Wiltshire archaeological and natural history magazine

into
FS ey

2 My

ws

ane AN ye

Mas HS aT

cog jeinoten,
A Ane -e

‘ aoe: ae
~*~ ‘

THE

WILTSHIRE
Archenlayral ont Batueal Wistory
MAGAZINE,

Published unver the Birection of the Society

FORMED IN THAT COUNTY, A.D. 1853.

VOL. XXV.

E DEVIZES :
: H. F. Bout, 4, Saint Joun Srrzer.

1891.

Tue Enprror of the Wiltshire Magazine desires that it should
be distinctly understood that neither he nor the Committee of the
Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society hold themselves
in any way answerable for any statements or opinions expressed
in the Magazine; for all of which the Authors of the several
papers and communications are alone responsible.

CONTENTS OF VOL. XXV.

No. LXXIII.

Account of the Thirty-Sixth General Meeting at Westbury ..........scecesee
Notes on the Churches visited by the Society in 1889: By C. E. Pontine,

PEPIN P a pe ce cat Reva tedhak wan sea eeies fats dcadesenteocinddt cmedastasecats datas daasmatiae
Westbury under the Plain: By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A.
White Horse Jottings: By the Rev. W. C. PLENDERLEATH ..........0.000
Some Western Circuit Assize Records of the Seventeenth Century: By

MN WARN ENE Ts) We cos ag Sap iovap ves oun esulivseatcersedecnestas <enecetaecaies
The Buried Palzozoic Rocks of Wiltshire: By W. Hzwarp Bett, F.G.S.
James Ley, Earl of Marlborough: By the Rev. W. P. S. Brnewam ......
The Church Heraldry of North Wiltshire (Continued): By ARTHUR

MESUEEG a sca aatk satis Val kas care doraceenlna sie aca (nivea weenie) acevebnanenne eanncet
Wiltshire’s Contribution to the Piedmontese Fund in 1655: By J. WaYLEN
Donations to Museum and Library ........ iieaite “heobeoercce Seer ad ance Soest :

No. LXXIV.

St. Nicholas’s Hospital, Salisbury : By the Rev. Canon MoBErty ........ :

_ The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury: A Lecture delivered at the Blackmore

Museum, Salisbury, January 27th, 1890, by the Right Rev. the Lorp
BisHor oF SaLisBury

On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain, particularly in regard to its
influence on the County of Wilts: Address by the Right Rev. the Lorp
BisHor or Satispury, as President of the Society, at its Annual
Meeting at Westbury, August Ist, 1889 .3.........00 Racbeedestecsareccudenre :

_ Two Wiltshire Mazers: By W. Cunnineton, F.G.S. ........... slevevavdvenee

_ Edington Church: By C. E. Ponrine, F.S.A. .

_ Notes on Remains of Roman Dwellings at useingion: “Wick : By the

Memeo, LH. GODDARD ‘siclic.cdkehoustortetebtvedecvactess Neagweupeuseeayeataues a

Donations to Museum and Library ...cccssssecsesssseas sesccessnscesesesssecoecces

PRO e ee meee were ee esse heseese sees sere ee eeeseseeseeeEse

119

165

191
205
209

232
234

iv. CONTENTS OF VOL. xXV.

No. LXXV.
PAGE
Account of the Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting at Devizes ...... Waceescasse / | 200
Notes on the Churches visited by the Society in 1890: By C. E. Pontine,
NOS TAG ee oo i cadedanscc ove Baeempamimmeratonseceeasthtowcncec eres Sente ts dee te laaaeeenmn 252

Notes on Plaees visited by the Society in 1890: By H. E. Mepuicorr... 280
Inaugural Address by the President of the Society, Lt.-Gun. Prtr-RrveErs,
F.B.S., F.S.A., on the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly
Dy BCG S iecatin cuss vce’. 3% » oe peameMamnnp beh paraansh acy sieebes is tpn see es aaah ean 283
Notes on Human Remains discovered by General Pitt-Rivers, D.C.L.,
F.RB.S., at Woodyates, Wiltshire: By J. G. Garson, M.D., V.P.A.L,
Lecturer on Comparative Anatomy at Charing Cross Hospital Medical

Schools London: .......dcssusensaemeaeentaessiasancapmtncecas sere ceteneetartne PEO yan aul
The Geology of Devizes: By A. J. Juxus-Browng, B.A., F.GS.......... 317
Notes on the Church Plate of North Wilts: By the Rev. E.H.Gopparp 336
In Memoriam John Edward Jackson, F.S.A., Hon. Canon of Bristol...... 355
Recent Occurrence of the Great Bustard in Wilts: By the Rev. A. C.

SMITH; ib ssddesicssdessisesosaneceousnsteseVanee timanaase ance te Barn sainoscAnesciac 359
Additions to the Museum and Library......sccscassscvesesseeses nvaieven Sayeed vee = B64

Kllustrations.

The Uffington White Horse, 66. The Old Westbury Horse, 67. The Modern
Westbury Horse, 67. The Alligator Mound, Ohio, U.S.A., 68. The Beaver
Mound, Wisconsin, U.S.A., 68. The Buffalo Mound, Wisconsin, U.S.A., 68.
Map of the British Isles in the Triassic Period, 80. Map of the British Isles
in the Liassic Period, 80. Map of the British Isles in the Cretaceous Period, 80.
Geological Sections (A. and B.) of Rocks under Westbury, 82. Section (C)
from Vallis Vale to Westbury, 82.

Plans (Nos. I. II. and III.) of St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury, 128. Plans
No. I., II., and III.) of the Bishop’s Palace, Salisbury, 184. Photo-print of
Mr. Cunnington’s Mazer, 205. Photo-print of the Rev. C. E. B. Barnwell’s
Mazer, 206. Edington Church, Wilts, Longitudinal Section, looking south, 215.
Edington Church, Wilts, Tomb in South Transept, 220. Drawing of Stole
from the Effigy of William of Edington in Winchester Cathedral, and of In-
scriptions under Figures of Saints in the Clerestory Windows of Edington
Church, 222. Plan of Roman Dwellings at Manor Farm, Hannington Wick,
uncovered October 23rd, 1890, 232.

Font—Cherington, 260. Church of All Saints, Marden, Wilts, 263. Map of
Bokerly Dyke, between Dorset and Wilts, 288. Section 1—showing the
natural order of the Strata beneath Devizes, 318. Section 2—showing the
successive beds of Chalk at Morgan’s Hill, 318. Fig. 3.—Structure of Siliceous
Chalk, 324. Figs. 4 and 5,—Structure of Melbourn Rock and of Chalk Rock,
326. Fig. 6.—Structure of Middle Chalk, 327. Fig. 7.—Structure of Chalk
Rock, 328. Plate of ten Chalices in Churches in North Wilts, 342. Plate of
five Flagons in Churches in North Wilts, 348.

b Anhitpvamd tye ee a ce Vay ont Mate te oe eee
her as aA rn ~ 5

JULY, 1890. “Vou, XXV.

THE

WILTSHIRE
Archeological ant Patwral Brstory

MAGAZINE,

Published unver the Direction

OF THE

SOCIETY FORMED IN THAT COUNTY,

A.D. 1853.

= ie: -— ti, am «.
Se ee a

Aas sey

a

ae ts .
eh NS

ie

>

ae
> >

«
hee

ra te

rer

>

on

Singh Ses
Lyre

DEVIZES:
_- PRINTED AND SOLD FOR THE SOCIETY BY H. F Butt, Sarnt Jonn SrReer.

Price 5s. 6d.—Members Grats.

E NOTICE, hat a copiGue Index for Gh Pp :
~ Volumes of the Magazine will be found at the es )
viii., xvi., and xxiv. H

the Financial Seelaees Mr. Digs eee 31, Long Hie
Devizes, to whom also all communications as "to the supply
of Magazines sbould be addressed, and os whom most of
back Numbers may be had.

The Numbers of this Magazine will be delivered ilies as er Be MS e:
to Members who are not in arrear of their Annual Subscrip-
tions, but in accordance with Byelaw No. 8 “The Financial
Secretary shall give notice to Members in arrear, and the
Society’s publications will not be forwarded to Members whose
subscriptions shall remain unpaid after such notice.”

All other communications to be addressed to the Honorary sual’ ie
taries: H. E. Mepuicorr, Esq., Sandfield, Potterne, Devizes :
and the Rev. E. H. Gopparp, Clyffe Vicarage, Wootton Basset %

The Rev. A. C. Surru will be much obliged to observers of beds 342 4
in all parts of the county, to forward to him notices of rar
occurrences, early arrivals of migrants, or any remarkable fact
connected with birds, which may come under their notice.

A resolution has been passed by the Committee of the Society
“that it is highly desirable that every encouragement shoul
be given towards obtaining second copies of Wiltshire Parish
Registers.”

| Wiltshire—The ch OTs C ollections i.

of Fohn Aubrey, F-R.S.,
A.D. 1b5G—70.
CORRECTED AND ‘ENLARGED

BY THE REV. CANON J. E. JACKSON, M. A. FS.
In 4to, Cloth, pp. 491, with 46 Plates. peel
Price £2 10s.

aap SECOND EDITION OF | ns a
— The British and Roman Antiquities of
“34 the orth Wiltshire Downs,
BY THE REV. ‘Ae Ae SMITH, fap

Exera Cloth. Price £2 28,

ss WILTSHIRE
Archeolagiral and Patncal Wistaryy

MAGAZINE.

Keg SM) >
Bae WME
me PIF Sa

= aS a»

No, LXXIII. JULY, 1890.

es:

Contents.
4 PAGE
Account oF THE THIRTY-SIXTH GENERAL Meretine at WESTBURY 1
Nores on THE CHURCHES VISITED BY THE Society 1n 1889: By
12

"0. B. Ponting, B.S.A. .accceessssssseeeeersetee te naserismneceereae
Westsury UNDER THE Pain : By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A. 33

aime Horse Jorrines: By the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath ............ 57
mez Western Circuit AssiZE Recorps OF THE SEVENTEENTH
Century: By W. W. Ravenhill ..........::cceceeeceeeeeeeeeeeesreesseseenes
‘Buriep Panrmozorc Rocks or WILTSHIRE: By W. Heward

Teh le fcc asne Wisdng ia™ Ach rpmte rea “0+ Terese piensena toes
? sees
s Ley, Eart oF MARLBOROUGH : By the Rev. W. P. S. Bingham 86

eer Giabiestutliciee™ sducivseoceve-ésssss ancsaxecs ace tevsncverensese recess eas sneess 100

LTSHIRE’S CONTRIBUTION TO THE PrepMontest Funp in 1655:
By J. Waylen ........0+ Me em ese Meche cata’ vonnelp nen Suns ioc smbnioe trp’ SLID
118

. =
DONATIONS TO MvusEuUM AND LIBRABY.......cccvcccccsccessecseeenccescnenees

&, ILLUSTRATIONS.

The Uffington White Horse ........:sescssresessssereeseneeeees 66
The Old Westbury Horse .......sscssseesereereeeeeseeeseeresees 67
The Modern Westbury Horse ....scsecscesecrsessereseeseneees 67
The Alligator Mound, Ohio, U.S.A.........:seecseeereeeee rene 68

_ The Beaver Mound, Wisconsin, U.S.A. ......s.sseeeeeeeees 68

The Buffalo Mound, Wisconsin, U.S.A. ......sseseeeeeeeees 68

ebted to the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath for the kind loan

(The Society is ind
of the wood blocks for the above.)

Map of the British Isles in the Triassic Period ............ 80

3 Liassic Period ............ 80

‘is % Cretaceous Period......... 80

— Geological Sections (A. and B.) of Rocks under Westbury 82

“Section (C.) from Vallis Vale to Westbury ...... ..+.-++++- 82
DEVIZES :

H. F. Bust, 4, Sarnt JoHN SrReEevt.

cath Ge ei be Pic pie

ty A eae

THE

WILTSHIRE MAGAZINE,

“MULTORUM MANIBUS GRANDE LEVATUR ONUS. ’—Ovid,

THE THIRTY-SIXTH GENERAL MEETING
OF THE
Wiltshire Archeological and Natural History Society,'
HELD AT WESTBURY,
July 31st, August lst and 2nd, 1889,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY,
Tue Ricut Rey. Tue Lorp BisHor or SAuisBury,

IN THE CHAIR.

GHIS was the first occasion on which the Society had selected
t AS Westbury as the place of its Annual Meeting. The num-
bers attending were smaller than they have been at some recent
Meetings, but the programme gone through by those who were
present was a most enjoyable one, and the weather was everything
that could be desired—warm and fine until the close of the third
day’s excursion, the rain only beginning to fall as the archzologists
departed for their homes.

The Right Rev. The President was unfortunately unable to be

present at the General Meeting, held in the Town Hall, at 3 o’clock;

1 For many of the details in the account of this Meeting the Editor is in-
debted to the columns of the Devizes and Wiltshire Gazette, the Trowbridge
Chronicle, and the Warminster and Westbury Journal.

VOL. XXV.——NO. LXXII, B

2 The Thirty-Sixth General Meeting.

and in his absence the chair was taken by Mr. W. H. Laverton,
who at once called on the Rev. A. C. Smiru to read

THE REPORT,

which was as follows :—

“The Committee has again the satisfaction of reporting the
steady progress of the Society, which, though not yet numbering
amongst its Members so large a body of Wiltshiremen as it desires
to do, yet contains on its books (including, as usual, the Societies
with which publications are exchanged) three hundred and seventy-
three names—a slight increase since last year,

“ We have, however, to lament the loss of several of our Members,
and though the list of these is not numerically so long as usual, it
contains the names of some whom we could ill afford to spare.
Among these we would first mention our late Financial Secretary,
Mr. Nott, whose active business habits and whose courtesy and
energy in our cause had rendered his services well-nigh invaluable
to the Officers of the Society ; and it is with most real gratitude,
as well as regret, that we call to mind his ready aid, on which we
could always rely. In Mr. Meek, again, whose loss has heen
severely felt by the whole county, we of this Society deplore one of
our most valued Officers, who served for a great many years on the
Committee and was a Member from the foundation of the Society.
Another original Member, who took part in the formation of the
Society in 1853, and who was a Vice-President and Member of the
Committee from the first, was Mr. H. N. Clarke, long resident at
Park Cottage, Devizes, and now very lately deceased. We would
also mention with regret the name of the Rev. A. O. Hartley, late
Vicar of Steeple Ashton; and there are some few others who have
died or left the county, or who, from other causes, have resigned
_ membership.

* As regards finance, as the balance sheet containing the account
of last year’s receipts and expenditure has just been placed in the-
hands of the Members of the Society, it is needless to say more
than that while our income is sufficient to cover our annual ex-
penditure with economy, we are not in a condition financially to

The Report. 38

incur any extraordinary expense in the way of exploration, restora-
tion, or otherwise, as we are often invited and sometimes expected

to do.
“‘The Library and Museum have been enriched with many
donations, several of which are of great value, as illustrating the
topography, antiquities, and natural history of the county. Detailed
lists of these donations are given at the end of each number of the
Magazine. For these the Committee desires cordially to thank all
the contributors, and at the same time to remind the Members of
the Society scattered all over the county how great is the importance
of preserving in some Museum, whether at Devizes, Salisbury, or
Marlborough, objects which, when scattered and in private hands,
are of little value, but are of the highest interest when collected,
classified, and arranged for purposes of observation and study. The
Committee has again to report very important work carried out by the
munificence and under the personal superintendence and direction of
the accomplished archzologist,General Pitt-Rivers,whose excavations
at Bokerly Dyke, in the extreme south of the county, were recorded
in the Report last year. This year the General acceded to the
urgent request of the Secretaries, and made a large section through
Wansdyke, a little to the north of Old Shepherd’s Shore. This
section was scientifically cut under the immediate eye of the General
and his three clerks, by a body of a dozen or more labourers, who
carried on the work for a fortnight in the spring of this year, when,
unfortunately, the weather was exceptionally cold and the wind
more than ordinarily keen and cutting. Though nothing was found
to indicate the exact date of the throwing up of the Wansdyke, the
discovery of some fragments of Samian ware on the original surface
of the down beneath the ramparts, in addition to the finding of an
iron knife and an iron nail, and the position in which these relics
were respectively found, proved to the satisfaction of all who ex-
amined them that the work was not pre-Roman, as had generally
-been supposed. But whether Roman or post-Roman (possibly even
Saxon) there is no evidence as yet to show. We rejoice, however,
to add that General Pitt-Rivers is not satisfied that the evidence is
exhausted, and proposes shortly to make further examination into

B 2

4 The Thirty-Siath General Meeting.

this interesting earthwork. We are confident that the Members of
the Society generally would desire to join the Committee in cordially
thanking the General for this great work of excavation, which he
is carrying on entirely at his own expense (for he generously declines
any help from the Society), and we shall all await the result of his
further researches with no little interest.

“In conclusion the Committee again invites the active co-
operation of Members of the Society in all parts of the county,
reminding them how very much yet remains to be investigated and
brought to light, and what a large field of enquiry yet offers itself
on all sides. For though your committee cannot but be aware that
the Society has done something towards elucidating some of the
obscure details of the history of the county, and calling attention
to some branches of its natural history, it is profoundly sensible
that it has as yet only touched the border of these subjects, and
that there is still a great work to be carried on before we can be
said to have mastered the antiquities as well as the natural history
and the general history of Wiltshire.”

The Rev. W. P. S. Bryeuaw, in proposing the adoption of the
Report, said that he hoped that the holding of the Meeting at
Westbury would lead to a considerable increase of Members from
that neighbourhood. At present, he thought, the Westbury district
was not at all adequately represented in the Society. He thought
that the thanks of the Meeting were due to Mr. Smith, for the
pains and trouble he had taken in the work of the Society during
the past year, and in drawing up the Report they had just heard.
He also thought that the thanks of the Meeting ought to be con-
veyed to General Pitt-Rivers, for the very valuable work he had
undertaken in the excavation of Wansdyke. Mr. H. J. F. Swayne
having seconded the motion the Report was carried.

On the motion of the Cuarrman, seconded by Mr. E. O. Bouveriz,
the whole of the Officers of the Society were re-elected to office.

The Cuairman then called on the Rev. Canon Jackson to read
“Some Notes on Westbury History.” It is needless to say that
this paper was listened to with the greatest attention, and that at
its conclusion a vote of thanks to Canon Jackson, proposed by the

The Dinner. 5:

Chairman, was carried with acclamation by the Meeting. Those
who have ever heard one of the veteran Canon’s papers know that
the singular power he possesses of revivifying even the driest bones
of local history by the touch of his own genial humour makes those
papers one of the greatest treats of the Annual Meetings of the
Society. The paper itself will be found at a later page of the
Magazine.

Mr. Smita having stated that the Rev. Canon Warre and the
Rev. W. P. S. Bingham had consented to act as Local Honorary
Secretaries for Melksham and Westbury respectively, proposed that
their names skould be added to the list of Local Secretaries. This
having been seconded by Mr. Swayne, and agreed to, the Meeting
came to aclose, and the Members, under the guidance of the Rev.
W. P. S. Bineuam and Mr. C. E. Pontine, F.S.A., adjourned to
the parish Church and examined its architectural details; some few
Members paying a visit to the Westbury Iron Works, which by the
kindness of Mr, S. Anderson were open for their inspection.

THE DINNER.

At 6 o’clock some thirty Members sat down to the Anniversary
Dinner at the Lopes Arms Hotel. The Presipent of the Society,
the Bishop of Salisbury, who had arrived shortly before the hour
fixed for dinner, oceupied the chair—and at the conclusion of dinner
proposed as the first toast, ‘‘ The Queen, the Prince and Princess of
Wales, and the rest of the Royal Family,” dwelling especially on
the late marriage of Princess Louise of Wales and the great interest
that had been taken by the whole nation in that event.

_ The PrestpEnt next proposed the “ Health of the Inhabitants of
Westbury,” coupling with the toast the name of Mr. Laverton, who
had so kindly taken his place that afternoon. He expressed his
regret that he was unable to be present before, more especially as

he had missed the pleasure of hearing Canon Jackson’s paper, by

ek
Bi =e

his absence.

Mr. Laverton, in responding, expressed the hope that the in-

| habitants of Westbury would show their appreciation of the Society’s

6 The Thirty-Siath General Meetiug.

visit to their town by a large attendance at the Conversazione to be
held that evening.

The next toast proposed by the Prusrpunt was the “ Healths of
the Local Secretaries, the Rev. W. P. S. Bingham and Mr. C. W.
Pinniger.” He said that theirs was not an easy position to occupy,
and the Society was under great obligation to them for the trouble
they had taken to make the Meeting a success.

The Rev. W. P. S. Biyeuam thanked the President for his kind
expressions, and the company for the way in which they had received
the toast; and alluding to the President’s remark that the office he
had filled was a difficult one, said that he could not say that he had
found it so himself, for Mr. Pinniger had done all the work.

Mr. C. W. Prynicer also responded, assuring the company that
any trouble he had undergone in endeavouring to make successful
arrangements for the Meeting and excursions had been a real
pleasure to him. His task had been much lightened, too, by the
ready assistance lent him by the Local Committee, the General
Secretaries, and more especially by the Local Secretary of last year,
Mr. Wilkins.

After a vote of thanks to the Bishop, for presiding, proposed by
Mr. Laverton, the company dispersed—to meet again at 8 o’clock for

THE CONVERSAZIONE

at the Laverton Institute—which, through the kindness of Mr.
Laverton, had been transformed into a drawing-room plentifully
furnished with lounges and easy chairs and beautifully decorated
with flowers, while a number of curiosities had been also arranged
for the inspection of the Members. Refreshments later on were
most kindly provided by Mrs. Pinniger and Mrs, E. Smalleombe.

The proceedings were opened by the reading of the Presidential
address by the Bisuop, on the subject of “ the Roman Conquest of
Southern Britain; its character and influence, especially upon our
own county.’’ This was a paper full of the most valuable matter,
but as it will appear in the Magazine its contents need not be further
mentioned here.

After a vote of thanks to the President, for his address, proposed

F

a

Thursday, August 1st. 7

by the Rev. A. C. Smith, the next paper was read by the Rev. W.
C. PrenprertEatH, on “Some further White Horse Jottings,” in
which, with reference to the Westbury White Horse, he maintained
that the balance of evidence was in favour of the tradition which
ascribed the origin of the old horse, replaced in 1778 by the present
one, to King Alfred on the morrow of his victory over the Danes at
Ethandune, in 878. “A short discussion followed this paper, the Rev.
J. Crarke expressing his opinion that strong reasons ought to be
adduced against the old tradition before they were required to give
it up.

The Rev. W. P.S. Bingham read the next paper on “ James, Earl

of Marlborough, and his successors,” connected with Westbury by

the fact that he lived at Heywood, and that his handsome monument
with effigies of himself and his first wife still stands in the south
transept of the parish Church.

Votes of thanks to the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath and the Rev.
W. P. S. Bingham, for their excellent papers, brought a pleasant
evening to a close.

THURSDAY, AUGUST lst.

About forty Members, and their friends, including the President
and Mrs. Wordsworth, took their seats in the breaks provided for
the purpose, at 9 o’clock, at the Town Hall, and a start was made
for Bratton Camp. On the arrival of the breaks at the bottom of
the steep escarpment on the brow of which the camp is situated, the
more active members of the party climbed the hill by a shorter path,
which afforded those who were botanically inclined an excellent
opportunity of observing some of the less common plants of the
characteristic down flora of Wiltshire—notably the pretty little
yellow Chilora Perfoliata. Arrived at the top, the earthworks of
the camp' were inspected and the magnificent view admired—but
only a few minutes halt was made, as the day’s programme was a
long one and time was getting on. A delightful drive over the
downs brought the party to Imber, one of the many Wiltshire

1See Magazine, vol. xix., p. 134,

8 The Thirty-Sixth General Meeting.

villages still remote from railways and the busier haunts of men.
Here the five-pinnacled tower and other objects of interest in the
Church, ranging in age from the twelfth to the eighteenth century,
were well pointed out by Mr. C. E. Pontsna, F.S.A., whose notes
on this and the other Churches visited during this Excursion will be
found at a later page.

The next place visited was West Lavington, where the Rev.
Canon Baynham—the Vicar—gave an account of the monuments
in the Chureh, and Mr. Ponting called attention to the various
changes in style and design which occurred as the fine edifice was
gradually brought to completion through a long period of time.

The study of architecture, combined with the effect of the down
air, having by this time greatly predisposed everybody in favour of
luncheon, ample justice was done to the refreshments provided by
the proprietor of the Lopes Arms, Westbury—after the discussion
of which the Members entered the breaks again for the seeond half
of the day’s excursion.

The first stoppage was at Little Cheverell Church, which, with
the exception of the tower, was entirely re-built in 1850. A few
remains of the old Church have, however, been built into the walls
of the new building and these were examined before the party drove
on to Great Cheverell, where the architectural history of the Chureh
was again explained by Mr. Pontina. On arriving at Erlestoke
Park the party left the carriages, and, by the kind permission of
Mr. Watson Taylor, proceeded through the lovely walks beside the
miniature lakes and cascades, and under the splendid trees for which
Erlestoke is famous; the only drawback being that so little time
could be spared to dwell on its beauties. After a hasty glance at
the beautiful little Church erected in 1880 from the designs of the
late Mr. Street, and containing a good east window by Clayton &
Bell, the party entered the carriages again and drove on to East
Coulston, stopping there for a look at the little Church, with its
Norman doorway, built up in the wall, before passing to Edington.

The visit to the magnificent Church of this place, under the
personal guidance of Mr. Pontine, who has so ably and carefully
directed its restoration during the last few years, was, perhaps, the

Thursday, August lst. 9

most interesting feature of the Westbury Meeting. The Vicar,
the Rev. H. Cave-Brown-Cavr (who has since died before the
completion of the work which was so near his heart), gave an
account of the restoration carried on gradually by the Committee,
who, at the Bishop’s instigation, have been instrumental in pre-
serving this grand, and in many respects unique, example of the
transition from the Decorated to the Perpendicular style, from the
ruin which must inevitably have overwhelmed it in a few years if
it had not been taken in hand intime. The magnitude of the work
made it altogether beyond the power of the parish to raise the
necessary funds, and the Committee, feeling that the interest of
such a building belonged rather to the county, or indeed to the
nation, than to the parish of Edington alone, appealed far and wide
for funds, with the result that the most necessary repairs have been
executed, though there is much still to be done.

The Members of the Society had every opportunity of judging of
the loving care bestowed on every part of the building by Mr.
Ponting—from the old glass, so carefully replaced in the transept
windows, to the late and curious plaster roof, restored and made
secure with great trouble and difficulty, in the nave. It wasa
_ privilege to see the building under the guidance of one who knows
every stone of it, as he does, and we are happy to say that the
paper on this Church read by him at the Salisbury Meeting will,
by the courtesy of the Council of the Archeological Institute, be
reprinted in the Wagazine.

After enjoying the welcome refreshment of a cup of tea at the
vicarage, by the kind hospitality of the Vicar, a move was made for
Westbury, taking Bratton on the way. There was some doubt
whether there would be time for this, but happily the programme
was adhered to; for, even after Edington, it was generally agreed
that Bratton Church, both in its architecture and its situation » Was
quite one of the most charming things we had seen. Moreover
the inhabitants of the village had prepared a welcome for the Society
and its President such as we met with nowhere else on our excursions,
the bells ringing merrily and numbers of the people turning out to
greet their visitors. The little eruciform Church, with its central

10 The Thirty-Siath General Meeting.

tower, is a singularly complete and perfect example of early fifteenth
century work; and its position in the valley, with the long flights
of paved steps leading up the hill-side to the houses of the village,
is singularly picturesque; and altogether the visit to Bratton will
remain among the pleasantest memories of a very pleasant Excursion.

Arrived at Westbury the most was made of the very short time
remaining for dinner, before the hour for the Conversazione arrived.

Tue PresipENnT, occupying the chair, called on Mr. W. W.
RavenuILL to read his paper on “Some Western Circuit Assize
Records of the Seventeenth Century,” in which Mr. Ravenhill ob-
served that these records form most valuable sources of information
for the future historian of that century.

Tue Presipent having conveyed the thanks of the Meeting to
Mr. Ravenhill, Mr. W. Hewarp Bett gave a very interesting
address, illustrated by several carefully-drawn diagrams, on “ The
Buried Rocks of Wiltshire,” for which he received the warmer
thanks, as papers on geological and natural history subjects have
been somewhat rare at our Meetings as compared with those which
are purely antiquarian and archeological.

A paper by the Rev. W. C. Prenperxeats, on “ Etymological
Interchanges” in that language of Wiltshire, which, in spite of
universal education, dies hard ; with a vote of thanks cordially given,
brought an instructive evening to a close.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 2np.

The interest of Thursday’s Excursion bad centred in Church
architecture. The interest of Friday’s Excursion, on the other
hand, was largely found in the domestic architecture of the delightful
group of old houses visited during the day.

The party which left the Town Hall at 9, a.m., was considerably
reduced in numbers from that of the previous day, many of the
Members being unable to stay for the last day’s Excursion. The
route lay past Heywood House to North Bradley, where the party
was received by the Vicar, the Rev. W. A. S. Mrereweruer, who,
assisted by Mr. Pontina, directed attention to the most remarkable

Friday, August nd. 11

features of the Church—the fine western tower and the beautiful
chapel at the end of the North aisle.

Then on to Cutteridge House, whence, after a short stay, the
archeologists walked to the neighbouring Brook House. Here, in
what are now used as the stables and cow-houses of the farm-house,
is an extremely interesting range of buildings, which, as Mr.
Ponting pointed out, formed the domestic offices of an early fifteenth
century house of considerable importance ; and although they are
now put to baser uses, yet they still remain in good preservation—
the original walls, floors, and roofs, the windows with their iron
grilles, the doorways and fireplaces being still in si/u and compara-
tively uninjured. These buildings were the subject of as much
discussion as time allowed of, and many of the party would willingly
have lingered longer had it not been necessary to continue their
journey.

The next item on the programme was Seymour’s Court, but
before the party arrived there they were hospitably stopped by the
way and entertained by Mr. W. R. Brown, at his shooting lodge.
After doing justice to the very welcome refreshments provided, a
short drive further brought the party to the charming old manor-
house, now—like Brook House—occupied as a farm. Mr. Pontine
read the history of the present condition of the building, as far as
a hurried examination of it sufficed to reveal it. He pointed out
that the back of the house, the very picturesque porch and room
over it, with the chimney stacks and one end of the house, were
all the work of about the middle of the fifteenth century, whilst the
front walls had been re-built, and windows of the period constructed
in them at the same time that the house was lengthened in the
time of James I.

Continuing on the Somerset side of the border Road Church was
soon reached, where the Rev. J. B. Mepigy gave many interesting
details of its history, and Mr. Ponrine, as before, described the
architecture.

At Beckington—which was the next place visited—luncheon, by
general consent, took precedence of sight seeing ; after which the
interesting Church was examined, and the study of domestic

12 Notes on the Churches

architecture was happily combined with tea, through the kind
hospitality of Mrs. Starky, at Beckington Castle.

Entering the breaks once more on the return journey to Westbury,
a halt was made opposite the entirely modern Church of Dilton
Marsh—not without protests at the impropriety of wasting time on
such a building, protests, which were, however, acknowledged to be
unnecessary as soon as the party found themselves in the really
striking interior, the style of which is a species of Byzantine used
here with singularly good taste and effect. }

Old Dilton Church, a picturesque little fifteenth century building
lying close beside the railroad, was the last place to be stopped at,
and after observing the points of interest about it under our inde-
fatigable architectural guide the party proceeded to Westbury, some
to catch the train, others—more fortunate—to the vicarage, where
tea was provided by the kindness of Mr. and Mrs. Binanam.

Alotes on the Churches visited by the Society

°

m 1889.

[Prepared (and in part delivered) during the Excursion.]
By C. E. Ponrtne, F.S.A.
Wednesday, July 31st, 1889.
Tue CuurcH oF ALL Saints. WESTBURY.

[Mr. Ponting’s notes on the structural features of this Church were
only intended to supplement the Vicar’s description. ]

“ek is a cruciform Church of clerestoried nave of four bays
¥ y‘ with narrow aisles, north and south transepts, chapels on
the north and south of the chancel, and a further chapel to the north

—

Visited by the Society im 1889. 13

of the easternmost bay of the north aisle. There is a south porch
and a modern vestry between this and the transept.

Although no Norman work is visible above ground (except,
perhaps, parts of the south transept wall), it is almost certain, from
the narrowness of the aisles, that the Church stands on Norman
foundations. I had been informed that there were Norman remains
in the tower, but I have failed to discover them. ‘The nave, aisles,
transepts, and tower, appear to have been re-built circa 1480, the
chapels on the north and south of the chancel some fifty years after,
and that against the north aisle later still. The clerestory appears
to have been an afterthought, and traces of an earlier roof can be
seen on the west face of the tower, but the alteration must have
taken place before the Church was completed.

The feature which strikes one at once inside the Church is the
way in which the buttresses of the aisles are carried over to support
the clerestory and at the same time to form arches to carry the
aisle roofs. Another special feature is the richly-groined porch
under the west window of the nave, the doorway of which has been
mutilated by the head being squared out. There is a stoup by the
south door. Stone bench seats are carried all round the Church
inside.

The turret staircase to the tower also led to the rood-loft, the
exit doorway for which remains. The archways between the
transepts and chapels ave of the panelled type of which we shall see
several examples during our excursion. There is a piscina in the
south transept, also a coeval recessed tomb. The two chapels have
their original roofs; that on the north has lost its braces, but the
corbels which supported them still remain in the east angles and
over the arcade. There are niches in the east walls of both chapels ;
those in the south chapel with their rich canopies appear to be
entirely new, but they are presumably copied from original work,

Thursday, August st.

Cuurce or S. Gires. ImBer.

This Church is one of the seven in the county dedicated in the

14 Notes on the Churches

name of S. Giles; it is simple in plan, having only nave with north
and south aisles, chancel, and western tower, but it has many points
of great interest.

As is frequently the case, the oldest feature is the font, the bowl
of which appears to be Norman work of about the middle of the
twelfth century. This would indicate the probability of an older
Church than the present one having stood on this site, and this
probability receives support from the extreme narrowness of the
aisles. The present aisles were built at a time when it was
customary to make them of much greater width than before, and
that this was not done here is probably due to the foundation lines
of a Norman Church having been followed. We may, therefore,
fairly assume that a Norman Church with aisles once stood here.
The foundations of Norman work—at least down to the middle of
the twelfth century—were almost invariably bad, and this doubtless
accounts for the re-building of Churches having so often become
necessary within so short a time of their original construction.
The re-building here began with the side walls and arcades of the
nave, which are probably the work of quite the end of the thirteenth
century. The west end of the north aisle was most likely built at
the same time, for the two buttresses there are of the work of that
period.

The great wave of Church building which swept over the country
in the fifteenth century did not miss Imber, for at a date not later
than 1420 the north and south aisles—with the very usual door in
each wall, the square-headed windows in the side walls, and the
pointed one in the east end—were re-built and the north porch and
tower added. The nave was also re-roofed in the waggon-head
form so prevalent in the south-west of England but less commonly
met with in this county. This fifteenth century work is bold and
massive, and it must have been no slight task in those days to get
up to Imber the large quoin and bonding stones which may be seen
on the outside. Owing to the peculiar treatment of the turret
staircase the tower has jive corners, and although it has losta
pinnacle it can still claim to possess the same number of pinnacles
as many other towers which have been less unfortunate. It will be

—__ =

Visited by the Society im 1889. 15

seen that the staircase is fair with the east face of the main body of
the tower, and is treated as an integral part of it, the parapet and
cornice being carried all round.

It is possible that, either during his lifetime, or at his death, the
knight, whose effigy lies under the beautiful recessed tomb in the
south aisle, was a benefactor to the Church at this time, and the
piscina adjoining the tomb indicates a chantry founded for his
benefit. There is a recumbent effigy of a second warrior under the
last bay of the south nave arcade, his head resting on a cushion
supported by angels and his feet upon a lion. His shield bears the
three lions rampant, but I believe his identity has not yet been
established. [Heralds Visitation, 1620, mentions Rous of
(Imber) three lions rampant. (Hereford 44.)]

There are a few bits of old glass in the windows of the south
aisle and tower, the most noticeable being a representation of our
Lord’s head, with nimbus, in the upper part of the east window of ©
the chapel at the end of the aisle.

This Church is unusually rich in post-Reformation oak work.
The pews and pulpit in the nave and the two benches and two chairs
in the chancel are good examples of the earlier work of the seven-
teenth century. There is a characteristic oval window in the
south wall of the aisle—inserted, probably, to light the squire’s
pew—an interesting relic of the early Georgian era, which should
be retained in any restoration, as a mark of history: it will
become increasingly valuable as time goes on. The chancel and
vestry were erected in 1849, and there is no record of what the
old chancel was. The only remains of it are the two carved label
terminals, representing a king and a bishop, to be seen inside the
vestry.

Att Satnts Cuurcn. BisHorps LavineTon.

: This Church presents a plan of unusual variety and interest for a
village Church—the result of many alterations, some of which are
not easy to make out. In the study of it we must bear in mind

_ that it was not the practice at the period we are considering to build

16 Notes on the Churches.

Churches by contract with a penalty on the contractor if he did not
complete it in the given time—say twelve or eighteen months.
One of the most rapid large works of the kind on record was the
erection of our mother Church of Salisbury. The foundation stones
were laid in 1220, and although within five years Bishop Richard
Poore saw the building sufficiently advanced to admit of service
being celebrated in the Lady Chapel, yet it was left to three of his
successors to continue the work, which was not ready for consecration
until 1258, nor quite completed until 1266 (the tower and spire
being added some sixty years after this). Thus the Cathedral took
forty-six years to build in spite of the enormous efforts which were
made to push on the work and so to remove the disadvantages of
the Cathedral being, as it was at Old Sarum, within the precincts
of the King’s castle.

We know, too, that the Charch at Edington was built in nine
years, but there also the object was a special one—the formation of
a new monastery—and the work was undertaken by a Bishop holding
the high civil office of Lord High Chancellor of England.

To return to Bishop’s Lavington, We may well believe that in the
building of a village Church like this, where perhaps there was
much more difficulty in raising the money, the proceedings were
much slower, and the style changed during the progress of the
work. This will explain the difference in style in different parts of
this Church. Thus, the earliest work we have here is the north
arcade of the nave: this has vigorously-carved capitals of a distinctly
Norman type—there being two patterns of carving on each cap—
and was probably erected soon after the middle of the twelfth
century; then, turning to the south arcade, although at first sight
its capitals would almost appear to be part of a later Church, I am
of opinion that this was erected in continuation of that on the north
side, and was completed before the end of the twelfth century.
These arcades are an interesting study, both have cylindrical columns
and arches in two square orders, with labels of a very similar type:
the capitals on the north side have the angles notched out so that
the abacus follows the line of the arch, and the arches themselves
are only slightly pointed—while the capitals on the south side have

Visited by the Society in 1889. 17

the abacus rounded, a distinct advance in style, and the arches are
rather more pointed.

The clerestory on both sides appears to have been erected on the
completion of the south arcade.

Then, before reaching the chancel, the builders seem to have
changed their original design, and decided to have a north transept,
so they prepared for it by re-constructing the easternmost bay on
that side in the later style then prevailing with a more pointed and
chamfered arch, but re-using the label-mould over. This arch and
respond (the latter with canted abacus) are coeval with the chancel
arch, which, however, has no label. If any proof is needed that
the north aisle was shortened to carry out the transept, and that
the latter was not originally intended, it may be found in the fact :
that the clerestory window of that bay is blocked up by the roof
on the outside, and that the arch between aisle and transept cuts
into the arch of the arcade.

The chancel was next proceeded with (before the erection of the
transept), and the four lancet windows, the piscina, and the string
course remain of the original features of about 1220—as also the
corbel table of the eaves on the north side. The present doorway
is a late fourteenth century insertion, and has the carved paterzx of
that period, but it probably supplanted an earlier doorway, as the
string appears to have been returned over it. The north and east
sides of the chancel are new work, and Canon Baynham informs me
that a priest’s door on the north side was done away with in erecting
it. This work appears, however, to be a good copy of the
original.

The north transept appears to have been next built, and indicates
the dawn of tracery in the north window. The single lancet in the
west wall is coeval, whilst that in the east wall is a !ater insertion,
There were, of course, north and south aisles at that time, but
the present windows are modern, and it is questionable whether
much of the old walls remains,

The Church was not, so far as can be seen, considered complete
until this stage had been reached, its erection having thus occupied
nearly a century; and this may be taken as a typical, though
VOL, XXIV.—-NO. LXXII, Cc

18 Notes on the Churches

perhaps prolonged, example of the method employed in building the
Churches of the early Middle Ages.

There are here, as in most cases, many subsequent alterations and
additions. At the west end the last hays of the nave arcades were
shortened, probably early in the fourteenth century, for the erection
of the tower. At that time the tower appears not to have had the
aisles continued past it as at present; these were added and the side
arches cut through some fifty years later. Traces of a coeval arch
may be seen in the east wall of the tower, over the present one.

Buttresses were built on the outside to resist the thrust of
these arches, and as it was probably found that the east wall
was giving way under the increased weight a new arch was
constructed within the previous one, and arches were built across
the aisles. A staircase for access was at the same time carried up
on the south side, forming a clumsy block on the interior, The
tracery of the west window has been renewed.

The next addition was the Dauntsey Chapel, erected outside the
south aisle, opposite the transept, about 1430. It is probable that
this chapel did not originally communicate with the Church, for the
present archway between it and the aisle is an elliptic one of
Elizabethan character, built of chalk or clunch, the soffit being
enriched with an ornament formed by four Ds united within a square
panel; the same device appears in some post-Reformation glass in
the west window here, which has been made up together with older
glass in which the chalice appears. It is doubtless intended as the
initial of either the Dauntsey or Danvers family, or both, for they
were united at this time. The former entrance to the chapel was
by a doorway in the west wall, now built up. An arch is carried
across from this chapel to support the clerestory.

There is a Perpendicular recessed tomb, with the effigy of an
unknown individual, and good later monuments which have been
described by the Vicar.

The last addition to the plan was the Beckett Chapel, erected on
the south side of the chancel towards the end of the fifteenth
century—about 1480. This must have been a richly-ornamented
work. The windows are all square-headed, but well traceried; the

Visited by the Society im 1889. 19

one on the east is placed out of the centre to accommodate a niche
on the north side of it. There are also traces of another niche,
with its corbel, in the south wall and a good piscina preserved
intact below it. The archway communicating with the aisle has
been removed and a modern window substituted. The corbel table
of the thirteenth century chancel has been carried round the chapel
as a cornice mould. At about the time of the erection of this
chapel an upper stage was added to the tower, carried on the
north and south sides on arches thrown across within the walls of
the previous structure, as though to reduce its plan from an oblong
to a square.

There is an iron-bound oak chest in this chapel with the three
locks as enjoined by the 84th Canon of 1603.

All the roofs of the Church are modern.

S. Paerer’s. Lirrte Carvers.

This Church was re-built, with the exception of the tower, in
1850, but several features of interest have been preserved, although
it is to be regretted that they have been so scraped as to make it
difficult at first sight to say whether they are original, or good
copies; on comparing them with the new work, however, the
difficulty disappears. These reinstated features consist of the outer
and inner doorways of the porch, the chancel arch, the vestry
window, the priest’s door, and the bowl of the font—all late
fourteenth century in date. The priest’s door is a beautiful feature
with ogee arch, and has suffered less than the others.

The tower is a remarkable structure of early fifteenth century
date ; it has vertical wall-faces without weatherings or string-courses
to divide it into stages: the buttresses are massive and good, but
beyond a west window of three lights, with a doorway under, it has
no openings on either side (if we except the small slits on the north
and east). There is a singular corbel over the west window, with
rich oak-leaf foliage, and probably intended in lieu of a niche, to
support a figure of S. Peter. The original parapet or roof has
disappeared and a modern slated one has taken its place.

c 2

20 Notes on the Churches

S. Perer’s. Great CHEVERELL.

This Church, like the last, is dedicated to S. Peter. It consists
of nave with south porch, chancel and western tower, with a chapel
on the south side of the nave and a modern vestry.

The side walls of the chancel are of early thirteenth century date,
and the facing is a good though unusually late specimen of flint- -
work laid in herring-bone pattern. The lancets in the north and
south walls of the chancel are original ; the other window on the
south side, the priest’s door, and the piscina are Perpendicular in-
sertions. The recessed tomb in the north wall of the chancel is
coeval with the earlier work and is probably that of the founder or
some great benefactor of the Church. It may, possibly, however,
have been the Easter Sepulchre. The east wall has been rebuilt.

The nave, porch and chapel are coeval, and were erected in the
best period of the Perpendicular—about 1460. All the windows
are square-headed, with good mouldings and tracery. Both nave
and chapel have their original roofs, that of the nave being of the
wageon-head or barrel-vault form, like the one at Imber, with
plaster-panels, the ribs being moulded and having carved bosses at
the intersections. The roof of the chapel is of flat span form, richer
and more massive, the timbers being moulded and the bosses carved.
The inscription “ W.S. 1699 ” on the east boss has no reference to
the date of the structure. The window and other features at the
east end have been destroyed to give access to the modern vestry.

The tower appears to have been added after the nave was built,
but it is very little later in style.

The font is a modern one; it would be interesting to know what
has become of the old one. There are some late memorial
inscriptions cut on the outside of the east wall of the chapel,

East Covutston.

This is one of the three Churches in Wiltshire dedicated in the
name of S. Thomas A Becket; and it is of earlier foundation than
any other Church in to-day’s programme. It consists of nave and
chancel with a chapel on the north side of the latter.

On the south side of the nave there is a good specimen of a

.
.
:
|
1

Visited by the Society im 1889. 21

Norman doorway of about 1120, apparently im situ, with carved
caps (the shafts are missing), the opening square, and the tympanum
over it plain. The caps of the chancel arch are coeval with it,
but the restorer has mistaken the Norman volutes for owls, and has
given them wings and feathers!

There is a fifteenth century doorway in the north wall of the
nave, with a stoup, and the buttress at the north-west angle is of
about the same date.

The chancel dates from early in the fourteenth century, but only
parts of the windows on the south side and the piscina remain,

The chapel was added about the middle of the fifteenth century,
and the piscina in the east jamb of the arch shows it to have been
a chantry. The window on the north has had its sill raised and
its head rebuilt in a square form, the old label being affixed over it
in a quite original fashion. The angle buttresses and plinth of
this part are good work.

There is a nice piece of seventeenth century wood carving of
* Grinling Gibbons ” type in the lectern.

[A full account of Edington Church will appear ata later page
of the Magazine.}

Cxuurcu or S. James. BRatron.

This is a perfect model of the cruciform village Church—a
minster on a small scale: and although there is evidence of a part
of the work being earlier yet it underwent such an entire re-
modelling early in the fifteenth century that it may be taken as
representing the idea then prevailing of what such a Church should
be, for it has had no additions, and no subsequent structural
alterations other than the re-building of the chancel within recent
years.

The Church consists of nave of two bays with north and south
aisles and clerestory; north and south transepts and chancel, with

22 Notes on the Churches

a tower at the crossing: there are three doorways, one in the west
wall and one in the north and south walls of the aisles, near the
east end, that on the south having a porch.

The east walls of the transepts are evidently parts of an earlier
Church, for they are built of rubble masonry instead of wrought
stone like the rest, and they have no plinths (the connection of
the later work with them is clearly distinguishable on the outside), °
but they had new parapets and buttresses added when the great
re-modelling took place at about 14.00.

The walls of the porch are also older, probably late twelfth or
early thirteenth century work, and they originally supported a roof
of stone, carried on moulded ribs—one of these ribs remains over
the outer doorway, and traces of another can be seen over the inner
doorway, which, if retained, would have interfered with the fifteenth
century niche, and to make room for this it was probably removed.
The line of the stone roof is also visible on the outside gable and
the old label terminals have been re-used for the later label. The
re-modelling of the porch took place after that of the south transept.

To return to my description of the Church as re-modelled. It
will be seen that, whilst the design is perfect, the work is also of
the most solid and complete description—the whole of the re-built
walls are faced inside and outside with wrought stone, the tower is
divided into four stages in height, the two lower ones being open to
the interior and ceiled with a groined vault; and light is admitted
to the crossing by windows in the north and south sides above the
transept roofs. The corbels supporting the angle ribs are carved
to represent kings and bishops alternately. The four piers of the
tower rest on stone bench-tables (which were probably the only seats
then used in the Church), but the bases are otherwise identical with
those of the nave arcade. .

The usual intention of transepts appears to have been to afford
more east wall space for altars, and that they were in this case used
as chapels is shewn by the four later niches, or reredos, inserted in
the wall of the north transept, and the piscina in that of the south.
There were no windows in these east walls, for the one now existing
in the latter is a modern insertion. The roof of the north transept

Visited by the Society m 1889. 23

was carried on four corbels with carved heads, whilst the corbels in
the south transept are plain. All roofs throughout the Church are
new.

The position of the turret staircase is placed so as to be available
for access to the upper stages of the tower, and also to the rood-loft ;
and in re-building the chancel the position of the exit door has very
properly been retained. This turret is carried up on the outside
above the tower, and capped with a spire, making a most picturesque
feature.

The jambs of the west window of the nave are carried down to
the ground inside, and the filling-in below the window sill, with the
door, are of later date; in making this alteration it was apparently
intended to erect a porch, for the bases on the outside are returned,
but the intention was probably never carried into effect. The
_ position of the north and south doorways, so far eastward in the
aisles, is unusual—that on the south was fixed by the older porch,
which came, perhaps, about in the centre of the original Church
(supposing it to have been without a central tower), whilst I think
that on the north may be also accounted for. Before I visited this
Church I was quite expecting to find that the great work which
had within a comparatively recent time been carried out in the
neighbouring parish of Edington, had made its influence felt here ;
and whilst my expectation was not realized as regards the details of
mouldings, arches, and tracery (which had kept pace with the
changes which had taken place during the forty or fifty years which
intervened), I attribute one or two peculiarities in the general
arrangement of the design to the noble example which the builders
had before their eyes; and I cannot help thinking it is this that led
to the placing of a doorway in such an unusual position in the north
aisle; but while its use as the monks’ entrance at Edington is
manifest, no such reason can be assigned for it here. Then, the
adoption of the cruciform plan in so small a Church must, surely,
be more the result of example than necessity !

The bowl of the font is Norman, and probably coeval with the
earlier Church, parts of which we have noticed as still remaining ;
and the base is of the date of the re-modelling of the Church,

Q4 Notes on the Churches

Friday, August 2nd.

Tur Cuurcnu or S. Nicuouas. Nort Brap.ey.

The plan of this Church shows some variation from the usual
type. It has a clerestoried nave with north and south aisles and
chancel in the ordinary way, but the position of the chapels is
unusual—that on the north occupying the easternmost bay of the
arcade, stopping the aisle and forming a kind of transept; whilst
the south chapel, besides covering the corresponding space to that
on the north, is carried on eastward against the wall of the chancel,
and has a second (though late) archway opening into it; the result
of this arrangement is very pleasing.

The nave arcade of three bays is apparently fourteenth century
work (although the re-facing of the stonework introduces some
doubt), and the south chapel is about the same date.

A complete re-modelling of the Church—a frequent process at
this time—was commenced about eighty years later. First a
clerestory was added to the nave, the north chapel was built, then
the chancel, aisles and porch were re-built and the tower added at
the west end.

The design of the north chapel is very remarkable—the founder’s
tomb in the north wall is treated on the inside as a recessed bay,
and, with its separate diagonal buttresses and pinnacles and richly-
panelled plinth on the outside, makes a charming feature. The slab
has the incised effigy of Emma, mother of Archbishop Stafford,
dated 1446. The original oak roof exists (it is profusely orna-
mented with carving, though almost, if not entirely, without
heraldry), and the piscina remains in the respond of the arch.

The south chapel, also, has the old roof, but it is more simple in
design than the last, There is no trace of niche or piscina here.
(A fine old chest with three locks stands in this aisle.)

The chancel has its original windows in the side walls, but the
east window is new; the coeval sedilia are of plain character, with
square heads. The panelled archways communicating with the
south chapel from the chancel and south aisle were doubtless inserted

Visited by the Society in 1889. 25

when the chancel and aisles were built, as also the similar one between
the north aisle and chapel.

The font is a very fine example of Perpendicular work. It is of
large size and octagonal, the four cardinal panels have the emblems
of the evangelists, and the diagonal sides are enriched with those
of the Passion. The porch has had its roof altered in pitch, but
the original can be traced.

The Church has a noble tower, well designed and substantially
built, with the stair-turret well pronounced and carried up for the
full height. The buttresses have diagonal shafts continued above
the top weathering, as though intended to carry pinnacles, but they
end in grotesque gargoyles at the cornice level in a very abrupt
manner. The angle pinnacles have been lost.

In a glass case in the vestry are an ancient chalice and paten of
pewter, the former much crushed, perhaps of the fourteenth century,
which were found during the restoration of the Church in 1863 in
a coffin formed out of a hollowed tree, under the arch on the south
side of the chancel.

[15th June, 1548. Amongst the list of chantry furniture bought
(in one lot) by Thomas Chafyn, of Mere, are the following :—

The Chauntre in the parish of North Bradley.
Imprimis—A chalyce of sylver waying viii ownce
Item. One old torn vestment of dornysse
» One altar cloth of no valewe xij4,
» One corporas with j old case
» One bell waying half a hundred

The vestments do not seem to have been of such great value that
we need regret the evident bargain made by Mr. Chafyn, but it
would be interesting to know what the bell was—perhaps thesanctus.]

Roap CuurcH.

This Church appears to have heen built all at one time (about the
middle of the fifteenth century), excepting the tower, which is
somewhat more debased. The plan consists of nave with clerestory,
north and south aisles, western tower, and chancel with north chapel.

26 Notes on the Churches

The nave arcades are well designed and the archway into the
chapel is similar to them ; the capitals of both are surmounted by
a pretty carved cresting. The roof and the inner arches of the
clerestory windows are modern. The stairs to the rood loft have
been removed, but the doorways remain, and a puzzling appearance
is given to the upper one by building a piece of the window tracery
across it. For some reason nearly all the original window tracery
of this Church has been taken out, and a stack of it, covered with
ivy, exists in the churchyard : I presume the new work which takes
its place has been copied from the old. A piscina in the north aisle
indicates the existence of an altar in front of the archway opening
into the chapel, and there is a squint looking into the chancel, but
nol towards the high altar—the same may be said of the one on the
south side. There was an altar also in the south aisle, the piscina
of which remains, and there is a recessed altar-tomb in the south
wall coeval with the Church. There are the remains of, apparently,
a stoup built in here. A piece of fresco, with a kneeling female
figure (probably representing the Annunciation) has been carefully
preserved on the south wall, and there is a pretty little niche with
colour near it remaining 7m sitw further westward. Both aisles
retain their original roofs of trussed-rafter form, but it will be
observed that the windows of the south are richer than those of the
north ; those at the east and west ends have pointed heads, and the
tracery of the square-headed side windows is more varied. At the
west end are the remains of a doorway which, probably, previously
led to a staircase for access to the roof, which was closed by the
addition of the tower,

The archway into the tower is of the same panelled kind as those
we saw at North Bradley, and the lower stage is vaulted in stone.
The staircase doorway is unusually good.

The chancel has been much altered, and the two-bay arcade
between it and the chapel is apparently new. The piscina and one
window in the south wall are original work, but the other and the
east window are new.

The side windows of the chapel have been less interfered with
than any others in the Church, but the east window here also is new.

Visited by the Society in 1889. 27

The bits of shafts and an early coffin lid built in over the door point
to the conclusion that a Norman Church stood on this site.

The porch has the original roof and ogee inner doorway with the
old hinges, but the outer doorway is new. The font is probably
coeval with the Church.

Cuurcy or S. Grecory. BErcKINGTON.

This is a Church of the written history of which I know nothing
but what has been given to us by Mr. Medley. I have nothing to
add to this but what can be gathered from the stones of the building
itself ; and from these we may trace many of the alterations which
the Church has undergone, and which make it so extremely in-
teresting. This interest has been well preserved in a very careful
restoration. :

In the first place I may say that we have here only the second
piece of pure Norman work which we have seen during our ex-
eursions, and it is somewhat remarkable that we should have
journeyed for two days within our own county of Wiltshire and yet
have to go over its berders to find any complete part of a Church
older than the middle of the twelfth century. The tower of this
Church is of Norman date for its full height, although it was
re-modelled in the fifteenth century by adding angle-buttresses,
staircase, and parapet, and by the insertion of the west window and
the archway into the nave (which, by the way, is of the same
panelled type as those we saw at North Bradley and Road), and
by vaulting the lower stage in stone.

It is not easy to account for the arch above the west window, but
it is part of the original work, and at first sight it seems to suggest
there having been some erection to the west of the tower, as at
Netheravon, but the string below, and the absence of traces of the
side walls contradict this, and the character of the arch is that of a
relieving arch. There are also traces of windows in the north and
south sides. Like many other Norman towers this appears to have
had insufficient foundations, hence the necessity for the buttresses
added in the fifteenth century and the somewat clumsy excrescence
against the north wall. There are remains of the Norman work in

28 Notes on the Churches

the chancel, which we shall see presently, and there are fragments
built up in the aisle walls, but not 2a situ. The pitch of the roof
of the early nave can be traced on the east face of the tower.

The body of the Church appears to have been entirely re-built at
about the middle of the fifteenth century—the nave, with clerestory,
aisles, and north and south porches being of that date, and the
hand of the designer of Road Church can be traced here in the
columns of the arcades with the same crested capitals. There are
squints in an unusual position on the east wall of the nave on each
side of the chancel arch, their direction being towards the high
altar. The original sanctus bell-cot remains on the east gable of
the nave. The rood-screen has disappeared, but there are pronounced
evidences of its having existed, and the two corbels in the east wall
probably indicate its level. The Church having been rebuilt at the
time when rood-screens were coming more into use the staircase for
access was made a part of the plan, and the inconvenient arrange-
ment usually met with where the rood-screen and stairs were inserted
is avoided. The staircase is made quite a feature here, and is carried
up the full height of the arch wall; it starts from the north aisle
and has a doorway opening out on to the loft, which probably existed
over the side altar there; a second door—the use of which is not
apparent—looks into the chancel; and a third, higher up, afforded
access to the principal loft across the chancel arch, whence the
staircase is continued on to the roof. There are the usual accessories
of side altars at the end of each aisle, the south aisle having a
piscina, with shelf, in the south wall, and an aumbry in the east
wall—also a squint pointing in the direction of the high altar. The
remains in the north aisle comprise a niche and part of the reredos
in the east wall, besides the piscina.

There is a curious instance in this Church of how the old builders
got over a mistake in setting out their work : the windows of the
aisle are not properly arranged to correspond with the bays of the
arcade, so that the roof-principals cut into the heads of the windows
—a position in which it would seem to be impossible to get a corbel ;
and more prosaic people might have done away with the brace
altogether in such acase. But these old builders were above such

Visited by the Society im 1889. 29

an expedient, and put in the corbel by the side of the window,
twisting the grotesque round and across it sufficiently far to catch
the bottom of the brace, altogether ignoring the fact that by such
means its practical value is lost.

The north porch formerly had a room over it, with a turret
staircase for access, the upper and lower doors of which remain.
The floor has been removed and the roof (which is the original one)
brought down below the top of the doorway. This was probably a
watching chamber, and the opening through the aisle wall can be
traced. On the outside there is also evidence of the lowering of
the walls and roof, but the niche in the gable has not been disturbed

In the chancel there are two recessed altar tombs in the north
wall, which were originally flush with the face of it, there being a
projection on the outside to admit of the depth of the recess; the
easternmost one appears to have been converted into a canopied
tomb at a later date, but the sides of the added portion look as
though they were not worked for their present position. This
contains two figures, supposed to represent John and Margaret de
Ereleigh, 1380—1400. The other has a single female figure, put
at 1860—1370, probably one of their daughters. 'The brass in the
floor commemorates John St. Maur and his wife Elizabeth, 1485.
There are two sedilia and a piscina with shelf in the south wall of
the sanctuary. The roof and east window are modern. ‘The re-
mains of the Norman chancel, to which I referred, are distinctly
traceable in the herring-bone masonry near the floor and part of a
window over it, cut into when the archway into the chapel was
formed.

The chapel on the south side of the chancel appears to have been
added late in the fifteenth century, and part of an earlier buttress
weathering is seen in the angle. . It is chiefly remarkable for the
large extent of window surface, the east window being of four lights
and the south window of six lights. There is a rude niche, formed
of rough masonry, also the remains of an aumbry, in the east wall
and a doorway exists in the south wall; the roof is a poor one of
the seventeeth century. The brass in the floor is to John and Edith
Compton, the former of whom died in 1515, and might have been

30 Notes on the Churches

the founder. The arms of the Longs (the lion rampant) figure on
a brass in the north jamb of this arch.

The font is of very unusual form, consisting of a large octagonal
bow] and base with a central shaft and eight small shafts around it *
all of Purbeck. It looks like the work of the twelfth century.

An Elizabethan tablet, bearing the Royal arms and the inscription
“ KE. R. 1574—God save the Queen ” is well preserved in the south
aisle.

Tus Cuurcu or S. Mary. Oxp Ditton.

This very picturesque little Church is a happy termination to our
two days’ excursion, and it will fully repay close investigation, for
there are many points of extreme interest in it which are not ap-
parent at first sight.

The Church was built, late in the fifteenth century, with a nave,
north aisle, chancel, and south porch, and there is no trace of earlier
work. (Ido not know whether the list of rectors goes back farther
than this, or whether there is any other evidence of a Church having
stood here before the present one.)

There was never any tower, but instead of it a charming bell-cot
was erected upon the west gable; this is octagonal in plan—the
west cardinal face is supported on a buttress carried up the centre
of the wall outside, and the east face is corbelled over inside; the
sides are filled by perforated stone panels. The bell-cot is sur-
mounted by a stone spire, and instead of a parapet the blocking
course above the moulded cornice is crenellated.

There were probably no windows in the west end, but the original
windows in the Church which still exist are:—One of three lights
in the south wall of the nave, three of three lights in the north wall of
the nave, and one of two lights in the south wall of the chancel. The
rest, for some reason not apparent, were removed, and two new ones
inserted in the west wall when the vestry and gallery were erected
~ on the south of the chancel in the debased Gothic of the seventeenth
century.

The porch itself remains almost untouched, and there is the usual
door opposite in the north wall. The inner door of the porch has

a

Visited by the Society im 1889. 31

an awkward-looking arch, with the remains of a segmental label
and its terminals over; but on looking at the north door we see
that the peculiar form of the arch is due to to the cusping having
been cut away. The remains of a niche—probably for a figure of
Our Lady, to whom the Church is dedicated—exist over the door.
The porch has the moulded oak ribs of its original roof, but the
ridge-piece is missing. Even the door and its hinges are old. The
outer doorway of the porch has the pointed arch under a square
label, which is so common in late Perpendicular work.

The nave arcade is of a peculiar type, but it was not constructed
as we now see it, and some of its peculiarity disappears on closer
inspection. The arches are panelled (the panelling being without
cusping), and the ribs die out on to the face of the pillars; these
latter were merely square piers, without caps or even an abacus mould.
This simple form seems to have offended the eye of some more
modern guardian of the Church, who (probably when the other
alterations were made) pared off the angles to give the piers more
the appearance of ordinary columns.

I have no doubt that there was a chancel arch of similar kind, for
there are no projecting responds: this, however, has disappeared,
possibly improved away; but I think it is more likely that it fell,
owing to the spreading of the abutments, for there are evidences
everywhere of defective foundations—the south wall is going out
and the nave arcade inclining northwards to an extent which should
receive consideration.

Further evidence of the chancel arch being the full width of the
chancel is afforded by the lower part of the rood-screen, which
remains intact, and apparently im situ, on the south side of the
gangway: this has been cut off at the middle rail, and the mortices
and pins of the upper stage can be seen. This rail has a broad flat
member, which contained carving planted in, as at Edington, so
that we may conclude the screen was a rich one. There are many
pieces of it—mullions, &c.—used as supports to the seats (two or
three being in one pew in the north aisle), and I have no doubt the
removal of the more modern pews would reveal sufficient evidence
for the entire restoration of the screen.

382 Notes on the Churches

Adjoining the part of the screen may be seen the roughly-cut
poppy-head of one of the chancel stalls, and another (better carved)
is in the pew I before mentioned. There are many of the original
benches in the Church, probably nearly enough to seat the nave, so
that I believe this little Church could be almost entirely re-fitted
with its old fifteenth century oak-work. It will be noticed, also,
that there are parts of the front framing in the large pews on the
north side of the chancel, and in the one in the aisle ; also that the
panelled sinking in the bench ends is, like that of the aisle arches,
without cusping.

It is probable that the original roof of the nave remains above
the plaster ceiling, for the waggon-head form is hardly that of
such a roof as would have been put on in more recent times.

The chancel has its priest’s door on the south side.

The font is the original one, but sad/y scraped, and on a new
plinth. It is a very nice example of the font of the period and of
good size. I am glad that the other stonework of the Church has
not suffered the fate of this.

There are bits of old glass in the old south window of the nave,
and amongst the devices are the initials R. H. coupled by a cord;
the Tudor flower and a cock—the latter probably heraldic.

There are some pieces of Jacobean pewing, and also some of oak-
work still later—all well worth taking care of. The rest of the
pews, also the pulpit and desk are of deal.

Probably at the end of the seventeenth or early in the eighteenth
century the addition to the north of the chancel was erected—a
vestry of two stories, both being open to the chancel, and the upper
being intended for use as a gallery. The east window and others I
have referred to were probably added at the same time.

It will be seen that the east gable of the nave has been made up
in a temporary manner, and slated, since the removal of the chancel
arch and the wall over it.

:

33

GHAesthury

Ander the Plat.
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jacxson, F.S.A.!

N the programme of our proceedings the paper now about to

be read was announced as “Some Notes of Westbury
History,” simply because its full history down to A.D. 1830 was
written in the late Sir Richard C. Hoare’s magnificent work on South
Wiltshire. The authors of county histories are, and must be, always
largely assisted ; and the best assistants are those who belong to and
reside in the particular district described, being able to supply local in-
formation, and having opportunity of access to documents in private
hands, without which nothing can be done with accuracy. Sir Richard
was helped, in such portions as related to modern times, by Mr.
Richard Harris, of Dilton; in his account of ancient times and

_ families by the officers in charge of the public records in London.

Such works as his are, no doubt, noble additions to our literature,
but, unfortunately, it requires a nobility of purse to buy them.

_ They are very costly, and, thanks to our American friends who love

to trace their connection with the families and places of the old
country, and so have raised the market price enormously, such works
are getting quite out of the reach of ordinary folk—who accordingly
are not much the better for them. Now, one of your fellow-
townsmen, Mr. Michael, has, to his great credit, taken pains to
present you with the main outline and substance of the more
splendid publication, at a price and in a form which bear a strange
contrast with the more expensive work—a modest little pamphlet,
price twopence. But observe the result. Where one person can
buy Sir Richard, thousands can buy Mr. Michael. At the railway
stalls among his little publications I observed one with which, as it

1 Read at the Meeting of the Wilts Archeological Society at Westbury, July
81st, 1889.

VoL, YXIV.——-NO. LXXII. D

34 Westbury under the Plain.

was compiled chiefly from something of my own writing, he has
done me the honour to connect my name. Some people might feel
mortified at seeing their handiwork, or rather the spinning of their
brains, offered at such a very insignificant figure. On the contrary,
this was exactly what I was pleased to see: because, the very object
of our Society was from the first, and is now, not to keep our in-
formation to ourselves, or hide it in volumes which nobody ean buy,
but to put county history and other archeological subjects into a
cheaper form, to popularize and diffuse it, to encourage a taste for
it, and enable people of the humblest class to take more interest ia
the places they live in, by knowing who had been there before them,
who built this house or Church, what changes there have been, and
so forth—things of which they are generally quiteignorant. I have
told the story before, but as a specimen of popular acquaintance with
the history of a place it will bear telling again. Visiting Glastonbury
Abbey some years ago, though not altogether unacquainted with
its history, I thought myself in duty bound to get all the information
I could from the cicerone of the ruins. The regular official happening
to be ill, or, at any rate, not forthcoming, an old post-boy (an
animal hardly known, except by tradition, to the present generation)
hanging about the gate offered his services, assuring me that he
knew all about it quite well. So, in the course of our tour, I asked
him, for fun, who was it that built up this old place? He had not
got his lesson quite pat, so he scratched his head, and said he’d heard
tell it wur Oliver Crummell. ‘‘ Well, then,” said I, ‘‘ who knocked
it about in this way?” ‘Oh! [then another scratch] why that
wur Willum Norman.”

A cheap account, then, of Westbury being now within very easy
reach, and other gentlemen being about to address you upon the
Church, the geology of the district, &c., I propose to make only a
few remarks on one or two of the more prominent points of the
subject, with, first, a slight sketch of the general history, for the
benefit of those who may not happen to have invested twopence in
Mr. Michael.

There is no other Westbury in Wiltshire, but there are several
places of the same name in England, some of them in counties

By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.8.A. 85

adjoining Wiltshire: and as it lies under the northern escarpment
of Salisbury Plain it used to be called “‘ Westbury under the Plain ”
_ to distinguish it more particularly from Westbury-on-Trym, near
Bristol, and Westbury-upon-Severn, both in Gloucestershire, as well
as from Westbury, near Wells, in Co. Somerset.

One peculiarity is that, whereas all the other hundreds in the
county contain, more or less, many parishes, the hundred of West-
bury consists of only one—the parish of Westbury. It is very
large, somewhere about thirty miles round, the town being nearly
in thecentre. For those who may wish to take so long a walk, there
is for their guidance an old Perambulation deed, taken three hundred.
years ago, which describes the parish boundaries with a very curious
minuteness, It includes several smaller places, villages and hamlets,
as Bratton, Westbury Leigh, Dilton, Heywood, &e. Of the most
ancient inhabitants there are vestiges in plenty, both above and
underground. On the downs above Bratton are the oldest, the
usual tumuli or burial mounds, and the great earthwork called Bratton
Castle. There are also traces of the Romans, and, after them, of
the Romanised Britons. Wherever the name of Ridge or Street
occurs in a country place, it is probable that something Roman
is not far off: and so it is here. There are, as is well known, four
or five principal highways called Roman (though some of them are
suspected to be really older), traversing the whole length of Britain
in various directions; but there were by-ways as well as highways,
and these are now to be discovered by local observers. The Romans
were at very great pains and cost in making their roads: some were
paved, others made with gravel or stone, but generally raised above
the level of the ground so as to present a slight ridge. Ridge is a
common country people’s name for an old Roman way; one in
Yorkshire, a very perfect specimen, goes, in the dialect of that
county, by the name of the Roman “rig.” Now that name occurs
here at several places, in one continuous line, You have first,
simply, Ridge (Rudge, as they call it), Hawkridge, Coteridge, Stor-
ridge, Bremridge, and Norridge (1.e., North Ridge) : and you have also
Short Street; all contiguous: so that there can be little doubt about
a Roman by-way having gone along there, though where it came

D2

36 Westbury under the Plain.

from, or led to, may not be now very evident. Under ground in
different places all along that side of the parish numerous coins and
fragments of pottery have turned up: many at Ham, a large open
tract north-west of the town. Tradition has it that old Westbury
stood there, and that it was battered (our friend Oliver Cromwell
again) from Bratton Camp. Sir R. C. Hoare was told by a quarry-
man that in a little piece of ground, then lately ploughed up, called
Compton’s Plot, was the well of the old town, into which all the
valuables had been thrown. Im the field between that plot and
Heywood the same man had assisted in digging up the foundations
of a large building of well-bewn stone ; and another labourer spoke
of a tesselated pavement found near the well. Cinerary urns have
been unearthed at the Iron Works!; at Highsomley many Roman
relics; and in Mr. Phipps’s garden at Charleote, where I happened
some time ago to see the men making new flower-beds, the earth
appeared to be almost black and strewed thickly with fragments of
pottery as if it had been an ancient cemetery. There is no record
of the state of things here in the days of these Roman roads and
tesselated pavements, nor does anything appear to be known about
it till we come towards the end of the Saxon period, when the whole
belonged to the Crown. By degrees, in Norman times, certain
portions were granted to monasteries and to the Cathedral of Old
Sarum : the rest was disposed of to the laity. But the monasteries
did not get so large a share in this as in neighbouring parishes.
Whilst the house of Bonhommes at Edington possessed the greater

1 Tn April, 1881, the late Mr. Henry Cunnington wrote to the Devizes Gazette:
“The workmen engaged at the Westbury Iron Works have just discovered, about
two feet under the surface of the soil, a cinerary urn, about eight inches high,
containing the burnt bones of a young person about sixteen years of age. In
the mouth of this urn another smaller one was placed, to prevent the earth from
falling in on the interment. What is very remarkable, on taking out the contents
of the lower urn, a very fine coin of Constantine’s was found at the bottom,
amongst the ashes. The coin is a bronze, and was struck in London. On the
obverse is the head of Constantine, laureated. Inscription : Emperor Constantine,
Pius, Felix, Augustus. Reverse: Mars marching to the right, with shield and
spear. Inscription: Mars, the defender of the country ; under the figure P.L.N.
Pecunia Londinensis), showing that the coin was struck in London. Both the
urns are in fine condition, and will shortly be placed in the Devizes Museum.”

By the Rev. Canon J. EB. Jackson, F.8.A. 37

part of that parish, and the nuns of the convent of Romsey in

Hampshire had all Steeple Ashton, a comparatively small part of
Westbury fell into ecclesiastical hands—what is called the Parsonage
Manor was bestowed by King Henry IJ. upon Sarum for the
maintenance of the Precentor. A manor that had belonged to
Bishop Waltham, of Salisbury (1888-1395), and afterwards to the
alien priory of Steventon, in Berkshire, being confiscated (as the
lands of alien priories often were), was given by Richard II. to the
Abbot and Convent of Westminster, to whose successors, the Dean
and Chapter there, it now belongs. Monkton Farleigh Priory, near
Bath, had the part still called Leigh Priors. Edington Monastery
had land at Bratton and Bremridge—the rest, as I have said, was
granted or sold to persons of influence, and in this way the one
original great manor got cut up into a number of estates. The
history becomes then very complicated, and not interesting to a
general audience. Instead of passing on in the simple way from
father to son, the properties had soon to be divided between co-
heiresses—each of whom carried away her moiety into another
family. In a generation or two more co-heiresses appeared, and
then there was a fresh sub-division of the first moiety, and so on;
so that what with moieties, semi-moieties, and demi-semi-moieties,
_ Westbury territorial history is somewhat of a labyrinth, abounding,
however, in old aristocratic names, such as St. Maur, Mauduit,
Stafford, Arundell, which, I believe, still survive as the names of
different portions of land about the parish. In course of years
many of these sub-divisions became re-united by successive pur-
chases, centreing chiefly in the Phipps family, of which a large part
has recently passed into the hands of Mr. Laverton. All the pre-
vious changes are given in detail in Sir Richard Hoare’s history.
For the present purpose it will be enough to select one or two of
_ the most important: before doing which I have a note or two about
_ the town itself.

ParuiIAMENTARY Notices.

The earliest mention we have of Westbury as a borough returning
members to Parliament is in the year 1446-7 (27th of Henry VL).

388 Westbury under the Plain.

Its obtaining that privilege is accounted for in the same way as in
the case of Calne, Wootton Basset, Chippenham, and others. They
were all Crown property, and the Crown took good care to strengthen
its own position by bestowing the privilege on places under*its
immediate control. The members for Westbury have been from the
first, upon the whole, taken from among Wiltshire families in the
immediate neighbourhood, and in one of these instances Westbury
borough is distinguished as having been the first in which bribery was
detected. The offender was Mr. Thomas Long, of the Semington
branch of that family, but owner of a manor within the parish of
Westbury ,who,in 1571 (14 Eliz.) ,was refused admittance to the House
on the ground of having paid to the mayor four pounds to obtain the
seat.' Among strangers wholly unconnected with the place who
have been returned as members, Westbury may boast of two very
eminent public men, Sir William Blackstone, the famous author of
that standard work, the Commentaries on the Laws of England ; the
other, the late Sir Robert Peel. There was also another M.P. for
Westbury who deserves notice, Capt. Matthew Mitchell, R.N., who
died in 1747. He had been a companion of Commodore (afterwards
Lord) Anson in his voyage round the world in 1741, as commandant
of The Gloucester. This unfortnnate ship, having been driven by
bad weather far from the rest, narrowly escaped destruction, was
lost for a considerable time, and when recovered was found with
most of her crew dead, and the captain nearly so, from starvation.
The story is given in Anson’s voyage.

1'W. Prynne mentions this as the first precedent he could find for the Com-
mons beginning to seclude one another upon pretence of undue elections and
returns. The case is thus described by Oldfield :—“14 Eliz. May 9, 1571.
Thomas Longe [Prynne prints Lucy, by mistake] gent. who was returned for
this borough, and who was deemed not of sufficient capacity to serve in Parliament
confessed that he had given Anthony Garlande, Mayor of Westbury, and one
Watts of the same town, the sum of four pounds for that place and room of
burgessship: And it was ordered by the House that the said Garlande and Watts
should immediately repay the said Thomas Longe the said four pounds, and also
that a fine of £20 be, by this House assessed upon the Corporation of the said
town to the Queen’s Majesty’s use for the said lewd and slanderous attempt.”’
[Oldfield’s Parliamentary History, vol. v., p. 141.]

By the Rev. Canon J. EL. Jackson, F.S.A. 39

Currey!

Of the ill-endowed vicars of the parish we have a list for five
hundred and fifty years, or thereabouts, but I do not see among
them the names of any persons of what may be called national
reputation, so that where nothing is known there is nothing to be
told. But every one must have observed how soon, how very soon,
names that made, perhaps, considerable noise in the country in their
day, slip out of memory when their day is over. Unless they have
left some abiding mark whereby posterity may be reminded of their
having once existed, the biography is summed up in the three
entries of a parish register—born, married, and died, if even so much
as that. It is so (according to Hamlet) with persons of more im-
portance than the modest vicars of acountry parish : “ There is hope
that a great man’s memory may outlive his life half a year, but by
our Lady he must build Churches then, or else shall he suffer not
thinking on.” But Time which so mercilessly devours most things
has kindly spared us a few crumbs concerning two of the older
vicars of this parish. One was

Puitre Hunton.

A man of good learning and abilities, who, after being schoolmaster
at Abury, was appointed in the Commonwealth period to be minister
first at Devizes, then at Heytesbury, and lastly ‘at Westbury.
Whilst he was here he was appointed one of the commissioners for
Wilts for ejecting from their livings those of the clergy who in the
good pleasure of the Puritanical party were considered to be “ scan-
dalous, ignorant, and insufficient.” He afterwards published a
treatise on monarchy, in which his views gave such offence to the

a

1 There is a singular entry relating to the Church property here, in Domesday
Book, at which time the whole lay manor belonged to the Crown. The land
belonging to the Church was nearly two hundred acres : held, says the record, by

* elericolus quidam.” The late Canon Rich Jones, in his edition of the Wilts
- Domesday (p. 14), observes that “* by clericolus the scribe meant clericulus: &

_ word explained by Ducange to mean a junior clerk or a choir-boy ’’ (both of which
- interpretations seem highly inapplicable), “ but it is difficult to say what is the
~ exact meaning of the word in this passage.”

40 Westbury under the Plain.

orthodox University of Oxford that they condemned it in Convo-
cation, and ordered it to be publicly burnt in the schools quadrangle.!

JoHN PaRaDisE.
The other vicar, also a Commonwealth man, minister of Westbury,
who survives in a printed publication, was a native of the county, of
whom it is particularly recorded, as something extraordinary, though
not so now-a-days, that he was so dexterous in writing shorthand
as to be able to take down, word for word, a whole sermon from the
mouth of any preacher. On the Restoration he conformed, and
preached as earnestly for the King as he had formerly done for the
Commonwealth. His shorthand notes from discourses of the previous
complexion could scarcely have been of much use to him. The one
discourse by which his memory lives was preached at Westbury on
30th January, 1661. It has the odd title of “ Hadad-rimmon, or
England’s mourning for Regicide, preached at Westbury on a
solemn Fast for the Horrid Murder of K. Charles I. of glorious
memory.” The name of Hadad-rimmon occurs only once in the
Bible, in the twelfth chapter of Zechariah :—*“In that day shall
there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadad-
rimmon in the valley of Megiddo”: alluding to a place of that

1 Antony Wood, in his account of Mr. Hunton in “ Athenz Oxonienses,” says
that this treatise on monarchy was in great vogue among many persons of
Commonwealth and Levelling principles, but that the offence specially taken to
it at Oxford arose from its assertion that the sovereignty of England lay in the
“Three Estates, the King, Lords, and Commons.” That is still the general
idea of the “Three Estates,” but strictly speaking, it is incorrect. The Crown
is not one of the estates of the realm. In the heading of the now disused service
for the 5th of November, in the Prayer Book, the case is stated correctly: * A
Form of Prayer and Thanksgiving for the happy Deliverance of King James
and the three Estates of England.’’ The collects of that service are still more
explicit: “The King and the Estates of the Realm, viz., The Nobility, Clergy,
and Commons assembled in Parliament.’’ Master Hunton designedly omitted
the clergy. The year 1683 was an awkward time to make such an omission,
because the Established Clergy having been for many years, in the Commonwealth
period, shelved and ejected, had lately recovered their position at the Restoration
of Charles II., and for them to be then proclaimed, by one of their own order, as
no longer one of the estates of the realm, was intolerable in the ears of Oxford
divines, who accordingly showed their sense of the indignity by putting the Vicar
of Westbury’s book into the fire.

By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, FS. A. 41

name where the good King Josiah was slain (II. Kings, xxiii., 27).
The object of this discourse was to rouse the slumbering loyalty of
Westbury. How far it was successful may be questionable. Ac-
cording to modern ideas, a ponderous discourse filling fifty-two
pages of close small print, requiring, if properly delivered, at least
three hours of attention, instead of rousing the slumbering loyalty
of a congregation would be more likely to have a different effect and
send them to keep company with their loyalty.'

I will now say a few words about one or two of the principal old
families and their places of residence within the parish.

Brook Hovsz, or Hatt.

The most important of the old families who owned large estates
here seems to have been the Pavely family, of Brook House. They
were here for about two hundred and fifty years, from Henry I. to
Edward III., and during all that time their estate passed through
successive Walters and Reginalds from father to son. The name
does not seem to have made much figure in the general history of
England at that period: and what is known about them is just what
isin most cases known about ancient families from deeds relating
to property that happen not to have been destroyed. They were
sheriffs, commissioners for the Crown in county business, such as
levies of militia, perambulations of Royal forests, and the like.
One was a judge, another a prior of the Order of St. John of
Jerusalem: some appear to have been Religious men, as in the south
transept of the Church, where they had a chantry chapel, there are,
or once were, in a niche in the wall, monumental stones with crosses
carved upon them. The devices and arms of Pavely are found
upon neighbouring Churches, implying contributious towards those
buildings. One of the old documents from which we glean their

1 The full title of this dreary discourse was “‘ Hapaprimmov, Sive Threnodia
Anglicana ob Regicidium: A Sermon on David’s Humiliatiou for Cutting off
the Royat Rozz, and Detestation of Cutting off the Royat Hxap of the Lorp’s
ANOINTED. Preached Jan. 30, 1660; Being a Solemn Fast for the Horrid
Murther of Kine Cuarues I. of glorious memory. At Westsury, in the
County of Witts. By Joun Parapisz, Preacher of the Word there.”

42 Westbury under the Plain.

history is rather curious. It is a formal deed in Latin, a sort of
letters patent, proclaiming (as such documents begin) to all the
faithful in Christ that Walter Pavely binds himself to supply Roger
Marmion every Christmas as long as he (Marmion) lives with a
furred robe after the pattern of that worn by the other Esquires in
attendance upon him. In consideration of which dignity Marmion
was to give up any claim he might have to a certain one hundred
acres of land, and pay one mark of silver every year. A train of
young Marmions in furred robes in attendance upon him gives one
an idea of the dignity of the chief esquire of Westbury in those
days. The formal grant of an annual dress, secured by a solemn
document, was quite a common custom then. In many of what are
called the wardrobe accounts of the Royal household we find legal
documents regularly drawn up in Latin and registered, in which
are prescribed most carefully how many yards of cloth or silk, fur,
ermine or rabbit skins, as the case might be, were to be used for such
and such an officer. The last male heir of the Pavely family died in
1361, and left two coheiresses, Alice and Joan: and here begins the
splitting up of estates which I alluded to before: with which,
however, we must deal very briefly. Alice married, and left three
daughters co-heiresses of her share; and one of those daughters
married and left two more co-heiresses: so that in course of time
Alice’s original half of the Brooke House cake got cut up into very
thin slices indeed. The story of the descent from her is simply a
labyrinth of pedigree. It is enough to say that to Alice Pavely’s
original moiety belonged whatever lands in Westbury were after-
wards found belonging to, or bearing the names of St. Loe,
Chedyock, St. Maur, Arundell, Stowell or Drury. Joan, the other
co-heiress of Pavely, married a Cheyney, and her moiety was not
subjected to so many subdivisions. It was divided only once,
between a Willoughby and a Paulet, Marquis of Winchester.
The Willoughby share passed by marriage to Blount, Lord Mountjoy,
so that ultimately half the original Pavely property belonged to the
two families of Blount and Paulett.! What house of residence

1The following table will explain, better than a long verbal detail, how the

By the Rev. Canon J. #. Jackson, F8.A. 43

there may have been for the elder sister Alice Pavely’s representatives
I cannot say: but of Joan’s representatives we know that Brook
House (which stood where Brook House Farm now stands) was
theirs. Of that house we have some account. Leland visited it in
his tour, in the reign of Henry VIII. He says, “ From Steple
Ashton to Brook Haule by woody ground. There was of very
auncient tyme an old Manor Place where Brook Haule now is, and
part of it yet apperith. But the new building that is there is of
the creating of the Lord Steward unto K. Hen. VII. [the first Lord
Willoughby de Broke, I believe]. The windows be full of rudders
(device). Peradventure it was his badge or token of the Admiral.
There is a fayr Park but no great thing. In it be a great number
of very fair and fine grand okes apt to sele houses.” John Aubrey,
a hundred years after Leland, saw and describes it as “ a very great
and stately old house. The Hall great and open with very old
windows—but only one coat of Pavely was left.” In the parlour,
chapel and canopy chamber, he found and copied twenty coats of
arms. “The rudders everywhere.” ‘These have been drawn and
published in the volume ealled “ Wiltshire Collections.” The ship’s
rudder, so frequent as a device, does not, however, appear to have
been as Leland “ peradventured ” peculiar to the Willoughby family,
but rather to their predecessors the Cheyneys; for it is found in
Edington Church on a little chantry chapel, of a date many years
before the Willoughbys succeeded to Brook. Of the Cheney family
of Brook little is left except the chantry just mentioned, which

original property of Pavely became ultimately subdivided. Suppose it, when
entire, to be represented by 20s.

pore 20s,

| |
St. Lo. Cheney,
10s, 10s,
| | ae,
Ghedyok. St. Maur. Willoughby.

58, 5a. 5s.
Gira 3 vi vest} PO Hise
| | I | |

Arundell, Stourton, Drury, Stowell, Bampfield, Blount, Paulett,
2s, 6d, 2s, 6d, ls. 8d, 1s, 8d, ls, 8d, 5a, 5a.

Three co-heiresses sold to Webb,

Ad Westbury under the Plain.

is built between two of the columns that divide the nave from the
south aisle. They were among the earliest patrons of Bishop
William of Edington, the founder of that fine old monastic Church,
and no doubt assisted him in the work.

WILLOUGHBY.

By marriage with one of the two co-heiresses of Cheney, Brook
came to Sir William Willoughby (of a junior branch of Willoughby
D’ Eresby), who was created baron by Henry VII. with the annex
of “de Broke” to his name. His grandson, Edward, died leaving
no male issue, so the estate was divided between Edward’s two
sisters, one of whom married Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy, and
the other W. Paulet, Marquis of Winchester ; and the title fell into
abeyance. But the grandson, Edward, left a daughter, who married
Sir Fulke Greville, ennobled as Lord Beauchamp of Broke. He,
again, leaving no son, his daughter married Sir Richard Verney,
who, being raised to the peerage, adopted the old title of Willoughby
de Broke, by which the Verney Family still continues to be repre-
sented in the House of Lords.'

Biount, Lorp Movunrioy.

By marriage with one of the two co-heiresses of Willoughby,
Brook was next the property of Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy.
The family of Blount was a widely-spread one, and produced many
remarkable men. Their history is published in a large volume,
which, in that department of literature, bears a high reputation.
William, Lord Mountjoy, the father of Charles, who obtained Brook
by marriage, had filled several high offices under Henry VII. and

1The Harleian MS. No. 483, p. 486, mentions that “ Brooke and Southwick
were granted to Edmund Ratcliffe, late ¢raitor Willoughby.” The explanation
of this is, that Sir Robert Willoughby the second and last baron was one of those
who favoured Henry, Earl of Richmond, and conspired under Humphrey
Stafford, Duke of Buckingham, to bring him to the thone, in opposition to King
Richard III. Stafford was beheaded, the rest fled abroad, but soon returned,
and were successful sharers in the Battle of Bosworth. (Dugdale’s Baronage.)
Southwick, in the adjoining parish of North Bradley, had belonged to the Cheney
family, and by marriage of an heiress had passed to the Willoughbys.

—————
*

By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson. F.8.A. 45

VIII. He had for his preceptor the celebrated Erasmus, from whom
he acquired that taste for letters for which the Court was then
remarkable. Erasmus says, in one of his letters, that he looked
upon England as his own country by adoption,"and desires to serve
it as much as his own native country. He often describes himself
as charmed with it, especially with the flourishing state of learning
and the number of learned men. He observes that it was the
peculiar distinction of England that the nobility and men about the
Court were conspicuous for the culture of the sciences; that there
was among them more rational conversation both on religious and
secular matters than in all the schools and monasteries in the
country. It was to William, Lord Mountjoy, that Erasmus had
dedicated his large folio work, the collection of proverbs, called
« Adagia Erasmi,’ but the father happening to die the very year
the work came out Erasmus wrote a supplementary dedication to
the son, Charles, Lord Mountjoy, then of Brook, of whom he speaks
as a person no less elegantly accomplished than the father. It is,
therefore, not unlikely that Erasmus may, in one of his many visits
to England, have been a guest at Brook House.' Charles, Lord
Mountjoy, was a soldier engaged in the wars with France. Whilst
there, not unmindful of the special uncertainty of a soldier’s life, he
made a will, which, under the circumstances, is so remarkable that
it must not be passed over in these notes of Westbury history.
Though a soldier, and busy in the rough work of war, he did not
forget the parish in which he was now a large owner of land. He
did that which in these days so boastful of enlightenment, so many.
people are striving to undo, or rather prevent, he made provision
for the religious education of the young in Westbury ; and although,
as will be perceived, he belonged to the faith which is not now the
national one, still, with a single exception, there is nothing in his
instructions but what might be usefully adopted at the present
time. His will runs thus :—“ Also I will that for the space of two
years after my decease a godly and discreet man may be chosen to

SS eee

"1 An ancient volume of Erasmus’s Commentary is still preserved in Westbury
Church, fastened to a desk by a chain.

46 Westbury under the Plain.

edify the youth of Westbury under the Plain with two lectures,
whereof the first lecture to be every day in the morning ordained
for the catechising of children, that they thereby may be perfectly
instructed to know what they profess in their baptism: in their
Pater-noster how to pray: in their Ave-Maria to know how our
Lord ought to be honoured, and in the ten commandments: and
that he who may be reader shall not only read unto them, but also
appose! them [#.e., question them] as they do in matters of gram-
mar. The second lecture to be within the same parish at after-
noon four times in the week ; 7.e., on Monday, Wednesday, Friday
and Sunday, to them that come; wherein chiefly to be declared,
the duties of subjects to their king and magistrates, for maintenance
of good order and obeysance, not only for fear but for conscience,
with Scriptures divine, and profane® policies [meaning secular
teaching’] consonant thereunto ; also increpation [?.e., condemnation]
of vice; with their texts of Scripture; and for the performance
thereof the Reader to have xx marks by the year.”

Brook Hall is said to have been bought from the Blounts by the
Hungerford family.

PENLEIGH

belonged anciently to the Fitzwarrens, of whom one was knight of
the shire in A.D. 1300. In one of the windows there are some of
the coats of arms of the Hungerfords.

BREMRIDGE.

This manor, with the advowson of the Heywood Chantry in
Westbury Church, belonged to the Marmions, afterwards to Sir
Philip Fitzwaryn and his wife, Constance, who granted it to
Edington Monastery in exchange for Highway Manor, near Calne,

1In Sir R. C. Hoare’s History of Westbury, p. 27, this word is accidentally
misprinted “oppose.” To appose is an old University term formerly used in
schools at Oxford, when two scholars tried to puzzle one another by questions.
This ‘“ Exercise’? was called ‘‘ Appositions.” We still retain the word in a
mutilated form when we say such and such a person was posed.

2 By “ profane” he only meant “ other than religious,” 7.e., secular instruction.
In Heb. xii., 16, Esau is called a profane person, not meaning blasphemous, but
non-religious.

By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.8.A. AT

It could not have been of much benefit to the Edington brethren,
for they had to pay out of it £10 a year, or thirty nobles, to Sarum
Cathedral, leaving only 13s. 4d., or two nobles, for themselves. I
mention the amount emphatically in nobles, as it suggests an in-
teresting discovery at Bremridge. The name is properly Bremel
ridge, and Bremel is simply our old acquaintance the bramble: the
same that gave its name to Bremhill, and we are to presume that
at both places the ground was more open and rough, and favourable
to its growth.! On the farm here belonging to Mr. Charles Phipps
some workmen making alterations in the house, in the year 1877,
came upon a hoard of thirty-two gold coins, piled one upon another,
as if they had been packed in some case of wood or leather, which
had perished. The workmen, ignorant of the law, proceeded
forthwith to appropriate the spoil, but being informed that such
gold treasure-trove belongs neither to the finder nor even to the
landlord, disgorged it. The coins were shown to the late Dr. Baron,
of Upton Scudamore, who took much interest in ascertaining what
they were, and published a full account of them, with plates, both
in the Archeologia and in the Wiltshire Magazine. He describes
them as gold nobles of the reigns of Edward III. and his son,
Richard II., and, therefore, deposited not before Richard. One
peculiarity is that some of them were coined in England, bearing
the English King’s name on them, and some in Flanders, bearing
the name of Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy and Count of
Flanders. This, as Dr. Baron observes, confirms the historical fact
(and this is one of the principal uses of old coins) that Edward IIT.
in his struggle with France did all in his power to secure the alliance
with Flanders, one important step towards his purpose being the
making the coinage of England and Flanders international. Another
interesting circumstance connected with these coins is that on one
side of some of them isa ship with the King standing in it, crowned,
and on the other side a legend or inscription round the margin, in
Latin, taken from Luke iv., verse 30 :—“ JESUS AUTEM TRANSIENS
PER MEDIUM ILLoRUM BAT.” [Jesus passing through the midst of
them went his way.| The first gold nobles were issued soon after a
1 See Vol. xxi., 121.

48 Westbury under the Plain.

great naval victory at Helvoetsluys, in which fight the French ships
were drawn up in line chained together. Edward seeing this, had
recourse to a stratagem. He steered off asif in flight. The French
loosed their ships to pursue. Edward then suddenly turned about,
and dashing through the centre of the French, broke the line and
won the day. It might be thought that the application of the text
of Scripture savoured rather of boldness, or worse: but, no doubt,
it was used religiously. Many members of the Government in those
days were high ecclesiastics, who would not quote Scripture carelessly,
and it was certainly intended that the victory should be regarded as
a providential deliverance from overwhelming numbers. The gold
noble got its name from its handsome appearance and purity of
metal. The market value is said to be 20s., but that is increased
to any amount, even to fabulous prices, by the rarity of a coin.
Only a few weeks ago, what is called the Pattern Crown of Charles
II., of which only two specimens are known to be in existence,
fetched the stupendous sum of £500. The Bremridge nobles were
sent up to the Treasury, according to law. Two or three specimens
only were detained for the National Museum, the rest were returned
with the request that the workmen might receive suitable compen-
sation. There is no fear, therefore, of anyone being shabbily treated
by the Crown officers, so that it is the best way always to obey the
law, for there is a heavy penalty if any infringement of it in this
point is discovered. I may add that if the number of thirty-two
nobles was really all that were found it is singular that this was
precisely the annual sum of thirty due from Bremridge to the
Cathedral of Sarum and two to the landlord. We may suppose,
therefore, that the tenant had got the money ready and was actually
going to pay when some disturbance or other induced him to hide
it, and that some accident having happened to himself it was never
recovered.

CHALFORD.

A correspondent acquainted with this part of the parish, between
Westbury and Westbury Leigh, says that ‘‘ there used to be here
an old place of meeting of the magistrates, and tnat the house, now

q
.

By the Rev. Canon J. LE. Jackson, F.S.A. 49

a private dwelling and shop, has in its front a stone on which is the
following: ‘Here is a stone stand in the wall, to testifie this is
Whitehall, I.H.M. 1704.” At the back still exists the place
formerly used as cells, and in the house itself is a capacious cellar,
which tradition affirms was for the use of the justices. In 1790 it
was the property of Lord Abingdon, and was known as “ The
Council House.” !

1The same “correspondent” gives the following account of a singular
discovery of coins at this place: “At the bottom of the hill coming from
Westbury, and just at the angle caused by the junction of the road that
leads from Ball’s Water, stood an old house known as the ‘George Inn.’ In
its latter days, some fifty years ago, it had fallen into decay. At one time
it had been a place of some importance, and was in fact a large building.
As people failed to get a living there it remained unoccupied and gradually
tumbled down, till it became in such a ruinous state that it was demolished
and the woodwork stored away in a shed near at hand. This shed was not
fastened ; consequently those cottagers living near made free use of the debris
to burn or for any other purpose. Some forty-five years since a man still
residing in Chalford, was returning home—the period of the year was about
Christmas time—and as he passed the place where the old George Inn had
stood, he picked up a piece of wood about six feet long. The finder carried
the wood to his cottage only a few yards off, and it being too long to burn
took a saw to cut it in pieces. He, however, failed to do so as the wood
was too hard. He then noticed a mortice, and thinking the tool would bite
in that place he again essayed to cut the piece, but the saw stopped half-way
through. Enraged at his failure the man took the wood up by one end and held
it over his head and brought the other end violently on the stone floor, causing
the piece to fracture just at the part half sawed through, and out rolled
ninety-nine gold coins. The man, frightened, ran out of the house, and the
news quickly spreading, the neighbours flocked in to inspect the pieces, which
had been collected on a plate. An old pensioner, who was looked on as an
oracle, declared the coins to be worthless, and the finder offered to take a
sovereign for the lot. They had been wrapped in a piece of rag and laid in a
roll in a hollow that had been scooped out of the wood, and a piece nailed
down on them; it was in this part that the finder attempted to saw, and
one of the coins was found to have been partly cut through by the tool.
The same evening, or the next day after the discovery, a man who employed
the finder, obtained from him all the money on the understanding that a full
account should be given of it, and said he to the finder: ‘ May my right arm
wither if I fail to give you the full value.’ From that hour till now the
finder has never had a penny, and it is said and believed, too, that the arm
of the man who had the coins actually did wither ; in fact he was never after
in possession of the use of his arm.”

VOL. XXIV.—NO. LXXIT, E

50 Westbury under the Plain.

Herywoop.

This place, on the northern side of the parish, is more connected
than the rest of it with the names of men of eminence who have
filled high public offices, more especially as distinguished members
of the legal profession, for it has been the home of three judges,
besides a Governor of the Province of Bombay. In early days,
before family names were settled, men, especially the clergy, were
known by their Christian name with that of the place of which
they were natives. By degrees the name of the place became the
family name. This was the case with William of Wickham, and
William of Edington, both Bishops of Winchester; and here of
William of Westbury. He was of a family possessed of property
in this and neighbouring parishes, and he rose to be Chief Justice
of the Common Pleas in the reign of Henry 1V. He and his
father built a chantry chapel on the north side of the Church, which
he endowed with lands, and then desired to be buried in it. In the
inquisition taken upon his death Heywood is mentioned as part of
his estates. The second judge, owner and occupier of Heywood,
was James Ley Chief Justice of the King’s Bench in 1620, created
by Charles I., Earl of Marlborough. His biography is given
succinctly on his monument in the Church, and some account of him
and his family is to be the subject of a paper from one of our col-
leagues. The third, whom, indeed, I need hardly name where he
is so well known, and known to be not less distinguished than any
of his predecessors, is the Right Hon. Lord Justice Lopes. Another
eminent lawyer, the late Lord Chancellor Bethel, paid your town
the compliment of taking it for his title, but he was not a native,
for he was born at Bradford, son of Dr. Bethel, a well-known physician
there at the beginning of this century : nor am I aware that Lord
Westbury had any kind of connection with this town, but Bradford
being already the title of one of the peers of the realm, he adopted
Westbury as the nearest to it in the same county. Before Heywood
became the property of the family of Ludlow, from which the
present owner derived it, it belonged to and was the residence of
William Phipps, Governor of Bombay, who died in 1748. An in-
teresting relic is preserved at the house, the identical tablet of wood

By the Rev. Canon J. £. Jackson, F.8.A. 51

brought from the house at Vevay, on the Lake of Geneva, inhabited
during his banishment by the celebrated Parliamentary General,
Edmund Ludlow. On the tablet are the words, “‘ Omune solwm
forti patria.” “ Any land is a home to a brave-hearted man.”

DItton.

Dilton, within this parish, and ecclesiastically attached to the
vicarage, has a little old Church, with a small crocketed spire, close
by the railway on the line tow ards Warminster. Dilton had formerly,
what many parishes used to have, a Church house : one kept solely
for parish meetings and business. This was built by the parishioners
at their own cost on a piece of ground nigh to the Church which
they held on a ninety-nine years’ lease from Edington Monastery.
There was also in Dilton a field called “The Sanctuary,” which
belonged to the Knights Templars, or Hospitallers of St. J ohn of
Jerusalem. This order had a small branch establishment at Ansty,
in South Wilts, called “‘ The Commandery of Ansty,” which was
- endowed with bits of land here and there all about the county.

Dilton Marsh is a different hamlet a little way off, and has a
Church, a vicar, and parish officers of its own. The manor house
called Dilton Court was no part of the great Pavely estate, but
together with Bratton belonged very anciently to the families of
Marmion and Dauntsey,

DAvNTSEY.

The Dauntsey family was one of the very oldest in this parish, and
I think that it must have been from them that were derived by a
succcesion of marriages the estates that in the last century belonged
to the Earl of Abingdon. There is a parish in North Wilts of the
name of Dauntsey which belonged to them, and they had also large
property at West Lavington.' Now, the Dauntseys of Dauntsey
~ 1 The name of Daunteey, of Lavington, after being extinct for some hundreds
of years, has been lately brought into very prominent notice in such a way that
the county is not likely to lose sight of it again. Under the will of a William
Dauntsey, @ native of Lavington, who died some four hundred years ago, a very
large sum of money has been offered by the Mercers’ Company in London, to
which certain property of his in London had been bequeathod, with certain cons
ditions, towards the establishment of a school,

E 2

52 Westbury under the Plain.

in North Wilts, ended in an heiress, who married Sir John Danvers.
The heiress of Danvers married Sir Henry Lee, of Ditchley, and
the heiress of Lee married the first Earl of Abingdon. In the year
1651 all the burgage houses in Westbury certainly belonged to Sir
John Danvers, who held his court here, and the Earls of Abingdon
certainly resided at Lavington, at a mansion now destroyed,
famous in its day for fine gardens, &c., so that putting all these
links together it seems highly probable that the Abingdon estates
came to that family through the chain of descent now suggested.
Sir R. C. Hoare mentions the property as theirs, but gives no ac-
count of the way in which it came to them. I know of no other
way of connecting the Earls of Abingdon, an Oxfordshire family,
with Westbury.

CHALCOTE.

Chaleote, so far back as 1364, belonged to the then great family of
Mauduit, whose name still survives in North Wilts, attached to the
parish of Somerford. Whether they lived here or not I cannot say.
They had larger possessions at Fonthill and elsewhere, especially at
Warminster, where they were lords paramount, and where, if any-
where, their residence would most likely have been. The heiress of
Mauduit married Sir Henry Green, one of the faithful adherents of
King Richard II. He defended Bristol Castle for the King, but
being betrayed by Bolingbroke (afterwards King Henry IV.) was
beheaded witk the rest.

Tn later times Chalcote passed through various hands till towards
the end of last century it became the property of a gentleman whose
name, being honourably connected with English literature, must not
be passed over now, for he was a native of Westbury, Bryan
Edwards, author of an able and accurate history of the British
Colonies in the West Indies. He was born in 1743. His father
had some small property in this parish, but died in difficulties. The

1 Ourself and Bushey, Bagot there and Green.” [Shakspeare, Richard II.
act I., scene 4.] In the second act, scene 2, Sir Henry appears on the stage
and brings to Queen Isabel the news of Bolingbroke having landed at Ravens-
purg.

ee

By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, P.S.A. 53

mother had a wealthy brother in the West Indies, Mr. Zachary
Bailey, who took the family under his protection and educated
young Edwards. The education was entirely in the English
language: for it was rather later in life that he began the usual
Latin, in which he says he made no great progress for he found it
“‘inexpressibly disgusting.” He was fond of writing, and, strange
to say, ventured upon turning Horace into English verse: but it
was only after he had got somebody else to translate the “ inex-
pressibly disgusting ” into English for him. Ultimately he became
rich by succeeding to some property, came home, sat in Parliament
for Grampound, and died in 1800. He purchased Chalcote, but
shortly before his death sold it to a younger brother. He was the
means of ejecting from the West Indies Dr. Wolcott, the famous
Peter Pindar, who was in that country doing mischief by some
furious poetry.’

Waite Horse.

I cannot bring to a close the few notes of Westbury history now
strung together without saying a few words upon that which is, in
one sense, the most conspicuous object in the parish; to get a hasty
sight of which the heads of young and old press towards the carriage
window as the train approaches Westbury railway station. In the
old coaching days we used to have more time for seeing whatever
was worth looking at along the line of the turnpike roads. In these
days of flying locomotion we can see nothing but our book or
newspaper; the journey is almost a dead blank, for no sooner does
a Church or other object come in sight than it is out of sight again
directly : something like the flash described in Midsummer Night’s
Dream :—

“ Brief as the lightning in the collied night
That in a spleen unfolds both heaven and earth,
And ’ere a man hath power to say, Behold!
The jaws of darkness have devour’d it up.
But at Wantage and at Westbury we are disappointed if the
weather is too foggy to let us see the White Horse. There is,

1 Gent. Mag., 1800, Part 2, pp. 702, 793.

54 Westbury under the Plain.

however, another kind of fog, always surrounding these objects,
through which it is by no means easy to see one’s way: and that
is, their real history. Our friend Mr. Plenderleath is the White
Horse champion, and has taken the subject under his special pro-
tection in an interesting little book, which probably many of you
may have read. He has a whole team of them to deal with, for
there are, I believe, no less than eight in the county of Wilts alone,
besides one or two in the North of England: and I see by the
programme that he has something more to say about them. There
are only two out of our eight that have any claim to antiquity : the
two I have just mentioned ; and even of these two the one on Bratton
Hill is only a second edition, the original figure, which was of more
antique shape, having been destroyed by a land agent a little more
than a hundred years ago. All the rest are not old horses, but only
young colts, set up to prance on the hill sides, some of them within
the memory of man. Some years ago one of our farmers was asking
me about these things, what they meant? I told him the little I
knew, how old some were said to be: but as to the one at Marl-
borough I did not know how old that one was. “Oh,” said he, “TI
can tell ’ee that, for I helped to make him. We boys at Mr.
Gresley’s school worked at it.” One opinion, perhaps the one most
generally held, about the old white horses, is that they were cut out
upon the turf to commemorate a great victory; and it is certainly
a historical fact that King Alfred did win a battle against the
Danes, at Ashdown, near the Berkshire white horse. And it is
also a historical fact that he did defeat them again at another place
called Athandun, which is interpreted by many archeologists to be
your Edington. It is entirely beyond the limits of this paper to go
into all the details of the discussion to which this has given rise :
for there are no less than six places that compete for the honour of
being the very identical spot on which Alfred crushed for a time
the power of the Danes in this country. What makes it so difficult
to decide the point is, that every one of those places has a name
sufficiently like Aithandun, and, further, every one of them has also
a strong hill fortress close at hand to which the defeated might
have fled, as in the history of the event, written at the time, they

By the Rev. Canon J. EL. Jackson, F.8.A. 55

are said to have done. If I may presume to imitate a well-known
passage in one of Cicero’s orations, in which he sums up the various
places that competed for the glory of having been Homert’s birth-
place, I may say that Camden, Sir Richard Hoare, and others place
ABthandun beyond all doubt at Edington, near Westbury; Milner is
clamorous for Heddington, near Calne; Whitaker of Manchester,
Beke, and Thurnam, insist upon Yatton Down, near Chippenham,
where, moreover, the late Mr. Poulett Serope actually built a tower,
with an inscription, to put an end to all strife. Barker maintains it
was at Edington, near Hungerford. Other Berkshire antiquaries
vociferate for Yattenden, in Berkshire; and latest of all comes
Bishop Clifford, of Clifton, contending, and with very strong
argument indeed—that it was neither in Wilts, nor in Berks, but
at Edington, near Bridgwater, in Somersetshire. Now I am sure
that if five eminent counsel were each to take up one of these cases
they would severally be able to produce such overwhelming reasons
in favour of each to perplex and bewilder you that you would
bounce out of the situation as King James I. did, after hearing
first one and then another, by declaring that they were every
one of them right. But as that cannot be,*‘and as only one can
be right, though it is not for me to venture to pronounce whieh
that is, I do feel obliged to say that: I cannot understand how
it could possibly have been at your Edington. It would take
a deal of time to go through all the pros and cons of this much-
agitated question: so I will just say a few words why your Edington
does not appear to me to fit the case. The names for Alfred’s resting-
places in his advance from the Isle of Athelney must be conjectures
in every one of the six competing explanations; but, in that which
brings him to your Edington, his stages and quarters for the night
are not only conjectures, but wholly unfitted to the circumstances.
You all know Brixton Deverel, a little way beyond Warminster,
and Cley Hill. Well, according to this theory, Alfred, having
passed one night with his army at Brixton, set off as soon as it was
light, reached Cley Hill, and passed the next night there. Now
the distance from Brixton to Cley Hill, as the crow flies, is just
four miles, by the road say five or six. It seems highly improbable

56 Westbury under the Plain.

that a commander-in-chief, anxious to pounce unexpectedly on an
enemy, should occupy a whole day from dawn to get over five or six
miles, and then go to sleep again within sight of his enemy at
Bratton. Moreover, if the Danish general, being in Bratton Camp,
saw that Alfred and his army had reached Cley Hill, and were close
upon him, he would surely never have come out of his stronghold on
the hill, but would have kept snug behind his rampart, and let Alfred
turn him out if he could. And there is another circumstance which
has always stood in the way of accepting your Edington as the place.
Soon after the battle, Alfred prevailed upon the Danish leader to
change his faith and be publicly baptized in a Church, which was
done. Was it in Edington or Bratton Church? In neither ; but
at Aller. Now Aller, in Somersetshire, is the nearest Church to
that other Edington at which Bishop Clifford fixes the Battle of
fEthandun. There is certainly no white horse there ; nor, according
to another, and a rather increasing number of archzologists, was
there any reason to expect one; because, according to their opinion,
these ancient figures of horses in conspicuous places had nothing
whatever to do with any battles in the time of King Alfred, but
had been displayed on the hill side, weather-beaten, scoured or
unscoured, as the case might be, for centuries before Alfred was born.
These writers consider them to have been emblems connected with
the superstitious religion of the old Britons. On the original
rudely-cut horse at Bratton there was a crescent attached to the
horse: and it is very remarkable that a crescent accompanies the
figure of a rudely-cut horse upon ancient British coins. Dr. Phené,
a learned foreigner, in writing upon these subjects tells us, in one
of his papers, just issued, that he has made them almost the sole
study of his life; for he has spent no less than thirty years in
travelling all over the world to search for and examine these strange
emblems of animals. They are most frequently found in earthworks,
mounds, and banks, heaped up in the shape of an elephant, dragon,
serpent, or the like. He assigns to them all a strange religious
origin, and very great antiquity. I lately read in some magazine
article (the reference to which I have unfortunately mislaid) that in
a work on “Travels in Central America,” the author mentions his

White Horse Jottings. 57

having seen on an island in the mysterious lake of Peten, the figure
of a white horse, which the people called “ Tzimin chak ”—chak in
their language signifying white.

So you see, with so many conflicting opinions, we are still very
far from knowing the real history of our most perplexing Wiltshire
antiquities ; but the world is not yet exhausted, enormous tracts of
country, hundreds of islands, are yet absolutely unexplored. It is
impossible to say what in these days of fresh emigration and
ransacking of the’ globe may not come to light. Perhaps in some
cannibal island, eight thousand miles under our feet, may yet turn
up the key to that other great riddle on Salisbury Plain—
Stonehenge.

White Borse Aottings.

By the Rev. W. C. PLENDERLEATH.

( SHE following paper contains the substance of sundry jottings
ay je as to the White Horses of our county which I have
put together since I addressed the Society upon the subject at
Trowbridge, in 1872.1

We are all acquainted with the venerable Wiltshire tradition
which asserts that the Westbury Horse, as it existed up to the year
1778, was cut out by King Alfred in Easter, 878, on the morrow of the
victory of Ethandune. I know that this tradition is now discredited :
I should be astonished if it were not so. For finality is a thing
which cannot I fear, be predicated of any branch of human know-
ledge. And I have even heard of persons so depraved as to say
that whenever an unusually positive assertion is made by scientists
of any description the one only thing of which we may be sure is
that the exact reverse will be asserted with equal positiveness a little
later. I remember that a great many years ago when large exca-
vations were going on upon the Palatine Hill, at Rome, the then

1 Wiltshire Archeological Magazine, vol. xiv., p. 12,

58 White Horse Jottings.

Minister of Public Works thought that it would be an excellent
plan to put up notice-boards to give visitors some information as to
the various buildings that were being unearthed. Only it happened
unluckily that he could not quite make up his mind to which of the
conflicting schools of topography he would give his credence. And
so it came to pass that you would one day pass along a road, and
read to the right, “ This is the Temple of Apollo,” and to the left,
** This is the House of the Slaves of Tiberius.” And the next day
you would find these boards removed, and other boards put in their
place, assuring you with equal dogmatism, “ These are the Baths of
Livia”: “These are the Cexnacula of the Palace of Augustus |”

Well now, as regards our Westbury White Horse. Honestly, I
do not see why the traditional history of its origin should not be
the true one. And my idea is that, wherever a definite tradition
exists as to the occurrence of any historical event, such tradition
ought to be upheld; unless, on the one hand, there is some inherent
evidence of its impossibility ; or, on the other hand, some fresh facts
have come to light establishing, beyond all reasonable doubt, the
greater probability of some rival theory. Furthermore, that, in
holding the balance between two conflicting i arn tae > should
be allowed considerable weight.

You will remember that King Alfred had come to the throne
eight years previously, on the death of his brother Ethelred, and
that he had for some time been dogged persistently by an evil fate.
He had in the first year of his reign been worsted by the Danes in
no less than eight or nine encounters, and had eventually been driven
to compound with them by a money payment for their departure
from Wessex. From this time he seems to have remained quiet,
recruiting his forces, until in 875 he felt himself strong enough to
resume hostilities. For a long time fortune was still adverse, and
at the beginning of 878 we find the Danes encamped in force at
Chippenham, and Alfred reduced to flight. ‘Then came the period
of his residence at Athelney, during which he was alternately occu-
pied in raising troops and (as a certain time-honoured legend informs
us) toasting cakes, and occasionally letting them burn; until in
May, he determined to make another bold stroke for the kingdom,

By the Rev. W. ©. Plenderleath. 59

and, as his faithful chronicler informs us, “rode to the stone
Aebryhta, which is the eastern part of the forest that is called
Selwood, but in Latin Petra Magna, in British Coit-maur.”

And now comes the difficulty. We have accepted the cakes, but
some of our greatest authorities find it difficult to digest the stone,
or at any rate to convert it into such good honest historical pabulum
as to be able to say exactly where it stood, or perhaps still stands.
For a long time it was largely believed that the name of Brixton
Deverell indicated its position, Brixton seeming a very probable
corruption of Ecbyrt’s stone. But, as all philologers know, there
is no such conclusive argument against a derivation as its primd facie
probability, even as you know that the one thimble upon the race-
course table under which the pea is not, is the one under which you
thought that with your own eyes you saw it placed! And a learned
member of this Society, in an article published in the Wiltshire
Archaological Magazine some fifteen years ago, suggested as a more
probable site for this Petra Echryghti that whereupon stands an
ancient stone called in Andrews and Dury’s Map of Wilts “ Redbridge
Stone,” on the Fairford estate. This stone may be seen in a small
plantation on the left hand of the railway cutting, about a mile
from the Westbury Station, on the way towards Frome, and projecting
somewhere about two or three feet from the ground.

After describing the enthusiasm with which King Alfred was
received at this trysting-place, the Chronicle proceeds to tell us that
he there encamped for one night: then went on at dawn of the
next day to a place called Ficglea, where he spent another night.

Now where was Aicglea? It has been variously conjectured to
have been either Cley Hill, or else Buckley (now generally spelled
Bugley), which are respectively a mile and a half and one mile to
the west of Warminster; or, on the other hand, to have been
somewhere on the borders of Berkshire, in a place subsequently
known as the Hundred of Aieglei, some thirty miles from Westbury.
And it has been suggested as against the claims of the two former
sites that they are too near to the place of encampment of the pre-

1Vol. xiii., pp. 108, 9.

60 White Horse Jottings.

vious night, which was only some four or five miles off (as the crow
flies), if we identify it with Brixton, or a mile further if we take it
to have been at the Redbridge Stone. It has been also pointed out
on very high authority that one great secret of King Alfred’s success,
like that of Napoleon and of many other distinguished generals, lay
in the rapidity of his forced marches. There is no doubt some force
in this objection : still I cannot think that it is conclusive. It must
be remembered that there were no telegraphs or war correspondents
in those days to tell generals the exact whereabouts of the opposing
armies, and it may not have been until he got to Ecbyrt’s stone that
the King found that he had fixed upon a place of rendezvous so very
near to the encampment of the enemy upon Bratton Hill.

For now comes a very noteworthy part of the history. On the
morrow after the encampment at Aicglea, King Alfred “ came at
dawn,” says the chronicler, “ to a place that is called Ethandunum,
where fiercely warring against the whole army of the Pagans, he
at last gained the victory, overthrew them with very great slaughter,
and pursued them even to their stronghold, where he boldly en-
camped with all his army.”

And now you see the importance of this question of the position
of Aieglea. If Acglea be in Berkshire, Ethandunum cannot be
Edington, in Wiltshire, as we have all been accustomed to believe
it to be, but another place, not far from Hungerford, which bears
the same name, or perchance Yattendon, near East Ilsley, in the
same county. Let me hasten to assure you that there does appear
to me to be very strong testimony in favour of our Edington ; and
that notwithstanding a conflicting tradition, of which I was told
some years ago by a learned Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries,
who had come down some while previously to visit our White Horse.
This gentleman informed me that when first he visited Bratton he
was accompanied by a local guide, who informed him that the
Battle of Waterloo had been fought in that place, and that on that
occasion the cart tracks had “ run down full of blood!”

Putting aside, however, this counter-tradition, notwithstanding
its element of circumstantiality, I will venture to assume that it was
on Bratton Down that Alfred sat down to besiege the Danes, who

By the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath, 61

were entrenched in that long encampment with double ramparts, of
which we can still see traces on the top of the hill. The siege is
said to have lasted for fourteen days, at the end of which time the
Danes surrendered at discretion. And then, doubtless, the question
arose of placing some monument to commemorate so important a
victory.

Now, seven years previously, Alfred, who was then Commander-
in-Chief under his brother, Ethelred, had defeated the Danes in the
great battle of Ashdown, and had (if our traditions be trustworthy)
commemorated that event by cutting the first of the white horses
on the side of Uffington Hill, in Berkshire. What more likely than
that he should now proceed to mark this still more signal and im-
portant victory in a similar manner,—or, I may add, that the icono-
graphic powers of his artists should have so increased as you may
judge by looking “on this picture and on that”? [See figs. 1 and
2, pp. 66 and 67]. For this second animal is, I think we may
venture to say, a good deal more like a horse and a good deal less
like a crocodile than the former. And it is indeed possible, for a
reason which I shall presently proceed to shew you, that his pro-
portions may have approached originally even nearer to such as
would commend themselves to General FitzWygram or to the
Master of the Beaufort Hunt.

But more than a century, alas! has passed away since mortal eye
has looked upon this memorial of Alfred’s victory. For in 1778 a
wretch of the name of Gee, who was steward to Lord Abingdon,
came down to survey that nobleman’s estates in the parish of
Westbury, and conceived the idea of immortalizing his name by
“re-modelling ” the White Horse—much as some of our restorers
have in times past “ re-modelled” those dingy old Raffaelles and
Lionardos and Guercinos in too many English galleries, and given
them such nice clean flesh tints and such beautiful black eyebrows,
and such charming pink lips !

The drawing upon p. 67 is enlarged from one given in Gough’s
Camden, which was made only six years before its destruction. It
faces, as you will see, to what heralds and numismatologists would
call the sinister side, whereas Mr. Gee’s horse faces to dexter. And

62 White Horse Jottings.

considering that in the vast majority of ancient coins the former is
the position shewn, I was at first inclined to fancy that this ir-
responsible individual must have absolutely destroyed the old horse
before beginning to cut the new one. I had, indeed, ventured to
state the question even more strongly than this, and in my paper at
Trowbridge I said that in zo British coin did a horse ever face to
dexter. Butit was pointed out to me some years ago that this was
a mistake, and I have subsequently seen in the British Museum
several coins showing horses thus facing, though they are in an
exceedingly small minority.

I imagine, therefore, that King Alfred did, for some reason or
other, cut his horse in this unusual position ; and that the fact of
its being shewn in the normal one in Gough’s plate is due to the
carelessness of the engraver, who simply re-produced upon his block
the drawing sent to him, not thinking that such a detail as the
right or left facing of a turf figure was a matter of the least moment.
And I am the. more inclined to this view as I have, over and over
again, in engravings both old and new, seen drivers represented
with the reins iv their right hands and the whips in their left; or
a troop of cavalry boldly sweeping on in line, every one of whom
held his weapon after the fashion of that renowned warrior, Caius
Mutius the left-handed,

Nor, indeed, are engravers the only folk that seem to be unable
to distinguish between their right hands and their left. There is a
remarkably pretty picture in one of the art exhibitions in London
this year representing a medieval company of ladies and gentlemen
going out a-hawking, and all of them without exception carrying
their hawks on the right wrist! Now this is, unfortunately, an
absolutely impossible position, for the left wrist, being protected by
a gauntlet, while the right is not, is the only one upon which the
hawk could possibly be carried. A wrist less strongly guarded
would be scratched and torn by the bird’s talons to the very bone.
And accordingly you may have noted that amongst the innumerable
instances in which we find a human hand or arm represented in
heraldry, the solitary exception to the rule that this must be the
right limb is when a hawk is shewn to be thereon carried. I presume,

By the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath. 63

therefore, that the artist, who has taken so great pains to represent
this gay cavalcade, has simply failed to take the small additional
trouble of enquiring of some practical falconer upon which wrist the
hawk was carried; or else has considered this question entirely
unworthy of consideration.

Apropos of heraldry, I may give you one more instance of incuria,
derived from this science. Not only is the right arm, with the
above-named exception, the only one borne single in heraldry, but
beasts are always represented as walking, and birds flying, and fish
swimming to dexter. On a shield, however, under the roof of the
Bayntun Chapel, in Bromham Church the roaches in the arms of
the old Wiltshire family of Roches are represented as naiant to
sinister—and that by a sculptor who must have been in other
respects a remarkably careful and painstaking person.

To return, however, to our White Horse. You will notice in my
drawings that the new horse (Fig. 3, p. 67) is represented as very
much taller in proportion to his length than the old one. But this
is accounted for by the fact that my horse is drawn in plane pro-
jection, whereas that of Gough is shewn fureshortened by perspective,
as we gather from his letterpress, in which he says that the figure
measures 100ft. in length by nearly as much in height. Allowing
for these diversities in the mode of delineation, it would have been
by no means difficult to evolve the one figure out of the other
without any undue expenditure of trouble on the part of the ignorant
destroyer.

Mr Gee’s horse, I may add, was repaired, and the outlines
practically re-cut, about the year 1853. My drawing was made
from a survey in 1870, since which time some further re-formations
have, I believe, taken place. I remember that before the latter
works were begun some one was good enough to write and ask me,
as he knew that I was interested in the horses, whether there was
any objection to the outlining of the figure witb kerb stones—much
in the same way as (I am informed) the long man of Wilmington
has been with white bricks. Iam afraid that my reply was con-
ceived in somewhat the spirit of Dr. Abernethy, who, when a
hypochondriac patient asked him whether she “ might eat an oyster,”

64 White Horse Jottings.

replied “Oh, yes, Madam, by all means, shells and all!” Mr.
Gee’s horse appeared to me to enjoy the same security against injury
causable by restoration as did Juvenal’s traveller against loss by
robbers when his purse was already empty !

But now I must proceed to give you two or three short jottings
which I have made with regard to the other horses of our county
since I last addressed the Society upon the subject. The Broad
Hinton horse I have discovered to have been cut in 1838, with a
view of commemorating the coronation of our present Queen, and
not three years earlier, as I had been previously informed. Its
architect, Mr. Robert Eatwell, only died as recently as 1854.

The name of the author of the Broadtown horse has also come
to light, and with it a very remarkable theory of his as to the
genesis of turf-horses generally, which is deserving of record. Mr.
William Simmonds, who in 1864 was resident at Littleton Farm,
cut it out in some of the grass-land attached to that property, but
told my informant a few years ago that he never meant it to remain
in its present size. His intention was, he said, to enlarge it by
degrees, as that was the way that all horses were made! It certainly
is the way in which Nature makes horses: but there do appear to be
difficulties in the way of applying a similar rule to any turf figures,
save rectilinear ones, which Mr. Simmonds does not seem to have
contemplated.

Another piece of information I have obtained which had previously
eluded me in the most curious manner. I had long known that a
horse had been cut out on Roundway Hill in the year 1845, but,
although the date was so recent, I had never by any of my numerous
enquiries been able to ascertain exactly where it was situated, or any
of the circumstances of its construction. At last, about four or five
years ago, I got a letter from a gentleman of the name of Barrey,
then resident in Hampshire, informing me that this horse was cut
by the shoemakers of Devizes at Whitsuntide, 1845, and that it
was for years afterwards known as the “ Snob’s Horse.” The word
snob, 1 may add, is used in more than one provincial dialect for a
shoemaker’s journeyman, and appears in the form of suad in Lowland
Scotch for an apprentice to that trade. It must, I have no doubt,

By the Rev. W.-C. Plenderleath. 65

be connected with the modern verb to snub, which comes from a very
old English word sneap, apparently of Scandinavian origin, and
meaning to pinch or nip. But why the junior members of this
particular calling should be supposed to be more pinched, nipped,
or snubbed, than those of other like callings, I am unable to say.

I will conclude my jottings by adverting briefly to the well-known
animal mounds in America, which may be said to bear a certain
sort of analogy to our various incised figures, though not a very close
one. These are of considerable number, and occur chiefly (though
by no means exclusively) in the States of Wisconsin and Ohio.
They vary in height above the soil from 2ft. to 6ft., and the largest
of them is stated to be 300ft. in length. They represent not only
alligators, buffaloes, beavers, &c., but also men, birds, and other
objects, one of which looks exactly like a barbed arrow-head. Mr,
Lapham, to whose work on the Antiquities of Wisconsin I am
indebted for the outlines of Figs. 5 and 6, does not doubt but that
they were all constructed by the Indians, and are of the character
of totems. Dr. Phené, however, who has carefully investigated the
subject, is of opinion that some of them were meant to represent
deities, while others were sepulchral, and some, again, intended as
landmarks. A few typical forms are given onp. 68. Of these the
alligator mound (Fig. 4) measures 250ft. x 120ft., not including
the heap of calcined stones projecting from the body. The beaver

_ mound (Fig. 5), 140ft. x 45ft. And the buffalo mound (Fig. 6),

:

108ft. x 52ft. I may add that these mounds are represented as
white upon black in my woodcuts for clearness’ sake, but that it is
not intended to convey thereby the idea that they are differentiated
in point of colour from the surrounding surface in the way that our
white horses are, this not being, so far as I am aware, the case.

: VOL. XXV.-——-NO. LXXII. F

White Horse Jottings.

66

‘oslo U0ySuy YL—'T “ST

By the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath.

Fig. 3.—The Modern Westbury Horse.

67

68 White Horse Jottings.

Fig. 4.—The Alligator Mound, Granville, Ohio, U.S.A.

Fig. 5.—The Beaver Mound, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, U.S.A.

Fig. 6.—The Buffalo Mound, Honey Creek, Wisconsin, U.S.A.

69

Some Western Circuit Assize Aecords of the
~~ Seventeenth Centurp.

By_W. W..Ravenui.t.

the Toor of our Aaah and I was able to give several extracts
from them which attracted some interest. It may be remembered
that these consisted, not only of commissions, precepts, calendars,
and indictments, but also of four volumes of the orders of the Judges
of Assize extending from A.D. 1629 to A.D. 1688, useful to those
who would study the history of our county in the seventeenth
century, and very illustrative of the country life of that period.

The paper I then read was published in our Magazine, vol. xviii.,
p- 136, and to thatels beg leave to refer you.

To-night wt propose to give you some further extracts from these
order books. They, even now, can only be specimens culled from a
large number of similar materials.

I go at once to the year of grace 1646. Such scanty crops as
there were, here and there, were ripening; and it seemed as if there
might be the blessings of harvest for some at any rate, as the
fighting had ceased, Even the forts still held for the King were
surrendering to the Parliament. The last, perhaps, of these, the
westernmost of the western circuit, Pendennis Castle, the guardian
of Falmouth, saw her gallant governor, Arundell, march forth with
honours on the 17th of August.

For some time past those practical souls still left in the House of
Commons had’ been turning their attention to “ the settlement of
these kingdoms.” The lawyers of influence amongst them knew
the value of an Assize for such a purpose. “ Let there be one.
There has been none for more than three years. The commissions
shall be sealed with our own great seal. Our powers as to this

70 Some Western Circuit Assize Records

have been secured by the breaking of Charles Stewart’s great seal
on the 11th of August, when we gave the pieces of silver, of which
it was in part composed, to the Speakers of both Houses, interesting
mementoes of past Royalty! Let there be an assize.”

And the Judges “ going ” Circuit were advised, or advised them-
selves, to search out and report on the general condition of the country
—to take heed that the Grand Juries (who had been summoned by
“ Parliament-appointed High Sheriffs”) weve not hindered in making
presentments with regard to the prospect of affairs in their own
neighbourhoods—their men and manners.

In the Western Circuit Order Book of the period we read what
happened in Dorset. It is of historic value, so given in full, for
I have only drawn attention to it hitherto.

Western Crrecuit Orper Book.

Dorset Summer Assize, 1646.

“ Alo houses. Upon the greate complaynt of the Gentlemen of the Grand
Inquest of this County made to this Court at this p’sent Assizes
against the multiplicity of ale houses win this County and the
dayly abuses and disorders kept and suffered in such ale houses

' especially on the Sabboth dayes, whereby the service of Allmighty

This order to God is much hindered. Ffor reforminge whereof this Court
be observed doth thinke fitt and declare that the Justices of the peace within
through the the. several divisions and libities of this County shall with all
whole Cireuite. convenient speede informe themselves by the best wayes and
meanes that possibly they can, concerninge the said abuses com-

mitted and suffered by such ale house keepers and not to suffer

or licence any to sell ale or beer but such as can bringe their

certificate under the hands of the most sufficient and best In-

habitants of the several places and parishes where they dwell,

concerninge their good behaviour and carriage, and the con-

veniency of the places fitt for such alehouses to be kept. And

to take speedy course for the punishinge and supp'ssinge of all

Ex‘. other ale houses also accordinge to the Statute in that case made

Lords day and and provided. Whereas this Court is informed that the last

fast day to Wednesday in the month w® is appoynted a day for solemne
be observed. fastinge and humiliation over the whole kingdom is not observed
and kept as it ought to be by divers persons and in many places
w'tin this County, and alsoe that the Lords day likewise ap-
This order to poynted to be kept holy is profaned by many lewde people and
be observed not kept and observed in many places as it ought to be, it is
through the therefore ordered by this Court that if any p'son or p‘ssons
whole Circuite. hereafter shall not observe and keep the said ffast day, or shall

of the Seventeenth Century. 71

profane the said Lords day, that then the next Justice of the
Peace upon complaynte to him made shall bind over the said
person or persons soe offendinge to the next Assizes to answere
his contempt. “

And all constables and other officers are hereby required to
take especial care to see this order p'formed as they will answere
the contrary and from whome this Court will expect a good
account of the performatice thereof.

Watchinge and It is ordered by this Court that watches and wards be dayly
Wardinge. observed and kept in parishes and tythings win this County

accordinge to the Statute in that case made and provided. And

This order to if any p'son or p"sons refuse to watch and ward as aforesaid the
be observed next Justice of the peace upon complaynte thereof to him made
through the _ shall bind such p'son or p'sons soe refusinge to the next Assizes
whole Circuite. to answere his or their contempt. And all constables and other

officers are hereby required to see this order p'formed as they
will answere the contrary.

Persons p'sented It is ordered by this Court that mo pson or psons whatsoever
not to be dis- which stand presented at this present Assizes or shal be p'sented
charged wout at any Assizes hereafter by the Grand Inquest or constable of
certificate. any hundred or libitie for any misdemean’ or offence whatsoever

punishable in this Court shal be discharged of the said p'sentment
unless they shall make oath in open Court or bringe a certificate

This order to under the hand of some Justice of the Peace of the County the
be observed Minister of the p'sh where the offence was committed or under

through the the hands: of the constables that p'sented them that the said
whole circuite. offences and misdemeanors are reformed, and that there will be

noe prosecution thereupon or otherwise shall acquitt themselves
by traversinge the same. And this order is to extend into the
several Counties of this Westerne Circuite And to be taken

Ex‘. notice of and observed by the officers of this Court.”

It will be noticed that these important orders, though made on
the complaint of the men of Dorset for dwellers in that county only,
were to be observed throughout the eircuit. Noisy alehouses to be
reformed or abolished. Fasts and “ Sabboths” to be kept together
with watch and ward; “and it will be the worse for thee, O
constable, if thou bringest not prisoners to the next assizes. There
must be malignants near you in these times—Godless Cavaliers—
whom it will be best to bind over, if not lock up.”

But this “ general order” is no stranger to modern ears than the
particular orders applying in individual counties. We find orders
(A.D. 1655) for moving the Lords Commissioners of the Great
Seal to “ amove ” two coroners of Wilts, and elect others,—“ a desire ”

72 Some Western Circuit Assize Records

to the Justices of Devon “att their next Quarter Sessions to take
some speedy course for the re-payment to the High Sheriffe of the
County of Devon a some of [money left in blank] or upwards,
disbursed by him for to prepare a halle in the Castle of Exeter and
fittings for the Assizes and Quarter Sessions to be kept.” These
duties have long disappeared from the Assize.

Then follows an order interesting to lawyers, as shewing the old
procedure in pauper settlement appeals. Under the statutes of
Elizabeth, and of Philip and Mary three years’ residence in a parish
gave a right of irremoveability to paupers. This order tells us
“that the Court [of Assize] is informed that there is a difference
betweene the inhabitants of Upton Pyne and St. Giles’, neere
Torrington, both in this county [Devon], about the settlement of
one John ffurseman a poore and impotent man att Upton Pyne
aforesaid. This Court doth therefore desire the justices of the peace
att the next quarter sessions to examine the said difference and end
it if they cann. Butt iff they cannott compose it then to state the
case and certifie the same to the judges at the next assizes to be
holden for this county for their resolucion therein. Att which tyme
the inhabitants of both places must attend that a fynall order may
be made therein. And this Courte doth thinke fitt That ye p'rish
on which the said settlement shall happen to be should reimburse
all surcharges thatt th’ other parish hath been att about ye same.”
The trial of these appeals has long since ceased to weary the Judges
of Assize. They are decided at the Quarter Sessions, with the right
of appeal to the Queen’s Bench, but only on points of law,

And now I find an order which tells us that Wiltshire was not,
in the opinion of some, as well-behaved as it should be :—

“Wittrs. Att the Assizes and Generall Gaole delivery of the County Afore-
said holden at New Sarum in the same County the one and twentieth day of
July in the yeare of the Lord 1656 before William Steele Cheife Barron of the
Publique Exchequer.

“Onthe fforasmuch as it appeareth to this Cort by the Grand Inquest att

Grand this Assizes.
Juries That the constables of hundreds doe neglect theire duties in p'sentinge
protm*. offences comitted w'*in theire hundreds, in regard That the petty
Constables and Tything men doe make noe pr'sentmts unto them,

of the Seventeenth Century. 73

before the Assizes as anciently they have done and of right ought to
doe, by meanes whereof many offenders oftn escape unpunished. It
is therefore nowe ordered by this Court That all petty constables and
Tythingmen w'in the sev’rall hundreds and lib'ties of this County
shall from henceforth a ffortnight at least before any Assizes make
their prsentments in writinge of all misdemean™ and offences comitted
and done w'Yin their libties and tythinges w* are not punished, and
carry the same prsentmts before the next Justice of the peace to be
sworne unto it. And afterwards the said petty conbles and Tything
men are to deliver the same present™* to the Constables of their
hundreds before every Assizes, who are to deliver the same into the
Gort with their owne presentmts, That proces may goe forth to call
in the offenders to answere to their offences. And coppies of this
order are to be sent to the Con of every hundred w'*in this County
who are to publish the same in their hundreds before the next Assizes
that p'sentments may be made accordingly.”

Penruddock and Grove had fallen, the fourteen Major-Generals,
“those Dragons,” were out harrying the land. The above looks
like a whisper of one of them dropped into the ear of the Chief
Baron, and passed on by him to the Grand Jury. Such an order
would increase the prevailing discontent, and may, amongst other
things, have induced “ His Highness” once more to summon
“ His Parliament,” which assembled “ for grievances ” on the 17th
of September following.

Then at the same Assizes “ John Parker of Leigh, upon hearing
of the matter in open court, it is ordered by his consent (?) that he
shall take the apprentice, Edward Lewis, placed with him by the
churchwardens and overseers of the poore with the consent of the
Justices of the Place.”

Judges of assize have ceased to act in such matters, and also in
the following.

Somerset Assizes, Chard,28th July,1656,before ChiefBaron Steele :

« fforasmuch as many useful lawes have been and are in force for the preservation
of tymber notwithstandinge which many persons mindinge theire private lucre
doe win the county distroy and grubb upp their woods w‘*out leavinge standolls
_accordinge to Lawe and otherwise offende in destroyinge the same w® being

taken notice of and p'sented by the Grand Inquest for this County att this
Assizes—This Cort doth refer and recomend a business of soe publique concern-
ment to the Justices of peace att their next publique Q'. Sessions to consider how
by such waies as they shall find just to encourage some ffitt p'sons to inquire
out and prosecute accordinge to Lawe and Justice such as doe or shall offend in
the p'misses.”

74 Some Western Circuit Assize Records

We remember that Somerset wsa Admiral Blake’s county. Can
timber for the navy be wanted? If so, some two months after this
there would be further interest in the matter; when news came of
his capturing the Spanish treasure-fleet off Cadiz on the 9th of
September, and the arrival of the Spanish plate at Portsmouth on
its way to London. The Justices might fear that the whole county
would be denuded in those days of Puritan simplicity. However
that may be, the order does not relate to what we would have
described as timber-trees, but only to pollards.

Then there is an order to enable “ the nowe-waymen” of War-
minster to be reimbursed for monies expended by them in repairing
their highways.

At Dorchester, March 18th, 1657, it appears that Thomas
Erlebridge and William Ogle “ nowe remaininge in the gaole were
very dangerous and suspicious people, this Cort [Mr. Justice Hugh
Wyndham] orders that they be by the Sheriffe of this County
carried from hence to Shaston [Shaftesbury] and there be whipt
on their naked backes untill they bleede and from thence be sent from
tything to tything by passes to the severall places of their birthes.”

At Chard (Somerset Assize) the Grand Jury present to John, Lord
Glynne (Penruddock’s judge), “a great scarcity of corn, that there
are so many maltsters that the barley in the market is so soon
bought up, that the poor cannot but at extraordinary prices have
any to serve their occasions, by reason whereof they are much
damnified. The Cort refers the matter to the justices of peace of
this County, and desires them to meet with all convenient speed ;
and take such course for the suppressinge the multiplicity of those
malsters and supplying the occasions of the poor as shall be agreeable
to Jaw and justice.”” This old and widespread grievance, was ag gra-
vated much by the Civil War, bad seasons, and perhaps now again
by increase in population in certain districts where land transport
was diffleult. I find from Mr. Hamilton’s book on Devon Quarter
Sessions, that in Devon in 1630 malting was altogether prohibited
by their Quarter Sessions, and I mentioned in my previous paper
that this occurred also in Cornwall A.D. 1648. And at Easter
Devon Sessions, 1649, a similar order was made which mentions a

of the Seventeenth. Century. 75

hard long winter, the necessities of the poor, all sober people
abhorring the multitude of ale-houses and protesting against the
unreasonable quantity of barley turned into malt which is wantonly
and wickedly spent in such houses. Puritan justices would be ready
to cut off the supplies of hostels where Cavaliers drank the King’s
health and speedy return. But the Restoration put these matters
on a different footing ; and at the summer assize, 15th September,
1660, at Salisbury, we find the judges—Sir Robert Foster and Sir
Thomas Tyrrell—granting licenses for ale-houses to Phineas Haines,
at Quarr House, Donhead; and to Francis Yerbury, at his house at
Bradford. On the petition supporting the first I find the names of
William and Richard Lush, so well known in that district.

It should be mentioned, too, that the orders, which had been
written in English during the Commonwealth, are in Latin after
the Restoration.

Then in the same assize at Dorchester, September 10th, 1660,

it is ordered that Sir John ffitzJames, Knight, Robert Coker, Esq.,
Thomas Moore, Esq., Walter ffoy, Esq., and Whiston Churchill,
Esq., five of the Justices for the County, or any two of them, doe
take care that ‘“‘The business concerninge the witchcraft and con-
sultation with the Devill and Evill Spiritts in Sherborne bee with all
speede examined,” and all concerned, and witnesses, to be bound
over to appear at the next assize.
- In 1662, July 15th, at Exeter, Sir Peter Prideaux, High Sheriff,
informs the Court that the Lord Treasurer of England complains
that the County is slow about paying the King’s contribution from
the County—£12,060. The Commissioners, appointed by the Act for
enabling the collection of the grant, are to meet in their several
divisions and collect, or fine defaulters, and get all in by Ist
September following.

16th August (no year, but next in book, probably same <Assize).
Order to Mayor of Launceston to appear at the next Quarter
Sessions to show cause why he should not apply some of the funds
of St. Leonard’s Hospital, near Launceston, to the inmates of St.
Lawrence Hospital. He is to bring his charter with him.

How changed is all this. Modern Courts of Assize would stare to

76 Some Western Circuit Assize Records

have such matters before them. And what would the Court of
Chancery or the Charity Commissioners say ?

The Judges at Winchester, 1664, July 28th—Sir Matthew Hale
one of them—are informed that Mr. Cromwell, lord of the manor
of Merdon, Hants, upon the apprehension of one Rd. Wasteridge,
seized some of his goods and ehattels. As Wasteridge is going to
foreign plantations, Cromwell is ordered to give them up to him.
This may be the quondam Lord Protector Richard Cromwell.

In Devon, at St. Thomas the Apostle (Exeter ?), the ale-house
of John Mountstephen is suppressed, as Richard Penstone was
convicted at the Assize, for the manslaughter of one Gilbert, the
death occasioned by wrestling, the challenge for it made whilst they
sat drinking there.

At the Summer Assize, Salisbury, July 8th, 1665, the High
Sheriff is ordered to seize a black mare for the use of the King as
a waif upon the flight of felony, Samuell Hooker and Charles
Howe having been acquitted of the charge of highway robbery in
stealing from John Harris the mare and 9s. Perhaps the mare was
Harris’s after all! He might re-purchase it of the King! Now-a-
days, on good cause shewn, the undivided half part might go to
both Hooker and Howe!

At Wells two men are sent to gaol until they provide themselves
with masters, or procure themselves to be sent to Jamaica!

Then appears again that dire calamity of those times—“ the
Plague.” I have previously alluded to its occurrence in 1646, when
it was at Salisbury and other places. An entry of 8th March,
1666, Winchester Assize, tells us that “Sir John Keelinge and
Sir John Archer (complaint being made of the inhabitants of
Alverstoke and Borough of Gosport being visited with it are unable
to relieve the poor infected persons and others and are now fallen
into great want by means thereof) do therefore desire Sir Thos Budd
and Sir Humfrey Bennett Knights, Richard Norton, Bartholomew
Price, John Stewkley, and William Collins, the Mayor and Justices
of the Borough of Portsmouth or any two or more of them, forthwth
to take care for their reliefe by rating the adjacent inhabitants
according to the statute in that case made and provided. And also to

of the Seventeenth Century. 17

take care that a convenient place be had for the burying of the dead,
it being alledged unto this Cort that the Churchyard is alwayes
filled and also that watch and ward be duly kept for securing the
neighbouring inhabitants and country round about them,” &c.

In the previous September, in London, ten thousand people were
said to have died in one week.

In the following year (1667) there was no Spring Assize for
Hants, but on the 1st March and July 20th I find an order at
Salisbury Assize relating to the collecting of the rate for the relief of
the poor infected persons in thatcity in the time of the late plague there.

At the Summer Assize, August, 1672, there is bitter complaint
against one John Thorpe, Gaoler of Fisherton Anger, by the prisoners
for debt, for “ preventing the use of the great courtyard of the prison
in daytime; charging excessive rates for lodging in the common
room, and not allowing their friends to relieve them, contrary to
His Majesty’s late gracious Act of Parliament ; had exacted 2s. a week
from those who sleep on the boards in the said greate roome; kept
messengers with provisions waiting two and three hours at one time
at the gate; stopped up a window whereby provisions have heretore
been conveyed to your petitioners with much ease; destroyed the
hearth of the prison rooms whereby no fire may be made; and by
many other practices contrived subtily to distresse ye poore pe-
titioners whose estates are consumed and health impaired so that
for want of ayer and necessaries they must perish unlesse relieved
by yr. Lordships.” They desire the above matters to be put to
rights. Thomas Mompesson, Esq., Sir Richard How, Knight,
William Swanston, and Alexander Thistlethwayte, Justices of peace
of this County, or any two of them, have it referred to them to
examine and to certify.

‘The next extract is one of interest. It tells of the abduction of
an heiress named Johanna Mortimore. At present I have not been
able to identify her or connect her family name with Compton
Cumberwell, which is a property in the parish of Compton Bassett,

near Calne.!

1 See Aubrey and Jackson’s Wiltshire Collections, p. 42, and Rev. A.C. Smith’s
Wiltshire Antiquities, p. 49.

78

Some Western Circuit Assize Records

It will be remembered that under the feudal law heiresses came of
age and could marry on attaining fourteen years.

WILTES.
Richard

Assizes New Sarum March 13 26 Car. II.
Whereas Robert Maundrell of Compton Cumberwell in this’

Raynsford & County Gent was at the last Assizes held at the Cittie of New

William
Swanston
Esqs.

Sarum in and for this County indicted for the unlawfull taking
away of one Johannz Mortimore about the age of twelve years in
the highway shee being a person of a very considerable ffortune
against the goodwill and consent of her the said Johanna Mortimore
w said Indictment att this present Assizes came to bee tryed
This Cort on Ex ,,.aination of Witnesses to prove the said Indictment
and hear Counsell on both sides concerning the premisses after a
long debate by consent of Parties on either side doth order that
the said Robert Maundrell shall presently enter into a recognizance:
of eight hundred pounds with this condition followeing, That the
said Robert Maundrell shall and doe bring Johanna Mortimore
before Thomas Bennett,Thomas Chamberlayne,and Jeffery Daniells
Esquires Justices of the peace of this County on Wednesday in
Easter weeke att the signe of the Bear in Marlborough or att anie
other tyme as they the said Justices shall appointe and not en-
deavour to marry or permit her to bee married in the meane tyme
before whome she shall or may freely declare wth. whome and
where (she) shall continue untill shee attaine the age of ffourteen
years and that shee shall or may dispose of herself accordingly
without the interruption or hindrance of him the said Robert
Maundrell or by his meanes or Procurement, And further doe
and shall stand to and abide such order for or concerning the
charges the said Robert Maundrell hath beene att concerning the
maintenance of her the said Johanna Mortimore as by the said
Justices of the peace shall be then and there made weh. accordingly
hee hath donne. And what charges hee the said Robert Maundrell
shall make appeare to the said Justices that he hath really dis-
bursed for and towards the maintenance schooling and education
and other necessary conveniences of and for the said Johanna
Mortimore they the said Justices are to allow him the said Robert
Maundrell in such order as they the said Justices pursuant to the
said Recognizance shall make and settle to be paid in such manner,
and forme as they shall direct andappointe. And they are hereby
desired to [report to] this Cort att the next Assizes what they have
donne in and about the Premisses.”

There may be, perhaps, some romance about the custody of the
fair Johanna, as she was “ taken ” in the highway. Eight hundred
pounds was a large sum for bail in those days.

The next is a sentence to death for poisoning. A similar burning’

LE ——_——

of the Seventeenth Century. 79

of the body after execution at Dorchester, A.D. 1705, may be re-
membered, when ten thousand people are said to have assembled to
witness it in the Amphitheatre at that place. There is a distinction
made between the principal felon and the accessory ; the body of the

latter is not to be burnt.

“ DEVON. Exeter Assizes, March 10th, 1676.
Ann Evans an apprentice indicted and conved. of poisoning her
Master’s wife and daughter, one Phillippa Carey wife of Robert
Carey being conved. of being accessory before and after ye fact at
Plymouth a populous towne, and Exen. there will be of publique
example That they bee excd. in some convenient place in the towne
neare where the sd. psons were poisoned and murdered Ann Evans
to be drawne on a hurdle to the place where she shall bee executed
and there to bee burnt to death. And the said Phillippa Carey
to be hanged on a Jibbett to be set upp for that purpose by yee
necke untill shee bee dead. And the Under Sheriffe of this County
his deputy is hereby required to see this order punctually performed
in every particular as hee will answere the contrary att perill. And
*They—Mr. yee day for the same execution to bee Thursday in Easter Weeke
Weekes (The being the thirtyeth day of this instant March between ye howers
Master) or of tenn and two of the Clock. But if they* shall fayle to undertake
the Magis- before Haster to defray the extraordinary expenses thereof the sd.
trates of | Execution is to bee donne att the tyme aforesaid in the ordinary
Plymouth. place for Execution of malefactors in ye said County of Devon.”

With two more I must conclude. And here, too, we note again
the absence of the touch of the vanished hand of a past procedure,
whilst several of the descendants of the Justices survive amongst
our present Magistracy.

“ SoMERSET. Taunton Wed. March 17th 1676.
Upon the psentment of the Grand Inquest for the County
aforesaid made att the Assizes concerning an house built at Pawlos
Street in Taunton for the meeting of Dissenters from the Church
of England to the encouragement of faction and contrary to a late

Act of Parlt. The Cort recommends presnt. to J. P. at next Qr.
Sessions to bee holden after the feast of Easter.”

“Wires. New Sarum July 15 1676.—Richard Raynsford and Humfrye
Littleton.
Complaynts about the Overseers accounts for the Parish of Calne
Cort desires St Thomas Estcourte, Thomas Bennett, Thomas
Chamberlayne, Robert Drew, Nevill Maskeline, Jeffery Daniell
and John Sharpe Seven of his Majesties’ Justices of the Peace for
the County aforesaid or any three or more to enquire into the
matter.

. Circuit Order Book No. 3, 1652—1679.

80

Che Buried Palwesoic Arocks of CMiltshire.
By W. Hewarp Bett, F.G.S,

AN putting together the following few remarks on the more
2 &\ ancient rocks of Wiltshire in the form of a short geological
history of the older and newer strata that we have passed over
to-day, I remember that we are a Natural History as well as an
Archeological Society, so that a geological discourse—although,
perhaps, rather dry—will not be altogether out of place, for archw-
ology really begins where geology ends.

A remarkable instance of this merging of the one into the other
occurs in our own county in the drifts near Salisbury. And
although the geological record is necessarily very imperfect, still
the history of the rocks is written in very clear language for those
who are able and willing to read it. Though not written in such
accurate details as the history of those interesting buildings we
have visited to-day, and which has been read to us by Mr. Ponting
from the stones of which they are built, this is an attempt to
interpret the still older and not less interesting history of the
formation of the various rocks that lie under our feet, and to discuss
the probability of that most valuable of the “ buried rocks ”—coal
—being found below those newer rocks upon which we stand; a
subject which must, I think, be of considerable interest to all of us.

In the first place an explanation of the accompanying maps and
diagrams will probably lead to an easier understanding of the
remarks that follow.

Section A. is a vertical section of the rocks that would be passed
through if a well was sunk in the neighbourhood of Westbury, with
the names of the different formations belonging to what is called
the newer or neozoic series. Section B. is a rather more problematic
section, but it shows the succession of the older palzozoic rocks
below the newer or upper series—in fact the buried rocks; this

™
M

“0a
A

fy il

me

14

ii

D

UF

_MAP II.—Gerocrarny or Tue Liss anv Inrertor Oouire.

a
aa

erie

;

A

iin,

(ai)

AN

MAP II1.—Creraczous Grocraray (SHOWING THE PROBABLE COASI

LINE DURING THE FORMATION or THE Uprer Green SAND).

The Buried Paleozoic Rocks of Wiltshire. 81

however, is not such plain sailing, and you will see that although
Section B is placed under Section A., and although the rocks really
do underlie those of the upper section, yet the beds are differently
inclined, and do not follow the upper rocks or each other in the
same regular way. To this point I want particularly to call your
attention, since it has an important bearing on the position of the
coal measures and their relations to the overlying strata, as also to
probability of their being found under Westbury or not. The
inclination, or dip, and succession of the upper rocks in Section A.
we know from finding them at the surface, and from the evidence
of wells, bore-holes, &c., which have been made in them from time to
time. But the relative position and inclination of the beds in
Section B. are matters of inference, not of observation, and conse-
quently are far less certain. Of their existence before the newer
rocks were laid over them there is no doubt, but which of them
occur under any particular spot, aud how much of them remain, is
quite another matter.

C. is a section across the country from Westbury to Vallis Vale,
near Frome, and represents the structure that might be made visible
if a long and deep trench could be cut through the earth’s crust
along this line. Here the upper rocks (neozoic) are seen deposited
in regular order and sequence, all with the same inclination, or dip,
while the lower (palzeozoic) show a different inclination and are very
irrevular. These upper and lower beds having no regular sequence
and apparently no relative connection with each other, are said, in
geological language, to be unconformable.

The three maps, marked respectively I., II., and III. (which Mr.
Jukes Brown, F.G.S., of the Geological Survey, has kindly placed
at my disposal, being taken from his work, “The Building of the
British Isles”), are intended to show the geography of the British
Islands at the different geological periods named on the maps; the
part coloured with blue lines being the ancient seas, the uncoloured
portions the then existing land; while the faint red lines show the
_ present outline of the land.

- I must now go back to the close of paleozoic time—to that period
which is called Triassic or Permian. ‘This commenced after a long
VoL. XXV.—NO, LXXIIL G

82 The Buried Paleozoic Rocks of Wiltshire.

period of quiescence, when by a gradual and quiet subsidence with
occasional periods of rest the paleozoic rocks, the lowest series on
Section C., were deposited ; the last of them to be deposited being
the carboniferous or coal measures. The Triassic period, which
immediately followed, was one of disturbance and change; the
carboniferous lands were broken up, some parts being converted into
sea, others into land surfaces; and one of these Triassic land tracts
seems to have run through Wiltshire, for no Triassic roeks have
been found either in Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, or Somersetshire.
In the northern part of England large inland salt lakes or seas were
formed, and over the intervening ridges and watersheds rain and
rivers cut their way and carved out hills and valleys in the carbon-
iferous strata. How long this state of things lasted we cannot say,
but at any rate long enough for the removal of immense quantities
of rock material.

Towards the end of this period a fresh set of disturbances began,
resulting in upheavals and dislocations of the older strata, bending
them into curves, and forming those great troughs and basins we
find in the coal measures at the present time, represented by the
curved appearance of the beds of the lower series of rocks on Section
C. These movements quite altered the configuration of the older
rocks at the surface, and especially led to the formation of a large
continent extending over all the northern, central, and western
portions of Europe. This was the Triassic continent, and it was
during this long land or continental period that the older rocks
assumed the shape and form that is roughly represented in Section
C. They were wasted and washed away by the continued action
of the atmosphere, rivers, and other forces of Nature until they
finally assumed the forms (problematic of course) shown on Section
C., after which they became the bottom of an ocean and had the
newer rocks, or upper series, as shown on the same section, deposited
on them. And this long period of time when these various agencies
were at work removing the old land surfaces, and re-depositing the
débris elsewhere explains clearly, I trust, the great break both in
time and in the continuity of life which is denoted by the un-
comformability of the strata.

23

ee Section A
Chalk AS
A CRETACEOUS
:
: ROCKS
i
C.
JURASSIC
ROCKS
D.
E

Whiteman & Bass Zithe London.

ae eee eS ee eee, lee

A.
Section B

Limestone Millstone Coal
Grit Measures

1 i
1 1
1 i]
! '
f {

1

SECT DON ROM VANES VALE NEAR FROME TO WESTBURY.

Ww
Alice River 7
Vale near Frome

by Dilton. Marsh LE Road E
f Sof Westbury

LLL

Carbonvferous Limestone

dN5 B. C D. E os
.
[| ]
3
Chalk Gault & Fullers Barth Trias
Greensand Clays & Great Ool.

Witesas & Bane lithe London,

By W. Heward Bell, P.GS. 83

I will now try to trace the events which led to the covering up
of these older rocks, and resulted in their becoming “ the Buried
Rocks of Wiltshire” (shown in Section C.).

Eventually in that part of the Continent, where our Islands now
stand, several large salt lakes were formed, which were gradually
enlarged until they became inland seas, like the Caspian; at the
bottom of these seas or lakes were laid down the great beds of salt,
which we find to this day in Cheshire and Worcestershire; but
no salt is found in Wilts or Somerset. The Mendips stood out as

-an island in this lake or sea, and round their flanks the shores of
the sea formed shingle beaches, which, during the lapse of ages,
becoming conglomerates, still bear silent witness to the very different
aspect they bore in that bye-gone time, while further from those
shores sand and marl were deposited which are now the lowest
neozoic strata in Wilts and Somerset, and are represented by the
lowest beds in the series on the Sections A. and C. The geographical
conditions are shown in Map L.,, a large salt lake or inland sea lying
over the greater portion of England with the Mendips standing
out as an island.

These deposits, formed at the bottom of this sea or lake, are, as

said before, the beginning of the secondary, or Neozoic period, and
are called the Triassic Rocks. It is in these newer or Triassic rocks
that the break referred to occurs.

These Triassic rocks are also extremely interesting from the fact
that the first relics of mammalian life are found in them, being the
fossil remains of small marsupials.

Continuing the history of the burial of the paleozoic strata we
come to the Jurassic series, consisting of lias, oolite, and Oxford
clays. By reference to maps I. and II. it will be seen that a

_ gradual subsidence of the land surfaces had taken place, leading to
a connection between these inland seas and the open sea lying
_ to the south; consequently oceanic and marine forms of life now
_ appear, at least we now find their fossilized remains; but there ig
no break, as in the previous change, from one series of rockg
to another, the change from the Triassic to the Jurassic being
~ gradual.
. G 2
a

r

84 The Buried Paieozoie Rocks of Wiltshire.

In these formations we find thick clays, shales, great masses
of marine corals, limestone, and sandstone, some of which are well
known from their commercial value all over the world as Bath,
Bradford, Box, and Corsham building-stones, and are found and
largely worked in the neighbourhood.

After probably a very long period of further subsidence, termi-
nating in the laying down of the Kimmeridge Clay, a reverse
movement set in. A large amount of land began to appear with
small lakes in the north, while in a deep sea to the south the
Portland Limestone (so well known as a building stone), was being
deposited, and the materials brought down by the river system of
the northern continent were being laid down as the Purbeck and
Wealden formations, containing the remains of land animals, fresh
water shells, &c.

At the end of this continental period another great subsidence
took place, resulting in the conditions shown in map III., which
shows the probable line of the sea-coast during the formation of the
green sand. The great mass of clay, which we know as gault,
must have been formed from the débris of the carboniferous rocks
of Wales, probably brought down by rivers flowing into an estuary
on the west and distributed on the floor of the ocean at its mouth.
The shores and bottom of this sea gradually sank and the sea gained
on the land until it probably reached Ireland, and only the largest
mountains of Wales were uncovered, standing out as small islands
in the great “ Chalk Ocean,” in the deep quiet waters of which the
countless remains of small animals falling on the bottom gradually
built up those enormous masses of chalk, which extend so far, and
of which our well-known downs are the remains. To complete the
history I ought, perhaps, to tell you something of the processes by
which the palzozoic rocks of the Mendips have been uncovered
again by the removal of the chalk which so long overspread them,
but it is too long a story to enter upon now.

Having thus roughly, and I fear in no very scientific manner,
traced the history of the rocks from the old Palzozoic continent to
those we now stand on, I should like to say a word or two on the
important bearing these old rocks have upon us now in the present

—— ee

ee a or

By W. Heward Bell, #.G.8. 85

or future. The most important point I wish to bring under your
notice is the question as to whetber or not coal is to be found in
the neighbourhood of Westbury. Of the existence of the older,
or Paleozoic, rocks under our feet there can be no doubt, but as to:
the existence of coal that is another matter. The central axis of
the Mendips, shows an inclination to trend round to the north
through Frome; and if the high dips west of Frome continue
there is a probability that the millstone grits and lower coal
measures may roll in under Westbury, but, as I have before ex-
plained, a doubt as to their position must remain, which can only be
settled by actual boring or trial. Such a trial bore was made some
time ago at Witham Hole, four miles south of Frome, which passed
through the Oxford Clay, cornbrash, and forest marble, to the depth
of 600ft., when it was stopped; had they bored twice that depth,
or even to 1000ft., the coal measures might have been reached. Nor
is this the only trial that has been made in the past ; a boring was
commenced at Trowbridge, but abandoned on account of water ;
another attempt, as far back as 1815, was made to sink to the lower
rocks at Melksham, but this was also defeated by water at a depth of
some 351ft. or thereabouts, after the cornbrash, or Kelloway Rocks,
had been reached. But when the near exhaustion of our present
coal-fields becomes imminent, more effectual trials no doubt will be
made to find workable coal seams below the newer rocks.

In conclusion may I add that, apart from the economic side of
the question, the study of geology is worth following for its own
sake, giving a new interest to those who live in the country and
care to observe the things around them,

It is anything but a dry subject, although 1 fear that my
discourse may itself have been rather of that nature.

86

dames Hey, Garl of Atarlborongh.

By the Rev. W. P. S. Binenam.

N looking over the Church this afternoon, we must all have
observed in the south transept the monument erected to
the memory of James, first Earl of Marlborough, with effigies of
himself and his first wife. It is a stately tomb, and the question
invariably asked by strangers is:—‘ What relation was that Earl
to the Dukes of Marlborough?” The most usual answer is:—
“None at all;” but this is not strictly true, as this Harl was great
‘uncle by marriage to the Hero of Blenheim ; and the earldom had
become extinct by the death of the fourth earl without issue, just
ten years before the future duke was created Earl of Marlborough,
There can, therefore, be but little doubt that Churchill chose this
this title to perpetuate the memory of the “ Good Earl” who is
buried in Westbury Church.
This monument, erected by Henry, the second Earl, bears an
inscription! which tells us more about the occupant of that tomb

1 Inscription of monument in Westbury Church :—
“D.0.MS.

“Hic in pace requiescunt ossa et cineres D! Jacosr Ley, Equestris ordinis
viri, et Baronetti, Filii Henrici Ley de Teffont Evias Ar: natu sexti, qui juvenis,
Jurisprudentiz studiis mancipatus, virtute meruit ut per omnes gradus ad
summum togate laudis fastigium ascenderet. Regii in Hibernia Banci
Justiciarius sufficitur capitalis, et in Angliam revocatus, fit Pupillorum Procurator
Regius. Dein Primarius in Tribunali Regio Justitiarius, que munia postquam
magnd cum integritatis laude administrasset, illum Jacobus Rex Baronis Ley
de Ley, (su familie in agro Devon. antiqua sede,) titulo ornavit, in sanctius
adscivit concilium, Summumque Anglie Thesaurarium constituit, et Rex Carolus
Marzipricit Comitis Auctario honoravit Regisque concilii instituit Preesidem.

“Uxorem duxit Mariam filiam Johannis Perrry, de Stock Talmage, Oxon.
Com., Ar. (cujus corpus juxta ponitur) ex qua numerosam prolem procreavit,
Henricum nune Marlbrigii Comitem, Jacobum, Gulielmum, Elizabetham,Annam,
Mariam, Dionysiam, Margaretam, Hesteram, Martham, Pheben ; qua conjuge
fato functé Mariam despondit Gul. Bowrer Equitis Aurati viduam, post cujus
obitum Janz, Domini Botteler filie enupsit, ex quibus nullam prolem suscepit.

“lta Vir iste quem ad gravem prudentiam finxit natura, et doctrina excoluit,

aE aes Ty
re
A Eo Ape Ty RA thy,

abel} tiger Y=

x . ’y
z= ;
# ‘ 2
rm a
4h "9 :
<
~
es

: ae

é = >
s :
a Te
- = i
-
~
= a
—_
=~, 2 a

=

> Ss -
=

> -.2

SAS
*

>

wags ofi«

phen

+
‘

av jettente

ft dy
q * mr ity ns

ey Gs ae
oe a ete

ProicreE oF The Harts or Marvsorouca.

James Ley, Earl of Marlborough,=1. Mary, daughter of 2. Mary, widow of 3. Jane, daughter
d. 1628.

John Pettey, of Sir William Bow- of John, Lord
Stoke Talmage. yer. Butler.

] ] | | ] i > ] | |
Henry,=Mary, James, d, William, 4th =—— Hewett. Kliz.=Morice Casant, Aun.=Sir Walter Long, Mary.=R. Enery, Dionysia.=John Harrington, Margaret.=Capt. Hobson. Hsther.=Arthur Fuller, Martha, Phabe.———Biggs,
2nd > dau.of unmar., Earl, d.s.p. of Toomer, of Drayeot. of Enery, of Kilmington. of Bradfield. d. un- of Hearne,
Earl, Sir A, 1618. 1679. Somerset. Cornwall. mar. Bucks.
4.1638. | Capel.

James, 3rd Earl,
killed June 8rd,

1665, unmar,

Extract From Prpicrer or Ley anp Cuurcuitt.

Lord Butler, of Bramfield.

| I
James, Earl of Marlborough.=Jane. Ellen.=Sir J. Drake, of Ash.

Sir Winslow Churchill.= Elizabeth.

John, Duke of Marlborough.

James Ley, Larl of Marlborough. 87

than it is the custom to do in these days, and I must say that I
think the archeologist of two hundred years hence will regret the
banishment from our Churches of epitaphs and heraldic devices.
They are contributions to history which will be much missed in
coming generations. This epitaph records that James Ley was the
sixth son of Henry Ley, of Teffont Evias, who, having in his youth
applied himself to the study of the law, by the greatness of his
merits passed through all its stages until he reached its highest
rank. After having served as Chief Justice of the Queen’s Bench
in Ireland, he was made Attorney-General of the Court of Wards
and Liveries, from which he was promoted to the office of Lord
Chief Justice of England. He wasa knight and baronet. James I.
made him Baron Ley, of Ley, in Devonshire, and Lord Treasurer,
and by Charles I. he was advanced to the earldom of Marlborough,
and made Lord President of the Council. He was three times
married. His first wife was Mary, daughter of John Petty, of
Stoke Talmage, in Oxfordshire. and by her he had issue three sons
and eight daughters. After her death he married Mary, widow of
Sir William Bowyer; and lastly Jane, daughter of Lord Butler, of
Bramfield, by neither of whom he had any issue. He died at
Lincolns Inn, the place he loved the most, on the 14th of March,
1628.

The outline of his life is thus recorded on his tomb, and if all
epitaphs were as explicit, it would be more easy than it often is to
write the histories of great men of former generations. His father,
Henry Ley, belonged to an ancient Devonshire family, the Leys of
Canon’s Ley, in Bere Ferrers, but he appears to have removed from
his native county, and established himself at Teffont Evias. He
must have been a man of considerable means, since he fought at the
head of his own men at the siege of Boulogne. James was his

(sam ifn allies ai Mies

_ (publicis usque ad declivem «etatem Magistratibus bene functis) senio confectus,
- animam de patrid optime meritam placidé morte Deo reddidit, Londini, in
Hospitio Lincoln. sibi ante omnia dilectissimo, Mart. xiiii. Anno Salutis
M.DC.XXVIII.

“Henricus, Marlbrigii Comes, optimis Parentibus hoc, pro munere extremo,
- monumentum uberibus lacrimis consecravit.

88 James Ley, Earl of Marlborough.

youngest son. We do not know where he received the rudiments
of his education, but in 1569, when he was about seventeen, he
matriculated at B. N. C. at Oxford. It is probable that he was
intended for the clerical profession, for his father was patron of
Teffont Evias, to which, when it became vacant in 1569, he nomi-
nated his son, James, who held the living until he resigned it in
1576.1

Aubrey mentions this, and says that Mr. Ash, of Teffont, has his
institution and induction, and supposes that the butler mast have
read the prayers whilst the Vicar was studying, first at Oxford, and
then at Lincolns Inn. Canon Jackson cannot understand how such
an abuse as the presentation of a youth of seventeen, who, of course,
was not in holy orders, could have happened. Such abuses were
common before the Reformation. William of Wykeham successively
held three prebendal stalls in Salisbury Cathedral, besides other
preferment, whilst he was only an acolyte; and Henry VIII. pro-
vided for the education of Reginald Pole, afterwards Cardinal and
Archbishop of Canterbury, by making him Dean of Exeter whilst
still a youth. That the Reformation did not at once correct all these
abuses appears from a sermon preached by Bishop Jewel, in which
he denounces the misuse of Church patronage which was frequently
made; “A gentleman,” he says, “ cannot keep a house unless he
have a parsonage or two to farm in his possession.” Minutes of a
license are in existence in Archbishop Laud’s handwriting, em-
powering a youth, who bore the title of Dr. Tucker and Vicar of
Old Windsor, to read divine service, although he was not in deacon’s
orders nor twenty years of age. There is some doubt whether George
Herbert was even a deacon when he was appointed to the Vicarage

1That such abuses were connived at by dispensations in the reign of Queen
Elizabeth is evident from Archbishop Grindal’s account of his Court of Faculties
made to the Queen and Council, in which it is observed : —“ Dispensations for a
minor (as he is termed, that is, for one whose age forbids ordination) are not
granted to any, but to those who at the least are sixteen years old and are resident
students in the Universities.” The Archbishop proposed to abolish dispensations
for children and young men under age to take ecclesiastical promotions. Strype
Grind , p. 302. Remains of Abp. Grindal, Parker Society, p. 450.

By the Rev. W. P. 8. Bingham. 89

of Bemerton—certainly he was not a priest. It is, therefore,
possible that the patron of Teffont may have appointed his son to
the vacant vicarage to defray the cost of his education, and employed
some neighbouring curate to perform the service. It may have
been done in the dond fidé belief that James Ley would enter holy
orders, and himself in time fulfil the duties of his office, but when
this course was abandoned, and his son turned his attention to the
law, the living of Teffont was conscientiously resigned in 1576.

From Oxford James Ley went to Lincolns Inn, where he was called
to the bar, and served the office of Lent Reader. Lord Campbell, in
his “ Lives of the Chief Justices,” speaks rather disparagingly of
his legal attainments, and intimates that his promotion was rather
due to his courtly manners than his learning, and that he became
serjeant-at-law in 1603, with a view to increasing his practice, but
that still his briefs were few. It was Lord Campbell who said that
he never went the Western Circuit without strengthening his
persuasion that the wise men came from the East, and therefore we
ean scarcely expect that he would write the life of a Wiltshireman,
whose ancestors came from Devonshire, without a strong and un-
favourable prejudice. There are some facts which do not look as if
he was a briefless barrister. He had been six years in Parliament,
representing the Borough of Westbury, when he became a serjeant,
and in the same year he was knighted. We must remember that
he was a younger son, and did not succeed to his patrimony by the
death of all his elder brothers until four years after this. Moreover
he must have had a residence here in Westbury as well as in London,
for he was married, and his eldest son, the second earl, was baptised
in Westbury Church in 1595.

His colleague in the representation of Westbury was Matthew
Ley, his elder brother, who presented the seal of the borough to the
corporation in 1574, By the time the two brothers sat together
for Westbury, one at least must have been a man of considerable
local influence. Heywood had been bought. It is said that the
house was built by James, but it may been commenced by the elder
brother, Matthew, and only completed by him. Sir R. C. Hoare
thinks that it was purchased either from the St. Maurs or from the

90 James Ley, Earl of Marlborough.

family of William of hint a former Chief Justice of the
Common Pleas.

In 1605, two years after he had become a serjeant, Sir James
vacated his seat for Westbury on his being appointed Lord Chief
Justice of the King’s Bench in Ireland. Lord Campbell says that
this was nothing better than the office of Chief Justice of Jamaica
would be at the present time, but in saying this he takes no account
of the exceptional circumstances under which Sir James Ley was
sent to Ireland. King James had determined to civilize Ireland by
the introduction of English law. Hitherto the laws of England .
had no force beyond the English pale. Beyond this, ancient custom
took the place of law, and amongst the ancient customs were many
which prevented the progress of the nation. There was one especially
which destroyed all fixity of tenure. The land of a Sept was held
to be the common property of its members, and was allotted to
each by its chieftain, and whenever one died the land was thrown
into common again and a fresh allotment made. No one, therefore,
was interested in improving land which any day might pass to
another member of the Sept. The introduction of a law of in-
heritance would give plenty of employment to law courts, which
would have to decide between rival claims. Vast estates in Ulster
had been confiscated after the rebellion of Desmond, Earl of Tyrone,
and although Royal grants were freely made, some other claims
arose, especially respecting lands which had formerly belonged to
the Church. Naturally, therefore, would King James look out not only
for a sound lawyer, but for a man whose high principle would enforce
respect for his decisions ; and such a man was found in Sir James Ley.

The King seems to have been very desirous that the Lord Chief
Justice of Ireland should be a man of the highest character, for on
his going over he charged him “ not to build an estate on the ruins
of a miserable nation; but by the impartial execution of justice,
not to enrich himself, but to civilize the people.” Sir James Ley
might have found ample opportunity of founding an estate for
himself, as most other English emigrants did at this time, but he
faithfully kept the King’s charge, which was endorsed by his own
conscience.

By the Rev. W. P. 8. Bingham. 91

Whilst he was in Ireland the administration of justice was not
the only thing which engaged his attention. As a true archzologist
he studied the history of the past with a view to the advancement
of the future. He collected the annals of John Clynne, a friar
minor of Kilkenny, and the annals of Rosse and Clonmell. All
these he caused to be transcribed, but his professional engagements
prevented their preparation for the press. They afterwards fell into
the hands of Henry, Earl of Bath. Extracts from them are in the
Dublin College Library, but the original will probably be found at
Longleat. Sir James Ley also wrote some treatises on heraldry and
antiquarian subjects, which are included in Hearue’s Collections in
the Bodleian Library. These collections are in one hundred and
forty-five MS. volumes, and as selections from them are being
published by the Oxford Historical Society, under the editorship of
Mr. Doble, of Worcester, it may be hoped that some of them may
yet see the light.

Sir James did not long hold the office of Lord Chief Justice of
Treland, for the King found that he had need of him at home. The
work which he had lent his aid to accomplish was so successful that,
according to Sir John Davis, in the space of nine years greater
advances were made towards the reformation of Ireland than in the
four hundred and forty years, which had elapsed since its first
conquest.

The work for which King James wanted him at home was the
Court of Wards and Liveries, of which he was made Attorney-
General in 1609. This court, which was established in the thirty-
second year of Henry VIII., had some very difficult and important
questions to decide. Many estates were then held by their proprietors
as tenants of the King, and when a tenant died, a jury was em-
panelled to ascertain whether the tenancy was only for life, in which
case it reverted to the Crown; or if the tenant died without heirs,
for then it would belong to the King by escheat ; or if he be attainted
of treason, whereby his estate is forfeited to the Crown. If the
purchaser of the land is an alien that is another cause of forfeiture,
and if the heir is an idiot or a minor, the King becomes the guardian
of his person and his lands. ‘This court was abolished at the

92 James Ley, Hari of Marlborough.

Restoration of Charles II., when the oppressive tenures which
gave occasion for its jurisdiction ceased to exist.

There seems to have been another reason which induced Sir
James to accept the presidency of thiscourt. Although he was the
the youngest of six children he was now the sole survivor of his
brothers, and as he had inherited the property at Teffont Evias and
Westbury he was naturally anxious to hold some office which would
enable him to reside part of the year at Heywood.

In that year—1609—George Webb, Vicar of Steeple Ashton,
the advowson of which parish then belonged to the Heywood
property, was appointed to preach at S. Paul’s, when the judges
attended service there on the first Sunday after Trinity. The
sermon which he preached, entitled “ God’s Controversy with
England,’ is published with a dedication to Sir James and Lady
Ley. In this he says that “he had been called from his little
Anathoth at home to bewray his weakness at the chiefest watch-
tower of the land.” Urged to publish his sermon he says, “ It being
a case of controversy and matter of judgment, how could it find a
better patrociny than to come forth under your protection, who
have yourself been heretofore a judge, yea Lord Chief Justice of
His Majesty’s realm of Ireland, a zealous and upright judge, es-
pecially in the controversies of the Lord, as the Church of Ireland
to God’s glory and your everlasting praise doth testify ; and now
also (and that most justly) are a judge in one of God’s most especial
judgment seats in this land to see that the orphans and fatherless
may not suffer wrong. Secondly, seeing that your worship is lately
seized with the patronage, to which as patron, though unworthy, I
owe myself and my service, I could not but congratulate your
entrance into the same with this poor present.” And then the
dedication continues with a tribute to Lady Ley, which tells us
something of her life at Heywood. “ And as for you, Madam, I
have made bold likewise to mention your name in this my dedication
that I might in some sort certify mine unfeigned thankfulness for
the many favours I have received at your hands, and for that great
encouragement which you have given both to me and others, my
fellow brethren, in our ministry here in this part of our country by

By the Rev. W. P. 8. Bingham, 93

your presence at our sermons, defending of our just causes, stirring
up of our auditors, and making yourself and your family a worthy
pattern and example of all Christian duties.”

Lady Ley, whose useful influence is thus described by the Vicar
of Steeple Ashton, did not long survive, for she died and was buried
in Westbury Church, October 5th, 1613. The eldest son, Henry,
was then eighteen years old, and the youngest, William, was a baby,
having been baptized March 1Uth, 1612. Sir James was thus left
with three sons and eight daughters, and it was probably the serious
charge of so large a family which soon induced him to marry again.
His second wife was Mary, widow of Sir William Bowyer,

In 1620 he was created a baronet, when the King, to get money
for the colonization of Ulster, instituted an hereditary order of
knighthood, which must have seemed in those days as great an
innovation as life peerages did in our own. When Sir James Ley
returned to England, he returned also to the House of Commons,
and sat for Westbury from 1609 to 1621, when he vacated the seat
on being appointed Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench. In
the representation of Westbury, he was succeeded by his son-in-law,
Sir Walter Long, of Draycot, to whom some of us may still feel
grateful, as he is said to have been the first person who introduced
tobacco into Wiltshire.

Sir James was installed as Chief Justice of England on February
1st, 1621, and before long he gave two judgments, which, though
criticised by Lord Campbell as bad law, will I think, commend
themselves as good sense to most of us. An innkeeper had been
indicted for exacting an exhorbitant price for oats. The indictment
stated that he had charged 2s. 8d. when the ordinary price was not
more than twenty pence. Objection was taken that the exact price
should have been stated in the indictment, but on appeal the Lord
Chief Justice decided that the words used— not more than twenty
pence ”—were sufficient.

The other case was that of a woman, who had said to a neighbour,
in the hearing of others, “ Thou perjured beast, I’ll make thee stand
upon a scaffold in the Star Chamber.” The question arose whether
this was a libel or not, as the words “ perjured beast” were used not

94 James Ley, Earl of Marlborough.

as substantives, but as adjectives; but the Lord Chief Justice ruled
that it was as wrong to injure the reputation of a neighbour with
an adjective as with a substantive ; in which decision, with all due
deference to Lord Campbell, we, who are unlearned in the law, will
most probably agree.

The judge had written a book on wards and liveries, which was
an authority as long as it was needed, and he still continued to
compile reports of cases which were tried at Westminster during
the reigns of James and Charles.

And now, in the first year of his office, the Lord Chief Justice
was called to execute a most important and delicate task, for which
his high character singled him out. Bacon, the great philosopher,
now created Viscount St. Albans, was Lord Chancellor, and whispers
were heard that he had not been above receiving bribes from the
suitors in the Court of Chancery. Bacon has been called—I think
by Pope—“ the greatest and the meanest of mankind.” He was
certainly the greatest thinker of his day, and the reputation of the
“ Novum Organum ” is as great now as it was then ; and some in
our time have asserted that he was the real author of Shakespeare’s
plays, and that Shakespeare was only the actor who placed them on
the stage. It is difficult now to ascertain with clearness the measure
of Lord Bacon’s guilt. It is certain that he accepted bribes, but
it has never been proved that these bribes perverted justice. The
accusation was rather that he received bribes and then decided
against the givers. The fact was really this. There was then, as
there has been in later days, a block of business in the Court of
Chancery, and years might elapse before a suit came on for hearing,
unless some interest was used with the Lord Chancellor to place it
early on the list. A request that it might be heard soon was often
accompanied by a present, which Bacon accepted, because his expenses
were so great that often he did not know where to turn for money.
This was not right, but it appears to have been the extent of the
alleged bribery and corruption; and if Bacon’s decisions had been
in favour of the suitors who were supposed to have bribed him,
nothing more would have been heard about it.

There were, however, some who were disappointed and aggrieved

By the Rev. W. P. &. Bingham. 95

when the judgment went against them after they had, as they
thought, paid for it. Complaints were made in the House of
Commons, and a committee was appointed to investigate the matter.
The consequence of this was that an impeachment was sent up to
the House of Lords. Bacon could scarcely preside in the House of
Lords during his own trial, and then it was that, at his own request,
a commission passed the great seal reciting that, by reason of illness,
he was unable to attend the House of Lords, and authorising Sir
James Ley, Knight and Baronet, Chief Justice of the Queen’s
Bench, to act as Speaker in his absence. Thus it was that the Lord
Chief Justice, not yet a peer, came to preside in the House and sat
upon the wool-sack when Bacon was arraigned.

The Chancellor, conscious of guilt, deprecated the vengeance of
his judges by a general avowal. He wrote to the King on the 25th
of March as follows :—‘ And for the briberies and gifts wherewith
I am charged, when the book of hearts shall be open I hope I shall
not be found to have the two-fold fountain of a corrupt heart in a
depraved habit of taking rewards to pervert justice, however I may
be frail and partake of the abuses of the times; and therefore Iam
resolved when I come to my answer not to trick up my innocency,
as I writ to the Lords, by cavellations and voidances, but to speak
to them the ]Janguage which my heart speaketh to me, in excusing,
extenuating or ingenuously confessing, praying to God to give me
the grace to see the bottom of my faults, and that no hardness of
heart do steal upon me or any shew of more neatness of conscience
than there is cause.”

The Lords, not satisfied with a general acknowledgment, insisted
on a specific confession of each one of the charges, and for this
purpose a deputation waited on Bacon. After having acknowledged
the truth of twenty-eight charges, he was asked if the confession
was his own voluntary act, and he answered, “ My Lords, it is my
act, my hand, my heart, I beseech your Lordships to be merciful
to a broken reed.” It now became the painful duty of the Lord
Chief Justice to’ pronounce the sentence of the peers against the
unhappy Chancellor, who, no doubt, had been for years his friend
and companion. He was spared the pain of doing this with Bacon

96 James Ley, Earl of Marlborough.

standing as a culprit before him, as his presence was dispensed with
on account of serious illness. The sentence was a fine of £40,000,
and imprisonment during the King’s pleasure. He was, moreover,
pronounced incapable of ever again holding office or voting in the
House of Lords.

Before the sentence was pronounced the great seal had been
sequestered and a new commission awarded to the Lord Chief
Justice “to execute the place of the Chancellor or Lord Keeper.”
So says the author of the State Trials, but Lord Campbell says that
when the King received the great seal, three commissions were
ordered to be sealed with it in his presence, one to Sir Julius Cesar,
Master of the Rolls, and certain common law judges, to hear causes
in the Court of Chancery; another to Sir James Ley, to preside as
Speaker in the House of Lords; and a third to Viscount Mandeville,
the Lord Treasurer, the Duke of Lennox, and the Ear! of Arundell,
to keep the great seal, and to affix it to all writs and letters requiring
to be sealed. We can scarcely over-estimate the importance of
these transactions, in which the Lord Chief Justice involuntarily
took the foremost part, as they purged the judicial bench for ever
after from all suspicion of corruption, and rendered it impossible for
a judge to take a bribe. If Sir James Ley’s hands had not been,
as Milton says, “ unstained with gold or fee,’ he could scarcely have
been placed in such a position as he was.

And now came the question as to the person to whom the great
seal, now temporarily in commission, should be entrusted. There
was Sir Edward Coke, the greatest lawyer of the day ; but Sir James
Ley had so admirably performed the duties of Speaker of the House of
Lords, that all eyes were turned on him; and there was also Hobert,
Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, who was also by his reputation
duly qualified to be Chancellor; but all expectations were disappointed
when, through the interest of the Duke of Buckingham, it was
offered to Williams, Dean of Westminster, soon to be Bishop of
Lincoln, and by him accepted; and this was the last time that a
clergyman has been Lord Chancellor.

Sir James Ley was, however, rewarded for his integrity, and
compensated for his disappointment, when in 1624 he was made

By the Rev. W. P. &. Bingham. 97

Lord Treasurer and raised to the peerage by the title of Baron Ley,
of Canons Ley, in Devonshire. He did not hold this office long,
for the King died, and in the next year, and soon after the accession
of Charles I. he was removed from his office on pretence of his age
and infirmities, but really to make room for Sir Thomas Weston, a
favourite of Buckingham, who was at that time all-powerful with
the King. Lord Campbell refers to Lord Clarendon’s opinion of
his incompetence as a reason for the removal of Lord Ley from the
office of High Treasurer, but all that Clarendon says is that if his
age and incompetency had been a sufficient reason for his removal,
they would have been equally a reason for his never being appointed,
as only two years had elapsed. If’ he had really been incompetent,
he would scarcely have been made President of the Council soon
afterwards, and advanced to the earldom of Marlborough.

His second wife had died in the interim, and he had married again,
Jane, daughter of Lord Butler, of Bramfield, and niece to the Duke
of Buckingham. No doubt it was through her influence that the
earldom of Marlborough was obtained, as it was settled on the issue
of this marriage with remainder to his own heirs. As there was
no issue by this marriage the earldom went with the barony to his
eldest son. No slight, however, was intended to his children when
Lord Ley accepted an earldom, which was first of all settled on
possible children, who, as events turned out, were never born, for
his eldest son was about the same time called to the upper house by
his father’s barony. He had represented Westbury in Parliament
from 1623 to 1625, and had previously sat for Devizes. It is
probable that all the members of the family were not as easily
pacified as the eldest son. Serious differences arosé with the Longs,
of Draycot. Hitherto the earl had been on the most affectionate
terms with Lady Ann, his daughter, and Sir Walter Long, her
husband. He had been so much at home at Draycot that he had
built a gateway there and put his arms upon it, but afterwards there
was a fierce quarrel, which probably arose from some remonstrance
on the marriage of the Earl with a young wife, or else from the
limitation of the patent. It seems never to have been healed during
his life, for in his will he “ begged pardon of the Lady Ann on the
VOL, XXV.—NO. LXXIII. H

98 James Ley, Earl of Marlborough.

bended knee of his heart for his conduct tuwards her.” Whether
he repented of his marriage or lamented the estrangement from his
daughter is a question which we need not decide.

And now comes the tragic end of the good Earl. For some time
he must have seen that darker days were drawing on, and it may be
that his counsels were unheeded by the King, and in that case what
passed between his royal master and himself was a secret which he
would never have divulged. The end came when the King dissolved
his fourth Parliament, and declared that he would rule without the
aid of parliaments. The Earl of Marlborough and his son, Lord
Ley, were both present in the House of Lords at the delivery of
the King’s speech, in which he said :—* I thought it necessary to
come here to-day to declare to you and to all the world that it was
merely the undutiful and seditious carriage in the Lower House
that hath caused the dissolution of this Parliament. You, my Lords,
are so far from being the causers of it, that I take as much comfort
in your dutiful demeanour as I am justly distasted with their pro-
ceedings. Yet to avoid mistakings, let me tell you that it is so
far from me to adjudge all the House equally guilty, that 1 know
that there are many there as dutiful subjects as any in the world ;
it being but some few vipers among them that did cast this mist of
undutifulness over most of their eyes. As these vipers must look
for their reward of punishment, so you, my Lords, must justly
expect from me that favour and protection that a good King oweth
to his loving and faithful nobility.”

