Kirkby-on-Bain is a village larger than most of those in the immediate
neighbourhood, situated on the river Bain, between 4 and 5 miles from
Horncastle, in a southerly direction, about 4 miles north-east of
Tattershall, and rather less south-east of Woodhall Spa, where are the
nearest railway station, money order, and telegraph office, there being a
post office in the village.
It was a saying of one of our chief archæologists, that “anciently every
local name had its meaning”; and we may extract more than conjectural
history from the name, Kirkby-on-Bain. The first syllable carries us
back into a distant past, earlier than the date of most of our written
records. As a rule, when the word “Kirk” forms part of a place-name, it
implies, not only the former existence of a church in the locality (the
name in Domesday is “Chirchebi,”) but also of a still earlier, and
probably Druid, temple. The syllable “Kir,” or “Ker,” {98a} with its
plural Kerrog, Kerig, or Curig (hence “Church”) means a sacred circle,
which was the form of the ancient British, or Druid, place of worship,
such as are still to be seen, on a large scale, in the megalithic remains
of Stonehenge near Salisbury, and at Avebury near Marlborough, in
Wiltshire; and, on a smaller scale, in many a lonely spot among the hills
in Wales and Scotland, and on the continent, as far Palestine. These
remarks apply to many places in our own neighbourhood, as Kirkstead,
Kirkby Green, beyond the once sacred stream of the Druids, the Witham, or
Rhe, East Kirkby beyond Revesby, &c. We have 5 Kirkbys, and 2 Kirtons
(Kirk-ton), in the county. Thus we get a British origin for this parish;
while the name of the river, on which it is situate, is also British; the
word “Ban,” meaning “bright,” or “clear,” is found not only in the river
Bain, but in several other streams. {98b}
The second syllable of the name Kirkby yields further information. While
the two contiguous parishes of Kirk-stead and Kirk-by have the first
syllable in common, in their suffix, they differ, since “stead,”
connected with our word “steady,” is Saxon, meaning a settled domicile;
and “by,” is an old Danish word, (still surviving in Scotland as “byre”)
meaning the same. {99a}
The Britons, therefore, have left their mark in the first half of both
these names, but from the second halves we gather that the Saxons made
their permanent residence in Kirkstead, whereas in Kirkby, although they
doubtless there also succeeded the Britons, they were, in turn,
supplanted by the Danes, who made this place their “byre,” or “by,” with
three “by-roads,” or village roads, branching from it.
In this connection we may also note, that “Toft,” which is a farm name in
the parish, is also a Danish word, and this is another of their
“footprints on the sands of time”; while further we may observe, that
those roving invaders were called “Vikings,” because they first
frequented our “viks,” “wicks,” or creeks; and there are geological
indications, in the beds of sand and gravel, in this parish, that the
river Bain was, at one time, much wider and deeper than it is in the
present day {99b}; and so, we may well suppose, that, up this “ancient
river,” the river Bain, those Danish marauders steered their way, from
its mouth at “Dog-dyke,” originally Dock-dyke, because there was a Dock,
or Haven, for shipping there (as the present Langrick was a long-creek of
the sea, a few miles beyond; the sea then coming up from Waynfleet); and
made their settlement here, from which they ousted the Saxons, whose
presence is implied in the name of the hamlet Tumby, originally Tunne-by,
which is, in part, a Saxon appellation.
Thus, by the analysis of a name we are brought down from those far-off,
dark ages to within the range of historic times. Kirkby is stated to be
in “the soke of Horncastle,” in a document of date 1327–8 (“Lincolnshire
N & Q.” vol. v., No. 44., p. 248), but the local historian, Mr. Weir
(“Hist. Horncastle,” p. 310, Ed. 1828) says, that it had a jurisdiction
of its own, including Kirkstead, and even more distant parishes, as
Wispington, and Waddingworth. {100a}
The Domesday survey of this county, made in 1089, by order of William the
Conqueror, and so named by the Saxons, because it recorded the doom of
many a Saxon Thane, ejected from his possessions by Norman warriors,
contains several notices of this parish; and although at first sight they
appear somewhat conflicting, yet a careful study of them enables us to
put together something like a connected account of some of its former
proprietors.
First we may mention the Saxon owners, who were dispossessed of their
lands by the Normans.
One of these was Ulmar, who had 150 acres, charged with the land tax,
called “gelt,” which was about 2_s._ to the carucate (or 120 acres);
besides which he had 1½ carucates (180 acres), sub-let to smaller bond
tenants, making in all 330 acres. He had also in the adjoining parish of
Tattershall Thorpe, 240 acres, “in demesne,” _i.e._, in his own
occupation, as Lord of the Manor, besides 360 acres sub-let to
dependents. Ulmar was therefore what we should call, “well to do,” a
Saxon yeoman of substance.
