Domesday Landowners 1066-1086 E- I


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.

EDELO <OF RAUCEBY>. Edelo, tenant of Robert of Stafford on the substantial manor of Rauceby in Lincolnshire6, is probably Robert's tenant Ehelo at Metheringham7, twelve miles away, and also his tenant Aslen at Swynnerton in Staffordshire8. These are only occurrences of those names in Domesday Book, and Swynnerton and Rauceby were later held by the Swynnerton family: Slade, 'Domesday survey of Staffordshire', p. 31. Robert son of Ehelen witnessed a Staffordshire charter in the 1120s and, as Eyton observed, the father's name is spelt 'with extraordinary variety', appearing in later records as Eslenem and Aelem as well as Ehelem: Staffordshire chartulary, pp. 195-98. Edelo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3021) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 183.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDEVA. Edeva appears to be a common name, distributed among eighteen counties and the lands of the king and twenty of his tenants-in-chief. Its distribution is skewed. Apart from a sprinkling south of the Thames and a single occurrence in Worcestershire, the names are concentrated in two large clusters, one in the adjacent counties of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, the other in those between Buckinghamshire and Suffolk. Eight manors were held by survivors. The scribe occasionally confused the name with Edith, and vice-versa.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDEVA <OF CHADDESLEY>. Edeva, who held the substantial manor of Chaddesley in Worcestershire before and after the Conquest9, is the only Edeva to retain her manor between those dates. Dr Williams suggests that she may be the Edith with two manors in Bickmarsh one of them substantial10 - who was perhaps related to the earls of Mercia, previous lords of Bickmarsh and Chaddesley: Williams, 'Introduction to the Worcestershire Domesday', pp. 21, 30-31; Baxter, Earls of Mercia, pp. 140, 171-73. Edith and Edeva are confused elsewhere by Domesday scribes; and,
7 LIN 59,19
8 STS 11,18
9 WOR 28,1
10 GLS 78,7. WAR 43,2
like Edeva, Edith held both manors herself in 1066, and from the king in 1086. Apart from the queen and a nun, Edeva and Edith are the only women of either name in the three counties of Gloucestershire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire. As her name is entered as Edith in both Gloucestershire and Warwickshire, that may be the correct form. If so, she is possibly the Edith who survived for two decades on an anonymous holding in Berkshire1, the only Edith to do so, though the holding is a mere virgate and there are no links with the Mercian manors. The tenants in Berkshire and at Chaddesley are recorded as different women in Coel (nos. 383, 9854), both referenced in Domesday people, p. 183; the Ediths at Bickmarsh are unidentified (nos. 28582, 29896).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDEVA [* THE FAIR *]. Edeva the fair, alias Edeva the rich2 and - very probably - Countess Edeva3, is given her byname on many manors in the counties of Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, and Suffolk, in all of which she was succeeded on most of her manors by Count Alan of Brittany, which plausibly identifies her as the Edeva on more than sixty others - too numerous to list - acquired by the Count in those counties; there is no instance where a second Edeva might reasonably be suspected of being his predecessor. As she is the only Edeva identified as a lord of men in those counties, she is probably the overlord at Stone in Buckinghamshire4; Caldecote, Drayton, Lolworth and Fulbourn in Cambridgeshire5; and Finborough, Hunston, Burgh and Gusford in Suffolk6. In all but the first of these, she was succeeded by tenants-in-chief who acquired other manors where her byname is supplied; and in three of them, she had other manors in the same vill. Stone was held by the bishop of Bayeux, who also acquired Reed in Hertfordshire7 from an Edeva who was overlord of two other men in that vill whose manors devolved upon Count Alan8 so there is little doubt as to the identity of the Edeva in those vills, though she is described as a 'girl' and a man of Archbishop Stigand on her demesne manor in Reed. The Countess Edeva of Burgh9 can scarcely be anyone other than Edeva the fair, Queen Edith - the only plausible alternative - presupposing scribal errors in name and - less credibly - title.
Edeva is normally identified by one of her bynames on the demesne holdings not acquired by Count Alan; but she is almost certainly the 'Edith' at Norton10 - where the dependencies give the correct form of her name and her byname11 - and the Edeva on the handsome manor of Sampford in Essex12, retained by the king with a number of her other manors. The Edeva at Thurlow in Suffolk13 is shown to be Edeva the fair by her tenure of the central manor and the intermediate tenure of Ralph Wader14; and the tiny holding at Hallingbury in Essex15 may also be hers since the bishop of London acquired other manors from her16.
Finally, she may be the Edeva whose manors in Kent and Sussex and Somerset were acquired by the bishop of Bayeux, Earl Roger of Shrewsbury and the king respectively. The royal
1 BRK 65,14
2 SUF 1,61;63. 31,54
3 SUF 4,17
4 BUK 4,1
5 CAM 26,40;49. 32,32. 35,1
6 SUF 1,64;89. 4,17. 46,5
7 HRT 5,16
8 HRT 16,5-6
9 SUF 4,17
10 SUF 1,88-90
11 SUF 1,61-64;67-73
12 ESS 1,30
13 SUF 25,104
14 SUF 1,90
15 ESS 4,16
16 HRT 4,22;25
manor of Crewkerne in Somerset1 is one of the two most valuable held by an Edeva, and Harold and his son Godwin - probably her husband and son (below) - held eight others in the county, Crewkerne being the most valuable of them all, one of a consecutive block of royal manors in Somerset2 held by Harold and his family, so Edeva was presumably one of them, and not the least important: Round, 'Domesday survey of Somerset', p. 398. Similarly, Hadlow in Kent3 is the third most valuable manor held by an Edeva who, as noted above, was succeeded by Bishop Odo elsewhere; she is probably the Edeva he succeeded at Tudeley, the one other Edeva in Kent4, both manors being subinfeudated to Richard of Tonbridge. The manors acquired by Earl Roger of Shrewsbury in Sussex5 were all valuable, the first two among the ten most valuable of her manors; two were held from the king, one from Earl Godwin. Sussex, of course, was the Godwinson heartland, and the absence of a tenurial link is irrelevant since the county was distributed by Rapes, and Count Alan was not one of the tenants-in-chief to hold one of them. The three other Edevas who held land in Sussex, all succeeded by William of Warenne6, are possibly also Edeva the fair, though the manors are not of the status of those of Earl Roger so are not here attributed to her.
The Edeva whose manors in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire were acquired by Ralph of Mortimer has also been identified as Edeva the fair (Boyle, 'Edeva', pp. 13-20); but that Edeva is more likely to be Edeva wife of Topi. A list of Edeva's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 273-79, which does not include those in Kent, Sussex and Somerset; or those at Reed in Hertfordshire7; Whittlesford in Cambridgeshire8, and Hallingbury in Essex9; or those of some of her men in Cambridgeshire10 recorded in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 77-80), or in Buckinghamshire11 and Suffolk12. Dr Clarke ranks Edeva fourth in wealth among untitled laymen, eleventh among the nobility; the additional manors would raise her to second and eighth places respectively.
Edeva has often been identified as Edith Swan-neck, married for some twenty years (though not in the eyes of the Church) to Earl Harold Godwinson, and mother of at least six of his children. Conclusive proof of this identification has never been found; but her beauty, her wealth, and its concentration in the area where Harold began his public career and was earl for almost a decade, make the identification probable, more so if her identification as the Edeva in Sussex and Somerset is valid. Her posthumous career tends further to confirm this. Her successor, Count Alan of Brittany, later abducted Harold's daughter Gunnhild from the nunnery at Wilton, probably - it has been argued - to secure title to his estates as heiress to Harold and Edeva, which presupposes the identity of Edith Swan-neck and Edeva the fair: Searle, 'Women', pp. 167-69.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDEVA [* WIFE OF EDWARD SON OF SWEIN *]. Edeva, who succeeded Edward son of Swein at 'Lisson' in Middlesex13, is probably his wife, named as such on a small holding in Essex14 where
1 SOM 1,20
2 SOM 1,11-20
3 KEN 5,60
4 KEN 5,62
5 SUS 11,10;18-19
6 SUS 12,11;19;51
7 HRT 5,16
8 CAM 14,18
9 ESS 4,16
10 CAM 13,8-10
11 BUK 4,1
12 SUF 3,84-85. 4,17
13 MDX 25,1
14 ESS 85,1
she also succeeded him. Her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1389) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 183-84.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDEVA [* WIFE OF TOPI *]. The Edevas who held Kettleby and Messingham in Lincolnshire1 are identified as the mother of Ulf son of Topi (q.v.) in his will: Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon wills, pp. 94-97. Both manors were acquired by Erneis of Buron, which makes it likely that the Edeva who preceded him at Melton, Brocklesby, Habrough and Grayingham2 is also Topi's wife. In Brocklesby, Grayingham, Kettleby and Messingham part of the vill was also held by Ulf3 or one of his sons or relatives4, Alnoth (q.v.) or Healfdene (q.v.).
Edeva's manors are encircled by the fief of Ralph of Mortimer, three of whose manors were acquired from an Edeva5. The most substantial of these manors, at Thornton Curtis, was six miles from that of Topi's wife at Melton Ross6. Kirmington, where her husband and son held land, even closer. Ralph's Edeva held messuages in Stow7, as did Ulf8, who also made a bequest to the abbey; and both Ralph and Ulf's successor, Gilbert of Ghent, were exempt from forfeitures on these holdings 'because of their predecessors'9. It seems likely that the predecessors were the son and wife of Topi. If this identification is valid, then the Yorkshire Edevas are also the wife of Topi, since all their manors were acquired by Ralph of Mortimer10, forming almost his entire fief in the county.
It is possible that the three other Edevas in Lincolnshire are the same woman. Austhorpe11 was acquired by Kolsveinn of Lincoln, who had an interest in several other vills - Riseholme, Holme, Fillingham, Claxby - where the Topi family held land12; and Robert of Tosny, who acquired the one remaining manor13, shared the priviledged status of Ralph of Mortimer and Gilbert of Ghent in 'Well' wapentake14 even though he held no land there, which suggests he was privileged because his predecessor was Topi's wife.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDEVA [* WIFE OF WULFWARD WHITE *]. Edeva, whose four substantial Buckinghamshire manors devolved upon the bishop of Coutances15, is almost certainly one woman, named on the first of the four as the wife of Wulfward, who is equally certainly the English magnate Wulfward White. Like her husband, Edeva held some of her manors from Queen Edith, which very probably identifies her as the Edeva whose two valuable manors in the county were acquired by Walter Giffard16, the first of them held from the queen. At Winchendon17, the scribe has confused Edith and Edeva by a misplaced de inserted above the line, producing the formulae 'Edith held this manor from Queen Edeva'. Edeva is also the unnamed wife of Wulfward, identified as Wulfward White in
1 LIN 34,3;8
2 LIN 34,1;9-11;27
3 LIN 30,6. 32,2
4 LIN 7,16. 8,31
5 LIN 36,1-2;5
6 LIN 34,1
7 LIN 36,5
8 LIN 24,9
9 LIN CW11
10 YKS 15E1-12;14-16. CE14
11 LIN 26,26
12 LIN 8,13. 26,5-6;23. 30,36
13 LIN 18,25-26
14 LIN CW11
15 BUK 5,1-2;7-8
16 BUK 14,13-14
17 BUK 14,13
Exon., on the royal manor of Keynsham in Somerset held by Queen Edith in 10661. She survived her husband and son, another Wulfward, retaining the manor of Little Linford as a tenant of the bishop of Coutances2. Her pre-Conquest manors are listed with those of her husband and son by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 366-68, who does not include Keynsham. Dr Clarke ranks the family as seventeenth in wealth among the nobility, eighth among untitled laymen; the addition of Keynsham would not affect this. Her one tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 1635) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 183.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDGAR. Edgar is a rare name which occurs on one fief and seven manors, distributed among five counties and the lands of the king and three of his tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDGAR <OF HOUGHTON>. The three Edgars in East Anglia may be one man. Those at Houghton and Cavendish in Suffolk were predecessors of Ralph of Limésy3; and although Mundham in Norfolk is some distance away, that Edgar was a lord of men4, apparently without demesne, as was the Suffolk Edgar.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* PRINCE *] EDGAR. Edgar, whose two substantial manors in Huntingdonshire constituted the fief of Earl Hugh of Chester in the county5, may be Prince Edgar, or Edgar the aetheling as he is more commonly known, as suggested by Dr Lewis: 'Honour of Chester', pp. 45, 47 and note 39. He held a small fief in Hertfordshire, where he is accorded his title. Apart from Edgar the priest of Wiltshire, he is the only post-Conquest landholder of this name, and the only one with significant resources. His career would explain the losses and gains, its most mysterious aspect being his meagre pre-Conquest endowment as heir to the Crown. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3818) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 184.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDGAR [* THE PRIEST *]. Edgar, who inherited the church of Poulshot in Wiltshire from his father6, is probably Edgar the priest at Deverill7, the one other Edgar in the south-western counties. Deverill is recorded in Coel (no. 1390) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 184; the tenant at Poulshot is unidentified (no. 16526).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDITH. The name Edith occurs frequently but most Ediths are the queen, daughter of Earl Godwin, wife of Edward the Confessor and brother King Harold and his brothers. Roughly two dozen unidentified Ediths are recorded, some of whom are probably also the queen. All the names are in southern England, the most northerly, at Rowton in Shropshire8, is that of one of the three surviving Ediths. The scribe occasionally confused her name with Edeva, and vice-versa.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 SOM 1,28
2 BUK 5,8
3 SUF 43,1. 76,20
4 NFK 35,8
5 HUN 11,1-2
6 WIL 1,11
7 WIL 67,52
8 SHR 4,27,26
[* QUEEN *] EDITH. Edward the Confessor's queen is usually accorded her title but may be the simple Edith succeeded by Ralph of Mortimer on a number manors in Herefordshire, Shropshire and Leicestershire. Queen Edith is named as Ralph's predecessor five times on the royal fief in Herefordshire, and once on his own fief1, so she may be the Edith from whom Ralph acquired his valuable manors of Shobdon and Orleton on the same fief2. She may also be the Edith who preceded him on several valuable manors in Shropshire3, and she is perhaps the Edith at Pulley4, where Mortimer succeeded Edith on another manor in the vill5. It is also likely that she is the Edith who preceded Ralph at Osbaston and 'Weston' in Leicestershire6, though the form of the entry appears to militate against this: 'Edric and Edith held these two lands freely' is disrespectful or uninformed. However, the association of Ralph and the queen elsewhere, and the occasional omission of her title, is evident; and these two manors constitute Ralph's fief in the county, suggesting it was acquired by antecession, either as the queen's predecessor or that of Edric the wild (q.v.), if this Edric be that man. The 1086 manor might be a conflation of two pre-Conquest holdings - a common occurrences - or the scribe may have confused the lord, the queen, and her man in a single statement, as occurred on a number of fiefs in circuit four. The only other Ediths in Leicestershire are the queen; there are no other Edrics.
The Edeva who held Kingston Deverill in Wiltshire7 may also be the queen. The manor was acquired by the Canons of Lisieux, and later held in alms from the Crown, so may once have been royal; the names Edith and Edeva are confused elsewhere by the scribes: Book of Fees, p. 743. Edith is also often referred to simply as 'the queen'8, the context normally identifying her in such cases. Edith's manors - including ambiguous cases - are listed by Stafford, Queen Emma & Queen Edith, pp. 280-305, whose list differs from the Statistics database in some respects, particularly in Kent, Sussex, Middlesex, Shropshire and Leicestershire. Estimates of the queen's manorial wealth vary wildly; they are itemised by Dr Baxter, whose own estimate is closest to that in the Statistics database (£1464): Earls of Mercia, pp. 128-29, 134-35, 318-19.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDITH [* THE NUN *]. Edith, who held a hide from the Church of Worcester at Greenhill in the county before 10669, may be Edith the nun, who held from the monks at Knightwick at the same date10, the only other Edith in the county apart from the queen. Edith returned her land at Knightwick to the monks as their community grew, a fact to which she testified in 1086, being still alive, so she is perhaps also the nun Edith with twelve acres of alms land at an unknown location in Somerset in 108611. This manor is recorded in Coel (no. 374) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 183.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDMER. Edmer is a common name in the south-western counties, particularly in Devon, occurring rarely in the north Midlands or northern counties. A significant proportion of the names are associated with the Count of Mortain, one of whose predecessors was the English magnate Edmer Ator. Survivors held four manors.
1 HEF 9,7
2 HEF 9,10;19
3 SHR C13. 6,2;4;9;30-31;33
4 SHR 4,27,6
5 SHR 6,30
6 LEC 21,1-2
7 WIL 19,1
8 BRK 21,20. GLS 1,7. LIN 68,24;31. SUF 6,112. 7,14-15;63. 41,13. 52,5;8-9
9 WOR 2,12
10 WOR 2,67
11 SOM 16,12
.............................................................................................................................................
EDMER [* ATOR *]. Edmer Ator is named in Domesday Book as a royal thane1 and a thane of Earl Harold2. Although unnamed in contemporary sources, he must have played a key role in the events of 1066 since it was at Berkhamsted, the most valuable of his manors, that the final surrender of the English leaders and the effective termination of the Conqueror's 1066 campaign took place. The Count of Mortain subsequently made Berkhamsted the seat of his Honour.
Edmer Ator is named as the predecessor whose '17 lands' in Devon were 'handed over' to the Count of Mortain3, and his byname is recorded in Domesday or Exon. on Mortain manors in Buckinghamshire, Devon, Hertfordshire, Middlesex and Somerset, so he is probably the Edmer who preceded the Count in eight counties, in most if not all cases. In Buckinghamshire, Cornwall4, Dorset5 and Middlesex all Edmers are predecessors of the Count; and in Hertfordshire only the manor of one of his men was acquired by another tenant-in-chief6, his byname being supplied in that case. Of the remaining three counties, all Edmers in Northamptonshire are probably Edmer Ator, all but one being preceded by the Count7, the exception at Hartwell8 holding a manor of appropriate status less than five miles from Alderton, acquired by the Count. In Somerset, the three unidentified Edmers may be one man but are unlikely to be Edmer Ator as two of them were tenants in 1086; there is no other indication that Edmer Ator was alive at that date, though many Englishmen survived on the Honour of the Count of Mortain in the south-west. Finally, in Devon, where the Count of Mortain had one of his largest fiefs and Edmer Ator the bulk of his Honour, unidentified Edmers outnumber those of all other counties combined, so it is probable that many, perhaps the majority, were Edmer Ator. Those whose holdings were acquired by the Count of Mortain9 almost certainly were (three are so-named in Exon.); but there are few links which would help to identify others. Three other tenants-in-chief acquired land previously held by Edmer Ator or his men according to Exon., but none were preceded by an Edmer in Devon or elsewhere.
A list of Edmer's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 280-81, which does not include three Somerset holdings attributed to Edmer Ator in Exon., the Cornish holdings, Bolberry in Devon, or Hartwell in Northamptonshire. Dr Clarke ranks him twentieth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors would raise him four places.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDMUND. The name Edmund occurs on two fiefs and almost forty manors, distributed among sixteen counties between Wiltshire and Yorkshire and the lands of the king and eleven of his tenants-in-chief, with small clusters in Hampshire and Yorkshire. Survivors held sixteen manors, all acquired since 1066.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDMUND <OF CHILDREY>. The Edmunds whose manors of Enborne and Childrey in Berkshire10 and Stratton in Gloucestershire11 were acquired by Roger of Lacy are almost certainly
1 MDX 8,6. BUK 12,3
2 HRT 15,1
3 DEV 15,31
4 CON 5,2,3. 5,24,13-14
5 DOR 26,26;44;46;49;52;63
6 HRT 15,1.19,1
7 NTH 18,5-6;9
8 NTH 2,7
9 DEV 15,12;32-38
10 BRK 45,1-2
11 GLS 39,17
the Edmund who held the valuable manor of Coleshill in Berkshire1, granted to Winchester abbey by Roger's father, Walter of Lacy. He is probably also one of the three thanes whose share in a hide in the same vill2 was acquired by Roger, the other thanes being Asgot of Hailes (q.v.) and Brictric of Newton (q.v.), who may be his brothers, also wealthy landowners. The three men may be the three free men who held the valuable royal manor of Sparsholt in Berkshire3, adjacent to Childrey and where Brictric had another manor, possibly two: Williams, 'Introduction to the Gloucestershire Domesday', pp. 24-25. Edmund may also be the predecessor of Roger of Lacy at Hopton and Stoke in Shropshire4. Although his family do not otherwise appear to have held land in the county, Stoke is a valuable manor and Edmund the only pre-Conquest landowner of this name in Shropshire. Finally, it is not unlikely that he is the royal thane Edmund at Wraysbury in Buckinghamshire5, though there are no familial or tenurial links in this case. Both Brictric and Asgot held land in the county, and Brictric at least was a royal thane. More significantly, Wraysbury is by a considerable margin the most valuable manor held by an Edmund before the Conquest, the next four - also considerably more valuable than any others - being held by Edmund of Childrey. Robert Gernon, who acquired Wraysbury as his fief and only manor in the county, had no other Edmunds among his predecessors or tenants. A list of Edmund's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 249-51, which does not include a share in Sparsholt, the Shropshire manors, or Wraysbury. 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.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDMUND [* SON OF AIULF *]. The Edmunds who held four successive manors among the king's thanes of Wiltshire may be Edmund son of Aiulf, named in the fourth of them and as the 'son of Aiulf' in a fifth, the following manor6, since all five thanes were survivors, clustered within a few miles of each other. The remaining Edmunds in the south-western counties in either 1066 or 1086 may be identified with some confidence as Edmund son of Payne. The manors of Aiulf's son are recorded in Coel (no. 551) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 184.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDMUND [* SON OF PAYNE *]. The three Edmunds among the king's thanes in Hampshire may be Edmund son of Payne, who held another manor in that fief, at Durley. He succeeded his (unnamed) father on one manor7, and was preceded on another by a Saewin8 who succeeded Payne - presumably Edmund's father - in the same Hundred in the New Forest9, where the third manor was also located10. There are no other Edmunds in the county. Edmund son of Payne also held three manors among the royal thanes in Somerset, and was a tenant-in-chief in Norfolk, where he succeeded his father. There are no other Edmunds in the three counties. Edmund's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 527) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 184.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 BRK 14,1
2 WIL 49,1a
3 BRK 1,10
4 SHR 4,8,3;7
5 BUK 20,1
6 WIL 67,55-59
7 HAM 69,20
8 HAM 69,54
9 HAM NF9,45
10 HAM NF9,45
EDNOTH. The name Ednoth is fairly common among pre-Conquest landowners but confined to eleven counties in southern England south of a line from Gloucester to Ipswich. After the Conquest the name is rare, occurring once in Cornwall and Somerset and twice in Sussex. The name is occasionally confused by the scribe with Alnoth: Fellows-Jensen, 'On the identification of Domesday tenants in Lincolnshire', p. 32.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDNOTH <OF EXFORD>. The tenant on the tiny holding worth 30 pence at Exford in Somerset acquired by Roger of Courseulles1, has no links with his namesakes. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 14904).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDNOTH <OF PENGELLY>. The tenant of the Count of Mortain at Pengelly2 and the pre-Conquest lord of Rosebenault3, some ten miles away; may be the same Ednoth. They are the only two Ednoths in Cornwall, and the Count of Mortain had no other tenants or predecessors of this name on his Honour. The one other Ednoth who might plausibly be linked with him held Germansweek in Devon before the Conquest4, acquired by Baldwin the sheriff. Three other manors held by a survivor have no links with this Ednoth5. It has been suggested that he may be the same man as Alnoth of Tolgullow (q.v.). His tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 240) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 185.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDNOTH <OF PLAYDEN>. As the name is rare in 1086, it is probable that the tenants of the Count of Eu at Playden and Hurst in Sussex6 are the same man, and likely also that he is the Count's predecessor at Iden7, adjacent to Playden, the one other Ednoth in the county. He has no links with other Ednoths. He is unidentified in Coel (nos. 15904, 15993).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDNOTH [* THE CONSTABLE *]. Ednoth the constable is documented in contemporary sources as holding office under the Confessor, Harold, and the Conqueror; he was killed in Somerset in1067, attempting to repel an invasion by Harold's sons. He was among the twenty wealthiest English landholders. In Domesday Book, he is named Ednoth the constable (Ednod Stalre) at Shippon in Berkshire8 and Ednoth the steward (Ednod dapifer) at Cadenham in Wiltshire9, both manors being acquired by Earl Hugh of Chester, who succeeded him on five of his six manors in Wiltshire. He is probably therefore be the Ednoth who preceded the earl in Berkshire10, Dorset11, and Somerset12, with two insignificant exceptions the only Ednoths in those counties. In Somerset, three of the four manors which constituted the earl's fief were held by Ednoth, so he may have held the fourth, at Sampford13, where no pre-Conquest lord is recorded.
1 SOM 21,59
2 CON 5,18,1
3 CON 5,6,4
4 DEV 16,8
5 SOM 21,59. SUS 9,109;129
6 SUS 9,109;129
7 SUS 9,110
8 BRK 7,7
9 WIL 22,5
10 BRK 18,1
11 DOR 27,3-4;6
12 SOM 18,1-4
13 WIL 18,2
Earl Hugh acquired the remainder of his fief in Dorset1, and manors in Devon2 and Gloucestershire3, from an Alnoth, who may be Ednoth the constable. Scholarly opinion is divided on this issue; but the balance of evidence tends to support the identification. Apart from a shared predecessor and the comparable status of many of the manors of Alnoth and Ednoth, these names are confused elsewhere by the Domesday scribe: Fellows-Jensen, 'On the identification of Domesday tenants in Lincolnshire', p. 32. Moreover, Ednoth the constable had a son Harding (William of Malmesbury, Gesta regum, i. 470-71), named in contemporary documents (Pelteret, Catalogue, pp. 1050106, 110-11, 119), while Harding son of Alnoth is recorded at Lopen in Somerset4 and on another manor in the county in the Geld Roll: VCH Somerset, i. 536. As Dr Williams observes, 'it does not seem necessary to postulate two men, both called Harding and both with fathers called Ednoth, in roughly the same area at the same time'. Although Alnoth the constable is not recorded in contemporary charters, an Alnoth the constable is named in Exon. as holding Knowle in Somerset before the Conquest5. This manor was acquired by Osbern Giffard, who also obtained Ugford in Wiltshire from an Ednoth6, a manor adjacent to Ednoth the constable's manor of Burcombe7. Domesday records that Ednoth recovered Ugford from Earl Godwin of Wessex, so he was evidently a powerful or influential man. It seems improbable that a second tenant-in-chief acquired manors from both an Ednoth and an Alnoth the constable in the same area as Earl Hugh's predecessor (or predecessors), unless Alnoth and Ednoth were the same man in both cases. See further Freeman, Norman Conquest, iv. 755-59; Lewis, 'Honour of Chester', pp. 67-68; Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 119-22.
Among the other Ednoths recorded in the south-west, it is likely that the Ednoth who held a significant part of the manor of Whitchurch from the bishopric of Winchester8 and the substantial and privileged royal manor of Ampney in Gloucestershire9 is the constable. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 281-82, which includes Whitchurch (or Freefolk) and Ampney, but not the Dorset manors of Knowle and Ugford. Dr Clarke ranks the combined wealth of him with his son twenty-seventh among the nobility, sixteenth among untitled laymen; the additional manors would raise them two and one places respectively.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* GRIM *]. Edric Grim is named as a predecessor of Count Alan of Brittany on the very valuable Kettleburgh among many others10, so the Edric from whom the Count acquired free men in Woodbridge, included in the valuation of Kettleburgh, is evidently Edric Grim11. Edric is also named as the predecessor of three other tenants-in-chief, one of whom, Hugh de Montfort, acquired free men on three manors in Suffolk from an Edric who may be the Edric Grim who held the preceding manor12. Edric Grim is several times named as a man of Edric of Laxfield, suggesting he may be the Edric who held the demesne manors of Cretingham, Debenham, Fordley, Chediston, Cransford, Brutge and Campsey as Laxfield's dependent13. Debenham and Fordley were acquired by Robert Malet, Edric of Laxfield's successor, together with Darsham and South Cove, where
1 DOR 27,1-2;8-11
2 DEV 14,1;3-4
3 GLS 28,5;7
4 SOM 47,3-8
5 SOM 39,1
6 WIL 48,12
7 WIL 22,4
8 HAM 3,5
9 GLS 1,65
10 SUF 3,34
11 SUF 3,45
12 SUF 31,15-18
13 SUF 4,18. 6,11;79. 7,15;142. 67,5;28
Edrics were, respectively, overlord and tenant1. The predecessor at South Cove was Edric of Laxfield and Edric is Malet's only tenant of this name, so he is probably Edric Grim. Further confirmation of his identity here and Fordley is provided by the interesting account at Fordley of the circumstances in which he became a man of King Edward when Edric of Laxfield was outlawed, but was allowed to return to his allegiance later, Edric of Laxfield presumably having been pardoned. The Hundred jury was sceptical, and 'did not see that he returned to Edric'; but he affirmed that he had; offered to undergo a trial to prove so for himself and 'also the free men whom he holds under him in patronage', in respect of whom 'he recalls Robert [Malet] as guarantor'2.
If this identification is valid, Edric Grim was treated more 'harshly and wretchedly' than most survivors, his manorial income declining from almost £50 to three shillings, unless he is also one of the other two Edric's holding land in the county in 1086, at Bungay3 and Flowton4. Bungay, about fourteen miles from South Cove, is the more likely but there are no links to warrant a connection. Edric's income before the Conquest ranks him as a magnate of regional importance, with land valued at almost £50; he would rank seventy-eighth among untitled laymen if included in Clarke, English nobility. The tenant at South Cove is unidentified in Coel (no. 11931).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* OF BAYSTON *]. Edric, who leased Bayston in Shropshire from the bishop of Hereford before the Conquest5, may be one of the two Edrics who witnessed one of the bishop's charters, more probably his steward than Edric of Wenlock since the implication of the claim concerning the tenure of Bayston recorded in Domesday is that Edric died before 1086, when Edric of Wenlock, alias Edric the wild, was still alive: Mason, 'Edric of Bayston', pp. 112-18; Galbraith, 'Episcopal land-grant', pp. 364, 371-72; Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, p. 93.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* OF EASTHORPE *]. Edric, from whom Count Eustace of Boulogne acquired Easthorpe in Essex, is probably Edric of Easthorpe, whose manor at 'Derleigh' devolved upon Ranulf brother of Ilger6. He may also be the Edric who preceded the Count on the two previous manors on his fief7. All three were substantial; two were subinfeudated to the same tenant; and Count Eustace had no other predecessors or tenants named Edric on his Honour. Ranulf had two, both identified as Edric of Laxfield, conceivably the same man, but there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* OF ELHAM *]. Edric of Elham is named as predecessor of the bishop of Bayeux at Ewell and Tickenhurst in Kent, and is almost certainly the Edric who preceded him on the very valuable manor of Elham itself8. There is little reason to doubt that he is the Edric who preceded the bishop on other manors in the county9 since these, too, were valuable and the few other Edrics in the county have associations with the bishop and are probably the same man. Edric's Canterbury manor of Garrington was previously held by the bishop of Bayeux10, and those Hugh de Montfort acquired from Edric at Newington and Ewell were part of manors he held as a tenant of the
1 SUF 6,78;97
2 SUF 6,79
3 SUF 1,111
4 SUF 29,4
5 SHR 4,14,12
6 ESS 20,40. 37,20
7 ESS 20,38-39
8 KEN 5,129
9 KEN 5,186;204
10 KEN 7,6
bishop1. Dr Williams suggests he 'perhaps' held Solton2, which follows Ewell and West Cliffe and where no pre-Conquest lord is named: World before Domesday, pp. 49, 172-73 and notes 28-30. The manor was valued at £15 in 1066; but the valuation is so disproportionate to the manor's resources that a scribal error for 15 shillings seems likely. The identity of the one remaining Edric, on a modest property at 'Stokenbury'3, is less certain; but even here there is an indirect association with Odo: Domesday Monachorum, p. 94. Edric may also have held the valuable manor of Dorking in Surrey4, where the bishop of Bayeux had an interest; this Edric is one of two in the county, the only one of substance. Dorking was 'held' by Queen Edith, so Edric was her man or may have preceded or succeeded her, in which latter case he survived the Conquest by a decade; but the text of the entry is ambiguous. There are similar high-status manors held by Edrics in Berkshire and Hampshire, but no tenurial associations to connect them to Edric of Elham. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 304-305, which does not include 'Stokenbury', Dorking or Solton. Dr Clarke ranks him fifty-sixth in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Dorking would place him comfortably among the top forty.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC <OF KILLAMARSH>. Edric, who shared a modest holding at Killamarsh in Derbyshire with two or three other lords before the Conquest5, has no links with other Edrics; he is the most northerly of the Edrics and somewhat isolated, his closest namesake being Roger of Bully's predecessor on a similarly modest holding at Weston, twenty-five miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* OF LAXFIELD *]. Edric was the greatest landowner in East Anglia before the Conquest, and one of the greatest in England after the earls. He is named in full on the majority of his manors; but where he is not, many have identifying characteristics, though his name is so common it is unlikely all can be identified. With the possible exception of a minor Wiltshire holding6, all his pre-Conquest lands were in East Anglia, almost all in eastern Suffolk. He was the designated predecessor of Robert Malet on several hundred occasions where he can be identified with some confidence, his name occurring so often that the scribes frequently abbreviated it to a simple E. Robert's five other named antecessores total scarcely a dozen mentions between them, so it is likely that virtually all the references to Edric on the Malet fief, or to an unnamed predecessor of Robert Malet elsewhere, are to Edric of Laxfield.
Earl Ralph Wader provides another link. He was granted many of Edric's manors and free men, which after his own forfeiture were redistributed to Roger Bigot, Bishop Odo of Bayeux, Count Alan of Brittany and others, resulting in a number of disputes which help to identify Edric. All three tenants-in-chief acquired other manors of Edric's dependants where Earl Ralph is not mentioned, though he may have been the intermediate landowner in some at least of these cases. Edric may also be identified by association with such known dependents as Edric Grim, Stanwin, Ulfkil and others. The status of some manors, links between them and their dependencies, and manors acquired by other tenants-in-chief in vills where Edric is identified, provide other identifying characteristics, as do the many vills where an unidentified Edric held land acquired by two or more of Edric's successors, as at Dilham, Glemham and Stalham in Norfolk, and Benhall, Blaxhall and 'Thorpe' in Suffolk. Holdings which went to other tenants-in-chief may sometimes be identified as Edric's by the same means. These characteristics enable Edric to be identified on
1 KEN 9,35;37
2 KEN 5,187
3 KEN 3,2
4 SUR 1,13
5 DBY 17,2
6 WIL 67,53
roughly two hundred manors, too many to list here. Of the thirty-eight demesne manors, six were retained by the king; twenty-five acquired by Robert Malet, including Laxfield itself; and the other seven by five tenants-in-chief. The name Edric is so common that it is likely he held more manors than those identified here; it is unlikely, however, that these are significant since of some three dozen unidentified Edric in East Anglia, only the lord of Frettenham in Norfolk1 held a manor worth more than £1.50, and only three were overlords.
Edric was outlawed by Edward the Confessor, apparently early in the reign, but restored with Harold's agreement, or perhaps by Harold himself2. He is normally assumed to have died shortly after the Conquest (Domesday Book, ed. Hallam and Bates, pp. 114, 210, note 53), and had certainly lost many of his estates before the death of William Malet in 1069 and the forfeiture of Ralph Wader in 1076; but, improbable as it may seem, charter evidence from Bury St Edmunds, though circumstantial, suggests that he survived on a very modest thaneland in Wiltshire3 under the alias of Edric the blind: Feudal documents, pp. xc-xciii, 151-52. According to one Suffolk entry4, he was also named Edric son of Ingold, Ingold being a name not otherwise recorded in Domesday.
A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 283-302. As is Dr Clarke's practice, it does not include dependencies or many free holdings without pre-Conquest valuations; but it does interpret references to Malet's (unnamed) predecessor as referring to Edric, as here. Additionally, Dr Clarke assumes that land with Malet associations said to be 'under patronage' implies that Edric was Malet's predecessor, even though no predecessor is mentioned, which adds several dozen holdings to Edric's total. Given the ambiguity of the text of Little Domesday, some of these references may refer to post-Conquest conditions (e.g., SUF 45,2-3) so this practice has not been followed here. Ambiguities, and alternative construction put on some formulae, inevitably mean that there are differences between Dr Clarke's list and the Statistics database, especially in relation to the free holdings of Edric's dependents. Among the more significant divergences are demesne holdings at Pewsey and Hartham in Wiltshire5, and Bacton and Walcot in Norfolk6; and those of his men at Cretingham, Redlingfield, Rendlesham, Livermere, and Aspall in Suffolk7. Dr Clarke ranks Edric twelfth in wealth among untitled laymen, twenty second among the nobility; the additional manors would raise him one place in each case. Edric's Wiltshire tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 195) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 185.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC <OF TISSINGTON>. The Edrics from whom Henry of Ferrers acquired five manors in Derbyshire are probably one man. The name is not common in the northern counties, occurring only twice more in Derbyshire, once in Nottinghamshire, and not all in Yorkshire. At both Tissington and Etwall Edric is associated with a Gamal and a Wulfgeat8, the remaining three manors clustering around Etwall9. There are no other Edrics among Henry's predecessors or tenants.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC <OF WESTON>. Edric, whose modest shared holding at Weston in Nottinghamshire was acquired by Roger of Bully10, has no links with other Edrics. His manor is somewhat isolated from
1 NFK 26,1
2 SUF 6,79;92. 7,114
3 WIL 67,53
4 SUF 4,15
5 WIL 67,50;53
6 NFK 7,18. 36,5
7 SUF 4,18. 6,192;272. 14,68. 77,4
8 DBY 6,7;98
9 DBY 6,34;39;49
10 NTT 9,70-71
those of his namesakes, the closest being a thane on a similarly modest holding at Killamarsh, twenty-five miles away. Roger had no other predecessors or tenants of this name.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* THE REEVE *]. The Edrics who held seven manors among the king's thanes of Dorset in 1086, said to be the same man on six of them1, is probably Edric the reeve, who owed tax on a hide in Hasler Hundred where two of the manors lay: VCH Dorset, iii. 142. There are no other survivors of this name in the county. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1765) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 185.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* THE SHERIFF *]. Edric, who preceded Arnulf of Hesdin on his fief in Somerset2 and on manors in Hampshire3, Wiltshire4, Dorset5 and Gloucestershire6, is presumably Arnulf's designated predecessor. He is probably also the Edric at Linkenholt in Hampshire, granted by Arnulf to St Peter's of Gloucester7. Several of these manors are valuable, Edric being one of the most substantial of Arnulf's predecessors. He may be Edric the sheriff, named on one entry in Wiltshire8, who is otherwise without known demesne land in the county. Edric preceded Edward of Salisbury as sheriff, both men holding land in Etchilhampton, where no Anglo-Saxon lord is named on Edward's manor - the largest in the vill - which was conceivably held by Edric before him. As sheriff, Edric may also be the tenant in 1066 of thaneland on the royal manor of Chippenham, where he leased land from the 'lordship revenue' to Ceolwin9. His name is so common that he may have held manors elsewhere, though there are no unidentified Edrics in the vills or Hundreds in which he can be identified. He was dead by 1086, survived by his wife, who was allowed to retain Etchilhampton and Calstone in Wiltshire as a tenant of Arnulf, with a house in Malmesbury, a generous provision by normal standards. She may be the Estrild recorded in the Wiltshire Geld Roll for 'Studfold' Hundred, where Etchilhampton lay: VCH Wiltshire, ii. 197. The only Estrild recorded in Domesday Book itself is a nun in Middlesex10. A list of Edric's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, p. 305, who does not identify him as the sheriff or include the Chippenham holdings; Dr Clarke ranks him sixtieth in wealth among untitled laymen. His widow's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1302) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 441.
................................................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* THE STEERSMAN *]. Edric, steersman of King Edward's ship, is named as holding land before the Conquest at Bradeston and Burlingham in Norfolk11 acquired by the bishop of Thetford. It is likely he is the Edric whose manor at Blakeney12 was held by the bishop and subinfeudated to the tenant of Burlingham, William of Noyers.
The fourteenth century chronicle of the abbey of St Benet of Holme records that Edric the steersman was one of the principal benefactors of the abbey, donating manors in the vills of Honing, Calthorpe, Erpingham, Antingham and Waxham in north-east Norfolk: Chronicle of John
1 DOR 56,42-47;49
2 SOM 41,1-3
3 HAM 26,1
4 WIL 25,4-5;24
5 DOR 32,1
6 GLS 60,4-7
7 HAM 7,1
8 WIL 45,2
9 WIL 1,5. 45,2
10 MDX 17,1
11 NFK 10,76-77
12 NFK 10,56
of Oxenede, p. 267. Of these, an Edric is recorded in Domesday at Honing1 and Waxham2. The Honing entry suggests that the arrangement between Edric and the abbey was more complex than the chronicle records, Edric enjoying a substantial manor from the abbey in return for the reversion of his share of the vill; the entries for Waxham also show Edric profiting at the expense of the abbey in the post-Conquest period, the Waxham holdings devolving upon Count Alan of Brittany, not the abbey. Count Alan acquired manors in Ingham, Stalham, Happisburgh, Palling and Catfield from Edric, who is probably the same man since the entry for Happisburgh3 provides a further link with the abbey of St Benet and implies that the Count's tenant was a man of Edric of Laxfield before the Conquest, linking the three entries. All these vills lay in the same Hundred as Waxham, two of them adjacent to that vill.
Though circumstantial, the case for identification appears fairly strong but there is a problem: the Domesday entries which name Edric as the steersman4 also recount that he was outlawed after the Conquest and fled to Denmark, whereas Count Alan's man was active after the forfeiture of Earl Ralph Wader (1076) and apparently still alive in 1086, with a modest holding in Happisburgh5. Some rebels did, of course, make their peace with the Conqueror, one of them being the abbot of St Benet, with whom Edric fled to Denmark: Williams, 'Land and power', pp. 179-80. An entry for Saxlingham6 suggests a possible mechanism for Edric's return to favour, recording that Edric pledged an estate to St Benet of Holme after the Conquest in order to raise the substantial sum of £13 'so that he might however redeem himself from capture by Waleran', Waleran presumably acting in an official capacity. The same entry reveals that Edric held land from the abbey on lease before the Conquest, confirming that this Edric is probably the abbey's 'benefactor', as also at Paston and Swafield7, less than three miles from one of the vills said by the abbey's chronicler to have been donated by Edric the steersman, and a few miles more from several others. He is probably also the overlord of a number of free men centred in Thorpe Market8. Thorpe and its dependencies form a close grouping in one corner of the Hundred of North Erpingham, Thorpe itself lying three miles from Antingham, one of the vills named by the Holme chronicler as a donation of Edric the steersman. Edric may himself have held the central manor at Thorpe, attributed in Domesday to an anonymous free man9. Another manor in this group, Aylmerton10, was held from Edric by Wigulf of Coddenham (q.v.), also his man at Crowfield in Suffolk, acquired by Roger of Rames11, who had one other Edric among his predecessors, at Rayne in Essex12. There are comparatively few unidentified Edrics in Essex so he, too, may be the steersman. Edric's subtenancy is not included in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDRIC [* THE WILD *]. Edric the wild is accorded his byname - silvaticus or salvage - once in Herefordshire13 and six times in Shropshire14. He can also be identified with reasonable confidence in vills where the Savage family - presumably his descendants - have left their mark at some time
1 NFK 17,51
2 NFK 4,40;42
3 NFK 1,197. 4,39;41;51
4 NFK 10,76-77
5 NFK 4,51
6 NFK 17,18
7 NFK 19,35
8 NFK 8,123-125;127;132
9 NFK 8,122
10 NFK 8,132
11 SUF 38,4
12 ESS 39,2
13 HEF 9,3
14 SHR 4,1,14;18;20. 4,5,13. 4,10,3. 4,22,3
or another on village surnames: Amport in Hampshire1, and Eudon and Walton in Shropshire2; Overton also descended to the Savage family3. Edric's manors in these vills were acquired by Ralph of Mortimer, who also held the one Herefordshire manor of Edric the wild, who may therefore be the Edric whose manors Ralph acquired elsewhere. This is probably the case in Herefordshire, where five of the eight manors of an Edric became Ralph's4. Of the other three, two were held in 1086 and there are grounds for believing that Edric the wild still held land at this date (below). In Shropshire, Mortimer acquired another three of Edric's manors5, and also Stretton in Warwickshire6 and Osbaston and 'Weston' in Leicestershire7 which, as they are his entire fiefs in those counties, probably devolved upon him as Edric's designated successor. In Leicestershire, Edric - the only Edric in the county - is paired with Edith, perhaps Queen Edith (q.v.), from whom Ralph obtained many of his manors in Herefordshire and Shropshire. Finally, in Hampshire, where Edric preceded Ralph at Amport, he may also be the Edric on a second manor in that vill since Ralph's five hides is said to belong to this second manor8, the two constituting the whole of the vill which had evidently been undivided before the Conquest, and so held by one man. The second and larger manor was held in 1086 by Hugh of Port who was also preceded by an Edric on four other manors in the county, one - East Cholderton - a mile from Amport, another - Over Wallop - less than five miles away9. Hugh's predecessor at Amport is probably Edric the wild, and possibly also on the nearby manors and elsewhere in the county. Hugh also acquired two of the manors of the Kentish magnate Edric of Elham; but it is improbable he is the same man as Edric the wild, having none of his other associations.
Of the other tenants-in-chief with manors previously held by Edric the wild, Earl Roger of Shrewsbury obtained from an Edric those in the adjacent vills of Siefton and Culmington10, both are fairly substantial so likely to have been Edric the wild's; he also acquired Acton Scott11. Edric the wild was the predecessor of Robert of Corbet at Middleton12 and may well be the Edric who preceded his brother Roger on five manors13, two of them substantial. Ranulf Peverel, who obtained Weston from Edric Salvage, also had the more valuable Cressage from an unidentified Edric14, Hugh son of Thorgisl had a similar pairing15.
The manors thus attributed to Edric the wild include eight of the ten most valuable in Shropshire. The two most valuable, at Clun and Hopesay16, are likely to have been his, too, strategic considerations pointing to the same conclusion. They were acquired by Picot of Sai, who also had three further manors from an Edric17. Reginald of Balliol, the sheriff, was another tenant-in-chief who acquired several manors from an Edric18, identified by Dr Clarke as Edric the wild. None were valuable, all but one being wasted; but their distribution is suggestive: Middleton
1 HAM 29,15
2 SHR 4,11,5;12
3 SHR 4,11,16
4 HEF 9,3;5;11;15-16
5 SHR 4,11,15. 6,13-14
6 WAR 25,1
7 LEC 21,1-2
8 HAM 23,44
9 HAM 9,2. 23,42-44;46
10 SHR 4,1,28-29
11 SHR 4,27,33
12 SHR 4,5,13
13 SHR 4,4,4;10-11;14;16
14 SHR 4,10,1;3
15 SHR 4,22,1;3
16 SHR 4,20,6;8
17 SHR 4,20,12;22-23
18 SHR 4,3,19;32;37;39;65
Scriven1 is two miles from the Mortimer vill of Eudon George, once Eudon Savage, and Kenley2 four from the Peverel manor at Cressage. Much the same is true of the other manors attributed by Dr Clarke to Edric the wild, all but Shawbury3 being within four miles of another of his manors: Pitchford, Oxenbold, Harley, Alcaston, Cantlop and Ackhill4.
Edric the wild was reconciled with the Conqueror in 1070 and campaigned with him in Scotland in 1072. The date of his death is unknown, but Dr Williams suggests he was alive in 1086 and may be identified as the Edric son of Aelfric (or Edric of Wenlock) who witnessed two charters of the bishop of Hereford and held land from Wenlock priory in 10865, in which case the only other surviving Edrics in the area, at 'Cuple' and Laysters in Herefordshire6, may also be him (above): English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 92-93; Reynolds, 'Eadric silvaticus', pp. 102-105. It has also been suggested that he is the Edric at Hindlip, steersman of the bishop of Worcester7, though this is 'more speculative' than his identification as Edric of Wenlock: English and the Norman Conquest, p. 93. A list of Edric's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 303-304, which does not include the Hampshire, Warwickshire or Leicestershire manors, or Elton, Birley and Laysters in Herefordshire, but adds Bayston8, more probably held by another Edric, Edric of Bayston. Edric is ranked by Dr Clarke thirty-seventh in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional holdings, minus Bayston, would raise him almost a dozen places. Edric son of Aelfric is recorded as another man in Coel (no. 6331), referenced in Domesday people, p. 185; the Edrics at 'Cuple' and Laysters' are unidentified (nos. 30383, 30576).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWARD <OF GRAPPENHALL>. All Edwards in Cheshire are 'certainly' one man: Sawyer and Thacker, 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', pp. 321-22. All but one of his eight manors lie in a cluster in the adjacent Hundreds of Tunendune and Bucklow, three of them - Lymm, Dutton and Grappenhall - held from Osbern son of Tezzo, whom he preceded on the same manors9. The other four were acquired by William son of Nigel, who also succeeded Edward at Clutton, thirty miles or so south of the cluster10. Each of the tenants-in-chief acquired manors in both Hundreds. All eight manors are of similarly modest status. Edward is unidentified in Coel (nos. 28945, 28948, 28950).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWARD [* OF SALISBURY *]. The Edwards who farmed the royal manor of Woodchester in Gloucestershire and held manors from Glastonbury abbey and Earl Hugh in Wiltshire are probably the sheriff of that county, Edward of Salisbury. At Woodchester11, his identity is indicated by the reference to his holding the land 'in the revenue of Wiltshire', and his tenancy of the Wiltshire manors is suggested by fees there by his descendants, three of which lay in vills in which he held land as tenant-in-chief12: Book of Fees, pp. 710, 720, 723; VCH Wiltshire, xii. 128-29. He is also the Edward who held two hides from Malmesbury abbey at Bremhill13, which is a partial duplicate of a manor on his own fief, identified by his tenant Gilbert in both entries; and it is probable that he
1 SHR 4,3,65
2 SHR 4,319
3 SHR 4,23,3
4 SHR 4,19,12. 4,21,4;8;19. 4,25,1. 5,7
5 SHR 3c,8;14
6 HEF 10,74. 36,2
7 WOR 2,52
8 SHR 4,14,12
9 CHS 24,5;7;9
10 CHS 9,4;16;22-23;25
11 GLS 1,63
12 WIL 7,4;7;12-13. 22,3
13 WIL 8,12
is the Edward who held a second subtenancy of four hides in this Malmesbury manor alongside a Theodric, Theodric being one of his tenants and the only Theodric in the county or on either Honour. There are more unidentified Edwards in Wiltshire than in any other county, which probably means that several other tenancies were held by the sheriff, those of the churches being the most likely candidates1, particularly land held in Salisbury from the bishopric and at Ashton from the abbey of Amesbury2, though in the absence of specific links they are not here assigned to the sheriff. Although he is not recorded as holding land before the Conquest, Edward may have been an Englishman, his mother possibly being Wulfwynn of Creslow (q.v.), in which case he was the most prosperous of the survivors by a very considerable margin: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 105-107. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 734) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 186-87, apart from Mildenhall, Bremhill and Hartham3, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 16640, 16688, 16791), but with the addition of part of the manor of Urchfont4.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWARD [* THE NOBLE *]. Edward cilt is named as a predecessor of the Count of Mortain on two manors in Buckinghamshire and of Walter Giffard on four, so he is presumably the Edward Walter succeeded at Woolstone5. Edward cilt also preceded Countess Judith on a substantial holding in and around Stamford and on the manor of Witham in Lincolnshire, so he may be the Edward from whom she obtained three respectable manors in Northamptonshire6, and - less certainly - a tiny holding at Sutton in Bedfordshire, where Edward is described as a man of the abbot of St Albans7.
The few other Edwards in Buckinghamshire, Northamptonshire or Lincolnshire may also be Edward cilt. The substantial manor of Broughton8, acquired by William of Warenne, is eleven miles from the noble Edward's principal manor at Wing9, and even closer to another of his manors, at Crafton10. If he held Broughton, he probably held Caversfield11, since they formed the entire fief of William of Warenne. In Lincolnshire, the unidentified Edward at Bytham12 was encircled by Judith's holdings; and the Edward who exchanged the substantial manor of Thoresby13 with the bishop of Bayeux can only have been someone of the status of Edward the noble. If he were that man, then he may also have held the nearby manor at Binbrook14. In Northamptonshire, the one unidentified Edward held Empingham15, three miles from Judith's manor of Tickencote16.
Edward was a man of several lords: at Caversfield, a man of Earl Tosti, elsewhere a royal thane17, or a man of Earl Harold18. He may have survived until 1086 since he is recorded as holding the third part of a church in Witham19. No other Edward held land in Buckinghamshire,
1 WIL 2,3. 3,4. 13,3;16. 14,1. 15,2
2 WIL 3,4. 15,2
3 WIL 7,7. 8,12. 22,3
4 WIL 14,1
5 BUK 14,36
6 NTH 56,25-27;36
7 BDF 53,25
8 BUK 15,1
9 BUK 12,7
10 BUK 12,8
11 BUK 15,2
12 LIN 30,31
13 LIN 4,42
14 LIN 57,6
15 NTH 35,9
16 NTH 56,26
17 BUK 14,23
18 BUK 12,7
19 LIN 2,34
Northamptonshire or Lincolnshire or on the fiefs of the tenants-in-chief who acquired the manors of Edward cilt in 1086 so, if not a scribal error, Edward the noble survived in extremely straightened circumstances. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, p. 306, which does not include Caversfield or Empingham and accidentally assigns the Buckinghamshire holdings to Hertfordshire and records the church at Witham as a pre-Conquest holding. He ranks Edward forty-first in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors would raise him a couple of places. Edward's tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 4507) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 186.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EARL *] EDWIN. The estates and career of Earl Edwin, son of Earl Algar of Mercia and brother of Earl Morcar. are documented in Baxter, Earls of Mercia, pp. 48-57. Although his name is a common one, the scribe appears to have been careful to identify him by his title. In the very few cases where this appears not to be the case, his circumstances allow him to be identified with reasonable confidence. In Yorkshire, the full jurisdictional rights held by Edwin and Morcar1 evidently belonged to the brother earls, and the Edwin at Cowling2 may be the earl, since Count Alan of Brittany also acquired the bulk of his manors in the county, in which only one other Edwin can be identified as holding land3. At Mission in Nottinghamshire4, the post-Conquest lord is named as Tosti in one case and is omitted in another; but Mission was a jurisdiction of the royal manor of Kirton-in-Lindsey in Lincolnshire5, which Earl Edwin held in 1066, evidently in succession to the outlawed Earl Tosti. Another scribal error may have occurred at Wychbold in Worcestershire6, attributed by the scribe to Earl Godwin but by Hemming to Edwin, brother of Earl Leofric, so perhaps Earl Edwin was intended: Williams, 'Introduction to the Worcestershire Domesday', p. 22. Similarly, at Burton Bradstock in Dorset7, the Earl Edwin recorded there is probably a scribal error for Earl Godwin (q.v.).
Despite the ubiquity of his name, it is unlikely that there are many, if indeed any, other unidentified Edwins who were the earl, since few held manors of any consequence. In Cheshire, where he was the dominant landowner, more than a dozen manors were held by unidentified Edwins; but only one was worth more than ten shillings, a sum exceeded by almost all those assigned to the earl, who held more than a third of the manorial value and a sixth of the hidage of the county: Sawyer and Thacker, 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', p. 322; Lewis, 'Introduction to the Cheshire Domesday', pp. 13-15. Outside the county, only the handsome manor of Stoke in Oxfordshire8 may have been his. Oxfordshire was a Mercian county; but the manor has no apparent royal or comital associations, and Edwin might here be Edwin the sheriff, or the Edwin whose lands were acquired by Walter son of Poyntz. Dr Williams gives Edwin a total of 600 hides/carucates excluding dependencies - the Statistics database 1019 with dependencies - and suggests that Edwin probably also held the Staffordshire manors - 115 hides - entered under the name of his dead father, Earl Algar: English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 51-52. A list of Edwin's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 212-15, which does not include Bedworth in Warwickshire9 or Mission and Cowling. Edwin is ranked sixth in wealth among the nobility by Dr Clarke; the addition of Algar's Staffordshire manors would raise him to third place. Baxter, Earls of Mercia, p. 129, supplies a considerably higher estimate of his manorial income; the Statistics database total (£721) lies between the two, closer to that of Dr Baxter.
1 YKS C36
2 YKS 6N128
3 YKS 2B8
4 NTT 1,65. 30,44
5 LIN 1,38
6 WOR 19,12
7 DOR 56,3
8 OXF 35,10
9 WAR 16,44
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWIN [* OF BUTTERLEIGH *]. Edwin, who held Butterleigh in Devon in 1066 and 1086, is evidently Edwin of Butterleigh, who held the following manor of Clyst William in 1086, for which he owed tax in Silverton Hundred, where Clyst lay1: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xxvii. He is the only surviving Edwin in the county, all other surviving Edwins in the south-western counties being identifiable as another man. Since he held Butterleigh before the Conquest, he may be one of several other pre-Conquest Edwins, the most likely being the Edwin in the adjacent vill of Ponsford; but the name is common and there are no links to connect them. Edwin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 809) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 186.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWIN <OF POULTON>. All fourteen Edwards in the Cheshire folios may be one man: Sawyer and Thacker, 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', p. 322. He preceded Robert son of Hugh on a tight cluster of seven manors in 'Duddeston' Hundred2, on the first six of which he was also Robert's tenant. In the same Hundred, he preceded Richard the butler at Poulton3, Gilbert the hunter at Eccleston4, and Osbern son of Tezzo at Golborne5; Gilbert also acquired Hope6 from him. As the only other Edwin in northern England to retain his manor for two decades, he is probably the Edwin who held Coleshill from Robert of Rhuddlan7, in which case he is likely to be the Edwin who preceded Haimo of Mascy at Aston and Llys Edwin8, both - like Coleshill - in Ati's Cross Hundred. All fourteen manors lie between Coleshill in the north-east and Hampton and Cholmondeley to the south-west9, those three manors being held by Edwin for two decades. Edwin is unidentified in Coel (nos. 28711, 28713-14, 28716, 28718-19, 28989).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWIN [* SON OF BURGRED *]. Edwin son of Burgred is named as a predecessor of the bishop of Coutances on two manors in Buckinghamshire and another two in Northamptonshire. Every manor held by a Burgred in those counties, and most of those held by his men, were acquired by the bishop of Coutances, so Edwin's father (q.v.) was almost certainly that man, and the Edwins who preceded the bishop are probably his son10; Burgred's unnamed son at Croughton may also be Edwin11, his other sons being recorded only in Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire. All Edwin's manors are close to each other or to those of his father. He is probably also the bishop's predecessor on the substantial manor of Kensington in Middlesex12, as is the Edwin from whom Ranulf son of Ilger acquired 'Tollingon', some six miles away13, since that Edwin was a man of the king and, like his father, Edwin was a royal thane and a lord of men14. Less certainly, the Edwin who preceded the bishop on a fairly substantial manor at Exton in Somerset15 may be him, but perhaps not the Edwin
1 DEV 52,38-39
2 CHS 2,7-12;20
3 CHS 6,1
4 CHS 17,1
5 CHS 24,2
6 CHS 17,12
7 CHS FD2,6
8 CHS FD7,1-2
9 CHS 2,7;9
10 BUK 5,3-4. NTH 4,5-6;19;25-26
11 NTH 4,29
12 MDX 21,1
13 MDX 22,1
14 BUK 5,3-4;9
15 SOM 5,5
from whom the bishop acquired the small holding at Kimworthy in Devon1. Edwin probably survived as a tenant of the bishop, on the two modest manors of Stanion and Lowick in Northamptonshire2, the first of which he also held in 1066; they are a few miles north of what may have been the centre of his father's Honour, at Raunds3.
Between them, Edwin and his father contributed the largest share of the bishop's fief; Ulf and Wulfsi, sons of Burgred, are also recorded4. Dr Williams, who suggests that Burgred and his family were related to Countess Gytha of Hereford, provides a list of the family holdings: 'The king's nephew', pp. 336-38. It does not include those in Middlesex and Somerset, though the Middlesex manors are added in a later work, together with North Stoke5, a valuable manor acquired by Miles Crispin, who had no other Edwins among his predecessors: World before Domesday, p. 157 note 57. In the absence of tenurial or geographical links, however, the identity of the Edwin at Stoke is problematic: there are three plausible candidates in addition to Burgred's son, so Edwin is currently unidentified in the Statistics database. Another list is provided by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 270-71, which does not include Stoke, 'Tollington' or Wellingborough6. Dr Clarke 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. The tenants at Stanion and Lowick are unidentified in Coel (nos. 26879-80).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWIN [* THE HUNTER *]. Most if not all unidentified Edwins in Dorset, Hampshire and Wiltshire may be Edwin the hunter, who survived for twenty years at Edmundsthorp, among the king's thanes of Hampshire7, though the manors were later held by different families. The Edwins at Blandford, Lazerton and Shilvinghampton in Dorset8 are identified in the Geld Rolls for the county as Edwin the hunter, who may be the Edwin at Gillingham9, another survivor among the king's thanes, the only other Edwin in Dorset (assuming Earl Edwin (q.v.) at Burton Bradstock is a scribal error): VCH Dorset, iii. 126-27, 134-35, 138, 140.
Of the three unidentified Edwins in Hampshire, two held land in 1066 in the adjacent vills of Nately and 'Bartley'10, neighbours of the royal manor of Odiham where Richard of Sifrewast, of Shilvinghampton in Dorset, later held land: Book of Fees, pp. 92, 1367. The third Edwin, at Oakhanger11, another of the king's thanes, was preceded by an Alwy, as was Edwin the hunter on two of his Dorset manors. Finally, the king's thane at Chedglow in Wiltshire12 who, like Edwin of Edmundsthorp, survived on the same manor for twenty years, may be the hunter. Of the other four Edwins in the county, three have tenurial associations. Two members of the Sifrewast family later held land in Wiltshire from the earl of Salisbury, descendant of Edward of Salisbury, who acquired Edwin's manor at Lacock13, while another held Great Somerford, acquired from Edwin by Humphrey de l'Isle, along with Clyffe Pypard and Bathampton14: Book of Fees, pp. 710, 716, 718, 720-22, 730, 732, 1117. All four manors are substantial, comparable to those in Dorset. The one
1 DEV 3,89
2 NTH 4,25-26
3 NTH 4,1
4 BUK 12,29. BDF 25,5
5 OXF 35,10
6 NTH 4,19
7 HAM 69,41
8 DOR 56,14;31-33
9 DOR 56,3
10 HAM 23,8. 69,5
11 HAM 69,4
12 WIL 67,51
13 WIL 24,33
14 WIL 27,9-10;16
remaining Edwin in the three counties, at Netheravon in 10661, is conceivably the hunter, though there are no links to confirm this. As all but one of the Edwins in the three counties have associations with each other, albeit slight or indirect in some cases, these are likely to be more than coincidental. Dorset, Hampshire and Wiltshire were the counties par excellence for hunting serjeanties, with more between them than the remaining counties combined; and it was not uncommon for huntsmen to hold land in two or even three of these counties, as did Aelfric, Cola, Croc, Godric, Waleran, Wulfgeat and Wulfric. Edwin's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 1769) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 186, apart from Oakhanger, Chedglow and Gillingham, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 6584, 17164, 2980).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWIN [* THE SHERIFF *]. All but one of the Edwins recorded in Warwickshire may be Edwin, sheriff of Warwickshire, named as a predecessor of the bishop of Bayeux at Beausale2 and of Thorkil of Warwick, his kinsman, at Marston Green3. All other Edwins occur on Thorkil's fief, nine of them stated to be the same man, two like the Edwin at Flecknoe, being in vills dominated by members of Thorkil's family, while Radford was sold by Thorkil's brother to the tenant of 10864. Edwin's manors are identified and listed by Williams, 'A vice-comital family', pp. 284-85, 293-94, to which should perhaps be added Napton5, probably acquired by Robert d'Oilly (q.v.) who held, leased or purchased several other manors from Thorkil's family. The only Edwin unlikely to be the sheriff is the one post-Conquest landowner, at Whitacre6, since Edwin was probably dead by then, having lost his pre-Conquest manors, though it is curious that the Edwin at Whitacre also occurs on Thorkil's fief. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 28356).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWULF. Edwulf is an uncommon name which occurs eighteen times, distributed among ten counties and the lands of the king and a dozen of his tenants-in-chief, spread thinly between Devon and Yorkshire, with a small cluster in Devon. Most Edwulfs are pre-Conquest lords, with five survivors scattered between Devon and Staffordshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWULF <OF ACKWORTH>. As the name is uncommon, the Edwulfs whose modest manors of Ackworth and Denby in the West Riding of Yorkshire were acquired by Ilbert of Lacy are probably one man7. The Edworth at Hutton Cranswick, some fifty miles away on the far side of the county, is possibly him also.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWULF <OF ADDINGTON>. Edwulf, who held a half-hide hide worth ten shillings at Addington in Buckinghamshire from Miles Crispin8, has no links with other Edwulfs, none of whom are within forty miles. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 1414).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 WIL 68,2
2 WAR 4,3
3 WAR 17,10
4 WAR 17,18-26;28-29;56
5 WAR 17,28
6 WAR 17,14
7 YKS 9W52;87
8 BUK 23,20
EDWULF <OF CRANSWICK>. Edwulf, whose modest manor of Hutton Cranswick in the East Riding of Yorkshire was acquired by Count Robert of Mortain1, has no links with other Edwulfs, the nearest being Edwulf at Ackworth in the West Riding, possibly the same man.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWULF <OF HOPE>. Edwulf, whose modest manor at Hope in Herefordshire was acquired by William son of Baderon2, has no links with other Edwulfs, none of whom are within fifty miles.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWULF <OF MOTTISFONT>. Edwulf, who inherited his father's messuage in Mottisfont among the king's thanes in Hampshire3, has no links with other Edwulf's. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 6612).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWULF <OF RUGBY>. Edwulf, who held a modest manor in Rugby from Thorkil of Warwick4, has no links with his namesakes, none of whom are within forty miles. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 28368).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWULF <OF THURVASTON>. As the name is rare in the region, the Edwulf whose modestly prosperous manor at Thurvaston in Derbyshire was acquired by Henry of Ferrers5 may be the Edwulf who held Okeover in Staffordshire, ten miles away, from Burton abbey 'for rent'6. Thurvaston is circled by the manors of Burton abbey in Derbyshire, the abbey perhaps rescuing its neighbour from penury at little cost to itself. Edwulf is unidentified in Coel (no. 31370).
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWY <OF MARKHAM>. Although the name Edwy is common, it is largely confined to the south and south-west, the predecessors of Roger of Bully at Markham and Boughton in Nottinghamshire7 being the only Edwys in circuit six or the adjacent counties of Cheshire, Leicestershire and Staffordshire. Markham and Boughton are six miles apart, so were probably held by the same Edwy. Roger had no other predecessors or tenants of this name.
.............................................................................................................................................
EDWY [* THE NOBLE *]. It is likely that most if not all Edwys in Herefordshire are Edwy the noble, named as a predecessor of the canons of Hereford at Priors Frome and of Roger of Lacy on eleven manors. All but one of the eight unidentified Edwys are predecessors of Roger8, one of whom was succeeded by his son, Alwin9, and three others by tenants who were subinfeudated with manors where Edwy the noble is identified. Roger of Lacy also acquired Wormington in Gloucestershire from an Edwy10. The one other Edwy in Herefordshire, at Harewood11, may also be Edwy the noble. Harewood, in the frontier zone of Golden Valley, was acquired by Gilbert son of
1 YKS 5E39
2 HEF 15,1
3 HAM 69,25
4 WAR 17,25
5 DBY 6,64
6 STS 4,8
7 NTT 9,6-8;16
8 HEF 1,16. 10,9;16;23;46;59;72
9 HEF 10,15
10 GLS 39,21
11 HEF 25,6
Turold, probably the sheriff of the county who farmed Clifford Castle for Ralph of Tosny1, the key defence in the area: Lewis, 'Norman settlement of Herefordshire', p. 207. Roger of Lacy held land in the castlery, and the Gilbert whom he subinfeudated with Bacton, his principal manor in Golden Valley, may be the sheriff2. If so, then it is likely that the Edwys who preceded Ralph of Tosny and Gilbert son of Turold on three manors in Worcestershire - the only Edwys in the county - are also Edwy the noble3; neither Roger, Ralph or Gilbert had predecessors or tenants of this name elsewhere. It is not improbable that he is the Edwy on six other manors in adjacent counties since there are no other Edwys in the western half of England north of the Thames apart from a householder in Wallingford, and none of the tenants-in-chief involved had tenants or predecessors of this name elsewhere in the country; but there are no more precise links to confirm identifications.
.............................................................................................................................................
ELAF. Elaf is an uncommon name which occurs twenty-two times, distributed among nine counties and the lands of eleven tenants-in-chief, thinly spread across the map, with small clusters in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire; there are no surviving Elafs.
.............................................................................................................................................
ELAF <OF CANDOVER>. Elaf, who had a plough and three slaves on the episcopal manor of Candover in Hampshire in 10664, has no links with other Elafs, all remote.
.............................................................................................................................................
ELAF <OF DRIFFIELD>. As the name is uncommon, the Elafs who preceded Reinbald of Cirencester in the adjacent vills of Driffield and Preston in Gloucestershire5 are probably one man, likely also to be the Elaf at North Cerney6, six miles to the north, all three manors being substantial. At Driffield, Elaf held from Earl Tosti, so he may be the royal thane at Bengeo in Hertfordshire7, the one other Elaf with a substantial manor in Domesday Book. Although there are no specific links, it is not unlikely that he is the Elaf at Winwick in Huntingdonshire8, who also held from the king, and possible that he is the one other Elaf between the Thames and the Wash, at Kington in Worcestershire9; but his shared manor is unremarkable and there are no tenurial links to warrant an identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
ELAF <OF KINGTON>. Elaf, whose shared a manor at Kington in Worcestershire was acquired by Roger of Lacy10, has no links with other Elafs.
.............................................................................................................................................
ELAF <OF NEWTON>. Elaf, whose ten-shilling holding at Newton in Somerset was acquired by Roger of Courseulles11, has no links with other Elafs.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 HEF 8,1
2 HEF 10,3;16
3 WOR 15,1. 20,3;5
4 HAM 6,13
5 GLS 26,2;4
6 GLS 52,3
7 HRT 34,16
8 HUN 19,17
9 WOR 18,4
10 WOR 18,4
11 SOM 21,3
ELAF <OF SPECCOTT>. Elaf, whose small holding worth seven shillings and six pence at Speccott in Devon was acquired by Theobald son of Berner1, has no links with other Elafs.
.............................................................................................................................................
"ELFAIN" <OF WADDINGHAM>. Elfain, who held the modest manor of Waddingham and its dependency among the king's thanes of Lincolnshire in 10862, is the only man of this name in Domesday Book. It is possible but unlikely that he is the same man as Elfin - a related form - the rather more substantial tenant of Henry of Ferrers in Derbyshire, almost a hundred miles away. Elfain is unidentified in Coel (no. 34892).
.............................................................................................................................................
"ELFIN" [* OF BRAILSFORD *]. The five Elfins in Domesday Book, all tenants of Henry of Ferrers in Derbyshire whose manors clustered near Brailsford3, are almost certainly Elfin of Brailsford, who gave land or tithes to Tutbury priory in three of his manors: Cartulary of Tutbury priory, pp. 64-66. It is possible, though unlikely, that he is the Elfain of Lincolnshire, almost a hundred miles to the east. Elfin's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 3858) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 187; the Elfains are unidentified (nos. 34892-93).
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EMMA *] ROGER OF LACY'S MOTHER. The mother of Roger of Lacy, wife of Walter, who held Siddington 'as her dowry', Slaughter in Gloucestershire from (or with) her son4, and who gave Duntisbourne Abbots to St Peter's of Gloucester5 'for her husband's soul', is not named in Domesday Book, but her forename - Emma or Emmeline (Ermeline) - is given in a spurious royal charter confirming the lands of St Peter's of Gloucester and in the records of the abbey: Regesta, iii. no. 345; Historia ... Gloucestriae, i. 15, 122, 224, 227, 258, 351. Her husband died in 1085 but is entered in Coel (no. 2487) for one manor he had received from Earl William son of Osbern6; see also Domesday people, p. 452. Walter occurs fairly frequently in Domesday, but always as an intermediate landowner whose manors are in other hands in 1086; he does not therefore appear in the Statistics database. Emma's manors are recorded in Coel with those of her son.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EMMA *] WIFE OF BALDWIN [* THE SHERIFF *]. Baldwin's wife, who held Wimple in Devon7, is named Emma on her manor at Bridford in Exon.8, both held from her husband, the sheriff of the county. Her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1300) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 440.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EMMA *] WIFE OF HERVEY [* OF HELLÉAN *]. The wife of Hervey, who held a small fief at Ashton and Hackworthy in Devon9 and a manor at Neadon as tenant of Baldwin the sheriff10, is almost certainly the widow Emma who, in the Geld Roll for the county, owed tax in Exminster
1 DEV 36,5
2 LIN 68,35-36
3 DBY 6,40-41;52;58;60
4 GLS 39,18;20
5 GLS 10,13
6 GLS 1,56
7 DEV 16,94
8 DEV 16,128
9 DEV 44,1-2
10 DEV 16,156
Hundred, where Ashton lay: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xxxvi-xxxvii. Her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 658) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 441.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EMMA *] WIFE OF WILLIAM OF PERCY. Hambledon in Hampshire, the single manor held by William of Percy (q.v.) outside Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, was acquired by William with his wife1. Though said to be held in chief, Round demonstrated that his wife was Emma of Port and that William is more correctly described as a tenant of Hugh of Port, as were his descendants of those of Hugh: 'Domesday survey of Hampshire', p. 438. William's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 707) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 478-79.
.............................................................................................................................................
ENGELRIC [* THE PRIEST *]. With one possible exception, all Engelrics in Domesday Book are probably Engelric the priest, a king's baron, named in the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin2: Feudal documents, pp. 8, 22. Engelric founded and lavishly endowed the church of St Martin-le-Grand in London, though the bulk of his endowment is attributed to Count Eustace of Boulogne in Domesday Book.
He is named as the Count's predecessor3, references to his Holding4 and his frequent status as an intermediate landowner on the Count's Honour further confirming his identity, so he is probably the Engelric who preceded Eustace in Hertfordshire5 and on many of his manors in Essex - too numerous to list - and in Suffolk6, and the Engelric whose depredations benefited the Count elsewhere7. As a king's baron, he is almost certainly the Engelric who granted land in pledge to the Bury St Edmund's 'when the English bought back their lands', and the Engelric to whom land 'was delivered on the king's behalf'8. His association with St Martin's identifies him as the Engelric at Benfleet in Essex9. The one other Engelric whose land was not acquired by the Count is that of the lord of the handsome manor of Newnham Murren in Oxfordshire10, predecessor of Mainou the Breton. It is difficult to believe that this was his only manor of this landowner; if not, he was perforce Engelric the priest. There are no tenurial or other links to confirm this, but the identification seems more likely than not.
A list of Engelric's pre-Conquest manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 307-308, which does not include Iltney11 but does include Newnham Murren. Dr Clarke ranks him sixty-third in wealth among untitled landowners, one of the wealthiest clerks in the kingdom. His post-Conquest acquisitions added substantially to this. He has been identified as the Engelbricus, canon of St Paul's, who held a manor in Stepney in 1066 and 108612; scribal confusion of Engelbricus and Engelricus is certainly possible, but Engelric had lost his extensive lands well before 1086, and there appears to be no indication that he was alive at that date. The mistake is pointed out in the entry for the canon of St Paul's in Coel (no. 1911), referenced in Domesday people, p. 188.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 HAM 25,1
2 SUF 14,101
3 ESS 1,24. SUF 5,4
4 ESS 20,17;44;62;70-71. 90,64
5 HRT 15,4-6;9. 17,1. 39,1
6 SUF 5,3-5
7 ESS 1,19;24;27. 17,2. 28,9
8 SUF 14,39. 39,3
9 ESS 6,1
10 OXF 35,11
11 ESS 20,16
12 MDX 3,6
ENISANT [* MUSARD *]. With a single exception, all Enisants in Domesday Book are tenants of Count Alan of Brittany and so almost certainly one man, named Enisant Musard on his manor of Toketorp in Norfolk1 and at Cheveley in Cambridgeshire2 in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 11). His remaining manors, all in Yorkshire3, were almost all part of the constable's fee of the Honour of Richmond at a later date, one of them - Croft4 - being the subject of a grant there to St Mary's of York in which his byname in given, confirming his identity as the Cambridge and Norfolk Enisant should confirmation be needed: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 81-85. It is likely that Enisant himself was constable of Richmond, though this cannot be documented. His byname means lazy or stupid. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 377) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 188-89, where is suggested he may be Enisant of Plévin, a relation by marriage of the comital family.
.............................................................................................................................................
ENISANT <OF BELCHAMP>. As the name is rare, Enisant, Aubrey de Vere's subtenant at Belchamp Walter in Essex5, is possibly the same man as Enisant Musard, his one namesake in Domesday Book; but there are no links to confirm this. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 5273).
.............................................................................................................................................
ERCHENBALD. Erchenbald is a rare name which occurs on one fief and six manors in Devon and Cornwall, and once each in Oxfordshire and Suffolk, perhaps representing no more three post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERCHENBALD <OF BAINTON>. Erchenbald, tenant of Giles brother of Ansculf on a modest manor at Bainton in Oxfordshire6, has no links with his namesakes in Cornwall, Devon and Suffolk, all remote. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 28001).
.............................................................................................................................................
ERCHENBALD <OF SUTTON>. Erchenbald, tenant of Hervey of Bourges on a modest manor at Sutton in Suffolk7, has no links with his namesakes in Cornwall, Devon and Oxfordshire, all remote. His single manor is recorded in Coel (no. 8837) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 158, under the form Arcenbald.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERCHENBALD [* THE FLEMING *]. As the name is rare, the Erchenbald who held a small fief from the Count of Mortain in Cornwall8 is probably the Erchenbald who held six manors from him in Devon9, and a small portion of Roald Dubbed's manor of Weare under him according to Exon.10. His byname is not strictly contemporary; but his descendant in 1166, another Erchenbald, is Erchenbald the Fleming whose manor of Bratton Fleming11 is named after him or one of his
1 NFK 4,14
2 CAM 14,62
3 YKS 6N5-6;8;12-25;64;66;68;86;104;109;146
4 YKS 6N16
5 ESS 35,6
6 OXF 37,1
7 SUF 67,21
8 CON 5,12,1-3
9 DEV 15,11;39-41;47;54
10 DEV 35,10
11 DEV 15,40
descendants: Red Book, i. 259. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 234) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 189.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERIK [* BROTHER OF TOSTI *]. All Eriks - Edric in one case of scribal confusion1, corrected in the Lincolnshire Claims2 - in Domesday Book may be one man, although his manors were acquired by five tenants-in-chief. In Lincolnshire, Laceby and its dependencies3, held before the Conquest by Swein, Erik and Tosti, is linked to another group held by Erik centred on Tealby4 by the intermediate tenure of Rainer the deacon5, the Tealby group in turn related to another of Erik's manors6 by soke in Willingham; Keelby7, the last of the Lincolnshire manors, is five miles from Laceby. Thistleton in Rutland8 is some distance from the Lincolnshire manors, and Catworth and Sawtry in Huntingdonshire9 more so; but an entry for Sawtry in the Claims for Huntingdonshire10 suggests a link between them, stating that Tosti at Sawtry was the brother of Erik, a claim supported by the Ramsey chronicle: Chronicon abbatiae Rameseiensis, p. 175; Early charters of eastern England, p. 235. As noted above, the main group of Erik's holdings in Lincolnshire were held alongside a Tosti. In view of the comparative rarity of both names, Erik and Tosti may be the Huntingdonshire brothers; Thistleton is roughly midway between their Huntingdonshire and Lincolnshire manors. If these identifications are valid, Erik lost all the manors he held in 1066; but, like many of his class, survived on a modest manor among the king's thanes, at Catworth11. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 32740), which names the pre-Conquest lord as tenant.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERMENALD <OF ANTONY>. All Ermenhalds in Domesday Book are almost certainly the same man. He held six manors from Tavistock abbey in Cornwall12, all said to be held by one man, and he was also the abbey's tenant at Tavistock in Devon13. His lands descended to the Daunay family: Finberg, Tavistock abbey, pp. 9-14. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 227) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 190.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERMENFRID. Ermenfrid is a rare name which occurs only in Warwickshire and Yorkshire. A William son of Ermenfrid is recorded in Kent: Domesday Monachorum, p. 90.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERMENFRID <OF POPPLETON>. As the name is rare, the Ermenfrids who held Poppleton and Scagglethorpe in Yorkshire from Osbern of Arques are almost certainly the same man14. His tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 4691) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 190.
1 LIN 28,20-24
2 LIN CN18
3 LIN 4,69-71
4 LIN 28,20-24
5 LIN CN13;18
6 LIN 14,7
7 LIN 47,3
8 LIN 56,12. RUT 2,8
9 HUN 19,1. 29,3
10 HUN D27
11 HUN 29,3
12 CON 3,1-6
13 DEV 5,1
14 YKS 25W13;16
.............................................................................................................................................
ERMENFRID [* OF WARWICK *]. As the name is rare, the Ermenfrids who held five manors in Warwickshire from Thorkil of Warwick are almost certainly one man and probably Hermenfredus de Warwic, who witnessed a charter for the foundation of Monks Kirby priory in 10771: Monasticon, vi/ii. 996, no. 1. It is very likely he is also the tenant of both Coventry abbey and Richard the forester in Radway, a vill encircled by Ermenfrid's other manors2. In the thirteenth century, the Simily family held land in Radford and in two of the vills Ermenfrid held from Thorkil, Calcutt and Ashow: Book of Fees, pp. 507, 955, 959. Ermenfrid's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 4759) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 190.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERMENALD <OF ANTONY>. All Ermenhalds in Domesday Book are almost certainly the same man. He held six manors from Tavistock abbey in Cornwall3, all said to be held by one man, and he was also the abbey's tenant at Tavistock in Devon4. His lands descended to the Daunay family: Finberg, Tavistock abbey, pp. 9-14. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 227) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 190.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNEIS. If the manors of the tenant-in-chief Erneis of Buron are discounted, Erneis is a rare name which occurs seven times, distributed among three counties and the lands of five tenants-in-chief, all but one of them borne by a tenant in 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNEIS [* OF BURON *]. All men named Erneis in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire are probably Erneis of Buron, tenant-in-chief in those counties. He is identified as the tenant of Earl Hugh of Chester at Riby5 and of Count Alan of Brittany at Masham6 by their descent to his successors, Geoffrey son of Pain and later the Trussebut family: Early Yorkshire charters, x. 23-27. He may also be the Erneis whose manor of Calton was absorbed into the castlery of Roger of Poitou7, Roger losing some lands in Lincolnshire to Geoffrey son of Pain. Similarly, the Erneis whose manor of Nettleton8 was held by Grelley family in the Lindsey Survey is probably Buron since the Grelleys also had Flaxby, held by Erneis of Buron in Domesday Book9. There were other such adjustments to the manors of the Trussebut fee in the course of its transmission to different families: Farrer, 'Domesday survey of Yorkshire', pp. 180-81. Erneis' manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2451) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 191.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNEIS <OF DOWNHEAD>. As the name is rare, the four tenants in Somerset may be the same Erneis, though he held from three tenants-in-chief. The bishop of Wells is unlikely to have had different tenants of this name at Wells and Evercreech10; and Downhead11 and Bruton12 are each
1 WAR 17,18-19;49;56;65
2 WAR 6,20. 44,6
3 CON 3,1-6
4 DEV 5,1
5 LIN 13,20
6 YKS 6N118
7 YKS 30W30
8 LIN 4,23-25
9 YKS 24W10
10 SOM 6,1;10
11 SOM 8,35
12 SOM 21,91
roughly five miles from Evercreech, all four being of comparable status. It seems likely they were held by one man whose namesakes in Cornwall and Leicestershire are more than a hundred miles away. Erneis' tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 8774) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 191.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNEIS <OF GLENFIELD>. As the name is rare, it is likely that the tenants of Hugh of Grandmesnil at Glenfield and Stoughton - seven miles apart - in Leicestershire1 are the same Erneis. His namesakes in Cornwall and Somerset are more than a hundred miles away. His tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 8775) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 191.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNEIS <OF PENHALLYM>. Erneis, who held a modest holding at Penhallym in Cornwall2 is the one pre-Conquest lord of this name, without links with others of this name, none of them within a hundred miles of his manor. No Old English forms are known, though it seems likely he is a native landowner: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 248.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNGEAT. Erngeat is an uncommon name which occurs fifteen times, distributed among five counties and the lands of king and eight of his tenants-in-chief, all borne by pre-Conquest lords, most of them having modest holdings; there are small clusters in Cheshire and Shropshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNGEAT <OF BRATTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Erngeats who preceded William Pandolf at Bratton, Horton and Lawley in Shropshire3 are probably one man. The vills are close to each other and remote from others held by an Erngeat, though it is conceivable he is the Erngeat at either Pedwardine or Somersal, roughly forty miles or so to the south and north-east respectively.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNGEAT <OF NESS>. As the name is uncommon, the Erngeats whose three whose manors of Willington, Ness, and Ledsham in Cheshire devolved upon Walter of Vernon4 are probably one man, who may also be the predecessor of Hugh Delamere at Caldy5, a few miles from Ness and Ledsham. Less certainly, he may be the one other Erngeat in Cheshire, at Peover6, some twenty miles from Willington, a holding of comparable status acquired by Ranulf of Mainwaring.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNGEAT <OF PEDWARDINE>. Erngeat, who held land worth ten shillings in Pedwardine in Shropshire acquired by Ralph of Mortimer7, has no with links with his namesakes, though he is conceivably the Erngeat at Ness, some forty miles to the north.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNGEAT <OF RAYDON>. Erngeat, who shared a holding with half a plough team worth ten shillings at Raydon in Suffolk acquired by Ralph Pinel8, has no links with other Erngeats.
1 LEC 13,40;52
2 CON 5,3,19
3 SHR 4,14,19-21
4 CHS 7,1-3
5 CHS 10,4
6 CHS 20,4
7 SHR 6,25
8 SUF 61,1
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNGEAT <OF SOMERSAL>. Erngeat, who preceded Henry of Ferrers at Somersal in Derbyshire1, is the most prosperous of the Erngeats, though modestly so. It is conceivable that he is the Erngeat at Bratton, forty miles or so to the south-west, but there are no specific links to connect them.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNGEAT <OF "TURSTANESTUNA">. Erngeat, who shared a holding with a plough team worth three shillings with two other free men at 'Turstanestuna' in Suffolk2, has no links with his namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNGEAT [* SON OF GRIM *]. Erngeat, a thane of Earl Edwin who held part of the royal manor of Bromsgrove in Worcestershire3, is very probably Erngeat son of Grim, named by Hemming as withholding Hampton Lovett and 'Thickenappletree' from the Church of Worcester, since both manors were held in 1066 by Alwold (q.v.), also a thane of Earl Edwin, who held another part of Bromsgrove and is probably the son of Erngeat whose admission to the monastery of Worcester was refused by Bishop Wulfstan unless 'Thickenappletree' were donated to the Church: Hemingi cartularium, pp. 264-65; Baxter, Earls of Mercia, pp. 173-4, 251-2, 295 note 95. As his name is uncommon, he may be the one other Erngeat in the county, a predecessor of Urso the sheriff at Hatete in 'Cresslow' Hundred4. Although the exact locations of the two holdings are unknown, they are in neighbouring hundreds and may be just a few miles apart; like Hatete, 'Thickenappletree' was in the hands of Urso in 1086. Dr Williams suggests that Erngeat had a second son, Frani (q.v.): 'Introduction to the Worcestershire Domesday', p. 22.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNSI [* SON OF ALDGYTH *]. Ernsi is a rare name and all Ernsis in Domesday Book are probably one man, Ernsi son of Aldgyth, alias Ernsi son of Ocea, though his manors were acquired by six tenants-in-chief. Neither byname occurs in Domesday Book itself. Ernsi held a dozen manors concentrated in the adjacent counties of Gloucestershire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire, many of them substantial. Apart from their distribution and status, they are linked by a web of relationships. Painswick5, acquired by Roger of Lacy, is circled by the manors of Hascoit Musard6 and of Drogo son of Poyntz at Frampton7, part of which Roger of Lacy held illegally. Drogo also held another Ernsi manor, Swell, adjacent to one of the Musard manors at Eyford, as a tenant of Ralph of Tosny8. Another Ernsi holding in Swell was acquired by William of Eu9. Both Roger of Lacy and Drogo son of Poyntz obtained manors previously held by Ernsi in Herefordshire10, and Ralph of Tosny one in Worcestershire11. None of these tenants-in-chief is likely to have had two
1 DBY 6,32
2 SUF 7,83
3 WOR 1,1c
4 WOR 26,9
5 GLS 39,8
6 GLS 66,3-6
7 GLS 54,1
8 GLS 45,6
9 GLS 31,12
10 HEF 1,30. 10,68
11 WOR 15,9
predecessors with this uncommon name. Finally, the remaining manor, acquired by Ralph of Mortimer1, was - like that held by Drogo2 - part of the great manor of Leominster.
Ernsi is identified by a story told in the Evesham chronicle concerning 'a certain noble lady', Aldgyth, who stole relics from the Church, repented after being struck blind, promising to bequeath land at Swell in recompense; but her son, Arnisius - evidently the Ernsi of Domesday Book - 'living extravagantly and imprudently like the foolish man he was', lost everything, leaving the abbot to deal with the unnamed magnate or magnates who acquired his lands: Thomas of Marlborough, pp. 73-75, 171-73; Early charters of the west Midlands, pp. 71-76. Ernsi is further identified in a royal charter concerning Swell, where he is named Ernsi son of Oce, his father evidently being Ocea the Dane whose manor of Astley in Worcestershire was unjustly seized by Ralph of Tosny according to Hemming, though Domesday Book3 attributes it to his son Ernsi (above): Williams, 'Introduction to the Gloucestershire Domesday', p. 24. A list of Ernsi's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, p. 307, which does not include those in Herefordshire. He ranks Ernsi fiftieth in wealth among untitled laymen; the Herefordshire manors would raise him a couple of places.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNUCION <OF GREATHAM>. Ernucion is a rare name which occurs four times, three times as a tenant of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, at Kinnerley in Shropshire4 and Greatham and Tortington in Sussex5. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he may be the fourth Ernucion, a subtenant of St Albans abbey at West Hendred in Berkshire6, which is plausible given the broadly comparable status of the manor and its situation between Shropshire and Sussex: VCH Berkshire, iv. 303. She also suggests that Earl Roger's tenant may be Ernucion Balbet, who granted land to the abbey of Sées. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 945) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 191. A John son of Ernucion held land in Essex7.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWIN. The name Ernwin is fairly common but its distribution is skewed. It occurs in ten counties, seven of them accounting for a dozen names, the remainder - some four-fifths of the total - distributed around the adjacent counties of Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire. The name is sometimes confused by the scribe with Ernwy.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWIN [* THE PRIEST *]. Most if not all the Ernwins in Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire may be Ernwin the priest, whose byname is recorded there more than two dozen times. In all three counties, he is recorded at both dates though rarely retaining the same manor, Kilham (29E12) being the one exception. The hiatus may be because he was outlawed, or 'taken'8, at some point. Outside those counties, he also held land in Bedfordshire9. His status as a survivor is one of his significant identifying characteristics. He is named in full as holding land in 1086 in all four counties; no other Ernwin can be identified as a survivor in those or any other counties.
The Yorkshire Ernwins present the fewest problems as the priest is named in most cases, or may be identified from the Yorkshire Claims, as at Aughton10, where he preceded the Count of
1 HEF 1,20
2 HEF 1,30
3 WOR 15,9
4 SHR 4,27,4
5 SUS 11,56;85
6 BRK 12,1
7 ESS 40,1
8 LIN 12,29
9 BDF 4,4. 14,1
10 YKS CE18
Mortain, though named Ernwy in the entries concerned1. The Claims also identify him as the Ernwin at Poppleton and Scagglethorpe (25W13;16), acquired by Osbern of Arques, where he 'ought to have' the land of Ernwin Cat's Nose held by Osbern and previously William Malet2; the two Ernwins are possibly the same man, though Farrer suggested they are probably father and son: 'Domesday survey of Yorkshire', p. 168. The Ernwins at Steeton3 and Brackenholme4 in the Yorkshire Summary are probably the priest as there are no other Ernwins among the tenants-in-chief in Yorkshire. He is likely to be the priest in York whose property was acquired by the bishop of Durham5, who also claimed plots from him at Grantham in Lincolnshire6; and he may be priest at Hambleton in 10667, which lay between the Yorkshire and Lincolnshire properties, eight miles from the nearest of these, at Cambleforth8. Snydale, acquired by the same tenant-in-chief9, may have been his on similar grounds, reinforced by the tenurial link between them. The one remaining Ernwin in the county, at Newsome in the East Riding, may also be the priest, as at Barrow-on-Humber in Lincolnshire YKS 14E15), both acquired by Drogo of la Beuvrière (below).
In Nottinghamshire, Ernwin the priest was a tenant of Roger of Bully at Flintham; and held Elkesley among the king's thanes in 1086 and Normanton and Gonalston on the same fief in 1066. He may be most or all of the other Ernwins among the royal thanes. It is improbable there were several such survivors in the county; and of the six10, only Mission and Willoughby on the Wolds11 are not neighbours of the priest or of each other. Mission was the third of three consecutive entries for Ernwin in the same Hundred, where the first is named Ernwin the priest. Roger of Poitou's tenant Ernwy at Willoughby12 may be a scribal error for Ernwin, since Ernwin the priest was a tenant of Roger in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, and an Ernwin had another manor in Willoughby13.
In Lincolnshire, Ernwin the priest held substantial properties in Lincoln, and others in Grantham and Stamford, and among the royal thanes in both 1066 and 1086; he is probably the Ernwin who held at Ingham, adjacent to his pre-Conquest manor at Fillingham14. As in Yorkshire, he is probably the Ernwin who preceded Roger of Poitou, or was his tenant, on nine manors, seven of which lay in wapentakes where the priest held land15, one in the same vill, another the subject of a claim. He may also be the Ernwin who preceded the bishop of Bayeux at Audelby and its dependencies16, his interests and those of the bishop being entangled elsewhere17; and he is more likely than not the Ernwin who preceded Count Alan in 'Calcewath' wapentake18, being the Count's predecessor on other manors on the fief19. Finally, these holdings of the Count are a few miles from South Ormsby, acquired from Ernwin by the archbishop of York20, while the remaining properties held by Ernwin in the county in 106621 are all close to the priest's manors. Among them, Barrow on
1 YKS 5E7-8;24
2 YKS CW32
3 YKS SW,An5
4 YKS SE,How9
5 YKS C2
6 LIN 1,9
7 YKS 9W25
8 YKS 29W2
9 YKS 9W97
10 NTT 30,35;42-43;51-52;54
11 NTT 30,43
12 NTT 16,5;12
13 NTT 30,35
14 LIN 68,25;30-31;42
15 LIN 16,1-2;4;7-8;33-34;47
16 LIN 4,17-22
17 LIN 4,1. CN16
18 LIN 12,93-95
19 LIN 12,7;29
20 LIN 2,21-22
21 LIN 28,5-6. 30,5. 47,2
Humber - acquired by Drogo of la Beuvrière who also inherited the manor of an Ernwin at Newsome across the Humber - would have facilitated communications between the priest's manors in the East Riding and Lindsey. It is thus possible that all Ernwins in Nottinghamshire, Yorkshire and Lincolnshire are the priest. Although some of the links are tenuous, they merit some weight in view of the fact that the adjacent counties of Derby, Leicester, Rutland, Northampton, Cambridge and Norfolk can muster only one more Ernwin between them1. Ernwin the priest's tenancies at Riby and Elsham2 are recorded in Coel (no. 946) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 192; the remaining Ernwins are unidentified (nos. 34887, 35634, 35647-48, 35656-57, 35659, 37357).
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWULF. Ernwulf is a rare name which occurs eight times, distributed among the lands of as many tenants-in-chief and half-a-dozen counties; three names are post-Conquest, five pre-Conquest. The name may be confused with Arnulf.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWULF <OF ALDINGHAM>. Ernwulf, who held six carucates at Aldingham in North Lancashire3 before the Conquest, has no links with his namesakes, all of whom are remote, the nearest pre-Conquest lord being two hundred miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWULF <OF BIDFORD>. Ernwulf, who preceded Robert d'Oilly on a modest holding at Bidford in Warwickshire4, appears to have no links with other Ernwulfs. As the name is rare, it is possible he is the Ernwulf at Longdon in 1066, twenty miles away; but it is not certain that the two names - Ernulfus in Bidford, Arnul in Longdon - are the same: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 244. His nearest other namesake of 1066 is some 150 miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWULF <OF "BREDESTORP">. Ernwulf, who shared a respectable tenancy from Drogo of la Beuvrière in the lost vill of Bredestorp in south Lincolnshire5, appears to have no links with other Ernwulfs, though as the name is rare he may be the one other northern survivor, on a somewhat more substantial shared tenancy at Featherstone in Yorkshire6, roughly seventy miles away. An Ernulf had a tiny holding at Leake in Nottinghamshire7, probably closer to the lost vill; but he has been plausibly identified as Arnulf of Bully (q.v.). Ernwulf of Bredestorp is unidentified in Coel (no. 34261).
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWULF <OF CANDOVER>. Ernwulf, who held a virgate of land with half a plough team - almost a peasant holding - as a subtenant of Cypping of Worthy at Preston Candover in Hampshire8, has no links with his namesakes, none of whom held land in southern England. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 6589).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 DBY 14,10
2 LIN 16,1;33
3 YKS 1L8
4 WAR 4,5
5 LIN 30,28
6 YKS 9W54
7 NTT 9,89
8 HAM 69,6
ERNWULF <OF FEATHERSTONE>. Ernwulf, who shared a tenancy from Ilbert of Lacy in the substantial manor of Featherstone in Yorkshire1, appears to have no links with his namesakes though, as the name is rare, he is possibly the Ernwulf at Bredestorp, the one other northern survivor, on a rather less substantial shared tenancy roughly seventy miles away. He is probably the Ernwulf who gave thraves in Preston and 'Rouedona' to the Lacy foundation of St Clement's of Pontefract: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 185-87. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 9372) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 193.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWULF <OF LATTON>. Ernwulf, who preceded Count Eustace of Boulogne on a fairly substantial manor at Latton in Essex2, has no links with any of his namesakes, with none of whom he had tenurial or other associations. His closest neighbour is Ernwulf of Parham in Suffolk, with half a plough team valued at seven shillings, a near-peasant holding.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWULF <OF LONGDON>. Ernwulf, who preceded Thorkil at Longdon in Warwickshire3, has no links with his namesakes. His closest neighbour, at Bidford, twenty miles away may not have the same name: Ernulfus in Bidford, Arnul in Longdon: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 244.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWULF <OF PARHAM>. Ernwulf, who preceded Robert Malet on a tiny holding of half a plough team worth seven shillings - virtually a peasant holding - at Parham in Suffolk4, has no links with his namesakes, the nearest of whom held Latton in Essex in 1066, a fairly substantial manor.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWY. Ernwy is a fairly common name which occurs more than forty times, distributed among a dozen counties and the lands of the king and almost thirty of his tenants-in-chief, with clusters in Herefordshire and Shropshire. It is sometimes confused by the scribe with Ernwin.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWY <OF PONTESBURY>. The Ernwys who held Pontesbury and Onslow from the Corbet brothers had retained their manors for two decades so are very probably the same man5, who is perhaps also Ernwin, a Corbet tenant at Farley, which he had held since 1066. The scribe confused these two names elsewhere, and Farley is adjacent to Pontesbury, of which it later became part6: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 89-90. Only one other Ernwy (or Ernwin) in Domesday Book retained the same manor for two decade, so a scribal error is not unlikely. The Ernwys who preceded the Corbets in the adjacent vills of Westbury and Oaks7 are probably also the same man, as is perhaps the Ernwy at Wrentnall8, half a mile from Oaks and three from Pontesbury. Given the comparative isolation of the Shropshire Ernwys from those in neighbouring counties, he may also be the predecessor of Picot of Sai at Brompton9 and of Reginald the sheriff at Easthope10,
1 YKS 9W54
2 ESS 20,13
3 WAR 17,8
4 SUF 6,32
5 SHR 4,4,12. 4,5,7
6 SHR 4,4,13
7 SHR 4,4,15. 4,5,4
8 SHR 4,26,3
9 SHR 4,20,1
10 SHR 4,3,11
the two remaining Ernwys in the county, ten and fifteen miles respectively from Oaks. Whether or not he held all these pre-Conquest holdings, Ernwy was more fortunate than the majority of English survivors, retaining his most valuable manor and a couple of others. They are recorded in Coel (no. 6665) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 191-92.
.............................................................................................................................................
ERNWY <OF STANTON>. Although the name is fairly common, it is likely that the Ernwys who held 'Clowne', Stanton and Ingleby among the king's thanes of Derbyshire1, and Ordsall among those in Nottinghamshire2, are the same man since the lords and their manors are of similar status and English survivors of this name are rare, the only other being a Shropshire landowner, Ernwy of Pontesbury; Ordsall is nearer to Clowne than Clowne to the other Derbyshire manors. On similar grounds, Ernwy may be the Ernwin who claimed land at Risley3, between Stanton and Clowne; the scribe confused the names more than once. Ernwy of Stanton had retained Clowne for twenty years, so he is not unlikely to be the Ernwy at Osleston in 10664 but perhaps less likely to be his other namesake in Derbyshire, who shared a waste holding at Hucklow over forty miles to the north with two other landowners5. Ernwy and Ernwin are unidentified in Coel (nos. 32503, 32515, 32484, 35661).
.............................................................................................................................................
ESBIORN. The name Esbiorn is stated or implied almost fifty times, thinly distributed among a dozen counties between Kent and Yorkshire and the lands of the king and twenty-one of his tenants-in-chief, with clusters in Kent and Lincolnshire. One Esbiorn survived among the king's thanes in Wiltshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
ESBIORN [* BICGA *]. The English magnate Esbiorn Bicga, who had jurisdictional privileges over his land and full jurisdiction in the city of Canterbury where he held eleven messuages, is presumably Esbiorn of Chelsfield, who had full jurisdiction in eastern Kent6. Chelsfield itself was held by Toki before the Conquest7; but Esbiorn Bicga did hold Keston, less than six miles away, and Dr Williams suggests it is likely he also held the preceding and very valuable manor of Cudham, where no pre-Conquest lord is named, Keston and Cudham both being subinfeudated to Gilbert Maminot, his only manors in Kent: World before Domesday, p. 48. These manors were acquired by the bishop of Bayeux, who obtained four others from Esbiorn Bicga. He also acquired Ditton from an Esbiorn8, probably Esbiorn Bicga since Ditton is a substantial manor three miles from the valuable Bicga manor of Birling.
Esbiorn Bicga also held Garrington, which the bishop of Bayeux gave to St Augustine's abbey 'in exchange for his park', and Postling, acquired by Hugh de Montfort. This was apparently granted to Hugh because it lay within his 'territory', Bishop Odo retaining the three pig pastures which lay outside. Almost all these manors were substantial, so it is not unlikely that Compton in Surrey9, the one comparable Esbiorn manor south of the Thames or, indeed, south of Leicestershire, was held by Esbiorn Bicga. He may also be the Bicga whose manor of Fetcham in Surrey was
1 DBY 17,10;22-23
2 NTT 30,56
3 DBY 16,2
4 DBY 6,63
5 DBY 7,10
6 KEN D25
7 KEN 5,23
8 KEN 5,42
9 SUS 11,36. SUR 18,1
acquired by Bishop Odo1; the scribe did occasionally use a byname in place of a forename, and this is the only occurrence of Bicga as a forename in Domesday Book. Finally, Bicga is probably the Esbiorn at Atherstone in Warwickshire2, despite its isolation, since this, too, devolved upon the bishop of Bayeux, who subinfeudated it to Corbin of Agneaux (q.v.), a tenant of his at West Peckham, seven miles from Birling.
The record of Esbiorn's jurisdictional privileges appear to suggest that he was alive in 1086, though this seems unlikely; if he did survive, he had lost all the land he held before the Conquest. It is conceivable that he is the Esbiorn who held a virgate valued at fifteen pence, at 'Frustfield' in Wiltshire3, the one surviving landowner of this name in the country; but this seems too cruel a joke by the conquerors; in the absence of links with other Esbiorns, he is here treated as another man. Esbiorn Bicga was the son of Alric Bicga and perhaps a relative of Alfred Bicga, who held Wickhambreux before the Conquest4: Robertson, Charters, pp. 188-89, 436-38; Williams, 'Lost worlds', p. 61. A list of Esbiorn's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 242-43, which does not include Compton, Fetcham, Atherstone or Cudham. Dr Clarke ranks him seventy-sixth in wealth among untitled laymen; the other four manors would place him comfortably in the top fifty. He is listed as a post-Conquest landowner in Coel (no. 143), referenced in Domesday people, p. 193, on the basis of his jurisdictional privileges, which appear to be current in 1086, though it is likely this is a scribal idiosyncrasy since Esbiorn appears to be dead, or at least disinherited, by then; the Wiltshire Esbiorn is an unidentified Sbernus in Coel (no. 17207).
.............................................................................................................................................
ESBIORN <OF CALOW>. Esbiorn, who shared a carucate at Calow among the king's thanes in Derbyshire before the Conquest5, has no links with his namesakes, the nearest of them on a waste holding some thirty-five miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
ESBIORN <OF OADBY>. As the name is uncommon, the Esbiorn who preceded Henry of Ferrers at Swepstone in Leicestershire6 may be the predecessor of Countess Judith, who 'held the whole of this land' with Earl Waltheof, apparently referring seven manors7, on six of which no pre-Conquest lords are named. One of these manors, Heather8 is a mile from Swepstone. Apart from a single manor held by Esbiorn Bicga, there are no other Esbiorns in circuit four.
.............................................................................................................................................
ESGER. Esger is a common name which occurs about 150 times; but if those identified as Esger the constable are excluded, three of the four remaining names are in East Anglia, the fourth in Yorkshire; in that sense, the name is rare. One Esger survived as a subtenant in 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
ESGER <OF COTTON>. As the name is rare, the Esger with a modest thirty-acre holding at Cotton in Suffolk acquired by Robert Malet9 may be related to either of his East Anglian namesakes, the nearest of whom is roughly thirty miles away, at Surlingham; but there are no links to confirm this.
1 SUR 5,22
2 WAR 4,2
3 WIL 67,93
4 KEN 5,124
5 DBY 17,9
6 LEC 14,23
7 LEC 40,1-7
8 LEC 40,7
9 SUF 6,217
.............................................................................................................................................
ESGER <OF OGLETHORPE>. One of the unnamed thanes at Oglethorpe in Yorkshire1 is identified as Esger in the Claims for the county2; he has no links with his namesakes elsewhere.
............................................................................................................................................. ESGER <OF RUSTON>. As the name is rare, the Esgers whose manors of Skeyton and East Ruston were acquired by Ralph Baynard and subinfeudated to Geoffrey Baynard are probably one man; the two vills are seven miles apart3. Esger's overlord at Ruston is Esger the constable. The nearest of his two East Anglian namesakes has a small holding of eight acres at Surlingham, roughly twenty-five miles away. ............................................................................................................................................. ESGER <OF SURLINGHAM>. Although the name is rare, the Esger with a tiny holding of eight acres at Surlingham in Norfolk acquired by Roger Bigot4 may be related to either of his East Anglian namesakes, roughly twenty-five miles away in one directions and thirty miles in another; but there are no links to confirm this. .............................................................................................................................................
ESGER [* THE CONSTABLE *]. Esger the constable, grandson of Tovi the proud, his predecessor as constable and on many of his manors, is well-attested in contemporary sources. He was one of the wealthiest English magnates, and played a significant role in the events of 1066. It is likely that all unidentified Esgers outside East Anglia and Yorkshire are the constable.
His byname is supplied in eight counties, in five of which he preceded Geoffrey de Mandeville, his officially designated predecessor in several entries, so he is probably the Esger whose men or manors were acquired by Geoffrey in Surrey5, Berkshire6, Hertfordshire7, Buckinghamshire8, Oxfordshire9, Cambridgeshire10, Northamptonshire11, Essex12 and Suffolk13. In Cambridgeshire, the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 26, 73) identifies him on two further manors14. With a single exception, these are the only unidentified Esgers in those counties; the exception, at Beauchamps in Hertfordshire15, being almost certainly the constable since the manor is one of seven acquired from an Esger by Count Eustace of Boulogne, on six of which Esger's title is recorded. In Oxfordshire, it is likely that Esger preceded Geoffrey on his entire fief, the pre-Conquest lord of the first two manors16 being unnamed; one of these, Kingham, seven miles south of Esger's Warwickshire manor of Long Compton and the most valuable of the three, was of comparable status to a dozen of the wealthiest Geoffrey obtained from the constable.
1 YKS 25W29
2 YKS CW2
3 NFK 31,2;5
4 NFK 9,26
5 SUR 25,1;3
6 BRK 38,3;5-6
7 HRT 33,3;6-7;10;12;16;20
8 BUK 21,7
9 OXF 39,3
10 CAM 22,3-4;9-10
11 NTH 45,1-9
12 ESS 30,2;5;16;22-25;27;31-33;35-36;38-40;42-43;45;48-49;51. 90,28
13 SUF 32,1;3-5;8;19
14 CAM 22,1. 32,16
15 HRT 17,10
16 OXF 39,1-2
Esger the constable may be the same man as Esger the cramped, whose manors in the south-western counties were acquired by Walter of Douai: Williams, World before Domesday, pp. 28-32, 35, 164-65 note 61. Esger is given his distinctive byname (contractus) in Exon.1, the Carmen de Hastingae proelio (pp. 40-41) using the same epithet to describe Esger the constable in 1066. Although the constable held nothing in the south-west under that byname, his grandfather Tovi the proud was a significant landowner in the area according to a late but credible source, the Waltham chronicle (pp. 3-4, 12-13, 18-19, 24-25, 34-35), the house-chronicle of Tovi's family, which credited him with the foundation of the abbey. Under his byname 'cramped', Esger held the royal manors of Ermington and Blackawton in Devon2, which Domesday reveals to have been exchanged for Bampton, held by Walter of Douai in 1086. Walter acquired the remaining manors of Esger in Devon3 and the single manor held by Esger in Somerset4, all substantial properties. The one remaining Esger in the south-western counties, at Calstock in Cornwall5, may also be the constable since this too was valuable, among the most substantial in the county.
There is one puzzle concerning Esger's status as predecessor of Geoffrey de Mandeville. At Sawbridgeworth in Hertfordshire, his most valuable manor, an Esger is named as a subtenant in 1086. As Esgers who are not the constable are otherwise unknown outside Yorkshire and East Anglia, a second Esger on Geoffrey's fief and the constable's manor seems highly improbable, though 'Esger's woman' - presumed to be the constable's widow - is recorded in the county6. The date of the constable's death appears to be unknown; he may, of course, have died during the Survey, which could reconcile these apparent discrepancies. If he was indeed Geoffrey's tenant at Sawbridgeworth on the eve of Domesday, then his was a calamitous decline in fortune, leaving him with less than 1% of his pre-Conquest estate; it was also a cruel joke to allow him only a fragment of his most valuable single manor. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 243-49, which does not include Hinton in Northamptonshire, the south-western manors of Esger the cramped, or the holdings of his men at Croydon, Fulbourn and Haslingfield in Cambridgeshire, the latter pair recorded in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis, and at Arkesden in Essex and Belstead in Suffolk. Dr Clarke ranks Esger second in wealth among untitled laymen, ninth among the nobility; the addition of the manors of Esger the cramped would raise him one place among the nobility. The tenant at Sawbridgeworth is unidentified in Coel (no. 7233).
.............................................................................................................................................
ESKIL <OF NUTHALL>. The Eskils who held Nuthall, Elkesley and 'North Morton' among the king's thanes of Nottinghamshire in 10667 may be one man. This is probably the case with Elkesley and 'Morton', which are close to each other and were both acquired by Ernwin the priest (q.v.). Nuthall is some forty miles to the south; but the status and scale of the three manors is similar and there are no other Eskils in the county, or in neighbouring Derbyshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
ESKIL [* OF SEACOURT *]. Eskil, who held the substantial manors of Seacourt, Bayworth, Marcham and Fawler (alias Sparsholt) in Berkshire from Abingdon abbey, is named Eskil of Seacourt in the Abingdon chronicle, where these manors are attributed to him8: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 52-55, 322-23. He incurred the wrath of William Rufus and died in prison,
1 DEV 1,23-24
2 DEV 1,23-24
3 DEV 23,15-16;22-24;26-27
4 SOM 24,1
5 CON 5,2,12
6 HRT 1,6
7 NTT 30,32;41-42
8 BRK 7,2;10;17;38
Rufus confiscating Fawler and threatening to seize his other manors until pacified by the abbot with a large bribe. Eskil's widow became one of Henry I's many mistresses, recovering Bayworth for herself and Seacourt and Marcham for her son, William: ibid, ii. 52-55, 182-87. Eskil is one of a handful of tenants of this name, the nearest at Eastwell in Leicestershire1. Two other Eskils in Berkshire are pre-Conquest landowners, apparently unrelated. Eskil's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 1578) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 152.
