kintburyandbeyond

A rich man in his castle?

Motte and bailey castles are the stuff of children’s story books: picture a mound surrounded by a ditch and topped with a wooded palisade, inside of which is a wooden or stone fortress. Perhaps knights in armour are seen approaching on horseback, or an elegant lady wearing the inevitable wimple or cone-shaped head dress. Somewhere nearby, colourful flags and banners ripple in the wind.

In reality, the motte and bailey castles of history were introduced by the Normans after the invasion of 1066 and an example can be seen on the Bayeaux tapestry:

Windsor Castle is an example of a motte and bailey, although over the years of its existence, the building has had much more added to it. By contrast, in Oxford only the motte survives of the original castle construction.

Most interestingly, the OS map of our area records a motte in the village of West Woodhay. A little way from St Laurence’s church, but on the opposite side of the road, and now surrounded by trees, most passers-by will be totally unaware of its existence. However, thanks to the work of O.G.S.Crawford (see a previous post) we can still identify the site of early medieval activity in our area as the word “motte” in a Gothic font is clearly marked on the map. But does the presence of a motte also indicate that there was once a castle, or at least some sort of defensive structure, in the now quiet and peaceful village?

There have never been extensive excavations in the West Woodhay area – perhaps I should add, as of yet. However, in the 1930s enthusiasts of the Newbury Field Club did painstakingly dig the site. Their findings were recorded by one E. Jervoise and you can read what he discovered in volume 7 of the Newbury Field Club Journal in Newbury Library.

The West Woodhay motte is of modest size – the Field Club members recorded its rise to be just 8 feet and the diameter at the top just 30 feet. These dimensions, of course, would have dispelled any expectation of a substantial building so I can forget any fanciful thoughts of a West Woodhay castle. However, red and brown roof tiles and eighty iron nails were found on the crest of the mound, suggesting some sort of construction even if quite small. Broken pottery was found on the top of the mound and in the surrounding ditch, including rims and bases of what was believed to be at least 40 cooking pots or bowls of a type in use in the twelfth century. Some of the sherds found showed traces of glaze. The excavators weighed these finds and found there to be 40lbs of them.

The diggers also recovered soes believed to have belonged to oxen. Also discovered was what Jervoise describes as a “hone” by which he must mean a stone for the sharpening of blades. It had been, “ made of fine grained silicous schist, a rock occurring in Scotland and Normandy.” Most probably a valued or valuable item, then.

Jervoise was particularly pleased by the discovery of a small bronze buckle “of fine workmanship” and having, “an unusually perfect green patina”.

He concluded that it might have been the site of an early medieval hunting lodge and it was certainly somewhere that food was prepared and eaten.

Hunting lodges were not uncommon in the medieval period – a time when a popular sport amongst the nobility was hunting for deer or boar. The lodge would have been the place where visitors, on what in later times might have been referred to as a “straightforward hunting weekend ” would stay or just return after a day’s sport for food and refreshments. With its slightly elevated position on the motte, its view towards Walbury Hill to the south west and the wide open Kennet valley to the south east, the hunting lodge might well have been built to impress.

Although the West Woodhay motte was likely never the site of a defensive structure, or indeed anything at all like a castle, I think it is quite safe to assume that the owner of this land in the twelfth century would have been a wealthy man and most likely of Norman descent, speaking Norman French. But while the nobility and upper classes generally would have spoken Norman French, it has to be likely that those preparing the food and washing the cooking pots were of humbler stock. These working people are likely to have spoken the language of the West Saxons or even Middle English – possibly a mixture of both.

Today West Woodhay is in many ways a quintessential English village – typical of many smaller settlements on the southern chalk lands. It is difficult to imagine a time when the English language, as we speak it today, would not have been understood there. Perhaps it is even more mind boggling to imagine a time when the local land owners would have conversed in Norman French!

The short life of Kintbury’s Catholic chapel

It is easy to forget that, before the reformation, all English parish churches would have been Catholic and all priests looked to the authority of the Pope. Although ancient buildings such as St Mary’s in Kintbury or St Michael’s in Enborne might seem to represent an enduring and continuing tradition of Christian worship, over the hundreds of years parishioners will have experienced turmoil and change particularly in respect of the break with the Catholic church in Rome.

After the Reformation, life became very difficult for those people who chose to follow the “Old” religion as keeping the Catholic faith became prohibited by law. Catholic positions in public life were restricted, for example Catholics were not allowed to enter the legal profession until 1791 and no Catholics were able to vote – even if they fulfilled other restrictive requirements – until 1829. Catholics were not accepted at either Oxford or Cambridge university until 1871.

It is not surprising, therefore, that in the south of England most people in towns or villages were either members of the Anglican church or one of the other protestant denominations – Baptist, Methodist, Congregationalist, Quaker and so on. However, some prominent families were able to maintain their Catholic faith and, in the south at least, these were mostly the wealthier families.

The Dukes of Norfolk, whose family seat is at Arundel in Sussex, are one such example. The present Duke is the country’s most eminent Catholic. Nearer to Kintbury, Sir John Throckmorton of Buckland House – the man who, in 1811 put up the wager which resulted in the Newbury Coat – was Catholic. Unusually for a small English village, mass was regularly held in the Catholic church in Buckland until the beginning of the twenty first century.

In 1893, a member of a wealthy Catholic family from the north of England chose to relocate to West Berkshire.

Humphrey J.G. Walmsley had been born in 1846 in Wigan, second son of William Gerard Walmesley & Caroline De Trafford of Westwood House, Lower Ince in what is now Greater Manchester. In common with other wealthy Catholic families of the time, the Walmesleys had a private chapel of their own which had been built between 1855 & 1856, the work having been overseen by the prominent church architect, Edward Welby Pugin.

In the world of church architecture, Pugin was a name to be reconned with. E.W. Pugin was the son of Augustus Northmore Welby Pugin, particularly remembered for having designed the interior of the palace of Westminster and the Elizabeth Tower which houses “Big Ben”. When his father died in 1875, E.W. Pugin took up the family business and continued as a successful designer of buildings in the then much admired Gothic style.

In employing E.W.Pugin to design the family chapel, the Walmesleys must have been making a statement not only of their commitment to the Catholic faith but also one which spoke of their ability to afford this addition to their home in the most fashionable design.

When Walmesley relocated to Inglewood House, a mansion near Kintbury, the nearest Catholic church was in Newbury. This must have been one of the reasons why the new owner decided to have a chapel erected at Inglewood. However, rather than commissioning the building of an entirely new place of worship, Walmesley had the chapel at his home in Wigan removed and transported brick-by-brick to Berkshire using the canal system for transportation. It must have been a slow and laborious process – to say nothing of the expense.

The re-erected chapel was consecrated on 26^th July 1905 by the Right Reverend Dr Cahill, Bishop of Portsmouth. According to the Wigan Observer, the new chapel was a site to behold with an altar of marble and alabaster, the altar steps of Italian marble. The stained glass had been designed by Hardman & Co., one of the leading designers of the time. Lamps, candlesticks, candelabra and vases were of brass burnished with gold. “It is a gift to West Berkshire” the report concludes.