There were also two other Saxon owners in the parish, who would seem, to
some extent, to have been partners. Godwin and Gonewate had between them
60 acres in Kirkby, charged with the aforesaid payment of “gelt,” and 75
acres exempt from it. They had also 360 acres in Tattershall Thorpe; and
separately, or together, they had lands in several other parishes.
Especially in Tumby, they owned 300 acres rateable to “gelt,” and 360
acres more sub-let to dependents.
Another part of this parish would seem to have been a separate demesne,
Fulsby, probably a contraction of Fugels-by, or the homestead of Fugel.
{100b} Here, at a later period, there was a large residence, named
“Fulsby Hall” of which possibly there may be still some traces in ponds
and mounds, in a field in the middle of what is still called “Fulsby
Wood.”
Toft Grange also would seem to have been another distinct property; and
was at a later date (as will be shown hereafter), owned or occupied by a
Dymoke. The term “Grange” would imply that it was an appendage of some
Religious House; and an old charter of Richard I., now in the Library of
Revesby Abbey, shows that that Sovereign granted to the Monks of St.
Lawrence at Revesby, the Grange of Toft, {101a} with its appurtenances, a
mill at Fulsby, with lands in Tumby, Coningsby, &c.
The greater part of Tumby was, as it is still, woodland, and formed
“Tumby Forest,” or “Tumby Chase,” of which old maps still show the trees.
{101b}
In a Close Roll, 5 Ed. IV. (1466), there is a reference to the great
wood, called “Tumbi Wode,” or “Tumbi Chase” (“Ibiden,” p. 131).
We have, thus far, three Saxon proprietors in this parish, who were, in
their day, men of substance; but the incoming of the Norman was the
Saxon’s doom; and while Domesday Book says, with pregnant brevity, that
Ulmar, Godwin, and Gonewate “had,” _i.e._ formerly owned, such and such
lands, it names the Normans alone as present proprietors.
In the case of Kirkby the accounts also of these Norman Lords might seem,
at first sight, somewhat conflicting. For instance, Domesday Book gives
Odo, Bishop of Baieux as owner of this parish, or a large portion of it;
but we turn over only a few pages, and find it referred to as among the
possessions of William de Karilepho, Bishop of Durham. But “hereby hangs
a tale.” Odo of Baieux was half brother of William the Conqueror; being
the son of Arlette, the concubine of his father, Robert, Duke of
Normandy, by a Norman Noble, Herluin de Contaville. Odo’s brother was
created Earl of Moretaine, his sister was the Countess d’ Aumale (which
in later times became Albemarle), and he was given by the Duke, in 1049,
the high position of Bishop of Baieux, in the now department of Calvados,
in Lower Normandy. {102a} On coming to England in the train of the
Conqueror, he was created Earl of Kent, Count Palatine, and “Justiciarius
Angliœ,” and no less than 439 manors were bestowed upon him, 76 of these
being in Lincolnshire. He was thus among the most powerful of the
Normans in this country; he was styled “Vice-Lord of the whole of
England,” and was said to be “second only to the King.” But his
greatness was his ruin. Elated by his vast wealth, he aspired to the
Papacy, and collecting a great amount of treasure, he was about to set
sail for Rome, when William seized him and his treasure, and sent him to
prison in Normandy, confiscating his estate. {102b} Thus Odo’s tenure of
his lands in Kirkby and elsewhere, was only brief; and there were other
grasping Norman followers of the Conqueror ready to step into his shoes.
One of these was the aforenamed William de Karilepho, Bishop of Durham;
who had been Abbot of St. Karilepho in Normandy, but, coming over to
England, was consecrated to that Palatine See in 1082. Thus Kirkby again
became the property of a scarcely less powerful prelate than Odo; for the
Bishops of Durham have ranked high in the episcopate down to quite recent
times; but in early days they were not only bishops, but princely nobles,
whose influence almost rivalled that of the Sovereign; and this prelate
again was Chief Justice of England. An indirect evidence of the Bishop
of Durham’s influence in Kirkby is seen in the following circumstance.
Both Ecton’s “Thesaurus,” and “Liber Regis,” state that the benefice of
Kirkby formerly paid a “pension of 40_s._ to the Priory of St. Leonard at
Stamford.” This would appear to have come about in the following manner.
Oswy, the Saxon King of Northumbria, in the middle of the 7th century of
the Christian era, having conquered the pagan King of Mercia, of which
Lincolnshire formed a part, as a thank-offering to God, gave to Wilfred,
the friend and instructor of his son Alchfrid, certain lands in Stamford,
for the maintenance of 100 Monks. Accordingly Wilfred, who afterwards
became Bishop of York, founded the Priory of St. Leonard at Stamford;
and, having received his own education at the Monastery of Lindisfarne,
in Holy Island, he gave the Priory to that Religious House. At the time
of the Conquest, the Monks of Lindisfarne, were attached to the See of
Durham, and thus their dependency at Stamford came under the cognizance
of William de Karilepho; and as Lord of the Manor of Kirkby, he charged
this benefice with this contribution to the Priory. Had the Monks of
Lindisfarne not been plundered by the Danes, and so driven to Durham,
Kirkby would not have had this payment to make; “40_s_” was, in those
days a considerable sum, the whole tithes of the benefice being only £1
7_s._ 4¼_d._ The buildings of the Priory at Stamford, were plundered by
the Danish rovers, but were rebuilt by William de Karilepho, partly
doubtless with money from Kirkby, about the year 1082. On the
dissolution of the Monasteries, in the reign of Henry VIII. that King,
who was generally in need of cash, appropriated the temporalities of the
benefice of Kirkby, and so became patron of the living, which is still in
the gift of the Sovereign.
