WINGFIELD
The modern parish of Wingfield lies in the Oxford
and Kimeridge Clay region of north and mid-west
Wiltshire, 2 miles south-west from Trowbridge and 2½
miles south from Bradford-on-Avon. It is bounded on
the west by the parishes of Tellisford and Farleigh
Hungerford (Som.). (fn. 1) By the Divided Parishes Act,
1882 (45 & 46 Vic, c. 50) detached parts of Wingfield
were transferred to the parishes of Bradford, Westwood
and Farleigh Hungerford. (fn. 2) In 1884 a small detached
part of Farleigh Hungerford was added to Wingfield,
and a part of Wingfield added to the parish of Bradford. (fn. 3) The Wilts. County Review Order, 1934, added
to Wingfield parts of the parish of Bradford Without
and of the Urban District of Trowbridge.
The parish of Wingfield has a small and scattered
population. The secondary road (B 3109) from Bradford-on-Avon to Rode (Som.) crosses the main road
from Trowbridge to Farleigh Hungerford (A 366)
approximately in the centre of the parish, and most of
the houses lie within ¼ mile of this road junction. (fn. 4)
These roads were turnpiked in 1799. (fn. 5) Midway Manor
(see below—Manors) lies off the former road, near the
northern boundary of the parish. Wingfield Common,
Wingfield House, Trowle House, and Trowle Farm
are just to the north and east of the cross-roads. Belle
Cour (see below—Manors) is ¼ mile south-west of the
cross-roads. Wingfield Church and the Church Farm
(see below) are in an isolated position ¼ mile south
of Wingfield House. Pomeroy Farm (see below—
Manors) adjoins Belle Cour on the south-west, and
Pomeroy Wood is ½ mile west. Stowford Farm (see
below—Manors) lies on the western boundary of the
parish opposite Farleigh Hunger ford. Swansbrook, a
tributary of the Biss, forms part of the eastern and
southern boundary of Wingfield, while the Frome forms
most of the western boundary. The height of the land
in the parish varies between 150 and 250 ft. above sealevel, being greater in the south-west.
Wingfield Church Farm stands a little to the west of
the church. The original building, constructed in the
mid-16th century, was L-shaped. The long arm of the
L ran east to west; the short arm joined the long arm at
the east end. In the 17th century two projecting wings
were added on the south. The original windows from
the east-west block were brought forward and inserted in these projections. At the same time the north-south arm was broadened and a porch entrance added
in the centre of the east front. This porch is of the mid-16th century and was probably taken from the east-west block. It has a moulded four-centred arch, square
head, hood with diamond-shaped stops, and spandrils
containing shields. On the left shield have been added
the initials C.P.M. and on the right shield the date
1630. The interior has been modernized but retains
a 16th-century stone fireplace and a number of 17th
century oak panelled doors with solid moulded frames
and their original hinges. Extending beyond the west
end of the south front there is a doorway very similar to
the porch which seems to indicate that the original
building has been shortened.
The lost village of Wittenham, formerly a separate
parish, lay in Wingfield. It is first mentioned in the
bounds of the charter of 1001 (see below-Manors) and
is named without an alias in sundry records (notably
the Nomina Villarum) until 1428. In and after about
1300 the manor of Wittenham is sometimes called the
manor of Rowley, a name, however, which does not
occur in the Nomina Villarum. In 1412 there is a
reference to the manor of Wittenham and Rowley (fn. 6) and
from this time onwards the forms Wittenham alias
Rowley, and Rowley alias Wittenham are found, and
also the single word Wittenhamrowley. From about
1450 the second of these forms tends to oust the first,
suggesting that Rowley, if, as may be presumed, it was
a separate place, was thenceforth the more important,
or perhaps the only visible one. In 1428 the depopulated parish of Wittenham alias Rowley was amalgamated (see below) with Farleigh Hungerford (Som.) to
which parts of its seem already to have belonged. This
measure had the effect of transferring the village for
parochial purposes to the diocese of Bath and Wells.
The township or tithing, as distinct from the parish,
was not, of course, affected and remained within the
hundred of Bradford. Henceforth it was associated by
the officers of that hundred now with one township and
now with another. Thus at the sheriff's tourn for 1439
one tithingman presented for Westwood and Rowley. (fn. 7)
In 1508 Rowley appeared with Trowle before the
Commissioners of Array. (fn. 8) It was rated with Trowle
and Wingfield to the subsidy of 1569, with Wingfield
to the subsidies of 1629 to 1631 and 1642, and with
Trowle to the monthly assessment of 1645. (fn. 9) The insignificance of the village doubtless made some grouping
of this sort inevitable. There is today no trace of
Wittenham on the map, but there is a Rowley Copse
in Farleigh Hungerford.
