CHAPTER ONE

 

The early history of Caldecote church

 

There is a notorious “legend” linking Caldecote with the Vikings rowing up Bourn Brook. Thus the Rev. J. W. Cawte (a former vicar of Caldecote) wrote in a letter to a member of Caldecote Parish Council (Maurice Wilkins) in 1961 (and first published in the Caldecote Newsletter of Nov./Dec. 1961) that: “Caldecote is said to be the oldest known Danish settlement, and the Danes came up the Bourn river in their long boats. This may seem strange to those who have only seen the present meagre trickle, but the Cement works that adorn the Kingston side of the brook are built on water-worn gravel. There was almost certainly a Saxon settlement, with a church of pagan temple on the site now occupied by St Michael’s Church. invaders frequently occupy the old religious sites for their own religious purposes.”

Is there any truth in this statement? Unfortunately Cawte did not provide any evidence to support his contention. Nor does the detailed historical account of Caldecote parish in the Victoria History of the Counties of England (A History of the County of Cambridge and the Isle of Ely, vol. v [Oxford University Press, 19731, pp. 16-25) discuss any pre-Conquest settlement in the parish. What it does say, however, is that the parish of Caldecote “may have originated as a hamlet of Bourn, upon which it was ecclesiastically dependent in the 12th century” (p. 16). This first chapter aims to disprove this statement by showing that the critical text (in the Barnwell Book, see below) on which it is based is probably anachronistic, i.e. a later insertion, and that there was a fully-fledged independent church (rather than a dependent chapel) at Caldecote old village from about A.D. 950.

 

The Barnwell Book

The earliest documentary evidence for a church in Caldecote occurs in the Liber memorandorum ecclesiae de Bernewelle ("The book of those things relating to the church of Barnwell which are worthy of mentions') which was begun in 1295 and completed in 1296 according to the standard edition of J. W. Clark (Cambridge, 1907). This book contains a historical account of Barnwell Priory, and the first reference to Caldecote in fact occurs in the account of the foundation of St Giles church, Cambridge prior to the foundation of Barnwell Priory itself. Thus the book states that in 1092 the Norman-born Pycot, who had been made sheriff of Cambidgeshire (and Lord of Bourn and Madingley) by William the Conqueror, together with his wife Hugolina, dedicated a church near the castle at Cambridge in honour of St Giles. They did this because Hugolina had been seriously ill and had vowed that if she recovered she would found a religious house in honour of St Giles. Pycot and his wife thus established six canons regular at St Giles and endowed the canons with the churches (ecclesias) of Bourn, Madingley, Ramplon, Comberton, Harston, Hinxton, Tadlow and Guilden Morden and with two-thirds of the demesnes of the knights holding of the barony of Bourn, Geoffrey of Huntingdon was made the first prior. Included in the church of Bourn is the chapel (capella) of the castle (of Bourn, where Pycot lived) and the chapel (capetia) of Caldecote. Caldecote is again mentioned in the granting of the tithes to the canons. The Latin charter can he translated as follows:[1]

 

Pycot, the sheriff, greets all his men and friends, French and English, both present and future. Know that I, on the advice of Lord Remigius, bishop of Lincoln and my the prayers of Hugolina my wife, have established canons regular at Cambridge at the church of St Giles in perpetuity to serve God and by their advice have given to those same canons and conceded and confirmed both by this my charter out of love for God and for the salvation of my soul the church of St Giles of Cambridge where their house has been founded, the church of Morden with the chapel of Reddetia (?), the church of Tadlow, the church of Bourn with the chapel of the castle and with the chapel of Caldecote, the church of Comberton, the church of Madingley, the church of Rampton, the churches of Histon and Hinxton, to have and hold freely, in peace, by right, completely, in the fields, in the lands, and meadows, together with both the tithes and all the other appurtenances in the villages and outside the villages as free, pure and everlasting also. 1 have also granted to the said canons on the advice of the aforesaid Remigius, bishop of Lincoln, two parts of the tithes from all the demesnes of all my soldiers in Cambridge, namely of Quy, Stow, Waterbeach, Milton, Impington, Histon, Girton, Oakington, Rampton, Cottenham, Lollworth, Trumpington, Haslingfield, Harlton, Eversden, Toft, Caldecote, Kingston, Wimpole, Croydon, Hatley, Papworth, Aldewincle(?), to have and to hold freely in peace and absolutely as everlasting and pure also for the everlasting sustenance of their house and those who serve God there. These are the witnesses, Humphrey the chaplain, etc.

