Proc Hampsh Field Club Archaeol Soc, 49 , 1993, 207-227

NETLEY ABBEY: MONASTERY, MANSION AND RUIN

Ay J O H N HARE

ABSTRACT

jVetley Abbey was the youngest of Hampshire's monasteries, but with the exception of those whose churches are. still used, its buildings survive more completely than those of any other. When, however, Henry VIII dissolved the abbey in 1536, a new and important phase began for the abbey buildings, which were now to re-emerge as a great Tudor mansion. Even when this phase had ended and tfie. buildings had become ruined, they continued to be influential. As a romantic ruin in the later eighteenth century, jVelley was to be a source of interest and inspiration to many of the writers of the lime, labels produced sonnets and odes and the name of Netley Abbey found its way onto the plqybilb ofljtndon and into the hands of the novel-reading public of Germany, France and America. In this varied history, Netley has reflected many of the developments of 600 years in Hampshire and beyond.

MONASTERY

Netley Abbey owed its foundation to Peter desRoches, bishop of Winchester (1205-38) and a major political figure during the reigns of KingsJohn and Henry III . As bishop of one oT therichest dioceses in Chr is tendom and as animportant influence on royal policy, he was a manof considerable wealth, and some of this wasapplied to religious uses. He had already foundedthree monasteries and a friary when, towards theend of his life, he became increasingly interestedin the Cistercian order. His heart was to be buriedat Waverley Abbey, Surrey, in the first of theCistercian houses and he planned to create twoCistercian houses, one in France, at la ClarteDieu, and one in England. It was the latter thatwas to become Netley.

The Cistercian order was one of the attemptsthat emerged in Europe in the eleventh century toreform monasticism along stricter moredisciplined lines. The monks would be engaged inmanual work, as well as thought and prayer, withsimpler buildings and music, and in remote sites

isolated from the temptation of the rest of theworld. The order had aroused immenseenthusiasm, and spread rapidly in England afterthe foundation of the first English house, that ofWaverley, in 1128. Its strictness and the simplicityof its life appealed both to those who wished todedicate themselves to the monastic life and, withits cheapness and spiritual enthusiasm, to thosepatrons who were contemplating founding a newmonastery. Netley was one of the last of theCistercian houses to be founded in England, andbelongs to a small group of monasteries settled inthe thirteenth century from the great new royalfoundation of Beaulieu in Hampshire, founded byKing John in 1203.

The history of the abbey's early years has nowbeen placed on a firm basis by CAF Meekings,upon whose article the next three paragraphshave been based (Meekings, 1981). Peter desRoches had died in 1238, before the foundationof his new abbey in the following year. Thesetting up of the monastery was thus the work ofhis executors, the commissioner abbots appointedby the Cistercian order (those of Q u a r r andWaverley). and the abbot of the motherhouse,Beaulieu. King Henry also helped, or did nothinder the process, and subsequently claimed tobe the founder of the monastery. Bishop Petermay have sought to gain the king's support withthe dedication of the new monastery, which wasgiven to Henry Ill's favourite saint, King Edwardthe Confessor, the abbey being called the abbey ofSt Mary of Edwardstow, or the place of StEdward. The new monastery would need lands toprovide it with an annual revenue: these camefrom the purchase from two main sources. Frenchmonasteries who had been given lands inEngland, part icularly after the N o r m a nConquest, found it attractive to sell these nowthat the English kings had lost most of theirFrench lands and a return of English control inFrance seemed unlikely. Secondly, gentry

208 HAMPSHIRE HELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Figl I lie- , i l ) l )c \ i h u n h the west

suffering from financial difficulties sold land tothe bishop or his executors. The endowment wascertainly not lavish, and the bishop's death mayhave been a cause of this. Netley was less wellendowed than his earlier foundations atHalesowen and Titchfield, al though notcompared with that of Selbournc. The abbey alsoneeded a site for itself, and one that wassufficiently remote to fit in with the demands ofthe Cistercian order. There was the village ofHound nearby but that was all. Then, though notnow, Netley, or Letley as it was also called.seemed a sensible choice; it was cut off from theworld by the woodland and heathland on itslandward side and by the sea elsewhere.

According to the Waverley chronicle, themonastery began in 1239, although its buildingshad not yet commenced, the site of Netley beingacquired in 1240-1. By 1245, the community was

well enough entrenched for its abbot to beappointed by the General Chap te r of theCistercian order to take part in the foundation ofXewenham Abbc\ in Devon. Initialk there islittle evidence of Henry III taking any interest inthe development of the abbey. The turning point,alter which the king became more interested,seems to have been the decision by his brotherRichard, carl of Cornwall , to found a newCistercian house at Hailes in Gloucestershire in1242-3 . Henry also could be a Cistercianfounder, but with the minimum cost. By 1244, hewas calling himself Netley's founder, or at leastone of the founders, and in 1251 he claimed soleresponsibility. In 1244 he ordered the grant of£100 'for the foundation of the church, whereofthe king wishes to lay the first stone as founder'.His name and title can still be seen carved onone of the foundation stones for the crossing of

MARK: NETLEYABBEY: MONASTERY, M \\M<>\ \ \ l ) RUIN 209

Fig 2. The south transept from the nortli-ursi

the monastic church. His generosity, however,seems to have been rather less than this mightsuggest. He did not give it any land until 1252-3,when he gave it an uncultivated area of three

roi) in the New Forest. His financial grants to theabbey and its buildings may, moreover, haveincluded money owed to Peter des Roches andfrom the vacant bishopric of Winchester. It thus

hundred acres at Roydon (the King's gift or don du seems more appropiate, while accepting a role for

2 1 0 HAMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB AND VRCHAEOLOGU AL SOCIETY

Henry in the construction of the buildings, to seedes Roches as the founder of the abbey.

Initially, the monks would probably haveoccupied temporary wooden accomodation, andthis and the more permanent buildings wouldhave begun by 1241. The latter buildingsprobably began in the east part of the site,including the sacristry, chapterhouse anddormitory. The foundation of the abbey churchprobably began in the period 1244-46, with thelatter year more likely. By 1251, substantialquantities of lead were ordered by the king for theabbey and he also granted 30 oaks, all for thechurch. The king made further grants of cash andtrees in the following year, and in the beginningof 1253 he gave a silver gilt processional cross. Allthis suggests thai during these years major roofingwas underway and that by 1253 substantial partsof the abbey church were operational (Meckings,

1981, 24-32). Architecturally these would haveincluded parts of the eastern a rm, but notnecessarily the easternmost window.

