Reviews

REVIEWS The Glass Industry of the Weald. By G. H. Kenyon. 9 | in. x7£ in. Pp. xxii+231, pi. xxii+21 figures. Leicester University Press, 1967. 50s. In outline, the annals of the glass-making industry in the Weald are short and simple; it began in the early fourteenth century, underwent a sudden development about 1567 with the immigration of French workmen, disappeared equally suddenly about 1617, and never extended beyond a small area in the north-west corner of the Weald, within a radius of five or six miles of Plaistow. Like the iron industry, it consumed vast quantities of fuel, and it was the availability of wood for firing the furnaces that led to the establishment of glass-making in the Weald. When coal, a more efficient fuel, came into general use in the early seventeenth century, the Wealden industry collapsed in the face of competition from Stourbridge and elsewhere. Since the raw materials, white sand, lime, and ash are ubiquitous, fuel and chance determined the location of the industry. In the Weald it never attained much importance, as Mr. Kenyon's thorough and painstaking study clearly demonstrates. Nor has it left much to whet the appetite of the industrial archaeologist. Furnaces were small, only a dozen feet square or less, and the siege banks no more than 2 ft. in height. Their construction was simple and cannot have occupied more than a very few days. Altogether, they do not make impressive ancient monuments, especiaUy where they have been robbed of their masonry. Mr. Kenyon has investigated forty-two proved, probable, and possible sites in his part of the Weald. From this unpromising material, supplemented by a hmited amount of record material, he has produced an authoritative and comprehensive account of the scope, technology, and history of glass-making in this corner of Sussex and Surrey, and of the families who worked with the glass-houses. No doubt from time to time other sites wiU be discovered, and Mr. Kenyon's work wiU need to be supplemented. It is difficult to believe that it wiU ever be superseded. The only Kentish reference is to the glass-house at Knole, established in 1585. It was published by T. Barrett Lennard in The Antiquary in 1905 and needless to say was known to Gordon Ward (see Sevenoaks Essays). Possibly it was set up expressly to provide glass for use in the mansion-house, although John Lennard, the then lessee of Knole, unlike Lord Buckhurst, the subsequent owner, is not usuaUy credited with any notable building activity. But, the transport of glass being as 300 REVIEWS difficult as it was, and the establishment of a glass-house so easy, it would obviously have been sensible to set one up in connection with any large-scale building operations if a plentiful supply of fuel was to be had locaUy. The largest and finest site to which Mr. Kenyon refers is the 1608 glass-house at Jamestown, Virginia. We are used to the idea that England and the U.S.A. share a common language, literature, and law; it now appears that our joint heritage even extends to industrial archaeology. It is indicative of the breadth of Mr. Kenyon's study of glass-making between the fourteenth and the seventeenth centuries that he brings in the New World to make good lacunae in the Old. F.W.J. A Calendar of the White and Black Books of the Cinque Ports, 1432-1955. Edited by Felix HuU. Her Majesty's Stationery Office and the Records Pubhcation Committee of the Kent Archaeological Society (1966). Price 10 gns. It is virtuaUy impossible to write a review of a Calendar which occupies (with the introduction and index) 960 large printed pages; an assessment of such a book as a tool for scholars is really all that can be offered. Since Miss K. M. E. Murray's Constitutional History of the Cinque Ports was pubhshed in 1935, there has not been a major work on this ancient confederation of maritime towns, an absence which may be partly attributed to the inaccessibility of the records during the war years and partly to a temporary lack of interest (for historical research on almost any subject except genealogy seems to be in or out of fashion from time to time) since the end of the war. With the pubhcation by the East Sussex County Council of detailed catalogues of the archives of Seaford (1959), Rye (1962) and Winchelsea (1963) and now Dr. Hull's Calendar, there is greater opportunity than perhaps ever before for scholars to work on various aspects of the Ports either as a confederation or as separate towns. Dr. HuU's introduction traces, among other things, the development and functions of the Brotherhood and Guestling and deals with the administration of the Courts; he writes, too, of the 'process of withernam', on maritime affairs as they affected the Ports, and on the relationship between the Brotherhood and the Lord Warden. These seventeen short essays are adequate to introduce the White and Black Books; Dr. HuU skUfuUy uses those original records in support of his statements. He also provides short descriptions of the books themselves and gives a precise statement on the editorial method he has adopted. To have reduced the proceedings of the Brotherhood for over 25 301 REVIEWS five centuries to a form which omits nothing other than 'verbiage' is a great achievement which puts scholars and all others who have an interest in the Ports very heavily in Dr. HuU's debt. Much that has now been made available to us is in the nature of national, rather than local, history; the marrying of our national records with local affairs will be simplified with the help ofthis Calendar with its very complete indexes. The meetings of the Brotherhood and Guestling were infrequent from about the third quarter of the seventeenth century; in fact, the courts met only five times between 1698 and 1857. 'No one', says Dr. HuU, 'could have been surprised if the meeting of 1828 had brought the useful life of the Confederation to an end, and in fact no meeting was held for 29 years.' It was, however, at the 1857 meeting that 'the members were made deeply aware of their ancient heritage by a letter from Mark Antony [not Anthony] Lower, a freeman of Seaford' which must have stirred the hearts of all who heard or read his resounding phrases. He said that the Cinque Ports possessed a charm of no ordinary character; he reminded the members of the part the Ports had played in the defence of the country, and the great dignity which the Ports enjoyed. Of course Lower was right and even if the Ports are shorn of much of their earlier importance, they are stiU a reminder of former liberties given in return for service. These points will be readily appreciated as one turns the pages of this book to find references to the men of the Kent and Sussex seaboard who were living when ships had to be furnished for the King 'against his enemies of France' in 1436, or ships being sent to the seas 'to represse enemyes' in 1596; unhappily, however, there are only oblique references to the Armada campaign (pp. 335, 406), but there is an interesting passage (pp. 405-06) in 1614 concerning the services of the Ports upon the seas for the defence of the realm in earlier years. There is also much in these records which will assist the local historian; the names of those attending from each town are given for every meeting and by the very nature of those meetings we can gain a picture of local disagreements, instances of real or imaginary grievances, and the severity of some of the fines. As an example of the latter, Adam White, a former mayor of Winchelsea, who after being admonished at a Brotherhood said, 'Indeede the wiser sorte of the house [i.e. the Brotherhood] would not, and the foolisher sorte durst not fine him', laid himself open to a penalty of £10—a not inconsiderable sum in 1609. The Ports, as a confederation, were usually willing to give financial help to such of their men who were called on to answer charges against them in London or elsewhere and there are instances (e.g. in 1614, p. 404) where a submission was made in Star Chamber that a case against the mayor and town clerk of Faversham ought to be heard before the Lord Warden and the charges borne by the Ports. 302 REVIEWS The protection of fisheries off the coasts of Kent and Sussex occupied a General Brotherhood in 1771 (pp. 562-64); also, in 1726 (p. 555), for example, we find the sohcitors being instructed 'to draw up a petition to the Lord Warden complaining that Yarmouth have taken upon themselves the right of fixing the price of herrings that are brought into the town during the herring season in violation of the privileges of the herring fishery of the Ports'. Fisheries, coats of arms and banners and coronations, shipping and services, customs and lawsuits, charters, records, officers and finance, prisons, soldiers, toUs, loyal addresses and taxes are among the numerous subjects which claimed the attention of the Brotherhood, and with such a diverse list of words in mind something must be said about the indexes to the Calendar. In such a book as this, the indexes are aU-important—a point that the editor realized. Dr. Hull compiled the subject index with its numerous and essential cross-references, while Mrs. J. Elliott of the East Sussex Record Office made the index of personal names; this was indeed a formidable task, for this index occupies 134 pages of the book. The edition sold by H.M. Stationery Office omits the Foreword by the late Major Teichman-DerviUe (one of the staunchest defenders of the Ports and their liberties) and. Dr. HuU's acknowledgments to those who, in one way or another, assisted him in his work; it was surely unnecessarily parsimonious for these few pages to be omitted from one edition if room could be found for them in the otherwise identical (except for the colour of the binding) edition pubhshed by the Kent Archaeological Society. Another omission in both editions is a bibliography: if this had been provided, it would have directed readers to much printed material with which they may not be already familiar. The Editor, the Historical Manuscripts Commission and the Kent Archaeological Society have earned our sincere thanks for making possible the pubhcation of The White and Black Books. The ancient and unique confederation of the Cinque Ports has been well served, and one can only express the hope that Dr. HuU and his staff at the Kent Archives Office, the Archivist to the Corporation of Great Yarmouth, the County Archivist of Essex (if any records have survived for Brightlingsea) and the County Archivist of East Sussex (in respect of the Pevensey records) wiU be able to prepare and publish catalogues of the archives of the individual Ports and their members. So much remains to be done on Enghsh local records: while the expert listing and repair of them helps to ensure their preservation, it is the pubhcation of catalogues which helps to bring them to a wider public in general and to scholars in particular who want to know the hmits of such documentary evidence as has survived. FRANCIS W. STEER 303 REVTEWS Lydden, a Parish History. By Christopher Buckingham. Thomas Beckett Books, Lydden, 1967, Pp. 98. This is substantially a history of Lydden since Domesday times, with a brief prefatory note on the Roman road through the parish. The book was obviously a labour of love, and perhaps inevitably has a slightly old-fashioned antiquarian air. Mr. Buckingham lists every individual and field name from the parish tithe award of 1842, but the field areas are omitted, and there is no discussion of the different economic weight of individuals or social classes. A feature of the book is the extensive use of documents from the Parish Chest, and their changing content is briefly related to national legislation as it affected local government. D.G. Sir Roger Twysden, 1597-1672. By Frank W. Jessup. 8£x5£ in. Pp. xi + 229. The Cresset Press, London, 1965. 35s. Kent was particularly fortunate both in the number and the quality of its gentlemen—scholars of the later Tudor and early Stuart periods. Amongst the able and brilliant men who helped to guide the county through the difficult years which presage, contain and foUow the Civil War, Sir Roger Twysden stands out as one whose integrity was never in doubt and whose qualities remained those of pietas, gravitas et prudentia, come what may. We are deeply indebted to Mr. Jessup for this scholarly and comprehensive study of a great jurist, scholar, antiquary and son of Kent whose misfortune, as the author says, was 'to live at a time when the country was governed rather according to men's emotions than their reason'. Yet, even Mr. Jessup, deeply attached as he plainly is to his chosen hero, confesses to the difficulty of presenting such a man in brilhant colours and admits to the ease with which he may be written off 'as being monumentally duh". It is a measure of Frank Jessup's achievement that his book cannot be so regarded. The character and quahty of Twysden may limit the imaginative scope of the writer, but the story he has to teU is intimately connected with great and stormy affairs of state as weU as those of the countryside; Twysden's abihties as an author were put to sterner and more dangerous tasks in framing the famous petition of 25th March, 1642, and his integrity and trust in reason and law were tested to the hmits during the subsequent years. Eveninmatters of family and estate, hfe by no means ran uniformily smoothly, for any man as conscious of rights and legal responsibilities as he, can never have been an easy neighbour. By presenting us with this weU printed, iUustrated and indexed 304 REVIEWS volume, Mr. Jessup has provided yet another window through which we can see the fascinating 'community of the gentry' in seventeenthcentury Kent. Sir Roger has at last been championed and we can only hope that before long Sir Edward Dering, perhaps here treated somewhat harshly, Sir Dudley Digges, Sir John Marsham and others of the galaxy wiU likewise find champions who wiU extol their virtues whUe by no means ignoring their shortcomings. F.H. A Kentish Patchwork. By Robert H. GoodsaU. 8 | x 5 | in. Pp. 153, 47 plates and drawings. Constable, London, 1966. 