This paper was written in about 1980 for William Sergeant by Tony Litchfield and sets out the early history of Beckingham, Fenton and Stragglethorpe.
"M. In Holm Ulf had 12 carucates of land in demesne and 12 carucates of land [which was] soke[land] [assessed] to the geld. There is land for as many teams. Gilbert has 4 teams there in demesne, and 28 sokemen and 28 villeins and 3 bordars having 14 teams. There are 2 priests there, and 2 churches, and 1 mill rendering 13 shillings and 4 pence. T.r.e. it was worth 10 pounds; now the like amount; tallage 3 pounds"1.
At the compilation of Domesday in 1086 listed amongst the holdings of Gilbert de Gant is the manor of Holm, previously held by Ulf Fenisc one of the largest landowners of pre-Conquest times. Gilbert de Gant had come to Britain with William I and was given large grants of land by the Conqueror, 75% of which was in Lincolnshire, including the estates of Ulf Fenisc of Funen. Today what is referred to as Holm in Domesday can be identified with the parishes of Beckingham, which includes the hamlet of Sutton, Fenton, and at least part of Stragglethorpe. Much of the Western boundary of the estate followed the Nottinghamshire/Linconshire county boundary and the old course of the river Witham, with the villages of Beckingham, Sutton and Fenton situated to the East of the river above the flood level, and Stragglethorpe at the opposite end of the estate close to the river Brant, which formed the farthest Eastern boundary. The area covers a little under 4,000 acres and is divided between the parishes thus:-
Acres
|
%
| |
Beckingham and Sutton
|
1,964
|
50
|
Fenton
|
1,231
|
31
|
Stragglethorpe
|
729
|
19
|
3,924
|
100
|
Evidence of late Iron Age and Roman occupation has been found around the beginning of the bridle road running from the Eastern end of the road leading from Sutton2, and a stone found at Stragglethorpe Grange is thought to be from a Roman altar3. Several Roman sites have been found close to the river Brant in Leadenham, Brant Broughton and Welbourn. Of the three sites located in Leadenham one is immediately to the East of the river Brant and two are in an elongated extension of the parish to the south of Stragglethorpe. Through one of these, at a later date, a ditch has been cut coinciding with the boundary between the two parishes; the other site is close to the opposite, southern boundary of the area. Romano-British pottery has been found on both sites and the latter has produced Samian ware and coins of Commodus (AD177-192) and Constantius (AD 337-361)4. The possibility therefore arises of a villa with its estate of satellite farms, the occupation of which continued at least until the latter part of the Roman occupation. It does not seem unlikely from their records that the later Stragglethorpe estates, whose limits had little to do with the parish boundaries, were based on those of the Roman period. From numerous terriers and deeds it is clear that all the vills had cultivated their land individually on the three field system, but the Stragglethorpe estates had a considerable amount of "ancient enclosure" both in Stragglethorpe and in the parishes of Leadenham and Fulbeck which may have originated from the old Roman fields5. It is interesting that in an undated terrier the chapel at Stragglethorpe, like the estates, was drawing income from outside the parish6.
The name Beckingham, derived from the Old Norse "bekkr" a river and the Old English "ham” suggests an Anglo-Saxon settlement by the river Witham with Sutton the "ton" to the South, and Fenton in the fenland, stemming from the original community which contained the mother church, or brought together to form an estate. Stragglethorpe from the Danish "thorpe" a hamlet or village, and possibly incorporating a personal name Trager or Strager may indicate a later acquisition of at least part of what had been the old Roman estate by a Danish settler.
Soon after 1066 on a mound to the South of the hamlet of Sutton was erected one of the forts built by the Normans to control the countryside. The low lying area to the West and South of Sutton, and stretching as far as the Witham, no doubt was already known locally as Holm, meaning in Old English an island or rich flat land by a river, and this was the name entered in the Domesday survey: thus within twenty years of the Conquest Gilbert de Gant had built a manor surrounded by a wooden palisade and a moat as an admministrative centre for his estate7. The demesne tithes of this estate he gave to Bardney Abbey8. Walter de Gant, Gilbert’s son pledged and later redeemed "Holm" during Henry I's reign9 and possibly granted the tithes of the mills (de molendinis) in Holm to the Abbey10, although except for a confirmation c.116011, no later records of the monks holding these tithes have been found. A charter of Gilbert de Gant II, the son of Walter, grants the "manor of Holm and Beckingham" to Bardney in exchange for a third of Baumber and its mill12. This appears to have been rescinded, since after his death his son-in-law, Simon St. Liz pledged the "manor of Beckingham and Holm" as surety for the return of property which Gilbert had given to the Abbey, and which was then being claimed by his widow13. Gilbert had divided the estate, creating a new manor centred on Fenton, and the coupling of Beckingham with Holm in the documents would be to distinguish between what was by now two separate estates.