Henry Shrapnel (1761–1842), inventor of the
Shrapnel shell, was the son of Zachariah Shrapnel of
Midway Manor. (fn. 10)
Manors
WINGFIELD is mentioned (under a
corrupt form of the name) in the bounds
of a charter attributed to King Edgar and
dated 954. (fn. 11) Another charter, dated 1001, sets out the
bounds of the manor of Bradford (q.v.); if this is to be
believed then Wingfield at this date formed part of
the Vill' of Bradford and was given by King Aethelred
to Shaftesbury Abbey. (fn. 12) There is no other evidence
that Wingfield was held by Shaftesbury, and there is
another reason for scepticism: Westwood, which according to the charter of 1001 was also part of Bradford, had
been granted in 987 by Aethelred to the thegn Leofwine. In and after 1086 Westwood belonged to the
monks of St. Swithun, Winchester, and does not appear
to have been connected with Shaftesbury at any date
other than 1001. (fn. 13) On the other hand it must be
admitted that during the Middle Ages the abbey of
Shaftesbury held the hundred of Bradford, and that the
bounds of the 'vill' of Bradford as given in the charter
of 1001 are nearly the same as the later hundredal
boundary. (fn. 14) If the charter granted the hundred to
Shaftesbury then the above difficulties do not arise. (fn. 15)
In 1086 the manor of Wingfield was held by Geoffrey de Mowbray, Bishop of Coutances, and under
him by Roger. Before the Conquest Azor held it. (fn. 16)
Geoffrey had been a prominent supporter of William
the Conqueror in and after 1066, and had received
grants of many manors in England; his estates were
most extensive in Somerset and Devon. (fn. 17) On his death
in 1093 his lands passed to Robert de Mowbray, son of
his brother Roger. (fn. 18) Robert, who had become Earl of
Northumberland in 1080 or 1081, was dispossessed
in 1095 after his rebellion against William II. (fn. 19) His
estates were split up: those in Somerset were given to
Robert fitz Hamar, whose daughter brought them in
marriage to Robert, Earl of Gloucester. (fn. 20) It seems
probable that Wingfield followed the same descent. In
1242–3 the Abbot of Keynsham (Som.) was holding
½ knight's fee in Wingfield of Joscelin de Bayeux, who
held of the Earl of Gloucester. (fn. 21) The abbey of Keynsham was founded between 1167 and 1172, by William,
Earl of Gloucester, son of Earl Robert. (fn. 22) There is no
extant record of the gift of Wingfield to the abbey, but
it must have been made before 1219–20, when the
abbot was engaged in litigation with Roger de St. Lo
over land in Wingfield. (fn. 23) Probably Wingfield was
granted to a member of the Bayeux family by the Earl
of Gloucester, and was later given to the abbey of
Keynsham by the tenant—possibly at the instance of
the earl. The Earl of Gloucester as overlord of the
manor claimed the assize of bread and ale in 1280–1,
and in 1288–9 was accused of withdrawing ½ mark
which used to be paid by the vill of Wingfield to
the sheriff at the tourn. The earl said that this ½ mark
was included in a rent of 5 marks paid by the hundred
at the tourn. (fn. 24) In 1428 it was returned that the Abbot
of Keynsham held immediately of the Earl of Stafford
certain tenements in Wingfield in pure alms by service
of ½ knight's fee. (fn. 25) The Earl of Stafford was a descendant of the Clare earls of Gloucester, through the
female line. (fn. 26)
The Abbot of Keynsham retained the manor until the
Dissolution. In 1241 Roger Whyteng surrendered to
the abbot all his claim to the manor. (fn. 27) In the following
year Adam de Greinville, lord of Southwick (in North
Bradley), granted to the abbot common in Adam's heath
called Cokmersdon, and in all the common belonging
to the manor of Southwick. (fn. 28) A final concord of 1268
between the abbot and John of St. Lo, in which John
recognized the abbot's rights in the manor, appears to
have been the genuine settlement of a dispute between
them. (fn. 29) The site of the manor, with a yearly stipend of
20s. for the woodward, was leased by the abbot in 1494
to William Clyvelode for a term of eighty years. (fn. 30) In
the following year Clyvelode also received the lease of
a messuage in Stowford, a cottage in Freshawe, land in
Wingfield, a woodward's stipend of 13s. 4d., and four
mills, for a term of ninety-six years. (fn. 31) At the Dissolution the possessions of the abbey in Wingfield and
Stowford were valued at £12. 13s. 4d. (fn. 32)
In 1539 Wingfield was granted by the king to
Thomas Bayley. The manorial rights, certain tenements, and the reversion of the site of the manor after
the termination of Clyvelode's lease were to be held in
chief for the service of 14/0 knight's fee. (fn. 33) Thomas
Bayley died in 1543 and was succeeded by his son
William, who died without issue in 1562. (fn. 34) William's
heir was his brother Christopher, who died in 1602,
having in the previous year settled the manor on his son
John in tail male, with remainder to John's daughter
and to another son Robert. (fn. 35) John Bayley died without
issue in 1621, having settled Wingfield on his wife
Katherine. He was succeeded by his nephew Christopher, son of Robert Bayley, to whom livery was made in
the following year. (fn. 36) The manor passed out of this
family in 1647, when John Bayley conveyed it to
Samuel Ashe (al. Mercer). (fn. 37) There had been numerous
conveyances of the manor between 1622 and 1647,
most of them being between members of the Bayley and
Ashe families. It seems likely that the Ashes were
mortgagees. (fn. 38)
Samuel Ashe and Anne his wife sold Wingfield in
1683 to Walter Greene. (fn. 39) It afterwards passed to John
Cooper, who held it in 1762 and 1765. (fn. 40) John Allen
Cooper of Cumberwell (probably the same man) sold it
in 1784, to Joseph Mortimer, who, by his will proved in
1789, left it to his youngest son Capt. Edward Mortimer,
of the 20th Regt. Light Dragoons: it was entailed upon
Edward's male heirs with remainder to Joseph, eldest
son of Joseph Mortimer and to the daughters of Joseph
senior. (fn. 41) Edward barred the entail in 1808, evidently
in order to sell the manor to John Tillie Coryton, in
whose possession it was in the following year. (fn. 42) Thomas
Timbrell, lord of the manor of Trowbridge, was lord of
the manor in 1820 and 1825, and Charles Spackman of
Bradford, dyer, in 1832. (fn. 43) The estate probably became annexed to that known as Belle Cour, which had
come into the possession of John Tillie Coryton from
his grandfather Sir James Tillie of Pentillie. (fn. 44) About
1828 this estate was sold to John Houlton of Farleigh
Castle. John Houlton was described as lord of the
manor in 1855 and 1867, but in 1875 Thomas
Rumming, a local farmer, had apparently acquired such
manorial rights as still existed. There is no reference to
the lordship after this date. Much of the land in the
parish was purchased about 1895 by Sir Vincent
Caillard (1850–1930), administrator and financial
expert. (fn. 45) In 1939 the chief landowners in the parish of
Wingfield were Mrs. T. Place and the trustees of Mr.
