Little Coates Church Grimsby ~ A Historical Guide
St Michael’s church in Little Coates, or Little Cotes as was, is a church primarily of two parts - new and old. We have got a nice picture of what the church and area once looked like !
Along with the church at Great Coates this is the church most local to me, only a few minutes walk away.
It’s very clearly a building of two parts, the most modern dates early 1900s which includes the tower and nave whilst the older part is much smaller but has, thankfully, been preserved.
The picture below shows the oldest part to foreground
St Michael’s Church Little Coates
Little Coates existed as its own parish before becoming part of Grimsby in 1928. As a village it dates back to the Norman Conquest and is mentioned in The Domesday Book of 1086.
On one of my visits I was given the opportunity of a guided tour which proved of great interest and I thank all those who took the time to put up with me !
It was great to see an oil painting of what the original building and its surrounding looked like, just as it was to get a tour of the stained glass. Something I learnt of interest was there is a little dog in one of the windows which is actually the signature of the artist who created it !
On a similar tack an interesting piece of propaganda is also built into the glass in the lady Chapel.
Jesus and his disciples are all depicted with perfectly stereotypical Anglo-Saxon facial and hair characteristics - all except one that is . . .
Judas has been depicted with every exaggerated and clichéd characteristic associated with being Jewish !
Fancy seeing that in a stained glass window !
Original Oil Painting of Littlecoates Church
Painted by G. Burwood in 1890
The painting above shows the view standing roughly where my picture is taken from, that is to say with your back to Toothill looking toward Great Coates. Indeed, looking to the space on the left between the two trees you can just see Great Coates church.
I’ll be hoping to provide much more historical detail as and when it becomes available so please do check back.
If you know of anything related to St Michael’s then please do leave a comment and share the information.
Many thanks
Rod
[edit] New pictures taken 27.8.10 - a great evening sky
St Michael’s at Sunset
St Michael’s at Sunset
St Michael’s at Night ~ Long Exposure Hence Car Lights
Please scroll down for lots more information and new pictures
Femme Fatale said,
December 15, 2009 @ 8:15 am
Rod,
How quaint, love the oil painting, it must be great living in such an historical part of the world?
I wonder how many people realise what is just on their doorsteps?
FF
xx
Rod said,
December 15, 2009 @ 9:08 am
FF,
I think many people would be surprised what’s in and has happened in their immediate area and not so immediate either - I had an email this morning from somebody in America - it was about Great Coates !
It’s a lovely oil painting as you say - it’s a shame we’ve not hung onto more of our heritage in Lincolnshire
Regards
Rod
chris keyworth said,
December 15, 2009 @ 1:59 pm
with the two churches in the picture you should be able to triagulate any point in that area onto a modern map, ie the graves or monuments or even the exact spot where the painter placed his eisel to replicate a modern picture from the exact same position.
its a very good study done by Burwood and quite detailed….
regards
chris
Rod said,
December 15, 2009 @ 5:13 pm
Chris,
it is a much nicer picture than perhaps one would expect - a quality piece of work.
There would be even more detail if it were professionally cleaned I suspect.
The monument in fromt of the church pinpoints it as well
Cheers
Rod
Amiguru said,
January 12, 2010 @ 8:00 pm
Rod,
Kelly’s directory for 1885: ‘Rev.Bartholomew Blenkiron MA……….Here are some natural springs called”blow wells” supplying an abundance of very good water, which, by means of a 12-horse, high-pressure steam engine, is forced to the reservoir at Scartho, …….William Angerstein esq. of Weeting Hall is lord of the manor and principal landowner………..population in 1881 was 60′ Charles Frederick Davy, was the only farmer.
Regards,
le
N
Rod said,
January 13, 2010 @ 9:08 am
Neville,
that’s excellent - very interesting as always.
I’ll throw in some key words I learnt the othe day as well
The Little Coates Land Company
Best
Rod
Peter Mullins said,
January 19, 2010 @ 10:00 pm
Glad you appreciated the tour. I’ll try to post some details if and when I have time. Meanwhile, Rod’s quotation from 1885 tempts me to post about (a) Batholomew Blenkiron (wonderful name!) who was Vicar for over 60 years but who paid a neighbouring clergyman to look after the minimal work involved in the tiny parish, only visited from time to time, and ended living in Bath, and (b) the water tower off Cambridge Road stands on the blow wells site and Anglican Water still owns and uses the site which a much earlier water company bought to exploit the blow wells.
Rod said,
January 20, 2010 @ 8:38 am
Peter,
all of that sounds absolutely fascinating, please do share it, and anything else, if you have the time - it would be greatly appreciated by a lot of people.
The Water Works are already an interesting area as they’re close to the hills we’re looking at.
I’m also very interested in the culvert that comes from there through the golf course.
Here’s the big question Peter . . .
Do you know anything of another religious building on or around the golf course or perhaps the Wybers Wood area ?
Thanks and regards
Rod
Peter Mullins said,
January 20, 2010 @ 12:51 pm
I’ve posted a reply against your Wybers Wood post.
Peter Mullins said,
February 3, 2010 @ 8:31 am
I’ve tried to follow up with North East Lincolnshire Council’s archaeologist your reference to the Loughlin/Miller record of a deserted mediaeval village site at Little Coates. He only says that ‘unfortunately Little Coates is one of our least understood settlements and I currently have no record for the village’ and (when asked what the basis for the Loughlin/Miller listing might then be) ‘I think it is based on a few earthworks located around the golf course entrance’. So it doesn’t look as if anyone has looked (let alone dug) but only had a suspicion.
Meanwhile, I have on an A4 sheet a poor copy of a mid-eighteenth century map of ownership in Little Coates which gives field names. Looking at it again now I notice two things. One is that Chapel Field is large and runs from the present house of that name all the way along in front of the church, so the name may simply mean the field next to the church.
The other is that there are field together called Mill Field, Mill Carr and Mill Close which would seem to indicate that a mill stood a little west of the present Green Bridge. This isn’t that far from the Aylesby Mill site, so this part of the Freshney might have been the best for building mills at an earlier period.
Mill Field itself doesn’t border the Freshney (although the other two do) which might support the sense that a feature doesn’t have to be in the field after which it is named.
Rod said,
February 3, 2010 @ 8:46 am
Peter, that’s just fantastic - thank you so much.
Very interesting about the lack of research and archaeology in the area - hopefully we can add to the sum of knowledge.
I know they had an archaeologist on the golf course once, in the very early days, he dug a small mound that the golfists wanted to do something with.
The club history reports nothing found but does note their amusement that the archaeologist saved them a lot of work by digging the mound himself - they seemed less than keen on th eidea of anything being there.
The Chapel Hill field information pins that down nicely Peter - great stuff.
Thanks again Peter - it really is very helpful and appreciated
All the best
Rod
Rod said,
February 3, 2010 @ 12:15 pm
Peter,
I’ve just been told something very interesting.
Some gravestones were unearthed on the golf course more or less across the road from St Michael’s I think.
Would you know anything about the graveyard being extended across the road at anytime ?