The Earl went home with a broken heart, for he loved his country
and his King. Four days afterwards he was dead, and his body
was brought from London to Westbury and laid in the same grave
with his first wife—the mother of all his children—in the south
transept of the Church.

And as I began with his epitaph, so I will end with words which
have immortalised his memory, the sonnet which Milton addressed
to Lady Margaret, his daughter :—'

1 Milton diverted himself sometimes of an evening in visiting Lady Margaret
Ley, daughter of the Earl of Marlborough, Lord High Treasurer of England and
President of the Privy Council to King James I. This lady, being a woman of

By the Rev. W. P. 8. Bingham. 99

“Daughter to that good Earl, once President
Of England’s Council, and her Treasury,
Who lived in both, unstained with gold or fee,
And left them both, more in himself content,
Till sad the breaking of that Parliament
Broke him, as that dishonest victory
At Cheeronea, fatal to liberty,
Killed with report that old man eloquent.
Though later born than to have known the days
Wherein your father flourished, yet by you,
Madam, methinks I see him living yet:
So well your words his noble virtues praise,
That all both judge you to relate them true,
And to possess them, honoured Margaret.”

He left by his will £20 to the poor of Westbury, and £20 for
the repair of the bells. His widow, still young, beautiful, and
fascinating, re-married Ashburnham the Cofferer, and lived an
eventful life through the Commonwealth. I had collected some
notes of the lives of the succeeding Earls, but this paper has been
too long already. Heywood still stands, and its present occupant
is a worthy successor of William of Westbury and James, Earl of
Marlborough, being the third of the eminent judges who have spent
their holidays under the shadow of its trees. As you pass that
house to-morrow you will be struck by the beauty of its situation,
and will remember that it was once the residence of the “ good
Earl” whose praise was sung by Milton.

EAR fe tos wipes Sh

admirable wit and good sense, had a particular esteem for our author, and took
much delight in his company, as likewise did her husband, Capt. Hobson ; and
what regard Milton had for her appears from a sonnet that he wrote to her,
extant among his occasional poems. Life of Milton, T. Burt.

100

The Church Heraldry of orth iltshive.

By Artuur ScHOMBERG.
(Continued from vol. xxiv., p. 307.)
LACOCK.

Chancel.

553. I.—On the Austrian eagle displayed sable ; quarterly, 1
and 4. Argent, on a fess azure three lozenges or. 2 and 3. Or,
a lion rampant gules ducally crowned azure. All ensigned by a cap
of a Count of the Empire, pink turned up ermine. Cresci¢ sub
pondere virtus.

Rear Admiral Charles Feilding, ob. 1837, “ enclosed in oak of an
English ship of war; lineally descended from Basil Feilding, 4th
Earl of Denbigh, of the House of Hapsburg, and Count of the
Holy Roman Empire.”

554. II.—Gules, a lion rampant within a bordure engrailed or ;
impaling, Paly of six argent and gules, on a chief sable two lions
passant guardant or. Srraneways. M.I.

Christiana Barbara, third daughter of Thomas Mansel Talbot,
and the Right Hon. Lady Mary Talbot, of Margam, Glamorgan-
shire, ob. 1808.

Stained Glass in East Window.
555. III.—Tatsor (554). Crest. On a cap of dignity a lion
‘statant, the tail extended. Tatsor. 1776.
Stained Glass in South Window.
556. IV.—'Quarterly, 1 and 4. Argent, on a bend azure three

1Qn the floor of the chancel is a brass plate to the memory of Mary Spencer
Grosett, wife of J. R. Grosett, M.P., ob. at Lacock Abbey, 31st Dec., 1820, bur.
in Bristol Cathedral.

—s,.* =.

The Church Heraldry of North Wiltshire. 101

acorns or. MurrHeap. 2 and 3. Azure, three mullets in fess
argent between as many bezants and an acorn of the last. Grossgrr,
impaling, Quarterly, 1 and 4. Paly of six or and azure, a canton
ermine, SuirtEy. 2and 3. Azure, three swords bendways proper,
hilted or, the points towards sinister base. Raw ins.

On a pillar between the two arches on the north side a shield Gules
a teazle-head (?) argent; im the moulding of the pillar the scorpion
of SHERINGTON.

North Chapel.

557. V.—A large white marble tablet, inscribed with a long Latin
epitaph, and supported on a block of stone, on either side a tall pillar
supporting a pediment thereon a trophy of arms ; Quarterly of six. 1.
Tatpot (554). 2. Azure, a lion rampant within atressureor. 3.
Bendy of ten gules and argent. 4. Gules, two crosses patty or
between as many flanches checky argent and azure. SHERINGTON.
5. Azure, abend argent. Lavary. 6. Per fess indented or and
azure six martlets counterchanged. Fransaam. Crest. On a
chapeau gules turned up ermine, a lion statant, the tail extended or.

John Talbot, ob. 1713, et. 838.

558. VI—A large stone altar-tomb (on the three front panels the
scorpion of SuErineton) with canopy, above is the following shield

supported by two naked boys :—

1. Quarterly 1 and 4. Suerineton (557). 2. Lavatt (557).
3. Fransuam (557).

2. On ceiling of canopy, the same quarterings ; impaling, Quar-
terly, land 4. Gules, bezanty, a eross couped of the last.
Watsincuam. 2 and 3. On a bend another wavy in
sinister chief a cross crosslet fitchy. WrytTz.

3. On dexter interior side of canopy, the same quarterings ; im-
paling, I. and IV. grand quarters—1l and 4. A cross en-
grailed. Bourcuter. 2and3. A fess between ten billets.
Berners. II. and IIL. grand quarters—Quarterly gules (?)
and azure (?) over all a bend.

102 The Church Heraldry of North Wiltshire.

4. On sinister interior side of canopy, the same quarterings ;
impaling, Gules, three unicorns in pale courant argent.
Farinepon.

On ceiling of canopy, “ Ser William Sherington Kn.”

Stained Glass in East Window.
559. VII.—Argent, two glazing irons in saltire between four
closing nails sable, on a chief gules a lion passant guardant dimidi-
ated or. ‘“ Ano. 1589.” Guaztrrs’ Co., London.

On the roof are two angels bearing shields thereon the Symbol of the
Blessed Sacrament ; an angel holding a shield thereon the Symbol of the
Five Precious Wounds; a staff erect between two bears standing on
their hind legs and facing one another; a swan with two heads (?)
proper; 7m the moulding of the south pillar of the west arch the scorpion
of SUERINGTON, and a garb; on the south side of the east window under
a niche an angel holding an empty shield ; on the outside of this
window is an angel holding a shield charged with a bend thereon . .
. .3 ™m the west window in stained glass the sacred monogram and
cross of St. George.

South Transept.

560. VIII.—Argent, on a chevron engrailed azure between three
rooks proper as many suns in their splendour. Rooke (550) ; im-
paling in chief, I. and IV. grand quarters—1 and 4. Gules, a lion
rampant argent, a crescent for difference. Wattace. 2 and 3.
Argent a fess checky or and sable. Lrinpsay. II. and III. grand
quarters—Argent, three pelicans feeding their young in as many
nests proper. Paterson ;—and in base, Azure, a chevron between
three fusils or; pendant therefrom a medal, thereon Britannia with
helmet and trident seated on a sea-horse couchant.

Frederick William Rooke, Capt. R.N., of Lackham House, ob.
1855.

561. IX.—A wooden tablet, once painted and gilt, surrounded
with eight shields, at the head another shield with date 1623:—

1. Quarterly land 4. Baynarp (529). 2and 3, Brust (529)-

Crest. A demi-unicorn rampant or.

By Arthur Schomberg. 103

2. Baynarp; impaling, Argent, a chevron between three fleurs-
de-lis sable.

3. Baynard; impaling, Azure, two swords in saltire between
four fleurs-de-lis or. Barrow.

4. Baynarp; impaling, Lupiow (9).

5. Baynarp; impaling, Azure, a chevron between three pears
pendant or. STEWKELEY.

6. BaynarD; impaling, Azure, fleur-de-lisy, a lion rampant or.
Poo.e.

7. Baynarp; impaling, Watstneuam (558).

8. Baynarp; impaling, Per fess embattled or and sable, six
crosses patty counterchanged. WaARNEFORD.

9. Baynarp; impaling, BiaKxe (26); the field or.

Edward Bainarde, ob. 1575.

562. X.—A similar tablet with same date :—

1. Quarterly, | and 4. Argent, a lion rampant sable, armed
and langued, gules. Srapieron. 2 and 3. Barry of six
or and gules. Firzatan; all within a garter, Orest
destroyed.

2. SrapLeron ; impaling, Sable, fretty or. BEAULIEU.

3. Srapneton; impaling, checky or and azure, a canton ermine,
within a bordure gules. Ds Ricumonp.

4, STaPLeTon ; impaling, Firzavan.

5. SrapteTon; impaling, Bendy of six or and vert (azure ?).

PHILIBERT.
6, Srap.eTon ; impaling, Ermine, a lion rampant vert (azure ?).
PICKERING.
7. SrapLeton; impaling, Barry of six or and vert (azure ?).
ConsTABLE.
8. SrapLuTon; impaling, SHertneton (557).

9. SrapLeTon; impaling, Ermine, on a fess vert (azure P) three
fleurs-de-lis-or. UFrrer.

Lady Ursula Baynard, daughter of Sir Robert Stapilton, of

Wyghall, in the County of York, Knt., and wife to Sir Robert

Baynard; Edward, her son, here buried, and Mary, her daughter.

104 The Church Heraldry of North Wiltshire.

563. XI.—Quarterly, 1 and 4. Argent, three fusils conjoined
in fess gules within a bordure sable. Montacu. 2 and 3. Or, an
eagle displayed vert, beaked and membered gules. MonTHERMER 3
impaling, HunegrrorD (236).

James Montagu and Diana, his wife; Edward, their eldest son ;
James, their second son, and his wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir
John Eyles, Knt. Anthony, their third son, is buried in St. Giles’
Church, Middlesex.

564. XII.—Montacu and Montuermer (563); impaling,
Quarterly, 1 and 4, Azure, three swan’s heads erased at the neck
proper. Hxpass. 2 and 3. Or, three bull’s heads caboshed sable.
GorE.

James Montagu, and Elinor, his wife, daughter and heiress of
William Hedges, of Aldrington, in this county.

565. XIII.—Monracu ond Montuermer (563). Crest. A
egriffin’s head couped, wings elevated or, gorged with a collar argent
thereon three fusils conjoined in fess gules. Supporters. Dexter
an antelope ; sinister a griffin gorged as in the crest ; both couchant
and turned away from the shield.

James Montagu, of Lackham, ob. 1798.

566. XIV.—Montacu and Montuermer (563); impaling,
Quarterly, 1 and 4. Baynarp (561). 2 and 3. Buruver (561).

James Mountague, third son of Henry, Earl of Manchester; and
Mary, daughter and heiress of Sir Robert Baynard, ‘of Lackham,
his wife ; they left issue, Walter (died young), James (married
to Diana, daughter of Anthony Hungerford, of Farley Castle,
leaving issue Edward, James, Anthony, and Robert); George,
Robert, Henry, Edward, Sidney, Mary (wife of Thomas Ewer, of
the Lee, Co. Herts), Charles, William, Katherine, Thomas, and John.

On the Floor.
567. XV.—'!4 brass thereon the figures of a knight in armour and

1 Kite’s “ Monumental Brasses of Wilts,’ pp 39, 40; and also ‘‘ Baynard
Monuments of Lacock Church,” Wilts Arch. Mag., vol. iv., p. 6, by the same
accurate and painstaking writer.

By Arthur Schomberg. 105

his wife, below are the figures of eighteen children, five of them are
daughters, the second son is tonsured, at each of the four corners is a
shield of arms :—
1. Quarterly 1 and 4. Buiuer (561). 2and 3, Baynarp (561) ;
repeated twice.
2. Quarterly, | and 4. Baynarp. 2 and 3. Lvuptow (9) ;
repeated twice.
On the knight’s surcoat, Buvrt quartering Baynarp ; also the same
on each shoulder ; on the loose mantle of the female figure, BAYNARD
quartering LupLow.

Robert Baynard, ob. 1501 ; Elizabeth, his wife.

In a stained glass window in memory of Captain Rooke, R.N. ;
Agnus Dei, and in dexter lower light behind a reclining knight in
armour a shield thereon, Sable, a dragon rampant within a bordure
engrailed gules; under roof jour angels supporting shields thereon a
cross-crosslet.

Hatchments in South Chapel.

568. XVI. Monracu and MontuEermer (563); impaling,
Quarterly, 1 and 4. Hepexs (564). 2 and 3. Gore (564).
Crest. A griffin’s head couped, wings elevated, gules, charged with
a porteullis. Quwies in cxlo.

569. XVII.—The same without crest. Vivit post funera virtus.

570. XVIII.—Fri.pine with quartering (553) : impaling, Quar-
terly, 1 and 4. Sable, two lions passant in pale paly of six argent
and gules, langued of the last. Srranaways (?554). 2. Ermine,
on a chevron azure three fox’s heads erased or, a canton of the
second charged with a fleur-de-lis as the third. Fox. $3. Sable,
three talbots trippant argent, langued gules. Tatpot. <4// charged
on the Austrian eagle. Crest. The cap of a Count of the Holy
Roman Empire ensigned with the Austrian eagle charged on the
breast with first quartering of Fritpine. Crescit sub pondere virtus.

571. XIX.—Moiruxapd quartering Grosxrr with the impaling
asin (556). In celo quies.

106 The Church Heraldry of North Wiltshire.

572. XX.—Dickenson (543), in pretence, Argent, a chevron
between three squirrels sejant, cracking as many nuts proper.
Goostrery (543). Crest. Out of a cloud a cubit arm erect holding
a branch of laurel all proper. Dei manus medicus.

573. XXI.—Argent, ten annulets gules, four, three, two, one.
See of WorczstEr ; impaling, Jounson (102); ensigned with a
mitre. In celo quies.

574, XXII.—Montacu and Montuermer (563) ; impaling,
Wroveuton (826). Crest. A griffin’s head couped or, wings
elevated sable, gorged with a collar argent, thereon three fusils
conjoined in fess gules. Jn ca@lo salus.

South Aisle.
575. XXIII.—Dicxenson (543), in pretence Goostrey ' (572).
Crest. Dickenson (572).

Barnard Dickenson, of Bowden Park, ob. 1814.

576. XXIV.—See of Worcester (573); impaling, JoHNsoNn
(102) ; ensigned with a mitre.

James, second son of Rev. James Johnson, M.A., Rector of Long
Melford, Co. Suffolk, and grandson of George Johnson, of Bowden
Park ; Bishop of Gloucester, 1752, translated to Worcester 1759 ;
ob. 1774.

On the eastern arch an empty shield ; under the roof over the west

window an angel holding a shield thereon a bend.

West Porch.
577. XXV. In centre of groined roof, Buunr (561) quartering
Baynarp (561),

Over the window above chancel arch two angels holding empty shields.

Hatchments. M.1.
578. XXVI.—Tatsor (554) ; impaling, Azure, ten billets, four,

1 Barnard Dickenson married Miss Goostrey, of Missenden, Co. Bucks, 6th
September, 1773. Gent. Mag., 1773, p. 469.

By Arthur Schomberg. 107

three, two, one, or, on a chief of the second a demi-lion sable (sic)
Dormer (434) all ensigned with an earl’s coronet.

579. XXVII.—Argent, a chevron between three cross-crosslets
fitchy sable. Davenrort; impaling, Tatpor (554).

On the external south side of nave on one of the pinnacles near the
slring-course, BAYNTON.

BOX.

Chancel.

580. I.—Crest. A demi-cockatrice, flames issuing from the
mouth.

William, eldest son of William Northey, of Ivy House, ob. 1826.

581. II.—On a fess or between three panthers trippant proper
semy of mullets argent a rose slipt, on either side a gillyflower;
impaling, Sable, on a chevron between three pistols argent as many
roses gules. Hopkins. Steady.

Wilham, son of William Northey, of Compton Bassett, by
Abigail, daughter of Sir Thomas Webster, of Battle Abbey, ob.
1770; Lucy, his youngest daughter, ob. 1783; Anne, his wife, ob.
1822, xt. 90.

582. IIT.—Eyre (319).

William Eyre, of Ashley, “ uxorem habuit Elizabetham Radolphi
Flowerdew de Hethersett, in Comitatu Norfolk, arm., filiam; ex

qua septem Liberos suscepit” ; ob. 1699, xt. 82.

583. IV.—. . . . impaling . . . . (all obliterated, not
blazoned in M.I.)

Mary Blow, widow, daughter of Robert Butler, late of Great
Chelsea, Co. Middlesex, and Martha, his wife; sister of Edward

: Butler, LL.D., late President of Magdalen College, Oxon, and sister

of Ann, wife of Sergeant Eyre, ob. 1755; buried with her husband,

_ Thomas Blow. Erected by her niece and executrix, Mary Herbert,
of Chelsea, widow.

108 The Church Heraldry of North Wiitshire.

584, V.—Norruey (581); impaling,. . . . ,Odliterated,
not blazoned in ML.)

Hariott, wife of William Northey, of Compton Bassett, daughter
of Robert Vyner, of Gautby, Co. Lincoln, ob. 1750; Ann, his
daughter, by Ann, daughter of Edward Hopkins, of Coventry, ob.
1765,

585. VI.—Gopparp (545), crescents ermine without the canton.
Crest destroyed.

Thomas, fourth son of Edward Goddard, late of Upham, ob. 1691;
Priscilla, his mother, ob. 1681, zt. 88.

On Iloor within Communion Rails,
586. VII.—Quarterly, 1 and 4. An eagle with two heads
displayed. 2 and 3. Two bars dancetty, in chief three annulets.
Bexe ; over all a mullet for difference.

“ Francis Speke, third sonne of Hugh Speke, Esq., was borne att
Haselbury ye 7th day of Oct. being thursday about four of ye clocke
in ye morning in ye yeare of the Reigne of our Sovereign Lord
King Iames Anno Domini 1610”; ob. 1683.

587. VILI.—Quarterly, 1 and 4, Two bars over a spread eagle
charged with an escocheon surcharged with a sinister hand (590).
2 and 3. ‘Three chevronels between as many mullets pierced.
Mayney (591). M.I.

(Sir Hugh Speke, Bart., ob. 1661; his only daughter, Ann;
Dame Rachel Speke, eldest daughter of Sir William Wyndham, of
Orchard Wyndham, M.I.), Co. Somerset, Kt., Bart., by Dame
Frances, daughter of Anthony Hungerford, of Farley Castle, and
relict of Sir George Speke, of Haselbury, Bart., and afterwards wife
of Rd. Musgrave, Esq., ob. 1711.

588. IX.—Sprxe (587); impaling, Per pale three chevronels
between as many cinquefoils counterchanged. Maynsy (591). M.I.
(Dame Anne Speke, sole daughter and heiress of John Mayney,
of Staplehurst, Co. Kent, relict of Sir Hugh Speke, and mother to
Sir George Speke, M.I.), ob. 1685 ; Mary, the daughter, ob. 1719;

an

By Arthur Schomberg. 109
Thomas, the son of George Speke-Petty, of Haselbury, ob. 1725.

589. X.—Quarterly, 1 and 4. Aspread eagle. Sprxe. 2 and
3. Three chevronels between as many cinquefoils. Mayney; the
badge of Ulster. Crest. A hedgehog. M.I.

George Speke, “ Baronettus, Filius Hugonis Speke, Baronetti, de
Haselbury in com. Wilton. Anneque filie unice et Heredis
Johannis Mayney, &c.,” ob. 1685. M.I.

“ By the three graduali stone seates is a Lyon rampant in stone
with a cross-crosslet on his shoulder (Bigop?).” A. and J.

590. XI.—A pennon; Barry of six argent and azure, an eagle
with two heads displayed gules, Spexe (586); impaling, Or, two
bars dancetty sable, on a chief azure three annulets argent. Buxe
(586). A. and J.

591. XII.—A pennon' Sprxe (590), with badge of Ulster; in
pretence, Per pale argent and sable, three chevronels between as
many cinquefoils counterchanged. Mayney (5$7). A. and J.

South Aisle.

592. XIII.—Or, on a chief embattled sable three plates.
Edward Lee, ob. 1797; Ann, his wife, ob. 1766.

593. XIV.—Crest. An arm erect, couped at the elbow, holding
in the hand an oak branch fructed.

Joseph Nash, M.D., of Chilton Hill House, Co. Somerset, youngest

son of the late Rev. Samuel Nash, LL.D., Rector of Great Tew,

_ and Vicar of Enstone, Co. Oxford, ob. 1857; Jane Amelia, his wife,

ob, 1850, xt. 81; Cavendish Lyster Joseph, grandson of the above,

and son of Dr. J oseph and Elizabeth Anne Nash, of Ashley Manor
House, ob. 1854.

ee ene Se ee ee

_ 1 The first is that of Hugh Speke, of Haselbury, ob. 1624, and his wife, Eliza,

daughter of Henry Beke, of Hartley Court, Berks ; the second that of his son,

the above Sir Hugh Speke, and his wife, the above Ann Mayney. Aubrey and
Jachson, p. 57.

110 The Church Heraldry of North Wiltshire.

Nave.

594. XV.—'Quarterly, 1 and 4, Lone (29). 2. Poenam, with
annulet for difference (484). 3. Swymour (5); over alla mullet
for difference; impaling, Quarterly, 1 and 4, two bars ermine.
Butter. 3 and 4. A lion rampant, double-queued. Mounrrorp.

Anthony Long, ob. 1578.

595. XVI.—Two birds in pale; impaling, An eagle displayed.
Corton.

Thomas Bowdless, of Ashley, ob. 1785; Elizabeth Stuart, his
wife, daughter and coheiress of Sir John Cotton, of Conington, Go.
Huntingdon, Bart., ob. 1797, et. 80; Jane, their eldest daughter, —
ob. 1784; Elizabeth Julia, their second daughter, ob. 1754.

Hatchments.

596. XVII.—Blank; impaling, in chief, Per fess gules and
argent, a cross bottony between four mullets counterchanged ; in
base, Or, on a bend engrailed gules three cross-crosslets fitchy argent.
Crest. A castle argent. Mors janua vite.

597. XVIII.—Quarterly, 1 and 4. Per pale Eneatanp and

Scottanp. 2. France. 3. IRELAND.
DITCHERIDGE.

Painted Glass in two South Windows of the Chancel symbols of
the Four Evangelists and of the Passion, the Keys of St. Peter, and
Cross of St. Andrew ; in a North Window of the Nave Agnus Dei.

COLERNE.

On the West external Wall of the Tower an angel under a niche
holding a shield thereon a cross.

BIDDESTON.
Chancel.

598. I.—Gules three escocheons or,

1 Only the tablet and the arms now remain; some fragments of the monument
are ina garden. Aubrey and Jackson, p. 57.

;
;
d

By Arthur Schomberg. 131

William Mountjoy, ob. 1734; Elizabeth, his wife, ob. 1741;
William Mountjoy, ob. 1766; Barbara, his wife, ob. 1767 ; William
Mountjoy, ob. 1766; Elizabeth, his wife, ob. 1776; William
Mountjoy, ob. 1787; Barbara, ob. 1720, and Sarah, ob. 1727,
daughters of William and Barbara Mountjoy, junior.

599. II.—An altar tomb. Quarterly. 1. On a fess three
roundles, a greyhound courant and collared. Haynes. 2. Quar-
terly. 1 and 4. Blank. 2 and 38. Per fess indented, over all a
fess. 8. A chevron between three leopard’s faces. 4. Barry of
eight ; in pretence, Barry of six. A.and J.

600. ILI.— Quarterly, 1 and 4. Enentanp. 2%. ScorLanp.
3. IRELAND.
SLAUGHTERFORD.
601. I.—Over South Door, a bull’s head caboshed. GorE. A.
and J.

602. I1.—Outside Porch Door an altar-tomb, a chevron between
three hearts. Bayurre. A. and J.

DERRY HILL.
Painted Glass in Hast Window.

603. Quarterly, land 4. Gules, a lion passant guardant argent,
crowned or, in chief three mullets pierced of the second. 2 and 3.
Or a fess between two chevrons sable. Occurs twice.

! William John Lisley, A.D, 1865.

1 Buried under a flat stone in the churchyard eastward of the chancel ; “of
Pewsham, formerly of Mirnwood, Herts, in which county he was a magistrate
and deputy lieutenant, and served as high sheriff in 1851. He was M.P. for
the Borough of Chippenham from 1859 to 1865. He died January 14th, 1873,
aged 81 years.”

112

GHiltshive’s Contribution to the Picdmontese
fund in 1655.

By J. WayYLen.

SHYT is not many months since a remarkable gathering took
a place in Torre Pellice, the capital of the Waldensian valleys
lying in the midst of the Cottian Alps, in the north of Italy, thirty
miles, more or less, from Turin. The object of the meeting was to
commemorate what has long been termed the “ Glorious Return ”
of the expatriated Waldenses just two hundred years ago; when
eight hundred resolute men, gathering on the shore of the Lake of
Geneva from the various scenes of their exile, fought their way back
to their beloved homes in the face of terrible hardships and the
opposition of French soldiery. At the bi-centenary celebration of
that event which came off in September, 1889, not only were
delegates present from many Protestant lands, but the King of
Italy expressed his personal sympathy by addressing an affectionate
letter to his Waldensian subjects, by commanding the Prefect of
Turin to attend the conclave as His Majesty’s representative, by a
donation of five thousand francs, and by knighting the Rev. J. P.
Pons—the ‘“ Moderator of the ‘Table,’ as he was termed—and
investing him with the order of the Corona d’Italia. Among the
English visitors the venerable figure of Sir Henry Layard, the
explorer of Nineveh, was conspicuous, himself a descendant of
French Huguenots.

But a narrative of the Glorious Return of 1689, how attractive
soever it might prove, is not so much the object of the present
article as to accept it as a suitable occasion for reviving the memory
of what took place in our own country, and in our own county of
Wilts too, when the Waldenses underwent the previous catastrophe
of the massacre of 1655. These two events in fact constitute the
two most prominent epochs in their history as a suffering Church,
They had been a proscribed race all down the centuries ; but the
tragedy of 1655 was of so desolating a character as to awaken the
horror of all the Protestant states of Europe. John Milton’s well-
known sonnet on the occasion by no means exaggerates the affair.

Wiltshire’s Contribution to the Piedmontese Fund in 1655, 118

As for the Protector Oliver, he lost no time in despatching Sir
Samuel Morland as ambassador extraordinary, to remonstrate with
the Court of Turin in words which, if unheeded, would soon have
become acts. At home he ordained a general fast throughout
England ; collections at the same time to be made in all the Churches
to relieve the homeless survivors in the valleys. He headed the
subscription list by a gift of two thousand pounds out of his privy
purse; and so cordially was his challenge accepted by the nation,
that, judged by the money standard of the age, their contributions
may be said to have risen to munificence. £16,500 is the sum
accounted for by Morland in the copious memorandum occupying
twenty-eight pages of Thurloe’s State Papers; though he admits
that this was only “ part of the moneys collected for the poor people
of the valleys.”

Scanning the contribution list of Wiltshire, we remark at first
sight that some parishes of importance are totally omitted, Malmes-
bury, Hindon, and Downton, for example; while on the other hand
sundry obscure villages surprise us by the largeness of their donations.
Leading families in this or that locality, as also the known principles
of the resident incumbent may have had something to do in this
matter. May we not reasonably conclude, for instance, that the
influence of the Frowd family is discernable at Edington (spelt
Edingston in the list) ? the Protestantism of the Frowds, always
of a pronounced character, being subsequently illustrated by alliance
with the Huguenot family of Faugoin,! who settled in the south-west
quarter of Wilts and enjoyed the friendship of the Hoares of
Stourhead. The Frowds (of Tinhead) have long disappeared from
Edington parish, but. the title of Frowd-Seagram, of Bratton,

1The Huguenot family of Faugoin, in South Wilts. The last household
bearing this patronymic comprised five daughters renowned for their beauty, and
one son; but as the son died unmarried the name is well-nigh forgotten. Of
the daughters, one married Mr. Partridge, the Vicar of Stourton ; another, Mr,
Turner, a clergyman of Mere; a third married Mr. Hyatt, a farmer near
Stourhead ; a fourth was the wife of Edward Frowd, of Tinhead aforesaid ; and
the fifth died unmarried. Through Camilla Sloper, a grand-daughter of Edward
Frowd, but maternally deriving from the Houltons, of Farley Castle, we trace
_ the progenitors of the present Lieut.-Colonel Frowd Walker, the energetic
_ commander of our Sikh troops in the Straits Settlements,

VOL, XXV.—NO, LXXIII, I

114 Wiltshire’s Contribution to the Piedmontese Fund in 1655.

perpetuates their memory. Then, again, the large sums collected
at the two Donheads remind us of the dramatic story of Peter Ince,
the ejected parson, and of his generous patron, Thomas Grove, of
Fern House. From Bradford, where Methuens and Houltons dwelt,
we might have expected larger results. But in place of finding
any fault, which is far enough from our design, let us hasten to
extol the generosity of Salisbury, which, with its suburbs of Harn-
ham, Fisherton, Old Sarum, and Stratford, furnished £105, equivalent
to at least £500 of our modern money. Next to Salisbury, the
contribution of Marlborough, including the suburbs of Preshute
and Mildenhall, amounting to £49 5s. 7d., naturally invites remark ;
and the circumstances which may be conceived as giving birth to
such a demonstration are worth recital.

Thomas Eyre, the Mayor of Marlborough at the period in debate,
was a personal friend of Oliver Cromwell. Whether or not he may
be identified with the Captain Thomas Eyre whom the Parliament
placed in the temporary command of Devizes Castle after its sur-
render to Oliver, or whether he was only a kinsman of that officer,
can perhaps be decided only by Canon Jackson, who may profitably
be consulted in all matters relating to that family. Now, there
was no town in England which from first to last, throughout the
recent war, had rendered more practical adherence to the Parliament’s
cause than Marlborough did. Cromwell was well acquainted with
the whole story of their varied trials ; and when those trials culmi-
nated in a disastrous fire which swept through the whole length of
their High Street, we cannot doubt that it came home to him as a
personal calamity. It was an accidental conflagration, this fire of
1653 ; and it occurred just one week after Cromwell’s forcible
ejectment of the Long Parliament—a busy time, no doubt; but so
confident did Mr. Mayor feel of the Lord General’s sympathy that
he at once made an appeal in behalf of his ruined fellow-townsmen,
and received an equally prompt response. By means of a public
collection instituted throughout England and Wales not “many
months elapsed before the town arose pheenix-like from its ashes ;
and one of the houses displays the conspicuous date of 1654 to the
present day. Cromwell’s name, it is true, does not appear on the

weet’. .

By J. Waylen. 115

acting committee sitting at Sadlers’ Hall to carry out this scheme ;
he had larger work in hand just then; but he found time to come
down to Marlborough and, in company with Mr. Mayor, to peram-
bulate the place and offer his practical advice. The tradition may
be at fault which attributes to him a promise that the new market-
house should be his personal gift to the town, seeing that in the
subsequent allotment of the national fund a thousand pounds was
expressly devoted to that object. But tradition has not falsified the
light in which he was generally regarded by the Marlborough
commonalty at that crisis; nor need we doubt that before his de-
parture he utilised the occasion more Gladstoniense for a characteristic
harangue on the moral aspects of the catastrophe. Anyhow, it
seems rational to conclude that gratitude for his services must in
great measure have been the motive prompting them two years
later to surpass every other town in the county (Salisbury excepted)
in their contribution to the Piedmontese Fund. It is a noticeable
fact, too, that, at the very moment of the fire’s breaking out, the
people of the town and neighbourhood were met in special conclave
to invoke the divine benediction on the arduous course of action to
which he had just committed himself. An extract from the Mayor’s
letter to Oliver on the day after the calamity will more fully set
this forth. ‘‘Too much,” says he, “ cannot be said for them; they
being a people more generally well-affected than any town I know
in this county. Yet, being confident that your Excellency’s ear
will be open to them, and also that you will be ready to act for
them, I shall only in reference to them say thus much more,—that
the very day when this affliction befel them the godly people of the
town and many of the country were together seeking God (ac-
cording to your desire in your late Declaration) for His presence
with you in your councils, that you might be endowed with the
spirit of wisdom and counsel for the management of the great and
weighty affairs before you, to the honour of His name and the good
and encouragement of His people, in settling justice and righteous-
ness in this nation—being confident that this was the end you
proposed to yourself in the dissolution of the Parliament. In the
truth and reality of this I am so well satisfied, that for my own
I 2

116 Wiltshire’s Contribution to the Piedmontese Fund in 1655.

part, as I shall not cease daily to pray for you upon the same account
as is aforementioned, so I resolve through the assistance of the Lord

to stand and fall with you, and according to my mean abilities, by
all ways and means, with the hazard of my life and fortune, to give
my utmost assistance to promote those ends which I have thought
And having so done, shall remain, my
lord, your Excellency’s humble and faithful servant, THomas Eyre.”

d.
5 9

it my duty to express.

Alderbury
Alderton
All-Cannings
Allington

Alton Barnes
Amesbury

Anstey

Barford St. Martin
Barwick St. James
Barwick St. Leonard
Baverstock
Bedwyn Magna
Bedwyn Parva
Bircombe

Bishops Cannings

Bishops Cannings St.James

Bishopston
Bishopston
-Bishopstrowe
Blacklands
Blunsden St. Andrews
Broad Blunsden
Boscombe
Bowlton

Box

Bradford
Bradley, North
Bratton
Bremhill
Brickfont

Brigmerston and Milston

Brinkworth
Britford

Brixton Deverill
Broadchalk
Bulford

Burbage

FOF OH TMONMNORWHODOHOONWOHHOFRPNOODOOOOFRPFHNWNDS

£78.

or
for)

12
5
10
5
10

a
RPRPROrRAOB Or EDS

e
ENON OD FR & SO

ownwnonwnofnwnocoon

Ie

Calne

Castlecombe

Castle Eaton
Chalfield

Cheverill Magna
Cheverill Parva
Chilmark
Chippenham
Chirton
Choldrington, West
Christian Malford
Chute

Codford

Codford St. Peter
Colerne
Collingbourn? Ducis
Collingbourn Kingston
Combe Bisset
Corsham

Corsley

Cricklade St. Mary
Cricklade St. Sampson
Cropthorne
Damerham, South
Dauntsey

Devizes, St. John
Devizes, St. Mary
Draycot-Cerne
Dunhead St. Andrew
Dunhead St. Mary
Durnford-Magna
Durrington
Eastkwite (sic)
Kaston Grey
Ebbesborne Wake
Edingston

Hysie

£ s.

Se ee eee a Be
CHF OMAmMmnonwnororwvoed

tS

—
OO Re ee ee OO

KDE WOH WODWOOCONDOWFODFOON
—

Be

_

oomooowoocurePoBe
e a =

NSeraAonwaonwnnso

i

d.

Sa Rpoaown

PFOODRrAOPSO

—
a Thro
BIH Wie Ole

NrOO

—

e
ODrFENONNOMWMODOOW

tole

By J. Waylen. 117
d.

£ s. £3. d.

Farley 09 0 Maiden Bradley 213 0
Fiddleton Old 0 Maidington 018 0
Figheldean 166 Manningford Bruce 07 0
Fisherton-Anger 1l1l 4 Marden 0 5 4
Fisherton-de la Mere 010 4 Marlborough 36 2 6
Fonthill-Epis. 0 8 5 Martin 16 8
Fonthill-Gifford Oll 3 Marston Meysey 013 O
Fovant 1 15 10 Marston-South Te 2
Fuggleston and Bemerton 0 18 0 Meere 5 3 6
Grinstead-West 14 4 Melksham 617 1
Grittleton 1 6 6 Mildenhall 312 4
Hannington 015 0 Milton 100
Ham 13 5 Netheravon ple fant
Harnham, West 0 6 8 Netherhampton 09 0
Headington 018 3 Nettleton 15 0
Highworth 19 0 Newton oll 0
Highworth 0 8 0 Newton Toney 1 6 4
Hill-Martin 1 210 Norton 0 8 5
Hinton-Parva 20 0 Norton Bavant 013 8
Horningsham 16 3 Odstock Digi) eons:
Huish 0 4 3 Ogbourn St. Andrew B it! aml
Hullavington 113 Ogbourn St. George 2 0 0
Idmiston, Porton, and Orcheston St. George 013 8
Gomilton 113 4 Orcheston St. Mary 06 4
Tnglesham 010 3 Pewsey 5 O11
Keevil 2 310 Pitton and Farley 11 8
Kingston Deveril 014 9} Potterne 23 2
Knoyle-West 018 3 Preshute 910 9
Kyngton St. Michael 1 12 103 Ramsbury 7U9 38
Kyngton West 018 8 Rodbourn Cheyney 1 3 0
Lacock 22 3 Rushall 010 0
Lanford 18 2 Sarum, Old 918 11
Langford 0 511 Sarum, St. Edmund 39 8 4
Langford, Steeple 119 Sarum, St. Martin 18 7 5
Langford-parva 0 6il Sarum, St. Thomas 31 1 8
Langley Burrel. 2 2 7% Seagre IME Ss
Latton 015 0 Sedghill 21 2
Laverstock 07 8 Semley 3.10)3
Lavington g Bes ee) Sharington 0 10 11
Lavington-west 018 0 Sherston 117 0
Lediard Millicent 110 6 Shopworth 0 5 5
Lediard Tregoze 116 2 Shorneut 029
Liddington 015 7 Shrewton Virgo 014 6
Lineham 012 9 Somerford-magna 010 9
Littleton Drew 0 5 6 Somerford-parva Oll 4
Luckington 0 14 103 Stanton St. Bernard 15 0
Ludgershall be didd Stanton by Highworth 1 1 8

118 Wiltshire’s Contribution to the Piedmontese Fund in 1655.

fi sca: £ os. d.
Stapleford Or: 2,46 Warminster 4 Fro
Steeple Ashton 118 9 Westbury 10 4 7
Stert 0 110 West Dean Gul79
Stockton 015 8 Whiteparish 111 0
Stourton 114 7 Wilcot 019 5
Stratford under the Castle 4 7 0O Wilsford 15 5
Stratford Stoney 010 6 Wilton-borough 74 3
Stratton St. Margaret 018 0 Wilye 015 7
Sutton Mandeville 2 4 0 Winkfield 110 10
Swallowcliff 15 0 Winslow and Stoke Oll 7
Swindon tye 2ia 42 Winterbourn 09 4
Teffont Ewias E050 Winterbourn Dauntsey 0 3 7
Tidworth-north 0 9 5 Winterbourn Earls 0 17 10
Tilshead 018 0 Winterbourn Gunner and
Tisbury 3 Oral Sherborough 013 0
Titcombe Oll 4 Winterbourn-Stoke 916 6
Tollard Royal 1 8 4 Winterslowe 30%
Trowbridge 2 611 Wishford Lin) -0
Uphaven 018 0O Woodborough 2 0 4
Upton Scudamore T 6.8 Wootten- Bassett 211 2
Urehfont 2.12 11 Wraxhall-north O11 8
Veney, Sutton 414 0 Wroughton By 9.6
Wanborough 2 0 6 Yatton-Keynell Oll 3

Dear Mr. Epitor, .

Will you allow me space in the Magazine to state that the thanks of
the Society are due to the Rev. Canon Eddrup for the map which accompanied
his paper on “Stanley Abbey,” and which he generously presented to the Society,
but of which, I regret to say, I carelessly omitted to make mention. The map
alluded to will be found in vol. xxiv. (No. 72), page 274.

Yours truly,
June 26th, 1890. THE LATE Epitor.

Monations to Atlusenm and Aibrarp.

Old Coaching Bill, York Stage Coach. Presented by O. Kimper, Seend.
Portion Ammonites perarmatus, from Seend. Presented by O. Kimpmr.

H. F, BULL, [rinter and Publisher, 4, Saint John Street, Devizes,

é LT .
. NATAVA ‘V 'S “9
“hupjodoog pprounuygy suonpny | ‘NIHSTIM NHOL ‘O68 WET ome
‘NEMO CIAVa ‘yoott00 punoy pue poyrpny
$ 9 IF go Ove
UT TR ay ae Ta Sk RCSA i 9 214g 9 9 1 nites neuaceseeetadeuaseneeeres rt HEOTOUNT NUE o eT Cer,
4 & G YyUNosoy omoouy [e1oueK 07 YYUoz-ou0 Ag “48TE ‘oaq IL 6L 67 *** gunoD08 4S¥] WOIF FYSNOIg eouRleq OF, “4ST ‘Uee
{eam “688T es F “688T
‘dO ‘ad
‘"ANOW dIHSHAaWNaAW AAIT
9 O Tere 9 O IGF
p 8 862 ep)
G@ SLOSL ‘''''*yunoooe yuerINn9 00 4 stresecenseeeeeree Dog sTissoy oyeortdng “ .
‘queg serjunoy pur jezideg 0 S—te¢ : " Sueoyy Ainqysa, Jo oourjeq “ =J
0 ry) OOT Cee rere eeeee of 22 ‘g[osu0g 9 GT z - seeeeeseeeessTosuOd uo spusprlalqg “ec =a
Il ral ZL Pewee eee eee eereseesees yseg z } 0 RL OC 0) (0) syorqdueg oI 6“
—! ‘ZIA ‘puey ul soureg 9 9 g vereeeers TINOSNY OF SUOISSIUUpY oq “ ws
v 6T LT pe ORR OTR SEUR UAC) 06 iT cc S}UB[Y SuLoaopy ,, $,uoyserq opt “
y & &Y ogg ee SHIM UMON », SYpUIg OFT “
(snuog s@ pouingjer) sourinsuy 0Oe¢etrT ue vs) SoIqny ,, Suosyoep oyiq, “
OF @ ssreeseexeT pury pue Ay1edotg P 612 *SQUIZVOBIN JO OTS LOZ poAtooar yseH “
0 8 & vo eeeeeese OP 7B COUEpUTITY IT Tt T9.
P IL ZL srreeeeeerorrmasn fl 7B sosuadxny 4293 seeeeeererees Dun drqsieq
6 6 oF eeeeeeee HOO Hee rete eee ee eee renseesesees IL ON, “WOT oFvT TWOAF AOJSUBLT, “e
‘euizeseyy 1oy“ow ‘Suravisuq ‘Suyuug 9 SL Sel “'''' aeok oy} Satmp
OLO TIL srereeseeeseees KQuOTIRIG puw SuyuLg SIoqUeyY WO; paateo
IT 81 8 Conv eeccesmeeeacervenuecseseneceares sosuadxry “ox suorditosqng yenuuy
snosur]jaosify pue ‘eserieg ‘eseysog pue seo couryaq ‘yseg “ 4sTEe ‘00g
Suipnput ‘sjuemAfed Aipuns ‘yseg &g “48T¢ ‘00q TIL OL 226 °** *JUNodDe 4se] WOIZ 4YSNOIq coURTeG OF, “4ST “UBe
is ae F SLNANASANASIA “688T Yee ee 3 ‘SLdI GORA he
“IENOOOOV "IVUANAD
‘aatsnpour sXep yyoq ‘gggT ‘aequieceg 48Tg 0} AxenueP ysT MOAT AyoI00g oY} Jo syuoMsINgsICT pue s}d

‘VT STH Fa rf"

ele):

7

litt, Berks ah

AxEL oi >

‘s

ARE NOW IN STOCK.

Be iced: and £1 for the 4to “ Beaciaagict
the prices at which they were published.

MAGAZINES. |

Copies. , No, Copies. No, .
oN (oy aii tcethaas oak ap,

31 sot OD | G2

38 we be | 59

52 |: ats 18 | 54

62 ge 61 | 55

10 |: an 74 | 56

; 57 | 57

72| 58

47 | 59

63 | 60

71/ 61

80 | 62

68 | 63

66 | 64

55 | 65

47 | 66

59 | 67

77) 68

73 | 69

46-7 (double No.)18 | 70

48 an. 54/71

49 ive 2212
50 ot 33 |

or Brackmore Museum,” Parts I. and IL,
HENGE AND its Barrows,” by W. Lone, Esq.,
¢ No. 46-7 of the Mag., in special covers), 8vo...

i % sit

Lately Published, by the Wiltshire Archeological & Natural History pak)
Society, One Volume, 8vo, 504 pp., with map, Extra Cloth. oA Siee

| The Flowering Plants of Wiltshire,

BY THE REV. T. A. PRESTON, M.A.
Price to the Public, 16s.; but one copy offered to every Member
of the Society at half-price.

Lately Published, One Volume, 8vo., 613 pp., Extra Cloth.

The Birds of Wiltshire,

BY THE REV. A. C. SMITH, M.A.
Price 16s. Half-price to Members of the Society.

AGENTS

FOR THE SALE OF THE

WILTSHIRE MAGAZINE.

ER a. gs vs uo. s ven C. Hatrert, 8 Bridge Street.

a) Sle James Fawn & Son, 18 Queen’s Road.
2" Yai SE ae A C. T. Jerrertes & Sons, Redcliffe Street.

TUDPNE nna cowkgsss= A. Heata & Son, Market Place.

Chippenham ...... ‘R. F. Houvtston, High Street.

Cirencester......... A: T. Harmer, Market Place.

IGDIZES eco ky «oe H. F. Butt, St. John Street.

Marlborough ...... Miss E. Lucy, High Street.

Melksham ......... J. H. Maces, Bank Street.

ODF GAIN soa. a in —vis Jas. Parker & Co., Broad Street.

Salisbury ......... Brown & Co., Canal.

Trowbridge......... B. Lanspown & Sons, 11 Silver Street.

Warminster ...... B. W. Coates, Market Place.

H, F, BULL, PRINTER, DEVIZES,

NOVEMBER, 1890. Vou. XXV.

THE

| WILTSHIRE
J} Atchwolagical and Matural History

' MAGAZINE,

Published unver the Direction

OF THE

SOCIETY FORMED IN THAT COUNTY,

; DEVIZES:
_ PBINTED AND SOLD FoR THE Society BY H. F Burt, Sant Jonn SrReEeEv.

Price 5s. 6d.—Members Gratis.

Days for the ee edy: of anise may be arate
Members of the Society who are interested in Geology a
who wish to receive notice of such Field-Days, when arrange
are requested to send in their names to
W. Hewarp Bett, Esq., F.GS.,

Seend, Peet
Melksham.

_ TAKE NOTICE, that a copious Index for the preceding eight
aa Volumes of the Magazine will be found at the end of Vols.
eae Vili., Xvl., and xxiv. e

Members who have not paid their Subscriptions to the Society 74 for 4
the current year, ave requested to remit the same forthwith to —
the Financial Secretary, Mr. Daviy Owen, 31, Long Street,

ee Devizes, to whom also all communications as “to. the supply

Ph of Magazines sbould be addressed, and of whom most of the —

ts: back Numbers may be had. i

nM The Numbers of this Magazine will be delivered gratis, as eH i

eS to Members who are not in arrear of their Annual Subscrip-

jon tions, but in accordance with Byelaw No. 8 “ The Financial —

Secretary shall give notice to Members in arrear, and the

Society’s publications will not be forwarded to Members whose —
subscriptions shall remain unpaid after such notice.”

All other communications to be addressed to the Honorary Seore= 5
taries: H. E. Mepuicort, Esq., Sandfield, Potterne, Devizes; :

and the Rev. E. H. Gopparp, Clyffe Vicarage, Wootton Bassett. i
2
The Rev. A. C. Sir will be much obliged to observers of birds oa
in all parts of the county, to forward to him notices of rare se
occurrences, early arrivals of migrants, or any remarkable facts i
connected with birds, which may come under their notice.

A resolution has been passed by the Committee of the Society, —
“that it is highly desirable that every encouragement should —
be given towards obtaining second copies of Wiltshire Parish | k
Registers.”

Wiltshire—The TopographicalC ollections
of ‘Fohn Aubrey, F.R.S., aa
A.D. 1b5G—70.
CORRECTED AND ENLARGED eee
BY THE REV. CANON J. E. JAUKSON, M.A., F.8.A.

‘een In 4to, Cloth, pp..491, with 46 Plates,
oP gy Price £2 10s. —

eee ae ey ll eden,

| WILTSHIRE

Archealogiral ant Hatual Bistary

MAGAZINE,

PAGE
119

165

" No. LXXIV. NOVEMBER, 1890. Vou. XXV.
Contents,

7 Sisk wi

> Sr. Nicnoxas’ Hosprrat, Satrspury: By the Rev. Canon Moberly...
Tue Bisnor’s Patace at Satispury: A Lecture delivered at the
p Blackmore Museum, Salisbury, January 27th, 1890, by the Right Rev.
s pene Lord Bishop: of Salisbury: ss. ciecsadeazeisdeveccs cbse icccecéccdacsed'e dite
' On tHE Roman Conquesr or SourHern Bariratn, particularly in

regard to its influence on the County of Wilts: Address by the Right
Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury, as President of the Society, at its
Annual Meeting at Westbury, August Ist, 1889 .......c..cccecceeceeseeece
Two Witrsniee Mazers: By W. Cunnington, F.G.S. ....ccccssessceses
| Epinetron Cuurcu: By C. E. Ponting, F.S.A...........ccccccecceececcecces
Nores oN Remains oF Roman DwexLiines at HANNINGTON WICE:
meee ber sof, Tp Meag ALAA rh Be Fi Uk Sa cad oW cds nodass SeSeed stated saleeb ens

-@ 37

DONAtTioNS TO MUSEUM AND LIBRARY..........ccceesssvesssessescncssecses
ILLUSTRATIONS.
Plans (Nos. I., II., and III.) of St. Nicholas’ Hospital,
REMMI es ee eased eee ya tadecnasneu ac tincacd vc gaccneeeed 128
Plans (Nos. I., I1., and III.) of the Bishop’s Palace,
PATO y ods seteacthuaets esas iecIaAtth tek~ do detcoes sence 184
Photo-print of Mr. Grivaiagton? SSM AER sca teaa Vanes 205
Photo-print of the Rev. C. E. B. Barnwell’s Mazer...... 206
Edington Church, Wilts, Longitudinal Section, looking
ODED nn Snccin caged Retina a vabian is -AthaVanabadwuiiosocs ona 215
Edington Church, Wilts, Tomb in South Transept ...... 220

Drawing of Stole from the Effigy of William of Edington
in Winchester Cathedral, and of Inscriptions under
Figures of Saints in the Clerestory Windows of

Edington Church... eS 222
Plan of Roman Dwellities iat Manion’ Tenis Sieniiairton
Wick, uncovered Goiehae 23rd, 1890 ........000. deapevsea’. VGme
DEVIZES :

H. F. Bout, 4, Saint Jonn Srrezer.

191
205
209

232
234

“eget
a

ova on Ik

—_——

OR8L ( qaaavon,

© sequriie D

meLt Cue . ar . pn
hiodoth aosad roll ot) (a + 209 ilar, tht Ao aie t
hie. (15 Ph tied ae

Git a8)

© add in. Some viish ete J = ¥auda
Zs Sc Pe ae sd yd OCS! te’ Fichual. cred pitet, wursau 1 om

“Sede CU yrbdattee eo ghee!
~ sigh Netealcioapend™, acatrnel: we ieaer yor 80 rbaugy.d0u) “aiid
difptil ik Ha eR byt tes 2 ad iv to GAO - su boa ane ee

(uilae Fourumank fala

li apa emer at? 16 Soestents ee yee
YE to sree

etietal aoped purdse

> “I aod aa ae
: ay - eee ee ee 4.2), ih CARR: fp ME qth setts ae
ee mitned 22.0 7H oe oe 8

(! eimod %o nr NSE
-fanbbokh A. & SS oe

2, Oe
. ware Te) Peer ee ee s
- aes epee) ave woes, ut “<a wis ‘od

Ae cag vie i ee pee 2 =a, GE
> MSN nares eel Ta BO

; RYO Te hid
sb infieott “aelottie: JP WH OTM Th

Gel: é a 7
aonlytt w] batt Ae tbat a hee a I D

NS Coe ae sreete® Tats <padiek’. ve, bac bt yest thee is

; DW Gring arrynaneersater sion }i © Mest yyt ‘poutucthe oO Josoloe Sapis v.
a + © er err a bie mate th DL cd eboL a tH Pare fh S Ww?
manioo!,, Bhi brat tas 4 kid Pret Oe eee! AJ any nih it See
ris ., if
; ca wie Chg hah aed nrre

*.
Pry 1 PEAR eas

aceay ae Bent degk. ad iW. Henstit® ) gofeai
aorgatha J Brautiyy a a6 HT sy eet Alpes ta Si fr A
opbhea . acorn mass | 46, hig pplexbonay’) darters i MO oot E
Ye huge ro evnl add ‘pi ‘wipia® ic aang
ie) +3 ee NT pe feng) ndaeoibey

sate? fosatl 4a ‘waeillon aqodd “Mh ee
; Goel nee ‘isa deoaeyoongy ae dei

beg iv a

ris as

i < ihe f . et ’ crt ks ; iy
By, s 4 pes : q. sean
. ‘aac ‘tol THILAE Sad sa

whee

re are .< bl

-
~~

WILTSHIRE MAGAZINE,

“MULTORUM MANIBUS GRANDE LEVATUR ONUS.’—Ovid.

St. Aicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

By the Rev. Canon MoBeERty.

PURPOSE, in the following pages, to put together a few
historical notices of the Hospital of St. Nicholas in
Salisbury, which may not be uninteresting to the readers of this
Magazine, with some additional facts derived from the cartulary, or
old register, of the hospital, which is in my keeping as Master.

I._—First Founpation.

When was the hospital founded? The answer is that we cannot
be sure. We can be sure that it was already in existence by 1227,
as two separate gifts of land are made to it in that year. But of
the original foundation there is no record.

It was, perhaps, natural to conjecture that it was founded and
built as an appendage to the Cathedral Church, soon after its
foundation in 1220, or its first consecration in 1225.

But Bishop Bingham, when he is recounting the property be-

_longing to the hospital in 1245, speaks of a “ vetus hospitale ” which
he is superseding by another building. Is it likely that he would
have spoken thus of a building not more than twenty years old?
It is not impossible, doubtless; but, to my thinking, improbable.
It is more likely that the original building was “ one of those old

__ wayside chapels” [to use Canon Jones’s words] “ not uncommon in

: Wilts, at which a wayfarer might get a night’s shelter; consisting

_ of a simple chapel, and two or three rooms, It was this that Ela,

_ Countess of Salisbury, endowed in 1227. It was placed on the

_ VOL, XXV.—NO. LXXIV. K

120 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

bank of the river to show wayfarers the ford, just as at other places
the cross or crucifix was placed in like manner and for a like pur-
pose.” It appears to have been built between three and four hundred
feet from what was then the north bank of the Avon, just to the
north of the ford. It was about a mile from the then city of
Salisbury (Old Sarum), and no doubt would often have been
welcome as a diversorium for the night to travellers from the south,
after crossing the river, and before climbing up to the city. It
seems to have stood alone on the north bank of the Avon, without
neighbouring houses, with the exception of a Church of St. Martin,
_ which Leland tells us was near the spot.

Can we find anything as to the purpose for which the original
hospital was founded? It is to this original foundation that Bishop
Bingham seems to be referring when he says (1245) that “it was
founded in a praiseworthy spirit for receiving and supporting the
‘poor ”—/(ad recipiendum et sustentandum pauperes laudabiliter sit
Jundatum). And even without this express testimony we should
gather that its purpose was something like what the purpose of the
hospital has been since.!

The two oldest deeds of gift to the hospital are dated in August
and September, 1227.

The first of these is a deed of gift? by the Countess Ela of
Salisbury,’ dated August 19th, 1227, from the Castle of Salisbury
(Old Sarum). The original has disappeared : the present copy was
made by Geoffrey Bigge, Master of St. Nicholas between 15938 and
1630, from the original in the Evidence House at Wilton, on one .
of the fly-leaves in the cartulary of the hospital. It gives for the

1 Tt will be seen that I put no faith in Leland’s statement, “ Richard Poore
founded the Hospital of 8. Nicholas, hard by Harnham Bridge, instituting a
master, eight poor women, and four poor men, endowing the house with lands.’
—Itinerary, vol. iii., p. 97, quoted in Appendix F.

2 See Appendix A.

3 William de Wanda, the dean of that time, characterizes her thus :—“ Ela de
Viteri, comitissa de Sarum, mulier quidem laude digna, quia timore Domini
plena.” Osmund Register, ii., p. 13. She was countess in her own right, being
daughter and heir of William of Evreux, the last Earl of Salisbury.

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 121

repose of her soul and that of her husband {the late William
Longespee), her south close in Bentley wood, with a copse and waste
(bosco et assarto), meadows, pastures, &c., and the close of Buckley,
to God, the Hospital of St. Nicholas of New Sarum, and Bishop
Richard of the same and his successors.

The second deed! is copied as the first of the deeds which begins
the cartulary. It is a deed of Bishop Richard Poore, dated Friday,
8th September, 1227, from the priory of (Monkton) Farleigh. He
gives to the “‘ Hospital of Sarum” certain rights in Wilsford
Church, reciting at the same time two deeds which he has previously
received: one from H(enry), prior, and the convent of Farleigh,
placing at his disposal the Churches of Box and Wilsford, which
belonged to their advowson; the other from Humphrey Bohun,
Earl of Hereford (great grandson of another Humphrey, who was
founder of Farleigh Priory, and donor to it of the Churches of Box
and Wilsford), confirming the same. The property he thus gives
is to keep a chaplain to say mass at the hospital for the souls of all
its benefactors, and he casually mentions a steward (procurator) of
the house.

II.—Bisuor Bincuam.
-1229—1246.

In 1229 Bishop Richard Poore was translated to Durham: and
Robert Bingham, the most learned of his canons (“a man of great
learning, and a long time master in theology,” says his own dean),
was appointed his successor.

Besides being a theologian he was great also in practical matters,
The Cathedral had been begun and consecrated while he had been
canon, and was now advancing towards completion ; but the city
which had slowly risen round it was only approachable from the
south with difficulty and sometimes danger. The Avon had been
apt to flood all the neighbouring tracts of land: to diminish the
trouble and risk of crossing it (there was only as yet a foot-bridge,
all horses had to pass by the ford, which at times was quite un-
discernible) an upper channel had some time before been dug some

1 See Appendix B.
K 3

122, St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

850ft. long, to carry off the overflow of the water, enclosing what
is now known as St. John’s Island. For this south side of the city
Bishop Bingham designed a threefold scheme. First, to build a
stone bridge in place of the foot-bridge ; secondly, to build a chapel
in connection with the bridge; thirdly, to erect a larger hospital
instead of the already-existing hospital of St. Nicholas, and place
all three of his institutions under the charge of the same person,
who was to be called warden of St. Nicholas.

The two first portions of this design are mentioned thus, ina MS.
now in my keeping, by Mr. Hickman, chaplain of the hospital, in
1713 :—* The good Bishop built a bridge over the greater channel,
and as soon as that was finished he enlarged it over the lesser channel
also, which was a work as full of honour and charity as of cost.
Then on the island on the east side of the said bridge (which island
was made by digging the new channel] aforesaid) he built the afore-
said chapel in honour of St. John the Baptist.” ’

He had purchased the land for the erection of the chapel for four
marks of silver from Henry de Wande, probably a kinsman of the
late dean’s. It is described in the deed as “ half-an-acre in Harn-
ham, extending from the head of the bridge on the south part of
Sarum to the King’s way towards the south.”* The date of this
must be before 1244: for on May 31st in that year the Bishop
made both bridge and chapel over to the dean and chapter, ap-
pointing the sub-dean, Nicholas Laking, first warden of the hospital,
and Walter de Wyley (afterwards Bishop) first warden of the bridge.®

It was probably the old hospital of which Nicholas Laking at
first assumed the wardenship: but a new one, a much larger pile
of building—that in fact of which there are relics to this day—must
have been in process of building. For on October 14th the next
year (1245) Bishop Bingham issued his “ ordination ” of his three-
fold design.‘

1 Hickman MS., p. 79.
2 Reg., p. 43.
3 Quoted by Hatcher & Benson from Bishop’s Records, p. 732.
4 Reg., p. 100, copied from the original by Mr. Bigge, in 1639. I do not give
this at length in the Appendix, as it is to be found in Hatcher & Benson, p. 732.

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 123

He puts the whole under the wardenship of one man (the aforesaid
sub-dean), a priest who is to act under the Dean and Chapter, with
three other priests under him: so that while two of the four lodge
at “the house opposite to the chapel,” and two at the hospital, all
four are to eat together in the hospital refeetory, and to be clothed
alike in a russet coat closed round the throat, and to keep step to-
gether. Then follow details as to the services to be said by each
separately. While the first pair were to say the canonical hours in
the chapel, the third priest (who was left over for the hospital) was
to serve the sick by saying a mass for the brothers and sisters who
have been benefactors to the hospital, and for any who have died
there: to visit the sick diligently, and be careful about the advice
he gives, with the arrangement of the warden, as to penitence and
confessions: and to bury the dead, at which the other chaplams were
not compelled to be present. The warden is to preside and set a
good example to the chaplains and servants, and to realize that he
is principally bownd to serve the Chapel of St. Nicholas neat the
hospital, and there to use the same ritual which obtains in the
Cathedral. He must besides pay the due stipends to each of his
assistants, and keep the bridge in repair; the rest of the gifts to the
hospital and bridge are to go for the relief of the poor. This is
signed by all the dignitaries of the chapter, together with the sub-
dean and sub-chanter.

The chapel of St. John the Baptist on the bridge is still standing,
but has been used for the last fifty years as an ordinary dwelling-
house. I hope soon to be able to restore it to a worthier use =
meanwhile its triple lancet window, running the whole length of
the three floors of the modern dwelling-house, is a conspicuous:
object from the stream above it, or from the garden of the hospital.
For three hundred years exactly—from 1244 to 1545—the salaries:
of the priests that officiated there, and the repairs of the bridge
itself, were paid by the masters of St. Nicholas, who recouped
themselyes with the offerings made by pious wayfarers who turned
aside from the road to this wayside chapel.

And now what was the staff of the hospital, and who were its
inmates? Light is thrown upon this question by various casual

124 St, Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

references in the old deeds. In 1227 a “ procurator,” or steward,
has been mentioned, and a “chaplain.” In 1239 and 1241 we hear
for the first time of a “ magister et fratres S. Nicholai.” Master,
chaplain, steward, and brothers therefore must already have existed
in the “vetus hospitale”’ under Bishop Richard Poore. In 1245,
in the charter of the new foundation, Bingham describes in detail
the duties of a custos (or warden) and chaplain, and besides mentions
‘ ministri” or servants; in addition to which he uses this remark-
able phrase “benefactores Hospitalis, fratres et sorores.” There
were sisters then as well as brothers of the hospital, and both sisters
and brothers were, or might be, in a position of life which enabled
them to be benefactors: or—which is the same thing—the bene-
factors might be appointed brothers and sisters, and take up their
abode at the hospital.

And now follows the question, what was the status of these
brothers and sisters? Were they, as at present, pensioners? or
were they, rather, brethren vowed to God’s service who nursed and
tended the poor? ‘To answer this question fully I believe we must
look beyond St. Nicholas to the other hospitals established in
England about the same time. Archdeacon Wright, in his account
of the Domus Dei at Portsmouth (itself dedicated to St. Nicholas),
says :—‘‘ We find these hospitals at Southampton, Portsmouth,
Dover, Arundel, &c., because they were there conveniently placed
for pilgrims making for the great shrines of Winchester, Canterbury,
Chichester, &c. They are generally of the twelfth, thirteenth, and
fourteenth centuries, and had a common plan: a long hall with
vaulting and divided into bays by pillars. At one end was usually
a porch, and at the other invariably a chapel. The central part of
the hall was kept free, the occupants being housed in the aisles.
Besides being hospitals for the sick and aged, like St. Mary’s
Hospital, Chichester, which preserves its ancient arrangement with

1 Exactly in the same way one Martin and Juliana, his wife, who gave land
to maintain a chaplain at St. Mary’s Hospital, Chichester, were rewarded: “in
acknowledgment of their kindness and beneficence the House was to receive the
two, as brother and sister of the Hospital, during the rest of their lives,”—
Swainson, p. 9.

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 125

dwellings or cells in the aisles, they were true houses of God: the
poor, the houseless, and the wanderer found a home there. . . .
The government was vested in a master; brethren aided by sisters
earried on the duties of nursing, prescribing, cooking, &c., while
the spiritual care of the hospital was entrusted to priest-chaplains.”

This quotation will be serviceable to us in more ways than one:
but now I ask attention to the last sentence only, which says that
(under a master) “ brethren aided by sisters carried on the duties
‘of nursing, prescribing, cooking, &c.,” and that in a “ hospital for
the sick and aged,” where “ the poor, the houseless, and the wanderer
found a home.” The Domus Dei at Portsmouth was founded in
1212: and its objects were precisely similar to those which I suppose
were the objects of our St. Nicholas.

Look, also, at St. Mary’s, Chichester, which was referred to by
Archdeacon Wright. This was founded, says Dr. Swainson, its
late custos, about 1220—1240: grants to it were made “ to the
House of St. Mary and the brethren and sisters serving God there,
for the purpose of sustaining the poor and infirm people lying in the
same house . . . . There was a marked difference between
‘the brothers and sisters who served God in the hospital? and
‘the poor and sick people who were lying there.” . . . The
hospital was intended to be a temporary home for the sick and
infirm: the brethren and sisters who dwelt within its walls were
intended to act as nurses. It was also intended to act as a refuge
for the night to the wandering poor—the casuals of the modern
day.” 1

Now the following are the descriptions of the inmates of St.
Nicholas, gathered from its deeds in the register. In 1227 they
are “ poor and passengers or resorters to the same house.” In 1245
they are “ Christ’s poor and weak and infirm [to be kept] as long
as their weakness does not suffer them to go out and wander.”
About 1250 they are “the brethren whole and infirm of the said
hospital, there serving God.” ‘This points clearly to a distinction
between the brethren : some nursed, some were nursed. About 1340

: 1 Swainson’s “ Hospital of St. Mary in Chichester,’ from Sussex Archwo-
logical Society’s Collections, vol. xxiv.

126 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

they are “the brethren and sisters serving God in that place, and
to serve Him in future ;” and the most common description of them
is this: “that they are serving God in this place ”—a description
which, though it might be conceived to be that of pensioners, is at
least more appropriate to ministering inmates. A still more con-
vineing description of them is “ brethren and sisters and infirm
people,” but to this we cannot assign any date. The “sisters”
appear very rarely in dated deeds, and range from 1245 to 1361.
The last record of them is in Phillips’ ‘ Wiltshire Institutions,”
where in 1861 we find Laurentia Bonham instituted to the house
of St. Nicholas by Bishop Wyvill, “as a sister of the said house, on
the presentation of the warden and brethren of St. Nicholas’ house.”

On the whole, therefore, it is probable that the “ fratres ” were
ministering brethren, and the “ sorores”’ ministering sisters, at
least down to the middle of the fourteenth century, after which we
have no evidence on the point. I shall discuss later on the question
at what precise date they were changed into pensioners.

But now we must turn to a different question. It has hitherto
been taken for granted that the arcade of eight arches, still partially
visible in the chapel and wall of the master’s house, with all the large
buildings once adjacent to it, was the work of Bishop Bingham.
But this is a conclusion not to be assumed without reason given.
The pillars and arches themselves, with an old doorway, and the
chapel and kitchen (which was once another chapel) are the only
remaining features of antiquity in the hospital. And it is disputed
of what antiquity they are. Canon Jones thought them about
1160.1 When the Archeological Institute visited Salisbury in

1 Canon Jones was of opinion that this arcade of arches, built about 1160, had
belonged to the old Church of St. Martin: and he referred (in a letter to me) to
Leland, and his words “that, when standing on the bridge in 1540, he saw on
the north side of St. Nicholas’s Hospital the remains of the old St. Martin’s
Church im a barn.” It would solve many difficulties if we could believe this ;
but Leland’s words actually are as follows :—‘‘ On the north side of this hospital
is an old barn, where in times past was a parish Church of St. Martin. This
Church was profaned, and another was made in Salisbury for it, bearing yet the
name of St. Martin. The cause of the translation was because it stood exceedingly
low and cold, and the river at rages came into it.” It is only fair to state that
Canon Jones was on a holiday, away from books, when he wrote. Leland

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 127

1887, all sorts of opinions were expressed: some placing them
earlier, some later than 1245, but the best authorities thought they
might probably have been built about that year.

Assuming then that they were built that year, in what shape were
those other buildings, which there plainly were, and which are since
demolished? Was the hospital built on the plan of most such edifices,
“a long hall with vaulting [to quote Archdeacon Wright’s words
again] and divided into bays by pillars”: the chapel at the east
end, and the inmates housed in cells in the aisles? In other words
were there ¢wo such arcades (the other since gone with the rest of
the building), and were the cells ranged outside them on the north
and south, the east end being closed by chapels?

That this was so there are two arguments.

1. The common practice of the times; as seen in the hospitals
of Portsmouth, Chichester, and Wells. It is sufficient to refer again
to Archdeacon Wright’s account of the Domus Dei at Portsmouth.
St. Mary’s, Chichester, is built on the same plan, and so is Bishop
Bubwith’s almshouse at Wells: a chapel occupying the whole of
the east end, and the only difference being that at Chichester the
cells are open to the central aisle, while at Wells they are closed up
into separate rooms. But note that if this plan had been carried
into execution at Salisbury, there must have been three separate
chambers, or chapels; the two which at present exist, and a de-
molished one to the north of them: or rather (for the wall of the
present chapel which blocks up the arches certainly had no original
existence) it was one long chapel from north to south, divided into
three compartments by the two rows of pillars.

2. That this actually was so is asserted, and very great detail
given, by a MS. in my keeping, which was written in 1713, by one
Mr. Hickman, the then chaplain, but evidently derived from much
older authorities." And Mr. Bigge, the master at the beginning of

distinctly says that the old barn was on the north side of the hospital: so that
nothing that it contained can have ever been in the hospital itself. There are
more than 200ft. between the hospital itself and the road which skirts the Close
wall: therefore there is ample room for a large Church to the north of the
hospital.

1 See Appendix C.

128 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

the seventeenth century, seems to have entertained the same belief.!
Our first illustration (Plate No. I.) gives, in the dotted lines, Mr.
Hickman’s picture of what the hospital had been.

Against these arguments, strong as they seem, is to be set the
present aspect of the remains of the hospital of 1245. Briefly, the
present look of those remains goes far to justify the assertion that
another arcade, supporting another set of cells, cannot ever have
been built, and that the original design admitted only of two chapels,
not three. There is no evidence, in the northern wall of the chapel
which is now the kitchen, of any beginning of a row of arches
corresponding to that in the south wall. The easteru wall of the
two chapels appears to be coéval with the rest of the chapels: yet
there is a very distinctly marked corner-buttress on the north-east
of the northern chapel of the two, corresponding to the buttress at
the south-east corner of the southern chapel. Now if there had
ever been another chapel at the north of the northern chapel, the
corresponding buttress would have been on the north-east of that,
and the eastern wall of the chapels would have been continued
without any buttress at all past the spot where the north-eastern
buttress now stands.?

On the other hand, it is hardly possible to suppose that Mr.
Hickman’s elaborate descriptions are entirely invented. Perhaps it
would be better, in the absence of direct evidence, to suggest the
conclusion that Bingham intended, when he began, to build a
hospital on the threefold plan so commonly in use: but that his
death stopped the design, which afterwards was completed on a
smaller scale, by finishing the two chapels already begun, and

1Mr. Bigge writes thus :—“ there is a chapel now within the hospital, the
other by it being pulled down.”

2 That the northern transept, as figured by Hickman, ever really existed there
is nothing to show. The southern transept was exactly on the spot where after-
wards (in the fifteenth century) stood a covered way to the privies (see Plate
No. II.), since demolished.

What Hickman calls the Sanctum Sanctorum—the building to the east of the
of the present eastern wall of the hospital—can never have been in existence at
all; and this is sufficient to discredit his whole plan.

rT

PLATE IT
8! Nicholas Hospital

AD 1245

G. Kitchen [at1! Gom* Halt]

» Bulliry,
. Sislers Room,

i. Inmates’ Rooms

yr

J. Ola Kitchen
K.Shof. X froase

EB Brelivens Rooms.
B Porch.

‘Whiteman & Bass. Phofo Ditto Landon

Walls sfilt existing
Walls dedreyed
TL Walls eugqerted by Mt

Hicxmans Rove PLAN
Jsor — m3

The jd st Hop
ae bia hor chalet an
Since ISOE (ws) 2/2 Years.

Pare OI
* S. Nickolas Hospital

BOONES PRON

.

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 129

building a row of cells upon the north of the arcade already in
existence, to correspond to that upon the south.

Next, did Bingham destroy the older building, or build on an
independent site? i.e., is the older building still traceable outside
what has since been the hospital? Our evidence on this point is
fairly conclusive. Bingham’s Inventory, written the same day with
his ordination of the hospital, mentions a “ mansus juxta vetus
hospitale versus aquilonem.” It is true these words are ambiguous :
they may mean only that St. Nicholas possessed a mansion to the
north of the old hospital, and give no indication whatever as to the
whereabouts of the old hospital itself. Still it is perhaps more
likely that they should mean that the “ vetus hospitale” was to the
north of the new hospital, then just built. So evidently Mr.
Hickman took them in 1713: for he draws upon his sketch-plan of
the buildings before 1502 a house to the north of the hospital, upon
which he writes the words :—“ The house on the north side of the
hospital mentioned by Bishop Robert in his ordination.”

In his description of the map he says :—‘ On the north side of
the hospital, between the new hospital and the churchyard or Litton,
was a tenement given by Bishop Robert in his ordination, which has
been since rebuilt in form of a church or hospital building: at the
east end of which was a door through a wall out of the aforesaid
additional buildings of the cross aisle into the churchyard. But
since the poor people’s rooms are gone on the north side of the
church (or cloister), and the chaplain’s lodgings which was over
them, there are two rooms built at the east end of the said tene-
ment (of late called the farm house, because the farmer that rented
the hospital lands generally lived there) for two poor people, and a
chamber and garret for the chaplain over them.” This passage gives
us as much as we know about the site of the old hospital: and the
map gives us the distance of the south wall of the building from
the surviving row of arches as 75ft. This is precisely the distance
of the south wall of the present brethren’s rooms from that same
row of arches: so that we seem warranted in concluding that in the
present men’s buildings we have the modern representative of the
original hospital to which Countess Ela made her gift. I have long

130 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

suspected that the south wall of this building is old; at least in its
lower courses of stones. Can it be the original wall of the beginning
of the thirteenth century? Notice especially the old doorway near
the west end of it: exactly in the spot where Hickman’s map
figures a door in the “ old hospital.”

III.—Bisuors Bripport AND WYLEY.
1257—1271.

Bishop Bingham died in the next year (1246) after he had finished
the building and constitution of his triple work—bridge, chapel, and
hospital. In the next episcopate, which lasted nine years, that of
William of York (1246—1256), the third Church and advowson
was given to the hospital besides the Churches of Wilsford and
Burstock.!. On August 19th, 1253, Sir Richard Hinton gave “ to
God, the Blessed Mary and Saint Nicholas of Salisbury,” the per-
petual advowson of Broad Hinton Church, near Swindon, together
with six acres of land, and two days afterwards Bishop William
confirmed the gift.?

But William of York died in 1256; and the next year Giles
Bridport, the dean of Wells, was consecrated bishop. He appears
to have been a bishop with theories of his own, for which he used
the benefactions of his predecessors without much caring to abide
by their intentions. It is very curious to study the devotion of
successive bishops to some one form of benefaction of their own
devising, which their successors sweep entirely away in equal devotion
to some other scheme. Thus the constitution of bridge, chapel, and
hospital, which Bishop Bingham had so carefully elaborated, was
swept ruthlessly aside; the new bishop had set his heart upon
another scheme. He wished to found a theological college in
Salisbury, and to connect it with St. Nicholas; and he changed the
constitution of St. Nicholas itself, constituting himself and his

1 The Church of Burstock, near Beaminster, had been given by Bishop
Bingham, in 1248.

2 John Manningford gave much land at Gerardstone to the hospital in 1256,
—Reg. Gerardst., 28,29. And in 1258 Richard and Sibill Ancher gave land in
Fisherton Anger.—J0, Fishert., 3, 4.

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 131

successors the wardens, and so taking from the dean and chapter
the patronage which had been theirs for the last seventeen years by
gift of Bishop Bingham, and putting a prior into immediate com-
mand of the hospital.

The “final concord” by which this last revolution was accomplished
is dated February, 1261, at which time legal sanction was sought
for what had probably been before determined on. An agreement
was made before the King’s Justices, that the bishops should be
perpetual wardens of St. Nicholas’ Hospital, and that in return for
this concession the dean and chapter should have the perpetual
nomination of one of the brethren—a privilege which they have
exercised ever since. Thus the nominee of the dean and chapter
appears to have been the first permanently resident brother in the
hospital.

The same year the bishop executed another deed, founding a house
to be called “ De Valle Scholarum beati Nicholai.” The name is
one that tells us a good deal about the purpose and studies of the
new foundation.

This thirteenth century had been, to an extent most unusual, oc-
cupied with thoughts of another world and theological study. The
institutions of the monks had grown worldly, but thase of the friars
had supplanted them at the beginning of the century, and were the
avowed servants of the Papacy. A revolution also was taking place
in the world of knowledge. The friars were for the most part ignorant,
but among them were reared the famous Mendicant Schoolmen of the
century, and they introduced their scholastic method into theological
study. A strife for professors’ chairs in the University of Paris
arose, and was not finally concluded for thirty years, when the Pope
settled it in favour of the Mendicants (A.D. 1259). But long
before this the “Scholares,” .¢., the four university professors of Paris,
had met in a secluded valley of Auvergne, and thence taken the name
of Valli-Scholares. The original Valli-Scholares, then, were men
of the old learning as opposed to the new—those whom Mosheim
calls Bidlicists'—men who deduced their conclusions from the study

1 Mosheim, iii., p. 222.

132 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

of the Bible and older fathers, and were opposed to the Mendicant
Schoolmen, who accepted the Bible as their text-book, yet drew
their conclusions from philosophy and by philosophical methods.
At the head of these Biblicists in Paris now was William de St,
Amour; at the head of the Mendicants, not only in Paris, but
throughout Europe, was Thomas of Aquino. The very year in
which Bridport founded his college (1261) died Pope Alexander IV.,
the great patron of Mendicants: but Louis IX. (Saint Louis),
hardly a less patron of the same party, was still King of France.
In the popedom of Alexander IV. it had required great courage for
William de St. Amour to bring out his work, “ The Perils of the
Last Times”: he was summoned to Rome, opposed by Thomas of
Aquino, tried, and sent into exile in France, where he continued till
Alexander’s death.

Now the fact that Bishop Bridport chose the name of Valli-
Scholares for his new college seems to indicate that he espoused
the cause of the old learning, the cause of William de St. Amour,
in this controversy. And the fact that Bishop Bingham had en-
couraged the foundation of Friar Preachers, or Dominicans—the
first Mendicant order—at Wilton, about 1245, shows that he was
disposed to favour the rival school, that of the new learning, or of
St. Thomas of Aquino.

But the University of Oxford had its internal troubles as well as
the University of Paris. The latter, on occasion of a fray with the
municipal authorities, had closed its doors, and issued forth into the
country, where it had set up its staff in different towns, nay, had
even been invited over by Henry III. to Oxford. In this it was
exactly imitated by Oxford. That university had at this time come
into collision with the town, and dispersed its students. Upon this
occasion many went to Cambridge: but others migrated to Salisbury.
In Salisbury they must have attended the Cathedral services, then
presided over by Ralph Heytham, as chancellor. But as it was
with the full concurrence of the chapter that Bishop Bridport
established his new college in 1261, we must not think that there
was any bickering’ between the Cathedral students of theology and
those of the new Valley College, or College de Vaux. We do not

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 133

hear of any such; but there must always have been the difference
between the two that the College de Vaux was founded to support
the older views in theology, which the Cathedral students may well
have thought reactionary and old-fashioned.

In the foundation deed of the college in 1261! Bishop Giles says
that he founds, to the honour of Christ, the Virgin, and St. Nicholas,
a house for the use and property of scholars, to be called “ the College
of the Valley Scholars of St. Nicholas,” by consent of Robert the
dean and the chapter of Sarum, the master and brethren of the
hospital of St. Nicholas, in the meadow hard by the Cathedral,
and the highway in front of the said hospital, for the support
of a warden, two chaplains, and twenty poor, needy, well-
born, and teachable scholars, serving the Lord and St. Nicholas
in that place, and living therein and studying and making progress
in the Holy Scriptures and the liberal arts. He ordains that on
the cession or decease of Sir John Holtby, Canon of Salisbury, now
warden of the house, the new warden should be elected by the dean
and chapter, out of the number of the canons, or at least with their
consent, and should have full right of correction within the circuit
of the said house. The deed was sealed with the seal of the dean
and chapter, and with that of the master and brethren of St.
Nicholas; and witnessed by the chancellor, the archdeacon of Wilts,
the sub-dean, and two canons; Reginald Wych, the Mayor of
Salisbury, besides many other laymen.

This introduces us at once to a large question, on which we get
singularly little light from either side, namely, what were the
relations subsisting between the hospital of St Nicholas and the
Valley College?

St. Nicholas’ hospital was by this time a rich institution. Land
had been literally showered upon it: and if it be true that Bingham
had ever built to the full extent of his apparent design, it was a
spacious as well as a rich foundation. At this very time we hear
in one of the deeds’ of a “ street in new Salisbury called St.

1 This deed is not in the cartulary : but Hatcher and Benson give it from the
Liber Evidentiarum in the Cathedral.
2 Reg. Sarum, 12.

134 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

Nicholas’ Street,’ which must, one would think, have been the
present Exeter Street, leading from St. Anne’s Gate to the hospital.
And we hear, also, in the next episcopate, casually and not at all as
if it were a new thiny, of St. Nicholas’ parish. When Bishop
Wyley was ordaining as to his new college of St. Edmund, he talked
of “ the tenants who before were parishioners of the hospital of St,
Nicholas,” and ‘the profits of the parish which the prior and brethren
of the hospital of St. Nicholas have been accustomed to receive.”
It seems, then, as if the prior was a parish priest ; in which case the
brethren might have been his lay assistants. Nay, Bishop Wyley
thought it necessary to obtain the consent of the prior before
founding his institution; for he says, in his foundation deed in 1270,
“with the consent of the venerable Robert the dean and our chapter
of Sarum, and of the religious men the prior and brethren of the
hospital of St Nicholas . . . we have built a humble church
in Salisbury.” This consent was not required of them as landowners,
for they possessed nothing yet in the town: but it clearly was as
occupying an important position in one quarter of the town ; perhaps
as rectors of a contiguous parish.

This, then, was the position of St. Nicholas’ when Bishop Bridport
thought well to adopt it, to make himself its custos, and to put a
prior in to govern it more immediately. There was a custos also of
the new Valley College, but he was the appointment of the dean
and chapter, and one of themselves.

IV.—TueE next Two Hunprep YEARs.
1271—1470.

A veil is upon the hospital for the next two hundred years, so
impenetrable that we cannot explain a great deal that took place
later. We have the lists both of wardens of the hospital and of the
Valley College ; we have the deeds which tell us of fresh acquisitions
of land by the hospital': but all the interior life is quite hidden
from us, and when the veil rises, it rises upon a hospital strangely
diverted from its original purpose.

1 Reg. passim.

OO

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 135

A list of those who were the heads of the hospital during this
time will be found in the Appendix.! Their official titles varied.
Nicholas Laking, the first head under Bingham’s foundation, was
called ‘‘custos,” or warden. But Bridport, calling himself ‘ warden,”
put in a “prior” to rule the hospital: and this arrangement con-
tinued under Bishop Wyley, in whose time (1266) we hear of
* Brother Adam, the prior” of the hospital. But in 1281 John
Burnes is again “custos”; Bishop Wykehampton seems to have
given up his claim to that title. And only once again do we find
the head of the hospital called “ prior”: and that is in the time of
the old Bishop Longespee, a younger son of Earl William of
Pembroke and the Countess Ela the first benefactress of the hospital,
who thus must have again adopted for himself the “ wardenship ”
of St. Nicholas’. After this the bishops again repudiated the title ;
for we find the immediate head always called “ warden,” and ap-
pointed by the bishop. The episcopal records of institutions begin
with the fourteenth century: so that thenceforward we have an
unbroken list of wardens, or masters. But “ warden”? is the title

‘by which they are consistently known till the beginning of the
sixteenth century.
We have also a list, though very fragmentary indeed, of the
wardens of the Valley College.? John Holtby was the first: the .
second bore the name of Thomas Bridport, and so was some relative,
or at least a fellow-townsman, of Bishop Giles, Once (1337) we
find the same man (Jobn Kirkby, Archdeacon of Dorset) warden of
doth institutions. Before this, in 1325, the chapter had voted that
the scholars of the Valley College should go “ to Oxford, or to some
proper place of study”: none were to remain and inhabit the
‘building but the two stewards, two chaplains, cook, and butler. It
looks as if the chapter had become jealous of Bridport’s college :
-and were determined that the office of warden should thenceforth
be a sinecure. At this time it was, perhaps, that the Salisbury
scholars acquired tenements in School Street, Oxford, “and par-
_ ticularly in two halls that joined together, one called for the most
. ; 1 Appendix D.
2 Appendix E.
VoL. XXV.—NO, LXXIV. L

136 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

part Salisbury, sometimes Salsary Hall, the other Little St. Edmund
Hall, on the site of which now stand Brasenose Hall, and part of
their library.” Antony Wood, who records this, also tells us that
‘the [Salisbury] scholars had a privilege among them, that on the
testimony of the chancellor of that church of their standing and
profit in letters, they might proceed to degrees in the university of
Oxford.” But this no doubt would rather apply to the Cathedral
scholars, for whom the chancellor was answerable.
In Leland’s time (1540) we read that “part of these scholars
remain in the college at Salisbury, and have two chaplains to serve
the Church there being dedicate to St. Nicholas: the residue study
at Oxford.” Here we have a testimony to the lastingness of the
arrangement whereby some of the Valley Scholars were always at
Oxford: and also a witness to the fact that the ‘ Church ” or
“Chapel” at the Valley College was dedicated to St. Nicholas.
Further, as to the connection between the two institutions, Mr.
Hickman tells us that “ in some old papers ’tis said that the College
de Vaux was a part of the hospital (that is, belonging to the
hospital) of St. Nicholas, and was suppressed in the time of King
Henry VIII. or Edward VI. . . . Besides there are (or have
been doors) in an old wall over against St. Nicholas’, which seems to
intimate a communication formerly between those two old religious
foundations.” If this is true the doors must have been in the
north-west corner of the St. Nicholas’ ground: and yet the com-
munication cannot have been a private one, as there must always
have been the breadth of the road which still runs between them.!
Meantime there can be no question that St. Nicholas was more
wealthy in land than the Valley College: and yet that the latter
possessed land independently of the former there is equally no doubt.
In addition to the lands at Wilsford, Broad Hinton, Gerardstone,
Fisherton, and New Sarum which were already theirs, the hospital
acquired about 1840 a valuable gift of land in East Harnham from

1 This would be true supposing that the Harnham road always struck the Close
wall at right angles, as now. But may it not possibly have run straight from
the hospital to the Close gate, and so left room upon the north-east for the Valley
College P

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 137

Robert Wande, a descendant, no doubt, of the Henry Wande, who,
a hundred years before, had given them a smaller piece of land
adjoining the hospital premises.

In 1407 the chapter came to a resolution that the office of warden
of the Valley College should always be filled within three days of
the vacancy occurring, by election of the canons actually resident,
and therefore on the spot. This resolution indicates that the
wardenship, if not a mere sinecure, was little thought of, and that
no pains were taken to secure the best man for it. The last warden
whom we hear of in the century was John Symondsbury, Archdeacon
of Wilts, treasurer of the Cathedral, and prebendary successively
of Yatesbury and Stratton, who died 1454.

In 1414 was passed a statute concerning hospitals that the
ordinaries should enquire of the manner of the foundation, estate,
and government of the same, and correct and reform them, “ac-
cording to the laws of Holy Church, as to them belongeth.” In
1414 Robert Hallum was Bishop of Salisbury, and therefore ordinary.
We hear of no examination held, or reforms recommended ; but in
the summer of that year Bishop Hallum went to Constance, where
he died in 1417 : and in the preparation for the great Church council
the affairs of an obscure hospital may well have been overlooked.
William Spaldwick was probably warden in 1414,

V.—Tae ReErormation Psriop,
1478—1593.

When the veil, which has been upon it for the last two centuries,
lifts, Bishop Beauchamp is promulgating his statutes concerning
the house or hospital of St. Nicholas Sarum, 1478. This year, also,
Roger Newenton resigned the wardenship, and Henry Sutton took
it: which may well have been in consequence of the new statutes,
or in preparation for them.

I will now give a translation of the text of these statutes :—

“1—First, it is ordained and determined that if any of the brothers or sisters
be a frequent stirrer of strife, and do not repent after being twice warned by
the master, on the third occasion when he deserves punishment he should be

expelled by the master.
“2—Also, it-is ordained that the master or warden of the said house of St,

L 2

138 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

Nicholas do not permit or allow any of the brothers and sisters to go begging
through the villages or parishes; but that he support them or have them sup-
ported with the goods which they brought at their first entrance into the said
house, as far as they are able to do it, and, when distress is upon them, with
clothes and other necessaries.

“3.—Also, it is ordained that every day within the said hospital the master
sing or say, if he be present, the canonical hours, or if he be lawfully hindered
get them said by another.

“4,— Also, it is ordained that the brothers and sisters do not behave in their
rooms or in hidden places so as to rouse suspicion, or dwell together in one room
unless they have been lawfully married before their admission, under a penalty
to be inflicted by the master in proportion to their deserts.

“5.—Also it is ordained that the master of the house of St. Nicholas receive
no persons to be entertained within the hospital, except such as have added to
the possessions of the said house, or given any great gift or present whereby the
house can be better supported.

“6.—Also, it is ordained that the master of the house of St. Nicholas, and
his successors for ever, shall pay yearly to the brothers and sisters there serving
God as alms each week seven shillings and sixpence for their commons. And
also the said master shall find for the said brothers and sisters of the said house
sixteen waggon loads of wood yearly to be taken from the wood of The Howe
and one waggon load of coals each year.

* Also, it is ordained that the master of the house of St. Nicholas shall find
for the said brothers and sisters a barber and a washerwoman, and all the
utensils necessary and convenient for the said brothers and sisters.”

There are two or three obvious remarks to be made upon these
statutes—which, by the way, are still in force, and by which the
master is bound as well as the inmates. And yet so much are the
times changed that I think they would be much astonished were I
to propose to cut down their allowance to 7s. 6d. a week, and find
a barber and washerwoman and the other toilet-necessaries !

1. The brothers and sisters are obviously by this time pensioners,
without a thought of their ever having been anything else. But
note that they are still described as ‘ the brothers and sisters there
serving God”—the very words which had been applied to the
nursing brothers and sisters. The question is, how long had they ©
been pensioners? Did Beauchamp make them such? or had they
been such for an indefinite number of years previously? I confess
to being strongly of opinion that Beauchamp made them pensioners :
and took the hint from the one pensioner brother, appointed by the
dean and chapter, who had always existed since 1261. As to their

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 139

number, the nearest contemporary evidence is Leland; who sixty
years later describes them as “eight poor women and four poor
men.” If this were so, they still keep to the total number of
twelve.

2. But the statutes also contemplate hospitality upon a larger
seale, and desiring to restrain this within limits, enact that only
considerable benefactors shall be received. It was then the custom
to receive such benefactors to lodge within the hospital—and such
hospitality had been unwarrantably extended.

8. The master in 1478 was as a rule resident, and it was the
exception when he did not officiate in the canonical hours himself;
in fact he was bound by Bingham’s charter, and so was to serve
the chapel of St. Nicholas next the hospital with the same ritual as
in the Cathedral. He was probably still assisted by a chaplain, who
was one of the three priests of St. Nicholas, the other two officiating
in St. John’s Chapel. MWdere the chapel where the master officiated
was, is another point of doubt: for the present chapel was not
consecrated till 1501.

In 1494 Warden Sutton resigned; and Bishop Blyth appointed
his brother, Geoffrey Blyth, who the same year was made treasurer
of the Cathedral, and in 1503 bishop of Lichfield. And in 1496_
we find transcribed in the bishop’s register a copy of the agreement
of 1260, whereby the dean and chapter gave up the patronage of
the wardenship of St. Nicholas’ to Bishop Bridport. This looks as
if the controversy about the patronage had been renewed. The
dean of the time was Edward Cheyne; and considering the low
ebb to which Church matters had been reduced at this period, it is
noteworthy to find Dean Cheyne presiding at a convocation of
canons called in 1490, to promote measures “for extending the
usefulness of the Church of Sarum.” The dean and chapter perhaps
asserted their right to appoint, urging Bingham’s Ordination, when
Sutton resigned in 1494; and the controversy, perhaps, was only
set at rest by Bishop Blyth’s promulgating again the settlement of
two hundred and thirty years before.

But in 1498 ° something happened which led to the demolition of

1 The exact date is given by Hickman’ s MS.

140 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

a large part of the hospital—some would maintain almost a half,
but to their opinion I find it impossible to subscribe. What it was
there is no record to tell, and I fear we shall never know. It
may have been that it was thought inexpedient to keep up such a
large building, now that the purpose of the hospital was definitely
narrowed from being the receptacle of sick- poor with their nurses,
to being only a retirement for pensioners. But whatever caused it,
there is no doubt that the demolition did actually take place: more
than fifty feet of the north wall were taken down, and the
cells on the north side of the row of arches swept away: and so
nothing remained of the hospital except the double chapel and five
cells to the south of the wall which contained the row of arches.
To provide room for the inmates Mr. Hickman tells us that two
rooms were built on to the farm-house (which had once been the
“ vetus hospitale ’’) on the east end, with a chamber for the chaplain
over them. And other rooms may possibly have been found in the
master’s house, which was over the cells to the west of what is now
the chapel; also possibly over a building which is figured in Mr.
Hickman’s map (see Plate II.) as the ‘“ Weavers’ Shops,” between
the farm-house and the row of old arches.

This map also tells us of a considerable amount of building outside
Bingham’s hospital, which must have been built previous to the demo-
lition of the end of the fifteenth century. Besides the weavers’ shops
already spoken of there were considerable buildings on either side of
the old porch. This porch was, like all the rest of the hospital, double :
and we can guess what the northern porch was like in size and shape
fyom the southern one, which remains, The northern porch was ap- ~
parently spared from the demolition of 1498, but alienated from the
hospital, and (probably with additions on the north side) turned into a
separate tenement: to the south of the southern porch there was
another small tenement, with a garden annexed, which was then the
kitchen of the hospital, and continued so to be for the next hundred
years.

Tn 1501 we come to the first event in the St. Nicholas’ history
of which a contemporary record is extant. On the last fly-leaf at
the beginning of the register are inscribed, in Latin, these words :

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 141

“The chapel of St. Nicholas Sarum, within the hospital at the same
place, was consecrated on the Thursday of the Paschal Week, 7.¢.,
the 15th day of April, 1501, by the venerable father Sir John, Bishop
of Mayo, at that time the suffragan of the reverend father Henry,
Bishop of Salisbury ; and the same day the cemetery was reconciled.
Witness, myself William Wylton then warden of the said hospital,
and others.”

