SOME THOUGHTS ON MALKIN TOWER
Posted: 20 Apr 2012, 15:33
SOME THOUGHTS ON MALKIN TOWER
21 October 2004
This topic reply isn’t meant to be any sort of a definitive statement, merely an indication of where John Clayton and I have got to and an invitation for any hard evidence out there.
John got interested in the 1580 map of Whitemoor and made some valuable suggestions about the interpretation of the southern part which had always bothered me. We started working on it, walking the ground and at first my main interest was to find out more about Black Dyke Mill. This is still a research aim but in the process of looking into this we have turned up some interesting stuff about ‘Malkin Tower’.
I’ve always been suspicious about Malkin Tower, there is too much myth and fiction mixed up together and no concrete facts. Potts account of the trial is generally held to be biased and the only other real source is Harrison Ainsworth’s book published in 1849. mind you, there is evidence that Ainsworth did a lot of research in the area and I have no doubt that there are some nuggets of truth in there somewhere.
I think that one of the first things to recognise is that as far as our enquiries are concerned, there are two main aspects of the beginning of the 17th century we should take into account. Bearing in mind that the witch trial took place in 1612, James 1 was king from 1603-1625 and was fascinated by witchcraft and the occult, he wrote a book about it ‘Demonology’ based in part on the much older Malleus Maleficarum. At the same time this was an era when great ideas were stirring, people with money and leisure were taking note of the latest ideas and books were easily available. I don’t think it is outside the bounds of possibility that the minor gentry of this area were travelling, reading and thinking more and this could have a bearing on what we are looking at on Blacko Hillside.
This pursuit started when John and I re-examined the 1580 map. We were only interested at that point in proving some of the alignments in the area of Blacko hillside. We took into account the Perambulation of 1147 which Henry de Lacy undertook to fix the boundary of Barnoldswick Manor before gifting it to Fountains Abbey. “By the stream called Blackbroc up the moor to Gailmers and so directly to Ellesagh, across Blacko Hill to Oxgill and up Oxgill to the pikelaw called Alainsete and thence to the ancient ditch between Middop and Coverdale”. We know now that Henry got the boundary wrong. When he hit the Black Dyke this side of Blacko Hill he should have turned right but instead carried on too far and inadvertently stole Admergill off the King! The bit that interested us was Gailmers and Ellesagh.
Several interesting points emerged when we looked closely at the alignments. We usually assign the name ‘Slipper Hill’ to the lane running down from Hollins Hall towards Foulridge but it became obvious from the position of the meer stones marking the county boundary and marked on the map that in 1580 Slipper Hill or Slippery Hill extends up to the corner at Pasture Head. My original interpretation of the line of the road is wrong, the line we were looking at was in fact the old county boundary. This placed all the items marked on the map further up the hillside in line roughly with Pasture Head and Black Hill.
Looking at the 1580 map we found two names on that line that coincide with the perambulation exactly. I really do mean exact because when you walk it on the ground there is no doubt what the line is. On the map we have ‘Gail Mose’ or ‘Fail Mire’ depending on whose interpretation you rely, the plaintiff or the defendant. This has got to be Gailmers in 1147. Then there was the one that had always baffled me, Haynslack. The next feature we found on the ground, equidistant between Gailmers and Blacko Hill is a large gulley or ‘slack’ with a stream in the bottom. I haven’t been able to find any clear etymological link between ‘Elle’ and ‘Hayn’ but we are in no doubt that this is the feature noted as Ellesagh by de Lacy and Haynslack on the 1580 map. It is the most noticeable topographical feature on the hillside and forms part of the manorial and county boundary.
Negative reports can be as enlightening as positive ones and the striking thing about the 1580 map is that there is no reference to Malkin Tower. Further, when John went digging in the records he turned up a very interesting fact, there is no reference in the records he looked at for Malkin, Maulkin or Mowkin (alternative spellings used in the records) until 1719 when Richard Towneley is recorded as being born. This could be simply a matter of missing records if it wasn’t for the fact that on the same hillside there are records for Hayn Slack, Heanslack, Haneslack and Heineslack from 1681 to 1742. After that the name disappears. Allowing for some overlap which would be understandable, it looks as though the name of Haynslack changed some time after 1700 and became Malkin Tower. Bear in mind that what we think we are dealing with here is what is now known as Malkin Tower Farm. The body of this house dates from c. 1720 and John tells me he thinks this is when the Townleleys bought it.
The hypothesis we are working on at the moment is as follows: The nearest feature to what is now Blacko Tower Farm is Haynslack. I can’t see any other possibility apart from the fact that there was a structure or group of buildings on that site or very near that no longer exists and was called Haynslack. C 1720 it changed it’s name to Malkin Tower Farm when it was rebuilt by the Towneleys. It may well be that the renaming was influenced by the legend of the Pendle witches and it could well be that the lurid account of Potts had an influence on this. Malkin is an OE word that can mean slattern, cat or familiar in the sense of a witch’s cat. Local folklore may have assigned the name after 1612, but it was not an accepted location name until after 1719.
This does not mean that there wasn’t a defensible structure on the site but it was most likely called Haynslack as on the 1580 map. Whether there was actually a tower remains to be seen.
That’s as far as we have got at the moment. We have a lot more to report and are still working on it. The one thing that seems to be clear at the moment is that the accepted legend about the tower has a lot of holes in it. Watch this space!
SCG/21 October 2004
21 October 2004
This topic reply isn’t meant to be any sort of a definitive statement, merely an indication of where John Clayton and I have got to and an invitation for any hard evidence out there.
John got interested in the 1580 map of Whitemoor and made some valuable suggestions about the interpretation of the southern part which had always bothered me. We started working on it, walking the ground and at first my main interest was to find out more about Black Dyke Mill. This is still a research aim but in the process of looking into this we have turned up some interesting stuff about ‘Malkin Tower’.
I’ve always been suspicious about Malkin Tower, there is too much myth and fiction mixed up together and no concrete facts. Potts account of the trial is generally held to be biased and the only other real source is Harrison Ainsworth’s book published in 1849. mind you, there is evidence that Ainsworth did a lot of research in the area and I have no doubt that there are some nuggets of truth in there somewhere.
I think that one of the first things to recognise is that as far as our enquiries are concerned, there are two main aspects of the beginning of the 17th century we should take into account. Bearing in mind that the witch trial took place in 1612, James 1 was king from 1603-1625 and was fascinated by witchcraft and the occult, he wrote a book about it ‘Demonology’ based in part on the much older Malleus Maleficarum. At the same time this was an era when great ideas were stirring, people with money and leisure were taking note of the latest ideas and books were easily available. I don’t think it is outside the bounds of possibility that the minor gentry of this area were travelling, reading and thinking more and this could have a bearing on what we are looking at on Blacko Hillside.
This pursuit started when John and I re-examined the 1580 map. We were only interested at that point in proving some of the alignments in the area of Blacko hillside. We took into account the Perambulation of 1147 which Henry de Lacy undertook to fix the boundary of Barnoldswick Manor before gifting it to Fountains Abbey. “By the stream called Blackbroc up the moor to Gailmers and so directly to Ellesagh, across Blacko Hill to Oxgill and up Oxgill to the pikelaw called Alainsete and thence to the ancient ditch between Middop and Coverdale”. We know now that Henry got the boundary wrong. When he hit the Black Dyke this side of Blacko Hill he should have turned right but instead carried on too far and inadvertently stole Admergill off the King! The bit that interested us was Gailmers and Ellesagh.
Several interesting points emerged when we looked closely at the alignments. We usually assign the name ‘Slipper Hill’ to the lane running down from Hollins Hall towards Foulridge but it became obvious from the position of the meer stones marking the county boundary and marked on the map that in 1580 Slipper Hill or Slippery Hill extends up to the corner at Pasture Head. My original interpretation of the line of the road is wrong, the line we were looking at was in fact the old county boundary. This placed all the items marked on the map further up the hillside in line roughly with Pasture Head and Black Hill.
Looking at the 1580 map we found two names on that line that coincide with the perambulation exactly. I really do mean exact because when you walk it on the ground there is no doubt what the line is. On the map we have ‘Gail Mose’ or ‘Fail Mire’ depending on whose interpretation you rely, the plaintiff or the defendant. This has got to be Gailmers in 1147. Then there was the one that had always baffled me, Haynslack. The next feature we found on the ground, equidistant between Gailmers and Blacko Hill is a large gulley or ‘slack’ with a stream in the bottom. I haven’t been able to find any clear etymological link between ‘Elle’ and ‘Hayn’ but we are in no doubt that this is the feature noted as Ellesagh by de Lacy and Haynslack on the 1580 map. It is the most noticeable topographical feature on the hillside and forms part of the manorial and county boundary.
Negative reports can be as enlightening as positive ones and the striking thing about the 1580 map is that there is no reference to Malkin Tower. Further, when John went digging in the records he turned up a very interesting fact, there is no reference in the records he looked at for Malkin, Maulkin or Mowkin (alternative spellings used in the records) until 1719 when Richard Towneley is recorded as being born. This could be simply a matter of missing records if it wasn’t for the fact that on the same hillside there are records for Hayn Slack, Heanslack, Haneslack and Heineslack from 1681 to 1742. After that the name disappears. Allowing for some overlap which would be understandable, it looks as though the name of Haynslack changed some time after 1700 and became Malkin Tower. Bear in mind that what we think we are dealing with here is what is now known as Malkin Tower Farm. The body of this house dates from c. 1720 and John tells me he thinks this is when the Townleleys bought it.
The hypothesis we are working on at the moment is as follows: The nearest feature to what is now Blacko Tower Farm is Haynslack. I can’t see any other possibility apart from the fact that there was a structure or group of buildings on that site or very near that no longer exists and was called Haynslack. C 1720 it changed it’s name to Malkin Tower Farm when it was rebuilt by the Towneleys. It may well be that the renaming was influenced by the legend of the Pendle witches and it could well be that the lurid account of Potts had an influence on this. Malkin is an OE word that can mean slattern, cat or familiar in the sense of a witch’s cat. Local folklore may have assigned the name after 1612, but it was not an accepted location name until after 1719.
This does not mean that there wasn’t a defensible structure on the site but it was most likely called Haynslack as on the 1580 map. Whether there was actually a tower remains to be seen.
That’s as far as we have got at the moment. We have a lot more to report and are still working on it. The one thing that seems to be clear at the moment is that the accepted legend about the tower has a lot of holes in it. Watch this space!
SCG/21 October 2004