We now get another name of rank among the Normans connected with Kirkby.
Domesday Book says, “Ilbert has here 1 caracate (120 acres), with 10
villeins (the lowest class of bondmen), and 4 bordars (the higher class
of bondmen), who hold under him another carucate; also the site of a mill
(a valuable possession in those times), 12 acres of meadow (probably rich
grass land watered by the Bain), and 160 acres of woodland interspersed
with pasture,” where the serfs would tend the lord’s herds of swine,
which fattened on the acorns in their season, and where he would harbour
his deer, and other animals of the chase.
In those times even a powerful noble did not disdain to be the vassal of
such a princely prelate as the great Bishop of Durham, at the head of one
of the three palatine counties in England; and such was this Ilbert, or,
as he was otherwise called, Hildebert de Lacy.
Coming to England with the Conqueror, he was granted by William the manor
of Pontefract, and 150 other lordships in Yorkshire, 10 in
Nottinghamshire, and 4 in Lincolnshire. In several other parishes,
{104a} Kirkby being among them, he also held lands, not absolutely “in
demesne,” as his own, but under the absentee Bishop of Durham as lord
paramount, to whom he paid a small yearly rent, which was exacted from
his Saxon dependents. This Ilbert, or Hildebert, built the castle of
Pontefract, {104b} and was one of the most powerful nobles in Yorkshire.
Another of his family, also Ilbert, was a witness to the Charter of King
Stephen, which secured the ecclesiastical liberties of England; and
another, John de Lacy, became Earl of Lincoln, by marrying Margaret,
daughter of Hawise de Quincy, sister of Ranulph, Earl of Lincoln and
Chester (A.D. 1232). Their son, Henry de Lacy, held the same honours in
the reigns of Henry III. and Ed. I. {104c} A John de Lacy was among the
signatories of the Magna Charta, and we may add that it is not a little
remarkable that, in this 20th century, the name of Ilbert is yet to the
fore, Sir Courtenay Peregrine Ilbert, K.C.S.I., C.I.E., &c., being now
Clerk of the House of Commons, and a distinguished lawyer and scholar.
By a curious coincidence, Pontefract was in Saxon times known by the name
of Kirkby, and this name continued even in later times; a charter of
Ilbert’s son, Robert, conveying lands to the Priory of St. John at
Pontefract, mentions them as being “de dominio de Kirkby,” while another
charter gives them as “de Pontefract” (Camden’s “Britannia,” p. 729.)
Thus Ilbert, Lord of Kirkby-on-Bain, held two lordships in different
counties, of the same name.
We have yet another landowner named as connected with this parish, of
scarcely less note than Ilbert de Lacy.
As we have observed in our “Records” of other parishes, Eudo, son of
Spirewic, and Pinso, were two Norman sworn brothers in arms, who came
over with the Conqueror, and did him such good service that William
granted them “the manor of Tattershall with the hamlet of Thorpe and the
towne of Kirkeby,” beside some 24 other lordships; Eudo to have tenure
directly from the King, and Pinso under St. Cuthbert of Durham. They
subsequently divided these possessions between them, Pinso taking those
further away, while Eudo seated himself at Tattershall. On his death
there, he was succeeded by his son, Hugh Fitz Eudo, commonly called
“Brito,” or “The Breton,” who founded the neighbouring abbey of
Kirkstead, A.D. 1139. He had in Kirkby 1 carucate (120 acres) of land
“in demesne,” with 8 acres of meadow and 80 acres of woodland
interspersed with pasture, very much as “Kirkby Moor” is still. He had
also in Tumby another carucate, in his own occupation, with villeins and
bordars, and two soc-men, _i.e._, free tenants, on 75 acres; also 20
acres of meadow, one fishery and a half, two mills, and 370 acres of
woodland, forming the “Tumby chase.” He had also lands in Waddingworth
and Wispington, which were within the jurisdiction of Kirkby; in the
latter two parishes he halved the land with the Bishop of Durham, who
also (as we have seen) had a slice of Kirkby.
With these several important personages connected with this parish, it
naturally also acquired a more important position than the villages
around, justifying the term “town of Kirkby,” given to it in old records
(Dugdale’s “Baronage” vol. i., p. 439).
Of subsequent owners of Kirkby, and its appurtenances, Tumby, Fulsby, and
Toft, we are not able to give a connected series, but there is evidence
enough to enable us to form fairly safe conjectures, concerning several
of them.
