HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The recorded history of Stainton begins with its inclusion in the Doomsday survey of 1086 under the name of "Staintone with Helgebi" as part of Dadesleia. The entry tells us very little because the boundaries of the cultivated land are not separately described. The whole unit had belonged apparently to two Saxons, Seeward and Elsi, both whom had lost their lives in support of their neighbour and uncrowned King, Harold of Coningsborough, who himself had been slain at Hastings.

William the Conqueror subsequently gave an extensive area, collectively known as the "Wapentake of Strafford", to a Norman supporter known as Roger de Busli. This included Dadesleia, together with most of what is now South Yorkshire, and part of Nottinghamshire, including Blyth.

Near to the actual hamlet of Dadesleia, with its church of All Hallows, there was an area of high ground probably known as "the wick hill", as such areas were at the time, and it was upon this high ground that Roger de Busli decided to build his home, fortified by earthworks and a high wooden fence or "palisade". The wick hill, by a process of language development, became Twickhill and then Tickhill, and a new town grew up around the castle, leaving Dadesleia to remain as little more than a well and a memory.

By a process known as "subinfeudation", the manor of Stainton was soon established in its own right. This process involved a grant of land being made by the principal lord, in return for some form of service being rendered by the newly created lord of the lesser manor and his heirs. But, as will be evident later, it was some two centuries before Stainton achieved its ecclesiastical independence of Tickhill.

Pre-History

The earlier history of the village can only be inferred from that of the whole surrounding area which is believed to have been part of the ancient British (i.e., Celtic) "Kingdom" or Elmet.

We are inclined to forget that, before the Romans withdrew from Britain in the fifth century, the official religion of the Roman Empire was Christianity and this had spread to include some of the tribes, including at least some of the Brigantes living in Elmet. What is not known is the extent of cultivation at that time or the location and names of the villages.

The Romans had certainly maintained a fairly large garrison at Doncaster under the name Danum and a smaller one at Templeborough, between Rotherham and Sheffield. Their job was probably to guard the roads connecting the main settlements at Lincoln, York and Chester, which passed through the area. To what extent there may have been any Roman civilian settlement is not known, but in 1953 some stones were found on the outskirts of Stainton at Chapel Holt which were though to have been part of a small Roman temple. The very name Chapel Holt may be evidence for a small religious building having occupied the site, because it was known that during the conversion from paganism to Christianity, the former temples were not destroyed but were used for Christian worship.

Another possible pointer to a pre-Saxon settlement in the Stainton area is of course the quarry. Although the Roman settlement at Danum was mainly a wooden structure, it appears that some stone defence works had been commenced, using local stone. There has always been a local traditionin the village that the quarry, which is clearly very old in the region of Holme Hall Lane, dates back to this era!

Anglo-Saxon Occupation

The Anglo-Saxon occupation seems to have reached South Yorkshire relatively late so that the Christian "Kingdom" of Elmet had a longer period of independence than some other parts of the country. In the first quarter of the seventh century, however, it appears to have been overrun by Edwin of Northumbria, only to be taken from him later by Penda of Mercia with the assistance of a prince of North Wales, known as Cadwallon.

A few years later the district was returned to Northumbria, but it was always a frontier area and its population must have included many Britons as well as Mercians and Northumbrians. The names of the rivers, Don, Dearne and Rother, are survivals from the Celtic language and the place names beginning with Eccles (although Saxon) are said to indicate the existence of a British church on the site when the Anglo-Saxons arrived (c.f. Welsh eglws = church)

It is possible, therefore, that there was a long standing Christian tradition in this area extending back to the Roman occupation. Clearly it would develop independently of the Roamn hierarchy during the Dark Ages, following the withdrawal of Roman troops, but would return to the fold after Synod of Whitby established the supremacy of Rome.

To sum up, we have no proof that there was any settlement in the area before some Saxon established the first farmstead and called it Stantone - or "The Stone-House". The suffix "ton" initially meant only a single farm, not a town or village. Thus "Stantone" was translated into Norman French as "Villa de Rupe" or Rock House. This, of course, may be the key to its situation beneath the present modern house, built in stone upon the bulldozed ruins of the old farm house known as Rock House. This used to nestle in a hollow beneath the present building and was perhaps a stone successor to several wooden predecessors built in the same rocky hollow over preceding centuries.

The Manor of Stainton

Whether the above speculation has any real foundation must be open to debate, but this is certainly not the first time that the suggestion has been made. Whatever the situation of the original Saxon homestead was, it gave rise to further clearing of the native woodland - a process which Hunter calls "Essarting" - and a larger community grew up.