 

The Bamwell Book states that after “a few years” both Pycot and Hugolina died. Their son, Robert, however, was soon accused of conspiracy against King Henry 1 and forfeited his lands etc. These were given by the king to Pain Peverel, a knight from the west country. In 1112 the latter decided to move the canons from St Giles to Bamwell (between the present-day Newmarket Road and the river) in Cambridge where the king gave him a site of some 13 acres. He did however confirm all Pycot's grants to the canons. This charter is in virtually the same language as Pycot's, beginning:

 

Pain (Paganus) Peverel greets all his men and friends, French and English, both present and future. Know that 1 have given, conceded and confirmed by this my charter to my canons from Cambridge out of love for God and for the salvation of my soul all the churches (ecclesias) and all the tithes (decimas) in Cambridgeshire which Pycot the sheriff gave, conceded and confirmed by his charter to the same canons.

 

The same list of churches (including “Bourn with the chapel of the castle and with the chapel of Caldecote”) is then recited. This is followed by the list of the tithes from the demesne lands of Landbeach, Waterbeach, Quy, Stowe, Mlion, Impington, Histon, Girton, Oakington, Rampton, Cottenham, Loilworth, Trumpington, Haslingfield, Harlton, Eversden, Toft, Caldecote, Kingston, Wimpole, Croydon, Haticy, Papworth and Aldewinckle. (Landbeach has been added to Pycot's list.) In addition Pain Pcverel's charter includes a grant to the canons (of St Giles) of 13 acres at Barnwell “which King Henry gave us”. Finally the charter has the following paragraph:

 

I have also conceded to them, for free aims, one hide of land from my demesne in Bourn and half a hide of land in Bourn which Prebertus the priest held and one virgate of land which Radulfus of Morden held.

 

The Barnwell Book then records that all documents were handed to the canons to be preserved by them.

The bishop of Lincoln, Remigius, was the next to confirm Pycot's charter -- with the wording of the phrase “church of Bourn with the chapel of the castle and chapel of Caldecote” identical to Pycot's charter). Caldecote is also (as before) included in the list of the tithes. All the charters were then (according to the Barnwell Book) confirmed by Hervey, bishop of Ely (at the instigation of Pain Peverel) and Nigel, a later bishop of Ely, also confirmed all previous grants to the canons, as did Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury.

When Pain Peverel died in 1121 he was buried at Barnwell Priory. William Peverel of Shropshire succeeded to the barony of Bourn and to the patronage of the Priory. When he in turn died on the Second Crusade (in 1148) the Peverel fief was partitioned among his sisters, with Bourn and the patronage of Bamwell Priory falling to Matilda Peverel, wife of Hugh of Dover. Matilda, however, died without issue in 1 1 85 and the honour of Bourn and the patronage passed to her nephew Geoffrey Pecche, lord of Great Thurlow, Sugolk and Kingston, Cambs. In 1190 Geoffrey Pecche was succeeded by his brother Gilbert Pecche.

It was under the patronage, therefore, of Gilbert Pecche that the next reference to Caldecote occurs, and this time there is a positive reference to a church rather than a chapel. Thus we are told (in the Barnwell Book, p. 66) that:

 

At his [sc. Prior Robert's] instigation, William, bishop of Ely, a man of inestimable and incomparable goodness and probity, granted for the use of the brother, the churches (ecclesias) of Waterbeach, Caldecote and St Oiles in Cambridge, churches which had long since been negligently alienated or taken away unjustly.[2]

 

William Longchamp was bishop of Ely between 1 189 and 1 196 and confirmation of this can be found in the Ely Diocesan Records (Gibbons, p. 10 A6, p. 3}: “The appropriation of Lord Eustacius, bishop of Ely, of the churches of Waterbeach and Caldecote”. This is dated in the Diocesan Records as between 1198 and 1215, slightly later than the Bamwell dating.

 

 

Commentary on the Barnwell Book

How reliable is this testimony in the Barnwell Book ? In the first place the picture it paints of a pious and devout Pycot is rather different from that given in the Liber Eliensis (written in the twelfth century), for in the edition by E. Blake (London, 1963), 11, ch. 131 there is a paragraph headed “Concerning Picotus the sheriff who caused many troubles for this church”. Pycot is said to have replied when criticized for his seizure of church lands and for his lack of respect due to a saint "Who is that AEthelthryth whom you talk about -- that I have usurped her lands ? I do not know her and I shall not release her lands." This is far from the pious Norman conqueror who is depicted in the Barnwell Book and indeed the picture of a sheriff of Cambridge terrorising Church officials and usurping land is much more believable.

