NOTES
(version 1a)

SHROPSHIRE. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote the running title SCIR0PESC1RE. in vermilion capitals across the top of the page centred above both columns, on each side of folios 252ab to 260cd inclusive. The form Sciropescire also appears in the heading of the Landholders' List on folio 252a.

	When quoting from the text, the abbreviated forms 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 Anglo-Saxon letters thorn (þ) and eth (ð) are reproduced as th.

C1	[* IN SHREWSBURY HUNDRED *]. The city paid tax for 100 hides in 1086 (C13) and was evidently considered to be a hundred, like Cambridge. Headings for land in or associated with Shrewsbury occur at 1,3-4. 3c,12. 3d,3. 6,33 and in this edition a hundred head has been supplied above any possession in the city of Shrewsbury, whether measured in hides or not.
	SHREWSBURY. Little is known about the early history of Shrewsbury. The name appears to mean 'the fortified place in or of the scrubland' and has nothing to do with the personal name Scrob as in Richard Scrob or Scrope. In 901 Ealdorman Aethelred of Mercia and his wife Aethelflaed stayed in civitate scrobbensi with leading Mercians: Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 221. There must have been sufficient accommodation for such a host. The Latin adjective scrobbensis contains no reference to defences, and coins struck there later in the reign of Edward the Elder (899-924) tend to bear the name Scrob, though this might be an abbreviation. However, a mint could probably only be established in a fortified place and it is likely that the defences of the borough were the work of Ealdorman Aethelred of Mercia or of his wife Aethelflaed, as part of their wider arrangements to fight off the Danes. The name of the fortified town, Scropesbyrig, makes its first appearance in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (version F) for 1006, then, with the name of its shire, in the same chronicle (versions D and E) in 1016. See Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 1; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 267, iv. pp. xiii-xv.
		For a thirteenth-century survey of this borough, see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 78b-80b, 106a-106b.
	BEFORE 1066. Te[m]pore Regis E[dwardi], usually abbreviated to T.R.E., literally 'in the time of King Edward', i.e. from 1042 to 5th January 1066, but translated here as 'before 1066'. The phrase T.R.W. (Tempore Regis Willelmi: 'in the time of King William', i.e. 1066-1087) also occurs frequently in Great Domesday and is translated as 'after 1066'. Compare T.R. chnut ('in King Canute's time') in 3c,2, and see also 4,1,12 'in the time of (King) Aethelred'.
	PAID £7 16s 8d. Domesday uses the old English currency system which lasted for a thousand years until 1971. The pound contained 20 shillings, each of 12 pence, abbreviated respectively as £(ibrae), s(olidi) and d(enarii). Domesday often expresses sums above a shilling in pence (as 22d for the fisheries in 4,1,3) and above a pound in shillings (as 45s and 40s in 1,7).
	IN TRIBUTE. Domesday has de gablo; gablum (Old English gafol) here was a rent paid to the landlord (in this case the king) from the houses he held in lordship in a borough; see Ballard, Domesday Boroughs, pp. 88-91. The rate of payment per house varied from county to county; here it would seem to have been 7 ½ d, if one reads £7 16s 8d as a scribal error for £7 17s 6d. VCH Shropshire, i. p. 294, errs in making the average payment just over 1s 7d a house, which would make the total payment almost £20.
C2	KING'S PEACE ... MADE AN OUTLAW ... 100s. Identical forfeitures are given in the account of the customs of Worcester (WOR C4). In Chester, however, the fine of 100s was due also when the peace was given 'by the king's hand' (CHS C3) and a different fine was payable in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire (NTT S1).
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 223 no. 1307.
	HIGHWAY ROBBERY OR HOUSE-BREAKING. A fine of 100s for forestel(lum) ('waylaying' or 'ambush') and for heinfare ('breaking into a house' or 'breach of the peace within a house') is also recorded in Domesday for Worcestershire (WOR C4) and Herefordshire (WOR C13), and for the latter only in Oxfordshire (OXF 1,13). In Chester there were two rates for these crimes: £4 if they were committed on the 12 days of Christmas, certain other holy days or on a Sunday, but 40s if committed on any other day (CHS C6).
C3	TO STALL GAME. Latin ad stabilitionem. Compare HEF C3 where one man from each house in Hereford had to stall game in the woodland (ad stabilitionem in silua) and BRK B11 (ad stabilitionem uenationis: 'stalling for the hunt'), a fine being payable if a man did not go. The method was to drive deer and other game from all sides into the centre of a gradually contracting circle of men, where, presumably, there would be a net, pen or stall in which to trap the animals; see Ellis, General Introduction to Domesday Book, i. p. 111. In CHS Rl,40a a cognate word stabilitura seems to imply an enclosure formed of nets or fences, similar in purpose to a 'hay' (see 3c,2 enclosures note).
	MARSLEY? PARK. Parcus was usually an area of woodland reserved for hunting within the bounds of the manor (but see HEF 1,41 park note) and contrasts with foresta, land outside. On several occasions in Great Domesday the phrase parcus bestiarum (siluaticarum) 'a park for (woodland or wild) beasts' is used (for example, DEV 1,64. CAM 14,78. CAM 41,1) and parcus ferarum occurs in HEF 1,41. It is possible that here quite an extensive 'chase' is intended, in view of the isolation of Marsley (if correctly identified). To the south and west the nearest Domesday vills are Ratlinghope and Overs (between 3 ½ and 4 miles away) and Rorrington, Middleton and Priestweston (5-7 miles).
		The park intended was probably at Marsley in Habberley parish, apparently the only occurrence of the name in modern Shropshire: Foxall, Gazetteer of the County of Salop. It had probably been a Saxon hunting-lodge; see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 309 note 4, viii. p. 239; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 45.
C4	SHERIFF ... WALES ... 40s. An identical fine for not following the sheriff's orders to march into Wales appears in HEF C10; compare HEF A8. HEF 1,49. WOR C5. The fine in WAR B6 was 100s for not following the king on an expedition by land.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1308.
	SUMMONED. The Latin edictus could imply a proclamation or posting of the list in the form of an edict.
C5	WOMAN ... HUSBAND ... 20s ... GIRL ... 10s. It is interesting that the same payment was due in Chester from a widow and from a girl if they committed intercourse unlawfully: CHS C9.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1309.
	IN ANY WAY … IN WHATEVER WAY. Latin maritum 'husband' implies marriage, not co-habitation or adultery. Marriage in the Anglo-Saxon period was normally a contract between a man and his spouse's kinsfolk. The provisions here govern a first marriage and one after a husband's death. The formula 'in any way … in whatever way' is probably intended to cover all eventualities and does not in itself suggest that there were several different forms of marriage.
C6	HOUSE BURNT DOWN ... 40s ... 2s. In CHS C13 a man from whose house a fire started paid a fine of 3 "orae" of pence and gave 2s to his next door neighbour.
	ACCIDENT, HAPPENING OR CARELESSNESS. This is a more exact translation than the 'misfortune, accident or carelessness' of the Phillimore printed translation. Latin casus is from the verb cado ('to fall') and refers to a fall, or collapse or to something that falls on or befalls someone. Latin eventus is from the verb evenio ('to happen, result, emerge, turn out') while negligentia (from nec and lego) means 'ignoring something' or 'a failure to do something'. The Alecto edition has 'by misfortune or accident or by negligence'. Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1310, has 'misfortune, accident, or negligence'.
		The Latin siue ('or') was written over erasure by the main scribe of Great Domesday; there is an erased memo in the inner margin next to it. There are 12 other marginal memos in Shropshire: 1,1;8. 2,1. 3b,1. 3f,2. 4,3,28;31;58;61. 4,25,3;6. 6,30. In each case the scribe jotted down in the margin a note of what he wanted to insert in the adjacent text (not necessarily the full insertion), generally because he had erased something there and was waiting for the surface of the parchment to be re-prepared for writing after the removal by scraping of the original text. He then usually erased his marginal notes when he had inserted the material, but see 4,3,28 hide note and 4,3,61 woodland note. On these marginal memos in Great Domesday, see Thorn, 'Marginal Notes and Signs', p. 126 (= Erskine and Williams, The Story of Domesday Book, p. 191).
C7	IN DEATH-DUTY. Latin releuamentum or releuatio was similar to the Old English heregeatu, Middle English heriot: a form of death-duty, payable by an heir on taking up his inheritance. Originally the heriot and the 'relief' were payments in horses and arms (for example, HEF C5. HEF 1,49. BRK B10. CAM B13-14), but like many other customary dues in kind they came to be commuted for payments in money, as here. A payment of 10s was also due by someone wanting to take possession of his land in Chester (CHS C11) and by a man without a horse in HEF C5, although there an alternative due was the man's land with its houses; see NTT C3 note; Ellis, General Introduction to Domesday Book, i. pp. 268-72; Freeman, Norman Conquest, v. Appendix, note II.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1311.
C8	BROKE THE TIME-LIMIT. The Latin is frangebat terminum. According to Morris, 'Office of Sheriff', p. 158, this was to do with the sheriff's holding of local courts in Shrewsbury: if a burgess did not present himself at one he was fined. Compare HEF A7, which records that a fine was due from anyone who, when summoned by the sheriff, did not attend the shire or hundred meetings, and CHS R1,40c where the fine was 10s for staying away from the shire moot without reasonable excuse and 5s for staying away from the hundred. This court might be the one trying his particular case: VCH Shropshire, i. p. 295. It is possible, however, that the 'time-limit' was the date imposed by the sheriff for paying a fine and if this date were missed a further fine of 10s would be exacted. Latin terminus can also mean a physical limit, a boundary, which is how it was translated in CHS Rl,41. CHS R5,3. However, that sense does not seem to be applicable here.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1312.
C9	SHED BLOOD ... 40s. The fine in Chester (CHS C5) for shedding blood depended on when it was shed: 20s if on certain holy days and from Saturday noon to Monday morning, but 10s for the rest of the week. Compare C2 robbery note.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1313.
C10	SHERIFF SENT HIM 24 HORSES FROM? LEINTWARDINE. The Latin reads mitteb' ei .xxiiii. caballos uicecom' Lenteurde. Since Lenteurde is not inflected, its case is in doubt. It is hardly likely to be genitive 'the sheriff of Leintwardine' or locative, 'the sheriff at Leintwardine'. Nor will it be accusative of direction 'sent ... to Leintwardine' since the king's journey to Staffordshire from Shrewsbury would have taken him along Watling Street; Staffordshire would not easily be reached via Leintwardine. A double journey seems implied: 24 horses are despatched from Leintwardine to Shrewsbury and then accompany the king on his journey to Staffordshire. Leintwardine had been a royal manor before 1066 (6,11) and stood in a strategically important gap in the hills at the confluence of the Rivers Teme and Clun; it would have been a key manor for controlling the Welsh March. It may be that cavalry was available from there; compare LEC C2.
	THE FIRST MANOR IN STAFFORDSHIRE. If the journey was along Watling Street, the first manor would be Sheriffhales (STS 8,5), the centre of which lies to the north of the road; Weston under Lizard (STS 14,1) lies directly on the line. The Alecto edition translates mansionem as 'house'. Mansio is the normal term employed in Exon for manerium, and it is possible that, in this unusual phrase, the scribe failed to change the term that he found in the circuit volume that preceded Domesday Shropshire.
C11	AFTER. In the manuscript this is postq with a line through the descender of the q (= postquam). Farley misprinted it with an elongated z-shaped abbreviation mark after the q; this ending usually abbreviates que in the Great Domesday manuscript. Farley also used the same elongated z abbreviation wrongly in 3g,7 (in s') and in 3d,7 his usq with it, while technically correct, did not reproduce the manuscript reading of usq;. He also occasionally reproduced a capital letter in the manuscript as a lower-case one (as in modo in 4,1,9;25 etc. and wast' in 4,1,11-12 etc.) and vice versa (as in Leuuedes in 4,1,30 and see 5,7 leagues note and SHR 8 Hugh note). Such minor errors occur in other Great Domesday counties as well. See also L3 church note.
	LIKE OTHER MONEYERS IN THE COUNTRY ... 20s. The phrase ut alii monetarii patriae (genitive, meaning Angliae, 'England') would seem to belong to the buying of the dies to strike the coinage, because in fact the payment which moneyers made varied somewhat over the country. In Hereford the custom was that each moneyer paid 18s for acquiring the dies and then within a month of returning with them had to pay the king 20s (HEF C9), whereas in Worcester the payment for receiving the dies in London was 18s (WOR C1). In Chester, Lewes, Dorchester, Bridport, Wareham and Shaftesbury the rate was £1 when the coinage was changed, but no mention is made of acquiring dies or of a time-limit for the due: CHS C19. SUS 12,1. DOR B1-4. In the Dorset boroughs referred to above the moneyers also each paid the king 1 mark of silver (13s 4d) which appears to be separate from the 20s payable on a change of coinage. In Huntingdon three moneyers paid 40s, but are no longer there: HUN B19.
C12	KING HAD TWO PARTS AND THE SHERIFF THE THIRD. The division of a borough's total revenues between the king and the sheriff (or more often the earl), particularly before 1066, at a rate of two-thirds to one-third is frequently recorded in Domesday Book (for example, HEF C12. STS B12. CHS C2;22. DEV C2. KEN D1. GLS B1); see Tait, Medieval English Borough, pp. 139-93. These revenues generally included the house rents, ground rents, market tolls, profits of the court, the mint, the king's mill etc; see Tait, Medieval English Borough, p. 141; Round 'The 'Tertius Denarius' of the Borough', pp. 62-64. Domesday Herefordshire (HEF C12) states that the customary dues detailed 'above' (i.e. in HEF C2-11), many of them the same as in this Shropshire section, 'formed (part of) the revenues (of Hereford)'. In 1086 Earl Roger received all the revenues of Shrewsbury amounting to £40 in 1085; on the total revenue from the city and the county, see 4,1,37. See also Morris, Medieval English Sheriff, p. 44 note 32. For 'the third penny of the hundred' which is quite different, see 4,1,1 pennies note.
	THIS SURVEY. The Latin is huius descriptionis, genitive, that is the Enquiry resulting in Great Domesday including the actual writing of it. Descriptio is also used in Great Domesday with this meaning in CHS FT2,19 and KEN 2,2; in GLS 1,63 the meaning is restricted to the Enquiry. The most famous occurrence is in the colophon of Little Domesday Book, which states that 'in the1086th year from the incarnation of the lord, the 20th of the reign of William, this descriptio was made, not only throughout these three counties, but also throughout others'.
		Shropshire was probably surveyed as part of the same circuit as Herefordshire, Worcestershire, Cheshire and Gloucestershire (circuit V); see {Introduction: Circuit}. The names of the Commissioners responsible for Worcestershire (and probably for the whole of this circuit) are given in Hemming's Cartulary (Hearne, Hemingi Chartularium, p. 288) as Bishop Remigius (of Lincoln), Henry of Ferrers, Walter Giffard and Adam (brother of Eudo the steward); none of them held land in Shropshire.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1314.
C13	HIDES. The hide is a unit of land measurement, either of productivity, of extent or of tax liability; it contained 4 virgates. Administrators attempted to standardize the hide at 120 acres, but incomplete revision and special local reductions left hides of widely differing extents in different areas. There is some evidence that there were smaller hides of perhaps 40 or 48 acres in the south-west as well as in Northamptonshire; see 7,4 acres note and {Hides}. In many counties the number of hides corresponds quite closely to the ploughland estimate (1,5 hide note), but in Shropshire there are more than twice the number of ploughs either at work or possible than there are hides. This fact and the fact that the 'County Hidage', probably dating from the eleventh century ( Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, pp. 455-60) states that Shropshire had 2400 hides whereas only about 1500 are recorded in Great Domesday suggest that a reduction in tax assessment had taken place; see VCH Shropshire, i. pp. 281-82 and {Introduction: History}.
		Unlike in Herefordshire, where there was a distinction between areas that had long been under English rule and were measured in hides and those that had been recently acquired from the Welsh and were measured in terms of ploughlands (carucatae), in Shropshire all the land, with two or perhaps three exceptions, whether newly conquered or not, either was not measured at all (for example, the land of Ial in 4,2,1, and the 3 Welsh districts in 4,1,13 and 4,3,42) or was assessed in hides: Clunbury (4,20,4) and Neen Sollars (5,8) are stated never to have paid tax and not to be hidated and see 4,1,15 ploughs note.
	OF THESE. St Alkmund's 2 hides are mentioned, but not named, at 3g,2. St Juliana's ½ hide is also unnamed and unidentified at 3h,1. The 1 hide of St Milburga's was at Sutton (3c,12); the 1½ hides of St Chad's were at Shelton (1,4), held from the Bishop of Chester; St Mary's 1 virgate was at Meole Brace (3d,3); the Bishop of Chester's 1 hide was at Crow or 'Monk' Meole (1,3) while Edith's 3 hides held by Ralph of Mortimer were at Meole Brace (6,33).
	[* OF SHREWSBURY *] ... [* OF MUCH WENLOCK *]. On all these churches, see SHR 3c St Milburga note, 3d St Mary note, 3f St Chad's note, 3g St Alkmund's note and 3h St Juliana's note.
	[* QUEEN *] EDITH. See 4,27,6 Edith note.
		The Domesday forms of her name - Eddid, Edid, Eddied, Ediet, Edied, Edded, Edged, Edit, Eddiet - represent Old English Eadgyth: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 231-32. JRM preferred the modern name Edith, as does the Alecto edition (except for KEN D25, where it has Eadgyth, perhaps in error).
C14	THIS ENTRY was a later addition by the main scribe of Great Domesday at the end of this section on the 'customs' of the borough of Shrewsbury. This complaint by the English burgesses that they were paying too much in tax may have arrived after the compilation of the circuit volume, which was the main, if not the only, source for Domesday Shropshire. It was written in paler ink and smaller writing than the preceding customs and was inserted at the same time as 7 tenuit on folio 252b (see 1,9 held note) and probably as an unnamed holding on folio 256d (see 4,9,4 entry note). The scribe wrote it on the first line of the horizontal scorings that appear only on this column in Shropshire (see {Introduction: Writing and Correction}).
	IT IS VERY HARD ON THEM. Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1315, translates 'The English burgesses of Shrewsbury say that is is very hard for them to pay … '. However, the Latin is clear: dicunt … multum grave sibi esse quod ipsi reddunt…literally 'it is very heavy on them namely that … '. The use of Latin grave here is idiomatic (compare graviter fero 'I take badly', literally 'I bear heavily'). The quod clause is explanatory. The meaning Fleming gives corresponds to multum difficile sibi esse reddere.
	AS MUCH TAX. The main scribe of Great Domesday originally wrote tot ('so many'), but corrected it immediately to tñt; the new verticals of an n can be seen inside the curves of the original o. Farley misprinted tot with an abbreviation line over the t, though there is no need for one in this word.
	AS WAS PAID. The Latin is reddebat' with the abbreviation sign that indicates an omitted -ur, which extends to reddebatur, the third person singular of the imperfect passive tense. The same abbreviation sign is used twice in 4,26,3 in calumniat' (= calumniatur) and testat' (= testatur). However, reddebat' here was mistranslated as reddebant ('they paid') in VCH Shropshire, i. p. 310, the Phillimore printed edition, the Alecto edition and Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1315.
	EARL'S CASTLE HAS TAKEN OVER ... . A common cause of the disappearance of houses in boroughs was the building of a castle there; see, for example, GLS G4. WAR B2. CAM B1. DEV C3. However, masurę here probably mean messuages, that is the sites of houses with or without the houses themselves: C14 messuages note.
		Shrewsbury occupies a naturally defended site in a bend of the River Severn and the name itself refers to some early fortification. A royal garrison (praesidium regis) was besieged here in 1069 by the 'Welsh and the men of Chester', and Robert of Bellême's men were beset here in 1102 during his rebellion; see Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. pp. 228-29; vi. pp. 28-31). King Henry took the castle and deprived Earl Robert of all his English lands and titles. The ex-earl went to the continent. Those who had held under him, but had not rebelled with him, were mostly allowed to retain their lands and become tenants-in-chief, their lands usually descending in their families for some generations. On the other hand, no new earl was appointed, the county being administered by its sheriff and initially by a local justiciar: {Introduction: Administration of the Shire}.
		On the castle, see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. pp. 430, 436.
	51 MESSUAGES. Latin ma[n]sura is an awkward word to translate: it can mean a plot (of land) for a house, or the land and a house built on it (as in 3b,3) or sometimes, apparently, the house itself, and the meaning can change between one entry and the next in Great Domesday. For example, in WIL M1, 'In ... Malmesbury ... 25 messuages (masuras) in which are houses (domus)', the meaning of masuras must be plots of land, but thereafter in this Wiltshire section the meaning seems to change to the dwelling itself (WIL M2;11 'half a derelict dwelling (masura uasta)'). In this Shropshire entry, too, the meaning may change; here the 51 messuages may possibly be empty sites, but the 50 masurae ... vastae seem likely to have been houses now derelict and empty.
		The related term mansio also has several meanings similar to ma(n)sura; see NTT B8 where there are 3 mansiones in which 11 houses (domus) are sited. In the account of Norwich (NFK 1,61) a distinction seems to be made several times between mansurae and domus: for example, Rabel is stated to have 2 houses and 2 messuages. But in SOM 40,1 the main scribe of Great Domesday changed the '1 house (domus) in Bath ... and another messuage (mansuram) also in this borough' in Exon to 'in Bath 2 houses'. In Colchester (ESS B1), there were iiii mansiones terrae ('plots of land', that is, for building purposes).
		Haga, usually translated in this edition as 'site' when in a town (it is linked etymologically with haia: 3c,2 enclosures note), also seems to have a similar meaning to ma[n]sura: in Wallingford (BRK B1) 8 hagae were destroyed for a castle, like the 51 masurae here, the four in WAR B1, the 14 domus in GLS G4 and the 27 domus in CAM B1. In BRK B2 (as in SUR 19,1) both mansurae and hagae occur as paying dues and it is not clear whether a distinction is intended between them. Ballard, Domesday Boroughs, p. 13, agrees that the terms masura, domus and haga were practically synonymous and that a rent coming from a burgess would seem to be the same as that coming from a mansura, the house he lived in. See also Ellis, General Introduction to Domesday Book, i. pp. 244-45 note 2.
	ABBEY, WHICH HE IS BUILDING THERE. That is, St Peter's; see SHR 3b St Peter's note. The burgesses are mentioned in 3b,1.
	200 MESSUAGES, LESS 7. This edition keeps to the exact translation here and elsewhere with minus ('less'), rather than translating them as 193 messuages, because sometimes the reason for the subtraction is noted (for example, in 4,20,8 the 'less 5s' of the value of the men-at-arms' holding is accounted for in the £6 5s of Picot's holding; see also WIL 2,1 '100 hides, less 3' where the removal of the 3 hides is explained. The total of 193 messuages here is made up of the 183 messuages mentioned in the rest of the entry which for one reason or another did not pay tax (assuming one burgess per house) and (presumably) the 10 unoccupied messuages recorded in Shrewsbury in 1,1.
LIST 2	LIST OF THOSE WHO HOLD LAND. Most county schedules begin with the Terra Regis, the king's land. But Shropshire was in effect a palatine earldom under Roger of Montgomery. Thus Earl Roger held the lands that had come into King William's hands by conquest; see 4,1,37 county note, 4,28,5 Farlow note, 4,1 Roger note and {Introduction: History}.
L3	SAINT-REMY'S CHURCH. In the manuscript the S' (Sanctus) has been written over what appears to be un-erased ink blot and is rather blurred, especially in the facsimile. Farley here and elsewhere in Shropshire has S with a horizontal line through it or above it instead of the diagonal line through it that is used in the manuscript ($); compare C11 after note.
		Saint-Rémy's Church is only the first of the eight churches to be detailed in chapter 3; see SHR 3a Saint-Rémy's note.
L4	EARL ROGER ... REMAINDER. This was written on the line immediately below the line containing .IX. Nigellus medicus, not with a space before it as Farley printed.
L5	OSBERN SON OF RICHARD. Lewis ('Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 7) maintains that the entries for Osbern son of Richard, Ralph of Mortimer (L6), Roger of Lacy (L7), Hugh the ass (L8) and Nigel the doctor (L9) were later additions to the Landholders' List, inserted beside numbers I to IIII, with two on one line in order to 'leave the statement that Earl Roger and his men held what remained as the last item, though the numbering was not altered and the logic of the list as it was left is unsatisfactory'. However, a study of the manuscript reveals that the reason why the main scribe of Great Domesday did not write entry IIII immediately after III was because he had already written V to IX, the last opposite a space. There is no sign from a change of ink, pen or style that numbers V to IX were not written after I to III. The scribe then wrote IIII: COMES ROGERIUS (lined through in red) Q[uo]d Reliquū ē tenet cū suis hominib[us] below both columns of landholders because of its length and the important and unusual information it contained; compare the similar statement in Cheshire (after CHS C25). The order of inscription of this list was therefore I to III, V to IX, IIII, in one stint as part of the initial writing campaign. In Lewis' view the scribe only became aware of the existence of these five tenants-in-chief after he had finished writing the first quire and so had to start a second quire for them: if he had found them earlier he could have 'inserted extra leaves' into the first quire. He could in fact still have added a half-sheet (one folio) to the end of the first quire, as he did at the end of Wiltshire, Dorset and Northamptonshire. There is similarly no evidence that the fiefs of these five tenants were overlooked and added later. On the probable reason for the scribe's starting a second quire, rather than adding a half-sheet at the end of the first quire, see {Introduction: Writing and Correction}.
L6	RALPH OF MORTIMER. See L5 Osbern note.
L7	ROGER OF LACY. See L5 Osbern note.
L8	HUGH DONKEY. See L5 Osbern note.
L9	NIGEL THE DOCTOR. See L5 Osbern note.
1	LAND OF THE BISHOP OF CHESTER. The lands that became Shropshire lay in two dioceses, those of Chester and of Herefordshire (SHR 1-2).
		The see of Mercia was fixed at Lichfield in Staffordshire by Ceadda (St Chad), Bishop of the Mercians, the Lindisfari (the inhabitants of Lindsey, later in Lincolnshire) and the Middle Angles between 664 and 672. The church was built on land that had apparently been given earlier by King Wulfhere of Mercia (657-674) to Bishop Wilfrith of York for the foundation of a monastery. St Chad's original diocesan church was on a site adjacent to the later cathedral. A new church was constructed by Bishop Headda and consecrated in 700. It was apparently dedicated to St Mary, although Bede (Ecclesiastical History, iv. 3: Colgrave and Mynors, pp. 344-45) gives St Mary as the dedicatee of the original church and St Peter as that of the new one. It was later dedicated to St Chad. In 822 there were 20 canons including a provost, that is, 11 priests and 9 deacons. They were then living in accordance with the rule of Bishop Chrodegang of Metz.
		The work of the bishops will have been disrupted by the Danish marauding and settlement of the late ninth century, since Lichfield itself would have lain just within the Danish part of Mercia, if the boundary between the kingdoms was Watling Street; see {Introduction: History}.
		The see was transferred by Bishop Peter to Chester in 1075. The cathedral church there was the church of St John the Baptist, a secular college, possibly founded by King Ethelred of Mercia in 689; more likely by the earl of that name in 906. It was repaired and endowed by Earl Leofric under Edward the Confessor. The see was moved to Coventry in 1102 by Bishop Robert of Limésy who had been consecrated in 1086, at which point the church of Chester reverted to being a college. Canons are mentioned in Domesday. See Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 413, 422.
		Unless there is other evidence, it is likely that the estates listed in Domesday had been held by the see from much earlier times. The initial endowment of the see, like the gift of Lichfield itself, was probably due to King Wulfhere of Mercia; see {Introduction; Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		1,1-2 [Shrewsbury] Hundred
		1,3-4 City (Shrewsbury) Hundred
		1,5 Wrockwardine Hundred
		1,6-7 Condover Hundred
		1,8 Hodnet Hundred
		1,9 Wrockwardine Hundred
	The entry for 'Chatshall' (1,9) appears to have been missed at some stage, as a place in Wrockwardine Hundred had already been entered.
1,1	[IN SHREWSBURY HUNDRED]. The heading is implied by 1,3 'In the City Hundred'; see 1,3 city note and C1 hundred note.
	THE BISHOP ... TAX. The first 1 ½ lines of this entry (up to geldant') were written over erasure by the main scribe of Great Domesday. There is an erased memo in the outer margin next to the first line. On these erased marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
1,2	CANONS. They belonged to St Chad's in Shrewsbury; on this church, see SHR 3f St Chad's note.
1,3	IN THE CITY ^[SHREWSBURY]^ HUNDRED. This statement and the one at 1,4 are written in capitals and rubricated and are in the correct position for hundred heads in the manuscript; however, the second one is not needed as such because there is no change in hundred. One would perhaps have expected the Shrewsbury hundred head to have come before 1,1. In 4,9,4 an identical phrase In eod' hund' is written in the body of the entry, in a similar position, but it is not in capitals and is not rubricated.
	[CROW] MEOLE. Crow Meole was also known as 'Monk' Meole, and was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad, now in the Ecclesiastical Parish of Shelton and Oxon. From C13 it is clear that the manor was 1 hide in extent. Much of the land formed part of the endowment of Buildwas Abbey for Cistercian monks (1,7 Buildwas note), being named as Cronyet (or Crowmehill) and Monkemeyt in Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 191; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 359; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 203.
1,4	IN THE SAME HUNDRED. That is in the City (Shrewbury) Hundred; see 1,3 city note.
	SHELTON. It lay in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad and is now in the Ecclesiastical Parish of Shelton and Oxon. On the estate, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 360; Bassett 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 11. For St Chad's, see SHR 3f St Chad's note.
	MORE PLOUGHS WOULD BE POSSIBLE. The Latin is carucae plus possent esse, subjunctive: in Shropshire the scribe uses this form more often than the indicative (potest/possunt esse, e.g. in 3c,8. 4,1,27-28. 4,14,18 etc.), though in Herefordshire and Worcestershire, for example, both forms are represented roughly equally. As the scribe may have intended to convey a slightly different meaning by the use of the subjunctive, the translation has preserved the distinction, the indicative being rendered as 'more ploughs possible'. It is perhaps interesting that in several entries (e.g. 4,1,5. 4,3,15) both forms occur. On this phrase being a substitute for the more common Great Domesday estimate of the ploughland, see 1,5 land note.
	VALUE. By the use of the verb valere ('to be worth') the Great Domesday scribe normally meant the amount due to lords from their lands; see, for example, 3d,6 where the 1086 value of Bromfield to the canons of St Mary's, Bromfield, was 50s, and HEF 24,13 where Richards Castle was worth 20s to Osbern son of Richard in 1086. There are also relevant examples in Devon (DEV 5,1;4. 45,3). That these amounts were due annually is made clear in Exon where the phrase per annum frequently accompanies the value statements (it also occurs in Great Domesday in DEV 45,3).
		In Shropshire, as in Bedfordshire, Berkshire etc., the scribe very often gives the value of a manor at three dates: before 1066 (T.R.E.), later (post) and in 1086 (modo): for example, in 1,7. 2,1. 3b,3. The intermediate date was that at which the tenant-in-chief took possession of the manor from King William, as can be seen by the phrases quando recepit or invenit (or occasionally both, as in 4,3,11) taking the place of post on several occasions (often when the land was waste); see 4,3,9 acquired note and SHR 6 Ralph note. To establish the value at three dates seems to have been part of the brief of those undertaking the Domesday Enquiry according to the questions reproduced at the beginning of the Inquisitio Eliensis (Hamilton, p. 97). In Exon, the phrase 'when he acquired it' or 'when X (the tenant-in-chief) acquired it' is regularly used when the corresponding Great Domesday entry has simply 'the value was' or 'formerly', so that when in Shropshire the scribe merely has valebat or valuit as here, with no reference to date, it is possible that he meant the value at the time the manor was acquired.
		Latin reddit (present: 'pays') and reddebat/reddidit (past: 'paid') would seem to have a similar meaning to valet and valebat/valuit. They often occur in the same value statement, as in 4,9,1. 4,14,27 etc. There is a view that, when reddere was being used, it meant that a manor was being held at a revenue (i.e. 'farmed', see 3d,5 revenue note) and also that the use of valere often concealed a similar fact; see Hoyt, 'Farm of the Manor' and Lennard, Rural England, pp. 105-41. Certainly there seems to be a distinction between valet and reddit in 3f,2 and 4,4,7 and compare 4,4,8 which apparently conveys the same information in a different way. However, there are many cases in Shropshire where reddebat is used and there is no hint that the manor was being 'farmed': see 3b,2. 3f, 1. 3g,6 etc. Moreover, there is much evidence available from a comparison of Exon with the corresponding Great Domesday entries for the south-west counties that seems to prove the interchangeability of the two verbs; see DEV 2,2 value note; CON 2,3 value note. On hawks forming part of the value of a manor, see 3c,5 eyrie note.
		The word ualuit here seems to have been written over an erasure as it is blurred, though the parchment is very rough here so it is impossible to be certain.
1,5	LONGNER. It lay in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad and was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086. It was later in Atcham Civil Parish. Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 5, suggests that Longner originated as a part of Ercall.
		In the mid-twelfth century it was held by Geoffrey son of Reginald under the Bishop of Coventry and he later gave ½ virgate in Longenholre to Haughmond Abbey; see the Black Book of the Exchequer (Hearne, i. p. 133); the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 727-29); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 205; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 198.
	1 HIDE [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday did not put a dot after hida and left a small space between it and the side marginal ruling, though many lines on this column extend past this ruling by a few letters. Throughout Shropshire, as in Domesday Cheshire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire, there are numerous occasions where a space has been left after the hidage of a manor. These spaces seem to have been left for the addition of the word(s) geld' or non geld' (= geldans, singular, geldantes, plural; see 1,6 pay note), rather than, as has been thought sometimes, for a fraction of a hide to be added. For example, in 4,3,31 the hidage is 4 hides and 1 virgate and so the space left after it cannot be for a fraction, and see 4,3,45 where 7 dimid' is interlined above viii hidę geld' where a space would have been left for the fraction if that was the meaning of these spaces (but no space was left because geld' had already been included). Moreover, the size of these spaces (wide enough for 4-6 letters to be inserted) would suit the addition of geld' or n[on] geld', but would be too small for fractions such as 7 dimid'.
		Various parts of the verb geldare were then later inserted, mostly by scribe B in Shropshire (see 4,1,1 pay note), though, a great many of these spaces were never filled. Sometimes no space was left after the hidage and geld' (or geldant') had to be interlined, as happened in 4,1,2. 4,3,5 and 4,14,17, all done by scribe B, and in 6,3 done by the main scribe. There are several other cases where the scribe left no space after the hidage, as in 3e,1. 3g,9. 4,1,5 etc., but in many cases the hidage comes at the end of a line and the scribe may have thought that the relevant word(s) could be added in the margin, as he did in 4,7,2 and as scribe B did in 4,1,1. 4,11,17 and 4,14,15; see also 4,3,35 hides note. Occasionally the scribe seems to have forgotten initially to leave a space and to have then left it later in the entry; see 4,24,4 land note and compare 4,17,2 land note. In some cases the manor was waste (for example, 4,23,15. 5,5-7) and so perhaps would not have paid tax (though some waste manors did, for example, 4,20,21-23) and the scribe did not feel it necessary to mention this. It is perhaps interesting that in 1,4 no space was left after the '1 ½ hides' and the statement that the manor paid tax had to be added at the end of the entry and that in the next entry (this one) a space was left.
		It is possible that the reason why the scribe did not know whether certain hides paid tax or not was because the original returns for some holdings did not differentiate between the hidage of the lordship land (which did not pay tax) and that of the land of the villagers, subtenants etc. which did. Certainly, with the possible exception of 4,1,3, in those cases where the lordship land is given in Shropshire (4,1,2 lordship note) the scribe either had included the information that the non-lordship hides paid tax or had left no space for such information to be added later.
		In just over half the cases where a space has definitely been left after the hidage, no dot was written after that hidage, but in the other, smaller, half there are dots; the significance of this is not clear: one would have thought that if the scribe did not intend to add anything to the hidage, which the dot seems to imply, he would not have left a space. The dots may in several instances be accidental; for example in 4,14,13. 4,21,13 etc. there is a dot after hida (at the end of the first line) with geld' at the beginning of the next, not added. In Herefordshire also there are sometimes dots, and sometimes not, after the hidage: see HEF 1,9 hides note.
		In some five entries the space left after the hidage is due to an erasure, which in the case of 4,27,29 was definitely of geld' and was probably also in 4,19,4. 4,27,2;3 and possibly in 4,27,9 too (see 4,19,4 hides note, 4,27,2 hides note, 4,27,3 hide note, 4,27,9 hide note and 4,27,29 hides note). Similarly placed erasures also occur in Domesday Herefordshire. Unless, as in HEF 29,16, a link-line was drawn over the erasure to indicate that the scribe did not intend to add anything there, it is not clear whether he intended to insert something later if available and so did not write over the erasure (this would be the case if the erasure were immediate) or whether the erasure was done at the correcting stage of the work (in which case a link-line ought to have been drawn, unless there was suddenly a question of whether the land paid tax or not, so the scribe erased the geld' and intended later to insert geld' or non geld' when he had found out the true position); see 4,27,29 hides note. The fact that in nine or ten entries where there was an erasure after the hidage scribe B inserted geld' (see 4,14,16. 4,19,1;5. 4,23,3;5 and perhaps 4,14,18, and also CHS A15. 1,6-8) may suggest that the main Great Domesday scribe had sometimes begun the next sentence and then realized he ought to have left a space for the possible insertion of geld' and then continued after the erasure.
	LAND FOR 2 PLOUGHS. An estimate of the ploughlands is a convenient way of giving the true arable extent of a manor without the complexities associated with the hide (on which see C13 hides note). In Domesday Shropshire two methods of giving such an estimate were used. As here, the scribe used the phrase Terra est ... carucis, normally after the hidage, and then recorded the number of ploughs actually on the manor, whether employed on the lord's own estate or by the villagers (used in the general sense). This phrase was very common in the south-west counties, in Cheshire, Staffordshire and elsewhere in Great Domesday, though for some reason was rarely used in Herefordshire, Worcestershire and Gloucestershire. In the vast majority of the entries in Shropshire where it is used, it can be seen that the actual ploughs on the land fall far short of the estimate (by 48 ploughs in 4,20,8 and see 2,1 ploughs note), although in some 36 cases the manors seem to have been fully 'stocked' and Pulley (6,30) had an excess of 2 ploughs in use (see also 4,19,13 ploughs note and 7,4 servants note). In many cases, especially of the shorter entries, no ploughs were recorded, only the estimate given.
		The other method used here to estimate the ploughlands was to record the ploughs on the land (whether lordship or villagers') and then to state how many more ploughs would be possible there. Normally this phrase on the potential ploughs occurs after the villagers' ploughs are given, though in the case of 1,4. 3b,2 and a few other entries it appears immediately after the lordship ploughs; occasionally it occurs at the end of an entry or after the resources. The fact that in 4,1,5-6 the scribe states twice that more ploughs were possible, first after the lordship ploughs and then after the villagers' ploughs, would suggest that the position of these phrases was important and reflected the actual areas of plough potential; the scribe presumably either had fuller information for these manors or failed to remove it when editing from the circuit volume. In some ninety entries no estimate of the ploughland is given but the ploughs are merely recorded; this may indicate that these manors could support no more ploughs, though it is possible that the scribe's information was defective there, as elsewhere in Shropshire (see {Introduction: Writing and Correction}).
		There is no obvious reason why in Shropshire the scribe should have used both phrases to assess and record plough capacity; he cannot have been reflecting the phrase used in the original returns for different areas, as every hundred has both phrases represented in its lands (except perhaps Shrewsbury in the case of the 'Land for' formula). The 'more ploughs possible' form is used largely up to the end of 4,13, only appearing twice thereafter, at 4,14,18 and 4,19,1, and the 'Land for' phrase is used mostly from 4,14 to the end of the county, although it does occur 49 times in the earlier part of the county, seven times in added entries (see 3d,7 land note). However, it is possible that after 4,13 he decided or was told to use the 'Land for' formula. In Domesday Yorkshire he had initially begun using the formula 'where there can be n ploughs' but changed to the 'Land for' formula on folio 325c (after YKS 14E50); where the 'Land for' formula occurs in entries before YKS 14E50 it is almost always because those entries are later additions and this gives a clue as to when the additions were made. In 4,4,20 both forms are used together: there is 'land for 41 ploughs' and '4 ploughs possible' in the lordship. The fact that both formulae occur together in several fiefs and sub-chapters does not suggest that the use of one phrase or the other was the result of different preferences among those making the returns. It is possible, however, that as the positioning of the 'more ploughs possible' seems to have had some meaning, the scribe used the vaguer phrase 'Land for n ploughs' when his material did not specify whether there could be more ploughs on the lord's manor or on the villagers' land. But this would not explain why he seems to have used two ways of stating that a manor was fully stocked (by merely recording the ploughs on that manor, if that is the meaning of this, or by making those ploughs equal those in the 'Land for' statement). In some other Great Domesday counties, such as Leicestershire, more than one ploughland formula was used and it is not clear there either what occasioned the scribe's change from one phrase to another; see LEC 1,12 land note. It is interesting that in two virtually identical entries in Yorkshire the phrase '6 ploughs possible' occurs in the first and 'land for 6 ploughs' in the repeat: YKS 9W131;144 (the latter entry was added, then erased).
		On the frequent artificiality of the numbers in the plough assessment, see Finn, 'Teamland', pp. 96-98; Moore, 'Domesday Teamland'.
	SLAVES. As in Gloucestershire, Cornwall and Devon, the proportion of slaves (servi) in Shropshire to other categories of population was high, almost one in five, although there are numerous manors where no slaves are recorded. The slave came at the bottom end of the social scale; he belonged to his master utterly, providing most of the labour on his land, he could be bought and sold, had almost no rights and rarely any share in the villagers' land and ploughs; see below and Finberg, Tavistock Abbey, pp. 36-38, 60-61. He could also be freed: in GLS 38,2 William Leofric had freed 12 slaves at Hailes. In Domesday Shropshire in the folios up to folio 253a (the end of chapter 3g) the slaves are almost always listed after the villagers and their ploughs (as regularly in Domesday Gloucestershire and Worcestershire), but they never occur in such a position thereafter, being given either after the lordship ploughs as in such phrases as 'n ploughs there, with n slaves' or 'he has ... n slaves'. It should be noted that Shropshire never definitely states that the slaves were in lordship: although they are regularly listed after the lordship plough(s), the punctuation is ambiguous because of the ubiquitous connecting 7. In 5,1 where no lordship ploughs are stated, the slaves are listed before the villagers, but the word order there is unusual in other respects as well. In four entries (4,1,36. 4,8,12. 4,14,5. 7,6) and possibly a fifth (6,6), slaves appear to have a share in the villagers' ploughs and in 4,9,4 1 villager and 2 slaves 'have nothing', presumably referring to their lack of ploughs. There is evidence elsewhere in Great Domesday that slaves had ploughs, or at least a share in them; for example, see HEF 1,10a. WAR 17,16. SOM 47,16. DEV 6,13. For the position of slaves in Exon and whether they were classed with other villani and so had a share in their land and ploughs, see DEV 1,3 slaves note. From the Exon for Somerset (SOM 21,55; and see SOM 21,71 slave note and SOM 45,7 slaves note) it would seem that slaves occasionally held land and in the Exon for Devon (DEV 3,54) a slave is said to live on a 'ferling', but see CON 5,2,7 acre note. It is perhaps also noteworthy that Domesday Middlesex, which lists the land holdings of various 'villagers' (men-at-arms, Frenchmen, villagers proper, smallholders and cottagers; see MDX {Appendix}) makes no mention of slaves with land. Exon also supplies the interesting fact that slaves as well as villagers and smallholders paid £8 from Lympstone (DEV 26,1) to King William in revenue; on the practice of 'farming' land, see 3d,5 revenue note.
		For the bouarii who, like the servi, also seem to have worked the lord's ploughs, see 1,8 ploughmen note.
1,6	BETTON. It was in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later divided between Condover Hundred and Shrewsbury Liberty. The Domesday holding is now represented by Betton Strange (SJ5009) and Betton Abbots (SJ5107). The former (in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad, then in Bicton Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish) was alienated, probably in the twelfth century, by the Lestrange family (see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215) who granted lands here to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, no. 18, appendix A. i). The other portion (in Berrington Ancient Parish), called Betton Abbots, went to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees pp. xx, 23, 24 etc.). It was sometimes known as Little Betton in contrast to Great Betton (Betton in Norton-in-Hales, 4,23,9) which was also later held by Shrewsbury Abbey, sometimes as Great Betton to distinguish it from Betton Strange; see Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 189; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 181; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 19.
		Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 5, suggests that Betton originated as a part of the great estate of Condover (4,1,2).
	WHICH PAY TAX. Latin geld' here and elsewhere after the hidage statement probably abbreviates the plural geldantes (geldans, singular) 'paying tax' (in this series the present participle has been translated as if it were a qui- clause), rather than plural geldant (singular geldat) 'they pay tax'. In 4,1,2 geldant' is interlined above the hidage and geldantes is written out in full in many identical phrases in Great Domesday: for example, in GLS 11,9. 28,4. 31,2) and see also HEF 2,21. Later extracts from Great Domesday often use the adjectival form geldabiles (singular geldabilis) 'taxable'. There are occasions when geld' refers to the hidage and must be extended to the active finite verb geldat or geldant (such as in 3c,9 and HEF 2,49;51), but only when a separate phrase is involved, not merely Ibi ii hidę geld' as here.
1,7	BUILDWAS. This was an Ancient Parish which lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Any suggestion that it could have been in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 is ruled out by the way the woodland is assessed (in pigs): see {Introduction: Writing and Correction}.
		In 1135 Roger of Clinton, Bishop of 'Chester' (1129-1148), founded an abbey here for Cistercian monks as a daughter-house of Savigny. The manor of Buildwas was given to it and continued to be held by it until the Dissolution; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 191-92; Monasticon Anglicanum, v. pp. 356-61; Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii. pp. 49-50 no. 132; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 317; VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 50-59. The remains of the abbey are at SJ642043.
	REEVE. The nine reeves (prepositi) recorded for Shropshire, one in each of nine villages, are listed with the other villagers, with a share in the ploughs except for the reeve in 6,12 who had ½ plough to himself. The functions of the reeve as a subordinate of the sheriff and as a local official in the manor and in the village were probably varied: Lennard, Rural England, pp. 271-76; Morris, 'Office of Sheriff', pp. 157-58; and HEF 1,3 reeve note.
	A MILL. This was of course a water-mill, as elsewhere in Great Domesday; windmills did not appear in Britain for another century. Apart from the mills mentioned generally in 3b,1, there are some 90 mills recorded in Shropshire; only on five occasions (3c,2. 4,1,21. 4,3,16. 4,20,24 and 7,4) is more than one mill recorded per entry. More than half these mills paid a money render, ranging from 6d (in 4,3,31) to 20s in 6,33 (the 2 mills at 26s in 7,4 are regarded as paying 13s each); two paid 3 "orae" (at 4,1,16;32). Seventeen mills rendered grain in some form or other; or so many packloads (summae, see 4,1,5 packloads note) of corn in eight instances and of malt and wheat in three, 8 sesters of rye in 4,17,3 (see 4,17,3 sesters note), 3 mensurae of wheat in 4,3,45, 24 uascula of corn in 4,27,21 and a modium of corn in 5,8 with an unspecified amount of corn in 4,4,12. Three mills rendered eels (from the mill-pond), two of them paying money as well. Two mills are linked with fisheries and eels also formed part of the (joint) render of the second one (4,19,2). The mill at Lydham (4,1,14) paid a pig, a very unusual render (compare the rare payment of a sester of honey from a mill in WOR 2,76). Three mills paid nothing and there are nine mills entered on their own with no information given, though the one at Chetton (4,1,31) is described as new. There are three references to mills serving the court (curia), and one to a mill serving the Hall (aula), meaning the lord's court on his lordship estate in each case, while the 2 mills at Much Wenlock (3c,2) served the monks (of St Milburga's). Finally, the mill at Welbatch (4,4,1) only worked in the winter not the summer, presumably because the stream had insufficient water in the summer.
	WOODLAND, 200 PIGS. In Domesday Shropshire phrases such as this where there is no verb or preposition before porc' probably mean that the woodland was of sufficient size to provide food (acorns and beech-mast) for a certain number of pigs (see 4,4,20;22): in 6,32 'woodland, 100 pigs' is rendered as 'woodland for fattening 100 pigs' in the duplicate entry 4,11,1. Elsewhere in Great Domesday this phrase can mean that a payment was made of so many pigs (sometimes as many as one in three) for the right to pasture them in the woodland: MDX 2,1 pigs note. WOR 3,3 pigs note.
		In Shropshire almost three times as many woodland entries are thus described in proportion to woodland measured in another common manner, of extent, that is by 'square' leagues (see 3g,3 league note) in all but five entries. On the two different methods of description being linked to the hundred in which the woodland lay, see {Introduction: Writing and Correction}. In 4,4,20;22 both forms of measurement are used: in each the woodland is 2 leagues long (no width is mentioned, as also in 4,23,2) and is enough to fatten 200 pigs. Some five entries state that there are hedged enclosures (haiae) in the woodland: 3c,2 enclosures note. Occasionally woodland in Shropshire has a render: ½ league pays 11d in 4,3,22, but only 3d in 4,3,23, while 1 league pays 16d in 4,3,25 and a small wood (silua modica) pays 5d in 4,3,21, but the small woods (both described as silua parua) in 4,1,4;11 pay nothing. These may be commuted pasturage dues; compare the common Domesday phrase 'from (pig) pasturage n s(hillings)'.
		For three statements concerning the ownership of woodland, see 3g,7. 4,3,28 and 4,25,6; on parua landa siluae, see 4,3,34 tract note.
	LATER 40s. The questions purported to have been those asked by the 'king's barons' in their enquiry, which are given in the Inquisitio Eliensis (Hamilton, p. 97), state that the answers should be for three periods: 'in the time of King Edward, when King William gave it and as it is now'. Great Domesday generally has very little information at two dates, let alone at three, though the value was usually given for when King Edward held it (or at an undisclosed time in the past) as well as 'now' and sometimes an intermediate value was given, such as 'later' or 'when acquired', especially in the returns for circuits I and III, but see also 4,3,9 acquired note. (On the use of 'when acquired' in the Liber Exoniensis for the value 'formerly' in the corresponding entries in Great Domesday - usually when acquired by the tenant-in-chief but occasionally by his subtenant - see CON 1,4 value note and DEV 2,14 formerly note.) In Domesday Shropshire, however, the provision of the intermediate value is remarkably full.
1,8	PREES. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086 and later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It continued to be held by the Bishops of 'Chester': Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 226. In 1255 6 ½ hides are recorded at Pres: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b. The Bradford Hundred Roll (p. 117) gives the members as Darlaston (Darliston SJ5833), Leeton (unidentified), Wotenhull' (unidentified), Mitteley (Mickley SJ6132), Willaston (Willaston SJ5935) and Millheyth' (Millenheath SJ5735) said to be held by the Bishop of 'Chester' of his barony of Eccleshall; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 244; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 250b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 128; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 170, v. no. 5.
	A PRIEST. There appears to have been a Saxon superior church or minster here: Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 435; {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}. Its work may have been interrupted by the fact that it was waste for some time between 1066 and 1086.
	SMALLHOLDERS. The term bordarius, written in full in 4,1,26 (which is rare in Great Domesday), apparently comes from borda 'a wooden hut' (perhaps Frankish hypothetical bord(e), derived from common Germanic bord 'plank'). Unlike the slave (see 1,5 slaves note) the smallholder seems to have had a hut of his own to live in: Finberg, Tavistock Abbey, p. 62. Although there are not quite as many smallholders mentioned in Domesday Shropshire as in neighbouring Herefordshire, Staffordshire and Cheshire, they still form almost a quarter of the recorded population. In Shropshire they are always listed after any villagers in an entry, though, as here, not always immediately after, and (except in 4,3,68) before the cottagers (cotarii), who, though like them in many respects, may have been poorer (see 3c,10 cottager note). Smallholders seem to have been very similar to, if not identical with, Cottagers (coscez), before whom they are also listed in this county; see 2,2 Cottager note.
		Smallholders are often recorded as having ploughs of their own (for example, in 4,8,6 where 1 smallholder has ½ plough and see 3b,5. 3c,7. 3g,4 etc.), but they may also have shared in the ploughs ascribed to other 'villagers' (as here and in 2,1. 3b,2-3 etc.). They are also recorded occasionally in Great Domesday as having some land of their own (for example, in HRT 33,17. 34,13. SOM 9,5. 21,22;25;31. DEV 20,6). See MDX {Appendix} for a summary of the land holdings of smallholders, among other classes, in that county. There is also the evidence of the Inquisitio Eliensis and of the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis for smallholders in Cambridgeshire who had land, ranging from 1 ½ acres to 15 acres (though 5 acres is the commonest holding, as it is for the cotarius; see 3c,10 cottager note). See also 4,14,15 smallholder note.
		Smallholders may also have shared in the land holding recorded for the 'villagers' as a whole in Exon; this is most likely to be the case where Exon replaces the general term uillani with the more specific bordarii; see DOR 12,16 smallholders note; CON 1,7 smallholders note; SOM {Introduction: Exon Extra Information and Discrepancies}.
		Smallholders are sometimes recorded in Great Domesday as paying dues: KEN 5,150. 9,54. SUR 6,1. DOR 1,23. 57,2 (see DOR 57,2 smallholders note). They probably owed their lords some form of labour service: HEF 19,1. In 4,23,17 here it is not clear whether the 4 smallholders recorded paid the 2s as well as the settler: 4,23,17 pays note.
		See Lennard, 'Bordars and Cottars'.
	PLOUGHMEN. Bouarii, literally men who look after the oxen (boues), apparently of the lordship plough, which they worked. There were probably two men to a plough, though single ploughmen are recorded in 4,3,8;63. 4,6,1. 4,14,11 and 4,21,4 and there are several cases in Shropshire where there is not a ratio of two ploughmen to one plough, even if the servi are included with the bouarii. They may have been of servile status though perhaps on the way to becoming free (in the early twelfth century they seem to have held land, perhaps as much as ½ virgate each and they may have been armed). A liber bouarius is recorded in 4,3,63, while 'free ploughmen' are mentioned in HEF 8,2. 9,6-7;9, although in all but one case they are listed with slaves, so the liber may not contrast one sort of bouarius with another, but the whole class of bouarii with the serui. There must have been a real distinction between the ploughmen and slaves, even though their jobs were identical for much of the time, because Great Domesday records both categories together in several manors. In 4,11,2 the scribe wrote serui and then underlined it for deletion and interlined bouar', but this may merely have been because he misread his exemplar.
		Although bouarii are recorded in Domesday Shropshire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and Cheshire and once in Warwickshire, nearly half of them appear in Shropshire - almost 390 on about 90 manors. They are usually listed immediately after the lordship plough(s) - with the slaves before them in some seven instances and after them in three - though sometimes they appear after the 'villagers' and occasionally (as in the sub-holdings in 4,1,2;8) they seem to have had a share in their ploughs.
		For a full discussion, see VCH Worcestershire, i. pp. 274-76; VCH Herefordshire, i. pp. 288-89; VCH Shropshire, i. pp. 302-304; Tait, Domesday Survey of Cheshire, pp. 67-70; Slack, 'Shropshire Ploughmen'; Nelson, Normans in South Wales, pp. 51-57.
	IN LORDSHIP ... PLOUGHS AND 2 VILLAGERS. Latin uill[an]os is accusative after h[abe]nt; it is unlikely, however, that the in d[omi]nio governs the villagers too, as it would be very unusual for villagers to be part of the lordship: 4,8,4 villager note. 4,11,4 villagers note.
	WITH 1 PLOUGH. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote this over an erasure; there is an erased memo in the outer margin next to it. On these marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
	3 OTHER MEN WHO PLOUGH THERE PAY 10s. This is an unusual statement; the 10s was presumably a rent but whether for land or for the right to plough is not clear.
1,9	'CHATSALL'. The form is Cesdille here and Cestulle at 4,23,5. It is also known as 'Chesthill': Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 76. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. This 'lost' manor was at the meeting point of the township of Moreton Say (in Hodnet Ancient Parish) and Stoke-on-Tern Ancient Parish. It was situated in the angle of the Bailey Brook's confluence with the River Tern and included Tern Hill (SJ6332) to the south, Stoke Grange (SJ6331) in the east and part of Helshaw (SJ6329, see 4,8,7 Stoke note) to the south-east. The name was known in the early nineteenth century as an alias for Stoke Grange: in a series of deeds of the Corbet family of Adderley it is Chatsal Grainge otherwise Stoke Grainge, sometimes spelled Chatsale, sometimes Chatshall. These deeds are in an uncatalogued collection in the Shropshire Record Office (call mark 327/1) in boxes 56 and 65. The formula is repeated many times, the first occurrence found by the editors of the Phillimore printed edition of Shropshire being in 1803, the last in 1825. The name may well have ceased to be in current use many years previously.
		This portion of the manor seems to have been combined with Gerard's part (4,23,5) and to have passed to his heirs. In 1212 it is described (Book of Fees, p. 147) as an escheat of Gerard de Thurnay held by Richard de Chesthull'. It was sold by him to the Abbot of Combermere (in Cheshire, see Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 107, and 4,15 William Malbank note), the sale being confirmed (with bounds) in a charter of Henry III: Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 326 no. vii. In Book of Fees, p. 539, the Abbot of Cumbremere holds ½ fee in Chethull' as a fee of Thurney and continued to do so until the Dissolution: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 227, 237; Valor Ecclesiasticus, v. p. 216; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 200; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 311 note 9.
	HE HELD IT. The main scribe of Great Domesday squeezed 7 tenuit into a space he had left after the place-name. It was written in the same paler ink and smaller hand that he had used for the six-line addition to the customs of Shrewsbury (see C14 entry note) and probably as an unnamed holding of Robert son of Theobald under Earl Roger (see 4,9,4 entry note).
2	LAND OF THE BISHOP OF HEREFORD. The lands that became Shropshire lay in two dioceses, those of Chester and of Herefordshire (SHR 1-2).
		The see of Hereford was established in 676 and a cathedral and secular college built there, dedicated to St Mary and later additionally to St Ethelbert, decapitated in 794 by King Offa of Mercia. The first bishop was Putta who was translated from Rochester (Kent). The cathedral was rebuilt in stone c. 825. There was a further rebuilding by Bishop Athelstan after 1012, but it was said to be ruinous when Robert Losinga was made bishop in 1079. He began building an enlarged cathedral.
		The bishops of the eleventh century were:
	1012-1056 Athelstan
	1056-1056 Leofgar
	1056-1060 Ealdred (who held the bishopric with that of Worcester also 1056-1060)
	1061-1079 Walter of Lorraine, chaplain to Queen Edith.
	1079-1095 Robert Losinga. (Probably educated in Liège; cleric to Edward the Confessor c. 1050.
		See Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 415, 426-27; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 384.
		In addition to the lands given in his fief, the Bishop of Hereford claimed Montford (4,4,23) and had Bayston (4,14,12) restored to him after 1086; see 4,14 12 Bayston note.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		2,1 "Rinlau" Hundred.
		2,2 "Culvestan" Hundred
2,1	THE BISHOP ... HOLDS ... HE HELD IT BEFORE 1066. Two different bishops are of course meant, Robert Losinga and Walter of Lorraine; see SHR 2 bishop note.
	LYDBURY [NORTH]. This was an Ancient Parish. The Domesday form is Lideberie. It is later called 'North' to distinguish it from Ledbury (Domesday Liedeberge) in Herefordshire which was also held by the Bishop of Hereford. It lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. It is not certain when the Church of Hereford acquired the estate. According to Walter Map, De Nugis Curialium, pp. 79-82 it was given to the church by Alnoth, son of Edric the Wild, after he was cured of paralysis.
		This large manor contained 53 hides and since it lay on the western edge of the county it effectively made its bishop a Marcher lord; a castle, first known as Lydbury Castle, later Bishops Castle, was erected here before 1148: it is castrum Episcopi in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233 with its church held by the Abbot of Wigmore (see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167a); on the castle see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 421. Lidebur' Nort contained a number of members surveyed in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 77b-78a. They were: 1 hide at Castrum Ep'i and Snellescroft (Bishops Castle SO3288 and Snakescroft SO3387); 1 hide at Linleg' (Linley SO3592), held by the Abbot of Haughmond (see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 143, 685, 700-22); Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 207); 1 hide in Norbur', Herdewyke and Bolle (Norbury SO3692, Hardwick SO3690 and Bow SO3689; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234); 1 hide at Estampton' and Witicote (Asterton SO3991 and Whitcot SO3791); 1 hide at Eyton', Ploeden and Walecot' (Eyton SO3787, Plowden SO3786, and Walcot SO3485; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233-34); 1 hide at Cot'dun and Acliche (Totterton SO3687 and Oakeley SO3388); 1 hide at Burhton' and Eston (Broughton SO3090 and Aston SO2991, the latter dependent on Montgomery in 1086: 4,1,35 Aston note; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233); 1 hide at Lideburi and half of Brocton (Lydbury and Brockton SO3285); 1 hide in La Lee and the other half of Brocton' (Lea SO3589 and Brockton); and 1 hide in Colebech and Widebech (Colebatch SO3187 and Woodbatch SO3088). On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. pp. 194-225.
	4 SMALLHOLDERS ... 28 SMALLHOLDERS. It is possible that one of these two mentions of smallholders is an error, but a rider also seems to have smallholders (and ploughmen) in 4,1,8 and in CHS 1,1 there is a rider with a villager.
	RIDERS. The forms radman (singular), radmans (plural) are from Old English rad-mann (plural radmen). They are very similar to, if not identical with, the radchenistre (plural radchenistres) which are from Old English rad-cniht (plural radcnihtas) and are translated 'riding man' in this edition to maintain the Latin distinction. Like the bouarii (1,8 ploughmen note), the radmans and radchenistres appear almost exclusively in the Welsh border counties in Domesday. The term radman is common in north-western Mercia up to the River Ribble, whereas the term radchenistre predominates in the south-western Welsh Marches, and also in Hampshire (where only five are recorded). In Domesday Herefordshire both terms are found and appear interchangeable (see HEF 1,4 riding men note, to which should be added the fact that the 8 radchenistres recorded in 1066 for Leominster, HEF 1,10a, are almost certainly the same as the 6 radmans mentioned for the same place in 1086). In Shropshire 174 radmans are recorded with 3 radchenistres at Stanton Lacy (7,4) in the south of the county. In more than half the entries which record riders only one rider is mentioned, with two or three in most of the rest of the entries; besides the eight here there are seven at 4,5,14, six at 4,1,14 and four each at 3c,8. 4,3,30 and 4,27,21.
		They were of higher standing than villagers, though in Shropshire they are regularly listed after them (but see 4,5,4;13. 4,7,3. 4,27,9;20. 5,9. 6,30. 7,3) and sometimes after, and sometimes before, the smallholders. Radchenistres are glossed twice as liberi homines ('free men') in GLS 1,15 and GLS 19,2, while in WOR 8,9b liberi homines and in 8,10a radmans perform similar services. However, they were apparently not allowed to be separated from the manor (see HEF 1,4 and GLS 3,1) and they had many obligations. Originally, as their names imply, they seem to have been men who rode with messages or on escort duty, for the king or for their lord (see WOR 2,29 and WOR 2,29 rider note), though they may have had some military functions, if only defence of the border. They also worked their own lands and those of their lord (see WOR 8,10a, GLS 1,24. HEF 29,4). Here in Shropshire they are several times recorded with ploughs of their own, separate from the villagers' ploughs: for example, in 4,14,10. 4,15,1. 4,20,7. 4,21,1;5. 4,27,24. 6,33. The radchenistres in 7,4 have land for 2 ½ ploughs and as many ploughs there. In the majority of entries, however, they seem to have a share in the ploughs recorded for the other villagers, smallholders etc. They may have had smallholders, ploughmen and even villagers of their own (see 2,1 smallholders note); presumably these or other 'villagers' worked the riders' land when they were absent on duty. They also apparently paid dues: 2 riders in 4,20,8 pay 2 cattle in dues (de censu), 7 riders in 4,5,14 pay 20s (though this may be a money rent) and in HEF 1,10a the riding men gave 14s 4d and 3 sesters of honey.
		For discussion, see VCH Worcestershire, i. pp. 250-51; Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, pp. 57, 66, 305-308; Vinogradoff, English Society in the Eleventh Century, pp. 69-71; Nelson, Normans in South Wales, pp. 44-51; Gwynne, 'Domesday Society in Shropshire', pp. 95-97.
	HALL. Aula, the house in which the owner or lord of an estate lived and from which the manor was administered. It has the same meaning as curia in 3c,8 (3c,8 court note) where a mill also serves (provides grain for) the court. On mills, see 1,7 mill note.
	A CERTAIN FRANK <OF LYDBURY>. VCH Shropshire, i. p. 311, translates quidam Franco as 'a certain Frenchman' and says in note 10 there 'or perhaps more probably "a free man" '. However, Franco must be nominative (because of quidam) and so is far more likely to be the Old German personal name Franco (Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names, p. 92) which occurs several times in Domesday (DEV 28,4. NFK 8,137. YKS 14E33;37;47;51) than an unusual form of francus (a hypothetical third declension name, franco, -onis; the term francones homines occurs in WAR 17,27, but there it is an adjective and translated as 'freemen'). The common form for 'Frenchmen' is francigena, as in C14 and passim in Shropshire. Nor is it easy to see how Franco on its own could be taken for francus homo ('freeman') which the scribe used in 4,3,24;29 (and compare LIN 26,53 quidam francus homo); see 3c,12 free(men) note. On franc' (= francus) representing Franco in an entry in Suffolk, see SUF 48,1 Frank note. The Alecto edition has the personal name Franco.
		His name was written over an erasure, together with ten' de ep'o before it; there is an erased memo in the outer margin next to it. On these erased marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
		The name Frank occurs eight times in Domesday Book, representing three, or possibly only two individuals. No other Frank held land within 200 miles of the Shropshire holding which was probably therefore the sole possession of its tenant (JP).
	WILLIAM THE CLERIC. Latin clericus can refer to a lay job or to an ecclesiastical office, and Great Domesday rarely indicates which is intended. However, although the English word 'clerk' would preserve the ambiguity of the Latin, William is a church tenant holding part of a church and its land, so he is more likely to have been a priest or canon. In STS 7 the holders are called the canonici of Wolverhampton in the Landholders' List (folio 246a), but both the clerici and canonici in STS 7 itself and the presbiteri of Wolverhampton in 12,1. In any case many members of the clergy, being literate, no doubt helped their lay and illiterate lords with the written work necessary in the administration of their lands, so their jobs had both ecclesiastical and lay aspects. William is probably one of the Bishop of Hereford's clerici who witnessed his grant of Holme Lacy (HEF 2,12) and Onibury (2,2) to Roger of Lacy; see Galbraith, 'An Episcopal Land-Grant of 1085', p. 360; and 2,2 Lacy note.
	THIS MANOR'S CHURCH. Domesday mentions priests and land attached. On the possibility that this was the minster church for the territory of "Rinlau" Hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	92 MORE PLOUGHS WOULD BE POSSIBLE. An extreme example of an understocked manor, probably because 32 ½ hides were waste in 1086; there were only 28 ploughs in use. On the two ways of estimating the plough capacity used in Domesday Shropshire, see 1,5 land note.
2,2	THE BISHOP ALSO HELD. That is, Walter of Lorraine, but the bishop referred to by 'him' in the next statement is Robert Losinga; see SHR 2 bishop note.
	ONIBURY. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. For a period the Lacy mesne tenure here seems to have excluded the bishop's overlordship. Roger of Lacy gave the tithes of Aneberie to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 34, 39), although the abbey was not able to keep them, and there is no mention of the bishop in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a (nor in 80b) where Walton' and Onibur' (Walton SO4679, a member of Onibury), 3 hides, are held by Robert de Lascy from the heirs of Walter de Lascy. On the other hand, Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223, records that Onebari and Walton are held from the lords of Ludlow (the Lacys) and by them from the Bishop of Hereford; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 55. For the church here in 1086, see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 166b, and Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 201.
	ROGER OF LACY HOLDS FROM HIM. Bishop Robert's grant of Onibury, for Roger's life only, for an annual payment of 20s at Martinmas survives: Galbraith, 'An Episcopal Land-Grant of 1085'. The 20s rent appears here as the 1086 value of Onibury.
	4 WHOLE AND 6 HALF VILLAGERS. Domesday has uillani integri ... dimidii. These half villagers may have been men who held half the normal holding of the average 'whole' villager in the area. In Gloucestershire, 38 'half-villagers' occur in four manors; see GLS 67,1 Ampney note on the probability that the average villager, of South Gloucestershire at least, held 1 virgate, also Vinogradoff, English Society in the Eleventh Century, p. 448 and note 3. However, the dimidius uillanus in DEV 19,43 and DEV 34,45 was one villager whose (land and) services were divided between two tenants-in-chief (brothers) who held in the same village (Ivedon). It is possible that this is the meaning here and that the other 'halves' of three at least of these six villagers are recorded in 7,4, Stanton Lacy, the next holding to Onibury and also held by Roger of Lacy, though in chief (see 7,4 half-villagers note). According to Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 4 note 4, the dimidii uillani were the same as the coliberti, i.e. partially enfranchized villagers, but he gives no evidence to support this view; moreover 'half Freemen' (sochemanni) and 'half priests' occur as well as 'half villagers' in Great Domesday: compare LIN 27,20 freemen note.
	1 COTTAGER. In Shropshire cozet is both singular and plural, but elsewhere in Great Domesday the singular is coscet, and the plural coscez, cozets. These forms, all indeclinable, represent Anglo-Norman versions of Old English cot-seta (singular), cotsetan (plural), 'a cottage-dweller; cottage holder' (Old English cot, saeta: see English Place-Name Elements under cot-saeta; Oxford English Dictionary under cotset). The Anglo-Norman letter z represents the sound ts and the spelling sc a miscopied st representing metathesis of ts, so coscet = cotset, and coscez, cozets = cotsets. The plural in -s represented by cozets (= cotsets) is the result of either a French adaptation or an Old English change of inflexion, and is the form used in WIL 1,1-15 (JMcND).
		'Cottagers' are almost entirely confined to the south-west counties in Great Domesday, Wiltshire providing about 80 per cent of the total entries. In Shropshire there are only nine Cottagers recorded: here and in 7,4;6. Not much is known about their status and economic position, though as can be seen from the few Shropshire entries they are listed after the villagers and either priests, smiths or smallholders and apparently shared ploughs with the other 'villagers'. Some of them at any rate seem to have had land of their own and they may all have shared in the land holding that was ascribed to the villani as a class in Exon: DOR 1,8 Cottagers note. A class of person called in Old English cotsetla ('cottage-dweller'), which seems equivalent to that of the coscet, has its obligations detailed in the Rectitudines Singularum Personarum, pp. 445-46, which dates from the tenth-eleventh century; see DEV 2,24 Cottagers note for a translation.
		Cotarii ('cottagers', see 3c,10 cottager note) were apparently a different class: in Domesday Wiltshire, coscez and cotarii regularly occur in the same entry. The distinction, however, is obscure and what one person called a coscet, another might call a cotarius; they do not occur together in Shropshire. The bordarii ('smallholders': 1,8 smallholders note) also had aspects in common with the Cottagers. It is interesting that in the Domesday satellite text Bath A (SOM {Appendix: Bath A}) coceti are replaced in the corresponding Exon and Great Domesday entries by bordarii, and it may be suggestive that in Devon smallholders are not recorded on estates which had Cottagers (DEV 2,24 Cottagers note), though they are here. It is worth noting that all the Shropshire occurrences of cozet are on manors held by Roger of Lacy, either in chief or as a subtenant, and it may be that the returns for these manors (all in the same area) were provided by Roger and that he (or his steward or bailiff) designated as cozet men who were elsewhere counted among the smallholders; see {Introduction: Writing and Correction}. On the whole topic, see Lennard, Rural England, pp. 346, 353-54; Lennard, 'Bordars and Cottars'; Finberg, Tavistock Abbey, pp. 61-62.
	HE HAS 1 PLOUGH. The manuscript reads i cār'. Farley omitted the first abbreviation sign which is in error. His practice as regards correcting obvious manuscript errors was varied, however: in 3g,1;5 in burgens[es] and tenuit respectively he kept the line above the g of burgens[es] and the abbreviation sign above the n of tenuit which should have been removed by the scribe when he extended these words, but in 4,9 1 (see 4,9,1 Morcar note) he added a sign that was omitted.
	5 VILLAGERS. It is not possible to tell the case of uill', though it is probably the
	accusative uill[anos] and is the object of 'he has'. Compare 4,1,19 villagers note, 4,3,29 villagers note, 4,20,8 ploughmen note and 6,11 villagers note. In 4,1,17 scribe B clarified (or corrected) the uill' of the main scribe of Great Domesday to uill[an]os.
	BEFORE 1066 … 9 PLOUGHS. There are only three references in Domesday Shropshire to T.R.E. ploughs; the others are in 3a,1, and in 4,20,4 which lacks all detail for 1086. The inclusion of the number of ploughs on an estate before 1066 is very sporadic in Great Domesday, although the information seems to have been asked for (Inquisitio Eliensis: Hamilton, p. 97) and it appears regularly in Little Domesday Book. It was probably included in other circuit volumes and then abbreviated out. Leicestershire is the only county where the T.R.E. ploughs are mentioned in any quantity, though there are a few references in Staffordshire and Northamptonshire which are also in circuit IV. In OXF 6,16 and HEF 29,11 this information was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday.
	NOW 20s. This was apparently the rent paid by Roger of Lacy for holding Onibury: 2,2 Lacy note.
3a	LAND OF SAINT-REMY'S. This was the cathedral church of St Remigius (Saint-Rémy) at Reims (formerly known as Rheims) in the French département of Marne; see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 524.
		It is unusual for a foreign church to be found holding English land before the Conquest, but the Annals of Lapley appear to give an authentic explanation: Edward the Confessor had intended to visit Rome, but in the event sent Archbishop Aldred of York who took with him some English nobles. Among them was Burchard, son of Earl Algar of Mercia, who on his return fell ill and died in Rheims, but not before asking to be buried in the church of Saint-Rémy and granting it land out of his patrimony in England. Archbishop Aldred reached England in 1061 and these gifts were subsequently approved by Earl Algar and King Edward; see Eyton, Domesday Studies: Staffordshire, p. 42, and STS 5 Saint-Rémy note.
		When he rubricated Shropshire, the main scribe of Great Domesday inscribed Saint-Rémy as the holder of chapter 3, probably because its holding was the first and only one in this chapter on folio 252b. However, there are in fact nine churches whose lands form the chapter; for clarity they are here numbered 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 3f, 3g, 3h; 3d contains the lands of two different churches dedicated to St Mary (see SHR 3d St Mary note). He omitted a rubricated heading above the section referring to the lands of St Peter's (3b), but he wrote III on the first line of folio 252c (level with the first line of 3b,1) and then erased it, though it is still visible in the manuscript. However, probably when he realized that other churches were the subjects of the chapter, he inserted headings ('What the Church of St Milburga [etc.] holds') above the remaining sections 3c-3h inclusive. Chapter 4 in Domesday Cornwall similarly contains the lands of several churches and the main scribe of Great Domesday similarly inserted the rubricated heading 'Land of St Michael's' at its start, although St Michael's only appeared in the first entry; in the Landholders' List in Cornwall, however, the true state of affairs was recorded as the fourth item is 'The Churches of Various Saints' (folio 120a).
		It is likely that the lands of these nine separate churches formed a single composite chapter, arranged by hundred, in the circuit volume (the likely source of Domesday Shropshire and the other counties in circuit V). At first sight, there is little evidence to support this notion in the order of Domesday, though nothing flatly contradicts it. A closer inspection reveals that any previous hundredal arrangement would have been disrupted by two editorial operations carried out by the main scribe of Great Domesday: the order in which he recorded these churches and the order of the entries within them. He arranged the churches in order of importance, beginning with a foreign church (Saint-Rémy of Rheims: SHR 3a), proceeding to Earl Roger's new Benedictine abbey of St Peter (SHR 3b), then to the lands of Wenlock (SHR 3c) which was the largest church in Shropshire, already a priory and attached to the Abbey of La Charité-sur-Loire. Local churches were then detailed, the first of them (St Mary's of Shrewsbury: SHR 3d,1-3;5) probably being the oldest. Compare the order of the similar group of churches in Domesday Cornwall (CON 4 St Michael's note), which the Great Domesday scribe had changed from the order found in his source, Exon. The hundredal order within each section of chapter 3 was distorted by the scribe's putting the most important holding of each church first, generally what it held in Shrewsbury, but thereafter there are no inconsistencies in the order, though it is not the 'standard' order found in several sub-chapters of Earl Roger's chapter 4 (see {Introduction: Standard Order of Hundreds}). The order of hundreds in the lands of each church is given in the notes to them in this edition.
		If these churches were detailed in one composite section in the circuit volume, it would explain several of the problems encountered by the Great Domesday scribe, such as the brief omission of a holding of Shrewsbury Abbey (see 3b,4 entry note) and of a holding of St Milburga which was not found until after rubrication had taken place (see 3c,14 entry note). Likewise a large detail on St Mary's of Bromfield was added (see 3d,7 entry note) as were all of the holdings of St Michael's Church and St Juliana's Church (SHR 3c, SHR 3e). Moreover, the confusion over the two churches of St Mary (see SHR 3d St Mary note) can best be explained by their being intermingled, as they would have been in a composite chapter, probably with their location only mentioned at the first occurrence, if at all. Finally, chapter 3 as a whole has more corrections in it than other chapters (sub-chapters in the case of chapter 4) in Shropshire, which would have been caused by the need to pick out each church's holdings and probably rearrange the order of these. A study of how the main scribe of Great Domesday rearranged the composite chapters that he found in Exon and the problems this caused is added proof that chapter 3 was so arranged in his source.
		There seems no reason to think that the churches in 3b-3h were tenants of Earl Roger (so VCH Shropshire, i. p. 291), rather than holding directly from the king, as the Landholders' List implies (chapter 4 there is the only one dedicated to Earl Roger and his men), despite the fact that the king is not mentioned in 3b-3h (though he is in 3a,1). St Michael's is said to hold Poston (3e,1) from the earl, but perhaps this was because St Michael's lay in or very near Shrewsbury castle or because Earl Roger seems to have been its founder. Earl Roger was also closely linked with the churches in 3b and 3c, but this does not mean that they were his subtenants. Lewis ('Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 11) reproduces the view of VCH Shropshire and adds that the absence from the Landholders' List of the churches in 3b-3h 'shows that they did not hold directly from the king, but under Earl Roger'. However, their omission was entirely due to the Great Domesday scribe mentioning only Saint-Rémy's land when rubricating, as explained above: this was then reproduced in the list.
3a,1	A MANOR OF 1 HIDE. The land was at Silvington (SO6279) which was an Ancient Parish. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b, for 'Overs' Hundred, Philip le Bret as guardian of the heir of Adam de Beysin holds 1 hide in Silveton' from the prior of Lappele. Lapley in Staffordshire was a dependency of Saint-Rémy of Rheims (Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 86). This was among several manors that Burchard son of Earl Algar gave to Saint-Rémy while dying at Rheims; see Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 1042-1043; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. nos. 503, 557, vi. no. 168; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 166b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 201; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 378.
	THERE WERE … 2 PLOUGHS. Presumably this refers to 1066; see 2,2 before note.
3b	[WHAT ST PETER'S [* OF SHREWSBURY *] HOLDS]. See SHR 3a Saint-Rémy's note.
		St Peter's was the Benedictine abbey founded by Roger of Montgomery, first Earl of Shrewsbury. Its monks are mentioned in 1086. Its predecessor, dedicated to St Peter and St Paul, was a small wooden church or chapel, a lignea capella, built outside the east gate of Shrewsbury by Siward son of Aethelgar, a kinsman of King Edward (see 4,27,32 Siward note). This church had Boreton and Lowe (3b,5 and 6,5) and the tithes of Upton Magna (4,3,24 Upton note)as its endowments. Under William I it was administered by Odelerius, a cleric of Earl Roger and father of Orderic Vitalis. Together in 1083 Odelerius and the earl began the building of an abbey dedicated to the same saints; its first abbot, Fulcred, came from the monastery of Sées (also founded by Earl Roger c. 1087 in Normandy). Roger himself became a monk there three days before his death and was buried there. Siward gave the site of his church for the abbey in exchange for the restoration to him of Cheney Longville (4,27,32) and Odelerius later gave to the abbey 1 hide at Charlton in Wrockwardine (4,1,1 St Peter note). In 1086 eight churches contributed income: Baschurch (4,1,3), Berrington (4,3,14), Corfham (4,1,6), Hodnet (4,1,4), Morville (4,1,5), Great Ness (4,1,17), Stottesdon (4,1,30) and Wrockwardine (4,1,1). Before his death Earl Roger gave the churches of Condover (4,1,2), Donington (4,1,25), Edgmond (4,1,23), High Ercall (4,1,21), Tong (4,1,24) and Wellington (4,1,22). This suggests that the church may have been more important than tradition suggests, and might have been a late-Saxon minster church, founded by an ealdorman to complement the episcopal minster of St Chad (3f) and the royal minster of St Mary (3d). Domesday calls it a monasterium: 3b,1 monastery note. The abbey's extensive early endowments are recorded in its cartulary: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. x-xi, and nos. 2-3, 34-36 and p. 254). See also Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. pp. 415-22); Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 189; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163a; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 57, 76; VCH Shropshire, i. pp. 30-37; Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', pp. 13-14; Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 95; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 523. On Odelerius, see Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 253.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		3b,1 [Shrewsbury] Hundred
		3b,2 Wrockwardine Hundred
		3b,3-5 Condover Hundred
	It is likely that Shrewsbury Hundred was included first because the church was in the city and had possessions there.
3b,1	[IN SHREWSBURY HUNDRED]. See C1 Hundred note.
	SHREWSBURY. In the manuscript SCIROPESBERIE is written in the same size capitals as the manor names. Farley misprinted it the same size as the SCIROPESBERIE in the first line of the county (C1), though it is unlikely that he thought it was a continuation of the section on the Shrewsbury 'customs' on folio 252a, despite the first three words being the same.
	MONASTERY. The church founded by Siward is not otherwise said to be a monastery in the strict sense. It could however have been a 'minster', that is a community of secular priests or canons who used their church as a base from which to preach and minister in the countryside. See 3b,1 parish note.
	WHERE THE PARISH [CHURCH?] OF THE CITY WAS. The Latin is ubi erat parochia civitatis and the meaning is unclear. The word parochia can stand on its own for 'parish church' (Niermeyer, Lexicon Minus, under parochia). This is illustrated by an entry in the Tutbury Cartulary (Saltman, p. 63 no. 51) where Henry of Ferrers and his wife Bertha, after granting Marston-on-Dove, Doveridge and West Broughton (all in Derbyshire) continue: Ad huc autem donavimus parochiam castelli mei ... ('Moreover, in addition, we have granted the parish church of my castle [at Tutbury]'). If that is the meaning intended here, the clause will be describing the position and status of the church on which Earl Roger was basing his abbey, referring to the wooden church built by Siward son of Aethelgar: SHR 3b St Peter's note. Because the sense of the word monasterium in the preceding clause is unclear, it could be that this clause is intended to make clear that this was not a monastery in the sense of withdrawal from the world, but a 'minster'.
		However, it was not the only parish church because Shrewsbury had several parishes. The scribe could have made this meaning much clearer if he had said ubi erat quaedam parochialis ecclesia civitatis ('where there was a parish church of the city'). If, however, parochia has its usual meaning of 'parish', then 'where there was a city parish' is also not clear in meaning. Again the scribe could have clarified by saying cui adiacebat quaedam parochia civitatis, 'to which belonged a city parish'. Here the tense of erat becomes important. Whereas a church might be said to 'have been' if replaced by an abbey, the parish continued to exist; it is represented by some or all of the later Holy Cross parish.
		Because the church that preceded St Peter's Abbey was a late foundation (SHR 3b St Peter's note), its parish will have been carved out of some other. Basset, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 13, takes parochia as 'parish' and further proposes that the rural land that formed part of it was drawn from the land of the church of Ercall Magna.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no.1316.
	FROM HIS BURGESSES. Their houses probably lay in the areas of Shrewsbury called
	Monkeyate alias Foryate and Castelforyate in Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 189, that is Abbey Foregate (formerly 'Monk Foregate') and Castle Foregate; see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 37). They may have been among the 39 burgesses mentioned in C14 as having been given by Earl Roger to the abbey.
	[HE HAS GIVEN] ... AS MUCH AS PAYS £12. In this long sentence ded[it] ('has given') has two objects: monasterium ('monastery') and tantum ('as much'). It seems that at first 'the abbey', represented by the dative eid[em], was said to have been given both the monastery and the render of £12, but the scribe transferred the £12 to the monks by adding a second dative monachis at the end of the sentence and partially interlined, upsetting its flow in so doing. Redd' could abbreviate reddebat ('paid'), rather than reddit ('pays'), because of the past dedit.
		The xii of the render was written over an erasure by the main scribe of Great Domesday; there is an erased memo in the outer margin next to it. On these erased marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
3b,2	EYTON[-ON-SEVERN]. It lay in Wroxeter Ancient Parish and was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred, and continued to be held by Shrewsbury Abbey until the Dissolution. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a, the Abbot of Shrewsbury holds 9 hides in Eiton', the gift of Earl Roger de Belem (i.e. Roger of Montgomery). It is Eyton Abbatis in the Bradford Hundred Roll (p. 116) with members Aston (Aston SJ6109), Siwaldeton ('Snalston' in Eyton), Riston (Rushton SJ6008), Donynton (Donnington SJ5707, apparently shared with Wroxeter: 4,3,26 Wroxeter note) and Drayton (Dryton SJ5805); see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 221, 228; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 189; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 279; and 3b,3 Emstrey note. Aston may perhaps have originally been a berewick of Wellington (4,1,22 Wellington note).
		'Snalston' appears as Snalston alias Shevalstone in 1655, and was later represented by 'Snalston's Hill', now apparently Charlton Hill (SJ5807): Purton, 'Corselle and Siwaldston'.
	EARL LEOFRIC. One of the three great earls (Siward and Godwin were the others) whom King Canute appointed to govern his kingdom. Leofric was created Earl of Mercia c.1018. His wife was Lady (Countess) Godiva. He died in 1057 and was succeeded in Mercia first by his son Algar, then by his grandson Edwin (see 3b,3 Edwin note). Although Domesday names Leofric as the T.R.E. holder, by which the holder at the death of King Edward is usually meant, it can be assumed that the land remained in his family. Domesday Book does sometimes assign a fief to a holder who was dead, deprived or had gone overseas. There are examples in Domesday Leicestershire, where the fiefs of Earl Aubrey, Countess Godiva and Countess Aelfeva are still listed under their names (LEC 10-12). By 1086, Earl Aubrey had returned to the continent and the two countesses were dead, but the implication is that their fiefs remained intact and had neither been re-granted nor broken up.
		For the suspicion that Earl Leofric's tenure had been illegal, see Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1317.
	2 FISHERIES. There are 28 fisheries and two 'half' fisheries recorded in Domesday Shropshire; see 4,1,16 mill note and 4,4,23 fishery note. Three fisheries are linked with mills with a joint render at 4,1,23 of 10s and at 4,19,2 of 5s and 64 sticks of eels. Five other entries record fisheries and mills together. Apart from these joint renders, eleven and a half of these fisheries paid money dues, four of which may have paid 1,000 eels as well (4,6,5 eels note). The fishery at High Ercall (4,1,21) rendered 1,502 large eels, while one of the fisheries in the present entry was reserved for the monks' supplies. Two fisheries paid nothing (of which one is said to be on the Severn, 4,3,21) and the one at 4,3,24 'pays what it can'. The five at 4,18,2 were rented by the villagers (4,18,2 fisheries note). Four and a half fisheries are entered on their own with no detail of render; this was probably because information on them was incomplete, though some fisheries in Great Domesday definitely paid no dues: HEF 1.4. KEN 5,141.
		Fisheries were not just areas where fishing was done, but were fixed contrivances for catching fish, whether weirs, 'stake-nets', 'draw-nets' or hatches etc.: Lennard, Rural England, p. 248; VCH Essex, i. pp. 424-25.
	THE OTHER IS FOR THE MONKS' SUPPLIES. That is, all the fish coming from it went to feed the monks of St Peter's; compare the fisheries in KEN 13,1. HAM 16,5 and HAM 35,4 which were reserved for the lord's hall (i.e. they supplied fish only for the lord's table).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left two-thirds of a line blank after the fisheries, perhaps for the later addition of other resources, such as woodland, meadow or pasture; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
3b,3	EMSTREY. The name means 'minster-church on an island site' (Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 123) though nothing is known of any minster there. The estate was, however, held by the minster of St Peter's of Shrewsbury. Emstrey lay in Atcham Ancient Parish. While Atcham was in Wrockwardine Hundred in1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred, Emstrey was in Condover Hundred. The spurious foundation charter of Earl Roger to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, no. 2 p. 5) grants Eitona (Eyton-on-Severn 3b,2), Eministra (Emstrey) and Burtona (Boreton 3b,5). Emystre is held by the Abbot of Shrewsbury in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a; Monasticon Anglicanum, iii. pp. 519, 521 (nos. iii and x); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 170.
	EARL EDWIN. He was the son of Earl Algar and grandson of Earl Leofric. He succeeded his father as Earl of Mercia on his death at some date between 1062 and 1066. He rebelled and made peace with King William at least twice and was finally killed by his own followers c. 1071. Although he inherited his father's estates and title, it is Algar who is often said to be the T.R.E. holder. See also {Introduction: History}.
	FRENCHMAN. There are 36 francigenae recorded in Domesday Shropshire, including the three 'who serve' in 3g,3 (3g,3 Frenchmen note). As with the Welshmen (4,1,8 Welshmen note) about half appear on manors held by Reginald the sheriff. They occur rarely in the western part of the county, being for the most part entered for manors in the central and eastern areas. They always appear among the other 'villagers' and they share the ploughs ascribed to the villagers as a whole, except in the cases of 4,3,53 and 9,1 where no ploughs are recorded. However, the Frenchman in 9,1 had a mill. See Gwynne, 'Domesday Society in Shropshire', pp. 93-95.
	PLOT OF LAND. Here Latin masura terrae obviously means a plot of land suitable for houses to be built on, rather than the dwelling itself; see C14 messuages note on the varied meanings of masura, mansura.
3b,4	THIS ENTRY was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday almost immediately, as the ink is the same colour as the preceding entries; it is rubricated. Transposition signs link it to the end of 3b,3. Farley did not reproduce these signs as they appear in the manuscript, but as circles with a line emerging on the right.
		After this entry the scribe left a space (for some 11 lines of writing) for more details of the holding of Shrewsbury Abbey to be added if necessary. None of this space was used, but he was able to add material in the similar spaces he had left after the end of the fief of St Milburga (see 3c,14 entry note); see also 3d,7 entry note.
	HE COULD GO WHERE HE WOULD. This means that he was free to choose any lord as patron and protector of his land; compare the phrases 'free with this land' in 4,3,6;8 etc. and 'he could grant and sell' in 4,3,18. Many holdings were 'tied' to a particular manor (thus, the ½ hide of the outlier Hopton (4,8,3) could not be separated from its caput Stoke-on-Tern) and holders and their lands were often bound to a particular lord, often a church, (for example, Aelfric, the T.R.E. holder of Bourton, 3c,8, could not withdraw from the Church of St Milburga, and Edric could not alienate Bayston from the Bishop of Hereford, 4,14,12).
3b,5	BORETON. It lay in Condover Ancient Parish and it was in Condover Hundred. Boreton had belonged to the old Church of St Peter and St Paul before 1066 and continued in the hands of the abbey that replaced it until the Dissolution, though not always in its demesne; see Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 189; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 173; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 40; and 3b,3 Emstrey note, 6,5 St Peter note.
	WITH 1 PLOUGH. So the manuscript. There are several oblique pen-marks scattered over 3b,3;5 and one of them falls just before the .i. of cu' .i. car', so that in the Ordnance Survey facsimile and in the Alecto facsimile the .i. could be taken for a .ii.
3c	WHAT THE CHURCH OF ST MILBURGA [* OF MUCH WENLOCK *] HOLDS. In 1086 St Milburga's was described as a church (ecclesia) though it was in fact a Cluniac priory that had recently been reformed from a secular college.
		A monastery at Wenlock was founded before 690 on land (144 manentes including 97 at Wimnicas) bought from Merewald, ruler of the West 'Hani' or 'Hecani', under-king of the Magonsaete and brother of King Wulfhere of Mercia, by Aethelheah, the abbot of Icheanog (?Iken in Suffolk). Initially Aethelheah and an abbess Liobsynd governed this double house. Merewald also founded Leominster Abbey in Herefordshire. St Milburga was his daughter and the granddaughter of King Penda of Mercia. In a rather obscure transaction, she seems to have given 60 manentes at a place called Homtun in exchange for all 144 hides including Wimnicas (which no doubt encompassed Much Wenlock) and become its abbess. The charter quoted in St Mildburg's Testament simply records the grant of 144 by Aethelheah to Milburga, but other details included in the Testament suggest that the story was more complex: Early Charters of the West Midlands, pp. 204-206.
		The next stages of its history are unclear prior to its destruction by the Danes c. 874. By 901 there appears to have been a minster here dedicated to the Holy Trinity served by secular priests: Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 221; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 436. Earl Leofric of Mercia is said to have re-founded it as a college of secular clergy some time between 1017 and 1035. About 1080 St Milburga's nunnery appears to have been deserted and, at about that time, Earl Roger 'instituted there a new and strictly monastic order of things represented in Domesday by the word 'Abbey' (Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 226), though in fact Wenlock was never an 'abbey' in the strict sense. He also made it a priory dependent on Sainte-Marie of La-Charité-sur-Loire, between Cosne and Nevers in the French département of Nièvre, itself a daughter-house of Cluny; see William of Malmesbury, Gesta Pontificum (Hamilton, p. 306), Gesta Regum (Mynors, Thomson and Winterbottom, i. p. 268); Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, i. no. 358 p. 92. Earl Roger's chaplains held part of the priory's lands (3c,9) briefly between c. 1074 and 1102: VCH Shropshire, i. p. 291, iii. pp. 7, 18, x. pp. 187-95, 416, xi. p. 35. For a history of the abbey, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. pp. 224-27; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 97, 101, 416, 433; VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 38-46, x. pp. 187-95; Goscelin's Life of St Milburga and that part of it called St Mildburg's Testament which is included in Early Charters of the West Midlands, pp. 197-216; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 529; Graham, 'Priory of Wenlock'; Edwards, 'Translation of St Milburga'.
