out on a magnificent scale. “The yeomen and grooms of the wardrobes were
busied in hanging of the chambers with costly hangings, and furnishing
the same with beds of silk, and other furniture apt for the same in
every degree. Then the carpenters, the joiners, the masons, the
painters, and all other artificers necessary to glorify the house and
feast were set to work. There was carriage and re-carriage of plate,
stuff, and other rich implements; so that there was nothing lacking or
to be imagined or devised for the purpose. There were also fourteen
score beds provided and furnished with all manner of furniture to them
belonging.” When the feast began the arrangements were perfect and we
are able to imagine the scene. “Anon came up the second course, with so
many dishes, subtleties, and curious devices, which were above a hundred
in number, of so goodly proportion and costly that I suppose the
Frenchmen never saw the like. The wonder was no less than it was worthy
in deed. There were castles with images in the same: Paul’s Church and
steeple, in proportion for the quantity as well counterfeited as the
painter should have painted it upon a cloth or wall. There were beasts,
birds, fowls of divers kinds, and personages, most lively made and
counterfeit in dishes, some fighting as it were with swords, some with
guns and crossbows, some vaulting and leaping, some dancing with ladies,
some in complete harness, jousting with spears and with many more
devices than I am able with my wit to describe. Among all, one I noted:
there was a chess board subtilely made of spiced plate, with men to the
same.” Cavendish goes on to mention the arrangements made for the guests
at night, and the whole account reads like an Arabian Nights’
Entertainment.
Although the above festivities at Hampton Court were or exceptional
grandeur, they were typical of the kind common throughout the land in
Tudor times. The fine houses having been built, it was only natural that
they should be filled with guests who would contribute to the gaieties
of the place. The scenes of pomp and splendour which were enacted at
many of the mansions illustrated in this book were duly recorded, and
royal personages as often as not appeared in the pageants. It requires
little effort of imagination to restore the glories of the past and to
people these ancient buildings with those for whose glorification they
were erected. The majority of the mansions themselves are but shadows of
their former selves, but the illustrations by which such artists as
Nash, Richardson, and Fairholt recorded their beauties enable us to
conjure up the ghosts of the departed Englishmen who gave life to the
structures. The remains of the buildings themselves are a heritage of
which we should be and are proud, and no efforts should be spared to
keep them from decay or destruction, whatever the difficulties.
Illustrations made in different periods are useful and entertaining, but
they are nothing compared with the pleasure given by the
mansions themselves. It would be a calamity indeed if these objects of
antiquity were to be swept away.
When Crewe Hall (illustrated here in Plates LIV, LV, and LVI) was burned
to the ground in 1866, the late S. C. Hall recorded that since he had
published his “Baronial Halls and Picturesque Edifices of England” no
fewer than thirteen of those he had described had been destroyed by
fire. Without attempting to complete these statistics it is certain that
the list could be considerably extended, and as time goes on other
accidents will rob the country of many more of its architectural
attractions. The romance which is enshrined in these old buildings will
never be forgotten, however, for the story of each structure has been
told many times, and events of the day often cause us to refresh our
memories. In 1913, for instance, the famous old Kirby Hall,
Northamptonshire (Plate XIV), came into the market, as Quenby Hall,
Leicestershire, had done also; and we were reminded then of their long
histories. A nobleman sells one of his pictures for a large sum, and our
thoughts immediately revert to the home which the painting has graced,
perhaps for centuries. Then there are all kinds of incidents connected
with the descendants of notable families, which bring forward once again
the architectural background of social life. Even though in some cases
these relics of the past have been razed to the ground, history has been
made in them which can never be obliterated. It is the personal and
sentimental interest which helps us to appreciate the work of the men
who built or decorated the houses where family histories began. These
architects, master-masons, and other workers skilled in invention and
execution contributed in the most permanent and satisfying way to the
distinction gained by their employers. If they themselves are unknown to
fame, or are forgotten by all but students of building, their genius is
imperishable. Later generations of architects and craftsmen have
supplied the best of all epitaphs, that of emulation. Whether John
Thorpe built this or that house, whether Inigo Jones did or did not
design portions of famous buildings, the questions afford pleasant
exercises in deduction and attribution. But the sum total of achievement
is the main thing to be considered. So far as domestic architecture is
concerned the lessons of the past have been put to good use in England.
