084  5,4-5;7. Nottinghamshire contains more than the usual num
ber of manors, some sixty, that had been formed from two or}{\f0\fs24\insrsid8325391  more}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084  manors in 1066; in these cases the scribe interlined the number of }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084 T.R.E. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084 
manors above the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084 M'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14900363 ; see 3,4 2M note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110084  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5571399 A significant proportion of those entries without }{\f0\fs24\insrsid8325391 any of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid5571399 
these marginal letters are}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7998081  later additions}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5571399 .
\par 
\par The layout and formulae of a number of the added entries, especially those entered after rubrication had taken place, are different; see 10,64 entry note.
\par 
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid5571399 Writing and Correction}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5571399 
\par The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote the account of Nottinghamshire in one and a half quires, each of which contained four full sheets (eight folios), and he later inserted a half-sheet for three omitted fiefs; see \{Introduction: Layout and Content of
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13334998  Entries\}. Circuit VI}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5571399  had the most correction and addition of all the circuits}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13334998 
 and Nottinghamshire had even more than the two counties written before it (Yorkshire and Lincolnshire) when the number of lines written during the initial campaign is taken into account. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9115532 
Apart from the three omitted fiefs, which were probably inserted while the scribe was still working on the county, over fifty entries (albeit some very brief ones) were originally omitted and later added by both the main scribe and scribe B, }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid13334998 the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11407830 vast }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13334998 majority never rubricated after insertion}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6175126 
; for those done by the main scribe, see 1,19 entry note and 1,31 entry note, and for the six added by scribe B, see 1,12 bovates note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16006929  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6175126 These entries were often added}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9579227 
 by the main scribe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6175126  in spaces left at the end of chapters, though whether such spaces had been deliberately left for this purpose is unclear}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15009427 . H}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9579227 
e also used the foot margin of several folios (always for the rubricated entries), as well as the side margin and twice the centre margin (1,53. 9,23), and wit
h the short entries (probably all members of manors) he squeezed them into spaces at the end of other entries, as scribe B did all but on}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12917826 
ce. In a couple of cases the main scribe added entries in spaces left within fiefs (5,2;12).}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10625906  He often did not write these entries on the scored horizontal lines}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 , but this was }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10625906 
not always because he was short of space}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1793039 , as }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 there was enough space }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1793039 at the end of chapters 10, 13 and 30.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4660736  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 
A pair of transposition signs was}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4660736  often used to indicate the correct position of the added entries in the main text; when there was more than one added ent}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9115532 ry in a particular margin}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4660736  and they }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 properly }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4660736 belonged in different places on the same page the main scribe varied the design of these signs, as on folio 284cd and folio 286ab.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 

\par \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4660736 Apart from these added entries}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4660736  both scribes added and corrected most aspects of a typical entry, either erasing original material and inserting the replacement over it}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3298047 , or interlining additional details. All o}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 r part of seven place-names was}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3298047  
underlined for deletion and a replacement interlined above them (1,6. 5,7. 11,11. 17,17. 28,2. 30,1;31). Two entries }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448 and details of one Jurisdiction in a third entry }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3298047 
were also struck through for deletion (10,6;23}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448  and 1,30}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3298047 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448 , almost certainly because they were found to be duplicates of material already entered,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3298047  and }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448 part of three tax assessments, the byname of a subtenant and of a }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448 T.R.E.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448  holder were underlined for deletion}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3298047 . }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9115532 
It is possible to allocate some of the minor reme}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448 dial work to a particular}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9115532  campaign of addition of entries}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448 
 by comparing the pen, the colour and type of ink used and the 'style' of the correction or addition.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5525375 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9792906 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16344506 The reason for all the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9792906  correction and addition}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16344506  in circuit VI}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9792906 
 may have been because the putative circuit volume was particularly poorly-arranged or defective or there might even not have been one, the main scribe assembling and editing the material for each county in this circuit from a variety of sources}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582  or even from a text arranged territorially rather than feudally}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9792906 . As this was almost 
certainly the first circuit to be written up by him, he probably encountered problems that needed to be resolved, such as whe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16344506 re to include the outliers and J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9792906 
urisdictions of manors, whether to detail their assessment and resources separately, and so on.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16344506  In 
the case of Nottinghamshire his source(s) may have been hard to read or unclear in many places, as, apart from material definitely added later, a large amount of correction and addition was done during the initial writing campaign.}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1866448  Indications of haste are found in several examples of poor writing by the main scribe and in his failure to line through for rubrication a number of place-names and other headings; see 1,10 manor note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1793039 
 The fact that on several pages unrubricated entries were inserted after rubric
ated additions suggests either that at least some of the information was missing not only when he began writing the county, but when he made his first check of his source(s), or that his material was in such a confused state that he failed to find a large
 number of details during the first check.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9792906 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9792906\charrsid16006929 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid2833011 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\b\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Appended to the list of Nottinghamshire landholders (folio 280d) are seven who held }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 In Rotelande}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and their lands duly appear under the heading }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Roteland }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 at the end of Nottinghamshire (folios 293c-294a). In 1086 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 was clearly neither a full county nor a mere wapentake. Fiscally integrated with the Nottinghamshire wapentakal system, it was nevertheless not contiguous to that county and eight of its 
estates were duplicated in an independent survey in the Domesday folios for Lincolnshire, only two of them under the heading '}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 In}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Rotelande}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 '}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 ; see RUT}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid2972582 \{Introduction: Duplicate Entries\}}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 . Rutland}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  became a full county }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582 
early in the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 thirteenth century}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2972582  with the addition of}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12331932  Witchley Wapentake from Northamptonshire. (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 'Roteland'}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  is used here for the eleventh-century and earlier land-unit that comprised in 1086 the wapentakes of Alstoe and 'Martinsley'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12331932 .)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par 
\par Wapentake Heads
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The are twenty-seven wapentake heads in the text, but a reconstitution of the wapentakes suggests that there is need of a further eighty or so; see }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2706379 \{Introduction: Identifying and R}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 econstructing the Wapentakes\}.
