WILTSHIRE
(version 1a)

INTRODUCTION 

THE COUNTY BOUNDARY
The shires in the south and south-east of the country were formed at a quite early date, all those south of the Thames being mentioned in the Parker manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle before 892. The Mercian shires, including Gloucestershire, seem to have been laid out in the late tenth century or early eleventh century. 
	Even so, some land-units appear to predate the county boundaries. Thus 'Dean' (comprising East Dean and West Dean), 'Wellow' (East Wellow and West Wellow), 'Tidworth' (North Tidworth and South Tidworth), and 'Cholderton' (Cholderton and East Cholderton) seem to have long been divided between Wiltshire and Hampshire.
	By 1086, a number of vills were divided by the county boundary.  Wulfric held West Winterslow in Wiltshire (67,66) and with it 1 virgate of [West] Tytherley, most of which lay in Hampshire (HAM 4,1. 45,7. 69,16). One hide of Idmiston (7,14) lay in Hampshire, and, on the same border, part of [West] Dean lay in Wiltshire (37,15), but the other part of  West Dean, (more precisely, West Dean All Saints; see HAM 45,6 Dean note) was in Hampshire until recent times. Both parts were held in 1086 by Waleran the hunter. Waleran had also put 1 ½ virgates of East Wellow (Hampshire) into Wiltshire (HAM 69,22).  If the 1 ½ virgates lay at Outwick, as seems to be implied by HAM 45,2 the transfer will have been short-lived, since Outwick is there included in Fordingbridge Hundred (Hampshire) and remained there.
	Bramshaw seems to have been divided between Wiltshire and Hampshire in 1086, with only the Wiltshire portion named in Domesday (67,55;78), although both parts are now in Hampshire. If Lechetone of the Gloucestershire folios (GLS 71,1) is correctly identified, then part of Latton lay in Gloucestershire, while one of the 25 hides that before 1066 comprised Coleshill (Berkshire) lay in Wiltshire, being apparently inscribed in the Wiltshire folios as an afterthought (WIL 49,1a). Shalbourne was more equally divided, with 6 ½ hides in Berkshire (BRK 1,27) and  4 hides 3 virgates in Wiltshire (50,1. 67,65;82. 68,7). Part of Conholt (SU3355) not mentioned in Domesday and now all in Wiltshire, lay in Hampshire in 1334, as probably earlier; see Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), pp. 112, 119, 348; VCH Hampshire, iv. pp. 1, 329.
	Kingswood, near Wootton-under-Edge (in Gloucestershire), was an outlying portion of Chippenham manor in the later Middle Ages, and remained in Wiltshire until 1844; it can be assumed that it was also in Wiltshire in 1086. At the time of the compilation of Great Domesday Book, Woodchester (in Gloucestershire, GLS 1,63) was effectively in Wiltshire (although it did not stay there), because Edward [the sheriff] had put it in the farm of Wiltshire.  
	From the nineteenth century there have been a number of changes to the county boundary that  have involved the transfer of the following Domesday estates: 

PLACE	1086	LATER	
Wiltshire/ Berkshire Border
BAGSHOT (BRK 21,6)

'CHARLTON' (WIL 32,5)

SHALBOURNE (BRK 1,27. WIL 50,1. 67,65;82. 68,7)

STANDEN (WIL 39,1)
	
In Berkshire

In Berkshire

Divided between counties

In Wiltshire	
To Wiltshire in 1895

To Berkshire in 1895

The Berkshire portion transferred
to Wiltshire partly in 1844, partly
in 1895

To Berkshire in 1895
	
Wiltshire/ Gloucestershire  Border
ASHLEY (WIL 30,5)

KEMBLE (WIL 8,7)

KINGSWOOD (unnamed in WIL 1,5. 45,2)

LONG NEWNTON (WIL 8,8)

POOLE KEYNES (WIL 24,27)

POULTON (WIL 21,3)

SHORNCOTE (WIL 52,1)

SOMERFORD KEYNES (WIL 6,2)
	