		Charters recorded a number of these early grants. Several of these charters no longer exist but are deduced from St Mildburg's Testament (Early Charters of the West Midlands, pp. 205-206). In the earliest charter issued between 675 and 690 (Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1798 = Early Charters of the West Midlands, no. 404 p. 147) Aethelheah, Abbot of Icheanog, grants to the nun Mildburg 144 manentes in various places including 47 at Magana, Lydas and 'another place by the River Monnow' (which lay in the area of the later Herefordshire) and 97 in Wimnicas (presumably near and including Much Wenlock 3c,2). This land he had purchased from the under-king Merewald. The grant of nearly 100 hides at Wimnicas will have included many of the lands mentioned or implied in Domesday.
		Between 674 and 704 (Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1799 = Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 147 no. 428) Merchelm and Milfrid with the consent of King Aethelred of Mercia give to their sister Mildburg 63 manentes in various places, some around the hill called Clee, some by the River Corve; some at a place called Kenbecleag (which has been thought to be Beckbury: 4,26,5 Beckbury note) and some in Chelmarsh. The lands around the Clee Hill were probably Stoke St Milborough (3c,9) and Cleestanton (3c,13) which between them will have included Clee Downton, Moor, Heath and Norncott. Those by the River Corve were probably Shipton (3c,6), including Larden and Skimblescott, Bourton (3c,8) and Sutton (3c,12). Also included were probably Easthope (4,3,11) and Patton (4,8,4), surrendered in 901 for other lands (see below). Chelmarsh itself was held by Ralph of Mortimer in 1086 (4,11,6) with no mention of any claim by Wenlock Priory, though the abbey held Deuxhill (3c,10) and had held Eardington (4,1,32; see 4,21,3 Millichope note) which were perhaps among the 'some lands' at Chelmarsh, although Eardington, though close, lay the other side of the Mor Brook.
		In a lost charter of 727-736 (Early Charters of the West Midlands, no. 429 p. 148 = Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1802) Sigward granted to the Abbess Mildburg 3 manentes at Magdalee (Madeley: 3c,4). Then in 901 (Early Charters of the West Midlands, no. 430 p. 148 = Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 221), Aethelred and Aethelflaed, rulers of the Mercians, granted to the church of Wimnicas (Much Wenlock) 10 cassatae at Stantune (Stanton Long?; see 4,8,6 Stanton note), previously surrendered to the king's lordship, and 3 manentes at Cahing Laeg (Caughley; see 3c,2 Wenlock note). In return these rulers were granted 8 manentes in Easthope (Easthope: 4,3,11) and 5 in Peattingtune (Patton; see 4,8,4 Patton note).
		Of Wenlock's early lands, Domesday records that in addition to Eardington (see 4,1,32 St Milburga's note) the church had also held Beckbury (4,26,5), a detached part of Patton Hundred. It also records that Stoke St Milborough was in 1086 in the hands of Earl Roger's chaplains; see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 291. Earl Roger later gave Millichope (4,21,3) to St Milburga's in compensation for Eardington.
		The priors of Wenlock gradually consolidated their lands into a Liberty, the contents of which are surveyed in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 84b-86b. A number of useful acquisitions, such as Willey (4,19,11 Willey note), Oxenbold (4,21,4 Oxenbold note), Wigwig (4,19,13 Wigwig note) and Patton (reacquired: 4,8,4 Patton note) gave the church a continuous belt of territory to its south. For the lands of the priory and their value shortly before the Dissolution, see Monasticon Anglicanum, v. pp. 72-73; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 215-16.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		3c,1-9 Patton Hundred
		3c,10-11 "Alnodestreu" Hundred
		3c,12 Shrewsbury Hundred
		3c,13 "Culvestan" Hundred
		3c,14 Condover Hundred
	It seems probable that the holdings in Patton Hundred were placed first as the priory was there, and Much Wenlock was the first manor to be entered in the fief.
3c,1	AN ABBEY. Earl Roger re-founded the church c. 1080, but as a priory, not as an abbey; see SHR 3c St Milburga note.
3c,2	THE SPACE left by Farley at the beginning of the first line of this entry is due to the large rubricated E of Eccl'am in the line above in the manuscript. Farley similarly included a space at the beginning of the second lines of 2,1 and 4,1,1, but he did not for 1,1. 3d,1. 4,6,1. 4,15,1. 4,19,1. 5,1.
	[MUCH] WENLOCK. This was an Ancient Parish and lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later perhaps at times considered a part of Munslow Hundred (see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 84b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228) but it formed the core of the great Liberty of Wenlock. The manor continued to be held by the priory until the Dissolution; see Book of Fees, p. 1283; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 164a, 167b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 215. It will have contained a number of members of which the survey in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 84b-86b (see also pp. 110a-12b) gives Wonl' (Wenlock), Calweton' (Callaughton SO6197), Bradeleg' (Bradeley SO5994) Wigewig' (Wigwig, a later addition: 4,19,13 Wigwig note), Wike (Wyke SJ6402), Barewe (Barrow SO6599; see VCH Shropshire, x. p. 224), Walton' (Wenlock Walton SO6398), and Atterleg' (Atterley SO6497; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. nos. 194, 587). Other lands included in that survey of the Liberty lay sufficiently close to Wenlock manor to have been included in it in 1086. They were:
		Burewardesleg' (Broseley SJ6701; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 503, vi. no. 168, viii. no. 507, x. no. 633; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; and 4,21,11 Bosle note);
		Edulleskot (Arlescott SJ6400; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 224);
		another Bradeleg' (Bradley SJ6301);
		Benethale (Benthall SJ6602; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. nos. 194, 587, v. no. 611);
		Posenhale (Posenhall SJ6501; see VCH Shropshire, x. p. 365);
		Ligleg' (Linley SO6898; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem i. no. 801; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 350; and 4,19,11 Willey note);
		Kakeleg' (Caughley SJ6900; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164a; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 170; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 233);
		Presthope (Presthope SO5897).
	It is probable that Weston' (Weston SO5992), Hopton (Monkhopton SO6293) and Mughal' (Monkhall? SO6194, Monghale Prioris in Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 77 no. viii; see 4,3,6 Acton note and 4,14,29 Buchehale note) were also in the 20 hides as well; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. pp. 39, 43, iii. pp. 223-95; VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 42-43; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 304. However, VCH Shropshire, x. p. 373, places these in Oxenbold which was a thirteenth-century grant to the priory.
		Caughley was among lands granted by Aethelred and Aethelflaed to the church of Wenlock in 901: 3c St Milburga's note.
	EXEMPT FROM TAX. The meaning of quietus here is clear, as in HEF 19,10 and, probably, in DOR 2,6, but elsewhere in Great Domesday it can mean 'free from customary dues' (as in CHS Rl,3;7 etc. and DEV 3,2) or 'exempt from service' (as in HEF 1,44) or 'undisturbed', 'without interference' (DEV 25,3 attached note. LIN CK67) or 'quit, settled, discharged' (WOR 2,74 discharged note. HEF C14). Exempt hides are also recorded in 3c,3-7;9.
	IN KING CNUT'S TIME. That is, 1016-1035.
	PAID TAX. Great Domesday geld' can abbreviate both the present tense geldat (plural: geldant) or the past imperfect geldabat (plural: geldabant), or the past perfect geldavit (plural: geldaverunt). When the past is meant, geld' is regularly, but by no means always, accompanied by the phrase T.R.E. ('before 1066'). Here the geld' statement is probably governed by 'in King Cnut's time' in the preceding clause. Other Great Domesday counties, such as those in the south-west, invariably have 'Before 1066 it (the manor) paid tax (geldabat) for n hides'. However, as Shropshire has the present participle geld[ans], plural geld[antes], for the tax statement (see 1,6 pay note), it is possible that geld' here abbreviates the present tense too and that the remaining 16 hides 'pay tax'.
	2 HEDGED ENCLOSURES. Haia ('hedge') is a Latinization of a Frankish word which gave Old English (ge)haeg and Old French and Modern French haie. Here it means a 'hay' or 'hedged enclosure' into which game were driven for capture. In 4,8,10 and 6,14 they are 'for capturing roe-deer'; see WOR 18,4. They were artificial: according to CHS R6,2 the men from Leyland and Salford made one in the woodland, as did the thanes of West Derby Hundred in CHS Rl,40a. The haia at Donnelie in WAR 16,17 is unusual in having a measurement, ½ league by ½ league. There are over 80 haiae recorded in Domesday Shropshire for about half that number of places, more than elsewhere in the West Midland shires. Several times (for example in 4,1,27. 4,4,20. 4,18,3) they are specifically said to be in the woodland; the three at Longnor (4,3,15) are described as firmae 'fixed' or 'solid' (4,3,15 enclosures note). See Ellis, General Introduction to Domesday Book, i. p. 114; Du Cange, Glossarium, under haga; English Place-Name Elements, i. under (ge)haeg, haga.
3c,3	TICKLERTON. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Eton under Heywood, Eton having been one of its members in 1086, but later displacing it as the manorial centre. Ticklerton was in Patton Hundred in 1086, then no doubt in Munslow Hundred, then in the Liberty of Wenlock, remaining with the priory until the Dissolution. It is not certain when the church of Wenlock acquired it. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85b, the priory holds Eton (Eaton-under-Heywood SO5090; see 3c,4 Madeley note), Herton' (Harton SO4888), Tycleworthin (Ticklerton), Longefeud (Longville-in-the-Dale SO5493) and Lussekote (Lushcott SO5595). It is quite possible that the two previous entries in the Rotuli Hundredorum, Hatton (Hatton SO4690) and Wlv'eton (Wolverton SO4787), should be included; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 311; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 323.
	7 HIDES. The figure vii was squeezed in, probably over an erasure.
	VALUE ... 100s; [***]. The space left between the T.R.E. and present values may be for the later insertion of the value of the estate when acquired, although none of St Milburga's estates included the value at this intermediate date. See 3c,4 value note.
3c,4	MADELEY. This was an Ancient Parish, and lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, then in Brimstree Hundred (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a) before being absorbed by Wenlock Liberty. It came into the possession of the church of Wenlock between 727 and 736 when Sigward, a follower of King Ethelbald of Mercia, sold it to Mildburg; see Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1802 = Early Charters of the West Midlands, pp. 148, 203, 206, 212 no. 429; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 35; and SHR 3c St Milburga note. It was Maddeleye in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228, held by the prior of Wenloc with Eton (Eton under Heywood: 3c,3 Ticklerton note) and Burghton (Bourton: 3c,8); see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 319; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 291, iii. pp. 7, 10, xi. p. 35; and SHR 3c St Milburga note.
	VALUE ... £4; [***]. The space left between the T.R.E. and present values may be for the later insertion of the value of the estate when acquired, although none of St Milburga's estates included the value at this intermediate date. See 3c,3 value note.
3c,5	[LITTLE] WENLOCK. This was an Ancient Parish. In 1086 it was, like Madeley (3c,4), a projecting or isolated part of Patton Hundred lying north of the River Severn. It is not certain when this estate came into the possession of the church of Wenlock. It may well have been early and included under some other name: SHR 3c St Milburga note. Parva Wonl' was held by the priory until the Dissolution; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164a; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 215; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 324; VCH Shropshire, ii. p. 45, xi. p. 80.
	2 HEDGED ENCLOSURES AND A HAWK'S EYRIE. Hawks' nests were regarded as of considerable value and are regularly recorded in Great Domesday, either in connection with hedged enclosures, as here and in 4,14,4, or on their own, as in 4,8,5; they are particularly well recorded in Cheshire. Hawks are often mentioned as part of a manor's value or render, as in 4,8,16. 4,24,4 (compare 4,27,4). Where they are commuted for a money render, frequently among a borough's customary dues, the rate seems to have been at least £10: WOR C2. LEC C4. WIL B2. WAR B4. NTH B36. On the types of falcon, see WOR C2 hawk note. Payments were even made 'for (the upkeep of?) hawks', as in GLS W2.
3c,6	SHIPTON. This was a chapelry of Much Wenlock, then an Ancient Parish. It was in Patton Hundred in 1086, then in Munslow Hundred, later in Wenlock Liberty. It appears to have come into the possession of the church of Wenlock between 674 and 704: SHR 3c St Milburga note.
		The holding included Lav' den' Inferior and Lav'dene Superior (Larden SO5693); see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 164a, 167b; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 473. It is likely that the next two entries in the Rotuli Hundredorum, that is Kilmescot (Skimblescott? SO5892) and Cornee (Corve SO5993, part of Brockton (4,3,13) in 1086), were also there in 1086; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 303; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 370.
3c,7	PERKLEY. Domesday Petelie. It lay in the Ancient Parish of Much Wenlock. This place, which lay in Patton Hundred, has long been regarded as lost, but was identified by Dr. David C. Cox in the course of editing VCH Shropshire, x. Petelia occurs c. l 102 (Edwards, 'Translation of St Milburga', p. 146), is Purteley in 1339 (Shropshire Record Office 3320/22/3-4), Pertlie field in 1727 (Shropshire Record Office, uncatalogued 3614) and Pertley on the Tithe Apportionment. It has no representative in the Rotuli Hundredorum, probably because it was early absorbed by the adjacent Much Wenlock in which parish it lies; see Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 83 no. ii; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 328.
		In the Alecto facsimile the P of PETELIE resembles a B. According to the Editors' note at the end of the Places Index in the Alecto edition of Shropshire (Shropshire Domesday, p. 53), this phenomenon was caused by 'the continuous-tone process of reproduction employed for the facsimile ... where the red of the rubrication is either contiguous with or superimposed over the dark browns of the lettering'. In Shropshire similar misreadings of place-names could occur in five other entries there; see 4,1,35 Dudston note, 4,11,6 Chelmarsh note, 4,21,3 Millichope note, 4,21,6 Holdgate note and 8,1 Knighton note. They could also occur in two hundred names; see 4,22,1 Leintwardine note and 4,27,27 Baschurch note. The omission of the rubrication of a place-name is probably also caused by this phenomenon (4,27,16 Eyton note).
3c,8	BOURTON. This was a chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Much Wenlock, then was itself an Ecclesiastical Parish. It was in Patton Hundred in 1086, then presumably in Munslow, later in Wenlock Liberty. It appears to have come into the possession of the church of Wenlock between 674 and 704: SHR 3c St Milburga note. Burton', 2 hides 3 virgates, belonged to the prior of Wenlock in 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85b); see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 215; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 300; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 420; and 3c,4 Madeley note.
	EDRIC. Edric son of Aelfric here and 'Aelfric's son' in 3c,14 were probably the same as Edric of Wenlock; see Mason, 'Edric of Bayston', p. 115; Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 92-93. Williams is further inclined to identify him with Edric the wild (4,1,14 Edric note). Edric of Wenlock was one of the witnesses to the grant by the Bishop of Hereford of land in Onibury (2,2) to Roger of Lacy: Galbraith, 'An Episcopal Land-Grant of 1085'.
	3 VIRGATES OF LAND. This seems to have been a correction by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure.
	MILL WHICH SERVES THE COURT. Latin curia here means the same as aula ('hall'), that is, the lord's house, the centre of the manor and of his lordship estate. It occurs in an almost identical phrase involving a mill in 2,1; see also 4,20,8 and 4,21,2 and DEV 5,1 mill note for other examples of a mill serving (i.e. providing flour for) the curia. Compare '2 mills which serve the monks' in 3c,2 and see 1,7 mill note.
3c,9	STOKE [ST MILBOROUGH]. Domesday Godestoch ('God's Stoke'), referring to its possession by St Milburga's priory. This was an Ancient Parish and lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, then in Munslow Hundred and later in Wenlock Liberty. It appears to have come into the possession of the church of Wenlock between 674 and 704: VCH Shropshire, x. p. 383; and SHR 3c St Milburga note.
		This large manor had a number of members and in later times seems to have included Cleestanton, separately listed in Domesday (3c,13) and adjacent in "Culvestan" Hundred: Stoke and Staunton are held from the prior of Wenlock in Munslow Hundred in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a, Sthoke at 20 hides includes Hunton' (Cleedowntown? SO5880), Newton' (Newton SO5882), Bothton' (Bockleton SO5783) and Ekinestaneston' (Kinson SO5782). The next three entries in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a, were probably part of this manor; they are Staunton (Cleestanton 3c,13), LaHethe (Heath SO5585; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 684, iii. no. 194) and Normonechot (Norncott SO5686; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, x. no. 618). These last two lie a little further off to the north, beyond Clee St Margaret; Heath was a detached part of the Ancient Parish of Stoke St Milborough. See Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 164a, 166b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 6.
	EARL ROGER GAVE IT. He and his successor held it c. 1074-1102; see SHR 3c St Milburga note.
	THE CHURCH OUGHT TO HAVE IT. Earl Roger seems to have appropriated this land which was an ancient possession of the church; see Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1318.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
3c,10	DEUXHILL. This was an Ancient Parish, united before 1535 with Glazehill Ancient Parish. It appears to have come into the possession of the church of Wenlock between 674 and 704, probably being granted as part of Chelmarsh: SHR 3c St Milburga note. It was in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, probably passing to Stottesdon Hundred before being absorbed by Wenlock Liberty. ½ hide is held from the prior in Dewkeshul' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85b; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 219; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 295.
	1 COTTAGER. Cotarius, an inhabitant of a cote (Old English for cottage), sometimes recorded in Great Domesday as having land of his own (as in MDX 2,2. 3,1: MDX {Appendix}, and in HRT 33,17). In Cambridgeshire (CAM 5,41 cottagers note. CAM 11,3 and CAM 26,34) cottagers who appear in Great Domesday have 5 acres of land each in the corresponding entries in the Inquisitio Eliensis and the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis. This same amount is recorded for the cotsetla in the Rectitudines Singularum Personarum (see 2,2 Cottager note), and often for the smallholder (1,8 smallholders note), though cottagers with fewer and greater numbers of acres are also recorded in the Inquisitio Eliensis and the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (CAM 5,47 cottagers note. CAM 5,50 cottagers note. CAM 11,4 cottagers note). On several occasions in Great Domesday cotarii are recorded as paying dues or rent, for example, in MDX 4,1 where the rent was for their 'gardens' (ortis) and also MDX 1,3. MDX 3,27. SUS 9,53. SUS 9,64. KEN 5,139.
		In Shropshire there are 15 cotarii recorded on five manors (3c,10. 4,3,2;68. 4,5,9. 4,10,1) in four hundreds. In each case they appear to have a share in the villagers' ploughs. They are listed after the villagers proper (where there are any) and after the smallholders except in 4,3,68. There are also 9 'female cottagers' in 7,5, but they are listed separately from the villagers and their ploughs.
		Cotarii are very rarely mentioned in Domesday for the West Midlands, though they are numerous in other areas of the country, especially in the south and south-west and in Cambridgeshire. This does not mean that they did not exist here, but that they were either included with another class of inhabitants, probably the bordarii (see 1,8 smallholders note), or that cotarii and bordarii, if not actually synonymous, had so many aspects in common that the two terms were frequently interchangeable (the foreign term bordarii was eventually completely replaced by the native term cotarii). In the summary of Glastonbury Abbey s lordship holding in Dorset in Exon folio 527b4, the 72 bordarii correspond to the 40 bordarii and 32 cotarii recorded in Great Domesday for Dorset (DOR 8,1;3); see also CAM 5,34 smallholders note. CAM 5,41 smallholders note. CAM 5,8 and 28,2 have bordarii where the Inquisitio Eliensis (Hamilton, p. 101) has cotarii for the same manors, though the Inquisitio Eliensis Summary (Hamilton, p. 168) has bordarii for those in CAM 5,8 and the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (Hamilton, p. 3) has bordarii for CAM 28,2. The Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (Hamilton, p. 80) has cottagers for the smallholders of Great Domesday CAM 31,6. The reverse occurs in the corresponding Inquisitio Eliensis Breviate entries for CAM 5,49;51;55;59-63 etc. In Cambridgeshire cotarii are not recorded at all in a group of hundreds in the south-east, though elsewhere in that county they occur, together with bordarii; as this area seems to have been the first to be surveyed, it is probable that personal preference for the term bordarii rather than for cotarii may be the reason. For the Exon evidence on this matter, see DEV 15,21 cottagers note. Likewise in the Berkshire hundreds of 'Blewbury', 'Slotisford', Wantage and Beynhurst, cottagers take the place of smallholders after villagers in the list of population; the first three of these hundreds are adjacent, though Beynhurst is quite separate, so this phenomenon cannot be due entirely to a particular local variation. It is more likely to be the choice of whichever clerk drew up the lists for those hundreds: Baring, Domesday Tables, pp. 11, 40. Certainly there is no mention of bordarii in the introductory paragraph to the Inquisitio Eliensis (Hamilton, p. 97) which purports to list the Commissioners' questions, while cot' (or cothcethle in one version) is mentioned there after the villani where the bordarii usually occur in Great Domesday.
		In Shropshire, however, cottagers and smallholders do appear to be separate categories, at least as far as this entry and those at 4,3,68. 4,5,9 and 4,10,1 are concerned. Other counties in Great Domesday also regularly record smallholders and cottagers in the same entry, though cottagers are not mentioned in every county. There probably were differences between the two classes, though perhaps only of wealth. The bordarius seems to have had slightly more land and ploughs than the cotarius who may sometimes only have owned nothing more than his cottage, though there was much overlapping and the distinction between the two terms may have only grown up gradually and not to have been universally accepted.
		The Cottager (coscet) also had several aspects in common with the cotarius and may have been regarded as identical sometimes; see 2,2 Cottager note.
		On these population categories, see Lennard, 'Bordars and Cottars'.
3c,11	PICKTHORN. It lay in Stottesdon Ancient Parish and was in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, then in Stottesdon Hundred, later in Wenlock Liberty. It is Pikethorn in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164b; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 218, 231; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 921, ii. no. 595; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 230.
3c,12	SUTTON. It was an Ancient Parish, later in Meole Brace parish as part of Shrewsbury Liberty. It was in Shrewsbury Hundred in 1086 and is mentioned in the 100 hides of Shrewsbury (C13). It appears to have come into the possession of the church of Wenlock between 674 and 704: SHR 3c St Milburga note. It is Sutton' prope Salop' ('near Shrewsbury') in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85b; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 215; Monasticon Anglicanum, v. pp. 78, 81; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 363. It is no doubt called 'south tun' by reference to Shrewsbury.
		Sudtone was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure.
	1 HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line, measuring about an inch to the side ruling, after i hida.; see 1,5 hide note.
	FREE[MEN]. Domesday homines ... francos. In this edition francus homo is translated 'freeman' to distinguish it from liber homo, translated here as 'free man'; the difference between the two terms is unclear, however. In the Alecto edition it is translated as 'free man'. In Medieval Latin francus can mean both 'free' and 'French' depending on the context and can be used as a noun ('a Frenchman'). To avoid possible confusion francigena is available for 'Frenchman', but is rather grand, like angligena for angli when there is no possible doubt about the meaning of angli. The main scribe of Great Domesday evidently attempted to use francigena for 'Frenchman' and francus for 'free'. There seems to be no unequivocal case where francus means 'French' or Frenchman. In the present context the use of homines with francos rules out the possibility of 'French' and it is also unlikely because of its contrast with villagers who do not seem to have been free in every sense (Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, pp. 41-52). However, Maitland (ibidem, p. 46 note 1) suggests that in 4,3,24 francus homo is an equivalent of francigena because in 4,3,23 a Frenchman is listed. However, francigena is the term invariably used, in Shropshire at least, for 'Frenchman' and in the examples Maitland quotes in his note the 'francos' of MDX 2,1 (a very similar phrase to the one here) and 'francus' of WIL 26,3 are both franc' in the manuscript which is more likely to abbreviate francigena[s], the 'lightning' sign used very rarely abbreviating -os or –us. Those two examples are translated by 'Frenchmen' and 'Frenchman' respectively in this edition, as also in the Alecto edition. On the two meanings of francus, see Freeman, Norman Conquest, v. Appendix. Note E; VCH Middlesex, i. pp. 90-91.
3c,13	CLEESTANTON. It lay in the Ancient Parish of Stoke St Milborough. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, then in Munslow Hundred and later in Wenlock Liberty. It appears to have come into the possession of the church of Wenlock between 674 and 704: SHR 3c St Milburga note. In the Middle Ages it was often counted as a part of Stoke St Milborough (3c,9) and called Stanton, Staunton or La Cleye S'ce Milburge: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 166b. It had been subinfeudated by c. 1200 and Wenlock's overlordship was gradually lost: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 111. Cleestanton had probably once formed a single land-unit with Clee St Margaret (4,21,2): Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 88.
	2 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for some five letters after hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
3c,14	THIS ENTRY was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday in a space left at the end of St Milburga's fief. He used a paler ink than he had used for the preceding text and
	the entry was not rubricated, so was a late addition. It was done at the same time as the other unrubricated additions in Shropshire: 4,1,33-34. 4,12,1. 6,28;32. 7,2. The ink is very similar in colour to that used for both the unrubricated entries in Bedfordshire, for one in Northamptonshire and for most of those in Derbyshire (BDF 24,11. 53,22. NTH 57,3. DBY 1,17. 6,100-101. 10,4. 16,3-8. 17,22-23), suggesting that he amassed several items for inclusion before adding them. However, the writing is more formal in the Shropshire added entries. Three of the seven unrubricated additions are for places in Condover Hundred. Very unusually for an unrubricated entry, he included the hundred head (written in a space at the end of the preceding entry), perhaps because the location of this ½ hide holding was unavailable. The only other occurrence of this is in Leicestershire (see LEC 1,12 entry note), but see HAM 5a fief note and, for the inclusion of one by scribe B, see CAM 1,22 entry note. See also SHR 3e fief note, SHR 3h fief note and 4,1,34 entry note.
	ST [MILBURGA]'S. WITBURGA is obviously a mistake for MILBURGA as the descent of the land proves, as does its tenancy by Aelfric's son (presumably Edric: VCH Shropshire, i. p. 313 note 14) who was St Milburga's tenant at Bourton (3c,8 Edric note). The source of this late addition was probably faulty; see also 3c,14 ½ hide note. There was a St Withburga who died in the mid-eighth century, some years after St Milburga.
	½ HIDE. This unnamed land was probably Hughley (SO5698), an Ancient Parish. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85b, ½ hide in Leg', formerly in Condover Hundred, is held by Hugh de Leg' from the prior of Wenlock; Leye is associated with Presthope (Presthope: 3c,2 Wenlock note) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228, and is Huglye in Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 216. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 302; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 313 note 14, x. p. 233. VCH Shropshire, x. p. 337, suggests that this might be the Lingen alias Liya given by King Coenred of the Mercians to the nun Feleburg between 704 and 709 (Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 139 no. 405 = Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1801) and which she subsequently gave to the church of Wenlock. However, Liya may well be the Lye that is near Lingen, both of which are now in Herefordshire (6,14 Lingen note; 6,16 Lye note).
	FROM IT. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote de eo in error for de ea: the feminine ea is needed to agree with Sancta Witburga.
3d	WHAT THE CHURCH OF ST MARY HOLDS. At some stage in the Domesday process two separate returns, one concerning St Mary's Church of Shrewsbury (3d,1-3;5) and one from St Mary's of Bromfield (3d,4;6-7) have become amalgamated. If, as suggested in SHR 3a Saint-Rémy's note, the holdings of the two churches were part of a composite chapter on churches in Shropshire in the circuit volume, it is likely that the identifying location of each only appeared once, if at all. That the main scribe of Great Domesday had problems with the lands of St Mary's of Bromfield is suggested by most of 3d,6 being corrected over erasure and 3d,7 being a later addition and also corrected over erasure; see 3d,6 now note and 3d,7 entry note.
		St Mary's of Shrewsbury was traditionally said to have been founded by King Edgar (957-975) who established secular canons there. In reality, it was probably a middle Saxon foundation, perhaps a minster for the Magonsaete and, with St Chad, one of the two senior churches in Shrewsbury. Its parish lay in the northern part of the promontory on which Shrewsbury was built, and it had further land, north of the River Severn. It seems probable that the parishes of St Juliana, St Alkmund and St Michael were carved out of it. If not founded by King Edgar, it probably had a royal origin and had become a royal free chapel by the thirteenth century; see VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 119-23; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 1464; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 418, 438, 482; Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', pp. 7-8; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 530.
		The minster Church of Bromfield was of pre-Norman origin, certainly founded before 1061, and probably, in view of its extensive and uninterrupted parochia, much older: {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}. It had been granted extensive liberties by Edward the Confessor (Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 150 no. 433 = Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1162), had 12 canons and had enjoyed considerable estates, although 10 hides of Bromfield (3d,7) and Chinbaldescote (4,20,21) had been lost to the church by 1086. In 1086 it was a secular college containing canons, and from 1115 it was a Benedictine priory. It was annexed to Gloucester Abbey in 1155; see the Gloucester Cartulary (Hart, pp. 214-14); Monasticon Anglicanum, iv. p. 155; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. pp. 207-208; Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 150 no. 433; VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 18, 27-29; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 52, 61, 112, 116, 468; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 530; Harmer, 'A Bromfield and a Coventry Writ'; Blair, 'Secular Minster Churches', pp. 128-31. On the relation of this church to the Hundred of "Culvestan" and to the other minster churches of Shropshire, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		3d,1-2 Baschurch Hundred (St Mary's, Shrewsbury)
		3d,3 Shrewsbury Hundred (St Mary's, Shrewsbury)
		3d,4 'Overs' Hundred (St Mary's, Bromfield)
		3d,5 Baschurch Hundred (St Mary's, Shrewsbury)
		3d,6-7 ["Culvestan"] Hundred (St Mary's, Bromfield).
	It is probable that the largest manor of St Mary's of Shrewsbury (at Broughton) was entered first, as that church is recorded as having nothing in the city.
3d,1	BROUGHTON. Broughton was a chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary, then was itself an Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred, Broughton itself being held by St Chad's Church (3f,5). This holding actually lay at Cleve and Sansall (Clive SJ5124 and Sansaw SJ5023), which were likewise part of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary and are now in the Civil Parish of Clive. The Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121, states that they were held by the Dean and Canons of the Church of St Mary, Shrewsbury, in free alms from the king; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a. These lands still lay in the parish of St Mary, Liberty of Shrewsbury, in the nineteenth century; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 160; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 313 note 15; and 3d, 2 Astley note.
	A PRIEST. He was probably a canon of St Mary's, Shrewsbury.
3d,2	ASTLEY. The Domesday form is Hesleie. It formerly lay in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary and is now a separate Civil Parish. It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, then in Pimhill Hundred and Shrewsbury Liberty. Estleg' was held by the Dean and Canons of St Mary's, Shrewsbury, as 3 hides of the King's Chapel in Shrewsbury in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b; it is Astleye coupled with Klive (3d,1 Broughton note) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121, and Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 157.
	A PRIEST. He was probably a canon of St Mary's, Shrewsbury.
3d,3	MEOLE [BRACE], RALPH OF MORTIMER'S MANOR. This 1 virgate is mentioned among the 100 hides of the City of Shrewsbury in C13. Ralph of Mortimer's manor was Meole Brace (6,33), an Ancient Parish.
3d,4	IN 'OVERS' HUNDRED ... ½ HIDE. It appears that this land, like 3d,6 Bromfield, was a possession not of St Mary's of Shrewsbury, but of St Mary's of Bromfield. It lay at Lower Ledwyche (SO5374) in Ludford which was formerly a chapelry of Bromfield, then a separate Ancient Parish. It is the Presteledewych' held by the prior of Bromfield from the king in 'Overs' Hundred in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b; see Monasticon Anglicanum, iv. pp. 155, 157; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 155; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 377; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 313 note 16. For Upper Ledwyche, see 4,14,22.
3d,5	MYTTON. It lay in Fitz Ancient Parish.. It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086. It would seem that the 1086 tenant Picot (of Say) alienated it from St Mary's of Shrewsbury and incorporated it in his own manor of Fitz (4,20,15), since it soon ceased to be an independent manor: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 156. Picot likewise appears to have alienated Chinbaldescote from the Church of St Mary of Bromfield (4,20,21 Chinbaldescote note).
	PICOT [* OF SAI *]. Picot here may be the same as Earl Roger's subtenant of that name, who may have come from Sai, see 4,20 Picot note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	NOW IT IS AT A REVENUE FOR 11s. In Domesday Book firma has several meanings (see also 4,1,12 revenue note and 4,8,8 revenue note), but here the phrase ad firmam pro seems to mean that the manor was being held at a revenue, i.e. for a money rent, that it was being 'farmed'. Under this system the firmarius or 'farmer' (here probably the subtenant Picot) agreed to pay a fixed sum of money annually to the king, the sheriff, or the lord of the manor (here St Mary's Church) which he hoped he would more than recover from the rents and dues he received from that manor as well as from the profits of the lordship. Other examples in Shropshire of land being held in such a way include 4,4,8. 4,25,4. 4,26,7. 4,27,5;30. 6,31, and see 4,5,14. 4,16,1. 4,26,5. 4,27,4. Occasionally the villagers themselves 'farmed' a manor: perhaps the men in 4,26,7. 4,27,30 and 6,31 who paid so much 'in revenue' and the Welshman in 4,27,4 who paid a hawk in revenue fall into this category, though it is possible that they merely paid a rent for a holding. See Lennard, Rural England, pp. 105-75, especially pp. 153-54; Hoyt, 'Farm of the Manor'; and DEV 6,6 villager note.
3d,6	[IN "CULVESTAN" HUNDRED]. This hundred head is supplied from geographical probability and from the later history of the manor (3d,6 Bromfield note).
	BROMFIELD. This was an Ancient Parish. It was probably in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. As in 3d,4 St Mary's of Bromfield has become confused with St Mary's of Shrewsbury; see SHR 3d St Mary note; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 313 note 17. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 225, the prior of Bromfeld holds Bromfeld with members from the king; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 163b, 166b. One of these members was Bromfeld Parva in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223 ('Little Bromfield': Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 254; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 220), also called Bromfeud Simonis in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a ('Simons' Bromfield). Other members were probably Acley or Okeleye (Oakly Park SO4876) held by Simon de Halton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a and in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223, and West Halhton' or Halecton' (Lady, Hill and Priors Halton SO4775, SO4875, SO4975) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223. The charter of Henry III given in Monasticon Anglicanum, iv. p. 155 (no. ii) includes lands at Haverford (Halford SO4383); Dudingehope (Upper and Lower Dinchope SO4583, SO4584; see 4,20,21 Chinbaldescote note); Efford (perhaps Ashford Bowdler, in Herefordshire); Feltune (Felton and Clayfelton SO5076); Burgeheye (Burway SO5075); Lethewic (Lower Ledwyche; see 3d,4 hide note) and Halentone (Halton, see above); see also the Henry VIII survey in Monasticon Anglicanum, iv. p. 155; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 207; VCH Shropshire, ii. p. 27. In 1155 there were prebends from Burway, Pontesbury, Felton, Halford, Dinchope, Ashford Bowdler?, Lower Ledwyche and Halton: the Gloucester Cartulary (Hart, pp. 214-14).
		Halford (including Dinchope) is now a separate parish, but was formerly a detached part of Bromfield Ancient Parish.
	IS SITED THERE. Domesday has ibi consistit. Thus the church stands at Bromfield not in Shrewsbury; see SHR 3d St Mary note.
	NOW ... MANOR. Almost all of this entry (2 ¼ lines) was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure, perhaps at an early stage. He had probably written the details of another holding here.
3d,7	THIS ENTRY was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday in a space originally left after this fief, probably at the same time as the fiefs of St Michael's Church (immediately below it: SHR 3e) and of St Juliana (at the foot of the column opposite: SHR 3h). The writing is compressed in all three additions and slopes upwards here. Almost a whole line (from totu[m] in the first line to teneb[at] in the second line was written over an erasure. On a possible indicator as to when this entry was added, see 3d,7 land note.
	HAD THE WHOLE. This corrects the 'held' of the Phillimore printed translation.
	SPIRTES ^[THE PRIEST]^. In this entry he is called a canon, but elsewhere in this county he is called Spirtes the priest (4,20,18. 9,1). He was a wealthy churchman who had held a total of over 80 hides in Shropshire, Herefordshire, Wiltshire, Somerset and Hampshire. He had been a favourite of King Cnut’s sons Harold and Harthacnut; see Hearne, Hemingi Chartularium: p. 254, and Worcester G8 (in WOR {Appendix}) which also mentions his expulsion from England (by King Edward) for an unknown reason. He had also held some land from St Alkmund's (9,1).
	ROBERT SON OF WIUHOMARCH. He was the father of Swein, the sheriff of Essex, and is also probably to be identified with Robert of Moyaux (in the French département of Calvados, canton Lisieux). Apparently a Norman by residence, but having a father or a mother with a Breton name, he held land under Edward the Confessor, was his staller and a close counsellor. He is said to have sent news of the battle of Stamford Bridge to William, then Duke of Normandy, to whom he was apparently related. He was sheriff of Essex under William and was succeeded by his son Swein. The exact dates are unclear, and it is possible that Robert relinquished the shrievalty in favour of his son before his death; see Green, English Sheriffs, p. 39. Robert is recorded as dead in ESS 24,59 and it is most likely that he had died before or during the conduct of the Domesday Survey and been succeeded in his lands by Swein. If Robert son of Wiuhomarch is the same as Robert the constable (unless Robert son of Ivo, also a constable, is meant) who appears in the Liber Exoniensis (both in the main entry, Exon folio 266a3, and in the Terrae Occupatae, Exon folio 510a6) and in SOM 19,7 as holding Crowcombe in 1086, then he is there recorded as still living. The same might apply to the present entry; see 3d,7 holds note. This apparent discrepancy may be explained if Robert’s death took place during the Domesday Survey and the Essex returns were later than those for the south-western circuit, or were updated to take account of this fact (Robert being a local lord of importance), or the news had not had time to travel to the west. See VCH Huntingdonshire, i. pp. 335-36; Harmer, Anglo-Saxon Writs, p. 571; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, pp. 393, 424.
		The Domesday forms of this name - Wimarc, Wimarch, Wimarc(a)e (genitive), Wim', Wicmarc, Witmarce (genitive), and, for 1086 holders, Wihomarc, Wihumar, Wihumarc, Wihunmard[us], Guihu'mar' - represent Old Breton Wiuhomarch, which is both a masculine and feminine name: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 349-50, 415; Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 231; Reaney, Dictionary of British Surnames, under Wymark. The Phillimore printed edition has the forms Wymarc, Wiuhomarch, Wihomarch; these have now been standardized as Wiuhomarch. The Alecto edition has Wimarc (for Robert son of Wiuhomarch), but generally reproduces the Domesday forms for the 1086 holders, except for Wymarc in Norfolk.
	AS IF TO A CANON. Robert was not a canon, but King Edward gave Spirtes' forfeited hides to him as he might (and probably ought to) have done to a canon. If the main scribe of Great Domesday had wanted to imply Robert was a canon (so Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 209), he would either have omitted the sicut altogether or put ut in its place.
	SON-IN-LAW. According to Eyton, 'Robert Fitz Wimarch', p. 5, this was Richard Scrope (SHR 5 Osbern note), but he does not provide any evidence to support this assertion; the identification is unlikely.
	TO BE RETURNED. The Alecto edition has 'revert'. Latin reverti, the passive infinitive of reverto and the infinitive of the derived verb revertor, can have these and several other meanings. On this, see Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 224 no. 1319. She translates 'he immediately ordered that the land ought to be returned to the church', but there is no word for 'ought' in the Latin.
	COULD COMMAND. That is, he was expecting to see Robert at the Christmas court.
	THE KING HIMSELF DIED. That is, on 5th January 1066.
	NOW ROBERT HOLDS IT FROM EARL ROGER. It is not certain which Robert is intended. Robert son of Wiuhomarch may have been dead by 1086 (certainly his son Swein was in possession of his lands and shrievalty in 1086 (see 3d,7 Wiuhomarch note) though the most obvious emphasis of the Latin is that Robert son of Wiuhomarch had held this land by gift of King Edward, but now (modo) holds it under Earl Roger. However, Robert might be the name of Robert son of Wiuhomarch's son-in-law (and therefore perhaps the Robert who was a tenant of Robert's son, Swein, in Essex), or possibly one of the Roberts (Robert son of Corbet, Robert son of Theobald, Robert the butler) who hold under Earl Roger.
		A Robert (of Stratford) also holds from Swein in SFK 27,9.
	LAND FOR 54 PLOUGHS. This formula for the plough estimate was not used by the main scribe of Great Domesday as much as the other formula (how many ploughs would be possible) at this point in the text; see 1,5 land note. It may be an indicator as to when this entry was added, as it has this formula (as do 3e,1-2. 4,1,33. 4,3,71. 4,9,4 and 4,12,1, all additions), whereas only 43 other entries up to 4,14 have the 'Land for' formula, compared to over 250 after it. Other added entries and chapters in Great Domesday Book contained differences in formulae, layout or content compared to the adjacent text; see LEC 1,12 entry note.
		The use of Int[er] tot[um] ('in total') implies that this estimate was for the whole of the manor of Bromfield; the preceding entry (3d,6) lacks a plough estimate.
3e	THIS FIEF was a later addition by the main scribe of Great Domesday in a space he had left after the lands of St Mary's Church (SHR 3d). It was entered at the same time as the fief of St Juliana (SHR 3h) and probably as an insertion on Bromfield (see 3d,7 entry note). As was the case with many other added fiefs and entries (especially unrubricated ones; see 3c,14 entry note), he failed to include the hundred head. On a possible indicator as to when this fief was entered, see 3d,7 land note.
	WHAT ST MICHAEL'S [* OF SHREWSBURY *] HOLDS. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote QD' TENET SCS' MICHAEL'; Farley printed SCI' in error and omitted the (albeit small) abbreviation line through the L of MICHAEL'.
		In 1086, St Michael's was a secular college, containing canons. The church lay in or immediately adjacent to the boundary of the castle at Shrewsbury. Its small parish appears to have been carved out of that of St Mary's of Shrewsbury: SHR 3d St Mary note. It may have been founded by Earl Roger, or possibly earlier in the Conqueror's reign by William himself. By the twelfth century it was a royal free chapel, known as the King's Chapel, and was later granted by Henry IV to his college of Battlefield (founded in 1409); see Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 1426, 1464; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 291; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 418, 438; Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 13; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 533.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		3e,1 ["Culvestan"] Hundred
		3e,2 [Hodnet] Hundred
3e,1	[IN "CULVESTAN" HUNDRED]. A hundred head is clearly missing here at the start of this fief. It is assumed to be "Culvestan" from the later history of Poston (3e,1 Poston note).
	[LESSER] POSTON. Lower or Lesser Poston was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Hopton Cangeford. For Upper or Greater Poston, see 4,21,17. It probably lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. Lesser Poston was given to the Church of St Michael by Earl Roger, but escheated to the crown on the fall of Earl Roger's son. It was later held by the Fitz Alan barony. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, Richard de Thonglond holds ½ hide in Possethorne from John Fitz Alan; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 206; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 239; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 167.
	LAND FOR ½ PLOUGH. On this plough estimate formula, see 3d,7 land note.
	FOR IT. Domesday has inde, which literally means 'from it', suggesting that the box-wood actually came from the 1 virgate of land in Poston. But since the box-wood is clearly a render, inde is probably been loosely used to mean 'for it'.
3e,2	[IN HODNET HUNDRED]. This head needs to be supplied because of the geographical position and later history of Soulton (3e,2 Soulton note).
	SOULTON. This was a township of Wem Ancient Parish. It was apparently in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220, Ivo de Soleton holds Soleton from Robert de Corbet who holds from the King's Chapel in Shrewsbury Castle; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 12; and 4,10,2 Lacon note.
	BRICTRIC. Domesday Brictric represents Old English Beorhtric.
	LAND FOR 1 PLOUGH. On this plough estimate formula, see 3d,7 land note.
3f	WHAT ST CHAD'S [* OF SHREWSBURY *] HOLDS. St Chad's lay in Shrewsbury and in 1086 was a episcopal college, that is the private property of the bishops of Lichfield (or of Chester from 1075), containing canons. It was dedicated to Ceadda, the first Bishop of Lichfeld (669-672), but its date of foundation is uncertain. Its parish occupied the southern half of the promontory on which Shrewsbury was built and it also possessed lands south of the River Severn. It seems probable that St Chad's and St Mary's were the two most ancient churches in Shrewsbury. St Chad's was possibly established as the minster for the Wreocensaete and subsequently became a possession of the Bishops of Lichfield. There is some evidence that it had the right to collect church-scot, a due associated with important minster churches. The link with Lichfield (the Bishopric of Chester in Domesday: SHR 1 bishop note) makes the exact tenure of some manors unclear. Thus, 1 ½ hides are said to be held by St Chad's in Shrewsbury in C13, but are said to be held under the Bishop of Chester (at Shelton) in 1,4. Wrentnall (4,26,3) had been lost to the church before 1086, and possibly also Welbatch and Woodcote (4,4,1. 4,5,8) from which it received the tithes; see VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 114-19; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 1463; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 418, 438, 482; Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', pp. 3-7; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 531.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		3f,1 Condover Hundred
		3f,2 Wittery Hundred
		3f,3-7 Baschurch Hundred
3f,1	'[LITTLE] ETON'. A lost place in Pitchford Ancient Parish; it lay in Condover Hundred in 1086. St Chad's overlordship is last mentioned in 1253 and the place itself in 1484. Its site is probably now ocupied by Pitchford Hall and the parish church, half a mile north-west of Pitchford village; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 569; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 284; VCH Shropshire, ii. p. 240, viii. pp. 117, 119. The Domesday Gazetteer wrongly identifies it with Eaton Mascott.
	TUROLD [* OF VERLEY *] FROM IT. It is not clear from the Latin whether Turrold was the 1066 or 1086 subtenant of St Chad's (or both). However, in view of the facts that the 1086 holder of the adjacent Pitchford (4,19,12) was Turold (probably Turrold of Verley: 4,19 Turold note) and that in the similar phrasing in 3d,5 Picot is definitely the 1086 tenant because of the later history of the holding and that in 3g,5-6;8 Godebold is almost certainly St Alkmund's tenant there as he is in 3g,3, it is more likely that the main scribe of Great Domesday merely omitted ten[et] after Turold[us] here. Moreover, there are only a handful of mentions in Domesday of people holding from the T.R.E. tenant.
3f,2	MARTON. This was a township of Chirbury Ancient Parish. It lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086 and was later in Chirbury. It was lost to St Chad's after Domesday, being given to the honour of Montgomery (4,1,15 Montgomery note), first to de Bollers then to the Cantilupe family under whom it was held by the Hunalds. In the Book of Fees, p. 966, among fees of William de Cantilupo, William de Honaud holds half a fee in Merton'; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233, 240; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 80.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. The Domesday forms of the name-form Alward - Aluuard(us), Eluuard(us), Aeluuard(us), Aluuart, Aluard[us], Awart - could represent Old English Ælfweard or Old English Æthelweard, or even Old Danish Halwarth: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 155-57, under Al-weard, and see also p. 142, under Al-. JRM followed von Feilitzen in keeping to the base form, but preferred the second element -ward for Old English -weard, as it reflected the majority of the Domesday spellings. The printed Phillimore edition has the forms Alward, Alfward, occasionally Aethelweard, and in Yorkshire Alweard; these have now been standardized as Alward. The Alecto edition has Alweard for those appearing under Al-weard. Some of those called Alward in the present edition appear under Old English Ælfweard in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 181, but only because the forms in the Liber Exoniensis suggest this, or because of other evidence. Some also appear under Old English Æthelweard in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 188-89, as they do in the Alecto edition, but their Domesday forms lack the medial -d- or -g- that JRM thought necessary for inclusion under that form.
		Alward is a common name, but family and tenurial links make it probable that the Alward who held from Earl Roger (3f,2. 3g,10. 4,1,2;36. 4,27,9;17-21;23-25), or whose estates were acquired by Reginald of Bailleul (4,3,61;64;68;70), was Almund's son. It is improbable that two Anglo-Saxon survivors named Alward would share the same tenurial patterns. Of the remaining estates held by Alward T.R.E. in Shropshire (4,4,21. 4,5,15. 4,21,6;10. 4,27,35), all except Holdgate (4,21,6) was a close neighbour to one of the holdings of Alward or Almund, and even Holdgate was conveniently situated midway between two clusters of their estates. It is likely that these, too, belonged to Alward son of Almund (JP).
		On Almund the father of Alward, see 4,27,17 Almund note.
	HOLDS FROM THE CHURCH. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about four letters after êccl'a. It is not clear whether he intended to add anything here, though almost all of the spaces he left in Shropshire were for a reason (1,5 hide note, 4,1,22 Earl note and {Introduction: Content and Layout}), but compare 4,20,18 land note, 4,26,3 land note, 5,1 ploughs note and 7,6 ploughs note.
	RIDERS. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote radmans over an erasure; there is an erased memo in the inner margin level with it. On these erased marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
	VALUE NOW 10s, BUT IT ONLY PAYS 6s 2d. The manor was probably being held at a revenue ('farmed'); see 4,4,8 which states that Bausley's value is 2s but it is 'at a revenue for 6s 8d', and compare 4,4,7 pays note. On the practice of 'farming', see 1,4 value note and 3d,5 revenue note.
3f,3	BICTON. This was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. In 1086 it was in Baschurch Hundred, then in Pimhill Hundred. It was held from the church in the thirteenth century by a family named from the place, later by the Abbey of Buildwas. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, in Pimhill Hundred, the heirs of William de Bukedon' hold Bukedon' of St Chad's in Shrewsbury; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 191; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 432; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 164.
3f,4	YORTON. Yorton is in Broughton which was a chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary, then was itself an Ancient Parish. Yorton and Broughton (3f,5) both lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred and the Liberty of Shrewsbury. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a (Pimhill Hundred) Burchton' and Ivarton are held by the Dean and Canons of St Chad's in Shrewsbury and by them from the fee of the Bishop of Chester; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 160.
	A PRIEST. He was probably a canon of St Chad's of Shrewsbury.
3f,5	BROUGHTON. It was a chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary, then was itself an Ancient Parish. See 3f,4 Yorton note and 3d,1 Broughton note.
3f,6	ROSSALL. 'Little' Rossall was in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad and is now in Bicton parish. Bicton was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish.. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred and Shrewsbury Liberty. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, Roshal' Parva, 1 hide, is held by William Terum of the fee of St Chad's; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 251 (where part is taxed with Bicton, 3f,3); Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 432; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 168.
3f,7	ONSLOW. This was in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad, now in Bicton. Bicton was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. Another part of Onslow (4,5,7) lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, but it is not necessary to supply a hundred head: the two parts went to different medieval hundreds, this holding of St Chad's being later in Pimhill Hundred, the expected successor for a place in Baschurch Hundred in 1086. This will have been the 1 hide held in Pimhill Hundred by Roger de Ondeslauwe from the fee of St Chad's in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 171, x. p. 169.
	1 PLOUGH. In the manuscript there is a full-stop after car'; although it is not particularly faint, it is not reproduced in the Ordnance Survey facsimile. This happens quite often with full-stops and attention is not generally drawn to it again in these notes. The stop is reproduced clearly in the Alecto facsimile. For other instances of letters and signs' being either imperfectly or wrongly reproduced or not reproduced at all in the facsimile, see 4,3,9;51;55;61. 4,5,1;5;7;10. 4,6,1. 4,11,7;13. 4,19,3;9;11. 4,20,1. 4,23,16. 4,27,6. 4,28,5. 8,1 notes. For an example of something reproduced in the Ordnance Survey facsimile that is not in the manuscript, see 4,3,32 facsimile note.
3g	WHAT ST ALKMUND'S [* OF SHREWSBURY *] HOLDS. The Church of St Alkmund was in 1086 a college of secular canons. St Alkmund was a Northumbrian prince said to have been murdered c. 800 on the orders of King Eardwulf. The foundation of the church was attributed to the Lady Aethelflaed of Mercia (daughter of King Alfred) who died in 918. King Edgar (died 975) increased its endowment and created 10 prebends for it. It appears to have been carved out of the land of St Mary's of Shrewsbury (SHR 3d) and to have been closely associated with the Church of St Juliana (SHR 3h).
		After the Conquest the patronage passed from the king to Earl Roger who gave many of the estates to his cleric Godebold: Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 253. The lands passed to Godebold 's illegitimate son Robert, then to Richard (I) de Belmeis, Bishop of London (1108-1127), who acted as viceroy in Shropshire after 1102. Richard (II) de Belmeis (brother of Philip de Belmeis, elder nephew of Richard (I) de Belmeis) secured the prebends and granted them to the Arrouaisian canons from Dorchester-on-Thames (Oxfordshire) who had been invited to Lilleshall by his brother Philip. The new Augustinian abbey was established at Lilleshall by 1148 and held St Alkmund's lands until the Dissolution. Lilleshall (3g,3) was among its possessions in 1086; see Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 262; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 210; VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 70-80, xi. p. 153; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 418, 438, 482; Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', pp. 9-11; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 531.
		The lands held by this church can be found in Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 197-98; and Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 263-64. A thirteenth-century cartulary of the abbey, owned by the Duke of Sutherland, is British Library, Loan MS 39 and was transcribed by Eyton for his Antiquities; his transcription is in the Bodleian Library, Oxford (Top. Salop, d.3); see Davis, Medieval Cartularies, p. 65 no. 577. The confirmation charter of Pope Alexander III (see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 219) enumerates the prebends as Lilleshull (Lilleshall: 3g,3), Ettingham (Atcham: 3g,6), Ukington (Uckington: 3g,5), Longedon (Longdon-upon-Tern: 3g,4), Edbricteleg (Albrightlee: 3g,7), Hennecot (Hencott: 3g,2 hides note), Preston (Preston[(Gubbals]: 3g,8), Lee (Lea: 3g,8 Preston note), Cherlton ('Charlton': 3g,9), Dinthill (Dinthill: 3g,11), Wiluuredeschot (i.e. Wistanstow: 9,1) and 9 acres in another Cherlton ('Charlton':3g,8 Preston note). The Confirmation of Henry III, given in Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 264 (no. xi), is similar, but adds Preston juxta Moneford (Preston Montford: 3g,10) and Wystanstowe (Wistanstow which had been alienated by 1086: 9,1). The prebend of Wistanstow contained 4 hides (Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 262, no. i) consisting of Wilfrescota (unidentified), Mora (Blakemore? and Bushmoor etc. SO4288, SO4387), Mersse (Marsh SO4488; see 4,3,47 Strefford note), Effechota (Affcot SO4486) and Wistanestowe itself. Caurtune (4,20,9) had also belonged to the church before 1066.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		3g,1-2 [Shrewsbury Hundred]
		3g,3-7 Wrockwardine Hundred
		3g,8 Baschurch Hundred
		3g,9 [Wrockwardine Hundred]
		3g,10-11 "Reweset" Hundred
	As with SHR 3b, what this church holds in the city of Shrewsbury is entered first. At 3g,9 ('Charlton'), Domesday has a "Culvestan" Hundred head, but there are strong reasons for believing that it is erroneous: 3g, 9 'Charlton' note. However, the correct head (Wrockwardine Hundred) involves repeating a heading.
3g,1	[IN SHREWSBURY HUNDRED]. See C1 Hundred note.
	SHREWSBURY. For the site of the houses held by St Alkmund's (near the castle), see Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 197, 198; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 265; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 368.
	21 BURGESSES. It would seem that the main scribe of Great Domesday originally wrote burg' and then changed it to burg'ens', but forgot to erase the first abbreviation sign which was no longer necessary. Compare 3g,5 held note. It is not clear whether burg'ens' abbreviates the singular burgensis (the scribe commonly used the singular after '21', '31', '41' etc.) or the plural burgenses.
3g,2	2 HIDES. They are mentioned in C13 among the 100 hides of the city and may well be the Hennecot (Hencott SJ4815) of Pope Alexander III's confirmation charter (SHR 3g St Alkmund's note). Alkmond Park (SJ4815) will also have been included.
3g,3	LILLESHALL. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, then in 'Bradford' Hundred. It was one of the twelve prebendal estates of St Alkmund's whose interests were transferred to the abbey in Lilleshall on its foundation; see SHR 3g St Alkmund's note. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, the Abbot of Lilishull' holds Lilishull' in 'Bradford' Hundred; in the Bradford Hundred Roll, (p. 113) its members are said to be Donyngton (Donnington SJ7012) and Mokeleston (Muxton SJ7114); see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 210; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 153.
		Linleshalle may have been written over an erasure; although the parchment here is quite rough, a finer pen was used for this place-name.
	10 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about six letters after hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
	FRENCHMEN WHO SERVE. The Latin francig[enae] seruientes here is also found in WOR 8,11 and DOR 26,9. Seruientes is probably being used in the sense of faciebant seruitium 'did service' (see WOR 8,9b;14), rather than implying land held by serjeanty, on which see LEC 13,63 servants note and, in contrast, see VCH Worcestershire, i. p. 273. Seruientes are also mentioned on their own in 4,4,25 and 7,4. Land held by serjeanty is normally found in the penultimate or final chapter of a Great Domesday county. In such cases the Frenchmen are named, and the nature of the serjeanty is clear from the text or from the later history of the holding. In the present case the Frenchmen are unnamed and it seems probable that servientes is included specifically to show that they are no different from the villagers. The Alecto edition has 'French sergeants'.
	WOODLAND. See 4,1,1 woodland note.
	LEAGUE. Domesday leuuede and leuua in Shropshire (also leuga in other counties) was a measure of length, used only of woodland in this county, though pasture and sometimes meadow were measured in leagues elsewhere in Great Domesday. It was traditionally reckoned at a mile and a half; but if so, some stretches of woodland etc. will have been of immense length; see VCH Northamptonshire, i. p. 280; and WOR 1,1c leagues note. In Shropshire the league (in both forms leuuede and leuua) is used mainly as a 'square' measure, as here, though the form leuua is used as a linear measure in 4,1,1;25. 4,2,1. 4,4,20;22 and 4,23,2 (in 4,4,20;22 and 4,23,2 only the length of the woodland is given). When the main scribe of Great Domesday wrote, for example 'woodland, 2 leagues' (4,1,7-8 etc.), it seems probable from the list of corresponding phrases in Great Domesday and Exon for Devon (DEV 1,4 leagues note), that he meant the woodland measured 2 leagues by 2 leagues (i.e. 4 square leagues), not 2 leagues by 1 league, as Eyton, Dorset Survey, pp. 31-33, believed.
		When indicating the genitive siluae here and elsewhere in this phrase, the scribe added a diphthong squiggle to the a of silua rather than writing the normal siluê; this is a peculiarity of the scribe in Shropshire, though he did use it occasionally in other Great Domesday counties.
	GODEBOLD THE PRIEST HOLDS IT. There is no dot after ten' in the manuscript, so it is possible that the main scribe of Great Domesday intended to add something to the sentence (perhaps overrunning into the side margin) or he merely omitted the dot in error. Compare 3f,2 Alward note. On Godebold, see Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. p. 220), who states he was one of three learned clerici in Earl Roger's household; see Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 253; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 210; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 314 note 19, xi. p. 153; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 216. He occurs again (as plain Godebold) in 3g, 5-6;8 and may well be the Godebold of 4,21,7 and 4,27,7
3g,4	LONGDON[-UPON-TERN]. This was a chapelry of Pontesbury Ancient Parish, later its own parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred and is held by the Abbot of Lilleshall in that hundred as Longedon' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 234.
		Land at Langandune was left to Burton Abbey c. 1003 in the will of Wulfric Spot: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536 = Charters of Burton Abbey, no. 29). The county in which Langandune lay, and its exact identity, are uncertain. In the case of Longden upon Tern in Shropshire there is no trace of any connection with Burton Abbey. It is possible that Langandune is in fact Longdon in Staffordshire: Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxxiv.
	2 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line after hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
3g,5	HELD. In the manuscript ten' was originally written by the main scribe of Great Domesday, but corrected to tenuit though without the abbreviation sign being erased; compare 3g,1 burgesses note. The present note was misplaced under 3g,6 in the Phillimore printed edition.
	UCKINGTON. It lay in Wroxeter Ancient Parish and was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Uckinton' is held by the Abbot of Lilleshall in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, and Attecham (Atcham: 3g,6), Unkynton and Adbright'lee (Albrightlee: 3g,7) in the Bradford Hundred Roll, (p. 113) where they are said to be members of the Church of St Alkmund's in Shrewsbury; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 237.
	GODEBOLD FROM IT. Although the Latin is unclear, Godebold (the priest) was almost certainly the 1086 subtenant, as in 3g,3; see 3f,1 Turold note and 3g,3 Godebold note.
3g,6	ATCHAM. This was an Ancient Parish. The place was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It is Attinham in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, held by the Abbot of Lilleshall; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113 (3g,5 Uckington note); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 239.
	GODEBOLD FROM IT. Although the Latin is unclear, Godebold (the priest) was almost certainly the 1086 subtenant, as in 3g,3; see 3f,1 Turrold note and 3g,3 Godebold note.
	1 HIDE [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for five or six letters after i hida; see 1,5 hide note.
3g,7	ALBRIGHTLEE. It was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Alkmund, then in Uffington Ancient Parish which was succeeded by a Civil Parish of that name. Albrightlee lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It is not mentioned in 1255 in the Rotuli Hundredorum, but is Adbright'lee in the Bradford Hundred Roll (p. 113; see 3g,5 Uckington note); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 246.
		With Albright Hussey (4,3,51;57) and Albrighton (4,3,71), Albrightlee had probably once formed a single land-unit: Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 9.
	1 HIDE. [***].The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for five or six letters after i hida.; see 1,5 hide note.
	EARL ROGER TOOK IT AWAY. It is not clear if the woodland (which may have lain at some distance from this estate) has been joined to any other manor.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1320.
3g,8	PRESTON [GUBBALS]. This was a chapelry of Prees Ancient Parish, then a Civil Parish from 1866, later included in Pimhill Civil Parish. The name Gubbals is from the holder Godebold . It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred, where the Abbot of Lileshull holds 4 hides in Preston Gubald belonging to the Church of St Alkmund in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a; see the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 119; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 231; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 171. Lea ( SJ4921 ) was a member, as was an unidentified 'Charlton', not the same as 3g,9: see SHR 3g St Alkmund's note.
	GODEBOLD FROM IT. Although the Latin is unclear, Godebold (the priest) was almost certainly the 1086 subtenant, as in 3g,3; see 3f,1 Turold note and 3g,3 Godebold note.
	4 HIDES [***].The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
3g,9	IN "CULVESTAN" HUNDRED. The heading must be an error since Lilleshall Abbey's
	'Charlton' lay in Shawbury parish. No later reference to 'Charlton' has been found that
	gives its medieval hundred from which its 1086 situation might be deduced. If the error of the main scribe of Great Domesday lay in inserting a hundred head, Charlton could have been in Baschurch Hundred, like 3g,8 and the adjacent Moreton Corbet (4,19,9). On the other hand, as it later lay in Shawbury parish, it may well have been in Wrockwardine Hundred, the scribe having failed to include it with other Wrockwardine manors (3g,3-7). It has been notionally included in Wrockwardine Hundred for this edition.
	'CHARLTON'. This lost place lay in Shawbury Ancient Parish and was perhaps in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 (see 3g,9 Hundred note). It is mentioned several times in the Lilleshall Cartulary (for example, on folios 61, 62, 81, 86, 123; see SHR 3g St Alkmund's note) and in two deeds in Shrewsbury Borough Library (nos. 5413, 16293) in the last of which it is described as Cherleton' iuxta Shawebury; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 197; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 265; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 1, vii. p. 202, viii. pp. 219, 250; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 314 note 21, ii. pp. 71-73, iii. p. 8, xi. pp. 96-97; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 73. It lay in the northern extension of the parish that is between Moreton Corbet and the River Roden, its last recorded mention apparently being on the Ordnance Survey Index to the Tithe Survey sheet 73SW (of c. 1850, overprinted on the one-inch map of 1833). For other 'Charltons', see 3g,8 Preston note. 4,1,1 St Peter note. 4,4,25 Cherrington note.
	IT PAID 4s. Or possibly 'he paid' referring to the rider which would mean that he had been (and presumably still was) holding 'Charlton' for a money rent; see 3d,5 revenue note on 'farming', and compare 4,12,1 free man note.
3g,10	PRESTON [MONTFORD]. This was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Alkmund, but is now in Bicton. Bicton was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. Preston Montford lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. Another portion (4,4,24) lay in Baschurch Hundred. After 1086, Preston was for a time held of the honour of Montgomery: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, records how the Abbot of Lilleshall holds it as a gift of Robert de Budlers, lord of Montgomery. See Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 96b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iv. p. 399; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 194.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. See 3f,2 Alward note.
3g,11	DINTHILL. Domesday Duntune. It lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred and was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Alkmund, now in Bicton. Bicton was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish.
		Dunthull in Ford Hundred is held by the Abbot of Lilleshull in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 196.
3h	THIS FIEF was a late addition by the main scribe of Great Domesday, done at the same time as the fief of St Michael's Church (SHR 3e) and similarly lacking a hundred head, and probably in the same campaign of addition as the nine lines on Bromfield (3d,7). There are two fairly large holes in the parchment to the right of the entry and in view of this the scribe would normally have begun a new column for a subsection of SHR 3. (He wrote round the holes on the reverse; see 4,1,26 this entry note.) He probably decided to write the addition here in order to keep the lands of the churches together, although if the two-line erasure at the foot of folio 253b had been done when he wrote (see 4,1,5 after note) he would probably have entered this fief to the right of the holes and extending under folio 253b. For an indicator of when it was added, see 3d,7 land note. These holes, like the one on folio 257 (see 4,11,5 hole note and 4,16,2 thanes note) have been neatly repaired during one of the re-bindings of the manuscript by a piece of parchment inserted from this side of the folio, the edges of the hole being scarfed and the parchment stuck over them.
		The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the abbreviation line above the C in SCA in the heading, although it is clear in the manuscript and is in the same deep red as the rest of the heading. It is clearly reproduced in the Alecto facsimile.
	WHAT ST JULIANA'S [* OF SHREWSBURY *] HOLDS. St Juliana's in Shrewsbury was, in 1086, a college for secular canons. The first mention of the church is in Great Domesday, but its foundation was probably earlier: the shape of its small parish and other details suggests that it was related to St Alkmund's and was possibly founded at the same time as a small house for nuns. It later became a royal free chapel and its history becomes involved with the Church of St Michael (SHR 3e St Michael's note). It is now called the Church of St Julian as if dedicated to a St Julianus. It is unclear which St Juliana is intended; see Auden, 'Church and Parish of St Juliana'; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 1464; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 79a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 367; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 418, 438, 482; Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', pp. 11-13; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 530.
3h,1	[IN SHREWSBURY HUNDRED]. See C1 Hundred note.
	½ HIDE. This estate is mentioned in C13 under the 100 hides of Shrewsbury and must have been part of the present parish of St Julian, but it has not been precisely identified; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 367.
4	LAND OF EARL ROGER. He was the son of Roger I of Montgommery, which is represented by the adjacent settlements of Sainte-Foy de Montgommery and Saint-Germain de Montgommery, in the French département of Calvados (arrondissement Lisieux, canton Livarot). The name was transferred by Earl Roger to Montgomery now in Powys (SO2296) just over the Welsh border. In 1086 it was the name of a castle, the centre of an important group of Earl Roger's lands; see 4,1,15. 4,1,35-36, and 4,1,15 Montgomery note. Roger is never called Roger of Montgommery or of Montgomery in Domesday, though his son Hugh was; see STS 9.
		In Normandy Roger was vicomte of the Hiémois. He was married to Mabel, daughter of William Talvas of Bellême. His children by Mabel were Robert of Bellême, Roger of Poitou, Hugh, Arnulf, Philip, Matilda (who married Count Robert of Mortain), Mabel (who married Hugh of Châteauneuf) and Sibil (married to Robert son of Hamo). After Mabel's murder c. 1077 Roger married Adelaide du Puiset and by her had a son, Everard.
		Roger supplied ships for Duke William's invasion of England, but did not come himself until 1067. He was a loyal supporter of Duke and King William to whom he was related by the marriage of his father to a niece of Gunnor(a), William's great-grandmother. In England he was granted the Rapes of Arundel and Chichester in Sussex and had a castle at Arundel, but there is no reason to think that he was ever styled Earl of Arundel. On the death of Earl Edwin of Mercia c. 1071, he received most of Shropshire, becoming Earl of Shrewsbury. Roger founded the Abbeys of Saint-Martin de Sées and of Almenesches (both in Normandy) and also St Peter's of Shrewsbury.
		He rebelled against William II in 1088 but managed to extricate himself. In 1094 he retired to his abbey in Shrewsbury Abbey just before his death. His English lands passed to his second son, Hugh of Montgomery, and on Hugh's death in 1098 to Roger's eldest son, Robert of Bellême, who forfeited the fief in 1102 for rebellion. His third son, Roger of Poitou, was given an important fief of his own by the Conqueror.
		See VCH Middlesex, i. p. 110; Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 68; Keats- Rohan, Domesday People, p. 399.
	There are several indications that in the circuit volume, which was the likely predecessor of Domesday Shropshire and the other counties in circuit V, all Earl Roger's lands were detailed in one large section that was arranged by hundred, although it is possible that those held by him in lordship (4,1) were in a separate section. The main scribe of Great Domesday would have picked out from this composite section the holdings of the individual subtenants. This is exactly what happened in Domesday Cornwall, where the bulk of the county was in the hands of the Count of Mortain and dealt with in Exon in one huge hundredally-arranged section, which the Great Domesday scribe split up into 26 sub-chapters arranged by subtenant. The same method of dividing SHR 4 into numbered sub-chapters is employed as it is in CON 5. The scribe's method of indicating the subtenants in SHR 4 is also exactly the same as in CON 5 (see CON 5 count note). Thus, the scribe indicated the beginning of each sub-chapter with capitals for the holder's Christian name, lined through in red for emphasis and with the initial letter a large rubricated capital; he used capitals and, with one exception (4,27,12, probably accidental), full rubrication for the names of the various holders in chapter 4,27 (which corresponds to the 'Land of the Thanes/French Men-at-Arms/King's Servants' in other counties). Subsequent entries in each sub-chapter almost invariably began 'The same/He also … holds'. Where the Great Domesday scribe did not adhere to this practice, there is often a suspicion that he was unsure of the tenant's identity, and the descent of the land in question often supports this; see 4,4,23 Roger note, 4,11,10 Cosford note, 4,11,17 Ralph note, and compare 4,5,5 Brampton note, 4,14,29 Buchehale note and 4,22,2 Hugh note. In Domesday Cornwall there are similar instances of a change in formula within sub-chapters and for the same reason; see CON 5 arrangement note. The Great Domesday scribe left a space for one or more lines of writing between these sub-chapters; with the exception of the line between chapters 4,15 and 4,16, Farley indicated these spaces.
		Moreover, the inclusion within sub-chapters of several entries that did not belong there suggests that the scribe (probably accidentally) wrote them where he found them; see 4,1 arrangement note. Finally, the brief omission of a number of entries is easily explained by the scribe's need to search repeatedly through a long section to remove the holdings of individual subtenants; these omitted entries would then have been found during the checking of the original and inserted; see 4,3,71 entry note, 4,9,4 entry note, 4,12,1 entry note, 4,14,28 entry note. Exactly the same errors and subsequent insertions occurred in Domesday Cornwall, though during the initial writing up of that county.
		It is improbable that the circuit volume was perfect. The Count of Mortain's fief in Cornwall in it, though arranged hundredally, contains some dislocations which are inevitable, if, as is likely, it was itself a conversion from a territorially-arranged schedule, containing full manorial detail, like the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis.
	ARRANGEMENT. After the land that Earl Roger himself held (see 4,1 Roger note), the lands of his tenants were detailed (sub-chapters 4,2 - 4,27). The order of these subtenants was not wholly by importance nor by the number and size of their holdings. An early place seems to have been accorded to Earl Hugh, Earl Roger's counterpart in Cheshire (4,2), then to Reginald, Roger's sheriff (4,3), who held the most land from the earl. It may be that the Corbet brothers, Roger and Robert, were entered next because of their importance (4,4-5), but it is probable that after Reginald the main scribe of Great Domesday entered tenants with the same initial next to each other, as elsewhere in Domesday: thus, 4,4,4 to 4,4,12 contain the lands of subtenants beginning with R, then 4,4,13 to 4,4,16 those beginning with W, followed by the holdings of two beginning with O, and so on. There seems no reason to think that the seven estates of 4,26 (Roger the hunter) were not a sub-chapter in their own right, but part of 4,27, as Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 12. Space was left after 4,26 and before the first of the entries in 4,27, as usual; on the layout of the latter, see 4,27 tenants note. When Robert of Bellême forfeited his lands in 1102, many of those tenants who had not joined him were allowed to retain their lands as tenants-in-chief. Chapter 4 ends with a brief appendix (4,28) consisting of lands that mostly should have been entered in sub-chapter 4,1.
		Although the lands of Earl Roger and his men are grouped by holder, not by hundred, there is a reasonably consistent hundredal order within each sub-chapter.
		4,1 Lordship land of Earl Roger
		4,2 Earl Hugh [of Chester]
		4,3 Reginald the sheriff
		4,4 Roger son of Corbet
		4,5 Robert son of Corbet
		4,6 Robert the butler
		4,7 Roger of Courseulles
		4,8 Roger of Lacy
		4,9 Robert son of Theobald
		4,10 Ranulf Peverel
		4,11 Ralph of Mortimer
		4,12 Richard
		4,13 William of Warenne
		4,14 William Pandolf
		4,15 William Malbank
		4,16 Walkelin
		4,17 Osbern [son of Richard]
		4,18 Odo [of Bernières]
		4,19 Turold [of Verley]
		4,20 Picot
		4,21 Helgot
		4,22 Hugh son of Thorgils
		4,23 Gerard of Tournai
		4,24 Nigel
		4,25 Norman [the hunter]
		4,26 Roger the hunter
		4,27 Various minor French and English tenants
		4,28 Further lands held by Earl Roger
	Within many of these sub-fiefs all the hundreds or groups of hundreds appear to be entered in a standard order of 1 Shrewsbury, 2 Hodnet, 3 Patton, 4 Condover, 5 "Rinlau", 6 "Reweset", 7 Wittery, 8 Wrockwardine, 9 "Merset", 10 "Culvestan", 11 Leintwardine, 12 'Overs', 13 Baschurch, 14 "Alnodestreu" and 15 'Conditre'. This was first suggested by Chris Lewis ('Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 9). In fact Shrewsbury Hundred does not appear in Earl Roger's fief and the fiefs where it does appear are in disorder or differently ordered. However, Lewis' numbering has been retained in showing the hundredal order of each of the sub-chapters; see {Introduction: Standard Order of Hundreds}.
4,1	[WHAT EARL ROGER HIMSELF HOLDS]. As a quasi-'Palatine' earl, Roger acted as the king within Shropshire. There is thus no Terra Regis in the county. Those manors (4,1,1-12) that were held by King Edward, and would normally have passed to King William, were held by the earl. For the extent of his powers, see 4,1,37.
	ARRANGEMENT. Sub-chapter 4,1 is arranged in a series of groups by the identity and status of the T.R.E. holder, and within each group by hundred:
		4,1,1-12. Manors held by King Edward. The hundredal order is: Wrockwardine Hundred (4,1,1); Condover Hundred (4,1,2); Baschurch Hundred (4,1,3); [Hodnet] Hundred (4,1,4); ["Alnodestreu"] Hundred (4,1,5); ["Culvestan"] Hundred (4,1,6); ["Reweset"] Hundred (4,1,7-9); [Wittery] Hundred (4,1,10); ["Merset"] Hundred (4,1,11-12);
		4,1,13. A Welsh district attached to "Merset" Hundred, two of whose manors (4,1,11-12) have just been entered.
		4,1,14-31. Land held by prominent earls and thanes of King Edward: Edric the wild, Earls Edwin and Morcar, the Lady Godiva and Leofwin Young. The hundredal order is: ["Rinlau"] Hundred (4,1,14); Montgomery Castle (4,1,15); "Reweset" Hundred (4,1,16); [Baschurch] Hundred (4,1,17-20); [Wrockwardine] Hundred (4,1,21-23); ["Alnodestreu"] Hundred (4,1,24-25); [Patton ?] Hundred or possibly a continuation of "Alnodestreu" Hundred (4,1,26); ["Culvestan"] Hundred (4,1,27-29); ['Conditre'] Hundred (4,1,30); ["Alnodestreu"] Hundred (4,1,31). The reason for entering Montgomery castle here (at 4,1,15) is unclear.
		4,1,32-36. A miscellaneous group of entries: land exchanged with Wenlock Church; land held by Steinulf and Siward T.R.E.; lands belonging to Montgomery castle. The hundredal order is: ["Alnodestreu"] Hundred (4,1,32-33); [Condover] Hundred (4,1,34); Wittery Hundred (4,1,35-36).
		4,1,37. Shrewsbury and Shropshire (summary).
	For the early entries in this sub-chapter, the hundred heads can be supplied from those manors to which the hundreds are said to have belonged. But from 4,1,14 onwards the heads must be supplied largely from later evidence, although the material is clearly arranged in hundredal groups. Thus the lands held by Earl Edwin T.R.E. are not entered together, but apparently hundred by hundred along with those of other of King Edward's leading men. In fact, within the groups, no hundred is entered more than once except "Alnodestreu" Hundred 4,1,24-25;31. This last entry is for the land of Countess Godiva which may have been missed at first or kept apart for some reason.
		When Robert of Bellême, Earl Roger's son, forfeited his lands by rebellion, all these estates came to the Crown and were granted out at different times to different holders.
4,1,1	WROCKWARDINE. This was an Ancient Parish. It was caput of Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. After being forfeited in 1102 it was royal demesne until Henry II granted half its annual value (in 1172) to Roger and Jonas of Powys, then (from 1175) its full value. It was farmed out to Hamo Lestrange in 1200 and continued in the family. Wrocwurthin' was held at farm by John Extraneus (Lestrange) in Book of Fees, p. 146, and Wrecwrthin in 'Bradford' Hundred in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56b, was held by Hamo Extraneus; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 221, 227, 238; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 516, ix. no. 224. The Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 117, lists the members of Wrowardyn as Admaston (Admaston SJ6313), Aldescote (Allscott SJ6113), Leyton (Leaton SJ6111), Burcote (Burcot SJ6211), Nesse (probably 'Nash', a township of Wrockwardine, rather than 'Ness Lestrange': 4,1,17, as proposed in the Phillimore printed edition), Clotley (representd by Cluddley and Clotley, both SJ6310; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 328, iv. no. 279) and Walcote (Walcot SJ5911), of which the Abbot of Haughmond holds Walcote: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 217, 421, 1237, 1250-55, 1270, appendix A. i). On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 19; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 310.
	7 ½ OUTLIERS. The nine later townships of Wrockwardine were Admaston, Allscott, Bratton, Burcot, Charlton, Cluddley, Leaton, 'Nash' and Orleton. Of these Bratton is separately treated by Domesday (4,14,19). Otherwise the list corresponds to that given in 4,1,1 Wrockwardine note, except that Walcot is not included, but Orleton is; see VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 310. Walcot may have become a member of Wellington (4,1,22 Wellington note) after 1086.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B added geld' here in paler ink and in the outer margin. This is the first of his 27 contributions to Shropshire, of which 19 concerned the taxability of the holding. These 19 additions are all parts of the verb geldare, usually abbreviated by him to geld' or gld'. See also 4,1,2. 4,3,2;4-5. 4,11,17. 4,14,1;14-18. 4,19,1;3;5. 4,23,2-3;5 and, in a longer phrase, 4,24,4. He also made similar insertions in Herefordshire (HEF 10,10. 12,1. 15,10) and Cheshire (CHS A15-16. 1,6-8;31) and once in Wiltshire (WIL 67,27). On the spaces regularly left after the hidage by the main scribe of Great Domesday, often with no dot after the word 'hide(s)', as here, see 1,5 hide note.
	WOODLAND. There is an area called Wrockwardine Wood about five miles from Wrockwardine (at SJ7011). This has been a Civil Parish since 1884, but may represent an ancient area of woodland appurtenant to Wrockwardine manor; see VCH Shropshire, xi. pp. 323, 326. Adjacent to it is Donnington Wood which belonged to Lilleshall (3g,3). This belt of woodland was probably once a resource for the Hundred of Wrockwardine and its precursor royal estate; see Stamper, 'Woods and Parks', in Astill and Grant, Countryside in Medieval England, p. 130.
	THE CHURCH OF ST PETER [* OF SHREWSBURY *]. This was Earl Roger's abbey (SHR 3b).
	THIS MANOR'S CHURCH WITH 1 HIDE. The church of Wrockwardine was a gift of Earl Roger who founded Shrewsbury Abbey, the St Peter's church referred to here (SHR 3b St Peter's note). The 1 hide is probably that recorded in the Shrewsbury Cartulary, as given by Odelerius the priest (the father of Orderic Vitalis) to the abbey. It lay in Cerletona (Charlton in Wrockwardine, SJ5911); see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xviii, xix, 5, 6, 30, 32-33, 37, 39, 41 etc.); Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56b; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 117; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 222; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 445, x. nos. 117, 632; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 312.
		On the possibility that this was the minster church for the territory of the royal manor of Wrockwardine which became its hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	2 PENNIES ... THIRD PENNY. The 'pennies' of Wrockwardine Hundred were from the pleas of that hundred (only a small portion of its revenues). The two pennies were attached to this manor because King Edward had held it; similarly with 4,1,2-3;5 and compare 4,1,6. This also occurs in HEF 19,2;10. HAM 1,19. DEV 1,41;45 etc. The third penny here is the same as the third penny of the pleas of the shire mentioned in WAR 1,6 and DOR 1,8, but is quite different from the third penny of the total revenues of a borough C12 parts note); see Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, Appendix H, pp. 287-96; Round, 'Tertius Denarius', pp. 62-64; Morris 'Office of Sheriff', pp. 33-34. See also Dialogus de Scaccario, Book I, section xvii, pp. 64-65.
		The earl here was Edwin, on whom see 3b,3 Edwin note.
		On this attachment of hundreds to manors, see {Introduction: Hundreds}.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1321.
4,1,2	CONDOVER. This was an Ancient Parish. It was caput of the Hundred of Condover in 1086 and later. It reverted to the Crown after the rebellion of Robert of Bellême, was granted in 1226 to Henry III's sister Joan, the wife of Llewelyn the Great, then in 1238 to Henry of Hastings (in exchange for land in Cheshire), but a successor exchanged it with Robert Burnell (Bishop of Bath and Wells 1275-1292) in 1284 after which it descended like Acton Burnell (4,4,3). The exchange is in a deed translated in Fletcher, 'Grant by John of Hastings', p. 108; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 63a-64a, 91b, 92b-93b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. nos. 194, 587, v. no. 611; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 8; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 37.
		Among the members of this manor will have been Mangn' Lithe and Parva Lithe (Great Lyth SJ4507 and Little Lyth SJ4706) and Wasseleg' (Westley SJ4606): Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 92a. Other members can be deduced from personal names: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. pp. 20-27. Land later held by the Abbot of Haughmond was described as an assart of this manor, but may have been the place called 'Botwood' in 1086; see 4,27,13 Leebotwood note.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B interlined geldant' above hidê in much paler ink and with a thicker pen than those used by the main scribe of Great Domesday. On the spaces normally left for the taxability to be entered, see 1,5 hide note. On scribe B's other additions on this subject, see 4,1,1 pay note.
	IN LORDSHIP 7 HIDES. The main scribe of Great Domesday only gave the lordship land here and in 4,1,3;5;35. 4,11,4 and 4,19,1, though in several counties in Great Domesday it is regularly given. The information seems to have been collected originally - at least in certain areas or for certain manors - as it appears (together with details of the villagers' land) in Exon (which was the immediate predecessor of Great Domesday for the south-west counties), but was excized for some reason, though imperfectly in some counties, as apparently here. Lordship land was exempt from tax: see, for example, HEF 8,2 and GLS 39,6.
	A PRIEST. There was a church dedicated to St Andrew in Condover (4,3,14 St Andrew's note). It was given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Earl Roger before his death: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 5, 30, 32, 37 etc.); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 247b. On the possibility that this church was the minster for the territory of the royal manor of Condover which became its hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	IT PAYS £10 WITH THE HUNDRED. That is, the payment includes the two pennies from Condover Hundred; see 4,1,1 pennies note on these 'pennies'. It is not clear whether the 1066 payment also included these pennies, though probably not as the scribe started a new sentence for Reddeb' x lib'.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1322.
	ROGER THE HUNTER ... 1 HIDE. This was probably at Great Lyth, Roger's successors being the lords of Pulverbatch (4,26,4) who held Great Lyth in 1368: Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous (1368), iii. p. 258 no. 684.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. See 3f,2 Alward note.
4,1,3	BASCHURCH. This was an Ancient Parish. In 1086 it was caput of Baschurch Hundred and was later in Pimhill Hundred. In 1086 St Peter's Church (i.e. Shrewsbury Abbey) already held the church and 2 ½ hides. This gift of Earl Roger is recorded as the church of Bascerche with its possessions, named as Prestecota (Prescott SJ4221), Noneleia (Noneley SJ4728) and Bageleia (Bagley SJ4027) in the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32 nos. 2, 34, 35 etc.). His son Robert of Bellême within a short time gave the rest of Bascerce 'with all that belonged to it': the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xviii, xix, 5, 19, 30-32, 35, 40, 42 etc.). Thus the whole manor came into the hands of Shrewsbury Abbey; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a (which has Baschirche 2 hides, Baggeleg' ½ hide); Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 119; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230.
		The element 'church' in the place-name may suggest an ancient foundation, possibly a minster that served a large multiple estate and later hundred; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 30.
		On the possibility that this church was the minster for the territory of the royal manor of Baschurch which became its hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	2 ½ HIDES. Scribe B interlined 7 dimid'.
4,1,4	[IN HODNET HUNDRED]. The heading is supplied from the entry below for Hodnet where it is said to be ' the hundred that belongs to the manor'.
	HODNET. This was an Ancient Parish. It was caput of Hodnet Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The manor went to the honour of Montgomery (4,1,15 Montgomery note) after Robert of Bellême's forfeiture and was held under that honour by a family named from Hodnet. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58b, Odo de Hodenet holds Hodenet in chief from the honour of Montgomery; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 17, 532, vi. no. 52, ix. no. 7, x. no. 115.
		In the course of time the manor was expanded by absorbing holdings that were independent of it in Domesday; thus the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 119 (see also Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221) records its members as: Longford (Longford SJ6433), Peplow (Peplow: 4,11,19), Parva Bowlas (Little Bolas SJ6421, probably part of Peplow in 1086), Preston (Preston-upon-the-Weald-Moors: 4,11,17), Horton (Horton, part of 4,14,20) and a half of Lawley (Lawley: 4,19,6). Longford is identified by Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 337) as the place in Moreton Say parish, but it is possible that it is the Longford adjacent to Preston-upon-the-Weald-Moors (SJ7218) and thus part of it in 1086. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 326.
	
	1 ½ HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for some five letters after i hida 7 dimid'.; see 1,5 hide note.
		In view of the 10 ploughs recorded on this manor and the estimate of a further 9 ploughs, Hodnet may have been beneficially hidated; see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 282; and compare 6,2 Cleobury note.
	A SMALL WOOD WHICH PAYS NOTHING. Domesday has silua parua, as also in 4,1,11. 4,19,2 and 4,28,6. Small woods are infrequently mentioned in Domesday: apart from in Shropshire, parua silua or silua parua occurs in BRK 8,1. 40,2. 44,2. 65,20. HAM 1,39. 28,6. 45,2. IoW6,11. KEN 2,24. SUS 2,5. 6,3. WIL 1,13. 13,11. 24,37. 27,17. WOR 15,5. 26,11. A paruum nemus is found in KEN 5,126 and there are several examples of diminutives: parua siluula in KEN 5,210. 7,23 and siluula parua in KEN 13,1. There is a paruula silua in HEF 9,9 and a silua paruula in GLS 3,7. To these should be added the .ii. siluulae of KEN 2,21, the one in KEN 5,134 and the one in WOR 23,12; in HEF 24,6 there is a siluula in which there is a hedged enclosure (haia). There is a parua landa siluae ('a small tract of [wild] woodland') in 4,3,34.
		The extent of these small woods is very rarely given, the use of parua or paruula presumably implying that the wood is too small to have a value. Twice this is explicitly stated (silua parua nil reddens), here and in 4,1,11. Sometimes a use is given: ad clausuram ('for fencing') at KEN 2,21. 5,134. 13,1. SUS 2,5. 6,3, while KEN 5,126 has paruum nemus de .xii. acris pasturê ('containing12 acres of pasture') and compare HAM IoW 6,11 silua parua sine pasnagio ('a small wood without pasturage'). Where an extent is given, it is, with two exceptions, small. Thus in Wiltshire two woods are of 10 acres and one is of 3 acres (WIL 1,13. 13,11. 24,37).
		All this tends to suggest that parua refers to the extent of the woodland, not to the size of the trees and this must also be the sense of paruula. The two exceptions are in WIL 27,17 where the parua silua is 1 league by 1 league and in WOR 23,12 which has 1 league of siluula. The contrast with the other examples suggests that, in these cases, the use of parua and siluula is erroneous or misleading. Possibly parua has been mistakenly included and siluula misused for silua; alternatively, in these instances they may be being used in the sense of silua minuta or silua modica, both of which refer to the size of the trees (see 4,3,21 wood note). In the case of the small woods used 'for fencing', noted above, they might also contain small trees, although the posts and slats can be made by splitting larger trunks.
	CHURCH OF ST PETER. Shrewsbury Abbey was given the church by Earl Roger: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xviii, 5, 30, 32, 37 etc.); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 247b. The church may have been more important than this terse entry suggests. On the possibility that this was the minster church for the territory of the royal manor of Hodnet which became its hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
4,1,5	[IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED]. This head is supplied from information contained within the entry.
	MORVILLE. Domesday has Membrefelde. Ekwall, Dictionary of Place-Names (under Morville), suggested that the Mor brook which names the village was originally called Memere or Meomere; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 213. This important Saxon vill was an Ancient Parish, was caput of "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Stottesdon Hundred. Earl Roger's grant of five of the 8 hides held by the Saxon church of St Gregory to his Abbey of St Peter in Shrewsbury began a change in the tenure of the manor. Already in 1086 Shrewsbury Abbey held five of the 12 hides, with the reversion of three held by Earl Roger's chaplains. Of his lordship hides Richard the Butler apparently held two (unless they are additional to the 12 hides of the manor), leaving only two for Roger himself: these may have included Aldenham (SO6795) and Bridgnorth (SO7193). In 1255, 1 virgate in Aldenham in Stottesdon Hundred was held by William de Aldenham from Walter de Baskervill' who was in the wardship of Sibyl Giffard (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b); see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 218; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 323; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 79.
		The borough of Bridgnorth (SO7193), perhaps earlier known as 'Quatbridge' (the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Parker) for 895, version C for 911), was probably founded on Roger's lordship land of Morville, or on the estate at Oldbury (4,3,68). In 895, a Danish army had overwintered at Cwatbrucge and built a fort there. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle does not say on which side of the River Severn, though from Aethelweard's Chronicle (Campbell, pp. 52-53) it appears that it was on the eastern side, if it was the same fortress that the Danes were using as a base in 910. For in that year, Aethelweard records that a Danish army had crossed the River Severn further downstream, that is from the English side, and ravaged lands on its western side, 'but when they returned to their home, rejoicing in their triumphal spoils, they crossed a pons (to put it in literate [Latin] spelling, which is called Cuatbricge ['Quatbridge'] by the common people) to the eastern side'. They were attacked by a joint force of Mercians and West Saxons and defeated at Wednesfield [near Tettenhall].
		In 912 Aethelflaed, Lady of the Mercians and King Alfred's daughter, constructed a fortress at Brycge on the west bank of the River Severn (the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle; John of Worcester, Chronicle, ii. pp. 366-67). It seems likely that Brycge (etc.) and Cwatbrucge (etc.) refer to the same place and that the bridge at what became Bridgnorth is intended. The eastern bank of the Severn beside the bridge at Bridgnorth would have lain in the Staffordshire manor of Quatt: WAR 12,8). There is no reason to think that there was a bridge lower down the Severn closer to the settlement of Quatt itself. At Bridgnorth Robert of Bellême refortified Aethelflaed's burh (John of Worcester, Chronicle, iii. pp. 100-101), beginning the construction of a castle there, and moved his collegiate church from Quatford. Despite his rebellion and forfeiture, Bridgnorth gradually replaced both Morville and Quatford (4,1,32) in importance; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 59a-60a, 88a-89b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 241; Mason and Barker, 'Norman Castle at Quatford'; King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 421; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. pp. 56-59; and {Introduction: History}.
		Bridgnorth included Walton (Bridgwalton SO6892): Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 219, 231-32. On the whole manor of Morville, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 25 onwards.
	CHAWSON … IS IN WORCESTERSHIRE The Domesday name-form is Caluestone. Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, i. pp. 27, 68), considering that the ascription to Worcestershire was in error, suggested Cold Weston. But Caluestone is probably a mere variant of a place called Celvestune in WOR 25,1, that is Chawson in Droitwich. The same place is found as Chalvestona in a list of manors with their hidage known as Evesham B: WOR {The Worcester Material}. Although remote from the Shropshire border, this outlier of Morville may have begun to be drawn out of Worcestershire by Earl Roger's reorganization of his manors in the same way that Halesowen (WOR 14,1) was later and more permanently: {Introduction: County Boundary}. The hide would have been adjacent to Salwarpe (WOR 14,2), Roger's other Worcestershire holding, and might have provided salt-rights for Morville. See VCH Shropshire, iii. p. 43 (correcting VCH Shropshire, i. p. 286).
	TWO PENNIES. On this render, see 4,1,1 pennies note.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1323.
	MANOR'S CHURCH IS IN HONOUR OF ST GREGORY. That is, it was dedicated to St Gregory. Although in honore with a dependent genitive could, and often does in Great Domesday, mean 'in the honour (i.e. holding) of' (making the meaning here that St Gregory's Church held this manor's church), this is unlikely in view of the Saxon 'minster' church of Morville being called St Gregory's; see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 4, 30); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 26; VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 18, 29. On the possibility that this was the minster church for the territory of the royal manor of Morville which became "Alnodestreu" Hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	CHURCH OF ST PETER ... 5 HIDES OF LAND. The Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32 nos. 2, 34, 35) records how Earl Roger gave the Church of St Gregory of Mamerfeld to the abbey with the following possessions: Estleia (Astley Abbots SO7096, said to be 5 hides in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 218, 231; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163a), Nordleia (Nordley SO6996; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 801, v. no. 594), alia Esteleia (perhaps 'Astley Parva', lost), Crofta (Croft SO6894), Halchtona (Haughton SO6795), Chinseteleia (Kingsley SO6995, rather than Kingslow SO7998, as identified by Eyton, which is the wrong side of the River Severn), Harpefort (Harpsford in Cross Houses SO6991) and Billingesle (Billingsley SO7085, presumably a detachment). These places were no doubt part of Morville in 1086, but probably included the 3 hides held by the earl's chaplains as well as the 5 hides held directly by St Peter's of Shrewsbury. The Shrewsbury Cartulary goes on to add La Nientona (Neenton: 4,11,8), Tugafort (Tugford: 4,3,8), Fertecota (a lost place in Thonglands, part of Tugford in 1086: 4,3,8 Tugford note) and Westona (possibly Cold Weston, SO5583; see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 318); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 166b, although Eyton was wrong in identifying this as the Caluestone of Domesday). These last places were not part of Morville. Tugford was given by Reginald the sheriff or Warin his predecessor (see 4,3,8 Tugford note; the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, p. 30).
