[1501] Perhaps add 5 hides at Suchelei; but apparently these have been already included in the account of the King’s Land.
[1502] A large hundred called Halfshire Hundred was formed. In Latin records it is Hundredum Dimidii Comitatus. For some light on the constitution of Dodingtree, see Round, Feudal England, 61.
[1503] ‘In Huntedunescyre sunt dccc hide et dimid.’ This means eight and a half hundreds.
[1504] Leges Anglorum, p. 7.
[1505] On a re-count I made 1185.
[1506] Mr Charles Taylor gives 2595. See above, [p. 412]. Therefore I have once more gone through the county with his book before me. The difference between us is not altogether due to my faulty arithmetic; but arises from the different constructions that we put upon a few composite entries. In particular I can not allow the bishop of Worcester anything like the 231 hides that Mr Taylor gives him. When I find an entry in this form: ‘Sancta Maria tenet H. Ibi sunt x hidae ... De hac terra huius manerii Turstinus tenet y hidas in O,’ I believe that x includes y, and this no matter how far the place called O may be from the place called H. My 2388 is I think a trifle too low; but I believe the number lies very close to 2400 on one side or the other.
[1507] Ellis, Introduction, i. 184.
[1508] Feudal England, 148.
[1509] After a re-count I think that my 1356 is a little too large, and should not be surprised if the 26631⁄2 had been exactly halved.
[1510] See above, [p. 451]. This is but one instance. Several other hundreds had been similarly relieved. See Round, Feudal England, 51.