The Old Parish of Nonington

A small place in East Kent history

Search results: "knolton" Page 1 of 3

Knowlton, also Knolton and anciently Chenoltone or Cnoltone, on the NE border of Nonington

Although not part of the old parish of Nonington the small adjoining parish of Knowlton has had close connections to Nonington over the centuries. Since the 1670’s the Knowlton estate has included Kittington, a manor and estate adjoining Knowlton parish in the north-eastern corner of Nonington.

Knowlton, often written as Knolton in the past but I will use the modern spelling, was once an ecclesiastical and civil parish in its own right. The former was abolished in 1940 and the latter in 1935 and the hamlet is now part of the civil parish of Goodnestone-next-Wingham.

St. Clement's Church, Knowlton.

St. Clement’s Church, Knowlton.

The Church of St Clement, which adjoins Knowlton Court House, is now redundant and has been in the care of the Churches Conservation Trust since 1st December, 1991. It was originally built as a private chapel for the manor house and later becoming the parish church. St. Clement’s still contains several fine monuments to the various families that have owned the estate over the centuries. In 1855, the architect William White carried out a restoration replacing the windows, pulpit, box pews and chancel gate.

The interior of St. Clement's Church, Knowlton.

The interior of St. Clement’s Church, Knowlton.

Around 1800 Knowlton was recorded by Edward Hasted in his history of Kent as extending to some 432 acres, virtually all of which were part of the Knowlton estate. The hamlet consisted of the mansion house and its adjoining building and the parish church and the mansion once had its own cricket ground.

A mile or so east of the mansion was Knolton Station, a stop on the single track East Kent Light Railway, one of the Colonel Stephens group of cheaply built rural light railways in England, which ran from Shepherdswell Station to Eastry where the railway divided with one line going to Wingham and the other to Richborough. Knolton station opened on 16th. October, 1916 and closed on 30th October, 1948. The platform was demolished and the track taken up in 1954.

Knowlton was recorded in the Domesday Book of 1086 as Chenoltone, other ancient records referred to it as Cnoltone. The name is said to derive from the Old English cnoll tun: the farmstead by the hillock or knoll. At the time of Domesday it was part of the extensive holdings of Odo, Earl of Kent and Bishop of Bayeaux, a half-brother of William the Conqueror. After Odo’s fall from favour for rebellion the estate, along with many of Odo’s other land holdings was given to members of the de Albineto  [also Albini, Albineo, d’Aubigny, and Albinione] family. Knowlton was given to William d’Aubigny, known as ‘Pincerna’, Master Butler of the Royal Household and the adjacent estate of Eswalt, later St. Alban’s Court  in Nonington, came into the possession of his younger brother, Nigel.

Cnoltune (Knowlton) later passed into the possession of the Earls of Arundal through Pincerna’s son, William “Strong Hand” d’Aubigny, 1st Earl of Arundal and 1st Earl of Lincoln and then on to the Countess of Eu. The Perot, or Pyrot, family held Knowlton from the Countess by knights service for many years before the estate passed by marriage to William Langley and then his son, also William. Their descendant Edward Langley of Knowlton married Elizabeth Peyton who, after Edward’s death, married Sir Edward Ringley, brother-in-law to William Boys of Fredville in Nonington. After Elizabeth’s death in 1544 Knowlton passed to her brother, Sir Robert Peyton and remained in the Peyton family until after the death in 1684 of his descendant, Sir Thomas Peyton.

Thomas Peyton was born in 1613, the eldest son of Sir Samuel Peyton, the first baronet. He succeeded his father as second baronet on his father’s death in 1623 and inherited Knowlton and other property which gave him an annual income of £1,000 but from the beginning was in financial difficulties, in part due to family commitments. A student of Greek and Hebrew, he disliked the increasing ‘pomposities of the clergy’ under Laud, and in 1640 he stood for Parliament at Sandwich, as had his father, and defeated the Court candidate there. Sir Thomas was a moderate Royalist and withdrew from Westminster in 1643, and was later imprisoned and fined £1,000 by Parliament for disobedience. In 1648 he was one of the leaders of the Kentish Rebellion in the Second English Civil War, and incurred a further fine of £900. Despite this Sir Thomas was active as a director of the Royalist Action Group during the Interregnum and during the intervals between periods of imprisonment devoted himself to Royalist conspiracy and to ‘the business of farming, which notwithstanding will never repair the breaches made in my fortune by the evil of persons and times’. The decimators [collectors or receivers of tithes then valued his estate at only £540 p.a. Despite his misfortunes he was ‘an excellent husband to two very different wives’.

After the Restoration of King Charles II in 1660 Sir Thomas received some compensation for his losses, receiving some £2,000 per annum from the Newcastle coal tax revenues. He was re-elected to Parliament for the county of Kent in 1661 and during his stay there was involved in some legal proceedings. Sir Thomas died of apoplexy in dire financial straits in February of 1684 and was buried in Westminster Abbey, the baronetcy died with him as he was survived by four daughters and no male heir.

Knolton by Kipp 1719.

Knolton Court and parkland, 1719.

Sir Thomas’s four daughters sold the estate to Sir John Narborough, Admiral of the Royal Navy, who had made a name for himself in the Anglo-Dutch Wars of the 1660’s and 1670’s. Sir John’s two sons, Sir John and James Narborough, were both drowned along with Admiral Sir Cloudesley Shovel when their ship and three others en route home from Toulon foundered during a very bad storm on rocks off the Scilly Isles on 22nd October, 1707 with the loss of over 2,000 sailors lives.

This disaster was caused by the inability of the ships navigators to calculate their longitude with any accuracy and so were unaware of how close they were to the rocks. The losses resulted in the passing of the Longitude Act of 1714, in which the British government offered a reward of £20,000 [present day value around £2.85 million] to who ever invented the first accurate marine chronometer. This was finally achieved after many years work by John Harrison who was rewarded by Parliament in the 1760’s.

Narborough memorial

The memorial to the Narbough brothers and Sir Cloudsley Shovel, St. Clement’s Church, Knowlton.

The Narborough brothers both died without heirs and their property went to their sister Elizabeth, who was married to Thomas D’Aeth, esquire of North Cray, Kent, who was created a baronet by the newly enthroned George I in 1716. Sir Thomas lived at Knowlton and re-built the house originally built by Sir John Peyton in 1585.

The Knowlton estate remained with the D’Aeth family until 1904 when Major Lewis Narborough Hughes D’Aeth, born in 1859, sold the estate to Major Francis Elmer Speed, whose descendant still own and live at Knowlton Court. Captain D’Aeth seems to have been in financial difficulties for some time before the sale. In 1895 County Court orders were taken out against him for the payment of bills for repairs to Knowlton Court house and out-buildings on behalf of the estate of Henry Maxted, a Nonington builder. At that time Captain D’Aeth was serving with the 3rd battalion Royal Scots Fusiliers, at Ayr in Scotland. The 3rd battalion was a militia battalion, acquired by the regiment under the Childers Reforms of 1881. He later appears to have moved from Knolton Court to the nearby Eythorne Court, possibly renting out the much larger Knowlton Court.

In 1897 ownership of the Griffin’s Head public house at Chillenden was transferred by Major D’Aeth to Maj. Gen. Craster Lambert, Lt. Col. Henry Smith and Alexander Browne of Doxford Hall, Chathill, North Humberland (and Callaly Castle, Northumberland). The D’Aeth crest was “A griffin’s head, or, with a trefoil in his mouth, vert”, and the pub had been called The Griffon’s/Griffin’s Head since 1724.

Other parts of the estate were transferred to new owners during this period. In 1898 the owner of Kittington Farm is recorded as being a Major Brown. One possibility is that ownership was transferred in payment of gambling debts. My grand-father, Frank Webb, always said that the Knowlton estate changed hands with the turn of a card, so it would appear that Captain D’Aeth was a heavy and not very successful gambler. The captain retired from the Army 1888 on retired pay just before he was due to transfer to the Militia, but he must have re-enlisted in the Militia as he was serving in the 3rd Battalion of the Royal Scots Fusiliers in 1898 when the following was published in the London Gazette:-

“THE LONDON GAZETTE, MAY 17th 1898

Royal Scots Fusiliers. N. H. D’Aeth resigns his Commission ; also is granted the honorary rank of Major, with permission to wear the prescribed uniform on his retirement. Dated 18th May, 1898”.

Possibly he resigned his commission because of debt, possibly to fellow officers or because it had become an embarrassment to the regiment.

Another possible reason for the transfer of the properties is that he transferred ownership to fellow army officers to avoid the property being seized and sold to recover debts and after the financial crisis had been resolved was returned to his ownership. At the time of purchase or shortly after Major Speed bought the Knowlton estate the properties were returned to its ownership where they still remain.

Knowlton, also Knolton and anciently Chenoltone or Cnoltone, on the NE border of Nonington

Although not part of the old parish of Nonington the small adjoining parish of Knowlton has had close connections to Nonington over the centuries. Since the 1670’s the Knowlton estate has included Kittington, a manor and estate adjoining Knowlton parish in the north-eastern corner of Nonington.

Knowlton, often written as Knolton in the past but I will use the modern spelling, was once an ecclesiastical and civil parish in its own right. The former was abolished in 1940 and the latter in 1935 and the hamlet is now part of the civil parish of Goodnestone-next-Wingham.

St. Clement's Church, Knowlton.

St. Clement’s Church, Knowlton.

The Church of St Clement, which adjoins Knowlton Court House, is now redundant and has been in the care of the Churches Conservation Trust since 1st December, 1991. It was originally built as a private chapel for the manor house and later becoming the parish church. St. Clement’s still contains several fine monuments to the various families that have owned the estate over the centuries. In 1855, the architect William White carried out a restoration replacing the windows, pulpit, box pews and chancel gate.

The interior of St. Clement's Church, Knowlton.

The interior of St. Clement’s Church, Knowlton.

Around 1800 Knowlton was recorded by Edward Hasted in his history of Kent as extending to some 432 acres, virtually all of which were part of the Knowlton estate. The hamlet consisted of the mansion house and its adjoining building and the parish church and the mansion once had its own cricket ground.

A mile or so east of the mansion was Knolton Station, a stop on the single track East Kent Light Railway, one of the Colonel Stephens group of cheaply built rural light railways in England, which ran from Shepherdswell Station to Eastry where the railway divided with one line going to Wingham and the other to Richborough. Knolton station opened on 16th. October, 1916 and closed on 30th October, 1948. The platform was demolished and the track taken up in 1954.

Knowlton was recorded in the Domesday Book of 1086 as Chenoltone, other ancient records referred to it as Cnoltone. The name is said to derive from the Old English cnoll tun: the farmstead by the hillock or knoll. At the time of Domesday it was part of the extensive holdings of Odo, Earl of Kent and Bishop of Bayeaux, a half-brother of William the Conqueror. After Odo’s fall from favour for rebellion the estate, along with many of Odo’s other land holdings was given to members of the de Albineto  [also Albini, Albineo, d’Aubigny, and Albinione] family. Knowlton was given to William d’Aubigny, known as ‘Pincerna’, Master Butler of the Royal Household and the adjacent estate of Eswalt, later St. Alban’s Court  in Nonington, came into the possession of his younger brother, Nigel.

Cnoltune (Knowlton) later passed into the possession of the Earls of Arundal through Pincerna’s son, William “Strong Hand” d’Aubigny, 1st Earl of Arundal and 1st Earl of Lincoln and then on to the Countess of Eu. The Perot, or Pyrot, family held Knowlton from the Countess by knights service for many years before the estate passed by marriage to William Langley and then his son, also William. Their descendant Edward Langley of Knowlton married Elizabeth Peyton who, after Edward’s death, married Sir Edward Ringley, brother-in-law to William Boys of Fredville in Nonington. After Elizabeth’s death in 1544 Knowlton passed to her brother, Sir Robert Peyton and remained in the Peyton family until after the death in 1684 of his descendant, Sir Thomas Peyton.

Thomas Peyton was born in 1613, the eldest son of Sir Samuel Peyton, the first baronet. He succeeded his father as second baronet on his father’s death in 1623 and inherited Knowlton and other property which gave him an annual income of £1,000 but from the beginning was in financial difficulties, in part due to family commitments. A student of Greek and Hebrew, he disliked the increasing ‘pomposities of the clergy’ under Laud, and in 1640 he stood for Parliament at Sandwich, as had his father, and defeated the Court candidate there. Sir Thomas was a moderate Royalist and withdrew from Westminster in 1643, and was later imprisoned and fined £1,000 by Parliament for disobedience. In 1648 he was one of the leaders of the Kentish Rebellion in the Second English Civil War, and incurred a further fine of £900. Despite this Sir Thomas was active as a director of the Royalist Action Group during the Interregnum and during the intervals between periods of imprisonment devoted himself to Royalist conspiracy and to ‘the business of farming, which notwithstanding will never repair the breaches made in my fortune by the evil of persons and times’. The decimators [collectors or receivers of tithes then valued his estate at only £540 p.a. Despite his misfortunes he was ‘an excellent husband to two very different wives’.

After the Restoration of King Charles II in 1660 Sir Thomas received some compensation for his losses, receiving some £2,000 per annum from the Newcastle coal tax revenues. He was re-elected to Parliament for the county of Kent in 1661 and during his stay there was involved in some legal proceedings. Sir Thomas died of apoplexy in dire financial straits in February of 1684 and was buried in Westminster Abbey, the baronetcy died with him as he was survived by four daughters and no male heir.

Knolton by Kipp 1719.

Knolton Court and parkland, 1719.

Sir Thomas’s four daughters sold the estate to Sir John Narborough, Admiral of the Royal Navy, who had made a name for himself in the Anglo-Dutch Wars of the 1660’s and 1670’s. Sir John’s two sons, Sir John and James Narborough, were both drowned along with Admiral Sir Cloudesley Shovel when their ship and three others en route home from Toulon foundered during a very bad storm on rocks off the Scilly Isles on 22nd October, 1707 with the loss of over 2,000 sailors lives.

This disaster was caused by the inability of the ships navigators to calculate their longitude with any accuracy and so were unaware of how close they were to the rocks. The losses resulted in the passing of the Longitude Act of 1714, in which the British government offered a reward of £20,000 [present day value around £2.85 million] to who ever invented the first accurate marine chronometer. This was finally achieved after many years work by John Harrison who was rewarded by Parliament in the 1760’s.

Narborough memorial

The memorial to the Narbough brothers and Sir Cloudsley Shovel, St. Clement’s Church, Knowlton.

The Narborough brothers both died without heirs and their property went to their sister Elizabeth, who was married to Thomas D’Aeth, esquire of North Cray, Kent, who was created a baronet by the newly enthroned George I in 1716. Sir Thomas lived at Knowlton and re-built the house originally built by Sir John Peyton in 1585.

The Knowlton estate remained with the D’Aeth family until 1904 when Major Lewis Narborough Hughes D’Aeth, born in 1859, sold the estate to Major Francis Elmer Speed, whose descendant still own and live at Knowlton Court. Captain D’Aeth seems to have been in financial difficulties for some time before the sale. In 1895 County Court orders were taken out against him for the payment of bills for repairs to Knowlton Court house and out-buildings on behalf of the estate of Henry Maxted, a Nonington builder. At that time Captain D’Aeth was serving with the 3rd battalion Royal Scots Fusiliers, at Ayr in Scotland. The 3rd battalion was a militia battalion, acquired by the regiment under the Childers Reforms of 1881. He later appears to have moved from Knolton Court to the nearby Eythorne Court, possibly renting out the much larger Knowlton Court.

In 1897 ownership of the Griffin’s Head public house at Chillenden was transferred by Major D’Aeth to Maj. Gen. Craster Lambert, Lt. Col. Henry Smith and Alexander Browne of Doxford Hall, Chathill, North Humberland (and Callaly Castle, Northumberland). The D’Aeth crest was “A griffin’s head, or, with a trefoil in his mouth, vert”, and the pub had been called The Griffon’s/Griffin’s Head since 1724.

