Outside the boundary of Tetford, to the west, and strictly speaking in the parish of Salmonby, a number of flint arrow-heads have been found on Warlow farm, near a spot named “Warlow Camp.”  They are of a trilobite form, finely chipped, and about one inch in length, three-quarters of an inch broad at base.  They belong to the neolithic period; and from the very crisp character of the chipping, it is evident that they have not been used; there was probably a factory of such implements on the spot.  Several specimens may be seen at the house of Mr. Westerby, tenant of the farm.

The earliest actual mention of Waddingworth is in Domesday Book, in which there are two references to it.  In one of these we are told that the Conqueror gave part of the parish to the proud and powerful Bishop of Durham, William de Karilepho, A.D. 1082, who was also Chief Justice of England.  There were 4 carucates of land, i.e., 480 acres, rateable to gelt (a very small tax), the whole being 6 carucates, or 720 acres, with 20 acres of meadow (“ings”) and 25 acres of underwood.  The other notice is that the same amount of land was given by the Conqueror to one of his distinguished Norman soldiers, Eudo the son of Spirewic.  Eudo, it will be remembered, was a comrade in arms of Pinco, the latter of whom acquired large property in the neighbourhood of Spilsby, and his descendants eventually became the Lords Willoughby d’ Eresby (i.e., Spilsby).  Eudo received the manor of Tattershall and several others, one of these being a moiety of Waddingworth.  He was the founder of Kirkstead Abbey, which he richly endowed.  This leads to a curious coincidence.  Dr. Oliver, the learned writer of “The Religious Houses on the Witham,” mentions that among the possessions of Tupholme Abbey were lands in Waddingworth.  What more natural than that, in days when spending one’s wealth on so-called religious works was a passport to heaven for the giver, and for his forefathers or his descendants, Eudo should have devoted some of his wealth to the Religious House at Tupholme, as well as to the Religious House at Kirkstead?  Tupholme was founded by two brothers, Alan and Gilbert de Nevil, in 1160, Kirkstead was founded 1139.  At the dissolution of the monasteries, Henry VIII. seized monastic property, and this is why we find the King as Patron of Waddingworth in “Liber Regis,” and also in much later authorities.  It is, indeed, now in the patronage of the Lord Chancellor, as representing the crown.  The Conqueror seized it by the right of conquest; Henry VIII. seized it as the plunderer of monasteries.  This carries us down to nearly the middle of the 16th century.  There were, however, other small proprietors who owned land, besides these two prominent parties.  At an early period, there is a “Final Concord,” so called, or agreement, of the 13th century, as follows:—“On October 19, A.D. 1200, Petronilla, the widow of Richard de Waddingworth, claimed of Robert de Waddingworth, tenant of a 3rd part, viz., 20 oxgangs (or 300 acres), with 6 tofts, in Waddingworth, besides lands in Bucknall and Horsington, as her dower, given to her by her late husband, the said Richard; and Robert surrendered all claim to the lands in favour of the said Petronilla for her life, for which Petronilla gave him 2½ marks.”  After the dissolution of the monasteries, though the crown retained the patronage of the benefice, the land seems to have passed into several other hands.  In 1559, Roger Fulstow, of Waddingworth, claimed of his sovereign, Queen Elizabeth, protection against the outrages committed by the mad Earl of Lincoln, who lived at Tattershall; and was well known for his violent proceedings towards the Saviles of Poolham, and others. [219a]  He (Fulstow) was afterwards sent on an embassy to the Landgrave of Hesse.  Macaulay, the historian, says that a Fulstow, of Waddingworth, incurred the displeasure of Henry VIII., and was punished, though he does not say how.  This was probably the same man earlier in life, and the employment of him, by Elizabeth, shows that, having annoyed the father, he recovered the favour of the daughter.  But even earlier than this, Thomas Dighton, of Waddingworth, gent. (son of Edmund Dighton, and grandson of Robert Dighton, lord of the manor of Stourton) was intimate with the Dymokes, and was visiting at Scrivelsby Court at the time of the “Lincolnshire Rising,” against Henry VIII. (otherwise called the Pilgrimage of Grace), in 1536, which led to the merry monarch pronouncing his well-known criticism on the men of Lincolnshire, that they were “the most beastly in all the realm.”  These Dightons came of a mercantile stock in Lincoln, where they were Mayors and Sheriffs, and amassed large fortunes.  One of them, Robert, of Stourton, married Joyce [219b] St. Paul (or vulgarly Sampoole), daughter and heiress of William St. Paul of Snarford, who was also involved in the Rising aforesaid; the chief member of the family being Sir George St. Paul, who died childless in 1614, when, with him, the family became extinct.  In the lists of those gentry who contributed to the defence of the country, when the Spanish Armada was expected, are the names of G. St. Paul, who contributed “1 lance, and 2 light horse”; while Thomas Dighton, of Waddingworth, of that day, contributed also 1 lance, and 1 light horse.  In the year 1546, Robert Hoberthorn, a native of Waddingworth, became Lord Mayor of London (“Weir’s History,” vol. i., p. 313.)  We have an early presentation to the Benefice of Waddingworth, in John Smith, clerk, appointed by Queen Elizabeth to the Rectory, vacant by the resignation of Thomas Rumney; this institution took place in 1563. [220a]  This notice implies a good deal more than it contains to the uninitiated.  Thomas Rumney had doubtless to resign, or rather was expelled from his living by “the bloody” Queen Mary, because he was a Protestant, and the living, like many others, remained for some years vacant, until the Protestant Queen Elizabeth, succeeding her sister Mary, had time to look about her, and she in 1562 filled the vacancy by instituting John Smith.

In the Stixwould Register there is an entry relating to Waddingworth, stating that Mr. George Townshend died at Halstead Hall, and was buried at Waddingworth “on Wensdaie night, the 13 of February, 1627.”  The cause of this is supposed to have been, that he was a Romanist, and therefore could not legally be buried at a Protestant place of worship.  Mr. Rutland Snowden, and Mrs. Frances Townshend, were married “the 25 December, being Christmas daie, 1628.”  This looks rather as if, after a year’s delay after the death of Mr. G. Townshend, to be respectable, Mrs. Townshend, his widow, married Mr. Rutland Snowden. [220b]  I find another record that Mr. George Townshend of Halstead Hall, by will, dated 1627 (he evidently dying rather suddenly) left his land in Waddingworth to his second son, George, the executor being Nicholas Larke, parson of Waddingworth.  This Mrs. Townshend was the widow of an Evington of Halstead Hall, so that she had three husbands, Rutland Snowden being the last, and by him she had several children.  He was the son of the Bishop of Carlisle.  They lived, it is recorded, at Horncastle, as they naturally would do, the Bishop being then officially the Lord of the Manor of Horncastle, having his episcopal residence near the present manor house.  He was buried at Horncastle in 1654, and his wife in 1658.  Richard Evington, of Halstead Hall, according to an old record, on his death in 1612, left 40s. to Abdeel and Joel Larke, sons of the above-named Mr. Nicholas Larke, parson, of Waddingworth.  The will of George Snowdon, of Waddingworth, was proved in 1704.  He left his lands in Waddingworth and Horsington to his nephew, Edward Dymoke, of Lincoln, gentleman, and to his heirs.  It is not clear who this George Snowdon was, but Jane Snowden, granddaughter of Rutland and Frances Snowden, married Charles Dymoke, of Scrivelsby, and died childless in 1743; and Abigail Snowden, daughter of the same Rutland and Frances Snowden, married Edward Dymoke, younger son of Sir Edward Dymoke, of Scrivelsby, from whom sprang the Tetford branch, who now hold the property of Scrivelsby and the Championship; and so Waddingworth passed to the Dymokes.  There is still a tablet in the church of Waddingworth referring to these parties.  It is a slab of black marble in the pavement, in the centre of the nave, and runs as follows:—“Here lyes ye body of Edward Dymoke, Esq., son of Edward Dymoke, of Tumby, in the County of Lincoln, Esq., grandson of the Hon^ble. Sir Edward Dymoke, Champion of England.  He married Mary, daughter and co-heiress of John Lodington, Esq., [221] relict of Captain Booth, of Market Rasen, in the county of Lincoln, and died April 29, A.D. 1729, aged 78 years, leaving Jane, his only surviving daughter and heir, married to Edward Southwell, Esq. of Wisbeach, in the county of Cambridge.  Here also lies interred Abigail, daughter of the said Edward Dymoke and Mary his wife, who died March 22nd, A.D. 1708, aged 17 years.”  Above this inscription are the crest, a sword and mantle, and on the shield, two lions, crowned, passant.  In course of time the manor passed, through the above marriage, to Edward Southwell, of the Trafford Southwell family, who now live at Wroxham, in Norfolk, and who, with the Vyners of Gautby, own the parish.

The old Manor House, or Hall, stood in the centre of the parish, and was at one time occupied by the Calthrop family, until they removed to West Ashby Manor, near Horncastle; the last of them residing there is remembered by the present writer, and there is a memorial in Ashby Church of Richard Calthrop, an officer who fell during the siege of Algiers.  John Calthrop afterwards removed to Stanhoe Hall, in Norfolk.  The old Hall of Waddingworth was a ruin 60 years ago, and afterwards pulled down.  The outline of it can still be traced.  The interesting old Rectory, of mud and stud, still survives as a cottage, to the north of the churchyard.  There is an inverted base of a churchyard cross still remaining on the south side of the Church.  Over the west door, which is of the Perpendicular style, but sadly dilapidated, is a reticulated window, and above that, let into the wall, is an Early English tombstone, or, more probably, a “consecration cross,” carved as a “cross flory,” in heraldic phrase.

Mr. James Turner, a considerable farmer, of Waddingworth, declared, on his own public affidavit, that he was attacked by robbers when riding home from Horncastle market, for, be it remembered, gigs were then little used; men rode to and from market, and carried their wives behind them on pillions (as the present writer has frequently seen, as a boy).  To use Mr. Turner’s words, he said, “When I had proceeded a quarter-of-a-mile through the village of Thimbleby (which he needs must pass), a little after 6 o’clock, p.m., I observed three men, walking in the middle of the road, about 100 yards before me.  I was riding at a canter, as it was moonlight.  Two of the men walked in the ‘ruts,’ on either side, and one in the middle.  He was a little behind the others, and he remained so, till I nearly rode over him.  I tried to turn out of the road, to avoid him, but I then found he had seized my horse by the rein.  The two men said ‘good night,’ and I replied to the same effect.  I then said to the man, ‘What!  Are you going to rob me?’  He made no reply, and I struck him with my stick on the head.  The mare I was riding then began to plunge, and the other two took hold of me, and dragged me from my saddle.  I lit on my feet, but the mare got away.  I struggled with the men, and got away from them.  The two stood on my left, and as I saw the third coming in on my right, I struck at him, and he for the moment gave way, but then, supported by the others, he again sprang at me, and seized me by the collar (which in those days were large).  The three then threw me to the ground, and placed a stick across my throat, and so kept me down.  They hurt me considerably, but I lifted the stick across my throat to my chin, which was much bruised.  They then tore my waistcoat open and took from my pocket a book containing blank cheques and memorandums, and my game license.  On this, they began muttering among themselves, and the one who first attacked me, said, ‘Where’s your money?’  I threw myself, as much as I could, on one side, to protect my ‘fob,’ but they tore my breeches open, and took from my right-hand pocket two canvas purses, in one of which I had two notes and some silver, and in the other £5 in gold.  They took all this, and an old-fashioned silver watch, and some loose coins besides.  I begged them not to murder me.  They took from my mackintosh a small bundle and threw it on the road, which contained my banking book and memorandum book, both of which I subsequently recovered.  They then struck, or kicked, me violently in the ribs, and ran through a gate into a field, towards Edlington.”

Mr. Turner testified to his recognising the men, as it was a moonlight night, and he had seen one of them before, in Bucknall, an almost adjoining parish.  Further evidence was very strong against them.  Anne Dawson, whose husband kept the “Nag’s Head” Inn, at Bardney, proved that, earlier on the same day, three men had called at the Inn, for refreshment, and took the road for Thimbleby.  Joseph Aukland also testified that, in returning from Horncastle market, the same evening, he saw the men only a few yards from the spot, before the robbery took place.  At the “Ram” Inn, at Stourton, three men called about 8.30 p.m., to have some ale, for which they paid, apparently (as was noticed) having plenty of money, and asked their way to Market Rasen.  On the next morning, Sunday, at 7.30 a.m., one of them entered the “White Hart,” the leading hotel in Rasen, and had refreshment.  Later, two of them called at a shop at Glentham, and produced two £5 notes (such as were stolen).  They were then on their way to Gainsborough.  They subsequently went to the “Dog and Gun” Inn at that place, and the landlord changed a £5 note for them, and a Mrs. Watson another of the same value.  One of them, next day, bought a new coat at Gainsborough, for £4 13s.; one prisoner was taken at Lynn, in Norfolk, wearing the said coat; and the others were subsequently captured, where is not stated.  The Judge pronounced the evidence to be most decisive, and the sentence was “Transportation for Life.”  The victim of this outrage arrived at his home late that night, in rather a sorry plight.  I think readers of this account will agree that Mr. James Turner made a very brave stand against such odds.  He must have been a powerful man, as his son, Mr. Jabez Turner, certainly was in his day.  I have myself been inside the house, for refreshment, of Mr. James Turner when shooting on the farm, but the robbery took place before I was old enough to carry a gun.  So end our annals of Waddingworth, with not the least stirring incident in its history.

Winceby is situated about five miles south-east of Horncastle, on the way to Old Bolingbroke.  It is approached by a good road, but leading up and down hills so steep as to render travelling slow, either for man or beast.  The village itself stands on high ground commanding very extensive views; the church of West Keal being a conspicuous object to the east; the lofty tower of Boston looming in the distance, southward, many miles away; Tattershall Castle and Church, the churches of Coningsby, Heckington, and others in the Sleaford direction being also visible, beyond the extensive tracts of fen barred by woods, which intervene; while, on a clear day, the prospect extends across the Wash to the low-lying coast of Norfolk.  Northward stretches a tract, less extensive, of varied, undulating ground, with the wooded heights of Warden Hill, Brinkhill, &c., forming the distant elevated horizon.  In early spring, or on a bright autumnal day, it would be difficult to find a wider range of view, or more varied colouring, to please the eye.  The parish is small, being but little more than 800 acres in extent, comprised in one large farm, the homestead of which, a large, lofty, and somewhat bleak-looking house, occupied by Mr. Edwd. Patchett, forms, with its surrounding buildings and well-filled stackyard, a prominent feature.  Yet this humble village has had its associations in the past of more than ordinary interest.

Domesday Book records that the Saxon Agemund held lands here, and in the adjoining Claxby Pluckacre; and that Walter, a vassal of the wealthy Norman Gozelin, also held land and a mill of the yearly value of 4s., while the still more powerful Norman, Hugh de Abrincis (Avranches, in France), Earl of Chester, also received a grant of land in this parish from his uncle, William the Conqueror.  Of this “Baron bold,” we may observe, in passing, that he acquired the surname of Lupus, or “the wolf,” from his many daring deeds.  In addition to almost the whole of the county of Chester, which gave him his title, he held about 20 manors in Lincolnshire, 22 in Leicestershire, 12 in Norfolk, 32 in Suffolk, besides several more in other counties.  Indeed, so large were his possessions, and so great his power, that the terms of the royal grant to him stated that he held his properties, not “de capite,” or “in chief,” of the Sovereign, as was almost universally the case, but “tam libere ad gladium, sicut Rex ipse tenebat Angliam ad coronam,” i.e., as freely by his sword, as the King did by his crown.  It is recorded of him, that he founded and endowed several monasteries, in England, and elsewhere, “for the good and salvation of his soul”; and it is näively added, that “if a tithe of that be true which is related of him by the Chronicler, Ordericus Vitalis (p. 787), he had needs enough to make some such amends for his doings.”  He, however, seems, in his latter days, to have attained to a proper sense of his actions, since he closed his career, after a long illness, by adopting the tonsure, as a monk of the Abbey of St. Werberg, of Chester, in his own Barony.  Few of these baronial possessions, however, remained long in the families of those favourites to whom they were granted by the Conqueror, solely by the right of conquest.  It had been asked long before, even by a Jezebel, “Had Zimri peace, who slew his master?”  And there were Norman Omris and Zimris.  It was a matter of natural, as well as of retributive justice, that, when the grip, by which the strong held his own, lost its vigour, even the strongest should make way for “a stronger than he.”  And although the proud Lupus lorded it over demesnes in Hag, Salmonby, Tetford, Brinkhill, Langton, Greetham, and in many another parish, beside Winceby, yet at a later period we find another powerful family, the Gaunts, in the ascendant, and the Duke of Lancaster, John de Gandivo, was “Dominus Manerii de Winceby” (Harl. MS., Brit. Mus., vol. iii., p. 770); and Walter de Gaunt granted to the Abbey of Bardney, which had been re-founded by his father, Gilbert de Gaunt, after being in ruins some 200 years, the tithes of his Fee in Winceby.  (Dugdale’s “Monasticon” ed. 1682, p. 143).  But not yet even was “fixity of tenure” a feature of the times.  Every dog has (only) his day; other owners followed not now known, and Winceby is now also owned by a name unknown to fame in the representative of the Hill family, who purchased the estate from C. Manwaring, Esq.  But the Domus Dei should be a spot undesecrated by earthly broils, a fold unviolated by “the wolf,” and although the Church, erected at Winceby, possibly by the proud Lupus himself, “for the good of his soul,” has, in its original fabric, passed away, yet there still stands on the same site, a place of worship, small indeed, but not unworthy of its holy purpose.  Dedicated to St. Margaret, the special Saint of purity undefiled, [227] it fitly stands on an isolated knoll, which on one side looks down on a deep gorge; with the few cottages of the, some 60, inhabitants clustering near at hand; with the great farm house, Winceby hall, standing out eastward, and the picturesque modern Rectory, peacefully embowered in trees and shrubbery, one field away to the west, the calm and comfortable retreat of the Rev. C. E. Bolam, Rector of Lusby, the Rector of Winceby being the Rev. Brice-Smith, resident at Hameringham.

Until recent years, the church had, in the course of time, degenerated into a small, mean thatched edifice; but, during the late incumbency of the Rev. William Wordsworth Talfourd, acting in the spirit of that “high priest of nature,” whose name he bore, the fabric was reconstructed in early English style; the nave being built at the expense of the late Mr. Charles Hill, of Winceby House, and the chancel by the rector.  It consists of nave, chancel, porch, and bell turret.  Its chief features are as follows:—In the north wall of the nave are two pairs of narrow pointed windows, within debased arches; the south wall has the same, with a porch, having narrow pointed arch.  The font, of stone, has a circular bowl, relieved by four small quatrefoils, at the four quarters, a circular shaft, and square pediment.  The west window is a cinquefoil, surrounded by eight small quatrefoils.  The pulpit and seats are of light deal.  The east window of the chancel, the gift of Miss Talfourd, is of three distinct trefoiled compartments, of coloured glass, the central one rather larger than the other two, and surmounted by a quatrefoil.  The subjects are, in the centre, the Crucifixion; in the northern one, Christ blessing little children; in the southern, the Last Supper.  In the south wall of the chancel is a single-light trefoil, window, with three small quatrefoils above; its subject being, Christ and the Magdalen, or “Noli me tangere”; a brass tablet states that this is “in memory of Frances Talfourd, March 9, 1862.”  The sedilia in the chancel are of handsome, modern, substantial oak.  The roof throughout is of pitch pine.  The one bell hangs in a turret supported by eight pilasters.  The living is in the gift of the Lord Chancellor.  The register dates from 1579.  Among the entries are the following:—“1773, Thursday, June 28th, — Spenly buried.  He was servant to Thomas English, and instantly killed with thunder and lightening in the house of his master, about 5 o’clock the evening before.”  In the two following, we do not see the object of the financial computation, unless the party making the entry was hypochondriac on the subject of £ s. d.  “1698 Mary daughter of Tho. Jeffery, ffarmer (not worth six hundred pounds) and Anne, his wife, baptised, October 23rd.”  “1699.  A similiar entry of John Bowsley, ffarmer, being not worth £600.”

We have only space here for a brief account of that engagement, which was important in its effect.  We quote from a curious contemporary record, written by a Parliamentarian, and who apparently took part in the events described. [228]  The Parliamentary army, then in the neighbourhood of Boston, after suffering a reverse near Grantham, and gaining a doubtful victory at Gainsborough, had been reinforced by Sir Thomas Fairfax; and Cromwell was also on his way to join it, with a valuable body of horse.  To prevent this formidable combination, the Marquis of Newcastle from the north, hurried towards Boston, and despatched Sir John Henderson, to intercept Cromwell.  Forces belonging to both sides had been encamped, on the previous night, in Horncastle, Thimbleby, Edlington, and neighbouring villages, where skirmishes had occurred.  The main body under Manchester, had moved from near Boston to Bolingbroke, which was held by Royalists.  On the Monday night, Major Knight, in the name of Manchester, had summoned the Castle of Bolingbroke (to surrender); but was answered that “his bug-bear words must not winne castles.”  Whereupon Knight resolved the next evening, to break open the Church doors, “and there to mount a morter-piece, and fire the Castle.”  But the events of the next day prevented this.  “Those of the Castle (the Royalists), killed one or two of our men; and, as Major Knight, and the Quarter-master Generall Vermeyden were viewing of it, made some shots at them, and one of them hit the said Quarter-master Generall a little below the ancle, but pierced not the skin, only bruised his leg.”  Seeing that they were determined to resist, Manchester then moved to East Kirkby; and his forces were encamped there, at Stickney, and at different points around.  Cromwell was encamped at Winceby, in advance, with his “light horse and dragooners,” where he passed the night.  The Royalists, under Sir John Henderson, pressed forward from Horncastle, in order, if possible, to attack Cromwell, before the main body had come up.  But Cromwell did not object to hard blows, and though his “horse were extremly wearied with hard duty,” he calmly and sternly awaited the event.  “About twelve of the clock . . . we began to descry the enemy coming toward us.  So soon as our men had knowledge of (this), they were very full of joy and resolution, thinking it a great mercie that they should now fight.  Cromwell led the van.”  He gave the watchword “Truth and Peace,” and then gave out a Psalm; and his troops moved on, singing it, to charge the foe.  They sustained a hostile fire along the whole of their line, but they rode on unshaken, at full speed.  A second volley, at close quarters, killed Cromwell’s charger; and as he rose to his feet, “he was knockit down again by the gentleman who had charged him, who ’twas conceived, was Sir Ingram Hopton;” and for a moment he lay as slain.  But he who, as a child, had escaped death in the arms of a monkey, was not to be so easily extinguished; he recovered consciousness, and mounted a trooper’s horse; his opponent, Sir Ingram Hopton, was slain in his turn; and “this first charge was so home-given (says the Chronicler), and with so much admirable courage and resolution by our troops, that the enemy stood not another, but were driven back upon their own body, which was to have seconded them, and at last put them into a plain disorder; and thus, in less than half an hour’s fight, they were all quite routed.  Our men pursued, and did execution upon them about five or six miles; all the way being strewed with broken arms, dead men and horses.”  Two hundred horses were afterwards found left in Bolingbroke Castle, which had been abandoned by the Royalists in a panic.  Many hundreds of the defeated fugitives rushed frantically into “waters up to their arm-holes [230a]; they that lay slain in the highways were very many; and divers of qualitie, for there were brave bodies stript naked.  The number of horses taken were about 2000, of prisoners about 1000, . . . of arms 1500, and not 100 of the enemie (’twas verily believed), to be found in a body; of 94 standards 35 were taken, whereas (he adds), wee but lost very few of our men, none of note, (and), wee hardly found above one of our officers hurt.”  With the Puritan’s faith he exclaims, “God himself did it all, taking away the enemie’s hearts, and giving resolution and courage to our men; to him therefor be all the honour and glory of this famous victory.” [230b]  This was a greater blow to the Royalist cause than has commonly been estimated.  Hitherto the struggle had been carried on with varied fortune, but as yet the Royalists had had no reason to despair, and had even achieved considerable successes.  At Winceby it may be said, the tide decidedly set in against them.  The struggle was prolonged; but Lincoln was taken by Manchester’s forces in the following May (1644).  In the same year was fought the disastrous battle of Marston Moor; and the even more fatal fight of Naseby in 1645.  After that the issue was almost a foregone conclusion.  As to the actual scene of the fight, the Royalists, from Horncastle, would seem to have advanced slightly beyond the village, before they encountered the enemy.  The name of “Slash Lane,” westward, still surviving, tells its own tale of their wild flight towards the town, which they had so lately left full of high hope.  The “clap-gate” farm at Holbeck, tells of hurried movements in the dark hours of the night.  The Winceby registers record no increase of burials at the time.  But tradition avers that many were interred by the peasantry on Scrafield hill-top.  The one known burial is that of Sir Ingram Hopton, whose body, by order of Cromwell himself, was conveyed to Horncastle, that it might be interred in a manner worthy of one, in whom he recognised “a brave gentleman.”

Like two of the parishes just mentioned as contiguous, the name of Wispington contains the Anglo-Saxon patronymic “ing.”  A Saxon settler named Uisp, or Wisp, probably took up his residence here; his children formed the “family” of Uisp, or Wisp-“ing”; and the settlement or enclosure, which they occupied, was the Uisp-ing-town, or Wispington. [231]  Under the ruthless rule of William the Conqueror, these early occupants would be displaced, and their land given to some favourite of that King; under whom possibly the late Saxon thane, and his family, might, at least, be allowed to labour as serfs.  Accordingly we find, in the great survey made for the Conqueror, called “Doomsday Book,” because it recorded the doom of so many, whom he subjugated, or dispossessed, two mentions of this parish.  The first of these, places it amongst the possessions of William de Karilepho, who had been Abbot of St. Vincent, but was promoted by the Conqueror to the Bishopric of Durham, as well as being made Chief Justice of England.  Old Chroniclers say that he was a man of great determination, but regulated by judgment; and he ingratiated himself with the King, who gave him large possessions in Lincolnshire, and other counties; a quarrel, however, with the succeeding King, Rufus, so wounded his pride, that he died of chagrin.  He held of the King, a large part of this parish, viz., 4 carucates (or 480 acres), 2 carucates of which were rateable to the tax called “gelt” (2s. to the carucate, or 120 acres).  Wispington is there said to be “in the soke” of Great Stourton, and Kirkby-on-Bain, i.e., within the liberty, or under the jurisdiction, of those parishes.  There was no resident proprietor at that date, but 9 sokemen (or free tenants) and 6 bordars worked the land under their “Mesne or Lord” the land being his “de-mense” or domain, i.e., Lordship.  The second mention of the parish in Domesday gives its whole extent as 8 carucates (or 960 acres), divided between the above-named Bishop and another of the Conqueror’s favourites, not seldom named in these records, viz., Eudo, son of Spirewic, Lord of Tattershall, who claimed, over the Bishop, the lion’s share, namely, two thirds of the parish.

After this period the ownership is not quite clear.  But this we can state.  We have seen that Eudo, son of Spirewic, owned two thirds of Wispington, by gift from the Conqueror.  His son, Hugh Fitz Eudo, commonly called Brito, founded Kirkstead Abbey, in 1137, A.D., and that religious house, at a later period, became possessed of land in Wispington, and the benefice thereof.  But meanwhile the ownership changed more than once.  From the Lansdowne M.S. (207 e., f. 455) in the British Museum, we find that Walter Bek, [233] who had come from Flanders, late in the 12 century, married Agnes, daughter of Pinso, and became, through his wife, Lord of Spilsby, Eresby, Lusby, Wispington, and other parishes; so that Eudo, and his later representatives, seem to have passed from the scene, and the successors of his quondam companion in arms, Pinso, to have taken their place.

By a Court Roll (9. Richard I., A.D., 1198), it appears that Philip, son of Robert, “put in a plea against Henry Bek, for a Knight’s fee,” i.e., a certain portion of land “in Tattershall, Wispington, and Kirkby.”  (“Architect S. Journ,” xxiv. pt. i. p. 39).

We further find, from “Testa de Nevill,” (p. 335, “Wapentake of Horncastle,”) that Simon de Driby, held, “of the Fee of Tattershall,” (circa A.D. 1215), lands in Kirkby, Waddingworth, Wispington, and other places under Robert of Tattershall; the Wispington portion, therefore, was probably that formerly held by Eudo.

When Walter Bek’s sons succeeded to his property, the eldest, Henry, received as his portion the manors of Spilsby, Scrivelsby, Wispington, etc.  (Harleian MS., 3720, f. 23.)

With the beginning of the 14th century, another prominent family is found connected with this parish.  Sir William Willoughby married Alice, daughter of John Bek, Lord of Eresby; and a “Feet of Fines,” of date A.D. 1304, (Lincoln, file 69, 31 Edwd. I.) shows that a law-suit arose between John Bek, plaintiff, and Robert Willoughby, defendant, as to the possession of lands in Wispington, Thimbleby, Langton, Woodhall, etc., and the advowson of Wispington, which ended in a compromise, Robert granting the lands and advowson to John, for his life-time, but to revert, on his decease, to Robert and his heirs for ever.  (“Architect S. Journal,” xxiv. p. 52).  The manor and advowson of Wispington thus passed to the ancestors of the Lords of Willoughby.  In the next century, we find these transferred to Kirkstead Abbey, as shown by the following entry, in the “Kalendar of Patent Rolls 1399–1401”:—“1401, April 20.  Licence paid in the hanaper for Philip de Dispenser, Knight; James Roos, knight; Eudo de Zouche, clerk; Richard de Wynnewick, clerk; Richard de Chesterfield, clerk; Henry Malbys, parson of the Church of Wylughby; and Thomas Fitz William of Mablethorpe, to grant in mortmain a toft and 4 bovates of land, in Wyspyngton, and the advowson of the Church of the same town, not held in chief, to the Abbot, and Convent of Kirkstede, in aid of their maintenance.” (p. 477). [234]

This was further confirmed, A.D. 1401, May 2, with the addition that the “Abbot and Convent of Kirkstede” might “serve the Benefice by a Chaplain, Monk, or Secular” (pp. 278, 279).

