Memorials of Old Lincolnshire

by Unknown

FOOTNOTES

[1] Scenery of England, p. 85.

[2] Professor Boyd Dawkins, Early Man in Britain, p. 224 and ff.

[3] March 1909, by Rev. E. H. Mullins.

[4] Since the above was written, a fine specimen of River Drift Man’s handiwork has been found by the author in the River Trent Gravels, June 21, 1910.

[5] Early Man in Britain, p. 315.

[6] Nature for December 1907, p. 103.

[7] Early Man in Britain, by Boyd Dawkins, p. 434.

[8] Kemble’s Horæ Ferales, pl. 17.

[9] Celtic Art, by Bowdly Allen, p. 77.

[10] Introduction to The History of Lincolnshire, “Pike’s Series.”

[11] Celtic Britain, pp. 30, 288.

[12] Vit. Agric. c. 20.

[13] “Richard of Cirencester” says that there were nine colonies in Britain, including Chester and Caerleon; and the statement is still often repeated, though no confidence can be placed in it.

[14] The date is unknown, but the original must be older than the eighteenth century, as neither T. Sympson nor Stukeley speaks of a double gate.

[15] Another milestone of his reign has been discovered in Wales, and his coins are not uncommon; so we have here fresh proof that the Gallic usurpers in the time of Gallienus were acknowledged in Britain.

[16] His see is given as Colonia “Londinensium,” and the reading “Lindensium” is the best hitherto suggested for a word that is evidently corrupt.

[17] Roman Roads in Britain, p. 384.

[18] It is once called in the Itinerary “Isubrigantum.”

[19] Herodian, iii. c. 14.

[20] The Fenland, Past and Present. By S. H. Miller and S. B. J. Skertchly, p. 181.

[21] Skertchly, op. cit., p. 142, and Miller, p. 28 and pp. 43-54.

[22] W. H. Wheeler, Fens of South Lincolnshire, p. 7.

[23] Miller, op. cit., p. 47.

[24] Of the name of “Cold Harbour,” which is generally associated with ruined buildings near Roman roads, there are at least ten instances in the county, and probably more. Five of these are in or near the Wolds of East Lindsey.

[25] The statue, altar, and milliary can still be seen at Ancaster Vicarage.

[26] This view has survived the discredit now attaching to the forged Itinerary of “Richard of Cirencester,” in which alone is found the positive statement that this province was beyond the Humber.

[27] So it is termed by Mr. Codrington in his Roman Roads in Britain, p. 225.

[28] Mr. R. Brown, jun., F.S.A., in his Earlier History of Barton-on-Humber, vol. i. p. 12, supposes that this road kept to the heights, leaving Yarborough to the east, and ended at South Ferriby. But if the Barton earthwork be really Roman, as Yarborough unquestionably is, a road connecting both with Caistor seems not unlikely.

[29] Geoffrey gives its British name as “Caer Corrie”—strangely corrupted by Camden into “Caer Egarry.” The name suggests a connection with the Coritani; but it occurs only in this mass of fantastic legend.

[30] E. A. Freeman, English Towns and Districts, 1883, pp. 210, 211.

[31] The Church of St. Peter “ad Fontem,” which Picot, son of Coleswegen, gave to St. Mary’s Abbey at York (see notice of grant ap. Dugdale, Mon. Angl., ed. Caley, &c., 1846, vol. iii. p. 549), was in the eastern suburb of the city. Here, then, we must place that “wasta terra” which King William gave to Coleswegen, and the two churches which Coleswegen endowed there (Domesday Book, Lincolnshire fac-simile, f. 2b).

[32] See plan of Barton-on-Humber and conjectural elevation of the original building, ap. Baldwin Brown, Arts in Early England, 1903, vol. ii. p. 210. An account of Broughton, with views of the tower arch, follows, pp. 211 sqq.

[33] The wooden stair at Brigstock has been replaced by a ladder, but the holes for the stair-logs remain in the inner wall of the turret. The stone stair at Broughton has been supposed to be an afterthought of the builders, but the present writer is very doubtful about this.

