The Baronial Halls_ and Ancient Picturesque Edifices of England_ Vol. 1 of 2 S. C. Hall 1600 downloads.pdf

Th e P ro j ect G u t en b erg eBook o f Th e Ba ron i al H a l l s,
an d An ci en t P i ct u resq u e Ed i f i ces o f En gl an d ; Vo l . 1
of 2
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before
using this eBook.

Title: The Baronial Halls, and Ancient Picturesque Edifices of England;
Vol. 1 of 2

Author: S. C. Hall

Release date: October 17, 2020 [eBook #63481]
Most recently updated: October 18, 2024

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/63481

Credits: Produced by Chuck Greif and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images available at The Internet Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BARONIAL
HALLS, AND ANCIENT PICTURESQUE EDIFICES OF ENGLAND;
VOL. 1 OF 2 ***

THE

BARONIAL HALLS,
AND

ANCIENT PICTURESQUE EDIFICES OF ENGLAND.

FROM DRAWINGS BY

J. D. HARDING, G. CATTERMOLE, S. PROUT, W. MÜLLER, J.
HOLLAND.

AND OTHER EMINENT ARTISTS.

EXECUTED IN COLOURED LITHOTINTS, BY DAY AND SON AND HANHART.

THE TEXT BY S. C. HALL, P.S.A.

EMBELLISHED WITH NUMEROUS ENGRAVINGS ON WOOD.

IN TWO VOLUMES.
VOL. I.

LONDON:
WILLIS AND SOTHERAN, 136, STRAND.
MDCCCLVIII.

C ON T E NT S OF VOL U ME I .
HOLLAND HOUSE Middlesex From a C. J. Richardson,
Drawing by F.S.A.
HOLLAND HOUSE, —— —— C. J. Richardson,
INTERIOR
F.S.A.
BLICKLING HALL Norfolk —— J. D. Harding.
BURGHLEY HOUSE Northamptonshire —— T. Allom.
CASTLE ASHBY —— —— F. W. Hulme.
KIRBY HALL —— —— J. D. Harding.
WOLLATTON HALL Nottinghamshire —— T. Allom.
BENTHALL HALL Shropshire —— J. C. Bayliss.
PITCHFORD HALL —— —— F. W. Hulme.
MONTACUTE, GREAT Somersetshire —— C. J. Richardson,
CHAMBER
F.S.A.
CAVERSWALL CASTLE Staffordshire —— H. L. Pratt.
INGESTRIE HALL —— —— J. A. Hammersley.
THE OAK HOUSE —— —— A. E. Everitt.
THROWLEY HALL —— —— W. L. Walton.
TRENTHAM HALL —— —— F. W. Hulme.
HELMINGHAM HALL Suffolk —— J. D. Harding.
HENGRAVE HALL —— —— C. J. Richardson,
F.S.A.
WEST-STOW HALL —— —— W. Muler.
HAM HOUSE Surrey —— Henry Mogford.
LOSELEY HOUSE —— —— Henry Mogford.
ARUNDEL CHURCH Sussex —— Samuel Prout.
BOXGROVE CHURCH —— —— S. Prout.
ASTON HALL Warwickshire —— A. E. Everitt.
BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL, —— —— George
Warwick
Cattermole.
CHARLECOTE —— —— J. G. Jackson.
CHARLECOTE, —— —— J. G. Jackson.
INTERIOR

COMBE ABBEY —— —— J. G. Jackson.
WARWICK CASTLE —— —— J. D. Harding.
WROXHALL ABBEY —— —— J. G. Jackson.
BROUGHAM HALL Westmorland —— F. W. Hulme.
SIZERGH HALL —— —— F. W. Hulme.
CHARLTON HOUSE Wiltshire —— C. J. Richardson,
F.S.A.
THE DUKE’S HOUSE —— —— C. J. Richardson,
F.S.A.
WESTWOOD HOUSE Worcestershire —— F. W. Fairholt,
F.S.A.
FOUNTAINS HALL Yorkshire —— William
Richardson.
HELMSLEY HALL —— —— William
Richardson.

º

Day &c. Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.

H OL L AND HOUS E ,

MIDDLESEX.

olland House stands upon rising ground, a little to the north
of the high-road which leads from Kensington to
Hammersmith.[1] It is interesting to all passers-by, as
affording a correct idea of the baronial mansions peculiar to
the age of James I.; and, from its vicinity to the metropolis,
its examination is easy to thousands who rarely obtain
opportunities of viewing the “old houses,” with which are
associated the records and pictures of English hospitality as
it existed in the olden time. Although modern dwellings of all shapes and
sizes have grown up about it, the house retains so much of its primitive
character—its green meadows, sloping lanes, and umbrageous woods, in
which still sings the nightingale; with gables and chimneys bearing tokens of
a date two centuries back—that few traverse the highway without a word of
comment, and a sensation of pleasure, that neither time nor caprice have yet
operated to remove it from its place, or even to impair its imposing and
impressive features. It is almost alone in its “old grandeur,” in a vicinity at
one period crowded with ancient houses; the baronial halls have, with this
exception, that of Campden House,[2] adjacent, and Kensington Palace, a
comparatively recent structure, been removed, to make way for “detached
villas” and streets of narrow dwellings; and there are many sad surmises
that, ere long, the park, and gardens, and venerable mansion, will be also
displaced, to supply building-ground for speculators in brick and mortar.
This will be a grievous outrage on taste, and a sore mortification to the
antiquary, and be another terrible inroad on the picturesque in a district
which, within living memory, was as primitive in character as if London had
been distant a hundred miles.
The approach to Holland House is by an avenue of venerable elms; the
entrance-gates are examples of wrought iron, remarkably elegant in design
and fine in execution. Within the demesne, small although it be, all sense is
lost of proximity to a great city: the close foliage completely shuts out the
view of surrounding houses, and the birds are singing among the branches,
as if enjoying the freedom of the forest. Yet Holland House is now enclosed

on all sides—north, south, east, and west—by brick houses of all sorts and
sizes, upon which it seems to look down, from its elevated position, with
supreme contempt for the convenient “whimsies” of modern architects.
Before we conduct the reader about the grounds and into the mansion, it
will be well to give some history of the several personages through whose
hands they have passed. As we have shewn in a note, the manor, during the
reign of Elizabeth, became the property of Sir Walter Cope, a knight who
became high in favour with her successor, James I., and who obtained, partly
by grant and partly by purchase, considerable possessions in and around
Kensington. By him the house, subsequently called “Holland House,” was
built. His daughter, Isabella, having married Sir Henry Rich, the second son
of Robert Rich, first Earl of Warwick, this Sir Robert inherited the estates in
right of his wife; in 1622 he was created Baron Kensington; and in the 22d
James I. was elevated to the dignity of Earl of Holland, and installed a
Knight of the Garter. Having taken part with the king during the civil wars,
he was tried by the Parliament, condemned to death, and beheaded on the
9th of March, 1649.[3] His lady was, however, permitted to return to Holland
House, where she brought up her family, and where she was succeeded by
her son, Robert, the second earl, who, in 1673, became also Earl of Warwick,
by the death of Charles, the fourth earl. He was succeeded by his son, the
third earl, who married Charlotte, only daughter of Sir Thomas Middleton of
Chirk Castle, Denbighshire, who survived, and subsequently took for her
second husband, in 1716, the renowned Joseph Addison; “but,” writes Dr.
Johnson, “Holland House, although a large house, could not contain Mr.
Addison, the Countess of Warwick, and one guest—Peace:” they lived on ill
terms, which probably hastened the death of Addison; an event which took
place in the mansion on the 17th of June, 1719.[4] Edward Henry, the fourth
Earl of Holland, dying unmarried, his cousin, Edward, succeeded as fifth
earl; but he dying without issue, in 1759, his honours and titles became
extinct; but the family estates were inherited by William Edwardes, Esq., son
of the sister of Edward, the third earl, created Baron Kensington of the
kingdom of Ireland in 1776. Holland House came into the possession of the
family to whom it now belongs (the family of Fox), first about the year
1762, when the Right Hon. Henry Fox, Secretary of State (soon afterwards
created Lord Holland), became a tenant of the mansion, which he
subsequently purchased, together with the manor, from Mr. Edwardes. Here
the first Lord Holland resided until his death in 1774, and was succeeded by

his son, Stephen, the second peer,[5] who died the year following, and was
succeeded by his son, Richard Vassal; during whose long minority the house
was let to the Earl of Roseberry and Mr. Bearcroft. On his death in 1840, he
was succeeded by the present peer, Henry Edward Fox, the fourth Lord
Holland.
During the lifetime of the late peer, Holland House obtained a certain
degree of fame as the occasional rendezvous of the wits of the age; and the
fêtes at which they were assembled furnished brilliant themes for the
exercise of poetical talent; but the records of genius there fostered and
encouraged are singularly few. The historian, the poet, the artist, and the man
of science, became guests in the mansion when they had acquired fame, but
those who were achieving greatness, and stood in need of “patronage,” were
not permitted to share its enjoyments and advantages.
The grounds and gardens of Holland House have been skilfully and
tastefully laid out; the trees are remarkably fine, and give a character of
delicious solitude to the place, keeping away all thought of the vast city, the
distant hum of which is at all times audible; and, although “prospects fresh
and fair” are in a great degree shut out, imagination may easily follow the
steps of Addison into this calm retreat, and quote the lines of Tickell on the
poet’s death, as applicable to the present day as they were to a century back:
—
“Thou hill, whose brow the antique structures grace,
Rear’d by bold chiefs of Warwick’s noble race;
Why, scene so lov’d! where’er thy bower appears,
O’er my dim eyeballs glance the sudden tears?
How sweet were once thy prospects fresh and fair,
Thy sloping walks, and unpolluted air!
How sweet the gloom beneath thy aged trees,
Thy noontide shadow, and thy evening breeze;
His image thy forsaken bowers restore,
Thy walks and airy prospects charm no more.
No more the summer in thy glooms allay’d,
Thy evening breezes and thy noon-day shade!”

The prospect, however, notwithstanding the multiplicity of houses by
which the grounds are surrounded, is not all destroyed; vistas are here and
there formed between the trees, which command extensive views; and
garden-seats still exist, to wile the visitor into “shady places,” where the hill
of Harrow and other striking objects are seen in the distance, while the
surrounding shadow enhances the value of the bright scene beyond:—

“For loftie trees, y’clad with summer’s pride,
Did spread so broad, that heaven’s light did hide,
Not pierceable with power of any starre;
And all within are paths and alleies wide,
With footinge worne, and leading inward farre.”

But judgment, tastefully exercised, has made many openings among those
thick woods; and those who wander among them enjoy the feelings of entire
solitude—a feeling augmented if the time be evening; for, as we have
intimated, although scarcely two miles distant from the heart of London,
here the nightingale
“Supplies the night with mournful strains,
And melancholy music fills the plains.”

The beautiful gates which open upon the avenue that leads to the
principal entrance to the mansion are pictured in the appended woodcut; they
were brought from Belgium by the late Lord Holland, and placed in their
present position about twelve years ago; they are of wrought iron, and are
considerably impaired by time. Recently they have been repainted, and
picked out with gold; and they now make a gay appearance; they are,
however, of a much later date than the venerable structure, with which they
would be out of “keeping,” but that they are separated from it by
considerable space—a long avenue of ancient and finely grown elm-trees,
which shadow the broad path that conducts to the house. The immediate
entrance is between two piers of Portland stone, designed by Inigo Jones,
and “executed by Nicholas Stone in 1629, for which he was paid 100l.;” they
have no peculiar merit, but serve the purpose of supporting “the arms of
Rich quartering Bouldry, and impaling Cope.” The pleasure-grounds are
behind the house, “falling abruptly to the north-east:” they were laid out by
Mr. Hamilton in 1769. Scattered in various parts are memorials to some of
the personal friends of the late Lord Holland: among others, the author of
“The Pleasures of Memory” is honoured by this poor couplet:—
“Here Rogers sat, and here for ever dwell
To me those pleasures that he sings so well.”

Some lines, scarcely better, have been appended by Henry Luttrell, Esq.;
but the genius of the place has essayed a flight no higher than that which
might grace a school-girl’s album. Nature has done more for the domain than

art; from
various
points, fine
views are
obtained of
the country
that surrounds
London; and
although, of
late years,
they have
been sadly
narrowed by
“endless piles
of brick,”
when Tickell
wrote his
lines on the
death of
Addison, no
doubt they
were “Fresh
and Fair.”
Considera
ble alterations
internally
were made to
the building
by Inigo Jones. The entrance-hall, the two staircases, and the parlour leading
out of the principal staircase, are the only parts of the mansion on the
ground-floor that still retain their original character. On the first floor, beside
the Gilt Room, is a noble long gallery, now the library, and the late Lady
Holland’s drawing-room or boudoir. All these rooms preserve their ancient
decorations, and are in the purest taste and the most costly style of
execution.
“The Gilt Room,” which forms the subject of the appended print, is
approached from the entrance-hall by a richly ornamented oak staircase.

From the style of the details it would appear that it was the work of John
Thorpe, and that the painted decorations were the produce of Francis (or
Francesco) Cleyn, a favourite artist of the time, who was employed largely
by the kings James I. and Charles I., from whom he derived an annuity of
100l., settled on him during his natural life, and which he enjoyed till the
Civil War. The ceiling of the room was originally painted by him in the same
style as the other portions of the apartment; being out of repair during the
minority of his late lordship, it was removed, and a plain one put up in its
stead. In the view here given, Mr. Richardson has supplied it from such
fragments and sketches as were obtainable several years ago.
Notwithstanding the loss of its painted ceiling, the room presents an
appearance of elaborate magnificence, and of unique singularity—carrying
us back at once to that luxurious period, the early part of the reign of Charles
I. The paintings, the figures over the fireplaces, deserve great praise,
although we cannot entirely coincide with Horace Walpole, who declares (in
his life of Cleyn) that they are not unworthy of Parmigiano. The paintings—
such as remain over the fireplaces and soffites of the arches—certainly are
masterly, though the architect might discover a little of the “contract style”
about them. Cleyn was employed by Charles I., whose good taste led him to
patronise only the most eminent men in art. The painter was denominated “Il
famosissimo pittore Francesco Cleyn, miracolo del secolo, e molto stimato
del Re Carlo della Gran Britania.”[6]
This cut represents some of Cleyn’s painting in the soffite of one of the
arches in the gilt-room; it is roughly painted—although in a free and
masterly style—in umber, on a white ground; the drapery, dress, and hair of
the figures, are gilt.

From a drawing by C. F. Richardson, F.S.A. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
THE GILT ROOM, HOLLAND HOUSE.

The decorative panelling of the Gilt Room is continued round the four
sides, and in the large recess in the centre (immediately above the entrance-
porch); the interior of each panel has a small raised fillet, about an eighth of
an inch in thickness, forming an ornamental border: this is gilt. In the centre
of the panels are painted alternately cross-crosslets and fleur-de-lis, charges
in the arms of Cope and Rich; they are surmounted by an earl’s coronet, with
palm or oak branches, in gold, shaded with bistre. The figures over the
fireplaces have the flesh painted, the rest is gold shaded; the lower columns
of the fireplaces are painted black, the upper being of Sienna marble: both
have gilt ornaments at the lower part of the shaft, and their caps and bases
gilt: for the rest, all the prominent mouldings, the flutes, caps, and bases of
the pilasters are gilt; the cima recta of the great entablature has a painted leaf
enrichment, with acorns between, the latter of which are gilt. The
groundwork of the whole is white. The busts in the room were placed there
by his late lordship: over the fireplaces are those of King William the Fourth,
and George the Fourth when Prince Regent. Arranged on pedestals round the
room are busts of the late Lord Holland, Francis Duke of Bedford, Henry

first Lord Holland, the late Duke of Sussex, John Hookham Frere, the Duke
of Cumberland (of Culloden), Napoleon, Henry the Fourth of France, the
Right Hon. Charles James Fox, by Nollekens, a duplicate made for the
Empress Catharine of Russia. In the bow-recess are models of Henry Earl of
Pembroke, and Thomas Winnington, Esq. The painted shields in the corner
of the room bear the arms of Rich of Warwick, and Cope and Rich. Of the
ancient furniture of the
Gilt Room two chairs alone remain;
these are mentioned by Horace Walpole
as being the work of Francesco Cleyn:
they are painted white, and partly gilt. A
large bench, formed by three of these
chairs placed together, with one arm only
at each end, was discovered by the artist
some years ago, in a lumber-place over
the stable, where, probably, it still
remains. The Gilt Room, during the
lifetime of his late lordship, was used as
the state dining-room: the state drawing-
room, lined with silk, and hung with
paintings, led out of it by the door on the
right—seen in the print. Parallel to these
rooms, at the back of the
building, is another line of drawing-
rooms, modernised, but which contain a valuable collection of paintings.
Among them is a celebrated one by Hogarth—the amateur performance, by
children of the nobility, of “The Beggar’s Opera.” This painting is very
large: the whole of the figures are portraits. Another painting by Hogarth is
in the collection, which has never been engraved. It is a view of the entrance
to Ranelagh Gardens, Chelsea. The collection contains a few very fine Sir
Joshua’s. Among them is his portrait of Joseph Baretti, well known from the
engraving. There are likewise a few first-rate pictures of the old masters. The
library contains a series of portraits of political and literary friends of his late
lordship; and, in the boudoir, are the series of the late J. Stothard’s most
exquisite compositions to illustrate Moore’s poems. These drawings are very
highly finished, and are twice the size of the engravings which were made
from them.

In “Lady Holland’s Boudoir,” among other curiosities, are two
candlesticks formerly belonging to Mary Queen of Scots; they are of brass,
each of eleven and a half inches in height. They are of French manufacture;
the sunk parts are filled up with an inlay of blue, green, and white enamel,
very similar to that done at Limoge. These candlesticks are extremely
elegant; one of them is represented in the above woodcut.
The accompanying woodcut represents the fireplace in “the ancient
parlour;” leaving the principal staircase in the ground floor; the door on the
left leads into this room. It is supposed to have been painted in a similar style
to the great chamber above-stairs. The fireplace in this room is of the most
excellent design and capital execution. A portion of the framing of the room
is shewn by the side of the fireplace: this is likewise very elegant. One of the
ancient windows of this apartment is blocked up, and an ornamental arch
placed in front of it by Inigo Jones. It was in this room that plays were
performed by the direction of the first Lady Holland, when the theatres in
London were shut up by the Puritans: it is commonly called “The Theatre
Room.”[7]
The other rooms will require but a brief notice. “The Journal Room” is so
named because a complete set of the journals of the Houses of Lords and
Commons are there preserved: it contains several portraits, among which are

three or four by Sir Joshua Reynolds. This is
on the ground-floor. Underneath the hall is the
ancient kitchen, not long ago fitted up as a
servants’ hall. In the north-east wing is a large
apartment, formerly the chapel of the mansion:
it has been disused for half a century, having
been converted into a bath-room.
The Libraries are spacious and “well
stocked;” the principal, which forms the west
wing of the house, is styled the Long Gallery;
it is, in length, one hundred and two feet, and,
in breadth, seventeen feet four inches.
According to Mr. Faulkner (“History of
Kensington”), whose account was written
under the superintendence of the late Lord
Holland, in the year 1746, this fine apartment
was entirely out of repair, and even
“unfloored:” it was, however, at that period
completely restored, and converted from its
ancient use, as the gallery for exercise, into a
receptacle for books, of which it contains a
rare selection. The first Lord Holland had
fitted it up for pictures; blocking up many of
the windows, and opening in lieu of them a
large bow-window on the west side. The “West
Library” and the “East Library”—two rooms
of moderate extent—contain also several
valuable folios—curious treasures of antiquity. Mr. Faulkner enumerates
some of the more remarkable of the contents of the eastern library, which
cannot fail to interest the reader:—
“A curious copy of Camoens, to which the praises of Mr. De Souza, the patriotic editor of the late
splendid edition of that poet, have given extraordinary celebrity. It is a copy of one of the earliest
editions, and Mr. De Souza alleges that it must have been in the hands of the poet himself. At the
bottom of the title-page the following curious and melancholy testimony of his unfortunate death is
written in an old Spanish hand, which states that the writer saw him die in an hospital at Lisbon,
without even a blanket to cover him.
“ ‘Que coza mas lastimosa que ver un tan grande ingenio mal logrado! yo lo bi morir en un
hospital en Lisboa, sin tener una sauana con que cubrirse, despues de aver triunfado en la India

oriental, y de aver navigado
5500 leguas por mar: que
auiso tan grande para los
que de noche y de dia se
cançan estudiando sin
provecho, como la arana en
urdir tellas para cazar
moscas!’
“Specimens of all the
types in the Vatican Library,
printed in the Propaganda
press, A.D. 1640, on silk.
“The music of the
‘Olimpiade,’ an opera of
Metastasio, well
authenticated to have been
transcribed by J. J.
Rousseau, when that
extraordinary man procured
his livelihood by copies of
this kind. The hand-writing
is so beautiful that it
resembles copper-plate
engraving.
“Four volumes of MS.
Plays of Lope de Vega, the
first containing three plays in
his own hand-writing, with
the original license of the
censor.
“The original copy, in
MS., of the ‘Mogigata,’ a
favourite play of the
celebrated Moratin, the first
writer of Spanish comedy
now living, but who has been
proscribed and exiled by
Ferdinand the Seventh.
“There are several others of nearly equal interest, and among the MSS. there are many curious
autographs of Philip the Second, Prince Eugene, Pontanus, Sannazarius, and others, and three original
letters of Petrarch.
“Also a voluminous MS. collection of the proceedings in Cortes, from the earliest period, copied
from the archives of the King of Spain. The original correspondence of Don Pedro Ronquillo, the
Spanish ambassador, resident in London at the time of our Revolution; part in cypher, with the
translation by the side, with several others of equal value and curiosity.”

The Long Gallery is ornamented with portraits of the Lenox, Digby, and
Fox families; Dryden and Addison; Sir C. H. Williams; Admiral Lestock; Sir
Robert Walpole; the Right Honourable Thomas Winnington; Cardinal

Fleury, by Rigaud; and Van Lintz, by himself. Scattered throughout the
apartments are King Charles II. and the Duchess of Portsmouth; Sir Stephen
Fox, by Sir Peter Lely; Henry, Lord Holland; Stephen, Lord Holland, by
Zoffany; the late Right Honourable C. J. Fox, when an infant;—when a boy,
in a group with Lady Susan Strangeways and Lady Mary Lenox (by Sir
Joshua Reynolds); and a fine picture of him in more advanced life by the
same artist. There are two busts, also, of him, by Nollekens, one of which
was taken not long before his death; and a statue, seated in the entrance-hall.
We may not take leave of this fine old mansion without expressing a
fervent hope that the interesting work of two centuries may endure for many
centuries to come; that modern improvements—although they may place the
suburb of which it is the crowning gem in the centre of the Metropolis—will
not displace it to make room for petty structures of a day, but that the tale of
the Olden Time may be there told to our descendants as it has been there told
to our ancestors.

From a drawing by J. D. Harding Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
BLICKLING HALL. NORFOLK.
From a drawing by J. D. Harding Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.

BLICKLING HALL. NORFOLK.

B L I C KL I NG H A L L ,

NORFOLK.

ourneying a dozen miles north of the city of Norwich,
the Tourist reaches the old town of Aylsham. A mile
hence is the very ancient manor of Blickling[8]—
famous so far back as the time of the Confessor, when
it was in the possession of Harold, King of England;
remarkable, in after times, when occupied by the
Bishops of the See, and celebrated, in the history of
various epochs, as a seat of the noble families of
Dagworth, Erpingham, Fastolff, Boleyne, Clere, and
Hobart. From this ancient house, Henry VIII. married
the unfortunate mother of Queen Elizabeth; here the virgin queen herself is
said to have been a guest, and here Charles II. and his consort were visitors
—events referred to by the court-poet, Stephenson:
“Blickling 2 monarchs and 2 queens has seen;
One king fetch’d thence, another brought, a queen.”

The mansion—Blickling Hall—is one of the most perfect examples
remaining of the time of James I.; the exterior has undergone few changes;
the bridge, the moat, the turrets, the curiously-formed gables, and the double
row of spacious and convenient out-offices—connected with the mansion by
an arcade—are characteristic of the period, while elaborate finish and costly
ornament indicate the wealth and rank of its noble owners. The high-road
passes the gates, and runs within a few yards of the house; a small green
sward only separating it from the public pathway. The moat is crossed by a
Bridge of remarkably light and graceful proportions; on either side of this
bridge are Pedestals with bulls (the heraldic crest of the Hobarts) bearing
blank shields. The entrance-porch is exceedingly beautiful; the design is
simple and elegant; “it may be regarded,” according to Mr. Shaw, “as one of
the earliest attempts at the restoration of classical architecture, and appears
to be formed upon the model of the Arch of Titus at Rome.” In the spandrels
are sculptured figures of Victory. Over the entablature, supported by two
Doric columns, is an enriched compartment, bearing the arms and

quarterings of Sir Henry Hobart, Bart. (by whom the stately mansion was
erected). A massive Oak Door contains the date 1620; the knocker of this
door is peculiarly quaint; a copy of it acts as the initial letter commencing
this description. Passing a small quadrangular court, we enter the Hall, from
which opens the grand Staircase of Oak, the newels of which are crowned
with figures. Unhappily, the oak has been covered with paint; and time
having removed some of the figures, their places have been supplied by
others out of harmony with the character of the venerable structure.[9] Of the
several apartments, the only one that demands particular notice is the Library
—a noble room, filled with the rarest and most valuable books. It measures
one hundred and twenty-seven feet; the ceiling is a magnificent collection of
works of art, unsurpassed by anything of the kind in Great Britain. It consists
of a series of models, representing the Senses, the Passions and the
Elements, in low relief—comprising a very large number of subjects, no two
of which are alike. The library is—as a private collection—extensive; the
books it contains are generally “large paper copies,” and in the finest
possible state. Some of its treasures are unique—here are a volume of Saxon
Homilies, and a Latin MS. of the Psalter, certainly as ancient as anything we
possess in the Latin tongue, and several others, with and without
illuminations, of very remote dates. Here also are two copies (imperfect) of
the Coverdale Bible; an uncut copy of the diminutive Sedan New Testament,
and a vast assemblage of the choicest productions of the early English press.
It was formed by Maittaire for Sir Richard Ellys, Bart., of Norton, in
Lincolnshire, to whom he dedicated his “Anacreon,” in 1725. The curiosities
of the library were shown to us by the Rev. James Bulwer, whose own
family seat of Heydon is in the neighbourhood of Blickling Hall.
Mr. Harding’s print of this fine old mansion affords an accurate idea of its
elegance and grandeur. Its form is quadrangular—having a square turret at
each angle. Viewed from any point it is highly picturesque. The Park, which
surrounds it on three sides, contains above 1000 acres. Its trees are
celebrated for their exceeding beauty and prodigious growth. A remarkably
fine piece of water, shaped like a crescent, adjoins the house, extending
nearly a mile in length. Nature and Art have both contributed to adorn this
artificial Lake; gentle acclivities rise from its sides, here and there fringed
with evergreens infinitely varied, while gigantic oaks, and elms, and
beeches, rising at intervals, seem the guardians of its banks.

We may sum up our account of Blickling Hall in the words of old
Blomefield:—“The building is a curious brick fabric, four-square, with a
turret at each corner; there are two good Courts, with a fine Library, elegant
Wilderness, good Lake, Gardens, and Park; it is a pleasant, beautiful seat,
worthy the observation of such as make the Norfolk Tour.”
The erection of the existing structure was commenced by Sir Henry
Hobart, Bart., during the reign of James the First, but was not finished until
the year 1628, when “the Domestic Chapel was consecrated.” The building,
however, retained its original character, varying very little, in external
appearance and internal arrangements, from the old Mansion in which
Queen Anne Boleyne was born, and which had been famous for centuries.
When the Domesday Survey was made, one part of the Manor belonged
to Beausoc, Bishop of Thetford (the seat of the See until 1088), the other
part being in possession of the Crown. Both moieties were invested with the
privileges of ancient demesne, were exempt from the hundred (of South
Erpingham) and had the lete with all royalties. Having successively passed
through the hands of many distinguished families, in 1431 it was the
property of Sir Thomas De Erpingham, by whom it was sold to Sir John
Fastolff, who, about the year 1452, sold it to Sir Geoffrey Boleyne, Knt.,
who was Lord Mayor of London in 1458, and who made Blickling his
country-seat. From him inherited his second son, Sir William Boleyne,
Knight,
who married Margaret, sister of James Butler, Earl of Ormond; dying in
1505, he was succeeded by his son, Sir Thomas Boleyne, who, the 18th of
Henry VIII., was raised to the peerage by the title of Viscount Rochford, and
three years afterwards was created Earl of Wiltshire. His daughter, Anne,
was privately married to Henry VIII., on the 5th of January, 1533. On the
19th of May, 1536, she was beheaded; her dismal fate having been shared by
her brother, Viscount Rochford; and the old Earl died in 1538—it is believed
of a broken heart. Soon afterwards the estate of Blickling, having been for a
short time in the family of the Cleres, was purchased by Sir Harry Hobart,
Bart., “a fortunate lawyer,” who became Lord Chief Justice of the Common
Pleas. He was succeeded by his son and grandson, the second and third
Baronets; the fourth Baronet was created, by George II., Lord Hobart of
Blickling, in 1728; and in 1746, Earl of Buckinghamshire. His son, the
second Earl, died without male issue, but left four daughters, one of whom
married the late Marquis of Londonderry, another William Lord Suffield, the

third Lord Mount
Edgcombe, and a
fourth the Marquis
of Lothian, whose
surviving son, the
fifth Marquis, died
at Blickling in
1841, leaving a son,
an infant, who is
heir-apparent to the
estate, now in the
possession of his
great aunt, the
Dowager Lady
Suffield.
The venerable
Church of Blickling
adjoins the
mansion. It is
built—in the style
of nearly all the
Norfolk Churches
—of flint, a
material that
essentially impairs
the solemn dignity
of the structure.
Many of the
Brasses and
Tombs are of high
interest; the one of
which we append
an engraving (on
the preceding
page) is to the
memory of
Edward Clere. It is described by Blomefield as “a most curious Altar Tomb,

placed between the Chancel and
Boleyne’s Chapel. The Effigy which laid
upon it is now gone; but there remain the
Arms and Matches of his family, from the
Conquest to the time that his son and heir,
Sir Edward Clere, erected this tomb.” As
a work of art, the Tomb possesses
considerable excellence. The carved
Armorial Bearings retain much of the
original brilliancy of their colouring.
Among the Brasses is one for Anne
Boleyne, aunt of the unfortunate Queen,
and another of Isabella Cheyne, (date
1485) remarkable as exhibiting the
earliest authentic example of the
necklace. An elaborately-wrought Oak
Chest, of great size, strongly banded with
iron, and secured by five curiously
formed locks and keys, is preserved in
Blickling Church; but a relic still more
curious and unique is a Poor-box, of very
primitive character, heart-shaped, and
painted blue, the letters, “Pray remember the Pore,” being gilt. We give
engravings of both these peculiar and very interesting antiquities.

B UR GH L E Y H OUS E ,

N O RT H A M P T O N S H I R E .

urleigh, or Burghley House, the princely seat of the
Marquis of Exeter, is one of the most magnificent
mansions of its period; it has come down to us intact,
and is perhaps more interesting—from its associations
with the “glorious days”—than any other edifice now
remaining in the kingdom. The halls are still standing
where the famous Lord Treasurer entertained his
Sovereign and her dazzling court; while Nonsuch,
Theobalds, and Cannons have vanished—their sites are
ploughed over; and Kenilworth has become a venerable
antiquity, a moss-covered ruin.
In the reign of the Confessor, Burghley was let to farm by the Church of
Burgh, to Alfgar, the king’s chaplain, for his life. The crown having seized it
at his death, Abbot Leofric redeemed it for eight marcs of gold. In
Doomsday Book it is rated at 40s. As usual in the feudal ages, it often
changed hands, when treasons and rebellions were every-day occurrences. In
the 9th of Edward II. Nicholas de Segrave was possessed of Burleigh, which
had descended to Alice de Lisle, as part of the inheritance of John de
Armenters. The successor of Nicholas de Segrave was Warine de L’Isle. He
was one of the great men who, in the 14th of Edward II., took up arms
against the King, under the command of Thomas Earl of Lancaster; was
made prisoner with him at the battle of Barrow Bridge, and the week
following executed at Pontefract. In the 1st of Edward III., Gerard de Lisle,
son of the above Warine, was restored to his father’s possessions, and
accompanied several times the King in his wars with Scotland and France.
After undergoing many of the usual changes to which property was
subjected in such uncertain times, it finally passed into possession of a
family named Cecil, as we now spell it, although it appears to have enjoyed
many variations of orthography in its transition. The founder of the house
and family was a gentleman named William Cecil, who accompanied the
Duke of Somerset to Scotland. At the battle of Musselburgh field he
narrowly escaped being killed, a gentleman who out of kindness pushed him

out of the level of a cannon, having his arm shattered as he withdrew it. On
his return he was made Secretary of State, and in some political trouble was
sent prisoner to the Tower: but no charge being brought against him he was
released from his captivity, again made Secretary of State, became a Privy
Councillor, and received the honour of knighthood. During the reign of
Mary, he attached himself much to the fortunes of her younger sister,
Elizabeth. When she ascended the throne, fresh honours were lavished on
him: he became Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, Master of the
Court of Wards, Baron Burleigh, Lord High Treasurer, and Knight of the
Garter. He was much afflicted with gout in his latter years, and on one
occasion when he was confined with an attack of it, at his house in the
Strand (called Burleigh House, where a street of that name is now built), the
Queen condescended to visit him. On one of these occasions, coming with a
high head-dress, and the servant, as she entered the door, desiring her to
stoop; she replied, “For your master’s sake I will stoop, but not for the King
of Spain.” He died in 1598, having been Lord High Treasurer twenty-six
years, and was buried in the parish-church of St. Martin, Stamford. A superb
white alabaster monument, sixteen feet high, is raised over his tomb; his
figure lies under a canopy supported by several black marble columns. It is
in the style of the period, and stands under the arch of the north aisle and
body of the church.
Thomas, Lord Burghley, the Lord Treasurer’s eldest son, was created Earl
of Exeter in 1605; and Henry, tenth Earl of Exeter and eleventh Lord
Burghley, his lineal descendant, was created Marquis of Exeter in 1801. His
son, Brownlow Cecil, the second Marquis, who succeeded his father in
1804, is the present possessor of the princely mansion and estates.
The mansion we are about to notice is built on ground where there is but
little undulation of surface, and stands about a mile and a half from the old
town of Stamford, in Northamptonshire, separated from Lincolnshire by the
river Welland, which runs through Stamford. At the northern extremity of the
domain stand the park lodges: they are extremely handsome erections, and
more than usually important buildings for such purposes. Although built so
recently as the year 1801, by Henry the tenth Earl, they are in perfect
harmony of design with the main edifice. The cost of their erection exceeded
5000l. The park is about two miles in length and a mile and a half in width.
It was arranged and planted by the famous “Capability Brown,” and is well
adorned with fine ash, elm, chestnut, and other trees, as well as plantations

of shrubberies. A temple, grottos, and picturesque buildings for domestic or
agricultural services, add to its beautiful character. It is well stocked with
deer. On entering the park to proceed to the house, a noble piece of water,
three quarters of a mile in length, is spanned by a handsome bridge of three
arches, having the balustrades decorated with four statues of lions couchant.
In the park enclosure are the remains of the ancient Roman road, called
Ermine Street, from Stilton through Castor to Stamford: it is easily traceable
in many parts.
On arriving opposite the
mansion, the eye is
bewildered at its unusual
extent: its numerous turrets,
and the spire of the Chapel
rising above the parapets,
give it the aspect of a town
comprised in comparatively
diminished area, rather than
a single abode. The
appended engraving exhibits
a portion of the west front.
The mansion stands in an
extensive lawn. Mr. Gilpin,
in his “Tour to the
Highlands,” thus describes
it:—“Burghley House is one
of the noblest monuments of
British architecture of the
time of Queen Elizabeth,
when the great outlines of
magnificence were rudely
drawn, but unimproved by
taste. It is an immense pile,
forming the four sides of a
large court, and although
decorated with a variety of
fantastic ornaments, according to the fashion of the time, before Grecian
architecture had introduced symmetry, proportion, and elegance into the

plans of private houses, it has still an august appearance. The interior court is
particularly striking: the spire of the Chapel is neither, I think, in itself an
ornament, nor has it any effect, except at a distance; when it contributes to
give this immense pile the consequence of a town.” Horace Walpole says,
John Thorpe was the architect; and that he superintended the erection of the
greater part of this stupendous building. This assertion is corroborated by the
plans, still extant, in this celebrated architect’s collection of designs, now in
the Soane Museum. It is built of freestone and forms a massive
parallelogram, enclosing a court 110 feet long and 70 feet wide. The
principal entrance is on the north side,
and offers a frontage of nearly 200 feet,
pierced with three ranges of large
square-headed windows, divided by
stone mullions and transoms. The outline
is varied by towers at the angles
surmounted by turrets with cupolas; the
frontage is varied by advancing bays
between the towers; a pierced parapet,
occasionally embellished with
ornaments that mark the Elizabethan era,
crowns the walls. The chimneys are
constructed in the hollows of Doric
columns, which are in groups, connected
by a frieze and cornice of the order; as
they are very numerous, and of fine proportions—rising loftily in the air—
they combine with the turrets, &c. to give a great variety of forms to the
superior portion of the main design. In the arched roof under the passage to
the interior court, which was in the first instance intended to be the chief
entrance, are escutcheons of the family arms, on one of which is inscribed
“W. DOM de Burghley, 1577,” being the year when that part of the house
was built. On the opposite side of the court, over the dial and under the spire,
is carved the date 1585, which indicates when that part was erected; and on
the present entrance, on the northern side, stands the date 1587 between the
windows. The house has been much adorned by various successive
possessors, and at the present time few seats, either in England or on the
Continent, can vie with Burghley House.

Queen Elizabeth frequently visited her favourite minister, her Lord
Treasurer, here; and on April 23, 1603, James I., on his journey from
Scotland, came to Burghley: the next day, being Easter Sunday, he attended
divine worship at the parish church, St. Martin’s, Stamford, when the Bishop
of Lincoln preached before him.
Ente
ring the
court,
the
beautie
s of the
architec
ture
become
apparen
t. The
append
ed
engravi
ng
represe
nts the
entranc
e from
the
courtya
rd. The
eastern
side is
the
most
highly decorated, and its three stories adorned with the Doric, Ionic, and
Corinthian orders, in super-position. Above the last are two large stone lions,
supporting the arms of the family. Over an arch before the chapel is a bust of
King William III.; the balustrades are enriched with a variety of sculptured
vases. Four large gates from the various sides open into the court, and give
entrance to the several portions of the building, which contains nearly one

hundred and fifty apartments, many of them of great dimensions, all
furnished suitably for their purpose, and a considerable number in gorgeous
profusion of decorative ornament and splendid furniture. It is one of the few
palatial mansions of a refined, gay, and brilliant period, which remain
carefully preserved, and undisturbed by modern upholsterers. It is
impossible to speak too highly of the elegance and splendour of the interior.
The first apartment on entering is the spacious Hall: from some of the
remaining features of its construction, it has been imagined that the great
Lord Treasurer did not build a new house from the foundation, but that an
edifice existed to which he imparted vastness by the additions he made. The
dimensions of this Hall show at once that it includes a noble space, being
sixty-eight feet long and thirty feet broad. It receives light from two large
windows, and has a fine open-worked timber roof, springing from corbels,
very similar in idea to the roofs of Westminster Hall, and the Parliament
House at Edinburgh. The chimneypiece is in perfect keeping with the
Baronial Hall, and is of stone, finely sculptured, bearing for its principal
device in the centre the shield and supporters of the founder of the family; it
is also ornamented by a number of pictures, some of which are portraits.
There are statues in marble of life size, one of which, very much esteemed,
represents Andromeda chained to the rock, and the Sea-monster. It was
purchased in Rome, a century ago, by the fifth Earl of Exeter, for 300l.
“Drakard’s Guide” attributes it to Peter Stephen Monnot; but Brydges, in his
“History of Northamptonshire,” says it is by Domenico Guidi.
From the Hall, visitors pass through the Saloon, and up the ancient grand
vaulted stone staircase in the north-west part of the house, to an apartment
called the Chapel Room, which contains nearly fifty pictures, mostly of
sacred subjects. A true description of the numerous pictures in the different
rooms is sadly wanted, as we find one here called Titian’s Wife and Son,
attributed to Teniers! in “Drakard’s Guide,” published at Stamford. Here
also stands a model of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, curiously inlaid. The
Chapel, to which the preceding serves as an ante-room, is spacious, being
forty-two feet long, thirty-five feet wide, and eighteen feet high. The ceiling
is panelled and studded with devices; the side-walls are wainscoted half-way
up, and at intervals are placed, on pedestals, ten antique bronzed figures, of
life size, each holding a lamp. Festoons of fruit and flowers, carved by
Grinling Gibbons, are its principal ornaments. Many of the finest apartments
in the house, such as chimneypieces, are profusely decorated with his

valuable carving. A seat on the left-hand side, nearest to the altar, is pointed
out as having been occupied by Queen Elizabeth when on a visit to
Burghley. There are some large pictures placed on the walls of another
space, which forms also a portion of the Chapel at the western end. This
part, thirty-one feet long and twenty-four feet broad, is wainscoted to the
ceiling, and is filled with open seats, for servants and others connected with
the family to attend divine service.
The gorgeous Ball-room succeeds, fifty feet in length, twenty-eight in
width, and twenty-six in height. The walls are painted with historical and
other subjects by Laguerre. The candelabra, which are placed on pedestals of
japan gilt about two feet high, are truly splendid. Two of them, placed by the
sides of the lofty bow-window, are the figures of Negroes kneeling, and
supporting the lights on their heads. The Brown Drawing-room, filled with
pictures and a carved chimneypiece by Gibbons, leads to the Black
Bedchamber, so called from the hangings of the bed, which are of black satin
lined with yellow; the chimneypiece here is also by Gibbons. The west
Dressing-room has in the window recess a toilette-table, set out with richly
gilt dressing-plate. The north-west Dressing-room is hung with pictures;
indeed every one of the principal rooms boasts of pictorial decoration, and
among the profusion are many fine examples of ancient art. In a small
apartment called the China Closet is an extensive gathering of varied
specimens of antique Chinese, and Indian porcelain. Queen Elizabeth’s Bed-
room is hung with tapestry, and contains an ancient state bed with hangings
of green embossed velvet, on a ground of gold tissue; with chairs to
correspond. The toilette-table is set out with richly chased dressing-plate. A
number of other apartments in this range follow, similarly furnished and
adorned. On the south side of the house there is another suite of grand
apartments called the George Rooms, which were decorated in 1789, under
the express direction and control of Brownlow, earl of Exeter, who selected
the whole of the ornaments from publications of ancient architecture in the
library at Burghley. His lordship directed the whole, without the assistance
of any professional person. The rooms are wainscoted with the finest Dutch
oak, of a natural colour; the ceilings are mostly painted by Verrio, in
mythological subjects; carving, gilding, and tapestry, are profusely
employed; the furniture is of corresponding magnificence; and pictures,
sculptures, and antiquities are dispersed, to add to the general
embellishment. The Dining-room contains two superb sideboards laden with

massive silver-gilt plate; a silver cistern weighs 3400 ounces, and a lesser
one 656 ounces: there are also coronation dishes, ewers, &c. Two apartments
are Libraries; they are filled with many MSS., fine and rare books,
antiquities, and an extensive collection of ancient coins.
The new State Bed-room, in the suite of George Rooms, contains a state
bed, which has the reputation of being the most splendid in Europe. It stands
on a base or platform, ascended by a couple of steps. A canopy, richly carved
and entirely gilt, is supported at the angles by clusters of columns rising
from elaborate tripods, which support the canopy or dome. The height of this
construction, which resembles a temple, is twenty feet from the ground; 250
yards of striped silk coral velvet and 900 yards of white satin are employed
in the hangings. The bed is a couch, which stands under the temple. The fifth
George Room is called “Heaven,” from the multitude of Pagan deities with
which Verrio has covered it; and the grand staircase (not the vaulted one) is
usually called “Hell,” in consequence of the painted ceiling representing the
poetic Tartarus.
It would be vain to attempt a minute description of all that interests the
learned or accomplished visitor; a volume has already been published, which
in itself is but an abridged account. Every faculty of rational enjoyment is
gratified to repletion in viewing the gorgeous halls of Burghley House.

