Christchurch (Christchurch Twyneham): Introduction, castle and manors

A History of the County of Hampshire: Volume 5. Originally published by Victoria County History, London, 1912.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.


'Christchurch (Christchurch Twyneham): Introduction, castle and manors', A History of the County of Hampshire: Volume 5, (London, 1912), pp. 83-101. British History Online [accessed 21 June 2024].

. "Christchurch (Christchurch Twyneham): Introduction, castle and manors", in A History of the County of Hampshire: Volume 5, (London, 1912) 83-101. British History Online, accessed June 21, 2024,

. "Christchurch (Christchurch Twyneham): Introduction, castle and manors", A History of the County of Hampshire: Volume 5, (London, 1912). 83-101. British History Online. Web. 21 June 2024,

In this section


Tweoxneham, Tweonea (x cent.); Thuinham (xi cent.); Crischarche de Twenham, Cristeschirche (xii-xv cent.).

Up to the year 1843 the parish of Christchurch comprised an area of 24,640 acres, with a coast-line stretching for a distance of more than 8 miles. In 1843 the ecclesiastical parish of Highcliff was formed, but the civil parish of Christchurch remained unaltered until 1894, (fn. 1) when an extensive subdivision was made, resulting in the formation of six separate civil parishes —namely, Christchurch East, (fn. 2) Hurn, Southbourne, (fn. 3) Pokesdown and Bournemouth (fn. 4); the remainder, comprising about 1,000 acres in and around the town, constituted the new parish of Christchurch. In 1897 the civil parish of Highcliff was formed by cutting off from Christchurch East a wide parallel strip along the coast; and in 1901 this parish was further increased by a transference to it from Southbourne parish of the promontory known as Hengistbury Head. (fn. 5) In the following year the civil parishes of Southbourne and Pokesdown (fn. 6) were absorbed into that of Bournemouth.

A great part of the parish was formerly common land, but in 1805 (fn. 7) the common lands in Hurn Manor and Hinton Admiral and Winkton tithings were inclosed. In 1806 Burton tithing was inclosed, (fn. 8) and in 1827 Roeshott, Rushford and Scott's Hill Commons, Saltmarsh and Stanpit Field. (fn. 9) In 1878 the common field known as Portfield, to the north of Christchurch, (fn. 10) was inclosed and has since been much built over; a 'stint' ground of 15 acres has, however, been allotted out of it to those whose rights of pasture were prejudiced, while a further 10 acres have been made into a recreation ground.

The present parish of Christchurch comprises 1,030 acres, (fn. 11) of which 139 acres are covered by tidal water and 2 by inland water, 57 acres are foreshore, 100 are arable land and 309½ permanent grass. (fn. 12)

The town lies between the Rivers Avon and Stour, on a triangular site, with the apex to the east. The priory, with the castle to the north, is nearest to the point of junction of the two rivers, and the centre from which the town has grown is the meeting point of Castle Street, which runs east and west, with Church Street going southwards towards the priory and High Street running north. The latter widens out and forms the principal street, with Millhams' Street turning eastward from it towards the Avon, and its continuation from the point where Barrack Street comes in from the north-west is known as Bargates, and continues as far as the bridge over the South Western railway, close to the station. On the west side of Bargates are some groups of houses now called Pit. Spicer Street is so named from the chairman of a committee which set itself to repair damages here caused by a fire in 1826. On the east of Bargates is the pound.

The Avon is crossed by Castle Street over a pretty stone bridge with low arches and pointed cut-waters, apparently mediaeval, and the general view of the town from the east bank of the river is very beautiful, with the great church standing close to the water on slightly rising ground, near the Norman hall of the castle and the ruined keep. The houses of the town are not of much architectural interest, and are for the most part of comparatively modern date, the bulk of the new building being to the north, where the presence of the railway station has caused a suburb to spring up.

There are, however, one or two red brick 18thcentury fronts, and in Castle Street is an ancient timberframed house which has been refronted and is now a butcher's shop. The town hall, of red brick and stone, on the east side of the High Street, was removed from the Square in 1859. A Congregational chapel with a tall spire is also in the High Street.

The harbour, formed by the junction of the Avon and Stour, is for the most part shallow, with a winding channel leading to the narrow mouth known as the Run, where the harbour communicates with the sea by a deep channel formerly running eastwards between the cliffs and a low sand-spit outside. In December 1910 the channel was altered to a southerly direction, passing through the sand-bank at a point opposite Sandhills and Gundimore. The land surrounding the harbour is mostly low and marshy, except on the south, where it is shut in by the lofty peninsula of Hengistbury Head.

A little way to the west of this is Southbourne, a growing watering-place 1½ miles from Christchurch town. West of the town is the picturesque village of Iford on the River Stour, close to which is the ground preserving traditions of Saxon battles.

There was probably always a school in connexion with the priory; it was included among the possessions of the priory when these were confirmed by Baldwin de Redvers in about 1140. (fn. 13) At the time of the Dissolution a master was kept to teach the children grammar, and a daily lecture in divinity was given. (fn. 14) At a subsequent date, which is not known, a free grammar school was founded, (fn. 15) and from 1662 until about 1870, when the school ceased, it was housed in St. Michael's Loft in the church, above the Lady chapel. (fn. 16) In 1845 the endowments amounted to £15 yearly, instruction in reading, writing and arithmetic being given to ten boys. (fn. 17)

There was formerly a hospital of St. Mary Magdalene for lepers in the Barrack Road. Nicholas Crompton was made governor in 1609. (fn. 18)

The burial-ground in Jumper's Road, opened in 1858, covers 14 acres and contains two mortuary chapels.

The parish of Christchurch East lies to the northeast of Christchurch and contains 6,755 acres, (fn. 19) of which 1 acre is covered by tidal water and 27 by inland water; 2,285½ acres are arable, 1,737¾ permanent grass and 1,224 woods and plantations. (fn. 20) There are many gravel and clay pits in the parish, mostly now disused.

The River Mude rises upon Poors Common and flows south through the parish.

Just north of Hinton is the small hamlet of Beckley. Hinton Admiral is the property and residence of Sir George A. E. Tapps-Gervis-Meyrick, bart., to whom Beech House also belongs; Heathfield Lodge is the property of Mr. Evelyn Geoffrey Saye; Winkton Lodge of the Misses Lassell; Winkton House of Mr. J. D. Mills of Bisterne; Burton Hall, a late 18th-century house of red brick with stone dressings, of Major Henry Lloyd Powell, late R.H.A.; and Whitehayes of Mr. Alfred Treeby.

The parish of Highcliff lies on the shores of Christchurch Bay between Milton on the east and Christchurch on the west. It contains 2,615 acres, (fn. 21) of which 120 acres are covered by tidal and 4 by inland water; 141 acres are foreshore, 896¾ arable land, 539¼ permanent grass and 154 woods and plantations. (fn. 22) The greater part of the parish is flat and low-lying, but the land rises towards the eastern boundary, a height of 134 ft. being reached in the north-east corner. The village, which lies upon the Lymington and Christchurch road, is beautifully situated in the east of the parish upon High Cliff. The cliff does not attain an altitude of more than 100 ft., and gradually falls away to the west. Two miles south-west of the village is the hamlet of Mudeford, on the shores of Christchurch Harbour, the southern and eastern portions of which are within this parish. The River Mude falls into the harbour at Mudeford, as does the Bure Brook, which rises in the parish. The promontory known as Hengistbury Head, the reputed landing-place of Hengist the Jute, which incloses Christchurch Harbour on the south and east, has since 1901 lain wholly within this parish. Here upon Warren Hill, (fn. 23) where a height of 123 ft. is reached, are disused ironstone quarries, formerly worked for their ore and also used from early times as building stone. On the north side of the earthworks known as Double Dikes are four barrows. (fn. 24)

Highcliff Castle, standing in a beautiful park upon the cliff, (fn. 25) is the property of Brig.-Gen. the Hon. E. J. Montagu-Stuart-Wortley, C.B., D.S.O., and the residence of Sir Harold Harmsworth, bart. It is an imposing modern building in a style based upon the French architecture of the 15th century. It was built about 1830 by Lord Stuart de Rothesay on the site of an unpretentious building erected by the Penleaze family after their purchase of the estate from the third Earl of Bute, who had built a house here from the design of the brothers Adam, which was rendered uninhabitable and ultimately destroyed by the fall of the cliff; the lodge gates are those of the first house, and the grounds, which are finely wooded, are surrounded by a wall of large red bricks with a serrated cornice.

The present house is roughly L-shaped, the arms running south and west, and the principal garden front being inclosed between them. The meeting of the arms consists of a large block of three stages, with tall ornamental chimney turrets rising above the level of the pierced parapet. At the south-east angle projects a large porch of three stages with ogee-headed entrances on the south and west, and an oriel corbelled out on the east side. A short wing of two stages runs north-eastwards from this porch to a tower of three stages with angle turrets, and to the east again a long wing of a single stage runs eastward. The south arm is of a single stage with very large windows and is cruciform, having a semi-octagonal termination flanked by short straight wings ending in three sides of an octagon. The centre face of the south octagon contains a doorway opening to a flight of steps into the garden. The whole building is crowned by an elaborately pierced stone parapet, and at the north-west angle is an imposing carriage porch with ogee-headed side openings, and a two-centred arch to the full height of the north face, which is steeply gabled and flanked by panelled octagonal turrets.

Louisa Marchioness of Waterford, the daughter of Lord Stuart de Rothesay, records that her father brought from 'la Grande Maison des Andelys, near Rouen,' cornices and window settings for incorporation in the building, (fn. 26) and it is from these that the style of the house was developed, with more success than might have been expected from the period.

The house has its place in modern history as the residence in 1907 of the German Emperor during his 'rest cure.'

Wolhayes is the residence of Mrs. John Mills; Nea House of Gen. Sir William Gordon Cameron, K.C.B.; Hubborn of the Hon. Lady Curzon-Howe; Bure Homage of Mrs. Ricardo; and Sandhills, the property and residence of Sir George Rose. Somerford Grange, which was once the grange of the prior of Christchurch, was inhabited by John Draper, the last prior after the Dissolution. It is now owned by the Rev. Gustavus Brander.

The extensive parish of Hurn lies north-west of Christchurch, and stretches further north than any other parish in the hundred. It contains 6,945 acres, (fn. 27) of which 81 acres are covered by inland and 4 by tidal water, 990¼ acres are arable, 1,236 permanent grass and 1,528 woods and plantations. (fn. 28) The village lies 3 miles north-west from Christchurch upon a road leading to Hampreston. North of it, at Hurn Bridge, (fn. 29) the road crosses the Moors River, which turns Hurn water mill close to the village. Cottages and farm-houses are scattered over the whole parish, and the open country is for the most part low-lying. There are three tumuli on Foxbury Hill and two on Matcham's Plantation in the far north; upon the latter a height of 124 ft. is reached. The highest point, however, in the parish (160 ft.) is upon St. Catherine's Hill, near Christchurch. On this hill are numerous tumuli and an ancient earthwork, (fn. 30) within which, to the south-west, can possibly be traced the foundations of an ancient chapel. The Cottage Homes and workhouse are in this parish. Just off the main road, close to the county boundary, are the hamlets of East Parley and Parley Green, while those of West Hurn and Merritown are west of the village. To the south, in beautiful grounds sloping down to the Stour, is Heron or Hurn Court, once the country house of the Priors of Christchurch and now the seat of the Earl of Malmesbury.

Benjamin Ferrey the architect, who laid out Bournemouth for Sir George Gervis, was born at Christchurch in 1810. (fn. 31) John Stuart, third Earl of Bute, politician and courtier, who died in 1792, spent most of his time at Highcliff during the last years of his life. Various members of the Rose family, who lived at Sandhills in Mudeford, attained distinction; William Stewart Rose was a great friend of Sir Walter Scott, who, it is said, wrote Marmion at Sandhills. Coleridge was living here in 1816. Sir Edmund Yeamans Walcott Henderson, chief commissioner of the Metropolitan police, who died in 1896, was born at Mudeford in 1821. Charles Lamb lived for a time at Burton, (fn. 32) as also, in 1800, did Southey, who did much writing there. Edmund Lord Lyons, admiral and diplomat, was born here in 1790. Among the men of distinction educated at Christchurch Grammar School were Bingley the naturalist, Warner the county historian, and Admiral Sir Harry Neale. (fn. 33) The house built before 1787 by Gustavus Brander on the site of the priory was once inhabited by the Duke of Orleans, father of King Louis Philippe.

The following place-names occur: Dudecompa (xii cent.) (fn. 34); Dudmore (xiii cent.), (fn. 35) the modern Dudmoor; La Grave, Bradefeld, and Hedenesbury (xii cent.), (fn. 36) the modern Grove Farm; Bernsfield Heath in Hurn parish, and Hengistbury Head, Waterditch (xii cent. et seq.) (fn. 37); Burtoneslonde (xii cent.), the modern Burton (fn. 38); Ochere (xiii cent.), (fn. 39) the modern Ogber; Portfield in Christchurch (xiv cent.) (fn. 40); Milham (xvi cent.), the modern Millhams (fn. 41); Pawmer's Bridge (xvi cent.) (fn. 42) was probably the modern Palmer's Ford in Hurn; Staple (xvii cent.), the modern Staple Cross (fn. 43); Longlathes or Latches (xvii cent.), (fn. 44) the modern Latch Farm in Hurn; Richedon (xii cent.), the modern Ramsdown Hill (fn. 45); Portrenemede, Hurlebat, and Ponsales (xiv cent.) (fn. 46); Benettyshey (xv cent.) (fn. 47); Pounteslondes, Sedenhams and Crokker (xvi cent.) (fn. 48); Cobland (xvi cent.) (fn. 49); Bromefelde Farm (xvi cent.) (fn. 50); Buren or Burne Place in Hurn, (fn. 51) Granborough and Stratford (xvi cent.) (fn. 52); Walmore, Lykehaye and Nonnewade (xvi cent.) (fn. 53); Hamborough, Bodyers, Gunters, and Ranckhams (xvi cent.) (fn. 54); Mackcliffe (xvi cent.) (fn. 55); Duncombe Close and Scottes Common (xvii cent.) (fn. 56); Garton, Little Podney, Podney Magna, Ilesham, Morley's Cross and Creedes (xvii cent.) (fn. 57); Horway Wood (xvii cent.) (fn. 58); Woor and Mallards (fn. 59) (xviii cent.).

In 1590 a house called Gerrard stood on the site of Somerford Manor, and near by was the Prior's Withie. (fn. 60)


To its position between the rivers Avon and Stour the site of Christchurch owed its earlier name of Twinham, representing an old English betwux thæm eaum, 'between the waters.' The Hampshire Twinham first appears in the chronicle in the annal for 901, which relates the events of 899, the year of King Alfred's death. Upon that event Ethelwold, a younger son of King Ethelred I, seized the estates of Wimborne of Twinham 'without the leave of the king or the Witan.' The suppression of his revolt was soon accomplished; its details are not relevant here. (fn. 61) But it is important to note that in the annal of 901 Wimborne and Twinham are described, not as burhs, or strong places, but as hams, the word most nearly approaching to the Norman manoir. It is evident that in 899 Twinham possessed no fortifications other than belonged to the normal estate of the time. On the other hand, it is included in the burghal hidage, which dates from approximately 920, and was therefore fortified and made a borough at some time in the first quarter of the 10th century. (fn. 62)

In 1086 the 'borough of Twinham' belonged to the king, who owned thirty-one messuages there, each of which paid 16d. land gavel. (fn. 63) Six others, worth 13s. 4d., belonged to the priory. (fn. 64) In the early 12th century the borough proper became a mesne borough, being granted about 1100 to Richard de Redvers as part of the honour of Christchurch (q.v.). From that date the manor of the borough followed the same descent as the rest of the honour till 1791, when Sir George Ivison Tapps sold it in September 1791 to the Rt. Hon. George Rose, (fn. 65) who held various official appointments during Pitt's administrations. In 1796 George Rose settled it upon his son Sir George Henry Rose on his marriage, (fn. 66) who again in 1820 brought it into a settlement upon the coming of age of his son George Pitt Rose. (fn. 67) Sir George Henry Rose was still holding in 1834, (fn. 68) but in 1863 he sold it to the trustees of the Earl of Malmesbury, and the present earl is now lord of the manor.