Also I wondered as a matter of interest, and forgive my ignorance, would this have been made ‘consecrated ground’ ? - I just owndered what was involved in such things
All the best
Rod
Amiguru said,
February 3, 2010 @ 3:04 pm
Rod,
I know that this is probablynothing to do with the meaning ‘of close’ in the case of Mill Close but is not the Wikipedia definition spookily appropriate in light of its proximity to the golfcourse:
“Close” is an ecclesiastical term for lawn next to a cathedral or convent
Regards,
le
N
Rod said,
February 3, 2010 @ 5:27 pm
Neville,
nice find but stop encouraging me
Best
Rod
Amiguru said,
February 3, 2010 @ 8:30 pm
Rod,
I guess you don’t want me to encourage you with a quote I have just found then which mentions ‘When half of the graveyard of the chapel of Coates was ploughed up’ do you?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh well, have to keep it to myself i guess
Regards,
le
N
Peter Mullins said,
February 3, 2010 @ 8:52 pm
This (the discovery of gravestones across the road from the church) is totally new information to me. I’d be interested in any more information you have about it.
Consecration. A churchyard would normally be consecrated (set apart for a sacred use by prayer - we consecrate Bishops as well as churchyards!), the Bishop of Lincoln certainly came to St Michael’s to consecrate the northern extension to the churchyard in the 1940s, and a priest might well bless a grave in unconsecrated graveyards (e.g. some civil cemeteries) before burying a Christian in it.
Discovering gravestones. In the same way that discovering bits of church building under the Golf Course is most easily (but not certainly) explained by rubble being moved from a demolished abbey, the discovery of gravestones is most easily (but not certainly) explained by their having been moved rather than there having been on top of graves (e.g. the whole of the old northern section of the churchyard is clear of gravestones and they must have gone somewhere and I’d speculate this to be the most likely source).
Unknown extent of churchyards. I doubt the unknown earlier extent of the churchyard wouldn have crossed the trackway which became the road (and, with a tiny population, Littel Coates would never have needed a large churchyard), but there is no way of knowing for certain. But we can be surprised: when we recently put new drainage and walls in at the west end of the old part of St Michael’s (for kitchen and toilets), the builder and then archaeologists unexpectedly encountered burials within the church the pattern of which led them to believe that the burials had been in churchyard (i.e. a St Michael’s building earlier than the present fourteenth century building would have been smaller than the present building and the westernmost part of the present building extends across what had been used as churchyard before that).
Discovering bits of church building under the Golf Course. I noticed this week that the 1970 Gillett History of Grimsby says of St Leonard’s Nunnery (Nun’s Corner) ‘Removal of stone after the dissolution was so extensive that excavations of the site revealed no trace of the church except a single voussoir [a stone cut to be part of an arch, which for that reason is not perfectly square or rectangular] with dog tooth ornament’ so I’d now speculate this as a more likely source of your stones than Wellow Abbey.
Peter Mullins said,
February 3, 2010 @ 9:02 pm
Sorry to double post, but I’ve now also looked at Amiguru’s latest posts.
Close is an ecclesiastical term for lawn next to a cathedral or convent. Yes, but I’m afraid field names in Little Coates in the eighteenth century include North and South Blow Well Close, Sow Close, Home Close, Rye Close etc.
I guess you don’t want me to encourage you with a quote I have just found then which mentions ‘When half of the graveyard of the chapel of Coates was ploughed up’ do you? Er, well, actually, as it happens, I could detect just a tiny inkling of a feeling that I might like to know the source of this quotation, if that isn’t too much trouble…
Rod said,
February 4, 2010 @ 8:07 am
Neville,
crikey - I just fell off my chair:)
Best
Rod
Rod said,
February 4, 2010 @ 8:19 am
Peter,
thanks for all the information, much appreciated and very illuminating.
My only problem with it being spoil is the sheer work of moving it. I would imagine when the Nunnery was dissolved there would be plenty of people wanting the stone for building and the like - it strikes me as a big job to drag it all the way out here when it could have been disposed of / dispersed in easier ways - just a thought.
I’m also fascinated by the ‘disposal’ of gravestones. I’d presumed, in my ignorance of such matters, they would have got some form of special treatment and not be treated as general stone. I was surprised to see a paved area in Lincoln made up of broken gravestones for example.
Obviously time marches on and they can’t all be kept, many of course fall to pieces - no wonder I’ve only found one stone with a Memento Mori on
Thanks and regards
Rod
Amiguru said,
February 4, 2010 @ 9:00 am
Peter,
Yes I do realise that the term close in this instance means just an enclosed field and is a very common name for fields. I have several enclosure and tithe award maps so am completely au fait with such names. The aim of the light-hearted suggestion was just to keep Rod’s flame flickering - and he knows that
The issue of the gravestones and the quote, I will deal with later in the day as I am at work at the moment and need to get something done. Yet another tease, but its a serious quote coming up…….
Regards,
le
N
Peter Mullins said,
February 4, 2010 @ 11:05 am
“I would imagine when the Nunnery was dissolved there would be plenty of people wanting the stone for building and the like - it strikes me as a big job to drag it all the way out here when it could have been disposed of / dispersed in easier ways - just a thought.”
The thought makes sense - and the explanation I’m championing as the most likely may in fact be wrong. But I’d guess that “plenty of people wanting stone” trumps “it could have been dispersed in easier ways” any day; the Trotter brothers of the day would have been in there with a bullock cart rather than little yellow van as quickly as they could since any other source of foundation rubble or building stone would take really substantially more cost and effort to source.
Meanwhile, nobody would get permission to use old gravestones for paths and things today as easily as in the past, but as they get broken and even dangerous you do still see permission given to do things like place them round the edge of the churchyard.
Now I’ll just have to sit and wait for Amiguru’s serious quotation to pop up here without looking too desparate. I wonder if he has any Little Coates enclosure or tithe awards the possibility of which posting here he could then tantalise us with; I see that the Lincoln archive lists a photograph of an 1844 Little Coates Tithe Map (at 10 NOTT 1 20) so I really ought to get re-registered there and take a look.
Rod said,
February 4, 2010 @ 1:53 pm
Peter,
Some interesting information, and local tales, came to light when researching St Mary’s Church with regard to what happened to the stone.
As to our stone I just try to think logically and put myself in that time, given this area was in the middle of nowhere effectively in relation to Grimsby at the time it just seems like a huge effort, not to mention cost in manpower etc, to move large amounts of stonework - they could of course - I merely speculate.
Thanks for the info on the gravestones, it’s a real insight as to what actually happens and nice to hear that they cannot simply be discarded etc.
I was at Croxton church this week and most of their stones had been placed around the perimeter Peter.
Neville will have dug something up of interest Peter, he always does.
What we really try to do here is evolve things as we go, different opinions alter the course of things as does new information coming to light.
Very often a few snippets can really lead somewhere which is why I treasure every bit of information people impart, find or suggest - it’s absolutely fabulous to look how these articles evolve - take a look at this one for example.
Kind regards
Rod
Amiguru said,
February 4, 2010 @ 5:37 pm
Rod & Peter,
OK, back at base camp again and ready to engage.
Firstly, I’ll give my overall opinion as things currently stand. I have major doubts that there has ever been an ecclesiastical building of any size on the site of the golfcourse, however, we do need to keep an open mind until the case is reasonably proven. It is extremely unlikely that a stone built religious building would have been established with no historical record of its existence. I think this concurs with Peter’s point of view, however, others have the right to a different opinion nad have already expressed it.
