The Stately Homes of England

by Llewellynn Frederick William Jewitt; S. C. Hall

WARWICK CASTLE holds foremost rank among the Stately Homes of England, both from its historical associations, and the important positions which, in every age, its lords have occupied in the annals of our country. Situated in one of the most romantic and beautiful districts of a fertile and productive shire, overlooking the “sweet-flowing Avon,” and retaining all its characteristics of former strength and grandeur, Warwick Castle is renowned among the most interesting remains of which the kingdom can boast. Of its original foundation, like that of other of our older strongholds, nothing is really known, although much is surmised. It is said to have been a Celtic settlement, converted into a fortress by the Roman invaders. However this may be—and there were several ancient British and Roman roads and stations in the county—it is not our purpose to inquire. It will suffice to say that at the time of the Roman conquest of Warwickshire, which is said to have occurred about the year 50, the county was occupied by two tribes of ancient Britons, the Cornavii and Dobuni, the boundary between these territories being, it would seem, the river Avon. Near the Avon, relics of frontier fortresses on either side have—as at Brownsover, Brailes, Burton Dassett, Brinklow, &c.,—been found; the principal British and Roman roads being the Icknield Street, the Fosse Way, and Watling Street. Warwick is believed, and not without reason, to have been one of these frontier fortresses; its situation would seem to lend strength to the supposition. In Anglo-Saxon times, Warwick formed a part of the kingdom of Mercia, the capital of which was at Repton, in the neighbouring county of Derby. At that period it “fell under the dominion of Warremund, who rebuilt it, and called it Warrewyke, after his own name.” Having been taken and destroyed by the Danes, it “so rested,” says Dugdale, “until the renowned Lady Ethelfled, daughter to King Alfred—who had the whole earldom of Mercia given her by her father to the noble Etheldred in marriage—repaired its ruins, and in the year of Christ DCCCCXV made a strong fortification here, called the dungeon, for resistance of the enemy, upon a hill of earth, artificially raised near the river side;” and this formed the nucleus of the present building. In 1016 it is stated to have again suffered from an attack by the Danes, who nearly demolished the fortifications of the castle and did great damage to the town. At the time of making the Domesday survey, Warwick was a royal burgh, and “contained 261 houses, and with its castle was regarded as a place of much consequence; for orders were issued by the Conqueror to Turchel to repair and fortify the town and castle of Warwick. This was carried into effect, by surrounding the town with a strong wall and ditch, and by enlarging the castle and strengthening its fortifications.”

In 1172 (19th Henry II.), Warwick Castle was provisioned and garrisoned at an expense of £10 (which would be equivalent to about £200 of our present money), on behalf of the king; and during those troublous times it remained about three years in his hands. In 1173 a sum equal to about £500 of our money was paid to the soldiers in the castle; and in the following year, the building requiring considerable repair, about £50 was laid out upon it, and a considerable sum was paid to the soldiers who defended it for the king. In 1191 it was again repaired, and also in the reign of King John. In the 48th of Henry III. (1263), William Mauduit, Earl of Warwick, was surprised by the adherents of Simon de Montfort, then holding Kenilworth, and the walls of the castle were completely destroyed; indeed, so complete was the devastation, that in 1315 “it was returned in an inquisition as worth nothing excepting the herbage in the ditches, valued at 6s. 8d.” In 1337 (12th Edward III.) a new building was commenced, and in that year a royal licence was granted for the founding of a chantry chapel in the castle. The building was commenced by Thomas Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, whose monument is preserved in the Beauchamp Chapel. In 1394 (17th Richard II.) Guy’s Tower is said to have been completed by Thomas Beauchamp, second son of the last named Thomas, at a cost of £395 5s. 2d., and by him to have been named “Guy’s Tower.” In the reign of James I. a sum of about £20,000 was expended by the then owner of the castle, Fulke Greville, Lord Broke, “in making it habitable and restoring it to its former importance.” From this time downwards, the castle has undergone many alterations, and so-called “beautifyings,” at the hands of its different owners; but, despite all, it retained its ancient grandeur and its most interesting features, and was, as Sir Walter Scott has said, “the fairest monument of ancient and chivalrous splendour which remains uninjured by time.”

The Castle, from the Temple Field.

And now as to its long line of illustrious and valiant owners.

Passing over the whimsical list of earls, &c., in Rous’s Roll, beginning with “King Guthelyne, about the sixth of Kinge Alexander the greate conqueror,” and “Kinge Gwydered, who began to reigne the 4th yere from the birth of our Lord,” reminding one very forcibly of the “Promptuaire des Medalles,” which commences the series with those of “Adam” and of “Heva vx Adam,”—the first we need even hint at, so obscure is the matter, is Rohan de Arden, who is stated to have married a daughter and heiress of “Æneas, Earl of Warwick, in the time of the Saxons,” and to have succeeded to that title and estates. Rohan de Arden is said to have lived in the reigns of Alfred and Edward the Elder, and to have been succeeded by the “renowned Guy,” Earl of Warwick (the legend connected with him will be noticed on subsequent pages), who had married his only daughter and heiress, Felicia. This Sir Guy “is said to have been son of Syward, Lord of Wallingford, which possession Guy also enjoyed.” “He was often in conflicts with the Danes in defence of his country; did many brave exploits; and, lastly, as the story goes, after his return from the Holy Land, retired from the world, and turn’d hermit, and lived in an adjacent cave, now called ‘Guy’s Cliff,’ wherein he died, and was buried in a chapel there, anno 929, aged about seventy years, leaving issue, by Felicia his wife, Reynborne,” who succeeded him, and “married Leonora, or Leoneta, daughter to King Athelstan.” From him the descent is said to have been continued in regular succession through father and son (Wegeat or Weyth, Wygod, Alcuin or Aylwin, &c.) to Turchel, who was earl at the time of the Norman Conquest, and who was allowed by that monarch to retain possession of the estates, but was ultimately deprived of both them and of the earldom.

The castle having been strengthened and enlarged, its custody was given to Henry de Newburgh, a Norman, who had accompanied the Conqueror, and to him was afterwards granted all the possessions of Turchel de Warwick, and he was made Earl of Warwick. By some he is said to have married the daughter of Turchel, but he is also stated to have married three other ladies. He was succeeded by his son, Roger Newburgh, as second Earl of Warwick, who married Gundred, daughter of the second Earl Warren, by whom he had a son, William, who succeeded him as third earl, and dying without issue, was succeeded by his brother Walleran as fourth earl, who married twice—first, Margaret de Bohun, and second, Alice de Harcourt. By his first wife he had two sons, Henry, who succeeded him, and Walleran. Henry de Newburgh, fifth Earl of Warwick, was a minor at his father’s death in 1205, and was placed under Thomas Bassett, of Headington, near Oxford. In the thirteenth year of King John, he was certified as holding 107 knights’ fees of the king in capite. Having led an active military life, and married two wives—Margaret D’Oyley and Philippa Bassett—he died 1229, and was succeeded as sixth earl by his son, Thomas de Newburgh.