In Wiltshire

In Wiltshire

In Wiltshire

In Wiltshire

In Wiltshire

In Wiltshire

In Wiltshire

In Wiltshire
	
To Gloucestershire in 1930

To Gloucestershire in 1897

To Gloucestershire in 1844

To Gloucestershire in 1930

To Gloucestershire in 1897

To Gloucestershire in 1844

To Gloucestershire in 1897

To Gloucestershire in 1897
	
Wiltshire/ Hampshire Border
BRAMSHAW (HAM unnamed. WIL 67,55;78) 

DAMERHAM (WIL 7,1. 11,2)

WEST DEAN (HAM 45,6. WIL 37,15)

PLAITFORD (WIL 67,56)
	
Part in Hampshire, part in Wiltshire

In Wiltshire

Divided between counties

In Wiltshire
	
Wiltshire portion transferred to Hampshire in 1895

To Hampshire in 1895

Wiltshire portion transferred to Hampshire in 1883

To Hampshire in 1895
	
Wiltshire/ Somerset  Border
KILMINGTON (SOM 1,9. 37,7)

YARNFIELD (SOM 23,1)	
In Somerset

In Somerset
	
To Wiltshire in 1896

To Wiltshire in 1896	
The dates of boundary changes are derived from Youngs, Local Administrative Units, ii. passim

In the case of other places divided between counties in 1086, mentioned above but not tabulated (Coleshill, Conolt, Idmiston, Latton, [West] Tytherley, [East] Wellow), the names are later confined to only one county, but it is not certain if a boundary change was involved or whether the name ceased to be used for the (small) portion in the other county later on.

Wiltshire had few natural boundaries, but in the south-west of the county, the River Avon marked Wiltshire off from Somerset for a few miles. Even here, tenure took precedence over nature, for a tithing of Bradford-on-Avon Ancient Parish, incorporating Limpley Stoke, projected into Bath Hundred (Somerset) west of the River Avon. This land belonged to Shaftesbury Abbey (the holder of Bradford-on-Avon) and the arrangement was included in the charter of King Ethelred (1001); see Charters of Shaftesbury Abbey, pp. 114-122 no. 29. 

HUNDREDS
For this edition, the form of some hundred names has been changed. Hundred names in double inverted commas are not found after 1086. Those in single inverted commas are named from places that are no longer on modern maps:

Phillimore printed edition	This edition	

Alderbury
Amesbury
Blackgrove
Bradford
Branch
Cadworth
Calne
Cannings
Cawdon
Chedglow
Chippenham
--------------
Cricklade
Damerham
Dole
Downton
Dunlow
Dunworth
Elstub
Frustfield
Heytesbury
Highworth
Kingsbridge
Kinwardstone
Melksham
Mere
Ramsbury
Rowborough
Selkley
Shippen [Scipe]
Stanford [Chalke]
Staple
Startley
Studfold
Swanborough
Thorngrove
Thornhill
Underditch
Warminster
Westbury
Whorwellsdown
	
 Alderbury
 Amesbury
 Blagrove
 Bradford
'Branchbury'
'Cadworth'
 Calne
[Bishops] Cannings
'Cawdon'
"Cicementone"
 Chippenham
 Collingbourne [Ducis]
 Cricklade
 Damerham
'Dolesfield'
 Downton
 Dunley
 Dunworth
'Elstub'
'Frustfield'
 Heytesbury
 Highworth
'Kingsbridge'
 Kinwardstone
 Melksham
 Mere
 Ramsbury
 Rowborough
'Selkley'
"Scipa"
 Stowford
'Staple'
 Startley
'Studfold'
 Swanborough
 Thorngrove
'Thornhill'
'Wonderditch'
 Warminster
 Westbury
'Whorwellsdown'

