« PreviousContinue »
one gallon of ale; in the afternoon, one manchet and one gallon of ale; and for after supper one chet loaf, one manchet, one gallon of ale, and a pitcher of wine, besides torches, faggots, and other necessaries. But a countess was allowed nothing at all after supper, and a gentleman usher had no allowance for the morning or afternoon. As, however, “Bouche of Court" was in addition to the excellent meals provided for everyone at the King's table, no one had cause to complain.
The miscellaneous offices in the palace, connected with the provisioning, housekeeping, furnishing and cleaning departments, with all their officers and attendants, were each similarly subject to a series of distinct regulations, and owned their separate local habitations. Various as these offices had been in Wolsey's time, they were still more
now that the whole royal establishment had to be accommodated within the building ; so that, as we have already mentioned, they were enlarged and extended by Henry VIII. as soon as he came into possession of Hampton Court. Not only do we hear, therefore, of the great kitchens, privy kitchen, cellar, larder, pantry, buttery, scullery, ewery, saucery, wafery, which had formed part of the Cardinal's establishment, but particulars occur, also, of the King's new kitchen, the fish kitchen, the chawndry, pastry, confectionery, squillery, sellery, spicery, poultry, accatry, washing house, scalding house, boiling house, pitcher house, still house, coal house, fish house, feather house, hot house, jewel house, pay house, counting house, check house, victualling house, store house, almonry, etc. Nearly all these, with their appurtenances, and with dwelling chambers annexed for the officers, clerks, and yeomen of the same, were situated behind the first three courts on the north side, and formed the long range of irregularly-gabled buildings, inclosing several small picturesque courtyards, which extend nearly the whole length of the palace.
To attempt to identify the exact position of each of them now, after they have been so much transformed, would lead us into an almost hopeless archæological puzzle; but a careful survey of these purlieus would still afford considerable interest to the curious antiquary, and enable him to recall much of the domestic economy of the Tudor Court. The
positions of the three great kitchens, at any rate, can be easily identified, and their forms and dimensions followed out and mentally discriminated from the many walls, partitions, and living rooms which have been built up into them. One of them, indeed, remains almost exactly in its pristine state. It is 40 feet long by 28 feet wide, and, to the apex of the open-raftered roof, 40 feet high; and looking on its lofty mullioned windows, its great arched fireplaces, 7 feet high and 18 feet broad, where many an ox has been roasted whole, and its hatches or dressers, on which the dishes were placed, abutting on the serving place, our minds are forcibly recalled to the grandeur and profusion of Tudor hospitality.
The serving place itself, also, is at once recognized by the external framework of the dressers, which communicate with the kitchens and other offices whence the dishes were brought up the backstairs of the hall to the royal table.
The accommodating of so vast and varied an assemblage as the whole of the King's Court and household, necessitated at the same time the enlarging of several other parts of the palace. This was especially the case with Wolsey's hall, which, though doubtless a fine and spacious room enough, yet did not satisfy Henry's regal requirements and more gorgeous taste. Accordingly, two months before the Cardinal's death—namely, in October, 1530—we find that the workmen were already employed in unroofing and pulling down the old hall, and laying the foundations of the “King's New Hall.” The whole size and proportions of the new hall were to be on a scale of grandeur and magnificence suitable to a place which had now become one of the King's favourite residences.
And here again arises the question, which we have before discussed in connection with Wolsey's original foundation of Hampton Court, as to who was the architect employed by Henry VIII. in the erection of these additional buildings. Britton, in his work on "Architectural Antiquities," makes mention of one Eustace Mascall, who, he tells us, was for seventeen years chief clerk of accounts for all the buildings of Henry VIII. within twenty miles of London, and whose name he inserts, apparently on that ground alone, in his list of mediæval architects, though he cannot venture to specify any of his works. Mascall certainly appears in nearly all the
WHO WAS HENRY VIII.'S ARCHITECT?
Hampton Court bills, as acting in the capacity of clerk of the works here for the King; and the inference that he probably prepared the designs for Henry VIII's works, if not also for Wolsey's, might seem to derive considerable colour from the fact that he was always employed as the Cardinal's clerk of
the works at his college at Oxford, to the style and details of which Hampton Court bears, in many particulars, a very close resemblance—the halls indeed being almost exact counterparts.
With more warrant, perhaps, though by no means with any certainty, we may give the credit of the architectural excellences of the old Tudor Palace to "Mr. Henry Williams,
priest, surveyor of the works at Hampton Court,” in whose presence the payments were made every month, “by the hands of the Right Reverend Father in God, Prior of Newark, Paymaster of the same." Williams's duties, at any rate, must have involved a considerable supervision of details, at a time when every workman was an artist, and the functions of architect, builder, and artisan were not so distinct as they are at the present day. And if it could be shown that he was also surveyor for the erection of the hall at Christ Church, the inference that his office was tantamount to that of architect would be pretty strong.
The resolve of Henry VIII. to make Hampton Court one of the most superb of the palaces belonging to the Crown, led him to secure the fee simple of the manor, which, it will be remembered, had been leased by the Knights Hospitallers to Wolsey for a term of ninety-nine years. An agreement, therefore, was concluded on the 30th of May, 1531, between the King and Sir William Weston, prior of the order, for the granting to his Majesty of the manor of Hampton Court, in exchange for other messuages; and on the 5th of June following, the grant was formally executed. This fact is to be noted, as it has hitherto been stated that the reversion came into the King's hands by arbitrary seizure on the suppression of the monastic orders, when their property was confiscated to the Crown.
Throughout the years 1531, 1532, and 1533, scores of workmen and artificers of all sorts were engaged on the building of the Hall, as Henry was anxious for its immediate completion; and the works were pressed on with the greatest activity. Curious evidence of this is afforded by entries in the old bills of “ Emptions of tallow candles spent by the workmen in the night times upon the paving of the Hall, for the hasty expedition of the same," and of extra payments to bricklayers, masons, carpenters, carvers, painters, and gilders for “working in their owre tymys (hour or over times) and drinking times for the hasty expedition of the same.” The King besides gave orders for pressing workmen to be employed on the royal works, and Edward Arnold, mason, received a special commission "to rest (i.e., arrest) and take up freemasons,” and Edmund More "to rest and take up carvers," with the same object.