^{page 175 note 1} Worcestre, William, Itineraries, ed. Harvey, J. H. (Oxford, 1969), p. 211Google Scholar, and Neville, Alexander, Norfolke Furies and their Foyle, ed. (Englished from Alexander Neville's Original) Woods, R. (London, 1623).Google Scholar

^{page 175 note 2} Presumably known from the cartulary evidence of Bishop Ælfric's gift of the site: Hart, C. R., The Early Charters of Eastern England (Leicester, 1966), p. 82.Google Scholar

^{page 175 note 3} SirSpelman, H., ‘Icenia Sive Norfolciae descriptio topographica’, Reliquiae Spelmannianae … with the Life of the Author (Oxford, 1698).Google Scholar

^{page 176 note 1} SirBrowne, T., Hydriotaphia, Urne-buriall, or a Discourse of the Sepulcbrall Urnes Lately Found in Norfolk (London, 1658), p. 25.Google Scholar

^{page 176 note 2} Almost certainly a reference to an early-seventeenth-century discovery of Iron Age silver coins at Thorpe, immediately east of Norwich.

^{page 176 note 3} Kirkpatrick, J., History of the Religious Orders and Communities, and of the Hospitals and Castle of Norwich, ed. Turner, D. (London, 1845)Google Scholar; Notes concerning Norwich Castle, from a Manuscript Volume of the Collections of Mr John Kirkpatrick in the Possession of William Herring, ed. anon. (London, 1847)Google Scholar; and The Streets and Lanes of the City of Norwich: a Memoir by J. Kirkpatrick, ed. Hudson, W. (Norwich, 1889).Google Scholar

^{page 177 note 1} Blomefield, F., An Essay towards a Topographical History of the County of Norfolk III and IV (London, 1806).Google Scholar

^{page 177 note 2} The cipher on a London memorial penny of 886 was, e.g., read as Northwic rather than Londinia.

^{page 177 note 3} These may have been genuine attributions, but the rarity of mint signatures in either reign raises suspicions which are not dispelled by his illustrations of the Eadred pennies.

^{page 177 note 4} English Historical Documents c.500–1042, ed. Whitelock, D. (London, 1955), p. 217.Google Scholar

^{page 177 note 5} E.g. those at East Dereham in 1679 and Bungay in 1688.

^{page 177 note 6} Nine Maps of Norfolk and Norwich by the Late Mr Samuel Woodward, ed. Woodward, B. B. (Norwich, 1847).Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 1} Stephenson, C., Borough and Town. A Study of Urban Origins in England (Cambridge, Mass., 1933).Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 2} The three most important of his many publications are an edition of Kirkpatrick's Streets and Lanes (see above, p. 176, n. 3) in 1889; Hudson, W., How the City of Norwich Grew into Shape (Norwich, 1896)Google Scholar; and The Records of the City of Norwich, ed. Hudson, W. and Tingey, J. C., 2 vols. (Norwich and London, 1906 and 1910).Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 3} Round, J. H., ‘The Castles of the Conquest’, Archaeologia 58 (1902), 313–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, rebutting the views expressed in Clark, G. T., Medieval Military Architecture (London, 1884).Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 4} Hudson, How Norwich Grew, frontispiece.

^{page 178 note 5} A Short Calendar of the Deeds Relating to Norwich Enrolled in the Court Rolls of that City 1285–1306, ed. Rye, W. (Norwich, 1903).Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 6} Hudson, , How Norwich Grew, p. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 7} Hudson, and Tingey, , Records II, i–viii.Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 1} Noting, however, that ‘it is not certain that the termination gate may not have been newly given [in some cases] some time after the Conquest’.

^{page 179 note 2} Of these Hudson was the first to realize the possible significance of Needham, a place-name in the thirteenth century referring to an area south-west of the castle (see below, pp. 198–9).

^{page 179 note 3} Within which he further noted a completely different parochial pattern.

^{page 179 note 4} Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum 1100–1135, ed. Johnson, C. and Cronne, H. A. (London, 1956)Google Scholar, no. 762, dated to 1106.

^{page 179 note 5} Stephenson, , Borough and Town, pp. 197–200.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 1} Armitage, E. S., The Early Norman Castles of the British Isles (London, 1912), p. 174Google Scholar. For the plan she worked on see Harrod, H., Gleanings among the Castles and Convents of Norfolk (Norwich, 1857), p. 133.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 2} See below, p. 202.

^{page 180 note 3} Jope, E. M., ‘Excavations in the City of Norwich, 1948’, Norfolk Archaeology 30.4 (1952), 287–323.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 4} Exceptions were a possibly middle Saxon object from King Street (within the area now suggested as Needham, see below, pp. 198–9) and two highly significant, but unfortunately unprovenanced, Viking swords.

^{page 182 note 1} Hurst, J. G., ‘Excavations at Barn Road, Norwich, 1954–55’, Norfolk Archaeology 33.2 (1963), 131–79.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 2} Green, B. and Young, R. M., Norwich: the Growth of a City (Norwich, 1963).Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 3} Ibid. p. 8, quoting from manuscript notes by O. K. Schramm held by the Castle Museum, Norwich.

^{page 182 note 4} Baggs, T., ‘The Location of Northwic’, Norfolk Research Committee Bull. 15 (1963), 3Google Scholar (see below, p. 201).

^{page 183 note 1} ‘Excavations, 1948’, p. 287.

^{page 183 note 2} By a working-party whose members were drawn from the Local History Library, the Museum, the Record Office, the Planning Department, the County Archaeological Society and the University of East Anglia.

^{page 183 note 3} A total income, including salaries, in 1971–2 of £4,000 compared to approximately £25,000 spent that year in Winchester.

^{page 183 note 4} More than 1,000 shelf feet earlier than c. 1500 survive.

^{page 183 note 5} Probably more than a thousand earlier than 1830 survive within the city's one square mile.

^{page 183 note 6} A considerable debt of gratitude is owed to the friendly, if usually sceptical, criticism of these ideas by James Campbell, who was working on his Norwich, Atlas of Historic Towns fascicle (London, 1974).

^{page 183 note 7} The distribution of landgable rents, the distribution of archaeological material, the analysis of past map evidence, and the dating and distribution of the churches.

^{page 184 note 1} Jope, ‘Excavations, 1948’, pp. 320–1: St Augustine's; St Olave, Pitt Street; St Mary-at-Coslany; St Clement, Fyebridge; St Botolph; St Edmund and St James, Pockthorpe.

^{page 184 note 2} Cam, H., Liberties and Communities in Medieval England (Cambridge, 1944), pp. 14–15.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 3} Lobel, M. D., Cambridge, Atlas of Historic Towns fascicle (London, 1974), p. 5Google Scholar, n. 58.

^{page 184 note 4} Maitland, F. W., Township and Borough (Cambridge, 1898), pp. 180–1.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 5} Barlow, F., Biddle, M., von Feilitzen, O. and Keene, D. J., Winchester in the Early Middle Ages (Oxford, 1976), p. 33.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 6} Ibid. p. 352.

^{page 184 note 7} Norwich, Norfolk Record Office, Norwich City Records: 17.b, 42v–53r; case 7, shelf I, and press E, case 18, shelf D (1541 and 1626).

^{page 184 note 8} Records 1, 233.

^{page 184 note 9} Ibid. II, xviii.

^{page 186 note 1} Ibid. 1, 247.

^{page 186 note 2} Hudson, W., Leet Jurisdiction in the City of Norwich during the XIIIth and XIVth Centuries, Selden Soc. 5 (1891), 36.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 3} E.g. in 1289 a fine of 2s. for 1d. landgable withheld, in 1292 a fine of 6s. 8d. for 1s and in 1312 a fine of 6s. 8 d. for 4 d.; Ibid. pp. 31, 44 and 55.

^{page 186 note 4} Hudson and Tingey, Records 1, 56. The amount of non-royal landgable seems, however, to have been extremely small.

^{page 186 note 5} ‘Et ex annua consuetudine reddebat unusquisque i.d.’ (Blomefield, , Topographical History 111, 17).Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 6} Hudson, W., ‘The Norwich Taxation of 1254’, Norfolk Archaeology 17 (1910), 4Google Scholar, and Blomefield, , Topographical History IVGoogle Scholar, passim.

^{page 186 note 7} The exception is the pairing of St Laurence (in existence by 1066) with St Gregory (stylistically Saxo-Norman).

^{page 186 note 8} E.g. SS Simon and Jude (in existence by 1086) with St George; St Julian (stylistically Saxo-Norman) with St Edward the Confessor.

^{page 186 note 9} 665 of the king's, thirty-nine on land once Stigand's and fifteen on land once Herold's; The Victoria History of the Counties of England: Norfolk, ed. Page, W., 11 (London, 1906), 46–7Google Scholar, translating fols. 116–18.

^{page 187 note 1} Personal communication of 22 May 1972.

^{page 189 note 1} The work was initiated by Jan Roberts and continued by Bill Milligan and Malcolm Atkin.

^{page 189 note 2} Hurst, J. G., ‘Saxo-Norman Pottery in East Anglia: Part III Stamford Ware’ [with an appendix on Ipswich ware], Proc. of the Cambridge Ant. Soc. 11 (1957), 37–65.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 3} Hurst, ‘Excavations 1954–55’, p. 155, where it is recognized that some of this material might possibly be Andenne ware.

^{page 189 note 4} These were found sealed beneath the mound of Norwich castle; Hurst, ‘Excavations, 1954–55’, pp. 155–7, and Hurst, J. G., ‘The Pottery’, The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Wilson, D. M. (London, 1976), pp. 342–3.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 5} By V. I. Evison, revised catalogue card in Norwich Castle Museum.

^{page 191 note 1} Everything south of, and including, site 78 (see fig. 8c).

^{page 191 note 2} For interim statements on the analysis of the town plan see Carter, A. and Roberts, J. P., ‘Excavations in Norwich - 1972. The Norwich Survey - Second Interim Report’, Norfolk Archaeology 35.4 (1973), 444–8Google Scholar, and Carter, A., Roberts, J. P. and Sutermeister, H., ‘Excavations in Norwich - 1973. The Norwich Survey - Third Interim Report’, Norfolk Archaeology 36.1 (1974), 55–7.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 3} Conzen, M. R. G., ‘The Use of Town Plans in the Study of Urban History’, The Study of Urban History, ed. Dyos, H. J. (London, 1968), pp. 113–30.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 4} Hudson, , Horn Norwich Grew, pp. 29–30 and 32–3Google Scholar. The significance of Tombland (the empty place: OE tōm, ‘empty’; see Schramm, O. K., ‘Place-Names’, Norwich and its Region, ed. Briers, F. (Norwich, 1961), p. 148Google Scholar) is further emphasized by the presence there of the earl's and bishop's palaces and the richest Domesday church; Hudson, and Tingey, , Records 1, 53–4Google Scholar; Rye, W., Norwich Houses before 1600, Rye's Norfolk Hand Lists, 1st ser. 4 (Norwich, 1916), 2–5Google Scholar; and Campbell, , Norwich, p. 4.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 1} Further emphasized by the peculiar line of the castle's north-eastern defences (see fig. 7).

^{page 193 note 1} Campbell, , Norwich, p. 25Google Scholar, App. IVC. Few early forms of the name are known, however, and this has led Professor K. Cameron, of the English Place-Name Society, to express (in a personal communication) doubts about its etymology.

^{page 193 note 2} See above, p. 179.

^{page 193 note 3} Campbell, , Norwich, p. 25Google Scholar, App. IVC.

^{page 193 note 4} The First Register of Norwich Cathedral Priory, ed. Saunders, M. W., Norfolk Record Soc. 11 (1939), 62Google Scholar (fol. 11).

^{page 193 note 5} E.g. Jarrold's yarn mill (north of Whitefriars Bridge) and no. 80 St George's Street.

^{page 194 note 1} On this, cf. the parish boundaries on Campbell, Norwich, map 7 (with comments Ibid. App. 11 and p. 25) with those shown on the 1:500 Ordnance Survey plans of 1883 (Norwich Within the Walls: 1883 Survey. A Reprint at a Reduced Scale of 1:1250 (Norwich, c. 1972)).Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 2} But see Campbell, , Norwich, p. 5Google Scholar and nn. 43 and 45. The parishes said in 1286 to lie in Blofield (rather than Norwich) hundred lie north, east and south of what is now thought to be the tenth-century burh.

^{page 194 note 3} Campbell, , Norwich, pp. 4–5.Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 4} Of the five stylistically Saxo-Norman churches in Norwich described by H. M., and Taylor, J. (Anglo-Saxon Architecture (Cambridge, 1965), pp. 471–5Google Scholar) - St John de Sepulchre, St John Timberhill, St Julian, St Martin-at-Palace and St Mary-at-Coslany - only St Martin-at-Palace is certainly pre-Conquest. The two St Johns are foundations of 1066–87 and St Mary-at-Coslany has distinctively post-Conquest Caen stone in its ‘Saxon’ windows (some details of which are matched by the mid-wall shafts of windows of c. 1100 in the south transept of the cathedral; D. Priddy, ‘The Saxo-Norman Churches of Norwich’, unpubl. B.A. dissertation, University of London, 1977), while the ‘Saxon’ windows of St Julian and those of St Gregory are closely paralleled by work of 1096 or later in the west wall of the cathedral cloisters.

^{page 194 note 5} For Whittingham's conclusions, see above, p. 180.

^{page 194 note 6} St Michael Tombland (Campbell, , Norwich, pp. 4 and 6Google Scholar, and a personal communication of 22 May 1972), St Gregory (Ibid. p. 5 and n. 45), St Ethelbert (Ibid. p. 4, n. 35) and St Clement (Ibid. p. 4 and n. 32).

^{page 194 note 7} St Peter Mancroft, St Giles, St Paul, St John Timberhill, St Stephen, the two St Georges and the three St Margarets (Campbell, , Norwich, p. 3Google Scholar, n. 24); also St Winwaloy (Campbell, J., ‘The Age of Arthur’ [review], Studio Hibernica 15 (1975), 178).Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 8} The parts of this article which are on work since 1971 have benefited considerably from discussions between myself and members of the Norwich Survey team (notably Helen Sutermeister, Jan Roberts and Malcolm Atkin). The use of the first person plural acknowledges this, but any errors that remain are mine.

^{page 195 note 1} Campbell, , Norwich, p. 2Google Scholar. Since then Biddle (‘Towns’, The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Wilson, p. 111Google Scholar and n. 100) has commented on the possible late-ninth- or tenth-century significance of the existence there of the isolated church of St Edmund.

^{page 195 note 2} Schramm, ‘Place-Names’, p. 48.

^{page 195 note 3} Campbell, , Norwich, p. 2Google Scholar. This is in marked contrast to Ipswich, for the significance of which see Biddle, ‘Towns’, p. 115 and n. 124. The absence in Norwich of eighth- and ninth-century imported pottery, again in marked contrast to Ipswich, is highly significant.

^{page 195 note 4} A possible contender for which (against Campbell's Thorpe (Norwich, p. 2 and n. 18)) might still be Hellesdon, immediately north-west of Norwich. The tenth-century account of St Edmund having been ‘taken in his hall’ at Hægelisdun (Whitelock, D., ‘Fact and Fiction in the Legend of St Edmund’, Proc. of the Suffolk Inst. of Archaeology 31 (1970), 218Google Scholar, quoting Abbo of Fleury's Passio Sancti Eadmundi) is lent circumstantial support by the casual find at Hellesdon of an eighth-century sceatta. The few other sceattas from East Anglia have been found mostly on sites of late Roman or, probably royal, middle Saxon significance - Caistor-by-Norwich, Caister-by-Yarmouth, Burgh Castle, Woodbridge, Ipswich and others.

^{page 195 note 5} Green, and Young, , Growth of a City, p. 9.Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 6} On which, again in contrast to Ipswich, note the silence of the Chronicle not only on defences at Norwich but on Norwich as such until 1004.

^{page 196 note 1} Campbell, , Norwich, p. 6.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 2} Cambridge, Norwich, Ipswich and Thetford; Campbell, , Norwich, p. 3Google Scholar, and Liber Eliensis, ed. Blake, E. O., Camden Soc. 3rd ser. 92 (1962), 100.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 3} Campbell, , Norwich, p. 5Google Scholar and n. 53 for references.

^{page 196 note 4} Idid. p. 5.

^{page 196 note 5} A single Northwic-mint ‘St Edmund’ penny of c. 892–910, and others of Athelstan; Ibid. p. 3 and n. 19 for references.

^{page 196 note 6} Ibid. p. 5.

^{page 196 note 7} Ibid. p. 9. This appears to be a reference to the 1,429 individuals of 1086 in contrast to the 1,320 TRE. Elsewhere, however (Ibid. p. 3, n. 23), Campbell convincingly calculates a population TRE of between 1,437 and 1,518.

^{page 196 note 8} Ibid. pp. 5–7.

^{page 196 note 9} Ibid. p. 2.

^{page 196 note 10} A worn Roman penny from site 149 (see fig. 8c). The appendix, below p. 204, gives the place of publication of this site and of those mentioned in subsequent footnotes.

^{page 196 note 11} Site 21 and sites 45 and 58 produced relatively large amounts of Ipswich ware; sites 283, 295, 157 and 162 and sites 280, 300, 154 and 156 have produced little or none (for the locations see fig. 8c).

^{page 198 note 1} The assumption, but not its corollary, was shared by Campbell, Norwich, p. 5 and n. 45, and p. 4 and n. 35.

^{page 198 note 2} Sites 149, 163 and 169 and sites 282 and 285 (see fig, 8c) with site 146 (see fig. 5).

^{page 198 note 3} Sites 16, 76, 88, 60, 54 and 262 (all unpublished building sites; see fig. 8c) with site 150 (see fig. 5).

^{page 198 note 4} As a consequence they do not appear on fig. 5; see above, p. 190.

^{page 198 note 5} See above, p. 189.

^{page 198 note 6} Jope, ‘Excavations, 1948’, pp. 317 and 320. The provenance of these swords is still being investigated.

^{page 198 note 7} Jensen, G. Fellows, ‘The Vikings in England: a Review’, ASE 4 (1975), 196Google Scholar. The relative concentration of place-names in thorpe west of Norwich and the modification of minor names within Norwich should be noted; Schramm, ‘Place-Names’, pp. 146–8 and fig. 2. See also Schramm, O. K., ‘Some Early East Anglian Wills’, Norfolk Archaeology 22 (1926), 350–69Google Scholar, for Scandinavian place names in and around Great Melton.

^{page 199 note 1} Schramm, ‘Place-Names’, p. 148.

^{page 199 note 2} As yet, however, no early form of Needham including a t is known; Kirkpatrick, , Streets and Lanes, p. 14Google Scholar. Evans, D. A. (Campbell, , Norwich, p. 25Google Scholar, App. IVC) suggested ‘poor village’ or ‘poor meadow’ for Needham. Karl Sandred, of the University of Uppsala, has kindly agreed to reexamine the evidence for this and other place-names in Norwich for the English Place-Name Society.

^{page 199 note 3} A description, of 1194–1272, of the foundation of the cathedral; Hudson and Tingey, Records 11, 52. St Mary's church is also recorded in Siflæd's second will; Anglo-Saxon Wills, ed. Whitelock, D. (Cambridge, 1930)Google Scholar, nos. xxvi and xxxviii. For the church's location, see fig. 7.

