The Real Wolfhall

However, at one time it was sumptuous, a twin-courtyard mansion suitable to entertain the king, and of palatial proportions (Fig 1). In addition to a house, there was also a manor of Wolfhall – an area of land extending to over 2,000 acres.¹ At one time there was also a small hamlet sharing the same name, which comprised 14 poll-tax payers in 1377, but which disappeared soon after.² The book Wolf Hall³ (spelled as two words) and its sequels were groundbreaking in many ways, selling over 6 million copies in dozens of languages, spawning BBC dramas and Broadway plays, and feeding our insatiable lust for the Tudors. It brought to life the everyday existence of people in the royal court, their loves, anxieties, foibles and above all their scheming, focused on Thomas Cromwell, the entrapped henchman of Henry VIII, whose personal survival depended on fulfilling his master’s ruthless ambitions. Wolf Hall was Hilary Mantel’s 10th novel, and brought her somewhat late-flowering, but certainly global success. It is fair to say that little of the action in Wolf Hall actually takes place at the house. However, she had seized on the mythical name to conjure up the extra-ordinary compelling melodrama of the period, which has reverberations reaching into our own time. Amusingly, Hilary Mantel had written to the owners asking whether they would mind if she called her latest novel after the name of their house, adding that she never expected to sell more than a few thousand copies.

Wolfhall has been spelled at least nine different ways in the last thousand years, generally as one word, perhaps more recently as two. The ‘W’ was often unrepresented in spellings, and until the early 20th century was rarely pronounced, as seen in such variants as Oolphall or Ulfhall. In fact the earliest written reference, in Domesday, is to Ulfela.⁴ Later variants include Wolphall, Woolphall, Wulfhall, or Wolfhale. The second part of the name comes from the Old English healh, meaning a nook or corner. The first syllable may refer to a Saxon called Ulf, as hinted at by the earliest place-name and by the pronunciation. In that case the name would mean Ulf ’s Corner, and would have nothing to do with wolves, and nothing to do with halls. If wolves really could be the origin of the ‘ulf ’ pronunciation, the name would refer to a wolf den. However, there are no other documentary references to wolves in the Savernake area. Just as importantly, there is no ‘original’ or accurate way of spelling the name, and it is erroneous to attempt to ‘correct’ other people on this matter.

One observation that Hilary Mantel has made when she speaks about her life and her technique, is that stories can develop a life of their own. They can be passed through generations and survive for hundreds of years. Romanticised tales, which modern research can demonstrate could never possibly have happened, nevertheless persist because their adherents want to believe the charming and enticing drama exposed. This is certainly the case at Wolfhall. One hundred years ago, postcards were sold to tourists showing the great barn of Wolfhall. These stated ‘In this barn Lady Jane Seymour was married to King Henry VIII the day after Queen Anne was beheaded at Windsor. The apartment was hung with tapestry, remnants of which may still be seen’. Every part of this is palpably untrue. They were not married in a barn, but at Whitehall Palace in London; they did not marry the day after Anne Boleyn was beheaded; she was not executed at Windsor, and the notion that priceless tapestries had not been removed for nearly 400 years is laughable. And yet, even today, the myth cannot be quite killed off. Archaeologists working there are hailed by visitors asking where the barn is where Henry VIII and Jane Seymour married.

The house of Wolfhall has gone through a number of iterations in its thousand-year history.

