Place names have a particular significance and are a source of considerable interest. Their primary purpose is functional. They help identify the position of a place for example, although not always precisely. At the time of Domesday three villages, Child Okeford, Okeford Schilling [Shillingstone] and Okeford Fitzpaine were all referred to as Ackford, Alford, and Ackford all mean – the ford by the oak. Only later were they distinguished by the addition of a second name. Nevertheless in ancient times as today one of the most important reasons for naming a place was that it constituted an agreed term of reference so that villagers and people from other areas could be certain they were talking about the same place. For the same reason and arguably of greater importance was the necessity to name the fields and closes in which the agricultural labourers would be sent to work

Field names in the time of the Open Fields.

Where there were three or four open fields in a parish the most common pattern of naming the fields was by their relationship to one another. Thus Martin’s tithe map of Winterbourne Steepleton shows fields named West, East and Middle field. Simple and straightforward. In the larger parishes, more names were needed and were somewhat more inventive; at Fordington we find, in addition to East and West field, names such as Pummery, Castle, East Home field and Coomb field. At Stratton in addition to East, Middle and West field we find Brewer’s Ash, Rick and Langford fields.

By the time of the tithe commutations many of these open fields were but a shadow of their former selves having been greatly reduced in extent, often to no more than a few furlongs. The open fields shown on the Stratton map are clearly remnants of an original, much larger, open field system. Brewer’s Ash and Rick may be the name of furlongs that were ‘promoted’ to fields when partial inclosure of the original field took place. Langford field is slightly different as it is continuous with Langford Farm which was probably inclosed from the original open field.

Naming of fields in this way had a limited utility and it was common for the individual furlongs to bear names as well. The only examples amongst Martin’s work that we find come, strangely enough from the Fordington open fields which were portrayed on the Dorchester Holy Trinity map [for reasons why see here]. Here part of Pummery and Castle fields were divided up into forty five furlongs. Some of these, such as ‘Pummery Gate’ furlong [a toll gate] were geographical in their origins, whilst others lay alongside the road, ‘Martin’s town path’ furlong, whereas others are less easy to explain ‘Windsor Goose’ and ‘Hunting Horn’ furlongs for example.

Below the level of the furlong lay the strips or selions owned by individual owners and occupiers. These rarely had ‘official’ names, in most open field parishes there were simply too many strips. How then did the owners know where their lands lay?

The best example of how this was managed comes from Laxton in Nottinghamshire which remains the last open field parish. It was surveyed in 1635 by Mark Pierce and has a particularly fine map which as well as showing the fields contains drawings that depict the country life; in addition to sowing, harvesting and ploughing there are hunting scenes. It is exquisite.

The large open fields are named on the maps in terms of their geography East and West fields, South field and Mill Field. These fields were packed with thousands of strips grouped together in into furlongs but these are not named on the map. With several thousand strips in the open part of the manor it would have been impossible to name each strip so how did they cope? The book of particulars is of interest at this point. Unusually it does not give a list of the furlongs instead under each man’s name are a series of numbers which relate to individual plot numbers on the map. Those who farmed in the open fields had no need for names. The strips themselves acted as their own point of reference as was pointed out by C S Orwin,

“The outside furrow slices of each parcel turned away from each other formed a well marked borderline [the furrow] between them and they were supplemented with landmarks, posts, driven in under the direction of the juries of the Manor Court at the corners of each man’s parcel……… These men knew their own lands as a shepherd knows his sheep.”[1]

A farmer looking over the location of each of the 20 strips held by his father in the Mill field, which he had cultivated as a young man 30 years before described how it was done;

“Start in Holme side furlong, plough two lands, miss three, plough one more, go onto Foxmore furlong etc”. He said that the only time that he had made a mistake was once when the ridge and furrow were alike obliterated by snow and he had carted manure to land adjacent to his father’s.”

Although there were over three thousand strip in Laxton they were divided between one hundred freeholders and tenants most of whom enjoyed long standing tenures. As Orwin said, they knew their lands as a shepherd knows his sheep. There was no need for names.

Field names after Inclosure.

Inclosure swept away the large open fields which were broken up into any number of smaller ‘closes’ separated by hedgerows. For a variety of reasons these new closes acquired names. A D Mills [2] is the acknowledged expert on place names and his ‘Place Names of Dorset’ series has extensive records of the parishes field names derived from the legal records [indentures] of the sale of land within the parish. In numerous parishes there is scant evidence of field names before [usually] the late 16th and early 17th century when they often appear in profusion. This is almost certainly due to recent inclosure within the parish.

Leaving aside the seemingly natural desire of humans to name things there were a number of reasons to name these new closes. Whereas before there were thousands of strips now there may have been only a few dozen closes but the disposition of these new closes would not have been known to the majority of agricultural labourers who would be required to work in them.

Furthermore inclosure made the sale of land easier and in the absence of a land registry it was necessary when selling land to be as accurate as possible in describing it’s position. The extract below is from an indenture of sale of lands in Shillingstone. It uses nine ways of identifying the lands involved. Ways that even decades later would be remembered and verified, if the need arose, by the local community.

“Two pieces or parcells of Meadow or pasture lying adjacent to or near unto the new Dwellinghouse [1] of Henry Kaines [2] in Beer Marsh aforesaid called by the name or sign of the Lamb [3] containing by Estimation four acres and three quarters [4] be the same more or less and also all that Close called East Well [5] Situate and being within the parish of Child Okeford [6] aforesaid between the Kings Highway [7]and the River Stower [8]containing by Estimation half an acre more or less [9]”.

The names of many of these newly formed closes betray their origins. At Child Okeford there were no fewer than seven closes named ‘Southfield’. Named, presumably, after the open field from which they had been inclosed. Just as the open fields disappeared so too did the furlongs which they contained although, as suggested previously, some of the new closes may have taken their names from them.

Field [3] names then are features of inclosed parishes and although I am not aware of anyone having done this, it might be possible, using the dates at which field names appear, to identify the progress of inclosure in a particular parish. The excellent series of books published by the English Place Name Society would be useful in this research.

Halstock and Corscombe.

Replacing several thousand, but unnamed strips, with several hundred new closes all requiring names does not appear to have taxed the ingenuity of the landowners greatly.The eponymously named John Field in his, ‘Dictionary of English Field Names’, identifies a number of groups into which field names can be put. They are fairly self evident and not particularly imaginative. The following names are taken from the tithe apportionment for Halstock [H] and its neighbouring parish Corscombe [C] and illustrate the different groups.

There are some categories that cannot be completed from the Halstock or Corscombe field names [4] but it appears at first glance that there is nothing very unusual about these parishes. As you continue to browse the names in the apportionment however you soon begin to realise that something unusual has taken place in these parishes. Plot 587 for example is conventional enough, “House Outbuildings, Yards, Barton and Garden” but the next plot, 8 acres of Meadow and Orchard is named “William 3rd” and plot 589, 4 acres of meadow and Orchard is called ‘Settlement’. More strangeness follows as in succession we come across ‘Stuart Coppice’, ‘Revolution’, ‘Boston’, ‘Freestate’ and much more.

It soon becomes obvious that Halstock and Corscombe are unusual parishes, and the man responsible for these unusual names is Thomas Hollis.

Thomas Hollis by Joseph Wilton marble bust, circa 1762 NPG 6946 © National Portrait Gallery, London

In 1740 Thomas Hollis inherited the lands of his father and great uncle. Rather unimaginatively they were all named Thomas. Young Thomas however was far from being unimaginative. He was educated as a lawyer at Lincoln’s Inn and until 1848 he lived there before embarking on an extended ‘grand tour’ around Europe not returning for over five years. He was by all accounts an exceptionable man for his time. “He drank no intoxicating liquor, abstained from dairy products, sugar, spices or salt” and in politics was probably a republican. In religion his failure to attend any church caused him to be labelled an atheist. 5

Disdaining parliament he sought to espouse his views by paying for the publication of numerous books and by editing numerous works of others. He was a major donor of books to Harvard when in 1865 it’s library burnt down, and to the University in Berne.

In 1770 he retired to Corscombe, the neighbouring parish to Halstock, and set about renaming the fields of both parishes. The tithe maps of Corscombe, drawn in [1839] and Halstock [1842] are of considerable interest. The parishes are similar in that there were multiple small centres of population. Mostly clusters of farms and their ancillary buildings.

At first sight the map of Halstock is unremarkable with the names of these farms written in; these are Wyke, Netherstoke, Croads, Abbots Hill and Bakers which do not sound to out of the ordinary but then we notice Ludlow, Portland and Sydney and even more strangely, Churchill, Russell, Neville, Factory, Moryatt, Factory, Locke, Marvell, Liberty and Harvard. The latter is explicable at least, in that his great Uncle was one of the founding benefactors of that American University.

Corscombe names are not quite so unusual although they still seem a little strange; Wick, Wayland, Weston, Norwood, Catsley, Urless.

When we come to the tithe apportionment of Halstock we find this strangeness in naming continues, for here we find closes [the parish was fully inclosed] named as follows. Some are self evident, some are derived from J D Mills’ work whilst others have eluded me but all have some reference to the ancient past, the English Civil War, Puritanism or the Enlightenment.

Some of these names have a connection with the Puritan movement and their side in the civil war; The Good Old Cause, Commonwealth, Lilburne, Ireton, Ham[p]den, New England, Massachusetts, Toleration and so on have such a connotation and of course Charles I was executed on 30th January. Others are great philosophers such as Aristotle, Plato, Socrates and Confucius whilst still others are what we could call political scientists such as Locke and Machiaval [spelt without the terminal I.] Still others simply reflect the spirit of the Enlightenment such as Understanding, Toleration, Constitution, Liberty and Reasonableness.

Corscombe

Hollis was no less inventive at Corscombe. Here the majority of names are more conventional but there are several of interest; I must leave the reader to work them out.

and for the prurient

Even Hollis could not find enough Puritans or Greeks or Enlightenment figures to complete the project and as a consequence there are plenty of ‘normal’ sounding names in both parishes. Shepherd’s Mead, Yonder Close, Longs strap and so on. There are however a whole raft of other names where it is not so clear whether they were made up by him or not.

What the tenants of the manor thought about all of this is not known although I suspect bemused would be one response. They did not appear to object to the changes and although Hollis died in 1774 his field names lived on – at least until the time of the tithe commutation some 68 years later. After that I cannot say.

Categories: In Depth