The new manor of Fenton Gilbert granted to his constable, Herbert son of Adelard14. Herbert's grandfather had originated from Bessingby, part of the Gant estates in Yorkshire, and members of the family had acted as constables to the Gants for several generations15. The grant to Herbert was for 37 bovates of land in Fenton, and a further 16 bovates in Walcott16, which he granted to Sempringham Priory where his daughter was a nun. It was made between 1150 and 1156 probably to recompence Herbert for lands in Bressingby which Gilbert had given to Bridlington Priory17. Herbert also acquired property in Orby, a village on the East coast of Lincolnshire from which the family tóok its name in the next generation18.
The balance of the estate, which contained the fortified manor of Holm together with Beckingham and Sutton was granted to Elyas Foliot. The grant appears to have been made by Simon St. Liz after the death of his wife’s father Gilbert II in 1155/6. Simon claimed the Honour and Earldom of Huntingdon, which had previously been held by his ancestors, and it may be that he made the grant to Elyas in an effort to gain support from the Foliot family who were tenants of the Huntingdon lands and traditional supporters of the rival claimant. Robert Foliot, Elyas’ elder brother was a baron of considerable wealth and no doubt influence; he had lands in the shires of Northampton, Huntingdon and Cambridge, and held the position of sewer to Earl Simon, as he had to Simon's predecessor in the honour, Henry the son of king David of Scotland19. Elyas witnessed several of Simon's charters20, but apparently none of Gilbert II's, and in 1166 was holding half a knight s fee in Lincolnshire21.
Prior to the Conquest Ulf had been assessed on 12 carucates of land in demesne and 12 carucates of sokeland. The assessors of 1086 agreed with this assessment in as much as they stated there was land for as many teams, namely 24. According to them however there were only 18 teams of oxen working the land, 4 in Gilbert's demesne and 14 shared between 28 villeins and 28 sokemen. This accounts for threequarters of the teamlands but offers no explanation for the omission of the other six carucates. The two churches mentioned in Domesday would have been at Beckingham, the mother church of the area and Stragglethorpe where Saxon features are still in evidence today. The latter was serving a community on the outskirts of the estate whose lands were probably largely contained in the 6 carucates or teamlands unaccounted for by Domesday. It is evident that Gilbert had no demesne land in Stragglethorpe from the records of Bardney Abbey. When he refounded the Abbey in 1087 Gilbert granted the monks the tithes of his demesne in Holm and its vills, and in a dispute of 1253 these demesne lands are described as being situated in Beckingham, Sutton and Fenton, which are the vills specified by Gilbert in his charter22. There are no records of the Abbey receiving tithes from Stragglethorpe and the following entry in the foundation charter, granting the demesne tithes in "Thorp" to the Abbey is concerned with some place other than Stragglethorpe.
In an exemplification of 1345 Geoffrey Baard, the tenant of a fee in Stragglethorpe in the second half of the Twelth Century, is described as having "the manor of Stragglethorpe and tenements in Sutton, Beckingham, Fulbeck and Leadenham of Gilbert de Gant, in chief by the service of a knight’s fee and a fourth part of a knight's fee" 23 The wording 'in chief’ suggests that although the fee was included in the Gant estates, and was listed amongst their holdings in the Book of Fees, it was in fact held of the king, particularly as the exemplification goes on to say that the de Gants had never received any service from the fee. The holding consisted of one knight’s fee in Stragglethorpe the manor holding, and a quarter knight’s fee, described in 1212 as in Beckingham and Fenton24, presumably from an old description made prior to the division of the Gant estate, as in other references there is no mention of Fenton, and the quarter fee being said to be situated in Beckingham and Sutton. According to court evidence given in 1227 the quarter fee was given to Geoffrey Baard by "Count Simon of Huntingdon", which suggests l174 as the earliest possible date of the grant, the year Simon received the honour25. Under the Escheat of the Normans in 1204 the holding came into the king’s hand and from that time, whatever the previous position, it was the king who appointed the subsequent tenants. Possibly it was in the capacity of some royal official that the de Gants held the land; certainly they did not have complete suzerainty over this part of the estate, holding the land for rather than from the king, and this would seem to be the reason for the exclusion of the 6 carucates from Gilbert's holding as recorded in Domesday.
