THE PLAN, FURNISHING AND FUNCTION OF A JACOBEAN COUNTRY HOUSE: BRAMSHILL, HAMPSHIRE, IN THE 1620s AND 1630s

Abstract

This article focuses on Bramshill, Hampshire, one of the most important country houses of the early modern period. From 1605 Bramshill was the home of Edward la Zouche (1556–1625), 11th Baron Zouche – a major courtier during the reigns of Elizabeth i and James i – and was reworked in phases up to and just beyond his death. Based on rare-surviving documents from the 1630s as well as analysis of the house’s fabric, this article reconstructs Bramshill’s plan and interiors as they existed in the late Jacobean and Caroline years. It reveals the arrangement of two significant state apartments – for king and queen – and also the lodgings of the owner, his family and guests, as well as service areas. The rich source material additionally allows the furnishings to be analysed. By using Bramshill as an example, the article aims to shed light on English country houses of similar size and date. The early modern period is important as representing an apogee in the history of country house building – reflecting the ambition of owners such as Lord Zouche and the popularity of the royal progress. Visitors to Bramshill in the early seventeenth century included James i, Charles i and Queen Henrietta Maria.

Bramshill in Hampshire is an architectural rarity: a major country house dating largely from the early seventeenth century which survives – in comparative terms – exceptionally well, and which is elucidated by a series of detailed documents dating from the Caroline period (fig 1). Very few high-status country houses of the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods can be understood to such degree, due to lack of historic documentation or substantial alteration and demolition.

Fig 1. Bramshill viewed from the south-west in 2016. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184539, reproduced with permission.

However, despite its architectural integrity, Bramshill has attracted only limited scholarly attention before now. The property was the focus of a study published in 1883 by its then owner, Sir William Cope, ¹ and was the subject of a series of Country Life articles published between 1899 and the 1950s. ² Bramshill was also the subject of research undertaken in the 1980s by Helen Hills, who went on to write the guidebook of 2008, and was the focus of an architectural study day in 1998; meanwhile, the plasterwork and Bramshill’s phasing were studied by Claire Gapper, FSA, in 2005. ³ None of these works considered the house’s plan in any detail. It has only been comparatively recently – following a change of ownership in 2015 – that an intensive programme of research and investigation has been initiated, as part of discussions about the future use of Bramshill and its estate. This article is one of the results of that work, which has involved Historic England, the National Trust and freelance experts.

In this article, four Caroline documents relating to Bramshill have been analysed in detail for the first time and are used alongside an assessment of the fabric to produce a confident reconstruction and description of the house’s floor plans in the 1620s/30s. Never before has such a reconstruction been attempted, yet a greater understanding of Bramshill is important for various reasons. The building is especially notable as a country house that retains its Jacobean state or ‘best’ rooms – a room type that was at its apogee in the early modern period. This reflected the ambitions and wealth of the English elite at that time as well as the popularity and importance of the royal progress, a summer voyage practised in particular by Elizabeth i and James i, which saw the monarch accommodated at the country homes of his or her subjects. Along with Bramshill, only a handful of English country houses retain state apartments of comparable type, date and status – the most notable others being Knole, Kent (c 1604–8), Audley End, Essex (c 1604–14), Hatfield House, Hertfordshire (1607–12), Blickling Hall, Norfolk (1619–27), and Apethorpe Hall, Northamptonshire (1622–4).

Of all English country houses of the early seventeenth century, only Audley End, Hatfield and Bramshill are known to have included two separate state apartments – a luxury very few owners could afford. ⁴ It may be more than coincidental that the builders of Audley End and Hatfield were both Lord Treasurers – a position to which Bramshill’s owner, Lord Zouche, aspired (see below). Such figures often pioneered trends in architecture and design, showcasing their standing, taste and associations in the form of their country homes. However, as noted below, Zouche was saddled with debts by at least 1604 – though he had sufficient ambition, he lacked adequate funds to truly emulate the great houses built by his two contemporaries. While Hatfield was built in a single phase on a new site and Audley End represents a radical Jacobean remodelling programme, Lord Zouche made some compromises due to existing fabric. In this regard, Bramshill has more in common with Knole (built by another Lord Treasurer), where the outer and inner rooms of the principal state suite are similarly divided by a long gallery – not considered the ideal arrangement in conventional planning of the time. ⁵ On the other hand, the long phase of early seventeenth-century alteration at Bramshill would have enabled Zouche to respond to changing fashions – his interiors were probably not finished until at least 1625, by which time Hatfield and Audley End had been complete for over a decade.

In terms of Bramshill’s plan overall, it is highly notable that so much of its arrangement can be well understood. As set out in this article, the survival of the series of 1630s documents – along with plans produced in the eighteenth century and analysis of surviving fabric – enables a confident reconstruction of the rooms on all three main floor levels. Very few comparable buildings of the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods can be reconstructed to the same degree. Bramshill is therefore of special significance for the light it can shed on how high-status country houses would have been arranged, decorated and furnished under Elizabeth i, James i and Charles i – a heyday for the building type in England.

THE CAROLINE DOCUMENTS

This article relies on evidence provided by four significant documents, all now held at The National Archives (see online supplementary material for transcriptions and comparison tables). ⁶ Two documents are especially full and detailed. Firstly, an inventory dated 19 September 1634, taken around three months after the death of Sir Edward Zouche (see below) (fig 2). ⁷ Secondly, a ‘schedula’ listing items at Bramshill that were to be sold to help repay debts accrued by Sir Edward Zouche, his wife Dorothy and their eldest son, James. ⁸ The latter document is undated but seems to have been compiled in 1637, at the time the sale of Bramshill by the Zouches was agreed. ⁹ It is not a comprehensive listing, as it names only items to be put up for sale, but the document is still highly detailed – it covers even more rooms of the house (sixty-five, excluding the stables) than are set out in the inventory (fifty-four).

Fig 2. Detail of inventory of 19 September 1634. Image: © The National Archives, C108/187 (part 1), reproduced with permission.

Additionally, there is an undated ‘Note of the howseholde stuffe’ at Bramshill. ¹⁰ That this document is later than the 1634 inventory but earlier than the c 1637 schedula is indicated by the values listed (higher than the inventory, lower than the schedula – reflecting inflation at the time), but room names are very similar to those given in the inventory. Most likely, the ‘Note’ dates to around 1635/6. It sets out the contents of only seventeen of Bramshill’s rooms, but these include some of the most significant spaces. The document is notable for its level of detail regarding furnishings such as tapestries.

There are also two further accounts, which are contained within a single document. First, a ‘Bill’ of ‘household stuffe’ removed from six of Bramshill’s rooms by Francis Annesley (1585–1660), 1st Baron Mountnorris, James Zouche’s father-in-law, when he left the house in 1637. Second, a note of goods sent to London on the order of Lord Mountnorris on 24 January and 26 February 1637. ¹¹ These goods derived from twenty-eight rooms, including the king’s and queen’s chambers.

