A CORNER OF KENT. # Platl I n CD z^s^; A CORNER OF KENT ; OK, SOME ACCOUNT OF THE PAEISH OF ASH-NEXT-SANDWIOH, ITS HISTORICAL SITES AND EXISTING ANTiaUITXES. BY J. R. PLANCHfi, EOUGE CKOTX PURSUIVANT. Seal of Uohert de Septvans, temp. King John. LONDON: EOBEET HAEDWICKE, 192, PICCADILLY. 1864. v.^' ^ -■ -? o "v^ ^ / /^/■c TO THE MOST EEVEBEND CHARLES THOMAS LONGLBY, D.D. AUCHBISHOP or CANTERBURY, AND PRIMATE OF ALL ENGLAND, Cljese C0ntrikti0ns tobmh t^t pistorg of a ||aris|t iE PEINCIPAL POETION OF WHICH, FKOM THE TIME OF THE CONQUEST, FOKMED FOE SEVERAL CENTUEIES PART OF THE POSSESSIONS OF THE SEE OF CANTERBUSY, ARE {Miii\f l^txmmiavi) RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY HIS GRACE'S MOST OBEDIENT AND VERY FAITHFUL SERVANT, J. R. PLANCHE. vr PREFACE. X AM not the first person by many who has found, -^ long before he finished his work, that he was writing a book he had no idea of writing when he began it. Having a ''vested interest" in the parish of Ash, in the shape of a daughter married to the incumbent of it, and mother of sundry urchins born in it, I one day, in an unguarded moment, took it in my head that a sort of digest of the account of the said parish, which I had read in the third volume of Mr. Hasted's '' History of Kent," brought down to the present day, with a few notes respecting costume and heraldry as illustrated by the fine series of monumental effigies and brasses in the church, a pretty woodcut or two, and possibly an attractive plate by way of frontispiece, might be acceptable to the . inhabitants and useful to the visitors of this out-of-the-way corner of the county ; and, as a shilling hand-book, if it did not quite repay the cost of publication, would not inflict any very ruinous pecuniary penalty on the compiler. In this com- placent state of mind I commenced my self-imposed task, as an agreeable occupation of my leisure hours during the following three or four months, and I am Vlll A CORNER OF KENT. now about to terminate it with a mortifying sense of its many deficiencies, after it has reached the extent of a goodly-sized octavo volume, and absorbed every moment of the time I could give to it, not for three months, but as many years. Whether I have made a mistake or not remains to be seen. If the public — I mean that small portion of it who take an interest in local and family history — do not lay down the book till they have finished it, they will not be surprised that I was unable sooner to lay down my pen. I do it now with regret, as I feel there are many important genealogical questions which have still to be satisfactorily answered; but I have at least pointed them out for the examination of abler antiquaries with more leisure at their disposal, and shall of course bear them myself in mind while occupied in similar researches professionally. It but remains for me now to perform the agreeable duty of returning my sincere thanks to the kind friends by whom I have been materially assisted in the progress of my work. To Mrs. Streatfield, of Chart's Edge, and family, for the liberality with which they threw open the doors of that cabinet containing the countless treasures collected with such care and at such expense by the indefatigable and enthusiastic antiquary, the late Mr. Thomas Streatfield, for his contemplated History of Kent, of which, alas ! the prospectus alone has been given to the public; a specimen which only deepens our regret at the non- fulfilment of its splendid promise. PREFACE. IX To Mr. Thomas Godfrey Eaussett, the descendant of another most able and zealous Kentish antiquary, for the inspection of the MS. church notes of his great grandfather, the Rev. Bryan Faussett, of Hepping- ton, whose extensive collection of Anglo-Saxon anti- quities, chiefly discovered by him in the parish of Ash, now forms part of the museum of Mr. Meyer, of Liverpool. My obligations to my friend and co-secretary of the British Archaeological Association, Mr. Edward Roberts, I have acknowledged in the chapter devoted specially to the church, respecting the architectural details of which he has furnished me with much valuable information; but I cannot thank him too often, and this catalogue of benefactors would not be complete without his name. To another architect and archaeologist whose friend- ship I have still longer enjoyed, and whose reputation is too well and too widely established to require a word beyond the mention of his name, Mr. Arthur Ashpitel, I am indebted for several important sug- gestions, for the drawings of the recently-discovered stone coffin and the plan of the church. While my brother officers at the College of Arms have one and all cordially encouraged and assisted me in my researches, the congenial taste and great experience of William Courthope, Somerset-Herald and Registrar, have proved invaluable to me. His intimate knowledge, not only of all the stores of curious unedited documents in tlie College itself, but h X A CORNER OF KENT. of our national records generally, guided me in the pursuit of information, and his own elaborate MS. pedigrees and genealogical collections illustrated many important points misrepresented or totally overlooked by previous writers of great authority. Lastly, but not less gratefully, I have to return my thanks to Miss Adelaide Godfrey, of Brooke House, Ash, for the spirited little drawings, the originals of the w^oodcuts which adorn the heads of the four first chapters; and to the Hon. George C. O. Bridgeman, for the reduction of the map of the parish. J. E, BLANCHE. College of Arms, CONTENTS. Introduction: xxi. CHAPTER I. BEFOUE THE CONQUEST. The Rutupiae shore alluded to by Lncan, 1. Kutupis, or Rutupinum, now Richborongh, 2. Etymological conjectures re- specting its name, ih. Description of the castle, 3. " St. Augustine's Cross," 6. The amphitheatre, 9. Site of the Roman town, 10. Notices of Rutupise by the Roman poets and historians, from the second to the fifth century, 14. Summary of the meagre materials for the history of Richborough, from the first invasion by Julius Csesar to the final departure of the Romans, 15. Celebrated personages who must have seen it in its glory, 16. The general features it probably presented at that period, 18. Arrival of the Jutes, 19. Uncer- tainty of all Anglo-Saxon history, 21. Reptacseaster and Ricsburg, Saxon names for Rutupis, 22. Eric or Esc, supposed son of Hengist, etymology of his name, 23. Probable derivation of the name of the parish of Ash, ib. Battle of Ebbsfleet, 24. Reigns of Eric, Octa, and Hermenric, ib. Guilton, or Guiltonfcown, celebrated pagan Saxon cemetery at, 25. Speculations concerning its name, ib. Local tradition of a golden idol there, 27. State of Ash in the sixth century, 28. Arrival of St. Augustine in the port of Richborough, ib. His reception by King Ethelbert, 30. Bertha, queen of Ethelbert ; a stone in the walls of Richborough casfcle called Queen Bertha's Head, 31. Restoration of paganism in Kent by Eadbald, son and successor of Ethelbert, A.D. 616, ib. Pious fraud of Laurentius, the successor of Augustine, ib. Destruction of heathen temples and idols throughout Kent by order of the Christian king, Ercombert, 32. Wasting of Kent by Cadwalla, King of the West Saxons, and ter- mination of its existence as a separate kingdom, A.D. 823, 33. h 2 XU A CORNER OF KENT. Inroads and devastations of the Danes, ih. Utter destruction of Richborough by the Danes, A.D. 990-994, 34. Subsidence of the sea and accumulation of sand in the port of Richborough during the seventh and eighth centuries, and consequent increase of the im- portance of Sandwich, ih. The river Wantsum, 35. State of the parish at the commencement of the eleventh century, 36. Bernholt, a supposed landholder in Ash in the reign of Edward the Confessor, ih. CHAPTER II. DESCENT OE THE MANORS. Ash next Sandwich, supposed by Hasted to be the Ece in Eastry Hundred mentioned in Domesday, 37. - Osbert Fitz-Letard a tenant there under Odo, Bishop of Baieux, temp. William the Conqueror, ih. Enumeration of the manors, 39. Fleet, granted by Archbishop Lanfranc to Osborne, 1084, 40. A portion held by William D'Arques, ih. Errors and confusion in the accounts of him and his family, 41. Legal document of the eighth of Eichard I., illustrating the state of Richborough at that period, with the names of the landholders in 1197, 42. Tenure of that portion of the manor knowm as Gurson Fleet, by the De Yeres, Earls of Oxford, under the family of Sandwich, 48. The other moiety called Butler's Fleet, 49. Descent of Gurson Fleet to the reign of Henry YIL, 50. Description of Bichborough Castle, temj). Henry YIII., 51. Aliena- tion of the manor to Hammond, temj;). Elizabeth, 55 ; and descent to the present day, ih. Butler's Fleet passed from the family of Pincerna to that of Latimer of Corbie, 5Q. Name changed to liATiMER's Fleet, 57. Again to Nevil's Fleet, 5^. Descent to present day, 59. Goshall. Given by Archbishop Lanfranc to Amoldus, temp. William the Conqueror, 60. Banulf and Walter de Goshall holders of one and a half knight's fee there, temp. Henry III. 61. Sir John Maunsel a tenant about the same period, ih. Re- markable notices of him in the Chronicle of Matthew Paris and contemporary records, %2. Descent of Goshall in the family of that CONTENTS. Xlll name from the reign of Edward I. to that of Richard II., Q5. Passed by a female heir to that of St. Nicholas, 67 ; and from them to Dynely, ib. Descent from 1484 to the present day, ih. Goldston granted with Goshall to Arnoldus by Archbishop Lanfranc, 68. William Fitz- Arnold a sub-tenant to Eobert de Goldstanton, fourth of John, A.D. 1202, ib. In the possession of the family of Goshall, temp. Edward I., Edward II. _, and Edward III., 69. Elmes, or Nell, an appendage to Goldston, held by the family of Leyghe, ib. Sir Boger de Leybourne Lord of the Manor in 1266, 70. Passed with his grandaughter, Juliana, to William de Clinton, Earl of Hunting- don, ib. Descent from Clinton to Clitherow and Norris, sold to John Lord Clinton, forfeited to the Crown by the attainder of Thomas Cromwell, Earl of Essex; granted by Henry YIII. to Vincent Engham, Esq. ; descent to the present day, 72. Overland. No record of, previous to the reign of Henry III., 74. Held then by the family of Criol under the Archbishop of Canterbury by grant of Henry III. to Bertram de Criol, ib. Passed to the family of Leybourne, temp. Edward I., ib. Juliana de Leybourne, the Infanta of Kent ; correction of errors concerning her, 75; Overland forfeited to the Crown by attainder of Sir Simon de Burley, K.G., 1387, and granted to the Priory of Canons alias Chiltern Langley, 77. Descent from the reign of Henry YIIL to the present day, ib. Molland. Held by a family of that name, teinp. Henry III., 78. Passed to that of Sandwich before the reign of Edward III., 79. Carried by Anne, daughter and heir of Nicholas de Sandwich, to her husband, John Septvans, ib. Passed by a female heir of Septvans alias Har- fleet to John St. Ledger of Doneraile, Esq., 82. Descent from 1710 to present day, ib. Chilton, a manor in a borough of the same name, 83. A Boger de Chilton living fourteenth Henry III., ib. William de Chilton died seized of the manor thirty-first of Edward L, 85 ; and William de Baude, fourth of Edward III., ib. Passed to Thomas de Walton, and from him to Sir William de Septvans, 86. Sold by John St. Ledger to Dr. George Thorpe, Prebendary of Can- terbury, 1675, ib. Bequeathed by him in 1716 to the Master and Fellows of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, the present possessors, ib. Names of fields at Chilton in 1286, ib. Chequer, anciently Estche- quer, probably so called from the Essex family De Scaccario^ or Exchequer, ib. Connection of that fandly with- those of Peyforer XIV A CORNER OF KENT. and Sandwich, 87. Manor carried by Anne de Sandwich to the family of Septvans, alias Harflete, alias Atchequer, ih. In the families of Alday and Monins, tem20. Henry YII. — Edward YL, 88. Eepurchased by Harfleet, ih. Sold in 1695 by Jobn St. Ledger to the Kev. George Thorpe, Prebend of Canterbury, and bequeathed by him to Emmanuel College, together with the manor of Chilton, 1716, 89. Hills Court, from the family of Helles, or Hills, of Darent, county Kent, ih. Descent of that family from Agnes, sister of St. Thomas a Becket, ih. Passed through the families of Wroth and Slaughter to Harfleet, 91. Sold by Henry Harfleet to Edward Peke, of Sandwich, tem^y. Charles I., ih. Sometimes called ''the Manor of Hills Church Gate," ih. Descent from 1701 to present day, 92. Twitham Hills. Identity of the families of Hills and Twitham, ih. Inquisitions respecting the lands of Alan, son of Theobald de Twitham, and discrepancies in Philipot and his followers respecting Maud de Twitham, 93. In the family of Septvans temp. Richard II. — Edward lY., 94. Descent through Wroth, Slaughter, and Harfleet to the present day, ih. Levericks. Uncertainty as to the origin of the name, ih. Notices of the family of Leverick, of Sandwich, from 1281 to 1510, 95. Purchased by Peke, of Sandwich, tern]). Henry YII., 97. Descent to the present day, ih. Wedding- ton. First found in the possession of the family of Hougham, in the thirteenth century ; supposed collateral descendants of the Avranches, Lords of Folkestone, 99. Match with Sanders of Norborne, 100. Doubts respecting the arms supposed to be of Sanders, 101. Curious MS. memorandum of Francis Hougham in 1717, 102. Wingham Barton. Part of the ancient possessions of the see of Canterbury, 103. Tithe of the manor given to the College of Wingham by Archbishop Peckham in 1286 j whence the name, ih. Family of Barton or Berton, ancestors of Finneux and Diggs, ih. Property passed from the see of Canterbury to the Crown, temp. Henry YIII., — the manor house given by Edward YI. to Sir Anthony St. Ledger ; the manor itself granted by Queen Elizabeth to Sir Roger Man wood, 104. Descent from Sir Peter Man wood, temp. James L, to present day, ih. CONTENTS. XV CHAPTER III. PEHAMBULATION OE THE PARISH. Extent, boundary, and divisions of the parish, 106. Church of Ash, formerly Chapel of Ease to Wingham, 107. Made a parish church and given to Wingham College by Archbishop Peckham in 1286, 108. Rectory and advowson in the King's hands, temp> Edward YI., ih. A separate vicarage as early as 1286 ; esteemed a perpetual curacy at the time of the suppression, and the advowson granted by Queen Mary to the Archbishop of Canterbury and his successors, 109. Passed into the hands of the Ecclesiastical Com- missioners, 1836, ih. Present lessees of the great tithes, ih. Pod- ding, 110. Carved panelling commemorating the family of Solly, A.D. 1662, 112. View from the hill above Pedding, 113. Guilton- town and Guilton Parsonage, ih. The School Farm, Guilton Farm, and Mill, 115. Site of the celebrated Anglo-Saxon Cemetery, ih. Excava- tions there by the Rev. Bryan Faussett, the Rev. James Douglas, Mr. Rolfe, Mr. Ingram Godfrey, and the Rev. H. S. Mackarness, 116. Chequer Lane — Manor-houses of Molland and Chequer Court, 117. Arms of the Harfleets in the windows at Molland, 118. Nell, anciently Elmes ; perhaps so called from the forest of elms formerly existing there, 121. The village of Ash or Ash Street, 122. The Chequer Inn, 123. The Yicarage, ih. The Infant School, ih. The Lion Inn, 124. The Ship Inn, 125. Ash Mill, ih. The Cartwright Schools, 126. The Moat Farm, ib. Notices of the families of Stoughton and Proude, ih. John Proude's bequest of a house, 127. Mount Ephraim and " Lovekey Street," 129. New Street, ih. Road to Sandwich ; old workhouse, now a brewery, ih. Ash-den, Hill's Court, Levericks, CoUarmaker's Hole, 130. "The Causeway," 131. Associations connected with it, 131-134. Modern alterations, 134. East Street, Goshall Fleet, Goshall, 135. Brooke House, 136. John Godfrey, Esq., J.P., "the poor man's friend," 137. Twitham Hill, Lowton, Cooper Street, Fleet, ih. Sham fight at Stonor before Queen Elizabeth, September 1st, 1572, 138. Richborough Castle and Farm, 139. Gustou, ih. Providence Cottage, Potts Farm, Sparrow Castle, Sandhills, Upper and Lower GoJdstone, Cop Street, XVI A CORNEH OE KENT. 140. Crackstakes, ib., note. Warehorn, Paramour Street, 141. "Ware, Bereling Street, 142. Westmarsh, Houghton, Wingham Barton, Housden or XJpliousen, Sherewater, 143. Hoden, 144. Overland, Nash, 145. Review of the general features of the parish and value of the land, celebrity of its market-gardens, its climate, and salubrity, 147. Disappearance , of ancient edifices, 148. Singular proximity of the old manor houses, 150. Ash apparently undisturbed by the civil wars and popular tumults of the fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries, 151. Notices of the Cess Books and other parish accounts, 152. Verbatim copy of the Churchwardens' accounts for 1634, 153. Extracts from the accounts for various years from 1635 to 1765, 161-172. Notices of the registers of baptisms, marriages, and burials, commencing first of Elizabeth, 1558, 172. Alphabetical list of the principal remarkable names in them, 173. License for a market and annual fair at Ash granted to William Lord Latimer by Edward III. ; the curfew and five o'clock bell ; number of communicants in 1588-1640 ; increase of births from 1620 to 1820 j population from 1801 to the last census, 1861, 174. CHAPTEB> lY. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. Situation of the church, 175. Probability of an earlier church having existed on the same site, 176. No portion of the present anterior to the close of the twelfth century, ib. General form of the church, arrangement and details, 177. Discovery of a stone coffin in 1863, 181, note. Chantry of "John Stevynj" of "the Upper Hall," and of "Our Blessed Lady," 183. Shields of arms and figures originally in the windows of Ash church, 186. Miss Friend's memorial window, 191. The high chancel thoroughly repaired by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, 1861, 192. The tower and bel- fry, 193. The font, 194. Extracts from the parish accounts of payments for the repairs of the church, bells, churchyard-gates, walls, &c., from 1635 to 1791, 195. Lists of benefactors, 198. The CONTENTS. XVll inonuments : — Sir John de Goshall, 203 j effigy of a female of the thirteenth century, 204 ; Sir John Leverick, 205 ; brasses of Richard Clitherow and his wife, daughter of Sir John Oldcastle, 207 j brass of Jane Keriel, 208 j presumed gravestone of Koger Clitherow, 210; mural tablets to the memory of Elizabeth and Jervas Cartwright, and of Eleanor and Anne Cartwright, 212 ; Latin epitaph of Gervase Cartwright, 213 j mural tablet, — Henry and Susanna Roberts and their children, and Eleanor, sister of Henry, 214; Edward, Samuel, and Sarah Solly, 215 ; Thomas Coleman^ ib. ; William and Frances Brett and family, ib. ; John Godfrey and his daughter Augusta, 216 j Arthur William Godfrey, 217 ; Benjamin and Frances Longley, ib. ; Joseph Smith, 218; effigies of John Septvans and Katherine, his wife, ib. ; brass of Christopher Harfleet and Mercy his wife, 224 ; brass of Walter Harfleet and Jane his wife, 227 ; mural monument of Sir Thomas Harfleet and Bennet his wife, 229 ; mural monument of Christopher Toldervey and Jane his wife, 230 ; gravestone of Thomas Peke, 231 ; of Susanna Peke, 232 ; of Elizabeth Lady Peke, ib. ; of Thomas, son of Sir Edward Peke, 233 ; singular epitaph of John Brooke, ib. ; sculptured stone with crest, supposed of the family of Gimber, 234 ; Thomas Singleton, M.D., 236 ; Mrs. Margaret Masters, ib. ; John Masters, 237 ; mural tablet, Whittingham Wood, ib. ; mural tablet, Vincent St. Nicholas, 238 ; gravestone, Samuel St. Nicholas, ib. ; gravestone, Vincent St. Nicholas, 239 ; Thomas St. Nicholas, ib. ; . . . . St. Nicholas, 240 ; mural monument, Richard Hougham, of Weddington, and family, 241 ; brass to Michael and Richard Hougham, 242 ; brass of Wyllm . . s and Anys his wife, 243 ; mural monument, Henry Lowman and Mary his wife ; Colonel Kien and Jane his wife, 244 ; inscriptions on their coffin plates, ib., note ; Evert George Cousemaker, ib. ; tablets to the family of Tomlin, 245 ; Dorothea St. Nicholas, 246 ; Lieutenant Henry Dawson, R.N., ib. ; Captain Westbeach, R.N., 247; John Fuller, of Molland, and family, ib. ; Richard Horsman Solly, ib. ; C. R. Streatfield Nixon, ib. Gravestones : — Mary Bax, 248 ; Mary Curling, Mary Ferrier, and Ann Roberts ; Martha Westbeach, Benjamin and Elizabeth Rowe, of Chequer, and family ; John Bushell, ib. Tombstones in the church- yard, 249. List of incumbents, 250-52. Notices of the chapels of Overland and Fleet, 253. XVIU A CORNEH OF KENT. CHAPTEE Y. NOTES AND QUERIES, GENEALOaiCAL AND HERALDIC. Prefatory observations, 254. Family of Arques, 256. Avranches, 260. Yere and Bolbec, 264. Crevecoeur, 286. Auberville, 290. Criol, or Keriel, 291. Sandwicb, 296. Septvans alias HarHeet, 307. Goshall, 350. St. Nicholas, 361. Leverick, 375. Paramour, 379. Hougham, 390. Solly, 401. Postscript, 407. EEEATA. Page 73, line 25, /or "Nicholas Toke, of Goddington, Esq.," read " the Keverend Nicholas Toke of Godington." Page 78, line 22, /or "the forty-fifth," read " the fifty-fifth." Page 88, line 9, for " Masters and Wardens," read " Masters and Fellows." DESCEIPTION OP ILLUSTRATIONS, AND DIRECTIONS TO BINDER. Plate 1. — View of Ash Street to face Title Woodcut. — Seal of Sir Robert de Septvans, ante 9th of King John, attached to a deed whereby ** Robertus de Sevanz, filius Roberti de Sevanz/' grants to St. Gregory's Priory, Canterbury, for the sum of one mark, half an acre of land in Huggefeld (said in dorso to be Hothfield), from the " Evidences of Cumbewell Abbey," in the College of Arms on Title-page Woodcut. — Part of the Ruins of Eichborough Castle Page 1 Plate 2. — Specimens of Anglo-Saxon Antiquities discovered at Guilton : — Fig. 1, Fibula ; fig. 2, Sword-hilt (reduced) ; fig. 3, Buckle ; fig. 4, Chain and por- tion of Horse's Bit, with Roman Coin attached to it . . . . . . to face Page 25 Woodcut. — Coffer of the Fifteenth Century, in the Vestry of St. Nicholas Church, Ash , Page 37 Woodcut. — View of Ash from Mount Ephraim Page 106 Plate 3. — Map of the Parish of Ash _ to face Page 110 Plate 4. — Ash Church from the South-west to face Page 175 Woodcut. — Piece of Carved Oak, a portion of the old Stalls, dug up in the Chancel in 1861 Page 175 Plate 5. — Plan of St. Nicholas Church, Ash _ to face Page 177 A. The Nave ; B. Chancel of Our Lady ; C. Central Tower ; D. North Tran- sept, or St. Thomas's Chapel ; E. South Transept ; F. Probable Site of early English Tower, as evidenced by thicker walls, &c. ; G. St. Nicholas, or Molland Chancel ; H. Porch ; /. Stairs to Parvise, now a Vestry ; a, 1). Respond piece in South Wall ; c. Column built into Wall, from which Arches spring right and left ; d, e. Probable length of Anglo-Norman Church ; f, g, Ragstone Column and Respond ; h, i. Foundation of old Wall. No. 1. Effigy of Sir John Goshall ; 2. Effigy of a Lady ; 3. Effigy of Sir John Leverick ; 4. Effigies of John Septvans, Esq., and Wife ; 5. Brasses of Richard Clitherow and Lady ; 6. Brass of Jane Keriel ; 7. Brasses of Chris- topher Harfleet and Wife ; 8. Brasses of Walter Harfleet and Wife ; 9. Brass of William (Leus ?) and Anys his wife ; 10. Burial-place of the family of St. Nicholas ; 11. Spot where the Stone Coffin was found ; 12. Piscina ; 13. Aumbry. Plate 6. — View from South Transept, looking through the High Chancel into the Molland Chancel , to face Page 185 Plate 7.— Fig. 1. Effigy of Sir John Goshall ; 2. Effigy of a Lady ; 3. Capital of Column in the Nave ; 4. Fragment of a Monumental Cross, dug up in Churchyard ; 5. Border of Fresco in North Transept ; 6. Lid of Stone Coffin discovered in North Transept in December, 1863 ; 7. Portion of the Septvans' Seat, discovered 186-1 ; 8. Capital of a Column dug up in Chancel ^ to face Page 204 XX A COHNER OF KENT. Plate 8. — Effigy of Sir John Leverick to face Page 206 Plate 9. — 1. Gravestone and Keraains of Brass of Eicliard Clitherow and his Wife ; 2. Brass of Jane Keriel to face Page 207 Plate 10. — Effigies of John Septvans, Esq., temj^. Henry VI., and his wife Katharine (?) to face Page 218 Plate 11. — 1. Brasses of Christopher Septvans, alias Harfleet, and Wife ; 2. Brasses of Walter Harfleet and Wife ; 3. Brass of William (Leus ?) and Anys his wife , . ....._ Plate 12, — 1. Monument of Sir Thomas Harfleet and Wife ; 2. Monument of Christopher Toldervy and Wife - to face Page 229 Woodcut. — Crest of Sir William de Septvans, from a drawing by Philipot, in the College of Arms, from the brass formerly in Canterbury Cathedral, and Shield of Arms of St. Nicholas, from a MS. in the College of Arms, marked, Vincent, 141 Page 254 Plate 13. — Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4. Personages represented in the old Windows of Ash Church, from drawings copied by Mr. Hasted from the '' Church Notes " of Peter le Neve in 1613 {vide page 189) ; figs. 5, 6, John St. Nicholas and his wife, Margaret de Campania, formerly in a Window of Ash Church, from drawings by Philipot, College of Arms; 7. Seal of William de Auberville ; 8. Arms of Walter de Goshall, from the copy of a Poll of the time of Edward I., College of Arms — Vincent, 164 ; 9. Seal of Margret de Goshall, Harleian Charters, British Museum .- to face Page 254 INTEODUCTION. nPHE parish of Ash-next-Sandwich, notwithstand- ^ ing that it can boast but of one village of any importance, that to which it gives, or from which it takes its name, — has probably as great claims upon the respect and interest of Englishmen as any other in the kingdom. Within its boundaries the Gauls found their most commodious haven; the Eomans erected their most famous fortalice ; the pagan Jute established his dominion ; the holy Augustine planted the cross. Many of the most celebrated names in the roll of our Norman ancestors are connected with its manorial records, and the greatest sovereigns of this country for many centuries made its now almost deserted road the highway to conquest, returned by it in triumph, or displayed on it the pageantry of a peaceful progress. These distinctions have frequently been* claimed for the county in which it is situate ; but, while we freely accord to Kent all the honour that is fairly its due, as '' the grand scene of the earliest recorded of the most important events in the annals of our country," we cannot allow the fact to be forgotten that it was XXll A CORNER OF KENT. within the boundaries of the present parish of Ash that the greater number actually occurred. The stranger who may now ascend the venerable tower of its church and gaze on the wide and pleasant panorama presented to him from its summit, will see no remarkable object to excite his curiosity. The long grey crumbling walls of E^ichborough may easily escape his notice, as his eye strays over them to the white cliffs of Eamsgate, and blue waters of Pegwell Bay, and then, following to the right the straight line of marsh, rests upon the red roofs and dusky towers of the little old-fashioned town of Sandwich. Wo rock-throned Pharos tells from afar of Eoman domination, — no frowning battlements of feudal power, — no ivy-mantled arch of monastic grandeur ; — all appears modern, peaceful, pastoral, and unro- mantic. On the one hand, marsh and meadow dotted with sheep ; on the other, a smiling valley, bounded by a range of low wood-crowned hills, — here and there a distant spire, a cluster of farm-buildings, a mill, or an oasthouse. Yet those meadows have swarmed with Csesarean soldiery ; over what is now a marsh have sailed the Roman galleys and the Saxon keels. Those hills have witnessed the worship of Woden ; amongst the trees of one of them nestles a village still bearing his name ; — that mill marks the site of a vast pagan cemetery; those farms are the remains of manor- houses, whose knightly owners lent lustre to the roll of English chivalry. The sculptured effigies of some INTRODTJCTION. XXlll yet moulder on their monuments in the chancel beneath. Puffs of white smoke point out the progress of the up-train from Sandwich rattling over a railway which sweeps by the amphitheatre and round the castrum of Rutupis; an omnibus is rolling along the road by which Eichard Coeur-de-Lion passed on foot to Canterbury, and Edward the Black Prince conducted a captive King of Prance to London. A CORNER OF KENT. CHAPTER I. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. •^ Ant vaga cum Thetis Eutupinaque lifcora fervent, Unda Caledonios, fallit turbata Britannos." — Lucan. "So 'Northern Britons never hear the roar Of seas that break on the far Cantian shore." — Bowe. rpHE history of the parish of Ash may be said to J- commence with the above allusion by Lucan, in his '' Pharsalia," lib. vi., to the Eutupine shore: the coast of Kent, or at least that corner of it north- east of Sandwich, having received that appellation apparently from the Portus Eutupensis, the name given by the Eomans to the estuary which then separated the Isle of Thanet from the mainland. 2 A CORNER OP KENT. At each end of this estuary was a fort which protected a haven, the one called E^egnlbium, now Reculver; and the other Rutupis or Rutupinnm, now Richborough. Hence, it is presumed, the plural name E;utupi8e.^ The etymology of this name is still a vexed question. Camden suggests its derivation from the British words rhyd'tufeth, vadum sahulo- sum, or sandy flats or fords. t Battely, from rupes, a rock; or from the it^i^^m, a people of Gaul ; andMale- hranche, from ridhen, interpreted a " rotten shore." But Pliny speaks of a Portus Butubis in Africa.^ jElian mentions a Sicilian city named Butupi, and the river Baya, which falls into the Gulf of Genoa above Yintimillia, is in the ancient maps of Liguria set down as the Butuba. Ordericus Yitalis also tells us of a powerful chief, called Butubus, whose castle, on the banks of the Seine, was besieged and taken by Julius Caesar, and named by him, after its former owner, Butubi Portus. These facts disincline us, therefore, to be satisfied with any of the above sug- gestions. A writer of the Augustine age, whose works have perished, appears to have used the word rutuba to express turbulence, tumult, or disorder. " Ergo turn Rorase parce pureque prudenteis Yixere in patria, nunc sumus in rutuha'"' — Yarro. And, as it has been already observed by Mr. Hasted, * The name of it is variously spelt by different authors. We find "Rutiipise m-bem," "Portus Rutupensis," "Eitupias," and "Ritupis portum," "Ritupise statio," "Rhutubi," and "Ruthubi portum," &c. t Mag. Brit. % Nat, Hist. v. 15. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 3 that in old glossaries, rutuhari is interpreted *' the raging of the sea," and rutuha^ the "perturbation of the waters," we agree with him in believing that the stormy coast of Britain obtained from the Romans the appellation of the Hutupine shore in the sense of the ancient word which Nonius has preserved to us.* The calm and safe harbour, "stationem ex adverso tranquillam,"t offered to their fleets by the estuary, might still be called "Portum E;utupensem," and the city that rose beside it '* Urbem Rutupise," or jointly, as by Orosius, *' Rhutubi Portum et Civi- tatem." In the absence, however, of all conclusive evidence, we must leave our readers to make their own election between the Rhyd-tufeth of the Belgic Britons and the Eutubus of the Romans and Cis- alpine Gauls, the two most probable conjectures. Under whatever name the locality might have been known to the original colonists, the trans- mutation to which all foreign words were sub- jected by the Romans has too effectually destroyed in this, as in so many instances, the hope of the etymologist. The high ground upon Avhich the ruins of the castrum or citadel of Rutupis still exist was at the time of its construction completely surrounded by water. Whether it has been originally the site of a * "E/utuba, 96, f. — Rutubam Yett. turbationem appellat Non. ex Yar. a Ruo, a tumult, trouble, or disorder." — (Littleton, Latin Diet. London, 1684.) t Ammianus Marcellinus. B 2 4 A CORNER OF KENT. British fort cannot now be ascertained ; but that the sea ran up to it, around it, and far past it, forming a secure haven for the peaceful merchant, or an inviting entrance to the hostile invader, is a recorded fact, which the features of the country at the present day sufficiently corroborate. Mr. Hasted, writing at the close of the last century, says, *^ It is at this time cut off from Gurson (Gust on) by a narrow slip of the marsh, across which even now in wet times the water flows in so much, that people passing along the road from Ash to Hichborough are obliged to ford through it. It is an entire parcel of land by itself, of its own construction, being a mile and a quarter in length and three-quarters of a mile in the widest part.""*' The military genius of the Eomans was not slow to perceive the strategic importance of this point, or to exert its utmost skill in taking advantage of it. There does not appear any satisfactory authority for the exact date of the erection of the castrum. The Sandwich MS., printed by Mr. Boys,t professedly compiled from ancient records and chronicles, says, " The ancient castle of Hutupi, now Bichborrow, was begun to be built by Vespatian, being the generall of the Romans in Brittaine, A.D. 55, and was perfected by Severus the emperor ; " but as no authority is quoted for this assertion, we can do no more than * Hist, of Kent, vol. iii. p. 686, note. t Collections for the History of Sandwich. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 5 admit the possibility of the circumstance.* By who- ever built, it was in form nearly square, walled on three sides, but, like Oaistor in Norfolk, and other similarly situated Eoman fortresses, open on the fourth, which was nearest the water, t Of the north wall, according to the measurement of the most recent investigators of this ancient remain, | nearly 450 feet are still standing, and rather more than half that quantity of the south wall. The western wall has suffered the most injury, but when perfect, measured 460 feet.§ At the north-east corner are the ruins of a return wall, which seems to have run down under the cliff, or rather bank; and from observa- tions made at the foot, there is reason for believing there was a landing-place on the beach, and that a sloping road behind the wall led up into the citadel. Eound towers of solid masonry protected the angles of the castle, and the sides were strengthened by square towers, solid to the height of nearly eighty feet from the foundation, the walls themselves being * Kilburne attributes its erection to the British chief popularly known as Arviragus, the opponent of Vespasian ; but the work is undoubtedly Roman. The Britons may very possibly have fortified the hill after their own fashion j but no evidence remains of the fact. t Writers unaware of this peculiarity have represented the fourth side as fallen. J "Wanderings of an Antiquary," by Thomas Wright, F.S.A. "Antiquities of Eichborough," by Charles Roach Smith, F.S.A. § Mr. Fussell in his "Journey round the Coast of Kent," gives the dimensions as existing as that time, as 500 feet on the north side, 540 on the south, and iSi on the west. 6 A CORNER OF KENT. from twenty-five to thirty feet high, and twelve feet in thickness. A well-protected postern gateway exists on the north-east side, designated in one of the j)lates of Battely's ''Antiquitates Entupinse " as the Decuman Gate, which latter, so called because it was wide enough to allow the passage of ten men abreast, is assumed by others to have been nearly in the middle of the western wall, but its precise posi- tion is no longer discernible.* Within the area, and much nearer to the bank than to the western wall, is what appears to have been the foundation of some building, which, from its cruci- form shape, is now popularly known by the name of St. Augustine's Cross. Camden, however, seems to imply that in his day this name was not given par- ticularly to this object. He says, ''Wherever the streets have run the corn grows thin, which the common people call St. Austin's Cross ; " t but he is speaking of the fields whereon he supposes the city stood, and not of the area within the walls of the castrum. This is worthy of observation, as he does not mention ''the cross" we are describing at all, though recent writers have from the above passage assumed that he has done so, and the inference therefore is, that it was not visible in Elizabeth's time, and that the appellation of " St. * Dr. Battely lias evidently founded his opinion on the description of Yitruvius, who, in speaking of the Decuman Gate, uses the words, " Egressus patet non rectus sed ohliquus.'' — (Architect. 1. 5.) t Mag. Brit, page 298, edit. 1600. BEPOUE THE CONQUEST. 7 Austin's Cross " has been transferred to it at a much later period. Somner, who appears to have written his '* Treatise of the Eoman Ports and Ports of Kent" (published in 1693) during the reign of Charles IL, seems to be the first who mentions it. The words " Wherever (ubicunque) the streets have run" dis- tinctly prove, that in Camden's day there were several crosses indicated by the partial growth of the corn, and not one large mass of solid work, an object too remarkable to have escaped observation. In excavating round this structure, Mr. Boys discovered that it stood on a platform, five feet thick, 104 feet long, and nearly 145 feet wide, formed of a composition of boulders and coarse mortar, on which was laid a smooth floor of mortar six inches thick. The cross itself, measuring from north to south forty- two feet by thirty-four, and from east to west nearly thirty feet by eight, had been faced with square stones, some of which remained in sitic.^ In 1822 a subterranean building was discovered beneath the platform, which was supposed to contain chambers used as store-rooms for the garrison, a granary or an arsenal; but no indications of any entrance could be traced, either at that time or as late as 1843, when the late Mr. Eolfe, of Sandwich, made a vigorous but unsuccessful attempt to pene- trate the compact masonry. Mr. Eoach Smith, in his "Antiquities of E/ich- * Collecti-jii>5. 8 A CORNER OP KENT. borough/' says, '' The popular notion that the cruci- form foundation on the platform is the base of a cross need scarcely be refuted, and the opinion that it may have supported a pharos is equally untenable.'* We must beg, however, to differ with him on this latter point. The sandy nature of the soil would render exactly such a foundation imperatively necessary to the safety of a tower of the height and magnitude requisite for such a purpose, and the cruciform shape which the surface now presents might have arisen from lateral buttresses projecting from its base. That there was some such building we cannot doubt ; and if not there, in what other part of the area would it be likely to have existed ? This theory by no means prevents us from admitting the probability that vaults may yet be discovered beneath the platform. '' That the subterranean building was constructed for some extraordinary and important purpose," observes Mr. Smith, '*is obvious from the fact that nothing analogous to it has been discovered at any of the Roman stations in this country, or, as far as can be ascertained, on the Continent." It is surely as obvious that the peculiar nature of the soil required a founda- tion unlike any needed where the Pharos was built on a rock or other solid substratum. Is there any other instance in England or on the Continent of an important Homan fortress erected actually on a sand- bank ? On the highest part of the hill, about 460 yards from the south-west angle of the castrum, are the BErORE THE CONQUEST. 9 remains of an amphitheatre, first noticed, it would appear, by the Eev. Mr. Gostling, in his '' Walk about Canterbury,"* and which Dr. Stukely calls a '^ cas- trensian amphitheatre." In 1849, Mr. Eolfe and Mr. Eoach Smith ascer- tained this work to have been a regular elliptical building resembling in miniature the great amphi- theatres of the Continent. Coins were found by them ranging from the reign of Domitian to that of Arcadius, who died A.D. 408, with a large number of small coins called minimi, which are believed to belong to the period when the Eoman towns were left to their own government, so that this amphitheatre must have been in use down to the latest period of the Roman rule in Britain, if not for an age or two after their depar- ture. We regret to add that agricultural interests have necessitated the filling up again of this little amphitheatre, the situation of which, so near to the old castle, rendered its preservation still more desir- * " We visited these venerable ruins," says the Reverend traveller, " with a gentleman of Sandwich, who from the old castle conducted us to some banks hard by, which he called the mounts ; where are found very plain remains of this work, an amphitheatre not mentioned by any Kentish writer that I know of, unless the little camp, as Dr. Harris calls it (p. 379 of his History), to the south-west of the castle be so, containing, as he guesses, not above an acre of ground, having a mount at each corner, though the form is oval or circular, and some remains of an entrance on each side The sloping bank, lowered by long cultivation, measures in circumference about 220 yards, and its present height from the arena or centre of the excavation is in the different parts from seven to nearly twelve feet." 10 A CORNER OF KENT. able. Such a circumstance could not have occurred in France or Germany. The two or three acres of land would have been purchased by Government and the amphitheatre, like that at Treves, been carefully preserved for the public. No satisfactory conclusion has yet been come to respecting the site of the E^oman town, or of the cemetery connected with it ; but the former is sup- posed to have been situated on the sloping ground to the south and west of the citadel.* Ptolemy the geographer, who lived in the first half of the second century of the Christian era, names Kutupise as one of the three towns of the Cantii, the other two being Londinium (London) and Durovernum (Canterbury), while in the Itinerary of Antoninus the port or haven alone is mentioned, '' Ad portum Kitupis." We find, in the work attributed to E^ichard of Cirencester, the expression '' Ehutupis Colonia ;" and not only in his description of the ancient state of Britain does he place Eutupis among the nine colonial cities^ but, under the head of Cantium, asserts that it became the Metropolis of the Province , that its haven was the rendezvous of the Roman fleet which com- manded the North Sea, and that its city was of such celebrity that it gave the name of Eutupine to the neighbouring shore. Mr. Roach Smith demurs to this, and considers that Richard was led into this * Camden. BErOEE THE CONQUEST. 11 mistake by Ptolemy and Orosius, and by tlie term Colonice applied to Hutupis in the Iter above men- tioned. He observes that ^'we have no evidence in existing remains or in recorded discoveries to warrant our placing Kutupise in the category vrith Londininm, Camulodunum, and such-like places, which were clearly towns or cities of great extent, the limits of most of which may still be traced, often serving as the municipal boundary down to the present time."* Without presuming to dispute the opinion of so competent an authority as Mr. Smith, or relying on the statements of B^ichard, who has been suspected of being no authority at all, we may, I think, suspend our judgment until further discoveries enable us to fix the site of the Eoman city, which Twine places at Dover, and Boys is anxious to prove was at Canterbury!! It is possible remains may yet be found in the neighbourhood of the little hamlet of Bichborough, as well as in the direction of Sandwich, tending to corroborate the as- sertion of Ptolemy, that it was one of the three cities of Kent, and originally, perhaps, the most important from situation, though ultimately outgrown and sur- passed by Londinium and Durovernum, with which it is classed by him. It may not have been a walled town, the castrum and the sea being considered sufficient protection. Mr. Smith himself, in another * Antiquities of Kichborough. t Collections. 12 A CORNER OP KENT. work,* admits that the whole neighbourhood, includ- ing Sandwich, is proved by sepulchral remains conti- nually discovered to have been well populated in the time of the E^omans, and, as one of the earliest settlements, it may have been less regular in plan, and consequently more extensive, than deliberately- constructed cities. What if it should have embraced the site of Sandwich itself? There are not wanting those who assert that Sandwich was actually the ancient city of Eutupise,! and it is so marked in some maps. The site of the Roman burial-place attached to it has also to be ascertained. J Mr. Boys states that in his time some urns were found in a sand-pit on the hill on the left hand of the road lead- * Inventorium Sepulchrale, p. 19, note. t Math. Westminster. Somner's Ports and Forts, pp. 3 to 7. Vide also Harris, Battely, and Plott. J Hasted remarks : " There are two large mounts like tumuli on the sides of the road at a small distance westward from where the Canter- bury Gate of the town of Sandwich lately stood, and there is another on the south side of the same road about a quarter of a mile westward from them : but without opening them it is impossible to ascertain for what purpose such as stood in the marshes and low grounds, as these three last do, were made." — (Vol. iii. p. 688, note.) There are several mounds in the marshes, which we believe to have been made in later times for the purpose of affording refuge to sheep and cattle when the marshes were flooded by high tides, or the prevalence of heavy rain. One of the largest tenants in this district, to whom we are indebted for this suggestion, assures us that he has levelled and examined some of them, and never found the slightest indication of their being sepulchral monuments. It is quite clear they could not have been of Roman construction, as the sea was at that period navi- gable over the spots on which they stand. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 13 ing from the castle to the modern hamlet of Rich- borough ;* and Mr. Smith observes that the situation is such as would be likely to haye been chosen for this purpose. t Mr. Pausset and other antiquaries have imagined it to have been at Guilton, adjoining the village of Ash, where indications of Roman interments have been discovered amongst the Saxon graves ; but these Mr. Smith considers to have belonged to the people of a vicus on the site of Ash or thereabouts. J It is nevertheless probable that the city may have extended in that direction very nearly as far as the village of Ash, and that such vicus was, in fact, a straggling suburb not altogether disconnected with the city, which evidently stretched away behind the castrum and the Portus Rutupis or actual harbour of Rutupise, and must have been limited to the highest ground in the parish, the rest being at that period undoubtedly covered by the sea at high tides, if not continually. Suggesting, therefore, that Antoninus speaks of the road to the Fort, and Ptolemy of the City itself, while Orosius mentions them jointly, just as writers of the present day might speak separately or jointly of the port and city of London; we will leave this point to be decided by future researches, and proceed to notice the few facts that have been recorded of the history of Eichborough. * Collections. f Antiquities of Eichborough. X Inventorium Sepnlchrale. 14 A CORNER OF KENT. As early as the second century of the Christian era, the delicious oysters conyeyed to Rome from this coast were celebrated by Juvenal in his Fourth Satire : — ....." Eutupinove edita fundo Ostrea." ..... An immense quantity of oyster-shells has been dis- covered here amongst the Eoman debris turned up at various periods, and particularly in the progress of the works for the Sandwich Eailway, which runs immediately under the walls of the castrum.* The Latin poet Ausonius, in the fourth century, makes several allusions to Rutupise. One of his uncles, Claudius Contentus, he tells us, was buried there ;t and his brother-in-law, Elavius Sanctus, appears to have been governor or prefect of the Rutupine district, which enjoyed great tranquillity imder his rule. :|: Ammianus Marcellinus records that Lupicinus, * From the appellation of " Trutulensis," given by Tacitus to this port, it has been suggested that the trout for which tlie Stoiir is still famous were as celebrated in the time of the Romans. t " Et patruos Elegeia meos reminiscere cantus Contentum Tellus quern Rutupina tegit." — Paeentalia. J " Militiam nullo qui turbine sedulus egit Prseside Isetatus quo Rutupinus ager." Dr. Harris says there were in his time about a quarter of a mile westward from the castle two very large tumuli which he supposes to have belonged to the two persons above mentioned. This is of course a mere conjecture : but vide note J, ante, p. 12. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 15 marshal of the army, landed in Rutupisej with a force of light-armed troops, sent by the Emperor Julian to repel the Picts and Scots ; and in the time of Yalentian and Valens, the arrival of Theodosius, father of the em- peror of that name, on a similar expedition, is com- memorated by the same historian.* At the beginning of the fifth century, we learn from the Xotitia that the town was the head- quarters of the second legion, called Augusta, and sometimes Britannica.f Pive or six facts in nearly as many hundred years ! Such is the meagre amount of information to be depended upon, which has been handed down to us respecting E^ich- borough during its occupation by the Romans. The rest is mere assertion or speculation, more or less probable. We may be justified in supposing that the highest ground in this district was, in the days of Julius Caesar, covered with wood, principally elm and oak; and imagination may people the sandy shore of that sea which then flowed over the marshes, with painted Britons, shaking their bronze-headed spears in defiance of the veteran soldiers advancing against them, with the same confidence in their dis- cipline and superior weapons which a regiment of the line would feel in making good its landing against a swarm of South- Sea islanders. Por the claims of the beach between Deal and Dover to be considered as the locality wherein the Iloman invader first set foot * Books XX. aud XXVII. t "Prepontus Legionis secuncU'e Augustse Rutupii." — (Cap. Hi.) 16 A COKNER OF KENT. are by no means undisputed. Nearly every possible spot between the North Poreland and Beachy Head has its enthusiastic advocate, and E-ichborough is not without its tradition and its theory ; but while we are in utter ignorance of the many changes the coast has undergone since that period, it is next to im- possible to draw any reliable inferences from Caesar's description of it. The frowning masses of masonry which have re- sisted the assaults of time, tempest, and man for eighteen centuries, are, after all, the great fact which is more valuable than a thousand theories. Whether a British fort, raised by a chief who has been called Arviragus, originally occupied the site of the castrum, may never be ascertainable ; but * that the walls still existing were reared by the masters of the ancient world ; that through that nearly perfect postern gate Ptoman emperors have entered and departed; that the shouts of joyous multitudes mingled with reverential cries of ''Ave, Csesar Imperator!" have arisen from that amphitheatre over which the corn now waves or the plough now passes, is as well known to us as if it were recorded in the pages of Tacitus. Vespasian may not have built the castle; but as an officer serving in the army of Aulus Plautus, he must have entered the natural harbour it afterwards commanded. Claudius came over to Britain to partake the triumph of his general, took Maiden, in Essex, the Camulodunum of the Bomans, and the BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 17 capital of Cunobellin, remained sixteen days in the island, and returned to E^ome, leaving Plantus to govern Britain. Titus, the future conqueror of Jerusalem, came hither as military tribune under his father Vespasian. Agricola with, possibly, Tacitus in his train, for there are expressions in his graphic account of the expedition that would justify our believing he was an eye-witness of some of the events he records; Hadrian; Severus, who is presumed to have completed the defences of Richborough, and died at York ; Constantius, who also expired in Britain ; his son Constantino the Great, who was raised to the purple in this country ; and Maximus, the competitor of Gratian, a Briton by birth, according to some historians, and who is stigmatized by Ausonius as "the Bobber of Butupis," — must all have passed through the water-gate of Butupium, the common port of communication with Gaul. One still greater than emperor, general, or historian, is presumed to have landed at Bichborough. There is a vague tradition that Christianity was first preached in Britain by St. Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, and much learning has been wasted in vain attempts to establish the fact.* We must, however, be first satisfied that he, like those we have already named, actually did visit these shores, before we speculate on the place of his landing. Amongst the holy and canonized men who in these early ages must have * Harris, Hist. Kent, p. 488. C 18 A CORNER or KENT. seen Richborougli in its glory, we may mention St. Germanus, Bishop of Anxerre, who twice encoun- tered the perils of the ocean to combat the Pelagian heresy in Britain, narrowly escaping on his second voyage, in company with Lupus of Troyes, the fearful tempests raised, as the Venerable Bede assures us, "by the malevolence of demons, who were jealous that such men should be sent to bring back the Britons to the faith." * With such materials for our fancy to work upon, we may stand upon that now deserted highland, and rebuild, in imagination, that celebrated fortress. We may still picture to ourselves '' the Channel fleet " of that period at anchor in the placid waters which then reflected its proud battlements, or seeking, by the light of its lofty Pharos, a refuge in that *' tranquil haven " from the dark and turbulent ocean without. Turning to the north, we may descry the Belgic Briton, in his wicker coracle, paddling over to the Isle of Thanet, divided from the mainland by the sea, at that point nearly a mile in breadth, and studded with trading vessels from Gaul, Greece, or Phoenicia. Or, looking westward, see the colonial city covering the slope of the hill; its busy streets, of which the tracks were visible in the reign of Elizabeth ; the forum thronged by its mixed population, foreign merchants, curious travellers, idle mariners, and all the motley crowd that congregate in a thriving com- * Eocles. Hi!^l. chiip, xviii. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 19 mercial seaport town. The temple of ^Esculapius^* the palace of the Prefect Sanctus, the villa of the opulent Contentus, of which, perhaps, that broken tile at our feet may he the last remaining relic. The reader may smile; hut there is no exaggera- tion in the picture. There can be no doubt that such were the general features of the scene which once presented itself to the sight on this spot, and the probability is that our slight sketch is rather under than over-coloured. Even after the final departure of the Romans, Rutupis retained its importance for centuries, both as a mart and a haven. Vessels from the west found a safer and shorter passage to the mouth of the Thames by passing through the estuary, and the large quantities of minimi to which we have already alluded, as well as of Saxon coins which have been discovered here, from those of the earliest descrip- tion called Sceattas, down to some of the ninth century, prove the continuous occupation of the site to that period. The first event of consequence after the withdrawal of the E;oman legions, was the arrival of the Jutes, traditionally under Hengist. '* The Saxon fleets," remarks Mr. Thomas Wright, '' had long infested the eastern shore of Britain with their incursions, and in the long series of usurpations of the imperial title by * A large brass image of a cock, the bird sacred to that deity, and supposed to have sarmounted a temple dedicated to him, was exhumed here, according to a tradition at Sandwich recorded by Dr. Battely. c 2 20 A COKNER OF KENT. governors of tlie island during the latter period of the E/oman sway, the Saxon and E-oman fleets had frequently ridden side by side in friendly alliance. In fact it is probable that the E-omano- British navy con- sisted, in a greater degree than we would suppose, of Saxon mariners. It is not unlikely they had formed settlements on the eastern coast, called after them the Littus Saxonicum, or Saxon shore, long before the Roman legions had relinquished the island. Eich- borough, the chief station of the Eoman navy, would be the last post deserted ; and a comparison of various traditions on the subject with a few facts that are known, would lead us to suppose that these Saxon settlers came rather as allies of the Eomans than under any other character, and that they established themselves in Thanet under the protection of Eegul- bium and Eutupise rather than in fear of those strong fortresses. As the support of the Eoman power was eventually withdrawn, the supremacy in the province of Britain was left to be contended for in a confused struggle between the new Saxon settlers, the old and more civilized Eomano-British population, and the barbarian Picts and Scots of the North."* In the year 449 according to the Saxon Chronicle — but it were safer to say about the middle of the fifth century — two Jutish chieftains, familiar to us under the typical names of Horsa and Hengist, with a small band of chosen followers on board of three vessels, entered * Wanderings of an Antiquary, pp. 71, 72. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 21 the port of Rutupis and landed, according to the best authorities, at a spot subsequently called Wypped's- floet, now Ebbsfleet, in the Isle of Tlianet. Bede says they were the sons of Victgilsus, whose father was Yicta, son of Woden or Odin, a deified chief of the Scandinavians.* The Saxon Chronicle interposes a fourth generation ;t but it is needless for us to enter into that controversy, or even to decide between those who assert that these victors were wandering exiles, and others who contend that they were invited protectors. We purposely refrain from even briefly noticing the stories of Nennius, Gildas, and Geoffrey of Monmouth. The romance of "Vortigern and Eowena" was appropriately dramatized by the im- postor Ireland. Sir Francis Palgrave observes: "These details have been told so often that they have acquired a prescriptive right to credit ; but I believe they bear no nearer relation to the real history of Anglo-Saxon England than the story of jEneas as related by Yirgil does to the real history of the foundation of E;ome."3: Whatever contests occurred between the Britons and Saxons at this period, it is clear that up to the present time neither the places, dates, or names of the leaders have been accurately recorded. All that we know for certain is that a Saxon or Jutish sovereignty was established during the latter half of the fifth century * Eccles. Hist. cap. xv. t " Sons of Wihtgils j Wihtgils son of Witta, Witta of Wecta, Wecta of Woden." — (Saxon Clironicle, sub anno.) % History of England, Anglo-Saxon Period, p. 30. L&'iia«i,^-.ai.^. 22 A CORNER OF KENT. in this part of Kent, either by the chieftain called Hengist himself, or by a near kinsman, some say his son ; and that Richborough was one of the earliest royal Saxon residences, its Roman name of Rutupis being transmuted by its new masters into Eepta- cseaster,* and occasionally Ricsburg, or the King's castle, t from whence its modern appellation. Whateyer may have been the real name of Hengist, that of his successor was undoubtedly Eric ; but, like his relatives, he also had a typical cognomen, the derivation of which is uncertain, but possibly of more consequence to our present inquiry than has been imagined. He was surnamed Esc, or Oisc, which has been latinized Escus, the interpretation of which must depend upon whether the name was given him by his own people or by the Britons. Use and Oisc are both of them forms of the old British word for water, which may be found in all its varieties, as asc^ isc, osc, use, &c. ; from whence the Axe, the Exe, the Ouse, and other names of rivers in this country, and, what is of more interest to us, the Eshe, as that part of the Stour was called in the neighbourhood of Ashford, anciently Eshetisford, or the ford of the Eshe; the Stour itself meaning the same thing, being only a corruption of es dilr, which also signifies in Celtic "the water." But, by one of those singular coincidences which so distract and mislead the etymo- * '• E-uthubi portum, qui portns a gente Anglorum nunc corrupta E-eptacester vocatus." — (Becle, Eccles. Hist. lib. i. cap. i.) t Alured of Beverley. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 23 legist, the word iEsc in Anglo-Saxon signifies an ash- tree. Sir Erancis Palgrave, one of onr most intelligent Anglo-Saxon historians, says, ''Prom the spear which he wielded, or the vessel which bore him over the waves, he was surnamed ^sc or Ash-tree; and ^Escingas, or Sons of the Ash-tree, did the Kings of Kent, his descendants, call themselves so long as their dynasty endured."* It would also seem pro- bable, as has been observed by another erudite and elegant writer, that Ash was the general name for a hero, in allusion to the primeval man of Teutonic mytholog}^, who was believed to have sprung from the sacred ash-tree, t Without dwelling further on this subject, or insisting in any way on the value of the suggestion, we will simply call upon our readers to remark that no question has hitherto arisen as to the cause of the name of Ash (Ece or Esce, as it appears in the earliest documents) being given to this ex- tensive parish,}: and leave them to form their own * Hist. Anglo-Saxon, p. 37. Vide also Bede, Eccles. Hist. lib. ii. cap. V. who calls him Orric, " surnamed Oisc, from whom the kings of Kent are wont to be called Oiscings" The descendants of Offa or Uffk, King of Mercia, were in like manner termed Offingse or XJffings. t Historical Memorials of Canterbury, by Canon Stanley, p. 15, note. Grimm's Deutsche Myth. i. 324, 530, 617. X Philipot, in his " Yillare Cantium," p. 395, briefly says, "Ash, from that kind of tree j" a mere suggestion applying to any place of that name (and there are several in Kent alone), and of the same value as his derivation of Ashford, viz. : " Orignally Eshetisford, implying the great plenty of Ashen trees growing about the forde" (p. 394) ; for- getting that £Jshe in this instance is clearly the old name of the jM^^^k::- •-" 24 A CORNER OP KENT. opinion as to the probability of its derivation either from the water which in the days of the Britons covered so large a portion of it, or from the warlike Saxon, who, as Sir Prancis Palgrave remarks, appears to have been the first real king of this part of the country, as "he and not his father Hengist was honoured as founder of the Kentish dynasty." According to the Saxon Chronicle, Hengist and his son JEsc fought against the Britons several battles in various parts of Kent : one at Aylesford in 455, where Horsa was killed ; another, if not two, the following year at Crayford; and in 465 a decisive one near Ebbsfleet, and there slew twelve British chieftains, losing one of their own thanes, whose name was Wypped ; from which circumstance the place is sup- pose to have received its name of Wypped's fleet. In 488, according to the same authority, ^sc succeeded to the kingdom. The reign of Eric or Esc, and of his successors Octa and Hermenric are described as "inactive," and we may therefore consider them peaceful. The battles of Cerdic in Sussex and the landing of Ida in Northumbria do not appear to have disturbed the tranquillity of Kent ; and for about eighty or ninety years Bichborough and its vicinity, it may fairly be presumed, enjoyed prosperity and increased its popu- lation. The extent of the sepulchral remains at river. As regards our parish of Ash-next-Sandwich, it is remarkable that the whole district is nearly destitute of ash, and is not tradi- tionally even celebrated for the growth of it. Platl 2. Fig.i Fib'Qla of SilTer gilt ^T\ d Br oplz e . Jig. 3. , Buclde of G-irdle or STTordBelt,! Sit\rer gilt w.i th p' o 1 d. b or der s . i ■ Waller LUb-lB.HiUcn'Jar'i'ri ]- ait of a Eoi s e s Bit lAn glo S axon) mtli a.PvomaiL Com attacfied to it . w&,siBxtt.aeietm; Aiigl o S axo j\ Aruti q u i ti e s di s c over e d at GrUiltoii BErORE THE CONQUEST. 25 Guilton, and the character of the ornaments and weapons discovered, prove that a large and wealthy community lived and died in this neighbourhood previous to the conversion of the Kentish Jutes to Christianity. The name of Guilton or Guiltontown, as it is indifferently called from its earlier appellation Guil- denton, is provocative of a little inquiry, connected as it is with this celebrated pagan Saxon ceme- tery, in which it is most probable King Esc and his immediate successors were royally interred; more particularly as neither Lambarde nor Philipot, Harris nor Hasted have indulo^ed in the slio;htest speculation as to its origin. The unfortunate silence of Anglo-Saxon annals and charters is still more to be deplored, as we have no more ancient form of the name to assist our investigation than one which occurs in a will of the fifteenth century, where it is spelt Gildenston. In another, a century later, it is spelt Gildestowne ; but the arbitrary character of the ortho- graphy of the Middle Ages must never be lost sight of in such researches. Gill, in Anglo-Saxon, signifies a small stream, or rivulet ; and as that which is called Wingham Brook runs through the meadows below Guilton, it might fairly be held to signify " the town on the brook ;" but taking into consideration the important evidence which the excavations in this locality have brought to light, we are inclined to believe that it indicates the existence here of some particular place of worship 26 A COENER OF KENT. — some peculiar object either of Celtic or Teutonic adoration. Cry Id, or Gylt, signifies, in one sense of the Anglo-Saxon, idol, or altar, and giltodan is to worship. It is true that the latter is deducible from the custom of offering money, gelt, at the altar, and is equiyalent to payment ; but that interpretation by no means weakens our argument; it rather strengthens it. The guilds of the Anglo-Saxons de- rived their appellation from the same source,* being originally convivial and social clubs or confederations, established to meet the expenses of penal mulcts and other pecuniary liabilities. In process of time, from general associations connected, after the conversion of the Saxons to Christianity, with religious establish- ments and observances, they became purely secular fraternities of particular craftsmen or dealers, known as '' merchants' guilds," and protected by special charters of incorporation. Guildenton, or Gildes- towne, may therefore be fairly interpreted either as the circle, enclosure, or town of worship or offering, or of the altar or idol, or as the town of the guild, or place where the community paid those offerings or contributions which defrayed, amongst other expenses, those oi burial and funeral ceremony .i * The payments or subscriptions to them in the earliest stage appear to have been in beer or mead, honey or malt, and not in coin ; geld must therefore in this instance be taken in its wider sense of offering or tribute. — {Vide Thrupp's "Anglo-Saxon Home," 8vo. 1862, p. 160.) t " One of the first occupations which the Guilds added to that of conviviality, was the superintendence of the burial of members. They BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 27 It was not till some time after this opinion had been entertained, that the writer was informed there had actually existed, from time immemorial, a local tradition, which appears to have been thought un- worthy of record by Kentish topographers ; viz., that on this precise spot stood an idol of solid gold, three feet in height, and that it still lay buried beneath one of the tumuli. So strong is that belief at the present day, that on applying recently for permission to dig on some land at Guilton, adjoining that portion which had been previously excavated, it was granted with the distinct stipulation, that if the golden idol should be disco- vered, it should be held as the property of the owners of the estate. Although local traditions are not to be entirely depended upon, as they have frequently their origin in the attempts of imaginative but unlearned persons to account for objects and circumstances which they do not understand, they are still deserving our re- spectful attention, as there is generally some modi- cum of truth to be extracted from them. Witness the legend of the British chief whose ghost, in golden armour, was said to haunt the tumulus bound themselves to recover the body of every fellow guildsman who died far a-field, to form a procession for bringing it home, and to wake and bury it with musical honours. The assistance of the clergy was necessary on these occasions, and consequently the payment of soul-shot and a certain sum for masses, were among the earliest recognized charges on the corporate funds," — (Thrupp, ut supi'ci, p. 161.) 28 A CORNER OF KENT. under which he was buried, at Mold, in Flintshire, and out of which tumulus the excavators for the railway between Chester and Bangor dug what they at first believed to be an old brass fender, but which proved to be an ancient British corslet of pure gold. The greater portion of it is now to be seen in what is called the '' Gold Boom," at the British Museum. We are not sanguine enough to expect a similar confirmation of the tradition of Guiltontown by the exhumation of a golden idol ; but the tradition itself is singularly in accordance with the suggested etymo- logy of Guildenton or Gildestown. Be this, however, as it may, we are fully justified in concluding that in the sixth century the highlands in this parish had been considerably cleared of wood, and were well covered with the habitations of a mixed people, Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon ; a friendly fusion of races, enjoying a community of interests, and if not adoring the same divinities, undoubtedly buried in the same graves. It was at this period and during the reign of Ethelbert, the great-grandson of Eric or Esc, that Augustine and his companions arrived in the port of Bichborough. The date is generally conceded to be 597. The Venerable Bede merely states that he dis- embarked in the Isle of Thanet ; but Thorne, a monk of Canterbury, says, " in insula Thanet, in loco qui dicitur Batesburgh," i,e. Bichborough; and Leland tells us that Bichborough was at that time considered BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 29 to be a portion of Thanet. The holy missionary, on leaving the ship, trod, we are told, on a stone, which retained the print of his foot as though it had been clay. This stone was preserved in a chapel dedicated to Augustine after his canonization, and yearly, on the anniversary of its deposit, crowds of people flocked thither to pray for and receive health. This state- ment, though of no historical worth, being written in the fourteenth century, is of value, says Mr. Smith, in reference to the antiquity of the chapel mentioned by Leland (of which we shall speak anon), while the general belief in the sanctity of the place and its asso- ciations, the periodical visits paid by the sick and the devout to the chapel of St. Augustine and to the holy stone, if they are not received as proofs of his landing at E;ichborough, may, at all events, be admitted as a tradition founded on a general knowledge that the Eutupine coast, and particularly Eichborough itself, were in the sixth century, and later still, the principal points of debarcation from Gaul.* The majority of the most respectable authorities concur in fixing upon Ebbsfleet in Thanet as the spot on which Augustine landed, and we have no wish to claim for Eichborough more than is fairly its due. It was undoubtedly into the haven it protected that the Christian missionaries guided their barque, and although it is most probable that they might first set foot on English soil on the opposite side of the harbour, * Antiquities of Richborongh, pp. 160, 161. 30 A CORNER OF KENT. it was no douM in the royal residences of Eicliborough, Eeculver, and Canterbury that their labours were prosecuted ; and in the '' Sandwich Manuscripts," printed by Mr. Boys in his Collections, a compila- tion of the sixteenth century from ancient chronicles and records, we find an account which we are much inclined to think approaches the truth as nearly as possible : — " Upon the east part of Kent lyeth the Isle of Thanet, where Augustine and his fellows landed, being in number forty persons, as it is reported, who, by his interpreter sent to King Ethelbert, gave the King to understand that he, with his company, was come from Rome to bring unto him and his people the glad tidings of the Gospell, the way unto eternal life and blisse to all them that believe the same ; which thing the King heareing, came shortly after into his pallace or castle of^upticester, or Michborrow^ situate nigh the old city of Stonehore, and the King sitting under the cliff or rock whereon the castle is built, commanded Augustine with his followers to be brought before him." This graphic and interesting description is in per- fect harmony with Bede's statement that the King '^ had taken precautions that they should not come to him in any house, lest, according to an ancient super- stition, if they practised any magical arts, they might impose on him, and so get the better of him ;" and his assertion, that some days after their arrival *' the King came into the island," is not invalidated, if we BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 31 are to credit those who tell us that Hichhorough was then considered to be a portion of Thanet. That the sovereign of Kent should be seated on the sea-shore, under the shadow of his own castle, and command the attendance of these mysterious strangers, is much more probable than that he should have crossed over to the Isle of Thanet for the purpose of a first interview. The Queen of Ethelbert was a Frankish princess, named Bertha, sister of Charibert, King of Paris. Bertha had embraced the Christian faith previous to her marriage, and had been accompanied to England by Luithard, Bishop of Soissons, who died in Kent and was buried at Canterbury. Bertha is naturally supposed to have influenced her royal husband in Augustine's favour. " In the north side of the cas- tel," writes Leland, " ys a hedde in the walle, now sore defaced with wether ; they cawle it Queue Bertha hedde." A piece of stone or marble, now worn com- pletely smooth, is still to be seen in the north wall near the postern-gate of Bichborough ; but whether of Boman or Saxon introduction it would be difficult now to determine. Eadbald, the son and successor of Ethelbert, a.d. 616, restored the Saxon paganism in Kent, and drove out the Christian ecclesiastics ; but Laurentius, the successor of Augustine, appeared before Eadbald, bleeding from severe stripes, and audaciously declared * Vide pp. 28, 29, ante. 32 A COUNER OF KENT. that St. Peter had inflicted them on him during the night, because he was about to forsake his flock, and had commanded him to go to the King and make known the true faith to him. The ignorant and superstitious Saxon, terrified at the idea that the next visit of St. Peter might be to him, became a penitent convert, recalled the exiled clergy, and eventually died in the odour of sanctity. Ercombert, his youngest son, who succeeded him, was, we are told, a zealous Christian, and ordered the heathen temples throughout his dominions to be razed to the ground, and the idols to be broken in pieces, lest they should hereafter prove a snare to the people. If an idol or Saxon temple of any description ever existed at Guilton, its destruction may therefore be fixed at this date. The fluctuations between Christi- anity and Paganism, which no doubt took place amongst the people as well as in their princes, are curiously illustrated by the contents of the Guilton sepulchres. The peace and prosperity of this part of the island were now rapidly departing. Intestine divisions en- couraged foreign aggression, and towards the close of tlie seventh century, Cadwalla, King of the West Saxons, in revenge for the death of his brother, Mul, Mol, or Mollo, who, after overrunning and plundering the country, had been burnt alive in a farm-house by the exasperated inhabitants, ^^ entered Kent at the * Saxon Chron. suh anno 687 ; Henry Hunttingdon, lib. iv. ; and William of Malmsbniy, lib. i. cap. i. BEFORE THE CONQUEST. 33 head of a formidable army, and wasting it from end to end with fire and sword, reduced it to such a state that it never recovered its importance during its ex- istence as a separate kingdom, which terminated in 823 with the death of Baldred, when it was annexed by the victorious Egbert to the rest of his dominions, and became part of the kingdom of England. It was now, however, to suffer from a new scourge. As early as 787, we learn from the Saxon Chronicle that the Danes had made their appearance on the English coast. In 832 they landed on the Isle of Sheppy, plundered it, and returned unmolested to their ships. Six years afterwards they again landed in Kent, and extended their ravages to Canterbury, Eochester, and even London itself. In 851, after being defeated at sea, off Sandwich, by King Ethel- stan, who took nine of their ships, they landed in the Island of Thanet, and wintered there, probably held in check by the still formidable fortress of Uichborough. Alured of Beverley, under this date, informs us that Alcher, the Ealderman, with the people of Canter- bury, fell on the Danes, encumbered with booty, and routed them at this place, then called Richberga. Undismayed by this reverse, they landed at Sand- wich in the following spring, and pillaged it ; and repeatedly, during the tenth and the beginning of the eleventh century, these ferocious Northmen re- peated their fearful visitations, and laid waste the neighbouring country with fire and sword. That the whole of this parish was more than once involved in D 34 A CORNER OF KENT. this destruction tliere can be no doubt. In the Sand- wich. MSS. we read : '' The city of Eutupi, with the castle now called E;ichborrow Castle, was utterly destroyed b^^ fire and sword. Such was the rage of King Sweyne and his Danes in the year of grace 990." We doubt the accuracy of the date. The invasion by Sweyne and Olave is recounted by the Saxon Chronicle in 993 and 994, in which latter year, it is quaintly recorded, " they wrought the utmost evil that ever any army could do, by burning and plundering and by man-slaying, both by the sea-coast and among the East Saxons, and in the land of Kent ^ and in Sussex and Hampshire." There is no particular mention of E;ichborough ; but as they do not appear to have held it at any period, they most likely did tlieir utmost to ruin it ; and as it had ceased for some time to be a royal residence, it may not have been thought neces- sary to repair the damages inflicted, and we have no evidence of its having ever been a place of strength or consideration after that date. The injury to its har- bour by the increase of the sand, and the consequent transfer of its commercial and military importance to the adjacent port of Sandwich, which is first heard of in the seventh century, contributed to its decay, and at the period of its history at which we have now arrived, it had been completely superseded by Sandwich, de- scribed, in the reign of Canute as '' the most famous of all the ports of England."* * EncoDi, Emma3, BEFOUE THE CONQUEST. 35 As early as the time of Bede, who wrote at the commencement of the eighth century, we find the noble estuary had subsided into ''the river Want- sum, about three furlongs over, and fordable in two places.*" An old map in Lewis's "Thanet" illus- trates this description. Before the I^orman invasion, Bichborough had dwindled down to an insignificant hamlet, and its castle was crumbling away beneath the hand of time and the depredations of man. The extinction of paganism had written Ichabod on the glory of Guiltontown, and the high road or street between Wingham and Sandwich, running through what is now the village of Ash, was the only import- ant feature of the parish. Important it must have been, as the direct line of communication by land between the capital of Kent and the principal port on its south coast. Here, if anywhere within the preserit parochial boundaries, would the Saxon inhabitants have been most likely to congregate around a Christian church (occupying, perhaps, the site of the present), having been itself erected on the ruins of a Boman temple, which had replaced a Druidical altar. That such was the ordi- nary course throughout the country there is ample evidence ; and without assuming it as a fact, we may believe that in all probability Ash was not an excep- tion to the rule. As during the Boman occupation the history of * Eccles. Hitit. ciq). xxv. D 2 36 A CORNER OP KENT. this corner of Kent is that of Richborough, so under the sway of the Saxons (at least after their conversion to Christianity) it merges into that of Sandwich ; and throughout the first half of the eleventh century we have continual mention of the plundering, burning, and ravaging to which the whole neighbourhood was subjected. The last previous to the great Norman invasion appears to have been in 1048, when, according to the Saxon Chronicle, " Sandwich and the Isle of Wight were ravaged, and the chief men that were there slain." At this period the powerful Godwin was Earl of Kent, and during his subsequent struggle with Edward the Confessor, the fleets of the King and of his turbulent subject alternately entered the port and threaded the diminishing channel of the Wantsum ; and in 1052 Godwin and his son Harold sailed through it to the mouth of the Thames, on their hostile expe- dition to London. It is only in the latter days of Edward the Confes- sor that we discover the name of a solitary landholder in some part of this devastated district, when a few acres were possessed by a person named Bernholt, at a place called Ece, in the hundred of Eastry, and which Mr. Hasted takes to be Ash-next-Sandwich, with what probability we shall inquire in the next chapter. ^ Coffer of the 15th Century in the Vestry of St. Nicholas Church, Ash. CHAPTEE II. DESCENT OF THE MANOHS. WITH the reign of William the Conqueror, com- mences that valuable series of official documents by which, with the exception of some fifty or sixty years, we are enabled to trace pretty clearly the descent of property in this country from the close of the 11th century to the present day, and illustrate by legal evidence the genealogies of its principal families. It is in the great Survey of England, known as the '' Domesday Book," made by order of the king, A.D. 1082 — 1086, that we find mention of a place called JEce, in Ustrei hundred, which, after the Conquest, formed part of the enormous possessions of William's half-brother Odo, Bishop of Baieux and Earl of Kent, and wherein a yoke of land was held under him by one Osbert Fitz-Letard. That on it were three 38 A COBNER OF KENT. villains (husbandmen, be it understood) ; that in King Edward's time, when it was held by a Saxon named Bernholt, it was worth 125. annually, afterwards only 6s,, and at the period of the survey had risen in value to 16^.* According to the same document, this Osbert, or Osbern Eitz-Letard, was a very considerable land- holder in this neighbourhood under Bishop Odo and other lords ; t but of his parentage or descendants we know nothing. The name of Letardus occurs as that of an undertenant in Wiltshire ; but whether the Osbert of Ash were his son or not, we are without means of ascertaining. There was also a Letard, Rector of Northfleet, who died in 1199, who might have been a collateral descendant of our Osbert ; but we have not been able to trace any connection, Mr. Hasted also quotes an entry in Domesday, by which it appears that one Turstin held two yokes in Ece of the bishop ; but as that Ece is said to have been in Summerden (Smerden) hundred, and the former in Estrei (Eastry) hundred, it is clear they are two different places; and indeed it might be * The jugum, or yoke of land, is estimated by Mr. Morgan (England under the Norman Invasion, p. 39) at half a ploughland, or carucate, which varied according to the soil ; being as much as a plough could till in a year. The yoke has been calculated at forty- eight acres, set by the perch of sixteen feet ; bat cannot be exactly determined. See notes *, pp. 39, 40. t "In Estrei Hund. Oslai filii Letard ttn de Ej o Hama." He also held Bedesham, now Beacham, in Wingham hundred, under which, m Domesday, he is called both Oabert and Osbern. DESCENT OE THE MANORS. 39 questioned whether either of them was the Ash next Sandwich, in the hundred of Wingham. Of Ash as a parish we shall speak hereafter. It is only from the descent of the manors it contained that we can learn much of its early history. These amounted to twelve ; namely. Overland, Goldston, Holland, Checquer, Chilton, Weddington, Levericks, Goshall, Hill's Court, Twitham Hills, Barton, and Elect. We shall commence with that of ELEET, as in it, or attached to it, were the hamlet and castle of Eichhorough ; and in following the descent of the manor, we shall continue and complete the history of that famous fortress. Elect, from the Anglo-Saxon fleot, a running water, — flood, is a district in the north-east part of the parish, and was anciently held of the Archbishop of Canterbury, as of his manor of Wingham ; accordingly it is entered under the general title of the Archbishop's lands in the survey of Domesday as follows : — " Of this manor {i.e. Wingham) William de Arcis holds 1 suling* in Eletes, and there he has in demesne 1 carucate and 4 Villeins, and 1 Knight with 1 earn- * Suliog, swolling, or swilling, is a word common to Kent, from the Anglo-Saxon sul, a plough. So in a charter of King Offa we find " aliquam partem terrse trium aratrorum quam Cantianse Anglice dicunt 'three sulinge.' " — (Somner's Gavelkind, p. 58; Kenet's Glossary, under Selio.) In Dorsetshire a plough is still called a zuU. According to some authorities, a yoke of land was the fourth of a 40 A CORNER or KENT. cate,* and one fishery with a saltpit of 30 pence; the whole is worth forty shillings." The Archbishop of Canterbury at this period was the celebrated Lanfranc, who had acquired the see on the disgrace of Stigand, A.D. 1070. On founding the priory of St. Gregory in 1084, Lanfranc gave that establishment the tithe of the Manor of Elect ; and this gift was confirmed by Archbishop Hubert in the reign of Hichard I. The manor itself was granted by Lanfranc '' to one OsbornCjt of whom," says Hasted, " I find no further mention, nor oftliis2^lctce, till Senry IIL's reign J' Hecent researches will enable us, however, to supply some curious information on the latter point. The person called William de Arcis in Domesday, who held under Archbishop Lanfranc the aforesaid portion of the manor of Meet, was William d'Arques, supposed to be a son of Godfrey or GeoflPrey Eitz- Goscelin, Viscomte d'Arques, a bourg and viscomte in the Pays de Caux.l Much confusion has arisen suling, which, by the computation given above (note *, p. 38), would make a suling about 192 acres. * A carucate is a plough-land containing two yokes, and therefore half a suling, or ninety-six acres, according to the above calculation. This seems borne out by the context, as William de Arcis is said to hold one suling, and to have therein in demesne two carucates ; viz., one carucate with four villeins, and one knight with one carucate. + Dugdale, Mon. Aug., vol. ii. p. 373- : " Quod feodum dedimus Orfberno." J Such is Mr. Stapleton's view of the case. ( Vide his elaborate paper in the Archseologia, vol. xxxi.) The authors of the " Recherches DESCENT OF THE MANORS. 41 respecting him by the capricious spelling of the name Arcis and Arsic, neither of which truly represents the Norman title, and occasion it to be confounded with Arsick, the cognomen of an entirely different family. William d' Arques, by his wife Beatrice, left, according to some writers, two daughters : 1st, Matilda, married to William the Chamberlain, de Tancarville; and 2nd, Emma, who married first Nigel de Muneville, and secondly Manasses, Comte de Guisnes. This Emma, it is quite clear, had a daughter by each of her husbands, the descent from whom we shall often have occasion to refer to. William d'Arques was Lord of Eolkestone, and that barony passed with Maud, daughter of Emma, by her first husband, Nigel de Muneville, to Euallon d'Avranches. Of this great family, from w^hom descended, by female heirs, nearly all the large estates in this part of the country to the families of Orevecoeur, Criol, and Sandwich, the most imperfect and inaccurate pedigrees have hitherto been published. Consider- able light is thrown upon it and its early connections by the recent publication of two very valuable original documents by the Kentish Archaeological Society ; the first being specially interesting to us, as it shows the descent of this very property in Elect, which we have seen was vested in William d'Arques at the time snr le Domesday" consider William d'Arques to be a collateral of the Viscomte. For our opinion the reader is referred to Chapter Y. of this volume, which we have specially devoted to all vexed questions, genealogical or heraldic. 42 A CORNER OF KENT. of the great survey, and, consequently, fills up the gap which Hasted describes as existing between that period and the reign of Henry III. It is a legal agreement, called '' a Pinal Concord," of the eighth year of the reign of Hichard I., A.D. 1197, between Elias de Beauchamp and Con- stance de Bolbec, his wife, plaintiffs, on the one part, and Buellinus de Abrincis (Avranches) * tenant, on the other, concerning half a knight's fee, with its appurtenances, at Pleet. The above-named persons agree that a moiety of the aforesaid knight's fee, with the lordship, shall remain in the hands of Elias and Constance his wife, and their heirs ; " to wit, a * The Kuellinus de Abrincis named in this document Las never appeared in any pedigree of the family of D' Avranches. From the other interesting record to which we have just alluded_, we infer that he was the brother of Simon d' Avranches, plaintiff, or appellant, in a trial by wager of battle with Baldwin, Comte de Guisnes, 10th February, 1201, respecting the right to some lands in Newington ; for there can be no doubt that the hiatus in the MS. should be filled up thus '.—'■'■ Inter Simonem de Avranches petentem per IioeUa.h6i. fratrem suum." — (Archieol. Cant. vol. ii. p. 265.) This name, which was that of his grandfather, who married Maud de Muneville, heiress of Folkestone, being most capriciously spelt, not only Koellandus, Kuellinus, Roelent, Rualo, and E-uallon, but also Graalandus and Graelent, as it will be found in the families of Tany, Yaloignes, St. Ledger, and others, beside tbat of D'Avrauches, In a document of the date 1127, printed by Mr. Boys in his " Collections for the History of Sandwich," pp. 551—3, the name of the grandfather is corrupted into Querent de Aurences, and in the " Hot. Curiae Begis," 9th & 10th of Bichard L, that of the grandson is indifferently given as Grelent, Rohelandus, and Rolandus. It has subsided into the more familiar form of Bulaud. DESCENT OF THE MANORS. 43 capital messuage and all the land within the walls of Ratteburg (the name by which Hichborongh was now known), and one acre which is outside the walls towards the south of the western entrance of the wall ; and the eastern part of the field called Cnolla ; and the northern part of the field which is north of the aforesaid field called Cnolla; and the northern part of the field called Claiire ; and the southern part of the field to the south of the Thornhushes ; and the northern part of the field which is northward of Hoga; and the southern part of the field called Nollis ; and the western part of the field called Scantegas ; and the western part of the field which is to the north of the road which reaches to the walls of Ratteburg ; and the eastern part of the field called Staldingburg ; and the southern part of Soga ; and the western part of and the north part of the field called Stepatra ; and the western part of one acre which is to the south of the houses of the Lady Isabella. Moreover, these men remain to the aforesaid Elias and Constance his wife, and their heirs Settlee, with all his holding and service ; Estrilda, the wife of Wlfi, with all her holding and service ; Luke and Philip, the sons of Wlfi, with all their holding and service ; Nicholas Pitz-Wimund, with ten acres of his holding Jordan of Mete, witli all his holding and service, excepting the moiety of service which he owes for tenants' cart service ; Edric le Sauner, with all his holding and service, and a moiety of the service of Walter Hassard ; to wit, 44 A CORNER OF KENT. for the eastern part of his holding ; and for the ser- vice of Alice the Angevine (or of Anjou) ; three pence halfpenny, and half the service of E^oger Bulege ; and for the revenue of Libricus Eitz-E^ichard, three pence three farthings. '' And for E/uellinus de Avranches, and his heirs, there remains his messuage in the field which is to the south from the ThornhiislieSi and all the land where the thorns are, to wit, of the above-named half knight's fee it belongs to Euellinus de Avranches next to the Mill; and the. western part of the field called Cnolla ; and the southern part of the field to the north of the aforesaid field of Cnolla ; and the southern part The part of the field to the south of the Thornhtishes ; and the southern part of the field to the north of Hoga ; and the northern part of the field called Noll ; and the eastern part of the field The part of the field which is to the north from the road to which reaches to the walls of Eatteburg ; and the northern part of the field which is to the south of the wall of Hatteburg and the part of the field called Staldinghurga ; and the northern part of Hoga ; and the eastern part of Pasture; and the southern part of the field called Stepatra ; and the eastern part of one acre which is to the south of the houses " Moreover, Alan de Berelinge remains to Euellinus de Avranches, with all his holding and service ; and Albrea, wife of Godwin, with all her holding and ser- DESCENT OE THE MANOKS. 45 vice ; and "William le Scot, with all his holding .... Humphrey and Roger, sons of Wlwinus, with all their holding and service ; Hugo Pitz-Eluric, with all his holding and service ; and the homage of Nicholas Pitz- Wimund de v are towards the north, near the field called Scantega; Mathew, son of Osbert, with all his holding and service ; and half the service and revenue of Walter Hassard, to wit, for the western and for the service of Alice the Angevine two pence halfpenny ; and half the service of Roger de Bulege ; and for the holding of Ederic * Fitz-Richard one penny three farthings, and two hens, and a moiety of service da to wit owes for tenant cart service. "And be it known that a whole moiety in the marshes and saltpits, with all the other appurte- nances that belong to the above-named half knight's fee, remain to Elias de Beauchamp and his wife, and their heirs ; and the other moiety remains to Ruellinus de Avranches and his heirs, with all its appurtenances, and the forstall t which is before the gate of the court is between Elias de Beauchamp received the homage of the aforesaid Buellinus for all the holdings described, which remain to the same Buellinus, to be held by him * Previously called Lihricus Fitz-Richard. t Forstall signified a grass plot in front of a gateway : several families have received the name of Forstall from owning or residing near one. " Fostal, sl paddock to a large house or a way leading thereto. Sussex.'" — (Halliwel], Archaic Diet.) 46 A COrvNER OF KENT. and his heirs of the aforesaid Elias and Constance his wife, and of their heirs, for the service of a fourth part of a knight's fee; and for this fine and agreement B^uellinus de Avranches gave to Elias de Beauchamp and Constance his wife ten silver marks." "We are sure it is not necessary to apologize to our least erudite readers for the insertion of this document in extenso, replete as it is with local and personal information of the greatest interest. Notwithstand- ing the tantalizing lacunae which here and there occur in the manuscript, we learn from it the names of tw^entv individuals who held lands in Eleet in the reign of Kichard Coeur de Lion, and nearly all of whom were living on the 4th of June, 1197, when this agreement was solemnly entered into at West- minster hefore Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury ; Ralph, Bishop of Hereford; and Richard, Bishop of Ely ; Master Thomas de Husseburne, Bichard de Heriet, Osbert Eitz-Hervey, Simon de PateshuU, Oger Eitz-Oger, justices ; and other faithful servants of the King being then present. Amongst the names of the under-tenants we find that of Alan de Berelinge, reminding us of Bereling Street, in this parish, and that persons are still living in the neighbourhood who bear this name ; of Jordan de Elete, apparently the most considerable landowner, as he had his surname from the manor itself. The Saxon names of Godwin, Ulfi or Ulsi, and Wulwin or Wulfin, probably those of descendants of families settled DESCENT OF THE MANORS. 47 there long before the Norman occupation.* But not only the names of the tenants are handed down to us, but those of the very fields they cultivated around the walls of Richborough Castle, and their positions so minutely and clearly described, that it would take no great trouble at the present day to identify them. That called CnoUa was most probably the one in which the amphitheatre was discovered. It still presents the appearance of a mound or knoll of earth. StaldingS^^r^, from its termination, indicates some tradition of a town. The other names are of uncertain orthography, and may be corruptions ; but it is yet possible they may be traced in charters and rolls of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The salts mentioned are specified in Domesday {vide page 40, ante), and are still known as "the salt- pans ;" and " the land within the walls of Ratteburg" leads us to imagine that it was even then pretty clear of buildings, and devoted to pasture or cultiva- tion. Whether the " one capital messuage" was one of '* the houses of the Lady Isabella," afterwards mentioned, is doubtful. The Lady Isabella was the sister of Constance, wife of Elias de Beauchamp, one of the parties to the agreement. They were daughters and co-heirs of Walter de Bolbec. By the Pipe Boll of the second of Bichard I. (six years previous to the * Just seventy years previous to this date we find the names of Wulfin de Bocklande, Sirent filius Godwyne, and Wolfioyne filius Coke, amongst those of grave old men of good reputation, "de proviucie circa Sandwicum." — (Boys's Coll. p. 652.) 48 A CORNER OP KENT. above agreement), we find that Earl Alberic de Yere* rendered account to the King of 500 marks for the daughter of "Walter de Bolbec, to give her to his, Alberic' s, son in marriage ; and by the Pipe 'Roll of the ninth of John, A.D. 1208, that Eobert de Yere gave the King 200 marks and three palfreys, to have Y[sabella] de Bolbec in marriage. The Lady Isabella then, about eleven years after the date of the Einal Concord, became the wife of Robert de Yere, after- wards third Earl of Oxford, and who died fifth of Henry III., 1221. Their son,, Hugh de Yere, fourth earl, was a minor at that period, and doing homage the fifteenth of Henry III., 1231, had livery of his paternal inheritance. His mother, Isabella, died twenty-ninth of the same reign, 1245, when he had also livery of the lands of her inheritance. Hugh died forty-seventh of Henry III., 1263, and was succeeded by his son:Bobert, fifth earl,t who died twenty-fourth of Edward I., 1297, when an inquisition was taken at Elect, and the jurors returned that he held the manor of '' Elete next Sandwich" of John, * This Alberic de Yere was the first husband of Beatrice, only- daughter and heir of Kose (or Sibilla, as she is sometimes called) de Guisnes and Henri Castellan de Bourbourg, and grand-daughter of Emma d'Arques, by her first husband Manasses Comte de Guisnes. Vide Chapter Y., in which the singular confusion existing in the genealogy of the De Yeres is examined, and an attempt made to reconcile the conflicting evidencCc t The editor of the Archseolog. Cant., in his remarks on the Final Concord, has confounded this Robert de Yere, fifth Earl, with his grandfather Robert, third Earl of Oxford. DESCENT OF THE MANORS. 49 son of John de Sandwyco (Sandwich) by service of one knight's fee, and that there is a capital mes- suage, with the curtilage, dove-cot, and certain closes, worth 6s. Sd. per annum. That the rents of assize at Michaelmas are 24od to Ashford to the shreve (sheriflP) a bout the Cesse for the shipes,* and for the boeke casting up of the Acers of land in our parish 13 6 Item, for mending of the gllass windowes of the Church lofte or scoUe houes 3 10 Item, payd to Thomas browne for his Christmas quartars wadges for whiping The dodges oute of the Church 2 Item, payd to John tomson for the breed and win of 3 monthly Communions 14 5 And for our Expenses at seyarall meet- inges about the parish busines 4 5 Item, layd oute apone gooing to Cantar- bury, Apon to sitasions a boute the parish busines 4 Item, given to tenn pore travellars 10 * This was the obnoxious " ship money " tax, one of the three principal and proximate causes of the Great Eebellion. PERAMBULATION OP THE PARISH. 161 Item, for Eepayaring of the gUass windows, for 134 peans of new gllas, and sadaring of the ould leedes of the windowes £0 22 9 Item, payd to Simon barrowes wife for washing the Communion linan and souring the pllate and pewtar for on year 5 And to Simon Barrow for tacking the Com- municats names all the yeare, monthly.. 4 And for the writing of this acount and the cesse following to Simon Barrow 5 Item, payd to Thomas Goullson for chinch- ing of the gUas windowes with lime and heare 10 In the year 1635 we meet with the two following entries, which tell their own story : — Given to one poor Man and his wife and too female children, being driven from their dwelling by reson of the wars and their house burnt £0 1 Given to Mr. John Carig (? Carrick or Craig), driven from Youghall in Ireland by the rebels 1 In 1635-6, the number of persons assessed in the parish was 150 ; out-men (^. e., owners or tenants of land not residing in the parish), 75; cottagers, 36: total, 261. In 1653 Thomas Beere, senior, churchwarden, accounts for the sum of £1. 5s., '^ received of Jfr, M 162 A COENER OF KENT. Thomas St. Nicholas, Esq.^ given by Mr. Camden's last will and testament as an annuity payable to the churchwardens of Ash aforesaid, to be bestowed — 5s. to the clerk and sexton, and 5s. to be retained to the usex)f themselves, and 15s. to the use of the poor of the same parish, which is disposed as forthwith amongst the poor." This is what is called sometimes the Toldervey Gift or Charity ; but in addition to this gift Mr. Hasted states that '*Mr. E^ichard Camden, in 1642, gave by will 40 perches of land, now in the occupation of William Chapman, for the use of the poor, and of the annual produce of 15s., which land is vested in the minister, churchwardens, and other trustees,"* thereby making two bequests to the parish instead of one. The fact is, that Mr. Camden, who was a connection by marriage of Mr. Toldervey, t left £20 to be invested in a house or lands, so as to produce a yearly sum of £1. 5s., to be disposed of as above stated, — the five shillings to the churchwardens being to buy them gloves, or to spend at a meeting, ^^ as they shall think fit," and the five shillings to the * Vide Chapter lY., where in the list of lands, tenements, and benefactions, this gift is mentioned without the name of the donor, the words "in the occupation of William Chapman" referring appa- rently to the date of tlie inscription, which is 1742, one hundred years later than the period of the donation, or rather date of the will. t Christopher Toldervey, of Chatham, Esq., married Jane, daughter of Sir Thomas Harfleet, and died in 1618; and Eichard Camden's second wife was Sarah, daughter of John Darrell, of Calehill, Esq., by the Lady Dorothy Harfleet, second wife and widow of Sir Thomas, and mother, or mother-in-law^ of Jane Toldervey, PERAMBULATION OF THE PAHISH. 163 clerk and sexton as payment for keeping clean the Toldervey monument in Ash Church. The church- wardens to whom this bequest was made in trust were in that year Thomas Beere, senior, and John Solly, who, in conformity with the testator's direc- tions, bought with the £20 an annuity, secured upon land, the property of Mr. Thomas St. Nicholas, of Hoden (son of the Thomas who died in 1626), who by his deed of the 24th of January, 1653, acknow- ledges the receipt of the £20, and charges the land in question, which was in Elmstone parish,'* with the annual payment of twenty-five shillings accordingly. The inaccuracy is easily to be accounted for, as there are entries in the Cess Books of receipts for £1. 5s. of Mr. St. Nicholas, as "a gift from Mr. Touldervy," and the original deed is actually endorsed " Toldervy Charity *' instead of Camden Charity, which it certainly is, and, to increase the confusion, is occasionally so termed in the churchwardens' accounts. It is amusing to examine local traditions, generally * " All that my piece or parcel of arable land commonly called Hales Close, containing by estimation seven acres and a half, more or less, and now in the custody of me Thomas St. Nicholas, lying and being in the parish of Elmstone, in the county aforesaid." — (Original deed in the Muniment Chest in Ash Church.) Mr. Hasted says, "Mr. Thomas St. Nicholas, who died in 1626, left an annuity of £1. 5s. charged on his estate of Hoden, for the repairing and keeping clean of the Toldervy monument, &c." We have carefully examined the will, and it contains no such bequest. M 2 ■ ' 164 A CORNEE OE KENT. fonnded to some extent upon facts, and see hovr inge- niously stories are constructed upon them. The bequest of five shillings for gloves to the church- wardens, in conjunction with that of five to the clerk and sexton '^ to look to the monument " of Christopher Toldervy, has given rise to a belief that the gloves were to be white, and that the churchwardens were to pass their hands in them over the monument, so as to detect the slightest dust or dirt if any remained upon it, in which case the clerk and sexton would lose their annual gratuity. The only characteristic entry during the time of the Commonwealth is under the year 1655, when the churchwarden accounts for 6s., " received for a fine for Mr. William Eaker, for his profane swearing in the parish of Ash." Prom April, 1655, to the Eestoration in 1660, no incumbent of Ash officiated at a marriage ceremony. The publication of the banns was made in Sand- wich or other market-places, and the parties were married by a justice of the peace or the minister of another parish. In 1660 there is an entry of 3d., paid " for setting up of the king's arms," and another of 5d. to the ringers upon 'Hhe King's Crownacion-day," which is all we find respecting the restoration of the Monarchy. In 1662, however, there was Is. 6d. given in relief to two women by order, '' their husbands being killed in the king's service." PEEAMBULATION OE TKE PAEISH. 165 1665. Paid to the ringers when the Dake of York's men lay in Ashe'^ £0 6 Tor matting of my new pew (Robert Wood's, churchwarden) 2 1677. Paid for one Bible forty-five shillings, and for one Common Prayer Book four- teen shillings, and the hoy-man t for bringing them down from London one shilling, (in) all £3 1678. Paid for a new Begister Book for the regis- tering of all persons buried in woollen, as was commanded £0 3 Paid for the Act of Parliament to that end 6 By this Act, which was passed for the encourage- ment of the woollen trade, the parties contravening it were liable to a penalty of £5, and we accordingly find in the accounts for 1679 : " Here followetli the names of those persons that received of the church- wardens of Ash the five pounds paid by David Ben, of Eastry, for burying his son, John Den, of Ash, in linen, made payable by that Act made for burying * After the DuWs great victory over tlie Datcli fleetj commanded by Tromp and Opdam, June 3rd, 1665. t The Sandwich hoy stills runs to and from the port of London. 166 A CORNER OF KENT. all persons in woollen," — £2. 10s. being paid "to John Priend, informer," and the rest to the poor. The persecution of the Protestants in Prance, and their consequent emigration to England, is indicated in the year 1686 by the following entry : — "May 30. Collected then towards the french protestants' Erief, in the parish of Ash next Sand- wich, in the county of Kent, the sum of three pounds nine shillings and sixpence. (Signed) John Smith, deac; William Price, and John May, churchwardens." Of the great revolution of 1688 we find no distin- guishable traces. The only remarkable entry during that year is under the date of May 7th : — Given to 15 Welsh that had a warrant to collect the charity of all well-disposed people, 8 parishes being drowned by the sea £0 10 1689. Gave to 14 poor distressed persons who had lost by sea and fire the sum of £2,750, and (some ?) of their husbands killed by a Prench Privateer, as appeared by their certificate 2 Immediately following the munificent distribution of two shillings amongst fourteen destitute and bereaved creatures, we read : — Paid John Chandler for killing of an otter in our parish £0 2 6 PERAMBULATION OF THE PARISH. 167 Paid Stephen Cox for going to Canterbury for orders for the militia going to Canter- bury at the same time £0 2 8 ffor writing these accoumps and soming of them up 2 6 The accomplished scholar who earned half a crown by the extraordinary feat just recorded, is not without a rival in these records. In the extraordinary expenses of Eichard May, 1715-16, is the mysterious entry, — Pd. a pon a p.articklear ocassion £1 7 6 As the date, however, is the 5tli of November, we think it is a pretty clear occasion, and were we in- clined to speculate, the delicate manner in which the Popish plot is alluded to would induce us to imagine Master Richard May was not the soundest of Pro- testant parish officers. There is little after this date to interest even the local reader, and we shall there- fore conclude this section of our work with a fev/ extracts from another set of books, containing the accounts of the overseers of the poor, as they illustrate the mode in which that portion of the parish business was conducted in the seventeenth century, and give us some insight into the nature and price of food, clothing, and other necessaries of life at that period. In the first place, it appears that before the erection of the workhouse, one mode of dispensing out- door relief was to make agreements with certain parish- ioners to lodge and board, and sometimes to clothe, the pauper for a stipulated yearly or half-yearly 168 A CORNEE OF KENT. payment. One of the earliest entries in the first book, and the first year of the operation of the Act of Parliament 34th Queen Elizabeth before men- tioned, is as follows : '* Item, to Widdow Paramore for keeping of a poor maid child till she could be placed." We add two examples of agreements under the date of May 11th, 1676 :-- " John Petley has agreed with the parishioners to keep ISTeave's girl this year for one pound and ten shillings, and he is to find her in all manner of clothing whatsoever." " Prances Barrow has agreed with the parishioners to keep Susanna Dunkin for meat and drink, washing and lodging, this year, and the parish is to find her in all manner of clothing whatsoever." Of miscellaneous items we have selected the follow- ing :— 1668. Paid Mr. Harflete for 18 sacks of coals for the poor , £1 13 Paid for a pair of bodyes and a pair of hose (and) to Aprons for Manly 's girle 5 9 Paid for a new hat and gloves 1 Paid Mrs. Licod for 16| yards of Kersie to cloath the poore 2 8 11 Paid her more for 36 yards of red cotton for the poore 3 2 4 Clothes for 20 poor persons, and such other necessary things as bee used to make them up 116 Paid for a pair of shoes for Pearmans boy.. 2 PERAMBULATION OF THE PARISH. 169 1672. Paid to Adam Jull for things the Widow Brown had in her sickness, and for letting Elizabeth Poat blood £0 6 3 Paid to Adam Jull for making a coat and hose and waiscoat for John Pairman, and for making Widdow White's suit ... 7 6 It would therefore appear that Dr. Jull, as he is in other entries described, paid attention in a double sense to the habits of body of the parishioners. 1677. Amongst the accounts of this year some " mute inglorious Milton" has scrawled a few couplets, the most ingenious of which must surely Iiave been in- spired by the '^Paradise Lost" and ^'Paradise Pc- gained " of his great contemporary : — " Christ in a garden was apprehended Because in a garden Adam first ofiended." To which is appended the following moral reflec- tion : — "I made a covenant with mine eyes, Whyfore should I think upon a maid." 1678. A hat for Gainsfords girle £0 3 Paid for canvas for a pair of britches for Gainsfords boy 1 A pair of shoes for Ilobacks boy 2 4 170 A CORNEE. OE KENT. Shoes vary from 9d. to 3s. per pair, of course accord- ing to size and description. 1683. A pair of pattens for Moynes girl £0 1 4 1685. Por a pair of gloves for Rows boy £0 6 In this year the burial of a pauper cost thirteen shillings and threepence, as under : — April 10th, for the laying forth of John Carter £0 2 Eor his coffin, knell, and grave 9 Por wool to bury him in 9 Eor his affidavit and register 16 £0 13 3 This affidavit was the certifying that he was " buried in woollen." 1710. On April 27th in this year, at a vestry held at the Lion, it was magnanimously '' Ordered that every one who comes to a parish meeting shall spend his own money." 1712. Paid Mr. Solly for cloathes as follows : 21 yards of cattaloon (challoon?), at 5^d. 3 yards of blue cotton, at 16d. 3 ells and J of TicMens (? Bed ticking), at lOd. PEUAMBTJLATION OP THE PAHISH. 171 1^ yard of cattaloon and cadis (a sort of wool), 9d. 3 ells of ossins (?), 2s. 6d. 5 ells of locker (in other accounts lockeram), at lOd. A pair of leather bodies, 2s. 8d. A bushel of wheat in this year cost 4s. 6d. 1714. In this year coals cost 2s. 4d. per sack, '* 28s. a chalder," and " 3 one-and-twenties of coals," £5. 5s. 1725. In this year, under the date of March 30th, '' It was agreed that Thomas Minter, Charles Horn, churchwardens, and David Denne, overseer, do build or hire, at y" charge of y^ parish, a house for the use of the poor." And in 1730. '* It was agreed between the parishioners and Doctor Hogben, that y^ s"^ Doctor shall look after all the poor in y' workhouse, and all that receive w^eekly collection, for y^ sum of ten pounds per yeare, except broken bones, & what y' overseers shall think fit to send him to which have not weekly collection, and for them he is to be paid as y"" overseers and he shall agree for ; & in case y^ small-pox should be breef, for the s'^ Doc'' to be allowed, & reasonable allowance." A memorandum, dated June 25th of that year, informs us that Henry Eastman and his wife were " appointed for 7 years, at £10 per annum, and also meat, drink, and lodging, for looking after the poor 172 A CORNEll OF KENT. of the parish of Ash ; and to have the lower room and chamber next the street, and to leave at a quarter's warning," which was apparently given them at Christmas, for in March, 1731, Leonard Bedo and his wife were appointed to replace the Eastmans. Another entry of that year records — " Spent when Leonard Bedo was chosen master of the workhouse." A fevi later entries, referring to the church, will be noticed in the section appropriated to its description ; but the above extracts are sufiBcient to show the nature of the information to be derived from the parish records, and contain all we considered likely to amuse or enlighten our readers. Pages are occupied in entries of payments for all sorts of*birds' heads by the dozen, and the only item during the rest of the century we thought worthy of transcription occurs in the accounts for the year 1765, viz. : — " Paid Henry Poster for saving James Johncocke a wig, Is." The registers of baptisms, marriages, and burials commence as early as the month of November in the first year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, A.D. 1558 ; but the upper part of a leaf has been cut out of the oldest book, making a blank from July, 1561, to January, 156^, and from October 3, 1562, to April, 1563. There are also twelve years wanting of all the registers from 164^ to 1653. Omitting the names common to all the parishes of England — the inevitable Smiths, the celebrated firm of '* Brown, Jones, and Ptobinson," the Whites, the Greens, and PEilAMBULATION OV THE PARISH. 