A HISTORY OF DORSET 



held it in demesne. At Turners Puddle (nos. 391 and cxxiv) there was i hide, 4 acres, 

 and a garden which did not pay geld, which are recorded in Exon. Domesday but not in 

 the Exchequer text, and the same is true of a piece of woodland i league and 8 furlongs 

 long and i league wide in Puddletown (nos. 8 and ii), 15 acres of wood at North 

 Poorton (nos. 329 and ci), 8 cottars at Frome St. Quintin (nos. 15 and xxi), 2 cottars at 

 Chilfrome (nos. 278 and Ixxxviii), and a vUlamis with J virgate at Winterborne 

 Houghton (nos. 275 and Ixxxv). Exon. Domesday reveals that only half of the 2 mills at 

 Child Okeford (nos. 7 and i) was held by the king, and that the wood at Nettlecombe 

 (nos. 88 and li) nullum fnictum fert. At Cruxton (nos. 279 and Ixxxix), Durweston (nos. 

 401 and cxxxiv), and Ringstead (nos. 409 and cxlii) the Exchequer text does not record 

 the men's ploughs, although they are entered in Exon. Domesday. Other minor 

 omissions include leaving out the words et dimidia in some cases, for instance at 

 Cranborne (nos. 16 and xxii) where there were 2\ leagues of pasture in length according 

 to Exon. Interlineations in Exon. Domesday are not always reproduced in the Ex- 

 chequer text. At Cerne (nos. 108 and Ixxxii) the mill was worth xx(v)</. in Exon. 

 Domesday and xxJ. in the Exchequer text. In the case of North Poorton (nos. 329 and 

 ci) the geld assessment is left out by the Exchequer text, although it is given by Exon. 

 Domesday, but this appears to be due to a scribal error. The Exchequer entry reads 

 Wido teriet de Rogerio POVERTONE. Alwimis et Ulf te?iuerunt [T.R.E.] pro ii hidis. As 

 it stands this makes little sense and it seems plain that the scribe intended to write 

 something like Ahvinus et Ulf tenuerunt pro ii maneriis T.R.E. et geldabat pro ii hidis.^^ 

 At Affpuddle (nos. 80 and xliii), where the Exchequer text breaks off short, the Exon. 

 entry is complete but makes little grammatical sense.''' It seems as if the Exchequer 

 entry, if taken from Exon., was left incomplete until this could be clarified. At Nettle- 

 combe (nos. 88 and li), where Exon. Domesday records a knight with two hides of land, 

 the knight was at first left out in the Exchequer text, but was added in the margin. 

 Several of these marginal additions occur in the Exchequer text, possibly left out in the 

 first place because of haste in the compilation of the Exchequer Domesday, but none of 

 the other entries involving such marginalia survives in the existing Exon. Domesday.'^ 

 Some omissions, such as that of the hundred rubrics mentioned above, occur in both 

 the Exchequer text and Exon. Domesday. Apart from this it is noticeable that in many 

 cases where a gap has been left in the Exchequer text for some item of information to be 

 inserted, the relevant information is missing from Exon. Domesday also. It is not stated 

 how many teamlands there were at Portland (nos. i and vi), Nettlecombe (nos 88 and li), 

 or Winterborne Stickland (nos. 403 and cxxxvi), although spaces have been left in each 

 case for the relevant information which is not recorded in the Exon. entries either. 

 Spaces have also been left for ploughs at Torne (nos. 419 and clii), for the men's 

 ploughs at Tarente (nos. 26 and xxxv) and Renscombe (nos. 91 and liv), and for the 

 number of villani at Morden (nos. 385 and cxvii). At Stafford (nos. 383 and cxv) there 

 is some confusion over the manorial adjuncts. The Exchequer text says that there were 

 24 acres of meadow, and 16 furlongs of pasture, and 8 acres, leaving a space after acres, 

 which would logically be filled by woodland, since meadow and pasture have already 

 been enumerated. This obscurity also exists in the Exon. text which states that the 

 manor was divided between two men, each of whom held xii agros prati et viii quad- 

 ragenarias pascue et iiii agros, without indicating to what the iiii agros refer. There are 



" Cf. the entry for Milborne St. .'Vndrew (no. 477), " The 2 manors referred to in this entry are AfFpuddle 



where the hidage is not given, and the entry for Petersham and Bloxworth (nos. 79 and xlii). The Bloxworth entry is 



(Farm) (no. 375), where there is no value. In both these complete in both texts. 



cases over-compression seems to be the cause. Neither is " See below, 

 covered bv Exon. Domesdav. 



