Kilkhampton
village and civil parish in Cornwall, England
Kilkhampton (Cornish: Kylgh, lit. 'circle') is a village and civil parish in northeast Cornwall, England, United Kingdom. The village is on the A39 about four miles (6 km) north-northeast of Bude.
Kilkhampton was mentioned in the Domesday Book as "Chilchetone". The population of the parish was 1,193 in the 2001 census. This increased to 1,368 in the 2011 census.
The remains of a late Norman period motte-and-bailey castle known as Penstowe Castle are located 500 metres west of the village. Further west, at Stowe is the site of Stowe House, the grand mansion of John Granville, 1st Earl of Bath, built in 1680 but demolished in 1739: some of the stonework was reused at Penstowe, also in the parish.
Kilkhampton has a post office, a primary school, and a community centre called the Grenville Rooms. There are three general stores, two pubs, and a selection of shops including an electrical goods store. There is also a MOT test station and an agricultural supply depot.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Kilkhampton” as village and civil parish in Cornwall, England. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the places & architecture register because the source frames it as village and civil parish in Cornwall, England. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The strongest evidence will usually combine a dated visual record with documents produced by the authority responsible for the place. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 3, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q3245937. VIAF identifies the subject as 130435624. The Library of Congress control number is nb2004311438. Authority coordinates are 50.875, -4.484. 1 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2001, 2011, 1680 and 1739.
Modern boundaries and familiar names can conceal earlier jurisdictions or structures that do not align with the present site. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Kilkhampton”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Kilkhampton primary sources, Kilkhampton archive and Kilkhampton research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Kilkhampton”?
- Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
- What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Kilkhampton” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.