CASTLE ASHBY, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

C AS T L E AS H BY,

N O RT H A M P T O N S H I R E .

astle Ashby, the venerable and deeply interesting
seat of the Most Noble the Marquess of
Northampton, is situate about eight miles from the
town of Northampton.
Much curious information exists concerning the
early history of the manor; to which, however, we
shall not be able to enter at any length. No mention
is made of the Saxon lord of “Asebi;” but in the
time of the Confessor it was rated at twenty
shillings yearly: this yearly value had quadrupled
at the time of the Domesday Survey, when the
estate “was held by Hugh, under the countess
Judith.” In the reign of Henry III., the manor was
seized under a forfeiture, incurred by David de
Esseby, for aiding the confederate barons against the king. After the battle of
Evesham, the estates of all these barons were confiscated; but by the
subsequent conciliatory policy of the sovereign, the offenders were allowed
to redeem their lands by payment of five years’ value within three years.
This boon led to much disputation and some violence between the de jure
and de facto holders; and in the case of Esseby (Ashby), Alan la Zouch, the
then holder, died of fever induced by wounds inflicted on him before the
king’s justices in Westminster Hall, by Earl Warren (guardian of Isabella,
grandchild of David de Esseby), who sought to recover the estates for his
ward. Immediately after this outrage Earl Warren fled, but was pursued by
Prince Edward, son of the king, who captured him, and it was only by much
crying for mercy, and many protestations of making such reparation as he
could, that he saved himself from immediate punishment.
It is not necessary to trace the various hands through which Castle Ashby
passed subsequently to this period, until we arrive at the fifteenth century,
when the estates became the property of the Compton family, ancestors of
the present noble possessor, who only succeeded in establishing a claim by a
re-purchase in 1465, after fifty years’ possession, in consequence of “rival

nuncupative wills” made by previous owners. Sir William Compton, the
purchaser, was the head of a family long settled at Compton Winyate, in
Warwickshire, from which place the family name was derived; at the death
of his father, Sir William had not attained his majority, and being in ward to
Henry VII., was chosen by the king to attend his son Prince Henry, who, on
subsequently ascending the throne, gave him an appointment as groom of the
bed-chamber. Sir William, then Mr. Compton, soon became a favourite with
the sovereign, one of whose freaks was to attend incog. a tournament got up
by some of the courtiers, on which occasion he was attended by his
favourite, Mr. Compton, who received a dangerous wound by an accidental
collision with Sir Edward Nevill. In November 1510, the king proclaimed a
tournament, “at which he with his two aids, Charles Brandon, afterwards
Duke of Suffolk, and William Compton, gave an universal challenge with
the spear at tilt one day, and at tourney with the sword the other.”
Magnificently accoutred, the royal party entered the lists, gained great
distinction, and received the prize. Afterwards, in 1511, the king granted to
William Compton Esq., “his trusty serv’nte and true liegman, for the good
and (acceptable) s’vyce whiche he hathe doone to his Hignesse, and durynge
his lyfe entendithe to doo,” the manor of Tottenham, in Middlesex, and he
was honoured, in the following year, with an armorial augmentation out of
the royal arms. “Mayster Compton,” as he is called in an old MS., became
Sir William in 1513, being knighted by the king after the battle of the Spurs
(5 Hen. VIII.). He died in 1528, after retaining through life the confidence
and regard of his wayward master, from whom he received many valuable
marks of attachment. His son Peter, who was only six years of age, became
the ward of Cardinal Wolsey, and afterwards of the Earl of Shrewsbury, to
whose daughter he was married. He died in his minority, leaving one son,
Henry Compton, who was knighted by the Earl of Leicester in 1566, and
summoned to parliament by writ, as Baron Compton, in 1572 (14 Eliz.).
About this time another attempt was made to wrest the estate of Ashby from
the Compton family, which, however, ended in a compromise between the
contending parties, each making some concessions, “for the finall endinge of
all sutes and controversies.” Lord Compton was one of the Commissioners
deputed to sit in judgment on Mary queen of Scots.
William, second Lord Compton, married the daughter and heiress of Sir
John Spencer, alderman of London, and thus obtained a large addition to his
possessions. This union would appear to have been made secretly, and

without the consent of the lady’s father; it took place at the church of St.
Catharine Colman, Fenchurch St., as the register shews: “18 Apr. 1599,
William Lorde Compton, and Elizabeth Spencer, maryed, being thrice asked
in the churche.” Lord Compton, by reason of zealous service, was regarded
with great favour by James I., who made him President of the Council within
the marches of Wales, to which he added the honour of Lord Lieutenant of
the Principality, and the counties of Worcester, Hereford, and Salop. In 1617
he was created Earl of Northampton. He died in 1630, and was succeeded by
his only son Spencer, who became one of the most distinguished men of the
age. He was an accomplished linguist, and filled posts of much distinction
about the person of the king; ultimately taking an active part in the great
civil war, and after many brilliant feats of arms he was killed at Hopton
Heth. He left six sons, all worthy of their heroic father, distinguished like
him for their devotion to the royal cause.
James, the eldest son of the loyal and gallant peer, became his successor
—the third Earl of Northampton. At Hopton Heath he was carried wounded
from the field, immediately before his father received his death-wound:
afterwards, he greatly distinguished himself in the king’s service,
particularly at Lichfield. On the Restoration he headed a troop of two
hundred gentlemen, “clothed in grey and blue,” at the entry of Charles II.
into London; and “his loyalty was subsequently rewarded with several
honourable appointments, which he held till his death, at Castle Ashby,
December 15, 1681.” George, fourth Earl, died in 1727, and was succeeded
by his eldest son, James, fifth earl, who was summoned to the House of
Peers, by writ, in 1711. He married Elizabeth Shirley, Baroness Ferrars, of
Chartley, by whom he had issue, and left Charlotte, his only surviving child,
who married the first Marquess Townshend. George, the sixth earl, after
enjoying his title but four years, died without issue, and was succeeded by
his nephew, Charles, seventh earl, a nobleman of considerable
accomplishments, who was made ambassador extraordinary to Venice in
1763. He died at Lyons, on his way home, leaving an only daughter,
Elizabeth, wife of the late, and grandmother of the present, Earl of
Burlington. Spencer, eighth earl, brother of the preceding, was succeeded, in
1797, by his only son, Charles, ninth earl, who was created Baron
Wilmington, Earl Compton, and Marquess of Northampton in 1812. On his
death, in 1828, the titles and estates devolved on his only son, Spencer

Joshua Alwyne Compton, born in 1790,—the present Marquess of
Northampton.
The noble marquess is not alone distinguished by high descent and lofty
position; few persons of the age have more assiduously cultivated science
and letters. His lordship is president of the Royal Society, and member of
various other learned Institutions; and his “annual gatherings” of
distinguished or accomplished men at his mansion in London, have been
among the most gratifying and beneficial events of a period which
recognises genius as a distinction, and gives its proper status to mind.[10]
Castle Ashby is about two miles from the White-Mill Station, on the
Northampton and Peterborough Railway, from which a convenient road
offers facilities to vehicles, while pedestrian visitors may shorten the
distance, and enjoy extensive prospects of scenery, by taking a footpath over
the hills—thus at once saving time and augmenting enjoyment. On
ascending the first of these hills, he sees before him an extensive valley; on
the opposite hill is placed the castle, of which, however, as yet he can obtain
no glimpse, being hidden from his view by a dense mass of noble trees,
which protect it from the northern winds.
Fro
m this
point
the
church
is an
object
of
much
beauty
in the
landsc
ape,
and
being
partial
ly
screen
ed by fine trees, offers, as the visitor proceeds towards it, many pleasing and

picturesque combinations. Emerging suddenly from under thick foliage, we
tread upon an extended lawn, and the whole of the southern front of the
mansion is at once in sight: its symmetrical regularity, its not unhappy
marriage of English with Italian, its stately octangular towers, and the silvery
grey of its time-bleached walls, all combine to produce a most agreeable
impression. It is placed on the crest of the hill, the slope in its rear, a large
tract of table land in front; at right angles with the front a most magnificent
avenue of noble trees passes far into the distance, terminating on the
northern side of Yardley Chase.
Mr. Robinson, in the “Vitruvius Britannicus,” relates all that is known
regarding the erection of the house. “The castle, embattled by license to
Bishop Langton, in the reign of Edward I., was the occasional residence of
successive proprietors. Sir William de la Pole, and Margaret Peveril, his
wife, in 1358, dated a feoffment of their manors of Ashley and Little
Brington at “Castell Assheby;” but when acquired by the family of Grey de
Ruthyn, in the fifteenth century, its proximity to their patrimonial seat at
Yardley Hastings, would naturally lead to its partial and, ultimately, entire
desertion. A century had scarcely elapsed before Leland thus recorded its
desolate condition. “Almost in the middle way betwixt Welingborow and
Northampton I passed Assheby, more than a mile off on the left hand, wher
hathe bene a castle, that now is clene downe, and is made but a septum for
bestes.” By a survey in 1565, it appears that George Carleton, Esq., under a
lease granted by Sir William Compton for sixty-one years, held the site of
the manor and farm of “Asheby David,” with all the demesne lands,
“whereunto pertaineth the old ruined castle.” Camden, in his “Britannica,”
says:—“From hence (Northampton) men maketh haste away by Castle
Ashby, where Henry L. Compton began to build a faire sightly house.” The
commencement of the present stately edifice may, therefore, be safely dated
between the expiration of the lease in 1583 and the death of this nobleman in
1589. One of the requests of the rich heiress of Spencer to her lord was, to
“build up Ashby House.” And the original pile may be presumed to have
been completed when King James I. and his queen favoured its noble owner
with a visit in 1605. The dates of 1624 on the east front and on the two
turrets, must have reference to the subsequent alterations and erections by
Inigo Jones.
The castle buildings occupy a huge quadrangle, with a garden court in the
centre. The most important apartments are on the northern and the southern

sides. The north front is of
pure Elizabethan architecture,
plain, but of massive design,
combined with a grandeur
and impressiveness not often
attained with such unadorned
simplicity. The principal, or
southern front, is remarkable
for the curious anomaly it
presents in the mixture of
Elizabethan with Italian
architecture. Pure taste, of
course, rejects such
experiments, but if they be at
all allowed, perhaps it would
hardly be possible to find an
instance in which the
incongruous association is
less offensive than in this
front; arising, no doubt, from
no attempt having been made
to engraft the one style upon
the other, both being kept
distinct. The Italian façade
was added to enclose the
court, and complete the quadrangle: it was designed by Inigo Jones, and may
be considered a good example of its peculiar character. In contrast with the
plain, massive, Elizabethan wings, the work of Jones may, perhaps, justly be
charged with something of a petite character; but, nevertheless, taking the
whole together, it forms a composition by no means unpleasing. On entering
the castle the visitor is ushered into the Great Hall, a room of noble
dimensions, and which formerly possessed many claims to admiration, but,
unfortunately, it has been modernised, and, therefore, after noting the fine
pictures it contains,—chiefly old family portraits,[11]—we pass on to the
Dining-Room, which also contains some choice pictures; the most striking
are portraits of the present noble marquess and his lady, apparently by
Hoppner, and some choice gems of the Dutch school. Hence we pass into the

Billiard-Room, where, after admiring the table and a few good pictures,
there is nothing to detain us, and we enter the Drawing-Room, in which is an
excellent large picture of landscape, with cattle and figures, the painter of
which is not known. Presently we come to the Great Staircase, which may be
admired for its rich old oak, carved, according to the fashion of Elizabeth’s
time, into a variety of geometrical forms, intermingled with wreaths of fruit
and flowers, some parts of which argue no mean skill in the artisan. From
hence we gain entrance to an ante-room, containing tapestry, said to have
been presented by Queen Elizabeth; and on leaving this room we pass into
the gallery of the Great Hall, whence we must pause awhile to examine a
portrait of Mrs. Chute, by Reynolds, a most valuable picture of an excellent
lady; the dress is white, the picture is in a light key, clear, broad, and
harmonious, and of perfect execution. The next room is the Octagon, where
are two life-size figures, in marble, of Mercury and the Venus de Medici, and
also various other statues, of minor size and merit. King William’s Room
next engages attention: it is of large dimensions, and is chiefly remarkable
for its ceiling, of which we have given one of the enrichments as our initial.
There are two magnificent bay-windows in this room. The Long Gallery is
contained in the upper part of Inigo Jones’ façade, or screen, of which it runs
the entire length—ninety-one feet. It is not remarkable for any peculiar
attractions. It contains a few good pictures, one of which is of interest, “The
Battle of Hopton Heath,” where, as we have seen, several members of the
Compton family were distinguished. It will be at once understood that our
remarks and enumeration of objects refer solely to matters of artistic or
antiquarian interest; we therefore pass over much that might greatly interest
general readers. On the whole, the interior does not sustain the rich promise
of the exterior; the plan does not seem to have been carried out with the
fulness and determination so marked in many of our Baronial Halls. The
gardens do not present any remarkable features: the grounds are picturesque,
and contain a large artificial lake, formed by the famous landscape gardener
Brown, to whom so many of our nobility entrusted their estates for such aids
as art can supply to nature. The grounds of Castle Ashby needed, however,
but little of such help; they are naturally of a kind which art cannot create,
nor do much to improve.

Day & Son, Lithᵗʰ. to The Queen.
KIRBY HALL, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

KI R B Y H AL L ,

N O RT H A M P T O N S H I R E .

irby Hall.—Although now deserted, this very venerable and
exceedingly beautiful Mansion ranks among the finest of the
kingdom.[12] For upwards of two centuries, it was the seat of
“the Hattons,”—the famous Sir Christopher and his lineal
descendants, the Earls of Winchelsea. It was built by Humphrey
Stafford, the Sixth Earl of Northampton; the Architect was John
Thorpe, and two plans of the building are preserved among his
collection of sketches in the Museum bequeathed to the nation
by the late Sir John Soane; one of them is thus distinguished:
—“Kirby, whereof I layd the first stone, 1570.” Not long
afterwards, it came into the possession of the Lord Chancellor
Hatton, who obtained it from Queen Elizabeth in exchange for
that of Holdenby—a superb structure erected by him, and which
Camden describes as “a faire pattern of stately and magnificent building
which maketh a faire glorious show,” and as “not to be matched in this
land.”[13] It is more than probable that Kirby was largely added to—perhaps
finished—by Sir Christopher; but that it was commenced by the unhappy
family of Stafford, is evidenced by the “Boar’s head out of a Ducal
Coronet,” and the name “Humfree Stafford,” to be found on several parts of
the building. The front was decorated by Inigo Jones about the year 1638.
The mansion is the property of the present Earl of Winchelsea, who was born
there. It remains in a comparatively good state of preservation; but it is
certain that in its now neglected and deserted condition, the encroachments
of Time will not be withstood much longer. Its situation, like that of so many
structures of the same date in England, is unfortunately low, and the
difficulty of drainage (it is liable at times to be flooded) offers some excuse
for removal to a more eligible site. The approach is through an avenue of
finely-grown trees, extending above three quarters of a mile. The first Court-
yard resembled that of Holdenby—a balustraded inclosure, with two grand
archways. The external front is the work of Inigo Jones, by whom also much
of the interior was considerably altered. Passing through this, the visitor
enters the principal Quadrangle (which forms the subject of Mr.

Richardson’s drawing). “On each side of the arched entrance are fluted Ionic
pilasters, with an enriched frieze and entablature; the arched window above,
opening upon a Gallery supported by consoles, has a semicircular pediment,
broken in the centre, and inclosing a bracket for a bust, with the date 1638.”
The window is, however, an insertion by Inigo Jones; and being of a much
later date than the other parts of the front, sadly mars the effect of the
architecture of old Thorpe. The third story contains the motto and date “Je.
Seray 1572, Loyal.” The Garden front has a raised Terrace—now a corn-
field—in which the slopes and a few ornamental seats yet remain. This front
supplies one of the grandest examples of Elizabethan architecture existing in
England. It was built by Thorpe, and essentially agrees with the German
School of Architecture of that day—which the British Architect had
evidently studied. The Garden seats, vases, &c., of which there endure only
broken fragments, are in the style, and believed to be the works, of Inigo
Jones. The Garden was terminated by a remarkably picturesque little bridge,
ornamented with a balustrade and scroll work, now, like all other objects
about the structure, or connected with it, submitted to the wanton assaults of
every heedless passer-by. Modern Vandalism has, indeed, been very busy
everywhere within and around this venerable Mansion;—a farmer occupies a
suite of rooms, the decorations of which would excite astonishment and
admiration in a London Club-house; farm-servants sleep surrounded by
exquisite carvings; one room in the south side of the Quadrangle, decorated
with a fine old fire-place, in which are the arms of the Lord Chancellor,
served, at the time of the artist’s visit, the purpose of a dog-kennel; and an
elegant Chapel, constructed by Inigo Jones, is entered with difficulty through
piles of lumber and heaps of rubbish.
Our initial letter is copied from one of the Finials, which crown the
pilasters and gables in the Quadrangle. They formerly held staves with
moveable vanes (in metal), “turning with every winde.”

From a drawing by T. Allom Day & Son, Lith.ʳˢ. to The Queen.

WO L L AT TO N H A L L ,

NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.

ollatton Hall, the seat
of the Right Hon.
Digby Willoughby, the
seventh Baron
Middleton, is situate
three miles west of
Nottingham, in the
centre of a finely
wooded park,
remarkable for a
judicious combination
of wood and water. It
stands on a
considerable elevation,
and is seen from all
parts of the surrounding
country; of which,
consequently, it
commands extensive
views—not only of rich
and fertile valleys, but
of one of the busiest
and most populous of
manufacturing towns.
We give on this page an engraving of the north entrance to the mansion.
The mansion was erected by Sir Francis Willoughby, Knt., towards the
close of the sixteenth century, as we learn from an inscription
over one of its entrances. In the old history of the county of Nottingham by
Thoroton there is a descent of this family, down to the builder of the present
Mansion, whose daughter Bridget married Sir Percival Willoughby, of
another branch of the family. Sir Percival left five sons, the eldest of whom,
Sir Francis, who died in 1665, was father of Francis Willoughby, Esq., one

of the greatest
virtuosi in Europe.
His renowned history
of birds was
published in Latin
after his death, in
1676. He died in
1672, leaving two
sons and one
daughter. The latter,
Cassandra, was
married to James
Duke of Chandos.
The eldest son died
unmarried, in his
twentieth year. The
second son was
created a peer in the
tenth of Queen Anne,
A.D. 1711. In 1781,
on the death of
Thomas Lord
Middleton without
issue, the estate and
its honours
descended to Henry
Willoughby, Esq., of Birdfall, county of York. It is a remarkable
circumstance, that up to the present time the heir-at-law, in consequence of
there being no proximate issue, has always been a remote member of the
family.
The exterior of the mansion is peculiarly grand and imposing. It is in the
fashion of Queen Elizabeth’s reign,—or rather the fashion just then
beginning to be introduced,—and is in the Italian style, but of Gothic
arrangement. It is square, with four large towers adorned with pinnacles; and
in the centre the body of the house rises higher, with projecting coped turrets
at the corners. The front and sides are adorned with square projecting Ionic

pilasters; the square stone pillars are without tracery; and “the too great
uniformity of the whole is broken by oblong niches, circular ones filled
with busts of
philosophers, &c.,
and some very rich
mouldings;” “In the
richness of its
ornaments it is
surpassed by no
Mansion in the
kingdom.” The
accompanying
engraving represents
the Terrace and south
entrance to the
mansion.
The Hall is lofty,
and the roof, which
is supported by
arches somewhat like
Westminster Hall,
has a very noble
appearance. The
screen in the Hall is
supported by pillars
of the Doric order:
there is a variety of
quaint devices under
the beams, in
conformity with the taste of the time; such as heads of satyrs, chimeras, &c.
&c. The walls and ceilings were painted by Laguerre. The rooms in general
are on a grand scale, lofty and spacious. The fabric, taken as one built by a
commoner, exceeds the loftiest ideas of magnificence. It is wholly of stone,
and must have cost an immense sum in its erection. Indeed the learned
Camden, in the first edition of his “Britannia,” pays to the builder a
somewhat equivocal compliment, asserting that by the time it was finished
he had sunk in its erection “three lordships;” “this Sir Francis,” he adds, “at

great expence, in a foolish display of his wealth, built a magnificent and
most elegant house with a fine prospect.”

BENTHALL HALL, SHROPSHIRE.

B E N T H AL L HA L L ,

SHROPSHIRE.

enthall Manor,[14] Shropshire, is in that part of Wenlock
hundred which was comprised in the Saxon hundred of
Patintune; a division which became obsolete soon after the
compilation of Domesday Book. Though in the present day
Benthall constitutes a parish in itself, it was included in that
of Wenlock till the latter end of the seventeenth century. In
the reign of Edward the Confessor—and, probably, from a
much earlier period—this estate belonged to the priory of
Wenlock; and when William, the successor of that pious
king, distributed lands among his Norman followers, at the expense of the
Saxon nobles, he had too much regard for his reputation to deprive the
Church of her possessions. Reconciling, however, his piety to worldly
policy, King William made the priory of Wenlock subservient to the abbey of
Rheims, and thus contrived to reward the latter establishment for successful
prayers made in favour of his expedition, and at the same time to raise a
Norman influence over possessions of the English Church. The abbots of
Rheims, like modern non-resident landlords, had cause to regret their
absence; for we find that in the reign of Richard I. the Prior of Wenlock dealt
with his lands as if the Norman abbot had no concern with them: and when,
at length, in the reign of Edward III., the Abbot of Rheims obtained the
king’s charter, confirming to him and his successors all the English lands
which belonged to his abbey, the interposition of the sovereign was
ineffectual as far as it related to Benthall, that estate having been in the
meantime irrevocably disposed of.
In a series of charters possessed by the Benthall family, some of which
are written in the Saxon language, though without date, it appears that the
manor was owned many years by a family who took their surname from this
estate, and these are referred to in the hundred-rolls of the reign of King
Henry III., as having been the ancestors of Phillip de Benethall, then Lord of
Benethall, who held certain lands under the Prior of Wenlock. Early in the
following reign, however, on Phillip’s forfeiting his lands, Benthall was re-
granted to Robert Burnell, Bishop of Bath and Wells and Lord Chancellor,

whose annexation of this and numerous other estates to his neighbouring
castle of Acton Burnell is not free from suspicion. The chancellor’s object
seems, however, to have been the preferment of his family, and, perhaps, an
addition to his local influence, rather than an increase to his own revenue,
for no sooner had he acquired the manor than he subgranted it to his
kinsman, John Burnell, who describes himself Lord of Benethall, and
appears to have resided here many years; but on his succeeding his son
Henry, as Abbot of Buildwas, his eldest son, Phillip Burnell, received
possession of his father’s lands, and, dropping the patronymic of Burnell,
assumed the surname of De Benethall.[15] Several acts of liberality on the
part of this Phillip towards the fraternity at Buildwas are recorded to his
credit; and his father appears to have been a considerable benefactor of the
abbey. The descendants of this Phillip de Benethall, and his wife Maude,
daughter of Nicholas Forrer, of Lynley, continued to hold the lordship of
Benthall, with other lands, upon conditions of feudal service to the elder
branch of the Burnell family, namely, the descendants of Sir Hugh, the eldest
brother of the chancellor; among whom are included the Handloes and the
Lovells, descended from Maud, sister and heiress of Edward Lord Burnell,
the grandson of Sir Hugh, until Francis Viscount Lovell, Lord Chamberlain
of the Household and Chief Butler of King Richard III., having fought for
his sovereign at Bosworth Field, his estates were forfeited to the Lancastrian
king, Henry VII.[16]
On the loss of the battle, with which King Richard lost his life as well as
his ill-gotten crown, Lord Lovell escaped to Saint John’s Abbey at
Colchester, and afterwards to Flanders, where Margaret, duchess of
Burgundy, sister to the late King Edward IV., supplied an army of two
thousand men; with which, and associated with John de la Pole, Earl of
Lincoln, he invaded England, and was killed at the battle of Newark-upon-
Trent, in the third year of King Henry VII. Robert Benthall, the seventh in
descent from Phillip Burnell, was owner of the estate at this time, and
continued to enjoy it, notwithstanding Lord Lovell’s forfeiture.[17] From this
circumstance there can be no doubt that Robert had proved himself of
Lancastrian politics; and it is probable that he was one of the party of eight
hundred gentlemen and others of Shropshire who were collected by his
cousin, Sir Richard Corbet, and accompanied the Earl of Richmond from
Shrewsbury to Bosworth.

From this period the family of De Benethall, or Benthall, held the manor
immediately under the crown,[18] till the death of Richard Benthall, Esq.,[19]
in 1720, who, by his will, gave this estate, together with other lands, to his
affianced cousin, Elizabeth, daughter of Ralph Browne, Esq., of Caughley,
who was high-sheriff of the county anno 1567, by Catherine, the daughter
and sole heiress of Edward Benthall. By the will of Ann, widow of Ralph
Browne, Esq. (who was a son of the before-mentioned Ralph), the manor of
Benthall was entailed, in the year 1768, on Lucia, the only daughter and
heiress of Francis Turner Blythe, Esq., afterwards the wife of the Rev.
Edward Harries, Rector of Hanwood, and Vicar of Cleobury Mortimer, from
whose eldest son, Thomas Harries, Esq., of Cructon Hall, the estate has been
recently purchased by John George Weld, second Lord Forester.
About twelve miles from Shrewsbury, and three from Wenlock, lies
Benthall Hall, built by William Benthall, Esq.,[20] A.D. 1535, on the site of a
former house, which, as well as the adjacent manor chapel, is mentioned in
the reign of Henry III.,[21] as being then the property of Phillip de Benethall;
the chapel, however, which was of early English architecture, remained until
A.D. 1666, when it was destroyed by fire, and in its place the modern chapel,
now the parish church of Benthall, was erected.
The situation of Benthall has at all times enabled its proprietor to exercise
considerable influence over elections in the borough of Wenlock, the
franchise of which extends over the whole of this manor; but few of the
preceding residents at the Hall have aspired to the office of bailiff, the chief
magistrate of this borough—an office which, nevertheless, is of importance,
since the liberties of Wenlock are more extensive, it is said, than those of any
other borough in England. There is, however, in the Bodleian Library, a
curious manuscript account of the honourable reception which Edward
Sprott, deputy to Richard Benthall, of Benthall, the bailiff, and Richard
Lawley, gave, on the 16th July, 1554, to the Lord President of the Marches
of Wales, on his visiting Wenlock with Justice Townsend. Mr. Sprott was a
member of an ancient family, who long held a considerable property, called
“The Marsh,” in the borough of Wenlock. Richard Lawley was a son of Mr.
Thomas Lawley, who had purchased the then lately dissolved priory of
Wenlock, and had converted it to a residence for himself. He was the
ancestor of the present (anno 1847) Lord Wenlock and Sir Francis Lawley,
Bart., to the latter of whom the extensive property of the Lawley family in
this neighbourhood now belongs. Richard Benthall was eldest son and heir

of William, who has been before noticed. He married Jane, daughter of
Lawrence Ludlow, Esq., of the Morehouse in this county.
The Hall stands on one of a chain of wooded hills called Benthall Edge,
which rises from a sheet of water in front of the house to a point at some
distance in its rear. In this direction the table of the hill is terminated by a
precipitous wood, which skirts the river Severn, and, at the left, commands a
distant view of mountains in Montgomeryshire, while the Severn is seen
winding its course through the vale of Shropshire. In the foreground the river
passes beneath the Wrekin hill, and washes the ruined walls of Buildwas
Abbey. These objects are presented from a natural terrace raised some
hundred feet above the Severn, which here, pent in by opposing hills, glides
rapidly towards Bridgnorth.
The oak carving in the hall, dining-room, and drawing-room of the
manor-house, were executed by order of John Benthall, Esq. (a grandson of
William), about A.D. 1618, and the arms of Cassey were impaled with those
of Benthall in the ornamental panels, as a compliment to that family, upon
the recent marriage of Lawrence, the heir of Benthall, with the daughter of
Thomas Cassey, Esq.,[22] of Whitefield and Cassey Compton, in
Gloucestershire.
During the Parliamentary wars, Lawrence impoverished himself by his
zeal in support of King Charles; he was one of a list of thirty-two principal
gentlemen of Shropshire (headed by the sheriff) who, in November 1642,
entered into a mutual undertaking to raise a troop of dragoons for his
Majesty’s service; a step deemed necessary in consequence of the additional
strength which the Parliamentary party had acquired in the county, by
Colonel Mitton’s capture of Wem, in the preceding month of August; but the
cause of the Royalists sustained a far severer blow eighteen months
afterwards in the loss of Shrewsbury, which borough, after having
voluntarily expended nearly all its resources in aid of the king, was surprised
in the night of 21st February, 1645, through the treachery of one of its
inhabitants. After an ineffectual defence, the town was carried by the rebels,
and among the prisoners whom they took on that occasion, was Ensign
Cassey Benthall, the eldest son of Lawrence. The young officer was
fortunate enough, however, to make his escape, and, pursuing his loyal
course, had attained the rank of colonel, when he was killed, fighting for
Charles I., at Stow-in-the-Wold, in Gloucestershire. Colonel Benthall had
enlisted in his regiment many of the yeomen in the neighbourhood of his

father’s estate, and among those who were killed at Stow was Thomas
Penderel, a brother of the famous Richard Penderel, who was the attendant
and guide of Charles II. in his wanderings after the battle of Worcester. The
loyalty of Lawrence Benthall was well known to Richard Penderel, and
nearly procured for the former the honour of aiding the king to escape; for
the royal fugitive, having been conducted by Richard to the town of
Madeley, would have crossed the Severn by the Benthall ferry, but his
intention had been anticipated by the Parliamentary soldiers, who had taken
possession of the boat. Charles, therefore, remained concealed at Madeley, in
a barn of Mr. Woolf, a worthy loyalist, who entertained him there a night and
a day; and from thence the unfortunate king retreated to Boscobel wood,
where he had the well-known adventure which has made the oak-leaf sacred
to his memory.
Many were the damages sustained by the houses of the gentlemen of
Shropshire at this troublesome period, through wanton acts of violence; but
Benthall Hall remained in tolerably perfect preservation till A.D. 1818, when
it was partly destroyed by fire, from which, however, the principal rooms
escaped without injury.
The
exterior of
the
mansion,
though it
would be
commonly
denominat
ed
Elizabetha
n, affords
an example
of the
domestic
architectur
e which
was
antecedent
to the pure Elizabethan style. The landscape view of the front presented to

the reader is taken from the avenue, which has been unfortunately deprived
of its most stately trees by its present noble proprietor. The building is of
stone; the extent of frontage being relieved by a slight projection on the left,
and by two tiers of bay-windows, which are placed at equal distances on
either side of a porch. All the windows have stone compartments and
lozenge-panes. The roof is gabled without finials, and the chimneys, which
are tastefully placed, are lofty, with ornamented shafts and mouldings. The
porch stands somewhat out of the centre of the frontage, so as agreeably to
subdue the regularity of the building, and surmounted by a windowed room,
harmonises with the other projections. The front entrance is a round arched
door, on the left of the porch.
The rooms in the interior are lofty. The entrance-hall has unfortunately
lost all its wainscoting, except some carved oak over the chimneypiece,
which represents the Benthall
coat of arms with that of Cassey impaled. On the right is the ancient with-
drawing-room, completely wainscoted, and containing an oak chimneypiece,
which is executed in the diminutive Grecian style essential to Elizabethan
architecture. The uppermost tier of columns, which have Ionic capitals,
enclose the Benthall coat of arms with that of Cassey impaled, and
immediately beneath it is the coat of Harries, enclosed by a tier of Roman
Doric columns. This room has an elegant bay-window, and a decorated
ceiling; further on the right is a spacious, but modern dining-room, built by
Francis Blythe Harries, Esq. of Broseley Hall, who resided here many years.
On the left of the entrance-hall is the principal staircase-lobby, forming a
passage to the ancient dining-room. This room is fully and richly
wainscoted, and has a handsome oak chimneypiece extending to a decorated
ceiling, and exhibiting on its panels the Benthall and Cassey coats of arms.
The staircase is also of oak, and elaborately worked, in the angle of which a
panel tastefully, though somewhat fantastically carved, represents a leopard,
the crest of Benthall.

From a drawing by F W Hulme. Day & Son. Lithʳˢ to The Queen
PITCHFORD HALL, SHROPSHIRE

P I T C HF O RD HAL L ,

SHROPSHIRE.

itchford Hall. This very curious and interesting example of the
half-timbered houses of the time of Henry VIII. is situate in the
hundred of Condover, and about six miles south of Shrewsbury.
Its position is singularly felicitous, being placed in one of the
pleasantest and most fertile parts of that most beautiful county,
Shropshire. From Shrewsbury it is approached by a sort of
“cross-country” road, passing through rich tracts of corn-
growing land, up and down, in and out; and the first view of its
chequered walls and clustered chimneys is gained from a
distance of about half a mile, looking up the well-wooded slopes of a rich
valley of pasture land. The road traverses one side of the vale; the Hall
occupies a commanding position on the other, presenting to the tourist new
combinations of beautiful scenery at almost every step he advances, all
marked by a happy unity of impression. No railway comes near it, to break
its quiet with the din and clatter of the too-busy world.
The best general view of the house is from the public road, seen from a
point nearly opposite the principal front: at a distance, the somewhat harsh
contrast of the vivid interlacings of black and white is toned down into
harmony with the general effect, still leaving point enough to give value to
the full, rich masses of wood, by which three of its sides are encompassed.
The house is highly picturesque; the walls seem to be composed, for the
most part, of strongly framed timber, raised on a substructure of stone and
brick. The whole is in a surprising state of preservation for its age, and
seems to have suffered but little from the progress of time, or the assaults of
“improvers.” In front of the Hall a small stream of water flows, passing
under a bridge, on one side of which it has been raised by means of a weir.
This serves a double purpose—it gives the upper part of the stream a broad
river-like appearance, and at the same time is an admirable defence to the
extensive gardens, which skirt its banks for a considerable distance. The
interior contains nothing peculiarly remarkable; it has some good rooms,
wanting in height, however, as is almost invariably the case in houses of this
description.

Pitchford is said to have derived its name from “a bituminous well, one of
the greatest natural curiosities of the county, on the surface of which
constantly floats a sort of liquid bitumen, in nature resembling that which
floats on the Lake Asphaltites in Palestine.”[23]
The earliest possessors of Pitchford of whom we find mention, were a
family who derived their name from the place; of whom one Ralph de
Pitchford, says Camden, “behaved himself so valiantly at the siege of
Bridgnorth, that King Henry I. gave him Little Brug near it, to hold by the
service of finding dry wood for the Great Chamber of the castle of Brug, or
Bruggnorth, against the coming of his sovereign lord the king.”
The Hall is now the property and residence of the Earl of Liverpool, to
whom it was devised in 1806 by Mr. Oteley, in whose family the estate had
been for nearly four centuries. William Ottley Esq., as the name was then
spelt, was high-sheriff for the county of Salop in the 15th of Henry VII., and
again in the 5th of Henry VIII., in whose reign the present Hall is supposed
to have been built. Robert Ottley is mentioned as the lord of the manor in the
time of Queen Elizabeth. During the Civil War, members of this family
gained much distinction as active and zealous, but not always successful,
adherents of the royal party. “Sir Francis Ottley was successively governor
of the towns of Shrewsbury and Bridgnorth; the latter he surrendered, after a
siege in 1646, to the Parliamentary forces.” In the articles of capitulation,
still existing at Pitchford, it is stipulated, that “Sir Francis Ottley be
permitted to retire with his family and baggage to his home at Pitchford, or
at the Hay,” another possession of the family.
Close to the Hall, screened on all sides by thick plantations, is the church,
a plain, neat, “respectable” structure, of great age. It contains some
interesting monuments of various members of the Ottley family, and also “a
fine and curious oaken figure of a Knight Templar, a Baron de Pitchford, a
crusader, who was buried here.”
In October, 1832, Pitchford Hall was visited by her Majesty the Queen
(then Princess Victoria) and her august mother, the Duchess of Kent; “on
which occasion,” says the loyal and zealous county historian, “it was the
scene of genuine Shropshire hospitality and festivity.”

From a sketch by C J Richardson Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen
THE GREAT CHAMBER MONTACUTE

MON TA C UT E ,

SOMERSETSHIRE.

ontacute. The village of Montacute is one of the
most primitive and picturesque of the villages of
England. It consists of a large Square, a Market-
place, with its simple and beautiful School-house,
an erection which dates so far back as the time of
Henry the Seventh,—a very rare and fine example
in a remarkably good state of preservation, which
formerly stood against a quaint old Market-house,
now destroyed. The principal street consists of
stone hovels, built in a rude style, but still retaining
proofs that the comforts of the inmates were duly weighed and considered.
The village and its vicinity are flourishing, in consequence of the ample
employment which the women obtain at glove-making, at which they are
nearly all occupied in their own cottages. It is situated within four miles west
of the town of Yeovil, and about the same distance south of Ilchester.
Montacute derives its name from a conical hill (mons acutus) which
overlooks the
village, and on which is a round tower, commanding an extensive view of
the Vale of Somerset, and the British Channel.[24] The prospect thence is,
indeed, not only extensive but exceedingly magnificent; including “the hills
below Minehead and Blackdown, Taunton, Quantock Hills, Bridgewater
Bay, and the coast of Wales; Brent Knoll, the whole range of Mendip, with
the city of Wells and Glastonbury Torr; Cheech and Knowl Hills, Alfred’s
Tower, and the high lands about Shaftesbury; also the Dorsetshire Hills, and
Lambert’s Castle near Lyme.” At the foot, is the site of a Priory of black
Cluniac monks, suppressed in the time of Henry the Eighth, of which only
the Gatehouse endures; it is here pictured from a drawing by Mr.
Richardson. It is somewhat extensive, and contains one room, little injured
by time, with a good oak ceiling of peculiarly bold character.
Montacute House, and the estates adjoining, have been for several
centuries the property of the family of Phelips; who originally “came over”

with the Conqueror,
and in consideration of
military services were
requited with large
grants of lands in
Wales, where they were
long settled. In the
fourteenth century they
“migrated” into
Somersetshire, residing
for many years at
Barrington, not far
from the present seat.
The “spacious and
noble building” was
commenced in 1550,
and finished in 1601,
for Sir Edward Phelips,
Knight, Queen’s
Serjeant, the third son
of Sir Thomas Phelips.
Its cost is said to have
exceeded the sum of £19,500. It has since continued in the family of the
founder, in the following line of succession. Sir Edward Phelips, Master of
the Rolls, Chancellor to Henry Prince of Wales, and Speaker of the House of
Commons, in the reigns of Elizabeth and James the First; Sir Robert Phelips,
his son, in the reigns of James the First and Charles the First; Colonel
Edward Phelips, during the Commonwealth, and in the reign of Charles the
Second;[25] Sir Edward Phelips, Knight, in the reigns of James the Second
and William the Third; his nephew, Edward Phelips, Esq., in the reigns of
Anne and George the First; Edward Phelips, Esq., in that of George the
Second; William Phelips, Esq., in that of George the Third; and John
Phelips, Esq., in that of George the Fourth; the present possessor is a minor.
But, unhappily, the Mansion, so long the scene of comparatively
uninterrupted hospitality, has been, of late years, deserted; stripped in a great
degree of its internal decorations; and left to the mercy of time. It presents,
however, one of the finest and most interesting examples of the architecture

of the period, yet existing in the kingdom; “combining simplicity of design
with richness of ornament,”—“a magnificent specimen of the style of
Elizabeth’s reign.”
The form of the building is that of the Roman letter E; a form which the
founder is said to have adopted in compliment to his Royal mistress. It is
built entirely of brown stone, found on the Estate. “The length of the Eastern
or principal front,” according to Mr. Shaw, (“Elizabethan Architecture,”) is
one hundred and seventy feet; it is three stories in height, and is surmounted
by gables and a parapet, crowned with pinnacles. Each story is marked by its
entablature; the bays of its numerous windows are divided by stone
mullions; and between each window of the uppermost story are recessed
niches, containing a series of statues, the size of life, in Roman armour,
resting on their shields.” The wings, twenty-eight feet in width, are crowned
by ornamental gables; the space between them being occupied by a terrace
ascended by a flight of seven steps. The Western Front—we learn from the
same source—was greatly improved, in 1760, by the acquisition of an
ancient screen, removed from Clifton House, near Yeovil; “it is placed
between the wings in front of the original edifice; surmounted by finials,
crowned with grotesque figures rising from turrets connected by a pierced
parapet.” The Court, upon the Eastern front, is “a fine and appropriate
accessory” to this stately Mansion. It contains two picturesque square
Pavilions, or Lodges, at the angles facing the building. The sides are formed
by an open balustrade, having a small circular temple in the centre of each;
these latter are twenty-five feet in height, from the level of the Court. The
whole composition exhibits great beauty.
Over the arched entrances in the centre compartment are the arms of the
family—argent, a chevron between three roses, gules, seeded or, barbel vert,
with lions rampant as supporters. Over the principal door of the building is
the following couplet, indicative of the hospitality of its high-born owners:
—
Through this wide opening gate,
None come too early, none return too late.

