John Throsby's sketch of Kimberley chapel.

We must now return to the Rector of Greasley, whom we left in the possession of the Manor of Kimberley and the advowson of the Church there, together with all the land which John de Kynmarley had at Newthorpe, &c. That transfer was made to him in 1336. Nicholas, as we have seen, went over the seas 8 years before then for 3 years, and will therefore have returned some 5 years before de Monte secured Kimberley. Three years afterwards, in the 12th year of Edward III., we find the Rector of Greasley conveying all that he had secured from John de Kynmarlie to Nicholas de Canteloupe, which Deed was confirmed by Richard del Hall, of Little Hallam, who probably was a prospective heir of de Monte’s, else his confirmation of the conveyance would have been of little use, if of any. We have to pass over 17 years more, and then in the 29th year of Edward III. Nicholas de Canteloupe (as the Torre Manuscripts inform us) passed the same property, except the Church, to Robert Barhak (or Barnack) and William de Braydiston (a cleric), who the same year settled it on Hugh de Cressy of Selleston for life, and afterwards on the Prior and Convent of Bevall. The Borough Records of Nottingham throw a little side light on the type of the religion of the Barnack family: One Nicholas Barnack and Margery his wife being in 1397, called upon to answer for themselves in an action brought against them by Richard de Watenow (a clerk), who by his attorney John Breadsall, claimed to recover from them the sum of six shillings and eightpence, &c., for an indulgence obtained for them at Rome by Master Thomas de Kirkby six years before, in 1391. The action failed, but it shews nevertheless, what had taken place.

Manor Farm, Kimberley (Photo: A Nicholson, 2004).
Manor Farm lies a short distance from the site of the demolished Kimberley Chapel (Photo: A Nicholson, 2004).

Hugh de Cressy (and Cecilia his wife), on whom Braydiston had settled the above part of the Kimberley property for life, did not wait more than four years, when in the 33rd year of Edward III., they released the possession and lands at Newthorpe to the Prior and Convent of Beauvale for £7 10s. per annum during Hugh de Cressy’s life, and £4 l0s. per annum during Cecilia’s life, if she overlived him, to begin after his death, for which, in case of non-payment they reserved to themselves the right to distrain in the Priory lands in Selleston, Watnow, Gryseley, and the Moorhouses. We must observe here that the de Kymberley’s interest in Newthorpe must, inter alia, have been in respect of Fulwood, as in the history of that hamlet will appear, and it is certain that the family had also landed interest in Watnow Chaworth, for of their manor there we shall find that Joan, the relict of Stephen de Kinmarlie, held two parts in dower, which, during her husband’s lifetime will have been held by him, by what was called the courtesy of England, i.e., in the right of his wife.

The Church of Kimberley, which as already shewn had been conveyed to Nicolas de Canteloupe was in 1339 settled by him on his Priory of Beauvale, and on the 24th September, 1448 was united to that of Greasley, and made subject to it as the Mother Church, so as all and singular the Parishioners of Kinmerley from thenceforth do repair to the Church of Griseley for sacraments, sacramontals and burials, &c., &c.

Throsby, Vol 2, p. 172, gives a drawing of some ruins which he believed to have been the remains of a chapel, which years ago some persons had told us, that from what they thought it might have been a chapel of ease belonging to Greasley; but we believe that the remains really were the ruins of the once small Parish Church of Kimberley which needed not to have been of larger proportions, since as Thoroton writes, there were as late as in the 7th year of Henry VI. but 10 householders in that Parish. Throsby speaking of Kimberley, and the said ruins writes: “The ancient Chapel of Kimberley has not much relation to the Forest. It stands without the boundaries, but was taken on an excursion to the Forest in 1792. It has but little about it toarrest attention, and it is not so much as mentioned in Thoroton’s history of the village, which by his account was but a small place about two centuries ago, now (that is in Throsby’s time) it is of considerable magnitude. It is in the Parish of Greasley. The village is one of the most romantic I have seen in these parts. Its site is extraordinarily diversified. Some of the dwellings perch upon the eminence, others sit snugly on the side, and some on the base; comparing little things with great, the travelling of an insect over a succession of anthills, is like that of a man over the lanes and passages through the village.” What would Throsby now say, when much of what seemed to him so romantic has made room for a populous and thriving township of tough practical every day work and business, with a Church and several other places of worship of considerable proportions in it, together with several Schools, and even a Branch Bank in the Township. The Chapel ruins, of which Throsby gave a drawing, betoken a much earlier construction than a chapel of a later date might be expected to exhibit. They have evident indications of a Norman character about them even though in paucity of design, and it can be easily noticed from the sketch which we here reproduce, that the entrance porch had at some time been altered, together with a window over it, an arch of which can still be seen though blocked or built up.

Another part of the Kimberley property which came to Nicolas de Canteloupe from De Monte, went away with Greasley from the Canteloupe family by succession to the La Zouches, descending (as an inquisition taken in Yorkshire on the 26th of February of the 14th year of Richard II. shews) to William, son of William La Zouche Chr., who, long before his death, settled the Castle of Greasley on William, Lord Ross, of Hamlock Chr., and others about the third year of Henry V. But the La Zouches continued to hold the property until it was forfeited by William Lord Zouche who suffered attainder, upon which on the 7th March in the first year of Henry VII. it was granted to Sir John Savage, junior. Respecting this grant we have a full explanation given us from an inquisition taken at Nottingham on the 9th of May, of the 19th year of Henry VIII., 1527. (See W. P. W. Phillimores, Exchequer copy: Excheator’s Inq. p. m. file 742, No. 3.) The Ecscheator was John Hercy, (after the death of Sir John Savage, Senior, Knight.), and the jury consisted of . . . . Blackenall, gentleman, Thomas Revell, gentleman, Richard Pyerpoints, gentleman, John Henryson, gentleman, Edward Farneworth, yeoman, William Gadde, yeoman, Robert Kylburn, yeoman, Richard Scott, yeoman, and William Sewall, yeoman, who say that:

“Sir John Savage, senior, Knight, did not die seized of any manors, lands or tenements in the County, in demesne or reversion because they (the Jurors) say that King Henry VII. was seized in his demesne as of fee, by reason of an act of forfeiture in his Parliament at Wesminster on 7th Nov. first Henry VII. (1485), of the Castle, manors, and Lordships of Greasley, Kymberley, Granby and Sutton, and so seized by his letters patent, dated 7th March, 1st Henry VII. (1485-6), granted the said Castle, manors and Lordships to John Savage, father of the said Sir John, by the name of John Savage, junior, which late were of Sir John Zouche, Knight. &c., &c., &c., &c.” The jury’s testimony in this case is a long one, which beyond the foregoing gives an account of the John Savages, senior and junior, having together been concerned in the murther of John Pouncefote for which they had to pay 1000 marks in charity for the latter’s soul, and 200 marks yearly to the King, &c., &c. &c. These conditions must have been complied with, otherwise the properties enumerated in this inquisition would not have remained at the disposal of the Savage family, who sold the same to Sir John Manners, the ancestors of the Dukes of Rutland.

A last remaining part of Kymberley, &c., which has been shown to have come to Beauvale Priory, through the de Cressy’s, who had it for life from Robert Barnack and William de Braydiston, to whom it had been passed by Nicolas de Canteloupe, was at the dissolution of the Monasteries by Henry VIII. granted to Sir William Hussy, as will appear in Newthorpe and Greasley.