By David Peter

The cross sands traffic, from Kent’s Bank on the west side of the Kent estuary to Hest Bank on the east, is well authenticated, and for hundreds of years this ‘road’ was followed by travellers on foot, on horseback, or in carts, carriages, and coaches between Lancaster and the north west of England. They preferred the risks attached to this eight mile crossing of the sands to the thirty mile, and often quite hazardous, alternative route via Kendal. The cross Bay ‘road’ was widely used until the opening of the UIverston-Lancaster railway, which bridged the river Kent at Arnside in 1857. Throughout this period the shorter crossing from Kent’s Bank to Silverdale was used by local traffic and by fishermen, but it also served as an escape route when the longer sands journey became impossible to use, due to adverse tidal or weather conditions. On such occasions landfalls would be made at Silverdale, either at Cow’s Mouth or at the Shore, and refreshment and shelter would be available at the Britannia Hotel (now the Silverdale Hotel).

The Britannia Hotel was built in 1826 to replace an earlier hostelry, the Blue Anchor (sited nearby, but on the opposite side of the road), which was established in 1744. The origin of the name ‘Cow’s Mouth’ is somewhat obscure. It represents a significant break in the line of low cliffs which form the western edge of the Silverdale peninsula. As such it would obviously be utilised by travellers, Including Drovers and their cattle, who had forded the river Kent The mai route for cattle droving (which flourished from approximately 1650 to 1850) was from farms in Northern Ireland, by boat to ports in South West Scotland. Here the Irish cattle linked up with the Scottish herds of black cattle, to be driven southwards to pastures and ultimately to markets in England.

Irish cattle were also landed at ports on the Cumberland coast, even as far south as Roa Island (near present day Barrow). They were destined for markets in Lancashire such as Lancaster, Garstang, Preston, Wigan, etc., after crossing the Leven and Kent sands. They provided food for the rapidly developing industrial communities in South East Lancashire. No doubt many of the herds would make the shorter crossing of the Kent estuary to Silverdale.

Could it be that the break in the line of cliffs here some slight resemblance to a cow’s mouth? Could it be that the pasture nearby, called Cow Close, was the place where the cattle were accommodated overnight to continue their journey the next day? A number of other facts lend support to this theory. Near to Cow’s Mouth is one of the oldest houses in the area, known as Waithman’s House. It once belonged to a well-known Quaker business man and bailor of that name, who was concerned with flax growing and linen manufacture in the Yealand and Holme districts. It is more than probable that his financial resources were placed at the disposal of the Drovers, from his base at Silverdale.

Published in Mourholme Magazine Issue 1 Autumn 1982

By Nancy Thomas

Wills and Inventories¹ are a fascinating source of material for local historians, and challenging as well, especially to those of us who may be just starting actually to ‘do’ local history. After we have struggled through the difficulties of early handwriting and the subtle blurrings wrought by time and the Xerox machine, it would seem only fair that the Inventories should then yield up to us a clear picture of how our predecessors in Warton lived.

Far from doing that, however,- they set us still other tasks: to discover what the words we have extracted actually meant when they were written and to try to piece together from the details given,as well as from those not given, the ’picture of life’ we are looking for. There are many ways Wills and Inventories may be used by local historians, and doubtless the pages of The Mourholme Magazine will carry articles inspired and informed by them for many issues to come. In this article, however, I propose to describe some of the kitchen or cooking equipment listed in the Inventories for the Warton area from about 1580 to 1650. Almost every Inventory lists some articles that have to do with cooking. One of the short cuts used by the ’praysers’ who made the Inventories was to list ‘All the Iren stuffe in the howse’. This, of course, is not very helpful to us. But some Inventories name a number of items before lumping the rest under ‘other Iren geere’, and others give very detailed lists. Thus, although it is impossible to say precisely what every house contained, we can get a good idea of the iron hardware and utensils in use in Warton parish at the time.

We know from studies of the vernacular architecture² of the area that the fire would probably have been an open fire on a floor-level hearth at one end of the main room, the room referred to in several of our Wills as the ‘fire- house’. From our Inventories we can be quite sure that the chief fuel for the fire was turves or peats, cut with turf spades from the local mosses. Occasional references to fire-wood establish it as a supplementary fuel.

Among the iron gear frequently identified is a racken- crook. The term combines the words ‘ racken’, a chain originally, and ‘crook’, a hook, end describes a device used to suspend cooking utensils over the fire. Racken- crooks in use in Lakeland farmhouses in the 19th century³ were fairly complex arrangements of two iron bars held together in such a way that one could be moved up or down along the length of the other, the moveable bar having a hook at the lower end. The racken-crooks of our Inventories may have been simpler devices, but similar in allowing the height of the utensil to be adjusted. Examples from 19th century Lakeland were generally suspended from cranes, iron bars or brackets hinged to the wall so that they could swing across the fire. Cranes do not appear in our Inventories, however, so the racken-crooks of our houses probably were hung from the more ancient ‘rannel-balk’ or ‘randle-tree’. This was an iron bar or wooden beam laid across beams fixed under the chimney hood⁴. The racken- crook could be moved along the bar and the bar along the beams, allowing the cook an added degree of temperature control for her boiling pot. Neither rannel-balk nor randle-tree appears in our inventories because they would have been considered part of the fabric of the house rather than ‘goods and chattels’.

The piece of iron equipment most commonly listed is the ‘brandreth’. The word is derived from a Scandinavian word which described a grate on three legs, a kind of portable fire. In our period it was a trivet used to support utensils over or beside the fire. Examples from Lakeland farmhouses and elsewhere have round tops with three metal prongs forming the grid and stand from 8″ to 15” high⁵. ‘Brandreth’ is a word used in other contexts in the Lake District. In Cumbrian dialect ‘brandreth steann’ means a boundary stone at the meeting of three townships or parishes⁶. Brandreth, one of the Western fells, is divided into thirds by three different watersheds, and a feature on High Seat is called Threefooted Brandreth. It seems an inescapable conclusion that the little trivet with its top resembling a pie cut into three pieces was a familiar fixture of Lakeland hearths from very early times.

A third cooking device frequently listed is a ‘spit’. The spit is an easy enough term for us today, but what the Warton appraisers meant by it is something of a puzzle. Roasting with a spit requires a rather complex apparatus: the skewer or spit rod to pierce and hold the meat and some sort of hardware to support the ends of the rod so that the meat can be held over the fire and rotated. Inventories from other parts of the country clearly identify the parts of the spit: ’spit’ or ’broache’ for the skewer and ‘cobiron’ or ‘andiron’ for the supporting parts⁷.

Cobirons were iron bars fitted with rows of hooks and were simply leaned from the front of the hearth to the back wall at a suitable angle. Andirons were similar to modern andirons but for spit use were fitted with hooks along the vertical member. The 19th century Troutbeck spit, illustrated by Dr. Rollinson, was supported at each end by what might be described as cobirons hinged in the middle to allow them to take the shape of an inverted ‘V’.

Our Inventories, however, tell us tantalisingly little about the design of the Warton spit. Andirons do appear, but infrequently, always in the singular, and never in conjunction with a spit. They were presumably used simply to support logs or to keep them from rolling away from the fire. Of the 25 or so Inventories that include a spit, only one records any support hardware specifically. Richard Hadwen’s Inventory (Carnforth, 1604) lists a spit with racks. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, racks were ’sets of bars of iron or wood’, and the illustrating quotation (1617) describes a rack as made of iron with ‘a long ranke of barres on it’. In other words, racks must have been very like cobirons. It seems strange, however, that iron supports of the complexity of those described, if they were in general use, would have been relegated so regularly to the ‘other Iron gear’ department. The answer may be simply that the term ’spit’ was used to cover the whole complicated apparatus. Or it may be that a simpler and cruder mechanism was used in our area, end that we have yet to identify it.

The cooking utensils listed include cauldrons, kettles cressets, frying pans, girdles, skillets, tongs, pots, and pans. Cauldrons and kettles were large, deep, wide mouthed vessels with half hoop handles or bails by which they could be suspended from the rackencrook. Frying pans also had bail handles but were wide, low-sided vessels.

Regularly listed with the frying pan is the cresset, an iron vessel used to hold grease or fat. The rendered fat or tallow collected in the cresset, in addition to any culinary uses, was the ingredient that rushes were dipped into to produce the rushlights that provided domestic lighting.

A girdle was a round, flat, iron plate, with either a bail or two dog-ear handles, used for open-fire baking. It is almost always coupled with the brandreth in the Inventories, and the two together occur not only more frequently than any other item but also where no other cooking equipment is listed. A reasonable inference seems to be that the girdle was customarily used on the brandreth, not suspended, and that the combination formed the basic minimum of equipment required for the kitchen hearth. Girdle and brandreth, in fact, would have been the means of producing that staple of Lakeland and N. Lancashire diet, the oatcake – the traditional bread of the region.

Gridiron and brandiron are occasionally listed, but the way they occur suggests that ‘gridiron’ was used to mean ‘girdle’ and ‘brandiron’ to moan ’brandreth’.

Of the remaining iron utensils, skillet appears infrequently. It was something like a modern saucepan but with a very long handle and three short legs and was designed to sit in the embers of the fire. Tongs then were probably like tongs today.

Last of all come pots and pans. They are such a large and interesting subject in themselves, however, that they will have to have an article on their own.

Notes

1. Inventories were required for probate. Shortly after a person’s death, ’four honest men’, usually neighbours, were appointed by the Court to make a list of all the deceased’s ‘goods and chattels’, together with an appraisal of the market value of each item or group of items. Words appearing in the Inventories have been modernised. ↩︎
2. R.W. Bronskill. Vernacular Architecture of the Lake Counties (1978), pp. 50-53. ↩︎
3. W. Rollinson, Life and Tradition in the Lake District (1981), fig. 8, p. 33. See Ch. 2, ’Hearth and Home – Some Farmhouse Equipment’, for descriptions and illustrations of other implements mentioned in this article. ↩︎
4. J. Wright (ed.), The English Dialect Dictionary (1961). ↩︎
5. Esp. the Museum of English Rural Life, Reading University. ↩︎
6. W. Dickinson, A Glossary of the Dialect of Cumberland (1899). ↩︎
7. B. Trinder and J. Cox (eds.), Yeoman and Colliers in Telford (1980), Salop; J. Moore (ed.), The Goods and Chattels of our Forefathers (1976), Gloucs ; F.W. Steer, Farm and Cottage Inventories of Mid-Essex 1635-1749 (195O); J. Woodall, From Hroca to Anne (1974), Ch. 17, Warks. ↩︎

Published in Mourholme Magazine Issue 1 Autumn 1982.

By Margaret Clarke

England was already an old country in 1066 when Duke William of Normandy invaded these shores. A thousand years earlier the Romans had conquered what was then a prosperous, well settled country. Evidence of settlement in many periods throughout the last five thousand years has been found in our local villages. Axe heads, flint tools, ‘a lozenge shaped arrow head, beautifully worked on both faces and fragments of pottery, all from the Neolithic period have been found in Carnforth. Warton, on the Crag, in Silverdale and the Yealands.¹

The tumulus on Summer House Hill in Yealand Conyers erected sometime in the Bronze Age is evidence of strong political administration and substantial numbers of people. Burial urns probably dating from the same period were found in the Crag Foot area in 1785 by John Jenkinson of Yealand when he was bringing new land into cultivation. Thirteen years later he was still locating archaeological evidence. Romaine Hervey recorded in his diary on 2 July 1798, ’John Jenkinson and I dug up some Roman bones on Warton Crag, they expected me to find an urn but were disappointed². Perhaps he was mistaken in thinking they were Roman.

The Iron Age is perhaps best known for the large number of hill forts, although they range in date from the late Bronze Age to the Roman conquest, and in some areas they appear to have been occupied throughout the Roman period and into the Dark Ages. The fort on Warton Crag is a fine example of an Iron Age Hill Fort ’in a perfect position on a prominent limestone hill, naturally defended on three sides by rock terraces and overlooking the sea to the west…a long slope on the north defensively reinforced by three curving but parallel stone wall ramparts’³. A hill fort can be compared to a medieval castle; both were important focal points, serving a military and an administrative purpose and acting as a refuge in times of need. ’In the labour demands and agricultural surpluses implied by hill fort construction we glimpse something of the interactions between the component parts of a complex system of settlement.⁴’

Although the first written record of our villages appears in Domesday Book in 1066, their names tell us a little about their earlier history, all our village names are Old English or Anglian, hut we have no means of knowing whether older Celtic or British settlements were given new names by incoming Anglians. Only the river names, Kent and Keer, are Celtic names. Lancaster was an important Roman centre, but has an Anglian name. In Lancashire there are more than fifty Celtic or British place names; most of them are south of the Kibble, several are in the Fylde, but there are none in the Lune Valley⁵. Warton means the ’guard settlement’ and probably was given that name by the Anglians because of the hill fort on the Crag. The ending ’-ton’ signifies a settlement and the prefix gives it its own identity. Hutton is the ‘settlement on a spur of land’. Carnforth means ’heron (or crane) ford’. The word ‘bere- wick’ meaning an ’outlying part of a lord’s estate’ in time became Borwick. There appears to be some doubt about the meaning of Yealand, and two alternatives are postulated, either ‘high land’ or ‘land by a stream’. Silverdale may mean ‘silver valley’ because of the light coloured limestone rocks there. Other old English names within our villages are Hilderston from the personal name Hild or ‘Hildered’s settlement’, Leighton from the word Ieactun meaning ‘garden, and Lindeth meaning ’lime tree headland’. All these settlement names seem to date from the later part of the 7th century. The nearest village to us with a name indicating that it dates from the earliest phase of Anglian settlement, c570, is Melling.