The ownership of the de Lacys continued, with one brief interruption, for
some generations. Hildebert was succeeded by his son Robert Henry, but
he, as Camden relates (“Britannia,” p. 712), taking part in the battle of
Tinchebray, Sep. 28, 1106, against Henry I., in favour of Robert, Duke of
Normandy, on the victory of Henry, was deprived of his possessions, which
were given to another Norman, Henry Travers (Dugdale’s “Baronage” vol. i.
p. 99), and afterwards to Wido de Laval, who held them till the reign of
Stephen; when that King restored to the said Henry his possessions once
more. His two sons Henry and Ilbert dying without issue, the estates in
1193 passed to their half sister, on the mother’s side, Albreda de
Lisours. She married Richard Fitzeustache, Constable of Chester; which
family subsequently took the name of de Lacy, and (as has been already
stated) became Earls of Lincoln. The estates continued in this line till
1310; when Henry de Lacy, having no male issue, left his property to his
daughter Alice, who married Thomas, Earl of Lancaster. He joined a
conspiracy against Edward II., and being defeated in the battle of
Boroughbridge, in the West Riding of Yorkshire (March 16, 1322), was
beheaded on a hill near his Castle of Pontefract {106}; being, it is
said, led out to the spot, by way of disgrace, “on a lean horse,” by an
official, named Gasgoyne; which name also, somewhat curiously (as will be
seen hereafter), is connected with Kirkby. A change in ownership now
appears; in the family of Bec, or Beke. In the 13th century one of them
Walter Bec was Constable of Lincoln Castle, under Henry de Lacy, Earl of
Lincoln, A.D., 1275 (“Hundred Rolls,” vol. i. p. 312). But 80 years
before this, a Final Concord, of 27 Nov. 1197, gives the following
agreement, “on the 2nd day after the feast of St. Katharine” between
Walter, son of Walter Bec, plaintiff, and Richard, Abbot of Kirkstead, as
to a wood called Langhace, and other land “in the field of Kirkebi which
is upon Bayne,” within the Court of the said Abbot, whereby Walter
“quitclaims all his rights to the Abbot and Convent” for which they give
him 4 marks (£21 13_s._ 4_d_).
By another Concord, on the octave of St. Michael (Oct. 6, 1226), between
William Bec, plaintiff, and Henry, Abbot of Kirkstead, tenant of certain
lands, in Kirkby, the Abbot acknowledges the lands to be “of the right of
the said William, which his father also had, to have and to hold (them)
to him and his heirs for ever, of the Abbot, and his successors,
rendering to them 6_d._ by the year, for all service”; and for this
William quitclaims all his rights to the Abbot, and his successors.
Another Concord (p. 220), shows that in 1227, Walter Bec had lands in
Kirkeby, Tattershale, and Thorpe, which he granted to Robert de
Tateshale; for which the latter was to “render £20 13_s._ 4_d._ yearly,
at Kirkby upon Bayne, and to do the service of one knight” (“Architect S.
Journal” xxiv. p. 34).
By another deed, in the same year, 1227, “three weeks from Easter day”
(May 1st), between Walter Bec, plaintiff, and Robert de Tateshale,
touching right of warren on the lands of the said Walter, in Kirkby,
Tateshale, and Thorpe, concerning which Walter complained, that Robert
unjustly, and without warrant, caused warren in the said lands, which
rightly are of the fee of the Bishop of Durham, an agreement is made that
Robert shall give an exchange of lands: whereupon Walter grants to Robert
“all his lands in Kirkeby, Tateshale, and Thorpe, in demesnes, homages,
rents, an services of free men, within the said manor, rendering £21
13_s._ 4_d._, by the year, at Kirkeby on Bayne, and the service of one
knight’s fee”; and for this Robert gives him 10 marks (£6 13_s._ 4_d._)
The head quarters of the Becs were at Lusby; Henry Bec, of Lusby, being
father of the Walter Bec, already named as Constable of Lincoln Castle.
They were strong in church influence; Thomas Bec, son of the said Walter
Bec, being Bishop of Lincoln, 1342–1346; while another Thomas Bec, a
cousin, had been Bishop of St. David’s, 1280–1293; and another cousin,
Anthony Bec, was Bishop of Durham, and so connected with Kirkby, as Lord
Superior, 1283–1310.
In a Harleyan charter (45 H. 12) in the British Museum we find the
following, “To all sons of Holy Church, Walter Bec, son of Henry Bec,
greeting. Know that I have granted and quitclaimed to the monks of
Kirkstead, the manure of their 300 sheep of their fold of Kirkby. Also I
quitclaimed to the same the toll of my corn, which now they are
accustomed to grind, according to the tenor of their charter &c.”
Witnesses, Richard, Dean of Horncastr, Henry de Langton, Nicholas Bec,
Henry Bec, and others.
