WYMERSLEY HUNDRED 



BLISWORTH 



view of frankpledge in the manor.' He married 

 Elizabeth daughter and heir of Hugh Cransley, and 

 was succeeded about 1 346^ by his son Sir Thomas 

 Wake, the husbandof Alice sister and co-heir of William 

 de Pateshull.-' He was living in September i^jg,* 

 but probably died soon after, leaving Blisworth to his 

 wife for her lifetime. On her death in 1 398 she was 

 succeeded by her grandson Thomas, the eldest surviv- 

 ing son of her son Thomas,' who had died in August 

 1383.* He was married to Margaret Philipot, the 

 sister of Sir John Philipot, citizen and grocer of Lon- 

 don, to whom Richard II had granted the lands and 

 marriage of Sir Thomas Wake's heir in September 

 1383.' Thomas Wake died before 1425, and the 

 manor passed to his son Thomas, who was then about 

 23 years old.' He married .'^gnes daughter and heir 

 of Thomas Lovell of Clevedon, Somerset, and died on 

 10 September 1458,' being succeeded by his son 

 Thomas, who was born about 1434. By his first wife, 

 whose name is not known, he had two or three sons, 

 the eldest of whom, Roger, succeeded him on his death 

 in May 1476.'° As a follower of Richard III he was 

 attainted by Henry VII, his manor of Blisworth being 

 granted to Sir James Blount." His lands were subse- 

 quently restored by Act of Parliament in 1487.'^ He 

 died 16 March 1504 leaving the manor of Blisworth 

 to his wife Elizabeth daughter of Sir William Catesby 

 of Ashby Ledgers, during her lifetime.'^ She then mar- 

 ried Sir John Grey, fourth son of Thomas Marquess of 

 Dorset, and was succeeded by her son Thomas Wake, 

 who sold Blisworth manor to Sir Richard Knightley 

 of Fawsley in 1522 or 1523.'* Sir Richard died in 

 December 1535 leaving Blisworth to his younger son 

 Sir Edmund Knightley and Ursula his wife." They 

 granted the manor to Henry VIII in i 542, in exchange 

 for other property,'* and it was incorporated in the 

 newly created honour of Grafton." The stewardship 

 of the manor was granted to Sir John Williams in i 545.'' 

 In I 592 or I 593 the site of the manor was granted 

 to Thomas Andrew of Charwelton," whose grandson 

 Thomas was living there in 

 1618." In 1628 Blisworth, with 

 ten other manors, was conveyed 

 to Sir Francis Crane, the manager 

 of the Mortlake tapestry works, 

 as security for a loan of ;^7,50o 

 advanced to the Crown. ^' Seven 

 years later the site of the manor 

 was leased to Sir Robert Cooke 

 for a period of thirty-one years. ^^ 

 In a survey of Crown estates 

 made in 1660 Blisworth is noted 

 as containing 894J acres of arable CharUsU-withihediffer- 

 land, 405 acres of pasture, and ">" "f " '""""■ basion 

 no meadowland." On the ex- gpl^'V^g"""-'' "'""■ 

 piration of Cooke's lease in 1665 Charles II granted 

 the manor with much other property to Dcnzil Lord 

 Hollis, Philip Earl of Chesterfield, and five others.** 



FiTZRov, Duke of Graf- 

 ton. The arms of King 



In 1673, however, Blisworth was given by the king to 

 Henry Earl of Arlington, with remainder to his son-in- 

 law Henry Fitzroy,-' who succeeded on his death in 

 1685. He was created Duke of Grafton in 1675, and 

 Blisworth remained in the hands of his descendants 

 until 1 9 1 9, when most of the Northamptonshire estates 

 of the Dukes of Grafton were sold. 



The church of ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST con- 

 sists of chancel, 30 ft. 4 in. by 18 ft. 8 in. ; clcrestoried 

 nave, 61 ft. 6 in. by 18 ft. 8 in.; north 

 CHURCH and south aisles, 11 ft. 6 in. wide; north 

 porch, and west tower, 9 ft. 10 in. by 9 

 ft. 6 in., all these measurements being internal. The 

 north aisle is the full length of the five bays of the nave, 

 but the south aisle^* is of three bays only. The width 

 across nave and aisles is 47 ft. 2 in. 



The building generally is of roughly coursed lime- 

 stone, mingled in the tower with local ironstone. The 

 roofs of the chancel and nave are slated, those of the 

 aisles leaded, and the porch is covered with modem 

 tiles. There are straight parapets to the chancel and 

 aisles: the nave roof overhangs. Internally, except in 

 the tower, all the walls are plastered. 



The church was restored in 1855-6 when a gallery 

 was removed and the pews converted into open benches, 

 and in 1871 the floors were paved with encaustic tiles. 

 The south aisle was rebuilt in 1926. 



The chancel and the three eastern bays of the nave 

 belong to a late- 13th-century aisled church, the nave 

 and north aisle of which were extended westward, the 

 aisle being rebuilt, and perhaps widened, about 1320- 

 30. The tower followed later in the 14th century. 

 The south aisle appears to be its original width, having 

 a chapel at its east end separated from the rest by a 

 1 3th-century transverse arch, and roofed at right angles 

 to the nave with a gable to the south. The north and 

 south^' doorways are also of 13th-century date with 

 edge rolls. With the exception of the porch, which seems 

 to have been added or rebuilt in the 1 5th century, 

 no further change in the plan was subsequently made. 

 In the 15th century, however, new windows were 

 inserted in the chancel and the clerestory erected or 

 reconstructed. 



The chancel is of two bays and has two 1 3th-century 

 windows on the south side, the south wall being sub- 

 stantially of that period, but in the 14th centur)' the 

 east and north walls were either wholly rebuilt or re- 

 faced. The pointed five-light east window has tracery 

 of an unusual type,-' which is probably of this date, and 

 the angle buttresses are placed diagonally: a chamfered 

 plinth and string occur only on the north and east. On 

 the north side the two bays are equal, each containing 

 a 15th-century pointed window of three cinquefoiled 

 lights with vertical tracery, and a blocked doorway in 

 the western bay, but on the south side the bays are 

 unequal in size. Of the two earlier pointed windows 

 in the south wall the easternmost is of two uncusped 

 pointed lights with a trefoiled circle in the head, and 



' Plac. de Quo M'arr. (Rec. Com.), 551. 



' Ciil. Pal. I 345-8, p. 60. 



' Cal. fine, vii, 1 19. 



' y.C.II. Sorthanis. Families, p. 320. 



s Chan. Inq. p.m. 22 Ric. II, no. 50. 



' Cal. Fine, i, 4. 



' Ibid. 



• Fine R. J Hen. VI, m. 5. 



' Chan. Inq. p.m. 37 Hen. VI, no. 19. 

 "■ y.C.II. Norlhanti. Families, p. 321. 

 " Cal. Pal. 1485-94, p. 231. 



" Rolls of Pari. \\, 393. 



•> Cal. Inj. Hen. VIl, ii, 847. 



'* Knightley family evidences, cited by 

 Bridges, Hist. Norlhanis. i, 335. 



" Chan. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), Ivii, 2. 



'<• L. and P. Hen. yill, ivii, g. 285 (6). 



" Slat, of ikt Realm, 33 Hen. VIII, 

 cap. 38. 



■» L. and P. Hen. Vlll, xx (i), p. 675. 



'0 Pa(. 35 \X\i. pt. 6. 



" Metcalfe, A*;;;/. Sortkanli. 63. 



" Cal. S.P. Dom. 1627-8, p. 585. 



" Pat. II Chas. I, pt. 13. 



" Lennard, Sural Norihamflonskirt, 

 p. 126. 



" Pat. 17 Chas. II, pt. g, no. i. 



»» Pat. 25 Chas. II, pt. 8. 



" Its length from the east is 39 ft. 2 in. 



" The south doorway, howcver.ii wholly 

 restored. 



" It is wholly restored but reproduces the 

 original design. 



lY 



225 



eg 



