DORSET
(version 1a)

INTRODUCTION

THE COUNTY BOUNDARY
Boundary changes in the nineteenth century and twentieth century have made some adjustments to the border of the Domesday county. In 1086 Thorncombe was in Devon, being transferred to Dorset in 1844; while Chardstock, Stockland and Dalwood (these last two not named in Domesday) were originally in Dorset, the first being given to Devon in 1896, the others in 1832. On the same side of the county, Hawkchurch, including 'Philleyholme', neither separately mentioned in Domesday, was transferred to Devon in 1896.
	Larger adjustments have been made on the boundary with Somerset. In 1086, Holwell (not mentioned separately in Domesday) was a detached part of Milborne Port parish (Somerset) lying completely within Dorset, to which county it was transferred in 1844. Also transferred from Somerset, all in 1896, were Adber, Goathill, Poyntington, Sandford Orcas, Seaborough, Trent and Weathergrove and in the same year Wambrook (a chapelry of Netherbury Ancient Parish ) not mentioned in Domesday) was transferred from Dorset to Somerset.
	Before April 1974, the only change on the border with Hampshire was the transfer of Kinson from Dorset in 1930. The 1974 boundary changes, otherwise ignored in this edition, pushed the Dorset boundary eastwards to the River Avon south of Fordingbridge, bringing into Dorset a number of places, including Bournemouth and Christchurch, and thus returning Kinson to the county.

PLACE	1086	LATER	
Dorest/ Devon Boundary

CHARDSTOCK (3,13)

DALWOOD (1,4 Fordington note; 12,14 Stockland note)

HAWKCHURCH (11,1 Cerne note; 17,1 Frampton note)

STOCKLAND (12,14)

THORNCOMBE (DEV 16,165)

In Dorset

In Dorset

In Dorset

In Dorset

In Devon	

To Devon in 1896

To Devon in 1832

To Devon in 1896

To Devon in 1832

To Dorset in 1844	
Dorset/Hampshire Boundary

KINSON (31,2)

In Dorset	

To Hampshire in 1930	
Dorset/ Somerset boundary

ADBER (SOM 19,74. 24,37.
47,11 )

GOATHILL (SOM 19,70)

HOLWELL (SOM 1,10 Milborne note)

POYNTINGTON (SOM 19,76)

SANDFORD ORCAS (SOM 45,5)

SEABOROUGH (SOM 3,1)

TRENT (SOM 19,75)

WAMBROOK (3,13 Chardstock note)

WEATHERGROVE (SOM 5,69)

In Somerset

In Somerset

In Somerset

In Somerset

In Somerset

In Somerset

In Somerset

In Dorset

In Somerset

To Dorset in 1896

To Dorset in 1896

To Dorset in 1844

To Dorset in 1896

To Dorset in 1896

To Dorset in 1896

To Dorset in 1896

To Somerset in 1895

To Dorset in 1896

PLACES ENTERED IN THE WRONG DOMESDAY COUNTY
At least two places which lay in Dorset in 1086 are wrongly included in another county. This is an error on the part of the main scribe of Great Domesday who was abstracting material from Exon in order to construct a full list of the lands held by each tenant-in- chief in each county. Exon was, however, differently arranged with the county subordinate to the fief; in other words, several fiefs in Exon contained lands in more than one county. It would be easy to miss a county heading in such circumstances or the heading itself may have been missing. This phenomenon is particularly marked in circuit IV (Oxfordshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Warwickshire, Staffordshire); see STS {Introduction: Places Entered in the Wrong Domesday County}. 
	In Domesday Wiltshire (WIL 23,10), an estate at Gussage St Michael is entered under the heading ' Land which was Earl Aubrey's'. Earl Aubrey was Aubrey of Coucy, created Earl of Northumbria in 1080. As he was 'of little use in difficult circumstances' he resigned and went home to Normandy. His lands were in the king's hands in 1086 and had not yet been granted afresh. Gussage St Michael was Earl Aubrey's only Dorset estate, a fact easily missed by the scribe. It certainly lay in Dorset in 1086 as an analysis of the Dorset Tax Returns locates it in Badbury Hundred. 
	A second estate of 3 virgates in Gillingham (WIL 66,5) held by Fulcred, a servant of the king, is similarly misplaced. All the other estates in Gillingham were rightly included in Dorset (1,4. 10,1. 33,1. 56,3-5;66). Moreover, an analysis of the Tax Returns shows that this particular estate lay in Gillingham Hundred.
	A further place that lay in Dorset in 1086 may be mentioned in Domesday Somerset. Under an entry for Martock (SOM 1,27), it is recorded that 1 hide and 1 virgate of land in Contone have been taken away from the manor and are held by Ansger the cook. This 'Compton' was tentatively identified with Compton Durville, the nearest Compton to Martock, in the Somerset volume of the Phillimore series. However, in the Tax Return for Sherborne Hundred (Exon folio 23b2) the king has no tax from 1 hide and 1 virgate which Ansger the cook holds by gift of the king. Since this holding is nowhere recorded in Domesday Dorset, it is possible that it represents an outlying part of Martock at Over Compton or Nether Compton in Dorset; see VCH Dorset, iii. p. 145.

HUNDREDS
In the Phillimore printed edition, the Domesday estates were allocated, for the purposes of indexing and mapping, to the later hundreds; this was the policy that the general editor (JRM) had wished to be applied to counties that lacked hundredal rubrication. However, the notes for this county show that in most instances places can be allocated to the 1086 hundreds on the basis of the Tax Returns which are included in the Liber Exoniensis, here called Exon (see {Introduction: Related or 'Satellite' Texts}) or by a study of the hundredal sequence in which they are entered in the text of Exon itself. Tabulated here are, in the first column, the names of the later hundreds, and, in the second, the names of the 1086 hundreds. A blank in the first column means that a hundred had ceased to exist by that time; in the second column a blank shows that the later hundred did not exist as such in 1086. Where names on the same line in adjacent columns are substantially different (for example Whiteway/ Hilton), this indicates that the Domesday hundred has been renamed. Some names that were used in the Phillimore printed edition have also been modified for this revision, either to take account of the modern spelling of the place that named the hundred (as Brunsell for Brownshall) or, by the use of single inverted commas ('Goderthorn' for Godderthorn) to indicate that the place which named the hundred is no longer in existence, although it is evidenced after 1086. Double inverted commas ("Stana") indicate that the hundred and the place that named it are not found after 1086. The relation between the 1086 and later hundreds in discussed below and shown in the second table.

Phillimore Printed Edition	This Revision	

-------------
Badbury
Beaminster
Bere and Barrow
Brownshall
Buckland Newton
-------------
-------------
Cerne, Totcombe and Modbury
Cogdean
Combsditch
Cranborne
Cullifordtree
Eggardon
----------------
Gillingham and Redlane
Godderthorn
----------------
Hasler
---------------
Knowlton
---------------
---------------
Loosebarrow
---------------
Pimperne
Puddletown
--------------
Rowbarrow
Sherborne
Sixpenny Handley
St George
-------------
Sturminster Newton
Tollerford
Uggescombe
Whitchurch Canonicorum
Whiteway
Winfrith
Yetminster	
'Alvredesberge'
Badbury
Beaminster
Bere 
Brunsell
Buckland [Newton]† 
'Canedone'
Chilbury
--------------
Cogdean
Combsditch
--------------
Cullifordtree
Eggardon
Farrington
Gillingham
'Goderthorn'
Handley
Hasler
'Hundesburge'
Knowlton
'Langeburgh'
Loders
Charborough
'Modbury'
Pimperne
Puddletown
Redhove
Ailwood or Purbeck
Sherborne
Sixpenny
Dorchester
"Stana"
[Sturminster] Newton†
Tollerford
'Uggescombe'
Whitchurch 
Hilton
Winfrith 
Yetminster
	
†  Buckland Newton Hundred was originally known as Buckland and Sturminster Newton as Newton. To avoid possible confusion they are here called Buckland [Newton] and [Sturminster] Newton throughout.

Identifying and Reconstructing the Hundreds
Although two hundreds are named incidentally in the text of Domesday Dorset - Buckland [Newton] Hundred at 1,30 and 'Purbeck Hundred' at 37,13 (that is probably Ailwood Hundred, later known as Rowbarrow Hundred; see 1,8 'Purbeck' note) - the schedule of lands completely lacks hundredal rubrication, in common with the other four south-western counties.
	However, Exon contains Tax Returns for Dorset covering 39 hundreds and from these valuable evidence for the identification of places can be obtained when the names of landholders and the sizes of estates are compared with Domesday entries, even though the Tax Returns do not themselves contain a single place-name; see {Introduction: Identification of Places}. Set out below are the names of these Tax Return hundreds (in the nominative; in Exon they occur in the genitive, ending in -e or -ę (for -ae), in phrases such as 'In the Hundred of Yetminster') with the modern equivalent name in brackets where it exists, their hidage totals and the Exon folio and entry reference. The names in the last column refer to the later hundred or hundreds in which they were incorporated. The numbering of the Tax Return hundreds is that adopted by VCH Dorset, iii. following their order in Exon.

Exon Reference	Name in Tax Return and modern form used in this edition	Hidage	Later Hundred	
17a1

17a2

17b1

18a1

18a2

18a3

18b1

19a1

19a2

19a3

19b1

19b2

19b3

20a1

20a2

20a3

20b1

20b2

21a1

21a2

21a3

21a4

21b1

21b2

21b3

22a1

22a2

22b1

22b2

23a1

23a2

23a3

23b1

23b2

23b3

23b4

24a1

24a2

24a3

(24a4	1 Etheministra (Yetminster)

2 Witchirca (Whitchurch)

3 Oglescoma ('Uggescombe')

4 Glochresdona (Eggardon)†

5 Albretesberga (‘Alvredesberge’)

6 Bedeberia (Badbury)

7 Canendona (‘Canedone’)

8 Pideletona (Puddletown)

9 Stana 

10 Goderonęstona ('Goderthorn')

11 Haltona (Hilton)

12 Beieministra (Beaminster)

13 Redehana (Redhove)

14 Tolreforda (Tollerford)

15 Bera (Bere)

16 Concresdic (Combsditch)≠

17 Cocdena (Cogdean)

18 Celeberga (Charborough)

19 Aileuesuuoda (Ailwood)

20 Hanlega (Handley)≠≠

21 Neuuentona ([Sturminster] Newton)

22 Langeberga (‘Langeburgh’)

23 Chenoltuna (Knowlton)

24 Sexpena (Sixpenny)

25 Hunesberga (‘Hundesburge’)

26 Pinpra (Pimperne)

27 Gelingeham (Gillingham)

28 Brunesella (Brunsell)

29 Haselora (Hasler)

30 Winfroda (Winfrith)

31 Celberga (Chilbury)

32 Dorecestra (Dorchester)

33 Morberga ('Modbury')

34 Sireburna (Sherborne)

35 Ferendona (Farrington)

36 Bochena (Buckland [Newton])

37 Cuferdestroua (Cullifordtree)

38 Frontona (Frampton)

39 Lodra (Loders)

Tax Total for Dorset)	47 h.

84 ½ h. 1 v.

104 h.

66 ½ h.

47 h.

32 h. 1 v.

48 h. 3 v.

91 h.

63 ½ h.

28 ½ h.

86 h. 1 v.

106 h. less 1 v.

7 h.

59 h.

49 h. 1 v.

77 h.

86 h.

41 ½ h.

73 h.

20 h.

47 h.

84 h.

36 ½ h.

50 h.

79 h.

34 ½ h.

79 h. less ½ v.

52 ½ h.

64 h. 1 v.

49 h. 1 v.

51 ½ h.

73 h. 1 v.

63 h.

75 ½ h. 25 c.

37 h.

39 h. less 1 v.

109 h.

35 h.

20 h.
	Yetminster

Whitchurch Canonicorum

'Uggescombe'

Eggardon

Cranborne (part)

Badbury (part); Cranborne (part)

Badbury (part); Cranborne (part)

Puddletown

Cerne, Tatcombe and 'Modbury'‡ (part)

'Goderthorn'±  (part)

Whiteway

Beaminster (part)

Beaminster (part)

Tollerford (part)

Bere and Barrow. Winfrith (part)

Combsditch

Cogdean

Loosebarrow

Rowbarrow

Sixpenny Handley (part)

[Sturminster] Newton

Pimperne (part). Cranborne (part)

Knowlton

Sixpenny Handley (part)

Pimperne (part)

Pimperne (part)

Gillingham and Redlane (part)

Brunsell$

Hasler

Winfrith (part)

Winfrith (part)

St George (part)

Cerne, Tatcombe and 'Modbury'‡
 (part)

Sherborne

Gillingham and Redlane (part)

Buckland [Newton]

Cullifordtree

St George (part). Tollerford (part)

'Goderthorn' (part)	
h. = hide. v. = virgate. c. = carucate

†  So in the Exon manuscript, with the l interlined above and between the g and o; Ellis misprinted gio-chresdonę

‡  Often known as Cerne, Totcombe and Modbury.

±  Often known as Godderthorn.

≠  So in the Exon manuscript, with Con interlined above and to the left of cresdic which is written right up against the In; commas indicate the position of the interlineation. Ellis misprinted cresdie and separates the In from it.

≠≠  So in the Exon manuscript; Ellis misprinted hanglegę.

$ Often known as Brownshall.

It will be noted that very few of these 'hundreds' contain a figure close to 100 hides (if that was the original total); several, such as Pimperne and Buckland [Newton], are much smaller, while others, for instance Loders and Handley, are merely individual manors which for some reason returned their tax separately. Some of these 'hundreds' may well have been temporary, artificial creations for the needs of a particular survey. It is probable that the 'hundreds' which supplied the Tax Returns and the 'hundreds' which contributed to the compilation of Domesday differed from each other (such is the Somerset evidence) and may well have differed again from the hundreds which under the Saxon kings had particular administrative and judicial functions.

Composition of the Hundreds
The villages that formed each hundred in the Tax Returns can be identified with differing degrees of completeness: the list below includes those where the identity seems reasonably certain; it largely agrees with the reconstruction in VCH Dorset, iii. and is less wholesale than the work of Eyton (Eyton, Dorset Survey) which has heavily influenced Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, an otherwise excellent work on the hundreds. The present editors hope to publish their analysis separately at a later date.

	Yetminster Hundred (Tax Return 1) certainly contained Yetminster itself and all the holdings called Melbury; it is likely that the total was made up by Woolcombe and Clifton Maybank.

	Whitchurch Hundred (Tax Return 2 ) contained Symondsbury, Pilsdon, 'Studley', Lyme Regis, Abbots Wootton, Moorbath, Catherston Leweston, Wootton Fitzpaine, Atrim and 'Stoke Wallis'. Most of Broadwindsor was also here in 1086, but later transferred to Beaminster Hundred; see 57,15 Broadwindsor note.

	'Uggescombe' Hundred (Tax Return 3) certainly contained Abbotsbury, Portesham, Littlebredy, Waddon, Langton Herring, Tatton (later in Cullifordtree Hundred), Shilvinghampton and Fleet. Elworth, Puncknowle, Corton and Bexington were also probably here in 1086.

	Eggardon Hundred (Tax Return 4) certainly contained Winterborne Abbas, Long Bredy, Nettlecombe, West Milton, Powerstock, Wraxall, Chilcombe (this last subsequently in 'Uggescombe' Hundred), Woolcombe (later in Tollerford Hundred) and the Loders holdings of 26,58 and 56,51 (later in 'Goderthorn' Hundred). Askerswell lay in Redhove Hundred (Tax Return 13) in 1086, but paid tax in Eggardon Hundred and was later transferred here. Kingcombe, later in Tollerford Hundred, was here in 1303 (Feudal Aids, ii. p. 33) and probably earlier; see Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 72; and 32,3 Kingcombe note and 47,7 Wraxall note.

	'Alvredesberge' Hundred (Tax Return 5) was broken up after 1086 and contributed Cranborne, Boveridge, Edmondsham and Pentridge to the later Cranborne Hundred; Brockington to Knowlton Hundred and Wimborne St Giles (see Book of Fees, p. 92; and 10,3 Wimborne note) to the later Wimborne Hundred.

	Badbury Hundred (Tax Return 6) was subsequently divided between the later Badbury Hundred and Cranborne Hundred. To Badbury Hundred it contributed 'Selavestune', 'Odenham', part of Hinton Martell (the rest was in ‘Canedone’ Hundred: Tax Return 7), Wimborne Minster, and Tarrant Crawford. To Cranborne Hundred it gave Witchampton, Preston and Hemsworth. Gussage St Michael also lay here in 1086 and was later a detached part of Badbury Hundred. Preston is included in both Badbury Hundred and Pimperne Hundred in Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), pp. 76-77; see Feudal Aids, ii. p. 43.

	'Canedone' Hundred (Tax Return 7) was similarly divided after 1086. From it, Badbury Hundred acquired Horton, Didlington, part of Hinton Martell (the rest was already in Badbury Hundred), Petersham, Thorn Hill (see Book of Fees, p. 88), Wilksworth, Walford and Mannington; Cranborne Hundred gained Hampreston and West Parley. In the Middle Ages, Petersham (now in Holt parish) was a part of Cranborne Hundred; see Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 75; Feudal Aids, ii. p. 39.

	Puddletown Hundred (Tax Return 8) contained Puddletown itself, Little Puddle, Tolpuddle, Piddlehinton, Waterston, Milborne St Andrew and Dewlish. The hundred total is probably completed by Athelhampton, 'Bardolfeston', 'Little Cheselbourne', Ilsington and Tincleton. Dewlish was sometimes counted in Whiteway Hundred (the successor to Hilton Hundred in later times); see 25,1 Dewlish note.

	"Stana" Hundred (Tax Return 9) contained Piddletrenthide and Cerne Abbas, and probably Alton Pancras (2,2 Alton note), Up Cerne (2,3 Cerne note) and the Cernel (possibly Godmanstone) of 24,5. Up Cerne was later in Sherborne Hundred and Alton Pancras is included there in Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 70.

	'Goderthorn' Hundred (Tax Return 10) had Bredy, Walditch and part of Loders (26,41; see 1,13 Loders note), and probably Swyre as well, although this was later in 'Uggescombe' Hundred.

	Hilton Hundred (Tax Return 11) certainly contained Melcombe Horsey, Ibberton, Cheselbourne, Stoke Wake, Hilton itself, Milton Abbas, Woolland and Lyscombe.

	Beaminster Hundred (Tax Return 12) combined with Redhove Hundred (Tax Return 13) to form the enlarged Hundred of Beaminster. The 1086 hundred included Beaminster itself, Corscombe, Mosterton, Toller Whelme, Catsley and a part of Broadwindsor (the rest was in Whitchurch Hundred: Tax Return 2). Chardstock was a detached portion to the west (see 3,13 Chardstock note; and Feudal Aids, ii. pp. 7, 8, 41). Stoke Abbott (3,9) and Wellwood (3,18) also probably lay here in 1086.

	Redhove Hundred (Tax Return 13) contained several holdings at Poorton, as well as a detached portion, Askerswell (which paid its tax in Eggardon Hundred: Tax Return 4).

	Tollerford Hundred (Tax Return 14) certainly comprised Wyford Eagle, Chelborough, Rampisham and a part of Compton Valence ( for the rest, see Tax Return 38 for Frampton Hundred). It probably contained also Chilfrome, Cruxton, Maiden Newton, Toller Fratrum and Toller Porcorum and Frome Vauchurch.

	Bere Hundred (Tax Return 15) covered an area larger than the later Bere Hundred and Barrow Hundred. To these it contributed Winterborne Kingston, Briantspuddle, Turners Puddle, Affpuddle and Milborne Stileham. It is likely that the southern boundary of the hundred was the River Frome (49,14 Hethfelton note); thus Worgret, later in Hasler Hundred, though a tithing of Barrow Hundred, was here in 1086 as were Hethfelton and Bestwall, later in Winfrith Hundred. The hundred will no doubt have contained Bere Regis itself, as well as Rushton, Holton and Bovington, three places more recently in Winfrith Hundred. Clyffe (12,6 Clyffe note), later in Puddletown Hundred, may have been here in 1086. Worgret, Bestwall and Rushton were in Barrow Hundred in the fourteenth century: Feudal Aids, ii. pp. 20, 42; Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 69.

	Combsditch Hundred (Tax Return 16) contained Bloxworth, Thornicombe, Blandford St Mary and Littleton (26,28 Littleton note), also several places called Winterborne. Among them will have been Anderson, Winterborne Clenston (26,13 'Winterborne' note), Winterborne Tomson (40,4 'Winterborne' note) and Winterborne Whitechurch (12,11 Winterborne note and 55,1 Martinstown note). Winterborne Muston, later in Winterborne Kingston (Bere Hundred), although a tithing of Combsditch Hundred, was probably here in 1086 (40,4 'Winterborne' note). Part of Winterborne Kingston may also have been here (55,1 Martinstown note).

	Cogdean Hundred (Tax Return 17) contained Canford Magna, Kinson, Corfe Mullen and Sturminster Marshall and probably Lytchett Matravers.

	Charborough Hundred (Tax Return 18) included Charborough itself, Spetisbury, Mapperton, Morden and probably 'Great Crawford' (56,12 'Crawford' note).

	Ailwood Hundred (Tax Return 19) also apparently known as Purbeck Hundred, incorporated Worth Matravers, part of Kingston (19,10 Kingston note), part of Afflington (28,6-7), Ower, Whitecliff, Swanage, Coombe, Wilkswood, Acton and 'Moulham'. It is likely that Ailwood itself, Studland, Rollington and Herston were also here.