In the 9th century Horsemen from Ireland and the Isle of Man came to the West coast and settled among the Anglian communities. Hyning if a Norse name meaning ‘enclosure from the Old Norse word hygna ‘to fence’, and Mourholme means the ‘island in the marshes’. The villages of Kellet have a Norse name meaning ‘slope on which there is a spring’, and Arnside means Arni’s saetr or ‘shieling’, a ’summer pasture’⁶.

In 1066 the villages which came to form the ecclesiastical parish of Warton, although existing close together geographically, were administered from widely scattered centres. Yealand, at that time not divided into two separate entities, covered a large area, including Silverdale it is thought, and was part of an estate administered from Beetham. Borwick belonged to this estate, which also included Farleton, Preston Richard, Heversham, Hincaster and Levens. This estate was one of many held by Tostig, Earl of Northumberland and brother of King Harold.

Warton and (Priest) Hutton were part of a larger estate administered from Austwick, which included Burton (in Kendal), Holme, Lupton, Preston Patrick, Mansergh, Middleton, Kirkby Lonsdale, Caton, Claughton, Heldetun (an unidentified place – could it be hilderstone?), and Clapham, and was held by Torfin, an Englishman.

Carnforth was administered from Halton, the centre of the most dominant estate, which included both Kellets, Bolton (le Sands), Slyne, Stapleton Terne (now a lost name), Bare, Poulton, Torrisholme, Oxcliffe, Heaton, Skerton, Lancaster and Kirk Lancaster, Aldcliffe, Thurn- ham, Hillham (in Cockerham), Hutton and Newton (both in Bulk, near Halton), Overton, Middleton, and Heysham. It was also held by Earl Tostig⁷.

It is unfortunate that the entries in Domesday Book for this part of the country are so brief. They consist only of the names of the holders of the estates, the component parts of each estate and the area liable to pay geld or tax. However these administrative areas had probably baen in existence long before 1066. Professor Glanville Jones argues, many think very convincingly, that these estates, which he calls multiple estates, had their origin in the Iron Age and were often associated with hill forts or fortified places. The estate of Torfin, with its centre at Austwick could well have been a multiple estate as described by Professor Jones.⁸

The Norman Conquest had far reaching effects in our part of the country. Between 1066 and 1086 each of the three estates to which our villages belonged received a different lord. Roger of Poitou, the son of a Norman, was granted the estate of Beetham. King William acquired Torfin’s estate of Austwick and Earl Tostig’s many estates including Halton.

A great reorganisation of land and estates subsequently occurred. In 1066 this area was in the west Riding of Yorkshire, within Northumbria, which stretched across the country from coast to coast and extended from the Humber and the Ribble over the whole of the north of England. King William granted out much of the land which came into his possession to his Norman supporters. Amounderness and the land between the Mersey and the Ribble, he granted to Roger of Poitou. Later William Rufus added Lonsdale, Cartmel, and Furness to Roger’s possessions. Furness and Cartmel form a geographical unit with Cumberland and Westmorland, but the route over the sands of Morecambe Bay was strategically important and so Roger of Poitou was given jurisdiction over these separated areas. Roger made Lancaster the administrative centre of his large estates, which became known as the ‘Honour of Lancaster’. In course of time this became recognised as a county. In fact this year, 1982, is the 800th anniversary of this recognition.

This reorganisation of land had a direct effort on our villages. The former English estates were broken up. Sometime after William the Conqueror’s death all our villages received the same lord when they were granted to Gilbert, 1st Baron of KendalVictoria County History of Lancashire VIII. pp. 151ff for history cf Barony of Kendal⁹. The Barony of Kendal had lands from Garstang in the south to Barton, near Ullswater, in the north, and as far west as Ulverston. During the later part of the 12th century the Baron of Kendal built two castles as his administrative centres, one at Kendal and the other, Mourholme Castle, at Warton. Thus Warton became the administrative centre of the southern part of this huge Barony. That Warton had achieved a position of some economic importance is indicated by the granting of a charter by King John In 1200 for a weekly market to be held on Wednesdays¹⁰.

