WYMERSLEY HUNDRED 



Derham and Charles Danvers in 1676;' and two years 

 later Sir John Osborn, bart., and Sir Edward Baynton 

 conveyed the manor to Sir William Temple, hart., and 

 John Temple, kt.^ Henry Temple of Sheen, Surrey, 

 was lord in 1714,^ which is the last mention found. 



HOUGHTON'S atiai PARKE'S alias ATTER- 

 B URT'S MANOR. Roger Dakency, as already men- 

 tioned, granted his share of the Daubeney inheritance 

 to Richard de Houghton.* The manor passed later to 

 the Parkes, apparently through an heiress. William 

 Parke received some tenements here in 1407 by a 

 Crown grant for life,' renewed to his son John in 1440,* 

 and in 1428 was oneof the joint tenantsof the Daubeney 

 manor.' His grandson Lewis, in a plea concerning land 

 here, mentioned William's wife Margaret as though she 

 was an heiress.' The Crown had resumed by 1592 

 the tenements granted by Henry VI to John Parke,' 

 but Houghton's Manor descended to Isabel daughter 

 and heir of Lewis. She married Lewis son of John 

 Atterbury,"* and Lewis Atterbury, presumably their 

 son, made a settlement of Parke's Manor in 161 2," and 

 died seised in the capital messuage in 1631. His son 

 and heir Stephen'^ in 1637 or 1638 sued his step- 

 mother for the manor, capital messuage, dovecote, closes 

 of about 133 acres called upper, middle, and nether, or 

 little burrough, ground on the west of the town and 

 closes caUed Saftridge, Hawney, and Hardney, of 

 which she had taken unlawful possession.'^ His wife 

 Frances is mentioned, and it is probably their son Fran- 

 cis Atterbury, clerk, who, with his son and heir Lewis, 

 made a settlement of 'two parts of the manor of Great 

 Houghton alias Parke's manor' in 1655.''' Lewis.Atter- 

 bur}-, clerk, was concerned with Abraham Bowcher 

 and Barbara his wife with a ninth part in 1657," and 

 in 1658 and 1660 with Gifford, Samuell, Tompkins, 

 Battison, Plowman, Chalcombe, Day, and Roberts,'^ 

 whereby all the nine parts were reunited in his posses- 

 sion. Lewis Atterbury, M.D., who made a settlement 

 in 1695" would be the Dr. Lewis Atterbury of High- 

 gate who was lord when Bridges made his visit.'* In 

 1738 Osborn .Atterbury conveyed it to William Lock." 

 It has been no further traced. 



Winemar held of the Countess Judith in 1086 i vir- 

 gate in Houghton of the soc of Yardley.^" This may 

 be represented by the 4 small virgates held in the 12th 

 century by King David, though these are said to have 

 been held by one Osebert.^' Three virgates here, which 

 Oger de Lisurs recovered in 1199 against Ilbert de 

 Pavcly,^^ were held in 1274 by Adam de Lisurs of 

 Gilbert de Preston, ^^ the representative of Winemar. 

 As late as 1350 certain tenements and rent in Great 

 Houghton were held by the Pavelys of 'the fee of 



GRE.-VT 

 HOUGHTON 



Lysours' of the heirs of John Halewyk.-'* The lands of 

 the Prestons in this parish were attached to their manor 

 of Preston Deanery (q.v.) and descended with it, being 

 granted by Wynmer de Preston in 1429 to John 

 Hartwell.^5 



The church of THE ASS UMPTION, 

 CHURCH which was described by Bridges as con- 

 sisting of chancel, body, and two aisles, 

 with an embattled tower 'in the midst',^* was found to 

 be 'greatly decayed' in 1753,^' and in the following 

 }ear was taken down and rebuilt in 'a plain, decent, 

 and commodius manner, without unnecessary orna- 

 ment'. The new church consisted of a nave measuring 

 internally 45 ft. 6 in. by 25 ft. 6 in., with a recess 6 ft. 

