Main Street, Newthorpe (Photo: A Nicholson, 2004).
Main Street, Newthorpe (Photo: A Nicholson, 2004).

In Domesday, "Neutorp." The meaning of this name obviously is "The New Village." We are therefrom entitled to believe that this settlement was formed later than either Greasley, Watnall, Kimberley, Brinsley, or Hemshel. The village was probably begun in a clearing made for it in the wood ,and as the name indicates, it will have been of Danish origin. It will thus have existed before the Confessor’s reign, and was probably founded in Fulwood, which as a place name is now altogether lost, so far at least as our parish and neighbourhood are concerned. The name of the earliest known chief landowner of this hamlet is also of Danish origin, who had also property in Watnall and an estate at Kimberley, with a "Berew" there. From the in early times connected properties of Newthorpe and Kimberley, one is inclined to conclude that the New Village of Neuthorpe was a Danish enterprise from Kimberley. Before the conquest Grunchel (also Grimshel) had, as the Domesday book informs us, some manors here, one of which was rated to the geld for 5½ bovats, the land being half a carucate only, which explains that the rest of this estate was waste in the Confessor’s time. All this was after the conquest given to Peverel as of his fee. The other manor of Grunshel’s was also 5 bovats to the geld, and had the Berew” already mentioned in Kimberley. At Kimberley, as in that township shewn, was a family descended from probably one of Peverel’s men, who had adopted the name of the place, and they had an estate at Newthorpe, which later on, through Sir John de Monte, the at that time Rector of Greasley, finally passed to the Priory of Beauvale; and it is not likely that it was one of the members of the de Kimmerley family who had assumed the name of Newthorpe. The de Newthorpe’s however do not seem to have been a family of much importance, and we meet with little about them except in connection with Fuiwood. May it not therefore, have been this branch of the de Kimmerley family which were the possessors of Fulwood in which the new settlement had been made before the conquest.

All the land which had been Grunchel’s (or Grinshel’s, as it stands in Domesday), and which had become Peverel’s fee, was by the latter given to his new founded Monastery of Lenton, as recorded there, to which other benefactions from Newthorpe were added as follows:

Beatrix de Whatton (see Thoroton), widow of Robert de Whatten (Lord of Whatten in the Vale) who had come over with the Conqueror (and was a descendant from Gaultier de Tirel, seigneur de Poix in Picardy, as shewn in Lenton), gave to that Priory 2 bovats in Newthorpe, from which she reserved 2 shillings per annum for herself. She had a daughter named Adeline, who was married to William de Heriz, who as interested parties in Beatrix’s gift to Lenton confirmed the same; but the time when this confirmation was made by them is not recorded in Lenton, nor in Thoroton or Throsby.

About 1234, in which Walter Grey, Archbishop of York issued (as the Borough Registers shew) a set of orders for the hospital of St. John the Baptist in Nottingham, Robert, son of Robert de Kimmerly and Roger Prior of Lenton agreed that a division should be made between the woods of the Prior and the woods of Robert de Newthorpe. Robert de Vavaseur of Chyppely (mentioned by us from the Torre Manuscripts in Hemshel), was to fence the Prior’s wood, which lay next to a “holm” in Newthorpe, which the Prior had given him and his heirs as a compensation for damages in connection with the Prior’s mill, or else the Prior would fence it close.

In the same 22nd year of Edward I., circa 1234, John, the son of Thomas Leech, medicus of Newthorpe, who during his minority had been a ward of the Prior of Lenton, released to William, the then Prior, all actions and demands in respect of the time of his wardship.

In 1316, the Prior of Lenton, pursuant to writs tested at Clifton on March the 5th, was (among other properties) certified to be Joint Lord of Newthorpe.

According to the Register of Felley Priory, as stated in Lenton, it appears that part of an open (i.e. unenclosed) hay, or wood, called Fulwood, was bestowed on the Monks of Lenton at an early period by Robert, son of John de Newthorpe.

Henry Grey, the youngest son of Sir Henry de Grey, Lord of Codnor, and dame Isoldaf his wife (for some certain reason), released to the Prior and Convent of Lenton all claims and right of common pasture in Fuiwood, either belonging to the Castle of Codnor, or to the town of Eastwood, or to any of his villains.

Again, in 1286, Ranulf Paskayle, of Eastwood, for himself and his heirs, freeholders and villains, released to the same Prior all claims and right of common pasture in the same wood; and about the same time William Paskayle, of Eastwood, likewise released his right of commons in Fulwood to the same Monastery; as did also William, the son of Godfrey de Eastwait, Thomas, son of William de la Rode, and others, upon which the Prior of Lenton enclosed Fulwood, and appropriated it to the exclusive use of his monastery.

We have purposely been particular to throw all the light we could gather on the now completely lost Fulwood, to shew that it bordered on Shipley and Eastwood, and probably reached close to Kimberley; and we shall now see that the wood was in Newthorpe.

When the Prior of Lenton had enclosed the wood, the Rector of Eastwood, whose name was Adam de Markham, considered that his right and interest had been damaged.

He instituted in 1290 a suit against the Prior and Monks of Lenton, alleging that they had unjustly deprived him of his right of common in about 150 acres of pasture in Fulwood, but the Prior pleaded that Fulwood was an extra parochial place, and was neither Burgh, Town, nor Hamlet, and the Rector of Eastwood lost his case. Adam de Markham, however, was not satisfied with the decision, and the case was tried a second time (abbrevatio placitorum, p. 224), when the Prior pleaded that Fulwood was in Newthorpe, and this having been proved to the satisfaction of the jury, the Rector of Eastwood was again defeated.