• The presence of extremely high-quality Saxon pottery, suggests that there must have already been a prestigious house present, perhaps occupied by Thorold and Alwin who are mentioned as holding the manor in Saxon times, or even by the ‘Ulf ’ of Ulfela.
• In Norman times there was probably a stone-built manor house.
• In the early 1300s, there is a reference to William, the chaplain of Wolfhall,⁵ suggesting there was a private chapel there, presumably linked to a house.
• In the later medieval period, when it became the principal dwelling of Sir William Esturmy, Speaker to the House of Commons, it became a massive stone-built structure, with thick walls, great bay windows and towers.
• The 1530s and 1540s saw the heyday of Wolfhall, when it was reconstructed to extravagant proportions, using extensive brickwork (a fashionable building material which was new to Wiltshire) and timber, in the Tudor style, also involving the installation of the modern facility of a sewer system. Henry VIII visited on a number of occasions.
• In 1552 the owner, the Duke of Somerset, was executed. His son was a child, and as soon as he came of age, he was incarcerated in The Tower of London, for ‘deflowering a virgin of the royal blood’ (Lady Katherine Grey).⁶ He was not released until 1570. He discovered that the magnificent Tudor Wolfhall, which had only been standing for about 40 years, had gone into rapid and terminal decay while lying empty. A large part of the building was demolished. Salvageable material was transferred to Tottenham Park where a replacement house was built in 1575.⁷
• A new (more modestly sized) farmhouse was constructed on the site of Tudor Wolfhall in the 1630s and let to tenant farmers. Alongside this were rooms and buildings surviving from the former house, including an Armoury,Evidence Room (where deeds and rental accounts were held) and two galleries, including a Long Gallery. The galleries and Evidence Room (and perhaps all four rooms) lay adjacent to each other, and they were excluded from the rent of the farmhouse. The Great Barn from Tudor times had survived and was included in the lease. Also surviving were two large Dovecots, a Hop Kiln, Brewhouse and Malthouse. These were initially excluded but later became part of the farm.8 About 93m of walk-through underground sewer also survived.
• In the 1670s, there was a proposal to rebuild Tottenham Park forWilliam, 3rd Duke of Somerset. The four surviving rooms of old Wolfhall were pulled down to provide materials for re-constructing Tottenham Park, which according to John Aubrey was to become a complete ‘new pile of good architecture’.⁹  However, the Duke died, aged just 19, and the Tottenham project was never undertaken. By now, the last relics of the Tudor mansion Wolfhall had been demolished, leaving just the 1630 farmhouse.
• From c1750 a Georgian wing was constructed to the north of the 1630s farmhouse, to form a T-shaped house ¹⁰ (Fig 2).
• From 1777 the former farmhouse was repaired, though the tenant claimed that the oldest parts were so old and decayed that it would have been better husbandry to rebuild than repair.¹¹
• In c1880 a Victorian extension was added at the north-eastern end of the T-shaped house.

Wolfhall’s links with the Seymours and the Wardens of Savernake Forest

One of the most remarkable things about Wolfhall, and its neighbouring land in Burbage, are the families which have long been associated with it. In 1086, the Domesday Book records that the lord of the manor of Burbage, Richard Esturmy, was a servant of the king. He also held Huish, Grafton, Harding, and Shalbourne, all of which became incorporated within the royal hunting forest of Savernake. In Norman times the royal forest was managed by a hereditary warden, able to transfer his office from one generation to the next. It is likely that Richard Esturmy, who held Burbage in 1086, was the ancestor of all subsequent wardens of the forest. The surname changed a few times, as inheritance went down the female line, to the Seymours (later, Dukes of Somerset), and then Bruces and Brudenell-Bruces (Earls and Marquises of Ailesbury), right up to the present day.¹² The current hereditary warden of Savernake, the Earl of Cardigan, who lives in the centre of Savernake, is the 31st warden. The current occupants of Wolfhall are also descended from Richard Esturmy. Hence a strand of DNA over 900 years old and stretching from Domesday, connects the lord of the manor of Burbage, and the first wardens of Savernake, with the current occupants of Wolfhall.

The unrivalled power of the Savernake Wardens

Savernake became protected as a royal hunting forest at about the same time that Marlborough Castle was built. It provided constructional timber and certain stone and sand for erecting and maintaining the castle, whilst also offering food for the larder, fuel for heating, and opportunities for recreational hunting. As the king’s representatives protecting the forest, the hereditary warden held a position of considerable authority and power, deriving lucrative benefits. Wardenship conferred a despotic power on its holder, who was capable of ruling a minor baronry under the king’s banner. This power extended to the ability to impose, and sometimes retain fines for trespasses against the vert and venison. It was the fear of the roving courts known as the Forest Eyre, whose draconian penalties extended to execution or mutilation, imprisonment or seizure of goods, that provided opportunity to extort monies or other favours for ‘overlooking’ misdemeanours. By controlling all roads, erection of buildings and fences, every use of the plough, grazing of animals, cutting of vegetation and hunting, he exercised power over the local populace, who found that money could be demanded for every minor activity.