The routes taken by the compilers of the fullest documents – the inventory and schedula – are not straightforward. There was movement between the ground, first and second floors, reflecting the authors’ use of staircases and perhaps also regular pauses – although both of these documents started out with the principal state apartment (king’s rooms). ¹² As stated above, the remaining accounts are only partial listings of Bramshill, although the ‘Note’ of c 1636 also begins with the principal state (or king’s) rooms, moving on to the queen’s suite. The ‘note of goods’ of 1637 moves randomly between all three main floor levels, though rooms are grouped in ways that provide useful evidence – especially about the two state suites.

Each of these documents was compiled for a different purpose and, while there is a great deal of overlap, certain documents are unique in recording particular rooms of the house. Also, many of the rooms are given slightly different names in each instance. It is the evidence provided by the group of documents as a whole that enables a reconstruction of Bramshill’s floor plans in the Caroline period, rather than any single document individually. Considered together, they provide a remarkably rich picture of Bramshill in the 1630s – probably then very little changed since the death in 1625 of the house’s builder, Lord Zouche.

GENERAL HISTORY, ARCHITECTURAL DEVELOPMENT, PLAN FORM AND ROYAL VISITS

The early history of Bramshill is unclear, but there seems to have been a house on the site by at least the fourteenth century. This passed through various hands, including those of Giles Daubeney (1451–1508), 1st Baron Daubeney, Lord Chamberlain to King Henry vii, and the Paulets, marquesses of Winchester, who were based at nearby Basing House. The form and extent of medieval and Tudor Bramshill is unknown, ¹³ but it is probable that – by the end of the reign of Elizabeth i – it was a courtyard house of brick, entered via a gatehouse on the east (see fig 21). ¹⁴

In 1605, Bramshill was acquired by Edward la Zouche (1556–1625), 11th Baron Zouche of Harringworth (fig 3). Zouche had been brought up in the household of Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley – Queen Elizabeth’s chief minister – and enjoyed a long and successful career at court. After acting as envoy to Elizabeth, he served as President of the Council of Wales (1602–7) and Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports (1615–24), and was a member of the Privy Councils of England and Scotland. For a time in 1612, it was thought that Zouche would succeed Sir Robert Cecil to the coveted and influential position of Lord Treasurer, though this did not come to pass. ¹⁵

Fig 3. Edward, 11th Baron Zouche, owner of Bramshill from 1605 to 1625. This portrait dates from about 1618 and is attributed to Daniel Mytens. Image: Royal Collection Trust © His Majesty King Charles iii 2023, reproduced with permission.

Zouche’s rising status was reflected by the scale, quality and ambition of his work at Bramshill, clearly intended to represent the height of fashion and attract a visit by royalty. It is probable that Zouche was closely involved in the process of design. A first phase of rebuilding was undertaken in c 1605–12, incorporating elements of the earlier house. This may have begun on a modest scale, but work seems to have become more advanced and ambitious in a second phase after 1612 (fig 4). This followed Zouche’s marriage of 1611 to Sarah (1566–1629), daughter of Sir James Harington, and the sale of his Northamptonshire estates. Work on the house continued through subsequent years and was still not fully complete on Zouche’s death in 1625. ¹⁶ This sporadic building programme probably reflected Zouche’s precarious financial situation – he spent well beyond his means and was beset with debts throughout his adult life.

Fig 4. The west elevation of Bramshill in 2016. The stone frontispiece was built in 1612 or shortly afterwards. Wings that originally projected to each side were demolished in about 1703. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184533, reproduced with permission.

However, it is probable that the house was largely complete by late August 1620, when James i made his first visit to Bramshill as part of his annual royal progress. ¹⁷ On this occasion, the king was accompanied by his son Charles, Prince of Wales, and their entourage. Zouche himself could not be present for the visit, but stated, ‘I am hartely glad that I have built a howse w^ch may drawe him [the king] to take pleasure there in’. ¹⁸ In August 1622, King James and Prince Charles returned to Bramshill, staying there for two nights (fig 5). ¹⁹ Charles made another visit to Bramshill as king in his own right, with Queen Henrietta Maria, on 25–8 August 1630. ²⁰ Other high-profile visitors to the house included George Abbot, Archbishop of Canterbury, who was at Bramshill in 1621, Henry Rich, 1st Earl of Holland, in 1629, and Charles i’s Secretary of State Dudley Carleton, 1st Viscount Dorchester, in 1630. ²¹

Fig 5. Map showing the progress route taken by King James and Prince Charles in summer 1622, based on the itinerary of James i, produced by Emily Cole. Map: © Historic England Archive.

Zouche’s work at Bramshill reflected his rank and connections. It is probable that Hatfield House in Hertfordshire – built in 1607–12 for Sir Robert Cecil, 1st Earl of Salisbury – was a particular source of influence (fig 6). Zouche was closely connected with the Cecils, having been raised from the age of thirteen as a ward of Lord Bughley and spent considerable time with Sir Robert at family seats such as Theobalds, Hertfordshire (built 1564–85). As projects, Hatfield and the first Jacobean phase at Bramshill were contemporaneous.

Fig 6. The south front of Hatfield House, Hertfordshire, built in 1607–12 for Sir Robert Cecil, 1st Earl of Salisbury. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP435475, reproduced with permission.

Bramshill was built to a plan typical of the time, with ranges set around a central courtyard. The courtyard itself is unusual in being long and narrow, and had a gatehouse on its east side (fig 7 and see fig 21). At some point, the principal approach to the house was moved from the east to the west. This work may have been carried out by Lord Zouche and had certainly been undertaken by 1612 or shortly afterwards, when the west façade was given its elaborate stone frontispiece (see fig 4). Originally, this was framed by projecting wings, as shown by a map produced in 1699 (fig 8). ²² The demolition of these wings in c 1703 (the date on rainwater heads) is Bramshill’s greatest architectural loss. They seem to have been slightly different in form and massing, though the 1630s documents indicate that they were both three storeys high, as with the main house. The overall effect must have resembled the south elevation of Hatfield House.

Fig 7. Bramshill’s central courtyard, looking east. This space was originally larger – it was curtailed on the north by the construction of a two-storey corridor in c 1812. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184550, reproduced with permission.

Fig 8. Detail of map of the Bramshill estate produced by Isaac Justis in 1699. Image: © Bramshill House Collection, reproduced with permission.