 deep and 12 ft. 6 in. wide for the communion table 

 at the east end, and a west tower 9 ft. 6 in. square 

 surmounted by a spire, and was in a very plain classic 

 st)le, with a three-light east window of 'Venetian' 

 t>'pe, and two round-headed windows and a doorway 

 on each side of the nave. It has since been altered and 

 its character in some measure changed, but the present 

 fabric is in the main that of 1754. No part of the old 

 church has survived, unless it be the vice, or newel 

 staircase leading to the first floor of the tower. In 1875 

 a porch was added on the south side, the windows and 

 south doorway refashioned, and a new window- sub- 

 stituted for the north doorway. All this new work is 

 in the 'Romanesque' st)'le, the windows being of two 

 round-headed lights under a semicircular arch with 

 shafted jambs. A north-west gaUery was taken down 

 and the church reseated. There were further internal 

 alterations in 1910-11, when the sanctuary was 

 carried westward, its floor paved with marble, an oak 

 altar erected, the walls panelled to a height of 7 ft., 

 and the side lights of the east window blocked. 



The nave is faced with ironstone ashlar, and has a 

 square plinth, flat strings at sill level and at the spring 

 of the window arches, and boldly dentilled cornice. 

 There is a pediment at the east end and on the north 

 and south aisles of the nave over the original doorways, 

 where the wall is slightly advanced. The roof is slated. 

 The eastern recess, which projects externally 7 ft. 6 in., 

 is separately roofed. Internally the walls are plastered, 

 and there is a flat plaster ceiling with cornice, and plain 

 round arch to the sanctuary recess. 



The square lower stage of the tower is ironstone, and 

 of the same character as the nave, with plinth, strings, 

 and cornice, but it retains its original tall round-headed 

 west window. The second stage is also square but of 

 limestone, with a circular opening on three sides,-' sunk 

 panels at the angles, and cornice. Above this is a lighter 

 octagonal stage surmounted by Tuscan columns sup- 



■ Ibid. Northantt. East. 28 Chas. II. 



' Ibid. Hil. iq 4 30 Chas. II. 



' Rccov. R. Hil. I Geo. I, rot. 128; 

 Bridges, op. cit. 371. 



* See above. 



' Cal. Pat. 14.05-8, p. 392. This 

 messuage and virgatc was in the hands of 

 the Crown in 1381 through the felony of 

 John de Pydyngton: Cal. Pal. 1377-81, 

 p. 607. 



' Cal. Pal. 1436-41, p. 467. 



' Feud. Aids, iv, 42. Bridges (op. cit. 

 371) quotes a plea of 1415 where Thomas 

 Clarcll claimed one of these manors 

 through four predecessors. 



' Early Chan. Proc. file 1044, nos. 1, 2. 



' Pat. 35 Eliz. pt. 6, m. 12. 

 "> Chan. Proc.(Ser.2),bdle.23i,no.23. 



" Feet of F. Norlhants. Trin. 10 Jas. I. 



IV 



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

 lOi. 



'•• Chan. Proc. (Ser. 2), bdle. 394, no. 

 56. 



'•* Feet of F. Northants. East. 1655. 



'5 Ibid. Mich. 1657. 



"• Ibid. East. 1658, Trin. 1658, Trin. 

 12 Chas. II. 



■' Recov. R. Trin. 7 Will. Ill, rot. 



74- 



" Op. cit. 371. 



'• Feet of F. Northants. Trin. 1 1 & 

 12 Geo. II. 



"> y.C.H. Norihanls. i, 354^. 



" Ibid. 375*. 



" Curia Regis R. i, 13. 



^' Cal. Intj. f>.m. ii, 69. 



^* Ibid, ix, 215. 



" Cal. Close, 1429-35, p. 29. 



2' Hisl. 0/ Nori/ianls. i, jyi. There was 

 a chantry cliapcl on the south side of the 

 tower, and the north aisle extended almost 

 the whole length of the chancel. The 

 length of the chancel was 33 ft. 8 in., of 

 the nave 53 ft., and the width across nave 

 and aisles was 48 ft. 3 in. The tower was 

 1 8 ft. 4 in. by 1 3 ft. 9 in. 



^' Advertisement in the A'V&n Mercury, 

 17 Sept. 1753, which announces that it 

 is intended to pull down and rebuild the 

 church, 'the steeple whereof is already 

 taken down*. An advertisement on 5 Aug. 

 1754, announces that the church is to be 

 rebuilt and the old materials sold. There is 

 no trace of the church having been reconse- 

 crated : ex inf. the rector. 



-' There are clock dials in those facing 

 north and south. 



165 



