Back to top
Frances Stackhouse Acton (1794–1881), born Knight, was one of those widely educated, multi-talented women who seem to crop up everywhere you look in 18th- and 19th-century England. In early 1812 she married Thomas Pendarves Stackhouse, whose name was expanded to Stackhouse Acton or Stackhouse-Acton—sources disagree about the hyphen—after he inherited the Acton property. Thomas was a quarter-century older, and their only child died just short of her 18th birthday, giving Fanny plenty of time to devote to writing and drawing, archæology and botany. The latter interest was inherited from her father, Thomas Andrew Knight, the owner of Downton Castle in Hereford. (There are no pictures of his house in the present book, since it’s in the wrong county, but you can find several in Humphry Davy’s Salmonia.)
Long before there were coffee tables, there were coffee-table books. According to the Preface, this one was written to raise money for the Salop Infirmary and the Eye and Ear Dispensary. The Salop Infirmary opened in 1744, became the Royal Salop Infirmary in 1914, and closed in 1977. The Shropshire Eye and Ear Dispensary was established in 1818, became the Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital in 1875, and closed in 1998. Both institutions moved into new and bigger buildings in the late 1870s, within ten years after Castles and Old Mansions was published; perhaps the money really did help. They were definitely built to last: the onetime Royal Salop Infirmary is now a shopping centre, while the Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital has been turned into flats.
Keen-eyed readers will notice that the name Frances Stackhouse Acton does not, in fact, appear anywhere in the book. But her identity can’t have been much of a secret; in the latter part of the century, assorted books and articles quote Castles and Old Mansions, always naming her as author.
A number of houses featured in the book are described as inhabited by farmers or “a tenant”, implying that a 16th-century manor house was just about adequate for a 19th-century tenant farmer. One former Castle has sunk still lower, being used only “as an out-house” to its successor. This is not quite as funny in an English book as it would be in an American one, but it’s still pretty disheartening.
The term “co-heiress” shows up often in the historical essays. Primogeniture applied only to males; if a man died leaving no sons, his estate was divided equally among all his daughters, however many there might be. But don’t tell the writers of Downton Abbey, or you’ll lose most of Season One.
The first three names, in “quotation marks”, are from the author’s Preface. Names in [brackets] aren’t mentioned in the Preface, though they are quoted just as often. Perhaps even more often: in the body of the book, Parker is quoted by name many times, while Eyton and Blakeway have to make do with a single comprehensive credit up front.
All illustrations were printed as unpaginated plates, generally two or three between every leaf of text. I have put each illustration above the house it depicts; where a single house had more than one picture, I’ve alternated them between paragraphs.
It is a good thing each picture was individually labeled, because there seem to have been some lapses in communication between author and engraver, or perhaps between editor and bookbinder. When two houses are pictured on the same page, the one shown on the bottom is often discussed first in the text—and listed first in the Index. Still more tellingly, when the text refers to an “upper sketch” and “lower sketch”, as often as not they are reversed.
As far as I know, the book was only printed once, in 1868.
Several names are spelled differently in the text than in the illustrations; the Indexes give further room for alternate spellings. The author, or her editor, was unsure how to spell “crenellate”, giving us one each of “crenelate”, “crenellate” and “creneltate”. To make up for it, they were absolutely certain the word is “freize”. Two widely separated passages are peppered with “ye” for “the”. Since each is quoted without attribution, there’s no telling whether it was Frances Stackhouse-Acton, or some intermediate source, who failed to understand the function of “y” as a stand-in for “þ” (thorn).
Typographical errors are marked with and are listed again at the end of each selection. The word “invisible” means that the letter or punctuation mark is missing, but there is an appropriately sized blank space.
And, finally: Yes, there are four Indexes. Some readers might consider this excessive, but it means you have no excuse for not finding the subject you are interested in.
he Anastatic Societies having met with encouragement in the object of preserving memorials of Old Buildings, (not of sufficient importance to deserve a place in Archæological works of a more expensive character,) together with the very unexpected result of an attempt to raise a small sum for an unfortunate family by the publication of a little volume of extracts relating to the places in Shropshire which were made Garrisons in the Civil War of Charles I.; have given rise to suggestions from various quarters, that a similar volume, consisting of sketches of some of the old Mansions of the County might produce a small sum in aid of the funds of the Salop Infirmary, and the Eye and Ear Dispensary; and in this hope the attempt is made. The greater part of the sketches have been taken from nature, and others have been copied from old drawings. The Anastatic process has no claim to any higher merit, than that it is capable of giving correct outlines, (and in abler hands this would have been done more successfully), and its cheapness, which enables a number of examples to be given at a small cost.
The short historical notes have chiefly been derived from Mr. Eyton’s Antiquities, Blakeway’s Sheriffs of Shropshire; and the few architectural descriptions have been mostly abridged from Mr. Parker’s Domestic Architecture.
In all cases where it has been possible the names of the Builders, and the dates of the Buildings have been ascertained; but of the small Manor Houses often little is known, except that the property was in possession of certain persons at the time that the style of the building would indicate it to have been erected, and the Sketches have been arranged accordingly, as tending in some degree to show the changes produced in Domestic Architecture, by the progress of civilization, and the altered habits of the people.6
The Keep Tower and the Hall were the distinguishing features in the Norman Castle, in the latter the family dined, while the vassals congregated round its central hearth during the day; and on its floor they slept at night. The earliest specimen of a Baronial Hall, in any state of preservation, in Shropshire, is that of Stoke-Say Castle, which was in existence before 1290. In the 14th century the Dining-room had begun to supersede the Hall; the necessity for a large number of dependents had ceased in consequence of the establishment of independent traders, and workmen; Serfs were no longer fed at their Master’s tables; and the more tranquil state of the Country when the wars of the Roses had terminated, rendered it no longer necessary to have a band of armed retainers on the spot: and guests were not accompanied by so many followers.
There appears to have been an interval between the Edwardian, and the Elizabethan periods, during which few Domestic Buildings were erected in the border countries; fortresses were no longer necessary, and the inhabitants had not recovered from the ruinous effects of the struggles between the rival houses of York and Lancaster, and had not yet acquired sufficient wealth by habits of peaceful industry to expend much on their houses. Shropshire however possesses two buildings of the 15th century, which Mr. Parker considers to be among the best examples in England, viz:—the Prior’s House belonging to Wenlock Abbey, and an old House in Butchers’ Row, in Shrewsbury,—the one of a Country, the other of a Town House. He also, in his work on Domestic Architecture, mentions Langley and Plaish Halls as good specimens of the time of Henry VIII; whilst of Elizabethan and Jacobean Houses, almost every parish furnishes examples, from the rich details of Moreton Corbet, and the beautiful outline of Condover among the stone buildings, and of Pitchford and Park Hall among those of timber, (the latter a style of building almost unknown except in the western counties of England), to the small picturesque Houses, once the homes of gentlemen of moderate fortunes, now abandoned by their descendants, and only occupied as farm-houses. Some of these small specimens have been selected for this work, with the view of affording hints for building farm-houses and cottages of the present day. Probably many better examples than those given may have been overlooked, but as the object of this work is to add a mite to the funds of two charitable Institutions, it is hoped that its shortcomings will be treated with indulgence, and that the admirers of old houses will deem it better to have these humble records of some specimens that have already passed away, and of others that have been much altered and defaced, rather than that all remembrance of the homes of their forefathers should be lost.
The Anastatic process has no claim to any higher merit, than that it is capable of giving correct outlines . . . and its cheapness
[The anastatic printing process, developed in the early 1840s, offered a new way of producing facsimiles directly from the original book or drawing. This led to the Anastatic Drawing Society, whose interests included old buildings.]
distinguishing features in the Norman Castle, in the latter
[Comma splice unchanged.]
an interval between the Edwardian, and the Elizabethan periods
[I don’t think she means only the five years from 1553 to 1558.]
HE state of this County in the Norman period is thus described by Camden. “Shropshire is replenished with castles standing thicke on every side, by reason it was a frontier Country in regard of repelling the Welshmen in the marches bordering thereupon; where our ancestors by an ancient word, named the confines of this Shire towards Wales, the Marches, and divers noblemen in this tract were called Barons of the Marches, or Lords Marchers, who had every one in his owne territory a certaine jurisdiction in their owne courts, ministered law unto the inhabitants, with sundry priviledges and immunities.”—Camden’s Brit.
The Norman lords, to whom the most considerable grants of land held of the Crown for military service were made, were Fitz Alan for Clun and Oswestry; Fitz Warrene for Whittington and Alberbury; Le Strange for Ellesmere, Knockin and Middle; and Peter Corbet for Caus.8
A century later, lands had become more subdivided, and the efforts of the Welsh to repossess themselves of the territories of which they had been despoiled, and the disturbed state of England during the reigns of Henry I. and Stephen, made it necessary that the under-tenants of the great feudal lords should build themselves houses capable of being defended; and hence arose numerous fortified mansions of greater or less importance: of many of these a mound and a ditch alone mark the site. It was during the reign of Henry III. that the greater number of these small castles were built, and as at this time it had become necessary to obtain a license from the crown before a fortified house could be erected, the dates of them can be determined with accuracy, though sometimes the license was obtained for making additions to older buildings, and in others, delays seem to have prevented the execution. In a paper of Mr. Eyton’s, on the Castles of Shropshire, he states that Ludlow and Holgate were built in the interval of twelve years which occurred between the Conquest, and the compilation of the Domesday survey; those of Shrewsbury and Bridgnorth were of a date equally early, but till a comparatively late period they were mere garrisons, and were held by the Sheriff for the crown.
Of the Castles of Clun, Whittington, and Ludlow, the ruins show the original extent; while the limits of many others are only represented by shapeless masses of wall.9
OLGATE CASTLE was founded by one Helget, one of William’s Norman followers, in the interval between the Conquest and the year 1078, when the Doomsday survey was made. It was at first called Stantone, but after a time obtained the name of its owner. Henry I. was entertained here by a descendant of Helgate in 1109, and six years later a great court was held within its walls by his vice general, Richard de Belemeis, to settle certain disputes relating to property belonging to the Prior of Wenlock.
About the time of Richard, the manor and Castle passed to the Mauduits of Warminster as collateral heirs to Helgate’s Barony, and by them it was sold in the reign of Edward I. to his brother, Richard Plantagenet, king of the Romans, who conveyed it to Robert Burnell, Bishop of Bath and Wells, Lord Chancellor, and builder of Acton Burnell Castle. In the next reign, the heiress of the Burnells married Lord Lovel, from whom Holgate descended to the Duke of Norfolk, who forfeited his estate by his rising in favour of Mary Stuart; but it appears from Leland that this portion of his belongings had been previously parted with. Leland,—“Helgate Castle standeth under the Clee hilles, hard by Corve-dale, a six miles from Ludlowe; the Duke of Norfolk exchanged it for other lands with Mr. Dudley.”
On the breaking out of the Civil War, the Castle was made a garrison for the King, and it was probably soon afterwards so far demolished as to render it untenable by either party (which was often done by the party in possession when no longer convenient to retain strong places for themselves; in order to prevent their being available for the enemy); for in 1645, when a party was sent out by the Parliamentary Committee at Shrewsbury to take Holgate, Broncroft, and Stokesay Castles, it was found to be too dilapidated to be worth holding, while garrisons were placed in Broncroft and Stokesay in order to keep possession of the roads to Ludlow, which were still in the hands of the Royalists.10
The round tower, which is now built into a modern farm-house, seems to have been part of the Norman building. It belongs to Mr. Thursby Pelham. The Church is Norman, with an elaborately carved font and door. The place must formerly have been of considerable importance, as in the reign of Henry III. a charter was obtained for a weekly market to be held here, and a fair on the eve, the day, and the day after, the Feast of the Holy Trinity.
HE history of this Castle has been so fully written, and is so generally known, that it is useless to say more than that the Keep Tower, which the sketch represents, was built by Roger de Lacy, very soon after the Norman Conquest, and it is supposed that the part erected by him consisted only of the Keep and the small court in which the well is situated. The round Chapel was the work of Joce de Dinan, in the reign of Stephen, and the limits of the outer walls of the Castle were the same as at present. The sketches of the Keep and the round Chapel show their appearance in 1684, when the drawings from which they are copied were made by Thomas Dinely, who was in the suite of Henry, first duke of Beaufort, when he made a progress through North and South Wales, the account of which is contained in a M.S. in the Library at Badminton, entitled ‘Cambra Britannica.’
The following is his account of the Castle at that time, where they arrived on Saturday, August 4th. “August 5th, 1684. The next day being Sunday, after a great and rich enterteinment provided for him in the Castle, which ended in the afternoone with great forme, His Grace went to the Chappel called Prince Arthur’s Chappel, where service was read by the Rev. — (name unknown). In the Chappel you will find that eight Bishopps have been Lord Presidents, 11 ye first whereof was by inscription there Wyllyam Smith, Bishoppe of Lyncoln.* The Castell Hall is very faire, having near ye King’s arms this inscription in letters of gold,—‘Richard, Lorde Vaughan, Earle of Carberry, Lord President of Wales and ye Marches,’ and opposite this is placed ye firearms of ye Castell. In a window on ye left hand ascending to ye chiefe table are ye armes of England, onely painted, but not quartered with France. Sir Walter Lacy is deemed founder of this Castell; this appears by an inscription in the Chappell, with his armes.”
“The council chamber, where ye judges dine, hath armes and inscriptions of ye Lords Presidents that have been. Next, ye greet hall and ye room below stairs, and ye council chamber, ye Presidents’ bed chamber, with a withdrawing room for privacy. Above stairs is a large dining room, famous for its roof of large tymbers; near this is Prince Arthur’s bed chamber, and was said to have a double heart, according to ye device seen therein painted and gilded against ye wainscot. Next above stair to be considered is ye Lord Presidents’ Lady’s room, and her bed chamber, furnished by his Majestie with lemon coloured damask. In ye window is painted an escutcheon, France and England quarterly, a labell of three ermine encompassed with a garter.”
