The Vanishing Houses of Kent

THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT 8. LAKE HOUSE, EASTWELL By E. w. PARKIN LAKE HousE, now nearly hidden by trees, would arouse little interest from the passer-by, but with a more detailed examination it soon becomes apparent that this is indeed a house of exceptional interest, and would appear to be an early manor house of Eastwell. It would not be the original house, as 'Domesday' shows that a manor existed here in Saxon times, and Lake House dates from no more than the thirteenth century, but it does seem certain that the earliest manor houses stood on this spot near the church, and subsequent ones on the site of the present mansion about half a mile to the east-north-east. From Hastedl and other sources it is possible to trace nearly all the owners of Eastwell for the past thousand years, and although not all details agree, it presents a most fascinating study. DESCENT OF THE MA.NOR Pre-Conquest, FREDERIC. 1069 HUGO DE MONTFORD. The 'Domesday' record runs thus: 'Hugo de Montford holds the manor of Eastwelles which Frederic held of King Edward, it is taxed at one sulung,2 there are three yokes within the division of Hugo and the fourth without, and is of the fee of the Bishop of Baieux .. .' 1099 ROBERT OUR.THOSE, or 0URTOYS, grandson of Hugo, who left his possessions to the Crown before embarking on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, the estate being granted to a family who took the surname of Eastwell. 1267 MATILDA DE EASTWELLES is recorded as having died in this year possessed of the manor,a the property passing to her son: 1267 BERTRAM DE ORIOL, then aged 30, who lived until 1297. 1297 JOHN DE ORIOL, son of the above. He was killed in the first great sea battle with the French at Sluys in 1340,4 and it is possibly he who built the old house at Eastwell. He left the property to his wife: 1 Hasted'a History of !{en,, iii, 196. 2 One sulung, nominally 160 acres. 3 Aroh. Oant., v (1863), 296. ' Burke's Dormant and Extinct Peerages, p. 444. 151 THE VANISHIN'G HOUSES OF KENT 1340 ALIANOR, who held it until her death in 1350, when it passed to her niece AGNES. The arms of the Criols were: ar, two chevrons and a bordure gu. 1350 AGNES entitled her husband: 1350 sm THOMAS DE POYNINGS (in Sussex) to the manor. He was followed by his son: SIR MICHAEL DE POYNINGS who had fought with distinction at the battle of Cressy. The coat of arms of the Poynings was: a harry of six, or and vert, a bend gu. 1369 sm THOMAS DE POYNINGS, 3rd Baron, who died without issue in 1376, and was followed by his brother: 1376 sm RICHARD DE POYNINGS, who died on a campaign in Spain with John of Gaunt. 1408 SIR ROBERT DE POYNINGS who fell at the siege of Orleans. His son Richard, having pre-deceased him, the manor passed to his only grandchild ALI.A.NORE. 1446 ALIANORE, wife or LORD PERCY the 2nd EARL OF NORTHUMBER· LAND. The property remained in the hands of this family for nearly a hundred years, through varying fortunes, first of the Hundred Years War, and then of the Wars of the Roses. The Earldom was forfeited in 1408, restored 1414, forfeited again in 1461, and restored in 14 71. 1537 HENRY the 6TH EARL OD' NORTHUMBERLAND died without issue, when the Barony of Poynings, and the Earldom became extinct. The property was conveyed to three feoffees6 who soon afterwards sold it to: 1542 sm THOMAS MOYLE, who as Hasted says '. . . built the new mansion'. It was during the construction of this house that Sir Thomas Moyle observed that one of the workmen could read, an unusual occurrence in those days, and befriending him learned that he had been in hiding since the battle of Bosworth Field in 1485, that he was Richard Plantagenet the last of that line. Sir Thomas built a small cottage near to his new mansion, and there Richard lived in peace until his death in 1550, aged 81. His name is recorded in the parish registers, and a plain tomb, recently inscribed, marks his burial place. Sir Thomas died on 2nd October, 1560, when the property passed to his two daughters, Catherine and Anne. The coat of arms of the Moyles was: gu, a mule (possibly a pun on their name) within a bordure ar. 1560 CATHERINE, who entitled her share of the estate to her husband: 1560 srn THOMAS FINOH, who died three years later, when the estate passed to the eldest son: 6 Thomas Cheyney, Wm. Walsingham and Wm. Fitzwilliam. 152 THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT 1563 SIR MOYLE FINOH. He obtained Royal permission to embattle the mansion,6 and at his death in 1614 the manor passed to his widow, 1614 ELr/.ABETH. She became the VISCOUNTESS OF MAIDSTONE in 1628 and died in 1634, when she was buried with her husband beneath the magnificent tomb in Eastwell church, recently removed (1968) to the Victoria & Albert Museum. She left seven sons and four daughters, the eldest son Sir Thomas Finch succeeding as: 1634 THE EARL OF WINCHELSEA (earlier spelling WINCHILSEA) who lived only another year, the estate passing to: 1635 THE RT. HON HENEAGE FINOH, the 2nd Earl, who lived until 1689 having sired twenty-seven children by his four wives. The manor then passed to Charles, the posthumous son of his eldest son, 1689 THE RT. HON. OHARLES, 3RD EARL OF WINOHELSEA, who died on 4th August, 1712. The property passed to his uncle: 1712 THE RT. HON. HENEAGE, 4TH EARL OF WINOHELSEA, who died at Eastwell, 30th September, 1726, without issue.7 1726 5TH EARL OF WINOHELSEA, brother of the above, who also died without issue. 