Phoebe Palmer.

The Antiquary (Volume 31) online

. (page 34 of 67)
Online LibraryPhoebe PalmerThe Antiquary (Volume 31) → online text (page 34 of 67)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

who was a Judge of the Common Pleas (1408 to
1425), and settled at Shilston, near Modbury, in
Devon, where his descendants continued for several
generations (see Prince's Worthies of Devon). Robert
Hull of Spaxton, and Isabella Fychet, are mentioned
in the rent-roll of the cell of St. Mary's of the Marsh,
Exeter ; and Collinson describes a seal (to a deed
dated 4 Hen. IV.) bearing the legend " Sigillum
Roberti Hulle," and the arms of Hill and Fychet,
viz., " a saltire vaire between four mullets," and "a
lion rampant debruised by a bend."

5. Robert Hill of Spaxton (1 Hen. VI. ; iv. 70).
He was several times representative of the county in
Parliament, and in different years from 1408 down to
1422 was Sheriff of Somerset and Dorset. In the



Inquisitiones his wife's pro|>erty is detailed, with
many additions, chiefly in Devonshire and Cornwall ;
but the only entry which appears to give a clue to his

farentage is that of " a third part of the manor of
iilton, ' in the parish of Marhamchurch, North
Cornwall, held under the castle of Launceston. Now,
this manor was one of those possessed by Sir Robert
Tresilian, Chief Justice of the King's Bench, deposed
and executed for high treason February 19, 1388
(Foss.iv. 102); his property was confiscated, and Hilton
was acquired by Sir John Cobham, of Blackborough,
in Devon, and his son (Inq., iii. 100, 120, and 200).
Inquiry shows that it came to Robert Hill through
his wife, l'olwhele (Devon, ii. 258) states that on
the death of the Cobham heiress a dispute about the
estates arose between Sir William Bonvile on the one
side, and the descendants of three daughters of an
earlier John Cobham on the other, viz., Sir William
Bampfylde, Catherine Peverell (Lady Hungerford),
and Isabella Fychet (Hill). The latter were success-
ful as to some small part of the property, and divided
it between them. Another account will be found in
Lysons (Mag. Brit., vi.).

The arms on the seal described above are those
of Hill of Hill's Court, Exeter. This family is
somewhat vaguely said to have been long settled
there, and the Hills of Heligan, north of Bodmin,
in Cornwall, who bore the same arms, are called a
junior branch. The head of the family about Robert
Hill's time was Sir John Hill, a judge of the King's
Bench from 1389 to 1407 (Foss, iv. 170), who was
buried at St. John the Baptist's Hospital, Exeter, to
which he was a benefactor, and his two wives,
Dionisia and Matilda, were buried beside him.
His second wife appears to have been the widow of
Sir Henry Percehay, who died about 1385 (Foss, iv.
66). He and Sir John Hill held the manor of Tallaton,
east of Exeter, between them ; his share passed by
marriage to the Fraunceys of Combe Flory, in
Somerset, and Sir John's was sold by his descendant,
Maurice Hill, to the same family. No ,long time had
elapsed, for in 1457 Henry Fraunceys died possessed
of the whole manor (Inq., iv. 473). A grandson of
Sir Henry's is mentioned, who must have died before
1398, when the property was divided between distant
relatives who had married into the families of Warre
and Hele (Polwhele, ii. 270).