Beyond the Chapel is seen in the sketch the great hall in which Comus was performed, (this has been added to Thomas Dinely’s sketch), and adjoining to the Keep are the buildings erected by Sir Henry Sydney. It is scarcely necessary to state that the court of the Marches was held at Ludlow, till it was abolished in the reign of William and Mary, and that the Castle was the residence of the Lord President.
The Castle was garrisoned in the Civil War for the King, and Prince Rupert superintended the throwing up ditches and other means of defence in person. It was the last place in Shropshire that held out against the Parliament, but it was at last taken by Colonel Birch, in June, 1646.
* Oak panels with the arms of the Lords President may be seen at the Bull Inn, at Ludlow, and have been engraved in the Hon. R. H. Clive’s History of Ludlow.
a M.S. in the Library at Badminton, entitled ‘Cambra Britannica.’
[Text unchanged; it’s really Cambria. The same passage, with the same spellings, is cited in a long footnote in an 1881 article in Archaeologia Cambrensis. Unfortunately, the author—like Frances Stackhouse-Acton—does not name his source; I doubt either of the two had the original 17th-century MS before them.]
August 5th, 1684.
[Printed as shown; it’s really 1634. The occasion was the first performance of Milton’s masque Comus.]
LUN CASTLE is supposed to have been built by Picot de Say, the Doomsday Lord of the manor. This branch of the De Says merged in an heiress Isabel, who about the beginning of the reign of Henry II. became the wife of William Fitz Alan, of Oswestry, after whose death she married successively with Geoffrey de Vere, and William Botterall. It was about the year 1195, while Botterall was holding the barony of Clun, that the Castle was stormed and burnt by Rhys, a Prince of South Wales, and in consequence of John Fitz Alan rebelling against King John, the sovereign himself led an army to besiege the Castle in 1216, and in 1234 the town was burnt by Llewellyn, but the Castle was not taken.
An inquest of the date of 1272 (56th of Henry III.) in the muniment room at Powis Castle, gives the following description of the state of the Castle at that period. “At Clun there is a certain small Castle competently built, but the head of the tower of — is necessary to be covered, and the bridge of the Castle ought to be repaired; and without the said Castle is a Bailey enclosed with a ditch, and there is a certain gate begun in the wall, and a certain part of the wall is begun, of the length of two hundred feet; and in the same Bailey there are houses, to wit, a grange, and a stable, and a bakehouse in a decaying state.”
The descendants of John Fitz Alan and Isabel de Say became Earls of Arundel, and continued to hold the barony of Clun, interrupted only by occasional forfeitures to the crown on the attainder of its owners, till the last of the line, Henry Fitz Alan, left an only daughter, Lady Mary Fitz Alan, married to the Duke of Norfolk. On his rebellion Queen Elizabeth seized his estates, and Clun remained in the royal keeping till 1603, when it was restored by James to two grandsons of Mary Fitz Alan, viz: Thomas Howard, created Earl of Suffolk, and Henry, Earl of Northampton, by whom it was sold in 1677. 13 Leland says of this Castle more than a century before, that “it was somewhat ruines. It hath been both stronge and well builded. By Clunne is a great forest of redde dere and rooes.”
The Honour of Clun is one of the most extensive in Shropshire, and its lords had unusual privileges,—among them that of inflicting capital punishments. In the inquest before quoted, one William Kempe is seen to hold a messuage and croft on the tenure of carrying to Shrewsbury the heads of felons. The explanation of this curious service is, that when any felon was captured on the land of the lord, and tried and condemned at Shrewsbury, the lord sent his own officer to fetch the culprit to be executed at Clun, and the heirs of William Kempe were bound to carry the head back to Shrewsbury, to prove that the right person had been executed. Another service due from some of the tenants was that of providing meal to feed the lord’s hounds.
In the reign of Henry VIII. the forest of Clun contained 1700 acres and a considerable quantity of timber was still standing.
HIS Manor appears in Doomsday as one of those held by Roger Fitz Corbet, as tenant of Roger de Montgomery, the Norman Earl of Shrewsbury. The date of the erection of the Castle is unknown, but the flat buttresses of the fragment that remains show it to have been early Norman work. One tower only is standing, but tradition affirms that the original building consisted of three more, the materials of which were carried to Alberbury Church for building the Leighton Chapel; and that the existing 14 tower was only a part of the Castle is evident from the greater indications of power to repel attacks from without, which two of its sides exhibit. Tradition also asserts that this tower had formerly an upper story, finished by a parapet and battlements several feet higher than the eaves of the present roof. On a level with the tops of the buttresses there are the remains of an internal platform, quite strong enough to have supported such a superstructure.
Wattlesborough passed from the Corbets to the Mouthès, and from them to the Burghs, and lastly to the Leightons. It is one of the few estates which have never been sold, but has passed in regular descent from its Norman lords to its present possessor, Sir Baldwin Leighton, in whose park it stands. It was inhabited by these successive families till 1712, when the family removed to Loton, and it is now occupied as a farm-house.
ISHOP’S CASTLE was built by a Bishop of Hereford before 1078, for the object of guarding the great Episcopal Manor of Lydbury from the aggressions of the Welsh, and it was then called Lydbury Castle. The manor of Lydbury was given to the Church of Hereford in return for a miraculous cure of one Egwen Shakehead at the shrine of St. Ethelbert, some time previous to the Norman Conquest; the disease was palsy, and his offering consisted of 18,000 acres. It was not a popular residence with the Prelates, for in 1263, Prince Edward being at Shrewsbury, wrote to his royal father to desire him to command Bishop Agneblame to abide in the Castle of Lydbury North, for the better security of the March in that quarter; but when Henry arrived at Hereford in the following year, the Bishop was still absent from his diocese, and the King addressed to him a letter of sharp rebuke, threatening to 15 seize into his royal hands all the temporal goods which his forefathers had with godly devotion given and bestowed for spiritual exercises. The Bishop returned to his diocese, but only to fall into the hands of the neighbouring Barons, who had joined in the insurrection of Simon de Montford. He was taken prisoner in his cathedral, and was long confined in the Castle of Eardisland; and that there was some excuse for the poor Bishop absenting himself is shown by the foregoing, as well as by the misfortunes that subsequently befel him, for “on the Thursday next after the transfiguration of the blessed St. Thomas the martyr, in the 47th year of King Henry III. Sir John Fitz Alan, lord of Arundel coming to Bishop’s Castle, took there the said Castle; and the constable was treacherously slain. Item,—in the said Castle they found 13 beeves, 2 waggons, and 2 carts, and one white mare. Item,—they found 32 horse loads of wheat, which the Lord Bishop sent thither, and all the produce of one year from two plough lands, in the barn, and the crop of the second year ready to cut, upon the land. Item,—of armour six hauberts, one of them without a head, six skull caps of iron, one pair of housings, and an iron surcoat belonging to the Bishop, six cross bows, sound and good, with bandrecks and a tierce quarrels, and the constable’s horse. The damage aforesaid destroyed at the Castle and Lydbury, and of timber that lay at the back of the Castle, is valued at 200 marks. Item,—the destruction of woods is valued at 100 marks. Item,—the issue of the manor for six years, excepting six weeks, during which the Castle and manor were in the hands of John Fitz Alan, is valued at 360 marks.”
In May, 1290, Bishop Swinfield in his Diocesan visitation passed four nights at his Castle. “In the adjoining town a weekly market was held, but it does not appear as if it was well provided with articles of food, for the baker who preceded the party brought yeast and salt with him, and most of the provisions were obtained from Ludlow. The quantity purchased was considerable, but the Bishop’s suite was a large one, as it required between thirty and forty horses for its transport.” It may interest some persons to learn what the food consisted of, and its cost. “Thursday being Ascension Day, 2 quarters of flour, baked from flour brought from the Manor, 6s. 8d.; beer, 16d.; 1 carcass of beef cost 6s. 1½d.; 1 roe, 11 kids, and 2 bacons from the Manor; 2 calves, 12d.; 13 geese, 4d.; 3 fowls, 12d.; 28 capons, 12 fowls a present; eggs, 10½d.; 16 milk, 3½d.; bread, 3d.; charcoal, 3d.” The above extracts are taken from Bishop Swinfield’s Roll of Household Expenses, edited by the Rev. John Webb.
When Leland visited Shropshire, about 1530, this Castle seems to have been in a habitable state, for he says, “Bishop’s Castle well menteined, on a stepe rocke, not very hy.” It was surrounded with strong walls, and had embattled towers, as is seen in the sketch copied from one in the British Museum. The Bishops were invested with all the powers of a feudal seniory, and had a dovecot, and garden, a range of forest, woodland, and a park or pasturage for deer. Elizabeth confiscated the possession of the Church of Hereford, and in the 7th James I. (1610) the King granted the Manor and Castle to Arthur Ingram and Thomas Williams; and eight years later, with the King’s permission, these persons transferred both to Henry, Earl of Arundel, together with the Honour of Clun. It was probably from this time allowed to go to ruin, for no allusion to it is made during the Civil War, though several accounts are extant of a party of soldiers who were sent out from the Shrewsbury garrison having attacked the town in September, 1644, on a Fair day, and burning most of the houses.
The site of the Castle is now occupied by the Castle Hotel, and a bowling green on a level with the second floor of the house is enclosed by the old walls of the Keep.
2 quarters of flour, baked from flour
[Text unchanged. The author is quoting a second source, edited by a third, so there’s no telling who first said “flour” where you would expect “bread”.]
HIS manor was granted by the Conqueror in the third year of his reign, by a curious document in verse, to the “heyres male of the Hoptons,” part of which runs thus:—
“I Will. King, the third of my reign,
Give to the Northern Hunter,
To me that art both Luine and Deare,
The Hoppe and the Hoptonne,
And all the bounds up and downe,
Under the earth to Hell,
Above the earth to Heaven.” &c.
It is not certainly known by whom or when the Castle was built, but Camden says it was given by Henry II. to Lord Clifford, and it was in the keeping of Roger Mortimer, of Wigmore, in the time of Edward I. Still it appears to have belonged at a later period to the Hoptons, for the heiress of Thomas Hopton, about the time of Henry VI. married, first, Sir Roger Corbet, the Earl of Worcester secondly, and lastly, Sir William Stanley. Her estates passed to the Corbets, and from them by another heiress to the family of Wallop, and one of these last was its owner at the time of the Civil War, when it was made a garrison by the Parliament, and Captain More was appointed Governor. By him and a small band of soldiers it was gallantly defended for a fortnight, but in 1644 it was taken by Colonel Woodhouse, the Governor of Ludlow, by whom most of the soldiers were cruelly and treacherously put to death.
No part of the Castle now remains except the Keep Tower, standing in a valley so surrounded with hills that it is singular that such a site should have been selected. It is the property of Salwey Beale, Esq., by one of whose ancestors it was purchased in the beginning of the last century.
To me that art both Luine and Deare,
[The original manuscript must have been even more illegible than the present book’s blackletter; I’ve also seen the word rendered as “cuine”. No matter how you spell it, Notes and Queries casts doubt on the whole story, tossing around words like “fabulous” and “apocryphal”.]
first, Sir Roger Corbet, the Earl of Worcester secondly, and lastly, Sir William Stanley
[The punctuation makes sense if you read it slowly.]
a valley so surrounded with hills that it is singular that such a site should have been selected
[Gormenghast had the same topographical oddity.]
CASTLE stood here as early as 843, but the portion that is now existing is supposed to have been built by Fulke Fitz Warine, who in the 5th year of Henry III., obtained a license for this purpose. He had been one of the barons who took up arms to obtain the Great Charter from King John, and his estates had in consequence been forfeited, but the year before he began to build his Castle, he had purchased the site from Henry for the large sum, in those days, of £262. It was held by this family for nine generations, each bearing the name of Fulke, till the last Fulke Fitz Warine died in , (2nd Henry V.) when it passed by the marriage of an heiress to Sir William Bouchem, Knight, who became Earl of Bath, by whom it was exchanged for other lands with Henry VIII. Edward VI. granted it to the Earl of Suffolk, and on whose attainder it was by Queen Mary given to Henry, Earl of Arundel, from whom it passed to William Albany, whose daughter married Thomas Lloyd, of Aston, from whom its present owner is descended.
The sketch is taken from one made in 1760, when five round towers were standing, connected by walls, and surrounded by a moat. In the same year the eastern tower fell, and the northern one was about the same time undermined for the purpose of getting stone for mending roads. In 1809 the smaller tower was taken down to repair the Gate-house, which is now nearly all that remains of the Castle of the Fitz Warines. The Keep tower must have early fallen into decay, as an old mulberry tree is growing on the mound.
he had purchased the site from Henry for the large sum, in those days, of £262
[At current silver prices, that works out to around $60,000, which does not seem like an awful lot.]
the last Fulke Fitz Warine died in 1615, (2nd Henry V.)
[The book does tend to play fast and loose with its centuries, but this one looks more like a printing error for 1415.]
the Earl of Suffolk, and on whose attainder it was by Queen Mary given
[Printed as shown; the “and” seems to be superfluous]
ENRY DE ALDITHELE had a license in the 11th year of Henry III. to build a Castle on his demesne, known at first by the name of Radcliffe, from its position on a rock of red stone.
The remains consist chiefly of one lofty tower and several smaller ones, situated on a perpendicular rock in the Park at Hawkstone, and form a most picturesque object. A shaft from the well was carried through every story, with openings on each floor, so that the bucket might be stopped wherever it was required.
HIS manor was held by the family of Say, from whom it derived its name, as under tenants to the Lacys till 1250, when Hugh de Say exchanged it with John de Verdon, of Weobley, for lands in Ireland. By him it was sold in 1281 to Lawrence de Ludlow, who was to present a sparrow hawk yearly, in lieu of certain services reserved. So complicated were the feudal tenures, that at the period of this purchase it appears that Theobald de Verdon still held the manor from the King, John de Grey under Verdon, and lastly, Lawrence de Ludlow under John de Grey.
In 1290, Lawrence de Ludlow obtained a license from the King, “to strengthen with a wall of lime and stone, and creneltate his mansion at 20 Stoke-say.” By those best qualified to form an opinion it is considered that the architecture of the hall and north end bespeak a date considerably earlier, and that the license was obtained previously to building the tower; and this supposition is confirmed by the fact that in April of the following year, Bishop Swinfield was entertained here with attendants sufficiently numerous to have consumed in one day 3 kids, 2 pigs, 10 capons, 5 fowls, and a quantity of pork: corn and hay were provided for 35 horses.
The descendants of Lawrence de Ludlow for many generations continued to be the lords of Stokesay, till on the death of John de Ludlow in 1497, his estates were divided between his daughters, who had married Vernons of Haddon and Tong. Thomas Vernon obtained Stokesay, and was living there when Leland passed it in his way from Ludlow to Bishop’s Castle. “Stokesay longing some time to the Ludlos, now to the Vernons, builded like a Castel, 5 miles out of Ludlo. Syr Richard Ludlo had two daughters; one was married to Humphrey Vernoun, the other to Thomas Vernoun, bretherne to the late Syr Henry Vernoun, of the Peke.”
In 1620 Stokesay was purchased by William, the first Lord Craven, and was soon afterwards let on a lease on lives to Charles Baldwin, of Elsick, whose descendants resided there till early in the 18th century, and were its last occupants. The Baldwins as well as Lord Craven, were staunch royalists, and on the breaking out of the Civil War in 1642, Stoke was made a garrison for the King: its position on the road between Shrewsbury and Ludlow made it important as securing the communication between those towns. In June, 1645, when most of the Shropshire garrisons fell into the hands of the Parliament, a party was sent by the Parliament Committee of Shrewsbury, and the Governor yielded without resistance, and thus saved the building from the fate that had made a ruin of many other old mansions.
For many years after the Baldwins had ceased to occupy it, it was used as buildings to a farm-house adjoining, which had originally formed part of the outbuildings of the Castle; but some years since the late Lord Craven had 21 it repaired, and it is now preserved with the care that an example deserves. Mr. Hudson Turner, in his “Domestic Architecture,” thus speaks of it,— “Altogether this is one of the most perfect and interesting thirteenth century buildings we possess, and it deserves a much more careful examination of the uses of its parts than it has yet received.”
The following description is chiefly taken from the same work. The court is surrounded by a moat, about 22 feet wide, out of which on one side rises the house, and on the other three sides, a wall. The shape of the court is irregular, as is shown by the ground plan made by the Rev. J. D. La Touche, which corrects some inaccuracy in that given by Mr. Hudson Turner. The only entrance to the court is by a gate-house of rich Elizabethan timber work. Opposite to the gate-house, on the west side of the court, stands the tower, the great hall, and an irregular building which is supposed to be the oldest portion, and which is connected with the end of the hall in a manner which could scarcely have been so arranged had they been erected at the same time: the upper part of this building now consists of a projecting story of timber, resting on the original stone wall. This room contains a fire place with a hood, of Early English character. The story below consists of two rooms, lighted with narrow loops, as is the ground floor, which is entered by a doorway down some steps at the north end of the hall; near which is a staircase of solid blocks of oak leading to the two stories above. It is difficult to guess the use of this lower room, which is nearly dark, yet the walls were painted with various devices in colours, among which were the Tudor badges of the rose and portcullis, birds, &c. It has a shaft in the projecting turret, which opens by a low arch on each side next the moat, for the purpose of drawing up water. The hall is lighted on the west side by four large windows overlooking the moat, and on the east by three, and a smaller one over the door, now blocked up; they are furnished with seats, and have had glass above the transom and only shutters below. The hall has no fireplace, but in the centre is a hearth, on which dogs originally stood. An external staircase at the south end of the hall leads to the principal apartment, or solar. This apartment is lighted by no fewer than eight windows, commanding the court, the hall, and the west side of the building. It has a chimney arch, similar to one in the south tower, which appears to have been added after the room was built, as it is 22 supported by large timbers in the room below, and the chimney externally is of much later date than those in either of the towers. In the room the stone arch is surmounted by an elaborately carved mantle-piece, which, with the wainscot which covers the walls, is not earlier than the time of Charles II. The tower is of very unusual form, presenting on the outside the appearance of a double octagon. It is of three stories, lighted by lancet windows, and surmounted by a battlemented parapet, pierced with loop holes: the roof is conical, and fifty years ago was covered with wooden shingles instead of tiles, and there are two original circular chimneys on the south side; a narrow staircase leads from the base to the roof, and in each of the irregular shaped rooms contained in the tower is a stone arched fireplace. The windows have seats, and have had shutters, as have also the loop holes in the parapets.
The first sketch shows the tower and west side of the hall; the second, the inside of the hall; and the third, the north tower as seen from the Church-yard, with the remains of a building now removed; the lower sketch on the same page shows several timber buildings now gone, and a wall surmounted by a roof which sixty years ago stood in the court; and the fourth, the gate-house, and the mantle-piece in the solar.
an elaborately carved mantle-piece . . . . the mantle-piece in the solar
[Like “hanged” and “hung”, the confusion of “mantle” and “mantel” seems to go way back.]
the lower sketch on the same page
[Or the upper sketch, as the case may be.]
CTON BURNELL “was a goodly manor place and Castel, four myles from Shrewsbury, where a Parliament was kepte in a greate barne. It longed once to the Lorde Lovel, then to the Duke of Northfolke, and now to Sir John Dudle. N.B.—Burnelle’s daughter was married to the Lorde Lovel, thereby the Lovelles’ landes increased.”—Leland.23
Robert Burnell, who in the reign of Henry III. was tutor to the Prince (afterwards Edward I.), resided here, where he had a house and park. On the accession of Edward I. he was elected Bishop of Bath and Wells, and made Lord Treasurer and Lord Chancellor. In the month of May, 1282, his royal master spent three days with his Chancellor, but it must have been in the old house which Leland calls a “greate barne,” for the license for building the present Castle was not granted till two years later. In the intervening year Edward again visited Acton Burnell, and he then stayed from the 29th of September to the 12th of November. Robert Burnell, together with the license to crenellate his new house, had also one to cut timber in the King’s Forest, for the building. The mansion was probably erected between this time and that of the Bishop’s death, which took place in 1292; and it is remarkable that its style is what is usually considered later than that of Stokesay (the license for which was granted in 1291), and strengthens the belief that the license granted to Laurence de Ludlow was only for an addition to an earlier fabric.
The general form of the house at Acton Burnell is a parallelogram, measuring about 95 feet by 60, and having a square tower at each angle. These towers are the only parts of the place which can be made out, the whole of the interior partition having been removed. The upper sketch shows the west and south sides (a modern roof being omitted), and the lower sketch shows the east side as it appeared in 1792, with three large transomed windows of two lights, having spherical triangles in the heads, and seats in the jambs. The building seems to have had three stories, the hall occupying the two upper ones of the eastern side. The remains of the older building consist only of two gables, the side walls of which are very low, and the gable enormously high. The width is 40 feet, and the distance between them is 157 feet. It was probably the hall of the old Castle; and that the Parliament summoned by Edward I. at Acton Burnell, in 1283, was held within its walls.
upper sketch . . . lower sketch
[Or vice versa.]
as it appeared in 1792
[Or 1777, as the case may be.]
It was probably . . . and that the Parliament
[Text unchanged. Perhaps the sentence originally began “It is probable that . . .”]
LTHOUGH forming part of the monastery of Wenlock, it was the residence of the Prior, and is therefore a specimen, and a very interesting one, of the domestic architecture of the latter part of the fifteenth century. The building is oblong, and the partitions are carried up from the base to the roof. The sketches show the eastern and western elevations; in both are seen two rows of windows separated by buttresses reaching the whole height of the building. In the west side is an upper and a lower gallery; a newel staircase connects them, and the doors of the principal apartments open into them. On the ground floor is the private chapel, with an altar in a recess, a kitchen, from which a small staircase leads to the hall above, and other offices. On the upper floor is the great hall or dining room, where the Prior entertained his guests and retainers. It has a handsome wooden roof, along the centre of which runs a band of trefoils; a central bay of different design, is divided from the rest by two principals, which rest on pendant posts, on stone corbels. The wall plates are moulded and battlemented. The carved ornaments consist of foliage of beautiful design, of which the sketch gives a very imperfect" idea. (An ugly modern fireplace on the north end has been omitted.) The windows, like all the rest on this story, are of two lights, with the mullions running through to the head; they are deeply recessed, and the head of the recess is panelled, but the windows in this and the next room are peculiar from having in the place of seats, which are usual in the jambs of mediæval windows, a kind of octagonal bracket, supported by short shafts, with moulded capitals and bases. These are too high for seats, and can therefore only have been used as brackets: they have a good effect. On the south wall, where was the dais, were formerly paintings of figures in armour. The hall and a room adjoining have deeply moulded doors opening into the gallery; the latter was the parlour of the Prior, and has a large low fireplace, with panelled jambs, and brackets in the windows similar to those in the hall. Divided from this room was a passage, in which was a staircase of solid blocks of oak, leading to an apartment above, the Prior’s parlour having originally had a flat ceiling.
An attempt has been made to represent the upper gallery: the roof is formed of plain spars, and the ridge piece is ornamented with bosses at intervals. A wooden embattled cornice is carried along the gallery, and is supported by stone corbels: it is carried over the arches of the doors that open into the Prior’s hall and parlour. The lower gallery is similar to the upper one, except that it has a flat ceiling formed by the floor of the upper one. Mr. Parker considers these galleries to be unique in England, though the fashion of having a gallery for the doors of the upper apartments to open into was common, particularly in inns, down to a late period.
The buildings to the right, in the sketch of the west side of the Prior’s house, have been so altered, that their original arrangement cannot be even guessed at; but a string-course under the Norman windows, shows that a covered passage was originally carried along that side of the court, and some foundations lately discovered in lowering the ground along the side of the court, opposite to the house, make it appear that some sort of gallery surrounded it on each side.
An ugly modern fireplace on the north end has been omitted.
[In 19th-century works of architectual history, the words “ugly” and “modern” are as inextricably linked as the words “damn” and “Yankee” in the speech of a pre-2004 Bostonian.]
HIS is a fine example of the timber houses of the time of Henry VII., with the overhanging story, and barge board; and the shop, which is a series of open wooden arches, with very good details, is considered as unique in England.”—Parker’s Domestic Architecture.
“History is silent as to when, or by whom it was erected, nor is there any decided information of its primary occupancy. It has been supposed to have been the habitation of the Chauntry Priests of the fraternity or guild of the Holy Cross in St. Alkmund’s Church, at Shrewsbury; but from its size, it is 26 more likely to have been the town mansion of the Abbot of Lilleshall, who had a residence in this part of the parish, to which monastery the patronage of the Church belonged. Ancient documents seem to prove that the guild house was on another site.” Note by Mr. H. Pidgeon.
In Owen and Blakeway’s History of Shrewsbury, a suggestion of the same" idea occurs, but Mr. Parker considers the lower story to have been intended for a shop, and he says similar shops are not uncommon in France.
HIS estate was purchased by Thomas Otley in 1473, but there is no record of the period when the house was built. The style of the timber work shows the date to be early, and it is therefore probable that it was erected soon after the purchase of the estate; and the remains of the moat, by which it was surrounded, is another evidence of its antiquity. Camden, who wrote in the reign of Elizabeth, mentions the Petroleum Spring, from whence the name is derived, as “in a private man’s yard”; and that Mr. Otley was the owner of the manor, but he is silent as to the existence of a mansion.
Sir Francis Otley, the loyal Governor of Shrewsbury in the Civil War, resided here, and it was occupied by his descendants till 1807, when, on the death of the last of the name, after a tenure of 334 years, it passed to the late Lord Liverpool, to whose daughter, Lady Louisa Cotes, it now belongs.
The house forms three sides of a court: the first sketch shows the principal front; the second, the side next the Church-yard, from which it is separated by a deep ravine, in which stood a mill, one of the usual appendages to ancient manor houses; the third sketch shows the interior of the court. A stack of chimneys, consisting of one in the centre, surrounded by four others, is believed to be unique.
the first sketch . . . the second . . . the third sketch
[The first picture is on a page of its own. The “second” and “third” are, respectively, the lower and upper drawings—in that order—on the next page.]
HE family of Burton was settled here at a very early period, for William Burton, of Longner Hall, was the representative for Shrewsbury in the Parliament assembled in 1382-83. Sir Edward Burton “was with King Edward IV., successful in fourteen set battles between the Houses of York and Lancaster, and for his great loyalty was made a Knight Banneret under the royal standard in 1460, and his son had a grant of arms in 1478.”
It is probable that the old house was built in the 15th century. It was surrounded by a moat; and had a curious wide staircase of wood, with large pillars of the same material on each side, in one of which was a sliding panel which formed the entrance to a hiding-place. In the garden is a tomb to the memory of Edward Burton, a zealous Protestant in the days of Queen Mary, at the time when her death was expected. The circumstances of his death are thus quaintly chronicled by a namesake and immediate descendant.* “He was sitting in his study, meditating on the fate of God’s people, when the bells of Shrewsbury struck up a joyous peal. Straightway his right discerning soul conjectured that this might be designed to announce the accession of Elizabeth, and he dispatched his son to learn the truth, with directions if it were so, to cast his hat into the air at a spot within view of Longner. The youth returns with the happy news, but finds his father dying, repeating ‘Now let thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation,’ being overcome with joy.” The minister of St. Chad’s parish, at Shrewsbury, in which Longner is situated, refused his body burial, as a heretic, and he was in consequence buried in his own garden.
Longner was made a garrison for the King early in the Civil War, and was taken down in the last century.
* In his “Commentary of Antoninus” by W. Burton, 1658.28
UGH EDWARDES was living here in 1549, and it is supposed that he was the builder of the house, on an estate which had long been possessed by his ancestors. The town of Shrewsbury is chiefly indebted to him for its School.—“This year” (says a MS. chronicle, 1551) “by the labour of one Hughe Edwardes of Salop, and late of London, and Master Rychard Whyttaker, being at the yeare one of the Baileffs, was laboured to the Kynge’s Majestie for an annuetie of £20 for and towards the mayntenance of a free Scoole in the sayde towne for ever, which was obtayned, to the greate preferment of the youthe of that towne, and of the quarters there adjoyninge in good learninge and godlie education.” His grandson, Sir Thomas Edwardes, was an active loyalist, and was created a Baronet by Charles I. in 1644, and from him the present representative of the family, Sir Henry Edwardes, is descended. The estate was sold, and the old house taken down in 1800.
The centre of the building consisted of a hall, and opening out of it, by a door concealed behind the tapestry, was a passage, and a flight of steps leading to a chamber below, which was evidently constructed for a hiding-place.
Kilhendre is in the chapelry of Dudleston, in the parish of Ellesmere.
HE family of More was settled at the More House, in Corvedale, at an early period. William More was living at Larden in 1477, and the timber portion of the house is believed to be part of that in which he resided; 29 the remainder, which is of stone, is shown by initials and a date to have been built by Jasper More in 1606. His only son, ten years afterwards, was killed in a duel, by his neighbour, Francis Shepherd, of Balret, and on his own death in 1612, Larden passed to a cousin who was father to Colonel More, the distinguished defender of Hopton Castle when besieged in 1644, and it now belongs to his descendant, the Rev. Robert More.
ILLICHOPE was another mansion of the Mores, but it is not known when it was built. John More, who lived in the reign of Henry VII., had two sons, of whom William his heir succeeded to the estates of More and Larden, and Richard, the younger, was the ancestor of the branch settled at Millichope. Charles More was living there in 1607, and on the death of his son, Thomas More, who had survived his three sons, his estates were divided between his two daughters and co-heiresses. The old house was taken down about thirty years ago, and the deer park was destroyed.
OBERT DE ATTE LEE, who was Sheriff of Shropshire in 1387, married Petronilla, the daughter and heiress of Roger de le Lee, of Langley, and the estates were held by their descendants till 1660, when, on the 30 death of Sir Richard Lee leaving co-heiresses, Langley became the portion of one of his daughters, who married Edward Smythe, of an ancient family in the county of Durham, from whom its present owner, Sir Charles Frederick Smythe, is descended. Sir Richard Lee was a staunch royalist, and a great sufferer in the Civil War of Charles I., and had to compound for his estates in the large sum of £3719. His father, Sir Humphrey, was the first Shropshire Baronet, his creation dating from 1620.
Leland thus describes this place. “Scarce a mile from Acton Burnell standeth Langley, seated very low and flat, in a parke full of woods, the dwelling-place of the Lees, which may well challenge to be ranged among the families that are of the better worth and greater antiquity in the tract.”
A stone arched gateway and an embattled wall, are assigned by Mr. Parker in his ‘Domestic Architecture’ to the reign of Henry VIII., and are therefore parts of the mansion described by Leland. The timber work by which it is surmounted Mr. Parker considers not to be older than the time of Elizabeth. Langley is now occupied as a farm-house.
OTHING is known of the history of this house; but the stone archway so nearly resembles that of Langley, that it is probable that the time of its erection may be nearly the same, viz: the reign of Henry VIII. It had formerly a gable on each side of the gateway, similar to the one that remains, but it was taken down some years ago. It has been restored in the sketch.31
HIS manor had for many successive generations been held by the family of Sprenghose, the last of which, Fulke Sprenghose, died in 1447, when his estates were divided between four daughters, co-heiresses, one of whom had married William Leighton, a younger son of John Leighton of Wattlesborough, before 1524. Tradition attributes the building of this house to their son, William Leighton, Chief Justice of North Wales, and one of the Council of the Marches, who died in 1606; but Mr. Parker considers its date to be earlier. “Plaish Hall is a good house, of the time of Henry VIII., with alterations of the time of Elizabeth; it is chiefly brick, with very fine chimneys of moulded brick. The hall is tolerably perfect, with an open timber roof, partially concealed by a plaster ceiling. The work bears considerable resemblance to Compton Wyneate, in Warwickshire, only on a much reduced scale, the license for building which was obtained in 1520, the plan is the usual one of two gables and a recess.”—Parker’s Domestic Architecture.
It is therefore probable that Plaish Hall was begun by William Leighton, after his marriage with the heiress, and completed by the Judge. Tradition says there was a chapel here; and there are some remains of a In Saxton’s maps, which were engraved between 1575-80, a park appears to have existed.
Plaish now belongs to Rowland Hunt, Esq., of Boreatton, and is occupied as a farm-house. It is situated in the parish of Cardington, five miles east of Church Stretton.
The name is more often spelled “Plash”, as in the illustrations.
the last of which, Fulke Sprenghose, died in 1447, when his estates were divided between four daughters . . . one of whom had married William Leighton . . . before 1524. Tradition attributes the building of this house to their son . . . who died in 1606
[It does not strike me as noteworthy that a woman got married less than eighty years after her father’s death, especially since the form “had married” implies that she married before his death. Moreover, the gap of 160 years (most sources put William’s death in 1607) between a grandfather’s and grandson’s death seems almost Biblical. Did a century get misplaced? A correspondent to Notes and Queries is puzzled by the same thing, and suggests, reasonably enough, that a generation has been omitted.]
and there are some remains of a moat.
text has , for . (comma for period)
LBRIGHT HUSSEY derived the second portion of its name from a family of the name of Hussey, who were early settled there. One of them, Sir Richard Hussey, married a Corbet of Moreton; and some years since, the arms of Hussey and Corbet remained in one of the windows, and in an oak panel in the wainscot of one of the rooms was the following inscription—“Made by me, Edward Huse, 1601.” On the entrance porch was the date 1524, which is probably that of the timber portion of the Additions and alterations were made about 1560, when the stone part was erected. The remains of a moat, and the gables of a chapel at a short distance from the house, still exist.
At the time of the breaking out of the Civil War, Albright Hussey was the property of Sir Pelham Corbet of Lee Hall, whose son, Robert Corbet, settled here, and it continued to be occupied by his descendants till they succeeded to the Sundorne estate in 1760. It is now inhabited by a tenant. Soon after Charles I. came to Shrewsbury in 1642, it was made a garrison to check the attempts made by the rebels at Wem to molest Shrewsbury.
The sketch of Albright Hussey is copied from a beautiful drawing by Buckler, taken in 1821, in the possession of the Rev. Lingen Burton.
which is probably that of the timber portion of the house.
final . invisible
FAMILY of this name (spelt originally Benethall) was settled here at an early period, and the estate remained in their possession for many generations. It became united with that of Burnell, A.D. 1280, by the marriage of Margery, co-heiress of Philip de Benethall, with John Burnell; who residing here took the name of Benethall. Henry de Benethall, a younger 33 son of the above John, was Abbot of Buildwas, A.D. 1317. Philip Burnell the head of the Burnell family, purchased a part of the manor, A.D. 1293, and that portion was long held with Acton Burnell.
The present manor-house was built by William Benthall in 1535. At the time of the Civil War it was garrisoned, and was captured by the Parliament party. Its owner, Mr. Laurence Benthall, was in the Commission of Array; and, like other loyalists, he had to compound for his estates. In 1720, the Manor passed to the family of Brown of Caughley, through an heiress of Benthall, and, later in the century, to that of Harries of Cruckton, and recently to its present possessor, Lord Forester.
ILLESHALL MANOR, and the site of the dissolved Abbey, were granted to James Leveson, 35th year of Henry VIII. (1544), by whose descendants it has been held to the present time. Soon after the purchase, a timber house was built as a residence, but it is not known by what member of the family; it was called Lilleshall Lodge, and stood on Muxon Hill, at some distance from the ruined Abbey. It was occasionally inhabited by its owners till 1818, when it was taken down, and a new house was built.
Among the list of places which had been garrisoned before 1645, given in Symonds’ Diary, is Lindsill (or Lilleshall), but whether it was any part of the Abbey or the Lodge is not distinctly stated by Symonds in his Diary. “May, 1645. For the King, Lindsill, three myle from Newport, a house of Sir Richard Levison’s, (Lindsill Abbey). Sir Richard Levison made it himselfe aboute Hallowmas, 1644; and still remayns so, pro rege, 160 men in it (he lives in the lodge), Bostock, Governor, obiit.” On the 15th October, Symonds gives Lilleshall among the places that had been lost to the King, and that Major Duckinfield lost it.34
N the 32nd year of Henry VIII. (1541), the King gave to Edward Littleton the site of the late Monastery of Haughmond, and shortly afterwards it was sold to Edward Barker, of Shrewsbury, who built within the walls of the Abbey a timber house, in which he resided; his arms, with those of his wife, who was a Charlton of Apley Castle, were carved in wood on a shield on the sill of one of the windows. The Barkers ended in the third generation, in an heiress, who married Edward Kynaston of Hordley, whose grandson, Corbet Kynaston, devised the Haughmond estate, including Sundorne, Uffington, and Upton, to his kinsman, Andrew Corbet of Lee Hall and Albright Hussey. The house was taken down about 40 years ago.
ADELEY MANOR was part of the possessions of Wenlock Priory, and after the dissolution in 1539, a residence there was assigned to John Cressage, the ejected Prior. In the 36th year of Henry VIII. (1545) it was purchased by Robert Brooke, Justice of the Common Pleas in the reign of Queen Mary; but the only tenements mentioned in the grant are Smeth’s place and Colebrooksmeth. Madeley Court was probably built by Robert Brooke, soon after he acquired the estate, and was held by his descendants till 1808, when it was sold; the increase of the surrounding iron-works having rendered it no longer a desirable abode. It is now divided, and occupied by the families of colliers. A curious sun-dial, which still stands in the garden, is shown in the sketch.
A party of soldiers on the side of the King were placed in it in 1644, its owner 35 Sir Basil Brooke, being a distinguished royalist. In the following year it shared the fate of nearly all the royal Shropshire Garrisons, by being taken by the Parliament troops.
It is now divided, and occupied by the families of colliers.
[I don’t know whether this counts as a worse fate, or not quite so bad, as becoming a tenant farmer’s outbuilding.]
ARK HALL, a fine specimen of a timber house was built by Robert Howell (otherwise Robert Powell,) in the reign of Queen Mary, between the years 1553 and 1558. It was inhabited by members of the same family, till it ended in an heiress, who sold it to Francis Charlton, of Ludford, a branch of the Charlton’s of Apley, and by his will it passed to his second son Job, on whose death without issue, the estate was inherited by his sister, who married for her third husband John Charlton Kinchant, whose descendant is its present owner. It is a specimen of a style which prevailed when the necessity had ceased for making houses capable of defence, and when the newly acquired power of admitting any amount of light and air into apartments was adopted to such an unreasonable extent, as to make nearly the whole fronts of houses to consist of mullioned windows.
HOUGH not exactly ranking as a domestic building, this has been admitted as representing a picturesque specimen of an old timber building. There is no record of the date of the older portion, but in an early parish register it is stated that the house over the prison was put up in 1577, this consists of two rooms, which have lately been fitted up with oak panelling and furniture of an elaborate style. Over the Recorder’s seat are the arms of Charles II.
There must have been a last-minute reshuffling; this is the only house whose picture is significantly out of sequence. It was printed on the same page as Old House, Wenlock, eight houses back.
was put up in 1577, this consists of two rooms
comma splice unchanged
HIS estate came into the Corbet family by the marriage of Sir Richard Corbet, of Wattlesbury, with the heiress of the Turrets, in the reign of Henry III. The family of Turret had long been settled at Moreton Turret, which name the place retained as late as 1516.
The building consists of the remains of two houses of different character, though from the dates on each it does not appear that many years could have intervened between the erection of both. Over the portal of the old Castle are the initials S.A.C. 1576 and 1578, also I.R.C., and the crest of the elephant and castle, as shown in the first sketch. The initials must be those of Sir Andrew Corbet, knight, who died in 1578, and of his son, Robert Corbet, who was a great traveller, and is said to have brought from Italy the design for the magnificent mansion, of which the second sketch shows the remains as they existed in 1840, when some fine old ash trees (since cut down) added much to the picturesqueness of the ruin. The walls are externally of stone, lined with brick. The lower story is of the Doric, and the upper one of the Ionic order, on the freize of which is the puzzling inscription—O.L.L.E. D. 1515, A.R.C., and on a pedestal, 1578. Camden thus describes it—“Moreton Corbet, anciently a house of the Turets, afterwards a Castle of the Corbets, showeth itself, where within our remembrance Robert Corbet, carried away with the affectionate delight of architecture, began to build in a barraine place, a most gorgeously and stately house, after the Italian model; but death prevented him, so that he left the new work unfinished, and the old Castle defaced.” Robert Corbet is said to have only survived his father four years, for according to a MS. chronicle “Mr. Robert Corbet goinge up to Loondon to vyset his uncle, Mr. Walter Corbet, who anon commynge, dyed of the plage, and the sayed Robert, by reason of the infection, dieed also; and thus death countermanding his designs, took him off, and so his project was unfulfilled.”