We are, after this period, unable to give (as has been done in the cases of some other parishes), a connected series of proprietors.  There are however, various scattered records of individual owners, which possess some interest.  In a Bardney Abbey Charter, lately recovered by the Rev. J. A. Penny, the present Vicar of Wispington, Thomas Sely of Wispington, and Henry son of Andrew, of the same place, are witnesses to a deed, of date May 22, 1281, signed in the Chapter House of that Monastery, “on the Sunday next after the Ascension of our Lord,” by which the Abbot of that House gives up for himself and his successors, all claim to his bondman, William, son of Peter Hardigray, with all his goods and chattels, in favour of Thomas Thorley of Gautby.  It is worthy of notice, that, by another charter, this same Thomas Thorley, of Gautby, grants to the above William Hardigray, no longer a bondman, but Rector of Mareham, certain lands and tenements in the adjoining parish of Edlington.  The two were, therefore, evidently close friends.  This deed is witnessed by Henry, son of John, of Wispington, Simon Francis, of Edlington, William son of Master Bartholomew, of Thimbleby, and others.

By a third charter, dated at Edlington, the day of Mercury (Wednesday) next after the feast of St. Michael, A.D. 1285, William, son of William of Wispington, gives, grants, and confirms, to the same William Hardigray, now of Edlington, clerk, a toft with the tenements thereon, situated in Edlington, for which he is to pay annually the rent of one farthing, at the feast of Easter. [235]

Among Gibbons’ “Early Lincolnshire Wills” (pp. 35, 36.) we find, that Henry de Brauncewell, Canon of Lincoln, by will in 1395, leaves money to his poor parishioners, at Wispington, Leasingham, St. Peter’s at Arches, and elsewhere.

We now get another name, which was one of weight in this parish and elsewhere for many years.  Among the list of noblemen and gentry, who subscribed for the defence of the country, when the Spanish Armada was expected, in 1589, we find the name of “Roberte Phillippes, of Wispington,” who, like his neighbour Vincent Welby, of Halstead Hall, contributed £25, which was a large sum in those days.  (“Linc. N. & Q.” vol. ii., p. 133).  In the next century, among the list of gentry of Lincolnshire, made on the Herald’s Visitation, in 1634, along with the well-known names of Heneage, Pelham, Massingberd, Monson, &c., we also find Robert Phillips, of Wispington.  (“Linc. N. & Q.” vol. ii., p. 73).

This family, which afterwards by marriage acquired the name of Glover, [236] possessed property outside of Wispington, for we find from a bond dated October 25, 1735, that disputes having arisen as to the boundary of the estate of Phillips Glover, at Walmsgate, and that of the estate of Matthew Lister, of Burwell Park, adjoining it, the two proprietors agreed to place 12 stones, in the presence of witnesses, to fix for the future the line of separation between the properties.  (Notes on the Manor of Burwell, by R. W. Goulding; “Architect. S. Journal,” xxiv., pt. i., p. 91.)  Other records in connection with this family, are as follows:—

(1.)  Walter Harpham, by his will dated 10 Feb. 1607–8, leaves the reversion of £100 to Alice Phillips, his daughter, and £300 to his granddaughter, Elizabeth Phillips, and to his grandson, Willoughby Phillips, £100, and makes his son-in-law, Thomas Phillips, executor.  (Maddison’s “Wills of Lincolnshire,” 1600–1617, p. 180).

(2.)  John Holland, of Hemingby, by will, of date 15 Sep., 1608, leaves 20s. to Mr. Stephen Phillips, of Wispington, for supervising his will.  (Maddison’s “Wills of Lincolnshire,” 1600–1617, p. 27.)

(3.)  Margery Neale, of Horncastle, by her will, dated July 10, 1611, leaves to Jane Phillips, wife of Vincent Smithe, £6 in money, herself to keep £3 of it, and to give £3 to her daughter Elizabeth, “my Goddaughter.”  (Ibidem, p. 51.)

In the Register of Admissions to Gray’s Inn, London (edited by J. Foster, 1889), “Robert Phillips, of Wispington, Co., Lincoln,” is named as a student “admitted Feb. 7, 1653–4.”

Phillips Glover, Esq., of Wispington, or Colonel Glover, married, circa. 1790, being then resident at Stainfield, Rebecca, eldest daughter of Mr. William Jepson Proctor, Chapter Clerk, &c., of the Bail, Lincoln, and sister to the Rev. George Jepson, M.A., Prebendary of Lincoln, 1781–1787.  (“Linc. N. & Q.” vol. ii., p. 150).

Colonel Glover had a daughter, who married Robert Vyner, Esq., of Eathorpe, Co. Warwick, and had a numerous family.  He, or more probably his father, was Sheriff of the county of Lincoln, in the year 1727.  Early in the 19th century was issued a large mezzotint portrait of Phillips Glover, Esq., of Wispington, described “as a steady disinterested friend, who never courted popularity, but was ever deserving of it.”  (“Linc. N. & Q.” vol. ii., p. 87).  The Glovers, or Phillipses, were patrons of the Benefice; John Phillips, according to “Liber Regis,” presenting in 1707, and Mrs. Glover in 1755.  In 1769, “pro hac vice,” Henry Martinson, Gent., presented, having doubtless bought the next presentation, since we find his relative John Martinson, instituted to the vicarage at that date.  On his death a Glover presented for the last time, the entire property being subsequently sold to Mr. Turnor, of Stoke Rockford, Panton, &c.