It seems that everything about Humphrey Walmesley’s chapel was lavish. Not surprisingly, perhaps, as this family newly arrived from the north were clearly very wealthy. During his time at Inglewood, Walmesley was able to purchase several neighbouring farms to add to his estate making him a prominent local landowner and person of standing in the Kintbury area. The 1901 census had shown that he was living on independent means and, not surprisingly, he and his wife Marie employed 16 live-in staff at Inglewood House as well as their own Roman Catholic priest.

The Walmesleys welcomed other local members of their faith to hear mass with them at their chapel thus enabling Catholics from the Hungerford area to attend a service without having to travel to Newbury or Woolhampton. I have not been able to find out if baptisms or weddings were ever celebrated at Inglewood, although I believe it must be likely that some baptisms would have been.

Inglewood House remained in the Walmesley family until 1928 when it was purchased by the De La Salle brothers, meaning it remained a centre for the local Catholic community

However, in 1972 the De La Selle brothers left Inglewood for Wallingtons, a similarly large property a little nearer to Kintbury. From 1972 the house was home to the Inglewood Health Hydro, then in 2006 it was sold to Raven Audley Court as a retirement home.

This sale was bad news for what remained of the relocated Pugin chapel and those with a fondness for Victorian ecclesial architecture, as well as those local Catholics who may have had very fond memories of hearing mass there. Despite representations to English Heritage from both the Victorian Society and the Pugin Society, the demolishers moved in before the building could be listed and subsequently preserved. The English Heritage report of 2006 gives us some idea of what it might once have looked like:

The chapel is built in Gothic style and is brick built with stone dressing.

Historic photographs indicate that the windows had tracery and stained glass.

The painted ribs to the nave ceiling and painted panels and ribs to the chancel survive as does the highly colourful tiled floor to the chancel. The tiles are Minton and are decorated with fleur-de-lys and floral motifs. There is also an elaborate metal-work rood screen in blue and gold incorporating the family coat of arms.

Historic photographs indicate that the chapel was very richly decorated internally with fixtures and fittings that were originally of the Pugin scheme. These included stained glass depicting the name saints of the Walmesley family, and a carved altar and reredos in alabaster and marble.

The walls were part covered in carved wooden panels.

All these features are believed to have been removed in the last couple of weeks.

So, to all intents and purposes, Humphrey Walmesley’s chapel was no more, its fittings and stained glass sold or given away to who knows where. The rest of the building was finally demolished and Kintbury’s small Pugin masterpiece became just a memory.

©Theresa A. Lock, 2024

References & sources:

https://www.hungerfordvirtualmuseum.co.uk/

English Heritage adviser’s report re possible Listing of Chapel, 22 Dec 2006.

The Wigan Local History and Heritage Society website on Humphrey J.G. Walmsley.

“Bulldozers outpace the Heritage bureaucrats”, The Times, 9 Feb 2007.

https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk

https://www.ancestry.co.uk

January 11th 2025: Remembering William Winterbourne

On January 11^th each year, local people, family members and supporters from further afield including historians, trade unionists and those concerned with social justice, gather at the grave of William Winterbourne in St Mary’s churchyard.

William Winterbourne, also known as William Smith, was hanged at Reading Gaol at 12 o’clock on January 11^th 1831. His crime was to have been involved in the protests that swept across southern England the previous autumn as labourers fought for improvements to their pay and conditions of work.

This year, the bright sunlight shone on the lichen covered stone such that William’s name could be read clearly. As his parents were not married at the time of his birth, he is buried under his mother’s name of Smith, in accordance with the custom of the time.

This year, we were joined by over twenty people who gathered to listen to accounts of how the Swing Riots had impacted on this part of West Berkshire, and William’s involvement in them.

All Photos (C) Chloë Wells

You may be interested in further posts about the Swing Riots in West Berkshire, those involved, and also what happened to one who was convicted and transported to Australia:

The Kintbury Martyr: 1

The Kintbury Martyr: 2

The Kintbury Martyr: 3

William Winterbourne: A Reflection by Keith Jerrome

A Revelation of Personal Endurance

Christmas for the new Edwardians: December 1901

“The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.” L.P. Hartley

Queen Victoria had come to the throne as an eighteen year old in 1837 and reigned for 63 years. Consequently, at the turn of the century in January 1901 (the 20^th century was deemed to have begun in 1901, not 1900) most people had known no other monarch.

Victoria died on the Isle of Wight on January 22^nd 1901 and was succeeded by her son, the new king, Edward VII. And so, the people of Britain were no longer Victorians, but Edwardians.

So what was the Christmas period like for the new 20^th century Edwardians? I looked through the pages of the Newbury Weekly News to find out.

The first thing that I noticed was that the Christmas period was much more low-key than at present with very few Christmas themed events, if any, and far fewer advertisements for Christmas goods. Life in our part of West Berkshire was not much different from any other two week period in the autumn or winter. Disappointingly, there are hardly any news reports from the villages in our area at this time although there are several reports from Hungerford and a few from Kintbury.

A colder spell before Christmas 1901 had resulted in the canal freezing over such that the inhabitants of Hungerford had been looking forward to an ”oldfashioned” Christmas, presumably looking back to the very cold winters of the mid 19^th century. Hopes were dashed, however, when the weather turned wet and windy. To prepare for the inclement weather, inhabitants of Newbury could, if they so liked, purchase a mackintosh with velvet collar for between 5 shillings 11 pence and 18 shillings 11 pence from McIllroy & Rankin of Cheap Street, and compliment the new coat with an umbrella from 1 shilling three farthings. Bailey’s of Northbrook Street boasted selling the cheapest boots: ladies’ at 1 shilling 9 pence a pair, gentlemen’s at 2 shillings 6 pence and children’s at 1 shilling 4 pence.

Despite the availability of wet weather clothing, Hungerford Primitive Methodist choir abandoned their customary carol singing in the town as the weather was considered too bad to go out. Perhaps instead they stayed at home and read by the light of a gas lamp, obtainable form Joseph Hopson of Newbury, which, it was advertised, would burn for 10 hours for only a farthing.

Although outdoor carol singing might have been abandoned, the pages of the NWN reveal that much local indoor entertainment was music- based. “Choral classes” were established in Kintbury with a Mr. S. Argyle conducting. The choir were practising a cantata called “King Harold” by Cunningham Wood. Also in Kintbury, a musical evening was held in the Wesleyan Methodist church on December 18^th where members of the newly formed Guild Band were hoping to raise funds for a harmonium by presenting a concert of religious songs, instrumentals and readings.

“The band is only in its infancy, “ the NWN reported, “ and does not yet expect criticism but promises to be worth hearing at no distant date”.

For the more energetic ladies of Hungerford, a Spinsters’ Dance was held at the Town Hall on a Friday before Christmas. It was attended by between 80 and 90 people and took place between 8 o’clock and 3 o’clock, which, I am presuming, was am rather than pm, although the report does not specify!

I had expected to read something of children’s Christmas parties but, if these were held in the local villages, no reports of them appeared in the pages of the NWN. Fundraising, however, did continue in Kintbury, where, in the week before Christmas, £1, 15 shillings 11 pence was raised by the children of St Mary’s School for Dr Barnado’s Waifs Association.

On the subject of schools and education, however, a letter in the NWN reveals that a very retrogressive attitude toward education still existed in some sectors of society, despite this being the 20^th century. A letter printed just after Christmas and sent from a former Newbury teacher reads:

“Sir, I am sorry to notice in your paper that there are a few people who are still of the opinion that education is not good for farm labourers and other working folk…

They themselves do not object to education but on purely selfish grounds they would keep it from the poor lest they should be less servile.”

If educational opportunities did not present themselves for the new Edwardians, servile or otherwise, an advertisement in the local paper suggested a career in the military might be beckoning as recruits were wanted for all branches of His Majesty’s army. I wonder how many local lads responded to the offer.

On the Monday after Christmas, the Craven Hunt met at Wallingtons, Kintbury, the residence of Mr William Hew Dunn. Attended by various of the great and the good of the area, the occasion was “of particular interest” as a portrait of Mr Dunn was presented to him in recognition of his service to the hunt.

Elsewhere, the Christmas period was a quiet one; at Hungerford market, corn had been in short supply due to the meagre attendance of farmers and traders. Anyone looking to buy “Native Guano” however, could obtain a 1 cwt bag mail order, which would be sent carriage paid to any station in England on receipt of a postal order for 5 shillings. I wonder how many were delivered to Kintbury, or whether the local equine population provided local gardeners with all they required.

The Christmas period does not seem to have been a time of conspicuous consumption and over-spending for the new Edwardians. However, should any one of them need some extra money, and just so happen to have an old set of false teeth lying around, an advertisement in the NWN of January 1902 has the answer. RD & JB Fraser of Princes Street, Ipswich would buy your old false teeth from you. So the new century was not without opportunities to make that bit of extra cash!

Our Neolithic neighbours

So who were our neolithic neighbours?

It is mind boggling to think of people living in this area over 6000 years ago. However, if you know where to look for it you can still see evidence of those people who lived around here between c4000 and 2500 years BC in the neolithic period.

The neolithic, or new stone age, was the period which saw a more settled way of life with the domestication of plants and animals and the beginning of farming rather than a hunter/gatherer life style.

During this period there were communal constructions of large scale earth works, banks and ditches. The famous henge monument at Avebury dates from this period.

But where is the evidence that neolithic people once lived in this area?

A favourite local destination for many of us in our area is Combe Gibbet above Gallows Down, close to the highest point on chalk in England and affording spectacular views particularly to the north across the Kennet valley. Standing right next to the gibbet we admire the view and identify local landmarks. It is an uplifting and spectacular spot.

But is there something that we miss? I know I did when I first walked up to the gibbet. As it stands on one of the highest points of the hill, it is easy to overlook the fact that the gibbet has been erected on a mound. The mound on which it stands is actually a neolithic long barrow.

There are around 500 neolithic long barrows in England of which three are in Berkshire and many more over the borders in Wiltshire and Dorset. Generally speaking most are in the Cotswolds or Wessex.

Our local barrow is oriented east to west and measures 65 meters by 20 meters and is surrounded by a ditch about 7 meters wide. Constructing it was no mean feat particularly when the only tools available were made from bone or flint and would have required a well-organised and dedicated work force.

But why was it built up here?

Long barrows were important communal burial sites during the neolithic. A chamber was usually constructed of wood or stone with an entrance at one end, then covered over with earth. Members of the community were laid to rest in the tomb but, in a practice that seems strange to us, often only certain bones were placed within and it seems likely that the remains were, at times, taken out and replaced.

It is likely that the long barrow would have been an important ritual site for the local community and might have indicated ownership of a particular area by a particular group of people. A location commanding an impressive view seems to have been important; for example, Wayland’s Smithy Long Barrow near Uffington and West Kennet near Avebury are also sited on higher ground.

The long barrow above Gallows Down was likely to have been the focus of communal events. However it may well be that our neolithic neighbours would have travelled further afield to meet up with other family members or community groups; the henge and stones at Avebury could have been reached by following the river Kennet westwards, for example. We know that neolithic peoples often travelled hundreds of miles to join in the ceremonies at Stonehenge so the thirty or so from here across Salisbury Plain would have seemed any easy journey to people used to walking long distances

So, as we traipse up to the gibbet and admire the view, perhaps we should remember that beneath our feet is a construction that would have been important to our neolithic neighbours – something that would have been revered and respected, which had taken much time and effort to build. After all, we can not imagine a time when we would walk through Winchester Cathedral whilst ignoring its significance as a place of worship, or pass Windsor Castle without seeing it as something just a bit special.

Our local long barrow, up above Gallows Down, might not look particularly important to us now, but it is worth remembering that 6000 years ago it might have been the most significant thing in the landscape.

From a dig at Inkpen to the skies above Stonehenge:

O.G.S. Crawford – the man who put history on the O.S. Maps

I have always enjoyed looking at Ordnance Survey maps – to plan routes for days out or just afternoon walks, or simply to see the names of woods, rivers, hills or countless other features all carefully recorded. But for me one of the most fascinating features of O.S. maps are those places labelled in a gothic or Old English font which indicate a site of historic or archaeological significance. “Walbury”, “long barrow” ( on Gallows Down ) and “moat” ( at Balsden Farm ) are all good examples from the Kintbury area.

Although the Ordnance Survey started publishing maps over 200 years ago, originally for military purposes, it was not until the 1920s that historic and archaeological sites were first identified as they are now. And the person first responsible for including that information had an interesting connection with our area.

Osbert Guy Stanhope Crawford was born in 1886 in Bombay, India where his father was a judge. However, as his mother died soon after his birth, he was sent back to England to live in London with two of his aunts. While the young Osbert was still of school age, he moved with them to The Grove, East Woodhay, a few miles from Kintbury and just over the border in Hampshire. Later the Crawfords relocated to Tan House, Donnington, just outside Newbury.

Crawford was educated at Marlborough College in Wiltshire and it was there that his interest in archaeology grew. As a member of the College’s Natural History Society, Crawford visited various Wiltshire archaeological sites such as Stonehenge, West Kennet Long Barrow and Avebury.

From Marlborough, Crawford went up Oxford University where his interest in archaeology continued. In 1908, whilst still a student, he excavated a Bronze Age round barrow at Inkpen, not far from his aunts’ East Woodhay home, as well as other – possibly less successful – work excavating at Walbury Beacon.

It was around this time that Crawford became friends with archaeologist and anthropologist Harold Peake and his wife Charlotte, excavating with them at Botley Copse near Marlborough. Harold Peake is particularly remembered in this area as being curator of the Borough of Newbury Museum from 1867 to 1946 and the person responsible for building up an important collection for what was later to become the West Berkshire Museum.

The Peakes lived at Westbrook House, Boxford, just to the north of Kintbury. Their interests included not only archaeology and anthropology but music, folklore and drama and they were very supported of younger people such as Crawford. It is believed that, under Peake’s influence, Crawford began to question the kind of extreme religious beliefs held by his aunts, in favour of a more science-based world view.