Robert Corbet died childless, and his estates passed to a cousin, Sir Richard, 37 who died in 1606, and was succeeded by his brother, Sir Vincent, who was created a baronet in January, 1642. He was distinguished for his loyalty, for which he had to compound for his estates in the sum of £1588 13s. 4d., by which, and many heavy charges brought upon him by his zeal for the cause of his Sovereign, he was so impoverished as to be under the necessity of selling some of his estates, and among them Moreton, but it was redeemed in 1743 by Andrew Corbet, of Shawbury Park.
A tradition has been handed down of a prophecy delivered by a Puritan who was concealed here by Sir Vincent during the persecution of that sect in the reign of James I.; when this was no longer practicable, and he was seized, and on the point of being carried off to Shrewsbury Castle, he pronounced the doom of his benefactor’s house in the following words—“Boast not thyself of thy wealth, or of the stately mansion from which thou expecteth so much content: it shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation; but wild beasts of the desert shall be there, and thy house shall be full of doleful creatures.” The house seems never to have been completed, though in 1644 it must have been capable of defence, for it was made a garrison for the King, and is stated in a contemporary account to be “very strong.” It was taken by a party sent by the Shrewsbury Committee, on the 20th of September in the same year, and during the siege, the prophecy of its being full of doleful creatures was probably fulfilled. It is said that further injury to the building was caused by a fire; it is now only a beautiful ruin.
One sketch shows the front of the Italian design, and the other, the remains of the older building; the third gives some details to show the richness of the ornamentation, which could not be represented in the general view. They are copied from drawings of the original design, in the possession of Sir Vincent R. Corbet. 1. A chimney. 2. The cornice of parapet. 3. The crest over the west window. 4. A crest on the Ionic freize. 5. On the base of Ionic columns. 6. On the base of the Doric column. 7. Termination of the parapet.
One sketch shows the front of the Italian design, and the other, the remains of the older building
[But which is which I couldn’t make out, despite my best endeavor.]
ELAND, whose “laboriouse journey in serche for Englande’s antiquities” commenced in 1538, and was continued for about six years, and the account of which was presented by him as “a new yeare’s gyfte to Henry VIII. in the 37th yeare of his raygne” (1546), thus notices Bellaport. “Grosvenor of Belaporte, 3 myles out of Draiton Market; this man, and Grosvenor of Eiton Bote, in Cheshire, cam of two younger brethren of Grosvenor of The Houme.”
Symonds, in his Diary of the time of the Civil War, states that “this Grosvenor built it (the house at Norton) in Queen Mary’s time.” It is clear that the house at Bellaport was inhabited in Leland’s time, but probably it may have been finished in the next reign. Symonds further says, “Tuesday, May 20th, 1645, his Majesty, with his army, removed from Chelwyn, through Drayton, com. Salop, and lay a myle farther. Lord Lichfield, &c., at Norton, at a house sometimes the habitation of Grosvenor, now Cotton’s. The King lay at Church, his house in Drayton parish. The elder howse of Grosvenor in this county is Bellaport, parish of Norton, com. Salop.” Here, its present owner believes that Charles passed two nights.
The property had been sold to the Cottons before 1617, when Sir Rowland Cotton, of Bellaport, was Sheriff of Shropshire. He is included among the worthies of Shropshire, by Fuller. The estate passed by an heiress to the Rev. Laurence Dundas Cotton, whose descendant, Mrs. Coulson, is its present owner. Early in this century the old house was taken down. It was surrounded by a moat, and stood in an extensive park. Symonds mentions some armorial bearings of the Cottons in a chamber window.
Bellaport ought to have been placed earlier in the collection of old houses, but the old drawing from which the sketch is copied was not received in time.
An error having been made in the mention of the present owner of Bellaport Hall, it has been judged advisable to correct it.
The last of the Cotton family who owned Bellaport, was Mary Teresa Cotton, who married the Rev. Lawrence Dundas Henry Cokburne. Mr. and Mrs. Dundas Cokburne never had any children, and, out of friendship, they bequeathed the estate to one in no way related to either of them, the Rev. Hugh Ker, youngest and fourteenth surviving child of Hugh Ker, of Newfield, Ayrshire, descended of the Kers of Kersland, an ancient branch of the house of Roxburghe.
The Rev. Hugh Ker assumed the name of Cokburne, by royal license, in accordance with the stipulation in the will of the Rev. Lawrence Dundas Henry Cokburne, and his wife’s. The Rev. Hugh Ker Cokburne became possessed of all the estates of the Ker family through the deaths of his eldest and succeeding brothers, and bequeathed Bellaport, with all his other estates, to his nephew, Edward Foster Coulson, who is the present possessor.
Leland, whose “laboriouse journey in serche for Englande’s antiquities” commenced in 1538, and was continued for about six years, and the account of which was presented by him as “a new yeare’s gyfte to Henry VIII. in the 37th yeare of his raygne” (1546)
[Stop showing off, Frances. The parts in quotation marks are simply the title given by Leland’s original editor.]
[This half-sheet insert somehow ended up between pages 46-47, in the middle of Condover Hall. I have moved it to its intended location.]
they bequeathed the estate to . . . the Rev. Hugh Ker, youngest and fourteenth surviving child of Hugh Ker
[One can only imagine the Ker family’s wild relief. But mark the sequel: all of Hugh’s older brothers died, so he ended up with the Ker property anyway.]
ILLIAM CRESSET, in the reign of Edward II., married the daughter of John, lord of Upton, and from him the place derived its name. Richard Cresset, Sheriff of Shropshire in 1584, built the house four years previously. It is of brick, with darker brick in patterns, and stone mullioned windows: one of the chimneys is similar in pattern to one at Plaish. There are some traces of a moat, with which the house was originally surrounded. It has not been inhabited by its owners since 1792, when Elizabeth Cressett, the last direct descendant of this old family, died, leaving her estates to her maternal uncle, Henry Pelham, of Crawhurst, in Sussex. Saxton in his map, printed between 1676-8, gives a park here. The old mansion is now occupied by a farmer. A gate-house is still standing, in which tradition says Prince Rupert once passed a night. It contains a staircase of solid blocks of oak.
HIS house, situated in the Abbey Foregate, at Shrewsbury, was begun to be built in 1578, by Richard Prince, an eminent lawyer, and it was finished in 1582. Churchyard, the Shropshire poet, speaks of it “as standing so trim, and finely, that it graceth it is in.” It was long known as ‘Master Prince’s Place’; and after having been occupied by his descendants for three generations, it passed by an heiress to Sir John Astley, and eventually to his grandson, the Earl of Tankerville, by whom it was sold to the late Dr. Butler, Bishop of Lichfield, to whose family it now belongs. It is built of red stone, and has a gate-house and a very interesting and beautiful example of a pigeon-house attached to it.40
HE exact date of the house is not known, but it is believed to have been built by Edward Acton, living in 1567, and its similarity in general design to the White Hall, Shrewsbury, begun in 1576, is confirmatory of this belief. The only daughter and heiress of this Edward Acton married Walter Acton, of Aldenham, a distinct family, bearing different arms, though of the same name. The second son of this marriage inherited Acton Scott, and it has remained with his descendants to the present time. Among the Shrewsbury records is the report of a trial in 1221, between Arnulphus and Richard Acton, brothers, as to the inheritance of lands at Acton Scott, which was decided in favour of the younger.
The author modestly refrains from mentioning that this is her home. Her husband inherited it only a year or so before his death, though he had already been living there for as much as 20 years. Modern photographs reveal that the drawing shows the south front (originally the entrance, now the garden). The house still looks much the same, except that the pictured east wing seems to have been lost.
BRANCH of the old family of Hill, of Court of Hill (from whom the Hills of Hawkstone are also descended) settled at Alcaston, in the parish of Acton Scott, in the reign of Elizabeth; and Humphrey Hill, who died there in 1585, is supposed to have built the house. His descendants lived in it till about twenty years since, when it was sold, and part of it taken down.41
ERWICK MAVISON was the property of a Malveyson, whose ancestors we find in the Roll of Battle Abbey, fought under the Conqueror’s standard at the Battle of Hastings. In the reign of Henry IV., John Malvesin was slain in a hunting match at the Wrekin, and his estates passed to his niece Edith, who married a Whitcombe, of Somersetshire, from which family it passed in like manner to the Grants, of Hembrooke, in Gloucestershire, who sold it to an ancestor of the present Lord Berwick. It was built by one of the Whitcombes, in 1585, and was taken down in 1798. It seems to have had a moat; and it stood a short distance from the village of Atcham.
BRANCH of the Corbets, of Cause Castle, settled here after that estate had gone from them, in the reign of Edward III. John Corbet, who was Sheriff of Shropshire in 1526, is styled ‘of Lee’; and Pelham Corbet was its owner at the time of the Civil War, and himself made it a garrison for the King in 1644, but soon withdrew the soldiers, from the fear that it would be attacked by the plundering parties who were continually sent out from the garrison of Wem; it did not, however, escape, for soon after the departure of the royalists, the rebels took possession of it, and from this time it does not appear to have been occupied by the Corbets, who henceforth made Albright Hussey their residence till they inherited the Sundorne estate. Sir Pelham was in the Castle of Shrewsbury when it was taken, February 4th, 1644, and his son was an officer in Lord Newport’s regiment. The house is said to have been built in 1585, on the site of an older moated mansion.
The view is copied from a beautiful drawing by Buckler, in the possession of Rev. Lingen Burton.42
HIS is one of the few houses that escaped the burning of the town, when it was taken by the Parliament forces in 1646. It bears in the entrance hall the following inscription—“Except the Lord BVILD THE OWSE The Labourers Thereof Evail Nothing. Erected by R. For. * 1580.” R. For. is supposed to have been Richard Forester, secretary to Bishop Bonner, who is known to have built another house, which was called ‘Forester’s House’, and was consumed in the fire, and which was Latinized by Baxter in ‘Forestari Dementia.’
Dr. Thomas Percy, Bishop of Dromore, the author of ‘Relics of Ancient English Poetry,’ was born in this house, April 9th, 1728, his grandfather, Arthur Percy, having removed from Worcester to Bridgnorth.
ITTLE is known of the history of this house, but in so many points it so nearly resembles Bishop Percy’s house at Bridgnorth, that the date must be nearly the same. It has been conjectured that the house was in some way connected with the court of the Marches which was held in the Castle, for on a ceiling in the principal room are the royal arms in plaster, with the initials J. R., denoting that it was placed there in the reign of James I. In the same room is a handsome carved oak mantel-piece.43
N the second year of Edward VI. (1549) the manor of Shipton, formerly belonging to the Priory of Wenlock, with Hopton and Brockton, were granted to Sir Thomas Palmer, Knight, subject to the payment of 26s. per annum for the fee of the bailiff and collector of the manor, and also 53s. 4d. “for the stipend of one chaplain for the cure and other observances celebrated at Shipton.” Sir Thomas Palmer was attainted of high treason, and was condemned and executed early in the reign of Queen Mary. The estate subsequently passed through several hands, till it was devised by the will of John Lutwyche in 1615 to his cousin, Edward Mytton, of Worcester, by whose descendant it is still possessed. The Myttons had lived at Shipton at a much earlier period as lessees of Wenlock Abbey, for William Mytton, Sheriff in 1456, is described as of Shipton. The house is believed to have been built by one of the family, about 1589.
T is shown by the herald’s visitations that the family of Scriven was settled here in the reign of Edward V. The house was built in 1594, by Edward Scriven, who died in 1631. Richard Scriven, his son, was distinguished for his loyalty; and a pair of embroidered leather gauntlets, said to have been presented to him by Charles himself during one of the King’s visits to Shropshire, are preserved by his descendants.
The house is of stone, and the bracketing of the corners of the upper story is uncommon. It now belongs to Sir Frederick Smythe, and is occupied by a farmer. The sketch is copied from one by the Rev. John Brooke.44
N the western side of Corvedale stands Wilderhope, formerly the property of the old family of Smallman. The first mentioned in the herald’s visitation is Edward: by his will he appointed his brother Thomas trustee for his son Stephen; and the house is said to have been built by him, and finished in 1593. Stephen was living there in 1623, and was succeeded by his son, Francis, and his grandson Thomas, who was a Major in the King’s service in the Civil War, and from the active part taken by him, he was hunted and persecuted not only by the troops sent out by the Parliamentary Committee at Shrewsbury, but also by his neighbours at Millichope, Larden, Morehouse, and Shipton; and many traditions of his feats and escapes are still remembered by the people of Corvedale. On one occasion, when pursued, he dashed across the ridge of Wenlock Edge, and leaped his horse into the valley below, from the summit of a perpendicular piece of rock twenty-five feet high. The horse was killed on the spot, but the rider escaped. The site of this feat is still pointed out.
The house is of stone; and the rooms have lofty ornamental plaster ceilings, and among other devices is the motto ‘MAL MEA DEA EST’, and the initials E. S., F. S. & P. S. and the date 1601. The same motto is on a ceiling in the Abbot’s House at Buildwas Abbey. The fine old house has long since passed from the family of its builder, and is now occupied by a farmer.
