Domesday Landowners 1066-1086 A-D

Where bynames are attested by contemporary sources, they are placed between [* *] in the translation (and by round brackets in the Names index and Statistics database); where not, an estate name, normally that of the most substantial manor or that held in 1086 by survivors, is employed, bracketed by chevrons in the translation, indexes and database. The conventions used for identifying various satellite sources are described in the documentation of the translation, indexes and database. As the exact location of most Domesday places is uncertain, distances between vills and manors in the notes are approximate walking distances.
...............................................................................................................................................
ACARD. Acard is a rare name which occurs six times, distributed among four counties and the lands of three tenants-in-chief.
...............................................................................................................................................
ACARD [* OF IVRY *]. The tenants of William son of Ansculf at Tyringham in Buckinghamshire1 and in the adjacent vills of Old Swinford and Pedmore in Worcestershire2 are very probably the same Acard. Tyringham and Pedmore were held in the thirteenth century by a Gifard from the successors of William son of Ansculf: Book of Fees, pp. 527, 884. As the name is rare, Acard may be Acard of Ivry, who held Aspley Guise in Bedfordshire from Hugh of Beauchamp3, ten miles from Tyringham, the manors being of comparable status. Aspley was later held by Ralph of Valery, possibly a descendant of Acard: VCH Bedfordshire, iii. 338-39. Acard of Ivry's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 664) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 123, those of William's tenant separately (no. 8491), with the suggestion that he is possibly Acard of Ivry.
1 BUK 17,22
2 WOR 23,11-12
3 BDF 23,17
.............................................................................................................................................
ACARD [* THE PRIEST *]. As the name is rare, the Acard who held two and a half hides at an unknown location in Binstead Hundred in Sussex from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury1 is probably Acard the priest, who held '2 virgates in prebend' in the manor of Walberton from the same tenant-in-chief, in the same Hundred2. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2024) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 123.
.............................................................................................................................................
ACWULF <OF THELNETHAM>. The thane Acwulf who held a respectable manor at Thelnetham in Suffolk3 is probably the thane at Ixworth Thorpe in the same Hundred, eight miles away4, and also the free man of that name on thirty-six acres at Burston in Norfolk, ten miles from Thelnetham5, despite their manors devolving upon three tenants-in-chief, these being the only Acwulfs in Domesday Book.
.............................................................................................................................................
ADAM. The name Adam occurs on one small fief in Essex and almost fifty times among the tenants in Domesday Book, distributed among seven counties and the lands of five tenants-in-chief, but possibly borne by no more than one or two individuals. An Adam son of William (or possibly Adam son of Robert) is named in the Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 125, 182) as the tenant of a sixth tenant-in-chief, in Hertfordshire. The one other Adam with a recorded byname is Adam son Hubert, who is probably the unidentified Adam in most, possibly all cases.
.............................................................................................................................................
ADAM <OF LEASINGHAM>. The tenants of the bishop of Lincoln on the fairly substantial manors of 'Ringstone' and Leasingham in Lincolnshire6 are very probably the same Adam: Hugh of Ringstone held a fee in Leasingham from the bishop of Lincoln in the 1240s: Book of Fees, p. 1075. In view of the distribution of the name and the status of his manors, it is not unlikely that he is the magnate Adam son of Hubert, a tenant of the bishop of Bayeux, though not in Lincolnshire. There are no links to confirm this, but Bishop Odo and the bishop of Lincoln did share other tenants. 'Ringstone' is attributed to the bishop of Lincoln's tenant in Coel (no. 9377) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 124; the tenant of Leasingham is unidentified (no. 33289).
.............................................................................................................................................
ADAM [* SON OF HUBERT *]. With the possible exception of two manors in Lincolnshire, it is probable that all unidentified Adams in Domesday Book are Adam son of Hubert of Ryes, a favourite of the Conqueror, brother of Eudo the steward, and the wealthiest of the tenants of the bishop of Bayeux. Although not a tenant-in-chief himself, he was among the wealthiest two dozen landowners in the country, outstripping most tenants-in-chief, including such magnates as the earl of Chester: Palmer, 'Wealth of the secular aristocracy', p. 281.
His byname is stated or implied by 'also' on fourteen manors in Kent, two in Surrey and one in Oxfordshire, all apart from a small amount of woodland held from the bishop of Bayeux, so he is probably the Adam who held eleven manors from the bishop in Kent7, seven in Oxfordshire8, eight
1 SUS 11,96
2 SUS 11,81
3 SUF 12,1
4 SUF 59,1
5 NFK 7,8
6 LIN 7,32-33;52
7 KEN 5,40;94;104-107;141-142;154;163;184
8 OXF 7,12;22;39-40;47;52-53
in Hertfordshire1 and one in Northamptonshire2. Of the two Adams who were not the bishop's tenants in those counties, one is identified as the son of Hubert by reference a manor he held from Bishop Odo3; the other, at Dernedale4, adjacent to Adam's manor of Fanscombe5, was a tenant of the abbot of Canterbury, who accommodated other tenants of Bishop Odo with grants of land. Although Adam's Honour fragmented, the descent of a handful of these manors identifies him as Adam son of Hubert, though there can be little doubt that he held all of them: Farrer, Honors, iii. 182, 190-91, 197-99, 227, 287, 292-93. He is possibly also the Adam who held two manors from the bishop of Lincoln in Lincolnshire.
Adam's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 602) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 123, apart from a subholding on his manor of Bowley6, attributed to a tenant of the bishop of Ely at Hatfield in Hertfordshire7 named in the Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 125, 182), where he is variously described as Adam son of Robert William, Adam son of Robert son of William, and Adam son of William (Coel no. 925). The entry for Bowley is ambiguous, and Bishop Odo had a tenant in Kent named William son of Robert; but it seems unlikely that Odo had two tenants named Adam on a single manor when there was probably at most only one other tenant of that name in Domesday Book. If the identification is accepted, however, a case could be made for attributing all the Hertfordshire manors to this Adam, since they descended as a group and included another Adam son of William among their descendants: Farrer, Honors, iii. 293-95.
.............................................................................................................................................
ADELELM. Adelelm is a comparatively rare name which occurs fifteen times, distributed among nine counties on the lands of eight tenants-in-chief; Alelm at Waxholme in Yorkshire8 may be a scribal error for Adelelm. All but one these names are borne by landowners in 1086 so probably represent the Old German Adalhelm; the exception9 may derive from the Old English Aethelhelm (which is translated accordingly), though von Feilitzen suggests otherwise. Aelm in Cornwall10 may be an abbreviated form: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 184.
.............................................................................................................................................
ADELELM [* OF BURGATE *]. Adelelm, tenant of Aubrey de Vere on the very valuable manor of Burgate in Suffolk11, is named Adelelm of Burgate in a royal charter of 1111 and in the Abingdon chronicle, where his donation to the church of Colne - a cell of the abbey - and arrangements for his burial there are recorded: Regesta, ii. no. 100; Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 88-89. Colne is one of Aubrey's manors in Essex. Adelelm is almost certainly Aubrey's tenant on a second holding in Burgate, and one in Gislingham stated to be held by the same man12. He is probably also the Adelelm who held Horseham Hall and Helions Bumpstead in Essex from Aubrey13, the latter another valuable manor. No other Adelelms held land in these two counties, and Aubrey had no tenants of this name elsewhere on his Honour. Adelelm's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 902) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 124, apart from Gislingham,
1 HRT 5,2-6;17-19
2 NTH 2,11
3 KEN 9,51. 5,163
4 KEN 7,14
5 KEN 5,163
6 KEN 5,74
7 HRT 8,1
8 YKS 14E17
9 KEN 9,11
10 CON 5,1,15
11 SUF 35,5
12 SUF 35,7-8
13 ESS 35,7;12
assigned to the tenant-in-chief. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that Adelelm may have been Aubrey's steward.
................................................................................................................................................................
ADELELM <OF HOBY>. Adelelm, who held Hoby in Leicestershire from Drogo of la Beuvrière1, may be the Alelm who held Waxholme in Yorkshire from him2. The form Alelm appears to be otherwise unknown. Adelelm has no links with his namesakes. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8723) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 124.
................................................................................................................................................................
ADELELM [* OF KINGSTON *]. Adelelm, who held Kingston Bagpuize in Berkshire from William son of Ansculf3, is identified by this byname in the Abingdon chronicle, which names him as one of the two 'foremost lords' of Kingston whose misdeeds brought upon them an episcopal threat of the suspension of worship in Kingston if they failed to make amends: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 42-43, 176-79. He has no links with other Adelelms. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1570) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 124.
................................................................................................................................................................
ADELULF. Adelulf is a rare name which occurs fifteen times, distributed among three counties: once in Kent, twice in Cambridgeshire, the remainder in Essex, tenants of three tenants-in-chief, one in each county.
.............................................................................................................................................
ADELULF <OF CROXTON>. As the name is rare, the Adelulfs who held Litlington and Croxton in Cambridgeshire from Hardwin of Scales4 are very probably one man. He is unlikely to be Adelulf of Marck, Litlington being held 'at a revenue', an improbable tenure for an honorial baron. Like Adelulf of Marck, Adelulf of Croxton was probably a Fleming, a charter cited by Dr Keats-Rohan referring to land at Croxton held by an Elwoldus Flammang, grandfather of the wife of the tenant in 1166 and perhaps the Domesday tenant himself. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1753) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 125; see further Round, Studies in peerage and history, pp. 156-57.
................................................................................................................................................................
ADELULF [* OF MARCK *]. Adelulf, who held ten manors from Count Eustace of Boulogne in Essex5, is Adelulf of Marck, named as his tenant at Dunmow and Steeple Bumpstead6. He is the only Adelulf in Essex or East Anglia. All but two of his manors were later held by the Marck family, the exceptions - Tolleshunt and Goldhanger7 - having been alienated to the abbey of St Albans: Book of Fees, pp. 236-37, 1428-29. Adelulf's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 679) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 125.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 LEC 36,2
2 YKS 14E17
3 BRK 22,12
4 CAM 26,23;43
5 ESS 20,13;22;24;29;54;57-58;68-69;79
6 ESS 20,15;27
7 ESS 20,57-58
ADELULF <OF WYE>. Adelulf, who held two-thirds of a sulung which paid 12d in the manor of Wye in Kent from Battle abbey1, has no links with other Adelulfs. He is identified in Coel (no. 183) as Aethelwold the chamberlain (q.v.) of the bishop of Bayeux, referenced in Domesday people, p. 125. The identification assumes a scribal error - Adelold for Adelulf - which is possible but unverifiable.
.............................................................................................................................................
ADELUND <OF NEWTON>. The Adelunds (Aelons, Adelund) who held Newton, Harleston, Felsham and Euston in Suffolk from the abbey of St Edmunds2 are certainly one man, said to be so in the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin which groups his manors together; he is the only Adelund in Domesday Book: Feudal documents, p. 21. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2050) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 125, under the form Adelo used in the Feudal Book, a name which occurs once more in Domesday Book, at Skellow in Yorkshire3, but is unlikely to belong to the same man. Dr Keats-Rohan points out that the Kalendar of Abbot Sampson shows that Adelund's estate had divided by the 1180s.
.............................................................................................................................................
AEFIC. The name Aefic occurs six times, once in Wiltshire, twice in Huntingdonshire and three times in Derbyshire, predecessors of different tenants-in-chief - two in Huntingdonshire - in each county.
.............................................................................................................................................
AEFIC <OF ASHE>. As the name is rare, the Aefics who preceded Henry of Ferrers at Ashe, Trusley and Hollington in Derbyshire are very probably one man, his manors lying in neighbouring vills in the Hundred of 'Appletree', two of them held with an Ulfkil4. He has no links with his namesakes outside the county.
................................................................................................................................................................
AEFIC <OF CATWORTH>. As the name is rare, the Aefics who held two manors in Catworth in Huntingdonshire are almost certainly one man, though a predecessor of two tenants-in-chief5. He has no links with his namesakes outside the county.
.............................................................................................................................................
AEFIC <OF WISHFORD>. Aefic, whose manor of Wishford in Wiltshire was acquired by William Cornelian6, has no links with his namesakes, all remote.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELBERT. The English name Aelbert is rare, as is the continental Albert if Albert of Lorraine and Albert Grelley are excluded. The forms are not always distinguishable; where they are, the translation renders English landowners Aelbert; continental, Albert. Aelbert occurs six times in Domesday Book and twice more in satellite texts, distributed among four counties, three fiefs and the town of Colchester.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 KEN 6,1
2 SUF 14,32;36;58;98
3 YKS 9W39
4 DBY 6,37-38;42
5 HUN 19,12. 29,3
6 WIL 68,32
AELBERT <OF BURTHY>. As the name is rare, the Aelberts (Ailbriht, Ailbric) from whom Richard son of Turolf acquired the two modest holdings at Burthy and Lanescot in Cornwall1 is probably one man. He has no links with other Aelberts, none occurring within almost a hundred miles.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELBERT <OF COLCHESTER>. Aelbert (Ailbriest), who held a house in Colchester2, is the only urban Aelbert and the only survivor this name. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 5814).
.............................................................................................................................................
AELBERT <OF QUARME>. Aelbert (Ailbrict), whose modest manor at Quarme in Somerset3 was acquired by Godebold the bowman (q.v.), has no links with other Aelberts, none occurring within almost a hundred miles.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELBERT [* THE STEWARD *]. As the name is rare, the Albert and Aelberts (Ailbertus) who held land in the neighbouring vills of Impington, Milton and Waterbeach in Cambridgeshire from the abbey of Ely in 1066 according to Domesday Book and the Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 113-14) are very probably one man, the abbey's steward named at Milton4. At Waterbeach5, the scribe renders the name of the abbot of Ely's man in 1066 as Albert (Albertus), but it is improbable he is another man than the abbey's steward.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELEVA. Aeleva is an uncommon name which occurs eleven times, distributed among seven counties and the lands of the king and nine of his tenants-in-chief. It is easily confused with Aelfeva: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 173-74, 183.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELEVA <OF KNOYLE>. The Aelevas of Berkshire and Wiltshire may be one woman. She held the very valuable manors of East Knoyle in Wiltshire6 and Basildon in Berkshire7, both conferred by the Conqueror on his principal lieutenant, Earl William son of Osbern, and subsequently retained by the king himself. She is probably also the Aeleva on the valuable manor of Aston Upthorpe8, which lies between Basildon and its urban holdings in Wallingford, a few miles from either; it was acquired by Reinbald the chancellor. The one other Aeleva in the two counties, who held part of the huge manor of Chalke from Wilton abbey9, is likely to be a lady of influence in the region, who can only be Aeleva of Knoyle. No other Aelevas in Domesday Book held manors worth even a tenth of the two royal manors she held, nor did any Aelfevas in the two counties. Aelfevas held manors in Hampshire10 and Oxfordshire11 sufficiently valuable to form the whole fief in the latter case and the greater part in the former; but there are no links to connect Aeleva and
1 CON 5,3,16-17
2 ESS B3a
3 SOM 43,1
4 CAM 32,36-37;39
5 CAM 32,39
6 WIL 1,20
7 BRK 1,8
8 BRK 61,2
9 WIL 13,9
10 HAM 64,1
11 OXF 26,1
Aelfeva. Aeleva of Knoyle's manors are worth £65. If included in Clarke, English nobility, she would rank fifty-eighth in wealth among untitled laymen.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFEVA. Aelfeva is a fairly common name which occurs more than sixty times, distributed among twenty-five counties and the lands of the king and more than thirty of his tenants-in-chief. It is largely confined to England south of the Wash, and thinly spread, the majority of counties having a single name, no tenants-in-chief having significant numbers of tenants or predecessors. There are small clusters in Devon and East Anglia, and five survivors, one in Suffolk, two each in Devon and Middlesex. The name is easily confused with Aeleva: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 173-74, 183.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* COUNTESS *] AELFEVA. Aelfeva, Morcar's mother, who held Warkton in Northamptonshire before the Conquest1, is almost certainly Countess Aelfeva, wife of Earl Algar of Mercia and mother of earls Edwin and Morcar, despite the omission of her title and that of her son. She is elsewhere referred to either as Countess Aelfeva or as Earl Morcar's mother, with or without her forename. She had jurisdiction and market rights in Nottinghamshire and held land or property in Hertfordshire, Leicestershire and Suffolk, and 'used to hold' Shalford in Essex2, and Coton-in-the-Elms in Derbyshire3, both in the hands of her husband in Domesday: Bates, Regesta, no. 33, p. 194. It is also likely that she was the predecessor of William of Warenne on the valuable manors of Wilton and Rising and several others in Norfolk4, though described simply as a free woman on one of them but not at all elsewhere. Her husband had been earl of East Anglia, and Warenne succeeded him on manors in Essex and Cambridgeshire. Aelfeva's manors, worth £17 in total, are the only manors held by an Aelfeva in East Anglia worth £1 or more which the Countess did not hold in 1066. A list of her manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 219, and by Baxter, Earls of Mercia, pp. 290-91, 299, 310, 312-14. Dr Clarke does not include the Norfolk manors; Dr Baxter does, his total for the Countess (£84) being similar to that in the Statistics database; if Shalford and Coton are included, this would add another £14.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFEVA [* WIFE OF HWAETMANN *]. Aelfeva, who held a half-hide of the king's alms land at Greenford in Middlesex in 1086, is probably the wife of Hwaetmann of London named in the preceding entry, with another half-hide of alms land in 'Elthorne' Hundred5, both acquired from men of Earl Leofwin. The three other survivors of this name held land in Devon or Suffolk; no Aelfeva held land in Middlesex. Aelfeva's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 450) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 126.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFGYTH. The name Aelfgyth occurs four times, once each in Somerset, Buckinghamshire, Essex and Suffolk, each on the lands of a different tenant-in-chief. The Aelfgyth in Essex is the one survivor, identified as an Englishwoman in the text. The name is easily confused with Aelgyth or Aethelgyth, but their distribution make it unlikely they are connected with the Aelfgyths.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 NTH 8,13
2 ESS B3j. 1,11
3 DBY 3,4
4 NFK 8,24-25;34-36;87
5 MDX 25,2-3
AELFGYTH [* MOTHER OF GODWIN *]. Aelfgyth, whose two hides at Oakley in Buckinghamshire were acquired by Robert d'Oilly1, is probably the mother of Godwin son of Aelfgyth (q.v.), a man of Wigot of Wallingford, predecessor and probably son-in-law of Robert d'Oilly: Williams, World before Domesday, pp. 120, 206 and note 151. In addition to her two hides, Aelfgyth, 'a girl', held half-a-hide of King Edward's household revenue - probably in Brill2 - 'which Godric the sheriff assigned to her for as long as he should be sheriff, so that she might teach his daughter gold embroidery'.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFGYTH <OF CLATWORTHY>. Aelfgyth, who held the respectable manor of Clatworthy in Somerset from Glastonbury abbey in 10663, has no links with her namesakes, all remote.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFGYTH <OF HARGRAVE>. Aelfgyth, who held the substantial manor of Hargrave in Suffolk from the abbey of Bury St Edmunds in 10664, has no links with her namesakes, all remote.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFGYTH <OF SUTTON>. Aelfgyth (Aluid), who held a modest manor at Hargrave in Essex from Swein of Essex5, is the only surviving Aelfgyth; she has no links with her namesakes, all remote. Her manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1859) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 139.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* BLAEC *]. It is probable that Aelfric, archbishop Stigand's man, who held land at Shephall in Hertfordshire6, is Aelfric Blaec since it is recorded at Datchworth, one of the four entries where he is accorded this byname7, that he held it from Westminster abbey before the Conquest, 'but for other lands he was Archbishop Stigand's man'. Although his name is common, he was a modestly substantial landowner, so it is not unlikely that his 'other lands' included some if not all of the manors in Norfolk held by Aelfric, a free man of Stigand, holding from or under the archbishop8. Most were respectable holdings, two comparable to those in Hertfordshire, each within a few miles of one of the more modest holdings, while on the remaining manor, at Mundham, he was important enough to be outlawed. Stigand had no men of this name elsewhere.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* KEMP *]. Aelfric Kemp is recorded in Domesday Book or the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 37-39, 43-44) as preceding Eudo the steward in Cambridgeshire and Suffolk, Robert Gernon in Cambridgeshire and Essex, Ralph Baynard in the same county, Roger of Rames in Essex and Suffolk, and the bishop of Bayeux and Richard son of Gilbert in the latter county. He is specifically named as the predecessor of Eudo on the fief of the bishop of Bayeux at Raydon in Suffolk9; but Robert, Ralph and Roger also acquired valuable demesne manors from him. He may therefore be the unidentified Aelfric who preceded Gernon at Wivenhoe in Essex10, and Baynard at Barn Hall and Lawford in the same county1, all three respectable or
1 BUK 19,3
2 BUK 1,6
3 SOM 25,8
4 SUF 54,2
5 ESS 24,35
6 HRT 2,3
7 HRT 2,1-2;5. 37,1
8 NFK 1,2. 6,6. 9,49. 29,5-6. 35,6
9 SUF 16,41
10 ESS 32,25
substantial manors. It is possible, even probable, that he is Aelfric cilt, recorded as a predecessor of Robert Gernon at Matching in Essex2 and as an overlord in Pampisford3, where Aelfric Kemp also had a man and held the adjacent manors of Babraham and Sawston4; the noble Aelfric was otherwise poorly endowed. Similarly, he may be the royal thane Aelfric recorded on the valuable manor of Arrington in Cambridgeshire5 and at Parham in Suffolk6. Whether Aelfric the noble in Cambridgeshire and Suffolk is the same Aelfric the noble recorded in Exon. as a predecessor of the bishop of Coutances at Portishead in Somerset, or the Aelfrics on several other substantial episcopal manors in the county, is impossible to verify, but seems unlikely in the absence of identifiable intervening properties, though Eudo did have a predecessor Aelfric at 'Losfield' in Berkshire7 and a royal thane Aelfric had two fairly substantial manors in Buckinghamshire8.
Eudo the steward was preceded at Radwinter and Arkesden in Essex9 by Aelfric Wand, who is almost certainly the Aelfric Wand who had the management of the huge royal manor of East Bergholt in Suffolk10 and who appears from an account of disputed revenues in one entry11 to be the same man as Aelfric the reeve on other royal manors in the county12. Although the entry is ambiguous and name is common, two surviving Aelfrics on the one royal fief with the capacity to wield such responsibility is improbable. On similar grounds, the reeve Alric managing another group of manors on the same royal fief13 may also be Aelfric Wand: the scribes often confused the two names and there are no other royal reeves of either name in Domesday Book. Eudo, however, was represented among the jurors in Cambridgeshire at the Domesday Inquest by a reeve Aelfric who is surely his predecessor Aelfric Wand: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 83, 99). Eudo had no tenant named Aelfric in Cambridgeshire, and indeed there are no Aelfrics in the relevant Hundred of Longstowe. Neither can Aelfric Wand be identified as a landowner in 1086, though he no doubt extracted a profit from the management of the royal manors.
Are Aelfric Kemp and Aelfric Wand also the same man? The forename is very common but the coincidences are striking: both are predecessors of Eudo the steward; both held valuable manors; both had a significant presence in Cambridgeshire, Essex and Suffolk; and neither held land in their own right in 1086, though in Kemp's case it cannot be demonstrated that he survived until then unless he is identified as Aelfric Wand/the reeve. On balance, the identification seems more likely than not. A list of Aelfric Kemp's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 227-28; see also Mortimer, 'The Baynards of Baynard's Castle', pp. 247-48. Dr Clarke does not connect Kemp with Aelfric cilt or Aelfric Wand or the reeve but otherwise attributes to him the manors named above, apart from the addition of Southill in Bedfordshire14, acquired by Eudo. Though possible, this is doubtful since the property is tiny and its owner named Alric and there is no compelling reason to posit an error in this case. Aelfric is ranked forty-fifth in wealth among untitled laymen by Dr Clarke; the addition of Wand's manors would raise him two places, Arrington and Parham another three.
1 ESS 33,8;17
2 ESS 32,6
3 CAM 32,3
4 CAM 25,1-3
5 CAM 13,11
6 SUF 3,88
7 BRK 32,1
8 BUK 43,5;10
9 ESS 25,24;26
10 SUF 1,100-106
11 SUF 1,103
12 SUF 1,17;23-30;60
13 SUF 1,44-60
14 BDF 21,8
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC <OF BRADBOURNE>. Although Aelfric is a common name, it is likely that all thirteen manors acquired by Henry of Ferrers from Aelfric in Derbyshire1 and Leicestershire2 were held by one man. Apart from a priest, only one more Aelfric held land in either county, at Caldwell in Derbyshire3, and he may be the same Aelfric since Caldwell lies within a few miles of several of the other holdings and may have escaped the grasp of Henry of Ferrers only because the king granted it to Burton abbey. The Leicestershire holdings are just across the boundary from those in Derbyshire, Stretton being divided by the county boundary. Aelfric held land in Stretton in both counties, sharing the Leicestershire holding with a Leofnoth, probably the Leofnoth Sterre (q.v.) with whom he also shared land in Snelston. The skewed tenurial distribution of the Aelfrics in these counties cannot be explained by Dr Fleming's thesis on the block grant of Hundreds and wapentakes, because Aelfric's holdings are distributed across much of Derbyshire, the bulk of them lying outside Appletree wapentake, where Henry of Ferrers was dominant: Fleming, Kings and lords, pp. 149, 151-52, 163-65. If anything, the Fleming thesis tends to suggest that Henry acquired Aelfric's lands before redistribution by wapentakes began. Henry had no other predecessors - and no tenants - of this name elsewhere on his Honour.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC <OF COLWICK>. With one possible exception, it is likely that the Aelfrics who held ten manors among the royal thanes of Nottinghamshire are one man. The ten form a close group in the neighbouring wapentakes of Broxtowe and Thurgarton. In six, Aelfric held the same manor for twenty years4, and in two others the land he held in 1066 had no named holder in 1086, so may have been his then also5. His ninth manor, at Nuthall6, was acquired after 1066. Only one other Aelfric in circuit six held land in 1086, and none north of the Wash held the same manor at both dates. The tenth Aelfric, and the possible exception, held 'Sutton Passeys' in 1066, and possibly in 1086 also since no tenant is named. This entry is misplaced, Aelfric being a predecessor of William Peverel rather than a royal thane, and Aelfric may in any case be a scribal error for Aelric, perhaps Peverel's predecessor and tenant on several manors, Aelric of Greasley (q.v.). Finally, it is possible that Aelfric of Colwick is the Aelfric who held land in Radford and Bramcote before the Conquest7. Both lie in Broxtowe wapentake, close to those of Aelfric of Colwick; but the name is common, and there are no specific links. All Aelfrics and Aelrics are unidentified in Coel (nos. 35610, 35616, 35636, 35638, 35655), apart from the tenant at Kirkby8, who is omitted.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC <OF GRAVENHUNGER>. The four Aelfrics in Cheshire may be one man. Three - at Stapeley, Chorley and Baddiley9 - preceded William Malbank in the same Hundred, while the manor of the fourth Aelfric, a predecessor of Robert son of Hugh at Burwardsley10, lies seven miles from Chorley. Aelfric may also be the Alric who preceded William Malbank at Worleston11. He is the only Alric in the county, and the two names are demonstrably confused by the Domesday scribe on a number of occasions. Finally, he may be Malbank's predecessor at Gravenhunger in
1 DBY 6,6;13;16;18;20;22-23;44;53;94;98
2 LEC 14,28;30
3 DBY 3,6
4 NTT 30,8;10;13;27;34;50
5 NTT 30,28-29
6 NTT 30,32
7 NTT 10,15. 29,1
8 NTT 27
9 CHS 8,34;39-40
10 CHS 2,21
11 CHS 8,29
Shropshire1, the one other Aelfric (or Alric) on his Honour: Sawyer and Thacker. 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', p. 320. All five manors are of similar, modest status.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* OF KEYNSHAM *]. Aelfric, who held a hide on the royal manor of Keynsham in 10862, is named Aelfric of Keynsham in the Geld Roll for Keynsham Hundred: VCH Somerset, i. 527-28. His forename is so common he cannot be identified with other Aelfrics. There are eight other survivors among the tenants in Somerset alone, four with different bynames. Of these, Aelfric of Stowey, named in Exon. at Chew Magna, is seven miles from Keynsham. The Domesday Stoweys are more than forty miles away, though Aelfric may have come from another Stowey, near Bishop Sutton, also seven miles from Keynsham; but there are no links to connect these survivors. As bynames in the Geld Rolls are frequently localised, it is not impossible he is the same man as Aelfric Small of Hampshire, who held part of the royal manor of Martock and survived on manors in another counties; but there are no links to confirm this. Aelfric's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 2086) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 145.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* OF MELKSHAM *]. The Aelfrics who held Monkton Farleigh and Whaddon among the royal thanes of Wiltshire in 10863 may be Aelfric of Melksham, the thane at Wilsford, the preceding entry, the scribe omitting - as he often did - an 'also'. Wilsford and Monkton had the same predecessor, and Whaddon is two miles downstream from Melksham (where no Aelfric is recorded). The following four entries were held by Aelfric Small, named perhaps to distinguish him from Aelfric of Melksham, though since bynames in the Geld Rolls are frequently localised, it is not impossible he is Aelfric Small; but there are no links to confirm this. Aelfric held Whaddon for twenty years, as did Aelfric Small outside the county. Aelfric's manor of Wilsford is recorded in Coel (no. 678) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 145; the other two tenants are unidentified (nos. 17129-30).
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* OF THATCHAM *]. Aelfric, who 'bore witness' concerning a hide in the royal manor of Hendred in Berkshire4, is Aelfric of Thatcham, named in the entry for the royal manor itself5. Four Aelfrics held land in Berkshire in 1086, two at Windsor, and one each at Boxford and Swallowfield6, none with links to Hendred and none nearby, the royal manor at Windsor being furthest removed, on the other side of the county. No Aelfric is recorded at Thatcham itself. Aelfric at Hendred is recorded in Coel (no. 741) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 146; the others are unidentified (nos. 662-63, 1025, 1054).
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* SMALL *]. Aelfric, the royal thane who held Cainhoe in Bedfordshire, is almost certainly the royal thane Aelfric Small in the adjacent vill of Silsoe7 and the Aelfric Small whose men held land in Streatley and Chells in Hertfordshire, all before the Conquest. It is improbable he is the same man as Aelfric Small of Hampshire.
1 SHR 4,15,1
2 SOM 1,28
3 WIL 67,16-17
4 BRK 21,17
5 BRK 1,38
6 BRK 1,1. 54,2. 64,2
7 BDF 24,15
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* SMALL *] OF HAMPSHIRE. Although the name is very common, it is likely that most if not all Aelfrics in Hampshire are Aelfric Small, named as such among the king's thanes in Hampshire1 and Wiltshire in 10862 and on the royal manor of Martock in Somerset3, where he is further identified as Aelfric of Hampshire in Exon, a designation which suggests he is a significant landowner in that county. Aelfric is also given his byname at Througham in the New Forest, which he held 'jointly' in 10664, another part of the vill being held jointly by a man with the rare name of Wihtlac (q.v.), a relationship which identifies Aelfric holding jointly with Wihtlac at Oxelei in the New Forest5 and Yarmouth and Yafford on the Isle of Wight6 and also as Aelfric the doctor who shared meadow with Wihtlac at an anonymous location in the Forest7. Four of Wihtlac's manors were acquired by Hugh of Port and his tenant Hugh of St Quentin, so Hugh of Port's predecessor at Bramley and Stratfield Turgis is likely to be Aelfric Small8, a likelihood increased by the fact that Aelfric held Stratfield Turgis for two decades, Aelfric Small being the only Aelfric in the county known to survive on the same manors during that period. Aelfric Small may also have held the nearby manors of Hartley Westpall and Stratfield Saye9, a mile or so either side of Stratfield Turgis, both held by one man. It is not unlikely that he is also the predecessor of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury at Preston Candover10, the most valuable manor held by an Aelfric in the county. Earl Roger was probably his successor elsewhere (below), and Aelfric Small can be identified as the Aelfric holding the remaining manors in the county worth more than £2. His designation as Aelfric of Hampshire is thus easy to understand.
Aelfric held several manors for two decades, so it is likely that Aelfrics who held Wigarestun and Pilley for the same period in the same Hundred as Througham are also Aelfric Small11. The Aelfric who held Milford and 'also' other manors in the New Forest in 1086, one of them being held since 106612, is identified as Aelfric Small in a document concerning the foundation of Milford church: Blair, Church in Anglo-Saxon society, pp. 517-18. On one of these manors - Brockenhurst13 - he succeeded his unnamed father and uncle, which suggests he may be the Alric who succeeded an unnamed father and uncle on an anonymous holding in Redbridge Hundred14: Williams, World before Domesday, pp. 101-104, 197.
Aelfric acquired Milford by exchange. It was previously held by a Saewulf, who is perhaps the Saewulf who shared Battramsley with an Aelfric in 108615 and held Ashley, two miles from an Aelfric at Barton in 106616, Aelfric probably being Aelfric Small in both cases. Of the three remaining Aelfrics in the New Forest, the survivor on an anonymous holding in Boldre Hundred17, where many of Aelfric Small's manors lay, is likely to be him also, as perhaps are the pre-Conquest lords of Hartford and Otterwood18, both in Redbridge Hundred where Aelfric Small had two
1 HAM 69,53. NF9,20
2 WIL 67,18-21
3 SOM 1,27
4 HAM NF9,21
5 HAM NF9,33
6 HAM IoW9,16;23
7 HAM NF9,12
8 HAM 23,5;38
9 HAM 68,9. 69,11-12
10 HAM 21,2
11 HAM NF9,18;27
12 HAM NF9,40-44
13 HAM NF9,44
14 HAM 69,38
15 HAM NF9,24
16 HAM NF3,12
17 HAM NF9,26
18 HAM NF9,1;6
unnamed manors. The other five Aelfrics on the Isle of Wight are evidently one man, his manors devolving upon the two sons of Azur, each of whom had a manor in both Hampstead and Chilton, a fifth manor lying in Wolverton (HAM IoW7,19-20. IoW8,10-12). As Chilton and Wolverton are two or three miles from Aelfric Small's manor of Yafford, and Hamstead four miles from another of his manors at Yarmouth, it is likely he held these too. Any or all of the remaining five Aelfrics in the county may have been Aelfric Small but there are no links to confirm an identification. Finally, it is not impossible that he is the same man as the survivors Aelfric of Keynsham and Aelfric of Melksham, though this cannot be confirmed. If the remaining identifications are valid, then Aelfric Small was a substantial landowner, just failing to reach the £40 required for inclusion in Clarke, English nobility. Though his losses after 1066 were considerable, he was still a prosperous landowner twenty years later, with manors valued at almost £15, a reflection perhaps of his usefulness to his new masters, as with many king's thanes. His tenancies in Wiltshire, Somerset and the two Hampshire manors where his byname is supplied are recorded in Coel (no. 1274), the Aelfric who held Milford and the following manors being identified as another man (no. 1907); both are referenced in Domesday people, p. 146. A few very minor holdings are attributed to the king, the remaining Aelfrics being unidentified (nos. 6350, 6596-97, 6710, 6719-20, 6920, 6929).
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* SON OF BRICTRIC *]. Aelfric, who acquired Scepeworde in Somerset from a Brictric1, is probably the Aelfric who succeeded his father on the valuable manor of West Lydford2 according to Exon.. He is unidentified in Coel (nos. 15309-310).
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* SON OF BRUN *]. Although Aelfric is a very common name and several different Aelfrics can be identified on the Honour of the bishop of Bayeux, it is likely that those who preceded him at Stonham and Ulverston in Suffolk3 are Aelfric son of Brun, his predecessor at Creeting St Peter4. That Aelfric was under the patronage of Wihtgar son of Aelfric (q.v.), as was Aelfric at Ulverston and probably also at Stonham, where the unnamed predecessor of Richard of Tonbridge who had the patronage of Aelfric is very probably Wihtgar, Richard's principle predecessor. At Stonham and Ulverston, Aelfric held alongside a Leofwin under the patronage of Edric of Laxfield: Williams, 'Meet the antecessores', pp. 280-81. His father was probably Brun the reeve (q.v.), and Leofwin son of Brun may have been his brother. Between them, these are the only Bruns by forename or patronymic in East Anglia, so the two names Brun and Brune in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 209, are equivalent, as perhaps elsewhere.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* SON OF EVERWACER? *]. Aelfric, who held a small subtenancy at Lamyatt on Glastonbury abbey's manor of Ditcheat in Somerset in 10865, may be Aelfric son of Everwacer, who held five virgates from Glastonbury at Brent according to Exon.6, the one other survivor of this name on the abbey's lands. A king's thane, Aelfric son of Brictric, however, survived at Lydford, between two and seven miles from Ditcheat and its dependencies; Brent is over twenty miles away. Lamyatt and Brent are attributed to Alfric son of Everwacer in Coel (no. 2005) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 146. Aelfric's father is probably Alwaker of Weare, the names Alwaker and Everwacer being almost certainly interchangeable in Domesday Book.
1 SOM 47,22
2 SOM 47,21
3 SUF 16,15;38
4 SUF 16,11
5 SOM 8,30
6 SOM 8,33
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* SON OF GODRAM *]. Aelfric is named as the brother of Aethelstan at Swaton in Lincolnshire1, an entry which refers to Aelfric's jurisdiction over his brother in Haceby2, a manor of Guy of Craon, who acquired the bulk of his fief in Lincolnshire from Aethelstan son of Godram (q.v.). Guy probably also obtained several other manors from Aethelstan's brother, since Aelfric is a name which occurs disproportionately on his fief3, his manors intermixed with those of Aethelstan but also forming a tight group of their own. Kirton alone lies outside that group4 but is adjacent to Aethelstan's manors of Wyberton and Frampton. All the manors of the two brothers lie in Holland and Kesteven where no other Aelfrics or Aethelstans held land. Although his name is common, therefore, it is likely that all Aelfrics on Guy's fief are Godram's son. Between them, Aelfric and his brother provided almost two-thirds of Guy's Honour.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC SON OF WULFGEAT. Alric? son of Wulfgeat, who held Easton Bavents and its dependencies in Suffolk under the patronage of Earl Harold5, may be same man as Aelfric son of Wulfgeat, who held Seckford from the earl and Little Bealings - the same man - on his own account6. The scribes confused these names elsewhere.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* THE HUNTER *]. The Aelfrics who held land at 'Winterborne', Blackmanston, Combe and Bovington among the king's thanes in Dorset in both 1066 and 1086 are probably Aelfric the hunter, who owed tax in the relevant Hundreds7: VCH Dorset, iii. 52-53, 134, 136-37, 142. He may also be the other survivor, the king's thane Aelfric at Crawford8; but perhaps not the Aelfric at Loders, who is more likely to be the predecessor of the Count of Mortain9. Outside the county, Aelfric the hunter held North Newnton in Wiltshire in 1066 from the abbey of Wilton10, where he was succeeded by Richard Sturmy. Dr Williams suggests he may be the Aelfric from whom Sturmy acquired Cowesfield, Burbage and Harding in the county11: VCH Dorset, iii. 53. Aelfric's manors at Blackmanston, Combe and Bovington, and one of the two in 'Winterborne', are recorded in Coel (no. 1766) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 146. The tenant at Crawford and one at 'Winterborne'12 are unidentified in Coel (nos. 2983, 2989), which includes the Aelfric at Loders as an identification 'suggested' by the Geld Roll.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* THE SHERIFF *]. The Huntingdonshire Claims prove that the Aelfrics from whom Aubrey de Vere acquired the two manors which constituted his fief in the county are one man13. He was killed at the battle of Hastings14, so is possibly Aelfric the sheriff, who does not appear to have
1 LIN 26,45
2 LIN 57,18
3 LIN 57,15-18;21;29;33-35. CK53
4 LIN 57,29
5 SUF 68,1-4
6 SUF 16,2-3
7 DOR 56,6;52;57;59-60;65
8 DOR 56,12
9 DOR 26,42. 56,51
10 WIL 13,2
11 WIL 61,1. 68,4;6
12 DOR 56,6;12
13 HUN 22,1-2. D7
14 HUN D7
survived the Conquest for long. He was succeeded in Huntingdon by his wife and sons, before they were displaced by Eustace the sheriff; and he resided on the royal manor of Keyston, paying the king's revenue from it 'and his sons after him, until Eustace received the sheriffdom'1. He is presumably also the sheriff of Cambridgeshire, Aelfric son of Godric2, who had been replaced by Picot by the early 1070s: Green, English sheriffs, pp. 29, 48. There are no other sheriffs of this name. He may also be the one other Aelfric in Huntingdonshire, whose manor in Orton Longueville was acquired by Eustace3; Picot was not preceded by an Aelfric anywhere on his Honour. According to the Huntingdonshire Claims, Aelfric held Yelling and Hemingford from Ramsey abbey during his lifetime in return for a promise to return them at his death 'with Boxted', which identifies him as the Aelfric whose valuable manor of Boxted in Essex was acquired by Count Eustace of Boulogne4. The Count also had an Aelfric Bicga and a thane Aelfric among his predecessors in Essex5, the latter holding a particularly valuable manor at Lawford; but the name is a very common one and another important Aelfric - Aelfric Kemp - held manors in the same Hundred as Lawford and the Count had a tenant Aelfric - evidently not the sheriff - on another valuable manor who is another candidate as the Aelfric at Lawford.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELFRIC [* UNCLE OF THORKIL *]. Most if not all Aelfrics in Warwickshire may be one man, the uncle of Thorkil of Warwick, whose holdings have been largely reconstructed by Williams, 'A vice-comital family', pp. 283-86, 288, 291, 93-95. Some are identified by links with other family members, others by his tenurial status, as the Aelfric holding land in Staffordshire6 and Warwickshire7 in 1086. Although three of the manors are attributed to an Aelric, these are likely to be scribal errors, the clearest case being at Flecknoe itself, a vill in which three of Aelfric's relatives held land. The other Aelrics are both predecessor and tenant - like Aelfric at Bubbenhall - of Robert of Stafford at Ilmington and Bearley; one of Robert's charters is attested by an Aelfric, along with Thorkil of Warwick and other members of his family, but none by an Aelric: Staffordshire chartulary, pp. 178-82. Robert also had a predecessor named Aelric at Edstone8, a mile from Bearley, perhaps the same man, though not identified as such by Dr Williams. Of Aelfric's remaining manors, Fenny Compton9 is a 'family' vill of Thorkil and his relatives, and the Aelfric of Marston10 may be identified by his association there with Robert d'Oilly, Thorkil's tenant in the vill and in half-a-dozen others. The Aelfrics at Bickenhill and an anonymous holding in Stonehill Hundred, both acquired by Thorkil and lying in Hundreds where Thorkil's uncle had other manors, may be him also11. Two of the three remaining Aelfrics in the county are probably one man since their manors both lay in Wolford12. One of them was acquired by the Count of Meulan, who also acquired Aelfric's manor in the 'family' vill of Fenny Compton (above), so this Aelfric, too, may be Thorkil's uncle, though Dr Williams does not identify him there. There are no links with the pre-Conquest lord of Haselor13. Aelfric's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 9856) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 147, apart from Flecknoe itself, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 28375).
1 HUN B10. D20
2 CAM B14
3 HUN 19,7
4 ESS 20,37
5 ESS 20,41;69
6 STS 17,5
7 WAR 17,32. 22,11;20;27. 44,9
8 WAR 22,8
9 WAR 16,57
10 WAR 21,1
11 WAR 17,3;64
12 WAR 4,4. 16,66
13 WAR 40,2
.............................................................................................................................................
AELGEAT. The name Aelgeat (Ailiet, Ailet) occurs twice, once each in Northamptonshire and Derbyshire, both pre-Conquest landowners; it can be confused with the more common Aelfgyth or Alfgeat.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELGEAT <OF HEYFORD>. The predecessor of the bishop of Bayeux on a small, shared holding at Heyford in Northamptonshire1 has no links with his one namesake. Bishop Odo also acquired the properties of an Alfgeat (Aluiet) in Hampshire2 and Suffolk3; but, even allowing for scribal error in the name-forms, it seems unlikely that these distant properties were held by the same man.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELGEAT <OF OSMASTON>. Aelgeat (Ailiet), predecessor of Henry of Ferrers on the fairly substantial manor of Osmaston in Derbyshire4, has no links with his one namesake. It is not unlikely, however, that he is the same man as the Alfgeat (Aluiet) from whom Henry acquired a comparable manor at Priors Frome in Herefordshire5, one of two manors on his fief there and the only one where the pre-Conquest lord is named, leaving open the possibility that Henry acquired his fief by antecession. Priors Frome was held from the bishop of Hereford and Osmaston together with (Earl) Waltheof (q.v.), so Aelgeat/Alfgeat was not a negligible figure. It is conceivable that he is also one or more of the three Alfgeats in Staffordshire6; but there are no links to support an identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELGYTH. Aelgyth is an uncommon name, apparently confined to Essex and East Anglia where it is possibly borne by one woman. A variant form, Aethelgyth, occurs once but is unlikely to be related to the East Anglian landholder, as also Aelfgyths, easily confused with Aelgyth: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 183.
............................................................................................................................................. AELGYTH [* WIDOW OF THORSTEN *]. Aelgyth, whose manors in Essex were acquired by Ralph Baynard7, is identified by the will of her husband, Thorsten son of Wine, which names all five: Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon wills, pp. 78-87, 189-99. Thorsten's will also bequeathed to her 'everything which I have in Norfolk'. The Norfolk manors are not specified but almost certainly include those acquired by Ralph Baynard8. Ralph also acquired land in Kedington, Poslingford and Shimpling in Suffolk from an Aelgyth9; and since Thorsten held land in Kedington, and Aelgyth's mother at Chadacre Park in Shimpling, this Aelgyth is probably Thorsten's widow, the status of the manors providing some confirmation. The Aelgyths named on four manors acquired by other tenants-in-chief may be the same woman. Count Eustace of Boulogne held Chipping Ongar10, where Aelgyth's husband held land,
1 NTH 2,12
2 HAM 23,58
3 SUF 16,35
4 DBY 6,58
5 HEF 13,1
6 STS 1,38-39. 8,7
7 ESS 33,6-7;11;19-20
8 NFK 31,20-25;34-37
9 SUF 33,1-2;13
10 ESS 20,46
albeit granted elsewhere in his will. Crimplesham, acquired by Reginald son of Ivo1, was of comparable status and less than six miles from her manors in 'Clackclose' Hundred acquired by Ralph Baynard. In four of these vills - including Crimplesham - she held land alongside a Thorkil, whose manors were acquired by Reginald son of Ivo. Aelgyth and Thorkil, the subjects of an undated will in favour of Bury St Edmunds, may be the same pair, both factors implying a relationship between them which could explain the descent of Crimplesham to Reginald, via Thorkil: Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon wills, pp. 93, 205-206. Reginald also acquired Yaxham2 from an Aelgyth, probably the same woman. The one remaining Aelgyth in East Anglia was the predecessor of Gilbert son of Richere at Mildenhall in Norfolk3. Mildenhall is usually assumed to be the Suffolk vill, some twenty-five miles to the south; but Domesday Book clearly states that it was in Norfolk, in 'Clackclose' Hundred, where the bulk of the lands of Thorsten's widow lay. Gilbert did not have a designated predecessor, acknowledged or not, his entire Honour consisting of two manors, the other acquired from Earl Godwin in Surrey. A list of Aelgyth's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 235-36, which does not include Crimplesham and Yaxham; see also Mortimer, 'The Baynards of Baynard's Castle', pp. 248-51. Dr Clarke ranks her thirty-ninth in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Crimplesham and Yaxham would raise her three places.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELLIC. The name Aellic occurs three times, twice in Huntingdonshire (once deleted), once in Wiltshire, both pre-Conquest lords.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELLIC <OF KEYSOE>. As the name is rare, the Aellic who held land at Keysoe from William of Warenne, and Hamerton - deleted - in Huntingdonshire4 is probably the same man who may have held Keysoe at both dates; he has no links with his namesake in Wiltshire. Keysoe is assigned to William's demesne in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELLIC <OF MERE>. Aellic, whose small holding at Mere in Wiltshire was acquired by Wulfric the hunter5, has no links with his Huntingdonshire namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELMER [* MILK *]. Aelmer, who held the Baynard manor of Tolleshunt before the Conquest, is identified as Aelmer Milk in an entry for Colchester which records a house attached to Tolleshunt6. Tolleshunt was acquired by an exchange, probably with Ranulf Peverel, named in the following Colchester entry as acquiring five houses attached to Terling from an Aelmer, identified in the Terling entry as a royal thane7. Ranulf inherited two other properties from an Aelmer, including his principle manor of Hatfield Peverel, a manor befitting a royal thane8, as was Thurrock acquired from an Aelmer by William Peverel along with Horndon, the whole of his fief in Essex.9. Ranulf and William were almost certainly related, though the nature of their relationship is unknown.
1 NFK 21,3
2 NFK 21,20
3 NFK 42,1
4 HUN 13,2. 15,1
5 WIL 67,68
6 ESS 33,23. B3r
7 ESS 34,6. B3q
8 ESS 34,4;14
9 ESS 48,1-2
The royal thane Aelmer also held the valuable manor of Easter, acquired by Count Eustace of Boulogne and granted to St Martin's, London1. Count Eustace had another of Aelmer's holdings in the vill of Tolleshunt, and granted a third to the church of St Martin-le-Grand. These links suggest that the Aelmer from whom Engelric the priest, founder of St Martin-le-Grand, stole the manor of Elmdon may also be Aelmer Milk2. There are difficulties with some name-forms. At Tolleshunt and Elmdon, it is Almer, probably scribal errors in view of Aelmer's second holding in Tolleshunt and substantial scale of the manor at Elmdon. Probably, though less certainly, the Aethelmer (Agelmarus) at Langford3, another valuable manor acquired by Ralph Baynard, may be another scribal error. None of the four tenants-in-chief who acquired these manors had predecessors elsewhere named Aelmer or Aethelmer; and the only Almers between them being Almer of Bennington (q.v.) and a predecessor of William Peverel on a single holding in Nottinghamshire. A list of Aelmer's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 236-37, who ranks Aelmer fifty-ninth in wealth among untitled laymen. .............................................................................................................................................
AELRIC. Aelric is a fairly common name which occurs almost fifty times, distributed among sixteen counties and the lands of the king and twenty of his tenants-in-chief, with a cluster in Lincolnshire and a smaller one in Worcestershire. Five manors were held by survivors. The scribes sometimes confused the name with the more common Aelfric and Alric.
.............................................................................................................................................
AELRIC <OF GREASLEY>. William Peverel's tenants at Greasley and Brinsley in Nottinghamshire(NTT 10,30-31) are probably the same Aelric (Ailric); the vills are adjacent, and there is only one other survivor of this name in the county. It is likely, too, that he is William's predecessor at Bilborough4, roughly five miles from the other two vills; Aelric held there alongside a Wulfsi, perhaps the Wulfsi he succeeded at Greasley. If the scribe's orthography can be trusted, he may be the Aelric who preceded William Peverel at Hargrave in Northamptonshire5, the only other Aelric on the Peverel Honour; and it is not unlikely that he is the Aelfric at Sutton in Nottinghamshire6, which he shared with a Brun and a Wulfsi, both of whom held alongside Aelric at Greasley and Brinsley. If not a scribal error, then this Aelfric could be Aelfric of Colwick (q.v.), who also held land at both dates in the county; but on balance, the coincidence of Peverel, Brun and Wulfsi make a scribal error the more likely explanation. Aelric is unidentified in Coel (nos. 35364-65).
.............................................................................................................................................
AELRIC [* SON OF MERGEAT *]. Robert of Vessey acquired his fief in Leicestershire from Aelric son of Mergeat7 and with one apparent exception the remainder of his Honour in Lincolnshire8, Northamptonshire9 and Warwickshire10 from an Aelric, described as his predecessor in the Claims for Lincolnshire11. It is virtually certain, therefore, that these Aelrics are Aelric son of Mergeat, as - almost as certainly - was the one apparent exception, on his Warwickshire manor of
1 ESS 12,1
2 ESS 20,59;74
3 ESS 33,22
4 NTT 10,39
5 NTH 35,15
6 NTT 30,55
7 LEC 16,1-9
8 LIN 37,1-7
9 NTH 29,1
10 WAR 24,2
11 LIN CK36
Wolvey, obtained from Alric son of Mergeat1, apparently a scribal error, though it is worth noting that Aelric is named Alric in a royal charter concerning his manor of Doddington (below): Bates, Regesta, no. 315, p. 929. The two names appear to be interchangeable here.
