[146] The aggregate of these areal measures does not bear out the statement of Domesday regarding them, the former Wapentake containing eighty-four ploughlands, where Domesday allows it only forty-eight.
[147] The entry is far more suggestive of the 'Hundreds' (vide infra) in Leicestershire, on the border of which Sawley stood. This remark applies also to the entry (i. 291b) that Leake (Notts) 'jacet in Pluntree Hund'.
[148] See D.B., i. fos. 298, 298b, and fo. 379.
[149] As Mr Pell did in the case of Clifton.
[151] 'There is no trace of any,' writes Canon Taylor (Domesday Studies, i. 74).
[152] As with maenols and trevs in North and South Wales.
[153] Mr Pell tried to explain it by assuming that the Leicestershire carucates were really small virgates of the hida in question!
[154] This at once shows the absurdity of taking these eighteen carucates to be eighteen 'virgates' of a normal hide, and of all the reasoning based thereupon.
[155] See more below on this point.