^{page 199 note 4} A possible parallel in an earlier period is with Hamwih and Hamtum (Burgess, L. A., The Origins of Southampton (Leicester, 1964))Google Scholar; but see Holdsworth, P., ‘Saxon Southampton; a New Reviewr‘, MA 20 (1976), 29–30.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 5} See below, p. 201, n. 1.

^{page 199 note 6} Whittingham, A. B., Norwich Cathedral Priory of the Holy Trinity: a Plan Showing the Disposition of Priory Buildings, and Grants of Land (Norwich, 1938).Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 7} If they exist they should now perhaps, in view of Campbell's comments about the period c 870–917, be seen as a response to the obvious threat after the sack of Ipswich in 991.

^{page 200 note 1} Hurst, ‘The Pottery’, pp. 314 and 318–19.

^{page 200 note 2} Ibid. pp. 314 and 318.

^{page 200 note 3} See above, p. 189 and n. 3.

^{page 200 note 4} Borremans, R. and Warginaire, R., La Céramique d' Andenne: recherches de 1956–1965 (Rotterdam, 1966), pp. 73–4.Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 5} Hurst, ‘Excavations, 1954–55’, pp. 135–7 and 150–5.

^{page 200 note 6} Unpublished excavation at sites 45 and 58 and sites 280 and 300 (see fig. 8c), and pit groups from building sites between the castle and the Cathedral Close.

^{page 200 note 7} Kiln sites, as opposed to waster heaps, have finally been discovered on Bedford Street and Lobster Lane (sites 163 and 336; see fig. 8c; publication forthcoming). Waster heaps are known from an extensive area east of the Great Cockey (for the location, see fig. 3d).

^{page 200 note 8} They continued in this area until at least 1069; Clough, T. H. McK., ‘A Small Hoard of William I, Type 1, Pennies from Norwich’, BNJ 43 (1973), 142–3.Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 9} No stream bed was found on sites 153, 157 and 162 (see fig. 5).

^{page 200 note 10} Register of the Abbey of St Benet at Holme 1020–1210, ed. West, J. R., Norfolk Record Soc. 2 (1932), 14, no. 17.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 1} The first attempts to locate the ditch, on sites 170 and 172 (see fig. 8c), were failures. It has now been observed on sites 173, 281, 284 and 302 (see fig. 8c).

^{page 201 note 2} Campbell, , Norwich, pp. 4–5Google Scholar and nn. 43–4.

^{page 201 note 3} Atkin, M. W. and Carter, A., ‘Excavations in Norwich - 1975/6. The Norwich Survey - Fifth Interim Report’, Norfolk Archaeology 36.3 (1976), 194.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 4} For the King's Ditch in Cambridge, see Lobel, , Cambridge, p. 5Google Scholar and n. 42 for references. For the Ipswich defences, see West, S. E., ‘Excavations at Cox Lane (1958) and at the Town Defences, Shire Hall Yard, Ipswich (1959)’, Proc. of the Suffolk Inst. of Archaeology 29 (1963), 291–4Google Scholar, and Dunmore, S., Loader, T. and Wade, K., ‘Ipswich Archaeological Survey: Second Interim Report’, East Anglian Archaeology 3 (1976), 135–9.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 5} See above, p. 196. The third, Thetford, covered about 200 acres by the late eleventh century. The extent of tenth-century settlement and the date of its defences are still not known; Dunmore, S. and Carr, R., ‘The Late Saxon Town of Thetford’, East Anglian Archaeology 4 (1976), 1–14.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 6} Unlike that of Norwich (Campbell, Norwich, p. 3, n. 19), the Thetford mint has been studied in some detail; Carson, R. A. G., ‘The Mint of Thetford’, NC 6th ser. 9 (1949), 189–236.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 1} Dolley, R. H. M. and Metcalf, D. M., ‘The Reform of the English Coinage under Eadgar’, Anglo-Saxon Coins, ed. Dolley, R. H. M. (London, 1961), p. 144.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 2} Smart, V. J., ‘Moneyers of the Late Anglo-Saxon Coinage’, Commenfationes de Nummis Saeculorum IX-XI in Suecia Repertis II (Stockholm and Uppsala, 1968), 240Google Scholar. The relative numbers of moneyers ate Thetford 30, Norwich 22, Cambridge 18, Ipswich 15 and Sudbury (probably including some Southwark) 9.

^{page 202 note 3} Dolley, R. H. M., ‘The Mint of Chester. Part 1. Edward the Elder to Eadgar’, Chester Archaeol. Society's Jnl (1955), 4.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 4} See above, p. 196 and n. 6; also ‘cannot have been less than five thousand and could just possibly have been as high as ten thousand’ (Campbell, , Norwich, p. 3).Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 5} See above, p. 180.

^{page 202 note 6} Around St Augustine's and St Olave's, around St Paul's, in the French Borough and along the southern ends of Ber Street and King Street (for the locations, see figs. 7 and 8c, on which King Street is parallel to Ber Street).

^{page 202 note 7} English and Norse Documents relating to the Reign of Ethelred the Unready, ed. Ashdown, M. (Cambridge, 1930), p. 139Google Scholar. This is apparently the same battle as that described in the Knútsdrápa: ‘Gracious giver of mighty gifts, you made corslets red in Norwich’ (EHD, ed. Whitelock, , p. 308).Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 8} Campbell, , Norwich, p. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 9} Addyman, P. and Hill, D., ‘Saxon Southampton: A Review of the Evidence. Part II: Industry, Trade and Everyday Life’, Proc. of the Hampshire Field Club 36 (1969), 61–96.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 1} A personal communication from A. Rogerson and K. Wade, who are writing up the material.

^{page 203 note 2} ‘Then 2 carucates of land, now I.’ The sea carried away the other; The Victoria History of the Counties of England: Suffolk, ed. Page, W. 1 (London, 1911), 451Google Scholar, translating fol. 311b.

^{page 203 note 3} This might provide a convincing explanation for the disastrous decline in Ipswich between 1066 and 1086: from ‘538 burgesses rendering custom’ to ‘110 burgesses who render custom, and 100 poor burgesses who cannot render to the King's geld but one penny a head … and 328 burgages (mansiones) within the borough lie waste’ (Ibid. p. 429, translating fol. 290).

^{page 203 note 4} Darby, H. C., The Domesday Geography of Eastern England (Cambridge, 1957), p. 194.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 5} Stephenson, , Borough and Town, Apps. v-vi, p. 225Google Scholar. The contributions of East Anglian towns in 1129–31 were (expressed as percentages of London's) Norwich's 25, Thetford's 8, Ipswich's 6 and Dunwich's less than 2 (Stephenson's cut-off figure). In 1155–86 the average figures were Norwich 26, Dunwich 19, Ipswich 4 and Thetford less than 2. See also Tait, J., The Medieval English Borough (Manchester, 1936), App. 1, p. 184Google Scholar, for a comparison of borough farms.

^{page 203 note 6} On the attempt by Herfast to use Thetford as a ‘spring-board’ for the economic capture of Bury St Edmunds, the failure of this and the transfer of the bishop's seat to Norwich, see Dodwell, B., ‘The Foundation of Norwich Cathedral’, TRHS 5th ser. 7 (1957), 1–18.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 7} Loyn, H. R., Anglo-Saxon England and the Norman Conquest (London, 1970), p. 92.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 8} Poole, A. L., From Domesday Book to Magna Carta 1087–1216 (Oxford, 1955), pp. 88–94Google Scholar, esp. 89. Earlier, possibly late-tenth-century, contacts in this area have been suggested by the dedication of a church in Norwich to the Flemish saints Vaast and Amand; Campbell, , Norwich, p. 6Google Scholar, n. 65.

^{page 204 note 1} Blomefield, , Topographical History IIIGoogle Scholar, preface.