Let us pause to remark on the significance of this entry.

1. The “‘ Wiltshire Institutions,” which have supplied us with
the list of masters regularly since 1597, that is for the last hundred
years, fail us after the institution of Geoffrey Blyth in 1494, and
record none till that of Geoffrey Bigge in 1593—that is for the
next hundred years. Why is this? I can account for it in no other
way than by supposing that the controversy as to the patronage of
the hospital, which had been settled by Bishop Blyth, was re-opened
on Bishop Deane’s appointment, and closed by the patronage being
given to the dean and chapter, the wardenship no longer being
considered an office requiring episcopal institution. Thus, though
Warden Wilton was one of the chapter themselves, and though
others may have been prebendaries, for the next hundred years
there was no guarantee against laymen holding the office of warden
—a thing contravening the whole spirit of Bishop Bingham’s
foundation charter.

2. Henry Deane was promoted from the see of Bangor to that of
Salisbury in 1500, and the next year advanced to that of Canterbury,
where he became papal legate. He can hardly have been resident
- at Salisbury at all: but in 1501 he appointed John Bell, Bishop of
Mayo, to act for him as suffragan, and it was he that consecrated
St. Nicholas’ chapel. It looks as if Bishop Blyth had intended to
do it, had he not died; and they got the first episcopal services that
they could. But what had happened that this should require con-
secration? Had it not been consecrated before? And the “ ceme-
tery,” or “litton”—which he “ reconciled,” or re-consecrated after
defilement—on the same day : what had happened to this? We know
from Mr. Hickman’s map, that the old “ litton,” or burying ground,
was the piece of ground extending along the north side of the

142 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

farm-house and hospital: something, therefore, had happened to it
to cause ceremonial defilement, after which it was impossible to bury
there until a service of “ reconciliation ” had been performed in it.
What was this?

Nothing that remains gives us any idea of the nature of it; and
conjecture is well-nigh worthless.

3. The part demolished of the hospital was the north row of
inmates’ rooms, up to the chapel on the east. The arcade of arches
was not yet built up into the north wall of the building, but re-
mained open, and was joined by a wall to the east end of the chapel,
so as to divide the chapel itself into two. The northern half of the
old chapel was then converted into a common hall; the space west
of this was occupied by a sister’s room, and a wood-house.

Such was the hospital over which William Wilton was made
warden, being probably appointed thereto by the dean and chapter,
and not instituted, as had been usual, by the bishop. He it was
that was warden when Bishop Bell consecrated the chapel. There
is every appearance of both chambers having been consecrated before:
so that this must mean, I think, re-consecrated the one after the
desecration of the other. And the same day he re-consecrated the
litton after some defilement, the nature of which we cannot guess.

With Wilton begins a new era. It is Wilton that began to record
the poor people’s names and dates of admission in a record still
extant. It is he that put together what we now call the Old
Register, and we recognize his handwriting in many of the marginal
notes to that volume.

To him succeeded, in 1524, Edward Fox, who before had been
steward of the hospital. Strange to say, there was one of the
chapter of that name, a relation of Bishop Fox of Winchester, who
in 1492 had become prebendary of Major Pars Altaris, and in 1533
was to become Archdeacon of Dorset, and Bishop of Hereford in
1535.1. But this was not the master of St. Nicholas’, for he by

1He took a forward part in the doctrinal reformatien: assisting the King in
the composition of the first draft of the ten articles, and being the envoy sent by
him to the League of Schmalkalde, 1535.

———— =

we ay Y

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 143

Mr. Bigge, seventy years later, is expressly called Sir Edward Fox,
knight, and given as an example of a lay-master. He was the first
layman that ever held the office: and seems to have been appointed
by the dean and chapter in direct contravention of the direction
given by Bingham in his Ordination, perhaps from a prevision of
what was going shortly to happen to the Church, and a desire to
save the hospital. There is no doubt also that the hospital at this
time was very poor, and perhaps it may have been thought as well
to give it in charge to a man of business, who was already well
acquainted with the working of it.

To him succeeded, after 1534, Sir Richard Long, apparently son
of Thomas Long of South Wraxall, and brother of Sir Henry
Long, of the same place, who was steward of Monkton Farley
Priory until its dissolution in 1541. Sir Richard Long’s reign,
which lasted till 1543, saw the dissolution of all the monasteries in
England, and no doubt the hospitals felt themselves threatened. It
was, no doubt, in view of some such blow as was directed against
colleges and hospitals in 1545 that St. John’s chapel was suppressed
either by him or his successor: for here there was undoubtedly a
superstitious use,” and “ it appeareth,” says Mr. Bigge, “ by the
certificate of 37 Hen. 8 [1545] that the chapel had ceased before
that time: for it was certified that there were no priests nor massing
there at that time.” At this time, probably, fell also the Valley
College. This had been flourishing in 1535, with twenty scholars,
two chaplains, and Richard Dudley, the precentor, for a master:
but John Bigge, prebendary of Yatesbury and custos, died in
1544, and there probably never was another. By the Act of the
next year the buildings were confiscated to the King, and so utterly
demolished that the exact spot where they stood is a question.

But St. Nicholas itself had escaped: and that the rejoicing was
great (though as yet premature) is likely from the appointment of
the Rev. Dr. Crayford by the dean and chapter in 1548 to be custos.
He was not instituted by the bishop as to a clerical office, though a
cletic himself; perhaps it was thought safer so.

King Henry VIII. died soon after the passing of the Act which
condemned hospitals and colleges ; but the Act was renewed by his

144 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

successor in 1547. Under this Act the hospital was examined in
1549: but “it is certified,” says Mr. Bigge, ‘‘ that in that year
there was neither priest nor master, but only twelve poor people
relieved and maintained.” Dr. Crayford then (if he survived till
then) resigned his mastership to save the life of the hospital.

In 1550 we find the first of the powerful family who mainly
protected the hospital through those troublous times, and who are
still worthily represented in the neighbourhood, recorded as master
—“Mr. Henry Herbert, gentleman.”’ In 1544 his father, Sir
William Herbert (brother-in-law of Queen Katharine Parr, who
married Henry VIII. in 1543) had received the grant from the
King of the lands of the rich abbey of Wilton, In 1551 he was
created Baron Herbert of Cardiff, and the next day Earl of Pembroke,
so that his second title passed to his eldest son, Henry, the master
of St. Nicholas’. Lord Herbert acted apparently as master till
1577, long after he had succeeded his father as Earl of Pembroke,
and by his powerful court influence protected the hospital from harm.
One ill turn, however, there was which he did us. He is said to
have removed many of the ancient deeds and evidences of the
hospital to Wilton. Certain it is that Mr. Bigge had access to a
few of them, which he copied out, in the Evidence House at Wilton:
but Mr. Hickman says that “ upon new building the house there
they were misplaced, and do remain confusedly all together in a
chamber among his own evidences unsorted, and cannot be found
till they are new placed.” And a letter of Mr. Bigge’s tells us of
a rumour of “ great abuse made by Henry Herbert custos,” which
“J think is untrue, for I do not hear that any tenant wanted
reasonable satisfaction for the fault in the leases, and I have seen
writings under many seals touching the great want of reparations
in the hospital to the value of three or four hundred pounds, beside
the danger of the statutes when he came to be master. And if he

1 He was married in 1553 to the Lady Katherine Grey, sister of Lady Jane
Grey: and would probably have come to the same end as his sister-in-law and
her husband had not his father, on finding that the popular voice declared in
favour of Mary, promptly made him repudiate her. She is buried with her
husband, Lord Hertford, in Salisbury Cathedral.

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 145

had the master’s portion for no government, he had but as many
others have had before and since: yet by account it appeareth that
the poor had as much or more than in former years, The error only
was in this, that he was not a presbyter.”

In 1577 Lord Pembroke resigned the mastership. But it is
certain that he retained the deeds and papers at Wilton, and probably
being an influential neighbour was consulted as to the patronage of
the hospital. The next master was also a layman—one Richard
Dolshon, who admitted to St. Nicholas’ in 1587 and 1588. He
was succeeded by Robert Parker, M.A., a clerk, who, as of old, was
instituted to the master’s office by the bishop, then Bishop Coldwell,
in 1591. And in 1598 Parker was succeeded by Mr. Geoffrey Bigge,
whose mastership was distinguished by the vigorous and successful
efforts which he undertook to save the hospital from annihilation,

VI.—Mr. Grorrrey Bicen’s Mastersa ie.
1593—16380.

It was by Bigge’s exertions that the hospital was saved from
being altogether wrecked by more imminent danger than had over-
hung it in the time of the Reformation.

The late Acts of Parliament against superstitious foundations
had given birth to a race of informers who made it their business:
to search out foundations that still entertained such superstitious
uses, and report them to Government, hoping for a share of the
spoil when they were destroyed. Such men were called concealers,
because they exposed concealments, which were hidden by the
authorities of the foundations : and were a very useful, nay necessary,
class of men, but odious in the highest degree to those whom they
exposed. Such were William Tipper and Robert Dawe, of London,

gentlemen, who apparently had reported badly of the hospital of
St. Nicholas to Sir Edward Dyer, who seems to have been chief
inquisitor for Wilts. Dyer issued a warrant against the hospital,
and petitioned the queen to grant its lands to Messrs. Tipper and

1 In Mr. Dolshon’s time one Thomas Green was admitted chaplain and brother,
4th February, 1587.

146 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

Dawe. This the Queen did by patent dated 2nd May, 1573.
Thenceforth Messrs. Tipper and Dawe were the legal proprietors of
the whole estate which had belonged to the hospital. But not the
actual; and why not? Presumably the then master, the Earl of
Pembroke, continued his rule quietly, because he was too great a
man to be disturbed. His father had kept well in faveur with each
successive ruling power; and had married the sister-in-law of the
old King, Katharine Parr’s sister. He himself was a Knight of the
Garter, and one of the peers commissioned to try the Queen of Scots:
and the husband of Mary Sidney, sister of Sir Philip, whom at the
end of her long life Ben Jonson calls “ Sidney’s sister, Pembroke’s
mother.” We can easily see that while so influential a man held
the mastership it was not safe to disturb him. And in 1576 was
passed an Act to restrain mercenary informers, who, under colour of
espying out lands concealed from the Crown by private persons,
sacrilegiously seized upon the lands of parish Churches, almshouses,
&c. This statute was confirmed, and its provisions enforced by
another in 1584, by which informers were bound to appear in person,
and to carry through their action, on penalty of the pillory for two
hours.

During these eight years then (1576—84), clearly it would not-
have been safe to attack St. Nicholas: and accordingly we find that
it was when this period of safety had begun, in 1577, that Lord
Pembroke resigned his mastership in favour of Mr. Dolshon,.

But six years later, when Mr. Bigge held the mastership, Messrs.
Tipper and Dawe succeeded in obtaining recognition of their right,
In February, 1590, on Sir Edward Dyer’s petition, Messrs. Tipper
and Dawe obtain a grant from the Queen in free and common socage
of all the hospital lands in Wilts: on December 22nd of the hospital
itself; and on March 380th, 1592, of all the old hospital lands in
Dorset. And no sooner had Tipper and Dawe got legal possession
of it than they made over their right to one Nicholas Geffe, of
London. But in spite of this Mr. Bigge was master: and nothing
was done by Tipper and Dawe to disturb his mastership. But this
set Bigge himself upon the ingenious and indefatigable manceuvres
which issued twenty years later in the new foundation of the hospital.

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 147

“ Our hospital,” says Mr. Hickman, “ was certainly a concealment ;
for had the master thereof but shewed the foundation (which was
only Bishop Robert’s Ordination and Bishop Beauchamp’s statutes)
in the times either of King Henry VIII., Edward VI., or Queen
Elizabeth, it had most assuredly fallen to the Crown, with the many
other superstitious foundations in those days.” It is impossible, on
considering the evidence, to arrive at any other conclusion than that
thus candidly avowed. ‘The restriction of the office of warden to a
priest: the giving him charge of St. John’s chapel, where also
priests said masses: the injunctions to the chaplain of the hospital
itself about serving the sick (by saying masses for quick and dead,
by visiting the sick, and by hearing their confessions) make it plain
that the hospital might too easily have been brought within the
scope of the statute, and thus destroyed, however lamentable and
unjust such destruction would have been. But to Mr. Bigge it
seemed an intolerable injustice that such a thing should be possible :
and therefore he set to work to prevent it by all the means in his
power, and was finally successful.

The Earl of Pembroke died January 19th, 1601, and was succeeded
by his eldest son, William. In this year also passed the statute of
charitable uses: which empowered the Queen to send into each
county commissioners, of whom the bishop and chancellor of the
diocese are to be two, authorizing them to enquire concerning
charitable foundations, to examine witnesses, and to decree as to
them. Mr, Hickman says :—“ It is supposed that when she sent
her commissioners into Wiltshire her eye was chiefly (in favour of
the said Tipper and Dawe, to whom she had given it two or three
years before) on this hospital of St. Nicholas, to which she bare no

good will.” But we can hardly suppose that a measure intended
for all the kingdom alike was set on foot because of ill will to one
_ small institution.

The commissioners sent to Wiltshire were thirteen; the bishop,
the dean, the chancellor of the diocese, the archdeacon of Sarum,
four knights, and five esquires. They issued searching articles of
enquiry: and to them Bigge had to make answer. His answer at
large does not survive, but the account that he made showing his

148 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

disbursements to the poor does, and is countersigned by Giles
Hutchins, the steward of the hospital.

Queen Elizabeth died in 1603, on which James of Scotland
succeeded, and a new set of counsellors and favourites came to the
front. Particularly Henry Howard, who had suffered much for Mary
Queen of Scots, was made Earl of Northampton in August, 1604,

In 1606 Archbishop Bancroft, of Canterbury, commissioned
Bishop Cotton, of Salisbury, to visit the hospital. The result shall
be told in Bigge’s words in 1609 :—“ The now Lord Bishop of Sarum
with others about three years past did likewise visit the said hospital
in the name of the now Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, and
diligently examined all things at my many appearances before them,
and found no fault, as may appear by the notes of the register and
the testimony of the registrar himself.”

In the year 1609 the plot thickens. That year Mr. Geffe writes
to Bigge as follows :—“ Sir, understanding by this bearer Mr. Ma:
Hill my good friend, that you and he have had some speeches
touching a grant in fee made by the late Queen of the hospital of
St. Nicholas, and that Mr. Samford had £50 of you to make com-
position with me about it, [I] do protest before God that neither he
nor any other did ever treat with me about it to any such purpose,
only he was made acquainted that there was such a grant, but did
never see, or desire to see it, But now at the entreaty of this my
good friend I do tender you this: that if upon examination of my
title [by] your learned counsel and mine it shall be thought by
them that my estate thereunto is good and perfect in law, you shall
for any such part thereof as is in your possession receive such kind
usage for my friend’s sake as shall be to your liking, and he shall
prevail very much with me in any matter he shall require for your
good. And so, very lovingly saluting you, I remain, your assured
friend, Nicnotas Gerre. April 12, 1609.”

From this letter we see that a suit had been commenced, and
counsel retained on both sides. On receipt of this letter Bigge
wrote to Lord Pembroke as follows:—‘To my most honourable
and most benign lord and master, the Earl of Pembroke: Your
lordship’s hospital of St. Nicholas is sought as a concealment by

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 149

one Mr. Geffe, who as he saith has a grant of the fee of it Eliz. 33,
but professeth good usage to your lordship, to the poor, aud to my-
self, that he may have free liberty to seize upon it. But our counsel
thinks his title weak, and therefore advises rather, because the state
of it is somewhat doubtful, to crave confirmation of it from the
king’s majesty, which because the like in like case hath been lately
obtained with great grace and favour, especially by the motion of
the Earl of Northampton, for the hospital of Heytesbury, they
think it will be easy for your honour to procure the same for us, if
your lordship do like of such a course, whereunto we have no
argument to move your good honour, but that piety and pity which
do much adorn your true nobility. The profit of it besides the name
is small, but the prayers to God for your honour are many. It
hath stood about four hundred years; my government and cost
upon the house and the poor have been such as the strictest visitors
have ever approved. I do only now as duty bindeth acquaint your
honour with the cause, and shall be ready to go forward in it when
and howsoever your lordship will appoint; and so rest, of all others
your honour’s most bounden servant, G. B.”

Lord Pembroke must have assented to this petition: for we find
that he applied to Bishop Cotton fora long lease of the patronage
of the hospital, which the bishop granted him for forty-one years.
Not for nothing, we may be sure: this was an age when everything
was bought and sold.

This having been done Mr. Bigge next visited London, bent on
bringing about the cession by Tipper and Dawe of their rights in
the hospital in favour of the new patron, This he effected by com-
pounding the suit now depending for 100 guineas, on which they
promised to pass on their right to Lord Pembroke. A note of the
transaction remains in Bigge’s handwriting, thus ;—“ Dee. 2, 1609,
I have paid fifty-two pound ten shillings to Mr, Richard Frances at
his house in Watling Street, London 52 10 0 And fifty-two

pounds ten shillings to Thomas Hill

at the same time and place 52 10 0

a

TQS: 102 Os?

150 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

Also during the same visit he was introduced by some person
unknown to the Privy Seal, Henry Howard, Earl of Northampton,
who received him favourably ; and to him, perhaps first, he broached
his idea of getting a new foundation. At all events he writes after
his return to his anonymous friend deprecating an intention to put
the hospital under the dean and chapter instead of under a master,
excusing himself for putting the hospital under Lord Pembroke’s
protection, and complaining that he had spent more than £140 in
this business.

And so in 1610 King James I. granted a fresh constitution to
the hospital, which has never been superseded. By this a master, a
chaplain, and six poor and infirm of either sex, were constituted a
corporation, and authorized to use a common seal. The Earl of
Pembroke has the appointment of the master for his life, and after
his death his executors for forty years: but after that time the
appointment is to revert to the bishop, or to the dean and chapter
in case of a vacancy of the see. The master is to swear to observe
the statutes either of Bishop Bingham, the founder, or Bishop
Beauchamp, the patron of the hospital: and to nominate and admit
brethren and sisters within one month of the vacancy to which they
succeed. One brother, however, is always to be appointed by the
dean and chapter.

Thus ended the long controversy: and this favourable event was
secured by the long-continued and patient exertions of one man,
Geoffrey Bigge, the master.

Mr. Bigge also made sundry alterations about the premises. Thus
he put an end to the lease of the St. Nicholas’ farm, one Thomas
Hancock surrendering his lease to him in 1617, The tenement he
seems to have pulled down: thus demolishing what had once
probably been the original hospital of St. Nicholas. For this he
substituted two sets of rooms on either side of the old west porch of
the hospital, which were old at this time: the northern half being (as
was said before) made out of the relics of the old north wing of the
hospital, which had been destroyed in 1498 ; and the southern half
being the old kitchen of the establishment, from which the meat
used to be passed through to the refectory by a private door. These

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 151

two halves of the new house he joined by a passage over the hospital
porch, and called the house “ The Old Kitchen,” assigning to it a
garden down to the river bank.

But where should he make the new hospital kitchen? He found
room for it at the east end, by turning the common hall into a
kitchen. It will be remembered that Geoffrey Blyth, or Wilton,
had made this common hall out of the eastern half of the north
chapel, turning the western half of it into a buttery, inmate’s room,
and woodhouse. This western half Bigge now crowned with a
second storey, in which he made four brothers’ rooms. All this we
find from the old accounts he did in 1622. But in 16%1 he had
“ditched and paled the litton.” The old hospital cemetery, which
had been “reconciled” in 1501, had been turned into an orchard
belonging to the hospital farm. But on the demolition of the farm-
house Mr. Bigge ditched and paled it, and let it in 1662 with the rest
of the farm-house lands to one Bate for the yearly rent of £5 18s.
It would be interesting to identify the litton exactly. Mr.
Hickman estimates its extent at three-quarters of an acre, and the
deed by which Hancock surrenders the farm-house says that it lay
on the north side of the farm-house. We may, therefore, pronounce
with some confidence that it is all that corner of the property which
lies between the Harnham Road and the road under the Close wall.

Five years before the deaths of both Mr. Bigge and the Earl of
Pembroke (they died in the same year, 1630), the latter executed a
deed of gift of the next presentation to the hospital wardenship to
John Nicholas, Esq., of Winterborne Earls. Mr. Bigge died
seemingly at the hospital: if so, he was the last master who has
resided there. He left a widow, and two daughters married to
Joseph Bate and John Dove. Joseph Bate was probably the lessee of
the farm-house lands. John Dove at all events bore the same name
with the Presbyterian colonel who made himself well known in
Salisbury during the Commonwealth, and who was high sheriff for
Wilts in 1655.

/ VIL—Tue Last Two Hunprep anp Sixty Yuars.
1630—1890.

On Mr. Bigge’s death Mr. Nicholas presented to the mastership

VOL, XXV.—-NO. LXXIV, M

152 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

his own son, Matthew. Matthew Nicholas was a man of 34, who
was rector of West Dean and prebendary of Axford, and perhaps by
this time already canon residentiary, being a great friend of Bishop
Davenant’s. It may have been with a view to his succession that
the presentation was given to Mr. Nicholas, his father.

For the next seventeen years he ruled the hospital from his house
in the close, leaving a chaplain to inhabit the hospital. The only
repairs, however, that he executed were in 1634 and 1635. In
1634 he made, in the hall within the porch, a staircase leading up to
the old refectory, which he shortened by 15ft. to make a new study
for the chaplain. The old refectory was thus reduced in dimensions
to a square of 21ft., and became the chaplain’s drawing-room, which
it continued to be till the demolition of the whole house in 1884,
In 1685 he made a private kitchen for his chaplain at the east end
of the house, strengthening the original wall of the southern tran-
sept so as to enable it to bear a kitchen chimney ; with an entrance
hall and back staircase to the chaplain’s room, and also a door into
the orchard beyond.

But in 1647 the Commonwealth was set up, and prelacy abolished
by law. The cathedral property was confiscated, the canons’ houses
sold, and the palace turned into an inn. Dr. Nicholas, more
fortunate than the rest, fled to Bristol, where he was also dean, and
lived there undisturbed though in poverty ; while first John Strickland
and later (on May 27th, 1647) Frances Rivett, Esq., was nominated
master of St. Nicholas’ by the Parliament. Dr. Nicholas did not
dispute the title, but gave into Rivett’s hands the necessary papers,
accounts, &. The poor inmates were continued as before. A Rev.
Henry Dent was chaplain during at least seven years (1652—59) of
the Commonwealth.

But the Presbyterian party, to which Mr. Rivett seems to have
belonged, were not long themselves in power. In Salisbury, indeed,
their power lasted longer than in the country at large. In this
country they were superseded by Independents, who beheaded the
King in 1649. But in Salisbury the Presbyterians had a majority
in the City Council until 1656. In that year the City Council re-
solved, by an Independent majority, to petition the Protector that

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 153

“ the circuit of the close, together with the hospital of St. Nicholas,
might be granted to the mayor and city, in as large and ample a
manner as to the bishops, deans, and chapters thereof.” This prayer
was granted in spite of a counter-petition from the inhabitants of
the close, and in September of that year the mayor and corporation
received a grant from the Parliament of the perpetual care, visitation,
inspection, patronage, and free disposition of the hospital: and the
mayor and any eight of the aldermen were fully empowered to
reverse the decisions of the master, and to appoint a new master,
when the place was vacant. On this (in 1658) Mr. Rivett resigned,
and the mayor for the time being, William Stone, was appointed.

But three years after—in August, 1659, when things were
ripening towards the next year’s settlement—the mayor and corpo-
ration were required to give up their new charter. They complied,
but John Ivey, senior, the mayor of the year, was sent to London
with a petition that the corporation might be allowed to keep the
hospital. This was granted, Ivey was continued in the mastership,
and his son, John Ivey, junior, continued as steward of the hospital,

John Ivey had been mayor, and therefore master of St. Nicholas’,
since the autumn of 1658. Immediately on succeeding to the latter
post, he had gone to law with Dr. Nicholas, the late warden, for
monies received by him in fines on leases, &c., and alleged to be due
to the hospital. To this Dr. Nicholas answered by the plea that
twelve years since he had delivered all the accounts into Rivett’s
hands, and had since only received rents which were lawfully due
to himself.

However, the tide was turning: at the end of May, 1660, the
King was brought back, and within the month (21st June) an order
was issued for Dr. Nicholas’ restoration to his mastership. It was
signed by the same clerk of the Parliament who thirteen years
before had signed the order for Rivett’s intrusion.

Dr. Matthew Nicholas also had a fresh grant of the deanery of
St. Paul’s, London, of which he had been made dean by Charles L.,
but had never come into possession. He died in 1662, and was
succeeded by his son, John Nicholas, a young man of 23, who was
appointed by Bishop Henchman, He had been at Winchester and

M 2

154 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

at New College, Oxford : and this preferment was followed by his
being appointed Prebendary of Lyme and Halstock by Bishop Hyde,
who also made him his chaplain, in 1667; fellow of Winchester,
1667; Warden of New College, 1675, which he resigned to become
Warden of Winchester College, 1679: and finally prebendary of
Winchester, 1684. He is well known to Winchester boys as the
builder of the hall which till this generation has been known as
* School.”

He also executed great repairs at St. Nicholas’; where, by the
way, he does not seem to have resided himself. In 1662 he built
a “chaplain’s chamber,” or bedroom over the study, approached by a
continuation of the staircase to the study. In 1668 he repaired the
great porch. In 1673 he boarded the floors of the inmates’ rooms.
From 1675 to 1679 he was at work on the chapel,which he wainscoted,
carving coats of arms on the wainscot, and setting upa pulpit. In
1625 he walled with brick the colonnade of arches, which till then
had been open, thus making a covered passage inside, and warming
the inmates’ rooms.

While he was master there were three episcopal visitations : one
by Bishop Henchman in 1662, at the beginning of his mastership :
two more by Seth Ward in 1670 and 1677. We have the questions
of the first and third of these, and the answers made to them by
the master. From these it appears that in 1662 one of the brothers
was expelled as a disorderly person. In 1677 the master stated that
he had one MS. volume of records and evidences—no doubt the
actual volume now called the Old Register: and that he had in a
chest in the master’s lodgings the “ charter” or “original foundation”
of the hospital with other indentures and papers (since lost).

Dr. John Nicholas died at Winchester in 1711, and was succeeded
by Thomas Burnet, afterwards Rector of West Keynton, near
Chippenham, who was collated by Bishop Burnet, whose youngest

1In 1703 Christopher London, the chaplain and steward, died, and was
succeeded by Edmund Hickman in both offices. Mr. Hickman compiled the
MS., which is my second source of information for this paper. He died in 1728 ;
“a very honest diligent man, living much beloved, and dying lamented.”

— ee ee

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 155

son he was.' He resigned in favour of his son, who was collated
by Bishop Sherlock in 1735.

After two Burnets follow two Humes, Nathaniel the brother,
and John the son of Bishop Hume, the uncle resigning in 1774 in
favour of the nephew. The nephew was also prebendary of Combe
and Harnham. He exchanged both his mastership and prebend for
the vicarage of Bishop’s Lavington, and the vicar of Lavington—
the Rev. Edward Emily—became by collation of Bishop Shute
Barrington prebendary of Combe and Harnham and master of St.
Nicholas’.

Emily was a great friend of Bishop Barrington’s; and when he
died in 1792 he left an estate at Woking, valued at £6000, to the
bishop, who handed it over to trustees for the further endowment
of St Nicholas’ Hospital.

After this Dr. William Coxe, afterwards archdeacon of Wilts,
held the hospital for a few weeks in 1792: and then Bishop Douglas
collated his son, William, who had held the archdeaconry of Wilts
before Dr. Coxe. Then in 1819 Bishop Fisher collated the Rev.
Arthur E. Howman, who died in 1822: and two years after, two
successive intervening masters (Dean Talbot, of Salisbury, and the
Rev. T. Rennell) having died each the year after they were collated,
the same bishop collated the Rev. G. E. Howman (afterwards Little),
rector of Barnsley, co. Gloucester, son of the former master of the
same name.

He was master for fifty-six years: and during his mastership the
hospital was entirely re-built, with the exception of the chapel and
master’s house. Large fines on the several properties were con-
tinually falling in; many men would have simply put them into
their own pocket, whereas he generously used them on behalf of the
hospital. These gifts, together with £1600 which he expended
upon a new Church at Manningford Bohun, a hamlet of Wilsford,
amounted altogether to the large sum of £5018 15s. ld.: and he

1He cannot have been of an age for orders when collated. His mother was
married in 1687, and there were at least four children older than himself. Life
of Burnet, pp. 24, 31. Yet in 1712 he was collated to the prebend of Lynn and
Halstock, which had been vacated by his predecessor at St. Nicholas’.

156 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

himself certified that during the twenty years between 1851 and
1870 the amount which he derived from the hospital for his own
use was only £196 11s. 7d.

I succeeded Mr. Howman upon his death in 1878; and in 1884
I pulled down and re-built the master’s house, carefully preserving,
however, the old arcade of arches, and as far as possible the old
character of the building. If in any degree I have been successful
in this, it is mainly due to the interest in the old building of the
Rev. Lewis Gidley, the late chaplain, whose acquaintance with the
hospital was far greater than my own. .

There is still much to be done at the hospital in the way of further
development of the charity. These things must wait for the neces-
sary funds, and perhaps will be carried out by a future generation ;
but meantime I rejoice to have put on record in this shape the
history of the hospital in its three stages :—as the unknown founder
designed it; as Bingham made it a hospital for the sick with
brethren and nurses; as Beauchamp restricted it to twelve pensioners;
who still, in spite of threats of dissolution which from time to time
have been heard, enjoy its bounty.

APPENDIX A.

“Carta Comitissee Ele de assarto in Bentlewood.

“ Omnibus Christi fidelibus ad quos presens scriptum pervenerit, Ela comitissa
Sarum salutem in Domino. Noverit universitas vestra me intuitu Dei et pro salute
animz domini mei Willelmi Longspee Comitis Sarum, et pro salute anime mex,
et pro animabus patris et matris me, liberorum, antecessorum, et heredum
meorum, dedisse, concessisse, et presenti Charta confirmasse Deo et Hospitali
Sancti Nicholai de nova Sarum, et venerabili in Christo patri Richardo episcopo
et successoribus suis episcopis Sarum, ad sustentationem pauperum et infirmorum
Hospitalis quod plene est in ordinatione predictorum Richardi episcopi et suc-
cessorum suorum episcoporum Sarum, Totam terram clausi mei australis de
Bentle[s]wood que mihi remansit post donum quod feci Johanni de Monemue,
Willelmo de Nevill, Alluredo de Boterell personze de West Deane, per concordiam
coram Justitiariis itinerantibus inter me et ipsos factam, cum bosco et assarto,
pratis et pasturis, viis et semitis, libertatibus et liberis consuetudinibus, et
omnibus aliis rebus ad eandem terram pertinentibus, cum clauso de Buclea.
Concessi etiam pradictoHospitali sexaginta averia cum exitibus unius anni, et duo-
decim equos vel equas et sexaginta porcos, et trecentas oves. Habenda in perpetuum
libere et quiete in pastura, per omnia loca ubi praedicti Johannes de Monemue,
Willelmus de Nevill, Alluredus de Boterell persona de West Deane habent mecum
communia, vel ego cum eis; omnia autem preedicta habebunt et tenebunt preefati

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 157

Hospitale Sancti Nicholai Richardus episcopus et successores sui episcopi Sarum,
in puram et perpetuam eleemosinam, libere et quiete ab omni servitio et seculari
exactione. Ego vero et heredes mei totam prenominatam terram cum omnibus
pertinentiis et cum tota predicta communia, sicut predictum est, Deo et supra-
dictis Hospitali sancti Nicholai et Richardo episcopo et successoribus suis episcopis
Sarum contra omnes homines et feminas warrantizabimus. Et in hujus rei
testimonium presenti scripto sigillum meum apposui : Hiis testibus domino.
Stephano Abbate de Stanley, Magistris Elia de Beth, Luca, Henrico de Byssopston-
Canonicis Sarum, Willelmo clerieo tune senescallo meo, Rogero de Calne tune:
vicecomite Wiltes, Willelmo Gilebert, Johanne le Daveis, Hugone de Broys,
Roberto de Hokanham, Henrico de Albiniacis, Hamoni de Bakhampton, Richardo:
de Poulesholt militibus, Michaele de Childhampton, Willelmo de Derneford, et
multis aliis. Datum apud Castrum Veteris Sarum anno ab incarnatione domini
[millesimo] ducentesimo vicesimo septimo, quartodecimo kalendas Septembris.

“Vere transcriptum ex originali remanente apud Wilton Evidence House per
me Galfridum Bygge Custodiem.”’

[N.B.—The above deed is only a copy of the original, and in some respects a
doubtful eopy, especially as to the proper names. Thus the name of the first-
mentioned canon of Sarum is given as “ Elias de Beth.” There were two canons
of the name of Elias in 1226—Elias de Derham, the builder of the Cathedral,
and Elias P. Ridel. The second canon’s name is given as “ Lucas.’ ‘There were
also two Lukes among them in 1226—Luke the King’s treasurer, and Luke de-
Winton. The names of the knights and esquires I believe I have deciphered
rightly ; except that the name ‘‘ Childhampton ” is doubtful. ]

APPENDIX B.

“ Ordinatio Ricardi Episcopi Sarum super ecclesiis de Boxe et de Wyvilesford
per consensum prioris et conventus de Farley.

“Omnibus Christi fidelibus ad quos preesens scriptum pervenerit Ricardus de
permissione Sarisberiensis ecclesiz minister humilis salutem in Domino eternam.
Noveritis quod prior et conventus de Ferleigh ecclesiam de Boxe juxta Ferleigh
et ecclesiam de Wyvilesford cum pertinentiis que ad eorum pertinebant advo-
cationem nostre ordinationi supposuerunt per cartam suam que talis est:
“Reverendo domino et patri in Christo Ricardo dei gratia devotissimus suus H.
dictus prior de Ferleigh et ejusdem loci conventus salutem et tam promptam quam
debitam cum obedientia reverentiam. Committimus unanimi assensu et voluntate
ordinationi vestre ecclesias de Boxe et de Wyvillesford, que ad nostram spectant
advocationem, paternitati ‘vestree attentius supplicantes quatenus intuitu dei de
preedictis ecclesiis ita ordinare velitis quod ordinatio vestra nobis proficiat ad
salutem. Ratum et gratum habebimus quicquid super premissis vestra duxerit
ordinare paternitas. In cujus rei testimonium Sigillum nostrum commune
apposuimus.’ Recepimus insuper literas nobilis viri H. comitis Herford super
eisdem ecclesiis in hee verba: ‘ Venerabili patri in Christo Ricardo dei gratia
Sarum episcopo Humfridus de bohon Salutem in domino. Cum ipsorum pro-
motioni specialiter intendere debeamus quos preedecessores nostri sincera caritate
sunt amplexati, pre dilectis nobis in Christo priore et conventu de Ferleigh,

158 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

quorum domum preedecessores nostri fundaverunt, paternitatem vestram attentius
rogamus et devote, quatenus paupertati eorumdem prioris et conventus miseri-
corditer compatientes eos promovere in ecclesiam de Boxe velitis, vel in aliqua
alia que ad eorumdem spectat advocationem, vel saltem Ecclesia de Wy-
velisford, quarum advocationes pidecessores nostri eis contulerunt, et nos
eisdem per cartam nostram confirmavimus. Ratum et [gratum] habebimus
quicquid super dictis ecclesiis vestra ordinaverit paternitas. Et valeat sanctitas
vestra in domino.’ Nos igitur considerantes paupertatem domus de Farleigh, ad
cujus sustentationem proprie non superfuerunt facultates, attendentes etiam
hospitalitatem quam ejusdem domus monachi in omnibus transeuntes ultra vires
exercent, precibus insuper et voluntati dicti comitis super ordinationem dictarum
ecclesiarum inclinati, Sic ordinamus quod prior et monachi de Ferleigh in usus
proprios in perpetuum nomine perpetui beneficii retineant omnes decimas
garbarum cum curia persone et terra ecclesia de Boxe, salva in eadem
ecclesia vicaria perpetua ad quam dictus prior et conventus vicarium cum
vacaverit presentabunt, qui nomine vicarie percipiet omnes obventiones altaris
et cimiterii, et omnes minutas decimas, et decimas feni, et molendinorum et
curtillagiorum, et preter ea singulis annis per manus monachorum de Ferleigh vy.
quarteria frumenti et v. de ordio et iij de mextilone et ij de avena. Quod
vicarius omnia onera ordinaria sustinebit preter procurationes archidiaconi quas
facient monachi; qui etiam invenient aream dicto vicario competentem et
honestam in qua possit sdificare, omnibus extraordinariis inter monachos et
vicarium pro rata partiendis. Ordinamus etiam de ecclesia de Wyvelesford in
hunc modum, viz. quod habita consideratione ad insufficientiam domus hospitalis
Sarum ad sustentationem unius capellani futuris et perpetuis temporibus cele-
braturi divina in capella hospitalis ejusdem pro salute anime nostre et pro
animabus preedecessorum et successorum nostrorum, et pro animabus nobilis viri
comitis Sarum Willelmi longespie et Ele comitissee Sarum necnon et canonicorum
Sarum et ad refocillationes pauperum et transeuntium ad eandem domum seu
declinantium, assignavimus omnes decimas garbarum in campis de parochia de
Wyvelesford, salvis vicario perpetuo singulis annis tribus quarteriis framenti
duobus de ordio duobus de avena et uno de siligine percipiendis per liberationem
procuratoris ejusdem domus qui episcopo Sarum futuris perpetuis temporibus
presentabit vicarium. In cujus etiam usus cedent omnes obventiones altaris,
et omnes decimz preter decimas garbarum quas et vicarius sustinebit omnia
onera ordinaria et procurationes archidiaconi faciet omnibus extraordinariis inter
vicarium et domum Hospitalis pro rata partiendis. Ut autem hee nostra
ordinatio firma et stabilis imperpetuum preservetur, tria scripta sub eisdem
verbis et tenore eodem, quorum unum in ecclesia Sarum remanebit, aliud penes
monachos de Ferleigh, et tertium in domo Hospitalis Sarum confici fecimus, et
sigillo nostro et capellani nostri Sarum communicavimus. Salvis omnino nostra
dignitate et auctoritate ecclesie Sarum et cura successorum meorum. Actum
apud Farleigh die Veneris proxima ante nativitatem beatae Mariz, anno ab incarna-
tione Domini millesimo ducentesimo vicesimo septimo, pontificatus nostri anno
undecimo. Hiis testibus Stephano Archidiacono Wilts, magistro R.de Brecham,
domino Waltero de Porleye, domino Valentio, Roberto de Witham, et magistro
Galfrido de Moritonia, et multis aliis.”

ES eS

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 159

APPENDIX C,

Extract from a MS. by Mr. Hickman, chaplain of St. Nicholas’
Hospital, dated 1713.

“T find that the body of the church (or cloister) was founded upon twelve
pillars with large and beautiful arches turned on them, six of each side, in distance
from each other about 14 foot, which said range of pillars and arches ran up also
on the north and south sides to the very east end of the chancel, in which were
eight or ten pillars more; and [the] body of the church (or cloister) was in
breadth in the inside from pillar to pillar about 25 foot, as was also the chancel
built on a continuation of the same range of pillars: the pillars was near 3 foot
square, and in height from the floor to the upper part of the cornice on which the
foot of the arches stood about 5 foot and a half in height. The body of the
church (or cloister) was in length about 76 foot, between which and the chancel
was across aisle ranging north and south; in length from the body of the church
each way were 40 foot, and in breadth about 13; but a wall went cross them and
a door in each at the end of about 20 foot exactly alike on both sides. From
the east end of the body of the church (or cloister) to the east end of the chancel
was about 46 foot in length, and at the east end of the chancel was also a sanctum
sanctorum, or low chapel of about 28 foot in length: so that from the west porch
of the church (or cloister) to the east end of the sanctum was about an 150 foot,
and the length of the cross aisles from north to south about 110 foot. At the
south end of the cross aisle was also a further building of necessary houses over
the water, and there was also additional buildings at the end of the north cross
aisle that answered to those on the south, and led to the door of entrance into
the churchyard, and these additional buildings had chambers over them. There
was there also chapels, one on the north side of the chancel dedicated to the
Blessed Virgin Maria, and another on the south side thereof, dedicated to St.
Nicholas, both of an equal length and breadth (viz.) in length 36 foot and in
breadth 20, which answered exactly to the length of the iuner part of the cross
aisles before you came to the wall and door that enters into [the] outer part of
the cross aisle, both sides being of an exact proportion, according as it is here
represented in the first platform or figure. The poor people’s rooms being twelve
in number were six on the north side of the body of the church (or cloister) and
six on the south, which six on the south continues much as they did from the
first, only as at first they came out of their doors into a passage of about 8 foot
wide between their said doors and the pillars of the cloister, between which
pillars it was all open, so that to go from the rooms on the north side of the
church (or cloister) to those on the south (or from the south to the north) they
went between the said pillars, and so cross the church (or cloister) : but since the
said church is gone there is now a strong brick wall made between the pillars on
the south side from west to east to keep the rooms warm, but both pillars and
poor’s chambers are all gone from the north side thereof, and shops for weaving
erected in the place of the poor people’s lodging rooms. There is no mention in
the ordination of any set number of poor people, but I am apt to believe it was
designed for twelve from the foundation. There was two porches for entrance,
one on the north, the other on the south side of the body of the church (or cloister)

160 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

besides one large porch between them, whieh poreh belonged to the cloister (or
church). The porch on the south side does yet remain, only a room is made over
it by the tenant of the old kitchen: and passing through these two porches you
come into two halls of about 25 or 30 foot long each from north to south, and
about 16 foot broad; out of which halls you entered into the passage that lead [s]
between the poor people’s doors and the pillars of the said church (or cloister), on
each side just alike, both porch, hall, and passage. That hall on the south side
is yet in being, only a large staircase made in it to ascend into the master’s
lodgings, which was done about an 100 years since, till which time it was still
called the old hall, and had a long old table board standing in it. Then on the
north side of the hospital, between the said hospital and the churchyard or litton,
was a tenement given by Bishop Robert in his ordination, which has been
since rebuilt in form of a church (or hospital) building; at the east end of which
was a door through a wall out of the aforesaid additional buildings of the cross
aisle into the churchyard. But since the poor people’s rooms are gone on the
north side of the church (or cloister) and the chaplain’s lodgings which was over
them, there are two rooms built at the east end of the said tenement (of late
called the farm-house, because the farmer that rented the hospital lands generally
lived there) for two poor people and a chamber and garret for the chaplain over
them ; which rooms and a chamber was builded about 1498, on the north side of
which lies the ground (now an orchard) formerly called the litton or churchyard.
Then on the south side of the north porch of entrance (at the west end of the
hospital) is the tenement called the old kitchen, because formerly when the master
and chaplains all ate together in the dining room of the hospital, all their meat
was dressed there, and a door was made on the south side of the said dining
room, about 8 foot from the west end, into the said kitchen for bringing the
meat, which door is now (since the staircase was built and a chamber and study
taken out of the west end of the said dining room) walled up. I have already
given an account that the poor people’s rooms were six on the north and six on
the south side of the church (or cloister). And over those on the south side was
(and still is) the master’s or keeper’s lodgings, and the great common dining
room, in length from west to east in the inside 36 foot and in breadth 21: the
breadth is still the same, but there having been a chamber (with a study over it)
and large staircase made and taken out of the west end thereof by Mr. Bigge
about an 100 years past, the length of it now is but just the same as the breadth,
viz., 21 foot. Then farther to the east there were two or three lodging rooms
which also yet remain, and a kitchen is built over good part of the south cross
aisle, and a thick wall for a foundation for the said kitchen chimney, and a room
to look into the new chapel. Then over the more southerly part of the said
cross aisle is built a washhouse, &c., and farther over the additional buildings is
a woodhouse and house of office, over the stream of water that runs under those
of the poor people. In the more southerly part of the cross aisle there is also a
staircase to come up into the master’s lodgings, called the back stairs. But note
that the master’s and chaplain’s lodgings being builded over the poor people’ss
was at least 8 foot broader than the said poor people’s rooms, for they went clear
over the aforesaid passage that is between the poor people’s doors and the pillars,
which is at least 8 foot, and joined to the said pillars or arches of the said church
(or cloister). :

EE Cr

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 161

“The church and chancel (or middle chapel) was dedicated to the honour of
Almighty God, in which mass was said or sung every Sunday and great holy
day, such as Ascension Day, Good Friday, and many more, as also the canonical
hours, that is in the middle chapel or chancel, for the body of the church (or
cloister) was never used for any divine service. The chapel on the north side
was dedicated to the honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and was constantly used
for masses and canonical hours, &c. (mostly by the master or keeper himself) on
every festival of the said Blessed Virgin, as well by night as by day. The
chapel on the south side (which yet remaineth) was dedicated to the Blessed
Nicholas confessor, and was used on all other holy days and at several other
times according as the master thought fit: in every of which chapels there was
a lamp constantly kept burning, as also in each of the cross aisles in the night
time, or at least in the evenings.

But I cannot tell on what account it was, but towards the latter end of the
fourteenth century the body of the church (or cloister), with all the poor people’s
rooms and buildings on the north side thereof was taken down, as was also the
chapel of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the sanctum sanctorum at the east end
of the chancel, and the chancel itself made into a common hall for the poor
people (I mean the east end of it) with a buttery for the nurse adjoining to the
west part of the said hall, and a room for a poor sister adjoining to the west part
of the buttery, and a woodhouse adjoining to the west part of the said room, all
which took up the whole length of the chancel and of the north cross aisle, which
was also pulled down with the additional buildings at the north end of it, to the
aforesaid door of entrance into the churchyard or litton, within which ranging
straight from the east end of the tenement or farm-house aforesaid was built two
rooms, as have been said, and a chamber over for the chaplain, and the door of
entrance into the litton is now the door of entrance into one of the aforesaid new
built rooms. Then was also the north porch and hall pulled down, as also the
porch belonging to the body of the church (or cloister), and tenements built in
their place. And an orchard was planted where the body of the church (or
cloister) stood, which is now and has for more than 100 years been converted
into a garden of herbs for the poor people’s pottage. And after all these ruinous
transactions I find that the chapel now in use (which was the only one then left
in the hospital) was again consecrated in 1501 to the honour of Almighty God,
the glorious Virgin Mary, and St. Nicholas confessor. And about 100 years ago
the aforesaid hall was made into a common kitchen, and four chambers built over
it and the buttery and aforesaid lower room for four poor brothers, viz., two over
the kitchen, one over the buttery and room aforesaid on the north side, and
another over the same on the south side.”

APPENDIX D.

List of Masters of St. Nicholas’ Hospital.

Nicholas Laking, custos, A.D. 1254 (Hatcher, p. 732).

Adam, brother: mentioned as prior, 1267 (Reg., p. 8).

John Burnes, mentioned as custos, 1281 (20., p. 42) ; vicar of Damerham.
John Hinton, mentioned as master, 1288 (Do.).

Pea

162

St. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

William Wokingham, custos, resigned 1305 (Phillips).

John Netheravon, made custos 1305, by Bishop Gaunt (Do.).

William Abingdon, coll. 1825, by Bishop Mortival; rector of Patney
and Broughton Gifford (Ph.).

Peter Romsey, coll. 1328, by ditto ; rector of Donhead St. Andrew (Ph.).

John Kirkby, coll. 1837, bp Bishop Wyvill; rector of Barford (Rich-
Jones, p. 402).

Richard Haversham, mentioned as custos, 1338 (Reg. p. 107 and Ph.).

Bartholomew Braddon, made custos by Bishop Wyvill, 1342 (Ph.) ; rector
of St. Peter’s, Marlborough, prebendary of Axford, 1344 (Ph.).

Robert Godalming, coll. 1852, and called master, Reg., p. 108 (Ph.).

Robert Hatfield, mentioned as custos, 1378, Reg. p. 27 (Ph.).

William Spaldwick, mentioned as “ gardeyn,” 1397, Reg., p. 11; made
custos by Bishop Mitford, 1397; prebendary of Ruscombe, 1398
(Ph.).

John Hurleigh, made custos, 1418, by ditto, resigned 1420; called
“miles’’ ; prebendary of Ramsbury, 1414 ; rector of Kingston Deverell ;
d. 1425 (Ph.).

Richard Bucklehurst, coll. 1420 (Ph.).

John Castell, coll. 142—P?; resigned 1432; prebendary of Yetminster
Prima, 1428 (Ph.).

John Wawne, coll. by Bishop Nevill, 1432 (Ph.).

Thomas Marshall, coll. 143—P?' (Ph.).

Nicholas Upton, coll. by Bishop Ayscough, 1442 ; precentor, 1446; died
1457 (Ph.).

Henry Duke, coll. by Bishop Beauchamp, 1457; sub-dean, 1452; died
1461 (Ph.).

Roger Newenton, coll. 1461; resigned 1478 (Ph.).

Henry Sutton, coll. 1478; resigned 1494; treasurer, 1495 (Ph.).

Geoffrey Blythe, coll. by Bishop Blythe, his brother ; treasurer, 1494 ;
archdeacon of Sarum, 1499; bishop of Lichfield, 1503; died 1533
(Ph.).

William Wilton, D.D. coli. by Bishop Deane, 1501 ; chancellor, 1507 ;
prebendary of Grimston, 1500; died after May, 1525.

Edward Fox, knight, lay master, called custos, 1524—1534 (Reg., fly-
leaf at beginning, and Hickm., p. 136).

Richard Long, knight, lay master after 1534; brother of Sir Henry Long
of South Wraxall.

Robert Crayford, of New College, D.D.; born at York (Kirby’s Register)
1543 (Hickm., p. 135).

Henry Herbert, afterwards Lord Herbert of Cardiff, second Earl of
Pembroke, lay master, 1550 (Hickm., p. 135).

Richard Dolshon, lay custos (Reg., p. 47), 1577 (Hickm., p. 135).

Robert Parker, M.A., made custos by Bishop Coldwell (Reg., p. 47),
1591, Hickm., p. 135 (Ph.).

Geoffrey Bigge, coll. by ditto, 1593; d. 1630 (Ph).

Matthew Nicholas, presented by J. Nicholas to Bishop Davenant, 1630 ;
dean of Bristol and St. Paul’s ; died 1662 (Ph).

34,

By the Rev. Canon Moberly. 163

1647. John Strickland.

1647. Francis Rivett, Esq., of King’s Sombourne, by Par
Tntruded liament : resigned in favour of

1656. William Stone, mayor.

1659. John Ivey, mayor.

John Nicholas, D.D., son of M. Nicholas, 1662; warden of Winchester
and New College, Oxford; chaplain to Bishop Hyde; prebendary of
Lyme and Halstock ; died 1711 (Ph.).

Thomas Burnet, rector of West Keynton; prebendary of Lyme and
Halstock, 1712; coll. by his father, Bishop Gilbert Burnet, 1711; re-
signed, 1735, in favour of his son; died 1750.

Robert Burnet, LL.D., collated, 1735, by Bishop Sherlock; died 1769 ;
vicar of Bishop’s (or West) Lavington.

Nathaniel Hume, prebendary of Winterbourne Earls and Yetminster ;
collated by his brother, Bishop Hume, 1769; died 1804; resigned 1774
and made precentor.

John Hume, collated by his father, Bishop Hume, 1774; Dean of Derry ;
exchanged Bishop’s Lavington with his successor, 1782; died 1782.
Edward Emily, vicar of Bishop’s Lavington, collated by Bishop Barrington,

1782; died 1792; prebendary of Combe and Harnham.

William Coxe, F.R.S., F.S.A., canon residentiary ; archdeacon of Wilts;

collated by Bishop Douglas, 1792; resigned 1792.

William Douglas, collated by his father, Bishop Douglas, 1792; canon

residentiary and precentor; died 1818.

Arthur Edward Howman, rector of Burstow, co. Surrey ; prebendary of
Durnford ; collated by Bishop Fisher, 1819; died 1822.

Charles Talbot, dean of Salisbury, collated by Bishop Fisher, 1822 ; died
1823.

Thomas Rennell, vicar of Kensington ; prebendary of South Grantham,
1823 ; collated by Bishop Fisher, 1824; died 1824,

George Ernest Howman [son of No. 42] (afterwards Little), rector of
Barnsley, co. Gloue. ; collated by Bishop Fisher, 1824; died 1878.

George Herbert Moberly, rector of Monkton Farley; collated by his
father, Bishop Moberly, 1878; prebendary of North Alton, 1889.

APPENDIX E.
Masters of the Valley College.

1261. John Holtby.

Thomas Bridport, prebendary of Ramsbury, 1284,

1297. Thomas Ashley, resigned.

1340.

John Maydenhith.
John Kirkby, archdeacon of Dorset, 1339.

1348. Robert Worth, sub-dean and prebendary of South Alton, 1309 ; resigned

Baldwin Mohun.
Walter Wells, prebendary of Bitton, 1347.

164 &t. Nicholas’ Hospital, Salisbury.

1419. John Tidling, resigned.
1428. John Symondsbury, archdeacon of Wilts, 1423; treasurer, 1449.
1506. George Sydenham, archdeacon of Sarum, 1503.

Richard Dudley, precentor, 1507; died 1536.

John Bigge, prebendary of Yatesbury ; died 1544.

APPENDIX F,
Extract from Leland’s Itinerary, vol. iii., pp. 97, 98.

“This Egidius [de Bridport] made the College de Vaulx for scholars betwixt
the Palace Waulle and Harnam Bridge.

“Part of these Scholars remain in the College at Saresbyri, and have two
Chaplains to serve the Chirch ther being dedicate to S, Nicolas.

“The Residue studie at Oxford.

“The Scholars of Vaulx be bound to celebrate the Anniversarie of Giles their
Founder at the Paroch Chirch of Britport where he was born.

“ Richard Poure, Bishop of Saresbyri, and first Erector of the Cathedral Chirch
of New Saresbyri, foundid the Hospital of St. Nicolas hard by Harnham Bridge,
instituting a Master, viii. pore wimen, and iv. pore men in it, endowing the-
House with Landes. On the §. side of this Hospital is a ChappelleofS ....
standing in an Isle.

“And on the N. side of this Hospital is an old Barne, where in times past was
a paroch Chirch of S. Martine.

“This Chirch was prophanyd, and a nother new made in Saresbyri for it,
bearing yet the name of S. Martine.

“ The cause of the translation was by cause it [stood] exceeding low and colde,
and the Ryver at rages cam into it.

“This Chirch of S. Martine and the Hammelet or Village of Harnham stode
or ever any Part of New Sarum was buildid.”

165

Che Mishoy’s Palace at Salishuvy.

[A Lecture delivered at the Blackmore Museum, Salisbury, January 27th, 1890,
by the Right Reverend the Lorp BisHor oF SALiIsBURY.]}

EY HE name palace, applied to a bishop’s residence, is of con-
siderable antiquity. The word was one of wide signification,
as ae Italian “ palazzo,” applied to any nobleman’s house, may serve
to remind us. It was also used for certain monastic buildings and
town halls, as the references in Du Cange show. It was, in fact, a
term which, like “aula” in Latin, or “ court” in English, had both
a special signification in regard to royalty, and a more general one
in regard to other persons. As will be seen from the plan, the
palace at Salisbury runs east and west, but in an irregular manner,
caused by the gradual filling up of an old courtyard, which at ono
time was rather large. The house, as a really old house, consists of
three main parts—(1) the hall and chamber on the west, which are
the work of Bishop Poore, cirea 1221; (2) the old dining-room,
with the chapel above it, in the centre, which is probably the work
of Bishop Beauchamp (1450—81); (8) the hall and tower on the
east, which are more certainly the work of the same prelate. Others
who have done much for us are Bishop Seth Ward (1666—88),
Bishop Sherlock (1734—48), who built the library, turned by Bishop
Barrington into a dining-room; Bishop Barrington (1782—90),
who spent £7000 upon the house, adding largely to the number of
bedrooms; and of my recent predecessors, Bishop Denison—the
latter mainly outside the house. To him is due the lake in the
garden; the pretty flower garden, enclosed in a low wall; and the
stables and lodge, built by Wyatt in 1843. The main facts of these
_ successive works up to his own time were recorded by Bishop Fisher,
in 1818, in an inscription on a marble tablet in the present entrance

166 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

hall, over the doorway that leads to the principal staircase.! It bas
been matter of general belief that our own palace was founded by
Bishop Richard Poore, the founder of the Cathedral and of the city
generally. It was not, however, till a few days ago that I became
possessed of conclusive evidence on this point, through the kindness
of Mr. James Parker, of Oxford, whose knowledge on such subjects
is only equalled by his generosity in imparting it. He has put into
my hands two of what are called Close Rolls of the fifth and sixth
years of Henry III., but, as it happens, both in the same calendar
year, showing that in 1221 the King granted timber from the
Royal forests to Bishop Richard Poore for the purpose of this
building at Salisbury.? The first is endorsed as follows :—* De

i« Aides . in perpetuum . episc . saris . usum
a. Yicardo . poore . primo . nove . saris . episc . a . fundamentis
suo . sumptu . ad. mccxx constructas
deinde . a . ricardo . beauchamp . saris . episc . primo . nobiliss
ordinis . periscelidis . cancellario . a.d. MccccL ampliatas
postea . a. seth . ward . episc . saris . quum
sacrilegorum . manibus . eheu . quod . non . sunt . ausi
foede . direpte . essent . a.d. MDCLXxX in . pristinam . faciem . revocatas
deinceps . a. thoma . sherlock . quinto . illius
successore . a.d. MDCCL auctas . et . ornatas
in . meliorem . tandem . formam . opere . et . cultu . splendidiore
amplius . vir . mill . lib . de . prop . pec(unia)
pro . solita . sua . liberalitate
erogatis . a.d. . MDCCLXXxvil . feliciter . perduxit
vir . undique . honorabilis
shute . barrington . s.t.p. . episc . saris
h(unc) t (ulum)
ne . tot . tantorumque . benefactorum . gratia . interciderit
johannes . fisher . s.t.p. . episc . saris
a.d. MDCCCXIII
p(onendum) c(uravit).

2 Rot. Claus. 6 Hen. III. memb 11=[1221].

“De maremio dato.—Rex Petro de Malo-Lacu salutem Sciatis quod dedi-
mus venerando patri Ricardo Sarisburiensi Episcopo xx copulas in parco nostro
de Gillingham ad aulam suam faciendam apud Novum Sarum. Et idcirco
vobis mandamus quod illas xx copulas ei habere faciatis ubi eas competencius
possit habere. Teste ut supra.

“TWestm. 9 die Maii.]’”

Do. 6 Hen. III. memb. 16=[1221-22].

“De X. copulis datis.—Rex Johanni de Monemuth salutem. Mandamus
vobis quod habere faciatis venerando patri Ricardo Sarisburiensi Episcopo x
copulas de quercu in haya nostra de Milcet, quas ei dedimus ad cameram suam
de Sarum faciendam. Teste H. &c. apud Neubir xxx die Dec. anno regni
nostri vi° per eundem coram domino Winton.”

By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 167
maremio dato ”=“ Grant of building materials,’ and runs :—

“The King to Peter de Malo-Lacu health. Know that we have given to
our venerable father Richard Bishop of Salisbury twenty couples (of beams)
in our park of Gillingham to make his hall at New Sarum. And therefore
we order you to let him have those twenty couples wherever he can most
conveniently have them. Witness as above.”

“(Westminster 9th May 1221).”

“The second is endorsed “de x copulis datis ”—=‘ Grant of ten
couples (of beams),” and runs as follows :—

-“The King to John of Monmouth health. We order you to let the venerable
father Richard Bp. of Salisbury have ten couples (of beams) of oak in our
wood (haya) of Milcet, which we have given him to make his chamber at
Sarum. Witness H. &c., at Neubir 30 Dec. in the sixth year of our reign
by the same before our Lord of Winton.”=30 Dec. 1221.

The interest of these rolls will be manifest to everyone who knows
the character of domestic buildings of the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries, and who is acquainted with the present house. They
show that the house was begun almost as soon as the Lady Chapel
—the earliest part of the Cathedral—and suggest that it was finished
in all its essential features before Bishop Poore’s departure to Durham.
A comparison also of the rolls with the existing building seems to
prove that we possess nearly all his work. They speak first of a
hall (aula) and then of a chamber (camera) which with their sub-
structures and appendages would cover all the necessary parts of a
house of the date in question. The identification of the hall is
happily quite clear. It is, of course, the great upper room about
54ft. long by 24ft. wide, now used as a drawing-room, which is
immediately over the vaulted room and passage that I have just had
the pleasure of restoring, with the kind advice and oversight of Mr.
Arthur Reeve. This was the chief building, and was naturally
completed first. ‘The chamber, I can have little doubt, is the block
of building with a sharp pointed roof, which is set at the side of the
south-west part of the “aula,” so as to form with it a building of
the shape of a Greek gamma (I) or the right half of a capital T.
According to Mr. Hudson Turner, in his well-known book on
VOL, XXV.—NO. LXXIV. N

168 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

“Domestic Architecture in England from the Conquest to the end
of the Thirteenth Century” (Parkers, Oxford, 1851, p. 2 foll.) :—

“ Ordinary manor houses, and even domestic edifices of greater pretensions,
as the Royal palaces, were generally built during the twelfth century [and
this, he tells us, was true also of the thirteenth—JZd. p. 59, &e.] on one
uniform plan, comprising a hall with a chamber or chambers adjacent. The
hall was generally situated on the ground floor, but sometimes over a lower
story which was half in the ground ; it presented an elevation equal or superior
to that of the buildings annexed to it; it was the only large apartment in
the entire edifice, and was adapted in its original design, to accommodate the
owner and his numerous followers and servants; they not only took their
meals in the hall, but also slept in it on the floor, a custom the prevalence
of which is shown by numerous passages in early authors, particularly in the
works of the romance writers.”

He then goes on to quote Alexander Necham or Nequam’s des-
cription of the various parts of a house as containing the hall, the
private or bedchamber, the kitchen, the larder, the sewery (answering
nearly to our pantry), and the cellar. “The private, or bedroom,
annexed to the hall—there being frequently only one (p. 5)—was
situated on the second story, and was called from an early period
the “solar” or “ sollere.” This room was used as a reception room
by the master of the house, as well as abedroom. Mr. Turner tells
us that, as late as 1287 (p. 5, note i.) King “ Edward the First and
Queen Eleanor were sitting on their bed-side, attended by the ladies
of the Court, when they narrowly escaped death by lightning.” If
this were the case in a royal palace, a bishop might well be content
with one chamber for bedroom and sitting-room in the beginning
of the thirteenth century. Under the “ camera,” or “ solar,” was the
cellar. The kitchen was a separate, sometimes a detached building,
and sometimes open to the air. The larder or buttery and sewery
were perhaps usually in the thirteenth century appended to the end
of the hall where it was entered, as in our college halls now. There
was, we know from an old plan of the house at least a hundred years
old, a pantry on the north side of the undercroft or vaulted hall
which I mentioned as being recently restored. This may have been
on the site of the old pantry and similar offices, such as the sewery,
in which the linen and table furniture were kept. The kitchen was

io

a)

By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 169

probably on the site of the old kitchen, parallel to the present chapel
wing, thus making with the hall three sides of a court or quadrangle,
a very common arrangement. We shall discuss the date of the
chapel presently. Access to the hall in our case must have been by
a staircase. I incline to imagine that there was both an outer stone
staircase from what is the court and a turret staircase at the head or
southern end of the hall, where our old plan shows a projecting
circular building of the right size, but only on the ground-floor, or
perhaps in the corner where the solar is attached to it. The plan of
Bishop Poore’s house would thus have been very much the same as
that of Bishop Joceline’s at Wells, which was building about the
same time (1205—44). In both the hall is raised on a vaulted
undercroft, and in both the chamber is at right angles to one end
of the hall, forming the same gamma-like figure with it. Thus
they both differ from the plan of Lincoln Old Palace, which had a
hall upon the ground-floor divided into a nave and aisles (like the
present chapel, once the hall, of Auckland Castle, and the King’s
Hall at Winchester.) At Lincoln, too, the solar was added across
the end of the hall, as seems to have been the ordinary arrangement
in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, not at right angles to it,
as here and at Wells (cp. Parker, “ Domestic Architecture, Fourteenth
Century,” p. 87, Oxford, 1852). The kitchen and offices at Wells
seem also to have been in the same position as ours, with the chapel
parallel to them, and having a court between as with us, though
the proportions are all larger. There is thus, as we should expect,
a certain provincial similarity between the palaces of these two
neighbouring cities, Wells and New Sarum. But while Bishop
Poore’s work is very fine, Bishop Joceline’s at Wells is magnificent
and princely. Where the substructure of our house is three bays
long his is seven, and three bays wide instead of our two; so as to
leave room for a long side passage or gallery, both on the ground-
floor and above, under a separate line of roof. This passage, of
course, may have existed here, but there is no evidence at all of it.
I have spoken of Bishop Joceline’s hall as if it was one splendid
room, but though this is possible I should say that Mr. J. H.
Parker considers it more probable that it was divided into three
N 2

170 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

rooms as at present.—(“ Architectural Antiquities of the City of
Wells,” p. 7, Oxford and London, 1866). The architectural details
were also probably very similar.

The next question that suggests itself is this, did our old house
contain a chapel, and, if so, when was it built and for what purpose
was it used? As the Bishop’s manor houses contained chapels in
which ordinations were frequently held, especially at Ramsbury and
Sonning, it is likely that his principal house did so too. But it is
curious that there is no mention of ordinations in this house in our
registers till the time of Bishop Jewel (1559—71), who often held
small ordinations “in Palatio Episcopali Sarum.” On one occasion
he ordained six deacons and seven priests here (27th March, 1568),
but usually his larger ordinations were in the Cathedral or at
Westbury Church, “sub plano Sarum.” TI do not doubt that “in
Palatio” means in the Palace Chapel, but it is remarkable that the
first specific mention of it is in the register of his successor, Edmund
Gheast, who once at least ordained “in Capella sive Oratorio infra
palatium Episcopale Sarum ” (3rd Sept., 1588). We must therefore
conclude that when Bishop Humphrey Henchman! “ restored and

1“ Consecratio Sacelli (infra Palatiu Epi Saru) Per Humfredu Epu,
Aug. 28, 1662.

“In Dei Nomine Amen Cum Nos Humfredus permissione Divina Saris-
buriensis Episcopus Cameram istam superiorem infra Palatium hoc nostrum
Sarum cui immediate subjacet Refectorium nostrum in dicto Palatio situm
divina beneficentia instaurari et perfici curaverimus eandemque sacris officiis
deputare munusque consecrationis eidem impendere constituerimus ut sit Deo
annuente futuris temporibus in perpetuum dicti Palatii Nostri sacrata Capella
Eandemque igitur Capellam (continentem intra muros ejusdem in Longitudine
ab Oriente in Occidentem quadraginta pedes et septem pollices aut circiter in
latitudine vero ab aquilone in Austrum Octodecem pedes et novem pollices aut
circiter) Sacra Mensa aliisque ad divinum cultum requisitis sufficienter et
decenter instructam Authoritate nostra Ordinaria et Episcopali pro nobis et
Successoribus nostris ab omni usu communi et profano seponimus et separamus
et soli Divino Cultui ac Divinorum celebrationi addicimus dicamus dedicamus
consecramus in perpetuum Atque insuper eadem authoritate nostra Ordinaria
et Episcopali pro Nobis et Successoribus nostris licentiam pariter et facultatem
in Domino concedimus Ad rem Divinam ibidem faciendam nempe ad preces
publicas et Sacram Ecclesiae Liturgiam recitandam ad verbum Dei sincere
proponendum et predicandum ad sacramenta administranda ceteraque quae-
cunque peragenda quae in istiusmodi privatis Capellis licite fieri possunt et

EE

By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 171

perfected” the upper chamber “ under which lies immediately our
refectory (or dining-room) in the said Palace of Sarum” after the
Restoration (Aug. 28th, 1662), and consecrated it to sacred uses, he
only revived a practice that had been in force for some time before
the Great Rebellion. Indeed it is quite possible that the lower part
of the screen may be of the reign of Charles I., and the upper part
Henchman’s work or later. The ribs of the panelled roof are
probably .of the same date as the walls. The panels are modern.
The chapel, which, with the ante-chapel, is about 40ft. long and
L8ft. wide, is, as you will remember, in a block of building ap-
parently of the middle of the fifteenth eentury. The lower part is
the present main entrance hall, to which is attached an unsightly
porch, testifying by the arms above it to the “ liberal but tasteless
innovations” of Bishop Barrington just about a century ago. This
block or wing is attached to the north-east corner of Bishop Poore’s
Hall, and may have taken the place of a chapel of his time, or at
any rate of an early date, just as Bishop Burnell’s existing chapel
at Wells took the place of that of Bishop Joceline. he fabric I
should venture to ascribe to Bishop Beauchamp (1450—81), who
built the great eastern hall, and I suppose the tower by which it
was entered—of which we shall speak presently —and who was a
great builder elsewhere. It is difficult to say exactly how much of
Beauchamp’s work still remains. It is stated by the Rev. Peter
Hall, in his “ Memorials of Salisbury ” (note to pl. 16, A.D. 1834),
that not only the porch just mentioned, but the windows of this
wing, were inserted under Bishop Barrington “ according to a

solent Ac tam Dei Ministro in Sacris Ordinibus rite constituto Preces Divinas
ibidem dicendi ceteraque praemissa faciendi quam populo Christiano preces
divinas Audiendi ceteraque premissa percipiendi plenam in Domini concedimus
potestatem. EHandemque Capellam ad usus praedictos sic consecratam fuisse
et esse et in futuris perpetuis temporibus remanere debere palam et publice
pronunciamus decernimus et declaramus Privilegiis insuper omnibus et singulis
in ea parte usitatis et Capellis abantiquo fundatis rite competentibus Capellam
hance praedictam ad omnem juris effectum munitam et stab‘litam esse volumus
et quantum Nobis est et de jure possumus sic munimus et stabilimus In quorum
omnium testimonium Sigillum nostrum Episcopale praesentibus hisce Literis
apponi fecimus Lecta et Lata fuit haec sententia vicesimo octavo die Mensis
Augusti Anno Domini Millesimo Sexcentesimo Sexagesimo, Secundo et Nostrae
Consecrationis Secundo.”

72 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

fantastic design of Sir Robert Taylor.” The windows are, however,
much better than the porch, and those on the north side of the
chapel, at any rate, seem to be old. What is clear, I think, is that
at some time or other the ceiling of the old dining-room was
raised, and with it the floor of the chapel, which is at present ap-
proached by seven very steep steps. The present windows of the
lower room are evidently much higher than the original ones, which
are now blocked up in the front, but which are shown open in the
eighteenth century plan. The chapel even then was approached by
steps, and apparently by as many as ten, so that it would not be
safe to assume that the ceiling was raised by Bishop Barington,
though he certainly blocked the front windows and put in the two
at the ends. I have said that the present chapel was probably the
chapel of the palace before its consecration by Bishop Henchman,
but that we can only trace ordinations in the palace back to the
beginning of Bishop Jewel’s episcopate. It is, perhaps, reasonable
to suppose that the causes why ordinations were not held in it before
his time were because the bishops were so frequently absent from
Salisbury that they did not wish to neglect the Cathedral when
they were present, and also that the numbers to be ordained were
larger than with us, owing to the number of acolytes, and sub-
deacons, as well as monastic deacons and priests, who had to be
provided for. I do not feel sure, however, judging from the evidence
of our registers in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, that either
of these reasons is quite sufficient, and I incline to think that there
was some feeling on the subject, possibly some lack of sympathy
between the Bishop and the Chapter, possibly some disinclination to
interrupt the ordinary services of the Church by such a ceremony—
which led to the more frequent use of the private chapel after the
Reformation. No register of ordination is found between 26th May,
1548, when the suffragan Bishop of Marlborough ordained Walter
Bower, fellow of Magdalen College, in the Church of Fittleton, till
the first ordination by Thomas Lankaster, another Bishop of Marl-
borough, for Bishop Jewel, in our Cathedral, 13th April, 1560—
that is, for nearly twelve years. The people were, therefore, un-
accustomed to the service, and some might think it too Popish,

By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 173

some too Protestant, when it was again brought into use. I may
mention while on the subject of these ordination lists, that they do
not with us, go back beyond Bishop Hallam’s register (1408—17),
and that they show that it was common to perform the ceremony
in a very large number of Churches—such as the great eonventual

~ Churches of Sherborne and Reading, Shaftesbury and Abingdon,

the Dominican Church at Fisherton, and the Franciscan at Sarum :
the parish Churches of some of the more important towns, such as
Devizes and Marlborough; and especially in the chapels and
Churches of the places where the bishop’s manors were situated.
Thus Bishop Hallam ordained himself five times in the chapel of
his manor at Potterne, and the same number of times in his chapel
at Sonning. Bishop Beauchamp ordained nine times in his chapel
at Ramsbury, and three times in Sonning Chapel. In the latter
part of the fifteenth and beginning of the 16th century, Ramsbury
seems to have been the favourite residence. Bishop Langton
(1485—93) ordained eight times in Ramsbury Chapel, and eight
times in the Church, and only once in the Cathedral. Bishop
Audley (1502—21) ordained eighteen times in Ramsbury Chapel,
which he is said to have built or re-built, and forty-eight in Ramsbury
Church, or sixty-six times altogether at that manor, and ouly three
times in the Cathedral, and five times in the Lady Chapel. His
successor, Cardinal Laurence Campegio, never resided at all, hence
we see the force of the suggestion why the Palace Chapel is not
mentioned as being used for ordinations, since for many years it was
_only an occasional residence of its tenants. A curious illustration
of this neglect of the palace after Bishop Beauchamp’s time is given
by a document which Mr. Malden has kindly supplied tome. This
is a declaration by Bishop Blyth (1493—99) of the terms on which
he has appointed John Alston as custos or warden of the palace.'

1 BryTHE ReaisteER, folios 41 and 42.
Note.—The contractions of the original have been expanded.

“ Custodia palatii Sarum.—Omnibus Christi fidelibus ad quos presentes
littere pervenerint Johannes permissione divina Sarum Episcopus salutem in
Auctore salutis. Sciatis nos pro bono et acceptabili servitio quod dilectus nobis
in Christo Johannes Alston serviens noster nobis impendit ac favente domino

174 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

He is to have two pence a day charged on the manor of Milford,
Wilts, and yearly one robe “ de secta generosorum nostrorum,” 7.¢.,
of the fashion of our gentlemen—or ten shillings for it—and one

nobis et successoribus nostris impendet in futurum ordinasse deputasse et con-
stituisse pro nobis et successoribus nostris eundem Johannem Alston Custodem
palatij nostri Sarum necnon officium custodis palatij nostri predicti eidem
Johanni pro nobis et successoribus nostris concessisse per presentes. Habendum
tenendum exercendum et occupandum officium predictum eidem Johanni Alston
per se vel per suum sufficientem deputatum pro termino vite sue. Pro quo
quidem officio per ipsum Johannem aut deputatum suum ut premittitur debite
exercendo: Sciatis nos prefatum Johannem Episcopum pro nobis et successoribus
nostris concessisse eidem Johanni Alston annuatim durante vita sua duos
denarios per diem percipiendos de et in Manerio nostro de Milford in comitatu
Wiltes ad duos Anni terminos viz. ad festa pasche et Sancti Michaelis Arch-
angeli per equales portiones et annuatim unam robam de secta generosorum
nostrorum vel decem solidos pro eadem. Ac unam carectatam feni de et in
prato nestro vocato Bugmore per manus prepositi Manerij predicti annuatim
ad festum Sancti Michaelis Archangeli deliberandam. Sciatis insuper nos pre-
fatum Johannem Episcopum concessisse eidem Johanni Alston totam vesturam
et herbagium in solo sive fundo intra limites et precinctum palatij nostri
predicti iam crescentia sive eius vita durante annuatim cretura Ad averia sua
seu aliorum ad eius libitum ibidem pascendum sive fenum ex vestura et
herbagio predictis faciendum et ad eius proficuum et solum commodum capi-
endum et convertendum cum omnibus ceteris proficuis emolumentis et com-
moditatibus eidem officio ab antiquo spectantibus. Et si ac quotiens contingat
dictum redditum duorum denariorum per diem ut premittitur aut dictam robam
sive caractatam feni a retro fore in parte vel in toto ad aliquod festum sive
terminum solubilem prespecificatum non solutum quod tunc et totiens bene
liceat et licebit prefato Johanni Alston et Assignatis suis in manerium nostrum
predictum intrare et pro redditu roba et carectata feni ac quolibet premissorum
si tune a retro existent distringere et districtiones sic captas licite asportare
abducere effugare et penes se retinere quousque de redditu predicto sic a retro
existente et eius arreragijs si que fuerint roba et carectata feni predicta una
cum impensis et expensis ea occasione habitis et factis plenarie fuerit satis-
factum et persolutum. In cuius rei testimonium sigillum nostrum presentibus
duximus apponendum Datum in Manerio nostro de Remmesbury xxiij° die
mensis Junij Anno domini millessimo ccce™® nonagesimo quinto Ac anno regni
regis Henrici septimi post Conquestum decimo et nostrae consecrationis Anno
Secundo.

“Et nos Magister Edwardus Cheyne Utriusque Juris Doctor Decanus ecclesiae
Cathedralis beate Marie Sarum et eiusdem loci capitulum singula premissa
considerantes ac rata et grata habentes de nostro communi consensu pariter et
assensu omnia et singula in presenti scripto specificata approbamus ratificamus
et auctorizamus. Ac quantum in nobis est pro nobis et successoribus nostris
confirmamus per presentes Juribus consuetudinibus libertatibus et privilegijs

By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 175

eartload of hay from our meadow of Bugmore, as well as the grass
growing within the precincts of the palace. If these emoluments
are not paid he has the right to enter the manor of Milford and
distrain. This deed is dated “ At our Manor of Remmesbury, 24th
June, 1495, the 10th year of King Henry the VIIth, and of our
eonsecration the second.” This grant was confirmed by the Chapter
during the vacancy after Bishop Blyth’s death, 7th August, 1499.
It appears from a phrase in it that this office of caretaker was not a
new one, and we may presume that it was a profitable one. Bishop
Blyth was, however, probably not so much non-resident as many of
his contemporaries—since he ordained nine times in the Cathedral
(seven of these in the Lady Chapel)—as against nine times in six
other Churches, not one of which was at Ramsbury. You will
pardon what may seem to be something of a digression, though it
certainly illustrates the relation of the house to the diocese.

The third division of the house is, as you remember, Bishop
Beauchamp’s Hall. This hall was very much ruined in the time of
the Civil Wars, and it is therefore very difficult to recover its plan ;
nor is it easy to understand how it was connected originally with
the work of Bishop Poore and with the chapel, which are distant a
good many feet from it. I am inclined to think that there was a
long low range of buildings, containing a kitchen and other offices
on the ground-floor, and bedrooms or store-rooms above, running
pretty much where the present red briek and plastered wing does
which faces south towards Bishop Denison’s pretty enclosed garden.
Mr. Reeve will tell you what he thinks about it in detail, but I may
say that when the Royal Archeological Institute was here in 1887
the members were generally of opinion that Bishop Beauchamp’s
Hall ran north and south, like Bishop Poore’s, which it must at one
time have faced, when the court was open. There was then a
passage leading by its side from the main door in the tower to

ecclesiae Cathedralis Sarum antedictae in omnibus semper salvis. In cuius
rei testimonium sigillum nostrum commune presentibus apposuimus Datum
in domo nostra capitulari Sarum quoad sigilli appositionem vicesimo septimo
die mensis Augusti Anno Domini millesimo ccecc™? nonagesimo nono.”
Compare a similar grant from Ri. Poore to Jordan Marescal of the custody
of his houses in London, in 1223 (Jones’ Register of 8. Osmund, ii., p. 24).

176 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

another door now built up on the south side, which, as we know
from our old plan, led to some buildings beyond. In this hall King
James I. created Robert Viscount Lisle, Earl of Leicester, and
William, Lord Compton, Earl of Northampton, 2nd August, 1618
(Benson and Hateher, p. 330).

I have now described the old house, as far as I have been able to:

re-construct it. I should like to add a few words about Bishop
Seth Ward’s connection with it. Over what we call the back-door
—though it is not more of a back-door than any other part of the
house—there is the date 1674, under the Royal arms on that
chequered front, which we know to have been put up by Bishop
Seth Ward. Looking at his valuable manuscript, ‘‘ Notitie,” a
little book which is in my registry (a beautiful copy of which was
made by Bishop Burgess, and given to the chapter muniment room)
I find the following memoranda :—

“Bishop's Hall sold by State to Colonel Ludlow, by him to Sir J. Danvers,
by him to one Hayles, who pull’d it down.”

By the accounts in this book, pages 153 to 160 of the chapter
copy, it appears that the cost of re-building the hall was
about £1140, and that other repairs cost about £536, including
a certain sum spent upon the Guild Hall and the Close wall.
The whole sum of £1676 13s. 7d. was divided amongst the
five bishops since the Reformation in proportion to their receipts,
according to the sentence of a Commission of Appeal, granted
November, 1671, which gave judgment on February 25th, 1673-4.
[The first two bishops, Duppa and Henchman, received respectively
£10,000 and £11,700, these comparatively large sums no doubt
being due to the fines taken on the grant of new leases.] Bishop
Ward, who carried out the work, and who put up the date 1674 as
we have said, and his own arms with the recovered garter round
them, opposite the Royal arms inside the hall itself, naturally has
the credit of this work, but it should be known that only a portion
of it was done at his expense. The details in the bishop’s own
hand, or gathered from his manuscripts, do not entirely agree with
Dr. Pope’s account of his life, chapter 10, which being re-printed

oi i cell alee

By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 177

by Cassan, and quoted by Mr. Fitzherbert Macdonald, has naturally
been generally accepted as the true account. It does not much
matter whether the dilapidation was the work of Hayles, as the
bishop says, or of Van Ling, a Dutchman, as Dr. Pope says, for
both might have been concerned. But Pope’s statement—* His
expenses in altering, repairing and re-building amounted to above
£2000, there being little or nothing done in order to it by his pre-
decessors, who had the cream of the Bishoprick ?’?—gives a false
impression. It no doubt represents his recollections of the bishop’s
grumbles before the suit was decided. But, asa matter of fact, of
the £1676 accounted for in the “ Notitiw,” £1375 was charged to
the preceeding bishops. It may be interesting to give the names
of the workmen employed on this building :—the carpenters were
John and Augustine Curtis; the masons, William Romsey and
Henry Lakes, and again Anthony Robertson and Roger Knight ;
the glaziers, Charles Horton and Henry Burges; the plombers,
John Smith and Charles Horton. The smiths are not mentioned.
Knight also appears as a heliar (or haulier). The architect who
estimated the whole cost, and who witnessed the signatures of the
different tradesmen, or as they are called persons of each profession,
was James Harris, who seems to have been employed by Bishop
Ward as early as December, 1668. Robert Matthew and Robert
Hole also witnessed the signatures, possibly as partners of Harris.

I will conclude by referring to three scenes in the inner life of
the palace, the first from the history of Bishop Jewel, who was the
first bishop after the Reformation, and also the first who resided at
Salisbury for a considerable time. He had a great many new and
good traditions to introduce as well as old superstitions to eradicate.
Le Bas, in his “ Life of Jewel,” thus describes one of the good
traditions introduced by Bishop Jewel :—

“To friendless worth and scholarship (wrote the biographer) his hand and
heart were always open. He had generally domesticated with him some half-
dozen lads of humble parentage, whom at his own charge he trained up to
the pursuits of learning. And it was one of his favourite recreations to hear
them dispute, during his meal, and under his own directions, upon questions
arising out of their daily task. In addition to this he allowed a daily pension,
for their maintenance, to several youthful students at the university; and

178 The Bishop's Palace at Salisbury,

when they came to visit him he seldom dismissed them without substantial
proofs of his liberality. And blessed indeed was the fruit of this pious and
charitable practice; for it is among the glories and felicities of Jewel, that
he helped to rescue from obscurity and indigence the immortal Richard
Hooker.”’

It will be remembered that early in the reign of Elizabeth the western
parts of England were visited by Jewel, under the Queen’s com-
mission. His benevolent and generous disposition thus became
known to the people of Exeter, which was the native place of
Hooker’s family; and accordingly, some short time after Jewel’s
promotion to the see of Salisbury, John Hooker, the uncle of Richard,
ventured on an application to the bishop, in behalf of his nephew, who
had already given promise of more than ordinary virtue and ability.
On being admitted into Jewel’s presence, the uncle “ besought him,
for charity’s sake, to look favourably upon a poor nephew of his,
whom nature had fitted for a scholar, but the estate of his parents
was so narrow that they were unable to give him the advantage of
learning; and that the bishop would, therefore, become his patron,
and prevent him from being a tradesman, for he was a boy of re-
markable hopes.” ‘Lhe bishop immediately appointed that the boy
should attend him at Salisbury at the Easter next following, together
with his schoolmaster. At the time fixed the teacher and the pupil
made their appearance. After some examination Jewel was so well
satisfied with the manners and attainments of the lad that he gave
a reward to the schoolmaster for his care, assigned a pension to the
parents of Richard for his support, and also promised to keep an
eye on him, with a view to his future advancement. Conformably
to this engagement, the bishop had him removed to Oxford in the
year 1567, when he was about fourteen years of age, and consigned
him to the care of Doctor Cole, then President of Corpus Christi
College. After he had been about four years at Oxford Richard
Hooker went on foot to visit his mother at Exeter, and on his way
thither he travelled by Salisbury, for the express purpose of visiting
his kind friend and benefactor. Both he and another youth from
Oxford, who was the companion of his journey, were invited to the
bishop’s table ; an honour which was always proudly and gratefully
remembered by Hooker. On his departure the bishop furnished

:
;

e

3

-

By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 179

him with abundance of good counsel, and, moreover, gave him his
benediction ; but by mere inadvertence forgot to provide him with
any other facilities for his journey to Exeter. The seeming un-
kindness, however, was soon repaired. The moment the bishop
recollected his omission he sent a servant to overtake Richard with
all possible speed, and to bring him back. On his return the bishop,
with singular considerateness for the feelings of a humble youth,
forebore to begin by any allusion to the immediate purpose for which
he had recalled him, but addressed him thus :—“ Richard, I sent
for you back to lend you a horse, which hath carried me many a
mile; and I thank God with much ease.” And here he put into
Richard’s hand a walking staff, with which he professed he had
travelled through many parts of Germany; a circumstance which
might well reconcile the young man to the labour and tediousness
of pedestrian travel. ‘ And Richard,” continued the bishop, “I do
not give, but lend you mine horse.” he then put money in his hands
for the journey. That interview between these two great men was
the last, and it was a very beautiful memory in connection with the
palace at Salisbury. A second scene I would mention in the history
of the Rishop’s Palace was the scene when James II. came 19th
November, 1688, to the house after poor Seth Ward, now an old
broken-down man, had gone away. It was on this occasion that
Mr. Knightly Chetwood, who attended the King as his Protestant
Chaplain, by his firmness preserved the palace chapel for the rites of
the Church of England. James, who felt the danger of his position,
was ready to give way on more important questions, but it was too
late (cf. Benson & Hatcher, p. 489). Churchill, afterwards the first
Duke of Marlborough, and Kirke and Trelawney were meditating

deserting the King. Kirke and Trelawney visited Warminster,
_ where their regiments were posted.

“ All,” says Macaulay, “ was ripe for the execution of the long-meditated
treason. Churchill advised the King to visit Warminster and to inspect the
troops stationed there. James assented, and his coach was at the door of the
episcopal palace when his nose began to bleed violently. He was forced to
postpone his expedition, and to put himself under medical treatment. Three
days elapsed before the hemorrhage was entirely subdued, and during those
three days alarming rumours reached his ears.’

180 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

Then the King had time to reflect upon what might have happened
if he had gone west. Macaulay continues :—

“There could no longer be any doubt that Kirke too was in league with the
Prince of Orange. It was rumoured that he had actually gone over with all
his troops to the enemy, and the rumour, though false, was for some hours
fully believed. A new light flashed on the mind of the unhappy King. He
thought he understood why he had been pressed, a few days before, to visit
Warminster.”

Oppressed by some such reflections as Macaulay puts into his mind,
the King fled from Salisbury on 22nd November, and finally went
down the Thames. But only a few days later, on Tuesday, 4th
December, another visitor came to the palace, William of Orange,
so that Salisbury was at that time almost the central point of the
great events of the year 1688. There were other things which took
place in the house of very great interest. Perhaps the most im-
portant, though I dare say it was thought very little of at the time,
was the ordination as deacon of Joseph Butler, afterwards Bishop
of Durham, in the palace chapel, 28th October, 1718. When Butler
was at Oriel College, he had become, like many others, a warm
friend of Edward Talbot, then a fellow of the College, who intro-
duced him to his father. Butler was ordained quite alone, and only
a few months before his ordination as a priest. We may imagine
the scene in that little chapel, which has been, comparatively
speaking, very slightly altered since that time, and realize the im-
portance of the vows and resolutions then made as the young man
knelt before the holy table. Lastly, I will mention that, when
I had the happiness of being presented to Her Gracious Majesty at
Balmoral in 1885, I ventured to remind her that she had once been

1 Tarpot Rearister, 1718, fol. 4a.

“‘Ordines sacri et generales per dictum Reverendum patrem in oratorio
infra Palatium Episcopale Sarum celebrati die Dominico Vicesimo sexto silicet
die mensis Octobris anno domini millesimo septingentesimo decimo octavo scilicet.

“Josephus Butler Artium Baccalaureus e coll. Oriel . Oxon.

“ ordinatus fuit in diaconum.”

On 21st December in the same year Joseph Butler was the only priest
ordained by the same bishop, at St. James’ Church, Westminster, with several
other deacons.

ES eee

By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury. 181

a visitor to our house, and she immediately acknowledged the cir-
cumstance, though she could not recollect it. Her Majesty being
at the time an infant in arms, could not recollect being at the palace,
but she at once remembered that the incident had occurred. She
knew the date and circumstances of her visit (December 20—238,
1819), which was paid when the Duke and Duchess of Kent were
going to Sidmouth, a journey from which the Duke did not return
alive.

Notes on the Architectural Wistory of the Palace.

By Mr. Joseph Artnur Reeve.
[Reprinted by kind permission of the Author. ]

Although within certain limits it is not difficult to decide the
various times at which the greater portion of Salisbury Palace was
built, it is nevertheless hard to assign its exact limits at any definite
period.

We know that it was begun by Bishop Richard Poore, the founder
of New Sarum, about the year 1221, and perhaps it is easier to
settle the approximate form and extent of the building as it was
designed by him than at any future date until the time of Bishop
Seth Ward, who restored the palace after the Great Rebellion.

Of this thirteenth century work the undercroft beneath the great
hall or “aula ” remains intact, although as now restored it does not
present exactly the same appearance as it did originally ; in the first
place the embrasure at the north end of the western aisle now oc-
eupied by a two-light window was formerly a doorway which
possibly gave access, as suggested in the foregoing lecture by Bishop
Wordsworth, to the larder, above which on the the level of the great
hall may have occurred the sewery; this seems a not improbable
arrangement, for by this means the larder or buttery would have
been placed on the level of the kitchen, and at no great distance
from it, while the sewery would have been within easy access of the
hall by means of a small doorway which may well have occurred in
the north wall.

The side windows of the undereroft were also rather different in

182 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

Bishop Poore’s design from what they now appear, for the detached
columns supporting the inner arches in the centre have been inserted
to give greater lightness to the general effect of the room; formerly
each light of these western windows stood in a separate embrasure,
the outer splays of the inner openings having been returned towards
each other in the centre, thus forming a solid block of masonry
between the two lights. The size and form of the lights themselves
must be very nearly the same as in Bishop Poore’s design, und
enough of the inner arches remained when the restoration was taken
in hand to make it possible to reproduce them exactly.

The single-light window in the north wall is probably entirely a
modern innovation; it is true an embrasure occurred here, but it
bore no signs of ancient work, and if it be the case that a building
formerly projected from the north wall containing the larder on the
ground-floor and the sewery above it is manifestly unlikely that any
window would have occurred at the north end of the eastern aisle
of the undercroft.

The fireplace may also present another entirely new feature in the
room; if one did formerly exist it must have occurred where the
new one has been placed, but this portion of the wall has been so
much cut about by various alterations that no traces of an ancient
fireplace could have come down to us even if one had formed part of
the original design.

With regard to the date of the wall which now divides the under-
croft into two parts, leaving two bays to the north and one to the
south, it is difficult to speak with certainty, but there can be no
question that it is an ancient erection, because an old doorway was
found in this wall exactly at the spot where the new one now stands ;
indeed the stop-chamfer at the bottom of the western jamb is
original, and it moreover bears somewhat the appearance of belonging
to thirteenth century work—that such walls were built across vaulted
apartments in early days in exactly this manner there can be no
doubt—; it may perhaps be said therefore that the evidence in
favour of this wall having formed part of Bishop Poore’s work is
rather stronger than the evidence against it.

The walls of the existing drawing-room no doubt contain much

By J. A. Reeve. 183

of the original work belonging to Bishop Poore’s “ aula,” and it is
probable that the present parlour on the western side of the drawing-
room also belongs to the same date; as stated in the foregoing
lecture, it was probably the ‘‘ Camera,” or bishop’s private apartment
and bedroom.

It is certainly probable, as Bishop Wordsworth says, that the
original kitchen was situated on the south side of the area which
occurs in the centre of the palace, that is to say, where the dairy
and still-room now stand. When Bishop Seth Ward restored the
palace he placed the kitchen at this point, and it is probable he did
so because the ancient kitchen had occupied the same position.

Finally, if a chapel existed in Bishop Poore’s palace it most prob-
ably occupied the site of the existing chapel, but it is likely to have
beea on a lower level.

The only evidence we have of the execution of any building work
during the fourteenth century consists in a fragment of a window
found at the foot of the west wall of the drawing-room ; this win
dow was probably inserted, either as an addition or as a restoration,
about 1330—40; it is interesting to note also that a fragment of
one of the thirteenth century windows belonging to the “ aula” has

likewise been dug up, which, together with the base of the angle

————— rt OC r—

buttresses at the north-west corner of this block, which have lately
been laid bare, gives a very definite clue to the original design of

Bishop Poore’s great hall. This thirteenth century window had

trefoil-headed lights with a quatrefoil above, the whole being rebated
outside for iron casements, while the lights were also rebated inside
for wooden shutters.

The present entrance hall and the chapel above belong to the 15th
century, and are generally supposed to have formed part of the work
carried out by Bishop Beauchamp between 1450 and 1482, but the
character of the work is so very different from that which we find
in the tower at the eastern end of the north front, which was uns
doubtedly erected by this great architect, that there seems some

room to doubt whether the chapel and hall really were built or re-

modelled by him; but if they were not they must have been erected
very shortly before his time, since the style of architecture precludes
VOL, XXV.—NO. LXXIV. )

184 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

the possibility of their having been built earlier than about 1425.

- The work which belongs unquestionably to Bishop Beauchamp
consists of the tower above mentioned and the great hall attached.
The tower remains almost intact, with its noble doorway in the
ground storey and its stair turret ending in a graceful pinnacle,
which rises some 20ft. above the battlemented parapet.