25s. This is the ninth and latest volume of a series dealing with Kentish history, past and present, to have come from the pen of our Member, R. H. GoodsaU. It includes several items of general interest gleaned over the years, some of which have previously appeared in print elsewhere, and is profusely iUustrated by the author's own drawings and excehent photographs. The contents of this volume provide ample proof of Mr. GoodsaU's wide interests in folk-lore and topography and illustrate his obvious gift for extracting information from and arousing interest even in the seemingly most intractable subjects; these range from the Romano- British potteries in the Upchurch marshes and the Saxon warriors of Lenham, through mounting blocks, ice-houses and fifteenth-century church towers, to frost and heat-waves and reminiscences of the Battle of Britain. Though the archseologist may feel somewhat uneasy at the author's expeditions in 'the lost lands', he would readily admit to having shared similar excitements and to being thoroughly entertained by these Kentish tales. A.P.D. Britannia: A History of Roman Britain. By Sheppard Frere. 7 X 9 | in. Pp. xiv+432, 1 colour frontispiece, 32 plates, 13 figures (1 folder). Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1967. 84s. It is just over thirty years since R. G. CoUingwood's summary of Romano-British history in Roman Britain and the English Settlements and twelve years since the pubhcation of the late Sir Ian Richmond's Roman Britain; in this time both historical research and archseology have made great advances, and there was need for a new appraisal taking into account the more recent developments in Romano-British studies. This need has now more than been filled by Professor Frere's book. This imposing volume is the first of a series entitled 'History of the Provinces of the Roman Empire', and it is quite evident from 305 REVIEWS the very outset that the author has set an unenviable task to the other scholars engaged in writing the volumes to follow, if they are to maintain his standard. Britannia is devoted to most aspects of Romano-British history and hfe and covers in its seventeen chapters many diverse topics ranging from the Iron Age in Britain and the background of the Roman conquest, the conquest itself and the mihtary history of the province until the third century, the Roman army in Britain, towns, the countryside, trade and industry to Carausius and the fourth century and the end of Roman Britain. Though it may be observed, understandably as it is more securely documented, that perhaps too much space is given to mihtary history at the expense of hfe in the province, such is the wealth of the information contained in this work that the present reviewer feels quite content to leave it to others better qualified to comment on it in detail. A book with such a wide range was bound to be somewhat heavy to handle and the publishers, if they soon force one to seek some means of support, must be complimented for compensating the reader's eye by the clear and pleasing production of the whole volume, unspoilt as it is by printer's errors (Chapter 3 appears twice in the table of contents); the plates and figures do fuU justice to the text, except for the colour frontispiece which is less well reproduced than the original plate in Antiquaries Journal. However, this volume will occupy a prominent place alongside its illustrious predecessors on at least one archaeological bookshelf and, though its inevitably rather high price may put it beyond the pocket of many readers, it should certainly be available in any public hbrary where it wiU no doubt serve as more than 'a spur to advance'. A.P.D. Canterbury under the Angevin Kings. By WiUiam Urry. 9|x6J in. 2 vols. Vol. I. Pp. xvi+514. Vol. II, 23 maps. University of London Historical Studies XIX. The Athlone Press, 1967. £5 5s. By the publication of this work Canterbury has probably lost one of its most entertaining spectacles. Since the War it has been no uncommon occurrence to go into the Chapter Library and find Doctor Urry hovering over an outsize map of Canterbury spread across a considerable portion of the floorspace and placing thereon the results of research now embodied in a large volume and in maps which are more easily controUed. In 1892 Henry Plomer wrote a short account of Canterbury's records, both ecclesiastical and civil. He advocated a permanent exhibition of these which would 'iUustrate the History of England, the History of the Church of England and the rise and progress of the 306 REVIEWS City of Canterbury. Such an exhibition of records would prove a very great attraction to the thousands of strangers that visit the city.' Today with our strong zeal for conservation such a permanent display would be considered impossible and we have to make do with the next