18 teams existing; arable land 2 leagues long and 1 [league]
wide. Eyton (Staffordshire, 48) has a long note on this entry
which makes against his doctrine that the teamland is 120
acres. He suggests that the statement by linear measure is a
correction of the previous statement that there is land for 8
teams. Unfortunately, as we have seen, this entry does not
stand alone. Morgan, op. cit. 34, speaks of some of these
entries. Those which he mentions and which we have not
noticed do not seem quite to the point. Thus (D. B. i. 263 b)
of Edesberie we read 'land for 6 ploughs ... this land is a
league long and equally wide.' We are not here expressly told
that all the 'land' thus measured by lineal measure is
arable. The cases of Dictune, Winetun, Grif and Bernodebi,
which he then cites, are beside the mark, for what is here
measured by lineal measure seems to be the whole area of the
manor.
[1428] To make safer, I take the Dorset and Somerset teamlands from
Eyton, the Gloucester teams from Mr Taylor. In the modern
statistics the 'arable' covers 'bare fallow' and 'grasses
under rotation'; the 'permanent pasture' includes 'grass for
hay,' but excludes 'mountain and heath land used for
grazing'; the total acreage includes everything but 'tidal
water.' To bring up the particulars to the total, we should
have to add (1) a little for orchards and market gardens, and
having thus obtained the sum of all the land that is within
the purview of the Board of Agriculture, we should still have
to add (2) the sites of towns, houses, factories, etc., (3)
tenements of less than an acre whereof no statistics are
obtained, (4) roads, railways, etc., (5) waste not used for
pasture, rocks, sea-shore, etc., (6) non-tidal water. The
area not accounted for by our figures will be smallest in an
inland county which has no large towns; it will be raised by
sea-shore or by manufacturing industry.
[1429] Agricultural Returns, 1895, p. xiii: 'The actual loss of
arable area in the interval covered by the last two decades
... is 2,137,000 acres.'
[1430] Mr Seebohm, Village Community, p. 103, seems to think that D.
B. testifies to no more than 5 million acres of arable. But,
even if we stop at the Humber, we shall have 9 million if a
team tills 120.
[1431] D. B. ii. 116: T. R. E. there were 1320 _burgenses_.
[1432] D. B. ii 372.
[1433] It seems probable that in many cases the parish priest is
reckoned among the townsmen, the _villani_.
[1434] See above, p. 20.
[1435] While historical economists can still dispute as to whether
the population in 1346 was 5 millions, or only 2-1/2
(Cunningham, Eng. Industry, i. 301) guesses about 1085 are
premature. M. Fabre has lately estimated the population of
England under Henry II. at 2,880,000. But as to this
calculation, see Liebermann, Eng. Hist. Rev. xi. 746.
[1436] See above, p. 366.
[1437] Walter of Henley, pp. 67, 71.
[1438] Walter of Henley, p. 19.
[1439] Rogers, Hist. Agric. i. 50-1.
[1440] Tour in the Southern Counties, ed. 3 (1767), p. 158. See also
p. 242.
[1441] Agricultural Returns, 1895, p. 239. The figures given under
the year 1894 which express the average yield of a statute
acre in imperial bushels are for Australasia, 8·18; India,
9·00; Russia in Europe, 10·76; United States, 12·79.
Apparently in South Australia 1,577,000 acres can produce as
little as 7,781,000 bushels. As I understand, Sir J. B. Lawes
and Sir J. H. Gilbert reckon that for an unmanured acre in
England 16 bushels would be an average return, but that if
the same acre is continuously sown with wheat, the yield will
decline at the rate of nearly a quarter of a bushel every
year. See Journ. Agricult. Soc., 3rd Ser. vol. iv. p. 87.
[1442] This calculus was officially adopted in 1891; see a paper by
Sir J. B. Lawes and Sir J. H. Gilbert in Journ. Agric. Soc.,
3rd Ser., vol iv. p. 102. I desire to express my thanks to
the Secretary of the Board of Agriculture for directing my
attention to this paper.
[1443] I understand that the average number of loaves that can be
made from 280 lbs. of flour may be put at about 90.
[1444] Agricultural Returns, 1895, pp. 166, 90, 198. The old rough
estimate of a quarter of wheat per head is much too high; the
average is about 5·65 bushels. See the paper cited in note
1442. Now-a-days we can further allot to each inhabitant of
the United Kingdom an amount of cereal matter other than
wheat, to wit, barley, oats, beans, peas, maize, etc. which
would take for its production perhaps as much as 1·5 times
the area of the land that is required for the growth of the
wheat that we have allotted to him. But much of this only
feeds him by feeding animals that he eats; much only feeds
him very indirectly by feeding horses engaged in the
production or transport of food; and some of it can not be
said to feed him at all. Then, on the other hand, large
quantities of potatoes, sugar and rice are being eaten.
[1445] Wheat, oats, barley and peas are mentioned in D. B.; also rye
(i. 257 b).
[1446] Hale, Worcester Register, p. civ.
[1447] Boldon Book, D. B. iv. 580-5. So in D. B. i. 69 the sheriff
of Wiltshire receives equal quantities of wheat and malt and
a larger quantity of oats. See also D. B. i. 179 b.
[1448] Domesday of St. Paul's, 164*. See also Cart. Rams. iii. 231.
[1449] Ibid, cxxxiv. 173.
[1450] Ibid. 173.
[1451] Calculations are difficult and may be misleading, not only
because of the variability of medieval measures, but also
because of the varying strength of beer. Mr Steele, the Chief
Inspector of Excise, has been good enough to inform me that a
bushel of unmalted barley weighing 42 lbs. would yield about
19·5 gallons of beer at 58°. The figures from St. Paul's seem
to point to a strong brew, since they apparently derive but 8
gallons from the bushel of mixed grain. The ordinances of
cent. xiii. (Statutes, i. 200, 202) seem to suppose that,
outside the cities, the brewer, after deducting expenses and
profit, could sell 8 to 12 gallons of beer for the price of a
bushel of barley. If we suppose that the bushel of barley
gives 18 gallons, the man who drinks his gallon a day
consumes 20 bushels a year, and when the acre yields but 6
bushels of wheat, it will hardly yield more than 7 of barley.
There is valuable learning in J. Bickerdyke, The Curiosities
of Ale, pp. 54, 106, 154.
[1452] As to both meat and drink see Ine 70, § 1; T. 460, 468, 471,
473, 474; E. 118; Æthelstan, II. 1. § 1; D. B. i. 169, rents
of the shrievalty of Wiltshire. Attempts to measure the flood
of beer break down before the uncertain content of the
_amber_, _modius_, _sextarius_, etc. In particular I can not
believe that the amber of ale contained (Schmid, p. 530;
Robertson, Hist. Essays, 68) 4 of our bushels; but, do all we
can to reduce it, the allowance of beer seems large.
[1453] D. B. ii. 162 b: Cheltenham and King's Barton.
[1454] D. B. i. 205. The abbot of Peterborough is bound to find
pasture for 120 pigs for the abbot of Thorney. If he can not
do this, he must feed and fatten 60 pigs with corn (_de
annona pascit et impinguat 60 porcos_).
[1455] Walter of Henley, 13. Every week each ox is to have 3-1/2
garbs of oats, and 10 garbs would yield a bushel.
[1456] Now-a-days the average acre in England will produce about 29
bushels of wheat or 40 of oats. Agricultural Returns, 1895,
pp. 66, 70.
[1457] See above, p. 398.
[1458] Rogers, op. cit. i. 51.
[1459] Clearly so in some cases. See e. g. the first entry in Inq.
Com. Cant. The teams of lord and villeins having been
mentioned, we then read that the 'pecunia _in dominio_'
consists of so many pigs, sheep, etc. Moreover, if all the
cattle not of the plough were enumerated under the title
_animalia_, there would not be nearly enough to renew the
number of beasts of the plough. Again, when the capacity of
the wood is stated in terms of the pigs that it will
maintain, the number thus given will in general vastly exceed
the number of pigs whose existence is recorded. Lastly, we
see that at Crediton (iv. 107) where the lord has but 57
pigs, he receives every year 150 pigs from certain
_porcarii_, whose herds are not counted. Throughout Sussex
the lord takes one pig from every villein who has seven (i.
16 b). See also Morgan, op. cit. 56.
[1460] See above, p. 76.
[1461] Before we have gone through a tenth of the account of Essex,
we have read of 'wood for' near 10,000 pigs. If the woods
were full and this rate were maintained throughout the
country, the swine of England would be as numerous T. R. W.
as they now are. No doubt Essex was exceptionally wooded and
many woods were understocked; still this mode of reckoning
the capacity of wood-land would only occur to men who were
accustomed to see large herds.
[1462] In the thirteenth century it is common to find that the acre
of meadow is deemed to be twice or three times as valuable as
the best arable acre of the same village, and a much higher
ratio is sometimes found.
[1463] This appears from the parallel account of Westley given in D.
B. and Inq. Com. Cant. (p. 19) where 'pratum 2 bobus' = '2
ac. prati.' Entries such as the following are not uncommon
(I. C. C. p. 13): 'Terra est 4 car.; in dominio est una et
villani habent 3 car. Pratum 1 car.' See Morgan, op. cit.
53-5.
[1464] Eyton, Dorset, 146.
[1465] In the above table all _vaccae_, _animalia_ and _animalia
ociosa_ are reckoned in the third column. I believe that the
two last of these terms cover all beasts of the bovine race
that are not beasts of the plough. The horses are mostly
_runcini_ and are kept for agricultural purposes. It may be
doubted whether destriers and palfreys are enumerated.
[1466] Rot. Hund. ii. 570, 575. The calculation which gave these
results was laborious; but I believe that they are pretty
correct.
[1467] On the whole, the _valet_ of D. B., so far as it is precise,
seems to me an answer to the question, What rent would a
_firmarius_ pay for this estate stocked as it is? But there
are many difficulties.
[1468] See the important but difficult account of the mill at
Arundel: D. B. i. 23.
[1469] Hall, Court Life, 221-3. The Glastonbury Inquests (Roxburgh
Club) show that 36_d._ is the settled price for the ox.
[1470] Rogers, Hist. Agric. i. 226, 342.
[1471] See above, p. 382.
[1472] Inq. Com. Cant. 38.
[1473] Or a little less.
[1474] Perhaps too small. One estate was valued in Essex.
[1475] See above, p. 443.
[1476] Domesday of St. Paul's, 59, 64, 69. See above, p. 399 note
1339.
[1477] Hanssen, Abhandlungen, i. 163.
[1478] After making an allowance of 22,000 for Suffolk (which I have
not counted) and adding 500 for the land between Ribble and
Mersey (which owing to some difficult problems, I have
omitted), the sum would fall a little short of 68,000. The
hides of London and other boroughs would raise the total.
Pearson, History, i. 658, guessed 90,000 to 100,000.
[1479] Above, p. 3.
[1480] As to the _magnum pondus Normannorum_, see Crawford Charters,
78.
[1481] D. B. i. 351.
[1482] D. B. i. 77.
[1483] D. B. i. 165, Alvestone.
[1484] D. B. i. 165 b, Malgeresberiae.
[1485] D. B. i. 252 b, Wenloch.
[1486] D. B. i. 40 b.
[1487] D. B. i. 32: 'postquam habuit pro 16 hidis ad libitum
Heraldi.'
[1488] Round, in Domesday Studies, i. 98-110.
[1489] K. 642 (iii. 203).
[1490] D. B. i. 41.
[1491] See above, p. 362.
[1492] I have chosen 'subpartitioned,' because 'repartitioned' might
have introduced the idea of periodical or occasional
rearrangement, and this it is desirable to exclude in the
present state of our knowledge.
[1493] See a speech by the Chancellor of the Exchequer reported in
The Times for 10 July, 1896.
[1494] Round, Feudal England, 50.
[1495] See also Pollock, E. H. R. xi. 222.
[1496] D. B. i. 172.
[1497] See above, p. 268.
[1498] The estate at Matma which is in the Dodingtree hundred will
be accounted for below.
[1499] Possibly this and the four next entries should be omitted.
[1500] We here omit the estates at Hamton and Bengeworth, about
which the churches of Worcester and Evesham were disputing,
for we believe that they have already been included in the
Worcester estate of Cropthorn. See Round in Domesday Studies,
ii. 545.
[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 2663-1/2 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.
[1511] My 500 (or a trifle more) for Cheshire does not include the
land between the Ribble and the Mersey. The figures given for
that district are, as is well known, very difficult. If we
take the final statement (D. B. i. 270) about the 79 'hides'
as a grand total and hold that each of these contains 6
carucates (Feudal England, 86) and that each of these
carucates pays geld equivalent to that of one ordinary hide,
then we have here 474 units to be added to the Cestrian 500,
and yet more northerly lands may have been gelding along with
Chester in Cnut's day.
[1512] The various copies disagree as to whether Herefordshire shall
have 1200 or 1500 hides. My figure stands about halfway
between these two; but many hides were not gelding in 1086. I
can not bring the Warwickshire hides down to 1200.
[1513] I take the numbers of the hundreds from Dr Stubbs, Const.
Hist. 106. I take them thence in order that I may not be
tempted to make them rounder than they are.
[1514] See above, p. 457.
[1515] Mr C. S. Taylor, op. cit. 31, finds 41.
[1516] Round, Feudal England, 44 ff.
[1517] Both statements might be illustrated from the Dorsetshire
accounts. Between 2 and 8 Hen. II. the geld seems to rise
from £228. 5_s._ to £248. 5_s._ but there is a blunder in the
addition of the pardons in the latter roll. I believe that Mr
Round has already mentioned this case somewhere. The
correspondence between the Pipe Rolls and Domesday is
sufficiently close to warrant our saying that the story told
by Orderic of a new and severer valuation made by Rufus can
have but little, if any, truth behind it. See Stubbs, Const.
Hist. i. 327.
[1518] The common formula is: 'T. R. E. geldabat pro _a_ hidis; ibi
tamen sunt _a´_ hidae' and _a´_ is largely greater than _a_.
I infer that _a´_ represents a new and increased assessment,
for the Geld Inquest seems to show Cornwall paying for 401
hides and a fraction while I make _a´_=399.
[1519] For these three counties we can not give any _B_, but must
draw inferences from _C_. Clearly in Hereford _C_ was often
thought to be much less than _B_.
[1520] As already said (above, p. 420) what we take to be
Leicester's equivalent for _B_ is sometimes given by an
unusual formula.
[1521] Rogers, Hist. Agricult. i. 110.
[1522] Yorkshire Lay Subsidy (Yorksh. Archæol. Soc.) p. xxxii.
[1523] Total acreage under all kinds of crops, bare fallow and
grass, excluding (1) nursery gardens, (2) woods and
plantations, (3) mountain and heath land.
[1524] Powell, East Anglia Rising, 121-3.
[1525] As we are giving or trying to give the fullest number of
hides whose existence is attested by D. B., and not the
number gelding in 1086, we compare with it the values given
by Pearson (Hist. Engl. i. 665) for the T. R. E. His values
for the T. R. W. are given above, p. 401.
[1526] Suffolk and Norfolk are omitted because the relation between
their carucates and the villar geld pence is as yet
uncertain. Stafford does not provide _valuits_ enough to give
a stable average; but in general the _valets_ and _valuits_
for its hides are high. I have excluded (1) royal demesne,
(2) cases in which there is any talk of 'waste,' (3) cases in
which a particular manor is obviously privileged. In
Lincolnshire it is difficult to obtain good figures, because
of the way in which the sokes are valued.
[1527] See above, p. 386, note 1304.
[1528] Werhard's testament, K. 230 (i. 297), tells us of a great
estate of 100 hides at Otford, of 30 hides at Graveney and so
forth. The figures are so little in harmony with D. B. and
with the other Canterbury charters that we may suspect the
100 manses at Otford of covering many smaller estates, each
of which appears elsewhere with a name of its own.