Thomas Smallman was fined £140 by the Long Parliament.
he . . . leaped his horse into the valley below
[There exist people who insist that horses are intelligent.]
among other devices is the motto ‘MAL MEA DEA EST’, and the initials E. S., F. S. & P. S. and the date 1601
[A 1903 article in Transactions of the Shropshire Archæological and Natural History Society, Volume 26 takes issue with almost every word of this.]
YTON-UPON-SEVEKN was one of the estates of the Bromleys, of Shrawardine Castle, and passed to the Bridgemans by the marriage of 45 the heiress of Sir Thomas Bromley, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench in 1553, and one of the executors to the will of King Henry VIII. Their son, Richard, was living at Eyton when his daughter, Madeline, married Sir Richard Herbert, whose son was the famous Lord Herbert, of Cherbury, born here in 1581. It is probable that Eyton became the principal house of the Bridgemans after High Ercall had been partially destroyed during the long time that it held out against the Parliamentary troops in the Civil War.
From the small portion that remains of the house, it seems to have borne some resemblance to Aston Hall, near Birmingham, which was built early in the reign of James I.
This, and other estates, passed away from the Bridgemans under the will of Henry, third Earl of Bradford, and now belongs to the Duke of Cleveland.
HIS manor was the paternal estate of John de Charlton, who married Hawise, the heiress of Powis Castle; and to him, in the first year of Edward II. (1308), a license was granted to fortify and crenelate his house at Apley. The original document is in the possession of the present owner of Apley, a descendant of John de Charlton. No remains of the old Castle exist; and the house which the sketch represents, which succeeded it, has also become a ruin, and is used as an out-house to a third Apley Castle. It was built at a cost of £6000, by Thomas Hanmer, who had married the widow of Francis Charlton, and was living in it when the Civil War broke out. Its vicinity to the town of Shrewsbury made the possession of it an object to either party, and 46 Mr. Hanmer had the choice of either making it a loyal garrison, or having it blown up. In 1643 he chose the former alternative, and armed his servants and tenants, but it was soon taken by the rebels, the house dismantled, and plundered of property of the value of £1500, and the lead from the roof was taken to repair the Castle of Shrewsbury.
HIS estate was purchased by Thomas Owen, in the reign of Henry VIII., of whom Camden says—“he was a great lover of learning, who being dead, left behind him a son, Sir Roger, an excellent scholar, and worthy of so excellent a father.” By him the beautiful mansion of Condover was built, in 1598. He was succeeded by his brother, Sir William, who lived in the unhappy days of Charles I.; and the following extract from the Sequestration Papers shows how, by his prudent management, he saved both his house and his purse from the ruin that fell on many good subjects who were faithful to their royal master. “Sir William Owen, of Condover, co. Salop, Knight, was in the Commission of Array, and signed some warrants; but as soon as Shrewsbury was taken, February 22nd, 1644, he rendered himself to the Parliament Committee. The Committee certefie that to do him justice, when wee first tooke footing within this countie, and were in ye lowest condicion, penned up in that poore garrison of Wemme, having ye enemie round about us, his residence being ye moste part in Shrewsbury,* hee held corrispondance with us, even whilst he acted with them in subscribing those warrants, and by his faithful, constant intelligence to us of ye enemie’s motions and designes, was a greate meanes of our securitie and preservation in that place; and in ye meane time of that intercourse and compliance with us, he 47 freely offered us ye possession of his house, being a strong stone building within three myles distance of Shrewsbury, and might have speedily binne made defencible had wee been in a condicion to have accepted it, and to have engarrisoned it for ye Parliament. All which passages are enducements to us to believe his affections were allwaies right towards ye cause of ye publike, and that what he acted against it proceeded from some passion of timourseness, or ye facilitie of his nature, and not from any disaffection, or malignance of spirit; neither hath his carriage towardes us since the taking of this garrison given us the least reason to suspect, but to confirm our opinion of ye reallitie of what he formerly professed, having ever since maniefasted his willingness by endeavouring in anything that might tend to ye good of ye publicke in discovering for us in great measure in estates of delinquents, though many of them his own debts, and engagements unto them; whereas on ye contrary, as wee are credibly informed, his backwardness in disposition to contribute mortgages, or otherwise to yeald any assistance, occasioned them to threaten the burning of his house.” “Signed by Robert Charlton, Humphrey Mackworth, Andrew Lloyd, Leighton Owen, Robert Clive, &c., Salop, 30th May, 1646.” Sir William Owen was fined in the small sum of £214. Condover is still in possession of a descendant in the female line of Sir William Owen.
* At the Council House.
the following extract from the Sequestration Papers
[Inquiring minds want to know: which Sequestration Papers, published by whom? Perfunctory research suggests there were dozens of them.
An article about Condover Hall in Country Life Illustrated for 26 March 1898 puts a different spin on William Owen’s “prudent management”. In their version, he “contrived, with a certain agility, to be now on one side of the hedge and now on the other”.]
ICHARD PIGOTT obtained this estate by his marriage with the daughter and co-heiress of Sir Richard de Peshall. It remained in the possession of his descendants till 1776, when Sir Robert Pigott sold it, and retired to the Continent. Its purchaser was the grandfather of J. C. Burton Borough, Esq., its present owner. The date of the house has not been ascertained, but it must have been built by one of the Pigotts about the end of the 16th, or beginning of the 17th century. On the 17th of May, 1645, 48 Charles I. took up his quarters here, and staid three nights at “the pretty house of Mr. Pigott,” according to Symonds. He says that at that time there were the arms of Leveson, Corbet, Pigott, and many others in the windows. The room in which Charles passed the day, and the bedroom in which he slept, are still to be seen.
There was an ancient park here which was destroyed, but has been restored since 1803.
The room in which Charles passed the day, and the bedroom in which he slept, are still to be seen.
[Thanks to the events of the 1640s, Charles I slept in almost as many places as George Washington.]
HOMAS NEWPORT, and Isabel his wife, procured a license from the Bishop of Lichfield, dated January 6th, 1398, to cause divine service to be performed in any of their oratories within that Diocese; and in 1402, a similar license was granted to Thomas Newport, in which the benefit of this service is restricted to the servants of Mr. Newport’s household, to the exclusion “of villains and bondsmen.” He is believed to have purchased the estate of High Ercall.
The house which the sketches represent, bears the following inscription:
· D N I ·
1608 · AETAT ·
VERO · SVAE · 52
FRANC’ · NEWPORT
MILES · HOC · AEDI:
FICIVM · DEO · IN:
CŒPTA · SECVN=
DANTE · INCHOAVIT
ET · PEREGIT.
On a stone in the Garden is another inscription:
PARS · ’ISTA · HVIVS · DOM’ ·
INCHOATA · FVIT · 14 · MARTII
A° 1617 · FINITA · VERO · 13 ·
OCTOBRIS · 1620 · OPERA
ET · IMPENSIS · FRANCIS:
CI · NEWPORT · MILITI.’
A MS. chronicle describes Francis Newport “a worthy and a valiant man, one of Her Majesties’ lefttenants and justis of pees,” he was father of the first Lord Newport, an officer in the army of Charles I, and was a great sufferer for his loyalty, his house at Ercall having been made a garrison, and on several occasions by the Parliamentary forces. It was the last place in Shropshire, except Ludlow, which held out for the King, it not having yielded till March, 1646. Lord Newport was fined in the large sum of his son in £5284,) beside £170 per annum towards the support of the Puritan Clergy, and he was driven at length to seek repose in a voluntary exile, and ended his days at Moulins, in the Bourbonnois, a year after the death of his royal master. Lord Newport was created Earl of Bradford, and in 1694, in the next generation High Ercall passed from this family, and in 1802 became the property of the Duke of Cleveland.
The upper sketch is copied from one in the British Museum, and represents a portion of the house, of which only the arches now remain, which show that the building originally surrounded a square court. In the lower sketch is seen the opposite side of the house as it now stands. In Saxton’s Map, engraved 1675, a park is marked.
the following inscription
[I don’t know why three of the four hyphens are represented in print as : colons and one as an = equals sign, nor yet why ° and · are represented with the same printed symbol. A drawing of the two inscriptions would have been useful.]
on several occasions besieged by the Parliamentary forces
text has beseiged
[Corrected because the word “siege”, spelled like that, occurs several other times in the book—as might be expected when describing the history of major houses built before 1660.]
Lord Newport was fined in the large sum of £3287, (and his son in £5284,)
text has £3287,(and without space
Moulins, in the Bourbonnois
[Spelling unchanged. Today it’s Bourbonnais, but in 1868 it could go either way.]
BOUT this old house very little information has been obtained, except that it was built by a Whitmore, about 1607, probably on the site of an earlier mansion, as the protection of a moat was no longer necessary in the 17th century; and the Whitmores are known to have been living here at an earlier period. Thomas Whitmore, of Ludston, in 1679, gave to the poor of Claverley, in which parish it is situated, £5 per annum, and appointed the same to be received by the inhabitants for the time being of his then dwelling-house, to be by them distributed among the necessitous poor. The house contains a handsome oak staircase, and other relics of its former importance, but it is now occupied as a farm-house.
HIS, like the similar structure at Wenlock, is not properly a domestic building, but as probably no memorial of it exists except the sketch from which the one now given is copied, it has been thought entitled to a place in this collection. It was taken down in 1839. The following is the account of its erection in 1617. “14th James I. Whereas lately, upon the testimony worthy of belief, we learn that the towne of Church Stretton, which is an ancient and populous towne, and is a place convenient, useful, and adapted not only to hold and keep a market for the common business of our people, but on account of being lodging and entertainment in it for our subjects passing through that ville; Bonham Norton aforesaid, and others which have supplicated us to grant that they may keep a market on Thursday in each week, and through the whole day, and may continue to hold it for him and his heirs, and that he may hold the stalls.”51
The inhabitants of Stretton had obtained a much earlier grant (in the 10th of Edward III., 1337) for holding a market on Thursday, and a fair on the eve, the day, and the day after the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, but the Market Hall was built by Bonham Norton, who received a confirmation of the former grant. He was a London stationer, and had purchased the manor of Stanton Lacy, and some estates at Stretton.
UNVALL is in the parish of Astley Abbots, and was the seat of a branch of the Actons of Aldenham. Edward Acton died here in 1603, and it was occupied by his descendants till the end of the last century. A Bible of the date 1582, commonly known by the name of the ‘Breeches Bible,’ from the old rendering of the 3rd chapter of Genesis, 7th verse, and other curious old books, relics of the Actons, are still preserved in the house by its present owner, Mr. Bowen. The building is entirely united by wooden pegs, without any iron-work.
commonly known by the name of the ‘Breeches Bible,’
[The Wycliffe Bible (1382) has “they sewed the leaves of a fig tree, and made breeches to themselves”; the 1599 Geneva Bible also says “breeches”. (The Vulgate has perizomata, which is comical in its own way, since it implies that Jerome couldn’t remember the Latin for “apron” and had to fall back on Greek.) Credit the King James translators for realizing that the Bible works better when it does not sound ridiculous.]
HITTON COURT, in the parish of Burford, was a seat of the Charltons of Ludford. Robert Charlton was living at Whitton at the time of the Civil War, and was a considerable sufferer in the loyal cause. He was father 52 of Sir Job Charlton, an eminent lawyer born in 1614, appointed Chief Justice of Chester soon after the Restoration, and chosen Speaker of the House of Commons, 1672. The date of its erection has not been ascertained, but the timber portion, as also that of stone represented in the lower sketch, is of much earlier date than the principal front, which is shown in the upper view, and is supposed to have been built in the 17th century. It had originally a park attached to it; and the interior contains some good oak wainscotings, &c. It has long been abandoned by the Charltons, and has passed through several hands by purchase, but has been only inhabited by farmers.
N Blount’s account of the escape of Charles II after the battle of Worcester, published in 1660, is the following account of this house. “Mr. Richard Sneade, an honest gentleman of that country, conducted the Earl of Derby, after his defeat at Wigan on the 25th of August, 1651, to this house. Mr. Sneade brought my lord and his company to Boscobel House, a very obscure habitation, situate in Shropshire, and lies between Tong and Brewood, in a kind of wilderness. John Giffard, Esq., having built this house about 30 years since, invited Sir Basil Brooke, with other friends and neighbours, to a housewarming feast, at which time Sir Basil was desired by Mr. Giffard to give the house a name. He aptly called it Boscobel, from the Italian Boscobello, which in that language signifies ‘fair woods’, because seated in the midst of many fair woods. It is now the inheritance of Mr. Basil Fitzherbert, by Jane his wife, daughter and heir of Mr. John Cotton, by Frances, daughter and heir of the said John Giffard.” The story of the King’s arrival here a few days later, together with all the romantic incidents of his sojourn here and at White Ladies, are too well known to require to be repeated here. White 53 Ladies also belonged to the Giffards, but no remains of the house exist. The sketches of it and of Boscobel, are taken from the old views in Blount’s book. The latter is now the property of the Misses Evans. The hiding-place in which Charles was concealed, and the secret stairs by which he descended to the garden, are still preserved, though the house has undergone much
though the house has undergone much alteration.
final . missing
IR RICHARD CORBET, of Caus Castle, married the daughter of Bartholomew Turret, who, on the death of her father about 1203, became the heiress to the estate of that old Saxon family. Moreton Turret (now Moreton Corbet) and Preston Brockhurst were among her possessions. Sir Vincent Corbet, created a Baronet in 1641, took a leading part on the side of his Sovereign, and in July, 1643, received a commission from the King (then at Oxford) to raise a regiment of “a thousand foote He was in the Commission of Array, and, like other loyal subjects, he had to suffer for his loyalty. Gough, in his History of Middle, writes as follows. “The Parliament, after bringing King Charles to the scaffold, voted that all who had been true to the King’s party should be proceeded against as traitors; but there came a little sprinkling of mercy from them, which was, that every such person should be acquitted on paying a certain sum of money for his composition; and now Sir Vincent Corbet was put to pay a great sum: it was £1588 13s. 4d., and £80 per annum for his ransom, for the raising whereof he sold several lands, and Preston Brockhurst among the rest; one very good farm to Mr. Wingfield, of Shrewsbury, who pulled down the hall, and built there a fair hall of freestone, where his son now dwelleth,” (1701.) The ‘fair hall’ and its appendages did not return to their proper owners till 1743, and it is now occupied as a farm-house by a tenant of the present Sir Vincent Corbet. Over the door is a shield bearing a raven, the Corbet crest. It is in the parish of Moreton Corbet.
raise a regiment of “a thousand foote voluntiers.”
text has ’ for ” (single for double close quote)
CTON REYNALD is supposed to have been either built, or additions made to an earlier house, by Sir Andrew Corbet, the son of Sir Vincent, who died in 1623. Sir Andrew Corbet was the father of Vincent, (who was created a Baronet, 1642, and whose zeal in the cause of his royal master has been mentioned in the account of Moreton Corbet); he died in 1637. The house has been added to and much improved, both by its present owner, Sir Vincent Corbet, and by his father.
