Letheringham Lodge
UNDERSTANDING THE EXTENT OF LISTING PART I
Michael Collins
LISTED BUILDING PLANNING CONSULTANT
Old School Studios Eastgate Street Bury St Edmunds
May 2014
LETHERINGHAM LODGE: UNDERSTANDING THE EXTENT OF LISTING
Michael Collins
Listed Building Planning Consultant May 2014
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 2
2.0 FABRIC, EVOLUTION AND CONTEXT
3.0 LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY RECORD
4.0 THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING(S)
5.0 PHYSICAL LAYOUT, OWNERSHIP AND FUNCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 On behalf of the owner-occupiers of Letheringham Lodge, Matthew and Pauline Bickerton, the objective of the report is to provide Leading Counsel with the information necessary to provide an opinion on the extent of listing of Letheringham Lodge.
1.2 The Lodge is a grade II* listed building which was entered on the statutory list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest on 16 March 1966. An understanding of the extent of listing of the Lodge will establish whether listed building control extends to specific buildings at Lodge Farm.
1.3 In providing an opinion on whether the nineteenth century buildings at Lodge Farm are subject to listed building control, it is necessary also to have separately considered the implications arising from the 400-year- old barn being listed in its own right. Letheringham Lodge Barn, now known as Long Barn, is a grade II listed building which was also entered on the statutory list on 16 March 1966.
1.4 Letheringham Lodge occupies a moated site on high ground and has its origins in the late fifteenth century. Recent dendrochronological analysis of primary phase timber has suggested a date of 1472-5, rather than the early sixteenth date previously ascribed to the building.
1.5 It is suggested that the earliest part of this building, a jettied timber- framed structure of 29ft square, was designed as a hunting lodge or ‘gloriette’, which would account for the absence of any record of occupancy until the early seventeenth century.
1.6 This structure formed part of the estate of Letheringham Hall which was the principal seat of the Wingfield family. Sir Thomas Wingfield, who married Elizabeth Drury in 1601, died in 1610 and over the entrance doorway into the north extension are the initials ‘EW’ together with the date ‘1610’. It would appear that the Lodge may have been extended to become the dower house for Sir Thomas’ widow, Elizabeth Wingfield, who died in 1620.
1.7 In the late seventeenth century, Sir Henry Wingfield, the fifth baronet, sold Letheringham. A survey plan, undertaken by J. Kirby in 1732, shows Letheringham Lodge Farm as a holding of approximately 389 acres.
1.8 The farm continued at this size throughout the nineteenth century, in the possession of the Dukes of Hamilton and in the occupancy of the Tollers from at least the 1830s through to the 1890s.
1.9 In the early twentieth century (1919), the Lodge Farm was offered for sale with a holding of approximately 330 acres. The Cloughs acquired the Lodge Farm in 1936 and, prior to them selling the property in 1996, the farm still possessed a holding of approximately 242 acres as late as 1987.
1.10 The current owners of the Lodge, Matthew and Pauline Bickerton, acquired the property in December 2012. The Lodge Farm and Long Barn are today in separate ownership.
2.0 FABRIC, EVOLUTION AND CONTEXT
2.1 The Easton Park Estate, in the possession of the Dukes of Hamilton since c.1831 and comprising 4832 acres, was offered for sale by auction on the 29 April 1919.
2.2 Letheringham Lodge, and the surrounding farm of 330 acres, formed part of this estate and was included in the sale as ‘lot 35’. The accompanying sales catalogue described the Lodge as ‘a most interesting old-fashioned moated residence’ (SROI, f SC142/1). The Lodge was on this occasion withdrawn from sale at £7,250.
Fig.1 Letheringham Lodge (1919 sales catalogue, SROI, f SC142/1)
2.3 Following his visit to the property in September 1915, an article about Letheringham Lodge by the Reverend Edmund Farrer (1848-1935) appeared in the ‘East Anglian Miscellany’ in 1919.
2.4 Farrer wrote that there was belonging to the Wingfield family a lodge, situated on high ground not far distant from their seat at The Hall,
and he suggested that this building was probably allotted for a residence to any widow of the main line, though possibly at other times to one of the younger sons.
2.5 Farrer observed that the Lodge was almost square, with an overhanging upper storey, and that at each corner there was a huge oak post. He also recounted that there was a fine staircase, which he ascribed to the earlier years of the seventeenth century, which ascended to an area where there were ‘walls covered with wainscot of as fine and as early a pattern as any in the county’. On the lower floor, in the kitchen, Farrer noted the doorway which has the inscription ‘EW 1610’.
Fig.2 Letheringham Lodge (Farrer Collection, SROI, HD78:2671)
2.6 He recorded that Sir Thomas Wingfield, Kt., married, first, Radclyffe, daughter of Sir Gilbert Gerrard, Kt., Master of the Rolls, and second, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Drue Drury, of Riddlesworth, in Norfolk. Farrer then added that this Thomas Wingfield had died in 1609 and that:
It seems most likely that if Letheringham Lodge were the dower house, it would be occupied after the death of the owner of the estate by his widow, and so in 1610 we find as evidence of that occupation ‘EW 1610’ standing, I think, for Elizabeth Wingfield.
2.7 Sir Henry Wingfield sold the estate about the year 1671, and Farrer declared that from that date onwards the house had been occupied by the man farming the land around.
