A HISTORY OF DORSET 



supposed to have been held by the Count of Mortain in 1086, it cannot be identified 

 among his manors. From the Somerset survey it appears that the Count of Mortain gave 

 to Athelnev Abbey the manor of Purse Caundle (nos. 1 18 and Ixiv) in Dorset in exchange 

 for Bishopston (Montacute) in Somerset." This exchange is not recorded in the Dorset 

 survey. Some of the tenants-in-chief in 1086 had been given their land by the queen. 

 Anschitil fitz Ameline held Tyneham (no. 369) of the queen ut dicit sed post tnortem 

 eius regetn tion requisivit. Dodo held \ hide, in an unspecified localitv, of the queen in 

 alms (no. 444). Torchil held part of Hampreston (no. 443) which Schelin had held of the 

 queen, but which in 1086 the king had in demesne {modo habet rex in dominio).^'' William 

 fitz Osbern had apparently once held land in Dorset, since Waleran the huntsman had 

 held Church Knowle (no. 308) of Earl William but modo ut dicit tenet de rege. 



Land disputed between two tenants is sometimes entered under each tenant's name, 

 but this only happens twice in the Dorset survey. Farnham is entered under Shaftes- 

 bury Abbey (no. 135) and under Aiulf (no. 352) and the wife of Hugh fitz Grip (nos. 

 396 and cxxix), and the disputed virgate at Winterborne Houghton is entered under 

 William of INIoyon (nos. 275 and Ixxxv) and the wife of Hugh fitz Grip (nos. 392 and 

 cxxv). One manor, Blackmanston, belonging to Alvric, seems to be entered twice. One 

 entry (no. 476) gives the name of the manor, the holder T.R.E., the hidage, and the 

 teamland, but is unfinished. The other entr>' (no. 489) omits the hidage but adds the 

 value. The fact that there are so few double entries makes it easier to calculate the 

 assessment of the shire for geld. The total hidage recorded in Domesday amounts to 

 2,304 hides.-^ This can be compared with the hidage recorded in the Dorset Geld 

 Rolls. There were 39 hundreds and, according to the figures given for the number of 

 hides in each hundred, there should have been 2,298 hides. The details of each hundred 

 account, however, do not always amount to the figure given for the number of hides in 

 the hundred. The figures derived from the actual details of each hundred account yield 

 a total of 2,307 hides, which is much closer to the Domesday figure. ^^ There was in 

 addition a substantial amount of land which was not assessed in hides and not liable 

 to geld. The six manors which had belonged to King Edward, and which were plainly 

 very large, had never paid geld. There were 25I carucates (carucate) at Sherborne 

 (no. 37) which had never paid geld, 16 belonging to the Bishop of Salisbury and g^ to 

 the monks of Sherborne. The bishop had 2 carucates at Beaminster and 2 at Netherbury 

 (nos. 46, 47), and 2 teamlands {qiiatitiim posmnt arare ii cariice) at Charminster (no. 32), 

 2 more at Alton Pancras (no. 33), 6 at Yetminster (no. 35), and i at Lyme Regis (no. 

 36). None of this land had ever paid geld. The monks of Sherborne had 2 carucates at 

 Stoke Abbott (no. 45) which did not pay geld. The Abbot of Glastonbur)- had 14 

 teamlands at Sturminster Ne^\ton (no. 63) and 8 at Buckland Ne\\ton (no. 65), which 

 w^ere exempt from geld. Aiulf the chamberlain had 4 carucates in demesne at Wootton 

 Fitzpaine (no. 347). Some manors were beneficially hidated. Puddletown (nos. 8 and ii) 

 was assessed at \ hide but had land for 15 ploughs. Okeford Fitzpaine (no. 64) was 

 assessed at 8 hides, but had land for 16 ploughs and Stanton St. Gabriel (no. 210) was 

 assessed at \ hide with land for 6 ploughs. Another part of Wootton Fitzpaine (no. 211) 

 was assessed at 2 hides, but had land for 7 ploughs. The king's manor of Wimborne 



" Dom. Bk. (Rec. Com.), i, f. 93- Aubrey, which must refer to the manor of Gussage St. 



" The queen had enfeoffed Hugh fitz Grip in several Michael, which is in Dorset, but which is treated as part of 



manors, all in the king's hand in 1086, and had probably Wilts, in Domesday; and 8 hides in Glochresdone hundred, 



given the 2 manors of Edmondsham (nos. 353 and 354) which cannot be identified with any manor recorded in 



to Humphrey the chamberlain. Domesday. When these 16 hides, 3 virgates, are deducted 



" IMaitland {Dom. Bk. and Beyond, 505) gives this from Eyton's total, 2,304 hides, i virgate, remain, 



figure as 2,321 hides, a figure apparently based on Eyton -* Eyton (op. cit. 144) gives these totals as 2,295 hides 



(Ke)' to Domesday: Dorset, 144). Eyton's total includes and 2,301 hides respectively. 

 8 hides, 3 virgates, in Badbur)- hundred, belonging to Earl 