Other parts of the estate were transferred to new owners during this period. In 1898 the owner of Kittington Farm is recorded as being a Major Brown. One possibility is that ownership was transferred in payment of gambling debts. My grand-father, Frank Webb, always said that the Knowlton estate changed hands with the turn of a card, so it would appear that Captain D’Aeth was a heavy and not very successful gambler. The captain retired from the Army 1888 on retired pay just before he was due to transfer to the Militia, but he must have re-enlisted in the Militia as he was serving in the 3rd Battalion of the Royal Scots Fusiliers in 1898 when the following was published in the London Gazette:-

“THE LONDON GAZETTE, MAY 17th 1898

Royal Scots Fusiliers. N. H. D’Aeth resigns his Commission ; also is granted the honorary rank of Major, with permission to wear the prescribed uniform on his retirement. Dated 18th May, 1898”.

Possibly he resigned his commission because of debt, possibly to fellow officers or because it had become an embarrassment to the regiment.

Another possible reason for the transfer of the properties is that he transferred ownership to fellow army officers to avoid the property being seized and sold to recover debts and after the financial crisis had been resolved was returned to his ownership. At the time of purchase or shortly after Major Speed bought the Knowlton estate the properties were returned to its ownership where they still remain.

The Quadryng family at Fredeuyle and Esol-revised and updated 03.01.2020

John Quadryng, a City of London mercer, acquired one half of the Manor of Fredeuyle, as Freydvill’ was by then known, in the opening years of the 15th century and the manor remained with the Quadryng, also Quadring, family for much of that century. It’s not clear when the Quadryngs acquired the Esol house and lands as there are at present no known records of any such property purchases by the Quardryngs. It’s highly likely that they purchased Esol house and lands from Sir John Harleston at the same time, or possibly before, they acquired the Manor of Fredeuyle.

A mercer by trade, John Quadryng may have bought Esol partly as a country residence and partly for use as a warehouse for storing the wool he exported and the silk, linen, fustian, and other textiles he imported through the nearby ports of Dover and Sandwich. Esol was especially well situated for trading through Sandwich which was only some six miles or so away by, for the time, a good direct road. After 1363 Calais was made the wool staple [market] through which all wool exports from England to the Continent had to pass.

During their tenure at Esol the Quadryngs acquired other land in and around Nonington. In addition to their holdings at Esol and Fredville they also held land in North and South Nonington.The 1469 survey of the manor of Wingham records the heirs of Richard Quadryng holding an unspecified amount of land in South Nonington and about 135 acres in North Nonington. During their tenure at Esol the Quadryngs built up a holding of over 400 acres of arable, pasture and woodland as well as receiving annual manorial and other rents in the parishes of Nonington and Goodnestone. John Quadryng added to the Nonington acquisitions in 1403 with the purchase of  “1 messuage, 1 toft, 80 acres of land, 3 acres of meadow, 3 acres of marsh, 6 acres of pasture, 3 acres of wood, 24 shillings of rent and a rent of 4 bushels of barley in Sholdon’, Staple, Northborne, Eastry, Hamme, Wodenesbergh’, Lymmyng and Elham”.
As merchants the Quadryngs needed a ready supply of cash and credit to trade, and were susceptible to the ups and downs of fortune where losses can be more easily made than profits. The loss of a cargo or a bad debt would have put the family in the financial mire. Richard Quadryng, draper and citizen of London and probably John’s grand-son, traded through various English ports including Bristol and in 1436 he took Robert Frere of Bristol, esquire, before Richard Estfeld, Mayor of the Staple at Westminster for a debt of £20.00. This indicates that Richard was a member of “Mayor and Company of Merchants of the Staple of England”.

[“The Company of Merchants of the Staple is one of the oldest mercantile corporations in England. It is rare, possibly unique, in being ‘of England‘ and not bounded by any city or municipality. It may trace its ancestry back as far as 1282 or even further. A group of 26 wool merchants apparently first started the Company. The Dukes of Burgundy and Counts of Flanders granted it charters. The Merchants were in Bruges in 1282, Dordrecht in 1285, Antwerp in 1296 and St Omer in 1313. The Company controlled the export of wool to the continent from 1314.  The Duke of Flanders awarded a grant to the English Merchants in 1341. Its first charter from an English monarch was in 1347 giving it control of the export trade in staple commodities. Commercial significance was in Calais – under English rule from 1347 and the main port for wool.    Exports were restricted to the Freemen of the Company who, in return for their monopoly, paid a levy back to the Crown.  With some two hundred merchants, in 1363 it was known as the “New Company of English Merchants dwelling nowe at Calais” and in 1369 as “The Mayor and Company of the Staple at Calais“. The Company later paid for and eventually managed the garrison in the city” –information from the website of The Company of the Staple of England].

Medieval merchants trading cloth and other goods.

In the mid-1440′s Richard Quadryng raised a mortgage of £200 against land and property held in Nonyngton which was the subject of various legal proceedings and transfers in 1447. A few years later in 1456 Richard Quadrynge, Robert Euyngham and Robert Sandeforde demised land & tenements in Chislet and Lympe to John de St. Nicholas of Ash, possibly to ease persisting financial problems.

The Mercers Company register for 1476 records that Thomas Quadryng, presumably the son of Richard Quadryng, was made a Freeman [member] of the Mercers Company of London and  the same year another Thomas Quadryng , the son of the new Freeman, was apprenticed to John Godyng, a Master Mercer of London.

In 1476 Thomas Quadryng the Elder became a Freeman [member] of the Mercers Company of London Freeman by patrimony, meaning his father or a close relative was also a Freeman of the Mercers Company.  In that same year Thomas Quadryng  the Elder’s son, Thomas the Younger, was apprenticed to John Godyng, a Master Mercer of London, and the Mercers Company record that Thomas the Younger was in his turn made a Freeman of the Company in 1490.

The coat of arms of the Worshipful Company of Mercers.

After the death of King Edward IV in April of 1483, the heir to the throne was the late king’s twelve year old eldest son, Prince  Edward, who was set to become King Edward V. The deceased king’s younger brother, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, was made Lord Protector of the presumed successor to the throne.

In May, 1483, Thomas Quadryng the Elder was one of the representatives of the City of London who greeted Edward V at Harnsey Park, now Hornsey Park in present Harringay.

However, Prince Edward was never crowned as Edward V as shortly after he succeeded his father the late King Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville, the mother of Prince Edward and the younger Prince Richard, was declared illegal. This made the two boys illegitimate, and therefore the young Prince Edward was not the legal heir to the throne.   When this illegitimacy was declared Richard, Duke of Gloucester, seized the throne and had himself crowned as King Richard III in July of 1483.

By 1483 Thomas Quadryng the Elder appears to have had serious financial problems, both having money owed to him and owing money in his turn. At some presently unknown time in 1483 he was a co-defendant in a legal action for the recovery of debt by Alan Horde, treasurer of Middle Temple in London. What the debt was for and for what amount  is unfortunately not recorded.
During the short reign of Edward V between the  9th April and 26th June in 1483  Law Court records show Thomas Quadryng, mercer,  as the plaintiff in at least eight legal proceedings in London for the recovery of debts owed to him by other mercers and merchants, as well as cloth-makers, dyers and other assorted tradesmen from London, Bristol, Bedfordshire, East Anglia, and by William Roos, gentleman, of Canterbury.
These actions for the recovery on debts owed to him are undoubtedly linked to a pressing need for money which resulted in the sale of “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp with appurtenances, and two messuages, 405 acres of land, three acres of wood and 76s 4d of rent, and the rent of eight cocks, 30 hens and one pair of gloves with appurtenances in Nonyngton and Godneston” before the death of Edward IV in April of 1483.

In the Trinity Term of the Law Courts [June and July] of 1484 John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerneys began legal proceedings through William Rose, their attorney,  to regain possession of “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’ with appurtenances, and two messuages, 405 acres of land, three acres of wood and 76s 4d of rent, and the rent of eight cocks, 30 hens and one pair of gloves with appurtenances in Nonyngton and Godneston” as their right. They claimed that the property in question had been illegally seized by John Metford, a wealthy London grocer, who appears to have taken possession of the properties as payment for money owed to him by Thomas Quadryng.

The record of this legal dispute is the first known use of Beauchamp’ when referring to a part of what had previously been  Esol, or Esole, manor that had previously been under the ownership of Sir John de Beauchamp, and then his brother, Sir Thomas de Beauchamp, 11th Earl of Warwick, some one hundred and twenty years previously.The area  referred to corresponds with the wood and pasture land in present day Nonington known as  “Beauchamps Wood” and “The Ruins”. Over the last ten years or so ongoing archaeological excavations there have brought to light the remains of a series of manor houses and associated out-buildings probably dating from between the mid-13th to the late 15th to early 16th centuries. Most of the last parts of the final manor house on the site were most likely built by the Quadryng family with attached outbuildings probably used as  warehousing for trade goods and raw materials  imported and exported through the nearby port of Sandwich. In 1501 manorial roll for Essesole manor the manor house with its adjacent gardens and orchards, now probably Beauchamps or Beachams Wood,  were referred to as “Bechams”.

1483 Court of Common Pleas record:Trinity Term of the Law Courts [June and July].  John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerneys  legal proceedings  to regain possession of “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp' ect".

1483 Court of Common Pleas record:Trinity Term of the Law Courts [June and July].  John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerneys  legal proceedings  to regain possession of “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’ ect”.

The four plaintiffs stated that they had been in possession of the property “as of fee and lawfully at the time of peace at the time of lord Edward IV, late king of England”, which meant they had held it since before April of 1483. As evidence of this they produced proof of suit of court to show that they had fulfilled their feudal duty to their overlord for Fredeuyle and Beauchamp [previously Esol], so confirming their possession of the two manors. After further claims and counter-claims before the court the plaintiffs possession of the property was confirmed.

During the court proceedings a Denis Guyer, recorded as being the tenant at of the properties in dispute, initially stated that John Metford had not disseise [deprived of seisin; wrongfully dispossess of a freehold interest in land] John Nethersole et al, but failed to return to court when summoned. This reference to a tenant at “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp with appurtenances, and two messuages ect.” is further evidence of the state of Thomas Quadryng’s finances. It would appear that he could not afford to live there and that he had found it necessary to rent out the manors and associated properties,  and had been doing so for some time before their sale to John Nethersole et al prior to the death of King Edward IV.

On 8th July, 1484, after the end of the court proceedings, a feet of fines [a form of conveyance of property] with John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerveis as the querents [plaintiffs], and Thomas Quadryng’ and Anne, his wife, as the deforciants [one/those who keep out of possession the rightful owner of an estate] confirmed the ownership of the property in question by the plaintiffs.

In 1485 John Nethersole in turn conveyed the properties to William Boys of Bonnington in Goodneston. Boys appears to have done well at this time as he also gained possession of other local property including the Manor of Shebbertswell (Shepherdswell), which had also previously belonged to the rebellious Richard Guildford.

There has over the centuries been some erroneous recording of the ownership and inheritance of Fredville in the years prior to its coming into the possession of William Boys of Bonnington.  
Thomas Philpott in his 1659 “Villare Cantianum: or, Kent surveyed and illustrated”; and William Hasted  in his “The History and Topographical Survey of Kent, volume IX” published in 1800, both recorded that Thomas Quadryng and his late wife Anne, herself a wealthy heiress in her own right, had a daughter called Joane who was their sole heiress and inherited their joint property. Joane was then said to have conveyed her inherited property to her husband, Richard Dryland, who in 1484 conveyed the Manor of Fredville and other property to John Nethersole, who in turn shortly afterwards conveyed it to William Boys of Bonnington.
However, the Thomas Quadryng and wife Anne which Philpott and Hasted both write of were actually from a separate but distantly related branch of the Quadryng family who held several estates in the vicinity of Faversham. The confusion probably initially arose from the fact that both Thomas’ had wives called Anne.
Close examination of the legal proceedings regarding the possession “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’ ect” clearly proves that Thomas Quadryng the Elder of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp did not die around 1482 and leave his property to an only daughter and sole heiress, but that he  sold the manors and other properties to John Nethersole et al at some time prior to the death of King Edward IV in April of 1483. The appearance of his wife’s name with his own on the feet of fines is also clear evidence of Anne Quadrynge of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp still being alive in 1483, and if Anne had been a wealthy heiress in her own right there would have been no need for selling up.

Following his coronation the new king faced problems with bringing the country under his control, and Kent was one of the counties where he faced opposition. Sir William Malyverer was one of six knights from King Richard III’s estates in the North of England brought down to Kent to restore order after a minor rebellion there against Richard III in October of 1483. These knights were well rewarded by the King with land and property confiscated from the rebels. The Kent rebellion was one of several insurrections in England and Wales known collectively as the Buckingham Rebellion which were intended to assist Henry Tudor, later Henry VII, to overthrow Richard III and become king in his place. The rebellion failed when Henry Tudor and five hundred armed men in seven ships were unable to cross the sea from Brittany because of a storm.

Malyverer was rewarded for services against the rebels by King Richard in August of 1484 with a grant in tail male [meaning only a direct male descendant  who could trace his descent through male descendants of Malyverer could inherit the property] which included “Hertang (Hartanger), and Paratt’s landis, (both) in the parish of Berston (Barfreston);  also a windmill called Berston Mylle; (Barfreston mill), lands in the lordship of Freydefeld (Fredville) ; the manor of Eythorne, and a rent therein; lands called Mottes in the parish of Nonyngton (in Frogham)“. The entailed land and property had belonged to Sir George Brown of Betchworth Castle in Surrey who had been another of the leaders of the  Kent rebellion.
Malyverer was also made Escheator for Kent, a potentially lucrative Royal appointment. An escheator was responsible for escheats,  the reversion of lands in English feudal law to the lord of the fee when there are no heirs capable of inheriting under the original grant.

Sir George had been tried in Westminster Hall and taken to Tower Hill and beheaded on 3rd or 4th December of 1483 and his estates were subsequently declared forfeit to the Crown by an Act of Attainder in January of 1484. Land and property belonging to Sir Richard Guildford, Sir George Brown, Sir John Fogge, and other rebels forfeit to the Crown had then been given by King Richard III  loyal supporters such as William Malyverer.

Soon after the end of the legal dispute regarding “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’ ect” Thomas Quadryng the Elder came up against Sir William Malyverer. William Langley of Knolton died in February of 1483,   leaving his son John, a minor,  as his heir. Joan, William’s newly widowed wife, appears to have married William Malyverer shortly after William Langley’s death, possibly for  political reasons, but most likely  under duress. The manor of Knolton is only a mile or so to the north-east of the manor of Esol [Beauchamp] and William Langley, or at least his widow, appears to have been a close friend of Thomas Quadryng.

In November of 1483 Malyverer seized the Kent lands of his newly acquired wife’s late husband which had previously been granted along with the wardship of the young John Langley to Richard Guildford (Guldeford) of Rolvenden, Kent. As one of the leaders of the recently failed Kent rebellion Guildford had subsequently had his estates confiscated by the Crown. Such was Malyverer’s  power in this time of ineffectual central authority that despite a Royal grant awarding “the warde & marriage of John Langley son & heire of the said William; with the keeping of alle Lordshipds ect” to Joan Langley and Thomas Quadring  he managed to retain possession of  of his step-son’s property, probably by use of his office as an escheator, until August of 1485 when Malyverer’s power and authority in Kent came to an abrupt end when his patron Richard III was defeated and slain at the Battle of Bosworth and Henry Tudor became King Henry VII. 

Thomas Quadryng the Elder lived at least until 1490, when he was involved in a court case to recover a debt of £80.00 from Richard Seintnicholas, citizen and tailor of London, who had property in and around nearby Ash. Whether this dispute had any link to the 1456 demise of land & tenements in Chislet and Lympe to John de St. Nicholas of Ash by Richard Quadrynge, Robert Euyngham, and Robert Sandeforde is not known, but at the time legal disputes could be protracted.

 

Kittington or Kettington manor and farm in Nonington revised 28.11.19

Kittington, 1870's. The Easole Mills are just off to the left.

Kettington, 1877 OS map

Kittington is on the east boundary of the old parish of Nonington between Easole and Elvington. It was for centuries a part of the Manor of  Wingham held by the Archbishops of Canterbury until Henry VIII’s reign when it was ceded to the Crown.
The name Kittington is said to have evolved from the Old English ‘cyte hamtun’ meaning ‘home farm where there are cottages’  via: Kethampton, 1226; Kethamtone; 1304, Ketyntone, 1330; Ketehampton alias Ketynton, 1537; and then Kettingden into Kettington. It is now recorded on maps as Kittington, but pronounced by many  older local born people as  Kittenden. This is because of the old East Kent dialect pronunciation of a letter e as an i, making a kettle into a kittle and missing out the g in the old Kettingden spelling.

Kittington was a detatched part of the Hundred of Wingham, the manors of Essewelle and Eswalt, which were both in the Hundred of Eastry, separated Kittington from the rest of Wingham Hundred. This is due to its being a part of Wingham manor, which in effect made up the ancient hundred of Wingham.
Archbishop Pecham’s  survey of Wingham manor in 1284 records Kittington as being the largest manor and vill’ in Nonington, covering  nearly 800 acres. Several people were recorded as having what were then considered to be quite sizeable holdings. However, the survey appears to show that the hamlet appears to have been more sparsely populated than other manors in Nonington.

The Nonington Church visitation of 1294 records that “the nuns of St. Sepulchre, Canterbury, take tithes in the parish, by what right is unknown”, these tithes were for land at Kittington. The convent held these tithes until its dissolution by Henry VIII in the 1530’s, and the King subsequently gave much of the convent’s property, including the Kettington tithes, to Sir James Hales. In 1539 the Abbot of St. Alban’s sold “Seynte Albons Courte” , now St. Alban’s Court , to Sir Christopher Hales, the King’s Master of the Rolls.
The 1294 visitation also records that “ the abott and convent of St Alban’s take certain tythes, by what right is unknown, and they sold the same that year at one time and in gross (simul et in summa)”. These tithes were also for land at Kittington, part of  Archbishop of Canterbury’s Manor of Wingham and by 1449 these tithes appear to have given rise to a dispute between the Abbot of St. Alban’s and the Archbishop of Canterbury.  The matter went to arbitration by senior churchmen who appear to have ruled in favour of St. Alban’s as the tithes still belonged to “Seynte Albons Courte”, when it was acquired by Sir Christopher Hales.

A 1469 survey of the Wingham holdings recorded Kethampton (Kittington) as being a part of the manor of Ratling and only having 237 acres of land. This appears to be because the manor had been subdivided amongst various tenants.
One of the tenants took their family name from the manor, the de Kittington (also various other spellings) family had held the manor for many years but around 1478, Cardinal Bourchier, Archbishop of Canterbury from 1454—1486, terminated a 99 year lease on 174 acres held by  John de Kettington senior, John de Kettington junior, and William Derby two years early due to non-payment of money owed. A new lease for one messuage or croft of 13 acres and 161 acres of land was given to Thomas Aldweyn (or Alwyn) at a rent of rent of “30s 7d (£1.53p) at Easter and Michaelmas by even portions to be paid and to doe suit from 3 weeks to 3 weeks to the said Archbishop’s court of Wingham”.

From the late fifteenth to late seventeenth centuries the Boys family of Fredville owned very large areas of land in and around the parish of Nonington.
On 6th December, 1537. Archbishop Thomas [Cranmer] granted “to ferme to William Boys of Nonyngton, gent.-one toft with 161 acres, 1 rod, 2 perches in Nonyngton in villata of Ketehampton alias Ketynton which among others Thomas [Bourchier] formerly Archbishop our predecessor lately recovered to the use of the Church of Canterbury  against John Ketinton, Joan Ketinton and William Derby by [breve de cesraut ?]
From next Feast of St. Michael (29th Sept) for 24 and 19 years {sic} paying yearly to the Arch. And his successors 30s 7d, at Easter and St. Michael by equal portions”.
The acreage and annual sum were the same as in 1478.

Richard Mokett was a prosperous yeoman  who held Cookys and other land in Nonington, and property and land several other parishes. In 1548 he added to his holdings in Nonington by acquiring a  moiety [half part] of “Manor of Ketehampton alias Ketynton”  along with one messuage, 360 acres of arable land, 20 acres of pasture land and 10 acres of woodland, presumably part of Tye Wood, from Nicholas and Anne Bremer of Canterbury. The moiety of the manor would have been a half part of the manorial rights and rents of the manor.
Unfortunately nothing is known of how the Bremers came into possession of the moiety of the manor and accompanying house and land. In his 1564 will Richard Mockett left, “To his sonne Christopher, all his estates, in the parishe of Nonington, Goodnestone, Woodnesborough and Barfrestone”. In his will Richard the elder also stated  his wish to be buried in Nonington Church  alongside other members of his family.
Christopher Mockett or  his heirs must have sold the moiety of the ” Manor of Ketehampton alias Ketynton” and the messuage and land to one of the successive Edward Boys’ of nearby Fredville as  in the 1626 marriage settlement of John Boys, 
the grandson of Sir Edward Boys the Elder of Fredville refers to “All that farm or messuage called Kettington, also Kethampton” and some 360 acres or so of land. At the time of the settlement the Boys’ of Fredville held in excess of 450 acres of land in Kittington. After  the 1537 purchase the Boys’ of Fredville had sold  parcels of land in Kittington to various buyers, especially the Kreke, also Kreake, Creke and Creake, family.  The Creakes were comparatively wealthy yeoman  with their main residence in nearby Easole. The family owned and rented land at Kittington and other parts of Nonington for over two hundred years. On the 1859 Nonington parish tithe map there are two Creek’s Closes commemorating their occupancy.

Kittington Farm, the 1859 Poor Law Commissioners map.

Kittington Farm, the 1859 Poor Law Commissioners map.

1859 tythe Kittington area

Kittington Farm, sketch map with field names included of the 1859 Poor Law Commissioners map.

After the Boys family sold off their Fredville estate in the 1670′s the greater part of Kittington became into the possession of the Peyton family of nearby Knowlton Court  and Kittington is still a part of the Knowlton estates. However, Tye Wood and some adjacent land remained with the rump of the Fredville estate which eventually passed into the possession of Denzil Holles, 1st Baron Holles of Ifield to settle a debt of £3,000 owed to him by Major John Boys of Fredville. The land which was once covered by Tye Wood is still part of the Fredville estate, the wood having been finally cleared in the early 1960’s.
Tygh, Tigh, Tye: wood, hedge, bottom & close, from the .O.E. ‘tye’, meaning common pasture, ie. held in common for communal use.

Kittington & Tye Wood 1859.

Kettington Farm with Tye Wood forming part of Nonington’s southern boundary with Barfreston to the left. From the 1859 Poor Law Commissioners map of Nonington.

The large Georgian farmhouse was badly damaged during its occupation by the Army during the Second World War and subsequently demolished, The present settlement of Kittington now only consists of some farm buildings and a nearby row of old farm-workers cottages which are now privately owned.

A survey of Archbishop Pecham’s Kentish Manors 1283-85.

A survey of Archbishop Pecham’s Kentish Manors 1283-85.

Published by Kent Archaeological Society in 2000. Archive ref: DA 1000a, also Arch. Cant. Vol XXXI page 169. Visitations.

The following are extracts from the above publication for hamlets, also known as villes, which formed a part of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Manor of Wingham, the inhabitants of which owed service directly to the Archbishop. The survey did not include land within the knight’s fees of  Ackholt, Ratling, and Old Court which were held directly from the Archbishop. Land holders within the fee owed service to the holder of the fee, who in turn owed service to the Archbishop.

For information on fuedal dues and customs, and ancient units of measurement not explained in the footnotes, refer to http://www.nonington.org.uk/old-units-of-measurement/

Ackholt
Thomas son of Stephen of Ackholt holds 314 acres of freeland [1] (comprising 1/8 of a knight’s fee [Du Boulay 1966, 389-90]). For this he owes nothing except suit at the court [2] of Canterbury; rent at Wingham at two terms; and what pertains to one freeman at session of the Hundred court in dealing with indictments for bloodshed, and to one shireman [3] in presentments at the county (court) and at holdings of the eyre [4].

John le Hert and Theobald le Hert hold thirty acres, Robert Blake holds 12 ½ acres. 

Thomas son of John Blake holds 12 ½ acres.

William of North Nonington and Seyena of Ackholt hold 6 acres, ½ a virgate [5] from the tenement of Osbert Smart.

Nicholas of Oxenden and Geoffrey of Oxenden hold 4 acres. 

Simon of Holestreete holds 2 acres, 1 virgate, and Roger of Holestreete 1 ½ acres.

Philip the Cooper holds 2 acres.

The heirs of Roger Lap hold ½ acre, ½ virgate.

The heirs of Roger storm (from Stourmouth [Wallenberg PNK 513]) hold 1 acre, 3 virgates.

The heirs of Robert Shameles (probably from shamelum, a shambles or market [Latham, 421-2, sub scamellum]) hold ½ acre.  And 2 acres, 3 virgates are vacant. Of these 76 ½  acres there are 5 ½ acres of inland [6]  by Dierth, for the gavel-land there are owed 3 boon-workers, 3 stackers, 1 averagium  [7] and 1 seam [8] of malt.

Egidius of Ackholt holds 10 ½ acres and Richard Shameles 10 ½ acres from the land of Eilnoth of Denne. For these 21 acres they provide 2 boon-workers [9] and 2 stackers, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt.

This hamlet contains 118 acres of gavel-land and 11 acres of inland. The gavel- land provides 7 boon-workers, 2 carts, 5 stackers, 3 averagia, and 3 seams of malt.  The inland and freeland owe no service.

Payments to the Archbishop
Theobald le Hert, 1 hen.  John le Hert, 1 hen.  Henry Dabloe & partners from the tenement of Smart, 1 hen. Robert Blake, 1 hen. Thos.  Blake,1 hen.  John, son of John Dabloe from the tenement of Ralph of Acholt,1 hen.  Egidius of Acholt from Dennesland [Denne Hill?] , 1 hen.  Seyene of Ackholt from the tenement of Sedemay, 1 hen.  In total 8 hens.

  1. Freeland, land free of customary manorial dues and services and was used principally of knights fees. A Freeman was the holder of freeland.

Knights fee. All land was held from the King, ‘the Lord Paramount’, either by ‘tenants-in-chief’ or someone else.  The land holders were subject to certain services, one of which was Knights Service, which was rent or service owed initially by those with more than twelve ploughs worth of land, and after the reign of Edward II for land worth more than twenty pounds per annum. If called the ower of the service had to go to war at their own expense with their overlord for forty days if a full fee was owed, twenty days for a half fee, and so on in proportion to the fee held.

  1. Suit of court was a tenants duty to attend the lord of the Manors court.
  2. Shireman, a shireland tenant. Shireland was an elevated form of gavelkind tenure carrying special representational duties, i.e. at shire courts and gave a status verging on that of knight’s fees. Gavelkind was the principle freehold land tenure in Kent existing into the early 20th century. The custom of inheritance insisting on equal division of property amongst male, and in the absence of male heirs, female heirs. This led to the fragmentation of land holdings.

Gavel land was land held by payment of gavel rent, usually 1d per acre, usually little by way of service by the Gavelmen,  the free holders of land under Gavelkind.

  1. An Eyre or Iter was the name of a circuit travelled by an itinerant justice in medieval England, or the circuit court he presided over, or the right of the king (or justices acting in his name) to visit and inspect the holdings of any vassal. The eyre involved visits and inspections at irregular intervals of the houses of all vassals in the kingdom, and often provoked terror in the populace; the 1233 Eyre of Cornwall, for example, caused most of the population to flee into the woods.

5.The virgate (Medieval Latin: virgāta) or yardland (Middle English: yardland) was a unit of land area measurement used in medieval England, typically outside the Danelaw, and was held to be the amount of land that a team of two oxen could plough in a single annual season. It was equivalent to a quarter of a hide, so was nominally thirty acres.  A ‘virgater’ would thus be a peasant who occupied or worked this area of land, and a ‘half virgater’ would be a person who occupied or worked about 15 acres (61,000 m2).

  1. Inland, a dependant tenure, so named because the earlier holdings of this type were clustered closely around the arable demesne.
  2. Averagium was the carriage of goods by pack horse, foot-averagium was the service of carrying goods, messages or other documents by foot.
  3. Seam, a measure of capacity, variable depending on the type of product and defined by statute as ‘a good horse load’. A seam for corn and salt equalled 8 bushels, whilst for faggots, bundles of wood then used for fuel, it was fixed at rates varying from manor to manor.
  4. Boon-worker, a labourer provided by the tenant at no charge to the land-lord.

Bonnington
Bonnington was not in the old parish of Nonington but some Nonington residents held land there.
Henry Dovorr’ (Dover ? later de Retlyng?-see Ratling) and Thomas son of Gilbert hold 75 ½ acres for which they provide 4 boon-workers and 4 light carts and perform the custom of ½ a Shireman .

John of Bonnington holds 38 acres, 1 virgate for which he provides 2 boon-workers and 2 light carts.  Alexander of Coleshill holds 38 acres 1 virgate. For these 76 ½ acres they perform the custom of 1 Shireman.

And Alexander owes in the hamlet of Uffington boon-workers, carts and the custom of ½ Shireman. 

William le V[F]rode and Goldelina hold 31 acres for which they provide 2 boon-workers and 2 stackers, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt.

William Adgar holds 39 acres for which he provides 2 boon-workers and 3 light carts.

Gilbert Baudechim holds 12 acres from the tenement of Eugene for which he provides 1 boon-worker, and 1 light cart. For these 51 acres they make 1 seam of malt and undertake 1 averagium.

Gilbert Baudechim, Robert Baudechim, Thomas son of Adam and his brothers hold 12 acres and Robert of Chillenden 12 acres. For these 24 acres they provide 2 boon-workers and 2 light carts, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt.

Gilbert Baudechim holds 12 acres from the land of William Long, Robert of Steghele, John Cooper and Stephen Weaver (textor) hold 7 acres and Thomas of Bonnington and Gilbert Baudechim hold 5 acres from the land of Walter of Tuniford. For these 23 acres they provide 2 boon-workers and 2 stackers, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt. 

Adam the Cooper and Richard son of Thomas hold 9 acres, 3 virgates from the lands of Osmund. Theobald the Tanner holds 17 acres from the land of le Lome. For these 26 acres, 3 virgates they provide 2 boon-workers, 2 stackers, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt.

William Adgar holds 6 ½ acres from the lands of Fulchir, for which he provides a 1/3 share of 2 stackers and 2 boon-workers, undertakes ¼ averagium and makes ¼ seam of malt.

This hamlet contains 319 acres, 1 rood. It provides 17 boon-workers, 11 stackers, 12 light carts, 5 ¼ averagia and 5 seams and 2 bushels of malt.

Payments to the Archbishop
John of Bonnington, 1 hen.  Thos. of Bonnington, 1 hen.  Henry Dover, 1 hen-later de Retlyng?.  William Adger, 1 hen; the same for his land at Soles (now Soles Court Farm, near Frogham), 1 hen.  Wm.  le V[F]rode, 1 hen.  Heirs of Richard le V[F]rode, 1 hen.  Adam Cooper, 1 hen.  Robert at Steghele, 1 hen.  Robt.  of Chillenden for the tenement of Ralph.  Richd.  Baudechim, 1 hen.  Heirs to Adam Baudechim, 1 hen.  Tenement of Tuniford, 1 hen.  Heirs of Srin[v}eday[?], 1 hen.  From the tenement of Eugene, 1 hen.  In total 15 hens.   

Kittington
Gilbert Parson, Henry son of John and Roger and Alexander his brother hold 59 acres for which they provide 1 boon-worker and 1 ½ harrows [1]. Joanna daughter of Lord Walter of Wingham and her sister hold 59 acres for which they provide 1 boon-worker and 1 ½ harrows. For these 118 acres they undertake to provide 1 averagium but make no malt nor plough nor reap nor telework [2]  and nor do other from this hamlet.

This [group of tenants also] hold 22 acres from the tenement of Geremund but owe nothing for it except rent because it is inland.

William son of Walter and Alan his brother hold 17 ½ acres together with 17 ½ acres from the land of Robert and 7 ½ acres from the tenement of Beregaderer (possibly from ‘bere’ a type of barley (possible origin of ‘beer’? my note) and ‘gathered’). For those 42 ½ acres they provide 6 boon-workers and 9 harrowers and undertake 1 averagium.

William Mot holds 25 acres for which he provides 2 boon-workers and 3 harrowers and undertakes 1 averagium (Mot family also held Broadsole aka Frogham Farm for many years).

Juliana at Logge holds 7 ½ acres. William of Northalle holds 7 ½ acres from the tenement of Le[e]s. Alexander Spr’nget holds 7 acres from the tenement of Eilard for these 22 acres they provide 6 boon-workers and 9 harrowers and undertake 1 averagium.

Richard of Woghope (a Richard of Woghope was Treasurer to the Archbishop in 1331. Du Boulay 1966 397) holds 93 acres, ½ virgate for which he provides ½ boon-worker and performs ¼ of the custom of 1 Shireman. [Woghhopes, {also Woodhope, Wohope, Whoope{ held Harnden, sometimes Heronden, in Eastry parish and land in Nonington. Commission of oyez and terminer in April, 1323,  for John de Woghhope against various neighbours in Knolton, Ash and Eastry for breaking his close and houses in Nonynton and carrying away his goods].

Thomas of Goodnestone holds 310 ½ acres from the tenement of Ralph and 62 acres from the tenements of Gilbert Thurston and Geremund. For these 372 ½ he performs with Richard of Woghope the custom of 1 full Shireman.  The other customs are commuted for money as described below. The same Thomas holds 418 acres 3 virgates in the hamlet of Goodnestone for which he performs the custom of 1 Shireman, touching the crown of the lord King and for the land he holds there and in Kittington he pays annually for commuted service 5s 3d.

William of Northalle holds 170 acres for which he provides 2 boon-workers and performs the custom of 1 Shireland.

The hamlet contains 207 acres of gavel-land, 263 acres of Shireland, 22 acres of inland providing 18 boon-workers, 24 harrowers and 3 averagia but (the tenants) do not plough reap or make malt. The Shireland provides ½ boon-worker. The inland owes no service.

Payments to the Archbishop
William le Mot for the enclosure, 1 hen.  William at Northalle: {for the tenement of} Le[e]s, 1hen. Julianna de la Logge from the tenement of Henry Our’th, 1 hen.  Heirs of Walter of Wingham, 1 hen.  Heirs of Alexander Sp’inget from the tenement of Eilard, 1 hen.  Alan Upton, 1 hen.  In total 7 hens.

  1. Harrows are agricultural implements used to break up the soil on ploughed land prior to sewing seed.
  2. Telework was the service owed for ploughing.

North Nonington
Margaret daughter of William of Nonington holds 50 acres from the land of Alfred (of Nonington) and she and Adam Herlewyne hold 25 acres. From these 75 acres they provide 1 boon-worker, 2 carts and perform as much as pertains to ½ Shireman together with customs of ploughing and reaping. They also hold 3 acres 3 roods of inland for which they owe no service.

Hamo at Mede holds 75 acres for which he provides 1 boon-worker and 2 carts and performs as much as pertains to ½ Shireman with customs of ploughing and reaping. He also holds 3 acres 3 roods of inland for which he owes no service.

From the tenements of Burnevale, Thomas of Bonnington holds 45 acres, Gilbert son of Thomas and Peter son of Alan hold 5 acres, the heirs of Robert Shameles hold 5 acres; the heirs of Thomas of Ackholt hold 18 acres; John Storm holds 1 ½ acres; Thomas [The?] Chaplain holds 11 acres; William of Nonington 47 acres; Geoffrey of Wood {Word =Worth?  my note} holds 3 ½ acres Stephen Goldsmith holds 1 ½ acres; John of Messeberghe and Thomas of Chillenden  holds 12 acres; and Emma Shameles holds 4 ½  acres. And there remains 2 acres for which they all answer. For these 157 ½ acres they provide 2 boon-workers and 2 carters undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt. This hamlet contains 307 ½ acres of gavel-land, and 7 ½ acres of inland. The gavel-land provides 4 boon-workers, 6 carters, 1 averagium and 1 seam of malt. And the hamlet contains 1 Shireland.

Payments to the Archbishop.
From the messuage of Alfred of Nonnington, 1 hen.  From the messuage of Hamo of Mede, 1 hen.  From the messuage of Herlewyne, 1 hen.  From the messuage of Burnevale, 1 hen.
In total, 4 hens.

South Nonington
Simon and John sons of Robert Shameles hold 25 acres 1 virgate for which they provide 2 boon-workers and 2 carters, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt.

Robert of Fingesthere and John his brother hold 25 ½ acres for which they provide 2 boon-workers and 2 stackers, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt.

The heirs of Robert Shameles and Robert Shameles hold 4 acres of pasture for which no customs are owed.

John Storm, Alfred and Reyn’us hold 5 acres and also 3 acres 3 virgates from the tenement of Humbold from which Richard Shameles holds another 2 ½ acres. For these 13 acres 3 virgates they provide 2 boon-workers and 2 stackers, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt.

Sayena of Ackholt holds 11 ½ acres from the lands of Sedemay and 5 acres 3 virgates from the land of Geremund , from the same land the heirs of William son of Alexander and John son of Alexander hold 3 acres 3 virgates. For these 23 acres they provide 2 boon-workers and 2 stackers, undertake 1 averagium and make 1 seam of malt.

Robert son of Walter Lap and John and William his brothers hold 2 ½ acres; Richard Shameles and his partners hold 2 ½ acres from the land of Sneynot. For these 5 acres they provide 1 boon-worker and 1 stacker and undertake 1 foot- averagium.

The heirs of William son of Alexander and their partners hold 7 acres from the land of Asketyn for which they provide 1 boon-worker and 1 stacker and undertake 1 foot-averagium. 

This hamlet contains 99 ½ acres of gavel-land and 4 acres of pasture. The gavel-land provides 10 boon-workers, 8 stackers, 2 carters, 4 averagia, 2 foot-averagia and 4 seams of malt. The pasture owes no service.

Payments to the Archbishop.
John Storm (of Stourmouth) for messuage, 1 hen.  Alfred Storm (of Stourmouth) for the messuage, 1 hen.  Reynard storm (of Stourmouth) for the messuage, 1 hen.  Richard Shameles of Dennesland, 1 hen.  Simon Shameles & partners, 1 hen.  John Mobili [?], & partners for Geremund, 1 hen.  Henry le Lap & partners, 1 hen.  Richard Shameles for messuage, 1 hen.  In total 8 hens.   

Oxenden
Thomas Raus and Richards Raus hold 19 acres and 3 virgates and 8 acres which are liable to pethamlode [1].

Thomas de Oxenden holds 19 acres 3 virgates. For these 47 ½ acres they provide 2 boon-workers, 2 carts, and 2 harrowers, undertake 1 averagium, make 1 seam of malt and perform pethamlode.

The widow of Nicholas of Oxenden holds 16 ½ acres ½ virgate, Eilnoth son of Malger and Richard son of Malger hold 16 ½ acres ½ virgate. For these 33 acres 1 virgate they provide 2 stackers, 2 boon-workers and 2 harrowers, make 1 seam of malt undertake 1 averagium and perform pethamlode.

Eilnoth s of Thomas and John his brother hold 38 acres for which they provide 2 boon-workers, 2 stackers, and 2 harrowers, undertake 1 averagium, make 1 seam of malt and perform pethamlode.

Simon of Warin holds 6 acres, Richard Knote holds 6 acres from the land of Vincent and 7 acres from that of Godwin.  From the land of Osmund, Thomas of Oxenden holds 3 ½ acres ½ virgate and Alexander of Oxenden and Simon le Heler hold 3 ½ acres ½ virgate. Stephen Barate holds 7 ½ acres from the land of Adam Pette. For these 33 acres they provide 2 boon-workers, 2 stackers, and 2 harrowers, undertake 1 averagium, make 1 seam of malt and perform pethamlode.

Stephen Goldsmith holds from the land of Eilnoth 8 acres 1 virgate, Richard Malger holds from the lands of Cobbe 8 acres 1 virgate. Geoffrey of Oxenden holds 16 ½ acres. For these 33 acres they provide 2 boon-workers, 2 stackers and 2 harrowers, undertake 1 averagium, make 1 seam of malt and perform pethamlode.

This hamlet contains 129 acres of gavel-land and 53 ½ acres of inland. It provides 12 boon-workers, 10 stackers, 10 harrowers, 2 carts, undertake 5 averagia, make 5 seams of malt and provide 4 carts of pethamlode.

Payments to the Archbishop
Thomas of Oxenden, 1 hen.  Eilnoth of Oxenden & John his brother, 1 hen.  Heirs of Nicholas of Oxenden & partners, 1 hen.  Eilnoth Lager &  associates, 1 hen.  Richard, son of Malger from the lands of Cobbe, 1 hen.  Baldwin Osmund, 1 hen.  Richard Knote & partners, 1 hen.  From the same from the land of Godwin, 1 hen.  In total 9 hens.

  1. Pethamlode was the delivery of 20 or so loads wood yearly to the lord which applied to heavily wooded areas. The loads had to be delivered to specified places and were usually for fencing or building purposes.

Crudes, later Curlswood Park Farm.
Cotland was inferior type of land tenure, usually in wood land, some rights such as grazing attached. Cotland local to the old parish of Nonington in the 13th and 14th centuries were some heavily wooded areas on the fringe of Wingham, manor at Crudes and Wolneth.  At Crudes, (Crudes Wood, later Curleswood Park Farm) Richard Hokemok held two parts and Rikemund the widow of Alexander Crud (from whence the name came) held the third part. Crudes consisted of 244 acres, Wolneth (Woolege) extended to  296 ½ acres. Of Woolege Wood 93 acres remained virtually intact until after the Second World War and it’s extent is still plainly marked out by tree belts.

Soles.
William Adgar and Stephen son of Henry hold 22 acres for which they provide 3 stackers, undertake 1 averagium & make 1 seam of malt.

[This land was not on the Manor of Soles but in the area then known as Soles. It would have bordered on the manor of Soles, most likley in the Frogham area].

Payments the Archbishop.
For their land at Soles, 1 hen.

 

The Quadryng family at Fredeuyle and Esol-revised 1.1.17

John Quadryng, a City of London mercer, aquired one half of the Manor of Fredeuyle, as Freydvill’ was by then known, in the opening years of the 15th century and the manor remained with the Quadryng, also Quadring, family for much of that century.

It’s not clear when the Quadryngs acquired the Esol house and lands as there are at present no known records of any such property purchases by the Quardryngs. It’s highly likely that they purchased Esol house and lands from Sir John Harleston at the same time, or possibly before, they acquired the Manor of Fredeuyle.

A mercer by trade, John Quadryng may have bought Esol partly as a country residence and partly for use as a warehouse for storing the wool he exported and the silk, linen, fustian, and other textiles he imported through the nearby ports of Dover and Sandwich. Esol was especially well situated for trading through Sandwich which was only some six miles or so away by, for the time, a good direct road. After 1363 Calais was made the wool staple [market] through which all wool exports from England to the Continent had to pass.

During their tenure at Esol the Quadryngs acquired other land in and around Nonington. In addition to their holdings at Esol and Fredville they also held land in North and South Nonington, which were part of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Manor of Wingham. The 1469 survey of the manor of Wingham records the heirs of Richard Quadryng holding an unspecified amount of land in South Nonington and about 135 acres in North Nonington. During their tenure at Esol the Quadryngs built up a holding of over 400 acres of arable, pasture and woodland as well as annual rents in the parishes of Nonington and Goodnestone.

John Quadryng added to the Nonington acquisitions in 1403 with the purchase of  “1 messuage, 1 toft, 80 acres of land, 3 acres of meadow, 3 acres of marsh, 6 acres of pasture, 3 acres of wood, 24 shillings of rent and a rent of 4 bushels of barley in Sholdon’, Staple, Northborne, Eastry, Hamme, Wodenesbergh’, Lymmyng and Elham”.

As merchants the Quadryngs needed a ready supply of cash and credit to trade, and were susceptible to the ups and downs of fortune where losses can be more easily made than profits. The loss of a cargo or a bad debt would have put the family in the financial mire. Richard Quadryng, draper and citizen of London and probably John’s grand-son, traded through various English ports including Bristol and in 1436 he took Robert Frere of Bristol, esquire, before Richard Estfeld, Mayor of the Staple at Westminster for a debt of £20.00. This indicates that Richard was a member of “Mayor and Company of Merchants of the Staple of England”.

[“The Company of Merchants of the Staple is one of the oldest mercantile corporations in England. It is rare, possibly unique, in being ‘of England‘ and not bounded by any city or municipality. It may trace its ancestry back as far as 1282 or even further. A group of 26 wool merchants apparently first started the Company. The Dukes of Burgundy and Counts of Flanders granted it charters. The Merchants were in Bruges in 1282, Dordrecht in 1285, Antwerp in 1296 and St Omer in 1313. The Company controlled the export of wool to the continent from 1314.  The Duke of Flanders awarded a grant to the English Merchants in 1341. Its first charter from an English monarch was in 1347 giving it control of the export trade in staple commodities. Commercial significance was in Calais – under English rule from 1347 and the main port for wool.    Exports were restricted to the Freemen of the Company who, in return for their monopoly, paid a levy back to the Crown.  With some two hundred merchants, in 1363 it was known as the “New Company of English Merchants dwelling nowe at Calais” and in 1369 as “The Mayor and Company of the Staple at Calais“. The Company later paid for and eventually managed the garrison in the city” –information from the website of The Company of the Staple of England].

In the mid-1440′s Richard Quadryng raised a mortgage of £200 against land and property held in Nonyngton which was the subject of various legal proceedings and transfers in 1447. A few years later in 1456 Richard Quadrynge, Robert Euyngham and Robert Sandeforde demised land & tenements in Chislet and Lympe to John de St. Nicholas of Ash, possibly to ease persisting financial problems.

The Mercer’s Company register for 1476 records that Thomas Quadryng, presumably the son of Richard Quadryng, was made a Freeman [member] of the Mercers Company of London and  the same year another Thomas Quadryng , the son of the new Freeman, was apprenticed to John Godyng, a Master Mercer of London.

In May, 1483, Thomas Quadryng the Elder was one of the representatives of the City of London who greeted Edward V at Harnsey Park, now Hornsey Park in present Harringay. The boy king had succeeded Edward IV in April of 1483 and only reigned  until June of 1483 before being deposed and, as one of the unfortunate ” Princes in the Tower”,  then possibly  murdered by his uncle,  Richard, Duke of Gloucester,  who then proclaimed himself King Richard III and was crowned on 6th July of 1483.

During 1483 Thomas Quadryng the Elder was pursuing several debtors for payment, whilst at the same time was also being pursued for payment of debts himself. This is the most likely cause of his having apparently sold “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’ [previously known as Esol] and 2 messuages, 405 acres of land, 3 acres of wood and 76 shillings and 4 pence of rent and a rent of 8 cocks, 30 hens and 1 pair of gloves in Nonyngton’ and Godneston’” at some time before the death of King Edward IV in April of 1483.

Thomas Philpott in his 1659 “Villare Cantianum: or, Kent surveyed and illustrated”; and William Hasted  in his “The History and Topographical Survey of Kent, volume IX” published in 1800 both recorded that Thomas Quadryng and his late wife Anne, herself a wealthy heiress in her own right, had a daughter called Joane who was their sole heiress and inherited their joint property. Joane was then said to have conveyed her inherited property to her husband, Richard Dryland, who in 1484 conveyed the Manor of Fredville and other property to John Nethersole, who in turn shortly afterwards conveyed it to William Boys of Bonnington. However, the Thomas Quadryng and wife Anne they write of were actually a different branch of the Quadryng family who had several estates in the Faversham area. The confusion probably initially arose from the fact that both Thomas’ had wives called Anne.

Close examination of contemporary documents appears to show a different chain of events regarding the sale of “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’ [Esol] and 2 messuages, 405 acres of land, 3 acres of wood and 76 shillings and 4 pence of rent and a rent of 8 cocks, 30 hens and 1 pair of gloves in Nonyngton’ and Godneston’”. Thomas Quadryng the Elder of Fredeuyle did not die around 1482 and leave his property to an only daughter and sole heiress but was still alive into the 1490’s, as was his son, Thomas Quadryng the Younger.

In 1476 Thomas Quadryng the Elder became a Freeman [member] of the Mercers Company of London Freeman by patrimony, meaning his father or a close relative was also a Freeman of the Mercers Company.  In that same year Thomas Quadryng  the Elder’s son, Thomas the Younger, was apprenticed to John Godyng, a Master Mercer of London, and the Mercers Company record that Thomas the Younger was in his turn made a Freeman of the Company in 1490.

In the Trinity Term of the Law Courts [June and July] of 1484 John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerneys through William Rose, their attorney, began legal proceedings to regain possession of “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp with appurtenances, and two messuages, 405 acres of land, three acres of wood and 76s 4d of rent, and the rent of eight cocks, 30 hens and one pair of gloves with appurtenances in Nonyngton and Godneston” as their right. They claimed that the property in question had been illegally seized by John Metford, a wealthy London grocer, who appears to have taken possession of the properties as payment for money owed to him by Thomas Quadryng.

The four plaintiffs stated that they had been in possession of the property “as of fee and lawfully at the time of peace at the time of lord Edward IV, late king of England”, which meant they had held it since before April of 1483. As evidence of this they produced proof of suit of court to show that they had fulfilled their feudal duty to their overlord for Fredeuyle and Beauchamp [previously Esol], so confirming their possession of the two manors. After further claims and counter-claims before the court the plaintiffs possession of the property was confirmed.

On 8th July, 1484, after the end of the court proceedings, a feet of fines [a form of conveyance of property] with John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerveis as the querents [plaintiffs], and Thomas Quadryng’ and Anne, his wife, as the deforciants [one/those who keep out of possession the rightful owner of an estate] confirmed the ownership of the property in question by the plaintiffs. The fact Anne, Thomas’s wife, appears with him on the feet of fines is evidence of her still being alive, and therefore of her not being the mother of Joane Dryland, née Quadryng.

In 1485 John Nethersole in turn conveyed the properties to William Boys of Bonnington in Goodneston. Boys appears to have done well at this time as he also gained possession of other property locally,  including the Manor of Shebbertswell (Shepherdswell) which had also previously belonged to the rebellious Richard Guildford.

England was at this time in the last throes of the Wars of the Roses and Richard III, who had  had himself crowned King in July of 1483 was striving to bring the country under his control, and Kent was one of the counties where he faced opposition. Sir William Malyverer was one of six knights from King Richard III’s estates in the North of England brought down to Kent to restore order after a minor rebellion there against Richard III in October of 1483. These knights were well rewarded by the King with land and property confiscated from the rebels. The Kent rebellion was one of several insurrections in England and Wales known collectively as the Buckingham Rebellion which were intended to assist Henry Tudor, later Henry VII, to overthrow Richard III and become king in his place. The rebellion failed when Henry Tudor and five hundred armed men in seven ships were unable to cross the sea from Brittany because of a storm.

Malyverer was rewarded for services against the rebels by King Richard in August of 1484 with a grant in tail male [meaning only a direct male descendant  who could trace his descent through male descendants of Malyverer could inherit the property] which included “Hertang (Hartanger), and Paratt’s landis, (both) in the parish of Berston (Barfreston);  also a windmill called Berston Mylle; (Barfreston mill), lands in the lordship of Freydefeld (Fredvill) ; the manor of Eythorne, and a rent therein; lands called Mottes in the parish of Nonyngton (in Frogham)“. The entailed land and property had belonged to Sir George Brown of Betchworth Castle in Surrey who had been another of the leaders of the  Kent rebellion. Malyverer was also made Escheator for Kent.

Sir George had been tried in Westminster Hall and taken to Tower Hill and beheaded on 3/4 December of 1483 and his estates were subsequently declared forfeit to the Crown by an Act of Attainder in January of 1484. Land and property belonging to Sir Richard Guildford, Sir George Brown, Sir John Fogge, and other rebels forfeit to the Crown had then been given by King Richard III  loyal supporters such as William Malyverer.

William Langley of Knolton died in February of 1483 leaving as his heir his son John, who was a minor.  Joan, William’s newly widowed wife, appears to have married William Malyverer shortly after her first husbands death, most likely for either political reasons or under duress. The manor of Knolton is only a mile or so to the north-east of Esol and William Langley, or at least his widow, appears to have been a close friend as well as once being a close neighbour of the Quadryngs, as by this time they were no longer in possession of Esol.
Around the time of the Buckingham Rebellion Thomas Quadryng crossed swords with William Malyverer on behalf of Joan when in November of 1483 Malyverer  seized the Kent lands of his wife’s late husband which had previously been granted together with the custody of the young John Langley to Richard Guildford (Guldeford) of Rolvenden, Kent. Guildford was one of the leaders of the Kent rebellion and subsequently had his estates confiscated by the King, and also loosing the custody of the young John Langley and his property.
Such was Malyverer’s  power in a time of ineffectual central authority that despite a royal grant awarding “the warde & marriage of John Langley son & heire of the said William; with the keeping of alle Lordshipds ect” to Joan Langley and Thomas Quadring he managed to retain possession of his step-son’s property until August of 1485 when Richard III was defeated and slain at the Battle of Bosworth and Henry Tudor became King Henry VII.

Thomas Quadryng the Elder lived at least until 1490, when he was involved in a court case to recover a debt of £80.00 from Richard Seintnicholas, citizen and tailor of London, who had property in and around nearby Ash.

The Quadryng family at Esol, later Beauchamp’, and Fredeuyle-revised with new information.

In 1368 Sir John’s nephew Roger and other co-heirs offered “le manoir de Easole” to the Priory of Christ Church in Canterbury on the condition: “namely, that one of your monks there should be perpetually specially assigned and deputed to sing mass, at the Altar of Our Lady in the Crypt, wearing vestments decorated with the arms of the Warwick family, and praying for the souls of our said uncle and our ancestors”. The priory’s response was that: “to bear and perform such a charge for so small a repayment, where there is scarcely any profit, would be too burdensome for us; wherefore, Sire, be pleased in this case to have us excused”. The refusal of the bequest indicates how unprofitable agricultural land had become in the aftermath of the Black Death of 1348 to 1350 which had killed up to half of the population of England. Sporadic outbreaks of this awful disease continued to occur in England into the 1360’s and beyond.

After Christ Church refused Esol the De Beauchamp family appear to have sold the property because the 1377 St. Alban’s Abbey manorial rental rolls for Esol record that the house, buildings and land previously held by Sir John de Beauchamp was then owned Sir John Harleston, who also had a life interest in Freydvill’. At some time between the death of Sir John de Beauchamp and its acquisition by Sir John Harleston the 1377 rental roll records that the property had been owned by Dominus (Lord) Richard Ricilynge, the Richard de Retlyng recorded in the 1346 Hundred Roll as holding part of the knights fee of Essewelle.

Sir John Harleston, sometimes spelt Harlestone or Herliston, had much in common with Sir John de Beauchamp, his predecessor at Esol. Sir John was a knight from a land-owning Essex family and he served and fought in the Hundred Years War with some distinction. As reward for his service he was made a Knight of the Chamber by King Richard II. As with Sir John de Beauchamp it’s likely Sir John Harleston  acquired Esol as a stopping off place for journeys between England and the Continent through the port of Sandwich, it’s ideally situated just some five or six miles from the port and would have provided a comfortable place to stay on arrival from the Continent or awaiting a ship to cross the Channel for Sir John or members of his household and entourage.

In 1359 he was credited with the capture of Flavigny-sur-Ozerain, some thirty miles north-west of Dijon. During the 1360’s he appears to have embarked on various diplomatic and other missions on behalf of the King, and he helped negotiate a truce in 1366 between England and France. On the resumption of hostilities between England and France in 1369 Sir John was appointed Captain of Guise and held the post until late 1376. In 1379 he was made Captain of Cherbourg, and for at least part of that year he was also Captain of Froissart and Kervyn de Lettenhove. During his time at Cherbourg he took part in various skirmishes, and in one of these he captured a French knight, William de Bordes, whom he gave to King Richard II in return for a grant of 10,000 francs. Sir John is also said to have received £1,583 6s 8d for the ransom of another unnamed French knight,  a considerable sum at a time when Richard II’s annual revenue was around £70,000.

After serving as Captain of Cherbourg he accompanied Thomas Woodstock, 1st Duke of Gloucester on raids into various parts of France which further added to his considerable wealth. For these raids he contracted to provide six bannerets [the highest order of knighthood], seventy three knights and eighty archers.

Sir John was back in England in 1381 and helped to defeat and punish participants in the Peasants Revolt in Kent and Essex on behalf of King Richard II.  However, he was not in England for long, and he returned to the Continent as part of Despenser’s Crusade of 1383.  This was a military expedition led by Henry le Despenser, the Fighting Bishop of Norwich, which was intended to help the city of Ghent in its struggle against the supporters of the Antipope Clement VII during the great Western or Papal Schism, a split within the Catholic Church which lasted from 1378 to 1417.  This expedition was an integral part of the Hundred Years War as France supported Clement, whose court was based in Avignon, whilst the English supported Pope Urban VI whose court was in Rome.

In 1384 Sir John returned to raiding in France, but this time he captured raiding villages belonging to Bruno, Graf von Rappoltstein, a powerful independent nobleman from Alsace who had extensive holdings in France and the Holy Roman Empire. Bruno von Rappoltstein held Sir John prisoner in Alsace and Burgundy and did not release him until 1392. On his release he was granted an annuity of one hundred marks by King Richard II to help compensate him for losses incurred during his imprisonment and this annuity was subsequently confirmed by Henry IV in October 1399. After his release Sir John led a quieter life, but still retained some interest in the Royal Court’s affairs until his death in October of 1404. The writ for Harlestone’s inquisition post mortem was issued on 25 January 1406.

John de Say, fourth and last Baron Say, died in 1382 aged about 12 years old and was without a direct male heir. Subsequently for the next two decades the lordship of the Manor of Freydevill’, which had reverted to the Barony of Say, passed by a complicated chain of inheritance to various surviving sisters of the third baron and then to their heirs resulting in the sub-division of the barony and its constituent manors.

The Manor of Freydvill’, the other half of the Essewelle knight’s fee, was also held by Sir John Harleston who had had a life interest in the manor granted to him by the 2nd Lord Say prior to 1356. The Manor of Fredeuyle, as Freydvill’ was by then known, was sold by Sir John Harleston and the heirs of the Barony of Say in May of 1401 to John Quadryng’, a City of London mercer, and it remained in the Quadryng, also Quadring, family’s possession for much of the 15th century.

It’s not clear when the Quadrings acquired the house and lands at Esol as there is no mention in the Feet of Fines dated May 1st of 1401 of any property being included in the sale of the Manor of Fredeuyle, so it’s possible that the Quadrings purchased Esol house and lands from Sir John Harleston at the same time or even before they aquired the Manor of Fredeuyle. As the Esol house and property were separate to Fredeuyle it would have most likely been a separate transaction, but unfortunately there is no known documentary evidence to confirm this.

A mercer by trade, John Quadring’ may have bought Esol partly as a country residence and partly for use as a warehouse for storing the wool he exported and the silk, linen, fustian, and other textiles he imported through the nearby ports of Dover and Sandwich. Esol was especially well situated for trading through Sandwich which was only some six miles or so away by, for the time, a good direct road. After 1363 Calais was made the wool staple [market] through which all wool exports from England to the Continent had to pass.

During their tenure at Esol the Quadrings acquired other land in and around Nonington. In addition to the holdings at Esol and Fredville they also held land in North and South Nonington, which were part of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Manor of Wingham. The 1469 survey of the manor of Wingham records the heirs of Richard Quadryng holding an unspecified amount of land in South Nonington and about 135 acres in North Nonington. During their tenure at Esol the Quadrings built up a holding of over 400 acres of arable, pasture and woodland as well as annual rents in the parishes of Nonington and Goodnestone.

John Quadring added to the Nonington acquisitions in 1403 with the purchase of  “1 messuage, 1 toft, 80 acres of land, 3 acres of meadow, 3 acres of marsh, 6 acres of pasture, 3 acres of wood, 24 shillings of rent and a rent of 4 bushels of barley in Sholdon’, Staple, Northborne, Eastry, Hamme, Wodenesbergh’, Lymmyng and Elham”.

As merchants the Quadrings needed a ready supply of cash and credit to trade, and were susceptible to the ups and downs of fortune where losses can be more easily made than profits. The loss of a cargo or a bad debt would have put the family in the financial mire. Richard Quadring, draper and citizen of London and probably John’s grand-son, traded through various English ports including Bristol and in 1436 he took Robert Frere of Bristol, esquire, before Richard Estfeld, Mayor of the Staple at Westminster for a debt of £20.00. This indicates that Richard was a member of “Mayor and Company of Merchants of the Staple of England”.

[“The Company of Merchants of the Staple is one of the oldest mercantile corporations in England. It is rare, possibly unique, in being ‘of England‘ and not bounded by any city or municipality. It may trace its ancestry back as far as 1282 or even further. A group of 26 wool merchants apparently first started the Company. The Dukes of Burgundy and Counts of Flanders granted it charters. The Merchants were in Bruges in 1282, Dordrecht in 1285, Antwerp in 1296 and St Omer in 1313. The Company controlled the export of wool to the continent from 1314.  The Duke of Flanders awarded a grant to the English Merchants in 1341. Its first charter from an English monarch was in 1347 giving it control of the export trade in staple commodities. Commercial significance was in Calais – under English rule from 1347 and the main port for wool.    Exports were restricted to the Freemen of the Company who, in return for their monopoly, paid a levy back to the Crown.  With some two hundred merchants, in 1363 it was known as the “New Company of English Merchants dwelling nowe at Calais” and in 1369 as “The Mayor and Company of the Staple at Calais“. The Company later paid for and eventually managed the garrison in the city” –information from the website of The Company of the Staple of England].

In the mid-1440′s Richard Quadryng raised a mortgage of £200 against land and property held in Nonyngton which was the subject of various legal proceedings and transfers in 1447.

A few years later in 1456 Richard Quadrynge, Robert Euyngham and Robert Sandeforde demised land & tenements in Chislet and Lympe to John de St. Nicholas of Ash, possibly to ease persisting financial problems.

The Mercer’s Company register for 1476 records that Thomas Quadryng, presumably the son of Richard Quadryng, was made a Freeman [member] of the Mercers Company of London and  the same year another Thomas Quadryng , the son of the new Freeman, was apprenticed to John Godyng, a Master Mercer of London.

In May, 1483, Thomas Quadryng the Elder was one of the representatives of the City of London who greeted Edward V at Harnsey Park, now Hornsey Park in present Harringay. The boy king only reigned from April to June of 1483 before being deposed and, as one of the unfortunate ” Princes in the Tower”,  then possibly  murdered by his uncle,  Richard, Duke of Gloucester,  who then proclaimed himself King Richard III and was crowned on 6th July, 1483.

During 1483 Thomas Quadryng the Elder was pursuing several debtors for payment, whilst at the same time apparently being pursued for payment of debts himself. It’s most likely that the debts were business debts, but they may possibly have bribes or penalties incurred for supporting the wrong side in the ongoing power struggle.

England was at this time in the last throes of the Wars of the Roses and Richard III was striving to bring the country under his control and Kent was one of the counties where he faced opposition. Sir William Malyverer was one of six knights from King Richard III’s estates in the North of England brought down to Kent to restore order there after a minor rebellion in October of 1483 against Richard and these knights were well rewarded with land and property confiscated from the rebels. The Kent rebellion was one of several insurrections in England and Wales, known collectively as the Buckingham Rebellion, intended to assist Henry Tudor, later Henry VII, to overthrow Richard III and become king in his place. The rebellion failed when Henry Tudor and five hundred armed men in seven ships were unable to cross the sea from Brittany because of a storm.

Thomas Quadring’ had crossed swords with William Malyverer in October of 1483 on behalf of Joan Langley, the widow of William Langley of Knolton who had married William Malyverer most likely for either political reasons or under duress. Malyverer had previously seized the Kent lands of his wife’s late husband despite their having been granted together with the custody of the young John Langley to Richard Guildford (Guldeford) of Rolvenden, Kent. Guildford was one of the leaders of the Kent rebellion and subsequently had his estates confiscated by the King. Such was Malyverer’s  power in a time of ineffectual central authority that he retained custody of both the late William Langley’s heir and his Kent holdings in spite of the royal grant awarding “the warde & marriage of John Langley son & heire of the said William; with the keeping of alle Lordshipds ect” to Joan Langley and Thomas Quadring. One of the manors inherited by John Langley was the manor of Knolton.

In August of 1484 a “grant in tail male” was made by Richard III to William Malyverer, esquire, “for services against the rebels” which included “Hertang (Hartanger), and Paratt’s landis, (both) in the parish of Berston (Barfreston);  also a windmill called Berston Mylle; (Barfreston mill), lands in the lordship of Freydefeld (Fredvill) ; the manor of Eythorne, and a rent therein; lands called Mottes in the parish of Nonyngton (in Frogham)“. The entailed land and property had belonged to Sir George Brown of Betchworth Castle in Surrey, who was another one of the leaders of the Kent. Sir George had been tried in Westminster Hall and taken to Tower Hill and beheaded on 3/4 December of 1483 and his estates had subsequently been declared forfeit to the Crown by an Act of Attainder in January of 1484. Land and property belonging to Sir Richard Guildford, Sir George Brown, Sir John Fogge, and other rebels forfeit to the Crown was then given by King Richard III such loyal supporters such as William Malyverer.

Early historians such as Thomas Philpott in his 1659 “Villare Cantianum: or, Kent surveyed and illustrated”; and William Hasted in the chapter on Nonington in his “The History and Topographical Survey of Kent, volume IX” published in 1800 record that Thomas Quadryng and his late wife Anne, herself a wealthy heiress in her own right, had a daughter Joane who was their sole heiress and inherited their joint property. Joane was then said to have conveyed her inherited property to her husband, Richard Dryland, who in 1483 conveyed the Manor of Fredville and other property to John Nethersole, who shortly afterwards conveyed it to William Boys of Bonnington.

However, it now appears that these early historians were mistaken and that the Thomas Quadryng and wife Anne they write of were actually a different Quadryng family who had several estates in the Faversham area. The confusion probably initially arose from the fact that both Thomas’ had wives called Anne.

Close examination of contemporary documents appears to show a different chain of events regarding the sale of “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’ [Esol] and 2 messuages, 405 acres of land, 3 acres of wood and 76 shillings and 4 pence of rent and a rent of 8 cocks, 30 hens and 1 pair of gloves in Nonyngton’ and Godneston’”.

The contemporary documents show that Thomas Quadryng the Elder of Fredeuyle did not die around 1482 and leave his property to his only daughter and sole heiress Joane but that he was still alive into the 1490’s, as was his son, Thomas Quadryng the Younger.

In 1476 Thomas Quadryng the Elder became a Freeman [member] of the Mercers Company of London Freeman by patrimony, meaning his father or a close relative was also a Freeman of the Mercers Company.  In that same year Thomas Quadryng  the Elder’s son, Thomas the Younger, was apprenticed to John Godyng, a Master Mercer of London, and the Mercers Company record that Thomas the Younger was in his turn made a Freeman of the Company in 1490.

Thomas the Elder may well have had to sell Fredeuyle and other property in and around Nonington to settle debts or to possibly avoid having his property seized for debt. As to the sale of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’, the chain of events appears to be as follows.
In the Trinity Term of the Law Courts [June and July] in the first year of the reign of Richard III [1484] John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerneys through William Rose, their attorney, began legal proceedings to regain possession of “the manors of Fredenyle and Beauchamp with appurtenances, and two messuages, 405 acres of land, three acres of wood and 76s 4d of rent, and the rent of eight cocks, 30 hens and one pair of gloves with appurtenances in Nonyngton and Godneston” as their right. They claimed that the property in question has been illegally seized by John Metford, a wealthy London grocer and, who may well have seized possession of the properties as payment for money owed to him by Thomas Quadryng.

The plaintiffs stated that they had had possession of the property “as of fee and lawfully at the time of peace at the time of lord Edward IV, late king of England”, who had died in April of 1483. This meant they claimed to have held the knights fee for the manor before King Edward IV’s death, and they also produced suit [of court] to show that they had fulfilled their feudal duty to their overlord for the manors thereby confirming their possession of the manors. After further claims and counter-claims the plaintiffs possession of the property was confirmed by the court.

On 8th July, 1484, seemingly after the end of the court proceedings, a feet of fines [a form of conveyance of property] with John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerveis as the querents [plaintiffs], and Thomas Quadryng’ and Anne, his wife, as the deforciants [one/those who keep out of possession the rightful owner of an estate] confirmed the ownership of the property in question by the plaintiffs. The fact Anne, Thomas’s wife, appears with him on the feet of fines is evidence of her still being alive, and therefore of her not being the mother of Joane Dryland, née Quadryng.

In 1485 John Nethersole in turn conveyed the properties to William Boys of Bonnington in Goodneston. Boys appears to have done well at this time as he also gained possession of other land locally,  including the Manor of Shebbertswell (Shepherdswell) which had also previously belonged to the rebellious Richard Guildford.

The Quadryng family at Esol , later Beauchamp’, and Fredeuyle-revised.

Some information has just come to light about the Quardyngs of Esol that has made necessary some corrections in the previous article. Nothing major, but it does correct some obvious anomalies.

In 1368 Sir John’s nephew Roger and other co-heirs offered “le manoir de Easole” to the Priory of Christ Church in Canterbury on the condition: “namely, that one of your monks there should be perpetually specially assigned and deputed to sing mass, at the Altar of Our Lady in the Crypt, wearing vestments decorated with the arms of the Warwick family, and praying for the souls of our said uncle and our ancestors”. The priory’s response was that: “to bear and perform such a charge for so small a repayment, where there is scarcely any profit, would be too burdensome for us; wherefore, Sire, be pleased in this case to have us excused”. The refusal of the bequest indicates how unprofitable agricultural land had become in the aftermath of the Black Death of 1348 to 1350 which had killed up to half of the population of England. Sporadic outbreaks of this awful disease continued to occur in England  into the 1360’s and beyond.

After Christ Church’s refusal of Esol the Beauchamp family appear to have sold the property because the 1377 St. Alban’s Abbey manorial rental rolls for Esol record that the property previously held by Sir John de Beauchamp was then owned by Dominus (Lord) Richard Ricilynge, the Richard de Retlyng recorded in the 1346 Hundred Roll as holding part of the knights fee of Essewelle.
The Manor of Freydvill’ was held by Sir John Harleston who had been given a life interest in the manor which had been granted to him by the 2nd Lord de Say prior to 1356. Sir John died in October of 1404.

John de Say, fourth and last Baron Say, died in 1382 aged about 12 years old and was without a direct male heir. Subsequently for the next two decades the over-lordship of the Manor of Freydevill’, as part of the Barony of Say, passed by a complicated chain of inheritance to various surviving sisters of the third baron and then inturn to their heirs which resulted in the sub-division of the barony and its constituent manors.

The Manor of Fredeuyle, as Freydvill’ was by then known, was sold by Sir John Harleston and others in May of 1401 to John Quadryng’, a City of London mercer, and it remained in the Quadryng, also Quadring, family’s possession for much of the 15th century.

It’s not clear when the Quadrings acquired the house and lands at Esol as there is no mention in the Feet of Fines dated May 1st of 1401 of any property being included in the sale of the Manor of Fredeuyle, so it’s possible that the Esol house and lands were purchased before the Manor of Fredeuyle .
A mercer by trade, John Quadring’ may have bought Esol partly as a country residence and partly for use as a warehouse for storing the wool he exported and the silk, linen, fustian, and other textiles he imported through the nearby ports of Dover and Sandwich. Esol was especially well situated for trading through Sandwich which was only some six miles or so away by, for the time, a good direct road. After 1363 Calais was made the wool staple [market] through which all wool exports from England to the Continent had to pass.

During their tenure at Esol the Quadrings acquired land in and around Nonington. In addition to the holdings at Esol and Fredville they also held land in North and South Nonington, which were part of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Manor of Wingham. The 1469 survey of the manor of Wingham records the heirs of Richard Quadryng holding an unspecified amount of land in South Nonington and about 135 acres in North Nonington. During their tenure at Esol the Quadrings built up a holding of over 400 acres of arable, pasture and woodland in the parishes of Nonington and Goodnestone.

In 1403 John Quadring purchased  “1 messuage, 1 toft, 80 acres of land, 3 acres of meadow, 3 acres of marsh, 6 acres of pasture, 3 acres of wood, 24 shillings of rent and a rent of 4 bushels of barley in Sholdon’, Staple, Northborne, Eastry, Hamme, Wodenesbergh’, Lymmyng and Elham”.

As merchants the Quadrings needed a ready supply of cash and credit to trade, and were susceptible to the ups and downs of fortune where losses can be more easily made than profits. The loss of a cargo or a bad debt would have put the family in the financial mire. In the mid-1440′s Richard Quadryng, a London draper and probably John’s grand-son, raised a mortgage of £.200 against land and property held in Nonyngton which was the subject of various legal proceedings and transfers in 1447.
A few years later in 1456 Richard Quadrynge, Robert Euyngham and Robert Sandeforde demised land & tenements in Chislet and Lympe to John de St. Nicholas of Ash, possibly to ease persisting financial problems.

The Mercer’s Company register for 1476 records a Thomas Quadryng as the newly indentured apprentice of Master Mercer John Godyng of London, this is believed to be the son of Thomas Quadryng of Fredevyle, who was to be the last Quadryng owner of that manor.

In May, 1483, Thomas Quadring’ was one of the representatives of the City of London who greeted Edward V at Harnsey Park, now Hornsey Park in present Harringay. The boy king only reigned from April to June of 1483 before being deposed and, as one of the unfortunate ” Princes in the Tower”,  then possibly  murdered by his uncle,  Richard, Duke of Gloucester,  who then proclaimed himself King Richard III and was crowned on 6th July, 1483.

During 1483 Thomas Quadryng the Elder was pursuing several debtors for payment, whilst at the same time apparently being pursued for payment of debts himself. . It’s most likely that the debts were business debts, but they may possibly have bribes or penalties incurred for supporting the wrong side in the ongoing power struggle.

England was at this time in the last throes of the Wars of the Roses and Richard III was striving to bring the country under his control and Kent was one of the counties where he faced opposition. Sir William Malyverer was one of six knights from King Richard III’s estates in the North of England brought down to Kent to restore order after a minor rebellion in the county against Richard and these knights were well rewarded with land and property confiscated from the rebels.

Thomas Quadring’ had crossed swords with William Malyverer in October of 1483 on behalf of Joan Langley, the widow of William Langley of Knolton who had married William Malyverer most likely for either political reasons or under duress. Malyverer had previously seized the Kent lands of his wife’s late husband despite their having been granted together with the custody of the young John Langley to Richard Guildford (Guldeford) of Rolvenden, Kent. Guildford was one of the leaders of the Kent rebellion against Richard III and subsequently had his estates confiscated by the King. Such was his power in a time of ineffectual central authority that Malyverer retained custody of both the late William Langley’s heir and his Kent holdings in spite of the royal grant awarding “the warde & marriage of John Langley son & heire of the said William; with the keeping of alle Lordshipds ect” to Joan Langley and Thomas Quadring. One of the manors inherited by John Langley was the manor of Knolton.

In 1484 a “grant in tail male” was made to William Malyverer, esq., “for services against the rebels” which included “Hertang (Hartanger), and Paratt’s landis, (both) in the parish of Berston (Barfreston);  also a windmill called Berston Mylle; (Barfreston mill), lands in the lordship of Freydefeld (Fredvill) ; the manor of Eythorne, and a rent therein; lands called Mottes in the parish of Nonyngton (in Frogham)“. The manor of Hertang (Hartanger in Barfreston) was one of the manors confiscated from Richard Guildford, and it probable “lands in the lordship of Freydefeld (Fredvill)” and “ lands called Mottes in the parish of Nonyngton (in Frogham)” were taken from the Quadryng estates.

I had previously thought that Thomas Quadryng must have died shortly after these encounters with Malyverer and that his only daughter Joane, was sole heiress to Thomas and his late wife Anne, herself a wealthy heiress in her own right, and had conveyed her inherited property to her husband, Richard Dryland. However, it now appears that I was mistaken and that the Thomas Quadryng and wife Anne were actually a different part of the Quadryng family who had estates in the Faversham area. The confusion arises from the fact that both Thomas’ had wives called Anne.

Thomas Quadryng of Fredeuyle [Fredville] was still alive when “the manors of Fredeuyle and Beauchamp’ [Esol] and 2 messuages, 405 acres of land, 3 acres of wood and 76 shillings and 4 pence of rent and a rent of 8 cocks, 30 hens and 1 pair of gloves in Nonyngton’ and Godneston’” were the Feet of Fines of 8 July 1484 was drawn up.  The sale gave rise to a court case in which John Nethersole, William Boys, Thomas Butte and Robert Gerneys  represented by William Rose, their attorney, sought to regain possession of the above properties from John Metford whom they claimed had illegally seized possession of them. The gist of the case appears to be that John Nethersole et al had bought the properties from Thomas Quadryng only to have John Metford take possession. Metford was a wealthy London grocer and it appears he must have seized the properties in settlement of a debt, only to find that the properties had already been sold. The case was settled in favour of John Nethersole, and by a feet of fines of 1485 he conveyed Fredeuyle, Beauchamps and the Nonyngton land, to William Boys of Bonnington.
Boys appears to have done well at this time as he also gained possession of other land locally,  including the Manor of Shebbertswell (Shepherdswell) which had also previously belonged to the rebellious Richard Guildford.

Thomas Quadryng and his wife Anne both appear on the 1484 Feet of Fines, and Thomas appears in court in person during the court case, so both were obviously still alive at the time of the sale. Thomas Quadryng appears to have lived on for some years as in 1493 Thomas Quadryng the Elder, citizen and mercer of London went to court for payment of an £80 debt owed to him by Richard Seintnicholas, citizen and tailor of London who had property in Ash, Wingham, and Elmstone in Kent.

Nonington and The Kentish Rebellion and Second English Civil War of 1648

The following article is in brief the parts played in the Kent Rebellion, a precursor to the short lived Second English Civil War of 1648, by those with connections to Nonington.

The rebellion had its origins in part in the Canterbury riots of Christmas Day, 1647, which began when the Puritan Mayor and officials of Canterbury tried to forbid traditional Christmas celebrations.

In May of 1648 members of the land-owning gentry and other prominent Kent citizens, including Colonel Robert Hammond and Anthony Hammond, his nephew, of St. Alban’s Court, Nonington, and Sir Thomas Peyton of neighbouring Knolton Court petitioned Parliament in May of 1648 and when Parliament rejected the petition a rebellion was raised in support of the King.

On 23rd May, 1648, a county assembly of leading Kent citizens held at Canterbury commissioned Colonel Robert Hammond to raise of force of foot-soldiers and Colonel Robert Hatton to raise a force of cavalry in support of the King. The two colonels lost no time in carrying out their commissions.  

The following day Colonel Hammond, with 300 well equipped and turned out foot soldiers, and Colonel Hatton, with 60 horse troopers,  met with other Royalist forces on Barham Downs.

Royalist cavalry were mainly raised from the wealthy local aristocracy and gentry.

After some initial success campaigning in the East Kent area against supporters of Parliament Colonel Hammond’s force increased to around 1,000 men and he further campaigned throughout Kent and beyond in the Royalist cause.

Colonel Robert Hammond of St. Alban's Court in Kent. His portrait hangs in the old Beaney Institute, now the Canterbury Royal Museum and Art Gallery.

Colonel Robert Hammond of St. Alban’s Court in Nonington.

A few days later the garrisons of the small coastal defence castles Sandown, Deal, and Walmer, originally built by King Henry VIII to defend the East Kent coast and shipping anchored in the Downs against French invasion, surrendered to the East Kent rebels without a fight and ships of the English fleet lying in the Downs off the coast of Deal and Walmer also joined the rebels.  Anthony Hammond, the nephew of Colonel Robert Hammond and also of St. Alban’s Court in Nonington, and Captain Bargrave went to Deal to negotiate with the fleet and were assisted in their negotiations by Captain John Mennes and Captain Fogg. Captain Mennes, a noted wit and poet with various works published in the 1650’s, was a naval officer who had lost his position in the Navy because of his Royalist sympathies and after the Restoration of King Charles II in 1660 he became Sir John Mennes, a Vice-Admiral and Controller of the Navy. Sir John’s wife Jane died at Fredville, then the seat of Major John Boys, in 1662 and was buried at Nonington Church where there is a memorial in her memory. This has a certain irony as in 1648 Major John Boys was a member of the Parliamentary Committee for Kent whose actions were at least in part responsible for the rebellion.

Dover Castle from the south-east. A contemporary print by Wencelas Holler

Dover Castle from the south-east. A contemporary print by Wencelas Holler. The Motes Bulwark is at the base of the V shaped feature below the castle’s curtain wall.