The dynasties of Sir William Esturmy and Sir John Seymour

Wolfhall, whose fortune has ebbed and flowed for 1000 years, probably had two periods of radical makeover. The first of these occurred in the late 1300s when Wolfhall was occupied by Sir William Esturmy, one of the most powerful men in the country. He was a Member of Parliament on 12 occasions in Hampshire, Wiltshire and Devon, was Speaker of the House of Commons, an ambassador to Rome and elsewhere, a Sheriff, Justice of the Peace, and a courtier who had held close links with Richard II, Henry IV and Henry V. It was he who got a special dispensation directly from the Pope which authorised him to have a font for baptisms and a chapel at Wolfhall. He almost certainly upgraded Wolfhall into a large and prestigious courtyard house in stone.¹³

It was Sir William’s daughter, Matilda, who through marriage brought Wolfhall into the Seymour family. In due course it was held by Sir John Seymour. He was at various times the Sheriff of Wiltshire, Dorset and Somerset, Constable of Bristol Castle and MP for Heytesbury. From these significant but essentially regional achievements, Sir John might have been remembered as little more than a local squire, had it not been for the extraordinary achievements of his children. Of his children, one (Jane) married a king, one (Thomas) married a queen (Katherine Parr, Henry VIII’s widow), and a third (Edward) became Lord Protector with all the powers of a king.

In September 1535 Henry VIII paid a week-long visit to Wolfhall, with a large retinue, and accompanied by Thomas Cromwell.¹⁴ Within eight months, Anne Boleyn had been executed and the king had married Jane Seymour. Sir John died before Jane married, and more than anyone else, it was her brother Edward who benefitted from the new royal affiliations, as he advanced in eminence, power and wealth.

Reconstructing Wolfhall

With the repeated surges of rebuilding and demolition, with almost nothing standing above ground which can provide pointers, we need to use every available source to reconstruct what Wolfhall may have looked like at its greatest. No paintings of the house are known until the modern era, although at least four pictures of the Great Barn survive from the 19th century, which show what a massive structure it was (Fig 3).

Archaeology

Archaeologists worked on site from 2016 until the Covid lockdown of 2020 interrupted investigations. Our understanding of how the various structures relate is very much a work in progress. Excavations to the east of the current house revealed the underground remains of a metre-wide stone wall, with a projecting bay of five sides (as if to support a turret with bay windows), and a hexagonal tower. The tower had been made in brick on a stone foundation and resembled hexagonal towers of Tudor gatehouses in palaces like Hampton Court. The findings suggest the wall of a courtyard structure, although the scale of the enclosed area is currently difficult to discern. In some cases, stone showing 12th or 13th century tooling had been erected over more recent 16th century brickwork, showing the complexity of unravelling the building sequence at Wolfhall, which has been repeatedly extended and remodelled using salvaged material of different ages.

Tiles

Seven types of floor tile were revealed. Four of these were inlaid decorated tiles of contrasting red and yellow clay/slip, while a further larger tile had an impressed design. One of the inlaid tiles, which can be combined into a larger 4-tile design, incorporating two circles, fleur-de-lis and other vegetation, has been found (with minor variations) in several places in Wiltshire, including Amesbury, Wilton and the Bishop’s Palace Salisbury. However, it most resembles a type found at Clarendon Palace, where it was discovered in the very tile kiln where it was manufactured, probably in the last quarter of the 13th century.¹⁵ This raises the prospect that Wolfhall could have been a prestigious site at this early stage. However, the possibility that Wolfhall was tiled with secondhand, plundered material cannot be ruled out (Fig 4).

Two of the other tiles resemble examples that can be found in North Moreton and West Hendred churches, both within two miles of Didcot. A third type is similar to one found at Toot Baldon, near
Abingdon.¹⁶ This invites speculation that the Wolfhall tiles may have been imported from a related source. Thomas Seymour, brother of Edward, Duke of Somerset, was granted the site of Abingdon monastery in 1547, and stone from here was also being transported for building Somerset House in London.¹⁷  It therefore seems possible that some of this material was removed to Wolfhall.

Small finds

A large number of metal clothing attachments were discovered, mostly from the medieval and Tudor periods, including dress hooks, buckles and plates, buttons, purse mounts, and pins. There was also a large quantity of window glass, with the lead mount or ‘came’ which held it, together with miscellaneous drawer or cupboard handles and musket balls. Relatively few coins were unearthed, but they included a long-cross penny of 1327-1422, and also a silver sixpence of Elizabeth I of 1573-1577, which is the very time that Tudor Wolfhall was being demolished (Fig 5).

Fig: 5 A Long-cross Penny of 1327-1422. Extending the cross to the edge made it difficult for fraudsters to shave silver from the edges. (Brian Clarke).

