Top of page Name Summary Distribution Map Property List Profile Bottom of page

Hold 2

Name

Summary

Hold 2 was a free man who held once acre north Essex TRE; he commended to Wihtgar.  He was probably still holding his land in 1086, albeit then as a minor subtenant of Richard fitzGilbert (Richard 5).

Distribution map of property and lordships associated with this name in DB

List of property and lordships associated with this name in DB

Holder 1066

Shire	Phil. ref.	Vill	DB Spelling	Holder 1066	Lord 1066	Tenant-in-Chief 1086	1086 Subtenant	Fiscal Value	1066 Value	1086 Value	Conf.	Show on Map
Shire Essex	Phil. ref. 90,60	Vill Alphamstone	DB Spelling Holt	Holder 1066 Hold 'of Alphamstone'	Lord 1066 Wihtgar son of Ælfric	Tenant-in-Chief 1086 Richard fitzGilbert	1086 Subtenant Hold	Fiscal Value 0.01	1066 Value 0.02	1086 Value 0.04	Confidence B	Map
Totals								Fiscal Value	1066 Value	1086 Value

Subtenant in 1086

Shire	Phil. ref.	Vill	DB Spelling	Holder 1066	Lord 1066	Tenant-in-Chief 1086	1086 Subtenant	Fiscal Value	1066 Value	1086 Value	Conf.	Show on Map
Shire Essex	Phil. ref. 90,60	Vill Alphamstone	DB Spelling Holt	Holder 1066 Hold 'of Alphamstone'	Lord 1066 Wihtgar son of Ælfric	Tenant-in-Chief 1086 Richard fitzGilbert	1086 Subtenant Hold	Fiscal Value 0.01	1066 Value 0.02	1086 Value 0.04	Confidence D	Map
Totals								Fiscal Value	1066 Value	1086 Value

Profile

Hold 2’s land was at Alphamstone, which overlooks a small tributary of the River Stour in north Essex near the border with Suffolk.  The DB entry, which describes Hold as a free man, occurs among the invasiones, or ‘encroachments’, of Richard fitzGilbert (Richard 5) towards the end of the Essex folios, in a small group of which the scribe noted that ‘Wihtgar had only the commendation’.  The implication is that TRE the men were commended to Richard’s antecessor, Wihtgar, and that Richard had acquired their lands on this basis even though they had not been dependent tenants of Wihtgar.

For the first man named in this group, the DB entry states that he held his land both TRE and in 1086.  Although DB does not say this explicitly in the subsequent entries, this precedent and the format of the whole group renders it more likely than not that all of the men listed, including Hold 2, were still holding their lands in 1086, albeit now as subtenants of Richard fitzGilbert.

This was the only instance of someone called Hold in DB and there is no reason to consider him in connection with any other person or estate.