[34] An illustration and description of this tower will be found in Assoc. Archit. Societies’ Reports, vol. xxix., 1907, p. 70, at the end of an article in which the present writer has collected the results of his observation of towers in the neighbourhood of Grimsby and Caistor.

[35] The present belfry stage of the tower is of the fifteenth century, and is built on piers and arches placed against the inner face of the older tower walls. For plan of the older tower, see Baldwin Brown, op. cit., ii. 240.

[36] Twenty-six is the exact number of towers which may be said to be unquestionable members of the group. But the number may be raised by the inclusion of a few more possible examples.

[37] The roof-line, visible on the eastern wall of the tower, is that of the mediæval church before the addition of the clerestory.

[38] Hough-on-the-Hill, as noted later, is the only example in which the details of the quoining really approximate to those at Barton; but at Hough there is no strip-work.

[39] A kindred example of strip-framing finished off in this way is the north doorway at Laughton-en-le-Morthen, near Rotherham. At Skipwith, near Selby, the tower arch has strip-framing. Both these churches lie within the area to which the Lincolnshire group may be said to belong. The present writer has dealt briefly with the Yorkshire churches in this area in an article on “The Village Churches of Yorkshire,” in Memorials of Old Yorkshire.

[40] Historical evidence which points to this conclusion has been summarised by Dr. Mansel Sympson (“Where was Sidnaceaster?”—Assoc. Archit. Soc. Reports, vol. xxviii., 1905, pp. 87 sqq.). A charter of Edward the Confessor, preserved at Peterborough, which contains the grant of the church, &c., at Fiskerton to the Abbey of Peterborough, is witnessed by several bishops and nobles, including Wulfwig, Bishop of Lindsey, who signs himself “Lincolie episcopus.” The charter, however, appears to be a copy of the original, in which “Lincolie” may have been written by error for “Lindisse.” But, if “Lincolie” is right, the use of the title by a bishop whose see was at Dorchester-on-Thames points to the fact that he looked on Lincoln as his true episcopal city. And the conviction of the present writer, on other grounds, is that “Sidnaceaster,” whose site was unknown even to writers of the Norman period, is simply a careless MS. corruption of “Lindaceaster,” or some allied Saxon form of “Lindum Colonia.”

[41] The old archdeaconry of Stow comprised the deaneries (now subdivided to some degree) of Aslackhoe, Corringham, Lawres, and Manlake—in fact, the original district of Lindsey, east of Trent and west of Ancholme.

[42] The dedicatory inscription on the tower of St. Mary-le-Wigford, while clearly pointing to its English origin, must not be taken as indicative of any positive date.

[43] Baldwin Brown, op. cit., vol. ii. chap. ii.

[44] See the article on this subject by Dr. J. H. Round, Feudal England, pp. 317 sqq. How far the influence of Normans in England before the Conquest may have affected work in masonry is a point which may be left to the judgment of the individual reader. The foreigners who threw up their own characteristic earthworks at the “Pentecost’s Castle” and “Richard’s Castle” of the Chronicle cannot be certainly credited with any influence outside their own branch of work; and the appearance of “Norman” technique at Westminster does not imply its general acceptance in the provinces.

[45] There is a concise account of the lords of Grantham in the Rev. B. Street’s Historical Notes on Grantham and on Grantham Church. To this book the writer is indebted for much of the historical matter of the present chapter, but has carefully checked it by his own research, adding where necessary references not noticed or imperfectly given by Street and his eighteenth-century predecessor, Edmund Turnor, author of the History of Grantham. Much research into the mediæval history of the town is still necessary.

[46] Rotuli Hundredorum (Record Commission), vol. ii. pp. 259, 288. The jurors, who suffered from bad memories, called the original grantee Ralph instead of William.

[47] See Street, Notes on Grantham, pp. 30, 31. The facts and dates given there are not wholly consonant with history, and the names and relationships of the owners of the manor are entirely wrong, Ranulf de Blundeville, Earl of Chester, being confused with Ranulf de Glanville, and the descendants of his sister Mabel with those of his sister Maud.

