THE SEARCH FOR THE PLACE NAMED ISTED(E) C1285 – FOUND?

By Kevin Isted (May 2007)

1.         At the end of the paper on the ‘Possible Origins of the Isted Family and its Name’, I listed what seemed the 3 most likely origins, but concluded that further research for a place once named Isted(e) or Ystede, in and around Mayfield in Sussex, might yield dividends. I eventually decided to take my own advice. This paper outlines the results of the subsequent research.

2.         I first checked current Ordnance Survey maps, and historical maps back to 1724. Unfortunately, I could find no hamlets or farms named Isted(e) or Ystede, or anything similar. I then directed my attention to land deeds etc – held at the East Sussex Record Office (ESRO). This produced a whole list of documents stretching back to the 17th century containing references to ‘the whole yard of Isted’, ‘the Istede’/ ‘the Isteds’ and ‘Isteds Reed’, which all appeared to be part and parcel of the same land holding. Arguably the most informative document is the earliest SAS – D/205 dated 8 February 1647. A transcript of the relevant part of this document is as follows: 

‘One messuage situated and being under the hill at Duddesland in the parish of Mayfield aforesaid now in the occupation of the said Thomas Kerwyn and also of one kitchen, two barns, and waynhouse, and close or yard, one garden and one orchard to the said messuage adjoining and belonging and therewith all used and enjoyed; and also two pieces or parcels of old freehold land thereunto adjoining, containing by estimation eight acres be it more or less, and also of all those lands and tenements of old freehold land being the whole free yard of  Isted. And also of all those several pieces or parcels of new freehold land (heretofore assart land) and heretofore called Isteds Reede; Middle Reede; Pett Reede alias Pikes Reede and Gilhawe: containing by estimation twenty and four acres be it more or less. all which before mentioned lands and premises are now commonly called or known by the names of the Dean, the Westfield, the Tenne acres, the Broomsfield, the Marling Wood, the three acres, the four acres, the orchard field, the Bentley field, the Norris field, the Isteds, the Longcroft, the great meadow alias the Connyberry field, and the Kitchen field and containing in all by estimation one hundred forty and three acres be it more or less and are now in the occupation of the said Thomas Kerwyn and which said messuage and premises are [unreadable word] situated lying and being in Mayfield aforesaid at or near Duddesland bounding to the lands of Thomas Relf on the East, to the lands of Thomas Westgate on the north, to the lands of John Tyherst on the north west, to the common called Pounslye wood on the west and south, to the common called Waldron Down on the south, and to the highway leading from Duddesland to Blackboys on the east and southeast.’ 

It would seem from this that the land ‘all those lands and tenements being old freehold land being the whole free yard of Isted’ formed the largest part of the property referred to in the document: 143 acres – all the old freehold land minus the 24 acres of ‘new freehold land (heretofore assart land)’ (i.e. previously assart land): 143 – 24 = 119.  

3.         In comparing the 1647 deed and the Custumals c1285, there are a number of things which seem to point to the ‘whole free yard of Isted’ (1647) and the Istede land c1285 being one and the same place. These are: 

             a.         The respective names Isted and Istede – spelling variations that are phonetically the same; 

             b.         There only being 1 acre difference in area between the whole of the Istede (William de Istede’s 100 acres and Emma de Istede’s 20 acres) and ‘the whole free yard of Isted’ (probably 119 acres), with both the Custumals c1285 and the 1647 deed making it clear that their respective areas were only estimations. 

             c.         The word ‘yard’ used in the 1647 deed is short for ‘yardland’ which was a term used in Sussex and elsewhere in lieu of the older word ‘virgate’. And the Custumals c1285 states that William de Istede’s land amounted to a ‘virgate’ (a variable area of land based on the rents and services due from it.) 

             d.         The 1647 deed states that the ‘whole free yard of Isted’ was ‘old freehold land’. And the Istede land referred to in the Custumals c1285 was freehold land, which would certainly have made it ‘old freehold land’ in 1647.    

4.         Some of the boundary locations referred to in the 1647 document are unknown to me, although it might eventually be possible to establish them with some further detailed research of other deeds of the time relating to adjacent farms. However, references to ‘Pounslye Wood’, ‘Waldron Down’ and ‘the highway…’ give a reasonably good indication of the area covered by the property when viewed in conjunction with: OS map – Explorer 135 - Ashdown Forest, and the historic maps of Mayfield at www.theweald.org. Incidentally, this land appears to abut the old boundary of the Parish of Framfield where later Isteds are also known to have held land.  

5.         I decided to check the field names referred to in the 1647 deeds against the 1839 Tithe Map of Mayfield and its apportionment (ESRO: TDE-E-133), but none of them appear to have survived until that date. Indeed, the majority of the fields in that particular area of Mayfield have no field names and only show the owner, acreage and usage of the fields in 1839. However, much of this land appears to have been part of what was known in 1839 as Dudsland Farm,  

6.         A further search of historic records, revealed a whole host of references to Dudsland. The earliest of which were 

However, it is difficult to reconcile the Dudsland in these early documents as being the same place as Dudsland Farm referred to in the apportionment to the 1839 Tithe Map of Mayfield, and other documents, and by extension the ‘whole free yard of Isted’ referred to in the 1647 deed. Indeed, it looks as if the Dudsland referred to in the 1623 and 1653 document are on the opposite sides of Mayfield Road from ‘the whole free yard of Isted’ (1647) and Dudsland Farm (1839). Even more curious, there is an unreferenced and undated document on the A2A website which refers to the ‘Gate House (formerly Dudsland)’ as part of the Manor of Apsley. And judging by the 1724 map of Mayfield, which can be viewed at www.theweald.org , Gate House was also on the other side of Mayfield Road from the ‘whole free yard of Isted’ and the Dudsland Farm of 1839, but the same side of the road as the Dudsland of 1623 and 1653. Furthermore, the freehold property called Dudsland/Gate House referred to in 1623 and 1653 had been held by the Fuller family, whereas the freehold of the ‘the whole free yard of Isted’  during the same period was held by the Kerwyns (SAS-D/205 & D/412). In addition, further reference to the 1839 Tithe Map reveals a Dudsland field name which appears to be more akin to the site of the former Dudsland/Gate House (1623 & 1653) than Dudsland Farm (1839).