This, however, is not the only inscription to convey their sense of duty to
their guests. Over the North Porch is the following:—

And yours my friend.

And on one of the lodges,
Welcome the coming
Speed the parting guest.

The interior is divided into suites of handsome and spacious apartments.
The staircase is of the construction usual in the time of Elizabeth—stone
steps round a
huge solid mass of
stone. In the Hall,
is a fine stone
screen; and, at the
end, a bas-relief,
four feet six inches
in height,
representing the
ancient custom of
“skimmitting or
stang-riding.” [26]
The Hall contains
also a curious old
chest—the work,
probably, of some
Italian or French artist of the time of Henry the Eighth. The Rooms are
generally panelled with oak; but the ceilings throughout, and the staircase,
are quite plain; the walls of the principal apartments are, however, lined with
finely-carved wainscotting to within a few feet of the ceiling—the
intervening space being ornamented by rich plaster-work, which has a fine
effect. The screen, which Mr. Richardson has pictured in the appended print,
belonged originally
to the entrance to the Dining-room, and was removed to its present position
by one of the later proprietors of the Mansion.[27]
Although the Mansion at Montacute supplies us with many subjects for
illustration by the pencil, we have preferred to introduce a copy of the
graceful and venerable School-house—one of the most striking and

interesting remains of a
remote period, and one with
which no other than
agreeable memories can be
associated. The initial letter
is part of the sculpture of the
western front.
Unhappily, the Destroyer
is busily at work about this
fine old Mansion—one of the
grandest, most original, and
most auspiciously situated of
the few unimpaired structures
of the reign of Queen
Elizabeth by which the
kingdom is still enriched.
Although its present
possessor is the direct
descendant of its founder,
and “the line” has been unbroken for nearly three centuries, it is now
deserted. All its glories are of ancient dates: the “wide opening gate” gives
admission to no gay revellers; and the yet existing motto seems a solemn
mockery—

Welcome the coming
Speed the parting guest.

From a sketch by J. L. P. Day & Son, Lith.ʳˢ to The Queen
CAVERSWALL CASTLE, STAFFORDSHIRE.

C AVE RS WA L L C AS T L E ,

S TA F F O R D S H I R E .

averswall Castle.—The pretty and secluded
village of Caverswall is seated in the centre of a
rich level vale, through which runs the river Blithe,
—here, not far from its source, a narrow stream,
which gradually swells into size and strength. The
venerable Castle of Caverswall, one of the most
striking, picturesque, and interesting remains of a
distant age, towers above this pleasant and
appropriately named streamlet, overlooking the
broad valley, the whole of which it completely
commands, and of which it was formerly the
guardian and the glory.
In the twentieth year of William the Conqueror,
Caverswall was held of Robert de Stadford by
Ernulfus de Hesding; but in the time of Richard
Cœur de Lion, one Thomas de Careswell was lord
of this demesne, from whom it descended to Sir
William de Caverswell, Knight, most likely the
same who was sheriff of Staffordshire towards the
close of the reign of Henry III., and whose descendant, probably grandson,
of the same name and title, in the latter end of the reign of King Edward II.,
built
a large and strong stone castle here, surrounded by a deep moat. As
additional security, when safety was worth a costly purchase, we are told he
gave it the further defence of square turrets at the heads of extensive pieces
of water. This is “the castel or prati-pile of Caverwell” of Leland’s time. Of
its founder, we know nothing more than is revealed to us by his marble
monumental slab, now reduced to the level of the church-floor at the
entrance into the chancel—strange transition!—to be trodden on by every
foot that passes. This “goodly castle,” as Erdeswick terms it, in his time,
about two hundred and fifty years ago, he tells us, “was lately in reasonable
good repair, but is now quite let to decay by one Browne, farmer of the

demesnes, which he procured (if a man might
guess at the cause) lest his lord should take a
conceit to live there, and thereby take the
demesnes from him.” Now, it is probable no
remnant of this ancient Castle is extant, unless in
the chiselled stones which give support to
garden-hedges about the village. Still, the lower
portions of the wall which surrounds the
platform of the Castle, with its graduated
buttresses, and perhaps also the foundations of
some of the turrets, give indications of an
architecture at least much anterior to the present
building. We are inclined to refer this ancient
wall to the period of the original Castle.
The lordship descended from the Caverswells,
who enjoyed it until the nineteenth of Edward
III., when by the heir-general it passed to the
Montgomerys, and subsequently to the Giffards,
the Ports, the family of Hastings, Earls of
Huntingdon, who were owners of it in the
seventeenth century; and, by purchase, to Matthew Cradock, Esq., whose
father, we are told in a celebrated letter of Sir Simon Degge’s, was a wool-
buyer at Stafford. In the reign of James I., this latter proprietor, it is said,
employed the skill of the celebrated Inigo Jones to erect the present
castellated mansion. The site of this solemn fortress-like structure, enriched
by the dark-grey tints of age, is the rock which gave foundation to Sir
William de Caverswell’s Castle. The grit-stone of which it is built has been
excavated from the moat that surrounds the whole; the same being the case
no doubt with the materials of the earlier building, for the circumstance, as
we shall see, is alluded to in the Latin lines on the founder’s tomb. The
Castle is placed upon an elevated quadrangular platform, which is defended
by a curtain running along each side, having a number of graduated
buttresses rising from the moat, and by an octagonal turret, with its base
dipping in the fosse, at each angle. The pointed arched gateway, approached
by a stone bridge, is flanked by an additional turret on each side, like the
others, balustraded at the top. This balustrade formerly was carried round the
top of the Castle also. Its removal in recent times has been injurious to

picturesque effect; hence the artist has retained this proper mark of style in
our lithotint. The quadrangle of the Castle is laid out in gravelled walks,
shaded by fine hedges of hornbeam, and a beautiful flower-garden,
exhibiting many of the gems of Flora’s chaplet, and some remarkably fine
specimens of Cotoneaster trained along the walls. The building itself is
chiefly interesting as presenting the ideal of the great architect of the
transition from the ancient castle to the baronial mansion. The keep may be
said to be still retained in the lofty square tower, which overtops the building
at its western end. Two great bays ascend, one on each side, to the top of the
building, which break the plainness of the front, and afford additional light
to the apartments. The numerous windows are all large, divided by deep
mullions; and in a winter’s evening, when most of the rooms are occupied, a
distant spectator might conceive there was an illumination in the Castle. The
rooms are plain, and afford nothing worthy of particular note. The square
tower is chiefly occupied by staircases. The turrets have been converted into
apartments of residence. Whilst around the whole, flow the dark yet clear
waters of the moat, which expands on the western side into a small lake.
This moat is supplied by a number of springs and a limpid rill that runs into
it. Its outer margin receives the shade of some fine limes. As if in pointed
contrast to all this panoply of defence, on the inner margin of the fosse there
is seen a pretty little flower-border, occupying the recesses between the
buttresses which support the platform.
We have here an indication of the peaceful, unwarlike purpose to which
this sombre fortress is now devoted. On the decease of Matthew Cradock,
Esq., who built the present Castle, it came into the hands of his son, George
Cradock, Esq., who died in 1643,[28] with whose descendants it remained
only till 1655. From them it passed to Sir William Jolliffe, Knight; and from
him, by marriage with his daughter, to William Viscount Vane, of Ireland. It
subsequently passed into the hands of the family of Parker, one worthy
descendant of which house, Thomas Hawe Parker, Esq., resides at Park Hall,
near the village, and still retains the manor. During the disastrous wars of the
French Revolution, it was purchased for the retreat of a religious community
from Ghent, in Belgium,—the Benedictine Dames,—who emigrated hither
in 1811, having previously settled at Preston, in Lancashire. These ladies, in
their antique black dresses and hoods, as they traverse the terraces on the
platform of the Castle, or engage in the cultivation of their flower-gardens,
give an air of surprising interest, of living reality, to this castellated mansion

of other ages. They have erected a good-sized chapel on the eastern side of
the house, in which is a large picture over the altar representing St. Benedict
and St. Scholastica praying to the virgin; and they devote much of their time
to the purposes of education. On the opposite side of the moat, amidst the
shade of surrounding trees, we perceive the final resting-place of the
sisterhood. In this neat little plot is a number of tombstones, two of which
are distinguished from the rest by bearing the cross and pastoral staff—
emblems of ghostly superintendence. They mark the graves of Lady
Abbesses. One lay sister, now rapidly descending the vale of years, is the
only religieuse who came over with the original refugees.
A doorway, now closed, formerly led from the Castle to the Church,
which is close by. It is a spacious village church, dedicated to St. Peter,
embosomed in a grove of
s
y
c
a

mores, and presenting, like many others, indications of great antiquity—
indications which are almost overgrown with the additions and
reconstructions of nearly every period since its foundation. The piers of the
nave, which give support to a series of semicircular arches, from their

plainness most probably belong to the Norman style. The decorated finds its
representatives in the belfry arch, and the two aisles of the nave; whilst the
perpendicular is fairly displayed in the handsome eastern window of the
tower. This tower and the aisles may be referred to the fourteenth century.
The beauties and harmonies of the whole have been sadly marred, especially
by the low flat ceilings, which extend from the tower to the chancel, in
different stages of degradation. The nave contains some plain low oaken
stalls, very ancient. Some pews also and the pulpit exhibit specimens of
carving in oak in a pleasing style—an illustration of which forms our initial
letter. The Church is rich in monuments. Beyond mentioning a fine evidence
of Chantrey’s skill, in a monumental figure to the memory of the Countess of
St. Vincent,—the lady kneels in an attitude of submissiveness to the
inevitable stroke, her coronet being laid aside,—beyond this mere mention,
and that the family vaults and monuments of the Parker family, of Park Hall,
the patrons of the living, exist here, we shall confine ourselves to the
memorials of the two founders of the ancient and more modern Castles of
Caverswall. At the entrance to the chancel, near to the foot of the pulpit
stairs, is a massy slab of grey marble, laid in the floor. This is all that now
remains of the monument of Sir William de Caverswell, the builder of the
Castle in the time of Edward II., about A.D. 1300. It has originally contained
a large and elegant cross-fleurie, stretching over the entire length of the slab,
a shield on each side, and an inscription running along the head and the two
sides, all in inlaid brass. Erdeswick, the Staffordshire antiquary, who
described it about two hundred and fifty years ago, tells us that then the
metal had been taken out. He adds, in a parenthesis, “such is the iniquity of
this day;” but yet he was able to perceive what the letters were. These letters
are in a fine character of the period, before black-letter was employed.
Having carefully examined them, we were still able to decipher the whole,
and now present a more correct reading than has ever before appeared,
which, together with the accurate drawing of this rich and finished tablet
(printed on the front page of this article) by our artist, Mr. F. Hulme, will, we
trust, preserve a faint memory of the original. The inscription commences at
an ornamental cross near the top on the left side, and ends at one opposite.

†Hic: jacet: Willƞs̄ : de: Kaverswelle: miles.†

Then follow these lines along the two sides:—

“Castri: strvctor: eram: domibvs: fossis: que: cemento.
Vivvs: dans: operam: nvnc: clavdor: in: hoc: monvmento.”

Which Dr. Plot informs us was Englished thus:—
“Sir William of Caverswall, here lye I,
Who built the Castle, and made the pooles by.”

In a spirit not altogether inaccordant with the original, another hand
added this couplet, as Dr. Plot further says:—
“Sir William of Caverswall here you lye,
Your Castle is down, and your pooles are dry.”

In the south wall of the chancel is a mural tablet in memory of Matthew
Cradock, Esq., the founder of the present Caverswall Castle. In its style, this
monument bears
marks of the age in which it was
constructed,—the reign of Charles I.
It is worthy of note, however, that,
whilst the hand of man, as well as his
foot, has continually warred against
the monumental memorial of his
great predecessor for more than five
hundred years, without being able to
obliterate the recognition of his name
and merits, the inscription on that of
Matthew Cradock, although not of
half the antiquity, protected and even
partially renewed, is now, in the
main, irrevocably effaced. It has
commenced in these terms, “Hic
sepelitvr Matie Cr rmig.” The rest is
so greatly defaced, as only to allow
us to make out that he married
Elizabeth, the daughter of a Salopian
esquire, and that his first-born child
married the daughter of John
Saunders, M.D., which agrees with the inscription on the mural tablet of

George Cradock, Esq. Some lines in white paint below profess to have
derived their origin from “ I. M. R. E. de Stoke.” Matthew Cradock, we
believe, was a merchant, and was returned to Parliament, A.D. 1640, 15
Charles I., for the City of London. His arms appear upon the tablet.
At an early period of the contest between Charles and his Parliament,
Caverswall Castle seems to have excited notice, and was garrisoned for the
Parliament; the family, no doubt, took this side. From the following entry of
the Committee at Stafford, the widow of George Cradock, Esq., appears to
have received some marks of respect amidst this military intrusion. “Dec. 4,
1643.—It is ordered that Captain John Young shall forthwith repayre to
Carswall House, and safely keepe the same for the use of the King and
Parliament, until he shall have order to the contrarie. But he is to leave his
horses behind him at Stafford; he is likewise to use Mrs. Cradock with all
respect, and not suffer any spoyle or waste made of her goods.” “It is
ordered that Mrs. Cradock shall have, towards the fortification of her house
at Carswall, liberty to take, fell, cut downe, and carrie away any timber, or
other materials, from any papist, delinquent, or malignant whatsoever.”
“March 1, 1643-4.—It is ordered that Carswall be made unservisable.” This
last order does not appear to have been fulfilled to the letter; for Caverswall
Castle still remains unimpaired, sombre and venerable, to grace the verdant
meads amid which it is situated—to shelter the religieuses who have
succeeded the refugees from the Low Countries—and to show the pilgrim,
who wanders through shady dells and by babbling brooks, catching the bland
whisperings of the spirits of the past, that—
“Time
Has moulded into beauty many a tower,
Which, when it frown’d with all its battlements,
Was only terrible.”

INGESTRIE, STAFFORDSHIRE.

I N GE S T R I E HAL L ,

S TA F F O R D S H I R E .

erhaps there are few districts so rich in
historical interest as that in which is
situated this venerable Mansion. The
manors of Shugborough, Sandon, Chartley
—with its ruined Castle—Heywood,
Blithfield, and Wolseley, are all within
view; Tixal Heath, with its abundant
legends, is close at hand;[29] and the ancient
Town of Stafford is distant about three
miles. Ingestrie, or, as now more commonly
written, Ingestre, and anciently Ingestrent
(from ing, in Danish, a meadow, that is, Trent Meadow), and in Domesday-
book called Gestreon, was a part of the Great Barony of Stafford, and
granted to Robert de Toeni by William the Conqueror, being then valued at
15s. 5d. In the reign of Henry the Second, it was held by Eudo, or Ivo de
Mutton, or Mitton, who gave certain lands in Ingestre to the Priory of St.
Thomas à Becket near adjoining, and then newly-founded: he afterwards
became a lay-brother there, leaving his possessions to his son, Sir Ralph de
Mutton, who had issue Adam and Philip, both knights. Sir Adam was also a
benefactor to the fore-named convent, and had the presentation of a canon
granted to him and his heirs for ever, to celebrate Divine Service for the
souls of Sir Philip de Mutton, his brother, his own soul, and those of his
ancestors and successors: he died in the fortieth year of the reign of Henry
the Third, leaving by Isabella, his wife, Ralph, his son, who died without
issue, and Isabella, his only daughter, married to Sir Philip de Chetwynd.
After the death of Sir Philip de Mutton without issue, Philip de Chetwynd,
son of Sir Philip and Isabella, became sole heir to that family (the Muttons)
in his mother’s right, and was possessed of Ingestre, &c., &c.; which, by a
continued succession, descended to Walter Chetwynd, Esq., who, dying
without issue, his estates devolved to Captain Chetwynd, his near relation,
whose descendants were created Barons of Ingestre and Talbot. In 1784,
John Chetwynd Talbot, who succeeded his uncle William in the barony, was

raised to the dignity of an Earl of the United Kingdom by the style and title
of Earl Talbot of Ingestre.
His successor was his son, Charles Chetwynd, Earl Talbot of Ingestre,
whose seat is still the noble old Hall of his ancestors. None of the nobles of
the kingdom are more universally esteemed or respected. He has extensive
estates in the immediate neighbourhood in his own holding; and is
distinguished by his active promotion of agricultural improvements. The
nobility and gentry of the surrounding district frequently assemble to witness
the success of his experiments, and to participate in the hospitality of this
noble “English farmer.” His Lordship, however, has not altogether eschewed
public life. For some time he was the Irish Viceroy. The manor and estate of
Ingestre have recently received a large accession by the purchase of the Tixal
Estate, from Sir Clifford Constable, by the present Earl Talbot.
Ingestre Hall is pleasantly situated on a gentle declivity, sloping towards
the river Trent, in a large and richly wooded park, which contains some
remarkably fine beech and other trees.[30] The house has a stately and
venerable appearance. It is in the style which prevailed during the reigns of
Elizabeth and James the First—having various projections, bay windows,
and others with stone mullions. The north front was built by the present Earl,
corresponding in character with the south front; and like that also of brick
and stone; by which means several elegant rooms and a grand staircase have
been added. The north side has a terraced flower-garden ornamented by
fountains, a stone balustrade, &c., which add much to the elegance of this
part of the building. The interior well agrees with the exterior—consisting of
large and well-proportioned apartments, the principal of which is the
Library, an elegant room occupying the western portion of the Mansion,
containing a valuable collection of Books, placed in handsome oak cases,
with pilasters, &c., of the Corinthian order; also a beautiful marble fire-
place. The Billiard-room is wainscotted with oak, one-third of its height,
containing a variety of grotesque heads in small panels. The grand Staircase
has a massive oak railing of arabesque character. The interior, however, has
been greatly modernised; and its chief attraction to the antiquary will arise
from the Family Portraits, which possess considerable interest. But the
Mansion contains a rich treasure of historical and antiquarian lore: in the
Library are preserved five Volumes in Manuscript, collected by Walter
Chetwynd, Esq., consisting of Letters, Pedigrees, &c., &c.[31]

The present Church of Ingestre is situate very near the Hall, on the S.E.
side (the ancient Church was on the S.W. side of the house), and is a plain
but handsome structure in the Grecian style of architecture—consisting of a
Tower; a Nave, with side aisles; and a Chancel; the Ceiling of the Nave
being much enriched with festoons of fruit, flowers, &c.—and that of the
Chancel with shields of arms, &c. The Nave is separated from the Chancel
by an appropriate Screen, having the Royal Arms in relief over the Entrance,
and, together with the Pulpit, &c., is of Flanders oak. The Chancel contains
several mural Monuments of the Chetwynd Family, and Busts of the late
Countess and a little Boy. There is an interesting mural Tablet for the late
unfortunate Charles Thomas Viscount Ingestre, who was lost in a Morass,
near Vienna, on the 23rd of May, 1826, being twenty-four years of age; it
represents the extrication of his dead body. There is also a figure exhibiting
Religion with a chalice in the hands. This is placed on a Monument to the
present Earl’s brother, the late Rev. John Talbot, Rector of Ingestre, &c. The
Church has six fine Bells, and an Organ; and was built by Walter Chetwynd,
Esq., in 1673. A full account of the building and consecration of the Church
is given by Dr. Plot, in his “Natural History of Staffordshire.”[32]
The neighbourhood of Ingestre is full of historical interest. On Hopton
Heath (now inclosed), distant about a mile and a half, a bloody battle was
fought on Sunday, the 19th of March, 1643, between the King’s troops,
commanded by Spencer Compton Earl of Northampton, and the
Parliamentary Forces under Sir John Gell and Sir William Brereton; in
which the Earl, with six captains and about 600 soldiers, were all killed.
Human bones and fragments of military weapons have been turned up by the
plough on this spot. One of the most interesting of several ancient remains in
the vicinity is that of Chartley Castle. It has been a ruin for more than a
century. The Park contains a thousand acres, inclosed from the Forest of
Needwood, and never submitted to the plough. It has long been inhabited by
a noble herd of “wild cattle,” descended, in a direct line, from the wild cattle
of the country which roamed at large in ancient times over the Forest of
Needwood—probably a corruption of Neat’s Wood, or the Wood of Cattle.
Chartley Castle was one of the prison-houses of Mary Queen of Scots. On
the 21st of December, 1585, she took her final leave of Tutbury, and was
removed to Chartley. It was during her residence at the latter place, that what
has been denominated “Babington’s Plot,” was matured; which, on its
discovery, led to the execution of no less than twelve persons engaged in it.

The discovery of this plot, likewise, in which Mary herself was intimately
involved, hastened the fate of the unhappy queen. It was whilst Mary was on
horseback, enjoying the sports of the field, in this neighbourhood, that she
received the messenger who communicated the discovery of her guilt. The
announcement of the fatal intelligence which Sir Thomas Gorges conveyed,
suddenly extinguished the fond expectations which had been so long
cherished. She instantly directed her horse’s head homewards; but was not
permitted to return thither. She was conveyed to Fotheringay—the last sad
scene of her eventful history.

From a sketch by A. E. Everitt. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
THE OAK HOUSE, WEST BROMWICH, STAFFORDSHIRE.

T HE OA K HOU S E , WE S T BR O MWI C H ,

S TA F F O R D S H I R E .

est Bromwich—a village distant a few miles from busy
Birmingham—supplies a curious and interesting example
of the half-timbered houses, of which many still remain
in the Midland Counties of England. It is commonly
known as “The Oak House,” is situated on the borders of
the great Staffordshire coal-bed, and is now surrounded
by collieries,—creating a dense and murky atmosphere,
which almost hides the ancient mansion from sight. Yet
the site was well chosen; for at the period of its erection it commanded
extensive views of a picturesque and fertile country, now absolutely covered
with iron-works and other results of the traffic peculiar to the district. Far as
the eye can reach, it encounters only the smoke and steam which indicate
busy labour; the few trees that endure to grace the landscape are stunted and
sickly, and even the fields seem never to have borne a coating of natural
green. Nevertheless, although the eye may turn away unrefreshed from a
scene which exhibits Nature expelled by Commerce, the mind will be
cheered to know that in these unsightly mountain-heaps, “dug from the
bowels of the harmless earth,” originates the true supremacy of England.
The coal-fields of Staffordshire and Warwickshire render available the
gigantic discoveries which have made the present century already famous.
Without their aid, science and manufacture could have achieved
comparatively little; it is by such auxiliaries only we can set at work the
forge and the foundry, where
“Incessant, day and night, each crater roars,
Like the volcano on Sicilian shores:
Their fiery wombs each molten mass combine;
Thence, lava-like, the boiling torrents shine;
Down the trenched sand the liquid metal holds,
Shoots showers of stars, and fills the hollow moulds.”

The “Poet of Science” seems to have had in view the locality to which we
refer; at least, to no part of England are his lines more strictly applicable.

Little is known of the ancient possessors of the Oak House,
notwithstanding that the direct descendants of the earliest occupants
continued to inhabit it until towards the close of the last century. The only
author who appears to have taken any note of them is the Rev. Stebbing
Shaw, who in his “History of Staffordshire,” under the head of West
Bromwich[33] states, that the Oak House belonged for several generations to
a branch of the respectable old family of Turton, of Abrewas, near Lichfield;
and the first mentioned in this parish was John Turton, in the freeholders’
book, A.D. 1653. Amongst the inscriptions formerly in the ancient Church of
St. Clement, here, was one to the memory of William Turton, of the Oak,
gent., who died A.D. 1682 (son of that John), and Eleanor his wife, daughter
of Robert Page, of Leighton, in the county of Huntingdon, who died A.D.
1696, ætat. 61; and one also to John Turton, of the Oak, gent., the eldest son
of the above William, who died December 6th, 1705, ætat. 45. This is the
same John, no doubt, who, with William his brother and Sarah their sister,
are mentioned in the will of Sir John Turton, of Abrewas, as his cousins.
Either from the first mentioned John, or from another of that name settled at
Rowley Regis, a few miles off, was, according to Shaw, descended the
eminent physician Dr. Turton, of London, whose ancestors had for some
years resided in an old house called “The Hall,” at Wolverhampton. The
house and estate afterwards came into the possession, by will, of a Mrs.
Whylie, who left it to the present owner, J. E. Piercy, Esq., of Warley Hall;
and it is now inhabited by his agent, Mr. Samuel Reeves.
The general character of the building is that of the later years of the reign
of Elizabeth; this will be sufficiently apparent from the drawing of the north
front, which supplies our principal plate. The groups of tall chimneys, and
the minor details of the doors, windows, &c., are all of that age; while
evidence of its date is confirmed by the south or garden front (as will be seen
by the accompanying vignette), built chiefly of red brick, and containing the
pediments and square stone mullions of the period.
Upon entering the house, through the porch, we reach a narrow passage,
formed by a small room, abstracted from “the Hall”—the spacious hall of
former times. At the termination of this passage a door leads into the present
hall, of far more limited extent, from which a broad flight of stairs conducts
to the upper apartments. These apartments, however, having been long
disused, exhibit the melancholy aspect of desertion and decay. The stairs

consist of four flights,
and the balusters of
the whole are
curiously carved; the
small pendant
hanging from the
upper flight,
as seen from the first-
floor landing,
supplies our initial
letter. On the ground-
floor there are four of
the rooms pannelled
with oak, the
chimney-pieces being
carved in arabesques.
The peculiar
feature of this house,
however, is the very curious timber turret or lantern which rises nearly from
the centre of the roof, and has its principal frontage towards the north. It is
square, and forms one small room, to which a subsequent addition appears to
have been made.
The parish Church (dedicated to St. Clement) is distant from the House
about two miles. Modern “improvement” has been busily at work in
mutilating and defacing it; yet “ignorant churchwardens” have been unable
to deprive it entirely of the venerable character it derives from age.
From the little that remains of ancient work, the whole Church seems to
have been built during the later period of the Decorated style of architecture,
with here and there additional portions of a later date. On the south side
there is a small chapel but whether used as a chantry or not is uncertain, the
date upon it being as late as 1618. It is most probable that it was used as the
burial-place of the Whorwoods; an old family, who inhabited a mansion built
on the site of the Priory of Sandwell, which stood at a short distance from
the Church. The Tower of the Church is square, of two stories, and has an
octagonal turret on its northern side. The Font also is octagonal, with the
sides pannelled, and containing shields. It stands at the west end of the north
aisle.

In the immediate
neighbourhood of the
Church are several old
houses, which seem to
belong to the seventeenth
and early part of the
eighteenth centuries, and
originally formed the
village of West Bromwich,
which at that period must
have been a very
inconsiderable place; but,
from its situation near the
main-road through the
mining district, and the
rapid increase of coal and
iron works in its vicinity, it
has become of
considerable note; the
whole of the distance
between the Oak House
and the Church being
thickly covered with houses, among which are three new churches, several
meeting-houses, and the other ordinary accompaniments of a modern town.
Within about the distance of a mile, at a place where three lanes meet, is a
wayside inn, bearing the sign of “The Stone Cross;” of the cross which
formerly existed there, barely a trace is left.
Amongst the other timber houses in the immediate vicinity of
Birmingham, there are but few remarkable for any peculiarity of
construction; such as still exist have been in nearly all cases subjected to the
“improvements” which destroy early and valuable character; perhaps the
only exception is an old house, situated on the north side of the churchyard
at Kingsnorton (a village in the county of Worcester), about five miles
distant from Birmingham, which is still retained for the use of a Free School,
founded there by King Edward VI., but which, from having a window at its
east end, that clearly belongs to the decorated period of English architecture,
was most probably used as a residence for the priest of the adjacent church.

But although the neighbourhood is so deficient in good examples of ancient
timber houses, there will be found several mansions worthy of observation;
we need mention only the names of New Hall, near the little town of Sutton
Coldfield; Castle Bromwich Hall, the seat of the Earl of Bradford, erected in
1580; the ancient Castle of Maxtoke, which remains, for the greater part, in
good preservation; and the magnificent pile of Aston Hall—one of the finest
and best preserved Halls yet existing in the Kingdom.

From a sketch by H.L. Prout. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
THROWLEY HALL, STAFFORDSHIRE.

T HR OWL E Y HA L L ,

S TA F F O R D S H I R E .

hrowley Hall. In the North-East corner of the
County of Stafford there exists an elevated region
of limestone hills; one of which, the Bunster, rises
to the height of twelve hundred feet above the level
of the sea. Their scanty soil, pierced in many
places by the naked rock, bears a rich verdure,
which is cropped by numerous herds of cattle and
sheep. The bottoms of the intervening valleys are
occupied by clear streams, which dash along their stony beds, and give
fertility to the various shrubs and trees growing upon their margins. In a
concavity, about midway down one of these hills, stands the old Hall of
Throwley. In the vale below, the superterranean or surface course of the river
Manyfold winds its devious way. This stream, like its fellow, the Hamps,
sinks into fissures of the rocks, and flows through caverns hid in the earth,
for some miles, whilst the remaining portion of the waters, especially during
floods, occupies the bed we have pointed out. The valley of the Manyfold,
opposite Throwley Hall, is marked by an umbrageous wood, exhibiting a
highly luxurious foliage of varied tints.
This picturesque spot, environed by the neighbouring hills of such great
altitude, was chosen for the foundation of a house at a remote period. At the
time of Erdeswick, we find him recounting that “Throwley is a fair, ancient
house, and goodly demesne; being the seat of the Meverells, a very ancient
house of gentlemen and of goodly living, equalling the best sort of
gentlemen in the Shire.” In the fifth year of the reign of King John, Oliver de
Meverell was settled here. In the second of Edward the First, Thomas de
Meverell married Agnes, one of the five daughters and co-heirs of Gerebert
de Gayton. In a deed given at Fredeswall, now Fradswell, another manor of
the Meverells, in the seventeenth year of Edward the Third, we find the
name of Thomas de Meverell, Lord of Throwley. The following inscription
occurs on an alabaster monument in the south aisle of the chancel of Ilam
Church, in which parish Throwley is situated:—“Here lyeth yᵉ bodies of
Robert Meverell Esqvʳ & Eliz: his wife, Davghter

of Sʳ Tho: Fleming Kniᵗ & Lord
Cheife Ivstice of yᵉ Kings Bench, by
whō he had issve only one davghter,
who maried Tho: Lord Cromwell,
Visconte Lecaile; wᶜʰ Robert died yᵉ
5th of Febrʸ anᵒ 1626 & Elizabᵗʰ
departed yᵉ 5th of Avgvst 1628.”
Upon a slab are placed the effigies of
this Robert, the last male of the
Meverells, and Elizabeth his wife, in
the magnificent ruffs and other
costume of the period—the husband
wearing a vast pair of boots with
spurs on them, the former falling in
thick wrinkles from the ankle to the
knee, and terminating in a peak about
the middle of the thigh. In a recess in
the wall above is the kneeling figure
of their daughter and heir, Lady
Cromwell, wearing her coronet, and
her four children by her. There are
shields of arms emblazoning those of Meverell, viz., argent, a griffin
segreant sable, armed gules, with the alliances enumerated; and above the
tomb is suspended a helmet having a pointed visor. We are enabled to trace
this heiress of the ancient House of Meverell to her last resting-place, for in
the floor near the altar in Fradsivell Church is a flat stone, inscribed, “Dame
Cromwell.” And on an old Tablet in the Chancel may still be read: “Iana
Cromwellʳ: Ex nobilibus Familys Cromwellorum et Meverillorum.” 1647.
From the family of Lord Cromwell, Viscount Lecaile, and first Earl of
Ardglass, in Ireland, Throwley subsequently passed to Edward Southwell,
the last Baron de Clifford; and was sold by him in 1790 to Samuel
Crompton, Esq., whose son, Sir Samuel Crompton, Bart., of Wood End, near
Thirsk, is now the proprietor of it. The Hall is occupied by a worthy family
of the name of Phillips.
The “fair ancient house of Throwley” has undergone many mutations
since the days of Erdeswick. It still, however, presents a diversity of outline
which corresponds admirably with the imposing site it occupies. It is built of

the limestone of the neighbourhood, quoined with larger gritstones; and its
walls bear a very time-worn appearance. On the Eastern side, its gables,
large bayed window of many lights, divided by stone mullions, terminating
in depressed arches, and its strong square tower, carry us back to the
Sixteenth Century—the period of its erection. Whether it was the work of
Robert, the last male of the House of Meverell, or one of his predecessors,
we are not enabled to ascertain by any positive evidence; yet there is little
doubt the latter surmise is most correct. On the western side of the House
there formerly stood a large Chapel, with a lofty ceiling to the roof; a stone
of which, still preserved, bears the initials “F. M.”, most likely pointing to
the founder of the entire structure. The little turret contains a circular stone
stair, that conducts to the roof of the tower, the leads of which bear many a
mark of visitors long since departed—most of them to an eternal home. The
view here, as it takes in a large reach of the valley in both directions, and
Castern on the opposite hill, is very fine. The principal entrance to the House
of Throwley has been on the north, and leads first to a small Entrance-Hall,
and next, to the great Hall; which in the strange transmutations it has
undergone, retains only a portion of its wainscot and the massive beams of
oak that support the ceiling. This Hall is lighted by the lower window in the
large bay to the left of our litho-tint. A fine room of equal size, above,
entered by a pair of oaken folding doors, has been richly finished, its ceiling
still bearing a beading that has been gilt, disposed in an elegant device of
octagons and stars. This chief apartment has had a large bay-window,
containing two rows of six lights each, to the South, as well as the Eastern
bay apparent in the engraving. All these windows are rendered secure by
upright bars of iron, bearing cross-bars at short intervals. They have
formerly contained some stained glass, the only remains of which, the arms
of Lord Thomas Cromwell quartering the sable griffin segreant of the
Meverells, are now placed in the neighbouring farm-house of Mr. Parramore.
An upper wainscotted room in Throwley Hall still retains an appropriate
memorial of its former lordly occupants in the armorial bearings of the
House of Ardglass, elaborately carved in high relief in oak, now enriched by
the tints of age, with the supporters, two fierce winged bulls. At a short
distance behind the house stands a stately pile of ancient stabling, two lofty
stories in height, topped with a high-pitched roof. The entrances are so tall,
that we might conclude the lords and dames of other days had mounted their
steeds before they issued to the chase or other amusements—among which

we may presume that of falconry would be no infrequent pastime amid these
wild hills.
Of the ancient owners, the Meverells, almost the only additional
historical notice we can regain, is, that Arthur Meverell of Throwley was the
last Prior of Sutbury. At the period of the Dissolution, A.D. 1538, he, together
with eight monks, surrendered the Priory, with all its possessions, into the
hands of Henry VIII.; the original deed still remaining in the Augmentation
Office, with the signatures of the Prior and brotherhood, and the common
seal of the Convent attached. In consideration of this surrender, Arthur, the
Prior, had an annuity of fifty pounds.
Besides the remarkable natural phenomenon before alluded to, of the
disappearance of the rivers Hamps and Manyfold in this vicinity, the vast
caverns in the limestone rocks present to our notice objects of great interest.
One of these, within a short distance of Throwley, has long been
distinguished by the name of “Thor’s House.” Both rivers and caves are
happily alluded to by the poet:—
“Still the nymphs emerging lift in air
Their snow-white shoulders and their azure hair;
Sail with sweet grace the dimpling streams along,
Listening the shepherd’s, or the miner’s song;
But when afar they view the giant cave,
On timorous fins they circle on the wave,
With streaming eyes, and throbbing hearts’ recoil,
Plunge their fair forms, and dive beneath the soil.”

By following the valley from Throwley about two miles, we reach the
beautiful gardens of Ilam Hall, its ivy-covered Church, and the village itself.
Passing over the chaste productions of modern art crowded into this graceful
spot, which is equally marked as the opening, round the base of the mighty
Bunster, of the most romantic portion of Dovedale, we can scarcely refrain
from noticing, as we depart, the two fragments of ancient crosses, covered
with sculpture forming rude devices, in the churchyard; the curiously-figured
Norman font; and the plain but handsome altar-tomb in the Church, which is
pierced at the sides with large quatrefoils, and bears the designation of
“Bartram’s Tomb.” This latter attracted Dr. Plot’s attention, who referred it to
St. Bertelline. He was the son of a king, and a hermit, who is related to have
lived on an island where the present town of Stafford is situated, till he was
disturbed, when he removed into some desert mountainous place, where he
ended his life. Plot has concentrated—

“Tradition’s dubious light,
That hovers ’twixt the day and night,
Dazzling, alternately, and dim,—”

upon the wild hills and dells which abound round Throwley, Ilam, and
Dovedale. He enumerates, as corroborative testimony, this tomb, which he
considers may have been renewed,—as undoubtedly it must have been if it
have reference to the legend; a well, and an ash tree near it, on the western
side of Bunster, towards the base;—all of them being then and still popularly
appropriated to St. Bertram. St. Bertram’s ash has been cut down in the
memory of many living in the village; whilst the water of St. Bertram’s Well,
“clear as diamond-spark,” still rills out of the base of the mighty hill.

From a drawing by W. F. Hulme. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
TRENTHAM HALL, STAFFORDSHIRE.

T R E NT HA M HA L L ,

S TA F F O R D S H I R E .

rentham, the home or settlement on the Trent, has
been a village since the days of the Saxons, who
adopted this fertile nook on the banks of a beautiful
stream as a fit abode for man. Here, in this well-
selected spot, they were led by their religious
impulses to found an Abbey, over which presided no
less a personage than Werburg, daughter of the
ferocious Wulphere, king of Mercia, whose palace was hard by, at Berry-
Bank, and whose wicked murder of his two sons, Wulfard and Rufin, on
suspicion of their conversion to Christianity, was perpetrated at Bursson and
at Stone, where subsequently religious houses were erected as memorials of
their martyrdom. St. Werburg, for she was canonized, and was, moreover,
sister to King Ethelred, died at Trentham or at Hanbury, in the year 683, was
buried at the latter place, and her body was in the year 875 removed to
Chester Cathedral, where the rich decorated stone case of her shrine now
forms the bishop’s throne. Of the Saxon abbey of Trentham no records
remain; of its “ancient glories” there exists not a trace.
In the time of King Stephen,
Ranulph, the second of the great Earls of Chester who bore that name,
refounded the monastery of Trentham for canons of St. Augustine. In the
present church, which closely adjoins to Trentham Hall, and which, by the
munificence of the Duke of Sutherland, has been within these three or four
years carefully and judiciously restored in every part, under the charge of
Mr. Barry, we have still some slight but interesting remains, reaching back
nearly to the time of its foundation. These consist of the tall, round, Norman
piers of the nave, with their quaint capitals, and the bold and lofty pointed
arches to which they give support.
The appended woodcut exhibits the interior of the church—the screen, of
carved oak, being one of very considerable beauty.
At the Dissolution, the Monastery had only seven religious, and was
granted by King Henry VIII. in 1539, to Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk. It

aft
er
w
ar
ds
ca
m
e
int
o
th
e
po
ss
es
si
on
of the Levesons, a Staffordshire family of great antiquity, seated at
Willenhall. Nicholas Leveson, lord-mayor of London, died in the year that
Trentham was granted to the Duke of Suffolk. His great-grandson, Sir John
Leveson, left two daughters only, co-heiresses; one of whom, Frances, by
marrying Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, carried Trentham and other
extensive possessions into this ancient Yorkshire family, which dates from
the Conquest. Sir John Leveson-Gower was elevated to the peerage in 1702-
3, as Baron Gower of Sittenham. His son John, the second Baron, was
constituted Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal, and was repeatedly one of the
Lords of the Regency during the absences of George II. on the Continent. In
1746 he was created Viscount Trentham of Trentham, and Earl Gower. He
died in 1755, and was buried at Trentham. He was succeeded by his eldest
son, Granville, the second Earl, who was Member of Parliament for the city
of Westminster. On the occasion of his appointment as one of the Lords of
the Admiralty, his re-election was strongly opposed by Sir George
Vanderput, who was defeated by a small majority. In consequence, a scrutiny
ensued; and there occurred several riotous proceedings recorded in the
journals of the time. He filled the high offices of Lord Privy Seal, Lord
Chamberlain, and Lord President of the Council. He was installed Knight of
the Garter, and created Marquis of Stafford in 1786. His eldest son, George
Granville, also a Knight of the Garter, married the late estimable Countess of

Sutherland in
her own right,
and was created
Duke of
Sutherland in
1833. This
peerage,
according to
some of the
Scottish writers,
is the most
ancient of any
in North Britain.
The Duke did
not long survive
to enjoy his new
dignity, but died
in the same
year, carrying
with him the
sincere regret of
his numerous
tenantry. The
latter, to testify
their respect for
His Grace’s memory, commissioned Sir Francis Chantrey to execute a
colossal statue of their noble landlord, which occupies a neighbouring height
of great elevation, immediately in front of Trentham Hall across the lake,
and forms a very conspicuous object in the surrounding scenery. Of the
present noble possessor of the title, George-Granville-Sutherland-Leveson-
Gower, the second Duke of his family, it will not be necessary to add much.
After sitting in the Commons for Staffordshire, he was summoned to the
House of Peers in the lifetime of his father, as Earl Gower, and is
distinguished for the gracious dignity with which, during the whole of his
career, he has sustained the honours of so many ancient and noble families,
concentrated, as it were, in his own person.

