ILLUSTRATIONS.

CHAPTER I.

PART I—PREHISTORIC. HORNCASTLE—ITS INFANCY.

In dealing with what may be called “the dark ages” of local history, we are often compelled to be content with little more than reasonable conjecture. Still, there are generally certain surviving data, in place-names, natural features, and so forth, which enable those who can detect them, and make use of them, to piece together something like a connected outline of what we may take, with some degree of probability, as an approximation to what have been actual facts, although lacking, at the time, the chronicler to record them.

It is, however, by no means a mere exercise of the imagination, if we assume that the site of the present Horncastle was at a distant period a British settlement. [1a] Dr. Brewer says, “nearly three-fourths of our Roman towns were built on British sites,” (Introduction to Beauties of England, p. 7), and in the case of Horncastle, although there is nothing British in the name of the town itself, yet that people have undoubtedly here left their traces behind them. The late Dr. Isaac Taylor [1b] says, “Rivers and mountains, as a rule, receive their names from the earliest races, towns and villages from later colonists.” The ideas of those early occupants were necessarily limited. The hill which formed their stronghold against enemies, [1c] or which was the “high place” of their religious rites, [1d] and the river which was so essential to their daily existence, of these they felt the value, and therefore naturally distinguished them by name before anything else. Thus the remark of an eloquent writer is generally true, who says “our mountains and rivers still murmur the voices of races long extirpated.” “There is hardly (says Dr. Taylor [2a]) throughout the whole of England a river name which is not Celtic,” i.e. British.

As the Briton here looked from the hill-side, down upon the valley beneath him, two of the chief objects to catch his eye would be the streams which watered it, and which there, as they do still, united their forces. They would then also, probably, form a larger feature in the prospect than they do at the present day, for the local beds of gravel deposit would seem to indicate that these streams were formerly of considerably greater volume, watering a wider area, and probably having ramifications which formed shoals and islands. [2b] The particular names by which the Briton designated the two main streams confirm this supposition. In the one coming from the more distant wolds, he saw a stream bright and clear, meandering through the meadows which it fertilized, and this he named the “Bain,” [2c] that word being Celtic for “bright” or “clear,” a characteristic which still belongs to its waters, as the brewers of Horncastle assure us. In the other stream, which runs a shorter and more rapid course, he saw a more turbid current, and to it he gave the name “Waring,” [2d] which is the Celtic “garw” or “gerwin,” meaning “rough.” Each of these names, then, we may regard as what the poet Horace calls “nomen præsente notâ productum,” [2e] they are as good as coin stamped in the mint of a Cunobelin, or a Caradoc, bearing his “image and superscription,” and after some 17 centuries of change, they are in circulation still. So long as Horncastle is watered by the Bain and the Waring she will bear the brand of the British sway, once paramount in her valley.

These river names, however, are not the only relics of the Britons found in Horncastle. Two British urns were unearthed about 50 years ago, where is now the garden of the present vicarage, and another was found in the parish of Thornton, about a mile from the town, when the railway was being made in 1856. The latter the present writer has seen, although it is now unfortunately lost. [2f]

These Britons were a pastoral race, as Cæsar, their conqueror, tells us, [2g] not cultivating much corn, but having large flocks and herds, living on the milk and flesh of their live stock, and clad in the skins of these, or of other animals taken in the chase. The well-watered pastures of the Bain valley would afford excellent grazing for their cattle, while the extensive forests [2h] of the district around would provide them with the recreations of the chase, which also helped to make them the skilled warriors which the Romans found them to be. [3] Much of these forests remained even down to comparatively recent times, and very large trees have been dug up, black with age, in fields within four or five miles of Horncastle, within very recent years, which the present writer has seen.

Such were some of the earlier inhabitants of this locality, leaving their undoubted traces behind them, but no “local habitation” with a name; for that we are first indebted to the Romans, who, after finding the Briton a foe not unworthy of his steel, ultimately subjugated him and found him not an inapt pupil in Roman arts and civilization. Of the aptitude of the Briton to learn from his conquerors we have evidence in the fact, mentioned by the Roman writer Eumenius, that when the Emperor Constantius wished to rebuild the town Augustodunum (now Antun) in Gaul, about the end of the 3rd century, he employed workmen chiefly from Britain, such was the change effected in our “rude forefathers” in 250 years.