Another name now appears among owners of Kirkby. The Willoughbys and the
Becs inter-married, and by a Feet of Fines (Lincoln file 68, 32; 30 Ed.
I.) Robert de Wilgeby grants to John Bec, for life only, certain lands
in “Kirkeby next Bayne,” and 37 other parishes, with mills, advowson of
benefices, 9 fees of knights, &c.; after his decease the said properties
to revert to the said Robert and his heirs, quit of the heirs of the said
John.
By an inquisition _ad quod damnum_ (17 Ed. II., 1323), it was shewn that
this manor was charged with a payment of £21 13_s._ 4_d._ to John son and
heir of this Robert de Wilgeby (Willoughby).
Some of the Lords of Kirkby and Tumby seem to have treated the Abbots of
Kirkstead with considerable liberality; for which, doubtless, they would
receive an equivalent in prayers, if not “indulgences,” granted in their
favour. In a cartulary of the Abbey (Vespasian, E., xviii.), now in the
British Museum, is a charter running as follows:—“I, Robert, son of Simon
de Tumby, have granted to the Church of St. Mary of Kirkstead half the
fishery of Troholm, and 5 acres of land in the field of Tumby, and common
pasture through all the fields and territory within the bounds of Tumby.”
This was early in the 12th century. The witnesses to this deed, it is to
be noticed, are his nephew Richard, and Gilbert, “clerk,” _i.e._, parson,
“of Driebe”; hence we should infer that the “de Tumby” and “de Driby”
families were one and the same; and this is proved to have been the case
by a Final Concord of 12 John (A.D. 1211), which mentions the above grant
of “5 acres in Tumby” to Simon de Driby and his heirs. {108} The grant
to the Abbots of Kirkstead was confirmed, some years later, by Robert,
son of Hugh de Tateshale, who “put his hand to the altar” in testimony of
the same (charter of same cartulary, quoted “Architect. Journ.,” xxiii.,
p. 107).
By a Chancery Inquisition p.m., 8 Ed. III. (1335), and by a similar
document, 41 Ed. III., it is shown that John de Kirketon (Kirton) held
for life the manor of Tumby, with that of Tateshale. The Kirktons of
Kirton, near Boston, were probably kinsmen of the Dribys, as this
transfer was made by John de Driby, and the Driby armorial bearings were
formerly in the windows of Kirton Church, along with those of the Earls
of Lincoln (connected, as we have seen, with Kirkby) and others
(“Lincolnshire Churches,” by Stephen Lewin). This local connection may,
in aftertimes, have led to the marriage alliance of the D’Eyncourts, who
held the manor of Kirton, with the next family whom we shall mention, the
Cromwells. {109a} The above Robert, son of Simon de Driby (or de Tumby),
had to wife Joan, co-heiress of the Barons of Tattershall; and somehow
that connection seems to have brought the Cromwells into possession of
the manor of Kirkby. In an Inquisition p.m., 22 Rich. II. (1399), Ralph
de Cromwell is described as owning the manor of Kirkby, with that of
Tattershall, through his wife Matilda, or Maud de Bernak, sister and sole
heir of William de Bernak, Lord of Tattershall. He had lands in 14
parishes in this county, 1 in Derbyshire, and 6 in Notts. {109b} His
grandson, Ralph, married Margaret, sister and co-heir of the 5th and last
Baron D’Eyncourt. His granddaughter, Maud, married Sir Richard Stanhope,
of Rampton, knight. Their daughter, Maud, married Sir Gervase Clifton,
of Clifton, knight, “The gentle Sir Gervase,” who was killed at the
battle of Tewkesbury, May 4, 1471; and afterwards married Sir Thomas
Neville, and then the 6th Baron Willoughby d’ Eresby. Thus we have a
number of important alliances of this family of Kirkby proprietors
(“Architect. S. Journal,” 1858, p. 228).
At the time when Gervase Holles, in 1630, made his peregrinations round
this county, he says that there were in the windows of the rectory house,
of Kirkby, the armorial bearings, in coloured glass, of some 20 leading
county families, including—Becs, Willoughbys, Percys, Tyrwhitts,
Tailbois, Dymokes, &c. These had probably been originally in the windows
of the church, and, on the decay of the edifice, had been transferred to
the house. Representations of these are given in the Harleyan MS.
(6829), now in the British Museum, together with a description of
monuments formerly in the church, but now lost. These arms enable us to
form an idea of the great families who were connected with this parish.
The association with the place of the Tailbois is not quite clear; but
Gilbert Tailbois was summoned to Parliament, as Baron Tailbois, in the
reign of Henry VIII., when he showed that he was descended from Sir
Edward Dymoke, who married Anne Tailbois. This Gilbert was also
descended from Henry Tailbois, who married Eleanor Burdon, daughter of
Gilbert Burdon, by Elizabeth de Umfraville, sister and heiress of the
Earl of Angus (“Dugdale’s Baronage,” vol. i.); who again was related to
the de Kymes, kinsmen of the Dymokes; the Kymes also being connected with
the old and distinguished county family of the Ayscoughs.
