The Baronial Halls, and Ancient Picturesque Edifices of England; Vol. 1 of 2
Date: 2020-10-17T00:00:00+00:00
Keywords: Historic buildings -- England

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Baronial Halls, and Ancient Picturesque Edifices of England; Vol. 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.

CONTENTS OF VOLUME I.

HOLLAND HOUSE | Middlesex | From a Drawing by | C. J. Richardson, F.S.A.
HOLLAND HOUSE, INTERIOR | —— | —— | C. J. Richardson, 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 CHAMBER | Somersetshire | —— | C. J. Richardson, 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, Warwick | —— | —— | George Cattermole.
CHARLECOTE | —— | —— | J. G. Jackson.
CHARLECOTE, INTERIOR | —— | —— | J. G. Jackson.
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.

HOLLAND HOUSE,

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.”

Considerable 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.

BLICKLING HALL,

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.

BURGHLEY HOUSE,

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.

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.

Entering the court, the beauties of the architecture become apparent. The appended engraving represents the entrance from the courtyard. 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

CASTLE ASHBY,

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.

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.

From this point the church is an object of much beauty in the landscape, and being partially screened 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

KIRBY HALL,

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.

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.

WOLLATTON HALL,

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.

BENTHALL HALL,

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 denominated Elizabethan, affords an example of the domestic architecture 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

PITCHFORD HALL,

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

MONTACUTE,

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.

CAVERSWALL CASTLE,

STAFFORDSHIRE.

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

sycamores, 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.

INGESTRIE HALL,

STAFFORDSHIRE.

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.

THE OAK HOUSE, WEST BROMWICH,

STAFFORDSHIRE.

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.

THROWLEY HALL,

STAFFORDSHIRE.

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.

TRENTHAM HALL,

STAFFORDSHIRE.

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 afterwards came into the possession 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.

xHELMINGHAM HALL,

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 understand, even to this day, raised every night. The appended print exhibits the picturesque 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 bareheaded, 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.

HENGRAVE HALL,

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.

WEST STOW HALL,

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 HOUSE,

SURREY.

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.

LOSELEY HOUSE,

SURREY.

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 Eighth Henry, bought by Christopher More, Esq., whose grandfather was Thomas More, of Norton, 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 Receiver-General and Treasurer to Henry Prince of Wales. The last male heir of the Mores 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.

ARUNDEL CHURCH,

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 Monks, who continued to conduct the establishment for nearly three centuries, 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.

BOXGROVE CHURCH,

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 composed.

The sepulchral remains in the Church of Boxgrove are remarkable, and worthy of investigation, 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.

ASTON HALL,

WARWICKSHIRE.

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.

BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL,

WARWICK.

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.

CHARLECOTE,

WARWICKSHIRE.

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 “threatened” Shakspere with punishment for deer-stealing, and is said to have been the object of a lampoon 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.”

Except the effigy, there is no tribute of any kind to the memory of Sir Thomas himself. 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.

COMBE ABBEY,

WARWICKSHIRE.

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.
A D 1643
Re Di Boenia
Æ S 17.”

From thence, passing a small ante-room, which contains a most curious picture of the “Decollation of John the Baptist,”

said to be by Albert Durer, the long 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.

WARWICK CASTLE,

WARWICKSHIRE.

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.

WROXHALL ABBEY,

WARWICKSHIRE.

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.

BROUGHAM HALL,

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. Cunegonde 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.

SIZERGH HALL,

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.

CHARLTON HOUSE,

WILTSHIRE.

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

THE DUKE’S HOUSE,

WILTSHIRE.

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

WESTWOOD HOUSE,

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

FOUNTAINS HALL,

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.

HELMSLEY HALL,

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, | —Maried— | Dorothy | —Coheir.
yᵉ Right Honᵇˡᵉ Robt. Lord Cholmondely | Elizabeth
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

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE

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

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

Table of Contents

- THE BARONIAL HALLS,

- CONTENTS OF VOLUME I.

- HOLLAND HOUSE, MIDDLESEX.

- BLICKLING HALL, NORFOLK.

- BURGHLEY HOUSE, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.

- CASTLE ASHBY, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.

- KIRBY HALL, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.

- WOLLATTON HALL, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.

- BENTHALL HALL, SHROPSHIRE.

- PITCHFORD HALL, SHROPSHIRE.

- MONTACUTE, SOMERSETSHIRE.

- CAVERSWALL CASTLE, STAFFORDSHIRE.

- INGESTRIE HALL, STAFFORDSHIRE.

- THE OAK HOUSE, WEST BROMWICH, STAFFORDSHIRE.

- THROWLEY HALL, STAFFORDSHIRE.

- TRENTHAM HALL, STAFFORDSHIRE.

- xHELMINGHAM HALL, SUFFOLK.

- HENGRAVE HALL, SUFFOLK.

- WEST STOW HALL, SUFFOLK.

- HAM HOUSE, SURREY.

- LOSELEY HOUSE, SURREY.

- ARUNDEL CHURCH, SUSSEX.

- BOXGROVE CHURCH, SUSSEX.

- ASTON HALL, WARWICKSHIRE.

- BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL, WARWICK.

- CHARLECOTE, WARWICKSHIRE.

- COMBE ABBEY, WARWICKSHIRE.

- WARWICK CASTLE, WARWICKSHIRE.

- WROXHALL ABBEY, WARWICKSHIRE.

- BROUGHAM HALL, WESTMORLAND.

- SIZERGH HALL, WESTMORLAND.

- CHARLTON HOUSE, WILTSHIRE.

- THE DUKE’S HOUSE, WILTSHIRE.

- WESTWOOD HOUSE, WORCESTERSHIRE.

- FOUNTAINS HALL, YORKSHIRE.

- HELMSLEY HALL, YORKSHIRE.

- THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE