News and Events
Meetings in 2021
October - "Our MPs since 1295 - who they were and what they got up to." - A talk by Mike Holcombe, chairman of the History Group
After a long break due to Covid-19, the History Group met again with its AGM during which particular mention was made of the monthly newsletters and the book Baslow Through the Ages that had been published during the covid-19 pandemic. David Dalrymple-Smith and Mike Holcombe were warmly thanked for these initiatives.
After the AGM, Mike Holcombe gave his talk This was a fascinating account of the development of representation in England stretching from the ancient Danelaw, through Magna Carta, the development of Parliament, the Reform Act of 1832 and eventual (near) universal suffrage in the 1920s. This development was never simple or linear. Expansion of representation was usually forced by the need to increase the base for taxation but for many centuries this representation was severely limited. There were many set backs with multiple suspensions of Parliament, an effective military dictatorship in Cromwell’s time and many parliamentary rejections of moves to reform voting rights.
Throughout the talk, Mike used examples from Derby and Derbyshire to illustrate his points. So in the earlier years there were only two representatives (Knights of the Shire) from the whole of Derbyshire and two Burghers from Derby and names like Cavendish, Vernon, Manners and Talbot cropped up time and time again. Even in 1734 Baslow had only 11 electors from a population of around 600. Elections were often biased as there were no secret ballots and electors could be evicted by landowners if they voted against the latter’s candidate. Bribery was rife at all levels- a Minister of War was found guilty and had to resign - and pocket boroughs (an area with few or no voters) persisted well into the 19th Century - The Duke of Devonshire controlled seven!
Mike concluded with comments on democracy itself. Near universal suffrage is only 100 years old and we have not had a government elected by an overall majority of voters since 1951. Even though there is a history dating back to the Danelaw, can we truly describe Westminster as the “Mother of Parliaments”?
Mike was thanked for his talk. It was gratifying to see 21 people at the event which suggests that interest in the group had not wained during the "lockdown".
November - “The History and Archaeology of the Lumsdale Valley - A talk by Julian Burgess.
Julian and two colleagues, Christine and Alan Piper, all members of the Arkwright Society, gave an extremely interesting and lavishly illustrated talk about the important industrial archaeology of the Lumsdale Valley, the history of its mills and some of the people key to its development.
The Lumsdale valley is situated to the east side of Matlock where the course of Bentley Brook allowed the development of different water-powered industries over a period of some 300 years. By the early 17th century there were lead-smelting mills; in the early 18th century, mills grinding corn and fulling cloth and later that century two cupolas smelting lead; and in 1783, Watts, Lowe and Co built a cotton mill which later became a very successful bleaching business. There is also evidence of a corn mill in mediaeval times.
The last bleach works closed in 1929 and all sites in the valley became derelict and overgrown apart from the mill owners houses which reverted to private hands.
Julian explained how the water of Bentley Brook was harnessed over the centuries, leading eventually to a complicated system of three holding ponds, goits and dams running the mills, with evidence of up to seven waterwheels down the valley. None of the wheels survive but the wheel pits show that they were substantial, one of over 20 feet diameter. He described, in turn, the Upper Pond, Middle Pond and Lower Pond and the industrial buildings: the Bone Mill (originally a lead smelter, then a cotton mill and finally a bone-crushing mill), Pond Cottages (the site of the cupolas), The Chimney (a spectacular structure, now fully restored) and the main collection of buildings below the Lower Pond. These comprised a Saw Mill, Paint and Grinding Mills and Upper and Lower Bleach Works. The whole area contains important archaeological remnants, for example, the site of a smithy, and the quenching trough for this, the old chimney and some uniquely designed tanning baths
Julian then explained something of the restoration of the area. When the last works closed in 1929, Lumsdale House was bought as a private residence and the rest of the site was included in the sale, as this had several times failed to attract a commercial buyer. With increasing deterioration and increasing risk of public liability from the site, the owner, Mrs Marjorie Mills stated restoration and, eventually bequeathed the site to the Arkwright Society in 1996. Since then, with the help of many volunteers, the National Lottery Heritage Fund, Historic England and Local Authorities, the industrial remains have been repaired and consolidated, the Middle and Lower Ponds de-silted and the area of the Upper Pond turned into a nature reserve. It is now an important Conservation Site and a listed Ancient Monument. University students of archaeology use it for field studies.