Mergeat's son had full jurisdictional and market rights in Lincolnshire2, where he was also the predecessor of the abbey of Westminster and of Baldwin of Flanders3, identified in the Claims for the county4. The Westminster connection makes it likely that he is the Aelric alleged to have granted Kelvedon in Essex to the abbey5, a likelihood increased by the fact that he is the only man of this name in the county, or indeed in Little Domesday. According to the text, Aelric 'went away to a naval battle against King William and when he returned he fell ill; then he gave this manor to St Peter's but only one man from the County knows this'. The jury was sceptical, recording that 'they have had neither a writ nor a servant of the King on [his] behalf after the King came to this land'; but Kelvedon remained in the abbey's possession: Harvey, Westminster, pp. 342-43. A spurious Westminster charter names him Aelric (Ailhre) the chamberlain: Harmer, Writs, pp. 303-303, 341-42. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 328-29, which does not include Braybrooke in Northamptonshire. Dr Clarke ranks Aelric fifty-third in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Braybrooke would not affect this.
.............................................................................................................................................
AESCHERE <OF IPSWICH>. Aeschere, who had a church and an acre of land in Ipswich in 10866, is probably also the Aeschere who had a house and nineteen acres in Colchester7, these being the only men of that name in Domesday Book, two substantial burgesses with so rare a name being improbable. Aeschere is unidentified in Coel (nos. 5850, 11493).
.............................................................................................................................................
AESCWULF <OF LANDICAN>. As the name occurs in Domesday Book only in Cheshire, the Aescwulf whose respectable manor at Landican in the Wirral peninsular was acquired by William Malbank8 is very probably the Aescwulf whose comparable manor at Dunham, near the base of the peninsular, was retained by the king9.
.............................................................................................................................................
AETHELGYTH <OF SOMERBY>. Aethelgyth, who held a very modest holding at Old Somerby in Lincolnshire acquired by Guy of Craon10, is the only woman of that name in Domesday Book. Aethelgyth is unlikely to be connected to the woman, or women, who bore a variant name-form, Aelgyth (q.v.), with whose manors in Essex and East Anglia she has no associations: see von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 183-84. Aethelgyth is easily confused with Aelfgyth; but the few occurrences of this form are distant, without tenurial or other associations, and unlikely to be related.
.............................................................................................................................................
AETHELSTAN. The name Aethelstan occurs almost three dozen times but is rare outside Lincolnshire, occurring once each in Somerset and Cambridgeshire (a survivor), twice in
1 WAR 24,1
2 LIN T5
3 LIN 9,1-2. 65,1-5
4 LIN CK27
5 ESS 6,9
6 SUF 1,122f
7 ESS B3a
8 CHS 8,7
9 CHS 1,3
10 LIN 57,43
Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire, and five times in Suffolk, the bulk of the Lincolnshire names being on one fief. It is likely that Aethelstan (Adestan) is interchangeable with Edstan and Estan (q.v.), and on occasions at least with Alstan (Alestan): von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 152-53, 182, 188, 237.
.............................................................................................................................................
AETHELSTAN [* SON OF GODRAM *]. The Aethelstans from whom Guy of Craon acquired the bulk of his Honour1 are probably Aethelstan son of Godram, who had full jurisdiction and market rights in the county and is named as the predecessor of Guy of Craon in the Claims for Lincolnshire. The extent of his contribution to the Honour is disguised to a degree by scribal confusion of the names Aethelstan (Adestan) and Alstan (Alestan); but the Claims for Lincolnshire2 reveal that the Alestan of Drayton3 is the same man as the Adestan of Bicker4, and that Aethelstan son of Godram and Alstan (Alestan) of Frampton are one man; at Frampton5, his name is recorded as Adestan. It is likely that the confusion between the two forms is repeated elsewhere in the fief, all such cases occurring on folio 368a. An interesting feature of the claim is that it reveals that Aethelstan was alive and recognised as Guy's 'man' in 1086 but apparently held no land at that date, from Guy or anyone else: there are no Aethelstans or Alstans among the Lincolnshire tenants.
The other party to the claim was Count Alan of Brittany, who was preceded on two of his manors by an Aethelstan6, one of them a jurisdiction of Drayton, suggesting that the Count's predecessor may be Godram's son. Aethelstan also held Swaton, acquired by Kolsveinn of Lincoln7, where the entry reveals that Aethelstan had two brothers, one of whom, Aelfric, had jurisdiction over him in Haceby. The only Aelfric at Haceby is on Guy's fief, incidentally indicating that part of Guy's Honour came from another member of Aethelstan's family. Between them, Aelfric and Aethelstan provided almost two-thirds of Guy's Honour. A list of Aethelstan's manors acquired by Guy is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 240-41. Dr Clarke ranks Aethelstan eighty-first in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors would not affect this.
.............................................................................................................................................
AETHELWOLD. Aethelwold (Adelold) is an uncommon name, distributed among seven counties and the lands of nine tenants-in-chief, with clusters in Bedfordshire and Kent, those in Kent being survivors. The name is at times interchangeable with the more common Alwold (Aluuold).
.............................................................................................................................................
AETHELWOLD [* OF ELTHAM *]. Alwold (Aluuoldus), whose valuable manor of Eltham in Sutton Lathe in Kent was acquired by the bishop of Bayeux8, is almost certainly Aethelwold (Adelold) of Eltham, who had jurisdictional privileges in the Lathe before the Conquest9. It is possible that he is the Aethelwold who subsequently became the bishop's chamberlain. One Aethelwold did survive for the twenty years after the Conquest, as a tenant of the Canons of Dover at Deal10, but there are no more specific links to connect the magnate of 1066 with the bishop's chamberlain. The tenant at Deal is recorded in Coel (no. 9298) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 125.
1 LIN 57,10-11;13-14;19;22;27-28;30-31;36-37;44;48-57
2 LIN CK66
3 LIN 57,56
4 LIN 57,44
5 LIN 57,28
6 LIN 12,20;76
7 LIN 26,45
8 KEN 5,30
9 KEN D25
10 KEN M17
.............................................................................................................................................
AETHELWOLD [* THE CHAMBERLAIN *]. Aethelwold the chamberlain is named as a tenant of the bishop of Bayeux at Frinstead in Kent, and in the Domesday Monachorum (p. 101) as his tenant on three other manors1, on two of which he was superseded by Robert the interpreter, as was Aethelwold - presumably therefore the chamberlain - on two more of Bishop Odo's manors2. The bishop had two other Aethelwolds among his tenants, at Woodnesborough in Sandwich3, five miles from the chamberlain's manor at Easole, and at Dean Court4, where it appears - the entry is ambiguous - that Aethelwold was superseded on part (possibly all) of the manor, suggesting he is the Aethelwold superseded elsewhere on the bishop's fief. He is perhaps also the Aethelwold who held a yoke in the manor of Westgate from the archbishop, shared with other tenants of Odo5: Domesday Monachorum, p. 82. Fowler suggested he is the Adelulf named as the chamberlain of the bishop of Bayeux in illegal possession of part of the manor of Totternhoe in Bedfordshire6: Bedfordshire in 1086, p. 90. Adelold and Adelulf are different names; but the scribe made worst mistakes in dealing with Old English names, and the bishop presumably had only one chamberlain.
As noted above, Aethelwold lost some of his manors shortly before the Domesday Inquest to Robert the interpreter; but since he held the valuable manor of Leeds and part of Frinsted and a yoke in Sandwich in 10867, this was probably the result of a re-shuffling of the bishop's manors following his imprisonment in 1082 rather than a demotion; Robert the interpreter held the manors at farm, not as tenant. Aethelwold's tenancies from Odo are recorded in Coel (no. 183) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 125, plus an Adelulf at Wye8 but not at Totternhoe; the tenant at Westgate is subsumed among the homines on the manor and at Dean Court is presumed to be superseded on the whole manor by 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
AGHMUND. Aghmund is an uncommon name which occurs more than two dozen times, distributed among eight counties and the lands of the king and fourteen of his tenants-in-chief, with a large cluster in Lincolnshire and a moderate one in Hampshire; the name is rare in the sense that it may have been borne by no more than half-a-dozen men. There are survivors in Hampshire, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
AGHMUND <OF ECKINGTON>. The four Aghmunds in Sussex are evidently one man, all his manors lying in the vill of Eckington9. As the name is rare, it is possible he is the Aghmund in Hampshire; but the manors are not distinctively substantial, and there are no links to provide confirmation of identity.
.............................................................................................................................................
AGHMUND <OF NORTON>. Aghmund, whose substantial manor of Norton in Northamptonshire was acquired by the Count of Meulan10, is conceivably the survivor on a ploughland 'with some
1 KEN 5,99-100;134
2 KEN 5,84-85
3 KEN 5,198
4 KEN 5,167
5 KEN 2,16
6 BDF 40,3
7 KEN 5,67;198
8 KEN 6,1
9 SUS 9,41;55;76. 10,89
10 NTH 19,1
men' worth five shillings at Grafton Underwood1 who may have held the same manor in 1066, no pre-Conquest lord being recorded. It is possible that he is Aghmund son of Walraven, who also survived in straightened circumstances for two decades, but there are no links to connect them.
.............................................................................................................................................
AGHMUND <OF WELLOW>. With one exception, all Aghmunds in Hampshire and Wiltshire may be the same man, who survived for twenty years at Chineham, East Wellow, Shoddesdon and Totton in Hampshire2. Chineham was acquired by Hugh of Port, who also succeeded an Aghmund at 'Binstead'3; Outwick, held by Waleran the hunter in 1086, had been part of Aghmund's manor of Wellow twenty years previously according to the Hundred jury4. Waleran acquired the one Wiltshire manor held by Aghmund5 and removed part of his manor of Wellow into Wiltshire6. Two of the three remaining Aghmunds, at Rollstone and Coxlease7, are less than ten miles from Totton and each other, alongside Southampton Water. The Aghmund who does not fit this pattern held the lost vill of Hotlop in Broughton Hundred8, where he is distinguished as the 'other' Aghmund. This Aghmund, whose manor cannot be many miles from East Wellow in the same Hundred, also survived for two decades and held his manor in freehold from King Edward in 1066 and directly from the Conqueror in 1086, as did Aghmund of Wellow on several of his manors. As the name is rare, these shared characteristics suggest a scribal blunder rather than a second individual, though it is difficult to imagine what kind of mistake would produce this result; as it is, the text is taken at face value in identifying another man.
.............................................................................................................................................
AGHMUND [* SON OF WALRAVEN *]. All Aghmunds in northern England may be one man, the lord of Redbourne in Lincolnshire, predecessor of Jocelyn son of Lambert on his Honour later known as the barony of Redbourne9: Sanders, English baronies, pp. 74-75. Aghmund may be the father of Godric, who survived at Beelsby10, and is certainly the brother of Sigketill and of two other brothers11, one of whom is probably Aslak (q.v.), the other possibly Alnoth (q.v.). If so, the family provided about half of Jocelyn's Honour. Aghmund is also certainly the son of Walraven (q.v.) who had full jurisdiction and market rights in Lincoln to which his son succeeded, retaining them in 1086 although he lost all or most of his manors12.
Of the other Aghmunds in the county, Walraven's son is identified as Jocelyn's predecessor at 'Middle Carlton' in the Claims for the county13, and at Canwick14 by the fact that his father held in the same vill; while Reasby15 was acquired by William of Percy, who succeeded to another of his manors in that vill as a tenant of Jocelyn16, and Pickworth was acquired by the bishop of Durham17 whose tenant there is probably Jocelyn himself. He is probably the one other Aghmund in the
1 NTH 55,5
2 HAM 23,10. 69,22;26;37
3 HAM 3,9
4 HAM 45,2
5 WIL 37,11
6 HAM 69,22
7 HAM NF9,9;28
8 HAM 69,23
9 LIN 28,3;10-11;14-18;25-28;29-31;32;36;42-43. LIN CS3. CW3;13
10 LIN 68,45
11 LIN 28,11
12 LIN C2-3
13 LIN 33,1. CW3
14 LIN 67,26
15 LIN 22,15
16 LIN 22,26
17 LIN 3,33-34
county, a priest who survived for two decades at Riseholme, just outside Lincoln1, where Walraven's son had full jurisdiction. It is likely, too, that he is the one Aghmund in Nottinghamshire, another survivor who retained his land for two decades, his manor of Clifton2 being a dozen miles from Riseholme. This Aghmund was a tenant of the bishop of Lincoln, who acquired one of his manors from Aghmund's father and from whom Aghmund's successor, Jocelyn son of Lambert (q.v.), held several more. Finally, the only other Aghmunds in northern England, who held the adjacent manors of Orgreave and Tinsley in Yorkshire3 are probably also Walraven's son. The manors were acquired by Roger of Bully, who also succeeded to the manor of another of Walraven's sons, Aslak, at Normanton-on-Trent in Nottinghamshire. As Roger's predecessors are the only men of that name in the two counties, the odds against them be unrelated are very high. There are two other Aghmund's north of the Thames, both in Northamptonshire, one a substantial pre-Conquest lord, the other surviving on a modest manor4, on which grounds either or both of them are conceivably Walraven's son, but there are no specific links to connect them to him. The tenant at Clifton is unidentified in Coel (no. 35157).
.............................................................................................................................................
[* AGNES *] DAUGHTER OF ALFRED OF MARLBOROUGH. Alfred's anonymous daughter, who held Pencombe in Herefordshire from him5, is probably Agnes, named as his daughter and the wife of Turstin of Wigmore on her manor at Cowarne. Her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2557) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 126, where the unnamed manor is at Pencombe.
............................................................................................................................................. AILBERN <OF WRATTING>. Ailbern, whose manors of Erwarton and Wratting in Suffolk were acquired by Richard son of Gilbert, is probably the same man as the predecessor of the bishop of Bayeux at Burstall6, in the same Hundred as Wratting, these three being the only Ailberns in Domesday Book.
............................................................................................................................................. AITARD. The name Aitard is stated or implied on eighteen holdings, distributed among four counties and the lands of the king and two of his tenants-in-chief, probably borne by three men, a priest in Nottinghamshire7, a man-at-arms in Cheshire, and a tenant in East Anglia. ............................................................................................................................................. AITARD <OF HALTON>. The man-at-arms who held one and a half hides in the manor of Halton in Cheshire from William son of Nigel8 has no links with other Aitards. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 28840). ............................................................................................................................................. AITARD [* OF VAUX *]. The Aitard who held eleven manors from Roger Bigot in East Anglia9 is almost certainly Aitard of Vaux, who claimed a number of free men on royal manors in Norfolk as part of the Holding of the bishop of Bayeux10, on two of which he is accorded his byname and on
1 LIN 68,47
2 NTT 6,12
3 YKS 10W8-9
4 NTH 19,1. 55,5
5 HEF 19,6
6 SUF 16,18. 25,68;85
7 NTT B13
8 CHS 9,17
9 NFK 9,26-28;94;140;160;165-166;198. 66,80. SUF 7,4
10 NFK 1,106;111;120-122
two others identified as a man of Roger Bigot. Aitard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 309) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 126-27. .............................................................................................................................................
AIULF. Aiulf is an uncommon name in the sense that it was borne by few individuals. Apart from three Aiulfs in Worcestershire and a fief in Berkshire, all Aiulfs occur in the four south-western counties of Cornwall, Devon, Dorset and Wiltshire, where the seven survivors are recorded.
.............................................................................................................................................
AIULF [* FATHER OF EDMUND *]. Aiulf, whose manor at Grimstead in Wiltshire1 was acquired by his son Edmund, has no links with other pre-Conquest Aiulfs. Some of the properties of Aiulf the chamberlain are near Grimstead; but the indications are that the chamberlain was a Norman, holding land only after the Conquest.
.............................................................................................................................................
AIULF <OF EXFORD>. As the name is uncommon, the Aiulf who held a half-virgate worth three shillings (if not waste) at Exford in Somerset before the Conquest2 may be the same man as Aiulf of Tremail; but there are no links to confirm this, and the properties are not close to each other.
.............................................................................................................................................
AIULF <OF TREMAIL>. In view of the distribution of the name and the interest of St Petroc's in both manors, the Aiulfs who held Carwogie in 10863 and Tremail before the Conquest4 may be one man, in which case he is perhaps the Aiulf who held Lidemore in Devon at both dates5, two survivors with an uncommon name in the area being unlikely. Given the localised distribution of pre-Conquest Aiulfs, he may also be the pre-Conquest lord of Treworyan6, eight miles from Carwogie, and of Kimber, in the same Hundred as the lost vill of Lidemore, and of Hele, some eight miles from Kimber7. It is less likely that he is the Aiulf of Exford in Somerset8, in view of its distance from other manors and the modest scale of Exford itself. The Aiulfs at Carwogie and Lidemore are identified as Aiulf the chamberlain in Coel (no. 176), and referenced in Domesday people, p. 127; but since Aiulf chamberlain was undoubtedly a Norman, he is unlikely to have held Lidemore, and therefore probably not Carwogie either.
.............................................................................................................................................
AIULF <OF WOLVERTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Aiulfs at Kidderminster, Wolverton and Broughton Hackett in Worcestershire9 may be one man; Wolverton is three miles from Broughton. All three have royal or official associations, and are held by the only Aiulfs outside the south-west not identified as the chamberlain. They may in fact be the chamberlain, though there are no links to confirm this and the manors are some distance from the bulk of his holdings, which are concentrated in Dorset and adjacent counties. The Worcestershire Aiulfs are unidentified in Coel (nos. 31682, 31701, 31891).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 WIL 67,59
2 SOM 21,58
3 CON 1,18
4 CON 4,14
5 DEV 17,18
6 CON 5,7,12
7 DEV 35,7. 39,8
8 SOM 21,58
9 WOR 1,2. 2,4. 8,24
AIULF [* THE CHAMBERLAIN *]. With the possible exception of the Aiulfs in Worcestershire, it is probable that all unidentified Aiulfs holding land in 1086 but not 1066 are Aiulf the chamberlain, also described as Aiulf the sheriff in Berkshire and Wiltshire, both descriptions being employed in Dorset, where he is sheriff in the List of Landholders and chamberlain in his fief heading. As sheriff of Dorset, he is probably the Aiulf described in Exon. as holding the royal manors of Puddletown and Frome1, and probably also the Aiulf holding Farnham from Shaftesbury abbey in conjunction with the wife of Hugh son of Grip, since Aiulf and Hugh - his predecessor as sheriff - both held in chief in that vill2. It is likely, too, that he held the thaneland in 'Cerne' from Milton abbey3, as he and his predecessor acquired other such holdings from both Shaftesbury and Cerne abbeys. The Aiulf at Stinsford4 may also be the chamberlain since Stinsford was held from another royal official and lay four miles from Puddletown, where Aiulf administered the royal manor. In Wiltshire, he is almost certainly the tenant of Edward of Salisbury at Tollard Royal, where he held in chief5. Finally, since Aiulf the chamberlain held three minor tenancies-in-chief in Berkshire, Dorset and Wiltshire, it is likely that he is the one other Aiulf with such a tenancy-in-chief, in Devon6.
Aiulf's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 176) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 127. They do not include the Wiltshire tenancy but add Carwogie in Cornwall and Lidemore in Devon, here assigned to an Englishman, Aiulf of Tremail. Aiulf was certainly a Norman, as was his brother, Humphrey (q.v.). He was successively sheriff of Dorset, Wiltshire and Somerset, and lived into the reign of Henry I, dying before 1121: Green, English sheriffs, pp. 37, 73, 85.
.............................................................................................................................................
AKI. The name Aki is stated or implied on about three dozen manors, distributed among a dozen counties and the lands of the king and nineteen tenants-in-chief, with one cluster in Suffolk, but is rare in the sense that it was probably borne by few men; all Akis are pre-Conquest landowners. Ten of the manors are worth £5 or more. The scribe appears to confuse the name with Eskil on occasions.
.............................................................................................................................................
AKI [* SON OF SIWARD *]. Aki, predecessor of Robert the bursar in Lincolnshire, is almost certainly the son of Siward and brother of Wiglac who had 'who had full jurisdiction and market rights' over his father's land7. Father and sons provided almost the entire fief of Robert the bursar in the county, Aki himself holding Thornton and Haltham8, a few miles apart in Horncastle wapentake, in the South Riding of Lincolnshire. There are no other Akis in Lincolnshire or on the Honour of Robert the bursar. As his family appears to be confined to the South Riding of Lindsey in Lincolnshire, it is unlikely that Aki is the same man as his distant namesakes in Staffordshire, Warwickshire or Worcestershire, or that he is the magnate Aki the Dane. The family lands are worth almost £50. If included in Clarke, English nobility, the family would rank among the eighty wealthiest untitled laymen in 1066.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 DOR 1,8;15
2 DOR 19,11
3 DOR 12,16
4 DOR 56,40
5 WIL 24,39
6 DEV 41,1-2
7 LIN T5
8 LIN 38,1-2;13
AKI [* THE DANE *]. The Akis who preceded Robert Blunt at Lavington in Wiltshire1, Laleham in Middlesex2, Grafton in Northamptonshire3, and on eight manors in Suffolk4, are almost certainly one man. Lavington is very valuable (£15), and Laleham, where he is described as a royal Guard, substantial (£8). He is probably also the predecessor of Walter Giffard on three consecutive manors in Cambridgeshire, described as a royal thane on the valuable manor of Harlton; as Aki the Dane, a man of Earl Harold, at Barrington; and as a man of Earl Harold at Orwell5: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 74-75, 79). The three Akis are the only men of this name in the county; and their manors are each within less than three miles from one of the others. It is not unusual for royal thanes or Guards to be men or thanes of the greater English magnates, so there is little reason to doubt that the Cambridgeshire Akis are one man.
The four Akis in Hertfordshire are probably also Aki the Dane. His fourteen houses in Hertford were acquired by Hardwin of Scales6, who obtained Bramfield, one of the three manors. All three are valuable, and Aki is described as a thane of Earl Harold at Westmill and Bramfield and of King Edward Flamstead7. Westmill is the most valuable of all the manors held by an Aki (£20). In Suffolk, the remaining Akis are also likely to be the Dane: at Wyverstone, acquired by Robert Malet, he is described as Robert Blunt's predecessor, while at Westleton he was succeeded by Gilbert Blunt, Malet's tenant and possibly Robert Blunt's brother8: Domesday people, p. 209. It is not unlikely that he is also the Aki whose very valuable manor of Easton in Essex was acquired by Matthew of Mortagne9, or even the one other Aki in the county, at Notley10. Aki, a royal thane, is also recorded on two manors in Bedfordshire11; but it is likely that these are clerical errors for Eskil of Ware (q.v.).
There are no links with other Akis but it is not unlikely that two of the most substantial remaining manors, at Harwell and Hendred - three miles apart - in Berkshire were his, too12. Apart from their value, they are roughly mid-way on a straight line between his manors in Hertfordshire and Wiltshire. Aki may also have held Blunsdon in the latter county, where the tenant - Robert - may be Robert Blunt13: Darlington, 'Domesday survey of Wiltshire', p. 106. Although there are no specific links to connect him, he may be the one other Aki in Northamptonshire, at Winwick14, fifteen miles from the manor he held from Robert Blunt, and also the one other Aki in Wiltshire, on an anonymous holding there15. If these identifications are valid, Aki's manors were worth almost £100, even without the Berkshire manors. If included in Clarke, English nobility, he would rank among the forty wealthiest untitled laymen without the Berkshire manors, among the top thirty with them.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALAN. If Count Alan is excluded, Alan is a rare name in the sense that it was probably borne by few individuals. It is stated or implied on eighteen holdings, distributed among seven counties and the lands of six tenants-in-chief, probably the number of individuals concerned, all except one
1 WIL 60,1
2 MDX 17,1
3 NTH 33,1
4 SUF 66,1-4;13-16
5 CAM 17,4-6
6 HRT B10
7 HRT 20,13. 22,1. 37,22
8 SUF 6,57;85
9 ESS 53,1
10 ESS 24,45
11 BDF 23,15;38
12 BRK 44,4. 62,1
13 WIL 24,21
14 NTH 55,4
15 WIL 66,7
tenants after the Conquest; one of these, a cleric of Bishop Odo in Kent, had lost his land before 1086. The pre-Conquest lord of Wyken1 is possibly a scribal error for Alstan.
.............................................................................................................................................
COUNT A[LAN]. Count A can only refer to Count Alan of Brittany. The abbreviation is used several times on his fiefs in Norfolk and Nottinghamshire and once elsewhere, at Briningham in Norfolk2.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALAN [* OF BURWELL *]. Alan, who held Burwell in Cambridgeshire from Count Alan of Brittany3, is almost certainly Alan of Burwell, a juror in 'Staploe' Hundred where Burwell lay: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 1, 97). As he is listed among the English jurors he is presumably a survivor. One other Alan is recorded before the Conquest, a predecessor of Peter of Valognes at Wyken in Suffolk4, possibly the same man though the Suffolk Alan may be a scribal error for Alstan. Alan's tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 4774) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 130.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALAN <OF WHILTON>. All Alans in Sussex5, Buckinghamshire6 and Northamptonshire7 are tenants of the Count of Mortain apart from the tenant of Countess Judith at Hardwick in the latter county8. As the name is rare, they are very probably the same man, though the manors whose descent has been traced were later held by different families: VCH Buckinghamshire, iii. 462; Farrer, Honors, i. 88-92. Alan is tentatively identified by Dr Keats-Rohan as Alan of Ducey, from Ducey in Lower Normandy (Manche: arrondissement Avranches), but is here named from the Northamptonshire manor from which the Welton family of Whilton9 took its name. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1671) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 130.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALAN [* THE STEWARD *]. Alan is named as the steward of Countess Judith at Eynesbury in Huntingdonshire10. As the name is rare, he is probably her tenant at Diddington11 and Hardwick in Northamptonshire12. Diddington and Hardwick descended together, to the Grimbaud family: VCH Huntingdonshire, ii. 269; VCH Northamptonshire, iv. 175. Alan's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2468) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 130.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALBERT. The name Albert, or Aelbert, is fairly common, occurring in twenty-three counties, though ten of these are accounted for by Albert of Lorraine. If he is excluded, the name is thinly spread between Cornwall and Yorkshire and among the lands of thirteen tenants-in-chief, with small clusters in Shropshire and East Anglia; five are pre-Conquest Aelberts.
1 SUF 37,5
2 NFK 10,59
3 CAM 14,69
4 SUF 37,5
5 SUS 10,1;49;79;116
6 BUK 12,9;12
7 NTH 18,26-30
8 NTH 56,47-48
9 NTH 18,27
10 HUN 20,6
11 HUN 20,9
12 NTH 56,47-48
.............................................................................................................................................
ALBERT [* GRELLEY *]. The tenants of Roger of Poitou in Lincolnshire1, Norfolk2 and Suffolk3 can be identified as Albert Greslet, alias Albert crematus, named as his tenant in Cheshire4 and Suffolk5 respectively, by the descent of these lands to the Grelley family: VCH Lancashire, i. 281, 326-44. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that he is also the tenant of Reginald the sheriff and subtenant of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury in Shropshire6, presumably on the grounds that the name is uncommon and Earl Roger is the father of Roger of Poitou. Two centuries later, these manors were in the hands of the Rossall family, named from one of Albert's manors7; but in view of the late documentation and the early forfeiture of both the earldom of Shrewsbury and the lands of Roger of Poitou, this is inconclusive; the Grelley family certainly lost lands during that period: Tait, Medieval Manchester, pp. 126, 131. Albert appears to have lived for another three decades or more since he is presumably the Albert recorded at Hainton, in the Lindsey Survey (16/5), a vill in which he held from Roger of Poitou in 1086. Albert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 277) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 132-33.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALBERT [* OF LORRAINE *]. Albert the cleric, Albert the chaplain and Albert of Lorraine were identified by J.H. Round as the same man on the basis of a Westminster abbey charter which names Albert the cleric in Rutland as Albert of Lorraine: Commune of London, pp. 36-38; Bates, Regesta, no. 334, p. 973. Albert was a Lotharingian, chaplain to both Edward the Confessor and William I, holding land in both 1066 and 1086, in nine or ten counties. He is identified by one of his bynames as holding minor tenancies in chief in Kent, Surrey, Herefordshire, Bedfordshire and Rutland; and is almost certainly the Albert who held a comparable fief in Berkshire, a manor at Dedworth8, since his successor there was Peter of Loreng (Lorraine), who succeeded to some of his Bedfordshire manors: Book of Fees, pp. 845, 852, 861, 885, 887. As Albert the cleric, he held part of the royal manor of Windsor, two miles from Dedworth, and almsland from the king in Warwickshire. He also held a church in Stamford, Lincolnshire. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he held Moredon in Wiltshire9. The descent of the manor, later shared between two families, casts no light on the identity of the Domesday Albert: Book of Fees, p. 725. Albert's 1086 manors are recorded in Coel (no. 148) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 133.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALCHERE. Alchere is an uncommon name which occurs fifteen times, distributed among six counties and the lands of seven tenants-in-chief. It is thought to represent the Old English Ealhhere: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 242. Despite this, twelve Alcheres are post-Conquest landowners, several holding more substantial properties than the scraps usually held by English survivors.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 LIN 16,14-17
2 NFK 26,2-5
3 SUF 8,13-14;56-58
4 CHS R4,1-2
5 SUF 8,15
6 SHR 4,3,5;54-56;65. 4,26,2
7 SHR 4,3,56
8 BRK 56,1
9 WIL 26,9
ALCHERE <OF ASTON>. As the name is uncommon, it is likely that the tenants of Henry of Ferrers on four respectable manors in Derbyshire1 and a more modest one in Staffordshire2 are the same Alchere, his manors forming a tight group on either side of the boundary between the two counties. On similar grounds, he may be the Alchere who held the respectable manor of Rayne in Essex from Hugh de Montfort3; Ferrers held land nearby, at Stebbing. Alchere's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3805) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 134.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALCHERE <OF BRIMBLECOMBE>. Although all three pre-Conquest Alcheres are Devonshire landowners, there are no links between the lord of the tiny property at Brimblecombe4 and his two namesakes, both some distance away.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALCHERE <OF LE PIN>. The Alcheres who held Wytheford, Aston Eyre and Middleton Scriven in Shropshire from Reginald the sheriff, Albrighton from his predecessor Warin, and Harcourt from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, are identified as one man, predecessor of the Fitz Ayer family, by the descent of his manors5: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. 309-20; x. 107-108. As the name is uncommon, he may be Earl Roger's tenant on the substantial manor of Mundham in Sussex6: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, p. 91. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he may be the Aubrey who held Cootham from the earl7, the one Aubrey in the county. Neither the earl or his tenants had a tenant of this name, easily confused with Alchere by a scribe, as happened with another of the earl's tenants, Fulco, represented both as fratre Alcherii and fratre Alberi: Calendar of documents: France, pp. 233-34. Alchere's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1843) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 134.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALCHERE <OF MULLACOTT>. Although all three pre-Conquest Alcheres were Devonshire landowners, there are no links between the lord of the modest property at Mullacott8 and his two namesakes, both some distance away.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALCHERE <OF SPRYTOWN>. Although all three pre-Conquest Alcheres were Devonshire landowners, there are no links between the lord of the modest property at Sprytown9 and his two namesakes, both some distance away.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH. The name Aldgyth occurs on one fief and sixteen holdings, distributed among twelve counties between Sussex to Yorkshire and Somerset to Suffolk, few of them substantial, and all but two acquired by different tenants-in-chief, with one cluster in Shropshire. Where sex is unclear, Aldgyth may be represented by Algeat or Alfgeat, though these forms do not appear to be connected to the Aldgyths listed below: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 146, 183, 240-41. At times, the name is confused with Edith. There were six surviving Aldgyths.
1 DBY 6,28;30;32;50
2 STS 10,8
3 ESS 27,11
4 DEV 40,3
5 SHR 4,3,4;60;65;71. 4,27,35
6 SUS 11,41
7 SUS 11,50
8 DEV 47,7
9 DEV 39,2
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH<OF CREETING>. Aldgyth, who held half an acre at Creeting valued at one pence among the vavassors of Suffolk1, is unlikely to be the other Aldgyth in Suffolk with a small property worth one shilling at Tuddenham, almost thirty miles away. The text is ambiguous as to when she held her half-acre. The vavassors are not listed as individuals in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF ELMBRIDGE>. Aldgyth, who held the tiny, anonymous holding worth three shillings in Elmbridge Hundred in Surrey in 10862, has no links with her namesakes, though as a survivor she is conceivably the same woman as the tenant at Winterbourne in Sussex3, roughly forty miles to the south. Her manor is recorded in Coel (no. 448) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 134.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF FOXCOTE>. There are no links between Aldgyth, whose land at Foxcote in Somerset was acquired by the bishop of Coutances4, and her namesakes. Her manor is fairly substantial so it is possible she is Gruffydd's wife; but there no links and her nearest manor is over eighty miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF GAINFIELD>. Aldgyth, who held a small property worth one shilling in Gainfield Hundred in Berkshire from Osbern son of Richard5, has no links with her namesakes. Her manor is recorded in Coel (no. 382) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 187.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF MARSTON>. Aldgyth, whose respectable manor at Marston Montgomery in Derbyshire was acquired by Henry of Ferrers6, has no links with her namesakes. Professor Meyer identifies her as Aldgyth wife of Gruffydd, which is possible in view of the status of the holding in Mercian territory, but unverifiable: 'Women's estates', p. 120.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF MIDDLETON>. Aldgyth7, named elsewhere as Edith8, whose modest holding at Middleton in Yorkshire was illegally acquired by the Count of Mortain, has no apparent links with her namesakes; there are no other Ediths or Aldgyths in the county. Professor Meyer tentatively suggests she was the wife of Gruffydd: 'Women's estates', p. 120.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF NEWTON>. Aldgyth, who held a small property at Newton in Warwickshire from Thorkil of Warwick9, is the only tenant of this name in the Midlands in 1086, without apparent links with her southern namesakes. It has been suggested that she is Aldgyth wife of Gruffydd, widow of King Harold, which is not entirely implausible since Newton is in Mercian
1 SUF 74,6
2 SUR 1,16
3 SUS 12,19
4 SOM 5,42
5 BRK 65,21
6 DBY 6,51
7 YKS CE6
8 YKS 5E27
9 WAR 17,42
territory and the Godiva who preceded Aldgyth was probably Countess Godiva (q.v.) - Lady Godiva - her grandmother: Meyer, 'Women's estates', p. 120. It seems unlikely, however, that Harold's widow would have remained in the country after 1066, and there is no other indication that she survived until 1086, and some later evidence to the contrary: Baxter, Earls of Mercia, pp. 127, 299-300. She is unidentified in Coel (no. 28388), though previously identified as the wife of Gruffydd: Keats-Rohan, 'Henry of Oxford', p. 300.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF TUDDENHAM>. Aldgyth, who held six acres valued at one shilling at Tuddenham in Suffolk acquired by Hervey of Bourges1, is unlikely to be the other Aldgyth in Suffolk, with a minuscule property worth one pence at Creeting, almost thirty miles away.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF WELLS>. Apart from two tiny pre-Conquest holdings in Suffolk, the Aldgyth who held the substantial manor of Wells in Norfolk in chief is the only woman of this name in Little Domesday2. She has no links with her namesakes in Great Domesday. It is possible that she is the sister of Ketil Alder (q.v.), the Aldgyth named in the will her mother, Wulfgyth, though not for this manor: Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon wills, pp. 84-87, 197-99. Her manor is recorded in Coel (no. 9226) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 134.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF WELSHAMPTON>. In view of the distribution of this name, it is probable that Aldgyths who held a cluster of five manors around Welshampton in Shropshire are one woman, though they were enfeoffed to four tenants of the earl of Shrewsbury3. Professor Meyer identifies her as Aldgyth wife of Gruffydd, which is not implausible given that the cluster is in Mercian territory and the name uncommon there: 'Women's estates', p. 120. But in the absence of more specific links, or of high-status holdings, she is here treated as another woman.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH <OF WINTERBOURNE>. The tenant of William of Warenne on a modest holding at Winterbourne in Sussex4 has no links with her namesakes, though as a survivor she is conceivably the same Aldgyth as the tenant of a tiny holding in 'Elmbridge' Hundred in Surrey, roughly forty miles to the north. She is unidentified in Coel (no. 16357).
................................................................................................................................................................
ALDGYTH [* WIFE OF GRUFFYDD *]. Aldgyth, wife of King Gruffydd and daughter of Earl Algar of Mercia, is recorded as the pre-Conquest lord of the moderately prosperous manor of Binley in Warwickshire5 and can be identified as the Aldgyth who held the substantial manor of Elmbridge in Worcestershire6 by the succession of her son-in-law, Osbern son of Richard, to both manors. Osbern married her daughter, the legendary Nest. Aldgyth was widowed in 1063 and married King Harold Godwinson in 1066. She does not appear in Domesday Book as Queen Aldgyth, perhaps for the same reason that Harold is never King Harold. She probably bore a son, another Harold, and may have enjoyed a posthumous career as Queen 'Edith' in Auvergne: Baxter,
1 SUF 67,15
2 NFK 60,1
3 SHR 4,3,49;54. 4,10,4. 4,25,3. 4,26,2
4 SUS 12,19
5 WAR 6,5
6 WOR 19,13
Earls of Mercia, pp. 299-300. Professor Meyer suggests she is the same woman as Aldgyth of Welshampton and also as the tenant at Newton in Warwickshire in 1086: 'Women's estates', p. 120.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALDRED. Aldred is a fairly common name which occurs almost seventy times, distributed among the lands of the king and more than thirty of his tenants-in-chief and eighteen counties between Devon and Yorkshire, with clusters in Devon, Hampshire, Hertfordshire, Shropshire, Somerset and Yorkshire. There are survivors in ten counties, most of whom may be identified as the brothers of Odo and Siward.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALDRED [* BROTHER OF ODO *]. Aldred brother of Odo is named in the Winton Domesday (p. 42) and on three manors in the Hampshire folios, two of which he held or claimed in both 1066 and 1086, his third tenancy being his wife's dowry in 1066, which makes it likely he is the Aldred who held Kilmeston, previously held by his wife1. His brother was Odo of Winchester (q.v.), which suggests he is the Aldred who shared a fief with him in Sussex2, each also holding part of the manor of Micheldever3. He is probably also the Aldred who held three consecutive manors in Devon4, the previous four held by his brother under the alias of Odo son of Edric. In the third of his Devon manors, the name-form is Edred, otherwise unknown in Devon, perhaps a scribal error. This manor, like the other two, was held for the twenty years after 1066, an identifying characteristic of the majority of Aldred's manors, also apparent in Wiltshire, Somerset and perhaps Gloucestershire. Of the five consecutive manors held by Aldred among the royal thanes of Wiltshire5, the first two were held between 1066 and 1086, as were both those among the thanes of Somerset6, the last Wiltshire manor being identified as that of Aldred brother of Odo by the Geld Roll for the county: VCH Wiltshire, ii. 215-16. Odo had a manor on the same fief. Finally, Odo's brother may be the Aldred who held Monksilver in Somerset7, as suggested by J.H. Round, and 'Wapley Rectory' in Gloucestershire8, these being the only other manors in the south-western counties held by an Aldred between 1066 and 1086: Round, 'Domesday survey of Somerset', pp. 416-17; 'Domesday survey of Hampshire', pp. 427-28. If he held Wapley, he is probably the pre-Conquest lord of Harry Stoke9, both manors being held by the only Aldreds in the county and both acquired by the bishop of Coutances. Aldred's 1086 manors are recorded in Coel (no. 457) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 134-35, apart from Monksilver and 'Wapley', whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 14880, 29469); see also Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 115-16.
............................................................................................................................................. ALDRED [* BROTHER OF SIWARD *]. Aldred, named by Orderic Vitalis (ii. 194-95) as the brother of Siward the fat (q.v.), son of Aethelgar and great-nephew of King Edward, is probably the Aldred who was either predecessor or tenant of the same tenants-in-chief as his brother in Shropshire: that is, Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, Reginald the sheriff, Ralph of Mortimer and Roger of Lacy. Reginald acquired the valuable manor of Longnor from him10; Ralph of Mortimer,
1 HAM 2,7
2 SUS 14,1-2
3 HAM 6,16
4 DEV 52,26-28
5 WIL 67,34-38
6 SOM 45,16-17
7 SOM 21,39
8 GLS 6,6
9 GLS 6,4
10 SHR 4,3,15
'Tumberland'1, and Roger of Lacy, Stokesay2, the most valuable of all his manors. In its place, Roger granted him the modest, but still valuable manor of Aldon, where he succeeded his brother, Siward3. Earl Roger allowed him to retain Smethcott and endowed him Acton Scott4. Aldred's three tenancies are the only ones held by an Aldred between the Bristol Channel and the Humber. Smethcott is adjacent to Longnor, Aldon to Stokesay, and Acton midway between the two pairs. The one other Aldred in the county, the pre-Conquest lord of Stanwardine, some distance from the nearest of these manors, is perhaps another man. Aldred is unidentified in Coel (nos. 31096, 31118, 31191). .............................................................................................................................................
ALFHEAH. The name Alfheah occurs two dozen times, distributed among ten counties between Cornwall and Nottinghamshire and the lands of the king and thirteen of his tenants-in-chief; there are no survivors of this name.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFHEAH <OF BARTON>. As the name is uncommon and the vills four miles apart, the Alfheahs who preceded Henry of Ferrers at Barton and Hollington in Derbyshire5 are very probably one man. He may be the same man as the Alfheahs in Nottinghamshire since the Alfheahs of these two counties are almost entirely isolated from their namesakes elsewhere and the manors may have been allocated on the basis on the wapentakes in which they lay, Henry's being in 'his' wapentake of 'Appletree': Fleming, Kings and lords, pp. 162-65.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALFHEAH <OF NORMANTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Alfheahs who preceded William Peverel at Normanton in Derbyshire6 and Beeston and Basford in Nottinghamshire7 may be one man, who is perhaps also the Alfheah at Papplewick in the same wapentake8, a vill in which Peverel held in chief. He is possibly the Alfheah on two other manors in the county and may be the Derbyshire Alfheah since the Alfheahs of these two counties are almost entirely isolated from their namesakes elsewhere and the manors may have been allocated on the basis on the wapentakes in which they lay, William's being in 'his' wapentake of Broxtowe: Fleming, Kings and lords, pp. 162-65.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALFHEAH <OF STANFORD>. Alfheah, who preceded Robert son of William at Stanford in Nottinghamshire, probably also held its dependency, Leake9. It is possible he is the same Alfheah as the predecessors of William Peverel Nottinghamshire and Henry of Ferrers in Derbyshire, though there are no links to confirm either identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* NEPHEW OF WIGOT *]. Alfred was a minor tenant-in-chief in Oxfordshire, where he is named as the nephew of the English magnate, Wigot of Wallingford (q.v.), whose estates were acquired by Miles Crispin and Robert d'Oilly, links which help to identify Alfred's manors at Eaton
1 SHR 6,17
2 SHR 7,5
3 SHR 7,6
4 SHR 4,27,15;33
5 DBY 6,34;42
6 DBY 7,4
7 NTT 10,34;51
8 NTT 30,29
9 NTT 28,1-2
in Berkshire1 and Harpsden and Cuxham in Oxfordshire2, held from Miles Crispin, and Harlington in Middlesex, from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury3, where Alfred succeeded his uncle, as at Cuxham. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he also held Sexintone in Oxfordshire4 and Inglewood in Berkshire5. Although it cannot be verified, Sexintone is plausible since it is surrounded by manors of Robert d'Oilly; but Inglewood probably belonged to another man. It appears to be a misplaced holding of William son of Ansculf, in which case Alfred is more likely to be the Alfred who held Hartridge from William, his only such tenant in the dozen counties where he was a tenant-in-chief. The Alfred at Hartridge, moreover, held the same manor in 1066 and there are no indications that Wigot's nephew was a Domesday landowner at that date. Dr Williams points to the difficulty of distinguishing native and Breton Alfreds in identifying Wigot's nephew; but neither Crispin or Earl Roger appear to have had Breton tenants: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 100-102. Alfred's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1575) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 143.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* OF CHANCÉ *]. Alfred is identified by Dr Keats-Rohan, from the evidence of the Lindsey Survey, which reveals that Alfred's tenancies from Guy of Craon were later held by either Walter son of Alfred6 or Alfred of Laughton7, named from his vill of Laughton8. According to the Survey, Alfred of Laughton also held land in Hibaldstow, Scawby and Castlethorpe, identifying the Domesday Alfred who held in those vills from Kolsveinn of Lincoln9. An Alfred also had manors in Scawby from Osbern of Arques10, Durand Malet11 and Odo the bowman12, and in Redbourne from Kolsveinn13, Osbern14, and Odo15, all therefore likely to be Guy's tenant. These links are reinforced by shared predecessors and family ties: Osbern and Odo were preceded by Grimbald, Odo and Guy by Esbiorn, while Alfred appears to have married the heiress of Odo, since the Lindsey Survey reveals that Odo was succeeded on several manors by an Anfrid and Alfred (Alfreit) de Canceio, from whom the family name of Chauncy derives: Sanders, English baronies, pp. 78-79. Alfred also held land from Guy at Mission in Nottinghamshire16, a dependency of Laughton. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that Alfred was a Breton, 'perhaps' from Chancé in Brittany (Ille-et-Vilaine: arrondissement Rennes). His manors (though not their dependencies) are recorded in Coel (no. 2480) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 140-41.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* OF GRANDCOURT *]. Alfred, who held Thurning in Huntingdonshire17 and Polebrook and Clopton in Northamptonshire18 from Eustace the sheriff, is identified in the estate book of the Hotot family, which records that Roger of Louvetot, baron of Southoe, granted these
1 BRK 33,8
2 OXF 35,26;31
3 MDX 7,4
4 OXF 7,13
5 BRK 65,18
6 LIN 57,1-4
7 LIN 57,5-9
8 LIN 57,7
9 LIN 26,17;19
10 LIN 41,1
11 LIN 44,2
12 LIN 48,2
13 LIN 26,18
14 LIN 41,2
15 LIN 48,3
16 NTT 1,66
17 HUN 19,18
18 NTH 55,3;6
manors, which he himself held from the abbey of Peterborough, to Alfred of Grandcourt, 'his knight': Estate records of the Hotot family, p. 16. They descended to his heirs, though according to thirteenth-century tradition the family name changed to Clapton, 'from the difficulty the lower people found in pronouncing his Norman name': King, Peterborough abbey, p. 47. Eustace had no other tenants of this name. Alfred's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2481) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 141.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* OF LINCOLN *]. The Alfreds who occur in many of the Lincolnshire Claims are probably the tenant-in-chief, Alfred of Lincoln, a major landholder in the county. He held land in the vills of Stewton, Huttoft, Goxhill, Coates and Uffington to which Claims refer1. He had no land at either Keddington2 or Ulceby3, the subject of other claims; but Keddington had a dependency in Cockerington, where Alfred of Lincoln's share in a mill was in dispute; and he held land in vills adjacent to Ulceby, when no other Alfred did so. The one other unidentified Alfred in the county, who had nine messuages in Stamford4, is also likely to be him, as the most significant landowner of that name. Alfred's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 332) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 141-42.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* OF MARLBOROUGH *]. The Alfreds who held Chelwood and Belluton in Somerset from Count Eustace of Boulogne5 are probably Alfred of Marlborough, who held two other tenancies on the Count's fief. Alfred's solitary manor held in chief in Somerset, at Chelwood, is three miles from Belluton, duplicated in the entry for the royal manor of Keynsham6. Count Eustace had no other tenants of this name elsewhere. The three unidentified Alfreds in circuit five are probably also Alfred of Marlborough, a tenant-in-chief in Herefordshire, where he was established before the Conquest. Alfred at Didley in Herefordshire7 is identified by reference to the Marlborough castlery of Ewyas Harold. The other two are probably one man since both of his manors were acquired from a Frani, an uncommon name which occurs nowhere else in the county. One was a subtenancy of the royal manor of Bromsgrove8, which was partially in Herefordshire, where Alfred of Marlborough had other holdings on the royal demesne. The substantial manor of Rous Lench was held from Urso the sheriff as a subtenancy, which cannot be traced9. Alfred's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 360) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 142.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* OF `SPAIN' *]. Alfred, who held two hides from Glastonbury abbey at Okeford Fitzpaine in Dorset10, is named Alfred of 'Spain' in the Geld Roll for the county; although the hidage there is slightly larger, it cannot refer to anyone else: VCH Dorset, iii. 139-40. He is also the Alfred on the royal manor of Williton in Somerset, identified by reference to his manor of Monksilver11. He was a tenant-in-chief in both counties, and also in Devon, Herefordshire and Wiltshire. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 296) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 141.