The connection of the Dymokes with Kirkby is seen in the following
bequest of “Arthur Dymmocke of Toft Grange, in the p’she of Kyrkebye,” of
date May 27, A.D., 1558. “I geve and bequeathe to the Church of the said
Kyrkebye one satteyn gown, to make a coope or a vestment. I will that
there shall be distributed among the poore people at my buriall xiiili.
xiis. viii. I give to the poore people of the towneshipp of Kirkebye
vili., to the poore of Tunbye xls.” There are also bequests to “Marum,
Willesby, Screuelby, Roughton, Connyngesbye, Tattershall, Haltam,” &c.
He adds, “I will that myne executour shall geve to the marriages of poore
maydens, at their discretions, xxvjli. I geve to the repayring of fowle
and noysome hie wayes xxvjli. I geve to my brother Sir Edwarde Dymmocke,
Knight, tenne pound, and my best gelding, with the best jewell he will
chuse among all my jewells. I geve to my sister his wif one gold ring wt
a turkey (turquoise). I geve to Sir {111} Thomas Olive, p’sonne of
Kirkebye one gold ring enamelled.” These, and many more bequests to poor
people in the county of Middlesex, &c., &c., show that Arthur Dymoke of
Toft Grange, was a man of substance, as well as of generous mind.
(“Linc. N. & Q.” July 1897, vol. v., No. 39).
We now get another family resident in this parish, of some importance.
We have mentioned Fulsby Hall, of which nothing certain now remains.
This demesne would seem to have belonged to the Nelthorpes of Scawby, N.
Lincolnshire, but it was occupied by a family named Cressy. The Cressy
pedigree is given in a MS. book of “Lincolnshire Gentry,” written by
Thomas Beckwith, F.S.A., 1768, and preserved in the Library of Revesby
Abbey (“Linc. N. & Q.” vol. ii., p. 166). As far back as A.D., 1216, we
find a William de Cressy named, along with Ralph de Haya (an old Norman
family), as being “sureties for the faithful service” of Simon de Driby,
already named. (Hardy’s “Rolls de oblatis et finibus,” p. 575.) Whether
he was of the same family we cannot say, but it is some hundreds of years
before the name occurs again.
Also a charter of Hamelin, Count de Warren, and his Countess Isabella,
about A.D., 1074, mentions a Roger de Cressy, with whom they unite in
granting a wood, and other properties, “to God and the Church of St.
Victor, and the Monks thereof,” in Normandy. The same charter also names
3 houses given by Ranulph de Cressy, “for the soul of his brother Hugh,”
(“Archæological Journal,” No. 9, 1846.) Thomas Cressy, of Fulsby, is
named among the Gentry of Lincolnshire in the “Herald’s Visitation” of
1634, preserved in the Library of the Herald’s College. Canon Maddison
in a note to his “Lincolnshire Wills” (p. 141) says that Nicholas Cressy
married Frances, daughter of Sir Henry Ayscough, Knight of Blyborough,
and left Blyborough for Kirkby-on-Bain, _i.e._, for Toft Grange. The
daughter, Faith, of this Nicholas Cressy, married George Tyrwhitt, a
cadet of the Kettleby family of Tyrwhitts; and we have already seen that
the Tyrwhitt arms were among those formerly in the Rectory windows. Her
sister Jane married Sir Edward Dymoke, Knight, of Scrivelsby. Her eldest
brother was named Brandon, from the connection of the Ayscoughs, with
Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk. This Faith had a daughter named
“Douglas”; the Tyrwhitts being related to the Sheffields, and John, 2nd
Lord Sheffield married Douglas, daughter of William, 1st Lord Howard of
Effingham. His son, again, Edmund, created Earl of Mulgrave, married
about 1590, Ursula, daughter of Sir Robert Tyrwhitt of Kettleby. Faith
Tyrwhitt, by will, dated 18 Feby, 1669, leaves bequests to Lady Jane
Dymoke, to her brother Major Thomas Cressy, to Edward and Charles Dymoke,
to Elizabeth Dymoke, her goddaughter; and “to my good child Douglas
everything else.” This “Douglas” was baptized at Horncastle, 8 January,
1628–9.
There is some difficulty in connecting the Percy family with Kirkby,
beyond the fact that their arms were among those in the rectory windows.