The plan of the transepts and choir, with thesquare ended and aisled eastern arm, showed thestandard design of English Cistercian churchbuilding from the early thir teenth centuryonwards (Coldstream, 1986, 145-8). Its planbears little relation to the grand chevet ofradiating chapels at its mother house,neighbouring Beaulieu, but it does showCistercian influence. Here should be noted thesimple plainness of the architecture, and the useof two storeyed design with the middle triforiumgallery having shrunk into a wall passage, withinthe clerestory or upper window storey (Fig 3),such as was also used at Tintern and Fountains(Coldstream, 1986, 150). Contrasting with thissimplicity and with the lancets of the choir and

I••••

Fig 3. The south transept and dormitory range from the south-west.

HARK: NETLEY ABBEY: MONASTERY. MANSION AND RUN 211

transept, and the plate tracery of the reredorterundercroft, is the tracery of the large east windowwhich shows the influence of Henry 's owngreatest architectural patronage: at WestminsterAbbey which he had begun to rebuild in 1246(Colvin, 1963, 141). Here the work ischaracterised by deep complex filleted mouldings,purbeck marble capitals and grooves for holdingthe window glass. This change may represent a halt in work or wholesale reappraisal of thedesign in the course of its construction. It maysimply represent the King's desire as patron thatat least the great east end should reflect the newstyle of building that was being developed atWestminster, rather than the more traditionalstyle of the rest of the building. The west entranceof the chapter house also shows the features ofthis new work suggesting an early remodelling ofthe cast range of the cloisters.

For the rest of the church the design providesour only dating evidence. Structurally, the naveseems to have post-dated the north wall of thecloister, although the south aisle existed from anearly date. The north aisle and the final completion of the nave would seem to belong tothe later thir teenth century. The eastern ordormi tory range was probably amongst theearliest buildings on the site, and probably thesouth range went with this. Not enough of thewest range remains to provide any specific datingfor its original buildings. It would appear thatwithin little more than about half a century, theabbey buildings had achieved their completedplan. It was a typical later Cistercianarrangement, with the dining hall or refectorybuilt at right angles to the adjacent cloister walk,by contrast to those of other monastic orderswhere the dining hall was usually built parallel tothe cloisters. The chapter house was also fullyintegrated into the eastern range. One of thepeculiarities of plan is the isolated building to theeast of the abbey with identical grouping of roomson the first and second floors. Whether thisrepresented the abbot's house or a building forspecial guests is unclear, but it has been referredto by the former title.

The re are very few indications of buildingworks after the original construction. This maynot necessarily reflect a lack of any building

activity for, as elsewhere, such alterations orinternal remodelling may well have left noevidence after the conversion to a country house,the subsequent removal of such alterations, and a period of decay. The only surviving evidence ofany major building programmes in the monasticchurch is provided by a nineteenth centuryillustration of the east window suggesting theaddition of stone vaulting in the choir (Sharpe,1848) and the remains of the vaulting of the southtransept. The latter probably belonged to thefifteenth century, and the springers for thevaulting may still be seen (Fig 4). Some of the ribsof the vault in the S. transept survived until thenineteenth century. Within the conventualbuildings, there was a remodell ing of thedormitory undercroft or the day room in the mid-fourteenth century, when new windows wereinserted, and in the west range the demise of thelay brothers probably led to rebuilding, and theaddition of a new room.

Little is known of the internal life of themonastery, for it is not well documented. Fromthe fifteenth century come two notebooks offinancial jott ings of receipts and expendi ture(PRO S C 6 / 1 2 5 8 / 1 1 ; S C 1 2 / 1 4 / 6 4 ) and someestate records, but this is little and late. Thesurviving remains would have only been part of a bigger complex of monastic life. None of theouter buildings which would have provided thehospitality, the workshops and the stores survive.At neighbouring Beaulieu such workshops arewell documented and range from the tanner andthe parchment maker to the forge and thebakehouse (Beaulieu Account Book). Someunidentified buildings have been located. Thebuildings would have been enclosed by theprecinct bank and ditch that ran round the site,nearby was the home farm and the three fish ponds that provided fresh fish, while water waschannelled from springs nearby (Kell, 69; Currie,1988, 271; idem, 1989,21).

The surviving monastic buildings suggest thatthe completion of the abbey was rapid, and on a substantial scale. Its abbot was summoned toparl iament in 1295, 1296, 1300 and 1302,suggesting an important status, that may havederived from a perception of being a royalfoundation. But despite the royal patrons, it was

212 II W I I ' S I I I R I ; FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Fig 4. The south transept: the remains of the later vaulting,

insufficiently endowed, small and continually indifficulties (Hockey, 1976, 95). In 1328 it had atleast 15 monks and at the end in 1536 it possessedseven, although the population of England haddeclined on a comparable scale during thisperiod. Its poor endowment was reflected in thetax assessment of 1291, when its income wasassessed at £S\ 2s (VCH, 147; Taxatio Ecclesiastica Papae Nicholai). It was by no means the poorest ofthe Hampshire monasteries, but it was certainlyamong the poorer ones. Nor did matters improvein the course of its existence. It acquired somemore land, but in the 1330's had to part withsome of its properties {VCH, 147). When HenryVIII carried out his assessment of the value ofchurch property in the Valor Ecclesiaslicus, theannual income of the abbey was assessed at £10012s 8d placin among the poorest of the CistercianHouses in England. Even the more generous

assessment a year later of £181 2s 81 2d. (PROS C I 2 / 3 3 / 2 7 ) , still placed it among the lessermonasteries.