1 LIN CS10;16-17. CN5;12. CK2
2 LIN CS9
3 LIN CN4
4 LIN S11
5 SOM 17,5-6
6 SOM 1,28
7 HEF 2,2
8 WOR 1,1c
9 WOR 2,18
10 DOR 8,2
11 SOM 1,6
................................................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* OF THAME *]. Alfred, who held six hides 'with his associate' in the bishop of Lincoln's manor of Thame in Oxfordshire1, is almost certainly Alfred of Thame, who held an unnamed manor from Giles son of Ansculf in Buckinghamshire. Neither Giles or the bishop had other tenants of this name. Alfred's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 743) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 142.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED <OF WELFORD>. The Alfreds - Alfridus, the form is unique - who held Welford and its dependencies in Northamptonshire2 and Lilinge in Leicestershire3 from Geoffrey de la Guerche may be one man. He is the only Alfred in Leicestershire, and other Alfreds in Northamptonshire may identified as different men with reasonable confidence; Geoffrey had no other tenants of this name. Welford and its dependencies was held by the Wyville family in the Northamptonshire Survey and later; the descent of Leicestershire manor has not been traced: VCH Northamptonshire, i. 379-80; Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, p. 264. Alfred's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 9357) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 135, where - following the normal practice of Coel - the dependencies of Welford are assigned to the tenant-in-chief. The Northamptonshire Survey and later records show, however, that they were held by Alfred's successors.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* THE BRETON *]. Alfred, who held Panson in Devon from Roald Dubbed4, is identified as the tenant-in-chief Alfred the Breton in Exon.; and the Alfred at Chitterley - and 'also' Thornbury - in the same county must be Alfred the Breton, whose tax in Silverton Hundred was unpaid, though the assessments do not quite match5, as is often the case: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xxvi. This raises an interesting possibility. Both manors were held from the Count of Mortain, whose tenant Alfred the butler held a vast Honour stretching from Cornwall to Yorkshire, including nine manors in Devon. Nowhere is the Count's tenant named the Breton apart from this entry in the Geld Roll. Alfred acquired Chitterley from Hademar, a rare name which occurs only on the lands of the Count of Mortain, in one other case (of three) as the predecessor of Alfred the butler at 'Stockleigh' in Devon6. Alfred at Chitterley and Thornbury may therefore be Alfred the butler, and the same man as the tenant-in-chief Alfred the Breton, unless there were two Alfred the Bretons in Devon. The manors of the tenant-in-chief and the Count's tenant descended to different Honours, though Panson and Thornbury did not, Panson being later held (as before the Conquest) by the abbey of Tavistock and Thornbury by Montacute priory of an unknown Honour: Book of Fees, pp. 781, 797. Alfred the Breton's manors - including Chitterley, Thornbury and Panson - are recorded in Coel (no. 154) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 139-40.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* THE BUTLER *]. Alfred the butler was probably the wealthiest of the honorial barons of the Count of Mortain, the element of doubt due to the fact that his byname is often omitted. It is not recorded at all in Domesday Book; but Exon. names him butler on seven manors in Devon7 one
1 OXF 6,10
2 NTH 47,1a-1c
3 LEC 29,6
4 DEV 35,4
5 DEV 15,59-60
6 DEV 15,18
7 DEV 15,16-19;32-33;55
in Dorset1 and three in Somerset2. It is likely that he is the Alfred on most, probably all, of the Count's manors in those counties3, and also his tenant in Cornwall4, his lands forming the barony of Chiselborough5 held by his heirs: Sanders, English baronies, p. 34. He is 'certainly' Alfred on the Count's Sussex fief6: VCH Sussex, i. 380. His grandson, Richard son of William, held a total of forty fees in Sussex, Dorset, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall, five of the nine counties in which Alfred the butler had a significant presence: Red Book, i. 204, 220, 257, 262. In Northamptonshire, all eight manors of Alfred are stated to be held by one man (NTH, 18,67-75), the Northamptonshire Survey revealing that most were held by Alfred's heir, William, as well as a tenancy from William Peverel at Guilsborough7: VCH Northamptonshire, i. 378-79. He is identified as the Count's tenant in Yorkshire8 by his grant of tithes to the abbey of St Albans: Early Yorkshire charters, ii. 282-83. The descent of his manors in Buckinghamshire9 and Nottinghamshire10 has not been traced; but his heirs had interests in both counties, albeit slight in the latter case: Salzman, 'Alvred pincerna', pp. 163, 170-72; Farrer, Honors, i. 199-201. It is possible that he is the same man as the Count's tenant Alfred the Breton at Chitterley and Thornbury in Devon11, named in the Geld Roll for Wonford Hundred where Thornbury lay; and, if so, the tenant-in-chief Alfred the Breton. The manors of the tenant-in-chief and the Count's tenant descended to different Honours, though Thornbury may not have done so, being later held by Montacute priory of an unknown Honour: Book of Fees, pp. 781, 797. The butler's manors - apart from Chitterley and Thornbury - are recorded in Coel (no. 233) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 143-45, where references for Cornwall and Northamptonshire are omitted.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRED [* THE STEWARD *]. Alfred, who held Swainswick in Somerset 1066 and 108612, is named Alfred of Wick (from the vill name) in the Geld Roll for Bath Hundred, where Swainswick lay; the assessments do not agree, but he is the only Alfred in the Hundred in 1086: VCH Somerset, i. 528. He is probably the Alfred who held the other part of Swainswick in 1066 and Twerton - four miles away - after the Conquest, both acquired by the bishop of Coutances13. The bishop had another Alfred on his Honour, at Barlington in Devon14; but the holding is small and over 100 miles away. At Twerton, he is named Alfred the steward in Exon, presumably steward of Queen Edith, from whom he held the manor. He is the only Alfred in the south-western counties to retain his manor between 1066 and 1086. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 15306).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRITH. Apart from an Edwin Alfrith in Leicestershire, the name Alfrith occurs six times, Aelfrith five. Although accepted as separate names by von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 144, 183, they are employed as equivalents by the scribe. The two names are distributed among
1 DOR 15,1
2 SOM 19,39;80;86
3 DEV 15,9;31. DOR 26,42;62. SOM 19,40-42;47;49;51;53;61;69;79
4 CON 5,11,1-7
5 SOM 19,47
6 SUS 10,1-2;87
7 NTH 35,23
8 YKS 5W38
9 BUK 12,26;30
10 NTT 4,5;7
11 DEV 15,59-60
12 SOM 47,18
13 SOM 5,38;46
14 DEV 3,19
five counties and the lands of four tenants-in-chief. The forms Aelfrith and Alfrith are distinguished in the translation but treated as equivalent in these notes.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRITH <OF CROOM>. Alfrith, who shared a small property with an Uglubarth at Croom in Yorkshire before the Conquest1, has no links with other Alfriths or Aelfriths.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRITH? <OF HANDSWORTH>. Aelfrith (Ailuerd), who shared a modest manor at Handsworth in Staffordshire acquired by William son of Ansculf2, is unlikely to be related to his namesakes, whether Aelfrith or Alfrith, all remote and without tenurial or other links.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRITH <OF MORETON>. Alfrith, who held half a hide at Moreton in Gloucestershire from Westminster abbey in 1066 and 10863, has no links with other Alfriths or Aelfriths. He is the one survivor of either name.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALFRITH <OF PIDDLETRENTHIDE>. All the manors of Alfrith and Aelfrith in Dorset4 and Somerset5 were acquired by Roger Arundel which - since both forms are rare - almost certainly means they refer to one man. It is likely that he had a brother, or relative, Almer of Piddletrenthide (q.v.), also a predecessor of Roger Arundel in the same two counties. Between them, Alfrith and Almer contributed over half the value of Roger's Honour. Alfrith may be the royal official, Aeilferth minister, who witnessed a grant of Edward the Confessor in 1061: Round: 'Domesday survey of Somerset', p. 419. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 234-35, which does not include Timberscombe and Charlton6. Alfrith and Almer are collectively ranked by Dr Clarke forty-second in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Timberscombe and Charlton would raise them several places.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALGAR [* "CIDA" *]. Algar, who held Kingston-on-Soar and Barton-in-Fabis among the king's thanes in Nottinghamshire7, is named Algar Cida, brother of Ulfkil, in a grant of their lands to St Cuthbert's and the monks of Durham. He is probably the one other unidentified Algar in the county, at Costock, acquired by Roger of Bully8, since he shared this manor with Godric son of Fredegis (q.v.) whose manor was part of the same grant to Durham: Bates, Regesta, no. 116, p. 409. Roger had no other Algars on his Honour.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EARL *] ALGAR. Although Algar is a common name, the scribe appears to have been careful to accord the earl his title. In the handful of cases where this is not so, his association with royal or comital manors, or his status as overlord, allow him to be identified with reasonable confidence. The Algar who held royal manor of Newton Solney in Derbyshire and eight messuage in the county
1 YKS 1E59
2 STS 12,29
3 GLS 19,2
4 DOR 9,1. 47,3-4;9
5 SOM 22,14;19;24;26
6 SOM 22,14;19
7 NTT 30,19;23
8 NTT 9,94
town1 is almost certainly the earl, as is the fictitious Earl Edgar at Great Chesterford in Essex2, confirmed by a reference to this manor in Cambridgeshire3. Similarly, the Algar who held the royal manor of Badmonsfield in Suffolk is undoubtedly the earl, since he held its dependency in Denston4.He probably also held the very valuable (£25) manor of Broadwell in Oxfordshire5, possibly once a royal manor since it was in the hands of Princess Christina in 1086; and he is identified as the Algar at Willoughby in Nottinghamshire6 by its dependence on the royal manor of Broughton. The association of Algar's family with Burton abbey suggests that the Algar who held the abbey's manor of Coton-in-the-Elms in Derbyshire7 is the earl, this being confirmed by a royal writ: Bates, Regesta, no. 33, p. 194. Finally, as the only overlord of this name in Great Domesday, the Algar at Berkesden in Hertfordshire8 is probably the earl; others of his men held land in the nearby vills of Luffenhall, Wyddial and Wakeley. Despite the ubiquity of his name, it is unlikely that he is to be identified with many, if indeed any, other Algars, since only two held manors assessed at three hides or more in counties where he had a presence. In one of these9, an Algar shared 3 1/2 hides with a Thorkil; while in the other, the royal manor of Winfarthing in Norfolk10, Algar is described as '(Earl) Harold's free man', an improbable association for a Mercian earl.
Earl Algar was the son of Earl Leofric and Countess Godiva, and father of earls Edwin and Morcar; he was earl of East Anglia (1051-1057) and of Mercia (1057-62). He was probably dead by 1063, see Harmer, Writs, pp. 546-47. His stormy political career is documented by Baxter, Earls of Mercia, pp. 43-48. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 206-212, which does not include his demesne manors at Granby in Nottinghamshire, Smallands in Essex, and the (1086) valuation of Holbeach in Lincolnshire; and those of his men at Middleton in Essex and Tuddenham in Suffolk. Algar is ranked fourth in wealth among the nobility by Dr Clarke; Baxter, Earls of Mercia, p. 129, supplies other estimates of his manorial income, his own (£714) agreeing with that of Dr Clarke; the Statistics database total (£787) is significantly higher, the difference largely accounted for by the omissions noted and the value to be assigned to Great Baddow in Essex, valued at eight nights' provisions before the Conquest (estimated in the Statistics database as £10 per night for Essex and East Anglia ) and £17 in 1086, the value accepted by Dr Clarke.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALGAR <OF TRENANCE>. Algar, who held a small fief from Count Robert of Mortain in Cornwall11, is the only Algar in the county in 1086. His six manors are in south Cornwall, mostly along the coast, between Trenance and Pelynt. He might be the tenant of Dunstone, further along the coast, in Devon12, who was one of only two Algars in Devon in 1086; but although two English survivors in the same area is suggestive, there are no other links to support an identification; the pre-Conquest Algars in Cornwall are all on the other side of the county, and without links. Algar's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 237) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 136.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 DBY B14. 1,18
2 ESS 1,9
3 CAM 1,10
4 SUF 1,121. 65,1
5 OXF 54,1
6 NTT 30,26
7 DBY 3,4
8 HRT 37,19
9 WOR 8,20
10 NFK 1,169
11 CON 5,15,1-6
12 DEV 52,42
ALGEAT. Algeat is a rare name which occurs in four counties, on the lands of four tenants-in-chief, probably borne by that number of individuals in 1066. It may be confused with Alfgeat or Aldgyth where sex is uncertain: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 146.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALGEAT <OF BULKINGTON>. Algeat, whose shared manor worth £1 at Bulkington in Warwickshire was acquired by the Count of Meulan1, has no links with his namesakes. No Alfgeats or Aldgyths are recorded elsewhere on the Honour of the Count, and no Alfgeats in the county, though Aldgyth of Newton was a tenant in the same Hundred.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALGEAT <OF "HATETE">. Algeat, whose shared manor worth thirty shillings at Hatete in Worcestershire was acquired by Urso of Abetot2, has no links with his namesakes and is unlikely to be Alfgeat the monk, recorded on the same fief, the one Alfgeat in the county, but could possibly be Aldgyth wife of Gruffydd (q.v.) at Elmbridge. Urso had no Alfgeats or Aldgyths on his Honour.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALGEAT <OF SHAWBURY>. Algeat, whose shared manor worth twelve shillings at Shawbury in Shropshire was acquired by Gerard of Tournai3, has no links with his namesakes. It is possible he is the one Alfgeat in the county, in the lost vill of 'Slackbury'4, which can be no great distance away, or even Aldgyth of Welshampton (q.v.); but there are no links to confirm either identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALGEAT <OF WESTON>. Algeat, who held Hail Weston in Huntingdonshire acquired by Eustace the sheriff5, has no links with his namesakes. The Huntingdonshire Claims reveal that he 'himself' held the manor from Earl Tosti and subsequently Earl Waltheof6. No Alfgeats are recorded in the county or on the sheriff's manors elsewhere.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALGOT. Algot is a rare forename which occurs once each in four counties, on the lands of four tenants-in-chief, twice among pre-Conquest lords, twice for tenants in 1086 whose name-forms may be of continental derivation: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 146.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALGOT <OF ASTON>. Algot (Aelgotus), who held Aston-by-Stone in Staffordshire from Robert of Stafford7, is one of two surviving Algots - the other in Berkshire - but there are no links between the two. It has been suggested that Algot is a scribal error for Helgot, Robert's tenant on the following manor of Barlaston, five miles from Aston, though the descent of Barlaston suggests it was held by Helgot of Holdgate (q.v.). Aston and Barlaston are assigned to Algot/Helgot in Coel (no. 3613) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 247.
................................................................................................................................................................
1 WAR 16,41
2 WOR 26,9
3 SHR 4,23,3
4 SHR 4,26,1
5 HUN 19,27. D11
6 HUN D11
7 STS 11,23
ALGOT <OF BASFORD>. Algot (Algod), who shared the manor of Old Basford in Nottinghamshire1 acquired by William Peverel, has no links with his pre-Conquest namesake, Algot (Alcot) the monk, at Defford in Worcestershire.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALGOT <OF ROWBURY>. Algot (Algolt), who held a subtenancy in Rowbury Hundred in Berkshire from Gilbert of Ghent2, has no links with his namesakes. His subtenancy is not included in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALI <OF BULCAMP>. As both Alis in Domesday are dependants of Manni, a predecessor of Roger Bigot in Suffolk3, there can be little doubt they are one man. The name is possibly the same as Alli; but none of the handful of Allis - all in Great Domesday - have discernible connections with the man of Manni: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 146-47.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALLI. Alli is a rare name which occurs nine times, distributed among the lands of six tenants-in-chief and five counties, all but one of the names occurring in the neighbouring counties of Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire. There are no survivors. It is possibly the same name as Ali, which occurs only twice, in Suffolk: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 146-47.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALLI <OF "CELVERDESCOTE">. As the name is rare and the distribution localised, it is possible that the Alli at Celverdescote in Northamptonshire4, whose manor was acquired by the Count of Mortain, is Alli of Lavendon; but there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALLI <OF LAVENDON>. The Allis in Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire are probably one man, though his manors were acquired by four tenants-in-chief. His seven manors form a cluster along the border between the two counties. Three of the four Buckinghamshire manors are in Lavendon, one acquired by the bishop of Coutances, the others by Countess Judith, the bishop obtaining the fourth, in the adjacent vill of Clifton Reynes5. The Countess also succeeded Alli at Felmersham in Bedfordshire6, his other manors - at Carlton and Pavenham7 - lying between Felmersham and Lavendon. On five of his seven manors, Alli is described as a man, Guard or thane of King Edward. It is possible, even likely, that he is the Alli at Celverdescote in Northamptonshire8, a manor of similar status to his others; but there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALLI <OF RODBASTON>. As the name is rare, the Alli whose manor of Rodbaston in Staffordshire9 was acquired by Richard the forester may be Alli of Lavendon; but there are no links to confirm this.
1 NTT 10,51
2 BRK 37,1
3 SUF 7,19;54
4 NTH 18,11
5 BUK 5,15;18. 53,3-4
6 BDF 53,11
7 BDF 47,1. 57,6
8 NTH 18,11
9 STS 13,9
.............................................................................................................................................
[* ALMER *] HOLDFAST. Holdfast, whose manor of Housham in Essex was acquired by William of Warenne1, is probably Almer Holdfast, who held Matching, two miles away, in 1066. The byname does not occur elsewhere in Domesday.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALMER [* OF BENNINGTON *]. All Almers in Hertfordshire may be one man, Almer of Bennington, or Almer Bennington2, named on a number of manors, his byname derived from the most important of them. Peter of Valognes acquired the seven demesne manors where his byname is supplied, and five others of his men, so he is probably the Almer succeeded by Peter at Hinxworth, Digswell and Libury3, and probably also the Almer at Bourn in Cambridgeshire4, Peter's one manor in the county, presumably acquired as the designated successor of Almer of Bennington. He may also be the Almer on the three remaining demesne manors in Hertfordshire. Alswick5, adjacent to his manor of 'Echington', is the most valuable manor held by an Almer after Bennington itself, while two of his men held land in Libury, where the demesne manor held by Almer was acquired by Bishop Odo of Bayeux, who also obtained the manor of one of his men6. Less certainly, he may be the Almer on the remaining demesne manor, at Watton7, adjacent to another of his valuable manors, Sacombe; at Watton, however, he is a man of Aelfric Blaec (q.v.), a substantial but lesser landowner than himself. It is possible that Aelfric of Bennington at Chells8 is a scribal error for Almer, the scribe repeating the name of his man: 'Aelfric, Aelfric of Bennington's man'; no Aelfric is recorded in Bennington but Almer did have a man Aelfric at Flexmore. Finally, as Geoffrey of Bec acquired the land of one of his men, he may be the Aelmer, Earl Leofwin's man, who was succeeded by Geoffrey at Windridge9; Aelmer and Almer, if they are different names, are often confused. If these identifications are valid, Almer was a royal thane, and a thane of Esger the constable and of earls Gyrth and Leofwin Godwinson, with land valued at more than £40, qualifying him for inclusion in Clarke, English nobility.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALMER [* OF BOURN *]. Almer, who held Bourn, Caldecote, Longstowe and Hatley St George in Cambridgeshire from Count Alan of Brittany10, is stated in the text to be one man, he and the Almers at East Hatley, Croydon and Kingston11 being named Almer of Bourn in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 56-57, 86, 89, 99), who is probably also to be identified with Almer the noble (cilt), the juror of Longstowe Hundred, where most of these manors lay. He may also be the Almer at West Wratting and its dependency12 who, like Almer of Bourn, was both a tenant of Count Alan and a survivor, the only other of this name in the county. Dr Williams suggests he is the Almer on another manor in Bourn, acquired by Peter of Valognes; but as this is the only manor in Peter's fief and he was the predecessor of Almer of Bennington, it is more likely that he acquired it from that Almer. It is not impossible that the two Almers are the
1 ESS 22,3
2 HRT 4,16. 20,4. 36,17
3 HRT 36,2;10;15
4 CAM 33,1
5 HRT 24,1
6 HRT 5,11;13
7 HRT 2,2
8 HRT 20,4
9 HRT 34,1;7
10 CAM 14,49-52
11 CAM 14,23-24;47
12 CAM 14,80-81
same man, though Peter's solitary acquisition in Cambridgeshire and the fact that Almer of Bennington retained nothing and Almer of Bourn most of his manors, tells against this. Dr Williams also suggests he is Almer son of Kolsveinn, a juror in 'Arringford' Hundred (where two of his manors lay) alongside his father: English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 88-89. If so - as seems likely - he appears to be unique in serving on two juries: Lewis, 'Domesday jurors', p. 41. Almer's tenancies from Count Alan are recorded in Coel (no. 220) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 136.
............................................................................................................................................. [* BISHOP *] ALMER [* OF ELMHAM *]. The identification of Bishop Almer of Elmham is complicated by the inconsistent forms used by the scribes of Little Domesday, usually Almer, but often - more than twenty times - Aelmer, and once Aethelmer1. In most cases, however, the form Aelmer is accompanied by his title; and the few exceptions have other identifying characteristics: a large manor2, or association with another bishop, Herfast3. In Norfolk, Bishop Almer's title is often omitted and his name abbreviated; but there is little doubt that all references to A4, Bishop A5, or to Almer6 in the fief of Bishop William of Thetford are to his predecessor, Bishop Almer, since Bishop A. can refer to no other person, and plain A occurs nowhere else in the county among pre-Conquest holders. Although Almer is a common name, its distribution confirms that it refers to the bishop throughout this fief; for while it occurs several dozen times within the fief, there are only half-a-dozen pre-Conquest Almers elsewhere in the county. These, too, may be Bishop Almer, since four are men of his brother, Archbishop Stigand7, who had no men of this name elsewhere; two are lords of men, which fits the bishop8, as do the associations between Almer, Roger Bigot, and Bury St Edmunds in the final case9. There is no Almer in Norfolk in 1066 who is clearly not the bishop. .............................................................................................................................................
[* BISHOP *] ALMER'S SON. The son of Almer, a tenant of Count Alan of Brittany on a small manor at Mileham in Norfolk10, is probably the son of Bishop Almer of Elmham, since the bishop's brother, Stigand, was his lord and held the royal manor in the vill11. Almer married before he became bishop, his wife's dowry, the manor of Blofield12, being subsumed in the bishopric. No other son of Almer is recorded in Domesday Book. The son's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 2074) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 198.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALMER <OF PIDDLETRENTHIDE>. The Almers from whom Roger Arundel acquired the substantial manors of Piddletrenthide in Dorset13 and Whitelackington in Somerset14 are probably one man, the same man as the Aelmer from whom Roger obtained comparably valuable manors in
1 NFK 10,20
2 NFK 10,20
3 SUF 19,1-2
4 NFK 10,6-7;9;12;15
5 NFK 10,13;19;21;26;42;60
6 NFK 10,23-24;31;33;70;72;79;81;85-86;92
7 NFK 8,14. 9,64;68. 19,39
8 NFK 8,127. 9,150
9 NFK 14,25
10 NFK 4,8
11 NFK 1,212
12 NFK 10,28
13 DOR 9,1
14 SOM 22,3
Dorset1 and Somerset2. The two names are often confused by the scribe. Almer is probably a relative - possibly the brother - of Alfrith of Piddletrenthide (q.v.). Both had their most valuable manors in Piddletrenthide, both held all their land as far as can be determined in the same two counties, and both were by a considerable margin the most significant predecessors of Roger Arundel, each contributing roughly sixty hides of assessed land, and between them over half the value of his Honour. A list of their manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 234-35, which does not include Alfrith's manors of Timberscombe and Charlton. Alfrith and Almer are collectively ranked by Dr Clarke forty-second in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Timberscombe and Charlton would raise them several places.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALMER [* OF WOOTTON *]. Although Almer is a common name, it is likely that most Almers in Buckinghamshire, and many in Bedfordshire, are Almer of Wootton. He is accorded his byname once, as the tenant of Miles Crispin at Wavendon in Buckinghamshire3, and is presumably the Almer who held the substantial manor of Wootton in Bedfordshire before the Conquest4, and probably also the tenant and predecessor of Miles at Wingrave and his predecessor at Soulbury5, in both of which he is described as a man of Brictric of Waddesdon (q.v.). Since he retained Wingrave for the twenty years after 1066, it is not unlikely that he is the Almer who also retained Swanbourne, six miles from Soulbury, as a tenant of the Count of Mortain6 and the Count's tenant at Amersham, Hardwick, Burston and Laughton7. Amersham and Burston were acquired from Siward brother of Saewulf (q.v.); and Burston (in Aston Abbots) is just over two miles from Hardwick in one direction and from Wingrave in the other. Two miles south of Swanbourne, the valuable manor at Hoggeston may also have been his8. The one other valuable manor in the two counties held by Almer, at Burnham in Buckinghamshire9, may have been his, too. This Almer was a royal thane, as was the Almer at Bolnhurst in Bedfordshire10, likely to be the same man since his endowment as a royal thane was otherwise meagre, worth twelve shillings. All the manors mentioned so far lie between Bolnhurst and Burnham, as indeed do all manors held by an Almer in the two counties. The links between the remaining Almers and Almer of Wootton, however, are insufficient for an identification.
If all or most of these identifications are valid, Almer was a man of many lords: of the king; of Earl Harold at Swanbourne, Aelfric son of Goding at Loughton, Bondi the constable at Hoggeston, Earl Tosti at Wootton, and Brictric of Waddesdon, mentioned above; Earls Harold and Tosti are perhaps additional links between Almer of Wootton and the Buckinghamshire Almers. This number of lords is unusual, though not unique; more than one is not uncommon. Almer's 1086 manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1672) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 136, apart from Swanbourne, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 1236).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 DOR 47,5-7
2 SOM 22,1
3 BUK 23,33
4 BDF 49,2-3
5 BUK 23,18;22
6 BUK 12,24
7 BUK 12,4;11;13;32
8 BUK 17,9
9 BUK 29,3
10 BDF 53,6
ALMER [* THE BEADLE *]. Almer, who held a virgate at Wool in Dorset in 10861, is probably Almer beadle, named in the Geld Roll for Winfrith Hundred, where Wool lay: VCH Dorset, iii. 143. He is the only survivor of this name in the county. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 3049).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALMER [* UNCLE OF THORKIL *]. Although Almer (Almar) and Aelmer (Ailmar) are recognised as separate names and both are common, their distinctive distribution in Warwickshire suggests that they all refer to one man, an uncle of Thorkil of Warwick: Williams: 'A vice-comital family', pp. 283, 287-88, 293-95. The majority occur on the fief of Thorkil himself2, while four others have the characteristic links with 'family' vills or family members demonstrated by Dr Williams, reinforced in the case of four of the five Aelmers by connections between Thorkil's fief and Robert of Stafford and Robert d'Oilly3. The fifth Aelmer, not listed by Dr Williams, is probably also Thorkil's uncle, Almer, since he was a survivor, as were most Almer/Aelmers, and the Thorkil he inherited from is probably his nephew4. Almer's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 4761) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 136, apart from Longdon and Kineton5, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 28350, 28497).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALMUND. Although considered distinct by von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 149, 185, the names Aelmund and Almund are probably variants. The names, stated or implied on more than fifty manors, have a distinctive distribution. Apart from four entries in Yorkshire, they are concentrated in the contiguous counties of Shropshire, Staffordshire and Warwickshire, the majority in Shropshire, all as tenants or predecessors of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury and his tenants. Even Yorkshire has a Shrewsbury association, one Almund being a predecessor of Earl Roger's son, Roger of Poitou. It is just possible that all Almunds are one man.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALMUND [* FATHER OF ALWARD *]. Almund and his son are named as joint tenants of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury at 'Amaston', which Almund also held before the Conquest6, as well as Wotherton, held by Alward from the earl in 1086 on the same fief7. Almund was also the predecessor of the earl on five manors in Staffordshire8, the only Almunds in the county, and three more in Warwickshire9, though the name-form there is Aelmund in one case, probably scribal variants in view of the tenurial associations and the appearance of both forms in the vill of Wolston10. The one other Almund (actually Aelmund) in that county, at 'Mackadown'11, lay between these manors and those in Shropshire.
Three of the manors in Warwickshire and one in Staffordshire were subinfeudated to the earl's sheriff, Reginald of Balliol (q.v.), who also acquired nine manors in Shropshire from an Almund12 or Alward, as did another of the earl's tenants, Helgot of Holdgate13; Almund and Alward
1 DOR 56,63
2 WAR 17,8;15;21-22;57-58;65
3 WAR 23,1-2;4
4 WAR 28,2
5 WAR 17,8. 28,2
6 SHR 4,27,17
7 SHR 4,27,21
8 STS 8,4;11;14-15;23
9 WAR 12,3-4;7
10 STS 12,4;7
11 WAR 17,9
12 SHR 4,3,45;47-48;63;67
13 SHR 4,21,8-9;18
are presumably the father and son. Two more of Earl Roger's tenants - Roger of Lacy1 and Picot of Sai2 - had a predecessor named Almund, though not an Alward; but as there may have been a second Almund at Clunton3, their identity is less certain. At Clunton, 'Almund, Wulfric and Almund held it as 3 manors', the second Almund making the identification of Alward's father problematic. There may, however, be an alternative interpretation of the 'second' Almund: as there is no 'another' to clarify the meaning, it is possible the scribe repeated the name to account for the three manors whose details he was summarising, two of them being held by Almund in 1066; there are similar cases elsewhere in the text (cf. Buggi). The distribution of the name makes it more likely than not that most, perhaps all, of the Lacy and Sai predecessors are Alward's father.
It is possible that he is also the Almund recorded on several holdings in Yorkshire4 since the last of these was acquired by Roger of Poitou, son of the earl of Shrewsbury, and the other two manors are in the same part of Craven. If not, it is an odd coincidence that every Almund in Domesday Book may be plausibly linked to the earl. Almund probably left his mark on the Domesday landscape since Almundestune in Herefordshire, held by Alward in 1066, is presumably named after him. Almund's one tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 6739) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 118.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALNOTH [* GRUTT *]. All seven Alnoths in Hertfordshire are probably one man, Alnoth Grutt, named as such at Lampeth and Clothall, two of the six manors acquired by the bishop of Bayeux5, and as a man of archbishop Stigand on three of these. On the seventh manor, at Hormead, acquired by Prince Edgar, he is described as the archbishop's thane6. Four of these manors are substantial, two of them - Clothall and Radwell- very substantial. Archbishop Stigand had another Alnoth among his men, who held the royal manor of Howe and its dependencies in Norfolk7. As this manor is also substantial and the archbishop's man one of only two Alnoths in the county, it is likely he is Alnoth Grutt. It is possible that he is also the Alnoth at Heacham8, a fairly substantial holding, but there are no links to confirm an identification.
It is just possible that Grutt is the same man as Alnoth the noble, alias Alnoth of Kent, a predecessor of Bishop Odo of Bayeux. The tenurial link and the scale of several of their manors suggest this as a possibility; and although their predominant name-forms - Alnoth and Aethelnoth - are distinguished by von Feilitzen, they are not consistently so by the Domesday scribe: Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 149-50, 185-86. Many individuals have more than one byname in Domesday Book, of course; but Grutt occurs only in Hertfordshire, whereas Alnoth the noble (cilt) is found in three circuits, and 'of Kent' (or 'the Kentishman') in two, both forms occurring in the same circuit as Hertfordshire9, perhaps an attempt to distinguish two Alnoths originating in the breve of the tenant-in-chief. Archbishop Stigand is the overlord of the bishop of Bayeux's predecessor only in Hertfordshire. On balance, Grutt is more likely to be another man. Clarke, English nobility, pp. 237-38, does not include Grutt's manors among those he attributes to Alnoth the noble.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 SHR 4,8,1;16
2 SHR 4,20,3;11;17
3 SHR 4,20,3
4 YKS C18. 29W39-40. 30W10
5 HRT 5,3-4;7;14;17;26
6 HRT 38,2
7 NFK 1,105-112;207
8 NFK 8,47
9 BUK 4,29;36. 17,25
ALNOTH [* OF BRAY *]. Alnoth, who held Bray in Devon1, is almost certainly Alnoth of Bray, named in the Geld Roll for South Molton Hundred where Bray lay, though the assessment of Bray does not match that in Geld Roll: Devonshire Domesday, i. pp. xx-xxi. He is the only surviving Alnoth in the county. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1788) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 137.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALNOTH [* OF LONDON *]. Alnoth of London, who received Tooting in Surrey in pledge from Earl Waltheof and assigned it to Westminster abbey 'for his soul's sake'2, was evidently an important man, citizen of London, nephew (nepos) of Swein of Essex, witness (with Swein) to a royal charter, and donor of 'lands and houses' to the abbey, in which he became a monk: Bates, Regesta, nos. 82, 290, 313, 324, pp. 347, 871, 879, 926-27, 947, 953; Harmer, Writs, pp. 311-13. His status and the London connection suggest he may be the Alnoth whose valuable manors in Surrey were acquired by Richard of Tonbridge3, two of which had sites and messuages in London and Southwark. He may also be the Alnoth on the valuable manor of Banstead in Surrey4, to which a house in Southwark and a 'lord's messuage' in London were attached: Round, 'Domesday survey of Surrey', pp. 282-83. Banstead was acquired by the bishop of Bayeux, who succeeded to the manors of Alnoth the noble, possibly therefore the Alnoth at Banstead; but apart from the London association and its proximity to the other Surrey manors, there may be a tenurial connection between Banstead and Alnoth of London, since the bishop's tenant at Banstead is possibly Richard of Tonbridge (q.v.): VCH Surrey, iii. 254.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALNOTH <OF TOLGULLOW>. The consecutive fiefs held by Alnoth, Ednoth and Alnoth from the Count of Mortain in Cornwall are not clearly delineated by the usual scribal conventions - large capitals and names lined in red - so it is possible that all three are, in fact, one man; it is not uncommon for the scribe to confuse Alnoth and Ednoth: Fellows-Jensen, 'On the identification of Domesday tenants in Lincolnshire', p. 32. However, to confuse them twice in successive entries seems implausible, so the three are here identified as different men, the first of whom held the manors of Tolgullow, Trescowe, Dizzard and Trehudreth, the first two of which he also held in 10665. It is possible, therefore, that he is the pre-Conquest Alnoth who occurs on some or all of six other manors in the county. Their distribution lends some support to this, since the four manors held directly from the Count span almost the length of the county, the other six lying between them6. Neither the Count or the tenants to whom he allocated these manors had an Alnoth as tenant or predecessor in the neighbouring county of Devon. Alnoth's tenancies at Tolgullow and Trescowe are recorded in Coel (no. 239) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 137; the other two are allocated to Alnoth of Woolston.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALNOTH <OF WOOLSTON>. It has been suggested that the Alnoth who held Woolston in Cornwall from Count Robert of Mortain7 is the same man as Alnoth of Tolgullow and Ednoth of Pengelly (q.v.), though the sequence of names - Alnoth, Ednoth, Alnoth - seems an unlikely scribal
1 DEV 52,36
2 SUR 6,4
3 SUR 19,1-2;5;14
4 SUR 5,8
5 CON 5,17,1-4
6 CON 5,3,2;26. 5,5,4. 5,12,1. 5,26,3-4
7 CON 5,19,1
confusion. Woolston, Dizzard and Trehudreth are assigned to this Alnoth in Coel (no. 9390) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 137.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALNOTH [* THE NOBLE OF KENT *]. Alnoth the noble, a royal thane, was a major landholder in 1066, with jurisdictional privileges and many manors - several very large - in Kent (D17;22. C6. P20. 1,3. 5,4;28;41;44;56;72;95;100;102;134;175), and others in Sussex1, Surrey2, Hampshire3 and Buckinghamshire4. He was important enough to be taken by the Conqueror to Normandy in 1067, described on that occasion as 'the noble Kentish governor (satrap)': Chronicle of John of Worcester, iii. 4-5. He is almost certainly the Alnoth of Canterbury whose man Wulfric held a small property at Walton Grounds in Northamptonshire5, since he had full jurisdiction in the city6 and a Wulfric held from him in Kent7. In Buckinghamshire, where he was succeeded at Westbury by Odo, he is very probably the bishop's predecessors Alnoth the Kentishman at Chetwode and the royal thane, Alnoth, at Tingewick8; and in Oxfordshire he is likely to be the Alnoth at Stanton Harcourt, and Alnoth of Kent at Great Tew, very valuable manors held by Odo in 10869. He must also be the Kentishman whose man, Edstan, held Chicheley in Buckinghamshire, acquired by William son of Ansculf10. Edstan, a rare name, occurs on the fief of Bishop Odo in Essex.
In Sussex, where Odo held no land, Alnoth the noble's huge manor of Alciston was used to endow Battle abbey11. Elsewhere in the county, its division into Rapes lessen the usefulness of tenurial factors for identifications; but it is not unlikely that the Alnoth who held the manors of Charleston, Alfriston and Wilmington12 - each within two or three miles of Alciston - as well as the more substantial manors of Wartling, Hailsham, Harpingden and Ovingdean13, a little further afield, is Alnoth of Kent. All but two were acquired by the Count of Mortain, whose more distant manor at Shovelstrode14 'lay outside the Rape', meaning it was a detached portion of one of the Count's manors laying in other Rape. Similarly, Harpingden, one of the two manors acquired by William of Warenne, had a detached portion in the Mortain Rape of Pevensey. Both fragments would have been part of manors acquired from an Anglo-Saxon predecessor, so possibly links to those of Alnoth of Kent. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 237-38, which does not include Chicheley, Walton or the Sussex manors other than those acquired by Battle abbey. Dr Clarke ranks him seventh in wealth among untitled laymen, fifteenth among the nobility; his total needs adjustment but neither this or the additional manors affects the rankings. Dr Williams describes Alnoth as 'one of the richest landholders in England' and estimates his assessed land at 216 hides, the Statistics database at 256: Williams, World before Domesday, pp. 54-55.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALRED [* OF YALDING *]. Aldred, whose very valuable manor of Yalding (£30) was acquired by Richard of Tonbridge, son of Count Gilbert, is probably the Alred at Barming - the two manors
1 SUS 8,1-2
2 SUR 5,1a
3 HAM 23,57
4 BUK 4,29
5 NTH 2,6
6 KEN C6
7 KEN 5,41;56
8 BUK 4,36;38
9 OXF 7,3-4
10 BUK 17,25
11 SUS 8,1-2
12 SUS 10,16;39;58
13 SUS 9,6;24. 10,68. 12,8;11
14 SUS 10,96
constituting Richard's fief in the county - and the Alred of Yalding who had full jurisdictional rights in the Lathes of Sutton and Aylesford1. He may also be the Aethelred at Addington, another valuable manor, eight miles from Yalding2, since Alred is variant form of Aethelred, the form (Agelred) occurring nowhere else in Domesday Book: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 150, 186. Aethelred of Addington was a predecessor of the bishop of Bayeux, as were the two other pre-Conquest Alreds in Kent3. As the name occurs nowhere else in the country, it is not unlikely that these Alreds are also Alred of Yalding. Dr Williams cites later evidence that Alred survived the Conqueror and all his sons, perhaps as an (unrecorded) tenant or farmer on his lost manors: English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 81-82.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALRIC [* OF BURGH *]. Alric, whose manor of Burgh in Suffolk was acquired by William of Warenne4, is probably Alric of Burgh, overlord in that vill and in four others5. He may also be the Alric whose manor of Bredfield and men in Boulge and Debach devolved upon Warenne6, since Alric of Burgh had a free man in Bredfield and all these Warenne holdings were subinfeudated to Robert of Glanville (q.v.).
................................................................................................................................................................
ALRIC <OF LANWARNICK>. Alric, who held Lanwarnick and Draynes in Cornwall from Count Robert of Mortain, held the same manors twenty years previously7. There are no other surviving Alrics in Cornwall, but the Count's tenant at Snorscomb in Northamptonshire had also retained his holding, and possibly two others, for two decades; but given their modest scale and the distance between the counties, it is perhaps unlikely that Alric of Snorscomb is the same man as the Cornish tenant. One or more of the nine other pre-Conquest Alrics in Cornwall may be Alric of Lanwarnick, the manors acquired by Osfrith8 and Reginald of Vautortes9, clustering suggestively around Lanwarnick; but the name is common and there are no specific links between them. Alric's manors of Lanwarnick and Draynes are recorded in Coel (no. 241) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 138.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALRIC [* SON OF GODING *]. Alric son of Goding is named on seven of his demesne manors in Buckinghamshire, all acquired by Walter Giffard, who also obtained another six demesne manors from an Alric10, probably the same man, described as a royal thane on two manors where his byname is recorded and on three others where it is not. The Alric who preceded Giffard on the valuable manor of Woburn in Bedfordshire11 is probably also Goding's son since here, too, he is described as a royal thane, and Woburn is the only manor of any substance held by an Alric in the county, as well as the most valuable of those acquired from Alric by Giffard. The Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 109) records an Alric Godingessune as a free man of the abbey of Ely at Melbourn in Cambridgeshire12.
1 KEN D25. 11,1-2
2 KEN 5,51
3 KEN 5,121;170
4 SUF 26,16
5 SUF 8,6;9. 32,23;28. 67,23
6 SUF 26,17-18;20
7 CON 5,20,1-2
8 CON 5,13,1;12
9 CON 5,2,9;32
10 BUK 14,9;31-32;34;45;48
11 BDF 16,1
12 CAM 31,2
Walter also obtained the land of four of Alric son of Goding's men; but the bulk of these devolved upon the Count of Mortain, Countess Judith and Miles Crispin in Buckinghamshire and Nigel of Aubigny in Bedfordshire, links which suggest other identifications. Miles Crispin and Countess Judith acquired the remaining demesne manors of an Alric in Buckinghamshire, at Upton, Saunderton and Emberton1, the last pair fairly substantial so it is not unlikely they were held by Goding's son, though Alric is described respectively as Earl Harold's and Bishop Wulfwy's man on the last two manors. As overlord, Alric can probably be identified as Goding's son at Holcot in Bedfordshire2 and Weston Underwood and Hardmead in Buckinghamshire3, where he is lord of other men where his byname is supplied; at Milton Keynes he was lord of an Oswy4 who held land in Hardmead, where the son of Goding was an overlord. As the only identifiable overlord in the county, Goding's son is probably the Alric whose men included four burgesses in Buckingham5, and he is likely to be the Aelfric son of Goding whose men were acquired by the Count of Mortain and Countess Judith6, who otherwise appears to have held no land in demesne; scribal confusion of Alric and Aelfric is not uncommon. Though less likely, he may be the man of Oswulf son of Frani (q.v.) on a virgate in Milton Keynes, a vill in which he had men of his own7.
Almer and Alwin, sons of Goding, are recorded in the same area, while Goding - presumably his father - occurs as an overlord at Bradwell, where his son had men. Their land was acquired by Miles Crispin who, as noted above, obtained the manors of some of Alric's men and (probably) two of his demesne manors. If these identifications are valid, Alric was another English magnate who survived on a fragment of his previous estate, since he continued to hold the smaller of the two manors acquired by Miles, at Upton8. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 228-29, which does not include the demesne manors acquired by Countess Judith and Miles Crispin or one or more of the holdings in Weston Underwood, Moulsoe, Milton Keynes, Bow Brickhill, Bradwell, Hardmead and Clifton Reynes in Buckinghamshire, or Holcot and Shelton in Bedfordshire. Dr Clarke ranks him sixty-first in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors would place him in the top fifty.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALRIC [* WINTERMILK *]. The Alrics who held a virgate at Henlow and a quarter of a virgate at Stanford in Bedfordshire in 1066 and 10869 is probably Alric Wintermilk, King Edward's man, who survived for twenty years at Goldington10, these three being the only Alrics in the county to retain their manors for those two decades. The tenant at Southill, a mile from Stanford11, is probably also the same man, one of only two other surviving Alrics in the five counties of circuit three; and it is not unlikely he is also the Alric with a second manor in Southill12. All Wintermilk's manors are very modest so it is improbable that he is the same man as the other survivor, Alric son of Goding. Alric's manors of Goldington and Stanford are recorded in Coel (no. 1642) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 138; the tenants at Southill and Henlow are unidentified (nos. 399, 537).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 BUK 23,1;5. 53,8
2 BDF 25,1
3 BUK 5,12. 29,4
4 BUK 14,47
5 BUK B7
6 BUK 12,32. 57,17
7 BUK 18,3
8 BUK 23,1
9 BDF 56,8. 57,9
10 BDF 57,8
11 BDF 32,15
12 BDF 21,8
ALSI [* ILLING *]. The Alsis who preceded Count Alan of Brittany at Kneeton, and Ralph of Limésy at Epperstone and Woodborough in Nottinghamshire1, a small cluster somewhat detached from those of other Alsis, may be Alsi Illing, who had 'full jurisdiction and market rights and the king's customary dues' in the county2. They are a meagre endowment for one with such rights, particularly as Epperstone is shared, and Alsi is said to have no Hall there. Other Alsis in the county, however, are identified as the son of Karski, a different man since both are in the list of those with jurisdictional rights. Ralph had no predecessors of this name elsewhere; but Count Alan acquired the manors of an Alsi in Cambridgeshire3, Hertfordshire4 and Yorkshire5. The name is common in Yorkshire; but the Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Alsis are probably one man, since all three were men of Edeva the fair and there are few Alsis in Cambridgeshire and no others in Hertfordshire. All three held respectable manors, so if held by Alsi Illing would provide an endowment more appropriate to his status. Dr Williams, however, suggests that the Alsi at Exning6 may be the cousin of Earl Ralph Wader, Exning possibly being the place where the revolt of the earls in 1075 was hatched: English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 59, 61-62.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALSI [* NEPHEW OF EARL RALPH *]. Most if not all Alsis in East Anglia may be the nephew of Earl Ralph the constable, cousin of Earl Ralph Wader who lost his lands in the aftermath of his rebellion in 1075. He is certainly the Alsi nephew of Earl R. overlord of free men at Gislingham in Suffolk7, named in full as an overlord at Old Newton8. He is very probably also the lord of two free men on another holding in Old Newton, acquired by the bishop of Bayeux9, and the Alsi who leased a manor in Gislingham from the abbey of Bury St Edmunds for the lifetime of himself and his wife, in return for which he bequeathed his manor of Euston to the abbey10. Gislingham was in the hands of Gilbert the bowman in 1086, while the one holding in Euston - held by the abbey - does not mention Alsi. Dr Williams suggests he also held Cantley from his uncle and is the king's thane at Fersfield11, and perhaps the Alsi whose holding in Field Dalling was acquired by Roger Bigot12. Cantley and Fersfield were added to the royal demesne in Norfolk managed by Godric the steward, who had charge of many of the manors forfeited by Earl Ralph Wader and his adherents, while the entry at Dalling has 'God and Robert' interlined above Alsi's name, 'perhaps indicating later tenants of the land', God possibly being an abbreviation of Godwin, Alsi's father, and Robert being Robert of Verly, who succeeded to Godwin's manors of Burnham Thorpe and Field Dalling and also to an Alsi at Market Weston in Suffolk13: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 61-62. If, as seems likely, this is a valid reconstruction, then Alsi may also be the overlord on a second manor in Fersfield14 and may have preceded Roger Bigot at Lopham and Blo Norton15, both respectable manors within five miles of Fersfield and Market Weston. He is also likely to be the Alsi who held Freethorpe under Earl R16, and probably the Alsi who held Carleton St Peter and
1 NTT 2,7. 14,5
2 NTT S5
3 CAM 14,68;73
4 HRT 16,11
5 YKS 6N9
6 CAM 14,68
7 SUF 6,216;233
8 SUF 8,50
9 SUF 16,12
10 SUF 68,5
11 NFK 1,94-95;175-180
12 NFK 9,86
13 SUF 60,1
14 NFK 66,61
15 NFK 9,77-78
16 NFK 10,71
Thelveton 'under King Edward'1, an uncommon construction which may indicate a relationship like that of royal thane. As the only Alsi with demesne land in Norfolk, he is likely to be the overlord at Clippesby and Southwood2; there are no other Alsis in the county. Of the three in Suffolk, the two on minor holdings in the jurisdiction and patronage of the abbey of Ely are unlikely to be Earl Ralph's nephew3. The third, at Elveden4, is more problematic. He is a predecessor of Count Eustace of Boulogne, whose predecessor, Alsi Sqitrebil, was both a royal thane and endowed with valuable manors in Cambridgeshire5 and (probably) Essex6, so is conceivably also Ralph's nephew. There are no more precise links to connect them, though it may be relevant that an Alsi and his wife gave land at Burwell in Cambridgeshire to Ramsey abbey, leased after Alsi's death to his kinsman, Godwin, subsequently seized by Earl Ralph Wader: Early charters of eastern England, pp. 241-42; Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, p. 62.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALSI [* OF BROMHAM *]. Alsi, Queen Edith's man, who held the valuable manors of Eaton Bray and Bromham in Bedfordshire before the Conquest7, is very probably Alsi of Bromham, Queen Edith's man, who held Biddenham, and possibly also the brother of Alli of Lavendon (q.v.), at Pavenham8, about five miles from both Bromham and Biddenham, the one other Alsi in Bedfordshire. More certainly, he is the Alsi with a small fief in Buckinghamshire9, granted to him by Queen Edith after 1066 upon his marriage to a daughter of Wigot of Wallingford (q.v.), one of the queen's circle and a key man in the events of that year. Another of Wigot's daughters married Robert d'Oilly, their daughter marrying Miles Crispin, so Alsi was well-connected, which may explain his relative prosperity in 1086, though modest compared with his pre-Conquest estate. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1634) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 139, where he is identified as a son-in-law of Wulfward White, not by his byname.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALSI <OF CASTLE CARY>. The Alsis who preceded Walter of Douai at Castle Cary10, his most important manor in Somerset, and a dozen other manors in Somerset11, Devon12, Dorset13 and Wiltshire14, most of them substantial, are probably one man in most if not all these cases. His manors cluster around Castle Cary in Somerset and Mohuns Ottery in Devon, with single manors at Stourton Caundle in Dorset and Celdewelle in Wiltshire. Though some distance from the Somerset group, they were probably held by the same man since Alsi is not a common name in either county, occurring only once more in Dorset and twice for laymen in Wiltshire, so the antecessorial link through Walter of Douai is persuasive. In Devon, Alsi had an outlier across the Exe at Dunsford, three or four miles from the nearest of two adjacent holdings at Lowley and Doddiscombsleigh15, held by an Alsi who may be the same man. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, p. 240, which does not include Shapcombe and Combe Raleigh in Devon but repeats
1 NFK 21,26. 52,4
2 NFK 10,91. 66,102
3 SUF 21,28;34
4 SUF 5,3
5 CAM 15,1
6 ESS 20,78
7 BDF 2,1. 23,29
8 BDF 47,1
9 BUK 56,1-3
10 SOM 24,17
11 SOM 24,15-16;20;37
12 DEV 23,12;17-21
13 DOR 39,2
14 WIL 36,1
15 DEV 47,5-6
Mohuns Ottery, or the Dorset and Wiltshire manors. Dr Clarke ranks Alsi seventy-fourth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional holdings would raise him approximately ten places.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALSI [* OF FARINGDON *]. Alsi, who held a subtenancy of four hides on the royal manor of Faringdon in Berkshire1, is evidently Alsi of Faringdon, who held Barcote in the county and Windrush in Gloucestershire. He farmed the royal manors of Barrington in Gloucestershire, and Langford and Shipton in Oxfordshire, so may be the Alsi who held a second manor in the latter vill, together with Rycote2, and the subtenant on another royal manor, Littleworth in Berkshire3. He is perhaps also the one other Alsi in the three counties, at Longney in Gloucestershire4 which, like Littleworth, he held in both 1066 and 1086.
Alsi may also have held Rycote in 1066 since no pre-Conquest lord is recorded there; but even so, his pre-Conquest estate is meagre compared to what he held in 1086. As his name is common, he may have held land elsewhere; but not in the three counties where his manors lay in 1086 since no other Alsis are recorded there, at either date. His manors have some curious features. Many were acquired from Earl Harold or his retainer, Tovi, which is unusual for a modest landowner; and apart from his tenancies and farms of royal manors, Barcote (held by Harold) was a gift from the Conqueror, who also gifted his son, Alwy (q.v.). Some unrecorded act benefiting the Conqueror at Harold's expense may be suspected. The life of St Wulfstan has a colourful tale of Alsi, who refused the bishop's command to cut down the nut-tree in the graveyard of his church at Longney, in whose shade he was accustomed to drink and dice with friends, angering the saint who cursed the tree, which withered away: Mason, St Wulfstan, pp. 165-67; Williams, World before Domesday, pp. 100-101, 197 and notes 122-35. Alsi's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 641) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 138, apart from Littleworth, assigned to another tenant (no. 146) and Rycote, who tenant is unidentified (no. 28087) though stated to be 'also' Alsi of Faringdon in the text.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALSI [* SON OF BRICTSI *]. Alsi, who held Bagwich among the king's thanes on the Isle of Wight5, may be Alsi son of Brictsi, who held Thorley on the same fief and Mattingley, Minley and Wallop among the thanes on the mainland. He may also be the tenant of Winchester abbey at Calbourne6, the one other Alsi on the island; the son of Brictsi was a tenant of St Peter's on the mainland, at Woodmancott. The descent of Bagwich and Calbourne has not been traced: VCH Hampshire, v. 172, 218-19. The manors of Alsi son of Brictsi are recorded in Coel (no. 569) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 138; the tenants of Calbourne and Bagwich are unidentified (nos. 6818, 6911).
................................................................................................................................................................
ALSI [* SON OF GODRAM *]. All Alsis in Lincolnshire may be one man, the Alsi who shared a manor at Swaton in Lincolnshire7 with his brothers Aelfric and Aethelstan in 1066, identified as the son of Godram by this relationship; Aethelstan can be identified as a son of Godram (q.v.), an important predecessor of Guy of Craon. Alsi himself held none of the manors acquired by Guy; but there are grounds for identifying him as the predecessor of the bishop of Lincoln, William of Percy
1 BRK 1,34
2 OXF 58,28-29
3 BRK 1,40
4 GLS 78,12
5 HAM IoW9,8
6 HAM IoW2,1
7 LIN 26,45
and Kolsveinn of Lincoln. Alsi's manor at Swaton was acquired by Kolsveinn, who also obtained the respectable manors of Marston and 'Oseby' from an Alsi1, the latter three miles from Swaton. A Lincolnshire Claim2 describes the manors of Alsi and Ulfgrim in Lindsey as rightfully belonging to the bishopric of Lincoln, 'because they had £160 for the lands themselves before 1066', a massive sum which indicates the status of the two men though the only holding the bishop acquired from Alsi was a jurisdiction in Stow3. At Stow, the bishop's tenant was William of Percy, who acquired several valuable manors from an Alsi4 who must be the same man as the manors are all in Lindsey, as stated in the Claim. Percy also acquired a manor from Ulfgrim, as did Guy of Craon which, since Ulfgrim is a rare name, provides another link between the Alsis who preceded Percy and the bishop of Lincoln and who had family ties with the predecessors of Guy of Craon. The other two Alsis in the county may also be Godram's son. Newton and its dependencies, acquired by Odo the bowman5, is intermixed with Kolsveinn's manor of 'Oseby', part of it lying in that vill, while Surfleet, acquired by Heppo the bowman6, is eleven miles from Swaton; both are fairly substantial manors. None of the tenants-in-chief who acquired Alsi's manors have an Alsi among their tenants or predecessors elsewhere.
................................................................................................................................................................
ALSI [* SON OF KARSKI *]. Alsi, whose valuable manor of Worksop was acquired by Roger of Bully, is named in the shire customs of Nottinghamshire as the son of Karski, with 'full jurisdiction and market rights and the king's customary dues' over Worksop7. Karski is a rare name which occurs only four times, twice each in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, all four probably being Alsi's father (q.v.). The two Nottinghamshire Karskis are predecessors of Roger of Bully, as are all but two of the Alsis in county8, who may therefore be Karski's son. Further support for these identifications is provided by Dr Fleming's thesis on the allocation of the bulk of the manors in any wapentake to single tenants-in-chief. Alsi's manors are distributed among five wapentakes, only one of which - 'Bassetlaw' - was a 'Bully' wapentake. Worksop and two other manors are in 'Bassetlaw', and Tollerton in Bingham, where Roger had a large presence; but he had few manors in Newark, while Rushcliffe and Broxtowe were 'Peverel' wapentakes, suggesting that Roger acquired Alsi's manors there as his designated successor: Fleming, Kings and nobles, p. 140.
