The name Blagrave is mentioned every day in the town of Reading in Berkshire, in one of its streets, on buses and even in the name of one of its pubs. But few people know where it originally came from and why it's remembered today. 

John Blagrave, one of the more famous of Reading's historic residents, was born to parents Anne and John Blagrave from Sonning. After taking the education expected of a wealthy young teenager, he developed a special curiosity for mathematics and mathematical instruments. At his home in Southcote Lodge he spent hours researching, experimenting and writing, publishing The Mathematical Jewel in 1585, with the wordy subtitle: 'shewing the making and most excellent use of a singuler instrument so called, in that it performeth with wonderfull dexteritie whatever is to be done either by Quadrant, Ship, Circle, Cylinder, Ring, Diall, Horoscope, Astrolabe, Sphere, Globe, or any such like heretofore devised’. In 1590 he published his Baculum Familliare Catholicon sive Generale. This book shared his new invention with the world: a 'familiar staffe', which could be carried along as you walked, and calculated 'geometrical mensurations of all altitudes'. By 1596, he was inspired by the long voyages carried out by Elizabeth I's sailors across the globe, titling his next work Astrolabium Uranicum Generale: a necessary and pleasaunt solace and recreation for Navigators in their long jorneying. After Elizabeth's death, he continued working into the reign of James VI and I, publishing The Art of Dyalling, in two parts, in 1609.

John Blagrave's memorial in St Laurence's Church, Reading (Jo Romero)

On his death in 1611, John left no children of his own, but bequeathed lands in Southcote to multiple family members, it being estimated that up to 80 people benefited from his generosity. He also left a sum of 20 nobles to be given to one woman in Reading each Easter, to help with her personal circumstances. He stipulated though, that she should be of good character and have already completed five years' service to a master of the town. John clearly preferred to help those who were hard-working and trustworthy. The women applied through a process like an election, where they would petition for their right to the cash, with the council considering each application. No doubt many seventeenth-century women benefited immensely from the funds that John left.

After more than 20 years of mathematical enquiry, John Blagrave died on 9 August 1611 and was buried in St Laurence's Church in the marketplace of Reading. His memorial effigy can be seen on the wall inside. It is very similar to that of William Shakespeare in Stratford Upon Avon in design. John is standing (or is seated?) upright, from the waist up, looking out at us and holding mathematical instruments in each hand. It is an early Renaissance-style English effigy memorial, crafted with flourishes, scrolls and painted with accents of gold. Two skulls hover on each side, warning us that death will come for us, too - while figures clad in classical togas hold geometric shapes and lounge on the pillars and structures around him.

The inscription reads: 

Here lyes his corpes which living had a spirit, Wherein all worthy knowledge did inherit, By which with zeal our God he did adore, Left for maidservants and to feed the poore, His virtuous mother came of worthie race, A Hungerford and buried neere this place, When God sent death their lives to call, They lived beloved and dyed bewayld of all. Deseased the 9th of August Anno Domino MDCXI.

John Blagrave was a Renaissance man who helped define his era. He was preoccupied with learning, dedicating hours to the study of new ideas in mathematics and the invention of mechanical instruments. He published works to help spread these ideas and allow people to build on them. Much in the same way too, that the early Medicis of Florence ploughed state money back into public buildings and art, John allocated funds of his own for the relief of the poor and divided up his estate so that many people could benefit from his accrued wealth rather than just one or two people. It is not clear whether he directed the design of his memorial in St Laurence's, but it has clear visual accents of the era: geometric shapes, figures resembling those of classical antiquity and features a number of different mathematical instruments he would have used, and even invented. Not to be forgotten, John Blagrave changed lives in Reading as well as further afield, and contributed to the study of one of the growing disciplines of the seventeenth century. 

Liked this? You might also like: The Cryptic Last Words of King Charles I, Reading's Regicide Daniel Blagrave and A Restoration Era Ghost Story of 1662.

My book,  Power Couples of the Renaissance, examines this era and explores the relationship dynamics that went against accepted norms of the period. There were also power-hungry couples who ruled, fought and spread the patronage of art, science and culture across the globe during one of the most tumultuous periods of history. Find it on the Pen and Sword Books website. 

Sources: 

Visit to St Laurence Church, Reading 2025

Dictionary of National Biography, Volume 2, George Smith, London 1908. 

Night took hold over the neighbourhood near the Tower of London as the Thames lapped gently onto the gravelly shore. It was 26 October 1276, a Sunday, and the Curfew Bell had rung, signalling for residents to return to the safety of their homes for the evening. But as the last few candles were extinguished in the huddle of thatched houses in this historic part of London, a scuffle, a round of loud voices and a shriek pierced the calm of the darkness. 

On Saturday 1st November the local Chamberlain and Sheriffs began their enquiries into the discovery of a dead body lying in the house of Roger le Chaloner in Mark Lane, a few minutes' walk from the looming pale turrets of the Tower. Calling in other local officials to investigate, they spoke to neighbours and began to piece together what had happened. 

After the ringing of the curfew bell, a man named Richard Moys was walking along the highway and came to the door of John le Chaloner near Fenchurch Street. John seems to have leased out the property, which at that time lodged Robert de Munceny and Arnulph his son, along with other members of their household. Richard tried to enter, making a noise and creating a disturbance. He was asked by Robert to 'cease making this noise, and go away', but refused. Again, after some more shouting from Richard Moys, Robert and his household told him a second time to go away, but he still continued. The dispute then spilled out into the street, with Robert, Arnulph and others deciding to send Richard away with force. The record in the Coroner's Roll of that year lists 'John de Munceny, son of Robert, John Fauntilun, Robert de la Rokele, Henry de Ginges, John Curtoys, John de Hakone, John le Wyte, Hugh de Hoddone, Hachard de Garbodesham, and Robert de le Lo', who approached Richard with 'swords, and some with other arms'. Robert, the householder, stood at his door, while Richard, suddenly panicked, fled to the house of a neighbour named Alice. 

The White Tower of the Tower of London, close to the events of October 1276

As Richard Moys burst in through the open wooden door, with the armed rabble following close behind, he disturbed a group of people drinking, all seated. Attempting to hide from Roger's men, Richard 'concealed himself between two wooden vessels', in the room of the house. One of the drinkers, called Richard de Parys, stood up and confronted Arnulph at the door, asking 'who are these people'? It was now that Arnulph turned violent, and lashed out at Richard de Parys 'with his drawn sword', with de Parys 'already stupefied as he was at the sight of the sword'. The statement of the report continues to describe how Arnulph ran into the house, wounding de Parys in the 'back, between the ribs of the body, two inches in breadth, and penetrating to the intestines'. This was clearly a deliberate and forceful blow, intended to seriously immobilise de Parys, who had only, according to the surviving evidence, entered the dispute to settle it down. De Parys also received another small wound 'under the left breast'. 

Arnulph and the other men fled the scene and returned to their lodgings, while Hachard de Gobodesham and Arnulph's brother John de Munceny ran away from the area. 

Richard de Parys was nursed by his neighbours and friends, but died from his injuries the following Thursday. Arnulph and the remaining men were questioned and imprisoned, although all their accounts agreed that Arnulph was the only one that attacked Richard de Parys on that chaotic and fateful night. 

The causes of the disagreement were not recorded in the Coroner's report. The Muncenys' running after Richard Moys into the street with weapons, and his loud banging on their door suggests that the two parties were known to one another and had perhaps a business or personal dispute that Richard had tried to tackle after dark. Robert Munceny was noted to have had items of some value, including six horses, three beds, a falcon and three greyhounds which were all assessed at twenty marks. In any case, it was a man apparently unconnected to the two parties who was mortally wounded in the course of that evening and later lost his life.

Like this? You might also like: The Medieval and Tudor Archers of Finsbury, London; The Medieval Brothels of Southwark in London and Moll King, Notorious Businesswoman of Georgian London.

Never want to miss a post? Subscribe to my newsletter here: 

Source:

Coroner's Roll of Our Lord the King, 1276 in Memorials of London and London Life, in the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries. 1276-1419. Henry Thomas Riley. Longmans Green and Co., London. 1868.

The execution of King Charles I, in January 1649, was a groundbreaking and politically shocking event. It brought a bloody end to the whole concept of monarchy in England, and sent ripples of worry and fear throughout the rulers of Europe. But there is an often-forgotten link between Charles' trial and execution and the commercial, leafy town of Reading in Berkshire. 

Daniel Blagrave, born in 1603, was a nephew of John Blagrave of Reading, a famous and historically-important mathematician. As a boy, Daniel entered into legal training, and in 1645 was appointed a recorder of the town. He was elected MP for Reading on 8 May 1648 and appears often in the accounts of the Reading Corporation throughout most of 1648. 

Claude Du Bosc, c.1711–1740, The Trial of Charles I. 1648, Engraving, hand-colored, Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, B1977.14.17893.

In early 1649 Daniel played a central and visible role in the trial of his king, Charles I. This would have required him to lodge in London for most of that January, as one of the commissioners of the unprecedented trial. He attended the first meeting, seated with Oliver Cromwell and Henry Ireton in the Painted Chamber of the palace of Westminster on 6 January 1649. Here, they appointed Edward Dendy, Sergeant at Arms, to proclaim the proceedings of the trial. They next met on 10 January, with Daniel once again present, to hash out how the trial would take place and who would preside over it. John Bradshaw was chosen to oversee the proceedings as president, with other commissioners and messengers also appointed in various roles. At a meeting on 13th January, Daniel would have looked on as it was agreed that the trial would be held privately, and at Westminster. On the 15th, a Monday, the charges against Charles were read out at court. Daniel would have noted his neighbour at some of these gatherings, Edmund Ludlow from Tadley Place in nearby Hampshire, a relative of Sir Henry Ludlow of the village. 

Daniel was at another meeting on 17th January, but not at one held on the following day on the 19th. He was back in the Painted Chamber on 20 January, when Charles first appeared to hear the charges against him. The king lodged with Robert Cotton during his trial and was brought to the court room with 32 guards. Asked to sit, he took his place on a 'velvet crimson chair', although stood up to glare at the guards and onlookers who had assembled. Charles listened as he was told that 'the Commons of England Assembled in Parliament, being deeply sensible of the Evils and Calamities that had been brought upon this Nation, and of the innocent Blood that had been spilt in it, which was fixed upon him as the principal Author'. They resolved, they informed the king, to 'make Inquisition for this Blood, and according to the Debt they did owe to God, for Justice, the Kingdom, and themselves'. Charles was visibly angered by the trial, and was repeatedly asked by the commissioners to be silent. He regularly interrupted those who were speaking and when he was described as 'a Tyrant, Traitor, Murderer', he laughed out loud, later arguing that the court 'had no legal authority' to act against him.

The next few dates were no more promising. Daniel Blagrave was listed as present on the morning of 22 January and again, in a packed room with 70 commissioners present, in the afternoon. At this later gathering Charles continued to argue that the men assembled had no right to proceed against him and that he did not know 'how a King can be a Delinquent'. On 23 January, Daniel listened as the king was finally asked how he pleaded. Charles allowed a pause, and then argued once again, that as a king he could not be tried by the people and that the commissioners had no power. Daniel was listed at the commission on 24 January, but not specifically on the morning of the 25th. He might have been one of the 'divers others' present, not listed by name. On this day, members of the public were called as witnesses to Charles' many actions of war, telling the council how he had held his sword in his hand and fought in battle, with deaths caused on either side. Others told how he marched through the country with his armies, one William Brayne of Salop relating how he had seen the king 'while the standard was set up, and the flag flying'. That afternoon, Daniel Blagrave was present, when the court declared that they were 'resolved upon the whole matter, that this court will proceed with the sentence of condemnation against Charles Stuart, King of England' and that he would be condemned as a tyrant, traitor and a murderer. 

Print made by William Faithorne, ca. 1620–1691, Charles I, 1658, Line engraving on medium, slightly textured, cream laid paper, Yale Center for British Art, Gift of Edward B. Greene, transfer from the Yale University Art Gallery, B1994.4.943.

