Guildhall, London. From an old print in the British MuseumGuildhall, London. From an old print in the British Museum
Guildhall, London. From an old print in the British Museum
6. From the members of these trade guilds in a town the town guild, orcorporation, was formed to rule the town according to its ancient customs and charters, and to obtain for the town as many new rights and privileges as possible. There is much in the corporation of a great city like London, with its many companies, or guilds, which is connected with city life and work of the Middle Ages.
Summary.—Woolandagriculturewere the great industries of the Middle Ages in England. English wool was an article of export, and English cloth also, in later times. Norman kings had introduced Flemishcloth-workershere, but the trade died down in the time of King Henry III.After the Black Death it revived greatly, andwool-merchantsbecame a very rich and powerful body. Many of the fine church towers, in Suffolk, Gloucestershire, and Somersetshire especially, were built by them. This was a period, too, whentrade guildswere very strong.
Summary.—Woolandagriculturewere the great industries of the Middle Ages in England. English wool was an article of export, and English cloth also, in later times. Norman kings had introduced Flemishcloth-workershere, but the trade died down in the time of King Henry III.
After the Black Death it revived greatly, andwool-merchantsbecame a very rich and powerful body. Many of the fine church towers, in Suffolk, Gloucestershire, and Somersetshire especially, were built by them. This was a period, too, whentrade guildswere very strong.
1. From early Christian times in England torelieve the poorwas looked upon as a Christian duty, and every church and religious house took its part in the work as a matter of course. You will remember that in early days there was not much moving about of people from one manor to another, so that it was not at first difficult to knowthe sick and the needy in each place, whether in town or country. Many religious houses or hospitals were founded for the purposes of relief. They were not on a large scale, but there were a good many of them. In the fourteenth centurypilgrimageswere very popular, and many pilgrims were always to be found on the road.
2. We must remember that there was another side to a pilgrimage besides the religious one. A pilgrimage was one way of travelling and seeing the world. Indeed it was almost the only means by which a poor man could travel and have change of scene. Permission was given for that purpose because it was regarded as a religious act. It is not at all surprising that folk who wanted to see the world often took advantage of a pilgrimage from no very religious motive. Pilgrims could always find food and lodging at a religious house on their way, and there were scores of places in England to which pilgrimages might be made, to say nothing of a journey to the Holy Land, or to the shrine of St. James of Compostello, which were two grand pilgrimages.
3. In time pilgrimages became somewhat of a nuisance, for many of the people taking part in them were anything but pious; and, towards the end of the fourteenth century, strict measures were taken to prevent beggars and servants from wandering from one hundred to another on pretence of going on a pilgrimage. Each had to have a letter, properly signed by an officer of the hundred, giving him leave.
Canterbury PilgrimsCanterbury Pilgrims
Canterbury Pilgrims
4. But beggars and wanderers increased. We find some towns, in Tudor times, taking steps to put downbeggars. In the early part of the sixteenth century vagabonds found in London were to be "tayled[12]at a cart's tayle", and collections were made for the poor weekly, and distributed at the church door. In the year 1536 there were fifteen hospitals and four lazar-houses in the city of London. At the dissolution of the religious houses all these were seized, but the city managed to save St. Mary Spital, St. Thomas's Hospital, and St. Bartholomew's Hospital. The city found that it could not get enough money to keep even one of these going, so a tax was levied for the purpose. Bishop Ridley and others tried to draw up a scheme for findingwork for the poor, teaching them to make caps, feather-bed ticks, nails, and iron-work.
5. Other towns tried the same plan, and the king and Parliament issued many orders about the treatment of the poor and vagabonds. But it was much easier to issue these orders than to carry them out, and the beggars increased in numbers and in impudence in spite of all. In 1547 it was ordained that a sturdy beggar might be made a slave for two years, and if he ran away, then he was to remain a slave for life. The sons of vagabonds were to be apprenticed till they were twenty-four years old, and their daughters till they were twenty years of age, and if they rebelled, they were sent to slavery. The idea was to train them to work.
6. In all this the difficulty was, how to find the money to carry out these schemes. The king had swept away all the goods and gifts which had been made to monasteries, churches, and hospitals; the free-will offerings of many generations had gone into the pockets of the king; the institutions which had been founded to help the poor had become the private property of the king's favourites. It was not likely that people would be very keen to offer their money for the relief of the poor, and though urged to give what they could, they were very backward in doing so. Later on, in Queen Elizabeth's reign, the dwellers in each parish were urged to find work for the labourers in their parish; but the beggars still wandered and the poor still abounded.
7. In the year 1572 some verysevere lawsweremade concerning vagabonds. A man who was convicted a third time of being a vagabond was to be punished with death. Habitations were to be found for all the poor belonging to a parish; no strangers were to be allowed to settle in a parish; and each parish was to be taxed for the relief of the poor. At the same time, every parish was to find something to do for all the poor who were able to work. Usually a stock of wool, hemp, and flax was bought, and the poor were supposed to be taught to spin. Each county was also to provide a House of Correction, where those who would not work should be forced to do so.
8. To keep down the number of poor people in a parish, order was given that only one family might live in one house, and no new house might be built in the country unless it had 4 acres of ground attached to it. In the cities of London and Westminster, and for three miles round them, no houses were to be built except for persons worth a specified amount. Houses might not be divided into tenements, nor might lodgers be taken in.
9. All this was to keep people as much as possible in the places where they belonged. Thechurchwardens and overseershad to attend to the relief of the poor. There are, belonging to a good many parishes in England,old account-books, showing how these officers raised and spent money on therelief of the poor. Some of these books go right back to this time, though most of them begin a good deal later. These officers had to keep a very sharp look-out. Of course they did not want thepoor-rate to be any higher than they could help, so strangers coming into the parish were quickly tracked and hindered from gaining a settlement there. Vagabonds and strolling players were hurried out of the parish, and in some cases whipped. The stocks, the whipping-post, and the cage were set up near the churchyard gate, and they were in pretty constant use.
10. The officers were very anxious, too, to prevent anytravellersfrom falling ill in their parish. Those who were sick, and could possibly be moved, they shifted on to the next parish, lest they should become chargeable to the parish. Some parishes spent a good deal of money, and the officers much time, in conveying people out of their bounds. That led, we may imagine, to many disputes between parishes, and gave the court of Quarter Sessions a lot of work to do; for amongst the many things which Quarter Sessions had to attend to was the carrying out of the Poor-Laws.
11. Parishes had to look after and to support their own poor in much the same way right down to the early part of the nineteenth century, less than a hundred years ago.
Summary.—Relieving the poorwas, in early times, a Christian duty. The poor belonging to a place were then easily known. Wandering from place to place was discouraged.Pilgrimagesbecame very popular, as it was the chief way by which poor people could travel and see the world. In later times pilgrims were often idle vagabonds.In the sixteenth century some attempts were made to restrain vagrants, and to find work for the poor. After the religious houses had been got rid of, the duty of doing this wasthrown on the parishes, and graduallyrates for the relief of the poorcame into being. The officers who specially looked after the poor were calledoverseers. Most parishes have still the old account-books, which show how the money was raised and spent for about two hundred years. Our present poor-law came into being less than 100 years ago.
Summary.—Relieving the poorwas, in early times, a Christian duty. The poor belonging to a place were then easily known. Wandering from place to place was discouraged.Pilgrimagesbecame very popular, as it was the chief way by which poor people could travel and see the world. In later times pilgrims were often idle vagabonds.
In the sixteenth century some attempts were made to restrain vagrants, and to find work for the poor. After the religious houses had been got rid of, the duty of doing this wasthrown on the parishes, and graduallyrates for the relief of the poorcame into being. The officers who specially looked after the poor were calledoverseers. Most parishes have still the old account-books, which show how the money was raised and spent for about two hundred years. Our present poor-law came into being less than 100 years ago.
1. In the time of King Edward III, that is, in the fourteenth century, there was a great change in the arrangement of castles and castle-building. We cannot say much about it here, it would take too long; but the changes made show that there was a desire to make the castle, not merely a strong defence against an enemy, but also a dwelling-place for the baron, his family, his servants and men-at-arms. Many buildings were added for comfort and convenience. In fact, a castle became a kind of little town.
2. William of Wykeham, that great master-builder, was not only a builder of churches and colleges, but a castle-builder as well. The great Round Tower at Windsor Castle, and other parts of that building still in use, are his work. The general arrangement of the Tower of London will give us an idea of the sort of habitation a castle of the fourteenth century was intended to be. In fact, we may say that every old castle, which is still inhabited, has considerable indications of workdone in this and the following centuries, to fit it to be a comfortable dwelling-place as well as a fortress.
The Round Tower, Windsor CastleThe Round Tower, Windsor Castle
The Round Tower, Windsor Castle
3. A good many houses, too, were protected by walls, and sometimes even called "castles", though they were not what we usually understand by the term. Many of these weremoated houses, the moat forming the first line of protection. Then came the battlemented wall, within which the house proper was built.
4. The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries were stirring war times, and the nobles kept up bands of armed men, who lived close to, and even in, their strong houses and castles. In the fifteenth century, during the long period of the Wars of the Roses, there was much work for these "men-at-arms to do". This constant warfare weakened at length the power of the barons. Sometimes the Yorkist king, sometimes the Lancastrian king was in power; and whichever side got the upper hand the king seized the property of the nobles on the other side.
5. As a matter of fact the nobles killed each other off, and when Henry Tudor, a Lancastrian, became king, there was an enormous amount of power in his hands; and he used it so as to keep a closer grip of it.
6. The towns and the traders had no liking for war, and they were quite satisfied to see the government of the country in the hands of a strong king. The new nobles, whom King Henry VII made, had most of them sprung from the merchant and trading class.
7. These new men, and even the king's own friends and supporters, were not allowed to keep bands of armed servants or retainers, able to turn the scale of a battle against the king. The Earl of Warwick, the "King-maker", had played that game several times; and it was through Lord Stanley bringing his men over from King Richard III's side to the side of Henry in this way that he had won the Battle of Bosworth, and placed the English crown on Henry's head.
8. After becoming king, Henry VII determined that these bands of armed men, who would follow the whistle of their lord, must be put down. He therefore set to work cautiously, but he had his way. The nobles might no longer keep hosts of servants in livery as they pleased. The king cut down the numbers, so that he might be in a position to say to any of his nobles that his good word he did not want, and his bad word he cared nothing at all about.
9. You will remember the story of King Henry VII and the Earl of Oxford. The king went to pay the earl a visit, and his host, to show him honour, had two long lines of stout retainers, all armed and dressed in his livery, drawn up to meet him. He did all in his power to show honour to the king. When the visit was over, the king said to the earl:
"I thank you, my lord, for your good cheer, but I may not endure to have my laws broken in my sight; my attorney must speak with you."
10. Then there was "trouble"; and the earl thought himself very fortunate in getting out of the "scrape" by paying a small fine of £10,000. It was very awkward for a man to be a noble in Tudor times. He never knew exactly where he was. The king might be making a great fuss with him one day, clapping him in the Tower a few days after, and then chopping off his head and ornamenting London Bridge with it.
11. Well, this did away with the necessity for big fortified houses which might contain barracksfor soldiers, and so we find that the new houses, built in Tudor times, were less like fortresses than they had been before. More attention was now paid to the size and convenience of the rooms. This sixteenth century was a great time for the building of large houses; indeed, the new nobles had better ideas of what a comfortable house was than the older barons had.
Summary.—In the time of King Edward III many Norman castles were altered so as to be more comfortable dwelling-places. Most of them could hold bands of men-at-arms.King Henry VII put down these large bands of retainers, and the new nobles whom he made were not allowed to keep up bands of men-at-arms. The need for castle-dwellings was gone. The new nobles were most of them raised from the merchant class. They had great ideas of comfort, and the age of Tudor houses began.
Summary.—In the time of King Edward III many Norman castles were altered so as to be more comfortable dwelling-places. Most of them could hold bands of men-at-arms.
King Henry VII put down these large bands of retainers, and the new nobles whom he made were not allowed to keep up bands of men-at-arms. The need for castle-dwellings was gone. The new nobles were most of them raised from the merchant class. They had great ideas of comfort, and the age of Tudor houses began.
1. In early Tudor times our towns were much more picturesque than they are to-day. That was chiefly owing to the fact that there were in every town so many religious houses, colleges, and hospitals. These buildings all had grounds of their own in the town, some more, some less; but these open spaces and garden grounds, though they were not open to the public, all helped to make the town airy, and to give variety to the view.
2. The buildings themselves were all different, and many of them were hundreds of years old. Towers, spires, turrets, gables, gateways, and archways in all styles of architecture abounded. There were, of course, many things in the towns which we should not have liked, but they had a pleasant variety which our modern towns have not. Thousands of streets in our towns are just rows and rows of houses, all alike, all ugly, and very dull and dreary to look at and to live in.
3. In the reign of King Henry VIII all the religious houses were suppressed, and given up into the king's hands. The life that had gone on in them for centuries came to an end. Both in town and country districts there were many people besides those who actually lived in them to whom this made a great difference—people who, in one way or another, got their living out of the monasteries. Shutting up the monasteries threw all these people, so to speak, out of work. That meant a great deal of suffering.
FOUNTAINS ABBEY, YORKSHIRE, ONE OF THE MONASTERIES RUINED BY HENRY VIIIPhoto. ValentineFOUNTAINS ABBEY, YORKSHIRE, ONE OF THE MONASTERIES RUINED BY HENRY VIII (page 154)
Photo. ValentineFOUNTAINS ABBEY, YORKSHIRE, ONE OF THE MONASTERIES RUINED BY HENRY VIII (page 154)
4. Nowadays, if a factory which has employed a number of people is suddenly closed, it means suffering for those who have been employed there and for their families. Now, though the monasteries did not employ people in the way in which a factory does, it did affect in many ways those who lived and worked and depended on them.
5. In these days, if people are thrown out of employment in one place they are free to go and seek it in another; but that was not the case in the reign of King Henry VIII. If they wandered fromtheir native towns and villages they were treated as vagabonds. It is true that the new persons, to whom the monastery lands were granted, were supposed to do for the people on the land—the poor and the sick—what the monasteries had done for them. But what they weresupposedto do and what theydid dowere very different things.
Old Timbered House, at Presleigh, Radnorshire, dated 1616Old Timbered House, at Presleigh, Radnorshire, dated 1616
Old Timbered House, at Presleigh, Radnorshire, dated 1616
6. It is pretty easy to see how things worked. A wealthy man managed to get a grant of the property of several monasteries at a very cheap rate. He did not want these places to live in; he wanted to make money out of them. The first thing that he did was to strip the buildings ofeverything which would fetch any money. The lead was usually the most valuable part of what the king had left. The roofs would be stripped, the graves broken open to get at the leaden coffins, and the windows smashed for the sake of the lead. Then the building was left standing a ruin. The poor people of the district had been used to receive food daily at the monastery gate, and no doubt had grumbled at the quality and quantity of the food often enough. But now it was no use going to the monastery gate, for the place was a ruin. They could not go to the new lord's house, for that might be miles away. Even if they did find him, he might be the owner of three or four such ruined monasteries. How could he be quite sure that they were the poor he was bound to relieve? And so the poor folk lost the daily food on which they had depended.
7. Then as regards the land. The new landlord, perhaps, might farm his fields; in which case the rents, instead of going to the monastery, went to him. But he was not always on the spot, and very frequently the land was let out to tenants; an agent or steward collected the rents, and the tenants never saw the landlord. But many of these new owners found that the management of the estates caused them a lot of trouble; and, naturally enough, they wanted to get as much money out of the property as they could at the least cost to themselves.
8. Now there was in this sixteenth century still a great demand for wool, and many of these landlords found it would save trouble to turn thesemonastery lands intosheep-runs. A very few men could look after a great many sheep, and there would be no bother about keeping up buildings and barns. If the people were got off the land, there would be no poor to bother about relieving. So it came to pass that much land, which had been cultivated for many centuries, went out of cultivation, and the people were turned adrift. It was a hard state of affairs. The rights which they had had to relief from the religious houses were taken from them, and the means of getting their living also taken away; they were robbed of their employment, and punished for wandering, for not working, and for begging.
9. There were, of course, many instances in which the new landlord came and lived near the old monastery. In some cases the old buildings were altered and turned into a dwelling-house; in others the building material was used for building a brand-new house close by. Where this was the case the old custom of relieving the poor who came to the gate did not quickly die out.
10. For instance, at Standon in Hertfordshire, there was a house belonging to the Knights Hospitallers. When the house was dissolved, much of the property at Standon went to Sir Ralph Sadleir, who had been secretary to Thomas Cromwell, the "hammer of the monks". He owned Standon Lordship, and when the poor were no longer relieved at the Hospitallers' House, in the village, they trooped from Standon up to Standon Lordship, about fifty of them, every day. That customof relieving the poor was kept up there for many years.
Summary.—Most of the picturesque buildings belonging to the religious houses were stripped of all that was valuable and let go to ruin. The new owners, many of them, lived away from their property; and, aswool-farmingwas very profitable then, much arable land was turned into sheep-runs. That threw many out of employment, and increased the number ofvagrants. The new owners were expected to do for the people on their lands what the monks had done, but very few of them did so. The custom of relieving the poor at the gate of the great house was kept up in some few cases, as at Standon Lordship, in Hertfordshire.
Summary.—Most of the picturesque buildings belonging to the religious houses were stripped of all that was valuable and let go to ruin. The new owners, many of them, lived away from their property; and, aswool-farmingwas very profitable then, much arable land was turned into sheep-runs. That threw many out of employment, and increased the number ofvagrants. The new owners were expected to do for the people on their lands what the monks had done, but very few of them did so. The custom of relieving the poor at the gate of the great house was kept up in some few cases, as at Standon Lordship, in Hertfordshire.
1. There were, in the days of Queen Elizabeth, in all parts of the country, hundreds of bare, gaunt ruins where once had been flourishing houses and centres of life and work. It may seem strange to us that the materials left were not sold and cleared away, and the sites made tidy. We must remember, however, that people could not build houses either in town or country as they chose. In Queen Elizabeth's reign the laws against building new houses were very strict indeed, so that there was not a very great demand for building material. Then, too, the quantity of such stone and wood in all these many buildings, in every town and almost every village, was enormous, so that the materialwas not worth much. The ruins were left, a sad and sorry sight, for many a long year.
2. In the towns some of the buildings were turned by their new owners into private houses, and the parts of the monastery were put to strange uses. Nobody seemed to mind; the spirit of destruction seemed to be in the air. Then, as years went on, and buildings needed repair, or roads wanted mending, the old ruins were the handiest places from which to get a load of stone; and so, with leave or without, many loads of stone were carted away from them.
3. We said just now that there was no encouragement given to the building of new houses in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and yet most of the most picturesque old houses in our towns and villages still standing were built at that time. These, however, were not new houses; they were rebuilt on old sites,improvedaccording to the ideas of the time.
4. You will notice in country places a great many houses built somewhat after this style. Many of them are now cottages, but they were not built for cottages; they were the ordinary houses in which yeomen lived in the sixteenth century.
5. There was the hall or house-place—an oblong room in the centre,—on to which other rooms were built, forming a wing at one end, or often a wing at each end, with gables towards the street, and projecting upper stories. A great deal might be said about this kind of house, but there is only space for a very short account of it.
6. The house was built upon a foundation ofstone or brick, so that the wooden sill should be above the ground-level. Into this wooden sill strong upright posts of timber, quite rough, some 8 or 9 inches square, were set. The posts at the angles were larger, often being butts of trees placed roots upwards, so that the upper story might project. Then on the main posts beams were laid, the ends projecting, upon which the framing of the upper story was set. It was just a timber skeleton, into which other timbers were set 8 or 9 inches apart. In later times these timbers were wider apart, and curved or diagonal braces were often used, but at first the uprights were pretty closely set.
Old English HouseOld English House
Old English House
7. The spaces between the uprights were thenfilled in with lath and plaster, flush with the wood-work. In some parts of the country brick was used instead, set in a herring-bone fashion. In later times, when the lath and plaster had decayed, the spaces were often filled in with brickwork laid in the ordinary way. Then again, in other cases the wood-work of the house shrank and left gaps between the lath and plaster and the wood, so the whole of the outside has been covered with plaster, or weather-boarded and painted or tarred, or hung over with tiles.
8. The windows were small, and sometimes in the upper story one was built out, forming an oriel. The roofs were high pitched, in many cases tiled, but more often thatched. In these old houses thechimney-stackis a great feature outside, and the huge fireplace, with its wide chimney-corners, takes up half the house-place inside. From most of these nowadays the old hearth is gone, and a small chimney-breast has been bricked up to take a modern range; but the old chimney-corner, with its funny little window, can usually still be traced.
9. There are quite a large number ofvillage innsof this kind. Very often these are the oldest and most picturesque buildings left in a village, except the church. It is these old-fashioned houses which make village scenery so pleasing to the eye after the dreary rows of bunches of brick, with holes in them for windows, covered in with slate, which fill the streets of our towns, all alike and all ugly.
Summary.—There were ruins in every town and nearly every village in the days of Queen Elizabeth. Gradually the stones were carted away for building purposes and for road-mending.There were many restrictions on building new houses. Most of the quaint old houses, with overhanging stories and high-pitched roofs, belong to the time of Queen Elizabeth. They were built on older foundations. The wood-work in later times has been in some cases filled in with brickwork, in others covered with boarding or hung with tiles. In those houses the chimney is usually at one end of the house, and the queer little window on one side shows where the chimney-corner once was.
Summary.—There were ruins in every town and nearly every village in the days of Queen Elizabeth. Gradually the stones were carted away for building purposes and for road-mending.There were many restrictions on building new houses. Most of the quaint old houses, with overhanging stories and high-pitched roofs, belong to the time of Queen Elizabeth. They were built on older foundations. The wood-work in later times has been in some cases filled in with brickwork, in others covered with boarding or hung with tiles. In those houses the chimney is usually at one end of the house, and the queer little window on one side shows where the chimney-corner once was.
An Elizabethan InteriorAn Elizabethan Interior
An Elizabethan Interior
1. We have said that the Tudor period was a time of building of big houses and mansions. Everycounty in England has some such houses to show. Many of them were built ofstone, some partly ofbrick and stone. Their style shows that the English or old fashion of Gothic building was dying out. Italian ideas and Italian ornament were coming into favour. No doubt one reason why so much of the old work was ruthlessly destroyed was because it was out of fashion. It is astonishing, even in these days, how much good work is destroyed just because it has gone out of date. Among the most famous of these houses we may mention Burleigh House "by Stamford Town", Haddon Hall, and Knebworth; and, belonging to a rather later date, Hatfield House.
HADDON HALL, FROM THE STEPSPhoto. Photochrom Co., Ltd.HADDON HALL, FROM THE STEPS (page 163)
Photo. Photochrom Co., Ltd.HADDON HALL, FROM THE STEPS (page 163)
2. For a big house the idea was to build it round a quadrangle. Smaller houses were in plan very like the half-timbered houses of the yeomen, only on a larger scale, and more richly ornamented. The hall and its wings were extended considerably, and, with a handsome porch, formed in plan a big capitalE, thus:—
Some people have thought that this plan was chosen in honour of Queen Elizabeth, but the truthis that it was the most convenient form, and fitted in best with the ideas of the time. It had grown up quite naturally, in the course of many generations, from the simple hall with the hearth in the middle, the beginnings of which we saw in the huts of the pit-dwellers.
3. Quite early in the fourteenth centurybrickhad begun to come into use for building, but the first bricks were probably imported from Flanders. Hull, which had been founded by King Edward I, had many buildings of brick, and by about the year 1320 it had brick-yards of its own. Flemish weavers were encouraged to settle in England by King Edward III, and they used brick in buildings which they set up. There are a good many houses in the eastern counties and in Kent still standing, which show Flemish and Dutch ideas.
4. Cardinal Wolsey's palace at Hampton Court is a good specimen of the brickwork of his time; and all through the reign of King Henry VIII the chief material used was brick, terra-cotta[13]being employed for mouldings and ornament. This was chiefly the work of Italian artists, and they produced also some very beautiful ceilings in plaster-work[14]for many of their fine houses.