Regarding the totally convincing stones which Rod has illustrated on this site, I too feel they are ‘robbed-out’ stones from either Wellow Abbey, The Nunnery or St. Mary’s. Regarding Rod’s argument about transporting heavy weights, who would have imagined that the Egyptians could have built the Giza pyramid consisting of 2.3 million blocks of stone weighing up to 80 tonnes each, some of them transported 500 miles from Aswan, all by manpower? If the need is great enough, labour cheap enough and time more leisurely than today, why not? Especially if you needed foundations of substance for a barn, say in undoubtedly boggy ground.
Next, I accept that the gravestones, or fragments thereof were found under the golfcourse. These came to my attention last weekend when I was talking to a former Head Greenkeeper employed by the golf club. He said they were under the ?eighth?, (not sure of the number,) green across the road from St. Michael’s. I am no expert on graveyards but I’m sure that from time to time I have come across annexed extentions.
Now for the bit you are all holding your collective breath over.
The full quote I refer to above is:
“Coates.
When half of the graveyard of the chapel of Coates
was ploughed up, it was sown with turnips, and the
sexton told the late Sir Charles Anderson, of Lea, that it
was ‘ a singular thing, they all cam oop fingers and toes’
evidently believing it to be the result of the sacrilege.
By ‘fingers and toes’ it is meant that the turnip,
instead of being of a globular shape, grows split up into
long carrot or finger-shaped fangs, and is thus quite
useless.”
It comes from ‘Country Folklore…….concerning Lincolnshire’ (1908) by Mrs. Gutch and Mabel Peacock
The reasons I give this quote weight, despite it being about folklore, are twofold.
As a trained horticulturist, I know that root crops do tend to fork if planted in rich soil, as that of a graveyard must surely be; the salient point being that the roots behaved in this way, not the crediting of the cause as being sacrilege.
Sir Charles Anderson was a respected 19th. century historian/archaeologist/writer and Mabel Peacock was Ethel Rudkin’s ‘mentor’.
Balancing the above arguements is one doubt in my mind - although the entry is about ‘Coates’ it doesn’t specify which, Great, Little, Coates-by-Stow, North, Somer or indeed any other I have missed. It does tie in with the incidence on the golfcourse quite nicely though.
Finally, sorry Peter, I don’t have the enclosure map for Little Coates, (Grimsby, yes).
Its over to you guys now to tear it to shreds….
Regards,
le
N
Rod said,
February 4, 2010 @ 6:43 pm
Neville,
great idea put put things in perspective - I’ll do the same - especially as this whole thing was at the very beginning of my foray into all things historical - when I first photographed the stone for this site I was clueless !
[edit] Remember Tea at the Vicarage almost 2 years to the day !
Now after a lot of research into various things and a lot of help from people on this site I am slightly less than clueless - I’m knocking on the door of having a hint of an idea of what I’m talking about
To that effect - my thoughts randomly and from both sides of the argument.
1: I cannot see how a church could have existed there and remain a mystery after all the research I and others have done.
2: Likewise any significant religious building that would fit the stature of the stonework I’ve seen and got
3: That said, early churches do, very rarely, turn up, archaeologically, that are not recorded
4: So do religious buildings - I think 3&4 unlikely here but not impossible.
5: I take Neville’s Egyptian point about the stone and spoil - I wouldn’t suggest it couldn’t be brought here just question why it was ? There were plenty of easier, quicker and cheaper options and indeed money making ways.
6: Spoil from Wellow Abbey strikes me as the most obvious answer were one forced to bet the farm on it.
7: I think there is a story here and we are uncovering things all the time - look at the latest info from Neville - gold dust and new to all concerned. If there’s no pot of gold at the end of it there will still be things of great interest come to light which might otherwise never have been known or recorded for all to see
************************************
Neville,
great piece of info about the graveyard - absolutely superb !
I would take that to be factually true. A mythical element of course which you’ve nicely explained I might add but even if one wanted to ignore the folklore aspect it is clearly attributed and I feel it’s a sure as these things can be that half of the graveyard of the chapel of Coates
was ploughed up
Fabulous - and pleased to hear any other ideas and opinions
All the best
Rod
Rod said,
February 4, 2010 @ 7:39 pm
I’m currently giving some thought to the use of the word chapel rather than church
Would Little Coates church have been referred to colloquially as a chapel ?
I think it technically wouldn’t be a chapel yet we have
Chapel Field House
Chapel of Coates (presuming it to be the Coates in question)
It’s probably a thought with little merit but a thought non-the-less
Amiguru said,
February 4, 2010 @ 8:40 pm
And then there is Peter’s statement about his copy of a map: ‘Chapel Field is large and runs from the present house of that name all the way along in front of the church‘
Then there is the question of what was the earlier building refered to by Peter: ‘i.e. a St Michael’s building earlier than the present fourteenth century…….‘
N
le
Peter Mullins said,
February 4, 2010 @ 9:38 pm
Thanks for Amiguru’s final revelation, and for the rough agrement honed out of this exchange.
I think he has provided his own coach and horses to ride through this one. Lea is five miles from Coates-by-Stow, Sir Charles (who was the Revd Sir Charles and the Vicar of Lea as well as living in the Hall) would have had many opportunities to chat with the Sexton there but little to chat with the Sexton here, Coates-by-Stow is frequently called plain ‘Coates’, and I’ve never come across Little Coates being so called.
But nevertheless it does supply some support to Rod’s suggestion because it is a reminder that things like ploughing up half a churchyard did happen. St Mary’s churchyard is beneath shops and offices today. St John’s, New Clee (which stood on Cleethorpes Road near where a Police Station has recently ben built) had a Victorian churchyard part of which is now benath the dual carriageway.
Meanwhile, the archaeologist thought that the earlier builing of St Michael’s was simply a smaller building on the same site; it was merely the present west end which was built across churchyard.
And I don’t know how common the colloquial use of ‘Chapel’ applied to ‘Parish Church’ in Lincolnshire. (In Ireland ‘Chapel’ normally means ‘Catholic Church’ while ‘Church’ often means ‘Nonconformist Chapel’, but that may not be very helpful.)
Amiguru said,
February 4, 2010 @ 10:22 pm
Hi Peter,
Thanks for putting me straight on that one. I did suspect, as hinted, that it might be the wrong ‘Coates’ but not to worry, at least it has aired a few things
Perhaps you can help with my latest puzzle……’Sydnaceaster’ on a map, NW of Lincoln. Google is, unusually, stumped by this!
Regards,
le
N
Peter Mullins said,
February 5, 2010 @ 8:00 am
I don’t know if you and Neville have the stamina to try to bottom out this ‘gravestones on the Golf Course’ bit?
He writes:
I was talking to a former Head Greenkeeper employed by the golf club. He said they were under the ?eighth?, (not sure of the number,) green across the road from St. Michael’s. I am no expert on graveyards but I’m sure that from time to time I have come across annexed extentions.
Is this first hand or second hand evidence? When and in what circumstances does he report they were discovered? Is it reported as a jumble of broken stone, a few stones neatly stacked, a single stone set as if on a grave, or something else? Exactly where does he think the stones now are (reburied on site I take it?)?
My least complicated theory is that this a pile of stones cleared from St Michael’s. It is very near. There is a suspicous lack of grave stones on the northern side of the church which does make it look as if they were cleared at some point. The basic churchyard round St Michael’s is plenty big enough for the tiny population of the parish so there would have been no need for an annexe across the road. When twentieth century population pressure required churchyard extension there was still plenty of neighbouring land to take in even then.