After graduating from Oxford, Crawford worked as an archaeologist in both Britain and Sudan. During the First World War he served as a photographer with the Royal Flying Corp but spent time in a German P.O.W. camp, having been shot down.

In the 1920s, Crawford worked for the Ordnance Survey in Southampton, as its first Archaeological Officer. It was around this time that historians and archaeologists began to use aerial photography in identifying and interpreting historic sites which could no longer be seen clearly above ground. The remains of structures and earth works which have long disappeared can be identified through crop marks and shadows which can then be studied using aerial photographs. Crawford’s time with the Royal Flying Corp would have given him first hand experience of how useful such photographs can be.

Crawford used the study of aerial photographs as well as information gathered from local antiquarian and historical societies to identify the locations of many ancient monuments which would not have been visible to cartographers working in the field. He also conducted his own surveys, often travelling across the countryside on his bicycle. Crawford then annotated each O.S. map by hand, adding the names and locations we are now familiar with but which today are identified on our maps in a gothic font.

At this time, Alexander Keiller, heir to the family fortune made in marmalade, was living at Avebury Manor. An amateur archaeologist, he had been involved in excavating the world-famous neolithic henge and other associated sites. In 1924 Crawford joined Keiller in an aerial survey of Wiltshire and Somerset as well as Berkshire, Hampshire and Dorset and in 1928 they published Wessex From The Air, a groundbreaking aerial photography survey of our area and the landscape of the wider Wessex.

Crawford assisted Keiller in the fund raising which enabled Stonehenge to be bought for the nation, and in 1927 he founded the influential archaeological journal, Antiquity.

Keiller worked for the O.S. until 1946 when he turned his attention to the preservation of those historic buildings in Southampton which had survived the devastation of the blitz during the Second World War.

Today, O.G.S. Crawford is recognised as an important figure in twentieth century archaeology. It is interesting to think that this important career began in part with an excavation at Inkpen and a friendship in Boxford.

Crawford died in 1957.

Sources:

https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/about/history

https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/archive/collections/aerial-photos/

https://hantsfieldclub.org.uk/ihr100/profiles-c/crawford.html

https://www.sarsen.org/2018/04/capturing-material-invisible-ogs.html

Wild Will Darrell

In Memory

Of Sr William Darrell

Of Littlecote in Wilts Knt

Who dyed without issue

On the 1^st of Oct 1589

He was Uncle of Sr John Darrell

West Woodhay and Balsdon Bar

Who was High Sheriff of Berks

In the Year 1626

And was buried in this Place

On the 14^th of May 1657

This memorial, now much faded and difficult to read, is on the wall of the north transept of St Mary’s church, Kintbury. From the information given on the memorial, one could assume that William Darrell’s main claim to fame was that he was uncle of a one-time high sheriff of the county. However, this is far from the whole story.

The “Littlecote” mentioned on the memorial is a grade 1 listed Tudor mansion, 6 miles to the west of Kintbury in the parish of Chilton Foliat, Wiltshire. It was built towards the end of the fifteenth century by Sir Edward Darrell and replaced the much earlier medieval house.

The second Sir Edward Darrell – son of he who built Littlecote – died in 1549 when his son William was just ten years old. Sir Edward left Littlecote to his mistress Mary Danyell although when he reached his legal majority of 21, William successfully challenged this in court. It was the first of many legal battles William was to engage in throughout his life.

In 1568 William had been involved in an affair with Anne Hungerford, wife of Wiltshire landowner Sir Walter Hungerford. Sir Walter sued for divorce but was defeated in court, subsequently spending three years in London’s notorious Fleet Prison.

In 1572 William Darrell was elected as Member of Parliament for the constituency of Downton in Wiltshire. This was a very small constituency with few people eligible to vote in these pre- parliamentary reform times, so Darrell’s time as a Member of Parliament probably said more about his personal influence rather than his popularity.

At the time of the Spanish Armada in 1588, Darrell is believed to have offered his support to Sir Francis Walsingham, the Protestant Queen Elizabeth’s so-called spymaster and arch enemy of those Catholics who were attempting to restore England to Catholicism.

Although there seems to be no evidence that William Darrell engaged in any form of military service, his life could, none the less, be described as colourful. Scandalous would probably be more accurate. He is believed to have had a profligate lifestyle, left bills unpaid and engaged in disputes with his neighbours frequently leading to litigation.

There are many versions of Wild Will Darrell’s story in histories, guide books and online. The monument in Kintbury church makes no suggestion of a colourful or notorious life and it is difficult to find out exactly when Darrell acquired the epithet, “Wild Will” and more colourful accounts of his life emerged. It is likely that the seventeenth century biographer, John Aubrey, may have written the earliest account although the History of Parliament website states that Darrell was first described as “Wild Will” by the popular Regency period novelist Sir Walter Scott in his poem, Rokeby. The name obviously stuck and the Wiltshire Independent of May 1855 carried the report of a Derby winning racehorse from stables in Hungerford being named “Wild Dayrel”. The paper then went on to print a detailed version of Darrell’s connection with Littlecote house and the now notorious murdered baby story.

There are many versions of this story and the main points have clearly been added to and embellished over the years. It goes something like this:

In 1575, on what may or may not have been a dark and stormy night in November, a village midwife, who might have been called Mother Barnes and may have lived in Great Shefford, was summonsed to Littlecote where a woman was in labour. The midwife was taken there on horseback, allegedly, according to some accounts, blindfolded so she could not identify where she was being taken.

On arriving at the house, the midwife was taken to an upstairs room with a roaring fire in the fireplace. A man was standing by a bed in which lay the labouring woman and he instructed the midwife to save the mother’s life. As soon as the child was delivered the man threw it in the fire ignoring the protestations of the mother, who might have been a servant.

According to some versions of the story, the midwife eventually reported what she had seen to the local magistrates, although she might not have mentioned Darrell by name. Some versions say that Darrell’s enemies decided that he was the newborn’s murderer. As proof that events had happened at Littlecote, the midwife is said to have produced a piece of the bedcurtains she had surreptitiously cut off and brought away with her.

Depending on which version of events you read, Darrell was either tried at Salisbury assizes or by the Commissioners at Newbury but escaped punishment, possibly by bribing the judge.

Although many of the supposed “facts” about Darrell’s life may well be apocryphal I think we can probably believe the memorial in Kintbury church when it states that he dyed without issue on October 1^st 1589. His death was the result of a riding accident and, of course, it is almost inevitable that the story of his life has been further embellished by the supposed appearance of the ghost of the murdered infant to frighten his horse, thus causing the accident.

Despite being remembered on a monument in Kintbury church, William Darrel was buried at St Lawrence’s church, Hungerford.

Littlecote House is now a hotel – and famous for its ghosts.