To the Levesons we may be allowed to recur. Sir Richard Leveson was
distinguished as a naval commander. He is considered to be the subject of
that fine old plaintive ballad, “The Spanish Lady’s Love,” which relates the
woes of a captive maid, “by birth and parentage of high degree,” at being
about to be separated for ever from her detainer—
“Full woe is me,
O let me still sustain this kind captivity!
* * * *
My heart in prison still remains with thee!”

for he accompanied the Earl of Nottingham, in 1596, in his expedition
against Cadiz, when he was twenty-seven years of age. He was married to
the daughter of this famous Earl, who was the Lord High Admiral and
Commander in Chief of the English fleet which defeated the so called
“invincible” Spanish Armada. Sir Richard Leveson, who was in this
engagement as well as many others, in 1601 was made Vice-Admiral, and
died early in life in 1605. In the Collegiate Church at Wolverhampton a
noble bronze statue, richly gilt, supported by a stately monument in black
marble, was erected to his memory; by which were two brass plates, the one
inscribed with the chief events of his life, registered at length in Latin,
terminating in these words—“E vita pie discessit
sine prole, sed non sine magno multorum luctu, auro dignus, ære contentus;”
and the other in English. He was succeeded by Sir Richard Leveson of
Trentham, Knight of the Bath, who erected this splendid memorial to the
Admiral’s fame. It was executed by Le Sueur for 300l., and the original
contract in French is still preserved at Trentham. During the contest between
Royalty and the Parliament, this bronze effigy was ordered by the
Committee of Sequestrations at Stafford to be taken away and cast into
cannon; but by the timely interposition of Lady Leveson, the Admiral’s
widow, it was redeemed for a sum of money, and deposited in Lilleshall
Church till the strife was over. The marble monument being destroyed, it
now occupies a niche in the church at Wolverhampton. A copy of the effigy
is placed in a recess in the court-yard at Trentham Hall of which we give an
illustration.
The above Sir Richard Leveson, Knight of the Bath, was member of
parliament for the county of Salop, and afterwards for Newcastle-under-
Lyme, and was devoted to the cause of Charles I. He made his residence at
Trentham, “being accounted one of the best house-keepers and landlords in

the county.” In consequence of his
adherence to the royal cause, his
property was sequestrated, for which
he compounded by the payment of
more than 6000l., the largest
composition obtained. There remains a
letter from him to the Governor of
Shrewsbury, which strikingly indicates
the distresses sustained, by persons of
distinction even, during those troubled
times:—
“Sʳ,
“Since the unhappy surprise of Stafford by the
rebelles, the place where I am is not safe, either for
myself or my goodes, and therefore I have sent 2
wagons loaded with some household stuffe, which I
desire, with your dispensac’on, may bee received
into your towne of Shrewsbury, into a roome which I
have longe reserved in myne owne handes for this
purpose against a tyme of neede; and that to this
effecte you will please to give order unto your watch
for free passage to and fro, whereby you will oblige
mee more and more to remayne
“Yoʳ ever affectionate frende,
“R. LEVESON.”
“Lilleshall Lodge, 16 May, 1643.
“To my muche respected frende,
Sʳ Francis Oteley,
Kt. Governour of Shrewsburye. Haste these.”

Sir Richard Leveson built the old hall at Trentham in 1633, two views of
which are given in Dr. Plot’s singular “Natural History of Staffordshire.” He
died in 1661. His widow, Lady Catherine Leveson, was a great benefactress
to the parish, and died at Trentham in 1678.
The present Hall, previous to the recent most happy and successful
“transformation” under the direction of Mr. Barry, was built on the model of
Buckingham House, in St. James’s Park. It has now become, by the addition
of the semicircular colonnade, rich carriage porch surmounted by the ducal
arms, and baronial tower, an imposing and stately mansion, enriched with
much diversity of outline.

A massy structure near the Hall was erected by the late Marquis of
Stafford as a family mausoleum, in the Egyptian style; the grounds around it
being planted with various species of yew and other sombre plants, of a
lofty, pointed, and pyramidal form. The ponderous architecture, the deeply-
tinted foliage and heavenward aspect of the evergreens, form most
appropriate emblems, both of human frailty and of the brighter hopes of the
Christian.
The park is marked by the unrestrained native beauties of the
neighbouring wood of oaks, “wild above rule or art,” and by the river Trent
expanding into a goodly lake:—
“A gentle stream,
Adown the vale its serpent courses winds,
Seen here and there through breaks of trees to gleam,
Gilding their dancing boughs with noon’s reflected beam.”

From a drawing by J. D. Harding. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
HELMINGHAM HALL, SUFFOLK.

x HE L MI N G HAM H AL L ,

SUFFOLK.

elmingham
Hall may
be classed
among the
most
remarkable
and
interesting
edifices in
the
Kingdom;
for,
although it
has
undergone
many
changes,
and been
subjected
to a variety
of “improvements,” the leading characteristics of the ancient structure are
retained; it still exhibits a connecting link between the strong castles of the
old Barons, and the embattled mansions which succeeded them. The Hall is
distant about eight miles from the venerable town of Ipswich. The Park
contains about five hundred acres, and is largely stocked with deer. The
Entrance-gate—which forms the initial letter to this Chapter—is placed
between two Lodges—modern, but in admirable keeping with the old House.
An Avenue, arched by magnificently grown trees, conducts to the South
Front of the Mansion; in which is the principal Entrance, approached by a
Bridge thrown across the Moat. The Moat encompasses the building; which
is surrounded also by a Terrace. Both are kept in excellent repair; and the
former is well supplied with fish. The Drawbridges are maintained in all

their
primitive
formality
, and are,
we
understa
nd, even
to this
day,
raised
every
night.
The
appende
d print
exhibits
the
picturesq
ue
interior
of one of
the two
“Gate-houses,” in which these ancient appendages still remain,—showing
also the rude machinery by which it was elevated or depressed. It is an
object now very rarely encountered: one of the most impressive records of
“the state” (using the term in its double sense) in which our ancestors lived
—keeping perpetual watch and ward. All praise be to the existing Lord of
this Mansion, who has taken especial care to prevent Time from destroying
so peculiar a relic of a remote age. The present representative of the
Tollemaches—John Tollemache, Esq.—has indeed manifested continual zeal
to protect from injury the seat of his ancestors—restoring with judgment,
skill, and taste, where injuries have resulted from years, but so as in no
degree to impair its original character; neither adding to, nor taking from, its
early and “fair” proportions.
Notwithstanding these solemn tokens of gone-by days, so intimately
associated with times of peril, the external appearance of the building is
peculiarly light and graceful—a character which it derives, chiefly, from four

large Bay Windows,
with projecting
cornices and
embattled parapets;
Gables profusely
ornamented with
richly wrought
finials; and a
multiplicity of
Chimneys similarly
enriched, with
reticulated and
indented mouldings.
The structure is
quadrangular. The
Courtyard, with its
several dependent
buildings, has been
restored with
remarkably good
taste and imposing
effect. The Eastern
Entrance to these
buildings is here
pictured. Crossing
this Court, the Hall is
reached[34]; the State
Apartments are
limited to the Western Front. They have been arranged with greater care to
comfort than to Baronial grandeur; due attention has been paid, however, to
the “furnishing,” and the taste of the Tudor age harmoniously prevails
throughout the Mansion. Until very lately, the Hall had been completely
deserted by the family, and was rapidly falling to decay. When it became the
residence of the present proprietor, it was completely renovated; the Garden
or West Front, which had become dilapidated, having been entirely rebuilt.
The Hall and several of the Apartments are adorned with Portraits of the

ancient and noble Family; among them are some fine paintings by Lely,
Kneller, and Reynolds.
A relic of exceeding interest is contained in one of the rooms. It is the
Lute which Queen Elizabeth presented to an infant scion
of the House, to
whom her
Majesty stood
Godmother. It has
the date,—1580,
—and the
inscription,
“Cymbalum Deca
chordon.” It is
preserved in a
glass-case, which
also encloses a
variety of rare and
curious coins; and
in the same
chamber is a spinette—believed to have been once the property of the Virgin
Queen.
The very ancient Family of Tollemache resided for many generations at
Bentley in Suffolk. In their old Manor House there was “to be seen until
lately,” (within the present century, perhaps), the following inscription:—
When William the Conqueror reigned with great fame,
Bently was my seat, and Tollemache was my name.

They boast their descent from Tollemache, a Saxon Lord of Bentley and
Stoke Tollemache in Oxfordshire, in the sixth century. In the Domesday
Book, the name is written Toolmag, and subsequently Thalemache,
Tolemache, Talmage, Tallmash, and Tollemache. For nearly thirteen hundred
years, the Family has dwelt in Suffolk county, flourishing in uninterrupted
male succession, until so recently as 1821, when, by the death of the late
Earl of Dysart, the title became extinct, and with it the direct male line of the
long famous race. They acquired the rich estate at Helmingham by the
marriage of Lionel Tollemache, of Bentley, Esquire, with Edith, daughter
and sole heiress of William Joyce, of Crekes Hall, in Helmingham, who in

the first year of the eighth Henry was found, by requisition, to hold the
Manor of Bentley by knight’s service. He served the office of High Sheriff
of Norfolk and Suffolk in the fourth year of the same reign. By this Lionel
Tollemache, Helmingham Hall was built. He died in the early part of the
reign of Edward the Sixth, and was succeeded by his son, Lionel
Tollemache, Esq., who was knighted by Queen Elizabeth, who, during her
progress through the counties of Suffolk and Norfolk in 1561, honoured him
with her presence at Helmingham Hall, on August 14th and four following
days, “where she was entertained with great splendour and hospitality.”
During the visit, Her Majesty stood Godmother to her Host’s eldest son,
Lionel: to commemorate this event, she presented to him, as we have stated,
a Lute, still preserved as an heir-loom in the Family.
His son, the first Baronet, was advanced to the dignity by James the First,
in 1611. He died at Helmingham on the 5th of September, 1612, and was
buried there on the same day (in the Parish Register the interment is entered,
“Et eodem die sepultus fuit).” Helmingham Hall continued in his male
descendants until the death of Wilbraham Tollemache, Earl of Dysart, in
1821[35], when it devolved upon his sister Louisa, Countess of Dysart, and
upon her death in 1840, to the present proprietor, John Tollemache, Esq.,
M.P. for North Cheshire, eldest son of the late Admiral Tollemache,
grandson to Lady Jane Halliday, sister to Lionel, fifth Earl, and Wilbraham,
sixth and last Earl of Dysart.
The Earldom of Dysart came to the family by the marriage of Sir Lionel
Tollemache, Bart., with the Lady Elizabeth Murray, eldest daughter and
heiress of William Murray, first Earl of Dysart; upon the death of her father
she succeeded to the title. Sir Lionel died in 1669, and was buried with great
pomp at Helmingham on the 25th of March, in the same year. The Countess
married secondly at Petersham, in Surrey, February 17, 1671-2, to John
Maitland, Duke of Lauderdale, and Knight of the Garter.
The Tollemaches—although classing amongst the most ancient families
of the realm, and for centuries preserving an unbroken link—appear never to
have been very emulous of distinction. The name scarcely appears upon the
Roll of Fame: neither in the Senate nor at the Bar have they achieved for it
high repute; nor does it occupy a conspicuous place in the annals of war of
any period—from the Conquest down to the existing age[36].
In the immediate vicinity of the Hall, are several primitive and highly
picturesque Cottages, many of which are of a date coeval with that of the

Mansion: and the very ancient and venerable town of Ipswich is
inconceivably rich in architectural antiquities.
Helmingham Church stands by the south side of the Park. The Tower was
built in 1487, as appears by the copy of an agreement now in the Church
chest, between “John Talmage, Esquier, Maistress Elizabeth, his wyff,
Edmund Joyce, Gent., John Wythe, and William Holme on the one part, and
Thomas Aldrych, of North Lopham, Mason, on the other, for thirty pounds.”
It is not known by whom the Church was built; but in 1258, Dame Margaret
Creke, who founded the Nunnery of Flixton, near Bungay, presented to it;
and the Prioress and Nuns of Flixton presented to it till 1312, when she
exchanged the patronage for that of Flixton, with the Bishop of Norwich;
from that time the Bishops presented to it till the Reformation, when the
Crown claimed and has presented to it ever since. It is dedicated to the
Virgin Mary. About a foot and a half from the ground, on the south side of
the steeple, carved in stone letters of a foot high, is the following inscription,
in old English letters:—
“Scandit ad ethera, Virgo, puerpera virgula Jesse.”

The Steeple is a square tower of Flints, embattled on the top: on the south
side are the arms of Tollemache—three shields—of the date 1543, when it
was built. It is supported by four buttresses, all standing diagonally. On the
west side, near the ground, was an inscription, now gone.
The Nave of the Church is of the date of the fourteenth century, and
contains a fine South Door of the then prevalent style of architecture. The
Windows, as well as the Roof, are of a later age—probably about 1540. The
Chancel is quite modern, but is now undergoing alterations and repairs; the
result of which will be to assimilate it with other parts of the venerable
building. In reference to this matter, also, high praise is due to the present
proprietor of Helmingham, inasmuch as he is removing many of the blots
left upon the sacred edifice by the bad taste or heedless indifference of his
predecessors.
Both the Chancel and Nave are crowded with monuments
commemorating the heroic deeds of members of the Family of Tollemache.
The most remarkable and interesting fills nearly the whole of the southern
side of the nave; and it is so lofty, that part of the roof has been displaced to
make room for it. It contains, in niches, four figures of men kneeling with

their
hands
clasped
and erect
before
them, the
three first
in a row,
the fourth
above
them;
they are
barehead
ed, with
swords
by their
sides, and
in the
dress of
the 17th
century. We learn from a rhymed inscription underneath each figure that
these are the effigies of the four first of the Tollemaches who settled at
Helmingham—the monument to their honour being erected by the fifth.[37]

From a sketch by C. J. Richardson. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
HENGRAVE HALL, SUFFOLK.

HE N GR AV E HAL L ,

SUFFOLK.

engrave Hall, “an embattled Manor-house, with Turrets of
singular design and a Gate-House of acknowledged
beauty”—is situate about two miles from the ancient and
venerable town of Bury St. Edmunds.[38] The founder of the
building was Sir Thomas Kytson, a wealthy cloth-merchant
of London, by whom it was erected, between the years 1525
and 1538, probably upon the site of a mansion still older,—
the ancient hall of the De Hemegraves. A brief history of the
several families through whose hands the Manor has passed
into those of its present possessor, Sir Thomas Gage, Bart., may interest the
reader.[39]
In the reign of Edward the Confessor, it formed part of the territory of St.
Edmund, by whose monks it was held at the Conquest. About the middle of
the twelfth century it was granted by Anselm, the seventh Abbot, to “Leo
and his heirs;” and by them was assumed the surname of Hemegrave. The
De Hemegraves filled the highest offices in Suffolk for upwards of two
centuries, when the race was extinct, and the estate became, by purchase, the
property of the Hethes. In failure of male issue, it passed—in the nineteenth
of Henry VI.—by purchase, to the Staffords. In 1522, consequent upon the
attainder of Edward, Duke of Buckingham, it was sold to Sir Thomas
Kytson, “citizen and mercer of London, otherwise called, Kytson the
Merchant;” so he is styled in an Act of Parliament which confirmed him the
purchaser of Hengrave.[40] He was succeeded by a posthumous son, who left
no male issue; he had, however, three daughters, one of whom married
Thomas Lord Darcy, created Viscount Colchester and Earl Rivers, and who,
in right of his wife, became entitled to, and resided at, Hengrave. From her
inherited a daughter, Penelope, who married Sir John Gage, Bart., of Firle, in
Sussex.[41] In this family Hengrave has since continued; its present
proprietor being Sir Thomas Gage, the eighth Baronet, born on the 20th of
March, 1812.
The Mansion, which seems to have undergone very little change since its
erection, and may be classed among the most unimpaired domestic

structures of the kingdom, is of considerable size, “covering 18,500 square
feet of ground,” although by the removal, in 1775, of a mass of building
which projected at the east and north sides, together with a high Tower, it has
been reduced one-third at least from its original extent. Several ancient
family documents which still exist, and of which copies are given by Mr.
Gage, inform us that the whole cost of the structure did not much exceed
£3000.[42]
From these interesting documents we learn also that the Mansion at
Hengrave was furnished with all necessaries from sources within its own
boundaries—a mill, a forge, and a farm; a dovecote, a grange, a barn; a great
and little park, a vineyard, an orchard, a hop-ground, and a hemp-ground.
There were butts for the Archers, (“still visible in the upper part of the
Park”); mews for the hawks, and kennels for the hounds. There was a
bowling-green also; and the neighbouring ponds were well stocked with fish
to divert the Angler and supply the “Fast-day meal.” The Inventory of
household goods, taken in 1603, enumerates among other items, now
familiar only to the Antiquary, “the Shovelboard,” a table for playing a
fashionable game; of Armour, the “Almain Rivetts,” “the Privye Coats” of
Mail; the “Jackes of Plate,” the “Mayle Gorgetts,” the “Spanish Burgenetts,”
the “Dagges,” (short Hand-guns); “Snaphaunces,” (Firelocks,) Pethernells,
(a kind of Harquebuss,) and Ptyzens, (Partizans,) both “ordinary and very
fayre.” Of Musical Instruments, the Recorder, the Cornute, the Bandore, the
Cittern, the Curtall, and the Lysarden—all “in ye chamber where ye
Musicyons playe;” with books, “covered with parchment,” containing
pavines, galliards, measures, levaultoes, corrantoes, and Italian fa-laes.
The beautiful and long-famous Gate-way of Hengrave Hall is pictured in
the accompanying print. It is a splendid example of “Tudor
magnificence;”—“of such singular beauty,” says Mr. Gough, “and in such
high preservation, that, perhaps, a more elegant specimen of the Architecture
of the age in which it was erected cannot now be seen.” We borrow our
description of it from Mr. Gage. The structure has an arch obtusely pointed;
in the spandrels appear the Kytson Crest,—a unicorn’s head erased. The
space above is filled by a triple bay window, the domes of which are rich in
scale work and crockets, and have basements or brackets elegantly
terminated in pendant corbels; each square compartment in the lower
division of the window contains a Shield, bearing the Arms of some member

of the family of the founder. On the frieze below two of these Shields are
these words:—
Opus hoc fieri fecit Tome Kytson.
Ano Dni. MCCCCC. Tricessimo Octavo.

The battlements of the Gate-house, assuming the appearance of small
gables, the points of which, crowned with richly carved hoop garlands and
vanes, correspond with those of the triple dome below, give height to the
whole, and complete the beauty and harmony of the design. The Inner Court
of fine masonry, embattled, appears in its original state; and is distinguished
by the bay window of the Hall on the north side. The interior of the Mansion
has little of its primitive character; but “the florid style of architecture which
prevailed, is still conspicuous in the fair tracery, pendant, and spandrels of
the bay window,” which retains its early beauty. Of the number and variety
of the apartments at Hengrave, and of the splendid luxury of its domestic
arrangements, some judgment may be formed from the “Inventory,” dated
1603, of which Mr. Gage prints a copy. Here we read of the Queen’s
Chamber, the Chiefe Chamber, the Great Chamber, the Armoury, the Gallery
at the Tower, the Dyning Chamber, the Chapell Chamber, the Chamber in
which the muscycions playe, and a host of others—all magnificently
furnished. The Great Chamber was hung with eight large pieces of fine arras
—“parke worke with great beasts and fowls, 160 yards;” the cheyres and
stooles were covered with coloured clothe of silver; the carpetts were of
Turkeye worke. The Dyning Chamber had its tapestrye—“of the story of
Danea.” The Wynter Parlor, its “pfuming frame of brasse” and “chesse
boorde, wᵗʰ men to it.” To the furniture of the Armoury and the Musicians’
Chamber we have adverted. The contents of the “Sadler’s Shopp,” however,
denotes more pointedly the wealth and luxury of the family. The saddles
were of sumptuous character—“layed with gould lace;” “fringed with gould
and silke;” “embroidered with goulde and purle;” and so forth.
Towards the close of the last century, the Mansion was the abode of a
sisterhood of expatriated nuns. They belonged to the English Convent of
Austin Nuns at Bruges, and obtained an asylum here by the generosity of Sir
Thomas Gage, himself a Roman Catholic. They subsequently returned to
France; but the mortal remains of many of the persecuted Sisters lie in the
Churchyard of Hengrave—among others, those of their Abbess, the

venerable Mary More, one of the heirs-general, and the last lineal
descendant, in the paternal line, of the great Chancellor, Sir Thomas More.
Hengrave Church is very close to the Hall, and would appear, indeed, to
have been originally attached to it. It has
long
ceased
to be
used for
the
purpose
of
worship,
but is
kept in
repair as
the
Burial-
place of
the
family.
It is of
small
structure, built of the materials common to sacred edifices in the counties of
Norfolk and Suffolk—rough flint, with cement and free-stone in the
battlements, parapets, groins, buttresses, windows, and arches. The round
Tower, indicated in the accompanying print, is curious, and of remote
antiquity. Its external aspect is peculiarly venerable, covered with Ivy-trees,
the growth of centuries. The interior where, it is said, no religious service
has been performed since the Reformation, the family having adhered,
through all changes, to the old faith, is without pews, and contains many
richly-sculptured Monuments. Among them is a superb Tomb of marble and
coloured free-stone, to the memory of Margaret, Countess of Bath, and her
three husbands; the first of whom was Sir Thomas Kytson—the citizen-
founder of Hengrave—who died September 13th, 1545, aged 55 years. The
other principal Tombs are in memory of Sir Thomas Kytson, the younger;
Sir Thomas Darcy; the Bourchiers, Earls of Bath; the Cornwallys; and the
Gages.

Altogether, there are few of the Baronial Mansions of England so little
spoiled by time—so comparatively uninjured by modern taste and
injudicious improvement. Hengrave Hall is “a fair and, in some respects, a
unique example of the domestic architecture of the period of its erection.”

From a drawing by W. Müller. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
WEST-STOW HALL, SUFFOLK.

WE S T S TO W H AL L ,

SUFFOLK.

ithin four miles—north-west—of the venerable town of
Bury St. Edmunds, the traveller may notice, not far from
the road-side, the turrets of an ancient House, now
decayed, but which, in the palmy age of England, was
classed among the stateliest of its “stately Homes.”
Unless attention is directed to it, however, it will attract
no passers-by; for very humble are now the pretensions
of the Palace-Hall, in which resided Charles Brandon,
Duke of Suffolk, and his Royal wife, the youngest daughter of Henry VII.,
sister to Henry VIII, and widow of Louis XII., King of France.
The Old Hall is situated in the very centre of a host of picturesque
antiquities; in all directions around it exist objects of exceeding interest,—as
relics of the olden time and imperishable illustrations of British History. It
would be difficult to find in the kingdom so many remains of architectural
splendour within a circuit of four or five miles. Bury contains the most
interesting of our monastic ruins. Among them are those of the famous
“Norman Tower” (still comparatively unimpaired), erected in the reign of the
Conqueror, as the Grand Portal to the magnificent church of Abbot Baldwin;
—the Charnel Chapel, in which Lidgate wrote,—the Church which for
centuries enshrined the miracle-working bones of St. Edmund,—and the
walls of the Chamber where, on the 20th of November, 1215, “the Barons”
pledged “the repose of their souls” to extort the Charter of Freedom from the
tyrant John. The road to West Stow is scarcely less rich in historic sites than
the town of Bury. Without the north-gate are the remains of the Gateway to
St. Saviour’s Hospital, where,—during the Parliament of 1446, assembled at
Bury, by Henry VI.,—the “good Duke Humphrey” was murdered by
Cardinal Beaufort and De la Pole; half a mile beyond, we cross the Old Toll-
gate Bridge of the mitred Abbots of St. Edmunsbury; at a short distance, an
ivy-clad Tower is all that remains of the Church of Fornham St. Genevieve;
but tumuli still endure to indicate where the ten thousand Flemings were
buried by “sloven-hands,” after the bloody battle which gave to the second
Henry peaceable possession of the crown. By other roads we pass objects

equally fertile of history. The Round Towers of Saxham are within ken;
Risby and Hengrave Churches are close at hand; and very near us are some
of the grandest and most beautiful of the Baronial Halls of England—
Coldham, Rushbrooke, and Hengrave among the rest.
All who visit the ancient mansion of West Stow, will first enter the
venerable Church, to which a footway leads through a field from off the
main road. It is a fine example of a very early age. The Tower is square and
embattled; the Chancel, apparently of a more recent date than the Nave,
contains an enriched Piscina, of the fifteenth century, and many mural
monuments and grave-stones of the once illustrious family of Crofts—a
family now known in Suffolk only by history and these cold records of their
fame. The Nave has an open roof; the brackets that support the principals are
ornamented with armorial bearings of “many ancient Lords of this Manor,
with their alliances.”
Of West Stow Hall very little is known. The assertion that it was formerly
the residence of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, and the Royal widow he
had married, is supported mainly by tradition and their armorial bearings,
which still exist, carved upon a stone, over the porch. Of the once extensive
pile nothing now remains, except the Turrets we have pictured; and a long
Corridor, reaching to a modern house—the comfortable home of a
substantial farmer. The former bears ample evidence that its date is of the
time of Henry VIII.; that of the Corridor is not so remote by a century.
It is certain that, after the romantic marriage of Charles Brandon with the
beloved of his younger days, when death had freed her from her state-
contract with Louis XII., and her early lover had become a widower, they
lived for many years in comparative seclusion in Suffolk; and, although
“Mary Tudor died at the Manor of Westhorpe in this county, in 1533,” it is
more than probable that West Stow was one of their mansions. It was
evidently of great extent; there are persons still living, who recollect a
quadrangular court and extensive out-buildings; and the wide Moat by which
it was surrounded was filled up only two years ago. The Tower is partially of
a defensive character; the interior consists of several small chambers, one of
which contains some singular paintings in distemper, the principal objects in
which are these:—A boy hawking, with an inscription in old English letters,
“Thus doe I all the day;” a young man making love to a maiden, inscribed
—“Thus doe I while I may;” a middle-aged man, looking on—the
inscription, “Thus did I when I might;” an aged man, hobbling onward—the

inscription, “Good Lord, will this world last ever?” The drawings are rude,
but they are of the age of Elizabeth. They were recently exposed to view by
the removal of a skirting of oak; and are as fresh as if painted yesterday.

From a drawing by Henry Mogford. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
HAM HOUSE, SURREY.

HAM H OUS E ,

S U R R E Y.

am House.—Few mansions are more pleasantly situated
than this—the dwelling of the Tollemaches, Earls of
Dysart. It stands on the south bank of the Thames;
distant about twelve miles from London; the pretty
village of Twickenham is immediately opposite; to the
left is “Eel-pie Island,” famous as a holiday resort of
many who “in populous city pent” covet periodical
acquaintance with clear streams and green lanes; to the
right is far-famed Richmond Hill, which, although
distant a mile perhaps, seems, from the tortuous
winding of the river, to form a part of the demesne; while the back ground is
supplied by Richmond Park, with its graceful slopes and its thick masses of
rich underwood mingled among groups of magnificent forest trees.
The House was erected early in the seventeenth century—the date, 1610,
still stands on the door of the principal entrance. It is said to have been built
for the good Prince Henry, eldest son of James the First; and a tradition
exists that the illness of which he died was the result of bathing too freely in
the adjacent river. It is, however, unlikely that the Prince ever resided here;
and it is certain that the builder was Sir Thomas Vavasor, Knight Marshal,
appointed, in 1611, together with Sir Francis Bacon, Judge of the Marshal’s
court, and to have been “surrendered by him, together with certain
customary lands, to John (Ramsay), Earl of Holderness, who died in 1624 or
1625.” We follow the authority of Manning, the County Historian, who
states that by this Earl, or, more probably, his heirs, the House and Lands
were “sold to William Murray—groom of the bed-chamber to James the
First, and afterwards created, in 1643, by that monarch Earl of Dysart[43]
—“whose widow, Katherine, on the 22nd May, 1651, surrendered them to
the use of Sir Lionel Tollemache and Elizabeth his wife, her daughter, who
in the year following surrendered them to the use of Sir Lionel’s will.” This
daughter, to whom the honour of the Earl—“such it was,” writes Burnet—
descended, having outlived Sir Lionel, married a second time (being then
Countess of Dysart) the Earl, afterwards Duke, of Lauderdale.[44] The House

and Estates of Ham were inherited by “her heirs by her first husband;” in
whose possession they have since continued, being now the property of
Lionel William John Tollemache, the sixth Earl of Dysart, and the residence
of his Lordship’s brother.
The Duchess of Lauderdale—famous during the reigns of four monarchs;
the First and Second James, and the First and Second Charles; and through
the Protectorship of Cromwell—refurnished the House at Ham; where she
continued to reside, until her death at a very advanced age. The Interior, with
its gorgeous, yet remarkably tasteful “furnishing,” has been scarcely altered
since the aged dame occupied the Mansion. Time has dimmed the splendour
of the “hangings,” and tarnished the costly draperies of the rich looms of
France; but they remain—in some places tattered and torn—to supply
indubitable evidence that the “woman of great beauty, but of far greater
parts,” had at all events a refined taste, and that at least a portion of the
money she was “wanting in
no means to obtain,” was judiciously
expended in the adornment of her
House. Among other untouched relics
of gone-by days, is a small
Antechamber, where, it is said, she
not only condescended to receive the
Second Charles, but, if tradition is to
be credited, where she “cajoled”
Oliver Cromwell. There still remain
the chair in which she used to sit, her
small walking-cane, and a variety of
objects she was wont to value and
cherish as memorials of her active
life and the successful issues of a
hundred political intrigues.[45]
The Exterior of the Mansion
derives singularity chiefly from the
adornment the outer walls receive
from a collection of Roman busts; some of which, however, having been
removed by time, have been replaced by those of Poets of the age of Anne.
Immediately in front stands the statue

of “Father Thames”—
copied from the well-
known work of the
elder Bacon in the
Courtyard of Somerset
House. The Hall-door
(which supplies our
initial letter) is of very
elegant and elaborate
workmanship. The Hall
is surrounded by an
open gallery; the rooms
on the ground floor
contain little to interest,
except the Chamber
and Dressing-room of
the famous Duchess—
the room in which her
descendant, the late
venerable Countess of
Dysart, also died.
Passing a small Chapel,
the Chambers on the
upper floor are reached
by a staircase of
peculiar character and very considerable beauty. The balustrades are of
walnut-tree, richly carved into representations of armour and military
trophies of various countries and epochs. The State Apartments are, as we
have intimated, little changed. On either side of the Landing are the State
Bed-rooms—one of which, containing copies in tapestry of some of the
Cartoons, the young Prince Henry is said to have occupied; the bed and
furniture are certainly of the period. The several Drawing-rooms contain
valuable and interesting relics of antiquity; and a small closet is amazingly
rich in the choicest and rarest objects of virtù—Miniature Paintings by Philip
Wouvermans, carved Frames by Grindling Gibbons, carved Cupids by
Fiamingo, Conversation Scenes by Watteau, Miniatures by Cooper—in
short, the assemblage here is of immense value and of surpassing interest.

Among its other
treasures may be
mentioned a Lock of
Hair of the unhappy
Devereux, Earl of Essex
—the authenticity of
which admits of no
dispute; a Prayer book,
the gift of Charles the
First; and, in the Library,
no fewer than sixteen
uninjured Caxtons.
The “Long
Gallery”—ninety-two
feet in length—is hung
with Portraits, the
majority of which are
original works of the
great Masters who
conferred honour and
glory on the Courts of
the First and the Second
Charles. Leading from
the Long Gallery is the
famous “Cabal Chamber,” [46] the chairs and tables and other furniture in
which have been untouched since the notorious “five” here met in secret to
arrange and carry out their plans.
So unchanged is the character of the Mansion, that little effort of
imagination will be required to people it with the gay courtiers and light
dames of the reign of the second Charles, when the “House at Ham” was in
its glory. Every object it contains is in keeping with the period; of modern
furniture there is nothing; but all the tables, chairs, footstools, fire-dogs,—
from things of curious and rare value down to the minutest matters of daily
use,—are of an age gone by. This advantage is mainly attributable to the fact
that since the Restoration the venerable dwelling has had but few occupants
—two of them, the Duchess of Lauderdale and the late Countess of Dysart,
having died there when their years numbered upwards of fourscore.

According to Hume, James the Second was “ordered to retire to this house,”
on the arrival of the Prince of Orange in London, but “thinking himself
unsafe so near the Metropolis, he fled privately to France.” Subsequently the
“Manor House at Ham” ceased to possess any public interest; fortunately
there has been no wish on the part of its noble owners to effect “restorations”
of any kind; it has been consequently suffered to retain its solemn aspect and
somewhat gloomy character; and remains a striking and impressive
monument of the period of its erection.

From a drawing by F. W. Hulme. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
LOSELY HOUSE, SURREY.

L O S E L E Y HOU S E ,

S U R R E Y.

oseley House. This ancient Mansion—the residence of
James More Molyneux, Esq., the lineal representative
of two families, famous in old times—although sadly
impaired by time and neglect—cannot fail, while one
stone remains above another, to retain the interest that
arises from venerable antiquity, in association with
renowned names. It is situated about two miles south-
west of Guildford. A long Avenue, perfectly bare of
trees, leads from the public road to the House. The old
Hall has been shorn of its proud and graceful proportions; repairs have been
made by sloven hands; parts of the Moat have been filled up, but so coarsely,
as to seem the result of accident rather than design. The principal approach is
over a bridge between clumsy stables and storehouses. The odious face of a
modern clock covers the antique Horologe, of which many of its old
admirers make honourable mention; the Porch, which bears the date of 1812,
over which is still inscribed, in Roman capital letters, the sentence—
“INVIDIÆ, CLAUDOR, PATEO SED SEMPER AMICO,”

is of a nondescript character, utterly out of keeping with the structure; a
deformity which—following absurdities of outhouses and unseemly patches
—carries conviction that
“Something ails the place.”

Nor is the impression removed upon entering the venerable Hall—venerable
only from its age—for bad taste appears to have studied how most
effectually to deface it. A patent stove, of Birmingham manufacture, stands a
few feet from the embayed window, illuminated with the “Household Coats
of the Family, emblazoned in the gorgeous tinctures of Heraldry on the
glass;” a “thin” Gallery, which the gauntleted hand of one of the grim
Knights of old times might shiver into fragments at a single blow, leads to
some upper chambers; above the sturdy arched Doorway hang some double-

handed swords, glaives, partisans, and rusty helmets, relics of the once
heroic masters of the place,—
“The treasures of a soldier, bought with blood,
And kept at life’s expense,”—

mingled with the bugles of a brass band, and the drumsticks of a corps of
Yeomanry.
These unequivocal signs of neglect and tokens of indifference towards
ancient honours and long-ago renown are mournful indications—grieving
the heart of the antiquary, and nullifying the belief that a proud name is a
noble heritage because a stimulus to rivalry in honour and in fame. It has
been our bounden duty thus to notice this modern vandalism—for the
humblest writer may contribute somewhat to increase a love for what is
excellent by aiding to censure what is evil.
Of its internal decorations there are some interesting and valuable
remains, which have neither been removed nor defaced. Mr. Shaw, in his
“Details of Elizabethan Architecture,” publishes an engraving of the
beautiful and elaborately-carved Chimneypiece of the Dining Room. “The
compartment above the mantel is entirely devoted to a very full display of
heraldic insignia, recording the descent and alliances of the family
of More; the rich effect of which is increased by the spirited carvings of the
styles, and of the six variously-formed panels in which the several shields
are inserted. These ornaments are all executed in fine stone, and skilfully
wrought.” The ceilings at Loseley are also of remarkable character. That of
the Drawing Room is especially fine. It is adorned with “Gothic tracery and
pendant corbels.” In one of the cornices is inserted a mulberry-tree, on one
side of which is inscribed “Morus tarde Moriens;” on the other, “Morum cito
Moriturum”—being a rebus on the name of the family. The ceiling of the
Bed Room, of which a portion is shown in the wood-cut annexed, is also
very beautiful. In several of the compartments are introduced the Moor-cock
and Moor-hen—badges of the race of More.
“The Manor of Loseley,” according to Mr. Kempe, in his introduction to
“The Loseley Manuscripts,”[47] “bore its present appellation from the Saxon
times.” Osmond gave it to King Edward the Confessor; the Conqueror gave
it to Roger de Montgomery, Earl of Arundel and Shrewsbury, a stout leader
of the Normans at Hastings fight; and after passing into the possession of
various persons by inheritance or purchase, it was, early in the reign of the

Eight
h
Henr
y,
boug
ht by
Chris
tophe
r
More,
Esq.,
whos
e
grand
father
was
Thom
as
More,
of
Norto
n, in the County of Derby, Gent., with whom the pedigree of More of
Loseley, in the Books of the Heralds’ College, begins. His son and successor,
William, who was knighted by the Earl of Leicester—“the Queen being
present at the ceremony”—built the Mansion at Loseley, commencing the
work in 1562—it is conjectured “to the north of an older edifice.” It was
evidently intended to form three squares of a quadrangle, if not a complete
square. The centre of the building, which remains to this day, was completed
in 1568. The Gallery and Chapel were added subsequently, but these have
been “of late years demolished.” The accompanying wood-cut is of the
South front; and, fortunately for the picturesque effect of the subject, a group
of trees on the
lawn conceals from view the ungainly modern porch, and some other
monstrous additions to the venerable building of the sixteenth century.
To Sir William More succeeded, in 1600, Sir George More, who had been
knighted by Queen Elizabeth; and who, under James the First, was
Chancellor of the Order of the Garter, Lieutenant of the Tower, and

Recei
ver-
Gene
ral
and
Treas
urer
to
Henr
y
Princ
e of
Wales
. The
last
male
heir
of the
More
s
dying
in
1689, the estate devolved to Margaret his sister, who married Sir Thomas
Molyneux, Knight, the ancestor of the present possessor of Loseley—a name
even more renowned than that with which thenceforward it became united.
It was during the Lordship of Sir George More—between the years 1600
and 1632—that the history of Loseley became deeply interesting, as
associated with some of the most remarkable events and illustrious worthies
of the epoch. The famous Dr. Donne—Poet, Scholar, and Divine—privately
married the daughter of Sir George. Donne was at that time Secretary to the
Lord Chancellor Egerton, the husband of the Lady’s aunt. The marriage was
“to Sir George so immeasurably unwelcome,” that he successfully exerted
his influence to procure the Poet’s dismissal from his honourable and
profitable service, and consigned to a gaol the clergyman by whom the knot
had been tied. His father-in-law—although earnestly intreated in a letter, still
preserved at Loseley, “so to deal in the matter as the persuasions of nature,
reason, wisdome, and Christianity should dictate”—separated the couple,

imprisoning one “offender,” and involving the other in a tedious and ruinous
law-suit, for the recovery of his “deare life.” His friend and biographer,
exquisite Izaak Walton, has in his own simple and natural manner recorded
the story of this young affection, and of the sad trials and pecuniary
difficulties in which the Poet and his wife were for a long period involved;
presenting us with a beautiful though a mournful picture of a high and
generous mind struggling against the most galling of all troubles; to him the
more intolerable, because of her whom he had “transplanted into a wretched
fortune, which he laboured to disguise from her by many honest inventions.”
At length, however, fate was not only borne but conquered; Dr. Donne
entered into holy orders, became a prosperous man—King’s Chaplain and
Dean of St. Paul’s—and the gates of Loseley did not for ever remain closed
against him. Other names—equally immortal—are associated with this
ancient house. Sir George More was the guardian of Lord Herbert of
Cherbury—the Knight “whose chivalry was drawn from the purest founts of
the Fairy Queen”—the history of whose life is a brilliant romance.
Queen Elizabeth paid frequent visits to Loseley during her “progresses;”
and among the “manuscripts” there exists a letter, not very complimentary to
the hospitality of the Mansion, in which Sir Anthony Wingfield warns his
friend Mr. More that he will find the visit “a very great trouble and
hinderance,” and advises him how to get himself excused from the honour. It
is certain, however, that her Majesty did receive entertainment there, several
times. There are letters from Sir Christopher Hatton, in 1583, and from Lord
Hunsdon, in 1591, ordering Sir William More that his house be “kept sweete
and cleane” to receive her Highness—and the former intimates, that a past
excuse will not again serve a turn; “for,” writes Sir Christopher, “I have been
heretofore informed that you had some sycke of the infectione the last yeare,
and of other dangerous diseases of late in it, w’ch is now reported here as a
misinformacion and for otherwise than the brute (bruit) declared.” The letter
is addressed “from the Court at Otlands, to the Right w’shipˡˡ my very good
frende, Sʳ Will’m More, Knight.”

From a drawing by S. Prout. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
ARUNDEL CHURCH, SUSSEX.

AR UN DE L C HUR CH ,

SUSSEX.

he church at Arundel—of which we give a print of the
interior from a drawing by Mr. Prout—is of very
ancient date. For a series of years down to our own
time, it was suffered to fall into decay; and age was
gradually removing all tokens of its former splendour.
The roof had disappeared from the chancel; and ivy
had overgrown its carved pillars and mullioned
windows; the few repairs to which it had been
subjected had been carried out in bad taste; and for a
long period it remained a discreditable evidence of the apathy of successive
Dukes of Norfolk, rather than a monument to record the honours and glories
of the race. It is now, however, in progress of restoration; its
claims upon the noble family have been recognised;
the inroads of time have been effectually arrested;
and it is undergoing such necessary changes (at the
cost of the present Duke) as are dictated by
judgment and good sense. The church occupies an
elevated position north of the town, and nearly
opposite the principal entrance into the Castle. Its
exterior has many traces of antiquity, and not a few
remains of early beauty. Age, and the slovenly
hands of stonemasons, have, however, materially
injured its venerable character and imposing effect
—its principal injury having been sustained by the addition of a wooden
spire placed above a low square tower which rises from the centre of the
edifice. The church is of large size, and consists of a double arcade, dividing
the nave from the aisles, above which are placed, “in what in the architecture
of the age was termed the cleoestory, a row of circular windows enclosing
quatrefoils—a shape of rare occurrence.” The south transept was, we are
told, formerly occupied by the parochial altar; it now contains the
communion-table and the font; the latter being octagonal upon an octagonal
shaft, with a corresponding pedestal. It is composed of Sussex marble, and is

of very early date. In the north transept was “the chantry of St. Christopher,
commonly called Salmon’s”—to which was attached a priest whose
endowment was the appropriation of the Church of Rudgwick, “with two
acres of land, one in Rudgwick for his use, the other in Arundel for the site
of his residence.” The foundation of this chantry was created by the
benefaction of Edward Mille, Esq. “The first incumbent, William Baynton,
took possession of the benefice on the 9th May, 1440.”[48]
The original ecclesiastical foundation was that of the alien priory, or cell,
dedicated to St. Nicholas, established by Roger de Montgomery, Earl of
Arundel, soon after the Conquest, and subjected to the Benedictine Abbey of
Seez, or De Sagio, in Normandy. It consisted only of a Prior and three
or
four
Mo
nks,
who
cont
inue
d to
con
duct
the
esta
blis
hme
nt
for
near
ly
thre
e
cent
urie
s, until the 3rd year of the reign of Richard II., when Richard Fitz-alan, Earl
of Arundel, obtained a license to extinguish the Priory and to found a
Chantry for the maintenance of a master and twelve secular canons with

their officers. Upon this change, it was styled “the College of the Holy
Trinity.”[49]
The Collegiate church being intended as the mausoleum of his family, the
founder supplied ample means to enrich it with examples of monumental
splendour. The tomb of his son Thomas Fitz-alan and his wife Beatrix,
daughter of John, King of Portugal, was the earliest of those placed in the
church. It is of alabaster, finely sculptured.[50] It was formerly painted and
gilt. It contains the effigies of the Earl and his Lady; at the feet of the Earl is
a horse, the cognizance of the Fitz-alans, and at those of the Lady are two
lap-dogs. Around, in niches, are small standing figures of ecclesiastics or
pleureurs, with open books, as performing funeral obsequies, and above
them as many escutcheons, the emblazoning of which is nearly obliterated.
Other “stately tombs” are erected to the memories of John Fitz-alan and
Eleanor his wife; Thomas, Earl of Arundel, and his wife, “one of the eyres of
Richard Wodevyle Earl Rivers, sister to Elizabeth Queen of England,
sometime wife to King Edward IV.”—recording the date of the Earl’s death,
1524; and to Henry, Earl of Arundel, the last of the Fitz-alans, erected by his
son-in-law, John, Baron Lumley, with a Latin inscription, of which the
following is a translation:—
“The magnanimous hero, whose effigy is here beheld, and whose remains are deposited beneath
this monument, was the Earl of this place, the last of a family deriving its lengthened descent from the
son of Alan. His name was Henry, Lord and Baron Maltravers, Clunne and Oswaldestre, senior knight
of the most noble Order of the Garter, only son and successor of William, Earl of Arundel, and the
worthy representative of his father’s virtues. To Henry, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth, he discharged
the duty of Privy Councillor. Under the first, he was Governor of Calais, Marshal of the army at the
siege of Boulogne, and afterwards Lord Chamberlain. At the coronation of Edward, he officiated as
Earl Marshal; at that of Mary, as Lord High Constable. To the former, as to his father, he was Lord
Chamberlain: to the latter, as well as to her sister, Queen Elizabeth, he was Lord High Steward, and
President of the Council.
“Thus, this man, illustrious in his descent, more illustrious in his employments, and deemed most
illustrious both at home and abroad, rich in honour, but broken with labour and worn out with age,
having attained his sixty-eighth year, calmly and piously fell asleep in the Lord, in London, on the
25th of February, 1579.
“To the kindest of fathers-in-law, and the best of patrons, here interred, John Lumley, Baron
Lumley, his affectionate son-in-law and executor, with many tears, and as a last testimony of his love,
has consecrated this monument, and adorned it with his own armour, not for the sake of preserving his
memory, which his virtues have rendered immortal, but for the sake of that mortal body, which is here
deposited, in the hope of a happy resurrection.”