We do not know precisely when the ecclesiastical parish of Warton came into being, but it seems very probable that the Baron of Kendal established the church at Warton sometime between 1160 and 1180. He endowed the church with Land at Hutton, which gave that place the new name of Priest Hutton. There may have been a chapelry there before 1160. We know that originally Carnforth was not part of the parish of Warton. A document dated 1320 says:Carnforth which is now in the parish of Warton was in the parish of Bolton before the interdict in England and the men of that township partook of all the sacraments of the church in Bolton church and their bodies were buried in the churchyard of the church of Bolton, and they paid all manner of tithes both small and great to the church of Bolton. And there is still a path between Bolton and that township called, as it is believed, Bolton ’KIRKSTY’ by which the men used to go from that township to the parish church of Bolton; the truth may be fully sought from the older men of the Township of Bolton¹¹.

In 1246 William de Lancaster III, Baron of Kendal, died, leaving his two sisters as co-heiresses. The Barony was therefore divided between them, Heloise Bruce receiving Kendal Castle and Alice Lindsay receiving Mourholme Castle. As a result Warton was detached from the Barony of Kendal, and its development thereafter was as the centre of an independent lordship. After it was granted borough status¹² by Alice’s son, Walter Lindsay, it was replanned as a village, evidence of which is visible today.

The division of the Barony affected our other villages also. Borwick, like Warton, was assigned to the Lindsays. Yealand had been divided during the 12th century when one part was granted to Adam de Avranches, who was eventually succeeded by his great-granddaughter who married Robert de Conyers. The other part was granted to Norman de Yealand whose son adopted the name Redman or Redmayne. Yealand Redmayne was assigned to the Lindsays, but Yealand Conyers was assigned to the other heiress. Carnforth had been divided into several moieties and granted to various people, and so in 1246 some parts were assigned to the Lindsays and others to the Bruces.

The Barons of Kendal, by granting out land to tenants, received from these tenants’ allegiance and services. The tenants became the lords of the estates or manors they had been granted and received from their tenants, the people living and working in our villages, rents in money or kind and services. By the end of the medieval period we find that our villages have developed in quite distinct ways and their customs show a great variation as a result of these many partitions of land.

Notes

Carnforth which is now in the parish of Warton was in the parish of Bolton before the interdict in England and the men of that township partook of all the sacraments of the church in Bolton church and their bodies were buried in the churchyard of the church of Bolton, and they paid all manner of tithes both small and great to the church of Bolton. And there is still a path between Bolton and that township called, as it is believed, Bolton ’KIRKSTY’ by which the men used to go from that township to the parish church of Bolton; the truth may be fully sought from the older men of the Township of Bolton.

1. The Cumbria and Lancashire Archaeological Unit is in the process of listing all known archaeological sites in these counties. Its records are kept at the University of Lancaster. ↩︎
2. Printed in Cumbria Family History Society Newsletter 15 (May 1980). ↩︎
3. C.L.A.U. ↩︎
4. B. Roberts, Rural Settlement in Britain (1979). ↩︎
5. J.J. Bagley, A History of Lancashire (1976) ↩︎
6. E. Ekwall, The Place Names of Lancashire (1922) ↩︎
7. Domesday Book transcriptions are available in the appropriate volumes of the Victoria County Histories, also in Domesday Book-Cheshire: including Lancs, Cumbria and N. Wales (1 78) ↩︎
8. G.R.J. Jones, ’The Multiple Estate as a Model Framework for Tracing the Early Stages in the Evolution of Rural Settlement’ ↩︎
9. Victoria County History of Lancashire VIII. pp. 151ff for history cf Barony of Kendal. ↩︎
10. T. Duffus Hardy (ed.), Rotuli Chartarum, Record Commission 1857, I, 1, p.50. ↩︎
11. From an Extent of the Manor of the Rector of Bolton le Sands, c1320, in Lancashire Inquests, Extents and Feudal Aids, W. Farrer (ed.). The interdict of 1208 occurred as a result of a quarrel between King John and the Pope. England was excommunicated and religious services throughout the country were suspended for some years. ↩︎
12. M. Bateson, ’The Creation of Boroughs’, English Historical Review XVII, pp286-95. ↩︎

Published in Mourholme Magazine Issue 1 Autumn 1982. This was the first article in the first Mourholme Magazine.

