Goadby's History Of Loughborough Chatper 3, Part 1

We continue with the transcription of Goadby's History of Loughborough which was serialised in 1864. In his Chapter 3, Part 1, Goadby now reaches the time of the Despenser family. 

As with previous chapters, I’ve kept both the text and the layout as it appeared in the newspaper, but have added one or two notes, where I have found useful information. As mentioned last week, in the 160 years since the original publication, there have been many more discoveries and revelations about Loughborough’s history, hence some of the information contained in these serials will be wrong. I have not tried to amend these in any way.

For previous chapters relayed in this blog, please see the 'Links to all blogposts' page. 

THE HISTORY OF LOUGHBOROUGH, FROM THE TIME OF THE BRITONS TO THE MIDDLE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 

Chapter 3, Pt 1 The family of the Dispensers

In: 'Loughborough Monitor' 11 August 1864, pg 5

Part 1 – How the town came into the hands of the Dispensers – Obscurity of their origin – Residence in the neighbourhood – Its likely effects – Rise of the burgh – Trading and military class – Grants of market and fair – erection of market cross – Old traditions.

Hugh Lupus, the first Norman Earl of Chester, was succeeded in his earldom and, as it would appear, in the possession of his other numerous and wide-lying territories by his son Richard, who was about nine years old at the time of his father’s death. For a little more than a hundred years, the manor of Loughboro’, with its several varying members, continued to be held by the successive earls of Chester, until it passed into the family of the Dispensers.

How it came into the hands of the Dispensers has generally been regarded as a mystery, which did not admit of being satisfactorily cleared up, but we are able, we think, to explain it in the easiest possible manner. A passage we have discovered in the Close Rolls of King John (so called from their being folded up, in contradistinction to the Patent Rolls, which were written upon open skins) and which has never been pointed out before, shows that this Hugh Dispenser, afterwards Earl of Winchester, came to certain lands by marriage with the widow of one of the Earls of Chester, and as we know that the manor belonged to them and was more likely to be apportioned to a widow than any integral part of the earldom itself, we may fairly conclude, in the absence of other evidence, that he came to it in this way, especially as no other hypothesis has anything like a historical basis, and those who image he came to the manor when he received a grant of a market and fair are very much mistaken, as will be presently seen. It may be true, as Dugdale [1] says, that he married Aliva, the daughter of Philip Bassett of Wycombe, without that fact at least affecting the authenticity of this an earlier or later marriage. The passage, besides disposing of a knotty question, is curious as showing in what unkingly affairs the feudal monarchs thought fit to intermeddle. A man could not trade as he chose, scarce marry whom he pleased, and not even pickle a few herrings without asking the king’s licence and protection, and paying him handsomely for them (See Hume, vol.ii, App.ii) [2] – The passage is as follows:

“Know ye that we give to Hugh Dispenser, the wife of Geoffrey of Chester, recently deceased, with the land and hereditament pertaining to her; and for that land and hereditament we receive his homage, or fealty. Whence we command you that you give full possession to him, without delay, as well as of the aforesaid wife, as of her lands. As witness me at Cliszon, the third day of August, in the eighth year of our reign.”

The date of this possession would therefore be 1206-7; and the homage required is further explained, as far as the manor of Loughborough is concerned, by an entry in the Testa de Neville, [3] compiled in the reign of Henry the 3rd and Edward the 1st, a record of the taxation whereby aid was granted the former king towards appropriately marrying his sister to Frederick the 2nd, Emperor of the Romans. From that entry we learn that Loughborough was a Knight’s Fee, [4] was held by Hugh Dispenser, and was taxed to the extent of two marks.

The origin of the family of the Dispensers is involved in much obscurity. Barke [5] conjectures that it was descended from Robert Dispensator, the steward of William the Conqueror, and it is plainly evident from the surname itself that some ancestor really filled that post in a royal household. According to evidence collected by Potter [6] in his ‘Charnwood Forest’, several persons bearing the name are mentioned in documents connected with different places in Leicestershire; the earliest mentioned one, Thomas le Dispenser, probably the great grandfather of Hugh Dispenser, granting lands at Barton to the monks of Garendon between 1168 and 1189, so that the connection of the family with the county was not determined solely by the marriage of Hugh Dispenser, although the fact of their connection may have had something to do in determining the marriage. It is also conjectured by Mr. Potter that the family had residences in the immediate neighbourhood of the town of Loughborough, and probably their intimate connection with it had a good effect upon it, since we find it now gradually passing from the ‘burne’ and ‘burh’ into the ‘burgh’, as evidenced by curious etymological changes, as Luteburg, Lughteburg, Loutherburgh. The new terminal implies an amalgamation of freemen for civil and political purposes of a more local and imposing character than the mere tithing. The tithings or gyldes [guilds] were, indeed, the foundation of the citizenal constitution of almost every important town. They contained, rudimentarily, the burgher’s club and the more modern corporation. They were a sort of Association for the Prosecution of Felons, combined with a Benefit Sick Club. Promoting peace, justice, and cordiality between man and man, they secured liberty for commercial, enterprise, and substantially for social life. At a periodical meeting of the manorial court, these Frank pledges, or guarantees of the freemen for each other, were examined and affirmed, and such a meeting was usually styled the View of Frankpledge. One of these pledges, either the oldest, most respectable, or elected one, was known as the Headborough or Chief Pledge, and had authority equivalent to our constable.  

Co-extensive with this gradual rise of a semi-corporate character in the constitution of the town, the details of which have not come down to us further than as they are enveloped in the terminal burgh, there was a general elevation of the trading, and a depression of the strictly agricultural classes. This was in a great measure due to the oppression of the feudal customs upon the latter, and a change of life created by the new wants of a military age. The labourer left team and furrow to toil in the deadlier fields, and the arm of the smith no longer beat the coulter [7] or bent the sickle, but welded the shining mail, pointed the spear, or shod the proud tramping war-horse. The glover worked at his habergeons [8] and gauntlets, and the doughty yeoman stored his salted meats for service. Besides furnishing one knight well armed and accoutred to serve the king at home or abroad for the space of forty days – Loughborough being a Knight’s fee – doubtless many of the inhabitants were compelled to attend upon their Lord. Even the home-keeping population had its homely wits disturbed by the agitations of war and sanguinary raids. In 1215 Saer de Quincy was Governor of Mountsorrel Castle, and he and his men made so many marauding excursions in the neighbourhood that the castle was called a ‘nest of the Devil’. The peasantry incessantly complained of these plundering raids, and Henry III at last commanded the Sheriff of Nottinghamshire to collect forces and demolish it. It underwent a siege of several days, and was relieved by forces sent from London by Lewis the Dauphin, to whom it then belonged. In a few years afterwards it came into the hands of the English King, and was razed to the ground, the neighbours no doubt gladly assisting in its demolition.