But we know that all sorts of things did happen in the past which are not obvious on the ground (e.g. that part of St Michael’s ancient churchyard turns out to be beneath the present church building, that half of Coates-by-Stow’s churchyard was ploughed up in the nineteenth century etc) so the least complicated theory doesn’t have to be the correct one.
Meanwhile, you could note that the lay-by used as St Michael’s Car Park is the ancient road line. The present road line is a modern straightening. When you drive passed St Michael’s you are well inside Chapel Field, and the green on the St Michael’s side of you is still part of the old field. The odd twentithe century structure on the green by the bus stop is one half of an entrance from the old road line (into what I am not sure).
Amiguru said,
February 5, 2010 @ 8:58 am
Peter,
The greenkeeper told me first hand over the phone, however, this issue was a tail-end ‘Oh by the way’ following a discussion about something entirely different. He is ringing me back tonight so I will pursue the details of the circumstances then and report back accordingly.
Cid,
I shall respond to you later when I have more time…..work pressing.
Regards to all,
le
N
Amiguru said,
February 5, 2010 @ 9:02 pm
Rod,
I’m taking bets that there will be a dedicated thread on Sydnaceaster before the week is out. Especially when you know it is linked to Lady Godiva!
See e-mail…..
N
le
Peter Mullins said,
February 6, 2010 @ 7:45 am
I’m glad you’ve got somewhere with Sydnaceaster. I couldn’t find any casual reference to the name even among all there is about the cluster of Roman discoveries all around the branch of Ermine Street which crosses the Trent at Littleborough. I was going to post a tease that the absence of information quite clearly indicates the mediaeval church censored out all references to it as at least one of the Apostles must have left clues there about the false nature of Christianity, but making a connection with Lady Godiva trumps that very well.
But shouldn’t you have been working on the gravestones mystery for us instead?
My latest snippet from 1881 is that two of the eleven inhabited dwellings in the parish are at the Waterworks where in each case the Head of the household (Edwin Wardale 47 born at Clee and George Woods 33 born at Grimsby) is an Engine Driver. The twelve horse power steam engine which they drove is described as such in Kelly’s Directory in 1885; it pumped water from the blow wells to a reservoir at Scartho. (And for some reason I enjoyed discovering that Edwin and Fanny Wardale had an 18 year old son called Enoch who was an apprentice Tinner.)
Amiguru said,
February 6, 2010 @ 10:13 am
Peter,
Apologies for not reporting back on the gravestones as I haven’t had the call yet. I shall ring today and let you know the outcome.
After a lot of literary rummaging I found out that Sydnaceaster is the Roman name for Stow-in-Lindsey. The ‘e’ was the stumbling block but the original reference was from a book published in 1810. This is a very import church and one of the oldest in England and is known as ‘The Mother Church of Lindsey’. You may already know this Peter now that it is identified but just for the record…..
Reading about this church and seeing the architecture, I can see Rod making a bee-line for it
Regards,
le
N
Amiguru said,
February 6, 2010 @ 9:07 pm
Rod and Peter,
My contact wasn’t present at the discovery of the gravestones as it happened when the road was re-routed as described by Peter above. He was told about them by another greenkeeper who had worked there all his life and is now in his seventies. He said he would have a chat with this ‘owd boy’ and would look out an old map he has of the area from the 1860’s.
So, patience called for once again chaps
Regards,
le
N
Peter Mullins said,
February 7, 2010 @ 7:56 am
As we wait patiently, yes, if only one Parish Church featured on this Blog it would have to be Stow Minster; apart from anything else the picture of a Viking longship traced on a wall by someone who may have seen such a ship on the Trent is one of the county’s great treasuers and can’t fail to send a chill down any spine. While Rod is preparing it, he could pop in to the neighbouring church of Coates-by-Stow (which always gives the impression the Victorian restorers never got to it, and is worth a major detort for any church crawler anyday) and ask whether anyone knows anything about the extent of the mediaeval churchyard there!
Rod said,
February 7, 2010 @ 7:58 am
From the club history:
Some enthusiasts would have had the 7th green moved to where the 8th competition tee used to be sited - down towards the bottom of the hill, and indeed that would have been possible until the kink was taken out of the road past St. Michael’s Church, the Corporation purchasing a crescent-shaped piece of our land to effect that change
Rod said,
February 7, 2010 @ 8:10 am
From a planning application to build on land to rear of Chapel Field House and next to golf course:
The site is of known or potential archaeological significance
Rod said,
February 7, 2010 @ 8:13 am
Peter,
rest assured I’ll be there - just waiting for the weather to return for reasons of light and photography.
Regards
Rod
Peter Mullins said,
February 18, 2010 @ 2:59 pm
Hum. Stroll around. Twiddle.
Amiguru said,
March 21, 2010 @ 9:41 pm
I’ll keep adding these in the relevant places Rod if you wish.
Calendar of Patent Rolls
Westminster 7 February 1258
42 Henry III
“Presentation of Laurence de Mauneby to the church of Little Cotes, void by the death of Fraricus, sometime rector thereof : directed to the bishop of Lincoln.”
Neville
Rod said,
March 22, 2010 @ 8:02 am
Neville,
that more than fine by me - really appreciated. The idea of building a database, if you like, with as much information that comes to light is one of my goals.
Thanks and regards
Rod
Peter Mullins said,
March 22, 2010 @ 9:31 am
The church has a list of Rectors / Vicars complied in 1919 from the Episcopal Registers. It begins with Geoffrey of Walsham who became Rector in 1294 on the death of John.
The list of Rectors / Vicars on a board at the back of the church takes a step further back than this, but on the bais of what research I do not know:
1254 - Richard of Sotby
1260 - John
1294 - Geoffrey of Walsham.
Neville now uncovers an earlier reference from court records rather than episcopal ones, which is new to me, and which I’d combine with the information I already have [but put in brackets the information for which I cannot verify a source] thus:
[1254] - [Richard of Sotby]
[After 1254 if Richard of Sotby infromation correct] - Fraricus
1258 - Laurence of Mauneby - certainly succeeds Fraricus
[1260] - John - there may be Rector(s) between Laurence of Mauneby and John
1294 - Geoffrey of Walsham - certainly succeeds John.
Amiguru said,
March 22, 2010 @ 12:05 pm
Peter,
That list is interesting. Just looking at it a thought occurred to me. Is it plausible that ‘Fraricus’ is a contraction of Fratre Ricardus, i.e. Brother Richard? If that was the case then Richard of Sotby and Fraricus could well be one and the same. Just a musing…
Regards,
Neville
Amiguru said,
March 22, 2010 @ 12:16 pm
Rod,
Here is an interesting one:
Calendar of Patent Rolls
24 September 1306
“Commission de walliis et fossatis to Thomas de Burnham, Henry de Baiocis and Roger de Cubbeldik, at Little Cotes on Humber and elsewhere in the county of Lincoln.”
This effectively means that the named were commissioners responsible for appointing workers to maintain the walls and ditches on the Humber Bank.
chris keyworth said,
March 22, 2010 @ 1:29 pm
Henry de Baiocis was Lord of the Manor of Keelby and was one of the major Benifactors of Newhouse Abbey and no doubt Nunn Cotham Priory too. Thomas de Burnham. very interesting name Rod, Re: my last post…
Regards
Chris
Amiguru said,
March 22, 2010 @ 1:44 pm
Peter,
Here is another gap filled in for you:
1254 - Richard of Sotby
1260 - John
1294 - Geoffrey of Walsham.
Your “John” is most likely to be John de Wynesflode who was presented to the church of Little Cotes 22 August 1259. He was at that time chaplain to Walter de Merton.
Source is the Patent Rolls again.
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
March 22, 2010 @ 3:21 pm
Neville,
that is interesting , very interesting names, who knows where some of these names will lead in time
Chris,
I’m going to try and make something of that asap
Best
Rod
Peter Mullins said,
March 24, 2010 @ 8:53 pm
Thanks, Neville, for the John de Wynesflode reference. Where do you think Mauneby and Wynesflode are? Peter
Amiguru said,
March 25, 2010 @ 7:49 pm
Peter,
I am pretty certain that Mauneby has its origins in the village of Maunby near Thirsk, Yorkshire and Wynesflode is an early version of Winslade near Basingstoke, Hampshire. I shall keep my eyes peeled for any more references to incumbents of St. Michael’s.
Regards,
Neville
Amiguru said,
March 28, 2010 @ 10:55 am
Rod,
Here’s an interesting case in which the common man wins and shows that in some cases the law was fair and the jury system worked though it necessitated the employment of an attorney.
Calendar of Patent Rolls
4 December 1343 tempus Edward III
“The prior was summoned to answer Richard son of John de
Parva Cotes touching a plea wherefore he took his cattle and unjustly
detained them. Richard, by Adam de Lymbergh, his attorney, says that
the prior on Friday after 6 May in that year in Little Cotes by Grymesby,
in a place called ‘ lo Estfold,’ took two horses of his and unjustly detained
them. The prior, by William de Ulceby, his attorney, justifies the
taking because Richard holds of him a messuage, GO acres of land and
30 acres of meadow, whereof the place is parcel, by fealty and the service
of 8s. yearly, of which service the prior was seised by the hands of John
de Cotes, father of the said Richard, whose heir the latter is, in right of
his church of St. Mary, Bolyngton, and the fealty and service were six
years in arrear. And the parties put themselves upon the country. And
a fortnight after Michaelmas the parties came by their attorneys, and tbe
justices of assizes in the county aforesaid sent here a record in these words,
‘ Afterwards at the day and place within contained, before Roger de
Baukwell and William de Thorpe, justices of assizes, the jury found
that on the day of the taking nothing was in arrear of the services and
assessed the damages at 40-9. Judgment that Richard recover against
the prior his said damages. And upon this Richard remits the damages.’ “
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
March 28, 2010 @ 11:14 am
Neville,
how good is that - what a find. Not only incredibly interesting but more names and . . . places
‘ lo Estfold,’
I’m off for a search about, this is cracking stuff Neville
Best
Rod
Rod said,
March 28, 2010 @ 11:27 am
Looks like St Mary’s Bolyngton is in Leicestershire, Prestwold area.
Adam de Lymbergh seems to have got about a bit, 1331 sees him as a King’s Clerk for example
Amiguru said,
March 28, 2010 @ 12:12 pm
Rod,
Yes the first reaction is that of incredulity that someone such as the Prior, being located so far away, should be involved in Little Coates, or indeed in any particular locality but we have to bear in mind that lots of land holding was granted as gifts or payments for deeds done etc. mainly by the powerful and wealthy among themselves as well as by granting it to The Church on the premise that it would stand them in good stead when reaching the pearly gates.
It is improbable that the Prior did the taking of the horses etc. but rather his agents in the locality.
That Adam de Lymbergh was a Kings Clerk makes total sense as he may have been employed as a recorder in the Courts of Justice which was based at Westminster but was periodically peripatetic and he may well have travelled around or, have been employed by the Court when in the eastern counties.
I’m really getting into this medieval/post-medieval stuff now as it brings those long lost centuries to life and allows us to see the minutiae of daily lives and empathise with our ancestors, both the common man in serfdom and the powerfully priveleged.
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
March 28, 2010 @ 7:19 pm
Neville,
I love the basic things aboutr lives at the time - can tell you so much - let alone the interest.
It’s a bit like the Stallingborough Bunkers, very interesting in itself but then Len tells us what was in his kit bag - it’s that stuff that’s nowhere else.
Best
Rod
Amiguru said,
March 29, 2010 @ 11:08 pm
Rod,
Some local nasties from Sessions of the Peace Rolls:
On the Sabbath next after the feast of Pope St. Gregory in the ninth year of the reign of Richard II
William de Paule of Stallingborough, mason, at Grimsby, assaulted William de Paule of Grimsby, mason, with a draw knife and struck him on the arm; William de Paule of Grimsby, to save his own life, struck William de Paule of Stallingborough in the breast and killed him. [Namesakes and possibly related]
On the Sabbath next after the feast of St Lawrence in the 4th. year of the reign of Richard II
John Walker (outlawed) of Little Cotes was assigned by Peter son of Robert and John Coup’, constables of Little Cotes, to serve Peter at See, at Little Cotes, as hayward but the said John refused and went to the village of Stallingborough where he
received higher wages ; he is a rebel against the assignment by the constables.
Day of the Lord next after the Feast of St. Luke the Evangelist, 19th. year of the reign of Richard II
John of Swanland, former servant of James of Little Cotes, knight, at night broke into the chamber of the said James and furtively stole 2 sheets, price 6s. 8d., and a horse, price 2 marks. Tried before the justices of gaol delivery, 3 March 1396, on appeal by James. of Cotes; guilty ; plea of clergy allowed; released to the bishop of Lincoln
Does that mean what it suggests? Also, it reads as if Sir James kept his horse in his bedroom
Beats soaps anyday.
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
March 30, 2010 @ 8:15 am
Neville,
more gold dust - just fantastic who is Sir James of Little Cotes that’s what I want to know ?!?
Why did the church save John ?
Best
Rod
Amiguru said,
March 30, 2010 @ 11:05 am
Rod,
I’m at school at the moment and having done quick search have come up with the following Wikipedia definition ‘plea of clergy’:
“In English law, the benefit of clergy was originally a provision by which clergymen could claim that they were outside the jurisdiction of the secular courts and be tried instead under canon law. Eventually, the course of history transformed it into a mechanism by which first-time offenders could receive a more lenient sentence for some lesser crimes.”
I think before long, due to these researches, we will all be qualified lawyers!
Regarding James of Little Cotes, I shall have to wait till I get home to check the original latin and then get back to you.
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
March 30, 2010 @ 12:47 pm
Neville,
it looks as though he must have been somehow ‘in with the church’ as it were then. The crime was not against the church or their property presumably so . . .
Very interesting and a great snapshot of life at the time
Best
Rod
Amiguru said,
March 30, 2010 @ 5:18 pm
Rod,
Here is the original text in Latin:
“……..lohannes de Swanland dudum seruiens lacobi de Cotes militis…….” which translates as ‘John of Swanland, some time ago servant of James of Cotes, knight’. So James would apparently be known as Sir James de Cotes.
“….it looks as though he must have been somehow ‘in with the church’ as it were then.”