	Handley Hundred (Tax Return 20) contained only the manor of [Sixpenny] Handley.

	[Sturminster] Newton Hundred (Tax Return 21) included Hinton St Mary and Fifehead St Quintin. The latter has since 1920 been part of Fifehead Neville parish and so in Pimperne Hundred, but actually was a tithing in the post-1086 Cranborne Hundred; see 19,9 Fifehead note and {Introduction: Tithings}.

	‘Langeburgh’ Hundred (Tax Return 22) contributed to the later hundreds of Pimperne and Cranborne. To Pimperne Hundred it gave Langton Long Blandford and Tarrant Keyneston (see Book of Fees, p. 87), as well as Tarrant Hinton, Tarrant Launceston and perhaps Tarrant Rawston; see 54,9 'Tarrant' note and {Introduction: Places Named from Rivers}. To Cranborne Hundred it gave Farnham, Ashmore and possibly Tarrant Rushton and Tarrant Gunville (1,24 'Tarrant' note). Tarrant Monkton was also here in 1086 and possibly Chettle, both being later parts of Monkton Up Wimborne Hundred. Tarrant Monkton was sometimes included in Cranborne Hundred; see Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 75.

	Knowlton Hundred (Tax Return 23) contained Long Crichel and Moor Crichel, Gussage All Saints, Knowlton and 'Philipston' (20,2 Wimborne note). Of these, Moor Crichel was later in Badbury Hundred and 'Philipston' was a tithing of Knowlton Hundred in Wimborne St Giles parish and hundred; see {Introduction: Tithings}.

	Sixpenny Hundred (Tax Return 24) contained Compton Abbas, Fontmell Magna, Iwerne Minster and Melbury Abbas, all belonging to Shaftesbury Abbey.

	'Hundesburge' Hundred (Tax Return 25) was almost completely redistributed after Domesday. Some places, including certainly Quarleston (55,1 Martinstown note), Durweston, Bryanston (Knicteton' and Blaneford' in Book of Fees, p. 87) and Winterborne Stickland went to the enlarged Pimperne Hundred. Pulham (36,4) went to Buckland [Newton] Hundred where another part is recorded in Tax Return 36. Hammoon, probably in this hundred in 1086, also went to Pimperne Hundred and continued to be in that hundred though separated from it by Okeford Fitzpaine (certainly in 'Hundesburge' Hundred in 1086, later in [Sturminster] Newton Hundred) and Shillingstone (probably here in 1086, later a detached part of Cranborne Hundred). Plumber, Turnworth and Fifehead Neville were also probable constituents of 'Hundesburge' Hundred in 1086; Plumber was later in Sherborne Hundred; Turnworth was later a detachment of Cranborne Hundred.

	Pimperne Hundred (Tax Return 26) itself contained Nutford, Stourpaine, Ash and Ranston and Lazerton (30,3 Ranston note and 56,32 Lazerton note). It was subsequently much enlarged.

	Gillingham Hundred (Tax Return 27) included Silton, Milton-on-Stour, Gillingham, Kington, Stour and Nyland and it is likely that Buckhorn Weston, Wyndlam, Fifehead Magdalen, Todber and Thornton (later in [Sturminster] Newton Hundred) were here in 1086.

	Brunsell Hundred (Tax Return 28) had Stalbridge and Stalbridge Weston, Stourton Caundle and part of Purse Caundle (26,70 Caundle note). Stock Gaylard, later in Sherborne Hundred, may well have been here.

	Hasler Hundred (Tax Return 29) contained Orchard, Church Knowle, East Holme, Steeple, Creech, Kimmeridge, Blackmanston, Tyneham, Povington and Stoborough as well as two places later in Rowbarrow Hundred (the successor to Ailwood Hundred): part of Afflington (28,6 Afflington note), part of Kingston (19,10 Kingston note) and possibly Renscombe (11,16 Renscombe note).

	Winfrith Hundred (Tax Return 30) in 1086 formed half of the later hundred of the same name, contributing Chaldon, Coombe Keynes, Lulworth, Woodstreet and Wool to it.

	Chilbury Hundred (Tax Return 31) formed the other half of the later enlarged Winfrith Hundred and contained Watercombe, Poxwell, Woodsford, Owermoigne, Moreton, Galton and Holworth. Ringstead was here also (as it was in Feudal Aids, ii. p. 29 and Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 68) but was later a tithing of Winfrith Hundred in Osmington parish, Cullifordtree Hundred. The two holdings at Mayne (27,4-5) may also have been in Chilbury Hundred, Broadmayne later being in St George Hundred (the successor to Dorchester Hundred) and Little Mayne in Cullifordtree Hundred.

	Dorchester Hundred (Tax Return 32) had Martinstown (55,1 Martinstown note), part of Stinsford (56,40 Stinsford note), Bockhampton, Bradford Peverell and a number of 'Cerne' holdings, probably Forston, Pulston and Herrison; see 26,5 'Cerne' note and {Introduction: Places Named from Rivers}. 'Frome Billet' was also here; it was later a tithing of this hundred in West Stafford parish, Cullifordtree Hundred. West Stafford may also have been here in 1086 (26,7 Stafford note). Ashton, later in Martinstown, was in Cullifordtree Hundred in the Middle Ages.

	'Modbury' Hundred (Tax Return 33) included Sydling St Nicholas, Cattistock, Frome St Quintin (this last was later in Tollerford Hundred) and an outlying part at West Compton.

	Sherborne Hundred (Tax Return 34) contained Sherborne, Oborne, Thornford, Bradford Abbas, Compton and part of Purse Caundle (56,55 Caundle note).

	Farrington Hundred (Tax Return 35) comprised Child Okeford, Hanford, Gold Hill, Iwerne Courtney, Sutton Waldron and probably Manston.

	Buckland [Newton] Hundred (Tax Return 36) contained part of Pulham (see 24,4 Pulham note), Glanvilles Wootton, Mappowder and no doubt Buckland Newton itself.

	Cullifordtree Hundred (Tax Return 37) included all the holdings named from the River Wey (see {Introduction: Places Named from Rivers}) and a number of places called 'Winterborne': Winterborne Monkton and 'Winterborne Belet' certainly, and probably Ashton (55,1 Martinstown note), Winterborne Herringston and Winterborne Farringdon, part of Winterborne Came (26,13 'Winterborne' note). Other places definitely in this hundred were Buckland Ripers, Lewell, Radipole, Chickerell, Bincombe, Osmington, Whitcombe, West Knighton and the 2 hides of Frampton not accounted for in Tax Return 38 for Frampton Hundred (see 17,1 Frampton note). Part of Stinsford may have been here (56,40 Stinsford note).

	Frampton Hundred (Tax Return 38) contained the major portion of Frampton (later in St George Hundred (the successor to Dorchester Hundred) and part of Compton Valence. The rest of Compton Valence lay in Tollerford Hundred (Tax Return 14) in 1086; see 51,1 Compton note.

	Loders Hundred (Tax Return 39). At only 20 hides this was a return from the royal manor of Loders (1,13).

The smaller hundreds of the above list were amalgamated to form larger units soon after 1086 and individual manors which had given separate returns were absorbed into adjacent larger hundreds, while at the eastern end of the county, a fuller reorganization took place. These changes yielded the medieval hundreds found in the Feudal Aids and the Book of Fees, which largely survived into modern times. 

The Later Hundreds
(1) Detached Parts
The later medieval hundreds sometimes included detached portions, often geographically remote. The creation of most of these detachments took place after 1086. Sometimes a particular lord might withdraw the suit of a manor from its geographical hundred and attach it to a hundred where he had more estates or greater importance. This is particularly the case with powerful ecclesiastical holders and led, in extreme cases, to the creation of scattered ecclesiatical hundreds, which sometimes became Liberties or franchises. In some cases the detached part was actually a place that was always in a particular hundred but became isolated from it by the detachment of some other intervening place. The following later hundreds had detached parts; their certain or probable 1086 location is given in the individual notes:

Badbury Hundred: Gussage St Michael
Beaminster Hundred: Chardstock
Cerne, Tatcombe and 'Modbury' Hundred: West Compton (also detached from 'Modbury'
	Hundred in 1086)
Cogdean Hundred: Charlton Marshall
Cranborne Hundred: Shillingstone, Turnworth
Pimperne Hundred: Hammoon
St George Hundred: Broadmayne  

(2) 'New' Hundreds
The later medieval hundreds were mostly expansions or amalgamations of the hundreds that existed at the time of Domesday. Four hundreds are, however, substantially new creations:

Barrow (or Hundredsbarrow) Hundred was formed from Combsditch Hundred. It included the Domesday places of Affpuddle, Briantspuddle and Turners Puddle. 

Rushmore Hundred likewise seems to have arisen from Combsditch Hundred: it contained Winterborne Zelston and West Morden tithing 

Monkton Up Wimborne Hundred was formed from manors belonging to the related abbeys of Cranborne and Tewkesbury, and included Chettle and Boveridge tithing and Tarrant Monkton as well as Monkton Up Wimborne itself (10,3 Wimborne note) in Wimborne St Giles parish.

Wimborne St Giles Hundred was a post-medieval creation (Place-Names of Dorset, ii. p. 263), and incorporated Woodyates (but East Woodyates was a tithing of Cranborne Hundred) and Wimborne St Giles itself. Most places in these two Wimborne hundreds were in Cranborne Hundred as late as 1327; see Place-Names of Dorset, ii. p. 194.

(3) Tithings
A number of places were locally in one hundred but tithings of another. These are of various origins, but a list of the major places is given here since in many cases the 'tithing' recalls the hundred where the place lay in 1086.

Place	Tithing in	Actually in	
East Woodyates (8,4)

Boveridge (10,2) 

Worgret (11,9 etc.) 

Fifehead St Quintin (19,9) 

'Philipston' (20,2 Wimborne note)

Winterborne Muston (26,13 'Winterborne' note and 40,4 'Winterborne' note)

West Morden (26,24 etc.)

Thornton (34,1)

West Holme (41,3 Holme note)

Ringstead (52,2) 

Ashton (55,1 Martinstown note)

'Frome Billet' (57,1)

	Cranborne Hundred

Monkton Up Wimborne Hundred 

Barrow Hundred 

Cranborne Hundred 

Knowlton Hundred 

Combsditch Hundred 

Rushmore Hundred 

Redlane Hundred 

Hasler Hundred

Winfrith Hundred 

Cullifordtree Hundred 

St George Hundred 	Pentridge parish in Wimborne St Giles Hundred 

Cranborne parish and Hundred 

Arne parish in Hasler Hundred 

Fifehead Neville parish in Pimperne Hundred 

Wimborne St Giles parish and Hundred

Winterborne Kingston parish in Bere Hundred 

Morden parish in Loosebarrow Hundred 

Marnhull parish in [Sturminster] Newton Hundred 

East Stoke parish in Winfrith Hundred 

Osmington parish in Cullifordtree Hundred 

Winterborne St Martin parish in St George Hundred 

West Stafford parish in
Cullifordtree Hundred 	

For Hawkchurch, a tithing of Cerne, Tatcombe and 'Modbury' Hundred, see 11,1 Cerne note.

