Page from Opera chirurgica(Pybus (Professor Frederick) Collection, Pybus, Pyb. C.v.5)
Pybus Collection: Pyb C.v.5
John Arderne (1307-1380) practised as a surgeon in Newark and London and earned himself great renown particularly for his medical works, written in Latin despite his lack of a university education. Arderne was typical of medical practitioners in the Fourteenth Century – embracing medical advances, pioneering new methods and referencing the likes of Hippocrates, Galen and Avicenna yet harking back to the Anglo-Saxons’ astrological approaches to medicine.
Page from Opera chirurgica showing marginalia illustrations (Pybus (Professor Frederick) Collection, Pybus, Pyb. C.v.5)
Arderne’s manuscripts were commonly illustrated, both to show techniques and remedies, and to aid the reader in navigating a potentially confusing text. This manuscript, written in Latin but including some passages in French near the beginning, has been illustrated with pictures of operations, instruments, plants, blazons, &c.
The manuscript was formerly part of the private collection of Professor Pybus (1883-1975) who donated his history of medicine books, engravings, portraits, busts, bleeding bowls and research notes to the University Library in 1965. The manuscript now bears his presentation bookplate but there is further evidence of provenance: it has been inscribed by W. Harrysson, Silvester Rowlestone, Sarah Ridall, Mary [Riddall?], Richard Pearson, Mster [sic] Rutter and Christopher Wainman.
Roughly contemporaneous with Arderne’ manuscripts, is Chaucer’ Canterbury Tales, the Prologue of which contains the following depiction of a physician grounded in astronomy, led by ancient classical texts, dressed in taffeta and silk, with a penchant for gold:
With us ther was a Doctour of Phisike; In all this world ne was ther non him like To speke of phisike and of surgerie, For he was grounded in astronomie. He kept his patient a ful gret del In houres by his magike naturel: Wel coude he fortunen the ascendant Of his images for his patient. He knew the cause of every maladie, Were it of cold, or hote, or moist, or drie, And wher engendred, and of what humour: He was a veray parfite practisour. The cause yknowe, and of his harm the rote, Anon he gave to the sike man his bote. Ful redy hadde he his apothecaries To send him dragges and his lettuaries, For eche of hem made other for to winne: His friendship n’s not newe to beginner. Wewl knew he the old Esculapius, And Dioscorides and eke Rufus, Old Hippocras, Hali, and Gallien, Serapion, Rafis, and Avicen, Averrois, Damascene, and Constantin, Bernard, and Gatisden, and Gilbertin. Of his diete mesurable was he, For it was of no superfluitee, But of gret nourishing, and digestible: His studie was but little on the Bible. In sanguine and in perse he clad was alle Lined with taffeta and with sendalle. And yet he was but esy of dispence; He kepte that he wan in the pestilence; For gold in phisike is a cordial, Therfore he loved gold in special.
Extract from The Poetical Works of Geoff. Chaucer … (Edinburgh: At the Apollo Press by the Martins, 1782) Vol. 1. (White (Robert) Collection W821.17 CHA)
‘King Edward’s Chair’ in: Shanks, E. The Coronation of Their Most Gracious Majesties King George VI and Queen Elizabeth (London: George Newnes, 1937) Held in Laura Gillott’s personal collection
An exhibition curated by Laura Gillott
Introduction
King Edward’s Chair, or, The Coronation Chair, is the throne on which the British monarch sits during their coronation. It was commissioned in 1296 by King Edward I to contain the coronation stone of Scotland, the Stone of Scone, which he had captured from the Scots. The chair was named after Edward the Confessor and was kept in his chapel at Westminster Abbey. Since 1308, with only a few exceptions, anointed sovereigns of England have been seated in this chair at the moment of their coronation. It is the coveted ‘throne’: fought for, and sought by, so many claimants over the years. To sit upon it was to be made monarch.
Throughout history there have been a huge number of claimants to the English throne. Some have posed more serious threats than others and some have even successfully usurped reigning monarchs. Thus, over the centuries, those in power have kept a close eye on their rivals and potential heirs to the throne.
Female claimants, whilst rarely considered as posing as significant a threat as their male counterparts, have arisen over the years. Queen Elizabeth I was herself accused of trying to overthrow Queen Mary I in 1554 and, when Elizabeth was Queen, she was so fearful that Mary, Queen of Scots planned to usurp her, that she eventually had her executed in 1587.
Women have been watched especially with regard to their choice of husband in fear that a wisely-chosen matrimonial union could have strengthened their claims to the throne. Although some claimants never showed any desire to become Queens, their very existence was considered threatening.
This exhibition looks at five women throughout history who came close to the English throne but whom, through war, death, imprisonment or bad luck, never became crowned as Queen. Had any of these women ascended to the throne English history could have been quite different and the modern royal family unrecognisable …
Empress Matilda (1102-1167)
Matilda of England was born in 1102. Matilda and her younger brother were the only children of King Henry I and Matilda of Scotland to survive to adulthood. The death of her brother, in 1120, made Matilda the last heir from the paternal line of her grandfather, William the Conqueror.
At twelve years old, Matilda was married to Henry V, the Holy Roman Emperor. After his death she returned to England and, in 1128, married Geoffrey of Anjou with whom she had three sons. Before Matilda’s father died in 1135 there were several contenders for the throne: Robert of Gloucester (the illegitimate son of Henry I); Stephen of Blois (Matilda’s cousin); Stephen’s older brother, Theobald; and Matilda (Henry’s only surviving legitimate child). Henry named Matilda as his heir and made the barons of England swear allegiance to her. Stephen was the first to do so but, when Henry died, he seized the throne, claiming that Henry had changed his mind on his deathbed. Stephen gained the support of the majority of the nobles as well as that of the Pope and his early reign was peaceful. Matilda then began military campaigns to re-claim her birthright.