best choice, the printed book, mostly to our loss. However, we may excuse the age in which we live when there appears such a work as Doctor Urry's. It is encyclopaedic but not aggressively so and the author has had the exceUent idea of dividing his not-too-long chapters into titled sections of a few pages. These may be read even as one reads snippets in a bedside book. There is an Index to Documents and a General Index which take up pages 447 to 514 and in them one's hobby-horses may be easily traced. The hard core upon which Doctor Urry has raised a fascinating pile of scholarship consists of seven rentals (A to G) and seventy charters which are printed on pages 221 to 442. The seven rentals, supplemented by a less important handful at Canterbury and elsewhere, are criticaUy examined in the Introduction and their probable dates defined. It is incredible that such material has not been used extensively before but a cursory glance at the rentals explains why. Only a devotee of Canterbury, wise in its lore and knowledgeable about every square yard of its terrain, could do them justice. During the present century the pages of Archceologia Cantiana have far too often contained severe reviews of books written by first-class historians with httle local knowledge (there may be instanced Captain Herbert Knocker's 'classic' in volume xxxix). Those of us who knew that Doctor Urry was in travail with this book were sure that there was going to be produced a worthy child and it is so. Not a word is wasted and twelfth- and thirteenth-century Canterbury are before us in detail. Doctor Urry has squeezed every particle from his sources and the medieval city and its inhabitants live as a result. But the author would be the first to deny that he has kiUed the golden-egg-laying goose and at many points he inspires further research. A most important section (pages 113 to 118) is that on the neglected Canterbury mint and its moneyers who normaUy are but names on a sUver penny but herein begin to take on a flesh and blood appearance. Moneyer Lambin Frese possibly played a part in the great fire of 1174 which destroyed the cathedral choir. He had a workshop in the aUeyway in front of Christ Church Gate and according to Gervase the Monk the fire started amongst buildings by the Gate and then spread. Lambin Frese moved some three years later to Stour Street. 'The monks seemed singularly anxious to get rid of him, for they bestowed on him ample ground, far more commodious than the cramped 307 REVIEWS patch he occupied before the gate, gave him a present of 10 marks, and went to the length of securing a charter from Henry I I himself, confirming the arrangements' (page 115). Other moneyers were not so fortunate and Solomon, after being fined the huge sum of 600 marks in 1176-77 for some monetary transgression, did not learn his lesson and again suffered as a result of the persecution of moneyers in 1180 and was written off—-'quietus est'. A moneyer's lot was definitely not a happy one but it often makes for good reading. Several moneyer's names winkled out by Doctor Urry, such as Freawin, Seman, Luke and Otdlief, have not yet been found on Canterbury mint pennies. Much space is given to the topography (for instance, in Rental F, c. 1207, there is the information that the land of the widow of Alured Goss is 'prope ecclesiam sancte Marie [Bredin] que quondam lignea fuit') and government of Canterbury; its mansurae, the gablum, forgabulum, and supergabulum; evework which was possibly a commuted labour service; early reeves; an early Mayor, James de Porta, isolated in time; the gilds and the situation of the gildhaUs; the wards (a London term) or aldermaneria; the ward officers and the extent of their jurisdiction. Complementary to this is an account of the trades and occupations and a discussion on craft gilds. Doctor Urry puts forward the view that St. Mary Magdalen (Fishmanchurch) and St. Mary in the High Street (Breadman-church) might weU be connected with the gilds of fishmongers and bakers. A chapter on the various relationships between the monks, their servants and the citizens kiUs the cherished faUacy that Church and City were poles apart. It is shown that it was not unusual for a citizen of Canterbury to have members of bis family within the monastery's waUs and the many tradesmen-servants attached to Christ Church still further made essential that quarrels should not arise. This chapter also contains valuable miscellanea. There is an assumption that it might not be profitable to excavate the main drain of Christ Church as the monks had a part-time employee who cleaned it out on Mondays. However, the reward might be worthwhile in studying the potter who had a ration of food for every dozen pots produced. Several years ago Doctor Urry headed a handbook from his pen with the foUowing quotation from John Twyne, Mayor of Canterbury, 1554: 'There is scarce any City in this Kingdom which can be preferred to ours, or even compared with ours, for the antiquity of her origins or the dignity of her fortune.' His own devoted work on the history of the City wiU do much to enhance its fame. He has made its dry Angevin-period bones live and has done so without having to depend on the story of St. Thomas Becket. Canterbury ought to be most grateful to him. L.R.A.G. 308 REVIEWS Staplehurst and the Weald of Kent. By Gertrude C. Keech. 7J X 5 in. Pp. 60+19 line drawings and 1 map. London: The Research Publishing Company, 1965. 5s. This booklet by our member Mrs. Gertrude Keech is intended as an appreciation of the timber-framed houses and other early buildings in the neighbourhood of Staplehurst. It is enthusiastic about these and the enthusiasm is backed up by charming drawings and vignettes by Leslie RowseU. However, to serious students of the district's history several curious errors will be immediately apparent. I hst some of these. (1) Green Court (page 19) is not an ancient monument but is included in the hst of scheduled buildings. (2) Mr. EUiston Erwood in Archmologia Cantiana, lxi, 51, has declared with plenty of justification that the opening in the north wall of the chancel of Staplehurst Church belongs to an anchorite's cell and that the smaller opening is a putlog hole. There is certainly no evidence for the author's conjecture that this feature was a wafer oven. (3) On page 39 'Thieraham' should be 'Thurnham' as in Hasted. (4) On page 21 Mrs. Keech feels sure that Tollhurst Farm has 'some connection with a toU-house. It is quite likely that the original tenant of Tollherst (sic) Farm took his name from his occupation and therefore the name is of very early date, before the general use of surnames'. Wallenberg (The Place Names of Kent) has identified ToUhurst with the 'Tun laf hirste' of MS. Cotton Claudius D.X. and the 'Tunlafahirst' of MS. Harleian 686. These names can hardly be linked up with a post-medieval turnpike. (5) Pages 43 to 54 are headed 'The British Moated Oppidum Scheduled as an Ancient Monument 1951' and unfortunately owe their inspiration to an out-of-date note by Roach Smith in Archmologia Cantiana, xiii, 492-93. A glance at the current List of Ancient Monuments in England and Wales (H.M.S.O.) would have shown that this mound, Castle Mount or Bank, is .listed as a medieval castle. Further enquiry at the Ministry of Pubhc Building and Works would have revealed that it is a motte and bailey and certainly not a British stronghold. As Mrs. Keech so rightly comments 'When you get as far back in history as that, then it is time to stop and wonder if you reaUy know what you are talking about.' L.R.A.G. Age by Age; Landmarks in British Archmology. By Ronald Jessup. IUustrated by Alan Sorrell. Michael Joseph, 1967. Pp. 96,44 plates. Ilx8£in. 30s. In this day and age the seeker after knowledge certainly has his path made smooth and easy with the aid of this kind of book which 309 REVIEWS Ronald Jessup knows so weU how to produce, and of which this is an excehent example. The scheme of the book is admirably simple for each page of text is accompanied by a fuU-page colour print in illustration. The first part of the book, consisting of thirty chapters, takes us by a clear and easy narrative from the palaeolithic hunting and fishing stages in prehistory up to the Saxon and Viking periods; seven chapters cover the Stone Ages, one the Bronze Age, four the Iron Age, eight deal with various aspects of Roman Britain, five with Saxon England, and three with the Vikings. Each chapter is complemented by a plate which either portrays reconstructed scenes from the phase described or typical products of it. Two other chapters are devoted to accounts of Stonehenge and the hiU figures of England. But the second part is as interesting as the first for it deals with other aspects of the archaeological scene such as methods of excavation, 'follies', archseology from the air and under water, industrial archseology, churchyard antiquities and the hazards to sites which have not yet been explored. The condensation of the immense mass of knowledge involved into a series of short essays has been brilliantly achieved by the author, who is obviously a master of this difficult method. Alan SorreU is weU known for his drawings and paintings of archaeological subjects and the plates which illustrate the book are admirable examples of his work; they include several coloured maps and plans. Ronald Jessup's book covers a long story which can usuaUy only be gleaned from a whole shelf-full of books. J.H.E. 310