and Mrs. A. S. Butler. (fn. 46)
WITTENHAM is mentioned in the bounds of the
charter of 1001 described above under the manor of
Wingfield. In 1086 it also was in the hands of the
Bishop of Coutances, with Roger as the mesne tenant.
Before the Conquest it was held by Alvet. (fn. 47) The name
of Wittenham is now lost, but the place must have been
north-west of Wingfield near Midway Manor. The
overlordship of the manor followed the same descent as
that of Wingfield. In 1361 and 1375 Wittenham was
held of the Earl of Gloucester. (fn. 48) In 1401 it was
held 'from the heir of Thomas le Despenser as of
the Honour of Gloucester'. (fn. 49) In 1428 Walter, Lord
Hungerford, held lands in Wittenham for the service of
½ knight's fee immediately of the Honour of Gloucester. (fn. 50)
Like Wingfield, this manor was granted by the overlord to the Bayeux family, and it seems to have been
subinfeudated by them to that of St. Lo. (fn. 51) By 1166
these two families were connected by marriage. (fn. 52)
Joscelin de Bayeux and Roger de St. Lo were holding
Wiltshire fees of the Honour of Gloucester in 1211–
12. (fn. 53) William de St. Lo held ½ fee in 1242–3 of
Joscelin de Bayeux, who held of the Earl of Gloucester. (fn. 54)
John de St. Lo and the men of Wittenham were presented in 1267–8 for having withdrawn the suit which
they had formerly been in the habit of doing at the
hundred court every three weeks. (fn. 55) John de St. Lo
concluded an agreement with the Abbot of Keynsham
in the same year concerning the manor of Wingfield. (fn. 56)
The manor is next found in possession of Sir Nicholas
de St. Maur, 1st Lord St. Maur (d. 1316). (fn. 57) How he
obtained it is not clear, but it is possible that his father,
also named Sir Nicholas de St. Maur (d. 1297), had
married as his first wife the heiress of John of St. Lo. (fn. 58)
Sir Nicholas de St. Maur presented to the church of
Wittenham in 1299. (fn. 59) He was tenant of the 'vill' of
Wittenham in 1316. (fn. 60)
Wittenham passed on the death of Lord St. Maur to
his second son by his second wife, Nicholas, 2nd Lord
St. Maur. (fn. 61) He died in 1361, leaving the manor to his
son, another Nicholas, then aged 10. (fn. 62) The king
granted custody of the heir to his own daughter Isabel,
but Nicholas died in the same year as his father, and
was succeeded by his brother Richard. (fn. 63) Richard,
summoned to Parliament as Lord St. Maur died in
1401, leaving his son Richard as his heir. (fn. 64) The younger
Richard, 5th Lord St. Maur, died in 1409, when it was
found that he had held Wittenham jointly with his wife
Mary. (fn. 65) Mary died in the same year two days after
giving birth to her husband's heir, his posthumous
daughter Alice, whose marriage and custody were
granted to Hugh Mortimer. (fn. 66) Before Alice's birth her
father's heir had been his brother John, and the latter
was holding the manor of Wittenham and Rowley in
1412. (fn. 67) Alice, however, must have regained possession
for in 1429 she and her husband, William, Lord Zouche
of Harringworth, conveyed the manor to Walter, 1st
Lord Hungerford. (fn. 68) In 1455 Lord Hungerford's title
was further secured by the quit-claim of John de Seymour and others. (fn. 69) Lord Zouche may have retained an
interest in the manor, since it was numbered among his
possessions at his death in 1468. (fn. 70) Meanwhile the
manor (or its reversion) had passed on the death of
Walter, Lord Hungerford, in 1449 to his son Robert,
2nd Lord Hungerford, and from the latter in 1459 to
his son Robert, 3rd Lord Hungerford and 1st Lord
Moleyns. (fn. 71) The last-named Robert was attainted in
1461 and suffered forfeiture. (fn. 72) The manor of Rowley
was granted in 1462 to Richard, Duke of Gloucester,
brother of the king. (fn. 73) Richard became king in 1483,
but after his death at Bosworth in 1485 the manor of
Rowley was restored to Sir Walter Hungerford, a son
of Robert, 3rd Lord Hungerford and 1st Lord
Moleyns. (fn. 74) Sir Walter's grandson, Walter, Lord
Hungerford of Heytesbury, was attainted and executed
in 1540. (fn. 75) The estates of Lord Hungerford were
restored to his son Sir Walter in 1554, and this manor
was included among them. On Sir Walter's death without issue in 1596 Wittenham passed to his brother Sir
Edward. (fn. 76) In 1607 Sir Edward also died childless and
the manor passed to his great-nephew and adopted heir
Edward, son of Anthony Hungerford, upon whom it
was settled in 1608–9. (fn. 77) Edward Hungerford died
without issue in 1648 and was succeeded by his
half-brother Anthony Hungerford of Black Bourton
(Oxon.). (fn. 78) Anthony was succeeded in 1657 by his son,
Sir Edward Hungerford the 'spendthrift', who in 1686
sold Rowley to Henry Baynton of Spye Park. (fn. 79) Baynton
sold Rowley in 1700 to William Chaundler of Bradford. (fn. 80) In 1743 Stephen Sly sold the manor to John
Halliday, and from John's descendant Simon Halliday
the estate, now only a reputed manor attached to Iford
(in Westwood), was bought by Charles Dingley. (fn. 81)
Dingley's heir sold it to John Turner of Harbourne,
who in 1777 in turn sold it to John Gaisford of Bitham
in Westbury. (fn. 82) From this time onwards the estate
apparently formed part of the Iford estate, which was
held in 1939 by Major M. J. Peto.
