LANDULPH, or LANDILIP.
HALS.
The manuscript relating to this parish is lost.
TONKIN.
Landulph is in the hundred of East. To the west of it is Pillaton and Botus-Fleming, to the north St. Dominick, to the east and south the river Tamar.
This signifies the church of Dilp.
It is a rectory, valued in the King’s Books at £20. 3s. 6d. The Duke of Cornwall patron.
This church was valued in the time of Pope Nicholas at £4, having never been appropriated, the prior of St. Germans receiving out of the rectory a pension of £8; and if I understand the entries rightly, the same did the abbat of Tavistock.
THE EDITOR.
The church of Landulph is situated almost on the margin of the shore, and looks directly down the river. It contains monuments of the Lowers, but it has one monument of extraordinary interest, to the memory of Theodore Paleologus, descended from the last Emperors of Greece, or as they styled themselves in the single city of Constantinople, Emperors of Rome.
A very ample account of all that can be collected with respect to this personage, has been given by the present learned and ingenious rector Mr. Francis Vyvyan Jago Arundell, in a communication to the Society of Antiquaries, in 1815.
“In the parish church of Landulph, in the eastern extremity of Cornwall, is a small brass tablet fixed against the wall, with the following inscription:—
‘Here lyeth the body of Theodore Paleologus, of Pesaro in Italye, descended from yᵉ Imperyal lyne of yᵉ last Christian emperors of Greece, being the sonne of Camilio, yᵉ sonne of Prosper, the sonne of Theodoro, the sonne of John, yᵉ sonne of Thomas, second brother of Constantine Paleologus, the 8ᵗʰ of that name, and last of yᵗ lyne yᵗ rayned in Constantinople until subdued by the Turks, who married wᵗ Mary, yᵉ daughter of William Balls, of Hadlye in Souffolke, Gent. and had issue 5 children, Theodore, John, Ferdinando, Maria, and Dorothy; and departed this life at Clyfton, yᵉ 21ˢᵗ of Janʸ, 1636.’
“Above the inscription are the imperial arms proper, of
the empire of Greece—an eagle displayed with two heads, the two legs resting upon two gates; the imperial crown over the whole, and between the gates a crescent for difference as second son.
“The Paleologus dynasty were descended from the imperial race of the Comneni; and the first of the family was Michael Paleologus about 1270; to whom succeeded Andronicus the First and Second, John I., and Emmanuel, who died 1425, leaving six sons. The eldest, John II., who was associated with his father in the government during his lifetime, succeeded him. Andronicus, the second son, had the principality of Thessalonica, and died of a leprosy soon after the sale of that city to the Venetians. Some fortunate incidents had restored Peloponnesus, or the Morea, to the empire; and in his more prosperous days Emmanuel had fortified the narrow isthmus of six miles with a stone wall and 153 towers. The wall was overthrown upon the first blast of the Ottomans; the fertile peninsula might have been sufficient for the four younger brothers, Theodore and Constantine, Demetrius and Thomas, but they wasted in domestic contests the remains of their strength, and the least successful of the rivals were reduced to a life of dependance in the Byzantine palace. On the death of John II., who survived four years the Hungarian crusade, the royal family by the death of Andronicus, and the monastic profession of Isidore (or Theodore), was reduced to three princes, Constantine, Demetrius, and Thomas. Of these, the first and last were far distant in the Morea; but Demetrius, who possessed the domain of Selybria, was in the suburbs at the head of a party. His ambition was not chilled with the public distress, and his conspiracy with the Turks and the schismatics had already disturbed the peace of the country. He would have supplanted his brother, and ascended the throne, but for his mother and the great men, who prevented him. His younger brother, the despot Thomas, also accidentally
returning to the capital, asserted the cause of Constantine, who was crowned emperor.
