his tour through the house. Ascending the staircase on one side of
the hall, the company passed through the solar or lord’s chamber, at
one end of which Mr. Parker thought the chapel had been originally
screened off, and that it was changed into a ball-room in the reign
of Queen Anne. The Buckingham Building, which was next visited, was
found to have been admirably restored, although it had fallen into a
sad state of ruin. Fragments of one of the old windows, however, were
discovered, and these enabled the architect to restore it completely.
Mr. Parker considered it to be one of the most beautiful instances of
restoration he had seen. It gave a most vivid idea of its original
state. The company then descended into the lower chamber or parlour of
the house of the time of Edward III., which was perfectly preserved,
and an excellent example of a mediæval vaulted substructure. Passing to
the Elizabethan house, the company entered a suite of rooms elegantly
furnished, and containing many exceedingly interesting objects. The
chairs were of the time of Charles II., of English manufacture, and
the best specimens of that date that could be found. There were also
a couch of the same period, and an Augsburg clock of the seventeenth
century, some very old and valuable paintings, and choice cabinets
of carved ebony. Among other curiosities was an illustration of the
funeral procession of Sir Philip Sidney. Mr. Parker then drew attention
to the exterior architectural style of the Buckingham Building, added
in the time of Richard II., and admirably restored by the architect.
The recent restoration of the Elizabethan Building had also been ably
done. The windows were especially noticeable, by the skilful manner
in which the work had been executed after the style of fragments
of the old work. The Elizabethan front was also an object of much
interest. The exterior architecture in the servants’ court was a noble
composition, full of interest.
[Illustration: _The Hall and Minstrels’ Gallery._]
Thus the “restorations” have been made in good taste and with sound
judgment; and the seat of the Sidneys has regained its rank as one of
the finest and most extensive edifices in the county of Kent.
In the interior the “Hall” is remarkably fine and interesting, with
good architectural features. The pointed timber roof, upon which the
slates are laid, is supported by a series of grotesque life-size
corbels; and the screen of the gallery is richly carved and panelled.
The gallery—“The Minstrels’ Gallery”—fills the side opposite the
dais, and the Gothic windows are narrow and lofty. Every object,
indeed, calls to mind and illustrates the age of feudalism. The oak
tables, on which retainers feasted, still occupy the hall, and in its
centre are the huge dogs in an octagonal enclosure, beneath the louvre,
or lanthorn, in the roof, which formerly permitted egress to the smoke.
“On each side of the hall,” writes Mr. Parker, “were two tables and
benches, which, if not actually contemporaneous with it, were certainly
among the earliest pieces of furniture remaining in England. There was
no doubt a similar—or probably a more ornamental—one on the daïs at
the upper end of the hall where the Elizabethan table now stood, which
was used by the lord and his more honoured guests, the side tables in
the lower part of the hall being for the domestics and retainers, and
guests of that class. One end of the daïs had been altered, so that the
original arrangement could not be seen; but there would necessarily
be at one end the sideboard, or buffet, filled with plate, arranged
on shelves to be well displayed, whilst it also formed a sort of
cupboard, with doors which could be closed and locked. This piece of
furniture was usually placed in the recess formed by a bay window in
halls of the fifteenth century, but it was doubtful whether the bay
window was in use as early as the fourteenth. At the opposite end of
the daïs was the door to the staircase of the solar or upper chamber,
used as the withdrawing-room for the ladies after dinner; and by its
side there was another door leading to the cellar. This was originally
the lower chamber under the solar, but afterwards there was often a
short passage to the cellar, which was sometimes underground, and the
original cellar, or lower chamber, became the parlour. But there were
always two chambers, one over the other, behind the daïs, the two
together often not reaching so high as the roof of the hall. The upper
room was the lord’s chamber, from which there was usually a look-out
into the hall, as a check to the more riotous proceedings after the
lord and his family or his guests had retired; or for the lords to
see that the guests were assembled before descending with his family
into the hall. In the centre of the hall was the original hearth or
reredos, almost the only one, he believed, remaining. By the side of it
were the andirons, or fire-dogs, for arranging logs of wood upon the
hearth, and over it was an opening in the roof, with a small ornamented
turret to cover it, called a smoke-louvre, which unfortunately had
been removed, after having been previously Italianised and spoilt. The
custom of having a large fire of logs of wood in the hall continued
long after fire-places and chimneys were used in the other chambers;
and it was a mistake to suppose that they were unknown in this country
until the fifteenth century. There were many fire-places and chimneys
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries in the chambers, but it was not
customary to use them in the hall before the fifteenth. In spite of all
the modern contrivances for warming rooms, it might be doubted whether
for warming a large and lofty hall it was possible to obtain more heat
from the same quantity of fuel than was obtained from the open fire,
and where the space was so large and the roof so high that no practical
inconvenience could be felt from the smoke, which naturally ascended
and escaped by the louvre.”
Leaving the hall, the Ball-room is entered; it is long and narrow,
the walls being covered with family portraits—some original, some
copies. Queen Elizabeth’s room succeeds: it contains much of the
furniture, tapestry-covered, that was placed there when the virgin
queen visited the mansion. In one corner is an ancient mandoline; some
portraits of the chiefs of the heroic race are here; and here is a
singular picture, representing Queen Elizabeth dancing with the Earl of
Leicester. The family portraits are gathered in the “Picture Gallery;”
it contains no others; none but a member of it has been admitted with
one exception—that of Edward VI., who gave the estate to the Sidneys.
Among them are several of Sir Philip and Algernon Sidney, one of Sir
Philip’s sister, the Countess of Pembroke, to whom he addressed the
“Arcadia,” and who is immortalised in the epitaph we have just given,
and one by Lely of the “Sacharissa” of the muse of Waller. A small
chamber in the mansion contains, however, a few treasures of rarer
value than all its copies of “fair women and brave men.” Among some
curious family relics and records is a lock of Sir Philip Sidney’s
hair; it is of a pale auburn. A lock of the hair of the ill-fated
Algernon is also with it, and in tint nearly resembles that of his
illustrious great-uncle.
There are many other relics of interest and value scattered throughout
the mansion, but towards the close of the last century a grand
collection of ancient armour, worn by generations of the Sidneys,
richly emblazoned and inlaid, was sold as old iron that cumbered
one of the rooms of the house; while MSS. of inestimable worth,
including correspondence with the leading worthies of many centuries,
mysteriously disappeared, and were probably consumed as waste paper,
useful only for lighting fires.
The church at Penshurst is dedicated to St. John the Baptist. It
immediately adjoins the park, and is connected, by a private walk,
with the gardens of the mansion. It is an ancient and very venerable
structure, containing many monuments to the Sidneys, and to members of
the families of Dragnowt, Cambridge, Egerton, Head, Darkenol, Pawle,
and Yden. The most interesting and beautifully wrought of the tombs is
to the memory of Sir William Sidney, Knight Banneret, Chamberlain and
Steward to Edward VI., and Lord of the Manor of Penshurst, who died
in 1553. It stands in a small chapel at the west end of the chancel,
and at the foot of the tomb is a very antique figure, carved in
marble, supposed to be a memorial to Sir Stephen de Pencestre. Below
is the vault which contains the dust of generations of the Sidneys.
Sir William Sidney’s monument is a fine example of art, elaborately
and delicately sculptured; it contains a long inscription, engraved
on a brass tablet, the lettering in which is as clear and as sharp
as if it were the work of yesterday. The roof of this chapel is
peculiarly light and elegant. In both exterior and interior it is
highly picturesque. The oak gallery is one of the earliest erections
of the kind that followed the Reformation. Mr. Parker, in his address
to the Archæological Society, thus spoke of the church:—“It exhibited
specimens of the architecture of various periods, and is interesting as
the burial-place of the ancient families that inhabited the mansion.
The north side was of the time of Henry III., and was probably built by
Sir Stephen Penchester; the south side in the time of Edward III. The
chancel chapel at the end of the south aisle was the burial-place of
the Pulteney family. There were also two chantry chapels on the north
side, one of the time of Edward I., and the other of the time of Henry
VI. Amongst the other interesting monuments and tablets there is one
commemorative of the late illustrious Lord Hardinge.”
In all respects, therefore, a visit to PENSHURST—now by railroad
within an hour’s distance of the metropolis—may be described as a
rare intellectual treat, opening a full and brilliant page of history,
abundant in sources of profitable enjoyment to the antiquary, affording
a large recompense to the lover or the professor of Art, and exhibiting
nature under a vast variety of aspects.[32]
WARWICK CASTLE.
WARWICK CASTLE holds foremost rank among the Stately Homes of England,
both from its historical associations, and the important positions
which, in every age, its lords have occupied in the annals of our
country. Situated in one of the most romantic and beautiful districts
of a fertile and productive shire, overlooking the “sweet-flowing
Avon,” and retaining all its characteristics of former strength and
grandeur, Warwick Castle is renowned among the most interesting
remains of which the kingdom can boast. Of its original foundation,
like that of other of our older strongholds, nothing is really known,
although much is surmised. It is said to have been a Celtic settlement,
converted into a fortress by the Roman invaders. However this may
be—and there were several ancient British and Roman roads and stations
in the county—it is not our purpose to inquire. It will suffice to
say that at the time of the Roman conquest of Warwickshire, which is
said to have occurred about the year 50, the county was occupied by
two tribes of ancient Britons, the Cornavii and Dobuni, the boundary
between these territories being, it would seem, the river Avon. Near
the Avon, relics of frontier fortresses on either side have—as at
Brownsover, Brailes, Burton Dassett, Brinklow, &c.,—been found; the
principal British and Roman roads being the Icknield Street, the
Fosse Way, and Watling Street. Warwick is believed, and not without
reason, to have been one of these frontier fortresses; its situation
would seem to lend strength to the supposition. In Anglo-Saxon
times, Warwick formed a part of the kingdom of Mercia, the capital
of which was at Repton, in the neighbouring county of Derby. At that
period it “fell under the dominion of Warremund, who rebuilt it,
and called it Warrewyke, after his own name.” Having been taken and
destroyed by the Danes, it “so rested,” says Dugdale, “until the
renowned Lady Ethelfled, daughter to King Alfred—who had the whole
earldom of Mercia given her by her father to the noble Etheldred in
marriage—repaired its ruins, and in the year of Christ DCCCCXV made a
strong fortification here, called the dungeon, for resistance of the
enemy, upon a hill of earth, artificially raised near the river side;”
and this formed the nucleus of the present building. In 1016 it is
stated to have again suffered from an attack by the Danes, who nearly
demolished the fortifications of the castle and did great damage to the
town. At the time of making the Domesday survey, Warwick was a royal
burgh, and “contained 261 houses, and with its castle was regarded as
a place of much consequence; for orders were issued by the Conqueror
to Turchel to repair and fortify the town and castle of Warwick.
This was carried into effect, by surrounding the town with a strong
wall and ditch, and by enlarging the castle and strengthening its
fortifications.”
In 1172 (19th Henry II.), Warwick Castle was provisioned and garrisoned
at an expense of £10 (which would be equivalent to about £200 of our
present money), on behalf of the king; and during those troublous times
it remained about three years in his hands. In 1173 a sum equal to
about £500 of our money was paid to the soldiers in the castle; and
in the following year, the building requiring considerable repair,
about £50 was laid out upon it, and a considerable sum was paid to
the soldiers who defended it for the king. In 1191 it was again
repaired, and also in the reign of King John. In the 48th of Henry
III. (1263), William Mauduit, Earl of Warwick, was surprised by the
adherents of Simon de Montfort, then holding Kenilworth, and the walls
of the castle were completely destroyed; indeed, so complete was the
devastation, that in 1315 “it was returned in an inquisition as worth
nothing excepting the herbage in the ditches, valued at 6_s._ 8_d._”
In 1337 (12th Edward III.) a new building was commenced, and in that
year a royal licence was granted for the founding of a chantry chapel
in the castle. The building was commenced by Thomas Beauchamp, Earl
of Warwick, whose monument is preserved in the Beauchamp Chapel. In
1394 (17th Richard II.) Guy’s Tower is said to have been completed by
Thomas Beauchamp, second son of the last named Thomas, at a cost of
£395 5_s._ 2_d._, and by him to have been named “Guy’s Tower.” In the
reign of James I. a sum of about £20,000 was expended by the then owner
of the castle, Fulke Greville, Lord Broke, “in making it habitable and
restoring it to its former importance.” From this time downwards, the
castle has undergone many alterations, and so-called “beautifyings,” at
the hands of its different owners; but, despite all, it retained its
ancient grandeur and its most interesting features, and was, as Sir
Walter Scott has said, “the fairest monument of ancient and chivalrous
splendour which remains uninjured by time.”
[Illustration: _The Castle, from the Temple Field._]
And now as to its long line of illustrious and valiant owners.
Passing over the whimsical list of earls, &c., in Rous’s Roll, beginning
with “King Guthelyne, about the sixth of Kinge Alexander the greate
conqueror,” and “Kinge Gwydered, who began to reigne the 4th yere
from the birth of our Lord,” reminding one very forcibly of the
“Promptuaire des Medalles,” which commences the series with those of
“Adam” and of “Heva vx Adam,”—the first we need even hint at, so
obscure is the matter, is Rohan de Arden, who is stated to have married
a daughter and heiress of “Æneas, Earl of Warwick, in the time of
the Saxons,” and to have succeeded to that title and estates. Rohan
de Arden is said to have lived in the reigns of Alfred and Edward
the Elder, and to have been succeeded by the “renowned Guy,” Earl of
Warwick (the legend connected with him will be noticed on subsequent
pages), who had married his only daughter and heiress, Felicia. This
Sir Guy “is said to have been son of Syward, Lord of Wallingford, which
possession Guy also enjoyed.” “He was often in conflicts with the Danes
in defence of his country; did many brave exploits; and, lastly, as
the story goes, after his return from the Holy Land, retired from the
world, and turn’d hermit, and lived in an adjacent cave, now called
‘Guy’s Cliff,’ wherein he died, and was buried in a chapel there,
anno 929, aged about seventy years, leaving issue, by Felicia his
wife, Reynborne,” who succeeded him, and “married Leonora, or Leoneta,
daughter to King Athelstan.” From him the descent is said to have been
continued in regular succession through father and son (Wegeat or
Weyth, Wygod, Alcuin or Aylwin, &c.) to Turchel, who was earl at the
time of the Norman Conquest, and who was allowed by that monarch to
retain possession of the estates, but was ultimately deprived of both
them and of the earldom.
The castle having been strengthened and enlarged, its custody was given
to Henry de Newburgh, a Norman, who had accompanied the Conqueror,
and to him was afterwards granted all the possessions of Turchel de
Warwick, and he was made Earl of Warwick. By some he is said to have
married the daughter of Turchel, but he is also stated to have married
three other ladies. He was succeeded by his son, Roger Newburgh, as
second Earl of Warwick, who married Gundred, daughter of the second
Earl Warren, by whom he had a son, William, who succeeded him as third
earl, and dying without issue, was succeeded by his brother Walleran
as fourth earl, who married twice—first, Margaret de Bohun, and
second, Alice de Harcourt. By his first wife he had two sons, Henry,
who succeeded him, and Walleran. Henry de Newburgh, fifth Earl of
Warwick, was a minor at his father’s death in 1205, and was placed
under Thomas Bassett, of Headington, near Oxford. In the thirteenth
year of King John, he was certified as holding 107 knights’ fees of the
king _in capite_. Having led an active military life, and married two
wives—Margaret D’Oyley and Philippa Bassett—he died 1229, and was
succeeded as sixth earl by his son, Thomas de Newburgh.
[Illustration: _The Keep, from the Inner Court._]
This nobleman married a daughter of the Earl of Salisbury, but died
without issue. His sister and heiress, Margery, who was married to
John de Mareschal, brother to the Earl of Pembroke, succeeded to the
estates, and her husband became seventh earl. This honour he did not
enjoy long, but died without issue “within about half a year of his
brother-in-law the late earl.” The widow then, by special arrangement
of Henry III., married John de Placetis, or Plessitis, a Norman by
birth, and a great favourite of the king. By the Countess of Warwick
he had no issue, and therefore at her death the estates passed to her
cousin, William Mauduit, Baron of Hanslape, who died without issue.
The title and estates then at his death passed to his sister, Isabel
Mauduit, wife of William de Beauchamp, heir of Walter de Beauchamp,
Baron of Elmley, who thus through her became heir to the title, which
however,—she having entered a nunnery,—was not claimed, but passed,
in the person of their son William, into the powerful family of
Beauchamp. By Isabel Mauduit William de Beauchamp the elder had four
sons—William, who succeeded him; John, whose grandson was created
Baron Beauchamp; Walter, ancestor of Fulke Greville, Lord Broke; and
Thomas, who died unmarried. William de Beauchamp, who bore the title
of Earl of Warwick during his father’s lifetime, married Maud, one
of the co-heiresses of Richard Fitzjohn, by whom he had issue with
others, Guy de Beauchamp, who succeeded him as Earl of Warwick. This
Guy, so called, no doubt, after the “renowned Guy,” attended the
king into Scotland, and for his valour at the battle of Falkirk, had
granted to him all the lands of Geoffrey de Mowbray in that kingdom,
with the exception of Okeford, and all the lands of John de Strivelin,
with the castle of Amesfield, and the lands of Drungery. He was one
of the noblemen who seized Piers Gaveston,—against whom he held a
mortal hatred for having called him “the black hound of Arden,”—whom
he conveyed to Warwick Castle, from whence he was removed to Blacklow
Hill, near Warwick, and beheaded. This Guy married Alice, sister and
heiress to Robert de Toni, Baron of Flamstead, and widow of Thomas de
Leybourne, and by her had issue two sons and five daughters. He died
(it was suspected by poison) in 1315, and was succeeded by his eldest
son, Thomas de Beauchamp, who married Catherine Mortimer, daughter of
the Earl of March, by whom he had issue seven sons and ten daughters.
The sons were—Sir Guy, “a stout soldier,” who died in his father’s
lifetime, leaving three daughters, all nuns, at Shouldham; Thomas, his
successor; Reynbourne, so called in memory of the son of the “renowned
Guy;” William, who became Lord Abergavenny; Roger, John, and Jerome.
[Illustration]
Thomas Beauchamp, the eldest son, who succeeded to the honours, was
knighted in the lifetime of his father. He, like his predecessor, made
many additions to the castle, the principal of which was the building
of Guy’s Tower. Having passed a troublous life, being at one time
confined and condemned in the Tower of London, he died in 1401, leaving
by his wife Margaret, daughter of Lord Ferrars of Groby, two daughters,
nuns, and one son, Richard Beauchamp, who succeeded him. This Richard,
Earl of Warwick, is said to “have surpassed even the great valour and
reputation of his ancestors;” and, indeed, his career seems altogether
to have been one of the most brilliant and successful on record; and
besides having a special herald of his own, “Warwick Herald,” he was
styled the “Father of Courtesye.” “He founded the Chantry of Guy’s
Cliff, where before this foundation were Guy’s Chappel and Cottage.”
In this he placed the statue of Guy (still seen, though much defaced),
made several pious donations, and died at Roan in the 17th of Henry VI.
There is extant a very remarkable and curious MS. Life of this renowned
warrior; it is preserved in the British Museum (Julius, E. IV.).
In it the illuminations are very spirited, and are highly valuable
as examples of armour, &c., of the time, no less than as genuine
representations of various valiant deeds in which he was engaged.
[Illustration]
Three of these we give. Our first shows the figures of the Earl of
Warwick and Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, from a picture of the fight
with Philip, Duke of Burgundy, before Calais. The next represents “how
a mighty duke challenged Erle Richard (Beauchamp) for his lady sake,
and in justyng slewe the Duke, and then the Empresse toke the Erle’s
staff and bear from a knight’s shouldre, and for great love and favour
she sett it on her shouldre. Then Erle Richard made one of perle and
precious stones, and offered her that, and she gladly and lovynglee
reseaved it.” The engraving shows the Earl vanquishing the Duke—his
lance has run through his body—and the heralds proclaiming his
victory. Behind are the Emperor Sigismund and his Empress, the latter
of whom is taking, as recounted, the Earl’s badge of the bear and
ragged staff from the shoulders of the knight to place upon her own. On
the Earl’s helmet will be seen his crest of the bear and ragged staff.
[Illustration]
In the third engraving we see the Earl of Warwick setting out in his
own ship, on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. He is dressed in pilgrim
guise, and, staff in hand, is just stepping into the boat to be
conveyed to the ship, his attendants and luggage following him. The
ship is sumptuously fitted with castle and state apartments, and has
the sail emblazoned with the Beauchamp arms, and the pennon, besides
the St. George’s cross of England, bears the bear and ragged staff many
times repeated. This badge will be best understood by the accompanying
engraving. The Earl had two wives; first, Elizabeth, daughter and
heiress of Thomas, Lord Berkley; and second, Isabel, daughter of Thomas
le Despencer, Earl of Gloucester. He was succeeded by his son Henry,
who was then barely fourteen years old.
[Illustration]
This Henry de Beauchamp—who had during his father’s lifetime been
called De Spencer, through his mother’s possessions—when only nineteen
years of age tendered his services to Henry VI. for the defence of
Acquitane, for which the king created him Premier Earl of England,
with leave to distinguish himself and his heirs male by wearing in his
presence a gold coronet.