From Rambles In and Around Warminster, first published in 1883:
Corsley
The inhabitants of Lilliput are represented as describing their country, which was just twelve miles in circumference, as “a most mighty empire, extending five thousand “blustrugs,’ even to the extremities of the globe.” Hence it is not a matter for very great surprise, that although its total population amounts only to 1019, Corsley should not only consist of several hamlets, but should also have considered it necessary, lest its vastness might confuse the mind of the stranger, to further sub-divide itself into “Great Corsley” and “Little Corsley.” But it must not be forgotten that although at present the population of Corsley is extremely small, this is owing to an enormous decrease within the present century. In 1831 the parish contained 1729 inhabitants, in 1881, 1019; showing a decrease of more than forty per cent in fifty years.
The parish of Corsley, situated about halfway between Warminster and Frome, and upon the borders of Wilts and Somerset, is one of the most straggling and most thinly-populated of all the parishes comprised in the Union of Warminster.
It is however a village of very considerable antiquity, and as it formerly had an old-established annual fair, held on the 27th July, it must have been a place of some little consequence. In the Domesday Book it is mentioned as “Corslie,” and it is also stated that it contained a wood, “a furlong in length and half a furlong in breadth, worth twenty shillings.” In the Nomina Villarum it is spoken of as “Villa de Corselegh.”
Corsley Church is a modern building erected in 1831-3. The old Church, which was of pointed architecture, with a bell turret, was entirely pulled down, and none of its features were preserved, even the ground plan being entirely altered.
The present building, with its high slated roof, its shapeless ungainly looking windows, its common-place square tower, its gallery, high pews, and other corresponding peculiarities, is a perfect example of what, it is to be feared, will go down to posterity as “the Early Nineteenth Century style of architecture.” A brass in the porch of the church states that the building expenses were defrayed by public subscription, and gives a list of the subscribers, who, it must be said to their honour, seem to have given most liberally. It is to be hoped that they were satisfied with their church when it was completed. The list of subscriptions was headed by the sum of £625 from the Marquis of Bath, and included, amongst many other donations, £120 from the Rector (Rev. R.C. Griffith), £150 from Mrs. Barton, £65 from Mr. Nathaniel Barton, £50 from Miss S.F. Barton, £50 from Mr. Fussell (Churchwarden), £50 from Mrs. Fussell, about £280 from various members of the Dredge family, £160 from members of the Meares family, £20 from the Rev. Lord John Thynne, £20 from Mr. W. Temple, and a collection of £110 on the opening of the Church on the 28th October, 1833. It is not very likely that such a sum of money will ever be raised again in the parish, but it must be remembered that the population at the time numbered over 1700, that agriculture was in a prosperous condition, and that the Cloth and Dying trade which once flourished in Corsley, had not then quite declined.
There are numerous tablets and monuments upon the walls of the Church, but they are mostly modern. At the East end of the north wall is a tablet with the following inscription:-
“Sacred to the memory of JOHN CARPENTER, an eminent dyer in this parish, who departed this life on the 25th Jan.1812, aged 58. To enumerate the several amiable qualities that adorned the character of this excellent and worthy man would far exceed the limits of this tablet. Suffice it to say that his heart was expanded by every generous sympathy, and his life distinguished by the most sincere beneficence and disinterested friendship. He was an industrious and conscientious tradesman, ever regulating his conduct by the Divine Precept, “Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.’ This monument is erected to his memory by his affectionate son-in-law, H.A. FUSSELL, as a small token of gratitude and respect to his kind father and best friend.”
On the opposite side of the wall is an old monumental tablet with an inscription to the memory of the Rev. Thos. Aylesbury, who according to this tablet was rector of the parish when he was only 21 years of age, and continued to be so until is death at the age of 77 in 1724. He was probably the same “Mr. T. Ailesbury” who is recorded at Kingston Deverill church as having been rector there in 1646.