In terms of Bramshill’s main block, this had a single-storey great hall dominating the west range, with service rooms at its low end (north), extending through the ground floor of the north range into cellars and into the block north of the gatehouse (fig 9). Further service rooms were located in a mezzanine level within the north half of the east range, beneath the long gallery (fig 10). As was traditional, the great parlour was situated at the high end (south) of the great hall, adjacent to the great staircase, while there was also a winter parlour at the low end of the hall. The latter seems to have been close to a low-end staircase, rising through all main levels of the house and providing access to lodgings – another conventional arrangement of the time. ²³ To the rear of the great hall was a double-height chapel with an upper gallery. The remainder of the house was given over to lodgings of various grades and types, situated on the first and second floors (figs 11 and 12).

Fig 9. Conjectural reconstruction of the ground plan of Bramshill in the 1630s. This and the other reconstruction plans reproduced in this article are coloured to indicate: surviving historic fabric extant by the 1630s (blue); conjectural areas based on evidence from historical sources (yellow); and areas which are conjectural, based on interpretation of contemporary documents and arrangements at comparable houses (pink). The room names given are those used most consistently in Caroline documents. Plan: © Historic England Archive, reproduced with permission.

Fig 10. Conjectural reconstruction of the mezzanine level within the north part of the east range of Bramshill in the 1630s. Plan: © Historic England Archive, reproduced with permission.

Fig 11. Conjectural reconstruction of the first-floor plan of Bramshill in the 1630s. Plan: © Historic England Archive, reproduced with permission.

Fig 12. Conjectural reconstruction of the second-floor plan of Bramshill in the 1630s. Grey areas represent roofs and roof space. Plan: © Historic England Archive, reproduced with permission.

Zouche had no direct male heirs and, following his death in 1625, Bramshill and its estate were inherited by his cousin, Sir Edward Zouche (c 1588–1634) of Woking – great-grandson of 8th Baron Zouche. Sir Edward was prominent in his own right and became Marshal of the King’s Household in 1618. His wife was Dorothy (née Silking, c 1590–1638) – a Danish-born courtier who served in the household of Queen Anne of Denmark. The couple had five children. The eldest, James Zouche (1613–43), inherited on his father’s death in 1634; two years later he married Beatrice Annesley (1619–68), daughter of Lord Mountnorris. By this point, however, the family debts had grown to an enormous scale and in 1637 Bramshill was sold by the Zouches.

After a brief ownership by Randal MacDonnell (1609–82), 2nd Earl of Antrim, Bramshill passed to the Henleys and then in 1699 to Sir John Cope (1673–1749), a businessman and politician. The property remained in the hands of the Cope family until 1936, and over this period of nearly 250 years a large number of alterations were undertaken. These included, in the early eighteenth century, the demolition of the house’s projecting front wings (said to have been damaged by a fire c 1640) and the refacing of the curtailed fabric (fig 13). ²⁴ Around the same time the great staircase was replaced, and in the early Georgian period a mezzanine level was constructed within the north range. Bramshill was then ‘restored’ in the second half of the nineteenth century and early 1900s, with various decorative features moved between rooms and a great staircase of Jacobean style (and probably partly Jacobean date) reinstalled in the south range. ²⁵ Bramshill was purchased in 1936 by the 2nd Baron Brocket (1904–67), became a headquarters of the Red Cross during the Second World War and subsequently served as the residence of the exiled King of Romania. From 1953 to 2015 it was state-owned and run as a police training college.

Fig 13. Bramshill from the north-west in a view of 1818 by J C Buckler. Image: Historic England Archive, ref. OP36251, reproduced with permission.

THE STATE APARTMENTS

As set out at the beginning of this article, Bramshill was exceptional in including not just one but two state apartments. Such suites were an important component in Elizabethan and Jacobean country houses owned by courtiers, ambitious office holders, members of the nobility and upper gentry. ²⁶ They were a reflection of status and were costly to build, decorate and furnish. In plan, state apartments – known at the time simply as ‘lodgings’ – were influenced by state suites in royal palaces. Almost invariably, they were at first-floor level, at the high end of the great hall, and typically comprised great chamber, withdrawing chamber, bedchamber, closet and, wherever possible, long gallery. In these chambers, a family would dine in state, celebrate special occasions and receive and accommodate honoured guests.

Most owners of status would have been more than satisfied with the provision of a single state apartment within their country house. However, a minority – builders of the greatest ambition and wealth – chose to include more than one suite. As far as is known, dual state apartments were included in only three country houses in the Jacobean period: Bramshill, Audley End and Hatfield House, where in all cases the apartments were allocated to the king and queen respectively. From the Elizabethan period, a dual arrangement could be found at Theobalds, the home of Lord Burghley where Zouche had spent many years (fig 14). ²⁷

Fig 14. Reconstructed first-floor plan of Theobalds, built 1564–85 for Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley. The two state apartments are end-to-end on the left (south), each with a long gallery. Plan: © Historic England Archive, reproduced with permission.

The king’s apartment

At Bramshill, the two state apartments were arranged on either side of the head of the great staircase – a similar plan to Theobalds (see fig 11). The largest, grandest and most formal of Bramshill’s two suites was the king’s apartment, which is of national note in surviving with only minor alteration. The first room is the great chamber, named the ‘great dining roome’ or king’s presence chamber in the 1630s documents and now the Great Drawing Room (fig 15). Great chambers were typically the most lavish rooms in Jacobean country houses, used for formal dining and entertaining, and this was the case at Bramshill. The chamber features an elaborate plaster ceiling, a sophisticated geometric marble chimneypiece and panelling based on that in the principal great chamber at Theobalds, installed by Sir Robert Cecil in c 1602. ²⁸ Documents show that, in the 1630s, Bramshill’s great chamber was suitably rich. It included four valuable tapestry hangings representing the story of Noah and the Ark, four carpets bearing Lord Zouche’s arms, a long table, stools, twelve chairs of ‘India stuffe’ and green taffeta window curtains.

Fig 15. Bramshill’s principal great chamber, now Great Drawing Room. Surviving seventeenth-century work includes the plaster ceiling and chimneypiece. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184561, reproduced with permission.

Next in the suite – its doorway placed enfilade with that of the great chamber – was the withdrawing chamber, a flexible space that could be used for formal or informal activities such as dining and games. In contemporary documents, this was named the ‘withdrawinge roome’ or ‘privie chamber’, and it later became the library (fig 16). Like the great chamber, the room has a fine plaster ceiling, marble chimneypiece and decorative panelling. In 1634 its contents were of even higher value than those of the great chamber – £236 as opposed to £170 (see appendix 2 in online supplementary material). Furnishings included five hangings depicting the story of Joseph and chairs and stools of different grades and heights, reflecting the importance of such furniture at the time. The majority of the furnishings were of crimson velvet, though some were decorated with gold and silver, and the three window curtains were of crimson taffeta. Interestingly, the colours used for these two rooms at Bramshill – green for the great chamber and crimson for the withdrawing chamber – matched those in the comparable rooms at Hatfield. ²⁹

Fig 16. Bramshill’s king’s withdrawing chamber, later a library, in a photograph of 1923. Photograph: Country Life/Future Publishing Ltd, reproduced with permission.