HAMPTON COURT PALACEPhoto. Photochrom Co., Ltd.HAMPTON COURT PALACE (page 164)
Photo. Photochrom Co., Ltd.HAMPTON COURT PALACE (page 164)
5. After King Henry VIII's quarrel with Rome fewer Italians were employed, and English artists were left to work out these new ideas in their own way. From about the middle of the sixteenth century the use of terra-cotta dropped out, and mouldedand shaped bricks began to be used, though stone was used for the more ornamental portions.
6. When we reach the reign of King James I, we find that the leading architect was Inigo Jones. We do not hear very much ofarchitectsduring the Middle Ages. The man employed to do the actual work was allowed to select his own materials and carry out his own ideas pretty much in his own way. But in the sixteenth century the architect became a more important person than the craftsman, and the craftsman had to work according to the pattern and design provided for him.
7. TheJacobean[15]housesshow that the old English styles of building were being left behind, and a newer type of house, plainer and heavier, was taking its place. The Civil War was a very bad time for architects and craftsmen, but after the Restoration a better time came to them again.
8. The Great Fire of London, which swept away almost every mediæval building in the city, gave a greatimpetus, or push forward, to building. You can quite understand that, with so much building going on, the work would be somewhat hurried and very much plainer than it had been. So London became a city of bricks and mortar. Middlesex has large quantities of good brick-earth; and, though bricks were made in that county long before the Great Fire, the Great Fire developed the industry greatly. There was a worthy old Royalist knight of Hammersmith, Sir Nicholas Crispe, who, after the execution of King Charles I,went over to Holland, as so many other Royalists did. There he watched very closely bricks and brick-making, and when he came back to England he introduced many improvements in the art of brick-making along the Thames valley.
Summary.—Italian ideas gradually were adopted in place of Gothic. Many of the finest houses, like Burleigh House and Haddon Hall, belong to this time. The Elizabethan house often took the form of a letterE.Brick has been used in Hull and in other places on the east coast from the thirteenth century, but the brick at first was imported from Flanders. It came into fashion about the time that Cardinal Wolsey built Hampton Court Palace. Italian artists were much employed at first, andterra-cottaandplasterwere much used.After the Great Fire of London brick became the chief building material in London, and the houses became much plainer. Sir Nicholas Crispe, after the Restoration, introduced many improvements into brick-making along the Thames valley.
Summary.—Italian ideas gradually were adopted in place of Gothic. Many of the finest houses, like Burleigh House and Haddon Hall, belong to this time. The Elizabethan house often took the form of a letterE.
Brick has been used in Hull and in other places on the east coast from the thirteenth century, but the brick at first was imported from Flanders. It came into fashion about the time that Cardinal Wolsey built Hampton Court Palace. Italian artists were much employed at first, andterra-cottaandplasterwere much used.
After the Great Fire of London brick became the chief building material in London, and the houses became much plainer. Sir Nicholas Crispe, after the Restoration, introduced many improvements into brick-making along the Thames valley.
1. Not very long after the dissolution of the monasteries the churches had a very bad time to go through. It is perfectly marvellous how rapidly some people, who were in power, discovered that the valuable ornaments and fittings in them were so very wicked and superstitious, that the only thing to do was to seize them for the use of the king as his private property. No attempt was madeto apply the money taken for the benefit of the parishes; it was shamefully and shamelessly squandered. The buildings were very badly treated, and everything in some of them that could be defaced and destroyed was so treated. The changes made in religion under the Tudor kings and queens were so many, and so violent, that ordinary everyday people could not understand them, and deeply religious people were driven in opposite directions. There was bitter persecution for all who did not fall in with the will of the Tudor sovereign, whether Catholic or Protestant, and good men had to suffer and to die on both sides for their faith.
2. All who did not attend their parish church, and take part in the services which those in authority considered to be most fitting, were regarded as bad citizens, and treated as such. We cannot wonder that the parish churches were allowed to go to decay. English people had spent much money on their churches right up to the time of the Reformation. Then they saw the gifts they and their forefathers had made abused or stolen. People were not disposed to do much for their churches after that. In some cases, especially in country places, where the leading people were Catholics or Puritans, it seems as if they purposely let the parish church, to which they were compelled to go by law, get so thoroughly out of order that they might be able to say that there was no church to go to.
3. Many of the houses built during Tudor times hadsecret chambersand hiding-places, which wereknown only to a very few persons. And such hiding-places were much used, in the times of Queen Elizabeth and King James I, by priests, who ministered in secret to those who clung to the old faith.
4. But though the churches were much out of repair, in some of them stately and costlymonumentswere erected in the sixteenth and early part of the seventeenth centuries. They were different from the monuments set up before the Reformation, and were usually built against a wall. They were of various coloured marbles, the effigies lying under circular-headed canopies, supported by columns in the Italian style. The effigies of man and wife were usually represented clad in robes of state, coloured, their children kneeling round the tomb in various attitudes.
5. By and by, instead of the effigies being represented as lying on their backs, with hands clasped, they were shown lying on one side, supporting their heads on their hands. There are many such monuments in Westminster Abbey, and in almost every old town church one or more can be seen.
6. It became a very common practice for one of the oldchapels, built on to the parish church, to be set apart as the private burial-place of a great land-owner. Many new chapels were built for this special purpose. In them we may see specimens of the different fashions in monuments from Tudor days, or earlier, right down to the present time.
Summary.—Much was destroyed in the churches during the violent changes made in the form of worship. In some cases the churches were let go to decay, so that there mightbe no church to go to. There were secret chambers built in many Tudor houses, where those in danger might hide.It was a great time for setting up splendid monuments in the Italian style, usually brilliantly coloured and ornamented.
Summary.—Much was destroyed in the churches during the violent changes made in the form of worship. In some cases the churches were let go to decay, so that there mightbe no church to go to. There were secret chambers built in many Tudor houses, where those in danger might hide.
It was a great time for setting up splendid monuments in the Italian style, usually brilliantly coloured and ornamented.
1. The most notable architect after the Great Fire of London was Sir Christopher Wren, and his master-piece is, of course, St. Paul's Cathedral. He designed, too, most of the city churches. The style was adopted in various parts of the country by various noblemen for building great houses. Brick was regarded as too mean a material for such very grand houses, and stone was used for facing them.
ST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL, LONDON: SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN'S MASTERPIECEPhoto. ValentineST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL, LONDON: SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN'S MASTERPIECE (page 169)
Photo. ValentineST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL, LONDON: SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN'S MASTERPIECE (page 169)
2. In the houses which Wren built brick was very largely used. He introduced rubbed bricks, and had them laid with very close joints. We have some very fine examples of such brickwork in gables of various forms in the early part of the eighteenth century—the reign of Queen Anne.
3. Designs for houses did not improve in beauty as the eighteenth century went on. Many of the houses were very substantially built, and were arranged with an eye to comfort and convenience. The hall, which had been the centre of the old English home, became smaller and smaller; the kitchens were placed below the ground-level, and in towns were often reached by a flight of stepsdown from the street to thearea, which is still so common in London streets.
House in Queen Anne style, South KensingtonHouse in Queen Anne style, South Kensington
House in Queen Anne style, South Kensington
4. Thefront doorof the house became the great ornamental feature of the building, approached by a flight of steps often protected by very handsome iron railings. Attached to many of the railings still are light upright posts for carrying an old-fashioned oil-lamp. Just a few of theselamp-carriershave extinguishers, which were for the use of the link-boys, when on dark nights they had safely lighted the master of the house through the dangers of the streets to his own front door.
5. The brickwork of these houses had become very plain, and less and less stone was used for ornament—a little over the principal windows, andthe boldly cut quoins at the angles of the house. Most of the windows were merely oblong openings in the blank wall.
6. The great point aimed at was to get a handsomedoorway. Sometimes a portico was built out, supported by stone pillars having richly-carved capitals. In other cases a canopy, supported by half-columns, or by brackets, was placed over the doorway. Stone was sometimes used for these canopies, but wood was more common. These wooden canopies and brackets are often very fine pieces of joinery and wood-carving. The canopy sometimes takes the form of a kind of big shell, the ornaments and pattern being finely moulded, and the cornice being deeply and boldly cut. These canopies were painted, and the tops covered with lead to protect them from the weather. As you walk along the streets of an old town, which has not been too much modernized, you will be almost sure to see some specimens of this kind of work.
7. The thick panelled doors of these houses are often grand pieces of work, which would rejoice the heart of a joiner who loves his craft. So many boys now are taught something of joinery at school that there must be a good many of them who know enough to see the beauty there is in a good piece of work, even though it may be quite plain.
8. Another feature in these doorways is the window over the door, intended to give light to the hall. We call it thefan-lightbecause it was usually made somewhat in the shape of an openfan, and you will find in fan-lights some very pretty designs cleverly put together.
9. About the middle of the eighteenth centurystuccocame into fashion. It was easy to handle, and ornamental patterns could be readily produced. The ornamental stone and wood-work was imitated in plaster. Like all mere imitations of good work, it soon became poor, and showed itself to be a sham; but it was very fashionable. There was such a rage for it that the brickwork of a house was often covered with a smooth coat of it, and the whole painted white, or cream colour. Some of the old houses of good sound brick were covered in this way, and it was often used to cover up very poor bricks and brickwork. Good plaster-work, no doubt, often served a purpose in keeping out damp, but it was very formal, and not very beautiful.
10. In the middle of the same century a fancy forGothic architecturerevived, and many brick buildings were built with pointed arches, doorways, and windows, with turrets and pinnacles, all covered with plaster-work and cement, imitating Gothic mouldings and carvings; but it was only sham Gothic, and not at all satisfactory.
11. Indeed we may say that, as the century went on, houses did not become more beautiful. As the population increased in the town, streets of houses sprang up, some large, some small, built in rows and crescents and terraces, in which all the houses were alike; and very dull and drab and mean-looking many of them have become. When theywere built they were made to look neat, or even smart, in front, but little care was taken about the appearance and convenience of their backs. They were not arranged in such a way that each might have a proper amount of light, and that a free current of air could pass through them and around them.
12. In some respects we have improved our houses, but we have much to learn yet. We have, for instance, yet to see thatallhouses, however small, shall have a proper number of bedrooms, large, light, and airy—for we spend one-third of our lives in them. We have also to see that both beauty and fitness shall be properly considered in building a house. Too often no care is taken to provide proper places where food and clothing can be kept, and where that very necessary but unpleasant process of washing and drying of clothes can be carried on without spoiling the comfort and health of the household. Every house needs a bath-room as much as a grate, for where dirt is there is disease, suffering, and death.
Summary.—Stone was used for facing large brick houses in the time of Sir Christopher Wren and at the beginning of the next century (Queen Anne's reign). Wren introducedrubbed brick, laid with close joints, and the specimens of that period are very good. As the eighteenth century went on, beauty declined. The hall became a mere passage, and the windows were oblong holes in the brick walls. Thedoorwayswere often handsome, with porticoes and canopies, some of stone, some of wood. Many of these remain in old town and village streets. Theiron-workof that date is often very good indeed. The doors themselves were usually plain,but well made and solid. The windows over the doors, usually calledfan-lightsfrom their original shape, give many varieties of shape.Stuccocame into use about the middle of the eighteenth century, and became very fashionable, carving being imitated in plaster, and often covering very poor work. Gothic began to revive, but plaster, not stone, was used, and it was a very poor imitation. The fashion for building whole streets, rows, and terraces of houses in the same style came into use.
Summary.—Stone was used for facing large brick houses in the time of Sir Christopher Wren and at the beginning of the next century (Queen Anne's reign). Wren introducedrubbed brick, laid with close joints, and the specimens of that period are very good. As the eighteenth century went on, beauty declined. The hall became a mere passage, and the windows were oblong holes in the brick walls. Thedoorwayswere often handsome, with porticoes and canopies, some of stone, some of wood. Many of these remain in old town and village streets. Theiron-workof that date is often very good indeed. The doors themselves were usually plain,but well made and solid. The windows over the doors, usually calledfan-lightsfrom their original shape, give many varieties of shape.
Stuccocame into use about the middle of the eighteenth century, and became very fashionable, carving being imitated in plaster, and often covering very poor work. Gothic began to revive, but plaster, not stone, was used, and it was a very poor imitation. The fashion for building whole streets, rows, and terraces of houses in the same style came into use.
1. After the Reformation the churches, as we have said, were much neglected for a long time. They were used in a different way from what they had been in the Middle Ages—a great deal more was thought of preaching and hearing sermons. People grew to be very particular as to where they sat in church, and to have a seat in accordance with their dignity and importance.Pewsbecame very important things. Churches were not heated in those days, though the services were very long, for sermons often lasted for an hour or two. No doubt one reason for making pews so high was to keep off draughts. The great people of the parish seemed to try to outdo each other in the height of their pews. Some of the grand pews had canopies to them, like old-fashioned four-post bedsteads, and they were hung round with curtains. In later times they even had fireplaces, with poker, tongs, and shovel all complete.
2. Gradually the whole floor-space got filled up with pews, some square, some oblong, all shut in with doors, and with seats like shelves running round them. The fashion of having pews shut in with doors lasted for several centuries; indeed you may see them still in some churches, though they are not nearly as high as they once were.
3. The churches needed repairs from time to time in the seventeenth century, and a few, a very few, new ones were built. But money was not spent upon them as it had been in the Middle Ages. They were patched up and mended for the most part as cheaply as possible. In very few cases was any attempt made to make them as beautiful as the houses which were being built at the time.
4. After the Restoration there arose a great interest inbellsand bell-ringing. At the end of the seventeenth century a great many rings of bells were hung in the old steeples and belfries, which had to be altered to receive them.
5. Themonumentsset up in the churches in the reign of King Charles II were somewhat smaller than they had been. They were oftentabletson the walls, ornamented with curious carvings of skulls and cross-bones, cherubs' heads, curtains, and festoons of flowers and fruits, often finely carved. You will not find in churchyards manygrave-stonesor tombs of an earlier date than 1660. Thehead-stoneswere then very small, and had little on them except "Here lyeth the body of" so-and-so, and the date.
6. A great many churches were built in Londonafter the Fire. They were furnished with high pews, usually all of the same height, and having doors. The wood-work, especially of the pulpit, reading-desk, and organ-case, in these churches is mostly very fine. A celebrated carver of this period was Grinling Gibbons, and he and his pupils did a great deal of such work, both in churches and houses.
7. In other parts of the country Wren's work was imitated in some of the new churches then built, and in some of the old ones which were altered or rearranged. One of the best specimens of work done at this time is to be seen at Whitchurch, in Middlesex.
8. Not very many new churches, however, were built until the beginning of the nineteenth century, except in some of the towns which had grown up from country villages. In and round London most of the villages increased so much in size that the little old parish church was much too small for the population. Galleries were put up in them in all sorts of queer places, to provide more seats. More room still being wanted, many churches were pulled down, and larger buildings set up.
9. The new churches of the latter part of the eighteenth and the early years of the nineteenth centuries were simply big oblong rooms. The outsides were often copies of parts of Grecian temples. They were crowned with towers and spires somewhat like those on Wren's churches, but not nearly so handsome.
10. Inside, the church was fitted up with a galleryrunning along two sides and across one end. In the end gallery a big organ was placed, and on either side of it, high up, near the ceiling, were smaller galleries, one for the charity-school boys, the other for the charity-school girls of the parish. The galleries and floor of the church were filled with high pews. On the floor opposite the organ were three huge boxes, rising one above the other. The lowest box was for the parish clerk, the middle one was the reading-desk, and the highest was the pulpit, which was often provided with a sounding-board, not unlike an umbrella. The altar was in a little niche behind the pulpit. Chapels were fitted up in much the same way.
11. Under all these churches and chapels werevaults, in which people were buried, but not in the earth. The coffins were placed on shelves, one above the other, round the vault. On the walls of the church above were oftentabletsto the memory of people lying in the vaults below. These, by the nineteenth century, were for the most part simply slabs of white marble, with black or grey borders. There was hardly any carving at all on them; only inscriptions or epitaphs, and texts.
12. Thechurchyardswere used for burials, and by the middle of the nineteenth century most of them were crowded with tombstones. In London nearly all are now laid out as open spaces; many of the grave-stones have quite disappeared, and those which remain are rapidly perishing.
13. When we remember that the churchyards of the old churches had been used as burial-places inmany cases since the early days of Christianity, and even before that, we can easily grasp the fact that the earth had been used over and over again for burials. About the middle of the nineteenth century the nation came to the conclusion that burials in churches and crowded town churchyards should no longer be allowed. The practice was dangerous to the living. Socemeterieswere opened in districts away from the towns and homes of the people. Towns have grown so fast that many of these cemeteries are now surrounded by houses, and are the centres of big populations.
14. About the year 1840 interest began to be taken in the old English styles of building, and a taste forGothic architecturearose again. Since that time places of worship of all descriptions have for the most part been built in some sort of Gothic. When you read that such and such a church or building is in the fourteenth or fifteenth century style, you must understand that it is not a copy of a church built in the fourteenth or fifteenth century, but that its window-heads, doorways, arches, and fittings arein the styleof the fourteenth or fifteenth century. Most of these modern buildings are of brick, only faced or dressed with stone. It is pretty safe to say that there is no old church standing which was built entirely in the fourteenth century, and has remained unaltered from that day to this.
15. In our towns almost every tower and spire which we see is a modern building, though thestylesmay vary from Norman to Perpendicular andseventeenth century. Modern buildings, churches, halls, public offices, and private houses are mostly imitations of the work of past ages. There is no nineteenth-century style of English architecture. Some day, perhaps, England may develop a new style of architecture, such as the world has never yet seen, but at the present time we can only copy and adapt the work of those who have gone before us.
Summary.—Pewscame much into use in churches after the Reformation, and the sides were very high. In the seventeenth century very few new churches were built, but many rings of bells were placed in the towers. Themonumentsbecame tablets, ornamented with skulls, cross-bones, &c. The oldesttombstonesin churchyards are not earlier than 1660. In Wren's churches there is much fine woodwork.In the eighteenth century the new churches built were oblong rooms, fitted up with galleries on three sides, havinghigh pews and a tall pulpit. Corpses were buried invaultsunder these churches and chapels, but by the middle of the nineteenth century burials in town churches and churchyards came to an end.About 1840 a liking forGothic architecturerevived, and the churches and chapels since then have been built mostly in one or other of the Gothic styles. The nineteenth century has no style of architecture of its own.
Summary.—Pewscame much into use in churches after the Reformation, and the sides were very high. In the seventeenth century very few new churches were built, but many rings of bells were placed in the towers. Themonumentsbecame tablets, ornamented with skulls, cross-bones, &c. The oldesttombstonesin churchyards are not earlier than 1660. In Wren's churches there is much fine woodwork.
In the eighteenth century the new churches built were oblong rooms, fitted up with galleries on three sides, havinghigh pews and a tall pulpit. Corpses were buried invaultsunder these churches and chapels, but by the middle of the nineteenth century burials in town churches and churchyards came to an end.
About 1840 a liking forGothic architecturerevived, and the churches and chapels since then have been built mostly in one or other of the Gothic styles. The nineteenth century has no style of architecture of its own.
1. A little of the property which had belonged to the religious houses was saved and turned to useful purposes. Just a very few of the old alms-houseswere allowed to continue their work, like St. Cross at Winchester, and some schools and colleges were founded.
2. There are some of those schools which bear the name of King Edward VI. But Edward VI was only a lad of sixteen years of age when he died, so that he had practically nothing to do with either the good or the evil which was done in his name. In other towns, besides London, good men set to work and managed to get back some small part of the property of old religious houses for school work. In some places they were allowed to have part of an old ruin, which they patched up and made to serve as a school-room. This was the case, for instance, at St. Alban's, where the Lady Chapel of the monastery was the grammar-school until about twenty-five years ago.
3. It is quite true to say that many of our presentgrammar-schoolsrose out of the ashes of the monasteries. But they were not great buildings to hold scores of scholars. Many of them were only founded for ten or twelve scholars from a particular town or district. The sum set apart for a master to teach them was very small, so that he was usually allowed to take other scholars who paid for their education.
4. These schools had their "ups and downs", but many of them in the eighteenth century were in a very bad way. Some had scarcely any scholars, and the buildings were much out of repair. However, most of them are alive and active to-day, and many of them have histories of which they may beproud, and a past which should help them to excel in the future.
5. Children were often taught in the church andchurch porchin country places. John Evelyn was so taught in the early part of the seventeenth century, and many more people could read and write than we sometimes imagine; but knowledge was not within the reach of all.
6. The condition of the poor occupied a good deal of attention, and thepoor-lawswere used to improve matters in many ways. At Norwich, for instance, in the year 1632, a children's hospital was provided for boys between the ages of ten and fourteen. They were to be taught useful trades, and fed and clothed. For dinner they were to have 6 ounces of bread, 1 pint of beer, and, on three days of the week, 1 pint of pottage and 6 ounces of beef; on the other four days, 1 ounce of butter and 2 ounces of cheese. For supper they were to have 6 ounces of bread, 1 pint of beer, 1 ounce of butter, and 2 ounces of cheese. For breakfast every day they had 3 ounces of bread, 1/2 ounce of butter, and 1/2 pint of beer.
7. About the year 1685 the Middlesex magistrates established a "College for Infants", as they called it, where poor children might be trained and taught; and the same plan was followed in other places.
8. Then, too, about the same time, we find private persons establishingcharity schoolsfor a similar purpose. The boys and girls, however, in these schools were not always boarded and fed, but lived at home and went to school day by day. The rulesdrawn up for them by their founders seem very quaint and almost laughable to us. We must remember that there were good reasons for those rules when they were made. There were charity schools in almost every town, and most of them were carried on in the old way till well into the nineteenth century.
9. Thedressof the school-boys looks queer to us, because it is the style of dress worn when the school was founded. Ablue-coatboy wears still the dress worn in the sixteenth century. The littlecharity-school boyswore leather breeches, coloured stockings, coats of a quaint cut of brown or blue or green or grey, and flat caps, with two little pieces of fine linen fluttering under their chins—bands as they were called. This was the boys' dress of the seventeenth century, and they wore it long after it was out of fashion. The girls, too, had frocks and cloaks of a wonderful cut and colour, white aprons, and "such mob-caps".
10. They went to school in queer old buildings on Sundays and on week-days. They were often taken to church, where they were perched up aloft by the organ in dreadfully uncomfortable galleries, so uncomfortable that it is a wonder that some of them did not fall over into the church below. There they led the singing—what little there was. Their hours in school were pretty long, but they managed to get in a very fair amount of play, and always had time for falling into mischief.
11. People often laugh at these old-fashioned charity schools, and the work they did. That isa pity, because they were founded long before Parliament troubled itself about the education of the people. All honour to those good old-fashioned men and women who did what they could to provide teaching and training for poor boys and girls, and to put them in the way of being able to earn their own living.
Summary.—Most of Edward VIgrammar-schoolswere founded out of small portions of property which had belonged to religious houses. Generally they were only for a small number of scholars. In the eighteenth century many of these schools were in a very poor condition. Most of them now are alive and flourishing. In the seventeenth century a good many attempts were made to teach the children of the poor on a small scale. Some took charge of the children altogether; others, thecharity schools,were day-schools. These lasted without much change till the middle of the nineteenth century. The blue-coat boys' dress and the dress of these charity children was the dress of the time when they were founded.
Summary.—Most of Edward VIgrammar-schoolswere founded out of small portions of property which had belonged to religious houses. Generally they were only for a small number of scholars. In the eighteenth century many of these schools were in a very poor condition. Most of them now are alive and flourishing. In the seventeenth century a good many attempts were made to teach the children of the poor on a small scale. Some took charge of the children altogether; others, thecharity schools,were day-schools. These lasted without much change till the middle of the nineteenth century. The blue-coat boys' dress and the dress of these charity children was the dress of the time when they were founded.