There is one monument of a peculiarly striking character; it occupies an
opening cut in the wall, between the chancel and the Lady’s chapel—the
chapel which forms the subject of our principal engraving. They are divided

by low arches. The tomb is an open feretrum or bier, carved in alabaster, and
formerly painted, under which lies an emaciated figure extended on a
shroud. Upon the upper slab is an effigy in plate armour, with a close tabard,
emblazoned with Fitz-alan and Maltravers, quarterly, the feet resting on a
horse. Two angels support the head. It represents John Fitz-alan, Earl of
Arundel, who died at Beauvais of wounds received at the siege of Gerberoy,
in 1435. He had selected this spot as the place of his interment; and although
his remains were buried in the Cathedral of Beauvais, this singular
monument was erected to his memory here.
The church encloses several monuments in addition to those we have
enumerated; and in the chancel are many brasses, containing epitaphs “in
obsolete Latin and monkish verse” to masters and fellows of the college and
to servants of the noble families—the Montgomeries, the Albinis, the Fitz-
alans and the Howards—who have held sway over Arundel for centuries, for
—
“Since William rose and Harold fell,
There have been Counts of Arundel;
And Earls old Arundel shall have
While rivers flow and forests wave.”

The decorations of the church and its magnificent tombs were either
seriously injured or destroyed by soldiers quartered in the church during the
siege of the castle in 1643. The windows were formerly filled with richly
stained glass, the eastern window containing a series of kneeling figures,
male and female, in coat armour and mantles, with their respective armorial
bearings.[51]
It is to the honour of the present Duke of Norfolk, that although a
member of the Roman Catholic Church, he has deemed it his duty to restore
this ancient and venerable edifice from the state of dilapidation in which it
has for many years existed.

From a drawing by J. D Harding. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
BOXGROVE CHURCH, SUSSEX.

B OXG RO V E C HUR C H,

SUSSEX.

he Priory, Boxgrove—part of which is now in ruins,
but portions of which are still used as the Parish
Church—was founded by Robert de Haiâ, Lord of
Halmacro, A.D. 1117, in the reign of King Henry the
First, in honour of the Virgin and St. Blaise, for three
monks only of the Benedictine order. The sole
daughter of the founder was married to Roger St.
John, who added three more; and the number was
augmented to fifteen, by their two sons, William and
Robert, in the reign of King Stephen. It remained, however, subordinate to
the Abbey of L’Essay, or De Exaquio, in Normandy, A.D. 1149. Before the
suppression, the monks were reduced to nine. But when Edward the Third
assumed possession of other alien Priories, that of Boxgrove secured the
privilege of being “indigena,” by which it was rendered independent, and
retained its endowment—considerable in proportion to the extent of the
establishment. In the year 1535, its annual revenue was £185 19s., without
including the income derived from fines and renewals.
The Ruins of Halnacre, or Halnaker, House, the mansion of Robert de
Haiâ, or De Haye, still exist in the grounds of Goodwood, the seat of his
Grace the Duke of Richmond. To this “worthie and valourous knight,” the
estate was given by Henry the First; from his descendant it passed, by
marriage, to the family of St. John. In the reign of Edward the Third it was
transferred, also by marriage, to the Poynings; subsequently, it passed
through the hands of the Bonvilles into those of the Lords de la Warr, who
gave it to Henry the Eighth in exchange for the Abbey and lands of
Wherwell, in Hampshire. Halnacre remained an appanage of the Crown until
towards the close of Queen Elizabeth’s reign, when the Morleys received a
grant of it. In 1701, it became the property of Mary, Countess of Derby,[52]
who inherited from her father, Sir William Morley. At her death in 1752, it
devolved to her cousin, Sir Thomas Ackland, Bart., who sold it for the sum
of £50,000 to the Duke of Richmond. The Remains are of very limited

extent; sufficient, however, to indicate the former magnitude and splendour
of the edifice.
Of the conventual buildings (the great extent of which may be estimated
by the old walls which form enclosures to neighbouring farm-yards) little
remains except the Refectory, now used as a barn; and the present Parish
Church, supposed to be the Choir of the original building. Some portions of
the ancient Nave, which appears to be of a
more remote era,
may be traced in
the broken arches
westward of the
Church; and the
Chapter-house is
attached,
externally, to the
North Transept,
having a Norman
doorway, with
arches on each
side of it, leading,
it is believed, to a
Cloister which
extended to the
Refectory and the
habitation of the
monks. It is this
fine relic of the
once extensive and richly-decorated structure which Mr. Prout has pictured
in the appended Print. A considerable portion of it has been removed by
time; and the Church is now separated from the Refectory by a huge gap,
where sheep were feeding quietly at the time of our visit. Marks of a Piscina,
and a place for the Bell, may still be detected by a minute scrutiny. In an old
MS., which came accidentally into our hands, it is surmised that this portion
of the edifice was the Private Chapel of the monks.
The exterior of the Church (represented on the opposite page) is of very
imposing character, bearing indubitable tokens of remote antiquity. The
Tower is low, with windows; in its general form it resembles that of

Winchester, and seems to be of the era of Henry the Second. The interior
consists of a Nave and Chancel, without division, with aisles on each side,
north and south Transepts; and a space, westward of the Tower, which is
certainly the most ancient part of the structure. In length it is 126 feet; the
width of the Nave being 24 feet, and that of the aisles each 13 feet 6 inches.
The Eastern Window, of three large lights, is separated internally by tall
shafts and flourished capitals, and is ornamented, externally, with the nail-
head moulding. This mixture of ornament affords almost conclusive proof
that the structure is of the date of Stephen or Henry the Second, when the
round Norman arch was first abandoned, and several novelties, which
prevailed only in a few instances, were introduced. Pillars, somewhat similar
in character, support the roof; but they have been consigned, from time to
time, to the hands of the “white-washer,” who has effectually hidden the fine
Purbeck

marble
of which
they are
compos
ed.
The
sepulchr
al
remains
in the
Church
of
Boxgrov
e are
remarka
ble, and
worthy
of
investig
ation,
although
it is difficult to ascertain with any degree of certainty to whom the Tombs
severally belong. They are six in number, two situated against the north wall
of the north aisle, and another of large dimensions under one of the arches
which divide the Chancel from the north aisle; and three others, placed
against the south wall of the south aisle. Two of these probably contain the
bodies of a sister and daughter of William de Albini, Earl of Arundel, who
left a donation to the Church for prayers to be made “pro animâ Adelizæ
reginæ (his mother, and Queen-Dowager of Henry the First), et pro
animabus Oliviæ; sororis meæ, et Oliviæ filiæ meæ, quæ ibi jacent.” Out of
this circumstance has probably arisen a tradition, that Queen Adeliza was
here interred; but there is sufficient evidence to prove that her remains were
deposited in the Conventual Church of Reading.[53] Dugdale asserts, but
erroneously, that Gundreda, wife of William Earl Warren, was here buried;
her husband, it is believed, was a benefactor to the establishment. Thomas de
Poynings and Philippa his second wife (daughter of Edmund Mortimer, Earl
of March, Countess Dowager of Arundel and Pembroke), are also said to

have been here interred; and upon the key-stone of one of the tombs in the
north aisle are the arms of the family of St. John (argent in a chief gules, two
mullets pierced or)—the tomb possibly of Thomas de Poynings, summoned
as Lord St. John of Basing, 1369, (42 Edw. III.), obit. 1429. It is left mainly
to conjecture, aided by the uncertain light of tradition, to determine whose
dust is covered by these stones. There is, however, one Monument,
concerning which no doubts can exist. It is a Sacellum, or Shrine, belonging
to the family of West, or La War. The date, as may be seen on the pendant
ornament between the two north-eastern arches, is 1532, which was during
the lifetime of Thomas West, second Baron La War and Cantilupe; but it is
supposed to have been erected after his death by his daughter, Dorothy, who
married Sir Edward Owen. The inscription under the Altar in the Shrine—

Of yʳ charite pray for yᵉ souls of Thomas La Ware and Elyzabeth hˢ wyf,

seems to sanction the supposition. In other parts of the Shrine may be read
the words,

Thomas La War Anno Dni MVXXXII.

and

Elizabeth La War.

Between the niches of the Shrine, over the arcades, are four coats of
arms, supported by angels, with the quarterings of La War, Cantilupe,
Mortimer, St. John, Poynings, Bonville, Wingfield, &c. The Tomb is a
peculiarly interesting and remarkably beautiful object. It has recently been
cleaned and repaired by order of the Duke of Richmond—somewhat
clumsily, however, for the workman has disarranged several of the
decorations, and one of the figures he has placed “upside down.” It is richly
carved in stone, and abundantly ornamented. Mr. Prout has introduced it into
the Drawing which exhibits the Interior of the venerable Church, with its
Pulpit of carved oak, black with age. An ancient Font has been recently
removed from the Nave to the foot of the Pulpit. In the Chancel are many
encaustic tiles—one of which supplies us with an initial letter.
The Church is situated about eight miles west of Arundel, a short distance
out of the road to Chichester, from which it is distant about four miles.

From a drawing by A. E. Everett. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
ASTON HALL, WARWICKSHIRE.

A S TON HA L L ,

WA RW I C K S H I R E .

ston Hall, the residence of James Watt, Esq.—whose
name has been rendered “famous for all time” by the
genius and enterprise of his great father—is situate about
two miles from the town of Birmingham, on an eminence
which overlooks the river Tame. Although erected during
the reign of James the First and his successor, it is certain
that a baronial mansion previously existed adjacent to the
present edifice: authorities are conclusive on this point,
and its site was indicated until recently by some
venerable trees, the relics of at least three centuries. Prior to the Norman
conquest (according to Dugdale) the manor of Aston, or, as it was then
written, Estone or East Town, was possessed by Edwin earl of Mercia. Upon
the distribution of lands which followed that event, it was bestowed by the
Conqueror upon William Fitz-Ausculf, lord of the neighbouring castle of
Dudley, for whom it was held by one Godmund. It was certified to contain,
at that time, viii. hides of land, valued at 100 shillings, a mill rated at iiis., a
church, and woods extending three miles in length and half a mile in
breadth. After passing through the hands of several successive lords of
Dudley, it was presented by one of them, named Ralph Someri, in the
beginning of the reign of King John, to William de Erdington and his heirs
for ever; and we find the following curious grant respecting it, viz. “That the
manour-house and demesne at Estone, with divers tenements thereto
belonging, should be held by him, by the service of a pair of gilt spurs, or the
value thereof, viz. vid., payable yearly at Easter, for all services or demands
whatsoever.” From the Erdingtons it passed to the family of Maidenhache,
whose daughter Sibel conveyed it by marriage to Adam de Grymesurwe,
whose daughter sold it in 1367 to John Atte Holt of Duddeston near
Birmingham, and in whose family it subsequently continued for upwards of
four hundred years. Originally of the people, they became powerful and
wealthy “lords of the soil,” eminent for worth and probity, and occupying
offices of high trust in Warwickshire and the neighbouring counties. Thomas
Holt is especially mentioned as an eminent lawyer in the reign of Henry the

Eighth; he was Justice of North Wales, and in commission as a justice of the
peace for his native county during the greater part of that monarch’s
sovereignty. To this “worthie gentleman” succeeded his son Edward, who,
dying in the thirty-fifth of Elizabeth, was succeeded by his son Thomas, who
was Sheriff of Warwickshire in the forty-second of Elizabeth, was knighted
by King James on his accession to the throne, and in the tenth year of his
reign advanced to the dignity of a baronet. It was this Sir Thomas who
enclosed the spacious park, and erected the present mansion. The date and
circumstances of the building are thus recorded over the entrance doorway:
—
“Sir Thomas Holte, of Duddeston in the countie of Warwick, Knight and Baronet, began to build
this house in Aprill, Anno Domini 1618, in the 16th yeare of the raigne of King James of England,
&c., and of Scotland the one and fiftieth; and the said Sir Thomas Holte came to dwell in this house in
May, in Anno Domini 1631, in the seaventh yeare of the raigne of our soveraigne Lord King Charles,
and he did finish this house in Aprill, Anno Domini 1635, in the eleventh yeare of the raigne of the
sayde King Charles.
“Laus Deo.”

We may hence infer that “Sir Thomas Holte of Duddeston,” until the
building of the mansion, chiefly resided at the old house at Duddeston,
which, though still standing, is so completely altered that barely a trace of its
ancient character remains. It is now used as a public place of recreation
under the title of “Vauxhall.”
Sir Thomas was emphatically a good man and a loyal subject. He
endowed alms-houses, which, to this day, give shelter to some aged people;
and though too old to appear in arms for his sovereign during the wars of
Charles with the Parliament, he was represented by his son in the army of
the king, whom he received and entertained in his house a few days prior to
the battle of Edgehill. For his devotion to his master he, of course, endured
persecution; heavy fines were levied on his estate, and his mansion was
more than once plundered. Sir Thomas was succeeded by his grandson and
heir, Sir Robert Holt; subsequently the estate came into the possession of Sir
Lister Holt, who, dying without issue the 8th of April, 1770. was succeeded
by his eldest brother Charles, from whom it passed into the family of
Bracebridge;[54] by them it was sold a few years ago to some parties in the
neighbourhood of Warwick, who leased it to its present occupier.
The mansion, which is built of brick, with stone quoins and dressings,
forms three sides of a square, and bears some resemblance to the letter E, a
practice which originated in compliment to Queen Elizabeth, and was not

altogether in disuse during the reign of her successor. The eastern or
principal front derives its principal features from the massive character and
judicious display of details; and a highly pleasing effect is given to the
structure by its gables, numerous picturesque chimneys, bay windows to the
wings, and, especially, the stately grandeur of the central and side towers.
The south, or garden front, is also an interesting portion of the structure;
the appended vignette affords a correct idea

of it. It will be seen that its principal feature is an open arcade, around which
are several antique carved seats, so placed as to facilitate views of the
garden, with its quaint and venerable trees and shaded walks. Passing
through a small door at the termination of this arcade, we step upon a noble
terrace, which extends the whole length of the back or western front of the
edifice. From this point we obtain an unbroken view of the park in nearly its
whole extent. The house is, from this side, very imposing, from its great
width and massive character.

Returning to the principal front, passing through the great doorway,
which is elevated on four steps and is of good character, we enter the great
hall. It is richly decorated; the fireplace is remarkably fine; along the sides
are ranged various old pictures, which, combined with antique furniture
profusely scattered about, take us back to the days of its early grandeur,
when the mansion was the residence of a true and hospitable baronial lord.
The apartments are fitted up in good keeping; the dining and drawing-rooms,
entered from the hall, retain their ancient aspects; the panelling and ceilings
are in excellent preservation, the chimneypieces comparatively unimpaired
by time, and the whole interior is of a character sound and true.
We must not omit to mention that the fine oak staircase received
considerable injury during the great civil war. It appears that a cannon was
fired from a little eminence at a short distance from the south side of the
house, the shot from which, after passing through two strong walls, lodged
on the first landing of the great staircase, shattering in its course a
considerable portion of the richly-carved balustrade—which, as a memorial
of the event, has not been since repaired.
The house is reached from the main road by a noble avenue of finely-
grown trees; these extend for nearly half a mile.
The entrance gates, of which we append an engraving, are directly
opposite the very venerable church; and this church must be associated with
the mansion, for it is the resting-place of nearly all its ancient owners. It is
dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul, and consists of a nave with north and
south aisles, a spacious chancel, and a substantial tower, surmounted by a
tall spire, at the western extremity of the nave. The church bears evidence of
being built at two distinct periods, or, at least, of having undergone
considerable alterations. We find, according to Dugdale, that the south aisle
was built by Henry de Erdington; for in the 12th Edward II. he gave a certain
rent-seck of vid. per annum to the maintenance of the gutter betwixt the
church and it. In this grant he terms it “Nova capella beatæ Mariæ de
Aston;” thus proving it to have been (with the north aisle, which is precisely
similar) erected during the prevalence of the decorated style. But,
unfortunately, owing to some injudicious repairs a few years since, the
whole of the windows, of which there are three, on each side, and one larger,
at the eastern and western ends, were deprived of both mullions and tracery,
and, no doubt, at the same time of several interesting portions of stained
glass, of which we have a description in Dugdale, but which is now nowhere

to be found. This, combined with the loss of the high-pitched roofs, gives a
poor appearance to the interior. The tower and spire are by far the finest
portions of the building, and add greatly to the beauty of the whole. The
tower is of four stories, with battlements and pinnacles; but its chief
peculiarity is the belfry story, which is decorated on three sides by six long
and narrow compartments, the two centre ones of which are pierced, and
have louvre boards for the better distribution of sound; on the fourth or south
side are only four of these compartments, the space for the two others being
taken up by an octagonal turret staircase, that adjoins this portion of the
tower. The spire is octagonal, plain, but of a good substantial character; and
from its details, with those of the tower, which exhibit some deviations from
the true principles of pointed architecture, we may safely trace their erection
to the early portion of the sixteenth century.
The pillars and arches of the nave, of which there are four on each side,
seem to belong, like the exterior, to a transition period, as their general
character is decorated, whilst there are several mouldings that may be
ascribed to the early English period. Among the modern barbaric

“restorations and improvements” to which this fine church has been
subjected, may be mentioned the plaster ceilings, the altar-screen of Roman
design, and an odious assemblage of pews of all shapes and sizes; but it may
be hoped, from the good spirit that has lately directed the introduction of
some ancient stalls from Leicester at the entrance of the chancel, a richly-
carved lecturn, and last, though not least, the establishment of a choral
service, that in a few years this noble edifice may resume its pristine
splendour and magnificence.
In monumental architecture this church will be found to possess an
interesting series. The most ancient, from the character of its design,
evidently belongs to the latter part of the fourteenth century; it is supposed to
be to the memory of one of the now extinct but once powerful family of
Arden. It is an altar-tomb of alabaster, supporting effigies of a knight and
lady, and is situated against the north wall of the chancel. Towards the
eastern end of the north aisle are two monuments that will next require our
attention. The first, an altar-tomb, around the side of which are angels
bearing shields, and still retaining traces of their original painting and
gilding; on the top are the painted effigies of William Holt, Esq. and Joan his
wife, and the inscription (now obliterated) originally bore the date of 1423.
Against the north wall, near this tomb, is a mural monument containing the
effigies of Edward Holt, Esq. and Dorothy his wife, under an arch of Roman
design, kneeling one on each side of a small lecturn or desk. This monument
bears the date of 1592. In the pavement near is a large slab, containing the
effigies in brass of the Thomas Holt and his wife Margaret, who, as we have
mentioned, was Justice of North Wales during the reign of Henry the Eighth.
The next monument demanding notice is situated against the north wall
of the chancel, and forms the subject of the accompanying vignette: it is of a
bold character, but, in its minor parts, exhibits a sad falling off in execution
as compared with the more ancient ones to which we have referred.[55] It is
to the memory of Edward Devereux, Esq. of Castle Bromwich Hall in this
neighbourhood (a seat now possessed by the Earl of Bradford), and the Lady
Katherine his wife, and was erected A.D. 1627: it bears their effigies, with
those of their children, painted and habited in the costume of the early part
of the seventeenth century. There are also two other monuments, which,
though not immediately connected with the text, may not be left unnoticed.
One of these bears the effigies of Sir Thomas de Erdington and his lady,
Joyce; the other is also supposed to belong to a member of the same family.

They originally stood
in the south aisle,
which was erected by
their ancestor, Henry
de Erdington, in the
reign of Edward II.,
and used as a
chanting chapel for
the family, but were
removed a few years
since to their present
position on the south
side of the chancel.
They are both good
specimens of the
monumental
sculpture of the
middle ages.
Recently a beautiful memorial window of stained glass has been erected
at the west end of the south aisle, which for excellence of design and
richness and harmony of colour, is hardly surpassed by the best specimens of
ancient days.
Among the very numerous series of mural monuments with which this
church abounds, we need only observe that there are several to the different
members of the Holt family, and one, in particular, to the good and worthy
knight Sir Thomas, the builder of the present hall; but from their wholly
unsuitable character for a Christian temple, and from their abounding in
pagan emblems and decorations, they serve only to disfigure the walls of the
sacred and very venerable edifice.

From a drawing by G. Cattermole. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
THE BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL, WARWICK.

B E A UC HA MP C HA P E L ,

WA RW I C K .

eauchamp Chapel ranks among the most exquisitely beautiful
examples of sacred edifices in Great Britain. It was founded
by that famous Earl of Warwick, who, early in the fifteenth
century, upheld the glories of his line, and transmitted his
abundant honours unimpaired to his posterity,—the Talbots,
the Dudleys, the Willoughbys, the Grevilles, and the Nevils.
[56]

The purpose of its erection was to supply a fitting mausoleum for the
noble family of its founder; yet few of his successors are there interred; for,
having subsequently become entitled to the patronage of the Holy Abbey of
Tewkesbury, they preferred it as their place of sepulture—and the great Earl
is nearly the only one of his proud and lofty race whose ashes moulder
beneath the fretted roof of the graceful and magnificent structure. It was
commenced 21st Henry VI. and finished 3d Edward IV.; occupying a period
of twenty-one years, and costing £2,481 4s. 7d.—an enormous sum, of
which some idea may be formed from the fact, that, at the time, “the value of
a fat ox was 13s. 4d.” The Chapel was not, however, consecrated until the
15th Edward IV., when John Hales, Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, was
specially commissioned for the purpose by John Carpenter, Bishop of
Worcester.
The Church of St. Mary, Warwick—to which the Beauchamp Chapel is
attached—is of very early date. Of its foundation, prior to the Conquest,
there is conclusive evidence; for in “the Survey,” it was certified to have
“one hyde of land in Myton, given to it by Turchil de Warwick, which land
was then valued at ten shillings.” It was made collegiate by Hen. de
Newburg, first Earl of Warwick; and his son Roger, in 1123, largely
augmented its revenues.
The riches and piety of subsequent Earls of Warwick contributed to its
grandeur and importance; and at the survey, 26th Hen. VIII., previous to the
dissolution, its revenues were certified to amount to £334 2s. 3d. A fire, in
1694, destroyed the whole of the edifice, except the choir and the

Beauchamp Chapel; and when the Church was rebuilt it was from a design
of Sir Christopher Wren. It is, nevertheless, conspicuous for no architectural
beauty, except the fine proportions of its Tower.
The choir—a part of the ancient church—is a rare example of the
architecture of the period. It was built by Thomas de Beauchamp, about the
43rd Edward III.; and his remains, with those of his Countess, a daughter of
Roger Mortimer, Earl of March, were interred in a sumptuous tomb, placed
in the centre of the edifice erected for their reception. Nearly five hundred
years have passed since the Earl was laid there, and the mason, the gilder,
and the sculptor, laboured to perpetuate the memory of a great soldier, who
led the van at Crecy, bled at Poictiers, “did great service in a sea-fight,”
“warred against the infidels,” and drove a besieging army from before
Calais, by the mere sound of his name,—yet the monument endures almost
unimpaired by time; telling its high tale of glory after a lapse of half a
thousand years.[57]
A vaulted corridor extends from the transept nearly the whole length of
the choir on its north side. This has been divided by a screen of blank
panelling, and the eastern portion formed into a “Vestrie.” The remainder is
used as a north entrance to the Church, having also an entrance into the
Chapter House. This building is hexagonal on its exterior end, and is now
appropriated as a mausoleum, to which those who love the muse will resort
as to a place of pilgrimage, for here repose the earthly remains of that
“servant to Queen Elizabeth, Chancellor to King James, and friend to Sir
Philip Sidney,” whose name will be as imperishable as that of the dear
brother of his heart, whose friendship was the climax of his fame, and the
consummation of all his ambitious hopes. The monument to the memory of
Fulke Grevill consists of a sarcophagus, placed beneath a heavy canopy,
supported by Corinthian columns. It is a heavy and ungraceful erection—
rendered picturesque, however, by the ancient helmets and glaives laid upon
it, and the moth-eaten banners, and rusted armour, that hang above the tomb.
The entrance to the Beauchamp Chapel is by a descent of several steps,
from the south transept of the Church, beneath a doorway of finely-carved
stone—the work of a
native artist, “a mason of Warwick,” in 1704. Entered, the spectator beholds
a sepulchral chapel, built in the “style of the later Gothic,” of limited extent
—its size being 58 feet in length by 25 in breadth, and its height being 32
feet—but of surpassing beauty. The light is supplied by three large windows

in the upper part of the side
walls (north and south), on
the west by a window
which looks into St. Mary’s
Church, and by a large
window on the east.
Formerly, they were all
richly adorned with painted
glass, of which some
valuable relics yet remain.
The east window is,
however, even now, nearly
perfect, and may be
considered one of the finest
examples of the art to be
found in the kingdom.
“Indeed,” (we quote from a
writer in “The Antiquarian
and Architectural Year
Book,”) there are few
windows of painted glass
remaining in ecclesiastical
or other buildings
in England that can, for its
dimensions, exceed, either
in beauty or general
treatment, this Eastern Window of the Beauchamp Chapel.” Its value has
been diminished by carelessness in repairs; some parts having been
displaced: but the figures, which form its primary objects, are gorgeous
specimens of art, on many accounts of rare value to the antiquary. The
ceiling of the Chapel is ornamented with groined ribs, at the intersections of
which are bosses elegantly painted and gilt. Old oak seats, richly carved,
antique desks, niches—which, according to Dugdale, formerly held images
of gold, each of the weight of 20 lbs.—and various other objects—minor,
though of considerable interest—demand attention; but their examination
may be postponed until a small oratory—of exquisite beauty—has been
inspected. It is reached by a short flight of stone steps—the roof is fan-work,

groined—peculiarly light and
elegant; and a range of high and
narrow windows open into the
Chapel. Scattered about are
some reliques—save for their
antiquity, out of keeping with the
peaceful and secluded character
of the small confessional—
glaives and head-pieces—one of
which bears indisputable
evidence that the wearer died not
in his bed. From this oratory,
some half-dozen steps, “worn by
the knees of fervent devotees,”
afford ascent to a small
confessional, formed in the
thickness of the south wall of the
choir. Both these interesting
objects, are represented, by
woodcuts, on the preceding
page. The ceiling and sides
partake of the elegant character
already described; and here
could the holy father, through a
small opening, unseen, witness
the elevation of the Host, or listen to the o’erburthened penitent.
The grand object of attraction in the Beauchamp Chapel, however, is the
gorgeous tomb of its founder. It is an altar-tomb, of Purbeck marble, bearing
the recumbent effigy of the Great Earl, in fine latten brass, gilt. His head,
uncovered, rests upon a helmet, and at his feet are a Bear and a Griffon. The
tomb is surmounted by one of the few “hearses” that yet remain in our
churches. It consists of six hoops of brass, kept extended by five transverse
brass rods, on which formerly was hung a pall “to keep the figure reverently
from the dust.” Around the tomb, in niches, are fourteen figures, in “divers
vestures, called weepers”—friends and relatives of the deceased, who mourn
his loss. Between each weeper are smaller niches, raised upon pillars,
containing whole length figures of angels, holding scrolls inscribed—

Sit deo laus et gloria:
defunctis misericordia.

The following
inscription is on the
edge of the tomb,
running twice round,
in the old English
character, and freely
interspersed with the
Earl’s crest, the bear
and ragged staff:—
“Preieth devoutly for the
Sowel whom god assoille of
one of the moost worshipful
Knyghtes in his dayes of
monhode and conning
Richard Beauchamp late Eorl
of Warrewik lord de spenser
of Bergavenny, and of mony
other grete lordships, whos
body resteth here under this
tumbe, in a fulfeire vout of
Stone set on the bare rooch,
thewhich visited with longe
siknes in the Castel of Roan
therinne decessed ful cristenly
the last day of April the yer of
oure lord god M.
CCCCxxxxix, he being at that tyme Lieutenant gen’al and governer of the Roialme of Fraunce and of
the Duchie of Normandie. by sufficient Autorite of oure Sov’aigne lord the King Harry the vi.
thewhich body with grete deliberacon’ and ful worshipful condiut Bi See And by lond was broght to
Warrewik the iiii day of October the yer aboueseide, and was leide with ful Solenne exequies in a feir
chest made of Stone in this Chirche afore the west dore of this Chapel according to his last will And
Testament therein to rest til this Chapel by him devised i’ his lief were made. Al thewhuche Chapel
founded On the Rooch, And alle the Membres thereof his Executours dede fully make and Apparaille
by the Auctorite of his Seide last Wille And Testament And thereafter By the same Auctorite They dide
Translate fful worshipfully the seide Body into the vout aboveseide, honured be god therfore.”[58]

The effigy may be considered as one of the finest works of this class
executed during the middle ages, and it derives additional interest from the
fact of the original contract for its construction being still in existence. Of
this beautiful work the late C. A. Stothard executed four views, in his
magnificent volume on the Monumental Effigies of Great Britain, in a spirit
worthy of so fine a subject. He ascertained that the ponderous figure of latten

or bronze which lay upon the altar-tomb was loose, and with considerable
effort succeeded in turning it over, when the armour at the back was found to
be as carefully and accurately represented as in front, having all the parts of
a suit, its straps and fastenings, displayed with singular minuteness. It is, in
this respect, a perfectly unique effigy, and of great value to the historic
painter, or student in ancient armour. On the preceding page we have given
the two views of the effigy, as pictured by Mr. Stothard.
The Chapel contains other monuments of rare beauty and exceeding
interest. The most remarkable is that to Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester
—“Queen Elizabeth’s Leicester”—and his Countess. It is erected against the
north wall, and consists of a heavy canopy, profusely ornamented, supported
by Corinthian pillars, beneath which is an altar-tomb supporting the
recumbent figures—that of the Earl being in armour, over which is a mantle
bearing the badge of the Order of the Garter on the left shoulder, the French
order of St. Michael on the left breast, and the Garter is round the knee—that
of the Countess is attired in the robes of a Peeress, a circlet of jewels round
the head, and wearing the high ruff of the period. A Latin inscription gives us
in full the proud titles of the famous favourite of the “Maiden Queene,” who
“gave up his soule to God his Saviour on the 4th day of September, in the
year of Salvation, 1588,” and informs us also that “his most sorrowful wife,
Lætitia, daughter of Francis Knolles, Knight of the Order of the Garter, and
Treasurer to the Queen, through a sense of conjugal love and fidelity hath
put up this monument to the best and dearest of husbands.”
Of the other tombs “of note,” may be mentioned that to Ambrose Dudley,
the virtuous brother of Elizabeth’s Peer; that to the infant son of Robert
Dudley,—“a noble impe,” a “childe of grete parentage, but of farre greter
hope and towardnes;” and that to the Lady Katherine Leveson, one of the
Dudleys, who “taking notice of these Tombes of her noble Ancestors being
much blemisht by consuming time, but more by the rude hands of impious
people, were in danger of utter ruine by the decay of this Chapell, if not
timely prevented, did in her life time give fifty pounds for its speedy repair.”
In all respects the Beauchamp Chapel ranks among the most interesting
of the venerable Ecclesiastical remains yet existing in Great Britain. Time
has done it little injury; and it escaped the perils incident to the civil war—
when all external tokens of piety were considered insults to the Deity they
were designed to honour. Moreover, its history is nearly perfect: the very
estimates, bills, and discharges of the builders, the gilders, and the glaziers

may be examined, in the actual presence of the works they executed
centuries ago.
Viewed in association with “the Castle,” of which it may be said almost
to form a part, its importance is greatly enhanced. And, in reference merely
to actual beauty of the design, and the exquisite character of the work, it may
be said to vie with any structure of the kind, not only in Great Britain, but in
Europe.

From a drawing by F. W. Hulme. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
CHARLECOTE, WARWICKSHIRE.

C HAR L E C OT E ,

WA RW I C K S H I R E .

harlecote—famous in association with the early
history of William Shakspere—has undergone little
change since he who was “for all time” wandered
along the thick-hedged lanes. So primitive is the
“ancient neighbourhood,” that Fancy may, almost
unbidden, call up the old glories of the place,—may
hear the voice of Sir Thomas Lucy chiding his
keepers for the loss of his fallow-deer, and the half-
suppressed “chuckle” of an unnoticed bystander
who, thereafter, was to fill the world with his fame.
The Mansion seems quite unaltered; the village
church precisely as it was at “the Reformation;” the
humbler dwellings, of red brick, are only a little older the park palings
merely made picturesque by overgrowing lichen; and the Park, as well as the
“sweet Avon,” exactly as they were two centuries and a half ago; the one
“flowing gently;” the other supplying, as of
yore, many—
“An oak, whose boughs are moss’d with age,
And high top bald with dry antiquity;”

while the same deer—“dappled fools”—only
look more conscious than they did, of assured
safety in
“their assigned and native dwelling place.”

Art and Nature seem both to have stopped
short of all “improvement;” there has been no
need of the one to disturb the renown which the
locality receives from the other; even the “stocks” that stand under a group
of “Patrician trees” at Hampton Lucy, are suffered to die of natural decay;
and it is as certain that the “bonny sweet Robin,” whose song we heard from

the hawthorn in the churchyard is the progeny of him who sung there when
Elizabeth was queen, as that the lord of the mansion is the descendant of that
very Sir Thomas Lucy who sat in judgment upon the youth who
“obscur’d his contemplation
Under the veil of wildness.”

This unity of character has been most carefully preserved in the new
buildings erected on the estate, of which the annexed wood-cut will afford
evidence.
It is difficult to
descend to simple
facts while
describing a
neighbourhood so
suggestive of
thought—so
redolent of fancy.
The Lucys, who
occupy to-day the
manor in which
they lived three
hundred years ago
—“good old
English
gentlemen” of the
present, as of the
olden time—have
inherited, without
break, from father
to son; adding
little to their
hereditary
property, and
losing no part of
it by carelessness,
profusion, or vice; generally, they seem to have been peaceable and liberal
manorial lords, studious to make their tenantry prosperous and their

dependants comfortable; dwelling apart from the bustle of action, and the stir
of contentious life, even rumours of “oppression and deceit” seem rarely to
have reached them; “exempt from public haunt,” they passed their days
happily and slept together—a long line of kindly, if not great, men—under
the roof tree of the little church where monuments loftier than their own
ambitions have been raised to perpetuate their names.[59]
The history of Charlecote and its Lords, is given with great minuteness by
Dugdale. Charlecote, Cherlecote, or Cerlecote, as it is written in Domesday
Book, was, previous to the Conquest, in the possession of one Saxi, but
afterwards became the property of the Earl of Mellent, and doubtless came
from him to Henry de Newburgh, Earl of Warwick,

From a drawing by F.W. Hulme. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
CHARLECOTE GREAT HALL.

whose son, Roger, (23rd Henry I.), gave half a hide of land lying in
Cherlecote, with the tithes of the whole lordship, and “two mills” to his
newly founded Collegiate Church of Warwick. He also enfeoffed

Thurlestane de Montfort of large possessions in this county, whose son,
Henry, with Alice de Harecourt, the widow of Robert de Montfort, his elder
brother, gave all the village of Cherlecote to Walter the son of Thurlestane de
Cherlecote, which grant was confirmed to him and his heirs by letters patent
from Richard the First, with divers immunities and privileges thereto: all of
which were ratified by King John, in the fifth year of his reign. From this
Walter de Cherlecote (who was a knight), by Cecily, his wife, descended
William, who assumed the name of Lucy, she perhaps being heir to some
branch of that family.
Our space may be better occupied than in carrying their history from this
remote age to the present day.
The Mansion was erected in 1558, by Thomas Lucy, who, in 1593, was
knighted by
Queen Elizabeth. It stands at
a short distance from, and at
some little elevation above, the
river Avon. The building
occupies three sides of a
quadrangle, the fourth being
formed by a handsome central
Gatehouse, which, with its
octangular turrets and oriel
window, constitutes an
interesting portion of the
façade, and as seen in the
accompanying view, backed
out by the Mansion and
connected by the terrace wings,
presents a very pleasing and
picturesque appearance. The
House retains its gables and
angular towers, but has suffered
from the introduction of the large and heavy sash-windows of the time of
William III., or George I. The entrance porch runs the whole height of the
building, and is ornamented by pilasters and a pierced parapet, having over
the arched entrance the family arms and the crest at each angle. From this
porch or loggia, you enter the Hall, of which Washington Irving in the

“Sketch-book” gives a graphic description as it existed at the period of his
visit. The present apartment, however, forms a portion of the extensive
alterations and additions carried into effect by the refined taste of the late
Mr. Lucy. The “Gallery” and “Organ” are gone, but the large and lofty
proportions of the room, as also the huge Bay Window, are preserved. The
interior—of which we have given an engraving—will convey an accurate
idea of this fine Hall. In the centre, on a highly polished marble floor, stands
a most elaborate and splendid table, purchased at the price of 1500 guineas
from the late Mr. Beckford’s collection at Fonthill, composed of lapis lazuli,
jasper, &c., intermixed with the rarest marble: it is a worthy rival to that at
Warwick Castle. The room contains many family portraits—the most
interesting of the collection being one which represents Sir Thomas, his lady,
and his children, painted by Cornelius Jansen.[60]
The Fire-place is modern, but of Elizabethan design, and finely carved.
Above are busts of Sir Thomas Lucy the elder, and his son, and in the centre
is one of Queen Elizabeth. The chairs, tables, &c., are all handsome, and
strictly according in style with the Hall, which is connected by folding-doors
with a fine oak staircase. The new apartments consist of a dining-room and
drawing-room, serving also as a library.
From the House we cross the quadrangle. This is laid out as an
ornamental flower-garden, with very charming effect. From thence the Park
is entered, which is agreeably diversified by hill and dale, wood and water.
The Avon winds its way irregularly through the plain, while ever and anon
the “careless herd” come sweeping by, calling up involuntarily to the mind
remembrances of the “melancholy Jaques” and his sad musings, as, in “the
forest of Arden,”
“he lay along
Under an oak, whose antique root peeps out
Upon the brook that brawls along the wood.”

Under a close avenue of trees a private walk leads to a corner of the Park,
where, snugly embosomed among “scented limes” stands the little Church of
Charlecote—with
its belfry, simple as a dovecote, and its somewhat grotesque exterior.
There are three monuments—each being of an elaborate and costly
character, with no inconsiderable pretensions to merit as works of art. The
one nearest the altar is that of the Sir Thomas Lucy who is reported to have

“threat
ened”
Shaksp
ere
with
punish
ment
for
deer-
stealin
g, and
is said
to have
been
the
object
of a
lampo
on
penned
by the
“immortal bard.”[61] The grave underneath contains also the ashes of his
lady. They are represented in the usual recumbent posture, on a tomb of
variegated marble, their hands uplifted in prayer. He is clad in armour, the
lady in the ruff and dress of the period. Two smaller figures are kneeling
below, and a tablet of black marble in the recess above their tomb has the
following touching and beautiful inscription:—
“Here entombed lyeth the Lady Joyce Lucy, wife of Sir Thomas Lucy, of Cherlecote, in the
County of Warwick, Knight, daughter and heir of Thomas Acton, of Sutton, in the County of
Worcester, Esquire, who departed out of this wretched world to her heavenly kingdome, the tenth day
of February in the year of our Lord God 1595, and of her age lx and three. All the time of her life a
true and faithfull servant of her good God, never detected of any crime or vice; in religion most sound;
in love to her husband most faithfull and true; in friendship most constant; to what in trust was
committed to her most secret; in wisdome excelling; in governing of her house and bringing up of
youth in the feare of God that did converse with her, most rare and singular. A great maintainer of
hospitality; greatly esteemed of her betters; misliked of none unless of the envious. When all is spoken
that can be said, a woman so furnished and garnished with virtue as not to be bettered, and hardly to
be equalled by any. As she lived most virtuously, so she dyed most godly. Set down by him that best
did know what hath been written to be true.
“THOMAS LUCY.”

E
xcept
the
effig
y,
there
is no
tribut
e of
any
kind
to the
mem
ory
of Sir
Tho
mas
hims
elf.
On
the
opposite side of the chancel, in a small vestry, or chapel, stands the tomb of
his son Thomas, erected by Dame Constance, his lady, daughter and heiress
to Richard Kingsmill; but having no inscription. It is one of the painted
monuments of the period, and represents him armed, and in the usual
recumbent attitude. On a pedestal in front, is a smaller-sized kneeling effigy
of his lady, and in two panels, one on either side, are the figures of eight
daughters and six sons in low relief. In the chancel, also, is another
monument carved very elaborately; where, under marble pillars and arches,
are the figures of his son Thomas and Alicia his wife, daughter and heiress
of Thomas Spenser, Esq., of Claverdon. The figures are gracefully disposed,
and most beautifully executed; all the details being highly finished. Behind,
on one panel, is a bas-relief of a figure on horseback, and in a corresponding
niche are sculptured shelves, on which are placed the works of various
authors, the central niche being occupied by a very long Latin inscription,
recording his virtues and death, which happened the 8th December 1640. A
further inscription states that the monument was erected by his lady.