But a Chancery Inquisition post mortem of 1381–2 (5 Richard II., No. 47),
shows that Mary de Percy, wife of John de Roos, was next heir to
Margaret, wife of John de Orby, who was jointly enfeoffed of certain
lands in Tattershall, &c.; and that on her decease the Earl of
Northumberland (a Percy) held and occupied the same, he having married
their daughter Joan, as second wife. The above John de Orby is stated to
have been kinsman and heir of Robert de Tateshale, knight. These lands
were also held of the Duke of Lancaster, a Gaunt. (“Linc. N. & Q.” vol.
vi., No. 47, p. 73). We further find that after the death of Gilbert de
Gaunt, his widow the Countess Roheis, in her own right married one
“Robertus, Dapifer” who was steward to the house of Percy (“Topographist
and Genealogist” i., 303). If this was, as seems likely, a Robert de
Tateshale, he would be a landowner in Tumby, and, as steward, also a
vassal of the Percys, Earls of Northumberland. As further connecting the
Percy family with this neighbourhood, we may mention, that among the
Revesby charters, is one of date about 1142, the witnesses to which are
Henry de Perci, Gilbert de Bec, and others. The same Henry de Perci is
also witness to another of these charters, of date 1155.
The arms of the Willoughbys have been already mentioned as among those
formerly in the Rectory. This may be accounted for by the fact that
Matilda, or Maud, Lady Willoughby, widow of Lord Cromwell, died in 1497,
seized of a greater part of the possessions of her late husband, and,
among others, “in fee tail of the manor of Kyrkeby upon Bayne” (“Chancery
Inquisition” p.m., 13, Henry vii., No. 34. Quoted “Architect S. Journal”
xxiii. p. 132.)
We have now shown links connecting this parish, more or less closely,
with most of the families whose armorial bearings formerly existed here.
There is only one more name not yet accounted for: that of Gasgoyne. We
are unable positively to establish any link in this case. Camden tells
us (“Britannia,” pp. 714–731), that the Gasgoynes were an “ancient and
virtuous family of Yorkshire, seated at Gawthorpe, probably (he says)
from Gasgoyne in France,” to which family belonged the famous Judge, Sir
William Gasgoyne, who showed his courage by committing to prison the
young Prince, who was to be the future King Henry V.
We have already mentioned that the property of the de Lacys (including,
probably, Kirkby) passed to Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, who was afterwards
beheaded for rebellion, being led out for execution by an officer named
Gasgoyne. It would appear, therefore, that a Gasgoyne held some official
post at Pontefract Castle, and that Lordship (as we have seen), was
connected with Kirkby, as belonging to the same noble owners, de Lacys,
and others; and hence the Gasgoyne arms appear along with those of the de
Lacys, and others. The name of Gasgoyne is found in Stow’s copy of the
roll of Battle Abbey, as among the distinguished soldiers who came over
with the Conqueror, coupled with Gaunt, Gaunville, and many another good
name.
At the dissolution of religious houses by Henry VIII., we find among
institutions to benefices, that Robert Brantingham, was presented to
Kirkby, in 1565, by Robert Brantingham, of Horncastle, by reason of the
advowson, for that turn, being granted to him by “the late Prior and
Convent of the Cathedral Church of Durham.” And so ended the connection
of Kirkby with the See of the proud Bishops of Durham. On the extinction
of the Cromwell line these lands, in Tattershall, Tattershall Thorpe,
Kirkby, &c., would revert to the King. Henry VIII. granted Tattershall,
and doubtless the other possessions, to his mother Margaret, Countess of
Richmond; and in the following year entailed them on the Duke. On the
latter dying without issue, Henry granted a vast number of estates in
this, and other localities, to Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk. On the
death of two infant sons of the Duke, shortly after their father’s
decease, Edward VI. granted them to Edward, Lord Clinton, whose arms were
also among those formerly in the rectory windows. His descendant Edward
Earl of Lincoln, died without issue in 1692, when the properties passed
to his cousin Bridget, who married Hugh Fortescue, Esq.; whose son was
created Baron Fortescue, and Earl of Lincoln in 1740; and a large portion
of Kirkby is still the property of Lord Fortescue, who is Lord of the
Manor, other owners being the Clinton, Wilson, Ashton, Lely families,
Lockwood trustees, &c.
By a similar process the lands formerly held by the Monks of Revesby,
were granted, on the dissolution, by Henry VIII. to his “well beloved and
dear kinsman,” the aforesaid Duke of Suffolk, Charles Brandon. Among
these are named lands in Tumby, Fulsby, Kirkby-on-Bain, &c., &c. From
the Brandons they passed to the great Lord Treasurer Burleigh, and then
to the Howards; then to the family of Sir Joseph Banks; and he, dying
without issue, left his estates divided among the families of Stanhope,
Sir H. Hawley, Bart., and Sir Edward Knatchbull, Bart. The present Sir
Henry M. Hawley, of Leybourne, Maidstone, Kent, is lord of the manor of
Tumby, including Fulsby, and resides at Tumby Lawn. Some of the land
belongs to the representatives of the late Right Honourable E. Stanhope,
H. Rogers, Esq., and smaller proprietors. The Fulsby Hall Farm, with the
watermill, was given in 1669 to the Grammar School at Brigg, by Sir John
Nelthorpe, the then proprietor; but most of this has been purchased in
late years by Sir Henry James Hawley; so that there now only remain some
70 acres, and the Fulsby watermill, connected with that school.