The Glovers, and Phillipses, had a fine residence here, of which extensive traces still remain, in moats, fish ponds, and terraced mounds, some 500 yards in length, and covering 5 or 6 acres.  The series of ponds and moats are arranged so as to curl about in a curious serpentine shape, forming the outline of a snake with double head.  This apparent survival of an old serpent worship, is not unusual in such ancient places as Abury Hill, on Salisbury Plain; Stanton Drew, in Somersetshire; Carnac, in Brittany; &c.  (Dean’s “Worship of the Serpent,” 1833); but here it would seem to indicate a greater antiquity than the time of the Glover family.  The gardens, and “pleasaunce,” surrounding the residence, must have been very extensive; the farmhouse, now occupied by Mr. Andrew Evison, was part of this residence, and there is some old brickwork among the farm buildings, said to have been part of a private chapel. [237]  To the east was an avenue of fine trees, of great age, which were felled in the first half of the 19th century.  The family continued at Wispington down to recent times, though in greatly reduced circumstances, the last of them being the Rev. Robert Glover, vicar of the parish from 1795 to 1838.  He died leaving a numerous family, scantily provided for. [238a]  During his time the church and parsonage would seem to have participated in the dilapidated condition of his own fortune, and in the Register we find the following note, in his own hand:—“The chancell of this church fell in, on Friday the 22 day of November, 1833, about 9 o’clock at night, R. Glover, vicar.”

We now proceed to the church.  Both Weir and Saunders state that the edifice, in their day, was without interest.  The late Rev. Charles Pratt Terrott, who was appointed to the vicarage, in 1838, by Mr. Christopher Turnor, took down this decayed structure, and erected an entirely new church; and, being well-known as an archæologist of wide learning, and cultivated tastes, [238b] with the aid of the architect, Mr. G. B. Atkinson, of York, he produced a church, which, though small, as the population only required, is one of unusual interest.  It was erected in 1863.  In the process of demolition of the former church, two late Norman capitals cut from one stone, [238c] were discovered, indicating that there had, at one time, been a Norman edifice here; and, from other relics, it was apparent that this early structure, had been either rebuilt or added to in the 13th century.  That building, however, had in turn been superseded by a wretched fabric of no architectural pretensions, now, happily, gone the way of its more worthy predecessors.  The present church, dedicated like so many others in the neighbourhood to St. Margaret, is of the Early English style, and consists of a tower with spire, nave, south porch, chancel, and vestry on the north side of the chancel, from which, for economy of space, access is had to the pulpit, standing in the north-east corner of the nave.  The nave has coupled lancet windows in the north and south walls; there are detached lancet windows, with a trefoiled light above them, in the west tower wall; and a triplet at the east end of the chancel, and two single lights in its south wall.  The tower and spire are almost a copy of the small but elegant spire of Woodhall St. Margaret.  It is supported within by the rather unusual arrangement of a narthex or arcade of three arches, and two pillars, instead of the more common single arch.  The walls are relieved by coloured patterns running round the windows, and various devices elsewhere, which have a very pleasing effect.  The roof of the nave is supported by corbels bearing the symbols of the Evangelists.  The pulpit is of Caen stone, with coloured marble shafts, the panels having sculptures, the work of Mr. Terrot, assisted by Mr. Watson Moore, of Horncastle; they represent the Nativity, Nathan and David, and the return of the Prodigal.  The font, of the same materials, is adorned with medallions, also carved by the reverend artist, representing the animals mentioned in the New Testament, arranged in groups and intermingled with foliage.  Mrs. Terrot’s artistic skill is also shown in the carving of the figure of St. Margaret, placed above a dedication stone in the western wall of the nave, and in various bosses and capitals, as well as in the oaken eagle lectern.  The paving of the nave alley is of red and black tiles; that of the chancel of Minton’s encaustic tiles, their richness being increased within the altar rails.  The reredos is of the same material, but differing in character.  The subjects in the coloured east window, by Messrs Ward and Hughes, are scenes from our Lord’s life on earth; and in the western window, are the figures of St. Margaret, and St. John the Baptist, by the same artists.  These were provided through the efforts of Mrs. Terrot, who also obtained the 3rd bell to complete the set.  The three bells bear the following inscriptions:—(1) “Ave Maria Graciæ Plena” (diameter 26¾ inches); (2) “Cast by John Warner and Sons, London” (diameter 28 inches); (3) “Sancta Maria Ora Pro Nobis” (diameter 36¾ inches).  It is curious that the only bells in a minor key, in this neighbourhood, are those of Baumber and Wispington, contiguous parishes.

Between the font and the west window is a blue slate slab, having the inscription “Here lyeth the body of Robert Phillips, gentleman, who departed this life, the 24th day of June, 1668.”  On the south side of this stone, close to it, lies the body of Phillips Glover, Esq.  On a white marble monument on the north wall of the chancel, are the arms and crest, of the Phillips family; crest, a white eagle, with blue crown round its neck, on a hemlet, mantled, the visor closed; arms, azure, party per chevron, argent, three white eagles with azure crowns round their necks passant, 1 and 2.  Below is the inscription:—“To the memory of John Phillips, Esq., this monument is dedicated by his nephew and heir, Phillips Glover, Esq.  He was the second and last surviving son of Robert Phillips, Esq., who lies buried in this chancel.  He died unmarried on the 19th of February, 1719–20, aged 62, and in him his family was extinct.  In memory of Phillips Glover, Esq: He married Mary daughter and heiress of Richard Lee, Esq., of Winslade, in Devonshire, and left two children, Phillips and Mary.  He died, June 28, 1745.  Veri cultor et Libertatis.  This inscription by his order.”

Over the instruments of the Passion, in a medallion above the vestry door, in the chancel (which are really the masonic signs of a Knight Templar’s encampment, [240]) is a tablet with this inscription:—“To the memory of the Rev. Robert Merony Glover, who was upwards of 43 years vicar of this parish.  He died Feb. 8th, 1838, aged 62 years.  He was the poor man’s friend.  Also of Ann, relic of the above Robert Merony Glover, whose remains are interred in the family vault of her parents, at Horncastle.  Four of their children rest in this chancel.  This tablet is consecrated by the affectionate and grateful survivors.”