The great hall has undergone such important alterations from
time to time that it is now extremely difficult to decide what its
original appearance may have been; however, from the remains of
an archway in the south wall of this block immediately opposite the
great doorway under the tower, which has been already alluded to,
it would seem that a passage of some width formerly existed along
the eastern side of the hall, and probably separated from it by means
of a wooden screen, which would prove that the axis of the apartment
was originally east and west; but if the present west wall of the
hall is in its original position the area of the room, after this passage
had been taken off, would have been reduced to very nearly a perfect
square, which is by no means a usual form for halls of this description.
It seems, therefore, most probable that the hall may originally have
been considerably longer from east to west than now appears. It may
in fact, have extended some 20ft. or even 25ft further to the west,
and the space then left between this supposed end of the room and
the open area in the centre of the palace would have formed on the
ground-floor the back or tradesman’s entrance, while above would
have occurred bedrooms on two floors, This hypothesis would
account very satisfactorily for one peculiar feature in connection
with the east wall of the central area, for at present it is merely a
sereen wall for nearly half its height, and it is difficult to understand
why it should ever have been carried up so high unless at one time
it had some special use.

The whole area of the hall, including the passage, was doubtless,
under one roof, and if we may assume, as seems likely, that the

Norr.—In the accompanying plan of the palace as at present existing
some portions of the walls shown in black as forming part of Bishop Poore’s
work are of later date, though standing on the site of the ancient walls.

N°.
THE BISHOP'S PALACE SALISBURY.

CONJECTURAL PLAN INTHE TIME OF BISHOP BEAUCHAMP,
“se = 45a.

CONJECTURAL
POSITION OF

OFFICES 3) 4 y A OPEN AREA,

CHAPEL.

(comscetunns)
agove.

N° IL
THE BISHOP'S PALACE SALISBURY.

PLAN OF THE BUILDING AFTER THE RESTORATION BY BISHOP SETH WARD.
1667 - 1634.

ALSO SHOWING BISHOP SHERLOCK'S LIBRARY-

B4- 1748+ =

SCmLE OF FEET.

H KITCHEN.

DINING HALL

Z
A
4 CHAPEL AgovE
y,

N° Il.
THE BISHOP'S PALACE SALISBURY.
PLAN AS AT PRESENT.
IBgo.

w $8 ” [a oe

SCALE OF Fear.

CHAPEL ABovE.

Winteman &Bais Fhote ithe Landon

By J. A. Reeve. 185

present walls are of about the original height, it will at once be seen
what an extremely fine apartment this great hall of Bishop Beau-
champ’s palace must have been ; it was probably lighted by lofty
windows, similar in character to the existing windows in the tower,
but of much greater length and divided into two parts by a transome,
and it is not unreasonable to suppose that a projecting bay window
occurred at the western end of the north wall, beside the high table,
such as fifteenth century architects so frequently adopted in halls of
this description.

The roof of the hall and the embattled parapets of the side walls
would no doubt have been carried up to the east wall of the area in
the centre of the palace in an unbroken line.

It appears that the whole of this eastern wing of the palace was
completely ruined at the time of the Great Rebellion, portions of
the outer walls having alone escaped destruction, hence the difficulty
of deciding what were the exact limits of the great hall as originally
designed by Bishop Beauchamp ; and although we are indebted to
Bishop Seth Ward for having preserved some portion of the shell
of the building, still the great alterations which he introduced into
its form and probable extent have very materially increased the
difficulty of re-constructing it in imagination on its original lines ;
but a careful consideration of the existing remains has suggested the
foregoing explanation of the various features which exist, and to
some extent it seems to account in a reasonable manner for the pe-
culiarities which we find.

Some remains of small door jambs in the east wall lead to the
supposition that an annexe formerly existed outside this wall; per-
haps the sewery may have stood here, for the original sewery be-
longing to Bishop Poore’s hall would have been too far off from the
new hall to have been convenient; various other offices may also
have been located at this point, but presumably Bishop Poore’s
kitchen remained in use down to the time of the Great Rebellion.

What may be called the medieval history of the palace ends with
the work executed by Bishop Beauchamp; after the partial des-
truction of the building at the time of the Great Rebellion a large
part of the central and eastern portions of the palace must have

02

186 The Bishop's Palace at Salisbury.

remained a ruin until Bishop Seth Ward took the restoration in
hand, just two hundred years after Bishop Beauchamp had com-
pleted his great works.

The central portion of the palace:as we now find it was entirely
re-modelled, probably almost entirely re-built, by this Bishop, and,
as has been already mentioned, he also restored and re-arranged the
remains of Bishop Beauchamp’s hall; he reduced its width from
north to south by placing a great staircase against the south wall,
and he constructed three large bedrooms in the upper part of the
building, access to which was obtained by the staircase here men-
tioned ; at the foot of these stairs he placed a wooden colonnade right
across the hall from east to west to support the front of the first
landing, which must have been open to the hall throughout its
entire length, with no doubt a balustrade and hand-rail in front of
it, similar to the corresponding features of the staircase itself. Al-
together this arrangement must have had a very pleasing effect in
the restored hall, but it was done away with at the end of last
century by Bishop Barrington in order to obtain an extra set of
bedrooms between those formed by Bishop Seth Ward and the hall.
It was by this last alteration that the hall was reduced to its present
unsatisfactory condition, and Bishop Barrington, besides reducing the
height of the apartment to about 9ft., also filled in between the
columns of Bishop Ward’s colonnade with a solid partition, whereby
the whole of the remaining architectural features of the hall were
finally swept away. The columns still remain, but they appear
only as shallow pilasters.

Bishop Ward’s staircase is a good one; it starts from the ground
and from the first landing with two flights of steps, one to the right
and the other to the left; these meeting on the half landings be-
tween the floors are carried up in each case in one single broad flight
in the centre; it is entirely composed of oak. A flight of stone
steps, still extant, gives access to the garden from a doorway on the
first half landing above the ground floor, but it is doubtful whether
this is original.

Probably the front staircase in the centre of the palace was also
executed by this bishop ; it is also of oak, and the details are very

By J. A, Reeve. 187

similar to those of the staircase just described, but the central
staircase is of less fine proportions, simply working round a square,
and its design was considerably hampered by the conditions which
had to be met. The appearance of the brickwork forming the-
external walls round this central staircase seems to prove that this:
block of building was entirely erected by Bishop Seth Ward.

In carrying out the restoration of the eastern wing of the palace;
Bishop Ward seems purposely to have designed all the features:
introduced by him in such a manner as to-make them harmonise-
with the surrounding earlier work. Thus he adopted mullioned
windows of an Elizabethan character, and embattled parapets very
much like those which crown the walls of. the tower and chapel ;
but in the south front he used a type of architecture more prevalent
in his own day, and similar to what we now know as the Queen
Anne style.

To return once more to Bishop Beauchamp’s hall, it is necessary
to mention that the windows as they now exist were arranged by
Bishop Barrington—at all events, the lowest tier was inserted by
him. It may have been that Bishop Ward’s hall was lighted by a
row of windows high up in the walls, in which case the windows
which now light the first-floor rooms may be in their original
position, but it is more probable that when Bishop Barrington con-
structed these first-floor rooms he took out Bishop Ward’s windows
and raised them so as to suit the level of his new apartments, before
inserting the lowest tier which give light to the hall as curtailed by
him.

The windows on Bishop Ward’s stairease in the south wall of
Bishop Beauchamp’s hall are similar to those already described, as
are also those in the east wall, some of which were inserted by
Bishop Barrington.

About seventy years after Bishop Ward’s work was executed, that
is to say, about the year 1740, an addition to the palace was made
by Bishop Sherlock in the erection of a library at the south-west.
corner of Bishop Poore’s camera. As far as we can see at present,
no alterations had been made at this end from the time of Bishop
Poore, all intermediate bishops having confined their alterations and

188 The Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.

additions exclusively to the central and eastern portions of the
palace.

This library was placed on the level of Bishop Poore’s aula and
camera, and no doubt the doorway from the latter to the library
was formed by Bishop Sherlock; the library was converted into a
dining-room by Bishop Barrington, and a projection at the S.W.
corner of the block, the original object of which is uncertain, was
made use of by the latter bishop for a staircase as a means of com-
munication between his kitchen and the dining-room.

The existing ceiling of the drawing-room and the roof above
were executed by Bishop Sherlock, who also appears to have raised
the ceiling of the entrance-hall, then the dining-hall, and the plaster
ceiling itself was doubtless executed by him.

The raising of this ceiling necessarily reduced the height of the
chapel above, and in consequence it appears to have been thought
desirable to raise the sill of the east window of this latter apart-
ment; the whole window appears to have been taken out and raised
about 18in. or 2ft., and the point of the arch externally now cuts
up into the string-course below the parapet in a very unsightly
manner owing to this alteration ; whether the tracery of the window
is original or not is doubtful, but it is certainly not a good specimen
of fifteenth century work, and it looks altogether rather more lik:
a bad copy made by men who had lost the feeling of the old style
of architecture; it is distinctly less good than the side windows of
the chapel which appear to be wholly original.

Bishop Barrington’s work has already been alluded to several
times in these notes, it only remains to be said that the drawing-
room was re-arranged by him, that is to say he inserted the windows,
doors, and fireplace, and generally brought the room to its present
state.

Besides the other works already described as having been carried
out by him, it may be mentioned that he converted the old dining-
hall beneath the chapel into an entrance-hall, and, as has been said,
turned Bishop Sherlock’s library into the dining-room ; he also
probably built the present kitchen and offices to the west and formed
the original kitchen into a still room and dairy.

———

By J. A. Reeve. : 189

The two existing windows in the entrance-hall were executed by
him; before his time this apartment had been lighted by four
square-headed windows in the north wall immediately underneath
and probably very similar to the side windows of the chapel above ;
these he stopped up, filling the greater part of the space occupied
by two of them with a very badly-designed pseudo-Gothie doorway,
which is entirely out of harmony with everything else in the whole
palace; and in connection with this it is certainly worth while to
point out that the statement of the Rev. Peter Hall, in his “ Me-
morials of Salisbury,” alluded to in Bishop Wordsworth’s foregoing
lecture, to the effect that the windows of this wing as well as the
porch were inserted under Bishop Barrington “ according to a
fantastic design of Sir Robert Taylor,” would seem to have been
based upon some misconception, perhaps: it may be said to be too
inclusive, for it is a practical impossibility that the same man can
have designed the side windows of the chapel and this porch; at
whatever date the windows were put in they were certainly designed
by 4 man who thoroughly understood fifteenth century Gothic,
whereas the porch bears evidence of having been erected by a man
who knew very little about architecture of any sort and nothing at
all about Gothic architecture, except that the pointed arch was one
of its characteristics ; probably, therefore, the Rev. Peter Hall ought
to have made his statement apply only to the east and west windows
of the entrance hall and the porch; these windows having been
copied directly from those in Bishop Beauchamp’s tower, have
escaped being architectural blots like the porch, but they might
none the less have been spoken of in the year 1834 as “ fantastic,”
because even then the beauties of Gothic architecture were only
beginning to be appreciated by a few students of Christian art.

The only remaining feature in the palace which has to be men-
tioned is the bell turret at the south-west angle of the chapel which
was erected by Bishop Hamilton. The restoration of the undercroft
beneath Bishop Poore’s “aula,” which has lately been carried out
by Bishop Wordsworth, has already been described.

190 The Bishop's Palace at Salisbury.

List of Portraits in the Palace.
Communicated by C. W. Houeare.

John Jewell, 1560—71. Two, a poor one on canvas and another on a wood
panel. On the latter is VE MIHI sI NON EVANGELIZAVERO.

Edmund Guest, 1571—76. Marked with his coat of arms, and “ Edmvndvs
Geste.”’ “ Aitat. Lx111., anno domini 1576.”

Robert Abbot, 1615—18.

Martin Fotherby, 1618—20. Marked with his coat of arms, and “ Anno dni.
1618.” Aitatis 58.” This picture was presented to Bishop Moberly for
the palace.

Brian Duppa, 1641—60.

Humphrey Henchman, 1660—63. By, or after Dahl.

Alexander Hyde, 1665—67. “There is a portrait of Bp. Hyde in the Palace
at Sarum. which was rescued from an obscure cottage in Wilts, and pre-
sented to our present excellent Diocesan, Bp. Fisher.” Cassan’s Lives,
(1824,) pt, iii., p. 31.

Seth Ward, 1667—89. By, or after Greenhill, a pupil of Sir Peter Lely.

Gilbert Burnet, 1689—1715. This picture “is an original; it was sent to
the Palace about six years since (7.¢., circa 1818) by the Executor of Mrs.
Bouchiere, of Swaffham, in Norfolk. The picture had been in the possession
of Bp. Lisle (Samuel Lisle, Bishop of St. Asaph, 1744—8, and of Norwich
1748—9), and left by him to his Chaplain and Executor, Mr. Bouchiere.
He left it to his widow, with directions to his Executor to send it, upon
the death of his wife, to the Palace at Salisbury.” Cassan’s Lives, pt. iii.
p. 365,

William Talbot, 1715—21. After Godfrey Kneller?

Richard Willis, 1721—23.

Benjamin Hoadley, 1723—34. ‘“* There is also a fine portrait of him in the
great room in the Bishop’s Palace at Salisbury.” Cassan’s Lives, pt. iii.,
p. 237.

Thomas Sherlock, 1734—48, Two, both on canvas. Copies of Van Loo’s
portraits P

John Gilbert, 1748—56.

John Thomas, 1757—61.

Robert Hay Drummond, 1761. Copy of Sir Joshua Reynolds’ picture painted
in 1764.

John Thomas, 1761—66.

John Hume, 1766—82. By J. Beach, 1777. A fine picture exchanged with
the family, during Bp. Moberly’s episcopate, for one in the Garter robes.

Hon. Shute Barrington, 1782—91. Painted in 1785.

John Douglas, 1791—1807. By Sir William Beechy, Knt., R.A.

John Fisher, 1807—25. By James Northcote, R.A.

Thomas Burgess, 1825—37. By William Owen, R.A. Also the original of
the silhouette which is reproduced in Harford’s Life (opposite p. 475) given
to the present Bishop by the late A. Harford Pearson, Esq.

————————————— le

On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain. 191

*Edward Denison, 1837—54, Head only, copied in 1870 from the picture

by H. W. Pickersgill, R.A., at Merton College, Oxford.

*Walter Kerr Hamilton, 1854—69. By George Richmond, R.A,

*George Moberly, 1869—85. By William B. Richmond, A.R.A.
* Painted by subscription throughout the diocese.

King George III.

Henry Lawes, the Musician. “In 1784, in the house of Mr. Elderton, an
attorney in Salisbury, I saw an original portrait of Henry Lawes on board,
marked with his name, and ‘ Mtat. Sue 26, 1626.’ (Sie; but the picture
itself is dated 1622. To the back of the picture is affixed a card on which is
written, apparently in Bishop Barrington’s handwriting, ‘ This original portrait
of Henry Lawes, a native of Salisbury, the most distinguished musician of his
time, and the intimate friend of Milton, ig left as an heirloom to the Palace
at Salisbury by Bp. Barrington, July 1, 1791.’) This is now in the Bishop’s
Palace at Salisbury. It is not ill painted; the face and ruff in tolerable
preservation ; the drapery a cloak, much injured.” Milton’s Works, edited
by Rev. Henry John Todd, M.A., 1801, vol. v., p. 208.

There are also plaster busts of Bishops Shute Barrington, Fisher, and Burgess:

On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain,

Particularly in regard to its influence on the County of Wilts.

- [Address by the Right Reverend the Lorp BisHop oF SatisBuRy, as President

of the Society, at its Annual Meeting at Westbury, August Ist, 1889.]

HE subject of my address is the Roman Conquest of Southern
Britain, its character and influence, considered of course
especially in relation to ovr own county. I have for some time
had in mind the wish to write a paper on this subject, but time has
failed me hitherto. I cannot pretend that I have been able to ac-
complish my wish to-night in the address which I shall have the
honour to give you as your unworthy President. I shall rely upon
our Members to help me with their stores of local knowledge,
naturally much greater than my own, in supplying my defects.
The method I shall pursue is first to trace the lines of Roman

192 On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain,

occupation in our county, and then to connect them with the
general history of the conquest.

At first sight nothing seems more remarkable than the paucity of
remains of the Roman period as compared with those that belong
to pre-Roman and Saxon times. We have within our limits only
three Roman stations mentioned in the Itinerary; and not one
single regular inscription on stone has come down to us from either
of them or from the other places where Roman remains have been
unearthed—no epitaph, or altar, or milestone to mark the ways. A
tile at Calne (C.1.L. vii. 1241), a round stone tessera, vaguely said
to be from North Wilts, with the letters F VI (4. 1265), the Rudge
Cup, to be mentioned below (7. 1291), and a few other trifles, are
the fragments that have been collected in the whole county under
the title of inscriptions. Nevertheless, there is evidence of a con-
siderable network of Roman roads, with villas upon them, from
which we may conjecture that the county was long and peaceably
occupied.

We shall naturally first consider the great roads described in the
Itinerary of Antoninus, and those that are immediately connected
with them. The roads in the Itinerary are three, and I shall give
them in the order in which they stand in the text.

(1) The road from Isca (Caerleon on Usk) to Silchester (Calleva),
near Mortimer, which cuts the north-eastern corner of the county,
making a circuit to avoid the Bristol Channel through the Roman
colony of Glevum or Gloucester. The Itinerary marks no station
between Durocornovium (Cirencester) and Spinae (Speen), near
Newbury, but carries the traveller from one to another without a
break. Poor man, if he had no better MS. road book, or, as the
Greeks called it, Synecdemus, than those copies from which the
itineraries have been printed, he must have found his journey long
and almost heart-breaking. The distance is really about forty
English miles, while the Itinerary only marks xv Roman miles.
Sir R, Hoare, noticing this blunder, thinks it arose from the
omission of the station Nidum, which he puts at Covenham Farm,
while others place it at Nythe Bridge. There is, however, an
obvious transposition in the arrangement of the Itinerary in which

Particularly in regard to its influence on the Couuty of Wilts. 193

the name Nidum occurs, showing that it is really in quite a different
district. It is, in fact, probably the same as Neath, in South Wales,
I should suggest that this xv is a mistake for xLv or some such
number, the Roman mile being, as is generally supposed, about
one hundred and forty yards shorter than the English. This road,
which must have followed the line of the one still in use, either
exactly or very nearly, passes first through Cricklade. I presume
that Latton, at which place a small hoard of fifty-two coins and
some remarkably fresh iron instruments were found by Professor J.
Buckman about 1866, lies on the same road. Mr. Buckman describes
it as about six miles south of Cirencester, and on the road to Crick-
lade (Wilts Arch. Mag., ix., pp. 282—7, pub. 1866), though he
connects its Church with the Roman road from Cirencester to Bath,
probably by aslip. Next comes Stratton St. Margaret, like other
Strattons bearing witness by its name to its position on the ancient
highway. The road then passes Wanborough, famous, as you know
for great battles supposed to have been fought there in the Saxon
period, particularly for one in 591, in which Ceawlin, the West
Saxon conqueror, was defeated by his nephew, Ceolric, in league
with the Britons. From the additions to Camden’s Britannia (vol.
1, ed. Gough, p. 139, 1806), I learn that a large quantity of Roman

‘ coins were found here in the year 168—. There can be little doubt

that the name is contracted from Wodensburgh, just as Wansdyke
from Wodensdyke. From Wanborough the road passes through
Baydon into Berkshire. Our Secretary has figured an ampulla
found at Botley Copse, near Baydon (Smith’s British and Roman
Antiquities, p. 80). Another Roman road is said to have led from
a point near Wanborough to Old Sarum, and, indeed this point is
said to have been a meeting-place of several such roads (Murray’s
Handbook to Wilts, p. 29), but I am not aware of the line which
the Sarum road took, nor is it mentioned in the Itinerary. The
road to Winchester will be mentioned below.

(2) The next road in the Itinerary lies between the same terminal
stations Isca and Calleva, but takes the shorter route by ferry
(Trajectus) over the Bristol Channel through Bath (Aquae Solis).
This road had two stations in this county, Verlucio and Cunetio—

194 On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain,

the first now generally identified with Wans House, near Bromham
—the second with Folly Farm, about one mile east of Marlborough.
The Roman villa discovered at St. Edith’s Marsh, in the parish of
Bromham, must have been connected with the station of Verlucio
(ep. Wilts Arch. Mag., xix., p. 299—302). Mr. A. C. Smith figures
a die for playing hazard found at Wans House (B. & R. Ant., p. 30).
(See also Wilts Arch, Mag., iv., p. 232). This interesting object is of
bronze, and is of a flattened oval shape. The name of the other
station, Cunetio, can hardly be dissociated from that of the river
Kennet, near which it lies. Ido not, however, know how to explain
the fact that the villages of East and West Kennet lie about five or
six miles distant along the same road, and of course considerably to
the west of Marlborough. Roman remains and large numbers of
coins are found also at Mildenhall, which formed probably part of
the same station, in all probability a large one (see the plate in
“ Ane, Wiltshire,” ii., p. 90 and ep, Waylen’s “ Marlborough,”
pp. 9, 10).

Another rather important road not in the Itinerary seems to have
passed through Cunetio, branching off from the Cirencester to Speen
road at or near Wanborough. Its line probably was very much
that taken by modern roads, through Chiseldon and the two Og-
bornes, after which it becomes lost, then after leaving Cuuetio it
runs straight through Savernake Forest,through Wilton and Marton,
and near, but not through, Tidecombe, and on through Tangley and
the neighbourhood of Andover to Winchester. With this road we
naturally connect the remains found at Great Bedwyn, described as
“a small castrametation surrounding about two acres of land,”
which it is supposed was the centre of the station, “ and still contains
a large quantity of bricks, tesserae, and other evidences of Roman
habitation.” (Rev. John Ward, “ Great Bedwyn,” in Wilts Arch.
Mag., vi., p. 261, pub. in 1860.) This station was situated about
half-a-mile east of the road. A bronze cup, found at Rudge, near
Froxfield, now preserved at Alnwick Castle (C. I. L., vii. p. 14 b),
and a pavement at Littlecot also testify to Roman habitations in
the line of the main road from Marlborough to Speen.

The Rudge Cup, which is figured by Sir Richard C. Hoare (Ane.

Particularly in regard to its influence on the County of Wilts. 195

Wilts, ii., p. 121) and in Waylen’s Marlborough, p. 17 and else-
where, is interesting as directly connecting us with the great military
work of Hadrian’s wall. It has on its rim a list of five stations in
peculiar order, “ A Mais [=Magnis?] Aballava Uxelodumo Am-
boclan(i)s Banna,” agreeing in several points with the anonymous
geographer of Ravenna, as Mr. Beale Poste has pointed out. I
should be glad of any hints as to the origin of such a curious com-
bination of purposes as a drinking cup and a road book.

(3) The third road in the Itinerary is also, like the other two,
connected at one end with the great central station of Silchester, but
terminates at the other end, at the other Isea—Isca Dumnoniorum—
the modern Exeter. Its course is through Winchester (Venta
Belgarum), then to Brige (Broughton), in Hants, and so near West
Winterslow, and under Figsbury Ring (commonly but incorrectly
known as Chlorus’ Camp), to Sorbiodunum (Old Sarum). The
pottery found at Holbury in 1870, and the villa and other buildings
at West Dean re-opened 1871—73, may possibly be connected with
this road, though Dean lies some miles to the south of it. These
antiquities at West Dean, which are of unusual interest, have been
carefully described by the Rev. G. S. Master, formerly rector.
(Wilts Arch. Mag., xiil., pp. 88—41, and pp. 276—79, and xxii.,
pp. 248 foll.) In his last communication on the subject he inclines
to suppose that the place was a Roman station, the first on a road
from Sorbiodunum to Clausentum, the nearest seaport—a place
about which we shall speak later on.

The further course of the main road from Winchester to Exeter,
which of course passed through Old Sarum, is of some importance
to the history of Salisbury. In early days it passed through
Bemerton—I believe through the rectory garden—and so on over
the meadows to the Race Plain. Hoare’s “ Ancient Wilts,” ii., p.
25 and plate.) This was convenient for Wilton, but inconvenient
in medieval times for the city of New Sarum. It was therefore
natural that Bishop Bingham, in 1244, should wish to change the

course of this road, so as to enable pilgrims and others to come
readily to the Cathedral, which was then nearing its completion.
Tn connection with this change in the road he completed the hospital

196 On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain,

of St. Nicholas and built the bridge at Harnham, and a chapel
upon it dedicated to St. John the Baptist, where two chaplains from
the hospital were to attend every day. (Cassan’s Lives, i., p. 177,
Murray’s Wilts, p. 87, Wilts Arch. Mag., vol. xxv., p. 121.)

Besides these three roads in the Itineraries and others crossing
them there are several others passing through parts of the county
which can be safely enumerated. These are :—

(L) From Silchester to Old Sarum, direct through or past Andover,
traces of which are distinctly visible to any traveller by rail between
the stations of Grately and Porton. There isa fine pavement, now
again buried, at Thruxton in Hants, which I only mention because
the inscription upon it, QVINTUS NATALIVS NATALINVS ET BODENI over
a head of Bacchus, is the one Roman inscription with which our
county is credited by Professor Hiibner (C. I. L., vii. 3), and that
erroneously, So poor are we in treasures of this kind.

(2) From Old Sarum to Witham, and then to Wells, or, as Sir
R. Hoare thinks, to the Bristol Channel, at the mouth of the river
Axe, traces of which can still be made out between Groveley Wood
and Great Ridge Wood, and by Kingston Deverill. (See “ Ancient
Wilts,” ii., p. 34 and plates.)

(3) From Old Sarum to Bath, first across the downs to Stapleford,
and then along the Wily valley. A station on this road must have
been at Boreham, near Warminster; and at Pitmead near it remains
of two villas have been found. (“ Anc. Wilts,” ii., p. 108, Murray’s
Wilts, p. 149.)

(4) The so-called Foss Way, from Cirencester to Bath, passes
through the north-west angle of the county. The remains at White
Walls, near Easton Grey, are supposed to be those of the city of
Mutuantonis, noticed by the geographer Ravenna (Murray’s
“Wilts,” p. 13), but I know not on what authority. I suppose
from the spurious Richard of Cirencester. The Roman villa, one
mile west of Castle Combe, and the same distance north-west of
North Wraxall, discovered in 1859 by Mr. Poulett Scrope, is also a
point upon this road. So also, I presume, are the remains at
Colerne, near Box, including a pavement representing part of a
chariot race. (Wilts Arch. Mag., ii., 14, &e.)

Particularly in regard to its influence on the County of Wilts. 197

The only other Roman remains of which I have a record are the
nineteen little images or Penates found in 1714, close to the site of
the present Southbroom House, which is out of the track of known
roads. A Roman road along the fertile Vale of Pewsey would,
however, be natural enough, and Harepath in Burbage has been
said to be on such a road, local antiquaries connecting it with A. 8S.
here-pad.

Is it not likely also that the station of Verlucio was joined by a
eross-road 10 Sorbiodunum? This would naturally pass through
the site of Devizes. Roman coins of the age of Constantine are
also said to have been found at Imber.

Having thus made a very rapid sketch ofthe existing Roman
remains in the county, I think it may be useful to connect this
sketch with what is known of the general history of the conquest
of Southern Britain. The materials for this purpose have been
gathered by many persons, for instance by Mr. Thomas Wright, in
his useful and compendius volume, “ The Celt, the Roman, and the
Saxon,” and with greater learning and more special knowledge of
the monuments by Prof. Emil Hiibner, in a paper called “ Das
Rémische Heer in Britannien” (Berlin, Wiedmanns, 1881, reprinted
from the sixteenth volume of the Hermes).

The invasion of Julius Cesar in the first century B.C. is im-
portant for the light which it throws on the early condition of the
country, and as affording the pretext on which after invasions were
founded, viz., the non-payment of the tribute or import and export
duties which he imposed; but it is well known that he “ retired
quickly ” (as Strabo observes) “ having effected nothing of conse-
quence ” (iv., p. 20U== Mon. Hist. Brit.,” p. vii.) It was not till
A.D. 42, in the reign of Claudius, that anything serious was done
in respect of Roman occupation. A fugitive king Bericus, whom
it is natural to identify with Verica, King of the Atrebates, son of
the Commius mentioned by Cesar, supplied, in accordance with
precedent, the proximate cause or pretext of the invasion, and
probably acted as guide and intermediary with the more friendly
tribes. (Dion Cassius, lx., 19, no doubt founded on the lost books
of Tacitus, cp. Hiibner, l.c., pp. 7, 8.)

198 On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain,

In the year 43, nearly a hundred years after Cesar’s first invasion,
an army of some fifty thousand or sixty thousand men was brought
over by iA. Plautius, an officer high in command in the neighbouring
province of Germany—an expedition which was honoured by the
presence for sixteen days of the Emperor himself, who joined it later
in the season. This number is made up by counting the soldiers of
the four legions which are known to have served in the campaign
as six thousand apiece (including one hundred and twenty cavalry
in each), and adding to them a “ vexillation ” or detachment of a
thousand men from at least one other legion, the VIIIth Augusta.
This gives us twenty-five thousand legionaries, mainly from the IInd
Augusta, [Xth Hispana, XI Vth Gemina, and XXth Valeria Victrix,
and adding to it an equal number of auxiliary forces we obtain a
total of fifty thousand. The soldiers serving in the fleet, &c., would
naturally make up the figures to the sixty thousand combatants, at
which Hiibner reckons the whole number. In this army served
two future Emperors, Galba and Vespasian, the former as one of
the suite of the Emperor, the latter as legatus of the IInd Augustan
Legion, having his brother Flavius Sabinus serving under him.

The question is at once naturally raised where this expedition
landed, and I think we may plausibly suggest that it was in South-
ampton Water, at the mouth of the Anton, or Test. IRfso this port
was no doubt chosen as the one nearest to the city of the Atrebates,
Calleva, or Silchester, to which Verica would naturally direct the
invaders. I should be glad to have more information as to the
name Anton, and its probable connection with Andover, near which
it flows. I would ask, however, as one conscious of defective local
knowledge, whether it is not probable that Antona was originally
the name for Andover, formed on a Celtic basis like Dertona in
Cisalpine Gaul, and that Hampton Shire and Southampton are only
Saxonising forms of the same old British word, having in reality
nothing to do with either “ham” or “ton,” but merely passing
into them as the nearest forms accessible in the language of the
Teutonic conquerors of later date?

In any case I presume that the Anton river is probably the same
as the river Antona referred to in a well-known passage of Tacitus’

Particularly in regard to its influence on the County of Wilts. 199

Annals (xii., 31), describing the action of Ostorius Scapula, the
successor of Aulus Plautius in the government. You will pardon
me for a short digression on this important text. After touching on
the tumults which awaited Ostorius on his arrival, and the prompt
measures which it was necessary for him to take, Tacitus goes on to
say, according to the MSS., “detrahere arma suspectis cunctaque
eastris Antonam et Sabrinam fluvios cohibere parat.” These words
are obviously not good grammar as they stand, and require some
emendation. Ritter and others alter Antonam to Avonam, following
Camden’s Aufonam, because they do not know the name of so com-
paratively insignificant a stream as the Anton, and insert wsque
after Avonam. Halm conjectures cis before the first rivername. I
myself think cs more probable, as more likely to have dropped out
than wsgue. If the Anton was the first river met with by Claudius’
expedition, the prominence given to it is easily explained. This is
interesting by itself, but it is even more interesting, in view of the
question raised about ten years ago as to the genuineness of the
Annals, to notice the use apparently made of this passage by the
geographer Ptolemy, who lived about a generation later than Tacitus.
In his description of the south coast of Britain, after noticing the
outlets of the Kenion, Tamarus, Isaca and Alaunus, which may,
perhaps, represent Falmouth, Plymouth, Exmouth and Axmouth or
Weymouth, he mentions the “ Great Harbour” (probably the Solent
and the inlets generally at the back of the Isle of Wight), and then
the mouth of the river Zrisanton. No one has been able to identify
this curious name, and I therefore suggest that the ¢ris in it is
simply a duplication of the -éris in castris in the sentence of
Tacitus, “ castris Antonam et Sabrinam fluvios.” If the original text
castris cis antonam was corrupted to castris trisantonam, we could well
understand both the omission of the cis in our present MSS. andthe .
origin of Ptolemy’s mistake. Such a blunder might seem almost im-
possible, were it not that we have a very similar and more ludicrous
one already recognised in Ptolemy. In Tacitus’ account of the Frisian
rebellion occurs the sentence, “ad sua tutanda digressis rebellibus ”
(Ann., iv., 73, 1), “the rebels having dispersed to protect their own
homes.” Ptolemy evidently took this for the name of a place,
VOL, XXV.—NO. LXXIV. P

200 On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain.

understanding it ‘the rebels having dispersed to Suatutanda,” since
he inserts this entirely absurd name in the form 2vatovrdvéa, in his
list of towns in North Germany (Geog. 2, 11, 27, ap. Furneaux
Annals of Tacitus, 1, p. 9). I have casually noticed an almost
equally stupid blunder in his account of Britain, where he puts the
IInd Augustan Legion at Isea (Exeter) in Devon, confusing it with
Isca Silurum (Caerleon on Usk). It would seem worth while with
these clues to scrutinise carefully the other lists of names in Ptolemy,
and to see if others of them may not be explained by similar means.

Supposing, then, that the army led by Aulus Plautius landed at
the head of Southampton Water, it was natural that the first station
founded by it should receive its name from the Emperor. This, I
believe, according to a conjecture already made, is to be found in Clau-
sentum, now generally identified with Bittern, a little to the east of
Southampton. Professor Hiibner suggests that this was corrupted
from Claudientum, but no such suggestion is needed. The Emperor
was nothing if he was not an antiquary, and I believe he called, or
Plautius at his direction called, this new town Clausentum, from
the mythical ancestor of his gens, the Sabine ally of Aineas (Verg.
/in., vii., 706), and from the first Roman Claudius, whose original
name was said to be Attus Clausus (Liv. ii., 16, ete.). Clausentum
would then be, unlike most Romano-British names, a purely Latin
form like Laurentum. The importance attached to the expedition
by the Emperor is shown by the name Britannicus taken by his son
as well as by himself. It was the only expedition in which he
personally took part, and was therefore likely to be specially marked
by the foundation of a town bearing his family name.

The first step in conquest after the army landed was probably the
subjection of the Isle of Wight by Vespasian (Suet. Vesp. 4).
Contemporaneous with this must have been the construction of the
road to Venta, the capital of the Belg (Winchester). Thence the
road would naturally be extended to Calleva, the capital of the
Atrebates, for the reasons already given. Venta and Calleva seem
at once to have become important military centres. The city of the
Regni (Chichester) must also have very soon declared itself friendly ;
and as we hear of no conflicts either now or at any later time with

Particularly in regard to its influence on the County of Wilts. 201

the Belgz, and as our own county contains no military stations of
much importance, we may presume that Plautius concluded a peace
at once with these three tribes, the Atrebates, the Belg, and the
Regni, Cogidumnus, or Cogidubnus, King of the Regni, became
a faithful ally of the Romans, as is witnessed by the inscription of
the Temple of Neptune and Minerva, for which he gave authority,
pro salute domus divine, as well as by Tacitus (Agricola 14). The
Cantii in Kent also appear to have been friendly.

But there were other well-known warlike tribes close at hand
both to the east and the west of the island, namely, the Trinobantes
in Essex, whose king, Cunobelinus, now dead, had been succeeded
by two warlike sons, Cataracus and Togodumnus; and the Catu-
vellaunians and their subjects, the Dobuni in Gloucestershire. After
the defeat of Cataracus (or Caractacus) and Togodumnus, for the
locality of which there are no data, the only battle of importance
mentioned by Dio is one against the Boduni or Dobuni, the people
of Gloucestershire, which took place on a large river, probably the
Severn, in which Osidius Geta, Vespasian, and Flavius Sabinus all
took prominent part. The centre of operations then shifted to the
Thames, where Togodumnus appears to have been killed. It is
probable that different portions of the fleet at once occupied the two
great inlets of the Thames on the east, and the Bristol Channel on
the west, in order to support the army in its conflicts with the two
hostile tribes of which we have spoken, supported as they were by
the even more warlike peoples of the Iceni of our modern Suffolk
and Norfolk and the Silures in South Wales. But the wealthy
city of Londinium (C.LL., vii., p. 21) on the east and the lead
mines of the Mendips on the west, were probably also attractions
from the first. Bars or pigs of lead stamped with the names of
Claudius and Britannicus, have been found on the Mendips dated as
early as A.D. 49.

After these victories Claudius was summoned by his successful
general, and landed somewhere, it may be conjectured, in Kent.
But Dio’s account is so vague that he might have equally landed at
Southampton. He was present, it would seem, at the capture of
Camalodunum, and returned to Italy after remaining in the country

P2

202 On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain.

only sixteen days. The question of his presence at the capture of
Camalodunum is not of much importance. Dio asserts it, Suetonius
seems to deny it. “ Sine ullo praelio aut sanguine intra paucissimos
dies parte insulae in deditionem recepta sexto quam profectus erat
mense Romam rediit” (de Claudio,e.17). This would agree better
with the presence of Claudius in the quiet district of the Belge,
Atrebates, and Regni, than amongst the Trinobantes, but both may
be true.

‘The ‘first permanent results of the eonquest were, it would seem,
the establishment of the colony of veterans at Glevum (Gloucester)
on the west, which we may suppose to have been the first home of
the IInd Legion, afterwards so long stationed at Caerleon, and of
the colony of Camalodunum, with its temple of the divine Claudius,
which was probably the first home of the KIVth Legion—a force
which we may remark was withdrawn in the year 70, and has
therefore left few traces in the island. Hiibner suggests that the
first quarters of the IXth Hispana were at Calleva (p. 24), and
those of the IVth at Cirencester or Bath (p. 25), but these con-
jectures, though plausible, are not established.

For us, however, the conclusion is clear that our county was almost —

outside the sphere of warlike operations, while it had nothing in
the way either of mineral wealth or of other natural attractions,
like those possessed by Bath, to draw to it any confluence of Roman
settlers. With the exception, therefore, of the roads necessary to
connect the main stations together and the villas adjacent to them,
the Romans left little mark among us. Had the Belge been a
strong and hostile race and Sorbiodunum required the presence of a
legion, either New Sarum would have been founded much sooner,
or Wilton or Stratford-sub-Castle would have grown up into greater
prominence. Probably, the keen instinct for sites possessed by the
Roman generals would have marked out the meeting-place of so
many valleys and streams as those we have at Salisbury as the
fitting site for a colony of veterans long before the end of the first
century, while the old city would have been crowned with buildings
of solid stone, including, perhaps, a beautiful acqueduct spanning
the Avon valley. But, as it was, the quiet, separative, secretive

a

Particularly in regard to its influence on the County of Wilts. 203

habits of the people were left unbroken, and were only emphasised
anew by the West Saxon invaders. Our virtues and our defects are
matters of long and steady growth, and he who would work in
Wiltshire must take this into account. Conservative for good and
evil, friendly but somewhat undemonstrative—such L suppose were
the Belge, such are the Wiltshiremen.

Since writing this paper I have been much interested to hear of
the excavations in the Wansdyke in Calstone parish and on the Tan
Hill side of Shepherds Shore recently made by General Pitt-Rivers,
with his usual conscientious care and careful registration of results.
The discovery of Samian ware and oyster shells under the banks of the
dyke seems to show that the work is Roman or post-Roman rather
than pre-Roman and Belgic. It had occurred to me in writing my
paper, though I had not time to put the conjecture into plausible
shape, that the Wansdyke was a Roman work, probably executed
by Ostorius Scapula, to protect the first province of Britain, which,
as we have seen, apparently contained the country of the Belge, the
Atrebates, and the Regni. If General Pitt-Rivers’s discovery be
substantiated, though our antiquaries may lose a pre- Roman monu-
ment, they may gain one which will enable us to rival in interest
the classic ground of Northumberland and Cumberland. It is
natural to suppose that the compendious sentence of Tacitus already
quoted, “ Cuncta castris cis Antonam et Sabrinam fluvios cohibere
parat”’ (he makes preparations to keep in check the whole country
on this side—.e., on the east !—of the rivers Anton and Severn by
the construction of camps) refers not only to a chain of military
‘stations, but to the vallum of the Wansdyke, parallel as it is in
great part of its course to the road from Calleva to the Bristol
Channel, which, as we have seen, possesses in our county old

1The Romans not improbably thought that the axis of our island ran more
§.W. to N.E. than it actnally does, and therefore cis might almost be paraphrased
“to the south of,” It is remarkable that the ‘‘ provincia inferior’ seems to have
included the eastern part of the island, and the “superior” the western, the
modern Wales. York, for instance, was apparently in the “lower province” as
well as London,

204 On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain.

stations at Marlborough and Wans, This road would then be like
the “via vallaris” with which we are familiar in the north, and
the whole system of fortification would be comparable to that of
Hadrian and Severus from Newcastle to Carlisle, and of Antoninus
Pius from the Forth to the Clyde. The course of the Wansdyke
will, I hope, be carefully pursued both to the east and the west. It
may be found that it actually touched the head-waters of the Anton
near Weyhill, whilst, as I believe, it undoubtedly extended to the
Bristol Channel. It is possible, too, that some of the camps now
considered British or Saxon may be found to be Roman or occupied
by the Romans. It is a mistake to suppose that Roman camps were
always rectangular, since Vegetius (i. 23; iii. 8) mentions that they
were sometimes triangular, circular, or semicircular, and Cesar in
the African war used semicircular camps (Bell 4/r., 80, 2).]

I ought to mention that, by the kindness of the Dean of Win-
chester, I have received an interesting letter from the Rev. R. H.
Clutterbuck, of Knight’s Enham, dated 24th August, 1889. Mr.
Clutterbuck believes that the river name Anton is literary and con-
ventional, and that the true name is Ann or Ande, appearing in
Ann Savage, Amport, Abbots Ann, Little Ann, Andover (ford or
passage over the Ande). No doubt the name Ann is old, but so
may Antona also be. I learn that at East Anton two Roman roads
intersect. Southampton is, I suppose, merely a corruption of South
Anton, and the county of Hants is South-Anton-Shire, the h from
South remaining alone at the beginning of the word. In other
respects Hants from South-Anton-Shire is exactly parallel to Wilts
from Wilton-Shire, and points to the antiquity and importance of
the element Anton. If Antona is (like Dertona) an old Celtic
name for a town it might also be so for a river: and such I believe
it to have been.

“The Rudge Cup” (writes Prof. Hiibner) “ must be a votive cup
recording the road traversed by the thank-offerer from his home to
the healing spring, like the Vicarello cup. Those of the Dea
Coventina at Procolitia are similar.”

14¢h November, 1890.

qvante mee a
TS ¥: er ©

205

Tivo Wiltshire Augers.
By W. Cunnineron, F.GS.

GHE vessel of which a photo-print appears on the opposite:
page! is a mazer, or drinking-cup, which was obtained by
myself from a cottage at Bromham, Wilts, about forty years ago.

It was exhibited at the Inaugural Meeting of our Society in 1853,
also at a Meeting of the Society of Antiquaries of London, Dec.
19th, 1889; and it has since been shown at the Tudor Exhibition,
in Regent Street, 1890.

A short description of it, by Mr. St. John Hope, appears in the
Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, London, 1889,

The bowl is of maple wood, with moulded stem, and foot of its
own, and has a simple thin moulding just below the curved part of
the cup.

The band, or mounting, round the edge of the bowl is of silver,
four-tenths of an inch deep inside, and six-tenths of an inch outside,
- It is plain, except a triple-edged fringe. On it is inscribed :—

“Thy blessing O Lord, grante mee and mine:
Thatt in life and death; wee maye be thine.”

A short distance from the commencement of this inscription is a
rude engraving of a seven-branched candlestick. The silver rim of
the foot is of good design, with egg-and-dart pattern, and above
this springs a triple-lobed fringe, which bending over the wood of
the mazer, secures the rim to the foot.

Diameter, four inches and two-tenths. Height, three inches and
eight-tenths. Interior depth, two inches and three-tenths. Diameter
of silver rim of foot, three inches and five-tenths.

It is of English workmanship, cirea 1590, but has no hall-mark.

1 The Society is indebted to Mr, Cunnington for the kind gift of half the cost
of the illustration of his mazer,

206 Two Wiltshire Mazers,

On the opposite page is a photo-print of another mazer, in
the possession of the Rev. C. E. B. Barnwell, of Southbroom
Vicarage, Devizes. This, though smaller than the beautifu] example
in the possession of Mr. W. Jerdone Braikenridge, engraved and
described by Mr. St. John Hope in the Archezologia, so closely
resembles it in style of ornamentation and detail of workmanship
as to lead to the belief that both were fashioned by the same hand.

The dimensions are as follow :—diameter, four inches and a half ;
depth of bowl, one inch and three-quarters; height, two inches and
eight-tenths.

The wood has been renewed, and consists now of a bowl and
somewhat heavy foot of lignum vite. It is, however, probable, that
the original bowl was, like Mr. Braikenridge’s, and many others, of
simple tazza form, with a ring foot.

The band is of silver-gilt, of very rich design. It is one inch and
two-tenths deep outside, and three-fourths of an inch deep inside.
The middle of it is plain, with simple mouldings towards the rim,
and though the lozengy diaper and cable moulding of the mazer
above-mentioned are absent, it is enriched with the same cavetto
and row of small balls, and by a similar scalloped and rayed fringe
below. (These balls are also used in the ornamentation of a mazer
dated 1521-2, in possession of Corp. Ch. Coll., Cambridge.)

In the bottom of the bow] is the circular medallion, or “ print,”
so common in mazers of this period. It is of silver-gilt, two inches
and two-tenths in diameter, with a scalloped and rayed fringe round
it of the same pattern as that on the band. The middle part is
bossed up, and has on the top a separate circular silver plate three-
quarters of an inch in diameter, on which is engraved a conventional
rose of five petals. This was formerly enamelled. It is now
soldered to a modern screw, passing through the print, and an
ordinary nut underneath secures it in place.

The band is attached to the bowl by a few small pins passing
through the scalloped fringe, but there are many pin-holes now
unoccupied, made in former alterations of the vessel.

On the plain portion of the band are the hall-marks, three in
number, of which, however, the date letter is alone decipherable.

MAZER,

IN THE POSSESSION OF THE

Rev. C. E. B. BARNWELL.

By W. Cunnington, F.G.S. 207

This is plainly the “C ” of 1540-1. The date of the Braikenridge cup
is 1534-5.

At equal distances from each other on the same part of the band
are engraved the crests of the three families through whom it has
descended, viz. :—1, of the Perrot family, a parrot; 2, of the Lowrys,
two branches of laurel, with the motto “ virtus semper viridis” ; 3,
the crest of the Barnwell family, the present owners, a wolf’s head,
with the motto “ Loyal au mort.”

Nortz.—From the able and exhaustive paper “ on English Medi-
eval drinking-cups called Mazers,” by W. H. St. John Hope, M.A.,
communicated to the Society of Antiquaries, and published in the
Archeologia, vol. L., 1887, I select the following explanatory notes
on the nature and use of mazers.

“ Of all the drinking vessels in use from the thirteenth to the
sixteenth centuries, none were so common or so much prized as those
known to us as mazers. Under whatever name it appears in ancient
documents it is quite clear that the same vessel is meant, viz., a
bowl turned out of some kind of wood, but by preference maple, and
especially the spotted or speckled variety which we call bird’s eye
maple. Although the term mazer is applied to a drinking bowl, it
is from the material out of which it was formed, and not the use it
was put to, that the name is derived. Professor Skeat says the word
is of Low German origin, and merely an extended form of the
middle High German mase, old High German m4s4, meaning a spot
—whence our word measles. (The German Maser is a spot, speck,
or the grain of the wood; maser-holz is veined wocd, and maserle,
maple wood, or the maple tree.—Cripps’ Old English Plate,3rd edit.,
p. 203.) A mazer is therefore so called from being a bowl of
“spotted” wood. During the medieval period mazers were used by
all classes of persons, from the king downwards. The inventories of
the religious house bear witness to the same fact : thus at Canterbury
in 1328 there were in the frater no fewer than one hundred and
eighty-two mazers; at Battle in 1437 there were thirty-two; at
Durham in 1446, forty-nine. It is unfortunate that, in spite of

208 Two Wiltshire Mazers.

the number of mazers formerly existing in this country, so few
should have survived to our time; but at present only about fifty
examples are known, though diligent enquiry would doubtless bring
to light a few more, The only essential part of a mazer is its bowl;
and the cheaper form, in use among the poorer classes, would usually
be but a plain bowl, while the wealthier folk ornamented their mazers
with silver-gilt mounts, or bands, and enamelled medallions, and
occasionally with splendid feet and covers.

Why shallow bowls were preferred to the more convenient cups
we cannot say, but that they were used to drink from is not only
abundantly proved by contemporary writings, but the mazers them-
selves attest the fact. Thus a mazer belonging to Mr, Shirley has
inscribed on the band :—

Su the name of the Trinitie
fille the kup and Drinke to me.

And the great York bowl bears grants from two bishops of forty
days’ pardon,
“onto all tho that drinkis of this cope.”

It is interesting to know that one of the mazers in the collection
of Mr. A. W. Franks was formerly used in their frater house by
the monks of Rochester, the legend on the band being :—

+ CIPHVS +¢ REFECTORII « ROFENSIS «¢ PERFRATREM
ROBERTVM + PECHAM.

The date of this example, as shown by the London hall-mark, is
1532. It found its way into the Fontaine collection at Narford
Hall, Norfolk, where it was sold in June, 1884, for £252, and
became the property of the present owner.

209

Evington Church.
By C. E. Pontine, F.S.A.

(The greater part of this paper was read at the Salishury Meeting, August
5th, 1887, and is now reprinted from the Archeological Journal, vol. xlv.,
p. 43, by kind permission of the Council of the Royal Archeological
Institute.)

N his admirable and exhaustive paper on the History of
<i Edington Monastery, published in the Wiltshire Archao-
logical Magazine, vol. xx., p. 241, Canon Jackson modestly states
that “he only pretends to make a little contribution of some details
relating principally to the Monastic Establishment ;” and also that
‘the grand old Church deserves—what it has not yet obtained—a
volume to itself, and one that should be rich in illustration.”

When J had the honour of being invited to read a paper on
Edington Church it oceurred to me that—whilst leaving the writing
of a volume on the subject in more able hands—it might not be
without interest to some who are not well acquainted with the
building if I ventured to supplement what Canon Jackson has said
with a few details of the Church itself which have come before my
notice in my long acquaintance with it, and in particular during
my recent closer study of this and other works of Bishop
Edington.

In illustration of my remarks I venture to make use of the plans
which I have prepared for the restoration of the Church—I use
the word restoration in its most conservative sense—and of other
drawings which I produce for this special purpose.

To make my remarks the more intelligible I will first state
shortly the history of the Monastery and its founder, culled from
Canon Jackson’s more elaborate details—the main authority for
which is the Register of Edington, forming No. 442 of the Lans-
downe MSS. in the British Museum, and I here wish to express
my obligation to the worthy Canon for so readily placing these
results of his researches at my disposal.

210 Edington Church.

The Rectory of Edington belonged to the Abbey of Romsey, of
which the Rector was a Resident Prebendary, and the parochial
duties, with the services in the Church (the predecessor of the
building under notice) were discharged by a Vicar. About the
year 1300 William of Edington (whose surname is unknown) was
born in the village whose name he adopted; after education at
Oxford, and having held two previous livings, he, in 1322, became
Rector of Middleton Cheney, in Oxfordshire. In 1345 he was, by
Royal favour, appointed to the See of Winchester, and shortly
afterwards made Lord High Chancellor of England. In the last
year of his life, 1366, Bishop Edington was nominated Archbishop
of Canterbury, which office, however, he declined, probably on ac-
count of infirmity.

Soon after his consecration to Winchester he appears to have set
about improving the state of the Church in his native parish of
Edington. He first (in 1351) arranged with the Abbess of Romsey
for the establishment at Edington of a Collegiate Body of Secular
Priests under a Warden. But a short time after this, at the special
request of the Black Prince, he converted his College into a Monas-
tery of the Augustinian Order of “ Bonhommes,” and built the
present Church. [There was a previous parish Church on the same
site, and during the recent restoration, the base, of late Norman
character, of the west respond of the south arcade was discovered 7m
situ, and opened out. ‘This appears to have been the starting-point
in setting out the new, and larger, Church—the corresponding
respond of which stands on the old one.]

Leland gives the following extracts from a certain Latin book of
Edington Monastery :—

“3rd July A.D. 13852. was laid the first stone of the Monastery

of Edindon.”
: « A.D. 1861. The Conventual Church of Edindon was dedicated
by Robert Wyville Bishop of Sarum to the honour of St. James
the Apostle, S. Katharine and All Saints.”

[Canon Jackson states: ‘‘ St. James the Apostle, as one of the
saints to whom the Church was dedicated, may have been an error
of Leland’s copying. In the foundation charter, printed in the New

—— SC

By C. E. Ponting, F.8.A. 211

Monasticon (vi., 536), the dedication is to the Blessed Virgin Mary,
St. Katharine, and All Saints.”’]

We are thus able to fix the exact date of the commencement and
completion of the Church, the whole of which was carried out during
the bishop’s lifetime.

It is by such authenticated examples that we are best able to fix
the periods at which the various styles of Gothic Architecture pre-
vailed, and this is an especially valuable example as it marks the
change from one of the great divisions to another—from the “ Deco-
rated” (which Mr. Parker sets down as ending about 1360, and
and Rickman as 1377) to the “ Perpendicular ” (which both these
authorities consider as commencing about 1400).

The value of this example is enhanced by the fact that, with the
exception of the porch, which appears to have been added to the
aisle wall, rather than dwilé up with it, and is somewhat later in
detail, [the upper stage of the porch was probably added in the
sixteenth century, and the original parapet and cornice re-set at the
higher level] the building is all of one date, and it remains practically
unaltered, so that it presents to us a complete specimen of the
Monastic Church of the fourteenth century.

The plan of the Church is cruciform, with central tower, and the
various parts are set out with great precision. It consists of a nave
of six bays with lofty clerestory, north and south aisles, north and
south transepts, and large chancel. Against the second bay of the
south aisle from the west is a porch of three stories, the lowest of
which is vaulted in stone. The middle one has a fireplace, and is
approached by a turret staircase on the west side—the steps
going on up to the aisle roof, from which again by a step about
3ft. high the doorway of the upper room is reached. There are
other stair turrets at the western angles of the transepts, each of
which leads to its respective side of the nave, transept, and aisle
roofs, the parapets being ingeniously corbelled out and the angles
of the tower canted off to admit of passage, and that on the south
gives access to the tower by means of another turret starting from
the transept roof, and carried up the south-west angle.

It will thus be seen that, with the exception of that of the north

212 Edington Church.

aisle, all the roofs are approached by staircases, and before the
destruction of the domestic buildings of the Monastery this roof
also had its stair turret, which projected beyond the west face and
was entered from the cloister. The west window of this aisle is
placed closer to the nave than that of the south aisle to admit of
this; and the point at which the string course and plinth stop
probably indicate its exact position. As showing the thoroughness
with which the work was done, I may here mention that the stone
roofs of these turrets are groined on the underside, the ribs springing
from the central newel.

The principal dimensions of the Church are as follows (inside
measurement) :—nave, 73ft. 4in. long and 22ft. 6in. wide; north
aisle, 73ft. 6in. long, and 12ft. 2in. wide; south aisle, 73ft. 2in.
long and 12ft. 3in. wide ; north transept, 21ft. 6in. long and 22ft.
2in. wide; south transept, 20ft. 9in. long, and 21ft. lin. wide ;
chancel, 52ft. 3in. long and 24ft. wide, in addition to the projection
of the screen into the crossing. The total internal length is 154ft.,
and the width across the transepts is 71ft. 8in. The spacing of the
bays of the nave is exact, the columns being 12ft. 3in. from centre
to centre.

The tower is 27ft. 6in. from north to south, and the same from
east to west outside, and 67ft high from nave floor to top of parapet.
The lower stage was intended to be vaulted in stone, and the corbels
and wall-ribs still exist; but it is doubtful whether the intention
was ever carried out. I would remark, in passing, that the belfry
windows were originally filled with coloured glass, portions of which
remain in the tracery, and for the same reason, probably, the jambs
and arches are, contrary to the usual order, deeply moulded on the
inside, whilst on the outside the tracery is flush with the wall. It
seems difficult to assign any use for this upper chamber, approached
as it is from the outside along the gutter of the transept roof.

The domestic buildings of the monastery were on the north side
of the Church and the north aisle formed one side of the cloister
garth, the windows of the aisle being shorter than on the south side,
and the lower part of the side window of the transept built solid to
admit of the cloister roof coming below them. The weather mould

ee

By C. B. Ponting, F.S.A. 213

over the roof still exists. I have traced the foundation of the west
wall of the cloister for some distance northward in a line with the
west front of the Church, but with this exception no part of the
original monastery remains. The entrance to the Church from the
monastery was by the doorway into the north aisle at the south-east
angle of the cloister, and the arch of this doorway is, unlike any
other throughout the building, enriched with carving.

The Church was built for the double purpose of a monastic and a
parish Church—its plan has been arranged for this, and the details
of the separate parts have been designed to emphasize their use. It
will be seen that the chancel (the monks’ choir) and the transepts,
which were used as chapels, have a distinctly different treatment to
the nave and aisles, which formed the parish Church. The windows
of the monastic Church have a distinct type of tracery; their
mouldings are richer and more varied; plinths on the outside and
string courses both inside and outside are carried round this part
only; the buttresses here are terminated by pinnacles, and the
gargoyles are carved, whilst those of the parish Church are plain.!

The chancel being the Church of the monastery, the parish altar
was placed under the western arch of the tower—the way to the
chancel from the cloister being behind it. The floor of the crossing
and transepts, also of the eastern bay of the nave and aisles, is
thirteen inches above the general floor of the nave; and the fact of
this raised level being carried so far westward indicates that the
altar was in this position. There are remains of a niche and piscina,
coeval with the building, in the east wall of the north transept.
The niche has a shelf and is groined—the front part of the canopy
has been cut away, but traces of it and of its flanking pinnacles
remain ; it is covered with the original rich colouring and gilding ;
and the lily painted on the splayed sides, with the predominance of
blue in the decoration, indicates that the altar which stood here was
dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Portions of the two steps across the south aisle remain, and a
piscina, coeval with the structure, exists in the south wall for the

} There were two secular priests set apart to attend to the services in the parish
Church,

214 Edington Church.

use of an altar here. Traces of a screen wall or reredos, 5ft. high
and 94in. thick exist behind the site of this altar; this was probably
erected when another chantry was formed farther eastward, where
a later piscina has been inserted.

Although the entire floor of the transepts is now on one level, the
rough wall surface above it on the east side, and the higher position
of the bases of the tower piers here, afford ample evidence that the
spaces on each side of the projecting rood screen were raised to the
extent of a further thirteen inches or so; this would point to there
having been another altar in the south transept. [It has since
been discovered that the lower step of this raised space returned
westwards across the south transept, sufficiently far in front of the
tomb to protect the grave of tke ecclesiastic whom it commemo-
rates. |

The large dimensions of the chancel would point to the conclusion
that the founder of the monastery contemplated a goodly number of
brethren, but Leland gives the number of priests in the college as
twelve, and the highest recorded number of inmates of the monas-
tery is that given in a petition to the diocesan to select a new rector
on the death of the first rector, John Ailesbury, in 1382, the words
* Co-rector and convent, eighteen in number,” here occur ; but as
this was sixteen years after the death of William of Edington, it is
possible that this number was at one time exceeded. At the sur--
render of the monastery by Paul Bush, in 1539, the number had
become reduced again to twelve.

The chancel is of three bays in length, and the side windows are,
in design and dimensions, like those in the transepts; and the Per-
pendicularized form of reticulated tracery here is very characteristic.
The original ehancel roof was an open timbered one, with circular
braces, the lines of which are traceable on the walls; this has
disappeared, and a modern roof and plaster ceiling about a century
old have taken its place. But the corbels, which supported the roof
trusses, remain—two on each side—and are supported by beautiful
niches. These four niches probably contained figures of the
Evangelists, the headless remains of two of which still exist, and
their graceful drapery indicates a high order of art. The emblems

| ? ss << ¥
oa Z 's :
| ’ \\ > ae
. z :
¢ f
ay
: . he
fs aos

HOpUr] PY oye MeN UeMoAyI A,

sq Snosoqpasy/ < Ud nag Sut yer! $ WUOLJIIS yeu pngyisao7T

“prraryrry,
‘Sarpoog I'D

a? J of oh ob ole ob + ri vol

Sith Going. wolsutp 7

=”

By C. E. Ponting, P.S8.A. 215

at the feet of these (the lion and the eagle) symbolize St. Mark and
St. John. The truss against the east wall was supported by similar
corbels set diagonally across the angles, whilst on the west, against
the tower, where the arch precluded this, the corbels are carried by
an octagonal shaft standing on grotesques. On the east wall, flanking
the window, are two niches of very elaborate design and delicate
construction, the slender proportion of their tabernacle work (the
smaller shafts of which are only jin square) being suggestive of
wood rather than stone. Both bear evidence of rich gilding and
colouring beneath the whitewash, and the spirit shown in their
handicraft by the respective workmen is very instructive ; for whilst
Bishop Edington’s artist gilded every part, even where hidden from
view behind the canopies; the churchwardens’ whitewasher only
smeared over the parts which can be seen from below—or perhaps
the latter was more sparing of his whitewash than the former of his
gold! The niche on the north is richer in some minor points of
detail than that on the south; and as the Church is dedicated to the
Blessed Virgin Mary and S. Katherine (with All Saints) I would
suggest the probability that figures of the two principal saints
occupied these niches, and that of Our Lady the richer one on the
north,

Before I leave the chancel I must allude to a singular combination
of features, which, so far as I know, has not hitherto attracted
notice. In the centre of the south side is a doorway (which,
doubtless, from its plain external appearance, has been considered
** modern,” and is described as such by Canon Jackson, who informs
me that this was the opinion of the Rev. E. Wilton, who had lived
nearly all his life in or near Edington, and was much interested in
the Church). This doorway is richly moulded on the inside, and
the label is carried up as an ogee canopy, with flanking pinnacles
and crockets, and dies into the string course as shewn in my longi-
tudinal section. But the rebate for the door is on the owtside, where
the western jamb and arch have a small plain chamfer, whilst the
eastern jamb is deeply splayed off. This was evidently not originally
an outside entrance to the chancel as at present, but opened into a
long narrow chamber against the two eastern bays. Referring to
VOL, XXV.—NO, LXXIv. Q

216 Edington Church.

the elevation, it appears that the outer sills of the windows of these
two bays are on this side, kept higher—the splays being flatter to
admit of it, and that the string eourse which is carried all round the
chancel and transepts elsewhere becomes here a mere weather-mould
over the roof of this adjunct, as well as being at a higher level.
The westernmost window is also some four or five inches higher
altogether, a break being made in the upper string forming the
label. ‘Then the plinth which elsewhere was carried round the
chancel and transepts, never existed here at all, and only occurs on
the face of the intervening buttress and for some six inches on the
return. There is a built-up window in the buttress at the west-end
of the chamber, and an archway for passage through the intervening
one also blocked up. The three buttresses have had their south
faces re-built, and probably set back, so that their present projection
does not represent the width of the chamber, but it was evidently
not much in excess of this—hence apparently the splaying off of
this door jamb.

When I had got thus far in my investigations, I looked for some
indication of other openings in the chancel wall, and on critically
examining the jointing I found that there are two built-up squints
or windows (with a mullion between) which once looked into the
sanctuary. The monument of Sir W. Lewys effectually prevents
an examination of these features on the inside, but from the fact
that the string course under the windows stops, at about two feet
from the last. window, against what is apparently the remains of a
pinnacle, similar in section to those flanking the niches, I conjecture
that there was a group of features under this window, which
probably included sedilia and piscina, and of which these openings
formed part, as at Dorchester, Oxon. [A portion of the sedilia has
since been opened out—each compartment has a circular back and
groined ceiling, and traces of a canopy similar to that over the
doorway near it.] There are also two larger openings divided by a
mullion, but these were probably only recesses, or aumbries, as there
is no sign of them on the inside. The object of this passage-like
chamber opens the field for much conjecture. It must have been
too narrow for a sacristy, and I do not incline to the Leper theory,

By C. E. Ponting, F.8.A. 217

so often advanced for openings in this position. Was the chamber
the kind of anchor-hold described by Mr. Mackenzie Walcott,—the
openings being to enable the recluse to see the mysteries? Or was
it not, rather, a watching chamber? The latter would seem to be
the more probable use. The fact of there being a doorway between
the chamber and the chancel, and that the outside wall of the latter,
under the window, bears marks of fire, might be of assistance in
forming an opinion. Certain it is, however, that all these features,
including the doorway, are coeval with the chancel, and that their
original use was abandoned at a very early period; for the filling
up of the small openings has oyster-shel/s in the joints, and I have
neyer yet seen nor heard of these having been employed in Post-
Reformation work.

In the westernmost bay of the chancel, on the north side, is what
Canon Jackson refers to, on the same authority, as a “ blocked-up
door, which once led into the cloister.” This doorway is only 2ft,
Odin. wide, but it is identical in its jamb and arch mouldings with
that on the south side, and there are mutilated remains of a similar
canopy over it. This opening has been built up so cleverly on the
outside as to entirely remove all traces of it there. I think it
probable that it opened into a sacristy, for the cloister could hardly
have extended so far eastward, and it is probable that the cemetery
of the monastery was on the north of the chancel.

I may here mention that on the outside of the north-wall of the
chancel, and in the next bay to the last named is another curious
niche. It is built up from the projecting plinth, and on rising
above it the sides are canted off to the wall face. The opening in
front has tracery of a very “Geometrical” type, the ceiling is
groined, and the whole is surmounted by an embattled cornice.
The masonry here has been much scraped away, but I can discern
three holes in the back of the niche (one of which has a metal rivet
left in it) in such a position as would seem to indicate that a crucifix
was fixed to it, facing the cemetery. That this, and also the features
on the south side are coeval with the original structure is proved,
not only by the unmistakeable manner in which the masonry of
the first is jointed, but also by the fact that in both cases the

Q 2

218 Edington Ofaurch.

consecration crosses, which everywhere else are placed against the
centre of the part of the building to which each refers, are cut here
on one side.

Behind the altar is a piece of Jacobean oak work, which it is
generally supposed was the chimney-piece of a secular building, but
I see no reason to suppose that it was not made for its present
position.

The rood-screen has been described as “a large rood-loft, with an
incongruous wooden screen beneath it;” but in my judgment it
deserves a much better character. It stands on a plinth of stone,
which indicates the original floor-level, 1ft, 2in. below the present
pavement of the chancel. [The original level of the chancel floor
has since been restored by Mr. S. Watson Taylor, the lay rector. ]
The screen itself is filled with plain panels below the middle hori-
zontal] rail, and the grooves in the mullions of the upper part indicate
that there were solid panels here also, behind the existing traceried.
heads; thus, with the exception of the open framing of the upper
half of the doors, the screen entirely shut out a view of the chancel
from the nave. The doorway has a four-centred arch, supported by
shafts with carved capitals, on the jambs; above this framing is a
panelled cove of slight projection, with moulded ribs, and bosses
planted on at the intersections; these are again framed into a
moulded front beam supported by carved brackets at the ends. The
loft over this is 7ft. wide; the eastern face of it is supported on a
carved beam, on the underside of which are mortises for the ribs of
a second cove, and also “ housings ” at the ends for similar brackets
to those under the west beam. It becomes clear on looking into it
that under the loft there was a double row of stalls facing east, and
that the eastern cove was framed at its lower edge into an inner
beam, and probably a second screen forming the back of the front
row of stalls. They appear to have been removed since the modern
painting was done, and their height is clearly traceable.

The framing of the loft consists of moulded mullions carried up
from the front beams to upper beams, which are also moulded and
had carving inserted; between these are solid panels, on which are
painted in black letters of Edward IV. character, on a white ground,

By C. #. Ponting, F.S.A. 219i

some sentences from the Book of Proverbs. This framing is now:
returned at the ends, and there is no means of access to it; but the
return pieces, although coeval with the rest, bear the appearance of
having been fitted here in more recent times, and as the ends of the
front beam have been roughly cut off, as. well as the string courses
of the transepts against which it would come, I conjecture that the
loft was originally carried through the transepts and crossing, and
this would account for its projecting so far into the latter. The
space under the existing part of the loft is divided from the transepts.
by stone walls, and in that on the north side is a small window
which would come at the end of the passage between the two rows.
of stalls, and afford a view of the altar in the lady chapel.

The entire erection is a very late addition to the Church, probably
about the end of Hen. VII., and the carving in the spandrels and
hollows is all planted on, but it is exceedingly rich and free in
treatment. The Tudor rose is conspicuous in it, but there is no
trace of original painting. Some Elizabethan enrichment of the
screen and doors has been added, and the latter have subsequently
been cut off to admit of the raising of the chancel floor. [The
missing carving and cresting of this screen is in process of being
reinstated.]

The roofs of the nave, aisles, and transepts are rude in workman-
ship and plain in detail. They are of the king-post and tie-beam
type, the nave and aisles having wall pieces and braces carried far
down and supported by corbels. The ceilings are formed by seven-
teenth century plastering secured to the underside of the rafters,
and the surfaces are enriched by plaster ribs in geometrical arabesque,
with cusping ; under the tower this takes the form of vaulting in
plaster, following the lines of the original stone wall ribs. This
work adds a special interest to the roofs, and it is unfortunate that
the rotten state of the timbers rendered it impossible to retain it in
the aisles and south transept, where new roofs have been substituted,
The ribs are formed of a light red plaster for their entire thickness.

Against the south wall of the south transept is a monument of
great beauty, of which a drawing accompanies this paper. It
consists of an altar-tomb supporting the recumbent effigy of an.

220 Edington Church.

Augustinian canon, with his head resting on a cushion and his feet
on a barrel, Over this rises a canopy with richly groined vaulting,
at the front of which is a traceried arch, and at each end a niche.
At the back is a blank space which was once apparently filled with
a panel of stone or marble about 24in. thick. The central part
being raised suggests the probability that the subject of this panel
was the crucifixion. At the front angles of the tomb are niches
containing figures of SS. Peter and Paul, with their emblems, the
keys and the sword (which, by the way, are the arms of the See of
Winchester). The cornice is richly carved with the vine pattern ;
in the centre above is an angel holding the supposed design or rebus,
a branch or sprig growing out of a barrel or twm. On each side of
this figure can be traced the section of a destroyed parapet, which
was probably pierced or carved. The moulded mensa is enriched by
carving—the subjects being the rebus referred to five times repeated,
the monogram IB twice repeated, a lamb with the same sprig crossed
above its head, and a Tudor rose. The front of the tomb below
this is divided into four panels of cusped quatrefoils, in two of
which the rebus runs, and in the other two the Tudor flower. Not-
withstanding all this symbolism the name of the departed ecclesi-
astic has never yet been satisfactorily identified, though many
guesses have been made; he was doubtless a benefactor of the
monastery. The original rich colouring of red, blue, black, and
gold remains on the upper part of the monument, though a good
deal of modern ruddle has been added. In re-laying the floor of
the south transept a stone-built grave was discovered in front of this
altar-tomb ; a piece of the original tile floor in situ under the lowest
step of the staircase, and the marks on the wall indicated that the
raised altar space against the east wall returned along over this
grave. The grave was not disturbed, but there can be little doubt
that it is that of the canon whom the monument commemo-
rates.

Under the second arch from the east of the south nave arcade
(which, I may mention, is the exact position of Bishop Edington’s
chantry in Winchester Cathedral) is another monument, perhaps a
little later in date, and supposed to be that of Sir Ralph Cheney,

————E——

—~

By C. FE. Ponting, F.S8.A. 221

who died in 1401, having married a danghter of Sir John Paveley, of
Brook House. This consists of a Purbeck slab,'from which two brasses
have been removed, resting on a panelled altar-tomb,with a canopy, and
there are indications of similar tracery, in the two-side openings, to
that referred to in the last. At the east end there is a niche, and at
the west end a canopied oratory, in which the priest might stand
when singing mass, the canopy and cornice being continued over it.
The cornice has the vine pattern carved in it, and a portion of the
crested parapet still remains. There are various shields bearing
arms, which Canon Jackson considers hardly bear out the union of
Sir R. Cheney with Sir J. Paveley’s heiress—though the rudder
(the Paveley badge) is many times repeated on the shields and in
the carving. This tomb extends the full width between the two.
pillars, which have been cut away to receive it. Both tomb and
pillars bear traces of original painting, in spite of the scraping
which the former has received,

Against this, on the nave side (and immediately at the foot of
the steps leading to the raised part of the floor) exists the moulded
stone curb of an ancient carol or enclosed chantry, and the position of
a similar one can be traced on the north side of the nave.

The font, which stands at the west end of the north aisle, has
been much mutilated; it has a bowl of Purbeck marble on a stone
base and an oak Jacobean cover. The pulpit is a good one of
Jacobean date, with sounding-board.

There are ‘many valuable bits of stained glass in the Church in
the style of the fourteenth century. The three-light east window
of the north transept (or lady chapel) contains almost intact the
subject of the crucifixion, Our Lady and 8S. John flanking the
main figure.

The clerestory windows contain figures of the bishops, with
mutilated inscriptions beneath them, of which an illustration is
here given.

Dr. Rock, in his work called “ Hierugia,” at page 786, gives the
names of a number of saints mentioned in an Anglo-Saxon litany
of the tenth century, both male and female. The names of the
males are given :—

222 Edington Church.

Sce Eadmunde
Sce Eadwarde
Sce Albane
and so on ;
the names of the ladies -—
Sea Brigida
and so on.
It is possible that, as the names are made to end in e, so the word
saint may have been garnished with the same superfluous vowel.

The Rev. Christopher Wordsworth, to whom these inscriptions
have been referred, considers the first to mean S. Cuthbert, and the
third S. Christopher—although the former figure has a sword, and
the latter is that of a bishop; and that the errors in the accessories
are due probably to the artist having had a conventional type in
the abstract, without much knowledge of hagiology.

Besides these there are almost perfect lights in the north aisle,
containing heraldic emblems, but no figure subjects. In one of the
aisle windows a single piece of heraldic glass was found with the
Hungerford arms (three sheaves and three sickles) on it. There are
in the south aisle several original oak benches, as well as parts of
others, including many good linen pattern panels, in the nave.

The exterior of the Church is remarkable for the regularity of its
design—thus, the cornices—(although those of the nave, transepts,
and clerestory are of different sections) are carried all round at the
same level. The side windows of the chancel and the four windows
in the transepts are alike in dimensions and design. Then the
clerestory windows and those of the aisles are similar in design ;
those of the north and south aisles only differ in height, owing to a
local circumstance. Parapets are carried round the whole of the
roofs, and are repeated on the tower, those, however, on the north
aisle and transept are plain, the rest being embattled. Diagonal
buttresses only occur in the porch, and may be taken as one of the
indications of its being a somewhat later addition. All the rest of
the buttresses stand square with the walls, and (excepting the low
ones at the west angles of aisles) are carried up above the parapets,

“HOYNH) NOLONICZ 30 SMOGNIM AYOLS3Y31D 3H1 NI “WHYOAHLYD YALSAHONIM NI
SLINIVS 40 SSYNSIS Y3IGNN SNOILdIYOSN| NOLONIOA 40 WWITTIM 40 ADIS43 AHL WOYS AIOLS

Aw 900278)
RULOIQne Ds!

By C. E. Ponting, F.8.A. 228

panelled, and surmounted by crocketted pinnacles. It is noticeable
that the side walls of aisles and clerestory are not buttressed. The
gables of the transepts are carried up within the parapets, the latter
rnnning round horizontally, and the gutter coming between. The
graceful lines of the coping where it is formed into a base for the
cross are an instance of the exceeding beauty of the curves in the
designs of this Church.!

The west front is notable for its unique window and doorway, to
which I shall have occasion to refer again. The doorway appears to
have been intended more as an architectural feature than for use, as
the splayed plinth of soft stone (which stands above the floor) is
carried through as a sill, and indicates little sign of wear.

The low and broad proportions of the tower by their very dignity
cause one the more to reeret the absence of bolder outside mouldings
to the belfry windows, by which a somewhat meagre appearance is
given them. The original doors remain, though much dilapidated,

at the south and west entrances, they have plain square inside

framing, and vertical boards on the outside; the hinges are quite
plain.

A noticeable feature in the design of the Church is that effect is
produced by good proportions, solid construction, and rich mouldings,
rather than by carving. There is no carving on the outside, beyond
the patere in the arch of the doorway into the cloister, the label
terminations of the east and west windows, and the gargoyles to
chancel and transept only ; whilst on the inside it is only employed
in the niches and corbels of the chancel, and two string terminations
in the transepts. The capitals throughout are moulded.

The consecration crosses were cut in the wall and inlaid with
brasses, each secured by four rivets. The brasses, however, are
all missing. There are twelve crosses on the inside and twelve
on the outside, and they occur at the following places :—inside—
one at the west end of each of the two aisles, one in the centre
of the head of the west doorway, one in the centre of the side wall

1 For illustrations of the south side and west front see vol. xx., pp. 241 and
295 of the Magazine.

224 Edington Church.

of each aisle, one in the end wall of each transept, one in the centre
of each side wall of the chancel, three on the east wall of the
ehancel. On the outside they are as nearly as they can be opposite
to those on the inside.

The four niches against the wall of the north transept, with their
scalloped heads and moulded seats, are doubtless additions made
after the monastery was bought, in 1549, by Sir W. Pawlett. The
domestic buildings were then pulled down, and a mansion erected
with the materials; these niches would seem to indicate that the
gardens extended up to this wall of the Church.

A beautiful monument in marble and alabaster, to the memory of
Sir Thomas Lewys, lessee of the house, from the Pawletts, in 1636,
occupies the south side of the sacrarium, and has its railing still
around it.

In the floor of the sacrarium is an interesting brass, 143in x
1l}in., with the inscription, “ Here lyeth the body of the Right
Honble. Anne Lady Beauchamp, who deceased the 25th of September
in the yeare of Our Lord 1664.” In re-laying the floor the lead
coffin containing the body was exposed. It is only 5ft. 2in. long,
shaped to the outline of the body, and the face is moulded in low
relief. It bears the inscription, ‘The Right Honble. Anne Lady
Beauchamp, deceased the 25th of September, 1664.” Lady
Beauchamp was the wife of Sir Edward Lewys, whose monument
is against the south wall.

I have hitherto only dealt with the general design and features
of the Church, but it is in the composition of these that its principal
teaching value consists, as illustrating the course of the transition ; _
and in briefly treating of this I hope to advance some further
evidence that it was the founder of this Church, William of
Edington, as I was glad to hear our President acknowledge in his
opening address (and not William of Wykeham, who has generally
been given the credit of it), who introduced the leading principles
of the Perpendicular style.

I would incidentally remark that Professor Willis says it is known
that Wykeham was in Bishop Edington’s service in 13852, and he
is supposed to have assisted as clerk of the works in the building of

By C. E. Ponting, S.A. 225

Edington Church. I think I ought to mention that on the occasion
of my visit to Winchester for the purposes of this paper I alluded
to this circumstance in conversation with the Dean as a proof of the
schooling which Wykeham received from his master and subse-
quently developed at Winchester; but the Dean replied that his
view of this particular connexion was that the elerk of the works
came to Edington to shew the Bishop how to build Edington
Church !

I will first quote the late Mr. J. H. Parker on the subject of its
characteristics. He says, “It is a fine cruciform Church, all of
uniform character, and that character is neither Decorated nor
Perpendicular, but a very remarkable mixture of the two styles
throughout. The tracery of the windows looks at first sight like
Decorated, but, on looking more closely, the introduction of Per-
pendicular features is evident. The west doorway has the segmental
arch, common in Decorated work, over this is the usual square label
of the Perpendicular, and under the arch is Perpendicular panelling
over the heads of the two doors. The same curious mixture is
observable in the mouldings and in all the details. . . . Bishop
Edington’s work at Winchester was executed at a later period than
that at Edington, and, as might be expected, the new idea is more
fully developed, but on a comparison between the west window of
Winchester and the east window of Edington it will at once be
seen that the principle of construction is the same. There isa
central division carried up to the head of the window, and sub-
arches springing from it on each side.”

There are, however, many peculiarities in the tracery which Mr.
Parker does not mention. For instance, in the centre light of the
east window is (if we except the small window in the transept) the
only bit of transom to be found in the Church, and it indicates the
change of style in a pronounced manner; in other respects the
tracery of this window is quite “ flowing” in character, and the
cusps of the middle light are terminated by carved bosses. Then
in the west window we have the central mullion springing off into
sub-arches, and none of the mullions carried through to the outer
arch, although this occurs in the east window, which is on the whole

226 Edington Church.

an earlier type. But the principle of Perpendicularity is shewn in
the vertical lines of the tracery, carried up from the points of the
four main lights. This window affords a striking instance, I think,
of the precedence which I elaim for William of Edington ; for it
will be seen, on comparison with a window at New College, Oxford,
erected by William of Wykeham in 1386, that the share of the
latter in the design consists of taking Bishop Edington’s window,
erected twenty-five years before, omitting the sub-mullions and
tracery of these four main lights (in short, regarding it as a fowr-
light instead of an eight-light window); extending its height to
fit the place for which he required it, and adding a transom to
support the lengthened mullions !

The three-light windows in the chancel and transepts are inter-
esting and unique specimens of the Transitional treatment of the
familiar Decorated type, known as “ reticulated” tracery. It is
interesting to compare this with a window from the vestry of
Merton College, Oxford, erected in 1325, By simply substituting
a two-centred for an ogee arch of each compartment of the tracery,
an elongation of the vertical dividing line is obtained producing the
mullion-tracery which constitutes the distinctive character of the
later examples. The narrow side windows in the transepts are quite
unique in design; that in the north transept has a decidedly Per-
pendicular feeling, and exhibits the wall panelling idea in its lower
compartments,

Much has been said of the tracery of the tower windows as ex-
hibiting the “ cross flewry”’ in supposed allusion to the.arms of the
Paveley family, but as the west windows of the aisles have the cross
turned the other way this intention hardly holds good. I regard
the tracery of these windows as a natural development of geometrical
forms, and a similar device to those in the aisle is to be seen in a
four-light window in Shere Church, in Surrey, given in “ Brandon’s
Analysis.”

It will be observed that the early segmental form of arch occurs
over all the windows of the aisles and clerestory, and that the outer
doorway of the porch has the pointed segmental arch which is so
conspicuous a feature in Bishop Edington’s work at Winchester.

By C. E. Ponting, F.8.A. 227

All the other arches at Edington are of the obtusely pointed form
known as the drop arch. A marked feature of the Perpendicular
style which prevails here, in almost all cases, is the return of the
label either as a string course, as in the windows of the chancel and
transepts, or as a knee, as in those of the tower. The mouldings,
even more than the tracery, indicate a leaning towards the change
of style, whilst retaining many of the characteristics of the Decorated,
and it might be worth while to trace their development from what
was probably the earliest to the latest work of William of Edington
—this Church being the connecting link. On comparing the in-
teresting porch of Middleton Cheney (of which Church he was
rector from 1382 to 1835) with Edington, I bave no doubt it was,
as generally supposed, erected during the time of his incumbency.
The form of the arch and the knee of the label, as well as the
mouldings of the doorway, are corresponding features.

Taking, then, this doorway as a specimen of Edington’s early
work—we have two orders of the wave-mould divided by a small
but deep hollow or “casement.” Then in the inner doorway at
Edington we have the same features advanced a stage. The inner
sinking of the wave-mould is quirked, whilst the outer sinking
remains as before and the casement is slightly flattened. Taking next
the doorway into the cloister, the early form of the filletted-roll,

with the deep outside sinking, and the small rolls which soften the

outline of the casement are here combined with a wide flat casement,
which indicates a much later feeling.

The reticulated windows of chancel and transepts have the double
ogee (or brace-mould) with a very flat casement, and an attenuated
form of filletted-roll forming a group of mouldings of decidedly
Perpendicular character. The east window has the same members,
with the addition of the quirk and sunk chamfer, to throw into
relief the fillets of the inner order of the tracery, which are features
of Bishop Edington’s work, both here and at Winchester. It also

has the somewhat unusual arrangement of two filletted-rolls set at

right angles, forming the inner edge of the jamb. The label and
string course are of the same late type which prevails throughout
the building. A similar kind of quirk occurs in the outside splay

228 Edington Church.

of the two narrow windows in the transepts, forming (with the line
of the splay and that of the outside face) the peculiar angular outer
member of the mullions, which occurs also in the great west window
at Winchester. The casement here is flat, and the outer member
of the jamb is the quirked wave-mould which exists on the inner
doorway of the porch. The window mouldings of the aisles and
clerestory, the nave arcade, and the various copings and cornices all
show the same mixture of early and late forms, the latter predomi-
nating, but all are rich and beautifully designed.

The leading principle in the construction of the groups of
mouldings at Edington is that which is a special characteristic of
Perpendicular work—that all lie on the splay or chamfer plane, and
the projection of the various members all ¢ouwch the line of that
plane. The splays, whether sunk or not, are also parallel to this
line, so that the mouldings are, as it were, sunk from the surface
represented by it. This applies not only to jamb and arch
mouldings, but also to the under sides of cornices and string courses.

I have only time to make a brief allusion to the work of Bishop
Edington at Winchester Cathedral, executed between the years
1345 and 1866; this consists of the entire west front, one bay of
the north aisle and two of the south aisle. As regards the
mouldings, Professor Willis states that “those of Bishop Edington
and Bishop Wykeham afford a very useful test of the different
powers of the artists who designed them,” and he arrives at a
conclusion unfavourable to our Founder. But I do not hesitate to
affirm that had the learned Professor studied Bishop Edington’s
mouldings in this Church he would not have accused him of any
lack of power of design.

His mouldings at Winchester show a great advance in the change
of style; they are much flatter, and of what Mr. Paley terms the
“ save-trouble” type. Moreover, the corresponding members are
of the same size, both in the great west window of the nave, and
in the smaller ones of the aisles, which has a very coarse and
dwarfing effect upon the latter. The same chamfer-plane treat-
ment with parallel sunk splays is noticeable in them as in those at
Edington. The singular quirk breaking the splay or hollow (to

By C. EB. Ponting, F.S.A. 229

which I have referred) occurs in the head of the western doors of
the aisles, in the outer doorways of the porch, and in the panelling
of the turrets. The two filletted rolls set at right angles occur both
in the east window at Edington and in the west porch at Winchester,
and the last two peculiarities are strong evidence that this porch
was erected by Bishop Edington. His work at Winchester, com-
pleted before 1866, has the leading characteristics of the fully
developed Perpendicular style, and, besides the indications of it in
. the mouldings, the mullions of the windows are carried rigidly right
through the head; transoms are freely introduced between them ;
the whole surface of the west front, both inside and out, as well as
that of the turrets, is panelled; whilst on the inside the main mullions
of the west windows of nave and aisles are carried up from the floor
to the window arch, and the doorways and windows themselves only,
as it were, form part of a general scheme of panelling.

It is, to me, a most remarkable thing that the same man should
have designed work, so widely distant, as regards the periods at
which the two styles prevailed, as the porch of Middleton Cheney
and the west front of Winchester, and it must, I think, be clear to
anyone who studies and compares the three works of Bishop Eding-
ton, to which I have referred, that the designer of them has a prior
claim to William of Wykeham to be considered the originator of
the Perpendicular style, and that he was, moreover, a man of very
extraordinary ability,and an honour to his native county of Wiltshire.

The following on the life of Bishop Edington has been communi-
cated to me by Mr. H. D. Cole, of Winchester, and I give a drawing,
taken from a rubbing which he kindly supplied to me, of the
ornamentation of the stole from the bishop’s effigy.

BisHor WittiamM DE Epynpon.

At the east end of the nave on the south side of the steps leading
up to the choir is the oldest chantry in the Cathedral, being that of
William of Edyndon, Edyngton, or Edington, who was Bishop of
_ Winchester, A.D. 1345, and who died in 1866.

In 1850 the bishop, who was in high favour with King Edward
IIl., was appointed the first prelate of the newly-instituted Order

230 Edington Church.

of the Garter, an honour which has descended to the successive
Bishops of Winchester. He also became Treasurer to the King,
and in 1357 was promoted to be Lord Chancellor of England. In
1366 he was elected to the highest dignity to which an English
Churchman could aspire, viz,, to the Metropolitan See of Canter-
bury; this, however, he declined to accept. Authors are divided as
to his reasons for the refusal, one ascribing it to his humility, another
to his advanced age (he died at the latter end of the year, 7th
October, 1366), whilst a third attributed it to motives of avarice,
stating that he used the following expression, which has become
known as a Winchester proverb:—“ Though Canterbury is the
highest rack, yet Winchester is the deepest manger.” His works of
charity and other benefactions during his lifetime prove, however,
that he was not an avaricious man.

The chantry contains the tomb and figure of the bishop in full
pontifieals, but without a pastoral staff. The mitre is half broken
off, and the precious stones have been torn from it. On the vest-
ment is a very curious and rare emblem called a Fylfot, or Suastika ;
this is of a peculiar cruciform shape, which has been found on
military and ecclesiastical decorations in England and on Eastern
coins. On a bishop’s vestment it is stated by one of the best
authorities to signify perfect submission to the will of God, and as
a religious symbol it seems to represent, under all circumstances,
one yielding on the knee, and there is no reason why it should not
have been a symbol of submission in the religious faiths of the
ancient world as well as in Christianity. Much has been written
on it in Emile Burnon’s Sanscrit Lexicon, and also by Dr. Schliemann,
Professor Max Miiller, and others. A paper was read at the Society
of Antiquaries showing that it was a religious symbol among the
earlier Aryan races, and was intended by them, in the first instances
to represent, in a cruciform, an ideograph or symbol suggested by
forked lightning. It is well shown by our letter z, two of which,
crossing one another in the middle, admirably represent the ordinary
device known by the names of the gammadion, croix-patieé, fylfot
and swastika.

The bishop was born at Edington, in Wiltshire. The Church of

By C. EB. Ponting, F.8.A. 231

that village was begun in 1352, and there is very little doubt it was
built by him, as the style of architecture is the same which the bishop
was at that very time beginning to introduce as a novelty into
Winchester Cathedral. On the walls are to be seen the crosses
which were sprinkled by the bishop at the dedication.

Edington was a noble benefactor to the Cathedral, and began the
great work of re-building the nave, but, not living to finish it, he
left by his will a considerable sum of money with which William of
Wykeham was enabled to carry it on.

The “ Somerset Herald” states that there were three coats of arms
assigned to William de Edington, but as to these he should un-
questionably take the evidence of his seal, especially when confirmed,
as it is, in two instances within his Cathedral. These arms are —
on a cross engrailed, five cinquefoils, but whether the field is lozengy
or merely diapered, he cannot say. According to Burke the arms of
Edington Priory, Wiltshire,’ are:—on a cross engratled gules, five
cinquefoils of the field. The examples of the bishop’s shield of arms
in the Cathedral are on the course above the arch facing his chantry,
and also on a boss of the second bay from the west in the north
aisle. The second coat of arms assigned him was :—asure, two lions
passant or, in a bordure argent, which is emblazoned on one of the
windows in the County Hall. The other is :—azure, two lions
passant guardant, argent, within a bordure gules. The seal is a small
circular one; its device is the bishop kneeling to S. Catherine under
an elegant canopy, and his arms on a shield in base, Jive cinquefoils
on a cross engrailed ; yound it, Sigillum Willelm Wi ‘yntoniensis epi.

Round the marble slab of the tomb, on an inlay of brass, is a
Latin inscription, which can be thus translated :-—

———— Cl

William, born at Edington, is here interred,

He was a well beloved prelate, and Winchester was his see,
You, who pass by his tomb, remember him in your prayers ;
_ He was discreet and mild, yet a match for thousands in knowledge and sagacity,
4 He was a watchful guardian of the English nation ;

A tender father of the poor, and a defender of their rights.

To one thousand, add three hundred, with fifty, ten, five and one,

Then the eighth* of October will mark the time when he became a saint.

’ There was recently a piece of glass in North Bradley Church with these arms.
* Canon Jackson gives the date as the seventh of October, 1366,

VOL. XXV.—NO. LXXIV. R

232

Alotes on Remains of Roman Divellings at
Harmington Tick.

By the Rev. E. H. Gopparp.

NN attention having been called by a letter from the Rev. J.
4G D B. Smeaton, Vicar of Hannington, to certain Roman

remains lately brought to light in that parish, I visited
the spot and found in the middle of a ploughed field, known as the
“Old Ploughed Ground,” belonging to the Manor Farm, Hannington
Wick, on the right-hand side of Nelland’s Lane, some two miles
from the village of Hannington, and within a short distance of the
River Thames, a small portion of a Roman tessellated pavement
which had been uncovered a day or two before. A large part of
the surface of the field was strewn with tessere, with here and there
a bit of pottery or broken tile or brick ; and it appeared that though
the labourers on the farm had always known of the existence of
“them little squares” and of “old foundations” in various parts
of the field no notice had ever been taken of them beyond digging
up the stones when the plough happened to hit upon them and
carting them away to mend the roads. Lately, however, the farm
has changed hands, and the present occupier—Mr. Wall—as soon
as the facts came to his knowledge called attention to them and
expressed a wish that the field should be properly examiaed and the
remains uncovered. Time, however, pressed, for the field was
wanted for ploughing again at once—so that whatever was to be done
must be done forthwith. Accordingly, on the 23d of October, the
services of three labourers having been secured, with the help of the
Vicar, Mr. Wall, and other volunteers, the surface soil was carefully
removed, and the pavement “ A” exposed to view. This measured
15ft. in length and 7ft. 6in. in breadth, and seemed fairly perfect
except at the southern end and the sides. It consisted of stripes of
red and white tessere. The central stripe was white, 9in. in width,
and formed of eight rows of tesserw, the red stripes on each side of
it were each 3ft. broad, while the white stripes bordering the sides
were apparently originally of the same width as the central stripe,
though only four or five rows of tessere now remain—the outer _

“SNOLLWGNNOA ANOLS °»

“ALAYINOD AO SAHDLWA *X
“ONIHILId ANOLS HMO *
*SNOO'Ld ALAYINOD HONOY °a4*D
“SLNGWSAVE CALVTTASSALL “A+V

WOPUOL PYILT ALY OTHTY UVTI

Obsl 32% L90
CAYAAOOND YOM. NOLONINNVH WaiVal YONVILLV SONTTTAME NVWOY dO NW Tal

Notes on Remains of Roman Dwellings at Hannington Wick. 233

rows having been broken away. The red tesserz were of fine tile
or brick broken very roughly into inch-square cubes. The white
ones, of the same size, were formed of a hard fine-grained oolite.
They seem to have been simply laid down on a smooth bed of grit
and gravel—perhaps once mortar—and to have been cemented to-
gether with a white plaster or cement ; now they are quite loose and
detached. I may mention that the soil here is thin and the subsoil
is a bed of river gravel near the surface.