Domesday does not enter hundred headings in the text of Wiltshire or the other south-western counties. The only hundreds mentioned incidentally are "Cicementone" and Startley Hundreds, adjacent to Malmesbury (B5), and Highworth Hundred containing Lus Hill (24,5). Although the Tax Returns in the Liber Exoniensis (see {Introduction: Tax Returns}) give certain holdings by hundreds and total numbers of hides for each, they do not usually name places. Many can nonetheless be identified, though with varying probability, and despite the reconstructions of Jones, Domesday for Wiltshire, and Darlington in VCH Wiltshire, ii. pp. 169-217, the evidence is insufficient to recover the 1086 hundreds in their entirety. It was the later hundreds that were to structure the material in Place-Names of Wiltshire, albeit in a simplified form, ignoring modern adjustments and amalgamations, and these were used in the index and on the maps of the Phillimore printed edition, with the exception of Malmesbury Hundred (an amalgamation of "Cicementone" Hundred and Startley Hundred), and Rowborough Regis (a later half of Rowborough Hundred). The Place-Names of Wiltshire includes Shippen (that is, "Scipa") Hundred although this is only evidenced in the Tax Returns, and its reconstruction (on p. 30) based on Jones, Domesday for Wiltshire, differs from the evidence of the Tax Returns, which suggest that "Scipa" Hundred included Stratton St Margaret, Rodbourne, Lydiard Millicent and Widhill.
	Many of the later hundreds of Wiltshire had detached parts. Those affected were Dunley Hundred, Thorngrove Hundred, Chippenham Hundred, Melksham Hundred, Warminister Hundred, 'Cadworth' Hundred, 'Branchbury' Hundred, Alderbury Hundred and Damerham Hundred. Only Dinton (12,6) and Fisherton-de-la-Mere (44,1), detached from Warminster Hundred, are evidenced in the Tax Returns.
	Nonetheless, the Tax Returns point to the general similarity of the hundreds of Domesday and of later times, although they indicate important adjustments. 'Dolesfield' Hundred included Gore (59,2), later in Rowborough Hundred. 'Staple' Hundred included Chelworth (68,30) and Calcutt (67,1), later the southern part of Cricklade Hundred. Whaddon (67,17) and Hilperton (66,3-4. 67,47;90), later the northern part of 'Whorwellsdown' Hundred, were in Melksham Hundred, as probably was Chalfield (25,8-9), later in Bradford Hundred. 'Wonderditch' Hundred included ten hides of Salisbury (3,4). Thorngrove Hundred extended eastwards to include Sevington (32,13), Kington Langley (7,11) and Easton Piercy (25,26), later the northern part of Chippenham Hundred, which also incorporated Stanton St Quintin (7,5. 48,4), this last being in Startley Hundred in 1086. 'Thornhill' Hundred seems to have included Earlscourt (66,6) which was later in Ramsbury Hundred. In Blagrove Hundred were Bincknoll (29,2-4) and Wootton Bassett (28,1), later in 'Kingsbridge' Hundred. From the hidages that the Tax Returns give for each hundred, it is evident that 'Frustfield' Hundred was smaller, and Swanborough Hundred, 'Wonderditch' Hundred, Thorngrove Hundred and 'Thornhill' Hundred larger in 1086.

THE DOMESDAY FORMAT
The Manuscript
The manuscript is written on leaves, or folios, of parchment (sheepskin), measuring about 15 inches by 11 inches (38 centimetres by 28 centimetres), on both sides. On each side, or page, are two columns, making four to each folio. The folios were numbered in the seventeenth century, and the four columns of each are here lettered a, b, c, d. The manuscript emphasises words and usually distinguishes chapters and sections by the use of red ink. Underlining here generally indicates deletion.

