Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 2.djvu/228

204 2lb. lloz. Around the sides are four escutcheons, standing out in relief from the surface, each of which is charged with the same heraldic bearing, viz. a lion rampant, with the tail deeply forked, and on its head a crown. The date of this relic appears to be about the reign of Henry III.

The castle of Fulbroke was built by John, duke of Bedford, third son of Henry IV., and described by Rous as "turrim nobilem castro æquipollentem:" Leland calls it "a praty castle made of stone and bricke." It was bequeathed by the duke at his death to his nephew Henry VI., who "granted the custody thereof to John Talbot, Lord L'isle, to hold during life, and to make use of the buildings therein for his own proper habitation at all times except when himself should be there ." Leland states that this castle "was an eye-sore to the earls that lay in Warwick castle, and was cause of displeasure between each lord." It consequently did not last long. Rous describes it in his day as being in a ruinous condition; and it was taken down in the commencement of Henry VIII.'s reign by Sir William Compton, keeper of the park, and the materials employed in building his house at Compton Wynyates. Joan, Lady Bergavenny (whose husband William Lord Bergavenny, brother to Thomas Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, possessed the manor immediately before the duke of Bedford) built here a handsome gate-house, of which Rous says, "nunc hæc porta destruitur." Dugdale also attributes to her the building of the lodge, which has been already noticed as mentioned by Leland in his Itinerary. The manor having thus come to the crown by the bequest of the duke of Bedford, it was granted by Edward IV. to Richard Neville, the stout earl of Warwick, and accompanied the descent of the earldom of Warwick till the attainder of John Dudley, duke of Northumberland, (1st of May.) since which time it has been no longer attached to their possessions.

Fulbroke is in the list of depopulated places in this neighbourhood given by Rous, on which subject he breaks forth into so long a strain of indignant and melancholy deprecation. He says, "via olim secura, modo per sepes et palos obtenebrata, fit latibulum . . . . . . et multis via est spoliationis, vulnerationis, et mortis . . . . ubi olim cunctis viantibus erat salubris et satis secura." It maybe added, that the church has been long destroyed. In the 18th Edward IV. it was certified to be in a ruinous state; and in the king's books it is entered as demolished. A field, however, opposite to the farm house, in the moat of which the weight was discovered, still retains the name of the Church Piece, and a grave-stone was ploughed up in it a few years since, with a cross upon it, which has been preserved.

The present aspect of the place is that of a quiet rural hamlet, containing only three farm-houses, and presenting no traces of the past. Its church, castle, gate-house, and lodge, are all gone, and no portions of these buildings remain. The brass weight seems the only relic or trace of ancient occupation which has been brought to light, connecting it with by-gone days of importance.