Rowley Farm, which had formed part of the manor
estate, was not sold with the manor in 1700 but was
bought by a Mr. Bernard, who later sold it to Zachary
Shrapnel of Midway, William Yerbury, and a Mr.
Dyke. (fn. 83) Yerbury's portion afterwards passed to Thomas
Cooper of Wingfield and is that part of Stowford Farm
which lies in the parish of Farleigh Hungerford. By
1870 the Rowley farm buildings had long disappeared. (fn. 84)
From a survey of the manor of Rowley taken in 1585
it seems that there were only two houses on it, Rowley
Farm and a cottage. At that time there were 37 acres
in Stowford Field and 57 acres in Westwood Field.
There were tenants of this manor at Box, South Wraxall,
Atworth, Avoncliff, Dingley, Bradford, and at Tellisford (Som.). (fn. 85)
An estate formerly known as HAMUNDES probably appears first as a virgate of land in Rowley held by
John the clerk, and a messuage in the occupation of
Peter the baker (pistor) on the east side of a meadow
belonging to the virgate, with ½ acre on the south side,
next to the arable called Worthehes and with another
½ acre lying in the east field near Noreshall. This was
granted, probably early in the 13th century, by Roger
de St. Lo, lord of Wittenham, to Walter Brutun.
Later in the 13th century, in the time of John de St. Lo,
John Brutun, son of Walter, granted the estate to his
daughter Catherine, evidently on her marriage to Roger
de Sokerwyke. From a confirmation of this grant by
Sir Roger de Clifton it appears that Catherine's husband
was Roger Hamund of Sokerwyke, and from him no
doubt the tenement derived its name. Catherine and
Roger conveyed the estate in 1302 to their son Thomas,
who was to pay for this grant two pairs of gauntlets.
Two years later Thomas sold the property for 20 silver
marks to Robert Bavent but in 1305 Robert conveyed
it back to Thomas, and in the same year Thomas's
brother Roger surrendered any claim that he might
have to the property. (fn. 86)
By 1431–2 the tenement, then comprising a messuage
and 40 acres in Rowley, had been reconveyed to the lord
of the manor, since that year John Hamond was excused
the quit-rent which he had previously paid for it. The
tenement was leased out that year. It included closes
called Homeclose and Bradecroft and a meadow called
Trewmede. (fn. 87) In 1447–8 meadows called Hamondesmede and Trewmede, the two closes, some pasture, and
8 acres of arable, all apparently parcel of the lands late
belonging to John Hamond, were being leased out by
the lord of the manor. (fn. 88)
The manor of POMEROY appears to have been a
very scattered one in the Middle Ages. In the early
14th century it was described as being in Pomeroy,
Bradford, Westwood, and Rowley. (fn. 89) In 1523 Pomeroy
was said to be in the tithing of Winsley (in Bradford). (fn. 90)
In the 18th century the whole of Pomeroy was apparently in Wingfield. (fn. 91)
Like Wingfield and Wittenham, Pomeroy was mentioned in the bounds of Aethelred's charter of 1001.
In the time of Edward the Confessor it was held by
Alnod, and after the Conquest it passed to Osmund
Latimar. (fn. 92) In 1242–3 William Waspre held 1/5 knight's
fee in Pomeroy of the Earl of Salisbury as lord of the
honour of Trowbridge. (fn. 93) There is no definite evidence
to connect the tenants of 1086 and 1242. (fn. 94) Pomeroy
was still part of the honour of Trowbridge in 1325,
when it was among the 75 fees conveyed to Hugh le
Despenser by Ebles Lestrange and Alice his wife, relict
of Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, to whom the lands of the
Earls of Salisbury had descended. (fn. 95) In 1428, however,
the manor was said to be held immediately of the Abbess
of Shaftesbury and this finding was repeated in 14845. (fn. 96) The same evidence was given by the jurors in
1523, when it was added that Pomeroy was held of the
abbess as of the manor of Bradford. (fn. 97) Since the abbess
held the hundred of Bradford and the tithings of the
hundred had long been in the habit of doing suit at her
court of the hundred, it is probable that the distinction
between her manorial and hundredal jurisdictions
became blurred.
In 1309 the tenancy of Pomeroy was settled on John
de Hauvill for life, with reversion to Robert de Hauvill. (fn. 98) Four years later (possibly after the death of John)
Robert de Hauvill conveyed the property to trustees
who in 1312 settled it upon him and his wife Margery. (fn. 99)
Tristram de Hauvill, who had put in a claim in 1310,
held Pomeroy in 1335, and settled it upon himself for
life with remainder to Thomas de Bradeston, Isabel his
wife, and the heirs of Thomas. (fn. 100) By 1352 the estate, now
known as the manor of Pomeroy, had passed to Edmund
de Brokenborough, who in that year conveyed it to
John de Edyndon. (fn. 101) About this time the estate was
greatly increased in size. In 1361 John de Edyndon
settled the manor upon himself and his issue with
remainder to Goda Butesthorn and Maud, daughters of
John Cormailles, and their issue, with remainder in
default to the right heirs of John de Edyndon. (fn. 102) John de
Edyndon died before 1369 without issue and Roger
Husyerd and Christine his wife, John's relict, took
possession of the manor contrary to the settlement of
1361. (fn. 103) Christine and Roger evidently retained possession, for in 1387 John Butesthorn and his wife granted
the reversion after the death of Christine and Roger to
certain trustees. (fn. 104) Possibly this conveyance was for the
purpose of a settlement of the manor on a member of
the Lisle family, for in 1428 John Lisle held ¼ knight's
fee in Pomeroy, which had formerly belonged to
Tristram de Hauvill. (fn. 105) John died in the following year
and from that time the manor descended in the same
way as that of Holt in Bradford (q.v.). (fn. 106) Edward Lisle
settled Pomeroy on himself and his heirs in 1723. (fn. 107)
Before 1793 it had become the property of Isaac Webb
Horlock, a banker who owned considerable property in
the neighbourhood. Horlock became bankrupt and in
1793 Pomeroy was sold with the rest of his property to
pay his debts. (fn. 108) It seems, however, to have been redeemed, for in 1826 Isaac William Webb Horlock
conveyed it to Jeremiah Osborne. (fn. 109) The site of the
manor was probably at Pomeroy Farm, which was
bought by Sir Vincent Caillard and became part of his
Wingfield estate.
Tithes from Pomeroy were given to the priory of
Monkton Farleigh by Geoffrey 'dapifer' and were held
by the priory at the Dissolution. (fn. 110)
There appears to have been another manor or reputed
manor at Pomeroy, called POMEROY-LA-SLOWE.
In 1385 Thomas de Hungerford was granted free
warren in his lands at 'la Slo', and in 1420–1 a rent of
106s. 7½d. was received by the king from land at Pomeroy
which belonged to Walter, 1st Lord Hungerford. (fn. 111)
This Thomas de Hungerford was presumably the father
of Walter, Lord Hungerford (who died in 1397). This
estate descended in the Hungerford family until 1607,
and was then mentioned as appurtenant to the manor
of Rowley. (fn. 112) In a Farleigh terrier of 1675 'the Slow
grounds' are described as the inheritance of the Longs
and as in the tenure of 'Mrs. Shertrin': possibly the
property was sold to the owners of the advowson. (fn. 113)
The name survives in the modern Slough field. (fn. 114)
The reputed manor of STOWFORD was annexed
to the manor of Wingfield and was leased in 1458 by
the Abbot of Keynsham, to William Sewey or Stowford and Margaret his wife for ninety-six years. (fn. 115) In
1495 the reversion of the property was granted to
William Clevelode, to hold for eighty-six years after
the expiration of Sewey's lease. (fn. 116) In 1539 the reversion
was confirmed to Thomas Bayley, and from that time
Stowford descended along with Wingfield. (fn. 117)
In 1661 the mansion house of Stowford with various
lands belonging to it was held under a lease made in
1654 by Samuel Ashe to John Brownjohn. This tenant
refused to pay tithes to the Rector of Wingfield because
the latter was a royalist. (fn. 118) At that time the tenant of
this estate had the right of fishing in the Frome 'from
the upper end of Countsham to the lower end of
Taggle mead in Wingfield'. (fn. 119)
Stowford Farm is situated on the west boundary of
the parish. It has two stories and attics and is built
mainly of rubble with worked dressings and stone-slated
roof. The original house was built late in the 15th
century, and looked east. About the middle of the 16th
century a small projecting oratory was added at the
south end of the east front and another larger kitchen
block at the north end. Late in the 16th century the
building was extended by a wing running west from
the back of the original house and about the middle of
the 17th century a small wing was added at the west end
of 16th-century wing, on the north side. All that remains
of the original house is part of its east wall with a
blocked window of two trefoiled lights and parts of
other blocked windows. Of the early additions the
oratory remains with its four-light windows to each
floor blocked, also its side lights. The kitchen block has
been much altered, its transomed windows partly
blocked and the east gable wall rebuilt in ashlar. The
interior has been modernized and, apart from a 16th-century stone chimney-piece with an added moulded
shelf and a number of moulded ceiling beams, there are
no features of interest. (fn. 120)
A tenement called FRESHAWE was granted in
1331–2 by William Ursel to the Abbot of Keynsham. (fn. 121) In 1458 the abbot granted a cottage in Freshawe to William Sewey and Margaret his wife for a
term of ninety years. (fn. 122) It followed the same descent as
Stowford and is last mentioned in the reign of Elizabeth
as Freshawleaze, a close in the manor of Wingfield. (fn. 123)
Another tenement called BRADLEYS was annexed
to Freshawe and followed the same descent.