Roger was also preceded on several manors in Yorkshire, all valuable by Yorkshire standards and all closer to Worksop than most of Alsi's Nottinghamshire manors so very probably held by him also9. One of the Yorkshire Claims reveals that the one Alsi manor acquired by Geoffrey Alselin10 - also valuable - was claimed by Roger of Bully so was probably held by Karski's son. It is also likely he is the Alsi from whom Ilbert of Lacy acquired a dozen manors in 'Osgodcross' (where one of the Bully manors lay) and Staincross wapentakes11, adjoining Strafforth wapentake where the remainder of Alsi's manors lay. Some of these Lacy manors are just a few miles from those acquired by Roger, most are closer to Workshop than his other Nottinghamshire manors, and almost all are substantial by Yorkshire standards. They were acquired by Ilbert because they fall within the bounds of his Honour of Pontefract, a block of five hundred square miles from which other lay tenants-in-chief were entirely excluded: Wightman, Lacy family, pp. 17-
1 LIN 26,20;32-34;37-39;45
2 LIN CS5
3 LIN 7,13
4 LIN 22,21;24;26;28-29;35-36
5 LIN 48,5-7
6 LIN 61,5
7 NTT S5. 9,43
8 NTT 9,2;43;77-78;90-91;95
9 YKS 10W3-4;16;31;34;43
10 YKS 18W2
11 YKS 9W35-36;39;41;44;46;51;63;65;76;89;93
20, 22-23. Of the five remaining Alsis in Yorkshire, it is not unlikely Karski's son is the Alsi on four properties in and around York, twenty miles or more to the north1; but there are no precise links to support an identification.
Ilbert's predecessor was also his tenant on three of his manors2, which almost certainly means that the Alsi who retained his manor of Darfield in Strafforth wapentake for two decades is Karski's son3; Darfield lies between the other Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire manors. It is it likely that the other two surviving Alsis in northern England are the same man. One, a tenant of Henry of Ferrers at Yeaveley in Derbyshire, is probably also Henry's predecessor at Elton4, the only Alsi in the county; Henry, like Roger of Bully, acquired one of his manors from Alsi's father. The tenant of Robert of Stafford at Ellastone in Staffordshire is the only Alsi in the county5; his manor is six miles from Yeaveley. If these identifications are broadly correct, then Alsi qualifies for inclusion in Clarke, English nobility, where he would rank among the top sixty untitled laymen; although he lost most of his land, his manors in Derbyshire, Staffordshire and Yorkshire left him in a comfortable state compared to that of most of his English peers. Henry's tenant is recorded in Coel (no. 3860) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 135, without the patronymic; Robert's is unidentified (no. 31510), as are the four Yorkshire survivors (nos. 37371, 37378, 37519, 38293).
................................................................................................................................................................
ALSI [* SQITREBIL *]. The predecessor of Count Eustace of Boulogne on the very valuable manor of Newnham Hall in Essex6 is probably the royal thane who preceded the Count on the even more valuable manor of Ickleton in Cambridgeshire7 and perhaps also on the respectable manor of Elveden in Suffolk8, held in 1066 by the one other Alsi on the Count's Honour. At Ickleton, he is named Alsi Sqitrebil in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis which also records one of his men at Linton (ed. Hamilton, pp. 34, 41), a manor held by Count Alan of Brittany in 10869. Count Alan acquired demesne manors in Cambridgeshire and elsewhere from an Alsi who is probably another man, Alsi Illing, though Dr Williams suggests that the Count's predecessor at Exning10 at least might be the nephew of Earl Ralph the constable: English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 59, 61-62.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALSI [* THE MASON *]. Alsi, who held Trelamar in Cornwall in 1066 and 108611, has been tentatively identified from later sources as the father of Bernard the scribe, and as a master-builder in the service of the canons of Launceston: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 122-23. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 242) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 139.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALSTAN [* OF BOSCOMBE *]. Alstan of Boscombe, or Alstan Boscombe, was the predecessor of William of Eu in Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Somerset and Wiltshire. There is little reason to doubt, therefore, that he is William's predecessor Alstan on another three manors in Bedfordshire12
1 YKS C12. 1W14. 11W3-4
2 YKS 9W35;41;141
3 YKS 29W3
4 DBY 6,11;61
5 STS 11,39
6 ESS 20,78
7 CAM 15,1
8 SUF 5,3
9 CAM 14,11
10 CAM 14,68
11 CON 5,21,1
12 BDF 18,2-3;7
and two in Hertfordshire1, or the Alstan who preceded William in Hampshire2, Berkshire3, Dorset4 and Gloucestershire5. He is probably also the Alstan whose lease of a hide from the abbey of Glastonbury at Bremhill in Wiltshire came into William's hands, as it did at Ditteridge6, and probably also the Alstan at Slacham in Hampshire, where his holding was acquired by Ralph of Limésy7, who preceded William of Eu on some of his manors in Dorset and Gloucestershire.
In Somerset, he is identified in Exon. as the Alstan whose manor of Eckweek was acquired by the Count of Mortain8, so he may be the Count's predecessor at Caundle in Dorset9 and at Barton St David in Somerset10, held by Roger of Courseulles but in part by the Count. Both manors lay between those of Alstan held by William of Eu on the Dorset/Somerset border. The Count was also preceded by an Alstan on three manors in Cornwall; but these are modest and remote from those elsewhere. The bulk of Alstan's manors lay in the south-western counties; but he had substantial holdings in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire so may well be Alstan, the sheriff of the latter county before 1066, there being no other Alstans who are likely candidates: Green, English sheriffs, p. 25. A list of Alstan's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 229-31, which does not include Boxbury in Hertfordshire11, and those at Slacham, Caundle, Eckweek and Barton discussed above. Dr Clarke ranks him fifth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional holdings would not affect this.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWAKER [* FATHER OF AELFRIC *]. All Alwakers and Everwacers in Domesday Book may be one man, their forenames almost certainly being equivalent though believed to be distinct: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 141-42, 249. As his name is rare, Everwacer, predecessor of Serlo of Burcy on the valuable manors of Uphill, Compton Market and two others in Somerset12, is almost certainly the father of Aelfric son of Everwacer (q.v.), a tenant of Glastonbury abbey in the county 1086, and just as certainly the same man as Alwaker, predecessor of Walter of Douai on seven manors Somerset13 and another in Wiltshire14. On Walter of Douai's manor of Huntspill15, Alwaker is rendered as Everwacer in Exon.; and although von Feilitzen attributes this to 'confusion', the circumstantial evidence of the distribution and status of the manors acquired by the two tenants-in-chief indicates otherwise. Glastonbury had a tenant at Blackford named Alwaker16 as well as an Aelfric son of Everwacer at Lamyatt, and both names are rare, with a localised distribution; Walter of Douai's predecessor held Sparkford17, four miles from Blackford. Other manors of Alwaker/Everwacer are interspersed with each other: Milton18 is two miles from Uphill19, and West Harptree1 is adjacent to Compton Martin2, the remainder all lying in the same
1 HRT 28,4;6
2 HAM 32,4
3 BRK 23,1
4 DOR 34,1;9-11;13
5 GLS 31,4;7;10-11
6 WIL 8,12. 32,11
7 HAM 1,32
8 SOM 19,61
9 DOR 26,70
10 SOM 21,92
11 HRT 28,5
12 SOM 37,2-4;10
13 SOM 24,2;9;18;28;30-32
14 WIL 36,2
15 SOM 24,28
16 SOM 8,9
17 SOM 24,18
18 SOM 24,2
19 SOM 37,2
area of north Somerset. Both tenants-in-chief acquired valuable manors, the most valuable of them - Weare3 - being surrounded by clusters of the remainder.
Three other tenants-in-chief acquired a manor each from Alwaker/Everwacer. William of Falaise, Serlo's son-in-law, obtained Everwacer's manor of Woodspring4, roughly midway between Alwaker at Milton and Everwacer at Uphill, a few miles from either. The other two manors are further afield; but Alwaker's manor of Ashe in Hampshire is another valuable property, so perhaps also held by Aelfric's father; if so, he was a dependant of Earl Harold5. Less certainly, the respectable manor acquired from Everwacer by Baldwin the sheriff at Exwick in Devon6, may have been his too, though there are no links other than the rarity of the name. Like many of his peers, Alwaker survived on a fraction of his previous estate, given refuge alongside his son on the Honour of Glastonbury abbey (above), where the abbot provided him with a fairly substantial manor. He was a wealthy landowner in 1086, among the half-dozen wealthiest laymen in Somerset. If included in Clarke, English nobility, he would rank nationally sixty-sixth in wealth among untitled laymen. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 14596).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD [* COLLING *]. The Alwards who held Potterne, Tilshead and Swallowcliffe in Wiltshire may be Alward Colling, who held Knook, the following entry, since the fief is in order of landowners rather Hundreds7. He is certainly the Alward on the bishop of Salisbury's manor of Potterne, where the circumstances in which the three hides he held in the vill became detached from the episcopal manor are rehearsed, and possibly therefore the Alward on the following manor8, both survivors, like those mentioned so far. In Dorset, he is named in Exon. as the Alward who held the royal manor of Langton before the Conquest9, and the Geld Roll for Combsditch Hundred identifies him as the Alward at Thornicombe in that Hundred10, which he held at both dates: VCH Dorset, iii. 135. At Langton, he was succeeded by the wife of Hugh son of Grip, so he may be the Alward whose six manors formed part of her fief in Dorset11. It is possible he held other manor since his name is very common in the five south-western counties of circuit two, even among survivors, who occur on almost three dozen manors there, a baker's dozen even retaining the same manors for two decades. Alward's 1086 manors are recorded in Coel (no. 259) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 147, except for the two Alwards on the manors of the bishop of Salisbury, identified as a second Alward at Potterne (Coel no. 93), and an unidentified tenant at Cannings (Coel no. 16602).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD [* MART *]. Alward, who held Colscott among the king's thanes in Devon in 1066 and 1086, may be Alward Mart of the following entry, holding land worth five shillings at an unnamed location, granted him by the Queen12. Alward Mart is recorded in Exon. as holding Dowland, Loosedon and Wolfin before the Conquest13, so he survived for twenty years. His manors were acquired by Walter of Claville, whose brother Gotshelm succeeded an Alward at Nymet, four miles
1 SOM 24,31
2 SOM 37,10
3 SOM 24,9
4 SOM 27,3
5 HAM 30,1
6 DEV 16,109
7 WIL 67,11-13
8 WIL 3,1-2
9 DOR 1,23
10 DOR 56,15
11 DOR 55,20;22;38;40-42
12 DEV 52,29-30
13 DEV 24,23-24;28
from Wolfin1, all three manors lying in North Tawton Hundred. The brothers, whose fiefs are interrelated, both acquired manors from an Alward in Fremington Hundred, at Instow and Newton Tracey, five miles apart2, their succession to Alwards who were near neighbours suggesting these, too, are Alward Mart. Gotshelm also obtained East Manley from an Alward, possibly the same man3. It is possible he held other manor since his name is very common in the five south-western counties of circuit two, even among survivors, who occur on almost three dozen manors there, a baker's dozen even retaining the same manors for two decades. Alward's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 361) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 147.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD <OF CLYST>. The Alwards who held two manors from the Count of Mortain in Cornwall4 and three in Devon5 are probably one man, since he held all five for twenty years, the only such Alward in the two counties, apart from one manor held by the king's thane, Alward Mart. He may also be the Count's tenant at Treworder in Cornwall6 and Rockbeare and Northleigh in Devon7 since no other tenant-in-chief had a tenant of this name in either county, and the Count himself had none elsewhere. Some of the pre-Conquest Alwards may also be Alward of Clyst. In Devon, the Count had one predecessor named Alward, on a tiny holding at Little Torrington8, where Exon. names him Alward Rufus, possibly an alias. Elsewhere, most of those who held land in the vicinity of Clyst and Northleigh have been identified as Alward son of Toki. In Cornwall, however, Alward of Clyst may be the Alward at Dannonchapel9, adjacent to his holding at Tregardock, and at Alverton10, a substantial manor retained by the Count, around Mounts Bay from Winnianton. The Count had a number of predecessors named Alward in other counties; but the name is very common, especially in the five south-western counties of circuit two, even among survivors, who occur on almost three dozen manors there, a baker's dozen even retaining the same manors for two decades. Alward's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 1699) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 147, apart from Treworder, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 2080).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD <OF DUNHAM>. All Alwards in Cheshire are probably one man. Those whose manors of Dunham Massey, Bowdon, Hale, Ashley, 'Alretunstall' and Sinderland in Cheshire were acquired by Haimo of Mascy11 almost certainly are, his manors forming a tight cluster around Dunham itself. It is not unlikely he is also the Alward at Shurlach and Worleston12, the two remaining Alwards in the county, though there are no links to confirm this; the two manors lie to the east of Chester, where Alward of Dunham had a house. A cluster of Alwards in the neighbouring county of Staffordshire are conceivably the same man, though it is perhaps more likely they are the Alward who survived at Fenton, in the centre of the cluster; there is no indication that the Cheshire Alward survived, though many Englishmen in the county did so: Sawyer and Thacker. 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', pp. 319-25.
1 DEV 25,9
2 DEV 24,26. 25,3
3 DEV 25,21
4 CON 5,16,1-2
5 DEV 15,6;58;61
6 CON 1,1
7 DEV 15,22;25
8 DEV 15,16
9 CON 5,25,3
10 CON 5,1,11
11 CHS 13,2-4;6-7. 27,2
12 CHS 5,6. 8,29
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD [* OF FELBRIGG *]. Alward, whose holding at Winterton in Norfolk was valued in Felbrigg, is almost certainly the Alward who preceded Roger Bigot on several components of his manor of Felbrigg1; as the name is rare in East Anglia, he is probably Roger's predecessor at Yoxford in Suffolk, where he is described as a royal reeve2. It is likely, too, that he is Roger's predecessor, Aethelward, at Hinton and Darsham3, the Aethelward at Darsham being also a royal reeve; here at least Aethelward is probably an equivalent name, though the two are thought to be distinct: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 155-57, 188-89. There are no other Aethelwards in East Anglia but five Alwards. Some of these may be Alward of Felbrigg, particularly the predecessors of Robert Malet4 and Ralph Pinel5, these three tenants-in-chief having a number of claims against each other; but there are no specific links to confirm an identification. Malet's predecessor retained his manor for two decades, and there is a suggestion that Alward of Felbrigg did so too. At Sustead, he 'held 3 smallholders' and 'has 1/2 plough', and Winterton 'is [included] in the valuation of Alward of Felbrigg. He also holds this.' The texts are not, however, as straightforward as they appear, 'he' being more likely to refer to the tenant of the previous entry, Stanhard. Tenses in Little Domesday are often ambiguous, but there is no suggestion in the remaining entries that Alward/Aethelward was active in 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD <OF NORMANTON>. Alward, whose small manor of little more than bovate worth a couple of shillings at Normanton in Nottinghamshire was acquired by Roger of Bully6, is the only Alward in the county or on the Honour of Roger of Bully. The name is rare in the north-east; and the only Alwards in adjacent counties - all in Yorkshire, some fifty miles away - have no links with him. Alward was a thane, with his own Hall, despite the tiny size of his manor.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. Alward is a common name, but family and tenurial links suggest that all Alwards in Shropshire are Alward son of Almund. He and his father are identified as joint tenants of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury at 'Amaston'7, and Alward 'also' held four other manors directly from the earl8. He is probably therefore the Alward holding another six manors from Earl Roger, on one of which he succeeded Almund9, and probably also the Alward who preceded the earl at Harcourt10. His father was a predecessor of Reginald the sheriff and Helgot of Holdgate as well as the earl, so the son may be the Alward whose manors they acquired11. He may also be the tenant of the Canons of St Chad and St Alkmund at Marton and Preston Montford12, and the predecessor of the Corbet brothers at Rorrington and Marrington13, all four lying within two or three miles of one of his manors discussed above. There are no other Alwards in the county.
1 NFK 9,146;158
2 SUF 7,18
3 SUF 7,5;36
4 SUF 6,202
5 SUF 61,1
6 NTT 9,69
7 SHR 4,27,17
8 SHR 4,27,18-21
9 SHR 4,1,2;36. 4,27,9;23-25
10 SHR 4,27,35
11 SHR 4,3,61;64;68;70. 4,21,6;10
12 SHR 3f,2. 3g,10
13 SHR 4,4,21. 4,5,15
Alwards are numerous in the neighbouring county of Herefordshire, some of whom may be Almund's son since one of them held the lost vill of Almundestune1, perhaps named after his father. The manor was acquired by Hugh the ass, whose predecessor at Stretton2 may therefore be Almund's son. There are other Alwards in the same area, but none of the links available in Shropshire to identify them: no Almunds in the county, only one surviving Alward, and no tenurial connection other than with Hugh the ass. The manors of 'Amaston', Rowton, Benthall and Wotherton3 are attributed to Alward son of Almund in Coel (no. 2576) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 149; the other tenants are unidentified (nos. 30642, 30659, 30670, 31089, 31106-08).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD [* SON OF TOKI *]. Alward is a common name, particularly in Devon; but it is likely that most if not all such predecessors of William the goat and his brother Ralph of Pomeroy are one man, Alward son of Toki. The entry for Cruwys Morchard4 records that it was taken from Alward son of Toki 'after King William came to England' and was held by William the goat 'with Alward's land', implying that William's title depended upon Alward. Exon. emphasises this, stating that Morchard was held 'with the Honour of Alward', a term normally used for estates comprising a number of manors: Devonshire Domesday, ii. 708-11. William acquired another eight manors from Alward, on three of which Exon. supplies his patronymic, while on another the tenant was Ralph of Pomeroy5 who acquired another three manors from Alward as tenant-in-chief, including one where Alward's patronymic is supplied by Exon.6. No Tokis are recorded in Devon.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD [* THE NOBLE*]. Alward the noble, a royal thane named on two Buckinghamshire manors7, is probably the man or thane of earls Harold and Algar and of Archbishop Stigand, though as the name is very common and his manors distributed among seven or eight tenants-in-chief his estate is difficult to reconstruct, most of it however lying in Hertfordshire, where his overlords and successors are all represented. On the face of it, it is very improbable that a man or thane of Earl Harold and Archbishop Stigand should also have a Mercian earl as his overlord, albeit one who died before 1066; but the location and status of Alward's manors, the divided ownership of Anstey, and the links on the fief of the bishop of London discussed below seem unlikely to be a series of coincidences.
Count Eustace of Boulogne acquired five of Alward's manors in Hertfordshire, on all which the overlord was Earl Harold, all but one being subinfeudated by the Count to the same tenant; four of the manors are substantial, Anstey in particular being the most valuable of all Alward's manors8, the one retained by the Count in demesne. Hardwin of Scales acquired the remainder of the vill, along with Luffenhall and Wyddial, all held by Alward from Earl Algar9. At Patmore10, the earl was also Alward's overlord on the manor acquired by the bishop of London, who also obtained Widford and Meesden - both substantial - from Alward; at Meesden, the bishop's tenant was Payne, steward of Hardwin of Scales and his tenant at Anstey. Alward's overlord at Widford and Meesden was Archbishop Stigand11, also his overlord at Libury, held by Bishop Odo of Bayeux in 1086,
1 HEF 29,9
2 HEF 29,13
3 SHR 4,27,17-22
4 DEV 19,35
5 DEV 19,5-6;14;16;19;24-25;39
6 DEV 34,1;8;14
7 BUK 4,28. 14,21
8 HRT 17,2-4;8-9
9 HRT 37,2;14;20
10 HRT 4,10
11 HRT 4,4;17
along with Alward's manor of Theobald Street1. Both are modest; but since Bishop Odo succeeded Alward the noble at Drayton Parslow in Buckinghamshire2, one of the two manors where his title is supplied, and on more substantial manors elsewhere (below), it is likely these two manors are also Alward's. Of the three remaining Alwards in the county in 1066, the lord of Boxbury is likely to be the noble Alward, his successor William of Eu probably acquiring substantial manors from him elsewhere3; William's tenant at Boxbury, Peter of Valognes, had Alward as his tenant on another manor in Libury4. The Alward at Hormead is more doubtful, his overlord Almer of Bennington being a local magnate5.
Finally, the one other pre-Conquest Alward in the county, on the respectable manor of Mardleybury6, is probably Alward the noble, his successor Robert Gernon acquiring a more substantial manor from him at Rainham in Essex7. At Mardleybury, Alward still held the manor in 1086, which almost certainly identifies him as the Alward of Mardleybury who held 'Rodhanger' for two decades and Watton in 1086, both among the royal thanes in the county8. He is very probably also the survivor at Reed and Libury9, both vills in which he had manors before the Conquest, held by the bishop of Bayeux and Count Eustace in 108610. No other Alwards held land in Hertfordshire or surrounding counties in 1086. Four of his five tenancies lay in Broadwater Hundred, where Alward of Mardleybury was a juror: Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 100).
Outside Hertfordshire, Alward's successors in that county acquired manors from an Alward in six other counties. The Essex Alwards are probably Alward the noble because his four manors there are respectable or substantial and two them were acquired by tenants-in-chief who had no other Alwards on their Honours: the bishop of London at Tendring11 and Robert Gernon at Rainham12, the latter one of Alward's most valuable manors. Bradwell and Thurrock were acquired by the bishop of Bayeux13, Thurrock being five miles from Rainham. In Somerset, Bishop Odo's one manor, at Templecombe, had been held in part by an Alward, though the manor was evidently acquired as successor to Earl Leofwin14; the respectable manor of Lexworthy was held by the one other Alward on the Honour of Count Eustace15. In Berkshire, William of Eu succeeded Alward on substantial manors at Denford and Denchworth16 which constituted two-thirds of his fief in the county, the other manor being held in 1066 by Alstan of Boscombe, Alward's overlord on the manor acquired by William at Boxbury in Hertfordshire. The Alwards of Denford and Denchworth are two of three unidentified Alwards in Berkshire, the other probably being the goldsmith named elsewhere on the same fief17. Finally, all Alwards in Kent are predecessors of Bishop Odo, and one of the three in Surrey. Horton, Ruxley and Charlton, the three most valuable Kentish manors, are within a few miles of each other, Horton being five miles from Ruxley which is eight miles from Charlton18; Otterden and Dean are some distance away but within five miles of each other (KEN,
1 HRT 5,2;12
2 BUK 4,28
3 HRT 28,5
4 HRT 36,10
5 HRT 38,2
6 HRT 20,1
7 ESS 32,28
8 HRT 42,1;13
9 HRT 16,6. 36,10
10 HRT 5,12. 17,2
11 ESS 4,5
12 ESS 32,28
13 ESS 18,23;28
14 SOM 4,1
15 SOM 17,3
16 BRK 23,2-3
17 BRK 65,5;16
18 KEN 5,18;22;33
5,76;167). Alward's overlord at Horton was Earl Harold, elsewhere King Edward. In Surrey, where he held the valuable manor of Bramley1, he is possibly also the Alward on the other two manors in the county, Peper Harrow2, another substantial manor held directly from the king, being six miles from Bramley, while the anonymous manor in Wallington Hundred held from Chertsey abbey3, must lie on a more or less direct line between Bramley and Horton.
The one tenant-in-chief not represented in Hertfordshire is Walter Giffard, who acquired Horwood in Buckinghamshire, the second manor on which Alward is given his byname; he is probably Walter's predecessor on the preceding and valuable manor of Swanbourne4, and the overlord at Salden in the same Hundred5. He is unlikely to be either of the other two Alwards in the county, both with minor holdings as dependants of overlords of modest status6. Another royal thane named Alward held a valuable manor in Gloucestershire, and a thane of Earl Algar a more modest one in Worcestershire, but their associations suggest these are other men. If all or most of the identifications suggested above are valid, then Alward the noble was a wealthy landowner before the Conquest, as his byname implies, with an estate valued at about £100, which would rank him comfortably among the wealthiest forty untitled laymen if included in Clarke, English nobility. His 1086 tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 680) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 147, apart from Reed and Libury, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 7117, 7286).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWARD [* THE REEVE *]. Alward, who held a one and a half hides at Wool in Dorset in 1086, is probably Alward the reeve, since the tax he owed in the Geld Roll for county will fit no other Alward. He may also be the Alward who held a virgate in the same vill before the Conquest7: VCH Dorset, iii. 143. He might be the Alward at Rushton, another survivor in the same Hundred,8, or Alward Colling, who survived for twenty years; but the name is common and there are no links to confirm an identification. Alward's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1772) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 149; Alward at Rushton is unidentified (no. 3004).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN [* DEVIL *]. Alwin, who held Pertenhall in Huntingdonshire before the Conquest, is named Alwin Devil in the Claims for the county9. Pertenhall was acquired by the bishop of Lincoln, who also inherited the four manors of Alwin Devil in Bedfordshire10, though not his other manor in Huntingdonshire, at West Perry, acquired by Eustace the sheriff. On two of his Bedfordshire manors, Alwin is said to be King Edward's man, on another he is anachronistically described as a man of the bishop of Lincoln, presumably meaning the bishop of Dorchester, Bishop Wulfwy. Bishop Wulfwy had a brother, Alwin, who held Maulden in Bedfordshire11 and Westbury in Buckinghamshire12, who may well be Alwin Devil, as perhaps is Bishop Wulfwy's man, Alwin, at Thurleigh in Bedfordshire13. Finally, Alwin Devil may be the Alwin at Keysoe which, like the
1 SUR 5,1f
2 SUR 22,3
3 SUR 8,23
4 BUK 14,20-21
5 BUK 12,25
6 BUK 17,20. 43,2
7 DOR 56,62-63
8 DOR 56,25
9 HUN 2,9. D16
10 BDF 4,2;6-8
11 BDF 16,4
12 BUK 41,2
13 BDF 28,2
adjacent vill of Pertenhall, was part in Huntingdonshire, part in Bedfordshire1. If so, he survived the Conquest, on a small fragment of his previous estate. Bishop Wulfwy had another dependant named Alwin, at Goldington in Bedfordshire, named Alwin Sack2, possibly an alternative byname for Devil, though the entry is sandwiched between two attributed to Alwin Devil, perhaps in an effort to distinguished two Alwins, an impression supported by the fact that all four of Alwin Devil's manors (though no other of his Lincolnshire manors) were acquired by William of Cairon, Sack's by Ivo Tallboys. Bishop Wulfwy had another brother, Godric, possibly Godric the sheriff (q.v.), whose lands were also added to the endowment of the bishopric of Lincoln. Alwin is unidentified in Coel (no. 32739)
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN DOD[SON]. Alwin Dod, who held ten acres at Chells in Hertfordshire in 1086 from Peter of Valognes3, may be the other survivor, Alwin Dodson, who held Wormley among the king's thanes. Alwin Dodson's tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 775) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 148; the Chells subtenancy is omitted from both.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN [* GOTTON *]. Alwin, who held the valuable manor of Ayot St Lawrence in Hertfordshire4, is identified as Alwin Gotton in a writ of the Conqueror: Bates, Regesta, no. 321, pp. 940-41; his man Siward held land there. Alwin is described as a royal thane at Ayot, and as Alwin Gotton, King Edward's man, at Hunsdon. He had other manors at 'Oxwick' and Stanstead Abbots in Hertfordshire and Quicksbury in Essex, immediately across the county boundary from Sawbridgeworth, where he had a Freeman. His name is variously Alwin Gotton or Alwin of Gotton in Domesday, the former probably the correct form since it occurs in all three of the Conqueror's writs: Bates, Regesta, nos. 297, 321, 324, pp. 891, 940-41, 947. It is possible, even likely, that he is the same man as Alwin Horne, also a royal thane, since between them they account for all the Alwins in the two Hertfordshire Hundreds of Broadwater and Braughing. Another royal thane held Aldbury and a thane of Earl Harold held Hertingfordbury, both valuable manors5, which is a large number of royal or quasi-royal thanes of the same name in a small county; but the name is very common and there are no apparent links between them.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN [* OF MENDLESHAM *]. Alwin, one of eighteen free men at Cotton in Suffolk added to the manor of Mendlesham, may be the Alwin of Mendlesham named at Old Newton6, though their status is dissimilar.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN <OF STANTON>. Alwin is one of the most common names in Domesday Book but comparatively uncommon in the north-west, occurring just twice in Derbyshire and not at all in Cheshire. In these circumstances, the Alwin from whom Henry of Ferrers acquired Stanton and one of the five manors in Etwall in Derbyshire7 may be the same man. The manors are roughly ten miles apart.
1 HUN 29,2
2 BDF 4,5
3 HRT 36,4
4 HRT 9,9
5 HRT 15,3. 24,3
6 SUF 1,77. 31,51
7 DBY 6,21;98
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN SON OF EDWY [* THE NOBLE *]. Alwin, who was preceded by his father Edwy on an unidentified manor held from Roger of Lacy in Herefordshire1, is almost certainly the Alwin son of Edwy the noble who held Butterley from Roger2. Roger had no other tenants of this name, and there were no other such survivors in Herefordshire or neighbouring counties. Alwin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4704) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 148.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN [* STICKHARE *]. Alwin, whose substantial manor of Heydon in Essex was acquired by Robert son of Roscelin3, is probably Alwin Stickhare, King Edward's man, who preceded Robert at Stepney in Middlesex4. Although Alwin is one of the most common names in Domesday, he may also be King Edward's man at Haggeston, two miles from Stepney5, and the Alwin on a second manor in Heydon6, both of comparable status to his other manors. Heydon was acquired by Hugh of Bernières, who had a manor in Stepney7 and a tenant in the vill, Alwin son of Brictmer, who held a mill from him8. If this Alwin is Alwin Stickhare, then he survived the Conquest, though only as a mill-owner. None of these tenants-in-chief had tenants or predecessors named Alwin elsewhere, except on one small holding at Alfhildestuna in Suffolk, acquired by Robert Gernon9. Alwin's mill is recorded in Coel (no. 566).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN [* THE REEVE *]. Alwin is a common name, and not uncommon even among survivors in 1086. There are ten such in Bedfordshire, one identified as Alwin the priest and three others as Alwin the reeve. There are grounds for thinking the remaining six are also the reeve. The survivors encircle Bedford, the southern half of the county containing none, though there are several pre-Conquest Alwins there. Four of the survivors occur in the section devoted to reeves, beadles and almsmen, three holding in the same vill, Sutton, and the fourth in the adjacent vill of Beeston10; one, at Sutton, had survived since 1066. The others are tenants of Eudo the steward at Sutton11 and of Countess Judith at Sutton and Clifton12. Sutton and Beeston are straddled by the vills of Tempsford, Edworth and Holme, where Alwin the reeve is identified; and Clifton is four to five miles from Edworth and Holme.
Alwin the reeve may also be the Alwin who held half a carucate in 1066 at Sawtry in Huntingdonshire13, where Countess Judith held the main manor in the vill and a former reeve, Alwin, is named as having 'formerly' held half a hide in a writ of William Rufus: Regesta, i. no. 322. Rufus ordered the sheriff to reinstate the abbey of Ramsey in the half-hide, which may cast some light on a mysterious statement in the Claims for Huntingdonshire14 'that the land of Alwin the priest was the Abbot's; and that each was the priest's and the reeve's land [respectively]'. What 'each' refers to is obscure; but it may well include the reeve's land at Sawtry. No Alwin the priest is
1 HEF 10,15
2 HEF 10,70
3 ESS 76,1
4 MDX 16,1
5 MDX 14,1
6 ESS 10,5
7 MDX 3,2
8 MDX 3,11
9 SUF 36,5
10 BDF 57,3v;3vi;5;11
11 BDF 21,7
12 BDF 53,22;36
13 HUN 29,6
14 HUN D6
recorded in Huntingdonshire, nor any Alwin on the Honour of the abbey of Ramsey. However, one such priest occurs in the region, the other surviving Alwin in Bedfordshire. Like several of the others, his manor is recorded among the reeves, beadles and almsmen1; and like Alwin at Sutton, he survived for two decades. These links are suggestive, despite the ubiquity of the name, though it is difficult to envisage the Conqueror endowing a reeve to perform 'mass every week on Mondays for the souls of the King and the Queen'. To put this distribution in perspective, no other Alwin the priest is recorded in circuits three or six at either date, and only one other reeve anywhere at all in Domesday, though a reeve of the abbot of Ely named Alwin occurs at Melbourn in Cambridgeshire in the Ely Inquisition2: Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 109). Alwin's manors on fief 57 are recorded in Coel (no. 1276) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 148, apart from Beeston, whose tenant and those on other fiefs are unidentified (nos. 229, 491, 506, 557). The wife - or widow - who succeeded Alwin at Sawtry is recorded in Coel (no. 10465).
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN [* THE SHERIFF OF GLOUCESTERSHIRE *]. Alwin the sheriff, named as the predecessor of William Goizenboded at Guiting and 'Duni' in Gloucestershire, may be the Alwin from whom William acquired six other manors in the county3, almost all respectable, two worth more than £5 each. He may also be the Alwin who preceded Gilbert son of Turold at Aylworth, where William Goizenboded was his predecessor in the same vill4. Alwin is named as sheriff on the royal manors of 'Barton' and Awre, assuming that Alwy the sheriff there is a scribal error, as seems likely5. At 'Barton', he leased a hide in Upton to which Humphrey of Maidenhill succeeded, so he may be the Alwy whose manor at Sezincote was acquired by Humphrey; Urso the sheriff acquired a manor in the same vill from Alwin6. Similarly at Awre, submanors which he 'placed ... out of the revenue' were held by Roger of Berkeley and William son of Baderon, both of whom succeeded an Alwin on their fiefs7. Alwin may also be the Alwy whose holdings at Evington and Cirencester were acquired by William son of Baderon8: Williams, 'Introduction to the Gloucestershire Domesday', p. 23.
Alwin is also named as sheriff at Wolferlow in Herefordshire9, where he was succeeded by Roger of Lacy, so he is possibly the Alwin who preceded Roger at Edgeworth10, which would have been one of his more valuable manors. His name, of course, is a common one, so he may have held other manors in the county, though none of these were more valuable than those assigned to him here. It has been suggested that he may be the sheriff, Alwy, who had a modest manor at Bletchingdon among the king's officers in Oxfordshire11: Green, English sheriffs, pp. 42, 69. There is no other indication that the sheriff of Gloucestershire survived until 1086; but this entry is ambiguous. Although Alwy 'holds' the manor, it is also recorded that Manasseh the cook (q.v.), who was probably dead by 1086, had bought it from him, so 'holds' may be a scribal error for 'held', no pre-Conquest lord being recorded in the entry. A list of Alwin/Alwy's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 233-34, which does not include Bletchingdon, the Lacy manors, or those of William son of Baderon attributed by the scribe to an Alwy. Dr Clarke ranks him sixty-eighth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional holdings would raise him a dozen or more places.
1 BDF 57,19
2 CAM 31,2
3 GLS 34,5-7;9-11
4 GLS 34,6. 52,6
5 GLS 1,2;13
6 GLS 65,1. 70,2
7 GLS 32,6. 42,2
8 GLS 19,2. 32,1
9 HEF 10,66
10 GLS 39,9
11 OXF 58,27
Alwy's apparent tenancy at Bletchingdon is recorded in Coel (no. 4312) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 149.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWIN [* THE SHERIFF OF WARWICKSHIRE *]. Alwin the sheriff, father of Thorkil of Warwick (q.v.), is identified by title or as Thorkil's father on seven manors in Warwickshire. Dr Williams suggests he is the Alwin who held land in the 'family vills' of Thorkil and his relatives: Kemerton in Gloucestershire1; and Fillongley, Lawford, Nuneaton, Lea Marston, Harbury and Flecknoe in Warwickshire2: 'A vice-comital family', pp. 279-82, 285, 288, 291, 294. To these should perhaps be added Fenny Compton3, acquired by Thorkil, shared with a brother, and located in a 'family vill'. He may also be Alwin the sheriff who held Offord d'Arcy in Huntingdonshire4, whose sheriffdom is uncertain: Green, English sheriffs, p. 48.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWOLD. Alwold is a common name which occurs in twenty-six counties, on the lands of more than forty tenants-in-chief, with significant clusters in Devon and in Somerset, where many of the most valuable manors lie; all but a handful occur south of the Wash. Eleven survivors are scattered around ten counties.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWOLD [* OF STEVINGTON *]. Alwold of Stevington, whose man held land in Turvey in Bedfordshire5, is very probably Alwold, a man or thane of King Edward, who provided the bulk of the fief of Count Eustace of Boulogne in Bedfordshire6, and almost certainly also the royal thane Aethelwold who held the valuable manor of Stevington itself7, also acquired by Eustace, though the names Alwold and Aethelwold 'would certainly be deemed distinct': Round, 'Domesday survey of Bedfordshire', p. 202. He is probably also the royal thane Alwold who preceded Countess Judith on another valuable manor, at Maulden8, since two royal thanes of the same name in a small county is unlikely. Neither tenant-in-chief had other Alwolds on their Honours. An Alwold, Bishop Wulfwy's man had a modest manor in Hinwick9, and an Alwold survived on a tiny holding in Rushden10, both within a few miles of Alwold of Stevington's manors in the same Hundred of 'Willey'; but there are no links other than proximity to connect them. A list of Alwold/Aethelwold's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 232-33, which does not include Maulden. Dr Clarke ranks him seventy-eighth in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Maulden would raise him approximately ten places.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWOLD [* SON OF ERNGEAT *]. Although a common name, it is likely that most if not all Alwolds in Worcestershire are one man, Alwold son of Erngeat, a thane of Earl Edwin, who held part of the royal manor of Bromsgrove11 alongside his putative father and perhaps a brother, Frani, both also thanes of the earl. This makes it probable that he is the Alwold who held
1 GLS 19,2
2 WAR 5,1. 17,47;70. 23,3. 29,2. 44,11
3 WAR 17,59
4 HUN 19,25
5 BDF 2,8
6 BDF 15,1;4-7
7 BDF 15,2
8 BDF 53,1
9 BDF 34,2
10 BDF 3,17
11 WOR 1,1c
'Thickenappletree' and Hampton Lovett1 which, according to Hemming, the bishop of Worcester demanded as the price for the admission of Erngeat's unnamed son - perhaps Alwold himself - to the monastery, Erngeat refusing: Hemingi cartularium, pp. 264-65; Williams, 'Introduction to the Worcestershire Domesday', p. 22. He may also be the Alwold whose valuable manor Elmley Lovett was acquired by Ralph of Tosny2, Elmley, Hampton Lovett and 'Thickenappletree' lying within five miles of each other, a few miles south-west and west of Bromsgrove, providing 'a reasonable case' for the identification: Baxter, Earls of Mercia, p. 252. It is likely, too, that he held 'Osmerley'3, acquired - like Bromsgrove - by Urso the sheriff, who may have succeeded Alwold's father at Hatete. Finally, it is not unlikely that he held Northfield4, almost as valuable as Elmley, seven miles from Bromsgrove, even closer to 'Osmerley'. There are no other Alwolds in the county.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWOLD [* THE BALD *]. According to Exon., Turstin son of Rolf acquired South Cadbury in Somerset from Alwold the bald, evidently Turstin's designated predecessor since the scribe noted where land had been added to that of Alwold5. More than 75% of Turstin's fief in Somerset was contributed by an Alwold6; in Gloucestershire, one of his two most valuable manors7; and another in Dorset8 from one of the two Alwolds in the county. He is probably also the Alwold who leased land from Cerne abbey at Cheriton in Somerset, where Turstin's predecessor had a manor in the vill9. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp 231-32, which does not include South Cadbury. Dr Clarke ranks him sixty-second in wealth among untitled laymen; Cadbury would raise him a couple of places.
............................................................................................................................................. ALWY [* OF THETFORD *]. All Alwys in Norfolk may be Alwy of Thetford. His byname is recorded on the royal manor of Stockton in Norfolk, six times on the fief of Roger Bigot in the county, and once again on his fief in Suffolk. It may reasonably be suspected that Alwin of Thetford, who preceded Roger at Hudeston10, is a scribal error for Alwy, an error repeated but corrected in a later entry11. Although the name is common, Alwy may be identified elsewhere with some confidence due to the highly skewed distribution of the name: only one of the twenty-six unidentified Alwys in Norfolk - too many to list here - are unconnected with Roger Bigot, who is named as Alwy's predecessor in several entries12. Further confirmation of his identity - should it be needed - is provided by his relationship with his son, Stanhard (q.v.); by his post-Conquest activities in the county recorded in eight entries13, and by his frequent appearance as a lord of men. In view of his numerous holdings, he is probably the Alwy who bought the large and very valuable manor of Hemsby14, previously held by Earl Algar. Archbishop Stigand 'took it away' and gave it to his brother, Almer, after which 'it was in the bishopric'. It is not clear when these events occurred; but if Alwy's purchase was before1066, he would qualify for inclusion in Dr Clarke's list of
1 WOR 26,10. 27,1
2 WOR 15,13
3 WOR 26,2
4 WOR 23,2
5 SOM 36,2;7
6 SOM 36,1;5;10-11;13-14
7 GLS 67,5
8 DOR 33,1
9 SOM 28,2. 36,14
10 NFK 9,100
11 NFK 9,183
12 NFK 9,14-15;183;228
13 NFK 9,16;23;104-105;108;228. 10,30. 65,10
14 NFK 10,30
landowners with more than £40 of land. Further detail on the relationship of Alwy and Bigot is provided by an early twelfth-century memorandum from St Benet of Holme: Stenton, 'St Benet of Holme', pp. 225-33. Alwy appears to have had an official position of some kind, perhaps a reeve or deputy to Roger Bigot1: Campbell, 'Some agents', p. 210; Williams, 'Meet the antecessores', 285-86. He may therefore be the same man as the reeve Alwy of Colchester, the only other Alwy in Norfolk, whose one appearance in Domesday Book is on the fief of St Benet of Holme, acting in an official capacity, a series of coincidences suggesting his identity with Alwy of Thetford; his son, Stanhard, had substantial holdings in the city. No Alwy is recorded in Colchester, though there are several Alwins, two with substantial holdings in the city2. .............................................................................................................................................
ALWY [* SON OF ALSI OF FARINGDON *]. The unnamed son of Alsi of Faringdon at Wallingford in Berkshire3 is probably Alwy, who held Milton-under-Wychwood in Oxfordshire4, identified from later records as Alwy son of Alsi of Faringdon: Stenton, 'Domesday survey of Oxfordshire', p. 388 note 3. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he is also the Alwy at Worton5, which is possible given that he is the only other surviving Alwy in the county if - as seems likely - Alwy the sheriff recorded at Bletchingdon involves scribal errors in name and date, that Alwy probably being Alwin the sheriff of Gloucestershire (q.v.), dead before 1086. Alwy's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4745) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 150.
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWY [* SON OF BANNA *]. Alwy, who held Alfoxton, Stawley and Oakley in Somerset6, is named the son of Banna in Exon., as at Martock and Shapwick7, where he is not recorded in Domesday Book itself, though twice named Alwin in Exon. (SO 1,27. 35,24). All five holdings were acquired by Alfred 'of Spain', evidently his officially designated successor since it is recorded of Alfred's manors of Stowey and Leigh that they had been 'added' to the lands of Alwy, identified at Leigh in Exon. as Banna's son. Alfred's fiefs in Devon8, Dorset9 and Wiltshire10 came from Alwy, as did eighteen manors in Somerset11, including those named above where Exon. identifies him as Banna's son. He provided more than 75% of the value of Alfred's Honour, and was his only significant predecessor apart from a single manor acquired by Alfred from Earl Harold. If Alwy of Thetford is excluded, Somerset and Wiltshire are the counties in which Alwys occur most frequently, so it is not unlikely that Banna's son held other manors there. Alwy lost all his lands; but if, as seems possible, he is the Eluui Haussonna recorded in Exon., he survived in straightened circumstances on a single hide at Banwell, a manor of the bishop of Wells12. With a single exception, his overlords are not recorded; but Professor Loud suggests he may have been a dependant of Earl Harold: 'Introduction to the Somerset Domesday', p. 18. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 221-22, who ranks him fifty-eighth in wealth among untitled laymen. Banwell is recorded in Coel (no. 1995) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 188, under Eluui Haussona.
1 NFK 65,10
2 ESS B3a
3 BRK B1
4 OXF 59,21
5 OXF 58,37
6 SOM 35,13;16;24
7 SOM 1,27. 8,5
8 DEV 38,1-2
9 DOR 45,1
10 WIL 54,1
11 SOM 35,1-5;10;13-24
12 SOM 6,9
.............................................................................................................................................
ALWY [* SON OF SAEWULF *]. Alwy, who held Lockerley among the king's thanes of Hampshire in 10861, may be Alwy son of Saewulf at East Tytherley, two miles away; both were held by Alwy or his father in 1066 and 1086. Another thane, Alwy son of Turber, is not recorded before the Conquest. The sons of Saewulf and Turber are the only surviving Alwys in the county. Alwy at Tytherley is recorded in Coel (no. 507) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 155.149; Alwy at Lockerley is unidentified (no. 6611).
.............................................................................................................................................
AMALRIC [* OF DREUX *]. Amalric, who held Britwell in Oxfordshire from Miles Crispin2, is probably Amalric of Dreux, who held land (albeit illegally) from Miles Crispin and Alfred of Marlborough at Chedglow in Wiltshire3, and from the king at Manningford4. The name is rare, the only other occurrences being tenants of Henry of Ferrers in Derbyshire5. Amalric son of Ralph, possibly a grandson of this Amalric, was a Ferrers tenant in Berkshire in the second half of the twelfth century which, together with the rarity of the name, suggests that the Ferrers' tenants in Derbyshire may be Amalric of Dreux: VCH Berkshire, iii. 401. The descent of Britwell tends to confirm this: Boarstall cartulary, pp. 325-27. Amalric's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4740) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 150, 489-90.
.............................................................................................................................................
AMBROSE <OF TILSWORTH>. The name Ambrose occurs seven times, all seven tenants of William Peverel so almost certainly one man. He held Tilsworth in Bedfordshire6; Adstock in Buckinghamshire7; Desborough, Kelmarsh, and Mollington in Northamptonshire8, and Strelley and Bilborough in Nottinghamshire9. When their descent can first be traced, they were in the hands of five families, three having possibly descended through his daughters, the others being unaccounted for: Farrer, Honors, i. 154-55, 158-59, 163-64, 178-79, 222-23. Ambrose's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1665) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 150.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANDREW. The name Andrew occurs five times in Domesday Book, in three widely separated counties, on the lands of three tenants-in-chief, so perhaps borne by three individuals.
................................................................................................................................................................
ANDREW <OF CHICHELEY>. Andrew, who held Chicheley in Buckinghamshire from William son of Ansculf10, has no links with his namesakes. The descent of Chicheley is obscure: VCH Buckinghamshire, iv. 311-14. Andrew is unidentified in Coel (no. 1346).
................................................................................................................................................................
1 HAM 69,24
2 OXF 35,22
3 WIL 26,19. 28,10
4 WIL 66,2
5 DBY 6,84;91
6 BDF 22,1
7 BUK 16,8
8 NTH 35,12-13;26
9 NTT 10,28;39
10 BUK 17,25
ANDREW <OF OTLEY>. Andrew, who held a substantial manor at Otley in Suffolk from Roger of Poitou1, has no links with his namesakes. Otley was later held by a family of that name: Book of Fees, p. 915. Andrew is unidentified in Coel (no. 12533).
................................................................................................................................................................
ANDREW [* OF VITRÉ *]. As the name is rare, it is probable that the Count of Mortain's tenant at Polscoe and Carbihan in Cornwall2 is his tenant on the royal manor of Winnianton, at Boden3; the tenants of this manor frequently held from the Count elsewhere in the county. He has no links with other Andrews. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1690) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 151, where he is identified as a son of the lord of Vitré in Brittany (Ille-et-Vilaine: arrondissement Rennes).
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSCULF. Ansculf is a rare forename which occurs on the Honour of William son of Ansculf, and twice in Norfolk.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSCULF [* OF PICQUIGNY *]. Ansculf, the sheriff named at Bradwell in Buckinghamshire4 and Wandsworth in Surrey5, is Ansculf of Picquigny, father of William son of Ansculf, who succeeded him on those manors and at Ellesborough in Buckinghamshire6, where his byname is recorded. He was from Picquigny in Picardy (Somme: arrondissement Amiens). As an intermediate landowner, his manors are not listed in Coel, Domesday people or the Statistics database.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSEGIS <OF NEWNHAM>. The name Ansegis occurs twice, both in Warwickshire, on manors some four miles apart, so the tenant of Geoffrey of la Guerche at Newnham Paddox is almost certainly the Ansegis who held Harborough from the king7. Harborough was in the hands of a family of that name in the early twelfth century; the descent of Newnham is uncertain: VCH Warwickshire, vi. 100-101, 193. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8851) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 154.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSFRID [* OF CORMEILLES *]. The Ansfrids at Moccas and Tarrington in Herefordshire8 are probably Ansfrid of Cormeilles, a tenant-in-chief in the county and in the neighbouring county of Gloucestershire. He held the remainder of the vill of Tarrington in chief9, and Moccas is eight miles from the nearest of his manors, at Clehonger10. The name is rare in this part of the country, all other Ansfrids in Herefordshire and neighbouring counties being Ansfrid of Cormeilles. His manors, including Moccas and Tarrington, are recorded in Coel (no. 2685) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 155.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 SUF 8,11
2 CON 5,24,22-23
3 CON 1,1
4 BUK 17,20
5 SUR 21,3
6 BUK 17,2
7 WAR 31,11. 44,16
8 HEF 7,7. 10,36
9 HEF 21,1
10 HEF 21,7
ANSGER. Ansger is not an uncommon name but most Ansgers are identified in Domesday Book or the satellite texts, fewer than twenty lacking bynames. Of these, six occur in as many counties north of the Thames, each on the fief of a different tenant-in-chief; the remainder in Devon. All Ansgers are post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSGER [* THE BRETON *]. The Ansgers who held four manors in Dorset1 and six in Devon2 from the Count of Mortain are probably Ansger the Breton, named in Exon. as his tenant on four manors in Somerset3 and another four in Devon4. He has been identified as the Ansger of Montacute who held a manor at Preston Plucknett in Somerset5 and a small fief in Devon6. Preston is two miles from Odcombe, caput of the barony held by the descendants of Ansger the Breton (Sanders, English baronies, pp. 132-33), the bulk of whose manors lay between Preston and those of Ansger of Montacute in Devon, Preston being one mile from Houndstone and another from Lufton7. There are shared names among the predecessors, though all - Aelfric, Alward, Godric -are common in the area; and Ansger's byname has obvious associations with 'the fee of Montacute', or with the castle of the Count of Mortain, three miles from Preston, so there are reasonable grounds for an identification, accepted by J.H. Round, though he might have had second thoughts had he known that Ansger of Montacute is named Ansger of Senarpont (de Ponte Senardi) in the Geld Roll for Devon: Devonshire Domesday, pp. xxii-iii; 'Domesday survey of Somerset', p. 412. If, as seems likely, Ponte Senardi is Senarpont in Picardy (Somme: arrondissement Amiens), a Breton byname is problematic. The manors of Ansger the Breton/of Montacute are recorded in Coel (no. 683) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 156.
.............................................................................................................................................
"ANSGERED" [* OF WATERVILLE *]. Ansgered, tenant of the abbey of Peterborough at Orton Waterville in Huntingdonshire8, is identified as the ancestor of the Waterville family by the descent of his manors: King, Peterborough abbey, pp. 24, 56; Henry of Pytchley, pp. 54-55. Dr Keats-Rohan identifies him as the Ansgered who held part of the manor of Cropredy in Oxfordshire9, perhaps as the only other Ansgered in Domesday. Twelfth century sources render it as Ansered, a form which appears once in Domesday10 but whose derivation is equally unclear: Hugh Candidus, p. 114; King, Peterborough abbey, p. 56. The descent of Ansgered's subtenancy at Cropredy has not been traced: VCH Oxfordshire, x. 162. Ansgered's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8838) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 154.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSGOT. The name Ansgot occurs on one fief and more than thirty manors, distributed among fifteen counties between Hampshire and Yorkshire and the lands of the king and ten of his tenants-in-chief, with a cluster in Kent and smaller ones in Surrey and Sussex. By convention, the translation renders pre-Conquest Ansgots as Asgot, post-Conquest as Ansgot. See von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 165-66.
