A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE
parts of Lancashire the perch of 21 feet is still employed. Many mediæval records, however, mention a perch of 20 feet, and it is almost safe to assume that this was the perch or 'rod-fall' most usually employed in Lancashire, outside the hundred of West Derby,[1] and probably employed in the survey throughout the region under review. To a great extent the area of woodland mentioned in the survey may be located by the aid of mediæval records. The 2 leagues by 1 league of wood belonging to the demesne of West Derby lay in the modern townships of West Derby, Croxteth, Fazakerley, and Halewood. Ughtred's 2 leagues by 2 leagues extended over Knowsley, Kirkby, and 'Achetun,' i.e. Bickerstaffe. In Little Woolton there was half a league of wood; in Lathom and Burscough 1 league by half a league; in Melling with Cunscough the same area, adjoining Ughtred's wood in Kirkby and Simonswood; in Lydiate 1 league by 2 furlongs. In Newton hundred the area of wood measured 10 leagues by 6 leagues 2 furlongs. The area of woodland in this region—known as Makerfield—before the conquest must have amounted to something like one-third of the whole area. No wood is recorded in Warrington hundred, by what appears to be an oversight on the part of the commissioners or their clerks. In the demesne of Salford hundred there was woodland 3 leagues by 3 leagues, and in the thegnlands 6 leagues by 4 leagues. The former probably lay in Broughton and in and around Horwich, whilst the bulk of the thegns' woodland probably lay in Rochdale and Tottington. In Blackburn hundred there was wood on the demesne lands 1 league by 1 league, probably lying in Ramsgreave, near Blackburn, whilst the thegns had woodlands containing 6 leagues by 4 leagues, lying in Rossendale and Pendle forests, and in manors lying in the Ribble valley. In the demesne of Leyland hundred there was 2 leagues by 1 league of wood, probably in Leyland, whilst the thegns had 6 leagues by 3 leagues 1 furlong lying in the region of Gunolfsmores, and in Brindle, Clayton le Woods, Whittle le Woods, and Chorley.
Before passing to the consideration of the infeudations made by Roger of Poitou, it is necessary to determine how much of the region under review—as proved by the wording of the record—he held at or before the date of the survey. The land between Ribble and Mersey had been Roger's, but was then in the king's hand (f. 301b). Amounderness had also passed out of Roger's hand, and was therefore included in the survey under 'the king's land.' Lonsdale, Kendal, Cartmel, and Furness likewise appear, immediately after Amounderness, amongst the king's lands, except five manors in Lonsdale and one manor in Kendal, that is Beetham with its members, which appear under the heading 'The land of Roger of Poitou,' without any remark to show that he had ceased to hold them. On the contrary, under Beetham we read 'Nunc habet Rogerius' (f. 332), and of certain of his manors in Craven we read of Barnoldswick that 'Berenger de Todeni tenuit, set modo est in castellatu Rogerii pictavensis,' and of Colton—'Erneis habuit, set modo est in castellatu Rogerii' (f. 332). Of his manors in Derbyshire it is recorded, 'Now they are in the king's hand' (f. 273b), but in Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire nothing is recorded to suggest that he was otherwise than in full possession of his fief. In Norfolk the survey of his manors is headed 'The lands which were Roger of Poitou's,'[2] but again in Suffolk[3] and Essex[4] the