The elevation of the trading class and the needs of the rising place soon rendered a market necessary, and no doubt the inhabitants addressed Hugh Dispenser for that purpose, who communicated their wishes to the King. The market and fair were granted some six years earlier than is ordinarily supposed, as appears from two passages in the Close Rolls of Henry III. Both were really granted in 1221-2, but only temporarily. It is stated that Hugh Dispenser shall have during his lifetime (usque ad aetatem suam) one market every seven days, on the Thursday at his manor of Luteburg, and that he shall have ‘during the life of our Lord the King (quod habeat usque ad aetatem Domin Regis) one fair every year at his manor on the eve of the Feast of St Peter’s Chains (i.e. Nov. 13 and 14). These conditions are curious, and have never been pointed out before. Probably the benefits arising from the market and fair were considerable, as we find a special grant made upon the subject in 1227, with additional privileges, liberating the inhabitants from local taxations of a somewhat troublesome character. The translation of the grant is as follows:

“The King to the Sheriff of Leicester sends greeting. Know thou that we have granted by our Charter to our trusty and beloved Hugh Dispenser, that he and his heirs may have for ever one market in every week, on Thursday, at his manor in Lucteburgh; and that they may have at the same place one fair every year, to last for three days, namely on the eve and day and morrow (in Vigilia et in die et in crostino) of St Peter’s Chains.

We have also granted to the same Hugh that he and his people (or vassals) of Lucteburgh, Burton, Huklescote, Fritheby, and Ernesby, be for ever free from all suits of county and Hundred and Sheriff’s aids, and view of Frankpledge, as is more fully contained in the aforesaid charter to him thereon made. And therefore we command that you cause the aforesaid charter to be read in your full Court, and the aforesaid market and the aforesaid fair to be proclaimed and strictly observed in the whole of your Bailiwiek. Witness the King at Westminster, 28 of April 1227.”

On the sixth of February in the succeeding year another charter was granted to his beloved and trusty subject, whereby he received permission to hold another Fair upon the second day of November, and it was also expressly declared that neither he nor his heirs should be put upon the Assizes, Juries, and Recognizances.

The setting up of the market-cross, no small event in the history of any community, was usually attended by some special religious ceremonies.

Where some great deed had been achieved, or upon any spot sanctified by religion or custom, this sacred symbol was erected. It was particularly the case when a market or a fair had been instituted by Royal Charter, and upon the open surrounding space, the people usually met for both trade and pleasure. Thus amidst the clamour of the market, and the tumultuous din of the holyday, this elevated symbol might serve to remind them of their religious duties and privileges. It also served to fix in their memories, and grateful, the fleeting images of a former faith. Reverential old men. Gathering their children around them on that eventful day, would recount the familiar village story received from their fathers; how the inhabitants were once Pagans, and were one day surprised by seeing a dusky-vestured, wild-eyed pilgrim enter their streets, pause at the crossway, strike a few notes on a rude harp, and then pour forth to the hastily assembled people the good tidings of the great joy of a new salvation by Jesus Christ; and how following him to the river side they were buried beneath its waters as a sign of their newness of life. Such was the old story often told over the erection of the market-cross, and so the symbol had its significance for our forefathers. It was meant to be at once the centre of their religious and secular life. Here all public notices were proclaimed by the town crier, the banns of marriage were published, and royal proclamations declared. Shakespeare alluded to this when he makes Henry IV say to Worcester:

“These things, indeed, you have articulated,

Proclaimed at market-crosses, read in churches.”

It is right we should mention a tradition here that was once very much believed in the neighbourhood. It was to the effect that prior to the above grants, Barrow-upon-Soar was the market village for Loughborough, the one being called High Borough, the other Low-Borough!

An ancient road, it is also believed, connected the two places, passing through what was called the Catsick meadow [9], the stones in the river that constituted the ford being said to be observable at low water less than 20 years ago. On a site between the two places, now scarcely identified, the tradition goes on, and called gaol-bank in the memory of living persons, there was once a gaol for their mutual convenience. The legend is evidently based upon a rude etymological guess, and needs no serious consideration, although it may strengthen the indications of an early relationship between them such as may have survived the destruction of the Saxon Mark.

END OF CHAPTER 3 PART 1

____________________________________

NOTES

[1] This is probably a reference to William Dugdale (1605-1868), an English historian who specialised in the study of Mediaeval history.

[2] This reference is probably to a ‘History of England’, a series of works written by philosopher, economist, and historian David Hume (1711-1776)

[3] The ‘Testa da Nevill’, originally called the ‘Book of Fiefs’ (Latin title ‘Liber Feodorum‘  was a listing of feudal landholdings. The edition likely to have been known to Goadby is from 1807, but a new edition was published in three volumes, between 1920 and 1931

[4] A knight’s fee was a unit of land measurement that was enough land to sustain a knight and his entourage. These varied across the country as soil variations had an effect on what and how much crop could be grown.  

[5] I cannot say for certain who Barke was, but perhaps he might be Edmund Barke who was Paymaster General of the Forces in 1782.  

[6] A reference to Thomas Rossell Potter (1799-1873), who wrote ‘History and Antiquities of Charnwood Forest’, published in 1842.

[7] A coulter is a knife-like vertical blade on a plough

[8] A habergeon was a sleeveless jacket made from chain mail, that was worn under a hauberk (breast plate) in Mediaeval times.

[9] There is certainly evidence of an area called Catsick between Loughborough and Barrow, particularly in the name Catsick Hill which is located on the River Soar, adjacent to the Grand Union Canal, about midway between Top Bridge and Pillings Lock.