Upon the East wall of the Church at the end of the South aisle is the large and handsome monument of the Barton family which is inscribed:-
“Sacred to the memory of NATHANIEL BARTON, Esq., who departed this life the 2nd Nov. 1828, aged 64, and whose mortal remains rest in the family vault beneath this monument. To a heart feelingly alive to every virtuous and liberal sentiment, and to a disposition truly benevolent and kind, were united those amiable and domestic qualities which rendered this affectionate Husband and Father beloved in life, and in death most sincerely lamented. Guided by truly Christian principles, his undeviating integrity and sound judgment, throughout his honourable course of professional practice, were acknowledged by all who had experienced the benefit of his advice. Deservedly respected and esteemed, his conciliating manners and friendly disposition will long be remembered by all who knew him, and his memory devotedly cherished by his sorrowing family.
“Also of ELIZABETH, relict of the above, who departed this life Dec. 27th, 1847, aged 61 years. – There is a prospect which death cannot efface, and a hope of immortality which the gospel of Jesus Christ has brought to light. May those who lament loss of one whose virtues and peculiar sweetness of disposition had so endeared her, that every tie grew stronger by time, and those who new her longest loved her most, console themselves by looking forward to the glorious resurrection, when, through the merit of their Redeemer, they may trust for their re-union with her for ever.”
The same monument perpetuates the memory of Mr. Nathaniel Barton’s father, John Barton, Esq., who died in 1783, aged 64, and who is buried at Upton Scudamore, with his only daughter. There is also an inscription to the memory of Mr. John Barton’s wife, who died in 1809, aged 89, and of “Mrs. Mary Watts, a respected friend and relative,” who died in 1820, aged 76; also of Elizabeth Barton, who died in 1851, aged 45; and Sarah Francis, wife of Joseph Lax, Esq. (Clifton), second daughter of Nathaniel and Elizabeth Barton.
Upon the wall near this monument, is a richly ornamental brass:-
“In loving memory of NATHANIEL BARTON, of Corsley House, only son of Nathaniel and Elizabeth Barton, born Jan. 20th, 1813, called to his rest Sept. 22nd, 1878.”
At the end of the opposite aisle is a large marble monument with four panels, surmounted by a quatrefoil, inscribed to the memory of Robt. Meares Esq. (d.1779), Harrison Meares his son, (d.1783), Robert Meares, of Hackney, (d.1816), John Meares, of Frome, second son of Robert, (d.1824), Robert Meares, son of John, (d.1832), Amelia Jane Meares (d.1843), Henry Meares, (d.1849), John Meares, (d.1855), Geo. Hammond Meares, (d.1859), and Peter Guillebaund Meares, (d.1880).
In the porch of the Church, upon a handsome tablet, is an inscription as follows:-
“Sacred to the memory of HENRY AUSTIN FUSSELL, of Stirford House, in this parish; born 1782, died 1845, aged 62 years. – Among the many labours of love which Divine Grace enabled this worthy man to discharge to God and his neighbour, and amid which he went down to his grave respected by all and beloved by many, his family would desire gratefully to record to the honour of his Saviour, the zeal which he displayed, with others, in collecting the funds requisite for the rebuilding of his parish church, and the daily care he personally devoted to the raising of this superstructure itself.”
His wife, who died in 1849, and who was the daughter of the Mr. John Carpenter already mentioned, is also commemorated upon the tablet, as are a number of his children.
The other monuments on the walls of the Church are to the memory of Wm. Battle, (d.1839), Jas. Knight, (d.1840), Geo. Knight, (d.1831), John Racster, (d.1859), John Gutch, (d.1865), Mrs. Wm. Bishop, of Balham Hill, (d.1833), and her mother, wife of Mr. Wm. Jesser Cooper, Edmonton, (d.1824).
Forming the pavement of a passage near the vestry are several old stones, one of which is inscribed:-
“In the vault beneath lye deposited the remains of Mr.WILLIAM JESSEE, late Citizen of London, who ended his life the 6th day of August, 1762, in the 57th year of his age. Also the remains of Mrs. ELIZ. JESSEE, his wife who died 1765. Also of Mrs. MARY JESSEE, late of Frome, who left this Vain and Troublesome world for a blessed Eternity above, on the 20 day of August 1773.
Another old stone commemorates John Mintey, “who deceased 1700.”
There are no other old monuments visible within the Church, but at the beginning of the present century there was a stone here with a very singular anagram as follows:-
APRIL 11th, Ao. Di. 1611.
Hugh Rogers, once of worthy fame, is dead and laid in chest,
Upon Hugh’s grave there is Hugh’s name, whereas Hugh’s corpse doth rest.
God gave Hugh great gifts with good success to advise, to heal, to cure,
He blessed Hugh’s works with perfectness that divers Hugh did pleasure.
Hugh’s skill, Hugh’s counsell, and Hugh’s aid was unto him a treasure.
Regarding poor folk’s ease and health, for God’s glory not for gains,
Of Charity freely he gave his wealth, his salves, his plaisters and his pains.
Given hath Hugh fower pounds likewise to this parish by his last will,
Even so that a crown to the yearly increase be added to the stock still.
Remembering the day of his death and not else, the residue be yearly paid,
Some to the parson, clerk, and poor, and balance as in his will it is said.
Hugh was a Christian good, a subject true,
A Commonwealth’s man rare,
Hugh’s judgement was great as many knew,
Hugh’s knowledge none can declare.
Rogers is gone, whose death many men both rich and poor will miss,
Rogers, we trust Christ Jesus, we shall meet thee in bliss.
Who list to know where Hugh’s body lies,
Near to the font let him cast his eyes.
Upon an ancient list of benefactors of the Church (dated 1634), it is stated that “Hugh Rogers, yeoman, gave fouer pownds.” From this and from the date on the inscription, it is plain that the term “a commonwealth’s man rare” does not refer in any way to the times of Oliver Cromwell. It seems from the epitaph that Hugh Rogers was a doctor, though the term yeoman would hardly indicate such a fact. The use of the word pains in line 7 is very peculiar. The word can hardly be taken in the sense of care or trouble, nor can it be believed that it is meant literally or even ironically. It rather seems that it has a now obsolete meaning, and refers to some sort of remedy applied by medical gentlemen in the good old times, when calcined crabs, hog’s lard, dog’s liver, bleeding, and other equally enjoyable practices and medicines were prescribed. It would be interesting to know what can have become of this singular old monument. In all probability it was here until the old Church was pulled down, but why was it not allowed a place in the new building? It cannot be said to be irreverent or in any way objectionable, and indeed it seems difficult to imagine how anyone could have had the heart to have allowed such a curiosity of quaintness to be lost or destroyed. But the re-builders of the Church appear to have eliminated nearly all that was antique in the ancient building. The old font mentioned in the inscription, has disappeared, and the only old monument now upon the walls is that to Mr. Ailesbury, who was perhaps respected as having been a former rector of the Church.
The only objects in Corsley Church worthy at all of the name of curiosities, are three old records, painted upon wood and roughly framed, containing the names of benefactors of Corsley Parish. Two of these inscriptions hang upon the west wall of the gallery, whilst the third has been separated from its companions and placed in the porch.
The following are the three inscriptions arranged in the order of the age of the tablets or boards upon which they are painted.
(1)
“The names of the Feuerall Benefactors of Cosley, and the particular sums of Monye given by them to the vse of the Poore of the Said Parish for euer to Continue, viz:-
William Hoare, Yeoman, gaue fouer Pounds.
Mr. John Cutlett, Minister, gaue fiue Pounds.
Mr. Moises Lye, Vintner, gaue fiue Pounds.
Hugh Rogers, Yeoman, gaue fouer Pounds.
John Hill, Yeoman, gaue fiue Pounds.
Richard Hofwey, Yeoman, gaue fiue Pounds.
Mr. John Lambe, Vpholster, gaue ten Pounds.
Mr. Richard Jenkins, Minister, gaue fiue Pounds.
Mr. Moises Maior, Vintner, gaue fiue Pounds.
–
Katherine Atford, widow, gaue this table, 1634.”
(2)
“Benefactors of Corsly, and the sums of money given by them to the use of the poor for ever.
Mr. Jeremiah Hollwey, Merchant, gave 50 pounds.
Mr. John Carr, Yeoman, gave 5 pounds.
Mrs. Jone Hollwey, gave 5 pounds.
Mr. Michael Parst, gave 5 pounds.
Robert Hopkins, Victualler, gave this tablet – 1688.”
(3)
“The names of the benefactors of Corsly and the perticular sums of money given by them to the use of the Poore of the said Parish, for ever.
Mr. Jeremiah Hollway, Merchant, gave fifty pounds.
