Archaeological Context

ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSALS AT

BEAUREPAIRE HOUSE AND

PARK, BRAMLEY,

HAMPSHIRE C

PCA REPORT NO. R11814

AUGUST 2014

PRE-CONSTRUCT ARCHAEOLOGY Archaeological Impact Assessment of Proposals at Beaurepaire House and Park, Bramley, Hampshire

Ordnance Survey Central National Grid Reference: SU 63515 158155

Researched and written by Guy Thompson

Project Manager: Charlotte Matthews

Commissioning Agent: Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners

Contractor: Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd

Unit 54

Brockley Cross Business Centre

Endwell Road

Brockley

London

SE4 2PD

Tel: 020 7732 3925 Fax: 020 7732 7896

E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.pre-construct.com

PCA Report no. 11814

August 2014 The material contained herein is and remains the sole property of Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd and is not for publication to third parties without prior consent. Whilst every effort has been made to provide detailed and accurate information, Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd cannot be held responsible for errors or inaccuracies herein contained.

DOCUMENT VERIFICATION

BEAUREPAIRE HOUSE AND PARK, BRAMLEY, HAMPSHIRE

ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSALS

Quality Control

Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited Project Number K3355 Report Number R11814

Name & Title Signature Date Text Prepared by: Guy Thompson 04/08/14

Graphics Mark Roughley 04/08/14 Prepared by: Graphics Josephine Brown 04/08/14 Checked by: Project Manager Charlotte Matthews 04/08/14 Sign-off:

Revision No. Date Checked Approved

Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited Unit 54 Brockley Cross Business Centre 96 Endwell Road London SE4 2PD

CONTENTS 1 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 4 2 INTRODUCTION 5 3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 7 4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 8 5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL AND SIGNIFICANCE 18 6 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT ON BURIED ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS 20 7 MITIGATION 22 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY 23

APPENDIX 1: Archaeological trial trench evaluation

Figures

Figure 1: Site location

Figure 2: Detailed site location

Figure 3: George Wyther’s estate plan, 1613

Figure 4: Sherborne St John tithe map, 1840

Figure 5: First Edition Ordnance Survey map, 1872

Figure 6: Second Edition Ordnance Survey map, 1897

Figure 7: Elevations of Beaurepaire, 1941

Figure 8: Ground floor plan of Beaurepaire, 1941

Figure 9: First floor plan of Beaurepaire, 1941

Figure 10: Proposed basement plan

Plates

Plate 1 Steventon Manor House, built by Sir Richard Pexsall c.1570-1)

Plate 2 Chimney stacks at the rear elevation of Christchurch Mansion, Ipswich, built by Sir Edmund Withypool in 1548

Plate 3 Reconstruction of the front elevation of Redgrave Hall, Suffolk, built by Sir Nicholas Bacon, c.1554 (from Sandeen, E.R. 1962. ‘The building of Redgrave Hall, 1545- 1554’, in Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology & History 29, pp: 1- 33)

Plate 4 Reconstruction of the rear elevation of Redgrave Hall, Suffolk, built by Sir Nicholas Bacon, c.1554 (from Sandeen, E.R. 1962. ‘The building of Redgrave Hall, 1545- 1554’, in Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology & History 29, pp: 1- 33)

Plate 5 Reconstruction of the ground floor plan of Redgrave Hall, Suffolk, built by Sir Nicholas Bacon, c.1554 (from Sandeen, E.R. 1962. ‘The building of Redgrave Hall, 1545-1554’, in Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology & History 29, pp: 1-33)

Plate 6 Stonor Park, Oxfordshire a view of c.1690, showing the retained medieval buildings at the extremities of the flanking wings of the Tudor E-shaped house

Plate 7 The house, gatehouse and gardens of the early Tudor mansion of Belhus, Aveley Essex, from a view of c.1710

Plate 8 Belhus, Aveley, Essex c.1832, showing the retained Tudor elements and the Gothick additions by Lord Dace, 1745-7

Plate 9 Early Tudor heraldic panelling in the Oak Gallery of The Vyne (from Howard & Wilson, 2003)

Plate 10 Early Tudor heraldic panelling in the Oak Gallery of The Vyne (from Howard, 1998)

Plate 11 The east elevation of Beaurepaire c.1850 (attributed to Bernard Brocas)

Plate 12 The south and west elevations of Beaurepaire c.1850 (attributed to Bernard Brocas)

1 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

1.1 Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited was commissioned by Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners on behalf of GrandLane Developments to prepare an Archaeological Impact Assessment of proposals at Beaurepaire House and Beaurepaire Park, Bramley, Hampshire, centred upon OS NGR SU 63515 158155. Beaurepaire House is a Grade II Listed Building and comprises the early 19th century service wing of a former 18th century manor house, which was situated to the south and demolished following a fire in 1941. The house (former service wing) sits in the north-west corner of a large medieval moated site. The 18th century house replaced a Tudor manor house, which is thought to have been upgraded from a medieval Hall house.

1.2 An archaeological desk-based assessment and geophysical survey were undertaken in 2013 (Wessex Archaeology 2013a; 2013c). Since then, new proposals have been developed, which include the construction of a new 30,000 square foot single family dwelling on the site of the demolished 18th century house, a new formal entrance to the estate at the junction of Vyne Road and Morgaston Road with a new drive ending with the proposed new four-storey house, the refurbishment of the moat and creation of new gardens and lawns and the provision of additional bridges over the moat. The Archaeological Impact Assessment was carried out in order to inform planning decisions and set out an appropriate mitigation strategy for the consideration of the planning authority. In addition, targeted documentary research was carried on the Tudor house at Beaurepaire at the request of the Hampshire County Archaeologist in order to understand the proposed impacts on the remains of this structure.

1.3 This research established that the manor of Beaurepaire emerged during the early 13th century. By 1357/8 the manorial complex comprised at least six separate buildings, with a grange and chapel outside the moat and a medieval hall, residential chambers, kitchen and possible bakehouse on the moated platform. Most, if not all of the buildings were timber- framed. The research also established that the Tudor house at Beaurepaire was built within the period 1553 to 1556 and certainly no later than 1558/9 by Sir Richard Pexsall. This house was substantial since it contained 39 hearths, only four less than The Vyne. It was was built of brick, aligned east-west and, of at least two storeys. Like The Vyne, Beaurepaire had a sequence of prestigious first floor apartments, linked by a richly decorated gallery. During the English Civil War in 1642, the house at Beaurepaire was garrisoned by Royalist troops and earthwork defences were erected in the surrounding park. The research also established that the Tudor house was replaced by a ‘Gothick’ castle around the turn of the 1760s by Bernard Brocas (1730-1777). Elements of the Tudor house appear to have been retained along the west elevation, which may have formed part of the west elevation of the Tudor house. Contemporary reactions reveal that the 18th century house was considered to be small and little more than a remnant of the house that preceded it.

1.4 Excavation for the proposed basement is likely to have a significant and highly adverse impact on any surviving archaeological remains located within that area of the moated platform. The potential for medieval and post-medieval archaeological remains in this area is high. An archaeological trial trench evaluation carried out in July 2014 uncovered the remains of the 18th century house and a considerable depth of overburden from its demolition. Although no evidence of the medieval or Tudor house was found these remains may have been buried by the overburden. It is therefore recommended that the evaluation is followed by archaeologically controlled ground work in the area of the proposed basement. This will permit the surviving below-ground remains of the 18th century house to be recorded and allow any remains of the medieval and Tudor houses to be investigated. It is recommended that archaeological investigation is undertaken in connection with the proposed works to the moat, to the east side of the moat platform, along the proposed access road, during the the construction of new service runs and landscaping.

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Background 2.1.1 Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited was commissioned by Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners on behalf of their Client to prepare an Archaeological Impact Assessment of new proposals at Beaurepaire House and Beaurepaire Park, Bramley, Hampshire, centred upon Ordnance Survey National Grid Reference SU 63515 158155 (hereafter referred to as the Site). Beaurepaire House is a Grade II Listed Building and comprises the early 19th century service wing of a former 18th century manor house, which was situated to the south and demolished following a fire in 1941. The house (former service wing) sits in the north-west corner of a large medieval moated site. The 18th century house was constructed before 1777 and replaced a Tudor manor house (ADAM Architecture, 2013, 3). The latter is thought to have been upgraded from a medieval Hall house c.1522 (ibid.). 2.1.2 The proposals are as follows: • To construct a new large single family dwelling on the site of the 18th century property which burnt down in 1941 and was completely demolished thereafter.

• To provide a new formal entrance to the estate at the junction of Vyne Road and Morgaston Road, and a new drive ending with the proposed new four-storey house.

• To regenerate the existing Grade 2 listed three-storey servants’ wing to provide a ensuite bedroom guest accommodation at the upper floor levels and staff/ kitchen/breakfast room/hall at ground floor level.

• To demolish 20th century constructed wings and courtyard to the existing building retaining only the original 19th century building fabric.

• To upgrade, clean and refurbish the moat and to create new gardens and lawns. To provide additional bridges over the moat.

• To re-establish the 18th/19th century kitchen gardens and orchards and to reorganise /convert the stable block for car parking.

• To refurbish and upgrade the ancillary staff accommodation houses and to reorganise the home-farm area.

• To bring the 400 acre estate to working and productive use.

• To revitalise the land and site and to create an environment able to sustain long-term local employment.