We may sum up our remarks on the Britons by saying that in them we have ancestors of whom we have no occasion to be ashamed. They had a Christian church more than 300 years before St. Augustine visited our shores. They yet survive in the sturdy fisher folk of Brittany; in those stout miners of Cornwall, who in the famed Botallack mine have bored under the ocean bed, the name Cornwall itself being Welsh (i.e. British) for corner land; in the people who occupy the fastnesses of the Welsh mountains, as well as in the Gaels of the Scottish Highlands and the Erse of Ireland. Their very speech is blended with our own. Does the country labourer go to the Horncastle tailor to buy coat and breeches? His British forefather, though clad chiefly in skins, called his upper garment his “cotta,” his nether covering his “brages,” scotice “breeks.” Brewer, Introduction to Beauties of England, p. 42.

PART II—THE DIMLY HISTORIC PERIOD.

The headquarters of the Roman forces in our own part of Britain were at York, where more than one Roman Emperor lived and died, but Lindum, now Lincoln, was an important station. About A.D. 71 Petillius Cerealis was appointed governor of the province by the Emperor Vespasian, he was succeeded by Julius Frontinus, both being able generals. From A.D. 78 to 85 that admirable soldier and administrator, Julius Agricola, over-ran the whole of the north as far as the Grampians, establishing forts in all directions, and doubtless during these and the immediately succeeding years, a network of such stations would be constructed in our own country, connected by those splendid highways which the Romans carried, by the forced labour of the natives, through the length and breadth of their vast empire.

Coins of nearly all the Roman Emperors have been found at Horncastle; one was brought to the present writer in the 1st year of the 20th century, bearing the superscription of the Emperor Severus, who died at York A.D., 211.

NOTE ON ANCIENT COINS FOUND AT HORNCASTLE.

The following list of Roman and other coins found at Horncastle, has been supplied by the Rev. J. A. Penny, Vicar of Wispington, who has them in his own possession.

Consular, denarius, silver.
Œs grave, or Roman as, heavy brass.
Augustus, quinarius (half denarius). B.C. 27–A.D. 14.
Claudius, brass, of three different sizes. A.D. 41–54.
Vespasian, denarius, silver. A.D. 69–79.
Domitian, brass. A.D. 81–96.
Nerva, brass. A.D. 96–98.
Trajan, brass, of two sizes. A.D. 98–117.
Hadrian, brass. A.D. 117–138.
Antoninus Pius, denarius, silver. A.D. 138–161.
Faustina I., his wife, brass.
Lucius Verus, brass. A.D. 161–169.
Marcus Aurelius, brass. A D. 161–180.
Faustina II., his wife, brass.
Caracalla, denarius, silver. A.D. 211–217.
Julia Sæmias, mother of Emperor Heliogabalus, denarius, silver. A.D. 218–222.
Gordian III., denarius, silver. A.D. 238–244.
Philip I., brass. A.D. 244–249.
Hostilian, denarius, silver. A.D. 249–251.
Gallienus, brass. A.D. 253–268.
Salomia, his wife, brass.
Victorinus, brass (Emperor in West). A.D. 253–260. (10 varieties).
Marius, brass (Emperor in West). A.D. 267.
Claudius II. (or Gothicus), brass. A.D. 268–270.
Tetricus I., brass (Emperor in Gaul). A.D. 270–273.
Tetricus II., brass (Emperor in Gaul). A.D. 270–274.
Probus, brass. A.D. 276–282.
Diocletian, copper, a new kind of coin named a “follis.” A.D. 284–305.
Maximian, copper, a “follis.” A.D. 286–305.
Alectus, brass (Emperor in Britain). A.D. 293–296.
Constantius Chlorus, brass. A.D. 305–306.
Maxentius, copper, a “follis.” A.D. 306–312.
Constantine the Great, brass. A.D. 306–337.
Crispus, brass. A.D. 326.
Magnentius, brass (Emperor in Gaul and Britain). A.D. 350–353.
Constantine II., brass (struck in London). A.D. 337–340.
Constans, brass. A.D. 337–350.
Constantius II., brass. A.D. 337–361.
Valens, brass. A.D. 364–378.
Gratian, brass. A.D. 375–383.
Theodosius I., brass. A.D. 379–395.
Arcadius, brass (Emperor in East). A.D. 395–408.
Honorius, brass (Emperor in West). A.D. 395–423.
Byzantine coin, bronze, date not known exactly but later than Honorius, so showing that the Romans held Horncastle against Saxon invaders.

A Roman milestone was discovered in the Bail, at Lincoln, in 1891, [5a] inscribed with the name of Marcus Piavonius Victorinus, who commanded in Gaul and Britain, and which must have been set up during his period of office, about A D. 267. The site of this was the point of intersection of the two main streets, which would be the centre of the Roman Forum at Lindum, one of these streets leading to Horncastle; from Horncastle also there branched off, as will be hereafter noted, several main Roman roads.