‘King Stephen’ from Raine, J. A Brief historical account of the Episcopal castle, or palace, of Auckland. . . 2 vols. (Durham: George Andrews, 1852) (Rare Books, RB942.81 RAI)
Matilda’s half-brother, Robert of Gloucester, campaigned for her in England and she invaded in 1139. In 1141, her forces defeated and captured Stephen at the Battle of Lincoln. He was effectively deposed and she briefly ruled. Matilda went by the title ‘Lady of the English’ and planned to become Queen. She lost support when she refused to reduce taxes and the citizens of London re-started the civil war.
Stephen was freed in exchange for the captured Robert of Gloucester and, a year later, the tables were turned when Matilda was besieged at Oxford. She escaped by fleeing across the snow in a white cape and crossing the frozen River Thames. She also later escaped Devizes in a similar manner, by disguising herself as a corpse and being carried out.
‘King Stephen before the Battle of Lincoln, 1141’ from Forester, T. (ed.) The chronicle of Henry of Huntingdon… (London: G.H. Bohn, 1853) [White (Robert) Collection, W942 HEN]
By 1148, after many failed attempts, Matilda accepted that she would never be Queen. Her eldest son, Henry, took up her cause and repeatedly invaded England. This led to the Treaty of Wallingford in 1153, in which Stephen agreed to name Henry as his heir. Matilda died in 1167 and is buried in Rouen Cathedral, where her grave is marked by the epitaph below:
The Ladies Catherine (1540-1568) and Mary Grey (1545-1578)
When King Edward VII lay dying, he nominated his cousin, Lady Jane Grey, as his successor to prevent his catholic sister, Mary, becoming queen. Jane ruled for nine days in July 1553 before Queen Mary I seized the throne that was rightfully hers according to Henry VIII’s will. Jane was imprisoned in the Tower of London and executed, along with her father and husband in 1554. The ladies Catherine and Mary Grey were the younger sisters of Lady Jane Grey and cousins to Queen Elizabeth I. After Jane’s execution they both had claims to the throne as granddaughters of Mary Tudor, the younger sister of King Henry VIII. (Their parents were Henry Grey, 1st Duke of Suffolk and Lady Frances Brandon.) Neither Catherine nor Mary were as religious as the fervently Protestant Jane and this probably saved them from becoming the focus of Protestant plots whilst Mary I was on the throne.
Lady Catherine Grey was born in 1540. She was married to Henry Herbert, in 1553 (on the same day her sister Jane married Guilford Dudley). When Elizabeth I came to the throne, in November 1558, Catherine’s availability as a possible heir came to the fore. At one point the Queen seemed to be warming to Catherine and it was rumoured that she was considering adopting her. As Catherine was a possible heir to the throne, Elizabeth had to consider a suitable marriage for her. The best match would have been one that would not threaten her reign, but could bring some political advantages to England if Catherine were indeed to succeed her. A union between Catherine and the Earl of Arran (a young nobleman with a strong claim to the Scottish throne) was envisaged.
In December 1560, Catherine secretly married Edward Seymour, 1st Earl of Hertford. Not having the Queen’s official permission to wed proved disastrous. Elizabeth had decided to send Edward on an educational tour of Europe. Catherine, who had fallen pregnant before Edward left, managed to conceal the marriage from everyone. However, in her eighth month of pregnancy she knew she would have to ask someone to plead for her with the Queen. She first confided in Bess of Hardwick, who was frightened about the consequences of knowing such a secret and refused to listen. Catherine then secretly visited Lord Robert Dudley, in his bedroom in the middle of the night and told him her story, but the next day he reported everything to Elizabeth. Elizabeth was furious that her cousin had married without her permission and thus thwarted plans for her to marry the Earl of Arran.
Portrait of Lady Catherine and her son, Edward Seymour. From the collection of the Duke of Northumberland. Used with kind permission of the Duke of Northumberland.
The unmarried Elizabeth feared that Catherine would give birth to a son and start a rebellion. Thus Catherine was imprisoned in the Tower of London, where Edward joined her on his return to England. The Lieutenant of the Tower permitted husband and wife to secretly visit one another and, as a result, they had two sons: Edward Seymour, Lord Beauchamp, born in 1561 and Thomas Seymour, born in 1563. In 1562 their marriage was declared invalid and their sons illegitimate. After the birth of their second child, the Queen ordered their permanent separation. Catherine was moved from one location to another under house arrest, eventually ending up at Cockfield Hall in Yoxford, Suffolk. There, she died in 1568, at the age of twenty seven, from consumption.
Lady Mary Grey was born in 1545. She was reportedly slightly deformed and was described by her contemporaries as the smallest person at court. Like her sister Catherine, Mary angered Queen Elizabeth I by marrying without royal consent. Her marriage to Thomas Keyes, the Sergeant Porter, in 1563 resulted, two years later, in her imprisonment in the Tower of London. (The marriage had surprised many since Keyes was an unusually large man whose height contrasted with that of the tiny Mary.) It is possible Mary thought that by marrying someone of such lowly rank, Elizabeth would see her as no threat.