Christine Piper then spoke about the context of the wider area. She described how Derbyshire had been regarded by prominent visitors such as Thomas Hobbes and Daniel Defoe who saw it as a wild, almost gothic, area and as “a site of romantic decay”. Lumsdale was successful industrially because of the combination of waterpower, easy access to lead and limestone products such as barytes, and fuel from local wood (white coal).
Alan Piper concluded the talk with brief histories of prominent families who had been involved with the industries in the valley. Matthew Sanderson was a lead smelter who was sued unsuccessfully by a Sheffield tradesman in 1771, filed a patent for a new method of smelting, went bankrupt in 1782 but set up as a chemist and perfumer in Manchester in 1783. Watts and Lowe were names associated with the three-storey cotton mill of 1783. During family history research, Alan had discovered that the two families were related and many of the founders of the mill were family members or influential contacts in a network of close friends. Alan concluded with a summary of five generations of the Farnsworth family who established a bleaching business in 1812; this included adultery, alcoholism and a deserter in the First World War. Clearly, these were not everyday stories of Derbyshire folk.
Further details are available in a book “Lumsdale. The Industrial Revolution in a Derbyshire Valley”, written by Alan & Christine Piper and available from Bannister Publications Ltd, Saltergate, Chesterfield.
After questions, Mike Holcombe, president of the History Group, thanked all three speakers for their informative and well-received talk.
Post Meeting Note:
Andrew Treves raised the question of why a bleach mill needed waterpower? His research has revealed that the bleaching process at that time involved 3 stages: boiling with an alkali; bleaching by means of an oxidizing agent; souring by treating with weak hydrochloric or sulphuric acid. The first operation was carried out in an upright cylindrical vessel, constructed of boiler-plate. The yarn was packed in and boiled with the alkaline lye (3–4% of soda ash or 2% caustic soda) from six to twelve hours. The cotton was washed in water 2/3 times and then treated with bleaching powder which is then drained off, then souring takes place. The acid is then is drained off and the cotton is washed in water and dried. Some machines were used to mechanise the process. Washing machines and drying machines could have been water powered. Plentiful supplies of water were necessary for these processes. Presumably, the effluent was discharged into the brook and ended up in the River Derwent in Matlock.
Nowadays the first stage of washing also has to remove the residues from weedkillers, pest killers etc. This is done by treating with a mild solution of caustic soda at 1000 C. It is then washed in hot water before being treated with a weak solution of hydrogen peroxide. Current research is looking at catalysts to enable the temperatures to be reduced to 30 C.
December - Mary Queen of Scots: The Captive Queen in England - a talk by David Templeman, Historian and Author.
David, a member of the Manor Lodge Society and affiliated to the “Friends of Sheffield Castle”, started by explaining that his latest book (with the same title as his talk) was the only one that covered in detail Mary’s period of captivity in England. Most other biographies gave no more than a chapter to this period, despite it being 19 years of her 44-year life. As a result his book has now been accepted as a GCSE text and is being studied by over 5000 students.
David explained that Mary arrived in England on May 16th 1558 after crossing the Solway Firth against the advice of her own courtiers. Her motivation is unclear except that she trusted Elizabeth to fulfil her promise to help Mary regain the Scottish throne; a trust that was to prove disastrously misplaced. Mary, herself a catholic, was supported by a network of catholic families in Cumbria and elsewhere with an ultimate aim of obtaining a marriage with the Duke of Norfolk, the most prominent catholic in the realm. Elizabeth was, at first, unaware of Mary’s entry to England but became concerned because of the catholic v protestant tension in the country and the family connections between them. They were cousins once removed but Mary had a significant claim to the English throne as Elizabeth’s descent from Henry VIII was via Anne Boleyn’s line and, in the eyes of the Pope and the catholic nations of France and Spain, was illegitimate.
Mary’s first two nights were spent in Cockermouth Hall with the Curwen family, to whom she gifted a stirrup-cup of agate, which is now on display in the Helena Thompson Morgan museum in Cockermouth. She was then escorted to Carlisle Castle where she was confined as a “house guest” for 4 to 5 months but granted a degree of freedom. She is recorded to have played football there. (The oldest football in existence was found in Mary’s rooms at Stirling Castle). Rumours of escape, led Mary to be moved to Bolton Castle, the home of the castle Governor Lord Henry Scrope. Here she was free to carry out many country and sporting pursuits - she was a keen falconer, could outride most men and was the first woman recoded to play golf - but was further from her supporters.
Henry Scrope’s wife was Norfolk’s sister and continuing concerns about the marriage plot, led to Mary being moved once again with her care being transferred successively to Sir Francis Knowles, a trusted Privy Councillor, and then to George Talbot, the Earl of Shrewsbury. The latter’s main base was Sheffield Castle but he held extensive lands in Derbyshire and elsewhere including Tutbury Castle, Wingfield Castle and, through marriage to Bess of Hardwick, Chatsworth. These properties were far from London, far from Scotland and with no room for escape. Talbot himself was trusted by Elizabeth and very rich and so able to subsidise Mary’s confinement.
David explained that the Shrewsbury Custodianship began on February 4th 1569, nine months after Mary’s entry into England and was to last until 1584. Mary was moved first to Tutbury, then a most inhospitable place on a steep hill surrounded by swampland. After 2.5 months she was moved to Wingfield Castle, much more opulent and of palace standard. However, news of the plot to marry Norfolk then surfaced and she was moved back to Tutbury. The poor conditions there led to serious illness of both Mary and Talbot, who almost lost his life.
November 1569 was the start of the “Northern Earls Revolt”. Northumberland and Westmorland had planned to release Mary and put her on the throne, but their complaints about Elizabeth’s general neglect of the North raised her suspicions and they were forced to act prematurely without full preparation. They marched south successfully as far as Wetherby but, not gathering as much support as expected, they stopped to take stock allowing Elizabeth’s forces time to gather. Mary was moved south to Coventry and subsequently back to Tutbury. Elizabeth’s retribution led to 1000 men being slaughtered and Westmorland fleeing to Spain where he ended destitute. Northumberland fled to Scotland but was betrayed and hung, drawn and quartered in York.
In May 1570, Mary began a period of 6 months at Chatsworth, the most lenient part of her whole captivity, during which time negotiations were held over her future with Sir William Cecil, later Lord Burghley. These came to naught and she was moved to Sheffield Castle in November because of continuing escape plots and a shortage of provisions at Chatsworth. As a major, fortified castle, Sheffield was really the only property of Shrewsbury’s where Mary could be considered safely imprisoned and was to become her main place of detention for the next 14 years.
At least three plots to enable Mary to escape are documented around this time but things were brought to a head when Cecil’s network of spies discovered the Ridolfi plot in 1571. This bold plan involving an Italian banker and Spain was to have seen an invasion from the Netherlands by 10,000 men, the overthrow of Elizabeth, the marriage of Mary to the Duke of Norfolk and installation as Queen. Norfolk was arrested for High Treason and Cecil petitioned Elizabeth for the arrest of Mary. Elizabeth refused this petition on the grounds that Mary was a fellow monarch and spared her life but with severe restrictions - only 16 people were to be allowed to support her, she was to live in two rooms in the castle and at least 1 hour’s notice was needed for basic exercise. Mary had no liberty and riding was forbidden. This situation pertained until 1575 when an earthquake affected Mary’s rooms.
During her stay in Sheffield, Mary was moved to the Sheffield Manor Lodge whenever her accommodation at the castle needed to be cleaned. This offered some respite as the Lodge was opulent, made of the same brick as Hampton Court and was centred in the largest deer park in England. She also journeyed occasionally to Chatsworth, to Buxton as the leading Spa town in England (the “Old Hall Hotel” was built next to the spa to accommodate her and still exists today) and, in 1583, to Worksop Manor which was the predominant Manor House in England (with 550 rooms it burnt down in 1761).
David finished this particular talk with only a brief summary of the rest of Mary’s life as he has a second lecture to cover it in detail. In essence, by the early 1580’s Shrewsbury was a broken man. He had been as much a prisoner as Mary; had suffered a stroke, dementia and a nervous breakdown; had spent the equivalent of £2m per year for 14 years out of his own pocket; and had lived under the constant orders of the three most powerful women in Tudor history. Mary fell off a horse in Sheffield castle in 1580 on the way to Buxton, suffering significant injury. By 1581 she was a “poor sickly, dying lady” becoming breathless after a few steps and possibly suffering from rheumatic fever. Her hair had turned grey at the age of 36. She left Sheffield for the last time on Sept 2nd 1584 moving to Wingfield, Tutbury and then Chartley Manor in Staffordshire. Entrapment in the “Babbington Plot” ensured her execution at Fotheringhay Castle on 8th February 1587.
Although never Queen of England, Mary had the consolation that her son, James VI of Scotland succeeded Elizabeth, the Virgin Queen as James I of England and every monarch since can be traced back to her ancestry.
Mike Holcombe concluded the meeting with a vote of thanks to David for a most interesting and entertaining talk and an invitation to come back to tell us about the second half at some future meeting.