The earliest grantor of municipal privileges was probably Richard de Redvers. His son Baldwin first Earl of Devon in a charter, known through a later confirmation, (fn. 69) in about 1150 granted the burgesses exemption throughout all his land from gable of standing in the market, from custody of thieves and prisoners, from the Whitsuntide penny for ale, from the reaping of half an acre and the carrying of writs, from toll of salt and from every custom of trade; he also remitted to them 10s. out of the 70s. (formerly £4) which they were wont to render for the toll of the town. (fn. 70) There is apparently no evidence of another charter until that of Baldwin the seventh earl, (fn. 71) quoted in the same confirmation. In this the earl not only granted the burgesses market rights (vide infra) but confirmed to them common of pasture in the meadows of Stockmead, Beremead and Bernardsmead after his hay had been carried, on payment of 30s. yearly, and freedom from the obligation of ransoming (fn. 72) their sons and daughters, both of which privileges they had enjoyed in the time of his father, in which matter the Lady Amice, his mother, gave testimony in their favour. (fn. 73)

An extent of the borough given in the inquisition on the death of Baldwin the seventh earl in 1262 shows that in burgo— that is to say, in terre nomine burgi—there were 118 places or holdings. For the most part each tenant held one place, but some held fractions, and the rents of the places varied between 6d. and 2s. 4d., the more ordinary rent being 1s. In the western part of the town were thirty-nine holdings at the same varying rents, while there were fifty-six general holdings also in the borough, representing 66 'places.' Thus altogether there were 224 places in the borough. (fn. 74) Another extent made in 1300—that is, thirty-eight years later—shows that there were then 228 places in the borough, forty-six of which were counted in terra forinseca. This does not, however, represent the total number of holdings, as under the heading burgagia there are altogether 200 holdings, some of which represented more than one 'place,' while many others were fractions of places. Thus there are three holdings of four places each, two of three places and several of two places, while men like Godfrey the Baker or Alfred the Butcher held only the fourth part of one place, or Margery the Cordwainer and others held a small portion of one place. Other holdings represented portions of land. Thus Robert the Chaplain paid only 1d. rent at Michaelmas for land near the castle ditch, or Richard Feron paid ½d. and 1s. at the feast of Holy Trinity for a portion of land in aqua. One seld also occurs in the list, and for this the almoner of Christchurch Priory, who held it, paid 1s. at the feast of St. John the Baptist. Similarly under the terra forinseca the forty-six 'places' were divided into thirty-seven holdings, one of which comprised five places, another four, and several two; others comprised only a fourth or a third of a 'place.' The rents as given in this extent differ little from those of the earlier year, except that some special rents in kind are added. Thus Robert Kene owed two barbed arrows or 1d. for his portion of a 'place,' John le Veylowed 1s. and 1 lb. of wax at Michaelmas for his 'place,' and another man owed 1 lb. of cummin or 1s. for his place. In the common field known as Portfield, which evidently comprised 125 acres, there were seventeen holders. Philip of Bathampton, the largest holder, had 24 acres, for which he paid 4s. yearly rent, at the rate of 2d. an acre; the smallest holder, who had 1 acre only, paid a yearly rent of two capons.

At the end of this extent there is an interesting account of some of the customs of the borough. The burgesses' rights of toll of the markets and fairs (see later) and of common of pasture, as granted by Baldwin the seventh earl, are recited in full. Further, the burgesses owed the lord a heriot—that is to say, 'the best beast if they have beasts.' Concerning the sale of burgages, the seller and buyer had to give 2s. to the lord—that is, each of them 1s.—for licence to hold according to ancient custom. (fn. 75) The total amount of the receipts of the borough had fallen from over £23 to £11 10s. (fn. 76) between the years 1298 and 1301.

A survey of Christchurch taken on behalf of the Prince of Wales, who held the interest of the priory of Christchurch in the borough in the early 17th century, shows that there was considerable confusion between the rights of Lord Arundell of Wardour, who held the honour, and those of the prince, particularly as to all waifs, strays and felon goods within the castle, manor and borough, all fines, amercements, recognizances and return of writs, the office of admiralty within the hundred, castle, manor and borough with royalties, wrecks, flotsam and jetsam, sturgeons, whales, &c. (fn. 77)

Separate courts, consisting of the three weeks court and the half-yearly view of frankpledge, were held for the borough. The officers of the borough were the reeve, two constables, a bailiff and an aletaster. (fn. 78)

The mayor of the borough is not mentioned on the court rolls, although the office of Mayor of Christchurch is known to have been in existence as early as 1486, when there was a bond between the Mayor, burgesses and commonalty of Christchurch and the king for the payment of £1,000 within a year. (fn. 79) Moreover, in 1518 John Bevyll, mayor, Thomas Hancock and John Mody, constables of the borough, and others were witnesses to a feoffment by William Peyntour, younger son of John Peyntour, mercer, of Christchurch, (fn. 80) and it certainly seems strange that on the court rolls only the reeve should be mentioned. However, the probability is that the mayor was only the reeve (fn. 81) under another title and held no higher status. Of the mayoral office in Christchurch and its rights and duties we know little. In the early 17th century the mayor was said to hold the profits of the market, (fn. 82) which in the early 14th century had belonged to the burgesses in toto. (fn. 83) From the 16th century the mayor has always also acted as returning officer for members of Parliament.

The borough received its first parliamentary summons in the last year of the reign of Edward I, and similar writs were issued for the next two Parliaments, in 1307 and 1308; no returns, however, were made, and no further writ was issued until 1571. This was probably due to the poverty of the town, a matter of importance in the days of salaried representatives. (fn. 84) In 1571 a committee was appointed to confer with the law officers about the return of burgesses from Christchurch, (fn. 85) and from that year until the passing of the Reform Act (fn. 86) two members were regularly returned. The franchise was vested in the corporation, which in 1832 consisted of the mayor and thirty-five burgesses, of whom twenty at the most had voted for the previous thirty years. (fn. 87) Since the Reform Act only one member has been returned and the borough extended so as to include the whole of the then parishes of Christchurch and Holdenhurst. (fn. 88) The nomination of one of the members belonged of ancient right to the lord of the manor of the borough. (fn. 89) Many notable men have represented Christchurch in Parliament: Sir Thomas Clarges sat 1679–85, Francis Gwyn 1689–95, (fn. 90) 1701–10 and 1717–22, Edward Hooper 1740–61, James Harris 1761–80, Sir James Harris, K.B., afterwards first Earl of Malmesbury, 1770–82, the Rt. Hon. George Henry Rose 1818–44, and William Sturges Bourne (Secretary for Home Affairs in 1827) 1802–12 and 1818–26. (fn. 91)

The town did not receive a charter of incorporation until 1886. Numerous complaints in connexion with this were made from time to time, (fn. 92) and a charter, incorporating the borough under a mayor and twenty-four chief burgesses, was actually drawn up in 1670 at the request of the burgesses. (fn. 93) It was further enrolled on the Letters Patent for that year, but the enrolment was cancelled, and thus the charter never came into force. (fn. 94) In the reign of George I a report was made to the king recommending an incorporation, but nothing further was done in the matter. (fn. 95) Before 1886 the government of the borough was nominally vested in the mayor, burgesses, bailiff and town clerk, but the town was wholly in the jurisdiction of the county magistrates. (fn. 96) The present corporation, under the charter of 1886, consists of a mayor, four aldermen and twelve councillors.

There was a yearly fair in Christchurch in the 12th century belonging to the lord of the manor and held on Trinity Thursday. Baldwin the first Earl of Devon about 1150 granted a tithe of the tolls taken at the same to the priory, (fn. 97) and about 1200 Earl William granted a further sum of 20s. from the proceeds of the fair to the priory. (fn. 98) In 1176 12 marks were paid as tallage by the borough. (fn. 99) In 1257 Baldwin the seventh earl received from the king a grant of another fair, to be held on the vigil, the feast and the morrow of St. Faith (fn. 100); shortly after he granted the burgesses the entire toll and stallage and all customs of merchandise of this fair, both within and without the town, saving to himself and his heirs attachments and pleas of the same.

In 1620 the Trinity fair belonged to the Prince of Wales as owner of the Priory Manor (q.v.); it was of little value, however, being leased to William Colgill for 6d. yearly. The other fair belonged at that time to Lord Arundell, lord of the manor of the borough. (fn. 101) The fairs were still held in 1846, on Trinity Thursday and 17 October (fn. 102); the former was still held in 1862, (fn. 103) but was abolished in April 1872. (fn. 104)

The weekly market has always been held on Monday. In about 1150 Earl Baldwin granted the priory the first market in case of his absence, otherwise the second, (fn. 105) and this was confirmed by his descendants. (fn. 106) He also granted the burgesses the toll of the market at the fee-farm rent of 70s. (fn. 107) In 1298 the farm of the market and toll was 100s., of which 20s. was paid to the prior for the anniversary of Countess Mabel, (fn. 108) and it was still 100s. in 1301. (fn. 109) In 1620 the market was described as a poor one, for which the town paid 30s. to the lord of the manor of the borough; it seems, however, to have been leased to the mayor for 6d. yearly by the Prince of Wales as lord of the priory manor of Christchurch Twyneham. (fn. 110)

The town has never enjoyed much prosperity at any time. There seem to have been no special industries here in early times, though the salmon fisheries must have given occupation to a number of persons; these have always been famous, and are said to have produced at one time £1,000 yearly. (fn. 111) In 1538 the town was described as being 'situate and set in a desolate place, in a very barren country out and far from all highways, in an angle or a corner, having no woods nor commodious country about it, nor nigh no good town, but only the said poor town of Christchurch which is a very poor town and slenderly inhabited.' (fn. 112) In 1579 there was a suggestion to establish the manufacture of frizados here. (fn. 113) In this connexion John Hastings, who had introduced the industry from Holland, petitioned the queen that whereas he had 'with great charge, cost and travails sett up and brought to perfection the making of frizados and other commodities in the port toun of Christchurch,' he might be enabled to 'setle and see these workes to contynue to the better maintenance of thinhabitantes and the better upholding of the same towne.' For this cause he besought that, whereas the houses in the town were decayed and the queen thus defrauded of her rents, he should be granted all her houses and lands at fee farm, rendering the decayed rents for the same. Further, that the manors of Hurn and Somerford, which had been granted by the Crown for term of one life with no rent reserved, should be granted to him for a term of years after the death of the lessee. If the queen would grant this request Hastings promised that he would be bound within a few years to furnish 'with armour and weapons sorted mete and serviceable a hundred able men of suche as shalbe sett a wourk and inhabite there wich shalbe not onlie to the strengthening of these partes being now weak, thoroughe lack of habitacion but also maye searve for the protectioun of the Isle of Wight or any other service.' (fn. 114) But the queen remained obdurate and the attempt was frustrated.

In 1644 the Parliamentarians under Sir William Waller captured the town (fn. 115); the garrison left there was, however, insufficient, and it was reduced to great straits in the following January, orders being given to relieve it from the Isle of Wight. (fn. 116) There was a riot in the town in 1650 at the committee of plundered ministers (fn. 117) and a more serious one in 1663, when the sheriff was stoned and the life of the mayor threatened. (fn. 118) In the reign of Charles II the Earl of Clarendon, who owned the manor, being anxious to improve the town, conceived the idea of making the Avon navigable from Salisbury to Christchurch. An Act for the purpose was secured, (fn. 119) but the scheme was not carried out. The accumulation of sand has long rendered it impossible. At this time Andrew Yarranton reported Christchurch as a convenient place for building ships and suggested the outlay of £2,000 upon a fort to prevent landings (fn. 120); nothing, however, was done in either direction. As a harbour Christchurch has never been of much value, being inaccessible except to vessels of very small draught. This is due to the ledge of rocks which stretches from Hengistbury Head towards the Needles in the Isle of Wight, and obstructs the entrance. There is high water in the harbour twice at every tide owing to the situation of the coast with respect to the Isle of Wight and the curious projection of the land at Hurst Castle.

The knitting of silk stockings was once a thriving industry in the town, but it has been declining for some time past; the most important industry, however, was the manufacture of fusee chains for watches and clocks, which was encouraged here by Robert Cox in the 18th century and which until recently provided work for many women and girls in the three factories devoted to it. (fn. 121) Christchurch has several times. been visited by reigning monarchs. King John stayed here, sometimes for two or three days, in the years 1200, 1204–6, 1208, 1210, 1212 and 1215. (fn. 122) It was visited by Edward VI in 1552, when the Privy Council met here, (fn. 123) and by Queen Anne in 1702. (fn. 124)

The Boundary Commissioners of 1832 reported that no trade or manufactures were then carried on. 'The town presents no symptoms of activity or industry. The houses are of a middling description. The appearance of the inhabitants, who are thinly scattered, gives no indications of prosperity.' (fn. 125)


CHRISTCHURCH CASTLE was probably erected by Richard de Redvers after he had received the grant of the manor from Henry I. (fn. 126) Its descent was identical with that of the manor or honour (fn. 127) of which it formed the 'caput.' The keep on its mound was excepted from the grant of the borough to the Rt. Hon. George Rose in 1791, and is now the property of Sir George Meyrick. The eastern part of the court hall, however, belonged, while standing, to the Earl of Malmesbury as lord of the borough.

In an inquisition taken in 1262 is a list of those owing castle guard at Christchurch. Foremost among these was the prior, who had to provide ward for eight days at his own cost for land he held at Sway. (fn. 128) It can have been very seldom, however, that this service was requisitioned, for the castle did not figure very prominently in history and is remarkable chiefly on account of the long list of its famous owners. In December 1307 an order was issued to keep securely and defend the castle, the king being about to set out to foreign parts. (fn. 129) From a survey of 1656 it appears that upon the apprehension of any felon within the liberty of Westover the constable had to receive him and convey him to the justice and to the gaol at his own cost; or the tithingman might bring the felon and chain him to the castle gate and leave him there. (fn. 130) The castle in the days of Cromwell's wars witnessed stirring scenes, but in May of 1650 a committee of the Council of State conferred with the army officers as to the advisability of its demolition. This was decided upon in the following November, the task being assigned to the Governor of Southampton. (fn. 131) He seems, however, to have neglected his orders, for in July of the following year directions were sent to three Hampshire justices of the peace with regard to the fort at Christchurch, which still remained undemolished. 'There are guns mounted on it without any guard, which may give an opportunity to enemies to put their destructive designs in execution, their disaffection wanting no greater encouragement than such a hold. Demolish, and remove guns to Pool.' (fn. 132) And so its fate was sealed.