In the afternoon of 26 January Daniel was among those who drafted the sentence against the king. On the 27th, he looked on as Charles listened to his fate. He would be 'put to death, by the severing of his head from his body'. The king repeatedly argued with Bradshaw and tried to interrupt, but when asked to reply officially to the sentence, he refused to speak. However after the proceedings were over Charles insisted that he wanted to address him with arguments, Bradshaw tersely reminding him 'Sir, you are not to be heard after the sentence'. As Charles was taken out of the chamber by armed guards, an eyewitness claimed that the king was spat on and tobacco smoke blown on his face. On 29 January his children Elizabeth and Henry visited him, the king telling them that he loved their mother and that they should obey their brother Charles if he ever became king. However, he told Henry 'do not be made a king by them', referring to the Commons. Henry told his father that  he would 'be torn into pieces first'. 

On 29 January 1649, Daniel Blagrave, with others, signed Charles I's Death Warrant and affixed his seal to the document. The commissioners met the following day, when Charles was taken to the scaffold. Telling the executioner that he would give him a signal when he was ready to die - his hands held out in front of him - Charles knelt and placed his head on the wooden block, which had been draped in black cloth. After a brief moment of prayer, the king gave the signal and the executioner struck. Daniel was present at the meeting before the execution, and so it is likely that he would have stayed to observe the action he had helped put into place, as one of the Regicides of the now late king. 

With Charles' body still warm in its coffin in St George's Chapel, Windsor, the Protectorate government under Oliver Cromwell established itself, and England entered into the Puritan religion. Daniel Blagrave continued to play a role in the new regime. He appears in the Corporation Records of Reading as a steward and dealt regularly with business there in the summer and autumn of 1649. In 1650 he listened to a case involving the fencing and railing of land belonging to Thomas Harrison's father in Reading. In May, he considered selling the town's lands in Silchester but decided to ponder on the problem before coming to an agreement, making it clear that 'Parr's business be concluded on' first. He is marked is absent in many of the town meetings during 1652 and 1653, perhaps because he was now needed closer to the centre of government. He worked in the Court of Common Pleas, securing an income of £500 a year, and was parliamentary treasurer for the county of Berkshire. In 1654 he appears often in Reading's local business, and was a commissioner for the Protectorate government 'for the ejection of scandalous and inefficient ministers'. He was accused at the time of being heavy-handed with his power, as 'a vexatious persecutor of the clergy'. Daniel later purchased the fee-farm rent of the manor of Sonning in Berkshire along with other lands, and represented Reading as a Member of Parliament in 1656 and 1658. 

In May 1660, at the Restoration of the Monarchy, Charles' eldest son Charles II was crowned. One of his first actions as king was to seek out those who had signed the death warrant of his father and issue punishment. Oliver Cromwell's corpse was even dug up out of its grave and subjected to a traitor's 'death'. Wisely perhaps, Daniel Blagrave escaped out of the kingdom and settled in Aachen in Germany. It's likely that he never returned to England, and is believed to have died at his Aachen home in 1668.

Liked this? You might also like: The Cryptic Last Words of King Charles I, and A Restoration Era Ghost Story of 1662.

My book,  Power Couples of the Renaissance, features this era and explores the relationship dynamics that went against accepted norms of the period. There were also power-hungry couples who ruled, fought and spread the patronage of art, science and culture across the globe during one of the most tumultuous periods of history. Find it on the Pen and Sword Books website. 

 Sources:

A true copy of the journal of the High-Court of Justice for the tryal of King Charles I. As it was read in the House of Commons, ... Taken by J. Nalson, LL.D. Jan. 4. 1683. 1731

Reading Records: Diary of the Corporation of Reading, Volume 4. J. Parker, London. 1892.

Dictionary of National Biography, Leslie Stephen and Sidney Lee. Volume 2. Smith, Elder and Co., London. 1908.