2.8 Writing in the ‘East Anglian Miscellany’ in 1922, Farrer told of his return visit to the Lodge and of ‘being glad to once again look upon those very fine fifteenth century corner posts, as well as the Jacobean staircase’.
2.9 It was however with ‘regret’ that he also had to record the fact that the early sixteenth century panelling had been removed since his visit in 1915, and which he regarded as ‘an irreparable loss’.
2.10 Sir Nikolaus Pevsner (1902-1983) is widely known for ‘The Buildings of England’ series, of which the first editions of each county volume were published between 1951 and 1974. The series was inspired by the ‘Handbuch der deutschen Kunstdenkmaler’ (‘Handbook of German Cultural Monuments’), the author of which was Georg Dehio (1850- 1932), and which was published in five volumes between 1905 and 1912.
2.11 The first edition of the Suffolk volume by Pevsner appeared in 1961, and contained the much quoted opening lines of the foreword:
Work in Suffolk has been a pleasure throughout. The weather was clement, the natives friendly, the scenery and the buildings a delight.
2.12 Pevsner had surveyed the county in August 1957 and wrote in his book of Letheringham Lodge:
The original part of the house has four surprisingly massive carved angle-posts and also the remains of a two-light window of the same date (late fifteenth century) inside. The house is surrounded by a fine moat.
2.13 A second edition, revised by Enid Radcliffe and published in 1974, contained the same entry for the Lodge. A third edition is currently in preparation by James Bettley, and its publication is anticipated for 2015.
2.14 An account by Vivian Salmon of the life of Elizabeth Wingfield, the widow of Sir Thomas Wingfield, appeared in volume XXIX.2 (1962) of the ‘Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology’, entitled ‘The other Elizabeth Drury: a tragic marriage in the family of John Donne’s patron’.
2.15 Salmon writes of Elizabeth Drury, by then Lady Wingfield, and a young widow at the age of twenty-five:
She was the eldest daughter of Sir Drue Drury. Elizabeth had been married at the age of seventeen to a man much older than herself, Thomas Wingfield of Letheringham. The marriage took place in 1601, a daughter was born in 1603, and the son and heir, Anthony, in 1606, the year in which his father was knighted, having recently succeeded to the family estates on the death of his unmarried elder brother. Sir Thomas was then 50, his wife only 21. Four years later, in January 1610, her husband was dead. Seven months later, on 9 August 1610, she was again a wife, to Henry Reynolds of Belstead.
2.16 The story of their marriage is related in a Chancery case of 1615 (Sir Drue Drury v. Henry Reynolds, etc., C2 James I D8/32). The plaintiff was Sir Drue, on behalf of his daughter and her children, and his deposition, although ostensibly concerned with revenues from various manors settled on the former Lady Wingfield, reveals a story of cruelty and treachery.
2.17 Salmon recounts Sir Drue’s claim that his daughter had been persuaded into marriage, and that she had received assurances that her new husband would make her an allowance of £300 yearly, and would not interfere in any way with the estates being held for her son. Sir Drue claimed however that Reynolds never made his wife the promised allowance, that he had made over the wardship of her son to his kinsman Sir Edmund Withypole, and that he had left his wife destitute. Sir Drue was seeking redress from Chancery because Reynolds was now gone beyond the seas.
2.18 The defendants’ version of the story, Salmon explains, is rather different. Reynolds deposed that he was sure his wife was as willing as he was for the marriage, and after the marriage Reynolds had been forced to sell his estate at Belstead in order to buy the wardship of Anthony Wingfield, which his wife did not wish to place in the hands of strangers. Belstead had brought him £4000, the wardship had cost £2000, and much of the rest of the money had gone in new buildings on the Letheringham estate.
2.19 Elizabeth died in 1620, and her son Anthony came of age in 1627 and took over his inheritance. Anthony died in 1638. Sir Drue had died in 1617 and on his monument in Riddlesworth Church, his eldest daughter, Elizabeth, is referred to as the wife of the late Sir Thomas Wingfield, with Reynold’s name excluded.
2.20 The will of Sir Thomas Wingfield of Letheringham, dated 16 January 1609/10, was proved at the Prerogative Court of Canterbury on 3 February 1609/10 (PROB 11/115/95) and includes the following:
I will that my wife shall take the profittes of my parke and Lodge in Letheringham and Wickham untill my sonne Anthony come to the age of one and twentie yeres.
2.21 In 1977, Eric Sandon’s book ‘Suffolk Houses: a Study of Domestic Architecture’ was first published. In notes made by Sandon in preparation for this publication (Eric Sandon collection, SROI, HG402/3/100), he acknowledges that the Lodge was a Wingfield house, but that whether it was an annexe to the Priory, or a dower house to the Hall, or connected in some way with the hunting lodge traditionally said to have been built on this site remained unresolved.
2.22 Sandon recorded that Farrer was inclined to associate it with Letheringham Hall, and that Farrer thought that the initials ‘EW’ and the date ‘1610’ to be seen carved over a side entrance indicated ‘Elizabeth Wingfield’, the widow of Sir Thomas Wingfield.
