How helpful is Wimpole Hall as a source in helping us understand the religious and social attitudes of the rich and poor in the 18th and 19th centuries?

GCSE Religious Studies (Philosophy & Ethics)

Nicola Kelly

10V1

How helpful is Wimpole Hall as a source in helping us understand the religious and social attitudes of the rich and poor in the 18th and 19th centuries?

Wimpole Hall is a stately home built near Cambridge by Sir Thomas Chicheley in 1640.

It has been owned by some of the most powerful families in England. Royal visitors such as Queen Elizabeth and Prince Albert have stayed at the house.

A full team of servants would have always run a stately home such as Wimpole, from the highest butler status to the lowest maid. There is not much evidence to suggest the social and religious attitudes of the poor, mainly due to the fact that they were not considered worthy of attention by anyone, except someone from their own social class. A few sources that give an insight into the attitudes of the poor were the rules that they were made to follow, and a section of a diary written by Queen Victoria’s maid of honour.

We can derive clues about the social attitudes of the rich simply by studying where Wimpole Hall was built. It is near to London, and therefore the queen. This meant that they could visit her, but more importantly she could come to visit them, which gave them more status. The location also gives a clue to their attitude to the poor as they aimed to be

located as far away from the poor as possible, out into the country air where there was no smog and disease. They had no respect for the poor which is clearly proven by source four that states three small villages were moved to ‘improve the views’ at Wimpole.

The exterior of Wimpole Hall and the surrounding grounds immediately give clues about the religious and social attitudes of the rich. For the owners, it was all about conspicuous consumption. They showed their wealth in every way possible, and at times led their visitors to infer that they were wealthier than they really were. An example of this was the stable block which was well decorated to give a good impression on arrival, or from the windows of the house. However, only three of the walls were decorated, the other wall was never seen and was therefore left bare. During the Georgian period there was a tax on windows, with a charge for each one, and to exaggerate their wealth, the owners of Wimpole had built in many windows. The grounds also give evidence of the type of social activities that were common e.g. the avenue of elm trees that visitors would walk through exploring the grounds and the large stable block that would have held many horses, possibly for sports such as polo and hunting.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Each area of the Wimpole estate shows the changes in fashion from Tudor-Jacobean to Neo-classical. All owners of Wimpole liked to keep in fashion; a perfect example of this is the nearby St. Andrews church. Each of the four walls of the church are in different styles that are still clear today, 18th and 19th century, classical, medieval gothic and gothic revival. The interior of the church is highly decorative, with large, very detailed glass on the windows and hand carved cherubs. This not only gives a religious impression, but the church was decorated to look good from the house and appeal to visitors. Inside the church are two large monumental graves. They both feature a man carved by marble lying on the stone holding bibles, swords, and books. The owners would have wanted to appear religious, courageous and well educated and would have built these graves to be on show to the visitors.

The grounds around the hall have also been developed for fashion. There is conspicuous consumption in the Chinese bridge that gives an all round impression of the owners as well traveled. Another building designed to impress is the folly. On the inside, the brickwork is small and new but the outside has been made to give it a castle-ruin look using large gray stones. The owners that built it would have used it to portray a long heritage.

The social attitudes of the rich from studying the grounds shows that they most likely hunted and took part in other horse sports, this is evident from the large stable block. However, there is no clear evidence suggesting how often the owners socialized with guests, when this took place, who they entertained, whether women were allowed to attend, and if they enjoyed it. Wimpole Hall lacks so many key features, and as a source it is very weak in parts.

Inside Wimpole, all rooms are heavily decorated with fine materials like silk; the walls are covered with portraits surrounded by large gold frames and mirrors. The yellow room is the most well known room of the house. It was used purely for entertaining guests, each item of furniture was made to fit the room exactly and the painting of cherubs on the ceiling is extravagant. It gives a religious and wealthy appearance. Not all items in the house are as they were made to appear. In the foyer of Wimpole there are two large marble-looking pillars, to the eye they appear to be marble, but when knocked they are hollow. A grand library was built into the house to give a well-educated appearance.

In contrast to this lifestyle, the poor were hidden away in basic living conditions. Many servants’ quarters were above the horse stalls in the stable block. When comparing the two, the stalls were more airy and larger than the rooms, suggesting that the owners cared more for their animals. The rich did not consider the poor; they hid them away and gave them secret doors and passageways to follow through to avoid guests. This shallow mindedness was acceptable in those days according to the evidence of how the servants lived.

A chapel was built inside Wimpole. To a visitor, who was not familiar with other houses of this type, they would presume that the owners must be seriously religious to have their own private chapel. However, it was never consecrated, no services, weddings, funerals or baptisms could be held there; it was purely for show. There is a high platform in the chapel where the owners would sit on comfortable seating. Below there are wooden benches that would have seated the servants. The owner’s attitude to the poor was that they were better than them and deserved to be seated away, and higher.

The evidence from studies of Wimpole Hall only, lead you to believe that the owners and servants were very religious. This is not the case when other sources are studied, such as source two that orders the servants to attend church, or source three that is a diary from the Queen’s maid of honour describing how she made an appearance in St. Andrews church and found only servants there. According to the 1851 census, church attendance was decreasing rapidly. Statistical evidence proves that Wimpole was all about conspicuous consumption.

Wimpole is limited as a source, there is little evidence suggesting any attitudes of the poor. However, in many similar houses there would not be any evidence, as the servants were never considered and so there would be no records of any opinions or attitudes, they simply did not matter.

There are some clues suggesting that there was a hierarchy amongst the servants. Source one and two show that the higher-ranking servants, for example the butler, cook and housekeeper, were all given more pay and responsibilities. There are bells lower in the house that would have called the servants to attend to their owners every need. The butler and housekeeper also have bells of their own, suggesting authority and hierarchy. The servants’ block was demolished, and as a source showing the religious and social attitudes of the poor Wimpole therefore has no evidence. We can only guess at how the servants quarters would appear by studying the ones that were built by Mrs. Bambridge in the 20th century, but these were not built in the period of study.

As for the religious attitudes of the poor, we could assume that they were religious by source three that states their appearance in church. However, we cannot know whether this was due to the rules that they were made to follow as shown in source two.

The National Trust took over Wimpole in 1976 and have added and removed items from the house to attract visitors. The original furniture was sold off in the 19th century and the National Trust has attempted to recreate the furniture. Many items in the house may be unsuitable for the period shown, making the house less genuine.

Conclusion

The house is a fairly useful source in giving an insight into the social and religious attitudes of the rich and poor but it has many limitations. Due to the number of owners that have altered the house, it may not be so reliable. Another important factor to take into consideration is that Wimpole is the only house being studied; it may not be a typical stately home for that period. We cannot prove the religious and social attitudes of the rich and poor in general by studying one home.

There are certain topics that are covered well by an examination of the house and the surrounding grounds. We can learn many things about the religious and social attitudes of the rich from the many examples. However, there is little evidence of the attitudes of the poor and this makes Wimpole a limited source unless you were just studying the wealthy owners. In comparison to other sources Wimpole would not give a clear picture and at times it is even misleading. However, without Wimpole the other sources do not give a full picture either. A visit to Wimpole brings to life the evidence given in papers and diaries; you get a feel of the atmosphere and can see things for yourself. Together they help us understand the religious and social attitudes of the rich and poor in the 18th and 19th centuries.