.............................................................................................................................................
ESKIL [* OF WARE *]. Al Eskils in Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire are probably one man, the royal thane Eskil of Ware. He is so-named on seven manors in Hertfordshire, where he or his men were succeeded by the bishop of London, Ralph of Tosny, Peter of Valognes, Hardwin of Scales, and Hugh of Grandmesnil at Ware itself2, by far his most valuable manor and the only demesne manor among the seven. None of these tenants-in-chief were preceded by an Eskil elsewhere.
Hugh of Grandmesnil acquired Ware by exchange with Ralph Tallboys, the predecessor of Hugh of Beauchamp (q.v.), who probably married his daughter and heiress, Azelina. Between them, Azelina3 and Hugh acquired all the manors of an Eskil in Bedfordshire, and all but two of those of his men4. One of these two, at Easton5, was claimed by Hugh as a dependency of his manor of Colmworth, while the other, at Holme6, lay in a vill where Eskil was lord of another man. In addition, Hugh probably acquired Haynes and Colmworth7 from Eskil. Both are attributed by the scribe to an Aki; but as two of the dependencies of Colmworth name Eskil as the lord, it is likely that Aki is a scribal error, perhaps at Haynes, too, as suggested by J.H. Round: 'Domesday survey of Bedfordshire', p. 200 note. Like Eskil, this Aki was a royal thane.
Both unidentified Eskils in Hertfordshire are probably Eskil of Ware, who had several other manors - including Ware - in the county. Like him, the Eskil at Knebworth8 is a royal thane, and Knebworth a substantial manor. The Freemen at Stanstead Abbots9, three miles from Ware, are likely to be his also, there being no other Eskils with demesne land in the county. Eskil's manors and men form a distinctive cluster, some distance from similar clusters in Berkshire and Northamptonshire, with which they have no apparent links. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 251-52, which does not include the lands of his men at Holme and Easton in Bedfordshire; or his demesne holdings in Haynes, Bletsoe, Colmworth, Cople, Battlesden or Hockliffe in Bedfordshire, or Knebworth in Hertfordshire. Dr Clarke suggests that the unnamed overlords from whom Hugh acquired many of his numerous Freemen in Bedfordshire may be Eskil. While possible, and likely in some cases, Hugh may well have used his powers as sheriff of the county to absorb them, whoever their lords, as sheriffs often did. Dr Clarke ranks Eskil thirty-second in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors would place him in the top two dozen.
.............................................................................................................................................
"ESTAN". The name Estan occurs fifteen times, thinly distributed among eleven counties between Kent and Yorkshire and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, all borne by pre-Conquest landowners. It is probably the same name as Edstan, a form which occurs five times, once on the Honour of William son of Ansculf, who numbered an Estan among his predecessors in the same
1 LEC 42,7
2 HRT 26,1
3 BDF 55,1-2;9-10
4 BDF 23,1-3;5-7;11-13;22;24;27;33;42;44;52
5 BDF 17,4
6 BDF 18,5
7 BDF 23,15;38
8 HRT 31,1
9 HRT 25,2
county. It is perhaps also the same name as the more familiar Aethelstan (Adstan, Adestan), which occurs on several Honours that acquired lands from an Estan. Bishop Estan at Priors Frome in Herefordshire1 is Bishop Aethelstan of Hereford (circa 1016-1056). On occasions, Estan appears to be equivalent to the much more common Alstan (Alestan, Alstan): von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 152-53, 182, 188, 237.
.............................................................................................................................................
"ESTAN" <OF BONCHURCH>. It is conceivable that Estan, whose modest holding at Bonchurch on the Isle of Wight2 was acquired by William son of Azur, is Estan of Hannington, the one other Estan (or Aethelstan or Edstan) in Hampshire; but there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
"ESTAN" <OF FARNINGHAM>. The Estans whose manors of Farningham in Kent3 and Glentworth in Lincolnshire4 were acquired by the bishop of Bayeux are probably one man. Both manors are fairly substantial, and both were subinfeudated to Wadard of Cogges (q.v.). Estan probably held the jurisdiction in Glentham attached to Glentworth5, though the form of his name there - Adestan - is normally rendered Aethelstan; the two names, however, may be interchangeable, as they appear to be here. Estan is probably also Eustan - a unique form - the bishop's predecessor at Maplescombe, two miles from Farningham6. He may also be the overlord at Brickhill in Buckinghamshire, acquired by Bishop Odo7. The holding is said to be dependant on Estan's manor of Brickhill, that is Great Brickhill, a valuable manor recorded as held by Earl Tosti8; Estan was either the earl's unnamed 'man' there or was granted the manor after Tosti's fall. Either way, Estan had a local presence, so he may be the other Estan in Buckinghamshire, the predecessor of William son of Ansculf at Tyringham9, thirteen miles from Brickhill. Roughly midway between the two vills lay Woughton on the Green, where Leofwin son of Estan was an overlord10, the Estan of Brickhill and Tyringham perhaps being his father. Woughton was acquired by Odo's half-brother, the Count of Mortain, who was preceded by the one other Estan in the Midlands, at Weedon in Northamptonshire11.
Another link tends to confirm the identity of the predecessors of Bishop Odo and William son of Ansculf. William acquired Chicheley12 from an Edestanus, a rare name likely to be a variant of Estan; his overlord at Chicheley is the magnate Alnoth the Kentishman, most of whose lands were acquired Bishop Odo. Less certainly, it is possible that the two other Edstans in Domesday Book are the same man, though there are no specific links to confirm this. One had half a messuage in Lincoln13, acquired by the abbey of Ely which had no other interest in the county but was an important landowner in Norfolk, where Edstan's other holding lay: two churches and a large amount of land in Norwich14. Count Alan of Brittany also acquired a substantial manor in the county, at Saxthorpe, from a man of Earl Harold who is named Estan in its dependency and Adstan
1 HEF 13,1
2 HAM IoW7,1
3 KEN 5,13
4 LIN 4,7
5 LIN 4,9
6 KEN 5,5
7 BUK 4,43
8 BUK 13,4
9 BUK 17,22
10 BUK 12,31
11 NTH 18,29
12 BUK 17,25
13 LIN C24
14 NFK 1,61
at Saxthorpe itself1, another example of the equivalence of Estan and Aethelstan. Bishop Odo, too, had another Adstan among his predecessors in the region, on the valuable manor of Thorrington in Essex2. In these cases at least it appears that Estan, Edstan and Adstan are the same name, borne by one man; there no others in Buckinghamshire, Essex or Norfolk. It is not unlikely, therefore, that the Count's tenant, Adestanus, at Soham in Cambridgeshire3, the only Estan, Edstan or Adstan in the county in Domesday Book and the only survivor of any of these name-forms in the country. If so, Estan/Edstan/Aethelstan survived on a fragment of his once extensive estate. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 1811). In the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 7), Adestanus appears as Alstanus, while a juror in Radfield Hundred - conceivably the same man - is variously recorded in the satellite texts as Adestan, Aethelstan and Alestanus (ibid., pp. 17-18, 98).
.............................................................................................................................................
"ESTAN" <OF HANNINGTON>. It is conceivable that the Estan who had a small holding at Hannington among the king's servants in north Hampshire4 is Estan of Bonchurch, on the Isle of Wight, the one other Estan (or Aethelstan or Edstan) in Hampshire; but there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
"ESTAN" <OF LOXLEY>. Estan, whose respectable manor of Loxley in Warwickshire was acquired by the Count of Meulan5, has no links with his namesakes. There are no other Estans, Edstans or Aethelstans in the county or on the Count's Honour. Estan of Farningham, is the one landowner of these name-forms in any of the adjacent counties.
.............................................................................................................................................
"ESTAN" <OF OTTERHAMPTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Estans who held Tuxwell, Otterhampton and Radlet in Somerset are probably one man. Two of the manors were acquired by Alfred 'of Spain'6, the third lying in a neighbouring vill7. It is not unlikely he is also the Aethelstan at Lexworthy8, four miles from Tuxwell, these names being treated as equivalents on other Honours and in other sources. There are no other Estans, Edstans or Aethelstans Somerset or adjacent counties.
.............................................................................................................................................
"ESTAN" <OF WYSALL>. The Estans whose manors at Wysall in Nottinghamshire9 and Wickersley in Yorkshire10 devolved upon Roger of Bully may be the same man, despite the distance separating them - almost fifty miles - Roger being unlikely to have two predecessors with this uncommon name. It is also likely, even probable, that Estan is the same man as Aethelstan, predecessor of Roger at Walkeringham in Nottinghamshire11. The two names are treated as equivalents on some other Honours, and the three Nottinghamshire manors are subinfeudated to one tenant, Roger of Louvetot. Roger's predecessor is perhaps the one other Aethelstan in
1 NFK 4,22;35
2 ESS 18,43
3 CAM 14,73
4 HAM 69,44
5 WAR 16,61
6 SOM 35,6-7
7 SOM 22,9
8 SOM 21,76
9 NTT 9,90-91
10 YKS 10W6
11 NTT 9,120
Nottinghamshire, the predecessor of Gilbert Tison in the lost vill of Alwoldestorp1. Gilbert also succeeded an Aethelstan at Swinton - six miles from Roger's manor of Wickersley - and Beamsley in Yorkshire2, very likely this man too, there being no other Aethelstans in the county.
.............................................................................................................................................
EUDO. Although Eudo is a fairly common name, it is rare in the sense that it was borne by few individuals, the great majority of Eudos being named in the text as one four landowners, two of them tenants-in-chief, another dead before 1086, and a fourth identifiable with reasonable confidence with the aid of a satellite text, leaving only three others to be identified. No Eudo held land before the Conquest.
.............................................................................................................................................
EUDO <OF BARNSLEY>. Eudo, who held seven virgates from the Church of Worcester at Barnsley in Worcestershire3, is the only Eudo in the west of England. It seems unlikely he is the same man as any of his namesakes, with none of whom he has any associations. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 29437).
.............................................................................................................................................
EUDO <OF FOLKESTONE>. Eudo, who held a half-sulung as a subtenant of the huge manor of Folkestone4, is the only unidentified Eudo south of the Thames. It is conceivable that he is Eudo the steward, who held manors in Berkshire and Hampshire, or Eudo son of Spirewic, who may have held a manor in Lincolnshire from Odo of Bayeux, the tenant-in-chief at Folkestone; but his manor is modest and the associations very slight. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 7779).
.............................................................................................................................................
EUDO [* OF MUMBY *]. Eudo, who held Mumby and its dependencies in Lincolnshire from Count Alan of Brittany5, is named Eudo of Mumby in the Lindsey Survey (12/7. 15/6). As his name is rare, he is very probably the Count's tenant elsewhere on his fief6, though one of the manors is held by a Wigot in the Survey, and another appears to be in demesne (17/4. 18,1). Eudo had, however, acquired land in Thorpe St Peter, and his descendants had other land in the county, so some shuffling of his tenancies occurred: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 269-61. It is improbable that the Count had two Eudos among his tenants when the only others in the county - or, indeed, in northern England - may be identified as one other man, Eudo son of Spirewic; the Count had none elsewhere on his Honour. Eudo's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 3005) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 195, together with East Keal7, where Eudo is more probably the son of Spirewic.
.............................................................................................................................................
EUDO <OF QUAINTON>. Eudo, tenant of Hascoit Musard on the fairly substantial manor of Quainton in Buckinghamshire8, Hascoit's entire fief in the county, has no links with his namesakes. The manor was held by the Neyrnut family in the thirteenth century: VCH Buckinghamshire, iv. 95. Eudo's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1654) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 195.
1 NTT 18,6
2 YKS 21W2;4
3 WOR 3,4
4 KEN 5,128
5 LIN 12,93;95-96
6 LIN 12,40;80-82;85-86
7 LIN 3,25
8 BUK 49,1
.............................................................................................................................................
EUDO [* SON OF CLAMAHOC *]. Eudo son of Clamahoc, or Eudo Clamahoc1, is named on five manors in Norfolk, one of which - Fransham - he is said to have held 'as long as he lived'2. On all five he was succeeded by Ralph of Beaufour, which almost certainly identifies him as the intermediate landowner on six other manors on Ralph's fief3. Only one other Eudo is recorded as an intermediate landowner in Domesday Book, also in Norfolk4, where he is described as a man of Earl Ralph Wader, probably the same man as Ralph's predecessor, who appears to be a Breton from the same region of Brittany as other followers of Ralph Wader, and so possibly implicated in his rebellion: Marten, 'Rebellion of 1075', pp. 176, 178. As an intermediate landowner, his manors are not listed in Coel, Domesday people or the Statistics database.
.............................................................................................................................................
EUDO [* SON OF SPIREWIC *]. Eudo, who claimed land at Tattershall Thorpe in Lincolnshire from the bishop of Durham5, is identified as the son of Spirewic on his demesne manors in the vill6, where it is explained that he held two-thirds of the vill, the bishop the other third. The shares originated in the division of the vill - described elsewhere in the Claims7 - between three brothers, one of whom, Sighvatr, was the predecessor of Eudo at East Keal, which indicates Spirewic's son is the unidentified Eudo who claimed part of the bishop of Durham's manor there8. As the name is rare, it is likely that Eudo is also tenant of the bishop of Bayeux on another manor in Tattershall Thorpe9. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 502) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 195, apart from the entry for East Keal, assigned to Eudo of Mumby.
.............................................................................................................................................
EUDO [* THE STEWARD *]. The Eudos who had houses and a garden in Hertford10, claimed land at Thurleigh in Bedfordshire11, and held a disputed tenancy from the abbey of Ely at Rettendon in Essex12, are probably Eudo the steward, a tenant-in-chief in those counties and in seven others. In Hertford, the houses and garden were held from him by Humphrey of Anneville (q.v.), his tenant in the county; and at Rettendon Eudo is shown to be the steward by a fuller description of the manor, including the interest of Ely abbey, on his own fief13. His men at Thurleigh claimed the manor 'through their lord's predecessor' - Wulfgeat, a royal thane - 'all of whose lands King William bestowed upon him'. No Eudo had a predecessor named Wulfgeat; but Eudo the steward acquired all the lands of Wulfmer of Eaton (q.v.), so Wulfgeat is probably a scribal error for Wulfmer. On Eudo's Honour, see Farrer, Honors, iii. 164-295; Lennard, Rural England, pp.99-104. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 279) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 194, with the addition of a tenancy at Micheldever in Hampshire14, here attributed to Odo of Winchester.
1 NFK 1,218. 66,94
2 NFK 22,11
3 NFK 20,1;7;10;31-32. 66,90
4 NFK 1,7
5 LIN 3,15. CS22
6 LIN 29,8;28
7 LIN CS21
8 LIN 3,25
9 LIN 4,55
10 HRT B5
11 BDF 28,1
12 ESS 10,3
13 ESS 25,20
14 HAM 6,16
.............................................................................................................................................
EUSTACE. Although the name Eustace occurs several hundred times, it is rare in the sense that it was borne by only a handful of individuals. Most Eustaces are named in the text as Count Eustace of Boulogne, Eustace the cleric1, or Eustace the sheriff, alias Eustace of Huntingdon. With one exception, the remainder are probably the Count or the sheriff.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* COUNT *] EUSTACE [* OF BOULOGNE *]. Count E, named on several royal manors and one belonging to of St Ouen in Essex, can only be Count Eustace of Boulogne2; on four of them he is named in relation to his predecessor, Engelric the priest (q.v.). He is very probably also the Eustace whose unnamed predecessor was the lord of free men in Finborough3, Finborough being a manor Count Eustace acquired from Engelric the priest4. The Count's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 261) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 196-97.
.............................................................................................................................................
EUSTACE [* OF TORCY *]. Eustace, who held a hide from William of Warenne in Falmer Hundred in Sussex5, has been tentatively identified as Eustace of Torcy, from Torcy in Upper Normandy (Seine-Maritime: arrondissement Dieppe), a benefactor of Lewes priory, which held land in Falmer Hundred. As unidentified Eustaces are rare, he may be Eustace the cleric, identified as a canon of St Mary's of Hastings, who held from another tenant-in-chief at Ratton, but there are no links to confirm this; neither descent has been traced. Their tenancies are recorded in Coel, assigned to different individuals (nos. 209, 948), referenced in Domesday people, pp. 196, 197.
.............................................................................................................................................
EUSTACE [* THE SHERIFF *]. Apart from the fief of Count Eustace, it is probable that all Eustaces in Huntingdonshire and Northamptonshire are Eustace the sheriff, alias Eustace of Huntingdon; these are the only counties where unidentified men of this name occur in any numbers. In Huntingdon, Eustace is named in several vills where the sheriff held in chief6; where he appears to be exploiting the powers of his office7; or where alleged seizures or disputed titles are involved8, a common pattern of behaviour by sheriffs within their sheriffdoms, Eustace being 'a shocking oppressor, robbing ... abbeys, churches, and private persons': Round, 'Domesday survey of Northamptonshire', p. 292. At Molesworth9, he was a tenant of Countess Judith, a manor acquired from Northmann, from whom the sheriff obtained two of his Northamptonshire manors10, so he may be the Eustace who held Rushton from the Countess11. In Northamptonshire, five of the six Eustaces had manors in vills in which the sheriff held in chief12, the sixth, a claimant at Knuston13, being probably the sheriff in default of another Eustace with land in the county. On three of the manors held from Peterborough abbey - Polebrook, Clopton and Catworth - the identity of Eustace
1 SUS 9,72
2 ESS 1,3;24;27-28. 17,2
3 SUF 29,1. 76,16
4 SUF 5,4
5 SUS 12,17
6 HUN 5,2. 13,3-4. 20,3
7 HUN B1;10;12-13
8 HUN 2,2. 6,3;7-8. D2;19;25
9 HUN 20,4
10 NTH 55,1-2
11 NTH 56,46
12 NTH 6a,13;17;24;26. 35,15
13 NTH 48,12
is confirmed by their descent: King, Peterborough abbey, p. 47. The sheriff's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 660) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 197.
.............................................................................................................................................
EVERARD. The name Everard occurs approximately sixteen times - there some uncertain cases - in Domesday Book, distributed among seven counties and the lands of the king and nine of his tenants-in-chief, with clusters in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, one name occurring in 1066.
.............................................................................................................................................
EVERARD [* OF LEATHLEY *]. All Everards in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire in 1086 are probably one man, tenant or man of William of Percy on all these manors1 and ancestor of the family which took its name from his manor of Leathley in Yorkshire (13W26). The Lincolnshire and Yorkshire manors descended to different families, though not all the links in the chain of descent can be reconstructed: Early Yorkshire charters, xi. 137-39, 203-205. Despite this, it is improbable that Percy had two tenants named Everard when all other tenants-in-chief north of the Wash could not muster one between them. Everard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3352) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 182-83.
.............................................................................................................................................
EVERARD <OF ST IVES>. Everard, who held a subtenancy from the abbey of Ramsey in St Ives in Huntingdonshire2, later in the hands of the Mowin family, has no links with other Everards: VCH Huntingdonshire ii, 181-82. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 32584).
.............................................................................................................................................
EVERARD <OF SPRIDLINGTON>. The Everard at Spridlington3 is the only pre-Conquest Everard in Domesday Book. The native origin of the tenant-in-chief, Kolsveinn of Lincoln, and the fact that Everard's two brothers shared the manor with him, suggests that Everard is a native landowner though there is some doubt as to the Old English derivation of his name: Forssner, Continental-Germanic personal names, pp. 63-64. Spridlington is only ten miles from one of the holdings of Everard of Leathley, tenant of William of Percy, and lies between this and the remainder of the Leathley manors in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. In the Lindsey Survey, Spridlington and the Percy manor of Holtham are recorded as demesnes of the tenants-in-chief. In view of this and the comparative rarity of the name, this is either a curious coincidence or the two Everards are the same individual, probably an English survivor. There are problems with either conclusion, so Everard of Spridlington is here treated as a separate individual.
.............................................................................................................................................
EVERARD [!4! SON OF BRIAN !4!]. The Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 9-10) identifies the Everard at Ashley and Saxon Street in Cambridgeshire4 as the son of Brian and a juror in Cheveley Hundred. Both manors were held from Aubrey de Vere and later descended to the Lavenham and Beauchamp families, who appear to have had no connection with any of Everard's namesakes: VCH Cambridgeshire, x. 33-34, 86-90. Brian is Brian of Scales, a relative of Hardwin of Scales, probably from Saint-Germain-en-Coglès in Brittany (Ille-et-Vilaine: arrondissement Fougères). Everard's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 947) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 195-96.
1 LIN 22,35-36. YKS 1W53. 13W16;26;35. SW,Bu49
2 HUN 6,7
3 LIN 26,25
4 CAM 29,1-2
.............................................................................................................................................
EVERWIN <OF TEW>. Everwin, tenant of Robert of Stafford at Duns Tew in Oxfordshire, is almost certainly the Everwin who held the largest holding in that vill from Robert d'Oilly1; there is only one other Everwin in Domesday Book, a burgess in Norwich2. Everwin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 11767) but not apparently in Domesday people.
.............................................................................................................................................
FALC <OF BRADFIELD>. Falc, who held a half-carucate from the abbey of St Edmunds at Bradfield in Suffolk is almost certainly the Falc who survived for two decades on eight acres held from the abbey of Ely in Rattlesden, where he is described as a man of St Edmund's3. As is often the case, Little Domesday is unclear as to the date of Falc's holding at Bradfield but the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin confirms his tenancy in 1086; the Rattlesden holding is not recorded there: Feudal documents, pp. 19-20, 34. He is the only Falc in Domesday Book. The tenant at Bradfield is unidentified in Coel (no. 12810), and the holding at Rattlesden assigned to the abbey's demesne.
.............................................................................................................................................
FATHERLING [* FATHER OF ROALD *]. The name Fatherling occurs five times in Domesday, all five in Hampshire, in a cluster north of Winchester. Four are tenants of Hugh of Port4, probably to be identified with the father of Roald named in the Winton Domesday (pp. 39, 103, 170), who may be the Roald (q.v.) - another rare name - who held Lomer, south-east of the city, from St Peter's of Winchester. The fifth Fatherling, a tenant of William Bellett at Woodcott5, is probably also Roald's father. Woodcott is two miles - one across the fields - from his manor of Litchfield, and he acquired it from William 'with his daughter'. Fatherling's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 935) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 197-98.
.............................................................................................................................................
FATHIR <OF BANHAM>. The five Fathirs in Domesday Book may be one man, the royal thane whose substantial manor of Great Bircham in Norfolk was acquired by Ralph of Beaufour, who succeeded Fathir on a comparable manor at Lexham, thirteen miles south of Bircham6. Another tenant-in-chief, William of Ecouis, acquired the two comparable manors of Wilby and Banham7, between twenty-five and thirty-five miles north of Bircham. Distribution, manorial status, and the rarity of the name make it improbable that two Fathirs are involved. Possibly, though less certainly, he held the seven acres at Cotton in Suffolk acquired by Richard son of Gilbert8, seventeen miles south of Wilby.
.............................................................................................................................................
FIN. The forename Fin occurs twenty times, distributed among three counties and the lands of four tenants-in-chief, all in 1066; nineteen, possibly all twenty, are probably the same man.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 OXF 27,5. 28,29
2 NFK 1,61
3 SUF 14,59. 21,2
4 HAM 23,22-24;68
5 HAM 52,1
6 NFK 20,2;8
7 NFK 19,11;13
8 SUF 25,24
FIN <OF BARNETBY>. As the name is rare, the Fin whose modest manor in Barnetby-le-Wold in Lincolnshire was acquired by Erneis of Buron1 might be Fin the Dane, the one other landowner of this name in Domesday Book; but there are no links to confirm an identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
FIN [* THE DANE *]. The Fins on twelve of the manors of Richard son of Count Gilbert in Suffolk2 are almost certainly Fin the Dane, so-named on two of Richard's manors in Essex3. On the Suffolk fief, Fin is twice described as Richard's predecessor, and Fin's Honour, or Holding, is mentioned on several other manors. His wife, Wulfeva (q.v.), held two manors from Richard in Cambridgeshire, and Fin himself was a minor landowner in Buckinghamshire before the Conquest4. The other two Fins in Suffolk are probably also the Dane, one, at Hemingstone5, described as Richard's predecessor; the other, sitting in judgement with Ralph Tallboys, can scarcely be other than a substantial landowner6. The one other Fin in Domesday, at Barnetby-le-Wold in Lincolnshire7, may be the same man, but there are no links to warrant an identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
FORNE. Forne is a rare name which occurs once in Gloucestershire and fourteen times in Yorkshire, possibly borne by two men.
.............................................................................................................................................
FORNE <OF LONGHOPE>. The thane Forne, who shared the substantial manor of Longhope in Gloucestershire acquired by William son of Baderon8, is unlikely to be the same man as his Yorkshire namesake whose manors are more than 150 miles away and without apparent links.
.............................................................................................................................................
FORNE [* SON OF SIGULF *]. Forne, who held Nunburnholme among the king's thanes in Yorkshire9, is identified as the son of Sigulf in charters of Henry I: Early Yorkshire charters, ii. 505-509. He is the only survivor of this name, and no Sigulfs are recorded in Domesday Book. As his name is rare, it is possible that all or most of the remaining Fornes in Yorkshire before the Conquest are Sigulf's son. Cleaving Grange, without a tenant in 108610, is two miles from Nunburnholme; and the cluster of manors around Skirpenbeck acquired by Odo the bowman - probably therefore held by one man - is roughly ten miles away11. They include messuages in York; and Scoreby Manor12, acquired from Forne by William of Percy, lies between York and Skirpenbeck and York and Nunburnholme. The other three manors - Anlaby, Kirkby Wharfe and Sproatley13 - are in the same general area; Kirkby, the one vill outside the East Riding, is fourteen miles from York. The concentration of all but one of the Domesday Fornes in this limited area - the Gloucestershire Forne is probably another man - suggests that most are one man, if not Sigulf's son. The objection to him is that that Forne - who prospered under Henry I, his daughter Edith becoming
1 LIN 34,4
2 SUF 25,19;51-53;56-57;59;61;63;72;75;77
3 ESS 23,38;43
4 BUK 19,5. 57,16
5 SUF 8,59
6 SUF 35,3
7 LIN 34,4
8 GLS 32,7
9 YKS 29E4
10 YKS 1E4
11 YKS C17. 26E1-2;4;8-10;12
12 YKS 13E5
13 YKS 1E1. 9W30. 14E52
one of the king's mistresses and subsequently wife of Robert II d'Oilly - is known to have died in the financial year 1130, which would make him very old if he were a landowner in 1066: Early Yorkshire charters, ii. 505-509. There are, however, other Domesday landowners who appear to have lived that long, Frawin of Cornwall, Harding son of Alnoth and Roger of Beaumont among them. Forne may have left his mark on the landscape, at the lost vills of Fornetorp, in the North and East Ridings, the last of which must be close to his manor at Swaythorpe1. Forne's tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 4687) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 199.
............................................................................................................................................. FRANI. Frani is a not uncommon name which occurs twenty-eight times, distributed among ten counties between Sussex and Yorkshire and the lands of the king and fourteen of his tenants-in-chief, with small clusters in Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire. Survivors held two manors in 1086. ............................................................................................................................................. FRANI <OF ASHLEY>. Frani, whose modest manor at Ashley in Northamptonshire was acquired by Robert of Tosny2, may be the father of the English magnate, Oswulf son of Frani (q.v.), a significant predecessor of Robert of Tosny; two of Oswulf's manors acquired by Robert - Stoke Albany and Brampton Ash - are two miles from Ashley. As Frani is not a common name, it is not unlikely he is one of only two survivors of this name, a tenant of Robert of Bucy at Slawston, three miles from Ashley, just across the border in Leicestershire3. He may also be the one other Frani in either county, at Horton in Northamptonshire, acquired by the bishop of Coutances4; Oswulf had manors in Bedfordshire, a few miles to the east. Interestingly, a Frani of Rockingham granted land at East Langton to Peterborough abbey towards the end of the tenth century: Early charters of eastern England, p. 244. Ashley lies midway between East Langton and Rockingham, roughly five miles from either, so Frani may be an ancestor of the Domesday lord; Rockingham, where the Conqueror was to build a castle, suggests a once-important lordship. ............................................................................................................................................. FRANI [* SON OF ERNGEAT *]. As Frani is not a common name, the two Franis in Worcestershire may be the same man, the name occurring only once more in the five surrounding counties. Frani held part of the royal manor of Bromsgrove as a thane of Earl Edwin5 and Rous Lench from the bishopric of Worcester6, characteristics which suggest he is a son of Erngeat son of Grim (q.v.), another a thane of Earl Edwin holding part of Bromsgrove, accused by Hemming of withholding two manors from the Church of Worcester which were in the hands Alwold (q.v.), a third thane of Earl Edwin at Bromsgrove and probably another son of Erngeat: Williams, 'Introduction to the Worcestershire Domesday, p. 22; Baxter, Earls of Mercia, pp. 251-52. ............................................................................................................................................. FRANK. Frank is a rare name which occurs eight times, distributed among five counties and the lands of three tenants-in-chief, all landowners in 1086. .............................................................................................................................................
1 YKS 1E34-35. 29E9
2 NTH 26,10
3 LEC 17,20
4 NTH 4,28
5 WOR 1,1c
6 WOR 2,18
FRANK [* OF FALCONBERG *]. As the name is rare, the Franks who held four manors in Yorkshire1 and two in East Anglia2 from Drogo of la Beuvrière are very probably Frank of Falconberg, Drogo's tenant at Rise, named in the chronicle of Meaux abbey: Chronicon monasterii de Melsa, i. 78-79. He was probably from Fauquembergues in Nord (Pas-de-Calais: arrondissement Saint-Omer). His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 938) and referenced in Domesday people, 199, with the addition of Thurborough in Devon. ............................................................................................................................................. FRANK <OF LYDBURY>. Frank, who shared part of the episcopal manor of Lydbury in Shropshire and its church3 with William the cleric4, has no links with other Franks. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 30601). .............................................................................................................................................
FRANK <OF THUBOROUGH>. Dr Keats Rohan identifies the tenant of Robert of Aumale at Thurborough in Devon5, as Frank of Falconberg, tenant of Drogo of la Beuvrière in Yorkshire and East Anglia. The grounds for doing so are not apparent. Drogo was succeeded by Count Stephen of Aumale; but the Aumale families of Devon and Yorkshire are unrelated and the Aumale lords of Holderness post-date Domesday. Frank's manor of Thurborough is recorded with those of Frank of Falconberg in Coel (no. 938) and referenced in Domesday people, 199.
............................................................................................................................................. FRAWIN. Frawin is a rare name which occurs six times in Domesday Book and once in Exon., distributed among five counties between Sussex and Devon; a Frawin of Kirtling is named as a juror in Cambridgeshire, and Frawins survived on two manors in the south-west. ............................................................................................................................................. FRAWIN [* OF CORNWALL *]. As the name is rare, the Frawin who held Tregony in Cornwall from the Count of Mortain6 is probably the Frawin who, according to Exon., preceded the Count on part of the manor of Hele in Devon7: Devonshire Domesday, i. 340-43. He may also be the Frawin at Alton in Wiltshire8, the one other survivor, and, less certainly, the Frawin at Bridgerule, Ingsdon and Leonard in 10669, which lie between the Cornish and Wiltshire manors. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he is Frawin of Cornwall, named in the Pipe Roll of 1130 as paying £50 for an old debt and 300 gold marks to recover his land. If so, he lived to a ripe old age if he held land before the Conquest. Other Domesday landowners, however, have claims to such longevity, Forne son of Sigulf, Harding son of Alnoth and Roger of Beaumont among them. The huge fine raises the possibility that he may be the one other landowner of this name, at Barlavington in Sussex10, the most valuable of the manors held by a Frawin. The tenancies in Cornwall and Wiltshire are recorded separately in Coel (nos. 1676, 1746) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 199, with the comment that they may belong to the same man. .............................................................................................................................................
1 YKS 14E33;37;47;51
2 NFK 8,137. SUF 48,1
3 SHR 2,1
4 SHR 2,1
5 DEV 28,4
6 CON 5,24,21
7 DEV 15,47
8 WIL 68,18
9 DEV 35,2. 43,5. 51,14
10 SUS 11,23
FREDEGIS. Fredegis is a fairly rare name which occurs fourteen times, distributed among four counties and the lands of six tenants-in-chief, with clusters in Northamptonshire and Nottinghamshire. Four manors were held by survivors
.............................................................................................................................................
FREDEGIS [* FATHER OF GODRIC *]. Fredegis, whose manor of Costock1 in Nottinghamshire was acquired by William Peverel, is identified as the father of Godric in a royal grant to the monks of Durham: Bates, Regesta, no. 116, p. 409. As his name is rare, he is probably the Fredegis who preceded Peverel at Rempstone and Radcliffe-on-Trent in the county2 and at Empingham in Northamptonshire3 and was William's tenant at Radcliffe and Tithby4. The Fredegis at 'Warby', a few miles from Radcliffe, and at Sibthorpe, ten miles to the north, may be the same man for similar reasons5. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he is also the one other survivor of this name in Domesday Book, at 'Houghton' (in Grantham) in Lincolnshire6, some twenty miles to the east. He is possibly the same man as Fredegis of Preston though there are no links to confirm this. His tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 3719) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 199.
.............................................................................................................................................
FREDEGIS <OF PRESTON>. As the name is rare, the Fredegis whose five manors in Northamptonshire were acquired by the Count of Mortain are very probably one man7. It is possible that he is the same man as the father of Godric, who held the one other manor in the county and several elsewhere; but as the manors of that Fredegis are without apparent links, some distance to the north, and include manors held in both 1066 and 1086, Fredegis of Preston is here treated as another man. He is unlikely to be the one other Fredegis in Domesday, at Scarning in Norfolk, over a hundred miles to the east.
.............................................................................................................................................
FREDEGIS [* OF SCARNING *]. Fredegis, who preceded William of Warenne on a modest manor at Scarning in Norfolk8, has no links with his namesakes, whose manors lie a hundred miles or more to the west and north-west.
.............................................................................................................................................
FRIDEBERT. Although identified as separate names by von Feilitzen, Fridebert and Fridebern appear to be interchangeable in Domesday Book, as with Colbern/Colbert, Ketilbert/Ketilbiorn, Osbern/Osbert, Thorbert/Thorbiorn: Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 253-54. The names occur once in Buckinghamshire (Fridebert), twice in Cambridgeshire (Fridebert), five times in Essex (both forms) and twice in Suffolk (Fridebern), distributed among the lands of the king and five of his tenants-in-chief. Fride, perhaps one or other of these forms, is the only possible survivor.
.............................................................................................................................................
FRIDEB[* ... *] THE PRIEST. Fride may be expanded as Fridebert or Fridebern both of which occur several times in the eastern counties, though the priest holding half an acre in alms at Coddenham in Suffolk9 is, if a survivor - the text is ambiguous - the only one, unlikely to be the
1 NTT 10,53
2 NTT 10,54-55
3 NTH 35,9
4 NTT 10,57
5 NTT 2,1. 16,8
6 LIN 67,20
7 NTH 18,18;20;26;31;90
8 NFK 8,67
9 SUF 74,16
same man as any of the pre-Conquest landowners. The manor is assigned to 'Miscellaneous' in Coel (no. 2094).
.............................................................................................................................................
FRIDEBERT <OF OCKENDON>. All Frideberts and Frideberns in Domesday Book may be one man, a royal thane and a man of Earl Leofwin1. His substantial manors of Hanechedene in Buckinghamshire2 and Hanningfield in Essex3 were acquired by Bishop Odo of Bayeux, their status and the tenurial link all but guaranteeing Fridebert's identity, despite the distance - roughly seventy miles - separating them. Six miles west of Hanningfield, the king retained Fridebert's manor at Margaretting4, while eight miles in the other direction Geoffrey de Mandeville acquired two substantial manors in Stow Maries from a Fridebern5, almost certainly the Fridebert from whom he acquired the most valuable of Fridebert/Fridebern's manors, at Ockendon6. Fridebern is also Geoffrey's predecessor at Stutton in Suffolk7, where he is described as a royal thane. The one other Fridebern in the county, a predecessor of Richard son of Gilbert, held the most modest of the manors, at Haverhill8, two-thirds of the distance to Harston in Cambridgeshire9, held by Fridebert. Although these last two manors are considerably more modest than the others and have no tenurial links with them, they are in the same area, lying between those in Buckinghamshire and Essex; Harston is an ecclesiastical holding of the kind often held by magnates both before and after the Conquest. It seems unnecessary to posit another individual or individuals named Fridebert and Fridebern.
.............................................................................................................................................
FRODO. The name Frodo occurs only in the three counties of Essex, Norfolk and Suffolk where all the landowners of 1086 can be identified as one man, the single pre-Conquest lord probably being another.
.............................................................................................................................................
FRODO [* BROTHER OF ABBOT BALDWIN *]. All but one of the Frodos in Domesday Book are probably the same man, named as the brother of Abbot Baldwin of Bury St Edmunds in the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin: Feudal documents, pp. 4, 108. Frodo, the abbot's brother, held fiefs in Essex10 and Suffolk11; and Frodo was a tenant of the abbey on five manors in Norfolk12 and nine in Suffolk, on several of which he is named as the abbot's brother in the Feudal Book13: Feudal documents, pp. 4-6, 10, 22-23, 33, 36-37. Of the three other tenants, that of Richard son of Count Gilbert at Depden14 is identified as the abbot's brother in the text, and that of the abbey of Ely at Chedburgh15 in the Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 181). The Frodo holding two Freemen in the royal manor of Thorney16, and claiming another at Onehouse1, may be him, too, as
1 BUK 4,20
2 BUK 4,20
3 ESS 18,36
4 ESS 1,22
5 ESS 30,44;50
6 ESS 30,4
7 SUF 32,6
8 SUF 25,82
9 CAM 5,24. 32,5
10 ESS 56,1. 90,85
11 SUF 12,1-7
12 NFK 14,19;22;35;42-43
13 SUF 14,21;28;33;65;68;86;106;137;139
14 SUF 25,79
15 SUF 21,40
16 SUF 1,1
the only Frodo who was a lord of men. The one other Frodo in Domesday Book, a free man who shared a ploughteam with others at Ringshall in 10662, may be another man. Frodo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 467) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 200.
.............................................................................................................................................
FRODO <OF RINGSHALL>. The free man who shared fifty acres and a ploughteam with three other free men at Ringshall in Suffolk in 10663 is unlikely to be the one other Frodo in Domesday Book, the magnate and brother of Abbot Baldwin of Bury St Edmunds, none of whose manors suggest he held land before the Conquest.
.............................................................................................................................................
FROGER [* THE SHERIFF *]. Froger, who 'put it'- - Pangbourne in Berkshire - 'in the King's revenue without plea and law' after the Conquest4, is evidently Froger the sheriff, named on the royal manor of Sparsholt5 as behaving there in a similarly high-handed manner after 1066. There are no other Frogers in Domesday Book; but he is named in the Abingdon chronicle as the leading participant in the devastation of villages in Berkshire until 'royal justice took away from him the tyrannical right by which he was raised up', condemning him to 'universal contempt by his neediness and stupidity' for the remainder of his life: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, i. 226-29; ii. 171-73.
............................................................................................................................................. FULCARD. Fulcard is a rare name which may occur five times - three are doubtful - distributed among three widely separated counties and the lands of five tenants-in-chief. ............................................................................................................................................. FULCARD <OF LANHERNE>. Fulcard, who held Lanherne in Cornwall from the bishop of Exeter6, has no links with his namesakes in Berkshire and Suffolk, the nearest of whom is almost two hundred miles away. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 2115). .............................................................................................................................................
FULCARD <OF MELLIS>. As the name is rare, the Fulcards who held a few acres on two adjacent manors at Mellis and Thrandeston in Suffolk7 are probably the same man, though his land was acquired by two tenants-in-chief. He is very unlikely to be related to his distant namesakes in Cornwall and Berkshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCARD <OF SPARSHOLT>. As his name is rare, the Fulcard (Polcehard) who held the respectable manor of Sparsholt in Berkshire from Henry of Ferrers8 may be the Polcehard who held Inglewood in the same county from William son of Ansculf9. The name-form Polcehard is unique in Domesday Book. It may be a scribal error for Fulcard, misreading an initial F as Þ, though neither Forssner, Continental-Germanic personal names, p. 98, or von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 256, list this form. But it is curious in that case that the same error is committed
1 SUF 2,7
2 SUF 7,56
3 SUF 7,56
4 BRK 1,43
5 BRK 1,10
6 CON 2,7
7 SUF 6,195. 35,7
8 BRK 21,12
9 BRK 65,18
twice, in different parts of the manuscript which would not have been close to each other in sources organised either geographically or tenurially. As it can be found in early twelfth century sources, it is more likely to be a name of unidentified origin: Green, Government of England, p. 266. Either way, the name-form strengthens the probability that both refer to the same individual. The descent of the manors casts no light on the identity of the Domesday tenants: VCH Berkshire, iv. 211-12, 315. Fulcard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 986) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 326, under Polcehard.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCHER. Fulcher is a fairly common name which occurs on one fief and twenty-six other manors, distributed among eight counties and the lands of the king and a dozen of his tenants-in-chief, with clusters in East Anglia and Bedfordshire/Northamptonshire; all Fulchers are post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCHER [* "DE MAYNERIS" *]. All but one of the Fulchers recorded in East Anglia are tenants of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds which suggests they are all one man; but the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin, which is organised by tenants, lists the manors in two groups, the second and larger group assigned to a Fulcher who has no byname. His manors lie to the east of those of the Fulcher the Breton, though no great distance away. He had three manor in Norfolk clustered around Diss1, and half-a-dozen in Suffolk which lie to the west of Diss2; to these the Feudal Book adds Bardwell3, held in demesne according to Domesday Book: Feudal documents, pp. 17-18. Of the two, he seems more likely to be the abbot's man in Norwich4 Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that this Fulcher may be Fulcher de Mayneris, who witnessed a grant to the abbey in the 1090s: Feudal documents, p. 153. Mayneris is 'perhaps' Mesnières-en-Bray in Upper Normandy (Seine-Maritime: arrondissement Dieppe), in which case Fulcher is not the same man as the Breton: Domesday people, p. 200. He is, however, possibly the one other East Anglian Fulcher, a tenant of William of Warenne at Blo Norton in Norfolk5, a vill surrounded by several of the manors of the abbey's tenant: Thelnetham is a mile away, Hopton two, Knettishall three, and Hepworth five. William of Warenne had no other Fulchers on his Honour and the abbey did have an interest in the vill of Blo Norton6, so the identification of Warenne's tenant as the same man as the abbey's is not implausible. It does, however, make it even more statistically freakish that that abbey had two tenants of this name; a scribal blunder seems possible. The manors of Fulcher de Mayneris are recorded in Coel (no. 1003) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 200; the Warenne tenant is unidentified (no. 9165).
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCHER [* OF PARIS *]. The Fulchers who held two manors in Holme in Bedfordshire from Nigel of Aubigny and Countess Judith are probably Fulcher of Paris, who had manors from the same tenants-in-chief and from Walter Giffard in the adjacent vill of Stratton7. Countess Judith also had a tenant named Fulcher at Walgrave in the neighbouring county of Northamptonshire8. He can be identified with some confidence as the same man as the six other Fulchers in the county9 by the
1 NFK 14,23;26;30
2 SUF 14,11;78;80;89-90;99
3 SUF 14,82
4 NFK 1,66
5 NFK 8,59
6 NFK 14,8
7 BDF 16,7. 24,25-26. 53,17-18
8 NTH 56,40
9 NTH 18,76-78. 39,4-6
descent of their manors to the Malsour (Malesoures) family, most recorded in the Northamptonshire Survey, where Fulcher Malsour is named as the tenant on one of them, Thorpe Malsor: VCH Northamptonshire, i. 380-82, 385; Farrer, Honors, i. 78-80, 119; ii. 341, 383. In Domesday, Fulcher Malsor also held part of the manor of Oakham in Rutland from the king1. As these are all the recorded Fulchers in the Midlands and Fulcher of Paris and Fulcher Malsor held manors in both counties from Countess Judith, it is likely they are the same man, though the Bedfordshire manors did not descend to the Malsour family: Farrer, Honors, ii. 383. But neither, apparently, did Oakham, and Fulcher's Northamptonshire estate fragmented during his lifetime: VCH Rutland, ii. 17. Fulcher's manors are attributed to two men - Fulcher of Paris and Fulcher Malsor - in Coel (nos. 1002, 1005), referenced in Domesday people, p. 201.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCHER [* THE BOWMAN *]. Fulcher, who held a small fief in Devon2, is evidently Fulcher the bowman, so named in Exon. on the last manor on his fief. He is the only tenant-in-chief of this name and the only Fulcher south of the Thames. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 802) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 200.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCHER [* THE BRETON *]. All but one of the Fulchers recorded in East Anglia are tenants of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds which suggests they are all one man. According to the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin, however, the tenants at Great Snarehill in Norfolk3 and Great Livermere in Suffolk4 are Fulcher the Breton, the remaining manors in the two counties being held by another Fulcher: Feudal documents, pp. 17-18, 21. As the Feudal Book is organised by tenants, this would seem to be conclusive, and there is some slight evidence that the abbey had a Fulcher who was not a Breton among its men. It is nevertheless extremely odd that the abbey had two tenants of this name when the remaining tenants-in-chief in East Anglia could - at best - muster only one other Fulcher between them; a scribal blunder of some kind seems possible. Fulcher's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1004) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 200.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCO. If Fulco of Lisors is discounted, Fulco is not a particularly common name, occurring in a dozen counties as tenants of fifteen tenants-in-chief. Folki (Fulchi) and Fulcwy (Fulcoius) may be variants of this name, in which case the distribution would include three more counties and tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCO [* OF BAINVILLE *]. Fulco, who held Bickley in Cheshire from Robert son of Hugh5, is almost certainly Fulco of Bainville, who witnessed Robert 's gifts to St Werburgh's of Chester: Charters of the Anglo-Norman earls of Chester, p. 41. He is probably also the Fulcwy (Fulcui) who held Upton in Huntingdonshire6 from Earl Hugh of Chester since a Richard de Benevill held a fee there of the Honour of Chester in the thirteenth century: Farrer, Honors, ii. 26-27. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he may be named from Banville in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Bayeux). His manor of Bickley is recorded in Coel (no. 3833) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 201; the tenant at Upton is unidentified (no. 32637).
1 RUT 1,18
2 DEV 49,1-7
3 NFK 14,10
4 SUF 14,22
5 CHS 2,19
6 HUN 11,1
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCO <OF CLAYBROOKE>. The Fulcos who held Weston-in-Arden, Wibtoft with Willey, and Oversley in Warwickshire1, and Claybrooke in Leicestershire2, from the Count of Meulan, may be one man. Wibtoft is two miles from Willey, one from Claybrooke, just across the county boundary; Wibtoft was later held together with Weston-in-Arden, by an Arnold du Bois: VCH Warwickshire, vi. 258. Fulco's Warwickshire manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4753) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 202; the tenant at Claybrooke is unidentified (no. 26701).
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCO [* OF LE PIN *]. The Fulcos who held manors in Leintwardine, Clungunford, Bedstone and Selley in Shropshire from Picot of Sai3 are probably one man, who may also be the Fulco who held another manor in Clungunford from Reginald the sheriff4; these are the only Fulcos in the county, the manors forming a close group in Leintwardine Hundred, two of the three being about three miles from Clungunford. Fulco may be the Fulco de Pino (Le Pin) who, according to Orderic Vitalis (iii. 138-43), was one of the men of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury who witnessed a charter for the abbey of St Evroul, where Orderic was a monk. It is possible that Fulco is the same man as Fulcwy of Withington (q.v.), though his manors form a separate group at the other end of the county. Fulco's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 9111) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 202, apart from Leintwardine, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 31011); the commentary on the name-forms Fulco and Fulcwy does not match the identifications in the database.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCO [* OF LISORS *]. The Fulcos who held two manors in Derbyshire5 and a dozen are Nottinghamshire6 from Roger of Bully are almost certainly Fulco of Lisors, named on the first of the two Derbyshire manors. He witnessed Roger's foundation charter for Blyth priory, his lands descending to the constables of Chester: Cartulary of Tutbury priory, pp. 207-209; Stenton, 'Domesday survey of Nottinghamshire', p. 225. There are no other Fulcos in Derbyshire or Nottinghamshire. In Yorkshire, too, he is probably the Fulco who held four manors from Roger7, on the first of which he held land in the jurisdiction of Hexthorpe, where Fulco of Lisores is named in the Claims as having land in the same jurisdiction8. The same claim records land he held in Loversall and Edenthorpe, though he is not named in the entries concerned9. Roger had no other tenants on his Yorkshire fief, and no other Fulcos on his Honour. Fulco's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2990) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 201.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCO <OF PORTLEMOUTH>. The Fulcos who preceded Iudhael of Totnes at Portlemouth, Ilton, Alston and Sorley in south Devon10 are very probably one man. The manors cluster in the southern half of Diptford Hundred, the first three in adjacent vills, Sorley lying a few miles to the north. The predecessor of Alfred the Breton in the lost vill of Ferding11 is likely to be the same
1 WAR 16,38-39;63
2 LEC 44,7
3 SHR 4,20,20;24-25;27
4 SHR 4,3,46
5 DBY 16,1-2
6 NTT 9,18;20-21;25;41-42;55-56;64;70-71;126-127
7 YKS 10W27;33;39-40
8 YKS CW14
9 YKS 5W8. 12W1
10 DEV 17,38-40;42
11 DEV 39,3
man. His manor is in the same general area of south-west Devon and of similar status to the other four, and there are no other Fulcos in Devon or, indeed, in the ten counties of circuits one and two, nor any Fulcwys in south-western counties.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCO [* SON OF RAINFRID *]. Fulco, tenant of William of Percy at Little Grimsby, Elkington and Fotherby in Lincolnshire1 and Pallathorpe and Snainton in Yorkshire2, is identified as Fulco son of Rainfrid by the descent of his manors, which also included Catterton, Toulston and Newton Kyme in Yorkshire3, held from Osbern of Arques: Early Yorkshire charters, xi. 89-104. He was certainly steward of the Percy Honour under William's son, and probably also under William himself. His father, a knight of the Conqueror, was an important figure in the monastic revival in the north of England: Knowles, Monastic order, pp. 166-68. It seems unlikely he is either of the two Rainfrids recorded in Domesday Book4. Fulco's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3351) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 201.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCRAN <OF BUTCOMBE>. The Fulcrans who held six manors in Somerset from the bishop of Coutances5 are almost certainly one man, the name occurring nowhere else in Domesday Book. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1684) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 202.
.............................................................................................................................................
FULCWY. Fulcwy (Fulcoius) is a rare name which occurs a dozen times in Domesday or Exon., distributed among six counties, the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, and both dates. It is probably a variant form of Fulco (q.v.) and Folki (Fulchi): Lewis, 'French in England', p. 131.
............................................................................................................................................. FULCWY <OF WITHINGTON>. Fulcwy, who held Withington and 'also' Wytheford in Shropshire from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury6, may be Fulcwy (Fulcoius) the sheriff, who witnessed a confirmation of the foundation charter of Shrewsbury abbey in 1121: Cartulary of Shrewsbury abbey, i. 36; Mason, 'Officers and clerks', p. 247; Green, English sheriffs, p. 72. If they are in fact different names, Fulcwy and Fulco are sometimes confused by the scribe; but this Fulcwy does not appear to be the same man as Fulco of Le Pin, who held several manors as a subtenant of the earl in the south of the county. The scribe is consistent in using Fulco for the one and Fulcwy for the other, and the manors form distinct groups, some thirty miles apart. Fulcwy's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3015) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 203, partially conflated with those assigned here to Fulco of Le Pin. ............................................................................................................................................. FULCWY <OF WOOLBEDING>. It is likely that all Fulcwys and Folkis south of the Thames are one man, though the names are believed to be of different origin and are distributed among three counties, four tenants-in-chief, and pre- and post-Conquest manors. Earl Roger of Shrewsbury acquired the substantial manor of Racton from a Fulcwy, who held subtenancies in Selham and Marden from his tenant, Robert son of Theobald7. Selham is less than five miles from the
1 LIN 22,25;28;33
2 YKS 13W13-14. 13N14
3 YKS 25W6;29-30
4 SHR 4,4,20. LIN 14,17
5 SOM 5,17;19;30-31;41;63
6 SHR 4,27-2-3
7 SUS 11,14;31-32
substantial manor of Woolbeding, acquired from Fulcwy by Odo of Winchester1, who succeeded a Fulchi on the valuable manor of Norton in Hampshire2. Fulcwy's pre-Conquest manor of Clandon in Surrey3 is also a respectable property. Whalesbeech in Sussex4, held by the one other Fulchi, though some distance from Fulcwy's manors in Chichester Rape, lay in Lavant, five miles from Racton, separated from Earl Roger's manors by the division of Sussex into Rapes. In view of an otherwise blank map of Fulcwys and Folkis south of the Thames, these links, though slight in some cases, suggest that the two names are interchangeable is these case, and the pre- and post-Conquest landowners the same man. If these identifications are valid, Fulcwy of Woolbeding survived in relatively comfortable circumstances compared to most of his peers. The tenant at Selham is unidentified in Coel (no. 16167), and the subtenant at Marden is not included there. .............................................................................................................................................
FULCWY [* WARUHEL *]. The Fulcwys who held manors in Whitwell and the adjacent vills of Croydon and Arrington in Cambridgeshire from Count Alan of Brittany5 are probably Fulco Waruhel, the juror of 'Wetherley' Hundred, where Whitwell and Arrington lay: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 68, 83). Here as elsewhere, Fulcwy and Fulco appear to be interchangeable, as is clearly the case at Arrington itself, where the scribe of the Inquisitio writes Fulco, the Domesday scribe Fulcwy. There are no other Fulcos or Fulcwys in the county. The descent of Fulcwy's manors is unenlightening: VCH Cambridgeshire, v. 142, 268; viii. 32. They are recorded in Coel (no. 2076) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 203, without reference to the juror.
.............................................................................................................................................
GAMAL. Gamal is a common name, but only in the north of England. In occurs in eight counties between Leicestershire and Yorkshire, all north of the Wash apart from one name in Leicestershire, with a particularly heavy concentration in Yorkshire, a significant one in Lincolnshire, and lesser groupings in Cheshire and Derbyshire. The king and more than two dozen of his tenants-in-chief had Gamals among their predecessors, five as tenants, Gamals also surviving among the king's thanes in Staffordshire and Yorkshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
GAMAL <OF SHOTTLE>. All Gamals in Derbyshire and Leicestershire6 are probably one man, all being predecessors of Henry of Ferrers. The eight Derbyshire vills are connected in various ways. Most are close to one or more of the others: Bearwardcote is two miles from Etwall, as is Mercaston from Mugginton; Swarkestone is three miles from Twyford, and Shottle six from Mugginton7. Only Tissington is somewhat detached, fifteen miles from Shottle8. But Tissington is linked in another way. Two of the pre-Conquest lords who shared the manor there also shared those at Swarkestone and Etwall with Gamal. Bearwardcote is linked in a similar manner. Henry had no other predecessors or tenants of this name on his Honour.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 SUS 14,1
2 HAM 69,2
3 SUR 27,3
4 SUS 10,106
5 CAM 14,25;43;45
6 LEC 14,33
7 DBY 6,12;83;91;94-96;98
8 DBY 6,7
GAMAL [* SON OF BARTH *]. Three of the very numerous Yorkshire Gamals survived for two decades on the same manor, tenants of Ilbert of Lacy at Smeaton1 and of Erneis of Buron at Arkendale2, and a king's thane on four manors in the East Riding3. Erneis had no other tenants (or predecessors) of this name, all other surviving Gamals in Yorkshire being tenants of Ilbert4 or king's thanes5. It seems likely that all are these Gamals are one man, Ilbert's acquisitions being explained by the location of the manors within his Honour of Pontefract. His tenant can be identified from later records as Gamal son of Barth, Barth (q.v.) being another of Ilbert's tenants and predecessors: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 284-87. As Gamal retained land in Smeaton for two decades, it is not unlikely that he is also - like his father - Ilbert's predecessor elsewhere; at Thornhill6, where he was succeeded by an Arnbiorn who preceded him elsewhere, this is probably the case; but since Ilbert retained most of the other manors in demesne, there are no other such clues7. Gamal's tenancies from Ilbert and at Walkington8 are assigned to one man in Coel (no. 8418), the remainder to a Game (no. 8724), both referenced in Domesday people, p. 203. Game is regarded as an alternative form of Gamal: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 257-58
.............................................................................................................................................