7.         The apparent mix up with the name of Dudsland probably occurred during the 18th century when both the Dudsland/Gate House property and the adjacent property which had previously been referred to as the ‘whole free yard of Isted’, came into the hands of the Dalrymple family by different routes. Gate House/Dudsland came into the hands of John Apsley through his marriage with Elizabeth Fuller, only daughter of Stephen Fuller of the Gatehouse Mayfield, in December 1730 (AMS6199/13/35); and then into the hands of James Dalrymple through his marriage with Cordelia Apsley, the only daughter of John and Elizabeth Aspley (nee Fuller), on 20 May 1762 (AMS6199/13/59, 60). However, the freehold of the property previously referred to ‘as the whole free yard of Isted’ appears to have been released in 1716, by Thomas Kerwyn to the Baker family (KIR/17/5) and was then sold to James Dalrymple by Samuel Baker sometime between 1775 and 1778 (KIR/33, & SAS/D238). The Dalrymples may well have subsequently operated both these adjacent properties as one entity.  

8.         Interestingly, Bell-Irving in her book ‘Mayfield – The Story of an Old Wealden Village’ (1903) (online at www.theweald.org/bk.asp?bookid=bell999) indicates that Dudsland Farm had once been owned by William de Dodeslond in 1295. This claim appears to have been based on William de Dodeslond’s name appearing in the Mayfield Subsidy Roll (tax list) of 1295, and the similarity of his name with the name Dudsland. This is not an unreasonable assumption. However, to put this in its correct context, William de Dodeslond, like all those listed in the Mayfield Subsidy Rolls of 1295, would have been a freeman cottar (smallholder) and a subtenant of a customary landholder who held lands directly from the Archbishop of Canterbury – the tenant in chief of Loxfield Hundred, which included Mayfield. All the freeholders who held land directly from the Archbishop of Canterbury, like the Istedes, were ‘excedunt taxationem’, i.e. outside of the tax and were, therefore, not included in the 1295 Subsidy Roll. There is also a Henry de Dodeslond in the 1332 Subsidy Roll who presumably was the heir of the William de Dodeslond recorded in the 1295 Subsidy Roll, although no one called Dodeslond is referred to in the intervening 1328 Subsidy Roll. However, I assume there was an error in the record and that the Henry de Wodeslond who is recorded in the 1328 Subsidy Rolls was really the missing Henry de Dodeslond. Nevertheless, there is no reference to Dodeslond or anyone called de Dodeslond, or anything similar, in the earlier Archbishop’s Custumals c1285. So, wherever the de Dodeslond land was located within Mayfield, it would seem that William de Dodeslond had leased it from a customary landholder sometime between c1285 (the date of the Custumals) and 1295 (the date of the Subsidy Roll).  

9.         It also seems that the location of Dudsland/Gate House would have most likely placed it within the boundary of Isenhurst c1285, which at that time was a humble virgate of neif land - much less than the estate it later became. By comparison, the Istede had been a separate virgate of free land c1285, which later appears to have diminished and disappeared as a separate entity. During the same period, it appears that Dodesland became Dudsland, possibly via Duddesland, and became a wider landmark name. It would, therefore, seem that while Bell-Irving may have been correct that the name Dudsland stemmed from land once held by William de Dodeslond, the location of his land is less clear.

10.       In any event, I am left with the conclusion that the land referred to in the 1647 document, as ‘the whole free yard of Isted’ was in all probability the Istede property referred to in the Custumals c1285. Unfortunately, it is not clear how long before 1285 the land had been known as Isted(e) and associated with a family of that name, or when before 1647 that association ceased (sometime between 1285 and 1647). Even more unfortunately, there does not appear to be any buildings in the area covered by the ‘whole free yard of Isted’ that date back to a time when it may have been associated with the Isted family. However, there are plenty of trees in the area and it is easy to imagine an old yew tree, or small plantation of yew trees, once growing there that may have given the land and the family that once occupied it their name.

 

Bibliography 

Mayfield Custumals c1285 (Sussex Record Society Vol 57 + Canterbury Archives) 

1295/6, 1327/8, 1332 Sussex Subsidy Rolls (ESRO)  

East and West Sussex Record Offices: 

SAS-D/138, dated 8 May 1622;

SAS-D/141, dated 21 Apr 1623;

SAS-D/205, dated 8 Feb 1647;

SAS-D/313, dated 12 Jul 1653;

SAS – D/412, dated 6 Jun 1681;

SAS-D/452, dated 10 Jun 1692.

KIR/17/5, dated 19 Apr 1716;

AMS6199/13/35, dated c1730;

AMS6199/13/59, 60, dated c1762;

KIR/33, & SAS/D238 & 249, dated c1770s;

SAS- DD/271, dated 15 Aug 1782;

WISTON/3052, dated 1831;

TDE-E-133, dated 1839

 (a summary of these records can be viewed at www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and www.a2a.org.uk )

www.theweald.org  

Ordnance Survey Map – Explorer 135 – Ashdown Forest 

Mayfield – The Story of an Old Wealden Village, by Elizabeth Bell-Irving (1903)