Gents Mag 1848 part 2 p.137
|
|
|
|
|
introduction | ||
|
|
list, 2nd qtr 19th century | ||
|
|
previous page
next page |
||
|
Gentleman's Magazine 1848 part 2 p.137
[accompani]ment characteristic of the age they were intended to represent - and so long as they say nothing about them, we will venture to say that no one will, either by word or deed, attempt to disturb their harmless amusements; but, if on the other hand, such parties, or others for them, will needs indiscreetly volunteer grandiloquent letters in periodicals chiefly appropriated to antiquarian subjects, setting known history at defiance, and recklessy throwing down right and left the established land-marks of antiquity, those letters henceforth become public property; and neither Mr. George Shaw nor any one else in the like position has just grounds of complaint, if the public take the liberty of making their own fair comments upon them, which we have done; and Mr. George Shaw need not think our remarks less worthy of attention because he does not know our names. We advise him not to estimate us too cheaply, for we may chance turn out more awkward customers than he anticipates; and instead of complaining of our "point-blank denials, without even a shadow of an attempt at proof," let him answer our objections - he is on his trial. We it was who taxed him with writing false history; therefore the onus probandi rests with him. And how does he answer? He could, or he would, or he might reply if he chose, "by re-insisting on the facts detailed in his letter, which are quite as likely to be true as our ostentatious accusations." Be it so. But we do not intend to let him ride off in that way; we shall see anon. As to ssaying that he did not wish to impress upon your readers that Brougham Hall, as it at present exists, "had done so for centuries, because he repeatedly spoke of renovations and repairs," that is not the question (though it is pretty well to tell us that "missiles of offence had in ancient times been projected" from a tower, which was newly built from the ground in 1830), the question is, did not Mr. George Shaw intend in his letter to convey notions of great antiquity as regards this house in general by such passages as these? "that the various buildings show remains of architecture from the ponderous Norman workmanship through successive centuries." How do you construe that? It certainly looks to us to point at something like the Norman Conquest, as the age of the structure - or his description of the offices in the yard, "with which the antiquary is delighted, none to appearance later than the time of Henry VII. gray with the weather-stain of ages." But Mr. G. Shaw says he did not intend to convey such an impression, and that is quite enough for us. At the same time we must say, had he only made the smallest inquiry when at Brougham he would have discovered that the carcass of the present Brougham Hall was built by Henry Brougham, esquire, about the year 1767; that there was no tower of any sort then, save a small summer-house at the front of the west end, about as high as the first-floor windows, with an out-door entrance, as may be seen in a print in Hutchinson's History of Cumberland. The trap-door which was described as a thing in existence when Mr. G. Shaw wrote his letter, not as having been, is attempted to be explained by a foot note which makes matters more difficult. It was not spoken of as being in a tower before; now it is in its old place, we fancy, in the new tower, but where is the flight of stone steps, and where the stone vault? We fear Mr. G. Shaw has laid a trap and fallen into it himself. The times of 1767 required no such secret escape for personal safety. Next comes the armour "hanging decayed upon the walls, and in some places dropped upon the floor, struggling with accumulated dust and cobwebs, ragged pennoncels, dropping from their hooks, bundles of pikes" (the Chartists must have left these). We are surprised there are no long bows in the collection, as it appears a weapon in much use in this locality. Well, we said all these matters came from Wardour Street, London, and elsewhere. And how is that rebutted? Merely by saying that one Henry Brougham by will in 1565 (8 Eliz.) left his harness, "arms and armour," to his son and heir Thomas (with Brougham) as heirlooms. We should like to see a copy of that will, because our forefathers were particular in the disposal of their armour, and most likely every suit will be specified. Did he leave two full suits of armour, one |
|||
|
|
next page | ||
|
gazetteer links
|
|||
|
|
-- Brougham Hall | ||
|
|
|||
Lakes Guides menu.