2.1.3 An archaeological desk-based assessment and geophysical survey were undertaken in 2013 (Wessex Archaeology 2013a; 2013c). Since then, more detailed proposals have been developed and the Archaeological Impact Assessment was carried out in order to inform planning decisions and set out an appropriate mitigation strategy for the consideration of the planning authority. In addition, targeted documentary research was carried on the Tudor house at Beaurepaire at the request of David Hopkins, Hampshire County Archaeologist in order to understand the proposed impacts on the remains of this structure within the moated site. 2.2 Site Location 2.2.1 Beaurepaire House and Park are situated to the south-west of the village of Bramley, and some 5km to the north of Basingstoke, Hampshire (Figure 1). The three-storey house sits in the north-western corner of the moated site, which is roughly rectangular in plan (125 x 85m) and aligned east-west. The house is approached from the east over the moat (Figure 2). Other Grade II Listed Builidngs within the cartilage of the house include Gate Piers, a Suspension Bridge over the moat and Pavillions. The ground surface within the moat is

relatively level at around 70m above Ordnance Datum (aOD). The British Geological Survey shows that the underlying geological deposits comprise Palaeogene clay, silt and sand of the London Clay Formation. 2.2.2 Beaurepaire Park in this report is defined as an area of up to 118ha within which proposed landscape improvements to the parkland setting of the house may be carried out (Figure 1). This area is mainly agricultural land and is bounded to the north by Boar’s Bridge and Silchester Road, by Vyne Road to the east and by agricultural land to the west and south. 2.2.3 Beaurepaire Park is crossed by a north-south driveway between Boar’s Bridge and Morgaston Road and by the roughly east-west Bow Brook, a tributary to the River Loddon. This brook lies to the north of the house. The park is occupied by arable fields in the north and east, pasture in the west and scattered woodland. Remnants of historic parkland surrounding Beaurepaire House, registered within the Hampshire Register of Historic Parks and Gardens are located within Beaurepaire Park, to the south and west of the house. Within this area, remnants of pleasure grounds, tree avenues and extant fish ponds are situated. A small watercourse tributary to the Bow Brook runs parallel to the south-eastern boundary of the park. A number of residential properties are situated within the park, including Beaurepaire Stud and cottages immediately north of the moated site and Middle Lodge, located along the driveway immediately north of the Bow Brook. 2.2.4 Beaurepaire Park lies at an elevation of 63m aOD in the bottom of the valley of Bow Brook, 70m aOD along Boar’s Bridge and 73m aOD along the southern boundary of the Site. The underlying geology comprises Palaeogene sand, to the north and south-west of the Site and clay, silt and sand of the London Clay Formation. In the river valleys, in the centre and along the south-eastern boundary, London Clay is overlain by Quaternary superficial deposits comprising alluvial clay, silt, sand and gravel (British Geological Survey).

3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT

3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 The archaeological desk-based assessment undertaken by Wessex Archaeology presented the results of a search of known heritage assets within a 2 km Study Area surrounding Beaurepaire House (Wessex Archaeology, 2013a). The findings of that assessment for the prehistoric, Romano-British and Saxon and medieval periods are summarised in brief below. 3.2 Summary of the archaeological evidence Prehistoric 3.2.1 Evidence of early prehistoric activity within the Study Area is limited. The Site is low-lying and may have undergone seasonal waterlogging. The Pamber Forest is known to have extended into the Study Area in the medieval and Romano-British period, suggesting that the landscape may have been dominated by woodland throughout the prehistory. These resources are likely to have been exploited for food and building materials. 3.2.2 Evidence for prehistoric activity within the Study Area mainly comprised findspots of flint implements and burnt flint concentrations. During the Iron Age a hillfort was established at Bulls Down, approximately 2.6km to the east. Iron Age pottery was recovered from a site approximately 550m to the northeast of the Site. Evidence of a possible prehistoric kiln was found to the north of Bramley. Romano-British 3.2.3 During the Romano British period, the Site lay within the hinterland of Silchester, approximately 2.6km to the north of the Site. 3.2.4 The Site is located between the courses of two Roman roads, linking Silchester with Winchester and Chichester. Traces of the agger of the road to Winchester survive as earthworks in Morgaston Wood to the south-west of the Site. The road to Chichester is not reflected in the alignment of modern roads, with the exception of a short stretch near Cufaude Farm. 3.2.5 Sherds of pottery and building material indicate the former presence of a Roman building approximately 500m north-west of the Site. Saxon and medieval 3.2.6 Although there is no archaeological evidence for Saxon activity within the Study Area, Saxon settlements within this landscape are mentioned in historic documents. 3.2.7 At the time of the Domesday Survey Bramley was a large settlement. The estate comprised woodland used for swine foraging, two mills and a church. The Church of St James is of 12th century origin; however, a Saxon structure may have stood previously on this site. The Sherborne St John Parish, the village, located approximately 2.5km to the south-west of the Site, was first recorded as in the Domesday Survey when it comprised a large settlement of 40 households. Following the Conquest both manors belonged into Hugh de Port, an associate of William I who held more than fifty manors in Hampshire alone at the time of the Domesday survey. De Port presided over a vast barony which extended over several counties from his principal manor at Old Basing. The manor of Sherborne St John continued in the possession of the de Ports and their successors the St John family until the 14th century, when it passed to the de Poynings.

4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

4.1 Introduction 4.1.1 The material that follows comprises targeted research into the documentary evidence for the development of the 14th, 16th and 18th century houses at Beaurepaire, in accordance with a specification prepared by Pre-Construct Archaeology (Matthews, 2013). This research seeks to build upon recent studies, which include a survey of the historical development of the house (Adam Architecture 2013) and a number of cultural heritage assessments undertaken by Wessex Archaeology (Wessex Archaeology, 2013a, 2013b, 2013c). The volume prepared by Adam Architecture provides the overall chronological framework of the historical development of the house and should be referred to in conjunction with the following information. The present research has clarified a number of lacunae and corrected a small number of errors in the earlier work. 4.2 The emergence of the manor of Beaurepaire during the 13th century 4.2.1 The manor of Beaurepaire emerged from the pre-Conquest manor of Sherborne St John during the early 13th century following the grant to Bartholomew Pecche of an estate called Crockerell Hulle during the early years of the reign of Henry III (r.1216-1272). Bartholomew was succeeded by his son Herbert, who died seised of a hide of land in Sherborne St John called Beaurepaire in 1272. Meaning ‘the beautiful retreat’, the name Beaurepaire (also Beaurepar, Byarpeyre and numerous other variations) came to supplant Crockerell Hulle as the name of the estate. 4.2.2 By the early 1320s the estate was in the possession of Sir John Pecche, who styled himself ‘Lord of Beaurepaire’. Sir John took possession of the manor at a time of economic and epidemiological crises, during which the family’s finances appear to have become overstretched. In 1350 Sir John obtained a mortgage on Beaurepaire for £200 from Master Bernard Brocas, shortly after which he died, thereby leaving his estate and liabilities to his son, also named John. Three years later John Pecche the younger settled his debt by selling the estate to Bernard Brocas for 100 silver marks. Within two years of acquiring the manor, Master Bernard granted it to his nephew Sir Bernard Brocas, thereby establishing the first of the family’s estates in Hampshire. 4.3 Reconstruction of the medieval house of Sir Bernard Brocas at Beaurepaire, c.1357- 1358 4.3.1 Throughout much of 1355 and 1356 Sir Bernard was away fighting in France. On his return to England the following year however, Sir Bernard turned his attention to his new estate in Hampshire. A set of accounts for the nine months between Christmas 1357 and Michaelmas 1358 prepared by Sir Bernard’s steward reveals the extent to which the estate at Beaurepaire had declined during the middle years of the 14th century (Burrows, 1886: 401-406). These accounts suggest that the estate had fallen into neglect: expenses incurred by Sir Bernard included the repair of ploughs, the planting of hedgerows, and the construction of a new wheel for the lord’s mill. 4.3.2 The largest single element of the works was itemised under the heading ‘Cost of the Houses’, which listed the payments made to repair the dilapidated properties at the heart of the Beaurepaire estate. The accounts reveal a pressing need to seal the buildings against the elements; men were hired to fix the roofs of the chapel, the hall, the chambers, the kitchen, the grange and “the house next the kitchen”. As many as 12,000 tiles “for repairing the houses” were manufactured at nearby Odiham at a cost of 40s, following which they were transported to Beaurepaire at Sir Bernard’s expense. Four “crests and roof for bed chambers” were purchased at a cost of 13s.4d. The walls too appear to have been in poor condition, and the steward listed the purchase of 800 lath-nails, as well as 33 quarters of lime for use in plastering the walls of the bed chambers and other rooms at costs of 16d and 22s respectively. A further 10s was paid for the services of a plasterer. The manufacture of “300 laths of the lord’s timber” was listed under the heading of ‘Necessary Expenses’. New doors were sawn on site at a cost of 4s. 2d. and new hinges were purchased for the doors of the chapel, grange and the mill. Two new ovens were constructed at a cost of 13s. 4., while three new hearths were built for a further 12s. A considerable sum was spent upon the refurbishment of the chapel; in addition to the new roof and doors, Sir Bernard paid 5s. 4d. for the construction of a new glass window, the only item of glazing listed in the steward’s

accounts. Additional items purchased for the chapel included a chest for 6s. 8d, and a Portiforium (i.e. a breviary or liturgy), which cost a further 20s, the most expensive single item in the entire account. No separate account was made of the expense of excavating a moat, suggesting that it probably already existed by this date. 4.3.3 The accounts of the steward of Beaurepaire indicate that the manorial complex comprised at least six separate buildings. These included a chapel, a (great) hall, residential chambers (presumably over two floors), a kitchen and a separate “house” adjacent, as well as a grange, which served as the manorial home farm. This arrangement is strikingly similar to that recorded a few years later at the manor house of Sherborne Cowdray, a manor detached from Sherborne St John during the reign of Henry II and known subsequently as The Vyne. When the latter manor was leased to Gregory of Basingstoke in 1369-71 the latter agreed to maintain “the hall and the adjoining chambers and the grange and the chapel at the house” (Howard, 1998: 42). 4.3.4 The only surviving illustration of the pre-18th century house at Beaurepaire appears on an estate plan drawn by George Wyther in 1613 for the then owner Sir John Savage (Figure 3). Although the plan shows that the house itself had been extensively altered (if not rebuilt) in the 16th century, it depicts a number of features that may represent medieval survivals. The most prominent is the moated island upon which the 16th century house stood. Moated sites became a common feature of the landscape in the South and South East of England between c.1150 and 1500, with a period of sustained expansion occurring between c.1200 and c.1325. More than 235 moated sites are known in Sussex and more than 90 in Kent, although neither of these figures is based upon systematic surveys. There appears to have been a strong correlation between these moated enclosures and geology, particularly the heavy Wealden Clay that is so prevalent in these counties. It is probably no coincidence that within Hampshire the majority of moated sites are concentrated in the north of the county, particularly on the heavy clay soils of the Loddon valley (Edwards, 2006: 11). Many of the larger moated sites were the headquarters of important seigneurial manors; comprising spacious platforms occupied by domestic, ecclesiastical and farm buildings (Brandon & Short, 1990: 113). 4.3.5 The extent of the area enclosed by moats could also vary over time, presumably reflecting changes in the fortunes of the owners and in the function of the moat itself. Archaeological investigations undertaken at The Vyne in the mid-1990s revealed evidence of a medieval moat sealed beneath an area of early Tudor courtyard cobbling (Howard & Wilson, 2003: 68- 69). Whilst this early moat was probably defensive in origin, a number of dark channels of buried silt that lay beyond the limits of a 16th century boundary wall probably represented a later and much larger moat comprised of broad shallow ditches. The latter appears to have been designed not to repel attackers but to impress visitors. 4.3.6 Wyther’s plan also shows a range of buildings enclosing a courtyard on three sides a short distance to the south of the southern arm of the moat (Figure 3). This appears to represent a stable-yard, although it has been suggested that the manorial grange may have been part of the same complex, at least by the post-medieval period (Simpson, 1951). To the north of the 16th century house Wyther depicted a pasture known as ‘Chapell Lawne’, which may have been the site of the chapel refurbished by Sir Bernard in the late 1350s. Taken together, this evidence suggests that the medieval hall, residential chambers, kitchen and possible bakehouse stood on the moated platform, beyond which stood the grange and the chapel. 4.3.7 Given the extent of demolition after the Second World War and the paucity of documentary evidence concerning the buildings of Beaurepaire, it is difficult to ascertain to what extent, if any, elements of the medieval house were retained in the fabric of the later houses on the site. The purchase by Sir Bernard’s steward of 800 lath nails and large quantities of lime for plaster suggests that most, if not all of the buildings were timber-framed. The absence of purchases of building materials such as stone from the accounts is also noteworthy, given the poor state of the repair of the buildings at the time of their acquisition by the Brocas family. The abundant woodland resource of the Beaurepaire estate appears to have provided the timber required to repair the dilapidated buildings. 4.4 The manor of Beaurepaire, 1358-1506 4.4.1 In 1361 Sir Bernard married Mary de Borhunte, widow of Sir John de Borhunte and daughter of Sir John de Roches. The marriage brought the nearby manor of Steventon into the possession of the Brocas family, in whose hands it remained until the 1640s. Marriage to

Mary granted Sir Bernard Mastership of the Royal Buckhounds for the term of her life, a title that was subsequently assigned in perpetuity to Sir Bernard and his heirs in 1366. Further rights granted by the Crown to Sir Bernard during the 1360s included a grant of free-warren (the right of the lord to hunt small game on his estates) in 1363 and a license to enclose Beaurepaire Park in January 1369. Sir Bernard was permitted to enlarge the park by Richard II nineteen years later, when he was licensed to enclose an additional 100 acres of land in Bramley, Sherborne St John and Monk Sherborne. 4.4.2 Sir Bernard Brocas died in 1395 after several decades of loyal service to both Edward III and Richard II. Beaurepaire descended to his son, the second Sir Bernard Brocas, who joined a failed uprising in support of the deposed King Richard II in January 1400. Captured and transported to London for trial, Sir Bernard was executed the following month. 4.4.3 Although the Brocas estates and rights were forfeited on the execution of the second Sir Bernard Brocas, the majority were subsequently restored to his son and heir William. William Brocas (c.1379-1456) chose to follow the path of a country gentleman, becoming one of the leading men of his county during the reigns of Henry V and VI. On William’s death Beaurepaire passed to his eldest son, also William, who gave up Beaurepaire to his son John in 1470. Like his father and grandfather before him, John Brocas largely avoided court affairs, dying at Beaurepaire in 1492. The manor and his titles passed to his eldest son William, who had two daughters, Anne and Edith with his wife Mary. 4.5 The Pexsalls of Beaurepaire, 1512-1571 4.5.1 When the third William Brocas died in 1506 he left no male heirs. Under the terms of his will, William’s estates passed into the possession of his widow Mary (TNA PROB 11/16/443). It seems likely that this arrangement was an attempt to prevent the couple’s daughters, both of whom appear to have been under twelve years old at their father’s death, from becoming wards of the Crown. By August 1510 the wardships of Anne and Edith Brocas were in the possession of a minor courtier named John Audeley, who arranged the marriage of the two girls to George Warham and Ralph Pexsall. Both marriages took place within a few months of each other in 1512; Pexsall had married the sixteen year-old Edith by July of that year, whilst Warham had married Anne by Michaelmas (Letters and Papers Henry VIII, i, 1316 (35)). The arrangement was profitable to both men; not only did their marriages give them access to the lucrative Brocas estates, but also enabled them to inherit the Mastership of the Buckhounds by right of their wives. 4.5.2 Warham was a minor figure in the courts of the early Tudor kings, a nephew of William Warham, who served both as Archbishop of Canterbury and as Lord Chancellor from 1502- 1515. His marriage to Anne Brocas was brief, the latter having died by 1514, leaving Edith sole heir to the Brocas estate. The union between Edith and Richard Pexsall lasted little more than five years, though it produced two sons before Edith’s death in 1517 at the age of 20. Although Ralph Pexsall’s origins are obscure, his career in the service of the Crown after his fortuitous marriage to Edith Brocas followed a trajectory similar to that of many of those who flocked to the court of Henry VIII seeking advancement via government service. Pexsall may have gained a foothold in Court through service to Cardinal Wolsey, William Warham’s successor as Lord Chancellor (Letters and Papers Henry VIII, iv 4454). As early as February 1515 Pexsall was appointed to the Commission of the Peace of Hampshire, upon which he continued to sit for the remainder of his life. By the spring of 1522 he had been appointed to the office of Clerk of the Crown in Chancery, in which capacity he received a meagre salary of £20 per annum. However, like many of his peers Pexsall augmented his earnings with additional sources of income, which included a lucrative corrody in the priory of St Mary’s Thetford that he acquired in September the following year (Letters and Papers Henry VIII, iii 3376 (16)). The fall of his former master in October 1529 appears to have had no adverse effect upon Pexsall’s career, and he continued to work as a Clerk in Chancery during the decade that followed. 4.5.3 In August 1531 Henry VIII visited Ralph and his third wife Anne at Beaurepaire during the course of a visit to Sir William Sandys at The Vyne. Ralph Pexsall continued to serve his royal master during the Northern Rebellion of autumn 1536, and his legal opinion was sought by the Duke of Norfolk during the suppression of Bigod’s rebellion the following March (Letters and Papers Henry VIII, xi 1206; Letters and Papers Henry VIII, xii part 1 615). Ralph Pexsall appears to have continued working almost up to the moment of his death; in July 1537

Thomas Pope, a lawyer and protégé of Thomas Cromwell informed his mentor that he had assumed the post of Clerk of the Crown in Chancery following Pexsall’s recent demise (Letters and Papers Henry VIII, xii part 2 274). No documentary evidence has been found which indicates that Ralph Pexsall rebuilt the house at Beaurepaire that he had acquired through his union with Edith Brocas. 4.5.4 In his will Ralph Pexsall bequeathed all of his money, plate, goods and chattels at his manor of Swallcliff Middlesex to his widow Anne, together with all his possessions at his London residence, a ‘Mansion House’ in Fleet Street (TNA PROB 11/27/197). To his surviving son Richard, Ralph bequeathed his Hampshire manors of Beaurepaire and Steventon. Probate on Pexsall’s estate was granted on February 1538. Richard subsequently erected a memorial to his parents in the Brocas Chapel in the parish church of Sherborne St John which featured a number of heraldic devices that emphasised the continuity of the Pexsall line with those of Brocas and de Roches. 4.5.5 Like his father, Richard Pexsall benefitted from the massive transfers of property that took place during the reign of Henry VIII. Pexsall was knighted towards the end of the brief reign of the Protestant Edward VI, suggesting that he was on good terms with the administration of the Duke of Northumberland, however this did not prevent him from going on to earn a reputation for loyalty to Edward’s Catholic successor Queen Mary. Evidently a pragmatic and loyal servant of the Tudor regime, Sir Richard served both monarchs as Sheriff of Hampshire in 1551 and 1558. 4.5.6 The marriage of Richard Pexsall at a young age to Eleanor Paulet, the youngest daughter of Sir William Paulet of Basing (later Marquis of Winchester), was politically astute and most likely arranged by his father Ralph. Richard appears to have been an assiduous member of county and regional society, courting and maintaining social ties with a large number of prominent local families (see below). 4.5.7 Sir Richard sold three of the old Brocas estates: Bromley (Dorset), Stoke Charity/Oldstoke (Hampshire) and Wickley (Northamptonshire), possibly in order to fund the building and rebuilding of the family mansions. It has been suggested that Sir Richard probably rebuilt Roche Court, the ancestral home of the de Roches, whilst towards the end of his life he managed to complete one wing of a projected grand new house at Steventon (c.1570-71). Although Sir Richard’s death meant that the house was never finished, Steventon subsequently became the chief seat of the family for several decades. Research conducted for the present assessment suggests that nearly twenty years before he started work on Steventon, Sir Richard made substantial additions to his house at Beaurepaire (see below). Sir Richard’s social aspirations may have been a motive for the rebuilding of the old houses that he had inherited. By the time of his death, Sir Richard appears to have become an example of those ‘compulsive builders’ of the period, men like Sir Nicholas Bacon of Redgrave in Suffolk “who continued to build, to alter and remodel, long after their basic housing requirements had been satisfied” (Airs, 1996: 20). 4.6 The first rebuilding of Beaurepaire House, c.1553-c.1558 4.6.1 Given that the principal elements of Beaurepaire were demolished shortly after the Second World War, evidence of the house that once stood there is confined largely to the documentary sphere. Amongst the most useful categories of documents for the reconstruction of historical country houses are building accounts and inventories of effects compiled after the death of owners, the latter of which can enable the sequence of rooms in a house to be reconstructed. Unfortunately no such records appear to have survived for Beaurepaire other than those relating to the repairs carried out by Sir Bernard Brocas in the mid-14th century. However there are a small number of historical records, which when considered together provide valuable clues regarding the possible appearance, extent and layout of the house during the 16th and 17th centuries. 4.6.2 The first of these documents is the estate map drawn by George Wyther for John Savage Esq. in 1613 (Figure 3). Savage was the third and final head of the family of that name to hold Beaurepaire during the period 1572-1618. Their right to the property resided in Sir Richard Pexsall’s widow and second wife, Eleanor and was contended by a number of members of the Brocas family. The purpose of the survey is not known. 4.6.3 Wyther depicted the house platform surrounded by a broad moat, approached from the south