In the church there are a circular plain font, apparently of very early date;
two small brasses of the 16th century, on the floor of the nave, and two bells
in the wooden turret, one bearing the date of 1625. Beyond these it contains
nothing worthy of notice.
Yet, as long as one stone shall stand upon another, will the little plain
Church of Charlecote be linked with a glorious memory of the past; the lofty
trees that grow around it conceal it effectually from sight; not so the Hall,
which, standing on a gentle elevation above the Avon, is seen from all points
of the adjacent scenery. It adjoins the pretty village of Wellsbourne; near to
which, on the road between Warwick and Stratford, commences a double
avenue of finely-grown elm-trees, which reaches, for more than half a mile
from the public road, to the house;—from Warwick it is distant six miles,
and from Stratford five. The Avon winds immediately around the mansion,
through the Park; close to the
entrance-gate it is crossed by a
pretty bridge, which heightens
the striking effect of the
landscape.
The whole neighbourhood,
indeed, between Wellsbourne
and Stratford, is full of beauty;
the land seems passing rich;
while, here and there, distant
glances are caught of the
Avon, or it accompanies the
wayfarer along the road; there
are few more delightful walks
in England—and none so
pregnant with “happy and
glorious” associations. Amid
these dells and by these hill-sides, was Shakspere taught of Nature.
“Here, as with honey gathered from the rock,
She fed the little prattler, and with songs
Oft sooth’d his wondering ears; with deep delight
On her soft lap he sat and caught the sounds.”
Every step to the pilgrim seems “hallowed ground;” he crosses the
bridge, built by Sir Hugh Clopton during the reign of the 7th Harry, and is at

once “at home” with Shakspere, who must have trodden upon these stones
daily when a boy, and passed them often during his occasional visits to his
birth-place, or when—“good easy man”—he retired hither from busy life, to
die like the deer where he was roused. The very mystery in which his whole
career seems inextricably involved, gives the fancy greater freedom: there is
no check upon imagination as we tread the streets of the Avon’s old town of
Stratford, muse in the small chamber where he was born, think in the school-
house where he was taught, or ponder in the church where his bones have
lain for two centuries and a half, “unmoved.”
Yet the often-quoted passage from Steevens is almost as correct to-day as
it was when he wrote it—notwithstanding every “hole and corner” in
England has been ransacked in the hope to find something that concerns him
—“all that is known with any degree of certainty concerning Shakspere is—
that he was born at Stratford-upon-Avon—married, and had children there—
went to London, where he commenced actor, and wrote poems and plays—
returned to Stratford, made his will, died, and was buried.”
Of all the poet wrote, during a long and busy life, no scrap remains to our
time; and of his autographs but five are known to exist, three of which are
affixed to his will in the Prerogative Office, Doctors’ Commons. One of the
latter is written in one corner of the three sheets of paper which form that
document, and is much injured in consequence, the christian name only
being in any degree perfect; the other two are rather cramped in style, and
one is much confused in the last letters, as if an error had been made in the
spelling. The finest and clearest autograph is that upon the fly-leaf of the
Montaigne of Florio, in the British Museum, which has been known but a
few years, and was secured to the National Library at the cost of one
hundred pounds. The fifth is in the Library of the City of London at
Guildhall, affixed to a deed of bargain and sale of a dwelling-house, in the
precinct of Blackfriars, to one Henry Walker, dated 11th March 1613; it is
written on the slip of parchment inserted to hold the seal, and is therefore
cramped; it, however, cost the Corporation of London forty-five pounds
more than was paid for that now in the British Museum. There was a sixth
known to be in existence to the counterpart of this deed, of which a fac-
simile was published by Malone, and which came into the possession of
Garrick, at whose death it could not be found.
The small chamber of the humble house in which he was born is still
preserved, comparatively unimpaired. It stands in Henley-street, and is kept

as “a show house,” by an aged woman who lives in the back apartments. It
was some years ago a butcher’s shop, and in possession of Mrs. Hart, a
lineal descendant of Shakspere by his sister’s side, who, upon leaving the
house, whitewashed the room to obliterate the names which were pencilled
over the walls by the many visitors. As this was done “at the last pinch” in
the evening before quitting, no size was mixed with the wash, and the next
occupant, with great patience, re-washed the walls, took off the coat of
white, and the pencilled names became again visible; among them are those
of Byron, Scott, the Countess Guccioli, Washington Irving, and a host of
others; the effect of the pencilling upon the walls and ceiling, which is very
low, is singularly curious: it looks as if they were covered with fine spider-
web, so very close is the writing of the various names.
Of Shakspere’s house, “New Place,” where he retired after the turmoil of
London life, in the gardens of which he planted the famous mulberry-tree,
and from whence he was borne to his last home in the venerable church, was
totally destroyed in 1757 by a certain “Rev. Mr. Gastrell,” whose want of
reverence to all the world holds dear, will ever deprive his name of any other
share of it than the prefix it bears. The whole history of the transaction is
disgraceful in the highest degree—the more so as the man was in holy
orders. The house was sold to him in 1751, on the death of Sir Hugh
Clopton, who had resided in it. Five years afterwards, Gastrell became tired
of showing the mulberry-tree, which Sir Hugh delighted in possessing, and
by way of saving himself any further trouble, as well as to vex the Stratford
people, with whom he was not on good terms, he cut it down, and sold it for
firewood. In the year following he rased the house to the ground for the most
discreditable of reasons—a refusal to pay poor’s rates.
But the church—the church in which, in 1564, he was baptised, and
where in 1616, just 52 years afterwards, he was buried—still exists, not only
uninjured but skilfully and judiciously renovated. Here the great object of
attraction is the famous bust, “by Gerard Johnson.” It was executed,
doubtless, by a literal copyist, who, if he had not the high talent of a great
sculptor who endows his work with traces of the mind, will, at least,
faithfully preserve all peculiarities of form and feature. The head as here
given, if not lit up with the soul of the great Poet, is not unworthy of his
calmer moments; the forehead is ample, and the brain large, well-developed,
and altogether characteristic of that evenness of temper which, combined
with unequalled genius, gave him the title of “the gentle Shakspere.” The

great breadth of the upper lip, which might be objected to as unnatural, finds
its fellow in that of another genius, the Shakspere of the North—Walter
Scott.
The “bones” moulder underneath the chancel; and the memorable
inscription remains uninjured upon the slab,—
“Good frend, for Jesus sake forbear,
To digg the dust encloased hear;
Blest be ye man yt spares the stones,
And cvrst be he yt moves my bones.”[62]

Although the history of Shakspere is not necessarily connected with our
subject—a visit to Charlecote, the seat of the Lucys—it was impossible to
consider the neighbourhood apart from the great genius who has made it
famous for all time.

From a drawing by J. G. Jackson Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
COMBE ABBEY, WARWICKSHIRE.

C O MB E ABB E Y,

WA RW I C K S H I R E .

ombe Abbey, the ancient and venerable seat of the Earls of
Craven, is situate in a pleasant valley on the banks of the
river, about five miles from Coventry. The Lordship of Smite,
of which the manor at the time of the Conquest formed part,
was, during the reign of “the Confessor,” in the possession of
Richard de Camvell, who, according to Dugdale, “being a
devout and pious man, and much affecting the Cistertian
Monks, whose Order had then been but newly transplanted
into England; and finding that part thereof which is situate in
the valley to be full of woods, and far from any public
passage; as also low and solitary, and so, consequently, more
fit for religious persons, gave unto Gilbert, Abbot of the
Monastery of our blessed Lady of Waverley in Surrey, and to the Convent of
that place, all this Lordship of Smite, there to found an Abbey of the
Cistertian Order. Whereupon they presently began to build, and out of their
own convent planted some monks here, dedicating the church thereof to the
blessed Virgin also, and calling it the Abbey of Cumbe, in respect of its low
and hollow situation; the word Cumen in the British signifying Vallis or
Convallis, as doth Cumbe and Combe in the Saxon.”
The monastery having been thus founded, its power was augmented by
various other “pious and bountiful gifts;” among the rest, in the time of
Henry II., the Earl of Leicester became so liberal a patron, “that the monks
allowed the said earl to be reputed the principal founder,” and agreed to
“perform for him and his heirs such duties in his life-time and death as for
their chief founder.” Thus richly endowed, and pleasantly placed among
fertile fields, thick woods, and beside a productive river, the monks of
Combe continued to enjoy life until the “killing frost” of the dissolution not
only nipped the shoots, but destroyed the root, of the flourishing tree.
The abbey with its estates then became the property of the Earl of
Warwick, to whom it was granted by Edward VI.; and after his attainder, a
lease of “the site, and divers lands belonging thereto,” was granted to Robert
Keylway, who dying (23d Elizabeth), left a sole daughter and heir, who

married John Harrington, Esq., afterwards Lord Harrington,[63] whose
daughter inheriting, became the wife of Edward Earl of Bedford; from her,
“in consequence of the profuse expenditure in which she indulged,” Combe
Abbey passed by purchase into the family of Craven, in whose possession it
has since remained.
The family of Craven was, at a very early period, seated at
Appletreewick, at Craven in Yorkshire. In 1611, Sir William Craven, knight
and alderman, was Lord Mayor of London; his son, William, having served
in the army with distinction, was knighted in 1626; soon afterwards elevated
to the peerage as Baron Craven of Hampstead Marshall, Berks; and in 1663
created Earl of Craven. This heroic ancestor of the family is immortal in
romance as the leading champion of Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, the eldest
daughter of James I., who, having married Frederic, the Elector Palatine,
became for a short time a queen, when the revolted states, in their attempt to
shake off the yoke of the Emperor Ferdinand II., advanced her husband to
the regal dignity. The battle of Prague was fatal to their fortunes, the result
having been to deprive the elector of his hereditary rank as well as his
crown, and to send him forth an outcast and a wanderer, asking the aid of
such cavaliers as sympathised with fallen greatness. The appeal was
answered by many brave knights, called around the banner of the dethroned
monarch chiefly by the charms and virtues of his British wife; and foremost
among them was the Lord Craven. They were foiled in their hopes, however;
the unhappy king died, and his widow returned to England, where, it is said,
she privately married her gallant champion, and to whom she bequeathed a
fine collection of paintings, chiefly portraits, which still adorn the long
gallery at Combe Abbey.
The earldom became extinct in 1690, but the barony continued in the
family; to which succeeded, in 1769, the sixth baron, who married Elizabeth,
daughter of Augustus Earl of Berkeley, afterwards the Margravine of
Anspach. William, his son, the seventh baron, was, on the 13th of June,
1801, created Viscount Uffington and Earl Craven; in 1807 he married
Louisa, daughter of John Brunton, Esq. of Norwich—a lady who had
previously “graced the British stage,” whose talents and virtues gave
additional lustre to the position to which her marriage raised her, and whose
name was not more honoured and respected when elevated to high rank than
it had been when fulfilling the duties of a comparatively humble station.
This estimable lady became a widow in 1825; when, the Earl of Craven

dying, he was succeeded by his son, the present earl, who in 1835 married
the Lady Emily Grimston, the second daughter of the Earl of Verulam.
The Abbey is, as we have stated, distant from Coventry about five miles;
a plain but neat stone erection forms the entrance lodge. For a short distance
the road winds through pleasant and truly English park scenery, interspersed
with clumps of trees of various sizes and forms; while herds of deer
sweeping across the path, give life and animation to the scene. Adjacent to a
large sheet of water stands the house, which forms three sides of a
quadrangle, originally the cloisters of the Abbey of Combe.
On the east side of these cloisters five highly
enriched arches still
remain of the later
Roman character, the
most northern being of
the transition period.
The openings towards
the court (now glazed)
are of later date,
probably about the
fourteenth century.
After the Reformation,
on the property falling
into the hands of the
first Lord Harrington,
he built the Elizabethan
portion of the mansion,
preserving, no doubt,
the cloisters as a means
of communication with
the several apartments;
and, on the whole, with
the manors of Combe,
Smite, and Binley, being transferred by sale from his daughter and heiress,
Lucy Countess of Bedford to Dame Elizabeth Craven, widow of Sir John
Craven (which transfer bears date 24th October, 1622); it fell in due time
into the hands of the famous William Earl Craven, her son, who made

considerable additions to the building, his architect, it is said, being the no
less famous Inigo Jones.[64]
To attempt a formal description of the rooms would far exceed our
purpose and limits; we shall, therefore, content ourselves with pointing out a
few of the more remarkable objects, commencing with the north parlour, a
very handsome room, in which are the fire-dogs, forming the subject of the
annexed vignette. This room contains very fine whole-length
portraits of the King and
Queen of Bohemia, by C.
Honthorst; and of Charles I.
and the Princes Maurice
and Rupert, by Vandyck.
There is also a very fine
bust of the present earl, by
Behnes. Adjoining this
room is the grand staircase,
the ceiling of which is
enriched by an oval garland
of fruit and flowers,
modelled with the most
exquisite taste and delicacy
of execution. Around the
walls of the landing are suspended whole-lengths of William the first Earl
Craven, Charles II., James I. and II., and others. From thence we enter the
Elizabethan room, the subject of our illustration. It is said to have been fitted
up for the reception of Queen Elizabeth, and is well worthy of such repute.
The fire-place, of most elaborate design and execution, contains on each side
the initials E. R. The ceiling is richly ornamented, and on the walls are hung
five very fine landscapes, by J. Lootens, with other pictures of considerable
merit. In the window is the bust of the Princess Elizabeth, with the following
inscription:—
“Ælis Reg.
Boh
Fil Jac Rex Mag Brit
1641.”
And also another bust, on the base of which is carved,—

“La Sereniss
Princ Sophia
Pal. Fig: Di: Fred.
AD 1643
Re Di Boenia
ÆS 17.”
From thence, passing a small ante-room, which contains a most curious
picture of the “Decollation of John the Baptist,”
s
ai
d
to
b
e
b
y
A
lb
er
t
D
u
re
r,
th
e
lo
n
g gallery is entered—one of those apartments so judiciously attached to the
houses of the wealthy of this period, for the purposes of recreation and
exercise during inclement weather. It is about one hundred feet in length and
sixteen in width, lighted from the court-yard side, and filled with portraits of
the early part of the sixteenth century. M. Mirèveldt and G. Honthorst are the
principal contributors, and in the historical series here presented to view are
subjects for much reflection. The Queen of Bohemia, whose destiny seems
so closely interwoven

with the house of
Craven, appears more
than once.[65] The
gallant and chivalrous
William Earl Craven—
the wise Chancellor
Oxenstern—Charles
XII. of Sweden, grim,
stern, and forbidding—
Archbishop Laud,—all
are here; and last, not
least, are the painters;
besides many others,
whose names are
registered in the pages
of history. Connected
with this apartment is
the elegant porch
which forms the
subject of our vignette,
and was, no doubt, a
garden-approach to the
principal apartments.
“It is constructed of
very friable stone, the
same apparently as that
used in the principal
buildings at Coventry. Some of its enrichments can no longer be made out.”
Descending to the opposite wing we find the dining-room, which is fitted
up in panelled compartments of oak, and contains some beautiful carving in
the sideboard, &c. Fine portraits of the Craven family, the Duke of
Richmond, and Prince Henry (son of James I.), adorn the apartment, which
also contains two transcendent pictures by Rembrandt. Adjacent to this room
is a very handsome
apartment, ornamented by columns, and containing two pictures by
Canaletti, which may be classed with the finest examples of that master.

There are numerous
other rooms
particularly rich in old
carved fire-places,
bedsteads (of which
we give a specimen),
tapestry, antique
furniture, and all
things which correct
taste and refined
judgment could
accumulate.
We may recur to the
almost romantic
interest which attaches
itself to this house,
from the chivalrous
exertions of one of its
early possessors in
behalf of the illustrious
but unfortunate princess, who is frequently recalled to memory within its
walls. At each step we are reminded of the fact; and it is a melancholy, yet
most pleasant reflection, in looking back through the vista of two centuries,
to find the youthful and early devotion of Earl Craven not merely a transient
and evanescent impulse, but enduring to the end, and manifesting itself in
studious care to protect and soothe that royal lady in the decline of her
fortunes and the close of her life. Well did he establish the truth of his family
motto,—
VIRTUS IN ACTIONE CONSISTIT.

From a drawing by J. D. Harding. Day Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
WARWICK CASTLE, WARWICKSHIRE.

WARWI C K C AS T L E ,

WA RW I C K S H I R E .

he early history of the town of Warwick is involved in the
mists of past ages, and carries us back to the period prior to
the invasion of Britain by the Romans; if Rous and other
old historians of the county be correct, who declare it to
have been a British town of considerable importance before
that great event. Dugdale says, “as it hath been the chieftest
town of these parts, and whereof the whole county, upon its
division into shires, took its name, so may it justly glory in
its situation beyond any other, standing upon a rocky
ascent, from every side, and in a dry and fertile soil, having
the benefit of rich and pleasant meadows on the south part,
with the lofty groves and spacious thickets of the woodland on the north:
wherefore, were there nothing else to argue its great antiquity, these
commodities, which so surround it, might easily satisfy us, that the Britons
made an early plantation here to participate of them.” The reader will not be
expected to place implicit reliance on the statements of Dugdale concerning
its foundation by Cymbeline, by whom it was termed Caerleon, and its
destruction by the Picts and Scots, “till Caractacus, the famous British
Prince, rebuilt it, making a mansion-house therein for himself.” After the
defeat of Caractacus in A.D. 50, the Romans, in order to secure their
conquests in Britain, erected several fortresses on the banks of the Severn
and Avon, and Warwick is said to have been one of these, but this is not very
clearly proved. During the Saxon period the town was included in the
kingdom of Mercia, and fell under the dominion of Warremund, who rebuilt
it and called it Warrewyke, after his own name. Warwick was subsequently
destroyed by the Danes, and, according to Dugdale, “so rested until the
renowned Lady Ethelfled, daughter to King Alfred, who had the whole
Earldom of Mercia given her by her father to the noble Etheldred in
marriage, repaired its ruins, and in the year of Christ DCCCCXV, made a
strong fortification here, called the doungeon, for resistance of the enemy,
upon a hill of earth artificially raised near the river side;” and this forms the
most ancient part of the present building. But the most important reparations

of the castle were the work of the famous Guy, Earl of Warwick, although
Dugdale tells us that the great tower at the north-east corner, called Guy’s
Tower, the walls whereof are ten feet thick, was built by Thomas, Earl of
Warwick, about the 17th of Richard the Second, on whose banishment the
custody of it was granted to John de Clinton, and in a short time after to
Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent. In the reign of Henry the Third, the
extraordinary strength of this building was alleged as a reason for
particularly prohibiting the widowed Countess of Warwick from re-marrying
with any other than a person approved by the King; but in the furious
contests which occurred in the latter years of this reign, William Mauduit,
the then Earl, neglecting to keep proper guard, the fortress was surprised,
and all the building, except the towers, levelled with the ground, while
himself and his Countess were carried prisoners to Kenilworth. The family
of Beauchamp shortly succeeded to the Earldom, and by Thomas
Beauchamp, in the reign of Edward the Third, the castle was repaired, strong
gates were added, and the gateways fortified with embattled towers. Thomas
de Beauchamp, his son and successor, passed a great portion of his time
here, during his exile from Court; he had, thus, leisure to repair and
strengthen the castle; and he it was who built the tower as stated above, on
which he bestowed the name of Guy’s Tower; it is a fine relic of early
castellated building, and is represented in our initial letter.[66]
The daughter of this Richard Beauchamp married Richard Nevil, son and
heir of the Earl of Salisbury, and in consequence of this marriage the
Earldom of Warwick came into the possession of the Nevils. This powerful
Earl played a conspicuous part in the wars of the Roses, and has been
immortalised by Shakspeare, in his drama of King Henry VI.; and, after a
life of strange vicissitude and high excitement, he was killed in the battle of
Barnet, A.D. 1471. His estates were forfeited, his widow was deprived of all
power, “as if she had been naturally dead,” and her vast inheritances were
settled upon her daughters, Isabel and Anne, the latter of whom was married
to George Duke of Clarence, created Earl of Warwick by his brother, King
Edward the Fourth. He chiefly resided at Warwick Castle, and added much
to the strength and beauty of its works. On the accession of Henry the
Seventh, the jealousy of that monarch to his son Edward, the last of the male
Plantagenets, induced him to compass his death, by holding out to him fair
promises and a hope of liberty (for he had been imprisoned in the Tower on a
groundless charge, to keep him secure), to confess a connection with Perkin

Warbeck, after which confession he was beheaded on Tower-hill. From this
time until the 1st of Edward the Sixth there was no Earl of Warwick; until
John Dudley having been advanced to the dignity of Viscount L’Isle, was so
created through the favour of the Duke of Somerset, the powerful Protector;
and on the failure of that line, the title was revived by James the First, in the
person of Robert Lord Rich, in whose posterity it continued till the year
1759, when it passed into the family of the Grevilles, who now hold the title
of Earl Brooke and Earl of Warwick, their seats being Warwick Castle and
Brooke House, Dorset.
The Castle occupies the summit of a steep hill, which greatly aided its
artificial defences in “the olden time.” The present approach is
by a narrow passage, cut through the
solid rock, and extending to the main
entrance from the Porter’s Lodge,—
the Lodge itself, however, being a
place of attraction which few will
leave unvisited, for here are collected
the marvellous relics of the great Earl
—a rib of the dun cow, a tusk of the
wild boar, with horse armour, a
helmet, breast-plate, tilting-pole, and
walking-staff, of such prodigious size
and weight that they could have suited
only a giant and his steed. Of the two
famous Towers, that of Guy is to the
right, while that of “Cæsar” (here
represented) is to the left: they are
connected by a strong embattled wall,
in the centre of which is the
ponderous arched Gateway, flanked
by Towers, and succeeded by a
second arched Gateway, with Towers
and Battlements, “formerly defended
by two portholes, one of which still
remains; before the whole is now a disused Moat, with an arch thrown over
it at the Gateway, where was once the drawbridge.”[67]

Passing the double Gateway, the court-yard is entered. Thus seen, “the
castellated mansion” of the most famous of the feudal Barons has a tranquil
and peaceful aspect; fronting it is a green sward, and the “frowning keep”
which conceals all its gloomier features behind a screen of ivy and evergreen
shrubs. It is only when viewed from the river, when the battlements of the
old Castle seem literally towering in air, that a notion is obtained of its
prodigious strength. The slopes, however, are now clothed with gently-
growing trees; several unscathed cedars speak of long years of rest from
strife; the gardens are among the fairest and most fertile of the kingdom; and
in one of the conservatories of the rich Park, is deposited “the Vase,” which
may be said to have given a second immortality to the name of Warwick.
The interior of Warwick Castle demands but a brief notice. “The Hall” is
a restoration; and the apartments, generally, have been subjected to the
deleterious influence of the fashionable upholsterer. The rooms contain,
however, many rich treasures of art; the collection of pictures, although of
limited extent, is of rare value, comprising, perhaps, some of the best
examples to be found in England of Vandyck and Rubens; and there is a fine
assemblage of costly garderobes, cabinets, encoigneurs, tables
of Buhl and
Marquetrie,
vases, and
bronzes, with
many veritable
antiques. An
object of much
interest is
pictured in the
appended wood-
cut. It is “the
Warder’s Horn.”
Its history is told
by the following inscription:—
PHIL. THOMASSINUS. FEC. ET EXCUD. CUM PRIVIL. SUMMI. PONTIFICIS ET
SUPERIOR. LICENTIA ROMÆ. FLORUIT 1598.

It measures two feet two inches across, and three inches and three-
quarters diameter at the mouth.

In all respects Warwick Castle holds rank among the most remarkable of
our existing remains of the dwellings of the Feudal Barons. Its history is
deeply interesting; and from the few changes it has undergone, we require
little aid from fancy to read there a full and perfect record of the leading
incidents of by-gone ages.

From a drawing by J. G. Jackson. Day & Son. Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
WROXHALL ABBEY, WARWICKSHIRE.

WR OX H AL L AB B E Y,

WA RW I C K S H I R E .

roxhall Abbey. Of Wroxhall there is no particular mention
in the Conqueror’s survey—a circumstance for which
Dugdale accounts by “the barrennesse of the soil,” which
now vies in fertility and beauty with the choicest districts of
England. “A monastery of nuns” was founded here so early
as “King Stephen’s time.”[68] The founder endowed it with
“totam terram loci de Wrocheshale—with large proportions
of lands and woods thereabouts: together with the church of
Hatton and whatsoever belonged thereto, and so much of
his royalty in Hatton as lay betwixt the two little brooks
there.” It also received large benefactions from other
parties, and sundry immunities and privileges. At the dissolution its value
extended to 72l. 12s. 6d. “above all reprises;” the then prioress received a
pension of 7l. 10s. per annum; and the site thereof, “with church, belfrey,
and all the lands thereunto belonging,” were given to Robert Burgoyn and
John Scudamore, and their heirs.
The present structure is on the original site, the southern and eastern sides
having been adapted as offices, and the western front was rebuilt by Robert
Burgoyn, and has been subjected to alterations of a later date, as will be seen
in our view. The mansion was purchased from the Burgoyn family, in 1713,
by the famous Sir Christopher Wren. It is, however, doubtful whether he
resided here, as he was at that period actively employed in his official
capacity. His son, Christopher Wren, died in 1747. He was buried here, and
most probably on this spot he compiled with so much care and diligence the
papers of the “Parentalia,” afterwards published under this title in 1750 by
his son Stephen.
The mansion, as will be perceived, has a picturesque appearance, and
some of the old wainscotting remains in the principal rooms, with some
good carving round the chimney-pieces. The Chapel seems to have been
formed from part of the cloisters: it is on the north side of the house, and
contains some monuments of the Wren family and some good stained glass.
It is at present in the possession of Mrs. Wren, a lady who derives her

position as well as her
property from marriage with
the latest male descendant
of the great architect. She
resolutely closes the doors,
not only of the mansion but
of the adjacent chapel,
against the entrance of all
applicants for admission to
examine either; and her
discourtesy is consequently
a proverb in the
neighbourhood. We may add
to this imperfect description
an expression of satisfaction
at the probable reversion of
the estate into the hands of
Chandos Wren Hoskyns,
Esq., a gentleman whose
acquirements are such as to
render him a worthy
successor of the great man
whose name has imparted
interest to this mansion.

From a drawing by F. W. Hulme. Day & Son. Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
BROUGHAM HALL, WESTMORELAND.

B ROU GH A M HAL L ,

WESTMORLAND.

rougham Hall—the seat of Henry, Lord Brougham
and Vaux—is situated about a mile south of Penrith,
on the high-road from Lancaster to Carlisle. It is a
structure of mixed character—half castle and half
mansion—of which there are many examples in the
northern districts of the Kingdom. Its origin dates
from a remote period; and it has, no doubt, largely
participated in the perils that arose from close
proximity to “the Border.” The remains of a castle still
more ancient than the greater part of the building, and, apparently, of far
greater strength, stand at a short distance from the Hall, in the midst of
“pleasant scenery”—fruitful fields and a gentle and generous river, the river
Eamont. The earliest mention we find of Brougham occurs in the “Itinerary”
of Antoninus, and in the “Notitiæ,” from which we gather that it was a
Roman station of considerable importance. The remains of the camp may
still be traced near the present house, and a field close by appears to have
been the burial-place (as usual, without the walls), many tombs and altars
having been, from time to time, discovered there.
“Although,” according to Camden, “time hath consumed its buildings and
its splendour, the name remains almost entire, for at this day we call it
Brougham.” And this so clearly resembles the Roman Brovocum or
Brocovum (for it is spelt both ways) that the etymology may be considered
settled, although for many centuries both the place and the family were
called Burgham—a name considered by Horsley (in his “Roman Antiquities
of Britain”) as of Saxon derivation, compounded of Burgh, castle, and Ham,
town. Stukeley in his “Itinerary,” (1725) says,—“The trace of the Roman
city is very easily discovered, where the ditch went between the Roman road
and the river. I saw many fragments of altars and inscriptions at the Hall near
the bridge, all exposed in the court-yard to weather and injuries of every
sort.”
In the earliest records belonging to the family, or to be found in the Tower
of London, the place is spelt Broham and Bruham; and this, singularly

enough, while it differs from the spelling of the Roman word (which, as
Camden says, was in his time changed into Brougham), yet in sound it is
absolutely identical with the pronunciation, which has probably always been,
and certainly is at the present day, given to the name. We are enabled from
original documents preserved in the Charter-room at Brougham, in the
Tower, State-paper Office, Rolls Chapel, and Chapter-house, and from other
authentic sources, to trace with accuracy the descent of Brougham in a
family of the same name, who have been settled there from times long
antecedent to the Norman conquest. An ancient pedigree preserved in a copy
of Cranmer’s great Bible (1540), now at Brougham, states Walter de Broham
to have held Brougham in the time of Edward the Confessor; he was
succeeded by Wilfred; and he by Udard, who was appointed keeper of
Appleby Castle on the degradation of the previous governor, in consequence
of his participation in the death of Thomas à Beckett. This border-fortress
was held by Udard until 1175, in which year he was defeated and the castle
taken by William, king of Scotland. Soon after this we find him taking part
against Henry II. for which he was fined eighty marks, “because he was with
the king’s enemies.” Udard was succeeded by Gilbert, who, in the year 1200,
“made fine with the king” that he might not go with him to Normandy. This
Gilbert, to get rid of the burden of Drengage, gave up to King John no less
than one half of the town of Brougham, together with the mill, the advowson
of the church of Brougham, a great part of the forest of Whinfell, and the
tower which formed the original building of Brougham Castle. The name
was at this period changed from Broham to Burgham. From Gilbert, after
Henry and Thomas, we come to Daniel, who commanded the king’s forces
against Roger Mortimer in Kent. In 1378, Sir John Burgham was Lord of
Brougham, and settled the boundary of the Lordship with Sir Roger Clifford;
the record of which, after noting the particulars of the agreement, thus ends:
—“And so thys ambulacyon was veiwyd and merkett in the secund yeare of
King Richard the Secund, by the assentt and consentt of Sr. Rogere Clifforth,
knight, and Sr John Burgham, in thayre time.” In 1383, Sir John Burgham
was member for Cumberland. He was succeeded by his son John, who
represented Carlisle. His son, Thomas, was one of the king’s judges in 1433,
as appears by a record of assize taken at Penrith in the 12th Henry VII. John,
the son of the above Thomas, was member for Cumberland, and was
succeeded in the fourth generation by Thomas, who in 1553 married Jane,
heiress of John Vaux of Cattulun and Tryermagne. The next possessor of the
name was Henry, who signalised himself in the family records by alienating

part of the ancient estate; which, however, was repurchased in 1726 by John
Brougham, the then representative of the family.
Henry was succeeded by his son Thomas, whose name we now find
changed from Burgham into Browgham, according to the spelling of the
place in the deed of 1567; he died in 1607, and was buried in the chancel at
Brugham: his widow, Agnes, having Brugham assigned to her for her life, by
a deed dated 29th March, 1608. The heir-male of Thomas was Henry
Browgham, of Scales Hall in Cumberland, who married a Wharton. His son,
Thomas, married a Fleming; and in the deeds of that time his name is spelt
Browham. His son, Henry, married the daughter of Lamplugh of Lamplugh,
ultimately heir-general of that ancient family (and whose descendant, Peter
Lamplugh Brougham, enjoyed their estates). From him descended John
Brougham, of Brougham in Westmorland, and Scales Hall in Cumberland,
who, dying without issue, was succeeded by his nephew, Henry Richmond
Brougham, owner also of Highhead Castle, derived from his mother, the
heiress of the Richmonds, and dying in 1749 was succeeded by Henry
Brougham, the grandfather of Henry, Lord Brougham and Vaux, the present
owner of Brougham, Scales Hall, and Highhead Castle; a nobleman to
whose genius the world owes much, and by whose active industry, science
and literature have been so extensively served, and so largely promoted, for
nearly half a century.
The castle-mansion is irregularly built, and with the court-yards and outer
offices covers a vast extent of ground. The garden-court comprises on two of
its sides nearly the whole of the buildings occupied by the family. At the
lower end of this court is a massive arched entrance-gateway, which,
together with the surrounding buildings, is very old and picturesque, clothed
with a garb of most luxuriant ivy: of this we append an engraving.
In our lithotint print is shewn the western side of the Hall, considered to
be the most ancient part of the structure. It is singularly solid in construction,
the works being several yards in thickness. The large tower in the
perspective contains the apartment formerly the Armoury. The terrace
commands an extensive view of scenes rich in historic interest, and of great
natural beauty; comprising in the distance the whole of the mountains of the
Lake district, which rear their airy summits, chain upon chain, peak above
peak, in almost countless numbers. Nearer, the eye ranges over thick woods,
chequered here and there with grey rocks and quiet holms; while nearer,
unseen, but plainly heard, the Lowther brawls over its rocky bed and through

the wide arches of Lowther Bridge—a famous and most picturesque
structure. Higher up the river, the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway passes
over an immense viaduct, of which the three or four most central arches are
distinctly visible from the Hall. Nothing can exceed the beauty of this scene
on a clear sunny afternoon, when the dull red bridge is in shade; the light
touched clearly but delicately along the parapet and down the inner sides of
the shafted piers: the whole framed, as it were, in ponderous masses of richly
coloured foliage, subdued and harmonised by ever-recurring passages of
most delicious shade.
The interior contains many apartments of high interest: several of them
having been renovated in the best possible taste, and in perfect harmony with
the edifice. Our space will not permit us to describe them in detail. The
Great Hall (of which we append an engraving) is a double cube forty feet by

twenty, and twenty high; the roof supported by arches, with open spandrels,
made of walnut-wood. The ceiling has been lately restored, having (at least
the greater part of it) fallen to pieces through age and decay. The fireplace
also has been restored. The windows (six in number) are filled with very fine
stained glass, chiefly of the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th
century; the colours are singularly rich: it appears to be of German
manufacture, and closely resembles the old glass at Nuremberg. There is a
good deal of curious armour here; especially a very old and very perfect suit
of Edward IV. or Richard III.’s time. The Armoury was a room about sixteen
feet square at the top of the highest tower, with a fine oak roof, but is now
used as a bed-room. All its contents were recently moved into the Hall,
where, although seen to greater advantage, they have no longer the
picturesque effect they must have had in their original situation.

In the Hall is a very old iron chest, with a lock in the lid which shoots
twelve bolts by one key, that turns in the centre of the lid. This was probably
used in ancient times to keep the vessels belonging to the chapel. The most
curious relic in the Hall is an ivory horn (introduced as the initial letter), of
very early workmanship, and used (as is believed) in the service of Cornage
—an ancient border service, by which certain of the lands of Brougham are
held. In former times this service consisted in blowing a horn from the top of
the high tower, to give notice of the approach of an enemy (most usually the
Scotch), so that the neighbouring barons might be prepared to resist the
threatened attack; or the nearest beacon (which is on the top of Penrith Fell,
and still in existence) might be lighted up to alarm the country. This service
in later times was changed into a Corn rent, and hence it has been
erroneously supposed that it was called Cornage: the original service,
however, was that of blowing the horn. From its workmanship and
ornaments this horn is evidently of Saxon times, and was probably used
before the introduction of the cornage tenure as a warder’s horn. Over the
chimney-piece in the old drawing-room are the arms of Edward VI. This
room and many others in the house are rich in tapestry and old stamped
leather.
“At the mansion of Browham stands a chapel of very ancient erection. In
the year 1377, ‘Johannes de Burgham’ is said to have had ‘Capellam apud
Browham, Sancto Wilfrido sacrum, ab antiquis temporibus fundatam,’ and
that a Chaplain attended divine offices at it. Through process of time it
becoming ruinous and neglected, it was lately repaird and beautify’d by the
piety of Anne, Countess of Pembroke, A.D. 1659.”[69] In this chapel there was
formerly a holy well, dedicated to St. Wilfred, which rose through the
ancient font by a hole bored through the shaft (in which also was the waste-
pipe) into the bowl. The hill near the chapel was cut through about fifty
years ago, for the purpose of lowering the road, and from that time the spring
which supplied the well was cut off, so that the water now only rises to the
height of the chapel-floor: the loss of this singular remnant of antiquity is
much to be lamented. There still remains the shrine, or a considerable
portion of it, now fixed at the west end of the chapel, noticed by Leland in
his “Itinerary,” and to which he says there was a great pilgrimage. The shrine
at the east end consists of three compartments, of very remarkable carving,
said to be by Albert Durer, but apparently, from the architecture of the
canopy work, of an earlier date. It is said to have come from the church of

St.
Cunegon
de at
Cologne.
The
windows
at the
east end
are early
Anglo-
Norman,
and are
filled
with the
earliest
stained
glass
known in
England.
Two
appear to
have
been
repaired,
and the broken parts replaced with glass of a more modern date. At one side
of the altar, in the north wall, is the ancient “ambrie,” or small cupboard cut
in the solid wall, in which were kept the vessels; some of these are still
preserved, and are of great curiosity—the pix, now very rarely to be met
with; the remonstrance, a small oblong box, either used as a reliquary, or,
more probably, to contain the cruet or phial of sacred oil. These are gilt and
finely enamelled, and are in a state of good preservation. The chalice and
paten (silver gilt) are of great antiquity, and are also well preserved. The
door of the ambrie is of black oak, curiously carved; on the back is fixed a
very singular gilt and enamelled crucifixion, with a very remarkable
representation of a glory above the head of our Saviour: this cross is of the
very earliest age, probably of the sixth or eighth century. The sedilia, of
black oak, still stands upon the raised part of the floor, on the south side of
the altar; and the old drain, or piscina, is still to be seen. The oak carving,

especially some of the stall ends, and the screen, are very fine, but have been
extensively repaired. Some of the oak and stained glass, which appear
formerly to have belonged to the chapel, are now in the great dining-hall; but
what is left, still shews a richness and abundance of carving rarely to be met
with in so small a space. Service is performed here whenever the family are
resident, and generally by the Rector, after his duty at the parish church is
over.
The situation of the parish church is remarkable. It is placed on the
borders of a meadow, close to the river Eamont, at a point where there is a
ford, in a direct line from the Roman way to Carlisle, and nearer than by
Brovoniacum. It is above two miles from the nearest village, called
Woodside, and still further from the place where the town of Brougham
formerly stood: there is no trace of any habitations having ever existed near
it.
Stukeley, who visited this part of Westmorland about 1724, and wrote his
account of it in 1725, after describing the British circus or camp on the
banks of the Lowther, called King Arthur’s Round Table, directly opposite to
Brougham, says,—“This is the most delightful place that can be imagined
for recreation; the rapid river Louther runs all along the side of it: the
Eamont joins it a little way off in view. Beyond is a charming view of a vast
wood, and of Brougham; beyond that the ancient Roman city, and the
Roman road going along under the high hill, whereon is the beacon.”—Vol.
II. p. 43.
After describing various British remains which abound in this
neighbourhood, he proceeds:—“In the pasture on the eastern bank of the
Louther, in the way to Clifton, are several cairns, or carrachs as the Scotch
call them, made of dry stones heaped together; also many other monuments
of stones, 3, 4, 5, set upright together. They are generally by the country-
people said to be done by Michael Scott—a noted conjuror in their opinion,
who was a monk of Holme Abbey, in Cumberland. They have a notion, too,
that one Turquin, a giant, lived at Brougham, and that Sir Lancelot du Lake
lived at Mayborough and slew him.”—P. 45. Stukeley accompanies his
description by a view of Brougham, as seen rising from the midst of fine old
trees (most of which are now cut down), with King Arthur’s Round Table in
the foreground.

From a drawing by F. W. Hulme. Day & Son. Lithʳˢ to The Queen.

S I Z E R GH HAL L ,

WESTMORLAND.

izergh Hall, with its venerable towers, presents to the
traveller journeying from Lancaster to Kendal an
appearance peculiarly impressive. After passing Levens
Hall, famous for its antique gardens and other vestiges of
the olden time, two miles bring us to Sizergh, which a
sudden turn presents to view, standing about half a mile
from the main road, on a fine natural terrace of
considerable elevation above the general level of the
surrounding country. Fine time-honoured trees are
thickly spread around; among them are some noble elms, whose stateliness
is, however, rapidly giving way before the inroads of age. The park is small,
and not particularly well ordered; it has also the appearance of being much
diminished in size, the main turnpike-road having, in all probability, been cut
through it, as in the case of Levens, where the house is on one side of the
road and the park on the other.
The palmy state of this place belongs to other days; nevertheless much is
left to shew what it has been, with the added interest of increasing years and
antiquity to throw its halo of mystery around the scene. The hall front faces
the east: the lithotint view will shew that it is singularly irregular and
picturesque in its general outline, the whole being a collection of parts
belonging to various eras; exhibiting here and there incongruities of style,
particularly in the ugly modern windows, which, about eighty years ago,
were introduced to supplant those that were mullioned. These abominations,
we were informed, are shortly to be removed, and their places supplied by
windows in keeping with the structure. By far the oldest parts of the building
are the two southern towers, of the erection of which, it is said, no record
remains; these towers are embattled, and are of amazing strength, the walls
and the floors that divide the several stories being of great thickness and
solidity, displaying a lavish use of materials in their construction: the beams
are particularly remarkable in this respect. The smaller tower rises
considerably above the other: in the upper part there is a guard-chamber,
capable of containing a dozen men—a necessary precaution in feudal times

to prevent sudden attacks. Behind, is a large square courtyard, one hundred
and eighty feet from side to side, and enclosed on three sides by the back
buildings of the mansion. These large yards were a necessary part of the old
Border strongholds; they were generally large, as in this case, fortified by
strong walls, and were used to protect the cattle, which were regularly
secured therein at night, and during the frequent inroads of the turbulent and
ever-watchful enemy, whose visits were not by any means either few or far
between. In front a double flight of steps leads from the garden-terrace to a
second terrace, leading direct into the Hall, a large room fifty feet in length,
hung with rich tapestry and some good family pictures, many of the latter
being of considerable artistic merit, as well as of historical interest. Among
these the most “noticeable” are—Sir Robert Strickland, a zealous adherent
of the Royalist party in the civil wars of the time of Charles I.; Sir Thomas
Strickland, knight-banneret, and one of the privy council to James II.; and of
his third son, Roger Strickland; Thomas Strickland, bishop of Namur, and
ambassador to England from the Emperor Charles VI., by Rigaut. There is
also a good portrait of Mary Queen of Scots, said to be by More. The
drawing-room contains portraits of James II. and his queen, and one of
Charles II., a royal gift from James himself to the family.
In the Great Tower are two rooms of much beauty and importance; one is
the drawing-room, the other is called the Queen’s Chamber. Both these
rooms are profusely decorated with rich carving, particularly in the
chimneypieces. Of that in the drawing-room we procured a sketch. It is
exceedingly rich and quaint, the centre compartment being occupied by a
well-executed carving of the arms of the Stricklands. The fireplace is, as the
reader will perceive, of recent date, and quite out of harmony with the more
ancient part above. There is scarcely a room of any importance in the Hall
that is not decorated with a rich chimneypiece and other carvings, all of great
merit, and some of them of rare beauty and originality. These carvings are of
the time of Elizabeth, in whose reign Walter Strickland, Esq., the then owner,
refitted the greater part of the rooms. They are all exceedingly interesting.
The Inlaid Chamber—a bedroom in the great tower—is, perhaps, the most
curious of all; it is panelled with rich dark oak, inlaid with holly in curious
arabesque devices. The bed is of the olden time, exceedingly massive, and
magnificently furnished, the pillars being quaintly carved and very elaborate,
supporting a canopy covered with rich draperies. There is not much old
movable furniture, but some chairs attracted our attention; on the back of

one was
carved the
date 1571. In
one angle of
the tower we
were shewn
a deep dark
hole,
constructed
in the wall,
with which
tradition has
connected
some strange
stories of
secret
violence
committed in
times when
might was
right; of
which,
however,
there is no
more direct
evidence
than rumour
and the
suspicious
look of the place. No ancient Baronial Hall could be complete without its
ample kitchen, and accordingly we find Sizergh in this respect well supplied.
The important adjunct to hospitality is of large dimensions, with an
enormous fireplace, in which, no doubt, was once placed an old-fashioned
and most capacious cooking apparatus: all this has given way to the modern
range, which had a look so undeniably recent and patent as to preclude all
particular examination from us. The kitchen is low, and approached from the
corridor by a broad flight of stairs.