The site of the castle lies to the north of the church, being now cut up into gardens. Its eastern boundary is a mill stream on the banks of which is the 12th-century hall of the castle, the 'Norman House,' now the property of Captain Douglas, who has inherited from the Rose family. Some hundred yards west is the earthen mound on which stands the ruined keep, the only remaining part of the masonry defences. Its external measurements are 50 ft. by 45 ft. 6 in. and the walls are 9 ft. 8 in. thick. The plan is a simple rectangle, except that the four external angles are cut back, leaving diagonal faces 7 ft. 8 in. wide at each corner. Of the north and south walls only the base-courses remain, but on the east and west the walls stand to some height, the level of the first floor being marked by a few corbels. A large window opening cut square through the wall, but having lost its inner and outer faces, remains on the west, and another of the same kind on the east, both having lighted the first floor, and at the south end of the east wall is a third opening at a lower level, apparently the entrance to the basement. Over it are corbels as for a wooden stair. At the southwest angle are the spring of a small arch and the jamb of a window, but no other detail of any kind remains and the walls in many places have been stripped of their facing and repaired in modern times. They are built chiefly of ironstone and Freshwater stone, the ashlar-work being of Binstead, Bonchurch and Freshwater stone, while a certain amount of rough Purbeck marble is used in the walling. The 'Norman House' is more remarkable in this respect, being in large measure built of rough blocks of this costly material, doubtless waste from the quarries. Ironstone and sandstone are also used, and the wrought details are in Binstead and Freshwater stone. A conglomerate full of small broken white shells in a red or red-brown matrix also occurs.

Christchurch Castle

The 'house' is a rectangular building 67 ft. by 23 ft. within the walls (the greatest length being from north to south), two stories in height, and on the whole in a very good state of preservation. Its western gable stands to the full height, and though the roofs and floors are entirely destroyed their lines may yet be seen. The ground story was a basement, lighted only by narrow slits, the principal room, which probably formed the hall of the 12th-century castle, being on the first floor. All the arrangements of the building cannot now be seen owing to the dense ivy with which the walls, especially on the south and west, are smothered, but enough remains to make the building of great value, dating as it does from the second quarter of the 12th century. The east wall is washed by the stream which forms at this point the boundary of the castle site, and has three shallow pilaster buttresses on its outer face, and at the southeast angle a block of masonry 13 ft. square projecting into the stream. It contained the garderobes, and has an arched channel through it from north to south at the ground level, but its upper part is ruined and overgrown with bushes and its original arrangement is lost. To the north of it is a water-gate 5 ft. wide, opening from the basement on to the stream, and having a low segmental-arched head with a chamfered label and abaci. The basement shows no marks of subdivision by masonry walls, and is lighted by narrow square-headed lights, three on the east and one on the north. It was entered by a door on the west near the north end, and by another in the south wall. Close to the west door is a small square recess in the wall. The southern window in the east wall is blocked by the northern part of the projecting garderobe, showing that this part of it at least is an addition to the original building, and an opening has been forced through the north jamb of the window.

Plan of 12th-century Hall, Christchurch Castle

The hall on the first floor was a fine room, lighted on three sides—north, east and west—by two-light windows and having a large fireplace in its east wall. The principal entrance seems to have been by a door in the west wall, and at the south end, at the southwest corner, is another doorway, which probably led to the kitchens and offices. At the south-east is a passage in the wall leading to the garderobe. Old engravings show a third two-light window on the east side of the hall over the water-gate, and it is not clear whether the south end was divided off by wooden partitions or whether the whole area of the first story was one room. Its floor was of wood, the holes for the beams which carried it still remaining, and the roof was probably an open-timbered one. The only ornamental details are to be found in the windows, which have two round-headed lights divided by a Purbeck marble shaft rebated for wooden window frames. The heads of the lights are carved with zigzag and a diaper pattern, and over them is an inclosing round-headed arch with a band of horizontal zigzag and a chamfered label with a single line of zigzag on the chamfer. The fireplace, which is a fine and early example, is unfortunately much ruined, though its circular chimney shaft remains. It probably had a round-arched opening like that in the 12thcentury house at Southampton called King John's House. In the north-east angle, now much ruined, is a narrow newel stair leading to the basement.

It seems probable that the curtain wall of the castle inclosure must have been continuous with the east wall of this hall, and old engravings show the start of such a wall at the south-east. At the present day all evidence is hidden by the ivy at this point, and the north-east angle is too much ruined to preserve any traces of such a wall. The garderobe tower was formerly as high as the east wall of the hall, and was lighted by a narrow slit on the east. In the south gable of the hall is an original round-headed opening, but below this, down to the level of the first floor, the wall seems to be blank as far as it can be seen for ivy.


The earliest record of CHRISTCHURCH that has been found is a grant in the year 939 by King Athelstan to the monastery at Milton in Hampshire of one weir on the Avon there. (fn. 133) In 1086 the manor of Christchurch belonged to the Crown, but since the time of the Confessor the woodland had been absorbed into the king's forest, the profits of the manor having thereby been halved. (fn. 134) About the year 1100 Henry I granted the manor to his cousin Richard de Redvers, (fn. 135) who had adhered to him in his contest with his brother Robert. Baldwin son of Richard and first Earl of Devon or Exeter sided with the Empress Maud against Stephen and defended Exeter and Carisbrooke Castle. He was compelled to fly to Flanders in 1136, and, being declared an outlaw, his possessions reverted to the Crown; they were, however, shortly afterwards restored to him. He was succeeded in 1155 by his son Richard second Earl of Devon; he died in 1162 and was followed by his son Baldwin, who, dying without issue in 1180, was succeeded by his brother Richard. Four years later he too died without issue, the family estates passing to his uncle William de Redvers (styled de Vernon, from the place of his birth in Normandy), the second son of Baldwin the first earl. (fn. 136) He in the year 1200 granted the manor of Christchurch as dower to his daughter Joan on her marriage with Hubert de Burgh Earl of Kent, reserving, however, to himself a life estate; this grant was confirmed by the king. (fn. 137) Joan died without issue before 1209 and her father survived her until 1216, when he was succeeded by his grandson Baldwin de Redvers sixth Earl of Devon. (fn. 138) His son Baldwin the seventh earl, who succeeded his father in 1244, (fn. 139) had a son John, who, however, died before his father, so that when the latter died in 1262 the estates devolved upon his sister Isabel widow of William de Fortibus Earl of Albemarle. The manor or honour of Christchurch included at that date the borough of Christchurch, the manor of Westover and the hundred of Holdenhurst. (fn. 140) In 1298 and 1301 it appears that the honour comprised three distinct manors, viz. the manor of the borough, the manor of Christchurch Foreign, embracing that part of the modern hundred which lies east of the Stour exclusive of the borough, and that of Westover, which lies west of the Stour. (fn. 141) Isabel did not obtain possession of the manor or honour until the year 1292, when her brother's widow Margaret, then the wife of Robert Aguillon, who held it of her in dower, died. (fn. 142) There were at this time a number of liberties attached to the manor; that of free court with sac and soc, tob and tem and infangenthef had been granted by Henry I to the first earl. (fn. 143) In 1280 the liberty of taking wreck of sea had been enjoyed by the lord of the manor since before the time of King Richard I, while that of plea of unlawful distraint levied upon tenants of the manor was first exercised by the seventh earl. The liberties of free gallows and assize of bread and ale were appurtenant to the free hundred annexed to the manor. (fn. 144) Isabel de Fortibus died in 1293, (fn. 145) having a few hours before her death executed a conveyance to Edward I (fn. 146) of the greater number of her estates, including Christchurch Manor. This the king alleged she was prompted to do 'from the consideration that her next heir Hugh de Courtenay was so remote in blood that if he were of age she might have married him without a dispensation.' (fn. 147) There is little doubt that the transaction was grossly fraudulent, and it is not improbable that the countess's charter was forged by the notorious Adam de Stretton, chamberlain of the Exchequer. (fn. 148) It is true that when Hugh de Courtenay, heir of the countess by descent from Mary the elder daughter of William de Vernon, (fn. 149) petitioned Parliament for restitution of the estates in 1315, at the inquiry which was ordered much episcopal and other evidence was forthcoming tending to dispel all suspicion of foul play (fn. 150); but this was inevitable under the circumstances, and the mere fact of such an inquiry being held is very significant. Nothing, however, came of this petition, nor of either of its renewals in 1347 (fn. 151) and 1364 (fn. 152) by the petitioner's son Hugh. In 1299 Edward I granted as dower to Margaret his second wife, daughter of Philip III, King of France, the castle, hundred and borough of Christchurch and the manor of Westover, (fn. 153) which together constituted the manor of Christchurch, and as such continued to be held together until the 16th century. In 1314 there was a commission of oyer and terminer on the complaint of Queen Margaret touching certain trespasses in the manor. (fn. 154) On her death in 1317 the manor, then worth £120 yearly, was given as dower to Queen Isabel the wife of Edward II. (fn. 155) The next year she received a further grant of various incidents and liberties, including return of the king's writs and summonses and all fines and amercements of the tenants in any of the king's courts, with forfeitures and deodands, &c. (fn. 156) In 1330 she surrendered the manor, (fn. 157) and a few weeks after the king granted it to William de Montagu and Katherine his wife in tail, (fn. 158) to include all profits since the surrender (fn. 159); following this was a grant of various royalties and liberties, including, besides those granted to Queen Isabel, wreck, waifs and strays, chattels of felons condemned and fugitives. (fn. 160) These grants were confirmed in 1337 (fn. 161) and 1338. (fn. 162) William de Montagu was created Earl of Salisbury in 1337, (fn. 163) and from this date Christchurch, like the other estates which belonged to him, followed the fortunes of the Earls of Salisbury, passing in 1471 to Isabel daughter of the 'Kingmaker' and wife of George (Plantagenet) Duke of Clarence. (fn. 164) The story has been already told so often (fn. 165) that it need not be repeated here.

Redvers. Or a lion azure.

De Fortibus. Gules a cross vair.

Montagu. Argent a fesse indented of three points gules.

Nevill. Gules a saltire argent and a label gobony argent and azure.

On the death of Isabel, in 1476, her husband held the manor until 1478, when he was beheaded and attainted. (fn. 166) His son and heir Edward Plantagenet, then aged two years, spent most of his short life in the Tower and was executed in 1499 for planning an escape. Henry VII on coming to the throne granted the manor to his mother Margaret Countess of Richmond, who owned it in 1494 (fn. 167) and probably until her death in 1509. (fn. 168) In 1513 Henry VIII restored Lady Margaret Pole, daughter of the Duke of Clarence and the last of the Plantagenets, to the family honours and estates. (fn. 169) She thus became Countess of Salisbury and obtained possession of Christchurch Manor. (fn. 170) In the year 1541, however, she suffered the common fate of her family, her possessions escheating to the Crown. (fn. 171)

From the records of this period it appears that the manor or honour now comprised the castle, borough and hundred of Christchurch, the lordships or manors of Christchurch and liberty of Westover and the hundred of Westover. (fn. 172) This estate was co-extensive with that comprised in the former description of the castle, borough and hundred of Christchurch and the manor of Westover. (fn. 173)

Edward VI in 1547 granted the castle and hundred of Christchurch to his uncle Edward Duke of Somerset and Lord Protector. (fn. 174) The grant was confirmed in 1550, (fn. 175) but on the attainder and death of the Lord Protector in January 1552 (fn. 176) his escheated estates were in May of the following year granted to Sir John Gate, kt. (fn. 177) However, the latter was attainted almost as soon as he had obtained possession, (fn. 178) and in June 1554 the whole of the estates (fn. 179) were given to Francis Earl of Huntingdon and Catherine his wife and the heirs of the body of Catherine, with certain contingent remainders in favour of heirs of the attainted Countess of Salisbury. (fn. 180) Catherine survived her husband and died in 1576, (fn. 181) being succeeded by her son Henry Earl of Huntingdon, who in 1592 received a further grant of the estates, together with a grant of the reversion expectant upon the contingent remainders mentioned in the grant to his father and mother, supposing they ever vested. (fn. 182) In the same year he suffered a recovery of the premises. (fn. 183) He died without issue in 1595, and was succeeded by his brother George, who in 1597 conveyed the estates to his younger son Henry Hastings (fn. 184); the latter in the year 1601 sold them to Thomas Arundell, afterwards first Lord Arundell of Wardour. (fn. 185)

Doubts had arisen at that time as to what liberties were attached to the manor, (fn. 186) and in 1616 there was a grant and confirmation by James I to Lord Arundell of all those previously granted to former holders; these were set out in full, one of the most important being that the estates should be free from all Admiralty jurisdiction, with power for the lord himself to hold an Admiralty court between high and low water and to determine all Admiralty matters. (fn. 187) This seems to have been a liberty which the grantee found much difficulty in exercising. After the death of James I there were complaints by the king's officers with regard to the opposition they met with from Lord Arundell, poor men who were summoned by them to Vice-Admiralty Courts being afraid to incur his displeasure by attending. (fn. 188)

Hastings. Argent a sleeve sable.

Arundell. Sable six hirondelles argent.

In 1636 Lord Arundell (fn. 189) settled the manor, after the death of himself and Anne his wife, upon his six daughters. (fn. 190) His wife died the following year and he himself in November 1639. A month earlier, however, he had purported to convey the settled estates to Cecil Lord Baltimore, the husband of his daughter Anne, who at his death entered upon them. (fn. 191) His title was no doubt soon upset, but the daughters do not appear to have obtained possession, for when the lands of Henry Lord Arundell, grandson of the first lord, were sequestered for his recusancy in 1646 Christchurch Manor was forfeited amongst the rest. A claim was, however, at once made by four of the daughters and the infant daughter of a fifth, who was then dead, to have five-sixths of the manor delivered to them. (fn. 192) Against this claim Lord Baltimore and his wife asserted that they had been granted a lease of the sequestered two-thirds of the manor. The next year John Earl of Shrewsbury and his wife Frances, one of the daughters, commenced an action to assert their claims, (fn. 193) and in 1652 Frances made her will, leaving her share, if it should be recovered, as portions among her younger children. (fn. 194) In 1654 two of the daughters contracted on the Recusants' Act for twosevenths of meir shares, (fn. 195) and in 1665 the co-heirs and their representatives joined in selling the manor to Edward Earl of Clarendon, the lord chancellor. (fn. 196) In 1707 his son Henry, who had succeeded him in 1674, was anxious to find a purchaser for the estates, which were then heavily mortgaged. (fn. 197) Robert Pitt, father of William Earl of Chatham, described the property in a letter to his father as the most desirable then in the market. His father, however, in replying, recalled that there were flaws in the title. (fn. 198) The estates were sold in 1708 to Peter Mews, who was knighted by Queen Anne. On his marriage in 1719 he settled Christchurch on Lydia Gervis or Jarvis, his wife, who held it till her death in 1751 without issue. She left it by will to her nephew, Jarvis Clerke, with remainder to Benjamin Clerke, sons of her sister Agnes and their heirs male. Jarvis died in her lifetime, without issue, but Benjamin survived her and left a son Joseph Jarvis Clerke, who, inheriting, (fn. 199) barred the entail, (fn. 200) and died without issue in 1778, leaving the estate to his cousin George Ivison Tapps, great-grandson of Elizabeth, another sister of Lydia, (fn. 201) who was created a baronet in 1791. He devised his estates to his son Sir George William Tapps Gervis, who died in 1842, leaving a son Sir George Elliott Meyrick Tapps-Gervis-Meyrick, who died in 1896, and whose son Sir George Augustus Elliott TappsGervis-Meyrick is the present owner. (fn. 202)

Tapps. Azure a fesse or between three rhinoceroses argent with three scallops gules on the fesse.

Meyrick. Sable a cheveron argent between three ragged staves or aflame with a fleur de lis gules between two Cornish choughs on the cheveron.

At the time of the Domesday Survey the canons of the Holy Trinity owned 5 hides and a virgate in the vill of Twyneham, which were stated to have always belonged to the church. (fn. 203) When Henry I granted Richard de Redvers the manor of Christchurch, the latter confirmed to the canons all the land held by them up to that time. (fn. 204) From his descendants the priory received numerous grants and confirmations of grants of land and liberties. (fn. 205) The priory was suppressed in 1539, and in the following year Henry VIII granted Thomas Wriothesley and William Avery a lease of the priory for twenty-one years. (fn. 206) Five years later the king granted Thomas Wriothesley, then Lord Wriothesley and Lord Chancellor, the site of the priory with the new house upon it called the Church House and the demesne lands, together also with a fishery in the Rivers Stour and Avon and other possessions of the suppressed priory, to hold during his life, (fn. 207) and two months later he granted the reversion of the same premises to Stephen Kirton, a London merchant, and Margaret his wife. (fn. 208) In 1557 Queen Mary granted Robert White a thirty years' lease of some land in Christchurch and another fishery which had belonged to the priory, (fn. 209) and later he obtained possession of the priory manor, which he owned at his death in 1565. (fn. 210) In 1610 it was granted by James I to Henry Prince of Wales, being then described as the manor, vill, borough and grange. (fn. 211) Henry died in 1612, and five years later the same premises were granted to his brother Charles Prince of Wales, (fn. 212) Sir Francis Bacon, Sir John Daccombe, Sir James Fullerton and others being given a lease for the term of ninety-nine years in the premises. (fn. 213) In 1628 the surviving lessees conveyed the unexpired lease to William Williams, Robert Michell, Walter Markes and Robert Marsh, as representatives of the Mayor and commonalty and citizens of the City of London, (fn. 214) and later in the same year the king assigned the reversion of the term and the reserved rent to Edward Ditchfield, John Highlord, Humphrey Clarke and Francis Mosse in fee farm as trustees of the Mayor and commonalty and citizens of London. (fn. 215) Two years later Richard Fenn, citizen and alderman of London, purchased the manor and took the assignment of the lease of ninety-nine years. (fn. 216) He then conveyed the manor to his brothers James and Robert, subject to a yearly rental of £32 14s. 1d. In March 1664 Robert Fenn made a fresh settlement of the manor, settling it on himself and Frances his wife and afterwards on their son Richard. (fn. 217) In 1667–8 Frances Fenn, widow, and Richard Fenn (the son) were holding the court of the manor; while from 1677 to 1678 Frances Fenn, widow, held the court alone. (fn. 218) It appears, however, that Richard Fenn her son did not die until 1683 and that on his death the manor descended to his only sister and heir Jane, widow of John Tregonwell. Already, however, Jane must have held the manor in lease, since in 1679 she and her husband John Tregonwell were holding the court of the manor and in 1681 she was holding the court as a widow. (fn. 219) In 1690 she conveyed the manor, together with Somerford and Knapp farm and fulling mill, to use for her life to her daughter Mary Luttrell and after her to Tregonwell Luttrell her son or any other of her sons. (fn. 220) Sir Jacob Banks married Mary Luttrell and the manor passed to their son Jacob Banks, who in 1728 suffered a recovery of the same to bar all entailments. (fn. 221) In 1734 Jacob Banks was still holding the manor, but in 1738 the rents were paid to James Willis, who may have been acting as steward only. (fn. 222) For the next few years the history is uncertain, but shortly before 1775 the manor was purchased by Gustavus Brander, (fn. 223) who, dying in 1787, left it to his cousin John Spicker for life with remainder to his cousin's sons successively in tail. John Spicker assumed the name of Brander, and when his son Gustavus Brander came of age in 1814 there was a re-settlement. (fn. 224) Brander sold the manor in 1830 to Sir George Ivison Tapps, and his descendant Sir George A. E. TappsGervis-Meyrick now holds it. (fn. 225)

At the time of the Domesday Survey there were two mills in Christchurch, one owned by the king (fn. 226) and the other by the priory. (fn. 227) It was probably the former which Baldwin de Redvers in about 1140 gave to the Abbot and brethren of Savigny, (fn. 228) and which Isabel de Fortibus granted in about 1272 to the abbey of Quarr. (fn. 229)

The manor of SOMERFORD, which extends from the east side of the harbour to Black Stoke, was in 1086 included either in the king's manor of Twyneham or in the priory estate. Baldwin first Earl of Devon and Richard his son in about the year 1140 confirmed an estate here to the priory, (fn. 230) and it was further confirmed by Baldwin the third earl in about 1175, when it consisted of a hide and a virgate of land. (fn. 231) The priory received further confirmations of the estate from William the fifth earl (fn. 232) and Isabel de Fortibus; in that of the latter, made in the year 1272, it was described as 'all the manor of Somerford with its hamlets.' (fn. 233) These hamlets were doubtless those of Bure, Chewton and Street. 'The land of Beora and Chiuentone' was granted to the priory early in the 12th century by Hawise Countess of Lincoln, daughter of Richard de Redvers, (fn. 234) and the grant was confirmed by his son the first Earl of Devon and by subsequent earls. (fn. 235) 'The land of La Stret' belonged to the priory before 1150, and was confirmed to it by various Earls of Devon. The three estates were all held of the manor of Somerford, as the charter of Isabel in 1272 (fn. 236) and subsequent records show. All three hamlets were returned as belonging to the priory in 1316. (fn. 237) The priory continued to own the manor, (fn. 238) receiving a grant of free warren there in 1384. (fn. 239) At the Dissolution in 1539 John Draper, the prior, in addition to his pension of £133 6s. 8d., was granted the mansion at Somerford known as the Prior's Lodging. (fn. 240) The manor remained in the king's hands until 1553, when Edward VI granted it to his uncle Sir Henry Seymour for his life. (fn. 241) From this time a series of leases of various parts of the manor were granted. (fn. 242) In 1610 the manor was granted by James I to Henry Prince of Wales, (fn. 243) and from this date it followed the descent of the prior and convent's manor of Christchurch Twyneham, being leased to the same trustees, and granted in fee farm to the same trustees in 1628, (fn. 244) and passing to Richard Fenn, who bought the two manors for £5,400. (fn. 245) It passed with Christchurch Twyneham into the Banks family, being held by Jacob Banks in 1728. (fn. 246) A little later it passed to Sir John Strachan, who got into pecuniary difficulties and conveyed it to John Spicker in trust for Charles Brander. (fn. 247) This conveyance was declared by Chancery to have been obtained by misrepresentation and by taking undue advantage of the necessitous situation of Sir John. Spicker was ordered in March 1759 to reconvey the estate to Sir John, who thereupon sold it in May following to Henry Dagge of the Middle Temple. Sir John must have died very shortly afterwards, as his widow Dame Jane Strachan married Dagge in 1760. At Dagge's death it passed to his nephew Henry (son of John Dagge), who sold it on 27 July 1797 to John Purdue. In 1801 Purdue sold it to Richard Debarry, who in 1809 sold it to Sir George Ivison Tapps, whose descendant Sir George A. E. Tapps-Gervis-Meyrick is now lord.

The farm-house or 'site of the manor' of Somerford was in lease to William Goldwyre in the reign of James I, (fn. 248) and his family continued to hold it down to 1781, when it was acquired by Gustavus Brander, (fn. 249) who pulled down the old house and built a new one on its site. It has descended in the Brander family, and now belongs to the Rev. Gustavus Brander. (fn. 250)

The 'mansion-house of Somerford known as the Prior's Lodging' (distinct from the farm-house or 'site of the manor') was granted in 1539 to John Draper, the late Prior of Christchurch, in addition, as we have seen, to his pension. (fn. 251) In 1541 it was included in the grant of the rectory of Christchurch to the Dean and Chapter of Winchester, with whom it remained (fn. 252) until sold in 1799 to James Harris, Lord Malmesbury, with the rectory of Christchurch. The deed of sale was enrolled in Chancery in 1801. (fn. 253) In 1834 James Edward second Earl of Malmesbury exchanged 'my old tythe barn called Somerford Grange' for some land in Bure and Hurn belonging to John Spicer. (fn. 254) This was presumably the ancient 'mansion-house.'

In 1086 an estate called Sclive (Cliff) was held by Walkelin Bishop of Winchester, whose predecessors had always owned it. It consisted at that time of only 8 acres of meadow, though in the reign of the Confessor, before its absorption into the forest, it had been assessed at 3 hides. This estate was probably the modern Highcliff. (fn. 255) It belonged to the priory, being parcel of the manor of Somerford. (fn. 256)

Chewton water corn mill, which still stands, has been always held of the manor of Somerford. (fn. 257)

The manor of HINTON or HINTON ADMIRAL (Hentune, xi cent.; Henton, xiii–xvii cent.; Henton Aumarle, xiv cent.; Hempton or Hompton Aumarle, Henton Amerle or Amarle, Hynton Amerell, xv cent.; Hington Amerell, Hynton Admyrall, xvi cent.) (fn. 258) lies to the north-east of Christchurch. It was held of the honour of Christchurch. In the time of the Confessor Ulwi and Edric each held estates here. In 1086 both were held by Earl Roger of Salisbury in chief, Fulcuin holding half a hide of him and Nigel 1 hide. Some of the land had by then been taken into the king's forest. (fn. 259) Before the grant of Christchurch Manor by Henry I to Richard de Redvers the overlordship passed to that family, and in about 1250 half a hide in Hinton, evidently Fulcuin's portion, was held of the Earl of Devon by Gregory and Maud de Kene for the eighth part of a knight's fee, (fn. 260) while Reginald de Albemarle, Nigel's successor, held Hammes and Hinton of the same earl for the fourth part of a knight's fee, (fn. 261) the subsequent descent of the overlordship being identical with that of Christchurch Manor (q.v.).

Reginald de Albemarle was succeeded by William, who owned the fourth part of a knight's fee in Hinton at his death in 1288. (fn. 262) This passed to his son Geoffrey, who apparently conveyed it to William de Albemarle, for in 1316 he was returned as one of the lords of Hinton, the others being Edmund le Boteler (Butler) and Joan widow of Henry le Moyne. (fn. 263) William gave his wife Agnes a life estate in the manor, with remainder to John Gimmings for his life; the latter afterwards conveyed his estate to another William de Albemarle, who in turn conveyed it to Sir William de Albemarle, kt., son of William and Agnes. (fn. 264) Agnes held the quarter of a fee in 1346, (fn. 265) but died soon after, as in 1355 her son Sir William conveyed his manors of Hinton and Hamme Albemarle to Thomas Warren, an annual rent of £100 to become payable by the heirs of the latter two years after his death. (fn. 266) In 1379 the manor was settled on Edith daughter of Thomas Warren in tail, with remainder to Richard Horn (fn. 267); the latter owned it at his death in 1394, his heir being Julia his daughter, wife of John Syward, jun. (fn. 268) It soon after came into the hands of the More family, Robert More and his wife Joan owning it in 1406. (fn. 269) In 1419 it was settled by them, (fn. 270) and in 1428 John More their successor owned the quarter of a fee in Hinton which Geoffrey de Albemarle had once held. (fn. 271) Three years later the manor was held by Katherine de Styntesford, still for a quarter of a knight's fee. (fn. 272)

The next record of the manor that has been found is in 1536, when, in a chancery suit between Tristram Fitch and Alice Storke, widow, it was ordered that the manor should be assigned to the former, (fn. 273) although Alice's husband had owned a considerable estate at Hinton. (fn. 274) In 1558 John Machell settled all his land at Hinton upon Thomas his third son in tail, with remainder to John his eldest son in tail. (fn. 275) He would appear to have owned the manor, as in 1560 there was a conveyance of it by trustees to Thomas, (fn. 276) who leased it for three lives to William Clatford. John Machell, on succeeding to it, disputed the validity of the lease, (fn. 277) and in 1592 conveyed the manor to John Gundrey and John Crocker. (fn. 278) In the 17th century the manor belonged to the Tulse family and in the early 18th presumably to the Hinxman family. (fn. 279) In 1767 it belonged, together with the Christchurch estates (q.v.), to Joseph Jarvis Clerke, (fn. 280) from whom Sir George Ivison Tapps inherited it. (fn. 281) It is now the property of his greatgrandson Sir G. A. E. Tapps-Gervis-Meyrick, bart.

The so-called manor of NORTH HINTON (Northentone, xii–xiii cent.; Northynton, xvi cent.; Northington, xvii cent.) originated in an estate held by the priory of Christchurch. In 1199 Richard Breton owned land there (fn. 282); Roger Breton succeeded to it, and in 1249 his sister and heiress Maud granted the prior 2 virgates there. (fn. 283) In 1263 the prior was liable for castle guard at Christchurch in respect of land at Hinton called Brutons. (fn. 284) A few years later the prior received from Isabel de Fortibus Countess of Albemarle a part of the land which had been given to her and her deceased husband by Eustace of Hinton, and this was confirmed by the king in 1313. (fn. 285) At the time of the Dissolution the priory estate was worth £9 0s. 6d. yearly, £8 3s. 10d. being the farm of the capital messuage now known as North Hinton Farm, and 16s. 8d. the rent of the customary land. (fn. 286) Five years later, in 1544, it was granted to Sir William Berkeley, kt., (fn. 287) whose successor Sir John Berkeley, kt., sold it in 1570 to Robert Bond. (fn. 288) William Bond in 1604 conveyed the greater part of it to Harry Hastings, (fn. 289) whose successor George Hastings owned 430 acres there in 1670. (fn. 290) The first record of the 'manor' that has been found is in 1733, when it belonged to Joseph Hinxman, jun. (fn. 291) In 1798 it was conveyed by Thomas Gale and Susan his wife to John Elliott. (fn. 292) It is now the property of Sir G. A. E. Tapps-Gervis-Meyrick, bart.

At the beginning of the 12th century the vill of HURN (Heorne, xii cent.; Horne, xvi–xviii cent.) passed with the royal grant of Christchurch Twyneham to Richard de Redvers, by whom it was shortly afterwards granted to the priory of Christchurch. (fn. 293) Baldwin de Redvers his son, first Earl of Devon, confirmed this grant and his son, the second earl, added a further confirmation describing the estate for the first time as 'the two Hurnes.' (fn. 294) In 1285 the prior and convent had a grant of free warren in their demesne lands in Hurn, (fn. 295) and they held this manor, to which various additions were made in the next centuries, until the Dissolution. (fn. 296) In March 1540 the king granted Thomas Wriothesley and William Avery a twenty-one years' lease of the manor, (fn. 297) and in 1553 Edward VI gave the manor to his uncle Sir Henry Seymour, kt., for his life. (fn. 298) The reversion was granted by Queen Elizabeth in 1574 to Thomas Henneage, Miles Finch and Michael Henneage, (fn. 299) and they in the following year assigned it to Sir Henry Seymour for £400, (fn. 300) his life estate thus becoming merged in the freehold. He died in 1578, having by his will directed the manor, then held in chief for the twentieth part of a knight's fee, to be sold within three years after his death. (fn. 301) Presumably his son John Seymour, then aged eighteen years, purchased it, for in 1598 he settled it upon his wife Susan, (fn. 302) and in 1616 on payment of £2399s. 4½d. he secured from James I a grant and confirmation of the manor to be held as before for the twentieth part of a knight's fee. (fn. 303) He died the following year and was succeeded by his son Edward, then aged thirty-seven, (fn. 304) who in 1624 suffered a recovery of the manor. (fn. 305) It was soon after sold to Robert Jason, who, dying possessed of it in 1637, was succeeded by his son Robert, (fn. 306) who was made a baronet in 1661; he died in 1675 and was followed by his son Robert, the second baronet, who resettled the manor in 1680. (fn. 307) His son George dying unmarried about 1697, it passed to his sister Anne, wife of Thomas Partington, (fn. 308) who in 1706 conveyed it to Robert Southam for ninetynine years. (fn. 309) However, in December 1751, before the lease had expired, William Webb was dealing with the freehold of the manor, which he conveyed to Joseph Lyne and Elizabeth his wife, (fn. 310) who in the following April conveyed it to John Willis for £2,200. James and John Willis sold the manor in June 1754 to Edward Hooper, who already held Heron Court. Edward son of this Edward Hooper died a bachelor and left the manor at his death in 1795 to James Harris Lord (afterwards first Earl of) Malmesbury, his first cousin once removed, (fn. 311) from whom it has descended to his great-great-grandson, James Edward Harris, fifth and present earl.

Hooper. Or a fesse between three boars passant azure with three rings or upon the fesse.

Harris, Earl of Malmesbury. Azure a cheveron erminois between three hedgehogs or and a chief of augmentation argent with the Black Eagle of Prussia therein.

The mansion-house of Heron or Hurn Court formed part of the manor of Hurn until 1575, when it was leased by Sir Henry Seymour to Robert Odber for a term of ninety-nine years. In June 1652 Robert Odber assigned the lease to Parkinson Odber, to whom in June 1658 it was renewed for another term of ninety-nine years, namely until 1674, by Sir Robert Jason, then lord of Hurn. Parkinson Odber's will was proved in November 1661, in which month his executors assigned the leases of Hurn Court to Edward Hooper. Before 1674 the latter secured a renewal of the lease from Sir Robert Jason until Michaelmas 1773. In May 1700 the remainder of the lease was settled on Edward son of Edward Hooper on his marriage with Lady Dorothy Ashley, and in the following July Edward Hooper the elder bought the reversion of the fee simple from the devisees in trust of Sir Richard Hawkins, to whom in 1680 Sir Robert Jason had conveyed the same. Edward, grandson of Edward Hooper the purchaser dying unmarried in 1795, left Heron Court to James Harris Lord (afterwards first Earl of) Malmesbury, from whom it has descended with the manor to the present earl. (fn. 312)

Heron Court, which is on the site of the manorfarm of the prior and convent, is an E-shaped house, the north front and main block being part of the old house. A drawing of the house made in 1806 shows out-buildings to the east and west; those on the west are still standing, but the others were cleared away in about 1807. Another story as well as a west wing were then added to the house by Lord Fitz Harris, afterwards second Earl of Malmesbury, improving the interior but rather spoiling the symmetry of the external proportions. The park is well wooded, and contains several very fine cedars of Lebanon.

There is a mill on the Moors River at Hurn.

At the time of the Domesday Survey Hugh de Port held both HURN and KNAPP (Chenap, xi cent.; Cnoppe, xii cent.; Cnappe, xiii–xiv cent.; Knape, xvi cent.) of the Bishop of Bayeux, and both were held of him by a certain Hugh. Both were also assessed as they had been in the time of the Confessor at 1 hide, but whereas Hurn had been then held by two allodial owners, Knapp had been held by three and there had been three halls there. (fn. 313) In the 13th century these two estates were represented by half a knight's fee held by the St. Johns, as heirs of Hugh de Port, in Hurn, Knapp and Murding. This halffee was then held of Robert de St. John by Aubrey de Botreaux, of whom the heirs of Philip de la Hurn, Richard Bacon and Hugh de Murding held separate portions. (fn. 314) In 1316 (fn. 315) and 1347 Maurice le Brune and other heirs of Aymer de Valence held the same half-fee of Edmund de St. John, (fn. 316) to whose widow the same was confirmed in dower in 1349. (fn. 317) In 1392 Isabel de Poynings, sister and heiress of Edmund de St. John, granted all her estate in Hurn and Knapp to the Prior and convent of Christchurch. (fn. 318) Thus the Port estate in Hurn and Knapp (fn. 319) became absorbed into the priory manor of Hurn and followed the same descent (q.v.). Other land in Knapp was included in the manor of Funckton or Merritown (vide infra).

There was a mill at Knapp in 1086 worth 20s., together with a fishery worth 50d. (fn. 320) These both continued to belong to the priory. (fn. 321) The mill was destroyed by fire in 1760, at which time it belonged to Matthew Aldridge, (fn. 322) but it was rebuilt and is still standing.

The land which belonged to the priory in 1086 included an estate at 'Bostel' with a third part of a mill. It was held of the king by Alnod the priest, who had held it of the Confessor. (fn. 323) It was confirmed to the priory by Richard de Redvers in about 1100 (fn. 324) and on several subsequent occasions. (fn. 325) It is probably represented by Bostell or Bosley Farm, which was conveyed to James Hooper in July 1700 by Matthew Blucke and Richard Webb. In 1716 it was held by the Rev. Thomas Hooper, of whom it was purchased by Edward Hooper, his elder brother. From the latter it has passed with Hurn to the present Earl of Malmesbury. (fn. 326)

The manor of FUNCKTON or MERRITOWN (Fonkehurne, xiv cent.; Fonketon, Fowncktowne, xvi cent.; Funk Town, xvii cent.; Founthill, Fincton, xviii and xix cent.) seems to have originated in an estate there and in Christchurch, Knapp and Murding which was in 1308 conveyed by William Bolymer to Elias de Godele and his wife Christine, (fn. 327) and which was held for half a knight's fee of the honour of Christchurch. (fn. 328) For the next 200 years its descent was the same as that of Sandhill Manor, near Fordingbridge (q.v.), and on the death in 1507 of Richard Molines it passed to his son William. (fn. 329) He settled the 'manor' of Funckton (so called for the first time) on John Due and Margaret his wife for their lives, and in 1542 he settled the reversion, after his own death, upon George Molines in tail. (fn. 330) In 1587 there was a settlement of the manor by Anthony Molines, (fn. 331) and three years later there was a further settlement of it upon Michael Molines. (fn. 332) In 1627 it was conveyed by Sir Barentine Molines, kt., and Michael Molines to Mark Bidlecombe. (fn. 333) It remained in the Bidlecombe family until 1728, when, after the death of Martin Bidlecombe the younger, it was sold to John Gore, who settled it on his wife Lucy in 1730 (fn. 334) and was holding it with his wife in 1731. (fn. 335) In 1738 Mary daughter of John and Lucy Gore married Robert Hippesley, and the manor was settled on her and her husband. (fn. 336) In 1786 it was conveyed by their heir John William Hippesley and John Long and his wife Ellen, presumably a daughter of Robert and Mary, to George Aldridge. (fn. 337) However, in 1800 an exchange was effected by which Droxford Farm in the parish of Droxford with a sum of £5,600 was transferred from Lord Malmesbury to George Aldridge in return for the manor of Funckton or Merritown. (fn. 338) From that date the manor and lands have descended with the title and now belong to the present Earl of Malmesbury.

Only one block of the original manor-house of Merritown is now standing, the rest having been pulled down late in the 18th century. Since that time it has been used as a farm-house, and the long disused ice-house is nearly overgrown by vegetation. The second Earl of Malmesbury discovered encased in the wainscoting of what was once the drawingroom of Merritown a fine 17th-century threequarter length portrait of George Villiers, second Duke of Buckingham, by Michael Wright. It now hangs in the dining-room at Heron Court. The resident at Merritown in 1760 set up an obelisk on a barrow on the common nearly a mile north of the house and planted some fir trees round it. Writing in 1834 Lord Malmesbury described the firs as a battered clump known as 'Hobluss,' a corruption of the name of the otherwise forgotten obelisk. (fn. 339)

The manor of WINKTON (Weringetone, xi cent.; Winton, xvi-xviii cent.; Winckleton, xvii cent.), lying to the north of Christchurch, was held of Edward the Confessor by Earl Tostig. In 1086 it belonged to Waleran the huntsman, of whom it was held by one Robert; 1 hide and half a virgate of land, together with all the woodland, had by this time been absorbed into the king's forest, while a further virgate had been given by William I to a certain priest (fn. 340); the remainder was gelded at 3 hides and 1 virgate. In about 1280 John of Monmouth held one knight's fee in Winkton in chief. (fn. 341) John de Campeny held this fee of him as of his barony of Walter Waleran, and attached to another fee which John de Campeny owned in Wiltshire. (fn. 342) A hundred years later the overlordship was in the hands of Oliver de Ingham, and at his death the knight's fee he owned in Winkton—valued at 40s. yearly—was assigned to Joan his daughter and Roger Lestrange her husband. (fn. 343) In 1406 the manor was held of Miles de Stapleton as of his manor of Dean, (fn. 344) and ten years later it was held of his heirs, (fn. 345) that being the last record that has been found of the overlordship.

John de Campeny sold part of his estate in Winkton to Christchurch Priory, (fn. 346) while the remainder, or the greater part of it, was acquired by William Gundeville, and was owned in 1316 by Robert Gundeville. (fn. 347) The latter still held it in 1344, (fn. 348) but two years later it belonged to Richard of Fernhill (fn. 349) and Henry Gundeville, (fn. 350) being then described as half a fee in Winkton and Steeple Langford in Wiltshire which had belonged to William Gundeville. (fn. 351) Henry's quarter of a fee descended to Alice the wife of Sir Thomas West, kt. She died in 1395 seised of half the manor of Winkton, (fn. 352) which passed to her son Thomas, the estate at his death in 1406 being regarded as a distinct manor. (fn. 353) He was followed by his son Sir Thomas, whose brother and heir Reginald succeeded to the manor on his death in 1416. (fn. 354) Richard of Fernhill's quarter of a fee descended to Ralph Bush, and in 1431 Sir Reginald West owned 'the manor of Winkton,' while Ralph Bush held 'another manor in Winkton.' (fn. 355) This other manor was in all probability that afterwards known as the manor of Fernhills Court in Winkton (q.v. infra).

Sir Reginald afterwards became the sixth Lord De La Warr and died in 1450, being succeeded by his son Richard, (fn. 356) who died in 1476, having eight years before settled the manor of Winkton upon his wife Katherine. (fn. 357) She died in 1494, the manor passing to her son Thomas West, the eighth lord, (fn. 358) at whose death in 1525 it devolved upon his son Thomas. In the year 1538 he appears to have had thoughts of selling it, according to a letter from Harry Huttoft, customer of Southampton, to Lord Cromwell. (fn. 359) At his death in 1554 the manor passed to his grandson William, tenth lord, who owned it in 1568. (fn. 360) Two years later his son Thomas West, with others having interests in it, conveyed the manor, together with that of BOCKHAMPTON (fn. 361) (Bachameton, Bochamton, xiii cent.; Brokehampton, xv and xvi cent.; Bockington, xvi and xvii cent.), to Sir John Berkeley, kt., and John Griffithe, probably on mortgage or by way of settlement. (fn. 362) This is the first record that has been found of the manor of Bockhampton, which from this date until the year 1603 passed with Winkton. It may be suggested that up till then it had been parcel of Winkton Manor, from which at this date it became detached, (fn. 363) being held as a separate manor, which ultimately became known as that of WINKTON WESTBURY (vide infra).

West, Lord De La Warr. Argent a fesse dancetty sable.

In 1591 both manors, together with that of Fernhills Court (which reappears for the first time since 1431), belonged to William Waller, who mortgaged them in that year to John Berkeley, (fn. 364) who in the same year conveyed them to Edward Read. (fn. 365) Numerous fresh encumbrances were created by William Waller, and in 1601 the three manors were sold by John Berkeley as mortgagee to John Moore, who took conveyances from the various encumbrancers, including Edward Read. (fn. 366) Two years later John Moore conveyed all three manors to William Tulse. (fn. 367) That of Winkton belonged in 1646 to Edward Lewen (fn. 368); eight years later it was held by Richard Stephens, (fn. 369) but Edward Lewen still owned it in 1670. (fn. 370) It soon after became known as the manor of WINKTON LEWEN, and in 1722 it belonged to Jacob Perkins, (fn. 371) whose successor Edmund Perkins held it in 1752. (fn. 372) No further record of the manor of Bockhampton has been found until 1707, when it was owned by John Hoskins. (fn. 373) It was then called the manor of Winkton, but by 1738 it was known as the manor of Winkton Westbury. In that year a third part of the moiety of it was conveyed to John Miller by Philip, Elizabeth and Anne Walter. (fn. 374) In 1752 it was owned by Edmund Perkins, (fn. 375) who, as has been seen, also possessed the manor of Winkton Lewen. Both manors continued in the Perkins family until 1802, when the widow of James Francis Perkins conveyed to Charles Jenkinson, who in 1816 sold to James Procter Anderdon. In 1829 Anderdon sold to Sir George Pocock, who ten years later sold to Thomas Jesson. The latter sold in 1848 to Henry Castleman, whose widow sold the manor in 1867 to J. H. Dart, after whose death in 1887 the trustees of his will sold it to Sir George Meyrick in 1890. (fn. 376)

The manor of FERNHILLS COURT (Farnelles or Fernile Courte, xvi cent.; Farnels Courte, xvii cent.) in Winkton originated, as has been seen, (fn. 377) in the half of Winkton Manor which Richard of Fernhill held in 1346 (fn. 378) and Ralph Bush in 1431 for a quarter of a knight's fee. (fn. 379) No record of the manor has been found from that time down to 1591, (fn. 380) when it was held by William Waller. (fn. 381) Its descent during the next twelve years was identical with that of Winkton, William Tulse owning it in 1603. (fn. 382) It was still in his family a century later, when it belonged to another William Tulse. (fn. 383) In 1732 Katherine Tulse sold it to William Goldwyre for £500, (fn. 384) and in the late 18th and early 19th centuries it belonged to the Mansfield family. Its identity is now lost.

At the time of the Domesday Survey there were two mills in Winkton, which paid a rent of 450 eels. (fn. 385)

The manor of EAST PARLEY (Porle, Perleye, Esperle, Est Purle, xiii cent.) lies to the north-west of Christchurch, near the county boundary. In the 13th century Robert de St. John held half a knight's fee there of the king in chief; William de la Falaise held it of Robert, and Aubrey de Linguire held it of William. (fn. 386) The St. John overlordship continued for many years. The manor was held of Robert's grandson John, the first Lord St. John, in 1300 (fn. 387); also in 1307 for the service at this date of a quarter of a knight's fee. (fn. 388) When he died in 1329 he owned half a fee in East Parley and Rockford, (fn. 389) as did his son Hugh, the second lord, when he died eight years later, (fn. 390) and his grandson Edmund, the third lord, at his death without issue in 1347. (fn. 391) Two years later the half-fee, worth 40s. yearly, was ordered to be delivered to Margaret eldest sister of Edmund and John de St. Philbert, her husband. (fn. 392) In the years 1450, (fn. 393) 1486 (fn. 394) and 1572 (fn. 395) the manor was held of the Prior of St. John of Jerusalem in England, but no further record of the overlordship has been found.