2.23 Sandon described the building as being ‘in two parts’:
The seemingly original nucleus is a square structure, flanked by oak posts, and the interesting thing about this square structure is the smallness. The later part fills in the space between the back of the square and the moat. The late fifteenth century date advanced by Pevsner would seem about right. The next stage would be the building of the north wing and the staircase, and there is no reason to do other than accept the date of ‘1610’.
2.24 Sandon also noted on his visit ‘a great oak timber-framed barn, intact in every detail except for the huge curved arch braces.’
2.25 The published book (1977) introduces Letheringham Lodge with the observation that ‘the Drift goes up the hillside to the Lodge, passing a great barn built probably before the seventeenth century.’
Fig.3 Letheringham Lodge (Eric Sandon Collection, SROI, K487/1/77)
2.26 Sandon then provides the following account of the building:
The house occupies a moated site on the higher ground. Roughly in the centre of the moat is a structure in the form of a square. At each corner are massive oak posts. These corner posts are ornamented at about two-thirds of their height with triple arches surmounted by scalloped cresting, suggesting work of c.1460. The roof is hipped back to the central stack on the south side and this was probably repeated originally on the north side also, making a tall, regular-sided building with a pyramidal roof rising to a stack at the apex. The Jacobean work produced a brick gable end on the north side of the house, which descends sheer into the waters of the moat.
2.27 Sandon remarks that the purpose of the building remained obscure, adding that of the occupancy of the Lodge there seems to be no actual record until the early seventeenth century, and that there is a tradition that it was built as a hunting-lodge.
2.28 He concluded that:
The structural evidence points to a building of the mid to late fifteenth century (possibly replacing one of an earlier date on an already moated site), to which a wing and staircase annexe was added in the early seventeenth century. The initials ‘EW’ and the date of ‘1610’ over the side entrance suggests that the extension of the house may have been built for Elizabeth Wingfield, the widow of Sir Thomas Wingfield who died in 1609.
2.29 In September 1991, Edward Martin and Timothy Easton led an excursion of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology to Letheringham Lodge, with the ‘kind permission of Mr and Mrs M. R. Clough’. The account of the visit, which appeared in volume XXXVII.4 (1992) of the ‘Proceedings’ under the heading ‘Moats in the Landscape’, declared that this was:
Very probably the smallest occupied moat in Suffolk. The earliest part is an extraordinary structure, originally square and jettied on all four sides, with large carved posts at the corners.
2.30 On the question of its original purpose, it was recorded in the account that it was sometimes claimed to be a hunting lodge, although it was noted that the structure does in fact lie outside the known park. However, it was put forward that:
The hill-top location with extensive views suggests a ‘gloriette’, a lodge of seigneurial apartments set on a high point for contemplation of the scenery and for enjoyment of the healthy air. From time to time it may also have served as a vantage point for spectators of the hunt.
2.31 The review made reference to the early sixteenth century panelling, ‘removed c.1920’, and that heraldic evidence linked it with Sir Anthony Wingfield (born before 1488; died 1552) of nearby Letheringham Hall, the Lodge having formed part of the Hall estate down to twentieth century.
2.32 Wingfield served in the French campaign with distinction, being knighted in September 1513 following the capture of Tournai, and both he and his wife were also present at the Field of Cloth of Gold in June 1520.
2.33 Sir Anthony was, from 1539, Vice-Chamberlain of the Household, Captain of the Guard and Privy Councillor to King Henry VIII, he was made a Knight of the Garter in 1541 and was later an executor of the king’s will. He continued to serve under King Edward VI and was Comptroller of the king’s household by 1550.
2.34 In May 1994, the ‘Moated site at Letheringham Lodge’ was scheduled under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 (as amended) for the reason that it is of unusual type, adding that in location, form and function it contrasts with the moated manorial site of Letheringham Hall which lies 1km to the north east, and that this contrast between the two sites, which are connected historically, is of particular interest in the study of land holding and land use in the area during the medieval and early post-medieval periods, particularly in relation to the Wingfield family.
2.35 The accompanying details describe Letheringham Lodge as being dated to the late fifteenth or early sixteenth century, with an early seventeenth century extension. They add that the earlier part of the structure is square and centrally positioned, and that the initials ‘EW’, carved with the date ‘1610’ above the entrance to the later wing, are thought to refer to Elizabeth Wingfield, widow of Sir Thomas Wingfield. The details also state that the Lodge has been identified as a place of resort for the enjoyment of the scenery and healthy air, away from the damp, riverside situation of Letheringham Hall. The house itself is excluded from the scheduling.
2.36 The Suffolk Historic Environment Record has the following entry for the scheduled ancient monument known as ‘Moated site at Letheringham Lodge’ (HER reference number LRM 003):
Small, square moat, wet with sides 48yds long. The main approach to the site is across a brick and timber bridge in the middle of the S side. There is another timber bridge in the middle of the W side. The edges of the island are brick revetted (eighteenth or nineteenth century). Most of the island is covered by the house.
The front part of the house was originally a square timber-framed structure, jettied on all sides. At each corner there are large wooden posts (two of these are now inside the existing house) decorated with a frieze of three arches on each of the exterior faces. Dated late fifteenth century by Pevsner and circa 1460 by Sandon. These posts support dragon beams which are in turn carried by a central brick chimney.
On the N side is a timber and brick extension, including a tall brick gable wall which runs down to the moat. A doorway into this extension, on the W side, has `EW 1610' on the lintel. On the W side of the square structure there is a small wing containing a Jacobean staircase.