		Billingsley, 1 hide, went to the Abbey of Sées c. 1147 and was later held under it by the de Beysin family; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. nos. 503, 557, vi. no. 168, viii. no. 507, x. no. 633; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 231; the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 306).
	HOLDS 1 HIDE. This was a later addition in the outer margin by the main scribe of Great Domesday.
	AND PAYS 4s TO THE MONKS. He paid rent to the monks of St Peter's, Shrewsbury, for the 1 hide, which was part of the 5 hides held by that church in 1086. The Latin has the present participle reddens, literally 'paying'; the 1-hide holding of the man-at-arms would not have been there when he wrote it (see 4,1,5 holds note).
	REMAINING 3 HIDES. These 3 hides were the difference between the 8 hides held by St Gregory's Church before 1066 and the 5 held by the Abbey of St Peter in 1086.
	18d. This was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure; it extends into the outer margin.
	RICHARD THE BUTLER … 2 HIDES. It is possible that these 2 hides are the 8 virgates recorded at Tassele (Tasley SO6994) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a, in Stottesdon Hundred, held by Roger Corbet under John Fitz Alan. They are likely to have been part of Morville in 1086, but did not go with the main manor to Shrewsbury Abbey. On the other hand, descent to Fitz Alan would imply that Reginald the sheriff was perhaps Richard's over-lord (under Earl Roger: 4,2) and Richard may thus have been Reginald's butler, not Earl Roger's; see Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 249; Book of Fees, p. 963; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 219, 231, 242; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 84; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 367. If so, this Richard will probably be the man of that name who holds of Reginald the sheriff in 4,3,2-3;12-13;29;59.
	A MILL. Domesday molin' may extend to the accusative molinum and thus be an object of ibi h[abe]t in the line above, as are the slaves and villagers.
	PACKLOADS OF CORN. The Latin is summas annonae, accusative plural. The word summa also occurs on eleven other occasions in Shropshire, all but once with corn, malt or wheat. The size of the packload is not known, but in the case of salt in CHS S1,4, it contained 15 bulliones 'boilings'. The summa of fish or salt (see 4,11,4) seems to have been 240 lbs: VCH Devonshire, i. p. 388. In WOR 2,57;82 mills are also recorded as paying so many packloads of corn (10, as here, in the case of the 2 mills at Hartlebury).
	AFTER THIS ENTRY two lines of text were erased, perhaps by the main scribe of Great Domesday when he added and corrected earlier in this entry; see 4,1,5 holds note and 4,1,5 18d note.
4,1,6	[IN "CULVESTAN" HUNDRED]. The heading is supplied from the entry below, which states that 'the whole of "Culvestan Hundred" and Patton Hundred belong to this manor', and also from geographical probability.
	'CORFHAM'. This lost place is represented by the site of Corfham Castle, marked on current Ordnance Survey maps. 'Corfham' lay in Diddlebury Ancient Parish. It was in "Culvestan" Hundred and was its caput in 1086, and was later in Munslow Hundred. Diddlebury was a member in 1086 and has since displaced 'Corfham' in importance. After being forfeited by Earl Roger's son, 'Corfham', with Siefton and Culmington 4,1,28-29, remained in royal lordship until Henry II granted it to Hugh de Periers. On his death it reverted to the Crown and was subsequently given (with the appurtenant forest of Clee) to Walter of Clifford in whose family it descended. The manor, held by Walter de Clifford from the king as 7 ½ hides, is surveyed in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 64b-65a, pp. 93b-94b, and included Norton' (Norton SO4681) held by Hugh de Cheyne and Bach (Bache SO4681). The Abbot of Haughmond then held 2 mills and ½ virgate in 'Corfham' (the Haughmond Cartulary: Rees, nos. 235, 270), the prior of Clifford 1 ½ virgates and the Hospitalers of Ludlow ½ virgate. Feudal Aids, iv. p. 245, records that John le Straunge holds Corfham once held by Walter of Clifford with members Norton, Dudulbury (Diddlebury SO5085), Bache and Bromcrqft (Broncroft SO5386); see Book of Fees, pp. 146, 965, 973, 1283; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 224, 228; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 544, ix. no. 223; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 145; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 82.
		Culmynton (Culmington 4,1,29) was also a member: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 516; see 4,1,29 Culmington note. So was Petone (Peaton SO5384): Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 544. A further part of the manor was ½ hide in Lanton or Lauton (Lawton SO5183): Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 70b, 71b; Book of Fees, p. 1284; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 921, iii. no. 156, viii. nos. 226, 496. This became a serjeanty.
	KING EDWARD HELD IT, [***]. In the manuscript there is an erasure of some 14 letters' width after tenuit, presumably done after the main scribe of Great Domesday had completed the entry. He probably intended to add something there as he did not draw a link-line to fill the gap; compare 4,1,9 hide note and 9,1 hides note. It is not clear what is missing from the entry, however, unless it is the "Culvestan" hundred head; see 4,1,10 king note and 4,1,22 Earl note.
	VALUE 5s. As this seems too little to be the value of all of 'Corfham', it would seem likely that it refers only to the ½-hide subtenancy, the value of the whole manor being £6.
	THE CHURCH OF ST PETER [* OF SHREWSBURY *] HOLDS THIS MANOR'S CHURCH. The church was at Diddlebury (Dodeleberia in the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, p. 30, see p. 32) given by Earl Roger to St Peter's, Shrewsbury, together with Spertford (Sparchford SO4983) and ½ hide in Croftona (part of Corfton SO4984: 4,8,10). The church subsequently went to the Abbey of Sées: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32, 306 nos. 2, 34, 35 etc.).
		The church may well have been a minster for the territory of royal manor of 'Corfham' and therefore of its dependent hundred of "Culvestan", and possibly of Patton Hundred as well; see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	PAYS 18s TO THE MONKS. St Peter's probably put the 18s from the revenue received for the hide towards the upkeep of their monks.
	"CULVESTAN" HUNDRED AND PATTON HUNDRED. It seems likely that King Edward had no manor in Patton Hundred, so his presence in it was assured by making 'Corfham' caput of it: {Introduction: Hundreds}.
	2 PENNIES. On this render, see 4,1,1 pennies note.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1324.
4,1,7	[IN "REWESET" HUNDRED]. The hundred head is supplied from the fact that Alberbury (4,1,9) was certainly in this hundred, since the hundred was attached to it.
	MINSTERLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. The place-name means 'field in a wood belonging to a minster church', referring to the church at Westbury (4,4,15): Place-Names of Shropshire, ii. p. 11. Minsterley seems to have been in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. After Robert of Bellême forfeited the earldom, Minsterley went to the Corbets of Cause; it is probable that the 1086 subtenant Roger is Roger son of Corbet (4,4 Roger note). Munsterlegh is held in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235 by Peter Corbet; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 85, iii. no. 603; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 45; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 310.
	ROGER [* SON OF CORBET *]. The identification is probable in view of the later descent of the manor to the Corbets (4,1,7 Minsterley note). Roger is a subtenant of Earl Roger (4,4).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining two-thirds of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,1,8	TREWERN. It lay in Buttington Ancient Parish which was in Montgomeryshire from 1536 (the dissolution of the Marcher lordships) until 1974 and is now in Powys. It lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086. Great Domesday Alretone was long thought to be Cause, later caput of the Corbet barony, but the case for Trewern has been fully established by Morgan, 'Trewern in Gorddwr', who arrived at the same conclusion independently of J. Lawson (Shropshire Newsletter no. 28 (February 1965) p. 2). Alretone is from Old English alra-tun that is 'tun among the alders' and occurs in medieval documents as Halreton, Allereton and Olreton. In the Calendar of Close Rolls, xii. (1261-1264) p. 265, Henry III instructs Gruffydd ap Gwenwynwyn (or de la Pole) to restore among other things all the land of Gorddwr to Thomas Corbet, lord of Cause, with the exception of Botenton' (Buttington SJ2408), Allereton and Hop' (Hope SJ2507), which had been granted by Robert Corbet to Gwenwynwyn son of Owain Cyfeiliog. These three vills had been granted by Gruffydd to his wife Hawys (Lestrange) and are confirmed as Holretun, Hoppe and Bodinton in Coiddur (Gorddwr) in the Calendar of Welsh Rolls, (1279) p. 179. The Inquisition Post Mortem of Hawise is in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 269, where she is said to have held the manor of Botynton, with members Trewern and Hop of the barony of Cawes. While Cause (4,4,20 Worthen note) rose in importance, Trewern declined. It was in the Corbet Welshry of Nether Gorddwr and was lost to the county in the early Middle Ages, probably in the thirteenth century; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 269; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 202; Davies, 'Lordships and Manors', p. 134; Morgan, 'Montgomeryshire Territorial Divisions', p. 39. For the extent of Over and Nether Gorddwr, see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 600. A member of Trewern may have been 'Great' Wollaston (see 4,4,7 Wollaston note) and others Wynancton (Winnington SJ3110), Trevenamit (Trefnant SJ3010) and Haregreve (Hargreaves SJ3110): Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235; Placita de Quo Warranto, p. 718.
	ROGER [* SON OF CORBET *]. In the manuscript 7 links Rogeri[us] to ALRETONE; Farley omitted it in error.
		The identification of Roger with Roger son of Corbet is probable in view of the later descent of the manor to the Corbets (4,1,8 Trewern note). Roger is a subtenant of Earl Roger (4,4).
	WELSHMEN. There are 67 Welshmen recorded in Domesday Shropshire, excluding the unspecified numbers here, in 4,1,12 and in 4,3,42. About half of them occur on manors held by Reginald the sheriff (as is also the case with the Frenchmen: 3b,3 Frenchman note). A large number of them appear in "Merset" Hundred on the border which had been badly devastated, also in "Rinlau" Hundred. In many cases the Welshmen had ploughs of their own or a share in the other villagers' ploughs; sometimes they had both ploughs and paid a money render, sometimes only a money render is recorded (in 4,27,4 the payment of a hawk by a Welshman is mentioned). They may have had some pastoral duties. See Gwynne, 'Domesday Society in Shropshire', pp. 91-93; and 4,3,38 Welshmen note on Waleis for Walenses.
	6 SMALLHOLDERS ... 3 SMALLHOLDERS. See 2,1 smallholders note.
	PAID 8s. This corrects the 'paid £8' of the Phillimore printed translation and of the previous version of Domesday Explorer.
4,1,9	ALBERBURY. This was an Ancient Parish which later became the parish of Alberbury with Cardeston when two Ancient Parishes were combined. It was caput of "Reweset" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Ford Hundred. As in the case of Minsterley (4,1,7) Alberbury was later held by the Corbets of Cause; the 1086 tenant is probably Roger (son of) Corbet (4,4 Roger note). The first recorded holder under the Corbets is Ralph Crassus ('the Fat') who gave the church to Shrewsbury Abbey between 1141 and 1155: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 43, 271-72, 316). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, the holder of 2 hides in Albebur' is Fulk Fitz Warin of the fee of Caus. A priory was begun here c. 1221-1226 as a dependency first of Lilleshall then of the Abbey of Grandmont (Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 103, 125): 2 virgates are held in arms by the Fratres Grandimontis in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 67a; see also Book of Fees, pp. 964, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 235, 241; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 50; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 214; VCH Shropshire, ii. p. 47, viii. p. 195.
		It is surprising to find no mention of a church, since there is evidence that there was a Saxon collegiate establishment here before 1066. This church was possibly the minster church for the territory of the royal manor of Alberbury which became the Hundred of "Reweset"; see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
		A reference to a hedged enclosure may also have been omitted, since the place-name Hayes (SJ3515) in Alberbury derives from one such: Place-Names of Shropshire, ii. p. 11.
	ROGER [* SON OF CORBET *]. The identification is probable in view of the later descent of the manor to the Corbets (4,1,9 Alberbury note). Roger is a subtenant of Earl Roger (4,4).
	1 HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday had erased something at the beginning of the second line of this entry and then had written Ibi i hida there, leaving a space suitable for about five letters after it. As no link-line (compare 4,1,6 king note and 9,1 hides note) was drawn to fill this space it must have been left deliberately like the other spaces after the hidage; see 1,5 hide note. It is possible that he had failed to leave a space for the hidage and that the erasure was immediate and of the lordship, which he then re-wrote after the space.
4,1,10	[IN WITTERY HUNDRED]. The head is supplied from the entry which follows: 'Wittery Hundred belongs to this manor'.
	CHIRBURY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086 and contained the hundred moot, being later caput of Chirbury Hundred. It had no doubt been an important royal centre. Aethelflaed, King Alfred's daughter and 'Lady of the Mercians', built a fortress here in 915 (Anglo Saxon Chronicle, Mercian Register). See Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 80.
		After King Edward and King William the next recorded holder is Gilbert de Salnerville (who may have been enfeoffed by Earl Roger or have been granted the land by the Crown after its forfeiture) who gave the tithes of the church to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 32, 34, 39, 260). Thereafter it seems to have been held of the honour of Montgomery by the Bowdler family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60a, Chirbur' is already split into a number of parts including 4 carucates held by the prior of Chirbury; other holders owe service at Montgomery castle: Book of Fees, p. 383; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 361, vi. no. 464, x. no. 188.
		Among the members of Chirbury were Walecote (Walcot: 4,1,35) held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b, and Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 342; Wititre (Wittery SO2798), ½ hide, held by Robert de Witit' from Roger de la Mora in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b; and Timiburt (Timberth SO2596) and Stocton (Stockton SJ2601) ½ hide each held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b, by Philip de Smethekote with service at Montgomery; see Book of Fees, p. 965; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 240; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 290, ii. no. 747.
		A priory for Augustinian canons was founded here c. 1200 from Snead: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 162b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 212; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 134; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 165; VCH Shropshire, ii p. 59.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 57.
	KING EDWARD HELD IT. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line after this statement, perhaps for the hidage to be added or for the hundred head (see 4,1,22 Earl note). However, there is a slight indication of an erasure above the space, though the parchment may just have been rubbed there; compare 4,1,6 king note.
	2 CHURCHES WITH A PRIEST. This was probably a minster church established to serve the royal multiple estate of Chirbury which probably once included all the lands that later formed Wittery Hundred: {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	WHO HAS. The main scribe of Great Domesday altered q with superscript i (= qui) from 7 ('and').
4,1,11	[IN "MERSET" HUNDRED]. The head is supplied from the entry which follows which reports that "Merset" Hundred belonged to the manor.
	MAESBURY. In 1086 it was caput of "Merset" Hundred with which name it is probably connected. It was presumably a very early parish but both parochially and manorially it was displaced by Oswestry (4,1,11 Oswestry note) which grew up on its land and Maesbury now lies in Oswestry parish. It is regarded as a member or township of Oswestry in the surveys cited under Oswestry.
		Maesbury and Oswestry were taken into Fitz Alan lordship of Oswestry and only returned to Shropshire in 1536.
	REGINALD [* THE SHERIFF *]. See 4,1,11 Oswestry note and 4,3 Reginald note. He gave the 'Church of St Oswald' to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 33, 38).
	OSWESTRY. Domesday Lvvre derives from Old French L'uuvre, Modern French L'oeuvre, a translation of Latin opus in the sense of 'siege-work, fortification', particularly referring to the castle (on which see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 427). The place is later known in English as Osewaldstreu, Oswaldestre ('St Oswald's tree'), Croesoswald in Welsh ('Oswald's Cross') and Blancmuster, a Norman French rendering of the Latin Album Monasterium. The Oswald from whom the place is named was the King of Northumbria, son of Aethelfrith. He was martyred in 642 at the battle of Maserfield (near Oswestry) and a church at Maesbury was dedicated to him, later replaced by a shrine at Oswestry.
		Oswestry soon displaced Maesbury in importance and became caput of the Fitz Alan barony of Oswestry (descent from Reginald: 4,3 Reginald note). The town itself was an important place for parleys between English and Welsh and a depot for military supplies, needed for operations in Wales. The Fitz Alans turned it into a Marcher lordship and it was lost to the county for many years; see {Introduction: County Boundary} and {Introduction: Hundreds}. The manor of Oswestry grew to encompass many of the vills held by Reginald in "Merset" Hundred under Earl Roger (4,3,32-43); they accordingly appear together with the actual members of Oswestry in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i no. 812 (of John Fitz Alan), iv. no. 90; in Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys; in Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. no. 235; and in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, AD 1268-1272, p. 504.
		Maesbury probably included in 1086 the land that became Sychtyn, a township of Llansilin Ancient Parish and Llanyblodwel Ancient Parish, together with part of Llanymynech Ancient Parish, unless these areas were only confirmed on Maesbury and Oswestry in the sixteenth century at the dissolution of the Marcher lordships.
	A CHURCH. This was probably at Oswestry; see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, i. pp. 33, 38); Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 24. On the possibility that it was the minster church for the territory of the royal manor of Maesbury which became "Merset" Hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	A SMALL WOOD. On Latin silua parua, see 4,1,4 wood note.
	ENGELBALD. Domesday Hengebald[us] represents Old German Engelbald: Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names, p. 71.
4,1,12	WHITTINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in "Merset" Hundred in 1086. It probably came to the Crown after the rebellion of Robert of Bellême and was given by Henry I to William Peverel of Dover. It was forfeited by his nephew and granted by Henry II to Geoffrey de Vere, but resumed, then conferred on Roger de Powis. In the thirteenth century it was held by the FitzWarins and seems to have been regarded as a Marcher lordship that had to be rejoined to England in 1536; see Book of Fees, p. 147; the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 511); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 233, xi. p. 29; VCH Shropshire, iii. p. 38. The Knights Hospitalers held land here in the late twelfth century.
		A castle built here is first mentioned in 1138; see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 432.
	AETHELRED, KING EDWARD'S FATHER. Aethelred the Unready; he ruled from 978 or 979 to 1016.
	THESE THREE MANORS. That is, Chirbury, Maesbury and Whittington (4,1,10-12). That they could pay half a night's revenue is indicative of their antiquity and prosperity, and this decline was probably due to devastations wrought by the Welsh under Gruffydd ap Llewelyn; see {Introduction: History}.
		The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote h' tria M' over an erasure; the words are very blurred because the surface of the parchment had not been re-prepared after the erasure.
	HALF A NIGHT'S REVENUE. The Latin is dimidiam firmam noctis; here firma represents Old English feorm ('a food rent'): Oxford English Dictionary, under farm(i). For other meanings of firma, see 3d,5 revenue note and 4,8,8 revenue note.
		Many royal manors, especially in the south-west, had to pay one night's revenue, which generally took the place of the normal tax payment, the manors often not being assessed in hides (though two of these three here and those in HEF 1,1 and GLS 1,9;11; 13 were hidated). Originally this fixed rent meant the amount of food needed to support the king and his household for one night; see Dialogus de Scaccario pp. 40-41; and CAM 1,1 where before 1066 the manor of Soham paid '3 days' revenue in corn, honey and malt and everything else'. However, by the eleventh century these food rents were generally commuted to money payments. From examples in Somerset and Hampshire £80 appears to have been a probable figure before 1066, and £100 after, for one night's revenue; see Poole, Exchequer in the Twelfth Century, p. 29; Round, Feudal England, pp. 109-15. In WIL1,5;7 also, figures appear of £110 and £100 for the present value of manors which had paid one night's revenue; the abbreviasted redd' in these entries is probably to be translated 'paid', rather than 'pays'. In Shropshire, however, as in NTH B36 and DEV 1,21, the combined 1086 payments of the three manors fell far short of the £50 figure (£100 in the case of Northamptonshire and Devon). It would seem that in some cases (for example DOR 1,2-4.GLS 1,9; 13. WIL 1,2-4) these food rents were not commuted, the manors continuing to pay the night's revenue in 1086. See also BDF 1,1;3 where Leighton Buzzard and Houghton Regis continued to pay in 1086 half a day's revenue in 'wheat, honey and other things'.
		In Domesday Somerset, Dorset and Devon, as apparently here, there are several instances of manors combining to provide this rent: SOM 1,2 revenue note. 1,10 revenue note. DOR B1 revenue note. 1,5 revenue note. This is the only reference to the night's revenue in Shropshire; there is no mention of which manor(s) contributed the other half of the night's revenue.
4,1,13	THIS ENTRY was probably included here because it was adjacent to and probably attached to "Merset" Hundred, lands in which had just been detailed (4,1,11-12). However, the main scribe of Great Domesday wrote Tuder in capitals and lined it through in red, treatment that he reserved elsewhere for Earl Roger's subtenants in each sub-chapter; see SHR 4 Roger note.
	[* IN WALES *]. This head has been added to indicate that this land did not lie in "Merset" Hundred.
	TUDUR ... 1 WELSH DISTRICT. Like Welsh lands mentioned at 4,2,1 and 4,3,42 this unnamed 'district' seems to have been attached to "Merset" Hundred and should be looked for in that area. Classical Latin finis is a 'boundary, end, limit', but was commonly used in the plural to mean an 'area, land, territory', a sense which seems here to be had by the singular. It appears in Domesday Shropshire to mean either a Welsh 'cantref' (as at 4,1,15) or its subdivision, the 'commote'. Tudur is probably Tudur (Tewdwr) ap Rhys Sais and his land Nanheudwy in the vale of Llangollen which must have been overrun by Earl Roger's advance to Ial (4,2,1: 4,2,1 Ial note); see Edwards, 'The Normans and the Welsh March', p. 159; Lloyd, History of Wales, ii. p. 389; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 428. Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 48, followed by Lloyd, 'Wales and the Coming of the Normans', p. 160, and VCH Shropshire, i. pp. 287-88, suggests that the land was Maelor Saesneg, but this was probably in Cheshire in 1086; see Tait, Domesday Survey of Cheshire, p. 24; and {Introduction: History} and CHS {Introduction: Hundreds}.
4,1,14	[IN "RINLAU" HUNDRED]. The hundred head is deduced from geographical probability and from the fact that manors in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086 are usually found in Purslow Hundred in later times; see 4,1,14 Lydham note.
	LYDHAM. This was an Ancient Parish. It seems to have been in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. After escheating to the Crown it was granted to the honour of Montgomery (4,1,15 Montgomery note): in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 175, William de Cantilupo (lord of Montgomery) holds Lideham; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, ii. no. 74; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, the Bishop of Hereford is in possession of 1 ½ hides of Lideham. A place that was detached from Lydham at an early date, probably before the grant to the honour of Montgomery, was Mora (More SO3491) held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, by Roger de Mora by serjeanty: Book of Fees, pp. 383, 1183, 1243, 1283; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. nos. 326, 464, iii. no. 240. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 275.
	EDRIC THE WILD. Saluage interlined is from Old French salvage, Modern French sauvage ('wild, untamed') from Late Latin salvaticus, Classical Latin silvaticus, from silva ('wood'): his byname appears as siluaticus in Orderic Vitalis and John of Worcester among others.
		He was nephew of Edric Streona (Ealdorman of the Mercians, appointed 1007, killed 1017) and cousin of Siward (founder of St Peter's, Shrewsbury) and his brother Aldred (4,27,32 Siward note). Edric held lands in Shropshire and Herefordshire under Edward the Confessor. Though he acknowledged William as king in 1066, he joined Kings Bleddyn and Rhiwallon of Gwynedd and Powys in devastating Herefordshire in 1067 and he burnt Shrewsbury in 1069. He submitted to King William in 1070: John of Worcester, iii. pp. 4-5, 14-15, 20-21. The last mention of him is in 1072 when he accompanied King William to Scotland. Many of the references to plain Edric holding in 1066 are probably to Edric the wild, but there are at least two other identifiable Edrics in Shropshire: Edric of Bayston and Edric of Wenlock. It is possible that at the height of his power Edric the wild held as many as 100 hides of land. The estates he held in Herefordshire went to Ralph of Mortimer as did some of those he held in Shropshire. Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 91-93, expects to find Edric the wild still holding land in 1086 and, following John of Worcester, is inclined to accept Edric as son of Aelfric, brother of Edric Streona, and therefore to identify him with Edric of Wenlock (3c,8) whose father was called Aelfric. However, John of Worceser is the only source who gives Edric the wild as a son of Aelfric, and it may be that he made a wrong deduction from the information he had, including that of Domesday Book. Moreover, there is no reason to think that Edric was still alive in 1086. On Edric, see Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. p. 166); Freeman, Norman Conquest, iv. Appendix Note E, pp. 736-38; and {Introduction: History}.
	A MILL WHICH PAYS 1 PIG. This is a very unusual render; see 1,7 mill note for the usual payment received from mills. However, in CAM 5,25 2 mills at 45s pay 2 pigs, which is expanded to '2 mills at 45s … 2 pigs are fattened from the mills' in the corresponding entry in Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (Hamilton, p. 48); see also CAM 1,2 '2 mills, 16s, feed 2 pigs a year'.
4,1,15	[CASTLE]. This entry cannot be governed by the previous hundred head (for "Rinlau", conjectured at 4,1,14). It is probable, like several castles in Hereford, that it was not regarded as part of any hundred, although its dependencies (4,1,35-36) lay in Wittery Hundred; see, for example, HEF 8,1. 19,1, and HEF {Introduction: Castles}.
	MONTGOMERY. The name Montgomery derives from the place of origin of its founder, Earl Roger of Montgommery; see SHR 4 Roger note.
		The castle and its lands are surveyed in three entries (see also 4,1,35-36). Montgomery Castle was established beyond Offa's Dyke in an area where the English had pushed their border into Wales, but which had been so greatly devastated, presumably by Gruffydd ap Llewelyn, that the 52 ½ hides attached to it had only been used for hunting under King Edward (4,1,35). The first Norman castle is generally accepted to have been at Hen Domen (SO2198): Barker and Higham, Hen Domen; Barker and Lawson, 'Pre-Norman Field System at Hen Domen'.
		After Earl Roger's death the Welsh sacked Montgomery, and after his son's rebellion it came into the hands of Henry I as an escheat. He then granted it as an honour (to which were attached a number of lands held by others in 1086) to Baldwin de Boilers who had married his niece Sibyl de Faleise. Robert de Boilers died without issue and the land passed to his brother Baldwin II de Boilers whose heir was William de Courtenay. On his death, King John treated it as an escheat and gave it briefly to Thomas de Erdinton, then to William II de Cantilupo. Thereafter, the castle with its immediate appurtenances and the honour were often treated separately, although the holder of the honour was sometimes constable of the castle. A new castle in Montgomery was begun in 1223: VCH Shropshire, iii. p. 38. Hubert de Burgo held the honour from 1228 to 1232; Henry III granted it in 1254 to his son Edward and it was held for a time by members of the Lestrange family. The castle and the honour suffered much from the depredations of Llewelyn ap Gruffydd 'Prince of Wales' 1246-1282. The holder in 1273-1274 was George de Cantilupo whose sister Millicent conveyed the lands to Eudo La Zouche.
		After 1086 Montgomery was drawn into a Marcher lordship then, following its dissolution, was in Montgomeryshire from 1536 until 1974 and is now in Powys.
	HAS 4 PLOUGHS ... HAS 2 PLOUGHS. It is quite possible that car' in both cases here does not abbreviate carucas ('ploughs'), but carucatas ('carucates'), although when the main scribe of Great Domesday used car' to abbreviate carucata in its various cases, he normally put t'rê (= terrae, 'of land') after it to distinguish it from caruca, though there are exceptions. Two facts suggest this: firstly, no extent is otherwise given for Montgomery castle although one would expect it for such an important place; secondly, in the description of the size of the similar frontier castles of Ewyas Harold and Clifford in Herefordshire (HEF19,1. 8,1) the scribe uses the formula 'n carucates' and its equivalent 'land for n ploughs'. Against this, however, is the fact that 52 ½ hides were attached to Montgomery castle (4,1,35) and normally land measured in carucates (or the equivalent ploughland expression) was newly-acquired land that had not yet been hidated: C13 hides note. Compare 7,4 servants note.
	PENCE. In the manuscript the den' might have been added as it is partly in the centre margin. The first few words at the beginning of the next line are hard to read because there was a large erasure of some two or three lines on the other side of the folio (after 4,1,5) and this shows through the parchment, which is particularly thin here; words have also 'spread' (presumably because the parchment had not been re-prepared after the erasure). The last line of this entry is very rubbed and is just below the bottom marginal ruling of the manuscript.
	ONE DISTRICT OF WALES. The Latin word finis (see 4,1,13 district note) is an unclear term, here meaning 'cantref, a group of 'commotes'. Other Welsh lands mentioned in Domesday Shropshire appear to be attached to "Merset" Hundred; see 4,1,13 district note. 4,2,1 Ial note and 4,3,42 districts note. This land within the castlery of Montgomery should be looked for in a different direction. It seems to be the cantref of Arwystli mentioned in Domesday Cheshire (CHS G2) as held by Earl Roger but claimed by Robert of Rhuddlan:
		'Robert also claims a hundred, Arvester (Arwystli), which Earl Roger holds. The
		Welshmen testify that this hundred is one of the (hundreds) of North Wales'.
	Robert of Rhuddlan had assisted Earl Hugh of Chester in annexing Gwynedd (which was presumably the area meant by 'North Wales' in CHS G2) after the death of Gruffydd ap Llewelyn. Although Arwystli was surrounded by Powys and geographically detached from 'North Wales', it was regarded as part of the latter and lay in the same bishopric as Gwynedd, that of Bangor rather than that of St Asaph's. Thus Earl Roger appears to have occupied it as part of his invasion of Powys, but Robert of Rhuddlan was claiming it as part of his land of Gwynedd. Arwystli does not adjoin Shropshire and cannot have been contiguous to it in 1086; its annexation implies that Cydewain and Ceri had been taken as a preliminary. Arwystli had been ruled by the prince Trahaearn ap Caradog. His death in 1081 at the battle of Mynydd Cam will have given a chance for invasion: Edwards, 'The Normans and the Welsh March', p. 160; Lloyd, History of Wales, ii. p. 3; Lloyd, 'Wales and the Coming of the Normans', p. 157; Jones, 'Divisions of Montgomeryshire', pp. 77-78; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 172; VCH Shropshire, i. pp. 287; Tait, Domesday Survey of Cheshire, p. 24; and {Introduction: History}.
	WHICH BELONGS. Domesday pertinent' often abbreviates pertinentes, which would be accusative plural agreeing with the (4 ploughs and) £6 of pence. However, it is more likely that it refers to the one Welsh district which belongs to Montgomery castle and so pertinen' would seem to abbreviate the ablative singular pertinente.
	ROGER ^[SON OF]^ CORBET. He is called Roger Corbet here and in 4,1,36, but Roger son of Corbet in sub-chapter 4,4 (4,4 Roger note). The omission of 'son of' in a byname occurs occasionally elsewhere in Domesday Book, as in the tenant-in-chief Robert son of Fafiton, who appears in HUN 25,1 as such, but as Robert Fafiton in HUN 25, as in Cambridgeshire, Middlesex and Bedfordshire. See also GLS G4 William note on William (son of) Baderon. On the omission of de before a place-name used as a byname, see 4,8,3 Roger note.
	ROGER ^[SON OF]^ CORBET ... WITH HIS BROTHER ... 40s. This sort of payment might be expected as tribute from a Welsh commote or cantref, possibly Cydewain and Ceri (see 4,1,15 district note). Roger's brother is Robert (4,5 Robert note); both held from Earl Roger.
4,1,16	[IN "REWESET" HUNDRED]. This head is supplied from the later history of the manor which became caput of "Reweset" Hundred and from which it was renamed Ford.
	FORD. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086 and subsequently replaced Alberbury (4,1,9) as the caput of the hundred which was renamed Ford. After the forfeiture of 1102, it remained in royal hands until granted in 1155 to Reginald, Earl of Cornwall. It returned to the Crown 1175-1230, then was given to the Audley family who held it for most of the thirteenth to fifteenth centuries. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, it is recorded that Henry (III) 'son of King John' gave Forde to Henry de Auditheley; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 87a, 96a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 97, 196, 285, iii. no. 536, vi. nos. 56, 137, 174; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 180; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 228.
		In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 62, the members, which will have accounted for some of the 14 outliers of 1086, are given as:
		Pontesford (Pontesford SJ4106);
		La Lee (Lea SJ4108); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 196;
		Hanewod (Little Hanwood SJ4407); see 4,4,14 Hanwood note);
		Espeleye (Ashlees? SJ4010 or Astley Nook in Pontesford);
		Saxecote (Sascott SJ4211 );
		Pleyleye (Plealey SJ4206);
		Sybaskot or Sibaldescote (Sibberscote SJ4207);
		Newenham (Newnham SJ4110);
		Ardeskote (Arscott SJ4307);
		Poulemere (Polmere: 4,27,19);
		Crokton (Cruckton SJ4310); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 827;
		Schrawardyn (Little Shrawardine SJ3915);
		Benthale (Benthall: 4,27,20);
		Eggett (Edge SJ3908), but Egge in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 196, iii. no. 560 and Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 162b;
		Moele or Mele (Cruckmeole SJ4209); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 196. This was later counted as a township of Pontesbury (4,4,12): Place-Names of Shropshire, ii. p. 32.
	Fordesham (unidentified) was also a member: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 476.
	15 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space for about six letters after xv hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
	MILL ... 3 "ORAE"; ½ FISHERY. The "ora" was reckoned at both 16d and 20d, the 20d rate generally being thought of as implying payments by tale to allow for clipping, though Grierson ('The Monetary System under William I', Domesday Book Studies, p. 75 (= Erskine and Williams, The Story of Domesday Book, pp. 112-13)) thinks a 4d allowance is excessive and payments at 20d were widespread.
		Domesday ores here is a very unusual plural: orê occurs in 4,1,21 and elsewhere in Great Domesday; the only other reference to the "ora" in Shropshire is in 4,1,32 where the ablative plural oris (molin' de .iii. oris) is used, so it is possible that in the original returns the main scribe of Great Domesday misread oris (no doubt as a third declension plural ores) in a phrase such as is used in 4,1,32 and changed the construction accordingly.
		In the manuscript there is a small erasure after dimid': it is possible that it was an 7, although no sign of it (or anything) can be seen, and that the Great Domesday scribe originally thought that the mill paid 3 ½ "orae" and there was a whole fishery there. However, the mill at 4,1,32 paid 3 "orae" and the other half of the fishery is recorded at 4,4,23 (it was probably a fish-weir across the Severn between Ford and Montford: a fish-weir is still marked on Ordnance Survey maps there). VCH Shropshire, i. pp. 296, 317, and Domesday Geography of Midland England, p. 147, mistranslate the phrases as ' ... 3 ½ "orae" and a fishery'. The Alecto edition has '3 orae and half a fishery'.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the fishery detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,1,17	[IN BASCHURCH HUNDRED]. The heading is supplied from the later presence of these four manors (4,1,17-20) in Pimhill Hundred and from geographical probability. Another part of Ness (4,3,52) appears in a group of places in Baschurch Hundred..
	[GREAT] NESS. This was an Ancient Parish. It seems to have lain in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. After forfeiture in 1102, it was in royal hands until Henry II gave it briefly to Cadwaladr (died 1172), second son of Gruffydd ap Cynan, Prince of North Wales (1081-1137). About 1157 it was given by Henry II to John Lestrange and like Cheswardine (STS 11,13), with which it is associated in later records, it descended in that family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, John Extraneus holds 2 hides from the king in chief. It is Nesse Le Estrange in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230, while Nesse and Cheseworthin' are held together in Book of Fees, pp. 146, 964; see the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 509); Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 119; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 104b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215, the members of Nesse are given as Kinton (Kinton SJ3719), Obreton (unidentified), Hopton (Hopton SJ3820) and Wyvelecote (Wilcott SJ3718); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 187, v. no. 264, vi. no. 248. On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 255; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 220.
	EARL MORCAR. He was the son of Algar and his wife Aelfeva, grandson of Earl Leofric and brother of Earl Edwin. Algar was Earl of East Anglia 1051-1052, later of Mercia from about 1057. Morcar was chosen as earl by the Northumbrians when they had deposed Earl Tosti (King Harold’s brother) in 1065. He submitted to King William, but rebelled twice and was in custody in Normandy at the time of the Domesday Survey.
	5 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters after v hide.; see 1,5 hide note.
	THE CHURCH OF ST PETER [* OF SHREWSBURY *] HOLDS. Shrewsbury Abbey was given the church of Ness by Earl Roger; see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32, 37, 41 etc.); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 247b. It was a 'superior' church, possibly a minster; see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	A CERTAIN ROBERT. This may have been Robert the butler (4,6) and his land, extent unspecified in Domesday, may have been an outlying part of the manor at Weston' (Weston Lullingfields SJ4224). Robert's lands passed to the honour of Montgomery and Weston' was held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a, from William de Cantilupo (lord of Montgomery) under John Extraneus; it is Weston super Lechefeld in the Pimhill Hundred Roll, (p. 121); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17.
	4 VILLAGERS. The main scribe of Great Domesday had written uill', which could be either uillani (nominative plural) or uillanos (accusative plural): 2,2 villagers note. Scribe B corrected (or clarified) it to uill'os (= uillanos) as the accusative case is needed after h[abe]t.
4,1,18	LOPPINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It appears to have lain in Baschurch Hundred in 1086 and was later in Pimhill Hundred. After forfeiture in 1102, it was in the king's hands and in the thirteenth century was held by a family named from the place. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 75a, 76b, Richard de Loppinton' holds 5 hides in Loppinton' and Burelton' (Burlton SJ4626, a member) from the king by knight-service. At a later stage the Abbot of Lilleshall was enfeoffed in half of Lopintone and William Le Botiler held under him; see Book of Fees, pp. 147, 965 (wrongly listed under the Fees of Tournay); Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 104b; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 216, 236; Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 119; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 529, 773; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 225. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230, Lopiton and Borewelton are coupled with Franketon (see 4,3,49). Burlton itself accounted for 3 hides: Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 119. The tithes of Loppington went to Wombridge Priory: Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 194.
	EDRIC THE WILD. See 4,1,14 Edric note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank three-quarters of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,1,19	ELLESMERE. This was a large Ancient Parish. In 1086 it probably lay in Baschurch Hundred and was later notionally in Pimhill Hundred. Because it was close to the Marcher lordship of Oswestry and to Wales and because it was granted from time to time to Welsh princes, it was only marginally in the county in the thirteenth century. For a time it was a separate Marcher lordship. It was held temporarily under Henry I by William Peverel of Dover, then conferred on David (Dafydd) ab Owain, a prince of North Wales, by Henry II (in 1174) when David married the king's sister Emma. The same man held Halesowen, also held by Earl Roger (WOR 14,1); see {Introduction: County Boundary}. For part of the thirteenth century Ellesmere was managed for the king by the sheriff and then by John de Grey for 15 years from 1253. It is he who holds Ellesm'e in Pimhill Hundred in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76b, but has withdrawn it from the county of Shropshire. It was also held by a member of the Lestrange family late in the thirteenth century. See Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 104b, Book of Fees, p. 146; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 232. Ellesmere formally returned to the county in 1536 on the dissolution of the Marcher lordships.
		The hamlets of Colmere (Colemere 4,25,3) and Hampton (perhaps part of Welshampton: 4,3,54) were part of Ellesmere according to Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 716. Stockett (in Cockshutt SJ4329) and Newton (SJ4234) were also members of Ellesmere, given to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 199, 201, 268, 336-37, 445, 487, 658-59, 681, 804-19, 1169-76, appendix A. i.).
		Cockshutt (SJ4329) was a chapelry of Ellesmere and became a separate Civil Parish. Dudleston (SJ3438) was also a township and chapelry.
	2 PRIESTS. The church that they served was certainly superior and possibly a minster; see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half-line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	MUNDRED [* THE SHERIFF *]. The Domesday form Mundret suggests Old English Mundræd; see von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 331. He may have been the sheriff of Cheshire of that name (CHS C24); see Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 246 and note 17; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 299. He is not mentioned at all in Green, English Sheriffs. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Shropshire.
	REGINALD [* THE SHERIFF *] 1 HIDE. See 4,3 Reginald note; Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 246. The land was at Lea (Lee SJ4032) given to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. xix, 6, 17, 30, 33, 38, 41 etc.); in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a, the Abbot of Shrewsbury holds ½ hide in Leg'.
	4 VILLAGERS AND 7 SMALLHOLDERS. It is not clear whether uill' and bord' should be extended to the accusative uillanos and bordarios and be the object of h[abe]nt in the line above; the semi-colon preserves the ambiguity of the Latin abbreviations. Compare 4,1,17 villagers note, 2,2 villagers note. 4,3,29 villagers note. 4,20,8 ploughmen note and 6,11 villagers note.
4,1,20	BERWICK. It was in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary. In 1086 it lay in Baschurch Hundred and was later in Pimhill Hundred. This 'Great' and 'Little' Berwick should be distinguished from Berwick 'Maviston' (4,3,25) in Wrockwardine Hundred. After the rebellion of Robert of Bellême, possession was resumed by the Crown until it was granted out by Henry I. In the late thirteenth century it was held by the Leybourne family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, John de Spenser holds 1 ½ hides from the king in Berewyk by service in Wales in wartime. Simon Leyburne holds Berewecke with members in the Pimhill Hundred Roll (p. 119); see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 104b; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 216, 230; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 95; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 213.
		The Domesday estate is represented on modern Ordnance Survey maps by Berwick (SJ4714) and Upper Berwick (SJ4715).
	EDRIC THE WILD. See 4,1,14 Edric note.
4,1,21	[IN WROCKWARDINE HUNDRED]. This hundred heading is restored from later evidence. These three manors (4,1,21-23) subsequently lay in 'Bradford' Hundred. See 4,1,22 Earl note.
	[HIGH] ERCALL. This was the Ancient Parish of Ercall Magna, also known as High Ercall. It appears to have lain in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. After forfeiture by Robert of Bellême, the vill became the property of the Crown, then was granted by Henry I to Hamo Peverel. The Burnell family were mesne tenants in the late thirteenth century. In the Book of Fees, p. 965, William de Hedleg' holds Ercalu among the fees of Peverel; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 237; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194, iv. no. 200. It is qualified as Ercalewe Magna in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 238, and Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611. Part of Hercalwe was held by Wombridge Priory in 1255: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b; see Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 194. The demesne tithes of Ercall were given soon after 1086 by Earl Hugh to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 7, 8, 11, 296-97). A church, not mentioned in Domesday had already been given by Earl Roger: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32 nos. 2, 34, 35 etc.).
		The Bradford Hundred Roll (p. 118) gives the members of Arcall' as Walton' (Walton SJ5918), Cotwall' (Cotwall SJ6017), Osbaston (Osbaston SJ5918), More (Moortown SJ6117), Wildislond (lost) and Shurlow (Shirlowe SJ6016), this last being held by the prior of Wombridge; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 194.
		Another member was Slepe, 2 ½ hides, a gift of Hamo Peverel to the Abbot of Shrewsbury: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 27-28, 41 etc.). It was subsequently joined to Crudgington (4,6,5) which had probably been a member of High Ercall in 1066 and certainly had the same T.R.E. holder.
		A further fee of Peverel was Tirne (Tern SJ6216) which in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a was held by William, lord of Tern, and given by him (apart from 1 virgate) to Lilleshall Abbey: Book of Fees, p. 965; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 197; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 238. The one virgate went to Buildwas Abbey.
		On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 62; Hill, 'The Demesne and the Waste', especially pp. 4-5. For Childs Ercall, see 4,3,23.
	7 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters after vii hide.; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining three-quarters of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	THE COUNTESS. The wife of an earl could use the title 'countess' by virtue of her husband's status. However, it appears that Earl Edwin never married. Indeed, Edwin's revolt against King William in 1068 was said by Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. pp. 214-15) to be because William had not fulfilled his promise to give Edwin one of his daughters in marriage. The countess might be Edwin's mother Aelfeva, wife of Earl Algar, or more probably his grandmother, Countess Godiva, wife of Earl Leofric of Mercia. With her husband, Godiva founded and endowed the monastery at Coventry and endowed St Mary’s of Stow. They also made gifts to the abbeys of Leominster, Wenlock, to two abbeys in Chester, St John’s and St Werburgh’s and to Evesham. They also gave lands to the church of Worcester. Leofric died in 1057, but Godiva survived into the Conqueror’s reign. She was dead by 1086, but her lands had not yet all been re-granted; see Harmer, Anglo-Saxon Writs, p. 561; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 218.
	BROUGHT TO HER AS A CUSTOMARY DUE. Compare HEF 1,6 where the reeve of Eardisland used to present Earl Morcar's lady, when she came to the manor, with 18 "orae" of pence 'so that she might be happy'.
		Farley misprinted the P of P[er] here as lower-case p.
4,1,22	WELLINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It seems to have lain in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. A church, not mentioned in Great Domesday was given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Earl Roger: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32 nos. 2, 34, 35 etc.). The vill was probably royal demesne from 1102, following its forfeiture, until 1177-1189 when it was held by Simon son of Simon. William and James, sons of Simon, held from 1192-1194, then Gwion, son of Jonas of Powys, from 1194-1210 in which year it was granted to Thomas of Erdington. Hugh Burnell had the overlordship by 1283. Thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a Wellinton' is said to be held by Egidius de Herdinton' having been given by King John to Thomas de Herdinton'; see the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 510); Book of Fees, p. 146; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 337, v. no. 611, viii. no. 667. The manor is coupled with Scayebur' (Shawbury 4,23,3) in Book of Fees, p. 964; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 827.
		Wellington had a number of members. Dawley (see below) had already been severed by 1086. Aston (Aston SJ6109, Aston subtus Wreken in Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 189; see 3b,2 Eyton note) was given to Shrewsbury Abbey c.l 144 (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. xix, 43, 44, 48, 50-51, 54-55 etc.). 1 hide and the mill at Walcote (Walcot SJ5911; possibly a member of Wrockwardine in 1086; see 4,1,1 Wrockwardine note) was given to Haughmond Abbey at about the same time; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a; Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii. nos. 376-77, 379; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 218. Three hides at Aston had already been granted by King Edgar in 975 to his minister Ealhhelm: Early Charters of the West Midlands, no. 432 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 802); VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 217. After 1086 it was sometimes counted as a member of the abbey's manor of Eyton-on-Severn; see 3b,2 Eyton note. Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 57 on) and VCH Shropshire (xi. pp. 216-17) also include Apley (SJ6512), Arleston (SJ6110; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611) and Dothill (SJ6412) as members of Wellington. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 40; VCH Shropshire, xi. pp. 215-18. On Orleton as a possible member of Wellington in 1086, see 4,11,18 Isombridge note.
	EARL EDWIN HELD IT, [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half of the line after tenuit which has no dot after it. There is no sign of an erasure as there is in the similar gap in 4,1,6 and, possibly, also in 4,1,10; see 4,1,6 King note and 4,1,10 King note. It was probably left for a hundred head (which normally occupies this position in an entry), though a space should have been left, and an insertion made, in the previous entry (4,1,21 Wrockwardine note). See 4,6,6 Wulfric note, 4,11,19 Earl note, 4,20,17 Almund note and 4,21,14 Genust note, but compare 4,14,25 Gamal note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining three-quarters of a line after the fisheries detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	WILLIAM [* PANDOLF *]. William was William Pandolf since after the cessation of Robert of Bellême's overlordship the manor went to the Pandolf barony of Wem, being held under the lords of Wem by a younger branch of the family. In Book of Fees, p. 964, the heirs of Alan Panton' (i.e. Pandolf) hold 1 fee in Dalileg' and Tibricton' (Tibberton: 4,7,2) of the barony of Wem; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 41; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 317 note 29, xi. p. 112; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
	DAWLEY [MAGNA]. Dawley was a chapelry of Shifnal, then an Ancient Parish which contained Dawley Magna and Dawley Parva (4,3,28), both at SJ6806, now forming the nucleus of the borough of Telford. It was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 and later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It became part of the Pandolf barony of Wem: VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 112.
4,1,23	EDGMOND. This was an Ancient Parish. In 1086 the place lay in Wrockwardine Hundred and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Earl Roger founded a church here possibly between 1086 and his death and gave it to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32 nos. 2, 34, 35 etc.); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 248a. The rest of the manor was forfeited to the Crown in 1102 following his son's rebellion and was given early in the thirteenth century to Henry de Audley. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221, Nicholas de Audetheleye holds Egemundun with members from the king; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 58b, 65a, 94b-96a; Book of Fees, p. 146; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 97, 196, 476, iii. no. 409, v. no. 62, vi. no. 56; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227. The Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 114, gives the members as Adeney (Adeney SJ7018), Magna Aston and Parva Aston (Chetwynd and Church Aston SJ7417, 7517; see 4,8,12 Plaish note and 4,19,2 Chetwynd note), Parva Halis (Little Hales SJ7416), Pickestoke (Pickstock SJ7223), together with the town of Newporte (Newport SJ7419). Of these Adeney had been given by King John to the Abbey of Croxden in Staffordshire (Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 107) before the rest of the manor went to the Audley family. It was later exchanged with the Abbot of Buildwas for Caldon Grange in Staffordshire: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 65a; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 191; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 114; Book of Fees, p. 146. Part of Aston Magna (Chetwynd Aston), two virgates, went to the Abbot of Shrewsbury (it is Monke Aston juxta Newporte in Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 189), one virgate to Lilleshall Abbey (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 65b). Newport (Novus Burgus) was a royal borough, but passed with Edgmond to the Audleys: Book of Fees, p. 147; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 97, 196, 285, 476. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 114.
		Church Aston had originally been granted by charter in 963 with Plaish: 4,8,12 Plaish note.
	YOUNG LEOFWIN. Domesday cilt, interlined above Leuuin', is from Old English cild, 'childe', 'born to an inheritance', 'well-born': Leofwin was a young nobleman. See Tengvik, Old English Bynames, pp. 244-45. He may be the same as Leofwin cilt in BDF 12,1 who was the son of Edwin of Caddington; see BDF 12,1 Caddington note; VCH Hertfordshire, i. p. 281; VCH Derbyshire, i. p. 322.
	11 PLOUGHS POSSIBLE THERE. In Domesday the Latin poss' can abbreviate either the indicative possunt or the subjunctive possent (as in 4,1,22;25-26 etc.). If it abbreviates the latter the translation should be '11 ploughs would be possible there'; see 1,4 ploughs note.
4,1,24	[IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED]. It is likely that there is a change of hundred here, since the next two places later lay in Brimstree Hundred.
	TONG. This was an Ancient Parish, originally collegiate. It probably lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Brimstree Hundred. Land at Twongan was left to Aethelric for his lifetime but for the ultimate benefit of Burton Abbey in the will of Wulfric Spot c. 1003: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536 = Charters of Burton Abbey, no. 29). This was possibly at Tong in Shropshire but, if so, there is no other trace of any connection with Burton Abbey. It might have been Tonge in Leicestershire. In the absence of documentary evidence to decide the question, it hinges on the likely development of the place-name; here the evidence is equivocal: Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxvii; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 293.
		After the forfeiture of Tong in 1102 it was granted to Richard deBelmeis, Bishop of London, and was later held from La Zouche, from de Braose or the honour of Brecknock (see Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 21-22). In the Book of Fees, p. 147 (escheats of Gerard de Thurnay), Roger La Zusche holds Thonke, once a fee of William de Browus; in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 225, Fulk de Penebrugge holds Togge and Norton (Tong Norton SJ7908) from the honour of Breyseynoc; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 305. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244 Tonge is coupled with Donynton (Donington: 4,1,25). Rokeleye (Ruckley SJ7706) was part of this manor, given to the Abbey of Buildwas by Philip de Belmeis: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 191. The church of Tong, not mentoned in Domesday, was given by Earl Roger to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32 nos. 2, 34, 35 etc.). On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 191.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining three-quarters of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,1,25	DONINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It seems to have lain in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Brimstree Hundred.
		Donington appears to have been held by one Wulfgeat of Donington in the late tenth century. In his will dating from c. 975 (Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 122 = Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1534) he gives to the church of Worcester a brewing of malt of which half comes from Donington and half from Kilsall (in Donington). To his wife he gives lands in Kilsall and in Hrodene (possibly Roden in High Ercall, 4,1,21, or Roden, part of Rodington, 4,3,31) and to his daughter Wulfgifu land in Donington. To her son he gives Ingardine (4,14,28). To (the manor of) Donington he gives the spring at wic, probably a salt spring, and associated houses and rights at Droitwich in Worcestershire; 4,1,25 salt-houses note.
	After 1086 Donington at first followed the same descent as Tong (4,1,24 Tong note), being held, after Robert of Bellême's forfeiture, by Richard deBelmeis; later it is held of the barony of Herbert son of Peter. Thus in Book of Fees, p. 966, Walter de Beumes holds in Doninton' of that barony; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 226, Doninton together with Culushall and Shakerlowe (Kilsall SJ7906 and Shackerley SJ8106) are held by John de Beaumes from Roger de la Souche; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 265, v. no. 458; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 173. There is a Beamish farm at SJ8204, that presumably preserves the name of the family. A church here, which is not mentioned in Domesday, was given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Earl Roger: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32 nos. 2, 34, 35 etc.).
	3 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line after iii hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
	5 SALT-HOUSES. The term salina includes all kinds of salt-workings from coastal pans to the boilers of Worcestershire and Cheshire, with their associated sheds and buildings; 'salt-house' is the most comprehensive term. See WOR 1,3a brine-pits note and WOR 1,3a "hocci" note on salt-extraction and WOR 1,3a Droitwich note for a list of the references to salt-workings in Droitwich, both in Worcestershire itself and in other counties where certain landholders had shares in the Droitwich salt-houses or salt-rights were attached to certain manors. Apart from the 5 salt-houses recorded in this entry, there is one in 4,1,26, also in Droitwich, which pays 2s, and in 4,11,4 there is a reference to 4 packloads of salt from Droitwich; see also 6,9 Kinlet note. See also {Introduction: Salt}.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the salt-houses detail, possibly for the later insertion of further resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,1,26	THIS ENTRY was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday around the now-repaired holes in the parchment mentioned in 3h,1 this entry note.
	[IN PATTON? HUNDRED]. It seems necessary to supply an "Alnodestreu" hundred head at 4,1,24 above Tong. Ditton Priors could have been in that hundred in 1086, but a Patton head seems preferable since Ditton Priors was in Munslow Hundred later and no "Alnodestreu" places seem certainly to have followed this course. It is possible, however, that Ditton Priors moved to Patton Hundred when it was granted to Wenlock Priory, which had its most important holdings in that hundred.
	DITTON [PRIORS]. This was an Ancient Parish. It was later counted in Munslow Hundred, or in the Liberty of Wenlock. This manor was forfeited with others in 1102 and was held by the Crown until Henry II granted it, together with 'Corfham' and Culmington (4,1,6;29), to Hugh de Periers early in his reign and by this Henry to Wenlock Priory; see Book of Fees, p. 146; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 85a, 110a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 164a, 166a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 215; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 329; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 305.
	4 OUTLIERS. Two of these outliers will have been Middleton Priors (SO6290), which followed the descent of the main manor, and Esfeld, Eysfeld or Effeld (Ashfield SO5889) in Munslow Hundred which was detached from Ditton probably under Henry I and became a serjeanty: Adam de Beisin holds in Book of Fees, p. 7. Another outlier or outliers will probably have been Great and Little Hudwick (SO6292). See Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 70b, 72b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 346; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 305 .
4,1,27	[IN "CULVESTAN" HUNDRED]. Presumably in view of its later status as a free-manor, Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xii. pp. 17-28, inclined to consider Stretton as extra-hundredal. On the other hand, Siefton and Culmington (4,1,28-29) must have lain in the body of "Culvestan" Hundred and the insertion of that heading above 4,1,27 will associate Stretton with the adjacent Cardington and Hope Bowdler (4,3,44. 4,22,2) which Domesday says explicitly were in that hundred in 1086, forming a detached portion of it. Like other places in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, it lay in Munslow Hundred later.
	[CHURCH] STRETTON. Church Stretton was an Ancient Parish and included All Stretton, Little Stretton and the area loosely called 'Strettondale'. It is likely that Stretton was in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086 since it was later in Munslow Hundred, and that this 8-hide holding included Little Stretton and All Stretton as well. After forfeiture by Robert of Bellême, it was a royal manor and was granted successively to Henry de Burgo, to Henry de Hastings, to Hamo Lestrange and to Hawise, wife of Griffin (Gruffydd) de la Pole (see 4,1,8 Trewern note). It was also held briefly by the Mortimers of Wigmore; see Book of Fees, p. 147; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 83b-84b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xii. p. 17; and 4,28,4 Minton note. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229, Church Stretton is called Strettonesdale (Stretton en le Dale) and held by the Earl of Arundel. The name is that of the valley and occurs both as that of a manor and a district: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. pp. 286-87, iii. p. 230; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 89.
	8 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after viii hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
	WOODLAND. See VCH Shropshire, x. p. 95.
4,1,28	SIEFTON. This lay in Culmington Ancient Parish (see 4,1,29). It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in 'Corfham' manor, Munslow Hundred. A third of the tithes went to Earl Roger's church at Quatford (4,1,32 Quatford note), a virgate to Haughmond Abbey (see the Haughmond Cartulary: Rees, nos. 234-39, 270; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 65; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 192) and 1 ½ virgates to Clifford Priory. Otherwise it followed the same descent as 'Corfham' (4,1,6) with which it is later associated; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 193.
	5 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line after v hidê.; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,1,29	CULMINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in 'Corfham' manor, Munslow Hundred. Like Siefton (4,1,28), it had the same descent as 'Corfham' (4,1,6 'Corfham' note); similarly a third of its tithes went to Earl Roger's church of Quatford (4,1,32 Quatford note). A member of Culmington was Burley (SO4781); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. pp. 181, 190.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,1,30	[IN 'CONDITRE' HUNDRED]. The insertion of this hundred head above Stottesdon is linked to the possible insertion of a head above Overton (4,11,16) which lies a little to the north. Stottesdon lies at the end of a group (4,1,27-29) of places in "Culvestan" Hundred and 4,1,31-33 are probably in "Alnodestreu" Hundred. Stottesdon could not have lain in "Culvestan" Hundred, but it could conceivably have been in "Alnodestreu" if Overton was. The places that lie closest to Overton, that is Neenton, Middleton Scriven, Glazeley, 'Fouswardine', Sidbury, Aston Boterell and Pickthorn, all appear to have lain in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, yet Overton (at 4,11,16) falls at the end of a 'Conditre' hundred group, places that lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred having already been entered (4,11,5-10), though below an erroneous Baschurch hundred heading. If Overton were in 'Conditre' Hundred, it would either have been a detachment of it, separated by Pickthorn and Aston Boterell, or have been reached by a narrow corridor of land. However, a further argument for Overton's being in 'Conditre' Hundred is that it was a member of Stottesdon Ancient Parish and may even have been its 'upper' tun. It would be topographically awkward if Overton were placed in 'Conditre' Hundred as an outlier and an "Alnodestreu" hundred head inserted above Stottesdon at 4,1,30. It also ignores the fact that lay landholdings are rarely detached in this way in Great Domesday. Moreover, the lost place-name 'Conditre', which was the moot-site, lay in Walton in Stottesdon (VCH Shropshire, iii. p. 2), so it seems that Stottesdon must be placed in 'Conditre' Hundred and it appears probable, despite the topographical difficulty, that Overton belonged in that hundred as well. This tidies up the sequence of hundreds in 4,11. The solution adopted in the Phillimore printed edition was to put Stottesdon in 'Conditre' Hundred and Overton in "Alnodestreu" Hundred, restoring an "Alnodestreu" hundred head at 4,11,16. The solution adopted here follows that chosen for the Alecto edition.
	STOTTESDON. This was an Ancient Parish. It probably lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086 and was later the caput of Stottesdon Hundred. After Robert of Bellême's rebellion, it fell to the Crown and was granted c. 1159 to Geoffrey de Gamaches. William de Gamages holds Stottesdone in the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 510), while in the Book of Fees, p. 147, it is described as an escheat of Matthew de Gamaches. Like Stretton (4,1,27) it had a variety of later holders: 4 hides are held by John de Plessy in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81a, while John de Segrave and his wife Christiana hold in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 218; see Book of Fees, p. 964; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 107b; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 231, 242; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 699, x. no. 116.
		The hidage of Stottesdon had been reduced before the grant to Geoffrey de Gamaches, by the removal of several of its outliers. In 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b) Philip de Beggesoure held 4 virgates in Berdel' (Bardley SO6980) and Thomas de Berdel' held 2 virgates there; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 218, 232; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 446, ii. nos. 259, 808, iii. no. 206. Similarly in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a, Walter de Baskervill and Philip de Gerros held 6 virgates and ½ virgate respectively in Northwod (Northwood SO6784). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a, Robert, son of Adam de Beyssi (or Beysin), holds 1 ½ hides by serjeanty in Wyrketon', which is called Workiton and Walkeslowe (Wrickton SO6485 and Walkerslow SO6586) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; see Book of Fees, p. 7; the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 453); Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 217, 231; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. nos. 503, 557, vi. no. 168, x. no. 663.
		Two further outliers were Newton (Newton SO6585) where two-thirds of the demesne tithes were given (with those of Walkeslawe) by Earl Roger's son Hugh to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 7-8; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b), and Dowles (SO7776) formerly called Achisey or Hakieshey were given to Guy son of Helgot and by him to Great Malvern Priory (Monasticon Anglicanum, iii. p. 448 no. iii, called Boules on p. 450 no. ix); see Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 238, 240; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. pp. 160-61. Dowles is now in Worcestershire.
		On the whole manor see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 142.
	9 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after ix hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
	FREEDMEN. The Latin is coliberti; former slaves. This is a continental term, not otherwise found in England and used in Great Domesday to render a native term, stated on three occasions to be (ge)bur: WOR 8,10a. HAM l,10;23. The coliberti are found mainly in the counties in Wessex and western Mercia, particularly in Wiltshire and Somerset. Apart from the 6 freedmen here, only seven other freedmen are mentioned in Shropshire (in 5,1, another manor in the south-east of the county); on both occasions they are entered at the end of the list of population and seem to have had a share in the ploughs recorded. In other counties in Great Domesday some held land (SOM 2,1 etc.) and paid dues (HEF 1,6. WOR 8,7 etc.). See Vinogradoff, English Society in the Eleventh Century, pp. 468-69; Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, pp. 36-37, 328-30; and OXF 1,6 boor note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	CHURCH OF ST PETER [* OF SHREWSBURY *] HOLDS … 2 ½ HIDES. The church and the land had been given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Earl Roger: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 5, 30, 32 nos. 2, 34, 35). The 2 ½ hides were at Duddlewick (SO6583), Hinton (SO6582) and Prescott (SO6681): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 30, 32); Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 189. Of these, Dudelwyk accounted for 1 ½ hides; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 218.
		On the possibility that this was the minster church for the territory of the Hundred of 'Conditre', see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
4,1,31	THIS ENTRY and the next one (4,1,32) were written by the main scribe of Great Domesday using a paler ink than for the preceding entries in this column, though the pen seems to be the same. He may have had a break at this point. The less likely alternative would be that he left a space suitable for about 11 lines after 4,1,30 before entering the details of Montgomery castle (4,1,35).
	[IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED]. A hundred head is needed here or at 4,1,30 (see 4,1,30 Hundred note) since geographically Chetton and Eardington can scarcely have been in any hundred other than "Alnodestreu" in 1086. Eardington might possibly have been in Patton Hundred as an outlier like Beckbury (4,26,5) so long as it belonged to the Church of Wenlock.
	CHETTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It probably lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Stottesdon Hundred. One third of the tithes here were given to Earl Roger's collegiate church of Quatford (4,1,32 Quatford note) and the manor went first to the king, on being forfeited, then was given to a family called de Broc; owing to the disputed inheritance of Sibyl de Broc, the king held the manor for a time, then gave it to Robert Fitz Corbet. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a, Chetyton is in the hands of the king, with Stephen de Butereleq' a provisional tenant. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a, William Corbet holds; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 217, 231; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. nos. 317, 365, ii. no. 498, iii. no. 194; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 164; Purton, 'Manor of Chetton'.
		Sibyl de Broc gave the mill here to the Benedictine nuns of Brewood: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 83a; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 162a; and see also 4,25,6 woodland note.
		Chetton later had a detached chapelry at Loughton (SO6183), though this may have been part of Wheathill (4,8,16) in 1086.
	COUNTESS GODIVA. See 4,1,21 countess note.
4,1,32	THIS ENTRY might have been added; see 4,1,31 entry note.
	EARDINGTON. This was a later chapelry and township of Quatford Ancient Parish, a reversal of the 1086 situation in which Quatford was attached to Eardington. It was probably in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. Earl Roger granted it to his collegiate church at Quatford: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 219, 231; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. pp. 103, 117.
		An early detachment was probably Mora (Moor in Eardington), 1 virgate held by serjeanty: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 126.
	ST MILBURGA'S. Millichope was subsequently given to the church by Earl Roger in exchange for Eardington; see 4,1,32 Quatford note, SHR 3c St Milburga note and 4,21,3 Millichope note.
	5 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about four letters after v hidê.; see 1,5 hide note.
	A NEW HOUSE; A BOROUGH CALLED QUATFORD. Quatford is now a parish. It lay on a narrow strip of land east of the River Severn in an area that was otherwise in Staffordshire in 1086, although soon transferred to Shropshire; see {Introduction: County Boundary}. This strip of land ran from the north of Bridgnorth to the south of Quatford, being four kilometres long and no more than a kilometre wide. It had presumably been carved out of the Staffordshire manor of Quatt (erroneously entered in WAR 12,8) on land that Earl Roger also held. It was probably he who transferred the land to Eardington and to Shropshire for the construction of a borough and a church.
		The significance of the domus is unclear: it was possibly a domus defensabilis (a 'fortified house'; see HEF 10,46. 25,9) and thus the predecessor of the Norman castle at Quatford. The domus could also be a religious 'house', for Earl Roger founded a collegiate church here, the precursor of the College of St Mary Magdalene in Bridgnorth whither his son Robert moved the college to his castle there in 1098. A memorandum concerning the foundation survived in an eighteenth-century transcript which was used by Eyton (Antiqities of Shropshire, i. p. 109). A facsimile of this transcript is given in Wasey, Ancient Churches; see Thompson and Maxwell, College of St Mary Magdalene, pp. 1-4; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 417, 421. St Mary Magdalene's was given Eardington (except for the land of Walter the smith and that on which Quatford stood), the church of Claverley (STS 8,1) and its land (Ludstone; see STS 8,1 Claverley note), the churches and tithes of Alveley (STS 8,3), Kingsnordley (STS 8,2), Bobbington (STS 11,43; see {Introduction: County Boundary}, the whole tithes of Leaton (4,1,1 Wrockwardine note) and one third of the tithes of Morville (4,1,5), Chetton (4,1,31), Stottesdon (4,1,30), 'Corfham' (4,1,6), Culmington (4,1,29) and Siefton (4,1,28). Wenlock Priory was compensated by the gift of Millichope (4,21,3). This church of St Mary Magdalene was given by Roger's second son Hugh to the Abbey of La Sauve Majeure near Bordeaux: Round, Calendar of Documents, France, nos. 1234, 1237; Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, i. no. 410; VCH Shropshire, ii. pp. 123-28; Mason, 'Norman Earls of Shrewsbury'; Thompson and Maxwell, College of St Mary Magdalene. The castle was also replaced by one at Bridgnorth by Earl Robert: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i p. 104; Mason and Barker, 'Norman Castle at Quatford': 4,1,5 Morville note. 4,3,68 Oldbury note and {Introduction: History}.
	WHICH PAYS NOTHING. The Latin burg[um] Quatford dictu[m] nil redd' may possibly be expanded to burgum Quatford dictum nil reddere and translated 'the Borough of Quatford stated (i.e. in the original returns) to pay nothing'. In 4,1,11 and 4,2,1, however, nil redd' almost certainly abbreviates nil reddens or nil reddentem, depending on whether burgum here is from burgum (neuter) or burgus (masculine). The Alecto edition has 'a borough called Quatford, rendering nothing'.
	NOW 30s. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote xxx solid' in a darker ink than he had used for the rest of the entry.
4,1,33	THIS ENTRY and the next one (4,1,34), both unrubricated, were added later in a paler ink by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the same campaign as all the unrubricated entries in Shropshire and some in other circuits; see 3c,14 entry note. These two entries were compressed into a small space that had been left after Earl Roger's lordship holdings and before the details of Montgomery castle and a summary of the earl's manors in Shropshire and their revenue. The I of Ipse in 4,1,33 is in the inner margin, while the I of In in 4,1,34 is the same size as the initial letter I (of Ipse, Isd[em] etc.) at the beginning of new sections and extends down to 'enclose' the second line of this entry. The ink used for 4,1,34 is slightly darker than for 4,1,33, probably because the scribe re-dipped his pen in ink, rather than because it was added even later.
	"BOLEBEC". This place, presumably in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, has not been identified. Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 126, without citing good evidence, identified it as The Moor in Eardington; see 4,1,32 Eardington note. However, as the main scribe of Great Domesday frequently omitted hundred heads in added entries, especially unrubricated ones (3c,14 entry note), there is no guarantee that it was governed by the "Alnodestreu" hundred head inserted at 4,1,31.
	LAND FOR 1 PLOUGH. On the use of this plough estimate formula in this part of the text of Shropshire, see 1,5 plough note.
4,1,34	THIS ENTRY and the previous one (4,1,33) were added later by the main scribe of Great Domesday; see 4,1,33 this entry note. It is a slightly shorter version of a holding that had already been recorded in sub-chapter 4,27 (which contains the lands of miscellaneous tenants of Earl Roger) at 4,27,14, where Siward is said to have been the tenant in 1086, as in 1066. He may have surrendered the tenancy or it was taken from him, upon which the land would have become part of 4,1 (Earl Roger's demesne) until granted out to another subtenant. Another possibility is that during a check, it was discovered that Siward was only the T.R.E. holder. The omission of the hundred head (especially common in unrubricated added entries; see 3c,14 entry note and compare 6,28 entry note and 6,32 entry note) when the entry in 4,27,14 is in a run of places in Condover Hundred, may suggest that the source of this added entry was different. For other added entries that were duplicates, see 4,12,1 and 6,32 and, perhaps, 7,2.
	[IN CONDOVER HUNDRED]. The hundred head is supplied from the duplicate of this entry at 4,27,14; see 4,1,34 Overs note.
	OVERS. This estate lay in Wentnor Ancient Parish. In the duplicate entry (4,27,14; see 4,1,34 entry note) Overs lies in a group of places in Condover Hundred. Overs has no later independent history - it may have been absorbed by Ratlinghope (4,5,2) which is adjacent and which Siward also held before 1066; see Placita de Quo Warranto, p. 718; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 296. The suggestion of Morgan, 'Montgomeryshire Territorial Divisions', p. 29, that Ovre may be Roveries (SO3292) granted with Hyssington and Snead to the priory of Chirbury is unlikely to be correct because Ovre lay in Condover Hundred in 1086, whereas Roveries would have been in Wittery Hundred and probably among the lands attached to Montgomery (4,1,35-36). But Roveries is the Oures of the Calendar of Charter Rolls (1226-1257), pp. 60-61, to which the Welsh definite article Yr was later prefixed.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. The Domesday forms of this name - Siuuard, Seuuard(us), Seuuar, Seiard(us), Seiar - represent either Old English Sigeweard or, probably in most of the Danelaw counties, the Old Danish Sigwarth: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 361-63. JRM preferred the form Siward as it is in regular use. The Alecto edition also has Siward.
		See 4,1,34 entry note and, on Siward [the fat] being the brother of Aldred and the son of Aethelgar and cousin of Edric the wild (4,1,14 Edric note), see 4,27,32 Siward note.
		Siward is a common name among T.R.E. landowners, but not among post-Conquest survivors; those holding the same lands at both dates being rare. Five of the ten such occurrences are in Shropshire (4,27,11;14;32. 5,8-9), and a sixth holding (4,8,9) has the Lacy connection associated with manors held by Siward [the fat] before the Conquest (7,3-4;6). Siward [the fat]'s patronage of St Peter's abbey makes it probable that he is the Siward of Upton Magna (4,3,24), an abbey estate acquired by Reginald of Bailleul, who also inherited twelve other holdings held by a Siward T.R.E. (4,3,1;23;33-34;38;41;43;51-53;57;59) and it is likely that the bulk of these holdings had been held by Siward [the fat] though it is impossible to be certain in individual cases. Since Earl Roger had granted estates held by Siward [the fat] to Ralph of Mortimer (4,27,11;14;32), it is likely that the Siward who preceded Ralph on the estates he held from the Crown is the same individual (6,1;18). See Williams, English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 93-96; Domesday People, p. 421 (JP).
4,1,35	MONTGOMERY. Details of the castle of Montgomery have already been given at 4,1,15; see 4,1,15 Montgomery note. These two entries, which rightly belong with the earlier one, enumerate the 50 ½ hides now dependent on the castle. They are in two groups: firstly those held by Earl Roger himself which have not changed from being waste since 1066 (4,1,35); secondly those held largely by Roger (son of) Corbet and which in 1086 had a value which marks their recovery (4,1,36). Many of these lands lie beyond the modern county boundary and several lie beyond Offa's Dyke. That they are hidated implies that the English settlement is long-standing and the dependence on Montgomery is probably only a recent convenience. They had probably been settled by the English early in the century and the wasting was due to the depredations of Gruffydd ap Llewelyn that had rendered them only fit for hunting: {Introduction: History}.
		Most of the dependencies subsequently formed part of the honour of Montgomery or of the barony of Cause (descent from Roger son of Corbet, 4,4). Edderton, Forden, Hem, 'Thornbury' (The Gaer), 'Woodluston' (Pen-y-Lan), Wropton, 'Wolston Mynd' (Trelystan) and Weston Madoc were later in the Corbet lordship of Upper Gorddwr. As part of Marcher lordships they are often poorly represented in later records. Many of them have a tenuous presence in Chirbury Hundred, but suit is often said to have been withdrawn from the hundred court: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 60a-61b; Placita Quo Warranto, pp. 718-19.
		When the Marcher lordships were formally dissolved and Wales was shired (in 1536) Montgomery itself was placed in Montgomeryshire, Wales. Most of its dependent estates were returned to Shropshire, but some followed it into Montgomeryshire, then, after 1974, into Powys.
	OSLAC <OF MONTGOMERY>. The Domesday forms of this name - Oslac, Oslac[us] - represent Old English Oslac: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 340, though he mentioned Old Norse Aslakr as a possible etymon. The Phillimore printed edition has Oslac, but the Alecto edition has both Oslac and Aslak. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Shropshire.
		The name Oslac occurs on 22 holdings in Domesday Book, probably representing between 13 and 15 individuals. The distribution is curious, falling into four distinct groups, in Devon, Shropshire, the Midlands, and East Anglia and Essex. The Oslac who shared the waste holdings at Montgomery with two other thanes 'for hunting', was remote from all others bearing his name and had no apparent connections with any of them (JP).
	AZUR. The Domesday forms of this T.R.E. holder - Azor, Azur, Azer, Atser[us], Azorius, Atsur, Assorin[us] - represent Old Danish/Old Swedish Azur: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 170-71. In the Phillimore printed edition this name is generally rendered Azor, but Atsurr in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. These have now been standardized as Azur. The Alecto edition has Azur
	52 ½ HIDES ARE ATTACHED TO IT. There may be a miscount here; compare 4,1,37 outliers note. The 52 ½ hides attached to Montgomery castle become 'the above 50 hides' at the end of the entry. The actual total seems to be made up of 35 ½ hides held by Siward, Oslac and Azur (4,1,35) plus 3 hides in lordship and 12 hides in 4,1,36 (which is not strictly a separate entry), making 50 ½ hides in all.
	EDENHOPE. This was part of Mainstone township in Clun Ancient Parish (Shropshire), appearing as Upper Edenhope (SO2588) and Lower Edenhope (SO2788) on modern Ordnance Survey maps; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 155.
	ASTON. Upper, Middle and Lower Aston, in that part of Churchstoke Ancient Parish,
	that was placed in Montgomeryshire in 1536. This land is Asto' Kelemont in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b, associated with Castlewright and Mellington, and appears as Aston Kelmund in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60a (Chirbury Hundred), where it is said to have been given by Robert de Buler, lord of Montgomery, to his son William. The latter sold these three manors to the Bishop of Hereford and they are subsequently known as Teirtref Esgob ('Bishop's Three Towns') a part of Bishop's Castle, member of Lydbury North (2,1); see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 155.
	"STANTUNE". It has sometimes been identified with Hyssington (in that part of Churchstoke Ancient Parish, that was placed in Montgomeryshire in 1536) or with Mainstone (an Ancient Parish), but there is no firm evidence: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 164; Thomas, 'The Gorther', pp. 197-98; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 318. This group of places seems, however, to be entered in a rough topographical order working northwards, so Stantune, like Goseford, should probably be looked for in the area now occupied by Churchstoke parish.
	CASTLEWRIGHT. The Domesday form Cestelop is probably corrupt and the place is to be identified with that Castelruht, half of which in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b (Chirbury Hundred) is held by Llewelyn 'Prince of Wales' of the honour of Montgomery, together with Aston and Mellington. It is the Chestroc of Bishop Swinfield's Register (year 1285). This identification, which has been questioned, is accepted by Noble, Offa's Dyke Re-viewed, p. 71 (map 17); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 156. Upper Castlewright and Lower Castlewright (Welsh, Castell-wrych) were in Castlewright township in that part of Clun Ancient Parish that was placed in Montgomeryshire in 1536.
	MELLINGTON. It lay in that part of Churchstoke Ancient Parish that was placed in Montgomeryshire in 1536. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b, half of Mulito' and half of Castlewright are associated with Aston and held by Llewelyn 'Prince of Wales' from the honour of Montgomery: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 156; and 4,1,35 Aston note.
	"GOSEFORD". The place is unidentified, though said by Thomas, 'The Gorther', pp. 197-98, to be Rhyd-y-groes. See 4,1,35 "Stantune" note.
	HOPTON. Red Hopton and Pied Hopton, or Hopton Uchaf and Hopton Isaf, lay in that part of Churchstoke Ancient Parish that was placed in Montgomeryshire in 1536; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 156. This manor went to the Corbet Welshry of Upper Gorddwr. A second manor here is subsequently held by the lords of Maelienydd-Ceri; see Morgan, 'Montgomeryshire Territorial Divisions', p. 23.
	"BENEHALE". It has sometimes been identified with Binweston (in Trelystan parish; see Thomas, 'The Gorther', pp. 197-98) but on no good grounds; see Davies, 'Lordships and Manors', p. 111; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 164; and 4,4,20 Worthen note.
	DUDSTON. It lay in Chirbury Ancient Parish. It passed to the Fitz Herberts (4,5 Robert note), being held in Book of Fees, p. 972, as Dudesdon' by William de Muleston' from the barony of Herbert son of Peter; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 361; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 157.
		In the Alecto facsimile the D of Dudestune resembles a B; see 3c,7 Perkley note.
	PEN-Y-LAN. Domesday Wadelestun survived onto modern maps as 'Woodluston' (see Ordnance Survey six-inch map 1st edition 30 SW), but has now been displaced by Pen-y-Lan. It lay in Forden Ancient Parish which was placed in Montgomeryshire in 1536 (see Richards, Welsh Administrative and Territorial Units), and is misplaced on the map in Domesday Gazetteer. It is Wedilistone held by Peter Corbet in Placita de Quo Warranto, pp. 718-19; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 159.
	HOCKLETON. It lay in Chirbury Ancient Parish. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b, ½ hide in Hokeltun was held, together with ½ virgate in the manor of Chirbury, by William de Hokeltun, by service at Montgomery castle; see Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233, 240; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 180, ii. no. 342; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 159.
		The Domesday name-form is Elchitun which could only have evolved to Hocleton by metathesis: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 154.
	WALCOT. It lay in Chirbury Ancient Parish. In later times it is counted as a member of Chirbury; see 4,1,10 Chirbury note.
	TRELYSTAN. Domesday Vlestanesmude. It was once in Worthen Ancient Parish, Shropshire, now in Leighton with Trelystan parish in Montgomeryshire. It was plaed in Montgomeryshire in 1536 at the dissolution of the Marcher lordships. The Welsh name has superseded the English, although the 1st edition Ordnance Survey map (sheet 60 of 1836, reprint sheet 40 of 1970) gives Wolston Mynd or Trelystan as alternatives. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 113a, Wolstandusmu'de like Ocleg' (Ackley; see 4,1,36 Ackley note) and Kilkewyt (Cilcewydd; see 4,1,36 Ackley note) is a member of Worthen (4,4,20) held by Thomas Corbet, but they have all been occupied by Llewelyn 'Prince of Wales'. The Book of Fees, p. 383, says that they are members of Chirbury (4,1,10); see also Placita de Quo Warranto, pp. 718-19; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 151. These three manors form Kings Teirtref.
		Other members of Chirbury Hundred that may have had some involvement with the above vills are ½ hide in Mucliwyke (Mucklewick SO3397) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b (see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 162b); Wilmitun' (Wilmington SJ2901) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b (see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 259, vi. nos. 320, 361); and Winesburi (Winsbury SO2498) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a (see Book of Fees, pp. 383, 965, 973; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233, 240; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 756, iii. no. 560, vi. no. 466). All these were held from the honour of Montgomery. Winsbury is coupled in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a, and Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 756, iii. no. 560, with Stanlowe (unidentified). Hyssington (SO3194) and Snead (SO3291), later given to Chirbury priory, were probably among these 50 ½ hides; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 162b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 21; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi pp. 164-65.
	ABOVE 50 HIDES. See 4,1,35 hides note.
4,1,36	THESE LANDS were held from Earl Roger, mainly by Roger son of Corbet. After 1086 they were gradually and intermittently absorbed by the Welshries. When the Marcher lordships were formally dissolved and Wales was shired (in 1536) Montgomery itself was placed in Montgomeryshire, Wales. Most of its dependent estates were returned to Shropshire, but some followed it into Montgomeryshire, then, after 1974, into Powys.
	THANES. The main scribe of Great Domesday interlined i above and between a and n of tani, though with no omission sign. The form tani occurs in HEF 10,28 and tannus is the preferred spelling for tainus of one particular scribe in Exon.
	WESTON [MADOC]. It lay in that part of Churchstoke Ancient Parish that was placed in Montgomeryshire in 1536. It is later associated with Brompton (4,27,24): Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 150.
		The Grid Reference (SO2394) is to Great Weston Farm.
	'STARCOTE'. The name of this member of Montgomery Castlery is poorly represented in later records, but it did not disappear in the thirteenth century (Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 151). It is Starcottes Field in 1556 (National Library of Wales, Powis Castle Deed no. 16274) and it survived into the nineteenth century as a field name in the Flos Lands to the north of Montgomery, in Montgomery Ancient Parish. The name is given to fields 425 and 441 on the Tithe Apportionment, which are the same as fields 750 and 753 on the Ordnance Survey 25-inch maps. The position of this vill was just to the north-east of Siglen at SO216985; see Pryce, 'Borough of Montgomery', pp. 53-78; Davies, 'Lordships and Manors', pp. 90, 130; Morgan, 'Trewern in Gorddwr', pp. 123, 125; Barker and Lawson, 'Pre-Roman Field Systems at Hen Domen', p. 67; Barker and Higham, 'Hen Domen', vol. i. p. 8.
	'HORSEWALL'. Domesday Horseforde. This vill was left unidentified by Eyton (xi. p. 151) and tentatively identified with Horsebridge near Minsterley by VCH Shropshire, i. p. 318. Horsebridge is a long way, however, from all the other places that can be identified in the castle(ry) of Montgomery. Thomas, 'The Gorther', pp. 197-98, suggested Rhydwyman (see Davies, 'Lordships and Manors', p. 120) and this is adopted by Morgan, 'Trewern in Gorddwr', p. 125 (map). In the Montgomery parish Tithe Apportionment seven fields are called 'Horsewall' very close to Rhydwyman farm (SO209984) and these must represent the Domesday place. The name is found in two Powis Castle deeds (nos. 12930, 16264) now in the National Library of Wales; see Barker and Lawson, 'Pre-Roman Field Systems at Hen Domen', p. 67; Barker and Higham, 'Hen Domen', vol. i. pp. 8-9. As a member of Montgomery Ancient Parish 'Horsewall' will have been placed in Mongomeryshire in 1536.
	THE GAER. Domesday Torneberie. It lay in Forden Ancient Parish which has been in Montgomeryshire since the formal dissolution of the Marcher lordships in 1536. The Welsh name has replaced 'Thornbury' which survived to appear on modern Ordnance Survey maps as an area name. It appears in the 1292 Placita de Quo Warranto Inquest (pp. 718-19) as being withdrawn from Chirbury Hundred by Peter Corbet; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 151.
	HEM ... EDDERTON ... FORDEN ... WROPTON. All these places were members of Forden Ancient Parish which has been in Montgomeryshire since the formal dissolution of the Marcher lordships in 1536. All appear, as Hemme, Edderton, Fortone and Wrobeton, in the 1292 Placita de Quo Warranto Inquest (pp. 718-19) as having been withdrawn by Peter Corbet from Chirbury Hundred; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 318, ix. no. 50; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. pp. 101-102, 151-53.
		Hem is represented by Great Hem (SJ2300), which includes Upper Hem and Lower Hem, and by Hem Farm (SJ2200), formerly Little Hem.
	ACKLEY. Now also in Forden Ancient Parish which has been in Montgomeryshire since the formal dissolution of the Marcher lordships in 1536. Acle appears in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b, as held by Llewelyn 'Prince of Wales' from the honour of Montgomery and in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 112b, as occupied by the same man when it should be held by Thomas Corbet; see Book of Fees, p. 383; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 153.
		In Book of Fees, p. 383, and Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b, Acle or Acled are coupled with Kilkewid or Kilkewyt (Cilcewydd SJ2203), Lettegu (Leighton 4,4,22), Newarch (unidentfied), Wlstanesmunede (Wolstan Mynd, otherwise Trelystan: 4,1,35) and Midulto' (Middleton: 4,27,22). Some of these may represent parts of the above vills.
	ROGER ^[SON OF]^ CORBET. See 4,1,15 son of note.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. See 3f,2 Alward note.
	THEY WERE WASTE. The main scribe of Great Domesday originally wrote Wasta. This is apparently neuter plural, agreeing with an understood maneria (compare 4,3,36 Haec ii maneria wasta fuerunt). The scribe then altered it to Wasti, masculine plural, though there is nothing for this to agree with. He may, however, have ttiought that the (understood) maneria was masculine as he did in 4,1,37 (M' quos ... alios xi M'). He ought in fact to have corrected Wasta to Wastae to agree with the feminine has terras three lines previously.
4,1,37	THIS ENTRY is essentially a summary of Earl Roger's lordship holdings and his revenue.
	THE WHOLE COUNTY. It is possible that comitatus here means 'earldom' because Earl Roger did not in fact hold the whole county (there were eight other tenants-in-chief besides him); also scira is used for 'county', 'shire' later in the Latin sentence. Roger enjoyed all the rights of an earl in Shropshire; see Davis, England under the Normans, pp. 517-20. However, placita comitatus in the next paragraph would seem to be the pleas of the whole county.
	12 MANORS ... WITH 57 OUTLIERS. The 12 manors are those that are first listed in Earl Roger's schedule (4,1,1-12). They had belonged to King Edward and many of them were the capita of hundreds. The total of outliers appears to be 53 not 57; mistakes in totalling are very common in Great Domesday (compare 4,1,35 hides note)..
	11 OTHER MANORS. Many more than 11 manors are given in this chapter. If Montgomery and Overs (4,1,15;34), both doubtful 'manors', are included, the number would be 21 (4,1,14-34) so there may be a figure error. There are further manors held by Earl Roger in 4,28. See VCH Shropshire, i. pp. 288, 292, 305.
	PLEAS OF THE COUNTY. That is, of pleas made in the county court. Revenue also came from pleas heard in the hundred courts: 4,1,1 pennies note.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1325.
	£300 AND 115s IN REVENUE. According to W. Morris, Medieval English Sheriff, p. 44 note 32, this money, received from the 'farming' of Shrewsbury, the (lordship) manors and the pleas of the county and hundreds, went to Earl Roger and not to the king; compare CHS C24 where Mundret 'farmed' Chester and 'all the earl's pleas in the county and the hundreds, except Englefield'.
4,2	[HOLDING OF EARL HUGH [* OF CHESTER *] UNDER EARL ROGER]. Hugh of Avranches, also known as Hugh the fat, was second Earl of Chester from c. 1071-1101 having succeeded William's first earl, Gherbod (left his earldom c. 1071; died 1085). Hugh came from Avranches in the French département of Manche. He was the son of Richard Goz, vicomte of Avranches, and a woman who was possibly a half-sister of King William. His lands became the honour or barony of Chester. Hugh's only son Richard perished with the White Ship in 1120 and the lands passed to a first cousin, Ranulph I Le Meschin, son of Ranulph the vicomte of Bayeux who was married to Hugh's sister Margaret. See Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 32-33; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 258.
		Like Earl Roger, Hugh was a 'palatine' earl and, like Roger in Shropshire, he held almost all the land in Cheshire (see the paragraph at the end of CHS C25 which takes the place of the Landholders' List in other counties). At this time Hugh and his assistant Robert of Rhuddlan were effectively controlling Gwynedd while Earl Roger was making inroads into Powys: 4,1,15 district note.
4,2,1	IAL. Domesday has terram de Gal. This was a Welsh commote (anglicized as Yale) and was the furthest north-western point that Earl Roger's advance into North Wales had reached in 1086. Its mention implies the annexation also of Cynllaith and Edeyrnion (4,3,42) and also probably of Nanheudwy (4,1,13 district note). Although Ial seems to have been regarded as part of Powys rather than of Gwynedd and thus fell into Earl Roger's sphere of influence, it lay adjacent to the Welsh District of Maelor Cymraeg, which was called 'Duddeston' Hundred in 1086 and was part of Cheshire. The possible conflict of interest between Earls Hugh and Roger seems to have been solved by making Earl Hugh the undertenant of Earl Roger; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 50; Lloyd, History of Wales, ii. p. 389; Lloyd, 'Wales and the Coming of the Normans'; Edwards, 'Normans and the Welsh March', p. 159; and {Introduction: History}.
		Cynllaith and Edeyrnion seem in 4,3,42 to be counted as attached to "Merset" Hundred; Ial should perhaps also be under the same heading.
	THIS LAND EXTENDS ... WIDTH. An unusual sentence which takes the place of the hidage statement, though one would expect the land to be measured in carucates, like other Welsh land; see C13 hides note on the hide and compare 4,1,15 ploughs note. In Domesday Lincolnshire, however, similar measurements are given in some 17 entries, though only in LIN 7,10 and LIN 14,83 is it stated that these are of the whole manor. Such measurements are also common in Little Domesday Book, but in these and the Lincolnshire cases the hidation or carucation of the holdings is also given.
	THE SAME [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line (room for about 12 letters) after similit' which has no dot after it. It would appear that he misplaced this part of the land's 'value', possibly led astray by the unusual description of the land's size (see 4,2,1 land note), which is similar to that used for the resources which normally precede the value. Also, if he dealt with any Welsh areas previously he would have been expecting only the briefest details followed by a value, as in 4,1,13 and 4,3,42. The value of the holding in 1086 would normally go here after the 'value' in 1066 and when acquired by Hugh, hence possibly the space. If so, he changed his mind and put the 1086 value in its correct place after the resources.
4,3	[HOLDING OF REGINALD THE SHERIFF UNDER EARL ROGER]. In Domesday he is called Reginald Balgiole (in the Landholders' List in Staffordshire: folio 246a), Bailgiole in STS 14 chapter head and de Balgiole in STS 14,1. He came from Bailleul (sometimes known as Bailleul-en-Gouffern) in the French département of Orne (arrondissement Argentan, canton Trun), near Exmes which was caput of Earl Roger's vicomté in Normandy ((VCH Shropshire, i. p. 296, but see Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 70). Although his name has sometimes been anglicized as Balliol, like the thirteenth-century founder of Balliol College, Oxford, the latter came from a different Bailleul (in Picardy) and there is no connection between them. Reginald’s wife Amieria was the niece (nepta) of Roger of Montgomery, so he was very much the earl’s official. She had previously been married to Warin the bald, Reginald's predecessor as sheriff of Shropshire. The transfer of power took place c. 1085 and involved a large amount of land, which may have been held in trust for Warin’s son Hugh who held both the land and perhaps the sheriffdom briefly after 1102. Reginald returned to Normandy in 1102 when Earl Roger's son, Robert of Bellême, forfeited the fief. See Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', pp. 245-47; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 70; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. pp. 203-11; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 348.
		As Reginald's lands appear to have come to him with the shrievalty, they subsequently came into the hands of the sheriff Alan Fitz Flaad, then descended to the Fitz Alans and to their barony of Oswestry. See SHR {Introduction: Administration of the Shire}.
		The lands of some of Reginald's subtenants have a regular descent: thus those of Azo [* Bigot *] (4,3,7;14-15;47;64) go to Lestrange, those of Alchere (4,3,4;60;65) to Fitz Ayer (or Fitz Aer), those of Albert (4,3,5;54-56;65) to de Rossall, and those of Ralph (4,3,67-68) to de Constantine.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,3,1-5 Hodnet Hundred
		4,3,6-13 Patton Hundred
		4,3,14-20 Condover Hundred
		4,3,21-31 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,3,32-43 "Merset" Hundred
		4,3,44-45 "Culvestan" Hundred
		4,3,46-47 Leintwardine Hundred
		4,3,48 'Overs' Hundred
		4,3,49-59 Baschurch Hundred
		4,3,60-68 "Alnodestreu" Hundred
		4,3,69-70 'Conditre' Hundred
		4,3,71 Baschurch Hundred
	The final entry is out of sequence as the hundred has already been entered, but it is a later addition.
4,3,1	MARCHAMLEY. This was a chapelry and township of Hodnet Ancient Parish. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Marchamley, as anticipated, descended to Fitz Alan. The Domesday holding, on later evidence, consisted of 4 hides at Marchamley itself and 1 ½ hides at Hopton and Espley. Thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58b, James de Aldith' (Audley) holds 4 hides in Marchimleg' from John Fitz Alan with service at Oswestry (Castle); see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 227, 236; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 97, 196, 285, v. no. 62, vi. no. 56. In the Rotuli Hundredorum, Marchimleg' is coupled with Weston (Weston-under-Redcastle 4,10,3) where James de Aldith' was also mesne tenant. The remaining 1 ½ hides were at Hopton and Espele (Hopton SJ6027, another part of which was later held by Haughmond Abbey (4,8,3), and Espley SJ6026) which Robert de Espele holds from John Fitz Alan in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a: see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116; Book of Fees, pp. 962, 970; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 221, 236. A part of Marchamley was Loscusford (Lostford SJ6231) in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 62; its tithes were given to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 34, 39). On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 272.
	AS 2 MANORS. This was written in the right margin of the manuscript by the main scribe of Great Domesday, slightly aslant and probably added; compare 4,14,25 Gamal note.
4,3,2	[HIGH] HATTON. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Stanton-upon-Hine-Heath. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Its overlord was Fitz Alan and in the mid-thirteenth century it was held by the Corbet family of Tasley. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b, Roger Corbet holds 1 hide (half the Domesday extent) in Hatton from John Fitz Alan. Hatton' is coupled with Hedleg' (Hadley: 4,3,27), both held by Thomas Corbet de Tasseleg' in Book of Fees, p. 971. It is Heyehacton in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221, He Hatton in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 119, Hatton upon Hyneheth in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 582 (of Thomas Corbet of Tasley) where it pays dues to Rounde Acton (Acton Round: 4,3,6). See Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 287.
	RICHARD [* THE BUTLER *]. He is probably Reginald's butler: 4,1,5 Richard note.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B added gld' here in a space originally left after hidê by the main scribe of Great Domesday; see 1,5 land note. For scribe B's other contributions of a similar nature, see 4,1,1 pay note.
	ALRIC. The Domesday forms of the name-form Alric - Alric(us), Elric(us), Aelric(us), Alrich, Alrist (a scribal error) - could represent Old English Æthelric or Old English Ælfric: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 150-51, under Al-ric, and see also p. 142, under Al-. JRM followed von Feilitzen in keeping to the base form, as does the Alecto edition. However, occasionally some of the people here rendered Alric appear in certain Phillimore printed translations as Aelfric or Aethelric, but their name-forms do not include the -u- or -f- required by JRM for inclusion under Aelfric, or the -d- or -g- required by him for inclusion under Aethelric.
4,3,3	STANTON[-UPON-HINE-HEATH]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred, and descended in the Fitz Alan barony: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a, Stanton', ½ hide, is held by Stephen son of Stephen from the fee of John Fitz Alan. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, it is held from John Fitz Alan, lord of P'ston juxta le Goord (Preston SJ5211, formerly Preston Boats or Preston on Severn, part of Upton Magna: 4,3,24). In the Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971, Stephen de Stanton holds Stanton', Rodene (Roden SJ5716, part of Rodington: 4,3,31) and Preston' from the barony of John Fitz Alan; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 227, 236; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix p. 292.
	RICHARD [* THE BUTLER *]. He is probably Reginald's butler: 4,1,5 Richard note.
	SAEWARD [* SIWARD THE FAT *]. Domesday Sauuard[us] represents Old English Sæweard (von Feiltzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 354), but it may be a scribal error here for Seuuard[us] as a Seuuard[us] ('Siward') was Reginald's predecessor in 13 manors. Compare 5,2 Saeward note and 7,1 Saeward note.
		On the possibility that he was the same person as Siward [the fat], on whom see 4,27,32 Siward note, see 4,1,34 Siward note.
	HE WAS FREE WITH THIS LAND. That is, he was free to go where he wished with his land and could commend himself to another lord; see 3b,4 go note.
4,3,4	[GREAT] WYTHEFORD. This lay in Shawbury Ancient Parish, was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086 and later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The overlordship went to Fitz Alan and in the thirteenth century the tenants were de Rossall and Fitz Ayer, the latter at least holding under the Lestrange family of Knockin (4,3,43 Osbaston note) or Ruyton (4,18,2). The share belonging to Fitz Ayer is represented in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, by 2 hides in Wythyford held by John Fitz Ayer of the fee of Knokyn, and in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221, by Magna Wythiford, Mokelinton (Muckleton SJ5921) and half of Erehaldinham (Edgebolton SJ5721; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635) held by John Fitz Ayer from John Extraneus, of his manor of Ruton (Ryton) according to the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115. The de Rossalls also held in Edgbolton and gave their share to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 303-309); Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 192. In due course part of Muckleton was given to the same abbey by Fitz Ayer; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 309. The Fitz Ayer family also held the other part of Great Wytheford (4,14,2) under the barony of Wem.
	ALCHERE <OF LE PIN>. It is likely that all occurrences of this name in Shropshire (4,3,4;60;65;71. 4,27,35) refer to the same individual and that he was also Earl Roger's tenant at Mundham in Sussex (SUS 11,41). He was apparently the ancestor of the Fitz Ayer family. See Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 91; Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 19; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 134.
	VILGRIP <OF WYTHEFORD>. The Domesday forms of this name - Wilegrip, Willegrip, Wilgripus - represent Old Danish Vilgrip: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 405. The printed Phillimore edition has Wilgrip; this has now been changed to Vilgrip. The Alecto edition has Vilgrip.
		It is probable that the Vilgrip who had held Kynnersley (4,23,1) was the same individual: these are the only occurrences of this rare name in Domesday Shropshire. See STS 11,32 Vithgrip note.
	WHICH PAY TAX. This was added by scribe B in a space left by the main scribe of Great Domesday; see 4,1,1 pay note.
	NOW 40s. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about five letters after wast' before writing 'now 40s'.
4,3,5	IN THE SAME VILLAGE. See 4,3,4 Wytheford note.
	WHICH PAYS TAX. Scribe B had to interline geld' because the main scribe of Great Domesday had failed to leave a space after hid'; see 1,5 hide note and, on other contributions by scribe B on taxability, 4,1,1 pay note.
	ALBERT [* GRELLEY *]. The byname is found in CHS R4,2: Albert greslet; the same man is also named Albert crematus in SUF 8,15. Tenant of Roger of Poitou in 'Between the Ribble and the Mersey' (attached to Cheshire in 1086, later in Lancashire), Lincolnshire, Norfolk and Suffolk, his lands subsequently forming the barony of Manchester (Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 130-31). He also held from the Earl of Shrewsbury in Shropshire. See VCH Lancashire, i. pp. 326-44; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, pp. 132-33 (JP).
		That an Albert 'Greslet' who was the forebear of the Grelley family of Lancashire held from Roger of Poitou is well established. However, although Roger of Poitou was Earl Roger's son, there is no other reason to connect the Albert who holds under Reginald of Bailleul under Earl Roger (4,3,5;54-56;65) with Albert greslet/crematus; indeed, the descent of Great Wytheford (4,3,5 Wytheford note) and the other estates contains no trace of a Grelley interest. As for many of Keats-Rohan's cross-references, the evidence to support an individual reference is lacking.
		The Latin crematus and the Old French greslet are not translations of each other. The first means 'burnt', the second 'struck by hail'. They must both, therefore, represent different ways of describing a skin-defect. The Old French is likely to refer to a skin that would nowadays be described as pock-marked, but without any implied reference to the pox.
	WOULD BE POSSIBLE. Domesday posset fieri in place of the more common posset esse, as also in WOR 1,5 and 2,85 (though with the indicative mood in the former). On this formula, see 1,4 ploughs note.
4,3,6	ACTON [ROUND]. This was a chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Much Wenlock, but is now its own Civil Parish. It lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred.
		Land at Actune was left to Burton Abbey c. 1003 in the will of Wulfric Spot: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536). The county in which Actune lay, and its exact identity, are uncertain, although the partially geographical arrangement of the will suggests that the place lay in Shropshire. In none of the three Actons in Shropshire that were Domesday manors is there any trace of any connection with Burton Abbey: Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxxi and no. 29.
		It remained a demesne holding of the Fitz Alans for many years. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, John Fitz Alan holds from the king Acton', Mughales (Monkhall SO6194; see 3c,2 Wenlock note) and Muckel (Muckley SO6495). It is Acton Round in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 225, and Acton la Runde in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 536; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; Book of Fees, p. 1283; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 90; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 121. The church of Acton Rotund' was held by the prior of Wenlock in 1291 (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 164b, 167b); see Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 216.On the affix, see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 6.
4,3,7	ABDON. This was an Ancient Parish. The Domesday place lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, then in Munslow Hundred. The overlordship passed to Fitz Alan, Reginald's successor in the shrieval estates, the mesne tenancy, as is usual with lands held by Azo in 1086, to Lestrange. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, Geoffrey de Ledewich holds 2 hides in Abbeton' from John Extraneus; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229, Abeton is coupled with Rothale (Ruthall: 4,23,13) and Thonglond (Thonglands, part of Tugford: 4,3,8); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 587; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 127; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 122.
		Azo Bigot had granted 1 virgate of Abbetona to Shrewsbury Abbey between 1121 and 1136 together with ½ hide in Longnor (4,3,15): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xx, 43, 64, 258, 262, 286); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167b.
	AZO [* BIGOT *]. The Domesday forms of this 1086 tenant - Azo, Asso - represent Old German Azo, Azzo, Atso, Adso, Old French Ace, Asse: Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England, pp. 39-40. The printed Phillimore edition has the forms Azo and Azor; these have now been standardized as Azo. The Alecto edition has Azo.
		For the identification of Azo as Azo Bigot, see 4,3,7 Abdon note, 4,3,15 Longnor note and 4,3,64 Glazeley note.
4,3,8	TUGFORD. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Patton Hundred in 1086 and was later in Munslow Hundred. Domesday records that it was given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Reginald for the soul of Warin, his predecessor as sheriff. The Shrewsbury Cartulary, however, attributes the gift to Warin himself. The size of the holding is 2 ½ hides according to Domesday (with deduction of Rainer's 1 hide) which is the extent given in Henry II's confirmation (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, p. 41); those of Stephen and Henry I (ibidem, pp. 33, 256) mention only 2 hides; see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xiv, xviii, xx, 4, 6, 30, 31, 37 etc.). Land at Fertecota (unidentified) was included: 4,1,5 St Peter note. The abbey continued to hold Tuggefford or Taggeford until the Dissolution; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71b (where the extent is wrongly given as 5 hides); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 163a, 167b; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 225, 228; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv p. 79; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 182.
	CHURCH OF ST PETER [* OF SHREWSBURY *]. That is, Earl Roger's abbey (SHR 3b). When he came to rubricate Shropshire, the main scribe of Great Domesday was misled by the capitals he had used for S' PETRI and probably also its position in the entry and lined them through in red instead of the place-name DODEFORT which was on the line below. On his failure to rubricate three hundred heads and six other place-names in Shropshire that were not later additions, see 4,3,52 Ness note, 4,3,53 Myddle note, 4,4,20 Wittery note, 4,21,11 Bosle note, 5,7 Ackhill note, 6,5 Lowe note and 6,33 entry note.
	HIS PREDECESSOR, WARIN [* THE SHERIFF *]. See also in 4,3,71. Warin the bald was Roger of Montgomery's first sheriff and, like his successor Reginald, was related to him by marriage (see 4,3 Reginald note). Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. p. 220) describes him as 'small in body, but great in spirit' and Earl Roger gave him the sheriffdom of Shrewsbury unless the Latin praesidatum means custody of Shrewsbury, i.e. the castle, though this probably amounted to the same thing: Round, 'Early Sherriffs of Norfolk', p. 496. Strictly speaking praesidatum means 'governorship, office' in Medieval Latin; it is from praeses ('governor', 'official'), not praesidium ('guard'). In his Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall iii. p. 21 and elsewhere) Orderic calls him 'sheriff of Shrewsbury'; his job, he says, was to crush the Welsh and any other enemies and pacify the whole province entrusted to him. Many of Warin's lands lay on the Welsh border and he seems to have led an expedition into Wales: Jones, Gruffydd ap Cynan, p. 123; see also {Introduction: History}. The mention of Warin in connection with St Peter's is interesting because Orderic (Ecclesiastical History: Chibnall, ii. pp. 420-21) records that Warin the sheriff was among the leading men summoned by Earl Roger to hear his plans for the building of Shrewsbury Abbey. Warin died some time between 1085 and the compilation of Great Domesday: Galbraith, 'An Episcopal Land-Grant of 1085', p. 360. See Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', pp. 245-47.
	See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1326.
	ALWIN. The Domesday forms of the name-form Alwin - Aluuin(us), Aluuine, Aeluuin(us), Aeluin(us), Aluin(us), Eluuine, Eluuin(us), Eluinus - could represent Old English Ælfwine, Old English Æthelwine, Old English Ealdwine or even Old English Ealhwine: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 158-60, under Al-wine, and see also p. 142, under Al-. JRM followed von Feilitzen in keeping to the base form, but preferred the second element -win to Old English -wine, as it reflected the form of the majority of instances in Domesday. The Alecto edition has Alwine for those appearing under Al-wine. Some of those called Alwin in the present edition appear under Old English Ælfwine in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 181, but the Domesday forms (Aluuinus, Aluinus, Eluuius) do not contain the -f- or –v- that JRM thought was necessary for inclusion under that name. Some also appear under Old English Æthelwine in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 190-91, but the Domesday forms (Aeluuinus, Aluuine, Aluuin(us), Aluinus) do not contain the -d- or -g- which JRM thought was the requisite for inclusion under that name. In some of the Phillimore printed translations the forms Alwine and A(i)lwin appear, but these have now been standardized as Alwin.
	RAINER ... 1 HIDE. This did not all pass immediately or permanently to Shrewsbury Abbey, but some or all was held for life by Rainer and was the subject of a dispute when his son William refused to give it up: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 2). The land concerned was at Fertecote which was presumably part of Thonglands (SO5489), the name of the hide from which Rainer and his descendants were named. It is Thonclond (Thonglands SO5489) in Book of Fees, pp. 963, 971, where Richard de Thonclond holds from the barony of John Fitz Alan; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 223, 229, 244; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 160; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 356; and 4,3,7 Abdon note.
4,3,9	STANWAY. This lay in Rushbury Ancient Parish. It lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. The overlordship came to Fitz Alan and the tenancy passed from Odo to Roger Fitz Odo, then to Hugh of Rushbury (named from Rushbury: 4,8,5). He gave the manor to Hugh of Audley, a gift confirmed in 1227 (Calender of Close Rolls, i. p. 36), but Hugh then exchanged it with Madoc of Sutton for a share in Weston-under-Redcastle (4,10,3). Thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, Madoc de Sutton holds 1 ½ hides in Stanwey. The manor also probably included Stoneacton (SO5093) for in Book of Fees, p. 965 (fees of Tournay) Madoc de Sotton' holds in Stanewey and Staniacton. Stoneacton may only have been ½ hide which the Templars of Lydley (4,27,12) hold in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 72b; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 245; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 89; and 4,3,44 Cardington note. Bradestana (Broadstone SO5489), 1 virgate, confirmed on Shrewsbury Abbey by Roger son of Odo de Rusberia and William Fitz Alan between 1155 and 1160 and said to have been given by Roger's ancestors, was also probably part of Stanway: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xx, 15, 16, 43, 250, 258, 262); VCH Shropshire, x. p. 161.
		VCH Shropshire, x. p. 61, suggests that Stoneacton may have originated as part of Cardington (4,3,44) or Gretton (4,3,10) and had been added by Warin to Stanway shortly before 1086 to compensate for the loss of Broadstone.
	ODO [* OF BERNIERES *]. The Odo who holds from Reginald of Bailleul and from Roger of Lacy (4,3,9-10;17-19. 4,8,5) may be Odo of Bernières who also holds directly from Earl Roger (4,18): Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 19; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 308. He is probably also known as Odo miles: 4,18 Odo note. However, an Odo clericus was a witness to the grant by the Bishop of Hereford to Roger of Lacy of land in Onibury (2,2) and in Holme Lacy (HEF 2,12): Galbraith, 'An Episcopal Land-Grant of 1085', p. 360. See 2,2 Lacy note. The identity of the Odo here has thus not been fully resolved.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank three-quarters of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	WHEN HE ACQUIRED IT. Great Domesday q'do recep' abbreviates quando recepit, the subject being either Earl Roger or Reginald the sheriff. Usually the date is that at which the manor was acquired by the tenant-in-chief from King William (see, for example, DEV 2,14 formerly note), but certainly in the case of these subsections of chapter 4 it may be the date of acquisition of the land by the subtenant from Earl Roger: see 4,2,1 q[uan]do Hugo recep[it]), referring to Roger's subtenant Earl Hugh. See DEV 16,88 formerly note and DOR 55,29 value note for other cases where the past value of a manor is when it was acquired by the subtenant, rather than the tenant-in-chief. This clause is a more exact description of the word post in previous value statements in Shropshire; see 1,7 later note.
		In the manuscript the dot after recep' is very pale and so is not reproduced in the Ordnance Survey facsimile; it is just visible in the Alecto facsimile. See 3f,7 plough note for other faulty reproductions in the Ordnance Survey facsimile of Shropshire.
4,3,10	GRETTON. This lay in Cardington Ancient Parish. It was in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. The two subtenancies here in Domesday were perpetuated. Part of Odo's share seems to have followed the same descent as Kenley (4,3,19) going to Petronella Fitz Odo on her marriage to Warner de Wililey, while the other portion seems to have gone to Richard de Belmeis under La Zouche. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, Burthe, widow of Nicholas de Wyleleg', holds 1 hide in Gretiton' from John Fitz Alan, as guardian of Ralph her son while Robert de Beumeys holds 1 hide from Alan de la Souche; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 105; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 63.
	ODO [* OF BERNIERES *]. See 4,3,9 Odo note.
	OTTAR. Domesday Otro represents Old Danish Ottar: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 342. His name was incorrectly rendered Othere in the Phillimore printed translation.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank three-quarters of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,11	EASTHOPE. This was an Ancient Parish. The vill lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. It was among the earliest possessions of Wenlock church, but was subsequently surrendered for Stanton Long (4,8,6): SHR 3c St Milburga note. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, John de Esthop' holds 2 hides in Esthop' from John Fitz Alan; see Book of Fees, pp. 963, 971; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 363; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 117; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 129.
	ERNWY <OF EASTHOPE>. Although the parchment of the manuscript is split between the last two lines of this column, just below Ernu, and a clear reinforcement piece recently stuck on which partly covers the nu, there is no sign that the name was ever anything other than Ernu: one would expect Ernui or Ernu'. It is probably a scribal error. On the name Ernwy, see 4,4,12 Ernwy note.
		The name Ernwy or Ernwin occurs eight times in central Shropshire and nowhere else within 50 miles; it probably represents two or three individuals. The pre-Conquest holder of the modest, shared property at Easthope might have been connected to those of Pontesbury or Easthope; but there are no discernible links to confirm this, and the Ernwys outside the county were too distant to be plausible related (JP).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,12	LUTWYCHE. This lay in Rushbury Ancient Parish, being represented by Lutwyche Hall which is Wenlock Edge School. The place lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. The overlordship went to Fitz Alan, the mesne tenants were lords of Brockton (4,3,13; both places have a 1086 tenant called Richard) and Lutwyche was held under them by a family named from the place. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, William de Lotwich holds a third part of 2 hides from Thomas de Brocton'; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 113; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 64.
	RICHARD [* THE BUTLER *]. He is probably Reginald's butler; see 4,1,5 Richard note.
4,3,13	BROCKTON. This was divided between Shipton, a chapelry of Much Wenlock Ancient Parish which itself became an Ancient Parish, and the Ancient Parish of Stanton Long. It was in Patton Hundred, later in Munslow Hundred. Descent was to the de Brockton family under Fitz Alan. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, Thomas de Brocton' holds 1 ⅓ hides from John Fitz Alan; see Book of Fees, pp. 963, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 223, 229, 244; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 109. Corve, which was later a possession of Wenlock Priory (3c,6 Shipton note), was originally part of this manor: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 111; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 374.
	RICHARD [* THE BUTLER *]. He is probably Reginald's butler; see 4,1,5 Richard note.
	ALGEARD. The Domesday forms of this name-form - Eliard, Eliert - could represent either Old English Æthelgeard or Old English Ælfgeard: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 146, under Al-geard, and also p. 142, under Al-. JRM followed von Feilitzen in keeping to the base form. The Phillimore printed edition has both Algeard (here) and Alfyard (BRK 7,24, the only other occurrence of this name); these have now been standardized as Algeard. The Alecto edition has Algeard.
	2 HIDES. In the manuscript Ibi .ii. hidae with a curved pen-mark between and below the Ibi and ii. The scribe probably wrote .i. hida first and corrected it to .ii. hidae (hence the interlined e for du[a])e and the diphthong squiggle on the a of hida), but the second i of Ibi is in darker ink and may have been originally omitted and then added and because of its closeness to the ii the scribe emphasized the number of hides by the interlined e.
4,3,14	BERRINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The overlordship passed from Reginald to Fitz Alan and the tenancy from Azo to Lestrange. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Richard de Dryton, William Fitz Alan, John son of Philip and Philip de Hungefort hold 2 hides in Biriton of the fee of John Extraneus. In Book of Fees, p. 973, Biriton' is coupled with Longelorn' (Longnor: 4,3,15) under the barony of Hugh of Kilpeck (4,3,15 Longnor note); see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 92a; Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. p. 114 no. 236; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 33; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 18.
		Berrington is at SJ528068, Berrington Manor Farm at SJ530068, Berrington Hall at SJ525075.
	AZO [* BIGOT *]. See 4,3,7 Azo note.
	THORTH [* OF WROXETER *]. The Domesday forms of this name - Toret, Tored(us), Tord, Tort, Toreth, Thoret, Thored - represent Old Danish Thorth, Old Norse Thorthr: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 396-97. The printed Phillimore edition has the forms Thored and Thorthr; these have now been standardized as Thorth. The Alecto edition has Thorth.
		On his perhaps being Thorth of Wroxeter, see 4,3,26 Thorth note.
	ST ANDREW'S. This is the church of Condover (4,1,2); see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 320 note 38; and 4,1,2 priest note.
	WHICH PAID TAX. [***]. Or perhaps 'which pay tax' as the present participle geld[antes] ('paying tax') can refer in a context like this to the present and the past, though the latter is more likely here in view of the tenuit earlier in the sentence. The main scribe of Great Domesday left the remaining quarter of a line blank after this before the lordship details, possibly for any change in the hidage or its taxability in 1086.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank two-thirds of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	ST PETER'S IN SHREWSBURY. That is, Shrewsbury Abbey: SHR 3b St Peter's note. The gift was of the church and the tithes of Berrington and was made by Warin the sheriff, Reginald's predecessor: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xiv, xviii, 6, 30, 33, 37, 41 etc.); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 247b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 184, 189.
4,3,15	LONGNOR?. The later history of Azo's manor suggests that Domesday Lege was replaced by the more specific Longnor which appears as Longenorlegh' in 1291 and Longnorley in 1586: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 182. Longnor itself was a chapelry of Condover Ancient Parish. Lege lay in Condover Hundred in 1086, as did Longnor later. Azo gave ½ hide in Longnor to Shrewsbury Abbey between 1102 and 1121. The confirmation of Henry I reads Atotus bicot (i.e. Azo Bigot) aliam dimidiam [hidam] in langanara. This is echoed in Henry II's confirmation de dono Azonis Bigot dimidiam hidam in Longenalra and by King Stephen's charter: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xxi, 33, 38, 41, 250, 258, 262).
		Of the rest of Longnor (l ½ hides by Domesday's reckoning) 1 hide at least seems to have followed the same descent as Azo's other lands: from Azo under Reginald to Lestrange under Fitz Alan, although the Fitz Alan overlordship is scarcely alluded to. The tenants-in-fee were the Sprenchose family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Roger Sprenthose holds 1 hide in Long' from John Extraneus. Fulk Extraneus holds Longenohr in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230, while in Book of Fees, p. 973, Roger Sprinchose and the heirs of Hugh Lestrange hold 1 fee in Biriton' (Berrington: 4,3,14) and Longelorn'. This last statement is headed 'The barony of Hugh de Kylpec' and if not an error (as suspected elsewhere; see 4,4,1Welbatch note;4,4,3 Acton note) may explain Roger the hunter's involvement in Lege in 1086 (see 4,3,15 Roger note).
		Lege (which usually becomes 'Lee' or Leigh' in place-names) is from Old English leah probably meaning here 'an open space' or 'a clearing in a wood'. The area will have been extensively covered in the eleventh century by the 'Botwood' and the holding at Longnor abutted the manor of Leebotwood later held by Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 693-94). Both manors had woods attached to them and there were a number of disputes concerning woodland rights between the holders or their tenants. The parishes of Leebotwood and Longnor are adjacent, but it is unlikely that Leebotwood (perhaps the Botewde of Domesday: 4,27,13) and Lege (= Longnor) derived their names from the same 'Lee'. Longnor is from Old English alor 'alder' referring to 'tall alders' or a 'long alder wood'. 'Lee' perhaps referred to a large open space, Longnor to the settlement within it; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 48; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 320 note 39, viii. p. 101; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. pp 173, 183.
	AZO [* BIGOT *]. See 4,3,7 Azo note.
	ALDRED [* BROTHER OF SIWARD *]. The Domesday forms of this name - Aldred(us), Eldred, Aeldred(us), Aldret, Aeldret, Eldret - represent Old English Ealdræd: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 241-42. JRM preferred the first element Ald- for Old English Eald-, as it reflected the majority of the spellings in the Domesday forms. The Alecto edition has Ealdræd.
		Apart from the similar tenurial pattern to his brother Siward - inheritance of their holdings by Mortimer, Lacy and Reginald of Bailleul - the identity of Aldred as the brother of Siward is also suggested by his continued possession of Smethcott (4,27,15) and his acquisition of two other holdings T.R.W. (4,27,33. 7,6) since Aldred is a comparatively uncommon name among post-Conquest landowners, these three being the only ones between the Bristol Channel and the Humber. Another holding, Longnor (4,3,15), is a close neighbour of Smethcott (JP).
		On the possibility that the Aldred who was Roger of Lacy's predecessor (7,6) was the brother of Siward and the son of Aethelgar, see SHR 7 Roger note.
	ROGER THE HUNTER ... FROM TAX. The sentence is inelegant and the word order is inverted, but the meaning is clear, the t'râ (terram accusative) and the ii hidae (nominative) leaving no doubt that it is Azo's 2 hides that make Roger the hunter's inland free of tax; inland, however, did not usually pay tax so did not need to be exempted (see 4,3,15 inland note). The details that follow lack a place-name but are tantamount to a new section and they properly belong in Roger the hunter's chapter (SHR 4,26). He held Pulverbatch (4,26,4) which is four miles from Longnor and a manor of 2 hides, also Wrentnall (4,26,2), also 2 hides, adjacent to Pulverbatch. Moreover, Pulverbatch becomes the caput of the barony of Roger's successors (4,26 Roger note) and so could be a candidate for 'the head of the manor'. However, there is no mention of this arrangement under Pulverbatch where 2 hides simply pay tax, nor under Wrentnall, but 1½ hides of Wrentnall appear to be alienated church land, and it may be that the present arrangement is some form of chicanery. Nonetheless, the details contained in 'Roger Hunter ... a mill', and perhaps including the value as well appear to refer to a quite separate estate, unnamed, but described as 'the head of the manor'. Thus Roger the hunter may have had another manor in Condover Hundred. It was probably adjacent to Pulverbatch whose 1255 hidage (4,26,4 Pulverbatch note) probably included Pulverbatch, these unnamed 2 hides and part of Wrentnall as well; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. pp. 49, 51, 198.
	"INLAND". Comparable with, though perhaps less restricted than, dominium, lordship land, generally cultivated for the owner's use and not let out or given to the villagers; it was usually land near the lord's house and generally exempt from tax; see Vinogradoff, Growth of the Manor, p. 226; Ballard, The Domesday Inquest, pp. 247-48.
	SOLID ENCLOSURES. Domesday has haiê firmae. The use of firma suggests something more substantial than the etymological meaning of haia ('a hedge') implies. Perhaps the material of which they were constructed was solid, that is they consisted of banks and palisades, or (as VCH Shropshire, i. p. 320) they were permanent enclosures; see 3c,2 enclosures note. The Alecto edition has 'secure enclosures'.
4,3,16	COUND. The Domesday name-form is Cuneet, on which see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 102. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. Descent was to Fitz Alan, Conet being held as 3 ½ hides by John Fitz Alan in Condover Hundred in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 63a. It is held by the Bishop of Bath (and Wells, i.e. by Robert Burnell) from Richard filius Alani in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215, and from the Earl of Arundel in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229. Cound is sometimes coupled with Acton Burnell (4,4,3) in later documents; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 827, ii. no. 536, iii. no. 194. The difference of 1 hide between the figures given in the Rotuli Hundredorum and Domesday is accounted for by Arneg' (Harnage SO5604), 1 hide held by the Abbot of Buildwas in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, granted by Gilbert of Lacy de Cristeseche (from Cressage: 4,10,1); see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 69; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 63.
		The Domesday estate is represented by Cound and Upper Cound (both at SJ5504).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,17	GOLDING. This was a township of the Ancient Parish of Cound. In 1086 and later, it was in Condover Hundred. The overlordship passed to Fitz Alan but is ignored in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, which imperfectly records the actual state of affairs: Golding was in fact then held by de Rushbury under Fitz Alan and under the former by de Pickford and de Beckbury, but the Rotuli Hundredorum state that the ½ hide in Golden is held by Walter de Pesal and Ralph son of Nicholas for the heir of Ralph de Pick' (Pitchford: 4,19,12 which is adjacent) and by Reginald and William de Golden of the fee of Rusbur' (Rushbury: 4,8,5); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 97; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 64.
	ODO [* OF BERNIERES *]. See 4,3,9 Odo note.
4,3,18	ACTON [PIGOTT]. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Acton Burnell. It was in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later.
		Land at Actune was left to Burton Abbey c. 1003 in the will of Wulfric Spot: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536). The county in which Actune lay, and its exact identity, are uncertain, although the partially geographical arrangement of the will suggests that the place lay in Shropshire. In none of the three Actons in Shropshire that were Domesday manors is there any trace of any connection with Burton Abbey: Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxxi and no. 29.
		After 1086 the overlordship passed to Fitz Alan, the mesne tenancy to Odo's successors, but at a later stage the de Pickfords (see 4,3,17 Golding note) and Robert Burnell acquired an interest. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, three hides in Acton Pigot are held by six people of the fee of Kenleg' (Kenley: 4,3,19, a holding of Odo in 1086); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 569, iii. no. 194, viii. no. 667; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 92; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 8.
	ODO [* OF BERNIERES *]. See 4,3,9 Odo note.
4,3,19	KENLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. The place lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The overlord became Fitz Alan and the mesne tenancy passed from Odo to Philip Fitz Odo, then to Petronella Fitz Odo who married Warner of Willey. In the Book of Fees, p. 962, Petronella de Kenleg' holds Kenleg' with appurtenances from the barony of John Fitz Alan; in the Book of Fees, p. 971, Kenleg' is associated with Bromcroft' (Broomcroft SJ5601), Acton Picot' (Acton Pigott: 4,3,18), and Allecot' (unidentified). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Kenleg' is 1 hide, a fee of John Fitz Alan held in custody for the son of Nicholas de Wilileg'; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194, viii. no. 451, x. no. 618; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 229, 239; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 80; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 94.
		Kenley is misspelt Kenly in the Penguin edition of the Alecto translation, though it is correct in the Alecto county edition.
	ODO [* OF BERNIERES *]. See 4,3,9 Odo note.
	THE LACK OF POPULATION recorded for this manor may be due to scribal error or an incomplete return or to Kenley's being worked by villagers from another holding, possibly the adjacent Acton Piggott (4,3,18). There is probably a similar case in 4,4,24 (which may have been worked by some of the 13 villagers with their 6 ploughs in neighbouring Montford: 4,4,23) and there are several holdings in Shropshire (such as 3a,1. 3e,2. 4,14,17;27 etc.) which lack much of the manorial detail. Compare 4,3,47 which states there were 'No men there'.
4,3,20	EATON [MASCOTT]. This was a township of Berrington Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The overlordship passed to the Fitz Alans and the mesne tenancy was held from the twelfth century by a family named Marescot. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, 3 hides in Eton Marscot are held by William Marscot from John Fitz Alan; see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 239; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 102; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 20. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194 (of Philip Burnell), 1 carucate in Eton Marhcote is said to pertain to the manor of Cound (4,3,16).
	THORTH [* OF WROXETER *]. On his name, see 4,3,14 Thorth note and, on his possible identification, see 4,3,26 Thorth note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,21	EATON [CONSTANTINE]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred, later in 'Bradford' Hundred when the Constantine family (named from the Cotentin peninsula in Normandy) held under Fitz Alan. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a, Thomas Costantin' holds 2 hides in Heton' from the fee of John Fitz Alan by service of guard at Oswestry Castle. It is Ecton Costentin' in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219, and is coupled with Aldebur' (Oldbury: 4,3,68) in Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 228, 237; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 747; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 1. A half-virgate here was given to Lilleshall Abbey, probably in the time of Henry III.
	WYNSIGE. Domesday Wenesi represents Old English Wynsige.
	2 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about four letters after ii hide; see 1,5 hide note.
	A FISHERY ON THE SEVERN. The river forms the southern boundary of the modern parish.
	A WOOD OF MEDIUM SIZE [TREES]. The Latin silua modica is infrequent in Domesday. Apart from here, it occurs in CHS 8,43. DOR 3,7;9. STS 11,11. 13,4. SOM 1,26. 5,12;17. YKS 5W30. 25W9. 28W33. Silua pastilis modica is found in YKS 3Y10-11. Ibi modicum siluae occurs in CHS 2,23 and siluae minutae modicum in NTT 1,10.
		The use of modicum as a substantival adjective should be distinguished from that of modica, simply used adjectively. The former (modicum), followed by a partitive genitive means 'a modest or moderate amount of' and is in a sequence with such uses as siluae aliquantulum ('some small quantity of woodland') in GLS 30,3, siluae minutae aliquantulum ('some small quantity of underwood') in NTT 1,3, paululum siluae ('very little woodland') in HEF 9,3 and parum silvae minutae ('a small amount of underwood') in DBY 1,32;34.2,2. 6,60;80;94. 9,1;4. 10,18. 17,15-16.
		On the other hand, modica, like minuta, seems to refer to the size of the trees. That minuta has this meaning is shown firstly by the occasional appearance of separate details for silua and for silua minuta in the same entry (for example in DEV 1,3;43. 12,1. DOR 3,13. SOM 5,16. 8,1); secondly, by the fact that the dimensions of silua and of silua minuta cover the same range and the extent of some siluae minutae is large as in DEV 1,43. 52,34 where in each case a silua minuta is 1 league by ½ league; many siluae are measured in small numbers of acres. In SOM 5,17 there is a silua modica ½ league by ½ league and in the same entry there is a silua 1 furlong by 1 furlong. Moreover, in three entries for which there are corresponding entries in the Liber Exoniensis (Exon), that is, SOM 1,26. 5,12;17 (= Exon folios 113a, 140a, 141a) the term used in Exon is nemusculum, which was more normally converted to silua minuta by the main scribe of Great Domesday (on over 70 occasions in Somerset alone). The Liber Exoniensis also contains two entries relating to the same estate of Abbas Combe (SOM 4,1). In one of them (Exon folio 467a) an Exon scribe uses nemusculum, in the other (Exon folio 153b) which was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday, silua minuta is used.
		Theoretically minuta and modica have different meanings ('small', 'thin' for the first, 'of moderate, medium, average size' for the second). However, since it is unlikely that the main scribe of Great Domesday was able to find out whether any particular nemusculum had small trees in it or medium-size ones, it looks as if the two terms are equivalent. They have, however, here been distinguished in translation, silua minuta as 'underwood' and silua modica as 'a wood of medium size [trees]'.
		Eyton, Domesday Studies: Staffordshire, p. 86, refers modica to the size of the trees, suggesting that they are larger than 'underwood' but not full grown. VCH Staffordshire, iv. p. 49, translates silua modica as ' Wood(land) of small trees', but this was altered for the Alecto edition to 'scrubland', its usual translation of silua minuta (translated in Phillimore by 'underwood'). The Phillimore printed edition has 'a small wood', the translation usually reserved for silua parua, where the parua describes the extent of the woodland, not the size of the trees in it (see SHR 4,1,4 wood note).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining two-thirds of a line after the wood detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	HE FOUND IT WASTE. Domesday inuen' abbreviates inuenit, as in 4,3,22-23;32 etc., and refers to the date at which Roger, or perhaps Reginald the sheriff, acquired the manor; compare 4,3,9 acquired note.
4,3,22	LEIGHTON. This was an Ancient Parish. This holding lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, William, lord of Leheton', holds 3 hides in Lechton' from John Fitz Alan, with service at Oswestry. It included Garmston or Garmonston (Garmston SJ6006) according to the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112, and Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219; see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 228, 237; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 325.
	3 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after iii hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
4,3,23	[CHILDS] ERCALL. This was an Ancient Parish also known as Ercall Parva. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Part of Childs Ercall was at Dodecote or Dottecote (Dodecote SJ6723) granted early by William Fitz Alan (I) to the Cistercian Abbey of Combermere: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 216; Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 324 no. iii. By 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b) the abbot was holding 2 hides in Hercalwe Parva, half by gift of Elias de Fanecin, the other half from John Extraneus; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, v. p. 216.
		The rest of Childs Ercall continued to be held by Lestrange under Fitz Alan. John Extraneus holds Mhutle (Myddle: 4,3,53) and Parva Erkalawe from the barony of John Fitz Alan in Book of Fees, p. 963, and its members are given in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220, as Acton (Hungryhatton SJ6726), Leyes (The Lee farm SJ6626) and Golston (Goldstone SJ7028); see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 227, 237. Another member was Naghinton (Naginton SJ6725) which in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b, was said to have been given to the Abbot of Haughmond by Hamo Extraneus in pure alms; see the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 452, 779-82, apendix A. i); Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 7.
	3 HIDES [***].The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after iii hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
4,3,24	UPTON [MAGNA]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. This important manor passed to the Fitz Alan barony: Hupton' is held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56b, by John filius Alani from the barony of Oswaldistre. It is Upton' 'with members' in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221. These members are listed in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116, as: Downeton (Downton SJ5412), Houkynton (Hunkington SJ5613), Magna Ree and Parva Ree (Rea Farm SJ5612), Wroxceter (Wroxeter: 4,3,26), and Norton (Norton SJ5609, a member of Wroxeter). Of these Downton and Rea went to Haughmond Abbey which was founded in woodland adjacent to Upton Magna: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 288-302, 422, 685, 889, 925-30, 1242, appendix A. i.). Another member was P'ston juxta le Goord (Preston, formerly Preston Boats or Preston on Severn, SJ5211), held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, by Stephen de Stanton' under Fitz Alan and sometimes coupled with Stanton-upon-Hine-Heath and Roden in Rodington (4,3,3;31); see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236. The tithes of Preston were given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Hunald, an early holder: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 34, 39). Pembeleg' (Pimley SJ5214), held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, by Geoffrey de Pembeleg' from the Abbot of Shrewsbury, had been given by Fulco the sheriff between 1135 and 1138 to the abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, xx, 42, 47, 48, 250, 258, 263). It was also originally part of Upton Magna. For Haughton (another member), see 4,26,7 Haughton note. On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 202.
		The church of Upton Magna was held by Shrewsbury Abbey: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 247; the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 64 etc.). The predecessor church (see SHR 3b St Peter's note) had held the tithes before 1066: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 33, 37).
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. On the possibility that he was the same person as Siward [the fat], on whom see 4,27,32 Siward note, see 4,1,34 Siward note.
4,3,25	BERWICK. This lay in Atcham Ancient Parish. It was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It was subsequently held by the Mavison family under Fitz Alan and became known as Berwick Mavison, now represented by Berwick Grove House: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 42. In Book of Fees, pp. 962, 970, Herbert Mauveisin holds Berewik' from the barony of John filius Alani. The extent is given as ½ hide in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a, with service at Oswestry Castle; see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 511, iii. no. 512, vi. nos. 490, 720; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 219, 236; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 387. See 4,1,20 Berwick note.
	½ HIDE [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after dimid' hida; see 1,5 hide note.
	[VALUE ***]. The scribe seems to have omitted the value of Berwick in error; see also in 4,3,62 and 4,28,1 (though in these most of the manorial details are also missing) and in 6,7.
4,3,26	WROXETER. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Wroxeter was held in demesne by the Fitz Alans, the church being given by William Fitz Alan (I) to the monastery at Haughmond: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 1133, 1370-77, 1379, 1381-87, appendix A. i.). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56b, John Fitz Alan holds Wroccecest' of his barony of Osewaldistre; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228. Norton (4,3,24 Upton note) was a member, as was Parva Buldewas ('Little Buildwas', lost but c. SJ642043): Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 250. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a, 'Little Buildwas' is held by Alan de Buldewas from the Abbot of Buildwas; it is there said to be hidated with Wroxeter; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118. 'Little Buildwas' had been given by William Fitz Alan I to Buildwas Abbey: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. pp. 309-15.
		Part of Donnington (SJ5707), otherwise a member of Eyton-on-Severn (3b,2), appears to have been among members of the estate at Wroxeter. It was given to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, no. 1387); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a.
	THORTH [* OF WROXETER *]. On the name Thorth, see 4,3,14 Thorth note. He is identifiable as Thorth of Wroxeter, who was named from this holding and who was ancestor of the Fitz Torets. Other occurrences of Thorth both as a T.R.E. and a 1086 holder (4,3,14;20;30-31;69. 4,27,10) may well be to this man: Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 90; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 428.
	4 PRIESTS. This plurality is the sign of a superior church. On the possibility that this was the minster church, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	WOODLAND, 1 LEAGUE [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line after leuua which has no dot after it, peraps for another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,27	HADLEY. This lay in Wellington Ancient Parish, but is now its own Civil Parish. It was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Before the death of Earl Roger, Geoffrey had given ½ hide here to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xx, 6, 30, 33, 39, 41, 256). The name-form there is generally Herlega or Herleia (pointing to Harley (4,21,8) although that is not held by Geoffrey in 1086), but Hetlega (pointing to Hadley) is the form on p. 41. The overlordship passed to the Fitz Alans, the mesne tenant in the time of Henry I being William de Hadley who with his wife Seburga and sons founded the priory of Wombridge dedicated to St Leonard for Augustinian canons in Hadley Wood c. 1130-1135. This area also lay in the royal forest of Mount Gilbert. The foundation was confirmed by William Fitz Alan; see VCH Shropshire, ii. p. 80; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 387; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 159; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 283. This small ecclesiastical establishment in a wood, originally extra-parochial, was the nucleus of Oakengates and later of the new town of Telford: Place-Names of Shropshire, iii. p. 39.
		Cecily, daughter of Alan of Hadley, married Roger Corbet of Tasley and the manor then descended in the Corbet family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, Roger Corbet' holds Hedleg' from John Fitz Alan; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 219, 227; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 352; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 256; and 4,3,2 Hatton note.
	WIHTRIC <OF HADLEY>. The Domesday forms of this name - Wihtric(us), Wictric, Wicstricus, Wistricus, Wistrinc, Witric - represent Old English Wihtric: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 414. In the Phillimore printed translation for DBY 6,7 and for BRK 31,6 the form Wictric was used; it has been standardized for the present edition. The Alecto edition has Wihtric.
		Note to be supplied on this identification (JP).
	GEOFFREY [* THE SHERIFF *]. There are three occurrences of the name Geoffrey in Domesday Shropshire (4,3,27. 4,4,20. 6,8). They may refer to the same individual. One of them, Geoffrey the sheriff, was a benefactor of Shrewsbury Abbey where his son Achard became a monk and this Geoffrey may be the same as the Geoffrey who was the sheriff of the area that later became Lancashire under Roger of Poitou, son of Earl Roger; see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 232, whose Shropshire references are to 4,3,27 and 6,8 only. For the occurrences of Geoffrey the sheriff in the Shrewsbury Cartulary, see Rees, pp. 35, 40, 42, 44, 79, 80, 259, 262, 306, 337. See STS 8,25 Geoffrey note.
		In the manuscript Gosfrid'; Farley misprinted Goisfrid'.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,28	DAWLEY [PARVA]. The land was at Dawley Parva which was part of Dawley (Magna). Dawley Magna was a chapelry of Shifnal, then its own Ancient Parish: 4,1,22 Dawley note. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086. Dawley Parva did not retain its independence; by the thirteenth century it was considered as part of Leegomery manor (4,3,30): Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 349; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 113.
	BENEDICT <OF DAWLEY>. Apart from Abbot Benedict of Selby, the only other occurrence of this name in Domesday is as a subtenant of Earl Roger in Staffordshire (STS 8,7), probably the same man as the Benedict here.
	SIGSTEINN. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Book.
	1 HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote Ibi i hida over an erasure; the surface of the parchment was not properly re-prepared after the erasure, as the words are blurred. In the central margin, level with this correction, [Ibi] i hid' was originally by the scribe and then presumably erased when the hidage was inserted in the text (though still partially visible). It is not reproduced in the Ordnance Survey facsimile and is not visible in the Alecto facsimile; Farley of course did not print it. On these marginal notes, see C6 accident note. On the space left after the hidage (suitable for about four letters), see 1,5 hide note.
4,3,29	2 HIDES AND 2 PARTS OF 1 HIDE. Neither the name nor the situation has been discovered: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 350; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 321 note 40.
	RICHARD [* THE BUTLER *]. He is probably Reginald's butler; see 4,1,5 Richard note.
	VILLAGERS. Latin uill' could be extended to the accusative uillanos and be the object of h[abe]t in the line above, like the slaves. Compare 2,2 villagers note, 4,1,19 villagers note, 4,20,8 ploughmen note and 6,11 villagers note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	3 SMALLHOLDERS. The main scribe of Great Domesday corrected the number over an erasure; it is blurred because the parchment had not been properly re-prepared after the erasure.
	6 OXEN PLOUGHING. That is, 6 oxen actually at work, as also at 4,4,9 with 5 oxen. This corrects the 'ploughing oxen' of the Phillimore printed translation. The villagers had 5 oxen in 4,4,16 and there were only 3 oxen on the holding at Buttery, 4,14,17. There were normally reckoned to be 8 oxen to a plough-team, but there is evidence for smaller teams in the south-west; see Lennard, 'Domesday Plough-Teams'; Lennard, 'Domesday caruca'; Finberg, 'Domesday Plough team'; DEV 3,37 oxen note. In Herefordshire there is evidence that, at least on the king's lordship land, a plough-team of 6 oxen was the norm; HEF 1,50 oxen note.
	1 ½ PLOUGHS WOULD BE POSSIBLE THERE. This sentence was probably added in the space left after the value statement, as it is misplaced and extends well into the right margin. However, similar statements are misplaced in a number of other entries and there is no indication that they were added there (1,8. 3c,8. 4,1,5 (Richard the butler's subholding). 4,1,23;27. 4,3,25. 4,4,3;10. 4,8,5). The singular posset is used here after '1 ½' as on many other occasions in Great Domesday (see, for example, 4,14,18), though not invariably (see, for example, 4,26,3 with the 1½ hides claimed).
4,3,30	LEEGOMERY. This was formerly a township of Wellington Ancient Parish, but is now in Hadley Civil Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Unusually Reginald's 1086 lordship does not survive to pass to the Fitz Alans after the fall of Robert of Bellême; the manor appears to have lapsed to the Crown and was first held by a family named Cambrai (who gave their name to the manor) then by one called Tuchet. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, John Mansel holds 4 hides in Lega Cu'brey from the fee of Robert Thocet; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 156, v. no. 515, ix. no. 250. These 4 hides will have been composed of three from Leegomery itself (which had a number of members) and one from Dawley Parva (4,3,28) which became part of the manor. The members are given in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219, as Parva Dalileye (Dawley Parva: 4,3,28), Malineleye (Malins Lee Hall SJ69090 and Watmundeshale (Wappenshall SJ6614); the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112, adds Ketley (Ketley SJ6710); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 339; VCH Shropshire, xi. pp. 219, 267.
	THORTH [* OF WROXETER *]. On his name, see 4,3,14 Thorth note and, on his possible identification, see 4,3,26 Thorth note.
	3 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about four letters after iii hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
4,3,31	REGINALD. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote his name over an erasure; there is an erased memo in the centre margin next to it. On these marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
	RODINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086; later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The overlordship passed to Fitz Alan and it is clear from Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a,b, that the 4 hides of Rodington consisted of 1 ½ hides at Rodinton' itself held by four people from John Fitz Alan, 1 hide at Suggedon' (Sugdon SJ6014) and l ½ hides at Rodene (Roden SJ5716; see 4,1,25 Donington note) held by Thomas de Le and then considered to be a member of Stanton' (Stanton-upon-Hine-Heath; see 4,3,3 Stanton note). Four men held Rodinton and half of Suggedon (see 4,11,18 Isombridge note) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220 (see Book of Fees, p. 962; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237), while in Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971, Stephen de Stanton' holds Stanton', Rodene and Preston' (Preston SJ5211; see 4,3,3 Stanton note and 4,3,24 Upton note) from the barony of John Fitz Alan. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219, these are Preston, Standon, Rodene and Rodenehurst (Rodenhurst SJ5815); see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236. On Rodington, see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 91; on Rodenhurst Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 361; on Sugdon, see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194, v. no. 611. On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 373.
	THORTH [* OF WROXETER *]. On his name, see 4,3,14 Thorth note and, on his possible identification, see 4,3,26 Thorth note.
	4 HIDES AND 1 VIRGATE [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after uirg'; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining two-thirds of a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,32	IN "MERSET" HUNDRED. Halston and the other estates listed by Domesday as far as 4,3,42, including the two Welsh areas, had passed from the county by the thirteenth century and into the Fitz Alan lordship of Oswestry or its associated lordships. With the exception of the Welsh areas they only returned to the county in 1536 at the dissolution of the Marcher lordships; see {Introduction: County Boundary}and {Introduction: Hundreds}. They are thus absent from the usual English records of the period. Several are, however, included in the Inquisition Post Mortem of John Fitz Alan (Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812) and in the Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III (AD 1268-1272), pp. 509-11, where they form part of the Waleschyria de Blancmustir ('the Welshry of Oswestry'); see also Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, pp. 66-74; Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. no. 235 (= Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, (old series) iii. pp. 222-23); and 4,1,11 Oswestry note.
	HALSTON. This lay in Wittington Ancient Parish. A preceptory for the Hospitalers was established here between 1165 and 1187; see VCH Shropshire, ii. p. 87; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 380; and 4,27,31 Halston note.
	IN THE ORDNANCE SURVEY FACSIMILE there are three red blotches between the second and third lines of this entry; they are not in the manuscript or in the Alecto facsimile. They must be blots made when the red ink was applied to the Ordnance Survey facsimile as a separate exercise (the photozincographic process only reproduced the dark brown ink of the main text initially).
4,3,33	WESTON [RHYN]. This formerly lay in St Martin's (Llanfarthyn) Ancient Parish, the parish name being from a Chapel of Oswestry, itself part of Maesbury (4,1,11) in 1086, that was founded near here (at SJ3236). Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 309, takes the view that Weston is the 'west tūn' in relation to St Martin's; it is also west of Ellesmere, but the early relationship of Ellesmere to Maesbury (if any) is unknown. Weston Rhyn is now a Civil Parish in its own right. Weston is mentioned among the members of Oswestry in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812 (of John Fitz Alan); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 90; Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III (AD 1268-1272), p. 509; Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, p. 69; the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 284, 285); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 361.
4,3,34	MORTON AND "AITONE". Aitone cannot be identified or located; Morton was formerly a township of Oswestry Ancient Parish, but is now its own Civil Parish. It is later held of the fee of Knockin, that is of Lestrange of Ness under Fitz Alan; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem (old series), iii. p. 223 (see 4,3,43 Osbaston note), (new series) iv. no. 90 (where Morton pays rent and customs to the Earl of Arundel); Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, p. 70; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 364.
		The Grid Reference (SJ2924) is for Morton itself. Morton Farm and Morton Common lie in the same grid square; Morton Hall and Lower Morton are at SJ3023.
	A SMALL TRACT OF [WILD] WOODLAND. Latin parua landa siluae; landa is 'untilled land', 'heathland', the opposite of the equally rare (in Domesday) phrase cultura terrae ('one piece of ploughland'), which is only found in LIN CN,4. SUR 14,1 and (without terrae) in CHS R2,2. Compare 4,1,4 wood note.
4,3,35	MAESBROOK. This is now a Civil Parish; it was formerly a township of Kinnerley Ancient Parish. It was held by Lestrange under Fitz Alan; see 4,3,43 Osbaston note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 377.
	2 HIDES. There is no dot after hidę, half of which is written in the margin; the main scribe of Great Domesday probably intended to write even further into the margin when he had discovered whether the hides paid tax or not. He probably meant the margin to be used also in 4,3,50;52-54. 4,11,14. 4,28,6, and possibly in 4,5,2 (but see 4,5,2 hides note), as he did not put a dot after the hidage there either. On the spaces he left after the hidage for the taxability to be added, see 1,5 pay note.
	HE PAYS 5s. Although redd' v solid' could be translated 'It (i.e. the manor) pays 5s', this is unlikely in view of the redd[un]t in the next three entries clearly referring to the Welshmen: they seem to have 'farmed' these manors (see 3d,5 revenue note on this practice).
4,3,36	'TIBETONE'. Although unlocated, this place survived into the Middle Ages and is counted as a member of Oswestry in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812 (of John Fitz Alan). In the Fitz Alan Surveys, Tyletoun (perhaps not the same place) is identified in the index with Llwyntidmon (SJ2920) although the grounds for this are unclear (Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, pp. 71, 177). Lontudemon certainly appears in a list of lands, rents and customs due to Oswestry in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 90 of Richard Earl of Arundel. Both in the Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, and the Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III (AD 1268-1272), p. 509, Tibeton' is associated with Treveltholvel and Blodowauhan (Treprenal SJ2821 and Blodwel SJ2622).
	LIKE MANY OTHERS. There is no dot after alia and the remainder of the line (room for about 15 letters) is blank; it is unlikely, however, that the main scribe of Great Domesday intended to add their names.
4,3,37	MELVERLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It was held under Fitz Alan by Lestrange of Knockin; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 264, where Milverlegh is held by John Lestrange from Edmund, Earl of Arundel; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 377.
4,3,38	WESTON [COTON]. The Domesday form is Westune. It lay in the Ancient Parish of Oswestry. There are two adjacent places, once separate estates but now combined, Weston and Weston Coton, representing the Weston and Cotun of Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812 (of John Fitz Alan); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 90; Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III (AD 1268-1272), p. 509; Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, pp. 65, 72; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 360. Cotton is one mile north of Weston: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 308.
	WELSHMEN. Domesday Waleis here (and also in 4,3,39-40. 4,20,5. 4,20,8 sub-holding and 4,27,4;25) is apparently an error for Walenses, used elsewhere: at some stage in the Domesday process an abbreviation overline has been lost and the result misread as Waleis (the normal abbreviation for Walenses would probably be Wal'ses, in line with burg'ses for burgenses).
	THEY WERE WASTE. Domesday has wasta fuer[unt], the wasta agreeing with an understood maneria, that is the manors of 4,3,37-38.
4,3,39	WOOTTON. This was a township of Oswestry Ancient Parish. The Robert who held under Reginald was probably Robert the butler since Wodeto' with Asto' (Aston: 4,6,6) and Hydeslont (Hisland; 4,6,6 Aston note) are said in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b, to belong to the honour of Montgomery (to which Robert's lands descend), though taken from Chirbury Hundred by John Fitz Alan (see 4,6,6 Aston note). Clearly Wootton belonged to his barony and all three places together with Twyford and Bromehurst (4,6,6 Aston note) are counted among knights' fees in the Inquisition of John Fitz Alan: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 7; Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, pp. 68, 74.
		The Grid Reference (SJ3327) is to Wootton, Wootton House and Wootton Fields. Wootton Farm and Wootton Castle are at SJ3427.
	ROBERT [* THE BUTLER *]. Apparently Robert the butler, because of the descent of the estate; see 4,3,39 Wootton note. Robert was Earl Roger's butler, not Reginald's, and held a small sub-fief of his own (SHR 4,6).
	2 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about four letters after ii hidę.; see 1,5 hide note.
	WELSHMEN. See 4,3,38 Welshmen note.
4,3,40	WOOLSTON. Domesday Osuluestune. This lay in West Felton Ancient Parish. Osselton is among knights' fees held from John Fitz Alan in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, where it is coupled with Samford (Sandford SJ3423); see Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, p. 73; Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. no. 235 p. 112; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 321. Half a virgate in Sonforde was given to Haughmond Abbey; see the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 462, 757, 1112-18); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 378.
	WELSHMEN. See 4,3,38 Welshmen note.
4,3,41	[WEST] FELTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It seems to have been held by Lestrange under Fitz Alan. A member was Teddesmere (Tedsmore SJ3625) which a tenant of Lestrange gave to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 141, 1201-1204); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 1. Richard, Earl of Arundel, had the advowson of the church of Felton according to Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. p. 112 no. 235. The 'West' distinguishes this place from Felton Butler (4,21,10).
4,3,42	2 DISTRICTS ... CYNLLAITH AND EDEYRNION. The Latin uses the imprecise term finis ('land, territory') where the Welsh 'commote' seems required, as at 4,1,13. Along with Nanheudwy (4,1,13) and Ial (4,2,1) these territories seem to have been occupied by Earl Roger (or by Reginald acting for him) as part of the Norman thrust into North Wales. They were presumably attached to the Hundred of "Merset" where Reginald was predominant, or to his castle of Oswestry (4,1,11). See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 46; Edwards, 'Normans and the Welsh March', p. 158; Lloyd, History of Wales, ii. p. 389; Lloyd, 'Wales and the Coming of the Normans', p. 160;
	COWS. See 4,20,8 for another example of animals being used as payment, and compare the render of a pig from a mill in Lydham (4,1,14).
4,3,43	[IN "MERSET" HUNDRED]. The head is supplied because of the identity and location of Osbaston and Kynaston. They lay in Kinnerley which itself is directly below a "Merset" hundred head at 4,27,4.
	OSBASTON AND KYNASTON. Both places were townships of Kinnerley Ancient Parish. They were held by Lestrange under Fitz Alan. One of the Lestrange family enfeoffed the Haughtons here and erected his castle of Knockin, perhaps in the mid-twelfth century; see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 426. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. (old series) p. 223 (= Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. no. 236) John Lestrange of Knockin is tenant of 2 knights' fees under Fitz Alan which included Northslepe (unidentified), Kynaston, Dovaston (Dovaston SJ3421), Maysbrok (Maesbrook: 4,3,35), Morton (Morton: 4,3,34), Knokyn (Knockin SJ3322) and Osbaston; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 187, v. no. 264; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 365.
	ALWY. The Domesday forms of the name-form Alwy - Aluui, Aluuius, Eluui, Aeluui(us) - could represent Old English Ælfwig, Old English Æthelwig or Old English Ealdwig: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 157-58, under Al-wig, and see also p. 142, under Al-. JRM followed von Feilitzen in keeping to the base form, but preferred the second element -wy for Old English -wig as it reflected the spelling in Domesday. Some of the people called Alwy in the present edition appear under Alfwy in the Phillimore printed translations. The Alecto edition has Alwig for those appearing under Al-wig. Some of those called Alwy in the present edition appear under Old English Æthelwig in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 189-90, followed by Alecto, but the Domesday forms (Ailwius, Ailuuin(us), Ailuin(us), Aelwi[us], Aeluuin[us], Aluui, Aluui[us], Aluuin(us) etc.) lack the medial -d- or -g- that JRM thought was necessary for inclusion under that name. On the confusion between the second elements -wig and -wine, see von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, § 148.
4,3,44	CARDINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. William Fitz Alan (I) gave Cardington, Enchmarsh (SO5096) and half of Chatwall (SO5097) to the Knights Templar who were established at the nearby Lydley (4,27,12 Lydley note). Thus in 1284 (Feudal Aids, iv. p. 225) the master of the Templars holds Carditon which is said to be a gift of Alan son of Ploc. This last name may be a mistaken representation of Flaad but he died too early to have granted lands to the Templars who reached England in the reign of Stephen. Cardynton belongs to the Templars in Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167b, but reverted to Fitz Alan on the suppression of the order c. 1311. Carditon is held by the Earl of Arundel in 1316: Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229.
		Half a hide was held by the Templars of Lidleg' in Chatewalle (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a), the other ½ hide there being held by William Fitz Alan de Draiton' from Gilbert de Buckenhull: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611. Chatwall had originally been part of the estaste at Plaish (4,8,12): VCH Shropshire, x. p. 29.
		A further part of Cardington was at Wiluriston (Willstone SO4995), where 2 hides were held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, by Peter de Muneton who did suit at the court of John Fitz Alan at Upton' sub Haemon' (Upton Magna: 4,3,24); see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 473. The Templars seem to have held Willstone briefly, withdrawing suit from the hundred court: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 100b. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 122; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 26. On the Templars here and at Lydley, see Lees, Records of the Templars in England, pp. cvi-cvii, cxi-cxiii, 26, 37-41.
4,3,45	[MUNSLOW] ASTON. Aston lay in Munslow Ancient Parish, and in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. Munslow itself would have been included in Aston in 1086. There must, however, be some uncertainty about the identification since it does not descend to Fitz Alan. Eyton suggested that as the caput of Munslow Hundred it may have been retained for a time by the Crown. It ultimately descended to the Hastings family: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, 2 hides in Munsel' (Munslow SO5288) and 2 hides in Aston' are held of the fee of Henry de Hastinges, while in the Book of Fees, p. 964, Henry de Hastenc holds Eston' and Mosselawe in chief from the king; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 223, 229, 245; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 129; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 55.
	ALMUND [* FATHER OF ALWARD *]. The Domesday forms of the name-form Almund - Elmund, Elmund[us], Almund, Almund[us], Aelmund - could represent either Old English Æthelmund or Old English Ealhmund: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 149, under Al-mund, and see also p. 142, under Al-. JRM followed von Feilitzen in keeping to the base form, as does the Alecto edition.
		This man was apparently the father of Alward; see 4,27,17 Almund note.
	8 ½ HIDES. Scribe B interlined 7 dimid', indicating its position in the text below with an insertion mark.
	MEASURES OF WHEAT. Domesday has mensuris frumenti. The measure is of uncertain size. The same word is used of salt (from Droitwich) in GLS 18,1. See 4,27,21 measures note and 5,8 measure note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining two-thirds of a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,46	CLUNGUNFORD. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. Domesday Clone has acquired the name of its T.R.E. holder Gunward as a termination. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, the 2 hides seem to be represented by 1 ½ hides in Sheldreton' (Shelderton SO4077) and ½ hide in Weho (Weo and View Edge SO4180, SO4280), held by Walter de Hopton' from John Fitz Alan; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 297; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 322 note 43; and 4,20,12 Hopton note; 4,20,24 Clungunford note.
	FULCO [* OF LE PIN *]. The Domesday forms of his name - Fulco, Fulcho - represent Old German Fulco, Folco: Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England, p. 98. Some of the people named Fulco in the present edition appear as Fulk in some of the Phillimore printed translations; these have now been standardized as Fulco. The Alecto edition has Fulk here.
		It is probable that all occurrences of Fulco in Shropshire refer to the same man; certainly a Fulco holds both parts of Clungunford (4,3,46. 4,20,24). He may be the Fulco de Pino mentioned by Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, iii. pp. 141-42; she calls him Fulk of Le Pin). Le Pin may be the place of that name in the French département of Calvados (arrondissement and canton Lisieux).
		Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 247, mentions a Fulco the sheriff, but as he has just mentioned a Fulcuius the sheriff (or under-sheriff) who was tenant of Withington and Little Wytheford (Fulcwy: 4,27,2-3), he may have confused the two: certainly the Fulco the sheriff 'whose existence is alleged by the Shrewsbury Cartulary', is Fulcoius (= Fulcwy), pace Rees, Cartulary of Shrewsbury Abbey, index, under Fulk, Fulco, the sheriff (all the cartulary references are to Fulcoius). Green, English Sheriffs, p. 72, also calls the person in the Shrewsbury Cartulary Fulk, but says he is only possibly to be identified with the Fulk of folio 259b (that is, Fulcwy of 4,27,2-3). Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 202, under Fulco with references apparently corresponding to 4,3,46. 4,20,20;24-25;27 (though she omits a second reference for folio 258b), correctly reports that Domesday 'carefully distinguishes' between the names Fulco (Fulco) and Fulcoius (see 4,27,2 Fulcwy note). However, she calls Fucoius a 'tenant of Rainald de Balliol, Roger's sheriff', when in fact he held directly from Earl Roger, an error she repeats on p. 203, under Fulcuius (where her folio references are to 4,27,2-3). She mentions (p. 202) that Fulco may be identifiable with the sheriff Fulk, and refers to Green, English Sheriffs, p. 72 (see above). On p. 203, however, she rejects the identification that Fulcuius (not Fulco) was an under-sheriff (reference to Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 247). It would thus seem that Earl Roger's sheriff (or under-sheriff) was called Fulcoius (Fulcwy) and that he was the tenant of that name in 4,27,2-3, but that he was a separate person from the Fulco in the present entry and in 4,20,20;24-25;27.
	GUNNVARTH. The Domesday forms of this name - Gunuuard[us], Gunuuar - represent Old Norse Gunnvarthr: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 278. JRM did not include the final -r in his rendering of Old Norse names. The Phillimore printed edition has Gunward for the only three occurrences of this name in Domesday (here, in 4,20,24 and in 6,23). The Alecto edition has Gunnvarthr.
		According to von Feilitzen (ibidem, p. 278 note 3) his name survived in Clungunford, which he had held here and in 4,20,24. He is probably the same person as the Gunnvarth in 6,23.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the hedged enclosures detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,47	STREFFORD. This lay in Wistanstow Ancient Parish. It was in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. It descended to the Fitz Alans and was held under them by a family called English. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a (1255), John Fitz Alan holds Strefford and Marhse, 3 ½ hides, for the heir of Hugh Anglicus. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223, Hugh le Engleys holds Mersse and Schereford from Richard son of Alan. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229, Marsh is coupled with Scotus Acton (Acton Scott: 4,27,33) and Foldhampton (Felhampton SO4487; see 9,1 Wistanstow note), all held by the Earl of Arundel; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 366; and 4,20,4 Clunbury note. The increase in the hidage between 1086 and 1255 is accounted for by the fact that Marhse or Mersse (Marsh farm SO4488) had originally been part of Wistanstow (9,1) which had been alienated from the church of St Alkmund and dismembered.
	AZO [* BIGOT *]. See 4,3,7 Azo note.
	ALMUND [* FATHER OF ALWARD *]. See 4,3,45 Almund note.
4,3,48	HENLEY. This lay in Bitterley Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Overs' Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. From the Fitz Alan barony, it passed to that of de Lacy (4,8 Roger note). In the Book of Fees, pp. 964, 972, Philip de Clinton holds half a fee in Hennele from the barony of Walter de Lasey; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 224, 245; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 54, vii. no. 710; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 374.
	ROGER [* OF LACY *]. In view of the descent of Henley (4,3,48 Henley note) it is likely that Roger here is Roger of Lacy: Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 9.
	ALMUND [* FATHER OF ALWARD *]. See 4,3,45 Almund note.
4,3,49	[ENGLISH] FRANKTON. It now lies in Cockshutt Civil Parish, but was formerly in Ellesmere Ancient Parish of which Cockshutt was a chapelry.. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086 and was later in Pimhill Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a, Richard de Franketon' holds 2 hides in Franketon' of the fee of John Fitz Alan. Richard appears to have been the successor to Eynon FitzOwein who held in Book of Fees, pp. 962, 970, from the Fitz Alan barony; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236; Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 106; and 4,1,18 Loppington note.
		Welsh Frankton is at SJ3633 between Whittington and Ellesmere.
	ALDGYTH <OF WELSHAMPTON>. The Domesday forms of this name - Alded here, elsewhere Aeldiet, Aeldit, Aeldid, Eldit, Eldid, Aldgid, Aldiet, Aldid(a), Aldeda, Aldi - represent the feminine Old English Ealdgyth: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 240-41. JRM preferred the first element Ald- for Old English Eald-, as it reflected the spelling in the Domesday forms. However, the name-form Aldith appears in several Phillimore printed translations, as also do Alded and Aldgeat; these have all now been standardized as Aldgyth. The Alecto edition has Ealdgyth. Von Feilitzen states that all the Shropshire entries refer to the same tenant (ibidem, p. 240 note 5). Welshampton was one of the estates held by Aldgyth.
		Von Feilitzen's attribution to one individual is presumably based upon the tight clustering of these estates, which makes the identification probable. It is tempting to connect this Aldgyth with Aldgyth, daughter of Earl Algar, widow of King Gruffydd, and wife of King Harold Godwinson; see WOR 19,13 Aldgyth note (JP).
4,3,50	SHRAWARDINE. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086 and was later in Pimhill Hundred. A castle was built here, probably in the time of Henry I, and it became an important centre of the Fitz Alan barony, receiving rents from a number of manors and the service of guarding the castle from a number of Fitz Alan tenants. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a, John Fitz Alan holds 1 ½ hides from the king in Sciewardin', a member of his barony of Oswestry; see the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 119; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, iv. no. 90; Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III (AD 1268-1272), p. 506; Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, p. 81; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 94.
		Edenestone (Ensdon SJ4016) was a member: Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215. The tithes of Shrawardine were given to Shrewsbury Abbey soon after 1086 by Reginald and by Hugh, son of his predecessor Warin: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 33, 38, 41, 43, etc.).
	2 HIDES [***]. In the manuscript there is no dot after hidę which extends right up to the side ruling, so the main scribe of Great Domesday probably intended the margin to be used when it was found out whether the hides paid tax; see 4,3,35 hides note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,51	ALBRIGHT [HUSSEY]. Albright Hussey was formerly divided between the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Alkmund and Albrighton, a chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary. It is now in Albrighton parish; see 4,3,71 Albrighton note. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. The Domesday forms Abretone, Etbretone are variants of the same name (which is the same as Albrighton: 4,3,71) and Siward held both in 1086. One of the holdings seems to be represented in later times by Albright Hussey, one by Harlescott (SJ5015). Only Harlauwecote is represented in the Rotuli Hundredorum (ii. p. 75b) where 2 hides are held by Margery de Lacy of the fee of John Fitz Alan; but the Pimhill Hundred Roll (p. 120) includes not only these 2 hides (at Harliscote held by John Hussey), but 1 hide held by the same man in Adbrighton; see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 970; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 230, 235; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 80.
		With Albrighton (4,3,71), and Albrightlee (3g,7) Albright Hussey (4,3,51;57) had probably once formed a single land-unit: Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 9.
		The battle of Shrewsbury (1403) was commemorated by the foundation of a collegiate church by the rector of Albright Hussey. The church replaced the chapel of Albright Hussey and became the centre of the Ancient Parish of Battlefield; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 32.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	VALUE ... 15s. There is a small dot after solid' in the manuscript which is not reproduced in the Ordnance Survey facsimile, but is just visible in the Alecto facsimile. See 3f,7 plough note.
4,3,52	[LITTLE] NESS. This was a chapelry and township of Baschurch Ancient Parish, and since 1866 has been a distinct Civil Parish. It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. Little Ness was kept by the Fitz Alans in demesne. Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a, records John Fitz Alan holding 3 hides in Nesse from the king in chief; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 119; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 101; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 221. Various parts of the manor including Adcote (SJ4119) were given to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 8-14); Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 113-14. The tithes of Ness and Shrawardine were given by Reginald and Hugh son of Warin to Shrewsbury Abbey soon after 1086: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 7, 8, 33, 38, 41, etc.).
		The main scribe of Great Domesday failed to rubricate NESSE; for other such failures, see 4,3,8 St Peter note.
	3 HIDES [***]. See 4,3,35 hides note.
	MILL AT 20s AND 600 EELS. The eels came from the mill-pond. Eels are a common render from mills mentioned in Domesday. They are recorded in Shropshire also at 4,11,2 and, again combined with a money render, at 6,11 and 4,19,2. At the latter they are linked with 2 fisheries, so the eels may have come from there; see also OXF 7,32;37 'From a mill and a fishery 15s 6d and 175 eels'. See 1,7 mill note.
		This mill may have been at Muleford (Milford SJ4120); see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 91.
4,3,53	MYDDLE. This was an Ancient Parish. The place lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. The core of the manor, consisting of 5 hides, was held in the thirteenth century by Lestrange under Fitz Alan. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a, John Extraneus holds 5 hides in Mudle from the fee of John Fitz Alan, with service at Oswestry; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 230, 235; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 264. In Book of Fees, p. 971, Mudle is held with Excalewe (Childs Ercall: 4,3,23) of the Fitz Alan barony.	
		A further 1 ½ hides of the vill were at Balderton (SJ4823) and Sleap Parva (SJ4826, in Wem; see 4,14,26 Sleap note) held directly from John Fitz Alan by the Hussey family (on whom, see 4,3,51 Albright note). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, Henry Hesee holds 1 hide in Baldreton' and ½ hide in Sclepe, a fee of Thomas Hesee, with service at Oswestry (see the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120). The remainder of the Domesday vill was progressively given to churches, including ½ virgate of Webblescowe (Webscott SJ4722) to Haughmond Abbey by John Lestrange and 1 virgate to the church of Lilleshall by the same man: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 139-40, 164, 772, 778, 1287-88); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 65.
		The church and tithes of Mutla had already been given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Warin the sheriff, or Hugh his son, before 1086: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 6, 33, 38, 41, 298); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 247b.
		The main scribe of Great Domesday failed to rubricate MULLEHT; for other such failures, see 4,3,8 St Peter note.
	8 HIDES [***]. See 4,3,35 hides note.
4,3,54	WELSHAMPTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a, Hauton', 2 ½ hides, is held by Thomas de Roshale (named from Rossall: 4,3,56) from the fee of John Fitz Alan, while in the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120, Roger Extraneus holds Hampton from John Fitz Alan; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 92.
		One hide at Broom had apparently been removed from this manor and was the subject of a dispute among Earl Roger's men: 4,26,2.
	ALDGYTH <OF WELSHAMPTON>. See 4,3,49 Aldgyth note.
	3 HIDES [***]. See 4,3,35 hides note.
	ALBERT [* GRELLEY *]. See 4,3,5 Albert note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,55	YEATON. It lay in Baschurch Ancient Parish, and was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. Domesday Aitone was considered by Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 86, to be The Isle, but left unidentified in VCH Shropshire, i. p. 323 (see note 44). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, Rossall (4,3,56 Rossall note) is counted as 3 hides which seems to represent the combined total of Rossall and Aitone which have the same 1086 holders; moreover, Eton is a member of Rossall in the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120, and Rosshale, Eton and Yakedon ('Yagdons': 4,27,28) appear together in an Inquisition of Thomas de Rossall (Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 243). Eyton himself may have thought that Aitone was from Old English Eg-tun ('tun on an island'), which is the root of some places called 'Eyton' (such as Eyton upon Severn, and Eyton-upon-the-Weald-Moors) and thus identified it with The Isle which is close to Rossall. But Aitone is from Old English Ea tun ('tun on the river [Perry]'). The derivation of Yeaton from Aitone is accepted by Ekwall, Dictionary of English Place-Names, and by Place-names of Shropshire, i. p. 333. The identification seems to have been first proposed by Mr Humphrey Sandford and reported in the edition of Lay Subsidy Roll, Shropshire, (1327), Pimhill Hundred, p. 76.
	ALBERT [* GRELLEY *]. See 4,3,5 Albert note.
	2 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about four letters after ii hidę.; see 1,5 hide note.
	AND 3 SMALLHOLDERS. In the manuscript there is a pale ink smudge to the right of the 7 and in the Ordnance Survey facsimile the number of smallholders could be taken as vii, though in fact it is clearly iii in the manuscript, as it is in the Alecto facsimile.
4,3,56	ROSSALL. This was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now in Bicton which itself was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad and is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086 and later, as expected, in Pimhill Hundred, being held under the Fitz Alan barony by a family named from the place. In Book of Fees, pp. 962, 970, Thomas de Roshale holds Roshale with appurtenances from Fitz Alan; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 231, 235; Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 251. A member is named as Eton (Yeaton: 4,3,55 Yeaton note) in the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120, and Roshale, a fee of John Fitz Alan with service at Oswestry, is said to be 3 hides in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b. This suggests that Yeaton (2 hides) and Rossall were combined into a single manor after 1086; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 86.
	ALBERT [* GRELLEY *]. See 4,3,5 Albert note.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. Hunni here, and Huninc, Huning, Hunnit, Hunni, Hunnith, Hunnic and Huni elsewhere in Domesday Shropshire, represent Old English Hunning; see von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 296, for the reasons for the varying forms. Compare 4,17,1 Bruning note and 4,18,1 Dunning note on the Domesday forms of these names.
		The name Hunning is rare and all the Shropshire occurrences (4,3,56. 4,4,1-2. 4,19,6;9-11. 4,20,15-16. 4,26,4. 4,27,8;27. 6,7) probably refer to the same individual. His large T.R.E. holding (some with his brother Wulfgeat) had been much reduced by 1086; see Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 90; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 276.
	1 HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about four letters after i hida.; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,57	ALBRIGHT [HUSSEY]. See 4,3,51 Albright note.
	HERBERT [* THE LATINIST *]. This man was probably Herbert grammaticus, one of the three principal clerks of Earl Roger: Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. p. 262); Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 253; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 250.
	2 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after ii hidę; see 1,5 hide note. The number seems to have been corrected from i to ii, probably immediately; he interlined e (for du[a]e) to emphasize this.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,58	HADNALL. This was a chapelry of Myddle Ancient Parish and is now a Civil Parish. In 1086 it lay in Baschurch Hundred; later it was in Pimhill Hundred. In the thirteenth century it was held by the Bannister family under Fitz Alan: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, William Banastre holds 4 hides in Hadenhal' of the fee of John Fitz Alan, with service at Oswestry; Hadenhale Parva is held by William Banastre in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230. Hadnall contained several members which Book of Fees, p. 970, gives as Hadenhal', Hauston' (Haston SJ5120), Swetton' (Shotton SJ4922) and Smethecot (Smethcote SJ5020); see Book of Fees, p. 962; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235. It also contained Herdewyke (Hardwicke Grange SJ5121) which was given with another part of Hadnall to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 7, 21, 34, 211, 308, 351-52, 354-55, 358-59, 361-62, 365-408, 515, 520, 528-36, 658, 685, 1071-73, 1101, appendix A. i.); Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 192, 193; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 44.
	GODWIN HELD IT. This was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure; there is an erased memo in the outer margin next to it. On these marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,59	ACTON [REYNALD]. This place lay in Shawbury Ancient Parish. Acton was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. The affix appears to derive from a family surnamed de Acton, three of whom had the forename Reyner. The early forms rule out a connection with Reginald of Bailleul, the 1086 holder; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 5. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii.p. 75a, Thomas Bot'el holds 3 hides in Acton Reyn' of the fee of John Fitz Alan, with service at Oswestry. The Pimhill Hundred Roll (p. 120) more accurately describes it as held by de Acton under de Stanton (from Stanton-upon-Hine-Heath: 4,3,3) under Fitz Alan: Roger de Acton holds Acton as a fee of Staunton, with service at Oswestry. In later times at least Acton contained Grineleshul' (part of Grinshill SJ5223; see 4,16,1 Grinshill note) according to the Book of Fees, pp. 962, 970: see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 192; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 231, 235; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 61.
		Land at Actune was left to Burton Abbey c. 1003 in the will of Wulfric Spot: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536). The county in which Actune lay, and its exact identity, are uncertain, although the partially geographical arrangement of the will suggests that the place lay in Shropshire. In none of the three Actons in Shropshire that were Domesday manors is there any trace of any connection with Burton Abbey: Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxxi and no. 29. Early Charters of the West Midlands does not mention the possibility that this Actune was Acton Reynald, but the identification is no more of less likely than with the other Actons in Shropshire.
	RICHARD [* THE BUTLER *]. He is probably Reginald's butler: 4,1,5 Richard note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,60	ASTON [EYRE]. This was a formerly a chapelry and township of Morville Ancient Parish. In 1086 it was in "Alnodestreu" Hundred, later in Stottesdon Hundred. The overlordship went to Fitz Alan while descent from Alchere was to Fitz Ayer as at 4,3,4;65. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b, John filius Cleri (i.e. Aeri) holds 2 hides in Whetene Aston (presumably a confusion of two Astons since Wheaton Aston is in Staffordshire) from John Fitz Alan; it is Aston Aer in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 218. See Book of Fees, pp. 963, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 231, 242; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 115, v. no. 470, ix. no. 459; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 199.
	ALCHERE <OF LE PIN>. See 4,3,4 Alchere note.
	SAXI. The Domesday forms of this name - Saxi, Sexi, Saxo, Sexi[us], Sessi, Sacxe, with the oblique forms Saxa, Saxae, Saxo, Saxonis - represent Old Norse/Old Danish Saxi: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 352. The Alecto edition has Saxi.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,61	EUDON [BURNELL]. This holding was at Eudon Burnell which like Eudon George (4,11,5) lay in Chetton Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b, Auger de Eudon' holds ½ hide from John Fitz Alan in Eudon' Maleseveres. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 217, the holder of Eudon is Hugh Burnel; see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 242; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 185; Purton, 'Manors of Eudon Burnell and Eudon George'.
		The small hidage given in 1255 by comparison with 2 hides in Domesday may in part be accounted for by the removal of Criddon (SO6691). This is the Breddon' of Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a, and the Criddone held by Alina, daughter of Ayer, in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 242; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 191.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. He was apparently the son of Almund: see 4,27,17 Almund note.
	2 HIDES. The parchment of the manuscript is yellow and transparent here, though the words are clear; in the Ordnance Survey facsimile the hidage is very blurred and in the Alecto facsimile the second minim of ii resembles an l.
	WOODLAND, 60 PIGS. The main scribe of Great Domesday added this detail in the space he normally left between the resources and the value, but it proved too small and he had to interline part of porc' after erasing the top of the V of Valuit to make room for it. He had jotted down in the outer margin what he had to add: silu … porc' can just be made out, though erased. It is not reproduced in the Ordnance Survey facsimile, though a small part of it is visible in the Alecto facsimile; Farley did not print it of course. On these marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
	THE VALUE WAS. In the manuscript Valuit, although the top of the V was erased (see 4,3,61 woodland note); Farley misprinted valuit.
	40s. This was corrected by the main scribe of Great Domesday.
4,3,62	HATTON?. The Domesday form is Etone. A second entry for Etone is 4,23,17 which was likewise held before 1066 by Thorgot who also held Cosford and Bishton close by (4,11,10. 4,25,7). The evidence is in favour of the Domesday vill's being Hatton, now in Shifnal Ancient Parish; thus an aspirate appears to be missing from its form here: Domesday Hetune (4,3,2) becomes (High) Hatton. Etone was in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and Hatton was later in Brimstree Hundred, its expected successor; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 145.
		The present entry is incomplete, but although it was probably part of the same Etone, it is unlikely to be a duplicate entry, since the later extent of Hatton is 1 hide, made up of these two holdings of ½ hide. Even so, this present entry may be entered in the wrong fief in Domesday, there being no later trace of a Fitz Alan holding in Hatton.
		Both halves went successively to Buildwas Abbey. One half of Hettune was given by Adam de Hetune and Reginald his son: Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 359 no. xvi. The other half (probably the holding of 4,23,17) is represented in Book of Fees, p. 147, by Hatton, an escheat of Gerard de Thorny (4,23 Gerard note) held by Robert Trainell': the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 453). This was held by serjeanty with service at Shrawardine (4,3,50). In Book of Fees, p. 383 (see also p. 346), Robert Traynel holds ½ hide in Henton' (i.e. Heton') in Brimstree Hundred. This portion of Hatton also went to Buildwas Abbey (Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 358 no. xiii) which was holding the whole manor of Hatton at the Dissolution; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 191. In Book of Fees, p. 1285 the Abbot of Buildwas holds 2 carucates in Soldehatton' (presumably a confusion with Cold Hatton: 4,23,8). On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 167.
	[VALUE ***]. See 4,3,62 Hatton note.
4,3,63	UPTON [CRESSETT]. The Domesday form is Vltone. If this is an error for Vptone this place was probably Upton Cressett, which was an Ancient Parish; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 296. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b, Thomas de Upton' holds 3 ½ hides in Upton' from John Fitz Alan. It is Opton' in Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971, and Feudal Aids, iv. p. 242, and Hopton in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 217, Upton in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 231: see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 138.
	ALMUND [* FATHER OF ALWARD *]. See 4,3,45 Almund note.
	1 FREE PLOUGHMAN. See 1,8 ploughmen note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,64	GLAZELEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. The overlordship went to the Fitz Alans and under them Lestrange was successor to Azo [* Bigot *] as in the cases of Abdon, Berrington and Longnor (4,3,7;14-15). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b, Alan de Perepunt holds 1 hide from John Extraneus in Glazeley; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 218, 231. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 113, it is held of the manor of Ruytone (Ruyton-Eleven-Towns: 4,18,2) which belongs to John Lestraunge of Knockin (4,3,43 Osbaston note). See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 210.
	AZO [* BIGOT *]. See 4,3,7 Azo note.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. He was apparently the son of Almund; see 4,27,17 Almund note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,65	MIDDLETON [SCRIVEN]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. The 1086 division continues into later times, Alchere's portion going to Fitz Ayer and Albert's to de Rossall. Thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b, Geoffrey de Breddon' and Hamo de Middelton' hold 2 hides in Middelton', Geoffrey holding 1 hide from John filius Cleri (i.e. Aeri) and Hamo 1 hide from Thomas de Rossale; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 218, 231; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 194.
	ALCHERE <OF LE PIN>. See 4,3,4 Alchere note.
	ALBERT [* GRELLEY *]. See 4,3,5 Albert note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	THEY WERE WASTE. Latin wasta fuer[unt]; it is not absolutely clear to what the plural refers, though it is most likely to be the two manors that existed before 1066, wasta agreeing with an understood maneria. In 4,3,38 in an almost identical phrase it refers to the preceding manor, but a T.R.E. value for 4,3,64 has already been given, so this is unlikely. In 4,5,2 wastae ... fuer[unt] refers to the 2 hides there and this could be the meaning here and the scribe could merely have written wasta for wastae.
4,3,66	ASTON [BOTTERELL]. This was an Ancient Parish. The place was in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b, Thomas Boterell' holds 3 hides in Aston Boterell' from John Fitz Alan; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 231, 242; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 222. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 218, the members of Haston are given as Necton (Norton?; see 4,3,69), Forde (The Ford SO6584), Heywode (Heywood SO6282) and Toteneye (unidentified). The additional 2 hides in the Rotuli Hundredorum total are probably accounted for by Norton (4,3,69) which merged with Aston.
4,3,67	'FOUSWARDINE'. This is now an abandoned site in Sidbury Civil Parish, the successor to the Ancient Parish of that name. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred, being held by the Constantine family under Fitz Alan: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a, Roger de Costentin is the holder of ½ hide in Fuleswrth from Thomas de Costentin; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 218; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 137. The place survived to be recorded on nineteenth-century maps. It is 'Fouswardine' on the first edition Ordnance Survey map (sheet 61 of 1833, reprint sheet 41 of 1970); 'Fouswardine Coppice' on the 6-inch map (no. 66 NW) of 1891.
	RALPH [* OF COSTENTIN *]. According to Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 345, all his holdings passed to the de Costentin family; they are named from the Cotentin peninsular in Normandy. On the descents of his holdings here, see 4,3,67 'Fouswardine' note, 4,3,68 Oldbury note and 4,6,3 Petton note.
	ALMUND [*FATHER OF ALWARD *]. See 4,3,45 Almund note.
4,3,68	OLDBURY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. As at 'Fouswardine' (4,3,67) and at Eaton Constantine (4,3,21) descent was from Ralph to de Constantine. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b, Thomas de Costentyn holds l ½ hides in Aldebyr' from John Fitz Alan; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 231, 242; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 102; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 131; Purton, 'Manor of Oldbury'.
		It is possible that the borough of Bridgnorth was contructed partly on the land of Oldbury, though it was more likely built on Earl Roger's lordship land of Morville (by his son Robert). A Danish and an English burh were built at Bridgnorth in the late ninth and early tenth centuries, but there is no evidence to connect them with the fortification that named Oldbury, though the matter needs investigation; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 226; and 4,1,5 Morville note.
	RALPH [* OF COSTENTIN *]. See 4,3,67 Ralph note.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. He was apparently the son of Almund; see 4,27,17 Almund note.
4,3,69	NORTON. It was in the Ancient Parish of Aston Botterell and it lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. The 2 hides of Norton probably merged with Aston to produce a 3-hide manor: 4,3,66 Aston note.
	THORTH [* OF WROXETER *]. On his name, see 4,3,14 Thorth note and, on his possible identification, see 4,3,26 Thorth note.
4,3,70	DETTON. Domesday Dodintone is probably the place that lay in the Ancient Parish of Neen Savage. If so, it was in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. It is held in the thirteenth century under Fitz Alan by a family named from the place. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 8lb, Roger de Pynelesdon', guardian of the son and heir of John de Dodyton', holds 1 hide in Dodyton' from John Fitz Alan; see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 217, 231, 242; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 281.
		The identification is probable but not certain, since insufficient forms of the name have been found to trace the evolution of Dodintone to Detton when it might have been expected to yield Dod(d)ington or Ditton; see Ditton Priors (Dodintone) 4,1,26 and Earls Ditton (Dodentone) 6,4 and 7,2, and Dodington (Dodetune) 4,7,4. A possible identification might be Doddington (SO6176) now a parish, but formerly a detached part of Cleobury Mortimer. Against this it can be urged (1) that, whereas Detton was in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, all the places adjacent to Doddington - Coreley, Hints, Cleeton St Mary - lying west of the Mill Brook, were in 'Overs' Hundred (the enlarged successor to the Domesday 'Overs' Hundred in the Middle Ages); (2) Robert de Dodinton whose family holds this manor of Dodyton/Dodynton in the thirteenth century occupied land in Bardley (SO6980) which is close to Detton: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. pp. 179, 183. The identification with Detton is accepted by the Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 106: the first citation of the form Detton is from 1576.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. He was apparently the son of Almund; see 4,27,17 Almund note.
	AS 2 MANORS. This was interlined by the main scribe of Great Domesday, the descender of the p acting as an insertion sign.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank three-quarters of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,3,71	THIS ENTRY was a later addition by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the space he had left at the end of this sub-chapter; he used a different pen and a paler ink to the preceding entries. He had probably originally omitted this entry for land in Baschurch Hundred (which he had already listed on folio 255a,b: 4,3,49-59) because he was unsure where to place it, as it lacked a 1086 tenant. He no doubt found the entry during a check and decided to include it here because of its link with Reginald through his predecessor Warin, though it should really have been put with Shrewsbury Abbey's lands on folio 252c (see 4,3,71 Albrighton note).
	ALCHERE <OF LE PIN>. See 4,3,4 Alchere note.
	ALBRIGHTON. This estate was formerly a chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary and was once called Monks Albrighton. It is now a Civil Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. There is no mention in the entry, which was a late addition (see 4,3,71 entry note, of a 1086 holder. It had in fact already been given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Alchere: Henry I's confirmation says Alherius ... Eadburtonam: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 33; see pp. xiv, xix, 6, 38, 41 etc.). It should thus have been included on folio 252c with other of the abbey's holdings. The abbey continued to hold it: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a, Albrichton' Monacorum Salop', 2 hides, is held by the Abbot of Shrewsbury; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 189-90; VCH Shropshire, i. pp. 297, 324 note 46; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 107. Albrighton manor probably included 1 hide in Leaton: 4,27,27 Leaton note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 211.
		With Albright Hussey (4,3,51;57) and Albrightlee (3g,7) Albrighton had probably once formed a single land-unit: Bassett, 'Anglo-Saxon Shrewsbury and its Churches', p. 9.
		On the succession of holders, see also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1327.
	WARIN [* THE SHERIFF *]. He was Warin the bald; see 4,3,8 predecessor note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,4	THE MAIN SCRIBE of Great Domesday originally wrote TE (the beginning of TERRA) in vermilion level with the hundred head (though in larger capitals than it): he presumably momentarily forgot that this was not an ordinary chapter but a subsection of chapter 4. Although he erased it, it is still visible in the manuscript, but is not reproduced in the Ordnance Survey facsimile and is not visible in the Alecto facsimile.
	ROGER SON OF CORBET. Corbet and his sons Roger (4,4) and Robert (4,5) were among several men given positions of authority in Shropshire by Earl Roger; see Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. pp. 220-21), but see Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 247. They may have originated from the region of Boitron and Essay near Sées (both in the French département of Orne (arrondissement Alençon, canton Mêle-sur-Sarthe); see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 373. Corbet seems to have been given lands on the border with a view to standing against or conquering the Welsh and Roger and Robert divided these. Most of Roger's lands lay in "Reweset" Hundred and were subsequently drawn into the Corbet Welshries of Upper and Lower Gorddwr; see the map in Morgan, 'Trewern in Gorddwr', p. 125; and {Introduction: History}.
		In addition to these lands the Corbets later held Minsterley, Trewern and Alberbury (4,1,7-9) and English and Welsh lands attached to Montgomery (4,1,15;35-36). They also had their own 'forest', that of Steyfrestones (Stiperstones SO3698 etc.): Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 600. The Domesday lands reappear in a number of Inquisitions of the Corbet family: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 85, iii. nos. 600, 635, vi. no. 318, ix. no. 50.
		Roger's lands continued in the Corbet family, although the detailed descent is problematical: Sanders, English Baronies, p. 29; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 400). They formed the barony of Cause, named from the castle that lies now in Westbury parish, although the land on which it was built was probably one of the unnamed outliers of Worthen (4,4,20) in 1086. Roger's younger brother Robert holds the adjacent fief in Domesday. In other counties (see DEV 19. and (probably) DEV 24 and DEV 25) villages are regularly divided between brothers and this is true here of Marsh (4,4,17 and 4,5,10) and Rorrington (4,4,21 and 4,5,12). The hundreds, where they correspond, are listed in the same order within each fief. It is possible that the brothers shared a single chapter in the volume for this circuit as did Walter of Claville and Gotshelm (possibly his brother) in Exon, corresponding to DEV 24-25.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,4,1-3 Condover Hundred
		4,4,4 "Rinlau" Hundred
		4,4,5-19 "Reweset" Hundred
		4,4,20-22 Wittery Hundred
		4,4,23-24 Baschurch Hundred
		4,4,25 Wrockwardine Hundred
	The final entry is out of sequence, but in fact 4,4,23-25 probably do not belong to Roger son of Corbet: 4,4,23 Roger note.
4,4,1	WELBATCH. It was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad and is now in Annscroft ecclesiastical parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. It seems to have continued in the hands of the Fitz Corbets, although Book of Fees, p. 973, wrongly states that Odo de Hodenet holds in Welbach' from the barony of Hugh de Kylpec', i.e. from the barony of Pulverbatch (4,26 Roger note). Wulbech is 1 hide, held by Odo de Hodenet from Fulk filius Warini in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 532, vi. no. 52, x. no. 115; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 119. On the connection with St Chad's of Shrewsbury, see SHR 3f St Chad's note.
	RANULF [* PEVEREL *]. See Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 356 (JP).
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
	MILL ... NOT IN SUMMER. Translated literally, the Latin is 'a winter mill, not a summer one'. The Alecto edition has 'a mill for winter, not for summer, use'. The small stream that passes Welbatch and is a tributary of the Rea Brook (formerly the Meole Brook) may only have produced a sufficient flow in winter; see 1,7 mill note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,4,2	STAPLETON?. Domesday Hundeslit, another part of which, held by Alward, is found at 4,27,9. Hundeslit appears to mean 'Hund's portion of the area called Hlid', that is Lyth Hill in Condover: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 278.