The abbey was poorly endowed and, for muchof its life, there remains little survivingdocumentation. For the first half of its existence,the evidence must necessarily be supplemented bythat of other Cistercian Houses and particularlyof the neighbouring but larger and richer motherhouse of Beaulieu. Fortunately there still survivesfrom the latter, a remarkable set of early accounts,which provide an incomparable picture of therunning of a Cistercian estate (Account Book ofBeaulieu Abbey; Hockey, 1976, 56-73). From thebeginning the Cistercian monks were helped by a group of lay brothers or conversi, men subject tothe monastic discipline but whose prime task wasto cultivate the estate or run the workshops: theself-sufficiency of the monastery could thus be

HARE:.: NEi'1'l.KY ABBEY: MONASTERY. MANSION AND RUIN 213

maintained while freeing the monks to devotethemselves more fully to prayer, study and theservice of god, although manual work was alsoincluded. Accommodation for such lay brotherswould be provided in the west claustral range.This range has largely disappeared at Netley, butthe former presence of the lay brothers here isindicated by the surviving access doorway fromtheir quarters into the west end of the church.Normally, the estates were cultivated by creatinglarge farms or granges which could be operatedby the lay brothers, supplemented by paid labour.On Netley's estate there were granges at Netley,Wellow, Roydon and Gomshall (Surrey) (Taxatio EccUsiasUca Papae Mcholai), but we know little morethan this. On diat of Beaulieu, there were a groupof granges around the abbey and another aroundFaringdon in Berkshire. For Beaulieu, we haveboth documentation and some of the survivingbuildings of these granges, which as at St Leonardand Great Coxwell, reflect the wealth and largescale of their agricultural activities. The accountsthere show the activity of diese lay brothers, andtheir regular return to the abbey itself. But fromthe beginning, Nedey also held other lands withan existing settlement and agriculturalorganization, with a manor that included a mixture of the monastic farm (as previouslycultivated by its lay owner) and of the landcultivated by the tenants. Such manors continuedto be operated in their traditional way. Duringthe thirteenth century, both Netley and Beaulieucontributed to the expansion of cultivation seen inthis period, and were particularly involved in thecolonisation into the woods and wastes of theNew Forest. Thus Henry's gift of Roydon, sawNetley converting the heath and scrub to a grange, and arable and livestock farming.

It is only in the fifteenth century that we canbegin to see the functioning of the estate, as a large number of manorial accounts survive forthe last century of the monastery's existence,although it is a very incomplete collection. Bythen the organization of Cistercian estates hadchanged as the monks had found it impossible tomaintain an adequate supply of lay brothers andthey began to differ little from other estates(Donnelly, 1954, 399-458). The abbey shouldnow be treated as a substantial Hampshire

landowner rather than a peculiarly Cistercianone. It had a relatively compact estate with muchof its lands in the area around SouthamptonWater: Totton, Southampton, Roydon, Westset,Hound, Shottisham, Sholing, Townhill,Shamelhurst, Netley and Wellow. In addition ithad a group of manors or lands scattered inneighbouring counties: Northleigh (Oxon.)Gomshulle (Surrey), Kingston Deverill (Wilts),Waddon, Ashley and Charleton (Dorset) (PROSC6/Hen VIII/ 3326). The estate was run bothby the abbot and his monks, such as the cellarer,and by lay officials such as the steward. Inaddition, as on other estates, the abbey had itsown council (Latham, 1928, 61-3). The manorialaccounts provide glimpses of the activity of someof the estate officials, thus at Kingston Deverill in1411 the visitors included the steward and otherscoming on two occasions to hold the manorialcourts and to supervise the manor and stock,brother John Lymington and brother Randulphwho came on the abbey's business on separateoccasions, and William Langport and others whocame to supervise the manor and the account(WRO 192/32). William seems to haveestablished a brief family tradition for in the1440's and 1450's a John Langport was the abbeyReceiver, and frequently appears to supervise themanor and stock, and draw up the annualaccounts. He was also to appear at Roydon in1459 and 1462 (PRO SC6/980/24; 26). In someyears the abbot came to Kingston Deverill. inothers not; at other times it seems to have beenthe cellarer who was the more active in estateadministration (WRO 192/32), a reflectionperhaps of varying personal interests and themore flexible distribution of tasks in such a smallreligious house. The abbot may have been a moreregular visitor to estates that were closer to theabbey itself as at Roydon (PRO SC6/980/24-27).The accounts may also provide glimpses of theearlier career of some of the abbots. ThomasStevens who was abbot of Netley at thedissolution, and then moved on to Beaulieu wherehe became abbot in time to see the end of thatabbey as well, had earlier been the abbot'sReceiver (PRO SC6/HVI1I/3319), and abbotJohn Burgeys had previously been the cellarer(PRO SC6/980/27).

214 HAMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Abbot'sLodgings

NETLEY ABBEY

50ft.

Fig 5. Plan of Neiley Abbey, based on the plan in Hamilton Thompson (1953).Abbreviations: (D) Dormitory above; (R) Reredorter (latrines) above; (F) Frater or dining hall.

On the Netley estate, as elsewhere, the laterMiddle Ages were to see the lord giving up hisdirect cultivation of most of the estates, replacingthe uncertainties of product prices by the greaterstability of rent and the greater ease ofadministration found when the land was leasedfor a fixed sum. As elsewhere in diis area, this wasnot a sudden or irreversible policy (Hare, 1985).The process was already under way at the end ofthe fourteenth century when Kingston Deverillwas leased by 1396 and Wellow by 1398(WRO/192/32; PRO SC6/983/12). But these

were not necessarily final changes and KingstonDeverill provides a good example of the abbeyrepeatedly changing its policy: it resumedcultivation temporarily in 1407, leased in 1408and 1411, cultivated again in 1421 and 2, andafter a lease in 1423 resumed again in 1426.From 1428 the leasing became permanent (WRO192/32). Elsewhere Northleigh and Gomshullewere leased by 1422, Charleton by 1448 andRoydon temporarily by 1422. Such manors sentcash to the abbey, although occasionally, as atKingston Deverill, some livestock was sent to the

HARE: NKT1.KY ABBKY: MONASTERY, MANSION AND RUIN 215

fi'

Kitchen I Hall Chapel [ c ^ } o o o < t f o < > o c > <> o o o < b

•g ID o j >

NETLEY:THE TUDOR MANSION

Fig 6. Plan of the Tudor mansion, based on the plan in Hamilton Thompson (1953). supplemented by the plans in Guillaume.1848, and Carter (BL Add. Mss. 29928). The garden measurements may not be exact.Abbreviations: (1) Great Chamber above; (2) gallery above; (3) garden terrace.

abbey hospice, or some of the cash used topurchase local products for the abbey (as in 1465when four cloths were purchased at Salisbury for£8 14s 4d) (WRO 192/32).

But like other monasteries, the abbeymaintained direct cultivation on some of itsneighbouring estates in the mid-fifteenth centuryand afterwards, in order to supply some of itsbasic food requirements (Hare, 1985). It wasengaged in direct cultivation at Townhill in 1459,1463 and 1488 (PRO SC6/983/10; 980/27; HenVII/676); and at Roydon in 1413, 1422 and1424, and, after a spell of leasing in 1425 and1459, resumed cultivation in 1461-3, until this

ceased by 1485 and 1501 (PRO SC6/980/2, 5, 6,18, 25; 981/18; Hen VII/652). Such estates, andthe home farm at Netley provided some of thegrain and meat needed by the abbey and it isclear from die accounts of Townhill and Roydonthat their surplus was dispatched to the abbeyitself, Townhill being engaged in some livestockfattening for this purpose (PRO SC6/983/10).The abbey continued to cultivate some of itslands in its vicinity until the dissolution (PROSC12/33/27).

The abbey was a substantial producer of woolin the thirteenth century, although on a muchsmaller scale to Beaulieu or the great Benedictine

216 HAMPSHIRE F1KI.D CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

houses (Lloyd, 1973, table 5). In the fifteenth century, it kept substantial flocks on its chalklandmanors at Waddon (and its smaller satelite ofAshley) in Dorset and Kingston Deverill inWiltshire: in 1461 after a heavy bout of sheepmurrain the flock at Waddon dropped from 828to 595, and at Kingston Deverill there wereregularly over 800 sheep in the mid century (PROSC6/833/20; WRO/192/32). The abbeyremained involved in these flocks until the 1490's,withdrawing between 1493-98. At KingstonDeverill the sheep had been incorporated in thelease of the manor but the abbey was still involvedin stocking the flock at Waddon and at Ashleyuntil at least 1499 (WRO/192/32; PROSC6/Hen VII/1040). This continued sheepfarming long after the arable lands had beenleased was a feature of many of the downlandlandlords (Hare, 1985, 85-6). The abbey flockswere essentially kept as a cash earner, and theirorganization reflected the impact of the market:the lambs who were walked from Waddon(Dorset) to Kingston Deverill were then fattenedfor sale in the prosperous neighbouring marketsof the cloth industry, as well as being rented fortheir manure.

The later Middle Ages were to be a period ofdramatic population decline but as on otherestates the impact was not uniform. Some areassuffered more than others, as they were unable toresist the lure of more attractive areas beyond.On the chalklands, a contrast may be seenbetween the Wiltshire and Dorset manors of theabbey. Kingston Deverill had the benefit ofproximity to the expanding cloth producing areasof west Wiltshire, which would have demandedmeat and grain as well as wool. Agriculture couldremain prosperous, although here by the 1430s,there were signs of increasingly decayed rents ofcottages, suggesting that the manor was losinglabour to the expanding cloth areas nearby(WRO 192/32; Hare, 1992, 27-30). By contrast,on its Dorset manors, there was less immediatedemand for agricultural products, and less abilityto retain its population. Thus Charleton wouldseem to have been deserted during the fifteenth century, for by 1501 there was little rent otherthan from the two farms into which the demesnehad been divided (PRO SC6/Henry VII/613).

The area around the abbey itself, is an area aboutwhose rural economy we know very little. Heretoo, some settlements suffered more than others,two rentals of 1303/4 and 1369/70, show thatWestbrook saw a much more dramatic decline inits tenant numbers than Hound (PRO SCI 1/583and 584).

Grand as were its buildings the abbey seemsto have been underendowed. When Henry VIIIdecided to dissolve the lesser monasteries (thosewith an annual income of less than £200) Netleywas one of his victims. The records of hiscommissioners provide us with a glimpse of theabbey at the end of its existence (PROSC12/33/27). There were then seven monks,'all being priests, by report of good religiousconversation'. All but one wished to remain asmonks, and unlike at the neighbouring house atQuarr, there is no evidence of the monkschanging their mind and wishing to leave (Faculty Office Register). In addition the buildings housed30 household servants, officials and officers andtwo friars observant, an order of friars that hadalready been closed by Henry and whosemembers had been distributed among varioushouseholds. Situated upon the shoreline, theabbey was of 'great relief and comfort' to thosetravelling upon the seas, giving it a similar roleto the Cistercian house of Quarr on the Isle ofWight (PRO SC12/33/27; Hare, 1993). Netley'sbuildings were described as 'large', and 'great',and as 'in good state of repair'. While it wasclearly not an affluent house, it seems to havebeen living within its means, and no criticismwas made of the religious life here. But what islacking from this source as in so much ourevidence about the abbey, is any indication as tothe spiritual life of the monastery or of thereligious role that provided the centraljustification for the existence of this gentryhousehold.

MANSION

The dissolution brought an abrupt end to thelife of the abbey, but it also opened up a newand important phase for its buildings. Likemany other monasteries, Netley was converted

HARE: NKTLEY ABBKY: MONASTERY, MANSION AND RUIN 2 1 7

into a great country mansion, in this case forthe Paulets. The buildings were to betransformed into something appropriate for thenew owner's power and prestige, and the sitewould remain an important centre of influencein the area around. As a ruin, Netley shows thisconversion better than most that are stilloccupied.

Once the abbey had been dissolved itsproperty could be disposed of. Some of its debtswere paid off (Youings, 1971, 226). MichaelLyster and William Sherland paid over £800 forall the 'cattle and stock' at Netley (Kennedy,1953, 149). Given that the dissolutioncommissioners had valued the stocks, stores andcorn at only £1 14. 13s. 8d. (PRO SC12/33/27)it would seem that they would have had theopportunity for considerable asset strippingwithin the buildings. Soon afterwards, however,Henry granted the site to Sir William Paulet,and it was he who transformed the monasteryinto a sixteenth century country house. Pauletcame from a Hampshire gentry family; he was a lawyer and civil servant who had already beensheriff of Hampshire, and the holder ofimportant posts in royal government, as masterof the King's wards and comptroller of the royalhousehold. Like many religious conservatives atthe court, he showed no reluctance to acquiremonastic land, and was second only to ThomasWriothesley in his acquisition of Hampshiremonastic land (Kennedy, 1972, 81-2; Hare,1993). He continued to prosper after hisacquisition of Netley, acquiring a peerage in1539, and subsequently becoming Earl ofWiltshire in 1550 and Marquis of Winchester in1551. This social elevation reflected hiscontinual political importance, as one of theleading councillors of the latter part of HenryVIII's reign and that of Edward VI, and onewho kept the post of Lord Treasurer throughturbulent political times and successive religiouschanges from 1550 until his death in 1572. Heremained one of the most powerful figures inHampshire politics until well into the early partof Elizabeth's reign (DNB; BindofT. 1982; Fritze,1982) Paulet also carried out major buildingworks at the family house of Basing House, andfor a time held the great palace of the bishops of

Winchester at Bishop's Waltham {Literary Remains, 81). For Henry VIII, this grant ofNetley, would have been both a means ofrewarding a loyal servant and of establishing a trusty lieutenant in a coastal and potentiallyvulnerable part of the country, near the ports ofSouthampton and Portsmouth. Paulet and laterThomas Wriothesley who acquired TitchfieldAbbey in 1538, would provide a focus for royalpower in the area.

The new owners of the monasteries adopteddifferent approaches to the problem of adaptingbuildings designed for monastic use into thevery different demands of a great country house(Howard, 1987). They wanted to produce up todate mansions appropriate to a nobleman, butfunds were not inexhaustable and they soughtto reuse the existing buildings as much aspossible. At Netley, study of the survivingbuildings enables us to establish how this wasdone: the abbey being converted into a courtyard house, the claustral area becomingthe main courtyard (see Figs. 5, 6). It was a conversion largely carried out in brick, althoughstone was also used, particularly for facing.Much of the brick work has, however, now gone,both during the later decay and quarrying ofthe country house, and by deliberate attempt topurify the ruins of what was perceived to belater clutter. Thus the blockings of the chapterhouse windows were removed during the 1860'sclearance (Kell, 75, 82).

Paulet turned the nave of the great abbeychurch into his hall and kitchen. A cross wall wasinserted to divide the nave at the end of the thirdbay from the west: the wall has gone but has leftits mark in the torn off shaft on the south wall.Brick ovens and hearths were installed, andfurther kitchen facilities were built outside to thenorth. The hall filled the eastern part of the naveand was entered from a newly cut door in thesouth wall by the cloister. Paulet probablyretained the arcades between the nave and aisles.This would have reduced his cost, and while thesehad certainly disappeared by the 1730's, theirearly disappearance could be explained by beingmade of fine quality ashlar stone which wouldhave been the most valued for quarrying and re-use. The north transept was pulled down at this

218 HAMHSHIRIiKlEI.UClJUBiUCDAKCHABOIjOGICAI.SOCIF.'IT

stage and not in the late eighteenth century as isfrequently stated (eg Hamilton Thompson, 1953).This is evident in an estate survey of 1725( H R O / C o p y 641 /12) . Car ter ' s plan in 1789shows the north wall of the nave and that of thechoir linked by a stone wall or footings acrosswhere the transept would have been (BL AddMss 29928) (see also Fig 7). Moreover theeastern shaft of the south west pier of thetransept has also been cut in such a way that asa new wall in this position could be keyed intothe pier. These are the sort of alterations thatwould only be made for conversion of thebuildings and not when they were in ruins. Thenor th t ransept would have been an obviousbuilding to pull down (as at Mottisfont Abbey);its presence would have blocked light from theformer crossing, now the lord's dining area. Theeastern arm of the choir was kept as a chapel,and the new cross wall built between it and whatwas now the hall , was recovered in thenine teenth century (Kell, 81). Paulet 's newprivate wing was built out of the south transept,with a major room or great chamber inserted asa first floor. T h e joist holes still cut into themonast ic archi tec ture show evidence of thisconversion.

In the east range, further doorways wereinserted to allow movement from one room toanother, so avoiding the need for the coveredcloisters, which were now destroyed; but the mainimportance of this range lay on the first floorwhere the dormitory was converted into one ofthe long galleries required by houses of theperiod, providing a central access for thebuildings as well as a recreational area forgathering and conversation (Coope, 1986, 44-51).The gallery included at least two staircaseentrances as well as access from the lord's greatchamber in the south t ransept . Addit ionalaccomodat ion was provided in the formermonastic reredorter. The new main or south frontwas built over the site of the former demolishedmonastic dining hall, and contained a centraldoorway flanked by two polygonal turrets, withsimilar turrets at either end of the range.Although these towers or turrets have nowdisappeared, they were visible in plan in 1789and their presence can still be deduced from the

structure today (Fig 8). T h e cloisters weredestroyed and the open space converted into a courtyard, probably cobbled, with a fountain inthe centre (Kell, 77). T h e courtyard wouldprovide access to the buildings around. T h evisitor would thus be faced initially by a grandentrance front and passing through this rangewould see a great courtyard with the hallopposite. Arrangements in the west range wereunclear although they did include a brick-linedstaircase and the range extended further to thesouth. Further east, a private garden was laid outbetween the new house and the former abbot'sbuilding. It had brick-lined terraces and wasenclosed by a high wall to the north (Kell, 85).Such an enclosed garden is parallelled by thearrangements at Paulet 's other Hampshi reresidence at Basing House.

While it is possible that these alterations may notall have have belonged to a single campaign, itseems likely that they all belong to an initialconversion. A contemporary letter to the newowner of neighbouring abbey of Titchfield impliesthat Paulet was then busy at Netley givinginstructions as to how the conversion should bemade (PRO SPl/131/f l01) , and there is nothingin the details of the building which would supporta substantially later date. Structurally the newgallery and the new entrance front go together, asreflected in the adjoining stair turret.Neighbouring Titchfield provides us with anexcellent point of comparision to this conversion.There, after much discussion and changes of plan,die frater or dining hall was transformed into themain hall (St John Hope, 1906, 233-43), and a great gateway was inserted into the nave of thechurch. But despite these contrasts, the final plansof the two houses ended up being very similar, withthe gatehouse range opposite the hall, and with a long gallery along one side (see also Hare, 1993,'pictures'). A standard courtyard plan might berequired, whether the origins of the buildings weremonastic, as also at Mottisfont Abbey (HRO 13M63 420), or secular as at contemporary Cowdray(Sussex).

Paulet was active in most of the activitiesconcern ing the defence and fortification ofHampsh i re and the Isle of Wight from 1539until his death in 1572, and it is appropriate that

HARE M.II.KY Al i im MONASTERY, MANSION WDKI IN 219

**m :

V

Fig 7. The south transept, with the remains of the vaulting in 1776 (Godfrey). Cope (lollection)

outside his new house at Nctley he was to build a small castle, whose guns would have been able tocommand the middle and upper reaches ofSouthampton water. Though built by himself itseems to have been part of a wider royal plan ofdefence and he was subsequently granted landfor the main tenance of the castle and itsgarr ison. The castle was built by 1545 andprobably in 1544, a critical phase which hadended with the French licet in the Solent. Itincorporates medieval mouldings suggesting thatin part it was built using materials from theabbey itself (Colvin, 1982, 554-7) . Kellsuggested that this incorpora ted the formermonastic outer gatehouse, but this has not beensubstantiated.

A late sixteenth century sketch of the house isincluded in a con tempora ry map ofSouthampton {Southampton maps) although this isnot detailed enough to be useful. T h e houseremained an important mansion both then andfor much of the seventeenth century. QueenElizabeth had visited Paulet's successor the carlof Hertford here, and the family continued tomake use of it in the seventeenth centurySevmour Papers, pp 167, 205, 221, 227, 247,

250 2, 292, 306). It was described as a lau.mansion house' in 1636 (A short survey . . .),and was clearly provisioned in 1642, when thepar l i amenta ry commit tee at S o u t h a m p t o ndecided that the stores of sea coal there shouldbe confiscated (Godwin, 162-3). In 1650. the

220 HAMI'sHIKI. FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGK ALSt M II. IV

Fig 8. Entrance front of Tudor house. The doorway was Hanked In two polygonal tOWCR. Thai to the right shows the i brickwork and the projecting quoins of the tower walls.

interior

Earl of Hertford wrote to his son who wasshortly to stay there , descr ibing Netley as,'neither unpleasant nor unsafe, if any place inEngland be safe . .' (Aylesbury Mss p 156). Itwas still operational after the restoration, andthe Hearth tax returns of 1665 show that with50 hearths it was amongst the largest houses inHampshire, and was then held by the countessof Somerset (Hear th Tax, 163). Likene ighbour ing Titchfield it may finally havesuccumbed to the uncer ta in t ies of familysuccessions, and in 1676, after the death of thedowager duchess of Somerset, it was sold YCHIII, 477). It was probably some time after this,towards the end of the seventeenth century, thatthe house fell out of use and parts were sold offfor demolition.

RUIN

By the beginning of the eighteenth century, theabbey had begun to enter its third phase ofexistence, as a ruin. Browne Willis, in a bookpublished in 1719 records that the church sectionsurvived until fifteen years before, when SirB[erkley] L[ewis] sold the chapel (the eastern armof the church) to a Southampton carpenter whotook off the roof and destroyed many of the walls,killing himself in the process. The destruction isreflected in the accounts for the rebuilding of StMarys church at Southampton in 1710 11 andagain in 1722-3 . The necessary stone for therebuilding was acquired from the ruins of NetleyAbbey and on the latter occasion necessitated thepurchase and use of gunpowder (HRO Top

HARE: M l i n MSM.Y MONAS1 ERY \l \ \M<>\ AND WIN 221

Till. NORTH VIEW OF XETLEY ABBY. IN HAMPSHIRE.

\F.TIjn ..I/.,'/. -th.-r.-l..,- /.',//{,,/, ///-,/ ,,;u /i-un./f./ if./('. *< fU . I „ Ij.l | •'.:/,. .1/,./ /.-./' ///*//// \ . /'I ',/'/ It'////>>///..h,.A /.u/ </ //".• ,.///.'/. /V. /W/v/»_ '^/,t,r 0 .«./<•// -,7',/ n-i/A (and* i" YMMemrt/A*t umlmrmi S0mi4mf tmittlujbrmof*(my.i/t ,f•n/i„A.M\v ,/vs.nl/fil''/a*. /niJitt.-tt • *!./.'/ /t/ ft'tn-trtiny if / /* / / <•'///.'ft/if f'/m r, 4 ,-,,/.•/. /<,/,/.. „ \. •.:'£<•> (AfieAl, /•„/ r/i, , (A.ififf/ • »> n-/u, A.//.//<• if ,,•»/,,:,u,< .I/.-II,/ time ft'Afii f't/h-n.At'/inft.T A.i,/.',>/,/t/11.1 .U.i. • Aii/Zi/

y/A.y/.t.i.i/i.i/ //n.hrt,iAn ,ti./>,ii,.i/r,iitf /,• i/m-ir ,/,vni / / . / / , ' ;</// , ' / / / >r,i.> , m.'A './/,' ,/..l/A ill A,.< , n/.r/"r ;, , 'A.- / v / ' i V: i. /w; •

rhc north view of Netley Abbey in Hampshire S&N Buck. 1733). (Cope Collection]

•̂ f t *

1

/>"

?i-y i i r

' #t &

.3>m

Fig 10. Inside view of Netle) Tomkins, 1794). Cope Collection]

222 II W I l ' M l l k l I I I . I . I M I 1 I! A N D A R C I I \ l . ( ) ! . ( ) ( , ICALSCX II \\

Fit; 11. Wesl view ofNetlcy Abbey (Tomkins, 1794). (Cope Collection

Southampton 1/3), probably in search of theashlar of the piers. An estate plan of 1725suggests, through differential shading and thepresence of a garden, the possibility that parts ofthe buildings may have remained in use, and thatonly the former abbey church was destroyed(HRO Copy 641/12) . It was after a period ofsuch destruction that the first illustration of theabbey survives. The Bucks' engraving, publishedin 1733, shows that the abbey church had beengutted and cleared of the Tudor alterations andany of the nave or choir arcades that had survivedthis conversion (Fig 9). The abbey was to remainin this state for over a century, decaying, beingrobbed, as when parts were used to produce a sham ruin at Cranbury Park. The abbey ruinswere becoming increasingly overgrown and filledwith trees. But the buildings shown in the

drawings and plans at the end of the eighteenthcentury, such as those made by J Carter in 1789(BL Add Mss 29928), were essentially those thatwe see now. further decay has occurred, but ithas been limited in scale: the remains of thetransept vault have collapsed (Fig 7), as has thevaulting of the dormitory undercroft, whosegroins remained in 1789 (BL Add Mss 29928);the tracery of the main west window and thevaults of the east range have gone.

But this very decay and the combination ofwoodland and sea were to make the ruinsincreasingly attractive in the second half of theeighteenth century, as the romantic movementgathered strength. To generations interested invisions of a medieval past, of ruins and of nature,Net lev seemed well placed. Its grand ruins weresurrounded by, and protruded, from woodland

HARE: NETLEY ABBEY: MONASTERY, \l VNSION AND RUIN 223

1 f — A ^

t$&\l ' ^

l \ •• 1

v -

Fig 12. Nctlcy: the chapel and south transept West.ill. 1828). [Cope Collection

and greenery, within the ruins were more treesand piles of debris, while part of the vault of thesouth transept remained suspended like a spider'swebb: 'the roof has tumbled in, yet some little ofit is left in the transept, where the ivy lias forcedits way through and hangs daunting down amongthe fretted o rnament and escutehens of thebenefactors'. (T Gray, BL Add Mss 19918) (Fig 7).Beyond, by contrast, could be seen the sea and itsships; and all this was within an easy boat tripfrom the nourishing holiday resorts ofSouthampton and the Isle of Wight (Patterson,1970, 72-84; for a visit from Ryde - BM Add Mss33652, f 12v). Tintern abbey might be a morefamous ruin, but as the Rev J Skinner remarked onhis visit to Netley in 1818 'I was, I confess, muchmuch more struck than on seeing Tintern, and thisI can only account for by supposing the ruggedness

of the area of Netley scattered over with thefragments of the pillcrs and the walls; and shadedby Ash trees of considerable size and beauty, ismore in harmony with a ruin than the smoothlevel green which is kept up with too muchneatness at Tintern' (BL Add Mss 33652 f 13r).

Poets and w liters, like Horace Walpolc andThomas Gray, enthused about the remains(Sambrook, 1980, 22 26), and the abbey gave itsname to poems by writers such as Southey ('Ode,Netley Abbey; Midnight', of 1790) and Bowles; a novel {Netley Abbey by R Warner in 1795); and anoperatic farce (by \V Pearce, first produced atCovent Garden in London in 1794, and again forat least the next seven seasons, and in Bath andBristol in 1795: Inchbald, 1815; London Stage part5, vol 3; Theatre Royal, Bath, 156, 157, 158; A Hare, pers comm). But the novel, subsequently

224 II VMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Rfi 13. Intc i.l \ c l l ( \ Al>l>< (lope Collection]

published in Paris, Berlin and Philadelphia alsoreminds us of a darker side of the romantie imageof the abbey, where under its profligate andlieentious abbot, the abbey had become the focusfor imprisonment and evil, and was to be thescene of the bloody culmination of the story.

By the 1840's tourism remained active but waschanging in character as the abbey became a popular place of call for the citizens ofSouthampton, who came for the ruins, for tea,music and dancing; the romantic atmosphere of themonument being broken by kthe popping of GingerBeer'. A scandalised RH Barham attacked suchconditions in 'Netley Abbey: a legend ofHampshire', in the Ingolsby legends of 1847. Such

popularity led to further damage to the ruins andthis and (hanging attitudes towards ruins created a transformation in the appearance of the site. In18()(), the owner, Thomas Chambcrlaync clearedthe site of rubble and some of the Tudor alterations,the difference in the appearance of the church beingclearly shown in contemporary illustrations (Figs12 13). Furthermore to protect the monument,Chambcrlaync placed the abbey under thesupervision of a porter, 'though attended with a trifling admission fee' (Kell, 75). All that was nowneeded was the clearance of the ivy in the twentiethcentury to give us the monument that we havetoday. But the nineteenth century was also to secother developments that were to transform the

HARE: NETLEY ABBEY: MONASTERY, MANSION AND RUIN 225

appearance of the ruins. The area ceased to bewilderness. Nearby was built the great armyhospital. The swing bridge and above all, theSouthampton to Nedey railway, opened in 1866(Course, 1973, 19) brought easy access to die abbey,not merely for visitors but for suburban villas andodier housing. While the site of die monastery itselfmight be secure, much of the precinct was to be soldoff for housing. It is now difficult to imagine thedeserted woods and heathland that seemed to markan appropriate site for the Cistercian founders, but itis also difficult to imagine the walk from the sea tothe overgrown romantic ruins in the midst ofnowhere. In all this, Nedey has continued, and willcontinue to reflect die changing world beyond.

A Manuscript and other record office material Manorial account rolls of manors belonging to Netley

Abbey. Wiltshire] R[ecord] 0[fiice] AbbeyWiltshire] R[ecord] Offfice] 192/32;P[ublic] R[ecord] 0[ffice] SC6 variousaccounts belonging to Netley. SC6: variousaccounts belonging to Netley.

Antiquarian accounts, Carter (Bfritish] Lfibrary] AddMss 29928); RevJ Skinner (BL Add Mss 33652)

Miscellaneous: BL Add Mss 19918 (Letter Grey toBrown). HRO Top Southampton 1/3(Information recorded in the parish registerof St Mary' Church Southampton).;

PROSPl/131/flOl.University of Southampton, Broadlands Archives

BR11/13/1: A visit to the Abbey fromBroadlands in 1788.

Note: Account rolls have been dated according to the closingyear of the account.

Netley is well provided for with engravings. Goodgroups are in the Cope Collections(University of Southampton) and the Wallop

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My thanks go to English Heri tage for theirsupport of some of the early research and forasking me to produce a new guidebook to the site:work which became the starting point for thisarticle. Jonathan Coad encouraged me to turn myattention to Netley, and has discussed the site andtext with me. My father, Dr Arnold Hare ,commented on the text and helped me with theabbey's theatrical phase. Dr C Woolgar providedsome additional references from the University ofSouthampton collections, and all the engravingsare reproduced from originals in the CopeCollection there.

collection (Hampshire Record Office). Secalso: Southampton University Petit WaterColours collection 16a, 12b, 9BR, 15a.

2. Printed material Anon [R Warner ] , Netley Abbey: a gothic story, 2 vol,

(Southampton, printed for the author by T Skelton, 1795). See also L'Abbaye de Netley, Histoire du Moyen Age, traduit de l'allemandpar JF Fontallard, Paris, 1801: it was alsoprinted in Philadelphia in 1796 (Eighteenthcentury short title catalogue).

Anon, 1765 The ruins of Nelley Abbey, 1765.Aylesbury Manuscripts, Historic Manuscripts

Commission, 15th Rep, app pt vii,Manuscripts of the Marquis of Aylesbury, 1898.

Barham, R H The Ingolsby legends (variouseditions).

Beaulieu Account book. The account-book of Beaulieu Abbey, edS F Hockey, Camden Soc 4th. 16. 1975.

Bindofr, S T 1982 The House of Commons, 1509-1558, Seeker & Warburg, History of ParliamentTrust.

REFERENCES

226 HAMPSHIRE HELD CLUB AND A R C H A E O I J O G I C A I . SOCIETY

Browne Willis, 1719/1 history of the mitre parliamentary abbies and conventual cathedral churches, 2 vol1718-19.

Calendar of Liberate Rolls, HMSO, vols IV-VI, 1959-62.Coldstream, N 1986, 'Cistercian architecture from

Beaulieu to the Dissolution', in ed C Norton& D Park, Cistercian art and architecture in the British Isles, Cambridge University Press,1986.

Colvin, H M 1963 R A Brown, H M Colvin and A J Taylor, The History of the King's works vol I—II,The Middle Ages, HMSO.

Colvin, H M t l t l 1982 The History of the King's works volIV, 1485-1660, HMSO.

Course, E 1973 The Southampton and Netley railway(City or Southampton) 1973.

Coope, R 1986, 'The "Long Gallery": its origins,development, use and decoration', inArchitectural History, 29, 1986, 43-72.

Currie, C 1988, 'Medieval Fish Ponds in Hampshire',in Aston, M (ed) Medieval Fish, Fisheries andFishponds in England, BAR British Series, 1988, 189.

Currie, C 1989 'The conduits at Netley', Newsletter Hants, Field Club, 19-21.

Dictionary of National Biography.Donnelley, J S 1954, 'Changes in the grange economy

of English and Welsh Cistercian Abbeys,1300-1540', Traditio, 10, 1954, 399-458.

Faculty Office Registers, 1534—49, ed D S Chambers,Oxford Univ Press, 1966.

Fritze, R H 1982 'The role of family and religion in thelocal politics of early Elizabethan England:the case of Hampshire in the 1560s', Historical Journal, 25, 267-87.

Godwin, G N 1904 The civil war in Hampshire, Gilbert,Southampton.

Guillaume, G 1848, Architectural views and details of Netley Abbey, Southampton.

Hare, J N 1985 'The monks as landlords: the leasing ofthe monastic demesnes in southern England',in eds C Barron and. C Harper-Bill, The church in pre-reformation society, Boydell Press,Woodbridge.

Hare, J N 1992 'The lords and their tenants: conflictand stability in fifteenth-century Wiltshire', ined B Stapleton, Conflict and Community in Southern England, Alan Sutton, Stroud.

Hare, J N 1993. The dissolution of the monasteries: a case study from Hampshire, HiDES, The University,Southampton.

Hoad, M 1990, 'Hampshire in 1839', Newsletter, Hants. Field Club., 14, 1-2

Hockey, S F 1970 Quarr Abbey and its lands, LeicesterUniversity Press.

Hockey, S F 1976 Beaulieu, King John's Abbey, PioneerPublications.

Howard, M 1987, The early Tudor country house, GeorgePhilip.

Hearth Tax The Hampshire Hearth Tax assessment, 1665, edsHughes E and White, P, Winchester,Hampshire Record Series 1991.

Kell, E Netley Abbey with an acccount of recentexcavations and discoveries, Collectanea Archaeotogica of British ArchaeologicalAssociation, vol II pt 1.

Kennedy, J 1953, The dissolution of the monasteries in Hampshire (unpublished MA thesis, Universityof London).

Kennedy, J 1972 'Laymen and monasteries inHampshire, 1530-58', in Proc Hants Field Club, 27, 65-86.

Latham, L C 1926 The decay of the manorial system, unpublished MA thesis, University ofLondon, 1928.

Literary Remains, Literary remains of Edward VI, ed J G Nichols, Roxburgh Club, 1857.

Lloyd, T H 1973 'The movement of wool prices in medieval England, Econ Hist Rev, supplement 6,Cambridge University Press.

Meekings C A F 1981 'The early years of NetleyAbbey', in C A F Meekings, Studies in thirteenth century justice and administration, HambledonPress.

Temple Patterson. A 1970 Southampton: a biography, Macmillan.

Pearce, W Netley Abbey an operatic farce in two Acts, London 1794, printed in Mrs Inchbald'sCollection of Farces, vol III, 1815.

St John Hope, W H 1906, 'The making of Place HouseTitchfield, near Southampton, in 1538',Archaeol Journal, 63, 231-44.

Sambrook, A J 1980 'Netley and Romanticism' inrecent editions of Hamilton Thompson(1953)

Seymour papers, Historic Manuscripts Commission,Report on the manuscripts of the most hon. the Marquis of Bath, vol IV, Seymour papers, 1532-1686, ed M. Blatcher, HMSO, 1968.

Sharpe, E 1848 Architectural parallels or the progress of ecclesiastical architecture in England through the twelfth and thirteenth century . . .John von voorst.

Short Survey 'A relation of a short survey of the WesternCounties' Camden Miscellany, 16, 1936.

Southampton Maps; E Welch. Southampton Maps from Elizabethan times, City of Southampton, 1964.

HARE: NETLEY ABBEY: MONASTERY, MANSION AND RUIN 227

Taxatio Ecclesiaslica papae. Mcholai, Record Commission, Heritage; page references are to the 19801810-. printing).

Theatre Royal Bath: a calendar of performances at the Orchard Valor Ecciesiasticus, Record Commission, 1810-34.Street Theatre, ed A Hare, Kingsmead press, VCH, 1903 Victoria County History of Hampshire vol II,Bath, 1977. 1903, 146-9.

Thompson, A Hamilton 1953, jVetley Abbey (the VCH, 1908 Victoria County History of Hampshire vol iii,standard guide book, having gone through 472-7.many editions under the Ministry of Works, Youings,J 1971 The dissolution of the monasteries, Allen & Department of Environment and English Unwin.

Author. J N Hare, Peter Symonds' College, Winchester

© Hampshire Field Club and Archaeology Society