173 tlie Blacks, and the equally popular appellations of Adams, Jackson, Johnson, Wilson, and other sons — the following are some of the most remarkable, and those of the principal families to be found in these valuable records : — Affeld, Alason, Allen, Ames, Androe, Anley, Ansell, Anselm, Arbeston, Aymis ; Bax, Backett, Beake, Beere, Benskin, Bing, Bishop, Blaxland, Bonner, Boughton, Boykin, Bourne, Brompton, Burthen, Bushell ; Camden, Carloil, Oatt, Chandler, Chapman, Claringbold, Cleveland, Cock, Collins, Coleman, Coltson, Combe, Constant,* Cooke, Copp, Corke, Craythorne, Curling, Cutburne; Dane, Danton, Davy, Delmar, Dilnot, Dive, Dunkin ; Elgar, Elvery, Elyot, Emptidge, Esdee ; Pennell, Eidge, Eoate, Eoote, Eorstall, Eriend ; Gammon, Gardner, Gibbs, Gifford, Godden, Godfrey, Gold, Goldstone, Goldup, Griggs; Harfleet, Harness, Hogben, Hougham, Howbancke, Huckstep; Innocent, Inkpet; Jethery, Johncock, Juddrey, Jull ; Keeble, Kelsey, Kennett ; Lacy, Lad, Landy, Laslett, Lass, Legnail, Legrand, Lettice, Lilly; Macket, Masters, Matson, Meriam, Mezday, Minter, Musred ; Natau, Nott, JSTunham ; Omer, Onyon, Organ, Osborne ; Paramour, Pay, Plosse, Peke, Ponte, Pordage, Prestly, Priggenden, Proude ; Quested, Quillock ; Ealph, Eatcliffe, Beist, Bigden, Bowe, Bye ; Sacket, Saffery, St. Nicholas, Saltenstone, Seed, Sevenaker, Sherry, Sladden, * A James Co/isiantinople msLYvied Mai-y Simmonp, Nov. 19, 1617. There is no repetition of the name. 174 A CORNER OF KENT. Solly, Spaine, Storke, Stumble, Stupple, SwaflFord; Tappenden, Thrumb, Tilley, Tomlin ; Umfield, Under do wne ; Waaker, ¥/hale, Wigg, Wild, Winalls. William Lord Latimer, in the thirty-eighth year of the reign of Edward III., obtained license for a market to be held at Ash every Thursday, and an annual fair on Ladyday. The market has expired ; but a few gingerbread-stalls and '^ knock'em downs" continue to do duty for " the fair " upon Old Lady- day and Old Michaelmas-day yearly, to the delight of small children, the amusement of waggoners' mates, and the advantage of the beer-shops. Amongst other ancient customs, the curfew still " Tolls the knell of parting day," and the "five o'clock bell," rung every morning, though it now only summons man '' to go forth to his work and to his labour," formerly at the same hour cailed priest and people to " matins." The number of communicants in 1588 was 500 ; in 1640 they had increased to 850 ; and from the registers it appears that from 1620 to 1820 the births had nearly doubled. The population in 1801 was 1,575 ; in 1821, 2,020 ; in 1831, 2,140. In 1841 there were 420 houses and 2,077 inhabitants ; in 1851, 2,095 inhabitants ; and at the last census, in 1861, the inhabited houses were found to be 438, uninhabited 11, and building 5 ; the males in number, 1,008 ; females, 1,031 : total population, 2,039 — a slight decrease during the last ten years. -r^ uJ ^— ,-.a 175 Fiece of carved oaJc dug zip in 1861. CHAPTER IV, THE OHTJECH AND ITS MONUMENTS. THE Parish Church of Ash stands nearly in the middle of the village, on the south side of the high-road running through it, crowning the hrow of the hill which overlooks the valley of Staple. Erom its elevated position, its spire forms a conspicuous feature in the landscape for miles around. On the site it now occupies stood, according to tradition, a Druidical temple or altar. This tradition, purely local, is not supported by any testimony that we have been enabled to discover. No exhumation has brought to light, as at Guilton Town, relics which, if not corroborating the statement, might yet account for its origin. At the same time the circumstance is exceedingly probable: so exactly, indeed, what we should look for on such a spot, that, while we by no 176 A CORNEH OF KENT. means insist on tlie truth of the story, we are unable to discard it as altogether unworthy of credence. No allusion has been made to it by Kilburne, Lambarde, Philipot, Harris, or Hasted ; but we do not, on that accoimt, hesitate to record the existence of such a tradition, leaving our readers to place their own value upon it. That an earlier Christian church, of Saxon or Norman erection, stood on this spot there can belittle doubt, as a considerable portion of the foundation- walls was found on the north of the Molland chancel. The most ancient portions of the present edifice are of quite the close of the 12th and commencement of the 13th century, and no discovery has yet been made of any fragment of sculpture of an earlier date. During the recent thorough repair of the high chancel, a small piece of carved oak, apparently part of some stall,^ was dug up, perfectly corresponding with the oldest portions of the architecture. The general form of the church is that of a cross,! with a tower at the intersection, and * Vide woodcut at tlie head of lliis chapter. That there were stalls in the choir here as late as the reign of Henry YIII. is clear from the will of Sir John Saunders, vicar of Ash in 1509, already quoted, as he bequeaths £4: for " the buying of a book called the Antiphonar for Holydays and Sundays, for (the) quire on the vicar's side in Ashe Church." t For the architectural details and professional description of this interesting building we are indebted to the kindness of Mr. Edward Roberts, of Parliament-street, AVestminster, F.S.A., one of the Honorary Secretaries of the British Archaeological Association, the publications of which society contain abundant evidence of his industry and intelligence in the study of mediaeval architecture. Platl b yl m m THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 177 having the cathedral-like feature of a departure from a strictly rectangular plan, so as to give a leaning of the chancel towards the south, supposed to be indicative of the bent position of the body of our Saviour on the cross. This peculiarity of arrangement is too often repeated to be accidental ; and we are too familiar with the exactitude of mediseval builders to believe that it was the result of error. In this particular case, the divergence from the straight line is so great as to become almost pain- fully visible, and is the more remarkable, not only from its extent, but from its being unusual in mere parish churches. Its arrangement differs, apparently, from that of the earlier edifice in some respects, for the former had a tower, the remains of which are clearly to be seen at the north-west angle, now part of the north aisle, and this would seem to be the most ancient existing portion of the building, and of the time of the transition from Norman to Early English (circa 1190), the outer walls here having an appearance of greater age than in any other part, though, being all composed of flints and boulders, it is not so easy to distinguish earlier from later work, as where different and more perishable materials have been used. It may be doubtful if there was at the same time a central tower also — most likely not ; although it rarely if ever happened that a cruciform church was altogether without one, or some arrangement which took the place of one, so as to avoid the very common 173 A COKNEU OE KENT. system of the present day of crossing the timbers of the roof at the intersection, and enabling them to abut the roofs against masonry. The present tower, how- ever, has been stuck in bodily from the foundation. This will be referred to presently. The sub-arrange- ment of the church is into a nave, with a north aisle and north porch, a tower and transepts, the north transept being larger than the south by reason of the aisle beyond which it extends, a chancel of great length, with a north chancel beside it. There has been, also, a south aisle or chapel, with two bays, the piers and arches of the arcade remaining in the pre- sent walls, which have been filled in ; the shafts and capitals, as far as they are visible, appearing to be of the same date as those on the opposite side of the nave; viz., from 1200 to 1220. Let us now apply ourselves to the details, taking first those of the nave or body of the church. Looking from west to east, we have behind us the large modern western window and restored door, both, however, in the position of their prede- cessors. On the left we have, first, the base of the old tower, then three equilateral arches of the same size and shape (date from 1200 to 1220), with hood mouldings on both faces, and with responds or abutments at each end of the arcade. The first respond has a corbel in lieu of a shaft. The two shafts beyond are (beneath the cap mouldings, which are alike) dissimilar in all other respects, save that of material, both being built of Kentish rag ; the smaller THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 179 one, however, has certainly been inserted, probably at the time the central tower was built, as there are no appearances of large rag-stones in other parts than where alterations are evident. The nearer and larger shaft is in eleven unequal courses of small stones, 5 feet 4f inches high in all, and 23 inches diameter. This is certainly in substi- tution of something which preceded it ; the other may be original, — i.e,, coincident with the first alteration or rebuilding, when only the west tower was left standing. The shaft in the respond is similar to the last described, and was most likely built at the same time as the tower. This seems to confirm the view already taken, that the one shaft is original and the other two are later, although in imitation ; and it is further strengthened by a red colour, of which there are evident traces on the entire shaft and base. At each pier is a corbel projecting into the nave; there has been a depression in their upper surface, showing that something was to have lain in them. On our right hand, or south side, we have firstly an inserted window, of about the date 1400, and two quite recent windows beyond in the filling in of the spaces of the old arcade, which led into the demo- lished aisle or chapel before mentioned. The buttress outside has been added, and in other respects there appear to have been great alterations, the use of similar materials tending, as we have before observed, to defeat the judgment as to age. Inside, however, Caen stone has been used — always a sign of early N 2 180 A CORNER OF KENT. work. The shafts of this arcade cannot be seen at all fx'om the interior : could they be perfectly ex- amined, they would most probably be found to corre- spond in material and workmanship with the large one opposite to them. Th€ north aisle is, including the old tower, of the same length as the nave. Three sides of the tower remain, about fifteen feet high. The north porch and priest's chamber, or vestry, above it, are new, but occupy the same position as those Avliich preceded them. They were rebuilt in 1848, chiefly at the expense of the E;ev. Edward Penny, then the incum- bent here, and now rector of Great Mongeham, Deal. On each side of the old porch were compartments of stonework, once ornamented with brasses, *' most probably,'' says Hasted, '' in remembrance of some of the family of Harflete, several of whom lie buried on the north side of the churchyard;" but the brasses, as well as the tombs, were all gone in his time.* In 1663-4, the sum of £3. 15s. was paid to ^ Mr. Bryan Faussett, iu his Charcli Notes, taken in 1760, says, " On each side of the entrance to the porch is an ancient monument. They both Imve been adorned with brasses, which, together with their inscriptions, are now lost." Hasted alludes to the tombs of Thomas Atcheker, otherwise Harfleet, and his father, Kaymond Harfleet, as the former in his wil], proved 29th January, 15||^, desires to be buried in the churchyard of Ash, on the north side, where his father lieth, and that a tombstone be laid over his father, with sculpture of his name, mentioning the day of his death, and without picture ; and another tombstone to be laid over himself, with sculpture mentioning his name and day of his death, and vnthout picture. As the tombs Mr. Faussett describes had been adorned with THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 181 the painter " for painting the church porch, and writing the sentences there, for shadowing the outside of the great doors, and for painting the screenes,^^ &c. The window beyond the porch is modern. At the east end of the aisle is an early arch, one pier of which was rebuilt when the central tower was inserted, and shows a different impost from that on the opposite side. This arch is perhaps thirty years later than the nave, and would induce us to think the transept an addition to it, and we find that it was formerly called the Chapel of St. Thomas the Martyr. The tower, when built, converted it into a transept proper. In this transept recently stood the organ, and a gallery of modern erection, both of which have been judiciously removed.'* At the east end is an brasses, they could not liave been those of Thomas and Raymond Harfleet, which appear to have been flat gravestones, with name and date of death cut upon them, and without pictures — i. e., brasses. John Harfleet, of Ash, son of Thomas above mentioned, also desires to be buried " in the churchyard of Ashe, on the north side, where my father lieth." Will proved September 19, 1581. But "the compartments of stonework " described by Hasted were evidently in the sides of the porch itself, and the disappearance of the brasses, which must have been before 1613, is much to be lamented. * On taking down the organ (December, 1863) the remains of fresco paintings, borders, and inscriptions were found on the walls, but unfortunately too dilapidated to trace or decipher. On the east wall, the naked feet and lower portion of the red robe of a figure were discernible. The borders seem to have been black bands with rows of white or yellow roundels on them. Of the inscriptions (probably texts) not one word was perfect enough to render it legible. While superintending the works in progress for the restoration of this transept, the Rev. H. S. Mackarness (the present incumbent) dis- 182 A CORNER OP KENT. archway of the fourteenth century, leading out of the transept into the north or Molland chancel. There are here two corbels, carved in the shape of human heads, with the hair arranged in the pecu- liar curl which distinguishes the figures of the time of Edward I. and II. ; but they have been sadly mutilated, indeed all but destroyed, in the erection some years ago of a wooden partition, now happily removed, converting the chancel into a school-room for the girls of the Cartwright Charity, the boys occupying the vestry above the porch previous to its reconstruction in 1840. There is an oaken screen here of the sixteenth century. We have seen the painter was paid for painting the screenes in the church in 1663-4. This chancel was anciently called St. Nicholas' chancel, and the remains of string-courses of early thirteenth-century work show that up to a certain point there are portions of the old walls standing. This is visible at the east end, where the string is covered a stone coffin of the thirteenth century, on the lid of which was sculptured a cross, planted on three steps (called, heraldically, " a cross degreed or degraded "), the form of which is rather uncommon, the transverse limb of the cross curving like the guard of an ancient sword. The coffin had evidently been opened, and the contents disturbed, the skull and other portions of the skeleton of an adult person being mixed up with large flint boulders and rubbish of every description. The lid, of great weight, considerably overlapped the coffin. The upper half of another lid, quite plain, was dug up near it. A small fragment of painted glass out of the old window was found at the same time, with a pattern upon it, from which the borders above mentioned seem to have been imitated. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 183 surmounted by a modern window. On the north side are two recently inserted windows, carefully copied from those they have replaced ; and an altar tomb of the fifteenth century, under a canopy slightly earlier. The tomb itself is of Purbeck marble, and is supposed to have been removed from some other part of the church, and put into a recess with which it does not in any way correspond, being too long and too dwarfed. Upon it have been placed the alabaster effigies of John Septvans, Esquire of the Body to King Henry YI., who founded a chantry here, called the chantry of the Upper Hall, as appears by the will of his widow Katharine, dated April 14? 1495. We have much to say on this subject when we come to describe the monuments, but necessarily mention this particular fact here as it is probable that the alterations made in the fifteenth century in this chancel took place at the time of the foundation of the chantry aforesaid. In 1540 we find payment '' to Sir Thomas Bruer, chauntry priest of the chauntry of John Stevyn^ in the church of Ashe, for land, and tenements by the yeare, £vij, £vi, £viii : thereof to be deducted for one obyte, to be yearly kept in the said church of Ashe, v'"* John Stevyn has been ludicrously perverted into Saint Stephen by Hasted or his informant, the name of the founder being mistaken for that of the Christian proto- martyr. It is just possible that Stevyn may be itself '"" Yalor Ecclesiasticus, temp. Henry YIII. 18 i A CORNER OF KENT. one of the many corruptions of the name of Sept vans, which has undergone, as we shall hereafter show, the most extraordinary transformations. In that case the chantry so dedicated would be the same as that of the Upper Hall which we have just mentioned ; but we must not omit to state that there was an ancient family here of Stiven (Stephyn, Stephen), one of whom married Alice, daughter of John Solly, of Pedding and Woodnesborough, ante 1624, and that there may have been a separate chantry founded by an ancestor of that family.* There was another in this church named '' the chantry of Our Blessed Lady," suppressed with the rest in first year of the reign of Edward VI. , when that of Our Lady was returned to be of the clear value of £15. lis. l^d., the lands with which it was endowed consisting, amongst other premises, of a house and fourteen acres of land in Ash, which were granted to Hichard Monins and Thomas "Wotton, Esqs., and they sold them again to Thomas Atchecquer, alias Harfleet.t Those belonging to John Stevyn's chantry consisted of a messuage, barn, &c., in Ash, *' Sampson Stevyn is named in the will of Sampson Style, of Middleton, dated 12tli August, 1464; and tbe will of Christiana Stephyn was proved 16th ISTovember, 1498. t By his will, proved 29th January, 1-559-60, he bequeaths to his son Cliristopher Harfleet, with other property, his principal messuage, and nine pieces of land, containing fourteen acres, in Ash, late belong- ing to the late chantry of Our Lady in Ash aforesaid, which he bought of Richard Monnyngs (Monins) and Thomas Wotton, Esqs. — (Prerog. Off. Canterbury.) Plate 6 '''X AlMJ i''/^^/^ / ; /A^'M /^: ^'///'' 4:' ' A^^ t/M I I E.lWalLer.LitnLiaEatton&aiden. i "L Viewfeomtlie SoutK Transept looking tkrougin ttie liLgK CiiarLcel irLto the Holland CliaTLC el . Tro-m^cLTlxotoyTccpl-L l^J M^ l\r. Dixon \ I. Smith.. LI tti. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 185 and 220 acres of arable, 30 acres of pasture, and 8 acres of marsh land, in the parishes of St. Nicholas and Monkton, Thanet, granted to Cheney, and held in capite. The land charged with the annual pay- ment of twenty shillings to the chantry of the Upper Hall is simj)ly stated in the will of Septvans's widow^ to be "that which lyeth or beith next to the said chantry," which must therefore have been in the village of Ash. The piscina in this chancel is of the fifteenth century. A priest's door (restored) communicates with the high chancel, called also the south chancel and the Guilton chancel, and in the fourteenth century designated, as already stated, the chancel of Our Lady. The wall on each side the door is pierced with arches appropriated to monuments of the families of Goshall and Leverick. The most important and peculiar is the one towards the west. The arch and jambs are in rag-stone, with imposts of the same ; the former are chamfered, and the imposts with a slightly hollowed moulding. The sill of the opening is sunk out for the reception of a recumbent figure, and has a sculptured trefoil border, so arranged as to be perfectly finished at the ends, or, technically, mitred, and returning through the opening. The work is well executed, very elegant, and with all the cha- racter and spirit of the sculpture of the early part of the fourteenth century. On the east side the door is a beautifully-canopied tomb, of the latter half of the fourteenth century, with three traceried and crocketed 186 A CORNER or KENT. gablets, with curved outline. The portions of those which remain are very judiciously left untampered with. The recess is groined in three bays, and the back is pierced with an opening into the north chancel, as already stated. Of the effigies on these two tombs we shall speak anon. In the south wall of this chancel is a trefoil-headed piscina, with round corbels (date about 1200), above it a lancet-headed window of the same period, beside it an aumbry, and two other windows of later dates, one on each side of the priest's door, which is modern. Mr. Hasted simply informs us that '' in the win- dows formerly were to be seen the armorial bearings of Septvans, alias Harflete, Notbeame, Brook, Ellis, Clitherow, Oldcastle, Keriell, and Hougham, and the figures of a St. Nicholas, a Keriell, and a Hougham, kneeling in armour, with their surcoats of arms; but all these were long ago demolished." Amongst the Additional MSS. in the British Museum,* however, are Mr. Hasted's own copies of a collection of drawings and notes taken in Ash Church on the 20th of November, 1613 ; and from these valuable memorials we are enabled to supply some most interesting details, not only of these windows, but of several of the monuments which were then in existence. We have also had the good '^ " Peter le Neve's Church Notes," (Add. MSS. No. 5479). The originals appear, by Mr. Hasted's account, to have been lent to him by Joseph Edmonson. THE CHURCH A:ND ITS MONUMENTS. 187 fortune to be permitted to examine the MS. Church Notes of that indefatigable and learned antiquary the E;eY. Bryan Eaussett, taken in 1760, and now in the possession of his great-grandson, Mr. T. Godfrey Paussett, from which we have obtained corrobo- rative and conclusive evidence on some highly im- portant genealogical points, as will appear in the progress of this and the following chapter. Prom these combined sources of authentic infor- mation, we have formed the following list of shields of arms that adorned the "storied panes" of St. Nicholas, Ash, in the seventeenth century : — 1. Gules, a lion rampant argent. 2. Argent, a plain cross gules. These two were existing as late as 1760, and are stated by Mr. Bryan Eaussett to have been in the " westmost window ;" by which we presume he meant the original window over the west door. 3. Azure, three winnowing fans or : Septvans, alias Harfleet. 4. Gules, a fess nebulee ermine : Notbeame. 5. Or, on a chevron azure three leopards' heads of the first : Leverick. 6. Argent, on a fess between six cross-crosslets azure three plates : Ellis of Sandwich. 7. Or, a cross sable (Brockhull ?) 8. Ermine, on a chief, three lions rampant : Aucher. 9. Septvans quartering Twitham, Sandwich, Ellis, Brooke of , Wolfe, and Wyborne, as in the win- 188 A CORNER OF KENT. dows at Molland, and on the brass of Christopher Harfleet in the north chancel. 10. Party per bend ; two eagles displayed counter- changed : Brooke of Brooke Street. 11. Party per chevron, embattled argent and sable, three mullets counterchanged, within a bordure engrailed ermine : Stoddard of Mottingham. 12. Argent, three cups sable : Clitherow, impaling argent, a castle tripled towered sable : Oldcastle. 13. Clitherow, as above, impaling argent, three bugle horns in pale sable. It is not stated in what particular window or windows the last eleven were situated ; but it is probable that they were, for the most part, in the north chancel. The following fourteen, and the four kneeling figures, we are strongly inclined to believe, from the particular order in which they are drawn on one page of the MS., adorned the great window at the east end of the high chancel. At top, ranged four and three, are : — 1. Or, two chevrons and a canton gules : Keriel, impaling Clitherow, as above. 2 a chevron between three wolves' heads : Wolfe, impaling Clitherow, as before. 3. Clitherow impaling three bugle horns, two and one. 4 a chevron inter ten cross-crosslets impaling ..... on a chevron three lions ram- pant : (Cobham ?) THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 189 5. Argent, three bars sable, impaling (Cobham ?), as above. 6. Clitherow impaling Oldcastle, as before. 7. Oldcastle quartering party per pale ..'... a double-headed eagle displayed Beneath these seven shields are ranged in a line the four figures, three male and one female, all in the costume of the fifteenth century, kneeling on cushions. 1. Male figure in armour, temp. Henry VI. or Edward lY., with tabard of arms. Ermine, a chief quarterly or and gules, an annulet for difference in first quarter : St. Nicholas of Thanet. This figure most probably represented John St. Mcholas, who died in 1462. 2. Male figure in armour, with tabard of arms. Or, two chevrons and a canton sable. If not a mis- take, a variation of the coat of Criol or Keriel. If intended to represent John Keriel, the husband of Joan Clitherow, the canton should have been differ- enced by a crescent. Notwithstanding these discre- pancies, the result perhaps of error, we are inclined to assign it to the aforesaid John, of whom more hereafter. 3. Male figure in armour with tabard, on which are drawn : Argent, on a chevron between three elephant's heads erased sable, as many mullets or. This coat, with different colours, is found quartered with that of Brooke, in the "Visitation of Kent," A.D. 1619, and this figure is underwritten " Solomon 190 A COHNER OF KENT. Hougham." "We shall have occasion to return to this subject in our fifth chapter. 4. A lady in the costume of the fifteenth century, wearing a mantle on which are the arms of Wolfe, as quartered with Clitherow in the shield above men- tioned. This figure is underwritten "The Wife of Keriell ; " but this must be simply the note of the writer. This is also an interesting point for discus- sion hereafter. There are no arms of Keriel on any part of her dress. Beneath these four figures are ranged seven more shields of arms, in two lines, four and three, as the seven above. 1. Septvans, with a crescent for difference. 2. Earry of six pieces nebulee argent and gules : De Campania, or Champion, of Champions Court, co. Kent, impaling St. Nicholas.* 3. St. Nicholas, with annulet for difference, as on armed figure just described. 4. De Campania impaling argent three bh^ds marked ''proper." (Query, Crows for Corbet ?)t 5. De Campania, impaling chevron between ele- * This is curious. John St. Nicholas married Margaret, daughter and heir of Simon de Campania (vide Chapter Y.) : but' here we have the indication of one of the Campania family having taken to wife a St. Nicholas. t This again is noteworthy. Catharine, daughter of Jolin de Campania and Margery his wife, married a Corbet : but this sbield, like the former (note, ante), would indicate exactly the reverse ; the arms of Campania being on the baron or dexter side. TUE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 191 pliants' heads, as on the tabard of Solomon Hougham above mentioned.* 6. De Campania impaling De Campania, t 7. Keriel impaling Wolfe, corroborating the state- ment, '' The Wife of Keriell," under the female figure above described. The herald and genealogist will at once perceive the valuable information that may be drawn from these records, in illustration of the very imperfect and inaccurate pedigrees at present existing of these fine old Kentish families. We shall do our best in the next chapter to elucidate some of the vexed questions ; but there will be still much to do for our successors in these researches. The grand east win- dow, which we have here most probably recalled to us, had been demolished before 1760, when Mr. Bryan Paussett took his notes, and was most pro- bably then succeeded by the plain one which was in existence till 1855, when an exceedingly handsome memorial window, designed and executed by Mr. Williment, . E.S.A., was put up by the late Miss Eriend, of Ash. { Beneath it is the following inscrip- * Indicating a match with either Sanders or Houghana. + We have here evidence of the intermarriage of two of the same family ; but as yet have found no such match in the scattered notices of the Campanias. i We lament to add that this estimable lady was burned to death at the residence of her sister, at Felderland, near Sandwich, April 15th, 1862, in the 75th year of her age ; having fallen into the fire, it is presumed in a fit, while sitting alone in her apartment. 192 A CORNER OP KENT. tion : — " Dedicated to the memory of "William and Sarah Priend, by their affectionate daughter, Ann Eriend, December 25th5 A.D. 1855. Prom the will of William Norrys, of Ash, it appears that in I486 there was an ''image of St. Mary Magdalene " in the chancel, either in statuary or painting. That there were stalls in it at a very early period, and as late as the beginning of the sixteenth century, we have already stated ; and pews as early as 1573-4, in which year Edward Stoughton, by will proved Pebruary 16th, desires to be buried in Our Lady's chancel of Ash, against his pew there. Of the rood-screen the only remains are the lower portions of panelled oak. The heavy altar-piece and massive rails with which the chancel was '' beautified," according to the taste of the eighteenth century, and out of the £100 bequeathed by Eleanor and Ann Cartwright in 1721 (see page 114 and list of benefactions), were replaced by the present, and a new pulpit and reading-desk also erected from a fund provided by Bishop Nixon, while incumbent of Ash, 1838-42, from the sale of the later editions of his excellent work, '' Lectures on the Church Catechism;" and in 1861 the chancel was thoroughly repaired and newly roofed and paved, at the expense of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and under the direction of Mr. Ewan Christian, their architect. The south transept appears to have undergone i^HH^ttflH THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 193 considerable repairs in the year 1675, as in almost every portion of the outer wall stones are to be seen inscribed with the names of various officers and inhabitants of the parish, all bearing the same date. Amongst the most legible are the follow- ing : — '' John Saffery, of Checquer, Churchwarden, 1675." "Geoarge Jay, 1675." " Henry Proud, 1675." "John Pidge, 1675." '' Martha... ampson, 1675." "John Brice, 1675." "James Kingsland's stone, 1675." "Thomas Sayer, ...75." We now come to the tower, the style of which is almost of debased Perpendicular, or beginning of sixteenth century. It may have been built at three different periods ; one stage at a time. The large piers inside the church are almost, if not quite, unique for the size of the stones, which are about 6 feet long, 4 feet wide, and 2 feet thick, and, for ragstone, very unusual. The south aisle, or chapel, had evidently been destroyed before the building of the tower. Over the arch, at the entrance to the high chancel, is a board, with the following in- scription :-— " This belfry was raised and rebuilt by Thomas Beake and Richard Laslett, churchwardens, 1750." This was in consequence of the fall of the great clock-weight, which broke through the flooring of the belfry and ceiling of the tower — providentially when the church was empty, as it crushed everything it came in contact with. o 19 i A CORNER OF KENT. In 1760, Mr. Bryan Paussett found five bells in the belfry, on whicb were the following inscriptions : — 1. (Only the date remains) ... 1581. 2. Joseph Hatch made me ... 1615. 3. Joseph Hatch made me ... 1620. 4. Joseph Hatch made me ... 1620. 5. Henry Wilner made me ... 1661. The present white marble font appears to have been given to the church by E^obert Minchard* and Abraham Pennell, churchwardens, in 1726, which date, with their initials, is also on the poor-box. Their names in full are engraved on the font, toge- ther with the arms of the Minchard family, a mullet within the horns of a crescent ; but in 1664 there is in the churchwardens' accounts the following entry : " Pd. Mr. Thomas St. Nicholas, Usq., for the ffunt, £1. Os. Od." And in a payment to a painter imme- diately following, one of the items is " for painting the ffunt.'' We are left to conjecture whether this was a new font of common stone purchased of Mr. St. Nicholas, or whether these expenses were incurred for the repair of an ancient one. Beside the items we have already extracted from the accounts for 1634 {vide page 153), the following, relating to repairs of the church, its pews and ornaments, the bells, churchyard-gates, * Robert Minchard married Elizabeth, widow of Thomas Peke, of Hills Court, Esq., who died in 1701, and in her right held the manors of Hills Court and Levericks during his lifetime. THE CHTJRCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 195 walls, &c., may have some interest for our local readers : — 1635. Item, first for timber to repair the steeple, with all the carrying and recarrying ... £9 11 To Justed the plumber for changing old lead for new and laying it on the steeple 83 2 11 1641. Eor the ringers and the workmen when the bells were a hanging, and when the bell founders came to see them hanged.. 8 6 More laid out for changing the communion flaggon 4 Item, paid to Henry Willner of Borden for casting the bell and the bell brasses for the third bell, and the little beU 6 15 8 1652. Paid to the churchwardens of Littlebourne for carrying the bell to the bell-founders 10 Paid to Simon Brice for his journey to bargain with the churchwardens to carry thebell 10 Paid to Thomas Sanders for carrying the bell to Littlebourne 3 4 Paid the glazier for glazing and leading the church windows 6 19 S^ o 2 196 A CORNER OP KENT. 1655. Per a frame for the hour-glass* £0 1 1661. Paid Eichard Pidge for himself and labourers for work done about the church wall, the church gate-house, the church and church-house 3 10 1 Paid for a lock and key for the chancel door - 5 1662. To Richard Fidge for whiting and colour- ing the church and finding all materials for the same 2 10 1663-4. Paid John Harris for 5 days' work about the church, and a table for the com- mandments 8 4 Paid to Edwards the painter for writing the commandments and for flourishing of the hand doors and the great doors and the pillars 8 1665. " Por matting of my pew" [Robert Woods then churchwarden] 2 * An hour-glass was an almost uni\^ersal appendage to a pulpit during the 16th and 17th centuries. The ironwork of the holders was sometimes of the most elaborate and tasteful description. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 197 In the Register of Baptisms for 1744, p. 88, there is the following note by B. Longley, curate : — "In the year 1744, Thomas JuU and Henry Minter, churchwardens, built the north wall [of the churchyard], and coped it with stone, and made a new gate at the east end. The gate at the west end, with the piers, were put up some years before by the father of the said H. Minter and John May, church- wardens." In 1779 the Molland chancel needed repairs, and Mrs. Allen, the owner of the manor of Molland at that time, was called upon to repair it. On her refusal so to do, proceedings were taken against her, and the suit being heard before the Dean of Arches in Trinity Term that year, it was decreed that she should forthwith repair it, and certify the same by the first day of Michaelmas term next afterwards, and was condemned to pay the full costs of suit. In 1791, £161. Is. 9d. was paid '' as per bill" for casting a new peal of bells ; and " at the opening of the new peal of bells,'' £2. 13s. Od. " To William Bushell for carrying the bells, £1. Is. Od. ;" and " to Thomas Jull, junior, for ditto, 15s." These bells are eight in number, and bear on them the names of E-obert Tomlin and Hichard Sutton, churchwardens, with those of the founders, ** Thomas Mears, late Lester Pack and Chapman, of London," with the date 1790. In the belfry is a board with the following information in gold letters : — 198 A CORNER OF KENT. QUEX INSTITUTION. J. p. POWELL, ESQ., PATRON AND FOUNDER. On Saturday, the 18*^ of February, 1826, was rung on these Bells Holt's true and complete Peal of grandsire trebels, consisting of 5,040 changes, with 98 Bobs and 2 Singles, in 3 hours and 4 minutes, by the undermentioned persons, members of the above Institution. This was the first true peal ever rung in this steeple, though the bells have been hung 36 years. Will- Darley, Treble Will- Clark, 5*^ John Beer, 2'''^ George Francis, 6*^ James Carter, 3'*^ Eobert Byall, 7*^ John White, 4*^ Nath^ Brewer, Tenor. > Churchwardens. Conducted by John Beer. Thom^ Coleman Geo® Quested On the nortli wall of the north aisle of the church is a board with the following : — Lands, Tenements, and Benefactions, IN Ash. Imprimis, one house in the street called y' Church house, with 2 garden plotts of 12 perches. Item, 4i acres and a ^ of land in Chapman Street, now in the occupation of Thomas Horn. Item, another piece of land containing 40 perches, in y' occupation of William Chapman. As to these 3 articles see the terrier.* * The terrier is unfortunately no longer to be seen. The third article is the donation attributed to Mr. Richard Camden by Hasted. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 199 Item, 1 pound 5 shillings on account of y^ Toldervey Monument, 10 shillings of which is for looking after y^ said monument, and 15 shillings every Christm'ss for y^ poor. See Thos. St. Nicholas, Esq., his deed. Item, in y^ years 1720 and 1721. Gervas Cartwright, Esq., and his sisters did for y^ teaching 50 poor children to read, write, etc., endow a charity school for ever with an estate in land to the yearly value of 31 pounds. See y^ deed of gift in y^ chest,* and y^ tombstone within the rails of the communion table. Item, Mrs. Eleanor and Mrs. Ann Cartwright (y*' sisters of the above gentleman), besides y^ hand they had in y^ said great charity, gave an 100 pounds for beautifying the chancel and providing 2 large pieces of plate for the communion service. * The chest alluded to is engraved from a drawing by Miss Godfrey, of Brooke House, and graces the head of Chapter II. It is kept in the vestry over the porch, and presents us with a fine specimen of a coffer of the 15th century. It is strongly banded with iron, and has three padlocks, one of which secures an iron rod passing through staples over the bands connected with the other two. Edward Stoughton, of Ashe, by his will, proved February 16, 1573, bequeaths to Joel his son, amongst other things, " his coffer with lock and key and bound with iron, in his counting-house, wherein his evidences, deeds, and escripts are." In the marriage contract between Sir John Stafford and Anne Bottereaux, March 16, 1426, the Lord William Bottereaux is required to deliver to the Prior of Bath all the charters, evidences, &c., in " a coffer locked with three divers locks." . . . . " One of the keys of the said coffer to be delivered to the Prior, to remain in the keeping of him and his successors ; another key to the said Lord ; and the third to the said John and Anne, to remain with them and the heirs of their body." 200 A CORNER or KENT. See the paten and flagon. Soon after Mrs. Susanna Roberts* added 2 other pieces of plate for collecting the offertory. See the said pieces : Prancis Conduitt -\ Rich'^ Horn / Church Curat. > and j Wardens, M.D.CCXLII. ) Will" Leger v. 1742. W" Pilcher pinxit . Deal. Eeside it, on another board : — St. Nicholas, Ash. Benefactions and Donations. 1813. Grant from the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty towards the purchase and enlargement of the Vicarage, and the purchase of Glebe land attached thereto , £600 1818. Mrs. Elizabeth Godfrey, widow of Thos. Godfrey, Esq., towards ditto £500 John Minet Eector, Esq., ditto 50 Bey. Chas. James Burton, ditto 50 Grant from the Governors of the Eund for the Augmentation of Small Livings, ditto 900 £2,100 * A tablet to her memory and that of her husband is on the south wall of the chancel, within the rails of the communion table. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 201 John Minet Pector, Esq., by bequest to the minister, which sum the Kev. Chas. James Burton gave towards the support of the Sunday school £10 1819. Mrs. Elizabeth Godfrey, by gift of deed in the Court of Chancery, in trust to the trustees of the Cartwright Charity, all those messuages and tenements, with their appurtenances, comprising the girls' schoolroom and adjoining cottage. 1832. Mrs. Elizabeth Godfrey, by bequest, in trust to the trustees of the Cartwright Charity 1000 With which sum (less the legacy duty), was purchased in the 3 per Cent. Consols, £993. 2s. 2d. in the names of "W. E. Boteler, Esq., and Wm. Eriend, Esq., her executors, producing the yearly interest of £29. 15s. Id., to be appropriated to the repairs of the above-named messuages, etc. And the surplus, if any, to be expended in coats, to be distributed annually to the deserving poor residing in the parish. Rev. Charles Eorster, Curate. George Quested ^ EiCHARD HoLTUM j Churchwardens, 1839. 202 A CORNER OF KENT. A third board records tliat : — ''The Master and Pellows of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, gave a piece of land to the Incumbent and Churchwardens of Ash, for the site of an Infant School. ''Mr. Tho'. Kelsey built an Infant School, at his own expense, on the site so given, and in August, 1860, Mr. Kelsey conveyed by deed of gift to the Incumbent and Churchwardens of Ash for ever, and to three trustees, Messrs. Tho'. Coleman, John Maylam, and James Petley, lands and tenements in the parish of Ash, of the then yearly value of £68, for the perpetual endowment of the said Infant School." GooDBAN Charity. Interest of £100, 3 per Cent. Stock, to be given away at Christmas. Mrs. Mary Wood is now endowing the parish with £300 Bank Stock, the interest, after providing for the due preservation of her sister's monument, to be ex- pended in warm clothing for poor females in Ash, at the discretion of the Yicar and Churchwardens.* * While recording charities, we may mention that John Malyn, by will proved 10th January, 1473, bequeathed "To the lazars of Eche (Ash), near Sandwich, iiij^." It is probable, therefore, that there was a lazar-house somewhere in this parish at that period, but we have found no other indication of it. the church akd its monuments. 203 The Monuments. The most ancient sepulchral effigy now extant in the church, is that of a knight, cross-legged, lying under an arch on the left of the doorway passing from the hisrh chancel to the Molland chancel. It has been appropriated by tradition to Sir John de Goshall, who lived in the time of Edward III. ; but the costume contradicts that assertion : and if it be indeed the effigy of a Sir Jolm^ it must be that of his grandfather, who possessed two knight's fees in Goldstanton and Goshall in the reigns of Henry III. and Edward I. The figure is represented in a long surcoat, open in front, of a form recalling to us that of Edmund Crouchback, Earl of Lancaster, in Westminster Abbey ; but this effigy presents us with the additional feature of those singular defences for the shoulder called ailettes^ which first make their appearance towards the close of the reign of Edward I., but were not common previous to that of his son and successor Edward II. In the will of Daniel Hole, quoted by Hasted (Hist. Kent, vol. III. page 692, note), the testator desires to be buried in the chancel of Ash Church, near the tomb of Sir John Goshall;* showing that as early as * " With a fair gray marble tombstone and superscription in brass for that he and his ancestors had lived at Goshall for an hundred years and upwards." We have not succeeded in finding his name in the burial registers of this parish. David Hole and others of the name occur, but no Daniel. Neither is there any fair gray marble stone remaining near the tomb of John de Goshall that would answer to the description. 204 A CORNER OF KENT. 1617, the date of that document, unless some other monument has disappeared, the name of John had been associated with this effigy. But for this fact, we should have been inclined to attribute it to Sir Henry de Goshall, probably son of the first, and father of the second Sir John, who was seised of Goshall in the reign of Edward II. In that case the female effigy in the cavity beneath, which is coeval with it, might have been fairly assumed to represent Margaret, daughter of Thomas, and sister of Nicholas de Sandwich, of Checquer, the wife of Henry de Goshall, as we have stated at page 65. There is nothing, however, in the costume of either effigy to forbid our admitting them to be those of the first Sir John and his lady, both of whom were living in the reign of Edward L, and probably did not die before the accession of Edward II.* The male figure has been engraved for the Journal of the Archaeological Institute, in illustration of a paper by Mr. Hewitt, who erroneously attributes it to one of the Leverick family. Our sketch of it is from the opposite side, showing the broken shield on which, in Philipot's time, were visible the arms of the Goshalls : semee of cross-crosslets a lion rampant crowned, as visible on the seal attached to a deed of the 7th of Edward III., preserved amongst * There was a Final Concord between John de Goshall and Henry Leverick and Margery his wife, in the thirty-fourth and last year of the reign of Edward I., A.D. 1306.— (Fic^ page 95.) Plate 7. Zig 1 Effigy of Sir Jolm Go shall p 2 03 ■►™~-"^^«^ Tig. 3. CapitalinlNfa^e 4 Tig. 4. AS^A' iHi n Iig. 7. PortioiL of ttLe SeplTajLS seat discoTered. 1864. FiQ'. 5 Tig.b, Lid of Stoae CofiiTi. r "VMerJith.ie.ikttQii Gaidea. Fig. 2 "W" C-. Smith., del et litti . Effigj of a Ladv (unknown.) p. 2 0b THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 205 the Harleian Charters.* The effigy was no doubt originally completely painted and gilt; but not a trace of colour or metal is now discernible. The female effigy beneath is of much ruder work- manship, and has suffered also considerably from ill-treatment as well as time. It presents us, how- ever, with the distinctive features of the costume of a lady of the thirteenth or commencement of the fourteenth century. The head is enveloped in couvrechef and wimple, and the body in a robe reaching to the feet ; the long tight sleeves of the kirtle being visible from just below the elbow. This effigy, we believe, is now engraved for the first time. On the eastern side of the entrance to the Holland chancel, and on the north of the communion table, lies the effigy of one of the Leverick family, as evidenced by the arms which were in Philipot's time visible on the shield, but have now totally disappeared; viz.. Argent, on a * Vide Chapter V. In the Additional MS., No. 4579, from which already we have obtained such valuable information, is a sketch of this effigy, very ill drawn, but undoubtedly displaying both on the shield and surcoat the lion and cross- crosslets. Mr. Bryan Faussett, in his Church Notes, A.D. 1760, says: " On the femme side, I with much ado made out the arms of Septvans, alias Harflete, as in the following page, but the Baron's side was quite effaced." If not a mistake, this circumstance would prove that the shield had been re-painted between 1613 and 1760, and though in one sense incorrectly, as the arms of the wife were never displayed on the war shield of the knight, it would indicate the knowledge or belief at that time preva- lent, that this Sir John de Goshall had married the daughter of a Septvans. 206 A CORNER OE KENT. cheyron sable three leopard's heads or.* We take this effigy to be that of Sir John Leverick, knight, of Ash, who married Joan, daughter of John Septvans, of Milton, living 1351, by a daughter of Koger Manston. The figure has been finely engraved by the late Mr. Stothard in his beautiful work, " The Sepulchral Effigies of Great Britain," and represents a knight of the latter part of the fourteenth century, temp. Edward III., in a highly ornamented suit of plate armour; the bascinet is spherical, with an escalloped border, and the camail is secured to the shoulders by embossed plates, representing lions' heads. The jupon, laced up the right side, is encircled by a magnificent military belt. The dagger is gone on the right side. The legs of the figure are crossed, and the feet rest on a lion, the head of which is remarkable for its life-like expres- sion. There is a great similarity between this e^gj and one in St. Peter's, Sandwich, erroneously attri- buted to a Sir John Grove, who died in the reign of Henry VI. Erom a sketch of the latter in Addi- tional MS. 4579 it clearly represents one of the Grove family ; but it is of the same date with this at Ash, and certainly not later than the time of Richard II. * The coat, as we Lave blazoned it, occurs in Philipot's " Ordinary Coll. of Arms," p. 94, as that of " Leverick of Carne, co. Dorset." There is also a pen-and-ink sketch of this effigy in the Additional MS. above quoted, with the arms distinctly drawn both upon shield and jupon. Plate 8 '^tj^§-^^^t^i-^ '//ciilsrIitK 18 Harron taiden >imtiL del etlitti Effig}r of Sir JoliTL Le^enck. Platl 9 m" \ riT ^1 it rw- 'W^ ilH'fe=^ ^'-' ■■ .IP"' Fig, Grave stoxi.e of Richard CiLttierow and "Aftfe. p. 2 7. Hg.2, Bxass of JaxLC Keriel. p. 208. "WTG- SraiflL afil et Hth. -A'Valier.IithLiaHaLfcon Garden THE CHTJIICH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 207 On the floor, and nearly in the centre of the high chancel, are the remains of a fine brass of the fifteenth century, once commemorating Richard Clitherow, of Ash, Esquire, Lord of the Manor of Goldstanton, now Goldston, in this parish, Sheriff of the county of Kent, fourth and fifth of Henry lY., and Admiral of the Seas from the Thames westward ; and his wife, daughter of Sir John Oldcastle. Weever has pre- served the portion of the inscription remaining in his time : *' Hie jacet .... Clitherow Ar. & . . . . uxor ejus filia Johannis Oldcastell qui obiit . . . ." — (Euneral Mon. p. 264.) The upper portion of the figure of the lady now alone remains, arrayed in kirtle and mantle, couvrechef and barbe, i. e., a piece of linen closely plaited, worn above the chin by all noble ladies in mourning down to the rank of a baroness, and under the chin by lords' daughters and knights' wives ; the inferior gentry and '^ chamberers " being ordered to wear the barbe '' below the throat goyll," that is, the lowest part of the neck. In this example the barbe is represented as covering the neck, and coming up close under the chin, as the daughter of Sir John Oldcastle, who assumed, in right of his wife, to be Lord Cobham. The Q^^j of her husband is totally gone, together with one of the crocketed canopies, the inscription, the miniature effigies of six children at their feet, and four shields of arms, three of which, from a drawing in the Additional MS. before quoted, exhibited (1) Clitherow, three cups covered within a bordure engrailed, impaling Old- 208 A CORNER OF KENT. castle .... a castle triple-towered; (2) Clitherow alone, and (3) Oldcastle quartering party per pale, a double-headed eagle displayed.* It is grievous to look upon the desecrated slab, and think that wanton mischief or paltry cupidity should have been suffered to deprive us of siXch interesting memorials. Side by side with it lies a similar record, which has fortunately escaped such wholesale spoliation. It is the brass of Jane, daughter of Eoger Clitherow, son of the Richard before mentioned, and wife of John Keriel, second son of Sir William, and brother of Sir Thomas Keriel, K.G., beheaded 1461. As nothing appears to have been said about the lady or her husband by any one who has noticed her gravestone, we will here briefly state that she appears to have been born between the years 1420 and 1430, and died before 12th March, 1454-5, the date of her father's death, without issue by her husband, who was for many years a prisoner in Prance, Leland says from 1450 to 1472. He married, secondly, Elizabeth Chiche, who survived him, and married two other * Harris says the Clitherows of Goldston and Little Betshanger bore Argent, on a chevron gules between three spread-eagles sable five annulets or ; and Oldcastle, Per pale argent and gules an eagle displayed counterchanged ; but the seal of Sir John Oldcastle, attached to an indenture made between him and his wife Johanna on the one part, and Sir Thomas Brooke on the other, exhibited Quarterly, 1st and 4th, a castle ; 2nd and 3rd Cobham : and it was circumscribed, " Sigillum Johannis Oldcastle D'ni de Cobham." — (MS. Coll. Arms, Philipot, P. E. I. p. 107.) The '^ party per pale and eagle displayed " coat was, as we have seen, occasionally quartered with Oldcastle, and was also in the windows of Ash Church. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 209 husbands, but had no issue by any, and died in 1499. We have no record of his death or the place of his burial, but it is not improbable that he also was buried here, as the figure of a Keriel kneeling in his coat armour A¥as formerly in the windows of this church, as we have stated at page 189. She is repre- sented in the full gown of the period, girdled at the waist, with wide sleeves, and wearing what has been designated the mitre-shaped head-dress of the reign of Henry YI., a fashion the varieties of which are almost innumerable, and more or less extravagant, according to the caprice or taste of the wearer. Beneath the figure are the following lines : — Pi'ey for the sowle of Jane Keriell Ye ffrendes alle that forthby pass In endeles ijfe perpetuell That God it grawnt mcy [mercj| and grace. Roger Clitherowe her fader was Thowgh erthe to erthe of kind reto^'ne Prey that the sowle in blisse sojo^^ne. The slab was formerly adorned with four cscu- cheons of arms, long since lost, two of which it would seem bore those of Keriel : Two chevrons and a canton, the latter charged with a crescent for ditfer- ence, impaling Clitherow.* Nearer the altar-rails, * Additional MS., Brit. Mus., No. 4579, wherein the effigy and shields are rudely drawn. The loss of the other two is the more de- plorable, as they doubtlessly displayed the arms of her own family, and might have accounted for those of " Wolfe" displayed on the mantle of " the wife of Keriell " in the old window. 210 A CORNER OF KENT. and at the foot of Richard Clitherow's gravestone, is a slab, from which the whole of the brasses haye disappeared, and, in fact, has been so much injm^ed by time or ill usage, that it is difficult to decide whether it ever possessed more than one brass, which seems to have represented the upper portion of a male figure (whether in civil or military habit we will not undertake to say), with an inscription beneath it. This may be the gravestone of Roger Clitherow, son of the above Richard, and father of Jane Keriel, who in his will desires to be buried " in the quire of St. Nicholas, Ashe," near Johanna [Stoughton], his daughter ; bequeathing a missal to the altar, and ten marks for all things necessary to it, and the residue of his estate to his wife Matilda, who is appointed executrix in conjunction with Thomas Hardres and John Oxenden. His wife Matilda, by her will proved in 1457, also desired to be buried in the choir here near her husband ; devising to John, son of John Norrys, and Eleanor his wife (who was her eldest daughter), the whole suit of armour of her late husband ; a bequest, perhaps, the more precious, as it was probably the one he fought in at the memo- rable battle of Agincourt. In this chancel must also have been the tombstone of William Norrys, of Ash, gentleman, a descendant of the above-named John, probably his grandson, who by his will dated Sep- tember 10, I486, and proved at Canterbury before the Prior and Chapter 20th November the same year. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 211 desires to be buried in the cliancel of Our Lady in the parish of Ash, at the south end of the altar there, that his red cloth of Bauderkyn* be laid upon his body in the said church of Ash, and is there to remain for a perpetual remembrance, and a black cloth and two tapers thereon set, to be lit and burning in the time of saying Divine service there, to be had and ordained over his tomb for a special remembrance of prayer. That a convenient stone be set in the ivall before his said tomb, under the image of Mary Magdalen there, with an image of the Trinity graven in brass, and picture of his body and arms therein set for a special remembrance of prayer. No trace of this stone existed in the old wall here specified, which was thoroughly repaired and partially rebuilt in 1861. Nor can we venture to speculate on the position which the image of Mary Magdalen occupied at the period in question. It is probable they both disappeared at the Reformation. There were several other dilapidated gravestones on the floor of the chancel, which were taken up during the recent repairs ; but being for the most part broken, as well as entirely destitute of any traces of sculpture or inscription, it was not thought necessary to replace them. On the north wall of the chancel is the following inscription on a mural tablet, surmounted by the * BaldekiD, a rich stuff originally manufactured at Baldeck, whence the name. The French call a canopy baldaquin, from the material of which it is composed. p 2 212 A CORNER OF KENT. arms of Cartwrigkt : Or, a fess embattled between three cartwheels sable ; crest, a griffin's head erased. In a vault in this Chancell lieth interr'd the body of M^'^ Eliz. Cartwright, widdow, who departed this life Decemb^- 2^^ 1713. As also of Jervas Cartwright, Esq^^ her only son, who died A|/ 6*^ 1721. And M^"s Eleanor and M^"^ Ann Cartwright, her daughters, who died the one Jan 20*^ | theother Febyl9t^/ ^^^^-^ At their desirs this Chancell was beautified and adorn'd and by their order a Charity school was erected in this Parish and munificently endow'd for ever. Inasmuch as you have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done unto Me. St Matt. C. 25th Y. 40. Blessed are the dead what dye in the Lord, for they rest from their labours and their works doe follow them. On the floor of the chancel, within the altar-rails, is an additional memorial of these worthy persons, in the shape of one of the most singularly constructed Latin epitaphs we have ever met with. '^ Old style; we should say 1722. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 213 H. S. E. Gervasius Cartwright, Armiger, Londini natus Hujusce Parochise dum vixit Decus et tutamen. Qui fin Deum pietatem c.. j In cosjnatos charitatem I .^^ Smceram i -r ■, ^ . . \ ita exercuit. In egenos beneiicientiam In omnes deniq' morum suavitatem Ut non magis omnibus peramatus vixerit. Quam desideratus Occident Yitam tranquille instituendo semper felix evasit Tandem sequa animi serenitate deponendo felicior Cum enim mors ipsa Apertis armata terroribus Certum intenderet telum Mira constantia Crudelem imperterritus excepit Ictum Et Deo conservatori Animam placidissime reddidit Ingens sane X^anse Fortitudinis Exemplum nee vanum futures illius quam animitus anhelabat Felicitatis Indicium In Pauperiorum hujus Parochise Alumnorum Eruditionem. .... impendendas in perpetuum reliquit. Obiit 6 die Aprilis, Anno j^'o-i"* 1721- C ^tatis 44. Juxta hoc locum conduntur reliquiae Dilectissimarum Sororum Eleonor^ J et > Cartwright, Virginum, Ann^ j Quae ne nimium diu tarn cbaro capite carerent Post decem menses morte Fratrum libenter secutse sunt Ilia 20 die Januarii > . -p. • • i^,i zrii. j. f 47 H^c 19 Februarii } ^"•^° ^°"'^" ^^H ^*^*- { 46 214 A CORNER 01' KENT. Above it the arms of Cartwrigbt, as in the mural tablet. On the east end of the south wall of chancel, facing Mr. Cartwright's :— In a vault in this Chancell lieth interred The body of Henry Egberts, Esq^" Grandson of Sir W^ Roberts Of Wilsden in y<^ County of Middlesex^ Bar* who died Feby 25^^ 1718. He had issue by Susanna his wife three sons and two daughters viz : Catherine, Henry, Harry, Susanna and Henry of which y^ first and the last only surviv'd ; the rest are with him in the same vault. As also M^^ Eleanor Roberts his Sister who died Feb! 1^^ 1719. " Come ye beloved of my Father inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the Foundation of the World." S^ Mat. c. 25, v. 34. In the same vault is also interr'd the body of M^s Susanna Roberts, late wife of the above Henry Roberts Esq^. Obiit the IV^ of Feby 1730. Mb. 44. Arms : Argent, three pheons sable, on a chief of the second a greyhound courant of the first, Roberts ; impaling, argent, on a mound vert a bull gules. Crest : A greyhound sejant argent. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 215 In Memory of Edward Solly Esq^' ; of London, a descendant of the Solly's formerly of Pedding and the Moat in this Parish, who died 30*^ March 1792 aged 63 years. Also Samuel Solly Esq^" of London, his brother who died 5*^ of Jany 1807, aged 79 years. And of Sarah Solly wife of Samuel Solly, who died 14th of November 1805, Aged 59 years. In memory of Thomas Coleman, of Goss Hall in this Parish, where he resided during the last thirty-eight years of his life. He died February 23^, 1856, aged 67 years. NORTH WALL OP CHANCEL. In memory of William Brett, Esq^^,* Cap* of the Hoyal Navy, Late of Guilton in this Parish, who died Jany y^ 19 1769, Aged 51. Frances his Wife (who erected this monument) died Jany 11, 1773, aged 39. W. F. Brett their son died March y^ 17 1779, Aged 13. Frances their daughter died July 14 1778, aged 23. * He was brother of Sir Percy (or Percival) Brett, Knt., M.P. for Queensborough 28th Geo. 11. and 1st & 7th Geo. III. 216 A CORNER OP KENT. Above the inscription are the arms of Brett: Argent, a lion rampant gules, an orle of cross-crosslets fitchee of the 2nd ; impaling, argent, on a cheyron gules between three lion's jambs sable as many crescents or, for Harvey. Sacred to the Memory of John Godfrey Esq^, of Brooke House in this Parish, Magistrate and Deputy Lieutenant of the County of Kent, who died January 26*^ 1861, aged 71. His truest memorial is in the hearts of his Family, his friends, and the people of this parish. *' The path of the just is as the shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect day." Prov. iv. 18. Also to Augusta Frances Elizabeth, eldest and beloved daughter of the above, who died May 15^^, 1861, aged 36. " Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." Matt. v. 8. Arms : Azure, a chevron or between three pelican's heads, erased. Crest : A demi-man naked, holding in his right hand a cross-crosslet. Motto : '' Corde Eixam/' THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 217 Sacred to the Memory of Arthuk William Godfrey, second sod of John and Augusta Isabella Godfrey, of Brooke House in this Parish. Born at S* Hillier's Jersey, Jany W\ 1829 ; Entered 2^ Batt. Kifle Brigade as 2^^ Lieut. Dec'^ 30th, 1845, from H.M. College, Sandhurst j Served in Nova Scotia and Lower Canada, and as Lieut. 1^* Batt. in the Kaffir War, 1852-53, for which he obtained the Medal. Served also with distinction in the Crimea, and gained the medal and clasps for Alma, Balaclava, Inkerman. Died on 27^^ of Nov^, 1854, of Cholera, in Camp before Sebastopol. His brother officers in affectionate commemoration, of his worth and gallantry, erected a stone over his grave on Cathcart's Hill. " The righteous hath hope in his death." This monument is erected by those to whom alone his value and endearing qualities were fully known. Same arms as on the last» ON THE FLOOR OF THE CHANCEL. Benjamin Longley, LL.B. Minister of y^® Parish 29 years ; Also Yicar of Eynsford and of Tongue. Died 6tii Feb. 1783, aged 68. Frances Longley, sister of the above, born 31 Oct. 1729 ; died 26th Dec^ 1813. 