From Saxon times a holding of 6 carucates was considered to be a suitable grant by a tenant-in-chief to an immediate undertenant to enable him to provide the service of one knight26, although the ultimate sub-tenant who actually performed the service was unlikely to receive more than one or two carucates. It may be that such a grant was the origin of the manor fee which, after the Conquest, was retained by the king and not granted to Gilbert de Gant, who had interests in Stragglethorpe other than those of the king.
The manor holding included tenements and land in nearby vills, and the quarter knight's fee in Beckingham consisted of 23s 4d rent from free tenants27; thus much of the holder’s income derived from outside the parish. Although no mention has been found of villeins belonging to Stragglethorpe, the manor fee does not appear to to have included demesne land some of which may have been in Beckingham, where references to lands of the Abbot of Notley, a later holder of the fee, are more fitting descriptions of demesne property than free tenant holdings of the quarter knight's fee the rents of which were paid by the Beckingham miller, presumably after he had collected it from the tenants concerned28. A meadow in Caythorpe called "Wydnes" was included in an extent of the manor at the time of the Dissolution29, and a lease of 1341 also mentions Caythorpe amongst the places in which there was manor property30. Gilbert de Gant lost a dispute over a meadow in Caythorpe in 108631, and Kirkstead Abbey was renting a meadow there from the lords of the manor of Beckingham in the 13th century32, but there are no apparent connections, and how and when the property was acquired by the manor remains obscure.
During the middle years of the 12th century Gilbert II gave to “the nuns of Sempringham and their brothers the fee and service of one knight in Thorp that is the land of William with his homage and service”33. The grant was made for the soul of his father Walter de Gant who had established the Order with Gilbert of Sempringham. This property, unlike the manor holding, was not subject to any outside intervention and is described in the Testa de Nevill as being "held of the feif of Gaunt of ancient feoffment, and he of the king”34.
It was a grant made by Gilbert out of his inherited Domesday holding and it follows that his manor of Holm was not confined to Beckingham and Fenton but extended into Stragglethorpe. The wording of the charter and the apparent absence of Stragglethorpe villeins implies a grant to Sempringham of Gilbert’s rights as the tenant-in-chief to receive service from land he held in socage. William the free tenant was presumably the same William de Thorpe who was holding one knight's fee in the time of Henry II35, and witnessing de Gant charters as late as 118536.
About 1160 the Priory is recorded as having 3 carucates in demesne37, and it is evident not only that Gilbert relinquished his right to the service in the fee, but that William actually granted Sempringham some of his land. The "granges of Fulbeck and Thorpe" were granted to the Priory in the reign Richard I (1189-1199) by Umfridis son of Walter38, and in the following century 6 acres of arable land in Stragglethorpe were given by John son of Helias of Stragglethorpe39; the prior acquired 1 carucate of land in Thorp “by feoffment of John de Thorp"40, and was claiming "free warren in his demesne lands in Stragglethorp"41. However at the Dissolution there remained five tenants in Stragglethorpe and Fulbeck who were paying small amounts of free rent. Two other properties in the district are listed in the 16th century Particulars of Grants as belonging to the Priory, a cottage in Carlton-le-Moorland and "one sheepgate called le Maidenhouse” in Fulbeck42. The enclosure map shows the latter as an enclosure on the heath high above the village at the opposite end of the parish from Stragglethorpe43; there the nuns of Sempringham are still commemorated today by a sign on the A17 road announcing "Maidenhouse Farm”.