____________________________________

Transcribed and presented here with the kind permission of the British Newspaper Archive. https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/ 

____________________________________

Posted by lynneaboutloughborough

With apologies for typos which are all mine!

_______________________________________________

Thank you for reading this blog.

Copyright:

The copyright © of all content on this blog rests with me, however, you are welcome to quote passages from any of my posts, with appropriate credit. The correct citation for this looks as follows:

Dyer, Lynne (2024). Goadby’s History of Loughborough, Chapter 3, Part 1. Available from: [https://lynneaboutloughborough.blogspot.com/2024/06/goadbys-history-of-loughborough-chatper-3-Pt-1.html] [Accessed 23 June 2024]

Take down policy:

I post no pictures that are not my own, unless I have express permission so to do. All text is my own, and not copied from any other information sources, printed or electronic, unless identified and credited as such. If you find I have posted something in contravention of these statements, or if there are photographs of you which you would prefer not to be here, please contact me at the address listed on the About Me page, and I will remove these.

External Links:

By including links to external sources I am not endorsing the websites, the authors, nor the information contained therein, and will not check back to update out-of-date links. Using these links to access external information is entirely the responsibility of the reader of the blog.

Blog archive and tags:

If you are viewing this blog in mobile format, you will not be able to easily access the blog archive, or the clickable links to various topics. These can be accessed if you scroll to the bottom of the page, and click 'View Web Version'. Alternatively, there is also a complete list of posts, which when clicked will take you to the page you are interested in.

Searching the blog:

You can search the blog using the dedicated search box that appears near the top of the blog when viewed in the web version. Alternatively, you can search using your usual search engine (e.g. Bing, Google, DuckDuckGo etc.) by following this example:

site: https://lynneaboutloughborough.blogspot.com/ “Radmoor House”

NOTE – the words you’re actually looking for must be in “” and the first of these must be preceded by a space

Thank you for reading this blog.

Lynne

Goadby's History of Loughborough Chapter 2 Part 2

Edwin Goadby, once editor of the 'Loughborough Monitor' began an extensive history of Loughborough, which was serialised in the newspaper during his time with the paper. We continue the history, with Part 2 of his chapter on the time of the Normans. I’ve kept both the text and the layout as it appeared in the newspaper, but have added one or two notes, where I have found useful information. As mentioned last week, in the 160 years since the original publication, there have been many more discoveries and revelations about Loughborough’s history, hence some of the information contained in these serials will be wrong. I have not tried to amend these in any way.

THE HISTORY OF LOUGHBOROUGH, FROM THE TIME OF THE BRITONS TO THE MIDDLE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

Chapter 2, Pt 2 Loughborough in the time of the Normans

In: Loughborough Monitor 30 June 1864, pg 5

CHAPTER II.

LOUGHBOROUGH IN THE TIME OF THE NORMANS

Part II – A Transcript from Domesday Book – Importance of its small Facts – Extent of Arable Lane in the Manor – The Mills and the Lord’s rights in connection with them – Meaning of Town and Village Bakehouses – The Number of Inhabitants – The Thanes – Law of Conditions supplies the omissions of the Survey – A Church or Churches, Halls, Households, Priests, Millers, &c. – Mount Sorrel [Mountsorrel] Castle and Feudal Customs.

When the general survey of the Kingdom was made by the Royal Commissioners in 1086, the following was the return as far as the town of Loughborough was concerned:

“In Lucteburne Roger holds of Earl Hugh eight carucates; [?] Ralph, three carucates and a half; Hugh, three carucates and a half; Godric, three carucates and a half; and Roger half a carucate. In the demesne or lordship, there are five ploughs and teams, and eight Villani, with fifteen Sochmanni, and sixteen Bordarii. They have twelve carucates and a half. There are two water-mills (molini) of ten shillings in value, and forty-five acres of meadow-land. There is also a wood of seven furlongs in length and three furlongs in breadth. And the five Thanes held in freehold (Quinque Thaini libere tenuerant). Lewin holds of the Earl one hide in Burton. The soke belongs to Lucteburne.”

These details are bare, and apparently insignificant enough, but the smallest facts are charged with meaning when viewed in all their relationships, and a little perseverance will enable us to secure through them a considerable amount of reliable history, and a very fair picture of the place and the people.

The actual amount of land belonging to the Manor of Loughborough is seen by the above enumeration to be considerable. It was chiefly arable. A carucate, from the low Latin caruca, through the old French caruc, a plough, is generally rendered as ploughland, or “as much land as could be tilled with one plough, and the oxen thereunto belonging in a year.” Bede [Venerable?] says it was as much as would maintain a family comfortably. But there are vague estimates of what was for two or three hundred years a very variable quantity, and by no means satisfactory for those unlearned in early agriculture and its curious measurements. A carucate, then, has been reckoned by competent persons to consist of from 100 to 150 acres, and at the first estimate there would be 3,050 acres of arable land in the manor at the time of the survey, and at the second 4,575 – certainly a very large proportion of arable to meadow land, and sufficiently showing the chief employments of the various descriptions of persons occupying the town. The amount of woodland mentioned is also small, and we are not informed whether any forest rights were claimed or not, but as neither Garendon nor Quorndon are mentioned as places in the Domesday Book, we may suppose that they were still waste and provided excellent masting for cattle. 

The water-mills, in all probability, occupied site adjacent to, if not actually the same, as those now standing, and were afterwards known as the King’s Mills, and more modernly as the Upper and Lower Mills. To these mills all the inhabitants were compelled by law to take their corn to be ground, paying a fixed and reasonable sum for the same, appears by feudal custom elsewhere, and expressly by a deed of complaint of one of the Earls of Huntingdon against several parties in the town, which is still preserved in the Court of the Exchequer. It appears that the right afterwards extended to some malt-mills, one of which is known to have existed upon the spot now occupied by Messrs. Paget’s factory in the Mill Street [now Market Street], and to have given the street its earlier name of Malt Mill Lane. The words of this deed are curious, and deserve quotation. It is declared “that all the tenants, residents, and inhabitants of, and within the said manor, by custom, tenure, covenant, or other lawful means. And have been and are, bound and obliged, and have used and of right ought to grind all their corn, grain, and malt, which they use spent ground in their respective houses within the said manor, at the said mills and not elsewhere; and that no person have or ought to erect or keep any other mills, querns, or other engines within the said manor in prejudice to the complainant; nor ought any miller, loader, or carrier, of or belonging to any other mill, or mills, to come within the said manor, to fetch and carry away the corn and grist of any person residing within the said manor to any other mill or mills.” These conditions are severe enough, but were everywhere common in the feudal ages, and one of the good things that came out of the loan Napoleon demanded from Prussia, in 1810, was the entire destruction of this surviving feudal monopoly in that kingdom.

The severity of this feudal custom has, as yet, perhaps, been understated. It extended beyond the simple grinding of corn, which a wise thrift might secure ground beforehand, to even the daily domesticities of life. Whether the inhabitants of the town, excepting of course the Thanes, could even bake their own bread at home is more than doubtful, since we find that in the old Norman seigneuries and elsewhere, the peasants were obliged, “by custom, tenure, covenant, and other lawful means,” no doubt, to take their dough to the bakehouse provided for the,, perhaps kindly and fatherly enough by their respective manorial Lords. The village bakehouses, once scattered almost everywhere throughout England, as, for instance, the one still remaining at Cotes, are remnants of this old custom. And it is well known to octogenarians that upon the site of the offices of Messrs. Cradock and Woolley, there previously existed what was called the “town bakehouse,” and what was at an earlier period the only one in town. The street abutting it is now known as Baxter Gate, and it is curious that Baxter is nothing but an earlier and more northerly form of Baker.

The existence of these water-mills by the river-side implies a good road to them and bridges over the stream. So that, as we shall find as we proceed in our narrative, the repair of both became very early in the history of the town a most important matter.

The number of inhabitants in Loughborough, according to the letter of the survey, was only forty-four, but there is every reason to believe that there must have been a larger number. The express purpose of the Commissioners in making the survey was to ascertain the number of men actually capable of bearing arms, the extent of the lands cultivated in each place, and the names and condition of the chief proprietors. Beyond this they issued few instructions, and the utmost capriciousness is observable in all the returns. Here, for instance, are evidently serious omissions, which a comparison with the returns from other places, and what we know of the state of the country at the time, enables us to supply. There is, in fact, no mention of a church or churches, nor of the private residences of Roger, Ralph, Hugh, Godric, and Roger, or even their households. Now it is expressly stated, as will be seen by the original words quoted in parenthesis, that these men were Thanes, and as we know what the conditions were which entitled a man to be a Thane, we can remedy this threefold defect of the Domesday account. These Thanes, or Thegns, were Anglo-Saxons, and any man could attain that rank, even though formerly a slave, upon certain conditions. The conditions as set forth in an old Saxon law, still extant, are somewhat curious, as they are for us, very much to the point. He was to possess five hides of his own land – the Saxon hid being, according to Kemble, about thirty acres – a church, a kitchen, and a bell-house – the latter of course in addition to his residence – and then followed as the privileges of his thane-ship, a judicial seat at the burgh-gate, or a selection as one of the twelve witness thanes of a hundred, and, it is conjectured, a seat in the Witena-gemot or Saxon Parliament. 

There were two orders of Thanes – King’s Thanes, or, as they were afterwards called, Barons, and inferior Thanes, subsequently known as Knights and Squires. The Thane’s residence was designated as a Hall, a spacious living-room occupying the centre, and the bedchambers of bowers (bur) where the birdes or ladies dwelt, with other apartments, were situate on either side, as appears from the illustrations to their manuscripts. The extent of their households was not very considerable, but it is singular there is no mention whatever of either their wives, children, or maid-servants. A Thane’s house was an asylum, and if a thief too refuge there he was allowed three days’ safety and protection. The omission of any reference to a church or churches in connection with the names of the five Thanes recently given, is easily enough understood when known to be implied by the express rank of the proprietors themselves, and the general course of procedure in compiling the survey, as testified to by eminent authorities. “I may add here,” says Dr. Lingard, [1] in his History of the Antiquities of the Anglo-Saxon Church, “that the number of churches and chapels in England at the time of the Conquest was very great.” Yet, he remarks further, “in Domesday they are entered only occasionally.” If the building were omitted, one would think that the officiating clergyman might have been mentioned, but a very few of them really were in any returns. In county after county we do not find even so much as a solitary entrance of the word presbyter, and only thirty-four are recorded in the entire county of Leicester. 

“All the monks,” says Sharon Turner, [2] “and nearly all the parochial clergy, are omitted.” Backed by these authorities, then, we may safely conclude that there was a church, if not churches, in the manor of Lucteburh, at the time of the survey, with one of two priests officiating at them. Such church or churches would be constructed probably of sawn forest timber, with the smooth sides inward, the interstices being filled with moss and earth, and the whole building roofed with reeds, many village churches being so constructed, according to the Venerable Bede, who calls the style more Scotorum – after the manner of the Scots – as though such a style would not be most perfectly natural in all places where timber abounded and architecture was comparatively unknown. There would be a belfry at one end of the edifice, and possibly it would not be destitute of some kind of pretensions to beauty.

Another omission is also curious. Two mills are mentioned, but no millers, and these are elsewhere distinguished with considerable precision. Nor is there any mention of bercary, which can be proved to have existed soon after the Conquest, and which would probably employ one or two men. We deed [need?] not be surprised at the omission of the Berquarii, since, according to Turner’s analysis of the Anglo-Saxon population as given in the Domesday Book, the only county in which they are mentioned at all is Sussex. It will not also fail to be noticed that there is no mention whatever of women in the returns for Lucteburh. The Commissioners would here and elsewhere appear to have been indulging in a little pleasantry to relieve their dry statistical labours, and thinking it would be naturally enough concluded that where the men were the women would be also, they have almost ignored the very existence of the latter, imagining, perhaps, that in so doing they paid a dry compliment to the ingenuity of the human understanding. Reckoning, therefore, a fair quota of women and children of Lucteburh in 1086, we may honestly put down the population, in addition to other omissions already inductively supplied, at something like one hundred and twenty instead of the forty-four actually given in the letter of the return.

We come now to the condition of the other classes of the inhabitants. The Villani were, in fact, nothing better than slaves, and answered to the Roman class of coloni. They were farm servants who were part and parcel of the several estates upon which they laboured, having neither constitutional nor political rights, but nevertheless protected by laws intended to promote their industry, good behaviour, and, finally, emancipation. The reward of good service was frequently manumission, and many masters manumitted their serfs by will at death. The Sochmanni were of Northern descent, probably Danes, and were usually freemen, though sometimes holdings their lands by peculiar tenures, honourable and otherwise, as repairing the castle gates, mills, implements of husbandry, &c., or following their lord with hawk and hound when it pleased him to recreate himself in the sports of the chase. Authorities are divided as to whether soc be derived from soca, a plough, implying services relative to it, or from another term expressive of privilege and freedom, but anyway they were known as freemen. They were liable to military service. Lewin, who held on hide of land of the Earl in Burton, was a Sochman, and held his land by virtue of some periodical but now unrecognizable service done for the benefit of the inhabitants of Lucteburh. The Bordarii or Boors, were so called from their living in cottages which were the property of the manorial Lord, for which they paid rent or bord in provisions, as bacon, eggs, butter, wheat, honey, and fruits. The two latter classes only must be understood as holding the twelve ploughlands and a half, since a Villain could not usually hold land without ceasing to be designated by that name.

Such were the inhabitants of Lucteburh in the time of the Normans. The place itself would be only remarkable for its rustic simplicity. Low wooden buildings with gable ends and thatched roofs almost reaching to the ground, interspersed with garden plots and scattered trees, would form the abodes of the generality of the inhabitants. Rude in dress and rough in manners, they would be hearty in such enjoyments as were common to them – probably running, leaping, wrestling, and other manly games at the neighbouring Holy Well, where such sports were usually indulged in, as appears from Mr. Wright’s account of their manners (‘Art Journal’, Vol. III, N.S., p. 169), enlivened by the song and the jest of the wandering minstrel and the noisy clamour of itinerant pedlars. But for the feudal system that overshadowed them, and perhaps in spite of it, they might have led a contented if not a very refined or progressive life. It was not permitted them to forget that they were a conquered people. The Earl of Chester was a wary, wily Norman, and took good care to secure what had once come into his full possession. Some time about 1080, it is conjectured, if not earlier, he erected a castle upon Mount Sorrel Hill, with the view to defend his surrounding properties if attacked, and command the allegiance of his subjects. All his tenantry, according to feudal custom, would repair at stated periods to its gates, and present themselves before him or his representative, and an armed retinue, to have their oaths of fealty registered, their tenures renewed, and such regulations made for their order and submission as might seem befitting and necessary.

Doubtless there were many aspects of this feudal life which were very pleasant, and even congenial to those upon whom we may ordinarily suppose its restrictions told most severely. The roving military propensity was certainly capable of immense gratification then in those in whom it might be wrong. Castle sports were hardy, healthy, and exciting enough. Even a lawless affray or a booty-hunting expedition would be dashed with the glamour of romance. There was plenty to catch the eye and command a certain awe and admiration. Discipline and subordination were also good educators of the directly governed classes, and helped to fashion the stalwart freemen of succeeding generations. But the condition of the agriculturists, of which the town of Lucteburh was mainly composed, was not very enviable. “A few paternal acres” are all very well when “our wish and care” can be gratified as we please, but somewhat burdensome when we are compassed by the rights of another, and haunted, not by an inoffensive tax-gatherer with a book, but a man sheathed in “complete steel,” with a battle-axe, perhaps, and neither an amiable disposition, nor any knowledge of such an item as “arrears of former rate.” To quote the words of M. de Tocqueville, [3] when writing of a similar class elsewhere – “As the peasant crosses the river, the Seigneurs wait for his passage to levy his toll. He finds them at the market, where they sell to him the right of selling his own produce; and when, on his return home, he wants to use the remainder of his wheat for his own sustenance – of that wheat which was planted by his own hands, and has grown under his eyes – he cannot touch it until he has ground it at the mill, and baked it at the bakehouse of these same men.” It would have been well if all their annoyances had ended here, and no savage raids had despoiled their crops, destroyed their houses, and desolated their homes. We have yet to see that this was a part of the bitter experience of the inhabitants of Lucteburh and its neighbourhood in the feudal ages.  

END OF CHAPTER 2, PART 2

____________________________________

NOTES

[1] Dr. John Lingard (1771-1851) was a catholic priest and a historian who wrote the multi-volumed work, ‘History of England’, published between 1819 and 1830.

[2] Sharon Turner (1768-1847) was an English historian, known for his multi-volume,  ‘History of the Anglo-Saxons’, published between 1799 and 1805.

[3] Alexis Charles Henri Clerel, comte de Tocqueville (1805-1859), as well as being a French aristocrat, was also a political philosopher and scientist, a sociologist, a diplomat, and a historian.

____________________________________

Transcribed and presented here with the kind permission of the British Newspaper Archive. https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/  

____________________________________

Posted by lynneaboutloughborough

With apologies for typos which are all mine!

_______________________________________________

Thank you for reading this blog.

Copyright:

The copyright © of all content on this blog rests with me, however, you are welcome to quote passages from any of my posts, with appropriate credit. The correct citation for this looks as follows:

Dyer, Lynne (2024). Goadby's History of Loughborough, Chapter 2, Part 2. Available from: https://lynneaboutloughborough.blogspot.com/2024/06/goadbys-history-of-loughborough-chapter_01904780546.html [Accessed 9 June 2024]

Take down policy:

I post no pictures that are not my own, unless I have express permission so to do. All text is my own, and not copied from any other information sources, printed or electronic, unless identified and credited as such. If you find I have posted something in contravention of these statements, or if there are photographs of you which you would prefer not to be here, please contact me at the address listed on the About Me page, and I will remove these.

External Links:

By including links to external sources I am not endorsing the websites, the authors, nor the information contained therein, and will not check back to update out-of-date links. Using these links to access external information is entirely the responsibility of the reader of the blog.

Blog archive and tags:

If you are viewing this blog in mobile format, you will not be able to easily access the blog archive, or the clickable links to various topics. These can be accessed if you scroll to the bottom of the page, and click 'View Web Version'. Alternatively, there is also a complete list of posts, which when clicked will take you to the page you are interested in.

