was not the Church of the Priory. 



17 



period of the demolitions. It is headed " Eeceipts of the Superfluous 

 Houses of the late Monastery of Amesbury, belonging to the Eight 

 Honourable Earl of Hertford," 31st of Henry VIII. This would 

 give the limits of time from the 4th December, 1539, to the 20th 

 April, 1540, but, in reality, it extends to the 21st August, 1542. 

 This document is rather puzzling, in respect of some of the dates, 

 and it has to be studied in conjunction with Nos. 2 and 4. I have 

 had to assume that, in one case, Canon Jackson has printed the 

 34th, by mistake for the 33rd year of Henry VIII., and then, I 

 think, I get the dates right. It would appear, from the dates, 

 either that the demolition was begun, on behalf of the King, and 

 afterwards brought into account on behalf of the Earl of Hertford, 

 or else that it was an understood thing, all along, which is perhaps 

 most probable, that the property would pass into his possession, and 

 that therefore the Earl began the demolition before the date of the 

 actual grant, 7th April, 1541. The first printed item appears to 

 be 10th February, 1540. On the 16th February, paving tile is 

 removed from before the high altar, with all the gravestones from 

 the same spot. On the 4th March, two tombstones are taken from 

 the north aisle. On the 12th March, paving tile is taken from the 

 south aisle. 



It is noticeable that all the printed items, up to the 30th October, 

 1540, with perhaps one exception, are such as could well be removed, 

 whilst the roofs were still standing, and as the demolishers afterwards 

 melted lead in the choir, they would naturally first remove the 

 paving. The possible exception is the first item : — " 10th day, 

 February, Humphry Lovingbone, for a ceiling and boards of one 

 chamber by the little cloisters, 4 shillings. " The little cloister 

 however, is not mentioned in the survey of the lead. Therefore 

 it, with the buildings adjoining, may have had stone-tile 1 roofs, 

 in which case there would be no reason for delay. 



1 One would not, I think, expect stone-tile as a roofing material at Amesbury 

 now, but something of the kind was formerly used, as, in demolishing "the 

 midel house, by the parke," Eobert Pederell of Amesbury was to take down 

 the "sclat" [slat stone, or slate] and to carry the same and set it in good 

 order at his cost and charge. (Wilts Arch. Mag., vol. x., p. 76.) Possibly 

 the word " slate" may have been applied loosely to earthen roofing tiles. 



VOL. XXXI. NO. XCIII. C 