(4) Liberties
The Dorset Liberties were Frampton (including Bincombe, Benville in Corscombe, part of Winterborne Came, Compton Valence, Bettiscombe and Burton Bradstock); Loders (including Lyme Regis); Powerstock; Broadwindsor; Fordington; Piddlehinton; Portland Island; Dewlish; Sutton Poyntz and Preston; Upwey; Gillingham; Halstock; Alton Pancras; Piddletrenthide (including Minterne Magna); Sydling St Nicholas; Stour Provost; Owermoigne; and Bindon (including Chaldon Herring, West Lulworth and Wool).

The Hundred Names
Many of the names both of the Tax Return hundreds and of the later hundreds are those of major settlements forming Domesday holdings and they present no problems of identification and location. A few, however, require brief discussion.
	A number of the Tax Return hundreds remained of about the same extent after 1086, but subsequently changed their names: 
	Haltona Hundred was replaced by Whiteway Hundred, but Hilton, a parish within it, preserves the name. Whiteway itself is apparently named from a site on the road from Binghams Melcombe to Hilton; see Hutchins, History of Dorset, iv. p. 347; Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset, p. 188; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 116.
	Celeberga Hundred, named from Charborough in Morden parish, was succeeded by Loosebarrow Hundred named from a barrow, now flattened, near the western end of Charborough Down; see Hutchins, History of Dorset, iii. p. 494; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 125; Place-Names of Dorset, ii. p. 55. Although the name changed, the site of the hundred moot may well have remained the same.
	Similarly with Aileuesuuoda Hundred named from Ailwood in Corfe Castle parish, the name, but perhaps not the moot-site, being displaced by Rowbarrow Hundred. Rowbarrow is said to be represented by Rowbarrow Lane, not on Ordnance Survey maps, south of Tabbits Hill farm (SY986809) in Woolgarston parish; see Hutchins, History of Dorset, i. p. 629; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 123; Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 4. 
	Dorchester Hundred was followed by St George Hundred, named from the dedication of the church in Fordington in Dorchester (Hutchins, History of Dorset, ii. pp. 533, 791; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 118; Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 334).
	Finally in this group, the name of Farrington Hundred called after a hamlet in Iwerne Courtney (alias Shroton) parish (ST8415; see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 137) was replaced by Redlane, a part of Gillingham and Redlane Hundred, now represented on Ordnance Survey six-inch maps by Red Lane which leads from the village of Todber towards Hayes farm (ST798197); see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 139; Hutchins, History of Dorset, iv. p. 56.  

Some of the Tax Return hundred names are unidentified, uncertain or have barely survived. Thus 'Alvredesberge' Hundred and 'Hundesburge' Hundred, though both found in Book of Fees, (pp. 92, 87), are named from barrows that have not been identified; see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, pp. 131, 133; Place-Names of Dorset, ii. pp. 194, 86. 
	'Langeburgh', a similar name, is possibly named from Pimperne Long Barrow (ST907115); see Hutchins, History of Dorset, i. p. 214; Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset, p. 50; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 133; Place-Names of Dorset, ii. p. 87. 
	The site which named 'Canedone' Hundred is lost, but the name is to be associated with Canford and may be connected with Cannon Hill in Hampreston parish (SU0401): Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 129; Place-Names of Dorset, ii. p. 133; see Book of Fees, pp. 88, 260.
	The stone which named "Stana" Hundred has not been located although it could be connected with Godmanstone; see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 115. 
	There is also some difficulty about the position of Redhove; it is placed by Hutchins, History of Dorset, ii. p. 153, in North Poorton parish, but a Redhove is found at SY4797, south of Beaminster, on the first edition one-inch Ordnance Survey map (sheet 18 of 1811, reprint sheet 84 of 1969); see Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset, p. 261; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 108.
	Celberga which named a hundred is probably represented by Chilbury Plantation just to the west of Owermoigne (SY765851); see Eyton, Dorset Survey, p. 58; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 120; Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 107.

Among the names of later hundreds, some of them the same as Tax Return hundreds, Brunsell is represented by Brunsells farm (ST715152) and Brunsells Knap, a lane name (ST725147) in Stourton Caundle parish on Ordnance Survey six-inch maps, and by 'Browns Wheel' (ST719152 on the first edition one-inch Ordnance Survey map, sheet 18 of 1811, reprint sheet 84 of 1969); see Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset, p. 33; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 135. 
	Tollerford is a ford (at SY5897) on the River Toller (now called the River Hooke) on the boundary of the parishes of Toller Fratrum and Maiden Newton; see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 112. 
	Tatcombe (often known as Totcombe), in Cerne, Tatcombe and 'Modbury' Hundred, is now represented by Tatcombe Wood (SY6799) near Bramble Bottom on the boundary of the parishes of Cerne and Nether Cerne. Likewise 'Modbury', Old English (ge)mot beorg ('meeting barrow') is said by Hutchins, History of Dorset, iv. p. 1, to be north-east of Cattistock; see Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset, p. 193; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 116. 
	Combsditch is named from the prominent Iron Age or Romano-British fortification running north-west to south-east that forms a boundary of the hundred (most clearly seen at ST8502 and ST8800); see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 127; Place-Names of Dorset, ii. p. 71. 
	The meeting place of Badbury Hundred was no doubt the notable camp of Badbury Rings (ST9603) in Shapwick parish; see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 129; Place-Names of Dorset, ii. p. 133. 
	The moot-siteof 'Goderthorn' Hundred is unknown, but Eggardon is preserved in Eggardon Hill (SY5494) and Eggardon farms (SY5393) in Askerswell parish; see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 110.
	The barrow that named Barrow or Hundredsbarrow Hundred lay in the south of Bere Regis parish (SY8493); see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 124; Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 288. 
	Cogdean survives as Cogdean Elms in Corfe Mullen parish (SY992980); see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 128; Place-Names of Dorset, ii. p. 1. 
	'Uggescombe' is a name now lost, said by Hutchins, History of Dorset, ii. pp. 714, 763, to be 'Mystecombe', north-east of Portesham, marked on the first edition one-inch Ordnance Survey map (sheet 17 of 1811, reprint sheet 92 of 1969) at SY614867; see Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset, p. 244; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 111. 
	Cullifordtree is the name of a barrow lying in Whitcombe parish, marked on the same Ordnance Survey first edition one-inch sheet (at SY700854); see Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 119; Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 195. 	Finally, Hasler is the name of a wood in Steeple parish (at SY905815); see Hutchins, History of Dorset, i. p. 550; Anderson, English Hundred Names: South-Western Counties, p. 121; Place-Names of Dorset, i. pp. 70, 98.

RELATED OR 'SATELLITE' TEXTS
The Liber Exoniensis (Exon)
For the south-western counties there is another set of returns, known as the Liber Exoniensis, Exon or the Exeter or Exon Domesday (henceforward Exon), the bulk of which appears to be a preliminary draft of  circuit II (Wiltshire, Somerset, Dorset, Devon, Cornwall) of Great Domesday, though differently arranged and worded and containing much information not in its successor, such as details of villagers' land numerous bynames, livestock and often more precise dating of the values of manors and how they were held. It seems very likely, however, that these counties in Great Domesday were taken directly from the main part of the Liber Exoniensis; see {Introduction: Exon Extra Information and Discrepancies}. Comparison with the version in Great Domesday shows that certain folios in Exon have clearly not survived, such as all those dealing with Wiltshire except for one entry, more than half of Dorset and four fiefs and a few entries for Devon. In Exon the overriding principle of arrangement is the individual fief, not the county; the county's lands appear as subdivisions within the fiefs and, generally speaking, Devon, Cornwall and Somerset appear in this order within the fief. The returns for Dorset, with the one Wiltshire entry, form a separate group, placed near the beginning of Exon as it is now paginated and bound. Within each county places are often grouped in hundreds, although without the hundred name given and frequently (especially for Devon) the hundreds occur in the same order under different holders. This provides important evidence for the identification of places and in part offsets the lack of hundred headings in the text of Domesday here; see {Introduction: the Identification of Places}. Information is sometimes duplicated in Exon, as for example in Cornwall where the same 11 hides are listed under the king's manor of Winnianton (folios 99-100) and among the Count of Mortain's holdings (folios 224-227) as he had seized them.
	Apart from the Exon Domesday proper, the Liber Exoniensis contains the Tax Returns or geld accounts (entitled Inquisitio Gheldi on folio 532a) for all five counties, compiled c. 1084-1086; see {Introduction: The Tax Returns}. Also included are details for Devon, Cornwall and Somerset of 'Appropriated Lands' (Terrae Occupatae) on folios 495-525. These contain condensed entries of certain manors, which had had land taken from them, or added to them, or which had not paid their customary dues, or which had been held as two or more manors before 1066 by one or more holders, or which were unusual in some other way; see SOM {Introduction: The Liber Exoniensis}, DEV {Introduction: The Liber Exoniensis}. The information given in the Terrae Occupatae almost always repeats what is in the main Exeter Domesday, but occasionally new information is given. A few lists of hundreds and some summaries complete the Liber Exoniensis. A convenient contents table of the whole is printed in Galbraith, Domesday Book in Administrative History, pp. 184-188. 
	The extant Exon folios dealing with Dorset, including the odd blank folio and the one Wiltshire entry in the middle, are: 11a-12b (= B4. B1-3 in Domesday); 17a-24a (the Tax Returns); 25a-62b (= in the order Domesday: DOR 1 with DOR 18 and part of DOR 24 and an odd 'Winterborne' entry included, DOR 58, DOR 11, DOR 13, DOR 15-16, DOR 12, DOR 36, DOR 47-48, DOR 55, DOR 41). Summaries of the holdings of Glastonbury Abbey in Dorset, of Robert son of Gerald and of the Count of Mortain are to be found on the imperfect folios 527b, 530b-531a.
	The Exon manuscript is preserved in the library of Exeter Cathedral and was printed in 1816 by Sir Henry Ellis in the third volume (fourth in certain bindings) of the Record Commission's edition of Domesday, from a transcript made by Ralph Barnes (1781-1869; this corrects the dates in the Phillimore printed editions of Dorset and Devon, which were those of his father, also called Ralph), Chapter Clerk. No Ordnance Survey facsimile, such as the one made by them for Domesday, exists for Exon. The manuscript consists of 532 folios of parchment, the majority of them measuring about 6 ½ inches by 9 ¾ inches (16 ½ centimetres by 25 centimetres); folios 1-3 and 526-528 are smaller. Each folio contains a single column on each side, most with about 20 lines. These folios fall into a series of quires, or gatherings, varying in number between one and ten folios. Generally a new quire was started for each major landholder, and a new side for most tenants. This led to many blanks, the number of which was increased by spaces sometimes left for information not to hand. There is no indication of the original sequence of quires, and the present order and system of reference date from the last rebinding in 1816; alas, these are not perfect: folios 519-525 were bound after folio 494 and folio 400 should have been numbered 402 and folios 401-402 should be 400-401. The manuscript is the work of about a dozen scribes and the hand changes often between entries and even within then (for example, three times on folio 98a3 = DEV 1,50); see Finn, 'The Exeter Domesday and its Construction'. See also Flight, The Survey of the Whole of England, Chapter 5, who reckons there were sixteen scribes; this agrees basically with the unpublished analysis of the Exon scribes by Dr Teresa Webber (kindly lent to the editors) and to the ongoing work of CT on the Exon manuscript.
	The text cannot be economically reproduced in this edition; nine-tenths of it is repeated in the Domesday survey, with discrepancies of a fraction of one per cent in many tens of thousands of figures. Ellis' edition has here been used in the main, though the manuscript has been checked where Exon and Domesday differ and in a number of other places. The principal corresponding reference to Exon, where it survives, is given at the head of the notes to each entry, after the Domesday reference, with other references in the notes; the last number refers to the order of the entry on each side, as indicated in the manuscript generally by 'gallows' marks. All additional information and all discrepancies for Dorset are given either in the translation (when the former can easily be inserted without disturbing the meaning of Domesday) or in the notes or in the table of details of holdings not given in Domesday (see {Appendix: Details Table}). A specimen entry, given below, with the Domesday equivalent, shows the differences in formulae. The substance, though not the wording, of the whole of the Exeter Domesday returns is therefore here reproduced.

