TITCHFIELD HUNDRED 



TITCHFIELD 



valued is shown by a letter of Capt. Anthony Deane 

 to the Naval Commissioners in 1668, in which he 

 writes : ' Mr. Eastwood gave you notice of the 

 timber felled in Titchfield Park and bought by 

 private men, and all the best trees docked for buckets, 

 which would grieve anyone to behold such strange 

 destruction to such rare goods and indeed jewels.' 

 He adds that he had treated about 500 loads at 38*. 

 the load. He knew of no timber like it except in 

 the New Forest." 



Apart from the manor of Titchfield proper, there 

 appears to have been an estate in Titchfield called the 

 manor of Titchfield in the sixteenth century, probably 

 owing its origin to the purchase by Thomas de Overton 

 from John de Masseworth of I carucate and 6 acres 

 of land in Chark and Titchfield in the fourteenth 

 century." The estate subsequently passed to his 

 daughter Isabel and her husband Thomas le Warrener, 31 

 who held it until 1407." From them it appears to 

 have descended in a direct line through five genera- 

 tions to Joan Tawke, who married firstly Robert 

 Ryman and secondly Edmund Bartlett, who both 

 predeceased her.* 5 She held the manor at her death 

 in I56I, 56 when it passed to her son William Ryman 

 for life with reversion to his brother Humphrey. The 

 latter appears to have died during his brother's life- 

 time," and from this date all assumed status of manor 

 was lost, and the estate evidently merged in Titchfield 

 proper. 



At the time of the Domesday Survey BROMW1CH 

 (Burnewick xi cent. ; Bromwych, Brunewych, xiv 

 cent. ; Bromwiche, xviii cent.) was held by Walkelin 

 bishop of Winchester of the king, though not as a part 

 of his bishopric. Angot held it under him, and it 

 had been held by Edric in the time of Edward the 

 Confessor. 58 At what date it came into the possession 

 of the Bromwich family does not appear, but in the 

 fourteenth century it was held by Lucas Bromwich 

 and John Bromwich successively. 89 By 1428 it had 

 passed to the Uvedale family, John Uvedale, son of 

 Sybil de Scures, having acquired the property probably 

 by purchase from Thomas Bromwych.* 



In 1434 it was granted or sublet to Reginald West, 

 Lord De La Warr, who was probably connected with 

 the Uvedale family, for in the time of Henry III a 

 certain Thomas Uvedale married Margaret daughter 

 of Roger De La Warr." On the death of Lord De La 

 Warr in 1451 the manor again reverted to the 

 Uvedales, and was held for a time by William son 

 of John Uvedale. 43 By a deed dated 1480-1 it was 

 granted by Thomas son of William Uvedale to his 

 father's brother Sir Thomas, to hold jointly with 

 Agnes Paulet his wife," and shortly afterwards it was 

 leased to a certain John Estuy for twelve years at a 

 rent of 1 6 marks and 2 pence. The lessor granted 

 to the tenant annually one robe of the suit of a 

 groom, and the latter was to pay the fifteenth to the 

 king when payable and all the church dues." Before 

 his death, in 1513, Henry Uvedale settled the manor 



on his wife Mary, 45 but in 1530-1 the presumptive 

 heirs to the manor all sold their interest in the rever- 

 sion to Sir Henry Wyatt. 46 Mary Uvedale survived 

 him, however, and his son, Sir Thomas Wyatt, sold 

 the reversion in 1538 to Sir Thomas Wriothesley. 4 ' 