GAMAL [* SON OF GRUFFYDD *]. Gamal, who held Balterley and 'also' Audley and Talke among the king's thanes in Staffordshire in 10869, may be the king's thane who held Cheadle and 'also' Mottram in Cheshire10; he may also be the one other such tenant in the two counties, who held land in Salford from Roger of Poitou, probably the thane who 'had his own exempt customary dues' in Salford Hundred before the Conquest11. If so, he is possibly the pre-Conquest landowner at Saredon, among the king's thanes of Staffordshire12, and at Poulton in Cheshire13, the two remaining Gamals in those counties, though both are distant from the tenancies of 1086. He may be the Gamal son of Gruffydd whose man is named in the Pipe Roll of 1130: Quidam homo Gamelli filii Griffini, perhaps the Gamal of a previous entry, slain by Liulfus de Aldredeslega: Staffordshire Pipe Rolls, p. 3. The identity of the Cheshire and Staffordshire Gamals, and their identification as the son of Gruffydd, were both rejected by J.H. Round, on the grounds that the Cheshire and Staffordshire manors descended separately, and the association of the Gamal of the Pipe Roll with the Gamal who held Audley (Aldidelege) was insecure: Peerage and Pedigree, pp. 25-26. But the Staffordshire manors were subject to confiscation and re-grant since they were held by Liulf's descendants, not Gamal's: Complete peerage, i. 336-37. Later scholars have tended to accept the identification: Sawyer and Thacker, 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', pp. 315, 322; Slade, 'Domesday survey of Staffordshire', pp. 25, 36. Gamal's Staffordshire manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8417) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 203; the Cheshire tenants are unidentified (nos. 28983, 29188).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 YKS 9W48
2 YKS 24W11
3 YKS 29E2;19-20;24
4 YKS 9W26;65-66;76-77;93;103;116
5 YKS 29E13. 29N11
6 YKS 9W115
7 YKS 9W24;47;56;78;100;112;129-30;138;142-143
8 YKS 29E24
9 STS 17,12-14
10 CHS 26,9-10
11 CHS R5,3;6
12 STS 17,2
13 CHS 24,3
GAMAL [* SON OF KARLI *]. The Gamals whose many manors in Yorkshire were acquired by Berengar of Tosny1 are very probably one of the sons of Karli whose feud with the earls of Northumbria disturbed the northern counties for several generations. Berengar's entire fief in Yorkshire was acquired from Gamal and Thorbrand (q.v.); Thorbrand can be confidently identified as one of the unnamed sons; Gamal was presumably another. Four of Gamal's manors were held from Berengar by the Canons of York in 1086, so the Gamal who gave four carucates in East Newton to the Canons before the Conquest may be Karli's son2. He is probably also the Gamal whose waste manors at Broughton, Swinton and Holme House were without tenants in 1086, in the hands of the king3, since his other manors in two of those vills were acquired by Berengar. He may also be the Gamal on waste manors in Dic, Maneshou and 'Bulford' wapentakes in the North Riding and Craven held by the king in 10864, all other Gamals in those wapentakes being predecessors of Berengar or otherwise identified as Karli's sons and all other landowners there bearing the names of his brothers being also identifiable as sons of Karli. He is almost certainly the Gamal at Barnoldswick5, whose twelve carucates became part of the castlery of Roger of Poitou but was previously held by Berengar, so he may be the Gamal whose three other manors in Craven were acquired by Roger6. It is also likely he is the Gamal at Thorpe Bassett7, which was shared with Cnut (q.v.) - probably his brother - and later granted to the abbey of St Albans by Berengar: Farrer, 'Domesday survey of Yorkshire', p. 160.
It is likely, too, that he is the Gamal who preceded William of Percy at Askwith (where Gamal preceded Berengar on another manor), Glusburn with Cheldis and 'Inglethwaite' (13W25;45. 13N15). William had claims on part of the estate of Karli's sons, since he acquired Seamer and East Ayton from them, and later held their manor of Weston and land in Craven which Berengar held in 1086. Farrer suggested that this Gamal is Gamal son of Osmund, Percy's predecessor at Hazelwood Castle; but the links with Berengar and members of Karli's family, as well as the location of the manors, point to Karli's son rather than Osmund's: 'Domesday survey of Yorkshire', pp. 160-61. Another link points to the same conclusion. The second manor (if not a duplicate) in Glusburn with Cheldis was also held by a Gamal, this one from Gilbert Tison8 who acquired three manors from a Cnut (q.v.) who is very likely another of Gamal's brothers. The predecessor of Drogo of la Beuvrière at Chenecol and Preston in Holderness9 is probably also Karli's son. Drogo acquired Rise - the family's ancestral home - and Catfoss in Holderness from a Cnut who is almost certainly Gamal's brother, and also Redmere in Holderness from a Karli (q.v.), who may be another.
The king and three of his tenants-in-chief who acquired manors from the Yorkshire Cnuts, Karlis or Thorbrands also acquired several manors from a Gamal which are located in the same wapentakes. The king retained the waste manor of Reighton in Hunthow wapentake10, where both Cnut and Karli held a number of manors, and where the Count of Mortain11 and Count Alan of Brittany12 acquired more than a score of manors from a Gamal between them. Count Robert also obtained manors from Cnut and Karli and manors from Gamal in vills - Bainton and Hutton Cranswick - where other tenants-in-chief did so as well. Count Alan was also preceded by Cnut on several manors and by a Karli in Lincolnshire who is possibly Gamal's brother. Hugh son of
1 YKS 8N2-7;11-22. 8W2. 8E2;4-5
2 YKS 2N5
3 YKS 1N67-68;72
4 YKS 1N57-58;74;82-83;86;88. 1W59-60
5 YKS 30W3
6 YKS 30W13-14;36
7 YKS 1E45
8 YKS 21W16
9 YKS 14E35;48
10 YKS 1E16
11 YKS 5N63;73. 5E4;21;29;31-32;42;44;61;67
12 YKS 6N26-27;30;56;71;90;103;105;107;132
Baldric is a more difficult case. It is very likely that Gamal was Hugh's predecessor on many of his manors since Hugh acquired a large number of manors from Gamal in areas dominated by his family, four of them - Bainton, Fraisthorpe, Hutton and Buckton Holms - in vills where Gamal himself or one of his brothers had another manor1, and another four2 subinfeudated to Gerard, who was also endowed by Hugh with manors of Thorbrand and (probably) Sumarlithi (q.v.), another of Karli's sons. But Hugh had another Gamal among his predecessors, Gamal son of Osbert (or Osbern), a man important enough to be addressed by a royal writ so presumably a significant landowner. He is known to have held the large manor of Cottingham acquired by Hugh and may well have held others of his. On the whole, the manors more likely to have held by Karli's son are well to the north of Cottingham3, with Etton4 perhaps the most doubtful and Kelfield somewhat less so5. The name Gamal is so common in Yorkshire that other Gamals may be Karli's son; the only Gamals apart from Osbert's son who can be excluded with some confidence are those surviving on sixteen manors in the county, since all the sons and grandsons of Karli apart from Cnut and Sumarlithi are said to have been slaughtered at Settrington in 1073 on the orders of Earl Waltheof: Fletcher, Bloodfeud, pp. 187-89.
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 Gamal 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.
.............................................................................................................................................
GAMAL [* SON OF OSBERT *]. Gamal, who held the large manor of Cottingham in Yorkshire acquired by Hugh son of Baldric6 is identified elsewhere in the text as Gamal son of Osbert, who had 'full jurisdiction, market rights and all customary dues' in that vill7, of which he was sole lord. He is very probably the Gamal son of Osbern addressed alongside Earl Morcar by a royal writ concerning the lands of St John's of Beverley: Bates, Regesta, no. 32, p. 193. As he was evidently a major landowner, he may be the Gamal who preceded Hugh elsewhere, though since Hugh had another Gamal among his predecessors, the manors of the sons of Osbert and Karli cannot be identified with certainty. It seems likely, though, that he preceded Hugh on two of the three manors on his fief which follow Cottingham and lie in the same neighbourhood: Little Weighton with North Cave, Hunsley and perhaps Skipwith8; and he possibly also held the very large manor of South Cave, acquired by Robert Malet9. Robert also acquired two modest manors in the North and West Ridings from a Gamal though there are no other indications that Osbert's son held land this far afield.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 YKS 23E8-9;13;16
2 YKS 23N10-12;15-16
3 YKS 23E6;10;15;17
4 YKS 23E6
5 YKS 23E10
6 YKS 23E2
7 YKS C36
8 YKS 23E3-5
9 YKS 11E1
GAMAL [* SON OF OSMUND *]. Gamal, whose manor in the lost vill of Saxhalla was acquired by William of Percy1, is very probably Gamal son of Osmund, who held the preceding manor of Hazelwood Castle. The two are linked in the Yorkshire Claims2, where Osmund's son is named as the pre-Conquest lord of Hazelwood, though Saxhalla is there assigned to a Ketil. Both manors lie in Barkston wapentake and both were subinfeudated to the same tenant. Less certainly, the same Gamal may be Percy's predecessor at Ilkley, which immediately follows Saxhalla in the text and lies in the adjacent wapentake of 'Skyrack'3. Percy, however, had a second Gamal among his predecessors who held land in 'Yarlestre' and 'Burghshire' wapentakes, both bordering on 'Skyrack'; and as he held only the single manor of Ilkley in that wapentake, its position in the text is not decisive.
.............................................................................................................................................
GAMALBARN <OF KIRKBY>. All Gamalbarns in Domesday Book may the one man. All his manors lie in the West Riding of Yorkshire in 1066, all but two of the thirty-three divided between William of Percy4 and Gilbert Tison5 apart from those waste manors retained by the king. The king and both tenants-in-chief, moreover, had manors in several of the same vills: Tison and Percy in 'Great Braham', Plompton Hall and Rudfarlington, and the king and Tison in Addingham, Eastburn, Grassington, Oakworth and Threshfield. The two manors acquired by Roger of Poitou lay a little further west of the others but no more than teen miles from Grassington. More than half of Gamalbarn's are recorded as waste or without value in 1066 but the assessment of his lands - over eighty carucates - would place him among the three dozen greatest lords in Yorkshire. It has been suggested that he is probably the Gamalbarn who was one of the three leaders of the Northumbrian revolt of 1065 according to John of Worcester (Chronicle, ii. 596-99), in which case much - perhaps most - of his land lay outside the scope of the Domesday Survey: Fellow Jensen, Scandinavian personal names, p. 95; Fletcher, Bloodfeud, p. 160.
............................................................................................................................................. GEOFFREY [* BAYNARD *]. The Geoffreys on the Honour of Ralph Baynard are probably his brother and successor. Dr Mortimer has demonstrated from charter evidence that this was the case at East Ruston and Hudeston in Norfolk6; and it is probable that the scribe has simply omitted Geoffrey's surname in the intervening entries between Rushton and Kerdiston and Skeyton7, where Geoffrey is given his byname. Dr Mortimer also suggests that most if not all the remaining Geoffreys on the Ralph's Honour, in Norfolk8 and Essex9, are his brother, the subsequent descent of Geoffrey's manors being different from that of the principle Baynard fee: 'Baynards of Baynard's Castle', pp. 244-47. The distribution of the name supports this: there are as many unidentified Geoffreys on the fief of Ralph Baynard as on the other sixty-two fiefs in Norfolk combined. Geoffrey is usually accepted as the son of Ralph Baynard; but charter evidence cited by Dr Mortimer, and the descent of Geoffrey's manors, suggest he was more probably Ralph's brother: Sanders, English baronies, pp. 129-130; Keats-Rohan, Domesday people, pp. 224-25. Geoffrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 124) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 224-25, apart from the second manor in Langford, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 5208).
1 YKS 13W4
2 YKS CW2-3
3 YKS 13W5
4 YKS C10. 13W13;17;24;28-33
5 YKS 21W5;7-15;17
6 NFK 31,5;8
7 NFK 31,1-4
8 NFK 31,17;31;44
9 ESS 33,2;22
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* DE MANDEVILLE *]. G. de Mandeville, who occurs in Essex1 and Suffolk2, can only be Geoffrey de Mandeville, tenant-in-chief in those and other counties. He is probably also the Geoffrey who held part of the manor of Ayot St Lawrence in Hertfordshire from Westminster abbey since he had two other tenancies from the abbey in the county3. Westminster had no other Geoffreys among its tenants, in Hertfordshire or in any other county. Geoffrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 672) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 226-27.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* GEOFFREY *] MARTEL. The Martels who held Hallingbury, Bigods, Dunmow and two manors in Roding in Essex from Geoffrey de Mandeville4 are probably Geoffrey Martel, his tenant at Abbess Roding5. As the name is rare, the one other Martel in Domesday, a tenant of Robert d'Oilly at Polehanger in Hertfordshire6, may be the same man, though there are no links to confirm this. Geoffrey is identified by Dr Keats-Rohan as the brother of Hugh son of Grip, sheriff of Dorset. Neither Geoffrey de Mandeville or Robert d'Oilly had unidentified Geoffreys on their Honours. Martel's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 356) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 230.
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* OF AALST *]. The lands held by Geoffrey from Drogo of Beuvrière at Thimbleby and Langton in Lincolnshire7 were held from his successor by William of Aalst (Alost) in the Lindsey Survey (19/7). It seems likely that William was Geoffrey's descendant, not merely his successor, since Drogo is more likely than his successors to have enfeoffed a Fleming. It is also likely that Geoffrey of Aalst is the Geoffrey who held the preceding and following manors - the only other Geoffreys on Drogo's Honour - at Stainton-le-Vale and North Ormsby8. Stainton had another tenant and Ormsby was held in demesne in the Lindsey Survey (7/1. 10,3), perhaps a consequence of Drogo's forfeiture, which affected his tenants, some of whom disappear from the region: English, Lords of Holderness, pp. 140-41. Geoffrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 9047) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 233, together with those here attributed to Geoffrey of Armentières.
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* OF ARMENTIERES *]. The Geoffreys who held Burley in Rutland9 and Kislingbury in Northamptonshire10 from Gilbert of Ghent may be Geoffrey of Armentières. The Armentières family held these lands in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and a Robert of Armentières (q.v.) was a tenant of Gilbert in Berkshire and Oxfordshire in 1086: VCH Rutland, ii. 113-14. Gilbert's one other tenant named Geoffrey, at Cranwell in Lincolnshire, the largest and most valuable of his tenancies11, may be the same man; it would help to explain the size of the fee - ten knights - held by his descendant, David, though the heirs of Robert of Armentières might be responsible for all or part of this: Red Book, i. 383. Dr Keats-Rohan attributes these manors to Geoffrey of Aalst.
1 ESS 1,3. 10,5. 20,71. 25,16. 34,7. 52,1. 77,1. 90,20-28
2 SUF 6,112. 21,58;95
3 HRT 9,9
4 ESS 30,24;31-32;35;43
5 ESS 30,3
6 HRT 19,2
7 LIN 30,18-19
8 LIN 30,17;20-21
9 RUT 5,15. LIN 24,80
10 NTH 46,1
11 LIN 24,36;80
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY <OF BALDON>. The Geoffreys who held Claydon in Buckinghamshire1, Cherington in Gloucestershire2, and Marsh Baldon and Watcombe in Oxfordshire3 from Miles Crispin are probably one man since these manors were later held by the de la Mare family: VCH Buckinghamshire, iv. 28; VCH Oxfordshire, v. 33; VCH Gloucestershire, xi. 168. Miles had no other tenants of this name on his Honour. Geoffrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4739) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 232, apart from the tenant at Cherington, who is unidentified (no. 29816).
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY <OF COLTON>. The Geoffreys who held Colton in Staffordshire4 and Denton, Carlby, Braceborough, Bourne and Thurlby in Lincolnshire5 from Robert of Stafford are probably one man. Dr Keats-Rohan states that he was succeeded by a son, William de Wastineis. Land in five of the six vills was held by William of Wasteneis from the Stafford Honour in the thirteenth century: Book of Fees, pp. 966, 974, 1026, 1051, 1092. The exception, Denton6, was held by the Baswin family; but as some of their lands were held by a Baswin in 1086, it appears that the family had acquired Denton in the interval: Staffordshire Pipe Rolls, pp. 175-76. Robert had no other Geoffreys on his Honour. Geoffrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3615) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 232.
.............................................................................................................................................
BISHOP G[EOFFREY] [* OF COUTANCES *]. Bishop G on the royal manor of 'Barton Regis' in Gloucestershire7 can only be Bishop Geoffrey of Coutances, tenant-in-chief in Gloucestershire and many other counties. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 837) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 228-29.
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* OF RIA *]. The Geoffreys who held land from Roger of Poitou in West Derby and Salford in South Lancashire8 may be Geoffrey of Ria, named in a grant made by Roger to the abbey of Sées: Thompson, 'Monasteries and settlement', pp. 211, 223. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 9362) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 227, with the addition of Ashley in Staffordshire, here assigned to Geoffrey the sheriff.
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* OF `RUNEVILLE' *]. Geoffrey, who held Stanstead Abbots from Geoffrey of Bec, is probably the Geoffrey 'of Runeville' who held 'Blackmore', the previous manor9. They are the only tenants on Geoffrey of Bec's small Honour, so it is improbable they were different men. Geoffrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 876) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 231.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 BUK 23,16
2 GLS 64,2
3 OXF 35,17;30
4 STS 11,29
5 LIN 59,1;4-5;7-8
6 LIN 59,1
7 GLS 1,21
8 CHS R1,43. R5,6
9 HRT 34,22-23
GEOFFREY <OF SEDGLEY>. Geoffrey, who held Sedgley in Staffordshire1 from William son of Ansculf, has no links with his two namesakes in the county, and William son of Ansculf has no other Geoffreys on his Honour. The descent of the Sedgley has not been traced: VCH Staffordshire, xx. 23. Geoffrey is unidentified in Coel (no. 31549).
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY <OF SWAFFHAM>. The Geoffreys who held Swaffham, Burwell and Isleham in Cambridgeshire2 and Hackforth, Aysgarth, West Burton and Garriston in Yorkshire3 from Count Alan of Brittany are almost certainly one man, these lands later forming the Burgh fee on the Honour of Richmond, charged with providing four knights for castle-guard, two from each of the two counties. The name of the fee probably derives from Burrough Green in Cambridgeshire, acquired by the family from Count Alan's demesne lands after the Domesday Survey4: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 164-67. Farrer suggested that Geoffrey might also be the Count's tenant in Norfolk5, though he acknowledged that the Burgh fee reveals no subsequent interest in those manors. He did not mention the one other Geoffrey on the Count's Honour, Geoffrey of Tournai, whose manor of Steyning in Lincolnshire6 would have been a useful staging post between Cambridgeshire and Yorkshire. As with Norfolk, however, there are no links to connect the two. Geoffrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1608) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 225-26, under the name Geoffrey de Burgh.
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* OF *] TOURNAI. Geoffrey Tournai, who held Steyning in Lincolnshire from Count Alan of Brittany, is presumably Geoffrey of Tournai7, perhaps from Tournai-sur-Dive in Lower Normandy (Orne: arrondissement Argentan). It is possible, though unverifiable, that Geoffrey is the same man as Geoffrey of Swaffham, the Count's tenant in Cambridgeshire and Yorkshire. Geoffrey's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 2896) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 231.
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* RIDEL *]. Geoffrey, who held Duckmanton in Derbyshire from Ralph son of Hubert, is probably Geoffrey Ridel8, perhaps the royal justice under Henry I who was drowned in the White ship disaster. Ridel is named incidentally in Norfolk as having returned from Apulia with the brother of Roger Bigot9, and Duckmanton was later held by another Geoffrey Ridel: Thurgarton cartulary, pp. clxxxii-iii. Ralph had another tenant named Geoffrey, at Teversal in Nottinghamshire, nine miles to the south, perhaps the same man10; Geoffrey Ridel held fees in Nottinghamshire from the barony in 1166, though these may, of course, have been acquired by other means: Red Book, i. 345; Green, Government of England, p. 232. Geoffrey's manor at Duckmanton is recorded in Coel (no. 1040) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 230-31; the tenant at Teversal is unidentified (no. 35478).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 STS 12,4
2 CAM 14,63;70;72
3 YKS 6N60;82;85;108
4 CAM 14,78
5 NFK 4,18-20;44
6 LIN 12,89
7 LIN 12,89
8 DBY 10,6
9 NFK 9,88
10 NTT 13,8
GEOFFREY [* SON OF HAIMO *]. Geoffrey, who held Rigneseta in Suffolk1 from Richard son of Count Gilbert, may be Geoffrey son of Haimo, who held Chilbourne from him2, his only other tenant of this name on his Honour; the two manors are of similar status. Geoffrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 601) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 229.
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* THE MARSHAL *]. Geoffrey, who held Draycot Cerne among the king's sergeants of Wiltshire in 1086, is named Geoffrey the marshal in the Geld Roll for the county3. He is presumably the same Geoffrey the marshal who had a messuage in Malmesbury4 and three manors in Hampshire5: VCH Wiltshire, ii. 212. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 353) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 230.
.............................................................................................................................................
GEOFFREY [* THE SHERIFF *]. Geoffrey, who held Hadley in Shropshire6 from Reginald the sheriff, tenant of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, is identified as Geoffrey the sheriff by his grant of land in that vill and in Garston, with the churches of Kirkham and Walton, to the earl's foundation of Shrewsbury abbey: Cartulary of Shrewsbury abbey, i. 33-34. He was sheriff of Lancashire, where he granted an orchard, houses, tithes and land to Lancaster priory, founded by Earl Roger's son, Roger of Poitou: Green, English sheriffs, p. 52; Thompson, 'Monasteries and settlement', pp. 206, 208-19, 222. Roger later confirmed Geoffrey's grants to Shrewsbury abbey: Cartulary, ii. no. 371, p. 337. Geoffrey may also be Roger's tenant at Osgodby in Lincolnshire7, and the Geoffrey who held Ashley in Staffordshire from Earl Roger8; the church of Walton is in the same Hundred. He is possibly the Geoffrey who held Worthen and Stepple in Shropshire from the earl's tenants9, though there are no specific links to confirm this. Earl Roger had five tenants named Geoffrey in Sussex10, most with substantial manors, but there are no apparent links with the sheriff of Lancashire: Farrer, Honors, iii. 55, 70. Geoffrey's manors of Hadley and Stepple, and his Lincolnshire manor, are recorded in Coel (no. 5189) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 232; Ashley is assigned to Geoffrey of Ria, and Worthen to an unidentified tenant (no. 30851); the Sussex tenants are unidentified (nos. 16146, 16168, 16205, 16250, 16320).
.............................................................................................................................................
GERARD <OF BOLTBY>. All Gerards in Yorkshire are very probably one man. All seven of his manors were held from Hugh son of Baldric in the North Riding11, all are of similar status, and six of the seven are the only tenancies created by Hugh in the Riding from lands he acquired from the sons of Karli (q.v.). There are no other Gerards on Hugh's Honour. Gerard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4693) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 207.
.............................................................................................................................................
GERARD [* OF LORRAINE *]. Gerard, who held Whittlesford in Cambridgeshire from Count Alan of Brittany, is almost certainly Gerard of Lorraine, who held the adjacent manor of Duxford
1 SUF 25,57
2 SUF 25,86
3 WIL 68,21
4 WIL M12
5 HAM 56,3. 62,1-2
6 SHR 4,3,27
7 LIN 16,9
8 STS 8,25
9 SHR 4,4,20. 6,8
10 SUS 11,3;15;36;66;113
11 YKS 23N4;9-11;13;15-16
from the Count1 and was a juror in Whittlesford Hundred where both manors lay according to the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 38, 42, 99). There are no other Gerards in Cambridgeshire, and no more on Count Alan's extensive Honour. Gerard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 219) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 207.
.............................................................................................................................................
GERARD [* OF TOURNAI-SUR-DIVE *]. Gerard, who held a fief in Shropshire from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury2, is identified as Gerard of Tournai by his grant of the vill of Betton3 recorded in a confirmation of the foundation charter of Shrewsbury abbey: Cartulary of Shrewsbury abbey, i. 33, 38. Tournai is shown to be Tournai-sur-Dive in Lower Normandy (Orne: arrondissement Argentan) by a later charter: Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman families, p. 104. There are no other Gerards in Shropshire, and Earl Roger had no more on his Honour. Gerard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2974) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 204-205.
.............................................................................................................................................
GERARD [* THE CHAMBERLAIN *]. The Gerards who held several parts of the royal manor of Tewkesbury4 are probably Gerard the chamberlain, named at Boddington and Kemerton5, which duplicates those submanors of Tewkesbury. He may also be the Gerard who held land from the king on an unnamed holding and monitored customary dues for him at Chepstow6. One other Gerard held land in the county, at Oakley, from Roger of Lacy; he has no links with royal estates or the chamberlain. Gerard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3449) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 207; the tenant at Oakley is identified as another man (no. 4701).
.............................................................................................................................................
GERARD [* THE DITCHER *]. Gerard, who held a manor in Lopen in Somerset from Count Robert of Mortain7, is probably Gerard the ditcher, named in Exon. as holding a second manor in the vill from Roger of Courseulles8 and in Greinton and Ham from Glastonbury abbey9. He may be the royal servant, Gerard, at Earnshill10, which lies between Lopen and Ham and Greinton. Of the three tenants-in-chief, only the Count of Mortain had another Gerard among his tenants, at Loders in Dorset11, likely to be the same man since in addition to the tenurial link he is the only Gerard in the county. The one other Gerard in Somerset12, at Bratton Seymour, has no apparent links with the ditcher. Gerard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1997) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 207; the tenant at Loders is identified as a Gerold (no. 9903).
.............................................................................................................................................
GERMUND. Germund is a rare name which occurs a dozen times, distributed among half-a-dozen adjacent counties between Buckinghamshire and Norfolk and the lands of four tenants-in-chief, all borne by post-Conquest landowners.
1 CAM 14,18-19
2 SHR 4,23,1-18
3 SHR 4,23,9
4 GLS 1,24;40-41
5 GLS 19,2
6 GLS W10;16
7 SOM 19,6
8 SOM 21,38
9 SOM 8,15;17
10 SOM 46,20
11 DOR 26,41
12 SOM 24,15
.............................................................................................................................................
GERMUND <OF "CUDESSANE">. As the name is rare, the tenants of Walter Giffard at Cudessane in Bedfordshire1 and Swaffham in Norfolk2 are probably the same Germund, despite the distance separating them. Germund of Swaffham is not included Coel; Cudessane is attributed to Germund of Villers.
.............................................................................................................................................
GERMUND <OF OAKLEY>. As the name is rare, the tenants of Ralph Baynard at Little Baddow and Little Oakley in Essex3 are probably the same Germund. In the early thirteenth century the two manors were held with others for five and a half fees from the Baynard Honour by a Richard Fillol, fees held in by 1166 by Richard of Baddow (Badwan): Book of Fees, p. 577; Red Book, i. 348. Germund is unidentified in Coel (nos. 5196, 5198).
.............................................................................................................................................
GERMUND [* OF ST OUEN *]. Geoffrey de Mandeville's tenants at Ivinghoe Aston in Buckinghamshire4, Birchanger in Essex5, and Ashwell, Hainstone and 'Stetchworth' in Hertfordshire6 are probably Germund of St Ouen, named in the Inquisitio Eliensis as a juror in Odsey Hundred, where two of his Hertfordshire manors lay: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 100). The Mandeville Carta of 1166 referred to his 'fee', then in the hands of Walter de Cantilupe and Robert Chevacheshulle, whose relationship to Germund is unknown: Red Book, i. 345. There is no evidence from descent that he is the same man as the tenants of Walter Giffard and Richard son of Count Gilbert in Bedfordshire, Essex and East Anglia (Lewis, Domesday jurors', p. 36), though given that the name is rare and that the tenants of all four tenants-in-chief have at least one manor in the area between Bedfordshire and Essex where the manors of Geoffrey's tenant lay, this possibility cannot be excluded. Germund's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 952) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 205, where it is suggested that he originated from Saint-Ouen-sous-Bailly in Upper Normandy (Seine-Maritime: arrondissement Dieppe).
.............................................................................................................................................
GERMUND <OF VILLERS>. As the name is rare, the tenants of Richard of son of Count Gilbert at Howe in Essex7 and Flowton in Suffolk8 are probably Germund de Villare, who witnessed a charter for Toppesfield for another tenant of Richard: Stoke by Clare cartulary, i. 57-58, 117. Toppesfield is a few miles from Germund's manor at Howe (in Finchingfield). Germund's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 953) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 205, together with the Giffard tenancy in Bedfordshire9. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests Villare is probably either Villers-en-Ouche (Orne: arrondissement Argentan), or Villers-Canivet (Calvados: arrondissement Caen), both in Lower Normandy.
.............................................................................................................................................
GERWY [* OF LES LOGES *]. The three Gerwys in Domesday Book may be the same man and the three Gerins. As his name is very rare, the Gerwy who held a hide on the royal manor of
1 BDF 16,8
2 NFK 66,63
3 ESS 33,13;15
4 BUK 21,5
5 ESS 30,48
6 HRT 33-7-8;12
7 ESS 23,15. 90,53
8 SUF 25,55
9 BDF 16,8
Breamore in Hampshire1 is probably Gerwy of Les Loges, whose wife had a small fief at Temple Guiting in Gloucestershire2. His hide is said to lie in the Isle of Wight, which very probably identifies him as the Gerin who held a hide among the king's thanes at Ningwood3, and also as the Gerin with eighteen acres in Southampton4 and a fief consisting of a single manor at Binton in Warwickshire5. The name of this Gerwy/Gerin is rendered Geri in an Evesham cartulary of the early twelfth century (Darlington, 'Aethelwig', p. 189), suggesting the possibility that he is the pre-Conquest lord of two Shropshire manors6, the only Geris in Domesday Book. The one other Gerwy or Gerin, Gerwy at Oakley in Gloucestershire7, may be the same man. The correct form of his name is uncertain, further complicated by a grant by his wife of land in Temple Guiting to St Peter's Gloucester, for the soul of 'her man', Juricus: Historia ... Gloucestriae, i. 80-81. The manors of Gerwy/Gerin and his wife are recorded in Coel (nos. 2121, 3639) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 208, 441.
.............................................................................................................................................
G[ILBERT] [* BLUNT *]. G, who held land or free men at Boyton in Suffolk from Robert Malet8, is probably Gilbert Blunt, who held the previous manor and seven others from Robert9. They are recorded in Coel (no. 152) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 209, apart from Boyton, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 11988). Dr Keats-Rohan also assigns Manuuic, Ashfield, Thorpe Hall, Leiston and Westleton to Blunt10. Robert had many other Gilberts among his tenants, two with bynames 'of Coleville' and 'of Wissant' who are difficult to distinguish among the unidentified Gilberts.
.............................................................................................................................................
BISHOP [* GILBERT MAMINOT *] OF LISIEUX. Gilbert, bishop of Lisieux, was a tenant-in-chief in six counties and a tenant in five, usually of the bishop of Bayeux. He is almost always referred to simply as the bishop of Lisieux, though once as Gilbert of Lisieux and in Gloucestershire as Gilbert Maminot in the List of Landholders, the scribe interlining bishop of Lisieux above his name. Not that there is any doubt his name or identity, which is recorded in many sources, a particularly detailed and vivid description being provided by Orderic Vitalis (iii. 18-23). There is, however, some doubt about the identity of plain Gilbert Maminot, who occurs once each in Berkshire11 and Buckinghamshire12, and twice each in Kent13 and Yorkshire14, in Kent and Buckinghamshire as a tenant of Bishop Odo. Most authorities assume that this Gilbert Maminot is the bishop of Lisieux; but Round identified him as 'probably' a nephew and namesake of the bishop without, unfortunately, recording his reasons: 'Domesday survey of Berkshire', p. 211. There is some textual support for two Gilbert Maminots. The Gloucestershire interlineation may be a scribal clarification when 'Gilbert Maminot' was found to be ambiguous; Gilbert Maminot and the bishop of Lisieux are named as such and treated as separate individuals in the summary of their holdings in
1 HAM 1,37
2 GLS 76,1
3 HAM IoW9,18
4 HAM S2
5 WAR 34,1
6 SHR 4,3,18;71
7 GLS 67,3
8 SUF 6,134
9 SUF 6,84-88;105;133;254
10 SUF 6,19-21;83;105
11 BRK 1,1
12 BUK 4,33
13 KEN 5,36-37
14 YKS C14. SE,Ac2
the Domesday Monachorum (p. 101); and Gilbert Maminot and the bishop of Lisieux are separately named on the fief of Bishop Odo in Buckinghamshire, as in Kent. The bishop's manors - including those of Gilbert Maminot - are recorded in Coel (no. 849) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 212-13; the plain Gilbert Maminot of Kent, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Yorkshire is here treated as another individual.
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT <OF ENGLEFIELD>. Although the name is common, the Gilberts who held Penn, Enville and Himley in Staffordshire from William son of Ansculf may be one man1. His manors form a fairly close group, Penn being three miles from Himley, and Himley five from Enville. The manors of other Gilberts in the county, all tenants of Robert of Stafford, form a distinct group twenty or more miles further north. William had two other Gilberts among his tenants, at Englefield and Stanford in Berkshire2, the most substantial of all these manors. It is likely that they were held by the Staffordshire tenant, a William de Englefeud holding the third part of a fee of the Honour of Dudley in Himley in the thirteenth century, indicating a link between the Berkshire and Staffordshire holdings: Book of Fees, p. 968. This William de Englefeud is presumably a descendant of Elias de Englesfeld who held three fees of the Dudley Honour in 1166: Red Book, i. 269. Gilbert's Staffordshire manors are recorded in Coel (no. 9384) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 215; the Berkshire tenants are unidentified (nos. 904, 913).
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT [* OF ESKECOT *]. The Gilberts who held Duntisbourne Abbots in Gloucestershire from Roger of Lacy and Bagendon from Hugh the ass3 are identified as Gilbert of Eskecot by his grant of land in those vills to St Peter's of Gloucester: Historia ... Gloucestriae, i. 73. He may also be Roger's tenant at Hampton, Bacton and Ledicot in Herefordshire4. These were almost certainly held by one man since they were in the hands of the same family a century later: Herefordshire Domesday, pp. 12, 42, 46, 85, 100. The family then took its name from Bacton, but this does not of course preclude their descent from Gilbert of Eskecot; at roughly the same date, Richard of Eskotot held three fees from the Lacy Honour in the Cartae of 1166, and three other member of the family also had fees in the Honour: Red Book, i. 282-83. Richard held the royal manor of King's Pyon in the Herefordshire Domesday (p. 48), but his Lacy fees are not recorded there under his name. Gilbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4390) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 210, apart from Bagendon, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 29813).
............................................................................................................................................. GILBERT [* OF GHENT *]. Gilbert, who claimed land in Honington in Lincolnshire through his predecessor Ulf, is almost certainly Gilbert of Ghent, who had a manor in the vill5 and whose principle precedessor was Ulf Fenman (q.v.). Similarly, he must be the Gilbert who claimed land in Luddington and other vills in the county, where the English lord was Ulf Fenman6. .............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT <OF HOPTON>. Although the name is common, the Gilberts who held Hopton, Salt, Cheswardine, Chipnall and Loyton in Staffordshire from Robert of Stafford are probably one man7.
1 STS 12,5;10;13
2 BRK 22,1;9
3 GLS 39,7. 63,4
4 HEF 1,16. 10,16;42
5 LIN 24,84. CK63
6 LIN 63,25
7 STS 11,11-13;53
Hopton and Salt are adjacent, as are Cheswardine and Chipnall, Chipnall being six miles from Loynton. The manors of other Gilberts in the county, all tenants of William son of Ansculf, form a distinct group twenty or more miles further south. Robert had one other tenant named Gilbert, at Aston in Oxfordshire1, a respectable manor comparable to those at Hopton and Cheswardine. As Robert's 1072 charter for Evesham abbey names only one Gilbert among the witnesses, he may be the same man, though witness lists are not comprehensive: Staffordshire chartulary, pp. 178-82. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8174) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 215, apart from Aston, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 27886).
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT [* OF SANNERVILLE *]. The tenant of Roger son of Corbet at Cardeston in Shropshire2 is probably Gilbert of Sannerville, who gave tithes at Chirbury to Shrewsbury abbey: Cartulary of Shrewsbury abbey, i. 34, 39. He is the only Gilbert in the county and Earl Roger's only such tenant or subtenant. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 8231) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 211.
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT <OF WEST DERBY>. Gilbert, who held two carucates from Roger of Poitou at West Derby in South Lancashire3, is his only such tenant, and the only Gilbert in Lancashire. It has been suggested that he may have been a household officer of Roger: VCH Lancashire, i. 285, note 7. He is identified as Geoffrey of Ria in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT <OF WORMLEIGHTON>. Gilbert is a common name; but eight of the nine Gilberts in Warwickshire occur on the interrelated fiefs of the Count of Meulan and Thorkil of Arden so may be the same man. Thorkil's tenant at Ladbroke4 is two miles from the Count's at Hodnell5, and the other Thorkil tenancy in the lost vill Bentone is in the same Hundred, possibly nearby6. Of the Count's other manors, Fenny Compton is two miles from Wormleighton7; and Stoneleigh, Woodcote and Newbold within four or five miles of each other8. Since neither tenant-in-chief had a tenant of named Gilbert elsewhere, this distribution suggests that all eight Gilberts are one man, though his manors were in several different hands in the thirteenth century: Book of Fees, pp. 507-508, 956-58. The ninth Gilbert, a tenant of Osbern son of Richard at Temple Grafton9, is likely to be another individual, and may not have been in possession for long. The manor was mortgaged by Osbern to the abbey of Evesham, which assumed full possession when he could not repay the mortgage; he seized the manor again, but it was held by the abbey in the early twelfth century: Thomas of Marlborough, pp. 134-85, 174-75, 176-79; Darlington, 'Aethelwig', pp. 186-89. Gilbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4757) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 215; the tenant at Grafton is unidentified (no. 28559).
.............................................................................................................................................
1 OXF 27,10
2 SHR 4,4,18
3 CHS R1,43
4 WAR 17,33
5 WAR 16,34
6 WAR 17,36
7 WAR 16,54;57
8 WAR 16,49;51;59
9 WAR 37,7
GILBERT [* SON OF DAMA *]. Gilbert, who held Thorpe Stapleton and Stapleton in Yorkshire from Ilbert of Lacy1, is almost certainly Gilbert son of Dama, who gave tithes in Stapleton to Ilbert's foundation of St Clement, Pontefract: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 185-87; Early Yorkshire families, pp. 83-84. He is the only Gilbert on Ilbert's Honour and the only unidentified Gilbert in Yorkshire. The name Dama does not occur in Domesday Book and appears to be unrecorded elsewhere. Gilbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4622) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 213.
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT [* SON OF TUROLD *]. Gilbert the sheriff, Robert of Tosny's tenant at Clifford castle in Herefordshire2, is identified as the tenant-in-chief Gilbert son of Turold by the duplication of part of the entry on his fief3: Lewis, 'Norman settlement of Herefordshire', p. 207. He has also been identified as Gilbert of Bouillé (Budi), who held a messuage in Warwick4 where the messuages are said to belong 'to the lands which these barons hold outside the Borough', a description which fits Gilbert son of Turold but no one else, the one other Gilbert among the tenants-in-chief in the county - Gilbert of Ghent - being separately listed among the householders. Turold's son may also be Gilbert with the beard, Robert of Tosny's tenant at Duxford in Cambridgeshire5, a county in which he was a tenant-in-chief: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (p. 42); if so, he was probably also Robert's tenant at Stone and Cheddington in Buckinghamshire6, all three valuable manors, two of them - one in each county - acquired from Ulf son of Manni (q.v.). There were no other unidentified Gilberts in those counties. A Gilbert was also Robert's tenant on two manors in Leicestershire7, where one other Gilbert held land in Welham8. Gilbert's tenancies were in the hands of different families by the thirteenth century; but it is doubtful whether this is significant since Gilbert's heirs seem to have failed, or been disinherited, his tenancies-in-chief in seven counties being later attached to other Honours, manors in Cambridgeshire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire falling to the Tosny Honour of Flamstead: VCH Cambridgeshire, ix. 226; VCH Warwickshire, v. 154; VCH Worcestershire, iii. 128. Gilbert's manors - including the messuage in Warwick - are recorded in Coel (no. 495) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 213-14; Gilbert with the beard is identified as another man (no. 1609); Gilbert at Stone is unidentified (no. 1356), and the Leicestershire Gilberts are accidentally linked to a William. Dr Keats-Rohan rejects the derivation of Bouillé (Seine-Maritime: arrondissement Rouen), from Budi, suggesting that Gilbert was more probably from Notre-Dame-du-Hamel (Eure: arrondissement Bernay).
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT [* THE HUNTER *]. The Gilberts who held from Earl Hugh in Cheshire and Dorset are probably Gilbert of Venables, alias Gilbert the hunter. In Cheshire, Gilbert is assigned two fiefs, one under each of his aliases; but their identity is demonstrated by the grant of land in Newbold by Gilbert of Venables to Chester abbey, Newbold being assigned to Gilbert the hunter in Domesday Book9: Lewis, 'Introduction to the Cheshire Domesday', p. 8. Elsewhere in the county, the context indicates that the holdings among the shared lands and the salt-works10 are those of Earl Hugh's main tenants, and Gilbert is therefore Gilbert of Venables, the only Gilbert among them. As the
1 YKS 9W17;50
2 HEF 8,1
3 HEF 25,9
4 WAR B2
5 CAM 20,1
6 BUK 18,1-2
7 LEC 15,13;15
8 LEC 17,19. 40,30
9 CHS 18,1
10 CHS 27,2. S1,7
only Gilbert in Dorset and a tenant of Earl Hugh who had no other known tenant of that name, it is likely that he is also the Gilbert at Fifehead Magdalen1: Farrer, Honors, ii. 286-87; Lewis 'Honour of Chester', p. 60. Fifehead is the earl's most valuable manor in the county, so likely to be enfeoffed to an important tenant. Gilbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2533) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 212; the tenant at Fifehead is unidentified (no. 2758).
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT [* THE MARSHAL *]. Gilbert, who held Garsington in Oxfordshire from the abbey of Abingdon2, is 'surnamed Latimer (that is, Interpreter)', alias Gilbert the marshal, in the abbey's chronicle: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 48-51, 324-25. He is the only Abingdon tenant of this name. Roger of Ivry had a tenant at Horspath, three miles away, the only Gilbert on his Honour, conceivably the same man, though the name is common; Garsington and Horspath were in different hands in the thirteenth century: Book of Fees, pp. 827, 839. Gilbert's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 2789) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 214; the tenant at Horspath is unidentified (no. 27931).
.............................................................................................................................................
GILBERT [* THE PRIEST *]. Gilbert, who held Serlby in Nottinghamshire from Roger of Bully3, is probably Gilbert the priest, who witnessed his foundation charter for Blyth priory: Cartulary of Blyth priory, p. 209. He is the only unidentified Gilbert in the county and the only Gilbert on Roger's Honour. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 9334) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 214.
.............................................................................................................................................
GILLEPATRIC <OF SPENNITHORNE>. All Gillepatrics in Domesday are very probably one man, all being predecessors of Count Alan of Brittany in the North Riding of Yorkshire4. Five of the six manors were subinfeudated to the same tenant, Ribald, and lay within a few miles of each other on either side of the river Ure.
.............................................................................................................................................
GLADWIN. Gladwin is a rare name which occurs eight times, distributed among six counties north of the Thames and seven tenants-in-chief, one Gladwin being a survivor; and the holdings are modest.
.............................................................................................................................................
GLADWIN <OF DIMSDALE>. Gladwin, who shared a manor worth ten shillings at Dimsdale in Staffordshire acquired by Richard the forester5, has no links with other Gladwins, none of whom are within forty-five miles of his holding.
.............................................................................................................................................
GLADWIN <OF DODDINGTON>. As the name is rare, the Gladwin whose modest holding at Doddington in Lincolnshire was acquired by Odo of Bayeux6 may be Gladwin of Wysall, whose manors are thirty to forty miles away; but there are no links to confirm this.
1 DOR 27,1
2 OXF 9,7
3 NTT 9,52
4 YKS 6N28;87;90;94;99;102
5 STS 13,7
6 LIN 4,76
.............................................................................................................................................
GLADWIN <OF NEWTON>. Gladwin, a tenant of Henry of Ferrers holding a plough and a smallholder at Newton in Leicestershire1, is the only survivor of this name; he is possibly Gladwin of Wysall, allowed to survive on a fragment of his previous estate; but there are no links to confirm this. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 26374).
.............................................................................................................................................
GLADWIN <OF PITSTONE>. Gladwin, whose four oxen and woodland for ten pigs at Pitstone in Buckinghamshire was acquired by the Count of Mortain2, has no links with other Gladwins, all distant.
............................................................................................................................................. GLADWIN <OF WYSALL>. As the name is rare, the Gladwins who preceded Roger of Bully at Wysall and Thorpe3 and William Peverel at Stapleford and Selston4, all in Broxtowe wapentake in Nottingham, may be one man. Dr Fleming's thesis on block grants of Hundreds and wapentakes, and in particular of the grant of most of Broxtowe wapentake to William Peverel, would seem to militate against the identity of the two predecessors: Kings and Lords, p. 148. However, the Bully holdings are in a detached portion of Broxtowe wapentake in the extreme south of the county where the Fleming thesis evidently does not apply since four tenants-in-chief held land there and two of the vills were divided between three of them. Apart from the four Nottinghamshire holdings, it is likely that the Nottinghamshire Gladwin is the same man as the Gladwin at Sandiacre in Derbyshire5, less than a mile from Stapleford, just across the county boundary. .............................................................................................................................................
GLEU <OF ROTHWELL>. All Gleus in Domesday Book are almost certainly the same man. He held five of the six manors from Alfred of Lincoln: Wymington in Bedfordshire6 and Cuxwold, Rothwell, South Witham and Thistleton and their dependencies in Lincolnshire7. The sixth manor, held from Godfrey of Cambrai8, also lay in Thistleton. Gleu's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 955) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 216, where it is suggested he may have been Alfred's steward.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODA. The name Goda is rare north of a line from the Bristol Channel to the Wash, where the few occurrences may be scribal errors; and it is only common south of that line if those identified as Countess Goda and Gode of Woolley are included, though there are clusters in Devon and Suffolk. Goda and Gode are masculine and feminine forms of the same name, but are not used consistently to separate the sexes by the Domesday scribe: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 262-63, 273. A further complication is that such forms as God, Godus, Godo, and Golde are sometimes employed by the scribe for Goda or Gode, and Goda where Godiva or Gytha are probably intended.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 LEC 14,24
2 BUK 12,18
3 NTT 9,90-91
4 NTT 10,16;65
5 DBY 17,15
6 BDF 31,1
7 LIN 27,12-14;47-49
8 LIN 51,10
[* COUNTESS *] GODA. Countess Goda, sister of Edward the Confessor, wife of Drogo Count of Mantes, and mother of Earl Ralph of Hereford (q.v.), was dead some time before the Domesday Survey, probably by 1049. She is accorded her title on manors in Sussex, Dorset, Middlesex, Buckinghamshire and Gloucestershire. Where it is omitted, distributional factors sometimes suggest an identification. Most, possibly all of the Godas in the Godwinson heartland of Sussex may be the Countess. In five cases1, she had other manors in vill concerned where her title is given, in some of these being succeeded by a tenant with the uncommon name of Reinbert, which suggests that the God at Mountfield and Godo at Chalvington2, whose manors were acquired by Reinbert, may be the Countess. Two other manors are substantial3, and close to others of hers. Only Birchgrove4, where the holding is tiny and somewhat isolated from the remainder, is particularly doubtful. Even there, however, the holding is freehold held directly from the Crown, and Countess had tiny holdings elsewhere in the county.
Outside Sussex, she is usually accorded her title; but in Devon, the unidentified Goda who preceded Ralph of Fougères may be the Countess5, Ralph being her predecessor on manors in Buckinghamshire and Surrey. In Gloucestershire, the Countess is identified in the first entry on the fief of Sigar of Chocques and so is very probably the Goda from whom he acquired the remainder of the fief6. Elsewhere, the scribe has attributed to her manors which more probably belonged to Countesses Godiva or Gytha (q.v.). Clarke, English nobility, does not include the Countess in his lists; had he done so, she would have ranked among the top twenty in wealth among the nobility, or raised her family from twenty-sixth to thirteenth place. Her lands are discussed by Williams, 'The king's nephew, pp. 331-32, who does not identify her with the God or Godo of Sussex, or the Goda in Devon.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODE [* MOTHER OF WULFRIC *]. If Countess Goda is discounted, the name Goda/Gode and variants occurs fifteen times in the adjacent counties of Huntingdonshire, Hertfordshire and Cambridgeshire, but only once more7 in the remaining thirteen counties of circuits four, five and six. Apart from this skewed distribution, there are grounds for suspecting that all fifteen names refer to one woman, Gode, who shared a holding with Wulfric at Woolley in Huntingdonshire8; she is almost certainly the Golde who held the remainder of Woolley with her son Wulfric9, although Golde is recognised as a different name: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 273.
Gode's five manors at Broadfield, Corneybury, Hoddesdon and Welwyn in Hertfordshire devolved upon five different tenants-in-chief; but since her name is uncommon and the overlord in four cases was Queen Edith10, and in the fifth the queen's husband11, it is likely that all five predecessors are one woman. Other links provide some confirmation. Two of the manors are in the same vill, Hoddesdon; King Edward's manor at Corneybury is a couple of miles from Queen Edith's at Broadfield; and Welwyn was held from Queen Edith by Gode and her son. The son is unnamed; but widows sharing with their sons are a sufficiently rare phenomenon to identify the Hertfordshire Gode as Wulfric's mother with a degree of confidence.
1 SUS 9,78;80;96;100-101
2 SUS 9,22;115
3 SUS 9,23. 10,42
4 SUS 10,110
5 DEV 33,1-2
6 GLS 72,1-3
7 OXF 58,21
8 HUN 19,21
9 HUN 29,5
10 HRT 18,1. 32,2. 34,4. 42,7
11 HRT 17,4
Between Gode's manors in Hertfordshire and Huntingdonshire lay a tight cluster of eight manors in Cambridgeshire, seven of them held by a Goda from Earl Algar1, and another from Edeva the fair2. Six devolved upon Earl Roger of Shrewsbury. Several of them - Shingay, Meldreth, Papworth - were substantial manors, appropriate to a magnate of regional standing. Their status, geographical concentration and tenurial links strongly suggest they were held by one person; and their situation between those in Huntingdonshire and Hertfordshire suggests that person is Gode of Woolley. One further clue points to this conclusion. Gode's successor at Broadfield in Hertfordshire was Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, who acquired the bulk of her Cambridgeshire manors. This insignificant property was the earl's only manor in Hertfordshire, perhaps acquired as a designated successor to Wulfric's mother. If these deductions are valid, she was one of the richer women in Domesday Book, with lands valued at approximately £45, which would rank her very comfortably among the hundred wealthiest untitled landowners in Anglo-Saxon England if recorded in Clarke, English nobility, pp. 32-33. She survived on land at Woolley worth £3, sharing it with her son. Her tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 6158) and referenced in Keats-Rohan, Domesday people, p. 233, under the name Golde.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODEBOLD. Godebold is an uncommon name which occurs on two fiefs and a dozen other manors, distributed among six counties and the lands of four tenants-in-chief and two tenants of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, perhaps borne by four men, one of them a pre-Conquest landowner.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODEBOLD [* FATHER OF ROBERT *]. The Godebolds who held Hockley, Notley and Nayland in Essex from Swein of Essex3 are probably the father of Robert son of Godebold, who founded Little Horkesley priory. Godebold, described in a Westminster charter as a 'baron' of Swein, witnessed a grant by the abbey on the occasion of Swein's burial: Early charters of Essex, pp. 41-42. Swein's tenant is the only Godebold in Little Domesday or adjacent counties. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1849) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 216.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODEBOLD <OF BRICKHILL>. Godebold, who held a hide at Brickhill in Buckinghamshire in 10664, is the only pre-Conquest lord of this name, a name apparently unknown in Anglo-Saxon England: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 263. He has no links with his post-Conquest namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODEBOLD [* THE BOWMAN *]. Godebold, who held a small fief in Devon, is identified as Godebold the bowman in Exon. on the second of his manors there5: Devonshire Domesday, ii. 1098-99, 1110-11. As the name is rare, he may be the one other Godebold with a fief, consisting of a single manor in Somerset6. Possibly also, though less certainly, he is the Godebold who held two manors from William son of Ansculf in Berkshire7, as suggested by Dr Keats-Rohan. Godebold's
1 CAM 13,1-2;4-7. 26,22
2 CAM 14,53
3 ESS 24,19;45;57
4 BUK 14,48
5 DEV 47,1-15
6 SOM 43,1
7 BRK 22,8. 65,18
manors are recorded in Coel (no. 801) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 216; the Berkshire Godebold is identified as another man (no. 12174), with a note that he may be the bowman.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODEBOLD [* THE PRIEST *]. The Godebolds who held three manors from St Alkmund's of Shrewsbury, and Lack from Earl Roger in Shropshire, are almost certainly Godebold the priest, tenant of St Alkmund at Lilleshall1, witness to the earl's foundation charter for Shrewsbury abbey and, according to Orderic Vitalis (ii. 262-63), one of three learned clerks in the earl's household: Cartulary of Shrewsbury abbey, i. 33. As the name is uncommon, he may also be the subtenant of the earl at Preen2. These are the only Godebolds in the border counties, or those adjacent to them. Godebold's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3765) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 216-17.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODFREY [* OF VAUTORTES *]. Geoffrey of Vautortes appears in the Geld Roll for Devon in place of Reginald of Vautortes (q.v.), who held Fardel in Devon from the Count of Mortain according to the Domesday text3: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xliv. Reginald was an important tenant of the Count, but the Count has no other tenant named Godfrey, and none of the half-dozen Godfreys in Devon have links to him.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODGYTH. Godgyth is an uncommon name which occurs seventeen times, distributed among five counties between Essex and Cheshire and the lands of the king and six of his tenants-in-chief, with a small cluster in Cheshire and a larger one in the adjacent counties of Hertfordshire and Essex; one Godgyth being a survivor.
............................................................................................................................................. GODGYTH <OF ALBRIGHTON>. Godgyth, whose modest holding at Albrighton in Shropshire was acquired by Norman the hunter4, has no links with her namesakes. .............................................................................................................................................
GODGYTH <OF MIDDLETON>. Godgyth, whose small property at Middleton in Derbyshire valued at six shillings was retained by the king5, has no links with other Godgyths.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODGYTH <OF THORLEY>. As the name is rare and its distribution skewed, it is likely that most if not all of the cluster of manors in Hertfordshire and Essex were held by one Godgyth, a free woman who held the valuable manor of Thorley in Hertfordshire6. She was the man of Esger the constable (q.v.) on her six demesne holdings in that county. Of the four acquired by Count Eustace of Boulogne7, one lay in Hoddesdon, where another of her manors devolved upon Geoffrey de Mandeville, who also acquired Thorley and the nearby manor of Wickham, held by one of her men8. The remaining property, held by another of her men and acquired by the bishop of London,
1 SHR 3g,3;5-6;8. 4,27,7
2 SHR 4,21,7
3 DEV 15,67
4 SHR 4,25,6
5 DBY 1,34
6 HRT 33,18
7 HRT 17,6-7;10;14
8 HRT 33,13;18-19
was at Thorley1, where the bishop claimed he had bought her other manor, that acquired by Geoffrey de Mandeville2.
Of the three Essex manors, that of Geoffrey de Mandeville at Hallingbury3, almost certainly belonged to Godgyth of Thorley since, apart from the tenurial link, it is less than three miles from Thorley, just across the county border. The identity of the others is less certain as there are no apparent links; but three individuals of this name in south-west Essex seems improbable when the name is rare elsewhere. Of the two, the Godgyth of Norton Mandeville4 is likely to be Geoffrey's predecessor. The surname of the vill suggests this; and although it had been argued that the surname originates at a later date and does not signify an early Mandeville interest, it would be an extraordinary coincidence if another Godgyth held land in a vill which later acquired a connection with the predecessor of Godgyth of Thorley, the name being rare. The concurrent suggestion that Godgyth is a scribal error for Godhild (q.v.), who had another holding in the vill from Haimo the steward5, is an unnecessary hypothesis, given that Godgyth is attested in the county: VCH Essex, iv. 151-52, 179. Like Norton, Basildon6 is a free holding, appropriate to the status of Godgyth of Thorley. Finally, she is likely to be the Godgyth who had '2 houses and 14 acres' in Colchester7, evidently a wealthy woman, though in this case the date to which the entry refers is, on the face of it, 1086, though this is also true of may urban holdings where a 1066 tenure may reasonably be suspected. It is perhaps more likely than not that Godgyth of Thorley held this with the other three Essex properties.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODGYTH <OF WARFORD>. As the name is rare and its distribution skewed, it is probable that the four Godgyths in Cheshire8, all of whose manors devolved upon Ranulf of Mainwaring, are one woman. Warford, 'Chapmonswiche' and Ollerton are adjacent to each other, Tetton twelve miles further south. She is the only Godgyth to survive until 1086, retaining her three-shilling holding at Warford as Ranulf's tenant. Warford is assigned to Ranulf's demesne in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODHILD <OF GREENSTED>. It is likely that all four Godhilds in Domesday Book are the same woman, a predecessor of Haimo the sheriff on three holdings in Essex, including the substantial manor of Greensted9. The fourth manor, at Wateringbury in Kent10, of the same value as Greensted, was acquired by the bishop of Bayeux. Haimo was sheriff in Kent and a tenant of the bishop there, so the link, though indirect, is perhaps sufficient in view of the rarity of the name and the status of the manors, to suggest that the Godhilds in both counties are the same woman.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODIVA. The distribution of the name Godiva is skewed, the majority - and the only concentration - clustering in the adjacent counties of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, Warwickshire, Worcestershire, Shropshire and Staffordshire in the north-west Midlands. This is Mercian territory, where Godiva is named as the Countess in most cases. Outside this area, the name Godiva is not particularly common, occurring fewer than twenty times, distributed among nine counties and the lands of fifteen tenants-in-chief, suggesting a preponderance of minor landowners.
1 HRT 4,23
2 HRT 4,23. 33,18
3 ESS 30,26
4 ESS 5,6
5 ESS 28,16
6 ESS 24,8
7 ESS B3a
8 CHS 20,5;7-8;12
9 ESS 28,13-14;16
10 KEN 5,98
.............................................................................................................................................
[* COUNTESS *] GODIVA. Countess Godiva, wife of Earl Leofric of Mercia, mother of Earl Algar and grandmother of Earls Edwin and Morcar, is the Lady Godiva who rode naked through the streets of Coventry according to thirteenth-century legend. Her title is supplied on manors in Worcestershire, Leicestershire, Warwickshire, Staffordshire, Shropshire and Nottinghamshire. Elsewhere, she is almost certainly the Countess Goda who held Appleby Magna in Derbyshire from Burton abbey1 since she held the other part of the vill2 and had close relations with Burton abbey, while Goda had no land or men north of Lavendon in Buckinghamshire; Stenton describes her name in this entry as 'merely a contracted form' of Godiva: 'Domesday survey of Leicestershire', p. 290. She very probably held Essington is Staffordshire, misplaced in the Warwickshire folios3, where no pre-Conquest lord is named. If not a duplicate of her manor in the Staffordshire folios4, it is the other half of the vill. There are few other unidentified Godivas whose holdings might be suspected of belonging to the Countess. Of those which lay within Mercian territory, Godiva at Furtho in Northamptonshire5 is a modest, shared holding, remote from others and without tenurial associations. Newton in Warwickshire6 is more likely to have been hers. Godiva was succeeded there by an Aldgyth, conceivably her granddaughter, Aldgyth wife of Gruffydd (q.v.). This would strengthen an identification; but, irrespective of Aldgyth's identity, Godiva may be the Countess, all other Godivas in the county being the Lady.
Professor Meyer identifies the Godiva who held land acquired by Earl Roger and Robert of Stafford in Staffordshire7, and by Roger of Poitou at Melling in Lancashire8, as Lady Godiva: 'Women's estates', p. 121. The Staffordshire manors, however, are more likely to have been held by another woman, Godiva of Madeley; and although the Leofricsons dominated Cheshire, they held nothing in Lancashire and the holding there is too small and remote to be safely assigned to the Countess. A list of Lady Godiva's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 217-18, which does not include Newton but adds a waste virgate at Cauldon in Staffordshire9 and Melling in Lancashire10. She would be ranked forty-first among the nobility by Dr Clarke, but is omitted from his table (p. 14). Her estates are also discussed by Dr Baxter, who does not include those in Staffordshire and Lancashire: Earls of Mercia, pp. 127, 160, 172, 180, 183, 291, 309, 314. She is listed in Coel (no. 3505) and in Domesday people, p. 218, with a note that fiefs entered under her name in Leicestershire and Warwickshire were escheats; she was dead before then.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODIVA <OF MADELEY>. The six unidentified Godivas in Staffordshire are probably one woman. Her manors cluster around Moddershall11, all but Moddershall itself devolving upon one tenant-in-chief, Robert of Stafford12. Moddershall was held by Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, who acquired the Shropshire manors of Lady Godiva, who has been identified as the Staffordshire Godiva: Meyer, 'Women's estates', p. 121. However, where she is given her title, her manors in
1 DBY 3,2
2 LEC 11,2
3 WAR 27,6
4 STS 22,12
5 NTH 18,34
6 WAR 17,42
7 STS 8,21. 11,4;13;23;37;42
8 CHS R1,33
9 STS 11,4
10 CHS R1,33
11 STS 8,21
12 STS 11,4;13;23;37;42
Staffordshire devolved upon William son of Ansculf1, who also succeeded her in Warwickshire2. These manors form a distinct group, twenty-five miles south of those around Moddershall. The Godiva at Cheswardine was bound to make a customary payment, and at Madeley 'could not withdraw'3, a phrase which suggests an unnamed overlord, which is unlikely for the countess on a lay estate; these two Godivas have nevertheless been identified as the countess by another scholar: Slade, 'Domesday survey of Staffordshire', p. 7. However, none of the manors appear to have associations with Lady Godiva's family, though Robert of Stafford did acquire the large manor of Bradley from her grandson, Edwin4: Baxter, Earls of Mercia, passim. It seems likely, therefore, that this cluster was held by another woman, here named after her principle manor. Clarke, English nobility, p. 218, assigns Cauldon5 to the Countess but not the remaining manors; Dr Baxter, none of them.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODIVA <OF NORTON>. Godiva, who shared a modest holding at Norton in Derbyshire acquired by Roger of Bully6, has no links with other Godivas. Roger had no other Godivas among his predecessors or tenants, and 'Scarsdale', where Norton lay, is not one of the wapentakes in which he received a block grant, so it is unlikely that Godiva is the Countess whose single manor he obtained on that basis: Fleming, Kings and lords, pp. 162-64. Norton has no known Mercia associations; Godiva is not identified as the Countess by Baxter, Earls of Mercia, p. 290.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODIVA [* WIFE OF BRICTRIC *]. The Godivas who held the valuable manors of Torbryan and Dodbrooke in Devon7 are probably Godiva wife of Brictric, who owed tax on a half-hide in Teignton Hundred: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xxxviii. Domesday Book records no land held by either a Godiva or Brictric which fits this description; but she is the only surviving Godiva in the county. At Torbryan, Brictric is described as 'her man' in Exon., so it is likely she is the Godiva who succeeded an unnamed husband at Mells in Somerset8, the one other surviving Godiva in Domesday Book. Her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 835) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 218, apart from Mells, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 14632).
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC [* OF CALVERLEIGH *]. Godric, who modest manors in Calverleigh and Bulworthy among the king's thanes in Devon9, is named Godric of Calverleigh (Calodelie) in the Geld Roll for Tiverton Hundred, where Calverleigh lay and where he owed tax on a half-virgate: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xxiv. He is the only survivor of this name in Devon, with no apparent links to survivors in the adjacent counties of Dorset and Somerset or to the pre-Conquest Godrics in the county or elsewhere. On both manors he was preceded by an Almer, a combination which occurs nowhere else in Great Domesday as an identifying characteristic. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 808) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 221.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 STS 12,5;21-22
2 WAR 27,6
3 STS 11,13;37
4 STS 11,6;67-68
5 STS 11,4
6 DBY 16,6
7 DEV 52,52-53
8 SOM 8,25
9 DEV 52,20-21
GODRIC [* OF COLCHESTER *]. Godric, who held land and a church in Colchester and four hides in Greenstead attached to the town1, is almost certainly Godric of Colchester, who held land in East Donyland2 acquired by Count Eustace of Boulogne, who also obtained a quarter of his holding in Colchester.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC <OF HOUGHTON>. The three surviving Godrics in Leicestershire may be one man. The survivors at Loughborough and Burton probably are, both being tenants of Earl Hugh of Chester on holdings which are close to each other and are components of the same manor, Barrow3. The earl had no other tenants of this name on his Honour. Less certainly, the survivor at Houghton, fourteen miles south-east of Barrow, acquired by Henry of Ferrers4, may be the same Godric. There are a number of surviving Godrics in adjacent counties, including a tenant of Henry of Ferrers in Derbyshire5; but the name is common and none of the manors distinguished by status or other characteristics other than those assigned to Godric of Shuttington. All three Leicestershire Godrics are unidentified in Coel (nos. 26365, 26677, 26680), as is the Derbyshire tenant (no. 32252).
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC <OF LAWTON>. All Godrics in Cheshire may be one man. All but two of his fourteen manors form a fairly tight group in the adjacent Hundreds of Hamestan and Middlewich, nine of them forming the fief of Hugh son of Norman6. Of the other three, Earl Hugh retained Marton in Hamestan7 with Ollerton8, a few miles to the north; Robert son of Hugh acquired Cranage9, also in Hamestan; and William Malbank obtained Hassall in Middlewich Hundred10, as well as the fourteenth manor, Wilkesley11. Wilkesley is almost twenty-five miles from the nearest of the other manors, but the tenurial link suggests it was held by the Godric on the other thirteen manors. Sawyer and Thacker suggest that the Godric who held Talke and Audley in Staffordshire in 1066 is the same man, which is not unlikely, they being three and five miles respectively from one of Godric's Cheshire manors12: 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', p. 322. Godric may also have held Betley13, four miles from Audley. He is unlikely to be the any of the remaining Godrics in Staffordshire, tenants and in one case predecessor of Robert of Stafford and the abbey of Rheims; there are no indications that the Cheshire Godric was among the many survivors in that county.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC <OF SHUTTINGTON>. Seven of the eight Godrics in Warwickshire are probably one man. These seven occur on the fiefs of the Count of Meulan and Thorkil of Warwick, which share several tenants and predecessors and include a high proportion of English survivors, Godrics among them on both fiefs. Four were survivors, tenants of the Count at Shuttington, Astley and 'Smercote'14 and of Thorkil at Newton15. At Shuttington, Godric retained his manor for two decades
1 ESS B1-2
2 ESS 20,42
3 LEC 43,2;4
4 LEC 14,16
5 DBY 6,12
6 CHS 11,1-8. 27,4
7 CHS 1,28
8 CHS 1,9
9 CHS 2,31
10 CHS 8,12
11 CHS 8,32
12 STS 17,13-14
13 STS 17,10
14 WAR 16,23;42-43
15 WAR 17,41
so he may be the pre-Conquest lord on the manors acquired by the Count of Meulan. Of these, Seckington1 is adjacent to Shuttington, where the Count acquired a second manor held by Godric2; and Minworth3, though detached from the others, is roughly equidistant from the two groups into which the remaining manors fall, around Shuttington and Astley. The eighth manor, at Studley4, devolved upon a different tenant-in-chief and was a considerable distance away, so may have been held by a second Godric. Godric's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 4754) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 221, apart from Shuttington, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 28293).
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC [* SON OF EDEVA *]. Godric, who held a modest manor in Burton in Lincolnshire acquired by Peter of Valognes5, is probably the lawman, Godric son of Edeva, who had full jurisdiction in Lincoln to which Peter succeeded6. His mother is probably Edeva wife of Topi (q.v.), apparently the only Edeva in the county: Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon wills, pp. 208, 211. Burton was a jurisdiction of Scampton, a manor of Ulf Fenman (q.v.), who may be his brother; though a jurisdiction, 'there was a hall there, however'. If Godric's relations are correctly identified, he may be the Godric who held land in any of the seventeen vills in which other members of the family were landowners; but there are several identified Godrics in the county and unidentified Godrics are numerous.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC [* SON OF FREDEGIS *]. Godric, whose manors of Costock and Gotham in Nottinghamshire were acquired by Roger of Bully and Saewin of Kingston7, is probably Godric son of Fredegis, whose land in those vills was granted to St Cuthbert's of Durham at some time between 1086 and 1100: Bates, Regesta, no. 116, p. 409. Godric's father probably held land in 'Warby' so the Godric whose manor there was acquired by Roger of Bully may be his son8. His name is too common to be safely identified elsewhere.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC [* THE HUNTER *]. Godric, who held a virgate in Gillingham in Dorset9, is almost certainly Godric the hunter, named in the Geld Roll for the Gillingham Hundred (where he is the only Godric). He is perhaps also the Godric among the king's thanes in Badbury Hundred, where he was succeeded by another hunter, Godwin10. Two other Godrics held land among the king's thanes in 1086, one identified in the Geld Roll as Godric the priest; the other, at Stourton Caundle11, may be the hunter, whose manor is closer and of similar status - three such survivors seems unlikely: VCH Dorset, iii. 53, 123, 141. Godric the hunter held Mere in Wiltshire in 1086, just across the county border from Gillingham, and probably Hartham, the following entry, where he succeeded his father, a common occurrence among the proto-serjeanties of the area12. He may be the Godric who had another manor in the vill in 106613. The name, however, is too common to assign to him
1 WAR 16,25
2 WAR 16,22
3 WAR 17,4
4 WAR 29,5
5 LIN 60,1
6 LIN C2-3
7 NTT 9,94. 30,24
8 NTT 9,105. 16,8
9 DOR 56,4
10 DOR 56,27
11 DOR 56,54
12 WIL 67,45-46
13 WIL 27,22
the nearby holdings of Weston and Todber or others in those counties1. Godric's 1086 tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 1787) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 221, apart from Godric at Caundle, who is unidentified (no. 3039).
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC [* THE PRIEST *]. Godric, who held five hides at Brianspuddle2 among the king's thanes of Dorset, is named Godric the priest in the Geld Roll for Bere Hundred, where Brianspuddle lay: VCH Dorset, iii. 134. Two other survivors of this name in the county are identified as another Godric. Godric's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1764) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 221.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC [* THE SHERIFF *]. Godric the sheriff of Berkshire and possibly of Buckinghamshire (Green, English sheriffs, pp. 26, 28) is named several times in the Berkshire folios3, twice as predecessor of Henry of Ferrers4 who acquired Fifield, Hendred and Woolhampton from him5, so he is probably the Godric who preceded Ferrers at Hendred6, on a second manor in Fifield, at Bagshot and Sparsholt7, and on the two manors which constituted his fief in Wiltshire8. His official status and presence in Wiltshire suggest he may be the Godric who held Lydiard Millicent before the Conquest9. Lydiard is by a considerable margin the most substantial royal manor held by an unidentified Godric. He may also be the Godric whose manor of Shalstone in Buckinghamshire was acquired by the bishop of Bayeux, who succeeded the sheriff and one of his men at Weston Turville10.
Two miles from Weston, the bishop of Lincoln acquired the substantial manor of Buckland from Bishop Wulfwy's brother, Godric11. The bishop also obtained respectable manors at Dean and Riseley in Bedfordshire from the royal thane, Godric12, and a substantial manor at Denton in Huntingdonshire13 from Godric. In Bedfordshire, one of the sheriff's men had another manor in Riseley14, and 'Godric, the sheriff's man' at Easton15 may well be a scribal error for the sheriff himself, Easton, Dean and Riseley being near each other in 'Stodden' Hundred: Abels, 'Introduction to the Bedfordshire Domesday', p. 32, note 213. In view of these associations, it is not unlikely that the bishop's predecessor in all three counties is the same man, his brother, who was also the sheriff of Berkshire. He may possibly be the Godric at Hemingford Abbots in Huntingdonshire16, a few miles from Easton, acquired by Ramsey abbey from the only Godric among its predecessors. Although the name is common, these are the only Godrics in either Bedfordshire or Huntingdonshire apart from a priest. On similar grounds, the eight Godrics in Leicestershire in 1066, all predecessors of the bishop of Lincoln17, may be him too. This Godric was succeeded on
1 DOR 26,1. 36,1
2 DOR 56,48
3 BRK 1,26-27;32;37;42
4 BRK 1,37. 21,13
5 BRK 21,15;17;22
6 BRK 1,38
7 BRK 21,6;12;16
8 WIL 39,1-2
9 WIL 1,21
10 BUK 4,5;30
11 BUK 3a,2
12 BDF 4,1;3
13 HUN 2,5. D8
14 BDF 23,25
15 BDF 17,7
16 HUN 6,17
17 LEC 3,5-10;12-13
six of his manors by a Ralph, possibly the Ralph son of Osmund who succeeded Godric at Hemingford Abbots, providing another possible link, though slight, between the Godrics of Bedfordshire, Huntingdonshire and Lincolnshire. Bishop Wulfwy had another brother, Alwin, perhaps Alwin Devil (q.v.), whose lands in Bedfordshire and Huntingdonshire were also added to the endowment of the bishopric of Lincoln. According to the Abingdon chronicle, Godric was killed at the battle of Hastings, though Domesday Book records one of his misappropriations after that date1: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, i. 201, 224-25. His daughter was taught gold embroidery at the king's expense2. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 309-10, who ranks him eighty-second in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors here attributed to bishop Wulfwy's brother (as sheriff) would raise him almost forty places.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODRIC [* THE STEWARD *]. The Godrics who managed many of the royal manors in Norfolk3 or were otherwise engaged in their affairs - too numerous to list here - are almost certainly Godric the steward, who also managed royal manors in Suffolk where he is accorded his title4. He is probably the Godric who appears on ten other fiefs in Norfolk in 1086 - again, too numerous to list - there acting in a steward-like capacity in relation to royal manors or to the forfeiture of Earl Ralph Wader (q.v.), whom he may have served before his forfeiture, managing the earl's lands on behalf of the king thereafter5 and consequently involved in disputes arising from their redistribution, notably on the fief of Roger Bigot.
Godric the steward held land in his own right in 1086, though on a much lesser scale. He had fiefs in Norfolk and Suffolk, for the most part acquired from Edwin, who may be his uncle, whose will names some of these manors: Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon wills, pp. 86-89, 19-201. Godric's brother, Ketil Alder (q.v.), also bequeathed him land in Essex and Norfolk, though this was in other hands in 1086: Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon wills, pp. 90-91, 198, 204. He also held the royal manor of Great Sampford in Essex 'in the King's hands'6 and Exning, in Suffolk but recorded in Cambridgeshire7. In East Anglia his identity was so apparent to the scribes that he is sometimes referred to simply as G the steward8, or simply G9. He was the predecessor of Count Alan of Brittany at Foxley in Norfolk10, where the descent of his manor establishes that he is the same man as Count Alan's steward on the great manor of Gilling in Yorkshire11, and his tenant on two manors in Lincolnshire12: Farrer, Honors, iii. 102-110; Early Yorkshire charters, v. 205-207. Godric was later sheriff of Norfolk for William Rufus; his son, Ralph, was active under Henry I: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 108-109. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 281) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 219-21, apart from the Lincolnshire manors, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 33436, 33440).
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EARL *] GODWIN. Although Godwin is one of the most common names in Domesday Book, the scribe appears to have been careful to identify the long-dead Earl Godwin by his title. There are
1 BRK 21,13
2 BUK 19,3
3 NFK 1,71-208
4 SUF 1,61-95
5 NFK 66,81
6 ESS 1,30
7 CAM 1,12
8 SUF 7,9
9 NFK 12,1;27
10 NFK 4,31
11 YKS 6N1
12 LIN 12,53-54;57
only a handful of cases where he may have failed to do so. The earl is certainly the Godwin exiled with Harold in an entry in Herefordshire1. The unidentified Godwin at Tilton in Sussex2 may be the earl, his son, Harold, having another manor in the same vill3. The substantial manors of Sheffield and Marden, held in freehold from the Crown4, may also have been his, and Dr Clarke suggests that so was Mayfield5, the most valuable manor in Rotherfield Hundred other than Rotherfield itself, which was held by the earl. The Domesday Monachorum (pp. 92-93) reveals that he held the boroughs of Saltwood and Langport in Kent6, and he is almost certainly the Godwin who unjustly held the valuable archiepiscopal manor of Sundridge according to the same source7; Domesday is silent on the pre-Conquest owners in all three cases. Exon. also states that he is the Earl Edwin - who otherwise held nothing south of the Thames - who according to Domesday Book held the third part, 'or the third oak', of the royal manor of Burton Bradstock in Dorset8, later attached to Frampton, held in 1066 by Gytha, almost certainly Earl Godwin's wife9.
In the counties in which the earl held land, there are a further five manors assessed at more than five hides or £5 held by unidentified Godwins, but insufficient information to associate them with the earl. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 164-69, which does not include the three manors recorded in the Domesday Monachorum, Chatham in Kent10, or the valueless Staunton in Herefordshire11. He attributes Tilton, Sheffield and Marden in Sussex to the earl (as here), and Woodchester in Gloucestershire12, held by his wife, and Pembridge in Herefordshire, held by Harold13. He is ranked third in wealth among the nobility by Dr Clarke; the additional manors would not affect this. Baxter, Earls of Mercia, p. 129, supplies a higher estimate of his manorial income; the Statistics database total (£812) is somewhat higher still.
.............................................................................................................................................
G[ODWIN] [* HEALFDENE *]. G, who 'also' held Gnatingdon in Norfolk in 106614, is probably Godwin Healfdene, the tenant-in-chief there twenty years later; there is no other plausible explanation of the abbreviation on this fief.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN <OF BARROWBY>. The Godwins from whom Robert Malet acquired his entire fief in Lincolnshire are almost certainly one man, a significant landowner with two of the most substantial manors in Kesteven15. He is implicitly named as Robert's predecessor in the Lincolnshire Claims, which record that Robert ought to have land in Ingoldsby 'through Azur, his predecessor'16. Azur is not named in the relevant entry17, which is a jurisdiction of Barrowby, Godwin's chief manor. Since Malet acquired his fief from Godwin, and nothing from Azur, it would appear that Godwin had replaced - or been replaced by - Azur.
1 HEF 19,3
2 SUS 10,20-21
3 SUS 9,43
4 SUS 10,111. 11,38
5 SUS 10,118
6 KEN 2,41;43
7 KEN 2,5
8 DOR 1,2
9 DOR 17,1
10 KEN 5,89
11 HEF 1,74
12 GLS 1,63
13 HEF 19,2
14 NFK 61,3
15 LIN 58,1-8
16 LIN CK35
17 LIN 58,3
Most of Robert Malet's acquisitions outside Kesteven lay in 'Winnibriggs' wapentake, where both Robert and Berengar of Tosny succeeded to three manors of a Godwin, two of them in the same vill as one of Malet's, both of them fairly substantial1. These Godwins, too, may be Malet's predecessor. Additionally, three holdings acquired by Ivo Tallboys were in the jurisdiction of Barrowby, one of Malet's capital manors; and since no pre-Conquest owner is named, he is presumably the Godwin of Barrowby2. Ivo also obtained two other holdings from a Godwin; but these were modest, shared with others, and at the other end of the county, so possibly held by another Godwin; the name is a common one.
Neither Ivo or the Tosnys acquired land from a Godwin outside Lincolnshire. Robert Malet, however, had Godwins among his predecessors in four counties. His one manor in Rutland had been held by a Godwin; and since it was reasonably endowed, no great distance away, and held by the only Godwin in the county, it is more likely than not that this Godwin was Robert's predecessor in Lincolnshire3. In Essex and East Anglia, Robert acquired a number of valuable manors from Godwins, three of them with different bynames, any one of whom might be the Lincolnshire Godwin - possibly Godwin son of Alfhere - rather than a fourth individual. However, several tenants-in-chief had three individually-named predecessors with this forename, even four would not be unique, so a connection with the Lincolnshire Godwin, though plausible, is insecure. A list of Godwin's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 311-12, which includes only those acquired by Robert Malet. He suggests (pp. 131-32) that Godwin was the father, or at least the immediate predecessor, of Azur son of Svala (q.v.), and ranks the pair ninetieth in wealth among untitled laymen; the additional manors attributed to them here would raise them two dozen places.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* OF *] BENFIELD. Godwin Benfield4 or Godwin of Benfield5, whose men in Hertfordshire were acquired by the bishop of London and Robert Gernon, appears to be a lord of several men without demesne land of his own in the county. There is a Benfield in Sussex6; but it is more likely that Benfield (Benefella) is a scribal error for Bentfield (Benedfelda), Bentfield Bury being a valuable manor of Robert Gernon in Essex, where he was preceded by an anonymous free man who may well be Godwin7, who is once named Godwin de Benedfelle8. Godwin may also be Gernon's predecessor on his even more valuable of Wormingfield and perhaps Culvert's Farm9. The bishop of London was also preceded by a Godwin on a respectable manor at Little Burstead and a lesser one at Horndon-on-the-Hill in the county10, and on a substantial manor in Stepney11, where he is the only Godwin in the county, suggesting he is the same Godwin. The bishop had no other predecessors or tenants named Godwin elsewhere on his Honour, nor perhaps did Robert Gernon (below).
Robert Gernon had predecessors in Hertfordshire named Godwin of Soulbury12, Godwin son of Wulfstan13, and Godwin, Almer of Bennington's man, at 'Woolwicks'14. All three are
1 LIN 18,28;31. 19,1
2 LIN 14,88-89;95
3 RUT 3,10
4 HRT 4,14. 20,11
5 HRT 4,18-19. 20,3;12
6 SUS 12,22
7 ESS 32,19
8 HRT 4,19
9 ESS 32,24;36
10 ESS 4,8;10
11 MDX 3,4
12 HRT 20,7
13 HRT 20,9
14 HRT 20,5
possibly Godwin of Benfield. Apart from the tenurial link, the Godwins of Benfield, Soulbury and 'Woolwicks' each held land in Broadwater Hundred, 'Woolwicks' lying in Stevenage, adjacent to Godwin of Benfield's holding at Graveley. If these three Godwins are the same man, then they can probably also be identified with Godwin of Letchworth, an overlord at Willian, also in Broadwater Hundred1, where Godwin of Soulbury held the valuable manor of Letchworth2, adjacent to Willian. As Godwin of Benfield, Godwin of Letchworth and Godwin son of Wulfstan were all overlords apparently without demesne land in the county, it is not unlikely they are the same man, who is possibly also Godwin of Soulbury, the one of the four with a manor of his own in Hertfordshire. It is otherwise difficult to understand, as Round observed, 'what could have led Hertfordshire men to seek him [Godwin of Benfield] as a lord', an observation which applies equally to Godwin of Letchworth and Godwin son of Wulfstan: 'Domesday survey of Hertfordshire', p. 277. The scarcity of demesne holdings diminishes the possibility that the several bynames are an attempt by the scribe to distinguish different Godwins. To complicate matters further, Soulbury is in Buckinghamshire, where there are several Godwins with valuable manors, including men or thanes of the king and earls Harold and Leofwin, though the only Godwin at Soulbury itself is Godwin the beadle, who held a half-hide there in 10863, one of only two surviving Godwins in the county, the other a priest. It is conceivable that he is the pre-Conquest royal thane surviving on a fragment of his previous estate. Dr Abels suggests a somewhat different reconstruction of these identities: 'Introduction to the Hertfordshire Domesday', pp. 25-26, 30.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* OF CHITTLEHAMPTON *]. The Godwins who held eleven consecutive manors among the king's thanes of Devon, said to be the same man on nine of them4, is probably Godwin of Chittlehampton, named in the Geld Roll for Axmouth Hundred where the last of these manors lay: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xxxv. One of the other two manors5 is Chittlehampton itself, the remaining manor being acquired from an Alstan who held all those not held Godwin himself in 1066. In Somerset, he is identified in the Geld Roll as the Godwin named in Exon. at Buckland St Mary6: VCH Somerset, i. 535. Godwin retained his manors of Chittlehampton, Holbrook and 'Down Umfraville' for two decades7, so it is not unlikely that he is the Godwin at Ridgehill and at Draycott, both of whom survived on their manors during the same period, the only others Godwins in the south-western counties to do so8; at Draycott, Godwin is described as 'the Englishman in Exon. Other surviving Godwins in the two counties may be another man, Godwin the priest. Godwin's Devonshire manors are recorded in Coel (no. 805) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 222, apart from Natson and Cheriton9, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 4308, 4310). In Somerset, the Godwins at Ridgehill and Draycot are unidentified (nos. 14721, 15303); the Godwin at Buckland is not included in Coel, where the manor is assigned to the demesne of the tenant-in-chief, Harding.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* OF HORMEAD *]. Godwin, who held the two manors which constituted the fief of Prince Edgar in Hertfordshire10, stated to be the same Godwin in the text, is almost certainly
1 HRT 34,7
2 HRT 20,7
3 BUK 57,18
4 DEV 52,11-19
5 DEV 52,9-10
6 SOM 47,7
7 DEV 52,10;18-19
8 SOM 16,10. 47,15
9 DEV 52,9;11
10 HRT 38,1-2
Godwin of Hormead, a juror in 'Edwinstree' Hundred, where the fief lay: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 100). Godwin's manors are valuable; there are no comparable tenancies held by a Godwin in Hertfordshire or adjacent counties, the nearest equivalent being Godwin of Shepshed in Leicestershire, with whom he has no apparent links. Godwin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8934) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 222.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN <OF MUNDON>. The Godwins who preceded Eudo the steward at Harlow, Mundon and Weeley in Essex1, and at Eriswell and Chamberlain's Hall in Suffolk2, are described as royal thanes on two of the Essex manors and on that in Suffolk. Four of the manors are valuable, Weeley and Chamberlain's Hall being the two most valuable on Eudo's Honour in 1086, while Mundon and Eriswell ranked fifth and sixth. The one other royal thane named Godwin in the two counties, at Wickford3, held the most valuable of all the manors in 1066; he may be the same Godwin. Eudo acquired one other manor from a royal thane, at Braxted4. The thane is unnamed, but since the manor is valuable and Eudo acquired the lands of no other royal thanes in Essex or East Anglia, he too may be Godwin of Mundon. The name Godwin is so common that he may have held other manors which cannot be identified, the most likely being Ridgewell in Essex5, as valuable as the most valuable of Eudo's manors. Ridgewell was acquired by Count Eustace of Boulogne, along with the valuable manor of a Godwin at Witchingham in Norfolk6; but, apart from the value of their manors, there are no links to indicate whether the predecessors of Eudo and Eustace are the same man. A list of Godwin of Mundon's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, p. 311, which does not include Braxted, Ridgewell or Wickford. Dr Clarke ranks him eighty-fifth in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Braxted would raise him a dozen places; either Ridgewell or Wickford another dozen.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN <OF SHEPSHED>. Godwin, who held the substantial manor of Shepshed in Leicestershire from the king in 10867, 'also' held Dishley and farmed several other valuable royal manors, all apart from Shepshed previously held by Queen Edith8. The three other surviving Godwins in the county held manors of little value without discernible links to the royal farmer whose closest namesake with manors of comparable status is Godwin of Hormead in Hertfordshire. Godwin at Shepshed and Dishley is unidentified in Coel (nos. 26165-66); the manors he farmed are assigned to the royal demesne.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN <OF TISSINGTON>. The eight Godwins in Derbyshire, all predecessors of Henry of Ferrers, are probably one man. Although Dr Fleming's thesis might suggest that Henry acquired the manors as part of the grant of the bulk of the wapentakes concerned, there are enough connections between them to suggest they were held by one man: Kings and lords, pp. 151-52, 164-65. Barrow is adjacent to Stenson9, and Kedleston close to Ireton10, while Godwin shared Tissington and
1 ESS 25,2;5;22
2 SUF 28,1a;1b
3 ESS 24,10
4 ESS 25,1
5 ESS 20,23
6 NFK 5,4
7 LEC 1,10
8 LEC 1,6-9
9 DBY 6,82;87
10 DBY 6,80;92
Hartington1 with an Ulfkil, and Kedleston and Barrow with a Wulfsi2. Of the remainder, Yeldersley3 lay between Tissington and Kedleston, only Hoon4 is detached from all the others. The interpretation of the place-name - Hoge - is, however, uncertain; and if it is Houghpark, as suggested in the Place-names of Derbyshire (iii. 574), then it is adjacent to Yeldersley.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN <OF WORTHY>. The predecessors of Bernard Pancevolt on five manors in Hampshire, another in Wiltshire, and three houses in Southampton are very probably the same Godwin, despite the ubiquity of this name, the manors comprising all those held by Bernard in chief5. Most cluster around the head of Southampton Water, probably serving a strategic function. Two are valuable, the most valuable held by unidentified Godwins in Hampshire. He may well therefore have held others, though his name is too common to identify them with confidence; the most likely candidates are the predecessors of Hugh of Port, several of whose manors are intermixed with those of Godwin of Worthy.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* SON OF *] AELFGYTH. Godwin Aelfgyth, man of Wigot, whose manor of Dawley in Middlesex was acquired by Earl Roger of Shrewsbury6, is presumably Godwin son of Aelfgyth. Wigot had no other men named Godwin, and Earl Roger no such predecessors or tenants; but Dr Williams points out that Robert d'Oilly, one of Wigot's principal successors, acquired the land of an Aelfgyth (q.v.) in Oakley in Buckinghamshire: World before Domesday, pp. 120, 206 and note 151. As the name is rare, these links suggest she may well be Godwin's mother.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* SON OF ALFHERE *]. Godwin son of Alfhere was a predecessor of Robert Malet in Suffolk, where he held the valuable manors of Edwardstone, Belstead and Playford7 among others; he may be the Godwin, or simply G, who held Thorpe Hall, Rushmere and Tuddenham, subinfeudated to tenants who were granted other manors of Alfhere's son, and also the Godwin on the valuable manor of Bedfield, a few miles from Thorpe Hall8. He is likely to be the Godwin who held three of the four manors which constituted the Malet fief in Essex9, just across the border from Edwardstone, these also being subinfeudated to tenants who were granted some of his Suffolk manors. In Norfolk, the one Godwin who preceded Robert Malet - at Glosthorpe and its dependency10 - is possibly Alfhere's son, though the potential link - Godwin's father - is tenuous. Alfhere may have been dead before 1066, and he is not explicitly associated with his son in Domesday Book; but the name is not a common one, and an Alfhere was a substantial landholder in Norfolk, with a group of three valuable manors in Wayland Hundred11 and possibly others in the adjacent Hundreds of 'Launditch' and South Greenhoe12, the latter pair some ten miles from Glosthorpe. Finally, it is just possible that Godwin son of Alfhere is the same Godwin as Robert
1 DBY 6,7;9
2 DBY 6,80;82
3 DBY 6,45
4 DBY 6,47
5 HAM 39,1-5. S2. WIL 46,1
6 MDX 7,7
7 SUF 6,1-2;26-27;112-113
8 SUF 6,12;114;116;120;307
9 ESS 44,1-2;4
10 NFK 7,1-2
11 NFK 1,135. 49,3-4
12 NFK 1,77. 27,1
Malet's predecessor in Lincolnshire, Godwin of Barrowby, though not so-identified here: Hart, 'William Malet and his family', p. 141; Early charters of eastern England, p. 66.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* SON OF TOKI *]. Godwin, who held Shipmeadow in Suffolk from Roger Bigot, may be Godwin son of Toki, who held the previous manor from him and preceded him there and at Stoven in Suffolk1 and at Woodton in Norfolk2. He may have held other manors since most of the tenants and some of the predecessors named Godwin in East Anglia were tenants or predecessors of Roger Bigot; but they include a son of Algar and a Godwin the priest, and the name is common. Godwin's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 496) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 224.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* THE NOBLE *]. Godwin, Earl Waltheof's man, who held Oakington and Over in Cambridgeshire3, is named Godwin scild in the second of these entries in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 92), sometimes translated 'Shield' but more probably cild, or noble, in this case. Godwin the noble or his men held several other manors in the county according to Domesday4 or the Inquisitio5, including the very valuable manor of Fulbourn6, which makes it not unlikely that he is the juror of Fleamdyke Hundred named as Godwin of Fulbourn and Godwin Nabson in the Inquisitio Eliensis and the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis respectively (ed. Hamilton, pp. 25, 98). He is possibly also Godwin of Linacre (Inquisitio, p. 28), Linacre being in the parish of Horseheath where Godwin the noble had another manor7; and he may be the Godwy who held land in Whitwell under Edeva the fair8, the overlord of the noble Godwin at Fulbourn and other manors. Apart from his role as juror, there is no other indication that Godwin survived until 1086; but it is not uncommon for English jurors to appear to be landless: Lewis, 'Domesday jurors', pp. 22-32, 41-44. No other noble Godwins are recorded in Domesday Book or the satellite texts; both Count Alan of Brittany and Countess Judith - who between them acquired most of his Cambridgeshire manors - had predecessors and tenants named Godwin in other counties; but the name is common and none of these manors of distinctive status.
.............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* THE PRIEST *]. Godwin, who held the valuable manor of Lavant in Sussex from Earl Godwin9, is probably the Godwin the priest, who held the even more valuable manors of Saddlescombe and Plumpton from the earl10, and Lavington11 and Farringdon12 from King Edward. Farrington belonged to the church of Bosham, to which Godwin may have been attached. Both Farrington and Lavington were acquired by the bishop of Exeter, who also held Bosham before and after the Conquest13. Bosham, famously portrayed in the Bayeux Tapestry, was one of the wealthiest churches in the country. Godwin is perhaps also Godwin the priest, Harold's man, at
1 SUF 7,22;47-48
2 NFK 29,9
3 CAM 41,13-14
4 CAM 14,1;80. 18,3. 35,2
5 CAM 14,6
6 CAM 14,1
7 CAM 14,6. 26,9
8 CAM 14,43
9 SUS 11,5
10 SUS 12,33;42
11 SUS 6,4
12 HAM 5,1
13 SUS 6,1
Norton in Suffolk1 and just possibly plain Godwin, Earl Harold's man, at Wolverton in Buckinghamshire2. The name, of course, is a common one; but Wolverton is a substantial manor and Godwin the priest is recorded on two other manors in the county, on one of which he is described a priest of Archbishop Stigand3, an appropriate relationship for a protégé of the Godwinsons. It is less likely he is Godwin the priest who occurs on other manors between Devon and Nottingham, modest or insignificant and without links with Earl Godwin's priest. That Godwin is probably the man who witnessed several charters with the earl in the 1050s: Charters of Abingdon, ii. 559-66, 569-72; Barlow, English Church, pp. 154-58. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 310-11, which does not include those in Buckinghamshire and Suffolk. Dr Clarke ranks Godwin forty-seventh in wealth among untitled landowners, one of the wealthiest clerks in the kingdom; the additional manors would raise him four places.
............................................................................................................................................. GODWIN [* UNCLE OF EARL RALPH *]. G, at Norwich, may be Godwin uncle of Earl Ralph Wader, named on two other royal manors, since he is named in the context of the earl and the premium due from the manor4. He is probably also G uncle of Ralph at Field Dalling, and the Godwin succeeded by Earl Ralph at Burnham Thorpe5. Earl Ralph is identified at Burnham as Earl Ralph junior - Ralph Wader - by the reference to his forfeiture: Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 61-62. .............................................................................................................................................
GODWIN [* WOODHEN *]. Godwin, who 'took away' two places from Horndon-on-the-Hill in Essex6, is named Godwin Woodhen in the Annexations for the county7. He also held land at Barking from the abbey there8. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 173) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 222.
.............................................................................................................................................
GOSPATRIC [* SON OF ARNKETIL *]. All Gospatrics in Domesday Book may be one man, Gospatric son of Arnketil. The name occurs only in Yorkshire, where it appears in more than a hundred times, all lacking a byname. According to Orderic Vitalis (ii. 218-19), Gospatric's father Arnketil was 'the most powerful of the Northumbrian nobles'. Despite Arnketil's involvement in the northern revolts of 1068 and 1069 and his exile, his son was allowed to retain some of the family estates, perhaps the result of an impression made at court when he was a hostage for the good behaviour of his father after the revolt of 1068. Gospatric was the only English tenant-in-chief in Yorkshire in 1086, his fief comprising forty-one manors, all but one held by himself or by Arnketil in 1066. He is evidently therefore the tenant of Count Alan of Brittany on twenty-one manors - too numerous to list here - held by himself or Arnketil in 1066. He may also be the Gospatric who held two manors among the king's thanes in both 1066 and 10869, and perhaps the one other Gospatric of 1086, at East Heslerton10. Most of these manors descended to the fief of the steward of the honour of Richmond, one of them being re-granted to Gospatric's grandson, Dolphin: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 18, 28, 38, 123, 221, 285; Charters of Mowbray, no. 392, pp. 250-51.
1 SUF 7,122
2 BUK 43,11
3 BUK 12,20
4 NFK 1,61;144;185
5 NFK 38,2-3
6 ESS 60,1
7 ESS 90,1-3
8 ESS 9,5
9 YKS 29W47;49
10 YKS 29E22
The Gospatrics whose thirteen manors were acquired by Erneis of Buron are also identified as the son of Arnketil by their later history, being added to Gospatric's fief by Henry I for the benefit of Nigel of Aubigny1: Charters of Mowbray, pp. xxii-iii, xxxix, 7-10, 102-103, 250-53; Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 40, 68. This is also true of many of the manors of Gospatric on the king's fief. These, like most other such untenanted royal manors, are problematic due the terse nature of the entries: in very few cases is it stated whether the name is that of the landholder before 1066, in 1086, or at both dates. However, it is more likely that the names are those of pre-Conquest landowners, as stated in the first entry and a few others2 and indicated by the fact that all the tenant names are English and none are explicitly stated to be holding a manor in 1086. This does not preclude the possibility that some of the pre-Conquest landowners still held their manors twenty years later, as appears to be the case with Gospatric at Thorpe le Willows (1N108), attributed to him as held in chief by the Yorkshire Summary (SN,Bi2). This may be the case elsewhere since many of Gospatric's twenty-two manors on the royal fief descended to those who acquired other manors of Arnketil's son3: VCH Yorkshire, ii. 183-185; Early Yorkshire families, p. 1. Of the remainder, five lay in vills in which Gospatric son of Arnketil held in chief, and another is adjacent to his manors4. Two manors in 'Bulford' wapentake are within two miles of each other or of his manor of Harton5, and Low Dalby in Dic wapentake is a similar distance from his manor at Thornton Dale6. The final two Gospatrics on the king's fief held in lost vills in the same wapentakes7.
Manors held by a Gospatric in 1066 were also acquired by Ilbert of Lacy, Roger of Poitou and the Count of Mortain. Ilbert's manor of Gipton with Colton is a few miles from several manors he acquired from an Arnketil who may be Gospatric's father8; those of the Count of Mortain are near neighbours of other manors of Arnketil9; and those of Roger are in Craven10, close to the heart of Gospatric's tenancy-in-chief, one of them previously held by Erneis of Buron. Finally, of the urban holdings of Gospatric11, two were acquired by Erneis of Buron from two Gospatrics, perhaps Gospatric son of Arnketil and his son Gospatric son of Gospatric. If all or most of these identifications are valid, Gospatric would rank comfortably among the fifty wealthiest landowners in 1066if listed in Clarke, English nobility; the addition of his father's manors could raise the family twenty or more places. Dr Williams (English and the Norman Conquest, p. 99) calculates the total for Gospatric's assessed land as tenant-in-chief as 145.5 carucates, slightly less than the Statistics database; he probably also held almost a hundred carucates as a tenant, his demesne holdings being slightly greater (though much less valuable) than those of Edward of Salisbury (q.v.). Gospatric's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 2448) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 234-35.
.............................................................................................................................................
GOTI. Goti is a rare name which occurs thirteen times, distributed among the five adjacent counties of Middlesex, Hertfordshire, Essex and East Anglia and the lands of eight tenants-in-chief, the majority on valuable manors.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 YKS 24W1-2;4-7;12-17;20
2 YKS 1N1;5. 1W71;73
3 YKS 1N42;46;48-49;53-56;93;97;104
4 YKS 1N105-108. 1W42;54
5 YKS 1N94-96
6 YKS 1N48;50
7 YKS 1N51;96
8 YKS 9W15;121;123;126;131;144
9 YKS 1N33;38-39. 5N28-29
10 YKS 30W22-23;30
11 YKS C11;13;18
GOTI <OF CHEDISTON>. Goti, who held fifteen acres and half a plough team worth two shillings under the patronage of Edric of Laxfield at Chediston in Suffolk1, is almost a neighbour of Goti of Stambourne, whose manor of Freckenham is about nine miles to the north; he is possibly the same man.
.............................................................................................................................................
GOTI <OF MOULTON>. Goti, who shared 2 1/2 acres worth 2 1/2 pence at Moulton in Norfolk in 10662, has no links with his namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
GOTI <OF STAMBOURNE>. As the name is rare and its distribution restricted, it is likely that the thane of Earl Harold at Cockhampstead in Hertfordshire3, his Guard at East Bedfont and Feltham in Middlesex4, and his man at Atelia in Essex5 are the same Goti, who is probably also Earl Harold's thane, Orthi, at Freckenham in Suffolk6, a name about which etymologists are uncertain but shown to be a scribal error by a bilingual royal writ concerning the Domesday manor which renders Orthi as Gotinus in Latin text and Goti in the Old English: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 338; Bates, Regesta, no. 226, pp. 715-16. Goti's manor of Atelia devolved upon Haimo the steward, who also acquired Wigborough and Stambourne in Essex from Goti7. Stambourne and Wigborough were valuable manors, as were Freckenham, Feltham and Cockhampstead, suggesting that the two remaining holdings, also valuable, at Hutton in Essex8 and Nettlestead in Suffolk9, acquired respectively by Battle abbey and Count Alan of Brittany, were held by this Goti, who held both in his own right, no overlords being named. Gotis occur only twice more on rural holdings, one, Goti of Chediston, being conceivably the same man, though the modest scale of his holding and absence of links precludes an identification. A list of Goti's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 308-309, which includes Hutton but not Nettlestead. Dr Clarke ranks Goti seventy-first in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Nettlestead would raise him half-a-dozen places.
.............................................................................................................................................
GOTSHELM. Gotshelm is a rare name which occurs once each in Cornwall and in Dorset, and on a fief and nine other manors in Devon, apparently borne by three individuals. The Dorset Gotshelm is identified in the text as a cook, and one in Devon as Gotshelm of Exeter, identified in the Geld Roll as a canon, presumably of Exeter: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xxvi.
.............................................................................................................................................
GOTSHELM [* BROTHER OF WALTER OF CLAVILLE *]. The Gotshelms who held fiefs in Cornwall10 and Devon11 are probably the brother of Walter of Claville, though nowhere named as such. Their fiefs are described together in Exon., both descending to the Honour of Gloucester; they were joint tenants-in-chief of Virworthy12; both held manors in the vills of Buckland, Coombe, Loosedon and Lupridge; and they shared six predecessors, too many to be coincidental, even
1 SUF 7,15
2 NFK 65,13
3 HRT 17,13
4 MDX 8,3-4
5 ESS 28,1
6 SUF 20,1
7 ESS 28,9;11
8 ESS 13,1
9 SUF 3,5
10 CON 7,1
11 DEV 25,1-27
12 DEV 24,32
though the names are common: Aelfeva, Alnoth, Alward, Brictric, Edwin and Wulfgeat. According to satellite texts, they both farmed royal manors, which almost certainly identifies Gotshelm on these and other royal manors1: Devonshire Domesday, i. pp. 74;76;78;80, 88. As his name is rare, he may also be the Gotshelm with tenancies at Rockbeare and Sellake from Baldwin the sheriff2, and at Owlacombe from Theobald son of Berner3, all three within a few miles of other manors of his, two of them with predecessors who occur on his fief. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 635) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 235, apart from the three tenancies, Theobald's tenant identified as perhaps another man (no. 2080), Baldwin's tenants are unidentified (nos. 3633, 3657).
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMBALD. Outside Lincolnshire, Grimbald is an uncommon name which occurs eleven times, distributed among eight counties and the lands of five tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMBALD <OF HASKERTON>. The free man of the abbey of Ely with a few acres valued at two shillings at Haskerton in Suffolk4 recorded in the Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 150) has no links with his namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMBALD [* OF HOUGHTON *]. As his name is uncommon, the Grimbald who held four manors in Northamptonshire from Countess Judith5 - stated to be the same man - is probably the Grimbald who held three others from her in Leicestershire, two of them in the same vill6. Judith had no other tenants of this name; there are no other Grimbalds in either county, and the Leicestershire manors are bracketed by those in Northamptonshire. Grimbald was identified by Round as Grimbald of Houghton, who witnessed the foundation charter of St Andrew's priory in Northampton, granting it land in his manor Moulton7; a descendant, Robert Grimbald, founded Owston abbey, where one of Grimbald's Leicestershire manors lay: Round, 'Domesday survey of Northamptonshire', pp. 293-94. Hanging Houghton lies between Grimbald's manors of East Farndon and Moulton, and Countess Judith had land there, though Grimbald is not recorded as her tenant. The Grimbaud family did not continue to hold all these manors, though there are indications of a continuing family interest in the vills: Farrer, Honors, ii. 301-307. Grimbald's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3709) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 238, without reference to his byname.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMBALD <OF SUTTON>. Grimbald, who held thirty acres from Theodric Pointel at Sutton in Essex8, has no links with other Grimbalds, all remote. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 149) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 238; it is suggested in Coel that he may be Grimbald the priest, named in a charter of Bury St Edmunds: Feudal documents, pp. 151-52.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 DEV 1,60-61;64-65;70
2 DEV 16,138;161
3 DEV 36,7
4 SUF 8,8
5 NTH 56,26-29
6 LEC 40,26-27;39
7 NTH 56,29
8 ESS 71,4
GRIMBALD [* THE GOLDSMITH *]. Grimbald, who held a fief in Berkshire consisting of the single manor of Hendred1, may be Grimbald the goldsmith, who held two manors among the king's thanes in Wiltshire2. The fief of another goldsmith, Theodric, follows Grimbald's and, as Round pointed out, shares Grimbald's Wiltshire predecessors: 'Domesday survey of Berkshire', p. 292. The Berkshire and Wiltshire manors ultimately descended to different families; but the routes by which they did so are unknown: VCH Berkshire, i. 302-307; Book of Fees, pp. 423, 714, 729, 741. The Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 15) also records that Grimbald the goldsmith held land at Quy and Stow3 before the Conquest, a manor which devolved upon Count Alan of Brittany. Count Alan was also preceded by a Grimbald in Lincolnshire4, possibly the same man; but as the name occurs as frequently in Lincolnshire as in all other counties combined, it is possible that this Grimbald - Grimbald Krakr - is another man. Three other Grimbalds held land in southern England before the Conquest, one of these, King Edward's man at Husborne Crawley in Bedfordshire5, may be the goldsmith, royal patronage of goldsmiths being the norm and the Confessor's partiality for Germanic servants well-attested, several of the goldsmiths in royal service - Otto, Reinbald, Theodric - bearing Germanic names: Dodwell, Anglo-Saxon Art, pp. 65, 78-79. Another Grimbald held land at Great Linford, eleven miles away6, but there are no royal or other associations to support an identification. Grimbald's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 119) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 238.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMKEL. The name Grimkel is largely confined to the area north of a line from the Bristol Channel to the Wash. It is common in Lincolnshire and to some extent in Yorkshire, but uncommon elsewhere, occurring fourteen times, predominantly on small holdings, distributed among seven counties and the lands of eight tenants-in-chief, a distribution suggesting a preponderance of minor landowners. Two survivors bore this name.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMKEL <OF BILBY>. The Grimkels whose manors at Bilby and Clayworth in Nottinghamshire - ten miles apart - were acquired by Roger of Bully7 are probably one man, possibly the survivor at Watnall8, though since all the holdings are modest and Watnall thirty miles to the south, this is too uncertain to establish an identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMKEL <OF WATNALL>. The Grimkels who held Watnall in Nottinghamshire9 from William Peverel and preceded him on another holding in that vill and in three more in the county10 may be the same man. All five holdings formed a tight cluster in Broxtowe wapentake, four of them in two adjacent vills. Grimkel survived on his most valuable holding, albeit a modest one and shared with another tenant. He is one of only two surviving Grimkels, the other - with a plough at Rowden in Herefordshire11 - unlikely to be the same man. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 35381).
1 BRK 62,1
2 WIL 67,43-44
3 CAM 14,66
4 LIN 12,9-13
5 BDF 41,1
6 BUK 17,21
7 NTT 9,45;126
8 NTT 10,46
9 NTT 10,46
10 NTT 10,33;43;47;62
11 HEF 1,71
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMULF. Grimulf is a rare name which occurs five times, distributed among three counties and the lands of four tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMULF <OF COLCHESTER>. As the name is rare, it is possible that the Grimulf with a substantial holding of two houses and nine acres in Colchester1 is Grimulf of Helmingham, whose manors lay some thirty miles away; but that Grimulf held his land only in 1066 and - if Little Domesday is to be trusted - the burgess only in 1086, and the transition from pre-Conquest manorial lord to post-Conquest burgess would be unusual. The dates assigned to urban holdings, however, sometimes appear suspect.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMULF <OF HELMINGHAM>. As the name is rare, the three Grimulfs in Suffolk may be one man, his holdings lying in a restricted area in south-east Suffolk. He had a modest manor at Winston acquired by Earl Hugh of Chester2, and was the lord of men in Hasketon and Helmingham, ten and three miles respectively to the south, with a more substantial manor in the latter vill, acquired by Humphrey the chamberlain3. It is possible, though perhaps unlikely, that he is the burgess Grimulf of Colchester.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRIMULF <OF MORTON>. Grimulf, who preceded Robert of Stafford at Morton in Warwickshire4, is the only Grimulf in Great Domesday. Although his manor is fairly substantial, it appears unlikely that he is the same man as either the Essex burgess or the Suffolk landowner, both some 150 miles or more away.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRUFFYDD. Gruffydd is an uncommon name. As a forename, it occurs once in Staffordshire and Gloucestershire, twice in Cornwall, four times in Cheshire, and on a fief and three manors in Herefordshire; four of these references are to one or other of the Welsh kings.
.............................................................................................................................................
GRUFFYDD [* BOY *]. Gruffydd Boy, who held parts of the royal manor of Leominster in Herefordshire5, and the Gruffydd who held King's Pyon from Roger of Lacy6, are identified as Gruffydd son of King Maredudd, who held another manor and a fief in the county7, by the descent of Pyon and some manors of Boy and Gruffydd's son to William de Blez: Herefordshire Domesday, pp. 14, 48, 72, 95, 122-23. Gruffydd's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2583) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 238, apart from the tenant at King's Pyon, who is unidentified (no. 30537).
.............................................................................................................................................
GRUFFYDD <OF ROSCARNON>. Gruffydd, whose manor at Roscarnon in Cornwall was acquired by the Count of Mortain, and the Count's tenant in that vill8 are almost certainly the same
1 ESS B3a
2 SUF 4,4
3 SUF 8,12. 52,9
4 WAR 22,19
5 HEF 1,34-35;38
6 HEF 10,50
7 HEF 9,14. 29,1. 31,1-7
8 CON 1,1. 5,7,1
man. The name does not occur elsewhere in the south-western counties. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 2081). .............................................................................................................................................
GUNFRID [* OF CHOCQUES *]. It is likely that Gunfrid, tenant of Robert of Tosny in Lincolnshire1 and Northamptonshire2, is Gunfrid of Chocques, a tenant-in-chief in those and three other counties. Robert's tenants are the only Gunfrids in the two counties other than Chocques himself; and the Lincolnshire Gunfrids were enfeoffed by Robert with the manors of the same predecessor, Arnbiorn of 'Avethorpe' (q.v.), from whom Gunfrid of Chocques acquired one of his two manors as tenant-in-chief, Arnbiorn having an interest in the other according to the Lincolnshire Claims3. The Northamptonshire Survey appears to show that Gunfrid's tenancy had been resumed into the Tosny demesne, which may explain why Gunfrid's Lincolnshire tenancies do not appear in the hands of his descendants: VCH Northamptonshire, i. 386; Farrer, Honors, i. 20-53. Gunfrid's manors as tenant-in-chief are recorded in Coel (no. 2457) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 239-41; the Tosny tenant is identified as another man (no. 8409).
................................................................................................................................................................
GUNNAR. Gunnar is an uncommon name which occurs eighteen times, predominantly on small holdings distributed among nine counties from Cornwall to Yorkshire and on the fiefs of the king and ten of his tenants-in-chief, the majority borne by pre-Conquest lords, with survivors in Cornwall, Yorkshire and Essex.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUNNAR <OF AVINGTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Gunnars who preceded Richard Poynant on substantial manors at Avington in Berkshire4 and Calstone in Wiltshire5 are probably one man. Richard's Honour is small, his predecessors few, and Gunnar the only name to occur twice among them. There are no other Gunnars in either county.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUNNAR <OF "CICLET">. Gunnar, whose modest holding in the lost vill of Ciclet in Devon was acquired by Walter of Claville6, has no links with other Gunnars.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUNNAR <OF DOMELLICK>. Gunnar, who survived on a tiny tenancy from the Count of Mortain - value twelve pence - at Domellick in Cornwall7, has no links with his namesakes. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 2398).
.............................................................................................................................................
GUNNAR <OF HALESWORTH>. As the name is rare in East Anglia, the Gunnars there, both of whose manors - at Halesworth and Levington in Suffolk - were acquired by Roger Bigot8, may be the same man, although they held minor holdings some thirty miles apart and under the patronage of different English lords.
1 LIN 18,17;20-23
2 NTH 26,10
3 LIN CK1
4 BRK 43,2
5 WIL 58,1
6 DEV 24,31
7 CON 5,24,11
8 SUF 7,17;117
.............................................................................................................................................
GUNNAR <OF MALDON>. As the name is rare in the region, the Gunnars who held Maldon and Totham in Essex from Swein of Essex1 are probably one man; the vills are less than four miles apart. Gunnar's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1862) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 241.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUNNAR <OF MOLLINGTON>. Gunnar, who shared a waste holding at Mollington in Cheshire acquired by Robert of Rhuddlan2, has no links with other Gunnars. It is possible, however, that he is the Gunnor at 'Redcliff' (in Chester), four miles away3. The form is unique and although identified as the rare Gunneuare (Gunwor) which occurs in Yorkshire, it requires only a poorly formed 'o' to misidentify him: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 278.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUNNAR <OF PONTSHILL>. As the name is uncommon, the Gunnars whose three small holdings at Pontshill, Weston and Coldborough in Herefordshire were acquired by Durand of Gloucester4 are almost certainly one man, as the text appears to state, though somewhat clumsily, while misspelling the name at Coldborough as Gunuer. The vills are within five miles of each other.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUTHMUND. Guthmund is a fairly common name which occurs almost forty times, distributed among eleven counties between Dorset and Warwickshire and the lands of the king and thirteen of his tenants-in-chief, with clusters in Essex and Suffolk. Guthmunds survived on ten manors, spread among six counties.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUTHMUND [* BROTHER OF ABBOT WULFRIC *]. With the exception of the tenant at Braxted, all Guthmunds in Little Domesday are probably the royal thane at Kelvedon in Essex5, alias Guthmund, brother of Abbot Wulfric of Ely, named at Occold in Suffolk6. Occold was acquired by Hugh de Montfort, along with Guthmund's manors in Essex7, Norfolk8, and Suffolk9. Of the three remaining manors, Guthmund is described as Hugh's predecessor on two of them10, as also within Hugh's fief11. He is elsewhere described as a royal thane, a thane12, and a free man13. Less certainly, the respectable manor at Tollesbury in Essex14, acquired by Count Eustace of Boulogne but encircled by de Montfort manors in other Hundreds, may also have been his, as suggested by Dr Clarke.
1 ESS 24,63;67
2 CHS 3,2
3 CHS 10,3
4 HEF 22,2-4
5 ESS 27,2
6 SUF 31,60
7 ESS 27,2;4-5;11;13-14
8 NFK 23,16
9 SUF 31,6;8-12;13a;14;38;40-43;45-48;55;60
10 SUF 29,1. 41,11
11 SUF 31,43-47
12 SUF 31,41
13 ESS 27,4
14 ESS 20,62
The Liber Eliensis puts some flesh on these bones. Guthmund, spurned by a high-born lady as insufficiently endowed, not having the forty hides of land to be counted 'among the foremost nobles', prevailed upon his brother to lease to him some of the abbey's estates, which availed him little since shortly afterwards the Normans conquered the kingdom and Hugh de Montfort 'took possession of these lands and to this day has withheld them from the church' (ed. Fairweather, pp. 198-200). The Liber Eliensis names some of the manors recorded in Domesday Book - 'Bensted', Garboldisham (Wick), Livermere, Nacton, Occold - and adds Marham1, held by the abbey in Domesday without mention of Guthmund. He probably did have an interest, however, since Hugh de Montfort is said to have received the customary dues of twenty-six Freemen attached to the manor. A list of Guthmund's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 312-14, which does not include Wick2 but does include Tollesbury. Dr Clarke ranks Guthmund forty-eighth in wealth among untitled laymen; the addition of Wick would raise him two places. See also Williams, 'Little Domesday and the English', pp. 107-108, 209, where Guthmund is Guthmund of Nacton.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUTHMUND [* BROTHER OF THORKIL *]. As his name is uncommon in the region, it is likely that the Guthmund who held Aston in Warwickshire from William son of Ansculf3 is the one other Guthmund in the Midlands, the brother of Thorkil of Arden at Packington in the same Hundred4, though the manors were in different hands by the thirteenth century: VCH Warwickshire, iv. 181-82; vii. 60-62. Dr Williams documents later connections between Guthmund's heirs and those of William son of Ansculf which suggest this conclusion: 'A vice-comital family', p. 288. Guthmund's manor of Packington is recorded in Coel (no. 4764) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 219; Aston is assigned to another tenant (no. 782).
.............................................................................................................................................
GUTHMUND <OF BRAXTED>. Guthmund, tenant of Haimo the steward at Braxted in Essex5, has no links with his one namesake in the region, the brother of Abbot Wulfric of Ely. It is unlikely he is the abbot's brother, Ely having no known interest in Braxted: Miller, Abbey and bishopric of Ely, passim. Guthmund is unidentified in Coel (no. 5018).
.............................................................................................................................................
GUTHMUND [* SON OF SAERIC *]. As the name is uncommon, the Guthmunds who held a cluster of manors in Herefordshire acquired by Roger of Lacy from Saeric, are probably Saeric's son, named on the last of these manors6, though they did not all descend to the same family: Book of Fees, pp. 804, 805, 814, 816, 1481. No other Guthmund held land in Herefordshire or adjacent counties, or on the Lacy Hnour. Guthmund's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4695) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 219.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUTHROTH. Guthroth is a rare name which occurs once in Essex and Yorkshire and four times in Lincolnshire, probably borne by three individuals, one of them a survivor: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, pp. 279-80; Fellows-Jensen, Scandinavian personal names, pp. 111-12.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 NFK 15,1
2 NFK 23,16
3 WAR 27,1
4 WAR 17,7
5 ESS 28,5
6 HEF 1,10b;17. 10,51;53;71
GUTHROTH <OF RADWINTER>. Guthroth, who held the fairly substantial of Radwinter in Essex from Tihel the Breton1, is the only survivor of his name in Domesday Book; it is unlikely he is the same man as the Lincolnshire lawman or his Yorkshire namesake.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUTHROTH <OF SKEWSBY>. Guthroth, who held two manors at Skewsby in the North Riding of Yorkshire before the Conquest2, is unlikely to be the same man as the Lincolnshire lawman, eighty miles to the south, still less the survivor in Essex almost 200 miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUTHROTH [* THE LAWMAN *]. Guthroth, who held a house of the abbot of Peterborough in Lincoln and land in Middle Carlton in pledge in 10663, is identified as Guthroth the lawman, burgess of Lincoln, with full jurisdiction in the city, by his association with Norman the fat, his predecessor4. He is not named on Norman's fief, not even at Carlton5. He is unlikely to be the same man as either of his two namesakes, the rural landowner in North Yorkshire or the survivor in Essex.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUY. If the tenants-in-chief Guy of Craon and Guy of Raimbeaucourt and the readily-identifiable tenant Guy of Anjou are excluded, unidentified Guys are rare, occurring once each in Sussex, Dorset, Somerset and Cambridgeshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUY [* OF ANJOU *]. As the name is rare, the tenants of Count Eustace of Boulogne at Finchingfield and Chishill in Essex6 are probably Guy of Anjou, his tenant at Massingham in Norfolk7 and at Duxford in Cambridgeshire8, where his byname is recorded in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 42). He is very probably also the Guy who claimed part of Anmer in Norfolk9 'because it was delivered to his uncle', Osmund of Anjou (q.v.) and Count Eustace. Massingham, Anmer and Chishill were held by Guy's descendants: Book of Fees, p. 236. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 89) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 463.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUY [* OF CRAON *]. Guy, who held South Warnborough in Hampshire from Hugh son of Baldric 'with his daughter'10, is evidently Hugh's son-in-law, named as such as Hugh's tenant at Claxby St Andrew and its dependencies and Sloothby in Lincolnshire11. He is Guy of Craon, a tenant-in-chief in Leicestershire and Lincolnshire. He is also the Guy at Mission in Nottinghamshire12, identified by the reference to his manor of Laughton in Lincolnshire. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 562) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 464.
1 ESS 38,3
2 YKS 5N57
3 LIN C21. CW3
4 LIN C2-3
5 LIN 33,1-2
6 ESS 20,30-31;72-73
7 NFK 1,1. 5,1
8 CAM 15,2
9 NFK 8,31
10 HAM 44,4
11 LIN 25,19-25
12 NTT 1,66
.............................................................................................................................................
GUY [* OF EU *]. Guy, tenant of the abbey of Ramsey at Longstowe in Cambridgeshire1, is probably Guy of Eu, perhaps the same Guy to whom Abbot Reginald (1114-1131) confirmed Longstowe: VCH Cambridgeshire, v. 121. His brother, Ingelrann (q.v.), was a Domesday tenant of the abbey in Huntingdonshire, where Guy subsequently held from the abbey. As the abbot of Ramsey's man, he was a juror in Longstowe Hundred: Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 83). His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 1657) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 463-64.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUY <OF LAVANT>. Guy, who held a hide in the manor of Lavant in Sussex from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury2, has no links with his namesakes, all distant. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 8858) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 465.
.............................................................................................................................................
GUY <OF POORTON>. As unidentified Guys are rare, the tenants of Roger Arundel at Poorton in Dorset3 and Halswell in Somerset4 are probably one man. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1217) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 465, where he is identified as the priest who held three hides in the manor of Long Ashton from the bishop of Coutances5, which is possible but unverifiable; Guy the priest, who held Roxford in Hertfordshire from Geoffrey of Bec6, is identified as another priest (no. 8907).
.............................................................................................................................................
GYRTH. Although the name Gyrth occurs more than 150 times, it is rare in the sense that it was probably borne by few individuals, all but one of them pre-Conquest landowners. The distribution is skewed, fewer than two dozen names occurring outside East Anglia, most of those in the adjacent counties of Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire. This area, of course, was where the earldom of Harold's brother, Earl Gyrth Godwinson, lay. The only Gyrth north of Cambridgeshire is the one post-Conquest landowner of this name.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EARL *] GYRTH. In view of the distribution of the name, it is probable that most - perhaps all - pre-Conquest Gyrths are Earl Gyrth Godwinson, all but a handful of the names occurring within the boundaries of his earldom. The distribution is important because Gyrth's title is recorded only seven times in East Anglia where there are far more unidentified Gyrths in each of the two counties than in the rest of the country combined. Within this area, Gyrth is almost certainly the earl on the royal demesne manors7 and on the substantial manors of Costessey, Sedgeford, Langham and Great Ryburgh in Norfolk8. The only demesne holding which appears slightly doubtful is the modest holding at Burgh St Margaret9. As no other Gyrth with significant demesne land in the region can be plausibly identified, Gyrth is evidently the lord of the considerable numbers of dependent free men of East Anglia.
1 CAM 7,2
2 SUS 11,5
3 DOR 47,8
4 SOM 22,17
5 SOM 5,34
6 HRT 34,21
7 NFK 1,48;59;91;192. SUF 1,32-35;37-43
8 NFK 4,9-11;15. 10,20;22. 34,9
9 NFK 64,1
Outside East Anglia, he is identified by reference to his mother at Chaddleworth in Berkshire1, and is accorded his title on all his manors in Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire, and on three of the four in Hertfordshire, all held by his men. In the Sussex heartland of the Godwinsons, the two substantial manors of Merston and Coombes2 are probably his since, apart from their status, both are adjacent to other Godwinson manors, Coombes being close to his own huge manor of Washington. Similar considerations suggest that the handsome manors of Hartley Mauditt in Hampshire3 and Eaton Hastings in Berkshire4 may have been his, as also Warley in Essex5, once the property of the Church. A list of the earl's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 194-200, which includes all the demesne manors of a Gyrth, but not those of his men at Pampisford in Cambridgeshire; Shottesham, Brundall, Kelling, Burgh, Wallington and Binham in Norfolk; or Brome, Pettaugh, Rushmere and Hemingstone in Suffolk. He is ranked by Dr Clarke sixteenth in wealth among the nobility; Baxter, Earls of Mercia, p. 129, supplies a somewhat lower estimate of his manorial income, almost identical to the Statistics database (£230).
.............................................................................................................................................
GYRTH <OF QUADRING>. Gyrth, who held a modest manor at Quadring in Lincolnshire6 from Count Alan of Brittany, is the one survivor of this name. It is unlikely he held land before the Conquest, all such Gyrths probably being Harold's brother, killed at Hastings.
.............................................................................................................................................
GYTHA. The name Gytha occurs in twenty-one counties, stretching from Cornwall to Yorkshire; but if those who identified as Countesses Gytha of Hereford and Wessex are excluded, the name is rare, occurring twice in Yorkshire and once in Lincolnshire; there are no survivors. The scribe appears to have confused the name with Goda and Godiva on occasions.
............................................................................................................................................. [* COUNTESS *] GYTHA [* OF HEREFORD *]. Countess Gytha, wife of Earl Ralph of Hereford (q.v.) and mother of Earl Harold, a minor in 1066, is easily confused with another Gytha, wife of Earl Godwin and mother of Earl Harold Godwinson. She may have been the daughter of Osgod Clapa and widow of Tovi the proud: Williams, 'The king's nephew', pp. 333-36. She was a major predecessor of William Peverel in Buckinghamshire, which identifies her as the Gytha who preceded him in his Northamptonshire manors7. The links between Gytha and Peverel make it likely that the Countess Goda (q.v.) recorded at Rushden in Bedfordshire8 and Clifton in Nottinghamshire9 are scribal errors for Countess Gytha. She is probably also the Goda who held Edwalton10, a dependency of her husband's manor of Stockerston, and the Countess Goda who had full jurisdiction and market rights in Nottinghamshire11. It is also possible, in view of their status, that the Godas who held the royal manors of Greetham and Cottesmore in Rutland are Countess Gytha12, Cottesmore being no great distance from her husband's manor of Stockerston: Stenton, 'Domesday survey of Rutland', p. 134. In all these cases, the particular reasons for
1 BRK 10,1
2 SUS 11,110. 13,19
3 HAM 35,2
4 BRK 30,1
5 ESS 3,11
6 LIN 12,90. CK69
7 NTH 35,1a-1j;2;3a-3g;4-7;10;14;20;22-26
8 BDF 22,2
9 NTT 10,5;7-11;13-14
10 NTT 23,1
11 NTT S5
12 RUT 1,5-6
identifying Goda as Gytha are supported by the fact that Countess Goda is not known to have held land anywhere north Twyford in Buckinghamshire whereas Gytha's family held extensive lands in the Midlands.
When both Countesses are accounted for, there are five other occurrences of the name Gytha in Domesday Book, any of which could refer to Countess Gytha of Hereford, though only those at Tilton in Leicestershire and Walton in Warwickshire lay within the territory in which she and her family is known to hold land. Tilton is ten miles from her husband's manor of Stockerston1 and a cluster of his other holdings, and Walton2 a similar distance from her son's manor of Burton Dassett3, itself four miles from another of her manors, at Mollington4. In view of the rarity of her name, it is perhaps more likely than not that both manors were hers. The other holdings in Lincolnshire5 and Yorkshire (5E35-36), may have belonged to other individuals, her family having no known associations with either county.
Gytha's lands are listed, and her family and background documented, by Dr Williams, whose list does not include the manors in Rutland: 'The king's nephew', pp. 333-38. A list of Gytha's manors is also given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 225-26, which does not include Paulerspury in Northamptonshire; Tilton in Leicestershire; Greetham and Cottesmore in Rutland; or the manors, men and privileges attributed by the scribe to Countess Goda but here assigned to Gytha. She and her family are ranked by Dr Clarke twenty-sixth in wealth among the nobility; the additional manors, with those attributed to her husband, would place the family comfortably in the top twenty.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* COUNTESS *] GYTHA [* OF WESSEX *]. Countess Gytha, widow of Earl Godwin and mother of Earl Harold Godwinson, survived her husband and all but one of her many sons. She was an early opponent of Norman rule, collecting allies in the south-west, where the bulk of her estates lay, and escaping to the continent after the failure of the revolt in 1068 (as she had done in 1051), reportedly with a great treasure: Mason, House of Godwine, pp. 178-83.
Where her title is omitted, the Countess can normally be readily identified, despite apparent scribal errors in a number of cases. Apart from single holdings in Berkshire6 and Gloucestershire7, all her manors lay in eight counties south of the Thames, on most of which she is clearly identified. Elsewhere, she is almost certainly the Gytha whose manors in Somerset8 and Wiltshire9 were valued at over £140. Apart from their status, these manors form part of blocks of royal manors which are organised in both counties first by King Edward, then by the Godwinsons, and finally by those held by lesser mortals; Exon. also identifies her as the Gytha at Queen Camel and Coker, part of the same block in Somerset10. The Countess is almost certainly the Gytha on the huge manor of Frampton in Dorset11, held by St Stephens of Caen in 1086 but evidently once a royal manor, worth £40 before the Conquest; her husband, Earl Godwin (q.v.), disguised as Earl Edwin, held part of it attached to Burton Bradstock12. The Cornish lands13 detached from her son's manor of Lanow1 are
1 LEC 2,7. 13,15
2 WAR 16,10
3 WAR 38,2
4 NTH 35,26
5 LIN 53,6
6 BRK 10,1
7 GLS 1,63
8 SOM 1,11
9 WIL 1,9-10;13
10 SOM 1,22-23
11 DOR 17,1
12 DOR 1,2
13 CON 5,7,6;9
very probably hers, and at Werrington in Devon2 she is identified in Exon. as Earl Harold's mother, and as Harold's mother at Oxted in Surrey in Domesday3, in both cases evidently the mother of Earl Harold Godwinson, not of Harold son of Earl Ralph (q.v.), whose mother held all her land north of the Thames. A list of Gytha's manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 204-205, which does not include Little Puddle in Dorset4. Dr Clarke ranks her fifth in landed wealth among the nobility; the addition of Puddle would not affect this. Baxter, Earls of Mercia, p. 129, supplies another, slightly larger estimate of her manorial income, the Statistics database total (£595) lying between the two.
.............................................................................................................................................
GYTHA <OF LECONFIELD>. As the name is rare, it is very probable that the Gythas whose manors in the adjacent vills of Leconfield and Raventhorpe in East Yorkshire were acquired by the Count of Mortain5 are the same woman. On similar grounds, she may be Gytha of Owston in Lincolnshire. These are the only occurrences of the name in either county, not excluding the Countesses; all the holdings are fairly substantial; and communications between them via the Trent and the Hull presumably possible. However, in the absence of tenurial or other associations, Gytha is here treated as another woman.
.............................................................................................................................................
GYTHA <OF OWSTON>. As the name is rare, the Gytha who held Owston Ferry in Lincolnshire, acquired by Geoffrey of la Guerche6, may be Gytha of Leconfield in East Yorkshire; but there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
HADEMAR OF <`OF STOCKLEIGH'>. As the four Hademars in Domesday Book are all predecessors of the Count of Mortain, at Perranuthnoe in Cornwall7 and 'Stockleigh' and Chitterley in Devon8, it is highly probable that they are one man; the three Devonshire manors cluster near each other.
................................................................................................................................................................
HAGNI [* THE REEVE *]. All Hagnis in Domesday may be one man. With a single exception, the forename is confined to Norfolk, borne by a substantial pre-Conquest landowner, a thane of the king and archbishop Stigand9, most of whose estates were absorbed into the royal demesne10; of those which were not, both Weybourne and Pentney are also substantial manors, while Hagni's overlord at Heckingham is Archbishop Stigand11. Hagni is also the name of a royal reeve who held a small fief after the Conquest12, as did his son, Ralph13, both of which passed to the Warenne family: Keats-Rohan, Domesday people, pp. 242, 339-340. As the name is rare and the distribution
1 CON 5,7,6
2 DEV 1,50
3 SUR 15,1
4 DOR 1,14
5 YKS 5E35-36
6 LIN 63,6;22
7 CON 5,23,5
8 DEV 15,2;18;60
9 NFK 1,182
10 NFK 1,81-82;84;86-87;182
11 NFK 6,2. 9,2. 12,42
12 NFK 56,1-9
13 NFK 57,1-3
restricted, it is not unlikely that Hagni the reeve is also the Cock Hagni at Creake and Burnham1, whose manors devolved upon Roger Bigot, who acquired Pentney; Creake is another valuable manor. Dr Lewis suggests that the one other Hagni in Domesday Book, who held the respectable manor of Sollers Hope in Herefordshire in 10662, may be the same man, perhaps imported from Norfolk by Earl Harold who had earldoms in both counties: Lewis, 'Introduction to the Herefordshire Domesday', p. 12. Hagni's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 1410) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 242.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAIMERIC [* OF ARQUES *]. Haimeric, who held a small fief in Devon3, is named Haimeric of Arques by Exon. on three of the five manors on his fief. The name Haimeric does not occur again in Domesday Book. He was presumably from Arques (Pas-de-Calais: arrondissement Saint-Omer). His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 803) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 242.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAIMO. Haimo is a fairly common name which occurs on two fiefs and more than sixty manors, distributed among eight counties and the lands of the king and eight of his tenants-in-chief, with clusters in Kent, Essex and Suffolk. All Haimos are post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAIMO [* OF MASCY *]. Haimo, who held tenancies from Earl Hugh in Cheshire4 and Wiltshire5, is almost certainly Haimo of Mascy, identified by the descent of his lands: Farrer, Honors, ii. 288-91; Sawyer and Thacker. 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', p. 312. He was probably from Macey in Lower Normandy (Manche: arrondissement Avranches): Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman families, pp. 61-62. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 959) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 242.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAIMO [* OF VALOGNES *]. The Haimos who held Parham, Blaxhall, Carlton, Bruisyard, Rendham, Swefling, Benhall and Great Glemham in Suffolk from Count Alan of Brittany6 are probably Haimo of Valognes, Count Alan's tenant at Wrabetuna and Blaxhall in the same county, Blaxhall being a vill in which one of the unidentified Haimos had another manor7. His descendants held Parham and its appurtenances as 5 1/2 fees - the Valognes fee - from the Honour of Richmond: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 234-37. As Parham is valued at only £2, it is likely that the remaining holdings are included in the 'appurtenances' of the Valognes fee, the whole being worth approximately £14 in 1086, not an extravagant endowment for 5 1/2 fees; the manors form a fairly tight cluster between Blaxhall and Bruisyard. Count Alan had no other Haimos on his Honour. The one other unidentified Haimo in East Anglia, at Hundon on the other side of the county8, may be another man. Haimo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 753) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 242-43, apart from Rendham, Swefling, Benhall, assigned to the Count's demesne; the tenant of Hundon is unidentified (no. 13334).
1 NFK 9,83-85
2 HEF 21,4
3 DEV 50,1-5
4 CHS 13,1-7. FD7,1-2. 1,22;34. 27,2
5 WIL 22,2;4;6
6 SUF 3,88-89;94;98-102
7 SUF 3,15;87
8 SUF 25,12
.............................................................................................................................................
HAIMO [* THE SHERIFF *]. Haimo the sheriff, alias Haimo the steward, was steward to both the Conqueror and William Rufus, and sheriff of Kent: Domesday Monachorum, pp. 55-56. He was a tenant-in-chief in Essex, Kent and Surrey, and held tenancies in Kent from the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of Bayeux; in Surrey from Chertsey abbey, and in Essex from the king, in all of which he is accorded one of his two bynames. At Nettlestead in Kent1 he is identified as the sheriff in the Domesday Monachorum (p. 103); and he is probably the Haimo on the royal manor of Hatfield Broad Oak2, where he is associated with Ralph of Marcy, his tenant on seven manors in the county. He is also likely to be the Haimo on an unnamed holding in the county, where his man Richard had annexed land and 'still has the booty from it'3, the sheriff being the only Haimo with a tenant named Richard. Haimo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 282) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 242.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAIMO [* THE SHERIFF *]'S SON. The son of Haimo whose Holding is referred to at Notley in Essex4 is - if not a scribal error - probably Haimo, son of Haimo the sheriff, since he is associated with Ralph of Marcy (q.v.), a tenant of the sheriff. However, his appearance at Notley may be a scribal error - though it is not apparent what feudo filii hamonis might be a corruption of - since this entry is a duplicate of part of the sheriff's manor of Notley5, where Ralph was the tenant of the sheriff himself. The only son of Haimo named in Domesday Book is Geoffrey, a tenant of Richard son of Count Gilbert, who appears to be unrelated. The sheriff did, however, have a son named Haimo, who succeeded him in his lands and office: Domesday people, p. 242.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAKON. Hakon is not a particularly common name, occurring twenty-one times, distributed among nine counties between Wiltshire and Yorkshire, and the lands of the king and fifteen of his tenants-in-chief; three manors are held by Hakons in 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAKON <OF ASHE>. Hakon, whose share in Ashe in Derbyshire was acquired by Henry of Ferrers6, has no links with other Hakons.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAKON <OF STAVELEY>. The Hakons whose manors of Barlow and Staveley in Derbyshire were acquired by Haimo of Mascy are probably one man7, who is possibly also the Hakon at Calow8, all these manors being within six miles of one of the others. Hakon was a fairly substantial landholder so may have had other estates in the area, the most likely being that at Rotherham in Yorkshire9, twelve miles to the north, or even the predecessor of Henry of Ferrers at Ashe; but there are no links to confirm either identification.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 KEN 5,96
2 ESS 1,3
3 ESS 89,3
4 ESS 20,6
5 ESS 28,3
6 DBY 6,37
7 DBY 12,1-2
8 DBY 17,9
9 YKS 5W13
HAMELIN. Hamelin is a rare name, distributed among five counties between Cornwall and Yorkshire and the lands of the king and four of his tenants-in-chief, probably borne by no more than that number of individuals, all post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAMELIN [* OF CORNWALL *]. As his name is rare, it is probable that the Hamelin who held a fief from the Count of Mortain in Cornwall is his tenant on two other manors in the county1, one a part of the royal manor of Winnianton at 'Crawle', where Hamelin held the other part of the vill2, the other stolen by the Count from one of the Cornish churches, a consistent feature of his endowment of his tenants3. Hamelin held two more manors from Count Robert in Devon4. There are no other Hamelins in the south-western counties or on the Honour of the Count of Mortain. Hamelin is perhaps the Hamelin of Cornwall who witnessed a charter of Count William of Mortain, circa 1103-1106, his style suggesting he may have been sheriff of the county. There is no documentary evidence for this, and he is not listed among the English sheriffs identified by Professor Green; but no sheriff of Cornwall prior to 1086 has been identified: Calendar of documents: France, p. 437; English sheriffs, pp. 33, 35. Hamelin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 164) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 243.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDING. Although the name Harding is stated or implied on forty-eight manors, it is a rare name in the sense that it was probably by few individuals, perhaps fewer than half-a-dozen. The manors - many of them substantial - are distributed among eleven counties and the lands of the king and nine of his tenants-in-chief. Roughly a third of the manors were held by survivors in 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDING <OF COVEHITHE>. Harding, who had a smallholder and four oxen at Covehithe in Suffolk acquired by Roger Bigot5, has no links with his namesakes, though as the name is rare he may be the Harding at Horswold, some thirty miles south-west of Covehithe.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDING <OF HORSENDEN>. The Hardings who held Horsenden and Bradenham among the king's thanes in Buckinghamshire6 are almost certainly the same man, the name being rare and the vills four miles apart. It is possible, even likely, that he is Harding son of Alnoth, though there are no links to confirm this: VCH Buckinghamshire, ii. 254; iii. 35. He is identified as Alnoth's son in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDING <OF HORSWOLD>. Harding, who shared four oxen with another free man at Horswold in Suffolk acquired by Roger of Auberville7, has no links with his namesakes, though as the name is rare he may be the Harding at Covehithe, some thirty miles north-east of Horswold.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 CON 5,5,1-22
2 CON 1,1. 5,5,1
3 CON 2,14
4 DEV 15,8;43
5 SUF 7,25
6 BUK 57,14-15
7 SUF 29,9
HARDING [* OF OXFORD *]. Harding, who shared with Leofeva nine messuages in Oxford1, is probably Harding of Oxford, who granted Eynsham abbey two houses in the city before going to Jerusalem, where he died: Eynsham cartulary, i. 37. He may be the Harding reputed to have strangled a lion with his bare hands in Constantinople at about the time of the Domesday Survey: William of Malmesbury, Gesta regum, ii. 245-46. His death in the Holy Land precludes the possibility that he is Harding son of Alnoth, who was alive when William of Malmesbury was writing in the 1120s: Gesta regum, i. 470-71. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 4732) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 244.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDING [* SON OF ALNOTH *]. The Hardings who held thirteen manors in 1086, and thirty-three before the Conquest, are probably Harding son of Alnoth, so-named at Lopen among the royal thanes in Somerset in 10862. His father was the English magnate, Ednoth the constable (q.v.) - Alnoth and Ednoth being sometimes confused by the scribe - and he was the ancestor of the Merriott family in Somerset and of Robert fitz Harding, the wealthy burgess of Bristol. There is little reason to doubt that he is the Harding who held the five manors among the royal thanes of Somerset which follow Lopen3, although the scribe has omitted an 'also' in three cases; he is named as the son of Alnoth owing geld on 1.125 hides in the Geld Roll for 'Abdick' Hundred which must refer to one or more of these manors where his patronymic is omitted: VCH Somerset, i. 536. His most substantial manor was at Merriott4, from which he is named in the Geld Roll for Crewkerne Hundred where Merriott lay; his son Nicholas held it at a later date: VCH Somerset, i. 532; Book of Fees, p. 85. Dr Williams suggests that the Harding at Wheatenhurst in Gloucestershire in 10865 is Alnoth's son, as the nearest of the Domesday Hardings to Bristol, where his descendants were to flourish: English and the Norman Conquest, p. 120.
One other Harding held land in Somerset in 1086, as a tenant of Glastonbury abbey at Cranmore6. He is named Harding of Wilton in the Geld Roll for Frome Hundred, and so may be the royal thane Harding in Wiltshire, who retained his manors for two decades7: VCH Somerset, i. 537. He is probably also the Harding who held Bredy in Dorset8, held by Berengar Giffard in 1086 but farmed in 1086 by his predecessor according to the Geld Roll for the Hundred in which Bredy lay: VCH Dorset, iii. 131. It is also likely he is the Harding at Alton in Hampshire9 and 'Burley' in Berkshire in 108610, both previously held by Queen Edith from whom Harding is said to have held 'Burley'. He is likely to be Queen Edith's butler of that name, recorded in the Waltham charter of 1062 and the butler of subsequent charter of 1065: Keynes, 'Regenbald the chancellor', pp. 206-207. His service with the queen may explain his byname, Queen Edith being the patron of Wilton abbey, which she rebuilt, where she was educated, to which she was exiled in the crisis of 1051-1053, and where she may have passed her widowhood; it was also where she held court in 1072 at a meeting of her counsellors where Harding was present: Stafford, Queen Emma & Queen Edith, pp. 109, 145, 257-59, 264-65, 269-70.
As Harding of Wilton held land in both 1066 and 1086, he is possibly to be identified with the pre-Conquest lord of six of the remaining eight Wiltshire manors11, two of which were within a
1 OXF B10
2 SOM 47,3
3 SOM 47,4-8
4 SOM 47,6
5 GLS 78,15
6 SOM 8,32
7 WIL 67,60-62
8 DOR 43,1
9 HAM 6,1
10 BRK 65,17
11 WIL 23,1-6
mile of two of his Wilton manors, and another within three miles, an unlikely clustering if the Hardings were different individuals, the only two in the county and both survivors. A seventh manor, at Winterslow1, lay in the same vill as one of the other six. Those six were acquired by Earl Aubrey of Coucy, who obtained his fief in Leicestershire2, and three of his manors in Warwickshire3, from an Harding, presumably Queen Edith's butler. He may also be the one other Harding in Warwickshire, a tenant of Thorkil of Warwick at Hodnell4, which lay between the three Coucy manors.
Harding of Merriott, the son of Alnoth, of Somerset and Gloucestershire, and Harding of Wilton, Queen Edith's butler, of Somerset and six other counties, have been identified as the same man by Dr Clarke and others, an identification considered improbable by Dr Williams on the grounds that Harding son of Alnoth is reported by William of Malmesbury to be alive and active in the 1120s, and so unlikely to have held land in 1066: Gesta regum, i. 470-71; English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 119-22. However, while unlikely, it is not impossible, and the Harding who according to Domesday Book held Beechingstoke in Wiltshire from Shaftesbury abbey in 10665 is almost certainly Harding son of Alnoth, since his daughter was a nun in the abbey and he was in possession of the manor in the 1120s: Williams, 'Knights of Shaftesbury abbey', pp. 227-28. Beechingstoke is just a few miles from a cluster of the manors assigned to Harding of Wilton. On general grounds, too, the identification is likely, since two survivors with more than modest holdings in the same area, with a name borne by few individuals, is statistically unlikely. Other Domesday landowners - Forne son of Sigulf, Frawin of Cornwall and Roger of Beaumont - may have lived as long as Harding.
A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 282-83, which includes every manor held by an Harding before the Conquest except two small holdings in Suffolk6. Dr Clarke ranks the combined wealth of Harding and his father Ednoth twenty-seventh among the nobility, sixteenth among untitled laymen; additional manors assigned to Ednoth would raise them two and one places respectively. Apart from Harding of Oxford, all 1086 Hardings recorded in Coel (no. 557) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 244, are identified there as Harding son of Alnoth, including those here identified as Harding of Horsenden.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDWIN. The name Hardwin is not uncommon, occurring on two fiefs and more than three dozen other manors; but it is rare in the sense fewer than half-a-dozen names may be identified with some confidence as one of two individuals named in the text, the exceptions being two Hardwins each in Cheshire and Suffolk and one in Northamptonshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDWIN [* BROTHER OF EARL RALPH *]. It is likely that most Hardwins in East Anglia are the son of Ralph the constable and brother of Earl Ralph Wader, who lost his lands in the aftermath of Ralph Wader's rebellion in 1075. He is named as Ralph's brother, accused of removing a half-mill from each of two adjacent vills in Suffolk, presumably the halves of a shared mill7. He is almost certainly the Hardwin at Barking, holding free men from Ely abbey 'when he forfeited'8, presumably in 1076 when his brother lost his lands. All three cases refer to the period after the
1 WIL 20,6
2 LEC 10,1-17
3 WAR 14,1;3;6
4 WAR 17,30
5 WIL 12,1
6 SUF 7,25. 29,9
7 SUF 2,10. 7,67
8 SUF 21,16
Conquest, his intermediate status allowing him to be identified as the Hardwin at Brundon in Essex1, Repps in Norfolk2, and Blakenham, Weston and Creeting in Suffolk3. Three of these manors were acquired by William of Ecouis, who obtained all but one of Hardwin's manors in Norfolk4, as well as others from those disinherited after 1075. The remaining manor, at Didlington5, was held by Ralph of Limésy in 1086, who also succeeded Hardwin at Brundon in Essex. Two other Hardwins held land in England before 1066, both free men on tiny holdings in Suffolk6, presumably different individuals.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDWIN [* OF SCALES *]. All Hardwins in Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire are probably Hardwin of Scales, tenant-in-chief in those counties. He is identified as the tenant of Count Alan at Reed7, where he also held in chief, by the tenure of the Scalers fee from Count Alan's descendants: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 260-65. On four Cambridgeshire manors8, his byname is supplied by the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 18, 54 107); the other ten Hardwins in the county occur on the fief of Ely abbey, in every case in vills where he was a tenant-in-chief9. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 633) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 244-45.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDWULF. The name Hardwulf occurs three times, on modest holdings distributed among three widely separated counties and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, borne by pre-Conquest lords, one of whom survived until 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDWULF <OF BRADLEY>. Hardwulf, whose land valued at ten shillings at Bradley in Devon in 1066 was acquired by the bishop of Coutances10, has no links with his two namesakes, both remote and as poorly endowed.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDWULF <OF BURNSALL>. Hardwulf, who retained land without recorded resources at Burnsall in Yorkshire for two decades11, has no links with his two namesakes, both remote and as poorly endowed; he is the only survivor among them.
.............................................................................................................................................
HARDWULF <OF COTTAM>. Hardwulf, whose modest manor valued at sixteen shillings at Cottam in Nottinghamshire was acquired by Roger of Bully12, has no links with his two namesakes, both remote and as poorly endowed.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 ESS 49,1
2 NFK 19,20
3 SUF 9,1-2. 23,1
4 NFK 19,27-28;32;36
5 NFK 28,2
6 SUF 6,46. 39,5
7 HRT 16,5
8 CAM 5,7;10. 14,22. 19,4
9 CAM 5,5;17;19;21-22;26;29-30;32;35
10 DEV 3,79
11 YKS 29W42
12 NTT 9,18
HAROLD. Harold is one of the most common names in Domesday Book, occurring several hundred times in total, in every county except Derbyshire and Northamptonshire, and on the fiefs of almost a hundred tenants-in-chief. However, if those who are named or identified as the two earls - Harold Godwinson and Harold son of Earl Ralph - are excluded, there are about two dozen names, distributed among a dozen counties and the lands of fifteen tenants-in-chief, occurring at different dates.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD [* BROTHER OF AELFRIC AND GUTHFRITHR *]. It is possible that all Harolds in Lincolnshire other than Earl Harold are the brother of Aelfric and Guthfrithr, named as predecessor of the bishop of Durham in the Lincolnshire Claims1; the bishop acquired Kirkby-on-Bain and Keddington from him2. Less certainly, Aelfric's brother may be the Harold at Westlaby3. The bishop's dispute with Eudo concerned rights which he claimed his predecessor, Harold, had in Langton-by-Wragby. Harold's interest is not recorded in the relevant entry4; but Westlaby is just a few miles from Langton, and the bishop also held land in the nearby vill of Snarford5. As the only significant landowner in the region other than the earl, Harold may be Harold the constable, who had 'full jurisdiction and market rights' in the county6 but not, apparently, any land there or in any other county.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EARL *] HAROLD. Most unidentified Harolds in Domesday Book are probably Earl Harold Godwinson, the scribes being particularly remiss in omitting his title, far more often than seems to be the case with his fellow earls. His identification is these cases is suggested by two general considerations: first, apart from Harold son of Earl Ralph, only two other Harolds in Domesday Book have a title or byname (both in Lincolnshire); and, secondly, in twenty counties where Harold's identity is not in doubt, only five other Harolds are named, four of them post-Conquest tenants, the one pre-Conquest landowner, a free man with a virgate in Hampshire7. Two other counties offer few difficulties. In Nottinghamshire, the unidentified Harolds from whom Earl Hugh of Chester acquired three of his four manors8 are probably the earl, who preceded him in seven other counties; while the Harold who shared a modest holding at Keyworth acquired by Roger of Bully is unlikely to be him9, Roger succeeding the earl nowhere else. Buckinghamshire presents the one ambiguous case: Harold of Tyringham, the one untitled Harold in the county, is conceivably the earl, though probably not.
Of the remaining counties in Great Domesday, the Harolds in Berkshire, Kent, Wiltshire, Hertfordshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire and Yorkshire present only minor problems. The Harolds on seven royal manors in Berkshire10, and the Harold who preceded Earl Hugh of Chester at Drayton11, are unlikely to be anyone other than the earl; the Harold at Barcote12 less certainly so, though the manor is a respectable one and had passed through the Conqueror's hands. In Kent, only Earl Harold is likely to have had such a well-endowed a concubine, or to have behaved violently
1 LIN CS9;21-22
2 LIN 3,13-15;27-30
3 LIN 14,43
4 LIN 3,10
5 LIN 3,2
6 LIN T5
7 HAM 1,W1
8 NTT 3,1-3
9 NTT 9,88
10 BRK 1,34-36;39-40;44-45
11 BRK 18,1
12 BRK 65,7
towards the Church with impunity, or to be the lord of men1; and in Yorkshire, where Earl Harold was a major landowner, the Harold who held the very valuable (£32) manor of Cleeton and its dependency2 is surely the earl, the Harold with fourteen carucates at Rothwell and its dependencies probably - though less certainly - so3. There is no doubt at all that Harold and Godwin, reported as exiled or acting together in the Herefordshire folios4, are the two earls exiled in 1051, little doubt that Harold's 'war against the Norsemen' mentioned in a Worcestershire entry5 refers to King Harold's Stamford Bridge campaign. Almost as certainly, the earl is the one unidentified Harold in Hertfordshire, a lord of men in a county where he was overwhelmingly the greatest lay landowner6. Finally, the one untitled Harold in Wiltshire - at Clyffe Pypard7 - is circled by the earl's manors. Clyffe was held by Miles Crispin, who acquired the previous and a subsequent manor from the earl8.
Most unidentified Harolds in Great Domesday occur in Sussex and Surrey, in both of which counties the earl was the greatest lay landowner in 1066. In Surrey, his identity at Pyrford9 is established by a royal writ (Regesta, i. no. xviii, p. 123), and at Oxted, Lambeth and Streatham10 by references to his mother and his relationship with the Canons of Waltham, his foundation. He is probably the Harold who held the valuable manor of Limpsfield used to endow Battle abbey and also the Harold whose men held two others11, and more likely than not the one other Harold in the county, on the modestly prosperous manor of Wotton12, acquired by the tenant who held the following manor from the earl. In Sussex, the Godwinson heartland, the very largest manors will have been Earl Harold's. Of those valued at less than £20, Compton13 lay in Laughton, where his father held the main manor; Tottington in Findon14, was worth £28; and Fulking15 in Shipley, which is not recorded in Domesday Book but is adjacent to Steyning where the Harold who held the borough worth £86 must be Harold Godwinson16. The remaining Harolds are overlords, so probably the earl17, there apparently being no other Harolds with demesne holdings in the county.
In Great Domesday, therefore, there are comparatively few uncertainties in identifying the earl, and very few Harolds who are not the earl. There is no reason to suppose that matters are different in the three counties of Little Domesday, once part of Harold's earldom. This is important because unidentified Harolds occur far more frequently there than anywhere else - more times in each one of the three counties than in all of Great Domesday - but the earl is given his title only once in each county18. In itself, of course, this may reflect the scribes' knowledge that other Harolds were extremely rare, if they existed at all. It is possible that there was only one such. Elsewhere, the royal estates, the larger manors, his lordship over men, his territorial predominance in some areas, association with members of his family, high-handed acts of violence, and relationships between estates, point to his identity.
1 KEN C4. P20. 5,14;18
2 YKS 14E8;54
3 YKS 9W119
4 HEF 19,2-3;8
5 WOR 26,16
6 HRT 17,4
7 WIL 28,3
8 WIL 28,2;11
9 SUR 6,5
10 SUR 15,1. 17,1;4
11 SUR 5,16;27. 11,1
12 SUR 36,4
13 SUS 10,23
14 SUS 13,7;11
15 SUS 12,29
16 SUS 5,2
17 SUS 11,26. 13,23;25;28-29
18 ESS B3k. NFK 3,2. SUF 68,1
Clarke, English nobility, pp. 169-91, lists Harold's manors. The list does not include manors named only in satellite texts or without valuations, or the demesne manors of Heddington, Hullavington and Latton (doubtful) in Wiltshire; St Stephens in Cornwall; Kimbolton and its dependencies in Huntingdonshire; Stoneley in Cheshire; Childerditch in Essex; Dereham (doubtful) or Panworth in Norfolk; or those of Harold's men at Balham in Surrey; Amwell in Hertfordshire; Wavendon in Buckinghamshire; Lexham, Ingworth and Spixworth in Norfolk; or Bealings and Derneford in Suffolk. Harold was, by a very considerable margin, the wealthiest English landowner after the king, far wealthier in demesne lands than any of the Conqueror's tenants-in-chief, even without taking the lands of his dead father into account. Baxter, Earls of Mercia, p. 129, supplies other estimates of his manorial income, all lower than his own (£3174); the Statistics database total is higher still than his estimate (£3432). Williams, 'Land and power', pp. 171-72, calculates his assessed land as approximately 2400 hides/carucates, the Statistics database as 2850.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD <OF BISHOPSTONE>. As the name is rare in 1086, the tenants of the bishop of Chichester at Bishopstone and Aldingbourne1 are probably one man, despite the distance separating the vills. This Harold is the best endowed of the survivors so it is not improbable that he is also Hugh of Montfort's tenant on two manors in East Kent2, not much further from Bishopstone than it is from Aldingbourne. Harold's manors in Kent are recorded in Coel (no. 8805) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 249; the Sussex tenants are unidentified (nos. 15644, 15654).
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD <OF CLAPCOT>. Harold, who held a tiny subtenancy from Miles Crispin at Clapcot in Berkshire3, has no links with his namesakes. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 949).
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD <OF CODDENHAM>. The abbot of Ely's free man with a plough and a couple of smallholders at Coddenham in Suffolk4 in 1066 may be the free man with a similarly modest holding at Thurleston5, four miles away.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD <OF KEYWORTH>. Harold, who shared a modest holding at Keyworth in Nottinghamshire acquired by Roger of Bully6, has no links with his namesakes.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD <OF KNIGHTON>. The thane Harold who held a virgate worth five shillings and the fifth part of a mill worth 22d in the royal manor of Knighton on the Isle of Wight before the Conquest7 has no links with his namesakes; he is unlikely to be the earl.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD <OF TYRINGHAM>. Harold, who held three hides at Tyringham in Buckinghamshire8, may be the thane who had shared ownership of the following unnamed manor, probably at
1 SUS 3,1;3
2 KEN 9,50-51
3 BRK 33,4
4 SUF 16,20
5 SUF 25,60
6 NTT 9,88
7 HAM 1,W1
8 BUK 17,22
Astwood some eight miles away1, both acquired by William son of Ansculf. It is just possible that he is Earl Harold Godwinson, despite his holding being conflated with that of four other thanes (normal bureaucratic procedure in circuit three). This is suggested by a number of coincidences. Harold of Tyringham is the only Harold other than the earl who was a lord of men before the Conquest, though he apparently had no manors other than these, and no men other than Godric. He is the only Harold apart from the earl to have a wife who held land in her own right. Earl Harold and his men were also predecessors of William son of Ansculf and his uncle Giles elsewhere in the county2. The name of his wife, Aelfeva (Aluueua), however, seems to preclude an identification. The earl's wife, named in Domesday Book only as the wife of her first husband, King Gruffydd (d. 1063), is Aldgeat3 or Aldgid4, variously rendered as Aldid, Aldgyth, Edith (Orderic Vitalis, ii. 138, 216) or Ealdgyth. But the scribe committed worse blunders in dealing with Old English name-forms.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD <OF WESTLECOTT>. As the name is rare in 1086, it is not unlikely that the Harold with a modestly substantial tenancy from Hugh the ass at Westlecott in Wiltshire5 is the one other survivor there, at Enford6, though this is on the other side of the county. Both are unidentified in Coel (nos. 16582, 17072).
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD <OF WHITNEY>. Harold, who held a waste holding worth six shillings at Whitney in Herefordshire from the Canons of St Guthlac's in 10867, has no links with his namesakes, though it is just possible that he is Harold son of Earl Ralph, who held land elsewhere in the county. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 30239).
.............................................................................................................................................
HAROLD [* SON OF EARL RALPH *]. Harold, son of Earl Ralph of Hereford (d. 1057), held land as a minor before the Conquest8 and had small fiefs in Gloucestershire, Worcestershire and Warwickshire in 1086. He is almost certainly the Harold who had two or four messuages in Warwick which 'belong to the lands which these barons hold outside the Borough'9, since he is the only Harold with land in the county, though it is curious that his name occurs twice in the list of 'barons'. It is possible, though unlikely, that he is the surviving Harold at Whitney in Herefordshire10. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2572) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 245 as Harold of Ewyas; the tenant at Whitney is unidentified (no. 30239.
.............................................................................................................................................
HAWARTH <OF STOKESLEY>. The name Hawarth is entirely confined to the adjacent wapentakes of Allerton and Langbaurgh in the North Riding of Yorkshire where the tight cluster of seventeen vills11 spanning fifteen miles from east to west very probably belonged to one man, the
1 BUK 17,23
2 BUK 17,2;5-6. 51,1-2
3 WOR 19,13
4 WAR 6,5
5 WIL 50,2
6 WIL 2,10
7 HEF 6,10
8 MDX 9,1
9 WAR B2
10 HEF 6,10
11 YKS 1N22-24;118;120-122. 29N8-9
lord of the very valuable manor of Stokesley1; only the king, the earls, the archbishop and two magnates had more valuable manors. Hawarth was an early casualty of the Conquest, the Yorkshire Claims recording that his land was held by William Malet 'before the castle was taken'2. Dr Newman doubts that William Malet 'ever came into actual seisin' of Hawarth's land, largely on the grounds that Hawarth's recorded land lay far beyond the area the Normans are thought to have controlled by September 1069: 'Yorkshire Domesday Clamores', pp. 265-69. But direct evidence for the area under Norman control is slight, and there appears to be no substantial reason to doubt the explicit statement of the jurors about Malet's possession of Hawarth's lands. As Hawarth was clearly a significant landowner, Dr Fleming's judgement that Malet's predecessors 'were an undistinguished lot', needs some modification: Kings and lords, pp. 159-60.
.............................................................................................................................................
HEALFDENE. Healfdene is common name, with a skewed distribution, most names occurring in Suffolk and the adjacent counties of Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, and Yorkshire, a pattern suggesting a few significant landowners among the small fry. Seventeen manors were held by survivors, all but two of them in Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
HEALFDENE <OF CROMWELL>. It is likely that most if not all fourteen Healfdenes in Nottinghamshire are one man, the lord of Cromwell, where he had a church3: Thoroton, Antiquities of Nottinghamshire, i. 169-70. Of the twelve survivors among them, eleven are recorded among the king's thanes4, seven preceded by an Ulfkil, while in two other cases no pre-Conquest lord is recorded and a tenth is held by an anonymous group. All were in vills a few miles from one or more of the others, in several cases in adjacent vills. The one other survivor in the county was a tenant of the Count of Mortain at Normanton5, eight to ten miles from the holdings of Healfdene of Cromwell at Widmerpool, Chilwell and Toton. As only one other Healfdene may have survived in the other thirty-three counties combined (below), it is likely the Nottinghamshire survivors are one man. Four manors were held by other survivors, three in the West Riding of Lincolnshire where one is a priest and the others likely to be so too6 and so probably not the Nottinghamshire thane. The fourth thane probably is (below).
Healfdene of Cromwell may also be the pre-Conquest lord of seven manors in Nottinghamshire. Of these, Chilwell is a jurisdiction of Toton, and Broxtowe and Watnall of Nuthall7; only Broadholme8 is at a distance from the others. Although none of the post-Conquest holdings are in the same vills, Trowell lies between Nuthall and Toton, while Awsworth9 is adjacent to Broxtowe, a mile from Nuthall, and two from Watnall. The two Healfdenes in Derbyshire may also be Healfdene of Cromwell. This is very likely the case at Esnotrewic10, where he was succeeded by William Peverel, who acquired most of Healfdene's manors in Nottinghamshire11, and probably also at Vlvritune12, held by the one remaining survivor among the royal thanes; though a lost vill, its position in the text suggests it cannot be too far across the county
1 YKS 29N8-9
2 YKS CN3
3 NTT 30,4
4 NTT 30,2-6;30;33;36;45;47-48
5 NTT 4,1
6 LIN 68,28;32;34
7 NTT 10,25-26;40-42. 13,5
8 NTT 21,3
9 NTT 30,30;33
10 DBY 7,3
11 NTT 30,25-26;40-42
12 DBY 17,19
border from those of the Nottinghamshire thane. Healfdene's Nottinghamshire tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 3807) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 134; the priest is identified as another man (no. 3808), the other tenants being unidentified (nos. 32512, 34889, 34891).
.............................................................................................................................................
HEALFDENE <OF HANSLOPE>. Healfdene, who held Tewin in Hertfordshire in 1066 which he retained as a tenant of Peter of Valognes1, may be the juror in Broadwater Hundred recorded in the Inquisition Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 100). He was a royal thane, evidently a significant figure since the Conqueror granted him and his mother Tewin 'for the soul of his son Richard, as he says himself and shows through his writ'; Peter tried to wrest the manor from him, claiming another royal grant. As his name is uncommon in southern England, Healfdene is probably also Peter's predecessor at Higham Hill in Essex2, and the royal Guard at Hanslope and Earl Harold's man at Chearsley, both in Buckinghamshire3, all three valuable manors held by the only Healfdenes in those counties; Hanslope, in particular, is a high status manor (£26). It was held in 1086 by Winemar of Flanders, who also acquired three of his five manors in Northamptonshire from Healfdene4. Chearsley was held by Miles Crispin, who obtained two of his Berkshire manors from Healfdene5, all three being subinfeudated by Miles to Richard son of Rainfrid (q.v.), as was Ickford in Buckinghamshire6, and Swyncombe, Draycot and Alkerton in Oxfordshire7, where no pre-Conquest lords are named, possibly therefore all held by Healfdene in 1066. It is not unlikely that one or more of the three Healfdenes in Gloucestershire and Leicestershire are the same man, but there are no links to support this. Healfdene qualifies as a magnate of regional significance; if included in Clarke, English nobility, he would rank among the ninety wealthiest untitled laymen of 1066, in the top eighty if the Oxfordshire manors are included. His one tenancy is recorded in Coel (no. 9880) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 134; see also Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 79-80, who suggests that it is 'possible, though perhaps unlikely' that his mother is Edeva, a landholder in Dorset in 1086 whose land was freed of tax by Queen Matilda in memory of her son Richard.
.............................................................................................................................................
HEALFDENE [* SON OF TOPI *]. Healfdene Topi, from whom the bishop of Lincoln acquired Bigby8, is Healfdene son of Topi, brother of Ulf, who granted Claxby to him in his will: Whitelock, Anglo-Saxon wills, pp. 94-97, 208, 211-12. The Peterborough chronicle recounts that Abbot Brand, his relative, leased Dunsby to him because he had been deprived of his lands by the Conqueror to endow the bishop of Lincoln, an arrangement alluded to in the Lincolnshire Claims9: Hugh Candidus, p. 69. This identifies Healfdene as the bishop's predecessor on eight manors10, six of which were the subject of grants by Ulf, though to other family members. He must also be the Healfdene at Steyning, which the Claims for the county identify as belonging to the bishop, not Count Alan of Brittany, because it was held by the bishop's predecessor, Healfdene11. The manors acquired from Healfdene by the bishop fall into two groups, at the two extremities of the county, which suggests that some of the intervening Healfdenes may be the same man. The predecessor of
1 HRT 36,19
2 ESS 36,6
3 BUK 23,10. 46,1
4 NTH 40,1;4-5
5 BRK 33,6-7
6 BUK 23,8
7 OXF 35,16;32-33
8 LIN 7,18
9 LIN CK45
10 LIN 7,16;20;22;27;30-33
11 LIN 12,89. CK67
the archbishop of York is the most likely candidate1. His principle manor of Dowsby lay within a couple of miles of the son of Topi's manor at Dunsby, and one of its dependencies a similar distance from the Steyning wrongfully detained by Count Alan. The archbishop had, moreover, bought the manors from Ulf son of Topi2, and one of those he acquired from Healfdene3 lay in vills where other members of his family held land. He may also be the Healfdene at Bonby4, a mile from his manor of Worlaby. The archbishop had no other Healfdenes on his Honour but the bishop was preceded by Healfdene at Buckminster in Leicestershire5, a county in which the bulk of the episcopal fief appears to be a new endowment, so this Healfdene may also be Topi's son. The one other Healfdene in the county has no apparent link; neither do the many other unidentified Healfdenes in Lincolnshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
HEINFRID <OF ICKLINGHAM>. The three Heinfrids in Domesday Book (Henfridus, Hainfridus), are certainly one man, all being intermediate landowners on the Honour of Eudo son of Spirewic in East Anglia, twice described as the predecessor of Eudo6. He is almost equally certainly the Herfrindus - a unique form - who preceded Eudo at Alburgh7, where he is also described as Eudo's predecessor. As an intermediate landowner, Heinfrid's manors are not listed in Coel, Domesday people or the Statistics database.
.............................................................................................................................................
HELGHI. Helghi is a rare name which occurs only in Sussex and Nottinghamshire, all Helghis being pre-Conquest lords.
.............................................................................................................................................
HELGHI <OF OWTHORPE>. As the name is rare, the three Helghis in Nottinghamshire, whose manors were acquired by Roger of Bully and lay close to each other, are almost certainly one man8, conceivably the Sussex Helghi though there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
HELGHI <OF WORTH>. As the name is rare, the three Helghis in Sussex may be one man. Two of his manors were acquired by Earl Roger of Shrewsbury and were subinfeudated to Reginald the sheriff9. The third, at Worth, some fifty miles away, acquired by the Count of Mortain10, may also have been his given the rarity of the name, its free tenure under King Edward, and its reasonably substantial nature. The tenurial settlement of Sussex by Rapes means that little significance can be attached to its acquisition by another tenant-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
HELGOT. Helgot is an uncommon name which occurs on one fief and eleven manors, distributed among four counties between Devon and Buckinghamshire and the lands of five tenants-in-chief; two more Helgots are recorded in Exon., both in Devon.
1 LIN 2,18-20;29-31
2 LIN CK10
3 LIN 2,19
4 LIN 25,1
5 LEC 3,15
6 NFK 29,8;11. SUF 53,1
7 NFK 29,7
8 NTT 9,98-99;111
9 SUS 11,46;116
10 SUS 10,65
.............................................................................................................................................
HELGOT <OF AWLISCOMBE>. As the name is uncommon, it is very probable that the Helgot who held Awliscombe in Devon from Ralph of Pomeroy1 is his tenant at Heaton2, and possibly also the tenant of Fulchere the bowman at Huish3, both named in Exon. but not in Domesday Book itself. It is not clear whether Domesday is correcting Exon. or has accidentally omitted the information; but the coincidence suggests both Helgots are the same man: Devonshire Domesday, ii. 924, 1128. Although the manors are not insubstantial, it is unlikely that he is related to his namesakes in Buckinghamshire or Shropshire with whom there are no links. Helgot is unidentified in Coel (no. 4061).
.............................................................................................................................................
HELGOT <OF DRAYTON>. As the name is uncommon, it is very probable that the Helgots who held Helsthorpe and Drayton Beauchamp in Buckinghamshire from Mainou the Breton4 are the same man; the vills are seven miles apart. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1655) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 246.
.............................................................................................................................................
HELGOT <OF HOLDGATE>. As the name is uncommon, it is likely that all Helgots in Shropshire are one man, the ancestor of the barons of Castle Holgate. Apart from his fief from Earl Roger5, Helgot was a tenant of Ralph of Mortimer at Adley, Bucknell, Sheinton and Burwarton6. Only Sheinton appears to have descended to his heirs; but Burwarton shared the same predecessor - Azur - as Sheinton and Norton7, and was adjacent to Charlcotte8, as was Belswardyne9 to Sheinton; Eyton suggests, with some circumstantial support, that the tenancies were lost, or sold, to subtenants, the Girros family: Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. 31-33; vi. 214-15; xi. 312-13, 318, 332-33.
Earl Roger also had a tenant named Helgot at Meaford in Staffordshire10, as did Robert of Stafford at Barlaston and Bobbington11. Barlaston is less than two miles from Meaford; and since a Philip son of Helgot held land in Shropshire and fees of the Honour of Stafford in 1166, and the heirs of John son of Philip had fees of the Honour of Stafford in Barlaston and Bobbington in the thirteenth century, it is not unlikely that the Staffordshire Helgots are one man, Earl Roger's tenant Helgot of Holdgate: Red Book, i. 267, 277; ii. 454; Book of Fees, p. 967. The heirs of John son of Philip are said to hold fees in Barlaston, Bobbington and Hilderstone with a Ralph de la Mare: Book of Fees, p. 974, and the de la Mare family married into that of the barons of Holgate: Sanders, English baronies, pp. 28-29. Philip and John presumably represent a cadet branch of the baronial family. Helgot's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2973) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 246.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 DEV 34,26
2 DEV 34,16
3 DEV 49,7
4 BUK 43,4-5
5 SHR 4,21,1-19
6 SHR 6,27;29;32. 4,11,1;9
7 SHR 4,21,1
8 SHR 4,21,13
9 SHR 4,21,9
10 STS 8,24
11 STS 11,24;43
HELIO <OF OAKLEY>. The two Helios in Domesday Book, tenants of Robert of Stafford at Cooksland and Oakley in Staffordshire1, are very probably one man. Robert had two other tenants with uncommon names - Algot and Helgot - holding land within a few miles of Cooksland; and since the name Helio is otherwise unknown, it is possible that it is a corrupt form of one or other of them, Helio possibly being Helgot of Holdgate. The two Helios are unidentified in Coel (nos. 31493, 31518).
.............................................................................................................................................
HELTO [* THE STEWARD *]. As there are no other Heltos in Domesday Book, those who held three manors in Kent2 and four in Buckinghamshire3 from Bishop Odo of Bayeux are probably Helto the steward, who held part of the royal manor of Dartford4. Helto was one of a handful of Odo's honorial barons who were wealthier than the majority of tenants-in-chief, his manors of Swanscombe in Kent5 and Dinton in Buckinghamshire6 being particularly valuable. He may have lost his lands when Bishop Odo was exiled, since he was in Normandy with the bishop after the Conqueror's death: Calendar of documents: France, pp. 530-31. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 161) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 247.
.............................................................................................................................................
HEMMING. Hemming is an uncommon name which occurs thirteen times, distributed among six counties and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief. Most of the manors are substantial, suggesting few men, possibly only one or two.
.............................................................................................................................................
HEMMING <OF BRANSTON>. It is possible that all Hemmings in Domesday Book are one man. Those who preceded Walter of Aincourt in Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire almost certainly are. This Hemming had full jurisdiction and market rights in Lincolnshire7 and was a substantial landowner in both counties, his manors at Branston8 and Granby9 each being worth more - £20 and £12 respectively - than the entire manorial wealth of many tenants-in-chief. Walter's three most valuable manors came from Hemming, who contributed roughly a quarter of the total value of his Honour. With the addition of Blankney and Metheringham10, his manorial income would place him among the hundred wealthiest pre-Conquest landowners. In view of this, it is possible that he is to be identified with the Hemmings of Buckinghamshire, Gloucestershire or Sussex, also substantial landowners, though these were acquired by other tenants-in-chief, Walter of Aincourt having no fiefs in those counties. The Buckinghamshire and Gloucestershire manors at Hitcham, Marlow and Claydon11 and Cherington in Gloucestershire12, individually valuable and together worth £13, were acquired by Miles Crispin and so were probably held by one man. As Marlow is only a few miles further from Granby than it is from Cherington, he may be the Lincolnshire Hemming rather than another wealthy landowner with a rare name.
1 STS 11,26;47
2 KEN 5,2;102;114
3 BUK 4,1-3;21
4 KEN 1,1
5 KEN 5,2
6 BUK 4,2
7 LIN T5
8 LIN 31,11-14
9 NTT 11,26-32
10 LIN 31,16;18
11 BUK 23,3-4;15
12 GLS 64,2
This may also be the case with the Sussex Hemming, whose Sussex manors are roughly as far from Marlow as Marlow is from Cherington. There is little doubt that all the Sussex manors were held by one man. The four respectable manors which devolved upon the Count of Mortain1 were held by Hemming as the Count's tenant as well as his predecessor, and two such survivors with this uncommon name in the same Rape is improbable. Rottingdean2, though held by Hemming only in 1066 and acquired by William of Warenne, 'lay in Firle', one of the manors Hemming held from the Count of Mortain3. Hemming's son, Richard, endowed Wilmington priory from these lands: Round, 'Some early grants', p. 77. There is another link, albeit slight, between the predecessors of the Count of Mortain and Miles Crispin. In Buckinghamshire, Hemming is described as a royal thane, and he held his Gloucestershire manor from King Edward. He also held three of the Sussex manors directly from the king, the other two from Earl Godwin. The one other Hemming in Domesday Book had a tiny property at Shepreth in Cambridgeshire4. This Hemming was, however, King Edward's man, so even he may be the Lincolnshire magnate. Apart from the Worcestershire monk and a moneyer of circa 900, the name appears to be otherwise unrecorded, which lends a little weight to the suggestion that the Domesday Hemmings are one man. If these deductions are valid, Hemming held land valued at £67, placing him among the sixty wealthiest English landowners. If not, one at least of the two or three landowners bearing this name - Walter of Aincourt's predecessor - was wealthy enough to rank among the untitled laymen listed by Clarke, English nobility. In Sussex, Hemming survived on the bulk of the land he held there before the Conquest, more fortunate than the majority of his English peers. His Sussex tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 2157) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 244.
.............................................................................................................................................
HENRY. If the three tenants-in-chief are excluded, the name Henry is rare, most tenants occurring on the Honour of Henry of Ferrers, where they are carefully distinguished from their lord. There are three other Henrys in Domesday Book, one each in Norfolk, Suffolk and Yorkshire, one a pre-Conquest landowner.
.............................................................................................................................................
HENRY [* OF FERRERS *]. Henry, who held a site in Wallingford, is probably the tenant-in-chief Henry of Ferrers, whose tenant Nigel5 held this site from him. The context suggests he is also the Henry who held part of the royal manors of Shalbourne and Hendred6, since he was sheriff of the county and his predecessor, Godric, was involved with the land concerned. In Derbyshire, he is identified as the Henry at Mapperley and Ednaston by reference to his manors in those vills7. Henry was a tenant-in-chief in fourteen counties; his manors are recorded in Coel (no. 639) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 247-48.
.............................................................................................................................................
HENRY [* OF FYFIELD *]. As the name is rare among tenants, those of Henry of Ferrers in Berkshire8, Derbyshire9 and Essex10 are almost certainly the same Henry, variously named Henry, a second Henry, or Henry the steward. In the cartulary of the Ferrers' foundation of Tutbury priory,
1 SUS 10,6;19;29;46
2 SUS 12,10
3 SUS 10,46
4 CAM 14,40
5 BRK B1. 21,8
6 BRK 1,27;38
7 DBY 1,35. 4,2
8 BRK 21,1;15;17-19
9 DBY 6,57;94
10 ESS 29,5
he is named Henry of Fifidre, evidently from his manor of Fyfield in Berkshire, where he is 'a second' Henry1: Cartulary of Tutbury priory, p. 65. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 280) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 248.
.............................................................................................................................................
HENRY <OF OTTRINGHAM>. Henry, a tenant of Drogo of la Beuvrière on a fairly substantial manor at Ottringham in Yorkshire2, is the only Henry in the county, or indeed in the north of England other than the tenant-in-chief Henry of Ferrers; it is unlikely therefore that he is related to any other Henry in Domesday Book. His manor was later held from the Holderness fee of Drogo's successors by a family which took its name from the vill: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 83. Henry is unidentified in Coel (no. 37865).
.............................................................................................................................................
HENRY <OF RUSHALL>. The three Henrys in East Anglia are almost certainly one man. He held Rushall in Norfolk from the abbey of Bury St Edmunds before the Conquest3 and part of Rede in Suffolk from the abbey twenty years later4. He held another twenty acres in the vill from Ely abbey in 10865, where he is described as a man of the abbot of St Edmunds in the Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 182). His holdings are assigned to the demesne of the abbeys in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT. Herbert is a fairly common name which occurs more than seventy times, distributed among twenty-two counties and the lands of the king and thirty of his tenants-in-chief, all borne by post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT <OF BURROUGH>. As the name is rare in the area - there is one other Herbert in Leicestershire and none in Derbyshire - the tenant of Henry of Ferrers at Breaston in Derbyshire6 may be the king's servant who held Cold Newton and Burrough in Leicestershire7, where Henry had a second manor8. He was perhaps the ancestor (or predecessor) of the FitzHerbert family. The descent of the Leicestershire holdings is obscure; but FitzHerberts were tenants of the Honour in both counties at a later date, and the family was established in both by the 1120s: VCH Leicestershire, v. 64; Nichols, History and antiquities of Leicestershire, ii. 526-27; iv. 860. Herbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8808) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 250.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT [* OF FURCHES *]. The Herberts who held four manors in Shropshire9 and two in Herefordshire10 from Roger of Lacy are identified by their descent as the ancestor of the Furches family; he is probably the Herbert de furcis who witnessed a Lacy charter in 1085: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. 44-45; Red Book, i. 282; Galbraith, 'Episcopal land-grant', p. 373. His
1 BRK 21,15
2 YKS 14E13
3 NFK 32,7
4 SUF 14,16
5 SUF 21,4
6 DBY 6,65
7 LEC 42,1-4
8 LEC 14,32
9 SHR 4,8,4;6;10-11
10 HEF 10,9-10
manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3712) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 249, where Eaton, held from Ralph of Tosny1, is also attributed to him, though on what grounds is unclear.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT <OF HARGRAVE>. The Herberts who held three modest holdings at Stukeley and Hargrave in Huntingdonshire from Eustace the sheriff2 are probably one man. There are no other Herberts in the county, or in the neighbouring counties of Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire, and Eustace had no tenant of this name elsewhere on his Honour. Herbert is unlikely to be Herbert son of Ivo, his nearest namesake, all of whose manors were held from Odo of Bayeux. The descent of the Huntingdonshire holdings is unrevealing: VCH Huntingdonshire, ii. 230-31; VCH Northamptonshire, iv. 18-19. Herbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8809) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 251.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT [* SON OF AUBREY *]. The Herberts who held Langton in Leicestershire3 and three manors in Lincolnshire from the archbishop of York may be Herbert son of Aubrey, father of Herbert the chamberlain of Henry I, who received further grants from Archbishop Thomas II: Early Yorkshire charters, i. 35-36. He held Lissington and its dependencies in the Lindsey Survey, later held together with Stallingborough and Rigsby by the same family4: Early Yorkshire charters, i. 36, 44-47, 50-51; Book of Fees, pp. 159, 1014, 1062, 1082, 1476. The descent of the Leicestershire manor has not been traced: VCH Leicestershire, v. 210. The archbishop had no other Herberts on his Honour. Herbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2992) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 250, apart from Langton, attributed to another Herbert (no. 8808).
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT [* SON OF IVO *]. The Herberts who held Ospringe, Ringleton, Hammil and Boswell Banks in Kent5 and Turvey and Wilden in Bedfordshire6 from the bishop of Bayeux are probably Herbert son of Ivo, his tenant on two other manors in Bedfordshire and several in Kent, many of them substantial. In Bedfordshire, Ivo's son held the two preceding manors, so the scribe may have omitted an 'also'; Wilden, the most valuable, was subinfeudated by Herbert to his nephew, Hugh. Herbert and his nephew also appear together in Kent, at Ospringe and Hammil, and probably also at Boswell Banks, where Herbert was succeeded by a Hugh who is probably his nephew since the same succession occurs at Ospringe, and Herbert is elsewhere recorded as an intermediate tenant7. Ringelton was one of his most valuable manors, though farmed for a substantial premium. Bishop Odo had no other tenants named Herbert on his Honour, and the one other Herbert in the two counties, a reeve with a half-hide at Eversholt in Bedfordshire, is unlikely to be the bishop's tenant. Herbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 547) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 250.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT [* THE JERKIN-MAKER *]. Herbert, who had a subholding in the manor of Upton in Cheshire in 10868, has been identified as Herbert Wambasarius, or jerkin-maker, from a reference to his half-hide in the cartulary of Chester abbey: Lewis, 'Herbert the jerkin-maker', pp. 159-60. As
1 HEF 1,22
2 HUN 19,10;13-14
3 LEC 2,2
4 LIN 2,6-7;11-15;18-20
5 KEN 5,145;183-184;195
6 BDF 2,8-9
7 KEN 5,155-156
8 CHS 1,34
the only other Herbert in the county, or anywhere in England, holding from the Honour of Chester, the Herbert at Heswall1 may be the same man. Both manors are in the Wirral, some thirteen miles apart. Both Herberts are unidentified in Coel (nos. 28746, 38693).
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT [* THE LATINIST *]. Herbert, named by Orderic Vitalis (ii. 262-63) as one of the three 'learned clerks' of the household of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury', elsewhere described as Herbert grammaticus, may be the Herbert who held Albright Hussey and Great Sutton2: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. 109-10. He was archdeacon of Shropshire, and witnessed charters of the earl as Herbert the archdeacon: Cartulary of Shrewsbury abbey, i. 30; ii. 255. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8806) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 250; see also Mason, 'Officers and clerks', p. 253.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBERT [* THE STEWARD *]. Herbert, who held Farwood in Devon from William of Poilley3, is identified as Herbert the steward in William's grant of the tithes of his manors to St Martin's of Sées in 1093: Calendar of documents: France, p. 235. There are no other Herberts on William's Honour, or in the county. Herbert's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 2038) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 250.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBRAND. Herbrand is a rare name which occurs five times, distributed among three counties and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBRAND [* OF PONT-AUDEMER *]. As the name is rare, the Herbrand of Pont-Audemer listed among the tenants-in-chief in Hampshire4 is probably the Herbrand at Pan in the Isle of Wight5, both manors - of equivalent status - being acquired from a Godric. The two Herbrands in Worcestershire are tenants of Urso of Abetot6, so very probably one man. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that the Hampshire and Worcestershire Herbrands are the same man. Their estates are similar, and Abetot and Pont-Audemer are both in Upper Normandy, separated by the Seine estuary, so the identification is plausible given the rarity of the name. Manorial descents do not clarify the issue, since all four manors were in different hands at a later date, though it is most improbable that they were held by four individuals in 1086: VCH Hampshire, iii. 442; v. 200; VCH Worcestershire, iii. 24-25; iv. 145-46. Herbrand's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 964) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 251.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERBRAND [* OF SACKVILLE *]. Herbrand, who held Fawley in Buckinghamshire from Walter Giffard7, has been identified as his steward, from Sauqueville in Upper Normandy (Seine-Maritime: arrondissement Dieppe), on the basis of later evidence accepted by Round as essentially sound due to its circumstantial detail, including Herbrand's name (Esbrandus), the name of his manor (selected, it is said, for the beauty of its site), and the statement that Giffard acquired his land
1 CHS 3,6
2 SHR 4,3,57. 4,21,15
3 DEV 21,15
4 HAM 58,1
5 HAM IoW9,5
6 WOR 8,16. 26,12
7 BUK 14,4
from Aelfeva 'the crazy', when he did in fact obtain his principal manor in Buckinghamshire - Long Crendon - from Saeric son of Aelfeva, and two more from Sired son of Aelfeva1: Peerage and pedigree, ii. 285-89. Herbrand's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 8810) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 251.
.............................................................................................................................................
HEREWARD [* 'THE WAKE' *]. It is possible that all Herewards in Domesday Book are the famous outlaw, Hereward 'the Wake', though the manors lay in four counties and devolved upon six tenants-in-chief; his byname is not contemporary but so familiar it would be pedantic to use another. He is almost certainly the Hereward whose Lincolnshire manors were acquired by the abbey of Peterborough and Oger the Breton, the Lincolnshire Claims revealing that the predecessors of both tenants-in-chief fled the country2. As the name is rare, it is likely that the four Warwickshire Herewards are one man; the three tenants of the Count of Meulan held their manors for twenty years3, and the fourth manor was held from Thorkil of Warwick who shared other tenants with the Count. It is also possible that the Hereward who held Evenlode in Worcestershire from the Church before the Conquest is the same man as Count's tenant4, two Evesham satellite texts implying that the 'held' of Domesday Book may be an error for 'holds', or even 'held and holds'5. Ladbroke, the fourth Warwickshire manor, held by Hereward in 1066, lay between the others in the county and that in Worcestershire.
Freeman and others have suggested that the Lincolnshire and Warwickshire Herewards are one man, a suggestion forcefully rejected by Round, who argued that 'there was absolutely nothing' to connect the two; this remains the accepted view: Feudal England, p. 162; Oxford DNB, xxvi. 767. Dr Baxter, however, has argued that 'the balance of probability is that there was only one Hereward', pointing to links between the Herewards of both counties and the earls of Mercia to support this view: Earls of Mercia, pp. 261-66. The Lincolnshire Hereward was associated with the Leofricsons, possibly a dependant. The abbot of Peterborough, who was present at the battle of Hastings and died shortly thereafter, was a cousin of Earl Leofric of Mercia; and Bourne, with which Hereward the Wake is strongly associated in later sources, was held by Leofric's grandson, Earl Morcar6. Both Morcar and Hereward were, of course, involved in the rebellion of 1071 and the siege of Ely. As for the Warwickshire Hereward, he held land at Ladbroke7, where Earl Leofric's family were endowed by Aethelred the Unready; and at Evenlode from Evesham abbey, of which the Leofricsons were patrons8. The Warwickshire Hereward, and perhaps the Worcestershire one, was alive in 1086, by which date Hereward is usually assumed to be dead, having lost his Lincolnshire manors; but the date of his death is unknown, and later sources record that he made his peace with the Conqueror (though not, perhaps, the abbey). Dr Baxter does not discuss one other Hereward in Domesday, with a small holding at Wickham in Suffolk9. Its status, and distance from the Midlands manors, suggest that this Hereward is another man; yet he, too, was a dependant of the house of Leofric, commended to Burghard of Mendlesham (q.v.), a son of Earl Algar and grandson of Earl Leofric. See also Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 49-51. Hereward's Warwickshire tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 4756) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 251, without reference to the outlaw.
1 BUK 14,2-3;5
2 LIN 8,34-38. 42,9-12. CK4;48
3 WAR 16,26;46;48. 17,33
4 WOR 2,43
5 WOR EvA120. EvC41
6 LIN 42,1
7 WAR 17,33
8 WOR 2,43
9 SUF 14,152
............................................................................................................................................. HERFAST. Although the name Herfast occurs more than two dozen times, it is rare in the sense that it was probably borne by no more than two individuals, Bishop Herfast of East Anglia and a tenant in Bedfordshire. .............................................................................................................................................
HERFAST <OF MARSTON>. As all laymen named Herfast are tenants of Nigel of Aubigny in Bedfordshire, there is little doubt that they are one man1 though the manors are in several different hands when next documented: VCH Bedfordshire, ii. 261-62, 281; iii. 309; Brett, English Church, pp. 147-48. Herfast's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 308) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 190.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* BISHOP *] HERFAST [* OF THETFORD *]. All Herfasts in East Anglia are almost certainly Bishop Herfast of Elmham, who moved the see to Thetford in 1071/2 and was succeeded by William of Beaufour in 1085. He therefore appears in Domesday Book as an intermediate landowner, which together with associations with his bishopric and with his episcopal predecessor and successor allows him to be identified where his title is omitted in Norfolk2 and Suffolk3. One Norfolk entry refers to his sons, so he was presumably married4.
............................................................................................................................................. HERFRID <OF THROWLEY>. All Herfrids in Domesday Book are almost certainly one man. Seven of his eight manors were held from the Bishop Odo of Bayeux, four in Kent5 and the other three in Surrey, where even his hide in the royal manor of Dorking was held from the bishop6. Several of these manors are valuable, notably Throwley in Kent and Gatton in Surrey. The eighth manor, Poulton, held from Hugh de Montfort7, is adjacent to his tenancy from Odo at Boswell Banks in the same Hundred. By the thirteenth century, Herfrid's successor held Throwley and Gatton from the Honour of Peverel of Dover, though the composition of the remainder his fee had changed: Book of Fees, p. 582. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he may have come from Bavent in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Caen), where a Ralph son of Herfrid gave land to St Stephen's of Caen. Herfrid's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 965) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 251. .............................................................................................................................................
HERLEWIN. Herlewin is uncommon forename, stated or implied on fifteen manors in Domesday Book, and in Exon., distributed among six counties and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, perhaps borne by half-a-dozen individuals, one of them a pre-Conquest landowner.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERLEWIN <OF COLLYWESTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Herlewin who held Collyweston in Northamptonshire from Ralph of Limésy8 may be the same man as one or more of
1 BDF 16,3. 24,6;8;29-30
2 NFK 1,57;61. 10,29;43;54;78;90;93
3 SUF 18,1. 19,1-2
4 NFK 1,69
5 KEN 5,155-156;170;195
6 SUR 1,13. 5,11;26
7 KEN 9,41
8 NTH 32,1
his namesakes in Huntingdonshire or Warwickshire; but there are no links to confirm this. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 27241).
.............................................................................................................................................
HERLEWIN <OF LUDDINGTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Herlewin who held Luddington in Huntingdonshire from Eustace the sheriff1 may be the same man as one or more of his namesakes in Northamptonshire or Warwickshire; but there are no links to confirm this. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 32687).
.............................................................................................................................................
HERLEWIN <OF PEASEMORE>. Herlewin, whose manor of Peasemore in Berkshire was acquired by Gilbert of Bretteville2, is the only pre-Conquest Herlewin; the name-form (Vrleuuine) is held to be an indigenous variant of the Old German name: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 248. It is, however, possible that he is Herlewin of Shelswell, Peasemore lying between his manors in Somerset and Northamptonshire. Peasemore is a few miles from two of the Berkshire manors of Baldwin son of Herlewin (q.v.), so Herlewin may be his father and the name continental.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERLEWIN <OF SHELSWELL>. As the name is uncommon, the Herlewins who held four manors in Somerset3 and Shelswell in Northamptonshire4 from the bishop of Coutances are probably one man. According to Exon., he also held a subtenancy from the bishop at Winscombe in Somerset, on the manor of abbey of Glastonbury there5. An Herlewin held a second manor in Northamptonshire, but this was the other end of the county and acquired by another tenant-in-chief so he may be another man. Herlewin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2002) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 252, apart from the tenant at Shelswell, who is unidentified (no. 26887).
.............................................................................................................................................
HERLEWIN <OF SHUCKBURGH>. As the name is uncommon, the Herlewin who held Shuckburgh in Warwickshire from the Count of Meulan6 may be the same man as one or more of his namesakes in Huntingdonshire or Northamptonshire; but there are no links to confirm this. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 28304).
.............................................................................................................................................
HERLEWIN [* SON OF IVO *]. The six Herlewins in Norfolk are almost certainly Herlewin son of Ivo, named in the Norfolk Annexations of Reginald son of Ivo, his tenant on the other five manors7. There are no other Herlewins in Little Domesday, and Reginald's Honour is confined to Norfolk. In a grant of the tithes of his manor Panworth8 to Thetford priory, he is styled Herlewin of Panworth, the second of these manors: Regesta, ii. no. cxxvii, p. 338. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1955) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 252, where it is suggested that Ralph and Herlewin were brothers.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 HUN 19,19
2 BRK 36,6
3 SOM 5,12-13;20;27
4 NTH 4,32
5 SOM 8,2
6 WAR 16,32
7 NFK 21,15-17;29;34. 66,51
8 NFK 21,16
HERMER. Although the name Hermer is fairly common in Norfolk, it rare elsewhere, occurring once in Berkshire, Gloucestershire and Lincolnshire, and three times in Devon, on the lands of the king and four of his tenants-in-chief. One Hermer held land in 1066.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERMER [* OF FERRERS *]. It is probable that all Hermers in East Anglia are the tenant-in-chief, Hermer of Ferrers, who held a substantial fief in Norfolk and a single manor in chief in Suffolk. All but two of the references to Hermer are to his predecessor1, which can only refer to Hermer of Ferrers as there are no other Hermers among rural landholders in the county. He is probably also the Hermer with eight burgesses, a man named William and a priest, Fulbert, in the city of Norwich2, since a William and Fulbert are among his tenants3. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 640) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 252-53.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERMER <OF GOOSEY>. The tenant of Abington abbey at Goosey (or Denchworth) in Berkshire4 is unlikely to be the same man as any of his namesakes. The abbey's house chronicle records that when he was granted Goosey by the abbey he held no other land, the abbey endowing him at the king's request because he had been seized by pirates and mutilated while on the abbey's business abroad: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 8-9. The chronicler records somewhat sourly that his mutilation rendered him unfit to perform his knightly duties for the abbey; less obligated patrons were unlikely to take a more humanitarian view. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 966) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 253.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERMER <OF HOLTON>. Hermer, tenant of Ivo Tallboys on at respectable manor at Holton-le-Clay in Lincolnshire5, has no links with his namesakes, all of them remote. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 3009) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 253.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERMER <OF SPURWAY>. As the name is rare, the tenants of Gotshelm of Claville at Hampson and Washbourne in Devon6 are almost certainly the same man, who is probably also the tenant of Walter of Douai at West Spurway, the one other Hermer in the south-western counties. Hampson is somewhat closer to Spurway than to Washbourne. According to Dr Keats-Rohan, Hermer's manors were later held by men named from Washbourne. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2109) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 253.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERMER <OF STOKE>. Hermer, whose share in the royal manor of Stoke Orchard was held by Bernard (Pancevolt) in 1086, is the one pre-Conquest landowner of this name. It is unlikely that he is related to any of the Hermers of 1086, all remote apart from a maimed man-at-arms in Berkshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERVEY. Hervey is a fairly common name which occurs on two fiefs and more than fifty manors between Wiltshire and Yorkshire, distributed among fifteen counties and the lands of the king and
1 NFK 8,18. 9,187;191;227. 15,2. 66,48-49;106
2 NFK 1,61;66
3 NFK 13,3;10;16-17
4 BRK 7,23
5 LIN 14,3
6 DEV 25,8;24
eleven of his tenants-in-chief, all borne by post-Conquest landowners. There are clusters in Wiltshire, Oxfordshire and Suffolk.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERVEY [* OF BOURGES *]. H, or Hervey, who held several manors from the abbey of Ely in Suffolk, is almost certainly Hervey of Bourges, alias Hervey of Berry, alias Hervey Bedruel, a tenant-in-chief in Suffolk, named as the abbey's tenant on twenty more manors in Domesday Book or the Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 162, 179-80). He held Westerfield from the abbot 'by order of the King', a formulae repeated in the following entry for Pettaugh, where he held in chief1. In Bredfield2, he held in chief and had another manor from the abbey there, four miles from Bromswell, whose holdings are intermixed with those of Bredfield3. Walton and 'Plumgeard', five miles from his manor of Bucklesham4, are like Westerfield held from the abbey after Hervey claimed to hold in chief. Ely had no tenant of this name elsewhere. Hervey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 141) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 253-54.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERVEY <OF HARDMEAD>. Hervey, who held three and a half virgates in Hardmead5 from William son of Ansculf, is identified by Dr Keats-Rohan as Hervey the commissioner, who held at Ibstone in the county6 and probably elsewhere. There appear to be no links between this Hervey and his namesakes in Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire, however, and the property is small and isolated from other holdings; its descent has not been traced.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERVEY [* OF `SPAIN' *]. The Herveys who held Willingale, Finchingfield and Stevington in Essex from Count Alan of Brittany7 are almost certainly Hervey of 'Spain', who held three other manors on the same fief, the six constituting the bulk of the Count's fief in Essex; he gave his name to Willingale Spain8 and to Spain's Hall in Finchingfield9. His Essex manors later constituted the Espagne fee in the Honour of Richmond: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 230-34. There are no other Herveys in the county. Count Alan had tenants named Hervey in Norfolk, Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, the first of whom may be Hervey of 'Spain', the only unidentified Hervey in the county10. Hervey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 663) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 254-55.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERVEY <OF STRETTON>. The Herveys who held a tight cluster of manors at Stretton, Water Eaton, Gailey, Great Saredon and Shareshill in Staffordshire from Robert of Stafford11 are probably one man, who is possibly also Robert's tenant at Norton Lindsey in Warwickshire12. They are the only Herveys in either county or on Robert's Honour. Hervey of Stretton held two fees of the barony of Stafford in 1166, and Richard of Stretton had fees in Stretton and Eaton in the following
1 SUF 21,29-30
2 SUF 21,84;87
3 SUF 21,83;86
4 SUF 21,50-51
5 BUK 17,28
6 BUK 48,1
7 ESS 21,2;4;12
8 ESS 21,2
9 ESS 21,4
10 NFK 4,49
11 STS 11,57-59;61;64
12 WAR 22,23
century, Gailey apparently being subinfeudated: Book of Fees, pp. 266, 951, 967, 974; Staffordshire chartulary, pp. 245, 252-53. The remaining manors were held by two other families when next recorded; but it is improbable that Robert had three tenants with this uncommon name in a limited area; none occur in Robert's charter of 1072: Staffordshire chartulary, pp. 178-82; VCH Staffordshire, v. 174; VCH Warwickshire, iii. 138. Hervey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3617) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 255.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERVEY [* OF WILTON *]. It is possible that all Herveys in the five south-western counties of circuit two are Hervey of Wilton, so-named among the king's officers of Wiltshire at Edington but named Hervey the chamberlain among the king's servants of Dorset, at Wimborne St Giles; he is probably also the Hervey with a second manor in Edington1. A royal charter names Hervey of Wilton as a landowner in Netheravon, where a Domesday Hervey had two manors2: Regesta, iii. no. 450. Another royal charter suggests he is the Hervey in Ratfyn, where a royal sergeant and a tenant of Edward of Salisbury named Hervey had manors in Domesday3: VCH Wiltshire, ii. 75, 106. Hervey's two bynames may be accounted for by the fact that he farmed the borough revenues of Wilton for the king, a chamberlain's task4. The one other Hervey in the south-west, at Stockland in Dorset5, is named Hervey son of Ansger in Exon. Stockland is the most valuable of the manors held by a Hervey, and its tenant might be expected to have others, so he too may Hervey of Wilton; but there are no links to confirm an identification. Hervey later became a monk: Calendar of documents: France, p. 511. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 172) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 254-55.
.............................................................................................................................................
HERVEY [* THE COMMISSIONER *]. Although the manors descended by different routes, the Herveys who held three consecutive manors among the king’s servants at Ibstone and Bix in Oxfordshire6 are probably Hervey the commissioner, who held a second manor at Ibstone, recorded in the Buckinghamshire folios, where his byname is supplied7: Round, 'Domesday survey of Buckinghamshire', pp. 215-16; VCH Buckinghamshire, iii. 62. He may also be the Hervey who held four manors from the bishop of Bayeux in Oxfordshire8 which cluster a few miles to the north-west of Ibstone and Bix. These manors descended to the Scalebroc family, of Skelbrooke in Yorkshire9, held from Ilbert de Lacy in 1086 by a Hervey who is evidently the commissioner. He is identified in a Lacy charter as Hervey de Campellis, alias Hervey of Sai if the Henry de Saieo who granted tithes in Skelbrooke to St Clement in Pontefract is a clerical error for Hervey de Saieo: Book of Fees, pp. 449, 829-30, 838; Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 185-87, 228-29. He was probably from Campeaux in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Vire): Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman families, p. 23. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he also held part of the royal manor of Cholsey in Berkshire10 which, as a royal commissioner, is not unlikely, and also Hardmead in Buckinghamshire11, here assigned to another man. He is more likely to be the Hervey who
1 WIL 15,1
2 WIL 1,18. 68,2
3 WIL 24,6. 68,15
4 WIL B1
5 DOR 12,14
6 OXF 58,11-13
7 BUK 48,1
8 OXF 7,7-8;31;60
9 YKS 9W42
10 BRK 1,7
11 BUK 17,28
purloined the profits of the royal manor in the lost vill of Verneveld1, in Benson Hundred, where two of his other manors lay. There are no other Herveys in the four counties apart from two in Yorkshire, identified as the ancestor of tenants of the Sutton fee in the Honour of Richmond: Early Yorkshire charters, v. 258-60. Hervey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 330) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 255.
.............................................................................................................................................
HILDEBERT [* OF TOURS *]. Hildebert, tenant of the bishop of Wells at Evercreech and Yatton in Somerset2, has been identified as the steward and brother (or brother-in-law) of John of Tours, bishop of Wells (1088-1122): Keynes, 'Giso, bishop of Wells', p. 219 note 93. He is probably also the tenant of Matthew of Mortagne at Clevedon and Milton Clevedon3, the only other Hildeberts in Domesday Book. Yatton was later held together with Clevedon and Milton, and Milton Clevedon is less than two miles from Evercreech; the other two manors are four miles apart: Oggins, 'Richard of Ilchester's inheritance', pp. 74-75. Hildebert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 969) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 279.
............................................................................................................................................. HILDWIN. Hildwin is a rare name which occurs four times, distributed among three counties and the lands of two tenants-in-chief. ............................................................................................................................................. HILDWIN <OF "ASSECOTE">. Hildwin (Elduinus), who held a villager paying thirty pence at Assecote in Devon from William of Poilley4, is unlikely to be related to his namesakes in the Midlands. He may have lost his manor by 1093 as he is not mentioned William's grant of tithes of all his manors to the abbey of Sées, though neither is Assecote, which is perhaps subsumed in another manor: Calendar of documents: France, p. 235. Hildwin is unidentified in Coel (no. 3870). .............................................................................................................................................
HILDWIN <OF BRAMPTON>. As the name is rare, it is all but certain that the tenants of Robert of Tosny at Bottesford (Helduinus) in Leicestershire5 and Brampton and Dingley (Ilduinus) in Northamptonshire6 are one man. In the Northamptonshire Survey, Brampton was held by his son, Ralph fitz Eldewyn, Dingley apparently being by then absorbed into Brampton: VCH Northamptonshire, i. 386; Farrer, Honors, ii. 393. Hildwin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3704) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 279.
.............................................................................................................................................
HOWARD <OF NAVESTOCK>. The name Howard (Houardus) occurs only twice in Domesday Book. Although the substantial manor at Navestock in Essex in 10667 is more than eighty miles from the modest holding on the royal manor of Bungay in Suffolk8, it is very probable they were held by one man, Howard being paired with a Wulfsi in both cases, both men apparently surviving for two decades. Although they lost Navestock to the Canons of St Paul's, they protested that they 'had it by the king's gift', so their share in the royal manor at Bungay may have been by way of
1 OXF 1,11
2 SOM 6,10;14
3 SOM 44,1;3
4 DEV 21,11
5 LEC 15,15
6 NTH 26,8-9
7 ESS 5,7
8 SUF 1,111
compensation. It was a modest compensation, however, as they were obliged to pay sixteen shillings to the manor, said to be worth thirty shillings in 1086, leaving the two lords with a tenth of their former manorial income. Dr Keats-Rohan identifies the Howard at Bungay as Huard of Vernon: Domesday people, p. 256.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUARD. Huard is an uncommon name which occurs about sixteen, distributed among five counties and the lands of six tenants-in-chief. There is some uncertainty about its relationship with Oder and Odard. According to Forssner, Continental-Germanic personal names, pp. 154-55, 194, 196, Huard, Oder, and Odard are separate names; but Dr Keats-Rohan suggests they may be interchangeable. Circumstantial evidence suggests that all Oders, who occur on two fiefs in Norfolk, may be Huards; and the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin records an Oder (Odarus) where Domesday has Odard (Odardus): Feudal documents, p. 19. Elsewhere, the case for identifying Odard and Huard is not clear. Unidentified Odards and Huards both occur in four counties, on the lands of five tenants-in-chief, the only overlap being the occurrence of an Odard and Huard in Leicestershire, though they are tenants on different fiefs. No pre-Conquest lords bear these names.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUARD <OF LUS HILL>. Huard, tenant of Edward of Salisbury at Lus Hill in Wiltshire1, has no links with his namesakes, all of them remote. He does not appear to be referenced in Keats-Rohan, Domesday people, but is recorded in Coel (no. 11532) as an Odard, whose successor in 1166 was Richard of Listelhul: Red Book, i. 240.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUARD [* OF NOYERS *]. Huard (Huardus), tenant of Geoffrey de Mandeville at Bengeo in Hertfordshire2, is almost certainly Huard of Noyers (Huart de noderes), the juror in Hertford Hundred where Bengeo lay; there are no other Huards, Oders or Odards in the county: Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 100). It has been suggested that the Hugh who held Barkway from Geoffrey may be a scribal error for Huard, whose descendants held Barkway by the 1140s; though the manor may, of course, have been acquired by the Noyers family after 1086: VCH Hertfordshire, iv. 30; Lewis, 'Domesday jurors', p. 36. Dr Keats-Rohan also suggests that the Odard (Odardus) who held Foulton in Essex from Swein of Essex3 - here identified as Odard of Foulton (q.v.) - is the same man. Huard's manor is recorded in Coel (no. 6691) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 307, under the form Odard, where it is suggested that he was 'perhaps' from Noyers in Upper Normandy (Eure: arrondissement Les Andelys).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUARD <OF PEATLING>. As the name is uncommon, the Huards who held four manors in Leicestershire from Hugh of Grandmesnil4 are probably one man, the only Huard Leicestershire or neighbouring counties. Dr Keats-Rohan identifies him as the Odard (Odardus) at Ilmington in Warwickshire. Huard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8766) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 307.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUARD [* OF VERNON *]. There are grounds for identifying all Oders, Odards and Huards in East Anglia as Huard of Vernon, named as a tenant of William of Ecouis at Ixworth Thorpe and
1 WIL 24,5
2 HRT 33,15
3 ESS 24,65
4 LEC 13,32-33;52;74
Market Weston in Suffolk1. Dr Keats-Rohan has shown that he is also named Odard in contemporary sources, and the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin names the Oder of Domesday Book at Great Ashfield and Stow as Odard2: Feudal documents, p. 19. Oder is a name-form which occurs only in Norfolk, where four Oders are tenants of William of Ecouis3, the other four of Ralph of Beaufour4. As Oder, Odard and Huard are all uncommon, William's Norfolk tenant Oder is very likely his Suffolk tenant, Huard of Vernon; Ralph's possibly also. The Odard who held Stow and Great Ashfield from Bury St Edmunds according to Domesday Book - Oder according to the Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin (Feudal documents, p. 19) - may be the same man, Ashfield being roughly equidistant from Ixworth and Weston, six or seven miles from either. Huard's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1961) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 256, with the addition of the Houart on the royal manor of Bungay5, here identified as Howard of Navestock (q.v.).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUBERT. Hubert is a fairly common name which occurs on two fiefs and some forty manors, distributed among thirteen counties between Devon and Yorkshire and the lands of the king and fourteen of his tenants-in-chief, all borne by post-Conquest landowners.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUBERT [* OF COURSON *]. Hubert, who held the valuable manor of Lockinge in Berkshire from Henry of Ferrers6, is identified as Hubert of Courson by the Abingdon chronicle, which names his sons, including another Hubert who succeeded him, and a Giralmus of Curzon, who held West Lockinge, or part of it: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 44-45, 282-85. The son is probably the Hubert of Courson who held three fees from the Ferrers Honour in the reign of Henry I: Red Book, i. 337. Hubert also held Fauld in Staffordshire from Henry7, where he is identified by its descent to his heirs: Book of Fees, p. 969. Henry had no other tenants of this name on his Honour, and there are no other Huberts in Staffordshire. Hubert probably came from Notre-Dame-de Courson in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Lisieux): Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman families, p. 37. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1572) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 256, where he also is identified as a tenant of Abingdon abbey at Wytham8. As the only Hubert in Berkshire or surrounding counties who is not plausibly identified, this is not improbable, given the family's association with the abbey; but it is curious that the house chronicle does not mention associate their tenant - 'a knight named Hubert' who was endowed with peasant land - when discussing the Coursons, or vice-versa: Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, ii. 8-9. Other scholars have identified this Hubert as probably the ancestor of a family which took its name from the vill, established by the 1130s: VCH Buckinghamshire, iv. 428.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUBERT [* OF MONT-CANISY *]. All Huberts in East Anglia are probably Hubert of Mont-Canisy, who held Wyverstone in chief and Bromeswell and Staverton in Suffolk from Robert Malet. The remaining Huberts in East Anglia - all without bynames - are also tenants of Robert Malet9, five of his manors lying in one of the vills named above; three more - Edwardstone, Rickinghall and Yaxley - being later held by the Mont-Canisy family: Eye priory cartulary, i. 13; ii.
1 SUF 9,2-3
2 SUF 14,71;93
3 NFK 19,13;27;31;40
4 NFK 20,4;9;26;28
5 SUF 1,111
6 BRK 21,11
7 STS 10,6
8 BRK 7,3
9 NFK 7,9;11. SUF 6,1;26-27;30;53;57-59;62;109;196;235;248-249;280;299;302
58, 76. A Hubert also held two manors in Essex from Robert1. The only other Hubert in that county, or elsewhere in eastern England, is possibly the same man, though there are no links to confirm this. He held a virgate at Waltham from Geoffrey de Mandeville2. Hubert of Mont-Canisy also had a messuage in York3, so may be the one other Hubert in the county, at Goldsborough4, a tenant of Ralph Paynel. With a house in York and a manor in the general area of the 'lost fee' of William Malet, Hubert may have been one of William Malet's men who followed his son south, since the Malet lands in Yorkshire were lost to his son. The manor was later held by a family which took its name from the vill: Early Yorkshire charters, vi. 118. Hubert was seneschal of Eye. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 686) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 256-57, apart from Goldsborough, assigned to another Hubert (no. 10781); the tenant at Waltham is unidentified (no. 5056).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUBERT [* OF ST CLAIR *]. The Huberts who held 'Winterborne', Hemsworth and Witchampton in Dorset5 and Charleston in Sussex6 from Count Robert of Mortain are probably Hubert of St Clair, named in Exon. as the Count's tenant on the substantial manor of Kingstone in Somerset7. Count Robert had no other Huberts on his Honour, and there are none in either county or, in the case of Sussex, in the surrounding counties either. Hubert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 778) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 257, apart from Charleston, assigned to Hubert of Mont-Canisy.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH. Hugh is one of the most common names in Domesday Book, occurring over a thousand times and in every county except Cornwall. Almost sixty Hughs have different bynames, thirty of them tenants-in-chief, Hughs also occurring as tenants of nearly a hundred other tenants-in-chief. Six Hughs appear in pre-Conquest contexts.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* HUGH *] BURDET. The Burdets who held Braunstone and Gaulby in Leicestershire from Hugh of Grandmesnil8 are probably Hugh Burdet, a tenant of Countess Judith in the same county9: Crouch, Beaumont twins, pp. 127-28. The Domesday scribe occasionally omitted a forename, and Burdet occurs only in Leicestershire. He was perhaps the son of Robert Burdet, whose wife held Ratcliffe from Robert of Bucy and probably Croft from Hugh of Grandmesnil10. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3078) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 258.
.............................................................................................................................................
[HUGH] DE MONTFORT. Montfort, named on the royal manor of Ringsfield in Suffolk11, can only be Hugh de Montfort, a byname here being used as a forename, as occasionally elsewhere; no one else in Domesday had this byname. Hugh held parts of other royal manors in Essex and
1 ESS 44,1-2
2 ESS 30,5
3 YKS C19
4 YKS 16W3
5 DOR 26,33;39-40
6 SUS 10,16
7 SOM 19,10
8 LEC 13,41;53
9 LEC 40,12-14;24
10 LEC 13,37. 17,29
11 SUF 1,17
Suffolk. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 682) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 265-66.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* EARL *] HUGH [* OF CHESTER *]. Earl H on the royal manor of Bungay in Suffolk1 can only be Earl Hugh of Chester. It has been suggested that the Hugh who held 'Shipton Dovel' in Gloucestershire from William of Eu may also be the earl, who was William's brother-in-law2; if so, it is an exceptional tenurial arrangement for an earl. The descent of Hugh's manor has not been traced; but the earldom of Chester later had an interest in Shipton: VCH Gloucestershire, xi. 252.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* GOSBERT *]. Hugh, who held Lewell among the king's thanes in Dorset3, is named Hugh Gosbert in the Geld Roll for Cullifordtree Hundred, where Lewell lay: VCH Dorset, iii. 147. He held four other manors on the fief where his byname is supplied4. He is possibly also the tenant of Roger Arundel at Powerstock5, adjacent to his manor of Woolcombe6, as suggested by Dr Keats-Rohan. Though a very common name, Hughs are not particularly thick on the ground in Dorset, and all but the Arundel tenant may be identified with a degree of confidence. Hugh of Teversham, a tenant of Roger Arundel in Somerset, is conceivably the same man; like the Hugh at Lewell, he was preceded by an Alward, though the name is a common one, particularly so in the south-western counties. Apart from these slight associations, there are no specific links between the Arundel tenant and the thane. Powerstock was later the centre of the Arundel barony, Roger's heirs favouring Roger and Robert as forenames: Sanders, English baronies, pp. 72-73. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 291) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 270 apart from Lewell, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 3054).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* HUBOLD *]. Hugh, who held three manors in Warwickshire from Osbern son of Richard7 - said to be the same Hugh - is very probably Osbern's Bedfordshire tenant, Hugh Hubold8, the Warwickshire manors descending to another Hugh Hubold in the thirteenth century, together with Longstanton in Cambridgeshire9, where Hugh is identified as Hugh Hubold in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 93): VCH Cambridgeshire, ix. 226. Longstanton was held from Gilbert son of Turold, who also had a tenant named Hugh in Worcestershire10, possibly Hubold since Gilbert's fief was modest and his tenants few, one Hugh being more likely than two. As Gilbert was disinherited during the reign of William Rufus, the descent of his manors is unrevealing: VCH Worcestershire, iv. 275-76. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 312) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 270, apart from the Warwickshire manors, attributed to another Hugh (no. 9396).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* MALTRAVERS *]. The Hughs who held ten manors from William of Eu in the south-western counties may all be Hugh Maltravers. He is named in Exon. as William's tenant on part of
1 SUF 1,110
2 GLS 31,9
3 DOR 57,2
4 DOR 57,5-8
5 DOR 47,6
6 DOR 57,8
7 WAR 37,4-6
8 BDF 44,1-4
9 CAM 24,1
10 WOR 20,4-5
Hinton in Somerset, and is probably the Hugh on part of the following entry, at Yeovil, where a manor was later named Henford Matravers1: Morland, Glastonbury, p. 14. On similar grounds, he is likely to be the Hugh at Lytchett Matravers in Dorset2, the most valuable of the ten; the other manors in the county3 were later held by the Maltravers family or were 'also' held by the same Domesday Hugh: Feudal Aids, ii. 36; Hutchins, History and antiquities of Dorset, iii. 314, 683. Of the three Wiltshire manors, Sopworth4 was later held by the Maltravers family5. Hugh's estate included substantial manors in all three counties, making him the wealthiest of William's tenants, so the other two Wiltshire manors - valuable and said to be held by one man - are perhaps more likely to have been held by Hugh Maltravers than a second Hugh, particularly as William had no tenants named Hugh in the other six counties of his Honour: Book of Fees, pp. 711, 724, 745, 1421. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 781) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 271, apart from the Wiltshire manors, assigned to Hugh the large (no. 344), and Woolcombe6, whose tenant is unidentified. The tenant of William of Mohun on three Somerset manors7 is also identified as Maltravers.
.............................................................................................................................................
[* HUGH *] NEPHEW OF HERBERT [* SON OF IVO *]. The anonymous nephew who justified the mill built by his uncle, Herbert son of Ivo, at the entrance to Dover harbour which 'wrecks almost all ships, through its great disturbance of the sea' on the grounds that it was authorised by Bishop Odo of Bayeux8, is probably Hugh, both Hugh and his nephew Herbert (q.v.) being important tenants of the bishop in Kent and elsewhere, Hugh succeeding his uncle on other manors in Kent9 and on the bishop's fief in Bedfordshire10. He is probably also the unnamed nephew of Herbert son of Ivo on Odo's fief in Essex, at Kelvedon Hatch11, and likely to be the unidentified Hugh who succeeded the unidentified Herbert at Boswell Banks on Odo's fief in Kent12, the one other Hugh in Domesday to do so. Nepos is ambiguous and may mean nephew, grandson, cousin or even kinsman; but as it was his uncle (avunculus) who built the offending mill in Dover, his relationship is that of nephew. Hugh was the bishop's tenant in Kent, Bedfordshire, Nottinghamshire and Essex; his manors are recorded in Coel (no. 853) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 271.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF BEAUCHAMP *]. The Hughs who held two manors from William Speke in Bedfordshire13, and nine from Countess Judith14, may be Hugh of Beauchamp, the sheriff and most important tenant-in-chief in the county. The two Speke manors were in vills where Beauchamp held in chief, William Speke having no other tenants named Hugh. Six of the nine manors held from Countess Judith are also in vills where Hugh of Beauchamp held in chief, two of the remaining three - Bolnhurst and Radwell - being adjacent to other such vills. A half-virgate in Potton15 is
1 SOM 26,5-6
2 DOR 34,5
3 DOR 34,4;7;14-15
4 WIL 32,15
5 WIL 32,5-6;15
6 DOR 34,7
7 SOM 25,3;37-38
8 KEN D10
9 KEN 5,145;184
10 BDF 2,9
11 ESS 18,25
12 KEN 5,195
13 BDF 25,3;12
14 BDF 53,6;9-10;12;14;16;31;33-34
15 BDF 53,16
somewhat apart. Hugh does not appear to be a tenant elsewhere; and although the Countess had at least four other Hughs among her tenants, none held land in counties where Beauchamp had a presence other than Bedfordshire itself. In that county, all other unidentified Hughs are plausibly identified as either Hugh of Flanders or Hugh of Hotot, though the latter's manor in Houghton Conquest1 lies in a vill where Beauchamp also had a manor. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 423) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 260, apart from the tenants of William Speke, who are unidentified (nos. 341, 355).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF BOLBEC *]. Twenty-seven manors were held from Walter Giffard by tenants named Hugh, all of whom are very probably Hugh of Bolbec, named as his tenant on three Bedfordshire manors, two in Buckinghamshire, and two more in Cambridgeshire2 in the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 12, 14, 102); one of these, Swaffham Bulbeck in Cambridgeshire3, preserves his name. His remaining tenancies in Buckinghamshire4, Huntingdonshire5 and Oxfordshire6 descended to his heirs, the earls of Oxford, who held them from Giffard's heirs: Book of Fees, pp. 829, 833, 881-82, 930. He may have been a relative of Walter, the founder of the Giffard dynasty being Osbern of Bolbec: Round, 'Domesday survey of Berkshire', p. 213. Hugh was also a tenant-in-chief in Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Huntingdonshire. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 368) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 261, apart from the tenant in Huntingdonshire, who is unidentified (no. 32640).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF BOSCHERBERT *]. The tenants of the wife of Hugh son of Grip at Stafford, Bridge, Chaldon and Ringstead in Dorset7 may be Hugh of Boscherbert, named in Exon. as her tenant at Brenscombe and Winterborne Houghton8. Stafford, Chaldon and Ringstead were later held by a William of Gouiz; Bridge is in the same Hundred: Feudal Aids, ii. 1, 9, 20, 29, 38. Hugh had a small fief of his own in the county. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 438) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 261, apart from Stafford, attributed to another Hugh (no. 9196), and Bridge, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 2945).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF FLANDERS *]. The tenants of Walter of Flanders at Turvey, Podington, Thurleigh, Astwick and Henlow in Bedfordshire9, and at Canons Ashby, Preston Capes and an anonymous holding in Northamptonshire10, are probably Hugh of Flanders, who may be Walter's brother. He is probably also the Hugh who held Silsoe in Bedfordshire from Walter brother of Sihere11, possibly his uncle: Fowler, Bedfordshire in 1086, p. 100. Hugh himself had a small fief in Bedfordshire, including the one other manor in Podington. Podington, Thurleigh, Henlow and Canons Ashby descended to Hugh's successors, the La Lega family of Thurleigh, other members of the family having interests in Turvey and Silsoe: Farrer, Honors, i. 69-76. Preston and Astwick were held by the Wahull family, barons of Odell, whose relationship to their Flemish predecessors is unknown:
1 BDF 53,2
2 CAM 17,2-3
3 CAM 17,2
4 BUK 14,2;6;27;30-32;34;41-42;44;46-47
5 HUN 12,1
6 OXF 20,2-3;5-9
7 DOR 55,8;18;33-34
8 DOR 36,3. 55,17;46
9 BDF 32,3;5;8;12;16
10 NTH 39,9;14;17
11 BDF 33,2
ibid. i. 77-78, 82; Sanders, English baronies, pp. 68-69. Preston Capes is adjacent to Canons Ashby, Henlow to Astwick, and neither Walter had tenants named Hugh elsewhere, so Preston and Astwick may have been held Hugh of Flanders, despite their descent. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 476) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 270, apart from those in Northamptonshire, where the tenants are unidentified (nos. 27314, 27319, 27322); some Bedfordshire references are missing in Domesday people.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF GOUVILLE *]. Hugh, who held Marston Trussell, Thorpe Lubenham, Weedon Bec and Ashby St Ledgers in Northamptonshire from Hugh of Grandmesnil1 - stated to be the same man in the text - is Hugh of Gouville (Witvile), who held five houses from Hugh in Leicester 'in exchange for Watford'2, Weedon being part of that exchange. He is probably also the Grandmesnil tenant at Shangton and Stonton Wyville in Leicestershire3, Stonton taking its name from his family. Grandmesnil had several other tenants named Hugh in Leicestershire4 and Northamptonshire, most or all of whom may be Hugh of Gouville though this cannot be demonstrated because the descent of Hugh's manors was disrupted, the Northamptonshire Survey revealing that every one of his tenancies in that county - including those where Hugh's identity is not in doubt - had escheated or were held by different individuals, no one successor having more than a single manor: VCH Northamptonshire, i. 367-68, 370, 372, 384. Those held by three lay tenants in the Survey were held by their families in the thirteenth century: Book of Fees, pp. 920, 929-40. As it is unlikely that three or more Grandmesnil tenants named Hugh lost their manors between Domesday and the Survey, Hugh of Gouville probably held them all in 1086. Kings Sutton, like Maidford, was acquired from Willa - who appears nowhere else in Domesday Book - and which like Thorpe Lubenham was held by the earl of Leicester - successor to Hugh of Grandmesnil - in demesne in the Survey; Middleton Cheney, like Weedon, had been used to endow one of the earl's ecclesiastical foundations5. Hugh has been identified as the ancestor of the Wyville family, major tenants of the Honour of Mowbray from the twelfth century: Crouch, Beaumont twins, p. 129; Ancient charters, pp. 59-63. If so, the family had lost all its Domesday manors by then: Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, pp. xxxiv-vi, 264. Hugh's Leicestershire manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3685) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 267, apart from Whitwick6, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 26340). Marston, Weedon and Ashby are assigned to another Hugh (no. 12082), the remainder are unidentified (nos. 27175, 27177-78, 27181).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF GRANDMESNIL *]. Hugh, tenant of Earl Hugh of Chester at Loughborough and Burton-on-the-Wolds in Leicestershire7, may be Hugh of Grandmesnil, the greatest landowner in the county. The scribe has indicated by his sigla that the two Hughs are the same person, and Hugh of Grandmesnil claimed jurisdiction in Burton-on-the-Wolds8. He had no other recorded holding in the vill in Domesday, though two fees were later held of his descendants as part of the Honour of Leicester: Feudal Aids, vi. 558. The Hugh who held Kirkby Mallory from St Mary's, Coventry, may also be Grandmesnil, who held the other part of the vill9. Hugh's manors, which are recorded
1 NTH 23,2-4
2 LEC C12
3 LEC 13,55-56
4 LEC 13,68;72-73
5 NTH 23,8;10-11;14
6 LEC 13,68
7 LEC 43,2;7
8 LEC 43,4
9 LEC 6,7. 13,10
in Coel (no. 652) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 262-63, do not include these manors, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 26216, 26676, 26686).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF HOTOT *]. It is likely that the Hugh who appears three times - two entries are duplicated - as a tenant of Countess Judith in Thistleton are one man1. He has been identified as Hugh of Bucy, ancestor of the Bussey family, which held land in the vill at a later date: VCH Rutland, ii. 156. But the descent of the tenancies of the Honour of Huntingdon were disrupted by political upheavals and are an unreliable guide to Domesday identities. The Busseys first appear in Thistleton in the thirteenth century, other tenants intervening: Farrer, Honors, ii. 296-301, 304, 306, 308. It is more likely that Hugh is Hugh of Hotot, named as Judith's tenant in Whissendine, seven miles away, particularly as he and the unidentified Hugh appear in consecutive entries, described in each as the Countess's man, a scribal eccentricity if they were different men. The descent of the Whissendine manor was also disrupted, being later granted to the Moreville family, constables of Scotland, who also held Houghton Conquest in Bedfordshire and Offord d'Arcy in Huntingdonshire from the Honour, both held from Countess Judith by an unidentified Hugh in 10862. On this basis, Farrer suggested these Hughs may be Hugh of Hotot: Honors, ii. 356-58. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1648) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 264, apart from Offord and Thistleton, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 32714, 32627).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF HOUDAIN *]. 'Of Houdain' at Whatfield in Suffolk3, and 'H of Houdain', who administered a group of royal manors in the county when Roger Bigot was sheriff4, can only be Hugh of Houdain, Roger's brother-in-law and tenant in Essex, Norfolk and Suffolk. He may also be Roger's tenant in a group of vills in 'Clackclose' Hundred5, several of which also contained royal manors, albeit not those he was responsible for. Roger had one other unidentified tenant of this name, at Aslackton6. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 659) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 264, apart from Aslackton, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 9660). The byname does not occur elsewhere in Domesday.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH <OF INGESTRE>. The tenants of Robert of Stafford in the adjacent vills of Tixall and Ingestre7 are likely to be the same man, represented by the Wastenis family in the thirteenth century, probably descendants of the William of Wastimais who held two fees of the Honour of Stafford in 1166: Red Book, i. 266; Book of Fees, pp. 966, 974. Hugh's manors are assigned to Hugh son of Constant in Coel.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF LACY *]. All or most of the nine tenants of Roger of Lacy named Hugh may be his younger brother, who according to Orderic Vitalis (iv. 284-85) was granted the Lacy Honour by William Rufus when he banished Roger for rebellion in 1096. Four of the six Herefordshire manors - Pudleston, Collington, Sawbury and Wolferlow8 - appear to be Lacy demesne early in the
1 LIN 56,12;21. RUT 2,8
2 BDF 53,2. HUN 20,7
3 SUF 7,2
4 SUF 1,44-60
5 NFK 9,230;232
6 NFK 9,211
7 STS 11,31-32
8 HEF 10,14;64-66
following century, perhaps re-united by Hugh's succession: Herefordshire Domesday, pp. 79, 103-104, 127-29. The descent of the other two is obscure1: ibid., pp. 103-105. Of the two Gloucestershire manors, the Lacy Honour retained a demesne interest in Wick Rissington and perhaps Windrush, both substantial2: VCH Gloucestershire, vi. 115. It has also been suggested that Hugh of Lacy held Chesterton in Cirencester from William son of Baderon; the manor is adjacent to the Lacy vill of Siddington3, both manors being subsequently held by the Langley family4; William had no other Hughs among his tenants. Finally, the one other Hugh on the Lacy Honour, at Stanford-on-Teme in Worcestershire5, may also be Lacy. The vill is four miles from Wolferlow and also four from Windrush, acquired from the royal thane Godric who may be the Godric at Stanford. One curious circumstance lends some general support to these identifications: although Hugh is one of the most common names in Domesday Book, there remains only one unidentified Hugh6 among the landholders of the three counties of Gloucestershire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire if the identification of Lacy and Hugh Hubold are acceptable. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4368) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 264-65, apart from Chesterton in Gloucestershire, assigned to another Hugh (no. 4337), and Stanford and Bishops Frome in Herefordshire7, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 30309, 30376).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF `SPAIN' *]. The tenants of Alfred 'of Spain' at Plainsfield, Marsh Mills, Leigh, Rodhuish and Preston in Somerset8 may be Hugh 'of Spain', named in the Geld Roll for Cannington Hundred where two of the manors lay: VCH Somerset, i. 533. Hugh de Tevera, also named in the Geld Roll for this Hundred, is probably another Hugh, a tenant of Roger Arundel. Alfred is known to have had unnamed brothers (Domesday people, p. 141), and Hugh has more manors and the most valuable tenancy on Alfred's Honour, if all five manors are his. Alfred had no tenants named Hugh in the other four counties in his Honour. Hugh's manors - including both in Cannington Hundred - are recorded in Coel (no. 1987) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 264.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF TEVERSHAM *]. The Hughs who held the consecutive manors of Fiddington and Tuxwell in Somerset from Roger Arundel9 may be Hugh of Teversham, named in the Geld Roll for Cannington Hundred where both manors lay: VCH Somerset, i. 533. Tevera has been identified as Teversham in Cambridgeshire (Tengvik, Old English bynames, p. 52), though the form bears little resemblance to the Domesday place-name and Roger had no known connection with that county, his Honour being limited to those of Dorset and Somerset. Roger had another Hugh on his Honour at Powerstock in Dorset10, here identified as Hugh Gosbert, who is conceivably the same man. Hugh's Somerset manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2099) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 272.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 HEF 10,8;67
2 GLS 39,5;16
3 GLS 39,16
4 GLS 32,1 Hugh note
5 WOR 18,2
6 HEF 1,75
7 HEF 10,2;67
8 SOM 35,8-9;14-15;18
9 SOM 22,8-9
10 DOR 47,6
HUGH [* OF VAUTORTES *]. The tenants of Count Robert of Mortain at Bolberry and Batson in Devon1 are probably Hugh of Vautortes, named in the Geld Roll for Diptford Hundred, where both manors lay; he may have owed tax on parts of one or other or both. Exon. records that Hugh was also a Mortain subtenant on part of the royal manor of Brompton Regis and his tenant at Foddington in Somerset, a vill in which he held another manor on his own account2. The Count of Mortain had no other unidentified Hughs on his extensive Honour, except in Sussex. Hugh may be the brother of Reginald of Vautortes (q.v.), a major tenant of Count Robert in the south-west. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1213) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 267, apart from his subtenancy, which is unrecorded, and Bolberry, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 3442).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* OF WANCHY *]. Hugh, who held Barsham in Norfolk from William of Warenne3, is identified as Hugh of Wanchy, his tenant at Depden in Suffolk4, by Hugh's grant of a church, a priest and tithes in those vills to Castle Acre priory, to which his son added the mill on the bridge, some peasants and land: Monasticon, v. 49, no 1. He is probably also the Hugh at Clopton5, near Depden, all three manors being acquired from Toki of Walton (q.v.). They were later held by members of the Wanchy family, together with Fincham, Denver and Larling in Norfolk, all held by a Hugh from William of Warenne in 10866: Farrer, Honors, iii. 373, 380-82. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 764) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 267, apart from Barsham, assigned to Hugh son of Golda, and Clopton, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 13486).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* SON OF CONSTANT *]. The Hughs who held five manors in Warwickshire and two in Staffordshire from Robert of Stafford and two other tenants-in-chief are probably Hugh son of Constant, tenant of Hugh of Grandmesnil at Loxley7. Hugh held another manor in Loxley from the Count of Meulan8, Loxley descending to Robert son of Odo of Loxley, probably the grandson of the Stafford tenant, Hugh9. Robert was his last male descendant, one of his heiresses marrying into the Bagot family, their descendants holding Preston and Morton Bagot, held by Hugh in 1086 from the Count of Meulan and Robert of Stafford respectively10, these links suggesting the identity the tenants of the three tenants-in-chief as one man: Red Book, i. 265, 326; VCH Staffordshire, xx. 163-64; VCH Warwickshire, iii. 130-31, 135, 142-43. Hugh's descendants also held land in Spernall11, held by a Hugh from William Bonvallet in 1086, and Patshull in Staffordshire, held by Hugh from Robert of Stafford. Hugh may also have held the following manor, Oaken, acquired from the same pre-Conquest lord12, and possibly Tixall and Ingestre13, though these were in the hands of another family by 1166 and are here assigned to another Hugh. Hugh's manors in Loxley and Preston are recorded in Coel (no. 2573) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 268; the remaining tenants are unidentified (nos. 28466, 28468, 28521, 31515, 31516).
1 DEV 15,38;74
2 SOM 1,11. 19,67. 45,13
3 NFK 8,99
4 SUF 26,9
5 SUF 26,11
6 NFK 8,16;18;54
7 WAR 18,15
8 WAR 16,61
9 WAR 22,19;21
10 WAR 16,62. 22,19
11 WAR 29,4
12 STS 11,44-45
13 STS 11,31-32
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* SON OF GOLDA *]. The tenant of William of Warenne at Threxton in Norfolk1 may be Hugh son of Golda, a Warenne tenant at Barnham in Suffolk2, fifteen miles south of Threxton; Hugh's successors held land in both counties, and Threxton 'belongs to Lewes' in Sussex, where Hugh was also a Warenne tenant, the descent of his manors identifying him at Ilford, Rottingdean, Warningore, Beeding and perhaps Allington3: Farrer, Honors, iii. 334-39. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 594) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 268-69, with the addition of Barsham in Norfolk, here attributed to Hugh of Wanchy.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* SON OF GRIP *]. All references to H, or Hugh, as an intermediate landowner on the fief of his wife - actually his widow - in Domesday Book or Exon. are to Hugh son of Grip4, the sheriff of Dorset, who was dead by 1086. The context makes it clear that he is also the Hugh who granted a manor at Gillingham to St Mary's of Cranborne5, acting as a royal official. He is several times referred to as Hugh the sheriff in the Dorset folios, always in the past tense. As an intermediate landowner, his manors are not listed in Coel, Domesday people or the Statistics database.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* SON OF GRIP *]'S WIFE. The wife of Hugh son of Grip is named in the rubric of her fief and on a number other Dorset manors. Only two landowners named Hugh had a wife recorded in Domesday Book, and only one of them held land in the south-west, or was a widow, so there is little doubt that Hugh's wife in Dorset6 and Wiltshire7 is the widow of the deceased sheriff of Dorset, Hugh son of Grip. Her identity was so well-known that the scribe could simply refer to her as 'H's wife' on one occasion8. Her name, not recorded in Domesday, is Hawise. She later married Alfred II of Lincoln and many - though not all - of her manors were held by their descendants: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. 181-82; iii. 413-15 Keats-Rohan, 'Domesday Book and the Malets', pp. 28-29; Williams, 'Domesday survey of Dorset', pp. 55-56. Her manors are recorded in Coel (no. 596) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 441.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* SON OF NORMAN *]. The Hughs who held Shenley in Buckinghamshire9 and a fief10 and Odd Rode in Cheshire11 from Earl Hugh of Chester are probably Hugh son of Norman, his principal tenant of that name, who also held manors elsewhere in Cheshire, Suffolk and Yorkshire from him. Hugh's predecessor on the Buckinghamshire manors was Burghard of Mendlesham (q.v.), from whom he also obtained some of his Suffolk manors where his byname is supplied12; Odd Rode was acquired from a Godric, from whom he also inherited his Cheshire fief: Tait, Domesday survey of Cheshire, pp. 50-51, 56-57, 217; Farrer, Honors, ii. 15-16, 110-15, 236; Sawyer and Thacker. 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', pp. 312-14. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 535) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 269, apart from those in Buckinghamshire, whose
1 NFK 8,50
2 SUF 26,9
3 SUS 12,3;10;46-47;51
4 DOR 55,21;23;25;27;33;36;47
5 DOR 10,1
6 DOR 3,15. 8,2-3. 11,6. 56,58
7 WIL 7,1
8 DOR 8,4
9 BUK 13,2-3
10 CHS 11,1-8
11 CHS 27,4
12 SUF 4,35;36-39
tenants are unidentified (nos. 1253-54), but with the addition of Gresford1, here assigned to Hugh son of Osbern.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* SON OF OSBERN *]. The Hughs who held South Ormsby and Ketsby in Lincolnshire2 and fiefs in Cheshire3 from Earl Hugh are probably Hugh son of Osbern, alias Hugh Blundus, as suggested by the descent of his manors: Farrer, Honors, ii. 127-29. He is given his byname as the earl's tenant at Broughton and Claverton in Cheshire4. He may be the Hugh at Gresford in the county5, where he shared the manor with Osbern son of Tezzo (q.v.), probably his father, a tenant of the earl elsewhere in Cheshire and in Lincolnshire: Sawyer and Thacker. 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', pp. 313-14. He was the Hugh who held the remaining manors in Exestan Hundred, including the neighbouring vill of Allington6 where his predecessor is Thorth, from whom he probably acquired Gresford. Less certainly, he may be the Hugh at Eastham7, Osbern holding Poulton three miles away8. Hugh's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2584) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 269, apart from Eastham, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 28661), and Gresford, attributed to Hugh son of Norman. See also Tait, Domesday survey of Cheshire, pp. 50-52.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* THE BOWMAN *]. Hugh, tenant of Henry of Ferrers at Trusley in Derbyshire9, is very probably Hugh the bowman, who gave tithes in that vill to Tutbury priory: Cartulary of Tutbury priory, p. 65. Hugh had tenants of this name in Leicestershire10, conceivably the same man, since only one Hugh witnesses Henry's charters; but the name is a common one. For that reason, Hugh the bowman, who held land at Filsham in Sussex from the Count of Eu11, may be another Hugh the bowman. Hugh's Derbyshire manor is recorded in Coel (no. 3857) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 258; the Leicestershire tenants are unidentified (nos. 26367, 26383) and the Sussex bowman identified as another man (no. 107).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUGH [* THE INTERPRETER *]. Hugh the interpreter, who held land at Arnewood in the New Forest12, is 'probably identical' with Hugolin the interpreter who held a house in Bath and three manors among the king's thanes in Somerset13 and with Hugh the interpreter, a tenant of Bath abbey in Bathampton according to Exon.(SOM 7,11): Round, 'Domesday survey of Somerset', p. 416. He is named Hugolin the commissioner (legatus) in the Geld Roll for Bath Hundred: VCH Somerset, i. 528. Hugh Beard, who held Dogmersfield among the king's thanes in Hampshire14, may be another alias of his, Hugh the interpreter making a grant to Wells abbey as Hugolin cum barba: English episcopal acta, x. no. 3. Hugh at Dogmersfield and Hugolin at Claverton15 were
1 CHS 27,3
2 LIN 13,41-43
3 CHS 12,1-4. 16,1-2
4 CHS FD5,1-2
5 CHS 27,3
6 CHS 16,1
7 CHS 1,22
8 CHS 24,3
9 DBY 6,38
10 LEC 14,17;33
11 SUS 9,14
12 HAM NF10,3
13 SOM 1,31. 45,9-11
14 HAM 68,1
15 SOM 45,11
each preceded by a Swein, who may be the same man as the name is rare in the area - there is only one other Swein between the two counties - and both manors are substantial. Hugh/Hugolin's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 314) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 258.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* HASTANG *]. Humphrey, who held land at Chebsey in Staffordshire1 from Henry of Ferrers, is probably the Humphrey who held three manors - said to be held by one man - in Warwickshire from Hascoit Musard2; Chebsey was later held from Henry's descendants by Robert de Hastenc, and the Hastang family held fees in 1166 from Hascoit's descendants, their representative, Aitrop, being named as the son of Humphrey Hasteng in a charter of Henry I: Book of Fees, pp. 969, 975; Red Book, i. 110, 338, 342; Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 132. Another son, Saloman the cleric, held the churches of Chebsey and Leamington Hastings during the reign of Henry I: Regesta, ii. no. 1857. Leamington is the one remaining manor on the fief of Hascoit Musard, its name indicating the association with the Hastang family, which acquired the whole of Hascoit's fief. Neither Henry of Ferrers or Hascoit had other Humphreys on their Honours, and there are no other such tenants in either of the two counties. Humphrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3542) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 275.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* NEPHEW OF RANULF BROTHER OF ILGER*]. Humphrey, who held the Norfolk fief of Ranulf brother of Ilger3, is very probably his nephew, named on the royal manor of Aylsham4, three miles south of his manor at Erpingham. He is perhaps also Ranulf's one other tenant of this name, on the respectable manor of Ramsden Bellhouse in Essex5, and possibly also the tenant of Peter of Valognes at Great Walsingham6, a manor he acquired from Bondi of Raynham (q.v.), a thane from whom Ranulf's nephew acquired two of his manors. Peter's tenure of Walsingham was apparently queried, the scribe noting that it 'was delivered to make up a manor, his men do not know which'. Walsingham is eight miles west of two of Humphrey's other manors. He may have held other manors, his forename being particularly common in East Anglia, but there are no links to identify him elsewhere. His manors on Ranulf's fief are recorded in Coel (no. 8886) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 273; the tenants at Ramsden and on a second manor in Erpingham are unidentified (nos. 5305, 11275), the tenant at Walsingham as another man (no. 3672), Domesday people, p. 274.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* OF ANNEVILLE *]. Humphrey, who held Knebworth in Hertfordshire from Eudo the steward, is named Humphrey of Anneville in the account of Hertford, where he held two houses with one garden under Eudo; he probably also held the anonymous manor in Hertford Hundred from Eudo7. The Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, pp. 70, 82) names him as the Humphrey who held Wimpole from Eudo and Barton from Guy of Raimbeaucourt8; and he is identified as Eudo's tenant at Clopton, East Hatley and Kingston, and of Guy at Eversden, by their descent9: Farrer, Honors, iii. 207-10. The Inquisitio names him as a juror in 'Arringford' Hundred, where three of his manors lay. There are no other tenants of this name in Cambridgeshire
1 STS 10,9
2 WAR 39,2-4
3 NFK 36,1-7. 66,103
4 NFK 1,192
5 ESS 37,2
6 NFK 34,18
7 HRT B5. 31,1;8
8 CAM 25,7. 31,3
9 CAM 25,4-6;8. 31,7
or on the Honours of Guy and Eudo. Humphrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 408) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 274.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* OF CARTERET *]. H of Carteret, who held land at Beaminster in Dorset from the bishop of Salisbury1, can only be Humphrey of Carteret, who is probably also the Humphrey who held Up Exe in Devon as a subtenant Drogo son of Mauger, tenant of the bishop of Coutances there2, the Geld Roll for Witheridge Hundred revealing that Drogo's subtenant at Thelbridge3 - who is not included in Domesday Book - is Humphrey of Carteret: Devonshire Domesday, i. p. xxiii-iv. The bishop of Salisbury had no other tenants of this name; but Geoffrey of Coutances had, at Cameley in Somerset4 and Sharnbrook in Bedfordshire5, the latter at least probably Humphrey of Carteret, even though the forename is a common one, since he is the only Humphrey in the county, as is the bishop's tenant in Devon, which makes it somewhat more likely that he is also his Somerset tenant. Humphrey may have been the son of Mauger, brother of Drogo of Carteret, alias Drogo son of Mauger (from whom he held Up Exe), major tenants of the Count of Mortain and the bishop of Coutances in the south-western counties. Humphrey's manor of Beaminster is recorded in Coel (no. 611) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 273; his subtenancy at Up Exe is not included, and the tenants in Bedfordshire and Somerset are unidentified (nos. 123, 14490).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* OF MAIDENHILL *]. Humphrey, who held a hide at Upton St Leonards in the royal manor of 'Kings Barton' in Gloucestershire, is probably Humphrey of Maidenhill, whose small fief included a hide at Upton6. Maidenhill, not named in Domesday, is close to Humphrey's manor of Sezincote. The Humphrey on several other royal manors in the county is probably another man, Humphrey the chamberlain. Humphrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3380) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 275.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* OF ST OMER *]. The Humphreys at Wickmere and Helhoughton in Norfolk7 are identified as Humphrey of St Omer at Brampton8 by his status as an intermediate landowner and predecessor of Drogo of la Beuvrière, characteristics which also identifies him as the Humphrey of St Bertin at Sotherton in Suffolk9. The Brampton entry reveals that he had forfeited his lands. There are no other intermediate landowners of this name. As an intermediate landowner, his manors are not listed in Coel, Domesday people or the Statistics database.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* OF THE COTENTIN *]. Humphrey, who held land at Tushingham in Cheshire from Robert son of Hugh10, is probably Humphrey of the Cotentin, witness to the grants of Robert son of Hugh to St Werburgh's abbey: Charters of the Anglo-Norman earls of Chester, p. 41. As the name is uncommon in the north of England and only one Humphrey witnessed Earl Hugh's
1 DOR 3,10
2 DEV 3,70
3 DEV 3,80
4 SOM 5,52
5 BDF 3,15
6 GLS 70,1-2
7 NFK 1,57. 8,137
8 NFK 8,8
9 SUF 48,1
10 CHS 2,18
charters, he may be Robert's tenant at Burwardsley1 and Earl Hugh's tenant at Coppingford in Huntingdonshire2, where he shared the fief (in adjacent vills) with Fulco of Bainville (q.v.), a fellow-witness to Robert's grant and his tenant in Cheshire, where Humphrey and Fulco also held in adjacent vills; the descent of Coppingford confirms his identity there: Farrer, Honors, ii. 27-28. Less certainly, he may be the one other Humphrey in Cheshire, the subtenant of William son of Nigel at Halton3. Humphrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3832) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 275, apart from Coppingford, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 32638). Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that he may be the Humphrey with demesne at Damblainville in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Caen).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* OF VEILLY *]. Humphrey, tenant of Ilbert de Lacy at 'Newton Wallis', Ackworth and Snydale in Yorkshire, is almost certainly Humphrey of Veilly, who gave tithes in Newton and Snydale to the Lacy foundation of St Clement's of Pontefract, and whose descendants held all three manors at times, though with fluctuating fortunes: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 186-87, 254-56; Early Yorkshire families, pp. 95-97. Ilbert has no other Humphreys among the tenants on his Honour, and Humphrey of Veilly appears unconnected with his two namesakes in the county, both in the East Riding. Humphrey came from Villy-Bocage (Calvados: arrondissement Caen): Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman families, p. 109. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4623) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 275.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY <OF WIGGINTON>. The Count of Mortain had two dozen Humphreys among his tenants, most if not all of whom are probably one man. In Northamptonshire, where all Humphreys are Mortain tenants, thirteen of fourteen are stated to be the same man4; the fourteenth, who held a subtenancy, is not grouped with the others in the text but it is surrounded by them on the ground5. By the time of the Northamptonshire Survey, Humphrey or his descendants had lost their lands, which were in the hands of the king and several other men: VCH Northamptonshire, i. 374, 378-79, 381, 383-86. This is presumably the case elsewhere, so clues to his identity are slight. He is probably the Humphrey in Buckingham6 and Cornwall7, where the Mortain tenants are the only Humphreys in those counties, and in Dorset8 where all but one of the Humphreys are identified. Less certainly, he may be the Humphrey in Sussex9, where there is one other unidentified Humphrey, Somerset10, where there are two, and Hertfordshire11, which has three, the Count being the only tenant-in-chief with a tenant named Humphrey in more than one of those counties. The two Hertfordshire manors of Wigginton and Little Gaddesden are the most substantial held by Humphrey, both close to Berkhamsted (of which Gaddesden was an outlier), the centre of the Mortain Honour, and on that account probably held by the Humphrey widely endowed by the Count. If these identifications are valid, Humphrey would rank among the ten wealthiest of the Count's tenants. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3394) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 276, apart from Goathill in Somerset, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 14812).
1 CHS 2,21
2 HUN 11,2
3 CHS 9,17
4 NTH 18,13-25
5 NTH 18,53
6 BUK 12,35;38
7 CON 5,24,19
8 DOR 26,21-22
9 SUS 10,91;117
10 SOM 19,70
11 HRT 15,5;12
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* SON OF ROBERT *]. Humphrey son of R, who held Boyton in Suffolk from Robert Malet1, and the Humphreys who held another fourteen manors in the county from him2, as well as Shotford in Norfolk3, are probably Humphrey son of Robert, who held the Malet manors of Playford and Grundisburgh. Apart from two small holdings in Henley and Thicchebrom4, all these manors were held by Alan of Withersdale in the thirteenth century. Thicchebrom is apparently in Weybread, where Humphrey had a manor5: Eye priory cartulary, i. nos. 311-13; ii. p. 75. Robert Malet had no other tenants of this name on his Honour. Humphrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 513) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 273, apart from Thicchebrom, whose tenant is unidentified (no. 12229).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* SON OF RODRIC *]. Humphrey, William of Warenne's man, who held land in Rattlesden in Suffolk from Ely abbey, is almost certainly Humphrey son of Rodric, who held a manor from William in the same vill6. He may also be the Humphrey who held Buxhall and Creeting - between six and eight miles from Rattlesden - from Warenne7. William had no other tenants of this name on his Honour. Humphrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 512) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 273, apart from Buxhall and Creeting, whose tenants are unidentified (nos. 13477, 13480).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* THE CHAMBERLAIN *]. Humphrey, who held Holton in Somerset8, is almost certainly Humphrey the chamberlain who held the preceding and following manors according to Exon. He is very likely also the Humphrey who farmed three royal manors in Gloucestershire9 and held another from the king on the same fief10. He held a fief in the county, in which one other Humphrey can be distinguished with reasonable confidence. Less certainly, he may be the Humphrey who 'holds a bit' of the royal manor of Bowcombe in Hampshire, another county in which he held in chief11. He had modest fiefs in several other counties between Dorset and Leicestershire. He was chamberlain to Queen Matilda and the brother of Aiulf the chamberlain (q.v.). Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he may be Humphrey Goldenbollocks, who illegally held a manor in Essex12. Humphrey's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 179) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 274; those of Humphrey Goldenbollocks (aurei testiculi) in Coel (no. 116), p. 272.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUMPHREY [* THE COOK *]. Humphrey, who shared Widhill in Wiltshire with another royal servant, Theobald the doctor (q.v.), is almost certainly Humphrey the cook, both being named together in the Geld Roll for the county13: VCH Wiltshire, ii. 210. Humphrey held another
1 SUF 6,172
2 SUF 6,13;17;125;175;261-263;295;311-315;319
3 NFK 7,6
4 SUF 6,17;295
5 SUF 6,312
6 SUF 21,1. 26,1
7 SUF 26,5;7
8 SOM 45,4
9 GLS 1,47-48;50
10 GLS 1,43
11 HAM IoW1,7
12 ESS 90,30
13 WIL 68,16
ministerial-type fief in Gloucestershire, where his byname is given1. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1832) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 274.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNDING. Hunding is a rare name which occurs five times, distributed among the three northern counties of Cheshire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, all on modest, pre-Conquest holdings. As two of the counties and tenants-in-chief shared an even rarer name - Hundulf - scribal error in one or other name may reasonably be suspected. Hunding appears to be otherwise unknown, but Hundulf occurs at the York mint around the millennium and left its name on the landscape, at Hundulfthorpe Farm in the North Riding2.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNDING <OF BUTLEY>. Hunding, whose manor of Butley in Cheshire3 was acquired by Robert son of Hugh, has no apparent links with his namesakes though he is possibly the same man as the Hundulf at Tiverton, also acquired by Robert4, and perhaps the Hunding at Winnington5, which lay between the two.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNDING <OF CASTLETON>. Hunding, whose modest holding at Castleton in Derbyshire was acquired by William Peverel6, has no apparent links with his namesakes though he is possibly the same man as the Hundulf at Hucklow, also acquired by William.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNDING <OF RAISTHORPE>. Hunding, who shared a modest holding at Great Houghton in Yorkshire retained by the king7, has no links with his namesakes. The three unnamed sons of Hunding at Great Houghton8, more than fifty miles away, are presumably the sons of another man.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNDING <OF WINNINGTON>. Hunding, whose very modest holding at Winnington in Cheshire9 was acquired by Osbern son of Tezzo, has no links with his namesakes but may nevertheless be the same man as the Hunding at Butley and the Hundulf at Tiverton, whose manors span his own.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNDULF. Hundulf is a rare name which occurs three times, twice in Derbyshire and once in Cheshire. As two of the counties and tenants-in-chief shared an even rarer name - Hunding - scribal error in one or other may reasonably be suspected though the names are recognised as distinct: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 295. It has also been suggested that it may be the same name as Hunwulf, but it is unlikely that the one Hunwulf in Domesday10 is either of the Cheshire men: Dodgson, 'Some Domesday personal-names', p. 42.
1 GLS 71,1
2 YKS 5N75
3 CHS 2,30
4 CHS 2,36
5 CHS 24,4
6 DBY 7,7
7 YKS 1E56
8 YKS 5W17
9 CHS 24,4
10 WOR 26,6
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNDULF <OF HUCKLOW>. Hundulf, whose modest holding at Great Hucklow in Derbyshire was acquired by William Peverel1, has no apparent links with his namesakes though he is possibly the same man as the Hunding at Castleton, also acquired by William. He may also be the Hundulf at Walton, given Peverel's association with the royal manors2.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNDULF <OF TIVERTON>. Hundulf, whose holding at Tiverton in Cheshire3 was acquired by Robert son of Hugh, has no apparent links with his namesakes though he is possibly the same man as the Hunding whose manor at Butley was also acquired by Robert4, and perhaps also the Hunding at Winnington5, which lay between those manors.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNEF. Hunef is a rare name which occurs once in Kent and twice in Huntingdonshire where it is almost certainly the same name as Huneva, though recorded as distinct in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest personal names, p. 296, and in the Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNEF <OF OAKLEIGH>. Hunef, whose respectable manor of Oakleigh in Kent was acquired by the bishop of Bayeux6, is conceivably the same man as the one other Hunef in Domesday Book, his prosperous Huntingdonshire namesake, though there are no links to confirm this.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNEF <OF STUKELEY>. Huneva, whose valuable manor of Great Stukeley in Huntingdonshire was acquired by Countess Judith7, is almost certainly the Hunef whose sixteen houses with full jurisdiction and market rights in the borough were also acquired by the Countess8. The borough holdings were shared with a Gos who according to the Claims for the county9 shared land with Hunef intended for Earl Waltheof, Judith's husband; the name Gos is unique to Huntingdonshire, so there can be no doubt that Hunef and Huneva here refer to one individual. As a significant landowner, it is conceivable that he is the same man as the one other Hunef in Domesday, at Oakley in Kent10, though as Stukeley is said in the Claims to have been in the king's hands in 1066, this is perhaps unlikely.
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNNING [* BROTHER OF WULFGEAT *]. Apart from Hunning of Colchester, all Hunnings in Domesday Book are concentrated in Shropshire so are probably one man, the Hunning who shared Moreton Corbet with his brother Wulfgeat for twenty years, and Preston Brockhurst with him before the Conquest. He held Lawley, Moreton, Preston and Willey as a tenant of Turold of Verley (q.v.), three of them retained since 106611. He also held Fitz and Merrington12, acquired by
1 DBY 7,10
2 DBY 1,10
3 CHS 2,26
4 CHS 2,30
5 CHS 24,4
6 KEN 5,108
7 HUN 20,3
8 HUN B14
9 HUN D3
10 KEN 5,108
11 SHR 4,19,6;9-11
12 SHR 4,20,15-16
Picot de Sai; Pulverbatch, shared with Wulfgeat and acquired by Roger the hunter1; and Cothercott and Leaton, retained by Earl Roger of Shrewsbury2. His manors in Rossall, Welbatch and Stapleton were acquired by Reginald the sheriff3 and Roger son of Corbet4, both of whom obtained manors from a Wulfgeat; and he is likely, too, to be the Hunning a Neen Savage, acquired by Ralph of Mortimer5. Dr Williams suggests that Hunning and his brother may be the two unnamed milites who held part of Longford6 from Turold; either of them may also have held his manor of Lawley, where no pre-Conquest lord is named: English and the Norman Conquest, p. 90. Hunning's tenancies are recorded in Coel (no. 3017) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 276, apart from Longford, whose milites are unidentified (no. 30976).
.............................................................................................................................................
HUNNING <OF COLCHESTER>. Hunning, who had two houses in Colchester7, is the only urban Hunning and the only man of this name other than Hunning of Preston.
.............................................................................................................................................
ILBERT. Although the name Ilbert occurs scores of times, it is rare in the sense that it was probably borne by fewer than half-a dozen individuals, among whom Ilbert of Lacy is by far the most significant. The skewed tenurial distribution of the name suggests he is the unidentified Ilbert in most cases.
.............................................................................................................................................
ILBERT <OF BLUNSDON>. Ilbert, who held a modest manor at Blunsdon in Wiltshire from Humphrey de l'Isle8, has no links with other Ilberts. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 11535) but not, apparently, in Domesday people. DR Keats-Rohan also assigns the previous and more substantial manor of Smithcot to him9 where the name of the tenant - Elbertus - is unique in Domesday, rendered as Elbert by the translations in the Victoria County History Alecto Editions and as Albert by Phillimore. The form is not recorded in Forssner, Continental-Germanic personal names.
.............................................................................................................................................
ILBERT <OF FARNHAM>. Ilbert, who held Farnham in Dorset from the wife of Hugh son of Grip10, has no links with other Ilberts. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 9392) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 279.
.............................................................................................................................................
ILBERT [* OF LACY *]. The great majority of unidentified Ilberts in Domesday are probably Ilbert of Lacy, tenant-in-chief in Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire, named as a tenant of the bishop of Bayeux in Buckinghamshire, Lincolnshire and Oxfordshire. Most Ilberts occur in these last two counties, every one of them on the fiefs of the bishop of Bayeux, the majority in Lincolnshire11 but also numerous in Oxfordshire1. An Ilbert is also the bishop's tenant at
1 SHR 4,26,4
2 SHR 4,27,8;27
3 SHR 4,3,56
4 SHR 4,4,1-2
5 SHR 6,7
6 SHR 4,19,1
7 ESS B3a
8 WIL 27,12
9 WIL 27,11
10 DOR 55,21
11 LIN 4,3-6;10-16;36-37;42-49;54;56-58;67-68;72-73;80-81
Cuddington in Surrey2, where he is again the only Ilbert in the county. Most of these manors can later be traced as part of the Lacy Honour of Pontefract: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 123-433; Wightman, Lacy family, pp. 26, 31-32, 35, 39, 60, 67-68. In Yorkshire, where the bulk of the Lacy manors lay, only one other Ilbert is recorded, a tenant of the archbishop of York at Warmfield3. Since Warmfield, encircled by Lacy manors, is the only one held by another tenant-in-chief within the bounds of the Honour of Pontefract, this Ilbert is probably also Ilbert of Lacy: Wightman, Lacy family, pp. 29-30. Ilbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 667) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 277-78. Coel suggests that the Ilbert at Campsall, on the Lacy fief in Yorkshire4, is not the tenant-in-chief himself but a tenant, Ilbert of Reineville (no. 9367), who gave land in Campsall to St Clement's, Pontefract: Early Yorkshire charters, iii. 185-87. The entry, however, uses the standard formulae for a demesne manor. Coel also identifies Ilbert the sheriff in Herefordshire who farmed Archenfield5 as Ilbert of Lacy, though the sheriff is more probably Ilbert son of Turold.
.............................................................................................................................................
ILBERT [* OF ROULLOURS *]. Ilbert, who held a small fief in Cheshire from Earl Hugh6, is 'presumed to be' the father of his successor, Richard of Rullos: Sawyer and Thacker. 'Domesday survey of Cheshire', p. 314. The name is not strictly contemporary but is the one by which he is usually known: Lewis, 'Honour of Chester', p. 61. Earl Hugh had no other tenants of this name and there none apart from Ilbert of Lacy in adjacent counties or indeed in the north of England. Ilbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 3481) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 279. He probably came from Roullours in Lower Normandy (Calvados: arrondissement Vire): Early Yorkshire charters, v. 95-99.
.............................................................................................................................................
ILBERT [* SON OF TUROLD *]. All Ilberts in Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire and Herefordshire may be one man. Ilbert the sheriff, who farmed Archenfield7, is almost certainly Ilbert son of Turold, who held portions of two other royal manors in the county, and the unidentified Ilbert who held parts of several more8. Ilbert was a tenant-in-chief in the county where Gilbert son of Turold (q.v.), possibly his brother, may have succeeded him as sheriff: Green, English sheriffs, p. 45. He is probably also to be identified with Ilbert of Hertford, named at East Hatley in Cambridgeshire9 and on several manors in Hertfordshire10, whose functions identify him as the unidentified Ilbert elsewhere in that county and as a past sheriff11. Ilbert held no land on his own account in either Hertfordshire or Cambridgeshire, an improbable circumstance for any of the Conqueror's sheriffs, suggesting his endowment must be sought elsewhere, which can only be in Herefordshire. The Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (ed. Hamilton, p. 56) does in fact name the Ilbert at Hatley as sheriff of Herefordshire; and although Round was disinclined to believe its testimony, it does make more sense of the Domesday texts than he was able to suggest: Feudal England, pp. 460-61; Regesta, i. no. 250. Dr Keats-Rohan provides circumstantial evidence that Ilbert is Ilbert of Fontaines, from Fontaines-sous-Jouy in Upper Normandy (Eure: arrondissement Evreux), a Tosny fief. The Tosny connection also suggests that Ilbert brother of William, at Dinedor in
1 OXF 7,20;26;30;33;55;57;59;61-64
2 SUR 5,19
3 YKS 2W1
4 YKS 9W38
5 HEF 1,1
6 CHS 23,1-3
7 HEF 1,1
8 HEF 1,10b;32-33;38;62
9 CAM 32,10
10 HRT 1,10-11. 34,13. 38,2
11 HRT 1,6;8-13. 34,13. 38,2
Herefordshire1, is another alias of Ilbert son of Turold, Dinedor being a Tosny manor. William and Ilbert, who shared the royal manor of Dewsall2 as subtenants of Ralph of Tosny, are very likely the same two brothers; Dinedor and Dewsall were both previously held by a Wulfheah. Ilbert's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2631) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 278-79, apart from Linton3, where the sheriff is identified as Ilbert of Lacy.
.............................................................................................................................................
ILBOD [* BROTHER OF ARNULF OF HESDIN *]. The three Ilbods in Domesday may be one man. As the name is rare, the Ilbod who held a small fief in Essex4 is likely to be the Ilbod who held two free men on the royal manor of Witham in the county5, both perhaps the brother of Arnulf of Hesdin who held a fief of comparable value in Oxfordshire6, though the manors were in different hands in the thirteenth century: VCH Essex, ix. 411; Book of Fees, pp. 821, 840, 1348, 1360, 1463. Ilbod's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 816) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 279, where it is suggested he forfeited his land shortly after 1086.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGELRANN. The name Ingelrann occurs twenty-five times, distributed among ten counties and the lands of a dozen tenants-in-chief, with small clusters in Shropshire and Sussex.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGELRANN <OF AMPORT>. The tenants of Ralph of Mortimer at Amport in Hampshire7 and on six manors in Shropshire8 are probably the same Ingelrann, the only Ingelranns in either county; he is preceded by an Edric identified as Edric the wild (q.v.) at Amport and on two of the Shropshire manors9. Several manors - including Amport - descended to the Savage family. At Walton10, where this was apparently not the case, its name - Walton Savage - reveals an otherwise undocumented connection: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. 230, 232, 269, 271-72; VCH Hampshire, iv. 341-42. Neither Ralph nor Earl Roger of Shrewsbury had other tenants of this name. Ingelrann's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 6833) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 280.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGELRANN [* OF EU *]. All Ingelranns in Sussex and Huntingdonshire may be one man. Those in Sussex, all tenants of the Count of Eu11, are probably the brother of Guy of Eu (q.v.), who gave a half-hide of land to St Mary's of Hastings in Wilting, where Inglerann held two manors12: Chartulary of Chichester, p. 301. The brothers are perhaps relatives of the Count, Ingelrann probably his sheriff, also known as Ingelrann of Hastings, alias Ingelrann of Scotney, who attested charters of the Count: Round, Calendar of documents: France, p. 81. He is probably also the Ingelrann who held Gidding and Liddington in Huntingdonshire from Eustace the sheriff, and part of St Ives from Ramsey abbey on which Eustace appears to have had a claim13. A charter of Henry
1 HEF 8,7
2 HEF 1,62
3 HEF 1,1
4 ESS 69,1-3. 90,77
5 ESS 1,2
6 OXF 48,1
7 HAM 29,15
8 SHR 4,11,12;16. 6,7;10;18;20
9 SHR 4,11,12;16
10 SHR 4,11,12
11 SUS 8,14. 9,1;9;14;19-20
12 SUS 8,14. 9,19
13 HUN 6,7. 19,15;19
I records that Ingelrann de Auco (Eu) gave a knight's fee in Gidding and Liddington to Huntingdonshire priory: Monasticon, vi. 79-80, no. 2; VCH Huntingdonshire, i. 334. Both Guy and Ingelrann were tenants of Ramsey abbey: Cartulary of Ramsey abbey, i. 147-48, 151-52. Ingelrann's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 970) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 280.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGENULF. Ingenulf is a rare name which occurs six times, distributed among three counties and the lands of two tenants-in-chief, probably borne by two men.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGENULF <OF IBSTOCK>. As the name is rare, the Ingenulfs who held Ibstock in Leicestershire1 and Wilnecote, Seckington and Bourton in Warwickshire2 from the Count of Meulan are probably one man. Wilnecote and Seckington were shared with Arnulf of Wilnecote (q.v.); Ibstock, Seckington and Bourton descended to the Bruton family, but not apparently Wilnecote: VCH Warwickshire, iv. 198, 249-50; vi. 39. Ingenulf's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 4751) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 281.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGENULF <OF WHADDON>. As the name is rare, the Ingenulfs who held Whaddon and Alderbury in Wiltshire from Waleran the hunter are probably one man3, who may also be Engenold, the tenant at Barford4. Engenold - an otherwise unknown name, perhaps a scribal error - was preceded by Bolla, who also preceded Ingenulf at Whaddon. Ingenulf has no links with the tenant of the Count of Meulan in Leicestershire and Warwickshire. His manors, including Barford, are recorded in Coel (no. 8772) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 188.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGRAM <OF BILBY>. All Ingrams in Domesday Book are tenants of Roger of Bully - at Norton and Alfreton in Derbyshire5 and Bilby in Nottinghamshire6 - and so are almost certainly one man. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 6835) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 281.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGVAR. The name Ingvar occurs sixteen times, distributed among five counties and the lands of eight tenants-in-chief. The distribution is skewed, with five names in Devon and the remainder in four adjacent counties in eastern England where several of the manors are valuable. All sixteen are names of pre-Conquest lords.
.............................................................................................................................................
INGVAR <OF BURSTEAD>. In view of their distribution and value, it is likely that all the manors held by an Ingvar outside Devon belonged to one man, variously described as a royal thane, a thane, and a free man7. As thane and free man occur on two of his most valuable manors, the terms are evidently scribal idiosyncrasies rather than accurate descriptions of status. Ingvar was the predecessor of three tenants-in-chief, each of whom acquired at least one of his valuable manors in
1 LEC 44,11
2 WAR 16,24-25;30
3 WIL 37,12;14
4 WIL 37,9
5 DBY 16,6-7
6 NTT 9,45
7 CAM 34,1. ESS 18,2. 37,3. SUF 19,16
one or more counties: Count Eustace of Boulogne at Duxford in Cambridgeshire1 and Chrishall in Essex2; Ranulf brother of Ilger at Everton in Huntingdonshire3 and Harlow, Thorpehall, Baythorn, and Mountnessing in Essex4; and the bishop of Bayeux at Burstead in the same county5, the most valuable of all. He may also be the anonymous free man who preceded Ranulf on the valuable manor of Birdbrook6, sandwiched between his manors of similar status at Thorpehall and Baythorn End. His less valuable manors at Gamlingay in Cambridgeshire7 and St Lawrence in Essex8 devolved upon Ranulf. The only 'man' of Ingvar, at South Elmham in Suffolk9, was presumably his also. A list of his manors is given by Clarke, English nobility, pp. 315-16, who ranks him forty-fourth in wealth among untitled laymen.
.............................................................................................................................................
IOVIN [* THE CRAFTSMAN *]. Iovin, who held a small fief in Cornwall and part of the royal manors of Winnianton (in Exon.) and Lanow from the Count of Mortain10, may be Iovin the craftsman (faber) named in a charter of Launceston priory, as suggested by Dr Keats-Rohan. The name Iovin does not occur elsewhere in Domesday Book. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 166) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 284-85.
............................................................................................................................................. "IRIC". The name Iric occurs four times, once in Devon and three times in Suffolk, all pre-Conquest landowners. Iric may be the same name as Erik, Erik of Tealby (q.v.) being named Yri in the Ramsey chronicle: Chronicon abbatiae Rameseiensis, pp. 175. However, the distribution and status of Erik's lands make it improbable that he is related to the Irics of Suffolk or Devon. .............................................................................................................................................
"IRIC" <OF BULKWORTHY>. Iric, whose respectable manor at Bulkworthy in Devon was acquired by the Count of Mortain11, has no links with his remote namesakes in Suffolk.
.............................................................................................................................................
"IRIC" <OF WINSTON>. As the name is rare, it is likely that the Irics at Winston, Hemingstone and Ashbocking in Suffolk12 are one man, though the manors were acquired by different tenants-in-chief, the vills being within a few miles of each other and the abbey of Ely having an interest in each of them.
.............................................................................................................................................
IUDHAEL. If Iudhael of Totnes is discounted, Iudhael is a rare name which occurs four times, twice in Devon (Judhell, Juhel) and once each Gloucestershire (Idhel) and Warwickshire (Juhellus). It is sometimes confused with Judicael.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 CAM 15,2
2 ESS 20,71
3 HUN 24,1
4 ESS 37,3;10;12;16
5 ESS 18,2
6 ESS 37,11
7 CAM 34,1
8 ESS 37,14
9 SUF 19,16
10 CON 1,1;4. 5,7,1-13
11 DEV 15,14
12 SUF 4,4. 21,22. 25,59
IUDHAEL <OF SECKINGTON>. Iudhael (Juhellus), tenant of William son of Corbucion at Seckington in Warwickshire1, is very unlikely to be either Idhel the reeve of Gloucestershire2 or Iudhael of Totnes. He is identified as Judicael the priest (q.v.) in Coel (no. 972), referenced in Domesday people, p. 282.
.............................................................................................................................................
IUDHAEL [* OF TOTNES *]. The Iudhaels assigned the borough revenues of Totnes and the queen's tenant at Asprington in Devon3 are almost certainly Iudhael of Totnes, tenant-in-chief in the county and the only Iudhael in the south-west. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 747) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 285-86.
.............................................................................................................................................
IUSTEN. Iusten is a rare name which occurs five times, distributed among three counties and the lands of as many tenants-in-chief, perhaps borne by two individuals.
.............................................................................................................................................
IUSTEN <OF HORDLE>. As the name is rare, the Iusten whose substantial manor at Hordle in the New Forest was acquired by Ralph of Mortimer may be the Iusten with a subtenancy from the bishop of Winchester at Crondall4. There is no direct link between them, but several such between the bishopric and Mortimer, who had acquired several manors at the expense of Winchester5, Hordle perhaps being one of them.
.............................................................................................................................................
IUSTEN <OF NORMANTON>. As the name is rare, it is likely that the Iustens whose manors of Normanton and Bridgford in Nottinghamshire6 were acquired by Roger of Bully is one man, who is perhaps also the thane Iusten at Newton in Lincolnshire7, a similar distance from Bridgford as Bridgford from Normanton. If so, he survived on the least of his holdings, which he retained for two decades but was waste in 1086. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 34898).
.............................................................................................................................................
IVO. Ivo is a fairly common name which occurs on two fiefs and more than forty other entries as well as a number of Claims, distributed among eight counties and the lands of the king and fourteen of his tenants-in-chief, with one significant cluster in Lincolnshire. It is, however, uncommon in the sense that it was probably borne by few individuals, perhaps no more than half-a-dozen.
.............................................................................................................................................
IVO <OF "ALUREDESTUNA">. Ivo, who held the substantial manor of Aluredestuna in Suffolk from Ranulf son of Ilger8, has no links with his namesakes. There are no more Ivos on Ranulf's Honour, and no other unidentified Ivos in East Anglia. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests he is 'possibly' Ivo of Verdun, a benefactor of Thetford priory named in the charters of the Bigot family. His manor is recorded in Coel (no. 8043) and referenced in Domesday people, pp. 282-83.
1 WAR 28,3
2 GLS W2
3 DEV 1,55;71
4 HAM 3,8. NF5,1
5 BRK 46,4. HAM 3,1;9. 29,1;3;9
6 NTT 9,69;101
7 LIN 68,41
8 SUF 39,12
.............................................................................................................................................
IVO <OF DRIBY>. As the name is uncommon, the Ivos who held several manors from Gilbert of Ghent and Eudo son of Spirewic in Lincolnshire1 may be one man, the ancestor of the Driby family, which held fees from their successors in 1166 and into the thirteenth century: Red Book, i. 383; Book of Fees, pp. 182, 1052,1056-57, 1067, 1069-70. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 8862) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 283.
.............................................................................................................................................
IVO [* OF GRANDMESNIL *]. The Ivos who held manors from Hugh of Grandmesnil and his wife in Bedfordshire2, Leicestershire3 and Northamptonshire4 may be their son, Ivo; if so, the Bedfordshire entry reveals that he was his father's steward: Mason, 'Barons and their officials', p. 256. Stenton suggested that the Leicestershire tenant might be the knight Ivo who witnessed a charter of 1077 for Monks Kirby priory; but the tenancies are rather substantial for a simple miles and more likely to have been those of his lord, Ivo: Monasticon, vi/ii. 996, no. 1; 'Domesday survey of Leicestershire', p. 292. Dr Keats-Rohan suggests that Ivo was 'perhaps' the tenant of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury in Sussex5. No other Ivo held land south of the Thames so these manors were probably held by one man though in the hands of different families in the thirteenth century: Farrer, Honors, iii. 33, 65-66. Ivo succeeded his father in the mid-1090s and was exiled by Henry I in 1102, both of which events may have affected the descent of his tenancies: Sanders, English baronies, pp. 61-62. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 401) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 282, apart from a subtenancy at Hardham in Sussex6.
.............................................................................................................................................
IVO <OF LOUGHTON>. As the name is uncommon, the Ivo who held Weston Underwood in Buckinghamshire from the Count of Mortain may be the tenant of Walter Giffard at Loughton, ten miles away7, though the manors were in different hands in the thirteenth century: VCH Buckinghamshire, iv. 396, 500. Neither tenant-in-chief had other Ivos among their tenants, and there are no others in the county. Ivo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 6840) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 283.
.............................................................................................................................................
IVO [* OF THIERCEVILLE *]. Ivo, who held Long Clawson in Leicestershire8 and Ropsley in Lincolnshire9 from Robert of Tosny, is identified in a charter of Henry I as Ivo of Tigerivilla, from Thierceville in Upper Normandy (Eure: arrondissement Les Andelys): Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman families, p. 103. The descent of Ivo's other tenancies from Robert10 has not been traced; but as the name is uncommon, they are likely to have been held by the same man. His manors are recorded in Coel (no. 2733) and referenced in Domesday people, p. 282.
.............................................................................................................................................
1 LIN 24,27;33;73. 29,27
2 BDF 54,4
3 LEC 13,35;44;50-51;65
4 NTH 23,9;12
5 SUS 11,5;32;55;79
6 SUS 11,79
7 BUK 12,34. 14,39
8 LEC 15,12
9 LIN 18,24
10 LIN 18,15-16;32
IVO [* TALLBOYS *]. The Ivos on the royal manors of Grantham and Great Ponton in Lincolnshire are evidently the sheriff, Ivo Tallboys1, who is also the Ivo who held Walcot and its dependencies from the abbey of Peterborough2, confirmed by royal writ: Regesta, i. no. 409. He is probably the Ivo who held Ashton in Northamptonshire from the abbey3, and also the tenant Roger of Poitou and Jocelyn son of Lambert at Dunstall and North Willingham in Lincolnshire4, where he held in chief in all three vills5, sharing the entire vill in the first two cases. Finally, he may be the tenant of Robert Malet at Casthorpe, a dependency of Barrowby, since he acquired three other dependencies of the manor from Malet's predecessor, Godwin of Barrowby6; his wife was Robert Malet's niece: Sanders, English baronies, pp. 17-18). The Ivo named in the Lincolnshire Claims is identified by entries on Tallboys' fief7. Ivo's manors are recorded in Coel (no. 1595), apart from a subtenancy at Casthorpe and a jurisdiction at Dunstall8; most of the references are missing from Domesday people, p. 283.
.............................................................................................................................................
IWAR. Iwar is a rare name which occurs three times, once in Shropshire and twice in Staffordshire.
.............................................................................................................................................
IWAR <OF ALTON>. As the name is rare, the Iwars who held adjacent, waste manors in Alton and Denstone in Staffordshire in 10669 are almost certainly one man, but perhaps unlikely to be the other Iwar in Domesday Book, a tenant of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury on a small manor in the lost vill of Newetone, south of Oswestry, in Shropshire, some sixty miles to the west.
.............................................................................................................................................
IWAR <OF NEWETONE>. The tenant of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury on a modest property in the lost vill of Newetone, near the Welsh border in Shropshire10, has no links to the one other Iwar, the pre-Conquest lord of Alton and Denstone in Staffordshire, roughly sixty miles to the east. He is unidentified in Coel (no. 31119).
1 LIN 1,9;14
2 LIN 8,10;28-30
3 NTH 6a,34
4 LIN 16,24. 28,21
5 LIN 14,7;23
6 LIN 14,88-89;95. 58,2;4
7 LIN CW13. CK63. 14,21;91
8 LIN 16,24. 58,4
9 STS 1,54-55
10 SHR 4,27,34

Comments

  1. Illinois video gaming is strictly limited to people 21 years of age and older. Your staff want to|might need to} card patrons in the gaming space and at least of|no less than} one employee who's over 21 years of age should always have a transparent line of sight to the doorway to the gaming space. Ensure your Illinois enterprise is operating in a municipality that allows video gaming. The IGB’s website offers a listing of the place video gaming is permitted. MGM Grand Las Vegas provides text alerts to shoppers thinking about receiving property discounts properly as|in addition to} event and 우리카지노 data related to MGM Grand Las Vegas.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Posts