Dover Castle remained in the hands of the Parliamentarians and to remedy this situation Sir Richard Hardres of Hardres Court near Canterbury, one of the rebellion’s leaders who had been a member of the Parliamentary Committee for Kent in 1643 but later became a Royalist, gathered some 2,000 men and went to lay siege to castle. The East Kent Royalists quickly seized the castle’s Mote Bulwark where they found stores of ammunition which they used to bombard the castle. One of the Hammond brothers, possibly Francis, was said to have commanded the artillery that fired 500 cannon balls at Dover Castle which despite this bombardment withstood the siege.

Heavy artillery from the Civil War period. Guns similar to this would have been used to besiege Dover and other East Kent castles.

Parliament dispatched troops of the New Model Army under the command of Colonel Nathanial Rich and Colonel Birkhamstead to retake Sandown, Deal and Walmer castles, and raise the siege at Dover.  Colonel Birhamstead’s troops relieved Dover Castle on 6th June and it remained in Parliamentary hands until the Restoration of the Monarchy in May of 1660 when Charles II landed at Dover en route from the Continent to London to reclaim the Crown.

Cromwell’s New Model Army was a well trained regular force initially raised 1645 for service anywhere within the kingdom.

Colonel Rich began to besiege the smaller castles. Walmer surrendered on 12th July, but the other withstood his efforts for some time as Royalist forces attempted to lift the sieges from the sea.

After the end of the Siege of Donnington Sir John Boys of Bonnington in Goodnestone near Wingham, who should not be confused with his distant kinsman Major John Boys of Fredville in the adjoining parish of Nonington, was reported to have gone to Holland. Sir John returned by sea to East Kent in August of 1648 with some 1,500 Dutch and Flemish mercenaries and took part in several skirmishes with Parliamentary forces near Deal in a vain attempt to relieve the sieges at Deal and Sandgate castles. During one of the later skirmishes Sir John was slightly wounded, it was recorded that he was “shot in the belly, pricked in the neck and wounded in the head with the butt end of a musket”. Fortunately a sword belt buckle absorbed most of the force of the musket ball and Sir John survived his wounds after taking refuge in Sandown Castle.

A painting by an unknown late 17th century artist which is almost contemporary to the Kent Rebellion showing Walmer Castle to the right, Deal Castle in the left mid view and Sandown Castle in the far left distance. The scene would have looked very similar during the rebellion with the Navy ships anchored off-shore in the Downs.

A painting by an unknown late 17th century artist which is almost contemporary to the Kent Rebellion showing Walmer Castle to the right, Deal Castle in the left mid view and Sandown Castle in the far left distance. The scene would have looked very similar during the rebellion with the Navy ships anchored off-shore in the Downs.

Deal Castle surrendered on 25th August after the garrison had received news of Cromwell’s victory at Preston by means of a message attached to an arrow shot over the castle walls. Sandown Castle, about a mile up the coast from Deal Castle, held out until 5th September when the garrison, including Sir John Boys, surrendered. Colonel Rich then served as Captain of Deal Castle from 1648 to 1653.

Sir John Boys of Bonnington

Sir John Boys of Bonnington in Goodnestone Parish.

Sir John Boys was imprisoned for some time and then released but he continued to be at odds with Parliament until the Restoration of the Monarchy in 1660.  In 1659 he received another prison sentence for petitioning for a free parliament and was imprisoned in Dover Castle.

After the defeat of the Kentish rebels Colonel Robert Hammond took part in the defence of Colchester which was besieged by Parliamentarian forces from July of 1648 until the defeat of Royalist forces at the Battle of Preston (17th-19th August, 1648) meant there was no hope of relief for the besieged garrison and they accordingly laid down their arms on the morning of 28th August. The terms of surrender stated that “the Lords and Gentlemen (the officers) were all prisoners of mercy”, and that the common soldiers were to be disarmed and given passes to allow them to return home after first swearing an oath not to take up arms against Parliament again. The people of Colchester paid £.14,000 in cash to protect the town from being pillaged by the victorious Parliamentarian forces.

Colonel Robert Hammond of St. Alban’s Court should not be confused with his name sake Colonel Robert Hammond (1621– 24 October 1654), best known for acting as Charles I gaoler at Carisbrooke Castle from 13 November 1647 to 29 November 1648 and for which service Parliament voted him a pension. He served an officer in Cromwell’s New Model Army during the early part of the Civil War and sat in the House of Commons in 1654.

The Kent Rebellion was discussed in Parliament, the following is an extract from a record of Parliamentary proceeding for 1st June, 1648.
Farther Account of the Kent Proceedings at large.
Out of Kent came farther this Day to this purpose: ‘On Wednesday in May last, His Excellency with four Regiments of Horse and three of Foot, with some loose Companies of Colonel Ingoldsby’s Regiment, marched from Eltham (where they lay in the Fields thereabouts the Night before) to Craford Heath, where the said Forces were drawn up to a Rendezvous, and after that marched thro’ Dartmouth, and then drew up on an Heath two Miles from the Town, where His Excellency had Intelligence, That a Party of Kentish had fortified and barracadoed a Bridge which led to Gravesend: A Commanded Party was sent forth under the Conduct of Major Husbands, about 300 Horse, who mounted about 1oo Foot behind them: When they drew towards the Bridge, the Enemy fired thick upon them; our Men notwithstanding fell on, and the Horse swam thro’ the Water, and so got over by this time the Enemy perceiving in what Danger they were, fled: Major Child who Commanded them, and was very active, hardly escaped, having his Horse shot, whereupon he forsook it; his Son was shot in the Back, and taken. There were about 20 slain in the Place, divers wounded, and 30 taken Prisoners; many escaped, by hiding themselves in the Corn-Fields and Houses. The Enemy’s Party consisted of the Country-men thereabouts, the Seamen, and some London Apprentices: One Mr. Phips was very active, in setting on the Countrymen.

 After this, Major Husbands advanced with a Party two or three Miles beyond Gravesend, and had afterwards Orders to march to Maulin, towards which the Army marches this Morning from Mapham, a very small Village, (where the Lord General quartered last Night, and his Forces about it in the Fields) and will make an Halt near Maulin, where Orders will be given out. His Excellency has sent forth a Proclamation, for the Prevention of Disorders in Soldiers, or the taking of Plunder in their March, Horses or Goods, and to restore what have been so taken. There are very few Men to be seen in the Towns through which we march, but only the Women making sad Moan, fearing the ill Success their Husbands are like to have. The Enemy are very Numerous, given out to be Ten Thousand at least, amongst which a great part Cavaliers. Their principal Ringleaders are, Sir Gamaliel Dudley, Sir George Lisle, Sir Will. Compton, Sir Robert Tracy, Colonel Leigh, Sir John Many, Sir Tho. Peyton, Sir Tho. Palmer, Esquire Hales, reported to be General, Sir James Hales, Sir William Many, Sir John Dorrell, Sir Thomas Godfrey, Sir Richard Hardresse Colonel Washington, Colonel Hammond, Colonel L’Estrange, Colonel Culpepper, Colonel Hacker, Mr. James Dorrell, Mr. George Newman, once a Colonel for the Parliament, and Mr. Whelton, Treasurer for the Parliament.

Sir Rich. Hardresse forced by Major Gibbon to retreat to Canterbury.

Major Gibbon, in the Relief of Dover Castle, hath forced Sir Richard Hardresse to retreat to Canterbury, who laid Siege to that Place; and this Day we hope to be over the River at Maidstone, or Aylesford, and to force the Enemy to flight or swim, for we have left a strong Party of Horse, Foot, and Dragoons, to make good the Pass at Rochester, whilst we fall on the other side the River, and make good Maidstone and Aylesford. Major Gibbons lies towards Dover, so they have nothing but the Sea to fly to.

 Mapham, June 1. 1648″.

The following extract from an article published in “The Gentleman’s Magazine” in 1797 gives a fuller report of the Kentish Rebellion and its participants.
“I am afraid he rather temporized in the time of the Rebellion. Lloyd in his “Memoirs of the Loyalists [London fol.1668] when he gave an account of the rising in Kent, in 1648, names Sir John Roberts, with Mr. Hales, Sir William Brockman, Mr. Matthew Carter, Sir Anthony Aucker, Sir Richard Hardres, Colonel Hatton, Mr. Arnold Braime, Sir John Mynnes and Col. Hamond, who, with the rest of the county gentlemen of Kent importuned George Goring, Earl of Norwich, to accept the charge of General. But I shall take this opportunity of mentioning a few particulars of this affair from a very scarce and curios little tract, entituled “A most true and exact relation of that as honourable as unfortunate Expedition of Kent, Essex, and Colchester, by M[atthew], a loyal Actor in that engagement, Anno Dom. 1648. Printed in the yeere 1650”. The disposition of Canterbury began to shew itself, by a riot, on Christmas Day, 1647; and, disturbances continuing, the parliament sent down Col. Huson’s regiment of foot to be quartered there, on whose arrival Sir William Man, Mr. Lovelace, Mr. Savine, and Mr. Dudley Wild and others were seized, and carried prisoners to Leeds Castle. About a fortnight before Whitsuntide, the Parliament sent down Serjeant Wild and Serjeant Steele, on a special commission, of oyer and terminer, to try the insurgents upon life and death: but the grand jury would not find the bills; on the contrary, they took this opportunity to draw up a petition to Parliament, dated May 11, 1648, complaining of their grievances, and demanding, that the King should be admitted to treat, in person, both his two houses of parliament. Sir Henry Heyman and Sir Michael Livesay are stated to have been the two great opponents to this petition. The Parliament sent an order to the deputy-lieutenants, to suppress and prevent the signing of this petition; and an order was accordingly issued from some of the deputy-lieutenants, dated at Maidstone, May 16; signed, amongst others, by James Oxendon and William James. The petitioners published a vindication and answer; whereupon, the trainbands were ordered out: this exasperated the petitioners, ” who resolved, like men of Kent, to maintain, if it were possible, their antient honor and liberties, or perish in the attempt ” Lord Clarendon seems inaccurate in laying the blame on too hasty an arming, before the Scotch army had entered the kingdom, on Mr. Hales’, pushed on by the intemperate zeal of Mr. Roger L’Estrange ; for a manifesto was already drawn up and signed, in the name of “the knights, gentlemen, clergy, and franchlins of the county ;” in execution of which, they seized all the arms and ammunition at Scott’s Hall, Ashford, Feversham, and other places, notwithstanding the vain endeavour of Sir Michael Livesay, and some other deputy lieutenants, to suppress them; when Mr. Hales raised a great party, in that part of the county, to join them. There were now strong bodies assembled at Wye, Ashford, Sittingbourne, Rochester, Gravesend, &c. and on May 23,  a large county-meeting took place at Canterbury; and, after having drawn up another spirited remonstrance, complaining of the indignity with which their petition had been treated, the commissioners, entrusted for that part of the county, gave commission to Col. Robert Hammond to raise a regiment of foot, and to Col. Hatton to raise a regiment of horse: their rendezvous was at Barham-down, where, the next day, Col. Hammond came, with 300 foot, well-accoutred and armed; and Col. Hatton, with about 60 horse.

This Col. Robert Hammond was a very different person from the Governor of Carisbrooke-Castle, who married Hampden’s sister, and with whom he has been ignorantly confounded. He was uncle to Anthony Hammond, of St. Alban’s, in Nonington esq. and was afterwards governor of the castle of Gowran, in Ireland, where he was shamefully shot by Cromwell. [See the mistakes in Noble’s Memoirs of Cromwell, II. p. i22.] . Col. Robert Hatton was son of Sir Robert Hatton, of Oswalds, in Bishopsbourne, knt. who died Jan. 10, 1653, leaving also a daughter, Elizabeth, who married Sir Anthony Aucher. Col. Hatton died in 1658, and was buried at Bourne Oct. 19. From Barham-down, where most of the gentry of the county met them. Col. Hammond and Col. Hatton marched their men to quarters at Dover. “And Sir Richard Hardres, Sir Anthony Aucher, and Mr. Anthony Hammond, justices of the peace, and men as hearty, as real, and as indulgently-industrious in the propagation of the engagement as men could be, with Mr. Thomas Peake, marched to Sandwich.” Here they found an impostor, who called, himself Prince of Wales: and here they had an opportunity to send copies of their petition to the Fleet. A summons was now sent to Dover-castle to surrender, bat in vain; and the same to Deal and Walmer castles. Letters were also sent to France and Holland, to bring over 10,000 men. Now, “the commissioners, with the rest of the gentlemen, marched on towards Deal, carrying with them Col. Hammond’s regiment, being at this time completed to a thousand, well armed, and as perfectly resolved, with colours flying, of white, answerable to the candid innocence of a peace-making engagement; and Col: Hatton’s horse, with some dragooners : the gentlemen, being about forty, were orderly drawn up into a troop, and, marching thus all the way upon the Downs, gave a very handsome appearance, both to the country on one side, and the ships then riding at anchor in the Downs on the other, which gave encouragement to both, and a disheartening also to the castles, then upon a treaty for rendition.” Deal received them with joy: its castle, and that of Walmer, were delivered up, and the fleet espoused their cause. They now marched for Sandwich, leaving Mr A. Hammond and Capt. Bargrave at Deal, to manage with the fleer, for which they had also sent to Sir John Mennes and Capt. Fogg, two naval officers, who had been displaced for their loyalty. From Sandwich they marched to Canterbury; and “that night, being Sunday night, they quartered in Canterbury, not slipping any opportunity, or minute of time, without an improvement of it to the best advantage, the next day being appointed for their meeting at Rochester. Here there came in many gentlemen, and others, to join with them, that were not at all engaged before, unless against us; amongst the rest, Sir John Roberts, and one or two deputy lieutenants more, who signed to the petition, and subscribed to the loan of money, although they had before engaged themselves, with the rest of the Committee, against the petition; but rather like physicians, that out of a private interest are nimble to assist and please others, to profit themselves, than out of a cordial affection to so just and honest an enterprize.” Here Col. Hammond completed his regiment; and at this time the Earl of Thanet shewed great activity about Ashford, Hothfield, and Charing, though he afterwards apostatized. This little army now marched on to Rochester, and part even advanced as far as Dartford; when, on a rumour that Lord Fairfax was advancing against them, they returned to Rochester. The next day, the whole met at a rendezvous at Barming-down, near Maidstone, where the Earl of Norwich was chosen general, and whence they marched back into quarters, contrary to the General’s opinion, who advised that the whole should remain together in the field; but the Council of war determining otherwise, the General, with a large body, returned to “Rochester, where Sir Anthony Aucher and Mr. Hales left them, intending to return the next day: but, alas! in the night, Lord Fairfax marched down upon the party remaining at Maidstone, consisting of the regiments of Sir John Mayney and Sir William Brockman, who, notwithstanding a most gallant resistance, were beaten, before the news reached the main army; who however, on the first rumour, were drawn out, and had actually begun their march. Had the whole remained together at Maidstone, perhaps the fate of the King and kingdom might have been turned by it!  On this intelligence, Col Hammond and Col. Hatton were ordered back to Sittingbourne, and afterwards to remain at Canterbury, where Sir Richard Hardres was prevailed on to return, to secure the Eastern parts; for Major Osborn, whose name is altered by a pen, in my book to Gibbon, and whom I strongly suspect to he Mr. Thomas Gibbon the elder, of Westcliffe, an officer of the Parliament, was already in those parts, with a troop of horse, securing Sir Michael Livesay, who was raising all the force he could thereabouts. The Earl of Norwich now pushed on, with the remainder of his army, to Greenwich, whence, after some difficulties, they crossed the Thames, and got to Colchester; of which the subsequent surrender, with the melancholy fates of Sir Charles Lucas, Sir George Lisle, and the Lord Capel, are well known”.

Nonington and The Kentish Rebellion and Second English Civil War of 1648

The following article is in brief the parts played in the Kent Rebellion, a precursor to the short lived Second English Civil War of 1648, by those with connections to Nonington.

For further information and updates go to the illustrated main article

The rebellion had its origins in part in the Canterbury riots of Christmas Day, 1647, which began when the Puritan Mayor and officials of Canterbury tried to forbid traditional Christmas celebrations.

In May of 1648 members of the land-owning gentry and other prominent Kent citizens, including Colonel Robert Hammond and Anthony Hammond, his nephew, of St. Alban’s Court, Nonington, and Sir Thomas Peyton of Knolton petitioned Parliament in May of 1648 and when Parliament rejected the petition a rebellion was raised in support of the King.

