A Family of Substance George Brigge of 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 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 . 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 , 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- 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 age 5. 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 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 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

1 William = Catherine

2 Thomas I = Joan William Brigge Rector

3 John

4 Thomas II = Isabel Russell

5 Edward = 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 Linnell 8 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 Blomefield 12 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 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 , 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- 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 merchant, Lord of was in Little 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- 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 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