Of more immediate significance to Caldecote, however, how reliable is the phrase in the Bamwell Book “negligently alienated or taken away unjustly”? In the first place, Caldecote is not linked with Boum in the phrase, but with Waterbeach. As we have seen the Bamwell Book claims that Pain Peverel gave half a hide of the land which the priest Prebertus held in Boum to the canons. Presumably therefore the canons had control over the chapel/church at Boum throughout the period 1092 to 1190, but at some point during this time the church at Caldecote was “taken away” from Bamwell Priory's control. Given the evident zeal with which charters were confirmed and re-stated such “negligence” seems inconceivable. One solution to the problem may be that the church/chapel at Caldecote had never in fact previously belonged to the Priory before 1190. This would mean that Caldecote was inserted anachronistically into Pycot's 1092 gift.

Support for such an argument comes from a study of the Domesday Survey (1086) itself. Pycot is named as holder of lands in numerous “vills” in Cambridgeshire, but not in Caldecote. The demesne -- or manor -- land of Caldecote is said to be held by Count Alan, duke of Britanny, with other land in Caldecote held by Harduin de Scalers (one of Pycot's aristocratic Norman peers in Cambridgeshire, based between Caxton and Eltisley at a place called Caxton Moats) and David de Argentomago. If Pycot owned the chapel in Caldecote (and the tithes from that chapel) in 1092, why is he not mentioned as a landowner in Caldecote in the Domesday Survey of 1086, six years earlier ? Pycot is certainly stated in the Survey to hold two manors at Bourn, where we also read:

 

Of the land of this manor [sc. in Boum] a thane, in the time of King Fdward, held three hides under King Edward. And two priests (they could not separate from the church (ecclesiam)) vassals of this thane, had one hide.

 

In 1086, therefore, there was a church (ecclesiam denotes a church, not a chapel) at Boum, and it seems logical to deduce that the half hide which Prebertus the priest held in the time of Pain Peverel was half of this one hide. It is, however, illogical to believe that six years later (in 1092) this church could have been called a “chapel of the castle”, unless there were in fact two churches at Bourn (a chapel of the castle and another, unidentified church elsewhere). It is much more likely that Boum had a single, fully fledged ecclesia in both 1086 and 1092 and that the reference in the Bamwell Book is anachronistic.

What reason, however, would there have been for the canons at Bamwell Priory in 1092 to have added a phrase about a chapel at Caldecote to the charter given by Pycot (and the later confirmations of the charters) ? Quite simply by giving the church at Caldecote a provenance connecting it with the Priory they could then in 1190 usurp the church (and its tithes) as their own. They could claim that Pycot had included Caldecote in the original charter and that the church and its tithes) were then “negligently alienated and unjustly taken away”. This (they could conveniently add) happened long before 1190.

 

Date of church at Caldecote

Given the existence of Caldecote as a separate vill (with its own boundaries) in the Domesday Survey of 1086, therefore, it seems logical to deduce that it had a separate church (rather than a chapel) functioning in the village prior to the Conquest, especially since the original boundaries of a vill were defined as units of church administration.  Thus Maurice Beresford in History on the Ground (revised edition, London: Methuen [1971], pp. 36ff.) argues that boundaries marked out villages as units of church administration and taxation as well as denoting “the limit of a parish priest's responsibility and the limit of the land from which payment of tithes was due”. The 1092 charter of Pycot admits that Caldecote does have tithes of its own and taking this and the references to Caldecote as a separate “vill”, in the 1086 Domesday Survey, it would appear logical to deduce that Caldecote had its own separate church.

How long is it likely that a church had existed at Caldecote ? Augustine first came on his missionary expedition from Rome to Britain and established the church at Canterbury in 596/7 (at the invitation of the Jutish King Ethelbert). Little progress was made at conversion in East Anglia, however, until in the 650s several Benedictine monasteries were established in the area (e.g. at East Dereharn, Peterborough, Caistor, Staniford and Thorney). Even when Christianity had become reasonably popular, there were probably very few churches in rural regions (and of course Cambridge itself was described by Bede c. 730 as delapidated). Given that the Danish incursions into East Anglia began c. 800 it seems unlikely that there would have been more than a rudimentary Christian presence at Caldecote before 800. Possibly there might have been a free-standing cross but there is no evidence one way or the other. At all events if there was a cross or even a church in Caldecote in the seventh century it would almost certainly have been stripped bare or razed to the ground by the invading Danes. For the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states that the Danes stayed in the vicinity of Cambridge for almost a whole year in 874/5. These armies (of perhaps some 2000 professional soldiers) were probably followed by Danish settlers (how many of them is uncertain), but certainly Scandinavian influence can be seen in the Bourn Brook valley in the places of Caxton, Toft and Bourn itself. At all events after the initial destruction and pillaging of church property the Danes came to tolerate Christianity more and more. Thus at some time during the 900s St Bene'ts church, Cambridge was (re)built in stone -- an indication perhaps of the growing power of the church. It is probable therefore that the church at Caldecote dates from the mid tenth century (perhaps as early as 930). It is unlikely that the church was anything more than a rudimentary wooden structure (without a tower) with a thatched roof. The church, moreover, was almost certainly first built by the owner of Manor Farm, with the part of the tithes which the church could command, going to this owner. There are numerous examples of local dignitaries erecting churches for their own (financial) purposes in the period from 930 to 1066. Indeed there are several cases in the Domesday Survey itself (e.g. Domesday Book, ed. A. Faricy & H. Ellis [London, 1783--1816], i.280: “Of Stori, Waiter de Aincurt's predecessor, it is said that anyone without anyone's leave he could make for himself a church on his own land and in his own soc and could assign his own tithes where he wished”).

A legal note in 1293 shows how owners of manors had the right to appoint priests of their choosing to “chapels” attendant to their manors:

 

Nota Ye yl y a chapele apendant a mere Esglice, c ily a chapele severale dunt la voweson apent a le maner...

 

From this it appears that there is one kind of chapel appendant to the Mother Church and another kind of several chapel the advowson of which is appendant to a  manor ... (Year Books of the Reign of King Edward the First, Years AXI and XXII, edited and translated by Alfted J. Horwood [London, 18731, pp. 282-3).

 

Site of church

The site of the church at Caldecote is just north of the Manor Farm house and outbuildings. As such one can deduce that it originally served the owner of the manor or demesne in pre-Conquest times. The manor house of many villages in the area (e.g. Caxton and Trumpington) is situated near the parish church not because the house was placed near the church but vice versa, with the church serving the manor (at least in pre-Conquest times). The need for high ground (favoured by the Normans) was not a factor in the siting of the church in the pre-Conquest era.

Of rather more speculative interest is the fact that the church lies across the line of the ancient track leading from Red Cross (south of Addenbrooke's Hospital roundabout in Cambridge), through Grantchester, Barton, Comberton, Toft, Caldecote, Bourn, Caxton and on to Eltisley. There are definite signs that the Romans used at least part of this track (it is probably even older than Roman times) and that the churches of all the aforementioned villages lie across or near its line. It is possible therefore that there were shrines or similar pagan objects of worship placed at intervals along this track -- shrines which later became churches. It is also possible, however, that the manor houses of the villages were positioned on this track and that their churches were sited alongside the track simply because they were close to the houses (and for no other reason).


[1] Picotus vicemites omnibus hominibus suis et amicis francis et angles tam praesentibus quam futuris salutem.

Sciatis me consilio domini Remigij Lincolniensis Episcopi et precibus Hugoline vxoris mee constituisse canonicos regulares apud Cantabrigiam et ecclesiam Sancti Egidij inpertetuum deo serquituros et eorum consilio dedisse eisdem canoniicis et concessisse et hac mea carta confirmasse pro amore dei et pro salute anime mee Ecclesiam sancti Egidij de Cantabrigia, ubi doimus eorum fundata est, cclesiam de Mordone cum Capella de Redderia, Ecclesiam de Thadelaus, Ecclesiam de Brune cum Capella Castelli et cum Capella de Caldecote, Ecclesiam de Cumbertone, Ecclesiam de Maddinglele, Ecclesiam de Ramptone, Ecclesias de Harlestone et de Henxtone, habendas et tenendas libere, quiete, honorifice, integer, in pratis. Omnibus alijs pertinencijs in uillis et extra uillas in liberam et puram et perpetuam elemosinam.

Concessi similiter iam dictis canonicis consilio predicti Remigij Lincolniensis   Episcopi duas partes decimarum de onmibus dominiis omnium militum meorum in Cantebrigesira; scilicet de Queya, de Stowe, de Waterbeche, de Middeltone, de Impetone, de Histone, de Grettone, de Hokitone, de Ramtone, de Cottham, de Lollesworthe, de Trumpitone, de Haselingfeld, de Harletone, de Eueresdone, de Tofte, de Caldecote, de Kingestone, de Wynepola,, de Crawedene, de Halteleya, et integre in perpetuam et puram elemosinam, ad domus sue et illic deo seruiencium perpetuam sustentacionem. Hij sunt testes. Humfridus Capellanus, etc.

 

 

[2] Eo quoque instante et instanter pulsanter, uir inestimabilis et incomparabilis bonitatis et probitatis Willelmus Elyensis Episcopus ecclesias de Beche, de Caldecote [et] Sancti Egiidij de Cantabrigia, iam pridem negligenter alienates, siue iniuste ablates, usibus fratrum concessit; concessas scripto  communiuit.