Searching the blog:

You can search the blog using the dedicated search box that appears near the top of the blog when viewed in the web version. Alternatively, you can search using your usual search engine (e.g. Bing, Google, DuckDuckGo etc.) by following this example:

site: https://lynneaboutloughborough.blogspot.com/ “Radmoor House”

NOTE – the words you’re actually looking for must be in “” and the first of these must be preceded by a space

Thank you for reading this blog.

Lynne     

Private Lacey Anthony Tingle and Little Bear

This year is the 80th anniversary of D-Day and Loughborough Library Local Studies Volunteer Group (LLLSVG) had the privilege of telling two stories of that day – very different from each other and yet not – at the Queen’s Park D-Day Beacon Lighting event.

 

The Story of Private Lacey Anthony Tingle

Killed in Action 06 06 44

Lacey Anthony Tingle was the son of a Methodist Minister, Robert Lacey Aubrey Tingle – known as Aubrey Tingle – and his wife Alice. He was born in February 1915 in Haringey, London. Lacey had a younger sister Margaret born in 1921 and a younger brother John A. Tingle. Lacey lived with his parents at 114 Manor Road, Loughborough and then later at 5 Lime Avenue.

Lacey Tingle. With permission from the Tingle family

Lacey's father Aubrey, came to Loughborough in 1939, as Superintendent at Leicester Road Methodist Church. From 1933 to 1936, Lacey had followed his father to Leeds University. According to the 1939 Register, Lacey was an elementary school teacher in Wigston, Leicester. He was still teaching when WWII began and enlisted in 1941 as a conscientious objector because of his Methodist upbringing. He went before a tribunal and was registered for noncombatant service. This group of men is now recognised as brave – being prepared to serve in the war but unarmed.

In 1941 Lacey was enlisted in the Bomb Disposal Unit and after training, he was based in London. In 1943 he was transferred to the Royal Army Medical Corps (RAMC) as part of the 6th Airborne Division, 3rd Parachute Brigade.

On D-Day, as part of Operation Overlord, with the 6th Airborne Division (“The Red Devils”), he parachuted into Normandy on 6th June 1944 as part of Operation Tonga. Their mission was to secure the left flank of the Allied invasion. They were tasked with securing bridges and villages and with destroying the Merville Gun Battery. The 6th Airborne Division lost 850 men of the 8,500 men who were deployed between 5th and 7th June 1944.

With the other members of the 224th Parachute Field Ambulance, RAMC, Lacey’s assignment was to set up field hospitals at strategic points and to attend to the wounded. Due to bad weather and poor navigation many of the Airborne troops were scattered throughout the operational area. These major errors had a positive outcome at the time when the Germans became confused about where the British troops were actually landing.

The 224th Parachute Field Ambulance, RAMC had been converted to an Airborne unit in 1942 and assigned to the 3rd Parachute Brigade, part of the 6th Airborne Division. They first saw active service in 1944 as part of the invasion of Normandy and D-Day. The RAMC is protected under the Geneva Convention and as such bears arms for personal protection only. When on parade this is reflected when swords and bayonets may be worn but must remained sheathed.

On 6th June 1944, Lacey and his comrades in the 224th Para RAMC jumped from the planes that had brought them to Normandy. As they landed, they were split into many different areas and groups. Lacey was later reported as missing, presumed dead, on 6th June 1944 and is commemorated on the Bayeux Memorial. It has now been discovered that Private Tingle landed near the village of Douville-en-Auge. A group of British and Canadian Paratroopers were surrounded by the enemy and, at some point in the course of the ensuing battle, nine of the group lost their lives. Prior to being moved to Ranville War Cemetery after the war, these paratroopers were buried in the village by locals – Private Tingle was among these nine. The official date of his death is 06 06 44.

 

74 years later, Lacey’s sister Margaret was contacted by the Ministry of Defence who confirmed that he had been buried in a grave in France marked with a stone engraved Known unto God. This is now in the museum at Pegasus Bridge. Margaret was informed by the MoD's Joint Casualty and Compassionate Centre (JCCC) that his grave was identified by a local Frenchman, Ludovic Louis, who had been working on this project for 10 years.

On 7th June 2018, a special re-dedication service and ceremony took place at the cemetery when, watched by his sister Margaret, Lacey’s original headstone was replaced with one inscribed with his name.

The Story of the Little Bear

The little bear in the picture belonged to an American paratrooper who everyone knew as Tex. He was one of the 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment of the US 82nd Airborne Division. It was perhaps his childhood toy or a good luck mascot but was certainly something that he cherished. Mrs. Worden took in laundry from him and other American GIs who were far from home.

She was doing his laundry on 29th May, and when he failed to collect it, she walked across the fields to return his clean laundry. The bear had been at the bottom of his kit bag and Mrs. Worden had kept it there ready to be returned to Tex. When Mrs Worden reached the camp, it was deserted. The paratroopers had left for training and for D-Day in Normandy.

Mrs. Worden kept the kit bags and the little bear in case Tex and the other men ever returned. He never did and he was probably one of the 220 unfortunate men killed in action. The little bear became a favourite toy of Mrs. Worden’s children and now belongs to her granddaughter. He is much loved and cherished and serves as a reminder of a brave American Paratrooper.

____________________________________

About Sharon

Sharon is a volunteer with the Loughborough Library Local Studies Volunteer Group, where her skills and experience in genealogy are put to good use, helping visitors to unlock some of their family history. Along with other volunteers, Sharon also gets involved in – and indeed organises – other research activity into various aspects of Loughborough’s history, is involved with preparation and hosting of the varied displays in the local history part of the library, looks after the books for the group (financial books, that is!), and is often seen promoting the work of the group at various heritage events. Before becoming a volunteer, Sharon, along with her husband, ran a hosiery company in the town.

Last summer, for this blog's 10th anniversary, Sharon shared her research into people who lived in Paget Street in 1891people who lived in Paget Street in 1891. She has written up her research in full, and the book can be bought from the Local and Family history Centre in the Loughborough public library on Granby Street.

____________________________________

Posted by lynneaboutloughborough

With apologies for typos which are all mine!

_______________________________________________

Thank you for reading this blog.