[48] Patent Rolls, 37-8 Henry III., pt. i., m. 8 (1253-4, 14 February, Bazas): grant to Edward of Stamford and Graham [Grantham] with its honour (cf. ibid., m. 3, 1254, 14 April, Meilhan); ibid., pt. ii., m. 8 (1254, 26 August, Bordeaux): notification supplementary to assignment in dower to Eleanor. They had been assigned to her 1254, 20 July, at St. Macaire (ibid., m. 10).

[49] See Close Rolls, 18 Edw. II., m. 12 (1324-5, 18 March, Westminster): order to deliver goods of Aymer de Valence to his executors, towns of Stamford and Graham [Grantham], &c., excepted; ibid., 19 Edw. II., m. 31 (1325, 28 July): escheat of manor.

[50] Patent Rolls, 19 Edw. II., pt. ii., m. 8 (1326, 17 May): grant; Close Rolls, 19 Edw. II., m. 4 (1326, 29 May): order to deliver; ibid., m. 3d (1326, 7 May): enrolment of release on quit-claim.

[51] Patent Rolls, 12 Edw. III., pt. ii., m. 22 (1338, 20 June).

[52] The date is given on the strength of Street’s notes; but Street adds that the grant was made on the marriage of Edmund with Isabel of Castile, which did not take place till 1372. Possibly the grant was made in 1373.

[53] In 1402 Edmund, Duke of York, was said to hold Grantham immediately of the King, warrant unknown (Subs. Rolls, box 106, No. 105, &c., ap. Inquisitions and Assessments relating to Feudal Aids, vol. iii., 1904, p. 252).

[54] Patent Rolls, 1 Edw. IV., pt. iv., m. 1 (1461, 1 June).

[55] It may be noted that the authority for the existence of this cross is no earlier than Weever’s Ancient Funerall Monuments (1631). There is some reason for supposing that the funeral procession travelled by way of Newark and the old road, known as Sewstern Lane, and did not touch Grantham. The cross destroyed at Grantham in the seventeenth century, and known as the Queen’s Cross, was not necessarily an “Eleanor” cross.

[56] Charter Rolls, 11 Henry III., pt. i., m. 20 (1226-7, 17 March, Westminster): grant to abbey and convent of lands which they hold in the town of Graham, and manses and land which Colegrim granted. For privileges claimed by the abbey see Placita de Quo Warranto (Record Commission), p. 394, col. 2.

[57] This was a chapel to the parish church of St. Wulfran, mentioned in the interesting inspeximus and confirmation of the agreement between the Abbot and Convent of Vaudey and Roger de Wolsthorp and Richard de Saltby (1349, 16 October; Pat. Rolls, 23 Edw. III., pt. iii., m. 22) as the Chapel of St. Peter in the south street (in australi vico) of the town.

[58] There is a document relating to the Friars Minors of Grantham, Close Rolls, 19 Edw. II., m. 11 (1325-6, 6 March, Leicester).

[59] Grantham lay on the way to Boston, the great port for the export of wool. Allusions to the connection with Boston are common: see, e.g., Patent Rolls, 42 Henry III., m. 9d, where the mayor and bailiffs of various Lincolnshire towns, including (the bailiff of) “Graham,” are ordered to provide carts at the King’s cost to carry the King’s wines from Boston Fair to Chester. It will be remembered how at a later date local merchants, members of the Staple of Calais, built their houses in villages near the town.

[60] This was Mr. Street’s idea, and it seems fairly probable.

[61] It is mentioned in the grant to Prince Edward from Bazas (see [note 1, p. 134]), and is said to be mentioned in the grant to Edmund of Langley.

[62] e.g. on 30th and 31st August 1291 (Pat. Rolls, 19 Edw. I., mm. 7, 6).

[63] Street, Notes, pp. 121, 122, quotes the earliest minutes of this ceremony from the Corporation Records (21 October 1634).

[64] The Abbot and Convent of St. Mary at York presented to Belton; the Abbot and Convent of Croyland to Sapperton.

[65] Rot. Hund., Edw. I., vol. i. p. 290, col. 2.