Dame Matilda married again, and died in 1416,
making her sons (or stepsons), John and Robert Hill,
her executors (Oliver's Monasticon D. Exon., p. 308).
The connection of Hill of Spaxton with Exeter
already noted, and others which follow, and the
identity of arms, seem to prove that our Robert Hill
was the son of the judge. It should be noted, on the
other hand, that Fuller, whose style prevents too
great reliance on his accuracy, gives (in his Worthies)
quite different arms to Robert Hill, viz., "Gules, a
chevron engrailed between three garbs or," which
resemble those granted in 1570 to the Hills of
Poundisford, Taunton, and borne also by the Hills
of Hilltop in Cornwall (see the Heralds' Visitations,
as printed by the Harleian Society). This latter
family exhibited a suspiciously complete pedigree,
reaching back to a Robert Hill "who came over
with the Conqueror," and showing also the derivation
of the Hills of Shropshire. Carew, writing about

1600, gives the same bearings to Mr. Otwell Hill,
" who deriveth himself from a family in Lancashire."
The arms of Hill of Shilston, it may be added, were:
" Argent, a chevron between three water bougets
gable." The pedigree of the Hills of Heligan, in the
Visitation, goes back a few generations only, but
according to the tradition in Lysons (Mag. Brit., iii.),
they were "descended from Sir John Hill of Kenston,
in Somerset, and married the heiresses of Fychet and
Fantleroy." This involves descent from Robert Hill
of Spaxton, who certainly held lands in Bodmin and
its vicinity, and to reconcile it with the tradition
already given (from Prince's Worthies) we must
suppose Sir John Hill of Kenston to be identical with
his namesake of Hill's Court. By Kenston perhaps
one of the Somerset Kingstons is meant, e.g., Kingston-
juxta- Yeovil. The arms borne by these families are
but a slight variation of those of the Champernowns,
pointing to marriage with some heiress of the latter
family, but I have found no clear evidence of such a
connection. Another family named Hull appears
prominently in connection with Exeter, during the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries ; in this case Hull
was not modified into Hill.

Robert Hill was succeeded by his son

6. John Hill of Spaxton (13 Hen. VI. ; iv. 160).
The patrimonial estates now appear greatly aug-
mented, and the list winds up with the offices of
" serjeant and bailiff of East Perret and Wells
Forum, and crier of the whole county " of Somerset.
The increase is chiefly in the eastern half of this
county Radstock, Wellesleigh, East Lydford, etc. ;
and on tracing this property back by aid of the In-
quisitiones, it is found to have been held previously by
William Banastre (19 Ric. II. ; iii. 188) and Philip
de Wellesleigh (22 Ed. III. ; ii. 144), and the
natural conclusion is that John Hill married the
heiress of William Banastre. This supplies a neces-
sary correction of Collinson, whose account, scattered
over various places (ii. 457, and iii. 196, 450), makes
a certain Sir John Hill (d. 15 Ed. III.) marry Joan,
daughter of William Banastre, and previously, at the
time of her father's death (19 Ric. II.), the wife of
William Alfoxton ; and from this marriage Robert
Hill of Spaxton was the issue. It is obvious that
the dates are hopelessly wrong (see No. 4 above) ;
but it may very well be that Robert Hill's father was
a Sir John Hill (viz., of Exeter), and that the
widowed Joan Alfoxton married a John Hill (viz., of
Spaxton), although the dates seem to prove that she
would be some twenty years older than her second
husband. Collinson in another place (iii. 542) men-
tions Cecilia (? Radington or Huish) as John Hill's
wife, and the manors of Radington and Lud Huish
appear in the list. She afterwards married Sir
Thomas Keryel of Westonhanger, near Dover, who
was executed by Queen Margaret after her victory at
St. Albans, February 17, 1461. She died in 1472
(12 Ed. IV. ; iv. 360) at a good old age, as appears
from her will (Nicolas's Testamenta Vetusta, p. 327).
John Hill left a son and heir

7. John Hill (proof of age, 24 Hen. VI. ; iv. 231 :
death, 34 Hen. VI. ; iv. 270). He is not described
as " of Spaxton," for a division of the property seems
to have taken place, by which his mother and his
sister Elizabeth divided the Somerset and part of the



Devonshire estates between them, and the former took
also a third of the remainder. As none of the Banastre
property went to the widow or son, Elizabeth must have
been the issue of her father's first marriage. John
Hill kept "two parts" of the manor of Inkpen (or
Westcourt), a little land at Fiddington, in Somerset,
and about two-thirds of the estates in Devon and Corn-
wall ; the only additions are some plots of land in
Exeter and East Devon. Except his marriage,
nothing seems known of his history ; a " Magister
Johannes Hylic, hospes noster," was buried at the
before-mentioned Hospital of St. John the Baptist at
Exeter. He married Margaret, daughter of Sir
Walter Rodney and his wife Margaret, the latter

chief) argent," for it would be only natural to indi-
cate the connection of the deceased with one of the
most prominent families of the time. As White
Waltham is so close to Windsor, where the King was
residing at the beginning of July, 1445, she may have
been on a visit to her courtier relatives.

Sir William Say, of Sawbridgeworth, Herts, son of
Sir John Say (d. 1478), was born about 1454, and
died December 4, 1529. He married (1) Genovefa
Hill, before 1474 ; and (2) Elizabeth, widow of Sir
Thomas Walgrave, of Smallbridge, Suffolk, by whom
he had two daughters. As this second marriage must
have taken place about 1485, the date usually given
for Sir T. Walgrave's death (1500) is incorrect. Sir

lirwirtgaipffla ijtiii WW tiK

qiirohjt^fiifuiniPJiiIiiaiinoMjgil \


[On a scroll at the top of the slab are the words tint mcrcj), and at the foot was also formerly another scroll

with the words JJituu hclpc]

being a daughter of the first Lord Hungerford. Mar-
garet Hill bore her husband a daughter, Genovefa,
who was afterwards married to Sir William Say, but
died without issue. In the chancel of the church of
"White Waltham, halfway between Windsor and
Henley, is a small brass over the burial-place of
14 Margaret Hille, wife of John Hille, who died
July 12, 1445." ^y tne kindness of the Rev. H. M.
Dyer, I have received a " rubbing " of it. The head
and the armorial bearings (if there were any) have
been broken off, and the only significant thing about
it appears to be the black girdle studded with three
bright discs (or, rather, two whole ones and two
halves). These may be a suggestion of the Hunger-
ford arms : " Sable, two bars and three plates (in

William retained the Hill property till his death, on
which it was divided among the descendants of the

8. Elizabeth Hill. She married John Cheney of
Pinhoe, Exeter, mentioned as "my son" in Dame
Keryel's will. They had a son, John, who left four
daughters, co-heiresses, viz., Mabel, who married
Edward Waldegrave, of Suffolk, an ancestor of Earl
Waldegrave and Lord Radstock, and seems to have
come into possession of the bulk of the Hill property ;
Helena, who was married to George Babington ;
Elizabeth, to William Clopton ; and Anne to Robert
Ilussey, of Lincolnshire. In the Inquisitiones a
Ralph Hill, a landless man, appears (15 Ed. IV. ;
iv. 369), and Robert Hill of Houndston is registered



also (9 Hen. VII. ; iv. 478) ; but there is nothing to
show that either of these was connected with the
Hills of Spaxton.

Collinson's account of the matter is, however, far
from accurate. Elizabeth Hill married John Cheney,
of Pinhoe, the younger son of Sir William Cheney, of
Up Ottery, and Cecily, daughter and co heir of Sir
John and Catherine Stretch, of Pinhoe ; he was
endowed with his mother's inheritance (Polwhele, ii.
185). There were at least two children of the
marriage, John and Agnes. The latter married
Edward Stawel, of Cothelstone, near Taunton, while
her brother married Alice Stawel. By this alliance
he had two daughters, co-heirs Elizabeth (or Isabel
or Mabel) and Joan.

Elizabeth Cheney married Edward Walgrave, second
son of Sir Thomas : a full pedigree will be found in
Burke's Peerage. Dame Keryel bequeathed to Isabel
Cheney, in view of her marriage, 100 marks and a

Joan married Thomas Say, of Liston, in Essex, a
younger brother of Sir William. They had four
children, viz., a son William, who died without issue
in 1508, and three daughters

Anne, married to (Sir) Robert Hussey, apparently
the second son of Sir William Hussey, the judge ;
their son and heir was Thomas. The meagre account
in Burke's Extinct Baronetages does not mention him,
but "Thomas Hussey of Essendon" is given as the
husband of Mary Bourne in the Essex Visitation (p.

Elizabeth, wife of William, younger son of Sir
William Clopton, of Kentwell, in Suffolk. She
brought Liston to her husband, and they and their
descendants lived there for about two centuries.
William Clopton is mentioned as the steward and
confidential agent of Henry Bourchier, Earl of Essex ;
their wives were first cousins.

Another Anne (or Elizabeth) seems to have been
the third daughter, but the matter is by no means
clear. She married a John Elys, and their daughter
and heir Helen married (before 1533) a George
Babington. I have not been able to find anything
further about them. The authorities for these state-
ments are Clutterbuck's Hertfordshire, iii. 193-8 ;
Visitations of Essex (Harl. Soc.) ; and Dr. Brewer's
Calendar of Letters, etc., Henry VIII., iv. 1298; v.
278 (34), 3i8 (6) ; vi. 578 (36).

Another part of the inquiry is opened by Collin-
son's statement (i. 89) that Sir John Malet, eldest
son of Sir Baldwin Malet, of Enmore {circa 1400),
married Joan, daughter of John Hill of Exeter,
combined with the statement of Prince ( Worthies of
Devon) and Polwhele that a daughter of the family
of Hill of Hill's Court, Exeter, married a Sir John
Malet of Enmore, and so closed the separate history
of her house. The exigencies of chronology seem to
show us that Sir John Hill's eldest son, John (see
No. 5), had a daughter, Joan, who became his heiress,
and considering that her uncle Robert was settled
at Spaxton, a match with his neighbour at Enmore
does not seem improbable. Collinson goes on to
say that Sir John Malet, who died before his father,
left an only daughter, Eleanor, who married Sir John
Hull. Sir Edward Hull, his son, Sheriff of Somerset
in 1438, 1443, an d 1448, was certainly living at
Enmore in 1442, when Bekynton (afterwards Bishop

of Wells) turned out of his way in order to consult
with him {Letters, Rolls Series, ii. 177). He seems
to have been much trusted by the King and his chief
ministers, and was killed, along with the great Earl
of Shrewsbury, in the attempt to relieve Chastillon
(near Bordeaux) in 1453; but the Inquisitio (32
lien. VI. ; iv. 262) states that he " neither holds
nor held " any land in Somerset, and another son of
Sir Baldwin Malet soon appears as the possessor of
Enmore (5 Ed. IV. ; iv. 329).

Dame Eleanor Hull was still living in 1455 (Rolls
of Par It., v. 313). Sir Edward is described in the
catalogue of sheriffs as "of Child Ockford." The
county historians (Hutchins' Dorset, iii. 707; iv. 77)
relate that Catherine, the daughter and heir of Sir
Robert Hull, of Child Ockford and East Pulham, in
Dorset, and Estoket (in Stoke, near Veovil), in
Somerset, married Sir Robert Latimer, of Duntish,
near Buckland Abbas (d. 1361). She had a brother
Robert, but nothing more is said of the family. Her
son, another Robert Latimer, married the widow of
Sir John Hill, of Exeter. The arms of these Hulls
were: "Or, a bull passant, labelled argent," and
however obscure their history may be, it is not un-
reasonable to conjecture that they may be the main
stock whence came the Hills of Houndston and of
Poundisford ; of Exeter, Spaxton, and Heligan ; and
perhaps of Shilston also. Houndston is near Estoket,
and the constant recurrence of Robert as a Christian
name cannot be overlooked. Robert Hill of Hounds-
ton (d. 1492) had property at Kingston-in-Yeovil. I
have not yet been able to use a reference to a memoir
of Sir Edward Hull by Sir H. Nicolas (Journal, p.
lxxii), which might settle some of these questions.

It may be added for completeness that Sir John
Malet had another daughter named Joan, who was
the first wife of Sir John Luttrell, of Dunster (d. 1431),
but died childless. See Savage's Carhampton.

The above may be conveniently summarized thus :

Sir John Hill (or Hull), who was Judge of the
King's Bench 1389 to 1407, married (1) Dionisia
and (2) Matilda, widow of Sir H. Percehay, and after-
wards the wife of Sir Robert Latimer ; and had issue
(by the first wife) :

(1) John Hill of Exeter, whose daughter and
heir, Joan, married Sir John Malet of Enmore (near
Bridgewater), and their daughter, Eleanor, married
Sir John Hull, but died without surviving children.

(2) Robert Hill of Spaxton (not to be confused
with his contemporary, Robert Hill of Shilston, d.
1425), who married Isabella Fychet, a great heiress.
Their son, John, married (1) Joan, widow of William
Alfoxton, and daughter and heiress of William
Banastre of Radstock ; and (2) Cecilia (? Radington
or Huish), who survived him, and was afterwards
married to Sir Thomas Keryel. He had two children,
John and Elizabeth, whose fortunes are narrated above
(Nos. 7 and 8).

I trust that some of your readers may be able and
willing to correct and supplement this account.

J. Brownbill.

To intending Contributors. Unsolicited MSS.
will always receive careful attention, but the Editor
cannot return them if not accepted unless a fully
stamped and directed envelope is enclosed. To this
rule no exception will be made.



The Antiquary.

JULY, 1895.

jRotes of t6e e^ontf).

The annual meeting of the Archaeological
Institute will be held, as previouslyannounced,
at Scarborough, from July 16 to the 23rd
inclusive, under the presidency of the Arch-
bishop of York. The arrangements for the
meeting are briefly as follows : Tuesday,
July 16, opening of the meeting, after which
the castle and St. Mary's Church will be
visited. Wednesday, 17th, Bridlington and
Burton Agnes, Thursday, 18th, Whitby.
Friday, 19th, Beverley. Saturday, 20th, Old
Malton and Kirkham. Monday, 22 nd,
Helmsley and Rievaulx. Tuesday, 23rd,
Pickering and Lastingham. An extra day
will be devoted on Wednesday, July 24, to
York, where the numerous parish churches
will be visited, most of which contain fine
painted glass. Professor Boyd-Dawkins will
be President of the Antiquarian Section, and
Sir George Sitwell, Bart., President of the
Historical Section. We trust that the meeting
will prove in every respect a success.


The British Archaeological Association is to
hold its annual congress at Stoke-upon-Trent,
under the presidency of the Duke of Suther-
land. The meeting will open on August 1 2,
but at the time of going to press we have
not received a detailed programme of the

$ $ $
The ancient " mercat " cross of the burgh
of Tain has been recently re-erected, in a
central position, near the Court House in
that town. Discarded and thrown aside, the
vol. xxxi.

base of the cross was found, nine years ago,
lying uncared for in a field near the town.
The Rev. E. Thoyts, at that time in charge
of the Episcopal chapel at Tain, secured the
old stone, and placed it for safety in the chapel
yard. The amusing part of the story is that
in re-erecting the cross the burghal authorities
blandly announced to the public that the
pedestal had been "kindly surrendered by
the trusteesof the Episcopal Church." Where-
upon the secretary of the Episcopal Church
at once wrote to say, that although the
trustees would have been most willing to
have handed over the stone for the purpose,
the opportunity for doing so was not given
to them, as the churchyard was surreptitiously
entered, and the stone removed without
permission being asked or given. All is well
that ends well, and it is a good thing that
the cross has been replaced in its old position.
They manage these things, however, in an
odd sort of way at Tain.

The council of the Yorkshire Archaeological
Society has issued a circular dealing with the
subject of a Photographic Survey of the
County. In doing this the council has drawn
up the following rules for the guidance of
intending contributors : " 1. It should always
be the aim of the photographer to show the
details of the object taken, rather than to
present a pleasing picture by attempting to
include effective surroundings. 2. A build-
ing should be taken from all its sides, or
from as many points of view as are necessary
to show the whole of it, and if it possesses
any special feature, such as a doorway or
window, or a fireplace in the interior, these
should be taken separately. 3. On the back
of each view should be written in pencil the
name of the object shown, its aspect, the
name of the ecclesiastical parish within which
it stands, and the Riding. For example
Longacre Hall, doorway in north side, parish
of Dale, West Riding. 4. The views should
be of half-plate size, and should be printed
by bromide, platinum, or carbon process.
They should in all cases be sent unmounted.
Although the society requests compliance
with the above rules as far as possible, yet
photographs of other sizes, or printed by
different processes, would not necessarily on
that account be declined."

2 c



We are afraid that these rules are a little too
stringent, and that an appeal for photographs
of antiquities in general, without reference
to their size or the method of printing, would
be preferable. The society would do well
to endeavour to obtain photographs of
churches and other antiquities prior to their
" restoration " or demolition. Photographs
are still obtainable of many old churches and
buildings, now destroyed. These should be
collected at once before it is too late to do so.

jjp cjjp

In regard to what we recently said as to
assistance being sought from the national
exchequer in this matter, Mr. W. P. W.
Phillimore writes to us as follows : " In your
May number you deal with the proposed
photographic survey of Berkshire, and suggest
that the various antiquaries should combine
to get the Government to give assistance
from the national exchequer. Will you allow
me to protest strongly against the proposal ?
I keenly appreciate the desirability of such
photographic surveys, but apart from the
general question whether it is right that
antiquaries should dip their hands into other
people's pockets, i.e., the national exchequer,
I have no wish to see this useful proposal
put into Government leading-strings, even
though they be of the decorative red tape
order. The woik will be better done by
private enterprise, and long before Govern-
ment has come to a decision to begin, a
great part of the work will have been done.
Don't let us whine for help, but let us set
about it, and with the advocacy of magazines
like the Antiquary we shall see that in the
course of a few years the zeal of amateur
photographers and local archaeological societies
will have done most of the work. See
what is in hand already : Warwickshire and
Gloucestershire have started, and probably
others. In my own parish of Chiswick there
are some active photographers who are hard
at work on a definite plan for that neighbour-
hood. May I suggest that the Antiquary
should open a special column to record the
progress of this class of antiquarian work ?"

J 'J?

The subject is one, like all others, with much
to be said on either side. We see no reason,
however, for altering our own opinion. Anti-
quarian research has long ago passed out of
the condition of being a mere hobby, and

has taken its place among the other sciences.
There appears to us little difference in
principle between the Government supporting
the British Museum or the Record Office,
as well as publishing the Calendars of State
Papers and other volumes on the one hand,
and, as we suggest on the other hand, sub-
sidizing or undertaking an archaeological
photographic survey of the country, some-
what after the method of the French Com-
mission des Monuments Hi>toriques. The
English Government has already concluded
a topographical survey ; it is engaged upon
a geological survey, and has recently sub-
sidized a magnetic survey of the country.
Why should it not also assist, or undertake,
an archaeological survey (aided by photo-
graphy) as well? There need be no red
tape about it. We feel that in this matter
foreign countries manage better than we do.
At any rate, the subject is well worthy of
careful and dispassionate consideration on
the part of antiquaries. Antiquaries would
be no more dipping their hands into other
people's pockets than geologists, astronomers,
or the rest do. Why should we alone have
to conduct all our excavations, inquiries, and
other work at our own expense, unaided
from the national exchequer? We confess
that so far we have seen nothing to make
us alter our opinion that pecuniary assistance

Online LibraryPhoebe PalmerThe Antiquary (Volume 31) → online text (page 34 of 67)