shows, both inside and out, considerable vestiges which appear to
suggest a Norman origin, and which we may assume were possibly
erected under the immediate auspices, if not under the personal
superintendence, of the Lady Adeliza. The exterior angles of the
eastern end exhibit the quoins so characteristic of the Norman style of
building, and the interior has many fine examples of Anglo-Norman
work, in the pillars, the groined stone roof, the arches at either end,
of a slightly pointed character, with the well-known zig-zag or chevron
moulding. The eastern window is of much later date, being Perpendicular
in style, and it is believed to have been inserted by Thomas Chard, the
last Abbot, as the upper panel of the left-hand side depicts a stag’s
head, whilst the companion panel, parallel to it, contains faint traces
of the oft-repeated monogram, T. C.
The next feature in point of antiquity is what is now termed the
“Monks’ Walk,” a range of ivy-clad buildings running back for nearly
four hundred feet from the eastern end of the Abbey in a northerly
direction, and it is thought that a similar range ran parallel to it.
The remaining wing is on the eastern side, and consists of two storeys,
the lower of which possesses some beautiful Early English work, and
the upper one was probably the monks’ dormitory. In the centre is an
archway of fourteenth century date, and along the entire length of the
wing is a series of lancet windows, almost perfect on the western side,
but destroyed or built up on the eastern. Hearne thus notices this wing:
But now, though one of the chief uses of the cloisters was for
walking, yet in Religious Houses they had sometime galleries for the
same end. We have an instance of it in Ford Abbey in Devonshire,
which is one of the most entire abbeys in England; in the east front
whereof, which is the oldest of the two fronts (though the south front
be the chiefest), there is a gallery called the Monks’ Walk, with
small cells on the right hand, and little narrow windows on the left.
Great as is the antiquarian interest of these fragments of what we may
reasonably presume to have formed part of the original foundation, the
greater part of the existing fabric is the work of Abbot Chard, of whom
we shall have something to say later. The best view of the building is
obtained from the front, where nearly all that meets the eye affords a
striking instance of the consummate taste and devoted perseverance of
this remarkable man under circumstances that may well have discouraged
the boldest. The storm which culminated in the dissolution of the
monastic houses was gathering; but instead of being filled with dismay,
as were so many of his fellow-churchmen, Thomas Chard spared no effort
to beautify his beloved abbey, perhaps that the very glamour of her
loveliness might enchant the eyes of the spoilers and turn them from
their purpose of ruthless spoliation. To a great extent, his work was
preserved, for, although the abbey did suffer, and that grievously,
yet it escaped the wanton wreckage by which most of these foundations
throughout the land were devastated.
[Illustration: Sidney Heath. 1907
Details from Cloisters. Ford Abbey.]
The first portion of Chard’s building to claim attention is the
cloister, late Perpendicular in style, with mullions and window tracery
which present an appearance at once good and bold, and show no signs
of the debasement and formality that are so characteristic of the late
buildings of this period. Above the windows a frieze of stonework
depicts on shields the arms of various benefactors to the Abbey—as
those of Courtenay quartering Rivers, Poulett, the Bishop of Exeter,
etc.; and on many shields appear either the monogram or the name of
Thomas Chard.
An excellent account of the cloister—and, indeed, of the whole Abbey—is
contained in a very rare little volume, entitled, a _History of Ford
Abbey_, written anonymously many years ago, but acknowledged by
ecclesiologists to be the work of one who for a long period must have
resided there, and who thus, by daily associations with the fabric,
became more familiar with its minute architectural details than
could possibly be the case with anyone who had not enjoyed a similar
privilege. As this volume is rare, as well as interesting and accurate
in regard to its architectural information, no apology is needed for
quoting certain passages from it here. In reference to the cloister we
learn that:
The cloister is divided by a suite of rooms and arcade from the
grand porch-tower, so conspicuous for its architectural beauty, and
which in days gone by was no doubt the original entrance. It is
richly ornamented with first-rate sculpture, some of it obviously
unfinished; the central boss in the vaulting uncut; and the blank
shield in the centre, below the basement window, encircled by the
garter, was doubtless intended for the royal arms. The uncut shield
on the sinister side, having the pelican and dolphin for supporters,
was for Courtenay. The two small shields cut are charged with a lion
rampant for De Redvers, and cheeky two bars for Baldwin de Brioniis.
Immediately over the arch of the door is a large scroll shield of a
more modern date, bearing the arms of Prideaux, impaling those of his
second wife, Ivery. On the upper part of this elegant specimen of Dr.
Chard’s taste, in the centre shield, are his initials, T.C., with the
crosier and _mitre_ (Dr. Chard was a Suffragan Bishop); and the two
smaller shields, with the T.C., crosier, and abbot’s cap, alternate
with the stag’s head cabossed—supposed to be the bearing of the then
Bishop of Exeter; and just below the battlement of the tower is the
following inscription:—
AN̄’O D’N̄I MILLESIMO QUINGESIMO VIC^{MO} OCTA^O. A D’N̄O
FACTUM EST THOMA CHARD, ABB.
Now, while there is no doubt that Chard united in his own person the
offices of Abbot and Suffragan Bishop, the above account is at fault in
attributing “the stag’s head cabossed” to the then Bishop of Exeter,
for it formed no part of the armorial bearings either of Bishop Oldham
or of his successor, Veysey. In a letter from Dr. Chard to Cardinal
Wolsey “the stag’s head cabossed” is used as the _seal_, and is
expressly referred to in the body of the letter as “_sigillum meum_,”
and we find the same device associated with his name or monogram in
various parts of the Abbey buildings; the most probable solution
being that it relates to the ancient cognizance of the Abbey, or the
site whereon it stands, which, as we have already seen, was Hertbath
(_balneum cervorum_).
[Illustration: Panel from Cloisters. Ford Abbey.]
Further confirmation of Dr. Chard’s double office of Bishop and Abbot
is found in a remarkable panel in the frieze (_see illustration_),
which appears to have been designed for the purpose of attesting this
fact, if not in actual words, yet in unmistakable and appropriate
symbolism. The small top corner shields of this panel contain the
letters T. C., and the lower ones an abbot’s and a bishop’s staff,
respectively; whilst on the hatchment-shaped panel in the centre
occurs the stag’s head and bishop’s staff, the name “Tho. Chard” on a
scroll entwined round an abbot’s staff; and above these, as a fitting
termination to the whole, appears the abbot’s cap, surmounted by the
bishop’s mitre.
[Illustration: THE CHAPEL, FORD ABBEY.]
The entrance porch contains a fine west window of the same character as
those of the adjoining great hall, which in their turn correspond with
those of the cloister, and above them is a frieze of grotesque animals.
To quote once more from the book already referred to:
This part of the building has been shorn of its length, as, on minute
inspection, will appear. The royal arms are not in the centre, as they
no doubt originally were. They consist of a rose crowned, encircled
with a garter, and supported by a dragon and greyhound, the badges of
Henry VII.... Although the remaining portion of this wing has been
altered, it was built by Thomas Chard, the battlements corresponding
with the tower and chapel; and as a more decisive proof that it was
so, there is, at the western end of the building, but hid by ivy, the
portcullis cut in stone, another of the badges of Henry VII.; and to
the north, or back side, are the initials T. C., with the crosier and
cap.
The ancient guest-chamber, so integral a part of these old foundations,
appears to have been at right angles to the great hall, as it was
noticed some years ago on the collapse of portions of the ceiling that
the ancient timber roof was still _in situ_. We shall have a little
to say later about the alteration and adaptation of the interior for
the purposes of a modern mansion, when, happily, much of Dr. Chard’s
work was not disturbed; but we have, unfortunately, no record of the
condition of the fabric prior to the restorations of the above prelate,
and his task seems to have been little less than the rebuilding of the
greater part of the edifice. The antiquary Leland, visiting the Abbey
during Dr. Chard’s alterations, writes: “_Cœnobium nunc sumptibus plane
non credendis abbas magnificentissime restaurat_.”[47] This beautiful
structure had scarcely had its delicate stonework mellowed by the soft
winds from the Devonshire moors, when the Dissolution, long impending,
burst in fury upon the larger religious houses, and on March 8th, 1539,
Thomas Chard was induced to sign the surrender of his beloved Abbey
of Ford, which was endeared to him by many sacred associations, and on
which he had lavished his own private fortune and the artistic genius
of a master mind. The following is a translation (according to Dr.
Pring) of the document of surrender, the wording of which, we may be
sure, accorded ill with the reluctant hands that attached the names and
seals:—
To all the faithful in Christ, to whom this present writing shall
come: Thomas Chard, abbot of the monastery or abbey, and of the
Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of Ford, in the county of Devon,
of the Cistercian order, and the same place and convent, everlasting
salvation in the Lord.
[Sidenote:
Per me Thomā abbem
Willūs Rede, prior
John Cosen
Robte Yetminster.
Johēs Newman.
Johēs Bridgwat^{r}.
Thomas Stafford.
Johēs Ffawell.
W. Winsor.
Elizeus Oliscomb.
William Keynston.
William Dynyngton.
Richard Kingesbury.
]
Know ye that we, the aforesaid abbot and convent, by our unanimous
assent and consent, with our deliberate minds, right, knowledge,
and mere motion, from certain just and reasonable causes especially
moving our minds and consciences have freely, and of our own accord
given and granted, and by these presents do give, grant, and surrender
and confirm to our illustrious prince, Henry VIII., by the grace of
God, king of England, lord of Ireland, supreme head of the Church
of England in this land, all our said monastery or abbacy of Ford
aforesaid. And also all and singular manors, lordships, messuages,
etc. In testimony whereof, we, the aforesaid abbot and convent, have
caused our common seal to be affixed to these presents. Given at our
Chapter House of Ford aforesaid, on the 8th day of the month of March,
and in the thirtieth year of the reign of King Henry aforesaid. Before
me, William Petre, one of the clerks, etc., the day and year above
written.
By me, Willm̄n Petre.
No sooner had the document been signed than the work of pillage
commenced; but one is inclined to agree with the Devonshire historian
Prince, that, “by what lucky chance he knew not, Ford Abbey escaped
better than its fellows, and continueth for the greatest part standing
to this day.” At the same time, there is little doubt that much havoc
took place, although, perhaps, not to the extent recorded by Risdon,
who says it now merely “somewhat showeth of what magnificence once it
was.”
It is just possible that Thomas Chard’s beautiful work softened the
hearts of the spoilers, and its very wealth of ornament caused it to be
retained as too valuable a prize to be utterly demolished; but, whether
standing entire or razed to the ground, it appears to have been an
encumbrance, for on October 28th, in the year of its surrender, it was
granted by the King, “with all and singular its manors, lordships, and
messuages, etc.,” to Richard Pollard, Esq.
At the time of its dissolution the annual revenues of the Abbey were
computed at £374 10s. 6¼d. by Dugdale, and at £381 10s. 6d. by
Speed, and the net revenue was, no doubt, somewhere between these two
sums.
Born probably at Tracy, near Awliscombe, Honiton, about the year 1470,
Thomas Chard was one of the most distinguished ecclesiastics of his
day, and evidently, as his works attest, an accomplished architect and
a most munificent man. The highly ornamental façade of the institution
over which he presided as last abbot is considered to be the finest
example of its kind in the West of England. On entering holy orders,
Chard appears to have held several livings in Somerset, Devon, and
Cornwall, and was elected Abbot of Ford about 1520. Previous to this,
in 1508, he was appointed Suffragan to Bishop Oldham by the title
“Episcopus Solubricencis,” in 1513 Warden of the College of Lady St.
Mary, at Ottery, and in 1515 Prior of the Benedictine or Cluniac Priory
of Montacute. It has been suggested that as Dr. Chard was Warden of
Ottery College about the time that the beautiful Dorset Chapel was
built (1513-18)—one of the most lovely pieces of Perpendicular building
we possess—the inspiration of this eminent architect may have done much
to influence the splendid design of this portion of the Church of Lady
St. Mary at Ottery.
It was Bishop Chard who officiated for Bishop Veysey, of Exeter, at the
noble obsequies of Katherine Courtenay, daughter of Edward IV., and
widow of William Courtenay, Earl of Devon, buried at Tiverton in 1527.
It is thought that his choice for this office was determined by his
headship of the Monastery of Ford, of which foundation the Courtenays
had always been great patrons and benefactors.
The burial place of Thomas Chard is unknown, but may possibly be in
the chapel of the Hospital of St. Margaret, near Honiton. Dr. Oliver,
who visited this chapel many years ago, writes: “The west door is
secured by a large sepulchral slab, to which was formerly affixed a
brass plate.” This has long since disappeared, but many writers agree
that there is little doubt that this slab covered the dust of the
Abbot-Bishop.
[Illustration: Seal of Ford Abbey.
Full Size]
The old abbey seal,[48] which had eluded the research of many
antiquaries, including the editors of Dugdale’s _Monasticon_, was
discovered by Mr. Davidson, of Sector, near Axminster. It is of oval
form, the usual shape for monastic seals, and is divided into three
compartments, in the uppermost of which is a bell suspended in a
steeple, and in the canopy beneath we see the Blessed Virgin with the
Divine Infant on her knee. On one side is the shield of Courtenay,
bearing—_or_, three torteaux, with a label of three points. On the
other side is the shield of Beaumont—barry of six, _vair_ and _gules_.
The lowest compartment occupies rather more than half the seal inside
the inscription, and shows an abbot standing, in his right hand a
pastoral staff, and holding in his left hand a book; and at his feet
are three monks kneeling, with their hands together in supplication.
With this description of the seal the claims of Ford Abbey to figure in
this volume of “Memorials” are practically finished, yet it may be of
interest to continue a little further in the personal and architectural
history of this wonderful old house. As we have seen, Henry VIII.
granted the abbey and all its appurtenances to Richard Pollard, Esq.,
who was subsequently knighted by Henry VIII., and from this gentleman
it passed to his son, Sir John Pollard, who sold it to his cousin,
Sir Amias Poulett, of Hinton St. George, and Curry Mallet, who had
held the office of head steward of the abbey under the _régime_ of Dr.
Chard (as had his father, Sir Hugh Poulett, before him), and who was
for a short time the custodian of Mary Queen of Scots. From Sir Amias
Poulett, the abbey and estates passed by purchase to William Rosewell,
Esq., Solicitor-General to Queen Elizabeth, and thence to his son, Sir
Henry Rosewell, who, in 1649, conveyed them to Sir Edmund Prideaux,
Bart., of Netherton, county Devon. He was educated at Cambridge, and
after being admitted a student of the Inner Temple was called to the
Bar, 23rd November, 1623. He was returned as Burgess for Lyme Regis and
took part against the King. He appears to have been a man of marked
abilities, as in 1643 we find him appointed one of the Commissioners of
the Great Seal, and three years later he was granted the privileges of
a King’s Counsel, the combined offices being worth some £7,000 a year.
It is somewhat singular that, while holding the first-named office he
was allowed to retain his seat in Parliament, and when he relinquished
the Great Seal, the House of Commons, as an acknowledgment of his
valuable services, ordered that he should practise within the Bar,
and have precedence next after the Solicitor-General, to which office
he himself was raised in 1647. Although attached to the Parliamentary
cause he took no part in the King’s trial, nor in the trials of the
Duke of Hamilton and others. Nevertheless, he shortly afterwards
accepted from the dominant party the office of Attorney-General, a
post which he retained for the remainder of his life. His remarkable
organising abilities were shown in 1649, when, as Master of the Post
Messengers and Carriers, a post he had acquired in 1644, he established
a weekly conveyance to every part of the kingdom, a great improvement
on the system he had found in vogue, and under which letters were sent
by special messengers, one of whose duties it was to supply relays of
horses at a given mileage. It is said that the emoluments accruing to
his private purse from this improved postal service were not less than
£15,000 a year. Sir Edmund was twice married, and by his first wife
Jane, daughter and sole heiress of Henry Collins, Esq., of Ottery St.
Mary, he had a daughter Mary. His second wife was Margaret, daughter
and co-heir of William Ivery, of Cotthay, Somerset, and by her he had
three daughters, and a son Edmund, who succeeded him at Ford Abbey.
It was Sir Edmund Prideaux who brought Inigo Jones to the Abbey to
carry out certain alterations, which he did by inserting square-headed
windows in the walls of the state rooms, and by adding these and other
classical affectations on to the old Gothic building he destroyed the
harmonious composition of the whole, and it is not, perhaps, a matter
of regret that this architect died in 1654, before his designs for
converting this fine old house into a sham “classical” building were
carried out, although the interior of the house was embellished with
magnificent decorations and the whole place made into a beautiful,
comfortable, and habitable mansion.
Edmund Prideaux, the younger, had for his tutor John Tillotson,
who afterwards became Archbishop of Canterbury. Although he took
but little part in the grave political troubles of his day, he is
remembered in history as the entertainer of the ill-starred Duke of
Monmouth, who visited Ford in 1680, on his journey of pleasure to the
west country, where he was royally entertained by his host, whose
connection with his noble guest did not end here, as after the Rye
House affair he was suspected of favouring the Duke, and the house was
searched for arms. When the Duke subsequently landed at Lyme Regis in
1685, Mr. Prideaux, like a prudent man, remained quietly at home, but
was visited at night by a small party of rebels requiring horses, and
it is said that one of them while in the house drank to the health of
Monmouth, which indiscretion becoming known in London, a warrant was
issued for Mr. Prideaux’s arrest, and he was taken to the Tower on a
charge of high treason. Notwithstanding that nothing could be proved
against him, he was kept a close prisoner until he had paid the sum of
£15,000 to the infamous Jeffreys, when his pardon was signed on March
20th, 1685. On the accession of William III. he petitioned Parliament
for leave to bring in a Bill to charge the estates of Jeffreys with the
restitution of this money, but the Act failed to pass.
The sole surviving daughter of Edmund Prideaux (and his wife, Amy
Fraunceis), in 1690, married her cousin, Francis Gwyn, Esq., of
Llansandr, co. Glamorgan, who thus inherited Ford Abbey, and was
succeeded in the estates by his fourth son, Francis Gwyn, who, dying
without issue in 1777, devised this house and all his other lands
to his kinsman, John Fraunceis, or Francis, of Combe-Florey, on
condition of his taking the name of Gwyn, and in this family the
Abbey remained until the decease of a John Francis Gwyn, in 1846,
when it was purchased by G. F. W. Miles, Esq., and afterwards by Miss
Evans. It is now the property of Mrs. Freeman Roper. The famous Jeremy
Bentham rented the abbey early in the nineteenth century and here he
entertained James Mill and other social and literary magnates. One of
the numerous Francis Gwyns was Queen Anne’s Secretary for War, and to
him Her Majesty presented the magnificent tapestries now hung in the
saloon. They are worked from original cartoons by Raphael, said to have
been designed at the request of Pope Leo. Charles I. is said to have
purchased the cartoons on the advice of Rubens, and to have removed
them from Brussels in 1630. They were first placed, it is thought, at
Whitehall, and William III. had them hung at Hampton Court Palace,
where they remained until 1865, when they were taken to their present
home, the Victoria and Albert Museum. These designs were the property
of His Majesty King Edward VII., who has, I think, recently bequeathed
them to the nation.
It was in 1842 that, for the convenience of county business, the parish
of Thorncombe, containing Ford Abbey, was transferred to the county of
Dorset.
DORCHESTER[49]
BY THE LORD BISHOP OF DURHAM, D.D.
If Bede is right, the Roman armies did not leave our shores till A.D.
452. Whether it was then, so near the end of the old Western Empire,
or a little earlier, it must have been a dark hour for Dorset, which
no doubt saw something of the embarkation; some considerable force,
in that strict order which to the last the legions maintained, would
no doubt march from Durnovaria to Clavinio (Weymouth) to take ship.
The light of history falls faint over Dorset and Dorchester for many
a year from that Roman exodus. But it is interesting to find that the
“Saxons,” to use the familiar term, took a century and a half to master
Dorset; our fathers must have made a stubborn fight against endless
raids. It is at least possible that the victory of Badon Hill—in
which, says the Arthurian legend, the Saxon hordes were ruinously
beaten by the “Britons,” led perhaps by a Rome-trained chief—was
won in Dorset; Badbury, near Wimborne, in the belief of Edwin Guest
of Cambridge, was Badon. But Wessex in due time absorbed Dorset and
Dorchester; and now our fields and woodlands were well sprinkled with
royal manors, while our town, beyond a doubt, still kept much of its
old dignity and culture; for the Saxons left the walled cities largely
alone, after disarming their inhabitants. Durnovaria, with its name
changed to Dorceastre, still stood fenced with its massive wall and
still contained many a stately house, tessellated and frescoed. Kings
of Wessex doubtless visited Dorset often, for the chase, and for
sustenance on their manors, and to keep state at Dorceastre. Alfred,
in all likelihood, was known by sight in the town. His grandson,
Athelstan, allowed it the right of coinage—a sure testimony to its
importance.