[Footnote 136: On this point one may compare with profit 'the making of the Danelaw' (858-78), by the late Mr Green (_Conquest of England_, pp. 114-29), who had devoted to this subject much attention. He discusses the limits of Eastern Mercia, the district of the Five Boroughs, in the light of local nomenclature (_ibid._, pp. 121-2), and includes within it, on this ground, Northamptonshire, while observing that the country about Buckingham, which formed the southern border of the 'Five Boroughs', has no 'byes'. My own evidence is wholly distinct from that of local nomenclature, and defines more sharply the district settled and reorganized by the Danes. The hidation of Northamptonshire is peculiar, a unit of four (reminding one of the Mercian shilling) coming into prominence. Still, it was not carucated, but retained its assessment in hides.] [Footnote 137: Stamford is assigned to Lincolnshire by Domesday, but is now in Rutland. The 'Rutland' of Domesday (the northern portion of the county as at present constituted) was included, we shall find, in the carucated district by which it was surrounded on the north.] [Footnote 138: Reg. Mag. Alb. at York, pars. ii. 1. Quoted by Canon Raine, in his edition of John of Hexham (who applies these _formulæ_ to Hexham itself), p. 61.] [Footnote 139: _Vide infra_, p. 149, _et seq._] [Footnote 140: 'Suma iii. hundr' et vi. car. et vi. bov.'] [Footnote 141: 'Suma iiii. hundr' et x. car.' (a wrong total).] [Footnote 142: 'Summa iii. hundr' et v. car. et iiii. bov.'] [Footnote 143: See also on these Hundreds Mr Stevenson's remarks in _English Historical Review_, v. 96, which have appeared since I made these researches.] [Footnote 144: This appears to be a clerical error. The actual figures represent 'Hundreds'.] [Footnote 145: The Northern division by threes and sixes is responsible, of course, for the six 'sheaddings' of the Isle of Man. On their connection with the 'scypfylleth' of three Hundreds see Vigfusson in _English Historical Review_, ii. 500.] [Footnote 146: The aggregate of these _areal_ measures does not bear out the statement of Domesday regarding them, the former Wapentake containing eighty-four ploughlands, where Domesday allows it only forty-eight.] [Footnote 147: The entry is far more suggestive of the 'Hundreds' (_vide infra_) in Leicestershire, on the border of which Sawley stood. This remark applies also to the entry (i. 291_b_) that Leake (Notts) 'jacet in Pluntree Hund'.] [Footnote 148: See D.B., i. fos. 298, 298_b_, and fo. 379.] [Footnote 149: As Mr Pell did in the case of Clifton.] [Footnote 150: _Vide infra_, p. 160.] [Footnote 151: 'There is no trace of any,' writes Canon Taylor (_Domesday Studies_, i. 74).]