THE NORTHAMPTONSHIRE SURVEY 



In EvERDON the monks of Bernay 2^ hides 

 and 2 small virgates.' There also Hugh the 

 sheriff 8 small virgates which the monks of 

 Daventre hold. There also Ralf de Waun- 

 deville 4 small virgates.* There also Walter 

 4 small virgates. 



In Snokescombe [Snoscombe] 4 small vir- 

 gates of the fee of the earl of Leicester.' 



In Stowe John de Armenteres 4 hides of 

 the fee of Gilbert de Gaunt.* 



HUNDRED OF AYLWOLDESLE 



In Baddeby [Badby]^ and Newenham 

 [Newnham] the abbot of Evesham 4 hides. 



In Norton 2^ hides and 2 small virgates 

 of the fee of Warewyk.^ 



In Thorp(e) Stephen de Turs' half a 

 hide. There also William de Neufmarchd 

 {novo foro) 4 small virgates.' 



In Beruby [Barby] 2 hides of the fee of 



Will 



lam reverei 



* This holding does not seem to be recog- 

 nisable in Domesday. Henry II., early in 

 his reign, confirmed to the monks of Bernay 

 [Eure] ' Ebredona ' among the lands given 

 them in England {Calendar of Documents pre- 

 served in France, p. 13 7). 



* These reappear in the Testa Sunxy as 

 ' 4 virgates which Geoffrey de Waundeville 

 holds of the fee of Albemarle.' They are 

 also found [Testa, p. 27) as held of the Belvoir 

 fief. 



' Domesday assigns to the count of Mor- 

 tain 2 virgates there. 



* Held in demesne by Gilbert de Gand in 

 1086. 



^ On the 4 hides at Badby assigned by 

 Domesday to Crowland, see the Introduction 

 to Domesday (p. 285). 



^ Norton (by Daventry) was held, in 

 1086, by the count of Meulan, brother of 

 the first earl of Warwick, as 2^ hides and 

 ^ hide. 



' He was seneschal of Anjou under Henry 

 II. As he was an under-tenant of Robert de 

 Chocques in 11 66, this was doubtless the 

 'half hide and fifth part of half a hide' held 

 by Gunfrei de 'Cioches' there in 1086. 



* Held of Hugh de Grentmesnil by 

 ' Osbern,' as ' four-fifths of half a hide ' in 

 1086. In the Testa Survey this holding is 

 entered as '4 virgates ' of the earl of Leices- 

 ter's. 



So also in Domesday. 



In Gildesboru [Guilsborough] the bishop 

 of Lincoln in demesne, 2 hides."* 



In Stav[er]ton William de Neufmarch^, 

 (novo foro) I hide of the fee of the earl of 

 Leicester.*' There also Stephen de Welton 

 3 hides of the fee of Roger de Moubray.** 



In Braundeston [Braunston] William 

 Trussebot 3 hides and 6 small virgates of the 

 fee of Payn Peverel.*' There also the earl 

 of Leicester 4 small virgates.** 



In Daventre Walter Fitz Robert 8 hides 

 of the fee of the king of Scotland.** 



In Welton William 2^ hides and 2 small 

 virgates of the fee of the earl of Leicester.*^ 

 There also Hugh the sheriff 5^ small virgates 

 of the fee of Berkamstede. The monks of 

 Daventre hold (them). There also Richard 

 Maulore 2 small virgates. 



In Esseby [Ashby St. Legers] 4 hides of 

 the fee of the earl of Leicester." 



In Dodeford Ralf de Chanes 3 hides.** 



*" This is not recognisable in Domesday. 



** Held of Hugh de Grentmesnil by ' Os- 

 bern ' in Domesday. 



** Held of the count of Mortain by ' Alan * 

 in 1086. These are described in the Testa 

 Survey as 'of the fee of Stuteville,' but the 

 Stutevilles were great under-tenants of the 

 Mowbrays. 



*' Held by Walter de Aincurt as 3^ hides 

 in 1086. In the later Survey, found in the 

 Testa (p. 36), Robert de Ros (Trussebot's heir) 

 is ' dominus ville,' but it is 'of the fee of 

 John de Eyncurt.' 



** Held of the bishop of Bayeux's fee by 

 William Peverel in 1086. 



'* The Countess Judith's in 1086. 



*® This was clearly the ' 3 hides less a 

 virgate' held here, in 1086, of Hugh de 

 Grentmesnil by ' Osbern ' ; and as the suc- 

 cessor of this Osbern in his two other under- 

 tenancies was William de Neufmarch^, this 

 was doubtless the name of the above 

 ' William.' 



*' Hugh de Grentmesnil's in 1086. 



'* Held of the count of Mortain by Wil- 

 liam (de Cahagnes) in 1086. The later 

 Survey in the Testa (p. 36) proves that the 

 overlordship had passed from the Count to the 

 earl of Leicester, for it speaks of the vill as 

 ' de feodo Leyc.,' though William de ' Kaynes ' 

 was its lord. 



371 