When Catherine died, Mary was brought to prominence as the last surviving grandchild of Mary Tudor. Since Catherine’s children were considered to be illegitimate, some people regarded Mary as heiress presumptive to the English throne. She remained under house arrest until 1572 and was permitted to attend Court occasionally. In spite of the intrigue surrounding her, it does not appear that Mary ever made a serious claim to the throne. Rather, it seems her life was ruined by her royal blood. She died childless and in some poverty, in 1578, at the age of thirty three.
Lady Arbella Stuart (1575-1615)
Lady Arbella Stuart (sometimes spelled Arabella) was born in 1575 and was considered a possible successor to Queen Elizabeth I. The only child of Charles Stuart, 1st Earl of Lennox, and Elizabeth Cavendish, Arbella was a direct descendant of King Henry VII. Through the paternal line, she was the great-granddaughter of Henry VIII’s sister. Both Arbella’s parents died before she was seven and she was raised by her grandmother, Bess of Hardwick.
‘Lady Arabella Stuart’ engraved by T.A. Dean in: Raine, J. A Brief historical account of the Episcopal castle, or palace, of Auckland . . . 2 vols. (Durham: George Andrews, 1852) [Rare Books, RB942.81 RAI]
Queen Elizabeth I came to the throne in 1558. As a woman, a Protestant, and having been declared a bastard after the execution of her mother, Anne Boleyn, in 1536, there were many who felt her claim to the throne was weak and as a result she always felt insecure and at risk from rebellions. Although Arbella’s claim to the throne was even weaker, Elizabeth feared her as she did all potential rivals, and kept a close eye on her throughout her life. It is likely that she preferred the idea of Arbella succeeding her rather than being succeeded by her Catholic cousin Mary, Queen of Scots. However, towards the end of her reign her close advisor, William Cecil, convinced her that Mary’s son, James VI of Scotland, who had been raised as a Protestant, should be her successor. There is no evidence that Arbella ever challenged this.
Towards the end of Elizabeth’s reign, there were reports that Arbella intended to secretly marry Edward Seymour. Arbella denied having any intention of marrying without the Queen’s permission. She was interviewed about her plans in the Long Gallery of Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire, in 1603.
Arbella found herself in trouble again when King James VI of Scotland ascended to the English throne and a plot was devised to overthrow him and replace him with Arbella. The main plot was devised by Arbella’s cousin, Lord Cobham, and Sir Walter Raleigh was among those involved. However, when Arbella was invited to participate by agreeing to it in writing, she reported the plan to James, thus escaping possible imprisonment herself.
In 1610, Arbella secretly married William Seymour, Lord Beauchamp, who later succeeded as 2nd Duke of Somerset. William Seymour also had royal blood as the grandson of Lady Catherine Grey. For marrying without royal permission, King James imprisoned them: Arbella in the custody of Sir Thomas Perry and Seymour in the Tower of London. The couple had some liberty within their prisons and were able to plan their escape.
In June 1611, Arbella dressed as a man and escaped to Kent. A proclamation issued on King James’ behalf stated that they had committed “great and heinous offences” and called upon all persons not to “receive, harbour or assist them in their passage” but to try and apprehend them and hold them in custody. However, it also stated that their intent was to “transport themselves into foreigne parts“. Thus, James must have known that Arbella posed no real threat to his throne and simply wished to escape to be with her husband. William did not arrive at the meeting place and so Arbella set sail for France without him. He had, however, escaped and was on the next ship to Flanders. By this time the alarm had been raised and ships sent after them. Arbella’s boat was within sight of Calais when she insisted upon stopping and waiting for William. This fatal pause allowed her captors to catch up to her and she was forced to surrender whilst, unbeknownst to her, William escaped. Arbella was returned to England and imprisoned in the Tower of London.
When Arbella fell ill in the tower in 1614, it was suspected she was faking illness either in order to escape or to gain sympathy. However, she refused both food and medical attention and was said by some to be delusional towards the end, believing William was coming to rescue her. When she eventually died in 1615 a post-mortem had to be carried out to rule out poisoning. It found that she had died slowly of starvation caused by her own negligence. It has been suggested that Arbella had porphyria, the disease George III and Mary, Queen of Scots are believed to have suffered from. This would explain both her physical and mental symptoms: porphyria can cause abdominal pain, vomiting, seizures and paranoia. She never saw her husband again and is buried in Westminster Abbey.
Princess Charlotte (1796-1817)
Princess Charlotte Augusta of Wales was born in 1796. She was the only child of George, Prince of Wales (later King George IV) and Caroline of Brunswick. As the only legitimate grandchild of George III, she would have become Queen if she hadn’t died in childbirth in 1817, at the age of twenty one.
Charlotte’s parents disliked each other and separated soon after Charlotte’s birth. Prince George left Charlotte’s care to governesses and allowed her only limited contact with her mother. As Charlotte grew to adulthood, her father pressured her to marry William, Hereditary Prince of Orange, but after initially accepting him, Charlotte soon broke off the match. This caused much upset between her and her father, including him placing her under house arrest for several months. He finally permitted her to marry Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld.
The wedding took place in 1816 and huge crowds attended. It is believed that Charlotte suffered two miscarriages in quick succession after the wedding but, by early 1817, she was pregnant again and it seemed to be progressing well. Her pregnancy was the subject of much public interest, with people placing bets on the sex of the child. Charlotte’s contractions began on 3rd November, but the labour lasted for two days and she eventually gave birth to a stillborn boy on 5th November. Charlotte took the news calmly, stating it was the will of God. She seemed to be recovering but not long after the birth she began bleeding heavily and died soon afterwards.