218 A GORNEH OF KENT. Beneath lies the remaiDS of Joseph Smith, late Curate of this Parish. Died May 22, 1817, aged 32 years. Passing into the MoUand^ or St. Nicholas chancel, the eye is attracted by the fine alabaster effigies of a knight and lady upon an altar-tomb under a canopy against the north wall, on the eastern side of the window. These noble examples of the sculpture of the fifteenth century represent John Septvans, Esquire of the Body to King Henry VI., and founder of a chantry here, who died A.D. 1458, and his wife, Katherine, who died in 1498. This John Septvans was the son of John Septvans, of St. Lawrence and Constance St. Nicholas, and nephew of Joan Septvans, wife of Sir John Leverick, of Ash, whose effigy imme- diately facing we have recently described. " Kateryn Martin, of the town of Feversham, widow," by her will dated 14 April, 1495, and proved 19 January, 1498, desires to be buried ''in the parish church of Ash, in the same tomb where the body of John Septvans, her husband, resteth." She bequeaths to the chantry of the Upper Hall, founded by her husband, for ever, 20 shillings annually of '' the land which lyeth, or beith next to the said chantry," upon this condition, that there be kept annually in the parish church of Ash an obit for the souls of her relations and friends. That after the decease of her Platl 10 Sinitb del "t hlk Effigies of Jolm. Septvaiis EscF® &- liis Wile ^ \no ^ -L ^^''" " ^-'■-. I" Batten (Jaiden. p. Clio. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 219 daughter, Edythe Wygmere (Wigmore), the manor of Short (Shoart) be divided among the daughters of her son, John Wygmere, viz., Margaret, Elizabeth, Anne, and Beatrix ; each of them to have portion alike, and to be each other's heirs ; and, if all decease unmarried, then the same to be distributed towards maiden's marriages, highways, and other charitable deeds.* To return to our effigies. The male figure is in the full military costume of the middle of the fifteenth century, consisting of a complete suit of plate armour, with elegantly designed knee and elbow pieces; the thighs protected by what were termed tuilles, fastened by straps and buckles to the taces or tassets ; horizontal bands of steel forming a sort of skirt to the breast-plate, over which, at this period, was worn a tabard of arms, with sleeves nearly to the elbow, and open at the side from the hips.t Eound his neck is a collar of SS., denoting his rank of Esquire of the Body to the sovereign. The hair is cut close above the ears, a fashion intro- * Prerog. Office, Canterbury. In Sittingbourne Church was for- merly "On a fayre Alabaster Tomb" this : — "Pray for y^ soul of John Sepuans, Esq'", of y^ Isle of Thanett, sonne of John Sepuans, of this Parish, Esq'^, and for the soule of Katharine his wife, w^^ Jo^ dyed ye 28 Decemb'*, 1458."— (Harleian MS., No. 3917.) t The drawing of this effigy in the Additional MS., so often quoted,, shows the three fans on the tabard. The monument is described as *' a very large tomb in the north chancel in the wall, of a second brother of the Sepvans, who lies in his coat of arms with a collar of SS about his neck. He dwelt in the Isle of Thanet." 220 A CORNER or KENT. duced at the beginning of the fifteenth century; and the head, represented partially bald, reposes on a tilting helmet supported by angels, and surmounted by the torse, or wreath, out of which issues the crest of this branch of the family, the head of a fish erect, or hawiant, as it is termed in heraldry ; those of the Harfleet line bearing an entire fish — " a bream in its proper colours" (Yinct. 145, Coll. Arms), in a hori- zontal position, or naiant, i.e., swimming.* The feet of the effigy, in pointed sollerets, rest upon a couchant lion. The cuffs of the gauntlets, and the edges of the jambs, or leg-pieces, have a richly ornamented border. The openings between the jambs and the sollerets are protected by gussets of chain ; and a thick gorget of chain protects the neck. The sword, somewhat mutilated, is on the left of the figure ; and the dagger, the hilt of which is gone, as well as the belt by which it was suspended, lies on the right. The lady is represented in the dress of a noble widow, '' barbed above the chin," with an ample veil, and wearing a kirtle with tight sleeves buttoned at the wrist, over which is a very full-skirted surcoat, reaching in graceful folds to the feet, and itself surmounted by a mantle of state, with cords and tassets dependent. At her feet are the remains of a small headless animal — probably a dog. The lady's head reposes on two square cushions, tasselled at the corners, the * By another authority it is called " a chevin," i.e., a chub, and we incline to think that this is its most correct designation, for reasons we shall adduce in our 5th chapter. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 221 upper one placed diamond fashion, and supported by angels. On each side of the recess in which the tomb stands are places formerly occupied by shields of arms. The tomb itself, of dark grey marble, is simply ornamented with quatrefoils. Here, again, we have to deplore tlie loss of the armorial bearings, which, in this case, prevents our perfectly clearing up one of the mysteries both genealogical and architectural of this interesting memoriaL In the first place, these effigies are declared not to belong to the altar-tomb on which they now are placed ; and that the tomb itself, as well as the effigies, have been removed from some other part of the church* — the now demolished chapel or aisle on the south side of it, as supposed by some who have taken an interest in the subject ; and in the second place, there is much confusion and misunderstanding respecting the lady presumed to be represented by the female effigy. Had all the shields of arms been fortunately pre- served, they must have thrown some light on both these questions. One, however, and a most important one, was existing in 1760, when it was drawn by Mr. Bryan Eaussett. It was the small one in the point of the arch above the monument, and displayed * It is worth noting that the tomb which formerly existed in Sittingbourne Church, and on which was an inscription respecting this very John Septvans and Katharine his wife, was of " fayre alabaster," as are their effigies here. Is it possible that the effigies were removed previous to 1613 from Sittingbourne to this church, and placed on the tomb of Purbeck marble in or under which the bodies were actually deposited ? ^22 A COHNER OE KENT. Septvans impaling a fess between three fleurs-de-lys in chief, and three fishes naiant in. base, giyen by Philipot as the arms of Kirton. If the effigies did not originally repose under the canopy which now overhangs them, either on the tomb at present there, or on a similar one, the armorial bearings within the recess and above it would, in all reasonable probability, have proclaimed them intruders. On the contrary, if rightfully entitled to rest there, the family of the lady (there can be no doubt about her husband) might have been satisfactorily ascertained. At present we can only draw our conclusions from the solitary shield just mentioned, the vague wording of the will we have just quoted, and some Church Notes by Philipot in the Harleian Collection, British Museum, No. 3917, from which we gather that she was by birth a Kirton ; that after the death of John Septvans, Esq., December 28, 1458, she married a gentleman named Wigmore, by whom she had a son, John, who died October 23, 1492, leaving by his wife Edith three daughters, who, with their mother, were all living in 1495 ; and that after the decease of Katha- rine's second husband, Wigmore, she married thirdly .... Martin, of Eeversham, dead in 1495, in the April of which year she made her will as his widow, and desired to be buried with her husband, John Septvans, at Ash. The evidence in support of this view will be found more fully detailed in our fifth chapter by those who are inclined to pursue the subject ; but we by no means consider it conclusive. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 223 The effigy of the lady on this tomb is, as we have remarked, hsLrhed above the chin, a distinction limited at the time of the decease of Katharine Martyn to ladies not lower in rank than the wishes of barons, by the funeral ordinances of Margaret Tudor, mother of King Henry VII. That sumptuary laws were con- tinually evaded we admit ; but the sculptor's object would be, of course, to indicate correctly the rank of the person commemorated, and neither as the wife of Septvans, Wigmore, or Martyn, could Katharine Kirton have been entitled to such a distinction. We have just pointed out to the reader the strict attention paid to this apparently trivial point in the brass of the daughter of Sir John Oldcastle. Two questions therefore suggest themselves : (1) Is the effigy that of Katharine ? (2) Are the arms those of Kirton ? She might be buried according to her directions, in her husband's tomb ; but it does not follow that she was his only wife. He might have had a previous one of higher rank ; and the fact of Katharine having survived him forty years, is strongly indicative of his having been considerably her senior, and therefore likely to have been a widower at the time of their marriage. As yet we have failed to discover a family of Kirton, bearing the arms attributed to them. Philipot, in his Church Notes (Harleian MS. 3917), describing the tomb at Sitting- bourne, says doubtfully : " her arms ... Kirton ?," and speaks of ''4 escocheons, 3 gon, and y^ fourth, the which is y^ armes of Valoynesy further research may 224 A CORNER OP KENT. yet decide this question. I will only add, respecting the original position of these effigies, that John Brooke, of whom we shall presently have to speak, desires in his will in 1582 to be buried in St. Nicholas' chancel, '' under the north window, hy Sepham^s tomb, close by the wall. Now, if Sepham be, as it is considered, one of the many corruptions of the name of Septvans, the position of Brooke's gravestone proves that the tomb, at any rate, was not far from that spot in 1582 ; but, as if purposely to complicate matters, there was a knightly Kentish family of the name of Sepham, whose arms were semee of cross-crosslets, three roses, and who matched with the Cobhams and other families of distinction in this county ; and it is not, of course, impossible, that a Sepham may have been buried at Ash in the fourteenth or fifteenth century. The cruel despoliation the recess and canopy have under- gone in the abstraction of the shields of arms, which could have enlightened us, cannot be sufficiently deplored or reprobated. On the floor of this chancel at the back of the Goshall monument, is a large slab with brasses in tolerable preservation, commemorating Christopher Septvans, alias Harfleet, of Molland, Esquire, and his wife, the daughter of Thomas Hendley, in some documents called Margaret, and in others Maria and Mercy. The brass fillet on which was the description of the persons represented has been partially destroyed. It reads at present as follows : — '*Hic jacent corpora LATL HaRFLET DE CHEKERINB\R0CHTAPE ASHARMIGERiqyiKATVS FVirPIE S'^CHAEUSA" Do:]567 SCOB^T p z^i sraawaDHQ ^ajt xMo !s ^jl$i AtaIo^^ xiaj v^xvawKt:) 'i^ia^iWHV j^ivhtaj 3cr ysMonvir) tiD :^ -». ^arfle'te' tip' mofanb w "^Iff) 'H.nmap'n nm natugt fuit ;rj>° &te' !3fuYi.T j^ <^ ^ ^ # .^5^i' ^S'^ b *tMi ^^ ^^ *^^ £^IK. OT \^ ^ f^-cgpQt iiHvy ^iq tiajr^r ;nq® ;^ ofc^i jgrni^y?^- /i^-r ;in; ^;bu janti u^giiuJB wbu® ^1 J^iQU^l^. ij .2P CD cn . lO THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 225 Christopher! Septvans alias Harflete de MoUand in Ash, Armigeri qui natus fuit xx° die Julii .... Hendley de Offam Amig^ri quse nata fuit xxix Septembris 1530 et obiit xxvii die Maii, 1602." We have, therefore, neither the date of Christopher's death, nor the Christian name of his wife preserved to us ; but con- sidering the vrholesale spoliation in other instances, we cannot be too grateful for what remains in the present. Christopher Harfleet, we know from other sources, died in 1575. His widow, who had been previously the wife of Edmond Eowler, of Islington, Esq.,* survived him, therefore, twenty-seven years. In one of the windows at Holland, over the arms, may clearly be deciphered '' Ma — rcie filia T. Hend . . . le armigeri" (^vide page 119) ; while in another it appears like '^ Mar — r^^." In the Burial E^egister, under the date of May 27, 1602 (the very day of her death according to the monumental in- scription), the entry is ''Mercie Harflete Widdow;" and as her son Walter had a daughter named Mercy, and we do not find the name of Margaret given to any of her children, we think we may lean to the side of Mercy without any detriment to justice. t * By whom she had three sons and one daughter, viz., Sir Thomas Fowler, Kt., of Walmestone, John, and Edmond, who died without issue, and Alicia, the wife of Edmund Oxenden, of Winghara, Esq. — (MSS. Coll. Arms; Philipot, 26-27 ; Vincent, 119 ; and J. P., Q^.) t In her will (Prerog. Office, Canterbury) the name is written Mary in the first folio, and Marcy in the following on-e ; and a marginal Q 226 A CORNER OF KENT. The figures of Christopher and his wife are engraved with much feeling and spirit. He is in armour, but bare-headed and looking towards the lady. His beard is peaked, a ruff close round the neck surmounts the gorget. The breastplate has the projecting ter- mination characteristic of that period, in which it took the shape of what was called '' the peasecod bellied doublet " of the civilian. The pauldrons (i. e, shoulder-plates) are very large ; and long tassets, rounded at the bottom, are suspended from the breastplate and strapped over the trunk-hose; leg- pieces and round-toed sollerets complete the defence of the person. The pommel of the hilt of the dagger which, according to the fashion of that day, is worn horizontally at the back, is just visible on the right, and a long sword with a bow guard hangs straight beside him on the left, the point resting on the ground. In his right hand, raised to his breast, he holds a small prayer-book. The lady wears that peculiar cap which is popularly called " Mary Queen of Scots," a large ruff, and cover- ing for the neck called a partlet, a peaked stomacher, an ample gown with turnover collar, open in front, and displaying a richly embroidered petticoat. Over the head of each figure is a shield of arms. The one on the right displaying three winnowing screens or fans, the later coat of Septvans; and that note is made in the book (No. 59, folio 69) to that effect. From this document, dated 14th of May, 44th Queen Elizabeth (1602), we learn that these fine brasses were executed by her own order. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 227 on the left the same impaling Hendley of Otham, quartering Argent, a saltier raguly between four torteaux, on a chief azure a hind couchant, or : Hendley of Coseburne (?). Between the figures, in a square, is a large shield of quarterings of the Harfleet family, corresponding with that formerly in the church window, with helmet, crest (the fish nalant), and mantlings. Below the figures are the following lines : — " Quid genus humanu sine Ohristo pulvis et umbra Limus, fax, fumus, debita massa neci Quid genus humanu in Christo, divina propago Christi solius morte redempta Deo. Ergo nosce Deum, Christum cole, sperne caduca. Sterna vita morte fruere pia." Below these lines again there are two cavities in the stone where small oblong brasses have been fastened, most probably engraved with figures of their children. Close beside Christopher and Mercy Harfleet lie the bodies of Walter their son, and his wife Jane Challoner. The brasses are in perfect preservation, representing Walter and his wife with their respective shields of arms, and, in miniature, their three sons Thomas, Walter, and John ; and their three daughters, Jane, Mercy, and Joan. The inscription, which is complete, reads as follows : '' Hie jacet corpus Walteri Septvans alias Harflete de Cheker in Parochia de Ash Armigeri qui natus fuit die Set' Michaelis A.D. 1567 & obiit 4" die Junii 1642, & Q 2 228 A CORNER OE KENT. Jana uxor ejus filia Johannis Challoner de Pulham Armigeri quae nata fuit 23^ Julii 1576 & obiit 4° die Decembris 1626." Walter is represented in the civil dress of a gentleman of the reign of Charles I. He wears long hair and peaked beard, a short-waisted doublet with tabs, full breeches, stockings, and shoes with large shoe-strings, a very deep rehato or fall- ing collar, and a long full cloak over his shoulders. In his right hand he holds a small prayer-book. His wife is represented with a large veil over her cap or coif; a full gown, with short, loose sleeves; a boddice, with tabs, encircled with a girdle tied in a precise bow, and a large falling collar. She holds a small prayer-book in her right hand, and a kerchief in her left. Over the head of the male figure is a shield, with the three fans and a mullet for difiPerence. Over that of the female, the same impaling three mascles and a chief — the arms of Challoner. Between them, in a circle, is a shield of quarterings of the Harfieet family, as in the adjacent brass, with helmet, crest, and mantlings. Beneath the figures are the following lines : — " Nominis egregium decus et solidata propago. Nunc ciuis (amplexus conjugis ossa) jacet Quam bene disposuit commissa charismata servns Si fas sit dicas, utilis ille fuit Impiger et prudens vitee documenta reliquit Et moriente omnes hinc dedicere mori." On the south wall, at the east end, over the effigy of Sir John Leverick, is a mural m.onument to Sir Plate 12 CD e5 ^ Ph cd -^ -i-i V 1 cd ^ H CU g rvj t — I i THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 229 Thomas Harfleet (the elder brother of Walter) and his second wife, Bennet Berisford. The figures of Sir Thomas and his lady are represented kneeling. He is in armour similar to that of his father, Christoplier, and the lady in the full costume of her period, with Prench hood, ample rufiF, and farthingale. In front of the prie-dieu, between them, is a shield of arms : Harfleet impaling Berisford. Over the head of Sir Thomas are the arms of his father and mother (Septyans impaling Hendley), and oyer those of Lady Harfleet the arms of her parents (Berisford impaling gules six plates, each charged with a fleur-de-lys sable.) (Kniyet?) Between these shields is the following inscription : — Here lyethe y^ bodyes of S^ Thomas Septvans al's Harflete of Molland in this P'ishe Knight who died ye \bla7iJc left for date] and the Ladye Bennet his wife daughter of Michael Berisford of Westerham in y^ county of Kent Esquier which Lady Bennet dyed y^ 2^ daye of July A^ Dni 1612 being of the age of 46 years. On that portion of the base of the monument immediately under the figure of Lady Harfleet, are sculptured seyen female children, all arrayed like the mother, but the four first and the last much smaller than the other two, and carrying skulls in their hands. The two largest are no doubt intended 230 A CORNER OF KENT. to represent her daughters E/Ose and Jane, who married Tripp and Toldervey. The other five, children deceased in her lifetime — viz., an infant buried March 12, 1585— Elizabeth, baptized April 25, 1598, and buried Sept. 27, 1599 — and Katharine, Susan, and Hose, who all three died in one month, August, 1593. The corresponding side is blank, but may originally have contained the figures of the sons, Michael and Christopher.* In a line with this, at the west end of the south wall, is the often mentioned. Toldervey monument. Chris- topher Toldervey and his wife Jane (daughter of Thos. Harfleet and the Lady Bennet just spoken of) are similarly represented kneeling, one on each side of a prie-dieu: the husband in the civil costume of a gentleman of the commencement of the seventeenth century, wearing doublet, full breeches, cloak, and ruff. The wife in Erench hood, gown, mantle, and ruff. Beneath them this inscription : — Here lye the the body of Christopher Toldervey of Chartham Sonne & heire of Christopli^' Toldery late of London Esq'" deceased ; he had to wife Jane daiight^' to Sir Thomas Harefleete K* with whom not longer livinge hee depi'ted this life y"- 25*^ of April 1618. in y^ 32^^ year of his age in acknowledgement of whose kind love as well y^ said Jane his wife as Kichard Camden Gent, his kiasman have caused this remembrance of him to be here erected. * Mr. Bryan Faussett, in 1760, says, " The marble under the man on which I imagine were the figures of the sons, is lost." THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 231 Above the monument is a shield of arms, with helmet and crest, displaying the armorial bearings of Toldervey : Azure, a fess or in chief, two cross- crosslets fitchee of the second. Crest : A dexter hand proper grasping a sea-shell, sable ; and above the prie-cUeu, between the figures, the same impaling Septvans. On the floor of this chancel, to the north of the Harfleet brasses, are several memorials of the Peke family, some quite illegible. The best preserved are as follows : — ■ Here lieth interred y® Peke of Hills Court Esq*' Edward Peke Esq*" of Who had to wife Kather D*" William Kingsley A Prebend of Canterbur Had issue six sons and Whereof left S^ Edw Damaris & Elizabe OctoVAnnl The terminations of the lines are quite effaced ; but we are able, from what remains, to supply the defi- ciency. The stone is in memory of Thomas Peke, of Hills Court, in Ash, son of Edward Peke, of Sand- wich, who purchased Hills Court from Henry Harfleet the younger (vide page 91). By Katharine, daughter of Dr. William Kingsley, Archdeacon and Prebend of Canterbury, he had six sons, of whom four were Edward (afterwards knighted), Thomas, Charles, and Peter; and four daughters — Damaris (who married Henry Dering of Purington), Susan (wife of Dr. 232 A COENEH OF KENT. Aucher), Elizabeth, and . He died October 8, 1677, aged 74.* Above the inscription are the arms of Peke : Three talbots, impaling a cross engrailed for Kingsley. At the head of this stone is another, partly illegible, to the memory of Susanna, a sister, we presume, of the Thomas just mentioned : — Here lyeth buried the body of Susanna Peke daughter of Edward Peke Esq^' who dyed the . . . day of October in yeare of her Ao Dmi 16... t Over the inscription are the arms of Peke, as above, quartering a chevron between three crescents (Norton of Peversham ?). Eastward of these is a stone to the memory of Elizabeth, wife of Sir Edward, the eldest son of the Thomas Peke above mentioned : — Here lyes interr'd the body of the virtuous Dame Elizabeth Peke relict of Sir Edward Peke K* & daughter of S'" George Wentworth K* brother to the most Illustrious Thomas late Earl of Strafford she departed this life the 29^^ day of February.^ Over the inscription are incised the arms of Peke, * This date is given by Cozens in his "Tour in Thanet/' p. 114. t "Sasanwah Peke, daughter of Edward Peke, Esq. ; died Oct. 26, 1633, aged 17." — (Cozens' "Tour in Thanet," ut sujora.) % 1691, Cozens' Tour. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 233 impaling a chevron between three leopard's faces : Wentworth. At the foot of this stone is one to her elder son Thomas, on which are the arms of Peke only, with this inscription : — Here lyetli y^ body of Thomas Peke of Hills Court in this Parish Esq^ eldest son to S'^ Edward of y^ same place K* who departed this life y*^ 7*^^ of August 1:701 in ye 29 yeare of his age. He married Elizabeth eldest daughter to M^" Anthony Ball of Bromley in Kent by whome he had six children viz. Thomas Edward, Ann, Elizabeth, Margaret and Sarah. To the north of this stone is the following quaint acrostic over the resting place of John Brooke, of Brooke Street : — J OHN Brooke, of the parishe of Ashe O nly he is now gone H is days are past His corps is layd N ow under this marble stone B rooke Strete he was the honor o-f B ob'd now it is of name nly because he had no sede O r child to have the same. K nowing that all must passe away E ven when God will, none can dellay.* He passed to God in the yere of grace A thousand five hundred fourscore and two it was The sixteenth day of January I tell you for playne The five and twentyeth yere of Elizabeth raigne. * The above ten lines were his own composition, and are contained in his will, proved February 7th, 1582, in which he desires to be 234 A CORNER OF KENT. Above it the arms of Brooke : Party per bend argent and sable two eagles displayed (connter- cbanged). Crest: On a ebapeau an eagle rising. At the foot of this stone is one with the inscription totally effaced ; above it a shield of arms, the bear- ings of which are also completely obliterated; bnt the crest is still clearly visible and displays a dexter arm embowed, the hand grasping a spiked mace or mallet. The arm having been worn perfectly smooth, and not the slightest trace of any details distinguish- able, it is impossible to say whether it was naked, vested, or in armour. The crest of Bathurst, a Kentish family, is a mailed arm embowed, the hand grasping a spiked club, sometimes drawn as a mace ; but the arm is embowed the opposite way to that on this gravestone. The crest of a Hampshire family named Cresswell resembles it in attitude, but the arm is vested in a slashed and puffed sleeve, which we do not think could have been the case in this instance. The only crest appearing to us as precisely corresponding, which we have hitherto met with, was granted by Bobert Cooke, Clarenceux, August 5th, 1590, to Pabian Gimber, of London, gentleman.* No buried in the church, of Ash in St. Nicholas chancel, under the north window, by Sephams tombe, close by the wall, and that a large marble stone be laid over him with the said epitaph therein written verbatim. The will is witnessed by Henry Harflete, gent., and Vincent St. Nicholas. '^ The patent sets forth that he was " The son of William Gimber, of London ; the son of William Gimber, of Tennesford ; the son of William Gimber, of Doddington, in the county of Huntingdon, THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 235 trace of that name, or of any corruption of it, can be found, however, in the registers of this parish ; but persons of that name are still living in Kent, and a Mr. Gimber is now resident in Sandwich. If it be the grave of any member of that family, it is probable the person was buried between the years 1641 and 1653, during which, as we have stated, no entries were made. That this stone should have escaped the notice of all previous investigators, ancient or modern, is very remarkable, as it must originally have formed an important feature on the floor of this chancel. The arms have been very spiritedly and tastefully sculptured, with crest, helmet, and mantlings, speci- ally ordered in the grant to be " Gules doubled {i. e. lined) silver," in the best style of the sevto- teenth century. There being no mention of it in the Church Notes taken in 1613, is, we think, con- clusive as to its *non-existence at that period. The next minute inspection of the church with which we are acquainted, appears to have been that of Mr. Paussett in 1760, and we can only account for his gentleman ;" and having first granted him permission to bear, as his ancestors heretofore have borne, these armes hereafter following, to> wit : The field saWes on a bend silver, three chevrons gules, cotised (cotticed) silver ; he adds, " and for that I find noe creast or cogni- zance to the same armes, as to many ancient armes there is none, I the said Clarencenx,"&c. &c, . . . "On a wreath silver and sable an armed arme in male (mail) proper holding a horseman's weapon called a holy- water sprinkell, gould." . . . . " Unto the said Fabian Gimber, gentleman, and to his posterity, and to the posterity of William Gimber his father." — (Grants, vol. ii. p. 499, Coll. Arms, London.) 236 A CORNER OP KENT. silence respecting it by presuming that, at the moment of his visit, it was concealed by some temporary construction. There were pews in the north-west corner of this chancel, and there may have been some at the east end during the last century. Previous to the noble gift of Mrs. Godfrey in 1819, the girls' school of the Cartwright charity was held in this chancel, and some desk, matting or wooden flooring may have covered this particular spot when Mr. Cozens copied the epitaphs in 1793 ; but it must have been exposed to friction for many years, or it could not have been worn so exceedingly smooth as we now find it. To Mr. Paussett we are indebted for the record of the following inscriptions, which are now no longer legible : — Here lies the body of Mr. Thomas Singleton, late of Molland, in this Parish, descended from the ancient Family of the Singletons, of Broughton Tower, in Lancashire. He was educated in the College of Peter House, in Cambridge, where he took his first degree in Physick, and afterwards married Mary, daughter of Mr. Abraham Dawes, Merchant, of London, who, with one son, John, aged 10 years, survived hioi. He died December 7th, A.D. 1710, in the 48th year of his age. Arms : Two chevrons between three martlets, two in chief and one in base. Singleton, impaling three mullets, Dawes. Here lies interred the body of Mrs. Margaret Masters, the wife of Mr. John Masters, second daughter and co-heiress of William Wilde, Esq., of Goldstone, in this Parish, who departed this life the 18th of April, 1758, in the 58th year of her age. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 237 Mr. Cozens records the following addition: — Mr. John Masters, her husband, of Dorchester, died Feb. 5th, 1761, aged 64 year^^f. NORTH TRANSEPT. Against the west wall is a mural tablet with the following inscription : — Keare this Place Is interred the body of Whittingham Wood 'Ei-c^' The last pretious Branch of The Male line of his Familie who Lived Exemplarily in y^ service of God & of this His Countrie, under y'^ Eminent Teachinge of that Grace* Tit. 2. 11. 12. 13. & havinge Married Elizabeth y^ sole daughter of Thomas S* Nicholas of this parish Esq^' December 25. 1655 Dyed In much sweet Peace July 27 1 656. In the 42'! yeare of his age Psalm 112. 6. Y^ Righteous shall be in Everlasting Remembrance. On the floor is the gravestone inscribed- Dormitorium Whittingham Wood. Arm. July 27. 1656. * Vide page 144, note. 238 A CORNER OF KENT. Against the east wall, in a diamond-sliaped tablet: — Christus mihi vita est. Et in morte lucrum. ViNCENTius S* Nicolas, al's Sennicalas Al's Seniclas, geDerosus obiit certa Spe resurgendi 20 die Augusti, Anno Domini 1589, Circiter setatis Annum 5S. Qui uxorem duxit Mariannam filiam Edwardi Brockhill* armigeri, quam Super stitem cum tribus liberis Yid^ Mercia Filia, Thoma et Timotheo iiliis ex ipsa procre- atis reliquit quibus videntibus Deus sit Propitius Civitatem Euturam Inquirimus. On the floor, accompanied by an escutcheon in brass of the arms of St. Nicholas : Ermine, a chief quarterly or and gules : — A Domino (Samuel) natum petiere parentes Excultum innumeris te dedit ille modis Rursus abis (Sanctus que) locis coelestibus ardes Ac velut Astra tuo lucidus orbe micas Vere igitur (Nicolas) coelis agis ipse triumpbos Victor et hsec laudis nos monumenta damns. Thy parents asked a sonn God gaue them thee Soe well adorned w*^ hopeful parts that wee Did much admire thy guifts and sobb at this Soe rich a Jewell lost so soone wee miss. But sure thou wast to bright for us belowe Which glisterest now above the starry rowe Thy selfe hast gain'd by death (though we have lost) Heavens richest tryumphs w*^ the glorious host Thy righteous soule in joyes doth rest above Under the stone thy corps on it may love. * She was the widow of Thomas Harfleet, of Holland, who died 1559. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 239 Around the stone is : — Samuel, the son of Thomas St. Nicholas, by Eliza his Wife, born at Ohatshara Bushes, by Ely, the 18th of August, 1614. Hasted to Heaven or his mornfuU by Sandwich, in Kent of October, 1624, and is here buried. ^'I know that my redeemer liveth." A square brass has been taken away from the lower part of this stone. Beside it, round an escutcheon of arms (St. Nicholas quartered with a cross voided, Apulderfield, and im- paling a cross between twelve cross-crosslets fitchee, Brockhill), this imperfect inscription : — YiNCENTi(?) St. Nicholas qui pacem ingressus hie requiescit in cubili suo etatis suss 56 (58?) Memorial of y- just shall be blessed — wicked shall rott. Prov. 10 ver This would appear to be the actual gravestone of Vincent St. Nicholas, second husband of Marian Brockhill, to whom the tablet against the east wall of the transept is dedicated ; and a little to the west of it are two other gravestones with brasses upon them, one of which, within a square border of alabaster, is similarly engraved with St. Nicholas and Apulderfield quarterly, impaling Brockhill as the latter, and the other with a lozenge of alabaster, the same coats quarterly, but impaling one which is all but entirely obliterated, but from earlier inspections would appear to have been the coat of Tilghman.* * Party per fess, sable and argent, a lion rampant regardant, coun- terchanged, crowned, or. The crown alone being now discernible, the charge has been mistaken for a regal personage. 240 A CORNER OF KENT. If SO, it probably indicates the actual resting-place of Thomas, son of the aforesaid Vincent and Marian, buried at Ash October 30th, 1626, and his first wife Dorothea, daughter of William Tilghman, to whom we shall find a mural tablet in the nave. Immediately beyond these to the west again is a very large and much-damaged gravestone, very few words of the inscription on which can now be deciphered. At the head of it, however,'are the arms of St. Nicholas, with a mullet for difference, plainly incised, beneath which may yet be read : — Thomas St Parish Gent .er of John on the 19th in the re of his and some other letters here and there more or less uncertain. The absenco of dates increases the diffi- culty of interpretation ; but Timothy, son of Thomas St. Nicholas, by his second wife, Elizabeth Woodward, and brother of the Samuel lying vvithin a few feet of this spot, was buried here on the 19th May, 1638 ; and there are instances of burial on the day of decease, or it may be Thomas, son of another Thomas and Elizabeth Plumley. The mullet for difference rather inclines us to this belief, as it is the mark of a third son, which, if he were not the eldest of that second family, he must have been, Samuel being born in 1614, and Timothy in 1616. The arms also being simply those of St. Nicholas, without an impalement, would add to our opinion that he died unmarried, which Timothv did not : at any rate, it would appear as if all the descendants of THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 241 this branch of the family who died at Ash were deposited as nearly as possible to one another in this spot. There may be some other memorials of this family still concealed by the flooring of the pews, about to be removed, in this transept. In Peter le Neve's Church Notes we read : '* There are in this church four monuments of the St. Nicholas's, whose wives are here expressed in pale with their hus- bands;" and the first mentioned is ''St. Nicholas and Engham," which we have been unable to discover. SOUTH TRANSEPT. Near unto this monument lyes the Body of EiCHARD Hougham, Gen* Late of Weddington of this Parish and Elizabeth his Wife, who was the daughter of Edward Saunders of Norton nere Sandwich Gen* w^^ said Richard & Elizabeth had Issue 3 Sonnes and on Daughter (viz*) Michael, Edward, Solomon and Ann The aforesaid Michael and Ann are also interred here. This Monument was erected accord- ing to the last will and testament of the aforesaid Ann Hougham De- ceased, who was baptized the 17*^ of January Anno Dmii 1601 and De- parted this natural life the 9*^ of June 16-61. If grace and vertue could have deified Here is interred a maide who nere had dyd Her charity on earth, that put her love On Heaven fitt only for the Saints above Let theise frayle ashes a memento be Her life a pattern and a legacy. R 242 A CORNER OP KENT. Above the inscription are the arms of Hougham, of "Weddington : Argent five chevronels sable, quar- tering Saunders (?) and Brooke, of Brooke Street, Ash. On the floor of this transept, under the boarding of a pew, is another memorial of this Bichard and his family, and of his brother Michael. A brass, on which is engraved — Here lieth buried the bodies of Michael and Eicha.rd Huffam, sonnes of Michael Huffam. Michael died in July, 1594,* & E-ichard died October, 1606. Richard married Elizabeth, daughter to Mr. Edward Sanders, by whom he had three sonnes, Michaell, Edward, and Sollomon, and one Daughter, named Ann, all yet livinge. They were men both of a tall stature and comely persons, besides were well estemed amonge all sortes of people, both for their vertuous lives and also in their younge yeares for there good and thriftie government, not of themselves onlie, but also they were a good stay in this Parish amonge ther neighboures. This stone was laide by the appointment of them w° were exec^ to ther wills, viz., Thomas Paramor, now mayor of Canterby, who married Ann Huffam, their sister, Mr. Series Hawket, and Yalint Austin, their Unckle. Immediately adjoining this brass is another, on which are engraved the figures of a man and woman in the costume of the early part of the 16th century ; the man in a long gown with loose sleeves, similar to those in which merchants or magistrates are re- presented; the woman with the peculiar head-dress rendered familiar to the public by the portraits of Catharine of Arragon, Anna Boleyn, and, indeed. * Buried 12th July, 1596 (Ash Reg.) ; so the date in the brass must be an error. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 243 most of the many wives of Henry VIII. The in- scription beneath being — Pray for the soulys of Wyllm . . . s & Anys his wyf thy dyed the XXIII day of martins in the year of our lord god Mcccccxxv. Are we to conclude that they both died on the same day ? Of the surname the last letter s only is undoubted. They have been read Leus for Lewis ; but we can only give an engraving from a rubbing, and leave our readers to form their own opinions. Annys is one of the most frequent Christian names of females that we find in the Baptismal Regis- ters of Ash. This burial took place thirty-three years before the commencement of the registers, but one of the earliest interments recorded is that of an ''Annys Lewes, July Tth, 1562," not improbably a daughter of the William and Annys aforesaid. There is no mention of this brass in any of the Church Notes of Ash printed or in MS. that we have inspected. On the west wall of this transept is a mural monument — • To the memory of Mrs. Maky Lowman, Daughter of Gregory Butler Gen* of Blackwall in the County of Northumberland Wife of Henry Lowman of Dortnued in Germany Esq^^ She died the 29*^ of September 1737 aged 84.* * From their coffin-plates, recently discovered, we learn that Mrs. Lowman was "Laundress to King William and King George y® 1^*^ & joynt house and Warde Robe Keeper at Kensington, with h^er K 2 244 A CORNER OF KENT. Also of her husband Henry Lowman of Dortnued in Germany Esq'' He died 3^ of February 174|. Aged 93. And also of Christopher Ernest Kien Lieut Colonel of the Horse Guards* He died the 29*^ of October, 1744, aged 61. and Jane his Wife Sole daughter of the above Henry & Maiy Lowman She died Jan^ 17*^ 1762 aged Sl.f Also of Evert George Cousemaker Esq^^ who died April the 6'^ 1763 aged 41 and interred in a Yault near to this place. Arms, in a lozenge : or, on a mount vert a naked man holding a branch in his hand proper, for Kien ; impaling per bend sinister argent and gules a knight armed on horseback, holding a tilting spear erect, the point downwards (Lowman). In this transept there are also two modern white marble mural tablets. The first over the gallery against the south wall, to the memory of Erancis Tomlin, of Goldston, Gentleman (younger son of husband to King William, Queen Anne, and King George y^ P* :" that she died 29*^ of Novemher (buried December 5, — Ash Keg.), and that Henry Lowman, Esq''% " born of a good family at Dortnued, in Westphalia," was " Clerk of the Kitchen and house Keeper and wardrobe Keeper of the Palace of Kensington, in the reynes of King William, Queen Anne, and George y® 1^*^, and his present Majesty, King George y^ 2^^." Also that he died in the 91st year of his age. * " Lieut. -Colonel of Her Britannic Majesty's third troop of Horse Guards." — Coffin-plate. t ''Obiit 12^^ of January, 1762, jetatis 78."— Coffin-plate. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 245 Prancis Tomlin, of Northdown, Thanet, Esquire, and Martha, his wife), who died 27th of July, 1751, aged 56 years ; and of Eichard Motton, of Sandwich, Gentleman, who died 26th of May, 1800, aged 81 years; and of Ann, first wife of the said Prancis Tomlin, and afterwards of the said Hichard Motton, who died 10th of June, 1801, aged 81 years ; and of the following sons of the said Prancis Tomlin and Anna his wife : — Thomas Tomlin, of Twitham Hill, in this parish. Gentleman, who died 4th of September, 1784, aged 33 years ; William Tomlin, of Birchington, Thanet, Gentleman, who died 11th of April, 1789, aged 44 years; and John Tomlin, of The Moat, in this parish, who died 19th of Noyember, 1820, aged 71 years ; and of Mary Tomlin, the wife of the said Thomas Tomlin, who died 26th of August, 1781, aged 30 years ; Susanna Tomlin, wife of the said William Tomlin, who died 9th of April, 1830, aged 82 years ; and Sarah Tomlin, wife of the said John Tomlin, who died 30th of June, 1835, aged 84 years ; and of Edward Tomlin, the son of the said William Tomlin and Susanna his wife, who died 2nd of August, 1800, aged 17 years. The other, oyer the door leading to the belfry, commemorates Thomas Minter Tomlin, of Twitham Hill, Esquire, who died in 1857 ; and the following children by Sarah his wife ; yiz., Sarah Tomlin, 1820 ; Thomas Minter Tomlin, 1815 ; Mary Belsey Tomlin, 1821 ; Thomas Belsey Tomlin, 1828 ; Elizabeth Tomlin, 1837 ; and Jane, wife of T. Collet, 1845 ; also Sarah Georgina Tomlin, 1853, and Sackct 24^6 A CORNEH OE KENT. Arthur Tomlin, grandchildren of Thomas M. Tomlin and Sarah his wife. On the floor under the window in this transept is a dilapidated gravestone, from which the brasses have long disappeared. The outlines of the space they occupied indicate a robed figure ; but whether of a priest, a magistrate, a merchant, or a female, it would be hazardous to assert. THE NAVE. On the south wall a tablet to the memory of Dorothea, first wife of Thomas St. Nicholas, who married secondly Elizabeth Woodward : — Pise cordatse modestse amabilique Foeminse fidelissimse conjiigi dilectissimse que Dorothea]: (filise Gulielmi Tilghman gener : ex Susanna filia Thomse Whetenham Armig.), 27 setatis, annum agenti Tres filios Tbomam Johannam Vincentiu filias duas que Deboram et Dorotlieam chara pignora superstites marito reliquenti 18 die Sep- tembris, An° Dom. 1605 (circiter tres horas post partum Yincentii predicti) suaviter in Christo obdormienti Thomas S* Nicholas moes- tissime viduatus pise memorise gratique animi ergo hoc monumentum statuit. She was buried in the north transept, where her husband was afterwards laid by his express desire. We are inclined to think this tablet is not in its original position. Near this is a tablet to the memory of Lieut. Henry Dawson, B;.N., who died of fever at Bombay, September 15th, 1839, erected by his widow. Another — THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 247 Sacred to the memory of Joseph Westbeech, Esq^", Captain of tbe Hoyal Navy, who died in this parish on the 9th of November, 1811, aged 53 years. Erected by his brother. Also one to John Fuller, late of Holland, in this Parish, Gen*, died the 10*^ of February, 1797, aged 84 years. Elizabeth his wife, daughter of Thomas Boteler, of Eastry, Gen*, died the 20th of June, 1785, aged 77 years. Mary, their daughter, died the 17*^ of October, 1763, aged 20 years. Thomas, their son, died the 28*^ of May, 1742, aged 8 days. Their only surviving daughter Elizabeth, the widow of Thomas Godfrey, late of Brooke Street, in this Parish, Esq'^^, from affection for the best of parents and for an amiable sister, long and sincerely lamented, has consecrated this monument to their memory. Arms : Argent, three bars and a canton gules, for Puller, impaling argent, three escutcheons azure each charged with a covered cup or, for Boteler of Eastry. Crest : A talbot's head argent. On the north wall is a tablet to the memory of Richard Horsman Solly, Esq., of 48, Great Ormond Street, London, eldest son of Samuel Solly, Esq., of the above place, and Sarah his wife. He died March 30th, 1858, and was interred in the Woking Cemetery. At the west end of the nave, on a mural tablet of white marble, in form of a cross, is an inscription to the memory of Charles Kobert Streatfield Nixon, eldest son of Francis E^nssell, Lord Bishop of Tasmania, late perpetual curate of this parish, born August 31st, 1837 ; died September 26tb, 1842. 248 A COENER OF KENT. On the floor of tlie nave are the following : — Here lieth interr d the body of M''^ Mary Bax, Wife of M^^ John Bax, Gen*, who departed this life the 14*^ of June, 1743, aged 58 years. Also the body of the above M^' John Bax, Gen<^, who departed this life July 11*1^, 1759, aged 77 years. Also of Mary Curling, Widow of Tho^ CurliDg, late of Eamsgate, Daughter of the above John and Mary Bax, who departed this life the 5*^ of July, 1769, aged 58 years. Hark from the tombs a doleful sound My ears attend the cry. Ye living men come view the ground Where you must shortly lie. Under this marble lieth interred the body of Mary, Wife of Major Solomon Ferrier, of the Town and Port of Sandwich. She departed this life April 5*^, 1760, aged 41 years. Also Ann Roberts, mother of the above said Mary. She died the 26*^ of April, 1766, aged 77 years. Joseph Westbeach, B.N., died 9 Nov., 1811.* Also Miss Martha Westbeach, eldest daughter of the above, who died 16 September, 1821, aged 21 years. M. Elizabeth Bowe, wife of M^ Benjamin Eowe, of Chequer Farm, in this Parish, who departed this life 23^ of November, 1811, aged 56 years. Benjamin Bowe died 17*^ Dec^', 1820, aged 69 years. Mary Bowe died 19*'' June, 1813, aged 70 years. Sarah Quested died 7*^ Feb>", 1816, aged 5 months. Jane B. Quested died 7^^ March, aged 18 years. Sacred to the memory of Mr. John Bushei>l, of this Parish, who departed this life the 6*^ day of June, 1831, in the 89*^ year of his age. He was born at Minster, in the Isle of Thanet, and many years resident at Batting Court, in the Parish of Nunnington. * The marble tablet on the south wall of nave commemorates the same officer. The flat stone is over the vault. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 249 UNDER THE TOWER. W. B. 1760 A Yaulfc. In tlie clinrchyard were formerly many tombs of the Harfleets and the Aldays;* but they had dis- appeared before the end of the last century. The memorials at present 1^ existing are principally to the families of Ansell, Alexander, Beake, Bushell, Claringbold, Cleveland, Chandler, Chapman, Dane, Eigar, Priend, Eennell, Gibbs, Godfrey, Holtum, Home, Joy, Jull, Kelsey, Kingsford, Laslett, Lad, Neame, Petley, Balph, Solly, Smith, Stothard, Tomlin, West ; and the only remarkable epitaph that of " Bartholomew Joy, of Ware in this parish, who died 4th Dec. 1778, aged 71 years," and is described as '' a good parent, though afflicted, he trusted in God in hope of a more paradiscal situation^ * Jolin Aldaye, of Ashe, in his will dated Oct. 19th, 1485, desires " to be buried in the Churchyard of Ashe, in the tomb where Joane his late wife lies." Kaymond Thomas and John Harflete were also buried there on the north side. {Vide p. 180, note.) In Le Neve's Notes we read : — " There are in the churchyard some of the Aldies buried who did sometime dwell where Sir Thomas Harflete now does, and some of the Gibbs now remaining about Elmstone, not far from this place, whose arms are as underneath — viz., Argent, three battle- axes sable." — (Additional MS. No. 5472.) Sir John Saunders, vicar of Ash, desires " to be buried in the churchyard of Ashe, at the south side of the west door, afore the grave of his mother" (Will in Prerog. Off. Cant. 1509) ; and Ellen Stoughton, widow of Edward Stoughton, late of Ash, to be buried in the churchyard of Ash, between her late husband Lawrance Omer and her children there. (Will proved June 20th, 1575.) 250 A CORNER OF KENT. The following List of Incumbents, though by no means perfect, previous to the 16th century, is the best we have been able to compile from the sources accessible to us : — Alanus Capellanus de Ash,* A° 43rd Edward III 1369 Dom'. Thomas Monketon Capel- lanus,! 4tli Henry Y 1416 John Middleton 1463 John Eussell 1493 John Saunders J 1494—1509 Thomas Bode § 1519 William Berimell|l 1550 William Lynch 1554 Christopher Meming^ 1558 John Stybbinge, '' Minister "**... 1593—1615 * " Cart^ Antique " (Hasted). + Charter of Gilbert de Cheker {alias Septvans). — Philipot, Coll. Arms. { "Sir John Saunders, Yicar of Ashe." (Will dated 14th August, 1509.) § " Syr Thos. Bode, Yicar of Ashe." (Will dated 1st July, 1519.) II "Yicar of Ashe." (So named in the will of Dr. Christopher Nevynson, of Addisham, dated ]\ larch 15th, 1550.) ^ Ash Registers, suh anno. As all that follow. ** He so signs himself in the Register ; but he and all his prede- cessors, whose wills are to be found in the Prerogative Office, Can- terbury, are styled vicars, after which they are described as curates. John Stybbinge was also rector of St. Mary's, Sandwich, and was buried in the chancel of Ash Church, according to his desire expressed in his will, December 30th, 1615. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 251 William Brigham 1626 William Holden 1638 William Lovelace 1643 William Brigham 1655 William Noakes 1659 James Brenchley 1660 John Benchkin 1664—1693 John Shocklidge* 1693—1712 Obadiah Bom-ne 1712—1721 Erancis Conduit 1722—1753 Benjamin Longleyt 1753—1783 John Lawrence 1783, obiit June 9tli Robert Philips 1783—1784 Nehemiah Nesbitt J 1784—1803 Charles Baker § 1803—1810 * Drowned in the Stour. + He was also vicar of Eynsford and of Tongue, co. Kent. Mr. Longley's entries go down to Marcli 5th, 1782, after which in one book there occurs this notice : — " The E,ev. Mr. Lawrence was appointed Curate in the room of Mr. Longley, deceased, but died in about two months, and was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Philips, since removed to Beakesbourne." Mr. Longley died February 6th, 1783, and was buried at Ash. (Vide p. 217.) Mr. Lawrence, who had also been presented by the Lord Chancellor with the rectory of Pambroke St. Gabriel, in the county of Lincoln, died June 9th, 1783, and was buried at St. Margaret's, Canterbury, in the same grave with his father, Dr. Lawrence, physician, who died the day before his son. i From March 29th, 1782, to October 5th, 1783, the entries are chiefly by " Thomas Yerrier Alkin, Minister." ISTesbitt's handwriting begins in October, 1783, but his first actual signature occurs in the Banns Book, under the date of June 6th, 1784. § He seldom officiated, and the Rev. J. Smith was his curate during the whole period of his incumbency. 252 A CORNER OE KENT. Henry Dimock, A.M 1810—1812 '* William Wods worth, incumbent pro tempore "* " Joseph Smith, A.B., was nomi- nated to this cure April 6th " t 1812 Charles James Burton, M.A. % ... 1817—1821 G. R. Gleig, M.A. § 1821—1834 Charles Eorster, M.A. || 1834—1838 Prancis Eussell Mxon, D.D. ^ ... 1838—1842 Edward Penny, M.A. ** 1842—1849 George Eidout, M.A.tt 1849—1857 Henry Smith Mackarness, M.A. ... 1857, present incumbent ; late Pellow of King's College, Cambridge ; rector of St. Mary the Virgin, in E^omney Marsh, 1853 to 1857 ; and chaplain to the 24th company of Kent Volunteer Biiies. Of the chapels of Overland and Fleet (or Pich- borough) appertaining to Ash, and given, with the parish church, to the college of Wingham, by Arch- bishop Peckham, in 1206, there are but few parti- culars to mention. That of Pleet must have existed * Ash Register. t Ibidem. He was afterwards promoted to W^oodnesborough, co. Kent ; died May 22nd, 1817 ; and was buried at Ash. {Vide p. 218.) % Now vicar of Lydd and chancellor of the diocess of Carlisle. § Now Chaplain- General of the Forces, and rector of Ivy Church, Komney Marsh. II Now rector of Stisted, co. Essex. IF Afterwards bishop of Tasmania. ** Now rector of Great Mongeham, co. Kent. ft Now rector of Sandhurst, co. Kent. THE CHURCH AND ITS MONUMENTS. 253 early in the 12tli century, for, in the seventh of John, we find that the presentation to it was in the family of Bolbeek, and that Helewisa de Bolbeck, grand- mother of Constance de Bolbeck, then the wife of Elias de Beauchamp, had previously possessed the advowson. — (Abb. of Pleas.) We have noticed the be- quests to it of Sir John Saunders, vicar of Ash in 1509, at page 58. To the chapel of Overland he bequeathed his '' little portys " (breviary) " of fine parchment, written with hand, p'ce 40s," and also ''40s. to make a window in the east end of the same chapel." In the Valor Ecclesiasticus, temp, Henry YIII., A.D. 1540 — 1545, we find the following entries : — All manner of tythes and other pfytes of the chapell of Overland xx. Por the salary of the iij Prests s'vying the cures of the said Chapels of Ashe Over- land and Bichborough xvij Henry Jones the elder, of Ash, near Sandwich, yeoman, in his will, proved 1588, mentions the chapel and churchyard of Overland, and the green next the churchyard, among other parts of the manor then occupied by him. Vincent St. Nicolas was at that time the owner of the lease of the parsonage of Overland, which he bequeathed to his son Thomas, with all the glebe land and appurtenances belonging to it. (Will proved Sept. 20, 1589.) No remains now exist of either of the chapels. 254 Crest of Septvans and Shield of Arms of St. Nicholas. CHAPTEE Y. NOTES AND QUERIES, GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC. AT the entrance to these premises we feel the necessity of affixing some such notice as is usually to be found at the gates of manufactories or the doors of private edifices or public works in the course of construction, viz., " Nobody admitted except on business ; " but as the reader has already (we hope) paid for admission, he cannot be so unceremoniously excluded. It is only, therefore, for U.S to warn him frankly, that unless he have special business herein, he will find nothing to Plate 13 -p . r J: 1 g. b . ^"f G^ S-irdiL del et hth., Pig.lto 6 rormerlym Asli Ctaircli "Wiudows.-vide p. 189 and postscript GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 255 interest or amuse him. We have raked together a heap of dry archaeological material out of '* the dast of dead ages," presenting to his sight a dreary region, in which he will feel no inclination to wander. To the antiquary, however, it opens a rich field of information as well as inquiry, as our subject has led us most unexpectedly into tracks either utterly neg- lected by previous explorers, or very superficially and imperfectly examined by them. Of the great Anglo-Norman families who from the time of the Conquest to, at least, the close of the 14th century, were most intimately connected with the parish of Ash, little is known beyond their names, and the armorial ensigns either actually borne by, or commonly attributed to them. Al- though the stock from which so many noble houses have sprung— although those ancient coats are still to be seen quartered in so many achievements, and studding the roof of Canterbury cathedral — the pedigrees of the most important which are presented to us in the various published Baronages and Peerages, or existing in MS. collections, are so imperfect, unconnected, and contradictory, that while they cannot be relied upon, even as regards the direct male line, they afford us little or no information of the collateral branches, and but rarely enlighten us on the very important question of matrimonial alliances. Of some there are actually no pedigrees, either in print or in MSS. In illustration of our second chapter, '' The Descent 256 A CORNER OF KENT. of the Manors," we have drawn up the following genealogical notices, and propose to examine the evidence on which they are founded in chronolo- gical order. We will therefore commence with the family of D'arqtjes, latinized De Arcis, and in English, Arches, Avhich is the earliest one we find holding land in this parish. "William de Arcis, as we have stated in our second chapter (p. 39), is recorded in Domesday as holding one suling of land in Pleet. This William de Arcis is supposed to he the same personage as William, the son of Godfrey, who in the same valuable record is stated to hold Folkestone and various other property in Kent, and specially three houses in Dover, one of which was the Gihalla or Gishalla of the burgesses. All that is known of him with any certainty is, first, that in the lifetime of the Conqueror he claimed certain lands which had belonged to Gozelin, Yicomte d'Arques (a bourg and vicomte of the Pays de Caux, in Normandy), of whom he assumed to be the grandson. The late Mr. Stapleton on this remarks, that '' Gozelin was his grandfather by his mother's side ; for Osborne de Bolbec .... is reported to have been his paternal grandfather." We presume the report alluded to is that of Guil- laume de Jumiege, who states as much in his 8th book, cap. 37. The learned authors of '' Eecherches sur le Domesday " differ from Mr. Stapleton and his apparent authority. They assert that he was the GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 257 son of an Osborne de Arcis, m4io was the son of William, the son of Gozelin, Viscomte d'Arques, tlms making our William the ^r^^^f- grandson of Gozelin, and rejecting his descent from Bolbec. But, if their story be true, he could not be the Lord of Folkestone we find in Domesday, because he is therein distinctly described as '* Willielmus filius Goidfride,^^ and not of Osborne, as they make him. Here we find ourselves between Scylla and Charybdis at starting, with only one fact to depend upon, — that he was the grandson, by his own account, of Gozelin the Viscomte. The second fact concerning him is, that he had a wife named Beatrix, who survived him, and had in dower the manors of Newington near Hythe, and Eedingfiekl.^' Of her parentage we at present know nothing ; but the mother of William de Arcis, who is said to have been a daughter of Gozelin the Viscomte, is also called Beatrix ; and until clearer evidence is discovered, we are inclined to believe in a theory Mdiich would reconcile the above contradictions. We believe William de Arcis to be the son of a Godfrey or Geoffrey Mtz Gozelin or Joceline, an elder son of Gozelin, Viscomte d'Arques, in that case his paternal grandfather ; and we think it highly probable that Beatrix, the daughter of Gozelin, married, as it is stated, Geoffrey de Bolbec, by whom she had a * She gave to the cliurch of LoDlay a moiety of tlthes^of Ne wing- ton, CO. Kent. S 258 A COENEE OF KENT. daughter, named after herself Beatrice, wlio became the wife of her first cousin William de Arcis. We are sustained in this view of the case by the fact that there were other male members of the family of De Arcis existing at this period, A William and a Hugh de Arcis, said by the authors of the '' Eecherches " to have been brothers of Beatrix d'Arques, the wife of Geoffrey de Bolbec, from the eldest of whom they consequently derive the Lord of Eolkestone, as we have already men- tioned.* But though we consider them to be mistaken on the latter point, there is evidence of the existence of an Osbert and his son a William de Arcis, the latter of whom had a daughter and heiress named Ivetta, who married Adam Bruce, of Skelton, and after his death in 1180 became the wife of Bichard de Mamville.t That they were the son and grandson of another William de Arcis, brother of Beatrix, we will not dispute : all we contend for is, that they had an elder brother, Geoffrey Eitz Jocelin, who was the father of our William PitzGeofFrey, Lord of Folke- stone, or othervase they must have carried off the representation. Another line of this family seems to have terminated in the person of Jana, the *' There was a Hugo, son of William, holdiDg a large portion of tlie land in tins manor, and wlio is first mentioned after William de Arcis. This Hugo must surely have been his son, and if by Beatrice de Bolbec, must have died without issue in his father's lifetime, as his sisters were undoubtedly co-heirs of William. t Vincent in B. 2, Coll. Arms, makes Flamville her first husband — at all events, she survived hoth.