Edward III was a lover of chivalry, celebration and order and also considered the ancient Briton King Arthur a bit of a role model. Other kings, like his later namesake Edward IV, admired his approach to court entertainment and adopted these traits into their own households. Theatrical, extravagant and concerned with heading a royal court of justice and legend, Edward III told his subjects in January 1344 that he wanted to host a tournament at Windsor Castle. 

Edward III, by William Bruges, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Windsor was then a stocky fortress, its famous Round Tower having been built by William the Conqueror after 1066. Many of the walls we see today date from the early 1500s, after modifications and building works were commissioned by Henry VII and his councillor Sir Reginald Bray. In the fourteenth century St George's Chapel was a smaller building, consisting of where Prince Albert's memorial chapel is today. The vast building on the left hand side was begun by Edward IV and finished under the reign of Henry VII. 

Edward III issued a safe conduct to subjects 'for the recreation and solace of men of war who delight in the exercise of arms' to travel to the castle. Foreigners were also invited, specifically 'knights, gentlemen and esquires', expected to descend on the castle with their servants. 

A fascinating eyewitness account of the tournament survives, written by Adam Murimuth, a lawyer and rector of Wraysbury, a position he held in 1331. He died later in 1347. Looking back on the event, Murimuth wrote that:

'This year the lord King arranged to have a most noble just or essay in the place of his birth, namely in the Castle of Windsor... which, at a fitting date preceding, he caused to be proclaimed both in parts beyond sea as well as in England. To which also he caused to be invited by his letters all the ladies of the southern parts of England, and the wives of the burgesses of London. Therefore having assembled the earls, barons, knights, and as many ladies as possible, on Sunday... in the aforesaid Castle, the King kept a solemn feast, so that the great hall of the same Castle was filled with ladies, nor was there any male person among them, save two knights who alone had just come from France for the festival. At which feast there were two queens, nine countesses, and wives of barons, knights, and burgesses, who could not easily be counted, whom the King himself personally arranged in their places according to their rank. The Prince of Wales, the Duke of Cornwall, the earls, barons, and knights, together with all the people, feasted in a tent and in other places, where there were rations and all other necessaries made ready and delivered to all freely and without murmuring, and later on ring-dances... and divers other dances were solemnly arranged.

The Norman Round Tower at Windsor today

And on the three following days the King with nineteen other knights held the lists against all coming from without; and the same Lord, not on account of the royal favour, but by reason of the great labour which he sustained, and from the luck which he had on the said three days, bore away the favours among those within. But from without Sir Miles Stapelton on the first day, Sir Philip Despenser on the second day, and Sir John Blount on the third day, bore away the favours. On the Thursday following... the Lord King made a great supper at which he began his Round Table, and received the oaths of certain earls and barons and knights whom he wished to be of the said Round Table, under a certain form pertaining to the said Round Table; and he fixed the day of holding the Round Table in the same place on the feast of Pentecost next after, and to all present he gave leave with acts of grace to return to their own affairs.

He also ordained afterwards that there should be made in the same place a most noble house, in which the said Round Table could be held at the term appointed; for the making of which, he appointed carpenters and other workmen and ordered to be provided both beams and stones, not sparing labour or expense.'

Murimuth also gives an account of another tournament and feast held at the castle in 1343, although it is not clear if this describes part of the same event or a different one. 

'In the year of Our Lord 1343, but in the second year of the pontificate of Pope Clement VI and in the seventeenth of King Edward the Third from the Conquest, beginning always and ending always at the feast of St. Michael, from which feast until the feast of the Purification of the Blessed Mary there were not any things done worthy of much note or relation, but on the Sunday next after the feast of the Blessed Mary, at Windsor, the Lord King kept a very great solemnity and a great feast ; to which he invited his first-born son the Prince of Wales, the earls, barons, and knights, and very many other nobles of his kingdom. There were also there the Lady Queen Philippa, with her children, the lady Queen-mother, the lady Isabella, countesses, baronesses, as well as ladies and gentlewomen, with an indescribable host of people about to delight in so great a solemnity. And so at feasts that were expensive and abounding in the most alluring of drink they were sustained to the satiety of everyone. Among the lords and ladies dances were not lacking, embraces and kissings alternately co-mingling. Among the knights continued joustings were being practised for three days; the best melody is made by the minstrels, and divers joyous things; to these are given changes of raiment, to those offerings were abounding; these being enriched with plenty of gold and silver.

This same solemnity lasted Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday ; on which day at night, after the end of the jousts, the Lord King caused to be proclaimed that no lord or lady presume to depart, but await until morning, to know the Lord King’s pleasure. When the morning, that is the Thursday, came, about the first hour the King caused himself to be solemnly arrayed in royal and festive vestures, and he had on uppermost a mantle of very precious velvet and the royal crown placed upon his head. The Queen was likewise most nobly adorned. The earls and barons, and the rest of the lords and ladies, with all the decency they could, according to the King’s command, prepared themselves to go with him to the chapel in the Castle of Windsor and hear mass. Which having been celebrated, the Lord King went out of the chapel, the lord Henry earl of Derby, as seneschal of England, and the lord William, earl of Salisbury, as marshal of England, going before him, each in virtue of his office carrying a staff in his hand, and the Lord King himself holding the royal sceptre in his hand. There followed him the young Lady Queen, and the lady Queen-mother, the Prince of Wales, the earls, barons, knights and nobles, with the ladies and all the people about to see so unwonted a spectacle, to the place appointed for the assembly. In which place the same Lord King and all the others at the same time stood up, and having been offered the Book, the Lord King, after touching the Gospels, took a corporeal oath that he himself, at a certain time limited to this, whilst the means were possible to him, would begin a Round Table, in the same manner and condition as the lord Arthur, formerly King of England, appointed it, namely to the number of 300 knights, a number always increasing, and he would cherish it and maintain it according to his power.

To observe, sustain, and promote which with all its appendages, the earls of Derby, Salisbury, Warwick, Arundel, Pembroke, and Suffolk, the other barons and very many knights, whom probity and renown put forward to be worthy of praise, made a like oath. Which being done, with trumpets and nakers sounding all together, the guests hastened to a feast; which feast was complete with richness of fare, variety of dishes, and overflowing abundance of drinks: the delight was unutterable, the comfort inestimable, the enjoyment without murmuring, the hilarity without care. The last things therefore corresponding to the first, the royal feast was ended, so that on the fifth day each might return to his own affairs.'

As we might expect for so lavish an occasion, Edward's costs were expensive, and not just for carving his Round Table. Works clearly involved erecting a building that the Round Table would be installed in, like a council room, although it didn't have to be used only for business. This involved a lot of money and various employees were called upon to carry out Edward's vision.  Two men were paid to drive two carts of sand over the 'bridges of the Castle... lest they be broken with the heavy carriage of the Round Table'. Their work took them two days and they were paid two shillings eight pence. Four men were paid to scatter the sand for the two days, with more sand delivered the following March. The building of the Round Table itself was begun on 15 February 1344. A carpenter named William Hurley was in charge of the project, and was asked to recruit carpenters from other towns and cities to work with him on the project. A mason named William of Ramsey was assigned for the same work. It was William of Langley's job to make sure the workers had enough stone and timber, which was to be brought from Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Middlesex. John Knyght was recruited to bring materials by boat 'between London and Windsor'. John Waleraund was 'overseer and controller of the works' and responsible for paying the bills. 

It's not known for certain what happened to Edward's building, but it no longer survives at the castle today. However its trace in historical sources and witness accounts acts as a reminder of the king's forward-thinking, chivalrous and ambitious approach to cultural identity during his reign. He died in July 1377 and was buried in Westminster Abbey.

Interested in the cultural development of England and other countries? You might like my third book Power Couples of the Renaissance. Tracking couples who drove arts, literature and the theatre forwards from the 1390s to the early 1700s, it features relationship dynamics that went against accepted norms of the period and power-hungry couples who ruled, fought and spread the patronage of art, science and culture across the globe during one of the most tumultuous periods of history. Find it on the Pen and Sword Books website. 

 Source: W.H. St John Hope. Windsor Castle, An Architectural History Volume 1. London, 1913.