1 DOR 26,8;11;26;43
2 DEV 19,31;36;65;75;81-82
3 SOM 1,19. 19,4;8;46
4 DEV 15,12-15
5 SOM 45,18
6 DEV 40,1-7
7 SOM 19,81-82
8 HUN 8,3-4
9 OXF 6,13
10 KEN 7,17
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSGOT [* OF BURWELL *]. Ansgot, who held a small fief in Lincolnshire1, is named Ansgot of Burwell in the Lindsey Survey, where he held the manors of his Domesday fief and a number of others, on two of which his wife was his tenant (16/21. 17/6. 18/3;15). The name does not occur in neighbouring counties apart from a single manor in Yorkshire, held by an Ansgot Rufus. His fief was subsequently confiscated and twice re-granted. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3365) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 157.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSGOT [* OF ROCHESTER *]. Ansgot of Rochester, named as a tenant of the bishop of Bayeux on two manors in Bedfordshire and seven in Kent, is identified in the Domesday Monachorum (p. 103) as the Ansgot who held another manor from the bishop in Kent, at 'Howbury'2; he is very probably the Ansgot of Rots (below) named in the same source (p. 95) as holding the valuable manor of Farningham from the archbishop3, and he is very likely the one other Ansgot in the county, on the royal manor of Aylesford, where he held 'as much of the land of this manor as is valued at £7 near Rochester'4. It is likely, too, that he is the tenant of Bishop Odo on three manors in Surrey5, and probably the Ansgot of Rots who held Preston Bissett in Buckinghamshire from the bishop6. No other Ansgots are recorded in Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire or Kent; of the two others in Surrey, he is unlikely to be Ansgot the interpreter but might be the Ansgot who held four hides in Woking from Bishop Osbern of Exeter, though there are no links to confirm this7. As Ansgot of Rots, his place of origin would be Rots in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Caen), a few miles from Bayeux and Caen, centres of Odo's power-base in Normandy, further confirmation if it were needed of the identity of Ansgot of Rots and Ansgot of Rochester. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 724) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 157.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSGOT [* RUFUS *]. Ansgot, who held Hamphall Stubbs in Yorkshire from Ilbert of Lacy8, is almost certainly Ansgot Rufus, who donated thraves of corn in Hamphall and Stubbs to Ilbert's foundation of St Clement, Pontefract: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 185-87. Ilbert had no other tenants of this name, and there are none elsewhere in Yorkshire or in the neighbouring counties, apart from Ansgot of Burwell in Lincolnshire. Ansgot's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 8802) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 157.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSKETIL [* OF FOURNEAUX *]. Ansketil, who held Barham in Cambridgeshire from Count Alan of Brittany9, is identified as Ansketil of Fourneaux in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 33), and as the Count's tenant at Swannington and Harling in Norfolk10 and at Ainderby Steeple in Yorkshire11 by the descent of the Fourneaux fee, with land in those vills: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 179-82. The Count had no other tenants of this name, and
1 LIN 55,1-4
2 KEN 5,20
3 KEN 2,28
4 KEN 1,2
5 SUR 5,6;12;14
6 BUK 4,35
7 SUR 4,1
8 YKS 9W43
9 CAM 14,8
10 NFK 4,32;47
11 YKS 6N34
there are no more unidentified Ansketils in Yorkshire. The one other Ansketil in Cambridgeshire is probably the juror, Ansketil of Hérouville, and it is unlikely that the Count's tenant is the reeve at Melton Constable in Norfolk, or the son of Ospak who failed to render account for his three-shilling subtenancy at North Barningham1, the remaining Ansketils in that county. Ansketil's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1181) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 152-53.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSKETIL [* OF GRAYE *]. The Ansketils who held Rotherfield Greys and South Newington in Oxfordshire from the escheated fief of William son of Osbern2 may be Ansketil of Graye, who held five other manors on the same fief. It is also likely that he is the Ansketil who held Chastleton from the bishop of Bayeux3, since many of the manors on the escheated fief were held by tenants of the bishop, notably Roger of Ivry and Robert d'Oilly (q.v.), who may be the Robert who held South Newington as a subtenancy from Ansketil. Chastleton, which belonged to Salford, is two miles from the Graye manor of Cornwell, Salford less than two miles. The one other Ansketil in the county, a tenant of Edward of Salisbury on the valuable manor of North Aston, has been identified as the same Ansketil, though this appears to be a mistake; he is more probably Ansketil the parker: VCH Oxfordshire, xi. 9. Ansketil of Graye may also be the tenant of the bishop of Bayeux at Thurrock in Essex, and perhaps of the bishop of London in Thurrock and the neighbouring vill of Orsett4. Part of Thurrock is later named Grays Thurrock; and although the name cannot be directly associated with the bishop's tenant, whose descendants have not been traced, it would be a remarkable coincidence if they were unconnected: VCH Essex, viii. 40, 59. Ansketil's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2718) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 151.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSKETIL [* OF HEROUVILLE *]. Ansketil, who held land at Croydon in Cambridgeshire from Picot of Cambridge5 and is the one unidentified Ansketil in the county, is possibly Ansketil of Hérouville, the juror of Whittlesford Hundred: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 99). Picot had no other tenants of this name. Ansketil is probably from Hérouville-Saint-Clair in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Caen). His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 6644) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 151.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSKETIL [* OF RIEUX *]. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that the Ansketils who held land at Bexhill, Footland and Wellhead in Sussex from the Count of Eu6 are 'perhaps' Ansketil of Rieux, who accounted in Sussex in the Pipe Roll of 1130 and whose family appears in the early charters of Tréport abbey, founded by the Count of Eu. The three manors are of similar status, lying a few miles on either side of Battle, so were probably held by one man, whoever his descendants. The Count of Eu had no other tenants of this name. The one other Ansketil in the county had a ploughteam from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury at Birdham, on the other side of the county, almost seventy miles away7. Rieux (Seine-Maritime: arrondissement Dieppe), in Upper Normandy, is a dozen miles from Eu. Ansketil's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 683) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 152.
1 NFK 10,58. 66,99
2 OXF 59,5;19
3 OXF 7,58
4 ESS 3,2. 4,6. 18,29. 48,2
5 CAM 32,11
6 SUS 9,11;128;130
7 SUS 11,44
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSKETIL [* OF ROTS *]. Ansketil, who held the entire fief of the archbishop of Canterbury in Hertfordshire apart from two acres1, is very probably Ansketil of Rots, named as holding part of Watton in the same Hundred 'under the archbishop'2, as well as parts of the archiepiscopal manors of Maidstone and Gillingham in Kent3 according to the Domesday Monachorum (pp. 85-86). Ansketil was one of the major tenants of Bishop Odo of Bayeux in Kent, with ten manors, on all of which he is accorded his byname in Domesday Book or in the Domesday Monachorum (pp. 101, 105), and at Tatsfield in Surrey. He also held Ashenfield in Kent from Christ Church, Canterbury4. He is probably the archdeacon who held the valuable manor of Deal from St Martin's of Dover, to which Bishop Odo added 100 acres filched from other prebends5, archdeacon perhaps of Canterbury and/or Rochester, possibly also a canon of St Paul's: Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae, i. 47; ii. 12, 81. There are no other Ansketils on the Honours of the bishop or archbishop and no unidentified Ansketils in Kent or Surrey, the one in Hertfordshire, a tenant of Robert Gernon, being very probably another man. Rots is in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Caen), a few miles from Bayeux and Caen, centres of Bishop Odo's power-base in Normandy. Ansketil's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 108) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 154.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSKETIL [* OF ST MEDARD *]. Ansketil, who held land at Wittering in Northamptonshire6 and Osgodby in Lincolnshire7 from the abbey of Peterborough, is almost certainly Ansketil of St Médard, identified by the descent of these manors: King, 'Peterborough "Descriptio militum''', p. 97; Hugh Candidus, pp. 112, 162; Henry of Pytchley, pp. 22-27. The abbey had no other tenants of this name, and there were no others in Northamptonshire, though the name is not uncommon in Lincolnshire. Ansketil's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2999) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 154.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* ANSKETIL OF TADMARTON *]. The anonymous man-at-arms who held Tadmarton in Oxfordshire from Abingdon abbey is identified in its house chronicle as Ansketil of Tadmarton8: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 198-201. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 4335) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 152.
.............................................................................................................................................
ANSKETIL [* THE PARKER *]. The Ansketils who held Clayhill, Rime, Chilton and Blackmore9 and eight more consecutive manors from Roger of Courseulles in Somerset10 are probably in most if not all cases Ansketil the parker, the scribe having omitted 'also' from the consecutive entries; the parker held Newton, Honibere and Milton among the royal thanes in the county11. No other tenant-in-chief had a tenant named Ansketil in the county, neither did Roger elsewhere on his Honour. Nine of the manors form a tight cluster in Cannington Hundred, where Ansketil parcarius owed tax on a hide: VCH Somerset, i. 533. He may also be the Ansketil who held the handsome manor of
1 HRT 2,1-3;5
2 HRT 16,1
3 KEN 2,11-12
4 KEN 7,13
5 KEN M14
6 NTH 6a,4
7 LIN 8,8
8 OXF 9,9b
9 SOM 21,7;9-10;35
10 SOM 21,20-27
11 SOM 46,17-19
North Aston in Oxfordshire from Edward of Salisbury1, later held by the Trivet family who held the parker's Somerset manor of Chilton Trivett: VCH Oxfordshire, xi. 9; VCH Somerset, vi. 80-81; Oggins, 'Richard of Ilchester's inheritance', pp. 95, 113-14. Ansketil's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1209), apart from Rime and Chilton, assigned to another Ansketil (no. 8845); the Coel entry revises that in Domesday people, p. 153.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNBIORN. Arnbiorn is a rare name, stated or implied once each in Leicestershire and Derbyshire, fourteen times in Lincolnshire and thirteen in Yorkshire in each of which counties, however, it was probably borne by no more than one or two individuals.
................................................................................................................................................................
ARNBIORN <OF 'AVETHORPE'>. It is likely that all Arnbiorns in Lincolnshire are one man. All but three of his manors were acquired by Robert of Tosny2, the three exceptions being linked to the Tosny manors in some way. Pointon3 was acquired by Gunfrid of Chocques (q.v.), who is probably the tenant of Robert of Tosny on five of his holdings from Arnbiorn and probably the subject of a claim by Robert in Casewick4. Of the other two, Uffington, held by Alfred of Lincoln in 10865, is in the same vill as another of the Tosny manors; and Deeping, in the hands of Godfrey of Cambrai6, is linked to the others by a claim involving vills held by all three tenants-in-chief. The Claim7 concerns four manors of Alfred of Lincoln, in Deeping and Uffington, Tallington (where Tosny acquired another of Arnbiorn's manors), and perhaps Casewick, where Gunfrid had a manor. The manors are said not to be Arnbiorn's; and since the parties are unnamed, it is unclear who was claiming what; but as all three tenants-in-chief had manors in those vills, Arnbiorn is probably the same man in each case. As the one Arnbiorn with land in the county, he is probably also the subject of the other two Claims8, both apparently concerned with manors of Alfred of Lincoln9, though Arnbiorn is not named in the relevant entries. Robert of Tosny also held land in one of these vills, Kirkby Underwood10.
................................................................................................................................................................
ARNBIORN <OF CASTLETON>. Outside Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, the name Arnbiorn is rare, the Arnbiorn who shared a modest property on which William Peverel raised his castle at Castleton in Derbyshire11 being the only Arnbiorn other than a priest in Leicestershire. He has no apparent connections with his Lincolnshire and Yorkshire namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNBIORN <OF FRIDAYTHORPE>. As the name is rare, the Arnbiorn who held the royal manor at Fridaythorpe worth five shillings12 may be Arnbiorn of Worsborough, though the isolation of his manor tells against this. There is no data for an identification other than the name of the vill since the entry does not specify when Arnbiorn held the manor or to what date the valuation refers,
1 OXF 41,1
2 LIN 18,11-12;17-23
3 LIN 52,2
4 LIN 52,1. CK1
5 LIN 27,34
6 LIN 51,2
7 LIN CK1
8 LIN CK9;47
9 LIN 27,24;55
10 LIN 18,16
11 DBY 7,7
12 YKS 1E55
though it is likely to be 1066 in both cases, the manor being probably valueless and without a tenant in 1086, as were the majority of those on the royal fief in Yorkshire.
................................................................................................................................................................
ARNBIORN <OF WORSBOROUGH>. With the possible exception of Arnbiorn at Fridaythorpe, it is probable that all Arnbiorns in Yorkshire are one man. All but one of his twelve manors were acquired by Ilbert of Lacy, and all are contained within a group less than twenty miles from north to south, most having other links between them. On three, Arnbiorn survived for two decades1; and on one of these and four others Gamal, Healfdene and Alric - usually two of them - held part of the manor in 1066 or 10862, perhaps a family group. Three of the remaining four are within two or miles of one of these manors3; only Crofton4 is somewhat detached, nine miles from Thornhill5, one of those held by Arnbiorn for twenty years. The one manor not acquired by Ilbert lies in the same vill of Darton as another he did obtain with the same assessment and valuation and is probably a duplicate6, possibly a scribal error but perhaps, as Dr Wightman has suggested, the result of the grant to Ilbert occurring while Domesday was being compiled: Lacy family, p. 27.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNGRIM. Arngrim is an uncommon name which occurs thirteen times, distributed among the lands of the king and nine of his tenants-in-chief, in six counties north of a line from the Bristol Channel to the Wash.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNGRIM <OF BIDFORD>. Arngrim, who shared a modest holding worth twelve pence at Bidford in Warwickshire acquired by the bishop of Bayeux7, has no links with other Arngrims, none of them nearby.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNGRIM <OF ELSTON>. The tenants of Ilbert of Lacy at Sibthorpe, Shelton and Elston in Nottinghamshire are almost certainly the same Arngrim8, as also the Arngrim on a second manor in Elston, held from the bishop of Lincoln9; he was preceded on all four manors by an Englishmen with the rare name of Pilwin, who occurs nowhere else. The manors and their dependencies form a tight cluster within three miles of Shelton. Arngrim is one of two survivors of this name, the other a Yorkshire monk. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 11668); he does not appear to be included in Domesday people.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNGRIM <OF MINSHULL>. As the name is rare and the vills six miles apart, the Arngrims at Wharton and Minshull in Cheshire10, acquired by Richard of Vernon and William Malbank, may be one man. If so, he is the only Arngrim in the county, with no links to those outside.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 YKS 9W72-73;115
2 YKS 9W77;116;120;138
3 YKS 9W102;140-141
4 YKS 9W98
5 YKS 9W98
6 YKS 1W24. 9W73
7 WAR 4,5
8 NTT 20,1-2;5
9 NTT 6,5
10 CHS 5,9. 8,14
ARNGRIM <OF WOMERTON>. Arngrim, whose manor at Womerton in Shropshire was acquired by Robert son of Corbet1, is likely to be the Arngrim at Upton and Laysters in Herefordshire2. All three manors were shared with an Arnketil, and the two in Herefordshire manors the fief of Roger of Mussegros, his predecessor being the only Arngrims in the county. As the name is rare, Arngrim of Womerton may also be the Arngrim at Penwardine, the one other Arngrim in Shropshire3, Penwardine lying between Womerton and the Herefordshire manors.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNGRIM [* THE MONK *]. Arngrim, who held land among the king's thanes of Yorkshire in 1066 and 1086 in the adjacent vills of Kirby Underdale and Painsthorpe4, is identified as a monk of St Mary's York in documents contemporary with the Domesday Survey: Liebermann, 'Early English document', pp. 414-16; Pelteret, Catalogue, p. 122; Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 160-61. As the name is rare, he may be the one other Arngrim in the county, at Huntingdon5, on the outskirts of York. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4657) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 253, under the form Hernegrin.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNI. Arni is a rare name which occurs nine times in Cheshire and once in Staffordshire, the sole surviving Arni. It is possible that Earne in Yorkshire is the same name: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 163.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNI <OF HIMLEY>. Arni, who held Himley is Staffordshire from William son of Ansculf6, is the only Arni in the county and the one surviving Arni in Domesday Book. It is possible, though perhaps unlikely, that he is the same man as the pre-Conquest lord of several manors in Cheshire, some sixty miles to the north-west.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNI <OF NESTON>. As the name is rare, all Arnis in Cheshire are probably one man. Seven of his nine manors were acquired by William son of Nigel and cluster in or around the Wirral peninsular7, as does an eighth, at Bagillt, acquired by Robert of Rhuddlan8; the ninth, a waste manor in the lost vill of Opetone, was retained by Earl Hugh9. It is possible, but perhaps unlikely, that he is the one surviving Arni, in Staffordshire. Had he survived, it seems likely he would have remained a landowner in Cheshire, where many Englishman held land in 1086: Sawyer and Thacker, 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', p. 32. It is even less likely he is the Yorkshire Earne, possibly the same name, whose manor liesa hundred miles or so to the north.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNI <OF NEWSOME>. Earne, whose manor of Newsome Farm in Yorkshire was acquired by Erneis of Buron10, is probably - though not certainly - one of the handful of Arnis in Domesday: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 163. It is unlikely he is related to any of his
1 SHR 4,5,3
2 HEF 11,1-2
3 SHR 6,26
4 YKS 29E17-18
5 YKS 1N101
6 STS 12,12
7 CHS 9,1-3;6-8. FD4,1
8 CHS FD2,5
9 CHS 1,18
10 YKS 24,18
namesakes, more than a hundred miles away and without tenurial or other links. He may, however, be the Eadne at Newsham, a waste manor retained by the king1, roughly fifty miles away. Eadne is an unknown name, perhaps a scribal error for Earne: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 233.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNKETIL. Arnketil is a common name with a skewed distribution. Of almost 120 occurrences, more than four-fifths are in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, the other seventeen being distributed among eight counties and the lands of the king and ten of his tenants-in-chief, all pre-Conquest landowners, the few survivors occurring in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNKETIL <OF BADDESLEY>. As the name is rare in central England, the two Arnketils in Warwickshire, whose manors at Baginton and Baddesley were acquired by Thorkil of Warwick, may be the same man, though the manors are some distance apart2. He has no links with his namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNKETIL <OF WELHAM>. As the name is rare in central England, the Arnketils whose manors of Lubenham, Welham and Keythorpe in Leicestershire were acquired by the archbishop of York are very probably one man3. The vills are close to each other, and no other Arnketils held land in the county. The manors appear to have been added to the endowment of the archbishopric, strengthening the impression they were acquired from one individual. He has no links with other Arnketils.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNKETIL [* SON OF ULF *]. Arnketil, whose manor at 'Haggenby' in Yorkshire was acquired by William of Percy, is named the son of Ulf in the Yorkshire Claims4. He may be the same Arnketil who preceded Percy at Stutton, Leathley and Rainton5. Leathley, like 'Haggenby', was subinfeudated to Everard of Leathley (q.v.), and Stutton, like 'Haggenby', was one of the vills where William Malet, Percy's predecessor on several manors, held land. Arnketil may also be Percy's tenant on the waste manor of Studley Roger6. If so, then he is probably the Arnketil who survived for twenty years on four manors in 'Burghshire' wapentake, where Studley lay, all situated, like those acquired by William Percy, in the area of William Malet's 'lost fee'7: Newman, 'Yorkshire Domesday Clamores', pp. 265-67. The one other survivor of this name, at Marton in Cleveland (29N6-7), might be the same man; but the name is common in Yorkshire, and Marton forty miles or more from the Percy manors. The Yorkshire Arnketils are unidentified in Coel (nos. 337695, 38328, 38330, 38332-33, 38389).
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNOLD. The name Arnold is not particularly common, occurring in a third of Domesday counties, on the lands of a dozen tenants-in-chief. Where the name occurs more than once in a
1 YKS 1N61
2 WAR 17,16;51
3 LEC 2,3-6
4 YKS 13W16. CW25
5 YKS 13W2;26. 13N18
6 YKS 13W22
7 YKS 29W34-35;37-38
county - as in Essex, Leicestershire and Sussex - all occurrences are on the fief of a single tenant-in-chief (Suffolk has two). One Arnold held land before the Conquest1.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNOLD [* OF BULLY *]. Ernulfus, who held the manor of Leake in Nottinghamshire from Roger of Bully2, may be a scribal error for Ernoldus, probably Roger's brother, Arnold of Bully, who witnessed his foundation charter for Blyth priory: Cartulary of Blyth, i. pp. xv-xvi, xix, xxiv, 207, 209. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 3716) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 192.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNOLD <OF SILEBY>. The six Arnolds in Leicestershire, all tenants of Hugh of Grandmesnil, are probably one man3. Hugh's wife, Adeliza, also had a tenant at Houghton in Bedfordshire - the only Arnold in the county - who is likely to be the same Arnold4. Houghton was a substantial manor, as were Sileby and Alton in Leicestershire. Arnold's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3468) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 191.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNOLD <OF WALTON>. Arnold, who held Walton in Staffordshire from Robert of Stafford5, is probably also his tenant at Morton in Worcestershire6; Robert had no other tenants of this name, and there were no more in either county. Arnold's descendants at Walton can be reconstructed for the next three generations from two Staffordshire charters: Staffordshire chartulary, pp. 199-204. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3469) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 191.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF. If Arnulf of Hesdin, Arnulf of Ardres, and Arnulf the wild are excluded, Arnulf is a rare name which occurs eight times, distributed among five counties and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, perhaps borne by that number of individuals. The name may be confused with Ernwulf.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF [* OF ARDRES *]. The Arnulfs who held Duxford in Cambridgeshire7 and Stevington in Bedfordshire8 from Count Eustace of Boulogne are identified as Arnulf of Ardres, named as his tenant on several other manors in those counties, by their descent to his heirs, the Counts of Guisnes: Book of Fees, pp. 236, 240; Round, Feudal England, pp. 462-64. Count Eustace had no tenants of this name elsewhere, and there were no other unidentified Arnulfs in the two counties. Arnulf's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 412) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 192.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF <OF BURGH>. Arnulf, who held sixteen acres worth seven shillings at Burgh in Suffolk from Roger of Poitou9, has no links with other Arnulfs. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests his name may be a scribal error for Arnold, and that he is the Arnold of the previous entry, and perhaps the father of Roger son of Arnold (q.v.), with another manor at Strettington in Sussex. A scribal error is plausible - if unverifiable - since the scribe almost certainly committed the same error in an earlier
1 KEN 5,203
2 NTT 9,89
3 LEC 13,43;45-46;64;66-67
4 BDF 54,2
5 STS 11,8
6 WOR 17,1
7 CAM 15,2
8 BDF 15,2
9 SUF 8,10
entry, in recording Roger son of Arnold as the son of Arnulf; the correct form is Arnold, as evidenced by the descent of his manors: Eye priory cartulary, ii. 77-78. However, as Burgh is not one of those manors and the holding tiny, a scribal error is an unnecessary hypothesis. If Arnulf held land elsewhere, it may be at Freston (below). Burgh, and the manors attributed to Arnold, are recorded in Coel (no. 944) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 158.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF <OF CHEARSLEY>. As his name is rare and his manor substantial, it is possible that the Arnulf who held Chearsley in Buckinghamshire1 from Walter Giffard is Arnulf of Hesdin, who held other tenancies in Buckinghamshire2 and manors in the neighbouring counties of Oxfordshire, Bedfordshire and Middlesex. Chearsley was not held by Arnulf's heirs at a later date, but neither were his other tenancies: VCH Buckinghamshire, iii. 484; iv. 19, 147. As there are no links to confirm an identification, however, Chearsley is here attributed to another Arnulf; its tenant is unidentified in Coel (no. 1268).
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF <OF FRESTON>. Arnulf, who had a ploughteam at Freston in Suffolk3, has no links with other Arnulfs. As the name is rare, he might be the Arnulf at Burgh in the same part of south-east Suffolk, the two holdings lying on either side of the river Stour below Ipswich. Arnulf is unidentified in Coel (no. 13524).
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF <OF HATFIELD>. Arnulf, who shared part of the manor of Hatfield Peverel in Essex with two other subtenants of Ranulf Peverel4, is the only Arnulf in the county; he has no links with other Arnulfs, none of them nearby. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 5216).
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF [* OF HESDIN *]. The Arnulfs who held Greenford in Middlesex from Geoffrey de Mandeville5 and Caverswall in Staffordshire from Robert of Stafford6 may be Arnulf of Hesdin. In Staffordshire, Arnulf of Hesdin was Robert's tenant in the adjacent vill of Weston7, and a fee in both vills was later held by Arnulf's heirs, the Fitz Alans: Book of Fees, p. 974; Sanders, English baronies, p. 124. The identity of the tenant at Greenford is less certain, its descent unclear; but since the name is uncommon, and Arnulf of Hesdin held the nearby manors of Ruislip and Kingsbury in chief8, he may well be Geoffrey's tenant: VCH Middlesex, iii. 209-11. Arnulf's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 634) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 192-93, apart from Greenford, assigned to another Arnulf in Coel (no. 5760) but to Arnulf of Hesdin in Domesday people.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF <OF WILNECOTE>. As the name is rare, the tenants of the Count of Meulan, who shared Wilnecote and Seckington in Warwickshire with a tenant with the rare name of Ingenulf are
1 BUK 14,12
2 BUK 4,34;37
3 SUF 27,12
4 ESS 34,4
5 MDX 9,4
6 STS 11,36
7 STS 11,34
8 MDX 10,1-2
probably the same Arnulf1; he has no links with other Arnulfs. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4758) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 158.
.............................................................................................................................................
ARNULF [* THE WILD *]. The Arnulfs who held land or men in five vills in Suffolk from the abbey of Bury St Edmunds2, and another at Bradenham recorded in the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin3, are almost certainly one man, who may be Arnulf the wild (silvaticus), witness to a charter of the 1090s concerning the abbey: Feudal documents, pp. lxxxxiv, 20, 152-53. In the Feudal Book all Arnulf's manors apart from Welnetham4 - which is omitted from the Book - are attributed to the same Arnulf: Feudal documents, p. 20. He has no links with the other two Arnulfs in East Anglia, and the abbey has no tenants of this name elsewhere. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 897) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 193, apart from Bradwell, assigned to the abbey's demesne, and Brettenham5, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 12918).
.............................................................................................................................................
ASCELIN. The name Ascelin occurs almost fifty times, distributed among fifteen counties and the lands of the king and nineteen of his tenants-in-chief, with one cluster in Somerset; all but two Ascelins are post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASCELIN <OF COLTON>. The Ascelins who held Colton and four other manors in Staffordshire from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury are very probably one man6: the manors are consecutive, the fief organised by tenants; and there are no other Ascelins in the county. He may also be the Ascelin who held a subtenancy in Shropshire from Roger of Lacy7, the only Ascelin in that county; the earl and Roger shared several other tenants. Most of Ascelin's manors descended to the Mavesyn family: Book of Fees, pp. 542, 544, 969, 974. They are recorded in Coel (no. 2790) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 159.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASCELIN [* OF EGGINTON *]. The Ascelins who held Etwall and Egginton in Derbyshire from Geoffrey Alselin are very probably Ascelin of Egginton, who made a grant of half a carucate in Egginton to the Ferrers' foundation of Tutbury priory, with Geoffrey's permission8: Cartulary of Tutbury priory, p. 65. He is the only Ascelin in the county, and the vills are less than three miles apart; Geoffrey had no tenants of this name elsewhere, and Henry of Ferrers had none of his own. Ascelin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3867) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 159.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASCELIN [* OF WATERVILLE *]. The tenant of Peterborough abbey at Achurch and Titchmarsh in Northamptonshire9 is named Ascelin de Waterville in the Northamptonshire Survey, and Ascelin de Walterville in the abbey's list of its men-at-arms: Domesday people, p. 99; King, 'Peterborough "Descriptio militum'', p. 98. He is the only Ascelin in the county, and the abbey had no tenants of this name elsewhere. The byname probably derives from the common personal name, Walter.
1 WAR 16,24-25
2 SUF 14,26-27;35;62;115
3 SUF 14,52
4 SUF 14,62
5 SUF 14,115
6 STS 8,14-18
7 SHR 7,4
8 DBY 9,2;4
9 NTH 6a,22-23
Lewis Loyd suggested its origin for an Aincourt tenant to be Vatierville in Upper Normandy (Seine-Maritime: arrondissement Dieppe), itself named from an unknown Walter; but the evidence is late and Vatierville is not necessarily applicable to this Ascelin: Some Anglo-Norman families, p. 111. Ascelin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3697) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 159.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASGOT. Asgot is a fairly common name which occurs approximately fifty times, distributed among twenty counties between Devon and Nottinghamshire and the lands of the king and more than two dozen of his tenants-in-chief, with small clusters in Gloucestershire and Suffolk. By convention, the translation renders the form Ansgotus as Asgot for pre-Conquest landowners, Ansgot for post-Conquest. See von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 165-66.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASGOT [* OF HAILES *]. The fiefs of William Leofric (q.v.) in Berkshire1, Gloucestershire2 and Essex3 were acquired from an Asgot, who may also have held William's unnamed manor in Oxfordshire4, where no pre-Conquest lord is recorded. William Leofric's one other manor, a hide at Coleshill in Wiltshire5, was held before the Conquest by three thanes, perhaps Asgot and his relatives, Brictric of Newton (q.v.) and Edmund of Childrey (q.v.). They may also be the three free men who held the royal manor of Sparsholt in Berkshire before the Conquest6, where Brictric had other manors in the vill. Apart from these shared manors, therefore, Asgot provided William's entire Honour, which identifies him beyond any reasonable doubt.
Asgot may also be the man of Earl Harold at Taplow in Buckinghamshire7 and Kempsford in Gloucestershire8, where Brictric was also the earl's man. An association with Harold would explain Asgot's manor in Essex, on the other side of the country, since the county was part of Harold's earldom: Williams, 'Introduction to the Gloucestershire Domesday', p. 25. Both manors are of comparable status to those of William Leofric, and no other Asgot held land in those five counties before the Conquest, apart from Asgot (Osgot) with two houses and an acre in Colchester9, possibly the same man though he appears to be a survivor. Asgot is probably Asgot of Hailes, who witnessed a Worcestershire charter in the 1050s and whose principal manor was at Hailes: Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon charters, no. 1408; Kemble, Codex, iv. 139. Dr Williams suggests that Asgot was the father of William Leofric (q.v.); but William is named the son of Richard in Berkshire, and it is certain that William Leofric and William son of Richard are the same man: Round, 'Domesday survey of Berkshire', p. 320. A list of Asgot's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 249-51, which does not include a share in Sparsholt. Dr Clarke ranks Asgot, Brictric and Edmund collectively as fifteenth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors attributed to the three of them would place the family comfortably within the top ten.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASGOT <OF RATCLIFFE>. The Asgots who held Normanton and Ratcliffe-on-Soar and their dependencies among the king's thanes in Nottinghamshire in 106610 are probably one man. He is the only Asgot in Nottinghamshire and his manors are four miles apart. He may also be the Asgot
1 BRK 28,1-3
2 GLS 38,1-5
3 ESS 59,1
4 OXF 46,1
5 WIL 49,1a
6 BRK 1,10
7 BUK 4,15
8 GLS 60,1
9 ESS B3a
10 NTT 30,14-15;20-21
on the royal manor of Shepshed in Leicestershire1, just across the county border, the only Asgot in that county; there are none in the adjacent counties of Derbyshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire or Yorkshire. Asgot had been a prosperous thane since Ratcliffe was fairly valuable and Shepshed, with a large population, had probably been substantial, though found wasted.
................................................................................................................................................................
ASGOT <OF WELCOMBE>. The Ansgots who held Meddon, Varleys and Sedborough among the king's thanes in Devon in 1086 are probably one man2 since the names Asgot or Ansgot are rare in the south-western counties of circuit two, occurring only twice outside Devon. Ansgot retained Meddon for twenty years, so may be the Asgot (Osgot) who preceded the bishop of Coutances at Welcombe3, three miles from Meddon, and perhaps the Osgot at Oak4, ten miles from Varleys. The one other Asgot (Osgot) in Devon, at Spriddlescombe5, is possibly the same man; but his manor is modest and on the other side of the county. The Osgot at Shalbourne in Wiltshire6 is also a king's thane, so could be the Devon tenant; but there are no specific links to confirm this. Asgot's tenancies in Devon are recorded in Coel (no. 8854) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 158; the tenant at Shalbourne is unidentified (no. 16565).
.............................................................................................................................................
ASKI. Aski is a rare name which occurs once in each of four counties, on the lands of four tenants-in-chief, probably borne by that number of individuals, one a survivor. Aski 'may alternatively stand for' Eskil, though the two names are distinguished in one entry7: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 168.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASKI <OF EDGBASTON>. Aski (Aschi), who shared a manor worth £1 at Edgbaston in Warwickshire8 acquired by William son of Ansculf, has no links with other Askis or the one Eskil in the county.
................................................................................................................................................................
ASKI <OF SUDTELCH>. Aski (Asci), who held a manor worth five shillings at Sudtelch in Shropshire acquired by William Pandolf9, has no links with his namesakes. An Eskil (Oschetel, Oschil) had three manors10 which were in the same area as Aski's lost vill; but the name forms are so distinct, they are here treated as a separate individuals.
................................................................................................................................................................
ASKI <OF THORNTON>. Aski (Ascha), who had a half-hide worth eight shillings at Thornton in Lancashire acquired by Roger of Poitou11, has no links with his remote namesakes. No Eskils are recorded in the county.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 LEC 1,10
2 DEV 52,31-33
3 DEV 3,90
4 DEV 16,24
5 DEV 15,77
6 WIL 67,82
7 NFK 65,13
8 WAR 27,4
9 SHR 4,14,27
10 SHR 4,23,12-14
11 CHS R1,11
ASKI THE PRIEST. Aski (Ascius) the priest, who survived the Conquest at Moulton in Norfolk1, has no links with distant namesakes. The one Eskil in the county was his man. An Eskil the priest held land in Suffolk, but the name-form is distinctive (Osketellus) and his status higher, having 'all the other lands' acquired by Ralph the constable2. Moulton is attributed to Goti, a free man on the manor, who is unidentified in Coel (no. 11136). .............................................................................................................................................
ASLAK. Aslac is an uncommon name, rare in the sense that it was probably borne by few men, perhaps only two, both pre-Conquest landowners; the name occurs thirteen times, distributed among four counties and the lands of ten tenants-in-chief. It has left its mark on the place-names of three of those four Domesday counties and no others), at Aslackby, Aslackton and Aslocton.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASLAK [* BROTHER OF AGHMUND *]. All Aslaks outside East Anglia may be one man, a brother of the Lincolnshire magnate Aghmund son of Walraven (q.v.). Aghmund is recorded as having four brother3, two unnamed, one of whom is probably Aslak, most of whose manors have associations with Aghmund or his family. His manors of Willingham, Ingham and Coates in Lincolnshire were acquired by Jocelyn son of Lambert4, half of whose Honour was supplied by Walraven's descendants. Kelby, acquired by the bishop of Durham5 who obtained Pickworth from Aghmund, is two miles from Aslak's manor of Aisby, held by Kolsveinn of Lincoln in 10866. The overlord at Thurlby7 can scarcely be other than Aghmund's brother, while 'Ringstone', acquired by Robert of Tosny8, lies midway in a straight line between Thurlby and Aisby, ten or eleven miles from either. Robert held the manor of Aslackby in 10869, a place-name perhaps derived from the Domesday lord or another of his family, as perhaps is the wapentake name 'Aslacoe', in which two of Aslaks manors, several of those of Aghmund, and the bulk of the Honour of Jocelyn son of Lambert lay. Ashby cum Fenby and it dependencies, acquired by Guy of Craon10, is within four miles of Beelsby, held by Aghmund in 1066 and by his son Godric twenty years later. Finally, the one other Aslak in Great Domesday held Normanton-on-Trent in Nottinghamshire, acquired by Roger of Bully11 who probably obtained Aghmund's only manors in Yorkshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
ASLAK <OF "RODENHALA">. All Aslaks in East Anglia may be one man, whose manor of Rodenhala in Suffolk was acquired by Hugh de Montfort12. The four overlords in south-east Norfolk13, some twenty miles away, are presumably the same man, no other Aslak having demesne in East Anglia. All four holdings were in the hands of Godric the steward in 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 NFK 65,13
2 SUF 4,14
3 LIN 28,11
4 LIN 28,5-9
5 LIN 3,35
6 LIN 26,47
7 LIN 8,39
8 LIN 18,15-16
9 LIN 18,19;22
10 LIN 57,1-4
11 NTT 9,69
12 SUF 31,28
13 NFK 12,16;19-20. 66,81
ASMOTH [* MOTHER OF BRICTMER *]. Asmoth, who held thirty acres at Wrabretuna in Suffolk acquired by Robert Malet1, is almost certainly the mother of Brictmer named at Middleton2. Although held by Earl Hugh of Chester in 1086, the tenant was Roger Bigot, who claimed Wrabretuna, while the patronage at Middleton had been shared by a predecessor of Robert Malet. These are the only occurrences of Asmoth in Domesday Book or in English sources: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 168.
.............................................................................................................................................
AUBREY [* DE VERE *]. Aubrey, who held two manors in Wadenhoe in Northamptonshire from the bishop of Coutances3, is almost certainly Aubrey de Vere, who had been succeeded by his son in the Northamptonshire Survey: VCH Northamptonshire, i. 366. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 181) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 131-32.
................................................................................................................................................................
AUBREY [* DE VERE *]'S WIFE. The wife of Aubrey, who held 'Napsted' and Aldham in Essex from the bishop of Bayeux4, is probably the wife of Aubrey de Vere, since de Vere is the only Aubrey in the county. She was guilty of an annexation in Maplestead and Pebmarsh, where her husband in named in full. Her name - Beatrice - and her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 754) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 440.
.............................................................................................................................................
AUGUSTINE <OF STRETTINGTON>. The two Augustines and three or four Austins who occur in Domesday Book may be one man, all five or six being associated with Earl Roger of Shrewsbury. Augustine at Strettington in Sussex is the earl's tenant5, and the Austins at Cardington, Meadowley and Broome in Shropshire his predecessors, or predecessors of his tenants6. One of these, Helgot of Holdgate (q.v.), also acquired the manor of the one other Augustine, at Barlaston in Staffordshire7. Oddly, 'another' Austin shared the manor of Cardington. He is possibly a family member; but in view of the highly skewed distribution of the name, another explanation seems more likely: that the scribe has recorded 'another' Austin because he is accounting for two manors rather than because he was aware of two individuals with that name. In circuit six, the same name appears more than once on several manors, and always makes up the number of manors, most strikingly in the case of Buggi, another rare name8. Augustine's tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 1197) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 159.
.............................................................................................................................................
AUTI. Auti is a fairly common name which occurs almost three dozen times times, distributed among thirteen counties and the lands of the king and twenty of his tenants-in-chief, with one large cluster in Lincolnshire but otherwise fairly thinly spread between Sussex and Derbyshire; there are five survivors.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 SUF 6,91
2 SUF 4,15
3 NTH 4,3-4
4 ESS 18,21;24
5 SUS 11,108
6 SHR 4,3,44. 4,21,12. 4,28,1
7 STS 11,24
8 NTT 14,2
AUTI <OF LULLINGTON>. Auti, who had a respectable manor at Lullington in Derbyshire in 10661, has no links with his namesakes, though he is possibly the Auti at Quatt in Warwickshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
AUTI <OF QUATT>. The tenants of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury at Quatt in Warwickshire2 and 'Lydley Hayes' and Leebotwood in Shropshire3 are almost certainly the same Auti, he being the only Auti in Domesday Book to retain his manors for two decades. It is probable that he is the subtenant of the earl at Womerton4, adjacent to 'Lydley Hayes' and Leebotwood, and also the tenant of Roger of Lacy at Stanton Lacy5, these being two of only three other surviving Autis in the country. As he preceded the earl elsewhere, it is likely he is his predecessor Norbury in Staffordshire6. There are no other Autis on the Honour of Shrewsbury, and none in the three counties; the one other survivor, who held a single ox in Lincolnshire, is unlikely to be the earl's tenant. All five survivors are unidentified in Coel (nos. 28249, 31092-93, 31187, 34890).
.............................................................................................................................................
[* AVENEL *] EARL WILLIAM'S COOK. Earl William's cook, who held half a hide at Netheridge near Gloucester7, is named Avenel in a twelfth-century charter of the earldom of Hereford: Walker, 'Charters of the earldom of Hereford', p. 54. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 29271).
.............................................................................................................................................
AVELIN [* OF DINTON *]. All Avelins in Domesday Book are almost certainly one man. His three demesne manors and the two held by his men all lie in the adjacent Hundreds of Stone and Ixhill in Buckinghamshire, all five being acquired by Bishop Odo of Bayeux8. Despite the limited area in which he held sway, Avelin was a substantial landowner, described as a royal thane on his demesne manors, one of which - Dinton - was one of the most valuable in the county.
.............................................................................................................................................
AZO. Azo is an uncommon name which occurs a dozen times, distributed among seven counties and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, with one cluster in Shropshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
AZO [* BIGOT *]. Azo, subtenant of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury in Shropshire and his tenant in Sussex, is very probably Azo Bigot, identified by the grant of land in his manors of Abdon and Longnor to Earl Roger's foundation of Shrewsbury abbey: Cartulary of Shrewsbury abbey, i. 33, 41, 43. His five Shropshire manors were held from the earl's sheriff, Reginald of Balliol. Of these, Abdon, Berrington, Glazeley, and Longnor9 descended to the Le Strange family; and although Shefford10 was in the hands of another family when first documented in the thirteenth century, the tenurial links and the limited distribution of the name Azo make it highly likely that Azo Bigot held this also: Book of Fees, p. 973; Feudal Aids, iv. 218, 223. Similar considerations suggest that he is
1 DBY 17,11
2 WAR 12,8
3 SHR 4,27,12-13
4 SHR 4,5,3
5 SHR 7,4
6 STS 8,10
7 GLS 1,6
8 BUK 4,2-4;21;23
9 SHR 4,3,7;14-15;64
10 SHR 4,3,47
the Azo who held Marden and Offham in Sussex from Earl Roger1, though they were in the hands of the Falaise family within a generation, possibly a new enfeoffment by Henry I: Farrer, Honors, iii. 41-46. There are no other Azos in Sussex or Shropshire or on the Honour of the earl of Shrewsbury. Azo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8237) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 159-60.
.............................................................................................................................................
AZUR [* FATHER OF SWEIN *]. The bulk of the Honour of Gunfrid of Chocques was acquired from a Swein or an Azur, probably the father and son whose relationship is indicated by Swein son of Azur's possession of twenty-one houses in Northampton, the greater part of Gunfrid's Honour lying in Northamptonshire. Swein contributed the larger share; but Azur held Boughton and Newton in the county2 and Casewick in Lincolnshire3. Father and son may be the two thanes from whom Gunfrid acquired Flore, and among the four thanes at Wollaston¸ in the county4; they may even be the two Freemen who preceded Gunfrid on his Bedfordshire fief, a single manor he is likely to have acquired by antecession5. Dr Williams suggests the father may be the Azur who preceded Swein at Ailwood in Dorset and also the unnamed father succeeded by Swein on three other manors in that county6: 'Domesday survey of Dorset', p. 52. The relationships are suggestive but the identifiable manors of that Swein and Azur are all in the Midlands and all acquired by Gunfrid of Chocques, while there are grounds for suspecting that the Dorset father and son are Swein of Essex (q.v.) and his father, Robert son of Wiuhomarch (q.v.).
.............................................................................................................................................
AZUR <OF SLINDON>. Azur of Slindon was one of the wealthiest thanes in southern England, his large estate centred in Sussex but spread as far afield as Gloucestershire. The bulk of his manors were held directly from King Edward, though his lords on several others were Earls Godwin and Harold. The division of Sussex into Rapes which cut across Anglo-Saxon tenurial arrangements make it impossible to be certain that every one of almost three dozen Sussex holdings - too numerous to list - belonged to the same Azur; but the fact that he held from both the King and the earls in the three Rapes where most of his manors lay; that he had large manors in all of them, and that the Sussex Azurs are disproportionately numerous, indicate the majority if not all of them were his.
The key to his identification in Gloucestershire, Wiltshire and Surrey, and the link between these counties and his Sussex manors, is provided by a Gloucestershire entry for Woodchester7 which reveals that Azur sold the manor to the Godwinsons and that it was held illegally in 1086 by Edward of Salisbury, on whom Azur's estates in Wiltshire8, and two in Surrey9, devolved. With one exception, the remaining manors in Surrey, all substantial, were acquired by Richard of Tonbridge10; they all lay between Edward of Salisbury's two manors, this and their value suggesting they belonged to same Azur. The remaining manor11, valued at £6, was granted by Azur to Chertsey abbey for his soul's sake, the act of a wealthy man, and so unlikely to be his only
1 SUS 11,34;92
2 NTH 48,1-2
3 LIN 52,1
4 NTH 48,4;14
5 BDF 37,1
6 DOR 56,28-29;48;53;58
7 GLS 1,63
8 WIL 24,22;34;42
9 SUR 27,1-2
10 SUR 19,6;15-16;36;44
11 SUR 8,30
holding. Finally, the three Hampshire manors acquired by Hugh of Port1 were freehold properties of substance, as was the Berkshire manor of Eddington2, retained by King William.
It may be coincidental but all the tenants-in-chief who shared Azur's manors held official positions, as sheriffs or lords of liberties. This suggests the intriguing possibility that Azur may be King Edward's bursar named in a Berkshire entry3, who has been identified as 'probably' King Edward's steward named in a writ of 1062, and his minister named in a charter of 1059: Keynes, 'Regenbald the chancellor', pp. 206-207. Both steward and bursar are offices held by the greatest English magnates under the Confessor, so the identification with Azur of Slindon is plausible, if unverifiable. If accepted, then Azur survived the Conquest to hold - like may of his peers - a fragment of his once extensive estate, the Berkshire manor where he is named as bursar, held as a tenant of Robert d'Oilly, though the men of the Hundred testified that he should hold it from the king, who 'restored it to him at Windsor and gave him his writ for it'. Finally, it is just possible that Azur is the same man as Azur son of Thorth, whose manors are intermingled with his in Wiltshire; if so, he was among the dozen wealthiest lay magnates of Anglo-Saxon England. Dr Williams suggests he may have been a relative of Edward of Salisbury: English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 105-106. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 255-57, which does not include the Berkshire manors. Dr Clarke ranks him sixth in wealth among untitled laymen; the inclusion of the Berkshire manors would not affect this, but if he were Azur son of Thorth, the combined resources would rank fourth.
.............................................................................................................................................
AZUR [* SON OF SVALA *]. Azur son of Svala, who had full jurisdiction and market rights in the counties of Lincolnshire4 and Nottinghamshire5, was evidently an important magnate in the north-east, yet his manors appear to be few and not particularly valuable. If every manor held by Azur in the two counties were attributed to him, he would still fall a long way short of the £40 traditionally expected of a magnate of regional significance. Including the surrounding counties of Leicestershire, Cheshire, Staffordshire, Derbyshire, Rutland and Yorkshire in the likely scope of his landholding, makes little difference. A solution to this puzzle was suggested by Dr Clarke, based upon an entry in the Lincolnshire Claims, which records that Robert Malet ought to have land in Ingoldsby 'through Azur, his predecessor'. Azur is not named in the relevant entry, which is a jurisdiction of Barrowby, the chief manor of Godwin of Barrowby (q.v.). Since Malet acquired his entire fief in Lincolnshire from Godwin, and nothing from Azur, it would appear that Godwin had replaced - or been replaced by - Azur. Dr Clarke suggests that Godwin was Azur's father, Svala his mother: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 378.
In Nottinghamshire, therefore, the Azur from whom Robert Malet acquired his modest fief6 is presumably the son of Svala; but the remainder of Azur's estate is impossible to reconstruct, and apparently not particularly significant since there is only one valuable manor held by either an Azur or a Godwin in the county, and only one other worth more than £2. It appears that Azur may have survived until 1086, since the only such tenant in the northern counties held land at Burton-le-Coggles in Lincolnshire7, previously held by Godwin of Barrowby. Azur's meagre pre-Conquest holdings are listed together with those of Godwin by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 311-12; he is unidentified in Coel (no. 33680).
1 HAM 23,28;45;48
2 BRK 1,28
3 BRK 41,6
4 LIN T5
5 NTT S5
6 NTT 25,1-2
7 LIN 14,95
.............................................................................................................................................
AZUR [* SON OF THORTH *]. Azur son of Thorth is identified by his patronym on the royal manor of Biddlesden in Buckinghamshire, where he is described as a royal thane1. The manor had previously been in the hands of Earl Aubrey of Coucy, who succeeded an Azur in Wiltshire2, Oxfordshire3 and at Halse in Northamptonshire4. Despite the name-form, he is the Azur filius Torodi who held the valuable manor of Combe St Nicholas from the bishop of Wells according to Exon.5, his identity there being confirmed by a diploma recording his sale of the manor to the bishop in 1072: Pelteret, Catalogue, p. 83. These manors are remarkable for their very high average value, approximately £18. Dr Clarke suggests that Azur may also have held Minster Lovell in Oxfordshire, where no pre-Conquest lord is recorded6, Minster being the one other manor in the county held by Earl Aubrey, and valuable (£10). On similar grounds, he may have held some or all the Northamptonshire manors of Earl Aubrey7 in addition to Halse, the only manor for which the pre-Conquest lord is named. This seems likely, though it should be noted that all or part of Earl Aubrey's fiefs in Leicestershire and Warwickshire were held by Harding son of Alnoth (q.v.) before the Conquest.
It is conceivable that Thorth's son is the same man as Azur of Slindon since their manors in Wiltshire are intermingled and both had very substantial manors in that county. There are, however, no tenurial or other associations to confirm this. A Thorth who gave land in Wiltshire to Wilton abbey 'with his two daughters' is possibly Azur's father8. There appear to no links to others of this name, though one held land in Northamptonshire before the Conquest9. A list of Azur's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, p. 253, which does not include Combe St Nicholas. Depending on which, if any, of Earl Aubrey's Oxfordshire or Northamptonshire manors for which no 1066 landowners are named are attributed to him, Azur would rank somewhere between twentieth and thirtieth in wealth among the untitled laymen listed by Dr Clarke.
.............................................................................................................................................
AZUR [* SON OF TOTI *]. The lands of the royal thane Azur son of Toti and his men were distributed among no fewer than nine tenants-in-chief; but he is named at least once in relation to six of them, which allows his other manors they acquired to be identified. He is named in full in Buckinghamshire as the predecessor of Robert d'Oilly, Roger of Ivry, Hascoit Musard, Martin, Bishop Odo of Bayeux and Walter Giffard, so is likely to be the overlord Azur whose men preceded Bishop Odo at Beachendon10 and Roger of Ivry at Beachampton11 in the same county, and the Azur whose demesne manors devolved upon Hascoit Musard in Warwickshire12 and Robert d'Oilly in Northamptonshire13. He may also be the Azur whose man on another holding in Beachendon was acquired by Miles Crispin14; and he is probably the Azur from whom Walter son of Other obtained his fief, including two of his most valuable manors, in Middlesex15. That Azur, like the predecessor of Hascoit Musard, was a royal Guard. Less certainly, he may be the Azur from
1 BUK 1,7
2 WIL 23,8-10
3 OXF 18,1
4 NTH 21,1
5 SOM 6,2
6 OXF 18,2
7 NTH 21,2-6
8 WIL 13,21
9 NTH 18,49
10 BUK 4,24
11 BUK 41,5
12 WAR 39,1;4
13 NTH 28,1
14 BUK 23,13
15 MDX 11,1-4
whom the Count of Mortain acquired the lands of two men in Buckinghamshire1, Azur being the only known overlord of his name in the county, or indeed in circuit three. Dr William's total of 62 hides for his lands does not include the Middlesex manors but assigns to him the substantial manor of Marsh Baldon in Oxfordshire, acquired by Miles Crispin2: World before Domesday, pp. 19, 157-58 note 66. This is possible, as there was a tenurial link with Crispin, albeit slight, tenants-in-chief often acquiring the lands of men - as Miles did at Beachendon - but not those of their lords; Marsh Baldon is five miles from Iffley, probably held by Azur son of Thorth, though that Azur had no tenurial links with any of those who acquired the lands of Azur son of Toti or his men. A list of the manors of Toti's son is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 253-54, which does not include the men acquired by Robert of Mortain or the manor of Marsh Baldon. Dr Clarke ranks him fifty-fifth in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Baldon would raise him five places.
.............................................................................................................................................