by a drive that led from the old road from Bramley to Sherborne St John, running between the fishponds, past a stable-yard or grange outside the moat to a bridge leading to a single-storey gatehouse at the southern edge of the platform. No other approaches to the house were shown. 4.6.4 The house itself was depicted as a single east-west aligned range. This was of two storeys, with probable attic accommodation under the gabled roof, the floors divided externally by a prominent string course. It has been suggested that Wyther’s sketch showed turrets at both corners of the house, much like the 18th century property that succeeded it (Simpson, 1951: 17; Willoughby, 2002: 36). However this may be a misreading of Wyther’s plan, in which he attempted to render all of the buildings on the estate in three dimensions. It could be argued that the west end of the range did not terminate in a tower, but rather in a gable end. In the central portion of the south elevation two large triangular gables surmount the second and fourth bays, the windows arranged symmetrically in the facade. At the eastern end of the range the roof line continues to the east of the easternmost of these gables, perhaps suggesting a continuous facade. However it is conceivable that the pronounced vertical divide between this and the easternmost section may be an attempt to represent a projecting bay at the east end, similar to that shown on the drawing of Sir Richard Pexsall’s Steventon Manor House, reproduced here as Plate 1. 4.6.5 Wyther’s drawing of Beaurepaire suggests that all four chimneys shown were located on the north elevation of the range, a common configuration in houses of the period. Comparable examples of this configuration include Sir Nicholas Bacon’s Redgrave Hall (completed 1554) and Sir Edmund Withypool’s Christchurch Mansion, Ipswich of 1548 (Plates 2 to 4). The centremost pair of stacks of Beaurepaire appears to be more prominent than the two at each end, similar to the massive stacks at Steventon (Plate 1). The stacks at the east and west ends may be set back, perhaps at the north end of short north-south aligned wings not shown on Wyther’s drawing (Figure 3). Such a layout would have been typical of the Tudor E- shaped mansions that were built in increasing numbers from the 1540s; however if Beaurepaire had been built to this plan it is not clear why Wyther didn’t show it (see Plate 5). Other E-shaped mansions built in the vicinity of Beaurepaire during this period include Sydmonton Court, the home of the Kingsmill family. It is possible that parts of the 14th century house at Beaurepaire were retained as service facilities to the rear of the Tudor house, in much the same manner as medieval elements were retained in the wings of the Elizabethan Stonor Park, Oxfordshire (Plate 6). 4.6.6 It is not clear why Wyther’s drawing does not show an entrance in the south elevation of the house given the alignment with the bridge and gatehouse to the south. If the entrance (typically enclosed by a porch) was located in the north elevation, then it seems unlikely that the southern approach to the house could have been the only or indeed the principal access route to the house. It is therefore conceivable that Wyther omitted the porch from the south elevation, perhaps in order to allow the small gatehouse at the north end of the entrance bridge to be shown. The relative height of this gatehouse suggests that it was probably built during the second half of the 16th century, like that of Stonor Park (Plate 6). Gatehouses built during the late 15th and early 16th centuries tended to be much taller, such the massive brick gatehouses of Oxburgh Hall, Norfolk (built in the 1580s), or Layer Marney and Belhus in Essex (both built during the mid-1520s) (Plate 7). 4.6.7 Wyther’s drawing gives no direct indication of the materials used to build the house, although the clay-rich local geology points to the likelihood that bricks, which had been increasing in popularity amongst house building members of the gentry and nobility since the late 15th century, were the principal building material. The proximity to the house of a large area of pasture called ‘The Bricke Lawne’ further suggests that the Tudor elements of the house were built of locally manufactured brick. 4.6.8 Wyther’s estate plan provides an indication of the general appearance of the house, but it does not represent a definitive portrait of the building as it stood in 1613 and should not be taken as such. Whilst the plan of the stable-yard/grange outside the moat can be determined, that of the house cannot, unless it did solely comprise a single range, like Sir Richard Pexsall’s house at Steventon. However the latter was never completed, whereas it is reasonable to assume that the earlier property at Beaurepaire was. Furthermore the 1665 Hearth Tax assessment of Hampshire indicates that the house was a substantial one, containing 39 hearths, only four less than The Vyne (Hughes & White, 1991: 239-40). By way

of contrast Steventon, which was the residence of Sir John Lewkenor in the mid-1660s, was assessed for only ten hearths (Page, 1911: 171-174). 4.6.9 The documentary evidence that reveals most about the Tudor house comprises the record of a visit made to Beaurepaire by a herald during the late summer of 1686, part of a heraldic visitation of the principal seats of Hampshire that year (Squibb, 1991: 230-231). The herald recorded the arms that were displayed in three rooms of the house which he identified as “the Chamber, the Gallery Chamber and the Queen’s (alias Corner) Chamber”. It is possible that these three rooms comprised a sequence on the first floor of the house; the gallery providing a means of communication between the two chambers at each end. It is conceivable that the sequence at Beaurepaire occupied the upper floor of the east-west aligned wing depicted by Wyther. Such sequences were fairly common in the great houses of the period, and a somewhat more elaborate version still survives at The Vyne (Howard, 1998: 46). 4.6.10 “The Chamber” at Beaurepaire was evidently a prestigious room, the windows of which were glazed with stained glass. The latter depicted the arms of the great nobility of medieval England and Hampshire: St John (of Basing), Stafford, Vere, Mortimer, Beauchamp, Basset and Neville Clifford, conveying a strong sense of history and place. 4.6.11 The “Gallery Chamber” was as its name suggests, a gallery, a development of the early 16th century designed both for movement and display. The oak gallery at The Vyne featured a remarkable collection of Tudor carved oak panels that contained the arms of many of the most influential people of the first quarter of the 16th century, a veritable ‘Who’s Who’ of early Tudor England (Howard & Wilson, 2003: 93). It is likely that the arms described by the heraldic visitor to Beaurepaire were also carved upon timber panels, in a manner similar to those shown in The Vyne (Plates 9 and 10). The arms of eight individuals and families were represented in the gallery at Beaurepaire, all of whom were connected to the Pexsall and Brocas families by kinship, friendship or working relationships. The arms of the following individuals were recorded: 1. Mast’ Dabridgecourt These were the arms of Thomas Dabridgecourt (1546-1614), of Stratfieldsaye, Hampshire. Thomas was the surviving son of George Dabridgecourt, who died in February 1559 when his son was thirteen years old and therefore a minor. 2. Sir Thomas Whight These were the arms of Sir Thomas White of South Warnborough, Hampshire, whose daughter Elizabeth married Chidiock Paulet (1535), son of William Paulet brother of Sir George Paulet. Sir Thomas was knighted in October 1553 and died in 1566. 3. Sir John Kingsmill These were the arms of Sir John Kingsmill (c.1497-1556) of Sydmonton, Hampshire. Sir John Kingsmill was the son of John Kyngesmyll, a supervisor of the will of William Brocas (d.1506), Sir Richard Pexsall’s grandfather. Friendly relations between the Kingsmills and the Pexsalls ended in 1558, when Sir Richard (then Sheriff of Hampshire) was ordered to burn the protestant heretic Thomas Bembridge, a relative of the Kingsmill family through marriage. 4. Sir George Paulet These were the arms of Sir George Paulet of Crondall (c.1492-1558/9), son of Sir John Paulet of Basing, and younger brother of Sir William Paulet, Baron St John of Basing. Sir William Paulet was Sir Richard Pexsall’s father-in-law. 5. Humfray Foster These were the arms of Sir Humphrey Foster/Forster of Aldermaston, Berkshire (d. 1555/6). Through his marriage to Elizabeth Sandys of The Vyne, Sir Humphrey was Sir William Sandys’ son-in-law. The family were related to the Brocases through the unions of the Forster, De La Mare and Brocas families in the 15th century. 6. Sir Oliver Wallop These were the arms of Sir Oliver Wallop of Farleigh Wallop (knighted 1547, d.1566). In