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par Standard Order of Wapentakes}{\b\f0\insrsid15359826  
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 In most counties}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2706379  in Great Domesday Book}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , depending o
n the format adopted within individual chapters, places that belonged to one hundred or wapentake are entered as a block, before a group belonging to some other hundred or wapentake. Moreover, in many counties the hundreds or wapentakes themselves are ent
ered in a standard order in each fief. This is either because the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 main }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
scribe of Great Domesday was using a checklist of hundred or wapentake names, perhaps primarily to ensure that all the material was included, or information had been extracted (probably when the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571  putative}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  circuit volume was compiled}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12331932 , if one was}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) from a document arranged like the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 where the county is divided into hundreds, the hundreds into vills and the vills into estates. For this reason, the different parts of vills in different fiefs are sometimes found in the same relative order; see \{Introduction: Order of Vills\}.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 There is plentiful evidence of a standard order of wapentakes in Nottinghamshire. This can be shown by allocating a number to each wapentake name as follows (1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 :}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Newark, 2}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 :}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  'Bassetlaw', 3}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 :}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  'Lythe', 4}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 :}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Thurgarton, 5}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 :}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Rushcliffe, 6}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 :}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Broxtowe, 7}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 :}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Bingham, 8}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 :}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 Oswaldbeck) and listing their occurrence in each chapter. It then becomes cl}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571 ear that most chapters that cont}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ain more than one wapentake are arranged in a standard order. Dislocations of t}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12331932 his order are oft}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12331932\charrsid5732183 en caused by}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571\charrsid5732183  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10320384\charrsid5732183 entries }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9338571\charrsid5732183 added}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid5732183  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2950622\charrsid5732183 at the end of the fief or }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10320384\charrsid5732183 within it, the latter often in the margins}{\f0\fs24\insrsid5732183 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10320384  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid12331932 (here enclosed in square}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  brackets}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12331932 ); round brackets are used}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  to signal other dislocations within the body of a fief}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12331932 .}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par 
\par \tab Chapter 1: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 2. 6. 7. (4}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10320384\charrsid6034525 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . [1]. [2].
\par \tab Chapter 2: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 3. 5. 7. 8.
\par \tab Chapter 3: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5
\par \tab Chapter 4: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 6.
\par \tab Chapter 5: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 4. [3]. 7. 2. [3]. [4]. 2. 4. [2]. 3
\par \tab Chapter 6: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 2.
\par \tab Chapter 7: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 4. 7.
\par \tab Chapter 8: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 3.
\par \tab Chapter 9: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. [2].
\par \tab Chapter 10:}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  (4). 1. 4. 5. 6. 7. (6). [2]. [6].
\par \tab Chapter 11: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 3. 4. [7]. 4. 7.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4543915   }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab Chapter 12: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4543915 2.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4543915\charrsid4543915 3. 4.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  7. [3].
\par \tab Chapter 13: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5. 6. [4]. [5].
\par \tab Chapter 14: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 4. (1).
\par \tab Chapter 15: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 2. 3. 6. 7. 
\par \tab Chapter 16: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 2. 4. 5.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 7. (2). [6?]}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13391453  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab Chapter 17: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 2. 4. 5. 7. 
\par \tab Chapter 18: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 (3) 2. 3. 4}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10320384\charrsid599346 ?}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13391453  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par \tab Chapter 19: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1.
\par \tab Chapter 20: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 7.
\par \tab Chapter 21: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1.
\par \tab Chapter 22: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 1. 2. 
\par \tab Chapter 23: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5.
\par \tab Chapter 24: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5. (3).
\par \tab Chapter 25: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5. 
\par \tab Chapter 26: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 7. 
\par \tab Chapter 27: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 7.
\par \tab Chapter 28: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 5. 6.
\par \tab Chapter 29: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 6.
\par \tab Chapter 30: }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4927128  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 2. 3. 4. 3. 4. 2. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 5. (4). 6. [2]. [8]. [6]. [2].
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110900\charrsid13391453 In some counties}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid13391453  where a fief begins out of order, the reason is that the holder's chief manor h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110900\charrsid13391453 
as been promoted to first place.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid13391453  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110900\charrsid13391453 The only examples in Nottinghamshire appear to be Southwell (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid13391453 5,1}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3110900\charrsid13391453 ) and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946 possibly }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110900\charrsid13391453 Averham (18,1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946 ; see NTT 18 Gilbert note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3110900\charrsid13391453 )}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid13391453 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab The justification for allocating particular places to particul}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4214880 a}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 r wapentakes is explained in the notes to each entry and the wapentakal 
order of each chapter is explored in the note that heads each chapter.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7034286\charrsid10701946 In the above tabulation of the small fiefs }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14038898\charrsid10701946 in chapters 19-29 it would seem}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7034286\charrsid10701946  that}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid14038898\charrsid10701946  the scribe }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946\charrsid10701946 mostly }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7034286\charrsid10701946 arrange}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14038898\charrsid10701946 d}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7034286\charrsid10701946 
 them according to the wapentake in which they lay with the last wapentake to be entered in one chapter}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7756454\charrsid10701946  occasionally}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7034286\charrsid10701946 
 being the first in the next. Thus, all those tenants-in-chief having lands in Newark Wapentake were listed first (chapters 19-22), then those having lands in Rushcliffe Wapentake (chapters 23-25). }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946 
It might then be expected that chapter 28 would follow, but he probably preferred to detail the holdings of Durand Malet (chapter 26) after those of Robert Malet, presumably a re}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946\charrsid10701946 lative, though Durand}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946  held only in Bingham Wapentake, but he then continued with that wapentake for chapter 27, before returning to deal with the holdings of Robert son of W}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946\charrsid10701946 
illiam in Rushcliffe Wapentake.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946  The last of these small fiefs contains lands in Broxtowe Wapentake, which was the wapentake with which he ended the preceding chapter. As the tenants
-in-chief of these chapters had relatively small and unimportant holdings,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7756454\charrsid10701946  so the question of hierarchy}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7756454\charrsid10701946 would not arise, and }
{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946 most of them }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7756454\charrsid10701946 held }{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946 in only one wapenta}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14038898\charrsid10701946 ke, the scribe could have arranged}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946  them in any order. If his source contained all these small fiefs in one section, arranged by wapentake, as can be seen in the section}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7226879\charrsid10701946 
s containing the lands of a number of '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946 French Men-at-Arms'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7226879\charrsid10701946 , 'English Thanes' etc.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946  for example, in}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946\charrsid10701946  the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid10701946\charrsid10701946 Liber Exoniensis}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14038898\charrsid10701946 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946 th
e circuit volume for the south-west counties}{\f0\fs24\insrsid14038898\charrsid10701946 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7226879\charrsid10701946  which were basically arranged by hundreds,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid2171725\charrsid10701946  the reason for the scribe's choice of this particular order in Nottinghamshire would be clear: he worked through this }{\f0\fs24\insrsid14038898\charrsid10701946 section, which would have been arranged in the '
standard' order of wapentakes, beginning with Newark and finishing with Bingham.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7034286 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab As in some other counties, such as Shropshire, this standard order seems to have been so fixed in the scribe's mind that in Chapter 17 he inscribed 'Newark Wapentake' (which 
comes first in the normal sequence) above the first entry (for the manor of Boughton) which in fact appears to have lain in 'Bassetlaw' Wapentake. 
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par Order of Vills}{\b\f0\insrsid15359826  
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 In shires where the order of wapentakes or hundreds appears to be standard in the majority
 of fiefs, and a number of vills contain more than one estate which appear in different chapters in Domesday, it would be expected that the names of vills would appear in a similar order. This is because both the wapentakes and their constituent vills pro
ba}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354 bly appeared in a territorially-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 arranged schedule similar to the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, before being converted to feudal form. Alternative causes, which would have the same effect is that the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354 main }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 scribe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354  of Great Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 was using a checklist, rather than a full schedule, but still arranged by wapentakes, hundreds and villages}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  or that fief}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354 -}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
holders themselves were instructed to list their holdings in a pa}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ticular order. A number o
f counties illustrate this clearly. In Nottinghamshire, there are plentiful signs that parts of villages that have been split among various fiefs are }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1853272 listed in the same order. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Roffe }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1853272 ('Introduction', }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid1853272 Nottinghamshire Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1853272 , p. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1853272\charrsid16536365 7, table 2) }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 has shown }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1853272\charrsid16536365 h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 ow}{\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid16536365 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid16536365 in Oswaldbeck Wapentake, }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 the holdings that are common to Mansfield (1,31-44), the Archbishop of York's estates}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354\charrsid16536365  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 
of Laneham (5,4) and Sutton-cum-Lound (5,8) and to certain of Roger of Bully's estate}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354\charrsid16536365 s (9,112-131), discounting the J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 urisdictions in this last, ha
ve an almost exactly similar order}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7226879 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid918616 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid16536365 There are many }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 examples}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid16536365  in other wapentakes. T}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 hus Ordsall, Hea}{\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid16536365 d}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 on}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354\charrsid16536365 
 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid16536365 and Upto}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 n (1,5}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354 -7) which are J}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
urisdictions of Dunham-on-Trent (1,1) occur in the same order in Roger of Bully's fief (9,23;26-27). Grimston, Kirton,Willoughby and Walesby}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4393354 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 and Beesthorpe and Carlton-on-Trent (1,18-21), which are parts of the supposed manor of Grimston (1,17), occur in the same order in chapter 12 (12,2-4; 9-10). Chapters 2 and 9 share Sutton-on-Trent (2,4. 9,63;67), Ruddington (2,6. 9,83),
 Kneeton (2,7-8. 9,102) and Treswell (2,9. 9,129) which are entered in the same order. Elston (6,3. 9,1) and Spalford (6,4. 9,4) are a small example of identical order, but even in so large a chapter as chapter 9 (132 entries), the order of entries shared
 with chapter 12 is virtually identical: Kirton and Walesby (9,13. 12,2;4), Carlton-on-Trent (9,61. 12,10), Gedling (9,72. 12,16-17), Burton Joyce (9,75. 12,18), Shelford (9,99. 12,19), Newton (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7624539 9,97}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 12,20 and Owthorpe (9,111. 12,21}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7226879 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12613640\charrsid7226879 ; on the only disruption, see 9,97 Newton note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7226879\charrsid7226879 .}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7226879  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7226879 The similarity between chapters 9 and 11}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 is surprisingly similar: Flawborough (9.2. 11,1;3;5). Hockerton (9,60. 11,8). Oxton (9,76. 11,11), Kelham (9,59. 11,19), Car Colston (9,107. 1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7480611 1,24) and Flintham (9,108. 11,25}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
). The entries that chapter 11 shares with chapters 20 and 27 are also in the same sequence: Alverton (11,3}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16536365 . 20,2), East Stoke (11,6. 20,3)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , Aslockton (11,22. 20,6), Cropwell Butle}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7480611 r (11,32. 20,7), }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Granby (11,26. 27,1) and Wiverton (11,29. 27,2). The
re are also cases where sequences overlap even though not all the places concerned are in every fief involved. Thus in chapter 9 the sequence is Willoughby-on-the-Wolds, Costock, Rempstone (9,92-94); in chapter 10, Willoughby-on-the-Wolds, Costock (10,1}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid14838336 0-11); in chapter 15, Costock, Rempstone (15,5-6).}{\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid14838336 
 No distinction is made in this list between manors and dependencies. The dependencies have to be entered with the manors, but where manors share dependencies, these latter are sometimes in the same order.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid7078577 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab It would, however}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7078577 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 be misleading to claim that such parallel orders are nearly universal. There are cases where the order is inverted, as if }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid12613640 a scribe}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12613640  at some stage}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 were working first }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7017285 down a page and then back up it. O}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 verall there are more cases where the order disagrees than where it agrees, and it seems that several processes have distanced the final }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid7017285 Domesday }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 text from any e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7078577 arlier territorial arrangement.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\highlight16\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par Duplicate Entries
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The following estate}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4413767 s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  may be duplicates of one another; the evidence for this is discussed in the individual notes:
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16340003 {\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003 \tab One carucate in the borough of Nottingham (B9) is identified as Sneinton and
\par \tab \tab  duplicated at 1,63; see 1,63 Sneinton note.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003\charrsid16340003 \tab ?Ordsall (1,12. 30,56). The second entry was added by the main scribe of Great 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12140306 \tab \tab Domesday; see 30,56 Ordsall note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003 
\par \tab Ranby (1,14;30). The second entry was deleted by the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003\charrsid11234367 main scribe of Great 
\par \tab \tab Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003 ; see 1,30 Ranby note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003\charrsid11234367 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6841963 {\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963\charrsid6841963 ?}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963 
Grimston and dependencies (Kirton, Willoughby, Beesthorpe, Carlton-on-Trent)
\par \tab \tab are shared with and possibly duplicated in Mansfield (1,17-21. 1,24;27); see 1,17 
\par \tab \tab outlier note.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11614014 {\f0\fs24\insrsid11614014\charrsid11614014 \tab ??Carlton-on-Trent (1,21 or 1,24. 12,23). The last entry was added by the main scribe 
\par \tab \tab of Great Domesday; see 12,23 Carlton note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11614014 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6841963 {\f0\fs24\insrsid12140306 \tab One bovate in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid12140306\charrsid12140306 Farnsfield (1,22. 11,17)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid12140306 
. This is more a cross-reference than a 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16340003 {\f0\fs24\insrsid12140306 \tab \tab duplication; see 1,22 bovate note.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003\charrsid11234367 \tab Warsop (1,25. 30,53). The second entry was added by the main scribe of Great 
\par \tab \tab Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003 ; see 30,53 entry note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003\charrsid11234367 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003\charrsid16340003 \tab Tiln (1,31;41). The first entry was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday; see 
\par \tab \tab 1,31 entry note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12140306 {\f0\fs24\insrsid12140306\charrsid12140306 \tab ?Bramcote (1,46. 10,37). The first entry was added by the main scribe of Great 
\par \tab \tab Domesday; see 1,46 entry note.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11234367 {\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367 \tab Misson (1,65. 30,44). }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367\charrsid11234367 
The first entry was added by the main scribe of Great 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367 \tab \tab Domesday; see 1,65 entry note. 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16340003 {\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003\charrsid11234367 \tab Clifton (10,6. 30,25). The first entry was struck through for deletion}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003 
; see 10,6 entry
\par \tab \tab  note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16340003\charrsid11234367 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6841963 {\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963 \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963\charrsid6841963 ?}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963 Adbolton (10,12;56). }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963\charrsid6841963 The first entry was added by scribe B}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963 ; see 10,12 entry note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963\charrsid6841963 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963  
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11234367 {\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367 \tab Old Basford (10,23;52. 30,28). }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367\charrsid11234367 The first 
entry was struck through for deletion, 
\par \tab \tab probably by scribe B at the same time as he added the entry at 10,52}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367 ; see 10,23 
\par \tab \tab entry note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367\charrsid11234367 . An interlineation made by the main scribe of Great Domesday in 30,28 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367 
\par \tab \tab }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367\charrsid11234367 duplicated the previous two entries}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367 ; see 30,28 Skuli note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367\charrsid11234367 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11234367 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6841963 {\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963\charrsid6841963 \tab ?Chilwell (10,26. 13,5). The second entry was added by the main scribe of Great 
\par \tab \tab Domesday; see 13,5 entry note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13509740 \tab ?Newthorpe (10,33;62). See 10,62 Broxtowe note.
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963\charrsid6841963 \tab ?'Sutton Passeys' (10,38. 30,55). The second entry was added by the main scribe of 
\par \tab \tab Great Domesday; see 30,55 entry note.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6841963 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid665263 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid7092398\charrsid665263 In addition, nine of the estates listed in 1,24 as dependencies of Mansfield are repeated in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid665263\charrsid665263 1,25-30. However, this is not s}{\f0\fs24\insrsid7092398\charrsid665263 
trictly a case of duplication, as the list at 1,24 contains only the name and the taxable extent of the estate, and is more in the form of a check-list; see 1,17 outlier note.
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\highlight3\insrsid11614014\charrsid7092398 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13257149\charrsid10363915 What is immediately obvious from the above list is the number of duplicate entries caused purely by later additions. It would seem that both the main scr
ibe of Great Domesday and scribe B did not bother, or perhaps did not have time, during their checks to verify whether an entry that they had found }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10363915 in some other document }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13257149\charrsid10363915 
had already been included}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10363915  in Domesday}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13257149\charrsid10363915 . This is true of other counties as well as Nottinghamshire. However, the deletion of three entries, only one of which was }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10363915 connected to}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13257149\charrsid10363915  an addition, suggests checking through the original text of this county was at least partially done.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10289911  
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4342543 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid10363915 
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  SPECIAL FEATURES
\par 
\par Boroughs 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The borough of Nottingham named the shire. A survey of it, according to the restricted purposes of Domesday Book, is included, with }{\f0\fs24\insrsid4413767 one for }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 the borough of Derby}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid4413767 , on the first folio}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  of the county schedule. Nottingham is first mentioned in 918 (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15171039\charrsid15171039 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) as a }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 burh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  captured from the Danes and fortified by King Edward the Elder. In the same source it is evidently}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555\charrsid7017285 the}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555 
 }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 capital of a shire in 1016. By 1086 there were in effect two boroughs, one French and the other English}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and Nottingham went on to be
come a major urban centre. A charter of Henry II (Ballard, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Borough Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ,}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  1042-1216}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, p. 7) confirmed on the burgesses all the free customs that they had had under Henry I.
\par \tab The only other borough that existed in Nottinghamshire in 1086, though not mentioned by that name was Newark-on-Trent where there were 56 burgesses in the lordship of the Bishop of Lincoln. 
\par \tab  By the thirteenth century, a borough had been established at East Retford, and there are grounds for thinking that it was actually esta
blished by Henry I early in the twelfth century. It is first mentioned by name in 1225 then in 1259 in a charter of Henry III granting an eight-day fair for the improvement of 'his borough'; see }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid15609111 Ballard and Tait
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 English Borough Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ,}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  1216-1307}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 139, 250}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 and 1,41 Clarborough note.
\par 
\par (On the Nottinghamshire boroughs, see Beresford and Finberg, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid1058555 English Medieval Boroughs}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 146-47. On Nottingham itself, see B1}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555\charrsid15609111 -20}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15609111 .)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par 
\par Castles
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottingham was a site of st}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555 r}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ategic importance, commanding communication northwards by road and water. William the Conqueror had constructed a castle there in 1068 as part of his campaign in the north and appears to have entrusted it to William Peverel who also had a castle at what b
ecame Castleton in the Peak District (DBY 7,7). He had a compact group of estates to the west of Nottingham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555 ; }{\f0\fs24\insrsid1058555\charrsid665263 see NT}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid665263 T 10 William note}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid665263 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Domesday does not mention the castle at Nottingham; see NTT B Borough note. The eleventh-century castle appears to have consisted of a motte and two baileys; see Drage, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Nottingham Castle}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , p. 34.}{\insrsid15359826  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Like Southwell (5,1), Nottingham was probably a walled or fortified site in the eleventh century.
\par \tab There is no other castle that was certainly established in Nottinghamshire in 1086. Newark-on-Trent was a walled town and a castle was built there by the Bishop of Li}{\f0\fs24\insrsid10422940 n}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 coln in the twelfth cent}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid10422940 u}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ry; see 6,1 Newark note.
\par \tab Roger of Bully had lands that lay on both sides of the Nottinghamshire-Yorkshire border and wh}{\f0\fs24\insrsid11692013 ich were consolidated into the h}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
onour of Tickhill or Blyth. A castle was built at Tickhill (SK 5993) just over the bor}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9704213 der in Yorkshire, }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9704213\charrsid665263 four miles}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6762632  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
from Blyth and the castle is sometimes called the castle of Blyth; see }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6762632 NTT 9 Roger note}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 
\par 
\par (On the castles and fortifications of Nottinghamshire, see King, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Castellarium Anglicanum}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 , ii. pp. 380-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 82.
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par 
\par Forest
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 There is no mention of forest in Domesday, but Sherwood Forest came to be an important area of the shire. There are two pre-Conquest mentions (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Scirwudu}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Scyryuda}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ) both contained in the grant of land at Sutton-cum-Lound made in 958 by King Edgar to }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538\charrsid6762632 [Arch]}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6762632 b}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
ishop Oscytel (Sawyer, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Anglo-Saxon Charters}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , no}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  679 = }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Early Charters of Northern England}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
, p. 112 no. 115); see Crook, 'Forest Boundaries in Nottinghamshire'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 ;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  and 5,7 Sutton note. The meaning is 'shire-wood' and if these forms are genuine, they suggest that Nottingham was a shire or at}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538  least a proto-shire by the middle of the }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 tenth century. It may be that the wood was regarded as a resource for the whole shire, with individual villages having rights to timber and pig-grazing. There is}
{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  however}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  a possible parallel with the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Hereswode }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 of Leicestershire (LEC C18)}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  'the wood of the army'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  suggesting that its exploitation was in the hands of the Danish arm}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6762632 y that occupied Leicestershire.}
{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Since }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 scir }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 means 'cut', }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
cutting' or 'share', it is possible that this was the wood belonging to a particular Danish army's share of Mercia, although the word is Old English, not Danish. Moreover}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 ,}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  the word }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Hereswode}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  in Domesday is glossed as }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 silua totius uicecomitatus}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538  ('t}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 he wood of the whole sheriffdom'}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 )}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .
\par \tab Such a wood and surrounding areas would have made an ideal forest and it is probable that William I or William II took the first steps to create a privileged area for hunting and subject to forest law. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6762632 A later William}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid6762632  Peverel}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  was controlling it, probably on the king's behalf in 1154, but after the forfeiture of the Peverel barony under Henry II, it was in the king's hands; }{
\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 see }{\i\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Rotuli Hundredorum}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 , ii. p. 315}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 .
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid6762632 \tab The p}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 riory of Newstead (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 de novo loco}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , 'of the new place') was established for Augustinian canons }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 c}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . 1163 by King Henry II}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9704213  in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9704213\charrsid665263 Sherwood}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Forest.
\par 
\par (On the Nottinghamshire forest and its keepers and on the parks of the county, see Cox, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Royal Forests}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , pp. 204-22; }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , i
. p. 365;}{\f0\fs24\insrsid6762632  Crook, 'Forest Boundaries in Nottinghamshire';}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Crook, 'Boundaries of the Forest in Nottinghamshire'; Crook, 'Early Keepers of Sherwood Forest}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid3934538 '; }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Crook, 'Private Hunting Rights in Nottinghamshire'; Crook, 'Private Parks in Medieval}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Nottinghamshire'.) 
\par 
\par 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 EDITORIAL
\par 
\par Identification of Places
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Domesday Book was used extensively as a basis for the admirable pioneering study of the county's antiquities by R.}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Thoroton, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Antiquities of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , published in 1677. That his work is still indispensable to }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11875131 
a student of the county emphasiz}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 es the dearth of other studies. It was the basis for the identification of places in the translation of Domesday published in 1906 in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshir}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 e, i. pp. 247-88. The place-names themselves have been surveyed by the English Place-Name Society, but in a volume (}{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Place-Names of Nottinghamshire}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
) compiled according to their restricted pre-war plan. The normal feudal sources are in themselves comparatively scanty for the county, and no }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Victoria County History}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
 'topographical' volumes have yet appeared to trace the descent of manors from 1086 and to identify them with precision. The result is that some identifications, especially of adjacent places that share a common name}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 ,}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  are less secure than they should be: for example, North and South Clifton, East and West Drayton, Litt}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 le Gringley and Gringley-on-the-}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
Hill, East and West Leake, North and South Leverton, North and South Wheatl}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16455828 ey. In some cases the 1086 and m}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 edieval division of holdings does not seem to correspond to the later separate 'villages'. 

\par \tab John Morris relied heavily on the identifications published in }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 VCH Nottinghamshir}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 e, i., supplemented by those that had recently appeared in the }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Domesday Gazetteer}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  (1975) for his edition of Domesday for Nottinghamshire that appeared in the Phillimore series in 1977. F.R.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1735997  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Thorn review}{\f0\fs24\insrsid3934538 e}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
d these identifications for the Alecto edition (1990) and the place-name changes that have been made in this re-edition of the Phillimore Domes
day Book mostly result from that work. Further research will no doubt alter some identifications and clarify others.
\par \tab A number of cases in Nottinghamshire illustrate some more general problems of the identification of places. Thus, if the identifications are correct, then the names Kirton (1,19;24. 9,13, 12,2.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid4735974  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
17,2) and Wellow (17,12) were comparatively early substitutes for the Domesday name-forms which had a different origin: Kirton is }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Schidrintune}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Schitrintone}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Schidrinton}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 , }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Schidrinctun}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 e, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Schidrictune}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 ; Wellow is }{
\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Creilege}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . Domesday distinguishes a Chilwell (10,26. 13,4-5) from an 'Eastern' Chilwell (13,4. 30,52) and calls them once 'the two Chilwells' (}{\f0\fs24\insrsid16455828 13,1), but although there is a m
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 edieval distinction between Chilwell and }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4735974 'Western'}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Chilwell, there is no
w only one settlement, and it is not clear whether Domesday really implies two settlements or only different ends of one. Likewise Domesday distinguishes a Morton (1,11), 'the other Morton' (1,11, perhaps Little Morton) and a 'North' or 'North}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid16455828 ern' Morton (9,34. 30,42), and m}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 edieval records have a 'Middle' Morton, a 'South' Morton and a '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4735974 Great' Morton as well as a 'North' Morton, but }{
\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid4735974 some of }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid4735974 thes}{\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid4735974 e distinctions have been replaced by others and their relation to the Domesday estates is unclear; see 1,11 Morton note.
}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826  Nottinghamshire is also }{\f0\fs24\insrsid9392358 a }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 county in which many villages have shrunk to single farms or have disappeared altogether, like 'West Burton' 
(5,4. 9,116) and 'Meering' (1,64) which now survive only as names of parishes; see Beresford and Hurst, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Deserted Medieval Villages}{\f0\fs24\insrsid9392358 , pp. 200-201}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . In some instances th}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid9392358 e settlement centre has moved: f}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 or example, the original site of Kinoulton (11,31. 30,38), '}{\f0\fs24\insrsid918616 Old Kinoulton', was at S}{\f0\fs24\insrsid918616\charrsid4735974 K676306}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 . In a case such as 'Sutton' (3,1. 4,2. 30,17-18) and 'Bonington' (3,3. 24,2. 30,15), now Sutton Bonington, the settlements have merged, while yet others have been overtaken by urban development. Domesday Book itself gives n
o form or shape to any settlement, and it is likely that the landscape has fluctuated repeatedly, with settlements both dispersing and gathering round a nucleus over the centuries}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid9392358 .}{
\f0\fs24\highlight16\insrsid15359826 
\par 
\par 
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \cbpat8 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid15359826 State of Revision}{\insrsid15359826  }{\insrsid918616 
\par \tab }{\insrsid15359826 The Phillimore edition of Nottinghamshire appeared in 1977. It was produced by the general editor, John Morris}{\insrsid1735997 ,}{\insrsid15359826  from a draft translation prepared by Celia Parker and Sara Wood.}{
\cf1\insrsid15359826  John Morris' policy was to produce a text and translation with minimal annotation, from a small range of sources and f}{\cf1\insrsid1735997 rom the text itself. Thus for 69}{\cf1\insrsid15359826 
 pages of translation there were four pages of notes.}{\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 \tab 
The preparation of an electronic edition has allowed a much fuller annotation to be provided. On the other hand, this is not a complete re-edition. In particular there is little refer
ence in the notes to the later history of the Domesday estates, except where it is necessary to distinguish places of the same name in the same wapentake or to support doubtful identifications.
\par \tab However, the opportunity has been taken to make a number of changes:
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}\pard \s15\ql \fi-360\li720\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\jclisttab\tx720\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\ls1\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid15359826 {
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 An Introduction has been provided. Within it the sections on History and Wapentakes take account of F.}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13334270  }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 R. Thorn's work for the Alecto edition (1990)}{\f0\fs24\insrsid1735997 .}
{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}
The probable names and contents of the 1086 wapentakes have been deduced from the text and identified from later sources. A full series of wapentake heads has been placed in the translation and the probable wapentake in which each place lay is discussed i
n the notes.
