228 A Plea for the Further Investigation of 



deal of work older than had been supposed, still remaining at 

 Longleat, was, on the whole, confirmed. 



Shortly afterwards, Canon Jackson found documentary evidence 

 that building had been done, at Longleat, at an earlier date than he 

 had supposed, and that Sir John Thynne had begun, by converting 

 the buildings of the priory into a dwelling-house, in the time of 

 Edward the Sixth. This was generally confirmatory of my opinion, 

 that the house was not all of one date, and that the oldest portions 

 were to be found in the walls of the courts. I may mention that 

 those walls are, to a great extent, concealed behind passages, that 

 have been added in modern times, but the original walls and windows 

 could be seen, in places, and bore some apparent traces of fire. 



I was rather surprised, however, to find that Canon Jackson ulti- 

 mately took this ground, that no part of Sir John Thynne^s earlier 

 buildings remained, but that the front and back walls of the present 

 house, though dissimilar in treatment, were all put up at the same 

 time. Now it is an unlikely thing that an architect would deliber- 

 ately design the front and back of a building, in difi'erent styles, and an 

 examination of an old building will generally enable one to determine 

 the relative dates of diflerent parts of it. What evidence is there, 

 then, of a complete re-building, in this ease, strong enough to over- 

 ride the apparent testimony of the house itself? It is true that Sir 

 John Thynne is said to have built Longleat, with ^is own stone and 

 timber and the materials of the former house which was burnt, but 

 persons are often described as having built, when they simply re- 

 modelled, or partly re-built, existing buildings. 



One would like to know whether the plan of the present house 

 was determined, at all, by the plan of the priory, which formerly 

 existed at Longleat, and whether any portion of the monastic 

 building still remains. If there is any, it must be very incon- 

 spicuous, but I am, by no means, certain that some small portion 

 does not remain. I remember noticing, in a cellar, in 1878, an 

 arched doorway which I thought might be monastic, but I could 

 not be sure. I may here quote a passage from Canon Jackson's 

 first paper. He says : — " That the Priory stood upon this identical 

 spot is proved by the discovery, a few years ago, during some 