November 1553 Sir Oliver was sent by the Court of Chancery to take a deposition from Sir Richard Pexsall in the case of a property dispute between Sir Richard and one of his tenants, indicating that the two men knew one another. 7. Sir Richard Cotton These were the arms of the Cotton family of Bedhampton and Warblington (near Havant). Sir Richard Cotton (c.1497-02/10/1556, knighted 22/02/1547) who was granted the manor of Warblington by Edward VI in 1551. Sir Richard’s Cotton’s son Francis married Sir Richard’s second daughter Margaret. 8. Mastr’ Putname These were the arms of the Puttenham family of Sherfield upon Loddon. ‘Master Puttenham’ appears to have been Richard Puttenham (c.1520-c.1597), who succeeded to the manor in 1550. In 1558 Sir Richard Pexsall purchased the estate of Bullesdens in Bramley from Puttenham, the manor becoming part of the Beaurepaire estate. 4.6.12 The third room recorded by the herald was “the Room called the Queen’s chamber alias corner Chamber”, which was presumably situated at the opposite end of the gallery from “the Chamber”. As the name indicated, the Queen’s chamber was located in a corner of Sir Richard’s house and its decoration suggests that it was the most prestigious apartment on the first floor. The windows were glazed with stained glass, depicting the arms that Sir Richard had displayed upon the memorial that he created for his parents in the Brocas Chapel in the parish church of Sherborne St John: Pexsall, Brocas and Roches, together with those of his first wife Eleanor’s family, the Paulets of Basing. The decorative scheme in this room therefore dates to the time of Sir Richard’s marriage to Lady Eleanor, which ended with her death in 1558. Nowhere in the house did the herald record the arms of Sir Richard’s next wife, the second Lady Eleanor (née Cotgrave), suggesting that the rebuilding predated that marriage. Although the room was clearly fitted out during Sir Richard’s tenure, the name was almost certainly given later, perhaps in association with the visit of the elderly Queen Elizabeth in 1601 (see below). 4.6.13 It is possible to draw certain conclusions from the documentary resource. Wyther’s estate plan suggests that it comprised at least one east-west aligned range; others may have existed in the form of projecting wings to the rear, although this is conjecture. Elements of the medieval house may have been retained to the rear of the main range, in a manner similar to that at Stonor, Oxfordshire. The property described by the hearth tax assessment of 1665 was a large one, albeit not as large as the neighbouring house at The Vyne. Like The Vyne, Beaurepaire had a sequence of prestigious first floor apartments, linked by a richly decorated gallery. At one end of this gallery was the Queen’s or corner chamber, which may have been located in a corner tower, or perhaps in a prominent projecting bay at one end of the range containing these apartments. The heraldry displayed in the gallery, presumably in the form of carved timber wainscot, suggested that the room could not have predated 1547 (when Sir Oliver Wallop and Sir Richard Cotton were knighted) and probably did not predate 1553, when Sir Thomas White was knighted. Given the deaths in 1556 of two of the individuals whose arms were represented (Sir Humphrey Foster and Sir Richard Cotton), it is likely that the decorative scheme was created during the intervening years (1553-1556) and certainly no later than 1558/9, when Sir George Paulet and the first Lady Eleanor Pexsall (née Paulet) died and Sir Richard Pexsall fell out with the Kingsmill family of Sydmonton. It is likely that this expensive and labour intensive decorative scheme was created in a single phase, presumably when the sequence of prestigious rooms on the first floor was laid out. 4.7 The occupants of Beaurepaire, 1572-1715 4.7.1 Eleanor and Richard Pexsall had four children, all of whom were daughters. Eleanor died in September 1558, following which Sir Richard married Eleanor Cotgrave. Sir Richard’s will devised his estates and property to his widow for thirteen years until his grandson Pexall Brocas came of age (PROB 11/53/489). Shortly after the death of her first husband, Dame Eleanor married Sir John Savage, a widower who had ten children of his own. The couple lived at Beaurepaire until their deaths. Sir John predeceased his wife, following which the house was settled upon his second son, Edward. It was Edward Savage who received Elizabeth I at Beaurepaire in the late summer of 1601.

4.7.2 Edward Savage’s son John was master of Beaurepaire in July 1613. The death of Dame Eleanor in 1617/18 brought the 50-year occupation of the house by the Savages to an end. Dame Eleanor was succeeded at Beaurepaire by Sir Pexall Brocas’ son Thomas, who set about buying up those portions of the estate divided by Sir Richard’s will of 1571 (Page, 1911: 158-171). 4.7.3 Thomas let out the park at Beaurepaire in 1631, following which he appears to have spent much of his time in London. Brocas was cut-off from Beaurepaire at the outbreak of the English Civil War in 1642, leaving the house in the care of his wife Elizabeth. During the war the house was garrisoned by Royalist troops as an outpost of Basing House, the principal Royalist stronghold in north Hampshire. Beaurepaire was described in a contemporary account as having been fortified, and it is likely that earthwork defences were erected in the surrounding park by the detachment of two troops of horses (between 60 and 200 men) and 60 musketeers who defended it. In April 1645 the newsletter The Perfect Diurnall reported that a detachment of Parliamentarian troops from Colonel Fiennes Regiment advanced on Beaurepaire, prompting the garrison to abandon the house and withdraw to Basing, which was besieged by Cromwell’s forces the following October (Burrows, 1886: 235). Beaurepaire fell into the hands of Parliament without a fight, and there is no evidence to suggest that it suffered any significant war damage during the conflict. 4.7.4 By the end of the second Civil War, Thomas Brocas was an outlaw; imprisoned for debt, his estates seized by the government. In 1654 the manor of Beaurepaire was leased to Angelo Stoner and Constance Waller (TNA E 367/792). It is unlikely that either lived at the house, for two years later it was occupied by John Thorner and his wife Jane, the widow of Thomas Brocas’ eldest son Robert, who had died in 1643. The Thorners were still resident at Beaurepaire in 1665, when the Hearth Tax Assessment of that year recorded that the property had 39 hearths, only four fewer than The Vyne. 4.7.5 Within fifteen years the house was in the possession of Thomas Brocas’ grandson (the son of his second son), also called Thomas. A set of household accounts of Thomas Brocas the younger (1650-1715) for the year 1680/81 indicate that the new owner was “constantly improving the property…putting up new buildings on the farm as well as elaborating his house at Beaurepaire itself” (Simpson, 1951). 4.8 The second rebuilding of Beaurepaire, 1758-c.1762 4.8.1 Thomas Brocas was succeeded in 1715 by his son (also Thomas), who held Beaurepaire until his death in 1750. Thomas was succeeded by his son and heir Bernard, who appears to have divided his time between Beaurepaire and his London residence in Sackville Street, Piccadilly (TNA ADM 106/1098/42). 4.8.2 Various dates have been proposed for the demolition of the Tudor house and its replacement by a ‘Gothick’ castle in the 18th century. Montagu Burrows, the author of a history of the Brocas family of Beaurepaire suggested that the events took place “in the reign of George II or early in the reign of George III” (Burrows, 1886). In a work published in 1786, the antiquarian Richard Gough (1735-1809) stated that Bernard Brocas (1730-1777) had “recently pulled down his mansion at Beaurepaire”, indicating that the demolition took place no later than 1777 (Adam Architects, 2013: 4). In a letter written to John Chute of The Vyne in September 1758, Bernard Brocas wrote of his “late house” at Beaurepaire (Willoughby, 2002: 29; HRO 31M57/923-926). At the time of writing Brocas was living at Wokefield Park, Berkshire, suggesting that old house at Beaurepaire had either been demolished or was in the process of demolition by this date. Given that Brocas subsequently returned to live at the ancestral family seat, it is reasonable to assume that the new house was built around the turn of the 1760s. 4.8.3 The design of the turreted, castellated house was characteristic of the ‘Pure Gothick’ style championed by Horace Walpole, a close friend of Brocas’ neighbour John Chute (Howard, 1998: 53-55). Chute was a leading member of Walpole’s ‘Committee on Taste’, which oversaw the conversion of Strawberry Hill, Walpole’s villa at Twickenham, into a showcase for the Gothic Revival between 1749 and 1776. Chute was responsible for the design of a number of features at Strawberry Hill and for the Gothic Revival alterations to his own house, the majority of which were realised in two phases during the early 1760s and early 1770s. It is possible that the work undertaken by Chute at The Vyne may have influenced Brocas’ own alterations at Beaurepaire, although no conclusive evidence has yet emerged to suggest that

the owners of the two properties collaborated over the alterations that were made to either property in the middle years of the 18th century. Similarly the published correspondence of Horace Walpole contains no references to Beaurepaire, suggesting that he did correspond with Bernard Brocas. It has been suggested that the works at Beaurepaire may have been financed in part by Sir Henry Lannoy Hunter, Bernard Brocas’ father-in-law, who had settled at nearby Beech Hill in Berkshire during the 1740s (Simpson, 1951; Willoughby, 2002: 28). No firm evidence of any such collaboration has come to light during the present research, although it is possible that investigation of the Hunter Papers held by the Berkshire Record Office may shed light upon the relationship between Brocas and Hunter. 4.8.4 The design of the new house at Beaurepaire is strongly reminiscent of the work of Horace Walpole’s friend Sanderson Miller (1716-1780), an amateur architect responsible for the design of Lord Lyttleton’s Hagley Hall, Worcestershire and Lacock in Wiltshire amongst others. At Belhus in Essex, Miller advised Thomas Barrett Lennard, Lord Dacre, on the rebuilding of the latter’s house, a somewhat down-at-heel early Tudor pile (Hawkins, 1964: 53). Between 1745 and 1747 Lord Dacre rebuilt the south and west fronts of the house on the site of the old formal gardens, although he retained many elements of the Tudor house behind the new frontages (see Plates 7 and 8). Although no evidence has emerged to suggest that either Miller or Dacre were involved in the rebuilding of Beaurepaire, the effect of the Gothick additions upon the appearance of both properties was similar (see Figure 7; Plates 11 and 12). 4.8.5 It remains uncertain whether Bernard Brocas demolished the Tudor house at Beaurepaire in its entirety and built his Gothic confection from scratch, or whether he retained some elements of the earlier building as Dacre and Miller had done at Belhus. Plans of the 18th century house drawn up after the fire of 1941 indicate that the walls in the north-west quarter of the building were thicker than those elsewhere, particularly those in the south and east fronts (Figures 8 and 9). The walls of the north-west corner tower (the ‘alcove’ of the ground floor dining room) were thicker than those of the turrets in the south-east and south-west corners, whilst the plan of the turret did not conform with that of the other turrets, or the bays that illuminated the library in the north-east of the house. The internal walls separating the dining room from the drawing room and the staircase hall were also noticeably thicker, suggesting that they might have originated during a separate phase of building. Archaeological investigation of The Vyne suggested that certain “especially thick” walls that enclosed the staircase hall and the cellars beneath probably represented an earlier phase of building, which had been incorporated into the fabric of the later house (Howard, 1998: 42: Howard & Wilson, 2003: 80). It is therefore conceivable that Bernard Brocas retained certain elements of Pexsall’s mid-16th century house in the fabric of the mid-18th century building. The survival of certain elements of the Tudor house may have given rise to the story, recounted in the 1872 sales particulars that Queen Elizabeth had slept in one of the first floor bedrooms (HRO 25M97/1). 4.8.6 On the other hand it has been suggested that Brocas may have demolished the earlier house altogether, albeit reusing building materials as he saw fit. The archaeological desk-based assessment noted that ground levels on the western half of the moated island were approximately 0.5m higher than those in the eastern half, which it was suggested could have resulted from the use of demolition material to raise the ground to the east in order to provide a more prominent setting for the new house (Wessex Archaeology, 2013a: 18). However the difference in levels is more likely to be accounted for by the levelling of ground inside the moat in order to create a lawn in the 1830s, when Bernard Brocas’ step-grandson (also Bernard) constructed a new east-west aligned entrance drive, which was flanked by the new lawns to the east of the house (Simpson, 1951). 4.8.7 Contemporary reactions to the house were not uniformly positive. By the late 18th century, the Gothick flourishes of the Strawberry Hill set were derided by a new generation of antiquaries, who considered them to be shallow and inauthentic. Yet Beaurepaire was criticised less for its style and more for its size. Some observers suggested that it was too small to function as a permanent family residence, others that it appeared to be little more than a remnant of the house that preceded it. A correspondent to The Gentleman’s Magazine wrote in 1787 that Beaurepaire “seems but a fragment”, whilst the editor of The Topographer noted in 1791 that the house “now belongs to the late Mr Bernard Brocas’s widow; only a fragment of a mansion sufficient for occasional residence, remains” (The Gentleman’s