BADA <OF NORTON>. The name Bada occurs only twice in Domesday Book, as a predecessor of Roger of Bully at Norton and of Dolgfinn at Tapton in Derbyshire3. As the vills are just a few miles apart, it is very likely they were held by one man, though acquired by different tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDRIC. Baldric is an uncommon forename which occurs fourteen times, distributed among eight counties between Kent and Nottinghamshire and the lands of six tenants-in-chief, with one cluster in Lincolnshire; four manors were held by a Baldric before 1066. The name is rare in the sense that it may have been borne by only four or five individuals.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDRIC <OF HAUGHTON>. The Baldrics preceding Henry of Ferrers in the neighbouring vills of Foston and Hatton in Derbyshire4 and Roger of Poitou at Haughton and its dependency in Nottinghamshire5 may be one man. Not too much weight can be placed on the tenurial links because Henry of Ferrers could have acquired the manors as part of his territorial block in 'Appletree' wapentake, rather than by antecession: Fleming, Kings and lords, pp. 151-52. As the name is all but unknown in Anglo-Saxon England, it is perhaps more likely his predecessor and Roger's are the same man though the vills are forty-five miles apart.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDRIC [* OF LINDSEY *]. The Baldrics who held Hemingby, Bucknall, Horsington, Farforth, Oxcombe and Fulletby in Lincolnshire from Earl Hugh of Chester6 are probably Baldric of Lindsey, who granted tithes in Farforth and Oxcombe to the abbey of St Evroul. As the name is uncommon, he is likely to be the earl's tenant at Cocle in Cheshire7, where his wife Billeheld was a patron of St Werburgh's: Charters of the Anglo-Norman earls of Chester, pp. 5, 20-21, 41. He may be the Norman tenant of St Evroul, Baldric of Bocquencé, from Bocquencé in Lower Normandy (Orne: arrondissement Argentan), a scion of the important family of the lords of Baudemont: Orderic Vitalis, ii. 80-85; iii. 238-39; Green, 'Lords of the Norman Vexin', pp. 50, 62. Dr Keats-
1 BUK 12,25-26
2 OXF 35,17
3 DBY 16,6. 17,8
4 DBY 6,26;49
5 NTT 16,9-10
6 LIN 13,22-23;31-32;39
7 CHS 15,1
Rohan suggests that he is also the Baldric who held Doddington from the bishop of Bayeux1, which is not unlikely since the earldom of Chester had reacquired some of Baldric's lands by the time of the Lindsey Survey (17/1) and had a later interest in the vill: Book of Fees, p. 186. Baldric's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2996) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 160. Curiously, Bishop Odo had a man-at-arms named Baldric in Kent2 who, as the name is rare, may be the same man; he is unidentified in Coel (no. 7781).
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDRIC <OF SCAWBY>. As the name is rare, the tenants of Jocelyn son of Lambert at Scawby, Bag Enderby and Hagworthingham in Lincolnshire3 may be the same Baldric. By the time of the Lindsey Survey, the manors were in the hands of the tenant-in-chief, who is unlikely to have lost three tenants named Baldric in the interval (1/17. 17/9). Baldric's manor of Bag Enderby is four miles from Fulletby, held by Baldric of Lindsey; but there appear to be no links between the two men. Baldric's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8728) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 161.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDRIC <OF STUDHAM>. As the name is rare, the tenants of Robert of Tosny at Studham4 in Bedfordshire, Barwythe in Hertfordshire5, and Bottesford in Leicestershire6 may be the same Baldric, though the descent of the three manors would suggest otherwise: VCH Bedfordshire, iii. 426, 428; Book of Fees, p. 518. As Robert's tenants are the only Baldrics in the three counties, however, it is improbable they are different men. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1821) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 161.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDWIN. The name Baldwin occurs several hundred times but was probably borne by only a handful of individuals. It is a continental not an English name, which enables two pre-Conquest landowners - Abbot Baldwin of Bury St Edmunds and Baldwin son of Herlewin - to be identified with some confidence. Together with the tenants-in-chief Baldwin of Exeter and Baldwin of Flanders they account for the overwhelming majority of the Domesday Baldwins, the remaining handful, scattered around seven or eight counties, belonging to a few minor landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* ABBOT *] BALDWIN. Baldwin, 'godson' (filiolus) of King Edward, to whom the Confessor granted (with Westminster abbey) part of the royal manor of Kirtlington in Oxfordshire7, was identified by John Morris as Abbot Baldwin of Bury St Edmunds. Baldwin, a monk of St Denys and physician to the Confessor before his appointment to Bury St Edmunds, received grants from the king which were subsequently held by Westminster abbey: OXF B8 Taynton note.
.............................................................................................................................................
ABBOT B[ALDWIN]. Abbot B of St Edmunds8 can only be Baldwin, abbot of Bury St Edmunds from 1065 to 1097. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 31) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 161.
1 LIN 4,76
2 KEN 5,128
3 LIN 28,16;33-34
4 BDF 26,1
5 HRT 21,2
6 LEC 15,15
7 OXF 1,3
8 SUF 14,26;167. 18,4
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDWIN <OF BUCKLAND>. If Baldwin the sheriff is excluded, the name Baldwin occurs only three times in the five south-western counties of circuit two, so it is very likely that the Baldwins who held consecutive manors on the fief of Gotshelm of Claville in Devon1 are one man. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he may be a Fleming, possibly Baldwin de Warten beige who attested a charter of 1068. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8839) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 162.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDWIN [* OF FLANDERS *]. Baldwin, who held a modest fief in Lincolnshire claimed by Westminster abbey, is named Baldwin of Flanders in the List of Landholders for the county2. He may be the tenant of Drogo of la Beuvrière in Yorkshire3 and of Rainer of Brimeux in Lincolnshire4. All three are Flemings or Picards and Rainer is linked to Drogo, being one of his tenants in both Holderness, where Baldwin's tenancies lay, and in Lincolnshire. There are no unidentified Baldwins north of the Wash other than the tenants of Drogo and Rainer, and the manors Baldwin held from Drogo were of comparable status to those he had as tenant-in-chief. As all three men lost their land at an early date - another link - their identity cannot be confirmed by descent: English, Lords of Holderness, p. 140; Regesta, i. no. 212. Baldwin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3047) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 161-62.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDWIN [* SON OF HERLEWIN *]. The identity of Baldwin and his father Herlewin are well-documented. Herlewin came England several decades before the Conquest, was in the service of the bishop of Worcester and rewarded by the grant of a holding in Lyppard5 which his son held in 1086, albeit as a subtenant of Hugh of Grandmesnil. Baldwin himself was steward to the next bishop: Lewis, 'French in England', p. 134; Williams, 'Introduction to the Gloucestershire Domesday', p. 25.
Baldwin's patronymic is recorded only twice, once each in Buckinghamshire6 and Gloucestershire7; but the bulk of his estate can be reconstructed from his distinctive pre-Conquest name and the links which this establish. In 1066, he or his men held lands in Berkshire8, Wiltshire9, Buckinghamshire10, Gloucestershire11, Northamptonshire12, Leicestershire13 and Warwickshire14, almost all of them in the hands of William son of Ansculf or Hugh of Grandmesnil in 1086, evidently his designated successors. Baldwin himself retained only two of his pre-Conquest demesne manors, both as tenant of William son of Ansculf15, which enables him to be identified elsewhere as probably the tenant of William in Surrey16, Buckinghamshire17, Worcestershire1, and
1 DEV 25,25-26
2 LIN 65,1-5
3 YKS 14E9;16;28;48
4 LIN 40,6;17-19
5 WOR 2,71
6 BUK 4,31
7 GLS 1,22
8 BRK 22,6-8. 33,1-2
9 WIL 24,38
10 BUK 4,31. 12,31. 17,3-4;15;24;30
11 GLS G2. 1,22. 47,1. 62,4-5
12 NTH 23,5-7;9;13;17;19
13 LEC 13,28
14 WAR 16,58. 18,2-3;7-8;10;13-14;16
15 BUK 17,15;24
16 SUR 21,4-5
17 BUK 17,30
Staffordshire2, and of Hugh of Grandmesnil in Worcestershire3. It is also possible that he is the Baldwin who held part of the royal manor of Fairford4 and a tenancy-in-chief which consisted of a single small manor in Ampney Crucis5, six and eight miles respectively from his manor at Coln Rogers, the only unidentified Baldwins in Gloucestershire or adjacent counties. Since the name is rare, the Herlewin who held Peasemore6, close to two of Baldwin's Berkshire manors, may be his father or perhaps a brother.
Lists of Baldwin's pre-Conquest manors are given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 257-58, and Lewis, 'French in England', pp. 140-41; Dr Lewis does not include those of Baldwin's men. Dr Clarke ranks Baldwin twenty-fifth in wealth among untitled laymen. His 1086 tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 8163) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 161, apart from Fairford and Ampney, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 29372, 29888).
.............................................................................................................................................
BALDWIN [* THE SHERIFF *]. B, who according to Exon. acquired many royal manors in Devon, can only be Baldwin of Exeter, sheriff of the county7. The Baldwins at Larkbeare in Devon and Hardington in Somerset8 are identified as Baldwin the sheriff by reference to his manors of Whimple and Hemington9; and the Baldwin who held Dittisham in Devon from the bishop of Exeter is probably the sheriff since Exon. identifies him as the Baldwin on the following manor of Slapton10, both a few miles from his manors of Englebourne and West Prawle in the same Hundred of Chillington11. The two other unidentified Baldwins in the county are probably another man. Baldwin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 400) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 162.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALKI. The name Balki occurs three times, twice in Suffolk, once in Gloucestershire, all three borne by pre-Conquest lords.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALKI <OF HELMINGHAM>. Balki, whose manors of Cretingham and Helmingham12 were acquired by the bishop of Bayeux, is almost certainly one man. Both manors were held under the patronage of an Aethelstan, the holdings lying within four miles of each other, in neighbouring hundreds. As the name is very rare, Balki is possibly the Dane in Gloucestershire, though there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
BALKI [* THE DANE *]. Balki, who held a modest manor at Aldsworth in Gloucestershire13, is described in a later document from Cirencester abbey as Balki the Dane: Cartulary of Cirencester abbey, i. 22, possibly the same man as Balki of Helmingham in Suffolk, but there are no links to confirm this.
1 WOR 1,1d. 23,3-4
2 STS 12,15-16
3 WOR 2,71
4 GLS 1,51
5 GLS 77,1
6 BRK 36,6
7 DEV 1,4;8-12;15-18;29;33-34;45-48;54-55
8 DEV 39,10. SOM 5,48
9 DEV 16,94. SOM 20,1
10 DEV 2,23-24
11 DEV 16,175-176
12 SUF 16,7;26
13 GLS 78,11
.............................................................................................................................................
BARTH [* FATHER OF GAMAL *]. All Barths in Domesday Book may be one man. He preceded Ilbert of Lacy at Burton Hall, Brayton, Thorpe Willoughby, Kellington, Eggborough and Roall Hall in Yorkshire and was Ilbert's tenant in the last three vills1. He is identified as the father of Gamal by grants he and his descendants made to the monks of Selby in Burton, Thorpe and Eggborough: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 194, 284-87; Early Yorkshire families, pp. 76-78. As his name is rare, he is very probably also the Barth who preceded Ilbert at Campsall, Smeaton (where he retained land as a subtenant), Stapleton, Darrington, Knottingley, Beal and Rothwell and its dependencies2, all but the last clustered in 'Osgodcross' wapentake; and as a survivor with a rare name, he is probably the thane who retained Hensall in 'Osgodcross' for two decades and had a second manor there before the Conquest3. Probably, though certainly, he is the predecessor of William Percy at Whixley and its dependencies in Cowthorpe, twenty miles north of Thorpe4. The one other Barth in the county, at Huggate in the East Riding5, is conceivably the same man, though as the waste manor was retained by the king there are no tenurial clues to his identity. The only other Barth in Domesday Book held the respectable manor of Coleby in Lincolnshire before the Conquest6, shared by a man with the very rare name of Wege (q.v.) whose one manor in Yorkshire was acquired by Ilbert of Lacy and is just four miles from the nearest of Barth's manors and a few more miles from several others. It seems likely that Barth and Wege are related in some way. If these identifications are correct, Barth qualifies for inclusion in Clarke, English nobility, where he would rank among the ninety wealthiest untitled laymen before the Conquest. His tenancies in 1086 are recorded in Coel (no. 4627) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 163.
.............................................................................................................................................
BARTHI <OF SLEAFORD>. All Barthis in Domesday Book are very probably one man, all his manors devolving upon the bishop of Lincoln. He was a significant landowner, with full jurisdiction and market rights in Lincolnshire7. The bishop acquired Holyoaks in Leicestershire8 from him, his entire fief in Northamptonshire9, and thirteen holdings in Lincolnshire10. His estate was worth almost £60, which places him comfortably among the regional magnates of Anglo-Saxon England. If listed in Clarke, English nobility, he would rank about sixty-sixth in wealth among untitled laymen.
.............................................................................................................................................
BASWIN <OF CREETON>. All Baswins in Domesday Book are tenants of Robert of Stafford in Lincolnshire11, so almost certainly one man. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2936) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 163.
.............................................................................................................................................
BEATRIX [* SISTER OF RALPH OF POMEROY AND WILLIAM THE GOAT *]. Beatrix, who held Chevithorne in Devon from Ralph of Pomeroy1, is evidently his sister named in Exon. on his
1 YKS 9W20;60-62
2 YKS 9W38;48;50-51;58-59;119
3 YKS 1Y12. 29W25
4 YKS 13W18;37. 25W22
5 YKS 1E9
6 LIN 34,24-26
7 LIN T5
8 LEC 3,11
9 NTH 5,1-4
10 LIN 7,38-43;45-51
11 LIN 59,9-11;21
manor at 'Stowey' in Somerset2. Exon. also names her as the sister of William the goat3. She is the only Beatrix named in Domesday Book or its satellites. Her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 926) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 163.
.............................................................................................................................................
BENEDICT <OF DAWLEY>. Apart from Abbot Benedict of Selby, the name Benedict occurs twice, both times on the lands of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, as his tenant at Moreton in Staffordshire4 and his subtenant, tenant of his sheriff Reginald of Balliol, at Dawley in Shropshire5, almost certainly therefore the same man. He is unidentified in Coel (nos. 30780, 31408).
.............................................................................................................................................
BENZELIN [* THE ARCHDEACON *]. Benzelin, who held the church of Yatton in Somerset from the bishop of Wells6, is identified as Benzelin the archdeacon in Exon., probably the archdeacon without territorial title: Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae, vii. 25. The editors of the Fasti and Dr Keats-Rohan identify the two other Benzelins in Domesday Book, a tenant of Arnulf of Hesdin at Standen in Wiltshire7 and a tenant-in-chief himself at Livingstone in Oxfordshire8, as the same man presumably because the name is rare, as there appear to be no other links between them. Benzelin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 927) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 163.
.............................................................................................................................................
BEORN. Beorn is a rare name which occurs four times, distributed among four counties and the lands of three tenants-in-chief, all borne by pre-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
BEORN <OF BEALINGS>. Beorn, whose land worth eight shillings at Bealings in Suffolk was acquired by the bishop of Bayeux9, is possibly the bishop's predecessor at Everdon in Northamptonshire10, worth five shillings; but the holdings are tiny and separated by more than a hundred miles.
.............................................................................................................................................
BEORN <OF BIRCHAM>. Beorn, whose modest manor at Great Bircham in Norfolk was acquired by William of Ecouis11, has no links with other Beorns, the nearest of them seventy miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
BEORN <OF EVERDON>. Beorn, whose land worth five shillings at Everdon in Northamptonshire was acquired by the bishop of Bayeux12, is possibly the bishop's predecessor at Bealings in Suffolk13, worth eight shillings; but the holdings are tiny and are separated by more than a hundred miles.
1 DEV 34,43
2 SOM 30,1
3 DEV 19,40;46
4 STS 8,7
5 SHR 4,3,28
6 SOM 6,14
7 WIL 25,7
8 OXF 52,1
9 SUF 16,3
10 NTH 2,10
11 NFK 19,9
12 NTH 2,10
13 SUF 16,3
.............................................................................................................................................
BEORN <OF KNOWLE>. Beorn, whose manor at Church Knowle in Dorset1 was acquired by Walter of Claville, has no links with other Beorns, all distant.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERARD <OF COCKFIELD>. All Berards in Domesday may be one man. His eleven holdings are all in East Anglia, the seven in Suffolk being held from the abbey of Bury St Edmunds2 and so almost certainly by the same Berard, whose main holdings are in Cockfield and Whatfield; the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin groups these manors together as held by the same Berard: Feudal documents, pp. 20-21. Apart from the rarity of his name, there are no links in the Domesday text between the abbey's tenant and the four Berards in Norfolk, though it may be significant that there is a suggestion of illegality in their tenures. Hindringham was claimed by the men of Drogo of la Beuvrière3; Somerton was acquired 'after Tosti went from England'4; and Banham was acquired by Roger Bigot's predecessor 'only after King William came to England. Berard also held a second manor from Roger5. In the later case, there is a post-Domesday link with the Suffolk manors, the Cockfield family later holding a fee from Roger Bigot: Farrer, Honors, iii. 359-68. In the circumstances, it is not unlikely that the other dubious tenures were held by the same Berard. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 928) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 163.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERENGAR. Berengar is a rare name in the sense that it was probably borne by few individuals, possibly only three. In Great Domesday, all Berengars may be identified with some confidence, as one of two tenants-in-chief of that name; those in Little Domesday may be one other man.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERENGAR [* GIFFARD *]. Berengar, who held the substantial manor of Sutton Mandeville in Wiltshire6, the entire fief of Richard of Tonbridge in the county, is the only unidentified Berengar in the south-western counties. He is probably Berengar Giffard, who held a small fief of two manors, Fonthill Gifford and Barford, five miles away7. The only other Berengar in the south-west is also Berengar Giffard, with another fief in Dorset8. In the mid-thirteenth century Sutton Mandeville was held from the Clares by Geoffrey de Mandeville, who then held Fonthill Gifford in chief: Book of Fees, pp. 714-15, 724, 735. Berengar's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 290) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 164-65.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERENGAR <OF TOPCROFT>. All Berengars in Little Domesday may be one man, a tenant of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds at Brooke and Topcroft in Norfolk9 and Mickfield in Suffolk10, whose three manors are assigned to the same Berengar in the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin: Feudal documents, p. 16. The one other Berengar in East Anglia, guilty of an annexation at
1 DOR 41,2
2 SUF 14,16;24;57;110-112. 40,5
3 NFK 11,3
4 NFK 10,83
5 NFK 9,79;219
6 WIL 40,1
7 WIL 47,1-2
8 DOR 43,1
9 NFK 14,16;37
10 SUF 76,19
Uggeshall1, is there described as a man of St Edmund's. Of the two Berengar's in Essex one, responsible for annexation at Chipping Ongar2, is presumably the same guilty party. He is there described as a man of Count Eustace, though the Count has no tenants of this name in Domesday Book. He did, however, hold the manor of Chipping Ongar, where Ralph Baynard held a small subtenancy from him3, Ralph being the tenant-in-chief at Hanningfield, held from him by the remaining Berengar in Little Domesday4. The links would appear inconsequential but for the rarity of the name Berengar. Berengar's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 898) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 164, where Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he is 'quite possibly' Berengarius de Sap, who gave tithes to Roger Bigot's foundation of Thetford priory: Monasticon, iv. 148-49, no. 2. If so, he was probably from Le Sap in Lower Normandy (Orne: arrondissement Argentan).
.............................................................................................................................................
BERENGAR [* OF TOSNY *]. All unidentified Berengars north of the Thames are concentrated on the fief of Robert of Tosny in Lincolnshire5 and are almost certainly his son, himself a tenant-in-chief in the county, as in Oxfordshire, Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire, where he was also his father's tenant6. His Lincolnshire fief consisted of a single manor, at Allington, where his father had a manor7. Berengar's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2465) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 164.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNARD. Bernard is a fairly common name which occurs more than seventy times, distributed among twenty counties between Cornwall and Nottinghamshire and the lands of the king and thirty of his tenants-in-chief, one Bernard8 apparently a 1066 lord, though possibly an intermediate landowner.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNARD [* BEARD *]. Bernard, subtenant on parts of the royal manor of Leominster at Wharton, Newton, and Middleton on the Hill in Herefordshire9, is probably Bernard Beard, who rendered 5 shillings to Leominster10. He held Wharton and Newton from William of Ecouis, who held the other part of Newton as a tenant-in-chief, where his tenant Bernard is probably therefore Beard, as also on the following manor of Croft11. The subtenancy at Middleton was held from Durand of Gloucester, who also had tenants named Bernard on five of his manors in the county12, perhaps the same man, one of whose manors, at Laysters, is adjacent to Middleton. There are no other Bernards in the county. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he may also be the tenant of Ansfrid of Cormeilles at Great Colesbourne and 'Duntisbourne' in Gloucestershire13, though the grounds for this are not apparent. Bernard's manors are allocated to three men in Coel (nos. 3050, 4696, 8880), one for each of the three tenants-in-chief, with a note that all three may be the same man; they are separately referenced in Domesday people, pp. 165-66.
1 SUF 76,19
2 ESS 90,87
3 ESS 20,46
4 ESS 33,14
5 LIN 18,1-10;13-14;29-30
6 YKS 7E1-2
7 LIN 18,31
8 GLS 1,18
9 HEF 1,24-25;31
10 HEF 1,10b
11 HEF 14,4-5
12 HEF 22,2-4;6-7
13 GLS 68,9;11
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNARD [* NAPELESS *]. The Bernards who held five manors in Devon from Baldwin the sheriff1 may be Bernard Napeless, so-named on the third of them in Exon., Baldwin's tenants being five of only seven Bernards in the county. His manors may constitute the 2 1/2 fees which Robert son of Bernard held from the Honour of Okehampton in 1166: Red Book, i. 252; Reichel, 'Feudal baronage', p. 556. The manors were in the hands of several different families by the thirteenth century; but it is inconceivable that Baldwin had five Bernards among his tenants in 1086: Book of Fees, pp. 784-85; Feudal Aids, pp. 313-14, 328-29. Bernard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1729) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 165-66.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNARD <OF ARLESEY>. Bernard, who held Arlesey in Bedfordshire from William of Eu2, may be his tenant at Cholderton and Codford in Wiltshire3, manors of comparable status, all acquired from Alstan of Boscombe. He may also be one of the two men-at-arms who held Edworth in Bedfordshire from William since his descendants held there in the thirteenth century: VCH Bedfordshire, ii. 223. Fowler suggested that the Bernard at Astwick and Henlow4, both adjacent to Arlesey, is the same man, Astwick and Henlow perhaps being absorbed into Arlesey at a later date. Bernard of Arlesey was the ancestor of the Burnard family: Bedfordshire in 1086, p. 90; VCH Bedfordshire, ii. 261-62, 281; Cartulary of Old Wardon, pp. 342-46. William of Eu's tenant at Arlesey and Edworth and in Hampshire is identified as this Burnard in Coel (no. 1589) and Domesday people, p. 172; the Bernard in Wiltshire as Bernard Pancevolt; and Bernard at Astwick and Henlow as a third man (no. 1871).
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNARD <OF CARLTON>. Bernard, who held Carlton in Bedfordshire from Nigel of Aubigny5, has no links with his namesakes. Nigel had no other tenant of this name, and there are no discernible connection with the other Bernard in the county, Bernard of Arlesey, or the two unidentified Bernards in neighbouring counties6. By the mid-thirteenth century, Bernard's tenancy, identifiable by its mill, was in the hands of the Perot family: VCH Bedfordshire, iii. 51. Bernard is unidentified in Coel (no. 327).
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNARD [* PANCEVOLT *]. Bernard Pancevolt, a tenant-in-chief in his own right in Hampshire and Wiltshire, is identified in Exon. as a tenant of Turstin son of Rolf at South Cadbury and Dunkerton in Somerset7. He is probably also the Bernard who held Gillingham and Nyland in Dorset8 and Hillesley in Gloucestershire9 from Turstin, since Eustace and Humphrey Pancevolt held fees from Turstin's successor, Henry de Novomercato, in 1166: Red Book, i. 296. Pancevolt may also be the Bernard who held land from the Crown and the bishop of Worcester in Gloucestershire10, as suggested by Dr Keats-Rohan. The royal and episcopal manors are adjacent, two lying in the vill of Stoke Orchard, and Bernard held land elsewhere on the royal demesne.
1 DEV 16,25;39;125-127
2 BDF 18,6
3 WIL 32,8;10
4 BDF 23,45. 55,10
5 BDF 24,21
6 BUK 12,17. 17,8
7 SOM 36,7;13
8 DOR 33,1;3
9 GLS 67,4
10 GLS 1,24;45. 3,7
Bernard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1187) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 165, apart from the bishop's tenant, identified as another man (no. 10479); the tenant of William of Eu in Wiltshire is also identified as Pancevolt, here as Bernard of Arlesey.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNARD [* SON OF UNSPAC *]. Bernard, who held Adley in Shropshire from Picot of Sai1, may be Bernard son of Unspac, later lord of Kinlet, who witnessed a charter of the Conqueror from the late 1070s. He subsequently played a part in the Conquest of Brecknockshire, so it is not unlikely that he was enfeoffed in the border territory near Clun: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. 185, 241-45. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 31018).
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNER. Berner is an uncommon name. Apart from a fief in Cornwall and the East Anglian manors of Bernard the bowman, the name occurs on fourteen manors distributed among six counties and five tenants-in-chief, perhaps borne by three or four individuals, all post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNER [* NEPHEW OF ROBERT OF PERONNE *]. Berner nephew of R. of Péronne, who held land at Appleton in Berkshire of the fee of the bishop of Bayeux2, is the nephew of Robert of Péronne, not himself a Domesday landowner. Berner was also a tenant of Abingdon abbey at Kennington, Sunningwell, Boxford and Garford in the same county3 where his identity and manors are recorded in the Abingdon chronicle, as is their descent to his son Hugh: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 26-29, 322-23, 379, 381-82, 386, 389, 393. He often witnessed the abbey's charters. Appleton was subsequently held by the Visdeloup family: Farrer, Honors, i. 54. Berner's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1350) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 167. He probably came from Péronne in Picardy (Somme: arrondissement Péronne).
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNER <OF GLOUCESTER>. As the name is uncommon, the Berner with a messuage valued at fourteen pence in Gloucester4 may be the Berner in Herefordshire and Shropshire, as suggested by Dr Keats-Rohan; but there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNER <OF HIGFORD>. The Berners who held Webton in Herefordshire5 and Plaish and Higford in Shropshire6 from Roger of Lacy are probably one man, and the same Berner as the tenant of William Pandolf in the adjacent vills of Ledwyche and Middleton7, Middleton and Higford being later held by the Hugford family: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. 10-13. The Herefordshire manors were held by the Criketot family in the thirteenth century; but may have been acquired from a collateral branch of Berner's successors, since he shared one of them with a Gerald, probably the Gerald who held Cobhall from Roger8, both manors descending to the Criketot family: Book of Fees, p. 811. There are no other Berners in either county, or in any adjacent county, apart
1 SHR 4,20,26
2 BRK 65,19
3 BRK 7,11;14;21
4 GLS G4
5 HEF 10,22-23
6 SHR 4,8,12;15
7 SHR 4,14,22-23
8 HEF 10,20
from the tenant on a messuage in the city of Gloucester, who might be the same man. Berner's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4705) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 167, with the addition of the urban property in Gloucester1.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNER <OF HORNACOTT>. As the name is rare in the south-western counties, it is likely that the Berners who held Nancekuke and 'Perran' from the Canons of St Petroc and St Piran2 are the Count's tenant in Cornwall3. The Count was responsible for many depredations at the expense of the Cornish churches, from which several of his tenants benefited, and in the case of 'Perran' Bernard is explicitly stated to be holding there from the Count of Mortain. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 231) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 167.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERNER <OF THORNBOROUGH>. The tenants of Mainou the Breton at Thornborough in Buckinghamshire4 and Maidenwell in Northamptonshire5 are probably the same Berner, since Mainou had only three other tenants on his small Honour. As his name is uncommon, Mainou's tenant may be the other Berner in either county, of Walter Giffard at Lamport in Buckinghamshire6, five miles from Thornborough, though the manors were held by different families in the thirteenth century: VCH Buckinghamshire, iv. 234, 238. Walter had no other Berners on his extensive Honour. Berner's tenancies from Mainou are recorded in Coel (no. 8915) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 167; Lamport is assigned to another Berner (no. 11902).
.............................................................................................................................................
BERTRAM. The name Bertram occurs four times, once each in Kent and Buckinghamshire, and twice in Somerset, all post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERTRAM [* OF VERDUN *]. As the name is rare, the Bertrams who held respectable manors in Huish and Fivehead in Somerset from Roger of Courseulles7 are probably one man, possibly Bertram of Verdun, a tenant-in-chief in Buckinghamshire8, though he came from a different area of Normandy from Roger of Courseulles. Bertram's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 761) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 168.
.............................................................................................................................................
BERTRAM <OF WORTH>. Bertram, who held a modest manor in Worth Hundred in Kent from Hugh de Montfort9, has no links to the Bertrams of Buckinghamshire and Somerset. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 8840) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 168.
.............................................................................................................................................
"BESI" <OF CALVERTON>. Although more than one origin has been suggested for the forms Besi, Bisi, Bosi, Beso by von Feilitzen, tenurial and other relationships suggest that the first three may be variants of a single name: Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 201, 207. Besi at Heyford in
1 GLS G4
2 CON 4,6;26
3 CON 5,8,1-10
4 BUK 43,7
5 NTH 54,3
6 BUK 14,25
7 SOM 21,43;70
8 BUK 38,1
9 KEN 9,11
Oxfordshire was a predecessor of Miles Crispin1, who was preceded by a Bosi at Eaton in Berkshire2 and a Bisi at Stantonbury in Buckinghamshire3. Miles' predecessor in Buckinghamshire is described as a royal thane, as is the Bisi who preceded Hugh of Bolbec at Calverton in the same county4. Another Buckinghamshire Bisi, who preceded William son of Ansculf at Linford5, was an overlord of men and a close neighbour to the Bisi on the Crispin fief. As the name is rare, Besi, tenant of Countess Judith at Whitwell in Rutland, may be the same man6. A Beso in Suffolk7 is perhaps not.
.............................................................................................................................................
"BESO" <OF GISLINGHAM>. The Besos with two small holdings in neighbouring vills in 'Hartismere' Hundred in Suffolk are very probably the same man8. The name-forms are unique; and although considered a variant of Besi by von Feilitzen, are probably a different person, if not a different name, from Besi of Calverton: Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 201).
.............................................................................................................................................
BIGOT [* OF LES LOGES *]. Bigot, who held a fief in Cheshire from Earl Hugh of Chester9, is named Bigot of Les Loges in the great charter for St Werburgh's abbey: Charters of the Anglo-Norman earls of Chester, p. 41. He also held the manor of Halesworth in Suffolk from the earl, where his byname is recorded. There are no other men in Domesday with this forename. He may have been related to Roger Bigot (q.v.). His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 671) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 168; see also Farrer, Honors, ii. 238-40.
.............................................................................................................................................
BLAECMANN <OF DARSHAM>. It is likely that all Blaecmanns in eastern England are one man. All his modest holdings lay in the two adjacent Hundreds of 'Colnes' and Carlford in south-east Suffolk, all but two of them being acquired by Robert Malet10 and Roger Bigot11, both of whom shared other predecessors and both of whom succeeded Blaecsunu of Rendham (q.v.), possibly a relative of Blaecmann. Blaecmann and Blaecsunu were both men of Edric of Laxfield for some of their holdings. One of Blaecmann's other two holdings, at Helmingham12, was acquired by Bishop Odo of Bayeux, who also obtained the one other manor held by Blaecsunu. Blaecmann's remaining holding, held by Hervey of Bourges in 1086, lay in the vill of Bealings13 where both Robert Malet and the bishop held land. These tenurial and spatial links are persuasive evidence of identity in view of the complete absence of Blaecmanns elsewhere in eastern England. As is frequently the case in Little Domesday, it is unclear whether Blaecmann survived until 1086, though an entry for Grimston14 appears to suggest he did.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 OXF 35,19
2 BRK 33,8
3 BUK 23,32
4 BUK 26,8
5 BUK 17,21
6 LIN 56,18. RUT 2,13
7 SUF 6,216. 35,7
8 SUF 6,216. 35,7
9 CHS 14,1-13. 27,1
10 SUF 6,93-94;112
11 SUF 7,36;76;99;111;120-121
12 SUF 16,26
13 SUF 67,11
14 SUF 7,99
BLAECSUNU <OF RENDHAM>. As the name is very rare, all Blaecsunus in Domesday Book are probably one man, the predecessor of Roger Bigot at Offton and Rendham in Suffolk1 and again at Burstall, where Roger was the tenant of the bishop of Bayeux2. Blaecsunu is described as a man of Roger's predecessor Edric of Laxfield on two of these holdings, and held land in Parham 'under patronage' of an unnamed overlord who may be Edric, the only named overlord in the entry3. Parham is five miles from Rendham. It is likely that Blaecsunu is related to Blaecmann of Darsham (q.v.) -also a man of Edric of Laxfield - most of whose manors were acquired by Roger Bigot and the bishop of Bayeux, and possible he is related to Brictric Blaec, who held land in Depden and Thorney4, the latter nine miles from Offton.
............................................................................................................................................BLAECWIN. Blaecwin is a rare name which occurs only Cambridgeshire and Suffolk.
.............................................................................................................................................
BLAECWIN [* THE SHERIFF *]. Blaecwin, King Edward's man, whose manor at Madingley in Cambridgeshire devolved upon the bishop of Lincoln5, is almost certainly Blaecwin the sheriff. The tenant at Madingley was Picot the sheriff, who acquired the five other manors of Blaecwin in Cambridgeshire, on four of which he is described as the sheriff, on one also as Edward's man; the fifth Blaecwin, who held from the king6, is almost certainly the sheriff, too. The Cambridgeshire manors form a fairly close grouping in the adjacent Hundreds of 'Northstow' and Chesterton. As the name is rare, the three remaining Blaecwins, all in Suffolk, may be the sheriff, but there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
BODIN. The name Bodin occurs only in Norfolk, Staffordshire and Yorkshire, and is rare in he sense that it was very probably borne by no more than three individuals, one of them a pre-Conquest landowner.
.............................................................................................................................................
BODIN [* BROTHER OF BARDULF *]. As the name occurs only four times outside Yorkshire, where all the manors of Bodin - more than two dozen - occur on the fief of Count Alan of Brittany (6N7;11;18;38-47;49-51;67;73;75-76;78;80;91;122;135), it is almost certain that these were held by one man, identified in later sources as the brother of Bardulf, probably half-brother of Count Alan and natural son of Count Eudo of Penthièvre, despite the fact that his manors were later held by two families: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 199-200. All but two of his manors were acquired from Thorfin of Ravensworth (q.v.), his designated predecessor. Bodin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2460) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 168-69.
.............................................................................................................................................
BODIN [* DE VERE *]. Bodin, predecessor of Walter Giffard at Cawston and Shotesham in Norfolk7, is evidently Bodin de Vere, named on the Giffard manor of Lynford8, identified by the rarity of his name and his tenure as an intermediate landowner. He was dead or departed by 1086.
1 SUF 7,60;146
2 SUF 16,35
3 SUF 6,32
4 SUF 25,79. 67,1
5 CAM 3,2
6 CAM 32,39
7 NFK 1,57. 25,15
8 NFK 25,25
.............................................................................................................................................
BODIN <OF GAILEY>. Bodin, predecessor of Robert of Stafford on a very modest manor at Gailey in Staffordshire1, is the only pre-Conquest lord of this name, unlikely to be related to his continental namesakes in Yorkshire or Norfolk.
.............................................................................................................................................
"BOIA". Boia is a rare name which occurs once in Cornwall and Devon and as the name of a juror in Hertfordshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
"BOIA" [* THE PRIEST *]. As the name is rare, the Boia who held the royal manor of Down in Devon2 before the Conquest may be Boia the priest of Bodin, with a hide on the royal manor of Blisland in Cornwall in 10863. His tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 1353) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 169.
.............................................................................................................................................
BOLLA. Bolla is an uncommon name, confined to the adjacent counties of Dorset, Somerset, Wiltshire, Hampshire and Gloucestershire, twenty of the twenty-three names occurring in the inner group of Dorset, Wiltshire and Hampshire, a distribution which suggests that most if not all were borne by one man, although the lands were held by the king and ten of his tenants-in-chief in 1086 where not held by Bolla himself.
.............................................................................................................................................
BOLLA [* THE PRIEST *]. Bolla, who held Chickerell among the king's thanes in Dorset in 1086, is probably Bolla the priest, named in the previous entry for Mappowder in 10864. He also held two manors from Abbotsbury abbey and another two among the king's almsmen, according to Domesday or Exon.5, all four also held in 1086; there are no other Bollas in the county. One other Bolla held land in 1086, at Appleford in the Isle of Wight, possibly the same man though there are no links to confirm this6. Bolla the priest had held Mappowder before the Conquest so might be the Bolla on several other manors in the south-west. His Dorset tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 1354) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 169, apart from Appleford, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 6931).
.............................................................................................................................................
BONDI. The name Bondi is almost entirely confined to England south of a line from the Bristol Channel to the Wash and east of the River Parrett in Somerset, with concentrations in the south Midlands and East Anglia. Within those areas, the name is common, occurring in eighteen counties and on the lands of the king and more than thirty of his tenants-in-chief; but if the manors plausibly attributed to Bondi the constable are excluded, Bondis are common only in East Anglia, with a thin scattering among half-a-dozen other counties, including three survivors.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 STS 11,59
2 DEV 1,72
3 CON 1,6
4 DOR 56,7-8
5 DOR 13,5;8. 24,2-3
6 HAM IoW9,24
BONDI <OF RAYNHAM>. In view of the distribution of the name, it is likely that most Bondis in Norfolk are one man, the predecessor of Hugh de Montfort, whose fief accounts for the majority of the names and many of the substantial manors held by a Bondi. Apart from the fourteen manors Hugh acquired from Bondi1, he is named as Hugh's predecessor at Gateley2, and is probably the Bondi whose manor in another part of Raynham was acquired by Reginald son of Ivo3. Dr Clarke suggests that he also held Great Walsingham4, which is not unlikely given that it is a reasonably substantial manor, roughly half-way between Bondi's manors of Raynham and Beeston5. If so, he may have held Erpingham and Edgefield6, the only other manors of substance held by Bondi in Norfolk. This Bondi was a thane and free man of Earl Harold and, like the Bondi of Great Walsingham - also a thane - was succeeded by Humphrey, perhaps Humphrey brother of Ranulf son of Ilger (q.v.). Given the distribution of the name, it is not unlikely that other East Anglian Bondis are the same man, though none of the remaining manors are nearly as substantial as several of those of Bondi of Raynham and only one - Elmham in Suffolk7 - has as associations of any kind with his manors. A list of Bondi's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, p. 268, which does not include Erpingham or Edgefield. Dr Clarke ranks Bondi seventy-seventh in wealth among untitled laymen. The addition of Erpingham and Edgefield would raise him half-a-dozen places.
.............................................................................................................................................
BONDI [* THE CONSTABLE *]. Bondi the constable, who is well-attested in contemporary charters of the Confessor and Conqueror, is named as such once each on the fiefs of William son of Ansculf and the Count of Mortain, and twice on that of Henry of Ferrers, though called Boding the constable in Henry's case8. As these are the only Bodings in Domesday Book and the two manors constituted Henry's entire fief, both are almost certainly scribal errors for Bondi, identified as Henry's designated predecessor at 'Alverston' in Gloucestershire9. Henry succeeded Bondi on high-status manors in Berkshire10, Oxfordshire11, Northamptonshire12, and Essex13. The text for Oxfordshire is ambiguous and may include the valuable manor of Badgemore, where no pre-Conquest landowner is named, and perhaps Chalford, where Bondi may have been the unnamed overlord of the two lords said to have held it in 106614. Bondi the constable is probably also the forester Bondi who held woodland in the royal manor of Bampton acquired by Henry of Ferrers15.
As the Count of Mortain and William son of Ansculf succeeded men of Bondi the constable, the Bondi who preceded them on the valuable manors of Sutton in Somerset16 and Barnack in Northamptonshire17 may be the constable. It is also possible, even probable, that he is the Bondi who held all or most of the valuable manors - some very valuable - of Sandlings in Kent18; Oakley, Stratford and Warnborough in Hampshire1; Fisherton in Wiltshire2; and Compton
1 NFK 23,1-8;10-13;17-18
2 NFK 10,53
3 NFK 21,22
4 NFK 34,18
5 NFK 23,5;8
6 NFK 36,1;6
7 SUF 19,16
8 BUK 27,1-2
9 GLS 31,2
10 BRK 21,3;7;20
11 OXF 24,3-5
12 NTH 25,2-3
13 ESS 29,3-5
14 OXF 24,1-2
15 OXF 1,6
16 SOM 19,56
17 NTH 36,2
18 KEN 5,38
and Broadwindsor in Dorset3. The half-dozen manors in Hampshire, Wiltshire and Dorset alone are worth almost £100; as a royal forester (above), the constable would naturally be endowed in those counties. His status as a lord of men further suggests he is the Bondi at Colemore in Hampshire4, and perhaps on the nearby holding at Empshott5. Between them, these manors account for all those held by a Bondi south of the Thames apart from one small property at Knighton, on the Isle of Wight6.
Finally, he may be the Bondi who preceded Countess Judith on several of her manors in Northamptonshire7. There can be little doubt that the Countess had only one predecessor named Bondi, five of his seven holdings being centred on Earls Barton, held with full jurisdiction, the whole complex worth £16. Its status befits the constable, and Earls Barton is less than three miles from the his manor of Ecton, acquired by Henry of Ferrers. Some further if slight support for this identification is supplied by Orderic Vitalis (ii. 344-45), according to whom Judith's husband, Earl Waltheof, granted the manor of Barnack to Crowland abbey, a gift later defeated by 'the malice of the Normans'. As noted above, Barnack was held by William son of Ansculf, who presumably succeeded Waltheof, the earl's other acquisitions from Bondi remaining in his wife Judith's hands. Since Judith succeeded to several of Bondi's manors, it has been suggested he was a man of Earl Waltheof (Scott, 'Earl Waltheof', pp. 163-64), which is possible but does not preclude his identification as the constable. Of the remaining Bondis, only one - at Ardleigh in Essex8 - held a fairly substantial manor but there are no links to connect him with the constable. Two of the three survivors held small manors in Northamptonshire acquired by the Flemish tenants-in-chief Winemar of Flanders9 and Gunfrid of Chocques10, both near-neighbours of Countess Judith on the continent, Winemar probably being from Lens where Judith's father was Count, and Gunfrid from Chocques fifteen miles away; Winemar was also a tenant of the Countess. Since she acquired most of the constable's manors in Northamptonshire, it is not unlikely that the two survivors are the constable, surviving like many of his peers on a tiny fragment of his once extensive estate. He may even be the one other survivor, a tenant of the bishop of Durham at Wainfleet in Lincolnshire11, a county in which the Countess had a large presence and where another Flemish tenant-in-chief - Gilbert of Ghent - held land in the same vill. The few other Bondis outside East Anglia12 are conceivably the same man but there are no links to confirm this.
A list of Bondi's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 266-67, which does not include the Ferrers manor of Buttsbury in Essex, Sandlings in Kent, the Hampshire manors of Colemore, Empshott and Knighton, or those in Northamptonshire which devolved upon William son of Ansculf and Countess Judith. Bondi is ranked fourteenth in wealth among untitled laymen by Dr Clarke; the additional manors would place him comfortably in the top ten. The three survivors are unidentified in Coel (nos. 27330, 27414, 33111).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 HAM 44,2-4
2 WIL 44,1
3 DOR 51,1. 57,15
4 HAM 57,2
5 HAM 62,1
6 HAM IoW9,15
7 NTH 56,15-18;37-38;53
8 ESS 39,8
9 NTH 40,5
10 NTH 48,16
11 LIN 3,47
12 WAR 16,31. 44,3. YKS C19. 14E26. CE32
BORDIN <OF THORPLAND>. All six Bordins in Domesday Book are almost certainly one man, all being tenants of Hermer of Ferrers on a number of small manors in Norfolk1. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1960) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 169.
.............................................................................................................................................
BOSELIN [* OF DIVES *]. The name Boselin is rare, all occurrences probably referring to one man, named Boselin of Dives on the manor held by his wife at Oakington in Cambridgeshire2. He may be identified elsewhere in relation to his son, William (q.v.), with whom he is probably the joint tenant at Stoke in Worcestershire3. Boselin's (unnamed) son also held land at Malling in Sussex4 from the archbishop of Canterbury, Boselin himself being recorded as a knight of the archbishop in the Domesday Monachorum (p. 105). Boselin also had houses in Pevensey5, and had held land at Chollington in Sussex and a house in London which are not recorded in Domesday: Regesta, i. no. 166. His family was established in Sussex and Northamptonshire: Domesday Monachorum, pp. 37-38. He was from Dives-sur-mer in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Lisieux). His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1199) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 169.
.............................................................................................................................................
BOSTEN <OF BARNHAM>. Bosten, whose manor of Barnham in Suffolk was acquired by William of Warenne6, is the only Bosten in Domesday Book; his name is otherwise unknown in English sources: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 207.
.............................................................................................................................................
BOVI. Bovi is a rare name, stated or implied eight times, distributed among five counties and the lands of the king and four of his tenants-in-chief, all borne by pre-Conquest lords.
.............................................................................................................................................
BOVI <OF ARLESCOTE>. As the name is rare, the Bovis whose manors of Bruntingthorpe in Leicestershire7 and Claverdon and Arlescote in Warwickshire8 were acquired by the Count of Meulan are probably one man who may also be the predecessor of the Count of Mortain at Whilton in Northamptonshire9, roughly midway between Bruntingthorpe and Arlescote, and the one other Bovi in that county, at Rockingham, retained by the king10, perhaps in order to build his castle there. The one other Bovi in the Midlands, at 'Morton' in Nottinghamshire11, is possibly also him, though there are no specific links to connect him. The manor is of similar status to some his manors and at no greater distance from them than some are from each other; and it may have been acquired by William Peverel because it lay in Broxtowe wapentake, the bulk of which he held, probably as part of a block grant of the wapentake: Fleming, Kings and nobles, p. 162. It is conceivable that he is also the two remaining Bovi, both in Norfolk manors12, but there are no links to confirm this.
1 NFK 13,6;19. 66,12;20-21;23
2 CAM 43,1
3 WOR 8,26c
4 SUS 2,1c
5 SUS 10,1
6 SUF 26,8
7 LEC 44,6
8 WAR 16,16;56
9 NTH 18,27
10 NTH 1,27
11 NTT 10,17
12 NFK 49,1-2
.............................................................................................................................................
BOVI <OF RINGSTEAD>. Bovi, who held Ringstead and Hunstanton in Norfolk before the Conquest, is stated in the text to be one man1. He was a fairly prosperous landholder, of comparable status to his namesake in Great Domesday, Bovi of Arlescote, so conceivably the same individual, though there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRETEL [* "DE SANCTO CLARO" *]. The name Bretel occurs on twenty six manors in Domesday Book, on twenty-five of them as a tenant of the Count of Mortain: in Dorset2, Somerset3 and Devon4, named Bretel of Saint-Clair (Sanctus Clarus) in the Geld Roll for 'Abdick' Hundred in Somerset, where his manor of Swell lay5: VCH Somerset, i. 536-37. He is assumed to be a Norman, though no specific continental origin is known. The twenty-sixth Bretel also occurs on the fief of the Count of Mortain, as a pre-Conquest landholder at Trevillyn in Cornwall6. This is either an highly improbable statistical freak, or Bretel is an Englishman from St Cleer in Cornwall, not a Norman from Saint-Clair in Normandy; it is all but inconceivable that every one of the twenty six Bretels in Domesday Book should occur on a single Domesday Honour and not be one man.
The name Bretel may be of Cornish or continental origin: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 208. The earliest form of the Cornish place-name is Sanctus Clarus, as in the Geld Roll: Ekwall, Dictionary of English place-names, p. 400. A Hubert and Richard of Saint-Clair also occur in Domesday Book, both presumed to have come from Saint-Clair-sur-l'Elle in Lower Normandy (Manche: arrondissement Saint-Lô); but, unlike Bretel, both have unmistakably Norman forenames and no pre-Conquest manors. St Cleer itself is not named before the early thirteenth century; but this does not preclude its existence in 1066, of course. St Cleer is a Brittonic saint, whose name is more likely to have established itself in Cornwall during the age of the Cornish saints and the fifth and sixth century migrations between Brittany and the Celtic fringe - migrations which included 'many hundreds of emigrant saints' - than in the twelfth century: Orme, Saints of Cornwall, pp 88-89; Morris, Age of Arthur, p. 363. If Bretel was indeed from St Cleer in Cornwall, then he was one of the most successful survivors of the Conquest, with demesne holdings valued at almost £50, fractionally less than those of Kolsveinn of Lincoln and more than twice that of Thorkil of Warwick, the two best-known survivors (unless Edward of Salisbury is English). Bretel's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 788) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 170, where he is identified as a Norman.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRIAN. Brian is a rare name which occurs on one fief and ten manors, distributed among eight counties and the lands of five tenants-in-chief, perhaps borne by that number of individuals, all post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* COUNT *] BRIAN. The Brians at Onehouse and Brettenham in Suffolk7 are evidently Count Brian, who preceded the Count of Mortain on seven other manors8 and is further identified by his status as an intermediate landowner and designated predecessor of Count Robert. He was a brother
1 NFK 49,1-2
2 DOR 26,12;17;28-29;54-55;60;63;69
3 SOM 1,5;9. 19,15;20-22;45;58;62-64;86. 46,4
4 DEV 15,20-21;63
5 SOM 19,15
6 CON 5,13,10
7 SUF 2,7;13
8 SUF 2,1-6;9
of Count Alan of Brittany, alleged by his nephew, another Count Alan, to have been the predecessor of the Count of Mortain as earl of Cornwall: Keats-Rohan, Domesday people, pp. 47-48. As an intermediate landowner, his manors are not listed in Coel, Domesday people or the Statistics database.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRIAN <OF CAVERSFIELD>. As the name is rare, the Brians who held Caversfield in Buckinghamshire1 and Gatehampton in Oxfordshire2 from William of Warenne are probably one man, possibly the ancestor of the Gargate family: Farrer, Honors, iii. 410-13. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1674) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 170-71.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRIAN <OF RAUCEBY>. As the name is rare, the Brians who held Rauceby in Lincolnshire3; Rudge, Weston and Levedale in Staffordshire4, and Ditchford in Warwickshire5 from Robert of Stafford are probably one man. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3607) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 171.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRIAN [* OF SCALES *]. Brian, who held Babraham in Cambridgeshire from Count Alan of Brittany6, is almost certainly Brian of Scales, a juror in Chilford Hundred, where Babraham lay: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 28). He is the only Brian in the county or on the Honour of Count Alan. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 2063) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 441.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRIAN <OF WIDEMOUTH>. As the name is rare, the Brian who - according to Exon. - held Trenhaile in Cornwall7 from the Count of Mortain is probably the Count's tenant on a small fief in the county8. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1358) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 171, apart from Trenhaile, attributed to the Count's demesne.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRIAN'S WIFE. The unnamed wife - widow - of Brian who held five hides in Stepney from the bishop of London9 is shown to be the mother of Ralph son of Brian and his brother William, both tenants of the bishop and of Ralph Peverel in Essex, by the descent of their lands: Taylor, 'Clerkenwell', pp. 17-28. Her manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1301) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 170.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTEVA. The name Bricteva occurs nine times, distributed among six counties between Devon and Lincolnshire and the lands of the king and six of his tenants-in-chief; there are two survivors.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 BUK 15,2
2 OXF 22,2
3 LIN 59,14-15
4 STS 11,15-16;66
5 WAR 22,16
6 CAM 14,15
7 CON 4,22
8 CON 5,9,1-4
9 MDX 3,3
BRICTEVA <OF BALDON>. Bricteva, who held a substantial part of the manor of Dorchester 'at a revenue' from the bishop of Lincoln, is probably his tenant at Baldon, where her holding may be a duplicate of that in Dorchester1: VCH Oxfordshire, vii. 1. An Englishwoman entrusted with farming a substantial episcopal manor is difficult to credit, so a scribal error is possible. If not an error, then Bricteva was an unusual woman, in which case an interesting possibility arises. The one other Bricteva holding land in 1086 had a small property at Corby Glen in Lincolnshire2, where the bishop of Lincoln was a landowner. This Bricteva held the property in 1066, as did a Bricteva in Hackthorn3 and another in Gidding4, all manors surrounded by those of the bishop of Lincoln. It is just possible, therefore, they were all held by one woman who made an impression on the bishop or his officials, though scribal error in the Oxfordshire entries seems more likely, in which case the apparent links may be illusory. Bricteva's Oxfordshire tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 3608) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 171.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTEVA <OF CORBY>. Bricteva, who held a small manor among the king's thanes at Corby Glen in Lincolnshire5, is one of two Brictevas to survive until 1086, unless she is the same woman as Bricteva of Baldon. She is unidentified in Coel (no. 34874).