Soon after the middle of the 12th century there was a general reduction in ratings of holdings as expressed in terms of knights' fees. Costs had risen due to the increased complexity of armour, the need for stronger horses to carry the extra weight and the additional expense incurred when serving abroad in foreign wars and the holder of a fee was finding more and more difficulty in meeting his obligations. Extracts from Earl Simon’s charter of 1166 show Herbert son of Alard (sic Adelard) having a holding, presumably at Fenton rated at one knight's fee (militem) which between then and sometime after the death of Henry II had been reduced by 50%. William de Thorpe was also rated at one knight's fee in 1166 but is omitted from the later list, presumably because his fee was by this time in the hands of Sempringham Priory. In the case of Elias Foliot no mention is made of him in 1166, but after Henry's death he was holding one third of a knight's fee in Lincolnshire. His omission from the earlier charter seems most likely to be explained by his not having been given the manor of Holm until after this date44.
A charter dating between 1173 and 1179 confirms to Roger son of Reinfrid "hulmum" (sic Holm) and land in Suttona and land in Bechingeham given to him by Alice de Gant in exchange for £15 of his inheritance of Toft and Manethorpe (Manthorpe), to be held of her by service of a third of a knight's fee45. This was a confirmation of her husband’s charter which appears to post date the original gift to Elias Foliot and was to be the cause of dispute at the beginning of the next century. As in the Foliot grant this may have been given in an effort to gain support for Simon's claim to the Huntingdon Earldom as Roger and his son Ralf are listed as having land in this area at "Gameningeye" or "Gamelingehey"46.
By 1212 according to the Book of Fees the Fenton manor had been further reduced to one third of a knight's fee. Of the Stragglethorpe property Sempringham's was still rated at one knight's fee and the quarter knight's fee also remained unaltered, whilst the manor holding had, in line with the other manor fees been reduced to a third47.
The Domesday survey was compiled for tax purposes and in the region covering the Danelaw assessements were made in terms of carucates and bovates, there being eight bovates in one carucate. It must be stressed that the assessment was merely a notional value of the holding, and no more an indication of true worth than is the rateable value of a property today, and although presumably when the assessment was first raised, some attempt was made to equate the values, the tenant-in-chief and his sub-tenant were at liberty to arrange terms with their under-tenants as they pleased. A village was assessed on its arable land and efforts were made to assess each village in a multiple of 6 carucates, but the property on which the assessement was made was not necessarily all situated in the village itself or belonged to a single tenant-in-chief.
Prior to the Conquest Holm was assessed at twenty four carucates and, was capable of being divided into four single knight's fees of six carucates and, if the Stragglethorpe quarter knight's fee is ignored, had the whole estate been divided and enfeoffed within a century of Domesday this would have occurred. Both Geoffrey Baard and William de Thorpe held a knight's fee, and it is evident from the comparative size of the villages that in order to value Stragglethorpe at two knights' fees the estates must have had interests outside the immediate area of the village. Fenton was first held at a single knight's fee which was later reduced to a half, and Beckingham and Sutton were enfeoffed at a third of a knight's fee after a further devaluation. The quarter knight's fee belonging to the holder of the Stragglethorpe manor was taken from Beckingham and Sutton which covered a considerably larger area than either of the other two villages, and therefore was presumably capable of
producing a greater income.
In an era of continually rising prices it would become less and less of an economic proposition for a holder of a fee, whose income was static to actually provide the services of a knight. In the case of a manor holding some action could be taken to maintain the income value; the lord could farm his demesne land himself or lease it out on more advantageous terms. The villeins' services could be commuted to a fixed payment instead of their labour, or they could be granted manumission. The income from land held in socage, being of a fixed rent, was hit particularly hard by inflation whilst being an advantage to the actual farmer. Such may have been the position of William de Thorpe, whose fee appears to consist only of sokeland and may account for his willingness to relinquish the property to Sempringham Priory. Such an institution was possibly contented to purchase tenants’ rights or wait for uneconomic land to return to their direct control when they could farm it themselves or re-lease it, as ultimately happened, the property being leased to Notley Abbey.
Thus at the approach of the thirteenth century, at the level of under-tenant to the tenant-in-chief, there were four estates, two at Stragglethorpe with additional interests in the surrounding area; Fenton apparently containing only a single estate complete in itself; and Beckingham and Sutton again containing a complete estate but also a holding of Straggglethorpe manor.