The square structure does not, in origin, seem to have been a normal domestic building. One possibility is that it was a hunting lodge. However, it lies outside the known area of the deer park at Letheringham (in the SW corner of the parish). This was disparked in 1712. Nonetheless a park is clearly shown surrounding the `Lodge' on Bowen's map of 1755.
The initials ‘EW’ over the door could stand for Elizabeth Wingfield. Elizabeth Drury married Sir Thomas Wingfield of Letheringham Hall in 1601. He died in January 1610, leaving Elizabeth as a young widow. She remarried in August 1610, to Henry Reynolds, but the marriage was a disastrous one and she and her husband were disputing in the courts by 1615. She died in 1620.
Letheringham Lodge may have been built as a dower house for her, but it is doubtful whether a dower house would have been needed in 1610 as her son was then only a small boy. It is also odd that the date and initials are over a side door and not the main one.
The unusually small size of the moat and the close correspondence between it and the size of the building makes it likely that the two are contemporary. It is possible that the site had a specialised usage, such as a banqueting house.
This site survives well and is of unusual type. It contrasts well with Letheringham Hall, and is of interest in the study of land holding and land use in relation to the Wingfield family.
Fig.4 1st edition 6” OS map, 1889 (LVIII.SE)
2.37 In December 2013, samples were taken from timbers used in the construction of the Lodge with the aim to provide additional understanding of the structure with the aid of the technique known as tree-ring dating. The findings from the subsequent analysis of ring-width patterns appeared in Dr Martin Bridge’s ‘Oxford Dendrochronology Laboratory Report, 2013/34’.
2.38 The felling date for the north-west corner post was given as 1472-5. Caution needs to be exercised in interpreting the date of a whole phase on this single timber, but it does imply a fifteenth century date for the primary phase.
2.39 Four timbers from the roof over the secondary phase dated and appeared to form a single group felled at the same time. One timber, an upper purlin, gave a felling date of summer/autumn 1609. This accorded well with the carved date on the door lintel to the former outside door bearing the text ‘EW 1610’, and Bridge concluded that the roof was therefore an early seventeenth century roof and not a late seventeenth century roof as suggested in the listing description.
2.40 In the light of the dating provided by Dr Bridge’s analysis, a comprehensive ‘Historic Assessment’ of the Lodge is currently being prepared by Leigh Alston. In his provisional ‘Synopsis’ (2014), Alston describes the Lodge as being ‘among the most historically important and picturesque houses in Britain’, and puts forward the argument that:
The Lodge, built in 1472 by the powerful Wingfield family, was designed as a hunting lodge or ‘gloriette’ from which high status visitors could watch the hunt and admire the surrounding landscape in the latest fashion of the day. Surrounded by a water-filled moat the house lies on high ground 1km south of the Wingfield’s principal seat at Letheringham Old Hall. The property’s position as the dominant feature of the local landscape, with uninterrupted views in all directions, represents a key part of its historic integrity as a medieval hunting lodge.
2.41 Analysing the building itself, Alston records that the original building was a remarkable timber-framed structure of 29ft square, with a jettied upper storey supported by massive, finely carved posts at all four corners. He adds that similarly carved posts projected from the corners of the first floor to support an overhanging roof or cornice ‘in a manner that has no known parallel elsewhere’.
2.42 Alston’s interpretation of the original layout of each storey is that it was identical, with a wide gallery to the rear (north), two heated rooms of modest scale but with finely moulded ceilings on both sides of a central chimney, and a small, plain antechamber in the north-eastern corner. A rear extension with a massive gable chimney was added in 1610, along with an impressive new staircase, but the property, Alston discerns, has since remained little altered.
2.43 Alston’s concluding remarks are that ‘medieval hunting lodges are exceptionally rare’. Recent dendrochronological analysis has dated its timber frame to c.1472, this being ‘some forty years earlier than previously thought’. He affirms that the Lodge substantially predates the famous ‘Queen Elizabeth’s Hunting Lodge’ in Epping Forest, which was begun by Henry VIII in 1543.
2.44 Further research into the history of the Lodge is also presently being undertaken by Edward Martin. In his interim report (2014), Martin describes the Lodge as being ‘a unique and internationally significant survival from the late Middle Ages’, and puts forward the following argument:
It immediately stands out from the other medieval moated sites of Suffolk by its small size – at only 0.1 of an acre it is the smallest occupied moated site in the county. Although small, the building on the moated island stands out as not being a normal domestic building. The original part is a perfectly square timber-framed structure that was jettied on all four sides, with large and decorative wooden posts at each corner.
This immediately indicates that this was a ‘display’ building – something designed to impress visitors, and to underline this, the building is prominently sited on a hilltop. Historical maps indicate that the Lodge was originally adjacent to or, more likely, actually within a deer park. Both moats and deer parks were important ways of displaying lordly power and prestige in the Middle Ages.
2.45 Acknowledging Sir Anthony Wingfield’s close contact with the court of King Henry VIII, Martin suggests that his well-decorated Letheringham Lodge was perhaps a combined banqueting house and an observation place for watching hunts in his deer park, adding:
There are only a few parallels for ornate banqueting houses or ‘housis of pleasure’ for relaxed dining, entertainment or quiet withdrawal at this time, most notably Henry VIII’s own banqueting howse at Nonsuch Palace in Surrey, which was in existence by 1550.
There are also some parallels for simpler hunt-watching places or ‘standings’, like the so-called Queen Elizabeth’s Hunting Lodge in Epping Forest, Essex. Cited as a ‘unique example of a surviving timber- framed hunt standing’, this was actually built in 1543 for King Henry VIII.
The Nonsuch banqueting house only survives as foundations and Queen Elizabeth’s Hunting Lodge is a simpler, less decorative structure than Letheringham Lodge.
2.46 In the light of the dating provided by Dr Bridge’s analysis, Martin declares:
As a banqueting house/hunt standing of Henry VIII’s reign, Letheringham Lodge would be an important rarity, but recent dendro- dating has dramatically increased its importance. One of the principal corner posts of the building has yielded a felling date of 1472-75. This makes the structure considerably earlier and without any surviving parallel. The tree-ring dating suggests that the builder of Letheringham Lodge was Sir John Wingfield (1428-81). Although only of knightly rank, the Wingfields had ready access to both royal and noble households and are likely to have been aware of the latest fashions in gardens and architecture.
2.47 Martin notes that the interior of the Lodge was ‘refreshed’ by Sir Anthony Wingfield, by the insertion of decorative panelling and probably other improvements, sometime after his marriage to Elizabeth de Vere in the late 1510s.
2.48 On the subject of Sir Anthony’s grandson, Sir Thomas Wingfield, who died in 1610 and, in particular, his young wife Elizabeth, the daughter of Sir Drue Drury of Riddlesworth in Norfolk, Martin writes:
Elizabeth appears to have renovated the Lodge, reroofing it and making some additions – the recent tree-ring dating revealed a felling date in the summer/autumn of 1609 for one of the rafters and there is the inscription ‘EW 1610’ above one of the doors. Her works to the Lodge may have been connected to her second marriage in August 1610 to Henry Reynolds. This marriage was a failure well before her early death in 1620.
2.49 Elizabeth’s son, Anthony, was created a Baronet in 1627, but by this time the family had moved to Godwins Place in Hoo, and then, in the early 1630s, to a new residence called The White House in Easton. Sir Anthony died in 1638.
2.50 Martin concludes that by the early 1700s, the deer park would have almost certainly been converted into farmland. The Lodge, he adds, would have become a farmhouse, but continued to form part of the Letheringham/Easton estate until 1919.
3.0 LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY RECORD
3.1 Letheringham Lodge and record of planning applications submitted to Suffolk Coastal District Council, 1987-2013.
Applications
Letheringham Lodge
C/10/1353
C/11/0978, C/11/0979 and C/11/0980 C/13/0374
13/2238/FUL
Long Barn
C/88/0729 and C/88/0730
C/94/0227 and C/94/0228
C/01/1501, C/01/1502 and C/01/1503 13/3847/LBC
Lodge Farm
C/9605 and C/9606
C/88/2566
C/91/0962
C/96/1073
C/98/1396
C/99/0850, C/99/0851 and C/99/0852
Fig.5 Summary of planning applications submitted to SCDC, 1987-2013
Reference, Building: May 1999, Proposal
Decision
C/9605 - 5 and 6
Conversion of redundant agricultural building to 3 no. holiday cottages
Approved 1 February 1989 (subject to section 52 agreement, rescinded in 1998)
C/9606
Other
Change of use of redundant agricultural building to farm shop
Approved
18 September 1987 (Revocation Order 1989)

C/88/0729
Long Barn
Conversion of redundant barn to dwelling
Approved 6 June 1989

C/88/0730
Long Barn
Partial-demolition and other alterations in connection with conversion of barn to dwelling
Approved 6 June 1989
C/88/2566 - 2
Conversion of redundant agricultural building to farm shop (alternative building to that approved under C/9606)
Approved
11 August 1989

C/91/0962 - 1, 7, 9, 11 and 12
Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to 5 no. holiday cottages
Approved 24 August 1992 (subject to section 106 agreement, rescinded upon implementation of C/99/0851 or C/99/0852)
C/94/0227
Long Barn
Conversion of redundant barn to dwelling (renewal of planning permission C/88/0729)
Approved 6 April 1994
C/94/0228
Long Barn
Partial-demolition and other alterations in connection with conversion of barn to dwelling (renewal of listed building consent C/88/0730)
Approved 6 April 1994
C/96/1073 - 1, 7, 9, 11 and 12
Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to 5 no. holiday cottages (renewal of planning permission C/91/0962)
Approved
21 October 1996 (subject to section 106 agreement, rescinded upon implementation of C/99/0851 or C/99/0852)

C/98/1396 - 5 and 6
Change of use of holiday cottages to residential use
Refused 4 May 1999

C/99/0850 - 2
Change of use of farm shop to B1 office and domestic storage use
Approved
14 September 1999

C/99/0851
Change of use of pair of semi-detached cottages to use as accommodation ancillary to Letheringham Lodge
Approved
31 July 2000 (subject to section 106 agreement)

C/99/0852
Change of use of holiday cottages to residential use (re-submission)
Approved 31 July 2000 (subject to section 106 agreement)

C/01/1501
Long Barn
Conversion of west section of barn to provide accommodation ancillary to existing dwelling
Approved 13 November 2001

C/01/1502
Long Barn
Alterations to west section of barn
Approved 13 November 2001

C/01/1503
Long Barn
Alterations to west section of barn
Approved
13 November 2001
C/10/1353
Lodge
Retention of insertion of windows
Withdrawn 20 April 2011
C/11/0978
Lodge
Retention of insertion of windows
Approved
24 August 2011
C/11/0979
Lodge
Retention of insertion of windows
Refused
4 October 2011 (Listed Building Enforcement Notice authorised)

C/11/0980
Lodge
Retention of removal of chimney
Approved
24 August 2011
C/13/0374
Lodge
Reinstatement of windows; replacement of render, together with associated repairs to timber-frame
Approved
19 April 2013 (subject to condition requiring reinstatement of windows within 18 months of date of consent)

C/13/2238
Lodge
Retention of summer-house
Approved
2 October 2013
C/13/3847
Long Barn
Internal alterations; insertion of windows and rooflights
Decision pending
3.2 The agent’s letter dated 6 April 1987, which accompanied application reference C/9605, included the following handwritten note:
Please could you confirm that an application for listed building consent is not required for these proposals.
