[Footnote 76: D.B. erroneously reads 'xxx.' (30) by the insertion of an 'x' too many. The I.C.C. correctly reads 'xx.' (20), its accuracy here being proved by the above arithmetic. Thus the I.C.C. corrects a reading which (1) would, but for it, appear fatal to the belief that 30 acres = a virgate; (2) would upset the above arithmetic. This ought to be clearly grasped, because it well illustrates the element of clerical error, and shows how apparent discrepancies in our rule may be due to a faulty text alone.] [Footnote 77: Here, as in the preceding instance, Domesday is in error, reading 'one virgate' ('I virgata') where the I.C.C. correctly gives us half a virgate ('dimidiam virgam'). The remarks in the preceding note apply equally here.] [Footnote 78: Here, again, Domesday is in error, reading _two_ and a half virgates, where the I.C.C. has _one_ and a half.] [Footnote 79: These two entries are by a blunder in the I.C.C. (see above, p. 23) erroneously rolled into one (of 1/3 virgate). In this case it is Domesday Book which corrects the I.C.C, and preserves for us the right version.] [Footnote 80: The I.C.C, which is very corrupt in its account of this township, gives us a deficiency of 1 hide 0-1/2 virgates.] [Footnote 81: The apparent exception was caused by the _Inq. Com. Cant._ reading 'pro iiii. hidis', and omitting the words 'xl. acras minus', the true assessment of the Manor, when the king's estate was excluded, being 'three hides _less forty acres_'.] [Footnote 82: The _blunder_ consists in treating 6-1/2 (geld) acres as part of the Countess Judith's estate, whereas they had been reckoned separately; the _discrepancy_ is due to D.B. reading 'ii. acras', where the I.C.C. has 'xxii. acras'.] [Footnote 83: Eyton's _Notes on Domesday_, p. 12.] [Footnote 84: _Ibid._, p. 13.] [Footnote 85: Dr Stubbs' remarks 'on the vexed question of the extent of the hide' will be found in a note to his _Const. Hist._, vol. i (1874), p. 74. Mr Eyton (_Key to Domesday_, p. 14) asserted that the _Domesday_ hide contained 48 geld-acres. Prof Earle in his _Land Charters and Saxonic Documents_ (1888) reviews the question of the hide, but leaves it undetermined (pp. lii-liii, 457-461).] [Footnote 86: See above, p. 27.] [Footnote 87: _Antiquary_, June 1882, p. 242. See also _Domesday Studies_, vol. i, p. 119.] [Footnote 88: The I.C.C. _omits_ the king's Manor (7-1/4 hides, 8 ploughlands).]