Sizergh Hall has been for many centuries the property and place of
residence of the Strickland family. At what time they first came here is not
exactly known; they were originally from Great Strickland, in the parish of
Moreland. “The son and heir of Walter de Stirkland was a hostage, in 1215,
for the good behaviour of Roger Fitz-Reinford.” The erection of the great
tower is attributed to Sir Walter de Stirkland, in the reign of Edward III.,
during which he procured from the king a license “to enclose his Wood and
Demesne Lands on this estate, and to make a Park here.” This supposition is
supported by the sculptured shield of arms on the north side of the tower,
“placed corner-wise, D’Aincourt quartering Strickland: three escallops, the
crest a full-topped holly-bush on a close helmet.”[70] Sir Walter was thrice
returned to Parliament, an honour which several of his descendants also
enjoyed. This was in the time of Edward III., when the name was spelt
Sirezergh. The family took part in the Border Wars; and it is said that in the
time of Henry VI. they mustered “bowmen, horsyd and harnessed, lxix;
bylmen, horsyd and harnessed, lxxiiii; bowmen, without hors harnesse, lxxi;
bylmen, without hors harnesse, lxxvi; totalis numerus, cclxxxx.” The Sir
Thomas Strickland, whose portrait is mentioned above, went into France
with the king, where he died, and was buried in the church of the English
nuns at “Roan” in Normandy. “His third son, Roger Strickland, was page to
the Prince of Condé, when he went from France to be elected king of
Poland.” The fourth son was the already mentioned Bishop of Namur. In
Kendal church, “Strickland’s Aisle” contains tombs of members of this
family; “one of them is remarkable for the figure of Walter Strickland, a fat
lad in a loose gown, with a most fulsome epitaph, dated in 1656.”
There is a tradition that Sizergh was once the property of the Crown; and
this supposition seems in some degree supported by the fact of the royal
arms being placed among the decorations of one of the chambers, and placed
there it is said by Catharine Parr: but for this there is no sufficient authority.
For some years Sizergh has been the residence of D. Crewdson, Esq., in
whom the old Hall has had a worthy and careful keeper, shewing its various
matters of interest with a courtesy and kindness not too common among
custodians of English antiquities. There is a moat in front of the house. This
place was visited by the poet Gray when on his tour of the Lakes, in 1769,
and its fine situation and antique appearance seem to have had a powerful
impression on his mind—proved by his letters to Dr. Wharton. From the Hall
two avenues diverge to the highway, one towards Kendal, and the other

southward, in the direction of Levens, Milnthorpe, and Lancaster. The
gardens are on the southern end of the terrace, and contain, in addition to the
usual modern flowering plants, some fine old trees, clipt into the fantastic
forms of other times, and also an old summer-house, fast falling to decay.
Altogether the old place is a deeply interesting relic of times now happily
gone by. The feudal tower—the varied and somewhat rude magnificence of
the time of Elizabeth and James—the spoliating barbarism of the eighteenth
century—all mingle here in curious contrast; carrying the mind rapidly
through a long series of years, and exhibiting, as if in mockery, memorials of
men, whose works remain, but whose hands—many of them, at least—had
mingled with the dust before the arrival of periods of which even the
antiquary speaks as “the past.”

From a drawing by C. J. Richardson, F.S.A. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ. to The Queen.
CHARLTON HOUSE, WILTS.

C HAR LTON H OUS E ,

W I LT S H I R E .

harlton House, the seat of the Earl of Suffolk and Berkshire,
stands in the centre of a spacious park, a short distance from the
ancient town of Malmesbury. The manor in “old times”
belonged to the abbey of Malmesbury, and subsequently passed
to the family of Knevit. Thomas Howard, the first Earl of
Suffolk,[71] having married Catherine, eldest daughter of Sir
Thomas Knevit, the estates became the property of that noble
house; and the Earl, soon after entering into possession,
commenced building the mansion we here engrave. It is
considered an excellent example of the style of architecture of
the time of James I.; the house was, however, enlarged and modernised by
Henry Earl of Suffolk and Berks., who was Secretary of State for the
Northern Department, in the reign of George III. The principal front is
ancient, with the exception of the attic over the centre portion between the
two towers. A plan of the building preserved by the family shews the
colonnade quite open, and forming one side of a large quadrangular court,
sixty-five feet square, in the centre of the building: at the end of this court
was the porch leading into the entrance-hall, which appears to have been in
the style of Inigo Jones (the reputed architect of the building). This court-
yard is now enclosed, and is formed into a saloon, which still remains
unfinished, the works before their completion having been suddenly
interrupted, probably by the death of the Earl in March 1799.
The only portion of the interior retaining its original character is the
gallery; it runs through the whole front of the building immediately over the
colonnade: the ceiling, which is ancient, is an extraordinary specimen of
elaborate decoration; it is 115 feet in length, and between the edges of the
cornice, 17 feet in width. An old fire-place, with the arms of the first Earl of
Suffolk, brought from the Charter House, London, has been placed here. A
collection of superb full-length portraits of this illustrious family adorn this
fine apartment. It is said that the ceiling of this gallery once saved the
building from destruction: previous to the alterations, the Earl, not liking the
situation of the house, thought of having it pulled down, and rebuilt in

another part of the park; the impossibility, however, of removing the ceiling
determined the rejection of the idea. The additions externally (with the
exception of one front) are closely copied from the older portions of the
structure. The house abounds in furniture of antique character, in harmony
with the character of the interesting building. One of these examples,
consisting of a clock and cabinet, we here engrave.
The architect under whose
directions the repairs and
additions were made, is well
known among the profession as
an “Architectural Plagiarist,”—
one who was accustomed to affix
his name to the designs of other
men. This person, thinking
probably that the architecture of
James I. would never be studied,
put up the following inscription at
Charlton; it is inscribed on an iron
plate inserted in the wall above
the roof of the saloon:—
“This edifice was rendered such as it is under
the skilful direction of Matthew Brettingham,
Architect,
and the careful superintendence of James
Darley, Clerk of the Works.

(Thomas Carter, Steward.)

Began A.D. 1772, finished A.D. 1776, by
Henry, Earl of Suffolk and Berkshire,
the principal Secretary of State to the best of
Princes.”

The mansion, taken altogether,
is of fine character and of very
considerable interest: as the
baronial residence of the noble
representative of an illustrious family, it retains some of the most striking
and important of its ancient features, conveying the (at all times pleasant)
idea, that antiquity is reverenced for its actual worth.

From drawing by C. J. Richardson, F.S.A. Day & Son Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
THE DUKE’S HOUSE, WILTSHIRE

T HE DUK E ’ S HO U S E ,

W I LT S H I R E .

he Duke’s House, at Bradford, in Wiltshire, is so called
from the Duke of Kingston, to whom it formerly
belonged. It subsequently descended to Earl Manvers.
It is now a dilapidated farm-house; but even in its
present condition of neglect, approaching ruin, it
exhibits interesting indications of its early architectural
character. In its pristine state, when the whole of its
ornaments were perfect, it must have presented an
appearance peculiarly imposing and grand; for it is seated on the side of a
steep hill, with a lofty terrace in front, approached by a flight of steps,
adorned with balustrades and vases: there were other terraces, walled
gardens also, and orchards in the rear and on either side of the house, which
is built of the fine white stone of the district.
The principal front—to the south—exhibited in the annexed view, is
divided into two stories, with attics in the gables. The entire front is, as it
were, one window: the three projecting bays are crowned with boldly
sculptured open balustrades. The effect is remarkably striking and
picturesque. The windows have all the mullions and transomes of stone like
the rest of the building. The centre bay, on the ground-floor, serves as a
porch, and has a fine large sculptured doorway, the upper part of which is
seen in the print.
At the time John Aubrey visited Bradford, in 1686, he described this
house as inhabited by John Hall, a wealthy clothier of the town, connected
by marriage with the family of Sir John Thynne, of Longleat. Mr. J. Britten
supposes that Bradford House was built by the architect who erected the
grand mansion of Longleat, the foundation of which was laid in 1567; but
the style of the building is that of a much later period; it was probably built
by the Duke of Kingston. A shield of arms, with what appears to be a ducal
coronet above it, is over the fireplace in the entrance-hall, and the same
shield is repeated in the other apartments. This shield, no doubt, belongs to
the nobleman who erected the mansion.

The palace at Longleat is a structure in style almost pure Italian, and the
architect is well known to be John of Padua, a very celebrated man. It is the
fashion with the antiquaries in Wilts, so proud they are of the name, to
ascribe to him every building and every separate fragment of Elizabethan
architecture in the county; but the Duke’s House is not by him: it is pure
English architecture, of the latest and most polished period of the style of
James I. Aubrey’s description of the house is curious; he calls it “the best
house for the quality of a gentleman in Wiltshire.” The house has two wings;
two, if not three, elevations or ascents to it, adorned with terraces, having
either rails or stone balustrades.
The interior contains numerous fragments of the old building: the
entrance-hall has a noble stone fireplace in two stories; one of the upper
rooms had, till within the last few years, a very handsome oak and stone
fireplace, elaborately carved. Some of the rooms contain oak panelling; and
there are a few ornamented ceilings, in which are pomegranates, the fleur-
de-lis, English rose, &c. The desertion of the house appears to have been
caused by the increase of the town, which rendered it anything but a rural
retreat.
Bradford is situated on the banks of the Avon, near the middle of the
western boundary of Wiltshire, on the borders of Somersetshire, within a
cove formed by the surrounding small hills, which screen the town from the
cold northern winds. The Avon here is generally called the Lower Avon, and
is considerably increased by the waters of the Were from Trowbridge. The
name is supposed to be derived from the Saxon word Bradenford, signifying
the broad ford. Over this ford there is now a handsome stone bridge. The
Duke’s House is close to the town, which contains more than 10,000
inhabitants, of whom the greater part are employed in the cloth-
manufactories. The church is a large and ancient building, in the chancel of
which is an antique altar-piece, coarsely ornamented with a painting that was
intended to represent the Last Supper. In the church are two windows of
painted glass, said to exhibit the actions of Christ and His Apostles. These
windows were a present from John Ferret, Esq., of London, a native of
Bradford, who died in 1770. Near the church is a charity-school, for the
education of sixty-five children, which was opened in January 1712. There is
an almshouse at the west end of the town, founded by John Hall, Esq., the
last of a family which had resided at Bradford ever since the reign of Edward
I.

From a drawing by F. W. Fairholt, F.S.A. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
WESTWOOD, WORCESTERSHIRE

WE S T WO OD H O US E ,

WORCESTERSHIRE.

ithin two miles of the ancient town of Droitwich, whose salt-
springs have been famous since the time of the Romans,
stands Westwood House, in the centre of an extensive park,
well wooded, and consisting of about two hundred acres. To
the east of the house is a lake extending over sixty acres, but
which was originally intended to cover one hundred acres of
ground. The principal front of the house commands a view of
this lake; and being situated in the centre of the park,
commanding on all sides the vistas produced by the fine old
trees, whose radiating avenues surround it, it is as happily
placed as any mansion in the kingdom. Nash, in his “History
of Worcestershire,” thus describes it:—“Westwood House
consists of a square building, from each corner of which
projects a wing in the form of a parallelogram, and turretted
in the style of the Château de Madrid near Paris, or Holland House. It is
situated on a rising ground, and encircled with about two hundred acres of
oak timber. The richness of the wood combining with the stateliness of the
edifice forms a picture of ancient magnificence, unequalled by any thing in
this county.” The house is of brick, with stone quoins and parapets, and bears
a striking resemblance to an old Norman château. Our plate exhibits the
peculiarities of its design as seen in the principal front. The body of the
house is a solid square of three stories in height, the saloon occupying the
first floor, and being lighted by large bay-windows. Wings project in a line
from the centre of each corner of the house, and communicate by doors with
each floor of the central building. Opposite each wing, at some distance from
them, are erected small square towers, which were originally connected with
the main building by walls, which have now been removed, and the small
garden surrounding the house entirely thrown open. This garden is encircled
by an open railing, and immediately in front of the house, and still further in
advance, is the entrance-gate. Our cut exhibits the construction of the central
pile as it appears from the garden, with the principal front and one side,
taking in a view of three of the wings. The offices and stabling are at some

short distance in the rear of this, and where the kitchen-garden now stands
originally stood an ancient nunnery, of which no remains exist; but Nash
tells us that, in digging, they sometimes find stone coffins and foundations of
buildings.

Eustachia de Say and her son Osbert Fitzhugh, having given the church
here to the abbey of Font-Evraud in Normandy, an abbey closely connected
with our Norman kings, and where several lie buried, and having, during the
reign of Henry II., granted them various lands, Osbert is styled the founder
of the church of St. Mary at Westwood, in the ancient deeds. Shortly
afterwards was erected a small priory, dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, for
six nuns of the Benedictine order, which, when once established, shared the
usual favours bestowed on such foundations during the middle ages; it
ultimately numbered seventeen or eighteen inmates. The grants of property,
as recited by Nash, do not appear to have been of such great value as ever to
have given great riches or importance to the priory, but they were of a kind
to ensure a certain amount of comfort and worldly prosperity to the nuns
who inhabited it; and some of the grants are curious, inasmuch as they shew
the kindliness of feeling with which they were regarded, and the simple

usefulness of many donations; all indicative of a period when the necessities
of life were more dependent on the interchange of individual courtesies than
they are at present. Thus, “Jocelyn Fitz Richard, of Wich (Droitwich), gave
them free passage for corn and hay over the bridge of Brerhulle, as far as his
meadow extended, from hay-time to Michaelmas, and for wood from hay-
time to All Saints.” Others made them various grants for things in return,
which they wanted, and which, being of considerably less value, became a
profitable quit-rent. Thus “Stephen de Elmbrug gave land in Ruinestreet,
Droitwich, for one pound of cummin or pepper yearly, at Michaelmas; which
was confirmed at his death by his son Inard.” Ralph Hacket, “a dole of salt,
with a salt-pit and wood-place, for three shillings and a mit of salt; Ralph
Huson confirmed this, and gave an acre in Broadmead, with seven butts
adjoining, for a mark of silver (13s. 4d.); also six sellions of land without
Guerston Ditch, belonging to their church of St. Nicholas, at Wich. Osbert
Fitz Osbert Bende, of Wich, gave lands in Wich, which he held in fee of
Derhurst, with two helflings (four pounds) and a half of salt at Northernmost
Wich, for a pair of white gloves yearly to his heirs, and fourpence halfpenny
and six baskets of salt.” Other lands were also held by the same grant of salt
from Droitwich, and remittances of rent by the same means. The change in
the value of money is strikingly visible in some grants; thus, “William Fitz
Aldred Fikemore gave 4d. yearly rent,” and “Adam Fitz Adam Luveton, of
Wich, gave 12d. yearly rent;” sums which now appear almost ludicrous.
Of the various prioresses of this retired and remote establishment, but few
notices or even names occur. The only noted one was Isabella, who ruled
between 1360 and 1370, and died under excommunication, for having joined
with the antipope Clement VII. The last prioress, Joice Acton, received at the
dissolution, in 1553, an annual pension of 10l. At this period the revenues
were valued at 78l. 8s. in the whole, and 175l. 18s. 11d. clear, which is
Dugdale’s valuation.
After the dissolution of religious houses, Westwood with its demesne
lands was granted, in the thirteenth year of Henry VIII., to Sir John
Pakington, knight, in whose descendants it still continues. The Pakingtons
resided first in their mansion at Hampton Lovet; when that was much
damaged in the civil wars, they enlarged the house at Westwood, which had
been built in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, as a lodge or banquetting-house,
and made it the place of their abode.

One of the most
interesting features of
the place is the gate-
house immediately in
front of the mansion; it
consists of a double
lodge of red brick, with
ornamental gables and
pinnacles; the gate in
the centre is ornamented
with the heraldic
bearings of the family,
the mullet or star of five
points, and garb or
wheatsheaf; their arms
being,—“party per
chevron, sable and
argent, in chief three
mullets, or, in base as
many garbs, gules.”
These bearings are
again sculptured on the
parapets, the
wheatsheafs doing duty
as pilasters, and the
mullets serving in place
of balusters. The timber
work over the gate, with
its high pointed roof and
pinnacle, is exceedingly picturesque and striking; and is all the more
interesting from the rarity of such examples.
Passing through the gate and crossing the small lawn we reach the
principal door, to which a flight of stone steps lead. The stone portico is
decorated in the style of the Renaissance, but is more purely Italian in its
taste than is usually the case in works of that period. An open balustrade is
on each side of the steps. Over the centre arch is a regal figure on an eagle. It

was probably erected after the civil wars, when Westwood was enlarged and
improved.
From the hall, which is an oblong room, presenting no particular features
of interest, and from which the library, containing many choice and curious
volumes, is reached, and which is situated in the wing to the left, the
principal apartments are reached by the staircase, a view of which is here
given, and which is chiefly remarkable for the Corinthian capitals,
supporting globes, which are placed on the banister. The whole of this
staircase is of carved oak, in a fine state of preservation, and exhibiting great
finish in execution. By this stair we reach the saloon, a noble apartment, with
a double bay-window situated immediately over the hall, and having its
walls hung with fine old tapestry of the Elizabethan era, filled with
symbolical representations of various kinds, and resembling, in style and
character, that exhibited in the great hall at Hampton Court. A magnificent
fireplace of elaborate detail, decorated with the royal arms, is in the centre.
The roof is of plaster, but is not the original one; it is very florid and
elaborate, in the style of Louis Quatorze, yet, however good as a specimen of
that peculiar taste, it does not harmonise with the rest of the building.

From the windows of this room
a noble view of the country is
obtained, which is very
undulatory and beautiful; the lake,
the avenues, and the antique oaks
which surround the house, also
add to the beauty of the prospect.
The effect of the pavilion opposite
each wing of the building is here
seen to good effect, surrounded as
they generally are with trees and
flowers. We engrave one of them.
The chimney upon its exterior
bracket is a peculiar feature in
their design.
Among the portraits preserved
in the mansion may be noticed
particularly a curious one of Sir
John Perrott, Knight of the Bath,
and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland
from 1583 to 1588, who was
descended from a very ancient
family in Pembrokeshire; his mother was Mary, daughter of James Berkeley,
Esq., second son of Lord Berkeley. Sir Robert Naunton, in his “Fragmenta
Regalia,” intimates that he was a natural son of Henry VIII. “If we
compare,” says he, “his picture, his qualities, gesture, and voice, with those
of the king, which memory retains yet amongst us, they will plead strongly
that he was a surreptitious child of the blood-royal.” His first appearance at
court was early in the reign of Edward VI. He was arraigned of high treason
at Westminster, April 17, 1592, and received sentence of death; but did not
suffer, for he died five months after in the Tower. He left one son, Sir
Thomas Perrot, knight, who married Dorothy, sister to the favourite Earl of
Essex, by whom he had one or more daughters. Sir Thomas dying early, his
widow married Henry Percy, the ninth Earl of Northumberland, and his
estate came afterwards by marriage to the Pakingtons.
Sir John Pakynton, knight, son of the first grantee, was sheriff of this
county in the reign of Elizabeth, and a favourite with that queen, who first

took notice of him in her progress to Worcester; he followed her to court,
and was made a Knight of the Bath. On one occasion he betted with three
courtiers, for 3000l., to swim against them from Westminster to Greenwich,
but the queen, by her especial command, prevented it. His only court favour
on record was a monopoly of starch. Fuller says of him, that, “being a fine
but no assiduous courtier, he drew the curtain between himself and the light
of the queen’s favour, and then death overwhelmed the remnant, and utterly
deprived him of recovery; and they say of him, that had he brought less to
the court than he did, he might have carried away more than he brought, for
he had a time of it, but was no good husband of opportunity.” He died of
gout at the age of seventy-seven, and was buried at Aylesbury, 1625.
Sir John Pakyngton, Bart., knight of the shire 15 Charles I., was a
confirmed loyalist, and was tried for his life by the Parliament, his estates
were sequestered, and he was plundered for his loyalty, but he ultimately
compounded with the parliamentary committee for 5000l., and died in 1679.
His house was an asylum for all learned men in these troublesome times.
Nash says, “Dr. Hammond, Bishops Morley, Fell, Gunning, and others,
always met with hospitable entertainment here, during the troubles of the
kingdom. In concert, with some of these, Dorothy, “the good Lady
Pakington” as she was called, is supposed to have written “The Whole Duty
of Man,” one of the most popular of religious volumes. In defence of her
supposed authorship, it is said that Lady Pakington’s letters and prayers are
marked with the easy familiar language of that book; and it has been asserted
that the original MS. in the handwriting of this lady, and interlined with
corrections by Bishop Fell, was sometime in possession of her daughter,
Mrs. Ayre, of Rampton, who often affirmed it to be the performance of her
mother, adding that she was also the authoress of the “Decay of Christian
Piety,” another celebrated religious work. But “upon the whole,” adds Nash,
“it still remains a doubt, and it is much easier to prove who was not the
author than to assert who was.”
At the Revolution, the doors of Westwood were open to some persons
who scrupled to take oaths to King William. Dean Hickes wrote here great
part of his “Linguarum Septentrionalium Thesaurus;” and the preface to his
“Grammatica Anglo-Saxonica” is dedicated to Sir John Pakington. In it he
gives the following declamatory description of Westwood,—“Ibi porticus,
atria, propylæa, horti, ambulacra clausa et subdialia, recta et sinuosa, omnia
studiis commoda; ibi luci, silvæ, nemora, prata, saltus, planities, pascua, et

nihil non, quod animum pene a literis abhorrentem et legendum,
audiendumve, et quovismodo discendum componere, et conciliare potest.”

From a drawing by Wᵐ Richardson. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
FOUNTAINS HALL, YORKSHIRE

F OU NTA I NS H AL L ,

YORKSHIRE.

ountains Hall is situated about five miles west of Ripon, in
the West Riding of Yorkshire, and “within two hundred
yards” of the famous Abbey, the name of which it
“borrowed,” as well as the stones of which it is built. The
hall was, indeed, formed out of the ruins of the time-
honoured structure; and Sir Stephen Proctor, by whom it
was erected, thought, no doubt, he was dedicating to “right
uses” the precious relics he had bought, which supplied him
with a “quarry”—plentiful and easy of access. It has since
passed through various hands; the descendants of the
builder held it but a short while: the daughter of Sir Stephen
conveyed it, with the manor, to John Messenger, Esq., whose descendant
sold it to William Aislabie, Esq.; recently it was the property of the late Miss
Lawrence of Studley-Royal; and now, we believe, belongs to the Earl de
Grey. Farther than this, little is known of the mansion or its history; and its
interest is derived principally, or solely, from the ruined structure—
magnificent and beautiful in decay—which it adjoins, and out of the broken
columns of which it was raised.
Fountains Abbey[72] ranks among the most
picturesque and interesting of the monastic ruins of
England. It was founded early in the twelfth century for
monks of the Cistercian Order; the locality being then an
“uncouth desert,” which supplied no better shelter than
“seven yew-trees,” under which the monks made their
habitation while their magnificent house was
progressing. Yet, long after the stupendous structure was
deserted and unroofed, their first dwelling continued in
existence; for, so late as the year 1810, six of the seven
trees were flourishing above the ground where the
builders had congregated, and formed their projects for a
great future. In process of time the abbey became richly
endowed: such was its repute for sanctity, that princes and nobles “purchased

with immense donations” the right of sepulture within its walls; the most
illustrious of the northern families were among its benefactors. “Popes and
kings seemed to emulate one another in granting to the monks privileges and
immunities;” its possessions “stretched from the foot of Pinnigant to the
boundaries of St. Wilfred of Ripon, without interruption.” Fountains-fell still
retains the name of its ancient possessors; “all the high pastures from thence
to Kilnsey were ranged by their flocks and herds;” and “their lands in
Craven” amounted to sixty-four thousand acres. At the dissolution, its
revenues exceeded a thousand pounds per annum; its site, with the estates
thereunto belonging, were sold by the sovereign spoiler to Sir Richard
Gresham, who resold them to Sir Stephen Proctor (the builder of the Hall out
of the Abbey stones); and the Abbey became a ruin—of deep interest to the
antiquary, the artist, and the lover of the picturesque.

From a drawing by F.W. Hulme. Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
HELMSLEY HALL, YORKSHIRE.

H E L MS L E Y H AL L ,

YORKSHIRE.

elmsley Hall is situate about six miles from Kirby-
Moorside, in the North Riding of Yorkshire. The date is early
in the seventeenth century; but it occupies the site, and is,
indeed, chiefly built from the relics of a structure of far more
remote antiquity. The manor is in Domesday called
Elmeslae, “from elm, and slae, a narrow vale,” and was
given by the Conqueror to the Earl of Morton. Not long after
the Conquest it became the property of Sir Walter de la Espee, from whom it
passed to the noble family of Ross or Roos, and from them to the Earls of
Rutland. Catherine, daughter of the sixth earl, married George Villiers, first
Duke of Buckingham, to whom was thus transferred the estate, which the
second Duke wasted by a career of profligacy and vice.[73] From his trustees,
Helmsley was purchased by Sir Charles Duncombe, from whom it has
descended to the present Lord Feversham.
Helmsley Castle, once a place of formidable strength, was built about the
year 1200 by one of the family of Ross—one who, it is said, forfeited by
rebellion during the reign of Richard I., but regained his estates by favour of
Richard’s successor, the infamous John. The remains are still imposing, and
give indications of having formerly covered immense space. They are thus
described by the Rev. W. Eastmead:—“The grand entrance on the south has
been very strong. Without the outer wall is a ditch, which has added to the
strength of the fortification; then the gateway leading into the first court or
ballium, which measures twenty feet in thickness. After that a second
gateway, leading to the inner court, where were the lodgings, &c.; and then
the keep, ninety-five feet high, under which was the dungeon: and these
walls were defended by a number of towers, which were strong and
magnificent. The walls of this castle were extremely well built, and the vast
masses of them which were thrown down yet hang together with amazing
firmness. Besides the south gate the remains of two others are yet visible,
one on the north and another on the west; and it is said that the waters of the
Rye were conducted through the ditches which surround the building.
During the Civil Wars the castle, after a severe conflict, was taken by the

Parliament forces under the command of Sir Thomas Fairfax, who, during
the siege, was wounded in the shoulder. It was soon afterwards dismantled
by order of Parliament.”
The Hall, as we have intimated, was built out of parts of the ancient
castle. The apartment pictured by Mr. Richardson is the principal drawing-
room, but the house has ceased to be inhabited by any member of the family
to whom it belongs; it is, nevertheless, a good subject for the artist, and one
which he is bound to rescue from the grasp of time.
This “state chamber” is approached by stone steps from the courtyard;
several smaller apartments are contiguous to it, but are without decorations,
unless their ample bay-windows may be so called. A lofty tower at the south-
east angle has been divided into several stories, but the stairs and various
floors are gone. Helmsley Hall is rapidly decaying, and will be ere long, like
its far more powerful parent and neighbour “the Castle,” but a relic of the
past; it will, however, always possess considerable interest. Here revelled the
licentious Buckingham,—
“That life of pleasure and that soul of whim!”

And these now lonely walls suggest many a thought to connect the
surrounding scenery with the brilliant career of the most famous of
Helmsley’s lords.

FOOTNOTES:
[1] Holland House is the manor-house of Abbots Kensington. “In Domesday Book (our
extract is from Lysons) the place is called Chenisitun, in other ancient records Kenesitune and
Kensintune. Chenesi is a proper name; a person so named held the manor of Huish in
Somersetshire, in the reign of Edward the Confessor. Kensington manor, which had been the
property of Edward, a thane of King Edward’s, was granted by the Conqueror to Geoffrey,
bishop of Constance, Chief Justiciary of England, under whom it was holden (when the survey
of Domesday was taken) by Alberic or Aubrey de Vere, ancestor of the Earls of Oxford. The
manor,” says the Survey, “is taxed at 10 hides, and contains 10 caracutes; on the demesnes are
four ploughs, the villans have five, and might employ six. There are 12 villans, holding each a
virgate, and 6 who hold 3 virgates jointly. The priest has half a virgate, and there are seven
slaves, meadow equal to two plough lands, pasture for the cattle of the town, pannage for 200
hogs and three acres of vineyards, valued altogether at 10l.—in King Edward’s time at the same.
The manor was afterwards the absolute property of the Vere family, and was held by them in
capite for several generations, being parcel of their barony by virtue of their office of High
Chamberlain. [In 1264, on the death of Hugh de Vere, the demesne was valued at 4d. an acre,
and the meadow-land at 3d.; a dovehouse at 3s., a court and vineyard 3s., fishpond and moat 2s.
In 1296 the whole value of the manor was 19l. 13s. 6¼d. In 1331 it was somewhat less.] Aubrey
de Vere, grand justiciary of England, was created Earl of Oxford by the Empress Maud, and

afterwards confirmed in that title by Henry II. Upon the attainder of John, the twelfth earl, who
was beheaded in 1461 for his adherence to the house of Lancaster, the manor was seized by the
crown and given to Richard, duke of Gloucester. It came afterwards into the hands of William,
marquis of Berkley, who gave it to Sir Reginald Bray. John, earl of Oxford, son of the attainted
earl, having been restored to his honours, recovered (probably by purchase) the ancient
inheritance of his ancestors, and by his will, bearing date 1509, left it to John, his nephew, the
next heir to the title. Subsequently it passed to Sir Walter Cope, and from him to Henry Rich,
earl of Holland, to whose descendant maternally, Lord Kensington, it now belongs. In 1776 the
only surviving son of Francis Edwardes, Esq., who married Elizabeth, daughter of Robert Rich,
earl of Warwick and Holland, was created an Irish peer by the title of Baron Kensington.”
[2] Campden House, now a ladies’ school, was built about the year 1612, by Sir Baptist
Hickes, an eminent citizen of London, afterwards Viscount Campden. In 1691, it was the
residence of Anne, then Princess of Denmark, who lived here for about four years with her son,
the Duke of Gloucester, who, unhappily, died at the age of eleven years. Here, it is said, a
regiment of boys about his own age was formed for his amusement, “with whom he sported in
military evolutions.” The house has undergone many alterations, but retains many of its original
features. The palace of Kensington was chiefly built by William III., but “considerably enlarged
and altered by succeeding monarchs.” Until his death, it was the residence of his late Royal
Highness the Duke of Sussex.
[3] Clarendon, in his “History of the Rebellion,” has drawn the character of this peer:—“He
was a very handsome man, of a lovely and winning presence, and genteel conversation, by
which he got so easy an admission into the Court of King James,” that he abandoned the life he
had previously led—that of a soldier. The favour of James was continued to him by his
successor, Charles I.; and “whilst the weather was fair, he continued to flourish above any man
about the court; but the storm did no sooner arise, but he changed so much, and declined so fast
from the honour he was thought to be master of,” that he grew distrusted by the two State
parties, and alternately deserted and betrayed both. Ultimately, however, he took part with the
king, was taken prisoner at a skirmish near Kingston, tried, and sentenced to death: “the house
being divided upon the question, whether he should be reprieved or not, and the Speaker giving
the casting vote against him.” “Thus,” says Lord Orford, “perished the once gay, beautiful, and
gallant Earl of Holland, whom neither the honours showered upon him by his prince, nor his
former more tender connexion with the queen, could preserve from betraying and engaging
against both. On the scaffold he appeared sunk beneath the indignation and cruelty he received
from men, to whom and from whom he had deserted.”
[4] The death of Addison is thus touchingly described by Dr. Young:—“After a long and
manly, but vain struggle, with his distemper, he dismissed his physicians, and with them all
hopes of life; but with his hopes of life, he dismissed not his concern for the living, but sent for a
youth nearly related, and finely accomplished (the young Earl of Warwick), yet not above being
the better for good impressions from a dying friend. He came, but life now glimmering in the
socket, the dying friend was silent: after a decent and proper pause, the youth said, ‘Dear sir,
you sent for me; I believe and I hope that you have some commands; I shall hold them most
sacred.’ Forcibly grasping the youth’s hand, he softly said, ‘See in what peace a Christian can
die.’ He spoke with difficulty, and soon expired.” Dr. Johnson states that “Addison had been
tutor to the young Earl, and anxiously, but in vain, endeavoured to check the licentiousness of
his manners. As a last effort, he requested him to come into his room when he lay at the point of
death, hoping that the solemnity of the scene might work upon his feelings. When his pupil
came to receive his last commands, he told him that he had sent for him to see how a christian
could die.”

[5] The second son of the first, and brother of the second, Lord Holland, was Charles James
Fox, much of whose early life was passed at Holland House.
[6] Francis Cleyn was born at Rostock, and was originally in the service of Christian IV. of
Denmark. For a proper education in art he visited Italy, and there became known to Sir Henry
Wotton, by whom he was introduced to Prince Charles, afterwards Charles I. Soon after his
arrival in England he was employed to give designs, “both in history and grotesque,” for the
tapestry manufacture then recently established at Mortlock. At Somerset House he painted a
ceiling of a room near the gallery, with histories and compartments in gold; the entrance of
Wimbledon House he painted in fresco; Bolsover in Nottinghamshire, Stone Park in
Northamptonshire and Carew House at Parson’s Green, were ornamented by him. He also
executed several books for carvers, goldsmiths, &c., “made designs for various artists,” and was
the master of Dobson. His two sons also were esteemed painters. He died in London—“a most
pious man,” according to Evelyn—in 1658.
[7] Whilst mentioning the drama as connected with Holland House, it is worthy of notice
that the tragedy of “Jane Shore” was acted there in the “late Lord Holland’s time” (Dodaley’s
“Old Plays,” vol. xii. p. 345). The late Mr. Fox supported the character of Lord Hastings; his
brother, the General, was Bishop of Ely; Lady Sarah Bunbury, Jane Shore; and Lady Susan
O’Brien, Alicia.
[8] “The name Blickling,” according to Blomefield, “seems to signifie the low meadows at
the Beck.”
[9] Among these odd substitutes for ancient heroes, are carved copies of foot-soldiers of the
time of George III. It would seem as if the Earl of Buckingham—writing in 1765—had actually
contemplated the “improvements” indicated in the following letter. “I have,” he writes,
“determined what to do with the Hall. Some tributary sorrow should, however, be paid to the
nine Worthies—but Hector has lost his spear and his nose; David his harp; Godfrey of Boulogne
his ears; Alexander the Great his highest shoulder; and part of Joshua has fallen in. As the
ceiling is to be raised, eight of them must have gone; and Hector is at all events determined to
leave his niche. You will forgive my replacing them with eight worthies of my own times, whose
figures are not yet essentially mutilated, viz., Dr. Shebbeare, Mr. Wilkes, Dr. Hill, Mr. Glover,
Mr. Deputy Hodges, Mr. Whitfield, Justice Fielding, and Mr. Foote; and as Anne Boleyn was
born at Blickling, it will not be improper to purchase her father Henry, the eighth figure (which
by order is no longer to be exhibited in the Tower), who will fill with credit the space occupied
by the falling Hector.”
[10] We borrow a passage from Mr. Robinson’s “Vitruvius Britannicus,” which conveys a
compliment as justly merited as it is well expressed. “On the resignation of the Duke of Sussex,
the Marquess of Northampton was elevated to the chair of the Royal Society; and if ardent zeal
in the promotion of scientific truth, unaffected affability of manners, liberal and unostentatious
hospitality, and exemplary private character, are deemed qualifications for the blue riband of
science, his lordship’s claim to the distinguished honour must be universally admitted.”
[11] Among the pictures are portraits of Bishop Compton, Sir Stephen Fox, a “conversation
piece,” by West, including the eighth Earl of Northampton, his lady, and two children. There is
also a portrait of Spenser, second earl (in armour), who, as we have seen, devoted himself so
bravely to the royal cause in the civil wars, and was killed at Hopton Heath: at an advanced age
he raised a regiment of foot and a troop of horse at his own expense. Other portraits at Castle
Ashby are, a curious and finely-painted head of Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, who was killed
by Felton. In the Long Gallery are portraits of John Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, and his
countess, painted on panel; these are valuable as examples of the art of the time of Henry VI.
This Talbot was one of the most renowned heroes of his time, having gained no less than forty

battles and skirmishes. At his death he was above eighty years of age. Walpole ranks these
pictures among the most ancient specimens of English painting.
[12] “Kirby Hall is situated in Corby Hundred, about nine miles north-west of Oundle,
partly in the Parish of Bulwick, and partly in that of Gretton—the Church of which contains
several monuments to members of the family of Hatton.”
[13] The family of Hatton is stated to be descended from Ivon, a noble of Norway, whose
sixth son, Wolfaith, obtained the Manor of Hatton, in Cheshire. Sir Christopher Hatton is said to
have danced himself into Court favour; mightily pleasing the fancy of “the virgin Queen” by the
graces of his person; and consequently rising with great rapidity through the several offices of
Captain of the Guard, Vice Chamberlain, Privy Councillor, &c., until, in 1587, he obtained
possession of the seals as Lord Chancellor. He died not long afterwards—and, it is believed, of a
broken heart, in consequence of a demand, on the part of his fickle and heartless mistress, for
the payment of an old debt, which he was unable to discharge. He was a liberal patron of
learning,—one of the worthies of the Elizabethan age; “so great, that his sentence was a law to
the subject; and so wise, that his opinion was an oracle to the Queen.”
[14] The name has been said to be compounded of Bent, an old English word for brow of a
hill, and the Celtic al, or hal (Lat. altus), a termination commonly found in names of hills. The
motto of Benthall, “Tende Bene et alta pete,” seems to allude to this interpretation of the name;
but as, in Domesday Book, the name is spelt “Benhale,” the first syllable may be derived from
the Gaelic word En, or An—water, the letter B being only the prefix importing the article the.
This suggestion receives some weight from the fact that the Benthall estate, and one of the same
name in another part of Shropshire, are washed by a river—the Severn. The derivation of the
second syllable is too plainly correct to be interfered with.
[15] Benthall MSS. Dugdale’s “Monasticon.”
[16] Polyd. Virg.
[17] Heralds’ “Visitations of Salop.”
[18] It is remarkable that a superior seigniory or lordship in this estate was retained by the
Burnell family till so late a period as the close of the reign of Richard III., while the Benthalls,
the subtenants, were lords of the manor, as appears by their descriptions in deeds and on the
court-rolls.
So early as in the reign of Edward III., lords of manors began to neglect the military
services, on condition of which they held their lands under the tenant in capite (in most
instances a powerful baron), who, on his part, owed and neglected services to the king, the
supreme owner of the lands. The rights of the superior or intermediate lords becoming disused,
the lords of manors gradually acquired the tenure which, in the present day, supposes only a
superior right in the sovereign; yet it was not till Henry VII. had grasped the sceptre that the
feudal system of military service was totally suppressed.
In effecting national improvement, that sagacious monarch acted on the just conviction that
his own paid army was better to be relied on than the retainers of his nobles: he wisely
conceived that, having already dethroned their sovereign, they might be little scrupulous of
removing his successor, whose personal pretensions to the throne, though strengthened by his
marriage, were by no means universally admitted.
[19] Buried in the family vault, near the altar of Benthall Chapel.
[20] This gentleman and his wife, Ann, daughter of Piers Cariswall, Esq. of Lilleshall, were
interred in St. Clement’s Chapel, in the south aisle of the parish church of Much Wenlock. There
is a small estate in the parish belonging to their descendants, the Benthalls of Buckfast, in
Devonshire.

