quinque sokemannos . scilicet . Colsweyn . Langebeyn . Truinwine . Stannard . Anund . ⁊ hos homines abstulit post mortem . Alfwoldi abbatis dum monasterium esset sub manu regis.[1] Et apud Multone aufert ipse .I. unani toftam cum segete . ⁊ de tofta ecclesie dimidiam acram . ⁊ de altera tofta dimidiam acram. Et apud Waketone auferunt prepositi eius Coleman ⁊ Wlricus . in hoc anno partem nemoris que ad nos pertinet . ⁊ partem nemoris ad Aselaketonam . aufert ipse .I. ⁊ homines illius.[2] Apud Tybenham aufert Walterus Canut .iias. toftas ⁊ quicquid ad illas pertinet. Et cum quidam noster homo uellet domum transferre sicut uicini fecerunt . scilicet Ringolf uenit ipse .W. ⁊ procidit lingna [sic] ⁊ artiffices [sic] uerberauit . ⁊ domum edifficare [sic] prohibuit.[3] Et iterum de Colesrode aufert quantum homines de uilla cognoscunt.[4] Et preter hec partes terre apud Antingham homines Rogeri . Gouti ⁊ socii sui auferunt quartam partem pasture qua fodiuntur turue.[5] Et in Stalham Rodbertus Dulum [sic] aufert sextam partem pasture ⁊ nemoris.[6]
At the time when the memorandum was written Norfolk was still a county sub lege Danorum. It is therefore natural that there should be a distinct Scandinavian element among the personal names which occur in the memorandum. It is much smaller than the Old English element, but it has a distinctive character. The names Gouti, Howard, Langebeyn, Ringolf, Anund, are rarely found in documents which relate to the Northern Danelaw. Bond or Bonde, one of the commonest native personal names in twelfth-century Norfolk, is rare in Lincolnshire. The names which occur in other portions of the register of St. Benet's produce the same impression. The Anglo-Scandinavian personal names which survived into the twelfth century form an immense mass of material upon which little work has been done as yet. But
- ↑ Domesday assigns to St. Benet an estate in Saxlingham which Edric, a free man of Archbishop Stigand, had given to the abbey in pledge (ii. 217). It had already suffered encroachment between the Conquest and the date of Domesday; in King Edward's time there had been nine sokemen upon it, in 1086 there were five. As the encroachment attributed to Ivo de Verdun must have been made in or soon after 1089, it is highly probable that the five sokemen whose names are given in the text are the identical five sokemen who still remained under the abbey in 1086.
- ↑ Moulton, Wacton, Aslacton, and Tibenham are adjacent villages in Depwade hundred, south-south-west of Norwich. The only estate assigned to St. Benet in this hundred is a manor of Tibenham (D. B. ii. 221). It was not a large manor, but it may well have included tofts in Moulton and wood in Wacton and Aslacton. In 1086 the fee of Roger Bigod extended into all three villages. There is nothing in Domesday to connect Ivo de Verdun with any of them, but he afterwards gave two-thirds of his tithes of Moulton to Thetford priory (Mon. Ang. v. 141).
- ↑ On the last folio of the Norfolk Domesday Walter Canud is assigned the fifteen-acre holding of a free man in Tibenham, because Walter's predecessor had received it in pledge in King Edward's time.
- ↑ It is difficult to identify this place, which is not mentioned in Domesday. It presumably lay near Tibenham.
- ↑ In 1086 Roger Bigod possessed a manor at Suffield, adjoining Antingham on the south-east. There was also land of his fee in Antingham itself (D. B. ii. 184 b), and St. Benet held a manor there (ii. 216).
- ↑ St. Benet possessed a manor of one ploughland in Stalham (D. B. ii. 220 b).