Adjoining this pavement at the north end was a floor of gravel
concrete, marked “C” on the plan, about 2in. thick. This floor
was apparently nearly square, measuring 12ft. by 11ft.

Having uncovered this we proceeded to search for further remains
over all that part of the field where tesserze appeared on the surface,
and soon came upon a second tessellated pavement, “‘ B,” in a line
with the first and 54ft. to the southward of it. This consisted of
three bands of tessere of exactly the same character as those of
which the other floor was composed. The central red band, however,
and the outer white ones were in this case of the same breadth, each
lft. wide, and containing ten rows of tessere; the whole measuring
9ft. by 3ft.

The edges seemed fairly straight and perfect, but the north end
appeared to have been broken away, and there was no means of
deciding whether the pavement had extended further or not.

On the southern side was a concreted floor, “ D,” about 9ft.
square, precisely like the similar floor “C,” but not so perfect ; and
lift. further to the south-west some large stones were found at
““G,” apparently the foundations of a wall, some of which were
calcined by the action of fire. Possibly they may have formed part
of the heating apparatus, but only a few detached stones remained,
a cartload having been dug out of this very spot only last year.
With this exception no remains of walls could be found, so that it
was impossible to say whether the floors “ A—C” and “ B—D”
belonged to the same or to separate dwellings.

At “E,” 34ft. to the south-west of the pavement “ A,” a patch of
rough stone pitching was found—possibly a part of the road to the
house, the stones being merely roughly set edgewise in the ground.

R 2

234 Donations to Museum and Library.

It was about 9ft. in diameter, and did not appear to extend further.

At “F” a few patches of concrete, indicating the existence of
another concrete floor, were found.

There was an idea among the labourers that a piece of pavement
with diamonds in white on a red ground had once been uncovered
by the plough, but diligent search failed to discover any traces of it.
All the tessere torn up by the plough, and scattered on the surface
of the ground, are of precisely the same rough character as those of
which the two floors are composed.

Only one coin was found—a small third brass—from the filleted
head apparently of the Constantine period, but quite undecipherable.
Of other objects the most interesting were two pieces of plain
Samian ware, a few bits of the usual rough unglazed pottery, one
of somewhat finer grey ware, apparently part of the almost flat top
of a box or jar, a few oyster-shells, and a certain number of pieces of
plaster, proving that the walls were, like those of Pompeii, painted in
various colours. Examples of a fine Pompeian red, a deep maroon,
and brown were found, the colours being singularly bright when
first found, while on two pieces traces of a pattern or figure appear,
of several colours, including green. Some broken tiles and portions
of hollow flue bricks were also found.

After the sketch-plan which accompanies these notes had been
taken the whole of the remains were covered up again forthwith, in
the hope that the plough from which they have so curiously escaped
hitherto may continue to spare them in the future.

It is possible that a more thorough trenching of the ground might
have brought other things to light, though the fact that none of the
floors are more than 6in. below the surface, and the entire apparent
destruction of the stone foundations, render it unlikely that much
more exists to discover,

Donations to Atlusenm and Aibvarp.

Portrait of Henry, Marquis of Lansdowne. Presented by J. Warten, Esq.

The Pedigree of John Stokes, of Seend, Co, Wilts—edited by A. Schomberg, Esq.
Presented by THE AuTHOR.

The History of the Hundred of Ramsbury, Part I., by E. Doran Webb, Esq.
Presented by THe AurHoR.

H. F, BULL, Printer and Publisher, 4, Saint John Street, Devizes,

11 UL. 9/ESD

~

ee TS pc ieee —C

(Any Member whose name or address is incorrectly printed in this List
ts requested to communicate with the Financial Secretary.)

WILTSHIRE

Archwological and Aatural History Society.

NOVEMBER, 1890.

Patron:
Tar Most HonovgasLe THE Marguis oF LANSDOWNE.

President :
GENERAL Pitt-Rivers, D.C.L., F.R.S., F.S.A.

Vice-Presidents :
The Most Hon. the Marquis of Bath The Right Hon. Earl Nelson

William Cunnington, Esq. Rev. H. A. Olivier
Sir Gabriel Goldney, Bart. Charles Penruddocke, Esq.
The Right Hon. Lord Heytesbury The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of
Sir Henry A. Hoare, Bart. Salisbury
Rev. Canon Jackson Rev. A. C. Smith
Sir John Lubbock, Bart., M.P. C. H. Talbot, Esq.
Sir John Neeld, Bart.
Trustees :
Sir Edmund Antrobus, Bart. The Most Hon. the Marquis of
The Most Hon. the Marquis of Bath Lansdowne
William Cunnington, Esq. Sir John Lubbock, Bart., M.P.
G. T. J. Sotheron Estcourt, Esq. Sir John Neeld, Bart.
G. P. Fuller, Esq., M.P. . The Right Hon. Earl Nelson
Sir Gabriel Goldney, Bart. Charles Penruddocke, Esq.

Committee :

T. B. Anstie, Esq., Devizes C. F. Hart, Esq., Devizes

J. I Bowes, Esq., Devizes Rev. C. W. Hony, Bishops Cannings

Henry Brown, Esq., Blacklands Joseph Jackson, Esq , Devizes
Park, Calne Rev. A. B. Thynne, Seend

Honorary General Secretaries :
H. E. Medlicott, Esq., Sandfield, Potterne, Devizes
Rev. E. H. Goddard, Clyffe Pypard Vicarage, Wootton Bassett

Honorary General Curators :
A. B. Fisher, Esq., Potterne
B. H. Cunnington, Esq., Devizes

Honorary Librarian :
W. Heward Bell, Esq., Seend Cleeve, Melksham

Honorary Local Secretaries :

W. Forrester, Esq., Malmesbury C. E. Ponting, Esq., Lockeridge,
F. H. Goldney, Esq., Chippenham Marlborough
H. Kinneir, Esq., Swindon J. Farley Rutter, Esq., Mere
Alex. Mackay, Esq., Trowbridge Arthur**Schomberg, Esq., Seend,
W. F. Morgan, Esq., Warminster Melksham
J. E. Nightingale, Esq., Wilton J. R. Shopland, Esq., Purton
Rey. J. Penrose, West Ashton, H. J. F. Swayne, Esq., Wilton

Trowbridge Mulville Thomson, Esq., M.D.,
a it C. Plenderleath, Cherhiil, Bradford-on-Avon

‘alne

Honorary Treasurer :
C. E. H. A. Colston, Esq., Rowndway Park, Devizes

Honorary Auditors :
G.S. A. Waylen, Esq., Devizes
John Wilshin, Esq., Devizes

Financial Secretary :
Mr. David Owen, 31, Long Street, Devizes

LIST OF SOCIETIES, &o., IN UNION WITH THE

Wiltshire Archwologicnl and Aatural Pistory Society,
For interchange of Publications, ¢c.

Society of Antiquaries of London
Royal Archzological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Society of Antiquaries of Scotland
Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland
Kent Archzological Society
Somersetshire Archzological Society
Oxford Architectural and Historical Society
Belfast Naturalists’ Field Club
Essex Archeological Society
Professor L. Jewitt
Bath Antiquarian and Natural History Field Club

United States Geological Survey

Herts Natural History Society

Powysland Club
Bristol Nutural History Society
Bristol and Gloucestershire Archeological Society
Essex Field Club
Berks Archzological and Architectural Society
Bureau of Ethnology, Washington, D.C., United States
Clifton Antiquarian Club

Azist of GRembers.

Life Members:

Awdry, Charles, 2; Hyde Park Street,
London, W.

Bruce, Lord Charles, Wilton House,
Eaton Square, London, S.W.

Duke, Rev. Edward, Lake House,
Salisbury

Ellis, Rev. J. H., 29, Collingham
Gardens, South Kensington, S.W.

Fitzmaurice, Rt. Hon. Lord E.,
Leigh House, Bradford-on-Avon

Foljambe, Cecil G. S., M.P., 2; Carl-
ton House Terrace, Pall Mall,
London, S.W.

Grove, Sir Thomas Fraser, Bart.,
M.P., Ferne, Salisbury

Hoare, Sir Henry A., Bart., Stourhead

Holford, R. S., Weston Birt, Tetbury

Jackson, Rev. Canon, ¥.S.A., Leigh
Delamere, Chippenham

Lansdowne, the Most Hon. the
Marquis of, Bowood, Calne

Lowndes, E, C., Castle Combe, Chip-
penham

Lubbock, Sir J. W., Bart., M.P., 15,
Lombard Street, London, E.C.

Lushington, Godfrey,16, Great Queen
Street, Westminster, London, S.W.

Meux, Sir Henry B., Bart., Dauntsey
House, Chippenham

Mullings, John, Cirencester

Neeld, Sir John, Bart., Grittleton,
Chippenham [Salisbury

Penruddocke, C:, Compton Park,

Penruddocke, C., Jun., Bratton St.
Maur, Wincanton, Bath

Prior, Dr. R.C. A., 48, York Terrace,
Regent’s Park, London, N. W.

Salisbury, the Rt. Rev. Lord Bishop
of, the Palace, Salisbury

Selfe, H., Marten, Great Bedwyn

Walmesley, Richard, Lucknam,
Chippenham

Wellesley, Lady Charles, Conholt
Park, Andover

Wyndham, the Hon. Percy, 44,
Belgrave Square, London, S.W.

Annual Subscribers :

Adderley Library, Librarian - of,
Marlborough College
Anderson, Rev. E., Berwick Bassett
Vicarage, Swindon
Anketell, Rev. H. K. F., Wootton
Bassett Vicarage
Anstie, E. L., Devizes
Anstie, T. B,, Devizes
Archer, Col. D., Fairford House,
Gloucestershire
Armstrong, F. A. W.T., Lyme House,
Wootton Bassett
Arundel of Wardour, the Rt. Hon.
Lord, Wardour Castle, Tisbury,
‘Salisbury
_ Astley, H. D’O. W., Hungerford
_Awdry, Rev. E. C., Kington St.
Michael, Chippenham
Awdry, Justly W., The Paddocks,
_ Chippenham
Awdry, West, Monkton, Chippenham
Awdry, Rev. W. H., Ludgershall,
Andover

Baker, T. H., Mere, Bath

Barnwell, Rev. C. E. B., Southbroom,
Devizes

Barrey, H. G., Devizes

Bath, the Most Hon the Marquis of,
Longleat, Warminster

Batten, John, Aldon, Yeovil

Bell, Rev. G. €., Marlborough College

Bell, W. Heward, F.G.S., Cleeve
House, Seend

Bennett, Rev. Canon F., Maddington,
Shrewton

Bennett, F J., M D., Vale View,
Monkton Combe, Bath

Bennett, W. S., Overcombe, The
Shrubbery, Weston-Super-Mare

Bethell, S., The Green, Calne

Bingham, Rev. W. P. S., Kenton
Vicarage, Exeter

Blackmore, Dr. H. P., Salisbury

Blake, Henry, Elmhurst, Trowbridge

Bond, Rev. John, Steeple Ashton
Vicarage, Trowbridge

iv LIST OF MEMBERS.

Booker, Rev. A. W., Sutton Veny
Rectory, Warminster

Bosher, C. W, 5, Prospero Road,
Upper Holloway, N.

Bourne, Rev. G. H., D.C.L., St.
Edmund's College, Salisbury

Bouverie, Rev. the Hon. B. P.,
Pewsey Rectory

Bouverie, E. O. P., Manor House,
Market Lavington

Bouverie, W. P., Manor House,
Market Lavington [Devizes

Bowes, J. I., Wilts County Asylum,

Bradford, J. E. G. Swindon

Bristol Museum and Library, Hon.
Sec. of, Queen’s Road, Bristol

Britton, Mrs. Helen, 39, Croydon,
Grove, West Croydon, Surrey

Brodribb, Rev. W. J., Wootton
Rivers, Marlborough

Brooke, J. W., Jun., The Green,
Marlborough

Brown, H., Blacklands Park, Calne

Brown, Henry, Salisbury

Brown, James, South View, London
Road, Salisbury

Brown, W., Browfort, Devizes

Brown, W. R., Highfield. Trowbridge

Bruce, Rt. Hon. Lord Henry B., MP.,
34, Eaton Place, London, 8.W.

Buchanan, Ven. Arch., Potterne

Buckley, Alfred, New Hall, Boden-
ham _ Salisbur

Buckley, Rev. Felix J., Stanton St.
Quintin, Chippenham

Bull, H. F., Devizes

Bullock, William H., Pewsey

Burges, Rev. J. Hart, D.D., the
Rectory. Devizes

Bush. J., 9, Pembroke Road, Clifton,
Bristol

Bush, J. J., Hilperton Grange,
Trowbridge

Butt, Rev. W. A., Minety Vicarage,
Malmesbury

Caillard, His Honour Judge, Wing-
field, Trowbridge

Calley, Rev. J. H., Chiseldon Vicar-
age, Swindon [Salisbury

Carey, Rev. T., Fifield Bavant,

Carless, Dr.. Devizes

Carré Rev. F. W., St. Katharine’s
Vicarage, Savernake, Marlborough

Cary, J., Steeple Ashton, Trowbridge

Chamberlaine, Rev. W. H., Keevil

Chandler, Thomas. Devizes

Chandler. T H. Rowde, Devizes

Chandler, W. Aldbourne, Hungerford

Cholmeley, Rev. Canon C Humphrey,
the Rectory, Beaconsfield (R.S.O.),
Bucks

Clark. Major T., Trowbridge

Clarke, Miss M., Prospect House,
Devizes

Cleather Rev. G. E., the Vicarage,
Brixton Deverell, Warminster

Clifford, Hon. and Rt. Rey. Bishop,
Bishop’s House, Clifton. Bristol

Colborne. Miss, Venetian House,
Clevedon

Colston, C. E. H. A., Roundway
Park, Devizes

Colwell, J., Devizes

Cowie, Dr., Devizes

Crespe, A. J. H., Wimborne

Crowdy, Rev. Anthony, Bankton,
Crawley Down, Crawley

Cunnington, B H., Devizes

Cunnington, Mrs. H., Devizes

Cunnington, William, F.G.S., 58,
Acre Lane, Brixton, London, S W.

Curtis. C. W., Everley, Marlborough

Daniell. Rev. J. J., Langley Burrell,
Chippenham

Dear, George. Codford St. Peter, Bath

Devenish, Matthew H.W., Westleigh,
Salisbury

Dixon, 8S. B.. Pewsey

Dodd, Samuel. 1, Tavistock Place,
Tavistock Square, W.C.

Dowding, Rev. W., Idmiston, Salis-
bury [W.C.

Dowding, W. D., 17, Clement’s Inn,

Du Boulay, Rev. F. H., Heddington
Rectory, Calne

Dugdale, Rev. S., 95, Crane Street,
Salisbury

Eddrup, Rev. Canon E. P., Bremhill,
Calne [penham

Edgell, Rev. E. B., Bromham, Chip-

Errington, Sir George Bart, Lack-
ham House, Chippenham

ee eS Se

LIST OF MEMBERS. Vv

Estcourt, G. T. J. Sotheron, Estcourt,
Tetbury

Estcourt, Rev. W. J. B, Long
Newnton, Tetbury [botts

Everett, Rev. E, Manningford Ab-

Ewart, Miss, 68, Albert Hall
Mansions, London, S.W.

Ewart, Miss M., Broadleas, Devizes

Ewing, Rev. Robert, Winterslow
Rectory, Salisbury

Eyre, G. Briscoe, 59, Lowndes
Square, London, S W.

Eyres, Edwin, Lacock, Chippenham

Eyres. Henry C., St. Alban’s House,
Highgate Rise, N.W.

Finlay, Rev. E. B., The Lodge, Ave-
bury, Calne

Fisher, A. B., Court Hill, Potterne

Fisher, Mrs., Poulshot, Devizes

Forrester, William, Malmesbury

Fox, C. F., The Bank, Sandown,
Isle of Wight

Fox, Francis F., Yate House, Chip-
ping Sodbury

Fuller, G. P., M.P., Neston Park,
Corsham

Gabriel, C. W., Vale Lodge, Weston,
Bath

Gillman, C., Tresco Villa, Devizes

Gladstone, John E., Bowden Park,
Chippenham

Goddard. Ambrose L., Swindon

Goddard, Rev. C. V., Chideock
Vicarage, Bridport

Goddard, Rev. E. H., Clyffe Pypard,
Wootton Bassett [Calne

Goddard, Rev. Canon F., Hilmarton,

Goddard, H. Nelson, Clyffe Pypard
Manor, Wootton Bassett

Goddard, W. C. G., 39, Castle Street,
Salisbury.

Godwin, J.G., 15, St. George’s Row,
Pimlico, London, ».W.

Goldney, F. H., Rowden Hill, Chip-
penham

Goldney. Sir Gabriel, Bart., Beech-
field, Corsham

Gouldsmith, W. A., Wintersleigh,
Wanley, Bradford-on-Avon

Gower, Granville Leveson, F.S.A.,
Titsey Place, Limpsfield.

Grose, Samuel, M.D., Melksham

Grove, Miss Chafyn, Zeals House,
Bath

Gwatkin, R.G.,ManorHouse, Potterne

Gwillim, E. Ll., Marlborough

G.W.R. Mechanics’ Institute, Secre-
tary of, New Swindon

Haden, Joseph P., Hill View, Trow-
bridge

Hadow, Rev. G. R., Calstone Rectory,
Calne

Hall. Capt. Marshall, St. John’s,
Bovey Tracey, South Devon

Halliday, J. Edmund, Warminster

Harding, John. 51, Canal, Salisbury

Hardwick, Philip, The Grange,
Bradford-on-Avon [cester

Harmer, G. H., Apsley Villa, Ciren-

Harris, Henry W., The Woodlands,
Calne

Harris, Thomas, South Place, Calne

Hart, C. F., Devizes

Hayward, Rev. 8. C., the Vicarage,
Pilsley Cross, Derbyshire

Haywood, T. B., Woodhatch Lodge,
Reigate

Heard, Rev. T. J., the Rectory,
Sherrington, Codford, Bath

Henly, E. R., Calne

Heytesbury, The Right Hon. Lord,
Heytesbury

Hill, James L., Chetwynd, Basset,
Southampton [ Devizes

Hillier, H. W., 2, Lansdowne Grove,

Hitchcock, Dr. C., Fiddington,
Market Lavington

Hitchcock, C. K., M.D., MA., The
Lunatic Hospital, Bootham, York

Hobhouse, sir C. P., Bart., Monkton
Farley, Bradford-on-Avon

Hodgson, Rev. Canon J. D., the
Rectory, Collingbourne Ducis,
Marlborough

Hony, Rev. C. W., Bishops Cannings

Hulse, Sir Edward, Bart, Brea-
more, Hants.

Hussey, Mrs. H., The Close, Salisbury

Hutchings, Rev. Canon R. S&S,
Alderbury, Salisbury

Hutchinson, Rev. T. N., Broad
Chalke Vicarage, Salisbury

vi LIST OF MEMBERS.

Inman, Rev. Canon E., Gillingham
Vicarage, Dorset

Jackson, Joseph, Devizes
Jacob, J. H., The Close, Salisbury
Jennings, 'J. C. S., Abbey House,

Malmesbury
Johnson, J.G., Concrete House, New
Swindon [minster

Jones, H. P., Portway House, War-

Jones, H. Hammond, Witley,
Godalming, Surrey

Jones, W. 8., Malmesbury’

Jukes-Brown, A. J., F.G.S., Geol.
Survey, 28, Jermyn Street, London

Kelland, J., Canal, Salisbury

Kemble, H., Overtown, Wroughton,
Swindon

Kemm, Mrs., Amesbury

Kemm, Thomas, Avebury

Kenrick, Mrs., Keevil, Trowbridge

King, Rev. Bryan, Avebury

Kingdon, The Right Rev. Bishop 4.
T., Frederickton, New Brunswick

King, Walter E., Donhead Lodge,
Salisbury

Kinneir, H., Redville, Swindon

Kinneir, R., M.D., Sherborne

Kirwan, J.S., 1, Richmond Gardens,
Bournemouth

Lambert, Rev. R. U., Christchurch
Vicarage, Bradford-on-Avon

Lansdown, G., Trowbridge

Laverton, W. H., Leighton, Westbury

Lawrence, W. F., M.P., Cowesfield,
Salisbury

Lewis, Harold, B.A., Mercury Office,
Bristol

Long, Frederick W., Court Field
House. Trowbridge

Long, W. H., M.P., Rood Ashton,
Trowbridge

Long, Col. William, Woodlands,
Congresbury (R.S.0.) Somerset

Lowe, Charles H., Rowde

Lukis, Rev. W. C., Wath Rectory,
Ripon

Mackay, Alex., Holt Manor, Trow-
bridge

Mackay, James, Trowbridge

Mackay, William, Trowbridge

Maclean, J. C., M.D., Swindon

Magrath, Col., Ban-aboo, Co. Wex-
ford, Ireland

Manley, Rev. F. H., Somerford
Magna Rectory, Chippenham

Mann, William J., Trowbridge

Marlborough College Nat. Hist.
Society, the President of

Maskelyne, E. Story, Hatt House,
Box, Wilts

Maskelyne, N. Story, F.R.S., M.P.,
Bassett Down, Swindon, Wilts

Master, Rev. G. §., Bourton Grange,
Flax Bourton, Bristol

Matcham, William E., New House,
Salisbury

Mayo, John H., India Office, Lon-
don, S.W.

McNiven, Rev. C. M., Perrysfield,
Godstone, Surrey

Mead, G. H., Devizes

Meade, Rev. the Hon. §., Frankleigh
House, Bradford-on-Avon

Medlicott, H. E., Sandfield, Potterne

Meek A. Grant, Hillworth House,
Devizes

Meek, Edgar H., Devizes

Merewether, Rev. W., North Bradley
Viearage, Trowbridge

Merriman, E. B., Marlborough

Merriman, R. W., Marlborough

Merriman, T. Mark,25,Austin Friars,
London, E.C. [Court

Methuen, Right Hon. Lord, Corsham

Miles, Col. C. W., Burton Hill,
Malmesbury

Mitchell, Arthur C., Cottles House,
Melksham

Mitchell, W.R., Salthrop, Wroughton,
Swindon

Morgan, W. F,, Warminster

Morrice, Rev. Canon W. D., Holy
Trinity Vicarage, Weymouth

Morris, W., Advertiser Office, Swin-
don [Devizes

Mullings, Richard B., Woodville,

LIST OF MEMBERS. Vii

Nelson, Right Hon. Earl, Trafalgar,
Salisbury

Nelson, Right Hon. The Countess,
Trafalgar, Salisbur

Nicholls, Rev. W. P., Little Cheverell
Rectory, Devizes

Nightingale, J.E.,F.S.A.,The Mount,
Wilton

Normanton, the Right Hon. the Earl
of, 7, Prince’s Garden, Prince’s
Gate, London, S8.W.

Noyes, George, 11, Bassett Road,
Notting Hill, London, W.

Oliver, Capt. S.P., F.S.A., F.R.G.S.,
Anglesey, Gosport [Salisbury

Olivier, Rev. Canon Dacres, Wilton,

Olivier, Rev. H. A., West Green
House, Winchfield

Owen, D., 31, Long Street, Devizes

Palmer, George Ll., Trowbridge
Parsons, W. F., Hunt’s Mill, Wootton
Bassett
Pass, Alfred C., Rushmore House,
Upper Belgrave Road, Clifton
Paul, A. H., The Close, Tetbury
Pembroke and Montgomery, the Rt.
Hon. Earl, Wilton House, Salisbury
Penrose, Rev. J., West Ashton
Vicarage, Trowbridge
Penruddocke, Rev. J. H., South
Newton Vicarage, Wilton
Pinder, R. G., Hernhurst, Florence
Road, Boscombe, Bournemouth
Pinniger, Henry W., Westbury
Pitt-Rivers, General Lane Fox,
F.R.S., F.S.A., Rushmore Lodge,
Berwick St. John, Salisbury
Plenderleath, Rev. W. C., Cherhill
Rectory, Calne [Marlborough
Ponting, C. E., F.S.A., Lockeridge,
Poore, Major R., Old Lodge, Newton
Toney, Salisbury [Hungerford
Popham, Miss Leybourne, Littlecote,
Powell, Mrs. M. E. Vere Booth,
Colewood Park, Cuckfield, Sussex
Price, R. E., Broomfield Hall,

Bridgwater
Proctor, W., Elmhurst, Higher Erith
Road, Torquay (Swindon

Prower, John Elton, Sissels, Purton,

Radcliffe, C. H., Salisbury

Radcliffe, F. R. Y., 5, Hare Court,
Temple, London, E.C,

Radnor, Right Hon. Earl of, Long-
ford Castle, Salisbury

Radnor, Right Hon. The Countess
of, Longford Castle, Salisbury

Randell, J. A., Devizes

Ransome, Rev. V. F., Compton Bas-
sett Reetory, Calne

Ravenhill, W. W., 10, King’s Bench
Walk, Temple, London, H.C.

Read, C. J., c/o Dr. Finch, Fisherton
House, Salisbury

Redman, T. E., Castle Fields, Calne

Rich, Sir C. H. S., Bart., F.S.A.,
Devizes Castle

Richardson, H., Littlefield, Marl-
borough

Richmond, George, R,A., 20, York
Street, Portman Square, London

Rodway, E. B., Adcroft House, Trow-
bridge

Roe, J. Reed, Wilts County Mirror,
Salisbury

Rolls, John Allan, The Hendre,
Monmouth

Rose, G. W., 14, Church Street,
Trowbridge

Rumboll, C. F., Lowbourne House,
Melksham

Rutter, J. F., Mere, Bath

Saunders, T. Bush, Bradford-on-Avon
Schomberg, Arthur, Seend, Melksham
Schomberg, E. C., Seend, Melksham
Seymour, Rev. C. F., Winchfield
Rectory, Hants
Short, Rev. W. F., the Rectory,
Donhead St. Mary, Salisbury
Shopland, James R., Purton, Swindon
Shum, F., 17, Norfolk Crescent, Bath
Sibbald, J. G. E., Admiralty, White-
hall, London, S.W.
Skrine, H.D., Claverton Manor, Bath
Sloper, Edwin, Taunton
Smith, Rev. A. C., Old Park, Devizes
Smith, H. Herbert, Buckhill, Calne
Smith, J. A., Market Place, Devizes
Soames, Rev. C., Mildenhall, Marl-
borough

Vili LIST OF MEMBERS.

Southey, Capt. A. H., Eastley Court,
Warminster

Spicer, Capt. John E. P., Spye Park,
Chippenham

Squarey, Elias P,, The Moot, Downton

Stancomb, J. Perkins, The Prospect,
Trowbridge

Stancomb, W., Blount’s Court, Pot-
terne

Staples, T. H., Belmont, Salisbury

Stevens, Joseph, 128, Oxford Road,
Reading

Stokes, D.-J., Rowden Hill, Chip-
penham

Stokes, Robert, Burroughs Mill,
Laverstock, Salisbury

Stratton, William, Kingston Deverell,
Warminster

Strong, Rev. A., St. Paul’s Rectory,
Chippenham

Strong, Rev. W., St. Paul’s Rectory,
Chippenham

Sturton, Rev. J., Woodborough
Rectory, Marlborough

Swainson, Harold,

Swayne, H. J. F., The Island, Wilton

Swinhoe, Dr., Park House, New
Swindon

Tait, E.S., M.D.,54, Highbury Park,
London, N.

Talbot, C. H., Lacock Abbey, Chip-
penham

Tatum, Edward J., Solicitor, Salis-

bury

Tayler, G. C., M.D., Lovemead
House, Trowbridge

Taylor, S. W., Erlestoke Park,
Devizes

Thomson, Mulville, M.D., Manvers
House, Bradford-on-A von

Thynne, Rev. A. B., Seend, Melksham

Toppin. Rev. G. Pilgrim, Broad Town
Vicarage, Wootton Bassett

Trask, J. J., Fairwood, Westbury

Trepplin, E. C., Vasterne Manor
House, Wootton Bassett

Trotter, Rev. H., The Rectory,
Trowbridge

Tucker, Rev. G. Windsor, Ingleburne,
Malmesbury

11 JUL.9

Tucker, Silas, Speneer House, Lark-
hall Rise, Clapham, London, S.W.

Usher, Ephraim, Ethandeme, Hil-
perton Road, Trowbridge

Wadworth, H. A., Devizes

Wakeman, Herbert J., Warminster

Walker, Rev. R. Z., Boyton Rectory,
Bath

Walker, William, Longfield House,
Trowbridge

Ward, Col. M. F., Partenkirchen,
Bavaria

Warre, Rev. Canon F., Vicarage,
Bemerton, Salisbury

Waylen, G. S. A., Devizes

Waylen, R. F., Devizes

Waylen, J., 64, Lillie Road, Fulham,
S.W.

Wayte, Rev. W., 6, Onslow Square,
London, 8.W.

Webb, C. W. H., Trowbridge

Weller, Mrs. T., 22, Tamworth Road,
Croydon, Surrey

Weston, Frederick, Wootton Bassett

Whinfield, E. H., The Hollies, Gipsy
Road, West Norwood, 5.E.

Whytehead, Rev. H. R., St. Peter’s
Vicarage, Marlborough

Wilkins, Henry, High Street. Calne

Willis, F. M., Steeple Ashton, Trow-
bridge

Wilshin, John, Devizes e

Wilson, J., M.A., Fair Lee, Ramsden
Road, Balham, London, 8.W.

Winterscale, Col. J.F.M., Buckleigh,
Westward Ho

Wood. Rev. 8S. Theodore, Hilperton
Rectory, Trowbridge

Wyld, Kev. C. N., St. Martin’s
Kectory, Salisbury

Wyld, Kev. Edwin G., Melksham
Vicarage

Yockney, A., Pockeridge, Corsham

PA ae
bet pe

THE FOLLOWING

~ PUBLICATIONS OF THE SOCIETY

ARE NOW IN STOCK.

—

*,* A bye-law of the Committee determines “ that when any No.
of the Magazine is reduced to twenty copies, the price of such No.
be increased ; the price to be determined by the Librarian.”—10s,
each is now charged for such of the ordinary Numbers as are so
reduced, and £1 for the 4to “Stonehenge.” Other Nos. are sold at
the prices at which they were published.

MAGAZINES. ;
No. Copies, ,No, Copies. No, Copies,
1 20 | 27 e021 BL Pe. 61
2 5 30 | 28 | 102! 52 ie 67
Me BN O9 isl ss ae
| 5 511 30 ‘a 18 | 54 ee 66
6 bi 61} 31 ips 61| 55 iy: Cy bese
9 a 9 | 32 ih 74,| 56 et 65
10 Ry, 3 | 33 a4 57 | 57 53 51
11 ts 1 | 34 SG. 72 | 58 i: 63
12 ag 13 | 35 25 46 | 59 rs 68
7136 LCG) ices GO-GO ren 73
Pa 14 as 42 | 37 os 71| 61 fa 80
15 WA 31 | 38 an 80 | 62 cs 86
16 a 55 | 39 a 68 | 63 te 88
17 oe 55 | 40 a 66 | 64 2 92
18 ve 42 | 41 ae 55 | 65 as 103
19 “A 56 | 42 a 47 | 66 ty 105
20 a, 59 | 43 ge 59 | 67 om 108.
21 a BL | 44 we 76| 68 oS 105
a Re: 59 | 45 a 73 | 69 te 93
93 = 71 | 46-7 (double No.)18 | 70 =a 81
24 oe 71 | 48 de 54/72. 2 74
25 Le 87 | 49 a 21| 72 ei 82
26 we 90] 50 a 32 | 73 ee 87
_ © Account or Brackmore Muszum,” Part I. 83
$ » Part II. 81

; : “STONEHENGE AND ITs Barrows,” by W. Lona, Esq.,
(being No. 46-7 of the Mag., in special covers), 8yo... 224

Rice & hee
SECOND EDITION OF

The British and Roman Antiquities of

the North Whultshire Downs,

BY THE REV. A. C. SMITH, M.A.
One Volume, Atlas 4to, 248 pp., 17 large Maps, and 110 Woodcuts,
Extra Cloth. Price £2 Qs.

Lately Published, by the Wiltshire Archeological & Natural History
Society, One Volume, 8vo, 504 pp., with map, Extra Cloth.

The Flowering Plants of Wiltshire,

BY THE REV. T. A. PRESTON, M.A.
Price to the Public, 16s.; but one copy offered to every Member
of the Society at half-price.

Lately Published, One Volume, 8vo., 613 pp , Extra Cloth.

The Birds of Wiltshire,

BY THE REV. A. C. SMITH, MA.
Price 16s. Half-price to Members of the Society.

AGENTS

FOR THE SALE OF THR

WILTSHIRE MAGAZINE.

BEF. acaeesk'-w eke C. Hatter, 8 Bridge Street.

Bristol ........055. James Fawn & Son, 18 Queen’s Road,
Blue beyonce .... C. T. Jerrertes & Sons, Redcliffe Street.

EES EET IS A. Heata & Son, Market Place.

Chippenham ...... R. F. Houston, High Street.

Cirencester.......+. A. T. Harmer, Market Place.

DevIze8 0. 6 oS pss H. F. Buu, St. John Street.

Marlborough ...... Miss E. Lucy, High Street.

Melksham ......... J. H. Mages, Bank Street.

DAFONA - oesye 05 + Jas. Parker & Co., Broad Street.

Salisbury ....2+.+- Brown & Oo., Canal.

Trowbridge... B. Lanspown & Sons, 11 Silver Street, :

Warminster ...... B. W. Coates, Market Place.

H. F, BULL, PRINTER, DEVISES,

eat thin ney Ot ecole

TW No Lxxv. JUNE, 1891. Vou. XXV.
THE

WILTSHIRE
Arehwologieal ont Hotural Wistory

MAGAZINE,

Published under the Birection

OF THE

SOCIETY FORMED IN THAT COUNTY,

A.D. 1853.

DEVIZES:
PRINTED AND SOLD FOR THE Society By H. F Butt, Sarnt Jonw SrReev,

a. ———
é od gr Nia a Be ‘ 2 ie —_e- *
fr i AD Dicte S e ed a e ev ne E >

Price 5s. 6d.—Members Gratis.

Pe Wr

hi Len Pay

a
c ‘cat

ae

oS ee

° >

a ae

‘
™
‘
*

Pgs ea ne ta tie eG ed
erie ? v Sel ae ae

—"

NOTICE TO MEMBERS.

TAKE NOTICE, that a copious Index for .the preceding eight ?
Volumes of the Magazine will be found at the end of Vols,

Vili. XVI., and xxiv.

Members who have not paid their Subscriptions to the Society for .

The

All

The

the current year, are requested to remit the same forthwith to
the Financial Secretary, Mr. Davip Owen, 31, Long Street,
Devizes, to whom also all communications as to the supply
of Magazines should be addressed, and of whom most of the
back Numbers may be had.

Numbers of this Magazine will be delivered gratis, as issued,
to Members who are not in arrear of their Annual Subserip-
tions, but in accordance with Byelaw No. 8 “ The Financial
Secretary shall give notice to Members in arrear, and the

Society’s publications will not be forwarded to Members whose

subscriptions shall remain unpaid after such notice.”

other communications to be addressed to the Honorary Secre-
taries: H. E. Muputcort, Esq., Sandfield, Potterne, Devizes;
and the Rey. E. H. Gopparp, Clyffe Vicarage, Wootton Bassett.

Rev. A. C. Surru (Old Park, Devizes) will be much obliged to
observers of birds in all parts of the county, to forward to
him notices of rare occurrences, early arrivals of migrants, or
any remarkable facts connected with birds, which may come
under their notice.

A resolution has been passed by the Committee of the Society,

“that it is highly desirable that every encouragement should
be given towards obtaining second copies of Wiltshire Parish
Registers.”

Wiltshive—The Topographical Collections

BY THE REV. CANON J. E. JACKSON, M.A., F.8.A.

of Fohn Aubrey, F.R.S.,
A.D. 1b59—70.

CORRECTED AND ENLARGED

In 4to, Cloth, pp. 491, with 46 Plates.
Price £2 10s.

WILTSHIRE
Archeological ant Batural AWistory

MAGAZINE,

No. LXXV. JUNE, 1891. 4827

Vou. XXV.

Rey

gree .-e3..
Contents. S23

F
“fea ne
TAL PV

Account oF THE TuirTy-Seventa AnNnvAL Mzsrine at Devizes 235
Norzs on THE CHURCHES VISITED BY THE SocreTy 1n 1890: By

C. EB. Ponting, F.S.A. ....ccccccccceesreessseeeserenseesecanereesesesecesagenee cs 252
Notes on PLaces VISITED BY THE SocrEry 1n 1890: By H. E.
Medlicott .....cscccscsseccecscneccecsecnecseetececescaecesesseeseeeeusseaneneeeesees 280

InavcuraL ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE Society, Lt.-Gen.
_ Pitt-Rivers, F.R.S., F.S.A., on the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts,

and Bokerly Dyke ......sessssseessssenseseeseseteseeeseseserseerersenrecseceeess 283
Norzs on Human Remains discovered by General Pitt-Rivers, D.C.L,,

E.RB.S., at Woodyates, Wiltshire: By J. G. Garson, M.D., V.P.A.I.

Lecturer on Comparative Anatomy at Charing Cross Hospital Medical

School, London ......sssscceceesseeeeecessseesecsensnsceeueeeeeeseuegecsecseeneeaas 312
Tar Guotocy or Devizes: By A. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., F.GS. ... 317
Norms on THE Cuvurcy Prats or Nortu Witts: By the Rev. E. H.

Goddard... ..c.csscssccvseseeveeseeves = oS MRP Cpe ccreoec pa ex 336
Ix Memoriam Joun Epwarp Jackson, F.S.A., Hon. CANON OF
BRISTOL .cccecscesceesceccseccnsccucesseenccecascueccseseceeacsseecsestecneesenses 355
Recent OccurRRENCE oF THE Great Bustarp 1n Wits: By the
Rey. A. C. Smith....... Bae Mee eat tathacndshedtwraevine shoves Weassencusaucea 359
Appirions TO THE MusEUM AND LIBRARY ........004 Rare san tte na eee 364
ILLUSTRATIONS.
Font—Cherington ......cecssececnecseeeeaseeseeeaeesneencases 260
Church of All Saints, Marden, Wilts ...........-s000+- Raneve 263
Map of Bokerly Dyke, between Dorset and Wilts ...... 288
Section 1—showing the natural order of the Strata
beneath Devizes .......secessecseereercceceseerecneseesseeees 318
Section 2—showing the successive beds of Chalk at
Morgan’s Hill ......cccseccecsessseeseneeneereeeeenenanennnens 318
Fig. 3.—Structure of Siliceous Chalk .........seseerrseees 324
Figs. 4 and 5.—Structure of Melbourn Rock and of
Chalk Rock .......... Beco a ncdadeaicivaccscdavecusesssessceses 326
Fig. 6.—Structure of Middle Chalke ......csssssseceeeeeeees 327
Fig. 7.—Structure of Chalk Rock .......::ssseeseseseeeeeees 328
Plate of ten Chalices in Churches in North Wilts......... 342
Plate of five Flagons in Churches in North Wilts ...... 348
DEVIZES :

H. F. But, 4, Saint Joun SrTReEsr.

he peak heey ae

HE

WILTSHIRE MAGAZINE,

“MULTORUM MANIBUS GRANDE LEVATUR ONUS.’—Ovid.

THE THIRTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL MEETING
OF THE
Wiltshire Archeological and Natural Bistory Society,
HELD AT DEVIZES,
July 30th and 31st, and August 1st, 1890.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY,
Lr.-Gen. A. Lanz Fox Pirt-Rivers,
IN THE CHAIR.

N 1880 the Society held its Annual Meeting at Devizes, in
es conjunction with the British Archeological Association.
The same town was selected as the meeting-place for 1890 mainly
in consequence of the very great interest attaching to the excavations
made in the Wansdyke by our President for the year, General
Pitt -Rivers.

The arrangements for the Meeting were carried out by a Com-
mittee, of which the Mayor, Mr. Gillman, was the Chairman, and
Mr. B. Howard Cunnington the Secretary—the latter gentleman
undertaking the chief part of the work.

The Town Hall, in which the Opening Meeting was held, had
been excellently arranged for the purpose, the whole of the end of
the room being hung with maps, plans, sections, and drawings
illustrative of the papers to be read; of these a certain number
_ were drawings or photographs of objects of interest connected with
Mr. Penruddocke’s paper on Mrs. Jane Lane, others were excellent
large-size drawings specially prepared by Mr. Bell for the elucidation

————

For many of the details of this account the Editor is indebted to the columns
of the Devizes and Wilts Advertiser.

236 The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting.

of Mr. Jukes Brown’s geological paper, but the greater number
consisted of singularly accurate plans of the excavations of which
the President was to give an account in his inaugural address. In
addition to these General Pitt-Rivers exhibited on tables in the
body of the room a number of large-sized coloured plaster models
of the most interesting portions of his excavations, including one
of the cutting made in the Wansdyke in 1889. These models
executed by the General’s assistants under his own personal super-
vision, and built up, as they are, from measurements and notes taken
with the greatest accuracy during the progress of the excavations,
showing the exact position in which the more important finds
occurred, preserve the evidence brought to light by his researches
better than the excavations themselves—even if they could be kept
open—could do. A large number of articles found by the General
at Rotherley and Woodcuts were also on view, together with the
urn and holed stones found at Oldbury and exhibited by Mr.
Plenderleath ; whilst in the Council Chamber the handsome borough
maces, the silver punch-bow! of the Brittox Club, a fine tall covered
cup of about 1609, a case of documents lent by Mr, Kite, of Seend,
together with the valuable series of charters, &c., relating to Devizes,
were all well worthy of inspection.

The proceedings began at 3 o’clock, by Mr. Story Masketyne
proposing, in a few words, that General Pitt-Rivers should take the
President’s chair. He said it was an honour to the Society to have
for its President such a distinguished archeologist, and one who had
done such a valuable work in the exploration and examination of
the remains of antiquity. The large volumes, in which the records
of the General’s excavations are contained, showed that his work
was in reality of much greater value than that of our other great
Wiltshire Archeologist, Sir Richard Colt Hoare, because it was
so accurately and completely done. He hoped that many more
volumes might be added to those already in existence, recording the
results of many more years of careful exploration and research.

The motion having been seconded by Mr. Cunnineton, THE
Presipent at once took the chair and called on the Rev. E. H.
Gopparp to read the

:

:
{
!
{

on

The Report. 2387
REPORT,

which was as follows :—

“ Your Committee reports that they have held five meetings since
the last Annual General Meeting, at which many matters of interest
and importance to the Society have come under consideration.

“The total number of members on the books at the last General
Annual Meeting (including, as usual, the Societies with which publi-
cations are exchanged), was stated to be three hundred and seventy-
three. Since that date we have lost by death six members, and five
by resignation. On the other hand seven new members have been
elected, showing as the total number of members on the Ist July
last three hundred and sixty-nine, a decrease of four.

* None of the Members whose loss we have to deplore were original
Members. Amongst them the name of the Right Hon. Edward P.
Bouverie will be remembered by us as a distinguished Member of
our Society. His Parliamentary duties in former days, and more
recently his numerous business engagements, allowed him but little
time for the enjoyment of country life, but he was known as a keen
observer of all that passed around him, and from time to time he
has notified the appearance of a rare bird on the Downs, or some
other object of interest to the Society, while in 1874 he took an
aetive part at our Annual Meeting. The Rev. Prebendary Scarth,
Rector of Wrington, died last winter at Tangiers. He had been
for years one of the most active members of the Somersetshire
Archzological Soeiety, and was at one time a member of our Society
also. He took an active part in the opening of the Blackmore
Museum. Sir Daniel Gooch, Bart., had been a Member since 1873.
The movement which has led to that great county undertaking, the
rescue from ruin of the grand Church at Edington, was initiated
during the incumbency of the Rev. H. Cave-Brown-Cave, who took
the greatest interest in the work up to his death.

« Amongst the names of those who have resigned we would note
that of Mr, Robert Elwell, our Local Honorary Secretary for the
Highworth district—creating a vacancy which we hope may be
filled during this Meeting—and also that of the Rev. T. A. Preston,
who has left the county, but whose name will ever be held in grateful

S$ 2

238 The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting.

remembrance by the Society as the author of “ The Flowering Plants
of Wilts, with Sketches of the Physical Geography and Climate of
the County ”—the most complete work we have on Wiltshire botany.
Mr. Preston was for many years our Local Secretary at Marlborough,
where he had done much to advance the study of natural history,
not only in our own county, but in the country at large, by his
lectures at the College. It may be observed that, in the preface to
his book, Mr. Preston bears testimony to the value of earlier work
in the same direction, the results of which have been recorded in our
Magazine. We regret his loss, and wish him well in his new home.

“Such losses should stimulate us to fresh exertions, not only to
add to our numbers, which have never yet quite reached four hundred,
though we think that in a large county like ours this might be
achieved with a little exertion on the part of the Local Secretaries
and of our Members, scattered as they are in all parts of the county,
but also to maintain the high repute of our Society, which cannot
by any means yet be said to have fulfilled its mission or to have
exhausted the archzological and natural history of a county second
to none in its resources for research.

“Such thoughts are forced upon our mind all the more keenly
when we are called upon to record our profound regret at the with-
drawal of the Rev. A. C. Smith, owing to failing health, from the
post of Honorary Secretary and Editor of the Magazine—a post the
duties of which he has fulfilled, not only to the entire satisfaction
of every Member of the Society since the year 1857, but with a
courtesy and affability which has endeared him to all of us, The
Committee has already passed a resolution upon this subject, which
will presently be put to this Meeting, and which will doubtless be
carried with acclamation. The Rev. Edward Hungerford Goddard
has been provisionally elected by the Committee (under Rule IX.)
to fill Mr. Smith’s place, and a resolution appointing him will be
submitted to this Meeting.

“ As to finance, an account of receipts and disbursements was
published with the Magazine issued this month. The apparent
falling off in the amount of subscriptions received can be accounted
for by the fact that in the year ending 1888 a considerable amount

The Report. 239

received under this head consisted of arrears of unpaid subscriptions.
The amount received from admissions to the Museum shows a con-
siderable increase owing to the reduced price charged for entrance,
viz., 3d. The general balance shows an increase as compared with
the previous year. There is still outstanding about £70 of sub-
scriptions and arrears, due lst January last.

“The Committee have had this under consideration, and they
would urge upon Members that if they would give a standing order
to their bankers to pay their subscriptions when due, viz., lst
January in each year, that much trouble would be saved to the
officers of the Society and to themselves. The Financial Secretary
would supply a form for this purpose at any time on application.

“The concluding number of volume xxiv. of the Magazine was
issued last spring, and with it concluded the labours of Mr. Smith
as Editor. All will concur in the opinion that his work has beer
crowned with success to the last. With volume xxiv. is issued a
general index to the last eight volumes, for which the Society is
indebted to the laborious and painstaking efforts of a valued Member
of the Committee, the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath. The first number
of vol. xxv. was issued quite recently, and it is hoped that it has
reacted the hands of every Member whose subscription has been
paid up to 30th June.

“A list of donations to the Library and Museum is published
with each number of the Magazine. The thanks of the Society are
due to all those who wisely consider that books relating to county
history, whether past or contemporary, and objects of interest of all
kinds which throw light on the study of the county are best placed
in the Library or Museum of the Society. At the same time the
energies of the Curators are sometimes severely taxed in the en-
deavour adequately to display to view the many treasures which are
offered to the Society, and it must be remembered if we are sometimes

_ forced to decline donations that the space available is so circumscribed
that it becomes increasingly necessary to confine ourselves to books

and objects referring directly to the history of our own county.
“It is hoped that many Members of the Society will take the
opportunity which our visit to Devizes affords of inspecting the

240 The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting.

valuable collections which the Museum now contains, for the classi-
fication and re-arrangement of which from time to time the Society
is deeply indebted to Mr. B. H. Cunnington, one of the Hon.
Curators, and members of his family, who take a very active interest
and natural pride in this very important centre of Wiltshire arche-
ology and natural history.

“The Committee has again to refer to the very important work
which is being carried on in the county by the President, General
Pitt-Rivers—work which is gradually elucidating a period of history
hitherto veiled in mystery, and work which can be carried on in no
part of the country with a better chance of success than in our own
county. The Society cannot but be most grateful to General Pitt-
Rivers for the costly and painstaking work he has so generously
taken in hand, and we hope the Wansdyke may yet yield results as
conclusive as those arrived at in the south of the county.

“The Society desires to urge upon all owners of property in the
county upon which archzological remains exist the great importance
of most carefully preserving such antiquities, and whilst we have as
our President “ Her Majesty’s Inspector General of Ancient Monu-
ments in Great Britain,” we feel it our duty to make an especial
appeal to all who have it in their power to entrust to his care
treasures, the full historical and national value of which is some-
times but little appreciated or understood. No greater venerator of
antiquity exists than General Pitt-Rivers, and even in cases where
an object cannot be made, technically speaking, an ‘ ancient monu-
ment,” his advice as to its preservation will be given, and may with
confidence be acted upon.

“Whilst congratulating the Society on the past, and expressing
an earnest hope and desire that it may flourish in the future in spite
of changes, your Committee appeals earnestly to the Members of
the Society in all parts of the county for their active co-operation.
We appeal to the Local Secretaries, and to any individual Members
who will take the trouble, to help the Society by increasing the
number of Members, by inducing some to join us who are not
Members but who show their interest in the general objects of
our Society by studying and sometimes publishing papers on

|

The Opening Meeting. 241

parochial history, on geology, on natural history, and kindred
subjects.

“Union is strength, active co-operation, all working together,
will give us the power, vigour, and means to accomplish yet the
vast work that still lies before the Society.”

The report having been adopted, ArcapEacon BucHaNan next
proposed the following resolution :—“ The Members of the Wiltshire
Archxological and Natural History Society, in General Meeting
assembled at Devizes, having heard with the greatest possible regret
the announcement of the resignation by the Rev. Alfred Charles
Smith of the post of Honorary Secretary and Editor of the Magazine,
desire to record their grateful thanks to him for his valuable services
to the Society from its commencement, but more especially as Hono-
rary Secretary since 1857, and Editor of the Magazine since 1864.
They feel most deeply the loss the Society sustains by Mr. Smith’s
resignation, and desire to express a hope that he may long be spared
to render the valuable help which he has been so good as to promise
if health permit.” He said Mr. Smith had always placed his
literary ability and great capacity for business alike at the service
of the Society, and he was endeared to its Members by the unfailing
kindness and courtesy which marked him in everything that he did.
He had from the very beginning been the life of the Society, and
had infused his own enthusiasm into their Meetings. He trusted
that Mr. Smith might live to watch over the interests of the Society
for very many years to come.

The Rev. W. C. PLenpErteatH having seconded the resolution,
_ Tue Presitpent said he should like to add a word or two to what
had been said. He deeply regretted that almost the first aet of his
presidency should have been to receive Mr. Smith’s resignation.
Mr. Smith had long been a hard-working archzologist, and his
_ great work on the British and Roman antiquities of North Wilts
_ was not only of great interest in itself, but was of the utmost im-
_ portance as a basis for future research. For if ever the antiquities
_ of North Wilts came to be properly explored and excavated whoever
undertook that work would find Mr. Smith’s book an invaluable
foundation for it.

242 The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting.

The resolution having been carried with acclamation, Mr. Surru
said he hardly knew how to thank the Society for the resolution
they had just adopted. He had received many kindnesses from the
Society in times past—for instance, when his book was burnt in
the fire in Paternoster Row, the Society most generously undertook
the cost of a second edition, and when his daughter was married a
very handsome present was given her in recognition—as they were
pleased to say—of his services to them as Secretary. His work as
Secretary had always been a great pleasure to him, but he felt that
it was time to resign it into younger hands now. It was sometimes
desirable to have an infusion of fresh blood. Moreover, he felt that
he could not have given up his office at a better time, for the Society
was never more flourishing than it was at the present time.

Resolutions were then carried that the names of the Right Rev.
the Lord Bishop of Salisbury and the Rev. A. C. Smith be added
to the list of Vice-Presidents of the Society, and that the Rev.
E. H. Goddard be appointed one of the General Secretaries and
Editor of the Magazine in the room of Mr. Smith.

Tue Presipent then read the first part of his inaugural address,
on his excavation of the Romano-British villages at Rotherley and
Woodcuts, and at Bokerly Dyke, in the extreme south of the county,
illustrating his paper by references to the numerous diagrams ex-
hibited on the walls. It is needless to say that this paper was of
very great interest and value, but as it will appear in full ata
later page of this Magazine further mention of it here is un-
necessary.

The Rev. W. C. Pienperiezats said that there was one matter
which he had had occasion to bring before the notice of the Council
of the Society, and which their Secretaries thought would must
fittingly be mentioned at that Meeting. Ten years ago, when the
British Archzological Association held a Meeting in Devizes, in
conjunction with that of their own Society, a curious mistake had
been made by two speakers with regard to the builder of Devizes
Castle, His attention had chanced to be called to this last year
when he was employed upon the index to their Magazine; and he
thought that, as one of the main objects of the Society was the

The Opening Meeting. 243

preservation of information with respect to the history of their
county, it was a matter of some importance that the information so
recorded should be correct.

A local antiquarian was reported to have said, in a paper read on
August 16th, 1880, at St. John’s Church, “ The tower, the transepts,
and the vaulted chancel are the oldest portions of the Church, and

. are stated to have beem built about the same time as
the Castle, namely, 1130, and at the expense and under the direction
of its celebrated founder, Roger Poore, Bishop of Salisbury and
Chancellor to Henry I., whose works in architecture were the

‘wonder of the age in which he lived.” (Wiltshire Archeological

Magazine, vol. xix., pp. 119, 20.) In a paper read subsequently at
the Castle itself, a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, who had
come down to tell them all about the history of their county, was
stated to have spoken of “the great Bishop Roger Poore, who, like
many another Norman, was attracted by the value of those earlier
earthworks for the erection of a castle, and who was wise enough to
erect his Castle upon them. He was glad to be able to say the
foundations whieh existed showed clearly workmanship of the time of
Roger Poore.” (Wiltshire Archeological Magazine, vol. xix., p.
128.)

Now it was a fact known to every student of the history of
Wiltshire that no such person as Bishop Roger Poore ever existed,
nor had his name ever been heard of until he had been evolved out
of the inner consciousness of these two learned writers. They (the
writers in question) had confused Roger, the Norman Bishop of Old
Sarum from 1107 to 1139, with Bishop Richard Poore, who was in
possession of the see from 1217 to 1229, and who transferred it
during that time from its ancient seat to the Cathedral which he
founded at New Salisbury. It was the former of these prelates
who built Devizes Castle, as well as other Castles at Malmesbury,
Sherborne, and elsewhere. But there was not the smallest ground
for attributing to him the surname of Poore, and very little for
supposing him to have been in any way connected with the family of
his illustrious successor. One historical writer had indeed suggested
as a possibility that such might have been the case, from the fact

244 The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting,

of Bishop Roger’s having had a nephew, or other near relative, who
was known as “ Pauper,” 7.¢., “ The Poor Man.” But this eponym
was quite accounted for by the revenues of both uncle and nephew
having been confiscated by King Stephen, so, that the latter was
left with very inadequate means for keeping up the dignity of the
office of Chancellor, which had been bestowed upon him. And the
etymology of the surname Poore, as borne by Bishop Richard and
by his brother, appeared to have been entirely different from this,
for the author of the St. Osmund Register spoke of him as “a
wealthy and painstaking man.”

Mr. PLeNDERLEATH added that he was sorry that this little
historical mistake should not sooner have been discovered, and been
corrected in the volume in which the record of it occurred. But he
thought that the Meeting would agree with him that, however late,
it was desirable that attention should now be called to it, and that
the Wiltshire Archeological Society should not be responsible for
the existence of a Wiltshire castle-builder whose name was unknown
to history (hear, hear).

The company then separated, and proceeded first to St. John’s
Church, and afterwards to St. Mary’s—the architecture of both
Churches being briefly described by the Rector, Dr. Burazs (cf
vol. ii, p. 2183—256, and vol. xix., p. 119—126), whilst a few
Members visited the Castle Grounds, which were kindly thrown
open to them for the occasion, thongh the house itself, being under
repair, was not shown.

THE DINNER.

At 6.30 thirty-one Members sat down to the Anniversary Dinner
at the Bear Hotel, at the conclusion of which the speechmaking
was cut very short. THe Mayor (Mr. Gillman), in responding for
the Corporation, expressed his pleasure at welcoming the Society to
Devizes, and he trusted that one result at least of their visit would
be that the valuable deeds and charters belonging to the Corporation
—hitherto hidden away in a somewhat mouldy chest—would be
carefully framed and exhibited permanently in the Council
Chamber.

The Conversazione. 245

THE CONVERSAZIONE

was held at the Town Hall, at 8, p.m., the attendance numbering
eighty-eight, when Tas Prustprnt continued the paper on the results
of his excavations, the first part of which he had read at the after-
noon Meeting.

At its conclusion a cordial vote of thanks was passed, and the
audience for a short space devoted themselves to the refreshments
kindly provided by the Mayor.

On the resumption of business the Rev. E. H. Gopparp gave
an address on the Church Plate of North Wilts, illustrating the
subject by a large number of drawings, made by himself and others
as a basis for the history of the Church plate of the county which
it is hoped may shortly be published by Mr. J. E. Nightingale.
He was also able, through the kindness of many of the neighbouring
clergy, to exhibit a series of actual examples of the various designs
of chalices, patens, and flagons of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and
eighteenth centuries, including a very beautiful flagon of 1603 from
~ Heddington, Elizabethan chalices from the same parish and Hilperton,
a chalice of 1631 from Wootton Bassett, the flagons of St. John’s and
St. Mary’s, Devizes, and other specimens of the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries from Clyffe Pypard, Calstone, Cherhill, &c.

THURSDAY, JULY 83lsr.

The carriages left the Market Place at 9, a.m., with some sixty
Members and their friends, for the first day’s excursion. The route
lay by the Quaker’s Walk, up the hill to Roundway Down and
Oliver’s Camp, which it was explained had nothing to do with Oliver
Cromwell. The ramparts afforded the party one of the finest,
perhaps, on the whole, the finest, view in Wiltshire—the various
localities in the distance being pointed out by Mr. Mepuicorr, who
afterwards read a short but lucid account of the Battle of Roundway

Down, which had been prepared for the occasion by Mr. Water
Bucuanay.

Mr. Cunnincton and Mr. Bett then called attention to the
- characteristic gullies which cut into the sides of the chalk escarpment

246 The Thirty-Seventh Annual Moeting.

here—and explained how they were in all probability, formed by
the rains rushing down from off the tertiary clays and sands which
once covered the chalk downs, the rainfall in those days being much
greater probably than it is now.

Entering the carriages again the party was driven to Blackland
Hollow, where most of the Members alighted and walked along the
course of the Wansdyke to the cutting made by General Pitt- Rivers
the year before, above Shepherd’s Shore. The sides of this cutting
were found to be still sharp and clear, and Taz Generat explained
the results he had obtained from it. An iron nail, an iron knife-
blade, and a few pieces of pottery were the chief things found.
The purpose of the excavation was to find some object on, or under,
the original turf-line of the down, upon which the mound had been
thrown up. Whatever was found at this depth below the mound—
and the original line of the turf was clearly shown by a band of
brown mould—must, of course, have been there before the mound
was thrown up, and if any bits of pottery could be discovered to
which a date could be assigned, that would go far towards settling
the date of the dyke itself. Grnzrau Pirt-Rivers said that the
presence of fragments of Samian ware under the outer and smaller
rampart proved pretty conclusively that that, at least, was of Roman
or post-Roman date; but as to the main rampart the evidence as
yet was insufficient to warrant a conclusion. He gave it as his
opinion that these dykes, being lines of defence, only protected the
open and exposed parts of the country, the low-lying grounds having
been then covered with dense forest, which would probably sufficiently
protect the inbabitants from any enemy. In support of this theory
he mentioned that both Bokerley and Wansdyke lose themselves at
each end in what must have been thick forest country, where, if it
was necessary to continue the line of defence at all, the place of the
dyke might easily have been taken by abattis of felled trees.
Probably the object of these defensive lines—as that of the Roman
wall certainly was—was to defend the country of some tribe or
nation in a more advanced state of civilisation from the attacks of
its more barbarous neighbours ; more especially to prevent the cattle
—which probably constituted the wealth of those days—being

Thursday’s Excursion. 247

earried off by a sudden raid. He suggested that, in some cases, at
least, the outer bank may have been used as a road, whilst the inner
embankment was probably crowned by a wooden stockade.

Having spent some time here the party proceeded to Shepherd’s
Shore, where they found lunch ready for them in the barn. Whilst
under shelter here some considerable showers of rain fell, but happily
with the end of the lunch the rain ended too, and the afternoon,
though somewhat overcast, was fine—a much better condition of
things than sunshine and heat, considering the amount of walking
to be got through. After lunch the breaks took the Members up
to the point on the dyke—about one mile from Shepherd’s Shore
towards Tan Hill—where the men were at work on the new cutting.
The original level of the soil had been reached about half-way
through the rampart, and whilst the visitors were present several
pieces of pottery were found in the original dark surface soil—the
rampart which had ‘been thrown up above this being formed of loose
chalk rubble. This particular spot was chosen for a cutting on
account of the small rectangular earthwork projecting from the
dyke at this place, which General Pitt-Rivers thought might mark
the site of a settlement of earlier age than the dyke itself. He
declined to express any definite opinion as yet as to the age of the
pottery found in this cutting, hoping for further evidence before
the work was finished.

Proceeding some distance further, to the foot of Tan Hill, in the
breaks, the party then alighted, walked up the steep slopes along
_the dyke, admiring by the way the wealth of down flowers, just
then at their best, with which the southern side of the rampart was
carpeted; pausing for a while to enjoy the grand view commanded
_ by the summit of the hill, and then walking on down the other side
to Cannings Cross Farm, where the carriages met them again after
making a long detour. Thence they drove at once to All Cannings,
where the Rector, the Rev. E. May, very kindly offered tea, an
invitation which the want of time obliged the archeologists to
decline. As it was they were somewhat hurried in their inspection
of the Church, where Mr. Ponting read a paper calling attention
to the points of interest, especially the rich external ornamentation

:
|

248 The Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting.

of the south chapel, and its great resemblance to similar work at
Bromham and St. John’s, Devizes.

They next proceeded with all speed to Etchilhampton Church,
where, with Mr. Pontine again for their guide, the fine altar-tomb
with recumbent effigies in the chancel, the nave roofs, west window,
and curious south-west buttress with battlemented niches, were all
noticed.

This was the last item on the programme, and Devizes was reached
in very fair time.

The proceedings at the Conversazione in the Town Hall, at which
seventy-two persons were present, began by Mr. PEnRuDDOCKE
being called upon to read a paper on Mrs. Jane Lane, in which he
described the adventures of Charles II. after the Battle of Worcester,
and his eventful escape, assisted by the heroine of the paper; after
which refreshments of a novel character, kindly provided by Mr.
PENRUDDOCKE in illustration of his paper, were handed round, con-
sisting of glasses of old Canary wine, and biscuits with a preserve
made from a recipe of Mrs. Jane Lane, amongst the ingredients of
which were rose-water and musk.

Tur Presipent then read portions of a valuable and learned paper
he had received from Dr. Garson, the eminent authority on the
subject, on the skulls and skeletons found during his excavations at
Rotherley and Woodcuts. After which Mr. PLenDERLEATH gave a
short account of the finding by flint-diggers of an urn and three
pierced chalk stones, supposed to have been loom-weights, in a pit
some 6ft. below the surface, close to the ramparts of Oldbury Camp,
and about 100 yds. south of the monument, a short time before.

As time pressed, the valuable paper by Mr. J. Juxzes Browy, on
the Geology of Devizes, which was next on the programme, was not
read, but the substance of it was given in a short but interesting
address by Mr. W. Hzewarp Bett, who lucidly explained the ex-
cellent diagrams of sections of the cretaceous strata of the neigh-
bourhood, which had been prepared for the illustration of the paper.

At the request of THz Prustpent, Mr. James Way en, the
historian of Devizes, gave a short account of the picture painted by
himself representing Devizes Castle as it may have been in its

Friday’s Excursion, 249

palmy days, which was hung behind the President’s chair. He

expressed an opinion that the biographical section of the county

history had been somewhat neglected in the Society’s publications,

and hoped that more attention would be paid to this in the future.
This brought the evening’s proceedings to a close.

FRIDAY, AUGUST lst.

Forty-three Members started on the second day’s excursion, which
left Devizes at 9.20. The weather looked gloomy but happily only
a few showers fell, and the heaviest of these was timed most con-
veniently, as on the previous day, to come down whilst the arche-
ologists were safely under cover at lunch, whilst towards evening
things brightened and the sun came out. Indeed, on the whole,
the weather could not have been better for both days’ excursions.
Dust—which is often so trying on such occasions—was entirely
absent, and the temperature was cool and pleasant.

The first stoppage was at Potterne Church, where ARCHDEACON
Bucuanan read a short account of the building, pointing out
especially the ancient Saxon font, the thirteenth century north door,
and a rubbing of the undecipherable inscription on one of the bells
(see vol. xvi., p. 281). After having duly admired this fine thirteenth
century Church, the Porch House was next visited, the history of
which was shortly described by Mz. Watrer Bucuanan (see vol.
xvi. p. 287). After wandering over the delightful old house so
lavishly restored by Mr. Richmond, and admiring the many bits
of ancient glass collected from various sources in its windows, the
party drove on to Market Lavington, where the Church was carefully
described by Mr. Pontine.

The next stopping-place was Erchfont, where the archeologists
found a Church in some respects the most interesting of any visited
this year, and which, never having been visited by the Society
_ before, was new, as, indeed, were also the four Churches next visited,
to most of the Members. ‘The interest here centred in the beautiful
and very unusual early fourteenth century chancel, which—with its
_ vaulted roof, its ridge stones and singular fleur-de-lys, showing that
_ the roof was originally covered with stone slabs, as the south porch

250 The Lhirty-Seventh Annual Meeting.

is now, the remains of contemporary glass in the heads of the
easternmost windows, and many other points of interest—is, in some
respects, unique in Wiltshire. After thoroughly enjoying this
Church, under Mr. Pontine’s direction, the party, at the invitation
of the Vicar, visited the picturesque garden of the vicarage, with
its curious deep ravine; aud then assembled at the school, where an
excellent lunch,provided by Mr. Reynolds, of the Bear Hotel, Devizes,
awaited them. Mr. Penruppockg, who took the chair in the
‘absence of the Chairman, thanked the Local Secretaries of the
Meeting for the excellent way in which all the arrangements were
made; whilst Mr. Men icorrt said they must not allow the Meeting
to terminate without expressing their thanks also to the Mayor of
Devizes (Mr. Gillman) for his very kind provision of refreshments
on the two previous evenings.

Chirton was soon reached after lunch, and the very interesting
little Church, with its splendid font, south door, nave arcade, and
roof, all of the twelfth century, were commented on by Mr.
Pontine, who, after a mile’s further drive, also did the honours of
Marden Church, pointing out the fine twelfth century south door
and chancel arch, with fifteenth century tower—the latter showing
now to the uninitiated, few if any traces of the fact that under
Mr. Ponting’s careful hands it was taken completely down, its
condition rendering this imperatively necessary, and was built up
again, stone by stone, upon new foundations, only a few years ago.
It is to be hoped that Mr. Ponting may soon be enabled to do as
good a work for the nave, which sadly needs it, as he has already
done for the tower.

Charlton was the next place on the programme, and here again
the Church seemed the only object of interest—indeed, through the
whole of this part of the Pewsey Vale, through which the route of
this day’s excursion lay, there is not a single specimen of domestic
architecture or other object of interest to vary the succession of
Churches. These latter, however, were, on the whole, a very
interesting series, giving examples of an unusually wide range of
date and style. Of Charlton Church itself, which presents a very
picturesque interior, the nave is entirely modern. The chapel on

=.

Friday’s Excursion, 251

the west side, with the tower and part of the chancel remain of the
old structure, as also the wooden screens of both chapel and chancel.
The most curious thing, however, about the building is the double
squint from the porch into the chancel, through the walls of the
chapel, which Mr. Pontine asserted was to allow a person standing
in the porch to see the priest at the high altar, and ring the sanctus
bell at the proper time.

Rushall Church was next visited, but, with the exception of a
Norman font, and the good oak benches of the sixteenth century,
and the strange private pew of the Poore family on the west side,
had little to detain the visitors. .

Upavon was on the programme, but it was found that time would
not allow of going there, and the carriages made for Manningford
Bruce, where the extremely interesting Saxon Church (see vol. xx.,
p- 122) with its apse, herring-bone flint- work, high narrow door
arches, and windows far up in the walls, was described by Mr.
Pontine. Through the kindness of the Rev. E. Evererr, the
beautiful little Pre-Reformation chalice belonging to the parish of
Manningford Abbots was exhibited here, and examined with much
interest.

After seeing the Church the whole party adjourned to tea at Mr.
and Mrs. Grant Megx’s, for which very welcome refreshment their
hospitable hostess was most heartily thanked.

The breaks then returned to Devizes, and the excursion of 1890
came to an end, after a very enjoyable day spent in a part of
Wiltshire new to many Members of the Society.

VoL. XXV.—NO. LXXY. T

252

Alotes on the Churches bisited by the Society
in 1890.

By C. E. Pontine, F.S.A.

[For St. John’s and St. Mary’s, Devizes, see Wilts Mag., vol. ii., p. 213 ;
for Potterne, vol. xvi., p. 274.]

S. Mary’s. Market Lavinerton.

(C HE plan of this Church consists of nave with north and south
A) aisles, south porch, western tower, and chancel, with a
sacristy on the north side of the latter, all ancient.

That a Norman Church stood here is shown by the pieces of stone
ornament, including the chevron and billet moulds of that period,
which are built into the walls of the porch and outside of the east
end of the nave—these were found during the restoration of the
Church in 1862. .

There is also a distinct and interesting feature of the same date
—though it does not occupy its old position—the bowl of a stoup,
now in the vestry and forming a piscina. The narrowness of the

south aisle also indicates an early foundation.

The nave and aisles were apparently re-built very early in the
fourteenth century—the period to which I assign the south arcade
and two bays of that on the north (both having square piers on
chamfered bases), also the door and west and east windows of the
north aisle and the lower part of the walls of the south aisle. It
will be observed that the westernmost arch of the north aisle was
formed at a later date, the inner order of the chamfered arch does
not die out on the face of the piers as in the case of the rest, but is
carried down to the bottom of the respond on one side, and corbelled
out against the pier on the other. The stop on the pier was then
worked to match the earlier one on the other angles, but no such
stop occurs on the respond.

Notes on the Churches. 2538

Whilst on this part I would call attention to the very marked
evidence which exists in this Church of the floor having been laid
to a slope following the natural level of the site—an expedient
frequently adopted in early structures. In this case the fall
was from north to south. The sill of the north door is 2ft. 6in.
above the present floor-level, and the rough appearance of the bases
of the odder piers of the north arcade shows that the ground around
them has been lowered and the foundations exposed; whilst the
lower level at which the worked stone commences on the respond

indicates the probability that this slope was done away with when
_ the fifteenth century western arch was inserted. Before leaving the
arcades I may mention the arch carried across the south aisle at
the point where buttressed by the porch and forming a good
support to the arcade,
The wall of the south aisle was raised and a two-light window
built in the added part, high up at the west end, at about the middle
_of the fifteenth century. A corbel of the old roof of this aisle exists
in the arcade wall; the three-light windows inserted in the south
_ wall are apparently of seventeenth century Gothic, and have square
heads. The square-headed two-light window in the east wall
without arch or cusping, is singular, but it has, I think, been
tampered with.

I said that the door and east end and west windows of the north
aisle were thirteenth century work, but this is not the case with the
‘walls and the rest of the windows and on a first glance this part
‘presents somewhat of a problem, which I solve in the following
way :—when the beautiful fifteenth century tower was built the
north wall of the aisle was evidently re-duz/t, for the tower plinth
‘is carried along this part, but the early window in the west end and
the north door were built in, for their label moulds indicate an earlier

So

:

the constructional stones in the usual way. The east wall of

is aisle was not re-built at this time. Here, too, are diagonal
buttresses which are later than the west window. The three
1 Tt 2

254 Notes on the Churches

Perpendicular windows have a very peculiar type of tracery and
the labels have long terminals returned into the wall, the reveals
are carried to the floor and form seats inside.

The cusping of the early west window has been eut away. A
piscina in the east respond of the arcade here doubtless indicates
the chantry chapel of S. Mary, S. Katherine and S. Margaret, in
which Robert de la Mere, a relative of William Beauchamp, of
Bromham, Lord §. Amand (and the sire of Richard, whose work
we saw at All Cannings yesterday,) ordered his body to be buried—
he died in 1457. The staircase to the rood-loft starts from this
chapel, but it is a fifteenth century insertion, as indicated by its
door areh and the little trefoil window—the stairs are in perfect
preservation: the passage is only 18in. wide, and affords one further
support to my contention that these staircases were not, in village
Churches, intended for the use of the priest.

The tower is a good and notable example of early fifteenth century
work. It has buttresses standing square with its sides, and is
entirely without strings to divide it into its three stages. The
west window and door are treated as one feature, with bold
projecting jamb and arch mouldings carried to the ground—the
splay being panelled. The staircase stops at the belfry level. (I
would remark, in passing, that oyster-shells are freely used in the
joints of this part.)

To return to the nave—the clerestory is coeval with the arcades
and the fenestration is remarkable: there are three of the original
single cusped lights on the north side and two on the south; on
the north there is a very late (probably sixteenth century) three-
light window near the east end, inserted, doubtless, to throw more
light on the rood-loft, and a two-light one of the same date in the
centre of the south side—both of these have wood inside lintels, while
the rest have arches. The roof of the nave is, I think, coeval with
these late windows, but modern braces and rafters have been added.

The south porch has a good inner doorway with cusped arch of
the date of the door and windows in the north aisle, and above it a
niche for a figure. There is a good corbel over the outer doorway
also, and part of a cross above.

Visited by the Society in 1890, 255

The chancel was erected at about the same time as the earlier
parts of the aisles and nave arcades, the north and east walls remain
of this work with two two-light windows and priest’s doorway in
the former and piscina in the south wall ; the south wall was erected
and the chancel arch and east window inserted without regard for
the old string course, in 1862. The chancel apparently has its
original roof above the plaster ceiling.

The sacristy was added later in the fourteenth century, as indicated
by the diagonal buttresses and the moulding of the label to the
outer door ; though the cusped arch of the doorway might be taken
as coeval with the chancel. Further evidence that it was an ad-
dition is afforded by the way in which its east wall cuts into the
window of the sanctuary. The corbels of the old roof remain: the
north window is a later insertion. The squint in the chancel wall
points in the direction of the high altar, and was probably
intended for the use of the priest in watching the altar.

The chancel was originally without buttresses.

The font is a plain but bold Decorated one, and of good size.

There is a rude sundial cut on the south-west buttress of the
porch, which certainly does not indicate the hours of the day, but
might have been cut to indicate the canonical hours. On the
opposite side of the doorway is rudely cut one of those small old
crosses, with a hole at each termination, which are often found on
the face of old walls.

S. Micnart’s & Att ANGELS. ERcHFONT.

The principal part of this Church was erected during the “ Deco-
rated” period ; the work is pure and rich, and at the same time it
possesses great individuality ; there are features here which, so far
-as I am aware, have no parallel in the county. A great deal might
be said on this Church, but I will describe its various features as
_ briefly as possible.

There appears to be nothing here earlier than the beginning of
_ the thirteenth century, but the font is of that period, and so also is
the chancel arch ; so much of the latter has been made up in modern
plaster-work that its appearance is misleading, but the sections of the

256 Notes on the Churches

old mouldings which remain indicate the date of the original parts.
It will be seen that the Norman feeling lingers in the billet mould
of the label, and in the square abacus (which latter, though modern,
is probably copied from the old). The Church of which these
features formed part has, however, with these exceptions disappeared,
but there is no occasion to regret this circumstance when so beautiful
a structure has been given us in its place.

The re-building commenced with the north and south transepts,
which date from the earlier half of the fourteenth century. The
tracery of the south window has been renewed, also the whole of
the two east windows of the south transept, but it is probable that
they are copies of the original work, as they go very well with the
old mouldings. There is a singular stepping up of 14in. only, in
the string course of the south transept, to adapt it to the respective
levels of the side and end window sills. The east window in the
north transept is of three lights, whilst that on the south is of five
lights. Canon Jackson mentions a tradition that on the destruction
of the chapel near Easterton one of these transepts was appropriated
to the inhabitants of Eastcott tything and the other to Wedhampton
(Wilts Magazine, vol. x., p. 279).

Immediately after this came the re-building of the chancel, and
this was done in the best work of the period. It is of three bays
divided by buttresses of very unusual form—they are very massive,
but they have not proved equal to the demands made upon them by
the heavy stone vault and roof, both being without any tie in them-
selves. It is somewhat remarkable that these buttresses, having to
resist so much lateral thrust, should have been exaggerated in width
rather than in projection. Tach bay on the south side and the two
end bays on the north have good two-light windows of “ Geometrical ”
design, but the middle bay on the north is occupied by a well-
designed porch over the priest’s doorway, formed by carrying up
the base-mould of the buttress ; both inner and outer doorways
having plain straight-sided pointed heads. The east window is a
modern one of three lights and poor design, The two angle but-
tresses and those at the east end have also been added, doubtless
with the view of arresting the spreading of the walls.

al

Visited by the Society in 1890. 257

The feature to which I desire to call particular attention is the
700f—this is vaulted in stone on the inside, with the central and inter-
secting ribs usual at that period. The subjects of the carved bosses
are (commencing at the easternmost one) :—S. Michael and the
dragon, a pelican feeding her young, a mermaid, two serpents. In-
stead of the tiled roof which we now see, it is evident that it was
originally constructed entirely of stone like the porch, the form of
construction being arched ribs supporting a covering of stone slabs.
The lower stones of this roof remain zz situ, and also the cap stones
of the ribs, each of the latter terminated by a fleur-de-lis, but the
covering has been replaced by tiles. The scheme was a bold one
for so wide a span, and it appears not to have been entirely satisfac-
tory from a structural point of view, though exceedingly picturesque.
The parapet is of a curious double-stage arrangement with quatre-
foil openings through which the water ran off (instead of being
collected in gutters and discharged through gargoyles) and a string
course above these.

Inside the chancel there is a coeval piscina with ogee arch and a
bowl of quatrefoil form, ‘partly cut away. In the windows north
and south of the sanctuary there are remains of old glass, apparently
coeval with the structure, with figures of angels.

The south aisle is a beautiful example of fully developed Late
Decorated work of a flowing type. The window coming between
the porch and transept is an exquisite one with a carved stem-and-
leaf ornament carried round in the hollow of the arch and jamb.
The other window in this wall is a square-headed one, but the head
was removed when the present parapet was added to the aisle; the
west window of two lights is coeval, but plainer. The diagonal
buttress with octagonal stem at the south-west angle has evidently
been added, as its connexion with the cornice shows, and its terminal
is quite a modern one.

The porch is an addition of early Perpendicular work, and it
partially conceals the flowing window above referred to; but for
this and for the angle buttresses the flat shape of the buttresses on
each side would lead one to assign it to an earlier period. In this
_ porch the chancel mode of construction has been followed, and the

258 Notes on the Churches

roof is here intact with the exception of the loss of its terminals,
so that we can clearly see what the chancel was formerly—the stone
ribs overlap laterally to cover the joints. The ceiling is a barrel-
vault of stone with cusped ribs; the outer doorway has a square
head, with niche over, and is flanked by pinnacles—the peculiar
design of the gable cross is deserving of notice. The inner doorway
is coeval with the aisle, and is remarkable for an unusually late
example of the dog-tooth ornament, used in the same group of
mouldings with the twig ornament before mentioned. The label
mould is a very bold and good one, and the cornice along the
springing of the porch vault is carried up over the doorway.

The nave arcades and clerestory are a little later than the aisle,
and the arch across the south aisle which abuts against the arcade
(but does not intersect with it) looks earlier than the arcade itself.
An arch of a plainer description is carried in a similar way across
the north aisle. This aisle is of fifteenth century date and has one
original window and one new one. The roof is a good specimen of
Jacobean oak-work with billet mould and pendants, and bears the
date 1631.

In the eastern responds of the nave arcades are two openings—
on the north side a doorway, and on the south a squint, but both
have been so disguised by modern plaster-work that it is difficult
to identify their original form.

The south transept was probably a chantry, for it has a piscina
coeval with its erection, although ¢47s has also been disguised by the
modern plasterer. The windows of this transept have inside detached
shafts and arches, and there was probably a canopied niche of their
full height between the two in the east wall, for its corbel remains,
and the side mouldings are continued down. The roof of this
transept bears the date 1787.

The tower was built in the latter half of the fifteenth century ;
the west window is of a somewhat unusual type, and the doorway
under retains its original oak door and iron-work. There is a
pretty niche ou the outside by the side of this doorway, with an ogee
arch, the tracery of which has been mutilated. The stair turret is
square on plan and terminates at the belfry level.

Visited by the Society im 1890, 259

The font is of thirteenth century date—it has a square bowl, the
angles of which are slightly canted off.

S. Joun Baprist’s. CHErineTon (or Currton).

This Church has been much altered, but there is still sufficient
evidence to enable us to form a pretty good idea of its history,

The first thing which strikes one is the very early roof, quite the
earliest example of timber-work that we have seen during our ex-
cursions for many years. Perhaps the best means of arriving at its
probable date will be to first consider the arcades which support it.
These are of three bays each of round arches, with quite plain soffits
and without labels. The pillars are round and the caps and their
abaci square—the carving in each being of a different type. Now
on reading this description alone one would be disposed to say “ Why
of course this is pure Norman work!” but if we look a little closer
we shall see that, although the builders preserved these peculiarities
of the Norman style, the carving shows signs of transition, and I
think we must put this work at not earlier than 1170. The
main timbers of the roof taken alone might be referred to early
in the thirteenth century—but it is hardly reasonable to suppose
that the nave could have required a new roof within fifty years of
its completion. I think, therefore, we are bound to assign the roof
to the same date as that of the arcades, and pronounce it a Tran-
sitional Norman one. And you may observe that, although the
rafters and braces have a later appearance, there are tie-beams at
which level a ceiling might have been put, and only these and the
wall-plates level with them are moulded, and this with the Norman
billet mould.

The beautiful doorway in the south aisle, which we saw as we
came in, is of the date of which we are now speaking— with the
exception of the inner filling with the pointed arch, which is of
fourteenth century date. The jambs and arch of this doorway have
a good bold roll moulding, and very varied carved subjects—amongst
which are, not only the beak-head, but deer’s heads and other
animals, human heads, hands, and entire figures—the inner member
being the zig-zag.

260 Notes on the Churches

There is further evidence of the twelfth century Church in the
chancel, the lower and thicker part of the east wall and the east
buttress of which are of that date.

The chancel has been partially re-built within recent years, but
the upper part of the east wall (above the outside set-off) with the
three-light window may be set down at about 1300, and the two-
light window in the north wall is probably coeval with it. The
curious two-light window opposite is a piece of Jacobean Gothic,
and the other window in this wall is modern, though the pretty
piscina in the angle of its splay is old work built in.

The north and south aisles have been re-built, but the east window
of the latter is the old one replaced. The piscina is coeval with it,

though not in its original position—it will be seen that it is too far.

to the west to serve for the altar there, and it is also too low for
use: the late vicar told me that the architect’s reason for this was
that in its old position it would have interfered with the new
chimney! I think this ought to be placed on record, lest any
casual observer might be misled into thinking that the original
builders had put a piscina in this peculiar position.

The porch has been partially re-built, but it was first erected in
the fifteenth century.

The tower is a typical specimen of the Perpendicular western
tower of a village Church. It is three stages high, and has a west
window of three lights with no door under. The arch communi-
cating with the nave is of the full width of the tower; there is no
stair turret. It is hardly necessary to add that the pinnacles sur-
rounding it are modern.

I usually leave the font to the last, although in this instance I
should, perhaps, from its importance, have placed it first. It isa
magnificent specimen of the Transitional Norman font, and was
doubtless the one made for the original Church of which we have
spoken.! It is circular, and the side is ornamented by a series of
twelve arches containing figures of the twelve apostles—all, with

1 The drawing of the font here given is taken from an old print in my
possession—the details are accurately shown.

FONT_CHERINGTON,

Lee

“ee

Visited by the Society im 1890. 261

the exception of one holding a roll), have books, and one (doubtless
S. Peter) has also a key (not two keys, as is more usual).

It is curious that this font and that at Avebury, which is of about
the same date, should have appeared in a list which was recently
sent to me for revision, amongst the instances of Jeaden fonts, and
I was asked to add to this list any more which I knew of. I
replied, “I cannot make any addition to your list, but I can strike
out two, which I know to be of stone!” Whether they were ever
covered with dark paint which led to this mistake, I do not know;
but that is the only explanation I can give of this error on the part
of a clever archzologist.

Att Sarnts’. Marpen,

Here we have two well-preserved features of a Church of the
pure Norman work of Bishop Roger’s episcopacy—the south
doorway and the chancel arch are not later than 1120 (some half-
century earlier than the work at Cherington), but the foundations
of this early work appear to have been so bad that none of the side
walls remain.

The doorway is enriched with the chevron and bold roll mouldings.
_ It has a square lintel—itself an early feature—and the tympanum

is plain, though it was probably left for sculpture. The label is
carved with the chain pattern, the links unequal, and in the centre
there is a gap: at first sight it would seem that the mason got
wrong in his setting out, and came to standstill; but on closer
examination it appears that the central stone bears a fifteenth
century moulding—a fact which seems to point to the conclusion
that the doorway was re-built when the great re-modelling of the
Church took place, and that this was put in to make up some
deficiency.

The chancel arch has become disturbed from the settlements, the
jambs have spread and the crown of the arch dropped, giving the
present curious flattened appearance.

I have often heard it stated that the jambs of the arches and the
line of the side walls in old work were built to slope outwards at
the top, like the sides of a ship, to symbolise the ship of the Church,

262 Notes on the Churches

but I confess that I have never yet seen an instance of it where
some more practical reason could not be given for this peculiarity.
For instance, at Cherington, and here, the subsoil is green sand
which, although an excellent foundation when a firm bed of it is
reached (as at S. John’s, Devizes), is very treacherous near the
surface (as at S. Mary’s, in the same town) ; hence we see that the
buildings have settled—I shall speak further of this when we come
to the tower. Then the later side walls here are built to batter on
the inside face; they are some 6in. thicker at the base than at the
root level: but surely this is only intended to give strength!
Probably the fifteenth century builders were warned in this respect
by the older walls having become so much settled that it was
necessary to re-build them.

But to return to this arch—it will be seen that it is composed of
three orders of the chevron moulding—all the work being on the
west face, so that the inner member is fair with the east face of the
wall. There is no label, but this has probably been cut away for
the rood loft—the doorway for access to which is seen high up in
the north wall. The abacus of the cap is carried across the nave on
each side as a string course.

The nave was, as I remarked before, re-built in the fifteenth
century, when the tower was erected. There are two of the nave
windows of this period Jeft—one in the north and one in the south
walls, both have had their tracery cut out. The roof of this period
remains and is of a somewhat peculiar type, and the form of the
spandrels suggest the idea that the pitch has been altered ; but this
is not so. The corbels supporting the principals represent a bishop
and a king alternately.

The tower is of unusual beauty. It was probably erected at about
the middle of the fifteenth century in the form to which it has
recently been restored, and I would ask you to especially notice the
proportions of the stair turret, and the pinnacle on each set-off of
the buttresses, also the ogee arches of the windows.

But the builders did not realise the real cause of the settlements
in the Norman work—or, at any rate, the proper remedy. They
doubtless found the sand was soft near the surface, and they sought

|

eit

<4 fh

a

SOUTH ELEVATION,
SHOWING TOWER RESTORED

SOUTH ELEVATION,- BEFORE RESTORATION.

oe

Visited by the Society in 1890. 263

to neutralise the effects of this by putting in large sandstone boulders
as a foundation instead of digging deeper. The result was that
these were crushed down into the sand, and the tower became split
and distorted. At some period—probably when the bells were put
in'— an attempt was made to arrest this damage by putting large
oak beams right through the walls from east to west and north to
south. These were keyed on the outside and the exposed parts
protected by a kind of stone hood. Then, as if to compensate for
the additional weight imposed by the bells, the top of the tower
was taken off for about 7ft. in height, and the cornice and parapet
were re-set at a lower level.

I have here two drawings, one showing the tower as it was before
the restoration in 1885, and the other showing it as it is now (and
as the evidences afforded by the stones indicated that it originally
was). You will see that the cornice is broken through to avoid
interfering with the window labels, and the shaft of the pinnacle
on the upper set-off of the buttresses was reduced to about a foot in
height; but the bases of these shafts remained, excepting, in one
instance, where the central cusping of the panelling of the face had
been re-fixed in lieu of the base: this, and the fact that the
pinnacles on the set off below were of equal height, gave the key to
the original design.

All the precautions taken for the safety of the tower were of no
avail! the settlements went on, and the rotten state of the mortar
offered no resistance, so that the whole structure was on the verge
of collapse, and Mr. Butterfield condemned it forty years ago.
When I was called to advise as to its treatment I at first hoped to
re-build only the upper part and to underpin the rest, but on
discovering the inferiority of the mortar I was obliged to abandon
this intention and to re-build the whole. The entire structure was,
therefore, taken down and re-built stone for stone, each being
marked, and a plan of the joints made to ensure its being re-placed

-—— = —

1 The dates on the bells are, 1627, 1740, 1757 (twice), 1788, and the following
inscription js cut on the bell frame :—

Weve paseo vens
B. H.) 1780,

264 Notes on the Churches

in the position in which we found it. At the same time the western
bay of the nave roof was restored, and I hope that the energy of
Mr. Fletcher will soon avail to complete the much-needed work of
a restoration of the rest of the nave.

The chancel has been re-built by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners,
and I judge from the two old windows and priests’ door built in
there, that this, as well as the nave, had been before re-built in the
fifteenth century.

The nave door and lock are of seventeenth century make.

A gallery appears to have been erected at the west end in the
seventeenth century, and the present window, high up in the south
wall (and bearing the date 1699) inserted to light it.

The font is a plain octagonal bowl on a small stem, and was
probably made in the early part of the thirteenth century.

S. Perer’s. CHARLTON.

This little Church was formerly a chapel belonging to Upavon,
where was an alien cell of S. Wandragesille’s, Normandy.

The original plan of the Church (or chapel) apparently consisted
of a continuous nave and chancel of the same width and height,
divided only by a screen, but a chapel has since been added on the
north side of the nave, with a tower adjoining forming the nave
porch. i

In 1858 the nave and chancel were re-built with the exception of
the part of the north wall westward of the tower, the lower half of
the west window with part of the west wall below, and the plinth
of the south wall. Besides these pieces of wall there are only two
items of evidence of what the Church was previously. First, we
have the charming piscina and the string course enriched with carved
paterze under the east window, which have been built into the new
walls—these may be put at the early part of the fifteenth century.
Then there is a sundial painted on the south face of the tower,
which can now only be seen from the hill above, owing to the high
pitch of the nave roof. It is clear, therefore, that there must
previously have been a roof of much lower pitch; but thirty years
ago low-pitched roofs were not in favour amongst architects, and

;
|
:

Visited by the Society im 1890. 265

we must not too severely criticise this alteration by the architect for
the restoration, who has, at any rate, given us a beautiful little
Church.

The chapel and tower were erected together at the latter part of
the fifteenth century. The brass on the west wall of the former
bears the following inscription :—

“‘ Off yo". charite pray for the soul of Willm Chaucey gentylma & Marion
his wyfe which Willm edefied thys Chapell and decessyd the ix day of Juni

Anno dni M°ecece°xxiiij?.”

The arms are those of Chaucey impaling Dunch, and as the same |
appear on a shield in the spandrel of the porch doorway it is probable
that both chapel and tower were erected, or “ edefied,” by William
Chaucey. The archway between chapel and nave is panelled like
that of the tower of Rushall, and has a rich oak screen, the com-
munication being by means of a traceried opening in the same,
without a door. The carving in this screen is not cut out of the
solid, but cut separately and planted in, a treatment often found in
late work. The chapel has two square-headed windows—a four-
light in the south wall and a two-light in the east. There are
corbels for figures in the angles on each side of the site of the altar,
and a piscina in a perfect state of preservation on the south side.
The original flat-pitched roof remains in this part.

The chancel screen, which forms the only separation of chancel

and nave, is of the same date as the screen of the chapel, but it has
doors. The original colouring remains on the old parts; the rood
~ loft does not exist.

The tower is of three stages, and its somewhat unusual position
is accounted for by its having been built with the chapel. There is

- no staircase to give access to the belfry, The lower stage forms the

porch for the nave, and from it the sanctus bell was rung during
mass.

_ The question of the use of low-side windows has lately been
revived in the columns of the ‘‘ Antiguary,” and I was invited by

Dr. Cox to give my views upon it.!| From the various examples
which I have studied I have no doubt that the low-side window was

1 Antiquary,” vol. xxi., p. 122,

266 Notes on the Churches

fitted with a shutter whick could be opened to give exit to the
sound of a hand-bell at the proper time in the service of the mass,
the bell being rung by an attendant placed in such a position as
would enable him to see the celebrant. Where there was a sanctus
bell in a separate bell-cot, or in the tower, the low-side window was
not needed, and is not found of coeval or subsequent date. This is
a good instance where such other provision is made. In the wall
between the tower and the chapel is a squint divided into two lights
by a mullion placed on each face of the wall—this gives a view of
the chapel altar: then there is a splayed single opening through the
east jamb of the chapel archway in a direct line with the position of
the celebrant in front of the high altar, so that the same squint
serves for use at either altar. The attendant would stand in the
porch and ring the sanctus bell placed in the tower.

This squint also fixes in a very definite manner the position of the
celebrant directly in front of the centre of the altar, as the two
points of sight through the two squints are so far apart that any
deviation from this position would place the celebrant out of sight
of the person ringing the bell.

S. Marruew’s. RvUSHALL.

There is not a great deal of old work here, but the quality of it
makes up to a great extent for the deficiency in quantity.

There was probably a Church here in Norman times, for the
bowl of the font is set upon an inverted capital of the latter half
of the twelfth century, which serves as a base, and the bowl—a
plain octagonal one—is perhaps of the same date.

The present nave is of the date of about 1360; it has two two-
light windows in the south wall with two good buttresses standing
square with the face of the wall, whilst the one at the south-west
angle is a diagonal one, but very massive and of good proportions.
The chancel arch is coeval, and consists of two orders of chamfers—
the outer chamfer being carried down whilst the inner one stops
against the face of the jambs.

The west tower was added at about the same time as the chapel
and tower at Charlton, and the arches are of the same panelled type.

\
—— a

Visited by the Society in 1890. 267

The pinnacles here are diagonal; the tracery of the west window
has been mutilated.

The chancel is a modern structure, and the north wall of the nave
has been re-built and an excrescence, consisting of a kind of Royal
Box, added, in which are the arms of the Poore family. There are
good bits of old glass in the windows of this pew.

The arrangements at the west end detract very much from the
proportions of the Church, and block up the tower. The bench
ends are a very interesting example of sixteenth century Gothic
work, and it is to be hoped they will be taken care of in any
restoration of the Church.