................................................................................................................................................................
BRICTEVA <OF GIDDING>. Bricteva, whose manor of Gidding in Huntingdonshire was acquired by William the artificer6, has no links with her namesakes, though it is possible she is the same woman as Bricteva of Baldon.
................................................................................................................................................................
BRICTEVA <OF HACKTHORN>. Bricteva, whose shared a manor at Hackthorn in Lincolnshire was acquired by Jocelyn son of Lambert7, has no links with her namesakes, though it is just possible she is the same woman as Bricteva of Baldon.
................................................................................................................................................................
BRICTEVA <OF HEANTON>. Bricteva, whose virgate at Heanton in Devon was acquired by Colwin the reeve8, has no links with her namesakes, the nearest roughly fifty miles away, on an even smaller holding.
................................................................................................................................................................
BRICTEVA <OF STANWAY>. Bricteva, who held eighteen acres paying 32 pennies which was added to the royal manor of Stanway in Essex9, is possibly the Bricteva at Wickford, whose holding suffered a similar fate, perhaps at the hands of the same man, Swein the sheriff; but the holdings are small and almost thirty miles apart.
................................................................................................................................................................
1 OXF 6,1b;17
2 LIN 68,18
3 LIN 28,12
4 HUN 26,1
5 LIN 68,18
6 HUN 26,1
7 LIN 28,12
8 DEV 52,8
9 ESS 1,19
BRICTEVA <OF STRINGSTON>. Bricteva, whose half a virgate at Stringston in Somerset was acquired by Alfred of 'Spain'1, has no links with other Brictevas, the nearest some fifty miles away.
................................................................................................................................................................
BRICTEVA <OF WICKFORD>. The Bricteva who held seventy-five acres which were added to the manor of Wickford in Essex2, acquired by Swein of Essex, is possibly the same woman as Bricteva at Stanway, whose holding suffered a similar fate, perhaps at the hands of the sheriff; but the holdings are small and almost thirty miles apart.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTFRITH. Brictfrith is a rare name which occurs four times, distributed among four counties and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, all four names borne by pre-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTFRITH <OF CARADON>. Brictfrith, who held land valued at ten shillings at Caradon in Cornwall acquired by the Count of Mortain3, has no links with other Brictfriths.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTFRITH <OF FROME>. Brictfrith, who held a modestly substantial manor at Frome in Dorset4 acquired by William Bellett, has no links with his namesakes in the south-west, none within fifty miles.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTFRITH <OF KILLINGHOLME>. Brictfrith, who shared a modestly substantial manor at Killingholme in Lincolnshire5 acquired by Ivo Tallboys, has no links with his namesakes, none of them within two hundred miles.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTFRITH [!1! UNCLE OF SAEWIN !1!]. Brictfrith, who was succeeded on his modest manor at Swimbridge in Devon by Saewin the priest6, is identified in Exon. as Saewin's uncle. He has no links with his namesakes, the nearest of them some fifty miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTMER. Brictmer is a common name, stated or implied on more than 140 manors, distributed among eighteen counties between Cornwall and Lincolnshire and the lands of more than fifty tenants-in-chief. There are significant concentrations, geographically and tenurially, particularly in Cornwall, Devon and Suffolk, which account for almost two-thirds of the names, with lesser clusters in Somerset and Essex. There are four survivors, one each in Sussex, Wiltshire, Somerset and Herefordshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTMER <OF RILLATON>. The disproportionate occurrence of Brictmers on the fief of Baldwin of Exeter in Devon suggests that most if not all of his eighteen predecessors are the same
1 SOM 35,4
2 ESS 24,9
3 CON 5,4,11
4 DOR 57,1
5 LIN 14,31
6 DEV 13a,2
Brictmer1, particularly as Brictmer contributed Baldwin's two most valuable manors, and four of the six most valuable; and, if one man, the largest single share of Baldwin's fief.
A Brictmer was also the main predecessor of the Count of Mortain in Cornwall2, supplying more of his manors and a larger income than any other individual, as well two of his six largest manors, including the largest, Rillaton, one of the two most valuable in Cornwall. It is tempting to suggest that he was also the pre-Conquest lord of Launceston3, the next most valuable manor in the county. This is where the Count built is castle, and no pre-Conquest lord is named. It is five miles from Dunterton4, acquired by Baldwin the sheriff from Brictmer. It is impossible to prove that all the Cornish Brictmer's are the same man, though it is likely that the majority were. Seven of his manors were allocated to the same subtenant; and it is noticeable that each of the others had one reasonably close to the three large manors of Brannel5, Trematon6 and Rillaton7. Finally, although there are no tenurial links to substantiate this, it seems likely that the predecessors of Count Robert and Baldwin are the same man, not two English magnates separated by a county border, along which several of their manors align.
A list of Brictmer's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 259-60, who includes all those above apart from Pencarrow8 and suggests that other of the many Brictmers in the south-west may be Brictmer of Rillaton. He mentions no specific cases, but the predecessors of William of Poilley9, Robert of Aumâle10, Ansger11, and Fulchere12 have manors close to one of those of Baldwin's predecessor. None, however, are particularly substantial. The one manor substantial manor held by Brictmer in the five south-western counties so far unaccounted for - at Haselbury in Somerset13 - was held by a royal thane who had retained it for twenty years. It is conceivable that he is Brictmer of Rillaton; but so many of the Count of Mortain's tenants are Englishmen, it is likely that the Count would have retained the services of his predecessor were he still alive in 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTMER [* SON OF QUENEVA *]. Most Brictmers in Essex and Suffolk may be one man, despite his lands devolving upon sixteen tenants-in-chief. The clustering of the name in the two counties is striking, there being only a single Brictmer in the six adjacent counties and very few in the outer ring beyond those six, providing a veritable cordon sanitaire for Brictmers, suggesting that most within the cordon are the same man.
An initial clue to Brictmer's identity, linking three of the tenants-in-chief, is provided by the entry for the manor of Ranulf brother of Ilger at Falkenham in Suffolk14, which explains that Brictmer had several lands, one part being delivered to Engelric the priest, and others to Ranulf and Ralph Pinel, among whom a dispute had arisen. Brictmer is identified on Ranulf's fief as the son of Queneva15. Engelric, the major predecessor of Count Eustace of Boulogne, preceded the Count on the very valuable manor of Fobbing in Essex, previously held by the royal thane Brictmer16,
1 DEV 16,4;12;19;31;33;58;65;69;71;83;85;96;104;110;116;140;161;175
2 CON 5,1,8;13. 5,2,1;11;16;19;21;33. 5,4,2;4;12. 5,5,17;20. 5,6,2. 5,7,4. 5,14,3-4. 5,24,25
3 CON 5,1,22
4 DEV 16,12
5 CON 5,2,1
6 CON 5,1,8
7 CON 5,1,13
8 CON 5,4,2
9 DEV 21,19-21
10 DEV 28,15
11 DEV 40,4
12 DEV 49,1-3
13 SOM 47,17
14 SUF 39,3
15 SUF 39,7-10
16 ESS 20,1
evidently the Brictmer of the Falkenham entry. Fobbing, with its free men, is the most valuable manor held by any Brictmer in Domesday Book, its lord clearly a man of substance. The other three manors Eustace acquired from him are minor holdings1. The two acquired by Ralph Pinel show the same pattern, Great Bromley in Essex2 being the second in value of Brictmer's manors in Essex or Suffolk, Layham in Suffolk3 a very modest property. Waldringfield in Suffolk, the most valuable of those acquired by Ranulf brother of Ilger, was worth only £1, the remainder a few shillings each4.
These manors stretched almost seventy miles between Fobbing in Essex and Falkenham in Suffolk, most of them close to the coastal estuaries and creeks. The majority of the Brictmers who preceded other tenants-in-chief are similarly situated, or are otherwise related to Queneva's son. The Essex manors held by Robert Gernon5 and Ranulf Peverel6 lie between Chelmsford and Colchester, close to the Blackwater estuary, in a direct line between Fobbing and the Pinel manor of Great Bromley. In Suffolk, Geoffrey de Mandeville acquired Raydon7, two miles from the Pinel manor of Layham, and Roger Bigot had Morston8, a vill in which Brictmer was also succeeded by Ranulf. Bigot's predecessor had Ely abbey as his overlord at Charsfield9, as did Ranulf's at Hemley, and the bishop of Evreux's at Campsey Ash10. Roger's manors of Benhall and Bruisyard11, however, had the East Anglian magnate Edric of Laxfield (q.v.) as Brictmer's overlord, as did Robert Malet's at Debenham, 'Laneburc', Aspall and Kenton12 and Hervey of Bourges at Tuddenham and Glevering13. The predecessors of Hervey and Robert Malet also had Earl Harold as their overlord at Braiseworth (where Brictmer is surnamed Bubba) and Martley14, as did Ralph of Limésy at Framlingham15. Brictmer's mother provides another link between her son and Roger Bigot16.
There are also geographical links. Hervey of Bourges held in Carlford Hundred, as did Ranulf and Roger of Rames17. Hervey, Roger Bigot, Robert Malet, Ralph of Limésy and the bishop of Evreux all had manors from Brictmer in 'Loose' Hundred. There is a marked concentration alongside the river Debden and above Woodbridge, half-a-dozen tenants-in-chief acquiring manors from Brictmer in this area, including the single manor of Count Alan of Brittany at Ashfield18. To complete the picture, Robert Malet acquired two other manors in 'Hartismere' Hundred19, Roger of Rames one in 'Lothingland'20, and two other tenants-in-chief a single manor each: Roger of Poitou at Hemingstone21, a tiny holding but in the same area as the bulk of the others, and Richard of Tonbridge at Horseham Hall22, close to the Norfolk border, the most isolated of all. The single
1 ESS 20,14;47;49
2 ESS 77,1
3 SUF 61,2
4 SUF 39,2-5;7-10;13
5 ESS 32,4
6 ESS 34,5;7;27
7 SUF 32,8
8 SUF 7,115
9 SUF 7,133
10 SUF 22,2
11 SUF 7,140;145
12 SUF 6,11;173;201;271
13 SUF 67,15;31
14 SUF 6,226. 67,27
15 SUF 43,6
16 SUF 14,117
17 SUF 38,23-24
18 SUF 3,65
19 SUF 6,209;215
20 SUF 38,16
21 SUF 8,65
22 ESS 90,52
manor of Earl Hugh at Middleton1 is linked to Brictmer's other holdings, being held it from the earl by Roger Bigot, part of the manor also being claimed by Robert Malet.
This entry for Middleton introduces a second Brictmer and a puzzle. The two Brictmers are lord and man: Brictmer son of Asmoth, with roughly eight acres, a man of Brictmer, Robert Malet's reeve. No Brictmer held land elsewhere in Domesday under another Brictmer. In view of the links discussed above, it is likely that the overlord in this entry is Queneva's son, his puzzling status as Bigot's reeve perhaps referring to a period after 1066 when he had lost is estates but was retained by Bigot in a service capacity, a common enough occurrence and one repeated elsewhere on the Bigot Honour; if so, Brictmer may be the beadle associated with Roger Bigot at 'Olden'2. Here as elsewhere, Little Domesday is ambiguous in the matter of the dates, especially for the holdings of free men, and it is possible that Brictmer survived until 1086 as Bigot's reeve and as a free man, at Benhall, Falkenham, Kembroke, Hemingstone, Wetheringsett or Rickinghall3. His man at Middleton may be the Brictmer in some of these cases as there appears to be no criteria for distinguishing him from his overlord; Middleton, however, may equally have been the only property of Asmoth's son; his mother's holding was modest. Either way, the affect on the value of the estate of Queneva's son would be minimal.
As mentioned above, the six counties adjacent to Essex and Suffolk include only one Brictmer, at West Bedfont in Middlesex4. He, too, may be Queneva's son, since his manor is substantial and his overlord Earl Harold, the overlord of manors acquired by Robert Malet, Ralph of Limésy and Hervey of Bourges in Suffolk. Earl Harold was also the overlord of Brictmers in Sussex and Herefordshire. In Sussex, Brictmer held Wantley from Azur of Slindon (q.v.), who in turn held it from Earl Harold, so he is likely to be the same man as the two remaining Brictmers in the county, at Cokeham and Ovingdean, both of whom had Azur as their lord5. Brictmer retained Ovingdean for two decades, as a man of Azur of Slindon in 1066 and as a subtenant of William of Warenne twenty years later6, the only Brictmer on the Warenne Honour. In Herefordshire, he held Castle Frome from Earl Harold, and is probably the Brictmer who held the following manor of Munsley, both acquired by Roger of Lacy7, and perhaps also the Brictmer at Hopton Sollers, four miles away8, both Munsley and Hopton being held free of lordship and three respectable manors. Unless there are two royal thanes named Brictmer, he is also the Brictmer at Hadzor in Worcestershire9. There are other manors in Herefordshire10 and Worcestershire11 some of which may have been his, a not unlikely possibility in view of the fact that he accounts for all the Brictmers in Sussex, Middlesex, Gloucestershire (below), Essex and all but one or very few of the large number of Brictmers in Suffolk; but there are no links to support an identification in these five cases. There are no links, either, to identify the three Brictmers in Gloucestershire, two on the neighbouring manors of Ebrington and Charingworth, the third at Batsford, five miles to the south12. All three are valuable- the most valuable manors held by an as-yet-unidentified Brictmer (£28 between them) - so were probably held by one man though devolving on three tenants-in-chief. If, as suggested, Queneva's son was a landholder in the west of England, their status suggests he may be that man.
1 SUF 4,15
2 SUF 74,4
3 SUF 3,101. 7,98;121. 8,65. 21,39. 35,7
4 MDX 11,3
5 SUS 12,12. 13,23;45
6 SUS 12,12
7 HEF 10,30-31
8 HEF 16,2
9 WOR 20,6
10 HEF 1,10b. 9,12
11 WOR 2,10. 8,10a-10b;24
12 GLS 34,4. 45,1. 68,4
If these identifications are valid, Brictmer was a major landowner, with a manorial income of more than £100, which would rank him among the three dozen wealthiest untitled laymen in 1066 if included in Clarke, English nobility. The tenant at Ovingdean is unidentified in Coel (no. 16350).
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTRIC. Brictric is a very common name which occurs roughly three hundred times, distributed among twenty-three counties and the lands of the king and more than seventy of his tenants-in-chief. The name is almost entirely confined to England south of the Wash, with concentrations in Buckinghamshire, Devon, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Suffolk. Almost two dozen manors were held by survivors, the bulk of them shared between three men.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTRIC [* BROTHER OF ALWY *]. Dr Williams suggests that the Brictric who preceded Edward of Salisbury on the fairly valuable manor of Lus Hill in Wiltshire1 may be the king's thane Brictric brother of Alwy who held Trowbridge and several other substantial manors in 10862, his estate later forming part of the Honour of Trowbridge held by Edward's descendants. She also suggests he and his brother Alwy may have been Edward's relatives: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, p. 105. There are no other Brictrics on Edward's Honour; another king's thane, Brictric of Newton, held substantial manors and survived in the region for two decades, but family relationships would seem to preclude identifying him as the same man.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTRIC [* FATHER OF AELFRIC *]. Brictric, who was preceded on the manor Scepeworde in Somerset by Aelfric, is presumably the Brictric father of Aelfric at Lydford, the previous entry, named in Exon.3. No other Brictric was preceded by an Aelfric (or Aelric or Alric) in Domesday Book.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTRIC <OF NEWTON>. Brictric, whose manors in Hampshire4, Berkshire5 and Herefordshire6 constituted the fiefs of Turstin son of Rolf in those counties, is evidently Turstin's designated predecessor, and so probably the Brictric who preceded him at Kimble in Buckinghamshire7, and Hasfield and Oakley in Gloucestershire8, most of them high-status manors. Although often referred to simply as a free man, he is designated a royal thane at Kimble.
Brictric is probably also one of the three thanes whose share in a hide at Coleshill in Wiltshire9 was acquired by Turstin, the other thanes being Asgot of Hailes (q.v.) and Edmund of Childrey (q.v.), perhaps his brothers, also wealthy landowners. They may be the three free men who held the valuable royal manor of Sparsholt in Berkshire10, Brictric having a second manor in the vill acquired by Turstin11, and possibly a third, another valuable manor, acquired from a Brictric by
1 WIL 24,5
2 WIL 67,2-10
3 SOM 47,21-22
4 HAM 38,1
5 BRK 55,1-4
6 HEF 17,1-2
7 BUK 35,1
8 GLS 19,2. 67,3
9 WIL 49,1a
10 BRK 1,10
11 BRK 55,4
Hascoit Musard1. Brictric's family connections suggest he is the Brictric among the king's thanes at Leckhampton in Gloucestershire2, where Asgot of Hailes had a manor3. If so, he was still alive in 1086 since he held Leckhampton at both dates, which makes it likely he is the king's thane Brictric who survived for twenty years at Woodchester and Wheatenhurst4, the only such Brictric in the county, these three manors being only three in the county held by a Brictric for two decades and the only substantial manors held by a Brictric for that period anywhere in the country (there are four less manors, in Cornwall and Somerset). There are no other Brictrics on Turstin's Honour; another king's thane, Brictric brother of Alwy, held substantial manors and survived in the region for two decades, but family relationships would seem to preclude identifying him as the same man.
A list of Brictric's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 249-51, which does not include Leckhampton, Woodchester and Wheatenhurst, or a share in Sparsholt. Dr Williams, who refers to Brictric as Brictric of Leckhampton, attributes all but Woodchester and Wheatenhurst to him: 'Introduction to the Gloucestershire Domesday', pp. 24-25. Dr Clarke ranks Asgot, Brictric and Edmund collectively as fifteenth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors attributed to the three of them would place the family comfortably within the top ten.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTRIC <OF WADDESDON>. Tenurial and distributional patterns suggest that all but one of the manors and men held by Brictric in the four adjacent counties of Buckinghamshire, Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and Oxfordshire were held by one man, the Brictric at Waddesdon, one of the three most valuable manors in Buckinghamshire5. Although his lands devolved upon eight or nine tenants-in-chief, his estate may be largely reconstructed from his description as a man of Queen Edith, some of whose manors were acquired by the Count of Mortain in Hertfordshire6; Robert d'Oilly, Miles Crispin and Hugh of Bolbec in Buckinghamshire7; and Osbern son of Richard in Worcestershire8. Apart from Robert d'Oilly, these tenants-in-chief - particularly Robert's son-in-law Miles Crispin - acquired the lands of many of Brictric's men - too numerous to list here - as did Odo of Bayeux, William son of Ansculf and Turstin Mantle. Further links between these three and Brictric of Waddesdon are indicated by their holdings in the vills of Beachendon9, Chesham10, Littlecote11 and Marston12, where d'Oilly, Crispin and Bolbec succeeded Brictric of Waddesdon. William also acquired Brictric's men in Hollingdon and Swanbourne13. Of the two remaining Brictrics in the county, the overlord at Helsthorpe14 may be Brictric of Waddesdon, Helsthorpe farm (in Wingrave) lying between his manors of Wingrave and Horton, a couple of miles from either; Kimble15 probably belonged to Brictric of Newton whose family relationships suggest he is another individual.
In Bedfordshire, too, the three unidentified Brictrics are probably Brictric of Waddesdon, the demesne manor of Clapham16, one of the most valuable in the county, devolving upon his
1 BRK 35,5
2 GLS 78,9
3 GLS 38,1
4 GLS 78,14-15
5 BUK 23,14
6 HRT 15,5
7 BUK 19,2. 23,14;20. 26,3
8 WOR 19,5
9 BUK 4,24
10 BUK 36,3
11 BUK 17,12
12 BUK 17,8
13 BUK 17,11;14
14 BUK 43,4
15 BUK 35,1
16 BDF 19,1
principal successor, Miles Crispin. Of the other two, both held by his men, one at Thurleigh was acquired by Crispin1, while Milton Ernest2 lay between Clapham and Thurleigh, three miles from either. In Oxfordshire, the holdings of the only Brictrics in the county3 were acquired by Miles Crispin. Finally, 'a widow of Brictric's held this land' at Drayton Beauchamp4, two and three miles respectively from his manors at Tring and Marsworth, so very likely his widow given his dominance in the area. If so, Brictric may have been dead by 1066, though 'held' may, as it occasionally did, refer to an intermediate date rather than the customary 'before 1066' or his wife's widowhood may simply be hindsight. No Brictrics survived until 1086 in the counties where he held land twenty years previously. If these identifications are broadly correct, Brictric was the wealthiest landowner in Buckinghamshire before the Conquest - ahead of the king, the queen and the earls - and the wealthiest untitled layman in the four counties as a group. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 262-64, which does not include Stewkely or his men at Whaddon, Chesham and Helsthorpe. Dr Clarke ranks him thirty-fifth in wealth untitled laymen; the addition of Stewkely would raise him one place.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTRIC [* SON OF ALGAR *]. The estates of Brictric son of Algar have been reconstructed by Dr Williams: 'West-country magnate', pp. 41-68. In Gloucestershire, where his byname is given, he was succeeded on the bulk of his lands by Queen Matilda, a link which identifies him as the Brictric whose lands were acquired by the queen in Cornwall5, Devon6, Dorset7 and Wiltshire8. His association with the queen also identifies him as the Brictric at Tarrant in Dorset9 and Umberleigh in Devon10, both held in 1086 by the queen's foundation of La Trinité of Caen; and at Northam11, held by St Stephens, Caen. Brictric is named in Exon. as the son of Algar on the fief of Walter of Claville at Leigh in Devon12 which, together with the association of the queen with his brother Gotshelm of Claville on several royal manors in the county, suggest that other Brictrics on their fiefs may be Algar's son13. The interrelationships of the Clavilles with Ansger of Montacute and Odo son of Gamalin14 make it likely that their predecessor, Brictric, was also the son of Algar; and a possible link between Odo and Poltimore suggests that he may be the Brictric who held a substantial manor in that vill15, a few miles from a cluster of Odo's holdings. Land recorded as 'added' to Brictric's manors on the fiefs of the Clavilles and Ansger16 suggests that 'most of their manors had probably belonged to him': Williams, 'West-country magnate', p. 49, presumably as an unnamed overlord. Other lands 'added' to Brictric's are also recorded on the fief of Humphrey the chamberlain in Somerset17. Finally, Dr Williams demonstrates that the past history of Boveridge and Dewlish in Dorset18 identifies their pre-Conquest lord as Brictric son of Algar, while the
1 BDF 19,3
2 BDF 32,2
3 OXF 35,12;14
4 BUK 12,14
5 CON 1,13-19
6 DEV 1,57-72. 27,1
7 DOR 1,15-17. 54,8
8 WIL 17,1
9 DOR 21,1
10 DEV 13,1
11 DEV 12,1
12 DEV 24,21
13 DEV 24,19;22;24;29. 25,27. DOR 41,1
14 DEV 40,5-7. 42,1;5-6;16-17;20
15 DEV 50,1
16 DEV 24,18. 25,20;25. 40,5-7
17 SOM 45,1-3;5
18 DOR 10,2. 25,1
Brictric who held the royal manors of Bushley, Hanley and Forthampton in Herefordshire1 can be identified by the reference to those manors in the folios of other counties, where his byname is recorded.
Lists of Brictric's manors are given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 260-62, and Williams, 'West-country magnate', pp. 63-68. Dr Williams does not include Knighton in Hampshire, listed by Dr Clarke, who does not include the following manors listed by Williams and included here: Dewlish and Afflington in Dorset; Down St Mary in Devon; the Devonshire holdings acquired by the Clavilles, Ansger of Montacute and Odo son of Gamalin; and Acton and Wickwar in Gloucestershire; neither Clarke or Williams include Poltimore. Clarke ranks Brictric as the wealthiest untitled layman, only six earls or their wives exceeding his manorial income; the additional manors would raise him above an earl and a Countess.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTRIC [* THE CORNISHMAN *]. Brictric, who held a small fief in Cornwall from the Count of Mortain2, is probably Brictric the Cornishman (Walensis), identified by J.H. Round from charters dealing with the land transactions of Brictric's nephew, Bernard the scribe: Round, 'Bernard', pp. 418-20. He is very probably also the one other tenant of this name in the county, the Brictric who held parts of the royal manor of Winnianton3, his holding there at Bojorrow (Bodeworwei) possibly being the Botwei acquired by Bernard: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 122-23. Brictric had held two of the manors on his fief in 1066, so he may be the Brictric who according to Exon. held Coswarth4, taken from St Petroc's by the Count of Mortain and held by his (unnamed) men. The Count's tenants were often endowed by him with parts of the royal manor and of the churches. Count Robert had four other Brictrics on his Honour, in Hertfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Suffolk, none of them survivors and all very unlikely to be the Cornishman. Brictric's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 244) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 170.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTSI. Brictsi is a moderately common name which occurs twenty-nine times, distributed among fourteen counties and the lands of the king and seventeen of his tenants-in-chief, all but five occurring south of the Thames where all the valuable manors lay; one Brictsi survived.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTSI <OF TRESPARRETT>. It is probable that the predecessor of Iovin the craftsman on a group of three holdings in the neighbourhood of St Gennys is the same Brictsi5. He may be the one other Bricsti in Cornwall, the tenant near the Lizard6, though the modest scale of their properties and the distance separating them suggests otherwise. The latter consideration applies with greater force to the one other Brictsi on the Count's Honour, at Itford in Sussex.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTSI <OF TORWORTH>. Brictsi, who shared a modest holding at Torworth in Nottinghamshire acquired by Roger of Bully7, has no links with other Brictsis, all remote. Roger had no other Brictsis on his Honour, and there were no more north of the Trent.
1 HEF 1,42-44
2 CON 5,23,1-5
3 CON 1,1
4 CON 4,22
5 CON 5,7,7-8;10
6 CON 1,1
7 NTT 9,53
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTSI <OF TREMBRAZE>. Brictsi, who held part of the royal manor of Winnianton at Trembraze in Cornwall in 10861, may be the pre-Conquest lord of several manors in the county, Brictsi of St Gennys, though the very modest scale of their properties and the distance separating them suggests otherwise. Brictsi is unidentified in Coel (no. 2067).
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTSI [* THE NOBLE *]. In view of the distribution of the name and the status of his manors, it is likely that most if not all Brictsis in Kent, Sussex and Surrey are Brictsi the noble, so-named as having full jurisdiction in western Kent2 and on his manors of Lullingstone, Plumstead and Seal in the county3, and at Stoke d'Abernon in Surrey4. The Kentish manors devolved on Odo of Bayeux, who held the remaining manors of a Brictsi in Kent, at Greenwich and Horton5. He also acquired from Brictsi Hatcham in Surrey6, a mile from Greenwich and five from Plumstead; Hatcham and Greenwich were subinfeudated to the bishop of Lisieux. The other manors of Brictsi in Surrey were held by Walter son of Other in 1086, at Compton and Horsley7; both are substantial, Horsley being seven miles from Stoke d'Abernon.
In Sussex the allocation of each of the Rapes to a single tenant-in-chief obliterated much of the Anglo-Saxon tenurial pattern on which identifications are often based; but the Brictsi who held the valuable manors of Stoke and Thakeham8 is more likely to be Brictsi the noble than a second magnate of this name. He possibly held the one remaining manor in the county, at Itford9, acquired by the Count of Mortain. Of the three tenants-in-chief involved, only the Count and other Brictsis on his Honour, on very modest holdings in Cornwall and most unlikely to be the noble Brictsi. Elsewhere, the most valuable manors devolved upon a number of different tenants-in-chief. Those valued at £8 or more were acquired by Aelfric Small in Hampshire10, Arnulf of Hesdin in Wiltshire11, William of Falaise in Somerset12, and Aiulf the chamberlain in Dorset13, none of whom had other Brictsis on their lands so it is unlikely that these are three separate Brictsis. The very substantial status of the Wiltshire and Somerset manors in particular suggest they may have been held by Brictsi the noble, but there are no tenurial or other links to underpin an identification. A list of Brictsi's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 265-66, which attributes all the manors of Brictsi in Kent, Surrey and Sussex to Brictsi the noble, but no others; see also Williams, 'Lost worlds', pp. 57-58. Dr Clarke ranks Brictsi thirty-third in wealth among untitled laymen.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTWARD. The name Brictward occurs a dozen times, distributed among the four adjacent counties of Dorset, Somerset, Wiltshire and Berkshire and the lands of the king and six of his tenants-in-chief. Four manors were held by survivors.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 CON 1,1
2 KEN D25
3 KEN 5,8;21;26
4 SUR 19,32
5 KEN 5,18;29
6 SUR 5,10
7 SUR 22,1;5
8 SUS 11,67. 13,49
9 SUS 10,11
10 HAM NF9,20
11 WIL 25,1
12 SOM 27,1
13 DOR 49,12
BRICTWARD [* THE PRIEST *]. Brictward, who held Writhlington among the king's thanes of Somerset1, is probably Brictward the priest named in the Geld Roll for the county, the one such tenant there: VCH Somerset, i. 537. Brictward the priest is recorded among the king's almsmen of Dorchester and Bere in Dorset2 and on the royal manor of Bedwyn in Wiltshire3. As the only other Brictward in Domesday in 1086, he very likely the Brictward holding five hides from the bishop of Salisbury at Bishops Canning4. If these identifications are correct, Brictward was a fairly prosperous royal clerk, with land worth more than £12. There is no indication in these entries that he held land in 1066, though Professor Barlow identifies him as the royal priest at Dorchester and Bere before the Conquest: English church, 1000-1066, p. 158. As no pre-Conquest lord is recorded there and Brictward's Wiltshire church had been held by his father, however, this must be regarded as uncertain. It is possible he is the pre-Conquest lord of the substantial manor of Merriott (or of Foddington) in Somerset5, which lie very roughly between his manors of Writhlington and Dorchester and Bere; but neither lord survived on these manors, neither of which have recorded churches or other apparent links with the priest. The priests of Dorset and Wiltshire are recorded as different individuals in Coel (nos. 1360, 1191) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 171; the Brictwards of Bishops Cannings and Writhlington are unidentified (nos. 15311, 16601).
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTWIN. The name Brictwin occurs almost three dozen times, distributed among thirteen counties south of the Wash and the lands of seventeen tenants-in-chief, with clusters in Dorset and Somerset. Thirteen manors were held by survivors, possibly all by one man.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRICTWIN [* THE REEVE *]. Most if not all Brictwins in Dorset are probably Brictwin the reeve. Domesday records that Brictwin held seven consecutive manors among the king's thanes in Dorset6, named as the reeve on these and four other manors in the Geld Roll for the county7: VCH Dorset, iii. 124, 126-27, 143-44, 146-47. The tenant of the abbey of Cerne at Cerne Abbas and Woodsford8 is probably also the reeve, since he survived for two decades, as did the reeve but no other Brictwin in Domesday Book. Like the reeve, he defaulted on his tax payments: VCH Dorset, iii. 131. Woodsford, which Brictwin 'held at a revenue' according to Exon., is flanked by several of the reeve's manors. Probably, though less certainly, the tenant of the bishop of Salisbury at Beaminster9 is the reeve, as the only other Brictwin in Domesday Book to hold land in 1086. It is possible that the three remaining Brictwins in the county are the reeve, all their holdings being in the same general area of south-western Dorset10; however, they are pre-Conquest landowners without specific links to the reeve, so are not so-identified here. Brictwin was a sufficiently important local figure to be individually named as an addressee in a royal writ to Bishop Herman, Swein and the king's thanes in Dorset: Regesta, i. no. 108. His tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 783) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 170, apart from the tenant of Cerne, identified as another man (no. 777), and Brictwin at Beaminster, who is unidentified (no. 2531).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 SOM 47,23
2 DOR 24,1
3 WIL 1,23j
4 WIL 3,2
5 SOM 19,32. 45,15
6 DOR 56,35-41
7 DOR 56,9-11;17
8 DOR 11,1;7
9 DOR 3,10
10 DOR 26,11. 33,6. 37,10
BROTHIR. Brothir is a rare name which occurs seven times, distributed among the four counties of Devon, Cornwall, Suffolk and Staffordshire and the lands of the king and four of his tenants-in-chief; no Brothir survived the Conquest.
.............................................................................................................................................
BROTHIR <OF BLAXHALL>. As the name is rare, the Brothir who held twelve acres worth two shillings at Blaxhall in Suffolk, acquired by Count Alan of Brittany1, may be the Brothir at Browston2, some thirty-five miles to the north, but there are no links between them.
.............................................................................................................................................
BROTHIR <OF BROWSTON>. As the name is rare, the Brothir who held sixty acres worth five shillings on the royal manor of Browston in Suffolk before the Conquest3 may be the Brothir at Blaxhall, some thirty-five miles to the south; but there are no links between them.
.............................................................................................................................................
BROTHIR <OF HENFORD>. As the name is rare, the two Brothirs south of the Thames, at Henford in Devon4 and Marhamchurch in Cornwall5, thirteen miles apart, may be one man, though their manors devolved upon different tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
BROTHIR <OF OAKEN>. As the name is rare, the only three Brothirs north of the Wash, whose manors of Swynnerton, Patshull and Oaken in Staffordshire were acquired by the same tenant-in-chief, Robert of Stafford6, are very probably one man. His manors are more substantial than those of his southern namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRUN. Brun, or Brune, is an uncommon name which is stated or implied twenty-eight times, distributed among ten counties and the lands of the king and thirteen of his tenants-in-chief, with a cluster in Suffolk, and smaller ones in Cheshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire; two Bruns survived the Conquest.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRUN <OF BRINSLEY>. As the name is uncommon, it is very probable that the Bruns whose manors at Strelley, Brinsley and 'Sutton' in Nottinghamshire devolved upon William Peverel are one man7. They are the only Bruns in the county, and Peverel had no other Bruns elsewhere on his Honour; the vills are within a few miles of each other.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRUN <OF SIDDINGTON>. All Bruns in Cheshire are probably one man, though his manors devolved upon four tenants-in-chief. His five manors lay in Hamestan Hundred, where Bigot of Les Loges acquired Norbury and Siddington8. Between these two manors lay Chelford, Alderley and Bramhall, held respectively by Earl Hugh9, William son of Nigel1 and Haimo of Mascy2 in 1086.
1 SUF 3,89
2 SUF 1,53
3 SUF 1,53
4 DEV 17,20
5 CON 5,5,5
6 STS 11,18;44-45
7 NTT 10,28;31. 30,55
8 CHS 14,5;7
9 CHS 1,30
It is possible that the Cheshire Brun also held 'Ludworth' in Derbyshire3, a few miles north-east of Norbury and isolated from the other Derbyshire manors held by a Brun; but there are no links to confirm an identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
BRUN [* THE REEVE *]. All Bruns in East Anglia may be one man, Brun the reeve. His manors of Stonham, Baylham and Langedana in Bosmere Hundred in Suffolk were acquired by Roger Bigot4, where he is named the reeve of Ipswich under the patronage of the queen on the first of them and as Roger's predecessor on the last two, so he is almost certainly Brun, Bigot's reeve, on the royal manor of Southmere in Norfolk5, and probably the Brun on another royal manor, Bramford, also in Bosmere Hundred, four miles from Baylham6. Aelfric son of Brun (q.v.), very probably his son, held three manors from the bishop of Bayeux, so it is not unlikely that the reeve is the free man Brun from whom the bishop acquired part of Brantham7. Similarly, Leofwin son of Brun, perhaps another son, was a man of Edric of Laxfield8, as was Brun at Grundisburgh9. The one other Brun in East Anglia preceded Roger of Poitou at Hasketon10, two miles from Grundisburgh. Between them, father and sons are the only Bruns by forename or patronymic in East Anglia.
.............................................................................................................................................
BURGHARD [* OF MENDLESHAM *]. All Burghards in Domesday may be one man, the Burghard of Mendlesham named just once in the text on a manor of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds as the lord of two men at Wickham Skeith in Suffolk11. The bulk of his manors lie in that county. The king retained Mendlesham and its dependencies himself12 - where Burghard is evidently Burghard of Mendlesham - and probably also a house in Norwich and a holding in Cotton, a vill in which one of the dependencies of Mendlesham lay13. Burghard held a second manor from the abbey of Bury St Edmunds, claimed as a dependency of Mendlesham14. The bulk of his remaining demesne holdings were acquired by Earl Hugh of Chester15. At Buckingham, where his burgess was acquired by Earl Hugh, he is named Burghard of Shenley; and on the earl's fief in the county, he is described as a royal thane and Guard. Alternative bynames are not uncommon in Domesday Book, the scribes often naming from selecting a bynames from a locality with which they were familiar. It is improbable that Earl Hugh had two predecessors named Burghard when the name had such a limited tenurial and geographical distribution.
The lands of Burghard's men were distributed more widely. Some went to the king and to Earl Hugh16, the remainder being dispersed among several other tenants-in-chief, as was often the case. As there is no clear instance of a second Burghard holding a demesne manor, the overlord of all these men is probably Burghard of Mendlesham, a probability supported by a variety of links.
1 CHS 9,28
2 CHS 13,5
3 DBY 1,30
4 SUF 7,63-66
5 NFK 1,2
6 SUF 1,119
7 SUF 16,43
8 SUF 6,110
9 SUF 67,10
10 SUF 8,8
11 SUF 14,152
12 SUF 1,66;76-87
13 NFK 1,61. SUF 1,95
14 SUF 14,146
15 BUK B4. 13,2-3. NFK 6,6. SUF 4,12;24;30-31;35;38
16 SUF 4,26;28-29;33;35;38-39
Most were acquired by Hugh de Montfort1. Their manors included Cotton and Wyverstone, vills in which Burghard had holdings dependant upon Mendlesham; Carlton Colville, Kessingland and Hatheburgfelda, where he preceded Earl Hugh; and Weston and Willingham, where he preceded Roger Bigot2. Roger Bigot also succeeded Burghard as a tenant of Earl Hugh at Fundenhall in Norfolk and the bishop of Bayeux at Stonham3, where Burghard had another holding dependant upon Mendlesham. Two other tenants-in-chief had similar links: Robert Malet - or rather, his mother - acquired a half free man of Burghard's in Thornton Magna4, where Burghard had yet another holding dependant upon Mendlesham; and the bishop of Bayeux acquired the land of another of Burghard's men, at Helmingham5.
Less certainly, Burghard of Mendlesham may be the one remaining Burghard in Domesday Book, with a respectable manor in Witham, acquired by Robert Gernon6. Burghard's father (below) held land at Smallands7, a couple of miles away, and many other manors in the county. Burghard (d. 1061) is identified as a son of Earl Algar (q.v.) by Dr Baxter, who also suggests he probably held all the manors and men of the Domesday Burghard: 'Death of Burghard', pp. 275-77, 322-23. Since East Anglia was once part of Algar's earldom, the identification helps to explain the distribution of the name Burghard and lends further weight to its attribution to one man.
Burghard's estate was worth very slightly over £51, which would place him comfortably among the hundred wealthiest magnates of Anglo-Saxon England, ranking seventy-first if included in Clarke, English nobility; Dr Baxter's figure is £50.
.............................................................................................................................................
BURGRED. Burgred is a fairly common name which occurs almost fifty times, distributed among seven counties and the lands of the king and thirteen of his tenants-in-chief; but it is rare in the sense that it was probably borne by fewer than half-a-dozen men. The distribution is skewed, all pre-Conquest names falling into one of two groups of adjacent counties: Cornwall and Devon, and Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire, where the bulk of the manors and all the most valuable of them occur. Three were held by survivors.
.............................................................................................................................................
BURGRED [* FATHER OF EDWIN *]. Tenurial and distributional characteristics suggest that all Burgreds in Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire are the royal thane Burgred8, the designated predecessor of the bishop of Coutances9, who acquired all Burgred's demesne manors and most of his men in Bedfordshire10, Buckinghamshire11 and Northamptonshire12, these manors clustering around the junction of the three counties. As no other Burgred had a demesne manor in those counties, he is probably the overlord of men whose manors were acquired by other tenants-in-chief13. At Piddington14, the bishop of Coutances claimed the holding; and at Weston Underwood15, Burgred had other men in the same vill, providing some confirmation. There are no
1 SUF 31,21-24;26-30;32-33;35-36
2 SUF 7,42-44
3 NFK 6,6. SUF 16,15
4 SUF 6,215
5 SUF 16,26
6 ESS 32,3
7 ESS 41,2
8 BDF 3,16
9 NTH 35,1j
10 BDF 3,1-7;9;13-17
11 BUK 5,12-14;16-17
12 NTH 4,1-2;4;8-13;15;17;23-24
13 BDF 2,4. 25,6. 54,4. BUK 12,34. 41,3
14 NTH 56,65
15 BUK 12,34
other Burgreds in the three counties, and none elsewhere on the Honour of the bishop of Coutances. Burgred and his son Edwin (q.v.) were between them the most important predecessors of the bishop of Coutances in terms of his assessed land. Burgred had one or two other sons - Ulf1 and Wulfsi2 may be scribal variations on one name - who held land in the same area. A list of Burgred's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 268-70, which does not include Burgred's manor of Barton in Northamptonshire or those of his men at Bolnhurst, Weston and Dadford. He ranks Burgred and his sons thirty-sixth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors and necessary adjustments to his figures would raise the family two places. Dr Williams suggests that Burgred was a kinsman of Countess Gytha of Hereford: 'The king's nephew', pp. 336-38.
.............................................................................................................................................
BURGRED <OF AUNK>. The six Burgreds in Devon are probably one man, though his manors devolved upon four tenants-in-chief. One man almost certainly held Aunk, Tale and Tedburn, the first two being acquired by Ralph or Pomeroy3 and Tedburn by his brother, William the goat4; the brothers shared other predecessors and tenants. Aunk is less than a mile from Clyst Hydon, the first of Burgred's two manors acquired by Baldwin the sheriff5, the second - Offwell - being seven miles from the sixth manor, at Gatcombe, acquired by the king's servant Ansger6. There are no other Burgreds in the south-western counties, and no more on the Honours of the tenants-in-chief concerned.
.............................................................................................................................................
BURGRED <OF COVEN>. The Burgreds who held consecutive manors at Coven and Coppenhall in Staffordshire from Robert of Stafford7 are very probably one man, the only Burgred in the county and one of two surviving Burgreds, the other a priest in Huntingdonshire. Geoffrey of Coppenhall held two-thirds of a fee from the Honour of Stafford in 1166, with Alan of Coven as his subtenant: Red Book, i. 267. Burgred's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3619) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 171.
.............................................................................................................................................
BURGRED <OF TREGOLE>. As the name is rare, the Burgreds whose manors of Tregole and Trewint in Cornwall were acquired by the Count of Mortain8 are likely to be one man; both manors are in Stratton Hundred.
.............................................................................................................................................
BURGRED [* THE PRIEST *]. Burgred, who held a church with Thorkil in Huntingdon for two decades, is identified as a priest in the entry for Botuluesbrige, where the church is named as St Mary's9. He is the only Burgred to survive for that period, though a Staffordshire Burgred held two manors in 1086. The name Burgred does not occur elsewhere in the county. His church is recorded in Coel (no. 6789) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 169.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 BUK 12,29
2 BDF 25,5
3 DEV 34,18;22
4 DEV 19,30
5 DEV 16,86;172
6 DEV 51,13
7 STS 11,62-63
8 CON 5,23,2. 5,26,1
9 HUN B12. 19,9
"BUTER" <OF PICKWELL>. Buter, who held the substantial manor of Pickwell and its dependencies in Leicestershire from Geoffrey of la Guerche1, is evidently the Buterius who witnessed Geoffrey's foundation charter for Monks Kirby priory in 1077: Monasticon, vi/ii. 996, no. 1. His name does not occur elsewhere in Domesday Book. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 8325) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 172, but not its dependencies, which are assigned to the tenant-in-chief. .............................................................................................................................................
CADIO. Cadio is a rare name which occurs five times, distributed among four counties and as tenants on the lands of three tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
CADIO <OF ASTON>. As the name is rare, the Cadios who held Ilbury in Oxfordshire2 and Aston and Stoke in Staffordshire3 from Robert of Stafford are very probably one man. It is improbable that he is the same man as his namesake on a near-peasant holding in Lincolnshire or on a modest manor in Devon, some 250 miles away. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2975) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 172.
.............................................................................................................................................
CADIO <OF BROUGHTON>. Cadio, who held six bovates ploughed by as many oxen at Broughton in Lincolnshire from Count Alan of Brittany, has no links with other Cadios4. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 3004) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 172, where it is suggested he might be the Gladiou with a small holding from William of Warenne in Essex5. The very modest dimensions of the Lincolnshire holding appear to make this unlikely, even if the names were identical.
.............................................................................................................................................
CADIO <OF DUNSLAND>. Cadio, who held Dunsland in Devon from Baldwin the sheriff6, has no links with his namesakes, over two hundred miles away. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 929) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 172.
.............................................................................................................................................
CEOLRED. The name Ceolred occurs four times, twice in Somerset and twice in Warwickshire; none survived the Conquest.
.............................................................................................................................................
CEOLRED <OF FODDINGTON>. As the name is rare, the Ceolreds whose manors of Bradon and Foddington were acquired by the Count of Mortain7 are probably one man. He has no links with his Midlands namesake.
.............................................................................................................................................
CEOLRED <OF SHUTTINGTON>. As the name is rare, the Ceolreds whose manors of Shuttington1 and Baddesley2 devolved respectively upon the Count of Meulan and Thorkil of
1 LEC 29,10-12;21
2 OXF 27,7
3 STS 11,9-10
4 LIN 12,47
5 ESS 22,13
6 DEV 16,16
7 SOM 19,23;67
Warwick are probably one man. The two fiefs shared a number of predecessors and tenants, and the two vills are six miles apart. Ceolred has no links with the distant and equally modest properties in Somerset.
.............................................................................................................................................
CEOLRIC <OF BRADON>. With the possible exception of a free man in Suffolk, all Ceolrics in Domesday Book occur in Somerset and so are very likely to be one man despite his lands devolving upon four tenants-in-chief in 1086. All five manors are of roughly comparable status and lie in the two Hundreds of 'Abdick' and Williton. Two of the manors were held from Muchelney abbey, one in each Hundred, one being held in 10663 the other twenty years later4, thereby linking the Hundreds and the pre-Conquest lords elsewhere5 with the one other survivor, who held Bradon among the king's thanes according to Exon.6. The tenant at Drayton is unidentified in Coel (no. 14682), while Bradon is assigned to the tenant-in-chief, Harding.
.............................................................................................................................................
CEOLRIC <OF LETHERINGHAM>. Gelric, named as a free man at Letheringham in Suffolk7 in the Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 151), may be a scribal error for Ceolric: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 214. He is the only Ceolric in eastern England, very unlikely to be the same man as his one namesake, in Somerset.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* PRINCESS *] CHRISTINA. The tenant-in-chief Christina, whose two fiefs included the very valuable manor of Broadwell (£31) in Oxfordshire8 and valuable manors at Ulverley and Itchington in Warwickshire9, acquired from Earl Algar and his son Edwin, is very probably Princess Christina, sister of Prince Edgar and of St Margaret, queen of Scotland. Itchington had been the most valuable of all, for 'when the King gave it to Christina it paid £36'. She became a nun at Romsey at about the time of the Domesday Survey: Chronicle of John of Worcester, iii. 44-45. Her name does not occur elsewhere in Domesday Book. Her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3492) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 176-77.
.............................................................................................................................................
CLARENBALD. Clarenbald is a rare name which occurs four times, distributed among four counties, as many tenants-in-chief, and three different dates.
.............................................................................................................................................
CLARENBALD <OF BOTTESFORD>. Clarenbald, who held Bottesford in Leicestershire from Robert of Tosny10, has no links with his namesakes in Essex and Suffolk, or with Clarenbald of Le Marais11, who appears to have died or left the country by the date of the Domesday Survey. Clarenbald's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 9363) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 173.
1 WAR 16,22
2 WAR 17,16
3 SOM 9,2
4 SOM 9,6
5 SOM 21,2. 36,4
6 SOM 47,4
7 SUF 32,14
8 OXF 54,1
9 WAR B2. 42,1-3
10 LEC 15,15
11 BUK 19,1
.............................................................................................................................................
CLARENBALD <OF HAVERHILL>. Clarenbald, who preceded Tihel of Helléan on a modest holding at Haverhill in Suffolk1, is the one pre-Conquest lord of this name; he has no links with his post-Conquest namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
CLARENBALD <OF RIVENHALL>. Clarenbald, who held Rivenhall in Essex from Swein of Essex2, has no links with his continental namesakes, the nearest some 150 miles away. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1848) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 173.
.............................................................................................................................................
CLARON [* FATHER OF ARNOLD *]. The name Claron occurs twice, each time as a tenant of Roger of Bully, at Markham and Elkesley - four miles apart - in Nottinghamshire3, so almost certainly held by one man, the Claron who witnessed Roger's foundation charter for Blyth priory and whose son Arnold subsequently witnessed a grant to Workshop priory: Cartulary of Blyth priory, p. 209; Stenton, 'Domesday survey of Nottinghamshire', pp. 225-26. It has been suggested that his name may be a variant of Clarenbald (Forssner, Continental-Germanic personal names, pp. 54-55); but, if so, there are no links between him and the four Clarenbalds recorded in Domesday Book. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3715) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 173-74, where it is suggested he is 'possibly' Clarenbald of Lisores, from Lisores in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Lisieux).
.............................................................................................................................................
CNUT. Apart from references to King Cnut and two forenames names in Suffolk, all Cnuts occur in the four adjacent counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, and are particularly numerous in Yorkshire. A Reginald and Walter Cnut occur south of the Wash. No Cnuts survived the Conquest.
.............................................................................................................................................
CNUT <OF METHLEY>. Cnut, predecessor of Ilbert of Lacy at Methley in the West Riding of Yorkshire4 might be Cnut son of Karli; but since Methley lies within the Honour of Pontefract, his identity cannot be tested against normal tenurial relationships. Ilbert had many Gamals on his Honour; but most were survivors and so cannot be Karli's son, who was assassinated in 1073: Fletcher, Bloodfeud, pp. 189-90. None of Karli's other sons appear within the Honour, so if Methley was held by Cnut son of Karli then his manor was an outlier at some distance from other family properties.
.............................................................................................................................................
CNUT <OF MISSON>. Cnut, who held land worth eight shillings at Misson in Nottinghamshire acquired by Ernwin the priest5, has no links with other Cnuts.
.............................................................................................................................................
CNUT <OF SANDIACRE>. Cnut, who shared Sandiacre in Derbyshire with two other landowners before the Conquest6, has no with links with other Cnuts, the nearest some fifty miles away.
1 SUF 42,2
2 ESS 24,44
3 NTT 9,28;32
4 YKS 9W94
5 NTT 30,43
6 DBY 17,15
.............................................................................................................................................
CNUT <OF TUDDENHAM>. Cnut, who held the substantial manor of Tuddenham in Suffolk in 1066, is almost certainly the overlord Cnut in the following entry1, these being the only Cnuts in southern England. He has no apparent links with his namesakes in Derbyshire and further north. His holdings were acquired by Eudo the steward.
.............................................................................................................................................
CNUT [* SON OF KARLI *]. Most Cnuts in northern England are probably one of the sons of Karli whose blood-feud with the earls of Northumbria culminated in the massacre of the family at Settrington in the winter of 1073-1074 on the orders of Earl Waltheof. He is almost certainly the Cnut whose manor of Rise in Yorkshire was acquired by Drogo of la Beuvrière2, Rise being the family's ancestral home: Fletcher, Bloodfeud, pp. 122-24, 175-76. Drogo probably also acquired Catfoss from him3, Rise and Catfoss both passing through the hands of William Malet4 and both lying in Holderness where Cnut's grandfather was a 'Hold', after which Holderness is named: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 30-31. As Malet was dead by 1069, the manors were lost by Cnut at an early date, before the massacre which he alone of those present survived, 'spared because of his innate goodness'; no Cnuts are recorded as holding land in 1086.
Cnut probably also held Thorpe Bassett5, shared with Gamal (q.v.) - one of his brothers - and later granted to the abbey of St Albans by Berengar of Tosny (q.v.), who acquired the bulk of the manors of Karli's eldest son, Thorbrand (q.v.) and some other family holdings: Farrer, 'Domesday survey of Yorkshire', p. 160. It is also likely that he is the Cnut at Swinton, Low Hutton, Wiganthorpe and Cranswick, his brothers holding other manors in those vills6, and also at Brandsby7, acquired by Hugh son of Baldric who succeeded Thorbrand at Cawton, six miles away. Four of these five manors lay in the north-western wapentakes of 'Bulford' and Maneshou so it is not unlikely (given that his name is uncommon) that he is the Cnut whose manors of Habton, Ryton, Amotherby, Appleton, Hindley and Raskelf were waste and untenanted in 1086, left in the king's hands and so without the lordship detail which would aid identification8. He may also be the one other Cnut in this area, whose manor in the lost vill of Berghebi in the small wapentake of 'Yarlestre' - between 'Bulford' and Maneshou - was acquired by William of Percy9 who obtained several other manors from Karli's family. Percy was established in Yorkshire by 1069 and profited at the expense of the principal leaders of the northern rebellions of 1068-1069, among whom the 'four sons of Karli' were prominent according to Orderic Vitalis (ii. 222-23).
Karli's son may also be the Cnut who held the remaining manors in the East Riding. East Cottingwith10 was acquired by the Count of Mortain who also had Cnut's manor of Cranswick (above) from Cnut, the only Cnuts on his Honour. It is likely, too, that it is Karli's son who had 'full jurisdiction, market rights and all customary dues' in York11, appropriate to his family's status and on the way between his manors in the East and North Ridings. Probably, though less certainly, he is also the Cnut who preceded Gilbert Tison at Kirk Ella, Anlaby and Chrachetorp12. The manors are
1 SUF 28,3-4
2 YKS 14E33
3 YKS 14E37
4 YKS CE38-39
5 YKS 1E45
6 YKS 1N68;85;89. 5E39
7 YKS 23N27
8 YKS 1N59-60;62;69;90;103
9 YKS 13N16
10 YKS 5E10
11 YKS C36
12 YKS 21E1-3
likely to have been held by one man since they form a tight group in Hessle wapentake, at no great distance from Rise and the family base in Holderness. More specifically, there are grounds for believing that Gilbert acquired land from Cnut's brother Gamal (q.v.) in Craven, and just possibly all his manors in Craven from Karli's family. The one other Cnut in the East Riding held Boynton in Hunthow wapentake1, a wapentake in which many manors were held Gamal and Karli. Finally, Cnut may be the predecessor of Count Alan of Brittany at Scruton, Aysgarth and Clifton-on-Ure2, the three remaining manors in the north-west of the North Riding. Count Alan appears to have obtained several manors from other family members, Gamal and Karli.
Count Alan also succeeded a Cnut at Spridlington in Lincolnshire3, one of three Cnuts in the county, all of whom are very probably Karli's son. All three manors lay close to each other in 'Aslacoe' wapentake, the other two - Cammeringham and Hackthorn - being acquired by Kolsveinn of Lincoln4 who also succeeded to Ingham5, less than a mile from Cammeringham, the one manor in 'Aslacoe' held by Sumarlithi, another of Karli's sons, his name sufficiently rare as to make his identification all-but-certain.
As the family is prominent in the history of the north in the eleventh-century and took a leading role in the revolt against Norman rule, its members were presumably major landowners, so the scale of landholding suggested by these identifications is not implausible. If the bulk of them are correct, then the manorial income of Cnut and his family was in excess of £100 in 1066, though in Yorkshire the assessment of their lands - more than 600 hides - is probably a better guide to their status. If included in Clarke, English nobility, their manorial income would rank them among the three dozen wealthiest untitled laymen; in assessed land, they were exceeded among laymen only by the royal family and some earls.
............................................................................................................................................. COLA. Cola is a fairly common name which occurs more than forty times, distributed among the lands of twenty-three tenants-in-chief and fifteen counties between Cornwall and Yorkshire, most of them south of a line from the Severn to the Wash. Ten manors were held by survivors. .............................................................................................................................................
COLA [* NEPHEW OF KOLSVEINN *]. Cola, who held a manor at Barlings in Lincolnshire in 10666, the only Cola in the county, is identified as a nephew of Kolsveinn of Lincoln (q.v.) in an entry for the city of Lincoln7.
.............................................................................................................................................
COLA <OF HELE>. The name Cola occurs five times in Cornwall, three in Devon, but nowhere else within a hundred miles. It is likely that the five Cornish manors belonged to one man in 1066, who survived as a tenant of the Count of Mortain at Hele8, adjacent to Week St Mary, one of the other four manors, all of which had devolved upon Richard son of Turolf9. The three Devonshire holdings were acquired by three tenants-in-chief and may have been held by different individuals, though that at Henscott in north Devon10 is fairly close to Week and Hele. Cola's tenancy is
1 YKS 1E15
2 YKS 6N58;82;119
3 LIN 12,42
4 LIN 26,10;16
5 LIN 26,11
6 LIN 26,7
7 LIN C22
8 CON 5,24,3
9 CON 5,3,5;8;18;23
10 DEV 3,12
recorded in Coel (no. 246) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 174-75, where it is suggested he may be Cola Rigenson, a burgess of Launceston priory recorded in its cartulary.
.............................................................................................................................................
COLA <OF HONLEY>. Cola, whose shared holding at Honley in Yorkshire was acquired by Ilbert of Lacy1, is the only Cola in Yorkshire, with no links with his namesakes in Derbyshire and Lincolnshire. Ilbert has no other Colas on his Honour.
.............................................................................................................................................
COLA <OF WINSTER>. As the name is uncommon in the north, the Colas who held Winster and Yeldersley from Henry of Ferrers2, and preceded him at 'Soham'3, are probably one man, who is perhaps also the Colle of Kniveton, Youlgrave and Harthill4. The name-form Colle is unique to these three entries; and although recorded as a separate name - Kolli - by von Feilitzen, it is likely here to be a scribal variant of Cola (Cola, Cole): Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 307. Like Cola, the name is borne both by a pre-Conquest lord and a post-Conquest tenant, two of the three manors also occurring on the lands of Henry of Ferrers; the third, at Harthill, being adjacent to the manor of Youlgrave he acquired from Colle. The Mountjoy (Munchoye) family later had an interest in Winster, Youlgrave and Yeldersley, in part at least acquired from a Robert son of Col, whom Statham suggests was the son of the Domesday Cola: Book of Fees, p. 993; Derbyshire charters, nos. 2620, 2716; Statham, 'Notes on Domesday tenants', pp. 178-80. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he is the Cola who held land among the royal thanes of Berkshire in 1086, perhaps on the basis that Ferrers was a significant landowner in that county, with land in several vills clustering around Cola's manors in Ginge and Hendred. This is not implausible; but if Statham is correct in his identification, the Derbyshire Cola had direct descendants and the Berkshire Cola did not. On balance, it is more likely that the Berkshire Cola is Cola the hunter. The Derbyshire manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1663) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 174.
.............................................................................................................................................
COLA [* THE HUNTER SON OF WULFGEAT *]. The Colas among the king's thanes of Berkshire5 and Wiltshire6 1086 may be Cola the hunter, named among the thanes of Hampshire7, since he is the only Cola in the three counties who held land in 1086, there being only four other such elsewhere in England, their properties tiny or remote and without links to the hunter. He may also be the Cola who claimed a mill at Ardington, in Wantage Hundred, where the thane's holdings lay8. On one of the two Hampshire manors, his father is named as Wulfgeat, probably Wulfgeat the hunter (q.v.), with comparable holdings in Dorset, Hampshire and Wiltshire.
All the manors in Berkshire, Hampshire and Wiltshire were held by different families when their descent is first apparent; but it is unlikely that this is a reliable clue to the identity of the Domesday tenants. The most substantial manor, at Hendred in Berkshire9, was in the hands of the Marmion family from an early date, possibly as early as 1097, certainly by the 1120s (Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 48-49; Regesta, ii. no. 1575), while Ginge10 was held by two other, apparently unrelated, Normans by the early twelfth century: VCH Berkshire, iv. 304. It is unlikely,
1 YKS 9W107
2 DBY 6,2;45
3 DBY 6,10
4 DBY 4,2. 6,76. 10,18
5 BRK 65,10;13
6 WIL 67,42
7 HAM 69,32;52
8 BRK 41,5
9 BRK 65,13
10 BRK 65,10
however, that Hendred and Ginge were held by different men in 1086 since these are the only two Colas in the county, and both were survivors among the royal thanes, holding in vills barely two miles apart. It is more likely that they were subject to escheat, forfeiture or descent through heiresses, in any of which cases the descent of the Hampshire and Wiltshire manors to other families is inconclusive: VCH Hampshire, iv. 563. See also Golding, 'Introduction to the Hampshire Domesday', p. 25; Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 115-16. The Hampshire manors are attributed to Cola the hunter in Coel (no. 398) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 174; those in Berkshire to another man (no. 1663); the Wiltshire tenant is unidentified (no. 17155).
.............................................................................................................................................
COLBERT. Colbert is a rare name which occurs only in the three widely separated counties of Devon, Cheshire and Lincolnshire, though Colbern, named Colbert in the list of landholders, held a fief in Norfolk1. The names Fridebern/Fridebert, Ketilbiorn/Ketilbert, Osbern/Osbert and Thorbert/Thorbiorn also appear to be interchangeable, though recognised as separate names.
.............................................................................................................................................
COLBERT <OF UPTON>. The four Colberts in Cheshire are probably one man. His manors of Wervin, Upton and Noctorum in the Wirral peninsular devolved upon William Malbank2, Wervin lying approximately midway between Upton and the adjacent vill of Noctorum and the fourth manor at Burwardsley, acquired by Robert son of Hugh3. Colbert retained Upton as Malbank's tenant. It is improbable that he is the same man as the Lincolnshire or Devonshire Colberts. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 28781).
.............................................................................................................................................
COLEMAN. The name Coleman occurs twenty-one times, distributed among nine counties and the lands of a dozen tenants-in-chief. The name is almost entirely confined to southern England, with one small cluster in East Anglia; one Coleman survived.
.............................................................................................................................................
COLEMAN <OF SUTTON>. The one Coleman in northern England, with a tiny holding at Sutton in Nottinghamshire4, has no links with his namesakes. It is unclear as to whether he survived on his holding.
.............................................................................................................................................
"COLNE" [* FATHER OF EDRIC *]. Colne, who held Longstone in Derbyshire before the Conquest5, is probably the father of Edric, who had a church in Derby in 10666. The name-forms (Coln) are unique in Domesday, though they may equate to the Colne who held Parwich after the Conquest7, another unique form. The rarity of the forms might suggest they belonged to one individual; but since the Coln of Derby had been succeeded by his son, this less likely. Etymologists are uncertain of the derivation of Coln/Colne, von Feilitzen suggesting that it is possibly an error for Colle (Kolli): von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 218. Since this form, too, is unique to Derbyshire, the suggestion is persuasive. However, the arguments for
1 NFK 45,1
2 CHS 8,4;8;10
3 CHS 2,21
4 NTT 30,18
5 DBY 6,72
6 DBY B8
7 DBY 1,15
identifying the Derbyshire Colles as Cola of Winster do not apply to Coln/Colne, who are treated here as separate individuals. Keats-Rohan, Domesday people, pp. 174, 185, suggests he may be Colne of Parwich.
.............................................................................................................................................
"COLNE" <OF PARWICH>. The name-forms Coln/Colne occur three times, all in Derbyshire1, so possibly borne by one man. However, Colne son of Edric had been succeeded by his son in one entry2 and so is unlikely to be the Colne who held the once substantial manor Parwich from the king3 in 1086. It has been suggested that he may be the Colle - another form unique to Derbyshire - here identified as Cola of Winster. Colne's manor of Parwich is recorded in Coel (no. 8729) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 174.
.............................................................................................................................................
COLWIN [* THE REEVE *]. It is very likely that all Colwins in Domesday Book are Colwin the reeve, named in the Geld Roll for Hartland Hundred in Devon as owing tax on half a virgate, his holding at Alminstone in that Hundred4: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xiv. As a survivor and royal official, he is probably the Colwin stated in the text to hold eight consecutive manors among the king's thanes in the county5, characteristics which also identify him as the Colwin whose remaining manors are associated with Baldwin the sheriff, with whom he administered the estate of the late Queen Edith in Exeter6, and farmed the royal manor of Lifton, probably under Baldwin7. He was Baldwin's tenant at 'Guscott' and Woolleigh8, and preceded him at Stockleigh9. This is the one Colwin who did not retain a manor he held in 1066; but since the reeve did, there is little reasons too doubt this Colwin is also the reeve. There are no other Colwins in Domesday Book. Like other officials whose administrative know-how was useful, Colwin prospered from the Conquest in a modest way. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 804) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 175.
.............................................................................................................................................
CORBIN [* OF AGNEAUX *]. The name Corbin occurs twice in Domesday Book, both times as a tenant of the bishop of Bayeux, on substantial manors at Peckham in Kent10 and Atherstone in Warwickshire11, both evidently the same man. Dr Keats-Rohan discusses the charter evidence for his origins, from Agneaux in Lower Normandy (Manche: arrondissement Sainte-Lô), where his family was associated with the bishop of Bayeux. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1931) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 176.
.............................................................................................................................................
CROC [* THE HUNTER *]. The forename Croc is confined to Hampshire and Wiltshire and to landholders in 1086. Croc the hunter held a small fief in Hampshire12, as did Reginald son of Croc, perhaps his son. The other Crocs, tenants of four manors in Wiltshire, are probably the same man.
1 DBY B8. 1,15. 6,72
2 DBY B8
3 DBY 1,15
4 DEV 42,3
5 DEV 52,1-8
6 DEV C2
7 DEV 1,25
8 DEV 16,13;41
9 DEV 16,37
10 KEN 5,59
11 WAR 4,2
12 HAM 60,1-2
One of the four, at North Tidworth1, is less than a mile away, across the county boundary from South Tidworth, held by the Hampshire Croc; another, at Collingbourne Kingston, five miles away2. Bradenstock3 is in the north of the county, some twenty-five miles distant; but as Croc was the witness or addressee of several royal writs concerning land in Berkshire, his reach was not confined to the area around the Tidworths: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 36-37, 122-23, 138-39. Both Tidworth and Bradenstoke were held as a royal servant. Croc has left his name of the landscape, at Crux Easton, one of his Hampshire manors4. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 396) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 177.
.............................................................................................................................................
CULLING THE BURGESS. It is probable that the Culling who had two houses and seven acres in Colchester5 is the same burgess as the even more prosperous Culling with a church and twenty-six acres in Ipswich, they being the only two Cullings in Domesday Book. The name may be the same as the equally rare Kollung, but it is unlikely that either of the minor rural landowners in Shropshire and Derbyshire bearing this name are the same man as the burgess.
............................................................................................................................................. CYNERIC. Cyneric is a rare name, which occurs once in Northamptonshire and six times in Suffolk, on the lands of four tenants-in-chief there; all seven names borne by pre-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
CYNERIC <OF BRADDEN>. It seems unlikely that the predecessor of Robert of Bucy at on the fairly substantial manor of Bradden in Northamptonshire6 is the same Cyneric as his Suffolk namesake on several modest holdings in Suffolk, roughly a hundred miles away, the only other Cyneric in Domesday Book.
.............................................................................................................................................
CYNERIC <OF DARMSDEN>. The six Cynerics in Suffolk may be one man, though his holdings were acquired by four tenants-in-chief. Those at Middleton, Occold and Bedingfield probably are, being dependants of Edric of Laxfield, predecessor of Robert Malet7. At Middleton, Roger Bigot stepped into Cyneric's shoes as a tenant of Earl Hugh of Chester there, while acquiring Cyneric's holding in Grimston as tenant-in-chief8, and part of his manor of Darmsden illegally9. The remaining holding at Battisford, held by Eudo son of Spirewic in 108610, is four miles from Darmsden. With the possible exception of this last property, it is likely that the dispersion of Cyneric's holdings is a consequence of the revolt associated with Earl Ralph Wader in 1075. The ensuing forfeitures are mentioned in two of the entries11, and the tenants-in-chief involved were all in dispute about other manors forfeited by Earl Ralph and his followers.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 WIL 24,14. 68,14
2 WIL 10,2
3 WIL 68,31
4 HAM 60,2
5 ESS B3a
6 NTH 30,17;19
7 SUF 4,15. 77,2-3
8 SUF 7,99
9 SUF 3,57
10 SUF 53,3
11 SUF 3,57. 4,15
CYNESI <OF HUISH>. As the name is rare, the Cynesi whose modest holding at 'Huish' in Somerset was acquired by Walter of Douai1 might be his one namesake, in Cornwall; but there is no link to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
CYNESI <OF WILLSWORTHY>. As the name is rare, the Cynesi whose modest holding at Willsworthy in Cornwall was acquired by the Count of Mortain2 might be the one other Cynesi, in Somerset; but there is no link to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
CYNESTAN <OF BROADWOODWIDGER>. The name Cynestan occurs four times in Domesday Book, twice as predecessor of Reginald of Vautortes on consecutive manors at Appledore and Bicton in Cornwall3, and twice as a predecessor of Iudhael of Totnes at Broadwoodwidger and Downicary in Devon4. In each case, the manors are within a mile or two of each other, so probably held by one man. Whether it was the same man in both counties is less certain; but as the name is very rare, and the manors - some twenty miles apart - not insubstantial, it is perhaps more likely than not that one man held in both counties.
.............................................................................................................................................
CYNWY [* CHELLE *]. As his name is rare and all his manors substantial, the Cynwy (Chenui) whose manors of Ashton Gifford in Wiltshire5 and 'Ash' in Oxfordshire6 were acquired by Humphrey de l'Isle and Henry of Ferrers is likely to be the royal thane, Cynwy Chelle, whose manors of Arlington and Saintbury in Gloucestershire were held by the king and Hascoit Musard in 10867. There are no other Cynwys in Domesday Book though the name might be confused with the even rarer Cynewin (Chenuin), one of whom - there are two - held the valuable manor of Chitterne before the Conquest8. As Chitterne is adjacent to Ashton, both manors substantial, and both names rare, it is not unlikely that Cynewin is a scribal error for Cynwy. If included in Clarke, English nobility, Cynwy would rank among the sixty wealthiest untitled laymen.
.............................................................................................................................................
CYPPING. Cypping is an uncommon name with a skewed distribution. It occurs thirty-two times, distributed among the lands of the king and nine of his tenants-in-chief, and among six counties in southern England and one north of the Thames, with a large cluster in and around Hampshire, where a large proportion of the valuable manors are situated, and a smaller one in Devon and Somerset.
.............................................................................................................................................
CYPPING [* OF WORTHY *]. Cypping, a major landowner in Hampshire, leased Headbourne Worthy from the bishopric of Winchester(HAM 29,3), which became the centre of much of his estate; he is named as Cypping of Worthy in the Winton Domesday (pp. 54-55), where he is additionally identified as the bishop's tenant by the succession of Ralph of Mortimer (below). He was important enough for the Conqueror to retain several of his manors, including some of the most
1 SOM 24,35
2 CON 5,4,7
3 CON 5,2,25-26
4 DEV 17,5;7
5 WIL 27,14
6 OXF 24,6
7 GLS 1,58. 66,1
8 WIL 24,23
valuable1; but most of them were acquired by Ralph of Mortimer2, who also succeeded Cypping on his one manor in Berkshire3.
As the name is uncommon and Cypping held a significant part of his land from the bishop of Winchester4, he may be the Cypping who survived on a subholding of the bishop's huge manor of Chilcomb, which he also held in 10665, possibly on that part of the manor acquired by Ralph of Mortimer. The king also gave him a respectable manor at Preston Candover, albeit not as handsome as the manor he had held in the same vill before the Conquest6, though his situation was relatively comfortable compared to most of his English peers. Although the holding is small and remote, it is also likely that he is the Cypping at Hazelbury in Wiltshire7 who, like Cypping of Worthy, held land in both 1066 and 1086 and was the only other Cypping to survive the Conquest. Dr Hooper suggests that a grave slab naming Alward son of Cypping found under the church of Stratfield Mortimer - where Cypping held land - possibly commemorates his father: Hooper, 'Introduction to the Berkshire Domesday', p. 19. An Alwin son of Cypping held a manor in Berkshire in 10868. A list of Cypping' manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 271-72, with an incorrect valuation for Stratfield9. It does not, of course, include the 1086 manors, whose tenants are unidentified in Coel (nos. 6136, 6588, 6590, 17154). Cypping is ranked twenty-fourth in wealth among untitled laymen by Dr Clarke.
.............................................................................................................................................
DAVID. David is a rare name. Apart from three small fiefs, the name occurs four times, once each in Cheshire and Essex, twice in Dorset.
.............................................................................................................................................
DAVID [* OF ARGENTAN *]. It is possible that all Davids in Domesday Book are one man. The David who held a small fief in Northamptonshire10 may be David of Argentan, who held similar fiefs in the neighbouring counties of Bedfordshire11 and Cambridgeshire12. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that the other Davids in Domesday Book - in Cheshire13, Dorset14 and Essex15 - are also David of Argentan, ancestor of Argentan family which bore the cup at the Coronation service. Three of these Davids were tenants of different tenants-in-chief, and none of their manors were later held by the Argentan family. But neither were those held by David of Argentan, which appear to have been lost at a fairly early date: VCH Bedfordshire, iii. 159; VCH Cambridgeshire, v. 17, 37; ix. 109; VCH Northamptonshire, i. 372. The manor to which the coronation serjeanty was attached - Great Wymondley in Hertfordshire - was a royal manor in 1086: VCH Hertfordshire, iii. 183. The usual indicators of identity are therefore not available; but there are nevertheless some slight indications that the Domesday Davids may be one man. The three fiefs are serjeanty-type fiefs, as is one of the Dorset manors16. The fifth lord of Wymondley, Giles, held land in Essex from the
1 HAM 1,26. 1,W19. NF1,1. NF9,15. IoW1,8
2 HAM 3,1. 29,1-3;5-11;13-14;16. S2
3 BRK 46,3
4 HAM 29,1;3;9
5 HAM 3,1
6 HAM 29,13. 69,6
7 WIL 67,41
8 BRK 65,6
9 HAM 29,16
10 NTH 58,1-2
11 BDF 50,1
12 CAM 39,1-3
13 CHS 9,8
14 DOR 37,4. 54,7
15 ESS 20,48
16 DOR 57,4
descendants of Count Eustace of Boulogne, of whom the Domesday David was a tenant, albeit on a different manor: Book of Fees, p. 485. Other members of the family later held land in Northamptonshire, the south-west, and the north of England: Book of Fees, pp. 332, 425, 431; Charters of the Redvers family, pp. 60-61. The links are tenuous; but they could hardly be otherwise since the family suffered one forfeiture, if not more: Regesta, iii. no. 23; VCH Hertfordshire, iii. 183. David's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 413) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 177; see also Round, King's sergeants, pp. 264-67.
.............................................................................................................................................
DEDOL <OF TIVERTON>. The Dedols who held Budworth, Bunbury, Tiverton and Cogshall in Cheshire before the Conquest are almost certainly one man1, the only Dedol in Domesday Book. The first three manors are within a few miles of each other in Rushton Hundred, Cogshall lying nine miles north of Budworth; all four are of similarly modest status.
.............................................................................................................................................
DENE. Dene is a rare name which occurs seven times in Lincolnshire and once each in Wiltshire, Gloucestershire and Nottinghamshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
DENE <OF MARNHAM>. Dene, whose modest holding at Marnham in Nottinghamshire was acquired by Roger of Bully2, has no links with his namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
DEORMANN. Deormann is a rare name which occurs on one fief and eight manors distributed among four counties.
.............................................................................................................................................
DEORMANN [* OF LONDON *]. Deormann, who had a house in Colchester3, is probably the tenant of the archbishop of Canterbury at Keston in Kent4, subsequently recorded as a knight of the archbishop: Domesday Monachorum, pp. 62-63, 105. He was a tenant-in-chief at Islington in Middlesex5, where he is accorded his byname. He is identified as the Deormann on five manors among the king's thanes in Hertfordshire6 by the descent of two of his manors - Watton and Walkern - to his brother Leofstan, and ultimately to Leofstan's grandson, Henry, the first mayor of London: VCH Hertfordshire, iii. 152, 159. Less certainly, in view of his urban associations he may be the one other Deormann of 1086, with two messuages in Oxford7. Only one more Deormann is recorded in Domesday Book, the pre-Conquest lord of the substantial manor of Moreton in Oxfordshire8, conceivably the same man, though there are no links to confirm this. He may have been a royal moneyer, from a family of royal moneyers who played a not insignificant role in national history: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 205-206; Oxford DNB, xv. 865-66. Deormann's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8929), which revises the entry in Domesday people, p. 177.
1 CHS 1,19. 2,25-26. 5,4
2 NTT 9,64
3 ESS B3a
4 KEN 3,1
5 MDX 23,1
6 HRT 42,1-5
7 OXF B10
8 WAR 16,8
.............................................................................................................................................
DEORMANN <OF MORETON>. Deormann, who held the substantial manor of Moreton in Warwickshire1, is the only pre-Conquest lord bearing this English name. He is conceivably the same man as Deormann of London, though there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
DODA. Doda is a fairly common name which occurs roughly forty times, distributed among fourteen counties and the lands of the king and twenty of his tenants-in-chief. The bulk of the names are in the south-western counties, where seven of the eight manors held by survivors lie.
.............................................................................................................................................
DODA [* OF CURRY *]. Doda, who held Dodington among the king's thanes of Somerset in 10862, is named Dodo de Cori in the Geld Roll for Williton Hundred, where Dodington lay: VCH Somerset, i. 532. He is presumably named from one of the Currys, where no Dodas are recorded. A priest, however, held land among the king's clerks in the county at Curry Rivel in 10863, which raises the possibility that Doda de Cori is Doda the monk in Dorset, another survivor. Doda de Cori is the only surviving Doda in the county; he is unidentified in Coel (no. 15300).
.............................................................................................................................................
DODA <OF GURLYN>. The Dodas who held Carsella and part of the royal manor of Winnianton at Trelan in Cornwall in 1086 are probably one man; few Dodas survived the Conquest, and several other of the Count's tenants combined parts of Winnianton with manors elsewhere in the county4. Doda retained Carsella for two decades, so is possibly the pre-Conquest Dodas elsewhere in the county, at Gurlyn, Avalde and Brea. Gurlyn and Brea are in the far south-west, on the fringes of the sprawling manor of Winnianton, while Avalde was acquired by the tenant who held Brea5. J.H. Round suggested that the tenant at Carsella is the Doda whose lands were granted by Henry I to Bernard the scribe, Dr Williams that he is the Doda at Avalde and Brea; both may be correct: Round, 'Bernard, the King's scribe', pp. 418-20; English and the Norman Conquest, p. 123 note 139. Doda's 1086 tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 248) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 178.
.............................................................................................................................................
DODA [* THE MONK *]. Although his manors devolved upon six tenants-in-chief, most if not all Dodas in Dorset may be Doda the monk, who held Woolcombe in 1066 and so may be the Doda who held land in the same vill in 10866. The two manors in Edmondsham are also likely to have been held by one man, probably the Doda granted land in alms by Queen Matilda, since it was she who acquired one of the Edmondsham manors7. If so, this Doda survived for twenty years, as did the monk. Less certainly, the remaining Dodas are possibly the monk. Two held land in the adjacent vills of Nyland and Kington8, one among the king's thanes; and the third held Milbourne9, which is approximately midway between these vills and Woolcombe. It is possible that the monk is Doda de Cori, a survivor in Somerset, though the link is too slight to warrant an identification.
1 WAR 16,8
2 SOM 47,12
3 SOM 16,11
4 CON 1,1. 5,24,9
5 CON 5,4,18. 5,12,2-3
6 DOR 57,8. 56,50
7 DOR 1,18. 50,1. 56,20-21
8 DOR 33,3. 56,2
9 DOR 54,12
Doda's Dorset tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 1770) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 178; see also VCH Dorset, iii. 53 for a discussion of his identity.
.............................................................................................................................................
"DODIN". The name Dodin is rare, occurring on in Northamptonshire and Lincolnshire, probably borne by one tenant in each county. 'It might be derived from a native Doding ... but is perhaps rather from' a Norman French diminutive form: Forssner, Continental-Germanic personal names, pp. 61-62; von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 255.
.............................................................................................................................................
"DODIN" <OF COTTESBROOKE>. All Dodins in Northamptonshire may be one man, though he held from four tenants-in-chief. He held half a hide in Cottesbrooke among the king's thanes1, two houses in Northampton, and six tenancies. The two houses in Northampton2 were held from Countess Judith and Winemar of Flanders (q.v.), from whom he held Ashton and Easton Maudit respectively3. The three manors held from Walter of Flanders included a second manor in Cottesbrooke, his most valuable property4; all three are stated in the text to be held by one man. His last manor, at Roade, held from Gunfrid of Chocques5, is just over a mile from Ashton. All four tenants-in-chief are Flemings, with other links between them. In the Northamptonshire Survey, the manors in Cottesbrooke appear to have merged, both held by a Robert Botevileyn, though part of Cottesbrooke was held with Pipewell in the 1120s, Pipewell descending to the Botevileyn family: Farrer, Honors, i. 80-82. The remaining manors were in different hands, probably indicating fragmentation rather than several Domesday Dodins. The one other tenant of this name held from a Breton tenant-in-chief in Lincolnshire. Dodin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3684) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 178.
.............................................................................................................................................
"DODIN" <OF RIPPINGALE>. As the name is rare, the tenants of Alfred of Lincoln on consecutive manors in Bourne and Rippingale in Lincolnshire6 are almost certainly the same Dodin. There are no links between the tenant of this Breton tenant-in-chief and the one other Dodin, a tenant of several Flemish tenants-in-chief in Northamptonshire. Dodin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3359) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 178.
.............................................................................................................................................
DOLGFINN. The name Dolgfinn is rare, occurring on two manors in Derbyshire and five in Yorkshire, all but one held from the king, with survivors in both counties.
.............................................................................................................................................
DOLGFINN <OF TAPTON>. As the name is rare, the Dolgfinn who held Tapton among the king's thanes in Derbyshire in 1086 is probably the Dolgfinn who claimed land in Calow7, four miles away, and the Dolgfinn who held another manor among the thanes in 1066, in Old Tupton8, five miles to the south. He may also have held Old Tupton in 1086 since the holding was waste, no tenant being recorded there. It is possible that the Yorkshire Dolgfinns are the same man, two
1 NTH 60,4
2 NTH B34
3 NTH 40,4. 56,52
4 NTH 39,1-3
5 NTH 48,17
6 LIN 27,51-53
7 DBY 17,8-9
8 DBY 17,3
holding before the Conquest and three in 1086; but there are no links to establish identity and the manors are modest. The Derbyshire tenant is unidentified in Coel (nos. 32499, 32502).
.............................................................................................................................................
DOT. Dot is a rare name in the sense that it was probably borne by few individuals. It occurs once in Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire and Shropshire; twice in Essex and Suffolk, but eighteen times in Cheshire, where most if not all Dots may be one man. There are no survivors of this name.
.............................................................................................................................................
DOT <OF HUYTON>. As the name is rare elsewhere in England, the eighteen Dots in the Cheshire folios may be one man, though his manors devolved upon nine tenants-in-chief. Roger of Poitou acquired Huyton in South Lancashire1, fifteen or so miles from a cluster of manors in Tunendune and Bucklow Hundreds acquired respectively by William son of Nigel2, Bigot of Les Loges3, Gilbert the hunter (17,7-8;10. 18,5) and Osbern son of Tezzo4. A similar distance to the south of this grouping, Dot's manors in the adjacent Hundreds of 'Duddeston' and Warmundestrou were acquired by Earl Hugh5, Robert son of Hugh6, Richard the butler7 and William Malbank8. It is not unlikely that Dot held the one other manor in northern and western England, at Rowton in Shropshire9, fifteen miles south of this latter group: Sawyer and Thacker. 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', pp. 320-21.
.............................................................................................................................................
DROGO. Drogo is a common name which occurs more than eighty times and is implied many times more, distributed among twenty-one counties and the lands of the king and eighteen of his tenants-in-chief. It is nevertheless a rare name in the sense that it was probably borne by fewer than ten men.
.............................................................................................................................................
DROGO [* OF LA BEUVRIÈRE *]. All Drogos in Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Suffolk and Yorkshire may be Drogo of la Beuvrière, a tenant-in-chief in those and other counties. He had a small fief in Suffolk and may be the one other Drogo in the county, tenant of the bishop of London at Oakley10. In Norfolk, he is named in several claims, two of them involving Humphrey of St Omer11 who is elsewhere associated with five such claims where Drogo is named in full, though disguised by the scribe as Drodo of la Beuvrière in one case12. He is probably the Drogo at Hindringham13, where he held in chief; and he may also be 'Drogo, Robert Malet's man'14, being involved elsewhere with Malet15. Similarly, and more certainly, he is 'a certain Drogo', a man of Geoffrey Alselin at
1 CHS R1,3
2 CHS 9,12
3 CHS 14,4
4 CHS 24,8-9
5 CHS 1,15
6 CHS 2,7;17;20
7 CHS 6,2
8 CHS 8,17;23;32;34
9 SHR 4,27,26
10 NFK 19,12
11 NFK 8,8. 11,3
12 NFK 1,57
13 NFK 11,3
14 NFK 66,59
15 NFK 30,2
Ruskington in Lincolnshire, where he held in chief in the same vill1. Elsewhere in the county, he is probably the Drogo at Witham, where he held in chief and the archbishop of York's woodland is said to be in his warnode2, such woodland also identifying him at Thistleton3. Three of Drogo's claims4 involve vills in which he held in chief; and though three others do not, one of them, at Bourne, involves land held by Earl Morcar, on whose lands Drogo of la Beuvrière is elsewhere stated to have claims5. As for the other two, there are no other Drogos holding land in the county, so these may refer to the tenant-in-chief rather than a landless and otherwise unrecorded Drogo. In Yorkshire, Drogo of la Beuvrière held in chief in three vills where an unidentified Drogo held land or was subject of a claim6. Drogo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 422) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 179-80, apart from Oakley, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 13130).
.............................................................................................................................................
DROGO [* OF LES ANDELYS *]. Drogo of Les Andelys is named in the Abingdon chronicle as a subtenant of Robert d'Oilly and tenant of Earl Hugh of Chester at South Weston in Oxfordshire who granted a hide to the abbey when he became ill and retired to the monastery: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 98-105. He is not named in the Domesday entry7; but the tenurial associations suggest he may be Robert's subtenant at Ardley8 and his tenant at Shirburn and Hardwick9, confirmed by his possession of houses in Wallingford attached to South Weston and Shirburn10. He is probably also Earl Hugh's subtenant at Buscot in Berkshire11, which he held from another Robert, identified as Robert son of Hugh, one of the earl's major tenants: Farrer, Honors, ii. 22-25. This in turn suggests that he is the tenant of Robert on five manors in Cheshire12. With one exception, these are the only Drogos recorded in Berkshire, Oxfordshire or Cheshire. Dr Keats-Rohan identifies the remaining Drogo, who held Charlton in Berkshire from Ralph of Tosny13, as the same man, which is plausible given that Charlton is midway between Buscot and Wallingford and of similar status to Charlton and his manors in Oxfordshire; but it is more likely that this Drogo is Drogo son of Poyntz. Drogo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 145) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 179. He was from Les Andelys in Upper Normandy (Eure: arrondissement Les Andelys).
.............................................................................................................................................
DROGO [* OF MONTACUTE *]. The Drogos who held Nyland and Toller in Dorset14, seven manors in Devon15, and twelve in Somerset16 from the Count of Mortain according to Domesday Book or Exon.17 are probably the Drogo of Montacute, who held Knowle Park in Somerset from the king, where his byname is recorded18. He is identified as Drogo of Montacute at Nyland19 by his
1 LIN 64,1-2
2 LIN 2,36
3 LIN 51,10
4 LIN CN28. CW20. CK6
5 LIN CK40;58. CN5
6 YKS 2E33. CE52. SE,Hu4
7 OXF 15,1
8 OXF 15,5
9 OXF 28,9;16
10 BRK B9
11 BRK 18,2
12 CHS 2,7;9-10;17;20
13 BRK 47,1
14 DOR 26,2;66
15 DEV 7,4. 15,23-24;34;62
16 SOM 19,9;23-25;30;34;55-57;74;77;86
17 DEV 1,11. 15,25
18 SOM 45,12
19 DOR 26,2
grant to Shaftesbury abbey of two hides there 'with his daughter': Regesta, iii. no. 818; Shepton Montague1 presumably derives its surname from his family, and 'Womberford' and Feniton were later held by William of Montacute2: Red Book, i. 228-29; Book of Fees, p. 782. In 1166, one of the knights of his descendant, another Drogo, was Thomas de Tolra, presumably named from Toller Whelme, another of his Mortain tenancies3: Williams, 'Domesday survey of Dorset', p. 60. The descent of the remaining manors has not been traced; but most if not all may be assigned to Drogo of Montacute with reasonable confidence on tenurial grounds: every other Drogo in the south-western counties can be identified as one of two other individuals; the Count of Mortain is unlikely to have had several such in thee counties when he had no others elsewhere on his Honour. Drogo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 684) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 180.
.............................................................................................................................................
DROGO <OF STOKE>. The Drogos who held Stoke Goldington in Buckinghamshire4, Esnotrewic in Derbyshire5, Horndon in Essex6, and Ravensthorpe, Teeton and Coton and its dependencies in Northamptonshire7 from William Peverel are probably one man, the only Drogo in those counties apart from Drogo of Beuvrière on a manor in Northamptonshire. The descent of the manors tends to confirm his identity: Farrer, Honors, i. 188-92, 217-18. They are recorded in Coel (no. 1666) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 181, apart from Teeton and Coton and their dependencies, assigned to William Peverel's demesne, and Horndon, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 1666).
.............................................................................................................................................
DROGO <OF WHITLEY>. The Drogos who held Whitley in Warwickshire8 and Levedale in Staffordshire9 from Robert of Stafford are probably one man, and the same man as the tenant of William son of Ansculf in the same two counties. The distribution of their manors is consistent with this, those of William's tenant lying between those of Robert, at Perry, Barr and Handsworth in Staffordshire10 - said to be held by one man - and Edgbaston in Warwickshire11, three miles to the south, later held with Perry by the Birmingham family: VCH Warwickshire, vii. 67. These are the only Drogos in either county, and neither tenant-in-chief had others among their tenants elsewhere on their Honours. Drogo's tenancies from Robert and William are recorded in Coel as held by two individuals (nos. 8769, 2984 respectively), both referenced in Domesday people, p. 181.
.............................................................................................................................................
DROGO [* SON OF MAUGER *]. The Drogos who held Exton, Wilmersham and Culborne in Somerset12, and six houses in Exeter13 from the bishop of Coutances are probably the Drogo stated to hold seventy-three manors from the bishop in Devon14, named Drogo son of Mauger on several of these in Exon.15. He may also be the Drogo on the substantial manor of Timberscombe1, circled
1 SOM 19,57
2 DEV 15,24;34
3 DOR 26,66
4 BUK 16,10
5 DBY 7,3
6 ESS 48,1
7 NTH 35,17-18;19a-19h
8 WAR 22,25
9 STS 11,66
10 STS 12,27-29
11 WAR 27,4
12 SOM 5,5-7
13 DEV 3,2
14 DEV 3,85
15 DEV 3,9;13-14;16
by three of his manors, though there are no links to confirm this. He may be the son of Mauger of Carteret (q.v.) and brother of Humphrey, important tenants in the south-western counties, from Carteret in Lower Normandy (Manche: arrondissement Valognes). His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 785) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 180, apart from Timberscombe, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 14960).
.............................................................................................................................................
DROGO [* SON OF POYNTZ *]. The Drogos who held Charlton in Berkshire2, Sarnesfield and Clifford Castle in Herefordshire3, and Lower Swell in Gloucestershire4 from Ralph of Tosny are probably Drogo son of Poyntz, a tenant-in-chief in Herefordshire, Wiltshire and Worcestershire, whose family succeeded to the Tosny lands: Sanders, English baronies, pp. 35-36; VCH Herefordshire, i. 278. He is probably also the Drogo who held Aston Blank in Gloucestershire from the bishop of Worcester5, held by his descendants, the Cliffords: Book of Fees, p. 38. It is likely, too, that he is tenant of the bishop of Hereford at 'Middlewood' in Herefordshire and of Richard son of Osbern at Staunton-on-Arrow in the same county6, they being the only other Drogos in any of the Welsh border counties. 'Middlewood' lies in Clifford, where Drogo son of Poyntz was a Tosny tenant, and Osbern's son was later Drogo's tenant at Rochford, so an exchange or other arrangement between the two tenants-in-chief may have occurred: Herefordshire Domesday, pp. 63, 65, 119. Drogo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 525) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 180-81, apart from Charlton, assigned to Drogo of Les Andelys.
.............................................................................................................................................
DUNN. Dunn is an uncommon name which occurs twenty-nine times, distributed among the six adjacent counties of Devon, Somerset, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, Hampshire and Berkshire, and the lands of the king and nine of his tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
DUNN <OF BRIMPSFIELD>. The Dunns who preceded Osbern Giffard in Berkshire7, Wiltshire8, Somerset9 and Gloucestershire10 are evidently Osbern's designated predecessor, implicitly recognised as such on his manor at 'Oldbury' in Gloucestershire, 'which did not belong to the man Dunn's land'11; Dunn preceded Osbern on the remainder of the fief. He contributed more than half of Osbern's Honour, four times as much as any other predecessor. His status as Osbern's predecessor enables him to be identified despite the variant forms of his name (Don, Dons, Dun, Duns, Domnus) whose derivation is uncertain: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 227-28. In addition to the lands acquired by Osbern Giffard, it is likely that the Dunns (Duns, Donnus, Domnus) who held Bitton in Gloucestershire12 and Buckland Dinham in Somerset13 in both 1066 and 1086, and 'Barley' in Wiltshire in 106614 are the same man, Buckland being adjacent
1 SOM 22,14
2 BRK 47,1
3 HEF 1,21. 8,1
4 GLS 45,6
5 GLS 3,5
6 HEF 6,9. 8,1
7 BRK 39,1
8 WIL 48,1;5;9
9 SOM 39,2-3
10 GLS 50,1-3
11 GLS 50,4
12 GLS 78,13
13 SOM 47,19
14 WIL 67,28
to his manor of Elm, and Bitton and Barley encircled by his manors; both Buckland and Elm are substantial, of comparable status to several other of his manors.
Given the distribution of the name, it is not unlikely that other Dunns in Somerset and Devon are Dunn of Brimpsfield, the most likely candidates being those who survived on the same manor for two decades1, or survived at all2, particularly in the first case, where the manor is the most substantial held by an unidentified Dunn. If this Dunn is Dunn of Brimpsfield, then the remaining Somerset manors lying between this manor and those of Osbern Giffard in eastern Somerset may also be his; but there are no tenurial or other associations to confirm an identification in Devon (where Osbern Giffard held no land) or elsewhere. A list of Dunn's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 273, which is confined to those acquired by Osbern Giffard and does not include his Berkshire manor. Dr Clarke ranks Dunn eighty-ninth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additions suggested above would raise him about two dozen places without those in Devon and western Somerset (which would raise him almost another twenty places if included). The 1086 tenants are recorded in Coel and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 178-79, as two individuals, one (Dons) at Bitton in Gloucestershire (no. 8306), the other (Domnus) at Buckland Dinham and on the four Devonshire manors (no. 1763).
.............................................................................................................................................
DUNSTAN. Dunstan is an uncommon name which occurs seventeen times, all but one in the north of England and all but three of those in Yorkshire, distributed among four counties and the lands of the king and six of his tenants-in-chief. There was one survivor.
.............................................................................................................................................
DUNSTAN <OF DONYATT>. Dunstan, whose shared manor of Donyatt in Somerset was acquired by the Count of Mortain3, is the only Dunstan south of the Trent. He has no links with other Dunstans.
.............................................................................................................................................
DUNSTAN <OF ETWALL>. As the name is rare outside Yorkshire, the Dunstans at Etwall and Hallam in Derbyshire4 and Gedling in Nottinghamshire5 may be the same man. Hallam is roughly halfway between the other two vills, about fourteen miles from either. The Nottinghamshire manor may have been acquired by Roger of Bully as part of a block grant of Thurgarton wapentake: Fleming, Kings and lords, pp. 162-64.
.............................................................................................................................................
DUNSTAN <OF SWILLINGTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Dunstans who preceded Ilbert of Lacy on eight manors in 'Skyrack' and Morley wapentakes6 may be one man, possibly Ilbert's tenant at Golcar7, surviving as was often the case on a fragment of a once extensive estate. Most of his manors were of similar status, and substantial in terms of their assessment. Apart from William of Percy's predecessor, Dunstan of Tadcaster, the only other Dunstan in the county was the pre-Conquest lord of Holme8, nine miles to the south of Golcar. Like Golcar, this, too, may have been held in 1086 since no tenant is recorded; it is likely it belonged to the same Dunstan.
1 DEV 52,34-35
2 DEV 2,2. 15,77
3 SOM 19,24
4 DBY 9,2. 11,4
5 NTT 9,72
6 YKS 9W3;16;118;122;128-129;136;139
7 YKS 9W13
8 YKS 1W26
.............................................................................................................................................
DUNSTAN <OF TADCASTER>. Dunstan, whose land at Tadcaster in Yorkshire was acquired by William of Percy, is probably the burgess whose messuage in York he held in 10861. The statement by a wapentake jury that Dunstan 'did not have Thorkil's land in Tadcaster'2 was probably aimed at Percy, whose holding at Tadcaster combined the manors held by these two pre-Conquest landowners. The urban context suggests this Dunstan is not Ilbert of Lacy's predecessor, Dunstan of Swillington, though their holdings are sufficiently close to make their identity possible; some Domesday burgesses had rural manors, a few several of them.
.............................................................................................................................................
DURAND [* MALET *]. It is probable that Durand, who held Sutton-by-Guildford in Surrey as a tenant of Robert Malet, is Durand Malet3, apparently a close relative though the nature of their relationship has not been established, the most recent view being that Durand may be a son of William Malet (q.v.) and brother of Robert: Oxford DNB, xxxvi. 312-13. Sutton constituted Robert's entire fief in the county, acquired by an illegal act by Durand, implying that Robert's possession was unwarranted. It is also possible that Durand is Robert's tenant at Cransford in Suffolk4, as suggested by Dr Hart, who has made a case for the pre-Conquest Durands in Nottinghamshire and East Anglia, and other post-Conquest tenants in East Anglia and Cambridgeshire, being Durand Malet: 'William Malet and his family', pp. 135-37, 144-46. The rarity of the name before the Conquest, the possibility that Robert Malet's tenant at Cransford5 was Durand Malet, and the proximity of several of Durand's manors to those of Robert Malet, are suggestive; but as there is no instance where Durand's byname is used, and no case where he held the same manor in both 1066 and 1086, Dr Lewis's suggestion that the pre-Conquest Durands are another man, Durand of Offton, seems more likely: 'French in England', p. 141. Two of the three Suffolk tenants of 1086 - possibly all three - are probably Durand the cleric, including the Durand at Cransford. Durand's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2560) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 182.
.............................................................................................................................................
DURAND [* OF GLOUCESTER *]. The Durands who held tenancies from ecclesiastical tenants-in-chief in Gloucestershire, Hampshire, Wiltshire and Worcestershire may be Durand of Pîtres, alias Durand of Gloucester, sheriff of that county and a tenant-in-chief in the first three of those counties. Dr Walker (''Honours' of the earls of Hereford', p. 177) has identified him as the Durand who held ten hides from the bishop of Winchester in Alresford6, and his tenancy at Overton in Wiltshire descended to his heirs7, along with tenancies from the abbey of Cormeilles and probably those from the bishops of Hereford and Worcester8: VCH Gloucestershire, viii. 72; x, 47; xi. 188-89; Book of Fees, p. 39. As its tenant elsewhere, he may be the Durand who held the handsome manor of Wield from Winchester9; and since he held another substantial manor from the bishopric of Worcester10, he may be the Durand who held Norton in Worcestershire from the Church1, particularly as that tenant is the only Durand in the county.
1 YKS C10. 13W1
2 YKS CW5
3 SUR 28,1
4 SUF 6,128
5 SUF 6,128
6 HAM 2,1
7 WIL 2,11
8 GLS 3,4. 4,1. 16,1
9 HAM 2,21
10 GLS 3,7
Of the remaining tenancies, Durand at Chedglow in Wiltshire is shown to be the sheriff by a duplicate2, while another at Portchester in Hampshire3 may be him given the strategic location of Portchester, though this cannot be verified by manorial descent, the manor remaining in the hands of the family of the Domesday tenant-in-chief: VCH Hampshire, iii. 151-52. Durand's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 648) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 181-82, apart from Norton, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 31731).
.............................................................................................................................................
DURAND <OF NORMANTON>. Durand, whose manor of Normanton in Nottinghamshire4 was acquired by Roger of Bully, is one of the few pre-Conquest landowners of this name. Although he had his own Hall, his small holding of little more than a bovate appears to be his only property. The one other Durand in circuit six is the tenant-in-chief, Durand Malet, with a fief in Lincolnshire and a single manor at Owthorpe in Nottinghamshire. It is conceivable that he is the pre-Conquest lord of Normanton as suggested by Dr Hart, since his close relative, William Malet, probably held land in Lincolnshire before the Conquest; but the most recent view is that Durand was a later generation Malet: 'William Malet and his family', pp. 146; Oxford DNB, xxxvi. 312-13.
.............................................................................................................................................
DURAND [* OF OFFTON *]. As eleven of the thirteen pre-Conquest Durands occur in the same area of south-east Suffolk on holdings of similar status, they are very probably one man, named Durand of Offton on Hervey of Bourges' manor of Bredfield5. Hervey also succeeded Durand or his free men on three more manors6. No Durand is recorded at Offton, but Siward acquired a manor from him at Battisford, four miles away7. Of his remaining holdings, four were acquired by Roger Bigot, on all of which Northmann was his overlord (7,84;111;118;121), while at Helmingham8, held by the bishop of Bayeux in 1086, his overlord was Edric of Laxfield, as on two of Hervey's acquisitions. On the final holding, Ranulf brother of Ilger's manor in the lost vill of Aluredestuna9, Durand is described as a predecessor of Robert Malet, who had no Durands among his recorded predecessors in the county; but the bishop, Bigot and Malet shared other predecessors in East Anglia. Dr Hart suggested that the pre-Conquest landowner is Durand Malet; but it is more likely that Durand of Offton is a different man, as suggested by Dr Lewis: Hart, 'William Malet and his family', pp. 144-46; Lewis, 'French in England', p. 141 (some references are omitted).
.............................................................................................................................................
DURAND <OF STORRINGTON>. It is probable that the pre-Conquest lord of Sway in the New Forest, a manor acquired by Earl Roger of Shrewsbury10, is also the earl's tenant on three more manors in the Forest, the only Durands in the area11. If so, the earl had improved his lot so he may be one other Durand on the Honour of Shrewsbury, holding the fairly valuable manor of Storrington in Sussex12, as suggested by Dr Keats-Rohan. It is tempting to suggest that he might be
1 WOR 2,29
2 WIL 26,19. 28,10
3 HAM 35,4
4 NTT 9,69
5 SUF 67,23
6 SUF 67,12;17-18;23
7 SUF 74,3
8 SUF 16,25
9 SUF 39,12
10 HAM NF3,3
11 HAM NF3,4;12-13
12 SUS 11,48
Durand the barber1 at Titchfield, across Southampton Water from the New Forest manors, en route to Sussex; but there are no links to confirm this. Durand is the only barber named in Domesday Book but is perhaps the king's rather than the earl's hairdresser. Durand's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8770) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 182, apart from Baddesley2, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 6659), and with the addition of Netheravon in Wiltshire3, held from Nigel the doctor, a tenant of the earl in Shropshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
DURAND [* THE CLERIC *]. Durand, tenant of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds at Stowlangtoft in Suffolk4, may be Durand the cleric, who held Kenton from the abbey according to the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin: Feudal documents, p. 11. He is possibly also the one other Durand in the county in 1086, at Cransford5, though Dr Hart suggests that this and other East Anglian Durands are Durand Malet: 'William Malet and his family', pp. 144-146. Durand's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3818) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 181.
1 HAM 65,1
2 HAM NF3,4
3 WIL 56,3
4 SUF 14,77
5 SUF 6,128