As Horncastle stands on the banks of the river Bain it has been taken by Stukeley, the antiquarian, and by others following him, [5b] to have been the Roman Banovallum or “Fort on the Bain,” mentioned by the Roman geographer of Ravenna; [5c] although, however, most probably correct, this is a mere conjecture. On the road between Horncastle and Lincoln we have the village of Baumber, also called Bamburgh, and this latter form of the name might well mean a “burgh,” or fort, on the Bain, the river running just below the village. The two names, however, might well exist at different periods. It may be here mentioned that this form, Bamburg, is found in Harleian Charter 56, c. i, B.M., dated at Wodehalle, December, 1328.

Tacitus, the Roman historian, [5e] tells us that the Romans “wore out the bodies and hands of the Britons in opening out the forests, and paving or fortifying the roads,” and we can well imagine that those skilled generals would see the advantageous position for a stronghold in the angle formed by the junction of the two rivers, and would employ the subjugated Britons of the locality in constructing, it may be, at first only a rude fort, protected on two sides by the streams and in the rear by a “vallum,” or embankment, and that on the site thus secured and already a native stronghold, they would, at a later period, erect the “castrum,” of which massive fragments still remain, testifying to its great strength.

These remains, indeed, in almost their whole course can be traced through present-day gardens and back premises, shewing the four sides of an irregular parallelogram. Their dimensions, roughly speaking, are on the north and south sides about 600-ft., by about 350-ft. at the eastern, and 300-ft. at the western end, their thickness being about 16-ft. The material employed was the Spilsby sandstone, obtainable within five miles, cemented by course grouting poured into the interstices between the massive blocks. These walls inclose a portion of the High Street as far eastward as the site of the present Corn Exchange, westward they include the present manor house and form the boundary of the churchyard in that direction. On the north they run at the back of the houses on that side of the Market Place, and on the south they extend from St. Mary’s Square, past the Grammar School, and through sundry yards, parallel with the branch of the canal, which is the old Waring river. The masonry of these walls, as now seen, is very rude. It is supposed that, originally as built by the Romans, they had an external coating of neat structure, but this has entirely disappeared, it is still, however, to be seen in the wells, which are next to be described.

In a cellar, south of the High Street, at a baker’s shop, and close to the eastern wall of the castle, is a Roman well; there is another close to the north-east angle of the castle walls, in what is called Dog-kennel Yard, and a third just within the western wall, near the present National Schools. Thus, although the two rivers were without the castle walls, the Roman garrison was well supplied with water.

The Roman roads branching from the town were (1st) the “Ramper,” [6a] as it is still called, running north-west, and connecting it with the Roman station Lindum; from this, at Baumber, [6b] distant about 4 miles, a branch running northwards led to the Roman Castrum, now Caistor; (2nd) north-eastwards via West Ashby, being the highway to Louth, the Roman Luda; (3rd) eastwards, by High Toynton, Greetham, &c, to Waynflete, the Roman Vain-ona; (4th) southward, by Dalderby, Haltham, &c., to Leeds Gate, Chapel Hill, and there crossing the river Witham to Sleaford and Ancaster, the Roman Causennæ, situated on the great Roman Ermin Street. This also was continued to another Roman Castrum, now Castor, near Peterborough; (5th) south-west, by Thornton, &c., to Tattershall, locally supposed to have been the Roman Durobrivæ, and where traces of a Roman camp still remain.

Besides these Roman viæ and Roman coins, quite an abundance of Roman pottery has from time to time been unearthed, and fragments are continually being found in gardens in the town. A collection of these, probably cinerary urns, was preserved until quite recently in the library of the Mechanics’ Institute, where the writer has frequently seen them, [7a] they varied in height from 8 inches to 18 inches. Unfortunately, for lack of funds, that institution was broken up about 1890, the books were stowed away in a room at the workhouse, a valuable collection, and the urns were sold by the late Mr. Joseph Willson, who acted as sole trustee. Other Roman relics have been fragments of mortars of white clay, found on the site of the present union, one bearing the word “fecit,” though the maker’s name was lost. Portions also of Samian ware have been found, one stamped with a leopard and stag, another bearing part of the potter’s name, iliani; with fragments of hand-mills, fibulæ, &c. [7b] The present writer has two jars, or bottles, of buff coloured ware, of which about a dozen were dug up when the foundations of the workhouse were being laid in 1838, they are probably Samian, a friend having exactly similar vessels which she brought from Cyprus. The writer has in his possession the head of a porphyritic mallet which was found in a garden in the south of the town a few years ago, it is probably Roman; the handle, which would be of wood, had entirely disappeared; it is much “pitted” through damp and age, is 6½ inches long and weighs 3-lb. 9-oz.

A discovery of further interesting Roman relics of another kind was made in 1896. The owner of a garden near Queen Street, in the south-eastern part of the town, was digging up an apple tree when he came across a fine bed of gravel. Continuing the digging, in order to find the thickness of this deposit, his spade struck against a hard substance, which proved to be a lead coffin. After this had been examined by others invited to inspect it, without any satisfactory result, the present writer was requested to conduct further investigation. The coffin was found to be 5-ft. 2-in. in length, containing the skeleton, rather shorter, of a female. A few days later a second coffin was found, lying parallel to the first, 5-ft. 7-in. in length, the bones of the skeleton within being larger and evidently those of a male. Subsequently fragments of decayed wood and long iron nails and clamps were found, showing that the leaden coffins had originally been enclosed in wooden cases. Both these coffins lay east and west. A description was sent to a well-known antiquarian, the late Mr. John Bellows of Gloucester, and he stated that if the lead had an admixture of tin they were Roman, if no tin, post-Roman. The lead was afterwards analysed by Professor Church, of Kew, and by the analytical chemist of Messrs. Kynoch & Co., of Birmingham, with the result that there was found to be a percentage of 1.65 of tin to 97.08 of lead and 1.3 of oxygen, “the metal slightly oxidised.” It was thus proved that the coffins were those of Romans, their “orientation” implying that they were Christian. It should be added that three similar coffins were found in the year 1872, when the foundations were being laid of the New Jerusalem Chapel in Croft Street, within some 100 yards of the two already described; and further, as confirmatory of their being Roman, a lead coffin was also found in the churchyard of Baumber, on the restoration of the church there in 1892, this being close to the Roman road (already mentioned) between the old Roman stations Banovallum and Lindum. Lead coffins have also been found in the Roman cemeteries at Colchester, York, and at other places. [8]

As another interesting case of Roman relics found in Horncastle, I give the following:—In 1894 I exhibited, at a meeting of our Archæological Society, some small clay pipes which had recently been dug up along with a copper coin of the Emperor Constantine, just within the western wall of the old castle, near the present Manor House. They were evidently very old and of peculiar make, being short in stem with small bowl set at an obtuse angle. They were said at the time to be Roman, but since tobacco was not introduced till the reign of Elizabeth that idea was rejected. In the year 1904, however, a large quantity of fragments of similar clay pipes were found in the ruins of the Roman fort of Aliso, near Halteren on the river Lippe, in Western Germany, some of rude structure, some decorated with figures and Roman characters. They were lying at a depth of 9 feet below the surface, and had evidently lain undisturbed since the time of the Roman occupation. From the marks upon them it was manifest that they had been used, and it is now known from the statements of the Roman historian Pliny, and the Greek Herodotus, that the use of narcotic fumes was not unknown to the Romans, as well as to other ancient nations; the material used was hemp seed and cypress grass. In the Berlin Ethnological Museum, also, vessels of clay are preserved, which are supposed to have been used for a like purpose. This discovery, then, at Horncastle is very interesting as adding to our Roman remains, and we may picture to ourselves the Roman sentinel taking his beat on the old castle walls and solacing himself, after the manner of his countrymen, with his pipe. (An account of this later discovery is given in a German scientific review for August, 1904, quoted Standard, August 12, 1904).

Of what may be called the close of this early historic period in connection with Horncastle there is little more to be said. The Roman forces withdrew from Britain about A.D. 408. The Britons harried by their northern neighbours, the Picts and Scots, applied for assistance to the Saxons, who, coming at first as friends, but led to stay by the attractions of the country, gradually over-ran the land and themselves in turn over-mastered the Britons, driving them into Wales and Cornwall. The only matter of interest in connection with Horncastle, in this struggle between Saxon and Briton, is that about the end of the 5th century the Saxon King Horsa, with his brother Hengist, who had greatly improved the fort at Horncastle, were defeated in a fight at Tetford by the Britons under their leader Raengeires, and the British King caused the walls to be nearly demolished and the place rendered defenceless. (Leland’s Collectanea, vol i, pt. ii, p. 509).