3.3 The agent’s letter dated 19 July 1991, which accompanied application reference C/91/0962, included the following typed note:
When submitting application C/9605 we did enquire whether an application for listed building consent was necessary to which your reply was no. As these buildings are further away from the main house (the Lodge) we have assumed this to be the case in this instance.
3.4 An enforcement investigation, reference EN/05/0347, into possible unauthorised works to ‘outbuildings’, concluded that no breach of control had occurred, and the case was subsequently closed on 17 July 2009.
4.0 THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING(S)
4.1 In 1949 Letheringham Lodge was included on a ‘Provisional list of buildings of architectural or historic interest’, and was described in the list entry as follows:
Sixteenth century with indications of fifteenth century work in the corner posts and some internal woodwork. The early work is seen in four very substantial corner posts, with enriched caps. An original well staircase, probably late sixteenth or early seventeenth century. There was until recently some good carved panelling.
Fig.7 Letheringham Lodge, 1968 (SROI, SBR1/80/7)
4.2 On the 16 March 1966, Letheringham Lodge was entered on the ‘Statutory list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest’. The Lodge was graded II*, which is reserved for ‘particularly important buildings of more than special interest’, and was described in the list entry as follows:
16/3/66. Letheringham Lodge. GV. II*. House, formerly hunting lodge. Sixteenth century with later additions and alterations. Timber framed with render and a plaintiled roof. Two storeys with an attic. Massive wooden corner posts at far right and left, jowled at their tops which have miniature arcades to their upper bodies. Jettied first floor. Hipped roof above to the apex of which is a massive chimney stack. To the ridge at far right is a massive chimney-stack supporting four diamond- section flues which have broach bases and banded upper body. Left hand side: Projecting staircase tower-wing. North face (rear): Brick gable end. Massive chimney stack to the apex. Interior: Within the kitchen outshut is a moulded lintel originally to an outside door which bears the date ‘1610’ and the initials ‘EW’. The seventeenth century staircase has turned balusters and moulded handrail and is of open- well plan. Winder staircase to the rear wing. Roof does not appear to be earlier than the late seventeenth century.
4.3 For the purposes of establishing the extent of a listed building, the position must be examined as it was at the date of listing of the principal building or, possibly, as it was at 1 January 1969 in relation to buildings listed prior to that date.
4.4 In this instance, the principal building is Letheringham Lodge and it was added to the statutory list on 16 March 1966. The key dates in this matter are therefore 16 March 1966 and 1 January 1969.
4.5 The implication of this is that listed building controls today extend to structures within the curtilage of the Lodge, the ‘principal building’, subject to the provisions of section 1(5) of the 1990 Act and subject to the structure being ancillary to the principal building at the date of listing, or possibly 1 January 1969 given that the Lodge was listed prior to this date.
4.6 There is another important consideration here in determining whether the nineteenth century buildings at Lodge Farm are subject to listed building control, and that is the fact that the 400-year-old barn is also listed in its own right.
4.7 The Easton Park Estate sale catalogue describes the structure, ahead of the auction in 1919, as being a ‘long, brick, timber, and recently reed-thatched double corn barn, with dressing floors and two corn holes, and a lean-to implement shed’ (SROI, f SC142/1).
4.8 In 1949 Letheringham Lodge Barn was included on a ‘Provisional list of buildings of architectural or historic interest’, and was described in the list entry as follows:
Fine sixteenth century timber-framed and weather-boarded barn, with thatched roof. 7-bays.
Fig.8 Letheringham Lodge Barn, 1988 (EH Archive, BB92.29105)
4.9 On the 16 March 1966, the Barn at Letheringham Lodge was entered on the ‘Statutory list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest’. The Barn was graded II, and was described in the list entry (amended 15 August 1988) as follows:
16/3/66. Barn at Letheringham Lodge (formerly listed as barn 170 yards to south-east). GV. II. Barn. Seventeenth century. Timber framed with corrugated iron roof, originally thatched. Eight bays with transepts to one side. South: Brick plinth of Flemish bond. Double doors at right and left, and double loft door to far right. East gable end: Nineteenth century brick outshut to the ground floor with pantile roof. Double door to the gable above this. North: Lean-to running between the two transepts which are eighteenth century additions with gable ends and double doors. Interior: Close studded walling and arched braces. Tie beams, originally supported on arched braces and now with knee joints. Collars above and wind bracing to the roof. Inserted twentieth century floor at one end.