A particularly perplexing coin was discovered when washing excavated bones. One of these, a leg bone, was dark brown, as though tanned, and it had a hole drilled through the top, as if to hold a leather thong suspended around the waist or neck. A silver coin was washed out from it, bearing an unfamiliar inscription. This appeared to be iron age, in a fashioned bone purse. As such it would be a unique find, of major significance. It was many months before the coin was identified. Remarkably, it was Turkish! In fact, it was a coin of Sultan Mehmed IV, minted in Constantinople in 1648, and bearing the inscription ‘May he be victorious’. The likely explanation is that the leg bone in which it was found was indeed a purse, hanging from leather threaded through the drill hole. It would have been decorated with fine cloth and perhaps adorned with bright stones or metal. It was probably a gift from Mary Seymour, sister of John 4th Duke Somerset who owned Wolfhall, who lived in Constantinople from 1668-1672, when she was married to the British ambassador to Turkey.¹⁸ Hence, in one instant this find had been relegated from a prehistoric purse of national significance, to tourist tat purchased from a Turkish bazaar! (Fig 6) Also of interest were a large number of coin-like ‘Jettons’ – tokens used in doing calculations on a counter. This was the easiest way to add and multiply Roman numerals before they were gradually replaced by Arabic numbers at the end of the medieval period.

Pottery and glass

Nearly 100kg of pottery was excavated during the archaeological digs. This was sorted into era, and the sherds all counted and weighed. There were small numbers of pieces from the bronze and iron ages, with more from the Roman era, reflecting the significant activity and many villas in the Tottenham area. The Saxon pottery included highest quality Stamford ware, suggesting that there must have been a prestigious house nearby. The presence of St Neot’s ware (manufactured in the same general area) might indicate a link with eastern England, or perhaps simply both came from an itinerant trader from those parts. In the medieval period the number of pieces discovered was over thirty times higher than all the earlier ones combined. Numbers dropped again in the Tudor era, which was not only shorter, but included a time when we know that Wolfhall was effectively abandoned. The pottery rose again significantly into the early modern era after Wolfhall was rebuilt.

One of the greatest single finds was a piece of stained and painted glass, found alongside many pieces of 16th century pottery. Its colour in reflected and translucent light are strikingly different. Its overall shade of cobalt blue is a colour which tends to date from after c1520. The piece has been shaped by ‘grozing’ or nibbling, rather than being cut by diamond, suggesting its manufacture before about 1550. This places it firmly in the era of the great Tudor re-build preparatory to the visits of Henry VIII. The feature might have come from the chapel and could be related to glass which had been described at Wolfhall in 1881. This was later remounted in its own window at Great Bedwyn church in 1905 (Figs 7 and 8).

The Wolfhall tunnels

Of particular significance at Wolfhall is the extensive network of underground brick drains or sewers, tall enough to stand in, with engineered chutes from garderobes (toilets) above, capable of taking foul and possibly kitchen waste away (towards a pond in the valley to the east). This is likely to have emulated systems in London where it could often be flushed by tidal waters. The weakness of Wolfhall was in having no flowing water, which had to be provided through collected runoff, or from wells over 30m deep (Fig 9).

Documentary sources

Of particular value in visualising what Wolfhall must have looked like comes from accounts, which describe monies spent in house repairs. These have occasionally survived and provide incredible detail. For example, the accounts of April 1537 record a payment of 11 shillings and 3 pence paid to ‘the glazier of Hungerford’ for setting 120 squares of his own glass, and for five feet of new glass, and for repairing 22 casements and setting new lead, all of which was broken by the wind in the turret.¹⁹ If it had not been for this single account, we would not have known Wolfhall had a turret at this time, or that it had so many windows, or that there had been a major storm in 1537. The same accounts talk about tiling over the King’s Chamber, and work on the Great Chamber and Broad Chamber, with references also to a court gate, a Garret Chamber over the gate, a Treasury House and much more. Again, in many cases these provide the only clues that these rooms once existed. The presence of a King’s Chamber at the time – a suite of rooms reserved specifically for royal visits – is particularly relevant. The king had married Jane Seymour the year before, and at the time of this account, Queen Jane was pregnant with the much yearned-for male heir of Henry VIII, the future King Edward VI. Where there was a King’s Chamber, it might be expected that there would be a Queen’s Chamber also, but because no tiling was necessary for that, there is no record of this room, or for the many other rooms in good repair, and we are left to wonder.

An indication of the scale of the property is given by its capacity to accommodate and entertain guests. At least 24 beds were taken from Wolfhall (without stripping it bare) to Edward Seymour’s new house (later rebuilt as Somerset House), many of which were richly carved and gilded, and with canopies and drapes of silk, embroidered in silver and gold. About 30 finely embroidered chair cushions and many wall tapestries were also taken.²⁰

When all these clues are put together, at the minimum we can see that Wolfhall was a grand and substantial twin courtyard house, with many fine and large rooms, capable of entertaining royalty and other visitors, often in great numbers (see list below).

Eight gardens including:

Fish and feasting at Wolfhall

Over 16,000 bones were uncovered in the archaeological digs. Just over half could be identified. Despite the proximity of Savernake, only 19 deer bones were uncovered. These were large and probably derive from red deer, which thrive well in deer parks locally, but have always been rare in the wild in historic times. Nearly 64% of all bones recovered were from common farm animals: cattle, pigs and sheep. In practice it is almost impossible to distinguish sheep from goat bones, but the latter are almost never mentioned in the local kitchen accounts. About 34% of all bones were from birds, especially poultry (chicken, geese, duck), and the rest were medium-sized, and probably comprised pigeon (there were two large dovecots), partridge and many other species. There were small numbers of rabbit and hare. Fish bones were rare, although fish are known to have been eaten in large numbers.

The commonest food artefacts dug up during the archaeological excavations were oyster shells. Nearly 5,000 were unearthed in the digs; these are not included in the above counts. Undoubtedly the true number was much higher than this, because it became hard for the archaeologists to keep track (and quite hard to maintain interest) amidst such profusion. Wiltshire is a long way from the coast – so how did they get there? And why so many?

The Catholic Church was very strict on determining when fasting should take place, and when meat was permitted. In Tudor England meat (including poultry and game) could be eaten between Sunday and Thursday. It was not permitted on Friday and Saturday, or during Lent. The whole purpose of refraining from eating flesh was to enable people to focus on the spiritual meaning of fasting and abstinence. Although the church did not require people to eat fish, instead of meat, on Fridays and Saturdays, this is what they did. And the provision of fish became as rich and indulgent as the consumption of flesh, for those who could afford it. And although the Catholic Church was strict in enforcing the rule, it was woefully lax and biologically inept in deciding what constituted ‘flesh’. Hence several absurdities were added to the list of creatures that could be consigned to the cooking pot on Fridays and Saturdays, generally because they had some watery connection. These included porpoises, beavers and seabirds like puffins.

We know quite a bit about the food eaten at Wolfhall because many kitchen accounts have survived. In the 1530s, the carters from Wolfhall, called Old Mr Green and Young Mr Green were sent to buy fish at market, often from Marlborough, but occasionally from Fish Street in London, or Bristol. Quite often it is difficult to relate the names given for fish in Tudor times to those used today. Some seem to be named after the landing places of the boats, including ‘Newland’ fish (Newlyn in Cornwall), Haberden fish (Aberdeen) and ‘Millwells’ (Millwall docks).²¹

Oysters were brought to Wolfhall in their hundreds each week. They could be purchased cheaply in Marlborough. In December 1537, 400 oysters were brought in for Christmas at a cost of only 8 pence. They were an affordable and universal food, easily stored and transported. They would not then have had the same reputation they have now, as a delicacy suitable for a sophisticated palate, which is an affectation deriving from their modern rarity and high price. Some fish were more expensive and reserved for special occasions. Fresh salmon, sturgeon and conger eels were 18d each, something called a ‘thornback’ was 11d, and dried ling (large cod-like fish) were 10d.

On occasions there were royal visits to Wolfhall which coincided with abstention days. In August 1539, Henry VIII was entertained there on a Saturday. At a feast involving 70 people, some 12 types of bony fish (including sturgeon, and a range of freshwater species), and lobsters were on the menu. It feels perhaps surprising to us, but distance from the sea did not inhibit the enjoyment of bountiful seafood in landlocked Wiltshire nearly 500 years ago.

However, this was trivial compared to the scale of indulgence when meat was consumed the following day. On that occasion approximately 1600 people dined, and the menu (for one sitting) involved the slaughter of 18 cattle, 24 sheep, and 428 birds.²² Food provision and preparation of such magnitude, with the most important of guests, must have involved the erection of numerous tents with catering conducted on a military scale (see menu below).