1729 DANIEL, THE 6TH EARL OF WINOHELSEA, and 2ND OF NOTTINGHAM. 1730 DANIEL HATTON, THE 7TH EARL OF WINORELSEA and 3RD OF NOTTINGHAM, who died in 1769 and was buried in Eastwell Church. The manor passed to GEORGE, son of the next brother WILLIAM, apparently without the titles.s 1769 GEORGE HATTON. 1783 GEORGE FINOH HATTON, of whom (in 1799) Hasted says ' .. . is the present owner of Eastwell'. He completely rebuilt the mansion between the years 1793 and 1799, employing an Italian architect named Bononi. He died on 17th February, 1823, and was buried in the family vault. 1823 EDWARD DANIEL JOHN FINOH-HATTON, Esq., is mentioned in the parish registers as having died on 15th January, 1841, aged 85. 1841 OONSTANOE HENRmTTA, OOUNTESS OF WINCHELSEA AND NOTTINGHAM, died 9th March, 1878. 1878 GEORGE WILLIAM HENRY FINOH-HATTON, VISCOUNT MAIDSTONE, died 7th February, 1879. About this time, the estate was rented to: Tlilll DUKE OF EDINBURGH, the second son of Queen Victoria; his • The pa.rish registers describe Sir Moyle Finch as 'Knight a.nd Baronet'. 7 Eastwell pa.rish registers. 8 Ireland's History of Kent, ii, p. 427. 153 THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT youngest daughter, the Infanta Beatrice of Spain was born here in 1884.9 It is not known how long this tenancy lasted, but the registers record: 1887 GEORGE JAMES FINCH-HATTON, the 10TH EARL OF WINCHELSEA, and the 6TH OF NOTTINGHAM, died 13th June, aged 72. 1892 This is the last year in which the Church Rate is recorded as having been paid by the 'E.A.RL OF WINOHELSEA.' in the parish of Eastwell with Boughton Aluph. Thus this distinguished family had been in possession of Eastwell for two hundred and fifty - seven years. Their coat of arms was: quarterly first and fourth az a chevron between three garbs or, second and third ar, a chevron between three griffins passant, wings endorsed sa. 1893 LORD GERARD paid the Church Rate from this year, and it is said that he greatly enlarged the house. 1922 OSBOURNE DAN, who never lived at Eastwell. He had a house at Wateringbury near Maidstone, and presumably bought the estate as a speculation. 1926 sm JOHN DE FONBL.A.NQUA PENNEFATHER, Bart., bought the manor from Osbourne Dan. His interest is said to have been more in architecture than in the estate. He completely demolished the existing mansion, and, using much of the old materials rebuilt the house as it now stands, but greatly reducing its size. So keen was he, it is said, that he lived in a tent during the rebuilding, and his architect in another. He was, however, overtaken by blindness, and he never lived in the new house. 1930 LADY MIDLETON, now COUNTESS MIDLETON, purchased the estate, and resides now in London. Her son, and presumed heir: OAFT.A.IN GEORGE BRODRIOK., manages the estate on very modern and efficient lines. SUMMARY Eastwell began as a small manor way back in Saxon times, and has always been privately held. The adjoining manor of Westwell was once held by the Archbishop of Canterbury, while Kennington, immediately to the south, was owned by the Abbot of St. Augustine's in Canterbury. In 1252 Henry III granted a charter to the Lords who formed the ancient corporation of twenty-three manors of Romney Marsh, of which Eastwell was one. The parent manor owned a detached holding at Schinglehalle, represented today by a field called Shinglehall and a modern house of that name on the east side of the parish of St. Maryin- the-Marsh. ° Kelly's Di-rectory of Kent, 1938, which has not been published since. 154 THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT A very interesting glimpse into the state of the manor in 1268 is obtained in a writ of 'diem clausit extremum'l0 upon the death of Matilda de Eastwelles. The estate had increased from not more than 160 acres at the time of Domesday, to 250 acres of arable land, 31 acres of pasture, one windmill, one water-mill, and two dovecots not stocked.TI The separate holding of Schinglehalle is mentioned, and was at the time occupied by Margeria, ' ... mother of the aforesaid Matilda who still liveth, and is seised in dower'. The estate in early times would undoubtedly be centred in the fertile little valley with the stream and springs which give it its name, and here the church and the manor house stood close together. Lake House may have been the third house on the site, for we know that in Saxon times Frederic lived here, and upon the Norman acquisition a new house would be needed for Hugo de Montford or his lessee. The architectural details of Lake House show that it was built about the year 1300, and if so, it must have been by John de Criol. How long it remained the manor house is not