Just outside the parish to the south-east is a large wood, now called
“Shire Wood”; but in a Revesby charter (No. 29), date Henry II., the name
is given as “Skire-wode”; which is Danish, connected with our words
“shear” to cut, and “shire” a division, and means the “boundary,” or
“dividing” wood. The same syllable occurs in the “Skir-beck” quarter of
Boston. In a smaller wood, in the west of the parish, called “Kirkby
Riddings” we have another relic of the Danes, as Mr. Streatfeild, in his
work “Lincolnshire and the Danes,” tells us, that in their language
“ridja” means to “clear away a wood.” We still speak of “ridding
ourselves” of anything, when we clear it away. The Kirkby Riddings,
doubtless tell of the “clearings” in those larger woods which we have
already mentioned as formerly existing here, wherein the Lords of the
demesne found their sport in the chase of the deer, the wild boar, and
other animals. {115a} Those “hardy Norsemen” were a tough race, and have
thus left their traces behind them.
We have mentioned an Ayscough in connection with Kirkby; a daughter of
Sir Henry Ayscough having married Nicholas Cressy of Fulsby Hall. This
was a very old family, originally located in Yorkshire; the name having
probably been Akes-heugh, or Ake-shaw, _i.e._, Oak-wood; it afterwards
came to be spelt in a variety of ways, as Ayscough, Ayscoghe, Aiscough,
Askew, &c.
They claimed descent from a Saxon thane, Thurstan “de Bosco,” and
“boscus” is Latin for “wood,” or “coppice.” This confirms the above
meaning. The heraldic device of the family was “three asses coughing”
(Guillim’s “Heraldry,” 1794), and the name, in some of their branches, is
still pronounced like Ass-_coff_ and not Ass-coe. They have been
distinguished in church, court, and camp, acquiring large property in
Lincolnshire, and allying themselves with some of our oldest families,
the Tailbois, Brandons, Hilyards, St. Pauls, Kymes, Clintons, Heneages,
Foljambes, Saviles, Boucheretts, &c. They gave to this county, what the
county may well be proud of, Anne Askew, who died at the stake, a Martyr
for the Protestant faith, at Smithfield, 16 July, 1546. {115b} A Walter
Ascoughe, and Henry his son, are named among those who succeeded to parts
of the former Revesby Abbey estates, when the Duke of Suffolk’s family
became extinct. (Dugdale’s “Baronage” ii., 300). And this family is
still established in various parts of the kingdom, the name surviving in
all ranks of life. Few families are without their humbler connections.
For instance, in the case of the parish with which we are now concerned,
we find in its former records a “Robert de Tumbi” who was a Bec, or a
Bernak, or a Cromwell, lord of many a manor, and also a “William de
Tumbi” who was a bondman of John Bec, lord of the manor, whose “body and
chattels,” the said John reserves to himself, while giving the land on
which the said William labours, to the Abbey of Kirkstead. (Charter of
John Bec. Harley, MS. 45, H. 13).
So in modern times, the late lord of the manor of Tumby, Sir Henry James
Hawley, Bart., married, as his first wife, Miss Elizabeth Askew, in the
south of England, while, in a humbler sphere in life, we find a small
farmer, in the person of Mr. Thomas Askew, residing in Kirkby-on-Bain; an
illustration in a new sense of Shakespeare’s saying, “a touch of nature
makes the world akin” (“Troilus and Cressida” act. iii., sc. iii.)
As these notes have now reached a considerable length, we will briefly
notice the Church of St. Mary, at Kirkby; and indeed, it barely deserves
more than a brief notice, as it has no claims to architectural beauty.
We may well suppose, that, as at that other Kirkby, now known as
Pontefract, a fine church was once a feature of the locality, so it was
once the same here; but this is no longer the case. If those armorial
bearings which Gervase Holles saw in the rectory 250 years ago, were
originally in the church, as would seem probable, they would doubtless
embellish a fabric of some size and beauty. We can hardly imagine, that
the benefice, under the patronage of rich prelates like the Bishop of
Durham, in a parish also connected with important monasteries like those
of Kirkstead and Revesby, having also powerful landowners such as the
Becs, Willoughbys, Cromwells, and other “Lords of Tattershall” (where so
fine a collegiate church was provided by them), would have been left with
an unworthy church here. But whatever may have been its former merits,
of these there are no longer any traces. On the south side lies the
square base of a churchyard cross, shorn of its shaft, probably by the
reckless Puritans, who may also have demolished, as they often did, the
fine stained-glass windows, of which the armorial bearings, once in the
rectory, may likely enough have been remnants. Gervase Holles mentions
two monuments which were in the church in his time. Of these one was in
the chancel, having a quaint Latin inscription to the following effect:—
Richard Lambard lies by this stone entombed;
Of this Church formerly Rector was he.
Who caused this Chancel to be newly built.
He presented a Missal, and other valuables.
On the 14th day of January he sought the stars,
In the 1450th year of our Lord.
To whom God grant eternal rest! Amen.