[1529] In D. B. i. 12 b St. Augustin holds 30 solins at Norborne. In
618 Eadbald of Kent, K. 6 (i. 9), gave 30 _aratra_ at
Nortburne; but the deed is spurious. In D. B. 5 b, Rochester
has 3 solins at Totesclive, 6 at Hallinges, 2-1/2 at
Coclestane, 3 at Mellingetes, 6 at Bronlei. In 788 Offa, K.
152 (i. 183), gave 6 _aratra_ at Trottesclib. Egbert, K. 160
(i. 193), gave 10 at Hallingas. In 880 Æthelstan, K. 312 (ii.
109), B. ii. 168, gave 3 at Cucolanstan. Edmund, K. 409 (ii.
265), gave 3 at Meallingas. In 998 Æthelred, K. 700 (iii.
305), gave 6 at Brunleage. The Rochester deeds therefore may
point to some reduction; but they do not tell of any
startling change.
[1530] Meitzen, op. cit. ii. 101, holds that the Euti who invaded
Kent fitted themselves into an agrarian framework prepared by
Celts. They came not, like the great mass of Saxons and
Angles, from a country in which villages of the Germanic type
had grown up, but from an originally Celtic land, which they
while still in the pastoral state had seized and subjugated.
It is an interesting though hazardous speculation. Certainly
some cause or another keeps Kent apart from the rest of
England.
[1531] Thus, K. 371 (ii. 207): Æthelstan gives to the church of
Exeter 6 _perticae_ (yard-lands?). B. ii. 433: he gives one
cassate to St Petroc. K. 787 (iv. 115): the Confessor gives a
_pertica_ and a half in Cornwall. Crawford Charters, pp.
1-43: Æthelheard gives 20 cassates at Crediton; that is, a
dozen of our parishes. Ibid. p. 9: a single yard of land is
gaged for 30 mancuses of gold. K. 1306 (vi. 163): in 739
Æthelred gives 3 _perticae_ to Athelney. K. 1324 (vi. 188):
Cnut gives to Athelney _duas mansas siue (= et) unam
perticam_.
[1532] K. 1143 (v. 278); B. ii. 527. For the _arepennis_ see
Meitzen, op. cit. i. 278, where an explanation derived from
the Irish laws is given of its name.
[1533] See above, p. 451.
[1534] The lords of Cambridgeshire may have done good service during
the campaign in the Isle of Ely.
[1535] Pearson's _valuit_ is £491; his _valet_ £736.
[1536] The appearance of the curious _hida_ may lead to the guess
that if the geld be at two shillings, it is the
Leicestershire _hida_, not the Leicestershire _carucata_
which pays this sum. But (1) if the _hida_ contains 18, or
even 12, carucates we shall then have on our hands a case of
extreme under-taxation; and (2) this will not account for the
fact that an exceedingly small value is given to the land
that a team ploughs.
[1537] D. B. i. 233.
[1538] At the end of the account of the land between Ribble and
Mersey (i. 240) we are told that there were altogether 79
_hidae_ which T. R. E. were worth £145. 2_s._ 2_d._ This
would give a very small value for the carucate, if the _hida_
of this district had six carucates; and in many cases 2_s._
8_d._ is the value assigned to the carucate. If to a
two-shilling geld the _hida_ paid but two shillings, this is
a bad, though not unprecedented, case of under-taxation. On
the other hand, if the carucate paid two shillings, its value
has been stated in some abnormal fashion. I do not think it
out of the question that the _hidae_ of Leicestershire and
Lancashire are modern arrangements designed to give relief in
some manner or another to districts which have been too
heavily burdened with carucates.
[1539] It may, however, have been applied to the conquered West
Wales from an early time. See above, p. 467.
[1540] See above, p. 427.
[1541] D. B. i. 293 b.
[1542] And two sokemen with two teams.
[1543] The artificiality or traditionality of the teamland is even
more obvious in D. B. than it is in our statement. At Okeham
are 4 hides; land for 16 teams. The men have 37. The king has
2 in his demesne 'et tamen aliae quatuor possunt esse.' So
what is land for 16 teams is not only stocked but
insufficiently stocked with 39. The manor of one carucate
held by Leuenot seems to be another infringement of the
traditional scheme, unless that carucate has been already
reckoned among the four at Okeham.