It is, of course, possible that there was an existing British village and the conquering Anglo-Saxons who settled there preferred their own name, so that the original British name has been lost. Speculation again, but not without foundation, because the native British who lived in the area when the Anglo-Saxons came must have had some villages, and they presumably had names. If some of these names had survived, one could legitimately question the thesis that others had existed whose names had been lost. However, the fact is that all the place names in South Yorkshire are Anglo-Saxon, which rather suggests that, even though they adopted existing settlements, they applied their own names to them. One reason for postulating that there was a British settlement in this area is the adoption of a Welsh saint as patroness of the Church - but more of that later.

The first evidence in surviving documents of the creation of the Manor of Stainton comes in 1147 when a deed was executed by Richard de Busli and Richard FitzTurgis (joint founders of Roche Abbey) and was witnessed by a Hugh de Stainton.

In 1236 the name of Sir John de Stainton appears as one of five knights who witnessed a deed of the lords or Wadworth. Sir John was the son of Hugh and had clearly risen in importance to have been knighted. Hunter draws the conclusion that by using de Stainton as a surname, the family were indicating that they were resident in the village. Hunter also thinks it likely that the de Stainton family built the present church, since it was usually accepted as the responsibility of the lord of the manor to make this provision.

By 1277, an inquisition concerning Margareta de Stainton found her "seised" of the manor and names her son and heir as John le Boteler. It was apparently quite normal for an heiress upon marriage to retain her former title, and one can presume that between 1236 and 1277 the manor passed from Sir John to Margareta who, as either a widow or a daughter, had married a le Boteler. Their son John then inherited the manor of Stainton through his mother. The same name recurs in deeds dated 1295, 1316, 1319 and 1321, but there is no evidence that the same person is referred to on each occasion - we may well be dealing with two generations of the same family.

For almost a century there appears to have been no record of the manor, but in 1416 the owners were Richard de Burgh and his wife Alice. In that year they conveyed it into trust, the leading trustee being John de Holland, Earl of Huntingdon. The others were Robert de Rockley, of the manor of that name near to Tankersley, and Ralph Fitzwilliam, presumably of Sprotborough. These were trustees of some consequence since the Earl of Huntingdon was a relative of Richard II, but unfortunately there is no evidence of the purpose of the trust nor of the beneficiaries. Hunter, however, draws the conclusion that the de Burgh family must have been influential people.

In 1441, a Thomas Burgh and his wife Anne are names in a lawsuit concerning the manor, which appears by now to have passed to Sir Henry Scrope who was Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench and also lord of the manor of Edlington. Stainton remained in the hands of the family of the Lords Scrope of Bolton until 1573 when it was sold to a Thomas Jennison. There was a rapid succession of owners over a short period resulting in the manor becoming possessed by Sir Edward Stanhope of Edlington by 1600. He in turn sold both manors to a Nicholas Saunderson who was knighted in 1603, became a baronet in 1612 and became Viscount Castleton in 1627.

In 1720, the fifth Viscount became Earl of Castleton, but he died three years later, leaving the manor to a relative on his mother's side, Thomas Lumley, second son of the first Earl of Scarborough. Mr. Lumley was persuaded to add Saunderson to his name, thus becoming Lumley-Saunderson, and in 1739 he succeeded to the title of Earl of Scarborough upon the death of the second Earl, his older brother. In this way manorial rights passed to the present Earl.

Growth of the Village

Stainton seems to have changed less in size than many other places in South Yorkshire which were of comparable size in the 12th century.

The records of the Poll tax of 1379 showed that at the time there were about 30 households in the village. By 1556, when the Parish Registers were first kept, there was an average of one marriage per year, but by the beginning of the 19th century this had risen to 17 in a period of 10 years. The dominant occupations were always agricultural, but the occasional "woollen webster" and linen weaver is recorded.

The first systematic appraisal of the size of the village came with the census of 1851. the enumerator was Mark Steel, who farmed Stainton Manor, situated where it now is, next to the church. As in subsequent censuses, questionnaires were delivered to the households and no doubt, since most people were still illiterate at that time, (as the Marriage Registers show), they would need some help in completing the form.

The returns of the census revealed that there were 30 farms with 51 farm labourers, 43 housewives and 109 children. The total population was 262. the ratio of farm workers to acreage was about 1 to 45 acres, although 1 farm had 4 workers to 100 acres and another had 2 to 52 acres. Compared with the 16th and 17th centuries when five or six in the village were described in the parish registers as "gentlemen" - presumably implying that they did not work for a living - only one in 1851 claimed to be of independent means. This could reflect a change in terminology or perhaps the social structure of the village.

Comparing the census returns of Stainton with Tickhill shows that against the 70% in the former engaged in agriculture, 10% in domestic service and only 1% in trades and crafts, there were in Tickhill 30% engaged in trades and crafts and 19% in domestic service. This confirms that Tickhill was in fact a small town of which Stainton was a satellite village.