After Charlotte’s death, there was a huge outpouring of public grief and the whole country went into deep mourning. Linen-drapers reportedly ran out of black cloth and the country shut down almost entirely for two weeks, including the banks and courts. With the loss of his only heir, Prince George was inconsolable and unable to attend Charlotte’s funeral and Princess Caroline fainted in shock when she heard the news. However, it was Charlotte’s husband of just over a year who felt the greatest loss – he was said to be utterly devastated at the deaths of both his wife and son. Many elegies and poems were written about Charlotte, lamenting the loss of the heir to the throne and hope for the future.
Title page of Cockle, Mrs. Elegy to the Memory of Her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte of Wales (Newcastle upon Tyne: Printed by S. Hodgson, 1817) [Clarke (Edwin) Local Collection, Clarke 1508(1)]
It wasn’t long before people looked for someone to blame for the tragedy. Although the post-mortem was inconclusive, many blamed Charlotte’s physician, Sir Richard Croft, and three months after her death, he killed himself. This led to significant changes in obstetric practice, with intervention in long labour becoming more commonplace and acceptable.
Princess Charlotte was buried, with her son at her feet, in St. George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle, on 19th November 1817. A monument was erected, by public subscription, at her tomb. People lined the streets along the funeral route from Claremont to Windsor to pay their respects to her. The mass public mourning is comparable with the outpouring of grief witnessed when Princess Diana died in 1997. With a mad king on the throne and an unpopular Prince of Wales, many had looked forward to Charlotte’s ascension to the throne and the new uncertainty about the succession accentuated the sense of grief felt by the British public.
What if they had been Queen?
Empress Matilda As her son, Henry, acceded to the throne after Stephen, Matilda’s being Queen wouldn’t have changed the succession. However, if she, as a woman, had become a reigning monarch in the Twelfth Century, then it is possible that we may have seen another queen before Mary I in 1553. Also, if Matilda had been a successful queen then perhaps future kings, such as Henry VIII, would have been less concerned with the need to provide a male heir to the throne.
Lady Catherine and Lady Mary Grey Although there was a good chance that either Catherine or Mary would become Queen, neither of them aspired to the throne and after the failed attempt to make their sister, Jane, Queen they could not count on a great deal of support from nobles who had no desire to lose their heads. Furthermore, neither of them was deeply Protestant, like Jane, and therefore they weren’t a viable alternative to the Catholic Mary I. As it turned out, neither of them lived long lives and it is likely that even if they had ruled, the reign would have been brief and relatively insignificant.
Arbella Stuart It is difficult to say whether or not Arbella desired to be Queen. On one hand she never made any attempt to seize the throne but she had been raised as royalty and her romantic assignations suggest ambition. Even if she had been named as Elizabeth’s heir, James would almost certainly have tried to claim the throne himself and, as a man and King already, would have garnered considerable support. If James had died young, his son, Charles would have eventually tried to take the throne. As her claim wasn’t as strong as theirs, it would have made for a very unsettled reign for Arbella.
Princess Charlotte Charlotte’s death left the king without any legitimate grandchildren and his other sons were urged to marry. George III’s fourth son, Prince Edward, dismissed his mistress and proposed to Leopold’s sister, Victoria. Their daughter, Princess Victoria of Kent, born in 1819, became heir and then Queen. Her uncle Leopold helped arrange her marriage to his nephew, Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. If Charlotte had not died then Victoria may never even have been born, and our current royal family would be descended from Charlotte instead.
Front cover of the Annual Report of the Northumberland Handicrafts Guild, 1918-1919 (Northumberland Handicrafts Guild Archive, NHG 3/11)
The Northumberland Handicrafts Guild was formed in June 1900 with the aim of promoting the study and practice of handicrafts, such as embroidery, wood work, basket work, leather work and weaving, in the County of Northumberland.
The Guild’s formation had its origins in the Arts and Crafts Movement which began in England in the 1880s in response to the growth of industrialisation and mass production by machines. The Movement called for a revival of real craftsmanship and traditional craft techniques, and embraced nostalgia for the mediaeval age which was seen as the golden age of creativity and freedom. Leading figures in the Movement believed in a social and utopian society where artists and craftsmen were viewed as equals. One of the founding fathers of the Movement was William Morris who famously advised, “Have nothing in your house that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful”.
A key feature of the Movement was the establishment throughout the country of societies and guilds to bring together artists and craftsmen, and to help publicise the movement through meetings, classes, lectures, exhibitions and craft demonstrations. The use of the word “guild” harked back to the mediaeval trade guilds which protected and promoted the common interests of craftsmen. The Northumberland Handicrafts Guild was one such example, and other examples included the Guild and School of Handicraft in the East End of London, the Century Guild and John Ruskin’s Guild of St George.
The decorative motif carried on the front cover of the Northumberland Handicrafts Guild’s Annual Reports, as depicted here, typified the artistic and graphic styles which were associated with the Arts and Crafts Movement, while the Guild’s motto proclaimed, “by hammer and hand all arts do stand”.
The Guild arranged teaching classes and lectures in most areas of the county, new classes in its first year including needlework and embroidery, led by Lady Anne Bowes-Lyon at Haydon Bridge and by Mrs H. Pease at Cramlington. Lectures in the first year included the Reverend S. Gates on “Lace Working and Embroidery” at Haydon Bridge, Messrs Hatton and Williams on “Handicrafts in relation to home life” at Allendale and Mr G. Blount on “Democratic Art” in Newcastle.