There is an Elizabethan tablet to ‘“ W.P.”—a member of the
Pinckney family.

S. Mary tHe Virein’s. Upavon.

This must have been, when at its best, a Church of very fine
proportions, and in this respect il reminds one of its sister Church
at Netheravon.

To trace the history of this building from its earliest period we
must begin at the east end where we have some well-preserved
evidence of the Church of the Transitional Norman period, or circa
1175. Although the north and south walls of the chancel and the
greater part of the east wall have been re-built, its original dimen-

sions have been retained, the buttresses remain undisturbed, and the

old features have been reinstated: of these original features there
are the three buttresses at the east end and the two side windows of,
probably, a group of three; the priests’ door in the north wall with

_the pretty stops on its jambs; the sanctuary window in the same
wall with inside bonnet arch ; and the singular triple chancel arch,

which latter I will describe more in detail. The central arch of the

_ three is wider than the others and pointed, the arch is of two orders,
_ the outer member is ornamented with the Norman chevron moulding
‘dl

and the inner member plain; it has a square billet-moulded label.
‘The side arches are carried back to the full width of the nave on
each side, and are semicircular, whilst on their east face they are
narrower—being contained within the width of the chancel—and

VOL. XXV.—NO. LXXV. U

268 Notes on the Churches

pointed. The piers between the arches are square, and have fluted
caps with square abaci.

It is probable there was no nave of stone at that time, but that
either the chancel was added to an earlier nave of timber, which
served the purpose for a time longer, or a temporary one was erected.
However that may be there is no trace of work in this part earlier
than about 1200—-1220, when a large Church with nave and aisles
was commenced. The three western bays of the north arcade and
the whole of the south arcade (the bays of which arcades, by the
way, are not opposite each other) were first erected—these have the
inner orders of the arches stopped on columns with moulded caps
‘and bases; but the easternmost arch on the north side was erected
some twenty or thirty years later, and it appears to have been cut
through a blank wall; its inner order is stopped on carved corbels
and the chamfer of the outer order carried down, with stops and
plain chamfered base. There is no clerestory.

At some date unknown the south aisle was pulled down and the
arches filled in, but I believe that in this part the only alteration
made during the recent restoration was the insertion of new windows.
The north aisle is new, but narrow, and probably on the Early
English foundations.

The tower was not erected until late in the thirteenth century,
and we have thus another very instructive instance of the slow
process by which a village Church was built in ancient times. It
is a magnificent and solidly-built structure of unusually broad
dimensions. The two lower stages are faced with good close-jointed
flint-work on the outside ; the top stage has a coarser facing and
it may have been built after a few years’ pause, but the corbel-table
under the parapet shews that it was completed before the close of
the thirteenth century, when it was probably terminated by a
pyramidal roof covered with shingles. The parapet was added in
the fifteenth century. The stair turret is a prolongation, without
break, of the east face of the tower (as at Imber) and is terminated
at the belfry level by a stone hipped roof. The belfry windows are
of two lights; the west doorway has well-designed jamb and arch
mouldings, and a fifteenth century carved crucifix has been fixed

Visited by the Soctety im 1890. 269

over it. The coffin-lid lying by the doorway is as old as the tower,
and it is a pity that it is not put inside, where there is ample room
for it, and where it would be better preserved. The archway between
tower and nave is a fine lofty one of three orders of chamfers con-
tinued down the jambs without intervening capitals, and the jambs
stand on stone benches or seats which are carried across for the full
width of the nave on each side.

The porch, which has been re-built, retains its thirteenth century
arch, and a coeval piscina exists in the south wall of the chancel.
There is no evidence of what was done in the fifteenth century to
the nave and aisles, for the south aisle having been done away with
and the north aisle entirely re-built, with all new windows, all traces
are, unfortunately, lost. But we have in the chancel some interesting
features of this period. The central one of the three Norman east
windows was taken out and a Perpendicular one of four lights
inserted ; whilst a two-light coeval window, with its inside jambs
carried down to form sedilia, took the place of one probably like
that on the north side of the sanctuary.

At the same time, probably owing to the development of ritual, a
low-side window, with square head, was inserted on the north side
in its most usual position near the chancel arch. It was probably
put on the north side because, as at present, the greater number of
the houses lay on that side of the Church.

The bowl of the font, which stands on a new base, is coeval with
the body of the Church, and is of considerable interest. It is
octagonal, and the faces are carved with various emblems and
devices :—

On the east is a cross within a quatrefoil.

On the south, a floriated cross.

On the north, a representation of the Annunciation—the
figures of the Blessed Virgin Mary and S. Gabriel, with

a lily in a pot between.

On the west, a leopard and dragon.

On the south-west, a lion and three fleur-de-lis.
On the north-east and south-east, leaves.

On the north-west, a geometrical pattern.

270 Notes on the Churches

Canon Jackson states (vol. x., p. 313) :—‘ Here was an alien
priory of Benedict monks, being a cell or house subordinate to St.
Wandragesille’s Abbey at Fontanelle, in the diocese of Rouen.
How mauy brethren occupied the Upavon cell, and whether they
had any Church or chapel apart from the parish Church, is not
known.” The large dimensions of the Church would lead one to
suppose that it served as the monastic as well as the parish Church.

S. Prerer’s. Manninerorp Bruce.!

This is the second instance in Wiltshire of a complete pre-Norman
Church, and it is of exceptional interest inasmuch as the other
example—that of Bradford—has a square-ended chancel, whilst this
has the earlier and more Eastern form of a semi-circular apse. In
other respects a great resemblance is seen in the two—the body of
the Church in both cases consists of simply nave and chancel; both
have north and south doorways in the nave; in both cases these
doorways are lofty and narrow—the dimensions in this case being
8ft. 9in high to the springing, and 3ft. 4in. wide. But here the
resemblance ends, for the Bradford Church is erected in the district
of a good building material—close to a quarry of oolite which
was undoubtedly worked at a very early period—whilst Manningford
possesses neither stone, nor clay for making bricks, and the builders
of this Church had to procure flints from the chalk hills which
limit the Pewsey vale on the north and south, and to content
themselves with sufficient workable stones for dressing the quoins
and openings. This wide difference in the respective local ad-
vantages of the two situations has had, as might be expected,
considerable influence in the design and ornamentation. The walls
at Bradford are faced on the inside and on the outside with wrought
stone, and ornamented by an arcade in flat relief carried round
the building, whilst at Manningford they are composed entirely of
flint-work and devoid of ornamentation. How far the greater

1 In revising these notes for the printer it occurs to me to say that they do
not pretend to more than briefly touch upon the main points of interest in the
building, and the reader is referred to the exhaustive paper by Dr. Baron (to
which I allude) for fuller details (vol. xx., p. 122).

Visited by the Society im 1890. 271

facility for procuring stone is accountable for the existence of north
and south porches at the Bradford Church it is impossible to say,
but there is no trace of porches at Manningford, though it is by no
means improbable that they once existed here as at Bradford, although
of wood, which was the usual building material of the period, and
was doubtless abundant in this immediate neighbourhood.

The adoption of the circular form of the apse, in preference to
the more English form of the square end, as at Bradford (the only
other difference in the plan of the two Churches), might have been
partially due to the lack of stone for quoins (many early towers
were built round for no other reason than this), though as the
vertical courses at the commencement of the apse take the same
quantity of freestone, this can hardly have been the sole cause.

Now to proceed to a more particular description of Manningford
Church. The first thing which strikes a person looking for Saxon
work here is the absence of long-and-short work in the quvins—all
the quoins being of the later flat-bedded type; but I do not attach
much importance to this circumstance, considering the difficulty of
procuring long stones here, and that long-and-short work does not
invariably occur in other Saxon buildings (e., Steyning, Sussex),
although it is the more usual kind of quoin.

It will be noticed that the flint-work is laid in diagonal courses
alternately sloping in opposite directions—called “ herring-bone ”
work. Although this is found in Roman masonry, it is not of itself
evidence of very early work, for I have met with it (as at Great
Cheverell) down to the thirteenth century. I consider that this
form of masonry was adopted more for convenience (to enable stones
of irregular length and thickness to be laid in courses without
cutting) than for ornament, and there can be no doubt that this
Church—as was almost invariably the case in Saxon work—was
plastered on the outside, and the axe marks to hold the plaster are
still discernible on the quoins and windows.

The total absence of the buttress is a definite mark of the early date
of thisChurch. A further early characteristic is the absence of an east
window. In a valuable paper on the Church by the late Dr. Baron,
contributed to vol. xx. of the Wiltshire Archeological Magazine, he

272 Notes on the Churches

describes the discovery, in a similar blank space in the apsidal Church
of Swyncombe, in Oxfordshire, of “a large archaic painting of Our
Lord between two angels, with a liberal supply on their wings of
eyes like those on a peacock’s tail (a peculiarity which he finds in
an Anglo-Saxon MS. of the tenth century). This painting had
been partly destroyed by the insertion of three little ronnd-headed
windows” and he concludes that both the apse and the painting
were much older than the Norman period. Dr. Baron also states
that the original Church dedicated to S. Aldhelm at Bishopstrow
(a place which that bishop is recorded to have visited as a missionary
bishop) was apsidal and had no east window. ‘There ean be no
doubt that the centre of the east end here at Manningford was also
intended for such a picture as that discovered at Swyncombe, and
that the side windows were relied upon for the necessary light :
great caution would doubtless be observed in those early days in
the number and position of the windows, as being assailable points
to be defended, and this probably accounts for the great height
at which they are here placed above the floor level.

A point not mentioned by Dr. Baron is the remarkable position
of the two chancel windows on the plan; they are placed at the
chord of the apse, with about three-fourths of their width on the
circular part and the remainder on the straight sides. At this point
—as if to afford a more definite line from which to start the apse,
there is a course of squared stones for the entire height of the wall
on each side, but these evidently never formed a terminating quoin
as they are rusticated on both sides. In the nave there is a similar
window in the north wall, and part of the arch of another opposite
in the south wall, but the latter was almost destroyed by the.
insertion of a two-light window in the fifteenth century. Beyond
these four windows—and probably one at the west end in the
position now occupied by a three-light window of late fourteenth
century date—there were apparently no others. All these have
wide splays on the inside and bonnet-shaped arches, but on the
outside rebates only—probably for wooden shutters. Whilst speaking
of the windows I may remark that in addition to the two later ones
mentioned a two-light window was inserted in the south wall of

Visited by the Society in 1890. 278

the chancel in the fourteenth century, but no other alteration appears
to have been made in the walls which stand as firm and solid as
when first erected.

On the north side of the chancel, in the straight part of the wall,
is a recess or credence with semicircular head, and on the opposite
side a similar opening for an aumbry, with rebate and marks of
hooks for a pair of doors. Both of these recesses have semicircular
arches, they are lft. 9in. wide, lft. 10in. deep, and 12in. high to
the springing.

The chancel arch is deserving of especial notice: it consists of
plain jambs and semicircular arch of square section, with an impost
Vin. thick worked with an early moulding which is carried to the
side wall of the nave on each side. On the east face, the arch
consists of two plain rings of thin stones, but on the west face
these voussoirs are fitted together with a V-shaped joint which is
unique. The wall here is 3ft. 4in. thick, the outer walls being
3ft. 38in. This arch has less of the character of a doorway than that
at Bradford—a point in favour of the greater antiquity of the latter.

There were three consecration crosses discovered here under the
whitewash on the circular end of the apse, about 7ft. 5in. above the
floor, two simple lines of red colour 5in. long, crossing each other
at right angles and enclosed by a quatrefoil, again within a circle;
there were probably three on each side of the Church, the number
which we have found in the much later Church at Edington.

The oak door and its iron-work are of seventeenth century date.

I have now described the main points of this extremely interesting
Church: it is difficult to assign a definite date to it, but there are
evidences—notably the distinct archway, rather than a doorway,
between the nave and chancel—of a more recent date than the
Church at Bradford, and yet it is not Norman. It will be observed
that, with the exception of the moulding on the impost of the
chancel arch, there is not a ¢race of ornamentation of any kind in
the original work—and the lofty proportion of the walls and
doorways is quite pre-Norman. I am disposed, therefore, to endorse
the opinion of Dr. Baron in assigning the erection of this Church
to the tenth century.

274 Notes on the Churches

I must be allowed to say one word of appreciation of the great
eare which has been shown in the restoration of this Church by
Mr. Pearson and the un-stinted liberality which was manifestly
accorded to him by his client, the late Mr. Alexander Meek. Some
may have preferred that the outside plastering (much of the original
probably remained) had been left, but much of the interest of the
building would then have been concealed, and the next best thing
in preserving the ancient appearance of the work has been done, in
deeply raking the joints and not pointing them flush with the flints.
The charming ceiling of the chancel—in which the idea suggested
by the arch stones has been carried out—and the solid roofs and
floors of the nave, the turret and the porch are all due to this
restoration.

Att Saints’ [or S. Annn’s?]. Ant Canntnes.

In a valuable paper by Canon Rich Jones, printed in vol. xi. of
the Wiltshire Archeological Magazine, some interesting information
on the history of the parish of All Cannings is given, from which
I will cull a few items by way of introduction.

The manor of All Cannings appears to have been bestowed by
some Royal benefactor on the Abbey of S. Mary, Winchester, some
time previous to the days of Edward the Confessor. This abbey
being under the value of £200 a year was one of the first batch of
religious houses ordered to be suppressed by Henry VIII. Dame
Elizabeth Shelly, its then abbess, managed, by her own exertions to
avert its fall for a time, and she obtained letters patent, dated
August 27th, 1536, by which her abbey was new founded with all :
its possessions ‘ except the valuable manors of Alle Cannynges and
Archefonte [Erchfont] together with the rectory of Archefonte and
the advowson of both Churches, which were alienated in favour of
Lord Edward Seymour, Viscount Beauchamp [afterwards Protector
Somerset] and Lady Anne his wife.” Dame Shelly was appointed
Abbess of the newly-founded convent, but it only stood for four
years longer. The manor remained for a long time in the possession
of the Protector’s descendants. In 1676 it was included in the
marriage settlement of Lady Elizabeth Seymour with Lord Bruce,

Visited by the Society im 1890. 275

soon after which it was purchased by one of the Nicholas family.
It is now the property of Lord Ashburton, in whom the advowson
is also vested.

There seems to be some doubt as to the dedication of the Church,
which Sir Thomas Philips gives, in 1492, as All Saints, but a vague
tradition assigns the honour of the dedication to St. Anne, the
mother of the Blessed Virgin, after whom the adjacent hill, now
ealled “ Tanhill,” the highest point in the County of Wilts, is said
to have been named, and in support of this it may be mentioned
that the old dedication feast of the village, which was probably the
forerunner of the great fair held on this hill, has always been held
on St. Anne’s day (August 6th).

There can be no doubt that a Norman Church, of the usual
cruciform plan, existed here before the present structure, but only
the south-west and north-east piers of the central tower remain,

their caps being about 6ft. from the floor. The Norman tower was

larger than the later structure, for the piers of the latter are built
inside the older ones. It is fortunate that we have piers of opposite
angles remaining, as they give us the plan and dimensions of the
Norman tower.

The re-building of the nave took place at about the middle of the
fourteenth century—the arcades of three bays each with cylindrical
pillars and arches of two orders of the cavetto moulding, are of this
period. It will be seen that one of the pillars on the north side
has a square base—the rest having octagonal. Some parts of the
Church had been re-built some sixty years before this, as the doorway
of the north porch dates from the end of the thirteenth century,
though it is at present built in with later walls.

Early in the fifteenth century a re-modelling of the parts about
the crossing took place. The Norman transepts were taken down
and, with the lower part of the tower, re-built—with the exception
of the north-east and south-west piers before referred to. ‘The
south transept was probably built as a chantry chapel, as there is a
coeval piscina in the south wall; and the curious corbel over the
jamb of the arch leading into the south aisle appears to suggest
there having been an altar there also. The north transept has the

276 Notes on the Churches

_ turret stairease, which is coeval with the alteration of the tower
(and not with the Norman work as Canon Jones gives it in his
plan), carried up within it, causing a great obstruction. The door-
way for entrance to this staircase, and the one which opened on to
the rood loft can be easily traced, and the corbels which carried the
loft over the transept chapel, &c., remain.

There are a few bits of old glass of late fifteenth century date
remaining in the windows of the transepts, that on the south having
the letters I.B. (which Canon Jones regards as pointing to Sir Jobn
Baynton), whilst an angel with censer, and the figure of S. Gabriel
with the inscription “ Ave plena gratia Dominus tecum,” &c., indicates
the subject of the Annunciation as having been here. The north
transept was, then, probably the lady chapel. The two three-light
windows in these transepts, though slightly different in design, are
the work of the same period.

The upper part of the tower was not completed until after these
were finished—or about 1480. The tower is without buttresses,
and the turret was finished level with the parapet, the raising of it
is modern. At about this time the chapel on the south side of the
chancel was erected, and the arms of Sir Richard Beauchamp, Lord
S. Amand (who died in 1508) in the parapet, point to him as the
probable founder of it. The similarity of the rich work of this
parapet to that at Bromham strikes one at once, and suggests that
they are the work of the same hand. It is interesting to note that
exactly the same thing was done here as at Bromham in building
the chapel—viz., the south transept was incorporated with it; the
walls were raised; the high-pitched roof altered and the elaborate
parapet of the chapel carried round. ‘There are, here, pinnacles at
the angles and in centre of the gable. The chapel has good four-
light windows in the east and west walls, with bits of the old glass
in the former. The arch into the chancel has the same corbelled
treatment as that between the south aisle and transept; the one
between the transept and chapel is modern, as are also the roofs of
both.

After the chapel the aisles appear to have been re-built. This
work is debased, and the doorways especially indicate this, The

a

Se

Visited by the Society im 1890. 277

north aisle has lost its parapet, which tends to still further impoverish
it. The archway into the north transept is a “ flying ” one, to
support the tower, and it has a corbel over it to receive a figure—
this seems to suggest another altar having been here. The roof of
the south aisle is of Jacobean character, resting on the Perpen-
dicular corbels. The nave roof tells its own tale, having the date
1638 carved on it, but the Gothie feeling lingers here in the peculiar
cusping and corbels. The pitch of the earlier roof can be seen on
the outside of the west gable.

The south porch has its original fifteenth century roof, and there
is a corbel over the doorway in the north porch.

The font is a Perpendicular one with good later oak cover bearing
the inscription T.M. 1633.

The chancel was re-built in 1867, at the cost of the Rev. T.
Anthony Methuen and his sons.

There are two good monuments in this Church ; one in the south
aisle 1o Walter Ernle—a nice piece of Elizabethan work dated 1587,
and bearing a quaint inscription (see vol. xi., p. 21) ; and the other
in the north aisle to a former rector, Sir John Ernle, son of the
above, who died in 1734.

S. Anprew’s. ETcHILHAMPTON.

This appears to have been, from time immemorial, a chapelry of
All Cannings.
Here, also the dedication of the Church (or chapel) is not without

~ some doubt: according to Ecton the patron saint is S. Andrew, but

Canon Jones (vol. xi., p. 188) suggests that this is a mistake for
S. Anne, and states that a mutilated effigy of S. Anne, in the act
of teaching the Blessed Virgin, was taken from a niche over the
north doorway during some repairs a few years ago. It seems
almost incredible that such a feature should have been lost, and if
it is—as it must surely be—still in existence, it is to be hoped that
so valuable a piece of sculpture may be restored to the Church.

The Church does not appear at first sight to possess much arche-

ological value, but on closer inspection features of very unusual

interest will be found. The plan is a simple one, as would be

278 Notes on the Churches

expected from its dependent position, and consists of nave, chancel,
and vestry: as the two latter are new, the account of the old chancel
given in Canon Jones’ paper has a special value. It was of singular
dimensions—only 11ft. wide, and 20ft. long; the east window
consisted of two trefoil-headed lights. From this description we
may conclude that the chancel was—as Canon Jones states—coeval
with the nave. The latter only, however, remains to claim our
attention. The character of the work leads me to suppose that it
is a little later than Canon Jones gives it; it may be put at between
1370 and 1390. The west end has a reticulated window of four
lights,with carved label terminals, flanked by buttresses. The existing
bell turret is modern. There is a two-light square-headed window
in the north wall, and a similar one opposite on the south side, the
head of which has been lowered. There are also doorways of the
same date opposite each other nearer to the west end; the one on
the north has the corbel and pinnacles of a niche over it, that on
the south retains its original wrought iron hinges with fleur-de-lis
terminations. The nave has diagonal buttresses at the four angles,
and the one at the north-west angle is of exceedingly rich and rare
design—the upper part of it is treated with niches in the three faces
with carved corbels and canopies, and at the two external and two
internal angles are detached semi-octagonal turret-like pinnacles,
with carved corbels starting at the same level as those of the niches,
and having embattled cornices from behind which the figures of
angels peep out ; the top of the buttress is finished with an ordinary
weathering. It is probable from this feature, and from the north
doorway having a niche for the figure of the patron saint, that
the approach to the Church was formerly in this direction. The
chancel arch is coeval with the rest of the work, and has a curious
ball-moulding on the east face. The most unusual feature of a
single-light window on each side in the east wall appears to
have existed here until the new and larger chancel was built. These
have been blocked up.

The font is a Transition Norman one, from which we may conclude
that a Church stood here at that period.

The carved stone inside the Church, representing the Ataheneel

0 ae

Visited by the Society im 1890. 279

Gabriel under a late Decorated canopy, is probably part of a reredos
which contained the Annunciation. (See vol. xi., p. 183.)

The altar tomb in the chancel is a singularly good one (see
drawings, vol. xi., pp. 185, 186). It is probably a little later than
the erection of the present nave, and it may have been set up to
commemorate the benefactor to whom the building owes its existence.
On the mensa are the recumbent figures of a knight and his lady,
with the feet of each resting on an animal resembling a hound,
The knight wears plate armour, and his head rests ona shield. The
lady wears a square head-dress and mantle, and a cordon round her
neck to which a cross is suspended. Her head rests on a pillow.
Around the. sides of the tomb are the figures of their twelve children.
There are no arms to assist us in identifying the knight, but Canon
Jones concludes he was a member of the Malwyn family, who were
lords of the manor at about A.D. 1400. I learn from a report in
the Devizes Gazette commemorating the re-opening of the Church
after restoration, that this tomb has passed through many vicissitudes.
“Tt was first in the nave, where its presence was felt to be an in-
trusion, and it was shouldered out to make room for modern pews ;
it was then removed to the old chancel, where its size made it an
inconvenient addition, and it was threatened with banishment to
the churchyard. However it remained at rest, jostled by the school-
children, scratched and picked by their knives, and used for the
accommodation of boys’ hats on Sundays.” On the re-building of
the chancel it was placed in its present position, under an arch in
the north wall.

There is a2 monument to Gertrude, relict of Edward Ernle, who
died 21st April, 1662 ; and another to Sir Walter Ernle, who died
16th July, 1732, et. 56.

280

Alotes on Alaces bisited bp the Society in 1890.

By H. E. Mep.icort.

" NOTICEABLE point in the country covered by the ex-

if cursions made by the Society from Devizes is the paucity
of old country houses in the district. Here, as elsewhere, in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries there were far more resident
gentry than there are at present. The number began to dwindle in
the eighteenth century, and in this particular district the number
of representatives of old county families still occupying country
mansions has dwindled to almost nothing. There are, however,
here and there traces of the former occupants, and it would be a
matter of regret to the local historian and the genealogist if these
were altogether lost.

The following short notes are made with a view of recording in
the pages of our Magazine the names of a few of the old people and
places which have not been mentioned in earlier volumes.

Passing by Potterne—which has had as Lords of the manor for
centuries the Bishops of Salisbury, with an ancient crenellated
mansion destroyed at the time of the Commonwealth—and Eastwell
—where the family of Hunt Grubbe has been located for four
hundred years—we arrived in Market Lavington. Here, at Cleeve
(now Clyffe) Hall, lived in the last century Henry Chivers Vince,
Esq., whose son married into the Long family in 1792; and there
seems to have been a residence of some kind at “ Feddenton”
Common, occupied by a Dr. Batters.

In consequence of a letter from Mr. Watson Taylor attention was
called during the excursion to the “ Three Graves” on “ Wickham
Green,” or “ Workforth Common.” ‘These are situated in the
middle of a large open field about a mile west of Erchfont Manor
House, and are fenced in and carefully preserved by the owner of
the property. It is said they are the graves of John, Jacob and
Humphrey Giddings, who all died of the Plague in 1644, and that
the Rev. Peter Glassbrook, his son, and four grandchildren, were
interred at the same place, having been all buried by their servant
maid, the only survivor of the household.

Notes on Places. 281

At Escott, or Easteott, House lived Seymour Wroughton, Esq.,
who also seems to have owned “ Maggot’s Castle,” otherwise known
as “ Wroughton’s Folly,” a building in a woody dell under the cliff
to the north side of Fiddington Sands. The fishponds remain, and
traces of banks and foundations show where the “ Castle” stood,
but the great stones above ground were removed years ago, just
within the memory of tbe oldest inhabitants. Seymour Wroughton
died 3lst May, 1789, et. 53, and was buried at Urchfont, where a
monument records nearly all that is known of him.

Erchfont Manor House, passed near the road shortly before
arriving at the village of that name, was occupied in Charles the
Second’s time by Edward Howard. The present mansion was,
however, built by Sir William Pynsent, Bart., of an old Devonshire
family, who was M.P. for Devizes, 1689—90, and High Sheriff of
Wilts, 1692. (See Waylen’s History of Devizes, p. 353—392.)
He left the property to the Earl of Chatham, by whom it was sold
to the Duke of Queensborough, or Queensberry, who lived at
Amesbury. Macaulay (Hist. Essay on the Earl of Chatham, vol.
iii., p. 499, ed. 1854) alludes to this incident as follows :—

“ About this time took place one of the most singular events of Pitt’s life.
There was a certain Sir William Pynsent, a Somersetshire Baronet, of Whig
politics, who had been a member of the House of Commons in the days of Queen
Anne, and.had retired to rural privacy, when the Tory party, towards the end of
her reign, obtained the ascendancy in her councils. His manners were eccentric.
His morals lay under very odious imputations. But his fidelity to his political
opinions was unalterable. During fifty years of seclusion he continued to brood
over the circumstances which had driven him from public life, the dismissal of
the Whigs, the Peace of Utrecht, the desertion of our allies. He now thought
he perceived a close analogy between the well-remembered events of his youth
and the events which he had witnessed in extreme old age; between the disgrace
of Marlborough, and the disgrace of Pitt; between the elevation of Harley, and
the elevation of Bute; between the treaty negotiated by St. John, and the treaty
negotiated by Bedford; between the wrongs of the House of Austria in 1712,
and the wrongs of the House of Brandenburg in 1762. This fancy took such
possession of the old man’s mind that he determined to leave his whole property
to Pitt. In this way Pitt unexpectedly came into possession of near three
thousand pounds a year. Nor could all the malice of his enemies find any ground
for reproach in the transaction. | Nobody could call him a legacy hunter.
Nobody could accuse him of seizing that to which others had a better claim. For
he had never in his life seen Sir William; and Sir William had left no relation
so near as to be entitled to form any expectations respecting his estate.”

The Earl of Chatham erected a monument to his benefactor on

282 Notes on Places.

his Somersetshire estate, which is still standing :—

“On the other side of the valley of the Parrett, W., a long stretch of bigh
ground rises. On an escarpment of these heights stands the ‘ Parkfield monu-
ment,’ commonly known as the ‘ Burton Steeple,’ a column 140ft. high, crowned
by a funeral urn, erected by the Earl of Chatham to the memory of Sir William
Pynsent. . . . To the 1. stood the mansion of Burton House, now almost
entirely destroyed. For many years this estate was the seat of the Pynsents,
but in 1765 Sir William Pynsent, the last of that ancient family, having no issue,
bequeathed it to William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, to whom he was an entire
stranger, ‘in his veneration of a great character of exemplary virtue, and un-
rivalled ability,’ and also on account of Pitt’s opposition to the cider tax. The
story goes that Sir William on more than one occasion attempted to make his
way into Pitt’s house to let him know his intention, but was turned back by the
servants on account of his disreputable appearance. . . . The grounds once
contained a funeral urn, dedicated to his (Chatham’s) memory, by his Countess,
1781, who made this her permanent home after her widowhood, and died here,
April 3rd, 1803. This urn was removed to Stowe, 1831. On the dispersion of
the objects collected there the urn fell into the hands of strangers, but was re-
covered by Mr. Banks Stanhope, and now stands in his gardens at Revesby
Abbey, Lincolnshire.” (Murray’s Handbook for Wilts, Dorset, and Somerset,
Ath edition, 1882, p. 443.)

At Conock in the last century lived John Powell, Esq., and
Gifford Warriner, Esq., who married Anne, sister of Richard Long,
of Rood Ashton. The property is now owned by Henry Ernlé
Warriner, representative of the Ernlé family, to some of whom there
are fine monuments at All Cannings.

At Weddington, now known as Wedhampton, lived
Titchbourn, Esq., in the last century, and James Long, “ of the
Chiveral branch of the antient family of Long, who died 21 Oct.,
1768, xt. 74,” as the monument at Erchfont records. He gave, or
was instrumental in procuring, the land dedicated to the public use
for straightening the main road between Tinkfield and Lydeway,
The line of the old highway can still be easily traced, and the great
benefit thus conferred on the public was thought at the time to
justify the erection of a monument recording the action of James
Long in the matter on the roadside nearly opposite Stert village.
This was passed on the homeward drive, after leaving Manningford
Bruce—or “ Crucis,” as it is called on an old map—I know not why.

At Rushsall, or, more correctly, Rushall Park, was formerly a
country mansion, the seat of the Poore family. The house has
entirely disappeared, but its site is still marked by the fine old elms

and park-like meadows.

Anangural Address by the President of the
Society,
Lr.-Gen. Prrt-Rivers, F.R.S., F.S.A.,

On the Greadations at Rotherley, Woodents, and Hokerly Dyke.

SN two copiously illustrated and privately-printed quarto
volumes I have described the excavations that I have
made in the neighbourhood of Rushmore, Wilts, during the last
ten years, the chief part of which relates to the two Romano-British
villages of Woodcuts and Rotherley, just outside the Park. They
were proved by the coins found in them to be of the Roman age,
though probably occupied chiefly by Britons, one or two British
coins having been found with the Roman ones in both villages.
Both villages were alike in their general arrangement, and their
chief feature consisted of pits, 8ft. Gin. to 10ft. in diameter, and
Sft. 6in. to 9ft. deep, filled up to the top with earth and refuse, so
that no trace of them could be seen on the surface. Of these ag
many as ninety-five were found in Woodcuts, and ninety-two in
Rotherley. The area occupied by the pits was drained by deep
trenches, 3ft. to 8ft. deep, also filled up to the top with earth and
: refuse, and laid out in such a manner as to carry the water down
the hill; the different drains branching out of each other like the
| Be ninrice of a stream or river, the main streams of which, in both
villages, ran along the two sides of a road leading from the village
towards lower ground, and showing that one of the chief concerns
of the inhabitants, in those days, was to carry off the heavy rain,
of the prevalence of which certain passages in the ancient writings
appear to hint, and geological and other researches confirm the
impression that there must have been a much larger supply of
‘water in early times than now. A well 188ft. deep was also re-
‘excavated, and the Roman bucket found at the bottom, but no
‘VOL. XXV.—NO. LXXY. x

284 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

water, showing that the water-line must have lain somewhat higher
in the hill in former days than is the case at present.

Woodcuts, or rather a portion of it, was surrounded by an en-
trenchment of slight relief, the ditch of which drained into the road
drain, above-mentioned; and at Rotherley a portion of the village
was separated from the rest by a-circular surrounding ditch, similar
to others which have been several times noticed in British villages
elsewhere, and which have been rather rashly assumed to be sacred
circles, but no confirmation of this was produced by the excavations
—the circle, on the contrary, appeared to have been occupied in the
- Same manner as the rest of the village. In Woodcuts three hypo-
causts of T-shaped plan were found, which were probably British
imitations of Roman ‘hypocausts for warming rooms by flues beneath
the floors. This, at least, is the most probable use to which they
can be assigned. A precisely similar one will afterwards be spoken
of at Woodyates. The houses must have been built of dab-and-wattle,
and, ‘by means of some of ‘the fragments of plaster, which had been
hardened by fire, and upon which the impression of the twigs had
been preserved, it was possible to ascertain the exact thickness of
the walls and the construction of the wattle-work, Timber was
also used in the construction of the houses, as appears probable from

the large number of iron nails, of a size suitable for fastening beams
of wood, and also from a number of cramps of the kind now used for
fastening timber together. Besides the dab-and-wattle-work houses,
which were probably round, some other houses must have been made
with flat sides, plastered and painted. These better class of houses
were peculiar to one quarter in Woodcuts, which from the quality
of the other objects found in it appears likely to have been a rich
quarter. The pits were probably used to contain refuse, and after
being filled up to the top were subsequently used for the interment
of the dead. The dead were not interred in these pits only, but
also in the drains, after they had been filled up to the top with earth,
a practice which, if not confined to this district, has, at any rate,
not been found elsewhere to such an extent as to lead to the inference
that it was a widely-spread British custom. It was a custom that
is highly favourable to anthropological research, as the skeletons

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 285

are, by this means, more clearly identified with the relics of the
every-day life of the inhabitants than when they were interred in
eemeteries, or tumuli, at a distance from the places where they lived,
and, as a consequence, it is more easy to determine the exact period
to which the skeletons belonged. They were buried in both crouched
and extended positions, and without orientation, the bodies facing
or extending in different directions. In other cases special graves
were dug, but without orientation in either case. The people
suffered from rheumatoid-arthritis. Three out of sixteen skeletons
in Rotherley were found to have been afflicted with this disease, the
cause of which appears to be a moot point in pathology, some
surgeons attributing it to exposure, and others to hereditary disease.
Their teeth were in some cases much decayed. Their horses, oxen,
and sheep were of small size, the horse rarely exceeding the size of
our Exmoor pony, viz., 11 hands 24 inches. The oxen resembled
our Kerry cow in size, but our shorthorn in the form of its horns;
and the sheep were of a long slender-legged breed, the like of which
is only to be found at present in the Island of St. Kilda, in the
Atlantic. The pig, as is always found to be the case in early breeds
that were but slightly removed from the wild boar, was of large
size, with long legs and large tusks. The dog varied from the size
of a mastiff to that ofaterrier. They ate the horse, and lived chiefly
on domesticated animals, but few remains of deer having been found
in their refuse pits, from which, and from the absence of weapons
generally, we may infer that they were not hunters, but that they
lived a peaceful, agricultural life, surrounded by their flocks and
herds. Their tools were iron axes, knives, and saws, only one or
two small spear-heads having been found. They spun thread, and
wove it on the spot, and sewed with iron needles. They grew wheat
in small enclosures surrounding their villages, and ground it upon
stone querns, and by measuring the number of grains to the cubic inch
it was found that their wheat was little, if at all, inferior to ourg
grown at the same levels. They shod their horses with iron, and

produced fire with iron strike-lights and flint. They cut their corn

oe Sas

with small iron sickles, probably close to the ear, and stored it in
small barns, raised upon four posts, to preserve it from vermin,
x 2

286 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

Their pottery was of various qualities, some harder and better baked
than others; some vessels perforated as colanders, some in the form
of saucers with small handles, some basin-shaped, others pitcher-
shaped, others in the shape of jars and vases of graceful form ; and
judging by the number of pots perforated with large holes on the
bottoms or sides, and having loops for suspension on the upper part,
with large open mouths, it would appear probable that they made
use of honey largely in their food, and that these vessels were em-
ployed for draining it into other vessels from the honeycomb. The
number of skeletons of new-born children was sufficient to create a
suspicion, at least, of infanticide, though not enough to prove that
such a practice prevailed.

Judging by the slight trace of their habitations that remained,
and the small size of them, and the apparently careless way in
which they buried their dead, one might suppose that they lived in
a poor way and died unregretted by their friends; but, on the other
hand, there were indications of comfort, and even of refinement.
There were found fragments of red Samian ware of the finest quality
and highly ornamented, which, at that time and in this country,
was probably equivalent to our china; and a few fragments of
pottery with green and yellow glaze, which was of extreme rarity
amongst the Romans. They had chests of drawers, in which they
kept their goods, which were decorated with bronze bosses, and
ornamented with tastefully-designed handles of the same metal.
They had vessels of glass, which implies a certain degree of luxury.
They used tweezers for extracting thorns, or for plucking out the
hair of their beards, bronze ear-picks, and even implements designed
expressly for cleaning their finger-nails, and they played games of
drafts. A number of iron styli showed that they were able to read
and write, and one decorated tablet of Kimmeridge Shale appeared
to be of the kind used for writing upon with the stylus, by means
of a coating of wax spread over it. Some of their houses were
painted on the inside and warmed with flues in the Roman style.
They were, perhaps, covered with the Roman tegule and imbrices,
and others were certainly roofed with tiles of Purbeck Shale. They
wore well-formed bronze finger rings, set with stones or enamelled,

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodeuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 287

and their fingers were of small size. They used bangles of bronze
and Kimmeridge Shale, and one brooch discovered was of the finest
mosaic, such as I found upon enquiry could not be easily surpassed
even in Italy at the present time. Also gilt and enamelled brooches,
some of which were in the forms of animals, They used bronze
and white metal spoons, and the number of highly ‘ornate bronze
and white metal fibulz, showed that such tastefully-decorated
fastenings for their dresses must have been in common use. Nor
are we left in doubt as to the exact way in which these fibule were
worn, for one skeleton was found with two of them, a bronze one
on the right shoulder, and an iron one on the right hip. As we
know that in the time of Agricola the Britons adopted the Roman
costume, we may feel sure that these were employed after the fashion
of the men to fasten the amictus, or a plaid, over the right shoulder,
and probably a skirt or tunic round the loins. They ate oysters,
which, considering the distance from the coast, implies a certain
degree of luxury, though it is possible that the shells may have been
used as utensils for some purposes. One of the most interesting
discoveries connected with these people was the small stature of both
males and females, but this is a subject that I shall refer to again
when speaking of my discoveries at Woodyates. The probability is
that both villages were inhabited by different classes, and not im-
probably they may have been the homes of Roman colonists, sur-
rounded by their families and a bevy of slaves. The possibly Roman
characteristics recognized by anthropologists in one round-headed
skeleton, may, perhaps, be regarded as favouring this view, but the
long heads of the majority seem to indicate with great probability
that the bulk of the inhabitants were of British origin; more than
that it would be unsafe to say. The coins prove that the villages
were occupied up to the Constantine period, and Woodcuts certainly
up to the time of Magnentius—A.D. 350—353.

These results, the details of which are given in tables, drawings,
and diagrams, in my book, furnish us with a fair idea of the condition
of the inhabitants of the villages ; and the number of different forms
of art and objects of industry discovered in them enables us to
identify clearly any other settlements of the same period that may

288 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

be discovered or examined hereafter. Of these there were probably
a considerable number in the same neighbourhood, Within a radius
of six or seven miles from Rushmore I have counted twelve or
thirteen places in which Roman remains had been found, some of
them apparently villages of equal size to those above-mentioned,
and, judging by my experience at Woodyates, there were probably
several more which may have been entirely destroyed by cultivation.
In fact, this district, which is now very sparsely imhabited, was in
Roman times a very populous one. This may have been partly
owing to the fact that at a time when so much of the country was
in forest the people were obliged to live in the open downlands, that
are now comparatively deserted. But this is hardly sufficient to
account for such a great concentration of Romano-British people in
this district, towards the close of the Roman occupation. We must
look to the effects of wars and invasions as a cause for the density
of the population at that time.

These considerations make it important that we should endeavour
to ascertain what connection existed between these villages and the
great military earthworks of the neighbourhood, such a number of
which are shown on the ancient map of the district that I have
made.!

I have frequently heard observations made upon this subject
which appear to me, from a military point of view, to be erroneous.
The isolated camps, with which the map is studded, which—though
called camps—were in reality permanent fortifications, are sometimes
spoken of as having been thrown up for the defence of a particular
district. But, apart from the fact that they are pretty evenly dis-
tributed over the country, occupying the most elevated positions as
they happen to occur, and not in lines drawn along the frontier of
any particular part, there is reason to doubt whether such detached
fortresses could, in those days, have served the purpose of defending
a district. In modern times we erect fortresses on the frontiers of

1This map was exhibited at the Meeting, and will be reproduced in the third p
quarto volume of excavations, giving detailed plans and sections of all the ex- —
cavations, with illustrations of the objects discovered in Woodyates.

ay
ee noe

CRANBORNE

PSS

FhotoLithopraphed & Printed by James Alermen,6,Queen Square, WC

BRITISH It /
VILLAGE - aun A . it
P | OF BOKERAYY DYKE BETWEEN DORSET AND WILTS. ea aN

ces 5
Seay ire

eS we
“RUSE, BLAGDON HILL ‘Sire!
3 en

—_MORCAN's LANE _/

j

SCALE OF FEET
1000 2000 3000 5000 MILE

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodeuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 289

great states, for their defence, because the great armies of our time
are encumbered with large supplies of food and ammunition, that
have to be drawn from the rear, and for which it is necessary to keep
open lines of communication with the base of their operations, and
the frontier fortresses of an invaded state serve for the defence of
that state, because it is impossible four an invading army to pass
between them without exposing its lines of communication. Such
fortresses also serve as fortified magazines for an invading army.
But in barbarous times, such impedimenta did not exist in con-
nection with invading forces; their objects were for the most part
predatory, and their wants were few, they could penetrate between
the fortified places, and subsist by plunder in the country surrounding
them, and the defenders of the fortresses, if they kept on the
defensive, and remained shut up in them, would only have to look
on. Wherever, therefore, we find such isolated eneampments on
the tops of hills, in prehistoric times, we may be sure that they were
simply places of refuge for some local tribe inhabiting their vicinity,
to which they resorted when attacked by a neighbouring tribe,
They imply a low state of civilization, before the inhabitants of any
large district had attained to such organization as was necessary for
combined defence.

When the people decineed to a higher state of civilization, and
several tribes combined for the defence of a district, it was not by
detached forts, but by continuous entrenchments, that they accom-
plished that object. They threw up continuous lines of ditch and
bank, the latter probably surmounted by a stockade, running for
miles along the open country, from an inaccessible position on one
flank to some other natural defence on the other flank ; and although
it may be true—as has often been said in support of the opinion
that these long entrenchments could not be defensive works—that
they would be difficult, or impossible, to defend at all points, yet we
know as a fact that this was the system adopted, and that the
Romans used it, not only in the north of Britain, as a defence

against the Picts and Scots, but also in the more extended defence

-
{

of their German frontier, by means of the Pfahlgraben, joining
the Rhine and Danube. When these continuous barriers were

290 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

erected, the hill-forts within the area defended by them were no
longer of any use. They might have been occupied afterwards, as
we know they were occupied in Roman times, but they were no
longer erected, except on a small scale on the lines of march of the
Roman armies, or as places of support for the continuous lines of
entrenchment. The inhabitants of the district, secured in the
peaceable occupation of their villages by these frontier defences, had
no longer any occasion to fortify their homes. Now the villages
that I have described, although some of them might have been
surrounded by slight banks and stockades, as a precaution against
wolves, or against casual marauders, were to all intents and purposes
open villages. They were the habitations of people who felt secure
in their positions, and I think that, for the reasons I have given, it
is reasonable, on a prior? grounds, to expect that such villages would
be found to be associated in point of time with the continuous en-
trenchments. Dr. Guest, in his well-known paper on what he terms
“the Belgic Ditches,’ appears to me to be perfectly right in
assuming that these continuous entrenchments must necessarily
have been the work of a people in a higher condition of civilization,
to secure their territory against the depredations of an inferior
people, in a lower condition of Jife. . But, whether he is right in
adopting Stukeley’s opinion that these superior people were Belge
is a question which I am not prepared either to accept or to deny,
without better evidence. It is open to doubt whether the Belgz
invaded the country in a body, or in driblets, and whether they were
so far in advance of the aborigines as to have adopted a totally
different method of warfare. From what little we do know about
them they appear to have been rather in the hill-fort stage of
organisation, like the Atrebates, Dobuni, Durotridges, and other
tribes, by which they were surrounded.

_ These were my views at the time that I approached the question
of the origin of Bokerly Dyke, though I did not care to publish
my opinions, because I think it is always undesirable to give ex-
pression to theories which one may afterwards feel one’s self committed
to as the investigation goes on. I am now in a position to speak
of these views as proved up to a certain point, and I am assured of

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 291

being on the right track for further discoveries if I live to accomplish
them.

Bokerly Dyke, the present boundary-line between Dorset and
Wilts, is an entrenchment of high relief, nearly four miles in length,
running in a north-west and south-east direction across the old
Roman road, which runs from Sarum to Badbury. It has a ditch
on the north-east side of the rampart, proving that it was from this
point the enemy was expected. The fact of its being a defensive
work can, I think, hardly be doubted by anyone who will take the
trouble to examine it from end to end. It everywhere occupies
strong ground, if viewed from the standpoint of an enemy advancing
to attack it from the north-east. It runs somewhat crookedly along
the ground, and I am inclined to favour the idea, suggested I think
by Dr. Smart, that this crookedness arose from the constructors
availing themselves of hollows, as they occurred in the ground, to
dig their ditch, throwing up the earth upon higher ground, and
that by conforming to the inequalities of the surface in this way
they obtained the relief they desired with less expenditure of labour,
but the general direction was determined by considerations of defence
that can clearly be recognised. It ran across the Gwent, or open
downland, between two great forests, which existed at that time,
and the remains of which still, or until quite lately, did exist on
both flanks. On the south-east the dyke terminates upon strong
ground in Martin Wood, which may be considered to be the survival
of the Forest of Holt, and to have been formerly continuous with
the New Forest, On the left it terminated in a part of the country
which within the memory of persons still living was a part of
Cranborne Chase Wood. It may be said, perhaps, that forests
would hardly be sufficient to secure the flanks of an extended line
of entrenchment, and that it might easily be turned if it rested on
no more inaccessible protection than a wood. But there is reason
to believe that in this moist climate the primeval forests may have
consisted of almost inaccessible networks of trees, and where this:
was not the case it is more than probable that the lines of entrench-
ment may have been continued through them by abattis of felled
trees. Czsar speaks of the Britons employing felled trees in their

292 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

defences, and applying this piece of information to the elucidation
of our old lines of entrenchment I think that, in cases in which
short lines of ditch and bank are often found to terminate en (air,
in a way that, as Mr. Barnes has truly observed, would serve no
defensive purpose, but which would resemble an attempt to stop a
flock of sheep by means of a single hurdle, placed in the centre of a
road; if we suppose the intervals between the flanks of these short
entrenchments to have been occupied by inaccessible forests, that
have now disappeared, we shall then understand how they might,
at the time they were constructed, have served as effective barriers
against an invading force. It is also to be observed that even large
dykes have been so completely effaced by cultivation as to show no
trace upon the surface.

But to return to Bokerly. It may be convenient for the sake of
clearness to separate the whole line into four principal divisions.
The part which I shall call the right flank extended from its
termination in Martin Wood to the summit of Blagdon Hill, and
was everywhere drawn along the brow of a steep hill having a deep
valley in its front. Blagdon Hill is the highest part of the line,
and might, perhaps, be called the key of the position. The hill runs
forward to the eastward at right angles to the dyke. The dyke
crosses it in the middle of the ridge. Viewed from the Salisbury
Road, the point at which the dyke crosses the hill—called Pick’s
Corner by the natives—can be seen in the centre of the ridge, in a
position that does not, from this point of view, appear well chosen,
and it is not evident for what reason this spot was selected, but on
examining the hill it is at once seen that its course was determined
by the lay of the land beyond the hill, which is not seen from the
Salisbury Road. At Blagdon Hill another dyke of small relief
joins or cuts across it, coming from the east along the ridge of
Blagdon Hill from the direction of Whichbury Camp. I shall not
speak of this small dyke now, as it would require excavation to
ascertain its significance.

Leaving Blagdon Hill, Bokerly Dyke runs down the northern
slope of it, and a small bank, described in the Ordnance Map as a
British trackway, runs behind it in a general line parallel to it.

|

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 298

This also it may be well to pass over for the present. The dyke in
this part, which I term the right centre, is thrown forward at a very
obtuse angle. The reason for this does not appear to have been
noticed by previous writers. It was not, certainly, thrown forward
in order to secure strong ground, for the apex of the angle is in the
bottom of a valley. But just in rear of the entrenchment, at its
most advanced point, in the bottom of the hill, the verdure of the
grass and crops, marked by a black oval patch in the map, seems to
denote comparatively rich soil, and it appears probable that a spring
or wells formerly existed in this place, the water from which, if a
spring, must have run down hill beyond the dyke to the eastward.
It was, I apprehend, in order to secure this spot that the dyke was
thrown forward. The northern or left face of this advanced portion
of the dyke terminated in a re-entering angle, which I fix upon as
the centre of the position. From this spot the dyke runs in a
north-west direction, with a high bank and deep ditch, to Bokerly
Gap, which is a part of the dyke about 120yds. in length, in
which the rampart has been, I believe, at some time removed for
top dressing the soil, but of this 1 have no certain evidence. Con-
tinuing in the same line beyond the Gap we come to an epaulement,
which has attracted the notice of archxologists. It is a spur, or
short branch, of the dyke which turns abruptly westward, with a
ditch to the north, and runs across a short natural ¢erre-plein of the
hill, for about 180ft., and terminates in a shallow combe, in the rear
of the main dyke. It has been conjectured that this epaulement
was the original termination of the dyke at its north end, at a time
when the Cranbourne Chase Wood extended thus far from the
northward, and this is rendered probable from the fact that even
within the memory of persons now living this spot was occupied
by a wood or copse. I shall have to return to this epaulement
hereafter. Leaving the epaulement, Bokerly Dyke runs on con-
tinuously to the north-west until the part, termed the Shoulder
Angle on my map, is reached. Here it turns westward for about
200yds, until it touches the modern Salisbury Road. The old
Roman Road here cuts the dyke at nearly the same spot, and makes
here its first and only turn of any importance between Sarum and

294 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

Badbury. This spot, for reasons that I shall afterwards explain, I
call Bokerly Junction. Here the left centre of the dyke terminates,
and turning at a sharp angle towards the north, the left wing of the
dyke, now reduced in size, runs forward, occupying the most elevated
part of the hill, until it reaches Hill Copse. This is nearly the only
remaining copse of the Chase Wood, the rest having been completely
destroyed in this district. Passing Hill Copse, the dyke winds
round to the westward, running down hill beyond West Woodyates.
It does not cross the Grim’s Dyke, as has been stated, but turns
and runs parallel to it. It is last seen, much reduced in size, in
front of West Woodyates, and making for the entrenchment in
Mistlebury Wood, but it cannot be traced up to it. The dyke does
not extend to the chalk escarpment on the north, as has been stated
by some writers, but runs nearly parallel to it, at a distance of a
mile from it, the ground rising gradually towards the escarpment
from the dyke. The interval was occupied formerly by Cranborne
Chase Wood, up to within 100yds. or so to the escarpment, along
which, for some miles, there appears always to have been, and is
now, a ridge of open down land, termed the Ridgeway, running east
and west along the top of the hill. Across this Ridgeway, on
referring to the Ordnance Map, banks may be seen in three
different places behind each other, having ditches on the east side,
and separated by intervals of a mile or so, the most westerly being
that which cuts across the hill, to the west of Win Green. These
short entrenchments, facing as they do always to the east, appear
to me to have been thrown up to check an advance along the
Ridgeway of an enemy coming from the east, and, if so, may have
been a part of the general system of defence of this district, in
connection with Bokerly Dyke, though not actually communicating
with it. These entrenchments had their left flanks on what I call
the chalk escarpment, though it is in reality nothing but a steep
hill, and their right, in former days, upon the Chase Wood.

Still further to the north-west a line of bank and ditch, with the
ditch still on the east side, runs across White Sheet Hill for about
a mile in the direction of Wardour. Both flanks of this detached
work terminate at the bottom of the hill, upon ground which may

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 295

very probably have originally been forest, most of the low-lying
valleys having, in all probability, been forest in those days. The
White Sheet Hill is a high tract of down land running east and
west, and must always have been open and accessible to an invading
army coming from the east. If these detached works that I have
last mentioned ever formed part of a general system for the defence
of the country, in association with Bokerly, the line must have
extended for nine miles, from Martin Wood on the right to the
termination of the dyke at White Sheet Hill on the left, the gaps
between the several lines having been occupied by forest. I base
this conjecture chiefly on the fact that the ditches of all of them are
on the east side, and that they were, consequently, thrown up with
a view to an attack from that quarter. If they were isolated and
independent entrenchments why should they all face the same
direction ?

I have read with attention all the writings that were accessible
to me upon the obscure periods of history to which these entrench-
ments may have belonged. Some are by scholars of great ability,
who would not have failed to bring to light evidence relating to
them if it was to be found in the ancient chronicles and the works
of the ancient authors. But these writings serve chiefly to convince
the reader that nothing definite is to be expected from such sources.
It is not known where the Belge landed, or where Vespasian
landed and fought, or where Cerdices Ora was, or where Mons
Badonicus was. I observe that two recent writers have proposed to
shuffle the whole of the ancient names of places and shift them from
their traditional localities. I have read with interest, but without
conviction, the imaginary campaign of Vespasian by one writer in
the West of England, and its final achievement in the hands of
another writer, in the great British Metropolis at the Pen Pits,
which turn out, on investigation, to be an ancient stone quarry ;
and whilst I am fully alive to the importance of studying all the
passages in ancient writings which have any bearing on the subject,
by competent scholars, I must confess that the evidence that can be
derived from them appears to be of the weakest possible description.
I am impressed rather with the value of an observation, made by

296 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

Mr. Green in the first page of his “ Making of England” :—« I
need scarcely say,” he says, “that I do not attempt to write a
history of Roman Britain. Such a history, indeed, can hardly be
attempted with any profit until the scattered records of researches
amongst the roads, villas, tombs, &c., of this period, have been in
some way brought together and made accessible,” or, I may add,
until the researches have been made, which can hardly be said, as
yet, to have been done to the extent that is requisite. I have often
noticed in my younger sporting days, and it is a fact well known
to sportsmen, that some hounds are apt to give tongue before they
have got a true scent, whilst there are others whose voice can be
relied upon. I am an old dog, and have always had a disposition
to run mute; indeed I should not have spoken now if some of my
friends had not given me the whip, by placing me unworthily in
this chair. This must be my excuse for passing over with such
slight comment the observations of previous writers on the origin
and uses of Bokerly Dyke. I wished to approach the subject with
an unbiassed mind, and, convinced by the experience of a number of
years that the question could be proved by excavations, I determined,
on the first opportunity, to make the attempt.

But in an entrenchment of such length it is quite uncertain
whether any relics can be found in a rampart unless the line happens
to pass over ground that had been occupied by a village or settlement
previously to the construction of the entrenchment, and no such
settlement presented itself to the eye of the observer on any part of
the line. I remained for some time in doubt, therefore, where to
begin, when, one day, towards the middle of 1888, Mr. Lawes, the
organist in Tollard Church, who is the conductor of my private band,
and who had acquired an. interest in such matters by his visits to my
Museum at Farnham, Dorset, happening to pass along the dyke to the
south of the Salisbury Road near Woodyates, found the occupier of the
farm—Mr. Trowbridge—engaged in cutting into the dyke to obtain
soil for top-dressing his fields, and in so doing five copper coins
turned up, together with a Romano-British fibula, which Mr. Lawes
brought to me. They were Roman coins, extending from Trajan to
Constans, and had evidently come out of the dyke. I had already

a ee a ee

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke, 297

discovered a small fragment of Samian pottery on the top of the
rampart, near the same spot. So I applied at once to Sir Edward
Hulse, the owner of the property, who readily gave me permission
to dig a section through the rampart at this spot. Section 1, 30ft.
wide, the position of which is marked on the accompanying map,
was the result of this excavation. Thirty-two coins, extending from
Gallienus to Constans, were found in the top and rear portion of
the bank and in the silting of the ditch. Although these were,
with little doubt, of the period of the entrenchment, it is my
custom, in cutting sections through ramparts, to distinguish objects
found in those positions into which they might by any possibility
have been introduced after the construction of the work, from those
found in the body of the rampart, which must certainly have been
placed there during the time or before it was thrown up, and which
could not by any possibility have got into it afterwards. In this
latter position one coin of Claudius Gothicus was found 3:1 ft. beneath
the crest. Some fragments of British and Romano-British pottery
and a piece of red Samian ware were also found in the same position,
and on the old surface line, beneath the rampart. It may save time
to state here that in all sections of ramparts in a chalk soil the old
surface line, representing the old turf before the rampart was thrown
over it, can be seen in a distinct line of dark mould beneath the
rampart. Beneath the silting which had accumulated over the
ditch, in the course of ages, to the extent of 6ft., or thereabouts,
two ditches were found one behind the other with a ridge of un-
disturbed chalk between them. This gave rise to some speculation,
and other instances, as, for example, at the Roman camp at the
Saalburg, near Homburg, where two ditches occur outside the
rampart, were called in evidence to explain the occurrence. But all
such conjectures were futile. The excavations which I shall describe
hereafter, subsequently revealed the true cause of this peculiar
construction, and serve to show how careful it is necessary to be,
even after excavations have been made, before conclusions are put

_ forward. In the counterscarp of the outer ditch the remains of pits

were found, which appeared to be connected with habitations of
some kind, but no trace of which could be seen on the surface, and

298 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

it was evident that the coins and other relics were in the soil about
these pits at the time the rampart was made, and that their presence
in the rampart arose from their having been thrown up with the
soil, by the constructors, without any notive having been taken of
them.

This discovery was amply sufficient to prove that the rampart at
this spot was constructed after the time of Claudius Gothicus, A.D.
268—270, and, in all probability, after the time of Constans, A.D.
337—350. But, in order to make matters more sure, I dug another
section of the same width, viz., 30ft., on the other side of the
Salisbury Road and Roman Road, at a distance of 150yds. from
the first section, the position of which is also marked on the ac-
companying map as Section 2. This turned out even more prolific
of coins than the first, five hundred and eighty-four having been
found in the rampart and silting of the ditch, extending from
Gallienus to Honorius, A.D. 253—423, and proving that it must
have been made at the time or subsequently to the departure of the
Romans from the British Isles in A.D. 407. This was no longer
a matter for conjecture—it was a proved fact. This section, like
Section 1, was filled with Roman and Romano-British pottery, and
relics of various kinds. Only one ditch was discovered in this
section, and this naturally created some surprise, because, if two
ditches were thought necessary in one part of the line, they would
be equally necessary in another part, on the principle that a chain
is no stronger than its weakest link; but this, as we shall see, was
explained afterwards.

An interesting discovery was made in this section. At the north-
west corner of it, just on the edge of the escarp, a skeleton was
found extended. The old surface-line was seen lying over it, and
showing that it must have been interred and covered over with
goil before the rampart was thrown over it. The legs extended over
the crest of the escarp, and one of the tibiz, which had been cut
off by the constructors of the ditch was found in the rampart behind

it, having evidently been chucked up by the Roman workmen. This —

gave additional evidence of the previous existence of a settlement
on the ground, as it showed that interments had been made in

Ss

ye

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 299

the settlement in the same manner as at Woodcuts and Rotherley.

It was evident that a settlement must have existed on the ground
before the dyke was thrown up. The greater part of the coins and
relics were found in the lowest part of the rampart, in dark mould,
just over the old surface line, and it appeared quite certain that this
mould must have come from the upper part of the ditch when the
diggers threw up that part first before they reached the chalk
beneath, all of which was found overlying the mould in the rampart
and containing comparatively few coins.

But there was no trace of any settlement or inequalities on the
surface of the ground near the dyke, or for some distance from it.
Feeling convinced, however, that some such settlement must have
existed, I commenced trenching the ground on the outside of the
ditch to see if any trace of habitations could be found, and soon
came upon some pits and a drain 4ft. to 6ft. wide and 3ft. deep, on
an average, running nearly parallel to the dyke. This, from its
position in front of the entrenchment, I called the Fore Drain. I
thén followed this drain, and found that it ran close up to the Roman
Road and then curved round and turned away from it to the north,
in which direction it extended in a straight line for about 530yds.
and then terminated. Roman coins and pottery were found in the
drain and in the surface soil on the sides of it and of the pits. This
ditch drained from north to south, and then from east to west, as
far as the ditch of the dyke. To the north of this, and nearly at
right angles with it, a somewhat larger ditch—9ft. to 10ft. wide
and 4ft. deep—which, from its being the outermost ditch discovered,
I called the Boundary Ditch, ran west to east, close to the end of the
Fore Drain, but not touching it, and under the Roman Road and
Salisbury Road, terminating in front of the Shoulder Angle of the
dyke. The West Drain, about the same size as the last, marked
the extent of my diggings on that side. About midway between
the Boundary Drain and the dyke, another, which I call the Mid
Drain, ran in a zig-zag course, cutting the Fore Drain about its
centre, and having two short drains running out of it to the south,
one of which ended in a pit, probably a dry well. This terminated
in the Cross Drain, -which ran parallel to the Roman Road, and was
VOL. XXV.—NO. LXXV. ¥

300 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

so called because it ran across the angle of the Fore Drain, and
across the Dyke. Near the Mid Drain, to the west end of it, a
T-shaped hypocaust—a model of which was exhibited at the meeting
—built with flints and mortar, similar to those found at Woodcuts,
was discovered, and close to it an extended skeleton lay buried, with
the head to the east, in a grave 4ft. deep. It was surrounded by
several large iron nails, which had probably served to fasten a coffin
or shell, and a large Roman coin, which was afterwards identified
as Faustina, was found on the breast just under the chin. In the
north-west corner of the settlement, within the Boundary Drain, a
square enclosure was discovered, the faces being 105ft. by 115ft.,
surrounded by a ditch 8ft. wide and 2ft. 4in. deep. Within the
enclosure were five graves, containing extended skeletons, in graves
about 4ft. 6in. deep. One of them—No. 15—was buried 6ft. deep,
and had a bone comb resting on the left breast, and a small earthen-
ware pitcher with a handle at the feet, with several large nails
around it. These graves were all cut nearly in the same direction, and
might possibly, in this case, have been dug with a view to orientation,
being within a few degrees of the east-and-west line, but they were
nearly parallel to the sides of the enclosure, which may have given
them their direction. The use of this square enclosure was not
ascertained ; the number of graves was scarcely sufficient to warrant
its being set down as a cemetery. The east face of this square was
the only part in the whole settlement which showed any trace on
the surface, before excavation. The East Drain ran from the
Salisbury Road in a north-west direction, and on approaching the
Roman Road turned and ran parallel to it, crossing the Boundary
Drain, and running on beyond it, down hill. It contained three
skeletons, on the bottom of the drain, buried extended (like those
of Woodcuts and Rotherley) in the direction of the drain, with the
heads in this case to the north. This and the Cross Drain, and the
Roman Road Drain on the west side, suggest, from their parallelism
to the road, that they must have been made subsequently to it,
because the road approaches the settlement without a turn, having
run in a straight line from Sorbiodunum, and as it did not adapt
itself to the drains, the drains must have taken their course from it.

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 301

Between the Roman Road and the first bend of the Mid Drain, the
ground being cut up in small enclosures by the ditches, appeared to
be a probable place for the site of habitations. It was, therefore,
trenched all over, with the result of discovering several pits, and a
hearth with marks of fire on it. Also a skeleton in a grave 2ft. 9in,
deep. To the east of the road near this spot a cluster of pits were
found. Another skeleton was found in a recess in the Cross Drain ;
it was in a crouched position, and a bronze fibula was found on the
pelvis. Probably the fibula was used for the same purpose as the
one found on the hip of a skeleton at Rotherley. Lower down, the
skeleton of a horse was found, buried in a grave cut across the drain.
This shows that, although they ate the horse, it was in this instance,
as also at Rotherley, sometimes buried entire. Further to the south,
another hearth was found, with marks of fire, and on each side of
the drain there were traces of habitations, as if the watercourse
had drained through the houses. The lines of the drains in the
settlement can only be shown by fine black lines in the annexed
map, but in my third volume of excavations detailed maps will be
given.

Nine bronze fibulz were found in the settlement and in the sections
of the dyke. They were of the same form as in the other villages,
but one was more distinctly Roman in character than any of the
others. Iron cleats, similar to those of the other villages, were
also found in several places, and two with hobnails at the feet of a
skeleton. The coins, of which three hundred and eighty-one were
found in the settlement, tallied with those found in the sections of
the dyke, and extended from Trajan to Gratian. Of this total number,
only two hundred and thirty-one could be identified, being in very
bad condition on account of having lain near the surface, and being

‘much exposed to moisture. They were occasionally found in batches,
and it is probable that the Roman workmen must have come upon
a large batch of them in digging the ditch in front of where
Section 2 was cut, and that the coins were thrown up into the
rampart with the soil without any notice having been taken of them.

No British coins were found in this settlement. The animal remains

throughout the settlement were the same, and the animals of the
¥2

302 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

same size, as at Woodcuts and Rotherley. The identified bones of
the ox amounted to 36:8 per cent. of the total number of fragments ;
sheep, 38°8 per cent.; and horse, 25-2 per cent. No grain was
found. In one respect a difference was observed in their culinary
practices. In Woodcuts and Rotherley an enormous number of
burnt flints were found, which had been used in a red-hot state for
boiling food in troughs. In this settlement not a single burnt flint
was discovered, which argues an entire difference in their mode of
cooking. .An interesting discovery was made in the Mid Drain, at
the bottom of which, at 2ft. 14in. beneath the surface, a coffin,
composed of a dug-out half trunk of a tree, was found with a
cremated interment in it. A model of this was exhibited. A
similar interment was discovered by me in a tumulus of the Bronze
Age, about four miles to the west, which is described in the second
volume of my “ Excavations in Cranborne Chase,” showing that
this mode of burial must have survived amongst the Britons until
Roman times, and that, in both periods, cremation and inhumation
were practiced simultaneously.

The quality of the pottery and the forms of the earthen vessels
tallied with those found in the villages, with some notable differences.
The proportion of vessels with loops for suspension and holes in the
bottom—supposed by me to be for draining honey, was considerably
less in Woodyates. The proportion of loops to the total number
of fragments of pottery in the settlement—viz., twenty-eight
thousand four hundred and eighty-nine,' being 0°03 per cent. in
Woodyates, as against 0°29 per cent. in Woodcuts, and 0°79 in
Rotherley, showing, either that there was less use for this class of
vessel in Woodyates, or that, being more distant from its place of
fabrication, it was less easily procured. The proportion of fragments
with basin-shaped rims and high ridges was larger than in Rotherley,
but not so numerous as in Woodcuts. The class of bowl, with a
bead rim, which was very common in the pits at Woodcuts, and
also, though in a less degree, at Rotherley, and which were generally

1The total number of fragments in Woodcuts was twenty-seven thousand
seven hundred and twenty-one ; and in Rotherley, eighteen thousand nine
hundred and thirty-two.

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 303

found associated with an inferior quality of ware, was nearly absent
in Woodyates, the proportion being no more than 0-03 per cent., as
against 2°16 per cent. at Woodcuts, and 1°50 at Rotherley. The
number of large handles for pitchers and small handles for saucers
was exactly in the same proportion as at Woodcuts, viz., 0°32 per
cent. A class of pottery, of soft cream-coloured texture in the
interior of the substance and painted on the outside, was abundant
at Woodyates, but rarely found in the other villages, the proportion
being, in Woodyates, as much as 3°7 per cent., and in Woodcuts
only 0-1 per cent., whilst in Rotherley one fragment only was
found, This must be regarded as a superior class of pottery, and
somewhat allied to the New Forest Ware in form.! New Forest
Ware, hard and well-baked, was, in Woodyates, 3°9 per cent.,
against 0°78 per cent. in Woodcuts, and 0°9 per cent. in Rotherley.
Samian pottery of the best quality was less abundant, being 0°9 in
Woodyates, as against 2°1 in Woodeuts, and 2°3 in Rotherley.
British imitation of Samian amounted to 0°6 per cent. in Woodyates,
but was scarcely a recognizable quality in Woodcuts and Rotherley.
Upon the whole, notwithstanding the small proportion of the best
class of Samian, the ordinary pottery was of a superior quality in
Woodyates to the other villages.

The greater part of the fragments of pottery and iron nails were
found to the westward of the settlement, in, about, and to the rear
of the Fore Dyke, leading to the inference that this was the part
chiefly inhabited, and that the ditches to the north and east must
in all probability have been the boundary drains of fields rather
than of inhabited areas; and this circumstance, together with the
information derived from the workmen as to the former discoveries
of Roman relics in the fields, on the surface, leads me to believe
that the part hitherto excavated, probably consists of the outskirts
of the settlement, and that the main body of it will eventually be
found to run on to the south, in the direction of the present village
of Woodyates.

BS al ie RE en ERS Bt a Zi a

* This quality of pottery is found in the Roman kilns at Crockle, in the New
Forest.

804 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

Fifteen skeletons were found in the settlement, of which the bones
were sufficiently perfect to enable a computation of their stature to
be made, viz., twelve males and three females. Of these, two were
buried in a crouched position, and the rest extended. A diagram
was shown at the meeting by means of which their relative stature
as compared with those found in the other ancient places in the
neighbourhood, could be seen ata glance. The calculation of the
stature from the bones was done according to Dr. Topinard’s method.
Various methods of comparison may be adopted. The average
height of any number of skeletons may be found by adding together
the estimated stature of the several skeletons and dividing by the
number of skeletons. In the case of a small number of skeletons,
such as this, this is an imperfect means of comparison, because
individuals of exceptional stature vitiate the result. The better way
is to place the whole of the estimated heights in a diagram according
to their sizes, side by side, from left to right, and take the central
individual, if an odd number, or the mean between the two central
individuals, if an even number, as the medium stature of the whole.
A comparison may also be made by comparing the males and females
taken together, of one place, with the males and females taken
together, of another place, or by comparing the males of one place
with the males of another place, and the females with the females.
Adopting the latter, as the most reliable method, and using the
medium stature, rather than the average, as a test of height, I find
the following results. The medium stature of the males at Wood-
yates was 5ft, 4°2in.; that of Woodcuts, 5ft. 4°7in.; Rotherley,
5ft, 1-5in.; while that of the Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Winkelbury
was 5ft. 6-9in. Of the females the medium stature at Woodyates
was 4ft. 9°6in.; at Woodcuts, 5ft. 0'0in.; at Rotherley, 4ft. 9°9in. ;
at Winkelbury, 5ft. 2:3in. Thus it will be seen that the stature of
the Woodyates skeletons is slightly higher than that of the other
Romano- British villages of Woodeuts and Rotherley ; but by what-
ever method of computation the comparison was made, it was found
that the stature of the Anglo-Saxon skeletons in the cemetery at
Winkelbury was from 3in. to 4in. taller than any of the Romano-
British settlements; whilst the only two Bronze Age skeletons that

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 305

I have discovered in this neighbourhood stood higher than all. This
is only in accordance with what has been found elsewhere.

In another diagram, I exhibited at the meeting in a tabular form
a comparison of the head-form of the skeletons from these several
places, by which it was seen that the number of round heads was :—
in Woodyates, two; in Woodeuts and Rotherley, each one; and in
the Anglo-Saxon cemetery there was no round-headed skeleton,
whilst Rotherley produced three hyperdolichocephalic, or very long
heads, out of the thirteen. found there. As round-headedness may,
perhaps, be taken to imply a mixture of Roman blood, this result
might be expected, as it is more likely the aborigines should have
mixed their blood with the Romans in places situated on the main
thoroughfare than in the remoter settlements. But the value of
these conjectures must be taken for what it is worth, considering
the comparatively small number of skeletons, viz., fifty-seven, from
which the head-form could be ascertained. This much may, however,
be said with certainty, that the population of these parts in Roman
times was of much smaller stature than now, smaller than it after-
wards became when the Teutonic element was introduced, but that
varieties of type had already appeared, which are characteristic of
it to the present time. We are fortunate in having obtained the
opinion of Dr. Garson, who has earefully examined these skeletons
and has tested all my measurements of them. His remarks are
contained in a very valuable paper which he has contributed to this
journal.

The drains of the settlement were obviously made for the purpose
of carrying off the heavy rainfall, as at Woodcuts and Rotherley,
but for what reason they were afterwards filled up again to the top,
so that skeletons could be buried in them, I am unable to understand.
The whole character of the settlement, and its contents, were the
same as in the other villages, and as the dyke is now proved to be
more recent than the settlement its date with respect to those

villages is also determined. This is the point towards which I have

been working during the whole of this investigation.
Before leaving this settlement another point must be noted. The
Itinerary of Antoninus gives the distance between Sorbiodunum

306 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

and Vindogladia, on this line, at XII M.P. Sir Richard Hoare,
recognizing the remains of a Romano-British village on Gussage
Down, as the only likely place for a Roman station in this neigh-
bourhood places Vindogladia at that spot. In order to make it
tally with the Itinerary it was necessary to alter the distance from
XII to XVI Roman miles. But if the ancient writers are to be
relied upon at all, their statements must be taken as they are given,
and not changed. Now the settlement at’Woodyates is as nearly
as possible XII Roman miles from Sorbiodunum, assuming a Roman
mile to be, as generally computed, 446ft., or nearly 150yds. less
than the English mile, and I have little doubt that had Sir Richard
Hoare known of the settlement that I have now discovered at
Woodyates he would without hesitation have located it at this spot.
At this spot the Roman Road makes its only turn of any importance
between Sorbiodunum and Badbury Rings, showing that it must
have been the most important point upon the line, more so than
Gussage Down, at which place the road makes no turn, although it
passes not far from the remains of the Roman settlement there.
Etymological evidence may also be adduced in favour of this
place being Vindogladia. I advocate no new theory of my own
upon this question. But referring to Stukeley, Warne, and others
who have followed him, I find that the word Vindogladia is assumed
to be derived from the two Celtic words, vint—=white, and gladh=a
ditch or rampart. Here, then, we have a distinct reference to
Bokerly Dyke, which, viewed from the surrounding heights, must
have been, at the time of its construction, a conspicuous white chalk
rampart, running for miles over the green sward. It may, perhaps,
be asked, how came a word with such a derivation to be included in
the Itinerary of Antoninus? which is believed to have been compiled
about the year 320, when the dyke is now proved to have been
thrown up no earlier than the reign of Honorius, A.D. 8395—423,
and possibly by the Romanised Britons as a defence against the
Saxons. The reply to this-is, that the Itinerary was a Roman road-
book, and is generally believed to have been altered from time to
time, during subsequent reigns, and I think I am justified in saying
that it is not known how long it may have ultimately remained in use.

oe ee

er

— ae

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 307

But further discoveries had yet to be made. The Cross Drain,
which runs parallel to the Roman Road, and which is on that account
assumed to be more recent than it, was found to cut across the ditch
of the dyke at a higher level than the bottom of it,and must, therefore,
have been constructed before the ditch of the dyke, unless it was
construeted after the latter had silted up, which is improbable. This
Cross Drain can only be shown by a very fine line on the accom-
panying map, this part of the evidence, therefore, cannot be well
understood except by reference to the larger map, which will ac-
company my third volume of excavations. On following the Cross
Drain further south it was found to run into a deep hole, no trace
of which was seen on the surface. This, being cleared out, was found
to be the section of another ditch in rear of, and of about the same
size, as the one in front of it, and it now appeared very probable
that this must have been a second and older dyke, in rear of the
first. I therefore had sections cut east and west,.and by this means
traced the Rear Dyke to its junction with what I now call the Fore
Dyke, just beneath the Salisbury Road. It was now found that
the ditch of the Rear Dyke crossed that of the Fore Dyke at this
spot, at a slightly higher level, and went on to form the outer ditch
of Section 1. The Fore Dyke was the most recent, as it crossed
the Rear Dyke at a lower level, and went on to form the inner ditch
in Section 1. This accounted for the double ditch, which had so
puzzled us when it was first discovered. It was evident the Rear
Dyke, for some reason, had been filled in from the point of junction,
and the Fore Dyke made at the same time, and that when this
occurred the makers of the Fore Dyke ran their ditch on in rear of
the other, along the whole face of the left centre dyke. This may
have been owing to the old escarp of the first ditch having become

rotten and unsuitable for a defence, and to its being found necessary

to form another fresh escarp of solid chalk by cutting another ditch
in rear. The probability is that the outer ditch was filled up at this
time, so that there never was more than one ditch open at the same
time. The whole of the defence, in fact, must have been renewed
at the time the Fore Dyke was made.

This discovery increased the importance of Section 1, as that

308 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society, .

section was cut at a spot which was to the east of the place where
the Fore and Rear Dykes branched off, and in order to make the
contents of this part of the entrenchment more certain, the rampart
portion of Section 1 was extended, and a coin of Maximinus II. (A.D.
308—313) was found on the old surface-line, and numerous frayments
of both British and Romano-British pottery in the same section.
This removed all possibility of doubt, if any had existed, of this
part being of Roman origin. In the Rear Dyke, which had been
filled up, Roman coins, extending from Septimius Severus to Gratian,
Roman pottery and relics of the same character as those found in
the rest of the settlement and in the Fore Dyke were discovered.

About 870yds. to the west of this spot there is a short detached
fragment of a dyke, marked in the map, in rear of the Fore Dyke,
which had puzzled Sir Richard Hoare. It is marked “ditch” in
the Ordnance 6-inch map, and abuts upon the west of the road
from Woodyates to Cobley Farm. It now appears evident that
this is a continuation of the Rear Dyke, and that if the ground was
excavated it would be found to be connected with the fragment
discovered at the Bokerly Junction, which is the name I gave to that
spot for reasons that do not now require explanation. The Rear
Dyke is seen again in rear of the Fore Dyke running through the
orchard to the north of West Woodyates Farm.

A section was now cut in prolongation of the Roman Road,
through the rampart of the Fore Dyke, and the flint pitching of
the Roman Road was found under the bank. This, on being traced
southwards, was found to lie over the ji//ing of the ditch of the Rear
Dyke, proving that the Roman Road was used after the Rear Dyke
was filled in. It does not follow that the Roman Road was made
after the Rear Dyke was filled in, as it may have been dug across,
and the road afterwards laid again over the filling of the ditch.

As it was now evident that one great alteration had been made in
the defences at Bokerly Junction, one dyke destroyed, and another
erected outside and in front of it, and the defences all along the
line apparently renewed, it became of still greater interest to examine
more closely the epaulement, spoken of in the first part of my paper,
and ascertain whether this may not have been the point of junction

:
,
;
j
q
‘
;

On the Excanations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 309

or departure of a still earlier dyke branching off to the westward
from this spot, or a shoulder, covering the termination of the en-
trenchment at some previous time. A section was therefore cut, to
the south-east of the epaulement, at which spot two ditches were
again found, as in Section 1. But in the rampart no coins were
found, and the pottery was of an earlier and coarser kind than in the
other sections. No distinctly Roman pottery was found in the body
of the rampart, and only a few doubtful fragments near the surface.
A long strip was then cut along the gap, where the upper part of
the rampart had been removed, and where the old surface-line conse-
quently could be got at quicker, but with the same results. Nothing
distinctly Roman was found.

We then attacked the epaulement itself. The rampart of the
dyke had, at some time, been thrown over the ditch of the epaulement
continuously in the line of the Main Rampart ; but this must have
been done subsequently to the time when it served as the northern
termination of the entrenchment, if it ever did so serve. The part
of the rampart which runs across the ditch of the epaulement I call
the “Traverse.” Was the old ditch to be found beneath the
Traverse? If so, it would prove that it once formed the termination
of the dyke before it was extended further to the north. . I cut a
section along the length of the Traverse into the rampart at the
shoulder of the epaulement, and found the solid chalk sides of the
old ditch beneath the Traverse. ‘The section showed that the ditch
had silted up to a great extent by denudation from the rampart
before the Traverse was thrown over it. In the Traverse nine
fragments of Samian pottery were found, and at 2°4ft. from the
summit of it a well-preserved coin of Magnentius. This proves
that the Traverse was erected in Roman times, but on digging
further into the old rampart beneath, and at the end of the Traverse
where it abuts upon the epaulement, no Samian or other Roman
remains were found. The difference in the contents of these two
deposits is made more striking by their juxtaposition. Similar
differences in parts of the entrenchment that were remote from one
another would prove only a difference in the previous occupation of
the ground, but in this case it is evident that, at the time when the

510 Inaugural Address by the President of the Society,

Traverse was thrown up for the purpose of continuing the entrench-
ment to the westward, the soil did contain Roman remains, whilst,
at the time when the older portion of the dyke was thrown up, the
same ground did not contain Roman remains.

Two hundred and sixty feet of rampart, in all, was dug on the
south-east of the epaulement without finding anything Roman
except some dubious pieces of pottery, quite near the surface. The
bulk of the pottery was of a kind that might be attributed to the
British as well as the Roman Age. This goes a long way towards
proving that the dyke to the south-east of the epaulement was
earlier, and that the extension of it to the north-west was made in
Roman or post-Roman times, but it is not conclusive. This spot is
more distant from the settlement than Sections 1 and2. Whatever
kind of pottery exists in the soil will be thrown up into the rampart,
and at whatever period a rampart may be made it will disclose only
such kinds of pottery as the soil contained, or such as might have
been accidentally dropped into it during its construction. The
absence of: Roman pottery is, consequently, no proof that a rampart
is earlier than the Roman times, though it may leave the question
of date open.

Trenches were dug in the combe at the end of the epaulement, to
ascertain whether it had ever extended further and been destroyed
by cultivation, but the end of the ditch was found at a distance of
272ft. from the spot where it leaves the Main Dyke, showing that
it never extended over the hill, but must have been merely a short
turn of the rampart to cover and protect the exposed flank, at this
time probably also protected by a dense growth of trees and under-
wood.

The question of the age of the right flank, right centre, and a
considerable part of the left centre of Bokerley Dyke as far as the
epaulement, must be left for future investigation, before it can be
determined with the same certainty that we can now speak of the
left flank. I have only to say, however, that as the whole character
of the extensions coincides with that of the main portion of the
entrenchment, except in being of slightly less relief, there is a
probability of the latter being found to have been constructed by

-
ee

On the Excavations at Rotherley, Woodcuts, and Bokerly Dyke. 311

the same people, though perhaps at an earlier date. More than
this cannot at the present time be affirmed with confidence. It
would be desirable to excavate on Blagdon Hill, especially at the
point where the branch line (also called on the Ordnance Map
“ Bokerly Dyke”) joins it, or perhaps only cuts across it. One
point, before leaving the dyke, I may notice, viz., that the irregu-
larity of its line, which has been commented upon by previous
writers, may, perhaps, be owing to the intermittent renewal of the
old escarp by the construction of a second ditch, at the time that
the Fore Dyke was made. It was seen that the double ditch was
not found everywhere. In some places the old escarp may have been
found steep and firm enough, and then the second ditch would not
be dug, in others it was found necessary to dig back to secure a hard
wall of chalk for the defence, and, by this means, irregularities may
have been produced which were not in the original construction.

Time forbids me to proceed further with this enquiry for the
present, and for the same reason many more or less interesting details
have been omitted, all of which will appear in the third volume of
the account of my excavations. I trust I have succeeded in con-
vincing those who have done me the compliment of following me,
that excavations afford a sure and effectual means of ascertaining
the date, within certain limits, of the most extensive earthworks,
and that, even when a series of alterations may have taken place in
them, from time to time, their continuous history may, nevertheless,
be unravelled by means of the pick and shovel. I had intended
saying a few words on the prospect which these researches hold out
of ultimately clearing up the history of Wansdyke, but after having
taxed your patience to so great an extent I fear that I must postpone
the consideration of that question until a future occasion,’

A diagram and model of the excavations made by mein Wansdyke
near Shepherds Shore was exhibited.

The address was illustrated by thirteen diagrams and nine models.

ee

1 The excavation of Wansdyke at Brown’s Barn was made after the Meeting
of the Society at Devizes. It resulted in proving by means of Samian pottery
found in the rampart that the whole work was Roman, or post-Roman, but as no
coins were found, its date could not be determined with the same certainty as
that of Bokerly. The account of it will be given hereafter.

312

Alotes on Auman Aemnins

Hiscobered by General Pitt-Aibers, B.C.9., F-H.S., wh
Goodpates, Wiltshire.
By J. G. Garson, M.D., V.P.A.I., Lecturer on Comparative Anatomy at
Charing Cross Hospital Medical School, London.

excavated by him at Woodyates, Wiltshire, and of comparing them
with the specimens he obtained a few years ago from the Romano-
British villages of Woodcuts and Rotherley.

Before my visit to Rushmore each specimen had been carefully
measured, the sex accurately determined, and the stature of the
individual estimated by General Pitt-Rivers, who kindly placed at
my disposal all the results of his investigations. Having satisfied
myself that these measurements and calculations were correctly
made and quite as reliable as any I could make, I devoted the time
at my disposal to studying the descriptive characters and comparing
the various series of skulls from the above-mentioned places with
one another. The data, therefore, on which the present communi-
cation is based, are derived from General Pitt-Rivers’ measurements
and my personal observations of all the specimens referred to in it.

A cursory survey of the Woodyates specimens, when placed side
by side in line, was sufficient to show me that they differed in some
respects from those found in the villages of Woodcuts and Rotherley,
which I had previously examined soon after their discovery. It was
also sufficient to show that among the individual specimens com-
posing the series there existed a considerable range of variation in
the size and proportions of the different parts of the skull. In other
words, I could readily see that the remains were not those of a
homogenous group of persons, but of individuals presenting as great
diversities in their physical characters as would be found to exist in
a series of persons taken from different families at the present day.
Further examination of the specimens and of the measurements

Notes on Human Remains from Woodyates, Wiltshire. 313

made by General Pitt-Rivers showed that not only is there con-
siderable diversity in the characters of the facial portion of the
skull, but that there is also a good deal of variety in the form of
the part which contains the brain, termed the calvaria.

In this communication I only propose to indicate generally the
characters and variations alluded to above, without going into details
as to the different measurements and proportions of the specimens, ex-
cept so far as may be necessary to illustrate the import of my remarks.

The general form of the calvaria, when viewed from above, is
oval, but the exact form of outline differs considerably. Thus, in
some cases, we find it is a broad oval, in others long and narrow or ir-
regular. Its ends are somewhat pointed in some specimens, while in
others they are broader, or even nearly square. The line of greatest
breadth is situated sometimes behind the centre of the oval, and in
other cases about the centre. The sides are flat and straight in one or
two instances, and asymmetry of the lateral halves is very common.
The parietal bosses are as a rule not very pronounced. The state of
occlusion of the sutures varies a good deal. In some instances they
are very open, while in others they are obliterated, or nearly so ; these
two conditions may sometimes occur simultaneously in the same speci-
men; partial synostosis is, therefore, not uncommon. As arule the
sutures are simple. Four instances of metopism or persistence of the
mesial frontal suture occur in the series, which is in the proportion of
about one in every four, a considerably higher average than obtains
amongst modern British skulls. Numerous Wormean bones in the
sagittal and lamboidal sutures occur in one instance, and to a less ex-
tent in another. The forehead is broad and square in all the metopie
specimens, and in them also the frontal bosess are well marked ;
in the other specimens it is receding to a greater or less extent.
The degree of development of the glabella and superciliary emi-
nences varies much. As a consequence the form and prominence of
the brow differs considerably. In many cases there is little develop-
ment of these prominences, and where this obtains the brow is flat,
while in others they are fairly well marked, but in no ease are they
greatly developed. The glabella is sometimes the main prominence in
the centre of the forehead, while in other cases the superciliary ridges

314 Notes on Human Remains from Woodyates, Wiltshire.

form the chief prominences, the glabella being a depression between
them. The bony ridges for the attachment of muscles or their
aponeurosis, such as those about the inion, stephanion, &c., are in
some cases well developed, but as a rule are only moderately marked.
When the characters of the calvaria are studied from the front, well
marked differences in the form of the arch of the vault may be
observed. In nearly a third of the specimens the arch is
moderately high and forms a well proportioned curve, in about a
third it is very acute or pointed at the summit or apex, while in
rather more than a third the opposite condition obtains, that is to
say, the arch is flat and broad at its apex. The cephalic index,
which expresses the relative proportion which the breadth bears to
the length of the calvaria (the latter being taken as 100), averages
in the whole series 76°4, and varies from 69'2 to 82°6. As great
importance attaches to this index for the purpose of classifying the
various forms of head, it is necessary to analyse its variations in the
group under consideration. Two of the crania are brachycephalic,
nine are mesaticephalic, five are dolichocephalic, and one hyper-
dolichocephalic. It should also be mentioned that the indices of far
the greater number of the mesaticephalic specimens are nearer the
upper than the lower limits of that group, and therefore more nearly
approach the brachycephalic group. The breadth of the calvaria is
in every ease except one, greater than the vertical height. In the
exceptional case the two measurements are practically equal, the
height being only 1mm. greater than the breadth.

Passing now to the characters of the face, we find it is long and
narrow in some cases, while in others it is short and proportionately
broad. The form of the nasal portion is always a very characteristic
feature of the face, and variations in the nasal index, which expresses
the relation of the breadth of the nose to its length, are, perhaps,
as strong evidence of mixed race as any character in the body,
particularly if conjoined with marked variation in the form of the
calvaria, indicated by the cephalic index. In these specimens great
diversity of the nasal index is found to exist, since it varies from
33°3 to 58°0. Six of the specimens are leptorhine (long and narrow),
four are mesorhine, and two are platyrhine (short and broad). Here

By J. G. Garson, U.D., V.P.A.L. 315

then we have the three groups represented into which the index is
divided. The form of the orbital opening also varies considerably ;
in some cases it is nearly rectangular at each of the corners, giving
a square appearance to the orbit, while in others it is much more
circular. The direction of the transverse axes of the orbits likewise
varies, being in some specimens nearly in the same horizontal line,
while in others they are set at a more or less acute angle. The superior
maxillz are sometimes massive, with the canine fosse but little
marked; in other cases their surfaces are deeply hollowed out,
forming large and deep canine fosse ; a well marked maxillary notch
occurs in several specimens situated mesially to the lower end of the
jugo-maxillary suture, but in other cases the lower border of the
orbital process of the maxilla curves outwards without a distinct
notch being formed. The malar bones are heavy and massive in
some specimens, and less strongly developed in others; several
individual variations in the form of these bones also occur. The
form of the mandible varies a good deal; in some cases it is
massive with well marked ridges for muscular attachments, while in
others it is decidedly feeble. Its lower margin is wide and spreading
outwards in some cases, while in others it slopes inwards. The
length and inclination of the so-called horizontal ramus varies; in
some cases it is short and nearly horizontal in position, while in
others it is longer and slopes downwards and forwards. ‘The chin is
rounded and broad in some specimens, narrow and pointed in others ;
it is seldom very prominent.

These characters enumerated fully justify the statement I made
at the outset, viz., that we had to deal with a set of specimens
showing very mixed characters. Had the persons whom these
skeletons represent been of a homogeneous type much less variety of
characters would have been found amongst them. It is a matter of
considerable interest to note how these specimens from Woodyates
agree or disagree with those found at Rotherley and Woodcuts, and
accordingly I propose to make a few observations on the subject.
Anyone accustomed to examine skulls, on looking at the three sets
of specimens, would have little difficulty in discerning that each set
possesses predominant characters of its own, though the Woodcuts
VOL. XXV.—NO. LXXV, Z

816 Notes on Human Remains from Woodyates, Wiltshire.

and Woodyates skulls resemble one another more closely than those
of Rotherley. The least individual variety occurs amongst the
Rotherley skulls—they are the most homogeneous group. On the
other hand, individual variety is greatest in the Woodyates specimens,
while the Woodcuts skulls in this respect occupy a mean position
between those from Rotherley and Woodyates. There are, of course,
specimens in each set which show similar fundamental characters,
particularly in the Woodcuts and Woodyates series. As minute
details regarding the differences between the three sets of specimens
are somewhat technical, and therefore tedious, except to those
specially interested in the subject, I shall only point out the
differences between them indicated by the form of the calvaria and
nasal portion of the face. The cephalic index shows that the
dolichocephalie element is most strongly marked in the Rotherley
specimens, only one specimen out of thirteen being brachycephalic,
and three mesaticephalic, while six are dolichocephalic, and three
hyperdolichocephalic. Of the Woodcuts specimens one is brachy- ©
cephalic, eight are mesaticephalic, while five are dolichocephalic.
The Woodyates specimens show the greatest tendency to brachy-
cephaly, the greater number of the mesaticephalic skulls from
there being at the upper end of that group, while the greater
number of the mesaticephalic skulls from Woodcuts are at the lower
end, that approaching the dolichocephalic group. In the nasal
characters, the platyrhine form is not present either at Rotherley or
Woodcuts, while the leptorhine and mesorhine forms are present
in about the same proportion. This comparison of the characters of
the skull shows that the Woodyates specimens belonged to a more
mixed race than the inhabitants of Rotherley, while the Woodcuts
people were intermediate in this respect. It also shows that the
people in the neighbourhood of Woodyates did not live isolated from
the Roman population, as the Rotherley people evidently did more
or less, but mixed and inter-bred with them. As far as I am able to
judge from the characters of the skull, there does not seem to be
any evidence present of crossing with the Celtic population of
Britain, and I am inclined to think that we have here to deal with
a crossing between the Roman and early dolichocephalic British race.

317

The Geology of Devizes.

By A. J. Juxes-Browng, B.A., F.G.S.

Part I.—Dzscriprion oF THE STRATA AND THEIR PECULIARITIES
OF STRUCTURE.

‘ PAPER on the geology of any town or district is often a

, very dry-as-dust affair, consisting chiefly of descriptions of
rocks, with a scattering of technical terms and names of fossils that
convey little meaning to ordinary ears. That kind of paper is not
at all suitable for delivery to a general audience, and should only be
read to an assembly of geologists. There are, however, certain facts
in the geology of any district, and in the structure of its rocks,
which may be explained and made interesting to people who have
little or no acquaintance with the science of geology. It is these
portions of the subject which are dealt with in the first part of this
paper, the more technical questions of nomenclature and classification
being left to form the second part.

Professor Huxley once gave a lecture on a piece of Chalk, and
found a great deal to say about it, both as to the peculiar structure
of the material and as to the manner in which it was made. Some
people may imagine they know all about Chalk when they know
that it is composed of carbonate of lime, but the microscope tells us
that there are as many different kinds of Chalk as there are different
kinds of Clay or Sandstone ; it shows us also that the number of tiny
fossils and organic remains in a crumb of Chalk is as large as the
number of live animals in a drop of pond-water. Some of you may
have seen the magnified reflection of such a drop of water thrown on
a screen by means of the oxyhydrogen lantern, and will remember
the lively scene it exhibited. In some pieces of Chalk the remains

of minute animals are nearly as numerous, but before entering on
EE STS: SOE Ae I RES

*,* The Society is indebted to Mr. Jukes-Browne’s kindness for two-thirds
of the cost of the illustrations of his paper.

Z2

——r --.

The Geology of Devizes.

