THE GLAVEN HISTORIAN

The Journal of the Blakeney Area Historical Society

No. 6 2003

Contents

Editorial 2

Richard Jefferson W J J Bolding (1815-1899), Pioneer North 3 Norfolk Photographer.

Jonathan Hooton The Ann of Clay Capt Francis Plumb 1841. 15

Monica White Reminiscences of the Glaven Valley: Care of 20 the Dying and the Dead in the First 50 years of the 20th Century.

Pamela Peake A Family of Substance: George Brigge of 28 Wiveton and his relatives.

John Peake The Glebe Terriers of Cley: Changes in the 43 Landscape during the 17th & 18th Centuries.

John Wright Some comments on the Blakeney Census 59 of 1871.

Eric Hotblack Further Field Walking at Field Dalling. 64

John Wright Blakeney Eye: some Comments on Current 68 Investigations.

Back Pages Snippets; Feedback; Obituary. 72

1 Editorial

ew Editor, new format. Or Monica White has been busy rather new Editors since it collecting memories for the BAHS Nseems to need four of us to Oral History collection. This fill John Wright’s shoes. We have Journal is being put together at moved to a two-column layout and Easter so the topic of death is not 12pt type (where possible) to make inappropriate. the text easier to read, while the Pamela Peake has been investi- typeface adopted is intended to be gating the Brigge family of Wiveton, standard across the full range of Lords of one of the Manors, and a BAHS publications and signing. very influential family, while John Any comments on the new format Peake has tackled the Cley Church are welcome. Terriers and tracked down the four, We were hoping to have a report yes four, parsonage sites in the from Chris Birks on the recent dig village. at the ‘Chapel’ site on Blakeney In addition to his Blakeney Eye Eye, but this has been embargoed preview, John Wright has con- by the Environment Agency for a tributed a paper on analysis of the couple of months to give them time 1871 census and makes compari- to assimilate the implications. As it son with figures from 1770 and is such a topical issue, we do how- 1971. ever have an explanatory preview. Eric Hotblack, who led field- It will be interesting to compare the walking classes in 2002 and 2003, NAU’s findings with our own, has collated the results and the strictly non-invasive, investigations findings are recorded here. reported in GH2. There ia also new feature we call Another topical paper is Richard “Back Pages” which we hope will Jefferson’s account of the life and develop into a useful and interest- work of WJJ Bolding, an almost ing collection of miscellaneous forgotten pioneer of photography snippets, feedback from previous from Weybourne. There is to be a articles and who knows what else! major exhibition of work by early A wide range of topics, styles Norfolk photographers, including and periods – from the Stone Age WJJB, at the Castle Museum, to the present day: we hope you Norwich, later this year. enjoy reading the latest Glaven The visual aspect is also covered Historian. If you have an article to by Jonathan Hooton who has contribute, or feedback on pub- investigated the origins of a ‘pier- lished material, please contact the head’ painting of the Ann of Cley. Editorial team. Some notes on pre- The genre is important to marine ferred methods of presentation are historians – even if it’s not great scheduled for the December art. Newsletter.

2 W JJBolding (1815-1899) Pioneer North Norfolk Photographer

by Richard Jefferson

Synopsis: an introduction to the tuition from an artist or artists of work of a pioneer photographer from the Norwich School, a number of Weybourne. As well as giving his whom acted as drawing masters to family background, the author supplement their income. For the traces connections with members of first forty years or more of the the Norwich School of painters. nineteenth century the accepted method of learning to draw was to illiam Johnson Jennis copy the original work of a profes- Bolding was the great sional artist. A pencil drawing of Wgreat grandson of William Cley Church survives (Fig. 1), Jennis (died 1766), whose account dated 1832 when he was sixteen. It book from the 1720s and 1730s of is an almost exact copy of J B the William & Thomas of Blakeney Ladbrooke’s drawing of the church survives.1 Through marriage in the (Ladbrooke and his father Robert 18th century, the Bolding family drew 677 Norfolk churches, all inherited considerable Jennis prop- published as lithographs). The Cley erty in Weybourne, so in 1847 at Church lithograph is dated 1824. It his father John Bolding’s death is a not unreasonable assumption (aged 67) WJJB, 32 years old, that J B Ladbrooke was WJJB’s found himself the largest resident drawing master in 1832. Three landowner and farmer in the village remarkable brown monochrome employing eleven labourers, owner drawings from the following year of the maltings, the brewery were almost certainly executed (employing three men) and the under the direction of his drawing watermill. His father had pur- master. Later WJJB painted in oils, chased public houses right across mainly scenes in and around North Norfolk, to be supplied by Weybourne, but his favourite medi- the family brewery. WJJB’s last um was watercolour: brown mono- business deal, in 1897, was to sell chrome, grey wash and pencil. It is fourteen to the Norwich brewers recorded that in 1849 and 1853 his Steward & Patteson. In 1846 with pictures were exhibited at the his brother-in-law William Norfolk & Norwich Fine Arts Monement, a cork merchant from Association annual exhibitions. King’s Lynn, he became the joint Before her marriage to William owner of the schooner Enterprise of Monement in 1845, WJJB’s sister Blakeney, thereby continuing the Esther kept a journal in which she ship owning tradition of the family. recorded that in May WJJB usually Evidence on William Johnson went away with his fishing gear Jennis Bolding’s early life is sparse, and sketching things. At this dis- but he showed considerable talent tance in time it is difficult to recon- as an artist from a young age. In all cile how WJJB managed his busi- probability he would have received ness affairs, along with the cultur- 3 Figure 1. Pencil drawing of Cley Church, after J B Ladbrooke, executed in 1832 when Bolding was just 16 years old. al, sporting, scientific and artistic Archaeology (1857) WJJB pub- activities he indulged in. For the lished, with sketch and diagram, best part of ten years after his his excavation of a Romano-British father’s death he was very active pottery kiln discovered on his away from Weybourne, particularly Weybourne land. In 1850 he was in during the summer months. In the Switzerland sketching, and taking 1851 census his mother, ‘old’ in Antwerp and Rouen either on Esther, is described as “Land and the way out or the way back. House Proprietor”. From her photo- Undated drawings survive of graph (fig. 3) she looks a formidable Land’s End and Ben Nevis, show- person and it seems likely that she ing that he really did travel the ran the businesses during her length and breadth of Britain. son’s absences. As an artist he had a great abili- In 1848 he was away sketching ty to capture atmospheric effect in in Wales, an extensive trip includ- his landscapes, and his artistic eye ing Tintern, Harlech and certainly influenced his photo- Llangollen. In August 1849, with graphic work. his friend Henry Harrod, the secre- tary of the newly formed Norfolk & nd so to William Johnson Norwich Archaeological Society, Jennis Bolding the photog- and other members, he took part in A rapher. It was certainly a survey of Castle Rising castle, through his connection with the producing two drawings; one of artistic, archaeological, scientific these etched by Norwich School and cultural set in Norwich (some- artist Henry Ninham appeared in times colloquially referred to as the Volume IV of Norfolk Archaeology Norwich Brotherhood) that he was (1855). In Volume V of Norfolk introduced to photography.

4 However it happened, he took to The majority of WJJB’s photo- the newly invented art form like a graphs are albumen prints from duck to water. In Marjorie collodion negatives. Allthorpe-Guyton’s book on The first photographic processes Norwich School artist Henry were extremely complicated. Bright2 WJJB is described as Exposures were often measured in being one of the most important minutes, coating and processing nineteenth century photographers. the plates took time (and a portable That is praise indeed. darkroom) and involved numerous, It was in 1839 that Louis often dangerous, chemicals such as Jacques Mandé Daguerre in France potassium cyanide, potassium perfected his photographic process iodide, and gallic and nitric acids; (the Daguerreotype), but the image collodion itself is gun-cotton dis- produced could not be multiplied. solved in ether. Despite wearing Later in the same year in England protective clothing the photogra- William Henry Fox Talbot went phers’ skin would be stained and public with his own process (the they would reek of the chemicals. Calotype), where there was a nega- The toner used to give the popular tive and multiple copies could be sepia effect was particularly noi- produced. This process, however, some. gave a soft image and was liable to There were few amateur photog- fade. raphers in the early days as pho- Photography came early to tography was an expensive exercise Norwich, and by 1843 there were – fortunately, WJJB was extremely professional photographic studios well off. As we have seen he was a in the city. Two prominent local talented artist with an original and amateurs, Dr Hugh Diamond and enquiring mind; he must also have Thomas Damant Eaton, were pro- been a proficient chemist to be able ducing images in 1845 and must to produce photographs of such a have been an important influence remarkable quality. in the development of WJJB’s pho- He converted a barn (Fig. 4) tographic ‘career’. The photograph which lay behind his house, now of his sister Esther is a the Maltings Hotel (Fig. 5), into a Dageurreotype, almost certainly by studio for his portrait photography. a professional photographer, and Sitters had to remain ‘frozen’ for a dates from the 1840s (Fig. 2). He considerable length of time – with probably experimented with the collodion negatives exposure time Calotype process, but his work was typically between 5 and 30 really took off after the invention of seconds. Many Victorian portaits the albumen print process by Louis seem stiff due to this contrived Blanquart-Everard in 1850, and positioning, yet WJJB managed to the wet collodion (negative) process portray his sitters resting at ease in by Frederick Scott Archer in 1851: a natural pose (Fig. 6). He took sev- this latter process used a glass eral photographs of his estate negative instead of a paper one, workers holding a tool of their and together these processes pro- trade, some headgear or their duced much sharper prints than hands in their lap. There is also the the calotype. For the next thirty wonderful portrait from about 1855 years and more these were the of his mother ‘old’ Esther (née popular photographic processes. Johnson, from Cley) aged about

5 sixty-five (Fig. 3) already alluded to. King’s Lynn, staying at The The sparseness of evidence on Cottage. His sisters, nephews and WJJB’s links with the Norwich ‘set’ nieces were frequent sitters for his leave many questions unanswered, camera over many years. His niece none more so than his friendship Rose became a proficient photogra- with the brilliant Norwich School pher, coached by her uncle, and a artist John Middleton (1827-1856), number of her prints survive. whose life was tragically cut short The Norfolk Chronicle & Norwich by consumption. The two men were Gazette for 28 October 1899, under frequent companions on sketching Weybourne news, recorded: “The trips, with Middleton often staying death occurred on Saturday in his at Weybourne. A number of the eighty-fourth year, of Mr William artist’s oils, watercolours and etch- Johnson Jennis Bolding, a well- ings were executed in North known inhabitant of the parish. Norfolk. A treasured item is a The deceased, who had been in fail- Middleton scraperboard; on the ing health for some years, will be back in pencil are the words much missed, especially by his “drawn expressly for Miss Bolding poorer neighbours, amongst whom by J Middleton”. Many of WJJB’s his kindly nature and unostenta- photographs are of fallen trees and tious charity had won him univer- woodland scenes – typical sal respect and esteem. He added Middleton material; though there is to considerable scientific attain- no evidence to support the idea, ments artistic powers of no mean one could easily imagine Middleton degree, and besides having trav- returning to Norwich with copies of elled a great deal in his early life, these photographs to help him with he was widely read in the literature the compostion of his paintings. of the day, especially as concerned Middleton, too, was a photogra- archaeological subjects”. pher; landscape images of his from a trip to North Wales are in the fter WJJB’s death his photo- Norwich Castle art collection. graphic output lay hidden in The Norwich Photographic Club A albums and loose in boxes was formed in 1854 and their first and folders – literally hundreds of exhibition was held at the prints. It was in the early 1970s Exhibition Rooms in Broad Street, that these came to light: he was St Andrews, in November 1856 ‘rediscovered’ in 1975 when a small when fifty photographers showed number of portraits were exhibited five hundred prints. WJJB had in ‘The Real Thing – an Anthology been enrolled as a member of the of British Photographs 1840-1950’, society by John Middleton and he a travelling exhibition sponsored by exhibited some portraits of his the Arts Council.3 The catalogue estate workers and village people, stated that “Bolding’s photographs as well as some landscapes. of his estate workers and the village WJJB never married. His sister people of Weybourne are amongst Hannah kept house for him until the most powerful portraits in the her death in 1892 (Fig. 7). His sis- history of photography”. ter Esther, her husband William Since then nothing has been and growing family (Fig. 8) – there heard of WJJB the photographer, were eventually eleven children – but currently his reputation is in often came to Weybourne from the process of being revived. An

6 Figure 2. Sister Esther – a Daguerreotype Figure 3. ‘Old’ Esther – WJJB’s mother from the 1840s probably the work of a pro- c1855 fessional photographer expert on early photography has Further Reading recently described his portraits as If your curiosity has been piqued by this being “seventy years ahead of their article you may like to read further. time”. Some of his photographs will For an historical overview Photography, be on view later this year in an A Concise History Ian Jeffrey (London: exhibition in Norwich on early Thames & Hudson 1981) is a reasonable Norfolk photographers – see the alternative to the Gernsheims’ magisterial two volume The History of Photography next paragraph for details. Maybe (London/New York: McGraw Hill, 1970). his reputation as a photographer For the impact of photography on 19th will now be permanent. century art and artists read Art and Photography by Aaron Scharf (London: Penguin 1983). he exhibition at the Castle Finally, Camera Lucida Roland Barthes Musuem, which runs for (London: Fontana 1984) and On T five months from 29th Photography Susan Sontag (London: September 2003 to the 29th Penguin 1979) give a good insight into the February 2004, is entitled “A ‘why?’ of photography. Period Eye” and will feature the References work of a number of early Norwich photographers; there 1. The William & Thomas: Trading will be at least three works by accounts 1726-1733. The Glaven WJJB included. Historian No.5 2. M. Allthrope-Guyton, 1986 Henry These images will be comple- Bright 1810-1873. Paintings and mented by, and contrasted with, drawings in Norwich Castle a number of new artworks (not Museum. Norfolk Museums Service. all photographs) inspired by 3. Anon, 1975 The Real Thing. An these pioneer photographers. Anthology of British Photographs 1840-1950. The Arts Council.

7 Figure 4. Farmyard scene c1855 including the barn at Weybourne that WJJB converted into his studio

Figure 5. Monochrome drawing by WJJB of his house at Weybourne in the 1830s.

8 Figure 6. Portrait of an unknown villager c1854

9 Figure 7. Memorial tablet to Hannah and Figure 8. Esther and William Monement WJJB in Weybourne church and four of their children. Portrait by WJJB (photo: J Peake). c1855.

Figure 9. WJJB and his sister Hannah pho- Figure 10. Portrait in oils of WJJB c1850. tographed by their niece Rose on the steps of The House (now the Maltings Holtel) c1890.

10 Figure 11. Portrait by WJJB presumed to be of an office clerk c1860.

11 Figure 12. Portrait of his nephew Frank (born 1858) c1862. Frank later built ‘The Green’ at Cley. 12 Figure 13. Nieces of WJJB in the garden at Weybourne. 1860s

Figure 14. Postmill, watermill, and cottages on the beach from the farmyard behind The House. c1854.

13 Figure 15. The Street, Weybourne, looking east c1854.

Figure 16. Preparing to mow the barley c1860.

14 The Ann of Clay Capt. Francis Plumb 1841

by Jonathan Hooton

Synopsis: the author gives some involved with. Although it was per- background on the artistic genre missible to accentuate details such known as “pierhead painting” and as pennants or flags, they would traces the origin of a particular not tolerate inaccuracy in the example which features a locally depiction of the ship. Sometimes owned vessel. the works were commissioned, but frequently the artist would produce he genre of ship portraits is sketches speculatively and hope for one that is probably of more a sale. This would not be forth- T importance to those interest- coming if the ship were not repro- ed in maritime and local history duced in almost photographic rather than to the art historian. detail, or if the price was too high. For the period before photography The artists were usually self it is of vital importance in supply- taught, based at one port and fre- ing the details of the hull, rigging quently they had been to sea and and appearance of the many small had gained first hand knowledge of merchantmen and fishing vessels their subject matter.2 that plied their trade around the The genre is likely to have coasts of Britain and Europe descended from the 16th and 17th throughout the nineteenth century. century ‘votive’ paintings. These The characteristic that distin- were devotional paintings destined guished the ship portraits, or pier- to hang in churches and intended head paintings, as they were fre- as a thanksgiving, commissioned quently known, from marine paint- by the crew after a miraculous ings, was that the ship itself was delivery from a near disaster at sea. the primary object, overriding all They showed the vessel in the other considerations. Little atten- midst of a storm often with the tion was given to the sea or sky Virgin Mary or a patron saint and background details were lack- appearing in the storm laden ing, not always accurate and, if clouds. This led in later centuries they were included at all, it was to the tradition of painting a pair of mainly to identify the port, espe- pictures, portraying the vessel in cially if the ship was trading over- both foul and fair weather.3 seas.1 The first true ship portraits However, the details of the ship appeared in the 18th century and were usually meticulous. Accuracy seem to have originated from ports was very important because the in the Mediterranean. They spread purchasers were usually the own- rapidly to the rest of Europe and ers or master of the vessel, who the majority date from the 19th wished for a memento of a craft century. At the beginning of the that they were often emotionally period it was usual to show the