Magazine, Volume LVII Part 2, 1787, pp: 683-4; The Topographer, Volume IV, 1791, p: 54). These observations are supported by historical evidence that suggests that following the death of Bernard Brocas in 1777 his widow Harriet continued to use Beaurepaire for entertaining, but that she spent the majority of her time at Wokefield Park (Adam Architects, 2013: 4; HRO 1M44/86/3). Fashionably Gothick in outward appearance, in terms of scale the house built by Brocas was reminiscent of the small compactly planned ‘villas’ that were first built in England during the early 18th century. Early examples included houses like Sudbrook Mansion, Petersham, Surrey, built by the architect James Gibbs in the 1710s. Such houses were an 18th century version of the Roman Villa Urbana, or country house of retirement, which were designed for specific social functions, such as entertaining, and as temporary retreats, rather than year-round living. 4.9 19th century additions and alterations 4.9.1 The observations of late 18th century visitors also suggest that the service wing, which survived the fire of 1941, was probably built at a later date (see Figure 4). It is most likely that this took place during the construction phase overseen by Bernard Brocas’ step-grandson in the 1830s. This impression also accords with the conclusions of the historic building assessment exercise undertaken by Wessex Archaeology (Wessex Archaeology, 2013b: 18). In 1843 a correspondent to an antiquarian journal noted with approval that the “old moated house [was] now under repair” (Collectanea Topographica e Genealogica Volume VIII, 1843, pp: 399-400). 4.9.2 Despite the addition of the service wing in the first half of the 19th century, sales particulars published in 1872 reinforce the impression that the house built by Bernard Brocas more than a century earlier remained compact and incompletely adapted to contemporary country house living (HRO 25M97/1). In an age when architects like Richard Norman Shaw were building sprawling country houses in the fashionable ‘Old English’ style, Beaurepaire must have appeared somewhat cramped and old-fashioned. By the date of publication of the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1872 a number of new service outbuildings, including a laundry mentioned in the particulars had been added, creating a courtyard to the rear of the house (Adam Architecture, 2013: 7; Figure 5). Correspondence held by the Hampshire Archives and Local Studies suggests that when Henry Welch-Thornton moved into the house as a tenant of the last Mrs Brocas in the 1870s, he started making alterations almost straight away (HRO 142M84/37). Changes made by Welch-Thornton included the refurbishment of the dining room, the enlargement of the west (service) wing, the replacement of the Gothick entrance porch on the east elevation and its replacement with a new front hall, the latter decorated in the popular Old English style and first shown on the Second Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1896 (Adam Architecture, 2013: 8-9; Figure 6). The plans of the 18th century portion of the house surveyed by the architect Conrad Birdwood Willcocks F.S.A in 1941 after the fire of the same year showed the effects of the Welch-Thornton’s efforts to modernise the property (Figures 8 and 9).

5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL AND SIGNIFICANCE

5.1 Prehistoric 5.1.1 The desk-based assessment found that minimal evidence of early prehistoric activity had been found in the vicinity of the application site. It is likely that the site remained under tree cover throughout the prehistoric period. Consequently the potential for the recovery of archaeological material from these periods is considered to be low. Any material dating to the period would be of local significance. 5.2 Romano-British 5.2.1 The Site lay within the hinterland of the cantonal capital of the Atrebates at Silchester throughout the Roman period. The site was located between two Roman roads that linked Silchester with Winchester and with Chichester, and potential evidence of a Roman building was discovered approximately 500m to the north-west of the site. Consequently the potential for Roman archaeology is considered to be low to moderate. Any Roman material encountered would be of local significance. 5.3 Saxon 5.3.1 No evidence for Saxon material has been discovered within the 2km radius of the study area. By the Saxon period the site straddled the boundaries the manors of Bramley and Sherborne (later Sherborne St John). It appears to have been situated on marginal ground some distance from either centre of population. It is therefore likely that the application site was part of the hinterland of one of these manors during that period. The potential for recovery of material from the Saxon period is therefore considered to be low. Any Saxon material encountered would be of local significance. 5.4 Medieval 5.4.1 At the beginning of the medieval period the application site was probably agricultural land, part of the holdings of one of the manorial estates of Bramley and Sherborne. The gradual fragmentation of the latter manor led to the emergence during the 13th century of the new estate of Crockerell Hulle. A hide of land called Beaurepaire was first recorded in 1272 and the present moated site had become the capital messuage of this manor when it was purchased by Master Bernard Brocas in 1350. There is rich documentary evidence of the manorial complex that occupied the site in the mid-14th century, and which remained the ancestral home of the Brocas family until the early 16th century. Timber-framed and possibly stone medieval buildings may have occupied the moated island for more than two centuries. The potential of the development site for medieval archaeological remains can therefore be described as high. Any medieval remains encountered would be of regional significance. 5.5 Post-Medieval 5.5.1 The acquisition of the Brocas estates by Ralph Pexsall through marriage in the early 1510s does not appear to have had an immediate impact upon the site. Although Ralph, who appears to have spent much of his time at Court, is unlikely to have made significant alterations to the site, his son, Sir Richard Pexsall certainly did. Documentary evidence suggests that Sir Richard built a large house with a principal east-west aligned range on the island during the mid-1550s. It is likely that the bricks from which the house was built were made on site, so there is high potential for evidence of post-medieval brick-making activities (in the form of kilns etc) in the area of ‘The Bricke Lawne’ shown on Wyther’s 1613 estate map. 5.5.2 There is also a high potential for the remains of the small gatehouse shown by Wythers on the south edge of the island. It is possible that this was flanked by a low wall, creating a boundary for the garden that must have occupied the ground to the south of the house. It is possible that garden features and paths may have survived although these may have been truncated by activity associated with the construction of the Gothick house in the mid-18th century and subsequent garden works. Although Wyther’s plan gives an impression of the appearance of the main house it does not indicate its extent. Documentary evidence suggests that it was extensive, containing 39 hearths in 1665. Comments made by antiquarians in the late 18th century suggest that the house built by Bernard Brocas (1730-1777) was somewhat smaller than its predecessor; there is therefore a high potential for remains of the Tudor house.

5.5.3 During the English Civil War the house was fortified and garrisoned by Royalist troops. It is unlikely that the latter confined themselves to the island and probable that earthwork defences were built in the surrounding park. There is a high potential for the remains of these defences in the archaeological resource. 5.5.4 Around 1758 Bernard Brocas demolished much (although probably not all) of the house built by Sir Richard Pexsall two centuries before and erected a turreted, castellated Gothick villa in its place. Previous cultural heritage investigations have revealed archaeological evidence of this building, which was demolished (save for a surviving cellar) after the Second World War. Evidence has included parch marks in the lawn to the south of the present house and geophysical evidence revealed by ground penetrating radar. There is therefore an extremely high potential for remains of this property. Given the Grade II listing status of the present Beaurepaire House, any remains associated with the historic house are considered to be of regional significance.

6 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT ON BURIED ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS

6.1 Previous Land Use 6.1.1 Investigation of historical land use and the map regression exercise undertaken by Wessex Archaeology has indicated that the site contained a moated enclosure as early as the mid- 14th century. During the late Middle Ages the island contained at least four medieval buildings, the majority of which were probably timber-framed. It is possible that the medieval hall was built of stone, likewise the chapel, which appears to have stood without the moat to the north of the manorial complex. During the reign of Queen Mary (1553-1558) Sir Richard Pexsall built a substantial brick-built Tudor country house on the island. Documentary evidence suggests that this comprised a principal range aligned east-west, although its dimensions remain unknown. This wing was of two storeys. It is possible that it had smaller flanking wings aligned north south. The demolition of this house c.1758 was followed by the construction of a much smaller rectangular castellated, turreted Gothick villa. The latter building occupied a smaller footprint than the house that preceded it. This house was demolished after the Second World War and the site was landscaped. 6.1.2 Each of the successive iterations of Beaurepaire House will have had a significant impact upon underlying archaeological deposits. The footprint of the Tudor house is likely to have significantly truncated any archaeological deposits or horizons relating to its medieval predecessor, although elements of the latter may have been retained in the 1550s house. Similarly, the construction of the Gothick villa in the south-west corner of the island during the mid-18th century is likely to have significantly truncated the remains of the east-west aligned range of the Tudor house in that area. The levelling of the eastern half of the island during the 1830s in order to create a new lane and driveway is likely to have significantly truncated any archaeological evidence of the Tudor house in that area. Truncation is therefore expected to have been most severe to the east of the footprint of the 18th century house, suggesting that the area to the south and west may be less extensively truncated. The formation of the lawn and gardens in this area are likely to have had only a minimal impact upon underlying deposits. In these areas, truncation of archaeological horizons is likely to be limited to terracing and limited levelling.