[66] The institution of Bononius, on the presentation of William de Yngoldesby, canon of Salisbury, to the vicarage of the prebend of [North] Grantham, occurs in Bishop Hugh of Wells’ roll for Lincoln Archdeaconry, m. 3. The last entry but one on the same membrane is the institution of Richard de Newerc, chaplain, on the presentation of Geoffrey de Boclond, canon of the south prebend of Grantham, to the vicarage of that prebend. Brief definitions of the vicarages follow each entry: the vicarage of South Grantham is said to consist in a moiety of the altarage of Grantham and Gonerby, and in all the fruits of the altars of Horton (Houghton) and Bresteby (Braceby). Each vicar had to pay a pension of 100 shillings yearly to his prebendary.

[67] A very full account of Grantham Church, by the late Bishop (then Archdeacon) Trollope, compiled for the Lincoln Diocesan Architectural Society’s meeting at Grantham in 1867, is printed in Assoc. Arch. Soc. Reports, vol. xi. pp. 1-12. Sir Gilbert Scott’s brief summary of its architectural history will be found in the same publication, vol. xiii. pp. 28-35. Turnor’s History of Grantham and Street’s Notes contain accounts of the building; and a small pamphlet by the Rev. D. Woodroffe, called Half-an-Hour in Grantham Church, may also be mentioned. The present writer, while mentioning these, has been led in some instances by his own study of the building to somewhat different conclusions.

[68] The carving is allied to that of the capitals in the Castle Hall at Oakham and in Twyford Church, Leicestershire, but is somewhat smaller in scale and less bold in outline. The foliage of some of the capitals was much mutilated by the introduction of galleries in the eighteenth century.

[69] No doubt the builders intended to rebuild the nave arcades in conformity with this new spacing. The design, however, was abandoned.

[70] The study of Newark Church is a necessary complement to the study of Grantham. From what happened there in and after 1313, probably as a result of the great extension at Grantham, we may gather that, as an initial part of such an extension, the lower courses of the new walls were first built, and that then the masons, beginning at the east end of one aisle, worked westwards, and left the other aisle, in which they worked eastwards, to the last. This would account for some differences in the masonry of the upper and lower parts of the walls of the south aisle.

[71] The top stage of the tower was probably added as an afterthought, and not designed until the stage below had been completed.

[72] A mill-stone was placed on the top, and the new vane mortised into it.

[73] The chantry returns of Edward VI.’s commissioners (Roll 33, Nos. 91-96) enumerate the chantries of the Holy Trinity, founded by John de Orston; Corpus Christi, by the same John and others; St. Mary, by William Gunthorp and others; St. John Baptist, by Richard Saltbie and others; St. Peter, by Robert Stonesbie; and Curteys’ Chantry, by the executors of Richard Curteis for two priests. No. 97 is a return relating to the endowment known as the “Deacon’s Land”; and No. 113 is the certificate of the Guild of the Name of Jesus, which held its services in Grantham Church. These chantries, with the exception of “Curteys Chantry,” were all of fourteenth century origin; and their foundation took place between 1346 and 1362. The early history of the Guild is obscure, until the endowment of a chaplain by the will of Robert Pacie of Barkston in 1494. Seven returns of Grantham guilds, in pursuance of the Act of 12 Richard II. (1388) appear among the Chancery Guild Certificates (Nos. 109-115).

[74] For the reference, see [note 1, p. 136]. The document deals with the endowment and appointment of three chaplains, one at the altar in the rood-loft; another in St. Peter’s Chapel in the South Street; and a third in the chapel of St. Thomas the Martyr in the churchyard. Their duties are carefully detailed; and the Abbot and Convent of Vaudey, in return for benefits conferred on them by the founders of the chantries (Roger de Wolsthorp and Richard de Saltby), charge themselves with the maintenance of the chaplains. St. Peter’s Chapel, mentioned here, was, as already noted, distinct from the parish church; and the chantry of St. Peter (see [note 1, p. 149]) may have been endowed in this building, and not in St. Wulfran’s. It is possible that the Haryngtons, whose tomb is in the south aisle, west of the doorway, may have been founders or co-founders of a chantry there, the position of the chapel of which may be indicated by the bell-cot at the west end of the aisle. The licence for the foundation of the chantries at the Holy Trinity and Corpus Christi altars bears date 18 August 1392; and on the same date William Gunthorp and others had licence to alienate land, &c., in augmentation of the chantries of St. John Baptist and St. Mary (Patent Rolls, 16 Rich. II., part i., mm. 13, 12).

[75] Evidence of the existence of relics of St. Wulfran here is given by a churchwarden’s minute in 1565: “Item, a sylver and copper shryne called seint Wulfrane shryne was sold, and bought with the pryce thereof a silver pott full gilt and an ewer of sylver for the mystification of the holye and most sacred supper of owre lorde Jhesus Christ, called the holy comunyon” (Peacock, Monuments of Superstition, p. 88, quoted in Bishop Trollope’s account, u.s.).

[76] Colonel Welby suggests that the niches, of which traces remain in the east wall of the outer part of the north porch, were intended for a holy-water stoup and almsbox at the foot of the stair. They have also been supposed to indicate the presence of an altar in this part of the porch; but this is less probable.

[77] The foundation-wall of the screen was discovered in the nineteenth century across the entrance to the chancel. No similar walls existed across the aisles. This points to the probability that the screen was built after the cessation of work in the south aisle of the nave, and before the building of the south chapel of the chancel (i.e. between 1320 and 1360). No screen could thus be continued across the south aisle, as the wall came in the way; and a light wooden screen would be sufficient for the single bay of the north aisle east of the nave. At the same time the evidence of the wide eastern bay of the nave points to some enlargement or rebuilding of the screen, or at any rate to a desire to free the rood and its beam of the eastern wall of the nave, against which they had not improbably been placed up to this time. The dislike of chancel arches in districts where elaborate screens are common will be remembered.

[78] A paper by Precentor Venables (Assoc. Arch. Soc. Reports, vol. xiii. pp. 46 sqq.) summarises the history of the controversy, and explains the part which Bishop Williams took in it more satisfactorily than other accounts within the writer’s knowledge.

[79] This, in 1662, was filled with armorial glass, as we learn from Gervase Holles’ notes on the heraldry of Grantham Church, in the Harleian MSS.

[80] A memorandum relating to the erection of the organ and position of the altar in 1640, containing a copy of a petition to Parliament from the Corporation against Puritan objections, is printed from the Corporation Records at the end of Precentor Venables’ article (see [note 1, above]).

[81] There is an interesting account of the history and contents of the library, by the late Canon Hector Nelson, in the Lincoln Diocesan Magazine for December 1893 and March and April 1894. Canon Nelson is responsible for the catalogue of the library.

[82] Particularly to the Rev. S. C. Tickell, author of a Guide to Old Stamford (1907), and Henry Walker, author of Stamford with its Surroundings (Homeland Handbooks), 1908.

[83] Having been granted as a barony to the Abbot of Peterborough.

[84] The conjectural identification, which appears in several accounts, of Causennæ or Gausennæ with Great Casterton (a village two miles north of Stamford and the site of a Roman camp) will not bear the test of comparison with the distances given in the Fifth Antonine Itinerary.

[85] Mackenzie Walcot, Memorials of Stamford, p. 2.

[86] There is some little uncertainty whether the “Stanforth” mentioned by Wessington can be positively identified with the Lincolnshire Stamford. Cf. Vict. Cty. Hist. of Lincs., vol. ii.

[87] Cf. Vict. Hist. Northants, vol. i. p. 256.

[88] Peck.

[89] E. W. Lovegrove, M.A., in the chapter on “The Churches of Stamford,” in the “Homeland” Handbook to Stamford, by H. Walker (1908), from whose admirable notes on the architecture of Stamford much of the present account has been taken.

[90] For this information the writer is indebted to the Rev. E. A. Irons, rector of North Luffenham, who has long made a special study of the records of the diocese and district.

[91] An interesting account of this fight, and the circumstances which led up to and followed it, is to be found in an article entitled “An Unnoticed Battle” in Rutland Magazine, vol. i. p. 186 et seq.

[92] Lincolnshire Topographical Society, 1843.

[93] Chequée or and gu., over all a bend erm.

[94] Sa. semée with cinquefoils arg., a lion rampant arg.

[95] Lincoln Cathedral Statutes, vol. ii. p. 447.