I suspect not Rod, I think in this case the latter mechanism was being employed. Stealing a knight’s horse would probably have been a fairly serious issue and John probably opted to claim ‘plea of clergy’ in order to avoid severe punishment.
This choice was not to be taken lightly however, as although it seems like a ‘let-off’ it could only be used once and in order to ensure that it couldn’t be claimed again, it was not only recorded by the clerk to the court, (as demonstrated in the OP), but the guilty party was branded in the hand for good measure!
This law is still on the statute books I understand but don’t think to make a ‘plea of clery’ the next time you commit a crime Rod as the consequences could be dire!
Regards,
Neville with hot-aches
Amiguru said,
April 2, 2010 @ 10:44 am
Rod,
Here is a reference to the same law, exempting pirates from the right to claim it:
Lex Mercatoria 1754
“For Treasons, Robberies, Felonies, Murders, and Confederacies, done upon the Sea, or in any Place above rehearsed,
the Offenders shall not have Benefit of Clergy.”
This demonstrates that the law was applied to both laity and clergy.
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
April 2, 2010 @ 1:25 pm
Neville,
this is fantastic information and great clarification - something completely new to me - changes the ideas and assumptions I might make completely.
This really is incredibly interesting and educational Neville and I know I’m not alone in my appreciation of all that you bring to the party as it were
There’s just so much interesting stuff coming to light - I absolutely love it
In appreciation
Rod
Rod said,
May 4, 2010 @ 7:13 pm
Neville,
just walked to the church to look for shells and fossils in the old stone here after you spiked my interest.
The stone is absolutley full of shells / fossils
Fascinating
Rod
Amiguru said,
May 4, 2010 @ 9:07 pm
Rod,
That’s quite encouraging as all of my suppositions are having to be made on the basis of mid-range images until you supplied the macros. I’m assuming you are referring to the newer, i.e. pink/grey stone to the rear in the OP picture. The older part of the church, on the basis of the same picture at this range, looks as if it might have been mined at Nettleton near Caistor. That would probably contain fossils which would be about 130 million years old.
Back when I was ‘on the range’ I got permission from British Steel to go to the mine on a Saturday morning when it wasn’t working. I came back with lots of fossils such as pectens about 4 inches across and belemnites up to 6 inches long!
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
May 5, 2010 @ 8:31 am
Neville,
no the oldest part of the building, hence ‘old stone’ I’ll go back and take some pictures - one piece even had a full oyster / clam shell in it. Another with a quartz type growth on it.
I’ll be studying all church stone like this now - many thanks for the inspiration.
Best
Rod
Rod said,
May 5, 2010 @ 10:39 am
Neville,
as promised a revisit this am. I narrowly avoided being ejected as an undesirable, I’m not sure whether it was the Sabaton hoodie and Motorhead bag which made me undesirable or saved me
I was also minded of a mention in Lincolnshire Notes & Queries (Vol III p153) of Roman bricks and tiles reused as infill betwen bricks.
‘Quartz’
Shell / Fossil in the stone of the church wall
The stone is very soft and brittle Neville and chock fulll of shells and shell fragments, I’ll email you a couple of gig pictures.
You’ve started something else here Neville !
Best
Rod
Amiguru said,
May 5, 2010 @ 11:44 am
Rod,
Many thanks for the pics, I for one am pretty certain that the reddish stone illustrated originates from either Nettleton or somewhere on the same seam of ironstone. I love big images as often the ‘devil is in the detail’, if that is not an inappropriate expression in this case.
Regarding the crystals, I would suggest that they are more likely to be calcite, (calcium carbonate), rather than quartz. Calcite is quite easily leached from the parent rock and recrystalised as in the stalagtites and stalagmites process. Quartz is a product of much higher temperatures and pressures and would not have developed on the surface as in your example picture.
Yes you’ve guessed it, amateur geology is yet another string to my bow but I will try not to get too technical
The crystal shapes are quite different in the two minerals as is the hardness; calcite is much softer at Moh 3 with quartz at Moh 7, diamond being Moh 10.
Here is a perfect illustration of the relationship you are observing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A_fossil_shell_with_calcite.jpg
Calcite comes in various forms including Iceland Spar of which I have a specimen; the refraction properties of this are amazing.
Hope that helps.
A different kind of ‘rocker’,
Neville
Peter Mullins said,
May 5, 2010 @ 4:18 pm
But, strangely, undesirables are just the sort of people we should really want. When some of those who come to church regularly on a Wednesday morning said there was a man outside taking close up pictures of the church wall I did say ‘I think I know who that might be’.
Rod said,
May 5, 2010 @ 5:43 pm
Neville,
that’s just fantastic - something else fascinating.
Can’t tell you how much I appreciate it
a slightly brighter Rod
Rod said,
May 5, 2010 @ 5:47 pm
Peter,
I suspect I looked more like somebody about to take the lead off the roof rather than take a picture !
I was once outside a church when the congregation came out and saw me with camera in hand. A nice old lady told me I’d made a mistake “there’s no wedding on at this church today” !
I thanked her and told it was OK as I was from the News of the World and I wanted a picture of somebody inside
best
Rod
Rod said,
August 15, 2010 @ 8:50 am
Little Coates Map Update:
Kindly sent in by Neville
Cotes Parva 1888
Rod said,
August 27, 2010 @ 7:33 pm
New St michael’s pictures added to original article
Amiguru said,
September 8, 2010 @ 4:46 pm
What a Guy!
“And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,…”
King James Bible; Genesis 1:28
These directions are open to interpretation but the Reverend James Guy, seems to have taken them quite literally and determined to populate at least half of north-east Lincolnshire!
I have become quite familiar with him through writing up the Parish Register of Irby and have been amazed at his fecundity. In the entry for 1750 it is noted at the baptism of David Guy that he was the 25th son of James Guy and his wife, not to mention daughters!
Supporting a large family requires a substantial income and in those days there were no state hand-outs and very little charity so James, besides having the benefice of St. Michael’s, Little Coates needed the curacies of two other local churches to maintain his private flock. One of these was St. Andrew’s, Irby and I suspect the other was
St. George’s, Bradley.
The reverend seems to have had a long and fruitful life and sadly, as was often the case in those times, several of his offspring died or were stillborn. He and his first wife Catherine had their last child Judith who was baptised in May 1732 but she was dead within a month. Catherine, his wife, was soon to follow her to the grave and was buried on 26 January 1733. My guess is that she was exhausted through child-bearing.
Undeterred, less than two years later, James married his second wife Ellizabeth Mackrell and the progeneration continued. James and Elizabeth had at least twelve children together until she too preceded him to the grave in May 1756. James died in January 1763 and was buried at Irby. Although there are a couple of ‘Guy’ gravestones in the churchyard, they are to later generations; whether there is a memorial inside the church, I do not know, but perhaps someone else can enlighten me.
The date of James’ death seems fairly certain but I am not sure of his date of birth. One source gives it as ‘about 1695′ but the image above shows an entry in The Gentleman’s Magazine, where his son implies that he was born about 1663. That would mean that he fathered his last child Edmond, in 1750 when he was 87! Not beyond the realms of possibility but somewhat questionable.
There are a lot of holes in the above story and perhaps some need of correction, so, if you know anything about Reverend James Guy and his family please do leave a comment. I’m sure Canon Peter Mullins can shed some light on this matter and I would welcome his contribution.