The Saxons in their turn, towards the close of the 8th century, were harassed by marauding incursions of the Danes, [9] which continued, though temporarily checked by Kings Egbert and Alfred, through many years, both nations eventually settling side by side, until both alike in the 11th century became subject to their Norman conquerors. The traces of these peoples are still apparent in Horncastle and its soke, since of its 13 parish names, three, High Toynton, Low Toynton and Roughton have the Saxon suffix “ton”; three, Mareham-on-the-Hill, Mareham-le-Fen and Haltham terminate in the Saxon “ham,” and six, Thimbleby, West Ashby, Wood Enderby, Moorby, Wilksby and Coningsby have the Danish suffix “by.” The name of the town itself is Saxon, Horn-castle, or more anciently Hyrne-ceastre, i.e. the castle in the corner, [10] or angle, formed by the junction of the two rivers; that junction was, within comparatively modern times, not where it is now, but some 200 yards eastward, on the other side of the field called “The Holms,” where there is still a muddy ditch.

So far our account of the town has been based mainly upon etymological evidence, derived from river and place names, with a few scanty and scattered records. As we arrive at the Norman period we shall have to deal with more direct documentary testimony, which may well form another chapter.

CHAPTER II.
RECORDS OF THE MANOR, &c., FROM THE NORMAN CONQUEST.

A recent historian [11a] has said “In the 13th century the northern counties of England were so unsettled that there was little security north of the Humber, and in 1250 the powerful Bishop of Carlisle found it necessary to buy the manor of Horncastle (his own residence in the north, Rose Castle, having been destroyed by marauders), and the Pope granted him the Parish Church (of Horncastle) for his use;” [11b] but we can carry our history back to a considerably earlier period than this. As a former Roman station, doubtless, and of even earlier origin than that, Horncastle had become a place of some importance, and so, even before the Norman conquest the manor was royal property, since Domesday Book states that King Edward the Confessor bestowed it upon his Queen, Editha. Edward died January 5, 1066, and his possessions naturally passed to his successor, the Conqueror. Its subsequent history for a few years we do not know, but in the reign of Stephen the manor was held by Adelias, or Adelidis, (Alice or Adelaide) de Cundi, daughter of William de Cheney [11c] (a name still known in the county), who was Lord of Glentham and Caenby, two parishes near Brigg. She had a castle in this town, the site of which is not now known, but it was probably a restoration in whole, or in part, of the old fortress. She took part against the King in his quarrel with the Empress Maud, and her estates were confiscated by Stephen, they were, however, subsequently restored to her on condition that she should demolish her castle.

On her death the manor reverted to the crown and was granted by Henry II. to a Fleming noble, Gerbald de Escald, who held it for one knight’s fee. [12a] He was succeeded by his grandson and heir, Gerard de Rhodes, [12b] whose son, Ralph de Rhodes, sold it to Walter Mauclerk, [12c] Bishop of Carlisle, and Treasurer of the Exchequer under Henry III. In the reign of Richard II. Roger la Scrope and Margaret his wife, with Robert Tibetot and son, his wife, as descendants of Gerbald de Escald, [12d] put in a claim for the manor and obtained letters patent, by which the episcopal possessor was bound to do them homage, but this was only for a brief period, and they then disappear from the scene.

The manor remained a possession of the bishops of Carlisle until the reign of Edward VI., when, by licence of the King, it was sold by Bishop Aldrich in 1547 to Edward, Lord Clinton. [12e] In the reign of Mary he was compelled to re-convey it to the see of Carlisle. [12f] Queen Elizabeth took a lease of it under the then possessing bishop, in which she was succeeded by James I. He assigned it to Sir Edward Clinton, knt., but through neglect of enrolment this became void. [12g] In the reign of Charles II. the former charters were renewed, [12h] and the bishops of Carlisle remained lords of the manor until 1856, when it was transferred, with the patronage of some of the benefices within the soke, to the Bishop of Lincoln. Thus from the reign of Edward the Confessor to that of Charles II., a period of about 600 years, broken by brief intervals of alienation, Horncastle was connected with royalty.

The lease of the manor was held, under the bishops of Carlisle by Sir Joseph Banks and his ancestors for nearly a century, the lease of Sir Joseph himself being dated 21 March, 1803, and renewed 1 June, 1811. He died in 1820 and was succeeded by his relative the Honble. James Hamilton Stanhope and, three years later, by James Banks Stanhope, Esq., then a minor, who, at a later period (in 1885) transferred all his rights to his cousin, the late Right Honble. Edward Stanhope, whose widow became lady of the manor and at whose death, in 1907, the lordship reverted to the Honble. Richard Stanhope, son of the present Earl Stanhope. Mr. Banks Stanhope died January 18th, 1904, aged 82, having been a generous benefactor to Horncastle and the neighbourhood.