[96] According to Gough (Camden’s Britannia) the stained glass of the church was taken out in 1737 to save the vicar wearing spectacles!

[97] Chancel Screens, A. Welby Pugin, p. 14.

[98] Pugin, p. 22.

[99] See plan and view in Gally Knight.

[100] Published by J. D. of Kidwelly, MDCLXXII.

[101] York Fabric Rolls (Surtees Society), p. 300-1.

[102] Archæological Journal, vol. xlv. p. 429.

[103] In the Lincoln Diocesan Magazine, 1895.

[104] In this respect resembling Chaucer’s Wife of Bath’s third husband, who “lith y grave under the rode-beme,” and an Alderman H. Philyp, who wished “to be buried in the Church of Seynt Petres, in the Baylly of Oxford, under the Rode.”—A. Gibbons, Early Lincoln Wills, pp. 87-8.

[105] Aymer Vallance, “Rood-Screen of Moulton Church,” Archæological Journal, vol. lxvi. p. 264.

[106] At Grimoldby, Addlethorpe, and Winthorpe still exist the pulley holes for working the lights in front of the rood-screen, according to “A. V.,” Church Times, July 29, 1910.

[107] English Church Furniture, E. Peacock, 1866, p. 151.

[108] Mason and Webb, Durandus’ Symbolism of Churches, p. civ. ed. 1893.

[109] Early Lincoln Wills, A. Gibbons. The bequests seem to begin early in the fifteenth century. There is only one instance (Jas. Burton, of Horncastle, 1536, to the Rood light xijd.) in Canon Maddison’s collection of Lincolnshire wills of the sixteenth century.

[110] Oliver Cromwell, p. 141.

[111] J. G. Williams, Linc. Notes and Queries, vol. viii. p. 101.

[112] On this occasion, probably, the Lincoln Corporation received from the King’s hands its third sword.—Williams, Linc. Notes and Queries, viii. p. 155.

[113] J. G. Williams, Linc. Notes and Queries, viii. p. 140.

[114] True Intelligence from Lincolnshire, presented to the view and consideration of the peaceably-minded, 15th August 1642.

[115] Joyful Intelligence from Lincolnshire, quoted in Linc. Notes and Queries, viii. p. 154.

[116] Clarendon’s History of the Rebellion, book v.

[117] Memoirs of Colonel Hutchinson, ed. 1892, pp. 143-45.

[118] Relation of a Fight in the County of Lincoln, &c., 1643.

[119] Carlyle, Letters of Cromwell, Part II. x.

[120] Great Civil War, i. p. 143.

[121] A. Paterson, Oliver Cromwell: his Life and Character, p. 51.

[122] Calendar of MSS. of the House of Lords, vii. App. i., quoted in Victoria History of Lincolnshire, vol. ii. p. 282.

[123] Memoirs of Colonel Hutchinson, pp. 150, 154.

[124] Carlyle, Part II. p. 123 (to the Committee of the Associated Counties).

[125] Possibly, as suggested in the Victoria History of Lincolnshire (vol. ii. pp. 284-85), the first password in each case was for Tuesday, the second for Wednesday.

[126] He was younger brother of Ralph, Lord Hopton, the Royalist commander in the West. Cromwell is said to have visited Horncastle after the battle to see that the body of this “brave gentleman,” as he styled him, was fitly interred. It is possible that he owed his life to Hopton’s forbearance at a critical moment.

[127] Scottish Dove, E. 75, 24.

[128] Mr. E. Peacock, F.S.A. (Lincs. Architectural Society’s Reports, vol. viii. p. 265), thinks that no move was made against Gainsborough till after the capture of the fort at Burton-on-Stather on December 18. But the letter of the Essex soldier (below) disproves this; and I suggest that a force from Lincoln invested the place till it was compelled to retire by the severity of the weather.

[129] Barrington MSS. quoted in Kingston’s East Anglia and the Civil War, p. 147.

[130] In Oldfield’s Wainfleet and Candleshoe, Appendix No. 6, pp. 12-16. The list is not complete, for the names of Sir John Monson and others are omitted.

[131] J. A. Gotch, Early Renaissance Architecture in England, 1500-1625, pp. 69, 70.