William de la Falaise and Aubrey de Linguire held the manor of Robert de St. John (fn. 396) in the 13th century, and from that date the manor followed the descent of Rowner (q.v.) until 1382, when Sir Maurice le Brune, kt., conveyed the manor to William Ringbourne, the latter granting him a life estate in it. (fn. 397) Seven years later Sir Ingram le Brune, kt., son of Sir Maurice, confirmed the manor to William Ringbourne. (fn. 398) William died in 1422, (fn. 399) and must have granted the manor to his wife Agnes in dower, for six years later her second husband John Holcombe owned it. (fn. 400) William Ringbourne, son of William and Agnes, owned the manor when he died in 1450, and was succeeded by his son Robert. (fn. 401) The latter died without issue possessed of the manor in 1485, his heir being his brother William. (fn. 402) On the death of the latter in 1511 the manor reverted to the Brune family, and from that time followed the descent of Rowner (q.v.). A moated house, now used as a farm, represents the manor-house.

Several other estates in Christchurch were mentioned in the Domesday Survey. HUBBORN (Hoburne, xi–xiv cent.; Huburne, xii–xiv cent.) was held at that time by Saulf's wife; her husband had held it in the time of the Confessor. (fn. 403) It was granted to the priory about 1100 by Richard de Redvers, (fn. 404) and most of his descendants confirmed the grant. (fn. 405) The house, now known as Hubborn, marks the site of the estate, which, however, never in fact became a separate manor.

STANPIT (Stanpeta, xi–xiv cent.; Stamputta, xii-xiv cent.) was held in 1086 by Hugh de Port of the Bishop of Bayeux. He had two estates there; one had been held of the Confessor by Wislac and the other by Godwine. (fn. 406) William II granted the priory an estate here, which was confirmed by Stephen in 1150. (fn. 407) Another grant of a hide and a virgate there was made to the priory by Witro the Falconer and Adeline his wife, and was confirmed by Baldwin de Redvers about 1175. (fn. 408)

BECKLEY (Bichelei, xi cent.), near Hinton, was in 1086 held by Nigel of Roger Earl of Shrewsbury, who held it in chief. It had been held by Holengar in the reign of the Confessor. (fn. 409)


