Not only should the etymology of the name of the parish be carefully considered, and its various forms of spelling be collected, from Domesday Book downwards, but a list should be made of the whole of the names of the physical features, such as hills, streams, and lanes, and especially of the field-names. Field-names—which will often establish the sites of disused chapels or manor-houses, of Celtic burials or Roman roads, as well as help to decide the nationality of the colonists that predominated in the district—can be sometimes gleaned from old private estate maps, or other exceptional sources, but the “Award” maps of Inclosure Commissioners from 1710 downwards, or the Tithe Commutation maps of 1836, are the chief and most reliable sources. These maps should be in most parish chests, but they have often illegally strayed into the private hands of solicitors, churchwardens, etc. When lost or difficult of access, the original maps can usually be seen at the offices of the Copyhold Inclosure and Tithe Commission, 3, St. James’s Square, on payment of 2s. 6d.; but under certain Acts the originals will be found, or rather ought to be found and to be accessible, at the Clerk of the Peace’s office for the county.

The best hand-books on local etymology are—Taylor’s “Words and Places,” and Edmund’s “Names of Places.” Leo on “The Local Nomenclature of the Anglo-Saxons,” Charnock’s “Local Etymology and Derivative Dictionary,” and Ferguson’s “River Names,” and “Teutonic Name System” may also be consulted with advantage.

“Prehistoric” Remains.

If there are any so-called “Druidical” (almost invariably a complete misnomer) or other “prehistoric” remains of that class, not a word should be written respecting them until Fergusson’s “Rude Stone Monuments” has been thoroughly digested. Though published in 1872, not one of the old-fashioned antiquaries has made any serious attempt to refute its conclusions.

The best work on tumuli, or barrows, is Canon Greenwell’s “British Barrows.” See also Bateman’s “Ten Years’ Diggings in Celtic and Saxon Grave Hills.” The two last essays of Sir John Lubbock’s “Scientific Lectures” give a popular account of that branch of prehistoric archæology which deals with the palæolithic and neolithic periods, i.e., with the races who respectively used the chipped and ground weapons of stone.

History of the Manor.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and other Old English chronicles, should be consulted for possible early mention of the parish. Most of these have been cheaply printed in an English dress in Bohn’s Antiquarian Series. In Kemble’s “Saxons in England” will be found a good list of the old tribal divisions into “marks.” Thorpe’s Diplomatarium Anglicum Ævi Saxonici is an admirable collection of early charters (with translations); some of the wills contain many place-names; the volume is indifferently indexed.

The Domesday Book, compiled in 1085-6, is preserved at the Chapter House, Westminster. It gives particulars of all the different manors throughout England, excepting those of Northumberland, Cumberland, Westmoreland, and Durham. It was printed in two large volumes in 1783, and a third volume of indexes and introductory matter added in 1811. A most valuable “General Introduction” was published in 1833, by Sir Henry Ellis. The Ordnance Survey have recently brought out a fac-simile edition of the Domesday Book, produced by Photo-zincography, which can be obtained in separate counties. The extended text and translation of most counties can also be procured.