15 Figure 1. The “Ann of Clay Capt. Francis Plumb 1841” in (almost) all its glory vessel in two and sometimes three have moved away. One fine exam- positions on the same canvas, ple that has come to my notice broadside, stern and bow, although recently is the ‘Ann of Clay’ owned later in the 19th century this usu- by William May of East Ruston. It ally became broadside only. is a watercolour, heightened with Usually there would be an inscrip- gouache, with a hand painted bor- tion stating the name, rig, home- der (fashionable 1780-1830) and port, name of the master and the close framed (i.e. no mount) in its port where it had been painted. original mahogany frame (Fig.1). The medium for most of these It is entitled ‘Ann of Clay Capt paintings was either watercolour or Francis Plumb 1841’. The signa- gouache, chosen because they were ture on the painting is ‘J Hansen quick drying and easy to handle. Sandberg No11 Altona.’ Altona is a Speed was important, because the port on the river Elbe next to vessel was usually in the port for Hamburg and in 1938, when the only a few days and the painting city boundaries were altered, it could be supplied quickly, often the became part of Hamburg. next day, rolled up for easy storage Sandberg was a street in Altona, on board ship.4 and presumably J Hansen was liv- ing at number eleven. Roger Finch hip portraits survive for sev- says of the port that “Altona, where eral of the Glaven’s ships. once the Danish East India SAlthough some still remain Company had its headquarters, on locally many have left the area as the Elbe estuary above the great descendants of the ship owners port of Hamburg was the home of a 16 Figure 2. Detail of the sloop-rigged vessel, Figure 3. Detail of the right hand vessel possibly the Ann re-rigged. long and distinguished line of ship The book also has an illustration painters. Their paintings were by J Hansen (plate 514) of ‘The brought back to Britain aboard the schooner Regina of Muhlerberg/ schooners and brigs to be proudly Blankenese 1840’ from the hung in sailors’ homes all through Altonaer Museum in Hamburg. the nineteenth century…Many This shows two views of the vessel paintings deriving from Altona were and includes a background similar by the Hansens; H.C.Hansen (flour- to the ‘Ann’. ished 1838-47), B.H. Hansen (flour- In the painting of the ‘Ann’, she ished 1827-56) and T. Hansen, is shown broadside on, rigged as a working at approximately the same brig with a female figurehead, a date, who were no doubt related”.5 square stern and eight figures por- He does not mention a ‘J’ Hansen trayed on the deck, one of which (although T and J may have been appears to be a woman. She also confused), but a J Hansen is has seven fake gun ports painted included by E.H.H. Archibald, in on the hull. To the right the vessel his Dictionary of Sea Painters, who is seen stern on, in rougher seas records the following, and carrying less sail. More puz- zling is the vessel to the left with “Hansen, J. Flourished early/mid just one mast. It could just be the 19th century. German ship por- ‘Ann’, rigged as a sloop as she traitist working in Altona in the seems to be the right size and has second quarter of the 19th century a similar white line with seven gun and in the usual stiff and stylised ports. However, there is no figure- manner”.6 head and the bow is different in 17 shape. It was not unknown for a were very similar, both being brig to be re-rigged as a sloop, as square rigged on two masts with this meant she could be handled the snow having a small trysail by a smaller crew and therefore mast just behind the main mast. It cheaper to run, but it is very is difficult to tell from the painting unlikely that she would have been whether the mast is there or not. converted from a sloop to a brig. Lloyds registers for 1842-44 record Ship portraits often contained the ‘Ann’ as a brig, sailing between other craft in the distance, such as London and Hamburg, with the vessel in between the broadside Captain F Plum as her master, so view of the ‘Ann’ and the sloop. there was confusion between brigs However, the sloop is shown flying and snows at the time.8 the red ensign, a triangular blue Francis Plumb was born in flag with a white letter ‘M’ and Blakeney in 1793, which would appears to be painted in too much have meant he was 46 when he detail to be considered part of the took command of the ‘Ann’ when maritime background. Possibly she was re-registered from she was another vessel, command- Newcastle in 1839. He was not ed by Captain Plumb and included present in Blakeney or Cley at the in the painting at his request, but time of the 1841 census, presum- as yet, there is no documentary ably because he was based in evidence to support this view. London where the ‘Ann’ was trad- The painting is dated 1841, ing from. However, there was a which is fortunate in trying to James Plumb, mariner, aged 25, track down details of the ‘Ann’ living in the High Street in because the surviving Cley Register Blakeney, who was presumably a of Ships in the Norfolk Record relation and probably Francis’s son Office starts in 1839. The ‘Ann’, or brother.9 was registered on 14th September Although vessels of 125 tons 1839, of 125 tons and built in could use Blakeney, the profits 1830 at Peterhead. She had been were obviously greater for the own- re-registered from Newcastle. She ers with the vessel trading from was described as having 1 deck, 2 London. Captain Plumb was obvi- masts, length 68 feet, breadth 21 ously profiting from the trade as on feet and 1/2 inch and depth 12 feet 22nd March 1842 he became a 3 inches, rigged as a snow with a part owner of the vessel when he standing bow sprit, square stern, bought the eight shares that had carvel built with no gallery and a belonged to Phoebe Digby.10 female bust. The 64 shares were owned by Thomas Beckwith, clerk, wo years later, when he was from Cley (32), Marjorie Moore, 51, Francis Plumb left the widow, from Cley (16), John T ‘Ann’ after five years as her Copeman, butcher, from Cley (8) master. He sold his shares in the and Phoebe Digby (wife of John vessel on February 29th 1844, to Digby, shoemaker) from Cley (8).7 Robert Mann and a new master This was obviously the vessel in was appointed. The ‘Ann’ contin- the painting, the only discrepancy ued to be registered at Cley until in the description being that the 1847, although she is unlikely to registers record her as being rigged have traded from that port. The as a snow. However, the two rigs appointment of a new master at

18 Newcastle in August 1847 was fol- his claims on the vessel ‘Susannah’ lowed in the December of that year are satisfied and the mortgage can- with the ‘Ann’ being re-registered celled.”13 at Workington.11 Francis Plumb must have con- Plumb apparently wanted a tinued fishing from Blakeney. He change in direction. He had made is recorded in the 1847 Poll book enough money to consider buying as living in Cley but was not men- his own vessel and was weary of a tioned in the 1852 Poll book, life away from home. He wanted to although James Plumb was still in be based in his home port and so Blakeney. By the time of the 1851 decided to pursue a career as a Census, (aged 58), his occupation fisherman. In November 1844, was still given as fisherman and he nine months after leaving the ‘Ann’, was still living in Blakeney, though he purchased the sloop perhaps by now he was in semi- ‘Susannah’, built at Blakeney in retirement with a younger relative 1822. In 1833 she was registered in charge of the fishing. He may at Cley (and recorded as being of have died shortly after this and 23 tons) belonging to Thomas certainly by 1865 when the William Temple. Later that year ‘Susannah’ was re-registered at she was sold to Robert Vince jnr. of Southampton.14, 15 Blakeney and Mark Cullingford of London, who held the majority of the shares, until she was bought References by Francis Plumb.12 The ‘Susannah’ was re-registered 1. C. Lewis, Pierhead Paintings; Ship Portraits from East Anglia, Norfolk at Cley in April 1845 (this time Museums Services, 1982 p9. recorded as 19 tons) with Francis 2. D Brook-Hart, Marine Painting, Plumb, fisherman, as master. The Antique Collectors Club, ownership at this date seems a lit- Woodbridge p17. 3. R Finch, The Ship Painters, Terrence tle confused. Plumb must have Dalton Lavenham, 1975 p24-5. had some financial difficulties as 4. C. Lewis, op cit. p10. the vessel had been mortgaged to 5. R Finch, op cit. p49-50. John Ransome, gentleman, of Holt 6. H. H. Archibald, The Dictionary of Sea Painters of Europe and America, in January of that year. It is not 3rd Ed., Antique Collectors Club, clear when Francis Plumb regained Woodbridge, 2000 p163. the ownership, but in 1848, a note 7. NRO P/SH/L/10 No 8, 1839. in the Registers states that Henry 8. M. Stammers, personal communica tion. Starling Ransome, as executor for 9. 1841 Census, PRO: HO/107/776. the estate, of the now deceased 10. NRO P/SH/L/10 No 8, 1839. John Ransome, “has transferred all 11. NRO P/SH/L/10 No 8, 1839. his rights to Francis Plumb of 12. R Kelham, Some gleanings from the Ship Registers, The Glaven Blakeney”. Also, during 1848, Historian No.3, 2000 p157. Plumb used the vessel as security 13. NRO P/SH/L/10 No 2, 1845. in borrowing £45 plus interest from 14. 1851 Census, PRO: HO/107/1826. William Cooke of Glandford. This 15. NRO P/SH/L/10 No 2, 1845. was only a temporary measure as another note in the Registers records Cooke as stating “that all

19 Reminiscences of the Glaven Valley: Care of the Dying and the Dead in the First 50 years of the 20th Century by Monica White

Synopsis: an account of local nurs- The nurse was based at Cley and ing and funeral practices in the first was a familiar figure, dressed in a half of the 20th century with refer- royal-blue uniform with a blue pill- ence to the customs and personali- box hat perched on her head, rid- ties as recalled by some of the peo- ing round the villages on a heavy, ple who lived in the Glaven villages upright, bicycle. One of the first at that time and was collected by nurses, if not the first, was Nurse the author at the suggestion of the Flatt who married three times, present Rector, the Rev. Philip becoming in turn Nurse Weston Norwood. and Nurse Docking. She seems to have been a woman of consider- uring the first half of the able character who is remembered last century most people with respect rather than with affec- Ddied in their own homes. tion. Many young women whom Few died in nursing homes or hos- she attended when they had their pitals, although during the first children were said to be terrified of three decades some, usually the her. very poorest, died in the institutes Nursing services, like all other (or workhouses) at Walsingham medical services at the time, were and Gressenhall. Before the dis- not free. Indeed they seem to have covery of antibiotics and the devel- been surprisingly expensive. As opment of modern surgical tech- with doctors’ practices, there was a niques, there was little medical club or fund into which small sums help for the chronically sick or of money could be paid each week, dying. Often all that could be done to be used when necessary. The was to alleviate their pain and money was collected by a woman make them comfortable. This could in the local community. But, dur- be done at home and so it was in ing the first half of the 20th the home that most dying people Century, incomes in North Norfolk were cared for. were low and often seasonal. Many There was some professional people could not afford to save on a nursing help available from nurs- regular basis. Even those who ing agencies based in Norwich and could seem to have preferred to use Cambridge and, after 1920, from the District Nursing Service only the District Nursing Service. This for childbirth care, or for nursing Service, which was instituted, I during short, acute illnesses. Few believe, soon after the end of the could afford to pay for nursing help 1914-18 war, was operational in for the chronically sick or for the North Norfolk in the early 1920s. dying.

20 The nurse was, however, always leave their jobs, or even their own willing to advise patients without children, to return home to nurse making a charge. Janet Harcourt, elderly parents. Most women seem for example, remembers being told to have done this with good grace, that soon after her birth her par- perhaps partly out of respect and ents became concerned about her love for their parents, but, perhaps, health. So her father saddled a also because they realised there horse and rode from Wiveton to was no alternative. But others Cley to ask the nurse for her resented the necessity to return advice. She gave it willingly and home and the consequent loss of freely. A number of other people financial independence. recalled being told of similar inci- There was help and support dents. from the local communities. The Nevertheless, the burden of rector, or vicar, and his wife made nursing care for the dying fell on regular visits to the dying and the families, and it must have been sometimes gave material help. The a considerable burden for many. doctor called, often waiving his fee, Cottages were small and families, and gave reassurance. Within each until well into the 1930s, were village there were women, often the large, often consisting of three gen- unmarried women from the more erations. Beds were shared as a well-to-do families, who took an matter of course, and most, if not interest in those most needing all, rooms were used as sleeping help. They provided luxuries for the quarters. Labour-saving domestic dying, particularly if they were chil- appliances were scarce, and, in any dren. Neighbours helped to care for case, few homes had electricity children; provided hot meals; work- before the mid 1930s and many ed on the allotments; and, perhaps, not until after 1945. No houses most importantly, would sit with were connected to the mains water the dying. It was considered wholly and sewage systems, until after the wrong that anyone should die 1953 floods. Before that, in many alone and unattended, so this was homes, water had to be pumped up a most valuable service. When it by hand from communal wells. All was clear that death was imminent toilet facilities were outside. It relatives, friends and neighbours must have been difficult to care would come to the house to share adequately for both the healthy the vigil over the dying person. and for the chronically sick or dying. It is probably for this reason that a significant, though small, Author’s note: It is perhaps easy to number of people, mostly the elder- overstress the amount of help and ly, spent their last few months at support given by local communities Walsingham or Gressenhall where, fifty or more years ago. People tend incidentally, they were unlikely to to remember particular incidents, have received medical care. not what happened most of the Very often the need to give the time. But it does seem that there dying continuous care and nursing were many people ready to lend a meant that couples with young hand and share in the care of the families had to welcome sick rela- dying and that, in the past, the com- tives into their own homes. munity did supply much of the care Sometimes, young women had to now given by professionals.

21 Care of the Dead a small bag of coal, or wood, a loaf of bread, or produce from an allot- hen a death occurred, ment. But most often she was preparations for the given clothes or effects of the W funeral took place within deceased which she then sold. the home. The body was not taken However she did sometimes receive away to a chapel of rest. It would cash. One summer, for example seem from the recollections of the soon after the 1939-45 war an old oldest in our communities, who gentleman died on Blakeney Point. recall stories told them by their His body, wrap-ped in a tarpaulin, parents and grandparents, that was rowed to Morston Quay by Ted during the 19th Century each fami- Eales, the Warden. On the quay the ly laid out their own dead. It was body was transferred to the back of the family who prepared the body a builder’s van, and taken to an to be coffined, and young children outbuilding attached to the gentle- were expected to help. But by man’s home in Blakeney High 1900, or probably a little before, Street. It was there that Dinah laid there were women in each village out the body and she was given the who were willing to undertake this loose change in the old man’s task for the families. In Wiveton pockets. Gladys believes that this and Cley there seem to have been a was the custom when someone number of such women during the died unexpectedly, not in their bed. first years of the 20th Century, but Dinah washed the body, dressed after 1920 the task was usually it, combed the hair, weighted down done by the District Nurse or by the eye-lids with old pennies, and members of the Red Cross. In did all the other tasks necessary to Blakeney, too, there were several prepare the body to be laid in the women ready to lay out the dead, coffin so that it could be viewed by including Mrs Daglish from Temple neighbours and friends. The Place who was the local midwife. deceased was dressed in a shroud But there was one woman above all or in clothes chosen by their fami- who was willing to turn out at any ly. The shroud consisted of a long time of the day or night to prepare white cotton or linen gown, rather the body to be placed in the coffin. like a nightgown, and white knitted This was Mrs Dinah Jackson who, stockings. In the early years of the together with her sister (who century it sometimes also included moved out of the district when she a white cap or bonnet and white married) learnt the art of caring for slippers. the dead from her mother. Dinah The shroud, if provided by the was a woman of character who is undertaker, represented a signifi- remembered with affection by all cant part of the cost of a funeral, who knew her, even those who only so most people made or acquired a knew her when, as children, they shroud during their lifetime, when saw her pushing an old pram up they could afford it. The shroud and down Blakeney High Street. was then wrapped in cloth and put Dinah was rarely given money away until it was needed. for her services; she was mostly Funeral expenses were a great paid in kind. Gladys Jackson, worry for many people, particularly Dinah’s daughter, born in 1903, for the elderly who did not wish the remembers her mother being given cost of the funeral to fall upon their

22 families. So most saved regularly sheds or cottages in the villages. throughout their life. Some took They were made from solid wood out life insurance for themselves, and lined with cloth. The quality and often, also, for their children. and type of wood and cloth used The insurance man was here, as depended on how much the family well as over most of the country, a could afford, but all had brass familiar sight on his weekly or handles and breastplate on which monthly visits to the villages to col- the name and age were engraved. lect the premiums. Those who Coffins were usually plain and the could not afford to take out a poli- lining very simple, but one woman cy put money aside when they recalls seeing a coffin lined with could. The money was given to a white velvet and with a pillow of reliable neighbour or hidden in the white flowers. She was only about house, surprisingly often under the seven years old at the time (in mattress. The state gave no money about 1926) and does not recall tow-ards funeral costs until the whose funeral it was. She believes early 1920s when Lloyd George that it was that of a young woman. introduced a death grant of £50. In In the early part of the century many parts of the country the coffins were not made for the desti- grant was known as “a Lloyd- tute. Instead their bodies were George” but I do not know if that shrouded and wrapped in material, was the case here. but this practice became rare after There were no specialist under- the end of World War I. takers in the coastal strip of North After the body was placed in it, and Northwest Norfolk until the the coffin was taken to a down- late 1950s. Local builders or boat- stairs room. The lid of the coffin builders doubled as undertakers, was not screwed down until the and it was the builder’s men who morning of the funeral, unless the organised the funerals and bore nature of the illness which had led the coffins from the house to the to the death made it necessary. church and from the church to the Instead, the lid was laid on the cof- grave. There were two firms locally fin and removed when friends and – Meadows-Grimes at Wiveton and neighbours called to view the body Starlings in Blakeney. They served and to pay their last respects. a wide area – Blakeney, Cley, When visitors came the drapes cov- Glandford, Hindringham, ering the face and body were folded Langham, Morston, Salthouse, back. Quite young children were Stiffkey and Wiveton, and even as taken to see the dead. One woman far as Burnham Market. As soon as remembers that when she was six possible after a death had occur- or seven years old she was taken red, the builder/undertaker’s men by her mother to see the body of were called to the house to meas- the old lady next door, a great ure the body so that a coffin could friend of the family. She felt no fear be made. Although pre-formed or apprehension, but she remem- coffins and coffin-packs were avail- bers clearly that the old lady able in big cities in the early 20th looked beautiful in a blue dress Century, none seem to have been and with her grey hair neatly used here until the 1960s. Coffins curled, and she still recalls the were made to measure, so to feeling of peace and tranquillity in speak, in the builders’ yards, in the room.

23 The stairs of many cottages at remembered going into the that time were steep, narrow, and Guildhall on their way to school in often twisty, so it could be very dif- a high state of excitement, alth- ficult to carry a coffin down these ough whether they were hoping to stairs and many subterfuges were see a dead body, or a skeleton, or a resorted to. Sylvia Claxton remem- ghost they cannot now recall. bers that one day, on her way to Sometimes coffins were placed in school, she saw a coffin being low- the north porch of Blakeney ered through an upstairs window Church (and probably in the of a house in Blakeney High Street. porches of other churches in the If it proved impossible to get the area). The porch was ideal for the coffin downstairs, one of the men purpose. It was cool, could be would take the family into a down- locked, had a grill for ventilation, stairs room, shut the door and dis- and was not used as an entrance cuss details of the funeral arrange- to the church. A number of people ments with them, while his col- recalled that the porch was used in leagues manhandled the body this way, but not why. Some sug- down wrapped in a blanket, often gested that it was done if the in a most undignified way. The deceased had no near relatives in men preferred to do this soon after the village; others that the bodies the death had occurred before the were those of people whose family onset of rigor mortis. The problem could not afford a funeral; others was so serious that people some- that it was due to the nature of the times brought the dying person fatal illness. downstairs in the days immediately There were many customs that before their death. This was partic- were observed following a death. ularly so if the sick person was Gladys Jackson told me that her unusually tall or heavy. mother opened a window as soon Usually the coffin was placed in as she entered the room where the a room that was rarely used, but in dead person lay, to speed the exit many homes this was impossible. of the spirit from the body. No-one One woman who was seven years else mentioned this custom. old when her mother died, remem- Perhaps the family did not know bers that the coffin was put on the that Dinah did this. The curtains table in the kitchen-cum-living in the room where the death had room. She asked her father if it occurred and, later, in the room could not be taken to the church. where the coffin lay, were drawn as He replied that it was her mother’s a mark of respect for the dead. It home and that she would remain was also a signal to the neighbours in it until she was taken to her that the sick person had died. In final resting place. some houses, the curtains in all But although the coffin was rooms facing the road were drawn. usually kept in the home until the As soon as possible after the day, or the eve, of the funeral there death the church bell was rung to were times when coffins were tell of the passing of a christian placed elsewhere. Bodies that were soul. It tolled a measured stroke washed up on the beach or marsh- for each year of life of the deceased. es were put in coffins in Blakeney Many people described, most mov- Guildhall, while attempts were ingly, how they would stop whatev- made to identify them. Many er they were doing in the home,

24 street or field, and listen to the North and Northwest Norfolk at the news told by the bell. In many time. There are many amusing sto- parts of the country the bell ries associated with the “Brancast- announced the death of a parish- er Girls”. Once, for example, the ioner by a peal of three times three girls were working in a grave close for a man, or three times two for a to a stone tomb. While they were woman. These were followed by the busy the grave-diggers rapped on years of the dead person. Dorothy the tomb. The girls were startled Sayer’s novel, “The Nine Tailors” and rather frightened, particularly suggests that this was the custom when the men said that they had in the fenlands of East Anglia, but not heard anything. When the no-one can remember whether it grave-diggers rapped a second happened here. The custom of time, the girls shot out of the grave ringing the church bell was discon- and refused to go down again. The tinued in 1939 when the pealing of turf had to be pulled up and church bells was to be a signal that spread on the ground before the an invasion had occurred and was girls would return to their work. not renewed after the war. There were areas in the church- yards purchased by particular fam- Graves – Burials – Funerals ilies. Generally, wealthier parish- ioners were buried on the south lthough the first crematori- side of the church; the poorer um was opened in London members of the parish on the north A in the early 1920s, locally side. But this was not invariable. almost everyone was buried, not When the rector’s wife, Mrs Lee- cremated, and most were buried in Elliott died in 1936 she asked to be a churchyard, not in a cemetery. buried on the north side because Before the 1930s the graves were “there are no poor or rich in the dug by the sexton, perhaps assist- sight of God”. Paradoxically she ed by the builder/undertaker’s asked for her coffin to be made by men. After this time, and particu- a specialist undertaker in Norwich. larly after 1940, the graves were Ted Grimes who organised the dug by the undertaker’s men. The funeral maintained that it was of graves were lined with real turf, not very inferior quality compared with artificial grass or baize. Sometimes a locally made coffin. the turf was studded with flowers There does not seem to have provided and put in place by the been a special area set aside for the “Brancaster Girls”. After the early destitute who could not afford to 1920s these were Girl Guides from pay for a funeral. This is very dif- the company run by Lady Cory ferent from large cities which, until Wright in Brancaster. Lady Cory the death grant, had paupers’ Wright was a keen and very skilled graves – large, shallow graves gardener and she had a plot of land which held many bodies. Such in Brancaster on which she grew burials were often not properly flowers for sale. She supplied her recorded. No-one could remember own florist’s shop in Burlington who paid, locally, for the funerals Arcade, off Piccadilly, in London, of the destitute, although it was and flowers for local funerals and suggested that the rector or vicar weddings. She was, I believe, the did so himself. only commercial flower grower in Funerals took place, for obvious

25 reasons, as soon as possible after back steered them. The undertak- death, usually within three days. If er walked in front of the bier from this was not possible, the coffin the home to the church. was lined with lead and securely Although biers were used for sealed. For example, the body of a most funerals, the coffins of the German sailor was washed up on more wealthy families – the farmers the shore at Blakeney soon after and the gentry – were carried to the end of the 1939-45 war. It was church on a horse-drawn hearse, placed in a coffin in the Guildhall which was drawn by regular car- and arrangements made for the riage horses, not by the special jet- funeral. On the morning of the black horses used in big cities. The funeral the body was identified by hearse moved at a walking pace, the German Embassy. Mr Starling preceded by the undertaker. As arranged for the coffin to be lined early as 1926 motor hearses were with lead and sealed, and the coffin used very occasionally to carry was driven down to Felixstowe on coffins from distant villages or the first leg of the its journey to the towns, particularly when the men man’s home in Germany. employed were not of the village. The coffins were conveyed to the The bier or hearse was followed church in a number of different by a procession of relatives and ways. Ted Grimes’ grandfather friends, men and women, dressed could remember a time, at the end in black. Most people had black of the 19th Century when a coffin clothes, put aside to be used at was carried from the home to the funerals, but black garments were church on the shoulders of four often borrowed, particularly by the bearers, accompanied by two men poorer families. As the procession carrying stools. Every now and moved through the village people then, the stools were placed on the would come to their doors and ground and the coffin lowered on to stand in silence. The men would them to give the bearers a rest. doff their hats. Anyone who was in Round about 1900 each of the the street as the procession passed churches in the area, with the would do the same. Vehicles on the exception of Glandford Church, road would stop or drop behind the acquired a wheeled bier or bier car- procession and proceed at the riage. These were used to bear the funeral walking pace. They would coffins from the home to the not overtake. The blinds or cur- church for the funeral and from tains of windows facing the road the church to the grave. Glandford were often drawn. It was almost as Church used the bier belonging to if the whole village was in Cley Church. The biers were slat- mourning. ted rectangular frames mounted on The coffins were often carried four wheels with a steering handle through paths rather than along or device at the back. A coffin was the main roads. This was particu- held in place by leather or canvas larly true of Cley where coffins straps. The biers were made by were carried from the Coast Road local craftsmen and vary consider- to the Fairstead through the ably in shape and quality of work- grounds of Hall Farm, and it was manship. They were pushed (or commonly believed that if a path pulled up hills) by four men, two was used by bearers carrying a cof- on each side. A fifth man at the fin it became a legal right-of-way.

26 At Blakeney and Cley the coffin Many of the pre-war customs dis- was taken to the Great West Door appeared, so by the mid 1970s and carried through it into the funerals were very similar to those church while a muffled bell was of today, with the community tolled. Many of those who were involved in only the very last act – choir members during the first 50 that of the funeral service. years of the last century and so were involved in many funerals, Author’s note: This account is nec- cannot recall that sound without a essarily an incomplete one, partly shiver. The atmosphere was because the events described hap- intense and very moving. pened a long time ago when the The coffin remained on the bier people I talked to were young, and throughout the funeral service. partly because the memories Then it was either wheeled from recalled depended on the questions the church to the grave, or carried I asked, and I only discovered what on the shoulders of the bearers. questions I needed to ask as the After the ceremony at the grave- study proceeded. But I hope that it side, the mourners returned to the does give a picture, however incom- house of the deceased for refresh- plete, of the way in which the dying ments. The bearers were invited and dead were cared for 50 or more back and were given some beer as years ago. a token of gratitude. The care of the dying and the dead changed gradually during the Acknowledgements: first 50 years of the last century, but the rate of change was acceler- am most grateful to all those ated by the Second World War and who gave me their time and who the subsequent changes in society. Ianswered my questions so The National Health Service and patiently and particularly to the improved health care meant that following: people lived longer and often died in hospital or residential home. In Mick Adcock the mid 1950s Starling’s funeral Ivy Arundel business was taken over by Mr Harry Bishop Sutton, a specialist undertaker, of Margaret Butler Stiffkey – later of Wells – and in the Sylvia Claxton early 1970s Grimes sold his busi- Harry Cory Wright ness to the same man. Suttons Ann Fenn opened a chapel of rest at Wells Mary Ferroussat and bodies could be taken there Marjorie Gray soon after death. The body was Janet Harcourt carried from there to the church by Gladys Jackson motor hearse, though for many Mary Newman years Sutton would, if asked, take Audrey Preston the coffin to the home of the Tony Preston deceased, and then get out and Barry Thompson walk in front of the hearse for about a hundred yards in respect for the dead. Mourners drove to the church in their own vehicles.

27 A Family of Substance George Brigge of Wiveton and his relatives

Pamela Peake

Synopsis: the brass memorials for there was little space for the ‘fami- George and Anne Brigge and the ly’, and children became adults at earlier cadaver are the starting a very early age.1 While such a points for exploring this family that characterisation of the family may held a manor in Wiveton, now appear rather strange to us today, known as Wiveton Brigges, yet it does identify some of the impor- seemingly never lived in the parish. tant themes that must have exer- Early colour is provided by wills cised the minds not only of George from the 16th century, highlighting Brigge, the key player in this paper, a family of substance with property but also his family before him. It across the county. They were also draws attention to the time- essentially medieval in outlook scale in which he was living, the where values of honour, integrity of 16th century in Tudor England at an inheritance and the permanence the very end of the medieval period of the name were paramount. and beginning of the early modern. Nowhere is this more clearly seen George Brigge who lived at Old than in George Brigge’s will, while Hall, the ‘big house’, was according his memorial is a lasting legacy to to the taxation lists of 1592, the the family. chief landowner in Letheringsett replacing the Heydons and particu- Introduction larly William Heydon who died the following year. He had only recent- he nature and structure of ly moved to Letheringsett from the family has changed and Guist where his immediate family T evolved over many genera- had lived for some time. Although tions and is not always easy to Cozens-Hardy describes him as a define. It has been argued that the man of substance, often called family as we know it, where the upon for assistance by those in intimate and private relations financial straits, there is no evi- between parents and children are dence that he ever held public or important values, only arose in the political office, although he was early modern period. Prior to this linked to those who did.2 the important features were Consequently he escapes atten- “Honour of the line, the integrity of tion in Hassell Smith’s seminal an inheritance or the age and per- account of government and politics manence of a name”.1 At the same in Elizabethan Norfolk.3 He is an time the ‘big house’ would have exemplar of a level of society below identified a certain social stratum, the level of gentry – the minor gen- it would have been the place where try or ‘middling sort’ – who as Lord people met, talked, did business of at least three Manors held power and socialised and consequently at a local level.

28 As might be anticipated there was the custom, that is, inheri- are no surviving family archives, so tance by the eldest son and when how do we paint a picture of there is no male heir, daughters George Brigge, a man immortalised inheriting as co heirs.4 It was by a superb portrait brass of him- made at Old Hall, now Hall Farm self with his wife in Wiveton Letheringsett, on 22nd February Church and whose family gave its 1597/98, just three days before he surname to a manor, Wiveton died, a most complicated document Brigges? Although ironically George addressing the issues that were insisted on calling it the ‘Manor of troubling him at that time.5 It was Wiveton’. Indeed this was a man of presented before the Prerogative substance, who was concerned Court of Canterbury and the with his place in history and whose Norfolk Consistory Court and even- family had held substantial parcels tually confirmed at the latter, 4th of land in Cley, Wiveton and November 1598, having been Letheringsett for some two hun- proved earlier on 16th March dred years since 1401. 1597/98 when probate was grant- There are only a few surviving ed to his widow, Anne Brigge. documents that provide any clues Foremost he wanted to ensure to the nature of the man, the two that his Manor of Wiveton and all most important being his will and of his other properties in Wiveton, that of his wife Anne. Additional Glandford and Bayfield or else- clues to his background are provid- where within the County, not ed by his brass and shield, as this already bequeathed, stayed within throws open the door on his the immediate family and that the antecedents, and their activities Brigge surname continued to be begin to shed light on each other. associated with them. He did this Then through the actions of his in the certain knowledge that his daughters it is possible to follow youngest daughter Sara, as yet the fate of some of the ancestral unmarried, had formed what he lands as they pass out of the fami- considered an unsuitable attrac- ly. Undoubtedly the paucity of the tion to John Jenkinson, a local records ensures a number of gaps man who was not to his liking and in this account, but it is a story not suitable for the honour of the worth recording given the impor- family. tance of the Brigge family in the His eldest daughter Margaret history of Wiveton. had already made an advantageous marriage with William Hunt, son George Brigge, “a man of and heir of Thomas Hunt of Foulsham, a notable family in the his time” (Figs 1 and 2) area with extensive land holdings. Last of the Line Previous negotiations with Thomas Hunt are alluded to in the will and he will of George Brigge pro- indicate that a marriage settlement vides an important insight had already been made or agreed, T into this Elizabethan man, it whereby the Manor of Callis in establishes a context and repre- Guestwick would pass to Margaret sents his views at a moment in and William after the death of her time when death was nigh. He mother. This would complement wrote his will when primogeniture the holdings the Hunts already

29 Figure 1. Brass memorial for George and Figure 2. George Brigge. detail from the Anne Brigge in Wiveton Church (rubbing by brass memorial. Kenneth Allen, mid 1900s). held and exclude the Glaven “utterly forfeit void and of none lands. effect”. His instructions were then This type of will, where a new emphatic “Whereas I have had a line of succession was named, was purpose and desire of long time if it known as an entail. It was a device please God to match Sara Brigg used to break existing lines and with Erasmus Brigg the eldest son transfer ownership of a property of Thomas Brigg of Lowestoft in the that was predetermined by law.6 County of Suffolk”, in other words The new line was to be through his Sara should marry Erasmus, her nephew, Erasmus, and his second cousin. If this marriage nephew’s male heirs. However by failed to take place then Erasmus the end of the 16th century, entails Brigge was to inherit Sara’s share were becoming unattractive to and his male heirs and for want of recipients because conditions were issue then it was to pass to his often attached, while lawyers and younger brother William and his courts were also finding ways of male heirs and for want of his breaking them for the disinherited issue, then and only then, Sara family. and her heirs or kindred nominees George was consumed with anx- providing she had married a person iety about the loss of the Brigge agreeable to his wife and that it name for the Manor of Wiveton and was not under any circumstances equally determined to put every John Jenkinson! For Sara, “should obstacle in Sara’s way. Clause after she be persuaded to consent pri- clause covered every conceivable vately or publickly to any contract eventuality. This was censure in of marriage with one John full operation and George was Jenkinson or to any secret agree- being true to his time in taking this ment whereby he may be benefited action, as 16th century family or relieved” was to be disinherited behaviour was characterised by and all her bequests were to be strong elements of deference, patri- 30 archy and authoritarianism. The venture is not recorded but George power of a father over a daughter left instructions in case his was not questioned and the rights Executor was driven to pay his por- of a child to select their own tion and so bequeathed all interest spouse were often strictly circum- and title of this land to his wife and scribed. Marriage was a contract to her heirs. This was a considerable protect property, personal feelings amount of money that could not be counted for little.6 Cozens-Hardy ignored. attributed modern sentiment when The Heydons and Brigges were he suggested that Sara was a diffi- well acquainted having exchanged cult daughter! Nonetheless one and purchased lands from each begins to see the determination other in the previous generation. that was characteristic of both Edward Brigge, George’s father, father and daughter. He was the had made an alternative bequest in product of his medieval upbringing his will to his younger son Edward where values of family honour in case, as he feared with good rea- came before self and expressions of son, Sir Christopher Heydon might feelings.2 claim fourteen and a half acres in He then made due provision of Guestwick that were destined for dower for his widow for the rest of Edward when he came of age5. her life as was custom which Then, rather tellingly George, included the foldcourses and liber- unlike his father and grandfather, ties of foldage for the Wiveton and left £4 be distributed to the poor of Glandford flocks. These rights were Wiveton, Blakeney, Glandford and an essential requisite for successful Letheringsett. Not Wood Norton sheep-corn husbandry on the light where he had been brought up as a sandy soils of coastal North Norfolk child, nor neighbouring Guist and increasingly zealously guarded where he had started family life by Lords of the Manor during the with his wife and children. latter half of the 16th century. Another sign of his determination The extent and regard for the to identify himself with the Glaven remainder of his family can be seen Valley and Wiveton in particular. with an annuity granted to his His will followed the custom of brother Edward, small bequests to the time and he was exercising all his married sisters and their chil- the rights of a late medieval head dren and finally instructions for his of family. George Brigge died 25th wife to provide for the feeding and February 1597/98, presumably at clothing of his sister Mary for the Old Hall, and was buried the next remainder of her life. Mary Brigge day in Wiveton Church.7 was subsequently buried at Wiveton, 30th July 1616, the last Anne Brigge, his widow (Fig, 3) Brigge by name of this line to appear in the Wiveton registers.7 ne has to wonder how Anne George wrestled with yet anoth- viewed her husband’s will, er problem which was the matter of Oboth as an obedient and a debt for “£800 odd” which he and compliant wife, whilst he was still Robert Stileman of Field Dalling alive, and then as a mother, when had stood surety for when Sir she was widowed and freed from Christopher Heydon had mortgaged his constraints. She made her will some land. The outcome of this in 1616,5 when her sentiments

31 Her will was highly irregular in many respects. First it was signed without witnesses then a codicil was added, witnessed but not signed. Secondly and more surpris- ingly, Anne was making a state- ment that quite clearly contradict- ed her husband’s intent, and more- over, in the knowledge that she had already rendered the property in Wiveton to her late husband’s executor, although probably retain- ing the use of it for her lifetime. This was done in 1604, shortly after Sara came of age and married and presumably this was Sara’s inheritance which she had forfeited Figure 3. Anne Brigge, detail from the by her actions. brass memorial. The sequence of events that fol- lowed are confusing as there is no became abundantly clear for she clear evidence. Anne had property not only appointed John Jenkinson and wealth in her own right that Gent. as her sole executor but also was hers to disperse to family and left the “Manor of Wiveton with the servants, but what had she hoped appurtenances to him and to his to gain by writing John Jenkinson heirs for ever”. In addition Anne left and the Manor of Wiveton into her property to Sara’s eldest son, Brigg will? Possibly in an age where Jenkinson and his heirs that was emphasis was placed on honour, to pass to his younger brother Anne was making in her will a pub- Henry if there were no heirs and lic statement showing her accept- then onto the three daughters of ance and approval of the marriage Sara. This property was described and singling out John Jenkinson as “one Tenement or Messuage by making him the sole executor of called Bases with barn, dove hous- her will. It suggests that, at least, es and Crofts thereunto adioyninge in the years since George’s death, situate and beinge in the Town of this part of the family was united. Wiveton”. Anne Brigge was buried in Anne, Elizabeth and Sara Wiveton Church on 18th July Jenkinson, Sara’s three daughters, 1616, just twelve days before her were left substantial sums of sister-in-law, Mary Brigge.7 money, whilst Anne was also to have “one chest of Linninge stand- The Elizabethan brass ing in the lible parlor and one bedd (Figs 1, 4 and 6) standinge in the parlor full fur- nished as it stand to have at the he status of the family is dayt and day of her marriage”. In graphically demonstrated by stark contrast, Margaret Hunt’s T the unique portrait brass three daughters were left a house that commemorates George and in Wiveton, Dawbers, the grand- Anne Brigge, this is monumental sons, nothing. art, the finest surviving portrait of

32 Figure 4. Family Arms: from left to right they are, Brigge, Cocket, Johnson, then George Brigge’s Arms, quartered with Johnson and Cocket (F Hawes, 2003). a civilian couple in the Holt Each effigy measures 32.5 inch- Hundred complete with shield. es tall by 12 inches wide and both Figure 1 shows a rubbing of the are standing on cushions with brass without the shield while in hands together in prayer and are Figure 6 it can be seen positioned depicted in fashionable centre top, between the effigies of Elizabethan dress of the day. George and Anne. The brass makes George wears a loose gown with a powerful statement about George hanging sleeves, doublet and hose Brigge’s view of wealth and his underneath and the ruff around position in society. his neck; Anne is dressed in a far- The brass was made in the thingale with stomacher, ruff and workshop of Garat Johnson in brocaded petticoat and on her Southwark, (south of the River head, a small cap with the hint of a Thames) 1597/98 and in addition widow’s veil at the back. to the two portraits and shield, The shield has the arms of the there is an engraved plate with a Brigge family quartered with the brief biography.9 Originally, these Johnson arms for his wife who brasses were designed to be set on was, Anne Johnson, the daughter top of a raised tomb for in 1614 it of George Johnson, and the Cocket is described thus “The tombe where arms for his mother who was, Mr Brigges was buried in the Katherine Cocket, the daughter of chansell where the high alter stood Edward Cocket.8 This is George is to be taken down and the grave Brigge’s pedigree, his lineage for all stone to be laid even with the to see and a reminder of advanta- ground”.10 This placed the original geous family alliances made by tomb in the most prominent posi- himself and his father. tion imaginable, for parishioners The various arms (Fig.4) are would look to the altar and be described as follows, where argent reminded of him. It must have is silver, sable is black and or is looked magnificent, as the brasses gold. The Brigge arms: Argent, were also originally coloured. three owls sable beaked and legged Today the memorial is nearby the or; the Johnson arms: Or a water chancel arch and laid flush with bouget sable on a chief of the sec- the floor. The brasses were set in a ond, three bezants or, and the new sandstone base in 1977, Cocket arms: Per bend Argent and replacing an older, much damaged Sable three Fleur-de-lis in bend and cracked slab of Purbeck counter charged. Marble.9 33 Generations of Lords

1William = Catherine

2 Thomas I = Joan William Brigge Rector

3 John

4 Thomas II = Isabel Russell

5Edward = Katherine Cocket Thomas III William = Margaret Bevis

6 George = Anne Johnson Edward Thomas IV

Margaret = William Hunt Sara = John Erasmus William Jenkinson

Sir Cloudesley Shovell

Figure 5. Lords of the Manor: the six generations of Brigge to hold the Lordship of Wiveton Brigges, with other key members of the family.

The Antecedents (Figs 5 & 6) and the rectors appointed by them and this was elaborated further by he origins of the family are Linnell8 who identified John Brigge far from clear, but various as the missing third generation in T authors have suggested a the succession. This information is link with the Brigges of Salle, summarised here in Figure 5. sometime towards the end of the Interestingly one of the very few 14th century.11 Brygges or Atte pieces of documentation regarding Brygge, as they were then styled, William Brigge is found in the appear in this area, first in Holt Close Rolls of 1406 which refer to then a little later in both Cley and him as “William Brigge, Steward of Wiveton. Thomas Brygge of ‘pilgrim Clay co. Norfolk” when he, Lady fame’ from Holt may even have Roos and her bailiff were ordered been a brother of William Brygge, to return to John Valence and the first Brygge to be recorded in Robert Valence their ship together Wiveton in 1401 as Lord of the with all the contents that had been Manor. This manor extended impounded when the vessel was across the marsh and into Cley and blown ashore during a gale.13 had been created from Stafford Within twenty years William was lands.12 dead and it was Catherine his Blomefield12 identified the suc- widow who became the first mem- cession of six generations of the ber of the family to present to the Brigge family to hold the Lordship living of Wiveton, the Advowson of the Manor of Wiveton Brigges having been acquired by her hus-

34 Figure 6. Interior of Wiveton Church looking towards the altar, showing position of brasses with the Cadaver in the foreground, William Bisshop Rector in the chancel beyond, and George and Anne Brigge’s memorial to the left. band some time after 1417. Hakon, a wealthy ship owner of Catherine presented Edward Hunt Wiveton left 200 marks in his Will in 1426 and then her son, William to build a new church for Wiveton. Brigge the following year.12 By all accounts building was rapid, The brothers Thomas I and the church being completed with- William, sons of William and out major interruption. Catherine Brigge, Lord of the The new church in Wiveton Manor and Rector respectively, faced Cley not across the present were pivotal to developments in day meadows but over the busy Wiveton during the middle years of medieval harbour and it must have the 15th century for this was a been built at about the time Cley period of great activity in the Church was completed. The latter parish, indeed for the whole of the had begun a hundred years earlier lower Glaven. By 1435 a new nave and came to a halt before work was had been built for St Nicholas in resumed in the middle of the 15th Blakeney, then in 1437, John century, maybe even stimulated by 35 watching St. Mary rise on the oppo- site bank. The three churches attest to the prosperity of the Haven and provide a glimpse of the activity and populace of the time. Wealth, prosperity, merchants from near and far, trade both coastal and overseas, this was the arena that the Brigge brothers, Thomas I and William, were operating in. Then in 1445, Thomas Brigge I made a gift to his brother, William Brigge chaplain, for the duration of his life of £4 yearly to be taken from the following lands that he held in Norfolk, namely: “Poors”, a piece of ground in Letherynsete (Letheringsett), C[l]okwode in Cleye (Cley), Godewyns in Eggefelde (Edgefield) and Caleyshalle in Guestwith (Guestwick). This was witnessed by William Yelverton the King’s justice, John Bacon esquire and John Heydon and followed by a Memorandum of acknowledge- ment by the parties on 18th November, 1468.13 Clokwode in Cley and Callis Hall in Guestwick together with Wiveton Brigges were core assets that remained central to the family’s income until the sev- Figure 7. The Cadaver brass. enteenth century, when all were eventually lost. Presumably Thomas I was pro- iting the area, probably in 1734.14 viding William, the first Rector of He recorded the inscription as the new church, with additional “Orate p’ a’i’a William Brigg quo’da’ income for living expenses to facili- rectoris istius ecclie”. Where did he tate his incumbency or maybe he see it, what caused it to be was making it possible for William removed or which area of Victorian to contribute to the rebuilding of tiles and wooden pews has since the chancel. For whatever reason, covered it up for it is not there it does provide a picture of finan- today? cial support for the church by the And one has to ask why is there Brigges and a glimpse of the family no memorial for Thomas Brigge I, lands. Patron of this new church? Surely William Brigge was Rector for 48 he would have desired a premier years, 1427-1475, giving a life time position for himself and his wife of service to the parish. His memo- Joan. Does the enigmatic cadaver rial stone in the chancel at Wiveton brass provide the clue? Positioned was noted by Blomefield when vis- at the east end of the centre aisle

36 of the nave just before the chancel, corpse. The Wiveton cadaver brass Figure 6, a prime position and with was described by Mill Stephenson the appropriate style being a as a rather crude example of local shroud rather than a knight in workmanship, not dissimilar to armour, which Thomas was not, it that found in Aylsham for Richard is certainly a strong candidate. and Cecily Howard, 1499.8 Salle In the event, Joan Brigge out Church has a shroud brass with a lived both her husband and broth- naked and emaciated figure, dated er-in-law and presented William 1451 for John Brigge, but the Will Bisshop to the living in 1475. He of his son Thomas 1494, left a sum also enjoyed a long period of serv- for the purchase of a stone for his ice till 1512 and his brass memori- father so that the brass cannot al survives set in the centre of the then be earlier than 1494.5 chancel floor, much worn but still Another example altogether is the visible, showing a priest in mass Symondes shroud brass of 1511, vestments that lack both stole and which can be found just across the maniple. Glaven valley in Cley. Parkin (in Blomefield) made no The Cadaver Brass, but reference to this brass in his which Thomas? (Fig. 7) account of Wiveton, suggesting that the inscription plate had already his brass is a male skeleton disappeared.12 Two hundred years wrapped in a shroud and later, Linnell was happy to suggest Tbound both top and bottom. that it was for “Thomas Brigge I A matching brass (on the right whose wife Joan presented (the side) is now missing, as is the rec- Rector William Bisshop) to Wiveton tangular inscription plate which Church in 1475”, a suggestion that would probably have identified and has been accepted and perpetuated dated the couple. We know that the in all the church guides ever remaining portion of damaged since.8 There is much to commend brass represents a man because, this viewpoint. when viewed with your back to the In contrast Mill Stephenson altar, it is on the left, the conven- gave a date for the cadaver of tional position for a male, and it c.1540, a time when cadavers were has a rib missing! The brass is set out of fashion and went on to sug- in a large stone slab measuring 9 gest that it was “possibly Thomas ft. by 4 ft. 4 ins. and in each corner Briggs II, who died in 1544”, the a small 3.5 inch square matrix grandfather of George Brigge.8 indicates a possible setting for the Subsequent documentary evidence four evangelistic symbols. shows that this Thomas died 8th Brasses of this design were February 1530/31 and in his will fashionable from the mid 15th cen- he expressed a desire to be buried tury, although fading by the early within the church at Heacham 16th century, in each case the throwing further doubt on this body was shown either as a skele- identification.5 ton or an emaciated corpse wrapped in a shroud. In addition the figures were often grinning and there were even examples where worms were shown devouring the

37 The West Norfolk Connection Thomas Brigge II continued to acquire additional land in he third generation repre- Heacham and in the neighbouring sented by John Brigge is vir- parishes of Snettisham, Ringstead Ttually without record. It is and Sedgeford, both “free and possible, though unlikely, that he bonde”. A pattern of enterprise could be the John Brygges on the emulated by his son and grandson, Cley Muster Roll for 1525, but he for it ensured that there were suffi- was not the John Briggs censured cient holdings to provide for in 1567 at Cley for not frequenting younger sons and settlements for his parish church and subsequent- daughters at the time of their mar- ly absolved by paying 2d to the riage, leaving the integrity of the Poor Box “pixi di pauperum”.13 ancestral lands in Wiveton and Apart from buying land in possibly Callis for the heir. It also Heacham in 1515/1516, when he raised their status as a family, was referred to as John Brigge of building a position of some conse- Cley, all we know of him with any quence in their communities and certainty is that he was the father thus enhancing the marriage of Thomas Brigge II, grandfather of prospects of daughters and Edward and great grandfather of younger sons. This was a family George Brigge, the three genera- where the men were concerned tions of Brigges that lived through- with the honour of the line and out the sixteenth century in times strengthening close kinship. of religious upheaval and change. The significant feature of his will However the Heacham connec- is that many of these newly tion is intriguing because it led to acquired pieces of land were identi- the discovery of a will made by fied with such precision and detail Thomas Brigge II of Heacham dated to size, name of previous owner 10th February 1527/28 which was and with sufficient topographical proved ten years later.5 This is the features to suggest that Thomas earliest will for any member of the was buying into an open field land- family and is typical for Catholic scape with closes. Furthermore, England in respect of provision for his descriptions allow some pieces his soul, bequests to the high altar to be identified in the Sedgeford for tythes and offerings forgotten Field Book of 1546.15 The total and the services of a priest to sing area held by the Brigge family in for the souls of his good friends, Sedgeford alone was just over 41 but atypical in many other acres. Edward Brigge, Thomas II’s respects. Furthermore, it provides heir, retained his properties in clear evidence that the family was Heacham and Ringstead until he not living in Wiveton, a fact sub- died in 1562, while the fate of the stantiated by subsequent family land held by his younger brothers, wills and a trend that continued Thomas III and William, is not until George returned in1592 to clear. spend the last five years of his life Edward was the first Protestant in the Glaven Valley. Thus we have Brigge to be Lord of the Manor and a long period of absentee Lords, his family began to make their whose affairs in the ancestral hold- appearance in early parish regis- ings of the Glaven parishes were ters.7 For the first time we get probably managed by stewards. hitherto unrecorded details such

38 as names of daughters, death of to Bradfield, near North Walsham, heirs and an awareness of infant where he married Margaret Bevis mortality, names of spouses, sec- the daughter of Thomas Bevis of ond marriages, cousins, ages at Bradfield. This is interesting for death and of course the parish in earlier Brygges had held lands which these events were recorded.11 there in the 13th and 14th cen- Cisilye Brigge made an auspi- turies which they subsequently cious entrance being christened on sold to the Harbord family, the May Day, 1558; she is the first Barons Suffield of Gunton Hall.17 name in the first baptismal register William was succeeded by his and the first Brigge in any of the son Thomas IV whose interests Wiveton registers. Was she extended to Lowestoft in Suffolk Edward’s daughter who he brought whilst he retained a base at back to Wiveton to be baptised in Bradfield. Thomas Brigge IV was the church where he was patron? thus nephew of Edward and first There is no information on when cousin of George Brigge and it was Edward Brigge moved away from Erasmus Brigge, his son and heir, Heacham, but eventually his activi- that George Brigge instructed Sara ties were centred around Wood to marry. Norton, Guestwick and Guist This complex and sometimes where he held another manor. confusing saga of George Brigge’s Katherine, his widow, held court antecendents demonstrates the for the Manor of Dele in Brygge mobility of the landed class with there shortly after he died, then representatives in the west of the again seven years later when she county around Heacham and was widowed for the second time.16 Sedgeford, in the east at Bradfield, When he died, Edward had ten Holt, Wiveton and Cley and south children to provide for, a married into Suffolk at Lowestoft, besides daughter, three underage sons and the strong representation in the six more daughters, again all centre around Wood Norton, Guist, underage. His will made provision Guestwick and Thurning. for everyone of them, leaving the advowson and patronage of The Co-heiresses (Fig. 5) Wiveton to his youngest son Edmund with instructions that his he story returns to the chil- wife was to protect it from being dren of George and Anne taken over by George.5 George T Brigge, for this couple had would have been about 18 years four daughters and a son, of which old when his father died and you only the eldest and youngest can’t help thinking that his charac- daughters survived to adulthood. ter was already noted. In the event The first daughter Margaret was Edmund died and George inherited baptised at Guist 1575, Richard, the advowson of Wiveton being the the son and heir at Guestwick last Brigge to exercise his right while the three younger daughters when he appointed James Poynton were baptised in Wiveton.7 George to the living in 1591. Edward was undoubtedly ‘operating’ across Brigge died 22nd January 1562/63 his sphere of influence, reinforcing and was buried at Wood Norton.11 his family links with Wiveton when William, Edward’s younger he brought his youngest daughters brother, moved across the county back.

39 Margaret Hunt ‘Milkers Meadow’ and ‘Dairy Margaret married William Hunt of Closes’.18 A later, nineteenth cen- Sharrington in Letheringsett tury map allows these lands to be Church 20th November 1596, the located today, in spite of subse- son and heir of Thomas Hunt of quent topographical changes.18 Foulsham, a soap boiler and suc- Margaret’s final resting place cessful London merchant, Lord of was in Little Walsingham where the Manor of Foulsham whose she was buried on 15th March, magnificent memorial is in the 1652 having reached the age of 77.8 parish church. The impact of this marriage on the Brigge Manor of Sara Brigge Callis lands would have been Sara was a teenager of some 15 or impossible for George to foretell, 16 years at the time of her father’s but he must have felt that they death and being resolved to marry would be secure for his grandchildren. John Jenkinson, she duly contest- Her husband, William Hunt, ed his will. For some unknown rea- died in 1644 and within the same son, Sara did not persist with her year Margaret was adjudged a suit and when she failed to appear lunatic at an inquisition, and the at the hearing, the will was duly Manors of Sharington, Holt Hales, promulgated. The consequence Geyst, Wichingham and various being that the Manor of Wiveton, others, which she was holding at the minor Manor of Cloc[k]wode the time, all passed directly to her and other property in neighbouring son, Thomas Hunt.12 Certifying an parishes went to her nephew, individual as a lunatic was a much Thomas Hunt. He then sold it to used ploy at that time to break his father just after Anne Brigge agreements and enabled relatives died and it was not long before it to seize control of an inheritance. passed out of the family.8 Cozens- In the fullness of time, the Callis Hardy identified Cloc[k]wode lands at Guestwick and Thurning through his family papers with which George Brigge had described Locker Breck, also known as Cley in his Will as “lands meadows pas- Watering which is in the south of ture feedings rents services and Cley parish where today, Water other herediments thereunto Lane meets the Cley – Holt Road. belonging” were amalgamated with It appears to have been a small Hunt properties and conveyed to parcel, no more than an enclosed Thomas Newman in 1688.18 The Close of 30 acres.13 deeds of this conveyance show that The Jenkinson name appears in the Brigge portion had consisted of Wiveton, Cley, Cockthorpe and “all those closes sometime the clos- Morston Parish Registers for some es of George Brigges called Inpins, years after and a picture of Sara’s the Fir closes and Buntings lying in life begins to emerge although Guestwick aforesaid and all those where and when she married John the five acres of arable land late Jenkinson is still unknown, as is also of the said George Briggs”. her final resting place. Her children The location of these holdings is were baptised in both Wiveton and illustrated on an estate map of Cley churches and using informa- 1726 that has long horned cattle tion from her mother’s will, we depicted on the pastures and is full know that there were two sons and of descriptive field names such as three daughters by 1616 and it

40 would appear that she lived in away from the parish, including Cley, presumably supported by her George Brigge himself. husband, his family and quite pos- Their story is still unfinished, sibly her own mother who seems to for the 16th century wills that have have had an affection for her formed the basis of this article, grandchild, Anne Jenkinson. This although illuminating, are at the reflects a sentiment, an expression same time misleading through of early modern family where pri- omission, posing yet more lines of vate relationships counted and enquiry. In dealing with their spiri- were recognised. tual and temporal affairs, each Ironically George Brigge would member of the family in turn pro- probably have been proud of the vided an insight into their respons- eventual outcome of this union for es to religious upheaval and per- Sara’s youngest son Henry married sonal circumstances throughout Lucy Cloudesley (also spelt the century. Each demonstrated Clowdesley) the daughter of that they were operating and con- Thomas Cloudesley of Cley and trolling properties across the their daughter Ann, married John breadth of Norfolk and were well Shovell the son of a farmer at able to provide for all their chil- Cockthorpe and great grandson of dren, probably not unlike their a Norwich Sheriff. Sir Cloudesley forebears in the 15th century. Shovell, the great Stuart Admiral They were men of substance. and Norfolk naval hero, was Sara’s However, wills have to be tem- great grandson by this marriage of pered with caution for rarely do John and Ann Shovell.7 they mention inheritance, marriage Sara’s prospects as she married settlements, endowments and John Jenkinson may not have been bequests that have taken place as promising as George had intend- before death. Indeed the Callis ed for her, but her family survived. lands disappear for some 150 years Sir Cloudesly Shovell, his great- before they are mentioned again in great-grandson, who had died trag- George’s will, while the lands in ically after his ship foundered and Guist, which Edward owned, were been buried in the Isles of Scilly, lost from sight for 70 years till his was returned to England as a grand-daughter’s inquisition, sug- national hero and buried in gesting they had been part of her Westminster Abbey at Queen marriage settlement. Anne’s expense – an indication of The inherited lands of Thomas the esteem in which he was held. and Edward, who both had sons, were safe with an heir but for Conclusion George and Anne who had lost Richard, their only son, the outlook he brass to George and Anne was quite different. Everyone of his Brigge has lain in Wiveton antecedants back to his three TChurch for 400 years as a times great-grandfather had pro- monument to a craftsman’ skills duced a son to inherit the Wiveton and a lasting testament to the fam- lands and it befell George to face ily. Strong ties of Patronage and the prospect of this two hundred Lordship held the Brigges to year link coming to an end. Was he Wiveton even though three succes- overcome with melancholy at the sive generations, at least, lived disappearance of the ancestral

41 lands from the family and the loss 1563 Edward Brigge, of his Brigge name? Norton PCC 10 Chayre His will, in spite of all its com- 1597 George Brigge, Latheringsett PCC 27 Lewyn plexities, was a vain attempt to 1616 Anne Brigge, safeguard against these eventuali- Wiveton NCC 97 Sayer ties. In doing so he demonstrated 6. R. A. Houlbrooke, 1993 The English that right to the end, he continued Family 1450-1700, Longman to be a late medieval man valuing 7. NRO, Parish Registers of Cley, Wiveton, Letheringsett, Blakeney, honour, integrity and name above Cockthorpe, Wood Norton, Guist all else. and Guestwick 8. C. L. S. Linnell, 1952 Wiveton Acknowledgements Norfolk, Transactions of the Monumental Brass Society, Vol. IX, special thank you to Paul Part I, No. LXXI 9. H. K. Cameron, 1977 EDP Rutledge for alerting me to 10. Transcript by Mary Grace A interesting and obscure 11. M. J. Sayer, 1972 Eynsford Hundred sources, nuances of word meaning Families 1550-1700, Norfolk and and generally opening my eyes to Norwich Genealogical Society, Vol the hand of 16th century scribes; 4, page 62 12. F. Blomefield, 1808 An essay to Frank Hawes for his help with towards a topographical history of the Arms and Linda Nudds’s gen- the county of Norfolk. Continued erosity in sharing her research. by C. Parkin, Vol. IX 13. K. Allen Papers, NRO MC/106/5 and 6 References 14. W. N. Dew, 1885 The Monumental inscriptions in the hundred of 1. M. Drake editor, 1994 Time, Family Holt, in the county of Norfolk, edit and Community - Perspectives on ed and indexed by W. Rye, Norwich Family and Community History, 15. Information from Linda Nudds, 2003 The Open University with 16. M. J. Sayer, 1973 Eynsford Houses, Blackwell Norfolk Archaeology Vol. XXXV, 2. Cozens-Hardy, 1957 The History of page 229 Letheringsett in the county of 17. P. Rutledge, 1997 Report on family Norfolk and estate papers of the 3. A. Hassell Smith, 1974 County and HARBORD FAMILY, BARONS Court - Government and Politics in SUFFIELD, 13th-20th Century Norfolk 1558-1603, Clarendon deposited in Norfolk Record Office. Press Royal Commission On Historical 4. D. Hey, 1996 The Oxford Companion Manuscripts to Local and Family History, 18. NRO, BRA 723/1/1-27 and BRA Oxford University Press 723/3/11 5. Wills: 1494 Thomas Brigge, Salle PCC 202 to 205 Wolman 1528 Thomas Brigge II, Heacham PCC 285, 286 Attmere

42 The Glebe Terriers of Cley Changes in the landscape during the 17th and 18th Centuries

John Peake

Synopsis: changes in field patterns performed regularly prior to an in Cley are analysed using a episcopal visitation and examina- sequence of 200 years of glebe terri- tion; copies were then deposited in ers. The few years between 1760 the diocesan registry. They were and 1765 are identified as the peri- concerned primarily with informa- od when the medieval pattern of tion on: (1) parsonage house or vic- open fields largely disappeared and arage plus associated buildings; a new order was established. (2) glebe lands; (3) church plate Information on 4 parsonages is pre- and other moveable objects; (4) sented and the Thomlinson family churchyard, and (5) rates and identified as key players in initiat- tithes.1, 2 Much of their value for ing change. this study lies in the continuity of this record, nevertheless as these Introduction documents were prepared solely for the church (and not historians) the ields and hedges set against picture that emerges can be in sea and marsh are reoccur- places tantalisingly fragmentary. Fring themes in the landscape As Dymond so expressively stat- of North Norfolk, a pattern broken ed “The parson’s glebe, in a sense, occasionally by church towers that was the last surviving medieval remind us of the omniscient pres- tenement in the modern land- ence of the church. Yet the origins scape”. Indeed the origins of the of much of this familiar scene are glebe holdings must reside in the comparatively recent with the pres- early development of parish ent pattern of fields and hedges churches and the endowments of only emerging during the 17th and benefactors wishing to make provi- 18th centuries and even as late as sion for their souls. Surprisingly, the 19th. Yet how, why and when the upheaval of the Reformation this happened is often far from left the glebe lands largely unaf- clear at a local level. This paper fected, but our knowledge of them uses one set of documents, glebe was expanded by the production of terriers, to explore some of the written records.2 questions relating to fields and par- sonages in the parish of Cley. Cley Glebe Terriers The production and form of the glebe terriers was established by he first terrier is from 16133, the Acts of 1571 and 1604 and in a prepared about a year after series of associated canons. They T the major fire in Cley, then were to be prepared ‘by the view of there is a gap until 16774 and from honest men in each parish’ and then onwards a continuous series

43 has survived, with usually one The complicated structure of being available in each decade, manors in Norfolk also impinges although two were produced in a here, for often more than one single year when there was a manor held land in a parish and change of rector. Their value for the then not as single block, but scat- study of landscape history dimin- tered throughout the fields. In Cley ishes, however, with the production there were at least five manors or of detailed surveys for Parliament- honours recorded as holding land ary Enclosure and tithe apportion- in the parish, while the Manor of ments in the 19th century. Cley held land in Salthouse, The terrier for 1613 is a simple Wiveton and Blakeney. So that document containing basic infor- glebe land for the benefice of Cley mation on the parsonage, the area held in Salthouse abutted at times of each piece of land held, where it onto lands of the Manor of was found and the whole divided Salthouse on one side and the into two groups on the basis of manorial lands of the Manor of their location in the North or South Cley on another! Fields. This format persisted until Care has to be taken when 1765, although the descriptions of using information gleaned from the each piece of land were expanded terriers, as the sample of land they from 1677 onwards to include data cover is small compared to the on abuttals and buildings. The overall size of the parish and the abuttals gave the basic information unique position of the glebe lands for fixing the position of each piece as the property of the benefice by naming the occupiers of land to means they may have been atypi- the north, south, west and east, cal, while the possibility of data and occasionally topographical fea- being copied from one terrier to the tures such as a highway or hill. next without revision will always be Consequently the abuttals provide a concern. On a more practical a wealth of information that note, the value of the information expands the value of the terriers is dependant on being able to fol- enormously. low individual pieces of land These pieces of glebe land would through successive terriers. For have been cultivated either by or the period between 1613 and 1760 on behalf of the benefice or let to this is feasible, but after 1760 the suitable tenants, while the sur- reorganisation of the field patterns rounding pieces were farmed by lay obscured many of the distinguish- people not necessarily living in the ing features. parish of Cley. Here a distinction has to be made between glebe Fields lands and land owned by the Rector; the former are the property ley lies in a part of the coun- of the benefice with the Rector only ty where the medieval pat- being a transitory occupant, while Ctern of farming was based the latter is held in his own right on large open fields with individual having inherited, purchased or farmers holding many small strips even been given it. Indeed many of land scattered across them. rectors have held lands in Cley as These strips were usually organ- individuals, including it would ised into blocks called furlongs that appear, rectors from other parishes. were then grouped together to form

44 fields. Characteristically there were refinements as the village was no hedges marking the boundaries divided into Northgate, Southgate between strips and woodland was and Fleagate.6 Southgate is now often scarce; a glance at Cotman’s called Newgate and is the district sketch of Wiveton and Blakeney around the church where in the from Cley emphasises the paucity 17th and 18th centuries the par- of trees in this area even as late as sonages were concentrated. the early 19th century. As The information from the Cley Williamson states ‘These were terriers is summarised in Tables bleak and open landscapes”.5 1–5. The basic data for fields being Gradually this landscape organised into four groups (Tables changed as land was enclosed, 1 and 3) that reflect stages in the with hedges being planted around evolution from a broadly medieval larger pieces of land formed by the pattern of open fields to the amalgamation of smaller strips; enclosed fields of the 19th century: typically these enclosed areas were owned by a single individual. The Group 1: Years 1613 – 1725: land negotiations needed to achieve divided into furlongs lying in two these changes must have been fields with some closes or enclo- complex and protracted given the sures number of people who were Group 2: Years 1740 – 1760: a involved. So the rate at which transition period with small enclosure progressed varied enor- changes in the organisation of the mously between parishes and furlongs and one of the open fields regions and in many areas it was subdivided not completed until Parliamentary Group 3: Years 1765 – 1812: Enclosure was enforced during the major changes – the two field 18th and 19th centuries. Cley arrangement disappears and a presents another interesting com- series of new divisions emerge plication for during the 17th and Group 4: Years 1812 onwards: 18th centuries a diverse array of further reorganisation under economic interests were represent- Parliamentary Enclosure; all the ed in the Town ranging from farm- small pieces of glebe lands disap- ing to fishing and maritime trade, pear and are replaced by a larger suggesting people with entrepre- unit. neurial flair were present. The characteristic village of the Group 1: Years 1613 – 1725 open field system was large and (Table 1) nucleated with the farmers living The terriers reveal a very simple within its envelope. However, arrangement during the 17th cen- despite being a linear village with tury with, at least, two fields, North nearly all the buildings concentrat- and South; on the east side of the ed along the interface between the Town the boundary between them land and the estuary, Cley still followed a line that would have lain shows many of the appropriate close to the route of the present characteristics. Yet this structure road leading from Cley to Holt. The was also a response to its functions glebe land consisted of 18 pieces or as a port during medieval and strips spread over 16 furlongs with modern times. The manor court a total area of just over 23 acres, books show there were further and these continued to form the

45 Figure 1. Aerial photograph of Cley looking south-east, 27 July 2002. Letters identify places or areas mentioned in the text: CHC = Cophill Close; CM = Cley Marsh; CS = Common Saltmarsh; DH = Dog Hill; F = Fairstead; FS = Field of Salthouse; GPF = Gravel Pit Field; HC = Hay Croft; NF = North Field; P1-4 = sites of four parsonages; PW = Processional Way; SF = South Field. core of the glebe holdings over the have increased with areas being next two centuries, for the habit of quoted as ‘by measurement’. giving land to the Church and the The frequent use of the term benefice appears to have largely ‘furlong’ and the presence of two ceased by this time. The majority of fields indicates that much of the these pieces had areas of less than parish retained a predominately one acre, with just a few pieces medieval form with open fields larger at 5, 3 and 2 acres. divided into smaller units, fur- The sizes recorded for each strip longs, that were further subdivided appear remarkably precise, but it is into strips cultivated by individual clear from commentaries in later farmers. It is impossible to deduce terriers that this precision is some- from the terriers whether there what illusory. Certainly earlier in were any additional fields, but it medieval times, acre was not a pre- was not unusual for parishes to cise area and it even varied have only two. In 1613 this scene between counties up to 1800.7 The would have been enhanced by open use of phrases in the terriers such saltmarsh to the west and north as ‘by estimation’ or the qualifica- and with Cley Common to the tions ‘a good’ or ‘generous’ and south-east, all providing common even reasons why changes have grazing for sheep and cattle. been made suggest imprecision. Although the first terrier gives However, towards the end of the no indication of whether any land 18th century precision appears to was enclosed, other sources are

46 more informative. Blomefield11 So from 1613 to 1725 the glebe records the gift by Lord Roos to the lands demonstrate a picture of sta- Rector in 1524 of a messuage and bility with only a limited number of a close (see below), and in various changes being introduced in the documents relating to the Britiffes North Field and none in the South. from the end of the 16th and early The addition of three pieces in the 17th centuries, closes surrounded ‘Field of Salthouse’ in the adjoining by walls were recorded within or parish is rather puzzling, but it is near to the Town8. While, in 1632 interesting to speculate on the rea- some 30 acres of Clockwode Close sons – did they result from land were recorded as a minor manor to exchanges or purchases or even the south of the parish near the additional gifts to the benefice? In boundary with Letheringsett, stark contrast, during this period Cozens-Hardy12 equating this close three separate buildings were listed with a field known as Locker Breck as parsonages. that sloped down to Water Lane. Here the limitations of the glebe From 1677 onwards the terriers terriers are evident, for Simon show a slight increase in enclosed Britiffe, as Lord of the Manor, lands, although the numbers embanked the salt marshes to the recorded are small suggesting that north of the parish in about 1650,8, 9 enclosure was limited (table 2). At a thereby creating both new land and micro level, other changes included improving access to existing land adjustments to the size or shape of on Cley Eye, an island that had existing closes. For example, a previously been isolated in the comparison of the abuttals for a estuary. Whether these areas were one acre piece of glebe land in the used for pasture or arable crops is North Field shows that in 1686 it not known, but their availability abutted Little Cophill Close only on could have reduced the pressure the east, but by 1706 it abutted on for enclosure elsewhere in the both the east and the north indi- parish and increased the quality of cating that the close had expanded pasture available. However, these or changed its shape. By 1686 this changes would have impacted on piece was described as having “furs common grazing rights, although growing thereon ye pasture” and by the common saltmarshes to the 1706 this had expanded to “ffuzz west of the parish survived until growing thereon having the Pasture 1823, when the sluice and road of the Lord on the south”. It was were constructed and the marshes still described as pasture in 1725, reclaimed.10 but by 1735 there was no mention At a county level the beginning of pasture and it abutted Clay Pit of the 18th century saw landown- Close to the south. Then by 1740 ers and farmers responding to the description identifies it as abut- opportunities presented by new ting on the “Common Way to the crops and new practices. The Gravel Pit south” with no mention responses, however, were not uni- of the Close. Such descriptions pro- form and considerable variation vide a rich picture of the dynamics existed at regional and parish lev- of short-term changes and percep- els and this persisted until tions suggesting that some enclo- Parliamentary Enclosure. This was sures, like Clay Pit Close, may have also an era that saw the emergence survived for only a short period. of large estates and along the coast

47 Table 1 Group 1 Group 2

Year 1613 1677 1706 1725 1740 1760 Location Barn + yard 2a 2a 2a 1r 1r (site of Parsonage 1) Parsonage 2 X 1r 1r 1a 1a2r Close 2a 2a 2a 2a2r 2a Parsonage 3 ------X X 2a 2a

North Field Parsonage 2 X Close 2a

No. of Furlong 13 3r 3r 3r 3r 1a 1a 20 3r 3r 3r 3r 3r 3r 26 3r 3r 3r 3r 3r 3r 29 3a ------29 2r 2r ------30 1.5r 1.5r 1.5r 1.5r 1.5r 2r 31 1a 1a 1a 1a 1a 3r 32 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 32 ------3r 3r 2a 3r 2r 33 0.5a ------33 ------1a 1a 1a 1a 1a1r 34 0.5a ------

South Field No. of Furlong 1 5a 5a 5a 5a 35 5a 4a 2 3r 1a 1a 1a 36 1a 1a 17 3.5r 3r 3r 3r 52 3r 3r 18 1.5r 1.5r 1.5r 1.5r 53 .5r 1.5r 19 3.5r 3r 3r 3r 54 3r 3r 19 2r 2r 2r 2r 55 2r 2r Hay Croft 25 3r 3r 3r 3r 61 3r 3r 27 2a 2a 2a 2a 63 2a 2a

Field of Salthouse Walshough Furlong 1a 1a 1a 1a 1a Mose (Moors) Furlong 3r 3r 3r 3r 3r Thirleshough Furlong 1r 1r 1r 1r 1r

Note: 1. 'X' building recorded , but no area given for associated land. 2. Areas given in acres and roods: 4 roods = 1 acre. 3. In 1613 Parsonage 2 and Close included in North Field, in all subsequent terriers treated separately.

Table 1. Summary of glebe lands for selected years between 1613 and 1760: the information is divided into two groups (see text). NB: in the first terrier there is no mention of Parsonage 1 or the barn. 48 at Holkham improvements in land growing of particular crops” and use and extended leases for ten- therefore not necessarily enclosed. ants were being implemented.14 In this case the crop was hay and What was the impact of these the area included at least two fur- developments on Cley? All the evi- longs with several tenants; this dence from the terriers suggests could be the forerunner of changes this was a parish where traditional about 20 years later when fields methods of agriculture continued were subdivided. and where extensive enclosure or Then in 1760 two terriers were consolidation of land into larger produced with almost identical blocks was slow to develop. Indeed wording; one was signed by the the survival of the open fields indi- retiring Rector, J W Girdlestone, cates that sheep-corn husbandry the other by the new Minister, still flourished and was vital for Robert Thomlinson. This signalled maintaining soil fertility on the the replacement of the old with the largely ‘hungry’ sandy soils of the new, but with the father of the area. new, John Thomlinson, sitting in the wings. There is no evidence of Group 2: Years 1740 - 1760 two terriers like this being pro- (Table 1) duced on any other occasion and This small group of terriers cover- the change was even reflected in ing the period from 1740 to 1760 the style of the documents, one can be characterised as transi- was clearly organised and written tionary, foreshadowing the major with a bold hand, the other was changes that were to occur in the clear but written in an archaic five years after 1760. style on a narrow strip of parch- The first of these terriers is ment! somewhat curious; the data in The Thomlinsons first appeared Table 1 demonstrate that the num- in the terrier of 1725 with Richard bering of the furlongs in the South Thomlinson being named in the Field changed to form a continuous abuttals, having recently acquired series with the North, with varia- the Cley Hall estate.6 In hindsight tions in the sequence between 52 it is tempting to interpret this as and 63. This suggests that other an entrepreneurial family seizing changes affecting the organisation an opportunity to purchase a of the furlongs had occurred, minor estate. By mid-century although not revealed in the terriers. Richard is replaced by his son, By 1743 the South Field is sub- John Thomlinson, who became one divided into two parts, one retained of the major landowners and holder the old field name and this was of the advowson for the church. probably the largest portion, while Here the sequence is not clear, but the other was called the ‘South- according to Cozens-Hardy,6 John East field commonly call’d Hay Thomlinson wanted to appoint his Croft’. The name ‘Hay Croft’ is son, Robert Thomlinson, to the liv- interesting, as ‘croft’ is usually ing but Robert was under age being associated with a small enclosure, born in about 1742. So as an but as one of the key texts on field interim measure Dr Backhouse names15 indicates “other elements was appointed Rector; yet irre- may combine with ‘croft’ to indicate spective of this measure it was a piece of land set aside for the Robert who wrote and signed the

49 Table 2

Year 1677 1735 1760 1765 1791 1801

Field 2 2 3 4 5 5

Inclosure 4 5 5 7 5 7

Piece 4 5 5

Table 2. Numbers of fields, enclosures or closes and pieces recorded in selected years. terrier of 1760 as Minister with no the owner (see Table 4). The addi- mention of Backhouse. tion of the latter was obviously needed to distinguish one ‘12 acre Group 3: Years 1765 - 1812 piece’ from another. The prolifera- (Table 3) tion of such simple descriptors in The contrast between the terrier of these names probably reflects the 1760 and that made 5 years later speed of change and in the absence can only be described as dramatic. of any traditional names the need The term ‘furlong’ disappeared to concoct an identifying tag; this from the descriptions of the glebe follows a similar pattern of naming lands as the pattern of two open found in other parts of the fields was replaced with new divi- country.16 sions sporting a new suite of The use of the terms ‘field’ and names. However, some degree of ‘close’ in the terriers from 1677 caution must be applied, as the onwards was unambiguous, as was sample in the terriers is probably ‘piece’ to describe a small parcel of too small to be certain whether the land and these terms continued to open field pattern disappeared be used in this context after 1760. completely in one initial burst of But if the use of the word ‘piece’ in reform or whether the process was the names of the large blocks of ongoing. Nevertheless, it was as land from 1765 onwards was dif- though the appointment of Robert ferent, what did it imply? Certainly Thomlinson as rector had provided the names were the precursors of the catalyst for change. the field names that appeared in In the new order, open fields the tithe apportionments of 1841. were subdivided to form large So why, in 1765, were the new blocks of land with consequential blocks of land not called ‘fields’? consolidation of many furlongs and The abuttals and the names of probably the engrossment of farms. the pieces indicate that these new The names given to these new divi- blocks were occupied or owned by sions are informative: a few were one or only a few individuals with obviously derived from local fea- occasional strips or closes, like tures such as Dog Hill (a field) or those belonging to the glebe, Gravel Pit Field, while others were embedded in them. They were cer- termed ‘pieces’ with a prefix giving tainly not organised around fur- an area and in some cases the longs and may even have operated name of an individual, presumably as a series of smaller ‘open fields’ 50 Figure 2. A traditional form of husbandry: a flock of sheep grazing on Cley marshes tend- ed by a shepherd (detail from early 20th century postcard). enabling specialist crops to be enclosure claim, even though this grown in a more effective manner. was undoubtedly biased to max- In this new situation it is likely imise the area of land he was that decisions regarding crops or awarded. This Thomlinson, the son rotations were no longer the pre- of Robert Thomlinson the Rector, rogative of village assemblies, but held the Manor of Cley having rather the responsibility of a few inherited land acquired by succes- individuals who could have operat- sive generations of his family and ed in an autocratic manner. Using he claimed “exclusive rights of an alternative to the familiar term sheepwalk and shackage over and ‘field’, with its links to the past, upon the common salt marshes, may have reinforced the changed commons, commonable lands and circumstances. So by the end of waste grounds” and he also men- this period the medieval pattern of tions “commonable cattle”.10 open fields had disappeared, at Whether these animals were ‘fold- least, over substantial areas of the ed’ on open fields or whether they parish, although the typically grazed on enclosed pastures must enclosed landscape with small remain speculative, but the use of fields in the ownership of a single the term ‘shackage’ implies that at individual was not fully achieved. least in some areas the traditional Was this compromise peculiar to rights of grazing were retained. Cley and a halfway stage towards Shackage was the right to full enclosure? graze or fold sheep on open fields It is interesting to speculate on from the end of harvest until the visual impact of this reorgani- March or longer on fields being sation on the landscape; initially it left fallow, thereby ensuring the may have been far less intrusive fertility of the soil and the mainte- than might be anticipated, for nance of high yields of corn, par- much would have depended on ticularly barley.13, 14 At other whether the new blocks of land times of the year grazing would were enclosed with hedges. Sheep have moved not only onto the and cattle would have continued to heathland common to the south be important components, as John of the parish, but also on the Winn Thomlinson testifies in his extensive saltmarsh, an often

51 Table 3 Group 3 Group 4

Year 1765 1791 1801 1827

Location Barn + yard 2a 2a 2a 28p (site of Parsonage 1) Parsonage 2 1r X X 1r Close 2a 2a 2a Parsonage 3 1a2r 1a2r ------

Location not specified 2r 2r ------17a2r13p 3r 1r

Dog Hill (Field) 2a 1a 1a 16 Acre Piece 5r 5r 5r Fifty Acre Piece 3r 3r 3 Twelve Acre Piece 2r 2r ------Gravel Pit Field 2a2r 2a2r 2a2r 2r 2r 2r 1a1r 1a1r 1a1r Hay Croft 3r 3r 3r 2a 2a 2r South Field 2r 2r 2r 3r 3r 3r 1.5r 1.5r 1.5r 3r 3r 3r 4a 4a 4a 1a 1a 1a

Field of Salthouse Walshough Furlong 1a 1a 1a 1a Moors 3r 3r 3r 3r Girdlestones Furlong 1r 1r 1r 1r

Note: 40 perches = 1 rood; 4 roods = 1 acre.

Table 3. Summary of glebe lands for selected years between 1765 and 1827: the informa- tion is divided into two groups (see text).

52 North Field 1613 South Field 1613

Long Furlong 1677 Dowell’s Pightle 1677 St Adams Hill 1677 Candle (Kandle) Hill 1677 Little Cop Hill Close 1677 White Bread Hill 1740 (Coppice 1765) Hay Croft 1760 Procession Way 1725 Fairstead 1760 Dog Hill 1760 Gravel Pit Field 1765 Mr Hipkin’s 16 Acre Piece 1765 50 Acre Piece 1765 Richard Johnson’s 12 Acre Piece 1765 Roger’s 12 Acre Piece 1765 John Johnson’s 12 Acre Piece 1791 23 Acre Piece 1791

Table 4. Place names appearing in the terriers together with the date of their first appearance. underestimated resource for these have demanded the agreement and coastal parishes. drive of the major landowners or Unfortunately place names pro- occupiers who wanted to ‘increase vide few clues to land use in any of efficiency’.13, 14, 17 This objective the terriers from this period, ‘Hay was probably motivated by the Croft’, Clay Pit Close and Gravel Pit opportunities presented by a Close are three examples that do. marked rise in agricultural prod- Another is Little Cop-Hill Close, ucts being traded through where in a single instance Close is Blakeney Haven in the second half replaced with the word Coppice of the 18th century, a trend whose indicating this was a managed origins must have been apparent woodland where the young growths earlier in the century.18 So eco- from stools were harvested. nomic pressures would have, at Although not land use, Procession least, reinforced the desire for land Way appears in the abuttals to land reform and even provided the driv- in the North Field, referring to the ing force that initiated it. road now known as Old Woman The names of some of the indi- Lane and this extended across the viduals involved in these reforms embanked marshes to Cley Eye.9 can be deduced from Table 5 where This ‘Way’ refers to ‘beating the for selected years the occupiers of bounds’, the traditional practice for land abutting onto the glebe land securing and maintaining the are listed together with the number boundaries of the parish that had of times these individuals were been enforceable in law since mentioned. The table also illus- Tudor and Stuart times. trates the trend for land to be con- The far-reaching changes in the centrated in the hands of fewer organisation of the land that individuals or families during the occurred in the very short period- 18th century. However, this list between 1760 and 1765 would does not include all landowners or 53 1735 1760 1765 1791 Richard 11 Robt Rogers 15 Richard 15 John Johnson 18 Thomlinson Johnson Thomas Rogers 11 John 12 John Thomlinson 12 Rev. Robert 11 Thomlinson Thomlinson Elizabeth Low 8 Thomas Dewing 9 Augustine 12 John 10 Dewing Thomlinson Henry Baynes 7 Framingham Jay 6 Framingham Jay 10 Heirs of 7 Framingham Jay John Royall 4 late Robert Lowd 5 Robert Jennis 7 Robert Jennis 6 'diverse men' 4 'diverse men' 3 'Various Owners' 2 John Mann 1 William Stirges 2 Robert Frankling 1 Peter Coble 1 Elizabeth Greeve 1 Elizabeth Greeve 1 John Johnson 1 Barbara Garret 1 John Johnson 1 John and Mallet Musset 1 Framlingham Jay 1 Peter Mallet 1 Joseph Ward 1 Lydia Pells 1

Table 5. Names of individuals appearing in the abuttals to glebe lands during the 18th century, together with the number of times the names appear. tenants, indeed major players such While these acts signalled the as Lord Calthorpe are absent; final stage in the demise of the rather it is an attempt to use the Medieval field system in Cley, the terriers to identify some individuals glebe lands survived to provide an who could have benefited most income for the benefice, albeit in a from land reforms. These would modified form. They were consoli- have included landowners and dated into a single block with the merchants, individuals like Robert addition of some small pieces. In Rogers, John Thomlinson, Thomas contrast, the three pieces of land Dewing and Framingham Jay in held in furlongs in the Field of 1760, or Richard Johnson, Salthouse continued to survive for Augustine Dewing and Robert a short time. So even at the begin- Jennis in 1765. ning of the 19th century the diver- sity of land management on a local Group 4: Years 1812 onwards scale persisted. (Table 3) There were two Enclosure Awards Parsonage and Associated 10 for Cley, the first was concerned Buildings primarily with existing land and reclaimed marsh, the other with ley is recorded as having the enclosure of the saltmarsh that four parsonages, even lay between Cley and Wiveton19. Cthough there is only one The former extended the consolida- standing today. In the terrier for tion of land into blocks and estab- 1611 a Parsonage is listed in the lished the process of legally enclos- North Field with land of two acres. ing fields with hedges. These In the next, for 1677, there is a reforms left John Winn Thomlinson new Parsonage and the old one is as the major beneficiary dominat- indicated as “the old parsonage”. ing the land holdings in the parish. This is followed in the terrier of 1706 by a further new parsonage 54 Figure 3. Cley Church from the the south-east; this would have been the view from the site of Parsonage 1 across the North Field. In the early 17th century there would have been no hedges except around a close on the right, very few trees, and the field would have been divided into furlongs and strips. Parsonage 2 was near the house nestling in the trees to the right. and by the middle of the 19th cen- since ye old parsonage house did tury there was still another. It is stand containing by estima(t)ion tempting to think the Rectors of two acres, & it standeth att ye East Cley were rather careless with their end of ye Towne by ye high-way parsonages or did the wealth of the side”. This was the description in benefice play a role! 1677 and the location can be iden- There are no descriptions of the tified on an estate map of 1841 by first two parsonages, for the third the presence of a tithe barn; today there is an informative account and the site is occupied by a large the fourth is still standing and metal barn belonging to Cley Hall lived in, albeit not by the Rector. Farm near the junction of Old Why successive houses were aban- Woman Lane and the Holt Road. doned is not recorded, but the fact This parsonage probably defined that both of the earlier buildings the eastern extremity of Newgate at disappeared rapidly after being a time when it was a prosperous abandoned suggests they were in area. Christopher Newgate, the poor repair. Gales and rages could wealthiest inhabitant of the parish have wreaked havoc and although in 1592, lived in what is now called there are no records for Cley, Newgate Farm and the discovery of across in Wiveton there are faculty house foundations when the road documents for 168720 preserved in was widened through this area the diocesan archives recording indicates that once there were storm damage to the tithe barn and more habitations in this part of the seeking permision to pull it down. Town.6 In 1791 a detailed description of Parsonage 1 the barn states: “Also a large Barn The limited information available seventy five feet long & twenty feet on this parsonage emanates from wide – a Lean too eighteen feet references in many terriers to a long, and twelve feet wide – all barn on a site where “…long time Brick, stone and tiled”. 55 Unfortunately the age of this barn still referred to as the ‘new parson- is not known, but it could have age, but by 1706 there was yet dated from the early 16th century another new parsonage! The word- or even earlier. It was certainly ing of the terriers in both 1706 and large, but it did not compare with 1725 suggests it was demolished. the gigantic barns at Waxham and The abuttals are also illuminating Paston that were 180 and 175 feet for they identify the close on the long respectively.2 The disparity in east separated from the church- size may be a reflection of differ- yard by a ‘common way’; so this ences in the local economy of the close would have been sited near two areas: one having a mixed the present churchyard extension. economy with maritime trade, fish- While the messuage that belonged ing and farming, the other being to the ‘Guild of St Margaret’ was no solely farming; one being sheep- longer occupied by them. corn, the other arable, and with the lands having different levels of pro- Parsonage 3 ductivity when the barns were built This parsonage was first mentioned – the sandy soils of Cley giving in 1706, it was a substantial build- lower yields compared to the rich ing as the description in 1791 loams of east Norfolk. makes clear, although by then it was let having been occupied by Parsonage 2 the Rector until, at least, 1768. The site of this parsonage is This description also indicates the instantly recognisable for it is nature of the lifestyle and status of clearly stated in every terrier, the the Rector: “…in Front to the West churchyard lay to the south and thirty one feet & eighteen feet wide this enables it to be equated with a a staircase to the North ten feet gift made to the benefice in 1524. wide – a Kitchen & Back Kitchen to Indeed some of the site, if not all, the South thirty feet long & nine- was eventually incorporated into teen feet wide – one Hay House & the present churchyard. Stable adjoining forty seven feet In Blomefield’s History of long & ten feet wide – a Chaise Norfolk11 there is recorded under house fourteen feet long & fifteen Cley that “On July 3, 1524, license feet wide – another building across was granted to Thomas Manners the yard eighteen feet long & fifteen Lord Roos to give a messuage, with feet wide – a coal House & small a close, late Colles, lying between Stable twenty feet long & ten feet the churchyard of Cley to the wide – all the above buildings are south, and a messuage belonging Brick & Stone and all tiled with to the guild of St. Margaret to the Pantiles” north, and the close lying thereby It was sited with the Fairstead, between the churchyard, west, and now called Newgate Green, on the the demean land of the lord, east; east, close to the site where the ….. clear to John Wyatt, then rector Cley Fair was held until the enclo- of this church, and to his suces- sure of the marshes. Different sors for ever”. descriptions state there was a gar- It is hardly surprising that near- den and yards containing about ly two centuries later this building one acre and a half and lying with was in a bad state of repair, the Kings Highway and the although in the terrier of 1686 it is Common Marsh on the west. The

56 main house was eventually demol- with the most important landowner ished, but it is possible that some in his time being the Reverend of the buildings now abutting onto Robert Thomlinson, Rector of the Newgate Green are remnants of the Parish, buried in the chancel not parsonage complex. far from the altar. Robert Thomlinson, as Rector, The glebe terriers enable lived in this parsonage when he changes in the landscape to be was first appointed to the parish, charted in a parish that is devoid but by 1791 he was the major of records from a major estate. landowner in Cley and installed in Moreover, these changes must have the improperly named ‘Manor been initiated or influenced by House’ in The Street.6 It was this those men whose memorials lie in Thomlinson who recorded in the the Church. As could be anticipat- parish registers much of the infor- ed the resulting picture is imper- mation on the ‘rages’ when the sea fect and incomplete, but the terri- flooded the Town at least 8 times in ers provide a simple framework the 18th century. So Robert that can be examined and expanded. Thomlinson’s interest in storms At the start of the 17th century may have emanated not solely from open fields dominated the land- his position as Rector or as the scape and their persistence well major landowner, but from a very into the 18th century is indicative personal viewpoint living in a of the continuing power of tradi- Rectory vulnerable to flood dam- tional forms of sheep-corn hus- age. One can imagine him sitting in bandry. Nevertheless, there is evi- his parlour watching the sea level dence of some piecemeal enclosure rise and adding another note to the and the division of one field leading registers! to the establishment of ‘Hay Croft’ in the mid 18th century heralded Parsonage 4 an important shift in the organisa- The last parsonage was built in the tion of the land. mid 19th century and is, therefore, Dramatic changes occurred in not part of this story. It is an the short period between the terri- imposing building still standing ers of 1760 and 1765; open fields today, although in private hands were consolidated into larger and in a location divorced from the blocks controlled by either single or village. a few joint owners, but with strips of glebe lands embedded. Initially Conclusions such arrangements might appear chaotic, but in the progression ley lies at the interface from open fields towards enforced between sea and land and enclosure such situations should Cmuch has been written be anticipated, especially in vil- about the history and impact of lages where the potential existed maritime trade and the magnifi- for ‘strong’ individuals to be vying cence of the Church. Yet many of for their share. Cley with the close the gravestones in the nave and juxtaposition of landowners and the chancel are also a lasting testa- merchants might have provided ment to men who were involved such a situation, for here were men with the land, some were mer- familiar with business and legal chants, others Lords of the Manor, agreements. And maybe some were

57 attracted to the area by the oppor- 5. T. Williamson 2003 Shaping Medieval tunities presented by rising trade Landscapes: Settlement, Society, in agricultural products through Environment 6. B. Cozens-Hardy 1963 The Glaven Blakeney Haven? Valley Norfolk Archaeology 23: The final death knoll for the 491-513 open field system in Cley was 7. PRO Finding Aid Leaflets: Enclosure sounded by Parliamentary Records (An Example) Enclosure, nevertheless the 8. West Susses Record Office: Add MSS 30550-844 medieval concept of glebe lands 9. B. Cozens-Hardy 1924/9 Cley-next- continued to flourish with the only the-Sea and its marshes. Trans. N. change being their consolidation & N. Nat. Soc. 12, 354-73 into a larger unit. 10. NRO Cley and Field Dalling Enclosure The parsonages present a less Award 1812 11. F. Blomefield 1805/10 An essay coherent story, as they are towards a topographical history of episodes in a much broader picture the county of Norfolk. Continued concerned with the wealth of the by C. Parkin. Vol 9. benefice and wider church affairs. 12. B Cozens-Hardy 1957 The History of The history of the first three build- Letheringsett, in the county of Norfolk ings appears to be one of deteriora- 13. S. Wade Martins and T. Williamson tion, demolition and building on a 1999 Roots of Change, Farming new site, with the fourth parsonage and the Landscape in East Anglia, still standing. Yet appropriately the c. 1700-1870 gift from the Roos family in 1523 14. S. Wade Martins 2002 Changing Agriculture in Georgian and remains within the control of the Victorian Norfolk. Norfolk Origins 6 church, incorporated into the main 15. J. Field 1993 A History of English churchyard and with at least some Field-Names of the adjoining close returned as 16. C. Taylor 1987 Fields in the English the churchyard extension. Landscape 17. J. A. Yelling 1977 Common Field and Enclosure in England References 1450-1850 18. J. Hooton 1996 The Glaven Ports 1. W. E. Tate 1883 The Parish Chest 19. Cley and Wiveton Inclosure Award 2. D. Dymond 2002 The Parson’s Glebe: 1823 Stable, Expanding or Shrinking? In 20. NRO Wiveton Faculty Book C Harper-Bill et al Edits East DN/FCB/1 Anglia’s History 21. N. Pevsner and Bill Wilson 1997 The 3. NRO Glebe Terrier Cley 1613 Buildings of England. Norfolk 1: 4. NRO Glebe Terriers Cley 1677, Norwich and North-East DN/TER/46/5/1 et seq.

58 Some Comments on the Blakeney Census of 1871

John Wright

Synopsis: some 25 years ago the This article uses the 1871 census author copied out, on visits to the for Blakeney as an example and Public Record Office in London, the comments not on particular people 1871 census returns for Blakeney. but about the whole population While looking for names to append and some groups within it.1 to the family tree, other questions came to mind. What were the occu- Total Population pations of the residents? How many were born in Blakeney? How many ynical jokes about the value children were there? Could compari- of statistics apply as much son with the censuses of 1770 and Cto census material as to any 1971 help to illustrate long-term present-day figures. The issues lie social changes? This article revisits mostly with definitions. An obvious notes made at the time, but it example is ‘How many people live remains a collection of comments in Blakeney?’ Not an easy question rather than a systematic demo- to answer today when so many graphic study. houses are used as second homes or as holiday accommodation. In Introduction 1871 there were probably no such houses at all but there were people ost people with an interest away at the time of the census who in local history will know are not listed in the returns. Mthat censuses have been Conversely there were a few people taken every ten years since 1801 visiting Blakeney on census night and that detailed results from more who were included in the Blakeney than 100 years ago can now be total. seen without having to go the PRO Table 1 shows that 806 people – indeed a visit to the History were recorded, or 803 if visitors are Centre Blakeney is all that is excluded. If absent household required. Since 1841 all the enu- heads (‘Strays’) are included the merators’ original lists have been total rises to 830. In theory, other preserved. From 1851 they contain Blakeney residents temporarily the names of every person present, away from the village (including together with some standard infor- those on ships) could be ascer- mation about them: principally tained from the census records but their age, sex, marital status, birth- this has not been done and no esti- place and reationship to the head mates have been made. Further of the household. There is much of comments about the ‘total’ popula- interest to be gleaned from these tion will refer either to the ‘net’ or the listings for each local community. ‘gross’ population as appropriate.

59 Category Males Females Total 447 (54%) were fairly evenly distrib- uted over the age range 20-74. Recorded One odd feature of the age population 372 434 806 Visitors 0 3 3 structure is the relatively low num- ‘Net’ Population 372 431 803 ber of men of working age com- pared to the number of women. In Absent household the age group 20-59 there were 204 heads 26 1 27 women but only 124 men. Adding Other absent residents ? ? ? in absent household heads changes Gross Population 398 432 830 the figures to 150 men to 205 women. This disparity looks odd Table 1. Blakeney 1871: Population totals. when there were more boys than girls and when the numbers aged Household size over 60 were exactly equal (60 men, 60 women). It suggests that there he ‘gross’ population lived as could have been another 30 or 233 separate households, more men away from home on cen- T which means that the aver- sus night. This unknown element, age household size was 3.6 people mostly sailors no doubt, is a per household – perhaps nearer to reminder that population figures 3.7 if all those absent could be need to be read in conjunction with included. The two-person house- their definitions. hold was the most common size (57) but over a quarter (62) had five Birthplace or more people living in them. Bearing in mind that the majority t is often assumed that until the then lived in High Street and First World War most people Westgate Street it can be imagined Iremained in the village of their that living conditions then were far birth. The 1871 census shows that more crowded than they are today. 500 Blakeney people (62%) were The largest households, incidental- born there. However, this is only to ly, were those of William Pond, a be expected when children form blacksmith, with wife, nine chil- such a high proportion of the popu- dren and a servant, and Henry lation. If all those under 20 are Beck, an agricultural labourer, excluded then fewer than half of all with a wife and nine children. adults (48%) gave Blakeney as their William Baker, postmaster and place of birth. This means, of auctioneer (and a widower) also course, that a small majority of had nine children to support. adults were born elsewhere, the proportions for men and women Age Structure being virtually the same. Whether this is a typical figure for villages at hildren comprised a high that time (assuming there is one) is proportion of the population: not known to the author, but no Cone quarter of the net total doubt much depends on population were under ten (rather more than trends. A growing village will bring today!), 286 (35%) were under 15, in people from outside – but and 355 (43%) were under 20. Only Blakeney’s population had been 28 people were, or claimed to be, falling during the previous 20 years aged 75 or over, while the remaining or so.

60 Perhaps those not born in were ‘professionals’, tradesmen and Blakeney came from villages close shopkeepers, and building workers. by? A count shows that 100 of the The missing 6% were merchants 235 ‘foreigners’ were born within with shipping interests (including five miles of Blakeney, and a fur- coal merchants) and coal porters ther 47 within ten miles. This cov- (musical or otherwise), land-based ers 80% of all adults and leaves perhaps, but dependent on the sea just 62 who came from elsewhere nevertheless. If the supposed addi- in Norfolk and 26 from outside the tional absent seamen are also con- county. (It’s a fair bet that today sidered then it could be argued rather more than 26 adults living that sea-based livelihoods were in in Blakeney were born outside the majority. And no doubt trades- Norfolk.) In view of the strong links men, shopkeepers and building between Blakeney and the workers would have been fewer in Northeast in the 1800s it is sur- number without their maritime prising that only two adults were customers. So perhaps Blakeney’s born there – and neither of them in seabord location accounted for South Shields. somewhere near 60% of all jobs Blakeney-born couples were not taken by men. very numerous: a ‘head of house- Other insights can be gained by hold’ and his wife both from linking occupations with birthplace Blakeney can be found in only 27 of and age structure. It is notable, for the 233 households in the village. example, that all the fishermen were born either in Blakeney or Occupations within ten miles of it, as were near- ly all the mariners. Taking the two ost married women were groups together, 71% were born in busy enough looking after Blakeney. Agricultural workers, on Mtheir families and had no the other hand, show a rather dif- additional occupation. On the other ferent pattern: of 55 such workers hand virtually all men had a specif- only 45% were born in Blakeney. ic occupation, sometimes more The difference between these two than one; very few had the leisure figures (notwithstanding the small of ‘retirement’. sample) suggests that Blakeney Marine occupations can be men may have preferred to go to expected in any coastal village. Of sea, despite the attendant dangers, the 236 men with known occupa- leaving others to take up agricul- tions in Blakeney at least 108 tural jobs. (46%) derived their living from the The census figures also show sea: 28 were fishermen and 62 that a relatively high proportion were mariners, including master (36%) of the professional and mariners. The others were mostly skilled workers came from beyond officials, including six pilots, and the ten-mile radius, and that only there were also four shipwrights 28% were born in Blakeney. This and a sailmaker. tendency can be seen in the mar- Compared with these, there itime sphere as well. The coast- were 114 men (48%) engaged in guard and the customs officer, as ‘land-based’ occupations. Almost well as two of the four shipwrights, half of these were farmers and came from more than ten miles farm workers, while the remainder away, as did the rector, schoolmas-

61 ter, druggist, barber and shepherd, years before 1871 and the one for example. This need not imply that taken 100 years after. The 1770 Blakeney was incapable of producing census was taken by the Church.2 such people – only that mobility was Each household is listed, with all greater in such occupations. adults named and a count of the As well as being the most ‘local’ number of children living there of the main working groups, the (stated to be those under 16). It fishermen also had a distinctive appears to represent the usually age structure: over 60% were aged resident population regardless of 55 or over – and only two were whether they were at home at the under 30 (one being the teenage time. The 1971 census is part of son of a fisherman). Conversely, the decennial civil series begun in almost 90% of the mariners were 1801. Much information is avail- aged under 55, presumably an able by parish although that relat- indication that being a sailor was ing to individuals, of course, can- preferable to being a fisherman. Yet not be seen until 2071. though these statistics tell us The total population in 1770 (roughly) ‘how many’ they do not was 458, including three women in tell us ‘why’. Perhaps mariners the Townhouses and six children were more than happy to convert to who appear to be orphans. This fishing once they had seen the implies that the population nearly world – and could afford a boat of doubled between 1770 and 1871, their own. although other census totals show To some extent the pattern at that the peak of Blakeney’s popula- sea was paralleled ashore: agricul- tion was around 1850.3 In the fol- ture was essentially a young man’s lowing 20 years Blakeney ‘lost’ occupation. Agricultural workers some 250 people – where did they and mariners together comprised go? By 1971 the total had declined over 60% of the 15-19 age group, further to only 660 (or there- whereas these two groups formed abouts). only 20% of the similar number in The only two elements of the the 55-64 age group. Many of the population which can be compared older men were tradesmen and directly in all three censuses are shopkeepers – had some started the proportion of children and life in agriculture? household size. In 1770 those under 16 (169) comprised 37% of Population Changes the village total; by 1871 the child population had risen to 295 but very census represents just still formed 37% of the total. By one moment in the continu- contrast, in 1971 there were only Eous process of population 110 children under 16, just 17% of change, a ‘still’ from a moving pic- the total. ture. Looking at one census in iso- In contrast to the fluctuating lation gives no indication of what total population, average household these changes might be, and a size has been falling steadily. In much longer article would be need- 1770 the average was 4.1 people ed to give a fair account of them. per household, in 1871 it was 3.6, All that can be done here is to and by 1971 only 2.3 (since when it make just a couple of points with has fallen further). The main rea- the help of the census taken 100 son for this inexorable trend is the

62 rise in the number of people living reached. Rather it is a reminder alone, especially older people. that census material can shed light Table 1 illustrates the changes that on many questions – but only if it have been taking place. These is approached with such questions include an increase in the number in mind. Even a brief study of cen- of single-person households from sus material can produce useful 6% of all households in 1770 to and perhaps unexpected insights 29% in 1971. Conversely, house- into the way people in the Blakeney holds with four or more people fell area lived during the nineteenth from 56% of households in 1770 to century. 17% by 1971. Such figures are a reminder of how society has Notes evolved towards the more solitary 1. The figures in this article may not be living conditions typical of today. exactly the same as those which They also explain why communities appear in census volumes but if need ever more houses even if their the author has not been exact in population is falling – quite apart his transcription neither are enu merators infallible in their addi from any demand for second tions. homes or holiday accommodation. 2. Norfolk Record Office, PD.619.31. 3. A graph of population change in Comment Blakeney during the nineteenth century can be seen in an article his article has no ‘conclusion’ by Monica White, Morston Road, in the conventional sense for Blakeney: Building in the 18th and 19th Centuries The Glaven there is no story being told, T Historian No. 5, 2002. no particular conclusion to be

40%

35%

30%

25%

20% 1770 1871 15% 1971

10%

5%

0% 12 34 5 6 7+ Persons per household

Figure 1. Blakeney: Households by size (as a percentage of the Total).

63 Further Field Walking in Field Dalling

by Eric Hotblack

Synopsis: a follow up to two ses- previous article) which provided a sions of field walking undertaken base line to mark out a 25 x 25 by BAHS members. metre square grid as shown in Figure 1. In 2002 the nine squares Introduction to the west were walked and in 2003 the nine squares to the east. he two field walking events organised by the BAHS on T the 9th February 2002 and Results 8th February 2003 provided some Romano-British interesting finds in spite of the From the work reported in the variable experience of the partici- previous article one would expect a pants and the previous extensive concentration of Romano-British work on this site by Ted and Eric finds along the hedge line fading Hotblack (TEH) which had already out to the west, south and east. produced more than 10kg of pot- Indeed the combined results con- tery. firm this pattern (see Figure 2). I am therefore grateful to the Surprisingly one piece of Samian Editors for allowing a short update Ware was found in 2002 and two in of the previous article,1 and to 2003. This is interesting because it explain the work carried out by was probably produced at Lezoux, Society members. near Clermont-Ferrand, and The Romano-British site (Sites imports to Britain ceased around and Monuments Register no. AD 200.2 Prior to 2002 there had 21317) was chosen for the two only been one piece of pottery with events because of the relatively such an early provenance, a piece high frequency of pottery finds pre- of Greyware, identified by the late viously made by TEH, while the Tony Gregory as 1st or 2nd centu- cropping of winter barley made it ry. So this site may have had activ- available on each occasion. Early ity during the early Roman period. February was chosen to try to In contrast to the pottery finds, achieve good conditions for field- tile fragments and one piece of Box work: the artifacts on the ground Flue tile (totalling eight pieces) were would have been well washed of found in the western squares in loose soil by autumn and winter 2002, but none were found in the rain. On both days there was some eastern half. Some pieces of Post- wind and some direct sunlight Medieval tile were found in the which was slightly less than ideal. same area, so surely if Romano- The site is dissected roughly British material were present to the east-west by a hedge line (see the east it should have been found.

64 grid N

EFGHIJ

1

2 metres 3 0 25 50 75 100

Figure 1. Field walking grid SMR 21317, from OS sheet TG 0137

Key to the number of finds per square Figure 2. Romano-British period pottery 1 to 5 distribution 6 to 10

11 to 15

16 to 20

21 to 25

26 to 30

31 to 35 Figure 3. Medieval period pottery distribution 36 to 40

41 to 45

46 plus

Figure 4. All worked flint distribution 65 Stone Age, Iron Age and Saxon Post-Medieval The distribution of worked flint The Post-Medieval period distribu- (Figure 4) is difficult to interpret. It tion, is not plotted, but it could be is of course challenging to find interpreted as another ‘manure worked flints in a field covered with scatter’ like the Medieval one. flints! A few pieces of ‘china’ were Activity throughout all the ‘stone found in both years, as were pieces ages’ seems to create a certain of iron slag. Clay tobacco pipe blotchiness in distribution of stems were found in 2002 but not worked flints.3 Unfortunately no in 2003; the latter are so conspicu- individual dignostic pieces were ous they are bound to have been identified by Prof Robins to indicate picked up if present, but as only which periods were represented. two were found in 2002 their The scarce local wares of the absence the following year is not Iron Age and pagan Saxon period surprising. Also in 2002 one frag- are difficult to distinguish even for ment of lava quern (undatable) was the expert. None were found in the found, but none in 2003. 2002 walking but nine shards were found in 2003. No plot has been Summary made for these periods which are immediately before and after the earing in mind the varying far more find-rich Romano-British skills of the BAHS participat- period. The best square was H2 Bing members it is encourag- with one shard identified as Iron ing that some interesting finds Age and the remaining seven iden- were made, particularly the Samian tified as “Pagan Saxon perhaps Ware. In spite of walking a total of including some Iron Age”. only 18 squares comprising 1.12 hectares (2.78 acres) some differ- Medieval ences in distribution of finds in the A scatter of Medieval pottery was various periods are evident: found, concentrated to the east • Romano-British pottery concen- (see Figure 3). This could result trated in a central area from ‘manure scatter’ during arable •the Romano-British building use. SMR site no.22442, two fields material only to the west away to the northeast, had a •medieval pottery shards increas- medieval scatter of 2-9 shards per- ing to the east whole 25m square when walked by • the concentration of the Pagan TEH in the winter of 1988/9, Saxon/Iron Age shards in which supports this interpretation. square H2 If further adjoining squares were walked it would show whether the These eight Pagan Saxon/Iron Age pottery density carried on increas- shards were in a single square with ing to the south and east, indicat- 39 Romano-British shards so could ing some habitation, or if the quanti- easily have been overlooked which ty stayed at a density comparable shows the value of thorough with a ‘manure scatter’. Comparing searching. Figures 2 & 3 it can be seen that the As discussed the worked flint finds density is higher even than the distribution totalling 376 items is Roman period in some squares. difficult to interpret, due to the lack of diagnostic finds.

66 Gridded field walking is a com- References parative method and despite hav- ing different people participating, 1. Eric Hotblack, 2002, Fieldwalking at Manor Farm, Field Dalling, 2002, this exercise demonstrates that The Glaven Historian No.5 some useful results can be 2. Kevin Greene 1986 The Archaeology of achieved. the Roman Economy p161 3. Robert Silvester, In Barton Bendish and Caldecote: Fieldwork in Acknowledgement Southwest Norfolk, East Anglian Archaeology No.80 1997, p79 and gain many thanks are due to fig.37. Dr Andrew Rogerson and A Prof Peter Robins of the Finds Identification and Recording Service of the Norfolk Museums Service for their expert examination and identification of our finds.

Norfolk Archaeologist in a hole?

See page 70 for the nitty-gritty... 67 Blakeney Eye: Some Comments on Current Investigations John Wright

Synopsis: the Chapel on Blakeney Cley and Blakeney Eyes which lie Eye has been a ‘fact’ of local history on either side of the River Glaven for centuries yet evidence of its exis- as it approaches the beach. At this tence is hard to come by. The BAHS point the river turns westward recently (1998/99) carried out field through a man-made channel into work at the site and prepared an Blakeney estuary. This channel account of the surviving documents. was built in 1924 to replace one Even more recently (2002/03) an further to seaward which was fill- extensive archaeological investiga- ing with shingle. This process is tion of the Eye has been conducted now threatening the present chan- on behalf of the Environment nel and some action needs to be Agency. This note outlines the taken to provide a secure passage nature of the studies. Any fuller for the river. account must await the release of On Blakeney Eye, to the west of the detailed report on the work car- the Glaven but actually in Cley ried out and the interpretation of parish, there once stood a building finds. now represented by low mounds of turf in the shape of two adjacent Background rectangles, with traces of flint walls protruding. This building was yes’ are a feature of the depicted on the first known map of marshes that lie between the area, dated 1586, and since ‘Ethe villages of Salthouse, then it has been described in docu- Cley and Blakeney and the sea. ments as a former chapel. The gen- These Eyes (from an Old English eral supposition is that friars from word meaning ‘island’) consist of Blakeney Friary were responsible mounds of sand and gravel of gla- for it until the Dissolution when it cial origin easily distinguished from may have had many uses before the surrounding marshland, fresh becoming a ruin. marsh now, but formerly salt The presence of these enigmatic marshes open to the sea. On this remains and the gradual but inex- part of the Norfolk coastline, the orable approach of the sea led to landward movement of the beach is the fieldwork conducted by the a conspicuous and continuing fea- BAHS in the winter of 1998/99 and ture as it is rolled landwards over reported in The Glaven Historian the marsh during storm condi- No. 2 for 1999.1 Resistivity and tions. One result is that some of magnetometer surveys were sup- the Eyes, particularly at Salthouse, ported by a sample survey of mole- have wholly or partly disappeared. hills – these being the only form of The same fate is in prospect for ‘excavation’ allowed on this

68 Scheduled Ancient Monument! The of a wider investigation of Blakeney findings suggested that the build- Freshes. The context is the need to ing consisted of two cells, the replace the Cley Cut in the near smaller one being less substantial future with an alternative channel and perhaps built at a different for the Glaven. Depending on the date. There was little sign of any option chosen the likelihood is that building material, except for frag- the Eye and its ‘chapel’ will be left ments of slate associated with the to seaward of the river. The existing smaller cell. The molehills provided seabank will provide protection for some other objects but nothing a while but eventually the Eye will that could be dated to the medieval go the way of those at Salthouse – period. Such negative evidence is into the sea. not incompatible with use of the The north Norfolk marshes in building as a chapel but it does the vicinity of Blakeney and Cley leave room for other interpretations. are at risk both from marine flood- After publication of the results, ing and from the potential blocking samples of the slate fragments of the river Glaven. As the statuto- were identified by the expert on ry authority for coastal and flood building materials at the British defence, the Environment Agency Geological Survey who concluded is required to maintain flood that they could not come from defences and drainage and has North Wales, Leicestershire or the begun a programme of studies to Lake District and that it was highly propose a scheme that would qual- likely they were from Devon or ify for funding from the Department Cornwall as they were similar to for Environment, Food and Rural material from Delabole.2 This is Affairs (DEFRA). particularly interesting as similar Although there are several slate is known to have been used stages yet to negotiate before fund- at various locations in southern ing is secured, the current expecta- England in medieval times.3 tion is that the selected scheme for Roofing slate from this period had re-routing the Glaven will be com- not so far been found in Norfolk or pleted relatively soon. It will, how- Suffolk but it has recently been ever, need to proceed in parallel reported from a 15th century with a linked scheme for flood building in Colchester.4 Although defence at Cley/Salthouse. the use of the slate fragments on the Eye cannot be dated, it is worth Archaeological Studies: noting that before the advent of rail Winter 2002/3 transport slate was an expensive commodity and tended to be used n the latter part of 2002 the only on important buildings. Norfolk Archaeological Unit I(NAU) prepared a Project Design The Environment Agency’s setting out in some detail the Programme archaeological work required on Blakeney Freshes including the ince the publication of the Eye in conformity with a Brief two articles in The Glaven established by the County SHistorian1 a much larger Council’s Norfolk Landscape study of the Eye has been initiated Archaeology (NLA). The Brief speci- by the Environment Agency as part fied that the evaluation should pro-

69 ceed by means of geophysical sur- put across the building but the vey, borehole survey, trial trench- east-west one had yet to be started. ing and field observation. It also set A tray of representative finds was out the research that would be put out for inspection. These necessary to place the site within included a piece of Beaker pottery its archaeological and historical from an unstratified source, a piece context. All relevant sources were of Grimston ware, which could not to be searched: published and be closely dated, fragments of slate unpublished reports, historical and tile, and various pieces of iron- documents, maps and aerial photo- ware, including a door brace, gin graphs. traps and .303 bullets. The slate The geophysical work, conduct- finds had been confined to the ed during December 2002 by southernmost, smaller, cell while Stratascan, entailed magnetometer the tile had been concentrated in a and electromagnetic surveys of the layer in the larger cell. Around the whole 10 hectares of the Eye. A building was a very sparse scatter resistivity survey was not included of debris – bits of pot, small animal because on the lower parts of the bones and oyster shells. The spoil Eye ground conditions would have from the trenches had been metal been too damp. The results have detected although relatively few not been released but it is known objects had been recovered, a that a number of potential archae- medieval penny being the best find ological features were identified in at the time. For the archaeologists various parts of the Eye. a most interesting find had been a In January 2003 boreholes to small piece of rope at the base of retrieve palaeo-environmental sam- one of the walls. ples were augered down to 15 The southern cell had a brick metres but only one penetrated the rubble base, apparently post- underlying chalk. This was fol- medieval, with a couple of small lowed by trial trenching to cover sandstone blocks included. In the some 5% of the site. Some 50 larger cell the north wall, below trenches, each 2 metres wide and ground, was substantial and had a 50 metres long, were arranged in a ledge and batter on the outer side, herringbone pattern but adjusted similar to examples (believed to be so as to pick up the anomalies medieval) seen by Society members recorded by the geophysical sur- in Wiveton in recent years. Some of veys. The ‘chapel’ building was to the wall had fallen and had sand be examined by at least two and gravel deposits over it. No floor trenches, on north-south and east- was visible in the larger cell although west axes. a cobble floor was subsequently revealed by the main east-west BAHS Visit trench. Within the larger cell, there was owards the end of the evidence of features in the sandy trenching phase the NAU’s deposits sealed under the base of T Project Director showed a the building indicating earlier occu- group of BAHS members the work pation of the site. Elsewhere, being undertaken at the ‘chapel’ trenching had uncovered an area of site. At this time, 24th February, prehistoric pits, some containing the north-south trench had been worked flints and some pottery

70 apparently of Neolithic date. Some of the other features shown up on the geophysical surveys appeared to be of geological rather than archaeological origin.

Current Position ince the Society’s visit to the site in February the trial Strenching has been complet- ed and work has continued off site. A record of the finds and features discovered during the various stud- ies, together with an assessment of their significance, has been pre- sented to the sponsors in the form of an Evaluation Report. The case for further excavations at the Eye is being assessed in order to eluci- date the nature and significance of Editors’ Postscript the long history of this site. The photograph above was taken This note has been prepared by the looking east along the trench dug author because the interpretation of through the larger cell (photo: J findings has not been made public. Peake). This shows the cross wall It is expected that an authoritative subdividing the cell and the cobbled report will appear in the next issue. floor at the west end, both possibly In the meantime this note should be constructed during the post- treated as a personal view written medieval period (J Bown 2003 by someone observing events from Norfolk Archaeological Unit, The the outside on behalf of the Society. Quarterly No. 50, pp 24-5).

Notes 1. P. Carnell, The Chapel on Blakeney Eye: Initial Results of Field Surveys, The Glaven Historian No. 2, 1999. J. Wright, The Chapel on Blakeney Eye: Some Documentary Evidence, The Glaven Historian No. 2, 1999. 2. Personal communication 1999, Graham Lott (BGS) to J F Peake). 3. E. M. Jope and G. C. Dunning, The Use of Blue Slate for Roofing in Medieval England, The Antiquaries Journal, Vol. 34, pp 209-217. 4. Essex Archaeology No. 31, p. 123. Reference supplied by Edwin Rose, NLA.

71 Back Pages

Snippets: Them stones, them dry stones

t the eastern end of the Chancel in Cley Church A there is a reminder of the many changes that have taken place in parish churches. Hidden from sight underneath the present Altar, there is a large stone slab that was eroded and cracked before Figure 1. Central cross of the Cley Altar being set in it’s present position. The slab, called a ‘mensa’, is the top of a medieval altar. Although many disappeared after the Reformation and the edict of 1564, they are not uncommon. Distinctive features of these altars are the five crosses incised into the surface, for the five wounds of Christ, which were anointed when the altar was conse- crated. One cross was central with another in each of the four corners. In the Cley altar four simple and Figure 2. The two slabs of Purbeck Marble rather crude crosses are still visible in Wiveton Church. with the central one being illustrat- ed in figure 1. In the north aisle there are rem- nants of another medieval altar. Two stones set in the floor under the present Altar have in total four crosses or parts of crosses cut into their surface. The arrangement of these crosses suggests the two stones were part of a larger slab with the central section now miss- Figure 3. Close-up of one of the Wiveton ing. They may have been part of a slabs showing the quarter circle removed from the corners. subsidiary altar or even an altar in the earlier and much smaller church. Both are now much eroded, with In Wiveton, the origins of two the smallest (A) having quarter-cir- stone slabs of Purbeck Marble, on cles removed from each corner (fig- either side of the pulpit, are more ure 3). Were these also parts of problematical (figure 2: A and B). altars? There are no crosses visible 72 on the surface of either stone, but 5 Dec 1770 in the John & Rebecca in Medieval times some subsidiary (John Taylor master) from altars did not have the distinctive Newcastle carrying 26 chalder of crosses as at Cley. There is, howev- coal and 2 British Gravestones. er, another possibility - these slabs (PRO ref E190/576/2) may have been part of an ornate tomb with pillars set in each corner Presumably British stones attract- to support a canopy or table-top. ed a lower rate of duty than foreign The original raised tomb of George ones. I cannot believe that only two and Anne Brigge is an obvious can- people, wealthy enough to afford a didate (see page 33). We know the headstone, died in Blakeney, Cley portrait brasses were once set in and district in 1770. So how did Purbeck Marble and in 1614 an the rest get their stones? order was made to dismantle this By the by, the Port Books also had tomb. four entries for grindstones, three of them in 1780. Curiously John Peake these grindstones were measured by the chalder rather than being individually counted as they had been in 1770 (there were only two Feedback: to count). So, how many grind- Importation of Stone for stones did one get in a chalder? memorials Was there even a constant size? Was there a reason for the change n the course of a fascinating in the style of entry in the Port tour around the graveyard at Books, or was it merely a quirk of IWells (reported in the BAHS the person making the entries? Newsletter, June 2003) conducted by Nina Bilbey, the question arose Richard Kelham of whence the material used for all the lovely headstones in this area’s many churchyards came. The obvious answer given was Snippet: that, as North Norfolk is not well From the Norfolk Chronicle endowed with freestone, they came 1770 by ship, possibly in lieu of ballast. These stone slabs must have been “Last Sunday evening [15 Jan] a a valuable commodity – and pre- fishing smack, riding in 6 fathoms sumably dutiable – so it is surpris- water off Blakeney, was run down ing just how rarely they feature in by a coasting sloop, and sunk the Cley and Blakeney Port Books. directly. The people were with great A quick perusal of my Port Book difficulty saved by a boat.” transcripts for the years 1770 and 1780 reveals precisely one entry for “Monday 7 May, Rev Thomlinson, ‘gravestones’, nine for ‘flagstones’ Rector of Cley, was married to Miss (measured in Dozens) and one Winn of Holt, a very agreeable ‘slabstone’, all shipped from young lady, endowed with every Newcastle or Sunderland in compa- qualification to render the married ny with a holdful of coal. The state happy, and possessed of a ‘gravestone’ entry is: fortune of £15,000.”

73 Feedback: Archaeological Research Centre – The Windows of Wiveton known to some NMM staff as the Church – an additional note “soggy wood department”. He was the author of numerous articles and not a few books, the ollowing the discussion in most famous of which is his two- Glaven Historian No.4 ( 2001) volume study of The Merchant Fa reference has come to light Schooners, essential reading for which might provide yet another anyone interested in the coastal explanation for bullet holes in traders of Britain. He was 83. church windows. K Thomas, in his important work Religion and the Decline of Magic (1971) discusses the irrever- Contributors ent behaviour of members of church congregations in the early Jonathan Hooton teaches geogra- 17th century, and the resulting phy and environmental science at referrals to the ecclesiastical Notre Dame School, Norwich. He is courts. He quotes a case (page 191, probably better known here as the taken from Ely Diocesan records author of The Glaven Ports. B2/20 f79v) of a man who took a fowling piece to church intending Eric Hotblack is a farmer whose to clean it during sermon. Having field walking experience has led to done so, he thought he might as a wider interest in landscape well check that it was working, and archaeology. so discharged it into the roof. Leaving aside the glass at Richard Jefferson, former crick- Wiveton, one wonders how many of eter and teacher, is an avid collec- the shotgun pellets discovered in tor of things historical, especially church roofs, attributed to those relating to the Glaven Valley. Cromwell’s men having shot at the angel figures, may have a similar John Peake, biologist, formerly origin. worked in the Natural History Museum, London, and recently Edwin J Rose retired; has many early links with Norfolk Landscape Archaeology north Norfolk.

Pamela Peake, author, lecturer and recently retired adult educa- Obituary: Basil Greenhill tion tutor; has a long-time fascina- tion for social history. he death has been announced of Basil Monica White is a botanist and TGreenhill, the maritime his- formerly lectured at University torian and former Director of the College, London. National Maritime Museum at Greenwich. During his tenure at John Wright is a retired town the NMM, Greenhill greatly planner who worked most recently expanded the scope of the museum for Norfolk County Council. and, inter alia, founded the

74