6.2 Impact of the Proposed Development on Buried Archaeology 6.2.1 Plans of the proposed development supplied to Pre-Construct Archaeology indicate that a basement will be excavated to a depth in excess of 5m to the extent shown in Figure 10. The extent of the proposed basement is overlain on historical maps reproduced here as Figures 5 and 6. The lawn to the east of the proposed basement will be affected by the redevelopment in that it will be impacted by temporary enabling works such as the formation of access across the eastern side of the moat and the installation of a crane base, a construction compound and other necessary works. Archaeological remains in the eastern side of the moated platform may have been truncated when the lawn was created in the 1830s. 6.2.2 The excavation of the basement to the extent shown will have a significant impact on any buried archaeological deposits. Excavation will truncate all medieval, post-medieval and modern archaeological deposits within the footprint of the basement. The insertion of wall piles and the underpinning of the eastern side of the existing building will cause localised truncation in discreet areas. Any other below-ground works, such as the creation of new service runs and external landscaping, may also have a significant impact on archaeological remains.

6.3 Ground Soil Contamination

6.3.1 A geo-technical site investigation has been carried out, comprising two boreholes, two trial pits dug against the inside face of the inner wall of the moat and two trial pits against the existing house foundations. The two boreholes were observed by an archaeologist from Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited.

6.3.2 The two boreholes in the garden to the south of the house on the moated platform confirmed the deposit sequence as comprising London clay at 1.8m below ground level covered by 1.5m of

made ground and 0.3m of topsoil. This sequence was, in general, the same as that found during the archaeological trial trench evaluation. Trial pits against the inside face of the inner moat wall revealed the inner face of the moat wall and adjacent deposit sequence of made ground to a depth of 2m and 2.4m.

6.3.3 The map regression exercise suggests that previous land use at the site is unlikely to have caused any ground contamination that may be detrimental to the health of persons working on or using the site, or to the environment.

7 MITIGATION

7.1.1 Excavation of the proposed basement is likely to have a significant and highly adverse impact on any surviving archaeological remains located in the area (Figure 10). The present assessment and earlier cultural heritage assessments have indicated that the potential for archaeological remains in this area is high. Archaeological evidence dating to the medieval and post-medieval periods is considered to be of regional significance. 7.1.2 In order to mitigate the adverse impact that the proposed development will have upon the buried archaeological resource, it was recommended that a trial trench evaluation was to be undertaken in this area in advance of the excavation of the basement. This was carried out in July 2014 and the results are summarised in Appendix 1. Although no evidence of the pre- 18th century development of the site was found during the evaluation this may have been masked by the considerable depth of 18th century overburden. The evaluation trenches were monitored by the Hampshire County Archaeologist, David Hopkins, in a site visit on the 4th July 2014. Based on the results of the evaluation, a further requirement for archaeological works in mitigation of the impact of the development should consider:

• Archaeologically controlled ground work to prepare the site for the proposed basement covering the preparation of the site for piling – e.g. ground reduction for a piling mat and excavation of the proposed basement. This will permit the surviving below-ground remains of the 18th century house to be recorded and allow any remains of the medieval and Tudor houses to be investigated and recorded.

• An investigation, including detailed recording, of the existing moat structure in tandem with works to form the new moat crossing aimed at an understanding of the structural history of the moat;

• Any outstanding potential within the moat for waterlogged remains that might represent medieval and later use of the site;

• Archaeological works necessary to offset the impact, even temporary, of enabling works such as the formation of access across the eastern side of the existing moat, and the installation of a crane base, a construction compound and other necessary works within the eastern half of the moated area.

• Archaeological works necessary to offset the impact of the construction of the proposed new access route across land to the south of the existing house including, but not exclusively, an investigation of visible earthworks along the new access route. This would enable a record to be made of any remains associated with brick kilns and with the possible Civil War defences. It is also recommended that targeted documentary research is carried out in order to understand the Civil War defence of Beaurepaire.

• Archaeological watching briefs during the course of underpinning works to the existing buildings, and during the construction of new service runs and landscaping.

8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

8.1 Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited would like to thank Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners (NLP) on behalf of their Client for commissioning the built Archaeological Impact Assessment of the proposals at Beaurepaire House and Park. The help and assistance of Iain Rhind and Sophie Hitchins of NLP; Neil Kocks, Project Manager at GrandLane Developments; Peter Tigg and Satish Patel of PTP Architects and Mike Ibbotson of Ibbotson Studio are gratefully acknowledged.

8.2 The staff of the Hampshire Record Office and The National Archives are thanked for their help and assistance.

8.3 The project was managed for Pre-Construct Archaeology by Charlotte Matthews. Guy Thompson carried out the documentary research and also wrote this report, Mark Roughley prepared the illustrations.

9 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Hampshire Record Office (HRO)

20M76/Z87 File marked 'HMC National Register of Archives' containing notes, correspondence and drafts of articles on Beaurepaire in the series 'Vanishing Country Houses', Date: c1950

25M97/1 Sale particulars for Beaurepaire Park, Sherborne St John, Date: 21 Aug 1872

28M75/B2 Plans and elevations for alterations to Beaurepaire House, Sherborne St John, Date: 1941

28M75/B3 Plans and elevations for alterations to Beaurepaire House, Sherborne St John, Date: 1941

28M75/B4 Plans and elevations for alterations to Beaurepaire House, Sherborne St John, Date: 1941

31M57/923-926 Letters from Bernard Brocas at Wokefield, to John Chute, with some of Chute's replies, concerning the manorial rights of Cranes, Beaurepaire and Sherborne St John, Date: Sep 1758

142M84/37 Correspondence of JW Simpson about Beaurepaire documents, and about life there in the early 20th century, Date: 1950

1M44/86/3 Letter from Lord Wallingford to the Earl of Banbury, Date: 5th July 1782

The National Archives (TNA)

ADM 106/1098/42 Bernard Brocas to Purveyor Royal Navy Dockyard Portsmouth. 30/03/1752

E 367/792 Stoner, Angelo Waller, Constance: Lease of the manor of Beaurapurr [Beaurepaire], 1654

PROB 11/16/443 Will of William Brocas of Hampshire, 17 July 1509

PROB 11/27/197 Will of Ralph Pexsall, 12 February 1538

PROB 11/53/489 Will of Sir Richard Pexsall of Beaurepaire, Hampshire, 8 November 1571

Secondary and Published Sources

Adam Architecture. 2013. Beaurepaire Hampshire: Historic Development. Unpublished report: Adam Architecture

Airs, M. 1995. The Tudor & Jacobean Country House: A Building History. Stroud: Sutton Publishing

Brandon, P. & Short, B. 1990. The South East from AD 1000. London: Longman

Burrows, M. 1886. The Family of Brocas of Beaurepaire and Roche Court, Hereditary Masters of the Royal Buckhounds. London: Longmans Green & Co

Edwards, 2006. Solent Thames Research Framework: Medieval Hampshire 1066-1540

Hawkins, 1964 Sanderson Miller of Radway 1716-1780 Architect. University of Cambridge: unpublished dissertation submitted for Diploma in Architecture

Howard, M. 1998. The Vyne, Hampshire. London: The National Trust

Howard, M. & Wilson, E. 2003, The Vyne: a Tudor House Revealed. London: The National Trust

Hughes, E. & White, P. (Eds). 1991. The Hampshire Hearth Tax Assessment 1665. Hampshire Record Series Volume II. Southampton: Hampshire County Council

Matthews, C. 2013. Beaurepaire House Heritage Statement Fee Proposal. Unpublished report: Pre- Construct Archaeology

Page, W. (Ed). 1911. A History of the County of Hampshire Volume 4. URL: http://www.british- history.ac.uk/source.aspx?pubid=525

Simpson, J.W. 1951. ‘Vanishing Country Houses: Beaurepaire House’ [draft copies of a series for Country Life, held by Hampshire Record Office catalogue reference: 20M76/Z87 File marked 'HMC National Register of Archives']

Squibb, G.D. (Ed). 1991. The visitation of Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, 1686. London: Harleian Society

Wessex Archaeology. 2013a. Beaurepaire House Bramley, Hampshire. Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment. Unpublished report: Wessex Archaeology

Wessex Archaeology. 2013b. Beaurepaire House Bramley, Hampshire. Historic Building Assessment. Unpublished report: Wessex Archaeology

Wessex Archaeology. 2013c. Beaurepaire House Bramley, Hampshire. Geophysical Survey Report. Unpublished report: Wessex Archaeology

Willoughby, R. 2002. Sherborne St John and The Vyne in the time of Jane Austen. Sherborne St John: self published

Journals

The Topographer, 1789a. ‘History and Description of the Vine, in Hampshire’, The Topographer Volume I Number II, pp: 51-61 London: Robson and Clarke

The Topographer, 1789b. ‘The Names of the Nobles &c of Hampshire temp. Hen. VII’, The Topographer Volume I Number? pp: 460-465

The Topographer, 1791. ‘Account of the Family of Brocas of Beaurepaire, Hants’, The Topographer Volume IV Number I, pp: 53-58

The Gentleman’s Magazine, 1787. ‘Genealogical Anecdotes of eminent Families in Hampshire’, The Gentleman’s Magazine Volume 57 Part 2, pp: 680-684

Collectanea Topographica e Genealogica. 1843. ‘Church Notes for Hampshire: Sherborne St John’, Collectanea Topographica e Genealogica Volume 8, pp: 388-400

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII Volume 1: 1509-1514 (1920)

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII Volume 2: 1515-1518 (1864)

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII Volume 3: 1519-1523 (1867)

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII Volume 4: 1524-1530 (1875)

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII Volume 5: 1531-1532 (1880)

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII Volume 10: 1536 (1887)

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII Volume 12 Part 1: 1537 (1890)

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic Henry VIII Volume 12 Part 2: 1537 (1891)

APPENDIX 1: ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATION by Paul McCulloch

In keeping with the outline mitigation strategy and further to consultation with the Hampshire County Archaeologist and Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council, an archaeological evaluation was carried out on the site of the proposed basement in July 2014. The evaluation was carried out in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (PCA 2014) that was approved by the Hampshire County Archaeologist.

