A HISTORY OF LEICESTERSHIRE 



become possessed of Garthorpe, which in 1086 had apparently belonged 

 to Roger de Busli. 16 Escheat and forfeiture had played havoc with the 

 Domesday baronage of Leicestershire. 



The last aspect of the Leicestershire Survey which need be noticed 

 here lies in its bearing upon the village topography of the shire. Perhaps- 

 the most formidable difficulty which besets the analysis of the agricultural 

 statistics entered in Domesday consists of the continual uncertainty which 

 prevails as to the amount of land which is covered by each manorial 

 heading." The present survey gives ample warning on this score. Scarcely 

 more than half the county is included in the record, yet within this limited 

 area the compilers of Domesday have, through design or inadvertence, made 

 no specific mention of more than a dozen vills which undoubtedly existed 

 in 1086. In some cases the assessments of two, three, or more vills are 

 included under one heading : Blackfordby, Kilwardby, and Alton Grange are 

 represented in Domesday by the latter name only ; Lockington, Hemington, 

 and Long Whatton are included under the Shepshed heading, and several 

 other cases in point will be discussed in the notes to the survey which follow. 

 With the aid of the present survey it is possible to make a fairly safe estimate 

 of the acreage represented by any place-name in Domesday relating to land 

 in the north of Leicestershire. On the other hand, with this survey before 

 us, it seems impossible to acquit the Domesday scribes of singular carelessness- 

 in making their compilation from the original returns before them. There 

 exist, at least, several cases in which a vill, which must have been included 

 in the original returns, is omitted from Domesday, to all appearance without 

 any attempt on the part of the scribes to include the details relating to it under 

 another manorial heading. Eaton, Thorpe Satchville, and Belton are three 

 cases in point taken from different parts of north Leicestershire. In other 

 respects the Leicestershire Domesday bears signs of having been compiled in 

 considerable haste ; but the present survey, valuable as is the definite infor- 

 mation which it gives, performs an important service in merely adding to the 

 proof that Domesday Book itself, the greatest of all surveys, is no infallible 

 record. 



[GARTREE WAPENTAKE] In THORP [Thorpe Langton] Eustace 3 



, . carucates and T. virgates. 4 

 the earl or Leicester o carucates. 



In the other (alia) LANGETON [East Langtonl 

 the abbot of (Peterborough 4 carucates and 



In the same vill the Earl of Leicester n 3 virgates. 5 In the same place Henry de Port 

 carucates and i virgate. 2 In the same place I carucate. 6 

 Pichard Basset 3 carucates and i virgate. 3 ^ THURUNGTON [Tur Langton] the same 



The descent of other and less important fiefs in Henry 12 carucates. 7 

 the county will be found tabulated in Feudal Eng- 

 land, p. 214. 4 The same amount of land was held by Robert de 



17 Compare Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 500. Veci in 1086. 



1 The only vill in this wapentake in which Hugh 5 As in Domesday, where the holding is described 



de Grentemaisnil, the earl's predecessor, held this sum as 5 carucates less 2 bovates. 

 is Stonton Wyville, which adjoins Tur Langton and 6 See next note. 

 Shangton, surveyed below. ' In Domesday the archbishop of York is represented 



* In Domesday 1 1 carucates are assigned to Hugh as holding 13 carucates in Tur Langton, one of which 



de Grentemaisnil in Langton. may safely be identified with the carucate assigned 



3 This represents the 3 carucates, 2 bovates held by above to Henry de Port in Thorpe Langton. On 



Robert de Buci in 1086, and entered in Domesday the other hand it is not easy to account for the 



as in Thorpe Langton. appearance of the Hampshire magnate Henry de Port 



344 