The enfilade of doorways in this part of Bramshill ends with that of the long gallery, which fills the first floor of the east range (fig 17). Such galleries were often placed at the end of a suite, but here the gallery served to join the outer and inner rooms of the apartment. ³⁰ This must have made it an adaptable room, capable of being used for public occasions, such as balls and feasts, as well as for private meetings and contemplation.

Fig 17. Bramshill’s long gallery, nearly 130ft (40m) in length, in a photograph of 1923. The ceiling is Jacobean, but the panelling is believed to date from later in the seventeenth century. Photograph: Country Life/Future Publishing Ltd, reproduced with permission.

The long gallery – which retains its original plaster ceiling – was the most expensively furnished of the rooms listed in Bramshill’s 1634 inventory; the slightly later schedula valued its hangings alone at £477, then a huge sum. The room’s contents included an assortment of richly upholstered chairs and stools, two gilded tables, two couch chairs with canopies and seven window curtains of red and yellow damask. Additionally, the inventory mentions ‘the geniologie of the kinges of England’, probably depicted in the ‘twelue peeces of hangings’ next listed; the schedula, meanwhile, referred to 795 yards (727m) of ‘damaske hangings’. The walls, therefore, were almost entirely covered with hangings, and the existing panelling seems only to have been added later in the seventeenth century.

The inner or private rooms of the king’s apartment were physically divided from the great and withdrawing chambers (see fig 11) – a plan that was unconventional but not unique, also being found at Knole. Bramshill’s arrangement was probably due to restrictions imposed by pre-existing fabric, though it still fulfilled the aims of apartment planning by ensuring privacy and detachment of the inner chambers. It is clear from the Caroline documents that the inner state rooms comprised a bedchamber (known as the ‘king’s chamber’ or ‘kings lodginge’) served by an outer or ‘passage room’ and an inner closet. The latter was variously named the ‘Inner Chamber to the Kinge’ and the ‘king’s withdrawing chamber’ or room. The position of these rooms within the house is made clear by the sequence and contents listed in documents, while the ‘Note’ of c 1636 refers to one of the king’s inner chambers as the ‘roome beyond the gallery’.

The outer closet or passage room (now the Fleur de Lys Room) appears to have been unheated, but was large enough to include a table, stools, folding bedstead, cupboard and close stool, the predominant fabric being caffoy (then known as ‘catha’ or ‘caffe’). ³¹ The inner chamber (now the Rose Room) was heated but similarly utilitarian; it contained a table, cupboard, chairs and stools, all upholstered in ‘old greene veluett’. Today, the walls of this room are lined with fielded panelling and it has a timber overmantel, comparable in design with the marble overmantels in the great and withdrawing chambers (fig 18).

Fig 18. The Rose Room, formerly the inner or withdrawing chamber of the king’s lodging, in 2016. The interior has been reworked but retains various Jacobean features, probably including the overmantel. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184588, reproduced with permission.

Meanwhile, the king’s chamber (now the Green Room) was suitably elaborate in its furnishings. Chief among the contents listed in the 1634 inventory was the bed; this was gilded, had nine damask curtains and a valance and tester of ‘wrought veluett dolphin worke’. The room’s other items included a table, cupboard, chair and foot stool of branched velvet and a high chair with high and foot stools of ‘clothe of tishowe’. Also mentioned are six pieces of tapestry, which may or may not have been displayed on the walls. The king’s chamber, as surviving, has what appears to be its original overmantel, while the walls are now predominantly lined with panelling elaborately painted with botanical specimens (fig 19). ³² This may be contemporary but does not appear to be original to the room, possibly having been brought from the north-west corner of the house when that was reconfigured around 1703.

Fig 19. The king’s bedchamber, now the Green Room, with elaborate contemporary painted panelling. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184585, reproduced with permission.

It is notable that these three inner state rooms survive as distinct spaces, although the king’s chamber and its inner chamber are now connected to a corridor added on the north range’s courtyard side in about 1812. All three rooms are comparatively modest, and this was a feature of Jacobean state apartments: the rooms of such suites were graded, becoming smaller and more private with each stage. ³³ At Bramshill, it is also likely that pre-existing fabric and limited funds reduced the opportunity for the creation of a larger suite. However, though modest in size, the king’s rooms may have had an appropriate prospect, given James i’s interests: it is probable that they looked towards Bramshill’s hunting park at the north, perhaps taking in the deer house and landscape features including the maze. ³⁴

The lodging made up of the three inner rooms could have been approached in different ways. The most formal route was via the great and withdrawing chambers and long gallery. However, the existence of a narrow passage on the gallery’s west side, with newel staircase opening off it, meant that a more secluded and informal route was also provided (fig 20). This passage could be accessed directly from the withdrawing chamber, which meant the gallery could be by-passed when required. ³⁵ The newel staircase descends to the gatehouse, while upwards it rises to a roof walk offering views over Bramshill’s landscape (fig 21). It would have been a convenient back staircase for use by the occupant of the state suite and also provided access for others, including servants. Such back staircases were a key component of state apartments in early modern England. ³⁶

Fig 20. The staircase and corridor to the west of the long gallery, looking north. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184580, reproduced with permission.

Fig 21. Bramshill’s east front, with gatehouse on the ground floor, long gallery on the first floor and access to the southerly roof walk above. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184529, reproduced with permission.

It would seem that the king’s apartment was also associated with another back staircase, opening off the room to the west of the king’s inner chamber. A staircase is shown in this position – in the thickness of the wall, on the courtyard side of the north range – in a first-floor plan of Bramshill dating from 1764, though all trace of this stair has now gone (fig 22). The 1634 inventory certainly implies a staircase in this location – the king’s inner rooms were followed immediately by rooms believed to be on the second floor of the north range. It is unclear whether this stair rose through all three of Bramshill’s main storeys or only connected first and second floors, though conventionally back staircases provided a route of access for servants and others and also enabled ready exit from a house. Overall, despite no stair appearing in this area on a schematic ground-floor plan of 1763, it seems probable that it did descend to the ground floor in the early seventeenth century and would have served both the king’s inner rooms and the lodging to the west. The stair may have descended into the service rooms of the north range or directly into the courtyard.

Fig 22. First-floor plan of Bramshill in 1764, by William Chapman. Plan: © Bramshill House Collection, reproduced with permission.

The queen’s apartment

The queen’s apartment at Bramshill was different in its planning from the king’s suite, though comparable in its components, decoration and furnishing. There has previously been confusion about the location of this lodging and indeed about Bramshill’s state apartments in general – Helen Hills, for instance, suggested that the king’s suite was located in the lost south-west wing. ³⁷ However, the contemporary documents – four of which include the queen’s rooms – leave the arrangement of the queen’s apartment in little doubt.

In terms of usage and status, the queen’s apartment would have provided a suitably splendid lodging for a distinguished guest – though of secondary rank to the guest occupying the king’s apartment. It would, for instance, have made a fitting suite for the wife of a visitor accommodated in the adjacent apartment. Lord Zouche probably built the suite with Queen Anne of Denmark in mind – she regularly accompanied King James on progress – but following her death in 1619, her place would have been taken by Charles, Prince of Wales, and after 1625 by Queen Henrietta Maria.

The queen’s rooms were approached via the great chamber over the hall, named the ‘little dining roome aboue’ and the ‘Chamber over the hall’ in the 1630s and now the Chapel Drawing Room (fig 23 and see fig 11). This chamber also led onto Lord Zouche’s own apartment and probably had a doorway, as now, leading into the chapel gallery (see below); it would have been used by the family for daily dining and other activities. However, when the queen’s suite was in occupation, the room probably became the great chamber of the traditional state apartment – used for state dining and receptions. The room is large and well lit, with an early Jacobean plaster ceiling and a compass window on its west. According to the 1634 inventory, it contained eight pieces of tapestry hangings, two tables, a cupboard, five chairs and forty-three stools.

Fig 23. The great chamber over the hall (Chapel Drawing Room), in a photograph of c 1910. The plaster ceiling dates from c 1607. Image: Historic England Archive, ref. OP28108, reproduced with permission.

At the south-west of the great chamber, a door leads into a space that functioned as the library by the second half of the eighteenth century and the chapel from the mid-1800s to 2015 (fig 24). Originally, the south-west wing – truncated in c 1703 – extended at this point. Evidence shows that, in the early seventeenth century, this space was the first main chamber of the queen’s apartment (equivalent to a withdrawing chamber). It is consistently named the ‘Hercules Labours room’ or chamber in contemporary documents. The room’s high status is underlined by its decoration – it has an elaborate plaster ceiling of c 1607 featuring the Tudor rose and Scottish thistle growing from a single stem, representing the union of England and Scotland under James i – and by its furnishings, which in 1634 made it the third most valuable room in the house (see appendix 2). The chamber took its name from a valuable series of five hangings depicting the Labours of Hercules. It also contained one high chair, a low chair, thirteen stools, two tables, a court cupboard and two taffeta window curtains. The room probably once had a rich chimneypiece, but this has since been removed.

Fig 24. The chapel, believed formerly to have been the queen’s withdrawing chamber (‘Hercules Labours Room’). Image: © Historic England Archive, DP184605, reproduced with permission.

On the west side of the chamber, a doorway would have led to the other rooms in the queen’s suite, lost through demolition in c 1703. The space to the immediate west of the Hercules Labours room was referred to variously as the ‘chamber next to herkules Labours’, the ‘passadge to the White roome’ or Queen’s Chamber, and the ‘entry roome’. This comparatively small room clearly functioned as an outer closet and was unheated. In the 1630s, it contained fairly rich furnishings: a couch chair, foot stool, folding table, cupboard and pallet bed, with one piece of tapestry hanging. The bed’s counterpane was of ‘white China damaske laced w^th siluer lace’, while the couch and cushions were of needlework on silver ground.

The room was closely related to the adjacent state bedchamber, known as the ‘White Room’ or ‘White Bedchamber’, though it was seemingly named the ‘Queenes Chamber’ in the ‘note of goodes’ sent to London in 1637. The chamber contained a sparver (tented or canopied) bed with a gilded bedstead, hung with white china damask. White damask was also used for the screen and cupboard cloth, while the high chair and various stools and cushions were ‘of silver grogerine’ (probably grosgrain or grogram, a corded silk). The room’s walls were hung with six pieces of tapestry hangings. In 1634, the bedchamber’s furnishings were worth nearly double those of the king’s bedchamber (£120 compared with £70).

The queen’s bedchamber was also served by an inner closet, which constituted the final room of the secondary apartment. This heated chamber was named the White Chamber’s ‘withdrawing chamber’ or ‘Queenes withdrawinge roome’ in documents. In the 1630s the room contained a table and court cupboard with an array of chairs, stools and cushions, all covered in crimson velvet. The contrast between the red and the white and silver fabrics used in the preceding two rooms must have created a remarkable effect. This withdrawing room would have been situated at the outer (west) end of Bramshill’s south-west wing.

That the withdrawing room was situated close to a staircase is shown by the sequence of rooms given in the 1630s documents. For example, in both the 1634 inventory and the schedula, the withdrawing room was listed immediately prior to a chamber at second-floor level, above the queen’s apartment. This back staircase was probably on the north side of the projecting wing and may have been topped by a turret, an arrangement found at Hatfield (see fig 6). ³⁸

SHARED SPACES AND FAMILY ROOMS

In common with all high-status country houses of the time, Bramshill’s plan included state rooms alongside shared spaces and a number of private lodgings. In terms of the former, most prominent was the great hall, where the family would have dined on festive occasions and celebrated other special events. Bramshill’s hall was of a single storey and located in the west range, with a screens passage at its low end (north) (fig 25 and see fig 9). The elaborate carved stone screen bears painted shields; originally these would have displayed the arms of Lord Zouche and his family, but they have since been repainted. Caroline documents show that the room was simply and cheaply furnished, perhaps reflecting its comparatively limited use and lower status by that time. According to the 1634 inventory, it contained three tables, six forms, a carpet and a desk with an old book of Chronicles. It survives largely as constructed though the entrance door was moved to a central position in the late 1600s and the panelling and chimneypiece are a Victorian arrangement.

Fig 25. Bramshill’s great hall, looking north. The stone screen is Jacobean, though altered. Most of the room’s other features date from the nineteenth century. Image: © Historic England Archive, DP184552, reproduced with permission.

To the immediate east of the hall is the Jacobean chapel, a double-height space (now subdivided) that projects into the house’s courtyard. This was consecrated in 1621, ³⁹ and originally seems to have been accessed via the east end of the screens passage and via a doorway at the foot of the great staircase. ⁴⁰ The plan of 1764 shows the chapel with a gallery at its north-west (see fig 22); this would have been reached directly from Lord Zouche’s chamber and possibly also via a newel stair. However, originally, it is probable that the gallery also extended across the west side of the chapel, allowing a clear line of sight to the altar – an arrangement found at houses such as Hatfield and Castle Ashby, Northamptonshire (as rebuilt c 1624–31). By the Caroline period, there is likely to have been a door linking through to the adjacent ‘little dining roome’ – though no such door is shown on the 1764 plan. According to the inventory of 1634, the ‘chappell aboue and belowe’ included eight carpet-covered wainscot desks, five chairs, six stools, a couch bed, a square table and seven pieces of hangings. The schedula shows that most of these items were in the upper chapel, which was heated by a fireplace.