RELATED OR 'SATELLITE' TEXTS
THE LIBER EXONIENSIS (Exon)
Introduction
For the south-western counties there exists another set of returns, the Exeter Book, usually known as the Liber Exoniensis or Exon Domesday. This contains the returns, differently arranged and worded, for Somerset and Cornwall, almost all of Devon, part of Dorset and one Wiltshire holding (that of William of Mohun: 34,1 = Exon folio 47a). Comparison with the version in Great Domesday Book shows that some information is clearly missing in the Liber Exoniensis, such as the rest of Wiltshire, a great part of Dorset and some entries for Devon. Arrangement is by fiefs, and within these by counties, though the counties do not always follow each other in the same order each time. Within each county places are often grouped in hundreds, although without the hundred name given, and frequently the hundreds occur in the same order under different holders. This provides primary evidence for the identification of places and in part supplies the lack of hundred headings in the text of Great Domesday here. Information is often duplicated, as for example in Cornwall where the same 11 hides are listed under the holdings of both the king and the Count of Mortain. As well as the account of the fiefs in the Liber Exoniensis  there are details for Devon, Cornwall and Somerset of 'Appropriated Lands' (Terrae Occupatae), on Exon folios 495-525, which usually repeat information given in the main entries. The Liber Exoniensis also includes the returns of the tax levied, probably in 1084, for all five counties; see {Introduction: Related or 'Satellite' Texts: the Tax Returns}. Totals of the holdings in Wiltshire of Glastonbury Abbey, Ralph of Mortimer, Miles Crispin, Durand of Gloucester and Gilbert are to be found in the imperfect Exon folios 527b; 530b-531a. A convenient contents table of the whole of the Liber Exoniensis is printed in Galbraith, Domesday Book in Administrative History, pp. 184-88.
	The manuscript is preserved in the library of Exeter Cathedral and was printed in 1816 by Sir Henry Ellis in the third volume of the Record Commission's edition of Domesday Book, from a transcript made by Ralph Barnes, Chapter Clerk. No facsimile, such as the Ordnance Survey facsimile made for Domesday, exists for the Liber Exoniensis. The manuscript consists of 532 folios of parchment, measuring about 6 ½ inches by 9 ¾ inches (16 ½ centimetres by 25 centimetres). Each folio contains a single column on each side of about 20 lines. These folios fall into a series of quires, or gatherings, varying in number between one and twenty folios. Generally a new quire was started for each major landholder, and a new side for most tenants. This led to many blanks, which were increased by spaces sometimes left for information not to hand. There is no indication of the original sequence of quires, and the present order and system of reference dates from the last rebinding in 1816. The manuscript is the work of about a dozen scribes and the hand changes often between entries and even within them.
	For a detailed description and evaluation of the Liber Exoniensis, see Finn, Liber Exoniensis; Ker, Medieval Manuscripts, ii. pp. 800-807; Ellis, Domesday Book, iii. (Libri Censualis) Introduction, pp. ix-xiv. 

The following extract compares the entry for Sutton Veny in the Liber Exoniensis and in WIL 34,1:

Liber Exoniensis  (folio 47a1)
W[illelmus] de moine h[abe]t .i. mansione[m] que vocat[ur] sutona q[u]a[m] tenuit Colo ea die qua rex E[dwardus] f[uit] v[ivus]t & m[ortuus] & m[od]o ten& ea[m] W[illelmus] hosat[us] de W[illelmo]. hec reddidit geldu[m] t[em]p[o]r[e] regis E[dwardi] p[ro] .v. hid[is]. has poss[un]t arare .iiii. carr[ucae]. de his h[abe]t W[illelmus] .iii. hidas & .i. uirgata[m] & .ii. carr[ucas] i[n] d[omi]nio & uillani .ii. hidas .i. uirgata min[us] & .ii. carr[ucas]. Ibi h[abe]t W[illelmus] .iii. uillanos & .vi. bord[arios] & .iii. seruos & .i. roncinu[m] & .ccc. oues & .i. molendinu[m] q[u]i reddit .iiii. sol[idos] p[er] annu[m] & .iiii. agros p[ra]ti & dimid[iam] leuga[m]  pascuae i[n] longit[udine] & .i. q[u]adrag[enam] i[n] latit[udine] & .ii. agros nemoris. hec uilla ualet .c. sol[idos] & q[u]ando W[illelmus] recepit ualebat .iiii. lib[ras]

'William of Mohun has 1 manor which is called Sutton [Veny] which Cola held on the day on which King Edward was alive and dead. Now Walter Hussey holds it from William. This [manor] paid tax for 5 hides in the time of King Edward. 4 ploughs can plough these [hides]. Of these [hides] William has 3 hides and 1 virgate and 2 ploughs in lordship, and the villagers [have] 2 hides, less 1 virgate, and 2 ploughs. William has there 3 villagers and 6 smallholders and 3 slaves and 1 cob and 300 sheep and 1 mill which renders 4s a year, and 4 acres of meadow and ½ league of pasture in length and 1 furlong in width and 2 acres of woodland. The value of this village is 100s and when William acquired it, the value was £4.'

WIL 34,1
WILL[ELMU]S  DE MOIVN ten[et] de rege .SVTONE. 7 Walter[us] de eo. Colo tenuit T.R.E. 7 geld[a]b[at] p[ro] .v. hid[is]. T[er]ra e[st] .iiii. car[ucis]. De ea s[un]t in d[omi]nio .iii. hidae 7 una v[irgata] t[er]rae 7 ibi .ii. car[ucae] et .iii. serui 7 iii. uill[an]i 7 .vi. bord[arii] cu[m] .ii. car[ucis]. Ibi molin[um] redd[ens] .iiii. solid[os] 7 iiii. ac[rae] p[ra]ti 7 .ii. ac[rae] siluae. Pastura dimid[iam] leu[gam] l[on]g[a] 7 una[m] lat[a]. Valuit .iiii. libras. Modo .c. solid[os].

'William of Mohun holds SUTTON [Veny] from the King, and Walter from him. Cola held it before 1066; it paid tax for 5 hides. Land for 4 ploughs, of which 3 hides and 1 virgate of land are in lordship; 2 ploughs there; 3 slaves; 3 villagers and 6 smallholders with 2 ploughs. A mill which pays 4s; meadow, 4 acres; woodland, 2 acres; pasture ½  league long and 1 wide. The value was £4; now 100s.'