For further details, see Galbraith Making of Domesday Book, pp. 184-88; Finn, Liber Exoniensis; Ker, Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries, ii. pp. 800-807; Ellis, Domesday Book, iii. (Libri Censualis), Introduction, pp. ix-xiv.

EXTRACTS TO SHOW COMPARISON BETWEEN EXON AND GREAT DOMESDAY ENTRIES

DOR 12,14 (folio 78b)
Ipsa ęccl[esi]a ten[et] ERTACOMESTOCHE. 7 Herueus de abb[at]e. T[empore]. R[egis]. E[duuardi]. geld[a]b[at] p[ro] .x. hid[is]. T[er]ra.e[st] .xvi. car[ucis]. De ea s[un]t in d[omi]nio .iiii.hidę . 7 ibi .ii. car[ucae] . 7 iiii. serui . 7 xl. uill[an]i h[abe]nt .xx. car[ucas]. Ibi .iii. molini redd[entes] xxxvii. den[arios] . 7 xx.iii.ac[rae] p[ra]ti. Silua .xiii. q[uarentinas] l[on]g[a] .7 xii .lat[a] . Valet .ix. lib[ras] 
Hoc M[anerium] fuit se[m]p[er] de d[omi]nio monacho[rum] ad uictū 7 uestitū eo[rum].

The Church [of Milton Abbas] itself holds STOCKLAND, and Hervey from the Abbot. Before 1066 it paid tax for 10 hides. Land for 16 ploughs, of which 4 hides are in lordship; 2 ploughs there; 4 slaves.
40 villagers have 20 ploughs.
3 mills which pay 37d; meadow, 23 acres; woodland 13 furlongs long and 12 wide. Value £9.
This manor was always [part] of the monks' lordship for their supplies and clothing.

Exon 44 b3
Abb[as] h[abe]t .i. mans[ionem] q[uae] uocat[ur] ertacomestoca. hec reddid[it] gild[um] p[ro] .x. h[idis] t[em]p[o]r[e] regis. e[duuardi]. q[ua]s poss[un]t arare .xvi. car[rucae]. de his h[abe]t abb[as] in d[omi]nio .iiii. h[idas]. & ii. car[rucae]. & uill[ani]. vi. h[idas]. & xx. car[rucas]. ibi h[abe]t abb[as] xl. uill[anos]. & .iiii. seru[os]. & .iiii. anim[a]l[ia]. & .vii.  porc[os]. & xx. cap[ra]s & iii. molend[inos] q[ui] redd[un]t p[er] ann[um] .xxx. & vii. d[enarios]. & xiii. q[ua]drag[enarias] nemor[is] i[n] lo[n]g[itudinem] & xii. i[n] lat[itudinem]. & .xxiii. agros p[ra]ti. & ual[et] p[er] ann[um] .viiii. lib[ras]. hanc mansione[m] ten& de abb[ate] heruei[us] fili[us] ansgerii & hęc mans[io] fuit se[m]p[er] ad uictu[m] & ad uestim[en]tu[m] monaco[rum]. & d[om]i[ni]ca fuit se[m]p[er] t[em]p[o]r[e] regis. e[duuardi]. de firma abb[atis].

The Abbot [of St Peter's Church, Milton] has a manor which is called STOCKLAND. Before 1066† it paid tax for 10 hides, which 16 ploughs can plough. Of these the Abbot has in lordship 4 hides and 2 ploughs and the villagers [have] 6 hides and 20 ploughs. The Abbot has there 40 villagers, 4 slaves, 4 cattle, 7 pigs, 20 goats, 3 mills which pay 37d a year, 13 furlongs of woodland in length and 12 in width, 23 acres of meadow. Value £9 a year. Hervey son of Ansger‡ holds this manor from the Abbot. This manor was always for the monks' supplies and clothing and it was always before 1066† in lordship, [part] of the Abbot's revenue.

†  Unusually for Exon tempore regis eduuardi; see {Introduction: Exon Extra Information and Discrepancies}.
‡  The 1086 subtenant normally appears earlier in an Exon entry, after the plough estimate.

Exon Extra Information and Discrepancies
The Notes incorporate material supplied by the Liber Exoniensis for Dorset, which is not in Domesday and which it has not proved possible to include within the translation nor in (Appendix: Details Table}. Also mentioned are any differences between the two texts, other than simply of wording, and information given in Domesday that is not in Exon.
	It may be noticed that, unlike in the Somerset, Devon and Cornwall editions in the Phillimore series, there is no Table of Lordship and Villagers' Land and Ploughs for Dorset. This is due to three factors. Firstly, the lordship land is given in many more entries in Great Domesday for Dorset than it is for Somerset and Devon, and where it is not, this information can be fitted into the text from Exon after the lordship ploughs have been given. Secondly, details of ploughs and land, both in lordship and held by the 'villagers', are omitted altogether from several entries in Exon for Dorset. Thirdly, there are only about nine occurrences in the part of Dorset Domesday for which Exon survives, of the phrase '[Land for] y ploughs, which are there', referring both to the lordship and to the villagers' ploughs: in these cases the Notes incorporate the details given in Exon of the holder(s) of the ploughs, and which in Somerset and Devon merit a separate table. There was also a separate table in Cornwall in the Phillimore printed edition, but its information has now been incorporated in the Notes in the revision of this county for the current project.
	Where the Tax Returns for Dorset (see {Introduction: Tax Returns}) provide evidence of bynames or of the identification of places and manors, this is given in the Notes. 
	The summaries of the fiefs of Glastonbury Abbey, Robert son of Gerald and the Count of Mortain provide very little useful information, much of which does not correspond either to the main Exon entries or to Domesday, probably because it derived from a different source and/or date; but see 1,2 cottagers note and 8,1 villagers note.
	No section survives for Dorset in the Terrae Occupatae.
	Scribal errors in the Exon manuscript, of which there are a great many, are given only when they occur in a quotation.