One of the most ancient buildings illustrated in the present volume is
Haddon Hall (Plate I), which dates from Plantagenet times, or earlier.
Alterations and additions were made subsequently, and the building
affords an almost unrivalled opportunity to study the ideals of various
periods. It is of the castellated type and was evidently built for
defence, but the later work is of equal importance. Sir George Vernon,
known as the “King of the Peak” on account of his magnificent style of
living, was responsible for considerable additions in the
sixteenth century, while the Long Gallery and parts of the garden are to
the credit of his daughter, Dorothy Vernon, who married Sir John
Manners, second son of the first Earl of Rutland. This old house,
situated so picturesquely on sloping ground, is associated with many
legends, including the supposed courtship and elopement of the
celebrated Dorothy, a pleasant fiction which is too generally believed
to be exposed. Haddon would lose some of its attractions if the “Walk,”
the “Door,” and other features associated with the popular heiress were
removed, but even without them the building would be of romantic
interest. Mr. Henry James, in one of his refreshing essays, has
recognised “the inevitability of a Dorothy Vernon and a Lord John,”
which sums up the prevailing sentiment of the place. It seems made for
an elopement, and if in reality one did not take place, then it was the
fault of the people and not of the house, which lent itself so admirably
to such a purpose. Cattcrmole, like many other artists, loved to paint
here and to conjure up delightful visions. Haddon was for a long time a
favourite place or residence of the Earls of Rutland, but towards the
end of the eighteenth century much of the movable furniture was taken to
Belvoir. Since the days of general travel the tread of visitors, often
on their way to Chatsworth, has been incessant, and if the chief
interest has been popular and sentimental rather than architectural, it
is not surprising under the circumstances.
To think of Haddon Hall without Hardwick Hall is impossible, for the two
are among the greatest of many attractions in Derbyshire. Hardwick Hall
(Plate XXV) dates from the year 1590 and adjoins the site of an even
more princely structure. It owes its origin to the famous Elizabeth
Hardwick, whose building activities were abnormal, partly because, so
runs the legend, it was predicted that she would never die until she
ceased to build; which prophecy was fulfilled, for her last day came at
the time of a frost so severe that her labourers had to suspend
operations. Bess of Hardwick survived four husbands--Robert Barley, Sir
William Cavendish, Sir William St. Loe, and the Earl of Shrewsbury, who
was custodian of Mary Queen of Scots. The history of her descendants is
even longer than her own. She accumulated vast wealth and spent on
building much of her annual income of £60,000, possibly for the reason
that she believed in the prophecy concerning herself. A woman of
extraordinary energy and accomplishments, she was responsible for the
erection of Hardwick, Chatsworth, Oldcotes, and other places. Everyone
knows the old saying,
“Hardwick Hall,
More glass than wall,”
which was applied to the first-named building for obvious reasons. In
those Elizabethan days there was a growing desire to dissipate
gloom and to reverse the old practice of building mainly for
strength. If Bess of Hardwick exaggerated the advantage of window space
at Hardwick Hall and gave it somewhat the appearance of a modern
steel-framed structure, she provided us with compensations in the same
house, for the state apartment, a corner of which is shown in the
illustration by Lake Price (Plate XXV), possesses great beauty in
conception. It is 65 feet long, about 30 feet wide, and 26 feet high.
The state bed included in the drawing came from Chatsworth.
Horeham Hall, Essex (Plate XI), is an interesting example of early
sixteenth-century work, retaining much of its original quality. The
Princess Elizabeth found a refuge here while her half-sister was on the
throne, and liked the place so much that she often revisited it after
she succeeded to the Crown. The building, owing its origin to Sir John
Cutt, shows a curious mixture of castle and mansion, not only as regards
the exterior but in the planning. It was once surrounded by a moat,
which was partially filled in about the middle of the nineteenth
century. The stepped gables and ornamental battlements give picturesque
irregularity to the elevation.
Essex possesses in Audley End (Plates XLII and XLIII) a special reminder
of the past. This mansion was more imposing in size originally than it
is now, so much so that James I is said to have remarked, “It is too
much for a King, though it might do very well for a Lord Treasurer”; an
observation matched by Queen Victoria, who on visiting Stafford House,
now the London Museum, said to the Duchess of Sutherland, “I have come
from my house to your palace.” Audley End takes its name from Sir Thomas
Audley, afterwards Baron Audley of Walden, who was Lord Chancellor to
Henry VIII in succession to Wolsey and More. The Manor of Walden had
been granted by William the Conqueror to his famous follower, Geoffrey
de Mandeville, first Earl of Essex, and in course of time had reverted
to the Crown. Sir Thomas Audley acquired it in 1538, after the
Dissolution of the Monasteries with which he had so much to do and by
which he profited extremely. His elder daughter married first Lord Henry
Dudley and afterwards the Duke of Norfolk, whose son, Lord Thomas
Howard, created Earl of Suffolk and Baron Howard de Walden, built the
magnificent home, named Audley End in memory of his mother’s father.
Lord Thomas Howard, who was one of the heroes in the fight against the
Armada, and became Lord Treasurer of England, made plans for a building
of surpassing grandeur and spent something like £190,000 on the place,
an enormous sum in those days. The work was begun in 1603 and was
finished about 1616. Soon afterwards the fortunes of the owner changed
and he found himself in the Tower. His successors were unable to
maintain the establishment, and in 1666 the third Earl of Suffolk sold
it to Charles II. It became a favourite place with the King,
partly because it was on the road to Newmarket, and the mansion became
alive with the festivities of the Court. Pepys records how having drunk
the King’s health he played a flageolet solo in the enormous cellars,
the echo pleasing him greatly. Evelyn described the mansion as “Indeede
a cheerfull piece of Gotic building, or rather antico moderno,”
conveying a hint of its Italian features. Audley End reverted to the
Howard family in 1701, and in 1721 Vanbrugh took it in hand, demolishing
three sides of the grand quadrangle and in other ways reducing its size
to more homely proportions. At the end of the eighteenth century Lord
Braybrooke restored the mansion at great expense and wrote its history.
Another Jacobean house associated with the Howard family was Charlton
House, Wiltshire (Plate XXXII), the seat near Malmesbury of the present
Earl of Suffolk. This building was “modernised” by Matthew Brettingham
in the time of George III, but many of its original characteristics
survived.
The other Charlton House (Plate XV) is in Kent. Sir S. P. Maryon Wilson,
Bart., the present owner, is the fortunate possessor of a building of
remarkable interest and perfection which has belonged to his family for
generations. The house was built for Sir Adam Newton between 1607 and
1612, and it is possible that it was intended to be a Royal residence.
The founder was tutor to the eldest son of James I, Prince Henry, who,
however, died in 1612. Evelyn believed the house to have been built for
the Prince of Wales, and as the royal arms were placed on the building
this theory is tenable. Though the surroundings of Charlton House have
changed during the three centuries it has existed, much of the original
interest remains. It is one of those buildings, like Cobham Hall, a few
miles from Gravesend, which, though on the verge of the newer
civilisation, retain their historic significance.
Kent is rich in the architecture of other days, and many instances could
be given of structures erected at different periods. They need not be
enumerated, for they are mostly well-known, but reference may be made to
those included among the illustrations. East Sutton Place (Plate XXXIX)
and Little Charleton (Plate LVII) are neighbouring houses, both being
associated with the Filmer family. The former is now the residence of
Mr. Malcolm Aird. The Old Manor House, Hollingbourne (Plate XXXVI), was
built in Elizabethan times for a member of the Culpeper family, and like
many another old family residence it became a farmhouse. Hollingbourne
is on the Pilgrim’s Way and has reverted to its original use, being now
the home of Mr. J. H. Deacon. The old house at Maidstone (Plate XLVIII)
is typical of many erected throughout the country in Jacobean times and
finished with great elaboration. Its date is 1611.
Somewhat later than the house at Maidstone, and more than rivalling it
in interest, is the old house at Ipswich (Plate XL). This was built in
the reign of Charles I for Robert Sparrow, Bailiff of Ipswich, after
whom the house was named. The four bay windows on the principal story
are supported by a cornice and a series of richly decorated corbels.
There are panels emblematical of Europe, Asia, Africa, and America, and
in the centre is a royal coat of arms. Figures appear again in the
gables of the dormers. The exuberant fancy of the designer of this house
was governed by a sense of proportion, otherwise the effect would have
been far different.
For picturesqueness the half-timber houses are unequalled, and many
examples remain in England to remind us of the successful conception of
this type of house, originating, no doubt, in the supply of local
materials. This style of architecture reached its zenith in the time of
Elizabeth and was popular both for town and country buildings. The
streets of Chester are a never-failing source of interest in this
respect, and many houses in the neighbourhood enjoy well-deserved fame.
One of them, Garden Hall, dating from the sixteenth century, was
destroyed by fire in 1912, a regrettable calamity. Moreton Old Hall
(Plate XXIII) is an exceptionally good example of a timbered house,
presenting nearly its original appearance. As we have seen (p. 16), it
dates from the middle of the sixteenth century, and although suffering a
period of neglect, it has been restored to usefulness and beauty. It is
now a farm and is still in the possession of the Moreton family,
traditionally associated with it. Entering by the stone bridge over the
moat, the view is quaint and attractive, the gatehouse and courtyard
being most impressive. Of the rooms not one is so interesting as the
ballroom or long gallery with its open timber roof.
Pitchford Hall (Plate XVI) is among the most striking buildings in
Shropshire, and it is said to possess an unbroken record of tenancy
since it was erected in the time of Henry VIII, never suffering from the
changes which are almost inevitable during such a long period. The
building is certainly in excellent preservation, and is maintained as a
residence with due regard to its venerable appearance. The Princess
Victoria and the Duchess of Kent stayed here in 1832. The drawing by F.
W. Hulme shows more windows than exist at present, an indication that
alterations have taken place--possibly restorations to a former and
better state. The moat has been altered also. The view taken by the
artist barely suggests the extent of the building, for only one wing is
shown prominently. Also in Shropshire is Park Hall, near Oswestry
(Plates XXVI, XXVII, and XXVIII), the residence of Mrs. Wynne Corrie.
This house was erected about 1640, and Richardson’s almost photographic
drawing represents the exterior as it stands at the present day. A
notable building is the Oak House, West Bromwich (Plate VIII).
The special feature is the timber turret rising from the centre of the
roof and competing in effect with the series of chimney-stacks. It is
now in the midst of the Black Country, with which it has little in
common.
Among the best half-timber houses in Lancashire is Smithells Hall (Plate
VI), where the bold quatrefoil work makes a variation in decorative
effect. It is of very ancient foundation, but the existing work dates
from the early sixteenth century. It passed into the Ainsworth family
about a hundred years ago at a cost of £21,000, and has since been
preserved as a family residence. Turton Tower (Plate VII) is also a few
miles from Bolton. The embattled stone tower, built for defence, belongs
to an earlier period than the wood-and-plaster portion and affords a
remarkable contrast in style. In Bolton, and now belonging to the
Corporation, is the interesting old building known as the “Hall i’ the
Wood” (Plate V), a description which has lost its point as much as the
original “Bolton-le-Moors.” Cotton-spinning accounted largely for the
transformation, and it is appropriate enough that the Hall i’ the Wood
should be a museum, reminding visitors of the history of a son of Bolton
who revolutionised the local industry, namely Samuel Crompton. The
picturesque old building, which once fitted so well into the open
landscape, became dilapidated and was divided up into tenements at the
end of the eighteenth century. Among those who lodged there in poverty
was Crompton, then engaged in perfecting his machine. Bolton operatives
did not look with favour on mechanical aids to labour, and Crompton had
to hide his “mule” from rioters. At last he disclosed his secret, and
the idea which helped to make Bolton rich gained immortality for the
inventor, but little else. Indeed, but for a few friends who came to
Crompton’s aid, poverty would have claimed another genius. As a Museum
the Hall i’ the Wood will remain in perpetuity as the shrine of this
remarkable man.
Another historic building to end its days as a museum is Aston Hall,
Warwickshire (Plates IX and LI), which after a period of suspense came
under the administration of the Birmingham Corporation. The majestic
appearance of the building remains in spite of attacks by man and time.