Summary

The fortunes of Wolfhall have ebbed and flowed for a thousand years. Its architecture has varied from farmhouse to fashionable and innovative designs on a gargantuan scale. At times it has been the seat of power in the local populace and the home of nobility. It has been visited by royalty, spawned a queen, seen riches and untold feasting and celebrations. Five hundred years ago three of the most powerful people in the country were born and lived there. The meteoric rise of Wolfhall looked certain. But all three were to die early, two of them beheaded. Wolfhall fell into ruins, and its salvage used to construct a farmhouse. And so, it remained in the twilight, until in this century, when awareness of it shot around the world as a result of the works of Hilary Mantel. We can be confident that the name of Wolfhall is destined to resonate with future generations.

Acknowledgements

The archaeological work was conducted by courtesy of the owners of Wolfhall, which is a strictly private residence. Many thanks to the many members of the archaeological team working under the direction of Robin Holley and Clive Green, with preparation of plans and cataloguing of finds by Brian Clarke.

Notes

1. Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre (WSHC) 192/53, Survey of Savernake Wolfhall and Easton c1580; 1300/90, Survey of Savernake Wolfhall and Easton c1580.
2. Fenwick, Carolyn, (ed.), 2005, The Poll Taxes of 1377, 1379 and 1381: Part 3, Wiltshire-Yorkshire. Records of Social and Economic History, new series 37, British Academy: Oxford University Press.
3. Mantel, Hilary, 2009, Wolf Hall, London: Fourth Estate.
4. Morris, John, 1979, Domesday Book: 6, Wiltshire, Chichester: Phillimore.
5. WSHC 9/6/754, Roll of Burbage Manor and Inventory Henry Sturmy Edward I and II.
6. Doran, Susan, 2010, Seymour, Edward, first Earl of Hertford, in: Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press.
7. WSHC 9/26/512, Sale Oaks Stock Woods 1575 (for construction of Tottenham House); Longleat Seymour Papers 5, fos 58, 59d.
8. WSHC 9/22/21, Lease Wolfhall (Ulphall) to Edward Savage 1633; 1300/6574, Survey Demesne Lands Wolfhall and Bowdens; 192/47A, Compotus Wolfhall cum Bowdens 1637, and lease Ulphall to Savage 1633; 9/22/40, Lease Wolfhall to Savage 1673.
9. Jackson, John E.J., (ed), 1862, Wiltshire: The Topographical Collections of John Aubrey 1659-1670, Devizes: Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 379.
10. WSHC 9/1/269 – 272, Savernake Estate Account Books 1749-1754.
11. WSHC 1300/2022, Letter Charles Bill April 1777 repair Wolfhall.
12. Brudenell-Bruce, C.S.C., (Earl of Cardigan), 1949, The Wardens of Savernake Forest. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.
13. Manning, James.A., 1850, Lives of the Speakers of the House of Commons, London: George Willis, 34-38; Roskell, J. S., 1957, Sir William Sturmy, Trans Devon Assoc 89, 78-92; Roskell, JS, Clark, Linda and Rawcliff, Carolyn, 2006, The House of Commons 1386-1421, IV Members.
14. Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the reign of Henry VIII, v8, 1535 (ed Gairdner, James)
15. Eames, Elizabeth, Tiles (chapter), in: Saunders, P. and Saunders, E., 1991, Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Medieval Catalogue Part 1, 93-139.
16. Parker-Hore Collection of Watercolours of Paving-tiles held in Worcester and in the Ashmolean Museum Oxford. Tile Web: Oxfordshire (O384) (ashmolean.org), accessed May 2022.
17. Longleat House, Thynne Papers, volume 2, f48, Papers of the Thynne family of Longleat House.
18. Moseley, C., (ed.), 1999, Burke’s Peerage (106th ed) v2, p3049. Crans, Switzerland:Burke’s Peerage (Genealogical Books).
19. Longleat House, Seymour Papers v9, f52r, Accounts concerning the house at Wulfhall c1535-1552.
20. Longleat House, Seymour Papers v4, Correspondence Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford, Duke of Somerset c1541-1550.
21. Longleat House, Seymour Papers v9, (references throughout).
22. Thurley, Simon, 2017, Houses of Power, London: Bantam Press, 189; Jackson, John E.J., (ed.), 1874, Wulfhall and the Seymours, Devizes: Privately Published, 6-10.

Bibliography

Burke’s Peerage and Baronetage, 1970. London: Burke’s Peerage Genealogical Books.
History of Parliament Trust, Stroud: Alan Sutton.