It seems very likely that the main scribe of Great Domesday had in front of him the Exon manuscript in its present form, no doubt with the portions of Devon, Dorset and Wiltshire which have not survived. Many aspects of Domesday and Exon suggest this. Firstly, though the policy throughout Domesday was to include hundred headings, they are surprisingly absent from Domesday for the south-western counties and from Exon: it would seem that for some reason (on which see Galbraith, Making of Domesday Book, pp. 114-15) they were not thought necessary in Exon and by the time that volume reached Winchester (or wherever Great Domesday was written) it was too late to discover in which hundred the thousands of places lay and so the main scribe of Great Domesday had to follow his copy in not including them. Secondly, within a fief the order of entries in Domesday frequently, especially in Somerset, Devon and Dorset, followed almost the exact order of those in Exon. But it is when one comes to study the two manuscripts closely that the immediate dependence of one on the other becomes obvious. There are a great many instances of the Domesday scribe's repeating unusual phrases from Exon, of copying obvious mistakes, of leaving spaces where there are spaces in Exon (see 1,1 life note) or where he was unsure of a statement (as at 11,5). Moreover, there are several occasions where Domesday preserves, rather than changes, the formulae of Exon, presumably by accident; see 28,2 value note, and compare the placing of slaves with the villagers (as in Exon), not in their usual position after the lordship, in 8,1 and 49,5. Likewise, in many entries in Exon an item of information has been initially omitted and then added out of place, and very often this same item is similarly misplaced in Domesday (see 16,1 tributaries note and 55,15 mill note). In some cases a whole entry is added at the foot of a column in Domesday that is also postscriptal in Exon (see DEV 3,19 Barlington note) and what is marginal in Exon is often marginal in Domesday (see DEV 15,47 jointly note). It may be thought that this indicates merely that late information was added to both Exon and Domesday at the same time, but in a great many cases in Exon the colour of the ink and the scribe of the addition are the same as for the main part of the entry, which would be unlikely if it were done much later, considering the number of scribes employed in writing Exon. Again, there are numerous examples of figures being corrected in Exon (often not well done) and the Domesday scribe sometimes misunderstanding or missing altogether the alteration (see1,19 villagers note). Although it is possible in some instances that the correction was done to the Exon manuscript after the Domesday scribe had used it, it is obvious that some of the later corrections and interlineations in Exon were seen by the Domesday scribe, such as the interlineation described in B2 neglected note. In some cases a figure is altered in Domesday to agree with a correction in Exon (see DEV 3,68 value note).
	All these instances make it impossible for Exon to be unconnected with Domesday. That was the view of Eyton, Somerset Survey, pp. 4-5; Reichel in VCH Devon, i. pp. 377-79; Salzman in VCH Cornwall i. part viii. pp. 45-46 etc. Both Reichel and Salzman believed that the Dorset and Wiltshire sections in Exon were taken from Great Domesday, but that for Devon, Cornwall and Somerset, Domesday and Exon were 'independent compilations'. These instances also make it impossible that Exon was a later compilation (as suggested by Vinogradoff, English Society in the Eleventh Century, p. 228). Moreover, they make it unlikely, considering also the lack of time, that a fair copy of Exon was made which was used in the compilation of Domesday and then destroyed when it had served its purpose, as stated by Finn, Liber Exoniensis, pp. 28, 52-54, and Finn 'Immediate Sources', and by Galbraith, Making of Domesday Book, pp. 31-32, 102-22.
	There are, of course, discrepancies between Exon and Domesday, but a study of the Exon manuscript has explained many of these: in several cases interlineations or marginal additions in Exon (though done at the same time as the main body of the entry, judging by the colour of the ink and with no change in scribe) were missed by the main scribe of Great Domesday (see 1,9 plough note, 12,16 mill note and 36,4 garden note); values and measurements sometimes span two lines in Exon and the Domesday scribe only noted the first part (as at 1,13 and 55,35); see also 47,8 woodland note; 47,10 tax note; 55,14 villager note; 55,29 meadow note; 55,37 pasture note and DOR 58 countess note. Scribal error too must have played a part. Some of the differences, such as in the names of subtenants or the numbers of population, may be ascribed to information becoming available after Exon had been compiled. The three instances of Domesday Dorset containing items that are not in the main Exon (see B4 abbess note) and the other instances in Devon, Cornwall and Somerset, can probably be explained by the Domesday scribe's having recourse to other sources of information (such as, perhaps, the Tax Returns or hundred lists, local data or the results of lawsuits) or to simple deduction (as probably for 11,12), rather than to a copy of Exon.
	According to Finn, Liber Exoniensis, pp. 52-54, this copy, now lost, contained some extra information but perhaps did not include later additions to the surviving Exon, and the foliation was different (hence the original omission in Domesday of DOR 36,4-11). However, it seems odd that if such a copy were made, so few new details were added to it and hardly any of the mistakes of the original corrected and the numerous spaces left for information unfilled, as Domesday shows. See Baring, 'Exeter Domesday'. It is argued by Galbraith, Making of Domesday Book, pp. 105-107, though Finn, Liber Exoniensis, p. 54, disagrees that in this fair copy, which was sent to Winchester while the surviving Exon manuscript remained at Exeter where it had been compiled, some attempt was probably made to arrange the king's lands and those of his thanes and servants in an order closer to that adopted for the other counties in Domesday (see, for example, DOR 1 king note, DEV 1 king note and DEV 22 William note). These rearrangements, however, were neither too extensive nor too complicated to have been done entirely by the main scribe of Great Domesday at the time of writing. It is possible that some of the material relating to the Inquiry remained at Exeter for the hearing of claims and the sorting out of illegal tenure and occupation, while the Exon we have was being used for the compilation of Great Domesday. This material, amplified or corrected at the hearings, may have produced the Terrae Occupatae which was later bound up with the Exon Domesday.
	There is thus compelling evidence that the main scribe of Great Domesday used the extant version of the main part of Exon, together with the parts of it that have not survived, as his chief source for the compilation of the south-west counties. This is discussed in DEV {Introduction: Relationship between Exon and Great Domesday}. See also Thorn and Thorn, 'The Writing of Great Domesday Book', pp. 56-61, and the forthcoming Thorn, Thorn and Gullick, The Scribal History of Great Domesday. 

In using the material in Exon the main scribe of Great Domesday largely changed the formulae, writing, for example, T.R.E. (tempore regis Edwardi: 'in King Edward's time') for Exon's more elaborate ea die qua rex Edwardus fuit uiuus 7 mortuus ('on the day on which King Edward was alive and dead', that is, 5th January 1066), and 'Land for y ploughs' for Exon's '[z hides] which y ploughs can plough', etc. There is a list of equivalent formulae for Domesday and Exon in Ellis, Libri Censualis, pp. xiii-xiv; see also the extracts given above.
	Exon often omits nouns (as Domesday does less often), as in 'the king has 3 ploughs in lordship and the villagers 4', where '4 ploughs' are intended: where Domesday gives the expected noun no attention is drawn here to the Exon omission. Exon regularly abbreviates personal names to the first letter (for example, H. for Hugo), generally when the name in full has already occurred in the entry. In the Notes the name thus abbreviated is always written in full, for example, 'H[ugh]', except in the cases of rex E. and rex W. (usually in the phrase tempore regis E. or tempore regis W.) which are so common that there is no doubt about the full version of the names.
	In the statement 'the villagers have y hides ... z ploughs', Exon regularly uses the term villani in the general sense of the inhabitants of a villa, covering smallholders, Cottagers (coscez), cottagers (cotarii), and possibly also other classes of population such as pigmen, salt-workers etc., as well as villagers. Often no villagers are mentioned in the holding, just smallholders and slaves (for example, in the Exon corresponding to 12,5;11). However, for 12,16 and on a few other occasions in Exon for Dorset, where there are only smallholders and slaves on a manor, the term bordarii takes the place of villani in the statement of their land and ploughs.
	In many cases the main scribe of Great Domesday cut out from Exon material of a type that he elsewhere included, such as the plough estimate for 18,2, the woodland details for 36,8. 47,8 and 55,29, the mill details for 55,16, the garden for 36,4, cottagers for 1,15. 11,5 and 36,6 (see 18,2 plough note; 36,8 woodland note; 47,8 woodland note; 55,16 mill note; 36,4 garden note), as well as subtenants for 13,5 and 36,5 and T.R.E. holders for 15,1 and 55,18;25;28. See also 11,5 [wide] note, 12,3 villagers note, and 55,10 land note.

Ellis' edition of Exon is not as accurate as Farley's one of the Domesday. Apart from larger errors and omissions, there are numerous occasions when the transcriber Ralph Barnes left gaps where there are none in the manuscript and vice versa, omitted underlining (indicating deletion) or put it in wrongly, positioned interlineations incorrectly, failed to include transposition signs, etc. It must be said, however, that many entries in the manuscript are untidy with much erasure, overwriting and correction; also, some of the letters are malformed and misled the main scribe of Great Domesday as well as Mr Barnes (for example, see DEV 25,20 Ash note, and compare DOR 55,29 meadow note). The scope of this edition prohibits mentioning all but the more important mistakes of Mr Barnes and checking the transcription of all the place-names, though it is worth noting here that three of the 39 names of the hundreds in the Tax Returns for Dorset were wrongly transcribed (see footnotes to the list in {Introduction: Hundreds}). Ellis' edition has misled a number of people, especially in the case of the place-names: Reichel with his many articles on Devon place-names does not appear to have checked the manuscript and in his translation of Exon for VCH Devon, i. he perpetuated the errors of Ellis' edition.  
	The Victoria County History for Dorset (VCH Dorset, iii. pp. 61-114) translates the Domesday text with the corresponding Exon (where it survives) beneath each entry. A survey of the different scribes of Exon is to be found in Finn, 'The Exeter Domesday and its Construction'.

Quotations are from, and references to, the Exon folios given at the heading of the notes to the relevant Domesday entry, unless otherwise stated. When quoting from the text, the abbreviated forms of the Latin are retained wherever possible, or the extensions to them are enclosed in square brackets; only where there is no doubt is the Latin extended silently. 

The Tax Returns
The Tax Returns, or Geld Rolls (Exon folios 17a1 to 24a3), although now bound up with Exon proper and probably close to it in date, are not for that reason to be considered part of the same survey: there are so many discrepancies of detail that it is difficult to regard them as strictly contemporary, or as compiled from the same material. The problem of dating and of the relation of the material to Domesday is admirably reviewed by Ann Williams in VCH Dorset, iii. pp. 115-23, and by Darlington in VCH Wiltshire, ii. pp. 174-76. For Galbraith's emphatic view that they date from 1086, see Galbraith, 'Date of the Geld Rolls', and his appendix to Galbraith, Making of Domesday Book, pp. 223-30. The survey of the Dorset boroughs in Exon is written in the same gathering of parchment as version B of the Wiltshire Tax Returns. This does not date the returns, but shows that one version at least of them and of the main returns in Exon were kept together from the beginning. 
	Tax Returns exist for all five south-western counties and were probably based on lists of tax liability that are now lost but which perhaps also contributed to the substructure of the Domesday Survey. They record the collection of geld at 6s to the hide, and a typical hundredal return begins with the total hidage of that hundred and (in Cornwall, Devon and Somerset) the amount of tax paid; this detail is entered later in the Tax Returns for Wiltshire and Dorset. 
	A typical return then names the holders of exempt land (usually the total of an individual fief-holder's lordship in that hundred), and finishes with a schedule of those by whom tax has not been paid; sometimes other details were added. They include a few place-names, though none for Dorset 
	However, the principal contribution of the Tax Returns to a study of hundreds lies in the fact that a comparison of holders and hidage with Domesday entries often allows particular Domesday estates to be allotted to particular hundreds listed in the Tax Returns. Sometimes it is possible to reconstruct a whole hundred by adding together the hidage of places considered likely to have been in that hundred, before adjusting the list to obtain the stated total. However, while some individual estates can be confidently identified from the detail of the Tax Returns, wholesale reconstructions based on figures alone cannot be considered completely secure.
	For Dorset there are Tax Returns for 39 hundreds, of which two, Frampton Hundred and Loders Hundred, are really manorial returns. They are translated and analysed in VCH Dorset, iii. pp. 115-48. A reconstruction of the hundreds (unpublished) by F. R.Thorn based on the Tax Returns underpinned the notes concerning places in the Phillimore printed volume and the map and 'Hundreds and Wapentakes' article in the Alecto edition. 

THE DOMESDAY FORMAT
The Manuscript
The manuscript is written on either side of leaves, or folios, of parchment (sheepskin) measuring about 15 inches by 11 inches (38 centimetres by 28 centimetres). On each side, or page, are two columns, making four to each folio. The folios were numbered in the seventeenth century and the four columns of each are here lettered a, b, c, d. The manuscript emphasizes words and usually distinguishes chapters and sections by the use of red ink. Underlining in the manuscript generally indicates deletion.
	From a study of the manuscript it would appear that Dorset, though not as untidy a county as Herefordshire, or Gloucestershire, was hurriedly compiled, with several spaces left by the scribe for information to be added when available, a number of marginal additions and the unusual entering on separate slips of parchment of the entries at 1,31. 36,4-11 and DOR 42. Farley also seems to have had difficulties in transcription, and attention is drawn in the Notes to more than a dozen mistakes of his, ranging from capitals for lower-case letters and vice versa to figure and name errors.