Bramshill’s ground floor also featured a great parlour at the upper end of the hall and a winter parlour at the hall’s low end. The former would have been used for dining and the reception of guests (along with the adjacent withdrawing chamber), while the latter would have been a more informal family space. Bramshill’s great parlour – named as such in contemporary documents or alternatively as the ‘Great dining roome belowe’ – was a room of considerable size and grandeur, the most valuably furnished space at ground-floor level (fig 26 and see appendix 2). It survives as a single space (now the Morning Room), with an impressive marble chimneypiece like that in the great chamber above. According to the 1630s inventory and schedula, the room contained a myriad of chairs and stools – forty-one, in total, all covered with Russian leather – as well as six tapestry hangings, a cupboard, gilt couch bedstead, three turkey carpets and three window curtains of red say, a blend of silk and wool.

Fig 26. The great parlour on the ground floor of the south range, with Jacobean chimneypiece. Image: © Historic England Archive, DP184557, reproduced with permission.

Meanwhile, the winter parlour was placed near the service rooms and family areas. Surviving Caroline documents refer to the room as the green parlour or ‘little dineinge Parlour’ and show that it was adjacent to the butler’s chamber and buttery. Its contents included a table, cupboard, black leather chair, chess table and pair of playing tables, green carpets, and chairs and stools upholstered in green cloth. The part of Bramshill that accommodated the green parlour was entirely reconstructed in the nineteenth century.

In terms of the private family lodgings, the most significant and elaborate would have been the suite used by the house owner. It seems that owners’ lodgings – sometimes known to scholars as great apartments – were often related to state apartments in terms of their positioning. For instance, the suites could be stacked one above the other (as at Hatfield House, where the Earl of Salisbury’s lodging was beneath the king’s apartment) or arranged in parallel ranges. In other instances – like Bramshill and Apethorpe Hall, Northamptonshire (as rebuilt in 1622–4) – the owner’s rooms opened off one side of a secondary great chamber. ⁴¹

It is notable that the owner’s apartment at Bramshill can be so well understood, thanks to contemporary documents and survival of the chambers themselves. The first room of the suite, following the ‘little dining roome’ (see above), was a withdrawing room – named ‘my Lords withdrawing roome’ in the ‘Note of the howseholde stuffe’ (see fig 11). It is now the Zouche Room and retains an early Jacobean ceiling, in date and style matching those in the adjacent great chamber and former bedchamber (fig 27). ⁴² Typically, such a withdrawing room would have been used as a daily sitting room by an owner, as well as his wife and family. By at least the 1630s, Bramshill’s withdrawing room contained the usual ensemble of chairs, stools, hangings and cupboard, as well as a gilded couch bed and two window curtains.

Fig 27. The Zouche Room, formerly the withdrawing chamber of the owner’s lodging, in a photograph of 1923. Photograph: Country Life/Future Publishing Ltd, reproduced with permission.

Opening off the east side of the withdrawing room is a chamber now named the Wrought Room (fig 28). This was described as the ‘Chappell Chamber’ in the 1634 inventory (‘next the’ withdrawing chamber), though it was ‘Lord Zouches chamber’ in the ‘Note’ of c 1636 and schedula. This identifies it as the bedroom used by Lord Zouche and presumably by his heir, Sir Edward. The room’s alternative title reflects its relationship to the chapel, a doorway to the south having seemingly led to the chapel gallery. In the 1630s, Lord Zouche’s chamber contained a gilded sparver bedstead furnished in ‘old printed velvet’, chairs and stools of orange velvet, a cupboard, small table and window curtain of red and white caffoy.

Fig 28. A photograph of 2016 showing the Wrought Room, originally Lord Zouche’s bedchamber. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184593, reproduced with permission.

The room’s decorative plaster ceiling survives but has been curtailed on its east side, indicating that the room was originally slightly larger; it was probably reduced in size when the adjacent staircase was inserted in the early to mid-eighteenth century. Formerly, the area occupied by this stair contained a lobby or closet to Lord Zouche’s bedchamber. This seems to have been the ‘Inner Chamber to the Chappell’ in the 1634 inventory and the ‘Lobby’ beyond Lord Zouche’s chamber in the schedula of c 1637; according to both documents, the room contained a half-headed bedstead and two pieces of hangings.

Also within this general area of the house was the library. The 1634 inventory records this room as containing 250 books, a ‘great table’ and desk covered with green cloth, chairs and stools upholstered in green, a half-headed bedstead, some ‘Mathematicall Instrumentes’ and an iron-bound chest. The schedula also mentions a ladder, a ‘presse in the entry of the closet’ and ‘a great presse for Evidences [valuable documents] couerd w^th green cloath’ – probably the ‘great table’ of the inventory. The exact location of this room is unknown, but it must have been close to the owner’s suite, and in the inventory and schedula it is listed immediately after/before the Red Chamber lodging (see below). It seems to have been in the north-west corner of the house as surviving, an area that has been completely reconstructed.

Another chamber that appears to have been close by was the ‘great dauncinge Roome’, named as such in Bramshill’s inventory of 1634; it seemingly appears as the ‘masking roome’ in the schedula of c 1637. This contained comparatively limited furnishings – the inventory mentions five tables, a cupboard, an old piece of hanging and a close stool – but was clearly spacious enough for dancing and theatricals and was probably well lit. ⁴³ The room is listed immediately after Lord Zouche’s withdrawing chamber in the inventory and before Sir Robert Spiller’s chamber, both on the first floor, and in the schedula appears immediately before the library and the Red Chamber, also on the first floor. It was probably situated in the area above the green parlour.

The Caroline documents indicate that the lodgings of Dorothy, Lady Zouche, were in a different part of the house from those of her husband. Her rooms appear to have been on the ground floor of the projecting north-west wing – off the green parlour and close to the service rooms – a position that would have maximised her ability to supervise the daily running of the house (see fig 9). Our understanding of arrangements here must rely upon historical documents, for the rooms themselves were lost with the demolition of the north-west wing in c 1703.

According to the inventory of 1634, the rooms comprised Lady Zouche’s chamber, a maid’s chamber and Lady Zouche’s closet, all listed immediately prior to the ‘Little dineing Parlour’ and butler’s chamber. The bedchamber contained a standing bedstead, chairs and stools, all upholstered in ‘branched red veluett’, and one window curtain. The closet was probably a small space that opened off the maid’s chamber; the inventory reveals that it contained ninety pieces of pewter and three flagons. The maid’s chamber itself – ‘beyond my Ladys in the Corner’, as it was described in the schedula – included two half-headed bedsteads, five ‘danske [Danish] Cheastes’, two trunks, two stills, three linen wheels (for spinning), a bathing tub, table and cupboard.

Adjacent to Lady Zouche’s bedchamber – probably on its east side – seems to have been the room named ‘M:^rs Sophia her Chamber’ in the inventory and ‘the nursery’ next to ‘My Lady’s chamber’ in the schedula. Sophia Zouche (1618–91) was the eldest daughter of Sir Edward and Dorothy Zouche; in 1635 she married Sir Edward Cecil, 1st Viscount Wimbledon – son of Thomas Cecil, Earl of Exeter, and grandson of Lord Burghley. The Caroline documents show that the room contained a high bedstead hung with striped fabric, a court cupboard, a truckle bed with green canopy and curtains, green hangings and a linen wheel. A third (half-headed) bedstead is also mentioned in the schedula. Most likely the beds in this area were used by Sophia as well as her siblings. As discussed below, the Zouches’ eldest son James appears to have slept in one of the lodgings on the first floor.

GUEST LODGINGS

In addition to the two state apartments, Bramshill included guest lodgings in five different areas of the house. These lodgings would have been graded, and the Zouches and their household would have had a keen sense of where to accommodate visitors of differing rank. Among the grandest was the suite in the south range, beneath the king’s great and withdrawing chambers. In other Elizabethan and Jacobean houses of Bramshill’s status, such a suite was sometimes occupied by the house owner – as, for instance, at Hatfield House. However, at Bramshill, the owners’ rooms were elsewhere, and it is almost certain that the ground-floor great apartment was intended for honoured visitors. In 1637 these rooms were used by Lord Mountnorris, father-in-law of James Zouche.

When this suite was in occupation, it likely included the great parlour (see above). The apartment continued with a withdrawing room, named the ‘little Parlor’ in the inventory of 1634. It then contained various chairs and stools, three carpets and a screen – all of red cloth – with six tapestry hangings, a pair of harpsichord virginals, a pair of organs, tables, a cupboard and two window curtains. By the time of the c 1637 schedula, the withdrawing room contained a ‘rose collord bed with the rest of the same furniture’ and the musical instruments were no longer present. It was this room that functioned as Lord Mountnorris’s bedchamber in winter 1636/7. ⁴⁴ In the early twentieth century, the room was combined with the adjacent bedchamber to form a grand dining room known as the Terrace Room.

The rooms beyond the withdrawing room are mentioned in only one of the Caroline documents – the schedula. This shows that they comprised a bedchamber with maid’s chamber (closet) and that there were two further rooms and a lobby beyond these. The bedchamber included seven pieces ‘of the better sort of hangings’ together with six pieces of ‘worse hangings’, along with a field bedstead covered in red cloth with blue lace and a window curtain, while the maid’s chamber included a half-headed bed.

The two other rooms in this area – probably forming a separate lodging of lower rank – were ‘the Corner Chamber by the bowling greene’ and ‘the next chamb to it’, each containing a half-headed bedstead and court cupboard; the latter had a green velvet bed canopy with green taffeta curtains and matching chair and stools. The lobby included yet another half-headed bedstead; this room was probably located on the north side, adjacent to the gatehouse, which would have provided a secondary route of entry and exit (see fig 9). The two main chambers would therefore have been in the block that projects to the south-east, though their existence suggests – along with other evidence – that the loggia now in this part of the house is not in situ Jacobean fabric (fig 29 and see fig 1). ⁴⁵

Fig 29. The loggia on the east side of Bramshill’s south terrace, believed to have been installed in this location around the early eighteenth century. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184548, reproduced with permission.

Another lodging of high status was in the south-west wing, beneath the queen’s apartment. The main room of this suite appears in Caroline documents as the ‘lower chamber on the South Side’ or the ‘chamber under the White chamber’. It contained five pieces of caffoy hangings – also given as ‘110 yards of silke stuffe hangings’ – together with a gilt bedstead hung with caffoy, chairs, stools and a carpet all of caffoy, a table and cupboard. In one document, the room seems to appear as ‘Mr hopkins Chamber’, though the identity of Mr Hopkins is not known. The bedchamber was served by two closets – an inner room and an outer room. According to the 1634 inventory, the inner room (probably the ‘chamber w^thin’ of the schedula) contained a half-headed bedstead with darnex canopy and curtains, three pieces of old hangings, table and close stool. The outer room – apparently listed in the schedula as ‘the Corner chamber’ next the bedchamber – was likely situated adjacent to the staircase that rose in this area. The original route of access to these rooms is now obscure due to later alterations, including the insertion of a loggia matching that on the east side of the terrace.

There were two further lodgings on the first floor of the north-west wing, above Lady Zouche’s rooms. These are consistently named in documents as the ‘redd Chamber’ (or ‘Redd corner chamb[er]’) and ‘Sir Robert Spillers Chamber’. The latter took its name from the politician Sir Robert Spiller (c 1592–1637), clearly a friend of the Zouches’ and a fellow resident of Woking. The room was probably in the east part of the wing, for it is listed immediately after the ‘Great dauncinge Roome’ in the inventory (see fig 11). Documents show that Sir Robert’s chamber contained a field bed (or ‘highe painted’ bed) hung in caffoy along with ‘silke stuffe’ hangings, chairs, stools, table, cupboard and close stool. The associated inner chamber included a half-headed bedstead hung with caffoy, four tapestry hangings, table and cupboard. By 1637 Bramshill’s owner, James Zouche, seems to have been sleeping in Sir Robert Spiller’s chamber, confirming its association with the high-status first floor. This may always have been the room intended for use by the owner’s heir, and James Zouche may have chosen to remain there after inheriting the property in 1634. Adjacent was the Red Chamber, which was slightly more richly furnished. By the 1630s it included a sparver bed hung with red cloth laced with blue, with chairs, stools, carpets and six pieces of hangings all of the same fabric. The room’s inner chamber contained a half-headed bedstead with the same fabric again, a table and three old hangings.

The first floor seems additionally to have contained a separate lodging in the north range, between Lord Zouche’s suite and the inner rooms of the king’s state apartment (see fig 11). Only the inventory of 1634 appears to mention these rooms, which are named the ‘bedchamber on the north side’ with ‘Inner Chamber’ and ‘outer roome’. The status of this lodging is reflected by the worth of its contents, as well as by its location within the house: the bedchamber’s furnishings were valued at £60, only slightly less than the £70 ascribed to the king’s bedchamber (see appendix 2). They included a bedstead inlaid with mother of pearl, topped with plumes of feathers and hung with ‘taffetie laced’ and cloth of silver, with matching chairs and stools, a cupboard and table. The inner chamber, which was heated, contained a court cupboard, table and chair and stools of ‘old greene veluett’ – a material also prominent in the king’s inner chamber – while the outer room included a bedstead hung in ‘olde damaske’, four pieces of old tapestry hangings, a table, cupboard, two chairs and close stool.

The 1630s documents show that Bramshill included a number of other lodgings at second-floor level, providing additional spaces for guests, family members and others (see fig 12). One lodging was in the south-west wing, above the queen’s suite. The main room was named the ‘middle Garrett on the South Side’ in the 1634 inventory and was positioned above the White Chamber. It contained a bedstead hung with ‘old grogerine’ (grosgrain), as well as a half-headed bedstead. Adjacent was an ‘Inner most roome’ or ‘corner chamb[er]’ containing a simple bedstead hung with green damask, with matching chair and stools. Nearby was a ‘passadge roome’ containing a half-headed bedstead. This lodging seems to have been self-contained – the high and elaborate plaster ceiling of the Hercules Labours Room rose up to second-floor level. The rooms would have been accessible via the staircase at the outer end of the wing and would have been convenient for attendants or relatives of the guest occupying the queen’s apartment.

In the equivalent space in the north-west wing there appear to have been two main rooms – the ‘Chamber over the Redd Chamber’ and the ‘Chamber over Sir Robert Spillers Chamber’. The former contained a half-headed bedstead with other simple furniture, while the room over Sir Robert Spiller’s chamber was slightly higher in status: it contained a field bedstead hung with buckram laced in orange, a chair, stools, cupboard and close stool. In 1637 this chamber seems to have been used by George Annesley (1632–69), the young half-brother of Lady Zouche. ⁴⁶

Both of these rooms in the north-west wing could have been accessed via Bramshill’s low-end staircase, as could the space on the second floor of the hall range. In Jacobean times, this seems to have been a large open chamber, heated by a fireplace (see fig 12). It probably functioned as the armoury mentioned in the inventory of 1634. This contained various items including swords, muskets, pikes and a great saddle. It is notable that the armoury at Hatfield House was in a comparable location – at second-floor level, in the hall range. ⁴⁷

It is difficult to be precise with regard to the location of the other lodgings mentioned in the documents of the 1630s, though they are all likely to have been located in and around Bramshill’s north range, at second-floor level. In the Jacobean house, this area would have been accessible via the low-end staircase as well as via the newel stair by the chapel and the staircase at the centre of the north range.

The second-floor rooms at the north-west of the hall range are likely to have included the more lavishly furnished of the lodgings: the ‘Blewe Chamber’ suite and the ‘old Catha Chamber’ suite. As might be predicted, the most prominent feature of the Blue Chamber was a standing bedstead hung in blue cloth, with matching chairs and stools. Its closet or lobby contained a half-headed bedstead, table and five pieces of ‘very old hangings’. Adjacent to this seems to have been the ‘old Catha Chamber’, also known as the ‘Orange tany chamb[er]’ – though documents indicate its bedstead was hung with crimson (not orange) taffeta. Next to this was a room named the ‘Chamber next to the Catha Chamber’ or ‘forest chamber’. It featured four pieces of tapestry hangings (probably of forest work) and a standing bedstead hung in red or orange ‘tany’ cloth laced with blue; these contents were valued at £32 in the inventory, the most expensive among the furnishings of the second-floor lodgings. Both the Catha Chamber and the Forest Chamber seem to have been served by closets.

Another lodging included ‘Mr Blagraves Chamber’ and was probably located towards the centre of the north range; in the inventory of 1634, these rooms were listed immediately after the king’s inner chambers, as if the document compiler had ascended the north staircase to reach them. The lodging likely accommodated Richard Blagrave (d 1641), a musician at the court of Charles i and friend of Sir Edward Zouche. ⁴⁸ The chamber contained a bed with a canopy of old green velvet and matching green velvet furniture, along with a chest containing six viols – an instrument Blagrave was renowned for playing.

SERVICE AREAS

As in all country houses, Bramshill’s service areas would have constituted a separate zone, presided over by the upper household staff. A discussion of these service rooms, which would have spread into outbuildings, will here be limited to those chambers mentioned in the documents of the 1630s and that formed part of the main house.

Bramshill’s principal service area was the ground floor of the north range, with further service rooms extending into the low end of the great hall and the north end of the east range (see fig 9). Together, the inventory of 1634, the schedula of c 1637 and the ground-floor plan of 1763 provide the best information about these rooms. They included the butler’s chamber, buttery and bailiff’s chamber, probably all located to the north of the screens passage. Moving into the north range, the schedula lists the cook’s chamber – likely close to the low-end staircase – immediately preceded by the kitchen, bakehouse, dry larder and wet larder ‘in the Corner’. These larders would have been used respectively for the storage of goods such as flour, milk and butter, and meat, fruit and vegetables. This range of service rooms was lit from the north, with fireplaces on the south; as was typical, the larders seem to have had a corridor on one side, ensuring maximum ventilation. ⁴⁹ At the north-east corner of the house – underneath the mezzanine servants’ chambers, according to the schedula – was the pastry, used for the preparation and storage of pies and other pastry dishes. Bramshill’s wardrobe, mentioned in three of the Caroline documents, may also have been in this area of the house. It was listed after the mezzanine servants’ rooms in the inventory and a location on the ground floor appears to have been conventional. ⁵⁰

Only the schedula details the service rooms in the mezzanine level of the east range, beneath the north half of the long gallery (see fig 10). They were named as: ‘Mr Courtys chamber under the Gallery’, ‘a little roome in the passadge’, the steward’s chamber, the wainscotted room next to it, an adjacent chamber ‘in the entry’, the coachman’s chamber and the footman’s chamber. ⁵¹ These clearly formed the lodgings of some of Bramshill’s upper servants. Other servants would have been accommodated in garrets, including above the long gallery and in the west range.

CONCLUSION

As this article has shown, the group of Caroline documents relating to Bramshill – along with the surviving fabric of the house – are invaluable in enabling us to understand how a residence of this type, size and status would have been laid out, furnished and occupied in the early seventeenth century. Very few houses of this period can be so fully understood, and Bramshill is of particular interest and rarity for its inclusion of two state apartments, known to have been used during royal visits. Furthermore, the arrangement of owners’ and guests’ lodgings, family rooms and shared spaces are also clear both archivally and physically. The contemporary documents provide a fascinating picture of a house with rooms of different grades, fitted out accordingly – moving from the state and ‘show’ rooms at the top of the hierarchy (resplendent with rich fabrics and colours) through to the owner’s suite, other rooms for honoured guests and finally down to more ‘workaday’ spaces such as the kitchen and attics. Bramshill can teach us so much about other houses – and even royal palaces – of the period, and appreciation of its interest is growing all the time. It is heartening, too, that a major restoration is due to commence following the return of the building to private ownership – a major landmark in its history (fig 30).

Fig 30. Detail of the Jacobean plaster ceiling in Bramshill’s principal great chamber, now Great Drawing Room. The Brussels tapestries date from the mid-seventeenth century and were introduced to Bramshill by the Henleys or the Copes. Photograph: © Historic England Archive, DP184565, reproduced with permission.