There were strong links between the Guild and the Art Department of the Durham College of Science at Newcastle upon Tyne, known from 1904 as Armstrong College (and ultimately to evolve into the present day Newcastle University). The Guild’s first Vice President was Charles W. Mitchell, Chairman of the College’s Art Committee and a member of the College Council, while its first Honorary Secretary was the historian Thomas Edward Hodgkin, also a member of the College Council. Other Armstrong College figures such as Richard George Hatton, for many years Professor in Fine Art, Ella Pease and Miss Noble held office or served on the Guild’s committee. Craft work produced during the Guild’s classes was exhibited annually in the College and entries were judged by a team of experts, with awards given for individual work.
The Guild was also the first organisation of its kind to teach handicrafts to wounded soldiers during the First World War. Classes were held in Armstrong College, part of which was being used as a ward of the First Northern Military Hospital, and doctors testified to the psychological benefits which patients derived from the work.
Illustration from March ‘Tossing the Pancake’ from The Comic Almanack: an ephemeris in jest and earnest, containing merry tales, humorous poetry, quips and oddities. By Thackeray, Albert Smith, Gilbert A. Beckett, the Brothers Mayhew, with many hundred illustrations by George Cruikshank and other artists. 1st [-2nd] series, 1835[-1853]. (19th Century Collection, 19th C. Coll 827.89 COM)
This year, Shrove Tuesday falls on 8th March. Christians were expected to go to confession in the week before the penitential period of Lent and Shrove Tuesday is the last day before Ash Wednesday (i.e. the first day of Lent). To shrive (the verb from which the past participle shrove is derived) means to obtain absolution but Shrove Tuesday can be thought of as a day of high spirits before entering a more sombre mood.
Of course, many people will know Shrove Tuesday by its more colloquial name of Pancake Day and in this guise, it is thought of more as a day of feasting on those ingredients which are prohibited during Lent, a time of fasting. In fact, the names given to the day in other countries often translate as Fat Tuesday.
From the Twelfth Century, Shrove Tuesday celebrations often incorporated games of ‘mob football’ but the Highway Act of 1835 banned the playing of football on public highways and the tradition died out in all but a few towns, including Alnwick (Northumberland) and Sedgefield (Co. Durham). Pancake races have proved to be a more enduring tradition. Since the mid-Fifteenth Century, entrants have run towards a finishing line, tossing their pancakes into the air as they go, and catching them in frying pans. The tradition is said to have originated with a housewife in Olney, Buckinghamshire who was so engrossed in making pancakes that she lost track of time and, on the peal of the church bells calling people to service, she rushed out of the house still carrying her pancake and pan.
This cartoon is from The Comic Almanack by the English artist, caricaturist and book illustrator, George Cruikshank (1792-1878). Cruikshank was renowned for his humorous drawings, satirical political cartoons and social caricatures of English life. He is considered to have been one of the most important British graphic artists of the Nineteenth Century and was undoubtedly one of the most popular cartoonists of his day.
The Comic Almanack, published annually from 1835, contained amusing stories, poems, jokes and cartoons. The illustrations were chiefly Cruikshank’s and he engaged others such as the novelist William Makepeace Thackeray to supply the stories. The Almanack was a hugely successful publication, although competition from Punch’s Almanack, which began in December 1844, eventually led to its demise.
2nd March 2011, marks the centenary of the death of Robert Spence Watson (1837-1911). This image of Spence Watson is pasted into the front of a copy of one of his publications, The Reform of the Land Laws (1905), contained in the Spence Watson/Weiss Archive (SW 10/9).
Robert Spence Watson was born in Bensham on the outskirts of Gateshead. His family’s house there, Bensham Grove, remained his home for all of his life. Born into a Quaker family and a lifelong Quaker himself, Spence Watson was aware from an early age of the presence of injustice in the world and the efforts made by those who strove to redress the balance. His father, a solicitor, was a campaigner for the first Reform Bill, an advocate for Catholic Emancipation, and northern secretary of the Anti-Corn Law League, and at the age of seven the young Robert reportedly heard the famous Quaker radical and Liberal statesman John Bright speak from the hustings at Durham.
Although he became a solicitor by profession, Spence Watson’s interests were many and varied and his work and achievements in the spheres of politics, social reform, philanthropy and education gained him a position of great influence and esteem in his native Newcastle and beyond. His entry in the Dictionary of National Biography states that he “represented the Quaker tradition of public action at its sturdiest”.
He was passionately interested in education and saw it as a means of improving an individual’s social condition. Amongst his many accomplishments in this area, he was Chairman of the first Newcastle school board and a pioneer of the Newcastle Free Public Library, ran working men’s Sunday classes and pioneered a system of adult schools. He was heavily involved in the foundation in 1871 of the Durham College of Science, later Armstrong College, which eventually evolved into Newcastle University, becoming its first President in 1910. He also served over a period of many years as Honorary Secretary, Vice President and later President of the Literary & Philosophical Society (Lit & Phil) in Newcastle.
A founder member and later President of both the Newcastle Liberal Association and the National Liberal Federation, Spence Watson was a lifelong adherent of the Liberal Party. Although he had no desire to enter the House of Commons, he was one of the most influential Liberal figures outside parliament. He had many high-profile political friends, many of whom he and his wife Elizabeth entertained at Bensham Grove, including the local Liberal MP Joseph Cowen, the afore-mentioned John Bright, Earl Grey and William Ewart Gladstone.