On 23rd May, 1648, a county assembly of leading Kent citizens held at Canterbury commissioned Colonel Robert Hammond to raise of force of foot-soldiers and Colonel Robert Hatton to raise a force of cavalry in support of the King. The two colonels lost no time as the following day Colonel Hammond with 300 well equipped and turned out foot soldiers and Colonel Hatton with 60 horse troopers assembled with other Royalist forces on Barham Downs. After some initial success campaigning in the East Kent area against the Parliaments supporters Colonel Hammond’s force increased to around 1,000 men and he further campaigned throughout Kent and beyond in the Royalist cause.

The garrisons of the small coastal defence castles Sandown, Deal, and Walmer, originally built by Henry VIII to defend the East Kent coast and shipping anchored in the Downs against French invasion, surrendered to the East Kent rebels without a fight and ships of the English fleet lying in the Downs off the coast of Deal and Walmer also joined the rebels.  Anthony Hammond and Captain Bargrave went to Deal to negotiate with the fleet and were assisted in their negotiations by Captain John Mennes and Captain Fogg. Captain Mennes, a noted wit and poet with various works published in the 1650’s, was a naval officer who had lost his position in the Navy because of his Royalist sympathies and after the Restoration of King Charles II in 1660 he became Sir John Mennes, a Vice-Admiral and Controller of the Navy. Jane Mennes, his wife, died at Fredville, then the seat of Major John Boys, in 1662 and was buried at Nonington Church where there is a memorial in her memory. This has a certain irony as in 1648 Major John Boys was a member of the Parliamentary Committee for Kent whose actions were at least in part responsible for the rebellion.

Dover Castle remained in the hands of the Parliamentarians and to remedy this situation Sir Richard Hardres of Hardres Court near Canterbury, one of the rebellion’s leaders who had been a member of the Parliamentary Committee for Kent in 1643 but later became a Royalist, gathered some 2,000 men and went to lay siege to castle. The East Kent Royalists quickly seized the castle’s Mote Bulwark where they found stores of ammunition which they used to bombard the castle. One of the Hammond brothers, possibly Francis, was said to have commanded the artillery that fired 500 cannon balls at Dover Castle which despite this bombardment withstood the siege.

Parliament dispatched troops of the New Model Army under the command of Lord Rich and Colonel Birkhamstead to retake Sandown, Deal and Walmer castles, and raise the siege at Dover.  Colonel Birhamstead’s troops relieved Dover Castle on 6th June and it remained in Parliamentary hands until the Restoration of the Monarchy in May of 1660 when Charles II landed at Dover en route from the Continent to London to reclaim the Crown.

Lord Rich began to besiege the smaller castles, Walmer surrendered on 12th July, but the other withstood his efforts for some time as Royalist forces attempted to lift the sieges from the sea.

After the end of the Siege of Donnington Sir John Boys of Bonnington in Goodnestone near Wingham, who is sometimes confused with his Parliamentarian distant kinsman Major John Boys of Fredville in the adjoining parish of Nonington, was reported to have gone to Holland. Sir John returned by sea to East Kent in August of 1648 with some 1,500 Dutch and Flemish mercenaries and took part in several skirmishes with Parliamentary forces near Deal in a vain attempt to relieve the sieges at Deal and Sandgate castles. During one of the later skirmishes Sir John was slightly wounded, it was recorded that he was “shot in the belly, pricked in the neck and wounded in the head with the butt end of a musket”. Fortunately a sword belt buckle absorbed most of the force of the musket ball and Sir John survived his wounds after taking refuge in Sandown Castle.

Deal Castle surrendered on 25th August after the garrison had received news of Cromwell’s victory at Preston by means of a message attached to an arrow shot over the castle walls. Sandown Castle, about a mile up the coast from Deal Castle, held out until 5th September when the garrison, including Sir John Boys, surrendered. Boys was imprisoned for some time and then released but he continued to be at odds with Parliament until the Restoration, receiving another prison sentence in 1659.

After the defeat of the Kentish rebels Colonel Robert Hammond took part in the defence of Colchester which was besieged by Parliamentarian forces from July of 1648 until the defeat of Royalist forces at the Battle of Preston (17th-19th August, 1648) meant there was no hope of relief for the besieged garrison and they accordingly laid down their arms on the morning of 28th August. The terms of surrender stated that “the Lords and Gentlemen (the officers) were all prisoners of mercy”, and that the common soldiers were to be disarmed and given passes to allow them to return home after first swearing an oath not to take up arms against Parliament again. The people of Colchester paid £.14,000 in cash to protect the town from being pillaged by the victorious Parliamentarian forces.

Colonel Robert Hammond of St. Alban’s Court should not be confused with his name sake Colonel Robert Hammond (1621– 24 October 1654), best known for acting as Charles I gaoler at Carisbrooke Castle from 13 November 1647 to 29 November 1648, for which service Parliament voted him a pension. He served an officer in Cromwell’s New Model Army during the early part of the Civil War and sat in the House of Commons in 1654.

The Kent Rebellion was discussed in Parliament, the following is an extract from a record of Parliamentary proceeding for 1st June, 1648.

Farther Account of the Kent Proceedings at large.

Out of Kent came farther this Day to this purpose: ‘On Wednesday in May last, His Excellency with four Regiments of Horse and three of Foot, with some loose Companies of Colonel Ingoldsby’s Regiment, marched from Eltham (where they lay in the Fields thereabouts the Night before) to Craford Heath, where the said Forces were drawn up to a Rendezvous, and after that marched thro’ Dartmouth, and then drew up on an Heath two Miles from the Town, where His Excellency had Intelligence, That a Party of Kentish had fortified and barracadoed a Bridge which led to Gravesend: A Commanded Party was sent forth under the Conduct of Major Husbands, about 300 Horse, who mounted about 1oo Foot behind them: When they drew towards the Bridge, the Enemy fired thick upon them; our Men notwithstanding fell on, and the Horse swam thro’ the Water, and so got over by this time the Enemy perceiving in what Danger they were, fled: Major Child who Commanded them, and was very active, hardly escaped, having his Horse shot, whereupon he forsook it; his Son was shot in the Back, and taken. There were about 20 slain in the Place, divers wounded, and 30 taken Prisoners; many escaped, by hiding themselves in the Corn-Fields and Houses. The Enemy’s Party consisted of the Country-men thereabouts, the Seamen, and some London Apprentices: One Mr. Phips was very active, in setting on the Countrymen.

 After this, Major Husbands advanced with a Party two or three Miles beyond Gravesend, and had afterwards Orders to march to Maulin, towards which the Army marches this Morning from Mapham, a very small Village, (where the Lord General quartered last Night, and his Forces about it in the Fields) and will make an Halt near Maulin, where Orders will be given out. His Excellency has sent forth a Proclamation, for the Prevention of Disorders in Soldiers, or the taking of Plunder in their March, Horses or Goods, and to restore what have been so taken. There are very few Men to be seen in the Towns through which we march, but only the Women making sad Moan, fearing the ill Success their Husbands are like to have. The Enemy are very Numerous, given out to be Ten Thousand at least, amongst which a great part Cavaliers. Their principal Ringleaders are, Sir Gamaliel Dudley, Sir George Lisle, Sir Will. Compton, Sir Robert Tracy, Colonel Leigh, Sir John Many, Sir Tho. Peyton, Sir Tho. Palmer, Esquire Hales, reported to be General, Sir James Hales, Sir William Many, Sir John Dorrell, Sir Thomas Godfrey, Sir Richard Hardresse Colonel Washington, Colonel Hammond, Colonel L’Estrange, Colonel Culpepper, Colonel Hacker, Mr. James Dorrell, Mr. George Newman, once a Colonel for the Parliament, and Mr. Whelton, Treasurer for the Parliament.

Sir Rich. Hardresse forced by Major Gibbon to retreat to Canterbury.

Major Gibbon, in the Relief of Dover Castle, hath forced Sir Richard Hardresse to retreat to Canterbury, who laid Siege to that Place; and this Day we hope to be over the River at Maidstone, or Aylesford, and to force the Enemy to flight or swim, for we have left a strong Party of Horse, Foot, and Dragoons, to make good the Pass at Rochester, whilst we fall on the other side the River, and make good Maidstone and Aylesford. Major Gibbons lies towards Dover, so they have nothing but the Sea to fly to.

 Mapham, June 1. 1648″.

 

The following extract from an article published in “The Gentleman’s Magazine” in 1797 gives a fuller report of the Kentish Rebellion and its participants.

“I am afraid he rather temporized in the time of the Rebellion. Lloyd in his “Memoirs of the Loyalists [London fol.1668] when he gave an account of the rising in Kent, in 1648, names Sir John Roberts, with Mr. Hales, Sir William Brockman, Mr. Matthew Carter, Sir Anthony Aucker, Sir Richard Hardres, Colonel Hatton, Mr. Arnold Braime, Sir John Mynnes and Col. Hamond, who, with the rest of the county gentlemen of Kent importuned George Goring, Earl of Norwich, to accept the charge of General. But I shall take this opportunity of mentioning a few particulars of this affair from a very scarce and curios little tract, entituled “A most true and exact relation of that as honourable as unfortunate Expedition of Kent, Essex, and Colchester, by M[atthew], a loyal Actor in that engagement, Anno Dom. 1648. Printed in the yeere 1650”. The disposition of Canterbury began to shew itself, by a riot, on Christmas Day, 1647; and, disturbances continuing, the parliament sent down Col. Huson’s regiment of foot to be quartered there, on whose arrival Sir William Man, Mr. Lovelace, Mr. Savine, and Mr. Dudley Wild and others were seized, and carried prisoners to Leeds Castle. About a fortnight before Whitsuntide, the Parliament sent down Serjeant Wild and Serjeant Steele, on a special commission, of oyer and terminer, to try the insurgents upon life and death: but the grand jury would not find the bills; on the contrary, they took this opportunity to draw up a petition to Parliament, dated May 11, 1648, complaining of their grievances, and demanding, that the King should be admitted to treat, in person, both his two houses of parliament. Sir Henry Heyman and Sir Michael Livesay are stated to have been the two great opponents to this petition. The Parliament sent an order to the deputy-lieutenants, to suppress and prevent the signing of this petition; and an order was accordingly issued from some of the deputy-lieutenants, dated at Maidstone, May 16; signed, amongst others, by James Oxendon and William James. The petitioners published a vindication and answer; whereupon, the trainbands were ordered out: this exasperated the petitioners, ” who resolved, like men of Kent, to maintain, if it were possible, their antient honor and liberties, or perish in the attempt ” Lord Clarendon seems inaccurate in laying the blame on too hasty an arming, before the Scotch army had entered the kingdom, on Mr. Hales’, pushed on by the intemperate zeal of Mr. Roger L’Estrange ; for a manifesto was already drawn up and signed, in the name of “the knights, gentlemen, clergy, and franchlins of the county ;” in execution of which, they seized all the arms and ammunition at Scott’s Hall, Ashford, Feversham, and other places, notwithstanding the vain endeavour of Sir Michael Livesay, and some other deputy lieutenants, to suppress them; when Mr. Hales raised a great party, in that part of the county, to join them. There were now strong bodies assembled at Wye, Ashford, Sittingbourne, Rochester, Gravesend, &c. and on May 23,  a large county-meeting took place at Canterbury; and, after having drawn up another spirited remonstrance, complaining of the indignity with which their petition had been treated, the commissioners, entrusted for that part of the county, gave commission to Col. Robert Hammond to raise a regiment of foot, and to Col. Hatton to raise a regiment of horse: their rendezvous was at Barham-down, where, the next day, Col. Hammond came, with 300 foot, well-accoutred and armed; and Col. Hatton, with about 60 horse.

This Col. Robert Hammond was a very different person from the Governor of Carisbrooke-Castle, who married Hampden’s sister, and with whom he has been ignorantly confounded. He was uncle to Anthony Hammond, of St. Alban’s, in Nonington esq. and was afterwards governor of the castle of Gowran, in Ireland, where he was shamefully shot by Cromwell. [See the mistakes in Noble’s Memoirs of Cromwell, II. p. i22.] . Col. Robert Hatton was son of Sir Robert Hatton, of Oswalds, in Bishopsbourne, knt. who died Jan. 10, 1653, leaving also a daughter, Elizabeth, who married Sir Anthony Aucher. Col. Hatton died in 1658, and was buried at Bourne Oct. 19. From Barham-down, where most of the gentry of the county met them. Col. Hammond and Col. Hatton marched their men to quarters at Dover. “And Sir Richard Hardres, Sir Anthony Aucher, and Mr. Anthony Hammond, justices of the peace, and men as hearty, as real, and as indulgently-industrious in the propagation of the engagement as men could be, with Mr. Thomas Peake, marched to Sandwich.” Here they found an impostor, who called, himself Prince of Wales: and here they had an opportunity to send copies of their petition to the Fleet. A summons was now sent to Dover-castle to surrender, bat in vain; and the same to Deal and Walmer castles. Letters were also sent to France and Holland, to bring over 10,000 men. Now, “the commissioners, with the rest of the gentlemen, marched on towards Deal, carrying with them Col. Hammond’s regiment, being at this time completed to a thousand, well armed, and as perfectly resolved, with colours flying, of white, answerable to the candid innocence of a peace-making engagement; and Col: Hatton’s horse, with some dragooners : the gentlemen, being about forty, were orderly drawn up into a troop, and, marching thus all the way upon the Downs, gave a very handsome appearance, both to the country on one side, and the ships then riding at anchor in the Downs on the other, which gave encouragement to both, and a disheartening also to the castles, then upon a treaty for rendition.” Deal received them with joy: its castle, and that of Walmer, were delivered up, and the fleet espoused their cause. They now marched for Sandwich, leaving Mr A. Hammond and Capt. Bargrave at Deal, to manage with the fleer, for which they had also sent to Sir John Mennes and Capt. Fogg, two naval officers, who had been displaced for their loyalty. From Sandwich they marched to Canterbury; and “that night, being Sunday night, they quartered in Canterbury, not slipping any opportunity, or minute of time, without an improvement of it to the best advantage, the next day being appointed for their meeting at Rochester. Here there came in many gentlemen, and others, to join with them, that were not at all engaged before, unless against us; amongst the rest, Sir John Roberts, and one or two deputy lieutenants more, who signed to the petition, and subscribed to the loan of money, although they had before engaged themselves, with the rest of the Committee, against the petition; but rather like physicians, that out of a private interest are nimble to assist and please others, to profit themselves, than out of a cordial affection to so just and honest an enterprize.” Here Col. Hammond completed his regiment; and at this time the Earl of Thanet shewed great activity about Ashford, Hothfield, and Charing, though he afterwards apostatized. This little army now marched on to Rochester, and part even advanced as far as Dartford; when, on a rumour that Lord Fairfax was advancing against them, they returned to Rochester. The next day, the whole met at a rendezvous at Barming-down, near Maidstone, where the Earl of Norwich was chosen general, and whence they marched back into quarters, contrary to the General’s opinion, who advised that the whole should remain together in the field; but the Council of war determining otherwise, the General, with a large body, returned to “Rochester, where Sir Anthony Aucher and Mr. Hales left them, intending to return the next day: but, alas! in the night, Lord Fairfax marched down upon the party remaining at Maidstone, consisting of the regiments of Sir John Mayney and Sir William Brockman, who, notwithstanding a most gallant resistance, were beaten, before the news reached the main army; who however, on the first rumour, were drawn out, and had actually begun their march. Had the whole remained together at Maidstone, perhaps the fate of the King and kingdom might have been turned by it!  On this intelligence, Col Hammond and Col. Hatton were ordered back to Sittingbourne, and afterwards to remain at Canterbury, where Sir Richard Hardres was prevailed on to return, to secure the Eastern parts; for Major Osborn, whose name is altered by a pen, in my book to Gibbon, and whom I strongly suspect to he Mr. Thomas Gibbon the elder, of Westcliffe, an officer of the Parliament, was already in those parts, with a troop of horse, securing Sir Michael Livesay, who was raising all the force he could thereabouts. The Earl of Norwich now pushed on, with the remainder of his army, to Greenwich, whence, after some difficulties, they crossed the Thames, and got to Colchester; of which the subsequent surrender, with the melancholy fates of Sir Charles Lucas, Sir George Lisle, and the Lord Capel, are well known”.

Page 1 of 3

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

Return to top of page
%d bloggers like this: