Domesday Statistics 17 



obvious that 28 separate divisions might be con- Re arks 



c i 1 r i i on Corp " 



structed ; or which 1 5 are set forth in the three parative 

 following comparative accounts ; no extreme mathe- 

 matical accuracy being postulated in a matter where 

 rough correctness is all that at present can be 

 looked for. In the first table it will be noted that 

 the comparison of like items gives satisfactory 

 results ; thus the hides of 1065 seem distinctly 

 the antecessors of those which furnished the ghelds 

 of the middle of the twelfth century, and the 

 valuits of 1065 differ not widely from the valets 

 of 1086, bearing in mind the absence of Yorks in 

 the former class, and of most of the carucated 

 counties in the latter. In these (Derby, Leicester, 

 Lines, Norfolk, Notts, Rutland, Suffolk, Yorks, 

 and part of Cheshire) greater changes occurred 

 than in hidated England, which the tables do not 

 adequately set forth ; nor are the wasted Yorkshire 

 manors to be discovered in the comparison of 

 Teamlands with Teams, the incompleteness of 

 which table gives it a better appearance than it 

 otherwise would have. In a country ploughed up 

 to the maximum an excess of teams over teamlands 

 would be expected, for the reason instanced above; 

 according to the witness of D. B. the majority of 

 counties had surplus arable.* It seems that no 

 definite amount of land was in view by the expres- 

 sion of land to one team, which would indicate 

 different quantities respectively on the demesne 

 and villenage ; the distinction is often made, and 

 the difference should not be overlooked, for on the 

 land of the lord the land of one plough would 

 include the assistance of the tenant, and on the 



;;: That is more teams, could have been used with advantage. 



2 