Spence Watson also cared deeply about the causes of those living under oppressed regimes. In particular he supported Russian political exiles in England, including Stepniak and Kropotkin. He was also well known in the North of England for his work as an arbitrator in trade disputes, which he undertook voluntarily, while he possessed a keen interest in literature and the history of the English language, and wrote a biography of his friend the pitman poet Joseph Skipsey.
One of his most high-profile acts of public work came in 1870 when he was appointed by the Society of Friends (the Quakers) as one of the commissioners of its War Victims Fund, travelling to Alsace-Lorraine to oversee the distribution of relief to non-combatants in the French-Prussian War, many of whom had been left homeless, destitute and bereaved by the ravages of war in the region. When he returned to France in 1871 to carry out similar work for the French Government, he wrote this touching letter home to his four-year-old daughter, Ruth. In the letter, which is held in the Spence Watson/Weiss Archive (SW 3/10), he told Ruth of his work in France. Although he wrote with the gentle tone of a father to his daughter, it was clearly important to Spence Watson that his children were aware of the hardships suffered by those less fortunate than themselves, just as he himself had been aware as a child. The first page of the letter is shown below. He wrote:
“Dear little Ruth I promised to write you a letter whilst I was in this beautiful place, & now I begin in such a large office, far larger than that which I have at home, and close to the place where we are going to put the clothes and food for the poor people. We have a soldier with a gun & sword walking up and down before our door, but he is very kind to me, & says “Bon jour Monsieur” whenever he sees me… you would like to see the wonderful dolls in the shops, dolls which walk & talk, & do many other funny things. But you would be sorry to see so many ladies all dressed in black, & to hear how many little children died here during the long cruel siege… I want much to get home to dear Mamma & you, but I cannot come until I see that their clothes & food have reached here quite safely.”
Letter from Robert Spence Watson to Ruth Watson (Spence Watson/Weiss Archive, SW 3/10)
The East view of Widdrington Castle in Northumberland (Local Illustrations, C432
Northumberland is full of ruined castles that draw tourists year after year to imagine how magnificent they must have once looked. But, it is also filled with sites where castles once stood, that today there remains little or no trace of. One such site is Widdrington in Northumberland, not far from Druridge Bay. This is where Widdrington Castle stood from the 14th century until its demolition in the 19th century.
The first records of a structure at this site describe a medieval fortified manor house and castle. In 1341 Gerard Widdrington was granted a licence to fortify the house. The engraving shows a substantial tower with turrets at the corners, similar to the castle at nearby Belsay. By 1592 the castle had three parts: the original tower, a great hall and a northern tower. In the late 17th century wings were added to the towers, and a walled garden was laid out. However, by 1720 and with new owners, it was in a ruinous condition. Sometime after 1772 the castle was demolished and rebuilt, but the new building burnt down before it was finished. After this a new Gothic castle was built, but this too fell to ruin and was demolished in 1862. The dilapidated state in which the castle found itself many times over the years probably owed much to the fact that it was rarely the main residence of the families who owned it, and lack of use caused it to fall into disrepair.
Widdrington Castle’s claim to fame is that King James VI of Scotland and I of England was believed to have stayed at the castle in 1603. Sir Robert Carey, the second cousin of Queen Elizabeth I, who married the widow of Henry Widdrington in 1593, rested here during his journey from London to Edinburgh to inform James of Elizabeth’s death. On James’ journey south to claim the throne the men are said to have stayed at Widdrington.
The Widdrington family themselves were Catholic and Royalist and therefore strong supporters of the Stuart cause. The first baron was a Royalist army officer, the second baron served in the army of Charles II, and during the revolution of 1688 the third baron was dismissed as governor of Berwick and Holy Island and imprisoned. His three sons, William, Charles and Peregrine, all became active Jacobites.
The fourth baron, William Widdrington (1677/8-1743) was educated at Morpeth grammar school and in Paris where he became familiar with the exiled Stuart court. He took a leading role in planning the north’s contribution to the Jacobite rising of 1715, providing one of the five troops in the Northumbrian force. However, he was confined to his bed with gout during the Battle of Preston, and when it was clear that the situation was hopeless he advised surrender. After the failed rising he was tried for high treason. In his defence he argued that he had not been aware of the plan and had only joined to keep face with his friends. He was found guilty and sentenced to death, but with only hours to spare he was reprieved and released from the Tower. The Widdrington estates were confiscated by the Crown and sold to Sir George Revel. The estate then passed via marriage to Sir George Warren and then on to Lord Vernon. An attainder was passed on the family titles although Widdrington’s eldest son, Henry Francis, was commonly called Lord Widdrington. Following the death of Henry in 1774 the Widdrington family appears to have become extinct.
The site of Widdrington Castle is a Scheduled Ancient Monument. All that remains of the protected site today is the Castle mound and a row of lime trees, known as The Apostles. The site lies close to The Country Barn in Widdrington, which uses the castle as its logo.
Postcard photograph of Mr and Mrs Charles Trevelyan, c. 1904 (Trevelyan (Charles Philips) Archive, CPT 1/3/4)
To celebrate the Royal wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton on Friday 29th April 2011 we bring you a special ‘wedding’ treasure!
The postcard photograph above shows Mr. and Mrs. Charles Trevelyan with the Trevelyan family crest, which bears the motto ‘Time tests faith’. Charles Philips Trevelyan (1870 – 1958) married Mary Bell (1881 – 1966), the half sister of Gertrude Bell, in 1904. Special Collections holds Charles’ papers, the Liberal MP who famously defected to Labour in 1918. It is unknown what this postcard was used for. It dates from after their wedding in 1904 as they are identified as ‘Mr and Mrs Trevelyan’. It may have been part of a thank you note to guests for their wedding presents or simply a portrait of the newly-married couple that they sent out to family and friends.