318

‘pueg pur[}tog pue ‘puesuoly g "puesuoory seddg p "AI@UO PIPPI £
AeO eSpusury v “qjnen) 2 “"H[BYO wemory a "yyeqo tweddg 6

‘TH 8,uesi0py 38 H[VYH FO speq eatssooons oy} Sutmoys—g uoroog
"SOZIAC, Y}BOMG ByVIZG ey} JO Jepxlo [enyeu og} Sutmoys—T uoryoeg
ad OOTL =LYIAN HONK XY “AWMWI = S3HQWIs aATWS

’
; 7 :
1 ‘ , TEU £
lag i ’ $ ae min
‘Two NnoLiod qv" Nivi 'TIIH SNVDUOW ANOLSIVD

ABs a) WERE SW Sea eC A ee EE «hs ek SS we OS ey Ol CEE
SSS ——SS

Lsvq savy satiaaq 7005 anahoms. “LSM

By A. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., F.G.S8. 319

an explanation of these I must direct attention to the sections,
Section 1 shows the natural order of the strata which lie beneath
Devizes. Beds of rock are not generally vertical masses, but layers
or courses which run one under another, and are continuous, hori-
zontally or obliquely, for a great distance underground. Thus
bed @ in the diagram, which is called the Kimeridge Clay, and
comes to the surface between Seend and Poulshot, would be found
under Devizes if anyone made a boring down to the level at which
it occurs, and a geologist can generally estimate the depth at which
any such bed can be found.

The other section before you is one through Morgan’s Hill, and
shows the successive beds of Chalk of which ‘it is composed, the
lowest of them resting on the same bed of green Sand which comes
to the surface round Devizes and Bishops Cannings.

The rocks in the immediate neighbourhood of Devizes belong to
the Cretaceous System, and for the purposes of description they may
be dealt with under the following names, in descending order :—

7. Upper Chalk. 3. Malmstone,
6. Middle Chalk. 2. Gault.
5. Lower Chalk. 1, Ironsands.

4, Greensand.

1.—Ironsands. The lowest beds of the system are the brown
pebbly Sandstones of Poulshot and Rowde, with the outlying patch
at Seend. The pebbles in these beds are chiefly small rounded bits of
vein-Quartz which have been derived from much older rocks that lie
to the west of Wiltshire. Fossils are rare in them, and they would
have been credited with few organic remains if Mr. W. Cunnington
had not been careful to collect from the cutting made for the road
up Seend Hill in 1849, This is an excellent instance of the useful
work which a local geologist can accomplish, and the geological
members of every local Natural History Society ought to consider
it their duty to record and collect from all such exposures while they
are fresh and clear. If they do not, valuable and interesting facts
are lost to science, for the banks become obscured with earth and
grass in the course of a few years, when the geologist who then

320 The Geology of Devizes.

visits them can only see that once upon a time an excellent and
interesting section was to be seen at the spot.

I need not now say more about the Ferruginous Sands except to
express a hope that the time may come when the Ironstone they
contain may be utilised, and to point out that they were formed in
very shallow water along the shore of an ancient continent which
then lay to the west of Wiltshire.

2. Gault. Above the Ferruginous Sands, and forming the lower
part of the slopes below Roundway, Devizes, Potterne, Stert, and
Urchfont, is a dark grey clay known as the Gault. The brickyards
at Dunkirk, Caen Hill, Stert, and Lavington are opened in this
clay, and its thickness in this district is from S8O0ft. to 90ft.

To the unassisted eye a lump of the clay only seems to be fine
dry mud glistening with minute particles of a silvery substance
which we know to be Mica. By the aid of the microscope we learn
that it chiefly consists of very fine mud, in which are scattered
small grains of Quartz, flakes of Mica, particles of Glauconite,
fragments of shell, and some perfect shells of the tiny creatures
known as Foraminifera.

The lowest beds are well exposed at Caen Hill and Dunkirk
brickyards, the middle beds at Lavington, and the upper beds were
formerly worked on the slope at Dunkirk, but are not now exposed '
at any place in the district. Here, again, we are indebted to Mr.
Cunnington for collecting from an exposure that proved to be
temporary ; for the fossils he obtained from this upper Dunkirk
brickyard are not the same as those which can be found in the lower
pit. At the latter the prevalent Ammonite is Am. interruptus, with
its variety Am. Benettie and occasionally Am. Budeantii, while at
the higher pit 4m. lautus, Am. tuberculatus, and Am. splendens were
found; species which also characterise the upper part of the Lower
Gault of Folkestone.

3. Malmstone. The upper part of the Gault becomes marly and
sandy, and passes up into a soft grey or buff sandy stone, which is
known as Malm or Malmstone. This is a peculiar rock, which has
not yet been found at any other geological horizon, but uniformly
occurs between the Gault and Greensand throughout the counties

By A. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., F.G.S8. 321

of Oxford, Berks, Wilts, Hants, and Surrey. When examined
under the microscope it is seen to consist of a variety of different
particles; small grains of Quartz sand, little flakes of Mica, and
grains of a green mineral] called Glauconite ; mingled with these, and
sometimes forming as much as 40 or 50 per cent. of the stone, are
particles of a clear glassy white substance, some of them being long
narrow rods with sharp points, and some being very small globular
or discoid bodies or lumps of such globules.

Now the needle-like rods are recognised as the spicules which
occur in the skeleton of a certain class of sponges—not the
sponges which are familiar to everyone, but like certain sponges
which now live in the deeper parts of the sea, and are common at
the bottom of the Atlantic. These sponges do not construct a soft
fibrous or horny skeleton like the sponges of commerce, but secrete
silica from the sea water and build up a siliceous framework or
network which is strengthened by rods and spicules of various
shapes. Many of these sponges shed their spicules, just as many
animals shed their hairs or as trees shed their leaves; the spicules
fall around them and are spread through the mud or ooze in which
the sponges grow, so that there is nothing surprising in the fact
that we sometimes find layers of stone that are almost entirely
composed of sponge spicules, lying as thick and close as‘the fir
needles that carpet the ground beneath a fir wood in winter time.

With regard to the globules, they also consist of a peculiar kind of
silica, similar to that of the spicules, not crystalline silica such as
sand grains are made of, but clear colloid silica which is nearly
structureless like solidified gum-arabic. We do not exactly know
how the globules were formed, but as they always occur with the
spicules we infer that they are derived either from the spicules or
more probably from the siliceous framework of the sponges, of which
few other traces are found. It is known that colloid silica is a very
soluble form of the substance, and it is probable that some chemical
change has taken place, which has reduced the beautiful lace-like
network of the sponge-skeleton to a shapeless mass of globules and
globular aggregations.

A pure Malmstone consists largely of colloid silica in the form of

322 The Geology of Devizes.

globules and spicules, but the amount varies greatly, and thin slices
of the Devizes Malm have rather a confused structure on account of
the large proportion of other mineral ingredients.

The Malmstone is, therefore, an interesting rock, for we learn
that at the time it was being formed this district was the bed of a
sea which was inhabited by a large colony of sponges. Other

creatures do not seem to have found the area a suitable abode, for _

larger fossils are scarce, except a small sea-worm, which built a
coiled calcareous shell (Vermicularia).

The Malmstone is well exposed by the entrance lodge to Broadleas
House, and along the scarped slope of Devizes Old Park. It passes
up into a soft Micaceous Sandstone, which also contains some siliceous
spicules and globules, but is mainly composed of the inorganic
ingredients, Quartz, Mica, and Glauconite. This Sandstone is ex-
posed in many road cuttings near Devizes, and has yielded a large
number of fossils. Of these at least three good collections exist, that
of Mr. W. Cunnington, now partly in the British Museum and partly
in the Jermyn Street Museum; that of the Messrs. Sloper, which I
arranged and named last summer in the Museum of this Society ;
and thirdly, that of the late Mr H. Cunnington, which has been
purchased for the Oxford Museum. These fossils are important,
because it is only near Devizes and Urchfont that this part of the
series contains so many organic remains. It would seem that the
conditions which were favourable to the growth of the Sponges did
not suit the Molluscs and Echinoderms, but that when the former
died out large numbers of bivalve Mollusca took possession of the
sea-floor, while Ammonites of several kinds swam through the water
above.

The Sandstone passes up into buff and grey sands, at the top of
which there is a course of hard dark grey Calcareous Sandstone.
This is the lowest rock bed seen in the road cutting south of Devizes,
and, as it was formerly quarried at Potterne for building-stone, it
may receive the name of “ Potterne Rock.” This rock has yielded
the same assemblage of fossils as the Sandstone below. The thickness
of beds from the base of the Malmstone to this rock is about 70ft.

4. Grey and Green Sands. Above the Potterne Rock are a set of

By 4. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., F.G.S. 323

grey and green sands, containing layers of hard greenish rock ;:
these are very conspicuous in the road cutting south of Devizes, but
we need only mention one peculiar fact about them, and that is that
though they are about 70ft. thick near Devizes, they thin out so
rapidly northwards that there are only 3ft. or 4ft. of such sand at
Heddington and Calstone. They form, in fact, a huge sand bank,
which seems to run nearly due east and west along the Vale of
Pewsey.

The silicified sponges which are found at several places in the Vale
come from these sands, and they are also the home of several species
of Pecten, especially P. asper, P. orbicularis, and P. interstriatus,
but other fossils are not abundant. In the Vales of Warminster
and Wardour these green sands contain layers of Chert and Sponge-
rock.

5. Lower Chalk. The passage from Greensand to Chalk is rather
rapid, the passage beds being only 6ft. or 7ft. thick, and consisting
of sand embedded in chalky matter, the proportion of the latter
gradually increasing till the grains of sand are few and far between.
In these beds are a number of greenish or brownish nodules, many
of which are casts of fossils, so that the rock looks very like a
greenish sandy mortar stuck full of pebbles. It is well exposed at
Calstone and at Urchfont, and is generally known as the Chloritic
Marl.

In the overlying Chalk the green grains gradually die out, and
we find a light grey kind of Chalk, some parts of which are soft and
some are hard. In other parts of the country this lower Chalk is
often burnt into lime, but in this part of Wiltsbire it is never burnt
because it does not make good lime; clearly, therefore, there is
something peculiar about it, and this peculiarity is soon found when
it. is examined under the microscope. When highly magnified
it is seen that the material is not all carbonate of lime, but that
part of it consists of minute discs and globules, exactly like those in
the Malmstone previously described, only they are smaller; and, as
before, whenever this globular silica occurs the siliceous spicules of
sponges are also abundant. This curious siliceous Chalk has been
found at Compton Bassett, Stockley near Calstone, Heddington,

324 The Geology of Devizes.

Roundway, Etchilhampton, and near Eastcott. At the last place it
contains further evidence of its siliceous character in yielding hard
cherty nodules which may be regarded as imperfectly formed flints.
These, too, correspond closely with nodules that are found in the
Malmstone of Surrey, but no such objects have ever before been
found in Chalk, so that Wiltshire can claim them as a unique
phenomenon.

The structure of this siliceous Chalk is illustrated in Fig. 3 ;
which is made up of two parts of a slide of such Chalk, and shows
the various states of mineralization exhibited by the sponge spicules.

Fig. 3. Structure of Siliceous Chalk (magnified about one hundred times).

The general ground mass is seen to consist partly of globular silica,
partly of shell fragments (/) with still finer calcareous dust between
them; a is a sponge spicule the central part of which is filled with
globular silica; 4 4 are spicules of unaltered silica cut through
obliquely and showing the axial canal filled with Glauconite; ¢ is
a partly dissolved spicule—its outline only shown by the globular
silica into which it seems to have passed ; and d is another partly
destroyed spicule; ¢ is a grain of Glauconite, of which this slide

By A. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., P.G.S8. 325

only shows a few svattered particles. For this drawing I am in-
debted to Mr. W. Hill, F.G.S., and the wood engraving is a
testimony of Mr. J. D. Cooper’s skill in that art.

The higher part of the Lower Chalk consists of alternating soft
and hard beds, some of the latter being very hard and weathering
out as steps in the old cart tracks which lead up to the downs above
Heddington, Roundway, Allington, Eastcott, and other places.
Under the microscope these hard beds are seen to consist largely of
fragments of Jnoceramus shell, a few foraminifera, and a few spicules.
There is no globular silica, but a large proportion of the shell
fragments have been silicified, that is to say, the fibrous arragonite
of the original shell has been replaced by minutely crystalline silica
(or chalcedony).

6. Middle Chalk. On the top of Roundway Hill, near the
plantation, there are some old pits in a very hard white rubbly Chalk.
This is the bed which is now called the Melbourn Rock, and forms
the base of the Middle Chalk. It occurs at the same horizon and
is of the same hard rough nodular character all over England, from
Yorkshire to Dorset and from Dorset to Dover, and it has also been
found in the deep wells under London. I have not the slightest
doubt that it runs all round the Vale of Pewsey, and underlies the
whole of Salisbury Plain, and one of my colleagues is now engaged
in tracing it over the country between Marlborough and Calne.
The Melbourn Rock is not a compact homogeneous Chalk, but
consists of layers of small nodules of a hard compact chalk em-
bedded in a chalk of coarser texture and largely composed of frag-
ments of Inoceramus shell. This structure is shown very clearly in
the slide from which Fig. 4 is taken, and is fairly well shown in
the engraving, which has been made from a photograph taken by
Mr. W. Freshwater. The dark portions are the nodules of compact
Chalk, and the other part is the shelly Chalk, one large fragment
of shell extending right across the lower part of the figure.

The higher part of the Middle Chalk is a typical white Chalk, so
pure, and containing so few flints or fragments of shell that it is
often used to make whitening. The material of which it consists is so
fine that even under the microscope it looks like fine white powder,

326 The Geology of Devizes.

Figs, 4and 5.—Structure of Melbourn Rock and of Chalk Rock
(magnified fifty times).

but in it are scattered immense quantities of small round bodies
which are either the cells of Foraminifera or of some allied organisms,
Foraminifera are minute creatures which abound in all the seas and
oceans of the present day, some living in shallow water, and some
only in the open ocean. They extract carbonate of lime from the
water, and construct tiny shells perforated by small holes, and these
shells, either perfect or in fragments, have contributed largely to all
parts of the Middle and Upper Chalk. A common form (Globi-
gerina) is seen in the lower part of Fig. 6, and the small round
bodies occurring in the surrounding material are nowhere so
numerous and so robust as in this part of the Middle Chalk. The
quarry below the butts on Roundway Hill is opened in this Chalk,
and it forms the steepest part of the slopes round Oldbury Hill,
Morgan’s Hill, and of the Downs that border the Vale of Pewsey.

Chalk Rock. We now come to another well-marked horizon on
the Chalk,and one that was first described from a section in Wiltshire,
This is the Chalk Rock which has been worked for road metal in so
many places on the Chalk hills, both to the north and south of
Devizes. This rock is a hard white Limestone, lying in courses

By A. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., F.G.S. 237

separated by layers of hard green-coated nodules, and no one who
has once seen it would mistake it for any other bed in the Chalk.
So also, when a thin slice is viewed under the microscope, it is seen
to have a structure which is different from any other bed, and Mr.
W. Hill, F.G.8., writes that ‘“ no one who has seen a slide prepared
from this rock will mistake it for Chalk from any other horizon.”
It is simply crowded with Foraminifera and with broken fragments
of shell and other organic remains; sponge spicules are common,
and there are large grains of Glauconite like those which occur in
the Greensand far below.

Figs. 5 and 7 illustrate this structure: Fig. 5 is the reproduction

Fig. 6.—Structure of Middle Chalk, engraved from a drawing by
F. Rutley, Esq., F.G.S.

of a beautiful photograph by Mr. Freshwater, and shows very well
the number and variety of Foraminifera which sometimes appear in
a single slice. Fig. 7 is a woodcut by Mr. Cooper, from a drawing
made by Mr. F. Rutley, F.G.S., and exhibits still better the different
kinds of organisms which are often crowded into a small area of
Chalk rock. A sponge spicule cut transversely is seen at 3, a
grain of glauconite at j, and a fragment of Echinoderm shell at g,
while the large object above this is a Foraminifer (Vernewillina).

328 The Geology of Devizes.

Fig. 7.—Structure of Chalk Rock (magnified sixty times).

The Chalk Rock is found near the top of Morgan’s Hill and
Oldbury Hill, and has been dug from shallow pits in many places
all round the borders of Salisbury Plain.

7. Upper Chalk. Above the Chalk Rock comes the Upper Chalk,
a pure soft white Chalk with numerous layers of flint nodules. This
Upper Chalk is not well exposed anywhere near Devizes, so I do not
propose to describe it in detail, though near Salisbury it is some
600ft. thick, and in the Isle of Wight more than 1000ft. There is
no doubt that it originally spread across the whole Vale of Pewsey,
and, together with the underlying Chalks and Greensands, spread.
westward across Somerset and Gloucester to the mountains of Wales.

The whole of England was submerged beneath the ocean in which
the Upper Chalk was deposited, and it is not even certain whether
the summits of the highest mountains in Wales remained above the
surface of the water. Some of my readers may ask, ‘“ Where has
all the great tract of chalk gone to?” The answer is that it has
been washed off all those parts where it is not now found; but
certain stones remain to testify to its former existence, for there are
few parts of England where chalk-flints may not be found in greater
or less abundance, and all these flints have been derived from the

By A. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., F.G.8. 329

great plains of chalk which once covered the surface of England,
and united England to France across the shallow trough which we
eall the English Channel.

Part II.—C.assiFicaTION AND NOMENCLATURE OF THE STRATA
DEscRIBED.

If we had merely to consider the neighbourhood of Devizes, or
even the County of Wiltshire alone, the simplest arrangement of
the Cretaceous Rocks would be to group all the Sands and the Gault
Clay together as a lower division, and to regard the several members
of the Chalk as an upper division. This was, indeed, the early
classification adopted by Conybeare and Phillips in 1822, and by
Fitton in 1827, but subsequent researches showed that it was not
really a natural one. The earliest names used for the beds below
the Chalk were Greensand, Gault, and Ironsands, the term Green-
sand being invariably applied by Dr. W. Smith to the sands above
the Gault, and including the Malmstone.

The person chiefly responsible for the present nomenclature was
Thomas Webster, who proposed the terms Lower and Upper Green-
sand in 1824. They were suggested as a compromise, and only
because certain persons had mistaken the green sandstone which
occurs below the Gault at Folkestone for the true Greensand of
Wiltshire. Fitton strongly protested against them, but they were
retained by Murchison and others, who thought they were con-
venient names and never realised the force of the objections which
were brought against them. These objections were urged at various
times by Dr. Fitton, Mr. Godwin-Austen, and Professor Judd.

The term Lower Greensand as a name for the Ironsands is bad,
because the general colour of these sands is not green, and because
it unites under a common designation two groups which are widely
separated in reality, one of them belonginy to the upper series and
the other to the lower series of the Cretaceous System. The terms
upper and lower can only be logically applied to parts of the same
whole, thus we can speak of the Upper and Lower Chalk, or of

330 The Geology of Devizes.

the Upper and Lower Gault; but as it is now universally admitted
that there is no such comprehensive group as a Middle Cretaceous
or “ Greensand” formation, it is illogical and inconsistent to speak
of an “ Upper ” and “ Lower Greensand.”

The suggestion made by Godwin-Austen in 1850, and more
recently (1870) urged by Professor Judd, that the French name of
Neocomian should be adopted for the Lower Greensand is equally
unfortunate, because the true Neocomian is the equivalent of the
Wealden, which underlies the Lower Greensand, and the name used
by the French for the beds which represent our Lower Greensand is

Aptien. Moreover a good name had been proposed for the British |

groups before Godwin-Austen wrote, for Fitton in 1847 had proposed
to call the Lower Greensand Vectine, from Vectis, the Roman name
of the Isle of Wight; and nowhere is the group better developed
or more conveniently exposed for study than in that island.

This is the name I have adopted, only altering it to the other
adjectival form of Vectian; in it we have a short well-sounding
name which does not convey any erroneous ideas and is derived from
a well-known locality.

But, when we have abolished the term Lower Greensand, we
cannot continue to speak and write of an Upper Greensand; we
must either revert to the original names of Gault and Greensand,
or we must find a new name, and first of all we must enquire
whether the Gault and Greensand are separate members of the
Cretaceous series, or whether they are only different parts or litho~
logical facies of one formation—the “ Gault ” of one locality passing
into the “‘ Greensand ” of another.

In this enquiry the fossils of the Devizes Sandstone afford valuable
assistance. If the Greensand always contained a similar set of fossils
and the Gault always held a different set, and if the characteristic
fossils of the one were never found in the other, then there would
be good reason for regarding them as distinct subdivisions of the
Cretaceous series. This, however, is not the case: at Folkestone,
where the Gault is so well exposed and so rich in fossils, there is
nothing which can be compared lithologically with the Sandstone
of Devizes, but most of the Devizes fossils are found in the upper

i

——— ll

By A. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., F.G.S. 331

marly portion of the Gault. Everyone who has described the

Folkestone Gault has divided it into two portions, characterised by

different species of Ammonites; now of the five Ammonites which

occur in the Devizes Sandstone two (dm. rostratus and Am.»
varicosus) are specially characteristic of the Upper Gault, two range

throughout the Gault, and one occurs only in the Lower Gault at

Folkestone, though elsewhere it is also found in the Upper.

Again, if the Malmstone and Sandstone of Devizes formed a
separate zone later than the Upper Gault, this Upper Gault should
occur beneath the Malmstone; but we have seen that the fossils
found in the old brickyard at Dunkirk were Lower Gault species.

It is clear, therefore, that the sandstones which contain the Devizes
fauna are merely a sandy facies of the upper portion of the Gault,
or conversely that the Upper Gault of Folkestone is the argillaceous
representative of what is elsewhere called Upper Greensand.

It follows from this that the Gault and Greensand are uot distinct
subdivisions, as generally supposed, but that the mass of the Green-
sand was formed contemporaneously with the upper part of the
Gault, and is sandy because it was formed nearer the shore of the
western Cretaceous land. It is, indeed, very probable that at Black-
down, in Devonshire, the whole of the Gault is represented in what
is there called Upper Greensand; for the Blackdown fossils are
almost identical with those of Devizes, and at the base there is
some dark argillaceous sand.

So long ago as 1850 Mr. Godwin-Austen was fully aware not
only of the distinctness of the Lower Greensand for which he
endeavoured to introduce the name Neocomian, but also of the fact
that the Gault and Upper Greensand are merely different facies of
one formation. Thus he writes (Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. 6,
p- 461) :—“ In applying the names of Gault and Upper Greensand
to the beds which underlie the Chalk along the line here described
it is not intended to convey the notion that any separation can be
traced between two well-defined groups, or that even any true sandy
beds occur. Indeed there is no name in the whole series of geological
formations so purely conventional as that of Upper Greensand.”
Again, on p. 472:—“ The Gault, moreover, is not an independent
VOL. XXV.—NO. LXXV. 2A

$B2; The Geology of Devizes.

formation, but merely the accumulation of a given condition of deep
sea, synchronous as a whole with that portion of the Cretaceous
deposits which we call “ Upper Greensand.”

. The case, therefore, is reduced to this, that Gault and Greensand
may be excellent names for certain kinds of rock-material, which is
in fact their primary and original signification, but they cannot be
appropriately used in a chronological classification. I do not hesitate
to say that the ordinary use of them in text books has conveyed a
totally wrong conception of the facts of Nature. Nine students
out of ten, and a great many teachers of geology, if asked to describe
the Gault and Upper Greensand, would place the former below the
latter, in the belief that it was entirely an older formation, This
is an error, for though there are localities (Devizes, for instance,)
where there is a Gaulé surmounted by a Greensand, neither of them
represents the whole of the Gault or the whole of the Greensand as
separately developed elsewhere.

Again, the compilers of text books and of stratigraphical tables
have always found a difficulty in giving a list of the characteristic
fossils of the Upper Greensand ; and this is not surprising, because
most of the fossils which occur in these sands are also characteristic
of the Gault. Hence many have been driven to regard the fossils of
the Warminster Greensand as specially characteristic. This selection
of the Warminster fossils obliges me to say a few words on that
deposit. Dr. Barrois long ago demonstrated that in the compound
formation which comprises the Gault and Upper Greensand of
English geologists there were three well-marked zones of life ;
these he termed respectively the zones of Ammonites interruptus,
Amm. inflatus, and of Pecten asper ; and he showed that the equiva-
lence of these zones was as follows :—

Zone of Pecten asper— Warminster Beds.
a Amm. inflatus=Upper Gault and Blackdown Beds.
if Amm. interruptus=Lower Gault.

Now the zone of P. asper is very variable in thickness; we have
seen that north of Devizes it is very thin, at Urchfont it is thick,
while at Warminster and in the Vale of Wardour it is a prominent

a

By A. J. Juhkes-Browne, B.A., F.G.S8. 333

part of the series. It also occurs in parts of Hampshire and Surrey,
but it appears to be entirely absent in the East of Kent. Notwith-
standing this variability of development it is certainly a distinct
portion of the series, and its fossils differ as much from those of the
Devizes Sandstone as these do from the fauna of the Lower Gault.
So far as I know it is never replaced by clay, and consequently this
zone of Pecten asper merits a distinct designation much more than
the rest of what is called Upper Greensand, because it is chrono-
logically newer than the sands and clays of the other two zones.
But if we retained the name Greensand for this zone it could not
rank as a subdivision of the first class, and if we called the other two
zones Gault we should have to include under that name the greater
part of what has hitherto been called Greensand.

I think I have now demonstrated that we cannot continue to use’
the terms Greensand or Upper Greensand in any definite chrono-
logical sense. They must be relegated to the limbo of general
lithological names, and share the fate of Greenstone, Trap, and other
terms that have done good service in their day, but are not adapted
to the present requirements of the science.

The next proceeding is, of course, to find a new name which shall
be free from the defects of the old one. Here I am at once met by
the strong objection entertained by some geologists to the intro-
duction of any new name into the generally-accepted scheme of
classification. There are, however, many geological workers in
England and America who do not share this feeling, who cannot
regard the growth of some seventy-five years as too sacred and
antique to be interfered with, and do not believe that the classification
now in vogue is destined to last for ever as a perfect expression of
natural facts. It is strange that any votaries of geology should
need to be reminded that all science is progressive, and that progress
means change. I cheerfully admit that no change should be made
unless a very good case can be made out for the desirability of such
change; but my feeling is that if any part of our nomenclature
conveys a wrong impression of Nature’s facts the sooner it is altered
the better.

There are two methods of effecting the desired amendment in our

2a2

334 The Geology of Devizes.

Cretaceous nomenclature: one is to find a new name for the group
of beds now ealled Gault and Upper Greensand; tke other is to
adopt the name which is used for some of the equivalent beds in
France. The first plan is, I think, the better one, but, unfortunately,
it is very difficult to find a name that is both appropriate and eu-
phonious. Fitton, when opposing the introduction of the names
Upper and Lower Greensand in 1824, suggested “ Merstham Beds”
for the former; but a compound name is inconvenient, and an
adjectival form analogous to Vectian would be much better.

Now there is no place more fitted to serve as a type locality than
Devizes, for—as we have seen in the first part of this paper—both
the Gault and the Greensand facies are well developed, the fossils
they contain afford a basis for establishing a complete succession of
‘zones, and there are many good exposures of the strata in the
immediate neighbourhood of the town.

The town of Devizes does not appear to have had a very ancient
origin ; there is no evidence of its having been a Roman settlement,
and it is not mentioned in Domesday Book. From papers written
by Canon Jackson and Canon Jones, and published in this Magazine
(vol. ix., p. 31, and vol. xvi., p. 255) it would seem that the town
sprang up round the castle built by Bishop Roger circa 1130. In
order to obtain a site for this he took a slice out of each of the two
manors that belonged to him (Bishops Cannings and Potterne) at
the point where they met and where the King’s manor of Rowde
also met them; the castle built at this point was called “ Castrum
ad divisas,” z.e., at the branching of the boundary lines, The place
was long called “ Zhe Devizes,” and as the name was not a Roman
one we need not recur to the strict Latin spelling in forming an
adjective, but may use a Latinised form of the modern name,
namely, Devisian.

The other alternative, of adopting one of the French names, would
have the advantage of avoiding the introduction of a new name, but
it so happens that, though the French Cretaceous series is similar
to ours, the French geologists have divided it in a different manner.
They place the beds which answer to our Gault and Greensand
partly in the Addien and partly in the Cenomanien étage, and they

By A. J. Jukes-Browne, B.A., F.G.S8. 335

are not agreed as to the line of demarcation between the two.

Even if we follow Professor de Lapparent, who makes the Albien
include the zone of Ammonites inflatus, we could not adopt that
name for an English group which also includes the zone of Pecten
asper, because all the French geologists agree in regarding this zone
as an essential part of the Cenomanien. On the other hand, we
eould not exclude the zone of P. asper because it is an essential part
of our Upper Greensand, and it would be impossible to draw a
continuous line of division in the midst of a mass of soft sands.

Hence we are driven to conclude that the only satisfactory solution
of the difficulty is the introduction of a new name fur the group of
beds which lie between the Vectian and the horizon known as the
Chloritic Marl. I have considered all the places situate on the
Gault and Greensand in the south of England, but have not suc-
ceeded in finding any town, river, or district, which affords so
appropriate a name as Devisian. The fact is that the tracts occupied
by the outcrop of these strata were in British and Roman times
covered with such thick woods and were so full of springs and
quagmires that they were unsuited for the establishment of towns or
military stations and were for the most part wild and uninhabited
districts like Selwood Forest. From this fact Sylvanian has been
suggested as a name, but as most other argillaceous outcrops were
equally sylvanian it is not sufficiently distinctive, and it lacks the
definite association with a typical district which is embodied in
Devisian.

My object in discussing this question has been to make it plain
that the use of the old names Gault and Upper Greensand only
serves to perpetuate error; it is not merely a fancy on my part that
such a name as Devisian or Sylvanian will look prettier and be more
convenient, but it is absolutely necessary if our names are to signify
definite portions of geological time that a new name should be found
for that portion of time during which the Gault and Upper Green-.
sand were formed. I wish it to be understood that I am not now
proposing any special name; I have simply discussed the names
that seem to me to be available, and if any of my readers can suggest
a better name I shall be very willing to consider its merits,

336

Alotes on the Church Dlate of Alorth CHilts.

By the Rev. E. H. Gopparp.

*,* For Notes on Church Plate in South Wilts see vol. xxi., p. 355.

( Tae study of Church plate as one of the minor branches of
be)

ecclesiastical art is attracting a good deal of attention at
the present time, though until the last few years it has been
singularly neglected. Whilst ecclesiastical architecture and ecclesi-
astical antiquities of all kinds have been long the object of diligent
and enthusiastic enquiry, few have cared to enquire what is the date
or fashion or history of the plate belonging to the Churches whose

other points of interest have been so generally investigated.

If the result of this want of interest in and knowledge of the
ancient plate of our Churches had been that it was allowed to
remain in safe obscurity there would, perhaps, have been little
cause to regret it—but unhappily the obscurity which has sur-
rounded it has by no means conduced to its safety. It is probably
not too much to say that more interesting Church plate has been
got rid of by its natural guardians, the clergy and churchwardens,
during the last fifty or sixty years, simply from want of knowledge
of its value and interest, than the accidents of time have destroyed
or the ingenuity of the dishonest has appropriated during the last
two centuries.

A Church is being “restored.” The Church plate is old—it has
worn thin and is a good deal dented and battered. It really does
not agree at all with the delightful freshness of the newly-scraped
stonework, or the spick and span pitch pine seats. Besides, its
shape—Elizabethan, perhaps, or that of the seventeenth century —
is by no means fashionable—it may even be considered “ objection-
able.” A new set on the approved model would be far more suitable.
So the silversmith is asked whether he will take the old plate in
part. exchange for a new set, and he kindly consents to do so; but

Notes on the Church Plate of North Wiits. 337

silver is very low in price, and he can only give the value of the
metal for it. That, however, is better than nothing, and the chalice
and its paten cover, which were provided in the days of Elizabeth
and have been bound up with the most sacred recollections of the -
parish ever since—or the seventeenth century cup and flagon, which,
although they bear the name and arms of the donor somewhat more
conspicuously engraved than it is the fashion to blazon them now—
were doubtless as honest gifts as our own—are got rid of, nominally
perhaps, “melted down,’ in most cases without a faculty, and
therefore quite illegally ; and the interest of the plate of that parish
is lost for another two hundred years. For the sake of a few
shillings a page in the history of the parish is torn out for ever,
whilst very possibly the very plate which was despised by its
original owners becomes the property of a collector who values it
in proportion to the large sum he has paid to obtain it. That this
is what actually happens is proved by the curious adventures which
have within the last few years befallen an interesting chalice and
cover at Cricklade (see Plate I., No. 4). It was kept at the clerk’s
house, and, as there was a second set of vessels, was never used,
and so was never seen or even heard of by anyone in the place. In
the natural course of things the old clerk died, and his relatives
removed to Manchester carrying with them amongst his effects the
chalice, which, although it bore an inscription stating that it belonged
to S. Sampson’s, Cricklade, they curiously supposed to pertain to
themselves. They sold it accordingly to a jeweller in Manchester
for 50s., who sold it in turn to a traveller fora London firm. After
passing through two other hands it became the property of a gentle-
man at the price of £45. At this point it was put up for sale at
Christie’s, and the attention of the Vicar and churchwardens of
Cricklade having been called to the matter they instructed their
solicitor to impound the articles. The gentleman into whose pos-
session they had passed, finding that they had been wrongfully
alienated expressed his willingness to give them up on receiving the
sum he himself had paid for them,—and the clerk’s family proving
amenable to the arguments pressed upon them, the £45 was pro-
duced and the plate restored to S. Sampson’s again. In this case,

3838 Notes on the Church Plate of North Wilts.

as in most others, the original sellers of the plate got very little for
their bargain. It is worth noting, too, that the happy ending to
these adventures of a chalice was entirely due to the fact that it had
been seen and a rubbing of the inscription upon it taken by Mr.
Cripps, the author of “ Old English Plate,” in 1876. Without this
its existence and identity could not have been established :—a singular
piece of evidence of the practical value of enquiries such as are being
carried on at present in Wilts.

A certain amount of plate, of course, has been stolen—as I believe
was that of Melksham ; and in such a case it is seldom indeed that
it returns so happily to its rightful owners as did the plate of Broad
Hinton in the middle of the eighteenth century. This plate consists
of a chalice, a paten, an almsdish, and two very large flagons, given
by the “worshipful and religious William Glanville Esq.,” son of
Sir John Glanville, the Speaker of the Short Parliament, in the
year 1677, of the perfectly plait and massive character usual at
that date. These vessels were kept in the parish chest in the
Church until one Tuesday morning they were found to have dis-
appeared. Accordingly the Salisbury Journal of February 9th, 1766,
contains the following notice :—

“Whereas the Chancel of the Parish Church of Broad Hinton in the County
of Wilts was on Monday night or early on Tuesday morning last broke open,
and two large Flagons. a Patten, and a Bason with the following inscription on
each of them: ‘Given by the worshipful and religious William Glanville Esq. in
the year 1677,’ a Challice with a cover with the following inscription: ‘ Be-
longing to the Parish Church of Broad Hinton,’ were feloniously taken and
carried away from and out of the Parish Chest there ; therefore if any person
will discover the person or persons who committed the said Felony, or Sacrilege,
so as he or thev shall be convicted thereof, shall receive of the Churchwardens of
the said Parish of Broad Hinton a reward of 10 guineas to be paid on the con-
viction of such offender or offenders ; and if the said Plate or goods or any part
thereof shall be offer’d to sale or to be pawned, the person or persons to whvia

the same may be so offer’d are desired to stop the same and give notice thereof
to the said Churchwardens and they shall be entitled to the same reward.

Epwakp HopEins, | Chuo aunts
JOHN DRAPER

Tradition asserts that, this advertisement proving of no avail, the
churchwardens determined to go down to Corsham and consult a
“cunning man” of much renown and known to be skilled in all

—————e ee

By the Rev. EB. H. Goddard. 339

such matters. This they accordingly did, and the story proceeds
that, the cunning man being quite equal to the occasion, gave
them the following excellent advice,—that they should return
home and let it be published throughout the parish and neighbour-
hood, (it was apparently suspected that the thieves were not
strangers,) that the chancel door would be left open for a week, and
if during that time the plate had not found its way back into the
chest from which it was taken, the cunning man would forthwith
come up from Corsham with his divining rods and all other things
needful and would most infallibly discover the thief. There is no
record as to what happened next, nor is there much need of any, for
the plate is safely at Broad Hinton still.

But the dangers which threaten the ancient plate of our Churches
at the present day arise less from burglars than—as I have already
said—from the small value too often placed upon it by its natural
guardians, and it was in the hope of at least mitigating this danger

‘by calling attention to the matter and putting on record the pos-

sessions of each parish Church that the Bishop of Salisbury some
five years ago first set on foot investigations into the Church
plate of this county by sending round to every parish in his diocese
a form of return to be filled up with the number, size, inscriptions,
and hall marks of all the sacred vessels belonging to the Church.
It was found, however, that in a very large number of cases the
information given by these returns needed to be supplemented or
corrected by a personal visit from someone with some previous
knowledge of the subject. Accordingly throughout the northern
half of the County of Wilts,—including that large part of it which
belongs to the diocese of Gloucester and Bristol,—the Churches have
been systematically visited by one or other of the gentlemen in-
terested in the work (Mr. Bell, Mr. Plenderleath, Mr. Ponting, and
myself), and careful drawings have been made of almost every
piece, over nine hundred in number, whether of ancient or modern
date, in the hope that tke information thus gained may, under the
able hands of Mr. Nightingale, be built up into a history and
inventory of the Church plate of Wilts, and published very shortly
as a companion volume to his “ Church Plate of Dorset.”

340 Notes on the Church Plate of North Wilts.

The drawings themselves, when complete, it is proposed to deposit
in the Devizes Museum.

In this paper, then, I propose to speak only of the northern half
of the county, to which my own knowledge of the plate is confined.
But although the area is comparatively small the variety and in-
terest of the plate is very considerable.

To begin with, Wiltshire possesses, both in the north and south,
more than its share of pre-Reformation plate. So clean was the
sweep made of the accumulated treasures of Churches under Henry
VIII. and Edward VI. and the subsequent injunctions of Elizabeth,
under which even the poor remnant of chalices which had not been
converted “ to the King’s use” were ordered to be melted down and
re-fashioned into “ decent communion cups,”’— that only about forty
chalices and double that number of patens of pre-Reformation date
are known to exist in the whole of England.

Of these we have in the north of the county the pretty little
chalice still in use at Manningford Abbots—probably of fifteenth
century date. This is of silver parcel gilt. The sides of the bowl
are somewhat straight. The knot has open work and lions’ heads,
whilst the foot, which is now round, has evidently, Mr. Nightingale
says, been hammered out of the original mullet or star-shaped base,
the engraving of the crucifix being still just visible if the chalice is
held at a certain angle. Possibly this alteration of the base to the
regulation circular shape of the Elizabethan cup and the effacement
of the crucifix on the foot was considered to have brought this piece
into sufficient conformity with the “ decent ” pattern, and so saved
it from entire destruction. The cover now belonging to it is of
later, probably Elizabethan, date. The second chalice is the ex-
tremely fine silver-gilt one at Highworth (No. 1 in the accom-
panying plate of chalices), bearing the date letter, apparently, of
1534. This belongs to a type of which the Wylye chalice (vol. xxi.,
p- 888) and that of Trinity College, Oxford, have been hitherto,
with one other, supposed to be the only remaining examples. So
that Wiltshire—in addition to the earliest known “ massing”
chalice, that of Berwick St. James, of the thirteenth century, now
in the British Museum (see vol. xxi., p. 368)—can claim two of the

By the Rev. HE. H. Goddard. 341

finest examples of the latest type in vogue just before the Reformation.
This Highworth chalice is of solid massive make and in excellent
preservation. The bowl is broad and shallow, with sides nearly
straight, having engraved round it the text “Beate qut audiunt
berbum Det ut custodint ilud,”The base is six foil in shape, and
round the inner circular part is engraved “ Shu rpe filt Det bt be
miserere nobis.”’ The junction of the foot and stem is sur-
rounded by a parapet of architectural open work. The stem itself
is hexagonal, with cable moulding at the edges, and the knot is
large, of six lobes projecting widely. A curious feature is the figure
engraved in the place usually occupied by the crucifix on the foot.
This is somewhat rubbed and indistinct and it is difficult to say what
it is, and I cannot find that a similar figure is known on any other
chalice. It is a seated figure, almost nude, with crossed legs holding
a palm branch (?), a lily at its foot,—possibly the Man of Sorrows.
Is it fanciful to suggest that both the figure and the texts have a
taste as of the approaching Reformation about them ?

The paten, which, though not hall marked or dated, seems to
belong to the chalice, has a shallow circular depression in the centre,
but is without the engraved vernicle or Head of Our Saviour, the
Hand of God, or the sacred monogram, which almost invariably
occupy the centre of pre-Reformation patens. Indeed it is
perfectly plain except for a few slight touches of engraving on the
rim. .

Though there are several patens in the south of the county there
is only one other in the north—that purchased some years ago
from Messrs. Singer and given to Melksham Church by Canon
Warre. It is probably of English make, and of late fifteenth or
early sixteenth century date, but is not marked. It has the vernicle
with wounds on the cheeks very rudely engraved in the centre.

Besides these pieces there is at Lacock a remarkable parcel gilt
covered cup—by some called a ciborium—probably of the latter half
of the fifteenth century. A broad rounded bowl, on a circular stem
widening to a base of the same shape, with a high conical cover
surmeunted by a ball. The edge of the cover and the base are
surrounded by the characteristic Gothic cresting of the time. This

$42 Notes on the Church Plate of North Wilts.

very handsome and remarkable piece was doubtless a domestic cup
given afterwards for Church use.

Of the small chalices and patens which were commonly placed in
the graves of priests in the middle ages—and which are génerally
of pewter or tin, except in the case of Bishops, when they seem to
have been of silver—we have an example preserved in the vestry of
North Bradley Church, which may be of the fourteenth century.
This little pewter vessel had a broad shallow bowl and spreading
circular foot, and like the paten accompanying it, is quite plain. It
was found some years ago in a rude coffin of oak under the arch on
the south side of the chancel. There are several such vessels at
Salisbury Cathedral (see vol. xxi., p. 360), but I do not know of any
others in the north of the county.

Coming now to the “ decent communion cups” which everywhere
supplanted the “ superstitious massing chalices” in the reign of
Elizabeth, we find a fine series in North Wilts, giving examples of
many of the types of ornamentation then in vogue—though the
actual number of chalices remaining is not so large as Mr. Nightin-
gale tells us still exist in the Dorset parishes. The general
character of these cups may be seen from the examples Nos. 2 and 3
given in the plate. They were small sized vessels, as a rule, com-
pared with the large cups which came into fashion at the end of the
seventeenth and throughout the eighteenth century, with deep more
or less bell-shaped bowls, bearing almost invariably either one or
two bands of the strap-work engraving, filled with conventional
foliage characteristic of .the period ; a similar band sometimes en-
circling the base also. They were always accompanied by a cover
fitting the cup, which was also used as the paten,—the handle serving
as a foot when so used. Sometimes there is a belt of foliage on the
cover, as in Fig. 2, whilst on the handle or foot is commonly inscribed
the date when the vessel was acquired for the Church. This date
in the north of the county is commonly either 1576 or 1577. The
earliest is that at Bradford, marked 1564, and the latest of the
type that of Burbage, marked 1624, when, as a rule, the cup had
assumed a slightly different shape. The Crudwell cup of 1628 is
of Elizabethan shape, but has inscribed within the belt “ The Parish

~N

BOP URT OLY Fema # MEANT,

‘eGs 7m GY, evog:

‘Leg Lespmayoytg Gig Suosdure gg apeppouy ZLG[ eaeurye(y ys] ‘QLST wouIypoN'] Pest TRAIOMYS TY
——— ~

a RT, Ys

oh a
me (2

(S) (1)
(€)
‘6RLI TOMY STL QOLT UOseyy LOLT ‘suosdure gc opeppoty V9O91 [[lyueag 1G OT ‘ysnor0 quay oug

aaa (Z)

By the Rev. BE. H. Goddard. 343

Cup of Crudwell Anno 1628 ” in the place of foliage. The edge
of the base is very often enriched with the egg-and-dart ornament,
and a belt of dotted lines sometimes takes the place of the foliage
on the bowl, the cover, and the base. A considerable number of
these cups bear only a maker’s mark, or no marks at all, and seem
to have been of local manufacture. There is a series of cups without
hall marks in the Pewsey Vale at Wootton Rivers, Manningford
Bruce, Stanton St. Bernard, and Etchilhampton, all of the same
character and unlike any others in the north of the county except
one at Little Hinton. They have a broad belt of interlacing
strap-work, without any foliage, of the same character as the orna-
mentation of so many cups in Dorset which Mr. Nightingale
supposes to have been of local make, but their stems and knots are
of the usual Elizabethan type. There are, however, two others—
those of Enford and Great Cheverell—also in the same neighbour-
hood, which have the curious cable moulding, and the stem with
the knot close up under the bowl, which is characteristic of the
Dorset specimens. These also bear no hall marks.

Two specimens, at Limpley Stoke and Littleton Drew, of 1577
and 1578, instead of the usual rounded knot in the centre of the
stem, have a rather narrow projecting horizontal moulding bearing
the ornament composed of short upright parallel lines which so
commonly marks the junction of the stem with the bowl and base,
while the Rowde (1576) and Winterbourne Monkton cups, (the
latter given in the present century and unmarked) have, on the
other hand, no knots at all, the stem being somewhat broad, and
plain.

Those of St. Mary’s Cricklade, and Somerford Keynes—both
bearing only the maker’s mark of a Lombardic T eclipsed by a
heart, are beautiful cups, the former, inscribed 1577, having two
belts, the lower one of dotted lines the upper one of unusually rich
and elaborate foliage ;. the latter, which is inscribed 1576, has only
one belt of foliage of the same character. In both cases the covers
are richly engraved in the same way. Wroughton has an unusually
large and handsome silver-gilt chalice and cover. In the Biddestone
specimen there is a projecting bead encircling the bowl above the

344 Notes on the Church Plate of North Wiits.

belt, while the Kington St. Michael cup has foliated engraving close
under the rim, in addition to the ordinary belt.

Two other cups of abnormal fashion must be mentioned; first that
belonging to Foxley, marked 1577, but not given to the Church till
a century later. This is a goblet-shaped vessel 5in. high, richly
ornamented, and quite unlike the chalice of the period—probably a
secular cup devoted afterwards to Church use. Secondly, a little
cup belonging to Leigh—a chapelry of Ashton Keynes—of the same
height as the last, with tapering bowl and baluster stem, entirely
plain except for three bands of gilding, one on the edge of the bowl
and two on the stem. It bears the date letter of 1596, and is
somewhat of the Tazza type, though its bowl is deep instead of
shallow—indeed it is much the shape of a modern wine glass.

There are three curious little vessels at Lacock, Biddestone, and
Alderton, the use of which seems doubtful. The Lacock specimen isa
little bowl about 6in. in diameter, embossed in its interior with cockle
shells and a bunch of grapes in the centre. It is marked 1583.
That at Biddestone also has a bunch of grapes embossed on it and
has two plain wire handles. It is marked 1672. The Alderton
piece is larger and shallower, covered with an ornamentation of rows
and circles of embossed dots. It has two flat ears or handles and is
marked 1639. These little vessels have been called wine-tasters—
probably they have been given to serve as patens.

During the first quarter of the seventeenth century the Elizabethan
type was slightly modified. The bowl grew deeper in proportion
to the stem and base, and the whole piece less broad in proportion
to its height. The mouldings of the base, too, were multiplied and
made more prominent. The engraved strap-work band disappears,
the bowl generally being plain, as in the Ditcheridge example (1627)
(No. 5 in the accompanying plate), though occasionally there are
belts of olive leaf engraving, as in the parcel-gilt Cricklade St.
Sampson’s cup of 1615 (No. 4).

An exceptionally beautiful cup of this potted is the silver-gilt one
of Fittleton (1610), which has an inscription in place of the belts
on the bowl, and olive leaf ornament round the knot.

Of this period, too, (1619) is a very beautiful cup at Froxfield,

By the Rev. E. H. Goddard. 345

pronounced by Mr. Nightingale to be of foreign—probably Augsburg
—make, having a deep bell-shaped bowl with engraved ornament
upon it, the base being covered with rich chased work of figures
and foliage. There are not many pieces of this date in North
Wilts ; indeed, the Elizabethan chalices are far commoner than those
of the first half of the seventeenth century.

Towards the middle of the century another type came into
fashion (No. 6), with short straight-sided sloping bowl, baluster
stem, and spreading plain foot, without any ornament at all. Of
these there are examples at Cherhill, Hardenhuish, Poulshot, and
St. Mary’s, Marlborough.

A little later the prevailing type was the plainest and rudest of
all—a simple deep large straight-sided bowl, with a circular stem of
considerable size spreading out into a wide foot without moulding
or ornament (No. 7). These cups are generally considerably larger
than any of the earlier ones, and they continue to increase in size
on to the middle of the eighteenth century. Inscriptions, too, with
the coat of arms of the donor surrounded by elaborate mantling now
appear on the bowl, and commonly also in the centre of the paten, or
on its foot,—this custom continuing on to the beginning of the
present century.

There are, however, several cups of this century which do not
conform to either of the ordinary patterns. Of these a very hand-
some cup with paten cover of 1631 belongs to Wootton Bassett.
It has the arms of the donor on the bowl. The stem has no knot,
but a sort of scallopped frill under the bowl instead, and the base is
rich in egg-and-dart and other ornaments.

Minety has a cup inscribed 1663 of provincial and somewhat rude
manufacture, which has the short bowl and base of the baluster-
stemmed type ; but in this case the stem is straight with a very
slight knot in the middle and a projecting flange at the junction
with the foot. The marks on this piece are four in number, ap-
parently consisting of two heads?, a lion, and a heart-shaped shield
with three fleur-de-lys. They seem to be the same as those on
another curious cup belonging to Purton, inscribed 1666 on the bowl.
It has a good base and stem of the fashion of the early years of the

346 Notes on the Church Plate of North Wilts.

century, but the bowl is rudely made and has a curious travesty of
the Elizabethan strap-work belt upon it.

Lydiard Tregoze has a large and massive cup in which the pro-
jecting flange which is placed close under the rather short square
bowl on the otherwise plain stem is a more marked feature. It is hall
marked 1649. No other occurs like it in North Wilts, but similar
specimens are engraved in the Carlisle Church Plate and elsewhere.

Alderton and Langley Burrell have cups bearing no hall marks,
the former inscribed 1663, which, without being remarkable in
shape, are singular in having a belt of engraving round tbe bowl in
poor imitation of the Elizabethan ornament.

In the eighteenth century the cup loses its straight sides, which
instead bulge out somewhat towards the bottom. The knot re-
appears on the stem in the form of a fillet or band, and the sacred
monogram with rays almost invariably ornaments one side of the
large bowl. About 1790 a number of goblet-shaped cups with
slender stems and sometimes square bases are found, accompanying
the classical flagons of that date. They are much the shape of the
ordinary modern prize cups, and are seldom very large. Some,
however, of the chalices given to small parishes during the last half
of the eighteenth century are of huge size, and though during the
first half of the nineteenth century the size of the bowl was generally
reduced, the type was by no means improved,—the vessels of this
period being undoubtedly in many cases the most hideous of any.
About 1840-50, however, ecclesiastical art began to revive, and the
medieval shapes have come more and more into fashion, until some
of the modern plate rivals the ancient medieval work in beauty and
excellence of workmanship.

Handsome modern sets exist at Marlborough College, the two
Savernake Churches, East Grafton, Wootton Bassett, and other places.

The presence, however, of a modern medieval chalice—by no
means always of excellent workmanship or design—too often means
that the sixteenth or seventeenth century plate has been ruthlessly
got rid of to make way for it,—a thing to he greatly regretted, from
an historical, an archeological, and I cannot help thinking also,
from an ecclesiastical point of view.

By the Rev. FE. H. Goddard. 847

Of unusual eighteenth century pieces Hullavington possesses a
fine two-handled cup of large size, of domestic fashion, dated 1738 ;
and Colerne has a two-handled caudle cup with cover, elaborately
ornamented with a removable outer case of pierced scroll and flower
work—given in 1774,

Having thus roughly traced the evolution of the chalice, a few
words must be said as to the paten. This, as has already been
stated, was in Elizabethan days simply a cover fitting closely to the
cup. In the Jacobean type the paten still fitted the top of
the chalice, but its rim grew wider, it became shallower and
less domed, and the edge which fitted over the rim of the chalice
disappeared. By degrees the paten grew larger, though still in
many cases fitting the chalice as a cover (see Fig. 9); but with the
new standard of silver in Queen Anne’s days came in a new fashion.
The paten had grown into a salver standing perhaps Sin. high on a
hollow circular foot, the top measuring Qin. or more across, and
ornamented round the edge and also round the base with the
characteristic pattern of the period—the fluting known as the
gadroon. These patens are almost all of new standard silver, that
is between the dates of 1696 and 1720, and bearing, therefore,
the hall marks of the lion’s head erased and the figure of Britannia,
instead of the lion passant and leopard’s head crowned; and more
often than not they bear the donor’s arms elaborately engraved in
the centre.

Throughout the eighteenth century they continue as high, but
not quite so large, and they commonly lose the gadrooned edge, and
bear the sacred monogram in the centre. Frequently towards the
end of the century domestic salvers or trays, with scollopped edges
and standing on three claw feet are found, used either as
patens or alms dishes. These latter, however, are commonly in the
eighteenth century plain dishes with depressed centres—a pair, of
precisely similar make, often serving, like the salvers, one for a
paten, the other for alms dish.

At Colerne is a paten of large size, and with gadrooned edge and
base and an elaborate chased foliage ornamentation attached to
its face, with a silver-gilt medallion in the centre of nymphs stealing
VoL. XXV.—=NO, LXXV. 2B

348 Notes on the Church Plate of North Wiits.

Cupid’s bow! This bears no date mark; it was given, in company
with the caudle-cup or porringer mentioned above, in 1774.

Two patens—those of Seagry (originally Lyneham), and West
‘Ashton—are of Dublin make, circa 1725. With the exception of
these and an apostle-spoon bearing the old Exeter mark and inscribed
1666, lately given to Ramsbury, no plate bearing provincial town
marks has been found except modern pieces of Sheffield, Birmingham,
and Exeter; although, as has been already said, a considerable
proportion of the Elizabethan pieces and some of the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries bear no hall marks at all, and were doubtless
of provincial manufacture.

Turning to flagons, the earliest in North Wilts is the very
beautiful specimen at Heddington. This is marked 1602, but it
was not given to the Church until 1830, and was doubtless made
for domestic use. It is of silver-gilt covered with rich strap-work
and embossed ornament. Next in date comes the tankard-shaped
flagon at Wanborough, marked 1615, but given in 1638. This,
as well as the preceding one, is very small in size, but, unlike
it, is perfectly plain and without any ornament at all.

Throughout the seventeenth century the flagons continue simply
tankards, without much variation in shape, the lids low, almost flat
on the top—the earlier examples often with the sides slightly bulging,
as in the Bishopstone example of 1634, given in the plate; the later
ones oftener with the sides perfectly straight, as in that of Garsden,
of 1684. This is by no means an invariable rule, however. On
the front they commonly bear the coat of arms of the donor, or the
sacred monogram surrounded by rays.

In the eighteenth century the lid became by degrees higher and
more dome-shaped, until it blossomed out into an acorn or other
ornament at the top, a spout grew out of the side where no spout
had been before, the whole vessel grew less broad and massive, until
the ugly tall attenuated flagon of the earlier half of the nineteenth
century came into existence.

Many of these flagons of the latter half of the seventeenth and
beginning of the eighteenth centuries are of enormous size, weighing
seventy or eighty ounces or more, and were often given, even to

HOPU'L eMAEE CLE WHET BEM

aks NY 5 Y - 97299

CPL ‘OTLT “9OLT ‘Peal veal
tomy sty ure Ty.re YH ‘Woy IeYD ‘uapsary ‘euoisdoysig

<>

By the Rev. £. H. Goddard. 349

comparatively small parishes, in pairs—as for example, at Lydiard
Tregoze and Broad Hinton. Judging from present needs people
are apt to wonder what possible use such large vessels could have
served, but we must remember that in those days the number of
communicants very far exceeded that of the present day—indeed,
that probably every person in the parish who was of age to receive
the communion did so. In reference to this a very curious and
interesting order from the Bishop of Salisbury to the curate and
churchwardens and parishioners of Aldbourne is given in vol. xxiii.,
p- 255 of this Magazine, wherein it is ordered “to the end that the
minister may neither be overtoyled nor the people indecently and
inconveniently thronged together” that thrice in the year at least
notice be given of four communions upon four consecutive Sundays,
and “ that there come not to the communion in one day above two
hundred at the most.” Probably, therefore, the flagons—there is
a very large one at Aldbourne still—huge as they appear to us—
were not larger than was considered requisite at the time they were
given.

At the beginning of the eighteenth century a few flagons are
found with pear-shaped body and spout—like a domestic hot-water
jug—of which there are examples. at Box, Market Lavington,
Ramsbury, and Hartham. And again at the end of the century
there is a departure from the otherwise prevalent tankard fashion in
the flagons of the elegant classical shape well known in articles of
domestic plate manufactured about 1790, due to the sudden and
transient revival of taste in designs after classical models consequent
on the publication of the discoveries of ancient art in Pompeii and
Herculaneum.

Of these flagons, which, though not ecclesiastical, are at least
elegant in form, specimens exist at St. Mary’s Devizes, Sopworth,
and Manningford Abbots. The plain goblet-shaped cups with small
stem which accompanied them are found in greater numbers,

A large and massive flagon, given to Erchfont in 1764, does not
fall into either of these classes. It has a ewer-shaped body with a

spout and high lid—handle, base, lid and an having a good deal
of florid ornament about them.
2B2

350 Notes on the Church Plate of North Wilts.

Pewter flagons still exist in many places, though almost invariably
disused now. They are generally heavy, clumsy vessels, but some
six of them are interesting as belonging to a type which is not
found in silver in North Wilts. They are very tall tankards, with
broad spreading base and tapering to a comparatively narrow top
without any spout. The cover is very high and surmounted by an
acorn, but their chief peculiarity lies in the handle, which approaches
the body of the vessel and then recedes again in a double curve.
The only one which is dated is that belonging now to Malmesbury
Abbey, which belonged formerly to the destroyed Church of St.
Paul. This is dated 1736. Others are at Clyffe Pypard, Lydiard
Millicent, Lydington, Stanton St. Bernard, and Edington.

I know of no example of an old pewter chalice remaining, but
patens and alms plates are not uncommon. On the other hand, a
large number of parishes have plated vessels, especially in the
neighbourhood of Bradford and Trowbridge. Indeed it is recorded
of Archdeacon Daubeny, Vicar of North Bradley 1778—1827, that
he said upon his death-bed, “ Let the communion vessels be plated.
I have always condemned those who have placed unnecessary
temptations in the path of their fellow-mortals, and I am anxious
that the last act of my life should hold out to others no inducement
to sin.” A laudable and excellent motive doubtless, but for all that
one cannot help feeling that the quaint and touching inscription on
the silver paten of Long Newnton expresses a truer aspiration : “ In
the year of Our Lord God 1691 August 10.* I hope my Lord will
take this little present well and in good part, because tis my best
I give to God my heart.”

In the reaction of the last fifty years towards the Gothic style
too many of us have seemed anxious to wipe out every trace of the
seventeenth and eighteenth cénturies altogether—whether in archi-
tecture, wood-work, or plate ; but, after all, those centuries do form
a part of the history of our nation and our Church, and the men
who lived in them did sometimes, at least “ give to God their best ”
and surely, unless there is really urgent cause to the contrary, their
offerings should be respected and preserved. If new plate is given,
well and good; use it if it seems more convenient, but at least let

By the Rev. EL. H. Goddard.

85T

the old which has sufficed for two hundred years or more be spared
the ignominy of the melting pot or the dealer’s shelf.

Chronological List of Silver Church Wlate of North Wilts
to the end of the eighteenth century.

[The dates given are those of the hall marks, wherever possible.]

Lacock. Covered cup.

15th century { Manningford Abbots.

Early

1534.
1564.
1570.
1571.

1572.
1573.
1574.

1575.
1576,

Chalice.
16th century. Melksham.
Paten (given recently).
Highworth. Chalice and paten
Bradford. Chalice.
Kington St.Michael. Chalice.
Melksham. Chalice (given
recently).
Foxley. Cup, probably do-
mestic (given 1682).
*Broughton Gifford. Chalice.
Kemble. Chalice and cover.
Malmesbury Abbey. Chalice.
Keevil. Chalice and cover.
Imber. Chalice and cover.
*Broughton Gifford. Cover.
Hilperton. Chalice.
Rowde. Chalice and cover.
Melksham. Chalice (given
recently).
Ham. Chalice and cover.
Clyffe Pypard. Paten cover

only.
Poulshbot. Paten cover only.
Wroughton. Chalice and
cover.
Yatton Keynell. Chalice and
cover. [cover.
Luckington. Chalice and

Somerford Keynes. Two
chalices and covers.
Rodbourne and Corston.
Chalice and cover.
Leigh Delamere.

and cover.

Chalice

1577.

by

Undated Elizabethan.

1602.

Biddestone. Chalice.
St. Mary’s Cricklade. Chalice

and cover.

Staverton. Chalice.
Limpley Steke. Chalice and
cover.

Stert. Chalice and cover.
Alton Priors. Chalice.
Heddington. Chalice & cover.

West Kington. Chalice.
Wanborough. Chalice and
cover.

Hankerton. Chalice & cover.
Littleton Drew. Chalice and
cover.
Semington.
cover.
Steeple Ashton.
cover.
Lacock. Small silver bowl.
Leigh. Chalice.
Little Hinton.
cover.
Wootton Rivers.
cover.
Manningford Bruce.
Enford. Chalice.
Great Cheverell. Chalice.

Chalice and

Chalice and

Chalice and
Chalice and

Chalice.

Winterbourne Monkton.
Chalice.
Etchilhampton. Chalice.

Stanton St. Bernard. Chalice.

Manningford Abbots. Paten
cover.

Norton. Chalice and cover.
Heddington. Flagon (given
in 1830)

* In vol. vi., p. 49, the date of this chalice and cover is erroneously given as 1546,

Notes on the Church Plate of North Wilts.

Foxley. Paten cover.
Fittleton. Chalice and cover.
Cricklade St. Sampson’s.
Chalice and cover.
Wanborough. Flagon (given
1638).
Stanton Fitzwarren. Chalice
(undated).
Ashley. Chalice and cover.
Burbage. Chalice and cover.
Chiseldon. Chalice and
paten cover.
Bishopstone.
paten cover.
Ditcheridge. Chalice.
Crudwell. Chalice.
Brinkworth. Chalice.
Wootton Bassett. Chalice
and paten cover.
Malmesbury Abbey. Chalice.
Cherhill. Chalice.
Shorncot. Chalice and cover.
Bradford. Chalice and paten

cover.

Chalice and

Bishopstone. Flagon (given
1719).
Poulshot. Chalice.

Avebury. Paten.
Lacock. Paten.
Brinkworth. Flagon.
Compton Bassett.' Chalice
and paten cover.
Hardenhuish. Chalice.
Alderton. Small bowl.
Bishops Lavington. Chalice
and paten cover, and paten.
Marston Maisey. Chalice.
Lydiard Tregoze. Chalice
and paten cover.
Steeple Ashton, Chalice and
paten cover. :
Lydiard Tregoze. Flagon.
Brokenborough. Chalice.
Grittleton. Paten.

Milton Lilburne. Chalice
and paten.

St. Mary’s Marlborough.
Chalice.

1660.
1661,

1662.
1663.

1664.
1665 P
1666.
1669.
1672.

1675.
1676.

1678.
1679.

1680.

”

”

”

”

Bishops Cannings. Chalice.

Little Cheverell. Chalice
and paten cover.

Bremhill. Chalice.

Lydiard Tregoze. Flagon.

Alderton, Chalice.

Minety. Chalice.

Wilcot. Chalice and paten.

Winkfield. Paten (un-
dated).

Ramsbury. Apostle spoon
(given recently).

Purton. Chalice and cover.

Lydiard Tregoze. Paten.

Biddestone. Simall bowl.

Etchilhampton. Paten.

Broad Hinton. Chalice,
paten cover, alms dish, and
two flagons.

Aldbourne. Flagon.

Pewsey. Chalice and paten
cover.

Imber. Paten.

Bishops Lavington. Flagon
(domestic, given 1790).

Great Chalfield. Chalice,
paten cover, and paten.

Wootton Bassett. Paten (un-
dated).

Whaddon. Chalice and
paten cover. (undated),

Tidcombe. Chalice (un-
dated).
WinterbourneBassett. Chalice
(undated).
Aldbourne. Chalice and
paten cover.
Tockenham. Chalice and
paten cover.
Little Bedwyn. Chalice
and paten cover.
Cricklade St. Sampson’s.
Flagon.

1682 Easton Royal. Chalice and
paten.
Clyffe Pypard. Chalice and:
paten.
Aldbourne. Paten.

1683.

By the Rev. EF. H. Goddard.

Winterbourne Monkton.
Alms dish (given 1844).
Coulston. Chalice and paten.

Garsdon. Two chalices,
paten, and flagon.

Collingbourne Kingston,
Chalice and paten.

Crudwell. Paten.

Hilperton. Paten (given
1851).

Christian Malford. Alms
dish (given 1726).

Wanborough. Paten.

St. Mary’s Marlborough.

Alms dish (given 1724).

Wootton Bassett. Paten.

Long Newnton. Paten.

Poole Keynes. Chalice.

Aldbourne. Chalice.

Long Newnton. Chalice and
flagon.

Somerset Hospital, Froxfield.
Chalice and paten cover.
Winterbourne Bassett. Paten.

Long Newnton. Paten.
Christ Church Bradford.
almsdish (given 1840).

Stanton Fitzwarren. Cover
of chalice.
Steeple Ashton. Paten.

Holt. Paten (given 1838).

Compton Bassett. Paten and
Almsdish.

Poulshot. Paten (uncertain).

Semington. Paten (uncertain).

Trowbridge. Paten,

Lacock. Flagon.

Cricklade St. Sampson’s.
Chalice and paten cover.

Malmesbury Abbey. Paten.
St. John’s Devizes. Flagon.
Draycot Cerne. Chalice,
paten, and flagon.
Somerford Keynes. Paten.
Langley Burrell. Paten and
Flagon.
Heddington. Paten.
Nettleton. Paten.

1704.

1705.
1706.

”

1707.
1707.

7

1708.

858

Steeple Ashton.
Bradford. Paten.
Biddestone. Paten.
Patney. Chalice.
Charlton. Chalice, Paten
and flagon.
Ramsbury. Flagon.
Hardenhuish. Paten.
Box. Chalice, two patens,
and flagon.

Wilcot. Paten.

Kemble. Paten.
Trowbridge. Flagon. ‘
Purton. Paten (given 1820).
Castle Eaton. Paten.
Chute. Chalice and paten.:
Wroughton. Flagon.
Nettleton. Chalice.
Hartham. Flagon (given
1861 ?).

Seend. Paten.
Bishops Cannings.
(given 1840).
Great Bedwyn. Paten (given
1831).
Nettleton. Flagon.
Little Somerford.
and paten.
Willesford. Paten.
South Marston. Chalice and
paten.

Enford. Paten.
Cherhill. Paten.
Kemble. Flagon.
Brinkworth. Paten.
Sherston. Paten.
Bradon. Paten
1869).
Little Hinton.
Ham. Paten.
Burbage. Paten.

Holt. Paten (given 1838).
Stanton St. Bernard. Paten,
Wroughton. Paten.
Bishopstone. Paten.
Corsham. Almsdish or paten.
Rodbourne and _ Corston.
Paten (given 1845),

Paten.

Paten

Chalice

(given

Two patens.

»

- Erchfont.

Notes on the Church Plate of North Wilts.

Leigh Delamere. Paten
(given 1847).
Ramsbury. Chalice, paten,
and paten cover.
Fittleton. Flagon and paten.
Langley Burrell. Paten.
Castle Combe. Flagon (given
1775).
Patney. Paten.
Winterbourne Monkton.
Chalice and paten (given
(1844).
Bradford. Flagon.
Broad Blunsdon.
(given 1815).
Poole Keynes.
1854).
Potterne. Two chalices, two
patens, and flagon.
Sherston. Chalice and paten.
Seagry. Paten (Dublin).
Market Lavington. Paten.
Paten.
Chute. Paten.
Nettleton. Paten.
Tidcombe. Paten.
Mildenhall. Paten.
Foxley. Chalice, paten, and
flagon.
Easton Royal.
Market Lavington.
and paten.
Easton Grey.
paten cover.
Ogbourne St. George. Chalice
and paten cover.
Melksham. Paten.
Rushall. Chalice
Broughton Gifford. Paten.
Coulston. Paten.
Market Lavington. Flagon.
Fifield.Chalice & paten cover.
Hullavington. Paten.
Crudwell. Salver-paten.
Luckington. Paten.
Ashton Keynes.
and paten.
Willesford. Chalice.

Paten

Paten (given

Paten.
Chalice

Chalice and

Chalice

1733.

39

thy

1750? West Ashton.

1753.
1764.

Mildenhall. Two chalices
and two paten covers.
Burbage. Flagon.

Broad Somerford. Paten.
Upavon. Chalice, two
patens, and flagon.
Hullavington. Fine domestic
two-handled cup.
Steeple Ashton. Flagon.
Edington. Chalice
paten.
Swindon

Flagon.
Stanton St. Quintin. Chalice
and cover, two patens, and

and

Parish Church.

flagon.
Calstone. Chalice and paten
(undated).

Market Lavington. Alms-
dish.

Broad Somerford. Chalice.

Highworth. Flagon.

Winkfield. Chalice, paten,
and flagon. _

Highworth. Chalice and two
salver patens.

Paten (Dublin
—undated).

Enford. Paten.

Everley. Flagon.
Willesford. Alms dish.
Holt. Cover of chalice.

Kington St. Michael.. Alms-
dish salver.

Holt. Chalice.

Bradford. Spoon.

Alton Barnes Chalice and
paten.

Corsham. Flagon.

Netheravon. Chalice, paten,
flagon, and alms dish.
Highway. Chalice.
Luckingtons Flagon.

Bishopstone. Paten (bowl).

Broad Blunsdon. Chalice.

Bradford. Two chalices, two
patens, flagon, and alms-
dish.

ee eee eee

In Memoriam John Edward Jackson, F.S.A. 355

1764. Erchfont. Flagon 1781. Fifield. Almsdish (given
» Corsham. Flagon (given 1833).
recently). 1782. Broadtown. Paten (given
1766. Patney. Flagon. 1843).
1768. Parish Church Chippenham. 1784. Keevil. Two chalices (given
Two chalices, two flagons, 1840).
and two salver patens. 1789. St. Mary’s Devizes. Two
1768. Chisledon. Paten, chalices, two patens, and
1771. Sevenhampton. Chalice, flagon.
paten, almsdish, and flagon. 1790? ManningfordAbbotts. Flagon
1774. Berwick Bassett. | Chalice © (uncertain).
and paten cover. 1791. Kington St. Michael. Paten
= Castle Combe. Two patens cover of Elizabethan cup.
(salvers on three legs). 1793. Marston Maisey. Paten.
a Colerne. Two-handled cup 1795. Langley Fitzurse. Chalice
‘ and cover and paten. (given 1858).
1775. Castle Combe. Chalice and 1799. Grittleton. Chalice.
cover. .

An Atlemoriam John Edward Aackson, F.3.3.,
Hon. Canon of Bristol.

OZACN Friday evening, March 6th, 1891, at the Rectory, Leigh
i): Delamere, died John Edward Jackson, Rector of Leigh
Delamere and Norton, Honorary Canon of Bristol, and F.S.A. He
had reached the great age of eighty-five, and his death was not un-
expected, for his strength had been slowly failing for many months
and for some time past approaching paralysis had deprived him
of the power of writing. But none the less does his death leave a
grievous gap in the ranks of the Wilts Archzological Society, as
well as in the singularly large and varied circle of his private friends,
which cannot be filled by anyone else.

He was indeed sui generis, for the immense stores of local infor-
mation and learning that he possessed were not more remarkable

356 In Memoriam John Edward iperk P.S8.A.

than the talent—for it was nothing less—with which he presented
the matured results of his investigations in a form acceptable not
merely to the antiquary but to the general public.

He was not a Wiltshireman by birth, having been born at Don-
caster in 1805. He was educated at Charterhouse and Brasenose
College, Oxford, where he took his degree—second class in Jit.
Hum.—in 1827; and his first curacy was that of Farleigh
Hungerford, to which he was ordained in 1834,

In 1845, however, he became—to the great advantage of our
county—a Wiltshireman by residence, being presented by the late
Mr. Joseph Neeld to the rectory of Leigh Delamere, and in the
following year to the vicarage of Norton, which he continued ?
hold with Leigh Delamere until his death.

In his earlier life he had paid much attention to the study of
geology, and the collection of fossils which he then formed he has
left by will to the Society’s Museum ; but in later days the absorbing
interests of family and county history and topography occupied the
greater part of his leisure time and thoughts. It was to these
subjects that the best years of his life were devoted, and it was in
these, rather than in art, natural history, or archzology strictly
speaking, that he specially excelled.

It is characteristic of the power, or rather, perhaps, of the instinct
which he possessed of completely identifying himself with the
genius loci of the locality on which his attention happened to be
fixed for the time that the years of his residence at Farleigh
Hungerford were marked by what he himself spoke of as his
“Hungerford mania”—a mania which bore fruit in a series of
portly folio volumes of MSS., containing an enormous mass of
information on the fortunes of that once widespread and important
family, and on the historical events with which the various members
of it were connected,— information which it is much to be regretted
has never been given to the world.

With this faculty of concentrating his powers on the history of
his “environment ” it is not to be wondered at that having settled
down at Leigh Delamere he should have at once set to work at the
task of collecting materials for the elucidation of the past history

|

In Memoriam John Edward Jackson, F.S.A. 357

of the county in which his lot was cast. The manner in which
those materials were collected was characteristic of the man,
Nothing connected with Wiltshire in the past came amiss to him—
a bit of family history—a monumental inscription—a discovery of
Roman remains—an entry in an ancient deed or will—or the mention
of some interesting event in a local paper—he might have had at
the moment no intention of writing anything about the particular
parish or district with which any of these things were connected,
but still it might come in useful some day, and accordingly a note
was made of it on half-a-sheet of note paper, the white side of a
circular, or the back of an envelope, and was carefully deposited in
the particular portfolio devoted to that particular parish or district,
so that at any moment he could refer to all the odd scraps of infor-
mation available for any special locality. (This collection of material,
together with other papers bearing on Wiltshire, has since his
death been given to the Society of Antiquaries.)

It was this systematic collection and arrangement of materials,
carried on for fifty years, that enabled him to delight the Members
of our Society year after year, wherever the annual meeting might
be, with a constant succession of papers, each of which seemed to
deal with the antiquarian history of the immediate locality as though
that was the special point on which the Canon’s thoughts and in-
vestigations had been fixed for the past twelve months. For from
the year 1853, when he took a leading part in the first foundation
of the Society and became one of its first Secretaries and the Editor
of the Magazine, up to within the Jast two years he continued to be
the most popular of readers at the Annual Meetings, and the
most valued of contributors to the pages of the Magazine. The
professed antiquarian as well as the less ardent member of the public
who had, possibly, after the labours of a long day’s excursion,
slumbered fitfully through other important business, alike regained
the fullest consciousness when Canon Jackson rose to read. He had
a way of catching your attention. There was a humorous twinkle
in his eye and a turn about the corners of his mouth which made
people feel that he had ‘something good to tell them by and bye,
and they had better listen carefully or they might lose it ; so that

358 In Memoriam John Edward Jackson, F.8.A.

year after year his paper came to be looked on as one of the special’
treats of the Meeting. Endowed himself with the power of seeing
the humorous side of things he used that power to give life to what
in other hands—as learned, perhaps, as his own—would have
remained to the end nothing but the dry bones of genealogical or
topographical research.

Of his published works the most important was, of course, his
annotations to the Topographical Collections of Aubrey. In this
thick volume the results of years of labour and research are contained,
the annotations being not only of far greater bulk but also of
greater value than the text on which they are based. But his other
monographs and papers, which may be found in every volume of the
Magazine, as well as those which—like the History of Grittleton
and of the two Churches of St. Mary’s and St. George’s, Doncaster
—were published separately, were one and all of them really
valuable, the greater number of them complete in themselves and
containing all the information which could be brought to bear upon
the subject in hand. Much of his most valuable matter he gleaned
from the MSS., deeds, and documents hidden in the libraries and
muniment rooms of the great houses of the county, notably from
those of Longleat, among which he was often at work ; some of
the most interesting of his communications to the Magazine being
founded on materials disinterred from that storehouse of valuable
documents.

It has often been regretted that he did not undertake that task
which still awaits fulfilment, the writing of the History of Wiltshire
—and he was, perhaps, the only man of the present time who
could have done it. But the time for it was scarcely ripe, the
materials were not ready to his hand, and he spent his life in
gathering and sifting the facts with which the future historian of
the county must build his history. He had a horror of doing
anything incompletely or inaccurately. When he excused himself
from reading a paper at the Devizes Meeting last year, it was on the
plea that he had so many things to finish up and put in order that
he could not now undertake any fresh work ; and only a few months
before his death he said, looking at the volumes of Hungerfordiana,

“ Recent Occurrence of the Great Bustard in Wilts.” 359

“They represent a good many years of my life—I have worked hard
in my time”; and then, as he spoke of his increasing weakness, he
said, “I should like to have had another ten years of life, I think I
could have finished a good many things then.” He had worked to
the last, and when the end came he passed away honoured and
beloved by all who knew him, not merely for his knowledge and his
learning, but for the genuine goodness of his heart and the singular
charm of his private character,—the genial kindness and quaint
humour which made him no less delightful as a companion in private
life than he was as a lecturer upon the public platform. By his
personal friends—and perhaps few men could number friends in so
many and diverse ranks and conditions of life as he could,—by his
neighbours, even by those who knew him only from his appearance
at our Annual Meetings, he was alike spoken of as “the dear old
Canon.” He was, indeed, one of the few of whom it may truly be
said that it was a privilege to have known him, as he is one of the
few, too, who will leave an enduring name behind him in the
antiquarian world—a name that will rank for the future with the
goodly company of Wiltshire antiquaries, with Aubrey and Hoare
Philips and Britton, if it does not in the opinion of posterity rank
first among them all as that of the man who has done most for the
unravelling of Wiltshire history.
B.. HG.

“Recent Occurrence of the Great Bustard
in Wilts.”

By the Rev. A. C. SmirH.
T the end of January, 1891, twenty years bad elapsed since
the latest visit of the Great Bustard to Wiltshire, and
not a straggler to its old haunts in this county had been seen since
the memorable incursion of these birds to the British Isles of 1871,

3860 “ Recent Occurrence of the Great Bustard in Wilts.’

when quite a large body came over: by some said to have been
frightened away from France, owing to the heavy firing during the
Franco-German war; by others, and with more probability, con-
jectured to have been driven from their usual haunts by an exception-
ally cold winter. Whether this body arrived in detachments, or
whether they came in one large pack, is uncertain; but if the latter
they must very soon have dispersed over a considerable area, for
some were obtained in Devonshire, some in Somerset, some in
Middlesex, some in Northumberland, and no less than seven found
their way to Salisbury Plain, to the parishes of Maddington,
Shrewton, Market Lavington, and Berwick St. James, as I have
fully detailed elsewhere (Birds of Wiltshire, p. 861).

Previous to this immigration of Great Bustards into Wiltshire
none had been seen in the county for fifteen years, and then but a
single bird was observed and captured in the neighbourhood of
Hungerford, in the early part of January, 1856, of which I have
also given particulars (Birds of Wiltshire, p. 358).

Since 1871 there have been occasional stragglers in various parts
of England, notably in the winter of 1879-80, when nine specimens
were captured, viz., one in Essex, two in Jersey, one in Cornwall,
three in Kent, one in Cambridgeshire, and one in Dorset, the greater
part of which were recorded to be females, and one only pronounced
to be a male: but none of these were observed in Wilts. Between
1880 and the beginning of the present winter I am not aware that
the Great Bustard has put in any appearance within the British
Isles: but now, during the remarkably cold weather which we have
experienced this winter, and which seems to have extended pretty
generally over the Continent of Europe, another arrival of Great
Bustards has taken place, and no less than seven specimens have
been taken in as many counties: for they, too, if they came over in
a body, as is probable, very soon scattered over the country, and
between December 20th and February 7th a single individual of
this fine species has been taken in Essex, in Carmarthenshire, in
Hampshire, in Sussex, in Norfolk, in Suffolk, as well as in Wilts, as
has been fully reported by Mr. Harting in the Zoologist and in the
Field. They were all females, not a male bird amongst them, and

By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 361

they averaged in weight between 8lbs. and 9]bs., the heaviest scaling
at 13lbs. and the lightest at 7lb. 10oz.

So much for the pack—if pack it was—that, in an evil hour for
themselves, came over to England.

To come to our Wiltshire specimen, of which I am able to furnish
reliable details, as they have been communicated to me at first hand
by the obliging captor of the bird. It appears that on February
5th last (not on the 4th, as I at first erroneously stated) Mr. Wood
and his brother, of Langley Green, near Chippenham, being tempted
by the hard weather to go out in search of Wild Geese, of which they
had heard tidings, found themselves at 10.a.m., in Alington Mead,
on the banks of the Avon, behind Kelloways Mills, and about three
miles from Chippenham; the wind blowing from the north-east.
Here they presently saw a large bird, which at first they supposed
to be a Wild Goose, flying towards them, down the wind, when both
brothers fired: the bird however, though evidently hard hit, did not
at once drop, but continued its flight : then they perceived it was no
goose, and on picking it up a little farther on found it to be a Great
Bustard, in excellent plumage, and, beyond a broken leg, very little
injured by the shot. Mr. Wood at once sent the bird for preservation
to Foot, the taxidermist, of Bath, in whose house it was seen in the
flesh by many persons, and who preserved the sternum. In reply to
my many enquiries Mr. Foot very courteously supplied me with all
the information he had as to the capture, and forwarded me a portion
of the contents of the crop, which appeared to consist of the leaves
of grass and other plants. Desiring, however, to obtain accurate
information on this point, I forwarded a small portion of the un-
digested leaves to Mr. Harting (Natural History Editor of the
Field), to Professor Newton, of Cambridge, and several other
authorities, not forgetting our own Wiltshire botanist, the Rev.
T. A. Preston. Professor Newton at once forwarded his portion to
Mr. Southwell, the well-known ornithologist, of Norfolk, who is at
énce a botanist, and has no little acquaintance with the habits of the
Great Bustard. Mr. Southwell conferred on the matter with a
botanical friend of some eminence, Mr. H. D. Geldart, and the
result of their examination was given as follows: “The leaves sent

862 “ Recent Occurrence of the Great Bustard in Wilts,”

consisted of Ranunculus bulbosus, Dandelion, and Hypocherisradicata.
The one blade of grass, by its redness below and white veins, may
be Festuca, but this is pure guess-work.” Mr. Preston, after ex-
amining his portion forwarded it to Kew, whence he received the
following authoritative decision: “It principally consists of leaves
and young buds of Ranunculus repens: there is one leaf of Cochlearia
officinalis, part of a leaf of an unknown plant, and the thorax of a
beetle.” On which Mr. Preston remarks: “ The leaf of Cochlearia
is very interesting : it is a seaside plant, and hence proves that the
poor bird must have been shot the very moment it reached Chippen-
ham.” Mr. Preston also discovered among what he conjectured to
be the leaves of common grasses the leaf of a plantain. [TI should
add, to account for any seeming difference of opinion on the part of
the above eminent authorities, that the portion of leaves submitted
to each of them was so excessively small, that in all probability
the sample examined by one did not consist of precisely the same
materials as seen by another. ]

So much and no more could I gather in regard to this Great
Bustard, which when shot was supposed to be a Wild Goose. But
the thought will naturally rise up in the minds of most people, how
sad that every one of these Great Bustards—and, I may add, every
other rare bird—should be immediately killed, as soon as it makes
its appearance in England! Alas! that such should be the case,
but I fear it is inevitable, so long as that most pernicious and most
foolish practice exists among some collectors, to value at ten, twenty,
or even fifty-fold a British-hilled specimen,in comparison with exactly
the very same species, and an equally good, probably better, skin
imported from the locality abroad where the bird in question is
abundant. There is nothing to be said in favour of this extraordi-
nary eagerness to possess specimens which have met their deaths in
this country, but it is obvious that such fictitious value imparted to
such unfortunate stragglers as, on a fatal day for themselves, visit
our inhospitable shores, is quite certain to ensure their destruction :
and until such collectors come to a better mind in the matter, we
fear that the death of all strange visitors to the shores of “ perfide
Albion” is inevitable.

~

By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 363

I cannot take leave of this subject without once more lifting up
my voice against another most grievous practice, which, though
often denounced in very plain language, is not by any means abated.
I mean the modern fashion on the part of the fair sex, of wearing
birds, or parts of birds’ plumage, in their hats. I am quite certain
that the gentle kind-hearted ladies of England would abstain from
this practice, however fashionable, could they but realize the whole-
sale massacre of countless beautiful happy birds, which this most
unfortunate demand for them entails. I do not exaggerate when I
say that the annual slaughter of sea birds for this purpose amounts
to tens of thousands ; and, but a short time since, a single plumassier
gave an order for five hundred robins! and another still more recently
for one hundred kingfishers! and all for what? in order (as the
noble President of the British Ornithologists’ Union has cleverly
expressed it) ‘ to supply ladies with feathers for personal disfigure-
ment.” With the whole realm of beautiful botanical specimens
open to them for selection, and which are really graceful and
appropriate adornments ; it seems amazing that the lifeless body or
part of a body of a bird, slaughtered for that express purpose, should
be chosen in preference, and most unnaturally and quite unbe-
comingly be made to do duty in their place! whereas in reality the
very commonest flower so employed is far more beautiful, because
far more in place and infinitely more harmonious with its surround-
ings; in short, the one is adapted to the position, and therefore
natural and charming; the other is altogether out of place, and
therefore ungraceful and unmeaning.

364 ‘

Additions to the Auseum and Librarp.

Ancient food vessel and holed stones—loom weights (?)—found in dwelling pit
at Oldbury Camp. Presented by the Rev. W. C. PLENDERLEATH.

A large collection of fossils and the cabinet containing them. Left to the Society
by the late Canon Jacxkson.

Specimens of painted plaster, tesserze, &c., from Roman dwelling at Hannington
Wick. By the Rey. E. H. Gopparp.

Wiltshire specimen of Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla garrula). By A. B.
Fisuer, Esq.

Photographs of objects of interest connected with Mrs. Jane Lane. By C.
PrenRvUDDOCEE, Esq.

Boyne’s Trade Tokens, vol. I. By purchase.

Yarrell’s British Birds, four vols. By purchase.

The History of the Hundred of Berkeley, one vol. By exchange.

Lives of the Berkleys, two vols. By exchange.

END OF VOL. XXV.

11 JUL. 91

H. F, BULL, Printer and Publisher, 4, Saint John Street, Devizes,

NaMO AI pny

61 L9F 6 61 L9F
Te 8-1. pci La tebdei lia |) (ca hea dag: pif f SSUIAtg “ -ngTS ‘097
6 & BQ errs soe sSuTAeg UL souepeg, 0 OL OL ‘une ‘expoppniueg * worz uoNjdiiosqng “ ‘yIOT Aine
0 918 yunoooy omoouy [elouery 04 yzuoq-ou0 Ag “48TE ‘00 OL & OF ‘'"'4yunoo0e 4s¥_ WOIT qysnoiq eoureq OF, “48, ‘uve
‘pics §F ‘O68T ‘Pp 8 §F O68T
“ao ‘dNOW dIHSAYaaWNaW AAT ‘aa
Qo pecs 9 9 bese
9 9 PI ‘rs Suoopy sazraog JO oouveq “f
O ZL 182 : 9 LIT ms 0341p yureg ssutaug soziaaq “
9 ZT TOT ‘*°********4yuNOod8 yIsOaep OL ITT Seg aise ie eI te aa
‘yueq soulavg sezlao(qy UO 4sotojUL “Yu sorjunoy pur [eyidep “
@ 9 OL “" Yunoose yuednd 0 &1@ trreeereeeeereeeesees STOSMOD UO SpuaplAlgG “
‘yueg sorunoy pur peyidep IlT@ © *eeneceseeserecereres pros sjorydmeg oq ‘*
0 0 OOT ° 3800 4e % 4g ‘sjosuog en’ A teerecees TUNOSN 0} SUOIssIMIpY 0731, “
T € & <b aoe RSP MAE em or 9 8 GLa « SJUL[Y SUMOMOTT,, SMoysorq oie “
—'Z1A ‘puey ut eourreg 0686 i“ (SHIM UMON,, 8.G}UIg oq “
QPL GT eres eetteessersseeeses -g 99 TOISSTULULOL) 0s tT teereenereee | AQIQNY ,, S,Mosyoue og “
O 61 gg OL I ZL *"* ~ SeulzeSeyy Jo oes roy poatooor yseg “
9 4 FL ““uhesnyy ye eswoyoog MON Oo OE. eee .
TL p I ssc Ait (snuog 9) ce) | g COI IC Das oh et aN drysxaq * =
s@ pouinjol ssoj) eouBInsd “Wey 2 WOAZ TOFSuBI
Or ZG ey puey is Tiiodbae 9 6 88T W HT Wt abate =
OAT Se at > CHER Ie soap ed Ey 0. Er ET. 2 1Gue is € ad
L IPL ‘umesnyy 48 sosuodxgy 0 O LPL O68T C 08%
OT 61 SPT 0 4 8@ 688T i de :
Bee eee eee eeeneerareeaees PL ‘ON 0 p P 88ST “c
9 OL L88T 10F uorydrtosqng “
ah ME 5 SR eg a aha ree eate 6h ‘ON 9 OTS —"" seeq souBuiy $7
—: soulzeseyy 10F “orp ‘Suravisug ‘ourjyutg —-: "21a “teak ay} Satmp
ro 61 PL Peet ee wm eres eneeenee Arou0yye3g pue Sulu §.10q U9 fT UOT paateod
IL c 81 POOP ee meee enema eee r aera eesaeaneesseeaee sosuodxgy -O1 suoldrirosqng jenauy
snosuuypeosify pues ‘eovltIvy ‘eBuys0d pue ‘seq oouviqug ‘yseg “ “4sTe ‘oa
Surpnpour ‘syueumdvd Aipuns ‘yseQ Ag “48Tg 09 b 8 86% ‘'4uNOdDB 4se_ WOT YYSNOIG soULTeG OF, “4ST ‘ave
“Pp § §F ‘SINGAWGSYNEASIG | ‘068T i ea Re ‘SLdIGOW ; ‘O68T
“an DNOOOOV IVYANAD ‘ad

‘oatsnpout skep yjoq ‘QGRT ‘Teqmeceq ysT¢g 0} Avenue 4sT Woz 2 hos ayy Jo ean Ee = sydso00e jo IY
: “ALOIOOS AYOLSIH TVYOLVN ANY

ee —_ ae eS EE Oe

G OL OGY. P Mieinbers patsrested tt Sisley, 5 eur fs
notice of any Geological Excursions which may be arra
are desired to send in their names to

W. H. Bett, Esq,,
Seend,

STONEHENGE anv AVEBURY. It is proposed to publist , al
the price of about lds., if two hundred subscriptions cam be
obtained, a series of very careful and accurate drawings ané
plans of Stonehenge and Avebury, made some years ago
the Rey. W. C. Luxis, F.S.A., and deposited in the Librar
of the Society of Antiquaries, London. Members wishing
subscribe for copies are requested to send in their names te
either of the Honorary Secretaries: H. E. Mepzicorr, ee
Sandfield, Potterne, Devizes; or the Rev. E. H. Goppag

Clyffe’ Vicarage, Wootton Bassett. es:

. C. W. Hoteare, Palace, Salisbury, who is editing the Lonel
Rolls of Winchester College, will be greatly obliged to anyone
who will lend him the Long Rolls for the following years, viz.,
1654 to 1667, inclusive, 1669, 1671, 1684, 1686, 1687, 1703,
1705, 1711, 1713, 1715, 1718, 1719, 1722, 1728, 1726, 1728, —
1729, and 1733. 2

LIST OF NEW MEMBERS—Elected 1890.

Life.
C. Penruddocke, Jun., Esq.

: Annual,
Walter P. Bouverie, Esq.
A. J. H. Crespi, Esq.
Miss Clarke.
Dr. Cowie.
Dr. Carless.
Rev. J. H. Calley.
John E. Gladstone, Esq.
G. Leveson Gower, Esq.
P. Hardwick, Esq.
Dr. Johnson.
J. Kelland, Esq.
H. E. Meek, Esq. .
Miss L, Popham.
E. P. Squarey, Esq.
James Waylen, Esq.
Frederick Weston, Esq.

is British yy ' Roman Annee |
the North Wiltshire Downs, —

a BY THE REV. A. C. SMITH, M.A.
ne eee Atlas 4to, 248 pp., 17 large Maps, atl 110 Woode
See Extra Cloth. Price £2 2s.

iiely Published, by the Wiltshire Archeological & Natural History _ Ba”
- Society, One ‘Volume, 8vo, 504 pp., with map, Extra Cloth,

s The Flowering Plants of Wiltshere,
:

BY THE REV. T. A. PRESTON, M.A.

Price to the Public, 16s.; but one copy offered M4 every Member
of the Society at half-price. :

Lately Published, One Volume, 8vo., 615 pp., Extra Cloth.
The Burds of Wiltshire, es
BY THE REV. A. C. SMITH, M.A. .

Price reduced to 10s. 6d.

AGENTS

FOR THE SALE OF THR

WILTSHIRE M MAGAZINE.

a MANGER |. Save csdvone C. Hattert, ceria Bridge Street.
Bas: TEPASLOU oso «nel wean James Fawn & Son, 18 Queen’s Boalt
aa SATE Er, C. T. Jurrerres & Sons, Redcliffe Street.
a CBE cbc Sisice sands A. Heats & Son, Market Place.

= Chippenham w+... R. F. Hovutston, High Street.

a Cirencester .....1.++ A. T. Harmer, Market Place.

———— DeviZE8 vss seveces H. F. Butt, St. John Street.
Marlborough .....6. Miss E. Lucy, High Street.

Be. OaFord © sesvecansss Jas. Parker & Co., Broad Street.
Salisbury .....000 Brown & Oo., Canal.

i Trowbridge... B. Lanspown & Sons, 11 Silver Street.)
“a Werminster ...... B. W. Coarzs, Market Place.

¥ am
a ¥ t @, ¥, BULL, PRINTER, DEVIZES,

iw

ou
a
,

nee ee care e
vary stig
alee aes

ew ee bal) ~
7 10 Pagan AS Sey in nl ey
en oer Ore et
bastenin eat Anas mo
ea ot ene ils ENN Ah om gegnitedonttary empe
ne : 7 Kw Secs
apg, NE WA ting: Aa - iy 2 i mata Sr Ars amg teeny,
¥ SN et he a “
wag tem firey I PD ase
rooeeres
i tn eh.
eek TaN seat ©
RNA cman nde A Seats Saige
a sae steam eg 4 Oy
+ ate

vite mytaan Smear ee

AR CP en
me Od pe eee, e