		The identification with Stapleton, an Ancient Parish, first made by Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 108), appears reasonable but is not without difficulty: the cause and date of the change of name are not clear and there is no subsequent Fitz Corbet interest in Stapleton. Roger's portion seems early to have been combined with Alward's and to have descended - like Cothercott and Smethcott (4,27,8;15) - to the honour of Montgomery, being held by the Cantilupe family, then by Eudes La Zouche from his wife Millicent, then by the Mortimers, the Earls of March. The later manor of Stapleton seems to have been composed of the two parts of Hundeslit together with Netley (4,28,2). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, John de Stepelton' holds Stepelton' of the fee of William de Canteloy. In Book of Fees, p. 966, Robert de Meysi holds one-fifth fee in Stepelton' from William de Cantilupo and in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215, Robert de Stepelton holds from Millicent La Such; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 230, 239; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 439, ii. no. 17; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 324 note 47, viii. p. 164; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 278. Stapleton lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later.
		The main scribe of Great Domesday initially omitted Hundeslit and had to interline it, probably at an early stage as the pen and ink are the same as in the text below.
	RANULF [* PEVEREL *]. See 4,4,1 Ranulf note.
	THEY PAY TAX. That is, the 1 ½ virgates; compare 4,4,4. However, 7 geld' could be translated 'It pays', referring to the manor, though the meaning is the same in either case. Compare 4,18,3 pays note.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the villager, probably for the later insertion of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,4,3	ACTON [BURNELL]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later.
		Land at Actune was left to Burton Abbey c. 1003 in the will of Wulfric Spot: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536). The county in which Actune lay, and its exact identity, are uncertain although the partially geographical arrangement of the will suggests that the place lay in Shropshire. In none of the three Actons in Shropshire that were Domesday manors is there any trace of any connection with Burton Abbey: Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxxi and no. 29.
		The manor descended in the barony of Corbet of Cause, being held from the late twelfth century by a family called Burnel. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Roger Burnel and Hugh de Becbur' hold 3 hides in Acton Burnel, a fee of Thomas Corbet; see Book of Fees, p. 973 (where it is wrongly ascribed to the barony of Hugh de Kylpec: 4,4,1 Welbatch note); Book of Fees, p. 964; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 229, 240; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 827, iii. no. 194, viii. no. 667, ix. no. 50; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 121; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 7; and 4,3,16 Cound note.
4,4,4	WENTNOR. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. The main manor continued in the family of the Corbets, lords of Cause. Thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, Thomas Corbet holds ½ hide of the fee of Cawes in Wontenour; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; Book of Fees, p. 1283; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 85, iii. no. 600, ix. no. 50. But the hidage of the manor was reduced from 2 ½ hides in 1086 to ½ hide in 1255 by a series of grants to churches. Thus the church, the tithes and 1 virgate went to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 7, 8, 34, 39, 42, 44, etc; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167a), but the mill of Wontenov'e went to the Abbey of Buildwas (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163a). The mill of Ricton (Ritton SO3497) also went to Buildwas (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 191) together with 1 ½ hides in Kim'iton' (Kinnerton SO3796; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a), held from the Corbets of Wattlesborough under the Corbets of Cause. Modlicot' or Medlycote (Medlicott SO4094) was given to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 742-55); Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 181.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about ten letters between the details of the population and the hedged enclosures, possibly for the later inclusion of woodland or another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,4,5	WINSLEY. It lay in Westbury Ancient Parish. It was in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. The manor was given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Roger Fitz Corbet between 1121 and 1135, Wynesleg' being held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, of the fee of Caures by the Abbot of Shrewsbury: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 42, 44, 56, 57, etc. and no. 288 p. 272); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 63; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 314.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about seven letters after the population, rather small for the later insertion of any resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,4,6	IN THAT HUNDRED. That is, in "Reweset" Hundred. The heading is above 4,4,5. The main scribe of Great Domesday often supplied an indication of the hundred in which an unnamed place lay.
	½ HIDE. This unnamed holding, lying in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, was probably that which was afterwards known as La Ree. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, Ralph de Ree holds ½ hide in Ree from Thomas Corbet of Cause; see Book of Fees, pp. 964, 972; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a. The name is derived from the Rea Brook. The precise settlement has not been identified, its last record as a manor being in 1346 (Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241), but there is a place now called Reabrook at SO3604 in Minsterley parish; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 116; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 315. It may be significant that this ½ hide, joined to the 14 ½ hides of Worthen (4,4,20), would make a 15-hide unit.
4,4,7	WOLLASTON. This was a chapelry of Alberbury Ancient Parish which was later united with Cardeston Ancient Parish. It is now a separate Civil Parish. Wollaston was in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. Wollaston continued to be held by the Corbets of Cause and seems to have been in two parts, 'Great' and 'Little' Wollaston. This entry probably represents 'Little Wollaston' ½ hide, held as Willaneston Parva of the barony of Caus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b (Ford Hundred). 'Great Wollaston' held by Picot's successors under the Corbets may have been part of Trewern (4,1,8) in 1086; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163a; Book of Fees, pp. 964, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 235, 241; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 67a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 113; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 202.
	HOWEVER, IT PAYS 12d. This may mean that Wollaston was being 'farmed'; compare the value statement of the next entry where Bausley is worth 2s, but is being 'farmed' for 6s 8d. See 1,4 value note and 3d,5 revenue note and the similar statement in 3f,2. It is interesting that four manors held by Earl Roger in Sussex (SUS 11,1;3;6-7) and two in Hampshire (HAM 21,1;6) had a 1086 value which was exceeded by a 'payment' (de firma in HAM 21,1) and that they were being 'farmed'.
4,4,8	BAUSLEY. This was formerly a township of the Shropshire Ancient Parish of Alberbury, now in Criggion parish, in Montgomeryshire, in which county it was placed (in Dethyr Hundred) in 1536 following the dissolution of the Marcher lordship of Nether Gorddwr: {Introduction: County Boundary}and {Introduction: Hundreds}. Bausley lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086 but was subsequently drawn into the Corbets' Welshry; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 104; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 97; Sandford, 'Bausley', pp. 87-112.
	HOWEVER, IT IS AT A REVENUE FOR 6s 8d. It was being 'farmed' (perhaps by the Welshmen as there are several references in Shropshire to Welshmen paying rent for holdings, for example in 4,3,35-38). On this practice, see 3d,5 revenue note, and compare 3f,2 value note, 4,4,7 pays note and 1,4 value note.
4,4,9	EYTON. It lay in Alberbury Ancient Parish which was later united with Cardeston Ancient Parish. In 1086 it lay in "Reweset" Hundred, later in Ford Hundred. Another portion of the vill is 4,27,16. It passed to the lords of Cause, successors of Roger Fitz Corbet and was held under them by a family called Marsh (see 4,4,17 Marche note). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, Roger de M'sse holds 1 hide in Eyton of the barony of Caus; similarly Roger son of Matthew holds ½ hide there; see Book of Fees, pp. 964, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 50; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 120; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 200.
	2 SMALLHOLDERS WITH 5 OXEN PLOUGHING. Latin .ii. bord' cū .v. bob' arant' could perhaps be translated '2 smallholders ploughing/ who plough with 5 oxen', as arant' can abbreviate both arantibus, ablative plural after cum, and arantes, nominative plural with ii bord' as its subject. In 4,3,29 arantes is written in full and must agree with the oxen in the accusative case. The translation in the Alecto edition is the same as here. The Phillimore printed translation has '2 smallholders with 5 ploughing oxen'.
4,4,10	LOTON. It lay in Alberbury Ancient Parish which was later united with Cardeston Ancient Parish. It was in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. From Roger son of Corbet it appears to have passed to his brother Robert and to have followed the same descent as Wattlesborough (4,4,16) and Cardeston (4,4,18), being counted as a member of Wattlesborough manor: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, Robert Corbet (of Moreton Corbet) holds 3 hides in Cardel, Wetlesburgh and Lohton of the fee of Caus; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 109; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 198.
		Lands at Locheton were granted to Shrewsbury Abbey between 1108 and 1121 by Robert Corbet. Both Eyton and VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 198 consider the possibility that the lands were at Loton, but Una Rees, editor of the Shrewsbury Cartulary, considers that Locheton is Loughton, now a parish near Wheathill, formerly in Chetton parish: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 34, 39, etc.).
	A HEDGED ENCLOSURE. It is presumably that mentioned in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 96b, as the 'free enclosure of Lochton' held by Thomas Corbet. It is no doubt represented by Hayes (SJ3515). See 3c,2 enclosures note.
4,4,11	YOCKLETON. In the manuscript IOCLEHVILE; Farley misprinted LOCLEHVILE. For another example of his printing L for I in a place-name, see 4,27,28 'Yagdons' note.
		Yockleton is now a separate Ecclesiastical Parish, but was formerly a township of Westbury Ancient Parish and remains for civil purposes in its successor, Westbury Civil Parish. It lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. The Domesday form Ioclehuile is from Old English geocled or iocled ('a small manor') and hyll ('hill'). In the modern form tun has replaced hyll as the termination (first noted in 1316); see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 333. Yockleton was held by the Corbets in lordship. It is Yokelcul in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, Yokelthul and Yokelthull in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 85, iii. no. 600 (of Thomas Corbet and Peter Corbet respectively) and Yekelton held by Peter Corbet in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 318, ix. no. 50; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 50; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 310. Roger son of Corbet granted the tithes to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 7-8, 11, 34, 39, etc.). A member of Yockleton was Le Park (Park farm SJ3910): Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 600.
	[6] SMALLHOLDERS. In the manuscript the v of vi is rather faint and might have been erased, though the parchment is shiny and greasy here, so the ink may merely not have taken (the fact that the i is darker may suggest that the scribe was aware of this, so charged his pen with more ink). In the Alecto facsimile the v has hardly been reproduced, though it is somewhat clearer in the Ordnance Survey facsimile. Farley printed vi.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,4,12	PONTESBURY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, afterwards in Ford Hundred. Pontesbury itself passed from Roger son of Corbet to the Corbets of Cause. In the thirteenth century it was held by the Fitz Herbert family: in Book of Fees, p. 972, Herbert son of Peter holds in Pantebur'; in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, Reginald son of Peter holds 2 ½ hides in Pontesbur'; in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241, John de Chorlton (the former holder being Rees ap Houwel) holds in Pontesbury of the fee of Caus. See Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 606, x. nos. 117, 632; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 129; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 264.
		The manor had a number of members: the 1 ½ hides that in 1086 did not pay tax may well have been church land at Estleg' (Asterley SJ3707) which by 1255 was regarded as a 2-hide vill, 1 hide being held by Robert Wyscart from the Church of St George, Pontesbury: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 66b, 96a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235. Mathelhurste (Malehurst SJ3806) lay within the 2 hides (or 2 ½ hides, see above) that Reginald son of Peter held from the barony of Cause: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b. Horton' 1 hide (Hortonlane SJ4411) in a remote corner of the Ancient Parish also seems to have been a member: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b; Book of Fees, pp. 964, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 50; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 137.
		There was a church here, not mentioned in Domesday; it was probably a Saxon foundation for secular priests; see Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 417, 435; and {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	ERNWY <OF PONTESBURY>. The Domesday forms of this name - Ernui, Ernuin(us), Arnui, Erneuui, Arnuinus, Ernu, Ernuit etc. - represent Old English Earnwig: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 243-44. JRM preferred Ern- for Old English Earn-, as it reflected the majority of the Domesday spellings. Von Feilitzen pointed out the frequent confusion between the elements -wig and -wine (in this case Earnwig and Earnwine), making it impossible to classify the Domesday forms Ernui and Ernuin correctly: ibidem and §148. The Alecto edition has Earnwig.
		The confusion between the names Ernwy and Ernwin may have occurred here. It is likely that the present Ernui and the Ernuin[us] in Farley (4,4,13) are the same person: both held in 1066 and continued to hold in 1086 from Roger son of Corbet and Farley later became part of Pontesbury (4,4,13 Farley note). It is also possible that the Ernui who had held Westbury (4,4,15) and two estates that passed to Roger's brother Robert (Oaks: 4,5,4, and Onslow: 4,5,7) and who was still holding Onslow in 1086 was the same man. If so, like a number of other Englishmen, he was only able to retain part of his former lands after the Conquest. See Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 89.
4,4,13	FARLEY. It lay in Pontesbury Ancient Parish. It was known as Fairley until the early twentieth century: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 130. Like Pontesbury it lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. It seems to have had the same 1086 tenant (see 4,4,12 Ernwy note) and appears to have been absorbed by Pontesbury manor (4,4,12) after 1086; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 144; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 271.
	ERNWIN [* ERNWY* <OF PONTESBURY> *]. See 4,4,12 Ernwy note.
4,4,14	HANWOOD. What is now Hanwood incorporated Great and Little Hanwood. Great Hanwood lay in the Ancient Parish of that name; Little Hanwood was a township of Pontesbury Ancient Parish. The estate lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. Hanwood descended in the Corbet barony, being held under the lords of Cause by a family named from the place. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, Reginald de Hanewodde holds 2 hides in Hanewode from the barony of Caus: see Book of Fees, pp. 964, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 235, 1241; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 117. Hanewode is associated with Wallop (Wallop SJ3207), presumably part of Whitton (4,4,19) in 1086, in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 50.
	EDRIC. Domesday Edic is presumably a scribal error for Edric; von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 236, includes it under Old English Eadric.
4,4,15	WESTBURY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. The vill was held under the lords of Cause by the Hodnet family in the thirteenth century and by the Ludlows in the fourteenth century. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, Odo de Hodenet holds 2 hides in Welbur' of the fee of Caus; the same man holds 1 fee in Westbur' of the barony of Thomas Corbet in Book of Fees, pp. 964, 971. William de Lodelou holds in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 52, ix. no. 50, x. no. 115; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 53; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 312.
		Cause, where the Corbets built their castle and which became the centre of their barony, was later in Westbury, but may have been one of the unnamed members of Worthen (4,4,20) in 1086; see 4,4,20 Worthen note.
	ERNWY <OF PONTESBURY>. See 4,4,12 Ernwy note.
	2 PRIESTS. There was a collegiate church here, not mentioned in Domesday, but implied by the adjacent place-name Minsterley; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 213; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 53; and 4,1,7 Minsterley note and {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
4,4,16	WATTLESBOROUGH. It was a township of Alberbury Ancient Parish which was later united with Cardeston Ancient Parish. In 1086 it lay in "Reweset" Hundred, later in Ford Hundred.
		A place called Wecelleburne is found in charter-grants by Wulhere, King of the Mercians, ostensibly in 664, and by Ethelred, King of the Mercians, supposedly in 680, both to Peterborough Abbey: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 147 nos. 426-27 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, nos. 68, 72); see 4,9,1 Shifnal note. Although the charters are post-Conquest forgeries, the spellings are often pre-Conquest. This place might be Wattlesborough (though the terminations of the two names differ), but, if so, there is no later trace of Peterborough Abbey's involvement.
		Wattlesborough descended in the Cause barony, being granted in the twelfth century to a subordinate branch of the Corbet family who named Moreton Corbet (4,19,9). In Book of Fees, p. 964 (barony of Thomas Corbet), Richard Corbet holds in Weltesborc. Moreover, Robert Corbet de Morton holds Watlesboru of the barony of Robert Corbet in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241; see Book of Fees, p. 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235.
		Wattlesborough developed into a large manor by absorbing other Domesday holdings: thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, Robert Corbet holds 3 hides in Cardel (Cardeston 4,4,18), Wetlesburgh and Lohton (Loton 4,4,10) of the fee of Cause. Bredeshuil (Bretchel SJ3311) was probably a member; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 100; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 196.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,4,17	MARCHE. It was a township of Westbury Ancient Parish, being in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. It presumably continued to be held of the lords of Cause, but the subtenants named from the place also held the other and larger portion (4,5,10) under the lords of Longdon and the particular identity of this holding was lost. It included part of 'Perendon' (see 4,5,10); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 127; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 316. The later subtenant, Roger de Mersse, also held Eyton (4,4,9).
	DAEGING. Domesday Dainz probably represents this Old English personal name; see von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 222. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Book.
4,4,18	CARDESTON. It was an Ancient Parish which was later united with Alberbury Ancient Parish.. Like Loton (4,4,10) it was absorbed by the growing manor of Wattlesborough before 1255; see 4,4,16 Wattlesborough note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 109; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 198.
	GILBERT [* OF SANNERVILLE *]. Gilbert is probably to be identified as Gilbert of Sannerville, in the French département of Calvados (arrondissement Caen, canton Trun): Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 94; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 211.
4,4,19	WHITTON. It lay in Westbury Ancient Parish and was in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. It passed to the barony of Cause being held by a branch of the Burnel family that called itself from the place. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, Robert de Wycton and Roger Burnel hold 2 hides in Wycton. The holders in Book of Fees, p. 964, are Robert and Roger de Witton' (the latter being also known as Roger Burnel) who hold Witton' with members from the barony of Thomas Corbet; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 235, 241; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 50; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 65; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 313. It is possible that Wallop (4,4,14 Hanwood note) was a member.
		The Grid Reference (SJ3409) is to Whitton Hall. Whitton Grange is at SJ3308.
	LEODMER <OF WHITTON>. The Domesday forms of this name - Ledmar(us), Ledmer(us), Lemar(us), Leimar, Leodmaer, Ledmaer, Leimer (as here), Lemer - represent Old English Leodmær: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 310. JRM preferred the second element -mer for Old English -mær, as it reflected more closely the Domesday spellings. The Alecto edition has Leodmær.
		There are only two occurrences of this name in Domesday Shropshire, the other Leodmer being one of the predecessors of Alward [son of Almund] in Polmere (4,27,19). Von Feilitzen (ibidem, p. 310 note 4) stated that he was the same as the present Leodmer, but gave no reason.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,4,20	IN WITTERY HUNDRED. The main scribe of Great Domesday failed to line through in vermilion this hundred head, as he also did the Hodnet hundred head in 4,7,3 and the 'Conditre' hundred head in 6,5. There is no sign that any of these hundred heads were later additions. For his failure to rubricate several place-names in Shropshire, see 4,3,8 St Peter note.
	WORTHEN. This was an Ancient Parish which lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086, then in Chirbury Hundred, though parts of the complex manor lay in Ford Hundred. It was a demesne manor of the Corbets and it was probably in one of its unnamed outliers that the family raised their castle of Cause which was to become the centre of their barony: the former identification of Alretone with Cause is erroneous (see 4,1,8 Trewern note). On the castle, which was perhaps preceded by one at Westbury (Hawcocks Mount), see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 422.
		Thomas Corbet holds Worthin in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60a, having withdrawn it from suit at Chirbury hundred court; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 112b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 85, iii. no. 600, ix. no. 50, x. no. 158; Placita de Quo Warranto, pp. 718-19; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232. Among the 13 outliers were probably:
		Caus (Cause SJ3307, said to be named from the Norman Pays de Caux): Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60a; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 85, iii. no. 600, ix. no. 210; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 216, 235, 241;
		Selve (Shelve SO3399): Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 600, ix. no. 50;
		Binneweston (Binweston SJ3004): Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 600;
		Astu' (Aston Pigott SJ3305 and Aston Rogers SJ3406) two places held respectively by Roger de Astu' and Robert Pigod in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 50;
		Waltu' (Walton SJ2905): Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a. It is held by the prior of Chirbury in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233;
		Leg' (Leigh SJ3303): Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; coupled with Walton in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 50;
		Habberleg' (Habberley SJ3903): Book of Fees, pp. 964, 971; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635, v. no. 188, ix. no. 50; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 45; and 5,2 Tetstill note;
		Hope (Hope SJ3401):Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a; Book of Fees, pp. 964, 972; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 50.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 95; VCH Shropshire, viii. pp. 180, 239; and 4,1,35 Trelystan note.
	14 ½ HIDES. The addition of the unnamed ½ hide of 4,4,6 would make a 15-hide unit.
	PICOT. The name is rare and it possible that this man is Picot of Sai who holds from Earl Roger directly (4,20): Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 325. However, nothing has been found to connect a part of Worthen with the Say family.
	GEOFFREY. See 4,3,27 Geoffrey note.
	GRENTO. The only other occurrence of this personal name in Domesday Book is in DEV 5,13: Grento, called a man-at-arms in the corrsponding entry in Exon, was a tenant of Tavistock Abbey. There is no evidence that they were one man.
	OF WHAT HE HOLDS. In the manuscript there is a small gap after qd' and one would expect Rog' to have been inserted. The parchment is slightly roughened in this gap and something may have been erased here: the original returns may have had R. and the main scribe of Great Domesday wrongly extended this to Reinfrid' and then realized his error (the value of his holding is given with the other men-at-arms), erased it and forgotten to insert Rog'.
4,4,21	RORRINGTON. This was a township of Chirbury Ancient Parish; it lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086, later in Chirbury Hundred. It was divided at Domesday between the Corbet brothers, both holding 1 virgate (4,5,12). The hedged enclosure was similarly divided; see 4,4 Roger note. By 1255 each portion of Rorrington seems only to have counted as ½ virgate: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a, Roger de Longedon holds ½ virgate in Rounton, presumably from the lords of Cause (although Longden itself (4,5,9) descends from Robert son of Corbet), while William de Mariton (from Marrington: 4,5,15) holds ½ virgate from Reginald son of Peter. The former holding appears to be that of Roger son of Corbet and is held by Edmund de Longedon in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233. The latter holding, passing to the Fitz Herberts (4,5 Robert note), appears to be that of Robert son of Corbet (4,5,12) held by Lucas de Roriton in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 560. On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 93.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. See 3f,2 Alward note.
	DOES NOT PAY TAX. The main scribe of Great Domesday omitted to put a hair-line below the interlined ñ (for non) to indicate its position in the text.
4,4,22	LEIGHTON. This was a township of Worthen Ancient Parish; it is now in Leighton with Trelystan Civil Parish and lies in Montgomeryshire. It lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086. Like Bausley (4,4,8) which was similarly left in Wales at the dissolution of the Marcher lordships in the sixteenth century, it was hidated but did not pay tax. After 1086 it was drawn into the Corbet Welshry of Upper Gorddwr; see Placita de Quo Warranto, pp. 718-19; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 116; Sandford, 'Leighton', pp. 333-54; and 4,1,36 Ackley note.
	1 RIDER. The main scribe of Great Domesday had to interline 7 un' radman above the ploughmen rather than after them (the usual place for riders) because there was more room between the lines there.
4,4,23	ROGER HOLDS. It is possible that the main scribe of Domesday has confused his Rogers in the last three entries of Roger son of Corbet's sub-chapter (4,23-25). However, he may have been aware of a problem of identity as he did not precede each 'Roger' with isdem ('the same'), as he did in 4,4,2-22. Moreover, he included de com[ite] which he normally reserved for the first entry in a sub-chapter. See SHR 4 Roger note. There is no sign, however, that these three entries were added, as tentatively suggested by Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 12. Descent of 4,4,23 is to the Lacy family and this suggests that the 1086 holder may have been Roger of Lacy, who holds under Earl Roger in 4,8, and from the king in chapter 7; see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 326 note 50.
	MONTFORD. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086 and was later in Pimhill Hundred. Roger of Lacy, if not the 1086 tenant, seems to have been in possession of the manor soon after Domesday, for he gave it to Shrewsbury Abbey before 1091: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 33, 38, 260). The gift seems not to have lasted since Montford later appears in the Lacy fief: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a, John Fitz Alan holds 1 ½ hides in Moneford of the fee of Matilda de Lacy; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 119; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 215, 230; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 124; and 4,8,14 Forton note.
	3 HIDES. […]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about five letters after iii hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
	½ FISHERY. The other half was across the River Severn at Ford (4,1,16 mill note).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	BISHOP R[OBERT]. He is probably Robert Losinga, Bishop of Hereford 1079-1095, but see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 291 note 60. The Alecto edition leaves him as 'Bishop R'.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 225 no. 1328.
4,4,24	ROGER HOLDS. See 4,4,23 Roger note.
	PRESTON [MONTFORD]. Preston Montford was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Alkmund, and is now in Bicton parish. Bicton itself was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. In 1086 this portion of Preston Montford lay in Baschurch Hundred, but a larger part (held by St Alkmund's: 3g,10) was in "Reweset" Hundred. Onslow (3f,7. 4,5,7) was divided in the same way. This part seems to have joined the other after 1086 and to have gone with the rest of St Alkmund's lands to endow Lilleshall Abbey: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 194, x. p. 128. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 137, Roger de Forde holds 1 virgate in Preston by Moneford from the Abbot of Lilleshall. Thus the attachment to St Alkmund appears to post-date Domesday and it will have been taken only at that time into St Alkmund's parish, unless the 1086 tenure was illegal.
	FOR THE LACK OF POPULATION in this manor, see 4,3,19 population note.
	THE VALUE WAS AND IS. In the manuscript Valuit 7 ualuit was originally written; the –ui- were scraped out of the second ualuit, but the main scribe of Great Domesday omitted to insert an e in their place to make the present tense ualet.
4,4,25	ROGER HOLDS. See 4,4,23 Roger note.
	CHERRINGTON?. If correctly identified, this was a township of Edgmond Ancient Parish and is now a separate Civil Parish.
		Domesday Cerlitone is said to be in Wrockwardine Hundred. Identifications have hesitated between 'Charlton', either in Shawbury or near Preston Gubbals, and Cherrington. 'Charlton' in Shawbury was probably in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 (see 3g,9 'Charlton'note) and if this holding were combined with St Alkmund's it would follow the same course as 4,4,24, Preston [Montford], in being absorbed by a manor of the same church. Moreover, in 1066, a Wulfric held parts of Withington (4,27,2) and Great Wytheford (4,3,5) and all of Sleap (4,14,26), all adjacent to 'Charlton'.
		St Alkmund's also held another 'Charlton' near Preston Gubbals, but to identify the present holding with it requires the substitution of a Baschurch hundred head for Wrockwardine Hundred. Moreover, that 'Charlton' may simply have been a member of Preston Gubbals in 1086 as later; see 3g,8 Preston note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 173.
		Charlton in Wrockwardine itself, which went to Shrewsbury Abbey, can be ruled out as it appears to have been part of Earl Roger's manor there in 1086 (4,1,1 St Peter note).
		Cherrington (in Edgmond parish) has two arguments for it: the hidage given by Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, is 4 hides, and could represent the combination of this 1 hide with the 3 hides of 4,23,4; secondly, the name form Cerlitone (perhaps with a nunnation mark omitted over the i) is more likely to produce 'Cherrington' than 'Charlton'. Cherrington of 4,23,4 is Domesday Cerlintone. Moreover, none of the many places called 'Charlton' in Ekwall, Dictionary of English Place-Names, has an early form in -i-. The identification of Cerlitone with Cherrington is accepted by Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 76. However, in none of the possible identifications has any trace of a Fitz Corbet or a Lacy holding been found; see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 326 note 52, xi. pp. 312-313; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 253.
4,5	ROBERT SON OF CORBET. Robert was the younger brother of Roger son of Corbet (4,4 Roger note). His Domesday fief was divided between his daughters Sibyl (who married Herbert son of Herbert, the king's chamberlain) and Alice (who married William Botterell of Cornwall). Sibyl was also a mistress of King Henry I. Her portion of the fief descended in the family of Fitz Herbert whose representative in 1255 (in the Rotuli Hundredorum) is Reginald son of Peter. Alice's portion continued in the family of Botterell who held the 'barony' of Longden (4,5,9); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. pp. 146-70; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 373.
		Robert's elder brother Roger holds the previous sub-chapter (4,4) in Domesday Shropshire. In other counties (see DEV 19. DEV 24. DEV 25) villages are regularly divided between brothers and this is true here of Marsh (4,4,17 and 4,5,10) and Rorrington (4,4,21 and 4,5,12). The hundreds, where they correspond, are listed in the same order within each fief. It is possible that the brothers shared a single chapter in the volume for this circuit as did Walter of Claville and Gotshelm (possibly his brother) in Exon, corresponding to DEV 24-25. Or, if all Earl Roger's lands were included in one large composite section in the circuit volume (SHR 4 Roger note), the brothers' lands could still have been detailed next to each other within each hundred in it.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,5,1-5 Condover Hundred
		4,5,6 "Rinlau" Hundred
		4,5,7-11 "Reweset" Hundred
		4,5,12-15 Wittery Hundred
4,5,1	WOOLSTASTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. At the division of Robert son of Corbet's fief, Woolstaston passed to the Botterell family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62a, Joanna Le Engles holds the 2 hides from William de Botreus, while in Book of Fees, p. 966, Roger Anglicus holds half a fee in Wlstanestan' from the land of Aubrey de Botereus; see Book of Fees, p. 973 (where it is wrongly stated to be part of the barony of Hugh de Kylpec'; see 4,4,1 Welbatch note); Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 230, 240; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. nos. 194, 587; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 151; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 172.
	1 ½ PLOUGHS. The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the abbreviation line in car': it is fairly faint in the manuscript, but is visible in the Alecto facsimile. See 3f,7 plough note on other imperfect reproductions in the Ordnance Survey facsimile.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,5,2	RATLINGHOPE. This was an Ancient Parish. It presumably lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 (hundred head above 4,5,1), but was later in Purslow Hundred. From Robert son of Corbet, it passed to the Fitz Herberts, and before 1209 a small Augustinian priory was established here as a cell of Wigmore (Herefordshire) endowed with at least half a hide. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, the Abbot of Wigmore holds ½ hide there from Reginald son of Peter; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 203; VCH Shropshire, ii. p. 80; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 158; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 151.
		A member of Ratlinghope was La Scutte, or La Stinte (Stitt SO4098) where ½ hide was held by Haughmond Abbey from Thomas Corbet in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. pp. 163-66, xi. p. 191. It became part of the abbot's manor of 'Boveria' ('oxen pasture') which grouped the manors of Betchcott and Leebotwood (4,27,13), Cothercott (4,27,8), Wilderley (4,22,2), Picklescott (4,27,15 Smethcott note) and Stitt: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, p. 11 and nos. 185-86, 880, 882-83, 1185, 1325-28).
	2 HIDES [***]. As the main scribe of Great Domesday did not put a dot after ii hidę the central margin would have to have been used for any insertion of geld' as the side ruling falls on the ę of hidę; see 4,3,35 hides note. However, it is possible, despite the capital used for Wastae, that he intended '2 hides are and were waste', as the preceding manor had a value T.R.E. and 'now'.
4,5,3	WOMERTON. This land formerly lay in the Ancient Parish of Church Stretton and now lies in the Civil Parish of All Stretton. It was in Condover Hundred in 1086. Most was waste in 1086 and probably long continued to be so. The overlordship was forfeited in 1102 and after the death of Robert son of Corbet, some time after 1121, the manor was not retained by his descendants. It seems to have been absorbed by the manor of Stretton (4,1,27) and transferred to Munslow Hundred. A wood at Womerton (boscus de Wimbriston') is mentioned in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 84b, within the manor of Stretton. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 157; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 90.
	AUTI <OF LEEBOTWOOD>. The name Auti occurs on 39 holdings spread mainly across Midland England; but the Auti holding the six holdings in Shropshire, Staffordshire and Warwickshire can be identified with a degree of confidence as one individual (4,5,3. 4,27,12-13. 7,4. STS 8,10. WAR 12,8). Five of the six people called Auti held from Earl Roger of Shrewsbury or his tenants; in three instances an Auti held both in 1066 and 1086 (JP).
	ARNGRIM < OF WOMERTON>. The Domesday forms of this name - Arnegri[m], Ergrim, Arnegrin, Ernegrin, Aergrim, Aregrim, Aregrin, Haregrim, Haregrin - represent Old Danish Arngrim, Old Norse Arngrimr: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 162-63. In the printed Phillimore edition of Yorkshire the Old Norse form was used; this has now been standardized as Arngrim. The Alecto edition has Arngrim. As in the present entry, the holdings of an Arnketil and an Arngrim were combined in 1086 in HEF 11,1-2.
		The name Arngrim occurs on 14 holdings in Domesday Book, probably representing four or five individuals. The four holdings on the border of Herefordshire and Shropshire are likely to have been held by one individual in 1066 since Arngrim shared three of them with an Arnketil while the fourth, Pedwardine, lay close to two of the other three (JP).
	IN TOTAL, VALUE ... 68s. That is, the total of the values of the four manors before 1066 came to 68s.
4,5,4	OAKS. Domesday Hach. Oaks was a township of the Ancient Parish of Pontesbury and a member of Ford Hundred; but was in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. It descended to the Botterell family, but had before 1191 been granted to Robert de Girros (4,21 Helgot note) whose undertenants in the thirteenth century were the Bicton family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Isabella de Biketon' and her sister hold 2 hides in Akes from the heir(s) of Robert Girros; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 166; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 266; Purton, 'Manor of Okes', pp. 30-35.
	ERNWY <OF PONTESBURY>. See 4,4,12 Ernwy note and 4,5,7 he note.
4,5,5	BROMPTON. It lay in Berrington Ancient Parish, was in Condover Hundred in 1086 and remained there. There is no later evidence of a Fitz Corbet holding here. The vill may have remained waste, or been combined with Picot of Say's larger and better cultivated manor (4,20,1); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 169; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 19.
		The main scribe of Great Domesday may not have been convinced that this was a holding of Robert son of Corbet as he wrote 'Robert holds from the earl' instead of his usual 'The same Robert holds'; see SHR 4 Roger note. However, he also used this formula in 4,5,6-7 and the later evidence suggests that these were holdings of Robert son of Corbet in 1086.
	EARL. The Ordnance Suvey facsimile fails to reproduce the abbreviation line in com': it is faint in the manuscript and only just visible in the Alecto facsimile. See 3f,7 plough note.
4,5,6	CHOULTON. This was a township of Lydbury North Ancient Parish. Lydbury North was held in 1086 by the Bishop of Hereford (2,1) and the connection with Choulton may not have been ancient. Choulton lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. In the division of Robert son of Corbet's estates, half of Choulton and half of Eton' (Eaton SO3789), which it included, went to the Fitz Herberts, the other half of each vill to the Botterell family. The Fitz Herberts gave the tithes of Choulton to the Church of Pontesbury and Choulton and Eaton themselves to Wigmore Abbey: in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233, the Abbot of Wigmore holds Eton; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165a. The Botterell family continued to hold their half of Choulton and Eaton: in Book of Fees, p. 1283, Reginald Botereus holds half of Cheleston' and half of Eton' belonging to the manor of Langedon' (Longden: 4,5,9); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 192.
	GUNFRID. Gunuert here and Gunner in 6,14 represent the hypothetical Old Norse Gunnfrothr: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 277, according to whom (note 7), he is the same as the 'Gunfrid' who held the site of Wigmore Castle in HEF 9,1. See 6,14 Gunfrid note.
4,5,7	ONSLOW. It formerly lay in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad, now in Bicton parish. Bicton itself was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. In 1086 Onslow was divided between two hundreds: the holding of St Chad's Church (3f,7) lay in Baschurch Hundred, this holding of Robert son of Corbet lay in "Reweset" Hundred, then in Ford Hundred. There was probably no ancient connection between this estate and the parochia of St Chad.
		The vill went to the Botterell family, being held under them by the Arundels: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, John de Arundel holds 1 hide in Ondeslawe as part of Longden manor (4,5,9); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 177.
	ERNWY <OF PONTESBURY>. See 4,4,12 Ernwy note and 4,5,7 he note.
	HE HELD IT HIMSELF. That is, Ernwy, perhaps the same man as the holder in 1066 and 1086 of Pontesbury, Farley and maybe of Westbury in 1066 which were held by Robert's brother Roger (4,4,12-13;15) and possibly also of Oaks in 1066 (4,5,4). See 4,4,12 Ernwy note.
	WITH 1 PLOUGH. The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the dot after car' which is in the manuscript. See 3f,7 plough note. It is just visible in the Alecto facsimile.
	NOW 12[s]. The central ruling falls between the two minims of xii, which is probably the reason why the main scribe of Great Domesday omitted the sol' . Compare 4,27,9 now note.
4,5,8	WOODCOTE. It formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad and is now in Bicton parish. Bicton itself was a township and chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Chad. It is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. The connection of Woodcote with the parochial of St Chad was probably not ancient.
		Woodcote lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. From Robert son of Corbet it passed to the Fitz Herberts. By 1255 Wodecote was divided into three portions: William de Horton held ½ hide from Reginald son of Peter and William's son Nicholas likewise held ½ hide. The remaining 2 virgates were held by William de Woddecote from the Abbot of Buildwas; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 144; and SHR 3f St Chad's note.
	1 BURGESS. He was no doubt in the borough of Shrewsbury.
4,5,9	LONGDEN. It was formerly a township of Pontesbury Ancient Parish. It lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. At the division of Robert son of Corbet's estates, Longden went to the Botterell family and became caput of their barony. It was held by the family until c.1282, was then conveyed to Robert Burnell (Bishop of Bath and Wells 1275-1292) and then descended like Acton Burnell (4,4,3). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, Reginald de Boterel holds 2 hides in Longedon', while in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 216, the Bishop of Bath and Wells holds Lundgedon from the king by service of two foot soldiers for 40 days in wartime; see Book of Fees, pp. 966, 972 (wrongly given as the barony of Herbert son of Peter); Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 47, iii. no. 194, v. no. 611, viii. no. 667; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 96b; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 234, 242; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 156; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 264.
4,5,10	MARCHE. It was formerly a township of Westbury Ancient Parish; it lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. It included half of the hamlet of 'Perendon' (see 4,4,17) and passed from Robert son of Corbet to William Boterell (c. 1141) continuing in the Botterell family, the lords of Longden (4,5,9). Its subtenant was de Mersse who held Eyton (4,4,9) and also the smaller part of Marche under the lords of Cause. One hide in Marsse is held by Roger de Marsse in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, of the manor of Longden and another part by the Abbot of Pola (Ystrad Marchel or Strata Marcella in the parish of Pool just east of Welshpool: Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 116; Jones, 'Abbey of Ystrad Marchell') of the fee of Roger de Botereus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 67a. Some lands were also given to Haughmond Abbey; see the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 738-41); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 127; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 315.
	TAX. The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the dot after geld' which is in the manuscript and is perfectly visible in the Alecto facsimile. See 3f,7 plough note.
4,5,11	WIGMORE. This was a township of Westbury Ancient Parish. The single 1086 estate became Upper Wigmore (SJ3411) and Lower Wigmore (SJ3511) later: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 314. It lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. From Robert son of Corbet it descended to the Botterells, lords of Longden (4,5,9): in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66a, Wygimor and Brerlawe (a lost place in Wigmore manor), 1 hide, is held by Adam de Brerlawe of the manor of Longden; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 170.
4,5,12	RORRINGTON. See 4,4,21 Rorrington note.
	½ HEDGED ENCLOSURE. The other half is recorded in 4,4,21.
4,5,13	MIDDLETON. This was formerly in Chirbury Ancient Parish and is now an Ecclesiastical Parish in its own right, sometimes known as Middleton-in-Chirbury; for civil purposes, it is still in Chirbury (Civil) Parish. It lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086 and was later in Chirbury Hundred. From Robert son of Corbet it passed to the Botterells, lords of Longden (4,5,9): in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b, Roger son of Grant holds two-thirds of Middeltun in Chirbury Hundred of the barony of Longedun. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 383, two parts of Midelton and Kyngton (Kinton SO2899) are held for 2 virgates from William de Botereus by Roger Grauntesone; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 232, 241; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 87. For the other half of Middleton, later counted as a third of the vill, see 4,27,22.
	EDRIC THE WILD. See 4,1,14 Edric note.
4,5,14	PRIESTWESTON. It lay in Chirbury Ancient Parish but is now in Middleton-in-Chirbury Ecclesiastical Parish; for civil purposes, it is still in Chirbury (Civil) Parish. It lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086, later in Chirbury Hundred. It passed to the Botterell family's barony of Longden: Llewellyn de Kolebe holds Westun' from that barony in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a, while John de Haudlo holds Prestesweston, a parcel of the manor of Longedon, in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, viii. no. 667. It is called 'Priest' Weston from the estate of the prior of Chirbury at Parva Weston (Little Weston SO2998) mentioned in the Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 162b; see Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 212; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 92.
	RIDERS ... THEY PAY 20s. In view of the lack of a 1086 value recorded for this manor, it is possible that the riders were 'farming' this manor; see 3d,5 revenue note. According to Nelson, Normans in South Wales, pp. 46-47, these riders (wrongly numbered as six there) are the same as the six thanes who had held it T.R.E..
4,5,15	MARRINGTON. This was a township of Chirbury Ancient Parish, and was in Wittery Hundred in 1086, later in Chirbury Hundred. It passed to the Fitz Herberts: in Book of Fees, p. 972, William de Merinton' holds in Merinton' from the barony of Herbert son of Peter, while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a, William de Maritun holds Maritun from Reginald son of Peter; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 560, vi. no. 464; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 89.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. See 3f,2 Alward note.
4,6	ROBERT THE BUTLER. Robert was Earl Roger's butler; see Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 249. He probably forfeited his small fief when Earl Roger's son Robert rebelled (see SHR 4 Roger note); it was subsequently granted by the Crown to the honour of Montgomery: Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 392. He is not the same man as the Robert the butler of GLS 40,1 Robert note.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,6,1-4 Baschurch Hundred
		4,6,5 [Wrockwardine] Hundred
		4,6,6 ["Merset"] Hundred
4,6,1	WALFORD. This was in Baschurch Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. It receives sparse mention in later documents since it seems to have been absorbed by the manor of Stanwardine-in-the-Fields; see 4,6,2 Stanwardine note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 291. Land in Walford was given c. 1216-1218 to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 36-7, 544, 772, 1227, 1272-81, 1323).
	STURMY. The Domesday form is Sturmid here and Estormid, Estormit, Sturmi, Turmit elsewhere in Domesday. A Richard 'Sturmy' holds in Wiltshire, Hampshire, and Surrey and a Ralph 'Sturmy' in Norfolk. The name is from Old French estormi meaning 'stunned, disturbed, overwhelmed': Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 345. See also WIL L61 Sturmy note.
	2 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line after ii hidę. in this entry; see 1,5 hide note.
	IN LORDSHIP. The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the abbreviation lines in d'nio or in ē, though they are not particularly faint in the manuscript. See 3f,7 plough note. They are both visible in the Alecto facsimile.
4,6,2	STANWARDINE[-IN-THE-FIELDS]. This lay in Baschurch Ancient Parish; it was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. The manor absorbed adjacent vills so that the 2 hides of Stanwardine had by 1255 become 5 ½ hides: Walford (4,6,1) and Eyton (4,6,4) were presumably included together with a further ½ hide from somewhere else. Descent was to the honour of Montgomery: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, William de Lechton', Philip de Huggeford, the Abbot of Haughmond, Hugh de Patinton' and John de Esseford hold 5 ½ hides of the fee of William de Cantilupo (i.e. the honour of Montgomery). It is Stanworthin in the Feld in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 235, Stanwardyne super Campum in the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 105a; Book of Fees, p. 966; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 1273-74, 1323); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 298.
	2 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line after ii hidę. in this entry; see 1,5 hide note.
4,6,3	PETTON. This was a chapelry of Baschurch Ancient Parish and is now a parish in its own right. It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. Petton had the same descent as Stanwardine-in-the-Fields (4,6,2) and in 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a) Petton' was divided into 1 ½ hides held by Richard de Petton of the fee of Stanewrthin and ½ hide held by the same man from the Abbot of Shrewsbury. Half a hide in Petton had been given by Hugh de Constantino to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. xxi, 33, 38, 41, 258); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 308.
	RALPH [* OF COSTENTIN *]. See 4,3,67 Ralph note.
	1 ½ HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about five letters after i hida 7 dimid'.; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about seven letters after the population, rather small for the later insertion of any resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,6,4	EYTON. The Domesday form is Hetone. The place lay in Baschurch Ancient Parish. It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086. After Domesday it had little independent history, being absorbed by the manor of Stanwardine-in-the-Fields (4,6,2); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 306.
	1 HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about five letters after i hida.; see 1,5 hide note.
4,6,5	[IN WROCKWARDINE HUNDRED]. Crudgington is assumed by VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 95, to have been in Baschurch Hundred in 1086 (hundred head above 4,6,1). But bearing in mind its geographical position and the fact that it becomes a member of Sleap manor in 'Bradford' Hundred, it may well have been in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086. It is taxed in 'Bradford' Hundred in 1327 (Lay Subsidy Roll, Shropshire (1327), Bradford Hundred, p. 184), and in 1334 (Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 251).
	CRUDGINGTON. There is no difficulty in identifying Domesday Crugetone, left unidentified by Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 308), with Crudgington that was a township of the Ancient Parish of Ercall Magna (also known as High Ercall); see Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Crudgington; Hill, 'The Demesne and the Waste', pp. 4-5 and note 7; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 103. Eyton accounted for Crudgington as a member of High Ercall (Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 102) and it certainly seems to have followed the same early descent. It was given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Hamo de Peverel, lord of High Ercall, between 1135 and 1139 (see the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, no. 40 pp. 47-48) and seems thereafter to have been accounted as part of the abbey's manor of Sleap which consisted of Slepe (Sleap SJ6317, perhaps part of High Ercall: 4,1,21), Crugulton, Kynnersley (Kynnersley 4,23,1) and Butterley (Buttery: 4,14,17) according to the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 117. Sleap and Kynnersley were given to the abbey by Hamo de Peverel at the same time as Crudgington; Buttery was given c. 1170-1175 by Ivo Pantulf: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 29).
	1000 EELS. This was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the right margin of the manuscript; as the colour of the ink and the pen are the same as for the rest of the entry, it was probably an early addition. He may have put it one line too low, after the value instead of after the fisheries. These eels were no doubt an additional uncommuted payment from the 4 fisheries; in 4,1,21 a fishery in High Ercall (in whose parish Crudgington lay) rendered 1,502 large eels.
4,6,6	[IN "MERSET" HUNDRED]. The restoration of this heading depends on the identity of Aston: 4,6,6 Aston note.
	ASTON. This place was probably the Aston which lay in Oswestry Ancient Parish; a "Merset" Hundred heading will have to be supplied, similar to the one added by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the margin next to the last entry in 4,18. It is the 'east tun' of Oswestry: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 22. This land appears to have escheated to the Crown like other members of this fief and then to have been granted to the honour of Montgomery. The whole of "Merset" Hundred was lost to the county in the early thirteenth century and the status of Aston became uncertain: {Introduction: Hundreds}. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b, Asto, Hydeslont (Hisland SJ3127) and Wodeto (Wootton: 4,3,39) are surveyed in Chirbury Hundred (the successor to Wittery Hundred) and are said to be held of the honour of Montgomery but to have been removed by John Fitz Alan. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, of John Fitz Alan, Aston, Wodeton and Hideslond appear as knights' fees in Oswestry, together with Twyford and Bromehurst, that is Twyford (SJ3426) in West Felton and Bromwich? (SJ3225). In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236, on the other hand, Wotton, Aston and Hideslond are surveyed in Pimhill Hundred (the successor to Baschurch Hundred), and are held by the Abbot of Haughmond, Thomas de Wotton and Thomas son of Philip. They are said to lie in the March of Wales, outside the county of Shropshire. It will be noted that Domesday mentions 12 Welshmen at Aston. Haughmond's portion is called Aston Abbots iuxta Oswestree in Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 192. See the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 36-113, 145, 484, 547-48, 555-58, 565-68, 736, 842, 1272-74, 1360, 1368-69); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 10; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 327 note 58.
		Aston would have formally been returned to the county in 1536 on the dissolution of the Marcher lordships.
		The Grid Reference is to Aston Hall (SJ325272); Aston Farm is at SJ325280.
	WULFRIC HELD IT [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half of the line after tenuit which has no dot after it. It was probably left for the insertion of a hundred head; see 4,1,22 earl note.
	2 HIDES [***]. I The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about five letters after ii hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,7	ROGER OF COURSEULLES. He was a Norman from Courseulles-sur-Mer (in the French département of Calvados (arrondissement Caen, canton Creully). He received his lands from his father William and held a large fief, almost a hundred entries, in chief in Somerset (SOM 21) and a single manor each in Dorset and in Wiltshire.. From the Exon entry corresponding to SOM 5,4, it is apparent that he was also known as Roger Witen (Wytent in the Tax Return for the Somerset hundred of Cheddar, Exon folio 76a2); see Tengvik, Old English Bynames, pp. 11, 146. This name is Old English Hwiting, a patronymic derived from Old English Hwita ('white') presumably used by Englishmen as a nickname for a Norman with exceptionally fair skin or white hair.
		Roger's lands in Shropshire (which may have been forfeited in 1102 after the rebellion of Earl Roger’s son Robert) passed to the Pandolf barony of Wem. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 46, ix. p. 194; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 298; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 94; Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 33; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 403.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,7,1-2 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,7,3-5 Hodnet Hundred
4,7,1	SUTTON[-UPON-TERN]. This was formerly the Ancient Parish of Drayton-in-Hales (also known as Market Drayton). It is now in the Ecclesiastical Parish of Little Drayton, but for civil purposes is a parish in its own right. The village is now known as Sutton, the district as Sutton-upon-Tern. It was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 (whereas Market Drayton was in Hodnet Hundred), and later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It passed to the barons of Wem and was held under them by a family named Eyton (from Eyton-upon-the-Weald-Moors: 4,14,18, also held from the Wem barony). In later times Sutton seems to be assessed with the Eyton family's other manors: in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115, Peter Eyton holds Eyton, Brocketon (Bratton: 4,14,19), Sutton and half of Lawley (Lawley: 4,14,21) together with land in Staffordshire from the barony of Wem; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 51, and the correction by Purton, 'Sutton upon Tern', p. 42.
		A member of Sutton was Cliva (Cliff Grange SJ6532) given to Combermere Abbey by Ivo Pantulf: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 52; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a.
4,7,2	TIBBERTON. This was formerly a township of Edgmond Ancient Parish and is now a separate Civil Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The bulk of the holding passed to the Pandolfs of Wem (4,14,4 Wem note), but 1 hide was given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Baldwin, son of Gilbert de Conedovera, and his wife Richeldis: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 43; see pp. 46, 75, 76, 249). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56b, 1 hide is held by the Abbot of Shrewsbury, 1 hide by John de Halts and 3 hides by four others with service on these last 4 hides at the castle of Wem; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 46; and 4,1,22 Dawley note.
	WHICH PAY TAX. It is possible that geld' was a later addition to the text by the main scribe of Great Domesday: it is in darker ink and in the right margin. His failure to put a dot after hidę may have been because he intended to add to the phrase; see 4,1,1 pay note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank three-quarters of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,7,3	IN HODNET HUNDRED. On the lack of rubrication on this hundred head, see 4,4,20 Wittery note.
	EDGELEY. The Domesday name-form is Edeslai. This was a township of Whitchurch Ancient Parish. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later no doubt in 'Bradford' Hundred. It passed to the barony of Wem and lost its separate identity, being enumerated as Edisley among the members of Wem manor in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 114; see 4,14,4 Wem note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 196.
4,7,4	'DODINGTON'. This was a township of Whitchurch Ancient Parish. It has been absorbed by the town and is represented by an area or township name and by Dodington Road (Doddington on the 6-inch Ordnance Survey map of 1891); see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 110. Dodington lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It passed to the barony of Wem: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56b, 1 ½ hides in Duthinton' are held by Ralph Pincerna from Wemme; Dudinton is among the lands of William le Boteler (barony of Wem) in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 529, ix no. 223. Like Edgeley (4,7,3) Dodington is reckoned as a member of Wem manor in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 114); see 4,14,4 Wem note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 194.
4,7,5	STEEL. This was in Prees Ancient Parish. Like the previous two entries, it lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred, and similarly passed to the Wem barony and was absorbed by Wem manor: Stiell' is enumerated among its members in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 114; see 4,14,4 Wem note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 197.
	KOLLUNG <OF STEEL>. The Domesday form, Collinc, represents Old Norse Kollungr: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 307. JRM preferred not to include the final -r in such Old Norse name-forms as it does not appear in the Domesday forms. In the Phillimore printed translations the form Colling appears, but as other Old Norse names beginning Kol- were kept as such (e.g. Kolsveinn), it has been decided to standardize in the present edition. The Alecto edition has Kollungr.
		There are only two references in Domesday to this name, the other being in DBY 6,49, but there is no evidence that they referred to the same individual.
		The two holdings are of modest size, some 50 miles apart, and without tenurial associations, they are likely to have belonged to different individuals (JP).
	THORGER <OF STEEL>. The Domesday form, Turgar(us), represents Old Norse Thorgeirr, Old Danish Thorger: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 393. In the Phillimore printed edition the form Thorgar was used, but this has now been altered to the Old Danish form. The Alecto edition has Thorger. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Shropshire.
		The name Thorger is uncommon, occurring nine times in Domesday Book and probably representing six or seven individuals. The very modest holding at Steel is likely to have been the only possession of this Thorger since it was distant from all others, with which it had no tenurial links (JP).
	1 HIDE AS 4 MANORS. [***]. This is an unusual phrase: one would expect the pro iiii Maneriis to have been added after the tenuer' in the line above. The main scribe of Great Domesday probably briefly omitted it and then inserted it after the hidage rather than interlining it above tenuer'; compare the added 'for 2 manors' in 4,3,1;70. There is no change in ink colour or pen at this point. The same word order occurs, however, in 4,14,7. 4,19,10 and 4,27,19, but perhaps also because he briefly omitted the phrase. See 4,21,10 manors note and 4,27,18 manors note for other examples of misplacements of the phrase 'as n manors'. Compare GLS 68,2. The inclusion of details on T.R.E. tenure is sporadic in Great Domesday, some counties and circuits having fuller information on it than others and there is virtually none in circuit VI. It was also added on a surprisingly large number of occasions, especially by scribe B and particularly in Devon and Dorset in circuit II. The scribe left the remainder of the line after it for the inclusion of the taxability of the hide; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,8	ROGER OF LACY. He also held in chief in Shropshire (SHR 7). For biographical details, see SHR 7 Roger note.
		When the fief that had been Earl Roger's was forfeited in 1102, Roger of Lacy became a tenant-in-chief of the lands he previously held under Earl Roger and they were joined to the lands (SHR 7) that he held directly from the king. The majority descend in the Lacy barony; see SHR 7 Roger note.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,8,1-3 Hodnet Hundred
		4,8,4-6 Patton Hundred
		4,8,7-9 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,8,10-11 "Culvestan" Hundred
		4,8,12 Leintwardine Hundred
		4,8,13 'Overs' Hundred
		4,8,14 Baschurch Hundred
		4,8,15 ["Alnodestreu"] Hundred
		4,8,16 'Conditre' Hundred
4,8,1	MORETON [SAY]. This was a chapelry and township of Hodnet Ancient Parish, later a separate parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It descended in the Lacy barony, being held in the thirteenth century by the Verdon family. It was later regarded as a member of Stoke-on-Tern (4,8,7) as Hopton (4,8,3) already was in 1086. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, Morton de Say', 1 ½ hides, is held by Robert de Say in the manor of Stok' from John de Verdon. Its members, forming the other 1 ½ hides, that is Styche, Bletchley, Audley Brow and Oldfields, were also counted in Stoke-on-Tern; see 4,8,7 Stoke note; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 54, vii. no. 710, ix. no. 262, x. nos. 205, 637; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 260.
		MORTVNE was interlined by scribe B, its position in the line below indicated by an insertion mark extending down before de. It is not rubricated in common with all of scribe B's work (including nine place-names). See 4,27,29 "Tunestan" note for an additional place-name that he inserted.
	WILLIAM [* OF SAI *]. William here and in 4,8,2 may be William of Sai, the ancestor of the de Say family. A W[illiam] de Saio appears in the satellite text Evesham K as having a mansio ('messuage') in Gloucester, though this section of Evesham K (Evesham K1) was updated to c. 1100; see GLS {Appendix: The Evesham Manuscripts}. The only men called William in the corresponding entry in Domesday Gloucestershire (GLS G4) are William (son of) Baderon, William the scribe and William the bald, the last two holding a messuage each, while the first holds 2 messuages and appears as holding 17 in Evesham K1. According to Ellis, 'Landholders of Gloucestershire', p. 91 note 3, William 'de Say' was husband of Agnes, daughter of Hugh of Grandmesnil and thus the brother-in-law of Roger of Ivry. Sai is in the French département of Orne (arrondissement and canton Argentan). Theodoric de Say, possibly his son, had succeeded him by 1100 and at some time the family were enfeoffed by Roger of Lacy at Stokesay (7,5) which he held in 1086 as a tenant-in-chief; see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 479. On the de Sai family, see Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 9.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,8,2	LOWE?. If correctly identified, this lay in Wem Ancient Parish and is now in the Civil Parish of Wem Rural. The Domesday form is Lai. The manor, which was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, was identified by Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. pp. 268-70) and by the Domesday Gazetteer as Audley Brow which was later a member of Stoke-on-Tern (4,8,7) and as Lowe by VCH Shropshire, i. p. 328. Since derivation of Audley (Aldeley in the thirteenth century) from Lai is unlikely, it is best to regard Audley as a member of Stoke-on-Tern in 1086. Lai may well be Lowe, but no appropriate later descent of the manor has been found. See 4,14,4 Wem note. The identification is not included in Place-Names of Shropshire, i.
	WILLIAM [* OF SAI *]. See 4,8,1 William note.
	1 FREE MAN. He might be the 1066 holder Alwy who was a free man; elsewhere Great Domesday records pre-Conquest landholders reduced to the status of subtenants of the vill that they had once held in chief. Compare 4,14,26 man note and 4,16,1 men note.
4,8,3	IN THIS HUNDRED. That is, in Hodnet Hundred; the heading is above 4,8,1.
	HOPTON. This was in Hodnet Ancient Parish and it lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It was given by a Lacy tenant, Elias de Say, to Haughmond Abbey, a gift confirmed in 1172 by Pope Alexander III (Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 112 no. xii). In 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a) Hopton in 'Bradford' Hundred is held of the fee of Stoke (Stoke-on-Tern: 4,8,7) by the Abbot of Haughmond; see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 583, 595-613, 1353, appendix A i.); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 271; and 4,3,1 Marchamley note.
		The main scribe of Great Domesday interlined Hotune above bereuuich', perhaps an early addition as the ink colour and pen are the same as in the text below. The lack of rubrication on it is not an indication that it was a late addition, as the names of members of manors were often not rubricated.
	ROGER [OF] LACY. The preposition de is frequently omitted before place-names when part of an individual's name; see Tengvik, Old English Bynames, pp. 126-30. In WOR 2,78 and HEF 24,11 Laci, rather than de Laci, is similarly interlined above Roger[ius]. Compare 4,11,4, and, on the omission of 'son of', see 4,1,15 son of note.
	STOKE[-ON-TERN]. See 4,8,7.
4,8,4	PATTON. This was in the Ancient Parish of Stanton Long. In 1086 it was caput of Patton Hundred, and later was in Wenlock Liberty or in Munslow Hundred. Patton had been a holding of Wenlock Abbey but, with Easthope (4,3,11), was exchanged in 901 for Stanton Long (4,8,6) and Caughley (see SHR 3c St Milburga note). In the reign of Henry I ½ hide returned to Wenlock Priory (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a) and ½ hide was held under the Hopton family (Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 223, 229); see Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 72; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 41; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 173.
	HERBERT [* OF FURCHES *]. Herbert is probably Herbert de Furcis, from Furches in the French département of Calvados (canton Morteaux-Couliboeuf): Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. pp. 44-45; Wightman, Lacy Family, p. 154 note; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 249. The same man also appears to have held land in Herefordshire (HEF 1,22. 10,9-10).
	1 VILLAGER AND 1 RIDER. Domesday uñ abbreviates unum, accusative, so it would seem that the villager and rider are the objects of h[abe]t earlier in the line, but unlike the plough and slaves they are probably not governed by In d'nio as it would be very unusual for a villager and a rider to be in lordship. Compare 1,8 lordship note and 4,11,4 villagers note. It is possible, however, that uñ is a mistake for un' (= unus, nominative) as in 4,8,6 (see 4,8,6 smallholder note).
	A PRIEST. His church was probably at Stanton Long (4,8,6), no Saxon or Norman church being evidenced at Patton; see Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 24.
4,8,5	RUSHBURY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred, descended with the Lacy barony and was divided among heiresses before being reunited later under the Mortimers. In the Book of Fees, p. 963, Stephen de Buterle and Petronella de Kenleg' hold 1 fee in Rusbur' of the barony of W(alter) de Lascy; see Book of Fees, p. 972 (4,8,16 Wheathill note); Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 70b, 80b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194, v. no. 611, vi. no. 54, vii. no. 710, viii. no. 667; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 229, 245; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 94; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 56.
		Rushbury itself only accounted for ½ hide out of the five; according to the Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 70b-71a, the other members were Walle sub Eywode (Wall-under-Heywood SO5192), 1 ½ hides; Estwalle (East Wall SO5293), 1 hide; Westwalle (Wall Bank? SO5092), 1 hide, and Cot' (Coats SO5292), ½ hide. The remaining ½ hide was probably at Wildredehope (Wilderhope SO5492); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 710; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. pp. 55-56.
	ODO [* OF BERNIERES *]. See 4,3,9 Odo note. His 5 hides included Wilderhope and part of Rushbury: VCH Shropshire, x. p. 59.
4,8,6	STANTON [LONG]. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. Ten hides at Stantune, of which these 3 hides may have been the core, had been granted back to St Milburga's Priory at Wenlock in 901 (SHR 3c St Milburga note), but all trace of a Wenlock interest is missing from Domesday, and only a mill is held later (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164b). A further 5 hides of this grant will have become the two 1086 manors of Stantune later known as Holdgate (4,21,5-6; see 4,21,5 Holdgate note).The overlordship was forfeited in 1102 by the rebellion of Earl Roger's son. The mesne lordship of Roger of Lacy had already been confiscated in 1096 and had probably been given to his brother Hugh. The land escheated to the Crown under Henry I following Hugh's death and part became a serjeanty. This was held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 72a, by Roger de Mora as Longestanton'. The Abbot of Haughmond had an interest in a part (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b; the Haughmond Cartulary: Rees, nos. 688, 730-35) and the Templars were enfeoffed in another, holding of the fee of Castle Holdgate (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 72b, 101a); see 4,21,5 Holdgate note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 32; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 171.
		Cote (Coates SO5890) was an adjacent serjeanty (Book of Fees, pp. 6, 383) which had perhaps been separated at an early date from Stanton Long.
		There was almost certainly a church here, not mentioned in Domesday. The priest given under Patton (4,8,4) probably served it. This church may have been the minster for Patton Hundred and for the territory that preceded it unless that church was at Diddlebury, a member of the royal manor of 'Corfham' (4,1,5) on which Patton Hundred depended: {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	HERBERT [* OF FURCHES *]. See 4,8,4 Herbert note.
	1 SMALLHOLDER. In the manuscript uñ bord' (= unum bordarium, accusative, but there is no subject and verb). This is a scribal error for un' bord (= unus bordarius, nominative).
4,8,7	STOKE[-ON-TERN]. This was an Ancient Parish, usually known in that capacity as Stoke-upon-Tern. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Roger of Lacy held two manors called 'Stoke', the present one under Earl Roger and another 'Stoke' in chief from the king (7,5). Both were held under the Lacys in the thirteenth century by the de Say family and both are sometimes called 'Stoke Say', sometimes distinguished from one another as 'North Stoke' and 'South Stoke'. 'North Stoke' or Stoke-on-Tern was also called 'Stoke Lacy'. In Book of Fees, p. 964, Walter de Say holds from the barony of Walter de Lasey 3 fees in Nortstok', Sutstok' and Wethul' (Wheathill: 4,8,16). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b, John de Verdon holds Stoke by exchange with Hugh de Say of the fee of Ludlow. It is Stoke Say in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220, Stoke super Tyrne in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227, and North Stoke in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237; see Book of Fees, p. 964; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 187, vi. no. 54, vii. nos. 83, 710, viii. no. 469, ix. nos. 379, 642.
		In 1086 Stoke-on-Tern had outliers at Hopton and Little Wytheford (4,8,3;8) which were assessed with it. This process was extended after 1086, for among the members of Stoke Say given in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220, are a number that were parts of other Lacy holdings in Domesday. These members were: Alvereton (Ollerton SJ6525); Eton (Eaton-upon-Tern SJ6523; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 710, x. no. 637); Wystaneswyk (Wistanswick SJ6629); Stoke Aubrey (an unidentified part of Stoke-on-Tern); Wodehus (Woodhouse SJ6426); Heselschauwe (Helshaw; see 1,9 'Chatshall'note); Pethesey (Petsey SJ6327); Morton Say (Moreton Say: 4,8,1 and see 4,8,1 Moreton note); Stuche (Styche SJ6435; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ix. no. 381); Blecheleye (Bletchley SJ6233; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635, v. no. 104, vi. no. 54, vii. no. 710; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b); Aldeleye (Audley Brow SJ6335); Oldefeld (Oldfields SJ6236); Hull (Hill House in Stoke Heath, SJ6529); Warendeshall (Warran SJ6530 or Wardale SJ6729); Parrok (Stoke Park SJ6526). See also Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 59. Of these members, Styche, Bletchley, Audley Brow and Oldfields were no doubt parts of Moreton Say (4,8,1) in 1086.
		Part of Stoca was given by Theodoric de Sai to Shrewsbury Abbey; the land was actually at Burhulla (lost): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 33, 38, 41).
	7 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about six letters after vii hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
	3 RIDERS. The main scribe of Great Domesday corrected their number to iii by overwriting.
4,8,8	[LITTLE] WYTHEFORD. Like Great Wytheford (4,3,4-5. 4,14,2) it lay in Shawbury Ancient Parish, but the two Wythefords lay in different hundreds in 1086, Little Wytheford in Wrockwardine Hundred, later in 'Bradford' Hundred, and Great Wytheford in Hodnet Hundred. There is no later connection here with the Lacy family; Little Wytheford was annexed to Shawbury (4,23,3) which is adjacent, while it was in the hands of the Crown. Half of Parva Whetheford' was given with Shawbury by King John to Thomas de Erdyngton: Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 71. For the other half of Little Wytheford, see 4,27,3.
	½ HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters after dimid' hida.; see 1,5 hide note.
	ASSESSED IN THE REVENUE OF. The Latin firma here represents the whole of the revenue/ income of Stoke-on-Tern (4,8,7) in which the payment of Little Wytheford was included; compare 4,28,4. For other meanings of firma, see 3d,5 revenue note 4,1,12 revenue note.
	STOKE[-ON-TERN]. See 4,8,7.
4,8,9	[WATERS] UPTON. This was an Ancient Parish, also known as Upton Parva. It was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It passed from the Lacy barony to that of Wem (descent from William Pandolf: 4,14 William note). In Book of Fees, p. 964, Walter de Opton' (whence 'Waters', as in Bridgwater, Somerset) holds 1 fee in Opton' of the barony of Wem. The place is Hopton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a, and Upton Waters in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237; see Book of Fees, p. 972; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 52; and 4,14,4 Wem note. The church of Upton Parva (Waters Upton) was subject to St Guthlac's of Hereford; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 245a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 57.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. On the possibility that he was the same person as Siward [the fat], on whom see 4,27,32 Siward note, see 4,1,34 Siward note.
	GAMAL. The Domesday forms of this name - Gamel, Game - represent Old Norse Gamall, Old Danish Gamal: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 257-58. In some of the Phillimore printed translations this name appears as Gamal, and in others as Gamall; these have now been standardized as the Old Danish form. The Alecto edition has Gamal.
	3 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about six letters after iii hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
4,8,10	CORFTON. It was in Diddlebury Ancient Parish. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. It descended in the Lacy family, being held in Book of Fees, p. 964, as Corfton' by William de Forches from the barony of Walter de Lasey. But in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, only 2 hides are held by William de Furches from the heirs of Walter de Lascy, the other hide being divided between Hugh de Patiton' holding from Walter de Hopton' and the prior of Wenlock holding from William de Furc'; see Book of Fees, p. 972; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 223, 245; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 44; and 4,1,6 St Peter note.
	HERBERT [* OF FURCHES *]. See 4,8,4 Herbert note.
	ALSI. The Domesday forms of the name-form Alsi - Alsi, Alsius, Elsi, Aelsi, Alsicus, Alsidus etc. - could represent Old English Ælfsige, Old English Æthelsige or perhaps Old English Ealdsige, Ealhsige: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 151-52, under Al-sige, see also p. 142, under Al-. JRM followed von Feilitzen in keeping to the base form, but preferred the second element -si for the Old English -sige, as that is what is found in the vast majority of instances in Domesday. The Alecto edition has Alsige. However, in some of the Phillimore printed translations the forms Alfsi and Alfsige appear for people who in the present edition are now rendered Alsi because the forms of their names lack an -f- or -v- which JRM thought was necessary for it to be included under Alfsi (a few of them appear in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 180, under Old English Ælfsige, and on pp. 187-88, under Old English Æthelsige). The Alecto edition has Alsige for those that appear there under Old English Ælfsige.
	HEDGED ENCLOSURE FOR CAPTURING ROE-DEER. Three such enclosures are also recorded at Lingen (6,14). Compare WOR 18,4 (i haia in qua capiebantur ferae: '1 hedged enclosure where wild animals were caught'), HEF 29,16 ('there is a hedged enclosure in which he may keep what he can catch') and CHS 1,1 (ii haiae capreolorum: '2 deer enclosures'); see 3c,2 enclosures note.
4,8,11	MIDDLEHOPE. Like Corfton (4,8,10), it was in Diddlebury Ancient Parish. It was in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, then in Munslow Hundred. The two vills had the same descent from the1086 holder Herbert to the de Furchis family under the Lacys. In the Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, William de Midelhop' holds Midelhop' from William de Furc', but there is no mention of the Lacy overlordship; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194, x. no. 618; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 51.
	HERBERT [* OF FURCHES *]. See 4,8,4 Herbert note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about seven letters after the population, rather small for the later insertion of any resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,8,12	IN LEINTWARDINE HUNDRED. If this heading is correct, Plaish will have been a detached part of Leintwardine Hundred, lying adjacent to a detached part of "Culvestan" hundred. It is possible that like the erroneous insertions of headings for Baschurch Hundred (4,9,1. 4,11,5. 7,1), the scribe has mechanically inserted the name of the next hundred that appears in the standard sequence. On the other hand, Leintwardine Hundred is split into two further parts and it may be that it was carved out of a large royal estate from which the hundreds of Patton and "Culvestan" were also created. The untidiness of the boundaries would reflect a division partly on tenurial lines. See {Introduction: Hundreds}.
	PLAISH. It lay in Cardington Ancient Parish. If the hundred head is not an error (4,8,12 Leintwardine note), Plaish will have been in 1086 an isolated part of Leintwardine Hundred while Cardington (4,3,44) was in a detachment of "Culvestan" Hundred; both places were later in Munslow Hundred. Plaish had the same descent as Higford (4,8,15) descending in the Lacy barony, then passing to Fitz Alan when William Fitz Alan married the daughter of Hugh of Lacy. In both places the undertenants are the de Higfords. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 222, Walter Springthus holds Plese in Munslow Hundred from Roger de Le, Roger holds from Geoffrey de Grete, Geoffrey holds from William de Hugsford who holds from Richard Fitz Alan; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 7 la; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 353.
		Plaish is one of the few Shropshire places represented in Saxon charters: in 963 King Edgar had granted to his thane Wulfric 6 mansae at Plesc (Plaish) and Eastun (Church Aston; see 4,1,23 Edgmond note): Early Charters of the West Midlands, no. 431 p. 149 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 723). The Plaish estate will have included Chatshall and Broome. Chatshall was a part of Cardington (4,3,44) in 1086 and Broome was a separate estate (4,28,1): VCH Shropshire, x. pp. 29-30. Eastun has been identified as Church and Chetwynd Aston, but a detailed study of the bounds show that they are only those of Church Aston: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 26. However, Place-Names of Shropshire, iii. p. 125, is less certain that Plesc is Plaish.
	BERNER <OF HIGFORD>. He is probably the same man as Roger of Lacy's subtenant at Higford (4,8,15), who had also succeeded Godwin; also the same as the Berner who was subtenant of William Pandolf (4,14,22-23). These manors all passed to the de Higford family. See Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 19; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 167. He is probably the same person as the Berner who held land from Roger of Lacy in Herefordshire (HEF 10,22-23).
4,8,13	BITTERLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. In 1086 and later, it lay in 'Overs' Hundred. It descended in the Lacy family, being held in Book of Fees, p. 963, as Buterle, 1 fee held by Stephen de Buturle of the barony of W(alter) de Lasey. It is held from Margery de Laci in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b, and from Theobald de Verdon in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 216; see Book of Fees, p. 972; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 234, 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 54, vii. no. 710; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 367. A mill there was early given to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 204-206).
4,8,14	FORTON. It lay in Montford Ancient Parish. In 1086 it was in Baschurch Hundred, later in Pimhill Hundred. It seems to have followed the same descent as Montford itself (4,4,23 Montford note) from Roger of Lacy to Fitz Alan and to have become a member of Montford: Manford (Montford: 4,4,23) and Fortone are given with Nesse (Little Ness: 4,3,52) and Serewardin (Shrawardine: 4,3,50) in the Inquisition on the death of John Fitz Alan (Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812). In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215, it is listed independently in Pimhill Hundred; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 600; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 252, x. pp. 98, 126, 129.
4,8,15	[IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED]. The heading is supplied from geographical probability and from the fact that Stockton in whose parish Higford lay is in a group of places in "Alnodestreu" Hundred at 4,23,18.
	HIGFORD. It lay in Stockton Ancient Parish; it was probably in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Brimstree Hundred. It followed the same descent as Plaish (4,8,12) passing from the Lacys to Fitz Alan: in Book of Fees, p. 962, Walter de Huggeford holds Huggeford with members from the barony of John Fitz Alan. These members are said by Feudal Aids, iv. p. 226, to be Norton (Norton SJ7200), Appeleg (Apley SO7199) and Astewall (Astol SJ7300); see Book of Fees, p. 971, Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 234, 243; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 10. It is possible that another member, though remoter, was Bolinghall (Boningale SJ8102), held in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 226, by the Abbot of Lilleshall from William de Huggefford; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 264.
	BERNER <OF HIGFORD> HOLDS ... GODWIN HELD. See 4,8,12 Berner note.
4,8,16	WHEATHILL. Domesday Waltham. It was an Ancient Parish. In 1086 it lay in 'Conditre' Hundred, later in Stottesdon Hundred. It descended in the Lacy barony and was held under the Lacys by the de Says: in Book of Fees, p. 964, Walter de Say holds in Nortstok', Sotstok' (Stoke-on-Tern and Stokesay; see 4,8,7 Stoke note and 7,5 Stokesay note) and in Wethul' from the barony of W(alter) de Lasey. It is coupled with Rushbury (4,8,5) in Book of Fees, p. 972; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 218, 231, 242; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 522; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 283.
	3 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about five letters after iii hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank two-thirds of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,9	ROBERT SON OF THEOBALD. He came from Avoine, in the French département of Orne (arrondissement Argentan, canton Ecouché). He held from Earl Roger in Sussex and in Shropshire. In Sussex he was Earl Roger's principal tenant (SUS 11), if most or all of the references to plain Robert are to Robert son of Theobald, and was Roger's sheriff in his Rape of Arundel. For that reason, he was also known as Robert of Arundel in his deeds of gift Lewes Priory. When the house of Montgomery forfeited its lands in 1102 (see SHR 4 Roger note), Robert's land, then presumably held by his son Hugh, escheated to the Crown. With the exception of Shifnal (4,9,1), what had been Robert's lands later formed the honour of Petworth (Sussex) under the lords of Arundel. See Round, Calendar of Documents, France, pp. l-li, and nos. 655-656 p. 233; Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', pp. 244-45; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 386.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,9,1-2 ["Alnodestreu"] Hundred
		4,9,3-4 Wrockwardine Hundred
	At 4,9,1 Domesday has an erroneous Baschurch hundred head.
4,9,1	IN BASCHURCH HUNDRED. [* IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED *]. There seems to be no reason why Shifnal and Kemberton (4,9,2) should be attached to Baschurch Hundred from which they are remote. It is likely that the wrong hundred was inserted and should have been "Alnodestreu", as is probably also the case at 4,11,5 and 7,1. The main scribe of Great Domesday very probably mechanically inserted the name of the next hundred in the standard sequence, even though the fief-holder had no estates there: {Introduction: Hundreds}.
	SHIFNAL. The place was an Ancient Parish; it no doubt lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Brimstree Hundred. According to two charters regarded as fabricated, Scuffanhalch together with Costesford (Cosford in Albrighton: 4,11,10), Wecelleburne (Wattlesborough: 4,4,16) and Lusgerde (Lizard Hill SJ7709) had been granted by Wulfhere, King of the Mercians, to St Peter's Church at Peterborough ostensibly in 664 and again by Ethelred, King of the Mercians supposedly in 680: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 147 nos. 426-47 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, nos. 68, 72); see the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (version E) for 675. No trace of the Peterborough interest is found in later times, nor of the grant by Wiglaf of land at Iddeshale to the minster at Hanbury in Worcestershire: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 101 no. 247 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 190). Lizard, part of Shifnal or of Tong (4,1,24), was later held by the Abbot of Lilleshall: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a.
		The Domesday name-form is Iteshale. The 1086 and modern forms have different origins, Iddi's halh and Scuffa's halh respectively, but seem to have co-existed. The forms Scuffanhalch and Shoffenhale are found in the above-mentioned charter-grants. The charters are post-Conquest forgeries, but these spellings seem to be pre-Conquest. This gift is referred to as Shuffenhale in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (version E) for 675. 'Idsall' is the predominant medieval name. However, the Iddeshale of the 836 charter of King Wiglaf cited above is probably not Shifnal, but a lost Worcestershire place; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 265 note 1; Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Shifnal and Idsall; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. pp. 263-64.
		From Robert the lands passed to King Henry I and were granted by him to Alan de Dunstanville, lord of Castle Combe in Wiltshire. Hideshale is held from the mother of Walter de Dunstanville in the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 509), and by Walter himself (as Ideshale) in Book of Fees, p. 966. The tenant in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234, is Bartholomew de Badelesmere; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 243.
		Robert gave the church and tithes to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 6, 34, 39, 42, 64, 256, 261, 297-98, 300, 342-43).
		Members of Shifnal will certainly have been Hemme and Hinynton (The Hem SJ7305 and Hinnington SJ7404) held by Bartholomew de Badelesmere in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 104; see v. no. 188, vii. no. 104, viii. no. 185, x. no. 639. It is probable that The Wyke (SJ7306), 'Trilwardyne', Priorslee (SJ7109, held by the Canons of Wombridge), 'Knowle' (now represented by Knowl Wood and Knowlbank SJ7208), The Woodhouse (SJ7210), Haughton (SJ7408), Stanton (SJ7707) and Upton (SJ7506) were also members: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. pp. 265-337. La Wodehouus is held by Bartholomew de Badelesmere in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 104. Another possible member was Evelith (see 4,19,9 Moreton note), also Grenhul (Grindle SJ7503), held by Bartholomew de Badelesmere in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 104; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 90.
		Earl Morcar also held the adjacent Tong (4,1,24) before 1066.
		There was a superior church here, not mentioned in Domesday; see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	EARL MORCAR. Farley printed an abbreviation line over the m of the interlined com, although there is not one in the manuscript (presumably because of the closeness of com to the hundred head above). See 2,2 plough note for other examples of Farley 'correcting' the reading in the manuscript.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,9,2	KEMBERTON. This was an Ancient Parish. In 1086 it probably lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred and was later in Brimstree. After falling to the Crown, Kemberton was held by Adeliza de Louvain as part of the barony of Arundel; see Sanders, English Baronies, p. 2; 4,1 Roger note). She was King Henry I's widow and subsequently married William (II) de Albini (Aubigny) who was created Earl of Arundel in 1176. Adeliza and William granted the subordinate honour of Petworth to Adeliza's brother, Jocelyn de Lovain, and it subsequently went to the de Percy family holding under the Fitz Alans who came to hold a quarter of the barony by marriage. In Book of Fees, p. 962, William de Alta Ripa holds Kembricton' from the barony of John Fitz Alan; the former holds Kembirton' from Henry de Percy in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 226; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 234, 244; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 245a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 1.
		The tithes of Cambristona were given by Robert son of Theobald to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 34, 39, 42, etc.).
4,9,3	WOODCOTE. This formerly lay in Sheriffhales Ancient Parish which was divided between Shropshire (Wrockwardine, later 'Bradford', Hundred) and Staffordshire (Cuttlestone Hundred). The portion that included Woodcote lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in Shropshire 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Woodcote later became a separate Civil Parish, lying entirely in Shropshire.
		Like Kemberton (4,9,2) it passed to the honour of Petworth. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b, Wodecot, 3 hides, is held of the fee of Henry de Persy, whilst in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220, William Randulfe holds Wodecote and Eye (Eye farm SJ6005; see 4,9,4 manor note) from Henry de Percy; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, viii. no. 309; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 11.
	3 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters after iii hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,9,4	THIS ENTRY was squeezed into the space left at the end of Robert's subtenancy by the the main scribe of Great Domesday; the pen he used is quite different from the one he had used for the rest of this sub-chapter and the ink is slightly paler. His use of the 'Land for' plough estimate formula also suggests a later addition; see 3d,7 entry note. This entry was probably added at the same time as C14.
	THIS UNIDENTIFIED MANOR of 1 virgate which lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 was probably at Eye in the Ancient Parish of Eaton Constantine. Eye followed the same descent as Woodcote and Kemberton; see 4,9,3 Woodcote note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 16.
	THEY HAVE NOTHING. This probably means they have no ploughs, as the villagers' land-holding is not recorded in Shropshire. See 4,14,15 smallholder note.
4,10	RANULF PEVEREL. He was a Norman from Vengeons in the French département of Manche (arrondissement Avranches, canton Sourdeval). There were several Peverels active in England in 1086, but no evidence of any close link between them; nonetheless, unless the nickname Peverel arose separately in different localities, there is probably some unfound kinship between them. If so, then Ranulf was probably a relative of William Peverel of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. Ranulf was succeeded by his son William Peverel of Essex, but this small fief probably escheated to the Crown under King Henry I or Henry II and was granted out to different lords; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. pp. 104-105, vi. p. 310; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 355.
		Peverel is from Old French Peurel, Latin piperellus, diminutive of piper ('pepper'). The diminutive suffix -ellus could mean 'small' or be affectionate 'sweet little'. If peppercorn is meant, the reference could be to Ranulf's rotundity or his dark hair or features; see Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 326. Reaney, Dictionary of British Surnames, under Peverall suggests that the reference might also be to a character trait: ' a small man with a fiery, peppery temper'. See also VCH Nottinghamshire, i. p 228; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 136; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 494.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,10,1 Condover Hundred
		4,10,2-4 Hodnet Hundred
4,10,1	CRESSAGE. This was formerly a township of Cound Ancient Parish, and is now its own Civil Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The overlordship of the manor passed to Hugh of Lacy by 1180, then ultimately to Maud of Lacy (SHR 7 Roger note) who was wife of Geoffrey de Geneville and whose granddaughter Joan brought it to Roger Mortimer, Earl of March, by 1308. From the subtenant Ranulf Peverel, it passed to William Peverel of Essex and was forfeited to the Crown by 1130. By 1180 the tenancy had passed to a branch of the de Lacys, relatives of the overlord. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215, Adam de Lacy holds Cristerdech from Geoffrey de Genevill and his wife Maud; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229, and Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 344, where it is held of the manor of Stanton Lacy (7,4). The Abbot of Buildwas had a short-term interest here: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 62b, 92a. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 308; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 74.
4,10,2	LACON. The Domesday name-form is Lack. The place was a township of Wem Ancient Parish, and was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. About 1130 it appears to have fallen to the Crown and was subsequently added to Soulton (3e,2) which was adjacent and belonged to the Church of St Michael in or close to Shrewsbury Castle. In the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 121, John de Laken holds Laken from Robert Corbet who holds from the King's Chapel in Shrewsbury Castle; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 352.
	ALNOTH. The Domesday forms of the name-form Alnoth - Alnod(us), Elnod(us), Aelnod(us), Alnot(us), Alnoth(us), Alnoht, Elnoc (an error for Elnot) etc. - could represent Old English Ælfnoth, Old English Æthelnoth, or the hypothetical Old English Ealdnoth: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 149-50, under Al-noth, and see also p. 142, under Al-. JRM followed von Feilitzen in keeping to the base form, Alnoth, but some of the people he called Alnoth, followed in the present edition, appear in von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 175, 185-86, 241, under Old English Ælfnoth, Old English Æthelnoth and Old English Ealdnoth, but their Domesday forms do not include the -f- that JRM required for a person to be called Alfnoth (his version of Old English Ælfnoth), the -d- or -g- that warranted its inclusion under Old English Æthelnoth, or the -t- necessary for its rendering as Aldnoth (his version of Old English Ealdnoth; but see NFK 1,109 Alnoth note). JMcND accepted this. The Alecto edition follows von Feilitzen.
4,10,3	WESTON[-UNDER-REDCASTLE]. This was formerly a township of Hodnet Ancient Parish and is now its own Civil Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. By 1130 the land appears to have escheated to the Crown, then was given in 1175 to Guy Lestrange. On his death it went to his two sisters and then both halves in various ways to Henry de Audley. It descended in the Audley family and was held from the Mortimers in the later thirteenth century. The land included 'Redcliff' on which the Audleys had their castle, probably established in the first half of the thirteenth century; see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 429. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, John de Aldithel' holds 4 ½ hides in Weston', half from Richard de Harecurt and half from Madoc de Sutton' in exchange for Stanwey (Stanway: 4,3,9); see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 222; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 97. The Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 117, gives the members as Wexhill' (Whixall: 4,10,4) and Chirbere (Chirbury Hill and Wood in Kenstone, SJ5928) held from Robert de Mortuomari of his barony of Burford. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 536 (of Nicholas de Aldithele), there is a longer list of the members which included Wykeshull, Cheseburi, Lakene (Lacon: 4,10,2), Weston, Hauekeston (Hawkstone SJ5829), Marchumley (Marchamley: 4,3,1) and Kentenesden (Kenstone SJ5928; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 285) held of the heirs of Maud Lestrange. Rubeum Castrum (Redcastle SJ5729) was also a member; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 196, 476, v. no. 62, vi. no. 56.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 341.
	EDRIC THE WILD. See 4,1,14 Edric note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,10,4	WHIXALL. This was formerly an area in Prees Ancient Parish, but is now its own Civil Parish. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It followed the same descent as Weston (4,10,3) and is sometimes found coupled with it. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58b, William de Lake holds ½ hide in Wickeshall from James de Audith, while in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116, William Laken holds Wekeshall' from Nicholas de Audeley' as a member of the latter's manor of Weston; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 221, 227; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 348.
	ALDGYTH <OF WELSHAMPTON>. See 4,3,49 Aldgyth note.
	A FREE WOMAN. Latin homo can in theory apply to either sex: in HRT 5,16;20 Edeva and Saehild, both females, are each described as the 'man' of some magnate. See CAM 13,1 Goda note. However, the main scribe of Great Domesday may simply have repeated the formula 7 liber homo fuit mechanically. In 4,14,3 Aelfeva is correctly described as a libera femina, as also in ESS 90,20; see also 'Aldgyth, a free woman (libera femina)' in SUF 67,15. SUF 74,6.
4,11	RALPH OF MORTIMER. He also held in chief in Shropshire (SHR 6). For biographical details, see SHR 6 Ralph note.
		He appears to have assumed the overlordship of these lands after 1102 and joined them to the fief that he held in chief from the king (SHR 6 Ralph note).
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,11,1 Condover Hundred
		4,11,2-3 "Culvestan" Hundred
		4,11,4 'Overs' Hundred
		4,11,5-10 ["Alnodestreu"] Hundred
		4,11,11-16 'Conditre' Hundred
		4,11,17-18 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,11,19 [Hodnet] Hundred.
	The beginning of this chapter is in the standard sequence. The last three entries (4,11,17-19) are out of sequence and there is no reason to think that they were postscriptal entries in Domesday, but there is a strong suspicion that they were not holdings of Ralph of Mortimer; see 4,11,17 Ralph note. At 4,11,5 Domesday has an erroneous Baschurch hundred head.
4,11,1	SHEINTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later, then in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. The entry is duplicated at 6,32, though with less detail, in the fief that Ralph of Mortimer holds directly from the king: the exact nature of the tenure must have been unclear to the main scribe of Great Domesday or to the compilers of the circuit volume. The overlordship continued with the Mortimers; thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Hugh de Seynton' holds 2 hides in Seynton' from Roger Mortimer; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 91b; Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 215, 232, 247; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235. The lords of Castle Holdgate (descent from Helgot, the 1086 subtenant; see 4,21 Helgot note) also retained an interest here: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 214.
	AZUR. On this name, see 4,1,35 Azur note.
	HELGOT <OF HOLDGATE>. The Helgot who holds from Ralph of Mortimer (4,11,1;9. 6,27;29;32) is no doubt the same as the man who holds directly from Earl Roger (4,21; see 4,21 Helgot note); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 318.
	SAEWULF <OF SHEINTON>. The Domesday forms of this name - Saulf(us), Saul, Seulf, Saolf, Saolt - represent Old English Saewulf: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 355. The Alecto edition also has Saewulf.
		The only other occurrence of this name in Domesday Shropshire is in the duplicate entry at 6,32 (see 4,11,1 Sheinton note).
		Since the nearest other holding was over 60 miles away, of modest value, and without tenurial associations, this was probably to only property of Saewulf (JP).
4,11,2	HUNTINGTON. It now lies in the Civil Parish of Ashford Carbonell. Ashford Carbonell itself was a chapelry of the Ancient Parish of Little Hereford, the only part of the parish to lie in Shropshire, the rest being in Herefordshire. Huntington was in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. The overlordship of both manors continued with the Mortimer family, the undertenancy of the first going to the de Lingen family named from Lingen (6,14) which was also held by a "Turstin" under Ralph of Mortimer in 1086. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, John de Lingenie holds Huntiton' from Roger de Mortuomar; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 100b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 73.
		The second manor seems actually to have lain at Asford Superior ('Ashford Jones' SO5271) where John son of Reginald holds 1 ½ hides from Simon de Burleg' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a. This place is Ascheford Jones (said to be in 'Overs' Hundred) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 243, held of the fee of Roger de Mortuo Mari; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 100b; Book of Fees, p. 963; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 79. 'Ashford Jones', now Ashford House, lay about a mile north-west of Ashford Carbonell, according to the map of Emmanuel Bowen (1724) and the first edition Ordnance Survey one-inch map (sheet 55 of 1832, reprint sheet 50 of 1970); see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 20.
	"TURSTIN" <OF HUNTINGTON>. It is not clear what name is represented by the Domesday form of this 1086 holder, Turstin[us]. The name is not mentioned in Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England. Dauzat, Dictionnaire des Noms et Prénoms de France, states that Tostain, Toustain are the archaic forms of the Norman names Totain, Toutain, deriving from the Nordic baptismal name Thor-steinn. Thorsteinn is the Old Norse form of the Old Danish Thorsten, used here for the T.R.E. holders (called Thurstan in the printed Phillimore edition), but has come into England by a different route, not directly from Scandinavia, but via Normandy, though retaining the medial -r-. The printed Phillimore edition has Thurstan, but this has been altered here to "Turstin". The Alecto edition generally has Turstin for the 1086 holders, though Thorsten for STS 12,31.
		The "Turstin" who held under Ralph of Mortimer (4,11,2. 6,14-15) was identified as "Turstin"of Wigmore (alias "Turstin" of Flanders), by Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 343, followed by VCH Shropshire, i. p. 289. However, this ancestor of the family de Lingen, is probably a different person: Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 435.
	4 PLOUGHMEN. The main scribe of Great Domesday originally wrote iiii serui and then he underlined the serui for deletion and inserted bouar' above it. See 1,8 ploughmen note.
4,11,3	THERE. Latin ibidem refers to Huntington (4,11,2), not to "Culvestan" Hundred. Had the latter been intended, the main scribe of Great Domesday would have written in eod[em] Hund[redo] as in 1,4 and 4,9,4.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. The several occurrences of a Richard holding under Ralph of Mortimer (4,11,3;14. 6,5-6;9;23-26) may refer to the same individual; see 6,23 Richard note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,11,4	CAYNHAM. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Overs' Hundred in 1086 and later. The 4 hides of lordship were given as part of the endowment of Wigmore Abbey: thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b, in 'Overs' Hundred, the Abbot of Wigmore has 4 hides in alms from Roger de Mortuomari. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232 (in Stottesdon Hundred), the Abbot of Wigmore holds Syveton (Snitton SO5575) and Kynham; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 103b; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 164b, 166b; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 349; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 202.
		It is likely that the other 4 hides, which did not go to Wigmore, included 1 hide in Hope Baghod (Hope Bagot SO5874) held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b, by Robert Baghard from Roger de Mortuomari in 'Overs' Hundred; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 103b; Book of Fees, pp. 963, 973; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235. A further hide lay in Hintes (Hints SO6175) held from the same Roger de Mortuomari in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 103b; Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 360.
	4 PACKLOADS OF SALT FROM DROITWICH. See 4,1,25 salt-houses note.
	IN THE WHOLE MANOR, LAND FOR 19 PLOUGHS. That is, in the subtenancies of Robert, Walter and Ralph as well as in the main holding.
	ROBERT [OF] VESSEY. Vessey is a place-name not a personal name, so Latin de has been omitted. Compare 4,8,3 Roger note.
		He perhaps came from Vessey in the French département of Manche (arrondissement Avranches, canton Pontorson). He held land in Domesday both as a tenant-in-chief and as a subtenant. Most of his tenancy in chief was incorporated in the Earldom of Warwick at its creation c. 1088. See Tengvik, Old English Bynames, pp. 117-18; Lewis, ‘Introduction’, Shropshire Domesday, p. 18; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 382.
	4 VILLAGERS AND 4 SMALLHOLDERS. Latin vill' and bord' may abbreviate the accusative uillanos and bordarios and so be the objects of h[abe]nt (though probably not governed by In d'nio) earlier in the line. Compare 1,8 lordship note and 4,8,4 villager note.
4,11,5	IN BASCHURCH HUNDRED. [* IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED *]. It is likely that here, as in 4,9,1 and 7,1, the main scribe of Great Domesday has put a Baschurch hundred head in error for one for "Alnodestreu". He very probably mechanically inserted the name of the next hundred in the standard sequence, even though the fief-holder had no estates there: {Introduction: Hundreds}.
	THERE IS A HOLE in the manuscript at the top of folio 257a which has been repaired from the other side of the folio (see 4,16,2 thanes note). As it occupies the space where the hundred head is normally written, this had to be written on the left side. The main scribe of Great Domesday had to write lib' hô round the bottom part of the hole (the top of the b' disappearing into it), but Farley did not indicate the gap thus caused.