EDITORIAL
The Identification of Places
In the text of the south-western counties, neither Domesday nor Exon includes the hundredal rubrication that is an important aid to the identification of places. This lack is felt especially in the case of Dorset where many places are named only from the rivers on which they lie, such as Frome, Cerne, Tarente, Wintreburne (see {Introduction: Places Named from Rivers}, and where a single Domesday form can represent more than one modern place at opposite ends of the county. Thus Bocheland can represent Buckland Newton or Buckland Ripers, Bradeford can be Bradford Peverel or Bradford Abbas, Hame can be Hammoon or Hampreston, while Stoche or Stoches can be Cattistock, Stoke Abbott, Stoke Wake, 'Stoke Wallis', East Stoke or Stock Gaylard.
	The absence of hundredal information can in part be made good from the evidence of the Tax Returns for Dorset (Exon folios 17a-24a), printed by Ellis, Libri Censualis, pp. 18-26, translated and annotated in VCH Dorset, iii. pp. l15-148; see {Introduction: Tax Returns}. In this edition, the evidence of a Tax Return for individual holdings is cited only where it is reasonably certain. Since the Tax Returns also give the total hidage for each hundred, it is sometimes possible to deduce all the constituent villages of a hundred simply by adding together the hidage of places considered likely to be in that hundred, then adjusting the list until the correct total is obtained. But this sole reliance on totals, when there are many discrepancies between the Tax Returns and Domesday and when many villages have the same hidage figures, must be regarded as unreliable evidence. This method was adopted by Eyton, Dorset Survey, who claimed to have identified every village in each hundred, although he rarely cited any evidence, and a number of his identifications can certainly be shown to be wrong. VCH Dorset, iii. wisely refrains from such wholesale reconstructions and distinguishes carefully between lands that are certainly in a given hundred and those that are only possibly there. This is a sensible precaution in view of the large numbers of estates called 'Winterborne' and 'Tarrant' that still await precise identification. A similar caution is followed in the present edition. The relation of the Tax Return hundreds to the later hundreds is given in {Introduction: Hundreds}. 
	A secondary source of place-name identification from within the texts of Domesday and Exon themselves is the order in which places are entered within each fief. In some Domesday counties where hundredal rubrication is full, lands are found to be entered in a consistent order of hundreds within each chapter, probably as the scribe rearranged into fiefs information that was first returned by hundreds; see Sawyer, 'Original Returns'. Among the south-western counties, Cornwall, Devon and Somerset show a consistent sequence of hundreds within each section in the order of the Exon. Moreover, in Somerset this sequence is that of a list of hundreds (list II) included in Exon (folios 64a,b); see SOM {Introduction: Hundreds}. In Cornwall, and to a lesser extent in Somerset and Devon, the order of Domesday differs from that of Exon; while in Dorset the two orders are very similar where Exon has survived, except for the king's land (DOR 1 king note) and DOR 12 and DOR 13 where the chief manor, Milton and Abbotsbury respectively, has been brought closer to the head of the fief (see VCH Dorset, iii. p. 3). Even so, in Dorset it is difficult to find a consistent order of hundreds within individual chapters. This may partly be because no list of the hundred returns that formed the basis of Domesday survives. It is clear from Domesday Somerset that the Tax Return hundreds and the hundreds whose information was used to compile Domesday differed in a number of respects, the Tax Return often grouping together into a single 'hundred' smaller 'hundreds' or composite manors each of which produced a Return for the Domesday Commissioners. The same may well have been the case in Dorset.
	From the study of separate chapters, however, certain patterns do emerge, suggesting that places were entered in some chapters in a sequence of groups of hundreds. These patterns have been systematized by Finn, 'Dorset Domesday', but a re-examination of the evidence suggests that the groupings are not as clear as Finn states and are found mainly in the chapters of lay landholders (DOR 25-53;55), being absent from the Land of the King (DOR 1), from those of the churches (DOR 2-23) as well as from DOR 54 (which is grouped by subtenants not by hundreds) and from DOR 57.
	In view of this, it is unwise to identify places only from the supposed sequence of hundreds; thus in the Notes, the only evidence of this kind normally used is where a place of uncertain identity falls within a group of places that appear from the Tax Returns to have lain within the same hundred.
	Total and secure identification of places depends on a study of early name-forms and later manorial history, both outside the scope of this edition. Fägersten's pioneering study of place-names (Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset) is invaluable but is now being superseded by the English Place-Name Society volumes, edited by A. D. Mills, of which the Place-Names of Dorset, i-ii. have so far appeared. In due course the appearance of further volumes of the Victoria County History can be expected to trace the descent of individual Domesday holdings with greater precision and bring some new or more exact identifications. In the meantime, while the Notes do not claim to be exhaustive, they attempt to offer enough later information, where this has been found, to support identifications which might otherwise be reasonably disputed.
	A number of adjacent modern villages in Dorset, now distinguished by affixes such as 'East' and 'West', 'St Quintin', 'St Michael' or 'All Saints', share the same Domesday place-name form. The existence of separate villages is rarely evidenced in Dorset, the few examples relating to rivers; see {Introduction; Places Named from Rivers}. Such places are not normally distinguished in the present translation. Where these modern separate villages can be traced from individual Domesday holdings, this fact is recorded in the Notes. It is possible, however, for modern editions to be over precise. Domesday manors often comprise a large number of hides and will have contained, but do not mention, several separate villages. It would thus be unwise to identify Sture 19,3, a manor of 17 hides, as one particular 'Stour' village.
	On the other hand, to avoid confusion, affixes are included where two places of the same basic name are in different parts of the county, or in different hundreds. Thus [Maiden] Newton appears in order to distinguish it from the distant [Sturminster] Newton, but the adjacent villages of East Chelborough and West Chelborough appear simply as Chelborough.
	A number of identifications in this edition differ from those of VCH Dorset iii. or Domesday Gazetteer; such discrepancies are recorded in the Notes. 

Places Named from Rivers 
In Dorset Domesday a particular problem is posed by the large number of places that are named from the rivers on whose banks they stand. This problem is also found in Devon and in Wiltshire, with other less complex examples elsewhere. In Dorset, major groups of places are so named from the rivers Cerne, Frome, Piddle, Tarrant and Wey and from the two rivers Winterborne. Smaller groups are associated with the River Caundle, the Bride, the Iwerne and the Stour, the Allen (formerly the Wimborne) and the River Char (originally a second River 'Cerne'). In modern times, such places are differentiated by suffixes, prefixes or secondary names and this process had begun by 1086. Thus Obcerne, Piretone, Litelfrome, Litelpidele, Affapidele, Cernemude, Cerminstre and Opewinburne had already become distinguished from their parent names.
	On the other hand, many places in Domesday are indicated only by the plain river name. In such cases, evidence has to be sought elsewhere, either in the Tax Returns, or in the order of entries within a fief or in the later history of manors. But even where the lands of a particular Domesday holding can be traced in later documents, it is often difficult to make an exact identification when a 1086 tenant-in-chief holds several lands of the same name. Thus in DOR 26 the Count of Mortain holds six places called 'Cerne', three called 'Wey', nine called 'Winterborne', three called 'Piddle' and two called 'Frome'.
	In some cases, a place can be assigned confidently to a particular hundred, even though its precise identity remains in doubt, while some places remain completely unidentified, for example several places called 'Winterborne' (1,6. 5,1-2. 39,1).
	In view of these uncertainties, it is difficult to be sure that some modern places named from a river had a precursor in Domesday Book. The practice adopted in the Phillimore printed edition, following Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset, the Domesday Gazetteer and the Place-Names of Dorset, i-ii (even though these were influenced by Eyton's conjectures in Eyton, Dorset Survey) was to include what were thought likely to have been Domesday estates in the Places Index under a river name, but without a chapter and section reference. Such places were usually parish names and had been chosen to show the likely geographical spread of a name. Thus, for the River Tarrant it was suggested that Tarrant Gunville, Tarrant Rawston and Tarrant Rushton might represent one or more of the undifferentiated Domesday places called 'Tarrant'. Broadway, Upway and Weymouth could be separate representatives of 'Wey'; Anderson, Quarleston, Winterborne Clenston, Winterborne Kingston, Winterborne Muston, Winterborne Tomson and Winterborne Zelston might be some of the estates simply named 'Winterborne' from the eastern River Winterborne; while Ashton (in Winterborne St Martin), Winterborne Came, Winterborne Farringdon, Winterborne Herringston and Winterborne Steepleton could be among the estates named from the River South Winterborne.
	These and other possibilities within parishes, including lost names, are explored below and in the Notes. Even where a river-derived place-name is given a chapter and section reference, it may be that other unassigned references belong to it.
	Listed here are the Domesday places named from rivers that can be certainly identified in Tax Return hundreds. These are followed by the location of all places named from that particular river in their later hundreds.  

	River Cerne
The Domesday name applied to two rivers; one, now the River Char, joins the sea at Charmouth (Cernemude) separately distinguished by Domesday, and flows through Catherston Leweston (Cerneli; see 26,64 Catherston note). The other river joins the River Frome just to the north of Dorchester; lying on it Domesday distinguishes Up Cerne (Obcerne) and Charminster (Cerminstre). This latter river will have passed through the Tax Return hundreds of "Stana" and Dorchester. "Stana" Hundred, which was later absorbed into Cerne, Tatcombe and 'Modbury' Hundred, will have included Up Cerne, Cerne Abbas and possibly Godmanstone; see 11,1 Cerne note and 24,5 'Cerne' note. Dorchester Hundred was renamed St George Hundred and, in addition to Charminster, contained Forston, Herrison and Pulston which were probably places simply named 'Cerne' in 1086; see 26,5 'Cerne' note; Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (Dorset), iii. pp. 71-72. 

	River Cerne
The Domesday name applied to two rivers; one, now the River Char, joins the sea at Charmouth (Cernemude) separately distinguished by Domesday, and flows through Catherston Leweston (Cerneli, see 26,64 Catherston note). The other river joins the River Frome just to the north of Dorchester; lying on it Domesday distinguishes Up Cerne (Obcerne) and Charminster (Cerminstre). This latter river will have passed through the Tax Return hundreds of "Stana" and Dorchester. "Stana" Hundred, which was later absorbed into Cerne, Tatcombe and 'Modbury' Hundred, will have included Up Cerne, Cerne Abbas and possibly Godmanstone (see 11,1 Cerne note and 24,5 'Cerne' note). Dorchester Hundred was renamed St George Hundred and, in addition to Charminster, contained Forston, Herrison and Pulston which were probably places simply named 'Cerne' in 1086; see 26,5 'Cerne' note and Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (Dorset), iii. pp. 71-72.

	River Frome
The river names a number of places of which Domesday only distinguishes Litelfrome, now Frome St Quintin. The river will have passed through the Tax Return hundreds of Tollerford (where Chilfrome, Cruxton and Frome Vauchurch can probably be identified), 'Modbury' (which certainly contained Frome St Quintin), Frampton and Dorchester (in which latter lay 'Frome Billett'). These and other places named from the river now lie in the following later hundreds: in Tollerford Hundred lie Chilfrome, Cruxton, Frome St Quintin and Frome Vauchurch; in St George Hundred lie Bhompston and Frome Whitfield, also possibly 'Frome Cranchen' (Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 368); in Cullifordtree Hundred lies 'Frome Billett' (but see {Introduction: Tithings}).

