It is sadly the case that I do not have the resources to include the tithe maps of the parishes mentioned in this section. It is unlikely in any case that either of the genealogy organisations that publish them would agree to their inclusion. I would remind viewers who live within the areas covered by Libraries West that they are able to access the copy maps published by Ancestry through their public library and during the current lockdown from their home computer using their library card and PIN.

Between 1837 and 1844 Martin was involved with nearly sixty commutations, either on his own or working with others. The definitive reference work for all tithe commutations is Kain et al [1] ‘The Tithe Maps of England and Wales: A Cartographic Analysis and County-by-County Catalogue published in 2011. Unlike Kain’s enclosure database, this is not available on line. In a table in the text he records that Martin was valuer in thirty nine of the two hundred and eighty three Dorset tithe districts, but the attributed map maker in only twenty seven of the maps. Kain does not attribute any of the Wiltshire commutations to Martin, although we know he completed at least two, and there may be some confusion as to the Somerset apportionments.

Kain credits ‘John Martin of Evershot’ with sixteen valuations in Somerset but there was another John Martin- ‘of Shepton Montague’ and the two were careful to distinguish themselves. Examination of the instruments of apportionment in Somerset reveals that in fact both men undertook nine commutations each.

The table below has been compiled from several sources. The first is the page in the instrument of apportionment where the rent-charge was converted into bushels of wheat, oats and barley. This was always signed by the valuer who usually also signed the instrument of apportionment at the end. It is thus easy to attribute the apportionment part of the instrument to a particular valuer.[2] From this we know that of the fifty seven commutations with which was involved he was valuer in fifty two of them. It was only at Bincombe, Oborne, Toller Fratrum, Wraxall and Wootton Fitzpaine that he was not the valuer, even though he is attributed as map maker in each parish. In the fifty two parishes where he was the valuer, he acted jointly with other valuers in eight of them: Corfe, Dewlish, Hardington Mandeville, Merriott, Penselwood, Sydling St Nicholas, Somerton and Symondsbury.

The more contentious issue is attribution of the maps for these parishes and more is said of this in an appendix. We have seen that Martin worked with a number of assistants, most of whom measured for him and some at least had a direct input to his map. Suffice it to say that if he is the attributed map maker in Kain then I have accepted this, although in at least one Wootton Fitzpaine I have doubts that it was drawn by Martin. One map, at Merriott, was definitely not made by him, although he was one of the valuers. In general the attribution of a map is dependent on the signature attached to it and I have noted the presence of a signature if found on either the copy or original map. More details on signatures are found an ‘In Depth’ article.

The list then is a list of parishes where Martin was either the valuer, or the surveyor or both. It has been compiled on the assumption that he began work in the year that the agreement was reached, and so it lists the commutations by year of agreement rather than the year of confirmation of the instrument of apportionment. The peak year of activity for starting commutations was therefore in 1839 although as we will see, a commutation could take several years to complete.