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
September 8, 2010 @ 4:51 pm
Neville,
now that’s a story and that’s a man !
36 children by two wives - he must have kept himself in work at the font alone
There must be more to his story, as you say bringing up that number of children financially !
Did he need 3 churches for 3 vicarages to put them all in
great find
Best
Rod
Peter Mullins said,
September 8, 2010 @ 7:20 pm
Diocesan enquiry records for 1723 (from a Lincoln Records Society volume in 1913) gives him as being instituted as Vicar of Little Coates on 13 May 1721: ‘no house, he resides at Bradley’. Despite the small size of the parish it also records a weekly service (’except in mid-winter’) and fortnightly afternoon catechising. Notes made from, the Bishop’s Registers confirm the institution date and give the next one as 2 June 1763 ‘one the death of James Guy, clerk’. Holding one rich benefice (or more) and paying somone else a fraction of the money to act as Curate and do the work was common practice and in some cases this Curate occupied the Parsonage. Holding a poor benefice and being paid by others to act additionally as Curates in other parishes was equally common; my guess, for example, is that Guy was catechising on Sunday afternoon (sort of teaching Sunday School) in one of the other parishes in alternate weeks to his doing so at Little Coates. And Little Coates didn’t have its own Parsonage until the twentieth century so the Vicar would always have had the necessary permission to reside elsewhere, which would explain his residing at Bradley early in his incumbency (and, from information in the post above) at Irby later on.
Amiguru said,
September 8, 2010 @ 8:19 pm
Peter,
Many thanks for that explanation and confirmation of the involvement of Bradley. As someone is wont to say - ‘its so good I read it twice’! In my case, four times, not that your explanation was lacking in any way, its just that I confess to not understanding all the subtleties of the language of the church.
I don’t know about others but I would benefit from a simple glossary of terms explaning the differences of the various clerical roles. Most non-churchgoers would refer to the person who conducts the services in a church as ‘the vicar’, which I suppose is acceptable in a general sense but here is a list of terms that might arise in historical research that I find can at times be confusing:
Parson, curate, vicar, canon, incumbent, priest, deacon, chaplain, cleric, clergyman, padre, pastor, rector, minister, presbyter and so on.
Of course, I do understand some of them and today we can all go and look them up individually on the web but a list in one place would be useful. When you have time Peter, could you oblige us with a concise guide, or maybe point out an existing one please?
As an example, you say above “[the]Curate occupied the Parsonage” - would the parsonage normally be occupied by the parson and is that the same as a vicar? Ergo, is the parsonage the same as a vicarage? I’m sorry if I am being naive but to the uninitiated it is all very confusing
Regards,
Neville
Peter Mullins said,
September 8, 2010 @ 9:59 pm
You are quite right to pick me up on this, but quite wrong to think I can manage a guide which is both simple and sufficient!
The following is almost true in the Church of England:
every ‘parish’ (area served by a particular church), ‘benefice’ (a single parish, or more than one parish put together into one unit) or ‘living’ (a single clergyman’s job)
will have one priest (a ordained man), ‘clergyman’ (an English term for an ordained man, sometimes abbreviated to ‘cleric’), ‘parson’ (another English term for an ordained man) or ‘incumbent’ (the holder of a living) who will be titled a Vicar or a Rector (which it is will depend on an accident of history)
who will live in a parsonage (a parson’s house) which will be called either a Vicarage or Rectory in each particular case
and who may or may not have one more junior assistants or deputies who will be titled Curate.
That covers most of your example words.
For the others:
Canon - a priest on the staff of a Cathedral (in most cases only on an honorary basis);
Deacon - this is one of the places where my summary above isn’t quite true - I was ordained deacon (and thus became a clergyman) a year before I was ordained priest; all bishops will have been ordained three times, first as deacon, then as priest and finally as bishop;
Chaplain - a clergyman who isn’t working in a parish at all so little of the above applies - but is serving, for example, a Hospital or School or in the Army;
Padre - another English term for a clergyman used almost exclusively to refer to a Chaplin in the armed forces;
Minister - a general term for any clergyman but actually most commonly used of non-Anglicans such as ‘a Methodist Minister’;
Presbyter - a rarer technical alternative term for a priest.
Amiguru said,
September 8, 2010 @ 10:17 pm
Peter,
Thankyou so much for taking the time and trouble to clarify it all, at least for me. You have covered most options quite succinctly and it is appreciated.
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
September 9, 2010 @ 7:45 am
Peter,
that’s superb, many thanks.
I must admit I’d often wondered about these things myself.
Best
Rod
Amiguru said,
September 9, 2010 @ 9:23 pm
Rod,
“In 1553 Lytell cotes possessed ‘ij gret belles’, which are now [1882] represented by a single small bell so placed as to be almost inaccessible; it is reported to be without inscription.”
Is it still the case I wonder?
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
September 10, 2010 @ 7:20 am
Neville,
another tasty nugget - very well found sir
I don’t know but know a man who might !
Best
Rod
Peter Mullins said,
September 10, 2010 @ 10:39 am
‘ “In 1553 Lytell cotes possessed ‘ij gret belles’, which are now [1882] represented by a single small bell so placed as to be almost inaccessible; it is reported to be without inscription.” Is it still the case I wonder?’
The church (which including a steeple at that time) appears to have been nearly derelict at the beginning of the seventeenth century and substantially restored at the end of the century (the earliest but much later drawings of it then showing, as today, no steeple) so my guess is that any bells in the steeple in 1553 went in that process.
The evidence is sparce. (a) A typed history sheet with no references (but an acknowledgement to notes from William Wright of Wold Newton and Edward Gillett the Grimsby historian) says ‘It is recorded that in 1602, the nave, chancel and steeple were found to be in such disrepair that “prayer cannot conveniently be done therein” but I don’t know what this record is. (b) The large late seventeenth century date on the Chancel would seem to indicate that major work was done or completed in that year, but I know of no evidence as to what this would have been.
Jill said,
September 10, 2010 @ 2:14 pm
Hello Peter - this isn’t actually about the church! I was at St Matthew’s Church Skegness this morning - helping with the newsletters - when your name came to mind re your post a few days ago about the Anglican posts ie vicar/rector etc - anyway, back to the parish office and newsletter - I asked if anyone knew of a Peter Mullins. Oh yes, said Malcolm France, our rector and oh yes said our new curate Julie Donn!! Julie asked to be remembered to you.
I thought it was only in Skegness that everyone knew everyone else - it seems that everyone in Lincolnshire knows everyone else!!!!
kind regards
Jill
Peter Mullins said,
September 11, 2010 @ 10:18 am
No, it in Grimsby that everyone knows everyone else, is related to them and/or went to school with them, or so I find repeatedly. Malcolm, Rector of Skegness, lived in Brighowgate, Grimsby before he moved to Skegness; I supervised some of his Post Ordination Training when he was Curate at St James, Grimsby. Julie, Curate of Skegness, lived in Woad Lane before she moved to Skegness; I sponsored some of her pre-Ordination training when she was a member of the congregation at St Nicolas’, Great Coates. When we eventually take over the whole Church of England it will be possible for those who look with care to trace it all back to Grimsby.
Rod said,
September 11, 2010 @ 10:58 am
Peter,
When we eventually take over the whole Church of England it will be possible for those who look with care to trace it all back to Grimsby
Now I like that - superb !