OHN LEYGHTON, Sheriff of Shropshire in 1468, was eleventh in descent from Tihel de Lahtun, who possessed Leighton at the time of the Norman conquest. He obtained Wattlesborough, Loton, Cardiston, and the ancient Corbet estates, by marriage with one of the co-heiresses of Sir John Burgh. Sir Edward Leighton, of Loton and Wattlesborough, was created a Baronet in 1692. It is not known when the house at Loton was built, but it is believed to have been added to by him about 1646, and to have been his abode while Wattlesborough Castle was occupied by his father’s widow. Wattlesborough continued to be the chief residence of the family till 1712, when they finally established themselves at Loton. The house has been much improved by the present Sir Baldwin Leighton and his father.
Here is an ancient park, inclosing the old Castle of Wattlesborough; and the ruin of Alberbury Castle is also in the grounds.55
OWLAND HILL, a younger branch of the Hills of Court of Hill, was living at Soulton in the reign of Henry VII. His grandson, Thomas Hill, was living there in 1681, when he was Sheriff of Shropshire. He is supposed to have built the house, over the door of which is a shield carved in stone, bearing the arms of Hill with many quarterings. It is the property of the Viscount Hill, but is occupied by farmers, and is in the parish of Wem.
was living at Soulton in the reign of Henry VII. His grandson, Thomas Hill, was living there in 1681
[Henry VII died in 1509. As with the Sprenghoses of Plaish Hall, I strongly suspect that one or more generations have gone missing.]
HIS estate was part of a purchase made by William, the first Earl of Craven, from the Earl of Lindsey, in 1673. In the ninth year of Charles I., 1634, a lease had been granted by Lord Lindsey, of “all that capital mansion or farm-house of Wooton, and the mill thereunto belonging, for ninety-nine years, to Arthur Winwood and his heirs,” which shows that the house was erected before that time. It was soon afterwards let to Richard Walker, who rented “the mines of cole and iron-stone on Clee hille,” and the forge at Bringewood. His son, John Walker, married the sister of the last Lord Folliot, and his grandson Francis quitted it to reside at Ferney Hall, in 1715, after which it was let to farmers. It was surrounded by a moat, and probably had at some time a park attached to it, as some of the grounds bear the name, and at an early period a great number of small parks were enclosed in Shropshire and some of the adjoining counties. Wooton was taken down about 1840. The estate is in the parish of Onibury.56
HIS manor was obtained by a younger son of the Corbets of Moreton, by his marriage with the heiress of Horde. Gough, in his History of Middle, says: “Robert, the grandson of Robert Corbet, Sheriff in 1636, built Stanwardine Hall that now is. The hall formerly stood in a place not far distant, which was moated, and still retains the name of the Old Hall. Thomas, the eldest son, enlarged Stanwardine Hall, and married the daughter of Sir Vincent Corbet of Moreton Corbet.” Gough further adds that Stanwardine was sold in 1701 to Sir John Wynn of Wattes-stay, but there was probably some connexion between the families previously, for on the house are the arms of Corbet and Wynn carved in stone, and in the garden is a stone pedestal, on which is a sun-dial, the plate of which is of silver, and on it is engraved the arms of Corbet and Wynn, with the date 1560.
On the wainscot of the hall is a scroll with the date 1588, and the steps of the staircase are of solid blocks of oak, brought from the older house. Stanwardine is four miles from Baschurch. The sketch is copied from one by the Rev. John Brooke.
OREATTON was the property of Sir Paul Harries, son of Sir Thomas, created a Baronet in 1622. His grandson was an eminent loyalist, and compounded for his estates in the sum of £1542. In 1655 he was implicated in a rising against Cromwell, and he had enlisted some troopers who were to 57 have mustered in Boreatton Park, but Humphrey Mackworth, the Governor of Shrewsbury, receiving intelligence of the design, instantly impressed the best horses in the town, marched to Boreatton, and seized the insurgents, with their ammunition, which consisted in part of bullets made from the lead taken from the roof of the house. Sir Thomas made his escape.
Before the Restoration, Boreatton had become the property of the Parliament Colonel, Thomas Hunt, but whether by purchase or as a reward for his services, does not appear. He was the Governor of Wem, member for Shrewsbury in 1645, and Baxter, who knew him well, says that “he was a plain-hearted, honest, godly man.”
It is not known when the house, which the sketch represents, was built, but certainly subsequent to the time of Colonel Hunt. The estate still belongs to his descendants, but part of the old house has been taken down, and a new mansion erected. The ancient park is still kept up.58
DWARD KYNASTON, (a branch of a family in very early times settled in Shropshire), in the reign of Henry VIII., married the heiress of Edward Oteley of Oteley, and the same family afterwards settled at Pitchford. Oteley remained in the possession of their descendants in the male line till on the death of Edward Kynaston, in 1781, it passed by an heiress to Edward Mainwaring, of Bromborough, who had married his sister, from whom it has descended to its present owner.
It is not known when the old house was built, but its style indicates that it must have been soon after the estate became the property of the Kynastons; it was taken down in 1830. The old hall seems to have narrowly escaped the fate of many of the old mansions of Shropshire, during the Civil Wars. The Park was enclosed early in the 14th century, and is marked in Saxton’s maps.
“Prince Maurice, in 1644, took up his quarters at Cockshutt, and the next day made his residence at Ellesmere, at which time Mr. Mitton of Halston was General of the Parliament force in this County, and was a valiant and politick commander, and, hearing the Prince made only his rendezvous at Ellesmere, and intended to go forward, the General, hoping to find some stragglers in Ellesmere that stayed behind the army, came with a troop of horse through bye-ways; but when he came to the gate that goes out of Oteley Parke, he found that he was come too soon, for there were three or four troops of horse at Oateley Hall, which got between him and home, and therefore when he and all his men were come through the gate, they shott a horse dead up to the gate, to keep it from opening; but the others soon broke down two or three ranks of pales, and followed so close that all the General’s men, before they came to Ellesmere, were taken, except the General, who turned down the dark lane that goes towards Birch Hall, and the rest went straight into the town. The next day the Prince caused the prisoners to be brought before him, and ordered thirteen of them to be hanged.”—Gough’s History of Middle.
The drawing is copied from one at Oteley.59
HE family of Baldwyn had estates in the parish of Delbury, in the reign of Richard II. William Baldwin held the office of cup-bearer to Queen Mary. He died without issue, and was succeeded by his brother Richard, who in 1545 married Margery, the heiress of Laurence Ludlow of Morehouse, in the parish of Shipton, and by him the house at Elsich is supposed to have been built. His eldest son, Thomas, was confined for three years in the Tower, on suspicion of being implicated with the Earl of Shrewsbury in a plot for the release of Mary, Queen of Scots. The following inscription on the wall of the room in which he was a prisoner is believed to have been inscribed by his own hand.—“Thomas Baudewine, Julie, 1585. As virtue maketh life, so sin causeth death.”
Elsich and the other estates in Corvedale were held by the Baldwins for several generations, and they also had a lease of Stoke Castle from the first Lord Craven, which only terminated early in the present century. The house at Elsich was surrounded by a moat. It is now the property of Mr. Lloyd Roberts, and is occupied by a tenant farmer.
HE Sketches of six old houses now added to the collection, were not obtained in time to be inserted in their proper places, but, being good specimens, are added in a Supplement. An opportunity is thus afforded of gratefully acknowledging the loan of drawings, and information obtained in too many instances to be separately enumerated, since this little work has been in progress.62
F the actual erection of this house (situate in Middleton township and Bitterley parish, about three miles from Ludlow) nothing is positively known. It belonged to the Shepheard family, who for five generations appear to have succeeded each other in the possession of this and the adjoining estates of The Brookhouse, Hill Appencott, and Middleton, all in the same parish. The name of Shepheard occurs repeatedly in the Parish Register from 1621 to 1721, when, by marriage of the heiress with the Halls of Downton Hall, the estates became merged in the latter family.
The date of the house would appear to be about the beginning of the 17th century, and it was probably intended to take the place of the older manor-house called The Brookhouse, a half timbered gable of which is still in existence, and the moat nearly perfect. From a map made in 1721, the house would appear to have been in good preservation at that time, as the sites of a summer-house, large walled garden, and a bowling green are all marked.64
HE manor, as early as the reign of Henry I., became the property of Baldwin de Boulers, or Bowder, and remained with his descendants till 1586, when it passed to David Lloyd by his marriage with Margaret, the heiress of John Bowdler. A Welsh poet of the time thus celebrates the event—
“Where Bowler so long had spit and board,
Is now the place of young David Lloyd.”
His grandson, Richard Lloyd, was the builder of the house, and over the original entrance are the arms of Bowler, Lloyd, Broughton, and Middleton; but considerable additions and alterations have subsequently been made to the building. In front of the house is a curious sun-dial, coeval with the house, and bearing the date 1595. It consists of a square stone pillar, on which is the Lloyd crest, together with the arms of six families connected with the Lloyds, and other devices, and the following inscription
“FROM DAI TO DAIE THESE SHADES DO FLEE,
AND SO THIS LIFE PASSETH AWAIE.”
Marrington was sold by the son of its builder to the first Lord Craven, and has since been repeatedly re-sold.65
OHN THYNNE, the founder of Longleat, who died in 1604, married Jane, the daughter of Sir Rowland Hayward, who inherited from her mother Jane, the heiress of William Tyllsworth, the manors of Cause Castle and “Stretton All” in Shropshire, and Minsterley was probably obtained in the same way. Several of the family had long previously resided at Botfield, in the parish of Church Stretton, but no tradition tells when the house of Minsterley was built, or whether any of its owners inhabited it, except that in 1691, when the Church was rebuilt, a handsome set of Communion plate was presented to it, by some ladies of the Thynne family, who were then living at the Hall. A large hall still exists, but the house, both externally and internally, has been much disfigured by modern alterations. It is now used as a farm-house.
EE HALL, in the parish of Ellesmere, was purchased from Thomas and Meynel Kynaston, in 1710, by Richard Hatchett, by whose descendant, Mr. Bulkeley Owen, it was sold, and is again a part of the Oteley estate. On the outside of the house is the date 1594, and on the wainscot of one of the rooms is that of 1657. Lee Hall does not appear to have ever been a family mansion, though superior in size and ornament to the usual farm-houses of the period at which it was built.66
RELAND’S MANSION, in the High Street, Shrewsbury, was built by Robert Ireland, the representative of a family who were living at Oswestry in the reign of Richard II. His father was a mercer at Shrewsbury, and Robert was a younger son. A MS. chronicle preserved in the School Library gives his character in the following terms. “1599, Mr. Robert Ireland, Esquire, departed thys present lyffe; who was a stowt Protestant, and a furtherar of the poore, a good housekeeper, and one that kept greate countenance in his proceedinges in this towne. He died godly, in good remembrance unto the last ende, and was solomly buried in St. Chad’s Churche; for whom many weeping teares and greate moane. He will be myssed by his kinsfolke and friends.” An escutcheon bearing his arms is on each of the four gables of his house.