The aims of the evaluation, taking account of the earlier assessments and anomalies detected by the geophysical survey, were to provide information, in the form of archaeological evidence for the development of Beaurepaire, to the Local Planning Authority. In particular the evaluation aimed to determine the character, extent, date, condition and significance of archaeological resources that may survive within the footprint of the proposed development, taking account of their potential to contain biological and palaeo-environmental remains. The evaluation addressed specific aims relevant to the development of Beaurepaire, which were:

• Does the site contain evidence of the medieval manor at Beaurepaire, any of its component buildings or evidence of what materials these were built in?

• Does the site contain evidence that a smaller moat once contained the medieval manor and was replaced or extended to form the existing moat? If so, what potential does that have to contain biological remains?

• Does the site contain evidence of Sir Richard Pexsall’s Tudor manor and for re-use of any part of it in Bernard Brocas’ later 18th century villa?

• Does the site contain evidence of the gatehouse depicted on Wyther’s 1613 estate map of the Tudor manor?

• Does the site contain evidence for the ground plan of the villa as depicted on 20th century plans?

Three trenches were opened within the footprint of the proposed basement. In summary the results of the evaluation were as follows:

• Natural yellow and blue London clay was encountered at approximately 1.3m below ground level. In all three trenches, this was sealed by a thick layer of make-up comprising re-deposited natural orange silty-clay loam that contained fragmented ceramic building materials including brick and tile. The make-up layer appears to represent a raft laid over the site to provide a level surface for the late 18th century villa and its gardens. It was thicker in the south than in the north and as such appears to have been laid to compensate for the natural fall in ground level from the north-west to the south-east that characterises the immediate topography of the site.

• Evidence for the late 18th century Gothick villa was uncovered and corresponded to the known layout of the building. Its southern and western extents were uncovered, represented by brick footings cut into the make-up layer. A basement, backfilled with rubble from the villa’s demolition, was identified and appeared to occupy the south-west corner of the villa.

• No evidence of the medieval manor, the Tudor mansion or for an earlier moat within the evaluation trenches was found.

The evaluation trenches were monitored by the Hampshire County Archaeologist, David Hopkins, in a site visit on the 4th July 2014. Although no evidence of the pre-18th century development of the site

was found this may have been masked by the considerable depth of 18th century overburden. Based on the results of the evaluation, a further requirement for archaeological works in mitigation of the impact of the development should consider:

• Archaeologically controlled ground work to prepare the site for the proposed basement covering the preparation of the site for piling – e.g. ground reduction for a piling mat;

• An investigation, including detailed recording, of the existing moat structure in tandem with works to form the new moat crossing aimed at an understanding of the structural history of the moat;

• Any outstanding potential within the moat for waterlogged remains that might represent medieval and later use of the site;

464000/159000

Beaurepaire House Beaurepaire Park

464000/155000

BASINGSTOKE

0 1km

Rosemary Cottage ROMAN ROAD (course of) Patricias Cottage

2 Bramley Corner LB 1 The Gables Sheilas Cottage

Greensleeves Pond GP

Drain Bramley Corner

Lodge SILCHESTER ROAD

Bramley Grange Chauney

Fairlands

Dunsandle The Slates Ppg Sta Park Gate Farm Little Oak Yew Tree Barton House Cottage

Park Gate Path (um) Barn Pond Avington Keepers Lodge SILCHESTER ROAD Beechgrove York Cottage Pear Tree Hammelhaus Cottage Tudor Lands Oak House

Cedarwood Church Farm Bungalow Pond

Track

Path (um)

Allotment Gardens

Glebelands 463650/159000 Bedruthan

Bramley Vicarage

Collects Marlborough 12 House Tudor Farmhouse

Clover Cottage

11 Belmeads Brantwood

Martins TUDOR CLOSE Oakdale Vectis Grafton House

9 1 SILCHESTER ROAD Oakenshaw

Tideswell House 6

Tumbling Bay (Weir)

Middle Lodge

Pond

Bowling Alley Copse

Track

Bow Brook Path (um)

Foot Bridge

Track

Drain

Foot Bridge Foot Bridge

Bow Brook

Park Copse

Pond

Sluice

Mill Cottage Pond

Wiltshire's Gully Copse

Drain The Mill House Pond Beaurepaire Park

VYNE ROAD

Issues

Pond Beaurepaire Park Stud

Queens Stable Cottage Cottage

Track Track

FB Beaurepaire

House FB

Ponds

Tennis Court

Issues Pond

Fish Ponds

Pond

VYNE ROAD Pond Beaurepaire 463650/157700 House

Pond South Lodge

Drain Cattle Grid

FB Track Moat

0 100m 0 400m

 Crown copyright 2014. All rights reserved. License number PMP36110309 Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 24/02/14 MR Figure 2 Detailed Site Location 1:8,000, detail - 1:2,000 at A4 Figure 3  Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 George Wyther's estate plan, 1613 24/02/14 MR (not to scale) N

0 50m

Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 Figure 4 24/02/14 MR Sherbourne St John tithe map, 1840 Approx. 1:1,250 at A4 N

Outline of proposed house 0 50m Outline of proposed basement

Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 24/02/14 MR

Figure 5 First Edition Ordnance Survey map, 1872 1:1,250 at A4 N

Outline of proposed house 0 50m Outline of proposed basement

Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 24/02/14 MR

Figure 6 Second Edition Ordnance Survey map, 1897 1:1,250 at A4 0 5m

Figure 8 Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 Ground floor plan of Beaurepaire, 1941 24/02/14 MR Approx. 1:100 at A4 Figure 7 Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 Elevations of Beaurepaire, 1941 24/02/14 MR (not to scale) 0 5m

Figure 9 Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 First floor plan of Beaurepaire, 1941 24/02/14 MR Approx. 1:100 at A4 PLATES

Plate 1: Steventon Manor House, built by Sir Richard Pexsall c.1570-1

Plate 2: Chimney stacks at the rear elevation of Christchurch Mansion, Ipswich, built by Sir Edmund Withypool in 1548 Existing Building N

Footprint of former Building

Moat

M O A T

0 20m

Figure 10  Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2014 Proposed basement plan 04/08/14 MR/HB 1:400 at A4

Plate 3: Reconstruction of the front elevation of Redgrave Hall, Suffolk, built by Sir Nicholas Bacon, c.1554 (from Sandeen, E.R. 1962. ‘The building of Redgrave Hall, 1545-1554’, in Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology & History 29, pp: 1-33)

Plate 4: Reconstruction of the rear elevation of Redgrave Hall, Suffolk, built by Sir Nicholas Bacon, c.1554 (from Sandeen, E.R. 1962. ‘The building of Redgrave Hall, 1545-1554’, in Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology & History 29, pp: 1-33)

Plate 5: Reconstruction of the ground floor plan of Redgrave Hall, Suffolk, built by Sir Nicholas Bacon, c.1554 (from Sandeen, E.R. 1962. ‘The building of Redgrave Hall, 1545-1554’, in Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology & History 29, pp: 1-33)

Plate 6: Stonor Park, Oxfordshire a view of c.1690, showing the retained medieval buildings at the extremities of the flanking wings of the Tudor E-shaped house

Plate 7: The house, gatehouse and gardens of the early Tudor mansion of Belhus, Aveley Essex, from a view of c.1710

Plate 8: Belhus, Aveley, Essex c.1832, showing the retained Tudor elements and the Gothick additions by Lord Dace, 1745-7

Plate 9: Early Tudor heraldic panelling in the Oak Gallery of The Vyne (from Howard & Wilson, 2003)

Plate 10: Early Tudor heraldic panelling in the Oak Gallery of The Vyne (from Howard, 1998)

Plate 11: The east elevation of Beaurepaire c.1850 (attributed to Bernard Brocas)

Plate 12: The south and west elevations of Beaurepaire c.1850 (attributed to Bernard Brocas)

PCA

PCA SOUTH UNIT 54 BROCKLEY CROSS BUSINESS CENTRE 96 ENDWELL ROAD BROCKLEY LONDON SE4 2PD TEL: 020 7732 3925 / 020 7639 9091 FAX: 020 7639 9588 EMAIL: [email protected]

PCA NORTH UNIT 19A TURSDALE BUSINESS PARK DURHAM DH6 5PG TEL: 0191 377 1111 FAX: 0191 377 0101 EMAIL: [email protected]

PCA CENTRAL THE GRANARY, RECTORY FARM BREWERY ROAD, PAMPISFORD CAMBRIDGESHIRE CB22 3EN TEL: 01223 845 522 FAX: 01223 845 522 EMAIL: [email protected]

PCA WEST BLOCK 4 CHILCOMB HOUSE CHILCOMB LANE WINCHESTER HAMPSHIRE SO23 8RB TEL: 01962 849 549 EMAIL: [email protected]

PCA MIDLANDS 17-19 KETTERING RD LITTLE BOWDEN MARKET HARBOROUGH LEICESTERSHIRE LE16 8AN TEL: 01858 468 333 EMAIL: [email protected]