	EUDON [GEORGE]. This place lay in Chetton Ancient Parish. Like Eudon Burnell (4,3,61) it probably lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Stottesdon Hundred and the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b, William de Sancto Georg', Robert Corbet and Geoffrey de Overton hold 8 virgates (i.e. the 2 hides of Domesday) between them with service at Wigmore. In Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972, William de Sancto Georgio holds 1 fee in Nene (Neen Savage: 6,6-7) and Eudon' of the barony of Ralph of Mortimer, while Neen Savage and Eudon are held together in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246. Eudon had been held by Edric (the wild) and both were held in the twelfth century by the Savage family under the Mortimers; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii p. 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. pp. 48, 51, iv. p. 272; Purton, 'Manors of Eudon Burnell and Eudon George'; and 4,11,16 Overton note.
	EDRIC [* THE WILD *]. The descent of this manor suggests the identification of this Edric; see 4,1,14 Edric note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,11,6	CHELMARSH. This was an Ancient Parish. It seems to have lain in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 (4,11,5 Baschurch note) later in Stottesdon Hundred. It appears to have been an early grant to St Milburga's Priory (SHR 3c St Milburga note) and will probably have formed a unit with Deuxhill and Eardington, the former of which survived in the priory's hands, the latter being exchanged for Millichope (see 4,1,32 St Milburga note and 4,21,3 Millichope note). There is no trace of Wenlock's holding here in later times. The manor passed as expected to the Mortimers, Hugh de Mortuo Mari holding 5 hides at Cheylmerse in 1255 and the advowson of the church being held by Wigmore Abbey; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 81b, 104a; 108a; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no.114; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 166a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 36; and 6,2 Cleobury note.
		In the Alecto facsimile CELMERES resembles CELMBRES; see 3c,7 Perkley note.
4,11,7	SIDBURY. The Domesday form is Sudberie. This was an Ancient Parish. It seems to have been in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred and in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. In the Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972, Ralph de Arras holds two fees in Sodbyr' or Sutbur' and Nenton' (Neenton: 4,11,8) from the barony of Ralph de Mortuomari. It appears as 1 ½ hides in Pulbyr' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 232, 246; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 60.
	IN LORDSHIP. The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the abbreviation line in d'nio, which is faint in the manuscript. See 3f,7 plough note for examples of other imperfect reproductions in this facsimile. It is visible in the Alecto facsimile.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,11,8	NEENTON. The Domesday form is Newentone. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred and in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer and it had the same descent as Sidbury (4,11,7). Ralph de Arraz holds Neynton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b, from Roger de Mortuo Mari and it is coupled with Sidbury in Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972, and in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 55; and 4,11,7 Sidbury note. For the Shrewsbury Abbey interest in Neenton, see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 166a; and 4,1,5 St Peter note.
	AZUR. On this name, see 4,1,35 Azur note.
	½ HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters after dimid' hida.; see 1,5 hide note.
4,11,9	BURWARTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It probably lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Stottesdon Hundred and in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. Helgot's 1086 subtenancy is represented in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b, by Thomas de Costentyn who holds ½ hide in Burewarton' from Roger de Mortuo Mari; see Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 232, 246; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 747, iii. no. 629, iv. nos. 235, 321; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 31.
	HELGOT <OF HOLDGATE>. See 4,11,1 Helgot note.
	AZUR. On this name, see 4,1,35 Azur note.
4,11,10	COSFORD. This lay in Albrighton Ancient Parish, near Shifnal. A place called Costesford is found in charter-grants by Wulhere, King of the Mercians, ostensibly in 664, and by Ethelred, King of the Mercians supposedly in 680, both to Peterborough Abbey: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 147 nos. 426-47 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, nos. 68, 72). Although the charters are post-Conquest forgeries, the spellings are often pre-Conquest. This place could be Cosford, but there is no trace of any Peterborough interest here.
		In 1086 Cosford lay apparently in "Alnodestreu" Hundred, but it did not descend with Ralph of Mortimer's other manors. Instead it went to the Pitchfords of Albrighton (4,25,6) and was given before 1176 to Buildwas Abbey; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 359; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 191; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 262; and 4,9,1 Shifnal note.
		It may be relevant in view of its descent that the main scribe of Great Domesday did not describe the holder as 'The same Ralph', but as plain 'Ralph', as if he were unsure of his identity; see SHR 4 Roger note. It is possible that this Ralph was an ancestor of, or connected to, the Pitchfords.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the lordship, probably for the later insertion of any population or resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,11,11	HIGHLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086 and later in Stottesdon Hundred and in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. Robert de Wodeton' and Roger de Borewardesleg' held 1 fee in Hugeleg' from the barony of Ralph of Mortimer in Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972, and Robert de Lacy held 2 hides here in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 232, 246; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. nos. 89-90, Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 260; and 6,2 Cleobury note. The church went to Wigmore Abbey (see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 166a), and the White Nuns of Breowode (Brewood) held 1½ virgates here later (see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 162a).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,11,12	WALTON. This lay in Stottesdon Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086 and was later in Stottesdon Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b, the Abbot of Wigmore, enfeoffed by Roger de Mortuo Mari, holds ½ hide in Walton' Savage in Stottesdon Hundred; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108ab; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 203; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 271.
	INGELRANN <OF WALTON>. Descent from Edric (the wild) and Ingelrann was to the Savage family; see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 280; and 4,11,16 Overton note. While Edric and the Savages may have been connected by blood, it is not clear how Ingelrann fits in. The estates may have reverted to or been claimed by Edric's heirs after Ingelrann's death. It is likely, however, that Ralph of Mortimer's subtenant Ingelrann here and in 4,11,16. 6,7;10;18;20 is the same man, as also the Ingelrann who held from Ralph of Mortimer in HAM 29,15, a manor which had been held T.R.E. by an Edric.
	EDRIC [* THE WILD *]. The descent of the manor to the Savage family suggests this identification; see 4,1,14 Edric note.
4,11,13	BAVENEY. This lay in Neen Savage Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086 and was later held under the Mortimers by the de Ribbesford family. It is Balbeneye in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 206, Babbeneye in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 258.
		The Domesday name is represented by Upper Baveney Farm (SO6979) and Lower Baveney (SO6978).
	"FECH". The Domesday form may represent Old Irish Fiacc or Old Norse Feigr: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 250; Fellows-Jensen, Scandinavian Personal Names, p. 81. In view of the uncertainty, it has been thought safer for the present edition to keep to the Domesday form. Both the Phillimore printed edition and the Alecto edition have Fech. See also 6,3 "Lel" note. Compare WOR 16,3 "Feche" note.
	½ HIDE. 1 VIRGATE OF THESE TWO LAY. The main scribe of Great Domesday had written Ibi dimidia hida. Vna ex his iacebat …. Scribe B then interlined uirgata, with an insertion mark between Vna and ex, and also duab[us] with a slightly differently shaped insertion mark after his. The circuit volume may well have had '2 virgates; 1 of these lay …', and in converting the 2 virgates to ½ hide, while leaving the rest of the sentence as it was, the main scribe of Great Domesday failed to see that it did not make sense. Scribe B should really have also interlined uirgatis after duab[us].
	CLEOBURY [MORTIMER]. It was held by Ralph of Mortimer directly from the king in 6,2.
	1 PLOUGH. The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the dot after car' here. See 3f,7 plough note. It is perfectly clear in the Alecto facsimile.
4,11,14	WALL TOWN. The Domesday form is Walle. This place lay in the Ancient Parish of Neen Savage. It was in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086. It appears to have lost its separate identity (there being no forms recorded between 1086 and 1526), and been annexed to the demesne of Cleobury Mortimer. Part went to Wigmore Abbey; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 274; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 298.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. On his being the same man as others of the same name holding under Ralph of Mortimer, see 6,23 Richard note.
	1 HIDE. The i is written over an erasure of a single figure, probably v or x and is blurred, but the correction by the main scribe of Great Domesday was immediate because there is no sign of hida corrected from hidê. The side ruling falls on the dot after hida, so he must have intended to add geld' or non geld' in the central margin; see 4,3,35 hides note.
	PLOUGHMEN. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote bouar' over an erasure.
4,11,15	CATSLEY. This lay in Kinlet Ancient Parish. In 1086 it was in 'Conditre' Hundred and was later in Stottesdon Hundred and in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. In the Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972, William de Forda and Thomas de Bardeleg' hold half a fee in Cackesleg' from the barony of Ralph de Mortuomari; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 81b, 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 260.
	½ HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters after dimid' hida.; see 1,5 hide note.
4,11,16	OVERTON. This was a township of Stottesdon Ancient Parish. On the possibility that it lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, see 4,1,30 hundred note. It was later in Stottesdon Hundred and in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. Here as elsewhere (see 4,11,5 Eudon note; 4,11,12 Walton note) land held by Edric (the wild) or by Ingelrann (or in this case by both) passed first to the Savage family (Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 269). Subsequently, in the Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972, Geoffrey de Overton holds 1 fee in Overton', Eudon' (Eudon: 4,11,5) and Cornleg' (Coreley: 6,1) of the barony of Ralph de Mortuo Mari; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 82b, 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 269.
	INGELRANN <OF WALTON>. See 4,11,12 Ingelrann note.
	EDRIC [* THE WILD *]. The descent of the manor to the Savage family suggests this identification; see 4,1,14 Edric note.
	2 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters at the beginning of the next line after ii hidê; see 1,5 hide note.
4,11,17	RALPH. For this entry and the following two (4,11,18-19) the main scribe of Great Domesday did not write 'The same Ralph' as he usually did for entries in a sub-chapter after the first one, but 'Ralph holds from the earl', treatment accorded to the first entry. He also left a very small space before this entry. See SHR 4 Roger note. This suggests that he was not convinced that Ralph was Ralph of Mortimer (as also in 4,11,10; see 4,11,10 Cosford note); three different people called Ralph could well be implied in these three entries. The fact that none of these entries remained with the Mortimers, but descended to the barony of Wigmore, further suggests that another Ralph was Earl Roger's subtenant here. This would also explain why these three entries disrupt the standard hundredal order of this sub-chapter; see 4,11 Ralph note.
	PRESTON[-UPON-THE-WEALD-MOORS]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It did not continue in the Mortimer fief, but went to the fee of Hodnet, becoming a member of the caput of the barony; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 257; VCH Shropshire, xi p. 177; and 4,1,4 Hodnet note.
	BURRER. Domesday Burrer may be a scribal error for Burred which represents Old English Burgraed: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 213.
	WHICH PAYS TAX. Scribe B added gld' in the central margin in a thicker pen and in slightly darker ink to the surrounding text; see 4,1,1 pay note.
4,11,18	RALPH. On the suspicion that this is not Ralph of Mortimer, see 4,11,17 Ralph note.
	ISOMBRIDGE. The Domesday form is Asnebruge. This lay in Rodington Ancient Parish. It was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The Mortimer interest here was lost after 1086, the manor being confirmed on the chief forester of Shropshire. In the Book of Fees, p. 6, Robert son of William, the king's forester of Shropshire, holds in Anebrig; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 160, iii. no. 15, iv. no. 115.
		Isombridge gradually declined in importance and became a member of a large scattered manor of which Great Bolas (SJ6421) was caput. The Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115, gives the members of Bowlas as Meiston (Meeson SJ6520), Esumbrige (Isombridge), Caynton (Caynton SJ6921), Calvynton (Calvington SJ7022), Ellerton (Orleton SJ6311, perhaps a part of Wellington (4,1,22) or of Wrockwardine (4,1,1) in 1086) and half of Sogdon (Sugdon SJ6014; see 4,3,31 Rodington note). For Bolas, see Book of Fees, p. 6; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 222; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 510, iv. no. 115; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 264. For Calvington, see Book of Fees, p. 6. On Meeson, see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 160. On Orleton, which included part of Rodingtun (Rodington: 4,3,31), see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 160, iii. no. 328, iv. no. 279; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 262.
4,11,19	[IN HODNET? HUNDRED]. In 1086 Peplow lay close to the border of Hodnet and Wrockwardine Hundreds, which later merged to form 'Bradford' Hundred. Thus the contents of each hundred have to be reconstructed from Domesday Book itself. In the Phillimore printed edition Peplow was placed in Wrockwardine Hundred, following the hundred head at 4,11,17. However, as a member of Hodnet Ancient Parish it could well have been in Hodnet Hundred in 1086. The main scribe of Great Domesday presumably thought it was not in Wrockwardine Hundred as he left a space for a hundred head; see 4,11,19 Earl note. The insertion of a Hodnet hundred head would only disrupt the standard hundredal order of 4,11 if Ralph were Ralph of Mortimer; see 4,11,17 Ralph note.
	RALPH. On the suspicion that this is not Ralph of Mortimer, see 4,11,17 Ralph note.
	PEPLOW. This was formerly a township of Hodnet Ancient Parish and is now in Hodnet Civil Parish. It may well have lain in Hodnet Hundred in 1086. It was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Like Preston-upon-the-Weald-Moors (4,11,17) it passed from Ralph of Mortimer and ultimately (with Little Bolas, its member) became part of the fee of Hodnet (4,1,4 Hodnet note): Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 254. The tithes were given to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 7-8, 11, 296, etc.).
	FROM EARL ROGER [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half of the line after PAPELAV which has no dot after it. He probably intended to add a hundred head here; see 4,1,22 Earl note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,12	RICHARD [* OF MONTGAROULT *]. He is apparently Richard of Montgaroult in the French département of Orne (arrondissement Argentan, canton Ecouché) who was a benefactor of Shrewsbury Abbey and of Saint-Martin de Sées; see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 360.
4,12,1	THIS ENTRY was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday, using a paler ink, in the space that he had left at the end of the lands which Ralph of Mortimer held from Earl Roger. It is not rubricated and was added in the same campaign as the other unrubricated entries in Shropshire and as some in other circuits; see 3c,14 entry note. It is a duplicate of an entry already written (4,27,30); see 4,12,1 Aisil note. The Great Domesday scribe probably forgot that he had already included Richard with other lesser tenants of Earl Roger in 4,27 (see 4,27 tenants note). Compare 4,1,34 which was added at the same time and is also a duplicate of material already entered at 4,27,14. The fact that he wrote smaller and so close to the preceding sub-chapter (almost 4 cms. remain after the entry before the bottom marginal ruling) may suggest that he envisaged the discovery of further holdings of Richard and intended to delete the entry at 4,27,30. Lewis ('Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 8) has suggested that the closeness of this entry to Ralph's subtenancy was perhaps to show that Richard held as Ralph's man, but the scribe definitely left a space before Richartd's land. Moreover, he wrote Richard's name (in capitals and with a large initial) as if he were a subtenant of Earl Roger in his own right and this would have been lined through in red if work on Domesday Book had not upruptly terminated. The Great Domesday scribe was also generally quite careful to record that someone was 'the man of' another person. The omission of the hundred head (see 4,12,1 Wrockwardine note) might suggest that the source of this addition was not the same as for the entry at 4,27,30, though such an omission is common in added entries, especially unrubricated ones.
	[IN WROCKWARDINE HUNDRED]. The Wrockwardine hundred head can be supplied from the duplicate of this entry at 4,27,30 (4,12,1 entry note).
	½ HIDE. It pays tax according to 4,27,30.
	BROCKTON. This is probably the Brockton that lay in Longford Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 and later presumably in 'Bradford' Hundred. There seems to be no other 'Brockton' lying in the area of Wrockwardine Hundred, but the descent is far from clear. It is possible that it was annexed to Longford manor (4,19,1) for a Brockton is mentioned among its members in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 114. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 125.
	AISIL. The Domesday form Aisil here and in 4,27,30 may represent Old English Æthelsige, the Domesday form of which is regularly Ailsi: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 142 and § 66 on the final l. This name, which appears nowhere else in Domesday Book, adds to the proof that 4,12,1 and 4,27,30 are duplicate entries.
	1 FREE MAN; HE PAYS 12d. Redd' xvi denar' must be the payment of the free man, rather than of the manor (i.e. he 'farms' the holding; see 3d,5 revenue note), because the duplicate of this entry in 4,27,30 states that the free man reddit xvi denar' de firma. VCH Shropshire, i. p. 331, however, translates 'It pays 16 pence', referring to the holding. See DEV 52,48 villager note for discussion of a similar statement and compare 3g,9 paid note.
4,13	WILLIAM OF WARENNE. He probably came from La Varenne in the French département of Seine-Maritime (arrondissement, canton and commune Bellencombre). He was the son of Ralph II of Warenne and Emma. William was a major force in William I’s England, especially important as holder of the Rape of Lewes, Sussex. At Lewes, he founded a Cluniac Priory 1078 x 1082. He sided with William II against Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, and Robert Count of Mortain early in 1088 and was appointed Earl of Surrey in mid to late April of that same year. However, he was wounded at the siege of Pevensey, and died in June 1088. He was first married to Gundreda, sister of Gerbod the Fleming, Earl of Chester (left his earldom c. 1071, died 1085) and then to the sister of Richard Guet. His successor in England was his son William (II), also Earl of Surrey, who forfeited in 1101.
4,13,1	WHITCHURCH. Whitchurch was an Ancient Parish and lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The Domesday form is Westune. It was also known in the Middle Ages as Album Monasterium, of which the Norman-French Blaminister and English Whitchurch are equivalents: Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 310. It is thus easily confused with Oswestry (4,1,11 Oswestry note). Before 1066 it had a number of Cheshire dependencies (at Marbury, Norbury, Wirswall and Stoneley: CHS 8,21;41) but these are not afterwards counted as members. It continued to be held by the Counts of Warenne (the Earls Warren), 7 ½ hides still being recorded as the size of Albimonast' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a. The Lestrange family also had an interest here in the late thirteenth century. See Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 226; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 387, vi. no. 516, ix. no. 223.
		The Bradford Hundred Roll, gives the members as Hilton (Hinton? SJ5343), Burthall' (Broughall SJ5641), Wodhows (Old and New Woodhouse, SJ5842, SJ5941), Magna Asche and Parva Asche (Ash Magna, Ash Parva, SJ5739), Tildstoke (Tilstock SJ5437), Hethley (unidentified, but there are a Heath Road and Heath Paddocks south of Whitchurch, SJ5539, SJ5538) and Kempley (The Kempley SJ5936).
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 14.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the hedged enclosures, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14	WILLIAM PANDOLF. William was lord of Noron in the Hiémois in Earl Roger's vicomté of the Oximin. Noron is now Noron-L'Abbaye, in the French département of Calvados (arrondissement Caen, canton Falaise-Nord). He was a great benefactor of the Abbey of Saint-Evroult, to which in 1073 he gave, among other things, St Peter's Church and Priory at Noron which he had founded; see Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, iii. pp. 154-59). Saint-Evroult is where he sought refuge after he was accused by Earl Roger's son, Robert of Bellême, of the murder of Earl Roger's first wife, Mabel; see Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, iii. pp. 160-63). He was reinstated by King Henry I. His English lands formed the barony of Wem and passed to his second son Robert in 1112, then continued in the family to William Pandolf (died 1233) whose heirs were Maud and Elizabeth. Elizabeth's share went on her death to Maud who married Ralph Butler, then Walter de Hopton. After her death the barony descended in the Butler family. See Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 94-95; Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 76; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 494.
		William's byname, probably a patronymic - Pantul, Pantulf - represents Old German Pandulf, Pandolfus: Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 223; Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England, p. 203.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,14,1-11 Hodnet Hundred
		4,14,12-13 Condover Hundred
		4,14,14-21 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,14,22-25 "Culvestan" Hundred
		4,14,26 [Baschurch] Hundred
		4,14,27 (uncertain)
		4,14,28 'Conditre' Hundred
		4,14,29 Patton Hundred.
	Entries 4,14,28-29 are later additions to the text, but only the last is out of sequence.
4,14,1	WOLVERLEY. This formerly lay in Wem Ancient Parish. It is now in the Civil Parish of Wem Rural. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It went to the barony of Wem and was later counted as a part of the manor of Wem; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 182; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B inserted gld' in a space left by the main scribe of Great Domesday after hidê. On the spaces left for the taxability to be entered, see 1,5 hide note. On scribe B's other additions on this subject, see 4,1,1 pay note.
4,14,2	[GREAT] WYTHEFORD. This lay in Shawbury Ancient Parish. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Another part of the vill was held by Reginald the sheriff (4,3,4-5) and in the thirteenth century both parts were held by the Fitz Ayer family under Fitz Alan and the barony of Wem respectively: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, 1½ virgates in Wythyford are held by John Fitz Ayer from the barony of Wem. It is Withefeld Magna in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237. On the manor as a whole, see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 115, v. no. 470; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 184.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14,3	HORTON. This place was in Wem Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Horton is later counted as a member of the manor of Wem; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 178; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
	AELFEVA. The Domesday forms of this name - Alueua, Aelueua, Alueue, Elueua, Elfgiuae, Aluiua, Aueue - represent the feminine Old English Ælfgifu: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 173-74. JRM preferred Aelfeva as it reflected more closely the Domesday forms. The Alecto edition has Ælfgifu.
4,14,4	WEM. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred and became the caput of the Pandolf barony of Wem. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a, Ralph Le Butiler holds 14 hides in Wem'e, while William le Butiller holds Wemme and Hynstoke (Hinstock: 4,14,14) of the barony of Wem in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 226; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 390, 773, 774.
		The manor was only 4 hides in 1086; the difference between this and the 14 hides of the Rotuli Hundredorum, is accounted for by Wem's having absorbed later a number of vills that were separately assessed in 1086; thus the Bradford Hundred Roll, pp. 114-15, gives the members as: Aston (Aston: 4,14,11); Stiell' (Steel: 4,7,5); Tilley (Tilley SJ5027); Dichelowe (?The Ditches SJ4929 and Lowe SJ5030; see 4,8,2 and Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 629); Horton (Horton: 4,14,3); Wolverley (Wolverley: 4,14,1); Edisstoston (Edstaston: 4,14,6); Coton (Coton: 4,14,7); Harpecote (Harcourt: 4,14,10); Beslow (Bestow: 4,14,16); Dodyngton (Dodington: 4,7,4); Alkynton (Alkington: 4,14,8); Edisley (Edgeley: 4,7,3). The Bradford Hundred Roll also includes under Wem the manors of Hynstocke (Hinstock: 4,4,14), Upton (Waters Upton: 4,8,9), Tibrighton (Tibberton: 4,7,2), Dawley (Dawley: 4,1,22), Eton (Eyton-upon-the-Weald-Moors: 4,14,18), Brocketon (Bratton: 4,14,19), half of Dawley (Lawley: 4,14,21) and half of Parva Drayton (Drayton; see 4,14,9 Drayton note). Newtown (SJ4831) was a chapelry of Wem in later times; its name may suggest that it dated from after 1086.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 157.
4,14,5	TYRLEY. This was a township of the Ancient Parish of Drayton-in-Hales (also known as Market Drayton). It is now a Civil Parish in Staffordshire, the estate having been transferred there, probably under Henry I, to join William (Pandolf)'s Staffordshire manor of Almington (STS 8,22); see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 5, 11; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 390 (where it is Tirley alias Tyrleye held by Ralph le Botiller); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 192; Eyton, Staffordshire Survey, p. 7; VCH Staffordshire, iv. pp. 2, 59.
		The exact lie of the 1086 boundary between Almington (the nearest Domesday place in Staffordshire) and Tyrley cannot now be certainly determined as the modern civil parish of Tyrley incorporates both Tyrley and Almington. It seems likely, however, that the Coal Brook marked the 1086 boundary between them.	The Grid Reference (SJ6733) is to Tyrley Castle Farm.
4,14,6	EDSTASTON. This was a township and chapelry of Wem Ancient Parish. It is now in the Civil Parish of Wem Rural and a separate Ecclesiastical Parish.
		The Domesday form is Stanestune but standing for Eadstan's tun; see Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Edstaston; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 121. It seems probable that the main scribe of Great Domesday had in front of him a form such as Edstanestune or Estanestune and assumed that the prosthetic E- had been prefixed to the group -st-, so simplified to Stanestune. This wrongful simplification occurred several times when the scribe was handling place-names in Exon.
		Edstaston lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred and was counted as a member of the great manor of Wem; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 179; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14,7	COTON. The Domesday form is Cote. Coton was a township of Wem Ancient Parish and now lies in the Ecclesiastical Parish of Edstaston and the Civil Parish of Wem Rural. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred and became a member of Wem manor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 180; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
	2 HIDES AS TWO MANORS. See 4,7,5 hide note.
4,14,8	ALKINGTON. This was a township of Whitchurch Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Although remote from Wem, it later counted as a member of that manor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 183; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
		The Grid Reference (SJ5339) is to Alkington Hall (SJ530392). Alkington House is at SJ523390.
4,14,9	[MARKET] DRAYTON. Market Drayton is also known as Great Drayton. It named the Ancient Parish of Market Drayton also known as Drayton-in-Hales. This holding lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The land was bestowed by William Pandolf on the monks of Noron (near Falaise, in the French département of Calvados, a dependency of Saint-Evroult), whose English estates were managed by the prior of Ware (in Hertfordshire). The estate was leased from that prior by the Abbot of Combermere. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a, the Abbot of Combermere holds Draiton' from the prior of War', a fee of Hugh Pounton' (Pandolf). Drayton is held by the Abbot of Cumburmayre in alms from the barony of Wem in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115, and is called Drayton in Le Hales in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; see Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 324 no. iii; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 216; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 185; and 4,14,15 Colehurst note. A small part of this holding may have been at Little Drayton, held as Parva Drayton under the barons of Wem in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115; see 4,14,4 Wem note and 4,19,8 Drayton note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14,10	HARCOURT. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Stanton-upon-Hine-Heath. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred, and was counted as a member of Wem manor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 181; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
	THORSTEN <OF HARCOURT>. The Domesday forms of this name - Turstan, Turstan[us], Turstin(us), Tursten, Turstane, Turtin - represent Old Danish Thorsten, Old Norse Thorsteinn: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 396. In the printed Phillimore edition this T.R.E. holder appears as Thurstan and (for YKS) as Thorsteinn; these have now been standardized as Thorsten. The Alecto edition has Thorsten. The only other Thorsten in Domesday Shropshire was Earl Roger's predecessor in Broome (4,28,1).
		Although the name-form Turstinus is common, it is uncommon among pre-Conquest landowners. As these are the only two occurrences in Shropshire, it is possible they represent one individual despite the distance between the properties (JP).
4,14,11	ASTON. This was in Wem Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred and became a member of Wem manor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 180; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
		The Grid Reference is to Aston Hall (SJ531286).
4,14,12	IN THE OUTER MARGIN of the manuscript, level with the first line of this entry, is written a k in darker ink; it stands for kalumnia/kalumpnia or klamor ('claim'). It means that a claim had been made for this land (the Bishop of Hereford was contesting the alienation of Bayston; see 4,14,12 Bayston note). It is impossible to tell exactly when the k was written, but the ones in Domesday Lincolnshire, for example, are definitely contemporary. On these and other marginal letters indicating disputes, see Thorn, 'Marginal Notes and Signs', p. 124 (= Erskine and Williams, The Story of Domesday Book, pp. 188-90). See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 226 no. 1329.
	BAYSTON. This was formerly in Condover Ancient Parish and is now in the Ecclesiastical Parish and Civil Parish of Bayston Hill. It was in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. It was restored to the Bishop of Hereford and was held under him as Beyston in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 63a, by Richard Sprenthose; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 215, 230; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 298; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 40.
		The original settlement was probably at Lower Bayston (SJ4908): Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 34; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 35.
	EDRIC [* OF BAYSTON *]. Edric was probably Edric of Bayston, the Bishop of Hereford's steward, not Edric the wild (as Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. pp. 298-99). William Pandolf probably acquired Bayston on the death of Edric (some time between 1085 and the date of Domesday) because it was only about a mile from his manor of Norton (4,14,13). See Mason, 'Edric of Bayston'; Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 94.
	[PART] OF HIS SUPPLIES. That is, either the revenue from Bayston was devoted to supplying the Bishop of Hereford or the manor provided produce directly for the bishop's table; compare the fishery in Eyton-on-Severn, 3b,2, which was for the monks' supplies.
	FOR HIS LIFE ONLY. Latin in uita sua; the sua ('his') refers to the bishop as subject of the two main verbs poterat and prestiterat (compare de uictu suo in the line above). In fact, however, the lease must have been intended to last only for Edric's life, a common term; see Galbraith, 'An Episcopal Land-Grant of 1085', p. 364. Strictly the Latin should read in uita eius referring to eo and ei above.
4,14,13	NORTON. This was in Condover Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. It descended to the barony of Wem, being still assessed as 1 hide in Norton in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 587; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 300; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 41. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611, it is Norton by Conedovere.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14,14	HINSTOCK. This was an Ancient Parish. The vill was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. That Domesday Stoche is later represented by Hinstock is proved by the descent: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a, Ralph le Butiler holds Hinestoke in 'Bradford' Hundred from the barony of Wem; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 390; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 114; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 227. Hinestok and Wemme (4,14,4) are coupled in Book of Fees, pp. 964, 972, and in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237. On this manor, see 4,14,4 Wem note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 20.
	SAXFRITH <OF HINSTOCK>. The Domesday forms of this name - Sasford, Saxford, Saxford[us] - represent Old English Seaxfrith: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 357. JRM preferred the first element Sax- for the Old English Seax-. The printed Phillimore edition has the forms Saxfrid, Sasfrid and, in Yorkshire in error, Saexfrith; these have now been standardized as Saxfrith. The Alecto edition has Seaxfrith for the T.R.E. holders, but Sasfrid for the 1086 ones.
		The name Saxfrith occurs 19 times in Domesday Book, probably representing four individuals. The two holdings in Shropshire, in adjacent vills and held from the same tenant-in-chief, probably belonged to one individual (JP).
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B inserted geld' into a space left by the main scribe of Great Domesday after ii hide 7 dimid'. On the spaces left for the taxability to be entered, see 1,5 hide note. On scribe B's other additions on this subject, see 4,1,1 pay note.
4,14,15	COLEHURST. The Domesday form is Corselle. This estate was identified by Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 24, as Cross Hills (SJ7025) which lay in Hinstock Ancient Parish (see 4,14,14) and shared the same 1086 holder. It thus lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The identification was adopted tentatively by VCH Shropshire, i. p. 332, and firmly by the Phillimore printed edition and by the Alecto edition. It had already been suggested by Purton, 'Corselle and Siwaldston', that Corselle was Colehurst in Sutton-upon-Tern, in the same hundred (Wrockwardine) and held under the barony of Wem in 1346. The increasing number of forms of the place-name that have now been accumulated and the acceptance of the assimilation of the termination to –hurst make this identification more likely. It was adopted by Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 95, and has been substituted for Cross Hills in this edition. Sutton-upon-Tern was formerly the Ancient Parish of Drayton-in-Hales (also known as Market Drayton). It is now in the Ecclesiastical Parish of Little Drayton.
		In Book of Fees, p. 964, Ralph le Gras holds ½ fee in Colsisel from the barony of Wem. It is Colshesel in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237, and Culsis' coupled with Bunstansdale (Buntingsdale SJ6532, possibly part of Drayton: 4,14,9) in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115.
	SAXFRITH <OF HINSTOCK>. See 4,14,14 Saxfrith note.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B added geld'. The main scribe of Great Domesday had written hidê up to the side ruling, apparently intending the word geld', if found, to be added in the margin, which is what happened; see 1,5 hide note. On scribe B's other additions of this word, see 4,1,1 pay note.
	1 SMALLHOLDER WHO HAS NOTHING. This may mean that he has no land (so Lennard, 'Bordars and Cottars', p. 356), but it is possible that, as Shropshire (in common with almost all Great Domesday counties) never records the smallholders' land holding, but regularly lists their ploughs (or their share in them), ploughs are what the smallholder here lacks. Compare 4,14,19 where 5 smallholders have nothing and WOR 26,9;14 for similar phrases; see also 4,9,4 nothing note and LEC 15,15. On smallholders generally, see 1,8 smallholders note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	VALUE ... NOW 12d. There seems no obvious reason why the value of Colehurst should have declined so dramatically since the date of its acquisition: it is not near the Welsh border and so subject to raids. It is possible, therefore, that xii denar' is a scribal error for xii solid' (there are several suggestions in Great Domesday of similar scribal errors in value). However, Bratton (4,14,19) where smallholders with nothing are also recorded (see 4,14,15 smallholder note) was 'almost waste' in 1086, so perhaps much of Colehurst was similarly waste, though the scribe for some reason failed to note this. Alkington (4,14,8) also declined in value in 1086, but no scribal error is suggested there because of the use of tantum 'only' with the value.
4,14,16	BESLOW. This was in Wroxeter Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It was later counted as a member of Wem manor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 40; and 4,14,4 Wem note.
	WHICH PAYS TAX. Scribe B added geld' over an erasure. On his other contributions of the same nature, see 4,1,1 pay note. On what might have been erased here, see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14,17	BUTTERY. This was in Edgmond Ancient parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It had the same early descent as Eyton-upon-the-Weald-Moors (4,14,18) before being given by Robert de Eitona to Shrewsbury Abbey with the consent of Ivo Pantulf: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, no. 33 p. 29, no. 280 p. 267; see pp. xx, 249). Thereafter it became a member of Sleap manor (4,6,5 Crudgington note). See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 36.
	WHICH PAYS TAX. Scribe B was forced to interline geld' as the main scribe of Great Domesday had failed to leave a space after the hidage (see 1,5 hide note on these spaces). On other insertions on taxability by scribe B, see 4,1,1 pay note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the oxen, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14,18	EYTON[-UPON-THE-WEALD-MOORS]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a, Peter de Eiton' holds from Ralph le Butiler with service at Wem, while John de Eyton holds Eyton super Wildemore in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237; see Book of Fees, pp. 964, 972; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 26; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 139; and 4,7,1 Sutton note and 4,14,4 Wem note.
	WARIN <OF EYTON>. This Warin, distinct from Warin the sheriff (4,3,8;71), was succeeded by the de Eyton family, named from this holding. He may have been their ancestor: VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 139; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 461.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B inserted geld' here, perhaps over an erasure (or possibly a rough patch of parchment) or in a space left by the main scribe of Great Domesday after the hidage; see 1,5 hide note. On scribe B's other additions on the taxability of a holding, see 4,1,1, pay note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14,19	BRATTON. The Domesday form is Brochetone. This was in the Ancient Parish of Wrockwardine. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It descended with Eyton (4,14,18) in the de Eyton family; see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 36; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 313; and 4,7,1 Sutton note; 4,14,4 Wem note.
	WARIN <OF EYTON>. See 4,14,18 Warin note.
	SMALLHOLDERS ... HAVE NOTHING. See 4,14,15 smallholder note.
4,14,20	HORTON. This was formerly in Wellington Ancient Parish, now in the Civil Parish of Hadley. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Part continued to be held of the barony of Wem, but much was claimed and held for a period by the de Hodnets: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 59a, Odo de Hodnet receives rents from John de Horton. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 38; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 257; and 4,1,4 Hodnet note.
	WARIN <OF EYTON>. See 4,14,18 Warin note.
4,14,21	LAWLEY. This was formerly a township of Wellington Ancient Parish and remains for civil purposes in its successor, Wellington Civil Parish. It is now a separate Ecclesiastical Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred, and was divided in 1086 between William Pandolf and Turold (4,19,6). William's portion is the 2 virgates in Laneleg' held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a, in 'Bradford' Hundred, by Ralph de Stanto' of the fee of Wemme, and the half of the vill held by Ralph de Staunton' from Peter Eton who holds from the lord of Wem in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 37; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 277; and 4,7,1 Sutton note and 4,14,4 Wem note.
4,14,22	[UPPER] LEDWYCHE. This was once a separate Ancient Parish, but was in Bitterley Ancient Parish by 1535. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. It did not continue with the barony of Wem, but the mesne tenancy passed from Berner to de Higford and the overlordship to de Lacy and then Fitz Alan, as at Middleton (4,14,23). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, Geoffrey de Ledewich holds 2 hides in Ledewich from Walter de Hugeford; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 87. Lower Ledwyche lay in Ludford Ancient Parish and belonged to the Church of Bromfield: 3d,4 hide note.
		In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b, in 'Overs' Hundred, Cletone (Cleeton St Mary SO6178), 1 hide, is held by William de Cletone from Geoffrey de Ledewich. Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 372, was unable to assign this to any Domesday manor, but the mention of de Ledewich and the fact that Cleoton is held from the Fitz Alans (by the Abbot of Wigmore) in Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. no. 234 (see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, (old series) iii. p. 222) points to it as a member of Upper Ledwyche.
	BERNER <OF HIGFORD>. See 4,8,12 Berner note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	HE FOUND IT WASTE. This was written over an erasure by the main scribe of Great Domesday.
4,14,23	MIDDLETON. This was in Bitterley Ancient Parish, and remains in the Civil Parish of that name. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Munslow Hundred. The descent was the same as for Upper Ledwyche, the de Higfords holding under Lacy then under Fitz Alan when Walter of Lacy's sister married William Fitz Alan. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, Walter de Hugeford holds 3 hides in Midelton' from John Fitz Alan; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 223, 229, 244; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 84. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b, Midelton' is regarded as a member of Stanton Lacy manor (7,4).
	BERNER <OF HIGFORD>. See 4,8,12 Berner note.
	WULFRIC HELD IT, AND EDWIN. An unusual word order: the main scribe of Great Domesday presumably only saw that there were two T.R.E. tenants after he had written Vluric tenuit. There is no sign of the later addition of 7 Eduin' or of a correction of tenuit to the plural tenuerunt; the entry is neat and clear.
	PLOUGHMEN. In the manuscript bouarii; Farley printed bouarij, as also for the manuscript's bouarii in 4,18,3. 4,19,2;5.
4,14,24	[LITTLE] SUTTON. Little Sutton, ½ hide, was in Diddlebury Ancient Parish and lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. Great Sutton, 2 hides, was also in the parish and a Domesday place (4,21,15). This vill did not descend to the barony of Wem, but became a serjeanty, that of conveying the royal revenue of Shropshire to London. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, Robert de Sutton' holds ½ hide in Sutton' by serjeanty. It is Parva Sutton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 71b, 100b. See Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 72a; Book of Fees, pp. 384, 1184, 1242; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 346, iii. no. 155, iv. no. 396, v. no. 574, vi. nos. 372, 531, vii. nos. 64, 333, viii. no. 451, ix. nos. 10, 505, 519, x. no. 11; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 90.
4,14,25	'MARSTON'. Domesday Merstun is probably from Old English mersc and tun ('tun by the marsh'). It lay in Diddlebury Ancient Parish and in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. The place is now lost but survived to be recorded on the 1841 Tithe Apportionment for the townships of Broncroft and Lower Parks (in Diddlebury parish) as 'Marstons Meadow'( fields 13-14) at SO528857, south-west of Broncroft Lodge; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 199 (where the grid reference is given as SO532862). Ralph le Botiler (barony of Wem) held land in Meryston in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 7la; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 110; Lay Subsidy Roll, Shropshire, (1327), Munslow Hundred, p. 323.
	GAMAL AND WULFRIC HELD IT. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about six letters after tenuer'., possibly for the later insertion, if necessary, of a phrase such as p[ro] ii M[aneriis] ('as two manors'); such a phrase was added in 4,3,70 and probably also in 4,3,1, but not in a space. It is unlikely to have been left for a hundred head (as elsewhere at the end of the first line of an entry: 4,1,22 Earl note) as there is no need for one. On the name Gamal, see 4,8,9 Gamal note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,14,26	[IN BASCHURCH HUNDRED]. In view of the later history of this manor, it appears that a hundred head has been omitted.
	SLEAP. This is the estate of Sleap 'Magna', which was in Wem Ancient Parish. It seems to have lain in Baschurch Hundred in 1086 and was later in Pimhill Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a, Robert de Besselauwe (from Beslow: 4,14,16) holds 2 virgates in Sclepe as a fee of Wemme. In the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121, Slepe Magna is held by Ralph Butler by service at the castle of Wem; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 1, x. pp. 42, 205. Sleap 'Magna' and Sleap 'Parva' (see 4,3,53 Myddle note) lay either side of the brook that divides the Ancient Parishes of Wem and Myddle. They are represented by Sleap and Sleap Hall respectively on the first edition Ordnance Survey one-inch map (sheet 73 of 1833, reprint sheet 33 of 1970).
	1 FREE MAN. Possibly the 1066 holder Wulfric had been demoted to tenant status; compare 4,8,2 man note and 4,16,1 men note.
4,14,27	"SUDTELCH". This manor, which may be governed by the Baschurch Hundred head supplied in 4,14,26 or may be in some other hundred, has not been identified; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. l, x. p. 206.
	ASKI <OF "SUDTELCH">. The name Aski occurs four times in Domesday Book, on widely separated and modestly or poorly endowed holdings. Each is likely to have belonged to a different individual (JP).
4,14,28	THIS ENTRY and the next (4,14,29) were added together by the main scribe of Great Domesday below the bottom marginal ruling, some nine letters into the outer margin, immediately below the second line of 4,16,2. They are directed to their proper position in the text at the end of William Pandolf's subtenancy by transposition signs; Farley printed them as daggers on their sides, not how they appear in the manuscript. The 'Conditre' hundred head was written in the outer margin at the same time and has a dark brown line encasing the bottom of it and the large I of Isd' in 4,14,28 encases its right-hand side. 4,14,29 was written on one line extending across the central margin and under folio 257d.
		In the Alecto Penguin edition these two entries appear confusingly to be part of Walkelin's subtenancy (4,16) and the second half of Walkelin's holding in Faintree (4,16,2) carries straight on from the end of 4,14,29. This edition also omitted the 'Conditre' hundred head because of its policy not to include anything written in the margin, whether written by the main scribe of Great Domesday or not; compare 7,2 entry note. The Alecto county edition for Shropshire prints these two added entries exdented and with the hundred head and uses § signs for the transposition signs; there is no confusion as to what 4,16,2 contains.
	INGARDINE. This formerly lay in Stottesdon Ancient Parish but is now in Farlow Civil Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. The mesne tenure passed to de Higford (see 4,14,22 Ledwyche note) and the overlordship to Fitz Alan. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a, Walter de Pedeivrthin holds 1 virgate in Ingwrthin, while in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 217, the same Walter holds from William de Hugeford who holds from Richard Fitz Alan of the honour of Oswestry; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 188; and 4,1,25 Donington note. On Farlow, see 4,28,5 Farlow note.
4,14,29	THIS ENTRY and the previous one (4,14,28) were later additions by the main scribe of Great Domesday; see 4,14,28 entry note.
	"BUCHEHALE". Domesday clearly places this in Patton Hundred, but it has not been identified. Eyton at first identified it as Monk Hall (3c,2 Wenlock note), then as Bucknell (4,20,26 Adley note). The first assumes that the Domesday form is mistaken, the second that the hundred head is an error; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 26, xi. p. 316. More recently VCH Shropshire, x. p. 358, has suggested a connection with the names Bacundale (1380), Baknall (1540) and Bakenell (1910) which appear on the boundary between Monkhopton and Acton Round, near Monk Hall. However, the evolution of these from Buchehale is problematic: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 171, iii. p. 170. It was left unidentified in the Alecto edition.
		The fact that the main scribe of Great Domesday did not put 'The same William' (i.e. William Pandolf) here, his normal practice for entries after the first in a sub-chapter, may suggest that he was unsure of William's identity. The W of Will's is also larger than usual; see SHR 4 Roger note. This adds to the problems of identifying this holding.
4,15	WILLIAM MALBANK. William Malbank was a tenant of Earl Hugh of Chester in Cheshire (CHS 8), and probably also in Dorset (DOR 27,2-11) as well as of Earl Roger here. His heir was his son Hugh who founded the Cistercian Abbey of Combermere in Cheshire in 1133 (Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 321) as a dependency of the Abbey of Savigny; see Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 112, 117. William's lands formed the barony of Wick Malbank, later Nantwich. On the byname ‘Malbank’ (Great Domesday Malbedeng from Old French mal banc ‘bad bench’) see Tengvik, Old English Bynames, pp. 349-50. See Farrer, Honors and Knight's Fees, ii. pp. 261-68; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 492.
		William held much land over the border from these four manors, in Cheshire (CHS 8) where he was lord of Nantwich (CHS 1,7). Three of his holdings in Shropshire went to the 'barony' of Malbank: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 373.
4,15,1	GRAVENHUNGER. This formerly lay in Mucklestone Ancient Parish, the southern part of which was and is in Staffordshire. Gravenhunger is now in Woore Civil Parish which was itself formerly a chapelry of Mucklestone Ancient Parish. Gravenhunger was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It remained in the Malbank barony, and was held in the thirteenth century by the Audleys. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a, the 1 hide of Gravinh'ker is held by Roger de Loskesford of the barony of Mauban' in socage with an annual payment to James de Audith'; see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 476, iii. no. 536, v. no. 62; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 373.
		The place-name Gravenhunger is represented on Ordnance Survey smaller-scale maps by Gravenhunger Moss (SJ7342), but Gravenhunger Hall lay at SJ7341.
4,15,2	WOORE. Like Gravenhunger, this formerly lay in Mucklestone Ancient Parish, the southern part of which was and is in Staffordshire: 4,15,1 Gravenhunger note. It was similarly in Hodnet Hundred, then 'Bradford' Hundred, and followed the same descent to the Audleys. In 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a) Wavre is held as 1 hide of the fee of Mauban (Malbank) by Richard de War' and others; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 220, 227; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 377.
4,15,3	DORRINGTON. This was once in Mucklestone Ancient Parish, the southern part of which was and is in Staffordshire. It is now in the Civil Parish of Woore which was itself formerly a chapelry of Mucklestone Ancient Parish. Dorrington was formerly in Hodnet Hundred, then 'Bradford' Hundred: 4,15,1 Gravenhunger note. It was given to Wenlock Priory and its thirteenth-century tenants are the lords of Willey (4,19,11). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a, the 1 hide at Derinton' is held by William de Derinton' of the fee of Nicholas de Wilileg'. The Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118, and Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220, make it clear that the tenure is under the prior of Wenlock. See Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 379.
4,15,4	ONNELEY. This was a township of Madeley Ancient Parish, the bulk of which lay and lies in Staffordshire. The Shropshire portion was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086 and seems early to have been combined with Gravenhunger (4,15,1) with which it no doubt descended: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 377.
		The Grid Reference (SJ7543) is for Onneley Hall. Onneley Hall Farm is at SJ7542.
4,16	WALKELIN. Nothing is known about this individual. He has not been identified with any other people called plain Walkelin in Domesday Book (LEC 2,1-3. NTH 4,5-11. 26,10. NTT 11,22;24); see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 445.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,16,1 Baschurch Hundred
		4,16,2 "Alnodestreu" Hundred.
4,16,1	GRINSHILL. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, then in Pimhill Hundred. The Domesday form Grivelesul suggests Old English grin ('snare', 'trap') and hyll ('hill'), rather than gren ('green'); see Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Grinshill; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 139. The land went to the Fitz Alans, the tenure under them being subsequently divided. Part of the land of Grineleshull was held by the Abbot of Haughmond directly from John Fitz Alan, part from the Orleton family (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a; the Haughmond Cartulary: Rees, nos. 6, 343-65, 533, 685, 778), while a separate part went to the lords of Stanton-upon-Hine-Heath. Adam de Orleton had granted ½ virgate to Haughmond before the end of the twelfth century; further land held by the Orletons had originally been given to Wombridge Priory but was transferred to Haughmond by the agreement of the two priors. It seems that the Orletons made additional grants; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. pp. 142-143; Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b.
		The third portion of Grinshill, ½ hide, was held by the Actons of Acton Reynald (4,3,59) under the Stantons. The two holdings (Acton and Grinshill) are often coupled in later documents; thus in Book of Fees, p. 962, Rainer de Acton' holds in Acton' and Grinleshul' of the barony of John Fitz Alan; see Book of Fees, p. 970; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 231, 235; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 144.
	LAND FOR 2 PLOUGHS. The fact that in the manuscript the ii is in slightly darker ink and there is a larger than normal space between it and car' suggests that the main scribe of Great Domesday may have been unsure at first of the number of ploughs in the estimate and so left a space which in the event turned out too large. Compare 4,21,7 land note, 4,23,14 land note and 4,23,16 land note.
	3 FREE MEN; THEY PAY 7s A YEAR. Perhaps three of the four 1066 holders were allowed to stay on as rent-payers. See 3d,5 revenue note on the practice of 'farming' and compare 4,8,2 man note.
4,16,2	FAINTREE. This lay in Chetton Ancient Parish. It was in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. The Domesday form Faventrei is from Old English fage and treo ('variegated tree'): Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Faintree; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 130. This land is later held by serjeanty of finding a foot soldier to serve in the king's army in Wales in wartime; see Book of Fees, p. 144; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 82b, 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 217, 231; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 54, vi. no. 248; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 159; Purton, 'Manor of Faintree'.
		The Domesday estate is represented by Faintree Hall and Faintree Hall Farm (SO6688) and by Lower Faintree (SO6588).
	AS 6 MANORS. The description of Walkelin's estate at Faintree is interrupted at this point by the addition of two holdings of William Pandolf at the foot of folio 257c; see 4,14,28 entry note.
	THESE THANES WERE FREE. The space of a third of a line left before this statement is due to the repaired hole in the parchment at the top of this folio; see 4,11,5 hole note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,17	OSBERN [* SON OF RICHARD *]. The early descent of Badger (4,17,1 Badger note) suggests that this man was Osbern son of Richard Scrope of Richards Castle; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 65. He also held in chief in Shropshire (SHR 5). For biographical details, see SHR 5 Osbern note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,17,1	BADGER. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Brimstree Hundred, before passing into the Liberty of Wenlock. In the thirteenth century it was held by a family named from the vill, at first under Osbern son of Hugh (grandson of Osbern son of Richard, who was probably the Domesday holder), then under the prior of Wenlock: Philip de Bagesover holds from the prior in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 446, ii. no. 808; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 61; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 215; and 4,26,5 Beckbury note. It is sometimes associated with Romsley (WAR 12,9) in later documents.
	BRUNING. The Domesday forms of this name - Bruning, Bruniht - represent Old English Bruning: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 210 and § 76. The Phillimore printed edition has Browning, in line with Brown (for Old English Brun, which means 'brown'), but the most common Domesday form Bruning corresponds to the Old English name and so it has been altered to that in the present edition. The Alecto edition has Bruning. Compare 4,3,56 Hunning note and 4,18,1 Dunning note on the Domesday forms of 'Hunning' and 'Dunning'. See also HEF 1,25 Bruning note.
4,17,2	BROCKTON. This place lay in Sutton Maddock Ancient Parish. It was in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Brimstree Hundred. Another portion lay in Sutton Maddock manor (4,23,16). After it escheated to the Crown this Brockton became a tenure by serjeanty (by service at Shrawardine or Montgomery castles), but the later size of the two serjeanties here (4 ½ virgates) greatly exceeds the 1 virgate 8 acres of the Domesday vill which must thus represent only part of them. In Book of Fees, p. 1284 ('Overs' and Brimstree Hundreds), 2 virgates are held by Thomas Russell for service at Montgomery castle and 2 ½ virgates by Henry de Fort' and Philip de Franlasche for a similar service; see Book of Fees, pp. 145, 383; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 225; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 801; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 93.
	WHO [IS MENTIONED] ABOVE. The Latin qui sup(ra) is too abbreviated: the main scribe of Great Domesday should have written either qui supra dictus est or supradictus Bruniht.
	8 ACRES. The only other record of land in Shropshire being assessed in terms of acres (rather than just hides and virgates) occurs in 7,4 where the acre is linked with another unusual measurement, the 'ferling' (7,4 acres note). The geld-acre occurred regularly in some counties in Great Domesday; for example in Essex and in Cornwall (though in the latter it was probably rated differently: CON 1,1 acre note).
	LAND FOR 1 PLOUGH. […]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about five letters after the plough estimate. It is likely that, as he did not leave a space after the hidage in this entry (probably for geld'; see 1,5 hide note), he left a space after the next statement instead, as he did in 4,24,4, which was later filled by scribe B. Compare 4,26,3 land note.
4,17,3	RYTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Brimstree Hundred. In the Book of Fees, p. 971, John de Ruton' holds Ruton' from the barony of John Fitz Alan and it continued to be held by a family named from the place; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 234, 244; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 80; and 4,25,6 Albrighton note.
	VITHFARI. The Domesday forms of this name - Wifare, Wiuara, Wiuar - represent Old Norse Vithfari: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 406. The printed Phillimore edition has the form Wivar, but this has been altered to the Old Norse form for the present edition, as JRM did not pronounce on it. The Alecto edition has Vithfari.
		There is no known link, tenurial or geographical, between this predecessor of Earl Roger and the two Staffordshire T.R.E. holders called Vithfari (STS 11,43. 12,26), the only other occurrences of this name in Domesday, though as both of them had held 'with full jurisdiction' it is possible that they were the same individual.
		However, the three holdings are within a day's journey of each other so it is possible that they were held by one individual T.R.E., despite devolving upon three different tenants-in-chief (JP).
	BRICTWOLD. Domesday Bricstual represents Old English Beorhtweald: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 198-99.
	SESTERS. The sester is a measure, sometimes of liquid (often of honey), sometimes of dry (as here). It was of uncertain and probably variable size (see GLS GI note and GLS 19,2 note). It was reckoned at 32 ounces for honey; see Zupko, English Weights and Measures, p. 155. A sester of grain seems to have been less than a peck: WIL 24p. Sometimes the sester payment was commuted: in Wiltshire (WIL 24p) Edward of Salisbury had, among other commodities as his annual payment as sheriff, '16 sesters of honey, or, instead of honey, 16s'. Compare WAR B5 where the Borough of Warwick pays '6 sesters of honey, that is a sester at 15 pence'.
4,18	ODO [* OF BERNIERES *]. Odo is called Odo miles in the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 30, 33) in connection with his grant of Hordley (4,18,1) to Shrewsbury Abbey. He is thought to be the same man as Odo de Berneris (of Bernières) who granted land in Broadstone (4,3,9 Odo note) to the abbey early in the twelfth century: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 15, 43, 258, 262). If so, there are several places called Bernières which could have been his place of origin and that of Hugh of Bernières. The two men may or may not be related and could be from different places called Bernières: in the French département of Calvados there is Bernières-d'Ailly (arrondissement Caen, canton Morteaux-Couliboeuf), Bernières-le Patry (arrondissement Vire, canton Vassy) and Bernières-sur-Mer (arrondissement Caen, canton Douvres-la Délivrande). Further, there is a Bernières in the French département of Seine-Maritime (arrondissement Le Havre, canton Bolbec) and a Bernières-sur-Seine in the French département of Eure (arrondissement Les Andelys, canton Gaillon-Campagne). The origin of Hugh appears to be Bernières-sur-Mer; see Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 72; Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 14; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, pp. 260-61. For Odo VCH Shropshire, i. p. 298, prefers Bernières-sur-Mer and Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 308, chooses Bernières-d'Ailly. This man was apparently also known as Odo of Rushbury from his holding there (4,8,5). However, there was also an Odo clericus active in Shropshire at this time; see 4,3,9 Odo note.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,18,1-2 Baschurch Hundred
		4,18,3 "Merset" Hundred.
	The last entry is out of sequence, but only the hundred head is a later addition.
4,18,1	HORDLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. Odo gave Hordeleia to Shrewsbury Abbey before the death of Earl Roger: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, xx, 6, 30, 33, 34, 39, 41, 256). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a, Thomas de Hordileg' holds 2 hides of the fee of the Abbot of Shrewsbury with suit at the abbot's court of Baschurch; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 245a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 122.
	DUNNING. The Domesday forms of this name - Dunning, Dunninc, Donning, Dunniht, Donninc - represent Old English Dunning: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 228 and § 76. The Alecto edition has Dunning. Compare 4,3,56 Hunning note and 4,17,1 Bruning note.
4,18,2	"UDEFORD" AND RUYTON-[ELEVEN-TOWNS]. Udeford is a lost member of Ruyton. The latter is now an Ancient Parish, strictly Ruyton of the Eleven Towns, the eleven being six in Ruyton parish (Ruyton, Coton, Wykey, Shelvock, Shotatton and Eardiston) and five in Felton parish (Felton, Sutton, Haughton, Rednal and Tedsmore). The 'eleven towns' include two Domesday places (West Felton and Wykey: 4,3,41 and 4,18,3) but even without these, the area is a great increase over the 1 ½ hides recorded here for Udeford and Ruitone in 1086. Ruyton was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, but seems soon to have been acquired by the Fitz Alans and was moved into their lordship of Ruyton or Oswestry, being held under it by Lestrange. It was thus lost to the county until the abolition of the lordships under Henry VIII in 1536; see Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. p. 112 no. 235; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 111. On the Eleven Towns, see Kenyon, 'Ruyton of the Eleven Towns'. Stanwardine-in-the-Wood (SJ4227), which is later a Fitz Alan possession, may have been a remote part of the manor in 1086. It was in Pimhill Hundred in the thirteenth century, but withdrawn from it and put to Oswestry lordship; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 685; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 119.
	5 FISHERIES IN THE DUES OF THE VILLAGERS. Latin v. piscariê in censu uillanor[um]; census has several meanings in Great Domesday, but according to Lennard, Rural England, p. 249, this phrase means that the fisheries were rented by the villagers, which is the translation used in VCH Shropshire, i. p. 334. However, there is a difference between what the Latin says and what it may imply, and there is no reason to think that census means 'rent'.
		The fisheries will probably have been on the River Perry.
4,18,3	IN "MERSET" HUNDRED. This was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the central margin. It is surrounded on all sides by the same colour of ink as was used for the heading; the I of Isd' Odo forms most of the surround on the right-hand side, so it is clear that the head governs the entry in the right-hand column. See 4,20,15 Baschurch note and 4,21,13 Wrockwardine note for other added hundred heads.
	WYKEY. This was a township of the Ancient Parish of Ruyton-Eleven-Towns (see 4,18,2 Ruyton note). It lay in "Merset" Hundred in 1086 and followed the same descent as Ruyton, passing into Ruyton and Oswestry lordships and being held by Lestrange under Fitz Alan before being held by John Yonge of the Earl of Arundel. It is Wyke, coupled with Shelfake (Shelvock SO3724; see 4,18,2 Ruyton note), in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. (old series) p. 223 (= Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. p. 115 no. 236). See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 22. On the abolition of the Marcher lordships in 1536 it was returned to Shropshire.
	IT PAYS TAX. Latin geld' here may abbreviate geldant 'they pay tax', referring to the 7 hides (compare 4,19,1). The main scribe of Great Domesday briefly omitted 7 geld' after berew' and tacked it on to the end of the plough estimate; compare 4,4,2 pay note.
4,19	[TUROLD [* OF VERLEY *]. He is called Toraldus de Verleio in the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 34, 39); see 4,19,8 Drayton note. According to Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 118, he was from Verly in the département of Aisne, France; but he is thought to be more probably from Vesly in the département of Eure (arrondissement Les Andelys, canton Gisors). A Roger son of Turold gave land at Vesly to the Abbey of Le Tréport when it was founded c. 1050 by Robert, Count of Eu, and his wife Beatrice. This Roger was her son by a previous marriage. It is possible that the present Turold, representing the next generation, was a son of that Roger son of Turold and that another Roger son of Turold who died while crossing with the future King William to England in 1066 was this Turold's son; see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 431.
		Most of his Shropshire lands were subsequently grouped together and known as the fee of Chetwynd when they passed to the Chetwynd family (named from Chetwynd: 4,19,2) who hold in the thirteenth century under the Fitz Alans. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 45, viii. p. 82.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,19,1-6 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,19,7-8 Hodnet Hundred
		4,19,9-10 Baschurch Hundred
		4,19,11 "Alnodestreu" Hundred
		4,19,12-13 Condover Hundred.
	This order represents a major departure from the standard sequence.
4,19,1	LONGFORD. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Land at Langanford was left to Burton Abbey c. 1003 in the will of Wulfric Spot: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536). This was possibly at Longford in Shropshire, but if so there is no other trace of any connection with Burton Abbey.
		Longford did not pass to the Chetwynds but the holders in the thirteenth century were a family called de Brinton, de Brympton or de Brompton. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 504, Adam de Brympton holds Longeford which is described as an escheat of Roger de Betlehem (Bellême), Earl of Shrewsbury. The same Adam holds Longheford in chief from the king in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55b; see Book of Fees, p. 964; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 221, 228, 237; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 126, viii. no. 9. In the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 114, Longford's members are given as Brocketon (Brockton SJ7216; see 4,12,1 Brockton note) and Chrestill' (Cheswell SJ7116). It is likely that the distant outlier at Sturcheley (Stirchley SJ6906) and the place called Culmayre (unidentified), held in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118, by the Abbot of Buildwas from Robert Corbet and by him from Adam Brimton, were also members; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 227; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 354; Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 357 no. iii; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 191; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 114; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 185.
		A place called Styrcleage (Stirchley) and one called Longford were given to Burton Abbey c. 1003 in the will of Wulfric Spot: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536 = Charters of Burton Abbey, no. 29, see no. 28), but there is no later trace of a Burton Abbey holding at either of these Shropshire places. On the other hand the partially geographical arrangement of the places granted and the fact that Stirchley and Longford are adjacent in the charter is in favour of their identification with places in Shropshire; see VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 185; Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxix.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 101.
	EARL EDWIN. See 3b,3 Edwin note.
	THEY PAY TAX. Scribe B inserted geld' over an erasure. For his other contributions on the taxability of a holding, see 4,1,1 pay note. On what might have been erased here, see 1,5 pay note.
	TWO MEN-AT-ARMS. They were perhaps the brothers Hunning and Wulfgeat because of the later descent of the land; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 114.
4,19,2	CHETWYND. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. This manor becomes the caput of the fee of Chetwynd (4,19 Turold note) held under Fitz Alan. This fee grouped most of the vills held by Turold in 1086. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, John de Chetewynde holds 9 hides in Chetewynde from John Fitz Alan; see Book of Fees, pp. 962, 970; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 386. The Domesday manor expanded by absorbing vills that were independent in 1086. Thus in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220, the members of Chetwynd are given as Stocton (Stockton in Woodcote, SJ7716. Chetwynd Aston is nearby; see 4,1,23 Edgmond note); Pyvelesdon (Puleston: 4,19,3); Ethelarton (Ellerton SJ7125, probably part of Sambrook); Sambrok (Sambrook: 4,19,4); Bardeston (Bearstone: 4,19,7); Howelye (Howie: 4,19,5); half of Pykelesleye (Pixley SJ6825, possibly part of Sambrook in 1086); see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112. Chetewynde is associated with Pichford (Pitchford: 4,19,12) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 81.
	COUNTESS GODIVA. See 4,1,21 countess note.
	WHICH PAY[S]. Latin redd' here could abbreviate either reddens, singular, referring to the mill only, or reddentes, plural, referring to the mill with the 2 fisheries. The render of money and eels does not point to the plural because eels were a common payment from mills: 1,7 mill note. Compare 4,11,1 where the verb in a similar construction is definitely plural, whereas in 3d,2 it is singular.
	64 STICKS OF EELS. That is, 1600 eels, at 25 eels to a stick.
	A SMALL WOOD [***]. As there is no dot after silua parua and the remaining third of the line is blank, the main scribe of Great Domesday may have intended to add further details of this wood or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}. On Latin silua parua, see 4,1,4 wood note.
4,19,3	PULESTON. This place was in Chetwynd Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It was regarded as a member of Chetwynd manor (4,19,2) in the thirteenth century.
	EARL EDWIN. See 3b,3 Edwin note.
		The Ordnance Survey facsimile fails to reproduce the abbreviation line in com'; see 3f,7 plough note on similar imperfect reproductions in this facsimile. It is very faint in the manuscript and is barely visible in the Alecto facsimile.
	WHICH PAYS TAX. Scribe B added gld' in a space left for it by the main scribe of Great Domesday after hida (see 1,5 hide note). For scribe B's other contributions on the taxability of a holding, see 4,1,1 pay note.
4,19,4	SAMBROOK. This was in Chetwynd Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It became a member of the manor of Chetwynd (4,19,2) and it is probable that two other members of the manor, Ellerton and half of Pixley, were a part of Sambrook in 1086; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 93.
	1 ½ HIDES [***]. In the manuscript there is an erasure of some four letters after dim', probably of geld' as the remains of the 'tail' of a g can be seen in the correct place. Compare 4,27,2 hides note, 4,27,3 hide note, 4,27,9 hide note and 4,27,29 hides note. On spaces left after the hidage by the main scribe of Great Domesday, see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,19,5	HOWLE. This place was in Chetwynd Ancient Parish. It was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It was counted as a part of Chetwynd manor in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220; see 4,19,2 Chetwynd note. Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 386 (of John de Chetewinde), records that of the 8 virgates, 4 virgates are held of the Abbot of Haughmond and 4 virgates of the Abbot of Lilleshall; see the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 461, 643-46, 650, 782); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 91.
	BATSVEINN. Domesday Batsuen represents Old Norse Batsveinn which means 'boatman': von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 193. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Book.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B inserted geld' over an erasure. It would seem likely that the main scribe of Great Domesday had written hidê at the beginning of the second line of this entry, then erased it and put it at the end of the first line (it overruns the side marginal ruling) so as to leave a space for the possible later insertion of geld'. On the spaces he left after the hidage, see 1,5 hide note. For scribe B's other additions of geld', see 4,1,1 pay note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,19,6	LAWLEY. This was formerly a township of Wellington Ancient Parish. It is now a separate Ecclesiastical Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. William Pandolf held the other part (4,14,21). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a, Robert Corbet (of Moreton Corbet) holds half of the vill of Laneleg' of the fee of John de Chetewind, and of Robert's share the nuns of Bruwod (Brewood) hold 1 virgate. In the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112, Robert Corbet holds half the vill from William de Hodnet; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. pp. 37, 99; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 277; and 4,1,4 Hodnet note.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
4,19,7	BEARSTONE. The Domesday name-form is Bardestune, on which see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 34. It lay in the Ancient Parish of Mucklestone, of which the bulk lay in Staffordshire, although Bearstone was and is in Shropshire. Bearstone is now a separate Ecclesiastical Parish, but it lies in Woore Civil Parish. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred and is treated in the thirteenth century as a member of Chetwynd manor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 372; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 386; and 4,19,2 Chetwynd note.
4,19,8	[LITTLE] DRAYTON. Little Drayton was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Drayton-in-Hales, which is also known as Market Drayton. It is now a separate Ecclesiastical Parish. For Market Drayton and another part of Little Drayton, see 4,14,9. The vill lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086 but was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The manor was a gift of Turold de Verleio (of Verley) to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 34, 39). It was thenceforth treated as a member of Betton (4,23,9); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 445; Monasticon Anglicanum, ii. p. 519 no. ii; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 370.
	COUNTESS GODIVA. See 4,1,21 countess note.
4,19,9	MORETON [CORBET]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, but it was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a, Morton' in 'Bradford' Hundred, 1 hide, is a fee of John de Chetewind. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221, Robert Corbet holds Morton 'with members' from Reginald de Chetewinde who holds from Richard Fitz Alan. The members are given as Preston 'in Pimhill' (Preston Brockhurst: 4,19,10) and Ivelithe 'in Brimstree' (Evelith SJ7405); see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 181. Evelith is remote from Moreton and may have been a member of some other manor (for example, of Shifnal: 4,9,1) in 1086. It is Yvelye, 1 virgate, held by Robert Corbet from the lord of Morton Tubaud (i.e. Moreton Toret) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 226.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY> ... WITH HIS BROTHER. According to Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 114, Hunning's brother was called Wulfgeat; both of them had held Preston Brockhurst (4,19,10); see 4,3,56 Hunning note.
		The Ordnance Survey facsimile fails to reproduce the abbreviation line in f're which is faint in the manuscript; see 3f,7 plough note. It is just visible in the Alecto facsimile.
	THEY HELD IT THEMSELVES; THEY WERE FREE MEN. The main scribe of Great
	Domesday added Ipsi tenuer' in the left margin of the manuscript hard up against the
	inner edge of the parchment. It is rather blurred and there are no transposition signs to
	direct it to its correct position in the entry, but the ink box that he drew round three sides of the insertion link it to the beginning of the second line before 7 lib[er]i ho[min]es fuer[unt], which was corrected by him from the singular lib[er] ho[mo] fuit. The singular is acceptable grammatically because 'with his brother' is not part of the subject. See 4,19,9 1066 note.
	THEY HELD IT ... BEFORE 1066. The main scribe of Great Domesday probably added this in the space left after the end of the entry when he found that he had omitted T.R.E. from the marginal insertion (see 4,19,9 themselves note) and had no room to add it there.
4,19,10	PRESTON [BROCKHURST]. This place was in the Ancient Parish of Moreton Corbet (see 4,19,9). It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086 and was later in Pimhill Hundred, whereas Moreton Corbet itself went into 'Bradford' Hundred. For another part of Preston, see 4,23,15. Preston followed the same descent as Moreton Corbet, being held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a (Pimhill Hundred), as 1 ½ hides in Preston Toret by Robert Corbet of the fee of John de Chetewynde, with service at Oswestry (implying a Fitz Alan overlordship); see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 178; VCH Shropshire, xi. p. 95.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
	1 ½ HIDES AS 2 MANORS. See 4,7,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the villagers, probably for the later insertion either of more of the population or of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,19,11	WILLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred and Wenlock Liberty. Willey passed from Turold 's heirs to the fee held by the Chetwynd family under the Fitz Alan barony of Oswestry, and was granted to Wenlock Priory, being held under it in 1255 by Andrew son of Nicholas as Wilileg'. It is often coupled with Linleye (Linley; see 3c,2 Wenlock note); Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 45; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 450.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
	THE ORDNANCE SURVEY FACSIMILE does not reproduce either the dot after eo or the one after car' in the line below. See 3f,7 plough note. They are very faint in the Alecto facsimile. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote de eo over an erasure and it is blurred, as is the stop after it.
4,19,12	PITCHFORD. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. In the thirteenth century it was held from the Chetwynds by a family named from the place under Fitz Alan of Oswestry. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Ralph son of Nicholas (otherwise Ralph of Pitchford) holds 3 hides in Pich' of the fee of John de Chetewind. William Fitz Alan is overlord in 1346 (Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236) and the Bishop of 'Chester' had an interest here in 1316 (Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 286, ii. no. 569; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 267; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 115; and 4,19,2 Chetwynd note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,19,13	WIGWIG. This was in Much Wenlock Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later, before being absorbed by Wenlock Liberty. After the forfeiture of the fief by Earl Roger's son in 1102, Turold became a tenant-in-chief. Wigwig was first given by Robert son of Turold to Shrewsbury Abbey (as Wicewica in the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, p. 34, see p. 39), but was later rented from it by the prior of Wenlock who drew it into his Liberty. Wigewig was held from the prior in 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 84b); see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 63a, 91b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 265; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 88, x. p. 421; and 3c,2 Wenlock note. The estate included Horner (SJ6101).
	LAND FOR 2 PLOUGHS. IT IS THERE. Latin T'ra ç .ii. car'. Ibi ç; the ç may be a scribal error for sunt ('land for 2 ploughs. They are there ... '), but because of the villagers' ½ plough this would make the ploughs on the manor exceed the estimate and, though in other Great Domesday counties the plough estimate is often exceeded (see DEV 1,3 land note for the frequent use of tamen in such cases), in Shropshire the only other instances of this are possibly in 6,30 and 7,4; see 6,30 ploughs note and 7,4 servants note. It is more likely, therefore, that the scribe omitted una after ç (making the reading 'Land for 2 ploughs. In lordship l'). There is no sign of correction of the ii (from i) in the plough estimate.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,20	PICOT [* OF SAI *]. He was Robert de Sai, nicknamed Picot, from Sai in the French département of Orne (arrondissement Argentan, canton Argentan-Est). His wife was called Adeloia, their sons were Robert and Henry and his brother was Payne of Sai. Another relative, Osmelin of Sai, may be the plain Osmelin who held of Earl Roger in Sussex. Picot was a benefactor of Earl Roger’s foundation of Saint-Martin-de-Sées. His successor was his son Henry, baron of Clun. See Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 96; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 112; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 325.
		With the Corbet brothers and William Pandolf he is mentioned in Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. pp. 220-21, see also ii. pp. 420-21) as one of Earl Roger's leading men in Shropshire. Like the lands of Roger and Robert (4,4 Roger note; 4,5 Robert note), his lay on the border with Wales; these holdings formed the 'barony' or 'honour' of Clun. The barons of Clun were strongly represented in Leintwardine Hundred and paramount in "Rinlau" Hundred. In this latter hundred only four manors (Lydham, Lydbury North, Wentnor and Choulton: 4,1,14. 2,1. 4,4,4. 4,5,6) were not held by them.
		From Picot the lands passed to his son Henry, then to Elias whose heir was his daughter Isabel. She married William (I) Fitz Alan, then Geoffrey de Ver, then William Botterell. After her death c. 1199 the barony went to the Fitz Alans and joined their barony of Oswestry; see Sanders, English Baronies, p. 112; and 4,3 Reginald note. Most of Picot's 1086 estates can be identified later in the various Fitz Alan Inquisitions and Surveys; see especially Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812; Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, pp. 51-65.
		Before the end of the twelfth century Isabel de Sai had given the churches of Clun (4,20,8), Llanfair Waterdine (6,22), Clunbury (4,20,4), Clunton (4,20,3), Hopton (4,20,12), Edgton (4,20,14) and Sibdon Carwood (4,20,7) to Wenlock Abbey: Monasticon Anglicanum, v. p. 76 no. iv.
		On the de Sai family, see Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 9.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,20,1 Condover Hundred
		4,20,2-14 "Rinlau" Hundred
		4,20,15-16 Baschurch Hundred
		4,20,17 ["Culvestan"?] Hundred
		4,20,18-27 Leintwardine Hundred
4,20,1	BROMPTON. This place was in Berrington Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later; see Lay Subsidy Roll, Shropshire (1327), Condover Hundred, p. 385; and 4,5,5 Brompton note. Picot de Sai granted the tithes of Brantone and Phitesoth (Fitz: 4,20,15) to Shrewsbury Abbey soon after Earl Roger's death, and, in the time of Henry I, Henry de Sai exchanged the whole manor of Brompton for Cheney Longville (4,27,32); see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a; the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 34, 39, 42, 45, 53, etc.). The abbey continued to hold it until the Dissolution. On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 169; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 19.
	ERNWY <OF BROMPTON>. On the name Ernwy, see 4,4,12 Ernwy note.
		The name Ernwy or Ernwin occurs eight times in central Shropshire and nowhere else within 50 miles; it probably represents two or three individuals. The pre-Conquest holder of the modest, shared property at Brompton might have been connected to those of Pontesbury or Easthope; but there are no discernible links to confirm this, and the Ernwys outside the county were too distant to be plausible related (JP).
	3 PLOUGHMEN. The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the top half of the last minim of iii nor the dot after it, making the number look like ii,. In the manuscript the iii. is perfectly clear, as it is in the Alecto facsimile; see 3f,7 plough note for other shortcomings of the Ordnance Survey facsimile.
4,20,2	MYNDTOWN. The Domesday form is Munete. It is named from La Munede, the Long Mynd. It was an Ancient Parish and lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, William de La Munede has ½ hide in La Munede from John Fitz Alan with suit at Clun. It is 'the town of La Munede' in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812. See Book of Fees, p. 963; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233, 238; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 273.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the hedged enclosure, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,20,3	CLUNTON. The Domesday form is Clutune, with a nunnation mark apparently omitted. It was in Clunbury Ancient Parish (see 4,20,4) but is now in Clunbury Civil Parish. It lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred, and seems to have merged with Hopesay manor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 251; and 4,20,6 Hopesay note and 4,20,8 Clun note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the hedged enclosures, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,20,4	CLUNBURY. The place-name may indicate that it was named from a fortified manor, there being no evidence of a fortress: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 92.
		This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. In Book of Fees, p. 963, Hugh Anglicus holds 1 fee of the barony of Clun in Clounebur', while in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 238, the same holding is named as Clunbury, Bromton (Little Brompton SO3681), Streford (Strefford: 4,3,47) and Marsh (Marsh; see 4,3,47 Strefford note), formerly held from William Fitz Alan by Hugh Anglicus; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 246.
	THIS MANOR HAS NEVER PAID TAX ... NOT HIDATED. Neen Sollars (5,8) was the only other manor in Shropshire which was never hidated and did not pay tax, but unlike Clunbury it had most of the usual manorial details. On land yet assessed in hides, see C 13 hides note.
	THERE WERE 6 PLOUGHS. Presumably this is a reference to 1066; see 2,2 before note.
4,20,5	KEMPTON. This place lay in Clunbury Ancient Parish. It was in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, then in Purslow Hundred and seems to have become a member of Hopesay (4,20,6 Hopesay note. 4,20,8 Clun note); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 251.
	2 MANORS. It is not clear from the Latin whether all the details of lordship ploughs, slaves and other population and resources refer to both Clunbury and Kempton, though it seems likely in view of the omission of such details from 4,20,4. Compare 4,23,8 and 4,23,8 manors note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the hedged enclosures, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource (see {Introduction: Content and Layout}), though he could have wanted to put the value on a separate line as it referred to the preceding entry as well.
	VALUE OF THESE 2 MANORS BEFORE 1066 £8. As the T.R.E. value of Clunbury has already been given in the preceding entry as £4, the value of Kempton would seem also to have been £4.
4,20,6	HOPESAY. Hopesay (Domesday Hope) is named from Picot of Say or his descendants. It was an Ancient Parish and lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. It became an important manor of the barony of Clun and absorbed other vills that were separate in 1086. Thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, John Fitz Alan holds 4 hides in Hope de Say, Eston' (Aston-on-Clun SO3981), Kempeton' (Kempton: 4,20,5), and Clonton' (Clunton: 4,20,3) of the barony of Clun; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 252; and 4,20,8 Clun note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the hedged enclosures, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,20,7	SIBDON [CARWOOD]. The Domesday form is Sibitune. This was a chapelry of Clun Ancient Parish but is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. The modern place-name is a fusion of two places: there are an Upper and a Lower Carwood at SO4085 in the parish. This vill was in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. Picot may have given two-thirds of the demesne tithes of Sibbeton to Shrewsbury Abbey in the time of Earl Hugh: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 7-8, 276-77, 301-302, 351-52). The manor itself became part of the barony of Clun. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, Roger Bardolf holds 1 hide in Bilbeton from John Fitz Alan, through his wife, guardian of the son of Henry de Silbeton, with suit at Clun. Sibeton with half of Wistanstowe (Wistanstow: 9,1) and Brome (Broome SO4080) are held by John de Sibeton from William Fitz Alan in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 238; see Book of Fees, p. 963; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 268.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,20,8	CLUN. This was an Ancient Parish. It was in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. It was caput of Picot's, then Fitz Alan's, barony of Clun: in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 684, John Fitz Alan holds Clawne township from the king. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 90, Richard Earl of Arundel holds Clone castle and manor and receives rents from the following places which were members of the barony: Aston (Aston on Clun; see 4,20,6 Hopesay note); Hope Say (Hopesay: 4,20,6); Berley (Barlow: 4,20,10); Clunton (Clunton: 4,20,3); Kempeton (Kempton: 4,20,5); Acton (Acton SO3184); Dounherberd (Guilden Down SO3082; Dune juxta Clune held by Giles de Berkele in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, Gilesdoune in Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vi. p. 111; see Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, pp. 58, 177); Aderdeley (now Llanhedrick, SO2884); Bikedon (Bicton SO2882); Hodicote (Whitcott? SO2782); Newcastle (Newcastle SO2482). Acton was ½ hide according to Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a. See Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233. Newcastle and Llanhedrick with Bicton were part of the manor of the Five Towns belonging to the Clun barony. This manor also contained Whitcott (see above) and Keysett (SO2782): Morgan, 'Montgomeryshire Territorial Divisions', p. 34. The Westone of Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812 (p. 280), may well be Weston (SO2781) and so another member of Clun.
		It is not certain that Clun manor extended so far west in 1086 as to include the area of Bettws-y-Crwyn Ancient Parish: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
		Mainstone (SJ2787) was a chapelry later attached to Clun and then a separate Civil Parish. However, the serttlements that can be identified as lying in its area were part of Montgomery (4,1,35-36) in 1086.
		The church of Clun went to Wenlock Priory (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167a). On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 255.
		On the dissolution of the Marcher lordships and the shiring of Wales in 1536, Clun was briefly placed in Montgomeryshire, but returned to Shropshire in 1546.
		On the castle at Clun, which probably dates from the late eleventh century, see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 423.
	MILL WHICH SERVES THE COURT. That is, it provided grain for the lord's house, the court of the manor; see 1,7 mill note and 3c,8 court note.
	PLOUGHMEN ... VILLAGERS ... SMALLHOLDERS. Domesday bouar', uill' and bord' may abbreviate the accusative bouarios, uillanos and bordarios and thus be the objects of h[abe]nt earlier in the line; compare 2,2 villagers note, 4,1,19 villagers note, 4,3,29 villagers note and 6,11 villagers note. On Waleis for Walenses, see 4,3,38 Welshmen note.
	CATTLE. The Latin is animalia, commonly called animalia otiosa ('idle animals') elsewhere: see, for example, Exon folio 174b4 = SOM 2,7. These are beef or dairy cattle in contrast to ploughing oxen, although occasionally in Exon and in a few counties in Great Domesday they seem to be oxen (DEV 1,3 cattle note). Although cattle and other animals are enumerated in the surviving circuit returns (Exon and Little Domesday), they were normally omitted from Great Domesday, except to make a particular point. Here the cattle were a rent, probably for some land though Domesday does not mention this; they may have been cows, as in the payment of 8 cows from Welshmen in 4,3,42.
4,20,9	PURSLOW. This place lay in Clunbury Ancient Parish. It was in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, then caput of Purslow Hundred. In Book of Fees, p. 963, Gilbert de Bockenhul' holds in Bockenhul' (Bucknell; see 4,20,26 Adley note) and Posselawe from the barony of Clun. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 76b, 77a, Bockenhull is 1 hide and Possel' ½ hide; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 238; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 266.
4,20,10	BARLOW. This lay in Hopesay Ancient Parish. It was in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. It pays rent to Clun in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 90 (see 4,20,8 Clun note), but manorially was probably a member of Hopesay (4,20,6); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 255.
4,20,11	OBLEY. This place was in Clunbury Ancient Parish. It lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086 and later was a member of the barony and manor of Clun. It appears as Obbele in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, of John Fitz Alan. See Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, p. 61; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 245.
	THESE LANDS. That is, 4,20,10-11, Barlow and Obley.
4,20,12	HOPTON [CASTLE]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. In the Book of Fees, p. 963, Walter de Hopton' holds 2 fees in Hopton' of the barony of Cloune. The same man holds Hopton', Bradeford (Broadward SO3876) and Coston (Coston: 4,20,13) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, with service at Clun. Hopton, Chelderlton (Shelderton SO4077; see 4,3,46 Clungunford note) and Coston are held by another Walter de Hopton in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 238. The Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, adds Tattel' (Tately SO4278, part of Clungunford: 4,20,24) and Haggele (Great Hagley SO3476). See Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 321; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 255.
4,20,13	COSTON. This place was in Clunbury Ancient Parish. It lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. It was later associated with Hopton (4,20,12), also held by de Hopton; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 75, vii. no. 311; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 251.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about seven letters after the population, rather small for the later insertion of any resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,20,14	EDGTON. This was a chapelry of Clun Ancient Parish and is now a separate Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish. It lay in "Rinlau" Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. In the Book of Fees, p. 963, Henry and Nicholas de Egedon' hold 1 fee in Egedon' of the barony of Cloune, while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, Peter de Bosco and Nicholas de Exedon' hold 1 hide in Exedon', Bronselawe (Brunslow SO3684) and Wolureston' (Woolston: 4,20,18) from John Fitz Alan with service at Clun; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233, 238; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 260.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left two-thirds of a line blank after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}. The fact that when he added the Baschurch hundred head for the next entry (4,20,15 Baschurch note) he put it mostly in the margin rather than in part of this space (hundred heads were often inserted in convenient spaces in preceding entries) suggests that he wanted to leave as large a space as possible.
4,20,15	IN BASCHURCH HUNDRED. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote this mostly in the outer margin, with a gallows sign separating the HVND' from the first line of the entry; see 4,20,14 [***] note. As the colour of the ink and the pen are the same as for the adjacent text this may be an early addition. For other hundred heads that were added, see 4,18,3 Merset note and 4,21,13 Wrockwardine note.
	FITZ. The Domesday form is Witesot, of which the second element is Old English hoh ('a spur of land'), the first element being uncertain. The modern form is drastically shortened: Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Fitz; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 132. It was an Ancient Parish, and was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. The manor passed to Isabel de Say, baroness of Clun, then to her descendants by William (I) Fitz Alan. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, Walter de Hopton and Thomas de Costentin hold 8 hides in Fitesho, a fee of John Fitz Alan with service at Oswestry. Fittes is held by Walter de Hopton in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 231; see Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 747. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 321, Fittes includes the hamlets of Mutton (Mytton: 3d,5 Mytton note) and Grafton (Grafton SJ4318) .The tithes were given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Picot de Sai (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 7, 8, 34, 39, etc.; see 4,20,1 Brompton note), the mill to Haughmond Abbey (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; the Haughmond Cartulary: Rees, nos. 323, 329-32, 1075). On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 144.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
4,20,16	MERRINGTON. The Domesday form is Gellidone. Later forms of the name are Gulidone, Murydon and Muridone; see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 336 note 89; Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Merrington; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p.
	204. Merrington was probably in Baschurch Ancient Parish. It was at first placed in Preston Gubbals Civil Parish, then in Pimhill Civil Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. Picot de Sai gave two-thirds of the demesne tithes to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 7-8, 43, 45, 276-79, etc.) and the manor itself was later given to Haughmond Abbey. In the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 121, the Abbot of Haughmond holds Meryden in free alms by gift of Robert Girreis; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 330, 332, 685, 767, 772-78, 1278-80); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 154.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
4,20,17	[IN "CULVESTAN"? HUNDRED]. Geographically, Westhope could have lain either in Leintwardine Hundred or "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086; its later situation in Munslow Hundred does not resolve the matter. Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 306) and VCH Shropshire, i. p. 336 note 90, prefer to assume that the Leintwardine hundred head beneath this entry governs it, as sometimes elsewhere in Great Domesday. In this edition a "Culvestan" head has been preferred on the grounds that places in "Culvestan" Hundred precede those in Leintwardine at 5,3 and 6,10. Moreover, a space may have been left for a hundred head: 4,20,17 Almund note.
	WESTHOPE. This place was a township in Diddlebury Ancient Parish and remains in the Civil Parish of that name. It may have lain in "Culvestan" Hundred and was later in Munslow Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, John Fitz Alan holds 1 hide from the king in Westhop'; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 648; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 306.
	ALMUND HELD IT. [***].The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line (suitable for some 17 letters) after tenuit.. It is quite likely that it was left for a hundred head like other spaces at the end of the first line of an entry (4,1,22 Earl note) as one may be missing (4,20,17 Culvestan note). However, it is possible that the space was left for p[ro] uno manerio; see 4,14,25 Gamal note.
	4 PLOUGHS. In the manuscript iiii has been corrected from iii by the addition of a final minim, under which can be seen the original dot.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank two-thirds of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,20,18	IN LEINTWARDINE HUNDRED. There are two unidentified manors belonging to Clun barony in 1086 in this hundred (4,20,19;21). In later records there are estates in this hundred that may correspond to these unidentified manors, have been parts of them or be members of other Clun baraony manors in this hundred. They were at La Stowe (Stowe SO3173), ½ hide held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76b, by the prior of Great Malvern from John Fitz Alan with suit at Clun; and Weston' (Weston SO3273), also ½ hide, held by Brian de Bromton'; see Book of Fees, p. 963; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233, 238; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 291. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812 p. 280, Weston is associated with Brompton (Brampton Bryan) held by Brian de Brompton. Brampton Bryan (6,23) is held under Ralph of Mortimer in Domesday but this may be another part of the vill, held under the Clun barony (see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244), or a mistaken inclusion. Another manor may be Skyborre (Skyborry Green SO2674 and Nether Skyborry SO2773): Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, p. 60.
		On Stow and Weston, see 4,20,26 Adley note.
	WOOLSTON. At first sight, Domesday Wistanestune is difficult to accept as a predecessor of Woolston (in Wistanstow Ancient Parish) but it probably shows confusion with the parish name: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 324. Wolureston', held from the barony of Clun, is later associated with Edgton; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 308; and 4,20,14 Edgton note. Woolston lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred.
	SPIRTES THE PRIEST. See 3d,7 Spirtes note. He was a canon of St Mary's, Bromfield, from whom he had held 10 hides (3d,7). He had also Wistanstow from St Alkmund's Church (9,1). Since Woolston was in Wistanstow Ancient Parish it is likely that it too had belonged to St Alkmund's and that either Domesday fails to mention this or its alienation had been concealed. See 9,1 Wistanstow note and SHR 3g St Alkmund's note.
	LAND FOR 8 PLOUGHS. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left the remaining quarter of a line blank after the plough estimate. Nothing is obviously missing from the entry; compare 7,6 ploughs note and 3f,2 church note.
	A PRIEST. The church was probably at Wistanstow (9,1), no Norman or earlier church being known at Woolston; see Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 24.
4,20,19	"CAURTUNE". This former possession of St Alkmund's Church has not been traced, although it is probably the Cauton that appears in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812, of John Fitz Alan, held by the prior of Brampton. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 309; and 9,1 Wistanstow note and SHR 3g St Alkmund's note.
	PICOT [* OF SAI *] HOLDS IT WRONGFULLY. Picot is holding both churchland and almsland. See Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 226 no. 1330.
4,20,20	LEINTWARDINE. This was an Ancient Parish. There seems to be no later trace of a holding of Clun barony here; these 3 virgates, which may have been alienated from the manor of Leintwardine (6,11) held by Edward the Confessor, were probably recombined with it (forming a five-hide unit) and followed its descent to the Mortimers of Wigmore; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 321; and 6,11 Leintwardine note. By being drawn into a Marcher lordship, Leintwardine was effectively taken from Shropshire. At the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, Leintwardine itself was placed in Herefordshire, though the Ancient Parish was divided between Herefordshire and Shropshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
	FULCO [* OF LE PIN *]. See 4,3,46 Fulco note.
4,20,21	"CHINBALDESCOTE". This is an unidentified place that lay in Leintwardine Hundred in1086. It might be represented later by Halford and Dinchope, in Halford parish, which were held by St Mary of Bromfield according to the confirmation charter of Henry III, but these may well have been outliers of Bromfield itself; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 310; and 3d,6 Bromfield note.
4,20,22	MENUTTON. The Domesday form is Munetune. Menutton was formerly in Clun Ancient Parish and remains in the Civil Parish of that name. A manor of the same Domesday name (now Minton: 4,28,4) also lay in Leintwardine Hundred, but there is no later evidence to associate Minton with Clun barony. Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 311, left this manor unidentified, but a Munetone occurs in several Fitz Alan Surveys and is probably to be identified as Menutton which lay close to several other Fitz Alan manors. Munetone is found in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812 (of John Fitz Alan). It is Moneton' subtus Porteloke (Purlogue SO2876) in 1272 (Calendar of Close Rolls, Henry III (AD 1268-1272), p. 506) and Munetone in Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, p. 60. On the name-form, see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 201.
4,20,23	LURKENHOPE?. If correctly identified, Lurkenhope lay in Stowe Ancient Parish. The Domesday name-form is Edretehope, the first element perhaps being from Edric, the T.R.E. holder. Edretehope lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086. It was left unidentified by Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 311), but identified by VCH Shropshire, i. p. 336, as possibly Hopebendrid, a township which includes Chapel Lawn and Pentre and lay in Clun parish. This is found as Obbendrif in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812 p. 281 (of John Fitz Alan), and as Owendriffe in vol. iv. no. 235, and as Owendrisse in Calendar of Close Rolls, Henry III (AD 1268-1272), p. 506. However, other forms are needed to convince that this is really a place-name derived from Old English hop rather than a later assimilation to 'Hope'. Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 152, considers possible Hobendrid (SO3076, the Hopebendrid identified by VCH Shropshire) or Hobarris and further suggests that Hobendrid and Hobarris (SO3178) might be later divisions of the same Domesday estate, though they appear to be named from different 'Hopes' (that is, valleys). Being close to other Clun barony holdings in both "Rinlau" and Leintwardine Hundreds, these are a possible identification. However, among the members of Clun barony in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812 of John Fitz Alan, is Larcwenhope (Larquenhopp' in Calendar of Close Rolls, Henry III (AD 1268-1272), p. 506), that is Lurkenhope in Stowe parish, a more probable identification, if Edretehope simplified to Hope after 1086 and later acquired a different prefix.
4,20,24	CLUNGUNFORD. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086 and was later in Purslow Hundred. The modern form represents the addition of Gunward's name to Domesday Clone. In Book of Fees, p. 963, Simon de Hauborthin holds ½ fee in Cloune Goneford of the barony of Cloune, while Cluna' Gonnef, Abbecot' (Abcott SO3978) and Routon' (Rowton SO4180), 1 hide, are held by the guardian of Simon's heir from John Fitz Alan in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233, 238; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 297; and 4,20,12 Hopton note. For another part of the manor, see 4,3,46.
	GUNNVARTH. On this name, see 4,3,46 Gunnvarth note.
	FULCO [* OF LE PIN *]. See 4,3,46 Fulco note.
	AT 32d. The main scribe of Great Domesday added this in the outer margin of the manuscript; he drew a gallows sign round denar' to separate it from the adjacent text.
4,20,25	BEDSTONE. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, later in Purslow Hundred. The evolution of the Domesday name Betietetune to Bedstone is difficult, but not impossible: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 35. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76b, John de Gay holds from John Fitz Alan in Gay (Jay SO3974), Bedeston' and Bekegay (Beckjay SO3977) with service at Clun; see Book of Fees, p. 963; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 238; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 489; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 302.
	FULCO [* OF LE PIN *]. See 4,3,46 Fulco note.
4,20,26	ADLEY. Domesday Edelactune. Now Adley Moor. For the name-form, see 6,27 Adley note. Adley was a township of Bucknell Ancient Parish but is now in Buckton and Coxall Civil Parish in Herefordshire. Buckton and Coxall originated as a township of Bucknell Ancient Parish. Adley was in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086 and later in Purslow Hundred. Neither Adley nor Edelactune is found among the later possessions of the lords of Clun. On the other hand, in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76b, Gilbert de Bockenhul holds 1 hide in Bockenhull (Bucknell SO3573 which is nearby) from John Fitz Alan of the barony of Clun. Thus, it is possible that Bucknell has replaced Adley as the name of this holding. The hidage given in the Rotuli Hundredorum is a reduction from that of Domesday, but this is consistent with other hidages in Purslow Hundred. Moreover, the next entry in the Rotuli Hundredorum, for Gay, Bedeston and Bekegay (representing Bedstone: 4,20,25), is 1 hide corresponding to the 2 hides of Bedstone in Domesday. Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 316) identified the later Clun barony holding at Bucknell with Domesday Buchehale (4,14,29; but see 4,14,29 Buchehale note). See Book of Fees, p. 963; Clough, Fitz Alan Surveys, p. 51; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; and 4,20,9 Purslow note. Bruce Coplestone-Crow (personal communication) suggests that Adley is represented by the holdings of Clun barony at Stow and Weston (4,20,18 Leintwardine note).
		Adley and other adjacent places were drawn into Marcher lordships and on their dissolution in 1536 were placed in Herefordshire.
	BERNARD [* SON OF UNSPAC *]. For this identification, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. pp. 242-44.
	LARGELY IS. The Latin for the whole sentence is Wasta fuit 7 est ex parte magna. Two translations are possible: 'It was, and is, largely waste' (as in the Phillimore printed translation) where ex parte magna is taken as governing both verbs; and 'It was waste, and largely [still] is' which takes ex parte magna only with est and suggests some recovery, as for many estates ({Introduction: Content and Layout}). The latter translation is, on balance, the more likely: had the main scribe of Great Domesday intended that ex parte magna should refer to the situation at both dates, he could have put it at the end of the sentence. However, this suggests a control of his material that he does not always show, so the question remains open. The Alecto edition has ' It was and is waste for a great part'.
4,20,27	SELLEY?. Domesday Hibrihteselle lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, but has long been unidentified; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 312. The termination could have survived in Selley (in Llanfair Waterdine), an identification proposed by Noble, 'Offa's Dyke Re-viewed', p. 50, but not apparently accepted by Place-Names of Shropshire, i. However, no descent for Selley has been found, although it is possible that it was replaced by the nearby Skyborry (4,20,18 Leintwardine note) or by Llanfair Waterdine (6,22 Waterdine note) if part of the latter was ever held by the barony of Clun (4,20 Picot note).
		Selley lay in Llanfair Waterdine which was a township of Clun Ancient Parish, then a separate Civil Parish from 1866.
	FULCO [* OF LE PIN *]. See 4,3,46 Fulco note.
4,21	HELGOT <OF HOLDGATE>. Helgot probably came from Résenlieu in the French département of Orne (arrondissement Argentan, canton Gacé), close to Earl Roger’s vicomté of the Hiémois. His lands went on to form the barony of Castle Holdgate, named from Holdgate (Domesday Stantune: 4,21,5-6) which is itself named from him. From him they passed to Herbert his son, then to Herbert’s son, Herbert de Castello (that is, of Castle Holdgate). His heir Agnes married Robert Mauduit, then Ralph de Ardene. Her son Thomas Mauduit inherited the barony in 1204 and his heir William alienated the estates to Richard Earl of Cornwall, styled King of Almain, who gave them to the Templars. These withdrew suit of most of the manors from their respective hundreds into their short-lived ‘Liberty’ of Castle Holdgate. Edmund, Earl of Cornwall and son of Richard, held for a short time, then c. 1284 the barony passed to Robert Burnell, Bishop of Bath and Wells (1275-1292). The lands then passed to his nephew Philip, then to Philip’s son Edward. Robert de Girros was an important undertenant of the barony in the late twelfth century. On Helgot and the barony, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 52; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 28; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 246.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,21,1 Hodnet Hundred
		4,21,2-6 Patton Hundred
		4,21,7-9 Condover Hundred
		4,21,10 Baschurch Hundred
		4,21,11-13 "Alnodestreu" Hundred
		4,21,14 [Wrockwardine] Hundred
		4,21,15-18 "Culvestan" Hundred
		4,21,19 Leintwardine Hundred.
	There are two sequences here, but no repetition of hundred heads.
4,21,1	NORTON[-IN-HALES]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred: Lay Subsidy Roll, Shropshire, (1327), Bradford Hundred, p. 136. Land at Northtune was left to Ufegeat for the ultimate benefit of Burton Abbey in the will of Wulfric Spot c. 1003: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no.1536). This was possibly at Norton-in-Hales, but if so there is no other trace of any connection with Burton Abbey.
		After 1086 Herbert son of Helgot gave the manor to Shrewsbury Abbey and it is confirmed by his sons as Nortona juxta nemus quod Lima dicitur ('Nortona near the wood called Lyme'): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 2, 4, 33, 38,41, etc.); see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 245a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 366; and 4,23,9 Betton note.
	AZUR. On this name, see 4,1,35 Azur note.
4,21,2	CLEE [ST MARGARET]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred and then in Wenlock Liberty. The Domesday vill was reduced in size by grants of ½ virgate to Shrewsbury Abbey (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 16, 343-44) and of 1 virgate to Haughmond Abbey (Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 113-14 no. xiv). The core of the manor followed the expected descent: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, a quarter of a hide is held in Cl'ies S'ce Marg' by William Maudut with suit at Castle Holdgate. It is held by Robert Burnel from the Earl of Cornwall in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224, and by John de Haudlo in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, viii. no. 667; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 75. It had probably once formed a single land-unit with Cleestanton: 3c,13): Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 88.
	A MILL WHICH SERVES THE COURT. See 4,20,8 mill note.
4,21,3	MILLICHOPE. This was in Munslow Ancient Parish. It lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred and then in Wenlock Liberty. It was granted by Earl Roger to the church of St Milburga in exchange for Eardington (Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 109; and 4,1,32 Quatford note), and is held by Wenlock Abbey in 1255 in two parts, ½ hide being at Mill'ghop Inf'ior, ½ hide at Alta Millîgehop ('Lower' Millichope and 'High' Millichope) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85b; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 146, iii. nos. 194, 587, viii. no. 667, x. no. 633; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 1; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 327. The estate at Millichope included land at Hungerford (SO5389).
		MELICOPE was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure. In the Alecto facsimile the C resembles a large lower-case e; see 3c,7 Perkley note.
	GAMAL. See 4,8,9 Gamal note.
	THE VALUE WAS. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote Vabb' (the abbreviation line passing through both b's) in error for Valb'.
4,21,4	OXENBOLD. The holding comprised Great Oxenbold (SO5991) and Little Oxenbold (SO5891). Great Oxenbold appears to have been an Ancient Parish and Little Oxenbold (from the time of its gift) a chapelry of Much Wenlock Ancient Parish. They are now in the Civil Parishes of Monkhopton and Stanton Long respectively. Oxenbold lay in Patton Hundred in 1255, later in Munslow Hundred and then in Wenlock Liberty. Like other holdings in 4,21 it descended to Robert de Girros who gave Oxebolde as a fee of Castle Holdgate to the prior of Wenlock: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71b. This helped produce or restore for the prior a continuous tract of territory south of Much Wenlock (SHR 3c St Milburga note). See Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 85a, 110ab; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 20; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 215; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 357. According to VCH Shropshire, x. p. 373, the estate included Weston, Hopton, Monk Hall, and Skimlescott (SO5892) but it is possible that at least the first three of these were part of the original grant to the church of Wenlock: 3c,2 Wenlock note.
	LAND FOR 4 PLOUGHS. The main scribe of Great Domesday corrected iii to iiii by the addition of an initial minim in darker ink.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	VALUE WAS 11s. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote the ix over an erasure.
4,21,5	HOLDGATE. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. The Domesday name is Stantune which is also represented by Stanton Long (4,8,6), the two perhaps once forming the single estate of 10 hides restored to Wenlock church in 901 (Early Charters of the West Midlands, no. 430 p. 148 = Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 221): SHR 3c St Milburga note. This holding was later known as Stanton Helgot from the 1086 overlord, then simply 'Holdgate'. It became caput of the barony of Helgot's successors. A castle here is mentioned in Domesday and a college of secular priests established within it before 1210: Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 415, 427. On the castle, see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 425.
		In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71b, William Maudut holds Castrum Holegod, 5 hides, from the king; Thomas Maudut had held it in Book of Fees, p. 144. The Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 100b, 101b, record it as held by the king de Alemannia, then held by the Templars from him, while Robert Burnel, Bishop of Bath, holds from the Earl of Cornwall in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224; see Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973, 1283; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 228, 245; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 203, iii. no. 194, v. no. 611, viii. no. 667; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 51; Purton, 'Holdgate and the Cressetts'; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 137.
		The Templars seem to have acquired also a part of Longestanton (Stanton Long: 4,8,6) which was adjacent and which escheated to Edward Burnel: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611.
		Herbert son of Helgot gave the church and tithes of Stantona to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 33, 38).
	1 SMALLHOLDER [***]. There is no dot after bord' in the manuscript, so the main scribe of Great Domesday may have intended to add details of any ploughs he held and also of any resources when and if available ({Introduction: Content and Layout}). Although dots are sometimes omitted in error, the half-line gap after it is rather too large for the space usually left before the value statement. It is just possible that there is a very neat erasure in this space.
4,21,6	HOLDGATE. See 4,21,5 Holdgate note.
		In the Alecto facsimile STANTVNE resembles STANTONE; see 3c,7 Perkley note.
	GENUST, ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *], DUNNING AND AELFEVA. The main scribe of Great Domesday unusually wrote an 7 only between the first two and last two names, so that one might almost think he meant the T.R.E. holders to be Genust, Alward Dunning and Aelfeva. Normally there is either an 7 between all names, as in 6,20;32, or just between the last two, as in 4,21,8;10. See von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 259, on the possible personal names represented by Domesday Genust here and Genut in 4,21,14; these are the only occurrences of the name in Domesday.
		On the identification of Alward, see 3f,2 Alward note.
	[HELD IT]. The main scribe of Great Domesday omitted tenuer[unt] in error.
	LAND FOR 6 PLOUGHS. The main scribe of Great Domesday corrected v to vi: the original dot after v can still be seen under the added i.
4,21,7	PREEN. This was in the Ancient Parish of Church Preen. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The Domesday vill descended to the lords of Castle Holdgate but had been divided before 1255. Of the 3 hides, 2 hides were in 'Great' or 'Church' Preen and were given to Wenlock Priory possibly by the Domesday subtenant Richard. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, the monks of Wenlock hold 2 hides in Pruna' Magna', a fee of William de Maudut; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230.
		The remaining 1 hide was at Parva Pruna, also known as Holt Preen. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Henry Girros holds two-thirds and the monks of Prune (a cell of Wenlock; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164b) one third of this hide. The Girros portion went to Richard, King of Almain, then to the Templars of Lydley, then (as Holtprene) to Edward Burnel; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 63a, 91b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611. 'Parva' Preen is now plain Holt (SO5396).
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 220; VCH Shropshire, ii. p. 38, viii. p. 125, x. p. 32.
	RICHARD [* OF BEAUMAIS *]. Perhaps the Richard here and in 4,21,12 was Richard of Beaumais, later Bishop of London (1108-1127), who was Robert of Bellême's clerk and possibly his steward: Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', pp. 253-54. He originated from Beaumais-sur-Dive in the French département of Calvados, arrondissement Caen, canton Morteaux-Couliboeuf. See Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 13; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 362.
	LAND FOR 3 PLOUGHS. In the manuscript there is a space after the iii, as if the number of ploughs had originally been omitted and then added in a space that in the event was too large for it. Compare 4,16,1 ploughs note, 4,23,14 land note and 4,23,16 land note.
	GODEBOLD [* THE PRIEST *]. Godebold was apparently Godebold the priest (on whom see 3g,3 Godebold note): Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 253.
	WOODLAND, 100 PIGS. This detail may be part of the main holding of Preen that Richard holds from Helgot, rather than of Godebold's subtenancy. Compare 6,11 woodland note.
4,21,8	HARLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. The vill lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The Helgot interest here was lost and the manor passed to the honour of Montgomery (4,1,15 Montgomery note). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Richard de Harleg' holds 3 hides in Harleg' from the former fee of William de Canteloy (honour of Montgomery); see Book of Fees, p. 966; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 215, 229, 239; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 230; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 87.
	A MILL [***]. In the manuscript there is a space suitable for about five letters after molin'; it is possible that there was a very neat erasure here, or perhaps an imperfection in the parchment, but the space may just have been left by the main scribe of Great Domesday for the mill's value or payment to be added when known.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,21,9	BELSWARDYNE. This was a detached part of Leighton Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. In Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973, Robert de Clifton' holds half a fee in Bedlesworthe of the barony of Thomas Maudut of Castle Holdgate. The same holding is described as ½ hide of the fee of Robert de Girros in Beclesworthin in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b. It was subsequently held by the King of Almain and the Templars; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 91b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 227.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,21,10	FELTON [BUTLER]. This was in Great Ness Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. The affix 'Butler' distinguishes it from West Felton (4,3,41). It is held by the Butlers under the barons of Castle Holdgate. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a, Hamo Le Bottler holds 3 virgates of the fee of William Maudut in Felton' with service at Montgomery. It is Felton Butler in the Pimhill Hundred Roll (p. 121) and held by the King of Almain in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 105a; see Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 201.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. See 3f,2 Alward note.
	"ALCHEN". The Domesday form Alchen, which only occurs here, might represent Old Danish Alfkil (von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 143 and § 60), but in view of the uncertainty the Domesday form has been retained. The Alecto edition has Alchen.
	AS 3 MANORS. In the text this phrase is misplaced after the statement that these men were free; it is obviously an immediate addition as the ink colour does not change, though the p' is slightly darker, probably because the main scribe of Great Domesday re-dipped his pen in ink. See 4,27,18 manors note and 4,7,5 hide note for examples of other cases where 'as n manors' has been misplaced.
4,21,11	"BOSLE". Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 2) followed by VCH Shropshire, i. p. 338, and by Domesday Gazetteer identified this as Broseley, an Ancient Parish. Bosle lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and Broseley in Munslow Hundred in the Middle Ages. Places that were in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 are usually found in Stottesdon or Brimstree Hundreds later. There is no known tenurial connection between Helgot's holding at Bosle and Broseley which was held by Wenlock Priory. Moreover, spellings for Broseley such as Burewardesleg' (1255: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 84b) and Borewardesleye (Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 254) make the derivation from Domesday Bosle unlikely, although VCH Shropshire, x. p. 266, has suggested that Bosle represents a shortened pronounciation of the longer name. Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 63, iii. p. 278, does not regard the names as related. Thus Bosle is probably an unidentified place and Broseley was probably part of Much Wenlock (3c,2 Wenlock note) in 1086.
		The main scribe of Great Domesday failed to rubricate BOSLE; for other such failures, see 4,3,8 St Peter note.
	GETHNE. See von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 260, on the possible personal names represented by Domesday Gethne. The name does not recur in Domesday Book.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,21,12	MEADOWLEY. This place was in Morville Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Stottesdon Hundred. In Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973, Hugh de Opton' holds 1 fee in Medowele of the barony of Thomas Maudut of Castle Holdgate, while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b, Thomas de Upton' holds 6 virgates from Roger de Beaumes (perhaps a descendant of the 1086 undertenant Richard) with suit at Castle Holdgate; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 219; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194, iv. no. 59; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 148.
	HE WAS FREE. This is another misplacement by the main scribe of Great Domesday, though an immediate addition judging by the ink colour, despite its running over into the central margin (many of the lines in the bottom third of this column overrun).
	RICHARD [* OF BEAUMAIS *]. See 4,21,7 Richard note.
4,21,13	IN WROCKWARDINE HUNDRED. This hundred head was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the wrong place; on the identity of Charlcotte, see 4,21,13 Charlcotte note. He had left a space at the end of the first line of 4,21,14 (see 4,21,14 Genust note) and then accidentally added this head four lines too early in a similar-size space before the value of 4,21,12. For other added hundred heads, see 4,18,3 Merset note and 4,20,15 Baschurch note.
	[* IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED *]. On this insertion to replace the erroneous Wrockwardine hundred head, see 4,21,13 Wrockwardine note and 4,21,13 Charlcotte note.
	CHARLCOTTE. This was in the Ancient Parish of Neenton. It must have lain in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Stottesdon Hundred. A member of the 1086 manor was The Bold (SO6484) which largely displaced Charlcotte in later documents. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82b, in Stottesdon Hundred, Robert de Bolde holds ½ hide in Bolde from William Mauduyt. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a, the King of Almain has removed Bolda from suit in Stottesdon Hundred and put it to Castle Holdgate; see Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 218, 231; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194. For Charlcotte, see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 629. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, i. p. 151.
4,21,14	[* IN WROCKWARDINE HUNDRED *]. For this insertion, see 4,21,13 Wrockwardine note.
	UFFINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish, though part lay in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Helgot himself gave 1 hide of the manor at Mora (Monkmoor SJ5113) to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 33, 38). The rest (later assessed at 5 hides) went to the lords of Castle Holdgate, and a tenant, Robert de La More, late in the twelfth century gave it to Haughmond Abbey: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b the Abbot of Haweman holds Uffinton', 5 hides, by gift of Robert de la Mar' from the barony of William Maudut of Castle Holdgate. The Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 112, records that the land had been taken into Castle Holdgate Liberty by the Templars, but was then held from Robert Burnel by the Abbot of Haughmond; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 192-93; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 30-32, 290, 292, 294, 299, 429, 432, 887, 905, 908, 1228-38, 1247); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 4.
	GENUST AND AELFEVA [***] HELD IT. In the manuscript the remaining third of a line after Elueua is blank, almost certainly left for the hundred head to be inserted later (4,21,13 Wrockwardine note), as in other entries; see 4,1,22 Earl note. However, there is an erasure extending from 7 Elueua to after tenuer' on the next line and these words are very blurred, so it is just possible that the scribe originally wrote either Alward or Dunning (or both) who held Holdgate with Genust and Aelfeva (probably the same lady) from Helgot in 4,21,6. For the name Genust, see 4,21,6 Genust note.
4,21,15	[GREAT] SUTTON. This was in Diddlebury Ancient Parish. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. For Little Sutton, see 4,14,24. The overlordship passed from the lords of Castle Holdgate to the Lacys. In the middle of the thirteenth century the King of Almain acquired all the estates that belonged to the Mauduit family (4,21 Helgot note) and alienated them to the Knights Templar. On the dissolution of the Templars, this estate returned to the Lacys. In Book of Fees, p. 964, Thomas Maudut' holds 1 fee in Sotton' and Wichecot' (Witchcot SO5381) of the barony of Walter de Lasey. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 107a (of 1274), the King of Alemannia has alienated both holdings to the Templars, while in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 225 (of 1284-1285), Sotton is held by Robert Burnel from Theobald de Verdun ( 4,8 Roger note) and Wichcot is held from the same Theobald by Robert Broun; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 245; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194, vi. nos. 54, 531, vii. no. 710. The place is called Sutton Major in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 507. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 64.
	HERBERT [* THE LATINIST *]. He is possibly Herbert grammaticus: 4,3,57 Herbert note.
4,21,16	STEVENTON. This was in Ludford Ancient Parish, which had once been a chapelry of Bromfield Ancient Parish. Until 1895 Ludford itself was partly in Shropshire, partly in Herefordshire. Steventon lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, Nicholas son of Andrew and William de Aldenham hold 1 hide in Stivinton of the barony of Castle Holdgate. Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 100b, records suit withdrawn from Munslow Hundred by the Templars and put to Castle Holdgate, while in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224, Stevendon is held in two parts from the heirs of John Fitz Alan who hold from the Bishop of Bath (Robert Burnell) under the Earl of Cornwall; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 68.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,21,17	[GREATER] POSTON. This is also known as Upper Poston. It was a township of Hopton Cangeford Ancient Parish. Hopton Cangeford itself had once been a chapelry of Stanton Lacy Ancient Parish. Greater Poston lay in"Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, Philip de Thonglond holds ½ hide in Possethorne Superior from Roger de Girros; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 61; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 239. For Lower or Lesser Poston, see 3e,1.
4,21,18	BOULDON. This formerly lay in Holdgate Ancient Parish, then in the Civil Parish of Diddlebury. The Ecclesiastical Parish of Diddlebury with Bouldon was created in 1926. In 1086 Bouldon was in "Culvestan" Hundred, later in Munslow Hundred. Robert de Bolledon' holds 2 hides in Bolledon' from William Maudut in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 7la. Suit was withdrawn for a time from Munslow Hundred by the Templars and put to Castle Holdgate (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 100b), but Hugh de Bulledon holds from Robert Burnel in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224, and Robert holds from the Earl of Cornwall; see Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 245; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 59; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 148.
4,21,19	ALCASTON. On the Domesday name-form Aelmundestune, see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 15. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Acton Scott. It was in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. Alcaston followed the normal descent of Helgot's manors for a time, being held as Allaunston in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 100b, by the Templars who withdrew it from Munslow Hundred. It is Alhameston', 1 hide, held by Phinian deRoghale (Rossall) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, from Thomas his father, but it ultimately went to the Fitz Alan Earls of Arundel; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 91, iv. no. 90; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xii. p. 1; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 15.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,22	HUGH SON OF THORGISL. These Shropshire manors are his only holding recorded in Domesday. His manors escheated to the Crown, perhaps at the time of Earl Robert's forfeiture of the earldom. They were joined to the honour of Montgomery that was bestowed by Henry I on Baldwin de Boilers/ Bollers/ Boullers; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 114; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, pp. 269-70; and 4,1,15 Montgomery note.
		The Domesday forms of his father's name - Turgis(us), Turgisus, Turgisle - represent Old Norse Thorgils, Old Danish Thorgisl: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 393. Thorgils appears in the Phillimore printed translations, but JRM regularly preferred the Old Danish name-forms to the Old Norse ones, and as the Domesday form Turgisle occurs several times, including here in 17,2, it has been decided to change to Thorgisl. The Alecto edition has Thorgisl.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,22,1 Leintwardine Hundred
		4,22,2 Condover Hundred
		4,22,3 "Culvestan" Hundred
	If the Hugh of 4,22,2-3 was not Hugh son of Thorgils (4,22,2 Hugh note) it would explain the non-standard hundredal order.
4,22,1	IN LEINTWARDINE HUNDRED. In the Alecto facsimile the second letter of LENTEVRD resembles an I; see 3c,7 Perkley note.
	CHELMICK. On the Domesday name-form Elmundewic, see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 75. This was in the Ancient Parish of Hope Bowdler (4,22,3). It lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086 and was later in Munslow Hundred. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, Baldwin of Montgomery holds 2 hides in Cheilmundewik' from Odo de Hodenet. The estate descended with the manor of Hope Bowdler (4,22,3); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 685; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 349; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 47.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, perhaps for the later insertion of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,22,2	HUGH. The use by the main scribe of Great Domesday of the formula 'Hugh holds from the earl' instead of his usual 'The same Hugh' (see SHR 4 Roger note) might suggest that he was unsure whether this was Hugh son of Thorgils; if he was not, then 'the same Hugh' of 4,22,3 would not be either. However, descent from Hugh is accepted by VCH Shropshire and Eyton (4,22,2 Wilderley note and 4,22,3 Hope note).
	WILDERLEY. This was in the Ancient Parish of Church Pulverbatch. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The overlordship went to the honour of Montgomery, the tenant from the thirteenth century being the Abbot of Haughmond. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62a, the Abbot of Hagmu' holds 2 hides in Wildridleg' of the fee of Hope Bothelers (4,22,3); see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 230, 240; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 247, 685, 894, 1185, 1314-30); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 258; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 134; and 4,22,3 Hope note. With Cothercott (4,27,8) and other manors it became part of Haughmond's estate of 'Boveria': 4,5,2 Ratlinghope note.
4,22,3	HUGH. See 4,22,2 Hugh note.
	HOPE [BOWDLER]. On the Domesday name-form Fordritishope, see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 157. It was an Ancient Parish and lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. 'Bowdler' is from Baldwin de Boilers to whom the honour of Montgomery was granted by Henry I (4,1,15 Montgomery note). In Book of Fees, p. 966, the Abbot of Haughmond and Stephen de Hop' hold in Hop' and Wilderdeleg' of the fee of William de Cantilupo. The place is Hup' Budlers in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, held by Odo de Hodenet from the heir(s) of William de Cantelou; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 246; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17, iii. no. 194, v. no. 611; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, no. 1323). The Abbot of Buildwas held ½ virgate here in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a (see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163a) and his 1 hide at Raggedon' (Ragdon SO4591) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70b, may have been part of Hope Bowdler originally; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163a. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 114; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 46.
	EDRIC THE WILD. See 4,1,14 Edric note.
	BEFORE 1066. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote T.R.R.E. in error for T.R.E.
4,23	GERARD [* OF TOURNAI-SUR-DIVE *]. He only held land in Shropshire. He is identified by the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 33; see also pp. 6, 38), a confirmation of the gift of Betton (4,23,9) by Gerard de Tornai. Tournai-sur-Dive is in the French département of Orne (arrondissement Argentan, canton Trun). Gerard probably died soon after 1086 and his lands, though held for a time by Hamo Peverel who married Gerard's daughter Sybil, were regarded as having escheated to the Crown. The fief was gradually broken up by successive grants to individuals who hold in chief from various kings, often by serjeanty. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 222; Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 104; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, pp. 204-205.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,23,1-5 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,23,6-12 Hodnet Hundred
		4,23,13 Patton Hundred
		4,23,14-15 Baschurch Hundred
		4,23,16-18 "Alnodestreu" Hundred.
4,23,1	KYNNERSLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The tithes of the manor were given to Shrewsbury Abbey by Hamo Peverel, then the manor itself was given (with Crudgington and Sleap: 4,6,5. 4,14,26) and became part of the abbey's manor of Sleap; see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 24, 28, 41, 47-48, 259); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 126; and 4,6,5 Crudgington note.
	VILGRIP <OF WYTHEFORD>. See 4,3,4 Vigrip note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank more than half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,23,2	UPPINGTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It escheated to the Crown probably because it had been exchanged (1139 - c. 1144) by Walkelin Maminot with the Abbot of Shrewsbury's Crudgington, an exchange that was disallowed by Henry II when he refused to accept William Peverel's designated heirs: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 26, 27). Uppington was thereafter held directly from the Crown as a serjeanty. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56b, Uppiton' is 2 hides held for the son of Walter de Buri of Uppiton' who is under-age. Part was held by the prior of Wombridge; see Book of Fees, p. 383; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 194-95; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. nos. 156, 445; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 151.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B inserted geld' into a space left by the main scribe of Great Domesday for it (1,5 hide note). For other additions by scribe B on the taxability of a holding, see 4,1,1 pay note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the hedged enclosure, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,23,3	SHAWBURY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Sachebur' was an escheat of Gerard de Thurnay in Book of Fees, p. 147 (see the Red Book of the Exchequer: Hall, ii. p. 509), and was granted to Thomas de Erdyngton by King John. Egidius de Herdinton' holds 2 hides in Chabur' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 227, 237; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 442, iii. no. 635. Schayebur' is held with Welinton' (Wellington; see 4,1,22 Wellington note) in Book of Fees, p. 964, and the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115, records its members as half of Parva Whetheford (Little Wytheford; 4,8,8 Wytheford note) and Besford (Besford: 4,23,14); see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 236; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 133.
	ALGEAT <OF SHAWBURY>. The Domesday forms of this name-form - Eliet, Aelget, Aliet, Elget - could represent either the hypothetical Old English Æthelgeat or Old English Ælfgeat or, where the sex is unknown (in WOR 26,9, WAR 16,41 and SHR 4,23,3), the Old English feminine names Æthelgyth, Ælfgyth or Ealdgyth: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 146, under Al-geat, and also p. 142, under Al-. The Phillimore printed edition has the form Algeat, though some of the above Domesday forms appear as Alfgeat; these have now been standardized as Algeat. The Alecto edition followed von Feilitzen with Algeat.
		The name Algeat occurs on four widely separated holdings in Domesday Book, all of modest value, none close to any other, and each devolving upon a different tenant-in-chief. All four were probably held by different individuals in 1066 (JP).
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B inserted geld' over an erasure. For his other additions on the taxability of a holding, see 4,1,1 pay note. On the spaces left by the main scribe of Great Domesday for them and what might have been erased here, see 1,5 hide note.
4,23,4	CHERRINGTON. This was a township of Edgmond Ancient Parish and was in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. In the thirteenth century the land here seems to have been held directly from the king. It is presumably the unnamed land that is an escheat of Gerard de Thurnay held by Thomas de Cherinton' in Book of Fees, p. 147. Richard (de Cherinton') holds 4 hides in Cherinton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, the additional hide perhaps representing the land named Cerlitone in Great Domesday 4,4,25 (see 4,4,25 Cherrington note). Half a hide had been granted by Ralph de Erleton to Shrewsbury Abbey in the mid-twelfth century (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. 43, 46) but the grant had not been sustained; parts were held by Wombridge Priory in 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b); see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 220, 237; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 389-90; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 195.
4,23,5	'CHATSALL'. This 'lost' manor was at the meeting point of the township of Moreton Say (in Hodnet Ancient Parish) and Stoke-on-Tern Ancient Parish: 1,9 'Chatshall' note.
	"LEDUUI". It is not certain what name is represented by the Domesday form Leduui, which only occurs here in Domesday; see von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 309. The Phillimore printed edition has Ledwy, the Alecto edition Ledwi. It has been thought safest to retain the Domesday form for the present edition.
	WHICH PAY TAX. Scribe B inserted geld' over an erasure; it is blurred. For other similar insertions of his, see 4,1,1 pay note. For the spaces regularly left for them by the main scribe of Great Domesday and for what might have been erased here, see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, perhaps for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,23,6	SANDFORD. This was a township of Prees Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. After escheating to the Crown it became a tenure in chief held by a family named from the place. In Book of Fees, p. 147, Ralph de Saneford' holds Saneford', an escheat of Gerard de Thurnay, while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, Odo de Hodenet, guardian of Ralph de Santford, holds 3 hides in an unnamed place, presumably Sandford, with service at Shrawardine (4,3,50); see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 221, 227, 237; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 5; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 221. Sondford is held with Rowthall' (Ruthall: 4,23,13) in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 70.
4,23,7	ELLERDINE. This was a township of the Ancient Parish of Ercall Magna (also known as High Ercall). It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. When it escheated it was combined with Sutton Maddock (4,23,16), Rowton (4,27,26) and Brockton (4,23,16) to form a serjeanty, the service being that of English-Welsh interpreter. It was given by Henry II to Iorwerth Goch and descended to the Madoc who named Sutton (4,23,16 Sutton note). In Book of Fees, p. 147, Gruffydd de Sutton' holds Ruelton' (4,27,26), Ellewurthin', Sutton' (4,23,16) and Brocton (part of Sutton: 4,23,16) by gift of King Henry, 'father of King John'. The 3 hides allowed to Rowelton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a (see 4,27,26 Rowton note), probably included the 1 hide of Ellerdine; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 239. The tithes of Rowton and Ellerdine were held by Wenlock Priory.
4,23,8	[COLD] HATTON. This place was in Ercall Magna (also known as High Ercall) Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. After the land escheated to the Crown, an early holder, Baldwin Wischard, gave a member, Podeleford (Potford SJ6321), to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 269 no. 283). Baldwin Wischart holds Hatton' in Book of Fees, p. 147, an escheat of Gerard de Thurnay; William Wischart holds it in Book of Fees, p. 966. William de Coldehatton' holds ½ hide in Coldehatton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a. William de Wischart gave the land to Lilleshall Abbey soon after; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 237; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 261a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 218.
	THESE 2 MANORS. That is Ellerdine and Cold Hatton (4,23,7-8). The odd fractions of a hide (1 hide, 1 ⅓ virgates, plus 2 ⅔ virgates) also link the two manors to form a two-hide unit. Such fractions are fairly unusual in Great Domesday and it is likely that these two manors with a joint assessment were really a single one. Although the Latin does not make it clear whether the details of lordship ploughs, population and value refer to both lands, it is likely that they did. Compare 4,20,5 and 4,20,5 manors note.
	LAND FOR 3 PLOUGHS. Scribe B interlined car' which had been omitted by the main scribe of Great Domesday in error; he showed its correct position in the line below with an insertion mark after iii. He made an identical insertion in DEV 28,8.
4,23,9	BETTON. The Domesday name-form is Baitune, on which see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 46. This place lay in Norton-in-Hales Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Gerard de Tornai gave a portion to Shrewsbury Abbey (an early gift, confirmed by Earl Roger; see the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, pp. xix, 6, 33, 38, etc.). Another part, Dunstal (Tunstall SJ6935), was given by Hamo Peverel c. 1136-1139: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 22, etc.). The result of these gifts is that in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a, the Abbot of Shrewsbury is said to hold Betton', 6 hides, from Gerard le Torney. It is Betton subtus Lyme in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227. The members are given in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 117, as Norton' (Norton-in-Hales: 4,21,1), Tunstall' (Tunstall), Rigwardyne (Ridgwardine SJ6838), Lees (The Lees SJ6638) and half of Parva Drayton (Little Drayton: 4,19,8). See Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 189, 190; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 197; and 1,6 Betton note. Betton and Norton between them would account for 6 hides.
	ULFKETEL. The Domesday forms of this name - Vlchil, Vlchel, Vlchetel, Vlchet(e), Ulketel, Vlketel(l)us, Ulfchetel, Ulfketel, Olketel, Ofchetel etc. - represent Old Norse Ulfkell, Old Danish Ulfkil: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 399-400. As the Phillimore printed translations include Ulfkell, Ulfketel, Wulfketel and Ulfketill, it has been decided for the present edition to use the Old Danish form for them all, although the presence of -chetel and -ketel in a number of Domesday forms may suggest that the name Ulfketil or Ulfketel was also current then. The Alecto edition has Ulfkil here.
4,23,10	LONGSLOW. The Domesday form is Walanceslau. Longslow was formerly in Hodnet Ancient Parish and is now in the Civil Parish of Moreton Say. Moreton Say itself was once a chapelry of Hodnet Ancient Parish. Longslow was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. In Book of Fees, p. 147 (see p. 965), it is represented by the unnamed land held by Hugh de Wlonkeslawe as an escheat of Gerard de Thurnay. It is then held by serjeanty with service either at Shrawardine Castle or Shrewsbury Castle or ultimately at Montgomery. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a, Hugh de Wlonkislow holds 3 hides in Wlonkislow with service at Shrawardine Castle or Shrewsbury Castle; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 221, 227,237; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 758, v. no. 447, ix. no. 381; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 214. A more modern form of the name, Longislow, is found in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116.
4,23,11	IGHTFIELD. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred, and after escheating to the Crown became a tenure by serjeanty. Roger de Ichefeud holds ½ fee in Ichefeud in Book of Fees, p. 965, as a fee de Turnay, while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57b, Griffin deWarran' holds 2 hides in Ihttefeud by exchange with Roger de Ihttefeud. By this time the Abbot of Combermere was holding ½ virgate here by gift of the same Roger; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 220, 227, 237; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 245a; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 208.
4,23,12	WOLLERTON. This was a township of Hodnet Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. The tithes were possibly granted to Shrewsbury Abbey at an early date, perhaps by Hamo Peverel (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, p. 11), then soon after the whole vill was given: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 33; see pp. xix, 38, etc.). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58a, the Abbot of Shrewsbury holds Wulvton, 1 hide, in free alms, the gift of Hamo Pev'el; see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 117; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 189-90; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 205.
	ESKIL. The Domesday forms of this name - Aschil, Anschil, Anschill(us), Osketel, Osketellus, Oschetel, Aschillus, Aschi, Osketel[us], Oschil - represent Old Danish Eskil, Old Norse Askell: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, pp. 167-68. The printed Phillimore edition has the forms Askell and Asketill; these have now been standardized as Eskil. The Alecto edition has Eskil here.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the woodland detail, perhaps for the later insertion of other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,23,13	RUTHALL. This place was in the Ancient Parish of Ditton Priors. It lay in Patton Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. After escheating to the Crown it became a serjeanty and was held by a family named from Sandford (4,23,6) and under them by families called de Ruthall and de Sandford (the latter named from Sandford (4,23,6), also held by Gerard in 1086). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 7la, John de Rodhal' holds ½ hide in Rodhall'; in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116, Ralph Sondford holds Sondford with Rowthall' in Munslow Hundred, while in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223, John de Rohale holds Rohale from Ralph de Sonfford; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 170, v. no. 5, vii. no. 70, x. nos. 353, 544; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 47; and 4,3,7 Abdon note.
	GERHELM. This is the only occurrence in Domesday Book of this name.
	ESKIL. See 4,23,12 Eskil note.
4,23,14	BESFORD. It was in the Ancient Parish of Moreton Corbet. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. After escheating to the Crown, it was given to the Erdington family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a, Egidius de Erdinton' holds 2 ½ hides and a quarter (hide) from the king in Besford. It was then, as later, regarded as a member of Shawbury (4,23,3); see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 216; Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 308, iii. no. 635, v. no. 104; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 173. By 1255 the remaining 1 virgate was in the hands of the Abbot of Haughmond: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 148, 731-2, 1105, apppendix A. i.).
	ESKIL. See 4,23,12 Eskil note.
	LAND FOR 3 PLOUGHS. In the manuscript there is a small space after the iii (not shown by Farley); it might be that the number of ploughs was not originally known and a space left which turned out to be too big. See 4,16,1 ploughs note, 4,21,7 land note and 4,23,16 land note.
	2 WIDOWS. They were possibly the widows of Eskil and Doda.
4,23,15	PRESTON [BROCKHURST]. This was a township of the Ancient Parish of Moreton Corbet. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. After escheating to the Crown, it was given to the Erdington family (like Shawbury and Besford: 4,23,3;14) and was held as ⅓ hide in Preston Toret of the fee of Egidius de Erdinton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75a. For another part of Preston, see 4,19,10. On the manor as a whole, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 178.
	ROBERT FROM HIM. The main scribe of Great Domesday interlined 7 Rob[er]t[us] de eo, the descender of the 7 reaching down after PRESTONE to act as an insertion mark. It was probably an early addition as the pen and ink are the same as in the text below.
	"BERTUNT". The Domesday form Bertunt probably represents Old English Beorhthun, though it could derive from Old German Berthund: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 194. In view of the uncertainty it has been decided to retain the Domesday form for the present edition. The Alecto edition has Beorhthun. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday.
4,23,16	SUTTON [MADDOCK]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Brimstree Hundred. Land at Suthtun was left to Burton Abbey c. 1003 in the will of Wulfric Spot: Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 149 no. 144 (= Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1536 = Charters of Burton Abbey, no. 29). This was possibly at this Sutton in Shropshire, but, if so, there is no other trace of any connection with Burton Abbey: Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxxi. A grant of four cassata at Suthtone with permission to acquire one more was made in 949 by King Eadred to Ulfketel miles: Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 549 (= Charters of Burton Abbey, p. xxxi and no 8). This may have been the same Sutton.
		After the land escheated to the Crown, it was granted to Iorwerth Goch under Henry II for interpreter service between England and Wales. He was son of Maredudd ap Bleddyn ap Cynfyn, ruler of Powys. The land went to his son Madoc, then to Madoc's brother Gruffydd who married Matilda Lestrange, then to their son Madoc who named the place. Griffin (Gruffydd) de Sutton' holds Sutton' in Book of Fees, p. 147, along with Rowton, Ellerdine and Brockton (4,23,7 Ellerdine note). Sotton is held with Brocton (part of Brockton SO7203; see 4,17,2 Brockton note) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234, and is Sutton Madok in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 157; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 516, ix no. 223; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 103.
	LAND FOR 12 PLOUGHS. This phrase seems to have been added: apart from the T of T'ra the ink used is darker. There is a small gap between xii and car', similar to other gaps left in the plough estimate (4,16,1 ploughs note, 4,21,7 land note and 4,23,14 land note).
	A CERTAIN MAN-AT-ARMS. In the manuscript a few letters have been erased between qd' and miles; Farley did not print the gap thus caused (though he did in 4,1,6;15 etc).
	THE ORDNANCE SURVEY FACSIMILE fails to reproduce the dot at the end of this entry. Compare 3f,7 plough note. It is visible in the Alecto facsimile.
4,23,17	HATTON. This was in Shifnal Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, then in Brimstree. For the descent of this portion, see 4,3,62 Hatton note.
	WHO PAYS 2s. Latin redd' could abbreviate either reddentes (plural), referring to the smallholders and the settler, or reddens (singular), referring just to the settler. The punctuation does not help in determining which is meant, but in 4,25,3 and 4,27,27 settlers make a money payment. This seems to have been for the right to settle on land, for in HEF 10,43 men pay 10s 8d for their right to settle (pro suis hospitiis) in Hopleys Green. Colonists were invited by a lord to cultivate his land, which was often on the border and newly acquired from the Welsh and waste; they may also have been engaged in clearing and then ploughing woodland. See HEF 10,44;47, in which money renders are also mentioned, and CHS 2,9. See Nelson, Normans in South Wales, pp. 57-60. However, smallholders sometimes paid rents (see 1,8 smallholders note) and the Phillimore printed edition translated redd' here as the plural.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,23,18	STOCKTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Brimstree Hundred. Stockton became a tenure in chief by serjeanty; see Book of Fees, pp. 1183, 1244, 1285; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 226; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 142.
4,24	NIGEL [* THE DOCTOR *]. Nigel is identified by Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 303, as Nigel the doctor (see SHR 9), with the suggestion that he was the man of that title who held in Kent, Hampshire, Wiltshire, Somerset, Gloucestershire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire. A plain Nigel also holds from Earl Roger in Hampshire and Sussex. These tenants of Earl Roger in three counties might be the same man. Earl Roger certainly had a doctor called Nigel (Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 750), but it is uncertain if the present Nigel is this man and that every Nigel holding from Earl Roger is the same individual. Keats-Rohan's connection between the Shropshire Nigel (the doctor) and the Nigel the doctor who held from the king in Wiltshire (also called Nigel the priest in the Tax Return for Calne Hundred, Exon folios 1a, 7b, 13a) and who was the ancestor of the Calne family seems gratuitous. See VCH Shropshire, i. p. 290, and Mason, ‘Officers and Clerks’, p. 252.
		The vills of this small fief escheated to the Crown and were given to Alan de Dunstanville by Henry I.
4,24,1	ADDERLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. After escheating it was granted by Henry I to Alan de Dunstanvil' and was combined into a single estate with Nigel's other manors. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a, Walter de Dustonvill' holds Addirdel' from the king in chief, while in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118, John Lamare holds Adurley through Petronella his wife with members Schenton' (Shavington: 4,24,2), Chalverhall' (Calverhall: 4,24,4) and Sponeley (Spoonley: 4,24,3); see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 222, 227; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 104; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 1. The Dunstanvilles held Shifnal (4,9,1) with which these manors were sometimes associated.
4,24,2	SHAVINGTON. This place lay in Adderley Ancient Parish. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It descended with Adderley; see 4,24,1 Adderley note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 7.
	HE FOUND IT WASTE. Domesday wasta, nominative, is in error either for wastam (feminine) or for wastum (neuter), both accusative to agree with either an understood terram (or perhaps dimidam hidam understood from dimidia hida in the first line of the entry) or with manerium, similarly understood. The phrase used in 4,3,22 is wastû inuenit. The scribe may have been going to write fuit or est in place of inuen[it], as in the next entry. The same mistake occurs in 4,25,2 and 4,26,6.
4,24,3	SPOONLEY. This was a township of Adderley Ancient Parish and was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Like Adderley, with which it descended, it was given to the Dunstanvilles; see 4,24,1 Adderley note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 9.
4,24,4	CALVERHALL. This place was formerly a township of the Ancient Parish of Prees, and is now a separate Ecclesiastical Parish, but for civil purposes is in Ightfield (Civil) Parish. It was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Like the other entries in this sub-chapter, it is later regarded as a part of Adderley (4,24,1); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, viii. no. 185; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 10.
	IN LORDSHIP 1. That is, 1 plough, the una agreeing with caruca; the syntax is interrupted by scribe B's insertion (4,24,4 land note).
	THIS LAND PAYS TAX. Scribe B added this in a space left by the main scribe of Great Domesday after, rather than before, the plough estimate. On these spaces, see 1,5 hide note. For other additions by scribe B on the taxability of a holding, see 4,1,1 pay note.
4,25	NORMAN [* THE HUNTER *]. He is called Norman Venator ('the hunter') in the grant of Booley (4,25,2 Lee note) to Shrewsbury Abbey: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, p. 33). He was apparently the brother of Roger the hunter (SHR 4,26); both of them were Earl Roger's huntsmen and had been granted land near the known Shropshire forests (Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 250). He was a benefactor of Lewes Priory. He may be the Norman venator who gave land at Macé (in the French département of Orne, arrondissement Alençon, canton Sées) to Saint-Martin-de-Sées (Round, Calendar of Documents, France, p. 233 no. 656; Bates, Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, no. 271 pp. 813-17). He was ancestor of the de Pitchford family who later held all the manors of his Shropshire fief that can be identified. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 150; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 298; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 306.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,25,1 Condover Hundred
		4,25,2 [Hodnet] Hundred
		4,25,3-5 Baschurch Hundred
		4,25,6-7 "Alnodestreu" Hundred.
4,25,1	CANTLOP. It lay in Berrington Ancient Parish. It was in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. It passed to the Pitchfords and by early in the fourteenth century was held under them by the Chetwynds who were the Pitchford's tenants at Pitchford (4,19,12). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, 1 hide, a fee of Pick', is held in Cantolop by Hugh de Wlonkesloy and John de Arundel; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. nos. 569, 758, iii. no. 194, v. no. 611, viii. no. 667; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 286; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 19.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,25,2	[IN HODNET HUNDRED]. The later history of Lee Brockhurst makes it clear that a heading has been omitted; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 1, ix. p. 361; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 340 note 103.
	LEE [BROCKHURST]. This was a chapelry of Wem Ancient Parish, then an Ancient Parish in its own right. It must have lain in Hodnet Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Norman gave part of the vill to Shrewsbury Abbey. This lay at Bolileia (Booley SJ5725): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 33, 38, etc.); Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 117. The rest of the vill, ½ hide, descended to the Pitchfords: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, Bertram de Burgo holds Lega, a fee of John de Picheford. It is Leye subtus Brochurst in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 119; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 569; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 361.
	WIHTRIC <OF LEE>. On the name Wihtric, see 4,3,27 Wihtric note.
		Note to be supplied on this identification (JP).
	ALFHEAH HELD. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote Elfac tenuer' over an erasure.
	HE FOUND IT WASTE. See 4,24,2 waste note for the scribal error.
4,25,3	COLEMERE. This was a township of Ellesmere Ancient Parish. It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. It was held under the Pitchfords in the thirteenth century by Bertram and then by Bartholomew de Burgo. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, Robert de Lacy holds 2 hides in Colem'e as a fee of Bertram de Burch'; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 227; Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 194; and 4,1,19 Ellesmere note.
		COLESMERE was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure; there is an erased memo above it in the top margin. On these marginal notes, see C6 accident note.
	ALDGYTH <OF WELSHAMPTON>. See 4,3,49 Aldgyth note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,25,4	"ESTONE". This place has not been satisfactorily identified. If it lay in Baschurch Hundred, Estone might be the Aston whose name is preserved in Aston Cottage, Weston Common in Baschurch: Foxall, Gazetteer of Shropshire, p. 11. If a "Merset" Hundred head is missing (as in 4,6,6) Estone might be Aston in Oswestry and is so identified by Domesday Gazetteer. But early forms for Aston Cottage are lacking and no descent to the Pitchford family has been found to support these identifications.
	2 ½ HIDES WHICH PAY TAX. The main scribe of Great Domesday momentarily omitted 7 dimidia and had to add it at the end of the phrase.
	IT IS AT A REVENUE FOR 36s. That is, it was being 'farmed' at a rate of 36s a year; see 3d,5 revenue note.
4,25,5	"CHENELTONE". Cheneltone remains wholly unknown; the name may have disappeared if the vill remained uncultivated: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 198; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 340 note 105.
		The inclusion of this holding here is odd, lacking both 1086 and 1066 tenants. It was presumably next to Nigel's holding of "Estone" in the circuit volume, the probable immediate source of Shropshire and other counties in circuit V. On a possible arrangement there of Earl Roger's lands, see SHR 4 Roger note. Compare 4,26,2 Broom note.
4,25,6	IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote IN E over an erasure: he may have begun tenuer' before he realized that there was a hundred head. There is an erased memo in the outer margin next to it, on which see C6 accident note.
	ALBRIGHTON. This was an Ancient Parish near Shifnal. It lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Brimstree Hundred. It descended to the Pitchford family and in the course of time became associated with other manors held by them. In Book of Fees, p. 1284, Ralph de Picheford' holds the manor of Albricton', while in Book of Fees, p. 964, the same man holds 1 fee in Aubricton' and Ruton' (part of Ryton; see 4,17,3). In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 225, John de Pucheford holds Albricton with Hunfreyston (Humphreston SJ8105), Wystan (Whiston SJ7902) and Bispeston (Bishton 4,25,7); see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 234, 244; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 286, ii. no. 569; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 149.
	ALGAR. The association with another holder, Godgyth, suggests that this is not the great Earl Algar of Mercia (pace the Phillimore printed edition) but a minor holder of that name of which there are several occurrences in Shropshire.
	GODGYTH <OF ALBRIGHTON>. The Domesday forms of this feminine name - Godid, Goded, Godet, Godhit (here a scribal error for Godith) - represent Old English Godgyth: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 264. This was apparently JRM's preferred form, but in the Phillimore printed translations the form Godith was also used. The Alecto edition has Godgyth. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Shropshire.
		Godgyth is an uncommon name, occurring on 18 holdings, probably representing four or five individuals. The modest Shropshire holding is likely to have been the only possession of this Godgyth since his nearest namesakes were over 60 miles away, their holdings were miniscule or wasted (JP).
	WOODLAND ... IN THE KING'S HANDS. The wood of this manor has probably been drawn into the forest of Brewood which is unmentioned in Domesday: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 185; {Introduction: Forest}. This is the only piece of Shropshire that Domesday records as being held by the king himself in 1086; see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 295; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 149. Brewood was a forest of considerable extent; it no doubt also included the woodland mentioned under the manor of Brewood itself (STS 2,1). Two small convents, one in Shropshire and one in Staffordshire, were established in this forest in the twelfth century: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 185; {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
4,25,7	BISHTON. The Domesday form is Bispetone ('Bishop's tun'); the bishop is unknown, but the manor had probably been a possession of the see of Litchfield: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 49. Bishton was in Boningale Ancient parish which was itself previously a chapelry of Stockton Ancient Parish. Bishton lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, later in Brimstree Hundred. It passed to the Pitchfords and became part of their Albrighton manor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ii. p. 166; and 4,25,6 Albrighton note.
4,26	ROGER THE HUNTER. He was apparently the brother of Norman [the hunter] who held from Earl Roger in the previous sub-chapter in Shropshire (SHR 4,25); compare the brothers Roger and Robert, the sons of Corbet, who shared adjacent chapters in this county (SHR 4,4. SHR 4,5). Roger the hunter was also a subtenant of Earl Roger in WOR 14,1. His successors are the barons of Pulverbatch, Shropshire. The lands passed to Roger (II) the hunter, then to Reginald de Pulverbatch in the reign of Henry II. Reginald’s daughter Emma married Herbert de Castello (that is of Castle Holdgate; see SHR 4,21 Helgot note). The barony passed to John de Kilpeck, then to his son Hugh and on his death was divided between his daughters Isabel (who married William Walerand) and Joan (who married Philip Marmion). See VCH Shropshire, i. p. 298; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 191; Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 73-74; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 411.
		His lands form a sub-chapter of their own and are not part of 4,27, as suggested by Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 12; see SHR 4 arrangement note.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,26,1-2 Baschurch Hundred
		4,26,3-4 Condover Hundred
		4,26,5 Patton Hundred
		4,26,6 [Hodnet] Hundred
		4,26,7 Wrockwardine Hundred
	This last is an added entry.
4,26,1	ROGER THE HUNTER HOLDS. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote tten' in error for ten'.
	'SLACKBURY'. This place, which survived at least until 1255, lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. It appears in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, as Sclachbur', 1 hide, in Pimhill Hundred held by William de Hochton', a fee of Thomas de Costentin who presumably held under the barons of Pulverbatch; see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 341 note 107; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 198. Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. xii, leaves Slacheberie unidentified.
4,26,2	IN THIS HUNDRED. That is, in Baschurch Hundred; the heading is above 4,26,1.
	BROOM ... THE EARL'S MEN ARE IN DISPUTE ABOUT IT. Broom is near Tetchill. It lay in Ellesmere Ancient Parish, but since 1894 has been in the Civil Parish of Ellesmere Rural. It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086. The litigation seems to have been rather more complicated than Domesday states: ostensibly the holder of this sub-chapter, Roger the hunter, is in dispute with Albert about the removal of land from Albert's village of Welshampton (4,3,54). However, Norman [the hunter: 4,25 Norman note] must have been a claimant, since Broom descends to the Pitchfords of whom Richard de Pitchford gave Brome to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 196-201, 487, 681, 1175). Though sandwiched between two estates held by Roger the hunter, this 1 hide has no named 1086 holder, and it seems likely that it is in this sub-chapter only because it is in the same hundred ('in this hundred') as 4,26,1. Working from a document like the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis, arranged by hundreds and vills, some scribe, probably one compiling the feudally-arranged circuit volume, was unable to allocate this land to a fief, so left it where he found it. A similar thing happens in Surrey (SUR 19,40 this entry note). Compare 4,25,5 "Cheneltone" note.
		Roger the hunter, Norman the hunter, Albert and Reginald under whom he holds are all 'the earl's men', and this appears to be a dispute among two of them; they are not suing some other party as implied by the translation in the Phillimore printed edition ('the Earl's men are suing for it'). The Alecto edition has 'The earl's men are litigating about this'. This dispute is likely to have been settled in Earl Roger's own court, so the clause has a particular significance: this is not a dispute that the Domesday Commissioners or the county court should or needs to resolve. Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 226 no. 1331 has 'The earl's men are litigating over it'. See Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 11.
		The confirmation by Engelard de Stretton calls this place Brome iuxta Elesmere; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 200.
	ALBERT [* GRELLEY *]'S VILLAGE, WELSHAMPTON. That is, 4,3,54, held in 1086 by Albert [* Grelley *] from Reginald the sheriff. On the doubtful identification of this Albert with Albert Grelley, see 4,3,5 Albert note.
	ALDGYTH <OF WELSHAMPTON>. See 4,3,49 Aldgyth note.
4,26,3	WRENTNALL. It lay in Church Pulverbatch Ancient Parish. It was in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. St Chad's Church never regained the 1 ½ hides it claimed and the vill subsequently merged with Pulverbatch (4,26,4); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 205; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 134; and SHR 3f St Chad's note.
	ERNWY <OF PONTESBURY>. Wrentnall is adjacent to other properties suggested as being held by this man (JP).
		See 4,4,12 Ernwy note.
	LAND FOR 5 PLOUGHS. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after this statement. There is no r (for require: 'enquire') in the margin drawing attention to something that needs to be added, and it is not clear what he wanted to add here. Because of its size it is unlikely to have been left for the later inclusion of geld' or non geld', as probably in 4,17,2 where he had failed to leave a space after the 2 hides (see 4,17,2 land note) and as definitely in 4,24,4 (4,24,4 land note). Compare 4,20,18 land note, 7,6 ploughs note and 3f,2 church note.
	THE COUNTY TESTIFIES ... THEY DO NOT KNOW. That is, the county court. In the second half of the sentence the main scribe of Great Domesday confuses the court (singular) with the men in it and uses a plural verb ignorant.
		On the claim, see also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 226 no. 1332. She is wrong, however to equate St Chad's with the Bishopric of Chester, which are given separate chapters in Domesday Shropshire.
	BEFORE KING EDWARD ['S TIME]. That is, before 1042.
	HOW THEY LEFT [THE CHURCH]. The Phillimore printed translation has 'in what way they went astray'. Latin exier[unt] is from the verb exeo ('to go out', 'leave', 'go away'). Land can be said to 'move' in sentences such as 'he could go where he would with his land' (3b,4 go note). Here a portion of land has been taken from St Chad's Church and joined with half a hide not in their ownership to form one manor where there were previously two.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the hedged enclosure, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,26,4	PULVERBATCH. This was the Ancient Parish of Church Pulverbatch. The Domesday vill, which lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later, included both Church Pulverbatch (SJ4302) and Castle Pulverbatch (SJ4202), the latter now known as plain Pulverbatch. It had become caput of the barony of Pulverbatch by the end of the twelfth century and a castle is evidenced there in 1205; see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 423. John de Kilpeck held from about 1193, then William de Cantilupe, then Philip Marmion. William de Cantilupo holds Castrum Pulrebeche in Book of Fees, p. 144. Part of Polrebeche is said to be land of Hugh de Kilpec in Book of Fees, pp. 966, 973, while Philip Marmiun holds Castell Poleredech from the king in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 229, 240; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. nos. 29, 279, viii. nos. 374, 557, x. no. 559; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 188; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 133; and 4,3,15 Roger note. The 5 hides held by Philip Marmion and William Walraund in Pulrebech in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62a, must have included part of Wrentnall (4,26,3) as well as the unnamed 2 hides that were the caput of Longnor (4,3,15 Roger note).
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank two-thirds of a line after the riders (who were entered after the woodland detail, not with the rest of the population); perhaps he thought more resources might be discovered; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,26,5	BECKBURY. This was an Ancient Parish. If the hundred head in Domesday is correct this will have been a detached part of Patton Hundred in 1086; this fact, together with the dedication of the Church to St Milburga, suggests an ancient connection with Wenlock Priory (SHR 3c St Milburga note) which is not mentioned in Domesday. It has been suggested that it is the unidentified Kenbecleag of the grant of lands to Milburga by her brothers between 690 and 704 (Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1799 = Early Charters of the West Midlands, p. 147 no. 428). On purely formal grounds this is unlikely; see Place-Names of Shropshire, iii. p. 104.
		Unlike Roger's other estates, Beckbury did not pass to the barony of Pulverbatch, but to Fitz Alan. In 1242-1243 (Book of Fees, p. 962) Beckebur' is held by John de Beckebur of the barony of John Fitz Alan, but in 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 85a) it was held by Philip de Bekebury under the prior of Wenlock; see Book of Fees, p. 971; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 225, 244; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 164b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 133; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 285 note 24; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 241. It was in Brimstree Hundred, then in Wenlock Liberty, and was sometimes coupled with Badger (4,17,1), as in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228.
		An early severance from Beckbury seems to have been Hadinton' (Harrington SJ7402) where Book of Fees, p. 1284, records that Griffin (Gruffydd) de Sutton (i.e. Sutton Maddock) holds 1 virgate of land, alienated from Hugh de Bekebir'; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 225.
	AZUR. On this name, see 4,1,35 Azur note.
	MAN-AT-ARMS PAYS 20d. He probably held Beckbury for a money rent, as no 1086 value is given for the manor; see 3d,5 revenue note.
4,26,6	[IN HODNET HUNDRED]. The identity and later history of Moston makes it certain that a hundred head has been omitted.
	MOSTON. This was a township in the Ancient Parish of Stanton-upon-Hine-Heath. It must have lain in Hodnet Hundred in 1086 and was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It descended to the barons of Pulverbatch: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 58b, Odo de Hodenet holds 2 hides in Moston' from the fee of Pulverbatch, while in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 119, William Hodnet holds Moston from Philip Marmyon who holds it from the king as a member of his barony of Kilpeck; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 532, iii. no. 635; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 356.
	HE FOUND IT WASTE. See 4,24,2 waste note for the scribal error.
4,26,7	THE MAIN SCRIBE OF GREAT DOMESDAY realized his omission of this entry at an early stage because of its insertion after 4,27,4 and not below the bottom marginal ruling (which comes about one line below the last line of 4,27,6). Farley printed as daggers on their side the transposition signs indicating the correct place in the text of this entry.
		In the Penguin Alecto edition the lack of transposition signs mean that this entry wrongly appears to be part of sub-chapter 4,27.
	HAUGHTON. Haughton Demesne was an extra-parochial place which was placed in Uffington Civil Parish in 1885, having briefly been a Civil Parish itself from 1858. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. This portion of the vill went to the barony of Pulverbatch; another part was held under Fitz Alan (as part of Upton Magna: 4,3,24). The Pulverbatch portion went to Haughmond Abbey early in the thirteenth century. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a ('Bradford' Hundred), Halihton contains 1 ½ hides of which the Abbot of Haymo holds half (presumably 1 hide, the larger 'half') from the honour of Pulrebach' and Thomas Bot'hel holds the other half from John Fitz Alan; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220; Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 32, 168, 172, 292, 396, 422-23, 462-91, 647-48, 653, 820); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 285. It is Halton subtus Haghmon in Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260a, and Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 192.
	1 MAN WHO PAYS 6s IN REVENUE. It would seem that he 'farmed' Haughton; see 3d,5 revenue note.
4,27	[HOLDINGS OF VARIOUS TENANTS UNDER EARL ROGER]. This sub-chapter appears to correspond to the two that commonly terminate a Domesday county: 'Land of the King's Servants (or Sergeants)', which often contained the lands of minor Frenchmen or those holding by serjeanty, and 'Lands of the English Thanes'. There are few names identifiable as French in this chapter. The great majority are Englishmen, some of whom had held the land in 1066. Others of them may have come into the land by inheritance.
		Lewis ('Introduction', Shropshire Domesday', p. 12) reckons that the layout of this sub-chapter, with spaces left between the lands of the Frenchmen on folio 259b but not between those of the English on folio 259c, 'signalled their division into two groups'. However, of the spaces he noted between the French tenants on folio 259b two are illusory, being caused by the heads for Wrockwardine and "Merset" Hundreds (above 4,27,2;4) being placed on a separate line above their respective holdings, rather than after the value of the preceding entry, the space before 4,27,1 is the normal one before a new sub-chapter (see SHR 4 Roger note) and no space was left before 4,27,5 as the scribe reverted to his normal practice, continued on folio 259c, of not putting the hundred heads on a separate line. Lewis further thinks that the scribe indicated that Godebold (4,27,7), whose land was listed first on folio 259c, was a Frenchmen despite the 'layout' suggesting he was English, by deliberately not aligning his entry with the rest of the column. A study of the manuscript does not show any misalignment: the scribe began the G of Godbold' exactly in line with the entry strokes of the initial letters of the succeeding tenants (the left-hand strokes of the As in Avenel and Alward in 4,27,8-9 naturally protrude), while the second line of 4,27,7 is likewise in line with the second and subsequent lines of the entries below. Moreover, the scribe could have shown that Godebold was French (if he was: his name is Old German) merely by putting the Condover hundred head above the next entry on a separate line, if that was really how he indicated the holdings of Frenchmen.
		These miscellaneous lands do not all descend in the same way; many became serjeanties, several go to the honour of Montgomery, and the lands of individuals - for example, of Fulcwy (4,27,2-3) and Alward (4,27,23-25, if this is one individual) - tend to have the same later history (in these cases passing to Fitz Alan and to the honour of Montgomery respectively).
	THE HUNDREDAL ORDER of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,27,1 [Hodnet] Hundred
		4,27,2-3 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,27,4 "Merset" Hundred
		4,27,5-6 Condover Hundred
		4,27,7 Wittery Hundred
		4,27,8-15 Condover Hundred
		4,27,16-20 "Reweset" Hundred
		4,27,21-25 Wittery Hundred
		4,27,26 Hodnet Hundred
		4,27,27-28 Baschurch Hundred
		4,27,29-30 Wrockwardine Hundred
		4,27,31 "Merset" Hundred
		4,27,32-33 Leintwardine Hundred
		4,27,34 "Merset" Hundred
		4,27,35 'Conditre' Hundred.
	The rationale for this sequence is unclear. The scribe may have tried first to separate Frenchmen from Englishmen, but he most probably tried to include all the lands of an individual together. In nearly every case, these lay in the same hundred but at 4,27,20-21 he followed the lands of Almund's son from "Reweset" Hundred to Wittery Hundred, and then stayed in that hundred to enter people who had not previously been included in this chapter. If the scribe was drawing his material from a larger composite chapter in the circuit volume or if the latter had been unable to draw all the material from a document (like the Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis) which was arranged by hundreds and vills, by going through only once, it is inevitable that the same hundred would appear more than once in several cases.
4,27,1	[IN HODNET HUNDRED]. The restoration of this head depends on the identity of Ludecote; see 4,27,1 Cotton note.
	RALPH THE COOK. Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 329, calls him 'tenant, and presumably cook, to Helgot of Castle Holdgate'. However, Ralph holds not from Helgot but from Earl Roger.
	COTTON. Domesday Ludecote. Because of the absence of a hundred head and the fact that the Domesday form seems to have simplified to Cote there must remain some uncertainty about this identification which is, however, accepted by Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 101. If it is Cotton (on Tern) it lay in Stoke-on-Tern Ancient Parish and was in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, then in 'Bradford' Hundred. It appears that Toki's portion (1 hide, though said to be 2 hides in Henry II's confirmation) was given by him to Shrewsbury Abbey as Cota: the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xix, 33, 39, 41, 256). Another part of the vill of Cotin', ½ hide, is in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 55a, said to be divided between John de Cotin and Walter Bras, both holding from the barony of Pulverbatch (4,26 Roger note). In the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 116, Robert de Wynkeshull' holds from William de Hodnete who holds from Philip de Marmyon; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 221;Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 358.
		The grid reference (SJ6327) is to Cotton Farm.
4,27,2	FULCWY <OF WITHINGTON>. The Domesday name-forms Fulcui, Fulcoius, Fulcuius, Fulcheius probably represent Old German Fulcwig: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 257; Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England, p. 98. The latter also suggested Old French Folcui, which might be more appropriate for those who held in 1086. The name is different to Fulco (see 4,3,46 Fulco note). JRM preferred the second element -wy for the Old German -wig. In the Phillimore printed editions the names Fulcwy, Fulkwy and Fulk appear; these have now been standardized as Fulcwy. The Alecto edition has Fulk, Fulcwig, Fulco, Fulcui, Fulchei etc.
		The Phillimore printed edition (4,27,2-3 Fulkwy note), refers to the identification by Mason, 'Officers and Clerks', p. 247, of this man with Reginald the sheriff's deputy (or under-sheriff), though he seems to equate Fulcoius with Fulco. Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 203, under Fulcuius, rejects this identification; however, she errs in calling Fulcuius the tenant of 'Rainald de Balliol', confusing him with the Fulco who was Reginald of Bailleul's tenant. Nonetheless there are grounds for thinking that this man was Earl Roger's sheriff or under-sheriff at some stage because of the evidence of the Shrewsbury Cartulary; see 4,3,46 Fulco note.
	WITHINGTON. This was a chapelry in the Ancient Parish of Upton Magna, then a separate Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. After escheating to the Crown, both of Fulcwy's lands (see also 4,27,3) were given to Fitz Alan and held under that barony by the de Haughtons. In Book of Fees, p. 971, Robert de Halecton' holds in Wythinton', Knitteleg' (Knightley in Staffordshire) and in Wytheford (Little Wytheford: 4,27,3). The 3 hides of Wythynton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, presumably included the ½ hide of Little Wytheford; see the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 220, 228; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 473, iv. no. 198; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 75.
	2 ½ HIDES [***]. In the manuscript there is an erasure of some four letters after dimid', possibly of geld' as the bottom part of a g in the correct place for geld' has not been erased. Compare 4,19,4 hides note, 4,27,3 hide note, 4,27,9 hide note and 4,27,29 hides note. On the gaps left after the hidage by the main scribe of Great Domesday, see 1,5 hide note.
	HE FOUND IT WASTE. This was added by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the outer margin of the manuscript, though probably at an early stage as the ink is the same colour as for the rest of the entry.
4,27,3	FULCWY <OF WITHINGTON>. See 4,27,2 Fulcwy note.
	[LITTLE] WYTHEFORD. This place was in Shawbury Ancient Parish. It lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It was given with Fulcwy's other manor (4,27,2 Withington note) to the Fitz Alans and held under them by Fitz Ayer. It is coupled with Withington and land in Staffordshire in Book of Fees, p. 971, was presumably accounted for by Withington in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, and is the Littill' Whetheford, half of which is held in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113, by John Fitz Ayer from Richard Fitz Alan. It is Parva Wythinton (a confusion with Withington) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220; see the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 115; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 122, iii. no. 115, v. no. 470; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, viii. p. 71. The other half of Little Wytheford (4,8,8) was held by the Erdington family: 4,23,3 Shawbury note.
	½ HIDE [***]. In the manuscript there is an erasure of some five letters after hida at the beginning of the second line; geld' may have been written as the bottom part of a g in the correct place for geld' has not been erased. Compare 4,19,4 hides note, 4,27,2 hides note, 4,27,9 hide note and 4,27,29 hides note. On the gaps left after the hidage by the main scribe of Great Domesday, see 1,5 hide note.
4,27,4	ERNUCION <OF KINNERLEY>. An Ernucion occurs twice in Sussex as Earl Roger’s tenant (SUS 11,56;85) and may be Ernucion Balbet, who made grants of land to Saint-Martin-de-Sées, one of them with the agreement of his brothers Hugh and Warin; see Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 191, who also has a reference for the only other Ernucion in Domesday (BRK 12,1). Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 181, explains Ernucion as a possible derivative of Old German Ernust (on which see Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England, p. 83, though he does not mention the Domesday form Ernucion)
	KINNERLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Merset" Hundred in 1086. It escheated to the Crown and was conferred by Henry II on his interpreter Iorwerth Goch (4,23,7 Ellerdine note; 4,23,16 Sutton note). It was involved in a series of disputes but eventually went to the Audleys. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii no. 476, William de Auditheleye held Kynardeley of the heirs of Madoc de Sotton (on whom, see 4,23,16 Sutton note) in exchange for Apedale (Apedale) in Staffordshire. It is there said to lie beyond the county; that is, it was under Marcher control. It is Kenardeleye in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 62, with Egardesley (Edgerley SJ3518) as its member. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 23.
		Kinnerley formally returned to the county in 1536 on the dissolution of the Marcher lordships.
	1 WELSHMAN PAYS 1 HAWK IN REVENUE. Because of the lack of 1086 value for this holding, it is quite likely that the Welshman was holding it for a money rent (see 3d,5 revenue note on 'farming' and compare 4,3,35 pays note), as apparently in HEF 25,4. Hawks often figure as part of a manor's revenue; see 4,8,16 and 4,24,4. However, the lack of 1066 value too may mean that the scribe was merely without the value as a whole of this manor and that the payment of the hawk was for some other purpose.
	AFTER THIS ENTRY the main scribe of Great Domesday wrote the details of a holding of Roger the hunter that he had omitted earlier in the column; see 4,26,7 scribe note. He indicated its position with a pair of transposition signs.
4,27,5	THEODULF [* THE MASON *]. Theodulf is possibly to be identified as Theodulf cementarius ('builder with cement', 'mason') who had a son called Walter: Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 425.
	'HAWKSLEY'. The Domesday form is Avochelie. It lay in Ruckley and Langley, which is now a Civil Parish but which was formerly a township of the Ancient Parish of Acton Burnell. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The site is deserted and the manor lost, but it was said to lie between Langley and Ruckley in 1269 and its site lay within Langley park in 1535. It was granted to Shrewsbury Abbey after 1086 and before 1194 and was leased to the Burnells, the lords of Langley (4,27,10): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 133, 232-33, 280, 343-44); Fletcher, 'Shropshire Feet of Fines A.D. 1196-1211', p. 309; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 148; VCH Shropshire, viii. pp. 141-43.
	THIS MANOR IS AT A REVENUE FOR 6d. See 3d,5 revenue note on the practice of 'farming' land.
4,27,6	THEODULF [* THE MASON *]. See 4,27,5 Theodulf note.
	PULLEY. It is probably 'Over' or 'Upper' Pulley, formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Julian, now in the Civil Parish and Ecclesiastical Parish of Bayston Hill; for Lower Pulley see 6,30 Pulley note. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later and became a serjeanty, the service being that of keeping the king's 'hay' in Lithewode (now represented by Great Lyth (SJ4507), Great Lyth Farm and Lythbank (SJ4607), Lythwood Hall, Lythwood House and Lythwood Farm (SJ4708) and Lythwood View (SJ4607). In Book of Fees, p. 7, Hugh Extraneus and Elias de Hatincham hold 2 virgates in Pulileg', the other virgate (making the 3 virgates of Domesday) being held by Dionisia, daughter of Roger Muissun, while 1 ½ virgates are held in Hoverpolile by Ralph Marescall' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 63a, from Engelard de Polileg' and a further virgate is said to be alienated in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 63b. See Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 755, vii. no. 660; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 206.
	[* QUEEN *] EDITH. Edith here may have been Edward the Confessor's queen of that name: an Edith also held the other holding in Pulley (6,30) which passed to Ralph of Mortimer and he succeeded to other lands held by Queen Edith (see for example HEF 9,7). See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 206; and 6,2 Edith note. On the name Edith, see C13 Edith note.
	3 VIRGATES. In the manuscript .iii. virg' appears clearly, as in the Alecto facsimile; for some reason the Ordnance Survey facsimile reproduces the number as .iiiy. See 3f,7 plough note on other faulty reproductions in this facsimile.
4,27,7	GODEBOLD [* THE PRIEST *]. See 3g,3 Godebold note.
	LACK. It lay in that part of Churchstoke Ancient Parish (Brompton and Rhiston) that was in Shropshire. It lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086, but seems to have little later independent history, probably being absorbed by Rhiston and Brompton (4,27,24 Rhiston note).
4,27,8	COTHERCOTT. This place was in the Ancient Parish of Church Pulverbatch. It lay in Condover Hundred in1086. It went to the honour of Montgomery, being held by the Cantilupe family, then passing by 1215 to Haughmond Abbey. It combined with Wilderley (4,22,2) to form a manor within the abbot's estate of 'Boveria' (4,5,2 Ratlinghope note); see the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 243-51, 1314); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 261; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 134. It is presumably the Crodecot of Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b, which pays assize dues to Haughmond Abbey.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
4,27,9	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 149, under Alward filius Elmundi, has five references to folio 259c, presumably referring to 4,27,9;17;23-25.
	STAPLETON?. Domesday Hundeslit. This portion of the manor seems to have combined with Hundeslit (4,4,2) and Netley (4,28,2) to form the later manor of Stapleton held of the honour of Montgomery: 4,4,2 Stapleton note. Stapleton was an Ancient Parish.
	1 HIDE AND ½ VIRGATE [***]. In the manuscript there is an erasure of some five letters after virg'; it is not possible to tell what was erased but it could have been geld', as probably or certainly in four other instances; see 4,19,4 hides note, 4,27,2 hides note, 4,27,3 hide note and 4,27,29 hides note. See 1,5 hide note on the spaces left after hidage by the main scribe of Great Domesday.
	NOW 4[s]. The side marginal ruling comes on the second minim of iiii, probably the reason why the main scribe of Great Domesday omitted sol', although he overran into the central margin several times in this column. Compare 4,5,7 now note.
4,27,10	THORTH [* OF WROXETER *]. On his name, see 4,3,14 Thorth note and, on his possible identification, see 4,3,26 Thorth note.
	LANGLEY. It lies in Ruckley and Langley which is now a Civil Parish but was formerly a township of the Ancient Parish of Acton Burnell. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. It became a tenure by serjeanty, the service being the carrying of a goshawk from Shrewsbury castle to Stepney (Middlesex) once a year: Book of Fees, p. 145. It is later held by the Burnell family. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, ½ hide is held in Longeley by William de Bardines (William de Gardinis in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 575), while William Burnel holds Longleye in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229; see Book of Fees, pp. 384, 1185, 1241; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 91b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 435, vii. no. 312; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 140; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 142; Fletcher, 'Grant by Sir William de Gardinis', p. 178.
4,27,11	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. See 4,27,32 Siward note.
	FRODESLEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. The overlordship passed to Fitz Alan with a family called Hunald as tenants: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62b, Thomas Unald holds 1 hide in Fredesleg' from John Fitz Alan. According to Book of Fees, pp. 962, 971, William Honaud had held Frodesleg' from the barony of John Fitz Alan. See Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 230, 239; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 291; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 81; Auden, 'Frodesley'.
4,27,12	AUTI <OF LEEBOTWOOD>. See 4,5,3 Auti note.
	'LYDLEY [HAYES]'. This place was in Cardington Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later (although it is included in Munslow Hundred in Lay Subsidy Roll, Shropshire, (1327), Munslow Hundred, p. 315, and in Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 254). The site is now deserted, but the place survived to be marked on the first edition Ordnance Survey map (sheet 61 of 1833, reprint sheet 41 of 1970) and is represented by Day House: Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 188. The estate was adjacent to Leebotwood (4,27,13), both apparently clearings in the same wood and both held by Auti in 1086.
	The land passed to the Fitz Alans and William Fitz Alan (I) endowed a preceptory of the Templars here along with Herbert de Castello (of Castle Holdgate). The Templars held a number of other estates close by Cardington including Enchmarsh and half of Chatwall (4,3,44 Cardington note). The grant of Lidleg' included Gumble (Comley SO4896) and Boccefelt (Botvyle SO4796): Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 63a. After the dissolution of the order, Lidleye passed to the successors of Fitz Alan, the Earls of Arundel: Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 237; Lees, Records of the Templars in England, pp. cvi-cvii, cxi-cxiii, 37-41 etc.; VCH Shropshire, ii p. 85, x. p. 27.
4,27,13	AUTI <OF LEEBOTWOOD>. See 4,5,3 Auti note.
	LEEBOTWOOD. Domesday Botewde. The place lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. Leebotwood, earlier 'Lee in Botwood', was an Ancient Parish and was named from one particular clearing or open space in a large area of woodland called 'Botwood' (see 4,3,15 Longnor note). There is no apparent continuity between the Domesday manor of 'Botwood' and the later Leebotwood. The latter was granted between 1163 and 1170 by Henry II as two landas in Botwood to Haughmond Abbey: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 144, 267, 425, 679-98). The Book of Fees, p. 146, calling it Leg' in Bottewud', assesses it as ½ hide, but describes it as assarted land (i.e. recently cleared) and as a former member of the manor of Condover (4,1,2). It was held by the abbey until the Dissolution; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 260b; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 24; VCH Shropshire, viii. pp. 98, 101. A member may have been Bechecot' (Betchcott SO4398), also an assart of the manor of Condover, held in Book of Fees, p. 146, by the Abbot of Haughmond in perpetual alms. Land in this wood was also held by the Templars (their manor of Botelege, possibly an ellipsis of a hypothetical Botewudelege), but that name and estate are difficult to connect with Leebotwood; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 172; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 91; and 4,27,12 Lydley note.
4,27,14	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. See 4,27,32 Siward note.
	OVERS. This place was in Wentnor Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086. The entry appears to be a duplicate of 4,1,34 (which was a later addition), though it has slightly more detail; see 4,1,34 Overs note.
4,27,15	SMETHCOTT. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086 and later. It passed to the honour of Montgomery, following the descent from Millicent, the sister of George Cantilupe, by marriage to Eudo la Zouche. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62a, ½ hide in Smethecot is held by three men from the guardian of the heir of William de Canteloy. Hugh Burnel and Reginald de Escot hold from Millicent (La Such) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 215. In the Book of Fees, p. 970, it was coupled with Hadnall and Halston (4,3,58;32); see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 230; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17, iii. no. 194. The other ½ hide was at Piclescot' (Picklescott SO4399) divided in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 62a, between the Abbot of Haughmond and Madoc de Piclescot' and held of the fee of Roger Sprenthose; see the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 186, 873-77). A successor of Madoc gave his portion to the Cistercian monks of Pole (Ystrad Marchel or Strata Marcella: 4,5,10 Marche note); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 250; Morgan, Montgomeryshire Territorial Divisions, p. 25; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 151.
	ALDRED [* BROTHER OF SIWARD *]. See 4,3,15 Aldred note.
	THE VALUE WAS 4s; NOW 4s. When the value of a manor remained the same between 1066 and 1086 the main scribe of Great Domesday regularly wrote 'The value was and is ... '. There is no sign that either of the values here was corrected which would account for this unusual formula and the 1086 value cannot have been added because the hundred head in the next line avoids it. The scribe probably wrote Valuit iiii sol' before he realized the present value was the same, though he could still then have written modo similiter 'now the same'. Alternatively one or other of the figures is an error.
4,27,16	EYTON. It lay in Alberbury Ancient Parish which was later united with Cardeston Ancient Parish. Another part of Eyton (4,4,9) passed to the lordship of Cause; both portions lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. Eyton followed the same descent as Stapleton (4,27,9) passing to the honour of Montgomery, being held by William de Cantilupo, then by Eudo la Zouche, then by the Mortimers, Earls of March. In the Book of Fees, p. 966, Roger de Eston' and others hold in Eyton' from the barony of William de Cantilupo; see Book of Fees, p. 1283; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 216; and 4,27,17 Amaston note. Half a virgate was held by the monks of Grandmont (i.e. the monks of Alberbury: Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 103; see 4,1,9 Alberbury note) in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 67a; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 120; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 200.
		In the Alecto facsimile ETVNE is not lined through in red; see 3c,7 Perkley note.
4,27,17	ALMUND AND HIS SON ALWARD. Scribe B interlined 7 ALWARD. In order to form an insertion sign for his addition, he erased the horizontal stroke of an original 7 written by the main scribe of Great Domesday. Farley printed this insertion mark as an 7, however, which might seem to make the reading 'Almund and Alward and his son'.
		Almund's son holds the next four manors (4,27,18-21) and the Almund who was his predecessor in 4,27,21 was almost certainly his father. It appears that the Almund named here was the Almund who was the predecessor of Reginald of Bailleul in this county (4,3,45;47-48;63;67) and also in Warwickshire (WAR 12,3-4;7). The Alward who preceded Reginald in four manors (4,3,61;64;68;70) was probably Almund's son: Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 90; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 188, who gives just one folio reference, corresponding to the present entry. See also 4,27,9 Alward note.
	'AMASTON'. The Domesday form is Enbaldestune. It was a township of Alberbury Ancient Parish which was later united with Cardeston Ancient Parish. It was in"Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. Amaston is a shrunken hamlet, represented by Amaston farm on the six-inch Ordnance Survey map (33 SW) of 1891, a name that seems recently to have been succeeded by Heath farm (SJ378112); see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 18.
		Tenurially Amaston had the same history as Rowton (4,27,18), both being held by the son of Almund. They went to the honour of Montgomery, were treated as a single manor and sometimes listed with Eyton (4,27,16). In the Book of Fees, p. 1283, William de Cantilupo holds 3 hides in Eton' (Eyton), Sunton' (Rowton) and Amboldeston'. Dunton' and Ambaldeston' account for 2 hides in Ford Hundred in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b, held by John le Poer and Nicholas Meverel although the record is probably in error in saying that the overlordship belongs to the barony of Cause. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b, Ruto' and Ambaldesto' are in Chirbury Hundred, held from the honour of Montgomery; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 173; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 200.
	HE HELD IT HIMSELF. Almund was the 1066 holder. The interlineation of his son as joint 1086 tenant interrupts the original sense of the first 1 ½ lines. Almund had also held Wotherton (4,27,21) which passed to his son (Alward).
4,27,18	ALMUND'S SON. That is Alward: 4,27,17 Almund note.
	ROWTON. This was a township of Alberbury Ancient Parish which was later united with Cardeston Ancient Parish. Like Amaston (4,27,17) it lay in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. It followed the same descent as Amaston, except that 1 virgate was given by Robert de Budlers to Shrewsbury Abbey: Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 66b. See Feudal Aids, iv. p. 216; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17, vi. nos. 137, 174; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 177; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 200.
		The Grid Reference (SJ3612) is to Rowton. Rowton Castle is at SJ3712.
	AS 4 MANORS. This phrase is misplaced after the statement that they (the T.R.E. holders) were free; it is possible that the main scribe of Great Domesday had a break after tenuer' ante eû, because 7 lib'i fuer' is in slightly darker ink and the fuer' particularly is larger and not so well written. Compare 4,21,10 manors note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank almost half a line after the riders, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,27,19	POLMERE. On the identification of Domesday Pole, see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 237. Polmere was a township of Pontesbury parish and was in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred. Polmere now lies in Lea Cross parish. It also seems to have merged, like Benthall (4,27,20), with Ford manor, becoming a mere member of it and having the same overlords, the Audleys; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 196; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii. p. 179; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 228; and 4,1,16 Ford note.
	LEODMER <OF WHITTON>. See 4,4,19 Leodmer note. The Phillimore printed edition has Leofmer here, in error.
	½ HIDE AS 2 MANORS. See 4,7,5 hide note.
4,27,20	BENTHALL. It lay in Alberbury Ancient Parish which was later united with Cardeston Ancient Parish. It was in "Reweset" Hundred in 1086, later in Ford Hundred and became a member of Ford manor. It may originally have belonged to Wenlock Abbey. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vii p. 178; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 228, x. p. 250; and 4,1,16 Ford note.
	WITH 1 PLOUGH. In the manuscript there is a dot after car'; Farley failed to print one.
4,27,21	WOTHERTON. The Domesday form is Vdeuertune. It lay in Chirbury Ancient Parish and was in Wittery Hundred in 1086, later in Chirbury Hundred. This vill became part of the honour of Montgomery. It is Wodforton' in Book of Fees, p. 965, Wodeverton' in Book of Fees, p. 973, Woden'tun, 1 hide, in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b, and Woderton in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 240, either held from the honour of Montgomery or by service at Montgomery castle; see Book of Fees, p. 383 (Wdeverton'); Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 89b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 361, vi. no. 685; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 74.
	ALMUND [* FATHER OF ALWARD *]. See 4,27,17 Almund note.
	24 MEASURES OF CORN. The main scribe of Great Domesday originally wrote xx, then immediately added four minims to it, the first covering the original dot after the xx; he then interlined or (the last two letters of quattuor: 'four') to clarify the correction; compare 6,1 slaves note.
		Latin uascula (frumenti) here is neuter plural of uasculum meaning a small vessel and by extension the amount it could hold, a small measure. The exact amount is not known, however. Compare modium frumenti in 5,8; see 5,8 measure note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining third of a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,27,22	ERTEIN. The Domesday form Ertein perhaps represents Old German Herithegan: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 248; Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names, p. 83. This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Book. (This corrects Dodgson and Palmer, Index of Persons, under Ertein. )
	MIDDLETON. This place was formerly in Chirbury Ancient Parish and is now a separate Ecclesiastical Parish. It lay in Wittery Hundred in 1086, later in Chirbury Hundred. In 1086 another half consisting also of 3 virgates was held by Robert son of Corbet (4,5,13); by 1255 the two parts were regarded as two-thirds and one-third of Middleton. The present holding, the one-third of the vill, went to the honour of Montgomery: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b, four men and one woman hold Middeltun' with service at Montgomery Castle. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 84; and 4,1,36 Ackley note.
	HE WAS A FREE MAN. The main scribe of Great Domesday interlined this above Ipsemet tenuit; no insertion mark was felt necessary. This was probably an early addition because the ink colour and pen are the same as in the text below, and another instance of his misplacement of parts of the T.R.E. tenure.
4,27,23	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. See 4,27,17 Almund note.
	'MUNTON'?. The Domesday form is Muletune. This place was in Wittery Hundred in 1086, later in Chirbury Hundred. The Domesday form suggests identification with Mellington (4,1,35) which is in the same hundred. VCH Shropshire, i. p. 343, tentatively and Domesday Gazetteer definitely choose this identification. But that part of Mellington was part of the castlery of Montgomery, waste in both 1066 and 1086, and no other vill given in 4,1,35-36 under Montgomery was divided between different 1086 holders. It is tempting to assume an error in the Domesday form (possibly influenced by the preceding name Mildetune) and identify it with a place called Munetun in 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 61a). It is said there to be 1 virgate in extent, to lie in Chirbury Hundred (the successor to Wittery) and to be held by Adam de Brerlawe and Adam Passavant, responding with Eitun (Eyton in Alberbury: 4,27,16) to Montgomery castle. Thomas Hager holds in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232, and 1 virgate in Moneton is held by George de Cantilupo, honour of Montgomery, in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17. 'Munton' appears regularly in medieval documents (for example, in Lay Subsidy Roll, Shropshire, (1327), Chirbury Hundred, p. 56; Lay Subsidy Roll (1334), p. 257) but is regarded as lost. A part seems to have been held from the Corbets of Cause in Worthen (Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 108) and in a 1272 document cited by him it is associated with Aston (Aston Rogers; see 4,6,6), Bromlawe (Bromlow SJ3101), Whytspon (Whitsburn SJ3302) and Lockelegh (Luckley SJ3201). It will be noted that ½ mile north-east of Aston Rogers is a place called Mondaytown. Its etymology requires further investigation. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 78. Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. xii, does not identify Muletune.
4,27,24	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote his name in capitals and lined it through in red, treatment reserved for different subtenants of Earl Roger (SHR 4 Roger note), suggesting that he was not absolutely convinced that this Alward was the same as the Alward who held the preceding estate (4,27,23); similarly for the Alward of the next entry (4,27,25). However, the fact that he put these three estates together might suggest that his conviction was not strong, as he made no attempt to detail the subtenancies of a man called Siward together (4,27,11;14;32), despite the fact that these Siwards may have been the same person (4,27,32 Siward note). The fact that all three holdings of Alward (4,27,23-25) descend to Montgomery suggests, but does not prove, that one person was involved.
		On the identification of Alward as the son of Almund, see 4,27,17 Almund note.
	RHISTON. It lay in that part of Churchstoke Ancient Parish that was in Shropshire. It was in Wittery Hundred in 1086, later in Chirbury Hundred, and descended to Montgomery honour. The Domesday vill will have included Brompton (SO2593) for in the Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973, Maurice de Hop' holds one-eighth fee in Brocton' (i.e. Bromton') and Russeton. ½ hide is held in Ristu' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 60b, with service at Montgomery, and Brompton is held in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 241, from Montgomery castle; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 631; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 71.
4,27,25	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. On the possibility that he is not the same man as the Alward in 4,27,23 or the one in 4,27,24, see 4,27,24 Alward note. See also 4,27,17 Almund note.
	CHURCHSTOKE. The township lay in that part of Churchstoke Ancient Parish that has been in Montgomeryshire since the abolition of the Marcher lordships in 1536. It was in Wittery Hundred in 1086, then in Chirbury Hundred. After 1086 it was at first part of the honour of Montgomery, then became royal demesne. Before it did so, Robert de Boilers had given the mill to the Augustinian canons of Snead: Fletcher, 'Three Early Shropshire Charters', p. 60. Later Churchstoke (with Hurdley, Hyssington and Snead) went to form the manor of Halcetor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. pp. 70-73; Mountford, 'Manor of Halcetor'; Davies, 'Lordships and Manors', p. 119. The church was held by the prior of Chirbury in 1291: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 162b.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about six letters after the woodland detail, rather small for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,27,26	ROWTON. This place was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Ercall Magna (also known as High Ercall). It is now a separate Ecclesiastical Parish, but remains for civil purposes in Ercall Magna Civil Parish. It lay in Hodnet Hundred in 1086, later in 'Bradford' Hundred. It was one of those lands given by Henry II to Iorwerth Goch for interpreter service in Wales (4,23,7 Ellerdine note; 4,23,16 Sutton note). In Book of Fees, p. 147, his son Gruffydd de Sutton' holds Ruelton' and Ellerdine (4,23,7), Sutton Maddock and Brockton (4,23,16 and 4,23,16 Sutton note). Rowelton' is held by Madoc de Sutton in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 57a, by serjeanty; its 3 hides will probably have included Ellerdine as well. These two places are associated in the Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 118, in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220, and in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 52. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 239.
	DOT. For a discussion of this personal name, see von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 226.
	A PRIEST. His church was probably at High Ercall (4,1,21); see the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, i. pp. 32, 37, 69); Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 24.
4,27,27	IN BASCHURCH HUNDRED. In the Alecto facsimile the last letter of BASECHERC resembles an O; see 3c,7 Perkley note.
	LEATON. It formerly lay in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary, but is now in Pimhill Civil Parish and a separate Ecclesiastical Parish. It was in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred and became a serjeanty. Roger de Leeton' holds 1 hide in Leeton' in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 76a, by service at Shrewsbury Castle; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 535, v. no. 87, x. no. 103; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 208. Another hide in Leaton was probably part of Albrighton in 1086: 4,3,71 Albrighton note.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the settlers, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,27,28	'YAGDONS'. In the manuscript the name is IAGEDONE; Farley misprinted LAGEDONE. For another example of his printing L for I in a place-name, see 4,4,11 Yockleton note.
		'Yadgons' is now in Leaton Ecclesiastical Parish and in Pimhill Civil Parish, but was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Mary. The Domesday vill is now only represented by Yagdons Lane (Yaggons Lane on the six-inch Ordnance Survey map of 1888). It lay in Baschurch Hundred in 1086, later in Pimhill Hundred. 'Yagdons' went to the Fitz Alan fief, being held under it by the de Rossalls. Thus in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 75b, Thomas de Roshal holds 1 carucate in Jagedon' of the fee of John Fitz Alan. It appears with Rossall and Yeaton (4,3,55-56) in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 243, of Thomas de Rossall; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 207; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 232.
4,27,29	POYNTON AND "TUNESTAN". These two T.R.E. manors with different names seem to have been combined into one, the name Tunestan dying out, probably soon after 1086 as it has not been found in any later record. Both were in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086, and Poynton (which was in the Ancient Parish of Ercall Magna, also known as High Ercall) was later in 'Bradford' Hundred. Poynton became part of the honour of Montgomery and was held under its lords by a family named from the place: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 56a, Pevinton' at 1 ½ hides (which presumably included Tunestan) is held by Philip de Pevinton' as a fee of William de Cantelupo (i.e. of Montgomery honour); see Bradford Hundred Roll, p. 113; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 220; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 1.
		Scribe B interlined 7 TVNESTAN above PEVENTONE; he did not feel it necessary to include an insertion mark. It is not rubricated; see 4,8,1 Moreton note. He may have been responsible for the erasure of geld' in the next line; see 4,29,29 hides note.
	1 ½ HIDES [***]. In the manuscript geld' has been scraped off after dimid'; it is still visible, though faint. Compare 4,19,4 hides note, 4,27,2 hides note, 4,27,3 hide note and 4,27,9 hide note, and see 1,5 hide note on the spaces left after the hidage by the main scribe of Great Domesday. It is not clear why geld' should have been erased: if it were found out that these two manors did not pay tax, a non could have been easily inserted, though it is possible that the intention was to write non geld' in the space. It may be that the erasure was done when 7 TVNESTAN was interlined: perhaps Poynton paid tax but Tunestan did not.
4,27,30	IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED that this entry and the next five (4,27,31-35), the last in this sub-chapter, were added, together with sub-chapter 4,28 and chapters 5-8: Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 12. However, there is no sign of a change in pen, ink or style at this point in the manuscript. See L5 Osbern note.
	RICHARD [* OF MONTGAROULT *]. See 4,12 Richard note. This entry is a duplicate of 4,12,1.
	BROCKTON. This place was in Longford Ancient Parish and lay in Wrockwardine Hundred in 1086. This entry is a duplicate of 4,12,1, which was a later addition (see 4,12,1 this entry note).
	AISIL. On this name, see 4,12,1 Aisil note. The duplicate entry (4,12,1) adds that he held the ½ hide in Brockton 'as one manor'.
	1 FREE MAN PAYS 16d IN REVENUE. On the practice of 'farming', see 3d,5 revenue note.
4,27,31	SIWARD. See 4,27,32 Siward note.
	HALSTON? AND "BURTONE". This pair of names has not been satisfactorily identified. Eyton (Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 43) left Haustune unidentified and took Burtone as Porkington/Brogyntyn. But his descent for Porkington is unsatisfactory (VCH Shropshire, i. p. 343 note 118) and the etymology from Burtone impossible (Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Porkington; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p.
	xii). VCH Shropshire, i. p. 343, suggested Halston? (the same place as Halstune in 4,3,32) and Brogyntyn?, which are, however, far apart. There is no philological difficulty in taking Haustune as an alternative for Halstune, but the identification of both places requires further study.
		If Halston is the correct identification, it lay in Whittington Ancient Parish. It will have been drawn into a Welshry after 1086 and only returned to Shropshire in 1536 at the dissolution of the Marcher lordships.
4,27,32	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. This Siward is identifiable as Siward Grossus (the Shrewsbury Cartulary: Rees, no. 1). He is probably the same as the Siward who held Hollow Court in Worcestershire (HEF 1,41) where he is described as a thane and kinsman of King Edward. Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, ii. p. 416), in his account of the founding of St Peter's Abbey, Shrewsbury, states that 'Siward son of Aethelgar, a kinsman (consanguineus) of King Edward' had built 'in earlier times' a wooden chapel dedicated to St Peter. Siward was persuaded by Earl Roger to give him the site in exchange for Cheney Longville so that he could found the Abbey of St Peter (SHR 3b): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, nos. 1, 35).
		This Siward was brother of Aldred and it is possible that these are the two men whose T.R.E. holdings were the only ones held by Roger of Lacy directly from the king (SHR 7 Roger note). They were probably the grandchildren of Edward the Confessor's half-sister Edith who was married to Edric Streona Ealdorman of Mercia from 1007 to 1017. They were thus cousins of Edric the wild (4,1,14 Edric note); Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History (Chibnall, iii. pp. 6-7); Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 291, xi. p. 370; Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 93; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 421.
		It is possible that the Siwards of 4,27,11;14;31 are the same man, as are some other Siwards in Shropshire, but the name was a common one. The main scribe of Great Domesday did not appear to connect the 1086 holders called Siward in this sub-chapter, as he did not place them together as he did the holdings of Alward son of Almund (4,27,17-21) and see 4,27,24 Alward note.
	[CHENEY] LONGVILLE. This place was in Wistanstow Ancient Parish. It lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086 and was later in Purslow Hundred. Siward had held it before 1066, but not continuously afterwards, since the Shrewsbury Cartulary records that it was given to him by Earl Roger in exchange: see 4,27,32 Siward note. Siward also gave Cheney Longville to the abbey which subsequently exchanged it with Henry de Say, lord of Clun, for Brompton (4,20,1): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. xi-xii, 1, 3, 30, 33, 37 etc.). Longefeud, ½ hide, is held by Cecilia de Wolv'eslawe in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 77a, of John Fitz Alan with suit and service at Clun Castle. Roger de Cheveney or le Cheyne holds in Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 233, 238; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 812; Book of Fees, p. 963: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 369. Longefeld is associated with Streforde (Strefford: 4,3,47) in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194 (of Philip Burnel).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank almost half a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,27,33	ALDRED [* BROTHER OF SIWARD *]. See 4,3,15 Aldred note.
	ACTON [SCOTT]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. It went to the Fitz Alan barony with Lestrange as mesne lord. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, four men, including Reginald Scot', hold 2 hides in Acton' and Hennel' (Henley SO4588) from John Extraneus. It is Acton in Longefeld in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 222, and Scotus Acton held by the Earl of Arundel (Fitz Alan barony) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 375; and 4,3,47 Strefford note.
	EDRIC [* THE WILD *]. He was possibly Edric the wild; see 4,1,14 Edric note. Aldred, the T.R.E. holder of Acton, was probably the brother of Siward [* the fat *] who held Cheney Longville (4,27,32). Siward was a cousin of Edric the wild; see Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 91; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 11.
4,27,34	IWAR <OF "NEWETONE". The Domesday form Iward[us] probably represents the same name as the Juuar who occurs twice in Staffordshire as a 1066 holder of two adjacent estates in the king's hands (STS 1,54-55): Old Danish Iwar (Old Norse Ivarr, Old Swedish Ivar): von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 300; see Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England, p. 286. The printed Phillimore edition has the form Ivar, though JRM's policy was to prefer the Old Danish over the Old Swedish name-form; it has therefore been altered for the present edition. The Alecto edition has Iwar.
		It is unlikely that this 1086 tenant of Earl Roger was the same as Iwar who held T.R.E. in Staffordshire.
	"NEWETONE". There appears to be no place called 'Newton' now existing in the area occupied in 1086 by "Merset" Hundred. There is a Newton associated with Caldecot (Caldicott or The Heath in Knockin, SJ3522) later held by Haughmond Abbey and lying in the diocese of St Asaph: the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, no. 207). This may have been "Newetone", but it is lost: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 376, xi. p. 22.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
4,27,35	ALCHERE <OF LE PIN>. See 4,3,4 Alchere note.
	HARCOURT. The Domesday form is Havretescote. This estate was later divided into 'Great' Harcourt and 'Little' Harcourt, alternatively Upper Harcourt (which survives at SO6982) and 'Lower' Harcourt (lost): Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 144. The place was in Stottesdon Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. It became a serjeanty. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 82a, John filius Cleri (i.e. filius Aeri that is Fitz Ayer) holds ½ hide by serjeanty in Hauerkercot'; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 217, 232; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 115, iv. no. 181, v. no. 470, ix. no. 459, x. no. 320; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 180.
	ALWARD [* SON OF ALMUND *]. See 3f,2 Alward note.
4,28	[WHAT EARL ROGER HIMSELF HOLDS]. This appears to be an appendix of miscellaneous lands mainly held by Earl Roger in chief. Entries 4,28,1-3;6 rightly belong in 4,1, as do the two manors of 4,28,4 dependent on Stretton (4,1,27). But 4,28,5 is an outlier of a Herefordshire manor held directly from the king.
		There is no sign, however, that it was a later addition (Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 12); see 4,27,30 has note. As he worked through the lands of Earl Roger, the main scribe of Great Domesday probably found several that he had omitted from 4,1 and kept them until the end, rather than add so many in the foot margin of folio 254a, as he had failed to leave a space after 4,1.
	The hundredal order of this sub-chapter is as follows (the bracketed numbers are explained in SHR 4 arrangement note):
		4,28,1-2 Condover Hundred
		4,28,3 Baschurch Hundred
		4,28,4 Leintwardine Hundred
		4,28,5 'Conditre' Hundred
		4,28,6 "Merset" Hundred
4,28,1	BROOME. This place lay in Cardington Ancient Parish and was in Munslow Hundred in the Middle Ages, but in Condover Hundred in 1086. It was probably part of the estate at Plaish (4,8,12) granted in 963 (Early Charters of the West Midlands, no. 431 p. 149 = Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 723); see 4,8,12 Plaish note. The entry is incomplete and the manor is not well represented in later records. The facts that Austin who held part of it before 1066 had also held part of Cardington (4,3,44, which was adjacent but in "Culvestan" Hundred), and that Reginald (the holder of ½ virgate of it) is probably Reginald the sheriff, the 1086 holder of Cardington, may explain the manor's disappearance and transfer to Munslow Hundred: it was probably absorbed by Cardington soon after Domesday. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 243; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 32.
	THORSTEN <OF HARCOURT> AND AUSTIN HELD IT. The main scribe of Great Domesday originally wrote tenuit, then (presumably when he interlined 7 Austin' was interlined, though the ink is paler) he interlined an r, extending it down over the remains of the partially-erased t; a small faint e can be seen before the r and a line was drawn over the top of the it, probably as a deletion line. The correction is not as clear as it appears in Farley.
		For Thorsten, see 4,14,10 Thorsten note.
	[VALUE ***]. See 4,3,25 value note.
4,28,2	NETLEY. This place lay in Stapleton Ancient Parish. It was in Condover Hundred in 1086 and was probably merged soon after Domesday with the two Stapleton manors (4,4,2. 4,27,9); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 297; VCH Shropshire, viii. p. 165.
		The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote NETELIE and the following two sentencies over a large erasure. It is possible that he had written details of the wrong holding here; compare 6,30 hide note. The words are blurred, so he may have corrected them at an early stage and did not wait until the surface of the parchment had been properly re-prepared for writing after the erasure.
4,28,3	FENEMERE. The place lay in Baschurch Ancient Parish. In 1086 it was in Baschurch Hundred, later in Pimhill Hundred. It appears to have been given soon after Domesday to Rainer the reeve and conveyed by him to Shrewsbury Abbey as quandam terrulam cum lacu qui vocatur Finemera ('a small piece of land with a lake called Finemera'): the Shrewsbury Cartulary (Rees, pp. 34, 39). But it seems to have passed from the abbey to the Fitz Alans, for in the Pimhill Hundred Roll, p. 120, Roger de Acton holds Fenymer from Richard son of Alan; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, x. p. 289. The 'mere' which names the place is still a notable feature.
4,28,4	EARL LEOFRIC. See 3b,2 Leofric note.
	MINTON AND WHITTINGSLOW. Minton was in the Ancient Parish of Church Stretton, now in the Civil Parish of Little Stretton; Whittingslow was in Wistanstow Ancient Parish. Whittingslow passed to Munslow Hundred and the honour of Montgomery (see 4,1,15 Montgomery note), being Wittokeslawe among the fees of William de Cantilupo in Book of Fees, p. 966, where it is held by Nicholas de Opton' and his partners; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 245; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xii. p. 4.
		Minton (also in Munslow Hundred) became a serjeanty, held for guarding the forest of the Long Mynd and the hays at Bissemor' (Bushmoor SO4387) and Hauechurche' (Hawkhurst in Cwm Head, SO4288); see Book of Fees, pp. 7, 383, 1184, 1244; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. nos. 473, 534, ii. no. 511, v. no. 8, vi. nos. 490, 720; VCH Shropshire, x. p. 90. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 512, it is Muneton in Strettonesdale (see 4,1,27 Stretton note).
	INCLUDED IN THE REVENUE OF. On the meaning of firma here, see 4,8,8 revenue note.
	STRETTON. Earl Roger's manor is 4,1,27.
4,28,5	WIDARD <OF FARLOW>. Note on this identification to be supplied (JP).
	FARLOW. It is now a parish, but with a more complex earlier history. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrongly placed it among this appendix to Earl Roger's lands, for the text makes clear that Widard held directly from the king. But although surveyed in 'Conditre' Hundred, it was in fact an outlier of Leominster in Herefordshire. The latter was a large composite manor, formerly ecclesiastical and temporarily in royal hands; see HEF 1,10a Farlow note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 191. Farlow was later regarded as a chapelry of Stottesdon Ancient Parish, the only part of that parish to be in Herefordshire, in which county it remained until 1844.
	IS ASSESSED. The Ordnance Survey facsimile does not reproduce the abbreviation line on the ç: it is faint in the manuscript, but is visible in the Alecto facsimile. See 3f,7 plough note.
4,28,6	"WLFERESFORDE". It lay in "Merset" Hundred, but is unidentified. There is a place named Wulfheresford in the Calendar of Patent Rolls (1262), p. 207, but that appears to be near Wenlock; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 43.
	2 HIDES. In the manuscript there is no dot after hidê which is written hard up against the side marginal ruling, so the main scribe of Great Domesday probably intended writing into the margin when he found out whether the hides paid tax; see 4,3,35 hides note.
	A SMALL WOOD. On Latin silua parua, see 4,1,4 wood note.
5	LAND OF OSBERN SON OF RICHARD. Osbern was the son of Richard Scrope (or Richard Scrob), a Norman who settled on the border in Herefordshire and Shropshire at the time of the Confessor and continued to hold land there after the Conquest. Osbern married Nesta, a daughter of Gruffyd ap Llywellyn. He had a son, Hugh, and a daughter who married Bernard of Neufmarché. Osbern succeeded to most of his father’s lands and was lord of Richards Castle in Herefordshire, which Richard had built. These lands lay near a particularly vulnerable part of the border since two-thirds of them had been waste at some stage in the previous twenty years.
		Most of his Osbern's lands in Herefordshire and Shropshire formed part of the honour of Castrum Ricardi (‘Richards Castle’). From Osbern they passed to his son Hugh, then to another Osbern and a further two Hughs, the last one dying in 1197 and leaving a daughter Margaret (de Say). She first married Hugh de Ferrers and her third marriage was to William de Stuteville, but the barony descended to Hugh Mortimer son of her second marriage (to Robert of Mortimer), then to Robert II and Hugh II. The barony was divided between Hugh II's daughters Joan (who married Thomas de Bykenore, then Richard Talbot) and Margaret who married Geoffrey of Cornwall, then William de Evereys. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 301; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 75; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 316. The barony is sometimes called ‘of Burford’ from Burford (SHR 5,1), the caput of Osbern’s Shropshire lands.
		Many of these lands reappear in Inquisitions Post Mortem of the Mortimers of Richards Castle; see especially Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, iv. no. 221, v. nos. 57-58. Another branch of the family were the lords of Wigmore (SHR 6 Ralph note).
		None of the estates in this chapter nor those in SHR 6-9 lay north of Shrewsbury and with only a few exceptions all are found in the southernmost hundreds of Leintwardine, "Culvestan", 'Overs' and 'Conditre'. That they are held from the king and not from Earl Roger suggests either that the king reserved for himself on the Marches a slice of territory between the 'palatine' earldoms of Earl Roger and Earl William son of Osbern; or more likely that this tract of country was originally under the control of the latter and was forfeited to the Crown on his son's rebellion; see {Introduction: History}. Intermingled with these lands on the ground, however, are vills in the same hundreds held by the same Osbern son of Richard (SHR 5), Ralph of Mortimer (SHR 6) and Roger of Lacy (SHR 6) from Earl Roger in 4,17. 4,11 and 4,8.
	In these chapters the hundreds are not arranged in the sequence which applies to a number of sub-chapters in Earl Roger's fief (SHR 4 arrangement note), nor do they share a similar sequence themselves. The hundredal order of chapter 5 is as follows:
		5,1-2 'Overs' Hundred
		5,3 "Culvestan" Hundred
		5,4-7 Leintwardine Hundred
		5,8 'Conditre' Hundred
		(5,9 'Overs' Hundred)
	The apparent repeat of 'Overs' Hundred is caused by 5,9 Milson being an outlier of Neen Sollars (5,8) and so entered after it.
5,1	BURFORD. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Overs' Hundred in 1086 and later, becoming the caput of Osbern's Shropshire barony and ultimately of the Mortimer sub-barony of Burford. It may have been the principal manor of 'Overs' Hundred: {Introduction: Hundreds}. Burford itself is Bureford' in Book of Fees, p. 1284, held by William de Stutevill' and belonging to Richards Castle. It is held as a 'free manor' by the same man in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a, and by Robert de Mortuo Mari of the barony of Burford in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 216; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 103ab; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 234, 242; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 439, ii. nos. 132, 640, iv. no. 221, v. no. 57. Burford is coupled with Stepelton (Stapleton 5,5 Stanage note) in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 715, viii. no. 111. Burford had a number of members. Among them were probably:
		Grete (Greete SO5770) held in Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973, of the barony of William de Stotevill'; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a; the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 604); Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 216, 234, 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, v. no. 57, ix. nos. 23, 445; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165a;
		Stota (Stoke SO5671), ½ hide, held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a, by Agnes de Stota from William de Stutevil'; see the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 604); Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 214, 234, 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640;
		Tileshop' (Tilsop SO6172) held in Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973, of the barony of William de Stotevill'; see the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 604); Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a (where it is given as 1 hide in extent); Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 216, 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, v. nos. 57, 90;
		Wn'tone (Wooton? SO5773), ¼ hide, held by Hugh Carbonel from William de Stutevil in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a;
		Wetemora (Watmore SO6171) held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a, by Ernald de Barkeley of the fee of Bureford; see Book of Fees, p. 965; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 243;
		Esses (Nash SO6071), ¾ hide, held by William de Clifford from John Est'rmi in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a;
		Westona (Weston SO5871), 1 hide, held by Philip de Thou't from Peter de Grete, a fee of Roger de Clifford, in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, v. no. 57;
		Wyttone (Whitton SO5772), ½ hide, in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 387;
		Cromwode ('Cornwood' in Knighton on Teme, Worcestershire, represented by Cornwood Common, now Knighton Common, on the first series Ordnance Survey one-inch map at SO6270). This went to Haughmond Abbey; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 163b; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 263-66, 1300);
		Burestone (Boraston SO6170), 2 hides, held by the prior of Worcester by gift of the predecessor of William de Stutevil'; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a;
		Herthale (Harthall SO5970), ½ hide, held by Agnes de Greta from Peter de Grete in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b;
		Hulla (Court-of-Hill? SO6072), 1 hide, held from Roger de Pynlesdone; see Book of Fees, p. 965; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 216. Osbern held another 'Hill' associated with Overton, just over the border in Herefordshire (HEF 24,12).
		For the church of Burford, see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165b. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 301.
		In 1086 Osbern held Ludford, which was adjacent to Burford, but in Herefordshire. It was transferred to Shropshire soon after. See HEF 24,12 Ludford note.
	RICHARD ^[SCROPE]^. The fact that the 1086 holder is Osbern son of Richard makes it certain that his father was Richard Scrope.
	A CHURCH. On the possibility that this was the minster church for the territory dependent on Burford and later for 'Overs' Hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	WITH 2 PRIESTS. Or perhaps 'and 2 priests': the main scribe of Great Domesday corrected either 7 to cû or vice versa. The same thing happens several times elsewhere in Great Domesday and in 4,27,19 and 7,4 here the scribe began to write cum, but stopped after c and wrote 7 over i.
	23 PLOUGHS. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after xxiii car'.; the parchment is rubbed here but there is no sign of an erasure. It is not clear what, if anything, he meant to add; see 3f,2 church note on the few other instances of this.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining quarter of a line after the hedged enclosure, perhaps for the later insertion of another resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
5,2	TETSTILL. This was in the Ancient Parish of Neen Sollars. It lay in 'Overs' Hundred in 1086 and later. This 1 hide holding was at Tetneshulle and Marebroc (Marlbrook SO6670), held by Adam de Arundellia in the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 604) of the honour of Richards Castle. Marlbrook probably stands for both in Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973, where Adam de Arondel holds ½ fee in Merebroc from the barony of William de Stotevill', and in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a, where John de Arundel holds 1 hide in Marebroke from Thomas Corbet; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 216, 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, v. no. 57. The Corbets held from the Mortimers in the case of Tetstill and Marlbrook, but these two manors are coupled in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 635, with Habberleye (4,4,20) held of the barony of Corbet of Cause. Maerebroc had once been a possession of Worcester Church but taken from it by Earl Swein; see Hemming's Cartulary (Hearne Hemingi Chartularium, p. 276: folio 129r). Swein was Swein Godwinson, Earl of the West Midlands 1043-1051. It is possible that this was a former comital estate: Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 93.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 349; the Herefordshire Domesday (Galbraith and Tait), p. 119.
	SAEWARD [* SIWARD THE FAT *]. Domesday Sauuard[us] may be a scribal error for Seuuard[us] or Siuuard[us], that is 'Siward', as Siward was Osbern's predecessor at Neen Sollars which is adjacent to Tetstill. See 4,3,3 Saeward note and 7,1 Saeward note. This man may be Siward son of Aethelgar: 4,27,32 Siward note.
5,3	ASHFORD [CARBONELL]. This was a township of the Ancient Parish of Little Hereford (which was otherwise entirely in Herefordshire), then a Shropshire Ancient Parish in its own right. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. 'Ashford' seems to have been the name of an area lying on both sides of the River Teme in 1086, represented later by Ashford Carbonell, Ashford Bowdler (in Herefordshire in 1086) and 'Ashford Jones' (4,11,2 Huntington note). Esseford was held by Hugh Carbonel in the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 604) of the honour of Richards Castle, while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, William de Stutevile holds 1 ½ hides in Aysford Carbonel; see Book of Fees, p. 965; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 223, 229, 245; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, v. no. 57, x. no. 426; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 81.
		Another part of Ashford, probably Ashford Bowdler, was apparently a dependency of Bromfield (3d,6) in 1086.
	LETHI. The Domesday form Ledi represents Old Norse Lethi: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 319. This is the only occurrence of the name in Domesday Book.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
5,4	KINSHAM?. The Domesday form is Humet. Upper Kinsham (SO3664) was an Ancient Parish, in Herefordshire since the dissolution of the Marcher lordships in the sixteenth century. Lower Kinsham (SO3564) was also in Herefordshire from the same date, but was a township of Presteigne Ancient Parish, which was divided between Radnorshire and Herefordshire: two wards of Presteigne itself and the township of Discoed lay in Radnorshire while all the rest lay in Herefordshire, the townships of Lower Kinsham, Stapleton and Willey lying north of the River Lugg, the townships of Combe, Rodd, Nash and Little Brampton south of it. The date of this division between the counties is uncertain (see below). In 1086, the River Lugg seems to have been the principal division between Shropshire and Herefordshire, with the places north of the Lugg being in Shropshire and those south of it in Herefordshire. Kinsham lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086.
		The suggestion is that Humet is at least to be identified with Kinsham, and probably with both Kinsham and Presteigne, though these identifications are tentative; Humet was left unidentified in the Phillimore printed edition and in the Alecto edition. These two adjacent places, Presteigne (SO3164) and Kinsham, seem to contain the same element and appear to be named by reference to each other. Ekwall (Dictionary of English Placenames, under Presteigne) and Smith in English Place-Name Elements (under haemed), took this element as Old English haemed, used in the rare sense of 'household'. More recently Margaret Gelling in the etymologies she provided for Copplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names (under Presteigne, pp. 117-18) has suggested derivation from Old English hemm-maed, meaning 'meadow on a boundary', referring to the well-watered nature of the site beside the River Lugg and the proximity to the then boundary between Shropshire and Wales. The two places are thus respectively the haemed or hemm-maed of the priests and of the king. It is not clear when this distinction arose, though it was probably before 1066 when Humet was held by King Edward; it might have been held by earlier kings. There is no later record of it being in royal hands. Soon after the Conquest it will probably have been granted to Earl William; see {Introduction: History}. Certainly it is tempting to think of Humet's being a single estate, later divided between a priests' part and a royal part, the latter being subsequently further divided into Upper Kinsham and Lower Kinsham. It is even more tempting to believe that the distinction already existed in 1066 and 1086, but was subsumed by a single name. A royal site and a priests' site within the same estate suggests the presence of an ancient royal estate complemented by a Saxon minster church containing secular priests or canons. Humet was waste in 1066 and all but the lordship was in 1086, so this negative evidence can be argued either way.
		The first occurrence of the differentiated forms Presteigne and Kinsham are, however, after 1086. In a list of lands (dating from 1137 x 1139) attached to the Herefordshire Domesday (Galbraith and Tait, p. 79) Osbern son of Richard holds 7 hides in Prestehemed (Presteigne, in Radnorshire, not mentioned in Domesday). These 7 hides could be the 5 hides of Humet plus the 2 hides of Clatterbrune (HEF 24,3) which now lies in that part of Presteigne that is south of the River Lugg . Kingesmede is found in 1210-1212 (the Red Book of the Exchequer: Hall, p. 512) and in 1216 (Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum, p. 279b; Rotuli Litterarum Patentium, p. 92), the year in which King John stayed at Kinsham on a journey from Radnor to Clun.
		It is likely that a number of the townships later counted as part of Presteigne were part of the 1086 estate of Humet. Thus in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235 (of Edmund de Mortuo Mari), La Humede is held with a place called Chesewaldesleye, also unidentified, although the etymology of Kinseys (SO3269, near Willey Lodge) requires investigation; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 343. The manors of Kinsham, Willey (SO3265) and Stapleton (SO3265) were held of the honour of Richards Castle. Wylyleye (Willey) is held in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 221, by Hugh de Mortuo Mari of Richards Castle; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 57. Overkyngesheinde and Netherkyngesheinde (Upper and Lower Kinsham) are held by Ralph de Lingen from the lords of Richards Castle in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 58, viii. no. 456. Stepelton (Stapleton SO3265) is coupled with Burford (5,1) in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vii. no. 715, viii. no. 111; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, iv. no. 221; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 344.
		On the dissolution of the Marcher lordships, Kinsham was placed in Herefordshire, and Presteigne apparently in Radnorshire. It is perhaps significant that the portion of Presteigne lying south of the River Lugg and lying in Radnorshire until 1974 is only incorporated in that county by a curious loop of the county boundary which turns south at SO320634 to join the Summergil Brook, follows it eastwards to its confluence with the River Lugg then follows that river westwards to a point (at SO310650) where it leaves the river and heads northwards. This is a circuit of some 7 kilometres, whereas, had the boundary turned northwards at SO310630, it would have skirted Presteigne on the western side and rejoined the later county boundary in under two kilometres. It is thus possible that this part of Presteigne was incorporated in Radnorshire later than 1536, and that initially, on the dissolution of the Marcher lordships, the whole of Presteigne both north and south of the River Lugg was put in Herefordshire. It also seems probable that in 1086, Presteigne lay entirely north of the river in Shropshire and it and Clatterbrune lying in Herefordshire stood for what became Presteigne south of the river.
		The matter of boundaries and these identifications need further investigation.
	EXCEPT FOR THE LORDSHIP ... 10s. A rare statement in Great Domesday, meaning that only what is in lordship has a value. It is also unusual for men-at-arms, rather than Osbern as 1086 holder, to have a plough in lordship: the main scribe of Great Domesday or an earlier scribe in the Domesday process may have omitted to state that the two men-at-arms were Osbern's subtenants. Compare Exon for DEV 19,36 where a villager has all the lordship land, and see DEV 3,91 lordship note for other examples of unusual tenures of lordship.
5,5	STANAGE. This place was formerly in the Ancient Parish of Brampton Bryan which lay in Herefordshire, though Stanage itself was in Wales. Stanage has been a Civil Parish (in Radnorshire) since 1866. In 1086 it lay in Leintwardine Hundred, was afterwards drawn out of the county and into a Marcher lordship, and was placed in Radnorshire in 1536 when the Marcher lordships were dissolved and Wales was shired. Stanage was held by de Brompton under the lords of Richards Castle. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640 (of Robert de Mortuo Mari), Brian de Brompton holds the hamlet of Stanegge; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 291, v. nos. 58, 130, viii. no. 456; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 340.
5,6	CASCOB. In the sixteenth century Cascob was an Ancient Parish in Radnorshire which included the township of Litton and Cascob. This township was partly in Herefordshire until 1844 when this portion was transferred to Radnorshire. This reflects an earlier complexity. Cascob was in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086 but soon began to be moved into Marcher jurisdiction. A waste ½ hide here, also held by Osbern son of Richard, is mentioned in Domesday Herefordshire (HEF 24,3) and said to lie in "Hezetre" Hundred and on the Welsh March. There is insufficient detail in the entries to determine whether the entries are duplicates, but to survey the same vill or two parts of the same vill in different counties suggests an unclear boundary between Shropshire, Herefordshire and Wales. A natural boundary in this area would be the River Lugg: Norton and Ackhill surveyed in Shropshire lie to the north of it; Discoed and Clatterbrune in Herefordshire to the south. Yet Pilleth on its north side is surveyed in Herefordshire and Cascob on its south side in both counties. See {Introduction: County Boundary}; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. pp. 302, 304, xi. p. 341. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 221 of Hugh de Mortuo Mari, Cascop is counted as a part of Herefordshire, as also in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235, where it is numbered among the hamlets of Radnor. By contrast, Pullid (Pilleth) is there counted in Shropshire.
		If the two Domesday entries for Cascob were indeed separate estates, it is possible that the Herefordshire one actually lay at Litton.
5,7	ACKHILL. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Presteigne (which was in Radnorshire from 1536 until 1974). It was in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, and drawn thereafter into Marcher jurisdiction though it was still recorded in Shropshire in 1304 when Akhull was held by Edmund de Mortuo Mari (Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 343. There is also an Oakhill Wood in the same hundred just south-east of Bucknell (SO3673, part of Coxall Knoll Wood).
		The main scribe of Great Domesday failed to rubricate ACHEL; for his failure to rubricate two other place-names and two hundred heads in Shropshire, see 4,3,8 St Peter note.
	3 HIDES. The iii hidê was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure.
	LEAGUE. In the manuscript leuua; Farley printed Leuua.
5,8	NEEN [SOLLARS]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086 and later joined its outlier, Milson (5,9), in 'Overs' Hundred. In the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii. p. 604) William de Solers holds Nene from the honour of Richards Castle, while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a, three men hold Nene Bauwyn from William de Solers of the barony of Burford; see Book of Fees, pp. 965, 973; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 104a; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 216, 234, 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, iv. no. 235, v. no. 57; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165b; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, ix. p. 291.
	NEVER BEEN HIDATED, NOR ... PAID TAX. See 4,20,4 for the other manor in a similar position in Shropshire. This might be a sign that this was or was part of an ancient royal or comital manor. See Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 93. She further suggests that this may have been an estate once held by Edric Streona, Ealdorman of Mercia (1007-1017), and that Siward is Siward son of Aethelgar; see 5,8 Siward note.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. This man may be Siward son of Aethelgar: 4,27,32 Siward note. However, the designation 'a free man' seems unlikely if a kinsman of King Edward is meant.
	A MEASURE OF CORN. The modius was a liquid and dry measure of uncertain size, possibly a bushel, of which the sester (4,17,3 sesters note) was a fraction. Compare 4,3,45 measures note and 4,27,21 measures note.
5,9	MILSON. This was an Ancient Parish, but united with the Ancient Parish of Neen Sollers before 1535. It was an outlier of Nene Sollars (5,8) in 1086, lying in 'Overs' Hundred where it remained. In Book of Fees, p. 965, William de Mulston' holds ½ fee in Mulston' from the barony of Walter de Stotevill'; in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74a, Mullestona is said to be 2 hides in extent. See Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 216, 234, 243; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 640, v. no. 57; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 346.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. See 5,8 Siward note. On the possibility that he was the same person as Siward [the fat], on whom see 4,27,32 Siward note, see 4,1,34 Siward note.
6	LAND OF RALPH OF MORTIMER. He was the son of Roger of Mortimer (from Mortemer in the département of Seine-Maritime, France, arrondissement Dieppe, canton Neufchâtel-en-Bray) and was probably the steward of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury (see Mason, ‘Officers and Clerks’, p. 248). His father Roger had held the fief before him and Roger or Ralph received a number of estates forfeited by Roger son of Earl William (of Hereford), Ralph's cousin, on his rebellion in 1074. He became a supporter of William II and fought in Normandy in 1089-1090 against Robert Curthose, and he similarly supported Henry I against Robert in 1104; see Tengvik, Old English Bynames, pp. 101-102; Loyd, Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 70; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 98; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 335.
		Ralph’s extensive lands in Shropshire and Herefordshire became the barony of Wigmore named from Wigmore Castle in Herefordshire (HEF 9,1), which had been built by Earl William, then given to "Turstin" of Flanders (also called "Turstin" 'of Wigmore') before coming to Ralph. The lands continued to be held by the various Mortimers of Wigmore, the last being Roger IV of Mortimer, created Earl of March in 1328 and executed in 1330: Sanders, English Baronies, p. 98.
		Wigmore itself became centre of a Marcher lordship and many of the lands lying in the south of Shropshire were taken from time to time either into the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer or from the county, many of the latter group emerging ultimately in Herefordshire. This process can be observed clearly in the Quo Waranto pleas of 1290 (Placita de Quo Warranto, pp. 675, 681) which list the manors whose suit has been withdrawn from the county and question the Mortimers’ right to hold Crown pleas. Conversely, Downton-on-the-Rock (HEF 9,2, also held by Ralph of Mortimer) was sometimes counted in Munslow Hundred; see Book of Fees, p. 963; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235. The lands of the barony are also found listed in the various Inquisitions relating to deaths in the Mortimer family of Wigmore; see especially Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, (old series) iii. no. 34, and (new series) iv. no. 235.
		Wigmore Abbey, founded by Hugh of Mortimer and first sited at Shobdon in Shropshire, was richly endowed by the Mortimers; see Dickinson and Ricketts, 'Chronicle of Wigmore'; Banks, 'Charters of the Abbey of Wigmore'; Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 344-346; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 202-203; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, p. 159.
		None of the estates in this chapter nor those in SHR 5, 7-9 lay north of Shrewsbury and with only a few exceptions all are found in the southernmost hundreds of Leintwardine, "Culvestan", 'Overs' and 'Conditre': SHR 5 Osbern note. Ralph's principal manor was Cleobury Mortimer (6,2) and that together with adjacent lands became the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. His lands in the extreme south of the county became part of the Mortimer lordship of Wigmore, based on Wigmore Castle (Herefordshire).
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		6,1 'Overs' Hundred
		6,2-3 'Conditre' Hundred
		(6,4 'Overs' Hundred)
		6,5-9 'Conditre' Hundred
		6,10 "Culvestan" Hundred
		6,11-29 Leintwardine Hundred
		6,30-32 Condover Hundred
		6,33 Shrewsbury Hundred.
	The entry for Earls Ditton (6,4) appears to interrupt the sequence, but it is assessed with Cleobury Mortimer (6,2). The holdings in Condover Hundred and Shrewsbury Hundred that lay in the centre of the shire surrounded by manors held by or from Earl Roger are entered last.
6,1	CORELEY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Overs' Hundred in 1086 and later, although suit was withdrawn from the hundred and put to the court of Cleobury Mortimer (6,2) for a period. In 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 74b) the 2 hides are represented by 1 hide held by Geoffrey de Wn'ton (Overton) from Roger de Mortuo Mari and 1 hide by Nicholas de Hintes from the same Geoffrey (presumably under the same Roger); see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 103b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 243; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 357. Overton (4,11,16) and Cornleye are held together by Geoffrey de Overton from Edmund de Mortuo Mari in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. On the possibility that he was the same person as Siward [the fat], on whom see 4,27,32 Siward note, see 4,1,34 Siward note.
	4 SLAVES. The main scribe of Great Domesday originally wrote iii and then squeezed in a minim, the original dot after the iii being visible under this minim; he then interlined or (for quattuor), as in 4,27,21, to clarify the correction.
6,2	CLEOBURY [MORTIMER]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred. From the mid-thirteenth century it was made into a Liberty by the Mortimers and most of their manors in the south of the county were drawn into it: SHR 6 Ralph note. In Book of Fees, p. 1283, Roger de Mortuo Mari holds the manor of Cleybir' 'with appurtenances' and Chemers (Chelmarsh: 4,11,6) while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81a, Roger holds Cleybur' Mortem', 5 hides, from the king in Stottesdon Hundred. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 183, Roger de Mortuo Mari holds Clebur(y) Mortimer and Cheylmerch, with the members Ernewode (Earnwood in Kinlet, SO7380) and Huggeley (Highley: 4,11,11). It is counted in the Liberty of Cleobury in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246; see Book of Fees, pp. 963, 971; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 193. The church was given to Wigmore Abbey: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165b.
		In view of the large plough estimate, which is matched by the actual ploughs in use, this manor may have been beneficially hidated. Compare 4,1,4 hides note.
	[* QUEEN *] EDITH. She is probably Queen Edith (so VCH Shropshire, i. p. 289 note 45; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 193), as she had been Ralph of Mortimer's predecessor in Leinthall in Herefordshire (HEF 9,7). Ralph's other predecessors called Edith (6,9;30-31;33) may also be the queen. Compare 4,27,6 Edith note. On the name Edith, see C13 Edith note.
6,3	MAWLEY. This was in the Ancient Parish of Cleobury Mortimer. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1066, later in Stottesdon Hundred and, for a time, in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. In Book of Fees, p. 963, John de Melleleg' holds in Melleleg' of the barony of Ralph de Mortuo Mari. Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a, records that Roger de Mortuo Mari has removed it from Stottesdon Hundred. Feudal Aids, iv. p. 247, includes it in the Liberty of Cleobury. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 228; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 289.
	"LEL" ... AND "FECH". Neither name has been identified with a place. However, Fech appears to be a personal name, for a Fech holds Baveney (4,11,13; see 4,11,13 "Fech" note), a ½ hide manor, along with an Alwy. One virgate of Baveney is there said to have lain in Cleobury Mortimer before 1066. The Latin here should therefore probably read: 7 Fech de eo i virgatam terrae [in Barbingi]: 'and "Fech" [holds] 1 virgate from him [Ralph] [in Baveney]'. Lel may be the result of a similar muddle or even a mangled form of Alwy; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 229; VCH Shropshire, i. p. 345 note 125. In Domesday Lincolnshire, personal names have likewise sometimes been mistaken for place-names; see LIN 4,19 "Summerlede" note, LIN 24,26 "Offran" note and LIN CN 28 "Schemin" note.
	THEY PAID TAX. The main scribe of Great Domesday interlined 7 geld' above Maner'. He had failed to leave a space after the hidage, possibly because it was split into 1 hide and two lots of 1 virgate; see 1,5 hide note on the spaces he normally left there for phrases such as this. There was space above all three hidages for the 7 geld', so the fact that he interlined it where he did may suggest that he only knew that the manor used to pay tax, but did not know the situation in 1086.
	WHEN "TURSTIN" OF WIGMORE ACQUIRED IT. Latin recepit means 'received' or 'acquired' and cannot normally be stretched to 'took' (Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 226 no. 1333) in the sense of 'stole', for which abstulit is routinely used in Domesday. With both "Turstin" and Earl William dead there was no need for euphemism. The issue here does not concern recepit but iunxit: "Turstin" joined this estate to Cleobury Mortimer. Changes in the number and status of manors greatly concerned those involved in collecting and compiling material for the Domesday Enquiry.
	EARL WILLIAM. Earl William son of Osbern; see {Introduction: History}. In HEF 9,2 Earl William had given Downton-on-the-Rock to "Turstin" of Flanders (alias "Turstin" of Wigmore).
6,4	THIS ENTRY follows straight on from 6,3 with the 7 before the 'Overs' hundred head linking it to the previous statement that (the lands in 6,3) were and are now assessed there (Cleobury Mortimer). There is no sign in the manuscript that this entry was added, as suggested by Lewis, 'Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 8.
	[EARLS] DITTON ... VALUED THERE. It formerly lay in Hopton Wafers Ancient Parish and for civil purposes is still in its successor Hopton Wafers (Civil) Parish. Ecclesiastically it now lies in Doddington Parish; see 4,3,70 Detton note. Though in 'Overs' Hundred in 1086, it had already been absorbed by Cleobury Mortimer and continued as a member of it; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 355; and 7,2 Ditton note. The affix 'Earls' dates from the time when the Mortimers became Earls of March.
		In the Penguin Alecto edition the place-name is wrongly printed as Earlsdition.
6,5	LOWE. This is now part of Farlow Ecclesiastical Parish and Civil Parish, and was formerly in Stottesdon Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon. Ralph de la Lawe holds 1 fee in La Lawe from the barony of Ralph de Mortuo Mari in Book of Fees, p. 963, while the same Richard holds 1 hide in Lawe from Roger de Mortuo Mari in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81a; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 236. La Lowe is coupled with Neen Savage in Cleobury Mortimer Liberty in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246.
		The main scribe of Great Domesday failed to rubricate the place-name LAV and also the hundred head IN CONDETRET H[UN]D[REDO]; for other such failures, see 4,3,8 St Peter note.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. The several occurrences of a Richard holding under Ralph of Mortimer (4,11,3;14. 6,5-6;9;23-26) may refer to the same individual; see 6,23 Richard note.
	THE CHURCH OF ST PETER [* OF SHREWSBURY *]. That is the Saxon church of Shrewsbury that was predecessor of Earl Roger's abbey. Its other early pre-Conquest possession was at Boreton (3b,5). See SHR 3b St Peter's note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
6,6	NEEN [SAVAGE]. This holding and the other one for Neen Savage (6,7) were parts of the Ancient Parish of Neen Savage. They lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, then in Stottesdon Hundred and in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. Together they form a block of 5 ½ hides, but in 1255 (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81a) only 2 ½ hides are found, 3 parts in Nene Savage, held by William de Sancto Georg', and 1 part held by Geoffrey de Ov'ton from Roger de Mortuo Mari with service at Wigmore Castle. Part of Neen Savage was coupled with La Lowe (Lowe 6,5) and part with Eudon (Eudon (George): 4,11,5) in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246. Descent from Ingelrann was to Savage (4,11,12 Walton note) suggesting that 6,7 Nene was certainly Neen Savage. But another part of Neen Savage and part at least of the other manor (called 'Nene Monell') went to Wigmore Abbey; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. l65a, 166b: Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. pp. 203, 211; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 230.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. See 6,23 Richard note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
6,7	NEEN [SAVAGE]. See 6,6 Neen note.
	INGELRANN <OF WALTON>. See 4,11,12 Ingelrann note.
	HUNNING <OF LAWLEY>. See 4,3,56 Hunning note
	[VALUE ***]. Either the main scribe of Great Domesday failed to include the value from the circuit volume or it was omitted there or the value was included in the other holding in Neen Savage (6,6). Compare 4,3,25 value note.
6,8	STEPPLE. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Neen Savage. It was in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon and in the Liberty of Cleobury Mortimer. In Book of Fees, p. 963, La Steple is among fees held of the barony of Ralph de Mortuo Mari; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 232; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 726; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 239.
		Stepple Hall is at SO6678, Little Stepple at SO6577.
	GEOFFREY [* THE STEWARD *]. See 4,3,27 Geoffrey note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a third of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
6,9	KINLET. Domesday Chinlete is probably Old English cyne-hliet ('royal portion'): Edith, the T.R.E. holder, may be Queen Edith; see Ekwall, Dictionary of English Placenames, under Kinlet; Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 166. Kinlet was an Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, later in Stottesdon Hundred and Cleobury Mortimer Liberty. The overlordship continued with the Mortimers, the undertenancy passing from Richard to the de Bromptons: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b, Brian de Brompton' holds 5 hides in Kynlet (one more than in Domesday) and one of these is held by Roger de Foxcot', all from Roger de Mortuo Mari; see Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972; Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 232, 246; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 291, vi. no. 247, x. no. 158. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235, Kynlet is coupled with Foxcote (Foxcote SO7181), while in vol. v. no. 130, a salt-spring in Wyc' is attached to the manor. This presumably was at Droitwich (see 4,1,25-26. 4,11,4), suggests an omission from Domesday (such rights were of great antiquity) and confirms that Kinlet was once royal land. Meton (Meaton and Little Meaton, SO7177, SO7078), held by Brian de Brompton in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235, with Pedwardine (6,24-26), was also probably part of Kinlet. The de Bromptons were benefactors of various churches. The church of Kynlet went to Wigmore Abbey (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 165a, 166a), while Brian and his brother Roger gave tithes in Kinlet and Frenchcote (Foxcote) to the Abbey of Lyre (Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 1095 no. xxi) and 1 virgate in Kinlet to the Templars. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 240.
		Kinlet is represented by Kinlet Hall and Kinlet Home Farm (SO7081) and by the isolated church at SO7181.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. On his being the same Richard as others of the same name holding under Ralph of Mortimer, see 6,23 Richard note.
	[* QUEEN *] EDITH. See 6,2 Edith note and 6,9 Kinlet note. On the name Edith, see C13 Edith note.
	4 HIDES. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters after iiii hidê.; see 1,5 hide note.
6,10	[THE] SHEET. This was in the Ancient Parish of Ludford which had formerly been a chapelry of Bromfield Ancient Parish. The Sheet lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086 and was later in Munslow Hundred (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a) or 'Overs' Hundred (Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234). Ingelrann's undertenancy went first to Savage (4,11,12 Walton note), then to de Bosco. In Book of Fees, p. 963, Philip de Mortuomari holds in Sete and Lecton' (Letton: 6,18) from Ralph de Mortuo Mari. Richard de Boys holds 2 hides in Sete from Roger Mortimer in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 234; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 72.
	INGELRANN <OF WALTON>. See 4,11,12 Ingelrann note.
6,11	MOST OF THE MANORS in Leintwardine Hundred in this fief (6,11-29) were drawn into the Mortimer Marcher lordship of Wigmore and ultimately emerged in Herefordshire. Some still paid occasional suit to Munslow hundred court in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries: SHR 6 Ralph note.
	LEINTWARDINE. This was an Ancient Parish, now in Herefordshire. It had probably been a 5-hide manor in 1066, but by 1086 3 virgates were held by Picot (de Sai) from Earl Roger (4,20,20 Leintwardine note). Leintwardine had also probably been the royal caput of the hundred under Edward the Confessor and an important frontier manor: C10 Leintwardine note. It was gradually drawn into the Mortimer lordship of Wigmore, although was still said to be in Shropshire in 1304 (Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235); see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 183, v. no. 133; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 321. The mill and church went to Wigmore Abbey: Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 329; Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 202. Members of the manor were probably at: Moketree (Mocktree SO4276; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, (old series) iii. p. 234; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. pp. 300, 323); Turpleton (Trippleton SO4173; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no.235); and perhaps also at Kynton (Kinton SO4074; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244).
		At the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, Leintwardine itself was placed in Herefordshire, though the Ancient Parish was divided between Herefordshire and Shropshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
	A CHURCH. A priest has already been mentioned. On the possibility that this was in fact the minster church for the territory of the royal manor of Leintwardine which became its hundred, see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	6 STICKS OF EELS. That is, 150 eels at 25 eels to the stick.
	5 VILLAGERS AND 3 SMALLHOLDERS. Latin uill' and bord' may extend to the accusative uillanos and bordarios and thus be the objects of h[abe]t in the line above, like the slaves. Compare 2,2 villagers note, 4,1,19 villagers note, 4,3,29 villagers note and 4,20,8 ploughmen note.
	2 MEN PAY 4s FOR LEASING THE LAND. The Latin verb locare can mean both 'to let, lease' and 'to take on lease, hire, rent', confusingly referring to both sides of the transaction. It is thus often not clear which is the meaning. However, here the men must be paying 4s as a rent for some land.
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 226 no. 1334.
	WOODLAND. It is not clear whether the woodland details are part of the main holding here and are misplaced, or part of the 1 ½ hides held by the man-at-arms or even of the land rented by the 2 men. Compare 4,21,7 woodland note.
6,12	'STANWAY'. A place, now lost, that lay in Winforton Ancient Parish, the bulk of which was in Herefordshire. It survived to be recorded on the first edition one-inch Ordnance Survey map of 1832 (sheet 55, reprint sheet 50 of 1970). After 1086 it continued in the Mortimer barony, being given as Stanewey and Stanwye in Placita de Quo Warranto, pp. 675, 681, among those manors whose suit had been withdrawn from Shropshire. Stanwey' was confirmed on Wigmore Abbey by Roger of Mortimer in 1249: Banks, 'Charters of the Abbey of Wigmore', p. 187. See also Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 325.
		At the dissolution of the Marcher lordships in 1536, 'Stanway' was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
6,13	ADFORTON. This was a township in Leintwardine Ancient Parish. It continued with the Mortimers, Atfreton being found in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235 p. 160 (of Edmund de Mortuo Mari). See Placita de Quo Warranto, p. 681; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 204; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 332.
		At the dissolution of the Marcher lordships in 1536, Adforton was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}. Since 1866 Adforton has been a separate Civil Parish.
6,14	LINGEN. This was an Ancient Parish. It continued to be held by the Mortimers and to make an occasional appearance at Munslow hundred court in Shropshire. In Book of Fees, p. 963, John de Lingaine holds ½ fee in Lingaine of the barony of Ralph de Mortuo Mari, while Ralph de Lyngeyne holds in Munslow Hundred in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 332. It was, however, effectively drawn into a Marcher lordship and at the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, Lingen was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
		In an early grant (Early Charters of the West Midlands, no. 405 p. 139, see pp. 203-212 = Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, no. 1801) Coenred, King of the Mercians, gave 8 manentes in Lingen (with Liya interlined above) to the nun Feleburg. Feleburg later gave these to Milburga who founded Wenlock Priory (SHR 3c Wenlock note). It is possible that these 8 manentes are represented in Domesday by the 5 hides in the various holdings at Lye (6,16 Lye note), by the 1 ½ hides in Lingen and possibly by the l ½ hides of 'Tumberland' (6,17 'Tumberland' note).
	"TURSTIN" <OF HUNTINGTON>. See 4,11,2 "Turstin" note. His name was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure.
	GUNFRID. Domesday Gunner; on the name, see 4,5,6 Gunfrid note. He is probably the same as Ralph of Mortimer's predecessor Gunuert in HEF 9,1: VCH Herefordshire, i. p. 275 note 73 (but he is not, as that note implies, the same as the Gunuuar who held Brampton Bryan in 6,23, who is Gunnvarth; see 4,3,46 Gunnvarth note). He may also be the same man as the Gunfrid in 4,5,6.
	LATER 6s. The main scribe of Great Domesday corrected an original iii to vi by joining together the first two minims to form a v.
6,15	SHIRLEY. It lay in Aymestrey Ancient Parish. Aymestrey itself was in Herefordshire in 1086. The name appears rarely in later records but is found as Shirlythe held under the Mortimers in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. (old series) p. 239; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 332. It was effectively drawn into a Marcher lordship and at the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, Shirley was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
	"TURSTIN" <OF HUNTINGTON>. See 4,11,2 "Turstin" note.
6,16	LYE. The townships of Upper and Lower Lye lay in Aymestrey Ancient Parish. Aymestrey itself was in Herefordshire in 1086. In Domesday the land at Lye was divided among several tenants and was partly in Shropshire (if correctly identified) and partly in Herefordshire (HEF 1,10c. 9,8;14. 24,4. 31,7). Ralph of Mortimer also held ½ hide in Lecwe in "Hezetre" Hundred, in Herefordshire (HEF 9,8), and 57 acres of land and all the woodland in Gruffydd's manor of Lega (HEF 9,14. 31,7). The Shropshire lands of Ralph came into Marcher jurisdiction and were ultimately put into Herefordshire. The earliness of this change and the lack of records make it difficult to determine the boundary between the two counties at this point. If in 1086 the boundary lay along the River Lugg, then it may have turned northwards along the tributary that separates Lower from Upper Lye, keeping Upper Lye in Shropshire (like Lingen (6,15) which is not far away to the north-west). Ralph certainly held land at Lower Lye, probably the Domesday Herefordshire manor which is Netherlege in Book of Fees, p. 804, and in Feudal Aids, ii. p. 377 (Herefordshire); see the Herefordshire Domesday (Galbraith and Tait, p. 38 and p. 95 note). In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235 (of Edmund of Mortimer) in Herefordshire, both Netherleye and Overleye are held from him by William de Leye and Robert Deverous respectively, but the latter probably represents the manor of Lye held by Gruffydd in Herefordshire in 1086 (HEF 31,7). The exact identity of this Shropshire manor of Ralph thus requires further investigation. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 338; and 6,14 Lingen note. Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 190, suggests Lye in Bucknell (SO337758).
		At the dissolution of the Marcher lordships in 1536, the parts of Lye that had been in Shropshire were placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
		On the possibility that land here was granted by King Coenred of Mercia to the nun Feleburg, see 3c,14 ½ hide note and 6,14 Lingen note.
	1 HIDE. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters after i hida.; see 1,5 hide note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining half a line after the hedged enclosures, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
6,17	'TUMBERLAND'. Domesday Tumbelawe was left unidentified for the Phillimore printed translation (1986), but was assumed to have lain, like the surrounding entries, in that part of Leintwardine Hundred that was later incorporated in Herefordshire. Information from Mr J.W. Tonkin allowed it to be identified for the Alecto edition (1990). It appears to have merged with the manor of Letton in the sixteenth century and to have lain close to Letton Cottages (SO377701), forming part of Upper Letton Farm, where the field name 'Tumberlands' appears on the 1846 tithe map. It will therefore have been in part of the county that was transferred to Herefordshire at the dissolution of the Marcher lordships in 1536. See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 338; Thorn, 'Hundreds and Wapentakes', Shropshire Domesday, p. 31; and 6,14 Lingen note.
		'Tumberland' will have lain in Leintwardine Ancient Parish and subsequently in Walford, Letton and Newton Civil Parish.
		On the possibility that land here was granted by King Coenred of Mercia to the nun Feleburg, see 3c,14 ½ hide note and 6,14 Lingen note.
	ALDRED [* BROTHER OF SIWARD *]. See 4,3,15 Aldred note.
6,18	LETTON. This was part of the township of Walford, Letton and Newton that was a member of Leintwardine Ancient Parish. This township became a separate Civil Parish in 1866.
		After 1086 Letton continued in the Mortimer barony. Lecton' is held with Sete (The Sheet 6,10) in Book of Fees, p. 963, from Ralph de Mortuo Mari; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, (new series) iv. no. 235, (old series) iii. pp. 234, 239; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 334. It was effectively drawn into a Marcher lordship and at the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, it was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
	INGELRANN <OF WALTON>. See 4,11,12 Ingelrann note.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. This man may be Siward son of Aethelgar: 4,27,32 Siward note.
6,19	WALFORD. This lay in Leintwardine Ancient Parish. Of the two estates here, the land of St Mary's of Wigmore (6,19) continued to be held by Wigmore Abbey (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 202), while the other portion (6,20) descended in the Mortimer barony. Nicholas de Hintes holds in Welle ford' in Book of Fees, p. 963, while Roger de Pedewardyn is the tenant in Munslow Hundred in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244.
		Walford was effectively drawn into a Marcher lordship in the Middle Ages and at the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, it was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
	HIDE. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote hida over an erasure; as he had to write quite small in order to fit it in, he may have originally written v' (= virgata) here.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, perhaps for the later insertion of a resource; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
6,20	WALFORD. On the manor, see 6,19 Walford note.
	INGELRANN <OF WALTON>. See 4,11,12 Ingelrann note.
	BLAECMER. The Domesday form Blachemer represents the hypothetical Old English Blæcmær: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 203. Elsewhere JRM preferred the second element -mer for the Old English -mær. The Phillimore printed edition has Blaecmaer; the Alecto edition has Blæcmær (but Blær in the Penguin translation, in error). This is the only occurrence of this name in Domesday Book.
6,21	BUCKTON. Buckton was a township of Bucknell Ancient Parish but since 1866 has been in Buckton and Coxall Civil Parish in Herefordshire. Buckton and Coxall also originated as a township of Bucknell Ancient Parish. The manor was later held under Mortimer by the de Brompton family: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 291, iv. no. 247 (of Brian de Brompton), and iv. no. 235 (of Edmund de Mortuo Mari). See also Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 331; and 6,24 Pedwardine note.
		After 1086 Buckton was effectively drawn into a Marcher lordship and at the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, it was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
	OIDELARD [* THE STEWARD *]. The Domesday forms of this 1086 tenant are Oilard[us] in Huntingdonshire, Oidelard[us] in other counties, and are accepted by Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England, p. 195, as representing Old German Odalhard, Odel(h)ard, Odilard etc. with loss of the dental in the Huntingdonshire form. However, an Old French form, not given by him, is more likely; the Domesday forms suggest it was Oidelard, with characteristic Old French differentiation of the initial long vowel. In the Phillimore printed edition the forms Odelard and Odilard appear and these have now been standardized as Oidelard. The Alecto edition has Oilard for the Huntingdonshire tenants and Oidelard for the rest.
		Oidelard was a tenant of Ralph of Mortimer in Shropshire and elsewhere, including Downton-on-the-Rock in Herefordshire (HEF 9,2). He was perhaps his steward: Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 312.
	5 HIDES. [***].The main scribe of Great Domesday left a gap suitable for about four letters after v hide.; see 1,5 hide note.
6,22	[LLANFAIR] WATERDINE. This was a township of Clun Ancient Parish, then, from 1866, a separate Civil Parish. The place-name form (Watredene) and the hundred (Leintwardine) identify this place, but no early medieval reference to the manor has been found; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 339. It may have been absorbed by the barony of Clun; certainly the church (the Llanfair or Mary Church) was subject to St George's Church of Clun, then to Wenlock Abbey; see Place-Names of Shropshire, i. p. 178; 4,20 Picot note; 4,20,27 Selley note.
6,23	BRAMPTON [BRYAN]. This was an Ancient Parish. From Richard the subtenancy passed to a family named from the place. Brian de Bromton' holds 1 fee in Bromton' in Book of Fees, p. 963, of the barony of Ralph de Mortuo Mari, while it is Brianes Brompton in Munslow Hundred in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. nos. 291, 395, v. no. 130; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 327; and 4,20,18 Leintwardine note.
		After 1086 Brampton Bryan was effectively drawn into a Marcher lordship and at the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, it was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. The several occurrences of a Richard holding under Ralph of Mortimer (4,11,3;14. 6,5-6;9;23-26) may refer to the same individual. His holding here went to the de Brampton family (6,23 Brampton note), of which he might be an ancestor; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 240; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 368 (though she calls him a tenant of Roger de Mortemer, not Ralph).
	GUNNVARTH. On this name, see 4,3,46 Gunnvarth note.
6,24	PEDWARDINE. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Brampton Bryan which was placed in Herefordshire in 1536 at the dissolution of the Marcher lordships: 6,23 Brampton note. From Richard, the 1086 subtenant, this estate and the next two estates in Pedwardine (6,24-26) went to Brian de Brompton and was held under his family by a family named from Pedwardine. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246, Roger de Pedewardyn holds Pedewardyn from Robert de Harleye in Munslow Hundred. It had formerly been held from Brian de Bromton. It is coupled with Meton (Meaton; see 6,9 Kinlet note) in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235. See Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 395, vii. no. 387; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 329. There were once separate villages here: places called Parva Pedewardin and Magna Pedewardin are found in Placita de Quo Warranto, p. 675a.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. On his being the same man as others of the same name holding under Ralph of Mortimer, see 6,23 Richard note.
6,25	PEDWARDINE. See 6,24 Pedwardine note.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. On his being the same man as others of the same name holding under Ralph of Mortimer, see 6,23 Richard note.
6,26	PEDWARDINE. See 6,24 Pedwardine note.
	RICHARD <OF BRAMPTON>. On his being the same man as others of the same name holding under Ralph of Mortimer, see 6,23 Richard note.
	ARNGRIM <OF WOMERTON>. See 4,5,3 Arngrim note.
6,27	ADLEY. The two estates here (see also 6,28) are respectively Domesday Adelestune and Edelactune. The place is now represented by Adley Moor and Adleymoor Common in Buckton and Coxall Civil Parish, Herefordshire. Buckton and Coxall originated as a township of Bucknell Ancient Parish. The second entry (6,28) is a late insertion in the Mortimer schedule added after 6,32 which is itself an addition; see 6,28 entry note and 6,32 entry note. Both entries appear to refer to a part of Adley (for another portion, see 4,20,26 Adley note). Adley was in Purslow Hundred in the Middle Ages. The Domesday forms appear difficult to reconcile (see VCH Shropshire, i. p. 346 note 132), but later examples show that this is not so. Adley subsequently became associated with Bucknell (6,29): in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235 (of Edmund de Mortuo Mari) 1 knight's fee is held in Bokenhull and Adelahton by Gilbert de Bockenhull and the Abbot of Wigmore. This holding by the Abbot of Wigmore may well be the unnamed land 'to the value of 20s' bought before 1185 by Hugh of Mortimer from Herbert de Castello of Castle Holdgate (descendant of Helgot; see 4,21 Helgot note) and given to Wigmore Abbey. Certainly Wigmore Abbey had an estate in Adelacton in 1256 (Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 313): it is possibly the same estate that is called Colkeshale (Coxall SO3774) in Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165a, which was confirmed as Adlacton' on the abbey; see Banks, 'Charters of the Abbey of Wigmore', p. 143; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 202 (Adlaghton). The Mortimers continued to hold other parts of Adley called Adelacton or Adelatton in 1292: Placita de Quo Warranto, pp. 675a, 681b.
		After 1086 Adley was effectively drawn into a Marcher lordship and at the dissolution of these lordships in 1536, it was placed in Herefordshire: {Introduction: County Boundary}.
	HELGOT <OF HOLDGATE>. See 4,11,1 Helgot note.
	RAVENSWARD. In the manuscript Rauenesuard; Farley misprinted Reuenesuard. See 7,1 Saeward note and LIN C3 Burgwald note for other cases of Farley misprinting e for manuscript a as the second letter of a personal name.
6,28	THIS UNRUBRICATED ENTRY was a late addition by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the space he had left at the end of this fief and after the added entry for Sheinton (6,32). It was written in pale ink and at the same time as all the unrubricated added entries in Shropshire and as some in other circuits; see 3c,14 entry note. It was directed by transposition signs (not shown by Farley) to its proper place after another holding in Adley earlier in the column; it therefore did not need a hundred head. The scribe was careful to use different designs for the two pairs of transposition signs so that the two added entries here (6,28;32) were directed to their correct positions in chapter 6.
	ADLEY. See 6,27 Adley note.
6,29	BUCKNELL. This was an Ancient Parish. The parish was formerly divided between Herefordshire (the township of Buckton and Coxall) and Shropshire. Since the transfer of that township to Herefordshire (where it became a separate Civil Parish) in 1894, Bucknell has been entirely in Shropshire. The advowson of the church went to Wigmore Abbey (Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 167a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 205) while the manor descended in the Mortimer fief. In Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. p. 235 (of Edmund de Mortuo Mari), one knight's fee is held by Gilbert de Bokenhull in Bokenhull and Adelahton (Adley: 6,27 Adley note). See Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 318; and 4,20,26 Adley note.
	HELGOT <OF HOLDGATE>. See 4,11,1 Helgot note.
	2 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about four letters has been left after hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
6,30	PULLEY. Because Ralph of Mortimer held Meole Brace (6,33) it is likely that this part of Pulley, which lay in Condover Hundred like the other (4,27,6), is the portion that was taken into the Ancient Parish of Meole Brace and so later into the Liberty of Shrewsbury. It lost its separate identity and became a member of Meole Brace: Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. pp. 206, 212 on. Pulley was otherwise in the Ancient Parish of Shrewsbury St Julian.
	1 HIDE … 5 PLOUGHS. The main scribe of Great Domesday wrote almost all of the second line of this entry (up to sunt before the 3 riders) over an erasure; perhaps as a result it is in darker ink.
[* QUEEN *] EDITH. See 6,2 Edith note. On the name Edith, see C13 Edith note.
	7 PLOUGHS. The main scribe of Great Domesday originally wrote iiii with or (for quattuor) interlined; he then corrected it by turning the first two minims into a v in darker ink, but he failed to erase the or. This makes the ploughs actually on the land exceed the estimate by two, the only instance of this in Shropshire (but see 4,19,13 ploughs note and 7,4 servants note).
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank a quarter of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
6,31	EDGEBOLD. Domesday Edbaldinesham. This lay in the Ancient Parish of Great Hanwood. It was in Condover Hundred in 1086, but seems soon to have become a member of Meole Brace (6,33) and so been taken into the Liberty of Shrewsbury: in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17 (of George de Cantilupo), Melesbracy receives rent from the lord of Egbaldenham; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 214.
		The Domesday estate is represented by Upper Edgebold (SJ4511), Lower Edgebold (SJ4510) and Mount Edgebold (SJ4510).
	[* QUEEN *] EDITH. See 6,2 Edith note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 350. On the name Edith, see C13 Edith note.
	1 FREE MAN WHO PAYS 8s IN REVENUE. In view of the lack of a 1086 value for this manor, it is likely that it was being held for a money rent by the free man; on the system of 'farming', see 3d,5 revenue note.
6,32	THIS UNRUBRICATED ENTRY was a late addition by the main scribe of Great Domesday in the space left by him at the end of this fief. It was done in the same campaign as all the unrubricated added entries in Shropshire and as some in other circuits; see 3c,14 entry note. It was directed by transposition signs to its correct place with other holdings in Condover Hundred earlier in the column; it did not therefore need a hundred head. See 6,28 entry note. Farley printed the transposition signs as crosses with dots in each corner, not as they appear in the manuscript. This entry is a shorter version of an entry already recorded at 4,11,1 where Ralph of Mortimer is said to be a subtenant of Earl Roger in Sheinton; in both Helgot holds from Ralph. There are several occurrences in Domesday Book of an entry appearing twice, not always because one is an addition, where an estate was held by a tenant-in-chief in one but by the same man as the subtenant in the other entry. For other duplicate added entries in Shropshire, see 4,1,34 and 4,12,1 and, perhaps, 7,2. The differences between 4,11,1 and this entry might suggest different sources.
	SHEINTON. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Condover Hundred in 1086. This entry is a duplicate of that at 4,11,1 (see 4,11,1 Sheinton note), though the details are slightly less full.
	HELGOT <OF HOLDGATE>. See 4,11,1 Helgot note. For the descent of part of Sheinton to the lords of Castle Holdgate, see 4,11,1 Sheinton note.
	AZUR. On this name, see 4,1,35 Azur note.
	SAEWULF <OF SHEINTON>. See 4,11,1 Saewulf note. On the loss of the f in Saul here (he appears as Saulf in the duplicate at 4,11,1), see von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, § 94.
	WOODLAND, 100 PIGS. That is, woodland sufficient for fattening 100 pigs, as can be
	seen in the duplicate at 4,11,1.
6,33	THIS ENTRY may also have been added at the end of chapter 6. Although the ink is not quite as pale as the succeeding added entries (see 6,28 entry note and 6,32 entry note), it is still paler than that in 6,31 and the writing is slightly smaller. MELAM is not rubricated, though the I of Isd' and the hundred head are, probably an oversight; for other failures in rubrication, see 4,3,8 St Peter note.
	MEOLE [BRACE]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Shrewsbury Hundred in 1086, later in Shrewsbury Liberty and probably absorbed the adjacent Mortimer vills of Pulley and Edgebold as well. William de Cantelupo holds 1 fee in Meeles in Book of Fees, p. 963, of the barony of Ralph de Mortuomari, while in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 240 (in Shrewsbury Liberty), William de la Souche de Harygworthe and Robert Bracy de Meole hold Meole Bracy; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 17, vi. no. 235, x. no. 42. One virgate of the manor was held by St Mary's of Shrewsbury in 1086 (3d,3) and the 3 hides of the manor are counted in the 100 hides of Shrewsbury in C13. The church went to the Abbey of Wigmore: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 165a, 167a; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 203. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 350.
	[* QUEEN *] EDITH. See 6,2 Edith note; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vi. p. 350. On the name Edith, see C13 Edith note.
	BURGESSES IN THE CITY. That is, in Shrewsbury.
7	LAND OF ROGER OF LACY. He was son and heir of Walter of Lacy (died 1085) and his wife Ermelina (Emma). They originated from Lassy, in the French département of Calvados (arrondissement Vire, canton Condé-sur-Noireau). Roger's brother, Hugh of Lacy, and his nephew, Ilbert of Lacy, were both Domesday tenants-in-chief. Roger himself was a tenant-in-chief and also held lands under Earl Roger (SHR 4,8). Both groups became part of the Lacy barony whose caput was Weobley in Herefordshire and whose chief Shropshire manor was Stanton Lacy (SHR 7,4). As a supporter of Robert Curthose against William II, he rebelled in 1088 and in 1094, lost his English lands and was banished. He returned to Normandy where he served Robert until his fall in 1106. His forfeited lands passed to his brother, Hugh, then to Roger's son, Gilbert of Lacy, descending in the Lacy family until the death of another Walter of Lacy in 1241.
		None of the estates in this chapter nor those in SHR 5-6, 8-9 lay north of Shrewsbury and with only a few exceptions all are found in the southernmost hundreds of Leintwardine, "Culvestan", 'Overs' and 'Conditre': SHR 5 Osbern note. Roger's manors were held T.R.E. either by a Siward or an Aldred, assuming that Saeward in 7,1 is an error for Siward. There were a Siward and an Aldred who were brothers and sons of Aethelgar. They were related to Edric Streona, King Edward and Edric the wild (4,1,14 Edric note and 4,27,32 Siward note). It is possible that these are the individuals whose lands Roger acquired. However, the description of Siward and Aldred as 'free men' may count against this, as Siward son of Aethelgar was described in HEF 1,41 as a relative of King Edward, and it would be normal to describe an important Siward simply as 'Siward' unless the main scribe of Great Domesday was ignorant of his status.
	The hundredal order of this chapter is as follows:
		7,1 ["Alnodestreu"] Hundred
		(7,2 ['Overs'] Hundred)
		7,3 'Conditre' Hundred
		7,4-6 "Culvestan" Hundred.
	At 7,1 Domesday has an erroneous Baschurch hundred head. The entry for Earls Ditton (7,2) is very probably a duplicate of 6,4; see 7,2 entry note.
7,1	IN BASCHURCH HUNDRED. [* IN "ALNODESTREU" HUNDRED *]. The Baschurch hundred head is probably an error for "Alnodestreu" (as in 4,9,1 and 4,11,5), there being no clear reason why Cleobury North should have been a detachment of a northern hundred. Moreover, it is only in the southernmost hundreds of Shropshire that lay tenants hold directly from the king (SHR 7 Roger note); elsewhere they hold under Earl Roger. "Alnodestreu" is probably the correct hundred. The cause of these errors is very probably that the main scribe of Great Domesday mechanically inserted the name of the next hundred in the standard sequence, even though the fief-holder had no estates there: {Introduction: Hundreds}.
	ROGER OF LACY HOLDS ... FROM THE KING. ROGERIUS De Laci ten' de rege was written by the main scribe of Great Domesday over an erasure. He probably wrote the wrong tenant-in-chief here, presumably one occupying less space as he had to write the R of ROGERIUS in the outer margin because of lack of space.
	CLEOBURY [NORTH]. This was an Ancient Parish. It probably lay in "Alnodestreu" Hundred in 1086, and was later in Stottesdon Hundred. Uferecleobyrig (Over Cleobury), like Hopton Wafers (7,3), had been held by Worcester Church but was removed from it by Earl Swein (Hemming's Cartulary: Hearne, Hemingi Chartularium, p. 276: folio 129r). Swein was Swein Godwinson, Earl of the West Midlands 1043-1051. It is possible that this was a former comital estate: Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 93.
		The Lacy interest in the manor did not continue after 1086; instead it passed to Bernard de Neufmarché (founder of Brecon Priory) and to the honour of Brecknock. In Feudal Aids, iv. p. 218 (Stottesdon Hundred) Robert de Halston holds Cleyburi North from Roger de Mortuo Mari, honour of Brecknock, and Roger holds from the Earl of Hereford. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81b, Northcleyburi, 2 hides, is held in two portions, one of the holders being Robert Wafre who named Hopton Wafers (7,3). The King of Almain (4,21 Helgot note) also held part of the manor for a time (Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 108a) and gave it to the Templars who withdrew suit to Castle Holdgate; see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 231; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, i. no. 446, ii. nos. 473, 474, 808, iii. no. 629, iv. no. 198; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 21. The church was given to Brecon Priory: Monasticon Anglicanum, iii. p. 264 no. ii.
	SAEWARD [* SIWARD THE FAT *]. In the manuscript Sauuard'; Farley misprinted Seuuard'; compare 6,27 Ravensward note. However, Sauuard' may be a scribal error for Siuuard' as a 'Siward' was Roger's predecessor in three out of the six manors he held in this chapter; on his being the son of Aetgelgar, see SHR 7 Roger note. Compare 4,3,3 Saeward note and 5,2 Saeward note. See SHR 7 Roger note. The Alecto edition has Siward.
		On his possible identification as Siward the fat, see 4,27,32 Siward note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the remaining three-quarters of a line after the mill detail, perhaps for the later insertion of the woodland or other resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
7,2	THIS UNRUBRICATED ENTRY was a late addition by the main scribe of Great Domesday, written in the foot margin and slightly into the outer margin; it interrupts the account of Roger of Lacy's manor of Stanton Lacy (7,4). It was written in pale ink in the same campaign as all the unrubricated added entries in Shropshire and as some in other circuits; see 3c,14 entry note. There are no transposition signs, but the assumption has long been that it belongs with 7,1 Cleobury North. VCH Shropshire, i. p. 347 (following Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iii. p. 23), tentatively identified Dodentone as part of Ditton Priors, which is the nearest Dodentone to Cleobury North, called 'Priors' from the main holding there (4,1,26) which went to Wenlock Priory. However, the coincidence of two places called 'Cleobury' (Cleobury Mortimer in 6,2 and Cleobury North in 7,1) both having 1-hide holdings in places called Dodentone attached to them was noted as strange in the Phillimore printed edition. A confusion in the text was also suggested there, though the identification of Dodentone in 7,2 was kept as Ditton Priors, albeit questioned, and 'Cleobury' as Cleobury North. However, since the publication of that edition in 1986 our work on the corrections and additions made to Great Domesday Book now suggests strongly that this entry is a duplicate of the one at 6,2, as are so many other added entries, especially those written at a late stage after rubrication of the county had taken place (see 4,1,34 entry note). It would seem likely that during a check the main scribe of Great Domesday found an entry for Dodentone linked to Claiberie, perhaps with the tenant abbreviated to R.. If he had looked through what he had written he might have seen the entry for Cleberie in Roger of Lacy's fief (7,1) with no mention of Dodentone in it, so he added it below in the nearest space. He may have failed to see Ralph of Mortimer's holding in Claiberie (6,2) or, more probably, did not find the detail on Dodentone which was tucked away at the end of the next entry (6,3) as 6,4. However, in view of the number of added entries that are duplicates, he may not have checked what he had already written. His omission of the 'Overs' hundred head (which was in the entry at 6,4) may suggest a different source for this added entry and may have contributed to his error in duplication. We do not accept the suggestion by Lewis ('Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, p. 8) that this addition corrected the detail in 6,4 and he errs in thinking that the duplicate entry had not been noticed before, as this point was mentioned in the Phillimore printed edition note to 7,2.
		The Penguin Alecto edition prints this entry in the middle of the entry for Stanton Long; see 4,14,28 entry note.
	[IN 'OVERS' HUNDRED]. This heading is supplied from the one at 6,4 on the ground that the present entry for Dodentone is a duplicate of that one: 7,2 entry note.
	[EARLS] DITTON?. For the suggested identification of this Dodentone with Earls Ditton, rather than with Ditton Priors, suggested in the Phillimore printed edition, see 7,2 entry note. It was identified as ?Earlsditton in the Alecto edition; see Thorn, 'Hundreds and Wapentakes', Shropshire Domesday, p. 31 note 3. Earls Ditton lay in the Ancient Parish of Cleobury Mortimer.
	CLEOBURY [NORTH?]. The main scribe of Great Domesday implied by his positioning of this added entry that this Claiberie was Cleobury North (7,1), but if, as suggested here (7,2 entry note), this is a duplicate entry for material already included in 6,4, then it is Cleobury Mortimer (6,1). The Alecto edition has Cleobury ?North; see Thorn, 'Hundreds and Wapentakes', Shropshire Domesday, p. 31 note 3.
	IT IS. For est ('is') the main scribe of Great Domesday interlined the abbreviation mark resembling the division sign; he used this abbreviation sign occasionally elsewhere in Great Domesday in place of ē.
7,3	HOPTON [WAFERS]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in 'Conditre' Hundred in 1086, and was later in Stottesdon Hundred. Like Cleobury North (7,1) it was claimed as Worcester Church land (Hemming's Cartulary; Hearne, Hemingi Chartularium, p. 276: folio 129r,) that had been alienated by Earl Swein. Swein was Swein Godwinson, Earl of the West Midlands 1043-1051. It is possible that this was a former comital estate: Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, p. 93.
		Also like Cleobury North, it descended to the honour of Brecknock: in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 81a, Robert le Wafre holds hides in Hopton from the Earl of Hereford of the honour of Brecknock. It is Hopton Waffre in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 217, and Upton Wafre in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 231; see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv. p. 183. The church went to Brecon Priory: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 165b.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. On this Siward being the son of Aethelgar, see SHR 7 Roger note.
7,4	STANTON [LACY]. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, then in Munslow Hundred, although the Lacys claimed it as a Liberty and it is surveyed in the Rotuli Hundredorum as a single complex manor, not attached to any hundred. It continued in the Lacy fief as their principal Shropshire manor: in the late thirteenth century it was held by Geoffrey de Geneville (married to Maud de Lacy) and then by their heirs. In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 106b, Geoffrey de Gemull' holds Stanton' in chief by barony from the king. It is Stanton Lacy in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 43, and Stanton juxta Lodelawe in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 72b, 80b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 344, x. nos. 307, 640. The 20-hide manor had a number of members. Among them were:
		Dounton (Downton SO5279) held in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224, by Gilbert de Lacy from Peter de Genevill;
		Hopton (Hopton Cangeford SO5480) held in Book of Fees, pp. 964, 972, of the barony of Walter de Lasey by Nicholas de Hopton'. Roger de Hopton holds Hopton from Peter de Genevill in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224, and Theobald de Verdon is overlord of Hopton Kandivant in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 54; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, v. no. 611, vii. no. 710, x. no. 637; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 245;
		Heyton' (Upper and Lower Hayton, SO5181, SO5080), two villages, held from the barony of Walter de Lasey in Book of Fees, pp. 964, 973, called Heyton Inferior and Heyton Superior in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224, Neothere Heyton and Overheyton in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, viii. no. 111, vi, no. 54, vii, no. 710; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 230; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 245;
		Pole (Pools farm SO4879) held by John Piron of Walter de Lasey's barony in Book of Fees, pp. 964, 972; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 225, 245; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b;
		Wigeleg' (Wigley SO5276), 2 virgates, held by Robert Dovile in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b; see Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. no. 54, vii. no. 710;
		Wodeton' (Wootton SO4578) held by Thomas de Grete from Peter de Genevill in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 224; see Book of Fees, pp. 963, 972; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 245; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iii. no. 194;
		Akes (Rock? SO5275, so Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 25), 1 virgate, held by Roger de Stanton from Margery de Lacy and 8 virgates held by gift of Walter of Lacy in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 69b;
		possibly Coldeweston (Cold Weston SO5583) held by Philip de Baggesore of Lawrence de Lodelowe in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 808.
		It is likely that the origin of the town of Ludlow (SO5174) is to be found in this Lacy holding. The Lacys had their castle there and a continuing interest in the town; see Book of Fees, p. 148; Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. pp. 68b-69b, 98b-100a; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 228; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, ii. no. 78, iii. no. 43, v. no. 187, vi. no. 54, vii. no. 710, viii. no. 469, ix. nos. 379, 642, x. no. 307; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 234. Eyton was, however, misled by identifying the Lude of HEF 24,11 with Ludlow; it is Lyde. On the castle, dated c. 1090, see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 426.
		The church of Stantone Lacy was held in 1291 by the prior of Llanthony Prima: Taxatio Ecclesiastica, p. 166b.
		On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. pp. 4-26.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. On this Siward being the son of Aethelgar, see SHR 7 Roger note.
	A CHURCH. With its 1½ hides of land and its two priests, this was clearly a 'superior' church; see {Introduction: Ecclesiastical Organization}.
	ST PETER'S OF HEREFORD. A college of secular canons (who are mentioned in Domesday) founded before 1084 by Walter of Lacy, father of the Domesday holder, Roger of Lacy. Walter of Lacy granted to it (the services of) 1 villager from each of 10 of his estates in Shropshire, Herefordshire and Gloucestershire, including Stanton and Stokesay (SHR 7,4-5). The college was granted by Hugh of Lacy (Walter’s son to whom Roger's estates passed on his forfeiture) to Gloucester Abbey in 1101, as a dependent priory. It was amalgamated with St Guthlac’s church in 1143. See Monasticon Anglicanum, i. p. 547 no. xiii; Gloucester History (Hart, i. pp. 85, 123); Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, pp. 54, 67.
	RICHARD [* OF STANTON *]. He may be the Richard de stantuna, one of Roger 's men, who was a witness to the grant by Bishop Robert of Hereford to Roger of Lacy of land in Onibury (2,2) and in Holme Lacy (HEF 2,12): Galbraith, 'An Episcopal Land-Grant of 1085', p. 360. See 2,2 Lacy note.
	ASCELIN. The Domesday forms of this name - Azelin(us) and (once) Aselinus - represent Old German Azelin, Old French Ascelin: Forssner, Continental-Germanic Personal Names in England, pp. 38-39. The Old French form seems more likely, despite the predominance of -z- in the Domesday forms. In the Phillimore printed translations both Ascelin and Azelin occur, but here they have been standardized as Ascelin. The Alecto edition has Azelin.
		Despite Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 159, this tenant of Roger of Lacy is unlikely to be the same person as the tenant of Earl Roger in Staffordshire; see STS 8,14 Ascelin note.
	2 HALF-VILLAGERS ... A HALF-VILLAGER. On the two meanings of dimidius uillanus, see 2,2 half note. It is possible that as Roger of Lacy was subtenant in Onibury (2,2) and tenant-in-chief here and as the two manors were fairly close and these half-villagers were in sub-holdings of them which were perhaps even closer together, the other 'halves' of these villagers were three of the six half-villagers recorded in 2,2; in other words, that these half-villagers owed services in both holdings, rather than that they held only half the normal holding of a villager here.
		There may be another link between this entry and 2,2: the unusual (for Shropshire) reference to Cottagers (the only other Cottager being in 7,6, another Lacy land). However, it is possible that the person making the Lacy return for these three manors called a cozet what someone else might have called a bordarius or cotarius; see 2,2 Cottager note.
	4 SERVANTS ... OF LAND. This is a confused statement. It may mean that the servants had 1 furlong ('ferling', see next note) and 10 acres of the manor of Stanton Lacy and that the estimate is for 3 ploughs (though in fact they have 4 ploughs actually working): so VCH Shropshire, i. p. 282 note 16. Or it is possible that the 'land for 3 ploughs' means the same as '3 carucates of land': in Exon and the corresponding Great Domesday entries for the south-west counties the phrases were often interchangeable (DEV 1,2 carucates note). This view is lent support both by the word order, by the fact that 4 ploughs seem too many to work the small area represented by 1 furlong and 10 acres, and by the fact that 'land for 2 ½ ploughs' in the next sentence must mean '2 ½ carucates'. However, a mixture of the two forms of measurement, carucates and hides (or their fractions), is unusual. See 4,1,15 ploughs note.
	FURLONG. Domesday ferling is from Old English feorthling, feorthing ('a fourth', 'a quarter'). In HUN B1;7;9-12 the ferling is a quarter in the sense of 'a ward or precinct' in a town; in KEN 5,188 a mill in Dover pays 48 measures (ferlingels) of corn; elsewhere in Domesday the word is used as a term of measurement of extent, that is a quarter of a virgate. 'Ferling' appears in the Oxford English Dictionary (though now only in historical use and with a reference to farthing) and the Domesday Geography of South-West England uses the words ferlings, ferdings and fertings, but John Morris decided to translate it as 'furlong' (like the furlong or 'furrow-length', Domesday quarentena, a twelfth of a league, which was used to measure woodland, pasture etc.). The 'ferling' appears regularly in both Exon and Great Domesday for Devon, Somerset and Cornwall in the record of tax assessment of the manor and of the lordship and villagers' holding there; it is used here as a fiscal measurement, like the acres (see 7,4 acres note).
	10 ACRES OF LAND. For the only other reference to the geld-acre in Domesday Shropshire, see 4,17,2 and 4,17,2 acres note. VCH Shropshire, i. p. 283 note 17, disagrees, believing this to be a 'field acre', but the acre was also combined with the 'ferling' (7,4 furlong note) in the assessment of tax in Domesday Devon (DEV 6,6 furlongs note). If one assumes that the 10 acres here were less than a 'ferling', then there would be more than 120 acres to a hide (in a 120-acre hide 7 ½ acres form a 'ferling'), but the existence of the 10 acres was originally briefly overlooked and the scribe may have been unwilling to alter the un' ferling to ii ferlings (and put 2 ½ acres). It is also possible that the 10 acres formed a separate holding of one or more of the servants and this was the reason why the scribe at first omitted it. The addition of 7 x. ac's t'rę was an early one because there is no change in ink colour; the transposition signs are as in the translation, not as Farley printed them.
	3 RIDING MEN. Domesday radchen[istres] are probably identical to radmans ('riders': 2,1 riders note). This is the only occurrence of the term radchenistre in Domesday Shropshire, though it is common further to the south in Herefordshire, Gloucestershire and Worcestershire.
	AUTI <OF LEEBOTWOOD>. See 4,5,3 Auti note.
7,5	STOKESAY. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred and in the Lacy Liberty of Stanton Lacy. Roger held another 'Stoke' ('North Stoke' or Stoke-on-Tern) under Earl Roger: 4,8,7 Stoke note. Stokesay continued in the Lacy barony with the de Say family as undertenants for a period. It seems probable that Roger of Lacy enfeoffed his tenant William of Sai (4,8,1-2; see 4,8,1 William note) here some time after 1086. In the Book of Fees, pp. 964, 973, Walter de Say holds three fees of the barony of Walter de Lasey in Nortstok' (Stoke-on-Tern: 4,8,7), Sotstok' and Wethul (Wheathill: 4,8,16). In Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, John de Verdun holds 5 hides in Stok' Say, Wetlinton (Whettleton SO4482) and Neuton (Newton SO4482) from the heirs of Walter of Lascy, while Laurence de Lodelowe holds Stoke Say from John de Grey who holds from Theobald de Verdon in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 223; see Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 80b; Feudal Aids, iv. p. 244; Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, vi. nos. 52, 54, vii. no. 710, x. nos. 115, 637; and 7,4 St Peter's note. The church of Stokesay was given to Haughmond Abbey and some land at Newton juxta Stoke Say, Stokesey and Weltylton; see Taxatio Ecclesiastica, pp. 163b, 166b; Valor Ecclesiasticus, iii. p. 192; the Haughmond Cartulary (Rees, nos. 238, 821-30, 1154-55, 1168, 1284-86); Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 113-14 no. xiv. On the whole manor, see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 29.
		A castle had been established here by the thirteenth century; see King, Castellarium Anglicanum, ii. p. 430.
	ALDRED [* BROTHER OF SIWARD *]. See SHR 7 Roger note.
	VILLAGERS ... COTTAGERS. [***]. It is unclear from the Latin whether the erant in the previous line also governs the villagers and cottagers. After them the main scribe of Great Domesday left the rest of the line blank (space for about a dozen letters), possibly for further details of the population.
	MILL WHICH PAYS. Or possibly 'which paid' if all the details of this manor refer to the past, like the lordship ploughs. Although redd' (like geld'; see 3c,2 paid tax note) can be extended to the past reddebat, as well as to the present reddit, one would nave expected a phrase such as T.R.E. in this instance as the details usually refer to the present.
	MILLER … BEEKEEPER. Millers and beekeepers are specified rarely in Domesday for some reason; though they obviously existed in considerable numbers, they were probably counted in with the villagers. This is another example, like the Cottagers in 7,4;6, of the apparent striving for exactness of the author of the Lacy return (the Herefordshire fief of Roger of Lacy shows the same degree of precision). It seems less likely that it was the main scribe of Great Domesday himself who identified the craftsmen (so Gwynne, 'Social Classes in the Welsh Border Region', p. 100), because of the number of such inhabitants specified in the Lacy holding when compared with other fiefs in Shropshire. Lewis ('Introduction', Shropshire Domesday, pp. 8-9) used our argument to support his view that Roger of Lacy's agents made the returns for lands that Roger held, whether as tenant-in-chief or as the subtenant of Earl Roger or of the Bishop of Hereford, but that where Roger had a subtenant, that person mde the return.
7,6	ALDON. This place was in Stokesay Ancient Parish. It lay in "Culvestan" Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow Hundred. In Book of Fees, p. 964, Roger le Poer and others hold half a fee in Euledon' of the barony of Walter de Lasey, while in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 70a, five men hold 2 ½ hides in Guledon' Inferior and Superior and in Weho (View Edge and Weo, SO4280, SO4180; see 4,3,46 Clungunford note) of the heirs of Walter of Lacy; see Feudal Aids, iv. pp. 223, 245; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, v. p. 26.
	SIWARD [* THE FAT *]. On this Siward being the son of Aethelgar, see SHR 7 Roger note.
	15 PLOUGHS. [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday corrected xv from xii, the two minims being joined to form a v which is taller than usual to emphasize the correction. It is not clear why he left the rest of the line blank after the plough estimate; compare 4,20,18 land note, 4,26,3 land note and 3f,2 church note.
	RICHARD [* OF STANTON *]. See 7,4 Richard note.
	ALDRED [* BROTHER OF SIWARD *]. See 4,3,15 Aldred note.
	VALUE … 105s. The main scribe of Great Domesday interlined 7 v above c.
8	LAND OF HUGH THE ASS. The manuscript has lasne (not Lasne, as Farley printed); the initial letters of bynames are often written in lower-case letters. It means 'the donkey'. 'the ass', from Old French asne (Modern French âne) with the French definite article. The Latin form asinus also occurs in Domesday (for example in WOR 27,1); see Tengvik, Old English Bynames, p. 359. The significance of the appellation is unclear.
		Hugh probably came to England with William son of Osbern and served under him, defending the English border against the Welsh. The bulk of his fief lay in Herefordshire. His Shropshire and Herefordshire border lands passed to the Mortimers of Wigmore, but his estates that did not lie on the Welsh March became the honour of Snodhill (Herefordshire) which was held from the early twelfth century by the Candos family; see Sanders, English Baronies, p. 79; Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, p. 270.
		None of the estates in this chapter nor those in SHR 5-7, 9 lay north of Shrewsbury and with only a few exceptions all are found in the southernmost hundreds of Leintwardine, "Culvestan", 'Overs' and 'Conditre': SHR 5 Osbern note.
8,1	KNIGHTON. Knighton and the next entry Norton were places which were in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086. They were both Ancient Parishes and were effectively drawn into a Marcher lordship after 1086 and at the dissolution of these lordships in 1536 they were placed in Radnorshire until the 1974 reorganization of counties after which they were in Powys.
		After 1086 both escheated to the Crown and in the Red Book of the Exchequer (Hall, ii p. 509), Kintone and Nortone are described as an escheat of Roger de Chandos, then held by Thomas de Erdintone. They went to the Mortimers and were gradually taken from the county of Shropshire and into their Marcher lordship. Kyngton and Norton are in Munslow Hundred in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 246 (of 1346), held pending the coming-of-age of Roger de Mortuo Mari, but they are 'in Welshry' in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem, iv. no. 235 (of 1304), and in the Marches of Wales in x. no. 640 (of 1361). See Book of Fees, p. 963; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 346.
		In the manuscript the form is CHENISTETVNE; in the Ordnance Survey facsimile the V appears joined at the top and resembles an O, as it also does in the Alecto facsimile; see 3c,7 Perkley note.
	LEOFFLED. She was the predecessor of Hugh the ass in several of his Herefordshire lands, as she was of some of Nigel the doctor's lands in that county.
		The Domesday forms of this name - Leflet, Leofleda, Lefflet, Lefled - represent Old English Leofflæd: von Feilitzen, Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book, p. 311. JRM preferred the second element -fled for the Old English -flæd as it reflected the Domesday forms. The Phillimore printed edition has Leofled; the Alecto edition has Leofflæd.
	5 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left a space suitable for about five letters after v hidę; see 1,5 hide note.
	A LARGE WOOD. Latin magna is only used of a wood four times in Domesday (here and in HEF 14,7. 25,9. 29,16): normally the extent of woodland was given or its productivity described in terms of pigs (1,7 woodland note) as woodland was an assessable resource. Presumably no information was available for the woodland other than its relative size: HEF 29,16 has 'a large wood there, but its size has not been stated'; compare 4,1,4 wood note.
8,2	NORTON. For the history of the manor, see 8,1 Knighton note.
	5 HIDES [***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank the rest of the line after v hidę which has no dot after it; see 1,5 hide note.
	AND IS. The main scribe of Great Domesday initially omitted the 7 ē and had to squeeze it in between fuit and Ibi.
	A LARGE WOOD. See 8,1 wood note.
9	LAND OF NIGEL THE DOCTOR. He is possibly the same man as the plain Nigel who held under Earl Roger. On the difficulty of identifying him, see SHR 4,24 Nigel note.
		None of the estates in this chapter nor those in SHR 5-8 lay north of Shrewsbury and with only a few exceptions all are found in the southernmost hundreds of Leintwardine, "Culvestan", 'Overs' and 'Conditre': SHR 5 Osbern note.
9,1	WISTANSTOW. This was an Ancient Parish. It lay in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, later in Munslow or Purslow Hundreds. It is possible that Wistanstow, "Cleu" (9,2), Woolston (4,20,18) and "Caurtune" (4,20,19) had originally formed a single block of land belonging to St Alkmund's (SHR 3g St Alkmund's note) and which was held and alienated by Spirtes or his successors. He is expressly said to have held Wistanstow from St Alkmund's, while he held Woolston and "Cleu" from overlords unspecified. St Alkmund's held "Caurtune", but Spirtes is not said to have been involved in the alienation. Wistanstow was permanently alienated to the Fitz Alan barony of Clun; the stages by which it was lost are given in a monastic narrative: Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. p. 750 no. xvi, translated in Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. pp. 355-58.
		John de Stepelton holds 2 carucates in Wystanstowe in Munslow Hundred in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, from John Fitz Alan, while Wistanestowe is accounted a member of Purslow Hundred in Feudal Aids, iv. p. 233. The St Alkmund interest was later claimed by Lilleshall Abbey, but settled in a final concord of 1188; see Monasticon Anglicanum, vi. pp. 265, 750; Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 355. The 2 carucates mentioned in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 7 la, may have been only part of the manor: half of Wistanstow was later held in Purslow Hundred by John Fitz Alan with Sibdon Carwood (4,20,7 Sibdon note), while further parts may have been Feldhampton (Felhampton SO4487) held in Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. p. 71a, by John de Stepelton from John Fitz Alan in Munslow Hundred (see Feudal Aids, iv. p. 229) and Marsh (4,3,47 Strefford note).
		See also Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, p. 226 no. 1335.
	SPIRTES THE PRIEST. He was a wealthy churchman who had held a total of nearly 80 hides in Somerset, Hampshire, Wiltshire, Shropshire and Herefordshire. According to Hemming (Hearne, Hemingi Chartularium, p. 254; see 'Worcester G8' in WOR {Appendix}), he was a favourite of King Cnut's sons Harold and Harthacnut but he was banished by King Edward; see SHR 3d,7. He is described as one of twelve canons of St Mary's, Bromfield, who alone held in 1066 ten out of the 20 hides in Bromfield in Shropshire (SHR 3d,7). He was Nigel's predecessor in several of the latter's holdings in Herefordshire, Wiltshire, Hampshire and Somerset.
	4 HIDES [***]. After .iiii. hidę the main scribe of Great Domesday wrote the top stroke of a T (probably for T'ra), then presumably realized he had meant to leave a space after the hidage (as elsewhere when he had not written (non) geld' after the hidage; see 1,5 hide note) and so did not complete it and omitted to erase it. This line is definitely not a link-line (generally used by the scribe to cover an erasure when no details are to be added later), as Farley printed it.
9,2	"CLEU". Apparently in Leintwardine Hundred in 1086, it has not been identified, although the involvement of Spirtes may suggest an alienation from St Alkmund's that was territorially close to Wistanstow (9,1); see Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, xi. p. 365.
	SPIRTES [* THE PRIEST *]. See 9,1 Spirtes note.
	[***]. The main scribe of Great Domesday left blank two-thirds of a line after the population, probably for the later insertion of the resources; see {Introduction: Content and Layout}.
	AFTER THIS ENTRY the remainder of folio 260d is blank, as are all of folio 261 and the recto of folio 262, though they have been frame-ruled; the account of Cheshire begins on the reverse of folio 262.