Regards
Rod
Amiguru said,
September 11, 2010 @ 12:53 pm
Peter,
“……it will be possible for those who look with care to trace it all back to Grimsby. “
So that’s the new take on ‘All roads lead to Rome’ ?
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
September 11, 2010 @ 2:25 pm
Neville,
that’s clever
All my research leads me to my own version of that famous saying:
All Roads Lead to Rennes-le-Château
Best
Rod
Jill said,
September 11, 2010 @ 3:17 pm
Hmmmm - will pass the message on to Malcolm and Julie - ie all roads lead to Grimsby!
Seems the natural progression is then …… from Grimsby to ….. Skegness! Maybe Skeg has something that Grimsby doesn’t have?
regards
Jill
Amiguru said,
September 17, 2010 @ 3:50 pm
Peter,
Re your comment 8 September 2010:
Seemingly I’m not the first to be confused; I’ve just come across the following in a magazine:
Call me ‘Brother’ if you will;
Call me ‘Padre better still,
Tho’ plain Mister’ fills the bill.
If that title lacketh thrill
Even ‘Father’ brings no chill
Of hurt, annoyance, or ill will.
If D.D. the name append,
Pastor, Rector, Vicar, Friend,
Titles almost without end
Do not grate nor yet offend;
But that man my heart doth rend
Who merely calls me ‘Reverend’.
Sums it up delightfully I think
Regards,
Neville
Rod said,
September 18, 2010 @ 6:50 pm
St Michaels new picture added
chris keyworth said,
September 18, 2010 @ 7:06 pm
that would look ace on a night shoot at Dona nook
regards
chris
Martin Kalson said,
October 31, 2010 @ 5:18 pm
Do you have a picture of the stained glass window in the Lady Chapel?
Rod said,
October 31, 2010 @ 6:19 pm
Hi Martin,
thanks for the comment and welcome to the site - I’m afraid I don’t have a picture but I’ll see if I can remedy that at some point and get one up here
Regards
Rod
chris keyworth said,
October 31, 2010 @ 6:20 pm
I seem to remember somone either repairing or replacing it a few years ago Martin, sure i have a picture of the original one though in my notes,
regards
chris
Peter Mullins said,
November 1, 2010 @ 5:41 am
Gordon Plumb, an expert in stained glass photography, did take a set of pictures a short while ago but they don’t yet appear in the large collection oin his flickr pages; I’ve just e-mailed him to ask him to put this right. Pevsner is wrong to say this is a Kemp window - even Homer nods from time to time. This month marks the centenary of its installation - when it would have been the main east window of the church on to which the major 1913-15 extension (which rendered the ancient chancel as Lady Chapel) had not been a added.
Peter Mullins said,
November 1, 2010 @ 9:09 pm
Gordon Plumb has replied to say that he’ll scan in his slides (actually he typed ’scan in my slices’ which makes a nice picture, but we know what he means) and have them up on his flickr pages in a few days time.
Peter Mullins said,
November 5, 2010 @ 3:21 pm
The pictures are up at http://www.flickr.com/photos/22274117@N08/tags/littlecoatesstmichael/.
Rod said,
November 29, 2010 @ 6:35 pm
St Michael’s in the snow
Saint Michael’s in the Snow
Jack said,
February 19, 2011 @ 10:19 am
I would like to refer back to the discussion about James Guy but first may I congratulate you Rod on such a good website, easy to navigate and full of useful content, not least of which was Neville’s generous submission of the transcripts from Irby.
Much has been said about James Guy’s fecundity but his last son Edmund was equally productive. He moved to Grimsby where he married Isabella Kenny and they had 13 children!
My interest in all this is that their 11th child, Rose Guy, born 24th September 1853 in Grimsby. was married, on 3rd June 1812 at St James to Abraham Lofas, a mariner, who was possibly from Hull. They were my wife’s 3xgreat grandparents. She died in 1853 in the Caistor Workhouse - what went wrong? I wonder if Abraham was lost at sea.
On a separate subject but allied to the above, my wife used to work at Guy & Smith in Victoria Strett, Grimsby. I believe that this firm was founded by Joseph Guy who was also a descendant of James Guy.
Jack
clive said,
May 18, 2011 @ 9:26 am
Very interested in the Littlecotes website. My maternal grandfather is buried in the churchyard. He was George William Chew. He had a boot and shoe repair shop at 13 Springbank Grimsby
Rod said,
May 19, 2011 @ 7:30 am
Hi Clive,
thanks for the comment, pleased you found it of interest and welcome to the site
All the best
Rod
Jo said,
June 16, 2011 @ 4:46 pm
Rod wrote - “I’m also fascinated by the ‘disposal’ of gravestones. I’d presumed, in my ignorance of such matters, they would have got some form of special treatment and not be treated as general stone”
We used to live in a little 16th century cottage in Keelby .. a few yards away from St Bartholomews .. and though I never actually found out for sure .. I was told that the chimney breast was built from old gravestones from the chuch next door.
Perhaps death and the dead were treated with less reverence back then.
Rod said,
June 16, 2011 @ 7:15 pm
Jo,
thanks for the very interesting comment and a warm welcome to the site.
When you think of how many people must have been buried in any village then look at the number of headstones left - an awful lot must have gone somewhere Jo.
Regards,
Rod
Jo said,
June 17, 2011 @ 3:03 pm
And thank *you* for putting together such a fascinating site.
Kevin Barrett said,
October 20, 2011 @ 6:24 pm
Hi,
I’m doing research for a play that takes place in 1890s England and came across your site in one of my searches. Beautiful site, by the way. I’m wondering if you can answer a question that’s been particularly hard to research: Woud a nun ever live at a parsonage/vicarage? And like Amiguru, I’m struggling a bit with the terminology; those two are more or less interchangable, are they not? Please forgive my ignorance, I’m not really a church-goer and I’m American so two strikes against me.
Thanks!
moleman said,
December 4, 2011 @ 1:03 pm
where dose the name toot hill come from? and is the great coats road a roman road? when we were kids mid 60s, we played at the green bridge and golf course wre we had many encounters wwith the green keeper and his son who lived on laceby bypass who showed us many roman finds and hypercourses on the golf course we was lead to believe there was two towers each side of the road wich were roman? in the mid 60s a sub station was dug out on the horse field side between the green bridge and the golf course dyke, were many roman things were dug up by the digger and we claimed and took them home. they were taken to western boy school and left with a teacher called Mr.Gore who left the school that year with a near complete roman vase nether to be seen again. also found a grave outside church boundry north side of church hope this helps to put a spanner in the works.
paul said,
January 4, 2012 @ 1:48 am
Great site, Rod, last year i gave you info as to where some broken gravestones where off Ayleby Rd, Wybers End, did you find anything out from them, also regarding scatterd/moved gravestones, i found another full grave stone about 4 years ago whilst doing a garden clearance in the back garden of a house on Laceby Road at Nuns Corner end, opposite side to the college (the house is next to a eight ft to a YEB yard). I left it in the garden with the house owner mistified to her new addition, so it should still be there. Maybe i could get a photo for you.
Cheers Paul
ps, Rod, i remember the fields behind st nicholas drive on the freshney park way as cow fields (mid 1970s), i know before that it was a refuse tip, can you remeber the tip and if so how long did it run for.
Paul