LBRIGHTON (near Shrewsbury) was part of the possessions of Shrewsbury Abbey, and after the dissolution, the estate was purchased by Thomas Ireland, the elder brother of Robert, of whom the same chronicle gives the following record. “1554, November 10th, was buried Master Thomas Ireland, of Salop, mercer, a right Protestant, a dylygent favourer of the Worde of God, and was a virteous and charitable man unto the poore, zealous and carefull in provydinge for them, and yf he had lyvyd, he wold have brought hys mynd to pasin the same for his perpetuall memorye.” His grandson was Sheriff in 1632, and by him it is probable that the house at Albrighton was built. It was inhabited by his descendants for five generations, and was then sold.
|Prior’s House, Wenlock||24|
|Old House in the Butchers’ Row, Shrewsbury||25|
|Old House, Wenlock||30|
|Market House, Wenlock||35|
|White Hall, Shrewsbury||39|
|68 Berwick Mavison||41|
|Leigh or Lee Hall||41|
|Old House, Bridgnorth||42|
|Feathers’ Hotel, Ludlow||42|
|Market Hall, Church Stretton||50|
|Ireland’s Mansion, Shrewsbury||66|
|Ludlow Castle in 1684||10|
|Ludlow Castle Hall||10|
|Ludlow Castle Chapel||10|
|Whittington Castle in 1760||18|
|Whittington Castle in 1820||18|
|Red Castle, Hawkestone||19|
|Stokesay Castle, Hall||19|
|Stokesay Castle Gate House||20|
|Stokesay Castle Fire Place||20|
|Stokesay Castle Ground Plan||21|
|Stokesay Castle The Court||21|
|Stokesay Castle North side, 1815||21|
|Acton Burnell in 1777||22|
|Acton Burnell in 1864||22|
|Prior’s House, Wenlock||24|
|Prior’s House, Wenlock North side||24|
|Prior’s House, Wenlock Cloister||24|
|Prior’s House, Wenlock The Hall||24|
|Shrewsbury, Old House, Butcher Row||25|
|Pitchford Hall The Court||26|
|Pitchford Hall West side||26|
|Longner Hall (2 views)||27|
|Langley Hall (2 views)||29|
|70 Old House, Wenlock||30|
|Market House, Wenlock||30|
|Plaish Hall (2 views)||31|
|Plaish Hall The Hall||31|
|Plaish Hall Chimney at||31|
|Moreton Corbet Ruins||36|
|Moreton Corbet Ornaments of||37|
|White Hall, Shrewsbury||40|
|Alcaston, Old House at||40|
|Leigh or Lee Hall||41|
|Bridgnorth, Bishop Percy’s House||42|
|Ludlow, The Feathers’ Hotel||42|
|Condover Hall (2 views)||46|
|Chetwynd Park (2 views)||47|
|High Ercall (2 views)||48|
|Church Stretton, Old Market House||50|
|Whitton Court (2 views)||51|
|White Ladies, Boscobel||52|
|71 Loton Park||54|
|Wooton (2 views)||55|
|Boreatton, Old Hall||57|
|Shrewsbury, Ireland’s Mansion||66|
|Acton Burnell, 1777||22|
|Acton Burnell, 1864||22|
|Alcaston, Old House at||40|
|Boreatton, Old Hall||57|
|Boscobel White Ladies||52|
|Bridgnorth, Bishop Percy’s House||42|
|Chetwynd Park (2 views)||47|
|Church Stretton, Market House||50|
|Condover Hall (2 views)||46|
|High Ercall (2 views)||48|
|Langley Hall (2 views)||30|
|Leigh or Lee Hall||41|
|Longner Hall (2 views)||27|
|Ludlow Castle in 1684||10|
|Ludlow Castle The Hall||10|
|Ludlow Castle The Chapel||10|
|Ludlow The Feathers’ Hotel||42|
|Moreton Corbet Ruins||36|
|Moreton Corbet Ornaments at||37|
|Plaish Hall (2 views)||31|
|Plaish Hall The Hall||31|
|Plaish Hall Chimneys at||31|
|Pitchford Hall The Court||26|
|Pitchford Hall West side||26|
|Red Castle, Hawkestone||19|
|Shrewsbury, Old House in Butcher Row||25|
|Shrewsbury Ireland’s Mansion||66|
|Shrewsbury White Hall||40|
|73 Stanwardine Hall||56|
|Stokesay Castle The Hall||19|
|Stokesay Castle Gate House||20|
|Stokesay Castle Tower Place||20|
|Stokesay Castle Ground Plan||21|
|Stokesay Castle The Court||21|
|Stokesay Castle North side, 1815||21|
|Wenlock, Old House at||30|
|Wenlock Market House||30|
|Wenlock Prior’s House||24|
|Wenlock Prior’s House North side||24|
|Wenlock Prior’s House Cloisters||24|
|Wenlock Prior’s House The Hall||24|
|Whittington Castle, 1760||18|
|Whittington Castle, 1820||18|
|Whitton Court (2 views)||51|
|Wooton (2 views)||55|
|Acton Burnell||9, 22, 23, 30, 33|
|Acton, Edward||40, 51|
|Actons of Aldenham||51|
|Alan Fitz, Henry||12|
|Alan Fitz, John||12|
|Alan Fitz, Sir John||15|
|Alan Fitz, Lady Mary||12|
|Alan Fitz, William||12|
|Albright Hussey||32, 34, 41|
|Aldithele, Henry de||19|
|Apley Castle||34, 35, 45|
|Arundel, Earl of||12|
|Arundel, Henry, Earl of||16, 18|
|Astley, Sir John||39|
|Baldwin de Boulers||64|
|Baldwyn, Family of||59|
|Bath, Earl of||18|
|Baxter, Richard||42, 57|
|Beaufort, Duke of (First)||10|
|Belemeis, Richard de||9|
|Benthall, Family of||32|
|Bishop’s Castle||14, 15, 16, 20|
|Boreatton||31, 56, 57|
|Borough, J. C. Burton, Esq||47|
|75 Boscobel House||52|
|Boscobel, White Ladies||52|
|Bouchem, Sir William||18|
|Bradford, Earl of (First)||49|
|Bradford, Earl of, (Third)||45|
|Bridgeman, Family of||44, 45|
|Bromley, Family of||44|
|Bromley, Sir Thomas||45|
|Brooke, Sir Basil||35, 52|
|Brooke, Rev. John||43, 56|
|Brown (of Caughley), Family of||33|
|Buildwas Abbey||33, 44|
|Burgh, Family of||14|
|Burgh, Sir John||54|
|Burnell, Robert, Lord Chancellor||9, 23|
|Burnell, Family of||32|
|Burton, Sir Edward||27|
|Burton, Rev. Lingen||32, 41|
|Camden||7, 17, 26, 36, 46|
|Carberry, Earl of||11|
|Cause Castle||7, 41, 53, 65|
|Charles I.||9, 11, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34, 37, 38,
41, 43, 46, 48, 49, 53, 55
|Charles II.||22, 35, 52, 53|
|Charlton, Family of||34, 35, 51, 52|
|Charlton, Francis||35, 45|
|Charlton, Sir Job||35, 52|
|Charlton, John de||45|
|Charlton, Robert||47, 51|
|Church Stretton, Market Hall||50, 51|
|Clee Hill||9, 55|
|Cleveland, Duke of||45, 49|
|Clive, Hon. Robert||47|
|Clun Castle||7, 8, 12, 13, 16|
|Condover Hall||46, 47|
|Corbet, Family of||13, 14, 17, 36, 41, 48, 56|
|Corbet, Andrew||34, 37|
|Corbet, Sir Andrew||36, 54|
|Corbet, Sir Richard||36, 53|
|Corbet, Sir Robert||32, 56|
|Corbet, Sir Roger||17|
|Corbet, Sir Pelham||32, 41|
|Corbet, Sir Vincent||37, 53, 54, 56|
|Corve Dale||9, 28, 44, 59|
|Cotton, Family of||38|
|Cotton, Rev. L. D.||38|
|Cotton, Sir Rowland||38|
|76 Cotes, Lady Louisa||26|
|Court of Hill||40|
|Craven, Lord||20, 55, 59, 64|
|Derby, Earl of||52|
|Domesday Survey||8, 9, 13|
|Dinan, Joce de||10|
|Dinely, Thomas||10, 11|
|Dudley, Sir John||22|
|Edward I.||9, 17, 19, 23|
|Edward II.||39, 45|
|Edward III.||41, 51|
|Edward VI.||18, 43|
|Edward, Prince (1263)||14|
|Edwardes, Sir Henry||28|
|Edwardes, Sir Thomas||28|
|Elizabeth, Queen||12, 16, 26, 30 31, 40, 49|
|Ellesmere||7, 28, 58, 65|
|Ercall, High||45, 48, 49|
|Feathers’ Hotel, Ludlow||42|
|Giffard, John||52, 53|
|Grant, Family of||41|
|Grey, John de||19|
|Grosvenor of Belaporte||38|
|Grosvenor of Eiton Bote||38|
|Grosvenor of The Houme||38|
|Gough||53, 56, 58|
|Hall, Family of||63|
|Hanmer, Thomas||45, 46|
|Harries, Sir Thomas||56, 57|
|Harries, Family of||33|
|Harries, Sir Paul||56|
|Hastings, Battle of||41|
|Hatchett Family of||65|
|Hayward Sir Rowland||65|
|Henry I.||8, 9, 64|
|Henry II.||12, 17|
|Henry III.||8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19, 23, 36|
|Henry VI.||17, 25|
|Henry VII.||29, 55, 58|
|Henry VIII.||13, 18, 30, 31, 33, 34, 38,
45, 46, 58, 66
|Herbert, Sir Richard||45|
|Herbert Lord of Cherbury||45|
|Hill, Family of||40|
|Holgate, Helget||8, 9|
|Hopton Castle||17, 29, 43|
|Hopton, Family of||17|
|Hussey, Sir Richard||32|
|Hunt Rowland, Esq||31|
|James I.||12, 16, 37, 42, 45, 50|
|John, King||12, 18|
|Kinchant, John Charlton||35|
|Kynaston, Edward||34, 58|
|Kynaston, Thomas and Meynel||65|
|Lacy, Family of||19|
|Lahtun, Tihel de||54|
|Langley Hall||29, 30|
|Larden Hall||28, 29, 44|
|La Touche, Rev. J.||21|
|Lee, Sir Humphrey||30|
|Lee, Sir Richard||30|
|Lee, Robert de Atte||29|
|Lee, Roger de le||29|
|Leigh or Lee Hall||34, 41|
|Leighton, Family of||14|
|Leighton, Sir Baldwin||14, 54|
|Leighton, Sir Edward||54|
|Leighton, John||31, 54|
|Leland||9, 13, 16, 20, 22, 23, 30, 38|
|Leveson, Sir Richard||33|
|Leveson, Arms of||48|
|Lilleshall, Abbot of||26|
|Lindsay, Earl of||55|
|Liverpool, Earl of||26|
|78 Lloyd, Richard||64|
|Loton Park||14, 54|
|Lovel, Lord||9, 22|
|Ludlow Castle||8, 9, 10, 15, 17, 20, 49, 63|
|Ludlow, Feathers’ Hotel||42|
|Ludlow, Lawrence de||19, 20, 23|
|Ludlow, John de||20|
|Ludlow, Sir Richard||20|
|Mackworth, Humphrey||47, 57|
|Malveyson, Family of||41|
|Mary, Queen||18, 27, 34, 35, 38, 43, 59|
|Mary, Queen of Scots||59|
|Mauduits of Warminster||9|
|Middle||7, 53, 56, 58|
|Montgomery, Roger de||13|
|Montford, Simon de||15|
|Morehouse||28, 44, 59|
|More, Captain||17, 29|
|More, William||28, 29|
|Moreton Corbet||36, 37, 53, 54, 56|
|Moreton Turret||36, 53|
|Mouthès, Family of||14|
|Mytton, Family of||43|
|Newport, Francis||48, 49|
|Newport, Lord||41, 49|
|Norfolk, Duke of||9, 12, 22|
|Northampton, Earl of||12|
|Norton Bonham||50, 51|
|Otley, Sir Francis||26|
|Oswestry||7, 12, 66|
|Owen (Archdeacon), and Blakeway||26|
|Owen, Sir William||46, 47|
|Owen, Mr. Bulkley||65|
|Palmer, Sir Thomas||43|
|Parker, Mr.||25, 26, 30, 31|
|79 Pelham, Thursby, Mr.||10|
|Peshall, Sir Richard de||47|
|Pigott, Sir Robert||47|
|Pitchford Hall||26, 58|
|Plaish Hall||31, 39|
|Powis Castle||12, 45|
|Roberts, Mr. Lloyd||59|
|Rupert, Prince||11, 39|
|Say, Family of||12, 19|
|Say, Hugh de||19|
|Say, Isabel de||12|
|Say, Picot de||12|
|Saxton||31, 38, 39, 49, 58|
|Shepheard, Family of||63|
|Shipton Hall||43, 44|
|Shrewsbury, Old House||25|
|Shrewsbury||8, 9, 14, 16, 22, 26, 27, 28,
32, 34, 37, 39,
40, 41, 44, 45, 46, 47, 53, 57, 66
|Shrewsbury, Earl of||13, 59|
|Shrewsbury St. Alkmund’s Church||25|
|Shrewsbury School Library||66|
|Shrewsbury St. Chad’s Church||66|
|Smallman, Family of||44|
|Smythe, Sir C. Frederick||30, 43|
|Stanley, Sir William||17|
|Stokesay Castle||9, 19, 20, 23, 59|
|Suffolk, Earl of||12, 18|
|Sundorne||32, 34, 41|
|Swynfield, Bishop||15, 16, 20|
|Sydney, Sir Henry||11|
|Symonds||33, 38, 48|
|Tankerville, Earl of||39|
|Thynne, Family of||65|
|Turner, Mr. Hudson||21|
|Turret Family of||36|
|Upton, John, Lord of||39|
|Verdon, John de||19|
|Verdon, Theobold de||19|
|Vere, Geoffrey de||12|
|Vernon, Sir Henry||20|
|Wallop, Family of||17|
|Warrenne, Fulke Fitz||7, 18|
|Wattlesborough Castle||13, 14, 31, 36, 54|
|Webb, Rev. John||16|
|Wem||32, 37, 41, 46, 55, 57|
|Wenlock Market House||35, 50|
|Wenlock, Old House||30|
|Wenlock, Priory||34, 43|
|Wenlock, Prior of||9|
|Wenlock, Prior’s House||24, 25|
|White Hall||39, 40|
|Whitcombe, Family of||41|
|Whittington Castle||7, 8, 18|
|William I.||9, 17, 41|
|William and Mary||11|
|Worcester, Earl of||17|
|Worcester, Battle of||52|
|Wynn, Sir John||56|
All Index entries are punctuated and alphabetized as shown, except that missing commas in page references have been silently supplied. If we were to pore over every missing comma and ambiguous full-stop we would be here all day. And as for the sometimes creative alphabetization—well, I’ve seen worse.
The original of this text is in the public domain—at least in the U.S.
My notes are copyright, as are all under-the-hood elements.
If in doubt, ask.