Special Collections also holds the papers of Mary Trevelyan (who was known as Molly), including her diaries for the years 1892 – 1917. The page below is taken from her diary for 1904 and is among a series of entries regarding their wedding day.
Newspaper clippings from Molly Trevelyan’s diary, listing the presents that were gifted to Charles and Molly Trevelyan on their wedding day, 1904 (Trevelyan (Charles Philips) Archive, CPT 2/1/9)
They include her handwritten account of the wedding day with cuttings from the press and a complete list of gifts received by the bride and bridegroom.
This page shows one of three cut-out from the newspaper listing all the wedding presents they received and who they were from.
The fact that this was published in the press shows that the public appetite for information about the rich and famous has always been strong!
Gifts included a grand piano from the mother of the bride; a fur coat from the father of the bride to the groom; numerous collections of books and poems, including The Life of Gladstone from Mr and Mrs Gladstone; some letters written by Dickens; tea sets; writing desks; two grandfather clocks; hundreds of items of silverware; and more candlesticks and inkstands than anyone could ever find occasion to use!
Wedding presents have been given since ancient times. They have normally been practical items for the new couple’s home. However, in some cultures guests would have been expected to contribute to the wedding banquet as a thank you for their invitation! The idea of the wedding trousseau or ‘bottom-drawer’ put together by the bride’s family has its origins in the dowry. Dowry is an ancient custom, which has been practised around the world throughout history. This has often been money but can also include a selection of goods paid for by the bride’s family to furnish the newlywed’s home. As many newlywed couples did not have much money, the bride’s mother would put away household goods, including homemade items often in a bottom drawer, starting before their daughters had even met their future husband! The idea was to create a collection of everything a young woman setting-up her first home would need. Some ostentatious Victorians even introduced a ‘trousseau tea’ in an effort to out-do each other, where wealthy families would display trunk loads of linens, china and clothes they had put together for their daughters!
Nowadays, as many couples live together before marriage, wedding gift lists are more likely to include luxury items rather than practical ones and many couples choose not to have traditional gifts at all, instead asking guests to contribute money to a honeymoon, they could perhaps not otherwise afford. Prince William and his bride-to-be Kate Middleton have asked guests to donate money to charity rather than buy them wedding presents. This is likely to lead to hundreds of thousands of pounds being donated to the twenty-six, not very well-known, charities that the couple have chosen. Of course there are some advantages – they are less likely to end up with things they do not need. The Queen and Prince Philip received five hundred cases of tinned pineapple and ingredients for their wedding cake from the Australian people when they married in 1947. However, William and Kate they are still likely to receive numerous presents from the general public. Prince Charles and Princess Diana received thousands of presents from well-wishers around the world after their marriage at St Paul’s Cathedral in 1981, including a roomful of antique furniture from Canada and twenty silver platters inscribed with their wedding date from Australia. A selection of the presents was placed on display at St. James’s Palace and some items were later distributed to charity. After all there are only so many toasters and kettles that a Royal couple needs!
Front cover of Wood, J.G. Skating and Sliding (London: Routledge, 1872) (19th Century Collection, 19th C. Coll. 796.91 WOO)
In the mid Nineteenth Century, increasing literacy levels and the industrialisation of printing and book-making combined to create a demand for cheap publications. This demand was well-met by ‘yellowbacks’: low-priced octavos with strawboard boards covered with yellow paper and often block-printed with pictures. Yellowbacks were ubiquitous in the 1870s and 1880s and George Routledge dominated the field. His publishing house started to experiment with non-fiction and with educational handbooks and thus the series Routledge’s Sixpenny Handbooks was born.
Illustration of ‘Skating’ from Wood, J.G. Skating and Sliding (London: Routledge, 1872) (19th Century Collection, 19th C. Coll. 796.91 WOO)
Skating and Sliding by the Reverend J.G. Wood and other
writers is an example of the series which also treated such subjects as
cricket, manly exercises, fireworks, swimming and conjuring. This particular
manual takes learners through the history of skating, putting skates on, how to
start from the inside edge and progresses to various skating figures, such as
the Dutch Roll and the Figure of Three. It quotes three maxims attributed to
renowned skater Robert Ferguson: “Throw fear to the dogs”, “Put
on your skates securely” and “Keep your balance”!
Extract from Wood, J.G. Skating and Sliding (London: Routledge, 1872) (19th Century Collection, 19th C. Coll. 796.91 WOO)
From 1607 to 1814 a frost fair was held on the River Thames
and into the early- Nineteenth Century rivers and canals froze sufficiently to
support skating. The Skating Club was founded in London, 1830 and in 1876, the
first artificial ice-rink (the Glaciarium) opened in Chelsea.
John George Wood (1827-1889), having worked in the
anatomical museum, Oxford and having made a name for himself delivering
illustrated lectures on zoology, was best known as a writer on natural history.
However, he also wrote books on gymnastics and other sports and even edited The
Boys Own Magazine.
Photograph of Lord Armstrong from University Archives
26th November 2010 marks the bicentenary of the birth of Lord Armstrong. William George Armstrong, Baron Armstrong of Cragside, was a scientist, engineer, inventor and businessman. His achievements brought him world renown and fixed Newcastle and the North East of England firmly on the science and engineering map.