We have here given a very condensed account of the ownership of this manor from the reign of Edward the Confessor to the present time, a period of nearly 840 years. Having had access to the episcopal archives of Carlisle, so long connected with Horncastle, we are able to confirm several of the above details from documents still existing, which we now proceed to do.

It has been stated that the manor of Horncastle was conferred upon Queen Editha by her husband, Edward the Confessor. In confirmation of this we find the following: In the reign of Charles I. the Vicar of Horncastle, Thomas Gibson, presented a petition claiming tithe for certain mills called “Hall Mills,” with a close adjoining called “Mill Holmes,” as belonging to the glebe. The tenant, William Davidson, resisted, arguing that he had paid no tithes to the previous vicar, Robert Holingshed, that the mills were erected before the conquest and were part of the jointure of Queen Editha, as stated in Domesday Book, and were therefore part of the manor, not of the vicar’s glebe. The result is not recorded, but doubtless the tenant was right. [13a] The passage here quoted from Domesday Book is the following: “In Horncastre Queen Editha had 3 carucates of land, free of gelt. This land is now 4 carucates. The King has there 2 carucates in demesne (i.e. as his manor), with 29 villeins and 12 bordars, who have (among them) 3 carucates. There are 2 mills worth 26s. yearly, and 100 acres of meadow. In King Edward’s time the annual value was £20, now it is £44.” [13b] These two mills and the meadow were doubtless those in dispute between the vicar and tenant in the reign of Charles I., the date of Domesday being about 1085, or 540 years earlier. They were plainly part of the royal manor and not at all connected with the glebe.

All this, however, proves that the manor of Horncastle belonged to King Edward the Confessor before the conquest, and 360 acres of it were assigned to his consort, Queen Editha. The expansion of the 3 carucates into 4, mentioned in Domesday Book, was probably (as in many other recorded cases) due to the reclamation of land hitherto waste in flood or forest.

On the death of King Edward in 1066 the royal demesnes naturally passed to his successor and kinsman, William the Conqueror, and in due course to the successive Norman kings of his line.

The connection of Horncastle with the sovereign is shown in various ways. Documents relating to the earlier kings are naturally rare, since for many years law courts were hardly yet established, the royal power being rather that of “might” than of “right.” [13c] Even the sale, or devising, of property could only be legally effected by the king’s licence. Among the Carlisle papers connected with Horncastle is one which shows that a matter which in modern times would be settled by the parish overseers, or more recently by the Urban Council, was to be formerly carried out only by the royal sanction. There is a Patent Roll of the 13th year of King Richard II. (pt. 1, m. 3) entitled “Concerning the paving of Horncastre,” and running as follows:—“The King to the Bailiff and proved men of the vill of Horncastre, greeting. Know, that in aid of paving your said vill, of our special grace we have granted to you, that from the day of the making of these presents to the end of 3 years, you may take, for things coming to the said vill for sale, the customs underwritten.” Then follows a long list of articles for sale, of which we can only specify a few here, viz.: “For every horse load of corn, ¼d., for every dole of wine, 2d.; for every pipe of ditto, 1s.; for every hide, fresh, salt, or tanned, ¼d.; for 100 skins of roebucks (it seems that there were wild deer in those days), hares, rabbits, foxes, or squirrels, ½d.; for every horse load of cloth, ½d.; for every cloth of worstede, called ‘coverlyt,’ value 40s., 1d.; for every 100 of linen web of Aylesham, 1d.; for every chief of strong cendal (silk) 1d.; for 100 mullets, salt or dry, 1d.; for every cart of fish, 1d.; for every horse load of sea fish, ¼d.; for every salmon, ¼d.; for every last of herrings (12 barrels), 6d.; for every horse load of honey, 1d.; for every wey of tallow (256 lbs.), 1d.; for every milstone, ½d.; for 1,000 turfs, ¼d. For every other kind of merchandise not here specified, of value 5s. and over, ¼d.; and the term of 3 years being ended, the said customs shall cease. Witness the King, at Westminster, 9 Nov., 1389.”

Truly the kingly government was a paternal one to take cognizance of such petty local matters. The “coggle” pavement of Horncastle is often complained of, but at least it had the royal sanction.