Mrs. Jone Hollway, gave five pounds.
John Carr, Yeoman, gave five pounds.
Of these three inscriptions the second stands in the porch whilst the 1st and 3rd are in the gallery. The third, although the most recent, is perhaps the most curious and noticeable, on account of the extraordinary way in which it is illuminated. It is painted in an almost unreadable “black letter style,” with numerous variations, probably the inventions of the artist. So singular indeed is this lettering that it is reported that there is a general belief in the parish that it represents the ten commandments in Hebrew. But as if to increase the difficulty of reading, the words are mixed up with a most extraordinary and amazing quantity of bewildering flourishes, curls, and other marks and signs, without any particular shape or meaning. If the person who designed and executed this work of art was paid by the hour, he probably made a very considerable sum. It will be observed that the name of Hugh Rogers, “once of worthy fame,” appears upon the oldest of the three inscriptions, which is painted in plain but rather uncouth Roman characters. The name of “Mr. Moises Maior” (Mr. Moses Mayor) was evidently added at a later period than that part of the inscription which precedes it. “Mr. Moises Lye,” who, like Moses Mayor, was a “vintner,” or wine merchant, belonged to a family who are said to have occupied the old manor house adjoining the church. The Lyes were at one time patrons of the living of Corsley.
The organ in the west gallery of the church was erected in 1874 by subscription. It is by Vowles of Bristol.
The font, as we have said is modern. It was presented by the children of the Rev. R.C. Griffith, rector of the parish for 28 years, who died in 1844, aged 52. The font was given in memory of him, and of his wife, who died in 1846. The brass ewer near the font is engraved:- “In loving memory of our sister, R.L.K. Swan.”
At the east end of the church is a three-light stained window, given not long since by Mr. John Walter Lea. It contains the figures of St. Margaret, St. John the Evangelist, and, in the centre light, our Lord. The St. Margaret who is represented is the virgin and martyr who is said to have been the daughter of a heathen priest and who met with her end in the third or fourth century. The Church is dedicated to this saint unless as is not likely, it was built in the name of the St. Margaret, Queen of Scotland, niece to Edmund the Confessor and sister to Edgar Atheling. It may be here mentioned that although there seems to be no authentic record as to the date of the foundation of Corsley Church, it is known that it was at first a chapel connected with the parish church of Warminster.
There is nothing else to note within the church. The churchyard which surrounds it contains a number of old stones, some of which probably date from the middle of the 17th century. The inscriptions are not remarkable. Upon one stone there is the following rather lifelike but not altogether pleasing portrait of a lady who died in 1817, aged 85:-
Here rests a woman, good without pretence,
Blest with Plain Reason, and with sober Sense.
No conquests she, but o’er herself, desired;
No arts essay’d nor sought to be admired.
Passion and Pride were to her mind unknown,
Convinced that only Reason is our own.
The tower of the church contains an excellent peal of six bells.
The following are the inscriptions upon the six excellent bells which hang in Corsley Church:-
1. MR. IOHN HOOPPER & MR. CALEB CUFF, CH. WDNS. W (bell) C. 1750.
2. MR. IAMES COCKRELL & MR. WILLIAM CULUERHOUSE, CH. WDNS. W (bell) C 1746.
3. WILLIAM COCKEY, BELL FOUNDER, 1732.
4. WILLIAM COCKEY, BELL FOUNDER, 1746.
5. GOD PRESERUE THE CHURCH, W (bell) C. 1732.
6. IOHN HUMPHRY & EBENY COOMBS, CH. WDNS, 1779 – WILLIAM BILBIE, CHEWSTOKE, FOUNDER.
It was a matter of considerable difficulty to get at the inscriptions on these bells, as they are hung in two sets, one set above the other, and can only be approached with ladders. It will be seen that with one exception they are all by William Cockey, the founder at Frome. William Bilbie was one of a renowned bell founder’s family. They carried on business at Chewstoke and Collumpton during the greater part of the last century. One of them, either Thomas or William Bilbie, made many vain endeavours to get the Collumpton Bells in tune, and his want of success is said to have so preyed upon his spirits as to have caused him to commit suicide.
The Corsley Registers are preserved from the year 1686, and are remarkable as having been particularly well kept. A curious baptismal entry which occurs in 1706, is worthy of preservation, as showing how high political feeling ran at that time, even in a small village like this. The entry is:-
“Orange Cary, son of Thomas Cary and Mary his wife, was born on June the 2nd, 1705. His father named him Orange in memory of Good King William, whom God made a glorious instrument to deliver these nations from Popery and Slavery, and to get our gracious Sovrain Queen Ann on the Throne, whom God bless, preserue, and prosper. Amen.”
Corsley, many years ago, had no burial place. The dead were conveyed from the village to the Warminster Churchyard. In 1415 a licence of sepulture was granted by John Chandler, Bishop of Salisbury, by a papal bull, as follows:-
“John, Bishop servant of the servants of God, to his beloved children of both sexes dwelling in Corsley and the hamlets adjoining. – Whereas the church of Corsley before this time was parochial in all respects except only the above right, the Pope on account of the distance and bad roads in winter, now permits them to bury in the Churchyard of Corsley, and delegates John Corsham, Prior of Bruton, to carry his bull into execution.”
It is doubtful, however, in spite of the infallible authority of this document whether Corsley was “parochial in all respects, excepting this right.” There is good reason to believe that it was originally only a chapelry of Warminster. It does not appear that the vicar of Warminster has any special prerogative now in Corsley Parish, but it is worthy of note, as perhaps a relic of the old connection between the two places, that the rectors of Corsley still show their fealty to the vicars of Warminster, by a small annual payment made every autumn.
The organ, which we have already referred to, was placed in the church by subscription, mainly through the exertions of Mrs. Swan.
The lectern, which is of very handsome and substantial brass workmanship (by Singer of Frome), has the following inscription:-
“To the glory of God and in memory of NATHANIEL BARTON, this lectern is dedicated and presented to the Church of St. Margaret, Corsley, by Mary, his wife, and Nathaniel Fletcher, his son.”
It should be mentioned that the stained East Window representing our Lord, St. Margaret, and St. John, was entirely designed and stained by Mr. and Mrs. J.W. Lea, by whom it was presented.
We understand that there is no doubt that the Temple and Whitborne property was originally Ecclesiastical, and it may be instanced in reference to this, that in a old map of the parish, a little hamlet near Temple is marked as possessing the Biblical name of Nineveh. This name has now entirely died out.
The Abbot of Stadlie presented to the “Chapel of Corselegh” in 1306. Afterwards the living was in the possession of the Lye or Leigh family, whose name seems to be preserved in “Leigh’s Green.” In 1667 Sir James Thynne was the patron, and the living has since belonged to the Thynne family.
THE KINGSTON(?) ARMS AT CORSLEY MANOR HOUSE.
In our second notice of the village of Corsley we drew attention to an old coat of arms on the courtyard gate of the old Manor House, near the Church. These we described as “Ermine a lion rampant,” the arms originally used by Sir John Thynne, the builder of Longleat, who is also known to have lived at this house and to have considerably altered, if not rebuilt it. Sir Richard Hoare, in his “Modern Wiltshire,” does not seem to have noticed any other charge upon the field beyond the lion rampant, and therefore assigns the coat to the Leigh or Lye family, who, as we have mentioned, were patrons of the living before the time of Sir James Thynne (1660). In Corsley the tradition that Sir Walter Raleigh lived at the house, has naturally given rise to the entirely erroneous idea that the arms are those of the Raleigh family. Upon paying a second visit to Corsley, and making a closer inspection of the shield, we noticed that what we believed to be ermine, bears a very strong resemblance to a rather uncommon charge, known by the unpleasant name of gutty, but meaning nothing more or less than goutee, or covered with drops. This charge in sclupture would be very similar to ermine, which, as heraldically represented, may be roughly described as a number of elongated arrowheads, pointing upwards with three small “points,” or dots above each head. Gutty is represented by figures of drops on the shield each drop being of course pointed at the summit, and globular at the base, as if running down the face of the shield. This is the appearance of the charge on this coat of arms. The only question is whether it is ermine so worn by age as to resemble gutty, or whether it was originally intended for gutty. The shield is certainly very time-worn indeed, but after carefully observing the best preserved parts of it, we have come to the conclusion that the charge is gutty and not ermine. We have since been informed that the arms of the Kingston family are gutty a lion rampant, and as the Kingstons were formerly landowners in Corsley, there can be little doubt this is their coat and not that of Sir John Thynne’s. It is now almost certain that the three coats of arms found in the debris of the old Search Hoop Inn, Warminster, and built into the wall of the Bleeck Memorial Hall, have no connection whatever with the Kingston Arms or Family, though a tradition has existed to that effect.
Adjoining the church will be noticed the Manor Farm House, a large ancient building, with three gable roofs, and lofty old-fashioned chimneys. In front is a broad enclosed space formerly a courtyard and probably surrounded by a substantial stone wall, part of which still remains. The presence of this wall is also indicated by the old stone gateway in front of the house. Over this gateway is a coat of arms, “Ermine a lion rampant.” This coat of arms is said to be that of the Lye family, patrons of the living of Corsley for many years, whilst the general belief in the parish is that they belong to the Raleigh family.* [*The Raleigh arms were a bend fusilly.] Both these opinions, however, are erroneous. The Lye of Leigh coat of arms is a lion rampant, but no ermine. At Longleat there are some of old seals of the first Sir John Thynne, with this very coat of arms, “Ermine a lion rampant.” The lion rampant, as is well known, still form part of the Thynne arms, but for some unknown reason the ermine appears in later times to have dropped out of the coat. The presence of these arms seem to show that this house may have been built or re-built by Sir John Thynne, the founder of Longleat. It is certain that he lived in it for several years whilst Longleat was in course of erection, probably between 1561 and 1565, and that if he did not actually build it, he made many alterations in its structure. He was the owner of a large part of the parish. The house is known as Whitbourne Manor House, and was the property of Dorothea, daughter of Sir William Wroughton, second wife of Sir John Thynne. After Sir John’s death she married Sir Carew Raleigh, and perhaps lived with him at this house. Sir Carew Raleigh was elder brother of the celebrated Sir Walter, who, though a younger man than Sir John Thynne, was contemporary with him, and was perhaps one of the Royal party who visited Longleat before it was completed, in 1575. There is still a full length portrait of him on the grand staircase of Longleat.
The tradition is that when Sir Walter fell under the displeasure of Queen Elizabeth, on account of an intrigue with Elizabeth Throckmorton, who became his wife, he retired to this old manor house then occupied by his brother, and concealed himself there from the search of the Queen. There is still a part of the building shown as the place in which he is believed to have been hidden.
There is a general idea in the parish that this house was actually the property of Sir Walter Raleigh, but this conjecture is entirely without foundation. No part of Corsley ever seems to have belonged to any of the Raleigh family, and if Sir Carew lived here it was in right of his wife, formerly Lady Thynne.
Sir Walter, as everyone knows, is the patron saint of tobacconists. He was the first to introduce the “noxious weed,” into this country, and was in all probability the very first to infect the air of Wiltshire with its odoriferous fumes. Nearly every place with which he was in any way connected lays claim to that officious but well intentioned domestic, who seeing his or her master apparently with an “infernal machine” in his mouth, and to all seeming consumed by internal flames was prompted to throw a pail of water over him. Corsley is no exception to the rule, and it is religiously believed that the event in question happened in this Manor House. The most that can be said is that if it ever took place at all, it is quite as likely to have happened here as anywhere.
But Corsley lays claim to another tale, probably quite as well founded and much less hacknied than this. It is said that upon a certain fine day Sir Walter emerged from his hiding place, and proceeded to the village Inn, where having no doubt raised the curiosity of the landlord by his appearance – he was eccentric in his dress – he had some liquor provided for him in a private room. Naturally enough he produced his favourite pipe, and was in the full enjoyment of it when the worthy host re-entered the apartment. Terrified at seeing this unknown and singular stranger belching forth smoke of such an extraordinary odour, and evidently rather enjoying it than otherwise, the amazed landlord at once came to the conclusion that he had been entertaining a fallen angel unawares, if not indeed the very prince of fallen angels. When therefore Sir Walter tendered his money, the unhappy man, resolved to have no dealings of any sort with the Evil One, most respectfully and firmly declined to touch the proffered coin. This veracious story is given in Sir Richard Hoare’s “Ancient Wiltshire,” with this variation, that the Inn spoken of is said to have been the Mansion near the church. It is not very likely that this old house was ever an Inn, and as it certainly had been recently occupied by Sir John Thynne, it is extremely unlikely that it was anything but a private house at that particular period.
In the large panelled Hall upon the ground floor of the house is a splendid old oaken banqueting table, 11 feet long by 34 inches wide. This, together with the size and the general appearance of the building, the court yard in front, and the old premises on the east side, which appear to have been kitchens, indicate most conclusively that the house must have been a gentleman’s mansion. The fabric, though it has more recently been strongly secured with iron work is still strong, and the old stone windows, filled until a comparatively modern date with diamond-shaped panes of glass, are of excellent workmanship.
Whether the house belonged to or was occupied by the ancient family of Wroughton, who held many manors in Wiltshire, it is not easy to say. It was the “Dower-House” of Sir William Wroughton’s daughter, Lady Thynne, and it has been imagined, not without some reason, that at some distant period, it may have been surrounded with a park. There are traces of a cutting of considerable extent through Mr. Wake’s farm leading towards the house, and this cutting has been supposed to be the remains of a road which formed an approach to the building. There are also some old premises upon the farm, known from time immemorial as “Park Barn,” whilst not many yards off is a place known as “Deer Leap.” These facts and the coincidence that the road near the church, though it is of unknown age, is still called “New Road,” lend some colour to the conjecture that before Longleat Park was formed, there may have been some sort of park or enclosure in this parish. Certainly the situation would not have been unfavourable.
Situated in Corsley Parish is an old hamlet called Temple. This designation may perpetuate the name of a family, but the fact that there is in the hamlet a magnificent yew tree, of immense age, is thought to indicate that the name may have reference to some “Religious House” formerly situated here. In saying this we may express a hope that if these lines should all into the hands of any inhabitants of this hamlet, they will not misunderstand our meaning. A certain antiquary of the last century travelling through a place as rustic and remote as Corsley, observed a cottage of a rather ecclesiastical appearance. He ventured to knock at the door and asked the good woman who opened it “Has this ever been a religious house?” “I don’t know what ye may mean,” said the indignant matron, “by a religious house; but it’s as decent and honest a house as any dirty old rascal like you is ever likely to have.”
The yew tree which we have mentioned is one of the very finest in the county. It was not long ago carefully examined by Mr. Berry, the head woodward to the Marquis of Bath, and was then pronounced to be in all probability over a thousand years of age. Mr. Berry also considered that it had every chance of living another century or two.
Mr. Berry at the time (1878) took the following measurements which were published in the Journal of Forestry:-
Height, 50 ft.; girth of butt at the ground level, 33 ft. 7 in.; do. at 1 ft. above the ground, 29 ft. 2 in.; do. at 4ft. up (or the smallest girth), 24 ft. 5 in.; length of butt, 6 ft., where it divides into several limbs; the two huge central limbs, girth 12 ft. 7 in., and 12 ft. 9 in., respectively; these latter, by a strange freak of nature, again unite at 6 ft. up, and are there grafted together in Siamese twin fashion; the diameter of spread of branches from north to south is 52 ft., and from east to west 57 ft.; and the circumference of the widest spread of branches is 168 ft. The following remarks were added by Mr. Berry:-
“This fine old yew is still healthy and growing; its head is very dense and full of leaf. Viewed from one side, it exhibits a perfect pyramid of dark green foliage, being broad at the base and gradually tapering to a narrow top, but on looking at it from the opposite side, it is more shouldered, and presents a flatter and more irregularly conical form. The butt, to all outward appearance, is sound and solid, and tolerably round, save about two of the large roots, where it bulges out slightly. The age of yew trees, growing under favourable circumstances, and when in healthy growth, may be approximately guessed by allowing 100 years for every foot in diameter of stem, therefore I should guess this tree to be not less than from ten to eleven hundred years old. I have recently grubbed out a quantity of shrubs that were growing round it, so as to encourage it to renew a lease of its life for another century or two; forked the ground over a spit deep, under and some distance beyond its branches, and afterwards spread a good thick layer of road parings over the surface.”