The central entrance leading to the hall is noteworthy as an innovation
in planning. With its curved gables, towers, and chimneys, the exterior
is picturesque, while the interior is attractive in many ways, not the
least interesting feature being the oak staircase which was damaged by
cannon-shot during the Civil War. Sir Thomas Holte, the first owner, was
a Royalist and entertained Charles I at his “poor house of Aston” just
before the battle of Edgehill, for which hospitality revenge was taken
by the Parliamentary army. Aston Hall was once the residence of James
Watt, son of the great engineer. In the middle of the nineteenth century
it was saved from demolition, the mansion, together with its
surrounding acres, being purchased for general use.
Although Hampton Court (Nash’s delightful drawing of which is reproduced
in colours as a frontispiece to this volume) is the private property of
the Crown, it is usually open for inspection, and its splendid past is
always an inspiration. It was due to Queen Victoria that the Palace and
grounds, long neglected, were made available for the public. A
politician with a gift for phrase-making has described it aptly as a
place of “pleasure, leisure, and treasure,” which is true, though its
educational value need not have been overlooked. A reference to its
association with Wolsey occurs on p. 18, and much more could be written
in connection with its early history, the period which provided Joseph
Nash with the subject of the drawing reproduced here. Since Hampton
Court was first built its appearance has been changed considerably,
notably by Wren’s addition of the beautiful Fountain Court and other
portions. The building provides many chapters of romance, sometimes
connected with the restoration of hidden features. Especial interest,
for instance, is attached to the stone bridge over the moat, built in
the time of Henry VIII, buried in after years, and not reinstated until
a few years ago.
The glory of Kenilworth has departed, but its history lives. It is a
long record, and if little remains of the structure which saw so many
pageants in Tudor and earlier times, the ruins, including the Gatehouse
(Plate LIII), are of exceptional interest. For all its poetic licence,
Scott’s novel is one of the books to which we turn for vivid
descriptions of the scenes which took place within its walls and in the
neighbourhood. It was a glorious pile, and, in the words of the late Mr.
C. E. Mallows, “in its perfect state, it must have been a complete
museum of English architecture from Norman times to Leicester’s
additions in the reign of Elizabeth.”
Crewe Hall, which suffered by fire in 1866, was rebuilt by Edward Barry
after the old model, and the present building might be mistaken for the
original structure, erected between the years 1615 and 1636 for Sir
Randal Crewe (Plates LIV, LV, and LVI). The story is told that at the
time of the fire Lord Crewe sent a telegram to his architect, saying,
“Crewe is burning, come and build it up again,” an example of sangfroid
suggested perhaps by the reply of Sheridan to a friend who asked the
dramatist how he could sit complacently with a bottle of wine before him
looking at the burning Drury Lane Theatre, which Sheridan practically
owned at the time. “Surely,” was the reply, “a man may be allowed to
take a glass of wine before his own fireside.” The noble old mansion
known as Kirby Hall (Plate XIV) is the work of John Thorpe, who has
recorded that he laid the first stone in 1570. Additions were made about
1638 by Inigo Jones. It was built for Sir
[Illustration: HENRY SHAW
CHIMNEY-PIECE IN DINING ROOM AT BUCKLING HALL, NORFOLK]
Humphrey Stafford and came into the possession of Sir
Christopher Hatton, afterwards becoming one of the seats of the
Finch-Hatton family. The mansion is rich in Elizabethan memories and is
one of the most interesting architectural relics in the country. There
is a story to the effect that it was intended to use the building in
1805 as a place of retirement for the Court in the event of an invasion
by Napoleon. Kirby has suffered many vicissitudes. A visitor some
seventy years ago wrote: “A farmer occupies a suite of rooms the
decoration of which would excite astonishment and admiration in a London
Club-house. Farm servants sleep surrounded by exquisite carving. One
room, decorated with a fine old fireplace in which are the arms of Lord
Chancellor Hatton, serves the purpose of a dog kennel.” In 1913, when
the building was for sale by direction of the Earl of Winchilsea, it was
stated that though it had been unoccupied for about sixty years it was
capable of restoration.
Loseley House, Surrey (Plate XVII), dates from between 1562 and 1568.
The seat of Sir William More, it has descended through the family to the
present owner, Mrs. More-Molyneux-MCCowen. It was visited frequently by
Queen Elizabeth, who stayed also at the neighbouring Sutton Place. In
its best days Loseley was a stately stone building of more than ordinary
significance in history, as recorded in “The Loseley Manuscripts,” by A.
J. Kempe (1836). Structural alterations in the past did not tend to
improve its original beauty.