-^-Vide Mon. Ang. vol. ii. p. 43. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 259 daugliter and heiress of a Eichard de Arclies, and the wife of Sir John Dinham, by whom she had a daughter Isabella, who married, first, Pulke Pitz- warin ; and secondly. Sir John Sapcote."* The coat attributed to the family of Arches, and which must have been invented for them in the 12th or 13tli century, is gules, three arches argent, which is brought in by Dinham, and sometimes seen quar- terly with it in the achievements of several of our nobility and gentry.! William de Arcis is supposed by our English genealogists to have died about the latter end of the reign of Eufus ; but the authors of the ^^Recherches" assert that he took the habit of a monk in 1088, and died, circa 1090, Abbot of St. Severs at llouen. Be this as it may, it is certain that he left by his Vvddow Eeatrice two daughters : Matilda, who married William the Chamberlain de Tancarville, who inherited the Norman possessions of her father ; * Amongst other members of tbis family may be mentioned Radulpli and Robert de Arcbes. — (Mon. Ang. voL i. pp. 330 — 773.) Herbert de Arcbes and 'William, " fil. suus," witnesses to a charter of Julianna, daughter of Alexander de Alreton, and wife of Richard, son of Hugo, to Kirkdale Abbey. — (Whitaker's History of Leeds, vol. i. p. 126.) Also Peter de Arches, who held half a knight's fee in Potter JSTewton, co.York, of the Earl of Lincolu. — (Ibid. vol. ii. p. 120.) An Agnes de Archis was wife of Herbert de St. Quintin, and founded the nunnery of Chillinge or Nun-Kelling, co. York, in 1152. — Mon. Ang. vol. i. t As that of Richard de Arches, it is given in a Roll of Arms, of the time of Edward I. or IT., a copy of v/hich is in Vincent, 16-5, p. 63, Coll. Arms. s 2 260 A CORNER OF KENT. and Emma, the heiress of Eolkestone, ^Yho married, first, Nigel de Muneville, or Monyille, and secondly, Manasses, soDietimes called Eobert, Count de Guisnes, to the latter of whom she ultimately brought the lands which had been settled on her mother in dower at Newington and Redingfield. In conjunction with her first husband Nigel she founded the Priory of Polkestone in 1095. By him she had a daughter named Matilda, who carried the lordship of Polkestone and the land atEleet into the great family of Avranches. By her second husband she had also an only child, named Bosa or Sybilla, of whom we shall say more under the head of De Yere. We must preyiously, however, follow the issue of the elder daughter and eo-heiress Matilda to the termination of the direct male line of AVRANCHES. Contemporary with the Conqueror we find a Wil- liam d' Avranches who was, according to Ordericus Vitalis, the son of Guitmond, Witmund, or Wymond, and cousin {i. e. blood relation) to Bichard, surnamed Goz, father of Hugh d'Avranches, the famous Earl of Chester. The exact degree of relationship has yet to be proved ; but it is no part of our present inquiry, and we shall not, therefore, encumber ourselves and our readers with more questions than are absolutely necessary. William d'Avranches is not named in Domesday, but he ajopears to have been one of eight knights intrusted by John de Eiennes with the wardship of Dover Castle. There is some GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES, 261 reason to believe that his wife was Emma,^ a daughter of Baldwin de Brionnej Viscomte or Sheriff of Devonshire ; but whoever might be his wife, by her he had a son, named Rualo or E/uallon,t to whom Henry I. gave in marriage Matilda, the only child of Nigel de Muneville by his wife Emma d'Arqnes, and heiress of Folkestone.! Eualo was Sheriff of Kent in 1131, and died be- fore 1147, leaving by Matilda a son named William, and a daughter, a nun at Elstow.§ Not even the Christian name of the wife of the second William d' Avranches has yet been discovered ; but it is clear that he had issue at least three sons : Simon, Eualo, and Geoffrey. William died in or before 1190, and was succeeded by Simon, who confirmed to the monks of St. Andrew of Northampton the grants of Wil« liam his father and Matilda his grandmother. This clearly proves that he was the son, and not * According to others, Alicia. She was the widow of William. Avenelj by whom she had Ralph Avenel, Baron of Okehampton, who married Matilda, daughter of Baldwin de Bedvers, Earl of Devon. + And another, supposed to be the elder, named Bobert, the adopted heir of his uncle, Bichard de Brionne, and who recovered from his half-brother Balph Avenel the barony of Okehampton. X She survived her husband, and gave to the church of St. Andrew, Northampton^ for the good of lier soul, the souls of her father, her husband, and her sons, the manor of Sywell, in the county of North- ampton. This gift was confirmed by her son William in 1147. — Mon. Aug. vol. i. p. 680. § With whom she gave to the priory there i\ virgates of land in Sywell. — Mon. Ang. ut sujyra. 262 A CORNER OF KENT. hrotlier, and lieir of William, as set down in some pedigrees. In 1190 (2nd Kicliard I.) he was in account with the Exchequer touching certain ships going to the Holy Land; and in 1194 (6th Richard I.) paid £4. 15s. towards the king's ransom.* In 1197 (8th Eichard I.) we find his brother Eualo (or Euellinus as he is called in the record) party to the final concord with Elias de Beauchamp which afforded us so much information respecting Eichborough in the 12th cen- tury ; and in 1209, as we have already stated (page 42, note), Simon had a dispute with Baldwin, Count de Gruisnes, respecting some lands in Newington, near Hythe, which we have seen formed part of the dower of Beatrice d' Arques. Simon d'Avranches married a lady named Cecilia, said by Segar (MS. Baronagium, Coll. Arms) to have been one of the family of Criol, or Keriel, another of those great Kentish houses of which we hear so much and know so little. The date of his death is uncertain, but it occurred in or before the 16th of John, 1214, when his son and heir William had a charter for a fair at Folkestone. Besides William (third of that name), who succeeded him, he had issue by the same wife three other sons : Geoffrey, Simon, and Boger. Cecilia survived her husband, and in 1215 sold her manor of Sutton, in Sussex, to the monks of Bobertsbridge, to raise money to ransom her son William, who had been taken prisoner by the king's forces. * Eot. Pip. sub ann. GENEALOaiCAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 263 William confirmed the grants of lands in I^^ortlieye which his mother Cecilia, then living, had made to Edmund, son of "William Goding.^ He claimed the manor of Avranches against Hugh Bigot, Earl of Norfolk, ninth of Henry III. (1224), \Yas constable of Dover Castle tenth of Henry III. (1225), and deceased before the fifteenth of Henry III. (1230). He married Maud, daughter and co-heir of William de Bocland, by Maud, daughter and co-heir of Wil- liam de Say. She was also sister and heir of Hawisia de Bocland, wife of John de Bovil, and succeeded to her lands in 1226. Looking at this descent, there can be little doubt that the possessions of the family of Avranches must have been largely increased by this marriage, the issue of which was a son and daughter. The son, William, was a minor in. 1230, when Hubert de Burgh paid 50 marks for his custody and marriage, and still under age in 1233, when the Bishop of Exeter paid 2,000 marks to have his custody, intending to marry him to a daughter of Bichard de Chilham and Boesia de Dover. Eventually, however, he is said to have married Mabel, daughter of Nicholas de Sandwich,t but deceased without issue before 1236, when his * MS. Coll. Arm. Yincent, 88, p. 72. Geoffrey and Simon witnessed this grant of their brother "^Villiam. Sir E,oger, the fourth sod, is said to have been the progenitor of the family of Everinge, co. Kent. The drawing of the seal of William in the above MS., repre- sents him on horseback, with the shield chevronny; the obverse displaying a kite-shape shield, with the same arms. t MS. Pedigree William Courthope, Esq. Somerset Herald. 264 A CORNER OE KENT. sister Matilda or Maud became heiress of the whole barony of Folkestone. This great heiress became the second wife of Hamo, son of Eobert de Crevecoeur, who did homage for her lands twentieth of Henry III. (1236), when, according to the presumed date of her mother's marriage, she could not have been more than fifteen. Prom her birth she appears to have been the ward of Peter de Maulay, out of whose custody her father received her in the first or second year of her age.'^ Of the Crevecoeurs we shall speak anon ; but we must now return to the collateral descent from Emma d'Arques the first lady of Eolkestone, who, as we have already stated, married, secondly, Manasses, Comte de Guisnes, and show the connection of this branch with the families of YEEE AND BOLBEC. The only issue of the marriage of Emma d'Arques with the Comte de Guisnes appears to have been a daughter, known like her father by two different names, Posa and Sibilla. She married Henri Cas- tellan de Bourbourg, by whom she had an only child, a daughter, named Beatrice. Eosa died in her father's lifetime, and her mother Emma, Comtesse de Guisnes, being an English woman, advised the selection of an English husband for the young heiress. The * Clo£e Eolls, 5lh of Henry III. mem. 12. GENEALOaiCAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 265 choice fell on Alb eric, the son of Alberic or Aubrey de Vere, the king's chamberlain. The marriage is said to have been hastened in consequence of the precarious state of the health of Beatrice, and as in case of her death without issue the comte of Guisnes would revert to the next heir, Arnold de Gand. On the death of Manasses in 1137, Alberic de Vere was requested by his father-in-law Henri de Bourbourg, to hasten and take possession of the county of Guisnes. He complied with the request, and was invested by the Comte de Planders, his suzerain; but, preferring a residence at the English court, he neglected his matrimonial domains and, sooth to say, his wife, till at length afiPairs culminated in a revolu- tion and a divorce ; Baldwin of Ardres marrying the Countess Beatrice, who survived, however, but a few days, and dying without issue by either of her husbands, Arnold de Gand succeeded as next heir to the county of Guisnes. This little history, which we have condensed- as much as possible from Mr. Staple- ton's elaborate essay, is necessary to the clear under- standing of the position of Aubrey de Vere the younger, who was thus styled Count or Earl before he was Earl of Oxford. His father, the king's chamberlain, was killed in London during a riot in the year 1140, and left by his wife Alicia, beside Alberic of whom we have been speaking, several sons and two daughters : Bohesia, married first to Geoffrey de Mandeville, Earl of Essex, and secondly to Pagan de Beauchamp ; and Juliana, married first to Hugh 266 A COENER OE KENT. Eigod, Earl of Norfolk, and secondly to Walkeline de Mamignot. Alberic having become one of the most active partisans of the Empress Matilda against King Stephen, had a grant from her in the year 1141 of all the land of William d'Avranches together with all the inheritance he claimed on the part of his wife as the heiress of William d'Arques,* and the promise of the town and castle of Colchester, as soon as they should be in her power, also the reversion of the earldom of Cambridgeshire and the third penny thereof, as an earl ought to have, provided the King of Scots had it not ; but in that case Alberic was to have the choice of four earldoms, — Oxfordshire, Berkshire, Wiltshire, and .Dorsetshire, — according to the decision of her brother, the Earl of Gloucester, Earl Geoffrey (of Essex), and Earl Gilbert (of Pembroke). His brothers Geoffrey and E;obert were also made barons, and his brother William was promised the Chancellorship of England. King Henry XL, on his accession to the throne, in 1135, made the famous Thomas a Becket chancellor, but performed that part of his mother's promise which related to an earldom for Alberic, and gave him that of Oxford. t Alberic enjoyed his honour * This was the land at IS^ewington and Kedingfield which we have seen her grandmother Emma brought to her second husband, Manasses de Guisnes. + William, in lieu of the chancellorship, had the bishopric of Hereford. GENEALOaiCAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 267 for nearly forty years, dying 26tli December, 1194, and was succeeded by his son of the same name, who in the sixth of John, A.D. 1205, paid fine to the king of 100 marks to be confirmed in his earldom and in the receipt of the third penny. Dying with- out issue male in 1214, his next brother, Hobert, succeeded as third Earl of Oxford. All this is per- fectly clear and indisputable, and consequently those genealogists who are content with recording the descent of the earldom have no difficulties to contend with. But that does not satisfy us. We desire to know who were the wives, and especially the mothers, of these earls ; and on referring to the existing cata- logues or pedigrees for such information, we are astounded at the mass of confusion and contradiction they exhibit."^ In order to arrive at something like the facts, we must retrace our steps. Alberic de Vere, the king's Chamberlain, slain in 1140, and father of Alberic, first Earl of Oxford, was himself the son of an Alberic de Vere, founder of Colne Abbey, county of Essex. We have, therefore, including Alberic, the second Earl of Oxford, four Alberics de Vere in immediate succession. Dugdale would make it five, by commencing with the " Albericus Comes " of Domesday ; but it is now generally conceded that he * Mr. J. Gougli Nichols, in his paper on the Earldom of Oxford (Journal of the Archseological Institute, vol. ix. p. 17), to which we naturally turned for information, has not touched upon the points in question. 268 A COENEll OP KENT. was not of this family; the earliest of whom at present identified is the Albericus de Vere of the same record, founder of Colne Abbey, as above stated, and father of the king's chamberlain. This Alberic the first, it appears, from a confirma- tion charter of Henry I. * and also by a charter of Geofi'rey de Vere, the eldest son of Alberic and who died in his father's lifetime, had for wife a lady named Beatrix, by some called a sister of William the Conqueror, and by Dugdale confounded with Beatrix de Bourbourgh, who married this Alberic's grandson. All we can really rely upon is that her name was Beatrix and that she was the mother of Godfrey de Yere, the eldest son, as acknowledged by him. It is, however, probable, that she was also the mother of his brothers Alberic, William, Bobert, and Eoger. Alberic the second certainly married a lady named Adeliza or Alicia, stated in the Book of the Miracles of St. Osyth to have been the daughter of Gilbert de Clare. Kennet asserts that she was the daughter of Boger de Ivray, and brought her husband the manor of Islip, in Oxfordshire ; and Sandford, in his Genealogical History, marries him to Mabel, a daughter of Bobert, Consul of Gloucester ; but we prefer the authority of the "Libri de Miraculis St. Osythse," which is attributed to the pen of one of * Henry I. confirmed the gift of Alberic de Yere of twenty acres of land to St. Mary of Abbingdon for the soul of Godfrey, his sod, deceased. GENEALOaiCAL AND HEEALDIC NOTES. 269 the sons of Alberic by this yery Adeliza, a priest at St. Osyth's, and brother of William de Vere, Bishop of Hereford.* A curious corroboration of his state- ment is to be found in the life of Giraldus Cam- brensis, which is more valuable as it occurs inci- dentally and without reference to any disputed point of genealogy. We give it in the words of the biographer : — '^It happened about this time that by an order from the king, Ehys ap GrufFydh was summoned to hold a conference with Baldwin, Archbishop of Can- terbury, and E^anulf de Glanville, chief justice of England, at Hereford. When seated at dinner in the house of William de Vere, bishop of that see, and Walter, a noble baron, both of whom were descended from the noble family of Clare, Giraldus, the arch- deacon, approached the table, and standing before them, thus facetiously addressed himself to Prince Rhys : * You may congratulate yourself, Bhys, on being now seated between two of the Clare family, whose inheritance you possess ! ' for at that time he held all Cardiganshire, which he had recovered from Roger, Earl of Clare. Rhys, a man of excellent understanding, and particularly ready at an answer, immediately replied: 'It is indeed true that for a considerable time we were deprived of our inheri- * It appears she gave to tlie monks of St. Osyth lands of the value of seven pounds per annum, lying at Dalham, Frustall, and Dinham, being part of her portion in frank marriage, and which Alberic, her son, confirmed. 270 A COENEE, OE KENT. tance by the Clares; but as it was our fate to be losers, we had at least the satisfaction of being dis- possessed of it by noble and illustrious personages, not by the hands of an idle and obscure people.' The bishop, desirous of returning the compliment to Prince Rhys, replied : ' And we also, since it has been decreed that we should lose the possession of those territories, are well pleased that so noble and upright a prince as Uhys should be at this time lord over them.' " * It would need strong evidence to rebut the con- temporaneous evidence of two such witnesses as the priest of St. Osyth, the son of Adeliza, and Giraldus de Earri, the acquaintance of her other son, the Bishop of Hereford, in whose cathedral he was a prebend. Ey the Book of St. Osyth we find also that the issue of Alberic by Adeliza was five sons. Alberic, the first Earl of Oxford ; William, Bishop of Here- ford; Gilbert, Lord of Bayham, county of Essex; Geofirey, who married Isabel de Say ; and the afore- said priest of St. Osyth. Their daughters were Bohesia, Countess of Essex ; Julianna, Countess of Norfolk, before mentioned ; and Adeliza, wife of Henry de Essex, and subsequently of Boger Eitz Bichard, Lord of Warkworth. We now come to the third Alberic, who, as we have shown, was, during his father's lifetime^ undoubtedly ^ Itinerary, vol. i. p. 23. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 271 married to Beatrix de Bourbourgh, Countess de Guisnes, from whom he was divorced, and by whom he had no issue. As this fact has only been elicited through the labours of the late Mr. Stapleton (Dug- dale, and previous writers, having confounded her with her husband's grandmother of the same name), she is not to be found, of course, in any of the older pedigrees in this her proper place ; but to make up for the omission, three other wives have been accorded to him— Lucia, Euphemia, and Agnes. The first, on the authority of Leland, and supposed by Segar to have been a daughter of William de Arches by a daughter of William de Avranches, we may dismiss in a few words. She w^as the first prioress, and perhaps founder of a nunnery in the parish of Castle Heningham ; but whoever she might be, there is not the slightest evidence that she was ever the wife of Alberic ; and Weever, who prints the lament of the prioress, her successor, for her loss, only suggests that, '' belike she was one of that honourable house," i.e., a De Vere.* The next, Euphemia, is said to have been the daughter of Sir William de Cantelupe. Of this we have no proof; but her charter to Colne Abbey is conclusive as to her being the wife of Alberic. In it, as the Countess Euphemia, she gives to the monks of Colne, with the consent of her husband, the Earl Alberic, 100 shillings from her manor of Icklington, '"- Fan. Mon. p. 621. 272 A COENEE OF KENT. for the health of the body and soul of Stephen, King of England, and for the soul of his queen Matilda, and the soul of Earl Eustace, their son, which manor of Icklington, she states, M^as given her by the said king and queen in frank marriage. This charter is witnessed by Earl Albert himself and his brother, Gilbert de Vere.^ This is very important, as although the document is not dated, there can be little doubt about the period in which it was executed. The particular mention of the hodij of Stephen shows that the king was at that time living, his queen, Matilda, and his son Eustace being dead, therefore not earlier than 1152 ; and the fact of the manor of Ikclington having been given to her by Stephen and Matilda as a marriage portion proves that Alberic must have been in favour with that monarch and his * Ego Eufemia Comitissa concessu comitis Alberici mariti mei dedi monachis de Colne redditione C s. in Iclintonia cum corpore meo sepeliendo pro salute corporis et animse Stephani Eegis Anglise et pro anima Matildis Reginae et pro anima Comitis Eustachie filii eorum, &c. . . . . sicut Kex Stephannis et Matildis Kegina uxor sua qui prsenominatum manerium de Iclintonia mihi dederunt in libero maritagio, &c. Witnessed by " Comite Alberico et Gilberto de Yeer." — (Dugdale, Mon., vol. ii. p. 877.) Alberic afterwards founded a nunnery at Icklington, in the diocese of Ely. The Empress also granted to Alberic, Diham (Dinham), " which belonged to Robert de Ramis and was the right of the nejohews of this earl ; viz. the sons of Roger de Ramis.'' — (Dugdale's Baronage.) As Alberic had no sister married to Roger de Ramis, it would seem as if the earl had married Roger's sister. The family of De Ramis, Raimes, or Raines, is always alluded to as of great importance, and has never yet been thoroughly investigated. aENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 273 queen at the time that marriage took place, which, as he was diyorced from Beatrix about 1143-4, and the queen died in 1151, could have been only a few years after his zealous partisanship of the Empress Matilda and her son Prince Henry. Another re- markable circumstance is, that in the charter above mentioned Alberic and Euphemia style themselves Earl (or Count) and Countess, although he had ceased to be Count de Guisnes when he was divorced from the Countess Beatrix (who carried the county and title to her second husband, Baldwin de Ardres), and was not made Earl of Oxford till 1155, first of Henry II. This appears to sustain the opinion that he was by descent Comte de Vere, as we find him indeed called by Giraldus Cambrensis ; but the royal gift of the manor of Icklington and the favour of Stephen and his queen have still to be accounted for, and we are therefore induced to believe that Euphemia was not simply the daughter of Sir William de Cantelupe, but, like her predecessor Beatrix, a countess in her own right, and probably a relation or connection of either Stephen or Matilda, who must assuredly have had some strong reason for thus sanctioning the marriage and endowing the bride of one of their chief opponents. Whether Euphemia lived to be Countess of Oxford we are at present without means of deciding ; but the book of Colne Abbey gives Alberic a third wife, named Agnes, and, according to Giraldus Cambrensis, he was married before 1163 to a T 274 A CORNEE OP KENT. daughter of Henry de Essex, from whom he was striving to be divorced, on account of the disgrace of her father, at the time that she w^as pregnant with his eldest son Alberic, the fourth of that name, who succeeded him as second Earl of Oxford.* But he * Itin. cap. vii. He does not mention her Christian name, but, in speaking of natural defects inherited by children from their parents, he says, " A like miracle of nature occurred in Alberic, son of Alberic, Earl of Vere, whose father, during the pregnancy of his mother, the daughter of Henry of Essex ('filia scilicet Henrici de Essexia'), having laboured to procure a divorce on account of the ignominy of her father, the child, when born, had the same blemish in its eye as the father had got from a casual hurt." Sir Eichard Colt Hoare, in his annotations on this chapter, vol. ii. p. 132, considers this to be a biographical error, as he found by the pedigrees of the Vere and Essex families that " Henry de Essex m^arried a daughter of the second Alberic de Yere." We have stated, on the authority of the work of St. Osyth, that he did marry a daughter of the second Alberic, who was of course sister of the third ; and we have here the circumstantial statement of an actual contemporary, who, being born in 1146, was seventeen years of age when Henry de Essex was defeated by Robert de Montforfc in the famous trial by battle in 1163, and thereby adjudged guilty of the cowardly and treasonable offence of throwing down the royal standard, of which he was the hereditary bearer, and flying from the field during the conflict between the king's forces and those of Owen Gwyneth, Prince of Powys, in 1157. Henry II. spared his life, but ordered him to be shorn a monk and retire into the Abbey of Reading. These remarkable events are just such as would be likely to make a powerful impression on the mind of a youth of the age of Giraldus, and who was subsequently the friend and companion of Henry II. and of William de Yere, Bishop of Hereford, the brother of that very Earl Alberic, with whom and with his countess indeed it is very probable he was also acquainted ; as, by his own account, this Itinerary was written in 1190, which would be four years previous to the death of the earl, who seems to GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 275 had also issue Eobert, afterwards third earl, and Henry, from whom the De Veres of Addington are said to be descended ; and as Giraldns does not inform us whether or not he succeeded in obtaining the divorce, we are left in doubt as to their being children of the same mother. Unfortunately, in none of the charters of his sons and successors that wo have yet met with is there any mention of their mother, nor do we know whe- ther or not she survived her husband, w^ho died 26th December, 1194; but the presumption is, that she did not. The fourth Alberic de Vere, and second Earl of Oxford, is said to have married Adeliza, daughter of Eoger Bigod, and died without issue 1214 ; but now comes the hardest knot in this exceedingly entangled skein. Robert de Yere succeeded his brother Alberic, and was at that time the husband of Isabella de Bolbec. Of these two facts the proofs are manifold. The Pipe-roll of the second of Eichard I., 1191, records that Earl Alberic rendered an account of 500 marks to have the daughter of Walter de Bolebec for a wife have married his first cousin, unless she were the daughter of Henry de Essex by a former wife. The facts and dates we have cited give us the following result : — Beatrice, = Alberic de Vere, = EuPblEMlA, =: Agnes, 1st wife, 1st Earl of Oxford, 2nd wife. 3rd wife. divorced 1143. died 1194. married before married before 1151. 1163. T 2 276 A CORNER OF KENT. to his son, not named.* It would seem that the mar- riage did not take place previous to the earl's death in 1194, for in the Pipe-roll of the ninth of John, 1208, it is stated that Robert de Vere gave 200 marks and three palfreys, to have Y(sabella) de Bolbec to wife, provided she consented ; and in which case he would pay the fine which she the said Y. had agreed to pay the king, not to be compelled to marry by the plea of Earl Alberic.f On the death of Eobert, Earl of Oxford, fifth of Henry III., 1221, his widow, Isabella, paid a fine to the king of £2,228 2s. 9^d., for the wardship of her son, then about six years old, after which she married Henry de Novant, and was deceased in 1245, when Hugh de Yere, who had succeeded his father as fourth Earl of Oxford, on attaining his majority in 1236, had livery of his mother's estates ; as in the Pine roll of the twenty- ninth of Henry III. we read, '' The king received the homage of Hugh, Earl of Oxford, son and heir of Isabella de Bolbeck, late Countess of Oxford." J Now in the face of this evidence we have to account for the existence of two charters, in both of which * " Comes Alberici reJdit coraputnm de D marcis pro habenda filia Walter! de Bolbeck ad opus filii sui."— (Mag. Rot. Pip. A^ 2nd Eic. I.) t '•' Kobertiis de Yer CC marcas et iij palefridos pro habenda in uxorem Y de Bolbec si ipsa voluerit ita quod si cum duxerit in uxorem ipse reddit finem quern ipsa Y fecit ne distriogatur ad maritandum per placitam comitis Alberici." — (Mag. Rot. Pip. A'' 9 John.) % " Rex cepit homagium Hugo. co. Oxon. filii et hered. Isabella de Bolbeck quondam Comitissa Oxon."— (Ptot. Fin. A° 29 Hen. III.) GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 277 Isabella, the daughter of Walter de Bolbec, is dis- tinctly averred to be the wife of Alberic de Yere, who is in one specified as the son of Earl Alberic. The first is in the cartulary of Nottley Abbey, and is a confirmation of the grant of Earl Walter Gifi'ord of lands in the vill of Hillerdon to the church and canons of Saint Maria de Crendon, by Alberic de Vere and Isabella, daughter of Walter de Bolbec, his wife, with the consent of Hugh de Bolbec* The other is in the Harleian Collection of Charters, British Museum, No. 57, c. 3, and is a grant by Alberic de Vere, son of the Earl Alberic and his wife Isabella de Bolbec C' ego et Isabella de Bolbec, uxor mea") to William Eitz Bering, of the land of Hoquering.f Had the evidence occurred in only the * " Notura sit omnibus tarn pntibus quam futuris quo ego Albericus de Yer et Isabella de Bolbec Jilia Walteri de Bolbec sponsa mea'^ d'c. . The Hugh de Bolbec whose cousent was required to this gift must have been the cousin of Isabella, as her uncle Hugh was dead in 1165.— (Vide page 282, note.) t It is indexed, '•' Carta Alberici de Yer fil Alberici comitis et femince sum Isabellce filice Walteri de Bolbec, Willielmo fil Derinck de Terra de Hoquering, cum sig." The seal is a curiosity, as it is one used by this family immediately previous to the introduction of armorial bearings, and represents a human figure erect with arms extended, the lower half hidden by a monstrous animal, a lion, dragon, or dolphin, or more probably one of those nondescripts we find upon the shields of the Norman knights in the Bayeux tapestry. The arms of De Yere, in the reign of Henry III., were Quarterly Gules and Or, in the first quarter a mullet argent. — (Effigy of Bobert, third Earl of Oxford, Hatfield Broadoak, and seal of the same ) This mullet was certainly borne as a difference. Now it is worthy of observation that Geoffrey de Mignaville, Earl of Ess"x, bore the same 278 A COENEE OP KENT. first charter, it might have been questionable. It might have been incorrectly transcribed, or altogether a forgery ; but we cannot so easily dispose of the second. The original, with its curious seal, can be seen by any one in the British Museum, and the words ''son of the Earl Alberic" show that it must have been executed during the lifetime of the first Earl of Oxford, i.e. ante Dec. 26th, 1194, and subsequent to 1191, when we know that the earl gave King Bichard I. 500 marks to marry a daughter of Walter de Bolbec to a son of his, not named. Now, unless there were two Isabellas, daughters of a Walter de Bolbec, it seems clear that the son he had selected as the husband of Isabella was his eldest, Alberic, and that they were accordingly married during his life- time. That there were not two Isabellas, or, at least, that the daughter of Walter de Bolbec, for the dis- posal of whose hand the Earl Alberic paid 500 marks, was the Isabella eventually wife of E^obert de Vere, his second son, is equally clear by the proof that he, Robert, in addition to his own fine, promised to pay that which " Y. de Bolbec," the lady in question, had agreed to give the King that she might not be com- pelled to marry according to the plea of Earl Alberic. And yet this contract with the King was entered into in 1208, six years before the death of Alberic de Vere, second Earl of Oxford, with whom in the two witliin a bordure vairy, and ClaveriDg descended from Fitz-Bichard, the same with a bend sable. GENEALOaiCAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 279 charters we have just quoted, she is associated as his Avife ! The only inference that we can possibly draw from these data is, that Isabella, who was certainly a minor in 1191,^' and is only spoken of as " the Lady Isabella" in 1198, at which time she would, under ordinary circumstances, have been Countess of Oxford, was married to Alberic in her nonage, and separated from him for some reason before 1198, t and that a dis- solution of this marriage, and a dispensation from, the Pope, on the ground of non-cohabitation, enabled her to marry her brother-in-law, E^obert de Yere, in 1208, when she had become of full age, and after she had protested against being compelled to marry con- trary to her own inclination. We are by no means confident that this is the clue to the mystery, but see no other way to reconcile such startling contra- dictions. Por Alberic's marriage with Adeliza, daughter of Ptoger Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, we have no positive authority; but without disputing it, we know that he died without issue, and therefore escape * If the folio wiDg record applies to her, she was then (1191) in her sixteenth year, as she was stated to have been in the tenth year of her age in 1185. " Filia Walter! de Bolbec que fait ix. annorum a festo sancti Michaelis fuit in custodia Comitis Alberici." — (Rot. de Dom.) t Even infantile marriages were by no means uncommon in a much later age, the object being to secure the property of the heiress as soon as possible. Isabella was fifteen when she was sold to the earl for his son ; twenty-three when she was mentioned as " the Lady Isabella" in the Final Concord, A.D. 1198, thirty-three in 1208, and nearly seventy at the time of her death in 1245. 280 A COENER OF KENT. one difficulty which might have seriously increased our embarrassment.* We have now struggled into the light of day. The Close E;oll of the sixteenth of John announces the succession of the Earl of Oxford on the death of his brother Alberic,t and that of the seventeenth gives to E^obert de Vere, Earl of Oxford, the third penny of the county. { We have already mentioned the date of his death, the enormous fine paid by his widow Isabella for the wardship of her son Hugh, her subsequent marriage with Henry de Novant, and death in 1245. Our next step in the pedigree is to show that in the seventh of Henry III., 1223, Margaret de Quincy, Countess of Winchester, paid 1,000 marks to the king for permission to marry her daughter Hawisia to Hugh, the young son and heir of E;obert de Vere, formerly Earl of Oxford, and who at that time could not be more than fourteen. § Hugh died in the forty-seventh * Alberic, if we may rely upon the statement of Giraldus, was born a few months after the disgrace of his grandfather, Henry de Essex, in 11G3, at latest in 1164. This would make him twenty-six or twenty- seven at the time of his marriage with Isabella. According to the same calculation, he was not more than fifty at the period of his decease in 1214. t "Admissus comitem Oxon post mortem fris Alberici comitis." — (Rot. Glaus. 16 John, p. 2, m. 19.) J " Robtus de Yeer Comes Oxon de tertio denario comitatus Oxon."— (Rot. Clans. 17 John, m. 30.) § '' Margareta comitissa Winton finem fecit cum Dno Rege per 1,000 marcas ut Hawisia filia sua marietur Hugoni fil et her R de Yeer quondam comitis Oxon." — (Rot. Fin. 7 Hen. III. m. 7.) GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 281 of Henry III., leaving by his countess, the aforesaid Hawisia, a son named Robert, twenty-three years of age at his father's death, and who succeeded him as fifth Earl of Oxford, and, marrying Alice, daughter of Gilbert Lord S andf or d. Chamberlain to Queen Eleanor, died in the twenty-fourth of Edward I., 1297, when it was found that he held the manor of Eleet-next- Sandwich, of John, son of John de Sandwich, and that Robert de Vere, son of said Robert, was his next heir, and twenty-four years of age. We may here dismiss the De Veres, as the re- mainder of the pedigree is unconnected with this inquiry, and has been sufficiently set down in our second chapter, on the descent of the manor of Fleet, and return to the family of Bolbec, respecting which the greatest uncertainty exists in all its branches. If we are to credit the assertion of William the monk of Jumieges, and we admit that we have no evidence to rebut it, one Osborne de Bolbec, by Avelina, sister of Gunnora, Duchess of Normandy, was the progenitor of half the noble houses in England, but specially of the great family of Giffard, and of that which retained the original designation of Bolbec. We have already, in this chapter, under the head of D'Arques, examined the conflicting testimony of the descent of Emma, the heiress of Eolkestone, from Osborne, and stated our view of the connection between the families of De Arcis and Bolbec. Beside the Geoffrey de Bolbec there men- 282 A COENEE OF KENT. tioned, there was a Hugh de Bolbec, who, at the time of the compilation of Domesday, possessed several lordships in various counties, but particularly in Buckinghamshire, and who is said to have had two sons, Walter and Hugh, who succeeded each other in the barony of Bolbec* ISTearly at the same period, however, another Hugh de Bolbec, li\dng tenth Henry I., in Northumberland, had also two sons named Walter and Hugh. Walter founded the priory of Blancland, in that county, and died before thirty-third of Henry II., leaving issue by his wife, Margaret, a son and heir, Walter, who died without issue seventh of John, when Hugh, the second son, was found heir to his brother Walter. He was one of the justices itinerant for the counties of North- ampton, York, Northumberland, Cumberland, and Lancaster, and died forty-third of Henry III., 1259, leaving by his wife Theophania four daughters and coheirs ; viz., Philippa, wife of Boger de Lancaster ; Margery, first married to Nicholas Corbet, and secondly to Balph, son of William, Lord of Grim- thorp; Alice, wife of Walter de Huntercombe; and Maud, of Hugh de la Val. We have been particular in clearing off this line of the Bolbecs of Northumberland, because from the * His wife appears to have been Hawisia or Helewisia de Courtenay. (Vide i)ages 253 and 285, note.) His son Hugh 'founded the Abbey of Woburne, in Bedfordshire, 10th of September, 1145, and was dead in 1165, when Walter gave the king 100 marks for the wardship of his brother's son and heir. — Rot. Pip. GENEALOaiCAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 283 parity of names and dates confusion has occurred on various points between it and that of the Buckingham branch, the eldest, as it would appear from the descent in it of the barony of Bolbec, and therefore undoubtedly the one to which we must trace Isabella, Countess of Oxford, as through her that barony came to the De Veres. That she was the daughter of "Walter de Bolbec, and niece of Hugh, is clear enough from the charters and wills we have quoted, though Dugdale has increased the confusion by stating, inadvertently we presume, that she was dmighter of Hugh and sister of Walter, in his Baronage, vol. i. p. 191. That she had a sister and coheir named Constance, married to Elias de Beauchamp, is also clear from the Pinal Concord of 1198, often alluded to in these pages. Dugdale records the match, but did not know the name of the lady, which has only reached us through the above- mentioned valuable record. That Constance was the younger sister we presume from the barony of Bolbec falling to Isabella's share ; and therefore, if we have been tolerably correct in our calculation of the age of the latter, Constance was the wife of Elias de Beauchamp at the early age of thirteen or fourteen at the utmost.*' But who was the mother of these two children ? Certainly not the Margaret de Mont- * We tliink it probable that she also died at an early age, for no issue is recorded of her, and in 1224 Isabella, as we shall see presently, speaks of herself as the heir (not one of the heirs) of Walter de Bolbec. 284 A COUNER OF KENT. fitchet whom Dugdale lias married in one place to Walter and in another to Hugh de Bolbec ; for she was one of the sisters, and coheir of Richard de Montfitchet, living forty-second Henry III., 1258, and dead in the fifty-first of the same reign (Rot. Pip. suh anno) ; nor could she have been the wife of the Walter de Eolbec who founded the priory of Blancland, as stated in Banks, vol. i. p. 38, unless she survived her husband more than seventy years, as he was dead in 1185 or 1186. In the Pine Boll of the 9th of John, 1208, we find that a Margaret de Bolbec, who had been the wife of Walter de Bolbec, was remarried to Henry de Pontibus, and she is expressly stated to have been the daughter of Henry the son of Hervey.* As the father of Isabella must have been dead in 1191, second of Bichard I., the date would correspond well enough with that of the remarriage of his widow in 1208 ; but here we are met by the evidence of the existence of an undoubted widow of our Walter de Bolbec previous to 1224. In that year, being the eighth of Henry III., Isabella, then widow of Bobert de Yere, petitions against the abbot of Mendham (co. Bucks) to recover from him three carucates of land in Mend- ham, her right and heritage, on the plea that the said lands formed no part of the dowry of Egelina * Or Henry Fitz-Hervey, wliicli is not quite the same thing. " Margareta de Bolbec filia Henrici filii Hervei qui fait uxor ^Yalteri." She was probably the widow of the founder of Blanchnd. GENEALOGICAL AND HEKALDIC NOTES. 285 cle Courtenay, of the gift of her husband Walter de Bolbec, whose heir she (the said Isabella) is.* We must surely conclude from this document that Egelina, widow of Walter de Bolbec, was not the mother of his daughter Isabella, and that both she and her sister Constance were by a former wife, who could not long have survived the birth of her second child, as Walter must have remarried before 1191, in which year he was dead. His having no son would account for his re-entering the married state as soon as pos- sible ; but whether Egelina was a Courtenay by birth, or had taken to herself a second husband of that family before 1224, we have yet to discover: from the lapse of time, most probably the latter. f The production of a single charter, the information con- tained in a few lines of some overlooked record, may, before these pages meet the public eye, upset all these calculations ; but they are, at any rate, founded * " Isabella qui fuit uxor Roberti de Yeer petit vsus abbatem de Mendliam 3 caruc terr cum ptni in ib ut jus et bereditatem suam in quos id Abbas non het iugressum nisi per Egelinam de Courtenay qui non babuit inde nisi dotem ex done Walteri de Bolbec viri sui cujus teres ipse est."— (MSS. Coll. Arm. Yinct. 13, p. 16.) The Abbey of Mendham was founded by Hugb, the brother of Walter, as a cell to Woburne, shortly after the foundation of the latter in 1145. + A Reginald de Courtenay had custody of the daughter and lands of the other Walter de Bolbec, founder of the priory of Blancland, according to two entries in the Rot. de Dominabus, 1185. We have proof also that a Helewisia de Bolbec, grandmother of Constance de Bolbec, possessed the advowson of the Chapel of Fleet (vide p. 253) ; and in a pedigree in the Coll. of Arms (E. 13, p. 15), she is stated to have been "Hawes d. to the Lord Courtenay." 286 A CORNER OF KENT. on official data, and are offered as the best solution we can suggest of a hitherto neglected genealogical puzzle. CREYECOEUR. Hamo de Crevecoeur,** in consequence of his for- tunate marriage with Maud d'Avranches, the second great lady of Polkestone, figures very conspicuously in all the pedigrees of his family, as well as those of several connected Avith it ; but, as is too often the case in such matters, this important match is alone recorded, no mention being made of his first wife, or third wife who survived him,t and the issue by the first confounded with his children by the second. The four coheiresses of Maud d'Avranches — Agnes, Isolda, Eleanor, and Isabel — are incorrectly stated in our standard genealogical works to have succeeded to the large estates of their mother upon the death without issue of their brother Eobert. This is an error. The E;obert alluded to was their nephew, the son of their half-brother Hamo de Crevecoeur, who was the only son of their father Hamo by his first wife, name and family unknown. $ Hamo the younger * The arms of this family were, Or a cross voided gules. t His third wife was named Alice, by whom he had no issue. J Hamo the elder was the son of a Robert de Crevecoeur, son of Daniel, son of Kobert Fitz Hamon de Crevecoeur, who had two wives ; by the first, named Isabella, he apparently had his son Adam, co- founder of the Priory of Ledes, co. Kent. By the second, Rosina, he had two sons, Elias and Daniel. The former, lord of the manor of Sarre, temp. Hen. I., had an only daughter and heir, Emma, of whom hereafter. Hamo, the husband of Maud d'Avranches, was the- GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 287 died during the lifetime of his father, forty-seventh of Henry III. (1263), leaving the said Robert and two other sons — John and Thomas — by his wife Joan — his widow in 1263. Eobert, by his wife Isolda (family yet undiscovered), had a son named William, wbo died unmarried, or at least without issue, tw^o or three years before his father. Hamo the elder had also by his first wife a daughter, who married a son of Thomas de Camville under age in 1234. Erom a charter dated thirty-first of Edward I., A.D. 1303, we believe this lady's name was Isabella, and that of her husband Roger de Oamville; and they and their issue, if they had any, would be the heirs of Robert de Crevecoeur before his aunts of the half-blood. To these ladies, however, the four daughters of Maud d'Avranches, came, it is evident, the great property derived from Emma d'Arques and Maud de Bovil. The eldest, Agnes, married John, de Sandwich, a member of one of the oldest and^ most influential families in this part of Kent, yet ' grandson of Daniel, as above stated, and is also called the son of Robert de Crevecoeur, heir of Walkeline de Maminot j but whether through his own parents or by his wife is not clear. "Walkeline de Maminot married Julianna de Yere, daughter of Alberic, the Cham- berlain, and widow of Hugh Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, but died without issue. He is said to have left one only sister and heir, who carried the honor of Maminot into the family of Say ; but by his charter to St. Saviour's, Bermondsey, witnessed by his wife Julianna, it appears he had several brothers (one named Matthew) and sisters. "Matthei fratris mei et fratrum meorum, et sororum mearura." — (Harleian MSS., No. 4757.) 288 A CORNER OE KENT. of which no pedigree exists, and hut for this great prize in the lottery of marriage, might have escaped altogether the notice of our genealogists. Isolda married Nicholas de Lenham, Eleanor became the wife of Bertram de Criol, and Isabel espoused Henry de Gant.* Of the descent from Agnes we shall speak in our notice of the mysterious family of Sandwich, and the issue of Eleanor will likewise be described in our examination of the pedigree of Criol, or Keriel. The heirs of Isolda appear to have been the Giffords of Bures, or Bury, in Essex, and the property passed to the family of St. Nicholas, under which we shall revert to this line. Of Isabel no issue is recorded by either of her husbands, and her sisters or their issue, by an escheat of the eleventh of Edward I., No. 38, are said to be next of kin. It is an extent of the manor of Morton, which the jurors find Isabella de Gant held of the king; and they say that Eleanora, wife of Bertram de Kyriel, John de Lenham, and Juliana, daughter of John de Sandwico, are her nearest heirs ; and they further say that Eleanora, sister of the said Isabella, is of age, and has been so now for thirty years past ; and that the said * MSS. Coll. Arm. Vincent. No. 61, and Segar, Baron, vol. i. 319. She is styled in a charter, "Domina de Mortona, quondam uxor Henrici de Gandivo" (MSS. Coll. Arm. R 27, marked ''Kent"), and died, as we shall see, seized of that manor, 11th of Edward I., A.D. 1284. Segar, in his MS. Baronage, Coll. Arms, says she re- married with William de Patteshull. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 289 John de Lenham, son of Ysonde (Isolda), sister of the said Isabella, is of age, and has been for nine years past ; and that the said Julianna, daughter of the said John de Sandwico, who was the son of Agnes, sister of the said Isabella, is under age, and of the age of eight years. Should any general reader, '' unsifted in such peril- ous matters," have ventured to follow us thus far, or accidentally cast his eye over the above dozen lines, he may be interested at finding how much curious and trustworthy material for the historian or bio- grapher is to be picked out of these ancient inquisi- tions, the truth of which was sworn to by the twelve persons appointed to make the return. We learn by the document just quoted, that in 1284 Eleanor de Criol was the sole surviving sister, and upwards of fifty years of age; that John, son of Ysoude (Isolda), by her husband, Nicholas de Lenham, had attained the age of thirty ; and that Julianna de Sandwich, grand-daughter of Agnes, the eldest sister, was a child of eight years old. Such facts enable us to correct the numerous inaccuracies which occur in pedigrees compiled from other genealogical works, untested by the investigation of similar official records. The attempt, by any other means, to reconcile the contra- dictions they involve, invariably leads to confusion worse confounded. We shall find the Criols or Keriels in our path in almost every step of our present inquiry ; but before we examine their pedigree, we will dispose of what V 290 A CORNER OF KENT. concerns us in another important family, of whicli they seem to have carried off the heiress, viz., that of ATJBERVILLE. The name of Auberville or Osburvill, and occasion- ally latinized Albertvilla, occurs in Domesday, at the period of the compilation of which a William de Auberville held Berham, in Hertfordshire. A Roger de Auberville was also a contemporary of the Con- queror, and is presumed to have been the father of the aforesaid William. In the next century, however, during the reign of Henry I., there were co-existing a Hugh de Auberville and a John and a William de Osburville. In the thirty-first year of that monarch's reign, A.D. 1131, John and William were still living, but Hugh was dead, having left a widow named Wynanc ;* and Turgisius d'Avranches gave the king three hundred silver marks, one gold mark, and one war-horse, for the lands and wife (widow) of Hugo de Albertvilla, and twenty-two marks annually to have his son in ward. This son was William de Auberville, Lord of Westenhanger,t who married Matilda, daughter and co-heir of Eanulph de Glanville, by his wife, Berta de Yaloignes. In his charter to Langdon Priory, he mentions his wife Matilda, his son William, * Kamed in the foundation charter of Langdon Priory, 1192, as one of those to be prayed for. — Mon. Ang. vol. ii. p. 622. t Hugh had also a daughter named Alice, married to Fulk de Lizures, and living, his widow, 1185, aged fifty and upwards. — Rot. de Dominabus. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 291 and his daughter Emma. He died before the tenth of John, A.D. 1208. His son and heir was Hugh de Auberville, who married a lady named Johanna or Joan, and died fifteenth of John, 1213, when William Brewer gave the king one thousand marks to have the whole of his land, and the marriage of his heirs and of Johanna, who was the wife of the said Hugh. His successor was his son Sir William de Auberville, who died twenty-ninth of Henry III., 1245,* leaving a widow, named Isabella (who in 1249 married Heginald de E vermuth), and an only daughter, Joan, who married, first, in 1247, Sir Henry de Sandwich, of Dentdelion, Thanet; and secondly, before 1254, Nicholas de Criol. j, \^ There is no record of any issue by her first husband f^ ^A^^'^^^^^^^ but the descent from her second husband is most (^j^^ o^ important to our history, and will be pursued in our ^/^^ examination of the pedigree of CEIOL OR KERIEL. This family, which took its name from Creuil or * In that year lie made a grant to Christ Church, Canterbury, of 20s., *' de libro redditu de Domico meo de Ostringehanges et Beruvye" etc. .... The witnesses being Dn^ Koberto de Auberville, Dii<^ Symone de Sandwyco, Dn^ Simone de Hauth militibus, John Checke, WilH Brewere.— (MS. Coll. Arms, R. 27, C. 1989, 1993.) The seal attached to a deed of this William exhibits his arms, — Parted per fess dancette two annulets in chief and one in base. We are inclined to believe that this coat is composed of that of Glanville and the original arms of Auberville, or that it is simply the coat of Glanville differenced by the annulets. In the coat of Sandwich, derived, as we believe, from a collateral source, the indented chief is frequently so deep that it appears as if the shield were parted per fess. u 2 >^- 292 A coRNEii or kent. Crielj a town in the department of the Oise, and now a station on the railway not far from Paris, was of eminence in England shortly after the Conquest, and before the close of- the twelfth century held consider- able possessions in the county of Kent.* John de Criol, in 1194, gave the church of Sarre, or Serres, in the parish of St. Nicholas, Thanet, to the Priory of Ledes, and a daughter of this house, named Cecilia, appears to have been the wife of Simon d'Avranches, in the reign of Eichard I., as we have already men- tioned, p. 262. John de Criol had by his wife Margery four sons, — Bertram, who became Sheriff of Kent, Simon, Wil- liam, and Nicholas. The latter married Margery de Clifford, by w^hom he left three daughters and coheirs. The elder brother Bertram married a lady named Emma,t and had by her three sons, — John, Simon, ^ It is important to remark that Elias de Crevecoeur, living 1145, and great-uncle of Hamo de Crevecoeur, was lord of the manor and patron of the church of Sarre, the advowson of which he gave to the Canons of Ledes Priory, co. Kent, in the reign of Henry I. (Text. Roffensis, vol. i. p. 598), and left an only daughter and heir, named Emma, living 1207, from whom, by marriage or otherwise, this property must have passed to the Criols, t Supposed to be the above-named Emma de Crevecoeur ; but not only do the dates render this improbable, but the advowson of the church of Sarre we find had been previously claimed by Bertram's father in 1194. In the MS. Coll. Arms, marked R. 27, are copies of three charters. 1. That of Emma de Creuquer, confirming a grant of Philip Utdevers to the canons of Begeham ; 2. that of Robert de Creuquer, confirming the donation of Emma; and 3. that of Nicholas de Kenet, confirming the gift of Emma de Creuquer, " mater mea'^ GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 293 and Nicholas.* The eldest, John, married in 1233 Matilda de Estwell, his father Bertram in that year paying 40 marks to the king for the permission. John de Criol died forty-eighth Henry III., 1263, leaving by his wife Matilda four sons, — Bertram, Ralph, Edmund, and Alured.t Bertram married Eleanor, one of the four daughters and coheiresses of Hamo de Crevecoeur and Maud d'Avranches, as noticed at p. 288. He died second of Edward I., leaving by Eleanor two sons, John and Bertram, and one daughter named Joan. John married a lady named Eleonora, and Bertram one named Petronilla. The families of both ladies are at present unknown ; neither, however, had any issue, and consequently, on the death of Bertram (who survived his brother) in the thirty-fourth year of Edward I., his sister Joan, then twenty-eight years of age, and the wife of Sir Bichard de Bokesly, was found to be the next heir. This Joan, by her husband Sir Bichard, had two daughters and coheirs, Johanna and Agnes. The former married Sir William Baude, and the latter, first, Walter de Patteshull, and secondly Thomas de Poynings. We must now return to Nicholas, the younger son of Bertram de Criol by his wife Emma. This was the Nicholas who, as we have stated, p. 291, married Joan, daughter * Inquis. post Mort. + This Aliired appears to have had a daughter named Isabel, ^nd we are inclined to believe that she married William de Chilton {vide p. 85), as Chilton passed, after William's death, to the heirs of Criol. 294 A CORNER or KENT. and heir of Sir William de Auberville, aud widow of Sir Henry de Sandwich. He appears to have survived her and married a second wife named Margery, family unknown, by whom he had no issue. By his first wife Joan, however, he had at least one son, named after him Nicholas, living thirtieth Edward I., and who married Margaret, daughter of Sir John Peche. By her he had a son, also named Nicholas, who died third of Edward III., A.D. 1320, leaving by his wife E^osia (who re-married John Bertram) a son John, who died in 1377, leaving by his wife Lettice, who survived him, two sons, Nicholas and John, and a daughter Ida, who married Sir John Brockhull. John, the youngest son, mar- ried Alice, daughter and coheir of John de Botetourt, and dying sixth of Henry YL, left an only daughter Joan, wife of John Wykes, of Sarre Court and St. Lawrence, Isle of Thanet. Nicholas, his elder bro- ther, survived his father Sir John but four years, dying third of Eichard IL, 1380. His wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Maud Trussell, who survived him,* and by w4iom he had William, son and heir, aged thirty at the time of his father's death. William died first of Henry Y., 1412, leaving two sons, Thomas and John. Thomas Keriel, the eldest (for so the name had now become written), was found at that period to be eighteen years of age, and heir to his grandmother Elizabeth, daughter "^ Tuq. post mortem, seventh of Henry Y., 1419. GENEALOGICAL ANB HERALDIC NOTES. 295 of Maud Trussell. He was made a Knight of the Garter by King Henry YI., but was never installed, and was beheaded in 1461 by order of Edward IV., having been taken prisoner in the fatal battle of St. Albans. He was twice married : by his first wife, whose name is yet unknown, he had an only daughter named Alice, who married Sir John Pogg, of Repton. His second wife was Cecilia, daughter of John Stor- ton, of Preston and Birmpton, co. Kent, and who re-married with John Hill. By her he had no children. John Keriel, his younger brother, mar- ried, first, Jane, daughter of Roger Clitherow, whose brass we have described at page 208, and secondly Elizabeth Chiche, who survived him, and married two other husbands, but had no issue by any. Here, then, we arrive at the extinction of this male line of Criol, and it is not within the scope of this inquiry to follow the descent of the various other branches.* * The arms of Criol or Keriel are generally blazoned, Or two chevrons and a canton gules ; but, in a KoU of Henry lll.'s time, the canton is called a quarter. " Bertram de Criol, d'or ove deux chevrons et ung quartier de goules ;" and in a Roll of the same date copied by Nicholas Charles, Lancaster Herald, the canton, if a canton it be, is certainly as large as a quarter. A singular variety of the arms of Criol is to be found in the copy of an ancient Roll of Arms in the Heralds' College,— (Vincent, 165.) It is attributed to "Nicholas de Cry el," and displays party per chevron (or, from the curving of the lines it may be intended for what Heralds call Point in Point,) or and gules, three annulets, counterchanged. The original Roll we should date about the close of the reign of Edward I. ; and the coat a])pearing to be founded on that of Auberville induces us to imagine 296 A CORNER OF KENT. We must now attack one of the most difficult subjects we have to deal with,— the pedigree of the family of SANDWICH. Mr. Boys, in his valuable Collections for the his- tory of the place, from whence they derived their name, gives up the task in despair, and contents himself with enumerating the instances in which a Henry, a Simon, a John, or a Ealph de Sandwich, is met with in charter or chronicle, without any attempt to identify the individual. The great match of John de Sandwich with Agnes de Crevecoeur, Lady of Eolk- stone, has secured for him and his immediate de- scendants a most prominent position in all genealogical histories, baronages, peerages, &c. ; but who was his father or mother ? Had he any brothers or sisters ? With what other families of eminence was he con- nected by intermarriage or descent ? On these points all are silent ; and for the little information we are now enabled to lay before our readers we are mainly indebted to William Courthope, Esq., Somerset He- rald, whose familiarity with our ancient records has made his kind assistance of the greatest value to us. The origin of the family, however, is still involved in mist. The earliest members of it do not appear to have been called " de Sandwich,"* and the similarity of the it is that of Nicholas de Criol, son and heir of Joan de Auberville. — Vide p. 291. * We are told by Tanner, Notit. Monast., that Thomas Crump- tlwrne and Elizabeth his wife, who founded St. Bartholomew's Hospi- GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 297 armorial bearings accorded to that name, with those of the Butlers, descended from Hervey Walter (viz. Or, a chief indented azure), point to a common origin, a marriage with an heiress or an important infeudation.* Herbert "Walter, one of the sons of Hervey, and bro- ther of Theobald Walter, the immediate ancestor of the Butlers of Ireland and Marquises of Ormond, was Archbishop of Canterbury, and must, therefore, have possessed the greatest power and influence in this Corner of Kent. We know that a branch of these Butlers descended from a Thomas Pincerna, held land in Pleet of the Archbishop, from which circumstance it obtained the name of Butler's Tleet; tal in 1190, were of the family of Sandwich, and Mr. Boys quotes a MS. in his possession to the same effect : — "Anno secundo Eichardi primi Thomas Crawthorne and Maude his wife, of the worshipful familie of the Sandwiches, first founded the Hospital of St. Bartholo- mew." William Burcharde, one of the early benefactors, was after- wards in possession " de tenemento de Crawthorne," and in the Costumal of Sandwich, the priests of St. Bartholomew's Hospital are required to pray for the souls of Bertine de Crawthorne, William Bourcharde, Sir Henry de Sandwich, and all their ancestors and posterity. Can Crumpthorne and Crawthorne be corruptions of Crookthorne, Curvaspiria, and Courbespine, the well-known name of an ancient Norman family, and ancestors of the Maminots ? A Sir Balph de Courbespine was witness with William de Arches to a charter of William the Conqueror. * The arms of the family of Crauthorne, lords of Crauthorne, in Langport hundred, corroborate this statement, as they are the same as those of Butler and Sandwich, differenced by a label of five points gules. Thomas de Crauthorne, in the reign of Edward I., was a benefactor to the Carmelites of Saudwich, and was buried in St. Peter's Church there. — Hasted, vol. iii. p. 506. 298 A CORNER OF KENT. and also that the great family of Yere continued for several generations to hold land in the same locality under that of Sandwich. Philipot has an unsupported pedigree beginning with, the names of Manwin and of Salomon of Sandwich, the son of Manwin ;* but it is not till the reign of Henry III. that we get any reliable information respecting the family. In a grant to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, Sandwich, by William Burcharde, we meet with the names of Henry de Sand- wich,t and of his son Simon, — ''Domino Henrico der"^" Sandwich, Domino Simonefilio suo." His son Bobert is also a witness to a charter of Henry de Kubergh. Henry de Sandwich names his wife Lucia in a deed without date, of the Abbey of St. Eadegund.J Sir * He appears to have found these names in a deed without date in the Priory Book of St. Martin's at Dover, by whicli Salomon of Sandwich, the son of Manwin, makes a donation to the priory of the value of 6s. 8d. per annum.— Church Notes, Harl. MS., No. 3917, p. 36. t Sir Henry de Sandwich had a grant of the lands of Kobert de Curcy, CO. Kent, 30tli September, 1204. He was remitted from knight's service 27th April, 1205, and 6th of June following had by writ seizin of the manor of Bilsington, co. Kent. He was bailiff of Sandwich A.D. 1213-1223, was seized of Dane Court, in Thanet, 1230, which had previously belonged to Sir Ralph de Sandwich, and had license to erect an oratory there in that year j held Ham, in the same county, as heir of E.alph Fitz Bernard j endowed the hospital of St. Bartholomew, Sandwich, about the year 1244, with the license of Pope Innocent III. in the second year of his pontificate, and was buried in the chapel there, where his effigy, in the military liabit of the period, is still to be seen in good preservation. t " Hen. de Sandwyco d. &c., 10s., A.R. apud Sandwic, &c. salute anime mee et Lucij uxoris mee, etc." The witnes^ses are Dno. .4 I GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 299 Simon de Sandwich first married a lady named Juliana, and it is strano^e that her family should not have been recorded, as it is evident she must have been a person of considerable importance, the name of Juliana being^cherished by her descendants, and much wealth apparently derived from her. He had two brothers, E^obert and John ; the latter was the fortunate husband of the great coheiress Agnes de Crevecoeur, sometimes called Agnes d'Avranches, as she carried off the whole barony of Folkestone? which had come down in that family from Maud de Monville, wife of the first Rualon d'Avranches. By this Agnes, John de Sandwich had two sons, John and Nicholas. John, afterwards Sir John de Sand- wich, died eleventh of Edward I., 1282, leaving by his wife Alice,* who re-married with Sir Henry de Panebrig, an infant daughter, aged eight at that pe- riod, and named Juliana, who became the wife, first, of Sir E/ichard Weylond, from whom she was divorced in 1302, and secondly, of Sir John de Segrave. No mention is made of issue by her first husband ; but she is said to have had an only daughter by her second husband, named Maria, who died, aged fifteen, unmar- ried, the twenty-third of Edward III. This, however, is wholly incorrect ; Maria was her grand-daughter, Hoger de Betleshanger, Osbo & Hamo fribus suis, Augero et Omero de Sandwich.^MS. Coll. Arms, R 27, " Kent." * She was party to an agreement with her brother-in-law, touching her dower (thirty-fourth Edward I., 1305) out of land at Woodensborough, co. Kent. 300 A COIINEK OF KENT. the only child of her son John de Segrave,* and on the death of this Maria, who was only fifteen days old at the death of her father, and lived altogether but five months, t Nicholas de Sandwich, son of Nicholas, brother of Sir John de Sandwich, was found to be her cousin and next heir, and at that time, 1349, to be fifty years of age. He was lord of the manor and rector of Otham, co. Kent, and also rector of St. Michael's, Crooked Lane, London ; and in him this line of the family expired. J We must now return to Simon and Juliana. They appear to have had issue three sons, Henry, John, and Ralph, and one daughter, Juliana, married to Pulk Peyforer. Henry de Sandwich was the first husband of Joan, daughter and heir of Sir William de Auberville, and did homage for his lands which * Aged twenty -nine at the death of his father in 1343, and whom he only survived six years, dying on Wednesday, 8th of July, 1349. —(P. M. Inqnis., 22nd August, twenty-third Edward III., 1349.) Julianna had also, by Sir John Segrave, a daughter Elizabeth, married first to Kichard Foliot, Esq., and secondly (fifth of Edward III., 1331) to Sir Eoger de North wode. She died without issue at Canterbury, 11th Dec, 1335, and was buried at Sheppey. + She died on Tuesday after the feast of St. Bartholomew, A.D. 1349.— P. M. Inquis., taken at Lyminge, Dec. 16th, 1349, twenty- third of Edward III. i He died in 1370, having in 1358 enfeoffed Edward de Stabelgate into his manors of Bilsiugton, Poldre, Eastry, and rent charge on Folkestone. His arms in Otham church had a mullet in chief for difference. — (Petre le Neve's Ch. Notes, 1610-24.) He had a younger brother John, dead before 1357, who was the first husband of Bene- dict, daughter of John de Shelving, who remarried, 1358, Sir Edmond Haute. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 301 he held of the king in capite, in right of his wife, the aforesaid Joan, thirty-second of Henry III., 1248. He was of Dent-de-Lion, now called Dandelion, in the Isle of Thanet, and seems to have had no issue by Joan d' Auberville, as Dent-de-Lion eventually passed, by marriage with his niece Juliana to William de Leybourne, who died seized of it third of Edward II., 1310. This Juliana is said by some genealogists to have been daughter of his sister Juliana by Eulk ' Peyforer, and heir to her uncle Sir Ealph. Others make her daughter as well as heir to Halph, who was probably heir to his brother Henry. Sir Halph was certainly married, for he was one of the Kentish knights summoned with his wife, " consortis suae." to attend the coronation of Edward II. He appears to have been a person in great estimation, as we find him appointed to various high offices during the reigns of Henry III. and Edward I. He was keeper of the king's wardrobe, and as such received the great seal at Gloucester forty-ninth of Henry III. (1264i-5) ; had the custody of the bishopric of Lon- don, first Edward I., 1272, and of the archbishopric of Canterbury, sixth of the same reign, 1277. The same year he was made constable and warden of Dover Castle ; witnessed the homage of Alexander, king of Scots, 29th September, 1278 ; was one of the council deputed to hear the complaints of the barons of Sandwich 1280 ; a member of the council of Prince Edward in 1297 ; had the custody of the Tower of London in 1306 ; and was summoned, as we have 302 A CORNER OF KENT. already stated, to attend with his wife the coronation of Edward 11., 8th February, 1308 ; and yet we are ignorant who was that wife, or whether she was the mother of his child, for such we certainly believe Juliana to have been, as on her marriage with William de Leybourne she had settled on her Dane Court, of which we find Sir Ralph, his brother Henry, his father and grandfather, were each in turn seized.* She survived her husband, who died before March 3rd, 1310, and by whom she had two children — Idonea, married to Geoffrey de Say, and Thomas de Leyburn, who died during his father's lifetime, leaving an only daughter, an infant of three years of age, Julianna de Leyburn, that great heiress of whom we have already so often spoken, and whose line failed in 1391, on the death of her great-grand- son, John de Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, when all her issue became extinct {vide p. 76). -Of John, the third son of Sir Simon, all we know at present is, that certain lands in E^ipple, Ham, and Walling were settled on him in remainder by his father in 1255.t * The point is all but settled by the fact recorded in the Patent Roll of the 49th Henry III., M. 4, that the manor of Preston, which had belonged to Simon de Sandwich (the father of Sir Ralph), and which had been seized by the King in consequence of the said Simon being '' inimicus Regis," is directed to be given to Juliana de Ley- bourne, to whom it would come " de jure hereditatis." t A John de Sandwich, armiger, is entered amongst the persons commemorated in the Leiger Book of Davington Priory, and imme- diately after his name we read " Beatrice de Sancwhich." GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 303 Here we are at fault, and fear even to venture a guess respecting the origin of another branch of this great family, from which the Harfleets of Checquer and Holland were immediately descended. There was undoubtedly a Nicholas,* son of Thomas de Sandwich, whose sister Margaret married Henry de Goshall, and whose daughter and heiress Anne was the wife of John Septvans, the progenitor of the Harfleets, according to the pedigree in Philipot's MS., before mentioned. Thomas, in that pedigree, is set down as the son of a William de Sandwich, who, in one account, is made the husband of a daughter of John Lord Oobham, and in another, of Eleanor^ daughter of Hamo de Orevecoeur,t the * There was a Nicholas de Sandwich, whose daughter Mabel is said to have married William, the last male heir of Avranches, before 1236. Another Nicholas de Sandwich was prior of Christchurch, Canterbury, elected November 1, 1244 j resigned, 1258 j precentor, 1262. A third Nicholas was a proprietor of lands in the hundred of Cornhil and Eastry, seventeenth of Edward I., and died 1289. — (Epitaph in Canterbury Cathedral.) A fourth Sir Nicholas, son of Sir Simon de Sandwich, Lord Warden, temp. Richard II., was a great benefactor of St. Bartholo- mew's Hospital at Sandwich, and is buried in the chapel there. — ("MS. penes G. B.," quoted by Boys in his Collections.) His arms are said to have been those of the Cirque Ports, impaling a lion rampant guardant. t This at'first sight seems to be a blunder arising from some confusion respecting the match of John de Sandwich with Agnes, daughter of Hamo de Crevecoeur, and that of Eleanor, her sister, with Bertram de Criol j but non constat that there might not have been an Eleanor, daughter of another Hamo de Crevecoeur, one of the branch of Hamo de Blen. The name of Hamo is exceedingly common in the family of Crevecoeur, and we find a Ham.o de Sandwich who was prebendary 304 A CORNER or KENT. said William being the son of Salomon, the son of Man win, as we have already stated. No trace of any of these names occurs in any of the numerous official records and charters from which we have gleaned the information just laid before our readers. Boys is perfectly silent respecting them, and Philipot himself appears to have been doubtful of his infor- mation, and quotes no authorities, though we have seen from whence he obtained the names of Man win and Salomon. To Thomas he gives for a wife a nameless daughter of Thomas de Helles, of Wood- ensborough, and to his son Nicholas an anonymous daughter of ... . Hess, of Great Mongeam, distinguishing that family by a shield of arms, displaying argent a fess sable (charged with a mullet or) between three lions rampant gules. This coat, without the mullet, is to be found in a copy of a Eoll of Arms of the 14th century. ^ — (Vincent, 165, Coll. Arms.) And a E,obert de Hes is witness to a charter of Matilda de Auberville in company with Henry de Sandwich, Eobert de Gosehall, William de Bock- land, and Andrew and Wibert de Sandwich. — (Har- leian Charters, 45 E. 33.) Now, first, as to William. Thoroton, in his History of Nottinghamshire, men- of Hereford in 1318. — (Willis's Cathedrals.) The match with a daughter of John Lord Cobham could not so well have escaped notice in some of the Cobham pedigrees ; but there is one curious piece of evidence in support of it, viz. the arms of Sandwich dimidiated with those of Cobham, formerly in a window of Cobham church, Kent. ^Philipot, MS. Coll. Arms, Pe. I. p. 94. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 305 tions a William de Sandwich, who had a brother John and a sister Idonea ; but they were the children of a John de Sandwich living in 1312.* Boys has also discovered in the Register Berthona, Archives of Canterbury, a William, brother of Henry ; but neither of the Henries of whom we have found positive evidence was the son of " Salomon, the son of Man win." Next, as to Thomas. Bobinson, in his " Gavelkind," tells us of a Thomas, son of Thomas de Sandwich, who had the custody of William and Thomas, sons of John de Helles, sixth of Edward II., as *'next of kin to whom their inheritance could not come." Philipot, we have observed, gives to Thomas de Sandwich the daughter of a Thomas de Helles for a wife. Supposing her to have been a sister of John, father of the wards William and Thomas de Helles, her son Thomas de Sandwich would have been their cousin, to whom, for some reason, their inheritance could not come. It is clear, at any rate, that the two families were connected by ties of blood ; and by a Plea Boll of the thirty-third of Edward I. we find that a Thomas de Sandwich, living about the * It is a fine levied in 1312 between Jobn de Sandwich and Mar- garet, daughter of Walter de Lundy, querentes, and Nicholas de Haliwell, deforciant, of three messuages, &c. ; whereby they were settled on the said John and Margaret for life, afterwards on Idonea, the daughter of John and the heir of her body ; remainder to John , his brother, and his heirs ; remainder to John de Sandwich and his heirs, William being brother of Idonea, and John the son of John. Vide also MS. Coll. Arms, R. 27, where the witnesses to a charter, C 750, are "Henr. de Sandwico, Will, fre suo." X 306 A COUNER OF KENT. same period, had a wife named Johanna and a son named John.* That he was the son of a Thomas, and may therefore be identified as the guardian of the children of John de Helles, is fairly deducible from the two following extracts from the Pine Rolls. The first, circa third of Edward I., shows us Thomas de Sandwich, plaintiff, and E/obert de Crevecoeur and Isolda his wife, defendants, in a suit respecting lands in Meet by Sandwich, the right of said Thomas and Johanna his wife, and the heirs of the said Thomas ; while in an earlier one of the forty- fifth of Henry III., Andrew de MoUand, Matilda his wife, and Idonea de la Porde, are plaintiffs, and Thomas de Sandwich, defendant, respecting two parts of a messuage, &c., in Ash, recognized by said Andrew and others as the right of the said Thomas. Still later we find another Thomas de Sandwich, of Essex, who had a wife named Elena ; but still we are unable to identify him with Thomas, the son of William, and the father of Sir Nicholas, or even to * *' Inter Thomam de Sandwico Joha uxorem ejus, et JoM filius eorum de terris in Lyme." Vide also a Final Concord of thirty-second Edward I. between Thomas de Sandwich and Henry Perot and Johanna his wife j from which it may be inferred that Johanna Perot was the daughter of Thomas de Sandwich. — (Lansdowne MS., Brit. Mus. 268.) It is also worth observing that in the twenty-eighth of Henry III. there was a Final Concord between one of this same family of Perot, named Alan, and Simon Fitz Henry de Sandwich, respecting land in Poire, the right of the said Alan (who was, probably, father of the Henry Perot above named), showing an earlier connection between the two families.— Lansdowne MS., Brit. Mus. No. 269, p. 26. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 307 guess how the descendants of Manwin and Salomon are connected with those of Henry and Simon, or Ralph. We have shown the extinction of the latter line in the persons of the two Juliannas and the Rector of Otham. The male issue of the former failed nearly about the same period when Anne, sole daughter and heiress of Sir Nicholas de Sandwich, married one of the equally important, but little better known family of — SEPTVANS, alias hareleet.* This remarkable name is suggested by Mr. Mark Anthony Lower to be derived from a place called Septvas or Septvents {i.e. Seven winds) in Normandy ; but whatever may have been its origin, the corrup- tions of it exceed in number those of any other patronymic that we remember. In Latin, it is gene- rally rendered Septemvannis, and sometimes Septem- vallibus ; but in Norman Erench, or English, we find it written Setuans, Septvans, Septvaus, Seavaus, Sevanz, Sephans, Sevance, Sevaunces, Senantz, Cen- nants, and even Setwentz and Setwetz ! * We have purposely throughout this volume, except when quoting literally aucient documents or other writers, spelt this name H&xfleet, in conformity with that of the manor of Fleet, from which we believe it to have been taken, as asserted in one instance by Philipot, apparently from the information of the family, who, though they con- tinued nearly to the end of the seventeenth century to write both Flete and Harflete, occasionally in some of the later instances, signed themselves Har/^ee^e, in accordance with the progress of orthography. X 2 308 A CORNER OP KENT. The name does not occur in Domesday, and the probability is that the earliest bearer of it in this country was the Robert de Septvans, husband of Emma, coheir of William Eitz Helte.* She is de- scribed as Emma de Septvans, of Aldington, which estate we find descend in the family, and where it would appear they were first seated in England. Emma had two sisters, Sibilla and Alicia. The former married Hugo de Ceriton,t and the latter Ansfrid de Caney. The husband of Emma was dead in 1180, and in 1185 his son Robert was found to be twelve years of age.:|: An Isilia de Septvans appears as a benefactress to St. John's Abbey, Colchester, § in the 12th century, who might have been the wife of the second Robert, who possessed property in Essex, * William Fitz Helte died shortly before twenty-sixth Henry II., 1180; for, by the Pipe Roll of that year, we fibd that William de Ceriton and Ansfrid de Cani and Emma de Septuans rendered account of 100 marks to have the land of William Eitz Helte. t She appears to have remarried, before 1181, John Monaco, as in that year seventy shillings was paid in to the Treasury " de Johanna Monaco et Emma de Setuans," who in the last line of the entry is described as " uxorem ejus." In the same year William de Haga paid five marks for a jury of matrons to ascertain whether Emma de Septuans had borne a child (to her first husband) ; the object being to prove the heirship. In 1185 the sheriff renders an account of 71s. and 5d. for Aldinton, the land of Emma de Setvans, and for 60s. for Maplescamps, also her land; and in 1187 the sheriff makes his return for Aldinton, the heir to which is in the custody of the king. J Rot. de Dominabus. Emma was dead in 1187, and in the Plea RoU of the 9 th of John, 1216, she is called " avia Rob't de Septem- vannis." — Abbrev. of Pleas, p. 57. § Morant's Essex. GENEALOGICAL AND HEEALDIC NOTES. 309 two persons named Malger and E^ichard, receiving his rents for him during his minority, in Wigeberg, in that county.* In 1199 (tenth Eichard I.) a suit was brought against Robert de Septvans, then of full age, and Malger de Wigeberg, by Alicia, wife of Eobert de Newlond, and daughter of Avicia, the wife of Swainus or Swain, to recover 1^ hide of land in Wigeberg, now held by the said Malger. By the pleadings in this suit we learn that Alicia had an elder sister, in right of whom it would seem the defendants resisted the claim. Her name is not given, nor any affinity to the defendants implied ; but she must have been some near connection of one or both of them. Eobert the second was dead in or before the ninth of John, 1216, and was succeeded in his estates by his son, a third Robert, of whom Emma de Septvans is in that year described as the grandmother, t There is another family named in connection with Robert de Septvans the second, bearing the singular appellation of Ut Devers. In 1205, sixth of John, there was a Pinal Concord be- tween Philippa de Ut Devers, petitioner, and Robert de Septvans, tenant, respecting an acre of land in Audington (Aldington), the right of the said Robert * " Robertus filius Robert! de Setvans est in custodia Domini Regis et per eum in custodia Yicecomitis de Essex et est xij annorum. Terra sua de Wigeberga fait in manu Domini Regis elapso 1 anno ab Epiphania. Malger et Ricardus receperunt inde firmam ij termino- rum Postea commisit Yicecomes terram illam Rogero Preposito pro xi libras, &c." — Rot. de Dominabus. t Rot. Cur. Reg. sub anno. 310 A CORNER OP KENT. and his heirs,* and in the sixth Henry III., another between Fhilijp de Utdevers (the son, it may be, of Philippa) and the third "Robert de Sevans," for apparently the same land in Aldington to which he had then succeeded. t There is also a charter of this Philip Utdevers, who, with the consent of his wife, and Osbert, his son, '' remits 10s. to the canons of Begeham, which they owed for the land of Blachinden."J In the eighth of Henry III., Hugh de Scerpton is the petitioner and Robert de Septuans the defendant in a Pinal Concord respecting half the manor of Aldington, the right of Robert and his heirs. We know of nothing more that can at present throw any further light upon this third Robert save that he died thirty-third of Henry III., A.D. 1249, seized of Aldington, Whelmstone, and Milton, was buried at Lid, and left a widow Matilda, who was living in 1253 ;§ and a son Robert, aged nearly forty at the time of the inquisition, to succeed him. This * Lansdowne MS., Brit. Mus. No. 269. t LaDsdowne MS., No. 269. X MS. Coll. Arms, R 27, Kent. Finis Levatt. in Cur. Eeg. § In the 15th of Henry III., 1238, there was a Final Concord between Isabella de Septvans and Mabilia, daughter of Gilbert de St. Ledger, respecting fifteen acres of land at Lidd and Bromhill, held by Stephen de Ospringe, the right of the said Isabella. Who was she ? — one of the St. Ledgers who had married a Septvans ? The widow of the second Robert, or the wife of his grandson, the fourth Bobert ? who would have been about five-and-twenty at that period, and certainly had a wife named Isabella. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 311 Robert, the fourth of the name at present known, survived his father only four years, dying thirty- seventh of Henry III., 1253, when it was found that he had a wife Isabella, and a son Eobert, three years of age. By the pedigrees, it would appear that he also left a daughter named Joan, who married John Lord Cobham; whether older than her brother E^obert or not we have no means at present of ascertaining ; we are also in the dark as to the families of the two widows Matilda and Isabella, co-existing in 1253. Segar, in the MS. copy of his Baronage, recently purchased by the College of Arms, has a note to the effect that Joan Septvans, Lady Cobham, was coheir of Bose, widow of Sir Stephen Penchester.* Now Bose was the daughter of Hawisia de Beseville, living in 1270, and was not the widow but the first wife of Stephen de Penchester, who married secondly Margaret, daugh- ter of John de Burgh, who survived him and married John de Oreby. Bose had a sister Johanna de Beseville, also living 1270 ; and Stephen de Penchester had a daughter named Joan, aged forty, second of Edward IL, 1309, t and the wife of Henry Cobham at Bensdale. * Banks also calls her "coheir to Hose, the widow of Stephen de Pencestre" (vol. ii. p. 104). t Date of escheat of " Margaret uxor Stephen de Pencester." — (Philipot, 4, P.E.) But query, had not Stephen a third wife j for we find in the same MS., under the 18th of Edward II., Johanna uxor Stephen de Pencester. 312 A CORNER OF KENT. By that calculation she must have been born in 1269, and therefore the daughter of Eose, and not of Margaret, as asserted ; but even correcting these two material errors does not enlighten us as to the connec- tion of Joan Septyans with E^ose de Penchester. Let us proceed a little further. Sir Robert de Septyans, fifth in succession, born, as we haye found, in 1250, died thirty-fourth Edward I., 1306, and was buried at Chartham. Of this E-obert there are many notices in the parliamentary writs,* but nothing to throw light on his genealogy. Philipot in his pedigree, marked Annulet, p. 37, marries him to a daughter of Aldon. It is quite possible that he might haye married one of that family ; but a curious piece of information is supplied by a Pine Eoll of the twenty-second of Edward L, 1294. We find therein that he had married Johanna, widow of E/ichard le Wallies, in contempt of the king's authority. Who this Johanna was by birth, howeyer, we haye not been able to ascertain, nor whether she was the mother of his children. His son William was found to be "twenty-five years of age and upwards" at his father's death in 1306. He must, therefore, have been born at the latest in 1281 ; but we do not know when the marriage of Robert with Johanna took place, but only that she was dead in 1294. We are half inclined to believe that a mistake of * He was knight of the shire, returned for Parliament 18th and 30th of Edward I, 1290 and 1302. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 313 one generation has been made respecting Joan Lady Cobham, that the last two Roberts de Septvans have been confounded, and that the wife of John Lord Cobham was daughter, not of the third, but of the fourth Eobert by this Johanna le Wallies. Whether. or not, she was Johanna, sister of Rose de Beseville, unmarried in 1270, which would allow twenty-four years for her to become wife and widow of Richard le Wallies, wife of Robert de Sept- vans, and mother at least of Joan Lady Cobham, can only be ascertained by further inquiry. Philipot, who asserts that his pedigree was compiled from family evidences, was clearly ignorant of this match. If, as he sets down, the last Sir Robert de Septvans married a daughter of Aldon, either before his mar- riage with Johanna le Wallies, or after her death in 1294, she was most probably the daughter of Elias de Aldon, by Christiana de Heringode, and sister of Sir Thomas de Al(Jon, w'ho married Elizabeth, daughter of Geoffrey de Say ; but the pedigrees of Aldon are silent, as usual, respecting daughters, and we have, therefore, no baptismal name to assist our speculations. To return to facts. Sir Robert, born in 1250, mar- ried one of the aforesaid ladies some time previous to 1281, in which year at the latest, we find his eldest son, William, w^as born, being twenty-five and upwards at his father's death in 1306, and already married to Elizabeth, daughter of Pimpe, of Pimpe's Court, Esq., in the county of Kent. 314 A CORNER OF KENT. Immediately upon his succession to his father's estates he appears to have had a settlement with a Eyohert de Septvans respecting a messuage and two carrucates of land in Lidd and Bromhill. The same E^obert de Septvans, we presume, holding two knights' fees in Wigberg, county of Essex, some nine years later. What relation this Kobert was to William does not appear. He may have been his brother; but not being so designated, it is more probable that he was a cousin. Down to this point we have no collateral descent recorded, or any trace of one ; yet it is not likely that the four E^oberts should all have been only sons.* Sir William Septvans, of Milton, for he was knighted, and is so described, was sheriff of Kent 14th and 15th of Edward II., and died 16th of same reign, 1323, leaving by his wife, Elizabeth Pimpe, William, his eldest son, aged twenty-two and upwards at that date, John, Symkin or Simon, and Robert. No daughters are mentioned. John married a daughter of Hoger Manston, of Manston Court, Isle of Thanet, and had issue, of which anon. Robert was priest and parson of St. Poter's, Sandwich, where he was buried. Of Simon, or Symkin, as he is indif- ferently called, we have no information we can rely * In the old Koll of Arms, temp. Edward I., already quoted, are the arms of a Robert de Septvans, — Azure, 3 faDS, or, differenced by nine cross crosslets of the second, 3, 3, 2, and 1 ; evidently that of a younger brother or collateral. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 315 upon. We will return to him presently ; but must first clear ofP the descent from his brothers. Sir William and John. William (second of that name)* is set down in some of Philipot's Pedigrees as the husband of Maud, sole daughter and heir of Sir Theobald de Twitham, Lord of Twitham in Ash ; but no actual authority is quoted, or can be found, for this marriage. On the other hand, we have official documents, showing that he left a widow named Elizabeth, to whom his son William was next heir. In the first place, there is the post-mortem inquisition, showing that William Septemvannis died 25th of Edward III., 1351, and that William, his son, was at that time aged five years and upwards. We have next the inquisition taken at Canterbury on the Saturday next after the Eeast of St. Andrew, 30th of Edward III., 1356,— *' Post mortem Eliz. de Seyvance," in which the jurors say that she held for life the manor of Milton ; that she died on Wednesday, the Eeast of the Apostles St. Simon and St. Jude, in the year aforesaid ; that William, son of William de Seyvance, is next heir of the said Elizabeth, and that the said heir is * It does not appear that he was ever knighted, though set down as " Sir William " in the Pedigrees. He was summoned as " Wilhel- mus de Setzvans, ^man at arms' to attend the great council of Westminster, on Wednesday next after Ascension day, 30*^ May, 17 Ed. 2^1.," and as "William de Sevanns," appointed with others to blockade the sea-coast from Bromhill to Dengemarsh, for the purpose of preventing the landing of emissaries from France, 19 Edward II.— Vide Parliamentary Writs under those dates. 316 A CORNER OP KENT. aged fifteen years. Thirdly, on the 1st of November, 1364 (38th of Edward III.), another inquisition was taken at Canterbury, ** post mortem " the same ^' Elizabeth, who was wife of William Sevance, de- ceased," when the jurors say that she held no lands " in capite," but that she held for term of life the manor of Milton with William de Sevance, late her husband, deceased, of the heirship of William, son of the late William, deceased, who held in capite, being within (under) age, and in custody of the king. *' That said Elizabeth died Thursday, on the Eeast of St. Simon and St. Jude, An° 30 of the king that now is ; and they say that William de S. is son and heir of the said William, and of the age of twenty- one years and more." It will be observed that in none of these inquisitions is "William, son of Wil- liam de Sept vans," called also the son of Elizabeth, but only her next heir.* That he was her son, how- ever, there can be little doubt, from the singular proceedings which took place in 1366, fortieth of * It is singular that none of the records respecting this Elizabeth de Septvans enlighten us on the important point of her own family. We are inclined however to believe that she was by birth a Darrell. In Le Neve's Church Notes, so often quoted by us, we find that in the windows of St. John's Hospital at Canterbury there were the figures of a lady and a knight kneeling on cushions, underwritten " Orate p. anima W^ Septuan Militis et Eliz. ux^' ejus." The lady having on her mantle azure a lion rampant crowned, or ; and that at the -same period were to be seen in St. Alphage Church in the same city : azure a lion rampant, crowned, or, in conjunction with the arms of Septvans. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 317 Edward III.,* when an inquisition '' probatio etatis " was granted on the petition of William de Septvans, who had been " led away and counselled " by Sir Nicholas Loveyne, of Penshurst, and others named in the petition, " to alienate his lands and tene- ments" to them, he not being at that time of full age, as had been falsely represented. The result of this inquiry, held before John de Cobham, Thomas de Lodelowe, and William Waure, at Canterbury, was the proof that the petitioner was not even then of age, and would be only '' twenty years, and no more, on the Peast of St. Augustine the Doctor next coming;" and the grounds on which they came to this decision was, that many of the knights and esquires on this inquest f were with the Earl of Huntingdon when the King (Edward III.) was at Caen (20th of July, 1346), and that the said Earl of Huntingdon returned to England to be cured of a malady which he had, and William de Septvans, father of the infant, was in the retinue of the Earl, and returned to England with him, at which time they * The letters patent were dated " 13*^ of April, in the fortieth year of our reign," the King being then at Rushingdon, a manor in Minster, Isle of Sheppy. t These twelve " knights and squires " were Sir John de North- wode, Sir Thomas Apuldrefield, Sir Thomas Chiche, Sir Richard at Lese, Sir John de Brockhull, John Barry, William Apuldrefield, Thomas Colepepper, Henry Apuldrefield senior, Henry Aucher, Fulk Payforer, and Geoffrey Colepepper; all Kentish worthies, many of whom we learn were at the taking of Caen and the surrender of Calais. 318 A CORNER OF KENT. found the wife of the said William pregnant of the said infant. That the Earl of Huntingdon went away to Poplar in order to have his physicians handy from London, and made the countess * live at Pres- ton (a parish adjacent to Ash), in order to be god- mother of the child when it should be born; that the infant was born on the day of St. Austin the Doctor, next after (28th of August, 1346) ; and that William, abbot of St. Austin's, and Thomas de Aldon the elder, both since deceased, were godfathers of the said infant, and the Countess of Huntingdon godmother ; and very soon after the earl was cured, and returned to Erance, and came to the siege of Calais, and William de Septvans with him ; and the said William told his companions, who were sworn on this inquest, how since his departure from them God of His grace had so visited him, that he had sent him a son, &c. We have abridged this account from the docu- ments which are printed in extenso in the 1st volume of the Archseologia Cantiana, to which excellent work we refer those who need further particulars, our object being only to show that William de Septvans was born 28th of August, 1346, and must certainly, therefore, have been the child of Elizabeth, widow of "^ This was the celebiated Julianna de Leyborne, countess of Huntingdon, of whom we have spoken so often. The inventory of her goods at her ^^ House at Preston " is published with her will and various other interesting particulars in the Archaeologia Cantiana, vol. i. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 319 the elder William, in 1351, when his heir was cor- rectly found to he five years of age. Most pro- vokingly, however, neither her name nor that of her family is mentioned in the ahove minute particulars. It is important, also, to call attention to the fact that no other issue is alluded to ; and as William de Septvans returned to Prance shortly after his wife's confinement, the probabilities are that his son William was an only child, whereas a brother, named John, has been given to him in the pedigrees, from whom descended the Septvans, alias Harfleets, of Holland and Checquer. We must clear off this direct line first. Sir William de Septvans (third of that name), Knt., was sheriff of Kent, and married Elizabeth, daughter of Boteler, of Woodhall, co. Hertford. He died in 1407, and was buried at Christ Church, Canterbury, under a flat stone in the middle aisle, with his arms and those of his wife, and the following epitaph : — '' Icy gist Guliam Sepvanus chevalier qui morust le Darnier jour D'Aust L'an de Grace m.ccccvu. de quele Alme Deux eit pite et mercy Ame." Sir William Septvans left by his wife Elizabeth Boteler, who survived him,* a son, named after him William, who was also knighted, and married * She was living in 1448, and had remarried with Sir Eichard Welsted, Kt. 320 A CORNER OP KENT. Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Peche,* and died March Mh, 1448-9, being closely followed to the grave by his widow, who died only twenty-four days after him, as we learn from his epitaph, formerly in Christ Church, Canterbury, where they were buried close to his father the sheriff. "Sub lioc marmore jacent corpora Willi Sepuans, militis qui obijfc quarto die Martij, Anno Dni 1448, et Elizabethse uxoris ejus filise Johanis Pecbe militis quae obiit 28 die mensis Martii quorum anima- bus propitietur Deus, Amen." They had issue but one child, Elizabeth, who married Sir William Eogg, of E^epton, near Ashford, and thus ended the name of Septvans in the eldest line of the family. We must now return to the issue of John, son of the first William de Septvans by Elizabeth Pimpe, and husband of a daughter of Koger Mansion. By her he had John Septvans, of St. Laurence and Sittingbourne, and a daughter named Joan, who became the wife of Sir John Leverick, of Ash. John Septvans, of Sittingbourne, married Constance St. Nicholas ; but which of that family was her father has not yet been discovered. It is only stated that he was of Thanet. No such name as Constance is to be found in the pedigrees or wills of the St. Nicholas' ; but her husband is said to have been lord of the manor * The singular fact of four successive Williams de Septvans marrying eacb a wife named Elizabeth, increases the usual difficulties and confusion to be found in such researches. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 321 of Upper Hall, whicli came to the family of St. Nicholas through the Goshalls.* By this Constance he had two sons and two daughters, John, Thomas, Constance, and Susan. John Septvans was Esquire of the Body to King Henry YI., and died Dec. 18th, 1458, apparently without issue by his wife, Katharine, who survived him and married, as it has been sup- posed, secondly, Wigmore, and thirdly, Martin of Graven ey,t and dying in 1498, desired to be buried with her former husband, John Septvans, at Ash. We have gone so fully into the question of this lady's family (presumed to be Kirton), in our last chapter (pp. 218 — 224), that we need not dwell upon it here, further than to express our doubt of the accuracy of the statement that she married, secondly, "Wigmore. The '' John Wigmore" she calls her son died 26th of October, 1492, and the name of ^^Editha consortis suae," has been singularly omitted in Weever's copy of the * Philipot. Yi 11. Cant. "We know from the will of Katherine, wife of John, the son of this Constance, that he founded the Chantry of the Upper Hall in St. Nicholas Church, Ash, but we question the manor descending from the Coshalls. Lewis (Hist. Thanet) tells us that Upper Court was so called to distinguish it from Nether Court, which belonged to the Goshalls, and that it was formerly a part of the estate of the family of Criol, in which it continued till the latter end of the reign of Henry YI., when it was passed away by Sir Thomas Criol to John White, Esq., who died seized of it ninth of Edward lY. If this descent of the property be correct, we cannot see when or how Upper Court or Hall, as it was indifferently called, came to either St. Nicholas or Septvans before 1458. t "Orate Johannis Martin Arm. qui obiit ultimo Octob. 1479." — Mon. Inscrip., Graveney, Weever's Mon., p. 282. Y 322 A CORNER OF KENT. monumental inscription at Paversham, but preserved by Lewis in his History of that place, p. 19.* It is, therefore, more probable that the "Edythe Wygmere" she calls her daughter was, in point of fact, her own child, either by Septvans or Martyn, and John Wygmere, the husband of Edith, her son iit laiv. Both could not be her own issue, and the distinction we nowadays make is of very recent origin. In Graveney church we are told that the arms of Martin impaling those assigned to Kirton were in a window by the north door, and the figure of a woman by it kneeling. t This is conclusive as far as the match with Martin goes, and we have shown that a similar proof existed in Ash church, in 1760, of the match with Sept vans ; but where have we such a corrobora- tion of the match with Wigmore ? In Mr. Streat- field's interleaved copy of Hasted it is true there is a drawing of a shield, Wigmore impaling Kirton, placed in conjunction with two others, displaying Septvans and Martyn, with similar impalements ; but no authority is quoted, and we are inclined to believe that it was only drawn in accordance with the re- ceived opinion that Wigmore was her second husband. Of this we humbly submit we have no proof, and that * Orate pro animabus Johannes Wygmore generosus qnondam socii de Gray's Inn et Editha eousortis suse et omnium filiariim suarum ac Ricardi filii ejus qui quidem Johannis obiit xxvi die mensis Octobris Anno Domini millessimo ccccxcij, quorum animabus propicietur Deus Amen." On a brass plate fastened on a flat stone ; no arms mentioned. t Philipot's Church Notes, Harleian MSS. Brit. Mus., No. 3917. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 323 the evidence adduced in its favour is fairly open to the interpretation we have given to it. To return to our genealogy. Thomas is marked as son and heir hy Philipot, and may, therefore, have been the elder brother of John : he died before him, however, and unmarried, or at least without issue, 31st of Henry YI., 1453. Susan married Sir Henry Hardress, Knt., and Constance became a nun, and eventually Abbess of Minster in Sheppey. Thus terminated this line of the family of Septvans. We have now to affiliate another John Septvans, the husband of Anne de Sandwich, and progenitor of that prolific branch of the family afterwards assuming the name of Harfleet. This John Septvans is, both by Philipot and by Hasted, who has followed him without comment or investigation, made in some places the son of Sir William Septvans, who died in 1351, and in others of Sir William's brother, Simon or Symkin ; in each case his mother is said to have been Maud de Twitham, who, with equal impartiality is made daughter of Theobald, and daughter of Alan de Twitham, and married to William in one pedigree, and to Simon in another.* Hasted under Meopham (Hist. Kent, vol. i.) very circumstantially informs US, that Theobald died seized of that manor, 4th of Eichard II., without issue, leaving Maud, his only daughter, heir to his large possessions in this country, all of which she carried in marriage to Simon Sept- * Philipot's MS. Coll. Arms, marked Annulet. Y 2 324 A CORNER OF KENT. vans, a younger branch of the Septvans of Milton, &e., quoting Philipot, and Avhat is of more im- portance, ''Rot. JEsch. sub anno'' He then adds, Simon had by Maud a son, Sir William de Septvans, whose son John married Constance, daughter of Thomas Ellis, Esq., of Sandwich, &c., &c.* We would not bewilder our readers with this mass of error and confusion, were there not glimpses of truth to be seen through it which may greatly assist our inquiries. The glaring inaccuracies and contradic- tions of Philipot's statements which had been so complacently copied by Hasted without a note of interrogation, induced us to rely with more confidence on an elaborate pedigree by the former, compiled apparently from family documents, and certified by no less a personage than Camden Clarenceux.f In this pedigree, Maud de Twitham is definitively married to Sir William Septvans, and made the mother of Sir William the Sheriff, and of the John Septvans in question. We have, however, shown a few papers back, that Sir William the Sheriff, about whose age so much dispute occurred, must have been the son of Elizabeth, who survived his father, and of whom he is found to be the heir, and that the peculiar circum- stances of the case render it improbable that he had any brother. In the will of the Sheriff, proved October 4th, * Philipot's MS. Coll. Arms, marked Mascle, and Yillare Can- tianum, page 235. t Philipot's MS., marked Annulet, ut supra. GENEALOaiCAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 325 1407, no mention is made of a brother John ; but, in the curious proceedings above alluded to, we find that amongst the lands illegally alienated by William while under age and before 1364, was the Manor of Promhull (Bromhill) in the County of Kent, which he had of the gift and feoffment of Eichard de Alesle, Rector of the Church of Harrietsham, on which was a rent-charge of ten pounds per annum for life to John Septyans: but no hint as to his affinity. We now come to another curious piece of evidence which has hitherto, we believe, escaped observation. The earliest pedigree of the Septvans contained in the "Visitations (D. 13, Coll. Arm.), commences with John de Septvans, but does not say of whom he was the son.* The arms, however, which are drawn in trick, display azure, three winnowing fans, or (the old coat of the Septvans), differenced with a border chechy of the same. This is surely a strong corroboration of the statement which makes him the cousin instead of the brother of Sir William the Sheriff, and induces us, in conjunction with other evidence, to believe so far in * Nor whom he married. No wives are mentioued in the earlier portion of this Pedigree, which otherwise would have been so valu- able. The MS. is not, however, quite so old as presumed, at least this part of it. It is described as a visitation by Benolt Clarenceux, temp. Henry YIII., and the majority of the arms and pedigrees appear to be of that date ; but we shall show hereafter that this par- ticular genealogy of Septvans, at page 27 of the volume, could not have been entered before the sixth of Elizabeth, 1564, and it is evident that other entries have been made in several pages by a later hand. 326 A CORNER OF KENT. that pedigree wMcli makes him the son of Simon by Maud de Twitham. All we hear of Simon is that he was living in the reign of Edward II. ; of Maud de Twitham we have found no trace. The EoU of 4th Richard 11., apparently quoted by Hasted in support of the statement of the marriage of Simon with Maud, daughter and heir of Theobald de Twitham, mentions neither of them. It is a mere repetition of the post mortem Inquisition of the 25th of Edward III., 1351, concerning the lands of Alan de Twitham, Lord of Twitham, and showing that Alan the son of Theobald de Twitham, son of the before - named Alan, is the nearest heir, and of the age of five years. It, however, proves this much in contradiction to the assertions of Philipot and Hasted, viz. : that Theobald did not die without male issue, and that if any Maud de Twitham became his heir, it must have been after the death of his son Alan, who was living 1351, and nearest heir to his grandfather.* Of course it does not follow that he had not a sister or an aunt (for, as we have mentioned, she is sometimes called daughter of Theobald and sometimes of Alan), who was named Maud, and married Simon Septvans, and as we hear no more of young Alan, she or her issue might have inherited the whole of the property. * A valuation of the lands of the same Alan the son of Theobald, also appears in the Escheats of the nineteenth and twentieth of Kichard II., 1396-97, as we have already stated at j)age 93, but neither seems to be an inquisition on the death of Alan, who, if living at that period, would have been only fifty. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 32? That some such circumstance did occur is evident by the descendants of John de Septvans, quartering the coat of Twitham, and the same fact tends to substan- tiate our statement, that William the Sheriff was not the son of Maud de Twitham, as no such quartering is to be found in the arms of that branch of the family. John Septyans, son, as we believe, of Simon by Maud de Twitham, married Anne, daughter and heir of Sir Nicholas de Sandwich. And now we arrive at a period when our researches are assisted by several important documents, for the copies of which we are indebted to Philipot, who has appended them to one of his Pedigrees of Septvans.* We shall give them in chronological order, and in support of the various points as they arise. The first we shall quote is the earliest in date, and is a deed of gift by Thomas Loverick, Esq., to Gilbert, son of John Sepuans, of Cheker in Ash, Co. Kent, Esq., of three acres of land in Ash aforesaid, dated 10 day of May, 44th of Edward III. (a.d. 1370), and the witnesses are John Sepuans, Esquire, John at MoUand, Thomas, Adam, Nicholas at Children (Chilton?), John and Thomas Eoger, Hamon de Strigula, and many others. t * MS. Coll. Arm. marked "Mascle," p.^8, and headed, "The profe for the changinge the name of Sepuans toe Cheker, and from Cheker toe Harflete, appereth in these evidences." t " Sciant presenter, &c., quod ego Thoma Loverick armiger dedi, &c. Gilberto filio Johis Sepuans de Cheker in Ashe in com Cantij 328 A CORNER OP KENT. The second is a similar grant by John Diggs to John Sepuans, of two acres and a half of land lying below Checquer Court (''sub cur del Escheker"), dated 2nd of Eichard II. (a.d. 1379), witnessed by Gilbert at Cheker.* The third is a gift (we presume in trust) by John Septuans to Gilbert Alflete and John Gray, of all the lands he had in Ash, dated the day of St. Barnabas the Apostle, 17th of Richard II. (a.d. 1394).t These three documents show that John Septvans of Checquer in Ash, Esq., was living in 1394, and had a son, Gilbert, who we shall find succeeded him in that pro- perty. Philipot also gives him a daughter Emma, who married Sir William Leverick, as we have stated at page 96. John Septvans of Checquer died, we presume, shortly after the execution of the above deed. At all events, he was dead in 1399, when the fourth document shows that "William and Thomas of Holland in Eshe (Ash) gave to Gilbert Sepuans, alias Armigeri tres acras terrse mee, jacent in Ash p'"dic. Data apud Ash pMic 10 die mensis Maij anno 44 regni Edwardi tertij. Hijs Testibus Johane Sepuans Armigero, Johanne at Holland, Thome, Adam, Nicholas at Childern, Johanne et Thome Rogero, Hamone de Strigula, et multis alijs." Seal obliterated. * "Sciant presentes et futuri quod ego Johannes Diggs dedi Johanni Sepvans duas acras et dimid terre iacent sub cur del Escheker," Data ij Richard 2^^^ Hijs testibus Gilbert© at Cheker et multis alijs. + Sciant, &c., quod ego Johes Sepuans dedi, &c., Gilberto Alflete et Johanni Gray omnes illas terras quod habui in Ash, Data die S**^ Barnabi Aposti. 17 Richardi secundi, GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 329 "at Cheker," half an acre of land lying at Small- brooke in Eshe aforesaid,* the lands of William and Thomas aforesaid, to the West, and the lands of the heirs of William E^oger to the North, and the lands of the said Gilbert to the South, and the lands of the heirs of John Septvans to the East, Given at Eshe aforesaid 22nd of Eichard II., a.d. 1399.t This completely settles the question as to John Septvans being at the Siege of Harfieur with Henry v., in 1415 ; and supposing him to be the John Septvans who had a rent-charge on Bromhill in 1366, it is clear he had a son Gilbert past infancy, if not of full age in 1370, and must therefore have been born some time previously to Sir William the Sheriff, yet certainly not his elder brother. Besides Gilbert, John had two other sons, J named John and Thomas, amongst whom his property is said to have been thus divided : — To John, called the eldest, he gave Hills or Helles, Twitham, Chilton, and * Qiiere, Swallow brook ? vide will of Stephen Hongham, cited at page 5S, t " Sciant presentes et futuri quod nos WillilTs et Thomas de Holland in Eshe dedimus, etc. Gilbert© Sepuans als atte Cheker dimidium acram terre jacentum q apud Smallbrooke in Eshe p^ diet terris Willi et Thome pMic versus west et terris hered^ Willi E-oger versus north et terris dicti Gilberti versus south et terris Hered^ Johannis Sepuans versus Est. Data apud Eshe p'' die 22 Kegni Kegis Ricdi secundi." No seal. X "John Sepvans, of the maner of Cheker, in the county of Kent, Esquire, marrid and had yssue John SepvanSj his eldyst sone, Thomas seconde w^ died bothe sans yssue ; Gilbert, third sone, succeeded." D. 13 Coll. Arms. 330 A CORNER OF KENT. MoUand in Ash, and other lands in Kent. Thomas, second son, had Dean Court, in Meopham, and other lands ; and Gilbert his manor of Checquer, in Ash.* As we have sufficient evidence of the last fact, in the grant we have just quoted, we may fairly give cre- dence to the other portion of the statement professing to be drawn from family sources at a time when the lineal descendants were in possession of the estates aforesaid. John and Thomas, we are told, died without issue, whether married or unmarried we know not. Their portions probably reverted to Gil- bert, the sole surviving son, who, by Constance, daughter and coheir of Thomas Ellis, of Sandwich, Esq., had three sons,t Thomas, Edward, and John, and one daughter, Margaret. This Constance has been confounded with Constance St. Nicholas, who married John Septvans, of St. Lawrence and Sitting- bourne, by some writers, and is made the wife of her father-in-law, John of Ash, in one of Philipot's pedigrees. After the death of her husband, Gilbert, she married, secondly, John Notbeam, of Ash. Gil- bert was living in 1416, when he executed a testa- mentary document, the fifth of those copied by Philipot, wliich is to this effect :~As Gilbert de * Philipot and Yiocent's " Kent." Coll. Arm. t The Visitation, D. 13. Coll. Arms, only names Thomas. "Gilbert Sepvance, thirde sone to John Sepvance, was called Gilbert Atcheker als Harfleure, who niarrj^ed and had yssue Thomas." He is after- wards, however, called "eldyst sone and heire to Gilbert," indicating that there was otbcr issue. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 331 Cheker, he confirms a charter of the same date infeoffing Sir Thomas Monketon, chaplain, and John Churchgate, of the parish of Ash, in all his arable lands, on condition that the said Thomas, the chaplain, and John shall, after his death, give his wife seizin and possession of forty-one acres, the same number of acres to his son Thomas, two acres to Margaret Armys,(?) and one acre to the chantry of Ash, the residue of his goods and arable lands to remain in the possession of his executors. Dated 20th of September, fourth of Henry V. (A.D. 1416)/^ "We are here met by a most serious contradiction. In one of Vincent's MSS., Coll. Arms, No. 145, is this note : — " This Gilbert was called Gilbert Septvans, alias Cheker, as appearith by a dede dated eighth Henry lY. He was also called Gilbert Harflete by the last will of Joane, his wife, dated 1432, Ao. 11. 6, xi., and by the said will the sayd Johan did make Thomas, her son, her executor." * Omnibus presentes literas visuris vel auditur salutem. Cum ego Gilbertus de Cheker 20 die Septemb carta meam de feodo confirmavi Dno Tlio Monketon Capellano et Jolii ChurcLgate de Parocbia de Ash omnes terras meas arabiles ut p^ die carta evidencis apparet sub toti tamen condicione qd p'" die Tho Capellanus et Johis post mortem meum p conffestum reddant uxori mei seissinam et possessionem xli acr. Item qd reddant Thorn se filio meo xli acr Item qd reddant Margarete Armijs (?) sessinam diiar acrse. Item qd reddant Cantuarise de Eshe seissinam unius acrse. Kesiduum omnem honorz mearz terraz Arabiliu qd dimittant in possessiorie Excecutorm mearz in cuis res Testimonium sigillum meum appossui. Dat 20 Septembris, 4^° Regis Henrici quinti." Sealed with 3 vans. 332 A CORNER OF KENT. This is terribly circumstantial, and unfortunately Gilbert, in the above disposition of his property, simply says "uxori mei," without the addition of her name ; but there is pretty sufficient evidence that his widow, Constance Ellis, remarried with John or "William [N'otbeame, of Ash, by whom she had a daughter, Alice, married to Eichard Exherst, of Ash, and the arms of Ellis, of Sandwich, are quartered next to those of Sandwich in the escutcheons of the Harfleets, their immediate descendants. We could find no will of a Joan Septvans in the Prerogative Court at Canterbury, and though we do not doubt that Vincent had knowledge of such an instrument, yet, as he does not give us a copy of it, we feel con- fident that there is some confusion either of names or persons. There may have been a Gilbert Harfleet living (circa) 1432 who had a wife Joan and a son Thomas.* We have often wondered that the name of Gilbert did not reappear at all in the pedigree. There is nothing in Vincent's note to identify the husband of Joan with the Gilbert Septvans alias Cheker " of the deed of the eighth of Henry IV., A.D. 1407," who was at that time the husband of Constance. We have no very positive evidence respecting the issue of * Thomas At Chequer, alias Harfleet, in his will proved 1559-60, mentions a "Joan Harflete, widow," who late held certain premises in Ash street for the term of her life, but unfortunately does not say of whom she was the widow. The word "late," however, would indicate a more recent date than 1432, that of the will of the Joan in question. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 333 Gilbert, except that of his having a son Thomas. A son John is named by Philipot, and a son Edward,* who had a daughter named after her grandmother Con- stance, by Vincent. t There might have been a fourth son named after his father Gilbert, of whom this is the only record, and who at the same time, with his elder brother Thomas, assumed the name of Harfleet ; for here again we are helped by Philipot, who appends to his ^*profes" above quoted this note: — ''Thomas, the Sonne of Gilbert Sepuans (who tooke the name of the manner of y^ Clieker), loste that name after it was sould to Mr. Aldy, and wrote himself in all his deeds Thomas at Clieker alias Harflete ; and soe it continued till Sir Thomas Harflete' s father, who revived the name of Sepuans, and Sir Thomas aforesaid hath bought the manner of y^ Cheker againe ; and it is to * In the Prerog. Off., Cant,, is the will of an Edward Sept vans, " Armiger" of Canterbury (9*^ of Sep^', 1465), in which he leaves all his goods to his wife, Benedicta, and makes her executrix with William Lynnch (?) and Thos. Arnold. If the son of Gilbert, he must have died "vita patris." An Edward Septvans is named in the will of John Notbeame of Rucking, March 4, 1400, who bequeaths to him six spoons, at the same time he leaves to William Septvans K*, various articles of plate and seven of his best silver spoons, making him residuary legatee and executor of his will in conjunction with his own brother William Notbeame and Stephen Wynder. Isabella, servant to said Edward Septvans, is also men- tioned in the will. t No. 123, Coll. Arms, and Philipot 26, they also give Gilbert a daughter named Margaret, who married William Falcocke, according to Philipot, and is made " uxor Barton " by Yincent. Was she the Margaret Armys (?) mentioned by Gilbert in his will above quoted ? 334 A COENEU OF KENT. be noted that they sealed with the Fanns, and fixed them on their monuments, which are most of them yet to be seene at Ash." In addition to this, he inserts in the Pedigrees accompanying "the proofs," ''Thomas Sepuans took the name of his manour of Plete, and called himself Harflete." Thus completely ignoring the whole story about the assumption of that name by John in con- sequence of deeds performed by him at the Siege of Harfleur, called Harfieet by the English. This Thomas, the eldest son of Gilbert of Checquer, married Alice, daughter of John Yaloynes, Esq., by whom he had two sons, Thomas and John,* and four daughters, Mary who married a Smith, Elizabeth who married Lancaster, Margaret wife of Walter Barton of Wingham Barton, t and Joan wife of Thomas Einneux, from whom Judge Einneux. Thomas, according to the Visitation D. 13 Coll. Arms, was the eldest son, but died without issue. | John the second son married Elorence, daughter and heir of John Clarke of Brayborne, Co. Kent, by a daughter of Engham of Chart. We have no record of the death of Thomas Harfleet, or of Alice his wife, * "Thomas Atcheker als Harflewe, eldyst sone and heire to Gilbert, marjed and had yssue Thomas, hys eldyst sone, John, second sone." D. 13. t There may be some confusion here between this Margaret, daughter of Thomas, and her aunt Margaret, daughter of Gilbert, as both are said to have married Barton. X "Thomas Atcheker, eldyst sone and heire to Thomas, died sans yssue." GENEALOGICAL AND HEUALDIC NOTES. 335 but Vincent, in his '* Kent," No. 145, Coll. Arms, has this note : " It appears by a deed dated 32^^ of Henry 6^\ that this John was the son of Thomas Sepvans, alias Harflete." It is probable therefore that Thomas was living 1458, as well as his son. The issne of John by .Florence Clarke is said to have been two sons, John and Christopher;* we hear of no daughters. John died without issue ; Christopher married Alice, daughter of Notbeame of Ash, and was dead in 1488, for here again we enter the region of fact, as we have the will of his widow Alice, dated 16th of October in that year, beginning, "Y^ Dame Alice Septvans, the widow of Christopher Sept vans, Esq., late of the parish of Ay she beside Sandwich." In it she names the daughter of Edward Septvans, but does not give her Christian name, nor enlighten us as to the parentage of Edward. The only daughter of an Edward Septvans we have yet met with is Constance, daughter of Edward, son of Gilbert. It is possible she might be living in 1488, but at a very advanced age. We cannot posi- tively identify that Edward with the Edward husband of Benedicta, whose will is dated in 1415, and from the fact of the latter being described as of Canterbury, we are inclined to think he may have been a younger son of Sir William the SherifiP, who is executor to the will of John Notbeame, in which Edward and his * "John Atcheker als Harflete, seconde sone to Thomas, and brother and heire to Thomas aforesaid, maryed and had yssue Xpher." D. 13. 336 A CORNEE OF KENT. servant Isabella are remembered. In 1471, a Thomas Septyans of the parish of Worth bequeaths to Benedicta his mother for life an annuity of 6 marks, which the lady Septuans gave him out of the tenement called " Le Cheker," and the lands belonging to the same ; also his house at Newenton, remainder together with said annuity to be sold.* Was he the son of the Benedicta, widow of Edward ? There is nothing but the name to guide us. He leaves, however, to William Saye eleven shillings, and to John Saye '' fratre meo^^ a garden in the parish of Worth. By " my brother" he must mean either his mother's son by a former husband or his brother-in-law, for such a connection is constantly so called in documents of this period. He also leaves to Elizabeth, wife of William Leute of Sandwich, 3s. and 4d. No children are mentioned, but it by no means follows that he had none. There is no mention in any of the pedigrees or genealogical notices of any issue of Thomas Har- fleet by Alice Valoynes, except Thomas and John; nor of any of John by Elorence Clarke, except Chris- topher ; but the latter is called eldest son and heir of John, in the Visitation D. 13, thereby indicating other issue. t Christopher Harfleet had by Alicia at least two sons, Baymond and Boger, both living in 149f, when a "Thomas Harfleet" of Staj)le, * Prerog. Office, Canterbury. t "Xpher Atcheker als Harflete, eldyst sone and heire to Jolin, maryed and had issue Raymond, his eldj'st sone, Roger, his seconde i GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 337 possessor of lands in the Hamlets of Chilton and Molland in Ash, wills to Isabella his wife all his lands and tenements for the term of her life, with remainder to Raymond Harfleet, in tail and remainder to E^oger, brother of the said Raymond ; dated Pebruary 14th, and proved the same year.'* He does not mention his own relationship to Roger and Raymond, but they seem to have been his next of kin, and he may have been their uncle, a younger brother of Christopher, t Of Roger we have the following evidence amongst Philipot's proofs : — " I, Roger Harflete, otherwise called Roger at Checker, son and one of the heirs of Christopher Harflete, otherwise called Christopher at Cheker, and Alice, formerly his wife, release Raymond Harflete also called Raymond at Cheker, my brother, in all the lands and tenements in Ashe. Dated 3rd of May, 24ith year of the reign of Henry yiL"t This Roger Harfleet is set down by Philipot as * Prerog. Office, Canterbury. t It was probably a daugliter of this Thomas of Staple who was the wife of Stephen Solly in 1509. J "Noverint &c. quod ego Rogerus Harflete als dictus Rogerus at Checker filius et unus heredem Christopheri Harflete alij dicti Christoferi atte Cheker et Alicii nuper uxoris ejus, remisisse Eaymondo Harflete also dicti Eaymondo atte Cheker fratre meo in omnibus terris et tenementis in Ashe. Data .3 Maij, 24 Regni Kegis Henrici Septimi." Henry YII. died in April, 1509, in the 24^A year of his reign, commencing on the 23rd of August, 1508. It should therefore probably be the 23rd year. Z 338 A COKNER OF KENT. leaving an only daughter named Agnes, married to " Stamble (Stumble), of Ash, father of James, father of Christopher,"* but we have no hint as to who was her mother. In the above grant of Eoger to Raymond he neither mentions wife nor daughter. With respect to the latter, we were in hopes the registers at Ash might throw some light on the subject ; our readers may therefore imagine our disap- pointment at finding among the burials in December, 1570, " Stumble, widow, buried y® 4th," neither her own Christian name nor that of her husband ! We are consequently prevented identifying her with Agnes Harfleet, and so far corroborating Philipot's assertions. Eaymond Harfleet alias at Checquer, witnessed the * Pedigree Pbilipot, Annulet. The name was Stwmble as appears from the various registers at Ash, and the wills of James and Christopher. It is in no case written Stamble. James Stumble was of Woodnesborough. His will is dated 25th March, 1582, and was proved 1st April following, but unfortunately it contains no mention of the name of his father or mother. James Stumble married Christian Lee, October 21st, 1572. Christopher, son of James Stumble, baptized December 8th, 1573. Oliver Stumble baptized October 2nd, 1575, and Christian, wife of James Stumble, buried October 21st, 1578. The above are all extracted from the Registers at Ash. Christopher Stumble of Woodnesborough died in February, 1596-7. In his will, proved 4th of that month, he describes himself as "husbandman," bequeaths all his goods and chattels to his brother Oliver, and desires his master, William Marshall, to be overseer of his will, which is witnessed by Elias Jacob, and Henry Harfleet. Pre. Off., Cant. The latter name indicates a family connection, but the above dates are difficult to reconcile with the statements in Philipot's pedigree. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 339 will of Sir Thomas Bode, Vicar of Ash, July 1st, 1519; but we have not the date of his death. He married Beatrix, daughter and heir of E^ichard Brooke,"* by whom he had, according to the earliest Visitation of Kent, D. 13, two sons, Thomas and William,! and we believe a third, named John ; as we find a " John Harflete " buried, 15th December, 15584 whom we can trace to no other line. Of William we hear no more. Both may have married and had issue, but we have no record of the fact. A *' Nicholas Harflete," whom we cannot affiliate, is witness to the will of Stephen Hougham of Ash, dated 20th November, 1555, with Christopher Har- fleet, eldest son of Thomas (brother of William), just mentioned. With this Thomas, then, we must now proceed. He married, first, Bennett, daughter and heir of George Wynborne, and Alice his wife, daughter and heir of Wolfe of Huntingdonshire ;§ and * His arms quartered with those of Twitham, Sandwich, and Ellis, impaling Lozengy or and gules, a chief azure for Brooke are still in the windows of Holland, vide page 119. We have doubts, however, on this subject. No such arms appear for any family of the name of Brooke, but this identical coat is set down in Vincent's Ordinary as that of William Brooke of London. It is also remarkable that no Richard occurs in the whole of the Harfleet pedigrees. t " Raymond At-Cheker, alias Harflete, eldest sone and heir to Xpofer, maryed and had issue, Thomas his eldyst sone, William seconde sone." % Ash Reg. § His arms, quartering Twitham, Sandwich, Ellis and Wolfe (?), z 2 340 A CORNER or KENT. secondly, Marianne, daughter of Edward Brock- bill,'* and was buried at Asb, April 4tb, 1559. By bis first wife, Bennett Wynborne, be bad five sons : Cbristopber, William, Jobn, Vincent, Edward, and George, t and a daughter named Constance; J by bis second wife be bad one son, Henry, and two daugh- ters, Bennett and Susan. § In his will, proved 29th of January, 1559-60, he describes himself as '' Thomas Atcheker, otherwise called Thomas Harflete," and mentions all his sons above-named, but no daughters. Bennett, however, was married to William Bishop, of London, and Susan died unmarried, and was buried at Ash, April 28th, 1565. Of Constance we hear no more. Christopher, eldest son of Thomas Atcbequer, married before 1561, || Mercy, daughter of Thomas impaling quarterly, Wynborne and Wolfe, are in the staircase window at Holland, vide page 119. The quartering of Wolfe in his own coat, implies the previous match of a paternal ancestor with an heiress of that family, unless brought in by Ellis. If not a mistake, a curious point for investigation. We have not succeeded in finding any pedigree of Wolfe of Huntingdon, which family appears to have been connected with the Keriels, vide pp. 190, 191. * She survived him, and married, secondly, Vincent St. Nicholas, vide pp. 238, 239. t Visit. D. 13. X Philipot. § Visit. D. 13. II We by this fact approach to a certainty the date of that portion of the MS. D. 13, in Coll. of Arms, as we find in it, " Xpher Atcheker als Harflete, eldyst sone and heire to Thomas, maryedM^rcj, daughter to Thomas Hendley of Kent, and by her hathe issue, Thomas hys eldest sone, and Dorothye." As Thomas was born 1562, and Dorothy in 1564, it is clear that this entry was made in or after the 5th of Queen Elizabeth. GENEALOGICAL AND nERALDIC NOTES. 341 Hendley, of Otham, Esq., and widow of Edmond Eowler of Islington, Esq., born 29th September, 1530. Christopher, who dropped the name of Atchecquer and resumed that of Septvans, signing his will '' Christopher Septvans, alias Harflete," died in 1575.* His widow survived him twenty-seven years, and died 27th May, 1602. She bore to him five sons : Thomas, Samuel, Walter, Raymond, and Cornelius, t and three daughters : Dorothy, Susan, and Mildred ; Dorothy died an infant, Susan married Edward Carewe of Romford, Co. Essex, Esq., and Mildred, William Courthope of Stodmarsh, Esq. J William, second son of Thomas Atchecquer, married a daughter of Eiske, by whom he had issue, Edward. § John Harflete of Ash, third son, in his will proved 19th September, 1581-82, |1 mentions his sons William * Buried, September 17th, Ash Reg. By his will, proved 18th October following, he bequeaths to his wife " Mercy,'' his Manor of Hol- land and other estates in Ash, for her life, with remainder to Thomas, his son in tail male, and remainder to sons, Samuel, Walter, and Raymond, in like tail. t " Cornelius Harfleet, my son," twice mentioned in her will, dated 14th May, 44th Queen Elizabeth (1602), with her sons Walter and Thomas ] but no mention of Raymond or Samuel, they might have been dead in 1602 ; but Cornelius would appear to have been a post- humous son, as he is not named in the remainders over in his father's will. We find neither baptism nor burial of this Cornelius in the register at Ash. % 1583, "Edward Carewe and Susan Harflete married, November 19th," Ash Reg. "My daughter Susanne Caro we." Will of Mary Harflete, 1602. Pedigree, Philipot Annulet. Will of Christopher, 1575. § Pedigree, Philipot Annulet. \\ Prevog. Off., Cant. 342 A CORNER OE KENT. and John, and Mary his daughter, bnt no wife, she was probably dead ; but we know neither her name nor her family. Of Vincent, Edward and George, the other sons of Thomas Atchecquer, by his first wife, we find no further trace. ^ Henry Harfleet, his only son by his second wife, married, July 9th, 1577, Mary, daughter of George Stoughton of Ash, and by her, who died in 1594, had a numerous family, of whom anon ; and secondly, Silvester, daughter of his stepfather, Vincent St. Nicholas, by a former wife, but by her he had no issue, t To proceed with the elder line : Thomas Harfleet, afterwards knighted, eldest son of Christopher Sept- vans, was born in 1562, and married, first, Elizabeth, daughter of William Gilborne of London, Esq., and sister of Sir Eichard Gilborne of Charing, Co. Kent, knight ; secondly, Bennett, daughter of Michael Berrisford of Squerries^ Esq., by Bose, daughter of John Knevit, who died July 2nd, 1612 ; and thirdly, Dorothy, daughter of Avery Mantell, * An Edward Harfleet of St. Paul's, Canterbury, Gent., was married to Mary Goodhead of Preston, October, 1605 (Add. MS., Brit. Mus. 5507), and a George Harflett was buried in 1574 (Ash Reg.) j another George Harflete of Petham, yeoman, aged 38, was married to Susan, relict of Pobert Friend, December, 1628 (Add. MS. ut supra), but we cannot undertake to identify them. f She re-married with Richard Knight of Aldington, yeoman (Add. MS. ut supra), and she was a widow when she married Henry Harfleet, who alludes in his will to her " first husband," but not by name. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 343 and widow of Thomas Mendfield, Esq., Mayor of Peversham, who survived him, and married John Darell of Calehill, Esq.* Sir Thomas Harfleet had no issue by his first or third wife; but by Bennett Berrisford he had two sons : Michael, who died with- out issue, November, 1618,t and Christopher, who succeeded him, and seven daughters, of whom only two survived;}: Eose, baptized April 27th, 1595, married Charles Trippe of Trapham in Wingham, Co. Kent, July I7th 1615 ;§ and Jane, married, first, in 1617, to Christopher Toldervey, of Chartham, Esq., who died the following year ; H and secondly, January 24th, 1619-20, to her cousin, Michael, son of George Berrisford, Esq.^ Sir Christopher Harfleet, only surviving son of Sir Thomas, was baptized April 5th, 1592, died at Canterbury, and was buried at Ash, August 6th, 1662. He married, April 6th, 1618, Aphra, daughter of and widow of Alcot, who died in 1664, by whom it appears he left no issue.** Of Samuel, second son of Christopher Septvans, by * Ash Registers and Pedigrees, Coll. Arms, Philipot 23, p. 8. Sir Thomas Harfleet was buried 27th September, 1617 (Ash Reg.) ; will dated 16th September, and proved 9th of October, same year. P.O.C. The will of Thomas Mendfield is printed in Lewis's Fever- sham, p. 62, dated July 26th, 1614. t Will, Prerog. Off., Cant., dated 17th October, 1617, proved 10th March, 1618-19. X Vide page 229. § Ash Reg. II Mod. In., vide page 230, and Ash Reg. % Ash Register. ** Vide pages 82 and 344, and note * page 345. 344i A CORNER 01^ KENT. Mercy Hendley, we know but little beyond his baptism. May, 1566. He married September 4th, 1592, Winifred, daughter of Sir Robert Peyton, Bart.,* by Elizabeth, sister of Lord E.ich, and widow of — — Osborne, Esq., Counsellor at law, who survived him and married, thirdly, John Hornbye, of Lincolnshire, Esq. Philipot says he had a son also, named Samuel, t Walter, third son of Christopher, described as of Beakesbourne, married Joan Challoner, and died January 4th, 1642 ; by her he had three sons and three daughters : John, Walter, Thomas, Jane, Mercy, and Joan; J of the sons, John and Walter died (apparently) unmarried. Thomas, the youngest, called of Trapham, married Margaret, daughter of Sir George Newman of Canterbury, knight, by whom he had two daughters, Jane and Aphra ; Jane died unmarried, 167x5 and Aphra, as heir to her father and sister, succeeding to all the estates in the Parish of Ash, formerly held by Sir Christopher Harfleet (from whom, in default of male issue, they had passed -^ AsTi Reg. and Add. MS., Brit. Mas. 5507. John Peyton of Iselkam, son of Sir Robert Peyton and Elizabeth Rich, married Alice, daughter of Sir Edward Osborne, Lord Mayor of London, A.D. 1583, progenitor to the Duke of Leeds. t Philipot, MS., marked Mascle. % Mary (Mercy ?) Harfleet, aged 18, daughter of Walter Harfleet of Beakesbourne, married Jacob Braems of Dover, Esq., widower, aged 27, in 1624, and Joan, daughter of Walter Harfleet of Beakes- bourne, Gent., aged 21, married Arnold Braems of Dover, Merchant (afterwards knighted), aged 27 in 1731. Add. MS. ut sui^ra. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 845 in remainder to his cousin Thomas, son of Walter, according to the will of Christopher Septvans, before quoted), conveyed them to her husband, John St. Ledger of Doneraile, Ireland, Esq., and thus was extinguished the line of Septvans, alias Harfleet, of Holland and Checquer.* We must now return to the issue of John Harflete of Ash, third son of Thomas Atchecquer, before mentioned. His son John, died March, 158f,t unmarried. William, sole surviving son, described as of Sandwich, married Clara, daughter of John Trippe of Trapham in Wingham. J By his will, proved 10th December, 1610, we find he left four sons under age : John, William, Charles, and Thomas ; and four daughters, Clara, Elizabeth, Mary, and Jane.§ Of * We have already alluded to the important error of Mr. Hasted, at page 82. The following extract from the Trust Deed, in the chest at Ash, will, we think, be perfectly conclusive : — " This Indenture made the six and twentieth day of Aprill, in the four and twentieth yeare of our Gracious Soveraigne Lord Charles the Second, by the Grace of God, of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, &c. ; and in the Yeare of our Lord God, one thousand six hundred, seventy and two. Between Margaret Harjleete of Trapham, in the parish of Wingham, in the County of Kent, widow and relict of Thomas Harfleete, Esq., late of Trapham aforesaid, John St. Leger of Donerayle in the kingdom of Ireland, Esq., aud Aphra his wife, daughter and heir of Thomas Harfleete aforesaid, and sister and heir of Jane Harfleete, virgin, deceased, on they re part," &c. t Ash Reg. % Visit. Keut, D. 18. Coll. Arms. § Prerog. Off., Cant. Clara Harflete of Sandwich, married John Page of Sandwich, mariner. May, 1612; aud Mary Harflete of Canterbury, aged 22, daughter of William Harflete of Sandwich, 346 A COHNER OF KENT. the sons, Charles appears to have become Vicar of Nonnington, Co. Kent, where, according to Hasted, he died in 1672. Of William and Thomas we know nothing ; but John, the eldest son, married Margaret, daughter of Edward Lawrence of Tutsham Hall, Co. Kent, Esq., by whom he had Harriet, married to Thomas Shirley, Esq., and one son, Cornelius, born in 1642, who married, first, in 1670, aged 28, Mary, relict of John Earmer of Sandwich, and secondly, in 1684, Elizabeth Nichols of Adisham.* This ''Cornelius Harflete, Gentleman," is the person we believe to have been buried in the Chancel of Ash Church, May 17, 1694 ;t but there was an- other '' Cornelius Harflete of Sandwich, woollen draper," living at the same period, who was a '' widower " in 1678, when he married Mary Elgar of Sandwich, aged 21, and again a widower in 1685, married Mary Shrubsole of Canterbury, aged 26. | Whether the Cornelius Harfleet, who died in 1694, left issue, we have not ascertained, but by what appears to be the will of the latter Cornelius, therein calling himself " of Sandwich, merchant," dated 10th Eebruary, 1708-9, § and proved 11th March following, he left two sons, Thomas and Henry, the latter under age at that date, and three daughters, Dorothy, Sarah, Gent., deceased, married John Old field of St. Gregories, Canterbury, yeoman, aged 19, in 1623. Add. MS. ut siqwa. * Add. MS. ut supra. t " J/r. Cornelious Harfleete, buried in the Chancel." — Ash Reg. X Add. MS. ut supra. § Prerog. Off., Cant. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 347 and Margaret, the two former apparently by a previous marriage. It is to be observed, however, that he twice names his then wife, whom he leaves sole executrix, " Margaret," and not " Mary." The latter name may have been an error of transcription. Thomas Harfleet of Sandwich (the son named in the will, we presume,) married Jane Hyde of Margate, in 1723,* and another, or perhaps the same Thomas, was made parish clerk of St. Clement's, Sandwich, in 1749. t What a termination to a pedigree traceable from the reign of Henry II. ! It now only remains for us to continue the line from Henry Harfleet of Hills Court, called the elder, the half brother of Christopher and John, being the only son of Thomas Atchecquer, by his second wife Marian Brockhill. This Henry, by his wife Mary Slaughter, had four sons and three daughters : Henry, John, Thomas, and Edward, Mary, Martha, and Susan.J John and Edward died young. § Thomas, baptized 18th August, 1587, married November, 1610, Eliza- beth Oxenden, || by whom he had three sons, Chris- * Add. MS. ut supra. + Ibidem. X Ash Eeg. Mary married Ethebert Omer, yeoman, at St. Margaret's, Canterbury, October 16th, 1600. Martha married John Hasnode of Canterbury, tailor, November 7th, 1608. And Susan, Henry Musred of Ash, husbandman^ November 30th, 1609. — Ash Reg. and Add. MS. ut supra. § John baptized March 3rd, 1583-4, buried June 28th, 1599, Edward baptized January 25th, 1589-90, buried May 28th, 1599.— Ash Reg. II " Thomas Harflete of Ash, Gent., and Elizabeth Oxenden of Wingham."— Add. MS. 5507. 348 A COENER or KENT. topher, John, and Thomas, and two daughters, Mary and Elizabeth.^ The latter, baptized at Wingham 2nd February, 161f , was, we presume, the Elizabeth Harfleet w^ho married, in 1652, Thomas Kitchell, and was at that time probably heir to her father, as her sister died in infancy, and we hear no more of her brothers. Henry, the eldest son of Henry of Hills Court, married Dorcas, daughter of Joshua Pordage of Sandwich, by whom he had six sons — Henry, Arthur, Thomas, Christopher, Samuel, and Samuel, and four daughters — Anne, Mary, Deborah, and Priscilla.t Of the sons, Henry alone seems to have married and had issue. By his wife, Dorothy, daughter and heir of Anthony Combe of Greenwich, he had issue two sons, Henry and Samuel, and two daughters, Abigail and Ursula. Of Samuel, baptized at Ash in 1635, we hear no more. " Henry Seffans, alias Harflete of Ash," J the elder brother, born 27th September, 1633, and unmarried in 1663, was buried at Ash in 1679, and with him this line seems to have expired. His sister Abigail married E;ichard Bellamy of Buxley, Co. Leicester, Gent. ; and Ursula was buried at Ash two days after her mother Dorothy, * Kegisters of Ash and Wingbara. + Ash Register, Visitation, Co. Kent., D. 18. The first Samuel died in infancy, and the second was baptized in the following year, 1626. Anne and Piiscilla also died infants, Deborah unmarried in 1641, and Mary married William Sprote of Eastwell, Gent. (Add. MS. 5,507). Henry Harfleet marrifd, secondly, March 26th, 1629, Bennett Hnffam (Ash Reg.), by whom it does not appear he had any issue. :|: Visitation, D. 18. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 349 as ''a syngle maiden daughter to the former," June 9th, 1659. Either the first or the second Henry Ilarfleet must have been the author of a book without date, entitled " Vox Coelorum ; or. Predictions Defended, with a Vindication of Mr. Lilly's (the celebrated astrologer) Reputation," and dedicated to ** John Boys of Bets- hanger, Esq''% one of the members of the honourable House of Commons." Henry Harfleet " the elder," who died in 1608, left all his law books to his son Henry, then 28 years old;*" and the probability is that they were both men of literary tastes and habits. The author of ''Vox Coelorum," Mr. Streatfield observes, was " a favourable prophet to the Bepubli- cans." — (Streatfield MSS.) And we are inclined to attribute the work to the second Henry. A word or two must still be said respecting the arms of this remarkable family. The seal of Bobert de Septvans, son of Bobert de Septvans, to the charter to St. Gregory's, Canterbury, ante 1216, preserved in the College of Arms, presents us with no armorial bearings, and the earliest example we at present know of them appears in the often engraved sepul- chral brass at Chartham of Sir Bobert de Septvans, fifth of that name, who died 34th of Edward I., 1306. It afibrds us a fine specimen of the ailettes * Will Prerog. Off., Cant. He was a member of some Inn of Court. See will of his brother Christopher, who leaves him '' £40 per annum if he so so long continue at an Inn of Court." 850 A CORNER or KENT. in fasMon at that period {vide our notice of tlie effigy of Sir John Goshall, p. 203), and displays on them, as well as on the surcoat, the winnowing fans, which were most probably at first seyen in number for " /S'^^^-vans," but reduced, in compliance with a later practice, to three, as they continued to bear them from the 14ith century. The earliest example of the crest we have met with is engraved at the head of this chapter from the brass on the gravestone, formerly in Canterbury Cathedral, of Sir William Septvans, 1407, exhibiting the head of a fish erect, as in the monument of John Septvans, Esq., in Ash Church. The line, however, from which the Harfleets de- scended, bore, as we have already observed, an entire fish naiant, called a bream by Vincent, and by Philip ot a chevin or chub. A family named Chevin was settled at Sholand in Newenham, in the reign of Edward III., when one of them married a co-heiress of the Cam- panias. We have strong suspicions that the Chevins were originally Septvans (Sevins), but if not, the alteration of the crest may have been occasioned by an unrecorded alliance between the two families. GOSHALL. Of the origin of this name, whether derived from the family, or vice versd, we have already acknow- ledged our ignorance. Kobert, the earliest of the family so called, appears with his son E^alph as a witness to the Charter of Eoger de Chilton, unfortu- nately not dated, but, from the names of all the parties GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 351 concerned in it, evidently not later than the commence- ment of the thirteenth century. " Eob" de Gosehaule et E^adfo f. ejus."* If this E^alph, the son of Robert, he identical with the " Rannulph de Gosehale," who held lands under the Archbishop of Canterbury, 8th of Henry III., A.D. 1224, as we have every reason to believe, his father Eobert must have deceased some short time previous to the latter date, and was there- fore living in the time of King John and Richard I. A Robert de Gosehall, most likely the same, is witness with Henry de Sandwich to a charter of Matilda de Auberville.t Ranulph, we know, was dead 25th of Henry III., A.D. 1241, when Walter, his son and heir, held IJ knight's fees in Goshall.J In the 37th of Henry III., 1253, there was a final concord between Walter de Gosehale and Richard de Heyrhebye, respecting 60 acres of land in Ash, with appurte- nances, in which mention is made of Margery, who was the wife of R. Sanders. § Here we come to a break in our evidence. We have no information respecting the wives of Robert, Ranulph, or Walter, nor whether they were (and it is most probable they were not) the only children of their fathers, nor can we yet state positively who succeeded Walter de Goshall, but we learn from another source, the Lieger Book of the Priory of Davington, that in the reign of Henry III. there was a Peter de Goleshaule or Gosehaule, who is distinguished as one of the bene- * Vide page 84. t Harleian Charters, 45, E. 33. X Vide page 61. § Lansdown MS., Brit. Mus., 267. 352 A CORNER OF KENT. factors of that establishment. " Dons Petrus de Goles- haule sive Gosehaule unus benefactorii nostrorn," and about the same period we find " Sara de Gos- haule Monachd^^ and " Johanna soror domine Sara de Gosehaule," recorded amongst the friends or inmates of that house, who were probably buried there. Hasted, without quoting his authority, says boldly, " John de Goshale was possessed of this manor in the reign of K. Henry III.," at which time, as we have already told our readers,* the celebrated Sir John Maunsell certainly held some portion of it, as in 1258, on his foundation of the Priory of Bilsington, he gave to it all his lands in " Goshale, Poire, and Eche." A few years previously, A.D. 1244, we find Simon son of Henry de Sandwich was in possession of lands at Poire, and we can scarcely doubt that there was some intimate connection between these three families ; but the link has yet to be discovered. In the year 1300, a Henry de Thorne owned the I manor of Thorne in Minster, Isle of Thanet ; and on / 7th Kalends of January, 1300-1, complaint having been made against him for causing mass to be publicly said in his private oratory at Thorne, to the prejudice of the mother church, and no notice taken of the interdiction of the oratory by Thomas, Abbot of St. Austin's, letters were sent by the Abbot to the Vicar of Minster, enjoining and commanding him to * Page 63. GENEALOGICAL AND HEUALDIC NOTES. 353 acknowledge the interdict, and threatening with anathematization any person going to mass at the said chapel.* This manor of Thorne passed, it would appear, to the family of Goshall upon the death of Henry, by marriage, it is supposed, with an heiressr ; but whether the daughter or sister of Henry, we have no evidence. It is, however, just at the time that we find the family of Goshall in connection with those of John Maunsel, Henry de Sandwich, and Henry de Thorne, that the names of John and Henry make their first appearance in the pedigree. We question if any John de Goshall was in possession of a por- tion of the manor of Goshall, tem]^, Henry III., as Hasted asserts. We have evidence of the existence of Walter de Goshall in 1276, third of Edward I.,t and in 1281, eighth of Edward I., we find Henry de Goshall and Alan Tyete concerned in the settle- ment of lands at Cofcmanton, in the parish of Ash, J which Lewis tells ns was in his time parcel of the estate of Thorne, and anciently belonged to St. Aus- * Lewis; " Thanet," 4to, 1723. t His name appears as witness to a charter of William de Breus to Walter de Shipley, Cierico. "H. T. Walter de Gossehale 3 of Edward son of King Henry." A.D. 1276. (Coll. Arm. R 27, Kent.) In a copy of a Roll of Arms of the 13th century, Vincent 164, p. 136, the arms of a Walter de Goshall are drawn as those of Sandwich, dif- ferenced by a hurt, charged with a cinquefoil, or, and in chief two bezants, each charged with a cinquefoil, azure. A very importan piece of genealogical evidence. X " Conventio inter Henricum de Goshale et Alanum Tyete de terr apud Cotmanton in poch de Esshe 8 Ed. 1st." (Harleian Charter, 78. D. 24.) The seal to this instrument has only a flower upon it. 2 A 354 A CORNER OF KENT. tin's Abbey.* As this would be twenty years at least before the death of Henry de Thorne, we are inclined to think his heiress, whoever she was, must have been the wife of the Sir John de Goshall who suc- ceeded Henry de Goshall ; but whether as son and heir, or brother and heir, we have nothing to inform us. We find amongst the Harleian Charters several in which mention is made of the Sir John de Goshall who held two knight's fees at Goldstanton and Goshall of the Archbishop, in the time of Edward I. No. 76 E. 55 is one in which Eobert, John, and Thomas, sons of Sir Robert de Champagne, acknowledge an annual rent of three pence and one hen to the said John de Goshall, for the occupation of lands not specified, dated 22nd Ed. I. (1294). No. 76 E. 56 is another by the same parties, but without date. Nos. 80 A. 43, 53, and 75, are three charters of William, son of Roger de Pondfelde, to the Lord John de Gos- hall, Knight, of land in Goldstanton and elsewhere not named, the first being dated 34th Edward I., 1306. There is also a charter by William de Sandfold confirming John de Goshale, knight, in divers lands and tenements in Ash, of which he had had novel deseisin from Edward I. in the thirtieth year of that reign (A.D. 1303), given at Goldstanton and wit- nessed by Alan and Theobald de Helles, Thomas at Mollond, &c. * Called Cotmannefeld in the Yaliiation by Nicholas de Thorne, Abbot, 1275.— Lewis's "Thanet," pp. 75-82. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 355 In the Lansdowne Collection, 'No. 268, Brit. Mus., there is a final concord between John de Gosehawle, Andrew de Barre, and Kroger de Camyille, and Isa- bella his wife, respecting a messuage, &c., in Ash, next Sandwich, dated thirty-first of Edward I. ; and in the same MS., page 293, another between John Gosehall and Henry Leverick and Margaret his wife, respecting land in Ash, next Sandwich, thirty-fourth Edward I., 1306. It would appear that Sir John de Goshall did not long survive the latter date, and was certainly suc- ceeded by his son Henry before the sixth of Ed- ward II., 1313, under which date we have in the Harleian Charters, 78 D. 25, a charter by Henry de Goshall, presenting certain lands in Ash, next Sandwich, to Alicia, widow of Bobert de Holonde. The seal is impressed simply with the figure of a rabbit. This Henry de Goshall, afterwards knighted, was seised of Goshall in the eighteenth of Edward 11., 1325, and dead in the seventh Edward III., 1335, when a partition took place between John, Henry, Walter, and Bobert, sons of Henry de Gosehall and of Margaret his wife, of lands in St. Lawrence, Minster, and Isle of Thanet, which they had in reversion after the death of Alice, wife of Anselm de Bipple, who had fined for them to John de Gosehall, grandfather of the said John, &c. This most im- portant document, which we have so happily lighted on, gives us in a few lines a quantity of information 2 A 2 356 A CORNER OP KENT. not to be found, perhaps, at present, elsewhere. Mar- garet, the wife of this Henry de Goshall, was, as we have stated in our second chapter, the daughter of Thomas and sister of Nicholas de Sandwich ; and the seal to this instrument exhibits two shields suspended from the branches of a tree, according to the fashion of that period ; the dexter with the arms of Goshall semee of crosslets, a lion rampant, as formerly on the shield of the Goshall effigy in Ash church, and the sinister with those of Sandwich ;* the whole in an oval with the words " Margare Gosehal" still clearly legible. We learn from this document that Henry, AYalter, and Kobert, the three younger sons, were all at that time under age, and the affiliation of their father, Henry, is proved by the declaration that Alicia de Eipple had paid for her lands to John de Gosehale, " avus predict! Johannis" (son of the elder Henry) and his brothers. Anselm de E^ipple, we gather from other charters, married one of the family of St. Ledger ; and John, the son of Anselm, assumed the name of Pesing, or Pysing, from the manor so called in the Hundred of Branesbergh, held by Graaland de St. Ledger in 1227, and which seems to have passed to Anselm de Kipple with his wife Alicia, in one instance called Alicia de Pesing.f Prom the lands in St. Law- * The indentation of the chief is" obliterated. t Daughter of Philip de Pesing, who was brother of Hugo de St. Ledger, by Matilda. John de Eipple (called also de Pesing) had a daughter named GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 857 rence, &c. being left in reversion to the sons of Henry de Gosliall, there can be little doubt that Alicia de Eipple, who had fined to their grandfather for them, was, either by birth or descent, a member of one of that family. It is unnecessary, however, for us to do more than point out the sources from which further evidence on this point may be obtained by those who are interested in the pursuit of it.* Our next step is to show the succession of the eldest son, John de Goshale, who was in possession of his father's estates in thirteenth of Edward III., when, as John, son of Henry de Gosehale, he made an agreement with Margaret, formerly wife of the said Henry, respecting lands at St. Lawrence and Minster in Alice, wife of Benedick de Ospringe, living S2nd Henry III. — MS. Coll. Arm. E. 27. * The following documents, copied in MS. H. 27 CoU. Arms, are those which have led ns to these conclusions : Charter of " Graeling, de 8"^° Leodegario, lands in Pyssing, H. T. Dom^ Bertramo de CrioUio Constabul de Dover, Henr. de Sandwyco, &c." Charter of Johes de Pyssing f Anselme de Bipple. Charter of the same f. Alicia de Pyssing, 4th Edward I. Charter of the same Johes de Pesing, land which beloDged to Grailand, " cognati mei." "Johes de Pessing de undecim aeras tre ppe trans que fuit Grailandi cognati sui." H. T. Ph« de Pesiug. Johes de Stifford F. et h. Mich, de Stifford remissi, &c., totum jus meum in uno messuag et tribus aeris tre, &c., apd Pessing et in hundredo de Branesbergh quod hui post Johem filiam Phi. de Pessing militis et Graalandi de Set** Leo^ Legar £ eiusdem Joham ava meam etc. remisi etiam de 64 aeras trd jacent in manerio de Pesing quas hui post Alicia filiam dni sorori die Johe matris dni Graellandi 358 A COENEE OE KENT. Thanet ; by the description, apparently, that portion to which he became entitled on the death of Alicia de Ripple. Henry de Goshall appears, however, to have had another son named Thomas, who must have been the eldest, married and dead before 1335, as he is not named amongst the brothers in the deed of partition aforesaid. We learn this from a charter of Walter, the fourth son, who, on the 12th of January, twentieth Edward III., 1348-9, having then, of course, attained his full age, as Walter, son of Henry de Gosehale, knight, gives to John de Gosehale, knight, and to Elizabeth, his wife, the third part of the manor of Goldstanton, with its appurtenances, which Beatrice, who M^as the wife of Thomas de Gosehale, his late brother {quondam fratris mei) held in dower by the assignment of the said Thomas, her late husband. The witnesses are Thomas and Adam de Helles, Henry Attecrouch, Nicholas, William, and Thomas Saffery, Peter de Pedding (all well-known names in Ash), Thomas de Garwynton, Poger T. Kynnere, William Styward, Stephen le Groom, Andrew Coneyfer, &c. The seal is too much obliterated for us to distinguish the impression.* The following charters by Sir John de Goshall it will be sufficient for us to indicate : — * This same Walter de Gosliall had a suit the following year, 21st of Edward III., against Thomas de Pedding, concerning the manor of Clivesend, Isle of Thanet. Hot. Pat. sub anno. The same roll, part 1, contains the exemplification of fine by John de Goshall for the manor of Goldstanton. GENEALOGICAL AND HEEALDIC NOTES. 359 Carta J. de Goeshall Johanni Sherrene de Maneris de Olyves in Insula Thanet. — Cum sig. 14 Edward III. Harl. 78 D. 28. Carta Johannis de Goseliale, fil Henrici de Gose- hale. Mil. Stephano de Byrking de Messagio in Esshe. Sine sig. 16 E^ III. 13M. (Harl. 78, D. 29.) Carta J. de Goshale, Johannis Cope de terr. in villde Esshe. Sine sig. Same date. (Harl. 78, D. 30.) Carta J. de Gosehale, fil Henrici de Gosehale,B;Ogero de Henthorne et Julianas uxori suae de Messagio in Esshe cum sig. (merely a human figure). Same date. (Harl. 78, D. 31.) Also, Carta Laurenti de Boklande Johanni de Gossehall de Terr, in Esshe juxta Sandwicum. Sine sig. Same date. (Harl. 76, C. 54.) The ahove are principally interesting as a record of names of holders or occupiers of land in the parish of Ash, in the reign of Edward III. We have seen from the charter of Walter de Goshall, just quoted, that, in 1348-9, his eldest sur- viving hrother, John, was married to a lady named Elizabeth. This Elizabeth we believe to have been the daughter and heir of Sir John Grove, whose mutilated effigy in St. Peter's, Sandwich, was pre- served from complete destruction by Mr. Boys, and is engraved in his " Collections." Upon the tomb to which it pertained were, in 1613, six shields display- ing, 1, Grove ; three leaves in bend, on a canton, three crescents, as on the shield of the effigy ; 2, Septvans ; 3, St. Ledger ; 4, Hilpurton ; 5, Isaac ; and 6, Sand- 360 A CORNER OF KENT. wich; — important materials for the pedigrees of all tliose families. Elizabeth survived her husband, who was dead in 1372, and was herself living in 1378, second of Richard II., when William Wylt- shire gives a bond to Elizabeth, "quae fuit uxor Johannis de Gosehale Militis" for £20. — (Harleian Charters, No. 80, I. 69.) In the same collection, and amongst the evidences of Combewell Abbey, preserved in the College of Arms, are numerous acquittances from " Elizabeth, who was the wife of John de Goshall, knight," or from '* Eliza- beth, Lady of Goshall," for different sums from various persons farming the manor of Elmes, or Nelmes, in Ash, next Sandwich, to which we have already alluded in our second chapter ; and here our knowledge of the family of Goshall terminates. The heiress, daughter, it is presumed, of the aforesaid Sir John and Elizabeth, and named after her mother, married Thomas St. Nicholas."^ Of her uncles, Henry, Walter, and Robert, if they were her uncles, we have not at present found the slightest trace, or the exist- ence of any collateral branches. We find from the extract from the Lieger Book of Davington that the Goshalls were great benefactors to the Priory there ; and the cartulary of that house, if still in existence, may yet enlighten us on some important particulars. * This opinion is greatly strengthened by the fact, that in the list of persons commemorated in the Lieger book of Davington we find "Domina Elizabetha St. Kicliolas una benefactoru," as well as " Domina Elizabetha de Goshaule," and " Matilda de Goshall una benef." GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 361 We have done all we can with the materials within our reach and in the time at our disposal, and must now turn our attention to the family of St. Nicholas, into which the elder line of Goshall merged, towards the close of the 14ith century.* Certainly about the last place in the world where we might have expected to find an elaborate pedigree * The arms of St. Nicholas, ermiDe, a chief, quarterly, or and gules {vide woodcut at the head of this chapter), deserve an essay to themselves ; and we regret that our space will not allow us to do more than briefly notice the most important facts connected with them. Camden, in his " Remains," has pointed out the similarity of them to those of the families of Peckham and Parrock, and given them as an example of the bearing of coat armour derived from that of a feudal lord; that portion of the shield called "the chief" in heraldry, being in this instance the coat of the great family of Say. The origin of the three families, St. Nicholas, Peckham, and Parrock, is generally considered to have been a common one, but which of them may lay claim to the possession of the earliest designation has yet to be discovered. Archbishop Peckham, who gave the church of St. Nicholas, Ash, to Wingham College, in 1286, is said to have been the son of humble parents in the County of Sussex ; while the St. Nicholases appear to have been settled as early as the reign of Henry III. in Essex. They afterwards are found seated at St. Nicholsis Court, in the Isle of Thanet ; but whether they gave their name to, or derived it from that property, has not been ascertained. If the latter, it is most probable that they were a branch of the Peckhams, and that the elevation of an obscure member of that family to the Archbishopric of Canterbury was the prelude to their importance in the county of Kent. Whether the arms of Say betoken sub- infeodation or collateral descent, further research may determine. The Parrocks bore a chess-rook in the first quarter, as a difference, and must therefore have been an offshoot from the parent stock. 362 A COHNEE, OF KENT. of the old Kentish family of St. Nicholas, was in a History of the County of Leicestershire. Neverthe- lesSj although the descent of it from Goshall has been but briefly and vaguely mentioned by Philipot and Hasted, and the Visitations of Kent contain only disjointed records of three or four generations during the 16th and 17th centuries ; the late Mr. Nichols, in consequence of the incident of a match between a younger son of that family with a Leicestershire lady, has presented us, in his yolu- minous and valuable History of the latter county, with a pedigree from the time of Edward III., down to his own time. As this Leicestershire lady was the Lady Priscilla Grey, daughter of Anthony, Earl of Kent, it is still more extraordinary that so little trouble should have been taken by Kentish historians and genealogists in later days, respecting the descent of her husband, particularly as it is an exceedingly good one. Mr. Nichols's Pedigree professes to be compiled from information received from the family, and evidences in their possession. We shall therefore follow it when not contradicted by researches of our own, and hope to illustrate it in several important parts from unquestionable authority. Mr. Nichols heads his Pedigree with a Sir Eoger St. Nicholas of St. Nicholas Court, Isle of Thanet, living, apparently, about the time of Edward II. or Edward III., from whom descended Thomas and Sir John, the latter of whom was living ninth of GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 363 Eichard II., 1386.'* As early, howeyer, as 1213, we find in the Close HoUs the mention of a Lawrence de St. Nicholas, who is described as attorney for the nephew of Cardinal Gale.f We admit we have no evidence to prove that he was a member of this family ; but the name of Lawrence is met with early in the Pedigree, and the probabilities are in favour of the assumption. J To come to matters of fact : — In the nineteenth of Edward III., 1345, the King's writ was issued, " Dilectis et fidelibus suis Petro Hayward, Thomce de Sancto Nicholao et Willielmo de Manston," in custody of the ports in the Isle of Thanet.§ This Thomas St. Nicholas was apparently dead in 1350, for in that year, on the death of Sir John Gifford of Bures,|| it was found that Thomas, son of Thomas * Vide Note, p. 364. _ _ t "Rot. Claus. 15 John. Eex, W. Thes. G. t. R. can ariis tc. Libate de the nro Laurencio de Sco Nicho. pcuratori nepotis dni Gale Cardinal XX m quas ei debemur de hoc anno sec fi pcipum T. Epo Osberne et aliis Romanis," % In the 20th of Edward III. a Lawrence St. Nicholas paid aid for the making of the Black Prince a Knight, as holder of one quarter of a knight's fee at Selgrove in Seldwich, Faversham hundred, which he held of the honor of Gloucester. — Hasted, vol. ii., p. 786. § Rymer Foedera, vol. iii., part 1. II Bury, in Essex. The St. Nicholas family had certainly early connections with this county, and we therefore think it worth notice, that in the 44th of Henry III. the name of Senicla (a form in which we find that of St. Nicholas in the wills and on the tombs of the family) occurs in some pleadings between William and Gilbert, sons of William fil Senicla of Dunmowe. Senicla, the father of William, having held 12 acres of land at Westinghales payne, and 2 sold ia Brimfield. Abbrev. Plac. H. III. No. 44, Essex. 364 A COUNER OP KENT. St. Nicholas, was his (Sir Jolin's) next heir, and that the said Thomas was, at that time, of the age of twelve years. This Thomas, afterwards knighted, died in 1375, and hy his will we find that he left a widow named Elizabeth, and three children, viz. : a son named Lawrence, and two daughters, Elizabeth and Agnes.* These alone are named in his will ; but it would seem that he must have had another son, whose name we believe to have been John, as we shall show presently. Elizabeth, his widow, is pre- sumed to have been the daughter and heir of Sir John Goshall, by Elizabeth, daughter and heir of Sir John Grove, as we have intimated under Goshall. Of the daughters, Elizabeth and Agnes, we have no further account; but, Lawrence de St. Nicholas is mentioned in Dover Plea Rolls, in 1401 ; and we find he had a daughter named Johanna, who married, first, Salam, or Salamon, at Berton; and secondly, Richard Einneux. He is said, also, to have had a son named Nicholas — dead in 1446 — who left a * Printed in Nichols ; Wills. A " Thomas, son of Sir Roger St. Nicholas, was sued hy the Abbot of St. Augiistines, as his ward, for refusing to marry Margaret, daughter of Thomas Fagg, ^ Chivaler,^ to whom the Abbot had engaged him. Die Lunse proximo post Festum Purificationis Beatse Marise anno Ricardi Regis Secundi nono. Regist. Ccenob. S. Angus, penes R. Parmer, D.D., (Nichols, Hist. Leicest.) Awssuming the correctness of this extract, this Thomas could not have been the Thomas whose will we have just quoted, and who died in 1375, and we must therefore presume that the latter had a brother named Roger, also a knight, who was dead in the 9th of Richard II., 1386, and left a son Thomas, in ward of the Abbot aforesaid. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 365 sole daughter and heiress, named Christian.* Having cleared ofiP this branch, we return to the John who we imagine was an elder brother of Lawrence, for this reason : — Thomas Senyclas or St. Nicholas of Thorne, who married Julian, daughter and heir of Nicholas Manston, by Eleanor, daughter and heir of Edward Haute, t in his will, dated 1474, names his mother, Bennett (i. e, Benedicta), but not his father. In a pedigree by Vincent (Philipot's MS., Coll. Arm., Nos. 26-27, p. 37), which commences with the father of this Thomas, the Christian name, John, has been added in pencil by the younger Vincent. Whether we may rely on this evidence or not, as to his Christian name, we cannot doubt his immediate descent from Sir Thomas St. Nicholas, as we find his sons bequeathing estates, which they could only have derived from the heir of Sir Thomas. * Close Eoll of 25tli of Henry VL, 1446, by which it appears that Christian St. Nicholas, Lady Prioress of the Minories without Aldgate, was daughter and heir of Nicholas St. Nicholas of St. Nicholas Court, Thanet, and Thomas St. Nicholas is named in the same record. — Yfeever, p. 265. t There is some strange confusion or error about this lady in Weever's Monuments. At page 267, we read — "Here lieth Thomas St. Nicholas, who married Joane, daughter of |Edmund Haute of Manston, died . . . , had issue Thomas St. Nicholas, here interred." Also, " Thomse Sayen Nicolas Armiger et Johanne consortis sue quse obiit XX Anno Domini Millesimo CCCCLXXIY. quorum animabs propitietur Deus. Amen." Now it is quite clear that the Thomas St. Nicholas, who died in 1474, married Julianna^ grand- daughter of Edmund Haute, and not Johanna his daughter. Yide her will in 1493. 366 A COENEU OF KENT. One of these sons was named John, we may fairly assume after him; he heing himself baptized John, according to the prevalent fashion of the times, after his maternal grandfather, John de Goshall. The other, we have seen, was named Thomas, after his paternal grandfather. We will clear off the descent from this Thomas (the younger son, as we take it, of John and Bennet), first, as the line in which we are most interested descends from the elder, John. By Julian Manston his wife, who survived him, we find he left four sons : Boger, Thomas, Bichard, and John ; and perhaps one daughter, Eleanor,* married to ... . Aucher. Boger St. Nicholas, the eldest son, died in 1484, seized of the manor of Thorne, leaving an only daughter, named Elizabeth, married to John Dynely of Worcestershire. Thomas, second son, died 1493. In his will he mentions Katharine, his wife, and Elizabeth his daughter. Of these we have no further knowledge, nor have we met with any mention of Bichard or of John, later than in the will of Julianna St. Nicholas, their mother, who appears to have died shortly after her son Thomas, her will being made 7th of July, eighth of Henry VII. (1493), and * In Add. MS. Brifc. Mus. No. 5,520, HeDry Aucher, son of Kobert Aucher, is set down as having married . . . . d. of John St. Nicholas, of Thanet, the brother of this Thomas. Thomas certainly does not call Eleanor his daughter in his will ; he simply names her " Eleanor Aucher." Nor does the pedigree give the Christian name of the wife of Henry Aucher, who may have married one of the two daughters of John St. Nicholas, mentioned in his will without their names. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 367 proved on the. 31st of January following, 1493-4. In that will she describes herself as late the wife of Thomas St. Nicholas, Esq. ; mentions her son, John St. Nicholas, but not E/ichard (who was probably dead), and Edmund Haute, her grandfather. She died seized of the Manors of Wormsell, Shelving, and Goshall ; and as we find that Henry, eldest son and successor of John Dynely of Charlton, about the latter end of the reign of Elizabeth, conveyed his right in Thome, Manston Court, Goshall, and Powcies, to Sir John Roper, afterwards Baron Teynham ; it is quite clear that Elizabeth, daughter of Eoger St. Nicholas, and mother of Henry Dynely, must have inherited nearly the whole property of Thomas, her grandfather, and therefore survived her uncle, John, and her cousin, Elizabeth.* With her, then, the name of St. Nicholas expired in this branch of the family. We now return to John, eldest son of John and Bennett St. Nicholas. He married Margaret, daughter and heir of Simon de Campania; inherited from his father the Manor of Bures or Bury in Essex, the old property of the Giffords, to which his grandfather. Sir Thomas, had been found heir; died in 1462, and was buried at Ash, in the Chapel of St. Thomas the Martyr. By * Dynely quarters St. Nicholas, bringing in, 1. Manston ; 2. Haute ; 3. Shelving ; 4. Argent, a lion rampant gules crowned or, Thorne ; 5. a lion ramj^ant crowned, between three mullets (no colours) ; 6. Argent three leaves in bend proper, on a canton azure three crescents or, Grove.— Ped. Dynely, Add. MSS. Brit. Mus. 5,507, 368 A CORNEE OF KENT. his will, dated ISth June, 1462, it appears he left four sons : Thomas, Eicliard, Eobert, and Eoger, all under age at that time ; and two daughters, un- married. His son Thomas was to have the Manor of Bury, CO. Essex ; B^ichard, certain lands in Ash and "Wingham; and Boger, those at Billericay. He mentions his sister Elizabeth, married to William Edwards, and Thomas his brother.* Of Bobert, the fourth son, we hear no more ; Boger, the third son, married Dorothy, daughter of Walter Boberts of Cranbrook (living 1522), t and widow of Simon Lynch, J 19 Henry VII., 1504 ; but we have no know- ledge of any issue. Bichard St. Nicholas appears as a witness to a charter, twenty-third Henry YII., 1508 ; but we cannot undertake to decide whether it was the second son of John of Ash, or his cousin Bichard, son of Thomas of Thorne. At all events, our inform- ation fails us as to any descent from the three younger brothers. The eldest, Thomas, married a daughter and co-heir of Apuldrefield,§ by whom he * Prerog. Office, Cant. t Will of her father, Walter, dated 11th September, and proved 13th October, 1522.— MS. Coll. Arm. B. P. A. vi. p. 485. J This Simon Lynch would seem to be the eldest son of William Lynch, of Cranbrook, who names him in his will dated April 28, 1480. He has been confounded with another Simon who died in 1573, and whose widow, consequently, could never have been re-married to Eoger St. Nicholas. § William de Apuldrefielrl, according to some pedigrees. We doubt, however, her being the daughter of William. In his will, proved April, 1487, he mentions his wife Mildred, and his brother Eichard^ and " remainder to Elyn Brayne and the heirs of her body ;" GENEALOGICAL AND HEUALDIC NOTES. 369 had John, and certainly another son, named E^oger or Thomas. John, the eldest, afterwards knighted, is said to have married a daughter of Walter E-oberts of Cranbrook,* by whom he had an only daughter and heir, Anne, who married John Baker, Esq., of Norfolk, to whom she carried the manor of Bury. Of this latter fact and descent, the best collateral evidence exists in the coat of the Baker family, whose paternal arms are quartered with St. Nicholas, Thorne, GifFord of Bures, Lenham, Apuldrefield, Avranches and Champion or Campania, in perfect accordance with the descent aforesaid. We come now to the last hitch in this pedigree. We have ventured to state that Thomas St. Nicholas, who married the heir of Apuldrefield, had certainly a second son, named Boger or Thomas. Our only proof at present of this assertion, is in the arms borne by the descendants of this Boger, the earliest of his family, who appears in. the Visitations and Pedigrees but no daughter, unless Elyn was such, and who, in that case, was living as wife or widow of Braynein 1487. * Sister of Dorothy, who married his uncle, Roger. This appears rather unlikely. In the pedigrees of Roberts, two daughters of Walter, Mary and Dorothy, are set down as wives of " St. Nicholas," no Christian name or other indication being given us whereby they could be identified ; and Philipot names Roger as the husbaud, of Mary in his MS. marked Mascle, p. 39^ It is clear, how- ever, from her father's will, quoted above, that Dorothy was the wife oi Roger in 1522; and in the same document his daughter Mercy (not Mary) is also mentioned as the wife of a St. Nicholas then living, but, unfortunately, not identified by his baptismal appellation. 2 B 370 A CORNER OP KENT. in the College of Arms. He is there stated to have been the son of a Thomas St. Nicholas, to have married (circa 1530 ?) Jane, daughter of Vincent Engham of Sandwich, and to have had by her a son, Yincent, born in 1531, and who married Marion, daughter of Edward Brockhill of AUington, Esq., and widow of Sir Thomas Harfleet ; Vincent St. Nicholas died 20th of August, 1589, and was buried in Ash Church.* The arms of this Vincent and of all his immediate descendants, display the coat of St. Nicholas quarter- ing that of Apuldrefield. ( Vide engraving at the head of this chapter, copied from a Pedigree in the Coll. of Arms, Vincent 145, and our description of the brasses remaining on the grave-stones of the St. Nicholas family, in the north transept of Ash Church, p. 239.) Now, as Thomas St. Nicholas of Bury, Co. of Essex, the father of John St. Nicholas, whose heiress, Eliza- beth, conveyed that manor to Baker, is the only individual who, we find, married an heiress of the Apuldrefields ; it follows, as a matter of course, that Boger, the father of Vincent, must have been either a son or grandson of that Thomas ; and such dates as we can rely upon, induce us to think he was the latter. In St. Lawrance Church, Thanet, there is the grave-stone of a Thomas St. Nicholas, who married Joane or Jane Manston, and had issue Thomas St. * Marion Harfleet was his second wife. By his first, who does not appear in the Visitations, he had a daughter named Sylvester, whose second husband was Henry Harfleet the elder, of Hill's Court, Ash. Vide p. 342. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 371 Nicholas, who is buried in the same chapel. The date was gone in Weever's time ; but the Johanna, daughter of Eoger Manston, whom we believe to be the person above-named, died in 1499.* It does not absolutely follow, that because no other children are named but Thomas, buried beside her, that Joane St. Nicholas might not have had another son named E^oger (as usual, after his maternal grandfather), and the probabilities are in favour of this being the missing link in this line of the pedigree of St. Nicholas of Ash. Henceforv/ard the Visitations and the Registers are our safe guides. By Marion, his second wife, Vincent St. Nicholas had five sons and one daughter; John, baptized December 24th, 1565, died an infant; Thomas, baptized August 27, 1567; another John, baptized November 28th, 1568 ; Timothy, who died young ; and Samuel, who only lived a year. The daughter Mary, called Mercy in the monumental inscription, was their eldest child, being baptized March 25th, 1563-4, and * Peter le Neve, in Ms "Church Notes," 1603-1624, says, simply, " A. gravestone of Thomas Sainct Nicholas, who married Jane Manston. Had issue Thomas St. Nicholas, who is buried in the same chapel" (Add. MSS. Brit. Mus. No. 5,479) ; contradicting Weever, who calls her daughter of Edmund Haute, of Manston. We believe the Thomas who married Joan Manston to have been Thomas St. Nicholas, of Ore, near Feversham. In the church there, were the arms of Lenham, quartering St. Nicholas ; and in a window an armed figure, with a tabard of the same, kneeling. — (Philipot's Ch. Notes, Harleian MSS. No. 3,917, and Philipot P. d. 20. Coll. Arms.) 2 B 2 372 A CORNER OE KENT. married the Kev. Anthony Pield, Eector of Chillenden, Co. Kent.* Thomas, the second son, alone survived and preserved the name of St. Nicholas. He was twice married, and died in 1626. Ey his first wife, Dorothea, daughter of William Tilghman, who died in childbed, September 18th, 1605, he had Deborah, baptized August 20th, t 1598; Susan, | December 7th, 1599; Dorothy, April 5th, 1601 ;§ Thomas, October 3rd, 1602; John, March 25th, 1603-4; and Yincent, baptized two days after the death of his mother, September 20th, 1605, and who only survived her a few months, being buried March 1st in the following year. By his second wife, Elizabeth Woodward, he had three sons : Timothy, Samuel, and Thomas, and one daughter, Elizabeth, married to Edward Mills of Westbere.ll Thomas St. Nicholas of Ash, the eldest son by the first wife Dorothea Tilghman, * In the will of Marion St. Nicholas, of Chillenden, widow, dated 23rd June, 1604, and proved 1st October following, she mentions "my daughter Brett." But there can be no doubt that Mary married Mr. Field, as we find her brother Thomas speaking of her as "My dear and loving sister, Mrs. Field— ^her reverend husband, Anthony Field. "—(Will of Thomas St. N., proved 1st Jan. 1626-7.) t Married Jan. 4=, 1617-18, to German Major. (Ash Eeg.) "My daughter, Deborah Major." — (Will of Thos. St. N. uf supra.) J He does not mention his daughter Susanna in his will ; she was probably, therefore, deceased. § Married Oct. 3, 1622, Edward Pordage. (Ash Keg.) "My daughter Dorothy Pordage." — (Will of Thos. ut supra ) II Visitation, D. 18, p. 139, Coll. Arms. She was unmarried at the time of her father's death. "My youngest daughter, Elizabeth St. Nicholas."— (Will, icf supra.) GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 373 also married two wives, and died in 1668. By his first, Susannah, daughter of William Copley, ofWadsworth, Co. York,* he had one son, Thomas, baptized Octo- ber 1st, 1637 ; and one daughter, Elizabeth, who mar- ried first, Wittingham Wood, Esq., and secondly, John Pratt, of Hinckley, Co. Leicester. Thomas, his son and heir, married Elizabeth, daughter of Plomley, who died 1671,t by whom he had issue Yin- cent and Thomas, and was living in 1668, when his name appears for the last time in the parish accounts for Hoden. Vincent left an only daughter and heir, named Grace. Of Thomas, baptized May 27th, 1667, the last of the St. Nicholases of Ash, we have found no further record. By his second wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Croke, of Well Place, Co. Oxon,:j: to whom he was married at St. Dunstan's, London, Eebruary I7th, * Visitation, D. 18, p. 137, Coll. Arms. t Elizabeth, widow of Thomas St. Nicholas, buried at Ash, Dec. 3rd, 1671. X She was his kinswoman, the daughter of his great-aunt. "My aunt, Mrs. Bennett Croke, widow, the natural mother of the wife of my son, Thomas St. Nicholas." — Will of Thomas St. Nicholas the elder, before quoted. On a flat stone in the north aisle at Knoll, Co. Warwick, are the arms of St. Nicholas, quartering Apuldrefield ; and in addition to a long inscription in Latin, the following is round the borders of the stone : — ^" In this cabinet is layd up the body of Eliza- beth, late wife of Thomas St. Nicholas of Ash, in the County of Kent, Gent., daughter of Henry Crooke, of Well Place, in the County of Oxon, Esq., who lived as meet helper with her husband six years, and had issue by him four sons; deceased, March 9th, 1631. Mat. V. 17." 374 A CORNER OF KENT. 1624, Thomas St. Nicholas had issue four sons, as we learn from the monumental inscription in Dug- dale's Warwickshire, page 702 ; but their names are not mentioned, and we know nothing more about them. We must now return to John, the second son of Thomas and Dorothea. He also married twice. His first wife was Ethelreda, or Audrey, daughter of Basil Good, of Shilton, Co. Warwick, by whom he had three sons, Timothy, Vincent, and Thomas, and three daughters, Abigail, Marie, and Elizabeth. Of these only two survived, Timothy and Marie. Timothy married first Anne, daughter of Christopher Copley, of Wadsworth, Co. York, who died 1664, leaving one son, named Basil, who died without issue; secondly, Elizabeth More, of Linley, who died June 10th, 1698.* Marie married first Captain Morick, and secondly, Henry Watts, an Independent minister, of Wedding- ton, Co. Warwick. Audrey St. Nicholas died November 11th, 1654, and her husband John married, secondly, the Lady Priscilla Grey, daughter of Anthony, Earl of Kent, who died 1657, without issue, and survived her forty-one years, dying in 1698, at the advanced age of ninety-five. A long and elaborate biography of him will be found in Mr. Nichols's History of Leicestershire ; but it con- * Mon. In. ISTortli aisle, Monk's Kirby, in which Timothy is described as "an affable, grave, wise, and useful man in his generation." GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 375 tains no interest to justify our even introducing an abridgement of it here.* Timothy, son of Marie St. Nicholas and Henry Watts, assumed the name of St. Nicholas in or before 1724, in which year, as Steward to the Duke of Kent, he is styled Timothy St. Nicholas of Burbach, Esq. ; and the male line of the St. Nicholases of Ash seems to have been extinguished in the person of Thomas, younger son of Thomas St. Nicholas and Elizabeth Plomley before mentioned, but of whose death and burial we have found no record. LEVERICK. This ancient family has been the most neglected of any connected with the history of Sandwich and Ash. Although not utterly extinct before the com- mencement of the sixteenth century, and therefore within reach of the Visitations, not a scrap of pedigree is to be found in them, save and except the mention of a match with Monins of Waldershare ; and neither Vincent nor Philipot, Glover nor Brooke, has, either intentionally or accidentally, collected any genealo- gical information respecting it. * He was a Puritan minister and volunteer lecturer amongst tlie Independents ; was nominated to the Kectory of Lutterworth, by the Parliamentary Sequestrators, and ejected by the Bartholomew Act in 1662, when he retired to Burbach, where he lost his wife, the Lady Priscilla, and lived in retirement till his death. He was the author of the History of Baptism, 1678, and several other theological works. His father-in-law, Anthony Grey, was also an Independent Minister, Hector of Burbach j and on his succession to the Earldom, refused to quit his ministry. 376 A CORNEE OF KENT. Mr. Boys, in his " Collections," while he professes himself disappointed at not being able to gather more particulars respecting the family of Sandwich, takes no heed of that of Leyerick ; and we have been left, therefore, to make the most we can of the few traces we have been able to discover of it in the Rolls and Charters of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The origin of the name is left entirely to our imagin- ation. We naturally turn to the Saxon Leuric and Leofric, so many examples of which are to be found in the early annals of England, and some particularly connected with this corner of Kent ; but there is also in Domesday mention of a Loveraz existing at that period in "Wiltshire, and Sir Eichard Colt Hoare, in his elaborate History of that county, gives us a pedigree of a family of that name from William and Odo de Loveraz, temp. Henry II., to Stephen and his wife Alicia, 5th of Edward III., the descendants of whom appear to have spelt the name indifferently Loeras, Lueraz, Loverick, and Leverick. John Leverick, of Crockerton, Co. Wilts, was living 30th of Edward IIL, and Alicia Leverick, daughter of William Levericke, of Shropham, Co. Norfolk, is mentioned in a Eoll of the time of Edward I. Love- ricks and Lavericks are also to be found in Southamp- tonshire, Dorsetshire, and even Cumberland. Whether the Lovericks and Levericks of Sandwich were a branch of the Wiltshire family, we cannot presume to say ; but, in an old MS. book of arms in the Heralds' College, we find those of Sir John Leverick of Carne, GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 877 (Co. Dorset) — Argent, on a chevron sable; three leopards' heads, or ; which are identically the same as those borne by the Levericks in whom we are inter- ested. Still we cannot connect even this John of Carne in any other way with the Kentish line, or show that he was one of the Wiltshire family ; and we must for the present, therefore, rest content with pointing out the above facts to the reader. , The earliest mention we have found of a Loverick of Sandwich is in 1281, when a Salamon Loverick appears a witness to a charter. We next find a Henry Leverick and Margery his wife parties in a final concord with John de Goshall, respecting land in Ash near Sandwich, 34th of Edward I., A.D. 1306.* John Leverick was Mayor of Sand- wich 1346, 18th of Edward III. Thomas Loverick was Member of Parliament for Sandwich 43rd of Edward III., 1371, and 1st of Eichard IL, 1377.t Contemporary with him were Salomon Leverick (spelt Leverske in Lewis's "Thanet"), who with John Denis, Mayor of Sandwich, and others, was attached to answer to a plea of trespass, by Robert de Stokes, Sheriff of Kent, prosecutor for the King, and not having made a sufiicient defence, was committed to jail, 1369. And Sir John Leverick of Ash, who married Joan, daughter of John Septvans, and whose effigy, we believe, lies on the north side of the high chancel at * Lansdown MS. 268, p. 293. t See his deed of gift to Gilbert SeptvaDS in 1370, page 327. 378 A COUNER OF KENT. Ash within the altar rails.* At all events, Sir John was living about this period. We have next a Thomas Leverick, Mayor of Sandwich 1412-1416, and contem- porary with him Sir William Leverick of Ash, hus- band of Emma, daughter of John Septvans of Ash, and who with his wife were buried in St. Mary's, Sandwich, to which they had been great benefactors, temp, Henry lY. ; and following them a Henry Leverick, M.P. for Sandwich, 7th Henry Y. Not one of the above can we venture to affiliate ! Not the least indication have we found of the affin- ity of any one of them to the other, and it is only some fifty or sixty years later that we arrive at any- thing resembling genealogical detail. From the will of Johanna Leverick, widow of William Manston, of the parish of Heme, proved in 1475, we gather that she had three brothers, Anthony, Henry, and Tliomas Leverick, but no hint of their parentage. She names '' John Loveryk," son of her brother Anthony, and Johanna, daughter of Henry, both living at that date, as also her own son, John Manston. Her brother Thomas proved her will, but of him we hear no more. Her brother Henry died in 1487, and by his will we learn that he was twice married. The first wife's name was Katharine, and the second, who survived him, Elizabeth. He names his daughter Susannah, then living a nun at Sheppey, but does not indicate of which wife she was the issue, nor does he mention * Vide page 206. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 379 the " Johanna, daughter of Henry," named in the will of his sister. Anthony Leverick of Heme, her elder (?) brother, married Constance, daughter of Woolbright, according to Philip ot ; but in the Pedigree of Monins set down as daughter and heir of Turberville. By her he had John, named above, who must have died unmarried or without issue, and Pernel, who, as daughter and heir of her father, became the wife of Edward Monins of Waldershare. Anthony Leverick died October 16th, 1510, and with his wife Constantia was buried at Heme, when the name appears to have been extinguished in this county. PARAMORE. Of this family no trace has yet been discovered earlier than the close of the fifteenth century. The name, spelt indifferently Paramore, Paramour, and Paramor, is so remarkable, that had any persons of consideration borne it in England previous to that period, it could scarcely, we think, have escaped notice. The early Kentish topographers and genealogists are perfectly silent as to its origin, and we are inclined to believe that the founder of the family in this country was some Erench or Italian merchant, who settled at Sandwich during the reign of Henry VII. Perhaps the very Thomas Paramore who heads the earliest pedigree in Philipot's MSS., and who is therein described as "of Paramore Streete in Ashe prope Sandwicum," and having by his wife, " Cecilia filia et heres Hambroke," two sons : William, who died 380 A COENER OF KENT. without issue, and Henricus, married to Alice Fornell, and living lOtli of Henry YIII., 1525-6, as we have already stated, p. 141. This Henry had a son John, who, by Jane, daughter of Thomas Beake of Wickham Breaux, had issue Thomas Paramor of Pordwieh, Mayor of Canterbury, to whom a mural monument was erected in the Church of St. Mary, Minster, Isle of Thanet ; * and underneath the kneeling effigies of the mayor and his wife the following inscription : ^^ Neere to this place lie enterred the bodies of Thomas Para- more, Esq., sometime Mayor of the citie of Canterburie, and Anne his first wife, by whom he had issue three sons and two daughters, viz. : Michael and Thomas, who died in his lifetime,! and Henry surviving, who married Marie, the daughter and heir of Tho. Garth of London, Esq. ; Jane, wife to Henry Saunders of Can- terbury, Esq., and Bennet, married to Thom. Eoach of Wotton, Gent. His second wife was Marie, the widowe of Tho. Garth of London, Esq. ; he departed this life the vij of July, A.D. 1621, resigning his soule to God that gave it." * There are two coats of arms of Paramour : Paramour of St. Nicliolas, Thanet, bearing azure, a fess embattled between three etoiles, or, crest, a cubit arm, vested azure, cuffed argent j the hand proper, holding an etoile of six points wavy, or. — Granted by Cooke, Clarenceux, 1585 : and Paramour of Ash, a similar coat, the fess being counter-embattled, and for crest, two arms embowed similarly vested azure, cuffed argent, and supporting an etoile, or. — Granted by Camden, Clarenceux, May 1616. t Michael died " about the age of 9 years." Thomas married Ann, daughter of Henry Frankly n of Throwley, and died without issue, September 13th, 1615. (Mon. In. St. Magdalen's Church, Canterbury.) GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 381 Under his effigy are the following verses : — Canterb. — Thanks, Isle of Thanet, for this Champion Ofs never dying name, my chiefe glorie ; His Trophie hath made me companion Unto the proudest by hisYictorie. Thanet. — Indeed thy countrie and unpeopled plaine, Unworthie were his wit and employment, And gladly do receive him home againe Kesting contented with his monument. We have transcribed these lines, certainly not for their beauty or their pathos, but because we believe that Canterbury, in thanking the Isle of Thanet for a champion, alludes to a singular trial by battle which was to come off in Tothill Pields, the 18th of June, 1571, and is told at great length by the old chronicler Stow. The subject in dispute was a certain manor and demaine lands belonging thereunto, in the Isle of Harty, belonging to the Isle of Sheppey in Kent.* * The manor of Harty, otherwise Sayes Court, was held in the reign of Henry II L by the family of De Campania under John de St. John. John and Mary de Campania, temp. Edward III., left three daughters and co-heirs, one of whom, Thomasine, married Thomas Chevin of Sholand in Newnham. His descendant, John Chevin, 3rd of Elizabeth, sold 'Hhe Mote," a parcel of this manor, to Mr. Paramour, by the description of a manor or messuage, 60 acres of land and 50 acres of marsh, with the appurtenances, in the parish of St. Thomas the Apostle, in the Isle of Harty, of the fee of William (Paulet), Marquis of Winchester (great grandson of John de St. John by Constance Poynings), capital lord of it ; but it being subsequently alleged by the said John Chevin that he was under age at the time of the above-mentioned alienation, and that he had passed it away again to John Kyme and Simon Low, they in the 13th year of the same reign brought out their writ of right. 382 A CORNER OF KENT. Simon Low and John Kyme were plaintiffs, and had a writ of right against Thomas Paramore, who offered to defend his right by battle, a challenge which they accepted, and offered to prove by battle that Paramore had no right or title to the said manor and lands. Herenpon, says the chronicler, the said Thomas Para- more brought before the Judges of the Common Pleas at Westminster one George Thorne, a big, broad, strong-set fellow; and the plaintiffs brought Henry Nailor, master of defence and servant to the Earl of Leicester, a proper slender man, and not so tall as the other. Thorne cast down a gauntlet, which Nailor took up. On the Sunday before the battle was to take place, however, "the matter was stayed," and the parties agreed that Paramore, being in posses- sion, should have the land, being bound in £500 to consider the plaintiffs as, upon hearing the matter, the judges might award. The Queen's Majesty, we are told, was the taker up of the matter in this wise. It was thought good that, for Paramore' s assurance, the order should be kept touching the combat in every particular, except the combat itself 1 The lists were set out, double railed, a stage set up for the judges, and scaffolds erected one above the other, for people to stand and behold. Behind were two tents, one for Nailor, the other for Thorne. Thorne was there in the morning timely ; Naiior about seven of the clock came through London apparelled in a doublet and gallygascoine breeches, all of crimson satin, cut and raised, a hat of black velvet with a red feather and GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 383 band, before him drums and fifes playing. The gauntlet that Thorne had cast down borne before the said JSTailor upon a sword's point, and his baston (a staff of an ell long, made taperwise, tipt with horn) with his shield of hard leather was borne after him by Askam, a yeoman of the Queen's guard. He was brought to his tent by Sir Jerome Bowes, Thorne being already in his with Sir Henry Cheney.* The Court of Common Pleas arrived at ten o'clock. The Lord Chief Justice and his two associates took their seats. Low was solemnly called to come in, or else to lose his writ of right, it having been previously arranged that he should make default. The cham- pions were next called for, and Sir Jerome Bowes led in Nailor by the hand, who ''curtseyed" to the judges first with one leg and then with the other, and went through the farce of stripping for the combat, pulling off his nether stocks (stock- ings) and appearing bare-foot and bare-legged, save his silk scavilonions (drawers) to the ancles, and his doublet sleeves tied up above the elbow, and bareheaded. Sir Henry Cheney next led in George Thorne in like manner. Proclamation w^as made by the Justices in the Queen's name that no person of what estate or condition he be, should be so hardy as to give any token or sign, by word or look, to either prover or defender, that might give one the * Henry, Lord Cheney, at that time was lord of the manor of Harty, and with the consent of Jane his wife sold it subsequently to Kichard Thornhill and Walston Dixie, Esqs. 384 A COENER OF KENT. advantage over the other, or suffer either of them to take and avail themselves of any of their weapons, &c., under pain of forfeiture of lands, tenements, goods, chattels, and imprisonment of their bodies, and making fine and ransom at the Queen's pleasure. The prover was then sworn in form as foUoweth : " Hear you Justices, that I have this day neither eat, drunk, nor have upon me either bone, stone, or glass, or any enchantment, sorcery, or witchcraft, where through the power of the Word of God might be inleased or diminished, and the Devil's power increased, and that my appeal is true, so help me God and his saints, and by this book." The solemn mockery was then terminated by the Lord Chief Justice rehearsing the matter in dispute, and the proceedings taken upon it, and adjudging the land to Paramore for default of appearance in Low, dismissing the champions, and acquitting the sureties of their bonds. Upon being desired to return Thorne his gauntlet, Nailor answered that his lordship might command him in anything, but that he would not willingly render the gauntlet unless Thorne would win it, and challenged him to play with him half a score blows, to show some pastime to the Lord Chief Jus- tice and the others there assembled; but Thorne replied that he came to fight and not to play. Then the Lord Chief Justice, commending Nailor for his valiant courage, commanded them both quietly to depart the field — no doubt to the bitter disappointment of the good citizens of London there assembled to the num- GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 385 ber of 4,000, who it is to be supposed were not in the secret of this child-like make-believe exhibition. If we are correct in identifying the defendant in this case with the champion "whose never-dying name was the chief glory" o'f Canterbury, we must say that old Durovernum was not difficult to please in those days, if the victory of a challenger who did not even fight by proxy was considered an achievement to be proud of. A John Paramor of the parish of St. James, Isle of Harty^ yeoman, in his will, proved June 15th, 1585, names his uncle Thomas Paramor, but does not enable us to connect him with the mayor. He seems, however, to have lived on the disputed estate, and left a wife named Agnes, and a daughter Alice. The mayor had a brother Henry, who died before him, and bequeathed to him Shreeves Court. Henry, the only surviving son of Thomas of Pord- wich, died in 1646, leaving by his wife, Mary Garth, a son Thomas, who died 1652. A branch of the original stock, however, remained and flourished at Ash, in the street to which they had given their name. The will of Thomas Paramore, of Ash, yeoman, was proved March 9th, 1559-60, in which he mentions his sons Symon, Raymond, John, Henry, and Thomas, Hobert Paramore of Worde, and his messuage at Paramore Street in Ash. This Thomas Paramore is called cousin by Thomas Harfleet, alias At-Chequer, in 1555 ; but his exact place in the pedigree has not been ascertained. His 2 c 386 A CORNER OP KENT. son Henry, we presume, is the Henry Paramore of Ash, whose will was proved 25th May, 1600; in which he mentions his wife Joan, and a sister married to Edward Purday. Thomas Paramor of Ash, pro- bably his younger brother, was overseer of the will of Stephen Petley of Dover, 2nd March, 1594. It is this Thomas Paramor, most probably, whose name we find so often in the earliest parish accounts, from 1600 to 1608 ; in which latter year, he was churchwarden. At the same time, the Parish Cess-Books make mention of a E/ichard and a Bartholomew Paramore, and a John Paramore of Worde; the latter, ap- parently, one of the six sons of B;obert Paramor of Worde and Wilmot his wife, named in his will, proved May 19th, 1579 ; the other five being Stephen, William, Thomas, Nicholas and E/ichard. Bartholomew appears to have been a son of Saphir Paramore of Eastry and Stattenboro'. Bartholomew's eldest son was named Peter. Thomas Paramor, the churchwarden, died in January, 1609-10, and his son Joshua, in 1635. His burial is the last but three of the family of Paramour entered in the registers at Ash. They appear about this date to have died out here, some of them having fallen into poverty, and being in the receipt of parish relief. The heirs female of the Stattenboro' and Eastry branches carried the property into the families of Sanders, Dilmot, Puller, Boys of Sandwich, and Boteler of Eastry. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 387 The following are all the entries of this family to be found in the registers at Ash : — BAPTISMS. John, son of Edward Paramore, 18th July, 1575. Timothy, son of Edward Paramore, 15th October, 1577. Angelica, daughter of John Paramore, 23rd August, 1579. Kichard, son of Edward Paramore, 12th January, 1579-80. Margaret, daughter of John Paramore, Eebruary 1580-81. Jane, daughter of Henry Paramore, April, 1581. Edward, son of Edward Paramore, 6th January, 1582-3. Margaret, daughter of Edward Paramore, 8th August, 1585. Mary, daughter of Edward Paramore, 10th August, 1589. John, son of Henry Paramor, 5th October, 1596. Henry, son of Thomas Paramour, 27th August, 1597. Edward, son of Henry Paramor, 3rd March, 1598-9. Joshua, son of Thomas Paramour, 1st December, 1603. Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Paramor, 5th April, 1607. John, son of Henry Paramour, 11th August, 1622. Edward, son of Henry Paramour, 21st August, 1625. Henry, son of Henry Paramour, 16th March, 1627-8. 2 c 2 388 A CORNER OE KENT. Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Paramour, 11th May, 1629. John, son of Edward Paramour, 28th June, 1629. Steven, son of Edward Paramour, 11th Eebruary, 1632-3. Mary, daughter of Edward and Anne Paramor, 23rd December, 1634. Anne, daughter of Edward and Anne Paramour, 21 Eebruary, 1640-1. MARRIAGES. John Proud and Alice Paramore, 18th October, 1561. Edward Paramore and Jone Hole, 26th November, 1565. John Paramore and Mary Hole, 13th October, 1578. Thomas Paramore and Ann Huffam, 24th January, 1582-3. John Wayman and Sarah Paramor, 16th October, 1598. Richard Paramor and Eve Stonard, 20th April, 1607. Nicholas Essex and Eve Paramor, widow, 7th April, 1608. Henry Paramor and Elizabeth Bax, 25th June, 1621.* * June 24tli, 1646, a Thomas Pa/rimore of Shoreditch, was married to Mary Adams of St. George's, Southwark, at St. Lawrence Pount- neys, London. This solitary entry, which was accidentally met with by a friend, and kindly handed to us, might be of some importance to a pedigree of the family, and we therefore record it, although there is nothing to show a connexion with the Paramours of Ash. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 389 George Gainsford and Mary Paramour, 25th June, 1676. Henry Paramor of Minster in Thanet, and Sarah Haslett, 30th January, 1807. William Farmour batchelor, and Martha Hills, 23rd October, 1830. BURIALS. Infant daughter of John Paramor, 4th May, ) -. k^o Mary, wife of John Paramor, 6th May, J Mary, daughter of Edward Paramor, 7th May, 1586. Henry Paramor, householder, I7th April, 1600. John, son of Henry Paramor, 27th November, 1601. Richard Paramour, householder, 1st November, 1607. Henry, son of Edward Paramour, 5th May, 1609. Thomas Paramour, householder, 1st February, 1609-10. Mary, wife of Henry Paramour Esq., 26th Eebruary, 1617-18. Henry, son of Henry Paramour, 21st June, 1628. Stephen, son of Edward Paramour, 18th November, 1633. Joshua Parramor, 25th Eebruary, 1634-5. Ann, daughter of Edward Paramour, 23rd October, 1635. A male infant of Edward and Ann Paramour, 10th Eebruary, 1637-8. Elizabeth Paramor, 30th August, 1638. 390 A CORNER or KENT. We will add to these extracts the following entries of admittances to Gray's Inn : — 1601. Thomas Paramore, son of Henry Paramore of the Isle of Thanet. 1617. Henry Paramore, late of Staple Inn, son and heir of Thomas Paramore of Pordigay « (Pordwich ?), co. Kent, Esq. 1620. Thomas Paramore, second son of K^ichard Paramore of Shankton, co. Leicester, Esq. 1635. Thomas Paramore, son and heir app. of Thomas Paramore of the Isle of Thanet, Esq. HOUGHAM. This is another Kentish family of great antiquity, large possessions, and important connexions, which has been totally neglected by the genealogists. Prom the arms borne by the most ancient branch, it is supposed that the Houghams, who derive their name from a manor so called, near Dover, as we have already stated in our second chapter, were a branch of the family of Avranches or Everinge. We have therein mentioned five Roberts de Hougham, who, from the time of Richard I., succeeded each other in regular rotation to the eleventh of Edward III., when the manor of Hougham went to the family of Yaloins by the marriage of one of the daughters and co-heirs of the fifth Robert to Waretius de Yaloins. The father of this Robert, who died twenty-ninth Ed- ward I., and left a widow named Alicia, is said to have aENEALOGICAL AND HEKALDIC NOTES. 391 had a younger brother named E;ichard5 from whom descended the Houghams of Ash. We have not been fortunate enough to find a trace of this Richard, but in the MS. we have so often quoted, marked E.. 27, in the College of Arms, there are abstracts of several charters, unfortunately not dated, but apparently of the thirteenth century, in which we find a Radulphus de Hugham, who had a son Osbert married to a lady named Pelicia, and that to this Osbert William de Lenham, by consent of his wife Cecilia, granted all the lands he had in marriage with her and of her inheritance; this deed of gift being witnessed by Robert and Alexander de Hugham, Philip, Walter and Peter, sons of Beatrice de Hugham, and Ralph, the son of Matthew de Hugham. This, we presume, was in the time of Edward II., as in the fourteenth of that king's reign we have a charter of Beatrice de Hougham, at that period the widow of Baldwin de Hougham, whom we therefore take to be the father of her children, Philip, Walter, and Peter ; and the same document informs us that she was the daughter of Robert de Chillenden. In another charter we find Thomas, son of Henry de Hougham ; but no Richard in any. Nevertheless, a Richard de Hugham was Prior of Dover, A.D. 1350, and a scrap of a pedigree is headed with '* Simon de Hougham filius Richardi," followed by '' Robertus de Hougham filius Simonis," with the information, " Obiit in Ash." His son Robert is described as of Elmstone, and father of William de Hougham, to whom a wife is given named 392 A CORNER OF KENT. Elizabeth, their son being Solomon de Hougham,* " whose figure," we are told, " stood in Ash church windows;" no doubt that of the kneeling warrior described at page 189, on whose tabard are arms differing only in colour from the other arms of Hougham, said to have been assumed from the family of Sanders of Norborne.t If there be any foundation for this assertion, it is very probable, from the special mention of Elizabeth as his mother, that she was an heiress of the family entitled to this coat. The descent from Solomon is a little clearer. He had two brothers, Thomas and Stephen (and perhaps a third, John Hougham, buried December 16, 1559), and a daughter not named, the wife of John Brooke (*' son of John"), by whom she had a son also named * A Solomon de Hougham died seized of Maplescombe, Co. Kent, 2nd of King Edward III. There were also two other Solomons, son and grandson of John Hougham of St. Martin's, Canterbury, by Joan his wife ; as we find by the will of said John, dated May 4th, and proved July 2nd, 1482 : his son Solomon being then dead, and his grandson apparently a minor. He bequeaths all his lands and tene- ments in Ash to Joan his wife, for life ; remainder to Solomon, son of Solomon Hougham, his late son, deceased, when he shall arrive at the age of 30 years, in-tail, &c. He names Dionisia his daughter, late wife of John Bishop, taillour, and also Jovina, his daughter, late wife of John Bishop, of St. Paul's, aforesaid ! Also his own sisters, Isabella and Margaret. The will of his widow Joan is dated May 8, 1503. t In the Visitation of Kent, 1619, C. 16, Coll. Arms, these arms are or, on a chevron between three elephants' heads gules, three mullets argent. The drawing in le Neve's notes gives the field argent, and the charges sable, which may be an error of the copyist. The crest in the Visitation is that of Brooke of Brooke Street, the arms of Brooke being in the second and third quarters. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 393 John, who died without issue, by his wife, Magdalen Stothard, 1582-3 (will proved Pebruary 7th). Of Thomas we know no more; but Stephen married Bennetta, daughter of John Brooke, the elder, and heir to her brother, it is said, on the death of her nephew. The property, however, could only have come to her heirs, as she herself died nearly two-and- twenty years before her nephew. "Bennet Huffam" was buried June 9th, 1560, according to the registers at Ash, and by her will, proved October 14th following, as '' Benedict HuflPam of Ashe, widow," she desires to be buried near her husband (who was dead in March, 1556), and names Michael and E^ichard, her sons, Joan, Margaret, and Elizabeth, her daughter's children, and Bennett, the daughter of Michael Huffam. John Brooke, the nephew, did not die till January 16th, 1582-3, and by his will, proved February 7th following, wills cer- tain lands, part of the manor of Nevil's Pleet, to John, son of Bichard Huffam, his godson, and his heirs male. Bennett's brother, John Brooke, was living in 1555, as he is named in the will of Stephen Hougham, dated November 20th in that year. Stephen names therein also his " wife Benet," his brother Thomas Hougham, Michael Hougham his son, and Stephen Solly, his daughter Elizabeth, wife of Stephen Solly, son of Stephen Solly the elder, and her daughters, Margaret, Elizabeth, and Joan, whom we have seen mentioned in their grandmother's will. Michael, his eldest son, married Edith, daughter of Austin of Addisham, and 394 A CORNER or KENT. Bicliard, his other son, Joan Foad. Michael of Ash left three sons, Michael, Stephen, and E;ichard,* and three daughters : Anne, married to Thomas Paramore of Pordwich, Bennett, who married Thomas Country, and , married to Bateman.f He died in 1583. His brother Bichard of Eastry had, by Joan his wife, five sons, Thomas, Vincent, John, George, and Stephen, and two daughters, Susan and Bennet, who both died unmarried. Michael, eldest surviving son of Michael of Ash, married, first, Elizabeth Joade, October 11th, 1578, by whom he had three sons, Thomas, Henry, and Bich- ard, and one daughter, Elizabeth ; and secondly, Jane Brook, by whom he had a son named Brook, baptized January 25th, 1596. Bichard, second son of Michael of Ash, had Wed- dington, and married Elizabeth, daughter of Edward Sanders of Norborne, who survived him and married Thomas Hawkes. Bichard died in 1606 (buried at * Will proved December lOth, 1583. t From a pedigree in one of Hasted's collections (Brit. Mus., Add. MSS., 5,520), we find that William, eldest son of Michael and Margaret Courthope, had by his wife, Susanna, daughter of John Clarke, fifteen children, eight sons and seven daughters; and that of the former, only one left issue. This was Francis Hougham, the "Citizen and Painter-Stainer," whose memorandum appears at page 102. He was twice married, and had issue by both wives. Gervase, whom in 1717 he names his heir, was his only child by his first wife, Mary, daughter and heir of Gervase Plumbe, Gent,, and was born June 13th, 1708. Nathaniel, the only surviving son by his second wife, was living in 1722. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 395 Ash October Sth), and left three sons : first, Michael, baptized June 6th, 1596, who married Margaret Courthope, from whom the Houghams we have enumerated in the last note, page 394 ; second, Edward, baptized May 25th, 1598, who, by Margaret his wife, left a daughter Anne, married to John Bet- tenham ; and third, Solomon, baptized January 1st, 1599-1600, who, by his wife Mary, left three sons : first, Solomon, a merchant in London, and who, hav- ing purchased the manor of Langport, alias Barton, at Canterbury, resided there, and was Sheriff of Kent in 1696 ; second, Richard of Sandwich, dead in 1662, and Henry, who left issue three sons, Solomon, John, and Charles ; the two first died without issue, and Charles became heir to his brother Solomon, who had inherited Langport from his uncle the Sheriff, in 1697. Charles had a son Henry, who married Sarah, daughter of William Hunt, and died 1726, leaving a son William, who married Margaret Hannah Boberta, daughter and one of the heirs of John Corbett, Esq., Co. Salop, by whom he had a son William, born in 1752, who married the daughter of Charles Bobinson, Esq., Barrister at Law, Becorder of Canterbury, and brother of Matthew, first Lord Bokeby. Eor the collateral branches we must refer the reader to the information we have been able to gather from the registers of Ash, the parish in which we are alone interested. The name of Hougham is still extant there and in the neighbourhood, but it seems to have died out of the parish during the seventeenth 396 A CORNER OE KENT. century.* Stephen, brother of Eichard of Wedding- ton, who married Joan, daughter of Thomas Beke, and was overseer of Ash in 1605, and whose daughter Bennet was the second wife of Henry Harfleet, and Thomas Huffam, churchwarden in 1609, being apparently the last of the name who held any position here. The entries of the family of Hougham in the registers of Ash are as follow : — BAPTISMS. George Huffam, 6th March, 1558-9. Elizabeth Huffame, 3rd September, 1560. Stephen Huffame, 11th April, 1561. (Page cut from July to January, 1561-2; and from 26th October to 16th April, 1563.) Susan, daughter of Richard Hougham, 10th October, 1563. Anne, daughter of Michael Hougham, 28th January, 1564-5. Vincent, son of Richard Huffam, 26th July, 1566. Michael, son of Michael Huffam, 28th October, 1569. Richard, son of Michael Huffam, 4th June, 1574. Stephen, son of Michael Huffam, 22nd June, 1577. Thomas, son of Michael Huffam, 17th July, 1579. Magdalen, daughter of Vincent Huffam, 3rd October, 1591. * No marriage of a Hougham is registered at Ash, between 1 655 and 1763, but one baptism during the last century, and no burial between 1660 and 1824. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 397 Brooke, son of Michael Huffam, 25th January, 1595-6. Michael, son of Richard Huffam, 6th June, 1596. Edward, son of Eichard Huffam, 25th May, 1598. Margaret, daughter of Stephen Huffam, 5th Septem- ber, 1599. Solomon, son of Richard Huffam, 1st January, 1599- 1600. John, son of Stephen Huffam, 5th October, 1600. Judith, daughter of Stephen Huffam, 1st November, 1601. Elizabeth, daughter of Stephen Huffam, 17th June, 1604. Bennett, daughter of Stephen Huffam, 8th October, 1605. Mildred, daughter of Thomas Huffam, 6th December, 1607. Samuel, son of Thomas Huffam, 6th May, 1610. Edward, son of Solomon Huffam, 17th November, 1626. Anne, daughter of Solomon Huffam, 17th November, 1626. John, son of George and Martha Huffam, 2nd Febru- ary, 1607-8. (No entries from 1641 to 1654.) Martha, daughter of John and Martha Huffam, 8th May, 1654. Sarah, daughter of Henry and Elizabeth Hougham, 5th April, 1750. Susannah, daughter of Henry and Elizabeth Hougham, 14th July, 1751. 398 A CORNER OF KENT. Henry, son of Henry and Elizabeth Hougham, 8th October, 1752. Edward, son of Henry and Elizabeth Hougham, 12th March, 1754. Alice, daughter of Henry and Elizabeth Hougham, 7th May, 1758. Edward, son of Edward and Sarah Hougham, 10th November, 1765. Sarah, daughter of Edward and Sarah Hougham, 1st March, 1767. Harriet, daughter of John and Margaret Hougham^ labourer, of Westmarsh, 9th October, 1814. George, son of John and Margaret Hougham, 10th November, 1816. Alice, daughter of John and Margaret Hougham. Michael, son of John and Margaret Hougham, 1821. MARRIAGES. Hichard Huffam and Jane Eord, November 27th, 1558. Thomas Country and Bennett Huffam, July 16th, 1575. Thomas Paramore and Anne Huffam, January 24th, 1582-3. Vincent Huffam and Elizabeth Pynnocke, January 1st, 1590-1. Thomas Browning and Margaret Huffam, October 28th, 1624. Henry Harflete and Bennett Huffam, March 26th, 1629. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 399 Edward Hougham, widower, and Sarah Chandler, December 7th, 1763. Anna Hongham and John Capell, March 6th, 1774. William Hougham, son of John Hougham, gardener, and Esther Carpenter, December 2nd, 1839. Ann Hougham, daughter of John Hougham, labourer of Ash, and John Greggs, April 10th, 1841. Alice Hougham, daughter of John Hougham, labourer of Ash, and John Wall, widower, Novem- ber 22nd, 1845. Harriet Hougham, daughter of John Hougham, farmer of Ash, and Thomas Upton of Eastry, No- vember 11th, 1848. BUHIALS. Bennet Huffam, June 9th, 1560. Infant daughter of Michael Huffam, December 15th, 1580. Michael Huffam, householder, July 12th, 1596. John, son of Stephen Huffam, October 11th, 1600. Mary, daughter of Stephen Huffam of Sandwich, June 21st, 1604. Ideth (Edith) daughter of Stephen Huffam, Oct. 9, 1604. Edward, son of Thomas Huffam, December 18th, 1619. Joane, wife of Stephen Huffam, Eebruary 15th, 1632-3. John, son of George Huffam, Eebruary 6th, 1637-8. (No entries from 1641 to 1656.) Stephen Hougham of Ash, aged 9, September, 1835. 400 A CORNER OF KENT. Edward Hougham of New Street, aged 30, September 8th, 1854. George Hougham of Cooper Street, Ash, aged 16, February 19th, 1857. We add the following entries from other sources, as partially supplying the gap between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries : — WiNGHAM EeGISTERS. BAPTISM. Elizabeth, daughter of Stephen and Elizabeth Huffam, December 8th, 1662. BURIALS.* Stephen Huffam, tailor, 1691. Stephen Huffam, son of Richard and Anne, 1695. E;ichard Huffam, tailor, 1697. Elizabeth Huffam, widow, same year. TeNTERDEN EEaiSTERS. Thomas Hougham and Mary Jenkin, married Decem- ber 28th, 1595. Add. MSS. Brit. Mus. 5,507. marriages. Bennett, daughter of Stephen Hougham of Ash, gentleman, aged 22, and Henry Forstall, Mayor of Sandwich, 162f . * "Michael Hougham, ob*. 1679, get. 61." Anne Hougham, daughter of Edmund Joy, ob*. 1677, set. 55. Mon. In. Preston Church. In Tenterden churchyard is a tombstone to the memory of Henry Hougham, and Joan, his wife, by whom he had fourteen children. He died September 8th, 1818, aged 75; he was therefore born in 1743. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 401 Stephen Hougham of Ash, gentleman, aged 21, vivo patre, and Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Light- foot of Canterbury, deceased, aged 18, 1629. Edward Huffam of Stourmouth, gentleman, widower, married Mary, daughter of Richard Laming of Preston, deceased, 1631. Bennett, daughter of Thomas Huffam of Dover, gentleman, aged 18, married Thomas Dedes of Dover, maltster, aged 20. Thomas HufiPam of Ash, husbandman, aged 24, married Susan, relict of Stephen Browne of Ash, 1634. Stephen Hougham and Elizabeth Selden, 1650. Solomon Hougham of Norborne, gentleman, aged 20, and Sarah Beke (or Beale), gentlewoman, aged 21. Susan Hougham and Andrew Honess, 1653. Sibel Hougham and William Lucket, 1656. Henry Hougham and Elizabeth Morris, 1681. Alice Hougham and Anthony Bayner, 1682. SOLLY. This ancient family, of which so many descendants are resident in the parish at the present day, is pre- sumed to have taken its name from the manor of Soles, in the neighbouring parish of Nonnington, in Wingham hundred, part of the possessions in 1080 of Odo, Bishop of Baieux. A John de Soles was in possession of it in the reign of Edward I.^ and his descendant, another John, died, seized of it in 1376. It was alienated in 1400 or 1401. 2 D 402 A CORNER OF KENT. Without affirming or contradicting this statement, with which we have been favoured by the direct representative of the Pedding branch of the family, there is the fact that a John Solly is entered in the register of the Abbey of St. Augustine, as holding the manor of Linucre or Linacre Court of tlie Abbot, by Knight's service, in the 49th year of Edward III., 1377. We have been unable to connect this John Solly with any of the family of De Soles,* or to discover any intermediate male descendant between him and the Stephen Solly who married a daughter of Harfleet, and was settled at Pedding in 1509 ; but in the Ash registers we found the following entry amongst the burials during March, 1586 : — " Sexborow Solly, wyd : buryed, being an hundred years owld, xxvj^^." She was, therefore, born in 1486, would have been 23 in 1509, and possibly the wife of Stephen Solly above mentioned. The name, which appears singular enough in the corrupt orthography of the register, is correctly Sexburgha, being that of a celebrated Abbess of Minster, and appears to have been a favourite one in the sixteenth century. A " Sixborrowe Sollye " preceded her venerable name- sake to the grave, being buried April 24th, 1573, and * Richard Sawlew is a witness to a grant of land from William Sanders, of the parish of Ash next Sandwich, son and heir of William Sanders of Minster, to John Bennett of Ash, aforesaid, dated Septem- ber 17th, in the 19th year of the reign of Richard 11. (A.D. 1398).— (Philipot MS., No. 23, Coll. Arm., p. 103.) The absence of the " de " before the name of the. oldest Solly, identified as one of the family, iR not to be overlooked. GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 403 another ''Sixborrowe Sollye, widow," followed her January 6th, 1591-2. Unfortunately, the earliest registers rarely afford us any information beyond the name and date of burial or baptism, and identification is therefore little assisted by them. No mention is made of whom the first of these Sexburghas was the widow, or the second, the daughter,* nor do we find the name any- where in the Harfleet Pedigree. We must therefore confine ourselves to the observation of the facts, and leave the conclusions to be drawn by the reader. We find no entry of the burial of Stephen Solly, ''the elder," as he is called in the will of Stephen Huffam, dated November 2nd, 1555, unless he was the " Stephen, son of William Sollye," buried March 4th, 1561-2. He had, however, a son Stephen, who married Elizabeth, daughter of Stephen Hougham aforesaid, and had a son John, who died at Podding in 1624, leaving three sons, John, Stephen, and Richard. The latter was of Pleet in Ash, and married Elizabeth, daughter of Daniel Pryor of Ash. He died March 18th, 1652, and left four sons ; the eldest, Richard, married Mary, daughter of John Proude, of * The other widow, we presume, was the wife of a William Solly, as the first entry of a marriage is that of " William Sollye and Sexborowe " (no maiden name mentioned !), November 24th, 1558 ; and a " William Sollye" was buried March 5th, 1570-71; and another ^'William Sollye, householder," January 2nd, 1591-2, only four days before " Sixborrowe." The latter was most probably her husband, but there is no deciding from any evidence we have hitherto inspected. 2 D 2 404 A CORNER OF KENT. the Moat in Ash, and died at the Moat, October 22nd, 1683, aged 50. His eldest son John married twice, and by his second wife Anne, sister to Sir Henry Purnesse, had a son E^ichard, who married Anne, daughter of John HoUis, by whom he had five sons : first, John, who died unmarried, 1750 ; second, Isaac, who married Ann, daughter of Nathaniel Neale, and had twelve children; third, Richard, who died un- married, 1743 ; fourth, Edward, who died unmarried, 1792; and fifth, Samuel, who married, 1776, Sarah, daughter of Dr. Horsman, and died 1805, leaving two sons, Eichard Horsman Solly, who died 1858, and Samuel E/cynolds Solly, of Manchester Square, London, E.R.S. and E.S.A., the present owner of the Moat. Of the collateral descendants (whose name is legion) we can trace no other line with any confidence to the Sollys now living in the parish. Mr. George Solly of E/ichborough is probably the representative of one. {Vide page 139.) Some branches of the family had fallen into poverty early in the sixteenth century. We find ''John SoUye, a poor house- holder," buried January 7th, 1594-5 ; '' Matthew Sollye, a servant," buried May 18th, 1606 ; and *' Priscilla Solly, servant to Mrs. Solly of Podding," buried September 22nd, 1666 ; and the name, like those of Paramore and Hougham, is still found amongst the labouring classes and in the humbler ranks of the community. But " apprenticeship doth GENEALOGICAL AND HERALDIC NOTES. 405 not extinguish gentry," and the poorest and lowliest members of these ancient English families may have the barren satisfaction of writing the proud motto of " Euimus " under the escutcheon they have inherited from ancestors who owned the broad acres they now till, in the times of the Plantagenets and the Tudors. Apropos of escutcheon, the arms attributed to the Sollys of Sandwich by Mr. Hasted (vol. iii. p. 670, note) are vert a chevron per pale or and gules, between 3 soles naiant, argent. In vol. iv. p. 24, note, he confounds them with those of the family of Sole of Bobbing; Argent, a chevron saUe between 3 soles haurient, proper within a bordure engrailed of the second : but the fact is, that no arms for the family of Solly of Kent are recorded in the Heralds' College ; neither does any pedigree of Solly appear in the Visitations of that county. There was, however, a family of the name of Solley existing in Worcester- shire as early as the^ reign of Henry IV., and their pedigree from Thomas Solley living in the thirteenth year of that reign (A.D. 1412) down to Humfrey Solley, in 1683, is to be found in the Visitations, C. 30 and K. 4, Coll. Arms. The coat accompanying it is a chevron between 3 fish (not soles) naiant ; no colours marked, which would indicate absence of proof of their authenticity. There is, however, much more probability that these SoUeys were collaterals of the Sollys of Kent than that the latter are descended from the De Soles. 406 A COENER OF KENT. Of the family of Solly the entries of baptisms at Ash alone amount to 292, of marriages to 104, and of burials to 176, exceeding those of any other in the register, except, perhaps, that of Lacy. POSTSCRIPT. TTTHILE awaiting the completion of the illustra- ^ * tions promised to our subscribers (the illness of the artist originally employed having delayed the publication of this volume considerably beyond the period we had contemplated), the works in progress at Ash and accidental circumstances have enabled us to add a few notes of some importance by way of postscript. In the first place, there has been discovered under the flooring of the pews in the South Transept a piece of carved oak which evidently formed part of the family seat of the Septvans in Ash Church, as on one side of it appears a shield of arms, on which are the well-known fans or wheat-screens as represented on the brasses in the Holland Chancel, and on the other an elaborately carved letter S of very graceful design. {Vide Plate VII. fi^. 7.) Secondly, in one of the unindexed MSS. in Philipot's Collection, Coll. of Arms, we have lighted upon a pedigree of the family of St. Nicholas, illus- trated by coats of arms, &c., and attached to it are some rude pen-and-ink drawings of figures formerly 408 A CORNER OF KENT. in the windows of the churches at Ore and Ash. Two of these, stated to have heen " in Ecclesia de Ash jnxta Sandwicum," are kneeling figures of a man and woman, the former in armour, with a tabard displaying the arms of St. Nicholas ; and the latter in kirtle and mantle, on which appear the arms of Campania. Underneath them is written '' Orate pro animabus Johannis Seynnicholas et Margaretse uxoris suae. 8 filiorum et septem filiar." This is a curious piece of genealogical information, as we have only the knowledge from his will of four sons and two daughters, all under age, at the date of its execution in June, 1462. As he died the same year, he must have lost nine children in infancy previous to that period. As these figures do not occur amongst the drawings of Peter le Neve in 1610, we must conclude that the glass on which they were painted had been destroyed before his time. The particular window is not specified by Philipot ; but it was probably that of the South Transept, wherein all the family lie bm^ied. We give the figures, in addition to the four drawn in Peter le Neve's Church Notes, on Plate XIII. page 254. Thirdly, on a more minute examination of the lid of the stone coffin recently dug up in the South Transept, our artist has discovered faint traces of the ornamental portion of the cross proper, and has indicated its probable original form by dotted lines on Plate YII. fig. 6, page 204. Pourthly, w^e have found amongst the old grants POSTSCRIPT. 409 by J. DaltoD, Norroy King of Arms, that on the 11th of May, 1560 (2nd of Queen Elizabeth), there was one of a crest to " Edward Singleton of Broughton Tower, in the Countie of Lancaster, Gentleman," which is blazoned as '' an arme armed at all pieces, the hand, charnell {i. e,, flesh- colour, or proper), holding a horseman's staff, gold, the hede sylver." We have no doubt, therefore, that the gravestone described by us at page 234 is that of Dr. Singleton of Molland, whose epitaph was preserved by Mr. Eaussett in his Church Notes {vide page 236) ; but though the coat is described by him correctly, he does not mention the crest, and the only one appearing exactly to correspond with it which we could discover was that of Gimber, for the sculptor of the gravestone has embowed the arm the reverse way, which, according to the rules of Heraldry, makes altogether another crest of it, and would still cause us to hesitate had we not proof of the burial of Mr. Thomas Singleton in this chancel in 1710, coupled with the statement that he was '' descended from the ancient family of the Singletons of Broughton Tower, in Lancashire." This fact '* dissolves our mystery," as Mrs. Malaprop would say, for it was certainly difficult to comprehend how such a stone could have escaped the notice both of Mr. Eaussett and Mr. Cozens. "We had indulged a faint hope that we should have been able^ by the assistance of Mr. Ashpitel, to have thrown some new light upon the remarkable deflec- 410 A CORNER OF KENT. tion of the High Chancel. We have mentioned at page 177, on the authority of Mr. Eoherts, one theory propounded by Eeclesiologists ; bnt there is another less fanciful which has also its supporters. The laying of the foundation of a church, or any particular portion of it, was generally preceded by a nocturnal service on the eve of the day of the saint to whom it was to be dedicated ; and as previously to the invention of the mariner's compass the only mode of ascertaining the east was by observing the rising of the sun, this was done on the following morning by " the watchers of the matins," and the orientation of the building depended upon their report to the architects, who set out the new work accordingly. Granting this to be fact, it follows as a matter of course that when the body of the church was dedicated to one saint and the chancel to another, there would be a sensible deviation from the right line in the orientation of the two portions of the edifice. Now, the Church of Ash is dedicated to St. Nicholas, while the High Chancel is expressly described as that of Our Lady, and an opportunity was therefore afforded us to test the value of this theory. The result of our observations were, how- ever, singularly contrary to our expectations, — the nave of the church being in a direct line towards the point at which the sun would rise on the 2nd of February, the day of the Purification (one of three great days appropriated to the Virgin), and the chan- cel diverging towards the point of sunrise on the 6th POSTSCRIPT. 411 of December, St. Nicholas' Day — the exact reverse of the proposition ! The question may arise, has there been any re- dedication ? Was the old Norman church, originally dedicated to St. Nicholas, and the short nave then existing in a direct line with the chancel, or was there an earlier edifice raised in honour of the Virgin, and a new Church of St. Nicholas constructed nearly upon the same foundation in the 12th century ? The nave has evidently been lengthened westward during the first half of the 13th century, and pre- viously to the period when it was made a parish church and appropriated to the College of Wingham by Archbishop Peckham, whose family, from the exact similarity of their coat armour, is supposed to be identical with that of St. Nicholas of Ash and Thanet. I cannot do better than conclude this postscript by transcribing some general observations on the church, which have been kindly contri- buted by Mr. Ashpitel, in further illustration of the plan, Plate Y., for which we are also indebted to him : — '' An examination was made of the south wall of the nave (see Plan A, B), where there are evidently the remains of two arches, leading either into a side chapel, or more probably what was once a south aisle. '' A cursory view shows they are supported by a column at C, but on cutting into the wall at b, it was clear there was a half-column attached to a pier. 412 A CORNEE OP KENT. or, as it is technically called, a respond, and not another column. It was then suggested that the original church might have only extended as far as the dotted lines d, e, and that it was probably (for the arches now built into the wall are pointed) the work of the Anglo-Norman period, circa 1160 — 1180, and consisted of a short nave (as shown by the dotted lines) and two aisles; and, as was usual at the time, there was also, in all likelihood, a small chancel, with an octagonal or circular apsis, under where the central tower now stands. If this were the case, the ragstone column aty, and the respond at g, may be original ; and the upper abacus, like that at e, has been superimposed at the time of the erection of the new Early English arches, for this is of Caen stone, like that at e, while the rest of the columns, capital, and base are of rag. " This yiew is further strengthened by the section of the capitals e and/, and still more so by those of the bases ^ and /, the latter of which is in all proba- bility half a century later than the first. " About fifty years after this date, in the palmy days of the Early English style, 1220 to 1240, the nave seems to have been lengthened westward, and the chancel built as we now see it. The transepts also must have been erected about that time; and, as previously stated, it would appear, from the extra thickness of the walls at the north-west end of the building (see letter E), there must have been a tower at that spot. This idea has been corroborated by POSTSCRIPT. 413 the finding the cill of a small oylet, or arrow-slit window, close under the present eaves, which could only have been made for the first floor, or ringing- loft, of a tower. That the Holland Chancel or St. Nicholas Chapel was then built, or shortly afterwards, is probable, as the remains of a foundation were discovered a short time ago, northward of the present wall, A, i. This part of the building, as it exists at present, was probably erected at the same time with the central towers." THE END. cox AND WYMAN, PRINTEES, GREAT QUEEN STREET, LONDON. 3W^ ^ -• ^ "y^r>^^yr\/r LIBRARY OF CONGRESS g^l 019 828 907 3 Ji