1. L.R.S. Vol.17. Final Concords Vol.II p.296-7 (1227).
2. Nottingham University aerial photographs. Pottery found on the site.
3. Stone now in Lincoln Museum.
4. Found by Mr. W.Sergeant proprietor of the land.
5. L.A.O. Enclosure Awards of Fulbeck and Leadenham.
6. L.A.O. Stragglethorpe Terriers.
7. Newark Museum: Report on Excavations at Holm.
8. B.M.Ms. Cotton Vesp.Exx. Arc. Soc. R.P. Vol. 32, p38. (1086-7).
9. Reg. Regum Anglo-Normannorum Vol.II 1100-1135 p.268.
10. B.M.Ms. Cotton Vesp.Exx.f.69. (c.1120-1130).
11. B.M.Ms. Cotton Vesp.Exx.f.63. (c.1159-1161).
12. B.M.Ms. Cotton Vesp.Exx.f.65d (c.1150-1161). Arc.Soc.R&P. Vol.32 p.55.
13. B.M.Ms. Cotton Vesp.Exx.f.65v (c.1159-1166). The Gant Family in England, Mary Abbot.
14. B.M. Chart. Harl. 50131. Genealogist I (1846) p.317.
15. The Gant Family in England, Mary Abbot. Complete Peerage.
16. B.M. Chart. Harl. 50131. Genealogist I (1848) p.317.
17. B.M.Ms. Add. 40008 f22v. Bodleian Ms. Dodsworth ciix fl57. Early Yorks Charters II (1915) no.1156).
18. Complete Peerage.
19. The Gant Family in England, Mary Abbot. Honours and Knights' Fees - Foliot
20. Records of Social & Economic History Vol.IX pp.184-6. B.M.Ms.Add.
40008 f 160v. B.M.Ms .Harl. 1063 Kirching; 1063 f2v. The Gant Family in England, Mary Abbot. Charters 67, 84-86, 105-106A.
21. Red Book of the Exchequer p.382.
22. B.M.Ms, Cotton Ms. Vesp.Exx.f,213-2124d. Arc.Soc.R&P. Vol 32 p55.
B.M.Ms. Cotton Vesp.Exx, Arc. Soc. R.P. Vol. 32, p38. (1086-7).
23. Calendar of Patent Rolls 19 Ed.Ill pt.2. p.521-2.
24. Book of Fees pp.187 & 359.
25. Curia Regis Vol.XIII pp.3-4 Bo.17.
26. The Knight and the Knight's Fee in England Sally Harvey, Peasants Knights and Heretics Ed. R.H.Hilton.
27. Curia Regis Vol.XIII No.17.1227-11.
28. L.A.O. Misc.Dep. 146/3/2, /3, /8.
29. Letters 8t Papers Foreign & Domestic 1544 36 H.VIII 166(21).
30. Calendar of Patent Rolls 18 Ed.Ill 1344 April 20.
31. L.R.S. Vol.19. Lincolnshire Domesday 74/36.
32. L.R.S. Vol.17. Final Concords Vol.II p.296-7 (1227).
33. P.R.O.159.187 (Exchequer Memoranda Roll Hilary 12 H,IV.)ml2 (13). E.M.Poynton Sempringham Charters. Genealogist xv p.223. (Charter of R.I).
34. L.N.Q. p.248. Testa de Nevill p.324.
35. Red Book Exchequer pp.381-384 Simon St. Liz's Charter
36. The Gant Family in England, Mary Abbot. Charter 74 $ 75 (1185-1191).
37. L.N.Q. ix p.124, P.R.O. Subsidy 242/113.
38. Genealogist xv p.223 (Charter R.I.)
39. Genealogist xvi p.227. (before 1153).
40. Calendar of Inquisitions Misc. Vol.I no.1569 p.441.
41. L.N.Q. ix p.248. Quo Warranto R. p.402.
42. P.R.O.E318/19/945&6. Particulars of Grants.
43. L.A.O. Fulbeck Enclosure Map.
44. Red Book of the Exchequer pp.381-384
45. E. Riding Yorks. C.R.O. DDCS/35/1.
46. Red Book of the Exchequer pp.377,582.
47. Book of Fees p.187.