MIDWAY, now called Midway Manor, formed
part of the Rowley estate, and was bought by Zachary
Shrapnel from Mr. Bernard after the break-up of the
estate. (fn. 124) Zachary's son, Henry Shrapnel, is noticed
above, p. 70. In 1908 Midway was the property of
Henry Summers Baynton.
Churches
The church of Wingfield was annexed to the manor until the Dissolution, and presentations were made by
the Abbots of Keynsham. (fn. 125) The church of Wingfield
was below the minimum value for the purpose of the
Taxatio of 1291. In 1428, though entered as a church
that was not taxed, it was rated for the purposes of
the subsidy at 6s. 8d. (fn. 126) In 1535 its net value was
£4. 16s. 4d. a year. (fn. 127) The king presented to the living
in 1547, and in 1551 granted the advowson to Thomas,
Lord Darcy. (fn. 128) Darcy transferred the advowson to
Christopher Bayley of Stowford, (fn. 129) who died in 1558 or
1559, leaving his son Thomas, a minor, as his heir. (fn. 130)
Thomas came of age in 1567 and was given livery of
his inheritance, but he died in 1568, leaving a daughter
and heir Rebecca; her wardship was granted to
Nicholas Brooke, who transferred it in the same year
to Edward Horton of Westwood. (fn. 131) Rebecca married
Henry Long of Whaddon (q.v.) and in 1592 she and
her husband were granted a third part of the advowson
by Maud, wife of Walter Bush and relief of Christopher Bayley, who had previously held it in dower. (fn. 132)
Henry died in 1612 and Rebecca later married Henry
Sherfield, who in 1620 presented to the living jointly
with her. (fn. 133) Sir Walter Long, son of Rebecca and Henry
Long, succeeded his mother and died in 1672. His son
and successor Sir Walter Long died unmarried in 1710
and his estates passed to Calthorpe Parker, son of
Rebecca, sister of the younger Sir Walter Long and wife
of Sir Philip Parker. Calthorpe died without issue and
was succeeded by his nephew Sir Philip Parker, son of
his elder brother. (fn. 134) In 1723 presentation was made by
Benjamina Parker 'soluta' and in 1747 by Martha
Parker, daughter of the above Sir Philip Parker the
younger. (fn. 135) Martha married John Thynne Howe,
Lord Chedworth, who presented to the church in 1757
in conjunction with the Earl Harcourt and Theophilus
Jones. (fn. 136) About this time the estates inherited by the
Parkers from Sir Walter Long reverted under the provision of Sir Walter's will to the Longs of Rowden. (fn. 137)
What happened to the advowson of Wingfield is not
absolutely clear, but in 1762 the presentation was made
by Daniel Clutterbuck of Bradford. Edward Bowles
of Bristol presented in 1775. (fn. 138) The Revd. Edward
Spencer, who became rector in that year, bought the
advowson. On his death it passed to his son, the Revd.
Thomas Spencer who also became rector and who held
it in 1859. (fn. 139) After the death of the latter the advowson
became vested in trustees. It is now held by the Church
Pastoral Aid Society. (fn. 140)
In 1704 the rectory consisted of 28½ acres and 7
'yard lands'. The churchyard and the rectory house
together occupied ¾ acre. There were 6½ acres of glebe
in the 'home grounds' and the remainder lay in small
parcels in places that included Stowford Field, Lower
Slow, Sheepmead and the Moor, and in 'Westwoodfields' (perhaps the common fields of Westwood). (fn. 141)
The church of ST. MARY lies at the south-east end
of the village, and consists of a chancel, nave, west
tower, south porch, and a vestry. With the exception of
the 15th-century tower and chancel arch it dates from
the 17th century, and all the windows, other than the
east, which is modern, are of that period. The vestry,
built on the north side, is a late addition, and houses
an organ, installed by the 5th Earl Temple of Stowe.
The parish registers begin in 1654 and are complete. (fn. 142)
In 1553 the king's commissioners took 8 oz. of plate
and left for the church a chalice weighing 9 oz. The
plate now comprises a paten given by John Bayly
(probably John Bayly, d. 1665, whose monument is in
the church), and a paten and flagon given in 1749 by
Martha Parker. (fn. 143) There were three bells in 1553.
Of the present three bells the oldest dates from c. 1500
to 1550, the others from 1607 and 1615. (fn. 144)
At the end of the 13th century Wittenham with
Rowley was a separate parish, with the advowson of the
church in the gift of the lord of the manor. (fn. 145) The
church, dedicated to St. Nicholas, was described in
successive presentations as Wittenham, Wittenham
alias Rowley, and Wittenham Rowley. In 1428
Wittenham was included among the parishes which,
having fewer than 10 parishioners, were exempt from
the payment of the subsidy. (fn. 146) In the same year Walter,
Lord Hungerford, the new lord of the manor, obtained
permission from the Bishop of Bath and Wells and the
Bishop of Salisbury to unite the parish of Wittenham
with that of Farleigh Hungerford, of which also he was
patron. (fn. 147) It was stated that the church of Wittenham
was impoverished and that for a long time no priest had
been found willing to occupy it. The amalgamation of
parishes was not a frequent event in the Middle Ages,
and the amalgamation of parishes in different counties
and dioceses is of peculiar interest. Those who carried
it out did not intend that the church of Wittenham
should be abandoned. The parishioners of Wittenham
were to maintain the nave of their church, and were
not bound to contribute to the upkeep of that of Farleigh Hungerford. The rector of the combined parish
was to maintain the chancel of Wittenham church as
well as that of Farleigh. The books, vestments, and
ornaments of Wittenham were to remain in the church,
and services were to be held there three times a year.
The parishioners of Wittenham were to have unrestricted access to the church of Farleigh, and to pay
the usual dues to the rector. To indemnify the Bishop
of Salisbury for the loss of future institutions to the
church of Wittenham it was provided that the Rector
of Farleigh should pay annual pensions of 8d. each to
the Bishop, the Dean and Chapter, and the Archdeacon
of Salisbury. The church of Rowley was mentioned in
1535, when 8d. was still being paid to the 'ministers
and servants of the cathedral church of Salisbury'. (fn. 148)
The date of the disappearance of the church is not
known and its site is uncertain. There is a tradition
that it stood in Rowley Lane, midway between Westwood and Farleigh Hungerford, where the lane widens
into an open green that still preserved the name Holy
Green in 1872. (fn. 149) Another tradition is that the roof of
Rowley church was moved in Elizabeth's reign and
put on the corn mill at Iford, which still stood in 1907. (fn. 150)
The parish of Wittenham alias Rowley had never
been compact, and the amalgamation of 1428 did not
therefore add a neatly bounded area to Farleigh
Hungerford. The church terriers of Farleigh show that
in 1675 many acres of land situated locally in the
parishes of Westwood, Bradford, and Wingfield were
part of and titheable to Farleigh. The glebe lands of
the rectory of Rowley had also been scattered, and it
was not until the Tithe Commutation of 1838 that
these ecclesiastical anomalies were fully investigated
and reduced to order. (fn. 151)
Nonconformity
In 1672 the house of Joseph
Bernard at Stowford was
licensed as a place of worship
for Presbyterians. (fn. 152) The Baptist chapel at Wingfield
was built in 1896 to accommodate 150 persons. (fn. 153) It
was founded by a mission band from Emmanuel
Church, Trowbridge. (fn. 154)
Agriculture
Little is known about the
agrarian history of Wingfield. As
the names Wingfield, Wittenham,
and Rowley (fn. 155) indicate, this area was once forest. It lay
at the northern edge of Selwood in Wiltshire and was
included legally in that forest at least until the end of the
13th century. Little of it was woodland at the time of
the Domesday Survey. (fn. 156)
The economy of the Hungerford manor of Wittenham in the 15th century is to some extent exposed by
a broken series of bailiffs' accounts running from 1431
to 1452. In 1431–2 the demesne had been leased out
the previous year to Thomas, Rector of Farleigh, for
seven years at an annual rent of £2. 16s. 8d. All charges
upon the land, except the fifteenth and the king's subsidy, were to be borne by Thomas. He was, however,
allowed 11s. 8d. for hay from a meadow called le
Greneham which had been given to the parker of
Farleigh for the support of beasts there. Some stock
thus appears to have been retained for the use of the
lord of the manor, and in the same year 9s. was spent
on three cart-loads of hay for the animals in the park. (fn. 157)
In 1440–1 Thomas, described as late Rector of Farleigh, paid £3 for the farm of the demesne. (fn. 158) In 1447–8
it was leased out in closes and small parcels of land
ranging from 1 to 7 acres. The parcels lay in fields or
meadows called Chesthull, Cleyfurlang, Wittenhamfurlang, Estevillefurlang, Holland, Longfordeyerde,
le Clyff, Stofordyate, Northull, Rodemede, Goremede, Edisshelese, Langmede, Fyneacre, Whitecrosse,
and Grenham. Tanggelmede and le Shawe were
described as closes. Another close called Corneham
and pasture for 2 oxen were leased to the Rector of
Farleigh for life. (fn. 159) The demesne was leased out in the
same way and for the same rent in 1449–50 (fn. 160) and
1451–2. (fn. 161) In the former year, however, 7s. rent had
to be debited on the account for the rent of a meadow
called Langmede which had been mown for the use of
the lord of the manor. In the latter year £2 had to be
debited for the rent of Haynesplace, afterwards called
Muchell, which had been granted that year by the lord
of the manor to William Hangsoke 'for his service'.
Rents of assize at Wittenham amounted to £12.2s. 9d.
in 1431–2 and were collected according to a rental of
15 September 1430. (fn. 162) In 1440–1 and the following
year they were £12. 3s. 7d.; (fn. 163) in 1447–8 and 1449–50
—£12. 6s. 1d., (fn. 164) and 1451–2—£12. 7s. 1d. (fn. 165) Moveable rents amounted to 3d. every year for which there
is an account. Courts were held twice a year except in
1430–1 when there was only one, (fn. 166) and brought in
small sums ranging from 9d. to 13s. 4d. Total receipts
from the manor were: 1431–2, £17. 2s. 4d.; (fn. 167) 1440–1,
£17. 16s. 4d.; (fn. 168) 1441–2, £17. 3s. 8d.; (fn. 169) 1447–8,
£18. 9s. 3d.; (fn. 170) 1449–50, £17.17s. 1d.; (fn. 171) 1451–2,
£20. 16s. 5d. (fn. 172)
There was a statutory inclosure in Wingfield in
1823. (fn. 173) Nineteen named parcels of land were to be
sold to defray expenses incurred in obtaining the Act.