Copyright:

The copyright © of all content on this blog rests with me, or in the case of guest blogposts, with the named Guest Blogger. However, you are welcome to quote passages from any of my posts, with appropriate credit. The correct citation for this looks as follows:

Gray, Sharon (2024). [Post title]. Available from: [ URL e.g. https://lynneaboutloughborough.blogspot.com/2023/03/loughborough-and-isaac-newton.html] [Accessed 7 June 2024]

Take down policy:

I post no pictures that are not my own, unless I have express permission so to do. All text is my own, and not copied from any other information sources, printed or electronic, unless identified and credited as such. If you find I have posted something in contravention of these statements, or if there are photographs of you which you would prefer not to be here, please contact me at the address listed on the About Me page, and I will remove these.

Blog archive and tags:

If you are viewing this blog in mobile format, you will not be able to easily access the blog archive, or the clickable links to various topics. These can be accessed if you scroll to the bottom of the page, and click 'View Web Version'. Alternatively, there is also a complete list of posts, which when clicked will take you to the page you are interested in.

Searching the blog:

You can search the blog using the dedicated search box that appears near the top of the blog when viewed in the web version. Alternatively, you can search using your usual search engine (e.g. Bing, Google, DuckDuckGo etc.) by following this example:

site: https://lynneaboutloughborough.blogspot.com/ “Radmoor House”

NOTE – the words you’re actually looking for must be in “” and the first of these must be preceded by a space

Thank you for reading this blog.

Lynne

Goadby’s History Of Loughborough Chapter 2, Part 1

Edwin Goadby's detailed series on the history of Loughborough continues with Chapter 2 and the Normans.

THE HISTORY OF LOUGHBOROUGH, FROM THE TIME OF THE BRITONS TO THE MIDDLE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

‘Loughborough Monitor’ 09 June 1864, pg 5

CHAPTER II.

LOUGHBOROUGH IN THE TIME OF THE NORMANS

Part I – Gradual Degeneration of Saxon up to the Conquest – The resistance of Eric, the Forester, an Ancestor of the Herricks of Beaumanor – His “house in Leicestershire” – Traditionary harangue at Copy Oak – His rebellion, reconciliation, and promotion – The Conqueror’s siege of Leicester – The Town and Manor of Loughborough are given by him to his nephew, Hugh Lupus, Earl of Chester – Historical facts concerning this First Lord of the Manor.

FEW races that have settled amongst the people they have subjugated have long retained the virtues which gained them their victory. The very weaknesses which they despised in them as enemies they have imitated as soon as they have become friends. The Anglo-Saxons were not an exception to this pretty general fact. In five hundred years their character and institutions had grown, flourished, and declined. The almost perfect communism of the markmen which seems so beautiful at the distance of some thirteen centuries had passed by gradual stages of which we have but little notice, into anything but the faintest realization of the dreams of St. Simon or Fourier. The peasantry had sunk or been gradually forced into slavery, and their condition had become hampered by vexatious laws, customs, and irregularities. Individual prowess and position, aided by kingly favour and gifts, did their share of work in effecting the supremacy of the military over the civil class, but the degeneracy of the peasantry, from whatever cause brought about, must have been marked to have produce[d] so complete a prostration as we found at the time of the Norman Conquest.

How far this general decadence effected [sic] the rising little town of Lucteburh we do not know, but that it does appear to have affected it will be presently seen. There are, however, two facts which are interesting as bearing upon the subject – firstly, the resistance of Eric, and, secondly, the gallant heroism of the chief county town, Leicester.

Eric, the son of Alfrike, Earl of Mercia, surnamed Silvaticus, or the Forester – an epithet also applied by old chronicles to Robin Hood – collected an army to oppose the invading march of William the Norman. [William the Conqueror] We are not informed whence or how this army was raised, but are left to conjecture that the greater part must have been gathered from his lands in the north of Herefordshire, and the remainder gathered from different parts, Leicestershire amongst them, and composed of patriots of all grades and occupations.  One of his residences would appear to have been somewhere in Leicestershire, at present uncertain, although we think it probable that it may have been in the neighbourhood of Beaumanor. This we believe to be contrary to generally received historical testimony, as far as actual producible documents go, since the earliest historical evidence for the location of the Herricks in the country, of which Silvaticus was the ancestor, is given by Throsby [explain] as found in a grant of lands near Leicester, made to the family in the time of King John, but the family had unquestionably a residence here, whether regular or occasional matters little, some hundred years earlier, for we find it recorded of the very Eric in question, in the anecdotes of the Swift family, [1] “that when old age had incapacitated him from performing the duties of his office near the King’s person, he retired to his house in Leicestershire.” “Probably the residence of so brave a personage in the neighbourhood, if our conjecture be true, would not be without its effect on the inhabitants of Lucteburh, and we may safely conclude that some of them, with the hardier rangers of the Forest, would crowd to his standard and play their humble part in the noble but ineffectual struggle for their Fatherland.

A sight more interesting than the gathering of this little band at Copy Oak, the old trysting tree of the freemen, and the harangue of their chieftain, does not often fall to the lot of the local historian to describe, but unfortunately we are left in ignorance of all details, and a little glimmer of tradition is all that remains to mark the event. We do not even know where his forces encountered those of the invader, although he is said to have been vanquished by him. He was not, however, thoroughly subdued, and during William’s absence in Normandy he again appeared in arms, and aided by two Welsh princes, Blethyn and Rywalhon, he revenged an affront he had received from Earl Fitzcrope and the garrison of Hereford by ravaging the country to the very gates of that city, and securing an immense amount of spoil. He also laid siege to the town of Shrewsbury. On his reconciliation, which soon after took place, he received many marks of the royal favour, and continued in service near his person until old age drew him from the artificial restraints of court to the more congenial retirement of his beautiful home.

The bravery and resistance of the Saxons did not expire even after the defeat of Hastings. England, in spite of its decay, was yet by no means a conquered country, and the numerous rebellions that continued to break out were only subdued by the most rigorous measures. In his third inland campaign, William the Norman stormed the fortifications of Leicester, and then divided the houses and bodies of its inhabitants among his insatiable followers. One house mentioned in Domesday Book as belonging to Loughborough, and undoubtedly some freehold possession of a native of the town, together with ten that may be similarly designated, belonging to Barrow, and six to Kegworth, were given to his nephew, Hugh Lupus of Avranches, to whom he also gave the town and manor of Loughborough, and several other possessions in Leicestershire.