4.10 As previously stated in the case of the Lodge, for the purposes of establishing the extent of a listed building, the position must be examined as it was at the date of listing of the principal building or, possibly, as it was at 1 January 1969 in relation to buildings listed prior to that date.
4.11 In this instance, the principal building is the Barn at Letheringham Lodge (known today as Long Barn) and it too was added to the statutory list on 16 March 1966. The key dates in this matter are also therefore 16 March 1966 and 1 January 1969.
4.12 The implication of this is that listed building controls today also extend to structures within the curtilage of Long Barn, the ‘principal building’, subject again to the provisions of section 1(5) of the 1990 Act and subject again to the structure being ancillary to the principal building at the date of listing, or possibly 1 January 1969 given that the barn was listed prior to this date.
5.0 PHYSICAL LAYOUT, OWNERSHIP AND FUNCTION
5.1 The Lodge together with its former farm buildings and surrounding land, in excess of 250 acres, appears to have remained a single holding in terms of ownership and function throughout the second and third quarter of the twentieth century, and it was only in the 1980s that the farm began to be broken up.
5.2 Prior to the twentieth century, and seemingly apparent throughout both the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, none of the buildings were historically independent. Similarly, the physical layout of the buildings is one of a group of structures at the heart of a farmstead. Whether accessed from the south or east, the historic layout was one of a farmhouse and associated farm buildings arranged around a defined area. This area was known as ‘Barn Hill’ according to documentary evidence.
5.3 This focal point for the operation of the farmstead was approached, from at least the late nineteenth century onwards, by way of ‘The Drift’ from the south. The seventeenth century residence lies on the north side of ‘Barn Hill’, facing south, whilst the principal farm building, the barn, lies on the southern boundary of ‘Barn Hill’ and faces north towards the house.
5.4 The timber-framed barn, built about the year 1600, is of eight bays with threshing floors in bays three and six. Evidence in the storey-posts confirms that the barn faced north when first built, and both threshing bays have at a slightly later date been provided with mid-streys on that elevation.
5.5 Farmsteads perform several basic functions. The farmhouse provides shelter for the farmer and his family, and the farm buildings provide for the housing and processing of crops, the storage of vehicles, implements and fodder, and the management and accommodation of livestock. In addition to the house and barn, this typically provides the farmstead with a range of buildings, including stables, cart-sheds, often with granaries above, cow-houses and shelter sheds, as well as enclosed yards for horses and cattle. The relationship between farm- based functions determines how buildings are arranged around the farmstead, and how they relate to the house.
5.6 The farm buildings immediately to the west of the Lodge, which similarly relate to ‘Barn Hill’ and are accessed by ‘The Drift’, are largely of mid- nineteenth century construction. They include cart-sheds, granary, cow-house, stables, and shelter sheds.
5.7 The early eighteenth century survey plan indicates the prior existence of structures in this location, none of which survive today. These lost structures are depicted on Kirby’s 1732 plan in such a manner as to suggest that there existed a small group of domestic buildings in the location of the nineteenth century farm buildings. The buildings drawn appear to represent the existence in 1732 of a dwelling of seventeenth century date situated immediately to the west of the moat, together with a contemporary, detached stable range further to the west.
5.8 Early nineteenth century plans show the existence of other lost structures, most probably agricultural in terms of function, which were located in the south-west corner of ‘Barn Hill’. These structures lay between the domestic group and the barn, but were again sited around the periphery of ‘Barn Hill’, adjacent to the field known as ‘cartlodge field’ or ‘cartlodge piece’.
5.9 The existing farm buildings in the north-west corner of ‘Barn Hill’, situated in close physical proximity to and forming a group with the Lodge, are either of timber-frame construction of a style typical of the nineteenth century, or are of brick construction of a uniform type and bond which is repeated on the range also erected in the mid- nineteenth century next to the barn.
5.10 Buildings 3 and 4 on a plan dated May 1999 are today used as annexe accommodation with the Lodge and are known as ‘Chestnut Cottage’. This is a building of mid-nineteenth century date which in 1919 was being used in a manner ancillary to the use of the Lodge as a dwelling. At some point after that date, and in the early twentieth century, it was converted to a separate residence, being known as ‘Lodge Farm Cottage’ in the 1960s and early 1970s.
5.11 A nineteenth century wall physically separates the garden of the Lodge from the meadow known as ‘Barn Hill’ to the south, although the bounds of this meadow, within which all the farm buildings are arranged, does provide a physical limit so as not to extend to include the whole of the holding. An orchard is situated to the north of the Lodge and additional garden to the east, both of which are clearly defined in their extent.
5.12 To the west, and adjacent to the mid-nineteenth century range of former piggeries and outhouses, is located a building that was described in the 1919 sale particulars (SROI, f SC142/1) as a ‘brick and tiled hackney stable, with two stalls and loose box’. This building was listed on the sales particulars as being with the ‘residence’, and whilst being ancillary to the Lodge prior to its conversion to a holiday cottage in 1989/90 (C/9605, approved 1 February 1989), it is now part of Lodge Farm.
5.13 This north facing structure, shown as building 5 on the May 1999 plan, had an access way between it and the former piggeries and outhouses. This is evident on the 1884, 1904 and 1975 OS maps, as well as the 1945 aerial photograph. This track, which also provided access from the farm yards to the fields to the north, no longer survives following the introduction of a separate residential use into building 5 and the subsequent erection of a boundary fence.
5.14 The facts of the matter in relation to the Barn are largely as that for the Lodge, that is, the common access by way of ‘The Drift’, the physical layout of the farm buildings around ‘Barn Hill’, the single holding in terms of ownership and function throughout the second and third quarter of the twentieth century, including both 1966 and 1969, and none of the buildings being historically independent.
5.15 The physical layout of the barn and the mid-nineteenth century buildings is one of a group of structures at the heart of a farmstead. Whether accessed from the south or east, the historic layout was one of a barn and associated farm buildings arranged around a defined area. This area was known as ‘Barn Hill’ according to documentary evidence.
5.16 This focal point for the operation of the farmstead was approached, from at least the late nineteenth century onwards, by way of ‘The Drift’ from the south. The barn lies on the southern boundary of ‘Barn Hill’, and the mid-nineteenth century buildings lie to the north-west corner of ‘Barn Hill’.
5.17 The barn, built about the year 1600, faced into the area known as ‘Barn Hill’. Barns, as in this instance, are normally the oldest and most impressive farm building on the holding. They provided for the processing and storage of crops and were regarded as status symbols, with the size of the barn reflecting the size of holding and the wealth of its owner.
5.18 The other buildings of the farmstead, including stables, cart-sheds, often with granaries above, cow-houses and shelter sheds, typically provide functions that are ancillary and subordinate to that of the barn. The age and construction of the farm buildings immediately to the west of the Lodge have been described earlier.
5.19 They represent a nineteenth century phase of redevelopment of the minor buildings on the farm whilst the main building, the barn, was retained. The association between the farm buildings is also demonstrated by the contemporary alterations and additions to the barn, as well as the construction of a new detached range.
5.20 Letheringham Lodge and the size of holding.
Year, Year, Acreage, Occupier, Reference
1732, 389 (approx.), Surveyed by J. Kirby
1790s, SROI, HD11.475/103
Early C19, William Cooper, SROI, HD11.475/563
1830s, 389 (approx.), SROI, HD11.475/596
1837, 388 (approx.), William Toller
1842/3, William Toller, SROI, FDA165/A1/1a+b 362 (approx.), Mr Toller, SROI, HD11.475/562
1919, 330 (approx.), Mr Capon, SROI, f SC142/1
1987, 242 (approx.), Mr M.R. Clough, C/9605
1991, Mr M.R. Clough, C/91/0962
Fig.9 The size of holding at Letheringham Lodge, 1732-1991
Fig.10 Letheringham Lodge Farm, surveyed 1732 by J. Kirby
Fig.11 The Lodge Farm, 1790s (SROI, HD11.475/103)
Fig.12 The Lodge Farm, occupier William Cooper (SROI, HD11.475/563)
Fig.13 Letheringham Lodge Farm (SROI, HD11.475/596)
Fig.14 Parish of Letheringham Tithe Map, 1842 (SROI, FDA165/A1/1b)
Fig.15 Land in the Parish of Letheringham (SROI, HD11.475/562)
Fig.16 Letheringham Lodge, lot 35, 1919 (SROI, f SC142/1)
Fig.17 Letheringham Lodge, 1987 planning appn (SCDC, C/9605)
Fig.18 Letheringham Lodge, 1991 planning appn (SCDC, C/91/0962)
Fig.19 William Toller, occ.1831, Lodge Farm (SROI, HD11.475/534b)
5.21 Letheringham Lodge and ‘Barn Hill’.
Year, No. Name, Cultivation, Reference
1732, ‘Barn Hill’, Surveyed by J. Kirby
1790s, ‘Barn Hill’, SROI, HD11.475/103
Early C19, 26, ‘Barn Hill’, SROI, HD11.475/563
1842/3, 59, ‘Barn Hill’, ‘Pasture’, SROI, FDA165/A1/1a+b
1842/3, 59, ‘Barn Hill’, ‘Pasture’, SROI, HD11.475/534a+b
1883/4, 54, 1st edition OS, LVIII.16
1903/4, 54, 2nd edition OS, LVIII.16
1919, 54, ‘Pasture’, SROI, f SC142/1
1975, OS map
Fig.20 ‘Barn Hill’ at Letheringham Lodge
Fig.21 Approach towards ‘Barn Hill’ from south by way of ‘The Drift’
Fig.22 Letheringham Lodge Farm, surveyed 1732 by J. Kirby
Fig.23 The Lodge Farm, 1790s (SROI, HD11.475/103)
Fig.24 The Lodge Farm, occupier William Cooper (SROI, HD11.475/563)
Fig.25 Parish of Letheringham Tithe Map, 1842 (SROI, FDA165/A1/1b)
Fig.26 Parish of Letheringham, 1842 (SROI, HD11.475/534a)
Fig.27 1st edition 25” OS map, 1884 (surveyed in 1883) (LVIII.16)