[21] Rot. Hund.
[22] At that time the head of the family of Cassey of Wightfield, Cassey Compton, and
Kilcot, in the county of Gloucester.
These manors descended to John Cassey, Chief Baron of the Exchequer in the reign of
Henry IV., and from him to Thomas, the subject of this note, who died while on a visit to his
son-in-law at Benthall, A.D. 1634, and was buried in Wenlock Church.
[23] Hulbert’s “History of Shropshire.”
[24] This tower was erected by one of the family of the Phelips. The ascent to it is so
gradual, that he is said, upon one occasion, to have visited the summit in his coach and four. The
road winds round the hill.
[25] The family suffered considerably, in consequence of their devotion to the royal cause
during the unhappy reign of Charles the First; and, afterwards, their loyalty being unchilled by
their losses, Colonel Richard Phelips united with Colonel Wyndham in secreting, and
subsequently conveying out of the kingdom, the Second Charles.
[26] “Skimmitting, or, as it is called in the north of England, stang-riding, is still kept up in
many parts of the kingdom, for the purpose of exposing to shame and ridicule, the man who has
been guilty of cruelty or infidelity towards his wife.” In the basso-relievo at Montacute, the
wife, accompanied by a crowd of villagers, is represented bestowing a few sound blows with her
shoe upon her faithless partner, and “the artist has with happy effect introduced a church in the
back-ground, to intimate that certain vows and promises which had been there solemnly pledged
ought to have been kept in remembrance.”
[27] “It would appear from the introduction of the elegant screens or door-cases in the
principal living rooms, that the cold draughts of air, caused by the long passages, the extent of
the rooms, and the great size of the windows, must have been felt even in the time of Elizabeth;
these screens could have been made only for warmth and comfort. They are beautifully painted,
and their effect is very quaint and pleasing.”—C. J. Richardson.
[28] On a mural monument in the chancel of Caverswall Church, adjoining that of his father,
which we have engraved, is the following singular inscription to his memory:—
“M.S.
“George Cradock, Esq., (for his great prvdence in yᵉ common lawes well worthy to be beav-
Clarke of yᵉ assizes for this Circvit), did take to wife yᵉ most amiable, most loving Dorothy, yᵉ
davghter of John Savnders, Doctor of Physicke, by whom he had a Pair-royall of incomparable
davghters, to wit, Dorothy, Elizabeth, and Mary.
“It is easie to gvess that he lived in a splendid degree, if I shall bvt recovnt vnto you that

Sʳ. Thomas Slingsby, Baronet, Dorothy
yᵉ Right Honᵇˡᵉ Robt. Lord Cholmondely —Maried— Elizabeth —Coheir.
Sʳ. John Bridgeman, Baronet, Mary

“But! but! to our grief, George Cradock is assavlted by death in yᵉ meridjan of his age, not
far off from his Castle of Caverswal (lately bvilt, even to beavty, by Mathew Cradock, Esq., his
father, who lies inter’d near this place).
“And dying of yᵉ small pox yᵉ 16th of April, 1643, he tooke himselfe to yᵉ private masion of
this tombe, erected for him at yᵉ cost of Dorothy, his obseqviovs wife, where he now rests (vnder
the protection of an Essoine) vntil he shall be svmmon’d to appeare at yᵉ last great and general
Assizes.”

The Sir Thomas Slingsby, of Scriven, Bart., who married Dorothy, the eldest of this “pair-
royal,” was beheaded by Oliver Cromwell.
[29] William Chetwynd, who was Gentleman Usher of the Chamber to Henry the Seventh,
in the ninth year of that king’s reign was barbarously and treacherously assassinated on Tixal
Heath, near Ingestre, by Sir Humphrey Stanley, of Pipe, from motives of jealousy, having
inveigled him from his house by a counterfeit letter. Pennant says:—“It does not appear that
justice overtook the assassin, although his widow perseveringly evoked it.”
[30] The fertility and other natural advantages of “the vale,” and, we may believe, its
picturesque beauties also, in remote times, determined the ancient nobility of Staffordshire to
make it their chosen seat. This, and a lower portion of the river, are adorned with that graceful
bird the swan. Ingestre, and the neighbouring royalties, have had “games of swans”
immemorially. Amongst the distinguishing marks on the beaks of the birds used in 1785 in the
several royalties adjoining the Trent, enumerated by Dr. S. Shaw, we find that of “Earl Talbot,
Ingestre; two notches on the right side.”
[31] Walter Chetwynd, Esq., of Ingestre, the celebrated antiquary, was the son of Walter
Chetwynd, Esq., and married Ann, daughter of Sir Edward Bagot, Bart., August, 1658. He
introduced the learned Dr. Plot, from Oxford, into Staffordshire, to write its Natural History. Dr.
Plot exhibits in his work (1686) a Plan of Ingestre Hall, and gives an account of the rebuilding
of Ingestre church by his patron.
The first person who undertook to write upon the history and antiquities of Staffordshire was
Sampson Erdeswick, Esq., of Sandon, near Ingestre, venerandæ antiquitatis cultor maximus, as
Camden describes him; i. e. an eminent encourager of venerable antiquity. He died in 1603, and
was buried under a handsome monument, having his effigy, “cut to life,” erected by himself in
his lifetime, in Sandon church. His MS. papers fell into the hands of Walter Chetwynd. This
latter gentleman obtained in addition the collections of Mr. Ferrers, of Baddesley, and of
William Burton, the Leicestershire historian, and brother of the Anatomist of Melancholy. To
these he added very large collections of his own. All these MSS., upon the repairing of Ingestre
Hall, were put in a box, for safety, by the Rev. James Milnes, rector, and were unfortunately lost.
They were, however, subsequently found at Rudge; but continued in obscurity, till rediscovered
at Ingestre, when they were placed in the hands of Dr. Stebbing Shaw, the learned and
indefatigable historian of the county, whose premature decease unhappily interrupted his
elaborate work. There is a good portrait of Walter Chetwynd, Esq., the antiquary, by Lely, at
Ingestre Hall.
[32] One member of the Talbot family, Charles Talbot (son of the Lord Chancellor), who
died in 1733, made the tour of Europe with Thomson, the author of the “Seasons,” to whom
Lord Talbot was a liberal patron and kind benefactor.—His poem on “Liberty,” which was
conceived during their travels, opens with an affectionate tribute of sorrow to the memory of his
friend.

“O my lamented Talbot! while with thee,
The Muse gay roved the glad Hesperian round,
And drew th’ inspiring breath of ancient arts;
Ah! little thought she, her returning verse
Should sing our darling subject to thy shade!
And does the mystic veil from mortal beam
Involve those eyes, where every virtue smiled,
And all the father’s candid spirit shone?
The light of reason, pure without a cloud;
Full of the generous heart, the mild regard;
Honour disdaining blemish, cordial faith,
And limpid truth that looks the very soul.”

Thomson also composed a poem “To the memory of Lord Talbot,” which is equally
creditable to the Chancellor and the Poet, and reflects great honour on Lord Talbot’s family, to
whom it is addressed.
[33] The village of West Bromwich is remarkable as the birthplace of Walter Parsons, porter
to King James I., who appears to have been equally distinguished for extraordinary strength and
equanimity of temper. His stature was but little above the common size; yet such was the
prodigious power of his arm, that he could easily “take up two of the tallest yeomen of the guard
and carry them where he pleased, in spite of their attempts to free themselves from his iron
grasp.”
[34] Over the entrance of the Porch leading to the Great Hall from the Court Yard, is a shield
cut in stone, with these seven quarterings:—

1. Tollemache, Argent, a Frett Sable.
2. Joyce Argent on a Chevron Gules, 3 escallops, Or.
3. Joyce Or, a Lion rampant, Azure armed Gules.
4. —— Gules, a Fesse between 3 buckles, Or.
5. Visdeliea Argent, 3 Wolves’ heads, couped Gules.
6. Curzon Ermine a bend checky, Argent and Sable.
7. Peche Argent, a Fesse between 2 Chevrons Gules.
[35] During the lifetime of this Earl, old English hospitality was kept up in a most primitive
style, whenever he was residing at the Hall. The tenants and tradesmen employed by his
Lordship were allowed to visit the Hall whenever they pleased, and many yet living remember
with grateful pleasure the entertainment afforded them there.
[36] The exception should, however, be made in favour of General Thomas Tollemache. In
the Church, there is a sarcophagus of white marble, in which stands, upon a pedestal, a bust, and
behind it an obelisk of reddish marble, surrounded by military trophies. On the face of the
sarcophagus is this inscription:—“Thomas Tollemache, Lieutenant-General (descended of a
family more ancient than the Norman Conquest,) second son of Sir Lionel Tollemache, Bart., by
his wife, Elizabeth Murray, Countess of Dysart in her own right. His natural abilities and first
education were improved by his travels in foreign nations, where he spent several years in the
younger part of his life, in the observation of their genius, customs, politics, and interest; and in
the service of his country, abroad in the field, in which he distinguished himself to such
advantage by his bravery and conduct, that he soon rose to considerable posts in the Army. Upon
the accession of King William III. to the Throne, he was made Colonel of the Coldstream
Regiment of Foot Guards, and soon after advanced to the rank of Lieutenant-General. In 1691,

he exerted himself with uncommon bravery in the passage over the river Shannon, and the
taking of Athlone, in Ireland, and in the battle of Aghrim. In 1693, he attended the King to
Flanders; and at the battle of Landen, against the French, when His Majesty himself was obliged
to retire, he brought off the English Foot with great prudence and success. In 1694, he was
ordered by the King to attempt the destroying of the harbour of Brest in France; but on his
landing at the head of six hundred men, he was so much exposed to the enemy’s fire, that most
of his men were killed, and himself shot through the thigh, of which wound he died a few days
after. Thus fell this brave man, extremely lamented, and not without suspicion of being made a
sacrifice, in this desperate attempt, through envy of some of his pretended friends; and thus
failed a design, which, if it had been undertaken at any time before the French were so well
prepared to receive it, might have been attended with success, and followed with very important
effects.”
[37] These rhymes are curious and interesting, and possess sufficient merit to justify our
devoting to them the space necessary.
I.

Baptized Lyonel Tollemache, my name,
Since Norman’s conquest of unsoyled fame,
Shews my descent from ancestors of worth;
And that my life might not belye my birth,
Their virtues’ track, with heedful steps I trod:
Rightful to men, religious towards God.

Train’d in the law, I gain’d the bar and bench,
Not bent to kindle strife, but rather quench;
Gentle to clients, in my counsels just;
With Norfolk’s great Duke, in no little trust;
Sir Joyce his heir was my fair faithful wife,
Bentley my seat, and seventy years my life.

II.

Heir of my Father’s name, surname, and seat,
Lands, goods, and goodness towards small and great;
By Heaven’s dear blessing on my best endeavour,
In his fair footsteps did I well persevere;
Amongst the best, above the most admir’d,
For all the parts my race and place requir’d.

High sheriff of Suffolk once, of Norfolk twice,
For both approv’d, right, gentle, just and wise;
Frank house, frank heart, free of my purse and port
Both lov’d, and loving towards every sort;
Lord Wentworth’s daughter was my lovely Pheer,
And fourscore, six less, lived I pilgrim here.

III.

My stile and state (least any question should)
My Sire and Grandsire have already told;
My fame and fortune not unlike to theirs,
My life as fair as human frailty bears;
My zeal to God, my love to ev’ry good,
My Saviour knows, his saints have understood.

My many virtues moral and divine,
My liberal hand, my loving heart to mine,
My piety, my pity, pains and care,
My neighbours, tenants, servants, yet declare.
My gentle bride Sir Ambrose Jermyn bred;
My years lack five of half my grandsire’s thread.

IV.

Here, with his father, sleeps Sir Lyonel,
Knight, Baronet, all honours worthy well;
So well the acts of truth, his life exprest
His elders’ virtues, and excell’d their best;
His prudent bearing in his public place,
Suffolk’s high sheriff twice, in sixteen years space.

His zeal to God, and towards ill, severity;
His temperance, his justice, his sincerity;
His native mildness towards great and small,
His faith, his love to friends, wife, children all,
In life and death; made him belov’d and dear,
To God and man, happy in Heaven and here.

Happy in soul and body, goods and name;
Happy in wedlock with a noble dame,
Lord Crumwell’s daughter; happy in his heir,
Whose spring of virtues sprouts so young and fair:
Whose dear affection, to his founders debtor;
Built them this tomb, but in his heart a better.

[38] Hengrave is called in Domesday Book “Hemegretha.” In several ancient deeds it is
variously spelt Hemegreth, Hemegrede, Hemegrave, and Hengrave.
[39] This information we condense, chiefly from a costly volume in quarto, published by the
late John Gage, Esq., F.S.A., entitled “The History and Antiquities of Hengrave.”
[40] His portrait, by Holbein, is among the family portraits at Hengrave. It is that of a fine
portly citizen, with a stern, but intellectual, countenance. He was Sheriff of London in 1533
having been previously knighted. His mercantile transactions were principally carried on “at the
cloth fairs or staples holden at Antwerp, Middleburg, and other places in Flanders, by the
Merchant Adventurers, to which company he belonged.” His wealth must have been enormous,
for he purchased estates in the counties of Suffolk, Devon, Dorset, Somerset, and Nottingham.
[41] It is said that Sir George Trenchard, Sir John Gage, and Sir William Hervey, each
solicited at the same time the hand of the wealthy heiress; and that, to keep peace between the

rivals, she threatened the first aggressor with her perpetual displeasure; “humorously telling
them that, if they would wait, she would have them all in their turns—a promise which the lady
actually performed.” Her first husband was Sir George Trenchard, her second Sir John Gage,
and her third Sir William Hervey. She left issue only by her second husband.
[42] Several documents relative to “the raising of Hengrave” are still preserved. Among
others, is the contract with John Eastowe, the mason, to “macke a house at Hengrave of all
manor of mason’s worck,” &c. &c. “The said John must have for ye sayd worck, and finishing
thereof, iic. li. (£200), to be paid, x li. when he begins the foundacyon thereof, and afterwards
always as xx li. worth of worke is wrought by estymacion.” The plasterer’s contract is for £116
“of lawful money of Ingland.” Among other items are these—“For a lode of tymber, vi s.;” “The
glasyar, for making of all the glass wyndowes of the manour place, with the solar, and for xiii
skuttchens with armes, iiii li.” (four pounds.)
[43] Burnet gives a character of the first Earl of Dysart by no means flattering. “He was well
turned for a Court; very insinuating, but very false; and of so revengeful a temper that rather
than any of the counsels given by his enemies should succeed, he would have revealed them,
and betrayed both the King and them. He had one particular quality, that when he was drunk,
which was very often, he was upon a most exact reserve, though he was pretty open at all other
times.”
[44] The Duchess of Lauderdale was one of the “busiest” women of the busy age in which
she lived. Burnet insinuates, that during the life-time of her first husband “she had been in a
correspondence with Lord Lauderdale that had given occasion for censure.” She succeeded in
persuading him that he was indebted for his escape after “Worcester fight” to “her intrigues with
Cromwell.” “She was a woman,” continues the Historian, “of great beauty, but of far greater
parts. She had a wonderful quickness of apprehension, and an amazing vivacity in conversation.
She had studied not only divinity and history, but mathematics and philosophy. She was violent
in every thing she set about; a violent friend, but a much more violent enemy. She had a restless
ambition, lived at a vast expense, and was ravenously covetous; and would have stuck at
nothing by which she might compass her ends.” Upon the accession of her husband to political
power, after the Restoration, “all applications were made to her; she took upon her to determine
everything; she sold all places; and was wanting in no methods that could bring her money,
which she lavished out in a most profuse vanity.”
[45] Lysons, writing more than half a century ago, describes the furnishing of the Mansion
in terms which suit exactly to describe its present state. “It is,” he says, “a curious specimen of a
mansion of the age of Charles the Second. The ceilings are painted by Verrio, and the rooms are
ornamented with that massy magnificence of decoration then in fashion. The furniture is very
rich; even the bellows and brushes, in some of the apartments, are of solid silver, or of silver
filigree. In the closet adjoining the bed-chamber, which was the Duchess of Lauderdale’s, still
remains the great chair in which she used to sit and read; it has a small desk fixed to it, and her
cane hangs by the side. The furniture of the whole room is such that one might almost fancy her
Grace to be still an inhabitant of the house.”
[46] The ministry, popularly known as the Cabal, came into power at the latter end of the
year 1667, when Clarendon was turned out of office, and impeached by Parliament. That
minister had raised a host of enemies at Court, by preserving a state and decorum foreign to
their reigning habits. Evelyn says, “He kept up the form and substance of things in the nation
with more solemnity than some would have had. The Parliament had accused him, and he had
enemies at Court—especially the buffoons and ladies of pleasure—because he thwarted them,
and stood in their way.” There were, however, grave charges brought against him as Chancellor,
and he was obliged to fly the kingdom, dying an exile in France about seven years afterwards.
The ministry that succeeded him consisted of five noblemen, the initials of whose names formed

the word Cabal, to which their actions in many instances too well answered. These noblemen
were Sir Thomas Clifford, first commissioner of the Treasury, afterwards Lord Clifford and high
treasurer; the Earl of Arlington, secretary of state; the Duke of Buckingham; Lord Ashley,
chancellor of the Exchequer, afterwards Earl of Shaftesbury and lord chancellor; and the Duke
of Lauderdale. During the ascendancy of these ministers, Charles grew more reckless than ever.
As none of them possessed the power Clarendon had of restraining him, he became much more
despotic, treated Parliament more contemptuously, and allowed himself to become the pensioner
of the French king.
The passing of the Test Act in 1673 first disunited “the Cabal,” on which occasion Clifford,
the Popish lord treasurer, resigned his staff. Soon after the Prorogation of Parliament, on the
fourth of November in the same year, the King took the great Seal from Shaftesbury, and gave it
to Sir Heneage Finch, as Lord Keeper. The other members of the Cabal ministry, Arlington,
Buckingham, and Lauderdale, were in seeming odium at court; and Clifford was unexpectedly
succeeded by Sir Thomas Osborn, who was created Lord Treasurer and Earl of Danby; he
became in effect prime minister, and the Danby administration was in many respects more
iniquitous than that of the Cabal.
[47] “Manuscripts and other rare documents illustrative of some of the more minute
particulars of History, Biography, and Manners, from the reign of Henry VIII., to that of James
I., preserved in the muniment room of James More Molyneux, Esq., at Loseley House, in
Surrey. Edited by Alfred John Kempe, F.S.A., 1836.” This curious and very interesting volume
contains many singular documents, “connected with passages in history and biography, with the
entertainment of the Court, with the internal regulations of the magistracy, and in some instances
with the minor relations of domestic life”—affording very considerable help to arrive at correct
ideas and just estimates of the state of society and political government in the 16th and early part
of the 17th centuries. The editor intimates that the manuscripts were discovered in the muniment
room at Loseley, “of which the key had been lost, and its existence disregarded during an
interval of 200 years.” One of its earliest documents is a summons to Christopher More, to come
to London to welcome Anne of Cleves, with six servants in his company, to ride amongst other
gentlemen in “cotes of black velvet, with cheines of gold about their neckes, and with gownes of
velvet or some other good silke for their chainge.”
[48] “In 1511, a dispute arose between the college on the one part, and the mayor, burgesses,
and parishioners on the other, as to the liability of their respective bodies to repair the transepts
and tower, with the bell and other appurtenances belonging to the latter. By consent of the
parties, the point at issue was referred to the arbitration of Thomas, Earl of Arundel, and Robert
Sherburne, Bishop of Chichester; and an award was soon after published, by which the burthen
was equally divided between the college and the town. To the former, the duty of repairing the
south transept, commonly called ‘the chancel of the parish,’ was assigned; to the latter, the
obligation of attending in the same manner to the north transept; while the expense of upholding
the tower, and the emoluments to be derived from the use of its bells, were thenceforth to be
shared equally by both.”
[49] At the suppression, it was endowed with a yearly revenue of 263l. 14s. 9d.
[50] By this Thomas Fitz-Alan and his wife Beatrix was founded a hospital called “Maison
Dieu,” for the maintenance of as many poor as the revenues with which it was endowed, would
support. At the Dissolution, these were valued at 42l. 3s. 8d. per annum.
[51] In one of the chapel windows is the figure of a swallow on the wing, which is
considered to intimate the original of the name of the castle; “for history and geography,” says
Mr. Tierney, “the realms of fancy and romance, have all been explored in order to discover its
etymon.” One author has amused himself with a rebus founded on the resemblance between the
words Hirondelle and Arundel; and “it is not improbable,” writes Dr. Beattie, “that the migratory

bird, here introduced, may have been selected as an appropriate emblem for the chapel window.
The conjecture is, at least, as plausible as another that has been advanced; namely, that Arundel
is derived from Hirondelle—the name of Bevis’s Horse.”
[52] This Countess of Derby was the daughter of Sir William Morley, K.B., and her mother
was a daughter of Sir John Denham, the Poet. On the north side of the Chancel is a marble
Monument to her memory. She died in 1752, at the age of 85. She was distinguished by
charitable deeds and on her tomb is represented sitting under an oak, relieving poor travellers,
and pointing to a building she had founded in the Parish—a Hospital endowed in 1741, as the
inscription informs us, “the Alms-houses for the habitation and support of poor aged and infirm
women,—the School for the habitation and maintenance of a school-master, and the education
of poor boys and girls—the women and children to be chosen out of the parishes of Boxgrove,
East Lavant, and Tangmere.”
[53] “This Adeliza,” writes Camden, “was daughter to Godfrey Barbatus, of Lovaine, who
had for her dowrie Arundell Castle and all the forfeited lands of Robert de Belismo, the Earle,
when the King (Henry the First) took her for his second wife.
“In her commendation, a certaine Englishman in that unlearned age wrote some unlearned
verses,” of which these lines are the commencement:—

“When Muses nine thy beauties rare (faire Adeliza Queene
Of England) readie are to tell, they starke astonied beene;
What booteth thee so beautifull, gold-croune or pretious stone,
Dimme is the diadem to thee, the gemme hath beautie none.”

After the King’s death she married William de Albini; “who, taking part with Maude the
Empresse against King Stephen, and defending his castle (of Arundel) against him, was, in
recompense of his good service, by the saide Maude, the Empresse and Ladie of Englishmen
(for this title she used), created Earle of Arundel; and her son, King Henry, gave the whole Rape
of Arundel to that William, to hold of him by the service of fourscore and foure knights’ fees and
one halfe.” During her contest with Stephen, Maud was lodged in the Castle of Arundel, which
the King besieged. The Earl, however—or, it is said, his Countess—by diplomacy, contrived to
facilitate the escape of the Empress to Bristol, from which she took shipping, and returned to the
Continent.
“A small Chamber, over the inner gate of Arundel Castle, enjoys the traditionary fame of
having been her sleeping-room, during her sojourn there. It is a low square apartment, such as
the Castellan might have occupied during a siege.” The Bedstead on which the Empress is
reported to have slept is still preserved there. “Its massive wallnut posts are elaborately carved,
but so worm-eaten that, unless tenderly scrutinized, the wood would be apt to fall into powder in
the hands of the visitor.” We have quoted this brief account from Dr. Beattie’s History of
Arundel. From the engraving that accompanies it, there can be little doubt that this relic is no
older than the reign of Henry the 8th, if so old.
[54] Hutton, in his “History of Birmingham,” states that Sir Lister Holt, taking advantage of
his brother’s necessities, induced him to cut off the entail, in order that the estate might pass
away from his family. Thus, he adds, “an ancient race, which sprung from the anvil, and sported
upon an estate of 12,000l. a-year, is now sunk into its pristine obscurity; for its head, Thomas
Holt (perhaps Sir Thomas), at this day (1812) thumps at the anvil for bread, in the fabrication of
spades—as amiable a man as any of his race; and the only baronet who ever shaped a shovel
may take a melancholy ramble for many miles upon the lands of his ancestors, but cannot call a
single foot of it his own.”

[55] For the several drawings which accompany and illustrate this account of Aston Hall and
the church, we are indebted to Mr. Allen Edward Everitt, an excellent artist of Birmingham.
[56] Richard de Beauchamp was born on the 28th of January. 1381, and succeeded his father
in the Earldom of Warwick in 1401. At the coronation of Henry IV., he was created a Knight of
the Bath, being then only 19 years of age. “When scarce more than a youth,” he suppressed the
rebellion in Wales, under Owen Glendower, whose standard he took in battle. During the whole
of the reign of the fourth Henry, he was one of the most prominent, honourable, and useful
“pillars of the state;” and, at the coronation of Henry the 5th, he was constituted Lord High
Steward; in 1415, he was declared Captain of Calais, and Governor of the Marches of Picardy:
subsequently, he became tutor to the young Prince Henry, and on the death of the Duke of
Bedford—14 Hen. VI.—he was appointed Regent of France, and Lieutenant-General of the
King’s forces in that realm and the Duchy of Normandy. He died in the Castle of Rouen, April
30, 1439—17 Henry VI. His body was conveyed to England, and deposited in the Church of St.
Mary, “in a fair chest made of stone.” until the Chapel was prepared for its reception.
[57] Thomas de Beauchamp died of the pestilence at Calais, on the 13th of November, 1370,
at the age of 63. He had retired from public life, but hearing that the English army, under the
Duke of Lancaster, lay in camp, perishing from famine and disease, and refused to fight the
French, by whom they were surrounded, he instantly embarked for France, where his “bare
appearance so alarmed the enemy, that they commenced an instant retreat.” Recumbent figures
of the Earl and his Countess—finely sculptured—are laid upon the monument which occupies
the centre of the choir. A fine brass of his second son, Thomas, and Margaret, his wife, was
preserved from the fire of 1694, and is now placed against the east wall of the transept, and near
the entrance to the Chapel. It is a beautiful specimen of the costume of the period, and has been
engraved in Waller’s recent publication.
[58] Dugdale has preserved a curious and interesting document in connexion with the
Chapel, being the “Covenants of Agreement between the Executors of Richard Beauchamp, Earl
of Warwick, viz. Thomas Huggeford, Nich. Rodye, and Wm. Berkswell, and the severall Artists
that were employed in the most exquisite parts of its fabrick and ornaments—as also of the
costly Tombe before specified, bearing date xiii Junii, 32 H. 6.”
These are the covenants of John Essex, Marbler; Will. Austen, Founder; Thomas Stevyns,
Coppersmith; Bartholomew Lambespring, Dutchman and Goldsmith. John Prudde, of
Westminster, Glasier, further covenanted to glase all the windows in the new Chappell in
Warwick, with Glasse beyond the Seas, and with no Glasse of England; and that in the finest
wise, with the best, cleanest, and strongest glasse of beyond the Sea that may be had in England,
and of the finest colours of blew, yellow, red, purpure, sanguine, and violet, and of all other
colours that shall be most necessary, and best to make rich and embellish the matters, Images,
and stories that shall be delivered and appointed by the said Executors by patterns in paper,
afterwards to be newly traced and pictured by another Painter in rich colour at the charges of the
said Glasier. All which proportions the said John Prudde must make perfectly to fine, glase,
eneylin it, and finely and strongly set it in lead and souder, as well as any Glasse is in England.
Of white Glasse, Green Glasse, black Glase, he shall put in as little as shall be needfull for the
shewing and setting forth of the matters, Images, and storyes. And the said Glasier shall take
charge of the same Glasse, wrought and to be brought, to Warwick, and set up there, in the
windows of the said Chapell; the Executors paying to the said Glasier for every foot of Glasse ii
s. and so for the whole xci li. i s. x d.
[59] While standing among the graves of generations of the family, and noting down the
words in which were recorded their claims to live in memory, we heard suddenly from a young
woman who guided us to the church—and who conveyed the sad intelligence with tearful eyes
—that on the very morning of our visit another of the Lucys had been summoned to take his

place among the dead. George Lucy, Esq., the Lord of Charlecote, died on the 1st of July, 1845
—somewhat suddenly; leaving, however, a son, not yet of age, to inherit the honours and
estates. The circumstance was to us peculiarly unfortunate; for Mr. Lucy had courteously offered
to supply us with all the information in his power to give, concerning the neighbourhood and its
several associations. We found that his loss was felt in the cottages almost as bitterly as in the
mansion; and obtained certain assurance that he, like his progenitors, had been a generous
landlord, and a kind friend to the poor.
[60] The painting is so well described by Washington Irving that we quote his words:—
“The picture gives a lively idea of the costume and manners of the time. Sir Thomas is
dressed in ruff and doublet; white shoes with roses in them, and has a peaked yellow, or, as
Master Slender would say, a cane-coloured beard. His lady is seated on the opposite side of the
picture, in wide ruff and long stomacher, and the children have a most venerable stiffness and
formality of dress. Hounds and spaniels are mingled in the family group; a hawk is seated on his
perch in the foreground, and one of the children holds a bow; all intimating the knight’s skill in
hunting, hawking, and archery, so indispensable to an accomplished gentleman in those days.”
[61] It is now generally admitted, however, that the lines beginning—

“A parliament member, a justice of peace,
At home a poor scarecrow, in London an asse,”

were—neither the whole nor a part—written by Shakspere, the lampoon containing no
indications of genius; it is a libel on the memory of the poet to assert that they were the offspring
of his mind—to say nothing of the “poorspite” they would have manifested,—a feeling totally
away from so great a soul. The story of Shakspere’s early transgression and its consequences is
thus related by Rowe: “An extravagance that he was guilty of first forced him out of his country,
and that way of living which he had taken up; and though it seemed at first to be a blemish upon
his good manners, and a misfortune to him, yet it afterwards happily proved the occasion of
exerting one of the greatest geniuses that ever was known in dramatic poetry. He had, by a
misfortune common enough to young fellows, fallen into ill company, and, amongst them, some
that made a frequent practice of deer-stealing, engaged him more than once in robbing a park
that belonged to Sir Thomas Lucy, of Charlecote, near Stratford; for this he was prosecuted by
that gentleman, as he thought somewhat too severely; and, in order to revenge that ill-usage, he
made a ballad upon him.” That Shakspere engaged in a frolic similar to the one related of him, is
by no means improbable; freaks of the kind are common enough to “young fellows;” and
although it is impossible to imagine that the poet took part in this, from any motive other than
that love of risk and adventure inseparable from great minds in the bud, we may readily believe
tradition to be in the main correct. That Sir Thomas Lucy was not a man of even poor
understanding is sufficiently proved by the epitaph to the memory of his wife.
[62] Mr. Wheeler, a most intelligent gentleman of Stratford, who has given much time and
thought to all subjects connected with Shakspere’s history,—and by whom we had the advantage
of being accompanied to the church—directed our attention to the fact, that formerly a charnel-
house adjoined the chancel, from which there was a communicating door. Here the bones of the
neglected or forgotten were gathered:

“The vault
To whose foul mouth no healthsome air comes in,
* * * * * * an ancient receptacle,
Where for these many hundred years, the bones
Of all my buried ancestors are packed.”

And it is by no means unlikely that the frequent contemplation of a scene so humiliating, and of
objects so revolting, may have induced the anathema,

“Cvrst be he yt moves my bones.”

[63] It was part of the plot of the conspirators implicated in the Gunpowder Plot to hasten
into Warwickshire, seize the person of the Princess Elizabeth, daughter of James I., and proclaim
her Queen; and, on the discovery of the plot, they did so “hasten into Warwickshire” (it is
surmised to Combe Abbey, where probably the princess then was); but the vigilance of Sir John
Harrington secured her from their hands. In a work published in 1833—“Lives of Eminent and
Illustrious Englishmen,” edited by J. G. Cunningham—we find the following interesting
particulars relative to the son of this Lord Harrington:—
“John, Lord Harrington, born 1591, died 1613, was eldest son of that Lord Harrington to
whose care King James committed the education of his daughter Elizabeth. While a boy, he
spoke French and Italian with fluency, and was distinguished for the extent, variety, and
accuracy of his learning. During a tour which he made on the Continent, he is said to have
excited the deadly enmity of the Jesuits by his ardent attachment to the reformed doctrines, and
by his bold and eager avowal of them in public; and it was supposed his premature death was
occasioned by poison, administered during his residence abroad; but it is extremely probable the
whole of this statement may be referred to the violent religious prejudices and antipathies of the
times. On succeeding to the family title and estates, he honourably discharged all the debts
which his father had contracted by his magnificent style of housekeeping. He was eminently
pious, spending great part of the day in religious meditation and exercises, and devoting the
tenth part of his income to charitable purposes.” He died in the twenty-second year of his age,
and his estate descended to his two sisters, Lucy, Countess of Bedford, and Anne, wife of Sir
Robert Chichester.”
[64] Mr. Richardson makes the following observations on this controverted point: “Great
portion of the present building was raised by Lord Harrington; of the ancient monastic pile a
portion of the cloisters only remains; these form a fine corridor, which ranges along the lower
division of the building. On the west side of the house is a large addition, said to be by Inigo
Jones, but which is more probably the work of Captain William Winde, the pupil of Sir
Balthazar Gerbier; at least, it is ascribed to him by Horace Walpole (see his ‘Anecdotes,’ vol. iii.
p. 169, Dallaway’s edition).”
[65] The Princess Elizabeth was married to the Elector Palatine at the early age of sixteen.
Her virtues, talents, and sweetness of temper, combined with exceeding gaiety of disposition,
together with her personal charms, made her almost an object of idolatry with the cavaliers of
her age. She was usually styled “the queen of hearts;” and it was to her that Sir Henry Wotton
addressed the elegant lines commencing—

“You meaner beauties of the night,
That weaklie satisfie our eies,
More by your number than your lighte,
Like common people of the skies,
What are you when the moon doth rise?”

Immediately after her marriage to the Elector, they proceeded to their palace at Heidelberg,
which became the focus of the chivalry of the period.
This scene of their enjoyment and happiness they quitted when the Elector became king of
Bohemia, and thenceforward evil destiny pursued their steps. The deposed sovereign died of a
broken heart, at the early age of thirty-six; and after his death the queen remained at the Hague,
living in privacy and poverty, but exerting the energies of her fine mind to educate her children,
of whom she had several. The management of her affairs she confided entirely to her gallant
defender the Earl of Craven, who had entered the military service of the states to be near her,
and to whom she is understood to have been privately married. On the Restoration she was
invited by her nephew, Charles II., to pass the remainder of her life in England, a proposal which
she gladly accepted. She arrived in London on the 17th of May, 1661, with Lord Craven, and
took up her residence at his house in Drury Lane, where she remained till the following
February, on the 8th of which month she removed to Leicester House, and died there on the
13th, only five days after she had entered it. She was buried in Westminster Abbey, in a vault
made for the interment of her brother Henry, prince of Wales.
That her ambition principally induced the downfall of her husband, there is little doubt. On
this subject we borrow an eloquent passage from Mrs. Jamieson: “One of the most interesting
monuments of Heidelberg, at least to an English traveller, is the elegant triumphal arch raised by
the Palatine Frederick V., in honour of his bride—this very Elizabeth Stuart. I well remember
with what self-complacency and enthusiasm our chief walked about in a heavy rain, examining,
dwelling upon every trace of this celebrated and unhappy woman. She had been educated at his
country seat; and one of the avenues of his magnificent park yet bears her name. On her fell a
double portion of the miseries of her fated family. She had the beauty and the wit, the gay spirits
the elegant tastes, the kindly disposition of her grandmother, Mary of Scotland; her very virtues
as a wife and woman, not less than her pride and feminine prejudices, ruined herself, her
husband, and her people. When Frederick hesitated to accept the crown of Bohemia, his spirited
wife exclaimed, ‘Let me rather eat dry bread at a king’s table than feast at the board of an
elector.’
[66] The legend of Guy of Warwick was extremely popular in the middle ages; and his
encounter with the Danish champion Colbrand, as well as his victory over the Dun Cow, was the
favourite subject of the wandering minstrel. Dugdale has given the narrative of his battle with
Colbrand, which he seems inclined to believe to be true in the main features, although “the
monks may have sounded out his praises hyperbolically.” According to him, “in the 3 year of
King Athelstan, A.D. 826, the Danes having invaded England cruelly wasted the countrys where
they marcht, so that there was scarce a Town or Castle that they had not burnt or destroyed
almost as far as Winchester,” where the King resided, and to whom they sent a message,
requiring him to resign his crown to their generals, holding his power at their hands, and paying
them yearly tribute for the privilege of ruling; or, that the whole dispute for the kingdom be
determined in a single combat, by two champions, for both sides. The King having chosen the
latter alternative, enjoins a fast for three days, and in great anguish of heart that Guy, the famous
warrior, is absent on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, prays Heaven for assistance. An Angel
appears to the King as he lies on his bed, and directs him to arise early on the morrow, and take
two bishops with him to the North gate of the city, and stay there “till the hour of Prime,” until

the poor people and pilgrims arrive, among whom he must choose a champion, and the choice
must fall on him who goes barefooted, with a wreath of white roses on his head. The King goes,
and meets the Pilgrim, accosts him, and asks his championship, which he hesitates to give,
excusing himself on the ground of his weakness with much travel, and exhorts him to seek a
fitter help. To this the King bitterly answers, “I had but one valiant knight, which was Earl of
Warwick, called Guy, and he had a courageous servant, named Sir Heraud de Ardene; would to
God I had him here, for then should this duel be soon undertaken, and the war finished, and as
he spake these words the tears fell from his eyes.” The Pilgrim is moved, and ultimately
consents, and after three weeks spent in prayer and preparation, the battle begins. Colbrand
“came so weightily harnessed that his horse could scarce carry him, and before him a cart loaded
with Danish axes, great clubs with knobs of iron, squared bars of steel, lances, and iron hooks,
to pull his adversary to him.” The giant uses a bar of steel in the combat, which lasts the whole
day—Guy in the end proving victorious, and taking a farewell of the King to whom he declares
himself, goes towards Warwick, and thence to a hermit in its neighbourhood, living with him till
his death, and succeeding him in his cell until his own decease. The spot is still pointed out, and
bears the name of Guy’s Cliff.
But this is not the only Giant story connected with the family. Their well-known crest or
cognisance is said to come from one Morvidus, an Earl of Warwick in the days of King Arthur,
“who being a man of great valour slew a mighty giant in a single duell, which gyant encountered
him with a young tree pulled up by the root, the boughs being snag’d from it; in token whereof,
he and his successors, earles of Warwick, in the time of the Brittons, bore a ragged staff of silver
in a sable shield for their cognisance.” Such were the old fables with which our ancient family
histories were obscured, or rendered romantic and wonderful to the subordinate classes.
[67] From the top of Guy’s Tower, ascended by 133 steps, the view is most fine and most
extensive. Far stretching in the distance are seen the tall spires of the Churches at Coventry;
nearer is the ruined Castle of Kenilworth; still nearer, are Guy’s Cliff and Blacklow Hill, famous
in legend and story; Leamington appears lying at our feet; while “Stratford-on-the-Avon” seems
almost “within arms-reach;” far off are the hills of Shropshire; on all sides are fertile plains, of
seemingly illimitable extent, with here and there dark woods and forests; the Panorama is
inconceivably beautiful and grand.
[68] The following legend is given by Dugdale, as extracted from a MS. penned about the
time of Edward IVth:—“Hugh the son of one Richard, holding the lordship of Hatton and
likewise this place of Wroxhall, of Henry earl of Warwick, was a man of great stature; which
Hugh going to warfare in the Holy Land was taken prisoner, and kept in great hardship for 7
years: at length he addressed his prayers to St. Leonard, the patron of his church, who appeared
to him in a dream, in the habit of a black monk, and bade him arise and go home and found at
his Church a house of nuns of St. Benet’s order. He treated it as a dream, but on its repetition
joyfully made a vow to God and S. Leonard that he would perform his commands: which vow
was no sooner made than he was miraculously carried thence with his fetters, and set in Wroxall
woods, not far from his own house, yet knew not where he was, until a shepherd of his own
accidentally found him, and though much affrighted (in respect of his being overgrown with
hair), after some communication discovered all to him. His lady and children being apprised of
the circumstance, came forthwith to him, but believed not that he was her husband till he
shewed her a piece of a ring that had been broken between them. Having given thanks to God,
our Lady, and S. Leonard, and praying for some divine revelation as to the site for his
monastery, he was specially directed by certain stones pitched into the ground in the very place
where the altar was afterwards set. On its completion two of his daughters were made nuns
therein, one of the nuns of Wilton being fetched to direct them in their rule of S. Benedict.”
[69] Extract from a MSS. written about 1690, by Dr. Markhouse, a prebendary of Carlisle,
upon the “Deanery of Westmorland,” and containing much curious information upon

ecclesiastical matters in that county.
[70] “Sir William Stirkland in the reign of King John or Henry III. married Elizabeth, only
daughter and heiress of Ralph D’Aincourt and his wife Helen.”
“This piece of sculpture is one of the earliest instances of the quartering of arms, and is a
curious example of the preference given to the heiress with whom the family had become allied,
the arms of D’Aincourt being placed first—a circumstance which often occurred at that early
period of heraldic art. The quartered coat was not in use before the time of Edward III.”
[71] “The family is a branch of the Howards, Dukes of Norfolk: the first Earl was only son
of the fourth Duke of Norfolk by his second marriage, and was a distinguished naval
commander temp. Elizabeth. In 1605 this peer was employed in the search about the houses of
Parliament, which terminated in the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot; in 1613 he was Lord
High Treasurer of England. His second son was the first Earl of Berkshire.”—Dodd’s Peerage.
[72] “The reason why the name of Fountains was given to this Abbey is a matter of some
doubt. It is not an improbable conjecture that the monks might think it conducive to their
honour, and that of their house, to give it the appellation of the place where their founder, St.
Bernard, drew his first breath—Fountaines in Burgundy. This opinion is also corroborated by
the consideration that no remarkable springs break out on this spot which could have given rise
to the appellation. But the learned and ingenious historian of Craven, Whitaker, has given
another derivation of the word. Skell, the rivulet that washes its walls, signifies a fountain; and
he observes that the first name assigned to this house was the Abbey of Skeldale; but the monks,
who always wrote in Latin, translated it ‘De Fontibus;’ and afterwards, when the original name
was forgotten, it was translated ‘Fountains.’ ”
[73] George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, died at a small inn at Kirby-Moorside, on the
15th April, 1687. He was buried in the churchyard, but the precise spot is unknown. The
following is a literal extract from the register which records his burial:—

“1687, April 17. Gorges vilaus Lord dooke of bookingam.”

He must have gone to the grave unattended except by the parish officials. The Earl of Arran
accidentally passing by the inn while he was dying, gave, indeed, directions to see him
“decently interred.” But the memory of his grave has faded; there is not only no stone to
preserve his name, but even tradition cannot point out the spot upon which to place it, so that his
ashes may be covered by a poor monument. The reader will recall the famous lines of Pope:—

“In the worst inn’s worst room,” &c.

The room is still shewn to the curious; it is a small and poor chamber, not the “worst” in the
house, although a strange contrast to the princely halls the licentious duke had so long inhabited:
—

“No wit to flatter left of all his store,
No fool to laugh at, which he valued more;
There, victor of his health, his fortune, friends,
And fame, this lord of useless thousands ends.”

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BARONIAL
HALLS, AND ANCIENT PICTURESQUE EDIFICES OF ENGLAND;
VOL. 1 OF 2 ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright royalties.
Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license,
apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and
trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not
be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of
the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project
Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may
use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative
works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks
may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically
ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S.
copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

T HE F UL L P ROJE CT GUT E NBE RG™ L I CE NS E
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic
work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept
all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic works in your possession. If
you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this
agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom
you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the

collection of Project Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works
in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project
Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can easily comply with
the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format
with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it
without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which
the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase
“Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with

this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located
in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the
country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived
from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United
States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or
providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”
associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with
the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain
permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide
access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official

version posted on the official Project Gutenberg website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of
obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided
that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth
in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in
Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend
considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and
proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the
Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be
stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete,
inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -
Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH
OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES

EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return
the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that
provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu
of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a
refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If
any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law
of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly
from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a)

distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b) alteration,
modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work,
and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals
and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely
available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and
permanent future for Project Gutenberg and future generations. To
learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and
the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state
of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue
Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is
64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S.
federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza
#516, Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact

links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable
effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have
not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including
how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back