The inclosure award allotted a total of 90 acres. The
lord of the manor, Thomas Timbrell, received half
(amounting to 1 a. 3 r. 1 p.) of what remained after the
sale of the 19 parcels. The commoners, apparently
well-to-do gentlemen, were allotted 41 parcels in lieu
of common rights, of which 41 the lord of the manor
received 6 parcels in addition to his initial share. Two
parcels of land were sold to 'labourers' apparently
already in occupation by encroachment at some previous unspecified time. One piece, also said to be an
encroachment, was sold to Thomas Timbrell and not
to the tenant in occupation. (fn. 174) There is still a small
common north of the church. A public carriage road
and twenty-five private carriage roads and public and
private foot-ways were enumerated in the award. The
private roads and foot-ways were to be maintained by
the new allottees by 'the Road Rate' as set out in the
schedule.
In 1801 the crop acreages for Wittenham were:
wheat, 92; barley, 35; oats, 45; potatoes, 6; peas, 8;
beans, 2. (fn. 175)
Mills
In 1086 there was a mill in the manor of
Wingfield, valued at 20s. It was probably
situated on the Frome at Stowford. There
was also a mill in the manor of Wittenham, worth
12s. 6d. (fn. 176) There is frequent later mention of mills at
Stowford. In 1458 there were 2 water-mills there
under one roof, which were leased by the Abbot of
Keynsham to William Sewey. (fn. 177) In the 16th and 17th
centuries Wingfield was evidently exploited by the
clothiers of Bradford and Trowbridge as both an
industrial and a residential area. This is reflected in the
history of the mills. In 1495 there were 4 fulling-mills
in Stowford. (fn. 178) When the manor of Wingfield was
granted to Thomas Bayley, the Stowford mills passed
with it. (fn. 179) Thomas Bayley was a clothier of Trowbridge.
Four fulling-mills were among the possessions of
Christopher Bayley in 1602. (fn. 180) In 1654 a water cornmill and 2 fulling-mills at Stowford, with a fishery in
the Frome annexed, were leased by Samuel Ashe to
John Brown John. (fn. 181) These mills were attached to
Stowford Farm, and there was still a mill at Stowford
in 1903. (fn. 182)
Schools
There was a private school at Wingfield
about 1800, kept by the rector, the Revd.
Edward Spencer. Its most distinguished
pupil was Thomas de Quincey. (fn. 183) 'The religious
principles' (of the school), says de Quincey's biographer, were 'more satisfactory than the scholarship'.
Another pupil was Edward Grinfield (1785–1864)
biblical scholar and author. (fn. 184)
In 1833 there was a school at Wingfield supported
by voluntary contributions and attended by 25 children. (fn. 185) In 1851 the site for a school, for which J.
Bailey was paid £3. 10s., was conveyed in trust, and the
school was built in the following year. (fn. 186) By the terms of
the trust the school was allied to the National Society,
which made a grant of £20. (fn. 187)
In 1859 the school was attended by 50–60 children,
and was considered to be 'under excellent auspices'. (fn. 188)
Accommodation (omitting a small classroom) was computed in 1872 at 66. (fn. 189) It rose in 1893 to 82, presumably because the classroom was then included in the
estimate. (fn. 190) A deed of 1901 provided for the enlargement and improvement of the premises. (fn. 191) Accommodation was assessed at 67 in 1910, and 52 in 1938 and
1950. (fn. 192) On the removal of the senior children in 1926
the school was left with junior mixed and infants'
departments. Controlled status was granted in July
1949 on application by the managers. (fn. 193) The average
attendance, which had fallen to 17 in 1938, was 29 in
July 1950. (fn. 194) There was then one teacher. (fn. 195)
Charities
By his will proved 1684, Richard
Bissie charged his parsonage or portion
of tithes in 'Pomfrey' (probably Pomeroy) with the payment of £4 a year towards the placing
of a poor boy of the parish of Wingfield as an
apprentice. It was stated in 1903 that the owner of the
tithes of'Pomfrey' was not known, but that from time
immemorial the rector had paid in £4 a year, and that
a poor boy, son of a parishioner, had been duly apprenticed.
By his will proved 1781, Thomas Pennington of
Bristol bequeathed to the minister and churchwardens
of Wingfield £50, the interest of which was to be
applied to the relief of those poor people not receiving
weekly pay. This legacy, with an addition from some
other source, was in 1807 laid out in the purchase of
£100 Consols, which in 1858 was transferred to the
official Trustees of Charitable Funds. The dividends
were in c. 1903 distributed to the poor every second
year in sums varying from 2s. to 4s. 6d.
Cooper's charity, now lost, was reported in 1834 to
have originated in 1724, when Thomas Cooper left
£40 by will, the interest to be applied to the relief of
the poor. The legacy was vested in his son John
Cooper and £2 was distributed every year on St.
Thomas's day. Distribution ceased after 1783, when
John Cooper became financially embarrassed and sold
his property. (fn. 196)