[1544] Many other instances suggesting the artificiality of _B_
might be given from northern counties; e.g. in Northampton
(i. 227) we have five consecutive entries in which _A_ = 2,
2, 2, 0·5, 4; _B_ = 5, 5, 5, 1·25, 10; _C_ = 3, 2, 5, 1, 8.
See also Round, Feudal England, 90.
[1545] D. B. i. 323 b.
[1546] D. B. i. 299 Walesgrif £56; 299 b Poclinton £56; 309
Ghellinghes £56; 305 Witebi £112. It will be remembered that,
as our hundred-weight (112 lbs) shows, 112 can be called a
hundred.
[1547] Pipe Rolls, 2. 3. 4. 5. Hen. II. In a few cases the earlier
_donum_ includes a composition 'for murders and pleas.' That
from Yorkshire is partly paid by York, that from
Gloucestershire by Gloucester.
[1548] Nearly.
[1549] Except the 'hides,' if hides they be, of Leicestershire and
Lancashire.
[1550] D. B. i. 35 (Surrey).
[1551] D. B. i. 49 b (Hants).
[1552] D. B. i. 364 (Lincoln).
[1553] See above, p. 394.
[1554] This part of the evidence is set out in Mr Round's Feudal
England, 37-44. I have gone through all the calculations. His
results are hardly different from those which I have obtained
and therefore I dwell no longer on this part of the case, for
it has been well stated.
[1555] D. B. i. 192; iv. 107. The Inquisitio Eliensis puts the
number of cottiers at 18, while Domesday gives 28. See
Hamilton's edition, p. 119.
[1556] Downham, Witchford, Sutton, 'Helle,' Wilburton, Stretham,
Stuntney, Doddington.
[1557] Wichford, D. B. i. 192; iv. 507; Hamilton, 119.
[1558] Witcham, Whittlesey, Lindon, Wentworth, Chatteris, Wisbeach,
Littleport.
[1559] Wisbeach, 3-1/2 H. + 1 V. + 150 A. + 2-1/2 H. = 10 H.
[1560] In giving the sum of the particulars I add hides to hides,
virgates to virgates, acres to acres, but I make no
assumption as to the number of acres or virgates in the hide.
[1561] D. B. iv. 4, 9, 16.
[1562] D. B. iv. 22.
[1563] D. B. iv. 1, 6, 13.
[1564] D. B. iv. 3, 8, 15 (Melchesham).
[1565] D. B. iv. 3-4, 9, 15 (Chinbrige).
[1566] D. B. iv. 61-2-3.
[1567] D. B. iv. 23 (Hunesberge); see also Langeberge on the same
page.
[1568] Round in Domesday Studies, i. 212: 'I have worked through the
_Inquisitio Geldi_ with this special object, but found to my
disappointment that the odd acres which paid geld on this
occasion did not pay at a uniform rate, some paying twice as
much as others.'
[1569] D. B. ii. 19: 'Ratendunam tenuit S. Adelred T. R. E. ... pro
20 hidis. Modo pro 16 hidis et dimidia.... Et 30 acras tenet
Siward de S. Adelred. Modo tenet Ranulfus Piperellus de rege,
set hundret testatur de abbatia. Et 3 hidas et 30 acras quas
tenuit ecclesia et Leuesunus de ea T. R. E. modo tenet Eudo
de abbate.' I think that this involves the statement:
16-1/2 H. + 30 A. + 3 H. + 30 A. = 20 H.
[1570] D. B. ii. 3, 11, 33, 63 b, 78 b, and in many other places.
[1571] Ibid. 31.
[1572] Ibid. 6 b, 42 b.
[1573] Ibid. 46.
[1574] Ibid. 48.
[1575] Ibid. 6 b, 49, 60.
[1576] Ibid. 43.
[1577] Ibid. 74.
[1578] Ibid. 1 b.
[1579] Ibid. 11 b, 30 b, 31, 47 b.
[1580] Ibid. 72.
[1581] Ibid. 21 b.
[1582] Ibid. 16, 15.
[1583] D. B. ii. 79.