	River Piddle
Places named from the river can be identified from an analysis of the Tax Return hundreds of "Stana" (where Piddletrenthide is found), of Puddletown (which included Tolpuddle and where Domesday distinguishes Puddletown (Piretone) and Little Puddle (Litelpidel)), and of Bere (which contained Briantspuddle, Turners Puddle and Affpuddle (Affapidele in Domesday)). These places and others, probably named from the river in 1086, are distributed among later hundreds as follows: in Cerne, Tatcombe and 'Modbury' Hundred lies Piddletrenthide; in Puddletown Hundred lie Athelhampton, 'Bardolfeston', Burleston, Piddlehinton, Little Puddle, Puddletown, Tolpuddle and Waterston. Lovard, Muston and 'Combe Deverel' should probably be added to these 'Piddles' (26,21 'Piddle' note). Lying in Bere and Barrow Hundred are Affpuddle, Briantspuddle and Turners Puddle; Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 290, would add Throop.

	River Tarrant
Domesday makes no distinction between the numerous 'Tarrant' villages which probably lay in the Tax Return hundreds of Badbury (which certainly included Tarrant Crawford), and of ‘Langeburgh' (which contained Tarrant Hinton, Tarrant Keyneston, Tarrant Monkton and Tarrant Launceston, and possibly Tarrant Gunville, Tarrant Rawston and Tarrant Rushton; see 1,24 'Tarrant' note and 54,9 'Tarrant' note). The relationship between the Tax Return hundreds and the later hundreds in this corner of Dorset is extremely complex (see {Introduction: Hundreds}) and the various places called 'Tarrant' later lay as follows: in Cranborne Hundred lay Tarrant Gunville and Tarrant Rushton; in Badbury Hundred was Tarrant Crawford; in Pimperne Hundred were Tarrant Hinton, Tarrant Keyneston, Tarrant Launceston and Tarrant Rawston. Tarrant Monkton lay in Monkton Up Wimborne Hundred.

	River Wey
All the villages named in Domesday from this river lay in Cullifordtree Hundred both in 1086 and later; three modern parishes, Broadwey, Upwey and Weymouth, represent the name and the first two of these contained other 'Wey' manors that may have Domesday ancestors. In Broadwey lay Causeway, 'Crecketway', 'Rowaldsway', 'Southway' and 'Wayhoughton' (Place-Names of Dorset, i. pp. 200-201), while Upwey contained 'Stottingway' (Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 247) and Westbrook; see 1,22 'Wey' note; 26,14 'Wey' note; 55,5 'Wey' note and 56,9 'Wey' note. 

	The Winterborne Rivers
Winterburne is the most frequent river-derived place-name in Dorset; none of the occurrences of the name is distinguished by affixes. The name applies to two rivers. Of these, the eastern river (plain River Winterborne) is a tributary of the River Stour, while the River South Winterborne is one of the River Frome.
	Places on the eastern River Winterborne lay in at least three Tax Return hundreds: ‘Hundesburge' Hundred contained Winterborne Stickland and Quarleston (see 55,1 Martinstown note); Combsditch Hundred containing Anderson and Winterborne Whitechurch, Winterborne Clenston and Winterborne Tomson, and perhaps also Winterborne Muston and Winterborne Houghton and a part of Winterborne Kingston; and Bere Hundred contained Winterborne Kingston. The later hundreds distribute these and other places named from the eastern River Winterborne differently. In Pimperne Hundred lay Quarleston, Winterborne Houghton and Winterborne Stickland; in Bere and Barrow Hundred lay Winterborne Kingston which absorbed Winterborne Muston from Combsditch Hundred (see {Introduction: Tithings}). Combsditch Hundred itself included Anderson, Winterborne Clenston (within which 'Phelpston' and 'Nicholston' may be Domesday places; see 26,13 ' Winterborne' note), Winterborne Whitechurch (including Whatcombe; see 26,13 'Winterborne' note and 55,1 Martinstown note) and Winterborne Tomson. Winterborne Zelston was in the later hundred of Rushmore.
	The villages on the River South Winterborne likewise lay in at least three Tax Return hundreds: Eggardon Hundred included Winterborne Abbas; Dorchester Hundred included Martinstown; and Cullifordtree Hundred contained Ashton (see 55,1 Martinstown note), 'Winterborne Belet' and Winterborne Monkton. The villages situated beside this river fell into four later hundreds: in Eggardon Hundred lay Winterborne Abbas; in St George Hundred lay Ashton and Martinstown; in Cullifordtree Hundred were found Winterborne Came (which includes 'Winterborne Hundyngton': Place-Names of Dorset, i. p. 263; see 17,1 Frampton note) and Winterborne Farringdon, Winterborne Herringston, 'Winterborne Belet' and Winterborne Monkton. A further 'Winterborne', Winterborne Steepleton, lay in 'Uggescombe' Hundred.

	Other Rivers
Less major problems are caused by smaller groups of places named from other rivers. Thus, various places named Caundle (see 26,70 Caundle note) can be identified from an analysis of the Tax Returns for Brunsell Hundred and Sherborne Hundred. On the River Stour Domesday distinguishes Sturminster, and from later evidence it is possible to separate East Stour and West Stour, Stour Provost and Stourpaine from each other. On the River Allen (formerly the River Wimborne) holdings are grouped around Wimborne Minster or Wimborne St Giles. The River Bride names various villages now called Bredy as well as Burton Bradstock (1,2 Burton note); while on the River Iwerne, Domesday distinguishes Iwerne Minster (Euneminstre) from the other holdings which also lay in different hundreds; see 30,3 Ranston note. Loders may also be an original river name; see 1,13 Loders note. Further information will be found in Ekwall, English River Names, in Domesday Geography of South-West England, pp. 72-76; and under individual village names in Fägersten, Place Names of Dorset, and the Place-Names of Dorset, the last volume of which will contain a study of the river names.

State of Revision
The Phillimore edition of Somerset was published in 1983. The draft translation was prepared by Margaret Newman, the maps were the work of Frank Thorn and Jim Hardy and the volume was edited by Caroline and Frank Thorn. 
	In their research the editors had incurred a number of debts to others which they acknowledged as follows:
'The Editors are deeply grateful to John McN. Dodgson of University College, London, who, besides seeing the present series through the press, has given advice about place and personal names with unfailing care and kindness, even when most pressed by his many other obligations; to Miss Daphne Gifford of the Public Record Office, Chancery Lane, for consulting the Great Domesday Manuscript on various points arising from Caroline Thorn's earlier examination of it and for answering several other queries; to Mrs Audrey Erskine of Exeter Cathedral Library for the loan of microfilm and for allowing frequent consultation of the manuscript of the Exeter Domesday, always providing a welcome and facilities for study in Exeter; to the staff of the Dorset Record Office; and finally to Mr J. D. Foy for reading through the translation and Notes and checking the Indices and for making numerous helpful suggestions'.
	John Morris, the originator and first editor of the series had died in 1977 and the subsequent volumes in the series were brought out under the supervision of John McN. Dodgson and Alison Hawkins. A note at the end of the Introduction said: 'At the time of Dr Morris's death in June 1977, he had completed volumes 2 [Sussex], 3 [Surrey], 11 [Middlesex], 12 [Hertfordshire], 19 [Huntingdonshire], 23 [Warwickshire], 24 [Staffordshire]. He had more or less finished the preparation of volumes 13 [Buckinghamshire], 14 [Oxfordshire], 20 [Bedfordshire], 28 [Nottinghamshire]. These and subsequent volumes in the series were brought out under the supervision of John Dodgson and Alison Hawkins, who have endeavoured to follow, as far as possible, the editorial principles established by John Morris'. The preparation of the volume was greatly assisted by a generous grant from the Leverhulme Trust Fund.

When it appeared, Dorset was among the most heavily-annotated volumes in the Phillimore series. It would nonetheless benefit from a revision, particularly because of the subsequent appearance of a number of important books and articles. The editors intend to undertake such a revision in due course. The present edition is part of a project to convert the annotation of the Phillimore printed volumes to electronic form and to revise them. For this purpose only a limited number of changes have been made to the printed notes:
•	The Appendix ('The Dorset Hundreds') has been incorporated in the Introduction but  has otherwise been left essentially as it was when published in 1983. John Morris, the general editor, had taken the view that, because of the lack of hundred heads in the text of any of the south-western counties, the later hundreds should be used for the purposes of mapping and indexing. The note did indicate, however, where Domesday, Exon and the Tax Returns showed that the hundreds contained different places. F.R. Thorn's work for the Alecto edition of Dorset (Thorn, 'Hundreds and Wapentakes', Dorset Domesday, pp. 26-42 and map) showed that it was possible to reconstitute the 1086 hundreds practically in their entirety. That article remains the most up-to-date treatment of the question until the present note is fully revised. However, the section concerning detached parts of hundreds has been largely rewritten, as the original was principally concerned with the mapping of such detachments.  
•	The two sets of notes (General Notes and Exon Notes) have been merged into a single sequence. The Introduction to the Exon Notes now appears in {Introduction: Related or 'Satellite' Texts}. The Introductory Notes on Places (1), the Dorset Rivers (2) and the County Boundary (3) are likewise in the Introduction. The first two of these are now to be found in {Introduction: Editorial} under the headings 'The Identification of Places' and 'Places Named from Rivers'. For the third, see {Introduction: The County Boundary}  The contents of the tabulation of the differences in the identification of places between VCH Dorset, iii, Domesday Gazetteer and the Phillimore printed edition has now been divided into individual notes.
•	The translation of some terms has been brought into line with those of the series as a whole.
•	The bibliographical and other conventions have been changed to align them with the other counties that have been revised for the current project.
•	Certain changes have been necessary in the conversion of the notes to a searchable electronic version, such as to the lead words for the notes, to cross-references and to punctuation. 
•	A number of the forms of personal names have been changed as part of an ongoing process to bring more consistency to the entire name stock of Domesday Book.
•	Some of the people have been further identified. When the identification comes from the person's occurrence in other documents or in other Domesday counties, this is shown in the translation between asterisks within square brackets. Where there is no documentary evidence for the identity of an individual, but it seems likely that a number of persons with the same first name are one and the same, this has been indicated in the translation by putting the name of one of the estates held by that person between < >. In this county some of the notes to justify both these forms of identification have been written by John Palmer and these have been attributed to him as (JP) put at the end of his paragraph.  
•	Obvious typographical errors in the Phillimore printed notes have been corrected.

In the Phillimore printed volume translations and annotation were provided for those places that lay outside Dorset in 1086 but which were subsequently transferred to it. These places are tabulated here in {Introduction: County Boundary}; for translation and notes, now see the counties concerned.

Caroline Thorn
Frank Thorn
March 2007
May 2007