In the vestry, on a tablet on the north wall, is this inscription:—“Sacred to the memory of the Rev. John Martinson, late vicar of this church, and rector of Screamby, who departed this life, the 16th of July, 1788, aged 51 years.”  An incised slab, now in the floor of the vestry, but whence removed is not known, has an inscription to John Hetherset, “Rector,” in 1399.  The figure is habited in full canonicals, even to the gloves.

In the south-east corner of the churchyard, is a tombstone with the inscription:—“In memory of the 18 children of George and Mary Hannath, who all died in their infancy, 1831–1855. [241]  He shall gather the lambs in His arms, and carry them in His bosom.”

One of the double lancet windows in the nave, nearest the pulpit has been, within recent years, filled with coloured glass in memory of the Rev. C. P. Terrot, by his widow.  The subjects are four:—(1) Bezaleel carving cherubim on the altar, and overlaying them with gold; (2) Aholiab, the cunning workman, looking at his work; (3) our Lord as a youth, working at his trade of carpenter; (4) a medieval priest, presenting before the altar, a small church, which is held in his hands.  The two small lancets in the south wall of the chancel have stained glass to the memory of Colonel Charles Terrot, eldest son of the Rev. C. P. Terrot.  The subjects are two:—(1) Samuel presented by Hannah in the Temple; (2) Joshua commanding the sun to stand still.  The small window over the font was presented by Miss Terrot, the subject being the Holy Dove hovering.  Recently Mrs. Terrot presented to the church a casket, containing an account of the restoration, and contents, of the church, beautifully bound.  This is kept on a bracket in the east wall of the nave, opposite the pulpit.

We give here a list of the vicars of this parish during the last two and a half centuries.  William Azlack, 1662–1670; John Smith, 1670–1707; Thomas Doughty, 1707–8–1754; J. Carr, 1754–1769; John Martinson, 1769–1788; William Chaplin, 1788–1795; Robert Merony Glover, 1795–1838; C. P. Terrot, 1838–1886; Beauchamp St. John Tyrwhitt, 1886–1890; F. S. Alston, 1890–1896; James Alpass Penny, 1896.

On Oct. 27th, 1692, is registered the marriage of “John Spennly, weaver, and Isabel Hawstead, spinster.”  The latter, doubtless derived her name from the neighbouring hamlet of Halstead, in Stixwould, still pronounced “Haw-stead.”  The addition of “weaver” to the husband’s name is interesting, as evidence of a bygone craft.  Weaving and spinning were at that time a common occupation of the humbler classes. [243]  The epithet “spinster” we still retain, of the woman to be married, but the term “weaver” for the man is now obsolete.  The Rev. J. A. Penny has part of a blanket, which was woven by the great grandmother of a parishioner in Wispington, now 60 years of age.

In 1792, we find “Bartho (Bartholomew) Goe” signing as curate; a patronymic which, until recently, survived in the neighbourhood.  Among a list of the Vicars of Boston, Bartholomew Goe is given as appointed in 1817 (Thomson’s “Boston,” p. 86).  It may also be noticed that on “July 16th, 1788, John Martinson, vicar, was buried”; the next entry recording the burials of his posthumous son, John, aged 8 weeks, on March 17th, 1789; while the next entry again records the burial of his relict, Mary Martinson, Sept. 21st, 1791.

On Nov. 2nd, 1710, “William Peascodd of this parish, and Amy Todd of ye parish of Bardney, were married”; in connection with which entry, we may mention, that there is in Boston Church, within the altar rails, on the north side, a fine brass of “Walter Peascod, merchant, 1398.”

Opposite several of the names in the register, both in the 17th and 18th centuries, are appended curious “hieroglyphic” signs, the meaning of which is, at the least, obscure.

Of the communion plate, the cup and paten are dated 1712, presented by John Phillips, Esq.

A group of trees in this parish is named “Barrow Plantation.”  Whether there existed formerly a sepulchral barrow, which gave rise to the name, is not known; the explanation given by the modern bucolic mind is that the spot is haunted by a spectral wheelbarrow.

A tradition lingers here that, in the 18th century, a duel was fought, around which the usual accretions have clustered; that the combatants were two brothers, who were attached to the same “ladye fayre”; that one killed the other; that they fought in the avenue near the former hall of the Glovers; while, in a pannelled bedroom at the adjoining hall farm, there is still preserved a cupboard, which has not been opened for many years, as it is supposed, in some way, to be connected with “the green lady” (such ladies are usually “green”), who was the cause of the quarrel.  Careful enquiry, however, has ruthlessly swept away all of the accumulated romance of this incident, and the bare facts are found to be as follows, for which, it should be added, the writer is indebted to a MS. in the possession of Captain Craggs, of Threekingham Hall, confirmed by the “Gentleman’s Magazine” of 1760, p. 246.:—Thursday, May 1st.  The combatants were Major Glover, of Wispington, of the Lincolnshire Militia, and Mr. Jackson, an apothecary, of Manchester.  “At a rehearsal, at the playhouse, in that town, Mr. Jackson came behind the Major, and struck him on the back, seemingly in joke, upon which the Major turned about and with a switch struck Jackson, saying, also in joke, ‘What!  Jackson, is it you?’  On this Jackson, in a great passion, said ‘D—n you, sir, although you are a Major, I will not take this from you.’  The Major, surprised at this, replied, ‘Why, what can you mean?  I was only in joke, as well as yourself.’  But Jackson persisted in his anger, and said he insisted on satisfaction.  The Major was not able to pacify him by saying that he meant no affront.  But Jackson insisted on fighting him with swords.  They went to a coffee-house, and there, in a back room, they fought.  The Major ran Mr. Jackson through the body, after which, on the former leading Mr. Jackson through the coffee-room for assistance, Mr. Jackson, owned, before several witnesses, that it was entirely his own fault, and that he had been wounded by the Major in a very fair and gentlemanlike manner; and that, if he died, he entirely forgave the Major.”

May Wispington’s future martial sons fight in a nobler cause than that of self pride.