This Hugh Lupus was in many respects one of the most important personages that figured in the reigns of the two Williams, and was remarkable alike for his riches, his ferocity, and his obesity. He was the son of Richard, Earl of Orange, and the Countess Emma, a half-sister of the Conqueror’s. As a reward for his numerous military services he was presented, in 1070, with the earldom of Chester, which he was to hold of the King as freely by his sword as he himself held England by his crown (ita libere ad gladium, sicut ipse totam tenebat Anglium ad coronam.)  He had numerous lands and towns besides in no less that twenty different counties. For the better management of his affairs, and by virtue of his power and position, he created under him four Barons, to whom he gave separate possessions and numerous privileges. His cousin Nigel he made Baron of Halton, Sir Piers Malbank, Baron of Malbank, Sir Eustace Mawpace, Baron of Mawpace, and Sir Warren Vernon, Baron of Shipbrooke. The numerous lands he held and the various persons recognising him as their lord, made him the ruler of quite an imperium in imperio.

Although the Earl of Chester was engaged in several wars on behalf of his uncle and Rufus, in none was the savage brutality of his character so manifest as in his various attempts to subdue the brave people of Wales. With rude weapons and undisciplined forces, but with the most indomitable courage, they swept back and scattered the armies sent to overpower them. Forts and outposts were vainly erected upon their boundaries. Secure in their mountain citadels, they looked with scorn upon these puny devices, and whenever the alarm of war resounded, they threw a glance at their white-robed monarch with his brow in the clouds, and rushed upon the foe with all the impetuosity of the Tyrolese and the obstinacy of the defenders of La Vendee. After the repeated failures of the Royal armies, their subjugation was left in the hands of the Earl of Chester and Salop, and the incursions upon Welsh territory were as much a part of their yearly divertisement as partridge shooting and fox-hunting are with their modern representatives. Whether by violence or treachery we know not, but at length possession was obtained of the island of Anglesey, the refuge of the Cymri whenever hard beset, and they committed the greatest atrocities, cutting off their limbs and mutilating their bodies in a manner too horrible to relate. Even the clergy did not escape their fury. Brompton [2] records the case of an aged presbyter named Renredan, who was dragged from his church, one of his eyes gouged out, his tongue torn from its roots, and his body most inhumanely maimed. In spite of all these cruelties, and notwithstanding that their last King Rees was slain, the Welsh were only temporarily subdued, and continued to rebel until the time of the Plantagenets.

In these expeditions of the Earl of Chester fully justified the propriety of his agnomen, Lupus or the Wolf, whilst the corpularity of his person caused him to be taunted by the Welsh as Hugh Vras, or the Fat.  He built the Abbey of Chester, and sent for the venerable Anselm from Normandy to arrange its affairs and comfort him in his last sickness; “adding,” says Holinshed, [3] “that if he hasted not the sooner he would be too late, whereof he would after repent him.” He died in 1102, and was buried in the church of St Werburgh, converted by him into an Abbey. The following curious epitaph, taken from an old M.S., [manuscript] and probably placed over him about the time of the dissolution of monasteries, we quote entire, because it gives the day and the date of his death, about which opinions are divided:

“Although my Corps it lies in grave,

And that my flesh consumed be,

My Picture here now that you have,

An Earle some time of the Cittye,

Hugh Lupe by name,

Sonne to the Duke of Brittayne,

Of Chivalrye them being Flower,

And Sister’s Son to William Conqueror.

To the Honour of God I did edifye

The Foundations of the Monastery;

The ninth year of this my Foundation

God changed my life to His Heavenly Mansion,

In the year of Our Lord them being so

A thousand one hundred and two,

I changed this life verily

The XVIII daie of July.”

Such was the first Lord of the Manor of Loughborough.

END OF CHAPTER 2 PT 1

____________________________________

NOTES

[1] I believe this is a reference to the family of Jonathan Swift, the author of ‘Gulliver’s Travels’

[2] I have been unable to identify Brompton.

[3] Ralph Holinshed (1525-1582) was responsible for writing what is commonly known as ‘Holinshed’s Chronicles’, the full title of which is ‘The Chronicles of England, Scotlande, and Irelande’.

____________________________________

Transcribed and presented here with the kind permission of the British Newspaper Archive. https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/

____________________________________

Posted by lynneaboutloughborough

With apologies for typos which are all mine!

_______________________________________________

Thank you for reading this blog.

Copyright:

The copyright © of all content on this blog rests with me, however, you are welcome to quote passages from any of my posts, with appropriate credit. The correct citation for this looks as follows:

Dyer, Lynne (2024). Goadby’s History Of Loughborough, Chapter 2, Part 1. Available from: https://lynneaboutloughborough.blogspot.com/2024/06/goadbys-history-of-loughborough-chapter.html [Accessed 2 June 2024]

Take down policy:

I post no pictures that are not my own, unless I have express permission so to do. All text is my own, and not copied from any other information sources, printed or electronic, unless identified and credited as such. If you find I have posted something in contravention of these statements, or if there are photographs of you which you would prefer not to be here, please contact me at the address listed on the About Me page, and I will remove these.

External Links:

By including links to external sources I am not endorsing the websites, the authors, nor the information contained therein, and will not check back to update out-of-date links. Using these links to access external information is entirely the responsibility of the reader of the blog.

Blog archive and tags:

If you are viewing this blog in mobile format, you will not be able to easily access the blog archive, or the clickable links to various topics. These can be accessed if you scroll to the bottom of the page, and click 'View Web Version'. Alternatively, there is also a complete list of posts, which when clicked will take you to the page you are interested in.

Searching the blog:

You can search the blog using the dedicated search box that appears near the top of the blog when viewed in the web version. Alternatively, you can search using your usual search engine (e.g. Bing, Google, DuckDuckGo etc.) by following this example:

site: https://lynneaboutloughborough.blogspot.com/ “Radmoor House”

NOTE – the words you’re actually looking for must be in “” and the first of these must be preceded by a space

Thank you for reading this blog.

Lynne