  • 1. With the trifling exception that in 1877 four small detached parts of the parish were added to Holdenhurst in exchange for two like parts of Holdenhurst parish (Pop. Ret. 1881).
  • 2. Part of this parish was taken from Milton.
  • 3. a A modern building district formerly known as West Shore.
  • 4. Bournemouth, however, was mostly carved out of Holdenhurst (q.v.).
  • 5. A small piece of the eastern extremity had belonged to Highcliff parish before.
  • 6. Together with that of Winton (vide infra).
  • 7. By award of January 1805 under Priv. Act, 1802, cap. 43.
  • 8. By award of September 1806 under the same Act.
  • 9. By award of August 1827 under Priv. Act, 1825, cap. 67.
  • 10. By award of January 1878 under the Gen. Incl. Act.
  • 11. Pop. Ret. 1901, table 15.
  • 12. Statistics from Bd. of Agric. (1905).
  • 13. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304.
  • 14. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiii (1), 1117.
  • 15. It may perhaps have been merely a survival of the old Priory School and not a new establishment.
  • 16. M. E. C. Walcott, Priory Church of Christchurch Twyneham, 32.
  • 17. Lewis, Topog. Dict. of Engl.
  • 18. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1603–10, p. 496. The 'master of the Lazer House' was mentioned in about 1640; Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.); Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 130–1.
  • 19. Pop. Ret. 1901.
  • 20. Statistics from Bd. of Agric. (1905).
  • 21. Pop. Ret. 1901.
  • 22. Statistics from Bd. of Agric. (1905).
  • 23. V.C.H. Hants, i, 38.
  • 24. Arch. Journ. v, 237–40; V.C.H. Hants, i, 344.
  • 25. In the time of James I this park was reported to be falling 'continually into the sea, 2 or 3 poles of land at once, and wasteth 2 or 3 a.p.a., and the house is about 3 furlongs from the sea. I am persuaded that within forty years it will waste near to the house, and there is no art can prevent it' (Rentals and Surv. [P.R.O.], Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 140–8). The process continued until 1875, when the cliff was successfully blocked up.
  • 26. Louisa Marchioness of Waterford, My Recollections to the Age of Twelve; a pamphlet kindly lent by the Earl of Malmesbury.
  • 27. Pop. Ret. 1901.
  • 28. Statistics from Bd. of Agric. (1905).
  • 29. Hurn Bridge is mentioned as early as 1274 (Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, pp. 226, 231).
  • 30. Vide V.C.H. Hants, ii, 344, 381.
  • 31. For this and the following see Dict. Nat. Biog.
  • 32. Woodward, Hist. of Hants, 96.
  • 33. Walcott, Priory Church of Christchurch Twyneham, 32.
  • 34. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304.
  • 35. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 231.
  • 36. Dugdale, loc. cit.
  • 37. Ibid. 229.
  • 38. Ibid. 230.
  • 39. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 226.
  • 40. Rentals and Surv. R. (P.R.O.), 581.
  • 41. Pat. 4 & 5 Phil. and Mary, pt. v (grant to Robt. White).
  • 42. Com. Pleas D. Enr. Mich. 4 Edw. VI, m. 5 d.
  • 43. Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.), Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 140–8.
  • 44. Pat. 4 Chas. I, pt. xxxiv.
  • 45. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304; called Richton or Riston at the end of the 13th century (Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, pp. 226, 231) and Russheton in 1506 (De Banco R. Mich. 22 Hen. VII, m. 123).
  • 46. Rentals and Surv. R. (P.R.O.), 581.
  • 47. Anct. D. (P.R.O.), A 5949, 12484.
  • 48. Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.), portf. 22, no. 79.
  • 49. Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 20 Hen. VIII (William Clement v. John Bartylmew).
  • 50. L. and P. Hen. VIII, v, 23.
  • 51. Pat. 12 Eliz. pt. v, m. 29.
  • 52. Ibid. 32 Eliz. pt. xvii (grant to Robert Zynlan).
  • 53. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xx (2), 496 (27).
  • 54. Pat. 32 Eliz. pt. xii (grant to Katherine West).
  • 55. Norden, Chorographical Description of Hants, 1595, in Add. MS. no. 31853.
  • 56. Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.), Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 140–8.
  • 57. Pat. 4 Chas. I, pt. xxxiv.
  • 58. Cal. Com. for Comp. 797, 1089.
  • 59. Recov. R. 5 Geo. II, rot. 36.
  • 60. Pat. 32 Eliz. pt. xii (grant to William Chaffyne).
  • 61. A.-S. Chron. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 75.
  • 62. a See Maitland, Dom. Bk. and Beyond, 502–4. Mr. Stenton points out the possible significance of the fact that in this document Twinham, to which a district comprising in different texts 460 or 470 hides was appurtenant, occurs between Shaftesbury and Wareham, and away from Winchester and Southampton. He also notes that a suggestion has been made (H. M. Chadwick, Angl.-Sax. Inst. p. 211) that at this early date Twinham and the area which belonged to it may have formed part of the county of Dorset. The addition of Twinham to Dorset and of Portchester to Sussex would show a somewhat symmetrical distribution of the hides of Hampshire and Sussex among the boroughs of those shires. But, as Mr. Stenton points out, any attempt to bring order out of early statistics by an arbitrary alteration of county boundaries must be regarded as highly speculative.
  • 63. V.C.H. Hants, i, 454.
  • 64. Ibid. 476. This portion was granted in 1610 to the Prince of Wales, whose rights were often confused with those of the lord of the borough (vide Exch. T. R. Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 130–5).
  • 65. MSS. penes Sir G. A. E. TappsGervis-Meyrick, bart.
  • 66. Recov. R. D. Enr. Hil. 1 & 2 Geo. IV, m. 18.
  • 67. Ibid.
  • 68. Brayley and Ferrey, Antiq. of Christchurch (1834), 10 n.
  • 69. The charter quoted is to be identified as his only by the witnesses, first of whom was Countess Lucy, said (but doubtfully) to be his wife Lucy daughter of Dru de Balon.
  • 70. Cal. Pat. 1313–17, p. 219.
  • 71. The charter is known as his by the mention of his mother Amicia.
  • 72. The reference in the case of the sons would seem to be to the levy of chevage and the prohibition as to the reception of orders. In the case of daughters merchet is probably meant.
  • 73. Cal. Pat. 1313–17, p. 219.
  • 74. Inq. p.m. file 29, no. 2 (47 Hen. III).
  • 75. Rentals and Surv. R. (P.R.O.), 581.
  • 76. Mins. Accts. bdle. 978, no. 20.
  • 77. Exch. T. R. Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 130–5.
  • 78. Ct. R. (P.R.O.), portf. 201, no. 10.
  • 79. Anct. D. (P.R.O.), A 6415.
  • 80. Ibid. A 12484.
  • 81. A meadow called the 'Portrevenmede' is mentioned in an early extent (Rentals and Surv. R. 581).
  • 82. Exch. T. R. Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 130–5.
  • 83. Rentals and Surv. R. (P.R.O.), 581.
  • 84. A letter is preserved among the corporation archives in which Sir Peter Mews, who represented Christchurch early in the 18th century, assured the burgesses against any claims for salary or other expenses in connexion with his services in Parliament.
  • 85. Cecil MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), ii, 542.
  • 86. Stat. 2 Will. IV, cap. 45.
  • 87. Boundary Rep. ii, 219. The parliamentary borough did not include all the then parish of Christchurch.
  • 88. The franchise had been confined to members of the corporation, but now included owners and tenants of houses yielding £10 per annum.
  • 89. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1581–90, p. 208. The members of the corporation have never exercised any judicial authority. The mayor used to be elected by scot and lot on 14 Sept. and he was sworn in at the Michaelmas court leet before the steward. According to Stockdale's Parliamentary Guide (1784), the inhabitants of the borough paying scot and lot were then about seventy.
  • 90. Portland MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), iii, 556, 567; iv, 28.
  • 91. Dict. Nat. Biog.
  • 92. Lord Arundell petitioned Parliament in 1637 against the appointment of John Hildesley as mayor, on the ground that the borough had never been incorporated by charter (Cal. S. P. Dom. 1637, p. 58).
  • 93. Ibid. 1670, p. 340.
  • 94. a Pat. 22 Chas. II, pt. i, no. 34–6.
  • 95. Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. viii, App. i, 25b.
  • 96. Brayley and Ferrey, op. cit. 14; Boundary Rep. ii, 219.
  • 97. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304; Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, pp. 229, 230.
  • 98. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 230.
  • 99. Pipe R. 23 Hen. II (Pipe R. Soc.), 174.
  • 100. Cal. Chart. R. 1257–1300, p. 2; Cal. Rot. Chart. et Inq. a.q.d. (Rec. Com.), 88.
  • 101. Exch. T. R. Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 135.
  • 102. H. Moody, Sketches of Hants, 259.
  • 103. Walcott, op. cit. 9.
  • 104. a Lond. Gaz. 9 Apr. 1872.
  • 105. Dugdale, loc. cit.
  • 106. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 229.
  • 107. Rentals and Surv. R. (P.R.O.), 581.
  • 108. Mins. Accts. bdle. 978, no. 19. Mabel was the wife of William the fifth earl.
  • 109. Ibid. no. 20.
  • 110. Exch. T. R. Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 134.
  • 111. The salmon fishing belonged to the lord of the borough, but the Prince of Wales, as representative of the prior and convent, had a moiety of the fishing— namely, the small fish—in the 17th century (Exch. T. R. Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 134).
  • 112. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiii (1), 1117.
  • 113. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1547–80, p. 623.
  • 114. Lansd. MS. 107, rot. 108.
  • 115. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1644, p. 102; Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. vii, 447a; Portland MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), iii, 110.
  • 116. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1644–5, pp. 256, 258, 272–3; House of Lords MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), vi, 53b.
  • 117. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1650, p. 178.
  • 118. Ibid. 1663–4, p. 130.
  • 119. Ibid. 1675–6, p. 331; Various MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), iv, 246, 254; Cal. S. P. Dom. 1661–2, p. 306; 1664–5, p. 534.
  • 120. Warner, Hist. of Hants, i, 148; Dict. Nat. Biog. under Yarranton.
  • 121. Guide to Bournemouth (Simpkin, Marshall & Co. 1876), 95; Woodward, Hist. of Hants, iii, 134.
  • 122. V.C.H. Hants, ii, 154.
  • 123. Brayley and Ferrey, op. cit. 97; Acts of P.C. 1552–4, pp. 114–15.
  • 124. Portland MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), iv, 46.
  • 125. Boundary Rep. ii, 219.
  • 126. Pat. 1 Hen. IV, pt. viii, m. 19; 3 Hen. V, pt. ii, m. 3; Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304; and see below.
  • 127. Vide infra.
  • 128. Cal. Inq. p.m. Hen. III, 174. Besides the obligation with respect to Sway, the prior, together with Gregory Marshall, owed similar service for an estate atHinton. The remaining landowners owing castle guard were Roger de Hinton for the land of Holway, Roger de Holehurst (Holdenhurst) for land at Holehurst, Richard de Fernhill for land at Fernhill, William Boschiri of 'Baylnclislegh' for his land there, the heirs of Bereminton for the land of Bereminton, Roger de Stanton for the land of Sopley, Nigel de Bocland for land at Arnewood, Henry Trenchard for the land of Hordle and Thomas de Orweye for the land of Downton. The borough of Dorchester, it may be noted, rendered 60s. yearly to the castle and Richard de Fernhill 30¼d. from Tonstal.
  • 129. Cal. Close, 1307–13, p. 50.
  • 130. Francis Grose, Antiq. of Engl. and Wales (pub. 1774), vol. ii.
  • 131. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1650, p. 178.
  • 132. Ibid. 1651, p. 293.
  • 133. Birch, Cart. Sax. ii, 452; Kemble, Cod. Dipl. no. 1119. This was probably the same property as the 12 acres, to which a fishery had once belonged, owned by the monastery in 1086, and then held under it by Edward of Salisbury, the sheriff of Wiltshire (V.C.H. Hants, i, 473).
  • 134. Ibid. 454.
  • 135. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304.
  • 136. G.E.C. Complete Peerage.
  • 137. Cal. Rot. Chart. et Inq. a.q.d. (Rec. Com.), 6; Rot. Chart. (Rec. Com.), 52.
  • 138. G.E.C. Complete Peerage. He was then a minor, and the king appointed Ralph de Wiliton bailiff of his lands (Cal. Pat. 1216–25, p. 126) and granted his guardianship first to Fulke de Breauté and then to Richard Earl of Cornwall. In 1218 John Marshal was made bailiff, and he was superseded by Waleran Lyes in 1224; ibid. pp. 137, 427.
  • 139. Cal. Inq. p.m. (Rec. Com.), i, 44. At this time the manor was held in chief partly by serjeanty and partly for the service of fifteen knights (Testa de Nevill [Rec. Com.], 232, 235).
  • 140. Cal. Inq. p.m. Hen. III, 173. The hundred of Holdenhurst seems to have been practically co-extensive with the modern hundred of Christchurch and liberty of Westover (vide supra).
  • 141. Mins. Accts. bdle. 978, no. 19; Rentals and Surv. R. (P.R.O.), 581 (extent of the borough 1300).
  • 142. Inq. p.m. 20 Edw. I, no. 139; Cal. Close, 1288–96, p. 236. She was sued by Margaret in 1267 for trespass upon her goods at Christchurch and for retaining the profits of the manor 'during the recent disturbances' (Plac. Abbrev. [Rec. Com.], 160).
  • 143. Dugdale, loc. cit.
  • 144. Plac. de Quo Warr. (Rec. Com.), 771.
  • 145. Inq. p.m. 30 Edw. I, no. 120. She granted the bedelry of the hundred and the custody of the warren to Roger de Gardino and Joan his wife in tail (Cal. Pat. 1317–21, p. 115). This the king confirmed in 1293 (Cal. Close, 1288–96, p. 336; Inq. p.m. 28 Edw. I, no. 5). In 1300 he granted the bedelry for life to Matthew de Grinstead (Cal. Pat. 1292–1301, p. 489), but Edward II in 1318 confirmed Isabel's grant to the de Gardinos (ibid. 1317–21, p. 115). In the same year, however, he gave Hugh Champion the custody of the warren (ibid. 126).
  • 146. Cal. Pat. 1334–8, 428; Rot. Orig. Abbrev. (Rec. Com.), i, 78; Rolls of Parl. (Rec. Com.), i, 336; Cal. Close, 1296– 1302, 536; Red Bk. of Exch. (Rolls Ser.), pref. p. cccxii. In the same year the king granted the custody of the manor to John son of Thomas, the steward of the New Forest (see Cal. Pat. 1292–1301, p. 41).
  • 147. Coll. Topog. et Gen.. vi, 263.
  • 148. Red Bk. of Exch. (Rolls Ser.), pref. p. cccxii. Fourteen years before this he had been imprisoned for wilfully destroying a charter made by Isabel Countess of Albemarle in favour of the abbey of Quarr (see Chart. R. 7 Edw. I, 72, m. 4). But compare the important paper by Mr. Round on the surrender of the Isle of Wight (Gen. Mag. 1, 1–9) by the countess, correcting the errors in the preface to the Red Bk. of Exch.
  • 149. He was her great-grandson.
  • 150. Rolls of Parl. i, 334; Cal. Close, 1313–18, p. 321; see also Red Bk. of Exch. (Rolls Ser.), 1014 et seq.
  • 151. Rolls of Parl. ii, 179b.
  • 152. De Banco R. 413, m. 233d.; 423, m. 328.
  • 153. Cal. Pat. 1292–1301, p. 452. The grant was confirmed in 1310 (ibid. 1307– 13, p. 216; see also Feud. Aids, ii, 315).
  • 154. Cal. Pat. 1313–17, pp. 135–6.
  • 155. Ibid. 1317–21, pp. 115, 131; Cal. Close, 1313–18, p. 538.
  • 156. Cal. Pat. 1317–21, p. 201; Cal. Close, 1318–23, pp. 57, 150.
  • 157. Cal. Pat. 1330–4, p. 54. In 1325 John de Mere had been given the custody of the manor (Cal. Close, 1323–7, p. 397), while in 1328 William Chicherel was made bailiff of the liberty (ibid. 1327–30, pp. 301,428). In 1330 the custody of the manor for seven years had been granted to Thomas West (Rot. Orig. Abbrev. [Rec. Com.], ii, 39).
  • 158. Chart. R. 4 Edw. III, pt. i, m. 2.
  • 159. Cal. Pat. 1330–4, p. 54.
  • 160. Chart. R. 5 Edw. III, pt. i, m. 12.
  • 161. Cal. Close, 1337–9, p. 54.
  • 162. Chart. R. 12 Edw. III, no. 17, m. 25.
  • 163. G.E.C. Complete Peerage.
  • 164. Vide Inq. p.m. 18 Edw. III (1st nos.), no. 51; 23 Edw. III, no. 58; 20 Ric. II, no. 35; 1 Hen. IV, no. 7; 10 Hen. IV, no. 54; 2 Hen. V, no. 39; 7 Hen. VI, no. 57; 18 Edw. IV, no. 47. Vide also Cal. Pat. 1399–1401, p. 124; 1405–8, pp. 96, 102, 109, 142; 1422–9, p. 474; 1429–36, pp. 122, 598; 1467–77, pp. 208–9.
  • 165. See for example V.C.H. Hants, iii, 410; iv, 608, &c.
  • 166. Inq. p.m. 18 Edw. IV, no. 47. It was then worth £66 13s. 4d. yearly.
  • 167. Cal. Inq. p.m. Hen. VII, i, 478.
  • 168. For a rental of the castle in this year see Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.), portf. 22, no. 79.
  • 169. G.E.C. Complete Peerage; Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), xxviii, 15; Exch. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), file 965, no. 9; Recov. R. Mich. 10 Hen. VIII, rot. 526.
  • 170. In 1539 Lewis ap Hoel was bailiff of Christchurch, for which he received 40s. (L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiv [1], 181).
  • 171. Sir Thomas Wriothesley was then made steward of the manor and bailiff of the hundred, as well as constable of the castle (ibid. xvi, g. 580 [95]).
  • 172. Pat. 1 & 2 Phil. and Mary, pt. vii; vide infra.
  • 173. The last record found in which this enumeration was given is in 1436 (Cal. Pat. 1429–36, p. 598; vide supra). The description of the estate varied from time to time and the various holdings have become somewhat confused.
  • 174. Pat. 1 Edw. VI, pt. iv, no. 8.
  • 175. Ibid. 4 Edw. VI, pt. viii.
  • 176. G.E.C. Complete Peerage.
  • 177. Pat. 7 Edw. VI, pt. vii.
  • 178. Ibid. 1 & 2 Phil. and Mary, pt. vii (grant to Francis Earl of Huntingdon).
  • 179. Which continued to be held together down to 1790, being sometimes spoken of collectively as 'the manor of Christchurch.'
  • 180. Pat. 1 & 2 Phil. and Mary, pt. vii.
  • 181. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), clxxxiii, 58. Christchurch Castle, borough, hundred and manor were valued at £16 4s. a year only, while the manor and hundred of Westover were valued at £75 11s. 5½d.
  • 182. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1591–4, p. 172; Pat. 34 Eliz. pt. xii.
  • 183. Add. MS. 33278, fol. 132b, 133b; Recov. R. Hants, Trin. 34 Eliz. rot. 16; Feet of F. Hants, East. 34 Eliz. (Ric. Reynells and another).
  • 184. Feet of F. Hants, Trin. 39 Eliz.; Com. Pleas Recov. R. Trin. 39 Eliz. m. 10.
  • 185. Com. Pleas D. Enr. Mich. 43 & 44 Eliz. m. 42.
  • 186. See above under 'Borough.'
  • 187. Pat. 14 Jas. I, pt. xxi, m. 15.
  • 188. Cal. S. P. Dom. 1635–6, p. 408; 1636–7, p. 146.
  • 189. i.e. all the estates.
  • 190. There were Katherine widow of Ralph Earl, Mary wife of Sir John Somerset, kt., Anne wife of Cecil Lord Baltimore, Frances wife of John Earl of Shrewsbury, Frances widow of Sir John Fortescue, kt., and Clara wife of Humphrey Weld (Inq. p.m. [Ser. 2], dcx, 110).
  • 191. Ibid.
  • 192. Cal. Com. for Comp. 3271.
  • 193. Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. vii, 9b
  • 194. Var. MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), ii, 321.
  • 195. Cal. Com. for Comp. 1224. They each then owned a fifth.
  • 196. Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiv, App. vi, 373. Described as 'the sixth part of the Hundred of Christchurch.'
  • 197. They had been resettled in 1683 (Feet of F. Div. Co. Hil. 34 & 35 Chas. II; Recov. R. East. 35 Chas. II, rot. 140).
  • 198. Fortescue MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), i, 34.
  • 199. MSS. penes Sir G. A. E. TappsGervis-Meyrick.
  • 200. Recov. R. Hil. 7 Geo. III, rot. 323.
  • 201. MSS. penes Sir G. A. E. TappsGervis-Meyrick.
  • 202. Ibid.
  • 203. V.C.H. Hants, i, 476.
  • 204. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304.
  • 205. Ibid. 304, 305; Cal. Chart. R. 1257– 1300, p. 469; 1300–26, pp. 226–34; Cal. Close, 1296–1302, p. 524; Brayley and Ferrey, op. cit. App. p. vii.
  • 206. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xv, p. 564.