Further information and sources:

https://historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/darrell-william-1539-89

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Darrell_of_Littlecote

https://hungerfordvirtualmuseum.co.uk/?view=article&id=462:littlecote&catid=24#wild_will_darrell

https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/berks/vol4/pp205-217

https://www.bbc.co.uk/wiltshire/content/articles/2007/05/31/psi_report_littlecote_feature.shtml

Who’s who: Local people in the letters of Jane Austen

We have just had two hampers of apples from Kintbury, and the floor of our little garret is almost covered

Letter to Cassandra Austen, October 1808

We have just had two hampers of apples from Kintbury, and the floor of our little garret is almost covered

Letter to Cassandra Austen, October 1808

In her letters, Jane Austen frequently referred to Kintbury and to local people, several of whom became members of her extended family or close friends. In this article we discuss who these people were.

THE CRAVENS

Lord William Craven 1770 1825

Lord Craven has probably other connections and more intimate ones, in that line, than he now has with the Kintbury family.

Letter to Cassandra, 1799

“Eliza has seen Lord Craven at Barton & probably by this time at Kintbury, where he was expected for one day this week. – She found his manners very pleasing – the little flaw of having a mistress now living with him, at Ashdown Park, seems to be the only unpleasing circumstance about him.”

Letter to Cassandra, January 1801

The Barton Jane refers to in this letter is Barton Court, Kintbury. By 1801, when the letter to Cassandra was written, Barton Court was the home of Charles Dundas and his wife Anne.

Lord William Craven was a distinguished military gentleman, served in Flanders and was AD to the King and a favourite of Queen Charlotte. A bit of a rake before his marriage, he kept his mistress, Harriet Wilson, at Ashdown House on the Berkshire Downs. After Harriet, having become tired of him, left, he went on to marry the actress, Louisa Brunton. They lived in Hamstead as a close family and the Countess was renowned for her gracious generosity.

Other members of the extended Craven family had power and influence across the West Berkshire area during the eighteenth century.

THE FAMILY OF CHARLES & ELIZABETH CRAVEN

“Governor” Charles Craven, 1682 – 1754, of Hamstead Marshall had been Governor of Carolina between 1711 and 1716. His wife, Elizabeth, 1698 – 1771, gained a reputation as a socialite and it is alleged that she treated her children badly.

Charles & Elizabeth had one son, John.

Rev’d John Craven 1732 – 1804

My Uncle is quite surprised at hearing from you so often – but as long as we can keep the frequency of our correspondence from Martha’s uncle, we will not fear our own.

Letter to Cassandra, 1799

The Martha referred to here is Jane’s close friend Martha Lloyd. Martha’s uncle was John Craven son of “Governor” Charles Craven & his wife Elizabeth of Hamstead Marshall.

When his widowed mother, Lady Elizabeth Craven, married the besotted Jemmet Raymond she proceeded to marry John to Jemmet’s sister, Elizabeth. Elizabeth was well off, but judged to be weak in intellect. They married in Kintbury in 1756.

Married for 20 years, John and Elizabeth did not have children so one might presume that the marriage was in name only. When Elizabeth died, Barton Court passed to another branch of the Raymond family.

Jane Fowle, nee Craven 1727 – 1798

I am very glad to find from Mary that Mr & Mrs Fowle are pleased with you.

Letter to Cassandra, January 1796

Jane Craven was the second daughter of Charles & Elizabeth Craven of Hamstead Marshall. In 1763 she married Rev’d Thomas Fowle of Kintbury and the couple had three sons: Fulwar Craven, Thomas, William & Charles.

Martha Lloyd, nee Craven 1729 – 1805

James I dare say has been over to Ibthrop ( sic ) by this time to enquire particularly of Mrs Lloyd’s health.

Letter to Cassandra, May 1801

Martha was Charles & Elizabeth Craven’s third daughter.

In 1763 Martha married the Rev’d Noyes Lloyd and the couple had three daughters: Martha, Eliza & Mary, and one son, Charles.

From 1771 until his death in 1789, Rev’d Lloyd was Rector of St Michael’s, Enborne. Sadly, in 1775 there was an outbreak of smallpox in the village and, whilst the girls survived, their brother Charles, aged 7, died.

Following Noyes’ death, his widow along with daughters Martha and Mary, moved to Ibthorpe (“Ibthrop.”)

THE FAMILY OF MARTHA & NOYES LLOYD

Eliza Lloyd 1768 – 1839

(Mrs Fulwar Craven Fowle)

Eliza says she is quite well but she is thinner than when we last saw her and not in very good looks. She cuts her hair too short over her forehead and does not wear her cap far enough upon her head. In spite of these disadvantages, I can still admire her beauty.

Letter to Cassandra, January 1801

Eliza Lloyd was the eldest daughter of Rev’d Noyes Lloyd and his wife, Martha, of Enborne.

In 1788, Eliza Lloyd married her cousin Fulwar Craven Fowle. They had eight children, one of whom died as a baby. The last child, Henry, was born when Eliza was 39. Eliza died in 1839 aged 71 and Fulwar the following year aged 76.

Martha Lloyd 1765 – 1843

(Lady Austen)

She is the friend & Sister under every circumstance’.

Letter to Cassandra, 1808

Martha was the eldest daughter of Rev’d Noyes & Martha Lloyd of Enborne.

Martha had been born in Bishopstone in Wiltshire then moved with her family to Enborne near Kintbury where her father became rector of St Michael’s. On her father’s death, Martha, along with her mother and sister Mary, moved to Ibthorpe where they became frineds with Jane & Cassandra Austen.

Following the death of George Austen in 1805, Martha joined Jane, Cassandra and Mrs Austen at their home in Bath, later moving with them to Southampton and eventually settling in Chawton.

In 1828 Martha married Jane’s brother, Captain Frank Austen RFN. Martha died in 1843 and is buried in Portsdown.

Mary Lloyd 1771 – 1843

(Mrs James Austen)

Mary does not manage matters in such a way as to make me want to lay in myself. She is not tidy enough in her appearance; she has no dressing gown to sit up in; her curtains are all too thin, and things are not in that comfort and style about her which are necessary to make such a situation an enviable one.

Letter to Cassandra, November 1798

Mary was the youngest daughter of the Rev’d Noyes & Martha Lloyd of Enborne.

Unlike Martha, Mary does not seem to have been a great favourite of Jane’s. When James Austen was widowed in 1795 he first turned his attentions to his widowed cousin Eliza. However, she did not return James’ affection and later married his brother Henry. When James married Mary Lloyd in 1797, it is said that she did not forget that she was second choice. Mrs. Austen however, was very pleased with the marriage and said that Mary was the daughter in law that she would have chosen.

Whether great friends or not Mary helped nurse Jane in her last weeks. In her widowhood she lived at Speen with her daughter Caroline. She died in 1843.

THE FOWLE FAMILY of KINTBURY

Rev’d Thomas Fowle 1726 – 1806

I am very glad to find from Mary that Mr & Mrs Fowle are pleased with you.

Letter to Cassandra, January 1796

Rev’d Thomas Fowle became vicar of Kintbury in 1762 when he succeeded his father, also called Thomas, and who had become vicar here in 1741.

In 1763 Thomas married Jane Craven of Hamstead Marshall. Thomas & Jane had four sons: Fulwar Craven, Thomas, William & Charles.

Thomas was succeeded as vicar of Kintbury by his son, Fulwar Craven Fowle in 1789.

THE FAMILY OF JANE (NEE CRAVEN) & REV’D THOMAS FOWLE

Fulwar Craven Fowle 1764 – 1840

“We played at vingt-un, which, as Fulwar was unsuccessful, gave him an opportunity of exposing himself as usual.”

Letter to Cassandra, January 1801

Fulwar Craven Fowle was vicar of Kintbury from 1798 until 1840.

Born in 1764, Fulwar was the eldest son of Thomas & Jane Fowle of Kintbury. He studied at Steventon under Jane Austen’s father, George Austen then went up to Oxford graduating in 1781. In September, 1788, he married his cousin, Eliza Lloyd.

Physically he has been described as rather short and slight with fair hair, very blue eyes and a long nose. In character he was impatient, rather irascible at times and hated losing at games as Jane hinted at in her letters.

When, despite many applications for mercy, Kintbury Swing Rioter William Winterbourne was hanged, Fulwar brought his body back home and had a tomb stone erected to his memory.

Eliza Fowle died in 1839, and the weeks before and after her death appear to be the only times in his long career that Fulwar failed to minister to his flock . On 9th March, 1840, he died in his 76th year. He was, as his memorial testifies, a conscientious and outstanding parish priest in an age when it was not always so.

Tom Fowle 1765 – 1797

“How impertinent you are to write to me about Tom, as if I had no opportunities of hearing from him myself.”

Letter to Cassandra, January 1796.

The second son born to Kintbury’s Thomas & Jane Fowle.

Tom Fowle had been born in 1765, studied at Steventon under George Austen, graduated from Oxford in 1783 and became ordained into the Church of England in 1790.

Tom was a kinsman of William, Lord Craven, and served as his chaplain on the military expedition to the West Indies in 1796, probably to earn money to enable him to marry Cassandra Austen, to whom he had become secretly engaged.

Sadly, he died in the West Indies of a fever, caught after bathing in great heat (according to his family) or possibly of Yellow Fever according to other sources. Yellow Fever was endemic amongst the British troops in the West Indies.

William Fowle 1767 – 1806

“Tell Mary that there were some Carpenters at work in the Inn at Devizes this morning but as I could not be sure of their being Mrs W. Fowle’s relations I did not make myself known to them.”

Letter to Cassandra, May 1799

William Fowle was the third son of Kintbury’s Rev Thomas Fowle & his wife Jane.

Born 1767, he became a physician after being apprenticed to his uncle, Dr. William Fowle. In October, 1791, he graduated in medicine from the University of Leyden.

In 1792 William married Maria Carpenter and went to live in Devizes, her home town. He was admitted to the College of Physicians 25th June, 1795 and went on to join the army as a physician. He saw considerable service in the West Indies and Egypt, dying there in 1801 aged 35.

William had a particular interest in the treatment of diseases, writing a dissertation on Erisyphlas which he dedicated to Charles Dundas, a paper, Experiments with Mercury in the Small Pox, translated from the French in 1793, and A Practical Treatise on the Different Fevers of the West Indies in 1800. This is rather poignant as his brother died there of a fever.

William and Maria had two children, Marriane & Charles, both of whom were baptised in Kintbury. Sadly, Maria and the children were left unprovided for when William died and in 1802 Maria was granted an annual award of £50. This was in consideration of the sufferings of her husband whilst in the Mediterranean and Egypt and his having died in service

Charles Fowle 1770 – 1806

“What a good-for-nothing fellow Charles is to bespeak the stockings – I hope he will be too hot all the rest of his life for it!”

Letter to Cassandra, January 1796

Charles was the youngest son of Kintbury’s Rev Thomas Fowle & his wife Jane.

Born 1770, Charles studied law and in 1800 it was announced that the Honourable Society of Lincolns Inn had been pleased to call Charles Fowle Esq, a Fellow of the Society. In 1799 he married Honoria Townsend in Newbury and later went on to practise law in the town.

During the Napoleonic wars, Charles Dundas asked him to form the Hungerford Pioneers, a group, said his family, comprised of worthy ironmongers and bakers.

It is thought that he had a teasing relationship with Jane. They played tricks and called each other names. Perhaps the silk stockings he was commissioned to buy her came from the Kintbury silk mill.

THE DUNDAS FAMILY OF BARTON COURT

Mrs Anne Dundas

Martha … is to be in town this spring with Mrs Dundas

Letter to Cassandra, January 1809

The Mrs. Dundas referred to here is Anne Dundas, nee Whitley, wife of Charles Dundas, M.P. Anne was the heiress who inherited Barton Court, Kintbury, when Elizabeth Raymond, formerly Craven, died.

Charles Dundas, Baron Amesbury:

Younger son of Thomas Dundas of Fingask, MP for Orkney and Shetland, Charles was born in 1752 and called to the Bar in 1777. As an M.P., it was said that he was ’liberal in politics’ and at one time expected to become Speaker.

Charles came into possession of Barton Court when he married Ann Whitley, member of the Raymond family.

He became a peer on 11th May, 1832 but died two months later of cholera.

Charles Dundas

References & sources:

The letters of Jane Austen Ed Deirdre Le Faye

The Creevy Papers

Greville’s Diary

The Gentleman Magazine

The British Newspaper Archives

The Dundas Papers

Fists at dawn: A tragedy at Enborne

In the world of late Georgian England, laws governing the sale of alcohol were very different to what they are today.

The 1830 Beerhouse Act – sometimes known as “Wellington’s Act, after the prime minister of the day – allowed any rate payer to brew and sell beer on payment of a two guinea licence. This was an attempt by the government to increase competition between the brewers, to lower the prices for the consumer and to dissuade drinkers from drinking spirits such as gin, which at that time was very cheap to buy.

Not surprisingly, the act resulted in new beerhouses opening. Many were no more than houses or cottages where the householder brewed beer at home. They were nothing like what we might think of today as an inn or “pub”. It is almost impossible to identify today where our local beerhouses might have been, although it is true that some which opened as a result of the 1830 Act might have gone on to become established public houses in the modern sense.

The Reading Mercury of April 1833 has a report concerning an unfortunate event which occurred at beerhouse in Enborne.

Apparently, two young men from East Woodhay, Samuel Pocock, a carpenter and Solomon Rose a labourer, were drinking in the beerhouse, the precise location of which is unidentified. Perhaps they had been drinking for too long, or perhaps the home-brewed beer was too strong, we shall never know, but things became very unpleasant when the subject came up of a young woman known to both men. Discussion turned to argument and argument would have turned into a fight there and then, but the owner of the beerhouse intervened to stop it.

Unfortunately, the two young men were reluctant to leave the matter there and it was agreed that they should fight it out. Consequently at 7 o’clock on the following Monday they met up.

Today, such a planned fight would seem to be nothing more than an extension of a drunken brawl. However, to put this event into its early nineteenth century context, it may be that the participants did not see themselves as brawling or being particularly disorderly.

Duelling, which is to say combat between two people using guns in order to settle a dispute, had not officially become illegal until 1819 although this had not prevented some continuation of the practice among the fire arm owning classes. As a form of entertainment, bare knuckle fighting was a popular sport amongst all classes and even between some women. There had been attempts to make “prizefighting” illegal but as matches were popular and constables of the newly formed police force thin on the ground, many prizefights went ahead, anyway.

Seen in this context, therefore, a fight following a disagreement in a beer house might have seemed to those involved to be a legitimate response – almost “sporting” perhaps.

The chosen venue was a field and the young men were accompanied by John Rose and Edward Pocock, presumably to see fair play.

The ensuing fight went on for a dozen rounds before Pocock hit Rose with a violent blow under his left ear. He was killed immediately.

An inquest was held and it was discovered that the blow had ruptured a blood vessel at the base of the victim’s brain and he had lost nearly a pint of blood.

Pocock was arrested and charged with manslaughter. John Rose and Edward Pocock were charged with aiding and abetting.

It was three months before the case came to Winchester Assizes and for Rose and the two Pococks, as well as for their families and friends back in East Woodhay, it must have been a very stressful time. Sentences available to a judge at this time included execution or transportation for life as well as imprisonment. Two years previously, William Winterbourn, from the nearby village of Kintbury, had been executed for his part in the Swing Riots and he had not killed anybody.

However, the judge’s decision might come as a bit of a surprise. According to the newspaper reports of the time,

“The learned judge, in addressing the prisoners, said that there did not appear to be anything unfair in the fight which had taken place in consequence of a quarrel and under such circumstances the offence did not call for severe punishment. Sometimes, persons went out to fight for money, and when that was the case, it should be known, that all persons who were present were equally guilty with those who were actually fighting. Taking all the circumstances into consideration, and that the prisoners had already been imprisoned for three months, the sentence of the Court was that they should pay a fine of 1 shilling and be discharged.”

So, in the opinion of the judge, the fight had not been unfair. Presumably it would have been considered that both men knew the risks they were taking and so Pocock was not held culpable for Rose’s death. Furthermore, no money had been involved, which, the judge had been at pains to point out, made all the difference.

Samuel Pocock returned to East Woodhay where, in 1841, he is living with his wife, Jane and their four children.

Was Jane the woman over whom Pocock and Rose were fighting? It has to be possible, although as Jane came from Great Bedwyn, a village in Wiltshire a few miles to the west, it is unlikely.

Though I can find no record of Edward Pocock after the tragic events of 1833, John Rose, the other witness to the fight, continued to live in East Woodhay with his wife Elizabeth and their family.

Was there any ill feeling between the Pocock and Rose family? We shall never know.

References & sources:

Photo: Pilot Hill, East Woodhay. Colin Park, Creative Commons

https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/

The Beerhouse Act 1830

Traditional Views & Challenging Opinions: Kintbury Men’s Fellowship of the 1950s

In the 1950s the church in Kintbury had a thriving Men’s Fellowship.

Now, as a mere woman, I would not have been able to attend these meetings, however the minute books were passed to me as a possible source of parish history.

The minutes make interesting reading – on the one hand they reflect an echo of earlier time, for example the home- grown entertainments at the Christmas Party could belong to the previous century, whereas the discussion of the Wolfenden Report into Homosexuality reflects a consideration of changing attitudes more associated with the 1960s. The minutes record several comments which reflect some opinions and values of the time and which would cause raised eye brows if expressed today.

I’ll begin by eavesdropping on the November meeting 1956. All, as the minutes say, were ‘seated in comfort, thanks to the vicar’s good offices’.

The talk was, as you might expect from a Christian fellowship, an exploration of the Bible. The speaker was Kintbury’s Mr. Sidney Inns (well- remembered by many of us). Sid, it says, probed with an historian’s knowledge into the early writings of the bible. So enjoyable and instructive was the talk that Sid had to promise a further contribution.

This meeting ended with plans being made for the Christmas Party, to which members could invite six people each, and a “Practical Day”, during which members would decorate the Parish Room. Finally the vicar drew attention to ‘Operation Firm Touch, a means of influencing adolescents back to church’ – so much for those who say that only this generation has deserted the pews.

The party was held in the Coronation Hall on 5^th January and seems to have been quite popular as approximately ninety people attended. Entertainment was provided by local people and included Mrs. Bailey and Mrs. Aldridge performing a sketch called ‘Over The Garden Wall’, The Kintbury Handbell Ringers, Gordon Perris singing a selection of popular songs, accordion players Geoff White and Miss Pat Reeves, and four ladies who, apparently, gave a hysterically funny performance of the play, ‘Mr. Macgregor comes to Tea’. Finally the Men’s Fellowship performed the ‘Berkshire Widdicombe Fair’. This last item was so popular that it was asked for over and again at different gatherings.

However, it is the next meeting that fascinates me most. The Vicar said that he really found it rather difficult to find a suitable bible passage for the topic under discussion. This does not surprise me for the topic was ‘Flying Saucer – Fact or Fiction’

A Mr. A.E. Jones proceeded to convince everyone present that flying saucers were not purely figments of the imagination but really existed. He explained that they had been observed in 1619 and now in 1956 a schoolmaster on the Yorkshire Moors had been confronted by a visitor from Mars and had experienced a strange feeling of peace almost as if the visitor was a deity. Mr. Jones produced other testimonies ranging from Norway to the USA and added the information that the saucers were reckoned to travel at 9000 miles an hour.

Not surprisingly after this stirring stuff the group returned to a safer subject, ‘The Drift From The Churches’. The minutes say that this was the first meeting in the redecorated Parish Room and maybe the brightness of the room demanded that the meeting be bright as it undoubtedly was. But was it safer than flying saucers – it was certainly a healthy discussion.

‘The Church in its capacity as the established church had backed the wrong horse probably due to tradition and the bowing to the demands of the wealthy section of the community, said Mr. Parry, the leader of the discussion.

This was most likely a controversial opinion to hold in the 1950s. Mr. Parry believed that 40 years ago a large number of poor people attended church regularly, thereby to gain spiritual salvation. Now one could only imagine that the lack of poverty had increased physical greatness with a consequent falling off in spiritual discipline.

Mr Parry was of the opinion that Sunday was now largely a family day, whereby most of the family could be together. No doubt the motor car and coach trip also accounted for absent seats at the local parish church. Further, Mr. Parry felt that a lot of people just didn’t seem to need the church.This provoked a very lively discussion and the majority of members present raised their voices and opinions regarding the apparent falling off and decline in church congregations.

The next talk was to be given by the vicar on ‘Church Architecture’ causing a Mr. O’Rourke to comment, ‘From Flying Saucers to Flying Buttresses’.

The meeting concluded with Mr. Palmer inviting members back to his home for cups of tea. Despite being newly decorated, the Parish Room did not have mod cons and refreshments could not be catered for.

A committee meeting in March brought forth suggestions for future gatherings. Some topics under consideration were of a seriously religious nature and included a Clarification of The Creed in Three parts, and a further two talks by the ever- popular Sidney Inns. However other suggestions were more topical and concerned contemporary issues such as, ‘Does the Welfare State Make for Better People?’, ‘Education Today,’ ‘Love Thine Enemy’, ‘Blood Sports’, ‘Local Government’, and ‘Trades Unions.’

It seems the men of Kintbury did not shirk from a subject because it might upset someone, put them off church, or create tensions. Lively debates took place and there was what might be called a ‘frank exchange of views’.

In March, 1957, the Bishop of Reading wrote to the Fellowship telling them of a meeting in Reading to be addressed by the Bishop of Coventry and titled, “Operation Firm Faith”. It was hoped that 2,000 men would attend although it seems that women were not invited.

In the event over 1,000 men turned up and were, apparently, held in the palm of the Bishop’s hand as he convinced them of the joy of being a Christian. Five points, he said, needed to be practised and the churches would be filled to over flowing. The points were Go Out, Stay Out, Think Out, Speak Out, Live Out.

This stirring meeting ended with the singing of Jerusalem and the minutes say that ‘words cannot describe the harmony of sound produced by so many male voices’.

There might also have been harmonious voices at the Annual General Meeting in May. It was a glorious evening and members set out to a private room in the Red House. There were abundant refreshments and a private bar. The title for the evening was; ‘Thirst after Righteousness’. The minutes record that, with regard to suggestions for the coming year, one suggestion, ‘Is beer our favourite beverage’? was no doubt prompted by the proximity of the beverage – the Red House was – and still is – a pub. The rest of the evening was devoted to general good will and the vicar soared to the heights of comedy by his presentation of Norfolk rustic life.

The following meeting was devoted to ‘Does the Welfare State make for Better People’? Speaking in favour, Mr. Cummings thought that education enabled people to choose their way of life rather than follow like sheep and be fearful of the consequences as happened in ‘the good old days’. Mr. Jones, opposing, felt that the Welfare State brought about a selfish outlook on life and mentioned that in eastern countries it was honourable to care for one’s parents in old age. The ensuing discussion was ‘most enlightening and many controversial facts were raised tho’ politics did not intervene.‘ It was thought that it would make interesting reading to have a similar discussion in fifty years time.

The spring of 1957 had seen the publication of the Wolfended Report which recommended that homosexual acts between two consenting adults should no longer be a criminal offence. At the time this was a contentious issues but the Men’s Fellowship did not shy away from it and the report was discussed at the April meeting. Question time produced many interesting items but they were evidently considered too risqué to record in the minutes. So what the men of the Kintbury Fellowship thought about this proposed change in the law, we shall never know.

January 1958 was devoted to a very touchy subject for a rural parish: Should Blood Sports be Abolished? Mr. Bob Sanders spoke about his boyhood in Devon and the damage that a stag and his harem can do to crops. Hunting, he said, was nature’s way of controlling vermin. Mr. R. Westcott proposed the motion and although secretly he agreed with hunting, from his vehemence one would have thought that all hunters and hounds should be boiled in oil. Hunting, he said, was a form of sadism in a civilised world. He ended by announcing that if the meeting voted to retain bloodsports they would all leave the meeting forever branded as sadists! Controversial stuff for a village.

Despite this ominous note members did condemn themselves by voting for retention which was probably not surprising

The following talk, once again by popular speaker Sidney Inns, was on a completely different – and much lighter – subject: Superstitions. Sidney explained the significance of different numbers and why horse shoes were considered to bring luck.

In May a touch of the exotic was introduced when Mr. Parry brought along his guest, Mr. Mohammed El Amin Ghabshawi, who was wearing the national costume of the Sudan. He explained the history of the Sudan and spoke with enormous enthusiasm about his country. The Sudanese government, he said, was friendly to all and welcomed foreign capital investment. It is rather sad in view of all that has happened since to read that the overall picture gained was that ‘here was a people who were striving in the right ways to improve their economy and by their general attitude to all other nations might very well attain a very high standard of living in the not too distant future.‘

The speaker in March 1959 was happy to express views that very few would concur with today. This was the era of apartheid in South Africa and the subject was inspired by a cutting from the Sunday Times in which the Prime Minister, Harold MacMillan, said that the South Africans were making a grave mistake in handling racial affairs.

The speaker, a Mr. Wallace, expressed some very controversial opinions which today would seem prejudiced and ill-informed. He said that he had not been in South Africa but he knew the Africans and had employed some of them on his farm. The word ‘freedom’ was being shouted by all Africans and they were becoming very unruly, in his opinion. He did not see what cause they had for shouting this as they had been given many freedoms. For example freedom from slaughter by other tribes and freedom from fear of being sold as slaves. He went on to say that he did not want any mixed race marriages and who really would? Africans, he believed, only understood harsh rulings and were much better off now than one hundred years ago all due to the whites.

Mr Wallace concluded by asking if anyone had any questions or comments. Mr. Inns then asked if witchcraft was still practised. Mr Wallace said that it was and that one of his farmworkers had died when cursed. He finished by saying that the proposed international boycott of South African goods was stupid.

The minutes do not record what the men of the Christian Fellowship thought about Mr Wallace’s hard line opinions.

Meetings continued into the early 1960s and Sidney Inns’ faith themed talks were still popular. In his next talk, Sid gave a brief description of four major religions in which he included – rather surprisingly – Mithraism along with Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam.

The recently published New English Bible – the New Testament of which had been published in 1961 – was, not surprisingly, a topic for discussion and the men were informed by a speaker that the new version was now listened to with more interest than the “King James” version of 1611.

These were the days before the Church of England updated its forms of service and the Book of Common Prayer of 1662 was the most frequently used. Opinions were expressed that the service of matins was very hard to understand particularly for the younger generation and a “Family Communion” in which all share would be easier to understand.

Other reforming ideas were discussed and during one of the periodic ‘Any Questions’ it was decided that it was a good idea, within certain limits, for priests to work side by side with factory workers and get the gospel to them that way. However, the right man ( no women priests back then, of course ) for the job must be found who should be very careful in his manner of approach.

Reforming suggestions continued to be discussed with the proposal – radical to some – that the appointment of a vicar to a living for life would no longer continue –led to a very lively discussion, opinions being divided more or less equally on most points.

Meetings continued throughout the 1960s. One topic that was perhaps surprising for a Christian fellowship was Psychic Research. Canon Harmon, vicar of Froxfield spoke about the nature of the mind, spirit, soul, telepathy and visions. Jesus, he believed, had psycho kinetic powers and examples of this were shown in His miracles. Canon Harmon was so interesting that he was invited back again and in his second visit gave examples of séances, materialisations and the return of departed spirits.

The Fellowship finally demised in the early seventies by which time some subjects under discussion had become a little more political. One of the last topics to be discussed was the war in Vietnam and the justification, or otherwise, of American intervention.

The Kintbury Men’s fellowship was obviously of its time. It is difficult to imagine that so openly racist views as held by Mr. Wallace in 1959 being allowed to go unchallenged today although the topic of bloodsports would still divide opinion. However, over sixty years later, “Does the Welfare State make for better people” might still prove to be a topic for an interesting debate.