Transcribed by Margaret Clarke

In 1609 a Rental and Survey of the Manor of Warton was made for the then Lord of the Manor, King James I. It listed the Lord’s tenants, the nature of their tenures, the extent of their holdings, and the amount of their rents. In addition, an attempt was made to define the boundaries of the Manor. In the apparent absence of any fixed official boundary, depositions were taken from four of the oldest inhabitants as to their understanding of the boundaries. The following is the record of the deposition proceedings;

Examinations taken the 26th Daye of June, A.D. 1609 and of the reign of our lord King James the seventh by the Jurye of Warton, Charged by Mr. John Woodwards, his Ma(jest)ies surveyor of the Lordshipp of Warton aforesaid, as follows:-

Thomas Waxen being of the age of foure chore yeares and tenn or thereabouts, sworne and examined deposeth and saith, that the bounders of Warton begineth at Keares becke upp Kear to over Kear bridge and so to the highe Crosse in Barwicke loone, from theare to Juett Well, then to Shawe Wodd from Shawe Wodd to Weates Bwer, from thence over the Mosse betwixte Yealand ‘Moss and Warton Moss to the Stenye Foorde, then to the Troughe of Trowe.

Robert Weathman of the age of 60 yeares or thereabouts being sworne and examined deposeth and saith, that the bounders of Warton be these followinge viz:-

It beginneth at the middstreame of Kent, from the midd streams cf Kent it goeth to Bearte Well, from thence to the Butt in Timber Slacke, from thence to the topp of the Burnte Hall, from thence to the hareapple tree, from thence to the healding stone above the holte pott head, from thence to the rydinge stone, from thence to the Topp of Burn barrowe.

Robert Houseman of the age of 80 yeares or thereabouts being sworne and examined deposeth and saith, that the bounders of Warton begyn at Mearesbecke, from thence goings upp midd K(ear) to Over Keer bridge, from thence to Juitt-Well, from thence to Pearson’s house and thence to the Troughe of Trowbarrows, from thence to the stonye Forde from thence to ( ) Mill from thence to BearteWell. We have also (had) shewed unto us by a vardit of a Jurye bearing date the 6th day of Maye in the 25th yoare of the reigne of our Queen Elizabeth that there was a Bonderye of the Lordshippe of Warton delivered unto Gervase Kytson, by Robert Kytson, worde by worde as followeth, viz:-

Firsts it beginneth at Juitt Well and so upp alonge rawehedge betwixt Juitt Fields and Yealand Fields, and soe to Dawes Parke a little from Holmes ’Riers Yate, from thence to Waynbroakestoone beneath Pearsons from thence to the great stoone betwixt Haddes house sonn of Hues the Leech, and newe one Lawes of Yeallande from thence to the highe Lynde, from thence to the roughe glade, from thence over- thwarte the Moss i( ) the Stonye Forde juste upon Trows from thence to the rydinge stone of Burnebar( ) from thence to the Hareappletree, from thence to the three stoones of sand bancke from thence to Bearte Well, and so to the middstreame of Kent.

• Leonard Washington
• Robert Hudson
• John Jackeson
• Robert S( )ann
• Robert Croft
• WilIm Browne
• John Pleasington
• John Borrows Senr.
• Mathew Makerell
• Robart Robinson
• Robert Watson
• John Borrow Junr.
• Robert Heste
• Edmund Dawson
• Wyllyame Borrow
• BryanWhorubye
• Robert gryn Wode
• Wyll Wallin
• Wyll Waythmane
• Anthonie Masone

It is interesting to note that Robert Weathman’s recollections are confined to the Lindeth-Silverdale boundary. He was, of course, a Lindeth man, an early member of a long line of recorded Lindeth Waithmans. It is even more interesting to compare his description of the boundary given in 1609 with the description of the perambulation of the same boundary made some 200 years later in 1811 by the Commissioners for the Inclosure of the Wastes & Cannons of Silverdale.

Starting at ‘Bardwell’ they proceeded in a south easterly direction to Timberslack and from Timberslack to the north westerly corner of Holefield, and to a Yewtree on the south side of the road leading to Lindeth thence in an easterly direction over Hall Close to Stone Cross and to a large stone called Hall Pot and thence in a north easterly direction across the last mentioned Road to the Ridingstones and then over the Common in a direct line down to the north westerly end of Slackwood Barn.

Editor’s note; These extracts are presented without further comment or explanation for the time being in the expectation that some of our readers may want to contribute both. Transcribed from Cumbria Records office – Kendal WD/D/S2/17 and Public Records Office LR2/220 fc. 27-65.

Published in Mourholme Magazine Issue 1 Autumn 1982