The Tax Returns
Tax Returns, often called Geld Rolls, survive for Wiltshire, and in three separate versions: version A (Exon folios 1a-3b); version B (Exon folios 7a-9b); version C (Exon folios 13a-16a). The designation of the three versions is due to Jones, Domesday for Wiltshire. Although they are now bound up with the Liber Exoniensis proper, and are probably close to it in date, they are not for that reason to be considered part of the same survey: there are so many discrepancies of detail that it is difficult to regard them as strictly contemporary, or as compiled from the same material. The problem of dating and of the relation of the material to Domesday is admirably reviewed by Ann Williams in VCH Dorset, iii. pp. 115-23, and by Darlington in VCH Wiltshire, ii. pp. 174-76. For Galbraith's emphatic view that they date from 1086, see Galbraith, 'Date of the Geld Rolls', and his appendix to Galbraith, Making of Domesday Book, pp. 223-30. The survey of the Dorset boroughs in the Liber Exoniensis is written in the same gathering of parchment as version B of the Wiltshire Tax Returns. This does not date the returns, but shows that one version at least of them and of the main returns in the Liber Exoniensis proper were kept together from the beginning.  
	Tax Returns exist for all five south-western counties and were probably based on lists of tax liability that are now lost but which perhaps also contributed to the substructure of the Domesday Survey. They record the collection of geld at 6s to the hide, and a typical hundredal return begins with the total hidage of that hundred and (in Cornwall, Devon and Somerset) the amount of tax paid; this detail is entered later in the Tax Returns for Wiltshire and Dorset. A typical return then names the holders of exempt land (usually the total of an individual fief-holder's lordship in that hundred), and finishes with a schedule of those by whom tax had not been paid; sometimes other details are added. Place-names are included sporadically, but the Wiltshire Tax Returns only duplicate a few names found in Domesday itself; thus, the place-name Winterbourne Stoke is supplied by the Tax Return for 'Dolesfield' Hundred (versions B, C); East Knoyle by the return for Mere Hundred (version A); and Bromham by that for Calne Hundred (version A). However, the principal contribution of the Tax Returns to a study of hundreds lies in the fact that a comparison of holders and hidage with Domesday entries often allows particular Domesday estates to be allotted to particular hundreds listed in the Tax Returns.
 	In all, the three Wiltshire versions of the Tax Returns supply the details of forty hundreds and one manor, Collingbourne Ducis, which seems to have been the nucleus of the later liberty of Everleigh. These 'hundreds' vary in size between 'Selkley' Hundred at 196 hides and 3 ½ virgates and 'Frustfield' Hundred at 11 hides and ½ virgate.  The hundreds appear in virtually the same order in all three versions of the Tax Returns, although Kinwardstone Hundred and Collingbourne Ducis manor (1,19) are omitted from version A. Also in that version Swanborough Hundred is entered in sixth instead of in ninth place, and Stowford Hundred is entered after, rather than before, 'Cadworth' Hundred. In version B and C the order of Kinwardstone Hundred and Blagrove Hundred is reversed. The three versions appear not to be independent of each other, but relate to the same tax collection, version C being the earliest phase and version A the latest; see VCH Wiltshire, ii. pp. 171-72. In addition, version A excludes the hidage of a number of important royal manors - Compton Chamberlayne (1,8), Rushall (1,9), Corsham (1,11), Aldbourne (1,10), Coombe Bissett (1,13) and Lydiard Millicent (1,21) - which were probably accounted for separately at that stage of the proceedings: royal manors may in fact have been separately surveyed for Domesday, and the Somerset hundred lists are likewise swollen by a number of royal manors, some of which are also accounted for in the solitary version of the Somerset Tax Returns.
  	The Wiltshire Tax Returns have been studied by Jones, Domesday for Wiltshire, by Darlington  in VCH Wiltshire, ii. pp. 169-217; and by Finn, 'Assessment of Wiltshire'; the first two have published reconstructions of all the hundreds, and Finn has tabulated the most straightforward quarter of them. Darlington's somewhat melancholy conclusion to his study (VCH Wiltshire, ii. p. 177) is that: 'owing to the nature of the evidence, several hundreds cannot be reconstructed and it seems best to acknowledge that some of the problems created by the survival of the Geld Rolls are insoluble ... On some matters, it is unlikely that any two scholars would ever reach agreement'. Nevertheless, because the Tax Returns remain the only contemporary evidence for the eleventh-century hundreds of Wiltshire, it is worth attempting to exploit them, while remaining aware of the pitfalls involved in their use. 

EDITORIAL
The Identification of Places
The secure identification of places in the five south-western counties is less straightforward than for much of the country, and Wiltshire presents particular problems. With the exception of Lus Hill (24,5) the text of Domesday does not allocate places to  hundreds. Moreover, several modern places often share the same Domesday name; sometimes these are widely separated like the Somerfords, and Langford, Landford and Longford (Domesday Langeford); sometimes they are adjacent places distinguished now by East and West, St Mary and St Peter. This lack of hundred headings can in part be made good by evidence from the Tax Returns. 
	Identification is sometimes possible where an uncertain place comes in the text of Domesday between places in the same or adjacent hundreds. But Domesday Wiltshire does not generally list the places in hundredal groups, unlike the text of the main part of the Liber Exoniensis for the other south-western counties. Unfortunately only one entry for Wiltshire survives in the Liber Exoniensis (Exon folio 47al = WIL 34,1). Unless the Tax Returns have evidence, identification of the different places callled Sutton, Lydiard and Easton etc., should be treated with caution.
	Place-names research involves also a full study of later surveys and of family and manorial history, outside the scope of this edition. The notes draw attention to some of the problems and cite some of the early evidence to enable places of the same basic name to be separated. Sometimes these may represent subdivisions of a holding that are later than 1086. It is by no means clear, for example, that the separate Codfords or Deverills existed at the time of the Survey. As a rule these separate identifications are included here only to distinguish places of the same basic name in different hundreds, for example, Littleton Pannell and Littleton Drew. Usually only the basic name appears and the problem is discussed in a note. 
	The pioneering work of Jones, Domesday for Wiltshire (1865), is still valuable. His identifications are largely reproduced by the Place-Names of Wiltshire (1939), by VCH Wiltshire, ii. (1955) and by Domesday Gazetteer, often omitting his evidence and his hesitations and queries. The Place-Names of Wiltshire volume does not give exact Domesday references, but its identifications are followed, except where noted.

Places named from Rivers
DEVERILL. The old name for the upper reaches of the River Wylye is given in Domesday to various settlements on its banks in the hundreds of Mere (Kingston Deverill and Monkton Deverill), and Heytesbury (Hill Deverill, Brixton Deverill and Longbridge Deverill). The Tax Returns enable most to be allocated to their hundreds, but individual identities are sometimes uncertain.

WINTERBOURNE. The old name for the River Bourne and the River Till and probably for the River Kennet is used in Domesday for a number of villages on their banks. Only Winterbourne Stoke (24,8-9) is separately identified by Domesday (Wintreburnestoch). Of the River Till settlements (in 'Dolesfield' Hundred), it is possible to distinguish Addestone, Maddington, Shrewton, Winterbourne Stoke, Elston and possibly Berwick St James, usually on the basis of later evidence. Place-Names of Wiltshire, p. 235, would also include Rolleston. Of the River Bourne settlements (Winterbourne Dauntsey, Winterbourne Earls, Winterbourne Gunner), only Winterbourne Earls is certain. The two River Kennett Winterbournes (Winterbourne Monkton and Winterbourne Bassett in 'Selkley' Hundred) can be separated. In some cases, the Tax Returns allow a Winterbourne to be assigned to a particular hundred, but the holding at 26,6 cannot even be identified in this way.

State of Revision
Wiltshire was published in the Phillimore series in 1979. It was edited by Caroline and Frank Thorn from a draft translation prepared by Caroline Thorn. The maps were the work of Jim Hardy and Frank Thorn. The editors were grateful to Mrs A.M. Erskine of Exeter Cathedral Library for her help in making available the manuscript of the Liber Exoniensis (Exon).
	 Before his death in 1977, John Morris, the originator and first editor of the series, had looked over some of the draft notes and considerably reduced their bulk in line with his policy of minimal annotation. The volume when it appeared adhered to his principles. The preparation of the volume was greatly assisted by a generous grant from the Leverhulme Trust Fund. 
	The present edition is part of a project to convert the annotation of the Phillimore printed volumes to electronic form and to revise them. The present small-scale revision is essentially an interim edition until time is available for a full-scale re-edition. For the present purpose only a limited number of changes have been made to the printed notes:
•	The notes on place-name identifications have been amalgamated with the main notes.
•	The translation of some terms has been brought into line with those of the series as a whole.
•	The bibliographical and other conventions have been changed to align them with the other counties that have been revised for the current project.
•	Certain changes have been necessary in the conversion of the notes to a searchable electronic version, such as to the lead words for the notes, to cross-references and to punctuation. 
•	The form of the hundred names (of which few are given in the text, but more in the notes) has been standardized so as to distinguish between those units that are named from places still extant and those that are not.
•	The section concerning the county boundary has been expanded and some additional notes provided on that subject.
•	A number of the forms of personal names have been changed as part of an ongoing process to bring more consistency to the entire name stock of Domesday Book.
•	Some of the people have been further identified. When the identification comes from the person's occurrence in other documents or in other Domesday counties, this is shown in the translation between asterisks within square brackets. Where there is no documentary evidence for the identity of an individual, but it seems likely that a number of persons with the same first name are one and the same, this has been indicated in the translation by putting the name of one of the estates held by that person between < >. In this county the notes to justify both these forms of identification have largely been written by John Palmer and these have been attributed to him as (JP) put at the end of his paragraph.  
•	Obvious typographical errors in the Phillimore printed notes have been corrected.

Frank Thorn
Caroline Thorn
January 2007
June 2007