A Roll of the 18th year of Edward III. (m 8), dated Westminster, 28 June, 1344, is directed “to his very dear and faithful John de Kirketon, Fitz Hugh de Cressy,” (and others) assigning them “to choose and array 100 men at arms in the County of Lincoln,” and (among others) “6 hoblers in the vill of Horncastre, to be at Portsmouth, to set out with the King against Philip VI., de Valesco (Valois).” This was the beginning of the campaign of Edward and his son the Black Prince, which terminated with the glorious battle of Cressy and the capture of Calais. “Hoblers” were a sort of yeomanry who, by the terms of their tenure of land were bound to keep a light “nag” for military service.

A Domestic State Paper of Queen Elizabeth (Vol. 51, No. 12, III) contains the “Certificate of the town and soke of Horncastle to the artycles of the Queen’s Majesty’s most Honorable Pryvye Councell,” dated 27 June, 1569, shewing what “soldiers were furnished and went forth under Captaine Carsey.” These were formerly the well-known local troops called “trainbands.” The paper contains, further, accounts of payments for “towne common armour, jerkyns, swords, daggers, corslettes, 1 caline (piece of ordnance), conduct money (i.e. hire money), pioneers, victuals,” &c. Accounts rendered by Thomas Hamerton, Arthur Patchytt, Thomas Raythbeake (all formerly well known names in the town), and others.

The head of the Carsey family was the owner of the Revesby Abbey Estate, and as such was lesse of the manor of Horncastle under the Bishop of Carlisle. They sold their property, in 1575, to Thomas Cecil, son of Lord Treasurer Burleigh.

There is another Carlisle document in connection with these trained bands among the same Domestic State Papers of Queen Elizabeth (Vol. 199, No. 7), in which the Earl of Rutland writes to Anthony Thorold, sheriff, that he has instructions “from the Lords of the Counsaile to put in strength the power of the realme for the maritime counties,” and he asks him to “choose captaines for the yet untrained companies, and to supply the place of Mr. John Savile for Horncastle.” N.B.—The Saviles owned Poolham Hall in Edlington. On this (State Papers, Eliz., Vol. 199, No. 72) the Earl writes to Mr. Valentine Brown that he thinks him “meete to supply the place for Horncastle,” dated London, 29 March, 1586–7. Sir Valentine Brown was of Croft and East Kirkby, and Treasurer of Ireland; he married the daughter of Sir John Monson, ancestor of the present Lord Oxenbridge.

Among the Domestic State Papers of Charles I. (Vol. 376, No. 123), is a petition from the inhabitants of Horncastle to Sir Anthony Irbie, Knt., sheriff of the county, complaining that the town was over-rated for the payment of “ship-money,” and praying for a reduction of the same. The county was charged £8,000. This rate, levied to maintain the navy, created widespread dissatisfaction and eventually led to the revolution. It was included among the grievances against which public protests were made in 1641. The five judges who pronounced in its favour were imprisoned, and Hampden received a wound in a skirmish with Prince Rupert, from which he died, June 24, 1643. Petitions were also presented to Sir Edward Hussey, sheriff, 1636–7, as given in Domestic State Papers, Charles I., Vol. 345, No. 42.

It has been already stated that in the reign of Stephen this manor was held by Adelias, or Adelidis, de Cundi. How this came about is not quite clear, whether it was inherited from her father, William de Cheney, who was probably among the Normans invited to immigrate by Edward the Confessor, since it would seem that at the time of the conquest he was already a large owner in the county, or from her husband, Robert de Cundi, a Fleming, probably named from the town and fortress of Conde on the frontier of France, situated on the Scheldt, in the department du Nord. There is, however, evidence to show that she had other possessions of considerable value apparently in her own right in Nottinghamshire and Kent, as well as Lincolnshire. [16a] She is described by the old chronicler, Geoffrey Gairmar, [16b] as a great patroness of learning and literature.

The Cheneys, or Chesneys, were apparently of foreign extraction, as implied by their appellation “de Casineto.” They had considerable influence at various periods, one of them being knighted, another made a baron by Queen Elizabeth. [16c] One, Robert de Cheney, was a powerful Bishop of Lincoln (A.D. 1147–67) and built one of the finest castles in England, the ruins of which still remain in the Palace grounds at Lincoln. [16d] The Cheney pedigree is given in The Genealogist of July, 1901. They seem to have settled in Yorkshire and Cambridgeshire, as well as in Lincolnshire. Sir Thomas Cheney, K.G., was Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports in the latter part of the 16th century. The Cheneys fell into decay towards the end of the 17th century, and at the beginning of the 18th century we find them in trade at Boston. About 1750 William Garfit of Boston married Mary, daughter of Thomas Cheney, and the name, as a Christian name, still survives in that family. The Cheneys, we may add, were among the ancestors of the Willoughbys, [16e] and the parish of Cheneys, in Bucks., doubtless named after them, is now the property of the Duke of Bedford.