certain, but the site wa.s eventually moved half a mile to the east-north-east, where the mansion has been rebuilt at least four times. In 1799, Hasted shows in his description and on his map of the parish that the entire estate at that time lay to the north of the church, and that the pale of the southern boundary passed close to '. . . the church and the court lodge'. This mention of Lake House as the 'court lodge' is most interesting, as it must help to confirm that this was the early manor house, where it wa.s the custom to hold in the hall of the owner's house the Leet Court, a court of record held before the lord or his steward, to deal with all estate matters, and at which all concerned might attend. Such courts are still held in some places, and many an old manor house is still known as the Court Lodge. The estate was greatly enlarged in the last century, and the beautiful lake of some forty acres formed in its midst. The park is now two and a half miles across, and embraces all the small parish of Ea.stwell, as well as parts of the parishes of Wye, Boughton Aluph, Westwell, and Ohallock, and includes the church of the last named parish. THE HOUSE Lake House, at present empty and derelict, is built mainly of flint rubble patched with red brick, with some original stone quoins and other work showing. It has been much altered and divided up, with chimneys and fireplaces added, while the roof was rebuilt in the seventeenth century. However, enough remains to determine the main features of the original house. It is in fact an extremely interesting 10 Eso. No. 82, 52 Hen. ID. 11 Arch. Oant., v (1863), 296. 155 THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT example of a house in the late Norman style, with a first.floor hall. The first feature which one observes in all Norman buildings is the great thickness of the walls, in this case two and a half feet thick. Another feature is the lack of adequate foundations, which had here eventually caused the walls to be pushed out of vertical by the thrust of the roof. The roof in fact may even have collapsed, as it was virtually rebuilt, and massive brick buttresses built against the west and south-west walls, and even since, the westernmost tie-beam (T) has pulled the wall-plate several inches away from the wall, and a stone corbel has cracked under the strain. The extent of the original house is shown in solid black on the plan (Fig. 1), with later additions hatched, and a reconstruction of the main features is seen in Fig. 2. A cross-section of the original building (Fig. 3) shows the form of the roof before rebuilding, and the two west windows of the first floor hall (Won plans, and Plates IIA and IIB). Norman families usually preferred a hall of this kind, for reasons of defence, and the living arrangements were simple, there being the main hall west of the partition Tp, and a small private room for the owner's use on the east side of this partition. The basement, or undercroft, was used for storage, and perhaps as servants' quarters. The four blocked original windows are in the Early English style, and there are two at each end of the building. A blocked doorway at Dl may have been the main access to the hall from an outer stairway S, as shown in Fig. 2. The partition Tp is interesting, it is timber-framed with wattle-and-daub infilling, and originally went only up to the tie-beam, there being a later lath-and-plaster partition above. The roof truss above this is the only part of the original roof which remains, apart from several re-used rafters, and it shows that the earlier roof had paired rafters with two parallel collars, the lower collar being supported by two sloping braces (Fig. 3,·and Plate IIIA). Soot blackening on these timbers indicates that the hall once had an open hearth, while the comparatively clean Jacobean rafters show that by that time chimneys had already been installed. This later roof is typical of the seventeenth century, being framed with principal, that is, heavier rafters at intervals of five rafters, with short butt purlins, or side pieces morticed into the principals. There are no wind braces. The blocked doorway D2 in the partition, and the one D6 in the outer wall, which is believed to have led into a garderobe, both have flat four-centred arches of the early fifteenth century, and this may mean that they were later insertions. Perhaps the owner only had a curtain originally, and this is surprising when one sees the list of important owners of this manor, but this is typical of the times. Norman halls have either a timber floor, or a stone-vaulted undercroft, and here at Eastwell the former was the oa.se. There appears to be 156 PtATJ•; I .\. Lok(' Ho118<' from tho ,;outh-wost. B. The eastern end of the house. 1/aa, p. 1;,n PLATE lI A. Rcmuins of originul window ot west end of houso. with inserted pa.-,..;. jtion. B. Sill of blocked window at the cost encl. A. Original roof trus.􀀺, and p11rtition. B. Original joist􀀻 of the hall floor-. PL.\TF. HI b b II 11 I I tlT I I I I F T p I􀀃./ -If=----- -- 1 I BP 11 I I 1 I I I I I II D2 l 1 FIG, 1. G EASTWELL 0 5 10 FT k++W -1 THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT ... 0 􀀂 I1 ,1 I I I I I I I lo. 0.. I lea I I N I- I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I --- - ---1-r:- - ----- - - - ----- -------- 1- I I 1 4.--Jr-n x I I I -:: :-_ -=::::: _-.:: - .J+ --..:: ::: ::-:-_ -_-- I- I I I I I I 1 ea I I I I I I I t I :z .. 􀀔:,.+-\ -- 158 "' 0 ===:, 1 I 11 11 C) ri '--¾ I I • ___ 1 f ____ , 1-... C> ... "' THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT T D D 0 5 10ft le+ +i--1 Fxo. 3. Lake House, Eastwell, near Ashford, Kent. Section of original house, looking west. no doubt that the heavy oak joists are the original ones, they are of oak, and vary slightly in size, being about nine inches wide by six or seven inches deep (Plate IIIB). The outer ends rest on a plate built into the rubble walls, and they span only half the hall, the inner ends resting on the massive beams B and Bp, seen in the basement. A splayed scarf, or sloping joint between these beams is supported by a post at F. The intriguing question then arises, that with the original rafters soot coated, and with a wooden floor, how could there have been an open hearth 1 There is the possibility, of course, that the original roof may have been destroyed by fire, but the remaining timbers are soot coated, and not scorched, and the outward movement of the walls gives sufficient reason for the re-roofing. There does not appear to have 159 THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT been a fireplace in the hall, as the joists below the floor and the plates embedded in the walls on which they rest show no break. A fire-basket, or brazier may be ruled out as too dangerous on a wooden floor, so the evidi,nce points to a 'pedestal' hearth,12 that is, one built up the seven feet from ground level to be flush with the hall floor (in Figs. 2 and 3). The site is now occupied by a wide chimney breast in red brick, but the short joists on each side of it (j) which appear to be original, and match the main joists, still rest on a short plate at X (Figs. 2 and 3). The tie-beam in the partition Tp also appears to be original, as the smoke-blackened truss above it fits perfectly on to it, and appears to be part of it, but the two tie-beams (T) over the hall part are different, and may be later, as they are less crude, and have narrow chamfers. They are supported by curved braces mounted on side posts which rest on stone corbels (C in Fig. 3). Of the four blocked windows, the two in the west wall are deeply splayed inside, and have pointed Gothic arches (Plate IIA), while the two at the east end which once gave light to the small withdrawing room, are much higher, the stone jambs rising to the eaves, and appear to be cut off there. This suggests that the roof at this end once finished in a gable instead of the present hip which is made up partly of re-used rafters. The wing E in Fig. 1 at the north-west corner was added at some later date. It has thick walls of flint rubble, similar to those of the hall, but the quoins are of brick. The stairs S2 are modern, and lead up from the basement to both the newer wing E, and through a doorway D7 cut into the main wall, to the older part of the house. D5 is the modern side door, leading into the lower floor, while some remains of stone jambs at D3 indicate the position of an original doorway. A modern porch P leads through another door D4 into the basement. The two chimney breasts are marked Ch, the main central one being of narrow red brick, with wide fireplaces fitted later with attractive cast-iron grates of the early nineteenth century. The chimney at the east end serves one fireplace in the basement, and is modern. To sum up, Lake House is a typical small manor house in the Norman style, dating from about 1300, and measuring only 45 ft. by 26 ft. 6 in. overall. It teaches us much about the living conditions of that time. The Pilgrims' Way from Winchester passed through Eastwell, close to the house, and on via Boughton Aluph and Godmersham to Canterbury, and one can well imagine the boisterous entertainment which doubtless would be given at times in the old house. The hall measured internally 30 ft. 6 in. by 21 ft. 7 in. wide, and this would be 12 Ma.rgaret Wood, The 1Dngli8h Medie1Jal House, p. 257, mentions instances of a, central hea.rth a.t first.floor level, at Hnmpton Oourt and elsewhere. 160 THE VANISHING HOUSES OF KENT used for almost everything-cooking, eating, sleeping, entertaining, as well as occasionally as a court room. Privacy, as we now know it, was only just beginning to creep into fashion, and only then for the owner and his lady. Defence was still an important consideration, for bitterness between the native population, and their French-speaking conquerors had not yet quite died out. AOKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks a.re due to D. G. S. Winters, Esq., of Boughton Aluph, for extensive research into parish a.nd other records, and to Captain George Brodrick for permission to examine and to record Lake House itself. 161