 Two years previously Mary Uvedale had given up her 

 life interest, 41 and later Sir Thomas Wyatt made a 

 fresh conveyance in confirmation of the Wriothesley 

 title. 49 The same year the manor was granted to 

 Sir Thomas Wriothesley's sister Anne Knight and 

 her husband for their lives and that of the survivor 

 at a rent of 6d. a year, but it was regranted to the 

 donor almost immediately ' in consideration of the 

 many benefits received from him.' M Ten years later 

 the manor was granted to Roger Polstin and his wife, 

 servants of Thomas Wriothesley (now earl of South- 

 ampton), with the explanation that it was for services to 

 be rendered as well as for those already received. They 

 were to hold it for three lives at a rent of 10, but 

 the grant did not include the right of fishing in the 

 pond by the manor house. 51 Henry Wriothesley 

 succeeded to his father's estates in 1550, and thence 

 they passed to his son Henry, who in 1617 leased the 

 ' messuage and farm called Bromwich Farm ' to 

 Philip Giffbrd at a rent of _lo \6s. the tenant was 

 to make all payments and duties 'for the King's 

 Majesty, the Church, the Parish and the poore of 

 the same.' Also twice in every year he was to 

 provide for the officers of the earl when they came to 

 hold courts there ' sufficient meat and drink and other 

 provision befitting their officers and servants, and 

 sufficient room hay litter and provender for their 

 beasts.' 5> On the expiration of this lease another for 

 twenty-one years at a rent of 10 l6s. was granted 

 to Sir Henry Wallop," who had married the sister of 

 the third earl of Southampton. Bromwich followed 

 the descent of Titchfield until 1734, when on the 

 sale shortly afterwards of a considerable part of the 

 Titchfield property to the duke of Beaufort it was 

 retained by the duke of Portland, in whose possession 

 it was in 1762. From him it was purchased by 

 Mr. William Hornby, governor of Bombay at the 

 end of the eighteenth century, in whose family the 

 property remained until the death of Mrs. Hood, 

 the last survivor of the family, whose husband, the 

 Hon. Albert Hood, is the present owner. 54 



There is no mention of the manor of CHARK 

 in the Domesday Survey, but it is probable that it 

 was included at this date in that part of Titchfield 

 which was held by the king. Some time in the 

 twelfth century the overlordship was granted to John 

 de Gisors, who was certainly holding lands in Hamp- 

 shire as early as I i6l. M He never held Chark, how- 

 ever, in demesne, but received a rent of 50*. from the 

 sub-tenants, 40.1-. of which he granted in alms to the 

 priory of Hamble. On the forfeiture of the estates 

 of de Gisors the remaining I os. rent escheated to the 

 crown, and King John granted it to Oliver de Beau- 

 champ as part of I oos. of land and rent which he had 



l Chart. R. 9 Edw. Ill, No. 72 5 

 Cat. S.P. Dam. 1635, pp. 121, 178 ; ibid. 

 1668-9, pp. 26-8. 



M Chan. Inq. p.m. 30 Edw. Ill (2nd 

 Nos.), No. lo. 



88 Feet of F. Hants, East. 37 Edw. III. 



M Chan. Inq. p.m. 9 Hen. IV, No. 27. 



3* Feet of F. Southants, Trin. 34 Hen. 

 VIII. 



86 Chan. Inq. p. m. 5 Eliz. pt. i (Ser. 2), 

 No. 15. 



"7 Ibid, n Eliz. (Ser. 2), No. 141. 

 " V.C.H. Hants, i, 463*. 

 M Feud. Aids, ii, 307, 335. 



40 Ibid, ii, 357 ; Surrey Arch. Coll. iii, 

 89. 



41 Berrjr, Hants Cental. 198 ; Add. MS. 

 34655, fol. 4. 



Ibid. Ibid. fol. 5. 



44 Ibid. 



45 Deeds relating to the manor of 

 Bromwich, fol. 5. 



225 



48 Ibid. fol. 6 ; Add. MS. 34655, fol. 7. 



4 7 Deeds relating to the manor of 

 Bromwich, fol. 10. 



48 Ibid. 



48 Anct. D. (P.R.O.), A. 3235. 



Add. MS. 34655, fol. 10. 



81 Ibid. fol. 8. 



51 Ibid. 



Ibid. fol. 9. 



" Private information. 



56 Red Bk. of the Exch. (Rolls Ser.), i, 28. 



2 9 