The granddaughter of Adelias de Cundi, Agnes, [16f] married Walter, son of Walter de Clifford of Clifford Castle, Hereford. Walter Clifford is named in the first great charter of Henry III. (A.D. 1216), along with the great nobles Walter de Lacy, William de Ferrars, Earl of Derby, William, Earl of Albemarle, and others.

William de Cheney, already mentioned as father of Adelias de Cundi, was “Lord of Caenby and Glentham,” and Walter de Clifford also is mentioned in the charters of Barlings Abbey as giving to that monastery lands in Caenby and Glentham, along with the above Walter de Lacy. The great feature of the reign of Stephen was the large number of castles erected by lords who were almost more powerful than their sovereign, and Adelias built her castle at Horncastle, where she resided in great state until, on her favouring the cause of the Empress Maud, daughter of the previous king, Henry I. (whereas Stephen was only his nephew), her lands were confiscated, and, as we have already seen, only restored on condition that her castle was demolished. [17a] This restoration was, however, only for life and on her demise the manor reverted to the crown.

The manor was next granted by Henry II. to Gerbald de Escald, a Flemish noble. [17b] This is shewn by a record still preserved at Carlisle, dated 1274–5. In the reign of Edward I. an inquisition was made at Lincoln, before 12 jurors of the soke of Horncastle, among the Commissioners being John de Haltham, Anselm de Rugthon (Roughton), Thomas de Camera (i.e. Chambers) of Horncastre, the King’s Justices and others, when it was declared that “the Lord Henry III., the father of King Edward who now is, once had the manor of Horncastre, and he enfeoffed Gerbald de Escald, a knight of Flanders, thereof, for his service, viz., by doing one knight’s fee for the Lord the King.”

Gerbald was succeeded by his grandson and heir, Gerard de Rhodes. This is shewn by a Carlisle document. [17c] A dispute arose between Hugh, son of Ralph (surname not given) and Gerard de Rhodes, concerning the manor and soke of Horncastle, the advowson of the church, &c., which were claimed by the said Hugh; but a compromise was effected, 400 marks being paid to Hugh, and Gerard de Rhodes left in undisputed possession.

It has been thought probable that this Ralph, father of Hugh, was Ranulph, Earl of Chester, who was lord of the manors of Revesby and Hareby, and had other possessions in the neighbourhood. He, it is supposed, held the manor of Horncastle, as trustee, during the minority of Gerard. Gerard was, in due course, succeeded by his son and heir, Ralph de Rhodes, in the reign of Henry III. This again is proved by a Feet of Fines, [17d] which records an “agreement made in the court of the Lord King at Westminster (3 Feb., A.D. 1224–5), between Henry del Ortiay and Sabina his wife on the one part, and the said Ralph de Rhodes on the other part,” whereby the former acknowledge certain lands and appurtenances in Horncastle and its soke to be the property of the said Ralph, and he grants to them, as his tenants, certain lands; they, in acknowledgement, “rendering him therefor, by the year, one pair of gilt spurs at Easter for all service and exactions.”

We have now reached another stage in the tenure of this manor and find ourselves once more at the point where the present chapter opened. Hitherto the manor had been held “in capite” (or “in chief”) of the king by lay lords, or, in the two cases of Queen Editha and Adelias de Condi, by a lady; but in this reign Walter Mauclerk, the third Bishop of Carlisle, purchased the manor from Ralph de Rhodes. He was himself a powerful Norman and held the office of Treasurer of the Exchequer (a common combination of civil and ecclesiastical duties in those days), but now he and his successors were bound “to do suit and service to Ralph and his heirs.” This purchase is proved by a Lincoln document called a “Plea Quo Warranto,” which records a case argued before the Justices Itinerant, in the reign of Edward I., when it was stated that Ralph de Rhodes “enfeoffed Walter Mauclerk to hold the church, manor and appurtenances in Horncastre, to him and his heirs, of the gift of the said Ralph.” [18a] That the Bishop, although an ecclesiastic, was bound to do service to the heirs of Ralph is shown by another document, [18b] in which John, son of Gerard de Rhodes, a descendant of Ralph, makes a grant to certain parties of “the homage and whole service of the Bishop of Carlisle, and his successors, for the manor (&c.) of Horncastre, which Gerard, son of Gerard my brother, granted to me.” This is dated the 13th year of Edward I., 1285, whereas the actual sale of the manor took place in the reign of Henry III., A.D. 1230, and was confirmed by the king in the same year. [18c]