PASE: Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England


[Image: Excerpt from the Domesday Book]
[Image: Durham Liber Vitae, folio 38r (extract)]

Othin 10 Othin ‘of Hanworth’ (Lincs.), fl. 1066

Author: DWP
Editorial Status: 4 of 5

  Discussion of the name



Othin 10 held land in central Lincolnshire TRE; the land was subject to a dispute in 1086 but no further details about it or Othin are forthcoming.

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 Holder 1066 DB Spelling Holder 1066 Lord 1066 Tenant-in-Chief 1086 1086 subtenant Fiscal value 1066 value 1086 value Holder 1066 ID conf. Show on map
Lincolnshire CK17 Potterhanworth Houden Othin 'of Hanworth' - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 E Map
Total               0.00 0.00 0.00  



Othin 10 is mentioned in DB only in the Clamores for Kesteven in Lincolnshire, where he is noted as the TRE holder of land claimed by Earl Hugh (Hugh 8) and for which the soke was stated to belong to Potterhanworth, in the broad valley of the River Witham south-east of Lincoln.

No further details are given nor is any obviously corresponding entry apparent in the main DB text, with the only other entry relating to Potterhanworth being for an estate held by Walter d’Ancourt (Walter 20) in 1086. There were two places in Kesteven where both Hugh and Walter held land in 1086, namely Metheringham and Timberland, with Hugh holding his parts as berewicks of his manor at Waddington (held TRE by Earl Harold (Harold 3)) and Walter holding his as sokelands of his manor at Branston (held TRE by Hemming (Hemming 5)). However, although each of these places was close enough to Potterhanworth for a dispute over sokeland there to arise, there is no evidence to establish any such association.

Othin 10’s name was rare and its form Houden in DB is similar to the Oudon recorded for Othin 9, the TRE holder of a manor that had sokeland only 9¼ miles from Potterhanworth, raising the possibility that they represented the same man. Against this possibility, however, are that Othin 9’s manor was small and did not pass to either Hugh or Walter after the Conquest. No certainty is possible here, but the balance of probability is just in favour of regarding Othin 10 and Othin 9 as separate people.

Return to PASE Domesday homepage
Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England

© 2016 King's College London