This photograph depicts Lord Armstrong standing at the doorway to Cragside, his country home in Rothbury, Northumberland, in c. 1897 when Armstrong was in his old age. In the photograph Armstrong appears to be content, satisfied and self-assured, if a little tired, and a glance at the story of his life and achievements explains why.
Armstrong was born on 26th November 1810 at 9 Pleasant Row, Shieldfield, in Newcastle upon Tyne. He was the only son of William Armstrong, a corn merchant and local politician. Armstrong Senior wanted his son to enter the legal profession and, upon leaving school, Armstrong took articles under the wealthy Newcastle solicitor and family friend Armorer Donkin, becoming a partner in the firm in 1835.
Armstrong was a good solicitor, but his passion lay elsewhere. From an early age he had possessed a fascination with all things scientific and mechanical. This continued into adulthood and a turning point in his life came in 1835 when, during a fishing trip to Dentdale in Yorkshire, his attention was captured by what he recognised as an inefficient use of water in an over-shot water-wheel. Over the next ten years, Armstrong devoted his spare time to developing the effective use of water as a motive power, and his tireless work culminated in his demonstration, to great applause, of a model hydraulic crane at the Literary and Philosophical Institute in Newcastle in December, 1845.
During this early period of his career Armstrong’s imagination was also captured by an aspect of science which was to become one of his greatest loves: electricity. When, in 1840, workers at Cramlington Colliery in Northumberland began to experience electric shocks from steam escaping at high-pressure from a boiler, Armstrong applied his capabilities to establishing and describing the cause of the phenomenon, later named The Armstrong Effect in his honour. He published a series of papers on the effect and developed a spark-inducing hydroelectric machine which he exhibited at the Literary and Philosophical Society. His discovery led to him being elected a fellow of the Royal Society in May 1846.
In the mean time, Armstrong’s hydraulic cranes had impressed many and were in such high demand that, in 1847, he established Messrs W.G. Armstrong & Co., in partnership with Armorer Donkin and others, to manufacture machinery using his hydraulic technology. He finally resigned from his solicitor’s job shortly afterwards. In the same year the partners founded an engineering works at Elswick on the banks of the River Tyne, just to the west of Newcastle. The Elswick Works were to go from strength to strength and evolve through several incarnations over the decades, Armstrong’s reputation as an engineer and a businessman growing alongside them.
In the 1850s Armstrong moved into the field of armament production when he developed a new type of field gun in response to the high loss of life experienced during the Crimean War, and was commissioned to supply the War Office with Armstrong Guns, receiving a knighthood for his services. Later, after the government ended its contract with the Elswick Works, Armstrong went on to sell armaments, including naval guns, indiscriminately to foreign countries. Although this seemed controversial to some, Armstrong felt justified in doing so.
Armstrong became a nationally and internationally renowned figure and, as he amassed great wealth from his engineering successes, he became a great benefactor to his native Newcastle. His gifts included Jesmond Dene, the landscaped park which he gave for the benefit of the town’s inhabitants, and substantial financial support towards the foundation of a College of Physical Science, ultimately to evolve into Newcastle University.
He was awarded many honours for his achievements, including election to the Presidency of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1863. During his inaugural address as President at the Association’s meeting in Newcastle in the same year, he spoke about the issue of finite coal reserves and the potential for harnessing solar power, adding “visionary” to his many other accolades.
In the same year, Armstrong purchased land near Rothbury and began the construction of his country residence Cragside, where he would increasingly spend his time as he retired from the day-to-day running of the business. These later years of Armstrong’s life saw his love-affair with electricity re-surface when, in keeping with his instinct for innovation, Cragside was the first house in the world to be lit using hydroelectric power and the first to be lit by Joseph Swan’s newly-invented incandescent light. He experimented further with electricity and in 1897 published the volume Electric Movement in Air and Water which contained a set of striking photographic images of electric discharges taken by the Rothbury-based photographer John Worsnop, who also took the photograph of Armstrong shown here.
Armstrong was raised to the peerage as Baron Armstrong of Cragside in June 1887. When he died in 1900, he left an enduring legacy and was remembered as having been a towering figure of the Victorian era.
Front cover of Campbell, W.D. Beyond the border. With 167 illustrations by Helen Stratton (Westminster: Archibald Constable & Co., 1898) (19th Century Collection, 19th C. Coll. 823.89 CAM)
Yes, it was most decidedly Black Duncan the smith who was at the bottom of the whole affair. He was the author of the remark that set everybody gaping, and made such a tremendous fuss in the town. He it was who let fall the fatal joke, when his wife brought in the dish of broiled haddock that morning at breakfast; and though it is not the best taste to laugh at one’s own pleasantries, he, I must confess, did so. It was beyond measure funny, and not a bite or sup would he taste till he had had his laugh out. Thus begins Walter Douglas Campbell’s Beyond the border (1898). It appears to be a children’s story, with a king and queen, a talking cat and a hag who lives in a tower with her daughter who has a “flat, yellow face, speckled like a trout”.
Helen Stratton (fl. 1892-1925) provided 167 black and white illustrations to accompany the text. A British illustrator who was particularly associated with children’s books and fairy tales, she was sometimes influenced by the Glasgow School of Art and art nouveau movement; at other times was influenced by the Pre-Raphaelite style of painting.
The book itself has a green Victorian cloth binding, with a front cover design depicting a witch dropping frogs into a cauldron, and highly-stylised cats on the spine. It was presented to J. Patten MacDougall from Innis Chonain in 1899. Innis Chonain is the Scottish Island on which Douglas Walter Campbell, an amateur architect, had built a large home.