  • 207. Ibid. xx (1), p. 677.
  • 208. Ibid. (2), g. 496 (27).
  • 209. Pat. 4 & 5 Phil. and Mary, pt. v.
  • 210. Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.), portf. 14, no. 58. It comprised precisely the same premises as had been granted to Stephen Kirton and his wife.
  • 211. Pat. 8 Jas. I, pt. xli.
  • 212. Ibid. 14 Jas. I, pt. x, m. 1; pt. xx, m. 15. As lord of the priory manor the Prince of Wales had certain rights in the borough. See under Borough.
  • 213. Ibid. pt. xx.
  • 214. Ibid. 4 Chas. I, pt. xxxv (A), m. 2.
  • 215. Ibid. pt. xxxiv. The rents of customary tenants had fallen to £14 17s. 3d. and the perquisites of the court had risen to £5 10s. 9d. The assized rents of free tenants were still 11s.
  • 216. a Abstract of title called 'Mr. Bank's title to the manor,' seen by permission of Mr. James Druitt of Bournemouth, steward of the Earl of Malmesbury.
  • 217. b Ibid.
  • 218. c Court Rolls examined by Mr. Herbert Druitt.
  • 219. d Ibid.
  • 220. Abstract of title above quoted.
  • 221. a Recov. R. Hants, East. 1 Geo. II, rot. 243.
  • 222. b Ex inform. Mr. James Druitt.
  • 223. Arch. Journ. v, 115. The 'site' of the manor belonged in 1786 to John Coventry (Recov. R. Trin. 26 Geo. III, rot. 54).
  • 224. Recov. R. D. Enr. East. 54 Geo. III, m. 52; Recov. R. East. 54 Geo. III, rot. 18.
  • 225. MSS. penes Sir G. A. E. TappsGervis-Meyrick.
  • 226. V.C.H. Hants, i, 454.
  • 227. Ibid. 476.
  • 228. Chart. R. 7 Edw. I, no. 72, m. 4.
  • 229. Anct. D.(P.R.O.), B 3691; D 942. Confirmation by William de Vernon in about 1200. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 231; Feet of F. Hants, file 13, no. 52. The following references also refer to mills at Christchurch: Chan. Proc. (Ser. 2), bdle. 20, no. 77; Com. Pleas Recov. R. Hil. 1 & 2 Geo. IV, m. 18; Add. MS. 6205; Pat. 33 Eliz. pt. xi, m. 32; 7 Jas. I, pt. xvi, xxxiii; 8 Jas. I, pt. xli; 14 Jas. I, pt. x; Com. Pleas Recov. R. Mich. 32 Chas. II, m. 17; Hil. 1 & 2 Geo. IV, m. 18; East. 54 Geo. III, m. 52; Add. MS. 6205.
  • 230. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 230.
  • 231. Brayley and Ferrey, op. cit. App. p. vii.
  • 232. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 229.
  • 233. Ibid. 230.
  • 234. Brayley and Ferrey, op. cit. App. p. vii.
  • 235. Ibid.; Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 229.
  • 236. It spoke of 'the manor' and made no mention of the three estates, as former charters had done.
  • 237. Feud. Aids, ii, 315.
  • 238. In 1291 it was worth £6 12s. 6d. yearly (Pope Nich. Tax. [Rec. Com.], 214). In 1274 Isabel de Fortibus confirmed to the priory 'all the meadow of Sterte which they have of the gift of Roger de Holehurst' (Cal. Chart. R. 1300– 26, p. 231). This was probably a further piece of land, not the original estate they held there.
  • 239. Chart. R. 7 & 8 Ric. II, m. 5, no. 6.
  • 240. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiv (2), 597; xv, p. 549.
  • 241. Pat. 12 Eliz. pt. v, m. 29.
  • 242. Ibid. 32 Eliz. pt. xii, m. 31—to Katherine West of Gunters and Rackhams meadows with land in Avonmead, Burton and Hamborough, rent £4 0s. 4d.; ibid. pt. xvii, m. 30—to Robert Zynzan or Alexander of site of manor, pasture and tithes in Ogbeare and Avonmead, pasture in Gramborough and tithes in Stratford, rent £7 10s. 8d.; ibid. 38 Eliz. pt. ix, m. 21—to Richard Wigmore of Naish Farm with land in South Chewton in Milton parish, rent £13 16s.; ibid. 13 Eliz. pt. iii, m. 14—to Henry Manning of Barkley Farm, rent £2 10s.; ibid. 8 Jas. I, pt. xl, no. 15—to John Eldred and others of herbage and pasture in Saltmarsh and Gramborough, rent £2 8s. 4d.; ibid. 3 Chas. I, pt. xiv, no. 16—to James Levington. The annual rents aggregated £30 12s.
  • 243. Ibid. 8 Jas. I, pt. xli. At this time the rents of customary tenants had risen to £56 13s. 4d. (Rentals and Surv. [P.R.O.], portf. 20, no. 26). For compositions with tenants of the manor in 1613 see ibid. Misc. Bks. cciii, fol. 65–6.
  • 244. Pat. 4 Chas. I, pt. xxxv (A), m. 2. The extent of Somerford Manor included a sea fishery in Chewton with a net called a ram's horn (compare Rentals and Surv. [P.R.O.], Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 140–8). The fee-farm rent was granted to James Duke of Richmond and Lennox (Cal. Com. for Comp. 1527). Part of it passed to William B. Pye Benet and Elizabeth his wife (Recov. R. Mich. 44 Geo. III, rot. 303).
  • 245. 'Mr. Banks's title to the manor,' MS. referred to above, penes Mr. James Druitt.
  • 246. Recov. R. East. 1 Geo. II, rot. 243.
  • 247. This and the later descent is taken from MSS. penes Sir George Meyrick.
  • 248. Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.), Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 140–8.
  • 249. Recov. R. D. Enr. Hil. 3 & 4 Jas. II, m. 5; Recov. R. Hil. 3 & 4 Jas. II, rot. 9; East. 22 Geo. II, rot. 14; Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 32 Geo. II, pt. ii (George Green v. Edward Stillingfleet); Trin. 5 Geo. III (Henry Fitch v. Mary Goldwyre); Mich. 6 Geo. III (George Bingham v. William Bowen); Hil. 21 Geo. III.
  • 250. a Ex inform. Mr. Herbert Druitt.
  • 251. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiv (2), 597; xv, p. 549.
  • 252. a Winton Cath. Doc. (Hants Rec. Soc.), ii, 98.
  • 253. Deeds penes the Earl of Malmesbury.
  • 254. MS. note book penes the Earl of Malmesbury.
  • 255. V.C.H. Hants, i, 510.
  • 256. Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.), Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 140–8. Then (temp. Jas. I) called Cliffe Park.
  • 257. Chan. Proc. (Ser. 2), bdle. 20, no. 77; Pat. 38 Eliz. clvii, pt. ix; Rentals and Surv. (P.R.O.), Misc. Bks. clvii, fol. 140–8; Pat. 8 Jas. I, pt. xli; 14 Jas. I, pt. x; Cal. Com. for Comp. 1755.
  • 258. The manor of Hinton Admiral takes its name from the family of Aumarle or Albemarle, who for long held it.
  • 259. V.C.H. Hants, i, 511. The whole was then in the New Forest Hundred.
  • 260. This estate did not become a manor.
  • 261. Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 233.
  • 262. Cal. Inq. p.m. Edw. I, 443.
  • 263. Feud. Aids, ii, 315. Two years later Agnes, William's widow, got licence to retain the land in Hinton which she and her husband had obtained from Geoffrey Albemarle (Cal. Rot. Chart. et Inq. a.q.d. [Rec. Com.], 257; Abbrev. Rot. Orig. [Rec. Com.], i, 245).
  • 264. Original documents of 1328 and 1347 penes Sir G. A. E. Tapps-Gervis-Meyrick, bart. In the former document John Gymmynges undertook to serve Sir William (Abbrev. Rot. Orig. [Rec. Com.], ii, 36; Chart. R. 9 Edw. III, m. 26, no. 67).
  • 265. Feud. Aids, ii, 328.
  • 266. Cal. Close, 1354–60, p. 228.
  • 267. Feet of F. Hants, file 28, no. 13.
  • 268. Inq. p.m. 17 Ric. II, no. 31.
  • 269. Feet of F. Div. Co. file 2, no. 16; Hants, Mich. 14 Hen. IV, no. 91 (2).
  • 270. Ibid. Div. Co. file 2, no. 7.
  • 271. Feud. Aids, ii, 349.
  • 272. Ibid. 371.
  • 273. From documents penes Sir George Meyrick.
  • 274. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), xliv, 62.
  • 275. Chan. Proc. (Ser. 2), bdle. 227, no. 10.
  • 276. Feet of F. Div. Co. Hil. 2 Eliz.
  • 277. Ct. of Req. bdle. 57, no. 55.
  • 278. Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 34 & 35 Eliz.
  • 279. Ex inform. Mr. Herbert Druitt, evidence from tombstones, &c.
  • 280. Recov. R. Hil. 7 Geo. III, rot. 323.
  • 281. Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 19 Geo. III.
  • 282. Ibid. 10 Ric. I, no. 26.
  • 283. Ibid. file 8, no. 32.
  • 284. Cal. Inq. p.m. Hen. III, 174.
  • 285. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 226. Free warren in this land was granted to the prior in 1285 (ibid. 1257–1300, p. 324).
  • 286. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 306.
  • 287. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xix (1), g. 812 (94). It consisted of the house and dove-cote and 600 acres of land called Northclose, all of which had been in the prior's own occupation.
  • 288. Chan. Proc. (Ser. 2), bdle. 180, no. 52; Ct. of Req. bdle. 92, no. 43.
  • 289. Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 2 Jas. I.
  • 290. Abstract of Claims on the New Forest (1776).
  • 291. Feet of F. Hants, Trin. 6 & 7 Geo. II; Recov. R. East. 6 Geo. II.
  • 292. Feet of F. Hants, East. 38 Geo. III. It then comprised 520 acres.
  • 293. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304.
  • 294. Ibid. 305. See also Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, pp. 229, 230, 233. The suggested explanation of this new description is that the priory had acquired neighbouring lands in Knapp that were absorbed into Hurn Manor (vide infra).
  • 295. Cal. Chart. R. 1257–1300, p. 324.
  • 296. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 306. The land lately in demesne was probably Hurn Court—known as 'the lord's demayne' —a tenement called Buren or Burne Place and other land, all leased in 1534 (Pat. 12 Eliz. pt. v, m. 29).
  • 297. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xv, 564.
  • 298. Pat. 12 Eliz. pt. v, m. 29.
  • 299. Pat. 16 Eliz. pt. xi. An extent of the manor was given. It comprised meadows called Budmoremead, Pickelswade, Walmore, Batecombe and marshland called Turfields or Barrefield.
  • 300. Feet of F. Hants, East. 17 Eliz.; Com. Pleas D. Enr. East. 17 Eliz.
  • 301. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), clxxxiii, 64.
  • 302. W. and L. Inq. p.m. lix, 29.
  • 303. Pat. 14 Jas. I, pt. xvii, no. 10. The manor was then worth £47 17s. 10½d., the perquisites of the courts having increased to £7 13s. 4d. (Add. Chart. 25656).
  • 304. W. and L. Inq. p.m. lix, 39.
  • 305. Feet of F. Hants, Trin. 22 Jas. I; Recov. R. Trin. 22 Jas. I, rot. 67.
  • 306. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), lv, 96; Abstract of Claims on the New Forest (1776), claim no. 20.
  • 307. Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 32 Chas. II; Com. Pleas Recov. R. Mich. 32 Chas. II, m. 17.
  • 308. G.E.C. Complete Baronetage.
  • 309. Feet of F. Div. Co. Trin. 5 Anne.
  • 310. This Joseph Lyne and his wife had already held property in Hurn, since in November 1730 they conveyed the moiety of a messuage and 16 acres of land called Lockver to James Willis, probably the brother of John Willis, to whom they afterwards sold the manor; Title Deeds penes the Earl of Malmesbury, bdle. 5.
  • 311. a Being son of his first cousin James Harris, whose mother, Lady Elizabeth Ashley, was sister of the Lady Dorothy Ashley who in 1754 married Edward Hooper, the purchaser of the manor.
  • 312. All the information concerning Hurn Court was kindly supplied by the Earl of Malmesbury from title deeds in his possession. The crypt in Christchurch Priory Church belongs to the Earls of Malmesbury as lords of Hurn Court.
  • 313. V.C.H. Hants, i, 486b.
  • 314. Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 233.
  • 315. Feud. Aids, ii, 315.
  • 316. Inq. p.m. 21 Edw. III, no. 57.
  • 317. Cal. Close, 1349–54, p. 16.
  • 318. Cal. Pat. 1391–6, p. 152; Inq. p.m. 16 Ric. II, no. 127. See also ibid. no. 109.
  • 319. The priory and convent already owned land in Knapp, since in 1384 they received grant of free warren in their lands there (Chart. R. 7 & 8 Ric. II, m. 5, no. 6). However, all these were later included in the manor of Hurn, and Knapp does not appear by name among the priory possessions at the Dissolution.
  • 320. V.C.H. Hants, i, 486b.
  • 321. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 230; Chan. Proc. (Ser. 2), bdle. 20, no. 77; Pat. 33 Eliz. pt. xi, m. 32; 7 Jas. I, pt. xvi; Com. Pleas Recov. R. Mich. 32 Chas. II, m. 17; Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 32 Chas. II.
  • 322. Ch. Brief Bks. (P.R.O.), ii, fol. 1.
  • 323. V.C.H. Hants, i, 476.
  • 324. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304; misprinted 'Gostel.'
  • 325. Ibid. (misprinted 'Gorstell'); Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, pp. 229, 230 (spelt 'Bostele'). Bostell Farm is mentioned in 1674 (Add. MS. 6205).
  • 326. a Ex inform. the Earl of Malmesbury.
  • 327. Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 2 Edw. II, file 23, no. 54; file 26, no. 80. It consisted of four messuages, I carucate of land and 15s. 2d. rent.
  • 328. Inq. p.m. 20 Ric. II, no. 35.
  • 329. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), xxi, 53; Exch. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), file 961, no. 17.
  • 330. Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 33 Hen. VIII. The manor comprised 430 acres and 5s. rent in Funckton.
  • 331. Ibid. Mich. 29 & 30 Eliz.
  • 332. Ibid. East. 32 Eliz.
  • 333. Ibid. Trin. 3 Chas. I.
  • 334. a Information kindly supplied by the Earl of Malmesbury from title deeds in his possession.
  • 335. Recov. R. Trin. 5 Geo. II, rot. 20. It then comprised 680 acres, £10 rent and a free fishery in the Stour.
  • 336. a Ex inform. the Earl of Malmesbury.
  • 337. Feet of F. Hants, Trin. 26 Geo. III.
  • 338. Ex inform. the Earl of Malmesbury.
  • 339. a Ibid.
  • 340. V.C.H. Hants, i, 496.
  • 341. Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 238.
  • 342. Ibid. 231.
  • 343. Cal. Close, 1343–6, p. 403; 1346–9, p. 437. The fee was stated to be in 'Winkton in the county of Wilts.'
  • 344. Inq. p.m. 7 Hen. IV, no. 26.
  • 345. Ibid. 4 Hen. V, no. 28.
  • 346. Woodward, Hist. of Hants, iii, 130. Extract from cartulary of 1312 in Cott. Lib. 'a manor at Winkton, on which is a chapel.'
  • 347. Feud. Aids, ii, 315. The other lords of Winkton, as of the neighbouring hamlet of Burton, were the king and the prior. The Campenys still held land here in 1344 (Add. Chart. 15464; Feet of F. Hants, file 10, no. 15; Harl. Chart. 50, I 10).
  • 348. Cal. Close, 1343–6, p. 403; 1346–9, p. 437, described as a fee in Winkton in co. Wilts extended at 40s. yearly.
  • 349. Members of the Fernhill family had been freeholders in Winkton since before 1272 (Feet of F. Hants, file 11, no. 76).
  • 350. Henry had received a grant of land here in 1333 (ibid. file 22, no. 27). He died in 1346 or 1347; Harl. Chart. 51, A 16, 17.
  • 351. Feud. Aids, ii, 328.
  • 352. Inq. p.m. 19 Ric. II, no. 49. The inquisition speaks of 'half the manor of Farnhull and Wynketon held of the Earl of Salisbury for knight's service,' but later 'these halves' are referred to. Winkton was never held of the Earls of Salisbury, but Fernhill (q.v. under Milton infra) was. The record is clearly inaccurate.
  • 353. Ibid. 7 Hen. IV, no. 26. Joan Blount, formerly the wife of John Farnhull, held dower in it.
  • 354. Ibid. 4 Hen. V, no. 28.
  • 355. Feud. Aids, ii, 349, 371. Each was held for a quarter of a knight's fee.
  • 356. Inq. p.m. 29 Hen. VI, no. 21.
  • 357. Ibid. 16 Edw. IV, no. 62.
  • 358. Ibid. (Ser. 2), x, 99.
  • 359. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiii (1), 177.
  • 360. Recov. R. Hil. 10 Eliz. rot. 145. See also Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 5 Edw. VI (Thomas Arundell v. William West); Hil. 4 Eliz. (John Berde v. William West and Thomas West); Com. Pleas D. Enr. Mich. 9 & 10 Eliz. m. 22.
  • 361. It is called the manor of South Bockhampton in one record (Ct. of Req. bdle. 115, no. 1). In 1250 Hamon of Bockhampton and Drew of Temton (? Teignton, co. Devon) held of the honour of Christchurch a knight's fee there (Testa de Nevill, 233), the overlordship of which belonged to the lords of Christchurch down to 1409 (Cal. Inq. p.m. [Rec. Com.], iii, 204; Inq. p.m. 10 Hen. IV, no. 54). This estate cannot have been parcel of Winkton Manor, the overlordship of which was different.
  • 362. Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 12 & 13 Eliz.
  • 363. In two records mention is made of 'the manor or lordship of Winkton and Bockhampton' (Com. Pleas Recov. R. Mich. 33 & 34 Eliz. m. 32 [1591]; Add. MS. 33278, fol. 121 [1601]). This seems to support the theory.
  • 364. Feet of F. Hants, East. 33 Eliz. He seems to have mortgaged Bockhampton Manor to John Berkeley about three years before. In 1594, when he instituted a suit in Chancery against the latter, his estates were hopelessly involved (Chan. Proc. [Ser. 2], bdle. 252, no. 32). The Berkeleys had owned a small estate in Winkton and Bockhampton since before 1428; Inq. p.m. 6 Hen. VI, no. 50; 38 & 39 Hen. VI, no. 57; 14 Edw. IV, no. 41; Cal. Inq. p.m. Hen. VII, 477.
  • 365. Com. Pleas Recov. R. Mich. 33 & 34 Eliz. m. 32.
  • 366. Add. MS. 33278, fol. 121; Feet of F. Hants, Trin. 43 Eliz.; Recov. R. Trin. 43 Eliz. rot. 88.
  • 367. Feet of F. Hants, East. 1 Jas. I; Add. MS. 33278, fol. 144b.
  • 368. Cal. Com. for Comp. 797, 1089. The manor and demesne were let at £40 yearly; the assized rents were worth £7 and the copyholds 17s. yearly. Barton Farm in Milton parish belonged to the manor and was worth £40 yearly, but was then estated out (vide Barton Manor, under Milton infra).
  • 369. Abstract of Claims on New Forest. A William Stevens then held 115 acres in Barton.
  • 370. Recov. R. Mich. 6 Chas. II, rot. 277.
  • 371. Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 8 Geo. I; Recov. R. Hil. 8 Geo. I, rot. 170. An Edmund Perkins had an estate here in 1670 (Abstract of Claims on the New Forest).
  • 372. Recov. R. Trin. 25 & 26 Geo. II, rot. 239.
  • 373. Feet of F. Hants, Trin. 6 Anne; Recov. R. Trin. 6 Anne, rot. 126.
  • 374. Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 11 Geo. II.
  • 375. Recov. R. Trin. 25 & 26 Geo. II, rot. 239.
  • 376. Ex inform. Cranley, Arnold & Co., solicitors to Sir George Meyrick.
  • 377. Vide supra under Winkton Manor.
  • 378. Feud. Aids, ii, 328.
  • 379. Ibid. 349, 371.
  • 380. Except a rental of 1517. The customary rents amounted to £15 4s. 6d. yearly, while the free tenants paid 17s. 6½d. A rent of 4s. 2d. was paid to Christchurch Castle (Rentals and Surv. [P.R.O.], portf. 14, no. 63).
  • 381. Feet of F. Hants, East. 33 Eliz.
  • 382. Ibid. 1 Jas. I; Add. MS. 33278, fol. 144b. A William Tulse had also owned it in 1670 (Abstract of Claims on the New Forest).
  • 383. Com. Pleas Recov. R. Mich. I Anne, m. 1; Recov. R. Mich. 1 Anne, rot. 139. It lay in Winkton and Bockhampton in the parishes of Sopley and Christchurch.
  • 384. Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 5 Geo. II.
  • 385. V.C.H. Hants, i, 496. Henry Gundeville owned a third of a mill there in 1333 (Feet of F. Hants, file 22, no. 27). There were two water mills belonging to the manors of Terstwood and Winkton in 1551 and 1567; ibid. Mich. 5 Edw. VI; Hil. 4 Eliz.; East. 1 Jas. I.
  • 386. Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 233.
  • 387. Inq. p.m. 29 Edw. I, no. 44.
  • 388. Cal. Inq. p.m. 1–9 Edw. II, 32.
  • 389. Ibid. 1–9 Edw. III, 185.
  • 390. Inq. p.m. 11 Edw. III, no. 49.
  • 391. Ibid. 21 Edw. III, no. 57.
  • 392. Cal. Close, 1349–54, p. 19.
  • 393. Inq. p.m. 28 Hen. VI, no. 18.
  • 394. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), i, 74.
  • 395. Ibid. xxvii, 67.
  • 396. Ibid. 39 Hen. III, no. 34.
  • 397. Feet of F. Hants, file 28, no. 28.
  • 398. Ibid. Div. Co. file 55, no. 181.
  • 399. Berry, Hants Gen.
  • 400. Feud. Aids, ii, 349, described as 'half a knight's fee in Estperle which Ysolda Brunne once held.'
  • 401. Inq. p.m. 28 Hen. VI, no. 18.
  • 402. Ibid. (Ser. 2), i, 74.
  • 403. V.C.H. Hants, i, 513.
  • 404. Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304.
  • 405. Ibid. 304, 305; Brayley and Ferrey, op. cit. App. p. vii; Cal. Chart. R. 1300– 26, pp. 229, 230, 233.
  • 406. V.C.H. Hants, i, 486.
  • 407. Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 233. The land had been mortgaged by Peter the dean to one Alwrico.
  • 408. Brayley and Ferrey, loc. cit. For other confirming charters see Dugdale, Mon. vi, 304; Cal. Chart. R. 1300–26, p. 229. For mention of land on Stanpit Marsh see Cal. Close, 1307–13, p. 103.
  • 409. V.C.H. Hants, i, 512–13.