This isn’t as rare as you might think

The star-studded story of Great Tangley Manor — said to be Britain’s oldest continuously inhabited house — begins more than 1,000 years ago. Its Saxon foundations date from 1016; a homestead on the site was thought to be owned by King Harold’s younger brother, Alnod Cilt. Later, according to the Domesday Book, Odo the Bishop of Bayeux, a half-brother of William the Conqueror, became its owner.

One estimation has Odo owning 11% of England’s GDP. Given the economic structure at the time that’s a lot of manors.

11 thoughts on “This isn’t as rare as you might think”

  1. Odo was William’s right hand man. He grabbed as much sh could lsy his filthy Norman hands on. Of course all fir the benefit of The Church !

    I come from Tooting and the subdistrict of Tooting Bec was awarded to the Abbey of Bec near Rouen ( it’s very nice there). They didn’t build an abbey in Tooting, but it was jolly fertile ( good orchards in that area ) and was managed for the holy sisters.

    It is a common misconception that Bec means a river or stream in Old English. That is “beck” as in Beckenham.

    BUT the original area in Normandy is named after a river or stream in Norman French (bekken).

    Dontcha love history !

  2. I’m guessing it’s notable because of the “continuously inhabited” part, as opposed to “let fall to ruin and another building set up some distance away and called the New House for a while”

  3. M. Given that the thing purportedly burned down in the 11thC, “continuously inhabited” is a bit of a stretch anyway. And that’s not counting all the remodelling over the centuries.

    Usually a building was rebuilt at a different spot ( much easier..) unless the site the building was on had great defensibility, or something else was …not ideal.. in the vicinity..

    [checks googol maps] Ah… control of the ford at Guildford and one of the few places conveniently close that doesn’t ( didn’t) get flooded regularly…

  4. I very much doubt it is “Britain’s oldest continuously inhabited house ”
    The photos show something couldn’t be much before C17th
    https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipOCvM6g7XdCd49ogZ6fZmaAACKJLwQQp_e9edKd=s1360-w1360-h1020
    “Its Saxon foundations date from 1016” Big deal. The building my Malaga City flat was in had foundations at the latest were Roman but possibly Carthaginian.
    It’s a basic misunderstanding of the history of buildings. Demolish, site clearance, rebuild is a modern innovation. Most buildings changed over the centuries. Several new handles, several new heads but it’s still the same axe. If it’s a site that good for a house it may have had a house standing on it the past 3000 years. In continuous occupation. Slowly being changed & modified, bits demolished to be replaced by different bits.

  5. Oh, & a lot of that timber framing’s faux. If a house is timber framed it’s built for board cladding or before, wattle & daub. You don’t timber frame a brick built building.
    Sometimes, they’d brick-in between the frame members as a “modernisation”. But if you’re doing that you cut out anything that’s not structural. Possibly where you see the diagonal over the extension. But not odd little panels. And the dormers are definitely recent.

  6. Those aristocrats were always very well manored.

    @Tim – “I had to run my eye over that a couple of times to make sure I couldn’t make a similar joke…..”

    Typical man. Can’t find the clit joke.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *