His succession to the lands of his father (who is assumed to have been Eudes [II], although this is not specified in the document) is confirmed by the Red Book of the Exchequer which, in 1166, records that "Odonis de Danmartino" certified that pater meus had held one knights fee in Norfolk [unspecified] from avo vestro [King Henry I] et de vobis [King Henry II], which Odonis currently held from King Henry II.Odo de Dan Martin son of Odo de Dan Martin donated land in Chertehamme which is of my fee of Tunrugge and..Chepstede...[and] of Mecheleham to Lewes St.[This links with the undated charter under which "Aubri comes Dommartini" granted Norton, Suffolk to William de Donomart, witnessed by Manasss de Dammartin, Bartholomew de Dammartin, Hamo de Dammartin and William his brother, Alan de Dammartin, Walter de Dammartin, Matthew de Dammartin, William the bastard, Gilbert de Dammartin and Roger his brother, and Philip de Dammartin.However, this charter (as reported: the complete document has not been seen) is confused: the title comes accorded to the grantor is anachronistic and the witnesses are more consistent with a later date.] Lord of Hamerton, Huntingdonshire: Simon Earl of Northampton and Huntingdon confirmed that Henricus de Rio had enfeoffed Alberico de Dammartin with Hamertun by charter dated to the early 1150s.
He is the only one of the sons of Eudes [I] who is recorded in this Pipe Roll, which suggests that he was his fathers oldest son.The name Manasss, used by the main English Dammartin family, was associated with the earlier comital family in France, but it would be unsafe to draw any firm conclusions about a family relationship based on this single onomastic connection.A further difficulty is introduced by an undated charter, quoted below, which was witnessed by numerous Dammartin individuals.Maybe the document is a later conflation of earlier charters.] He succeeded his father in [1178/79]: the 1178/79 Pipe Roll records "Bartholomeus de Dammartin" liable in respect of terre patris sui in Norfolk and Suffolk.Maybe the document is a later conflation of earlier charters.] (-1195).However, this charter (as reported: the complete document has not been seen) is confused: the title comes accorded to the grantor is anachronistic and the witnesses are more consistent with a later date.