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}References have been inc}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13334270 luded to all known Anglo-Saxon c}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 harters}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1735997 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}All Domesday estates have been systematically designated either as Ancient Parishes, townships, chapelries or hamlets}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid1735997 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\cf1\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 The translation has been reviewed and brought into lin
e with counties published later in the Phillimore series. It has }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid1735997 also }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 
been compared with the translation published subsequently by Alecto (on which the present editors also worked); mistakes have been corrected and any important changes or differences have been commented upon. }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\cf1\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 The place-names have been re-scrutinized}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid1735997 .}{
\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826\charrsid13334270 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\f3\cf1\insrsid13334270 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}\pard\plain \ql \fi-360\li720\ri-325\nowidctlpar\tx284\jclisttab\tx720\tx8280\tx8460\faauto\ls1\rin-325\lin720\itap0\pararsid13334270 \cbpat8 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cf1\insrsid13334270 The bibliographical and other conventions have been changed to align them with the other counties that have been revised for the current project.
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\f3\cf1\insrsid13334270 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}\pard \ql \fi-360\li720\ri6\nowidctlpar\tx284\jclisttab\tx720\tx8460\tx8640\faauto\ls1\rin6\lin720\itap0\pararsid13334270 \cbpat8 {\cf1\insrsid13334270 
Certain changes have been necessary in the conversion of the notes to a searchable electronic version, such as to the lead words for the notes, to cross-references and to punctuation. 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\f3\cf1\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}\pard \ql \fi-360\li720\ri-325\nowidctlpar\tx284\jclisttab\tx720\tx8280\tx8460\faauto\ls1\rin-325\lin720\itap0\pararsid13334270 \cbpat8 {\cf1\insrsid15359826 
The handling of the Domesday forms of personal names has been completely revised}{\cf1\insrsid13334270  and notes written on each name as part of an ongoing process to bring more consistency to the entire name stock of Domesday Book.
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\f3\cf1\insrsid13334270 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}\pard \ql \fi-360\li720\ri6\nowidctlpar\tx284\jclisttab\tx720\tx8460\tx8640\faauto\ls1\rin6\lin720\itap0\pararsid13334270 \cbpat8 {\cf1\insrsid13334270 
Some of the people have been further identified. When the identification comes from the person's occurrence in other docume
nts or in other Domesday counties, this is shown in the translation between asterisks within square brackets. Where there is no documentary evidence for the identity of an individual, but it seems likely that a number of persons with the same first name a
re one and the same, this has been indicated in the translation by putting the name of one of the estates held by that person between < >. }{\cf1\insrsid13385764\charrsid13385764  }{\cf1\insrsid13334270\charrsid13385764 
In this county some of the notes to justify both these forms of identification were written by}{\cf1\insrsid13385764  John Palmer and these have been attributed to him as (JP) put at the end of his paragraph.}{\cf1\insrsid13334270 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\cf1\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}\pard\plain \s15\ql \fi-360\li720\ri0\widctlpar
\tx284\jclisttab\tx720\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\ls1\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid15359826 Internal cross-references have been expanded}{
\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid1735997 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}Both in the Introduction (The Domesday Format) and in the Notes, additional information has been included concerni
ng the order of writing, the circuit, the ruling pattern used in }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11535092 Nottingham}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
shire, the problems faced by the main scribe of Great Domesday and the corrections and additions made by him and by scribe B. This information comes largely from the researches of C
aroline Thorn and Michael Gullick which will be published as Thorn, Thorn and Gullick, }{\i\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 The Scribal History of Great Domesday Book}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
. As the work of scribe B was not identified and other advances in the understanding of the writing of Domesday Book were not m
ade until after the Phillimore printed edition went to press, the notes therein contain some information that has been superseded by further research.
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s15 \f3\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13385764 \loch\af3\dbch\af0\hich\f3 \'b7\tab}}\pard \s15\ql \fi-360\li720\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\jclisttab\tx720\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\ls1\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid13385764 {
\f0\fs24\insrsid13385764 Obvious typographical errors }{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid13385764 in the Phillimore printed notes have been corrected}{\f0\fs24\cf1\insrsid12866531 .}{\f0\fs24\insrsid13385764 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li360\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin360\itap0\pararsid1735997 {\f0\fs24\insrsid1735997 
\par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 {\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Much o
f John Morris' original brief commentary has been retained and, what has been, is attributed to him with the bracketed initials (JRM). Within a paragraph, any sentence that follows one attributed to JRM and any paragraph not attributed to him is by the pr
esent editors.
\par 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid13334270 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid13334270 Acknowledgements
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid13334270 \cbpat8 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\expnd0\expndtw3\cf1\insrsid13334270 
Access to the manuscript of Great Domesday on an unprecedented scale over a period of more than thirty years has always been freely granted by the staff of the Public Record Office; thanks are particularly due to Elizabeth 
Hallam Smith, Helen Forde, Mario Aleppo and John Abbott. Jim Foy's acuity and knowledge are always available to us.}{\cf1\insrsid13334270 
\par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15359826 \f2\fs20\lang2057\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp2057\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\fs24\insrsid13334270 
\par }{\b\f0\fs24\insrsid13334270\charrsid13334270 
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 Caroline Thorn
\par Frank Thorn
\par }{\f0\fs24\insrsid11535092 May 2006}{\f0\fs24\insrsid15359826 
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx284\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12866531 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12866531 June 2007}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15359826 
\par }{\insrsid6258006 
\par }}