392
NOTES AND QUERIES, m s. vm. NOV. 15, 1913.
one hundred years. The Vicar has reason
to think that this tree was planted when
the Vicarage was built, in 1660. Probably
all trees grow at a more rapid rate in their
youth than in their maturity, and the
estimate of 9 in. per century perhaps applies
to much older trees, for a time must come
when the growth becomes slower before it
ceases altogether.
In 1777 Gough writes of a yew tree in Totteridge Churchyard : " Its trunk every- where of nearly the same size, 3 ft. above ground is 26 ft. in circumference." In 1877 it was again measured, and found to be precisely the same size.
In the Register of Stoke Hamond (Bucks), under date 27 Dec., 1687, mention is made that " those two trees att ye church doors was sett by me George Bate, Rector." The trees are evidently the two yews, there being no other trees in the churchyard two centuries old.
On 20 March, 1900, I measured them : one girthed 88 in., and the other 85 in., at about 4|- ft. from the ground. On 28 Oct., 1913, I paid a special visit, and remeasured them,. The larger tree is quite easy to measure, as the cylindrical bole girths 91 in., not only at 4^ ft. high, but at higher and lower points, showing an increase of 3| in. in thirteen years, or about 27 in. in a "century.
The smaller tree is nearer to the church, and is rather difficult to measure, as the bole is ribbed and certain of these ribs project boldly. The smallest girth is about 3| ft. from the ground, and measures close on 90 in., an increase of nearly 5 in. in thir- teen years, or 38 in. in a century. There is a fallacy in this last instance, due, I think, to the marked longitudinal ribs and hollows.
In the park at Gayhurst House (Bucks) are several clumps of yew trees which must be many centuries old ; in the clump N.E. of the mansion is growing the largest of these trees. Mr. W. W. Carlile, the owner of Gayhurst, informs me that an expert from Kew estimated the age of this tree at six centuries, but the former does not know how this estimate was arrived at. On 21 June, 1913, Mr. Carlile and I measured this tree. At 3 ft. from the ground the girth was 162 in. ; at 4 ft. from the ground the girth was the same, though boughs are sent off slightly above this height : the diameter is therefore 54 in. Taking 9 in. as the average growth of a century, this tree is, therefore, 600 years old.
Other instance's, not my own observations,
are :
Basildon, Berks. Two, planted 1726 ; measured in 1889, 9 ft. 6 in. and 9 ft. 2 in.
East Woodhay (Bishop Ken's). Planted 1660 ; in 1888 measured 7 ft. 7 in.
De Candolle estimated the growth of the yew to be at the rate of 2 lines a year, or 16f in. in a century whether of girth or diameter my informant sayeth not.
In order to arrive at a reliable estimate, it is necessary to accumulate a large number of carefully observed examples, and wherever mention is made in old books or documents of the planting of a tree, the reference might well be recorded in ' N. & Q.' There are many who could utilize the references and take a modern measurement. I have thrown off this suggestion before, and
it flew
Like a clothyard shaft from a bended yew, I cannot say whither I never knew.
Bletchley.
WILLIAM BRADBROOK.
The subject is fully discussed in ' Byways
in British Archaeology,' by Walter Johnson,
1912. R. STEWART BROWN.
[MR. W. G. BLACK also thanked for reply.]
WILL OF KATHERINE, COUNTESS OF WAR- WICK, 1369 (US. viii. 326). MR. J. HARVEY BLOOM states that in Doyle's ' Official Baronage ' is "a note that this lady died before 1340 " ; and he goes on to show this to be inaccurate by giving a transcript of her will, which was made 4 Aug., 1369. He also states that her husband, Thomas de Beauchamp I., died 13 Nov., 1369.
Having a copy of the ' Official Baronage/ and being anxious to test the accuracy of this very useful work, I thought that I would follow the advice given by ' N. & Q.' to verify quotations, and not only one's own, but those of other people. The result is that I would ask MR. HARVEY BLOOM if he is sure that Doyle does make such a statement. On p. 581 of the third volume of the ' Official Baronage,' under the account of Thomas de Beauchamp I., Earl of War- wick, occurs the following passage (in the usual italics adopted for recording mar- riages) : " m: Lady Katherine Mortimer, eldest d. of Roger, 1st Earl of March," fol- lowed by, in ordinary type, ' ; before 1340," and then, just below, concluding the ac- count, " d. Nov. 13, 1369." This last, of course, refers to the death of the husband. Do not the words " before 1340 " obviously refer to the approximate date of Lady Katherine's marriage, not of her death ?
