
By John Watson-Taylor. 381 
It is probable, therefore, that the correct explanation of “ Erle” 
is that which is most simple, and that it was the old English form 
of the title Earl. In Anglo-Saxon it was spelt “orl,” and was a 
word adapted from the Danish “jarl,” which is said to have been 
introduced into England by the Jutes and to have gradually taken 
the place of the older word ealdorman, signifying a nobleman, or 
one holding high office under the King, in which senses it is fre- 
quently found used in Anglo-Saxon documents. If, as seems to 
be the case, it was added in the latter part of the twelfth century, 
erle is the form in which it would then be written, and the varia- 
tions in the spelling, eorl, earl, and comitis, seem to show that this 
is the meaning that has always been attributed to it. In Domesday 
Book there are several examples of its use: Erlesholt, in Yorkshire, 
held both at the time of the survey and of Edward the Confessor 
by the Archbishop; Erlestune, in Derbyshire, held by Henry de 
Ferrers; Erlide, in Staffordshire, held by Earl Roger; Erlingeha’, 
in Gloucestershire, and Erlestone in Northamptonshire, held by 
the King; and Erlham, in Norfolk, held by Godric the Sewer 
and Alnot the Saxon. Of these the last two only occur in the 
Book of Fees, where they are given as Herleston and Herlh’m, and 
in the same record Erlega has become Herleg. In later times, 
however, the “h” was dropped again, and Herlh’m, in Norfolk, 
was called Jerlham or Earlham. This form seems to point to the 
title as its origin from Anglo-Saxon times, for although Domesday 
Book has no places with the prefix Jarl or Yarl the modern 
Yarlingtons of Somersetshire and Yorkshire may yet belong to the 
same category in their Domesday forms Gerlington and Girlington. 
_ The only earl who can be proved to have been connected with 
Erlestoke is Earl Harold, who held Melksham at the time of 
_ Edward the Confessor, no doubt by virtue of his office of Earl of 
Wiltshire, and it may have been that the demesne land of the 
parent manor was all situated at Stoke, but it is very unlikely 
that of the enormous number of manors which he held in England 
this small sub-manor should be the only one whose name owed its 
- origin to him. 
In later times the title of an owner was frequently added to 