“Demetrius and Thomas now divided the Morea between them; but, though they had taken a solemn oath never to violate the agreement, differences soon arose, and Thomas took up arms to drive Demetrius out of his possessions; Demetrius hereupon retired to Asan, his wife’s brother, by whose means he obtained succours from Amurat, and compelled Thomas to submit the matters in dispute to the emperor’s (Constantine’s) arbitration. But that prince refusing to deliver to his brother the territories that fell to his share, Mohammed ordered Thuraken, his governor in the Morea, to assist Demetrius, and demolish the wall that shut up that country. Hereupon Thomas gave him the city of Kalamata, in lieu of the territory of the Skortians, which he detained. Immediately on this event, Mohammed besieged and took Constantinople, in defence of which Constantine was slain.
“The dissensions of the two brothers may be considered a principal cause of the fall of the Greek empire.
“After the capture of Constantinople, Mohammed makes war on Demetrius and Thomas, under pretence of recovering the tribute due to him from them as despots of the Morea; but he is obliged to retire, and soon after comes to agreement with them. At this time the Albanians, Thomas’s subjects, revolt, and attack Pattras, a city of Achaia, where Thomas resided, but are repulsed; they would have been, however, ultimately successful, had not Mohammed sent his general Thuraken to their assistance.
“The two brothers again falling out, and endeavouring to supplant each other, Mohammed takes advantage of it, and in 1458 sends an order to the despots of the Morea to pay three years’ arrears of ten thousand ducats tribute, or quit the country. In spring following, he marched to attack the Morea, and reduced Corinth, without using force. At the first news of his appearance, Thomas, one of the despots, retired to Italy with his wife and children; and Demetrius,
the other, submitted of his own accord to the Soltân, who carried him away to Constantinople.
“Such is the account given in the Universal History from Dukas. The relation of Khalcondylas in the same work is more particular, as well as more favourable to the character of Thomas: ‘Prince Thomas having retired from Pylos, repaired to the island of Korfu, where he left his family, and set sail for Italy; at the same time he sent an ambassador to know if Mohammed would give him a great extent of country along the sea coast in exchange for the city of Epidamnum. The Soltân, by way of answer, put the envoy in irons, but soon after sent him back. Thomas arriving at Rome 1461, was lodged in the Pope’s palace, and had a pension of three thousand livres for his other expenses.’
“Rycaut, in his History, gives a still higher character of Thomas: ‘Thomas getting into the castle of Salmenica, defended the same against the infidels a whole year, when, despairing of relief, he escaped into Italy, where the Pope allowed him a pension till the day of his death.’ Of him Mahomet gave this character: ‘That he had found many slaves, but never a man in the Grecian province besides Prince Thomas.’
“But Gibbon has a very contemptible account of the ultimate fate of this unfortunate family. He says, that Demetrius died at Constantinople in a monastic habit, and abject slavery; that the misery of Thomas was prolonged by a pension of six thousand ducats from the Pope and cardinals; that he died leaving two sons, Andrew and Manuel, who were educated in Italy; that Manuel the younger returned to Constantinople, where he was maintained by the Soltân, and died, leaving a son, who was lost in the habit and religion of a Turkish slave. The elder brother, Andrew, contemptible to his enemies, and burthensome to his friends, was degraded by the baseness of his life and marriage, and sold his title to the empires of Constantinople and Trebizond to Charles VIII. in 1494,
who assumed the purple and title of Augustus. And in a note he says, from Du Cange, that the Palæologi of Montferrat were not extinct till the next century, but they had forgotten their Greek origin and kindred.
“So degrading is the account this historian gives us of the remains of this celebrated family. It is a grateful task to endeavour to prove his representation in some respects incorrect and undeserved; as we shall then be authorised to hesitate upon what he tells us as to the rest, and to put a more liberal construction upon the whole.
“From the inscription at Landulph it is clear Thomas had three sons: the third, called John, whose family, though we have no particular mention of them, remained in Italy, at Rome probably, and Pesaro, till the time of Theodore. From the inscription it is also certain that this family was not extinct in 1636, and perhaps some of the descendants are still living in England at this moment.
“The imputation thrown on the Montferrat Paleologi certainly does not apply to this branch, that they had forgotten their Greek origin and kindred; on the contrary, the inscription proves, from the accuracy of the pedigrees and the arms with the difference of second brother, that the family of Theodore Paleologus, had neither forgotten their Greek origin nor high descent, but still gloried in them, and were scrupulously exact in perpetuating the same.
“The names of Theodore and John occurring in this pedigree, and continued in the family of Theodore, are still stronger evidences. Camillo, Prosper, and Ferdinando, were probably acquired on their connection with Italian families.
“It would be absurd to make any conjectures as to the history of Theodore’s predecessors, as we have no documents to warrant any conjecture. If we hazard any opinion at all, we may suppose, that when, in 1464, the Venetians under Vetorio Capelli warred against the Turks and attacked Pattras, Thomas’s former residence, he probably joined them, perhaps fell there; and in the frequent
wars which afterwards occurred between those powers, John, Theodore, Prosper, and Camillo, were probably not idle spectators, but joined against the common enemy, as well from a recollection of former wrongs, as a hope to regain some part of their ancient possessions. Indeed, their settlement at Pesaro might have been whilst the duchy of Urbino belonged to the Venetians, and in consideration of the part they took in those wars.
“Theodore Paleologus was born, we may infer from the inscription, at Pesaro. Of his mother we know nothing; his father was called Camillo. The time of his birth is also uncertain; though, from his marriage in 1615, then a widower, we may suppose him to be then about forty, which carries back his birth to 1575.
“Theodore’s removal from Italy, and settlement in England, must have been either compulsive or voluntary. If the former, it was probably either on account,
“1. Of his religion; or,
“2. From other causes.
“As to the first, the Paleologus family, from the time of John II., were reconciled to and in union with the Latin church; and to this circumstance is probably to be attributed the protection afterwards afforded to Thomas by the Pope, perhaps through the interest of Cardinal Isidore, the resident nuncio at Constantinople. But the Greek church still differed very materially in many points from the Latin; and though Gregory XIII. founded a college at Rome for the education of the Greek children in the sciences and religion, (and here perhaps Theodore was educated), yet we find him opposing what he called the errors of the Greeks; and in particular, on his alteration of the calendar he is much incensed against them for refusing to receive it. And again, in the pontificate of Clement VIII. we find him particularly anxious to reform the Greek church, and much enraged at being imposed on by a pretended embassy from the metropolitan of Russia, which proved to be a forgery. If Theodore, as is most probable,
was still of the Greek Church, these circumstances might have induced the Pope to withdraw the protection and support hitherto afforded to the family.—But if,
“2. To other causes, is to be attributed Theodore’s departure from Italy, it was perhaps from the rigid decree of Sixtus the Fifth, (about the year 1585), prohibiting foreigners from living at Rome, unless they brought a certificate that they were able by some trade or profession to maintain their families. If Theodore’s family were then at Rome, and in dependance on the papacy, perhaps Sixtus might enforce this decree to rid himself of a family whose high descent he possibly regarded with a jealous eye, recollecting the meanness of his own origin. Or, the severe famine, which in 1590 afflicted all the ecclesiastical state, might oblige Theodore, among others, to emigrate to another country.
“If, on the other hand, Theodore’s departure from Italy was voluntary, as is most probable, it might be from having formed some acquaintance, either with natives of this country, or with foreigners who were coming hither.
“About the same time that the Greek college was founded at Rome, (and where we may imagine Theodore to have had his education), another was founded called the Scotch college, for children of refugees from Scotland and England. Here we may suppose Theodore to have had some acquaintance; nor is it unlikely that when the jubilee in 1601 attracted a vast assemblage of persons from all countries to Rome, some one of these might have prevailed on Theodore to return to England with them. In the same year 1601, the Duke of Braciano, a neighbouring state to Pesaro, came to England, or rather Scotland, on a visit to the King of the Scots his relation. Did Theodore accompany him? Again, we may suppose him to have volunteered in the war against the Turks under Rodolph II. in whose army were many Englishmen, and in particular Sir Thomas Arundel, whose namesake, and probably friend, Thomas Arundel, resided at Clifton, the subsequent residence of
Theodore. Did he come over with him? If not, we may lastly imagine he came here through Sir Henry Killigrew, ambassador about this time to the Venetians or Genoese. The connection between the Arundel, Killigrew, and Lower families, give the most plausibility to the two last conjectures.
“But whatever may be our conjectures as to Theodore’s removal from Italy, we know that in 1615 he was actually in England, at Hadley in Suffolk, and (then a widower) married Mary, daughter of William Balls, of that town. No traces of the Balls family remain at present, either from tradition or otherwise, except the register of Theodore’s marriage; and even here, Mr. Wilkins, the minister, who has favoured me with a copy of this register, says that it is too mutilated and imperfect to decipher accurately the name of Paleologus.
“The issue of this marriage, as the monument tells us, were five children, Theodoro, John, Ferdinando, Maria, and Dorothy, all of whom must have been born before Theodore left the eastern part of the kingdom; for the register of Landulph, perfect till the year 1629, makes no mention whatever of the name. He could not therefore have settled at Clifton in Landulph earlier than 1622 or 1623.
“Clifton, a few years before this, in 1600, was the mansion of the Arundels; but in 1630, Sir Nicholas Lower, a Cornish gentleman, who married Sir Henry Killigrew’s daughter, was living at Clifton. Between these two dates Paleologus must have come here; and what is more particular, he died at Clifton in 1636, at the very time that Clifton was the residence of Sir Nicholas Lower.
“I have made repeated inquiries of the old people of the parish, but not the slightest tradition remains respecting him; and here again conjecture must supply the place of fact. When Theodore came to Clifton, he came with his family, for by the register it appears one of his daughters married in the parish, and the other died here unmarried.
There must then have been some connection either between the Arundel or Lower families and himself.
“As to the first supposition, if it is probable he came into England with Sir Thomas Arundel from the battles in Hungary, we may suppose Sir Thomas recommended him to Landulph, as from its vicinity to the sea and warmth of climate, more nearly resembling the climate and situation of Pesaro than any other place in the kingdom. In this case we may suppose him to have taken Clifton for a term, and as the house appears to have been originally divided into two, the subsequent occupier, Sir Nicholas Lower and Paleologus, might be both living at Clifton at the same time, unconnected with each other.
“The more probable supposition, however, is, that he settled at Clifton from the connection that subsisted between Sir Henry Killigrew (who, I feel strongly inclined to believe, brought him to England) and Sir Nicholas Lower. Sir Nicholas Lower married Sir Henry’s daughter, and as they were now advanced in life, without any family, the society of Paleologus and his children might be desirable to them; particularly when we recollect that this was the time when the Greek language was so much in fashion in England, that even ladies studied it most zealously; that Lady Killigrew was one of the learned daughters of Sir Anthony Cooke, celebrated for her literary attainments, and particularly her knowledge of Greek; and it is reasonable to suppose her daughter, Lady Lower, wife of Sir Nicholas, was brought up with the same fondness for the classic languages; and where could she expect to find so able an instructor as a descendant of the first family in the Greek empire; or what place could be more suited to classical pursuits than the retirement of a country mansion, such as Clifton.
“On the 21st of January 1636, as appears by the monument, Theodore Paleologus died at Clifton, Sir Nicholas and Lady Lower being still alive; of whom the latter died in 1638, and Sir Nicholas in 1655.
“The Landulph register, perfect from 1540 to 1628, has then a great chasm till the year 1649; and during this interval all the entries that would have been probably most interesting to our inquiries were made.
“Some little time since I examined the duplicates of parish registers, deposited in the room of archives in Exeter cathedral; and after a laborious search among the registers of two centuries, thrown promiscuously together without arrangement as to either parishes or dates, and those for the most part obliterated by the damp, I had the good fortune to recover the Landulph register for the year 1636, which had the following entry:
“‘Theodore Palleologus was buryed the 20th daye of October.’
“By the monument Theodore is said to have died the 21st of January 1636; from the register it appears he was buried October 20, 1636. It can hardly be supposed the body was kept from January till October, and the difficulty is increased from the knowledge, that by the mode of calculation in use at that time, the year commenced at Lady-day; so that, if he died January 21, 1636, the 20th of October following must have been in 1637.
