THE HUNDRED OF GANFIELD
Containing The Parishes Of Buckland; Hatford; Hinton Waldrist; Longworth; Pusey; Shellingford; Stanford In The Vale
At the time of the Domesday Survey the hundred of Ganfield included
nearly all the parishes contained in the modern hundred, (fn. 1) though 5 hides in
Buckland were entered under Wantage, possibly by mistake. (fn. 2) Hatford was
in Marcham Hundred (fn. 3) and Stanford with part of Pusey was entered under
Sutton, but in this case the rubrication has apparently been omitted. (fn. 4)
Littleworth, now in the hundred of Faringdon, may have formed part of
Ganfield at this date, (fn. 5) but was apparently transferred before 1316, (fn. 6) by which time Ganfield
Hundred had reached its present limits. In
the reign of Edward the Confessor the assessment of Ganfield Hundred was 124 hides
1 virgate 4 acres, which in 1086 had been
reduced to 45 hides 3 virgates.

Index map to the hundred of ganfield
During the 13th century Stanford in the
Vale was withdrawn from suit at the hundred
court of Ganfield by a grant of Henry III to
William de Ferrers Earl of Derby, (fn. 7) which was
confirmed by Edward I to Gilbert de Clare
Earl of Gloucester, then owner of the manor. (fn. 8)
By 1275 2 hides in Pusey held by Roger le
Coumber had been annexed by Henry of
Allemagne to 'the Earl of Cornwall's hundred in North Oseney,' (fn. 9) and
John de Limesey, who held 4 hides in the same place, also neglected to do
suit at the hundred court. (fn. 10) All these places, however, seem to have been
included in the hundred of Ganfield in 1316. (fn. 11)
The hundred at first belonged to the king, but afterwards came into
the hands of Fulk Fitz Warin, (fn. 12) who was holding it in 1275 together with
the hundred of Wantage, the descent of which it seems always to have
followed. (fn. 13)
It would appear from 14th-century documents, (fn. 14) and also from the
survival of Gainfield Farm as a place-name, that the site of the ancient
hundred court was in Buckland parish.
Footnotes
| 1 |
V.C.H. Berks. i, 336, 341–3, 346, 357, 361, 367, 369. |
| 2 |
Ibid. 342. |
| 3 |
Ibid. 357. |
| 4 |
Ibid. 349 and note. |
| 5 |
Ibid. 334. |
| 6 |
Feud. Aids, i, 52. |
| 7 |
Hund. R. (Rec. Com.), i, 11. |
| 8 |
Ibid. |
| 9 |
Ibid. In the reign of Edward III certain lands 'within the hundred of Ganfield' were held by John
de la Coumber of the honour of St. Valery (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. vii, App. 681). |
| 10 |
Hund. R. (Rec. Com.), i, 11. |
| 11 |
Feud. Aids, i,51. |
| 12 |
Hund. R. (Rec. Com.), i, 9, 11. |
| 13 |
Ibid.; Feud. Aids, 51; Feet of F. Div. Co. Mich. 1652; Mich. 1655; East. I Jas. II. As early
as 1284 the two hundreds were represented by the same jurors (Assize R. 44, m. H22), and in the aid of
1428 the whole of Ganfield Hundred is entered under Wantage (Feud. Aids, i, 60). In 1651, however, it
is surveyed as a separate hundred belonging, like Wantage, to the Earl of Bath (Parl. Surv. Berks. no. 10). |
| 14 |
Lansd. MS. 432; Cal. Pat. 1361–4, p. 124. |