“The body, if it remained any considerable time uninterred, would have been inclosed in a lead coffin; but this was not the case, for about twenty years ago, when the vault was accidentally opened, the coffin of Paleologus was seen, a single oak coffin; and curiosity prompting to lift the lid, the body of Paleologus was discovered, and in so perfect a state as to ascertain him to have been in stature much above the common height, his countenance of an oval form, much lengthened, and strongly marked by an aqueline nose, and a very white beard reaching low on the breast.
“Of the five children left by him, no traces remain of two sons, John and Ferdinando. Whether they joined the brothers of Sir Nicholas Lower, who were distinguished cavaliers on the king’s side in the unhappy wars that distracted
the country soon after the death of Theodore, and in which Major Lower gallantly fell; or whether the miserable state of England induced them again to re-visit Italy, cannot be ascertained.
“Theodore was a sailor, and served on board the Charles II. Captain Gibson. He died at sea 1693, as appears by a will and power in the Commons, obligingly communicated to me by Francis Townsend, Esq. Windsor Herald. This is dated August 1, 1693, and solely in favour of his wife Martha. If he had any children they are not named in it. The signature is Theodore Paleologey; and though described simply as mariner, it should seem he was possessed of landed estate, as there are four witnesses, Charles Gibson, commander, J. Wright, John Corneth, Richard Roberts.
“Mary Paleologus died at Landulph unmarried in 1674; and her sister Dorothy was married in 1656 to William Arundel, the grandson probably of Alexander Arundel, of Clifton. This marriage is registered at Landulph and St. Mellion, as solemnised in both parishes; the entry at the latter is, ‘Dorothea Paleologus de stirpe Imperatorum.’ Soon after their marriage they settled in St. Dominick, an adjoining parish, the registers of which having been accidentally destroyed, it is impossible now to determine if they had any issue, though it seems highly probable. They were both buried at Landulph, Dorothy in 1681, and her husband in 1684; and as some years after, a Mary Arundel was married to Francis Lee, the imperial blood perhaps still flows in the bargemen of Cargreen!”
The manor of Landulph is traced back to the family of D’Alneto, from whom it passed to the Courtenays, and fell to the Crown on the attainder of Henry Courtenay, Marquis of Exeter, in 1539, soon after which it was annexed to the duchy of Cornwall.
The manor of Glebridge has passed through various families, and is now the property of Mr. Bluett.
But the principal place in this parish was Clifton. Sir John Arundell is said to have built the house about the
year 1500. It is believed to have afterwards belonged to the Killigrews, as it passed in succession to Sir Nicholas Lower and Sir Reginald Mahon, who married the daughters of Sir Henry Killigrew. The former died without issue; and it was ultimately sold with the other property of the Mahons to Pitt.
The Lowers had their principal seat at St. Winnow, and were eminent during several successions. Some of this family were distinguished by their proficiency in science, and by their friendships with scientific men. This has been very recently made prominent in a work that cannot receive too much commendation, either for the accuracy, the ability, or for the industry displayed by its author. The Life of Dr. Bradley, by Stephen Peter Rigaud, M.A. Savilian Professor of Astronomy in Oxford, and Director of the Radcliffe Observatory, 1 vol. 4to. 1832.
Landulph measures 1564 statute acres.
| £. | s. | d. | |
| Annual value of the Real Property, as returned to Parliament in 1815 | 3596 | 0 | 0 |
| Poor Rate in 1831 | 363 | 0 | 0 |
| Population,— | |||
| in 1801, 529 | in 1811, 590 | in 1821, 579 | in 1831, 570 |
giving an increase of not quite 8 per cent. in 30 years.
Present Rector, the Rev. F. V. Jago, F.S.A. presented by the Prince of Wales, as Duke of Cornwall in 1805.
GEOLOGY, BY DR. BOASE.
Doctor Boase says of the geology of this parish, that it is situated like the last on the calcareous series, and that its rocks are similar.