Site map
A History of Preston in Hertfordshire
A History of Stagenhoe: Correspondence between
Michael Dewar and Reginald L Hine 1934/35
1811c
At Hertfordshire Archives and Local Studies (HALS: Ref 71038A) there is a bundle of letters
between Michael Dewar (MD), his secretary D Curwen (DC) and Reginald Hine (RH) between
1934 and 1935 which describe how the History of Stagenhoe was commissioned and produced.
It outlines a valuable description of the steps necessary for a successful business proposition
which may be of interest to those who wish to follow a similar path.
Included are comments which may explain or highlight what was written.
Michael Dewar (l), Reginald Hine and Richard Whitmore
Some background information
In 1932, Dorothy Dewar, Michael’s wife purchased
Stagenhoe House (shown right) and estate in Hertfordshire.
Michael was Chairman of British Timken which manufactured
bearings which were used in a variety of applications and
which prospered in the late 1930s (Link: Dewar) .
Hine’s (Link: Hine) situation in late 1934 was that although a
member of the legal profession, until July 1933 he had been
earning a modest wage as a solicitor’s clerk dividing his time
between his work and his interest in history.
The opening gambit and Dewar’s reply
From a later comment it seems that Hine had not met Dewar before they exchanged letters. However,
it is possible that their wives were acquainted as both were local Girl Guides District Commisioners in
1935. The first known contact between Dewar and Hine was on 28 October 1934, when Hine sent
Dewar a letter and some of his books. Maybe what he wrote was the catalyst for Hine’s writing the
History of Stagenhoe. Although a copy of that letter is not in the bundle at HALS, because its contents
are mentioned in other letters, some, if not all, of the items which were sent with it are known.
A listing of the printed sources of the history of Stagenhoe was included in the letter, together with
‘particulars of History of Hitchin and Hitchin Worthies’. As the letter and its contents appear to have
resulted in the commission to write the history, it is possible that securing that work was a reason for
Hine sending the package. Rather than this being in some way vulgar, it was common practice in
those days for solicitors and writers alike to look for work, which was acceptable.
Hine was quite capable of bringing pressure to bear on people when it suited his purposes. Whitmore
relates an occasion when Hine submitted an early book, Dreams and the Way of Dreams, to a
publisher, only to be told that a report by literary critic, Darrell Figgis, lead to the publishers rejecting
his book. In Confessions of an Uncommon Attorney, Hine wrote that he ‘was furious’ and caught the
first train to London to confront Figgis in his home. According to Hine, the result of this meeting was
that Figgis wrote a ‘much more acceptable report - one that was to ensure the publication of my book’.
After mulling over the matter for around two months (and possibly over Christmas), on New Years Day
1935 Dewar expressed his interest in the History of Stagenhoe being researched and written - this,
despite the increasingly important business affairs that he oversaw.
Despite recently publishing the three books that made his name, he then declared that he had ‘made
no money whatsoever from his books’. Indeed, when Natural History of the Hitchin Region (of which
he was essentially editor, contributing only an introduction) was published in late 1934, with expensive
production costs including a special map which cost almost half of the total cost of the book to
produce. It was sold for 7s 6d. This was approximately a third of its real cost, the shortfall being made
up by the Ransoms and the Seebohms, prominent Quaker families at Hitchin.
Hine inherited no real wealth from his family. It was his wife, Florence, who enjoyed any inheritance,
being the grand-daughter of George Pyman, founder of the Pyman Shipping Group who made fortune
from shipping coal. In July 1933, Hine passed his law examination and was admitted as a solicitor,
but he was not invited to become a partner at Hawkins, becoming instead a salaried assistant
solicitor.
Whitmore suggests that in 1932, after the publication of the trilogy of books, History of Hitchin - Vols 1
& 2 and Hitchin Worthies, Hine was ‘on the brink of a nervous breakdown’. During the 1930s, Hine’s
major works had been completed and he appeared becalmed as a writer, content with copying and
pasting various sections of History of Hitchin in a revamped booklet form.
In addition to this brief appraisal of his situation, he and his family had moved house to Willian, Herts
in the early 1930s and his only daughter, Felicity, had obtained a place at an Oxford University.
I should mention that I am not aware of any other new commissions being accepted by Hine. It is also
surprising that Hine’s biographer appears to have been unaware of the Stagenhoe piece and the
correspondence which accompanied it. He makes no mention of it or Dewar in The Ghosts of
Reginald Hine.
This article includes several references to Richard Whitmore’s biography
of Reginald Hine, The Ghosts of Reginald Hine - An Uncommon
Attorney.
Despite the sometimes candid, personal and unflattering image of Hine
which is portrayed therein, it was published with a chapter written by
Hine’s eldest grandson, Andrew McEwen, who wrote of the desire to
understand his grandfather better. One might assume that what
Whitmore wrote was acceptable to McEwen.
I have dipped into Whitmore’s well-written and detailed book because
perhaps his comments explain and embellish some of what occurred
during Hine and Dewar’s interaction.
Those who are inclined to write family or local history might find it useful to consider the important
question that Hine next raised with Dewar. He asked, what form should the history take? Should it be
1) a collection of copies of documents in chronological order that related to the estate and then
bound within a Book of Stagenhoe or 2) would Dewar prefer Hine to write an historical account of the
estate which could either be bound up in typescript, or printed for private circulation? The answer to
these questions was essential to be agreed upon before even an estimate of cost could be given.
It will be noted that there was no discussion whatsoever of the assignment of copyright re: History of
Stagenhoe and there is no ‘All rights reserved’ notice in any copy that I’ve seen. This, despite the fact
that Hine was legally trained and that Dewar owned a printing press.
It is worth noting that Hine was sometimes criticised for the order in which he presented the subjects
of his books and what he included and excluded. For instance, W Branch once opined, ‘...the general
arrangement of the two Hitchin volumes are curious echoes of the Victoria County History of
Hertfordshire...the manor, church, the priory, all receive their separate chapters...to bind them
together into a coherent picture of Hitchin development’.
Hine also requested sight of the title deeds of the estate. He wrote that Dewar’s solicitors may have
custody of these, especially the earlier ones, and (even more) especially the relevant Court Rolls
which would be important for the information they contained. However, these were often retained by
the vendor or their solicitors.
He also suggested that he might ‘turn up early drawings and paintings of the mansion and its
owners’. Might Mr Bailey Hawkins help here? In addition, Hine submitted that he could obtain the
view of Stagenhoe in Chauncy’s History of Hertfordshire and also a ‘careful’ enlargement of Buckler’s
drawing dated 1832 which was in St Albans Abbey. This is a reminder that in 1935 it was not as
simple as it is today to make a copy of an original document.
From his office at 10 Mayfair Place, London W1, he wrote ‘I should very much like to to have some
research work done on Stagenhoe. Could you give me some idea as to what it would cost and
whether you would be prepared to undertake it? I should like to try and find some old drawings and
prints there are of it, and its real history. I hope in the summer to open up the secret passage which Mr
Baillie Hawkins tells me exists, and if possible to follow it to its end.’
Dewar’s early enquiry as to the cost involved is not surprising. This is often the concern of those
requesting that research work should be started and is maybe a sign that they do not fully understand
the complexity of the research task. It also perhaps demonstrates Dewar’s cautious, business-like
nature - which was to manifest itself more than once, as we will see.
At the same time on 2 January 1935, Dewar’s secretary wrote to Hine asking from whence he could
obtain History of Hitchin and Hitchin Worthies because they appeared to be unobtainable - a request
with which many writers of local history will be familiar even in these days of Abebooks on the internet.
The speed displayed by Hine’s response to Dewar’s interest is a testament not only to the postal
service of the day, but also how he was drawn to the research task ahead. The day he received
Dewar’s letter, on 2 January 1935, he replied ‘I am glad you feel disposed to have some research
done into the history of Stagenhoe and of its successive owners. It is a work that should have been
undertaken years, if not centuries ago; and the results should add to your enjoyment of the property
and be of definite value if ever you decided to sell’.
Hine was here expressing a genuine desire - even a passion, to carry out this research. He highlighted
the potential economic benefits of documenting Stagenhoe’s history and was evidently attempting to
persuade Dewar to complete the commission while also reassuring him of his capability to undertake
the research.
Hine then addressed the subject of his fee, saying that it was hard to give even a rough estimate
because he didn’t know precisely what Dewar wanted and therefore suggested a meeting ‘…either in
Town or at Stagenhoe itself. Preferably on a Sunday morning or afternoon when I am more my own
master, or at Mayfair Place almost any evening after 6.15, or at or after lunch time at Stagenhoe any
day’.
One might conclude from this classic ‘either/or’ approach to securing an appointment, that Hine’s diary
was less than full and that he was keen to clinch the assignment. Dewar’s secretary had mentioned
that Dewar would like copies of the printed sources of the estate’s history to add to his library and Hine
would be pleased to assist him ‘if he was still of that mind’.
A commitment to deep research and an accurate report
Hine emphasised the enormity of the assignment and also tacitly provided an assurance that the piece
would be accurate by explaining that this research would involve the labour and cost of sifting through
Hertfordshire’s stacks. He would search for manuscripts relating to Stagenhoe - ‘Patent Rolls, Close
Rolls, Domestic State Papers, Assize Rolls and Papers, Pipe Rolls, Inquisitions, Charter Rolls,
Quarter Session Rolls, Manor and Court Rolls, wills, feoffments and Title Deeds, Household Account
Books, Diaries, letters etc. It means turning over some thousands of documents, but I am inclined to
think it would be worthwhile and you would at any rate know that every possible avenue of information
had been explored. A mere casual or surface browsing over the obvious sources would hardly be
worth undertaking.’ Perhaps such a long catalogue of sources was unnecessary.
This passage is reminiscent of Hine’s comments when he penned the History of Hitchin. He wrote of
hundreds of thousands of documents ‘that had first of all to be discovered and disinterred; and not in
one parish or county and country, but in many parishes, counties and countries...the records of your
parish will be scattered over the face of the earth; and even in your own soil you need to dig not one
spit deep but two. Small things and tiny parishes, slipping more easily through nooks and crannies of
time, sink deeper into oblivion.’
He would become not an ‘historical artisan but an historical artist. Building up, if you can, an authentic
picture of the past; assembling your innumerable isolated facts of every conceivable colour, fitting,
joining, compacting them together into a preordained design’. Here, Hine is expressing a commitment
to the thoroughness and challenging nature of his research and a willingness to deeply delve into the
hidden crevasses of archives and museums. It is shorthand for, ‘this will be expensive, but
scrupulously veracious’.
It is therefore odd that History of Stagenhoe includes sections that contain incorrect details which
could have been resolved by properly conducted research. (For a detailed example, use this link:
Caithness’ car and scroll down to Addendum) Whitmore briefly comments on being ‘surprised to find
that, despite Hine’s claims of carefully wading through (thousands of documents), there are a good
number of factual errors in his books’. He offers no explanation for this. He merely quotes a curator of
Hitchin Museum saying that Hine, ‘frequently stretched the bounds of probability in the interests of
telling a good story’.
Is it sufficient to believe this was the reason for his imprecise prose? Perhaps he deliberately
described events erroneously because this version was what he thought his readers wanted to hear?
And, how does knowing that he was to be well-rewarded by Dewar for his work allow him to describe
events falsely? Perhaps the accounts of his hoaxes (of a buried ‘artefact’ supposedly of great antiquity
and the ghostly apparition at Minsden Chapel) reveal a conscious flirting with truth which contradicts
his publicly expressed desire to dig two spits to discover and divulge that truth.
The method to be used when writing the History of Stagenhoe
2 January 1935 - Hine’s reply and the ’fourth book of Hitchin’
A copy of Hine’s handwritten reply is included in the deposit. It reveals that the typing of his letter was
probably produced by some one other than Hine as ‘Chauncy’ and ‘Buckler’ were carefully spelt out
(by the typist?) in capital letters, thinking maybe along the lines of, ‘must not misspell these names’ -
Hine’s handwriting was notoriously hard to read.
Hine then added, ‘Now that I have finished ‘Hitchin’ (the fourth volume was published last month), I
could, I think, find time to undertake what you suggest.’
Taken at face value, it is not obvious to which book Hine is referring when he states that the fourth
volume of Hitchin was published last month. However, we are helped by a review of The Natural
History of the Hitchin Region in the Hertfordshire Advertiser which described book (first published in
December 1934) as “his fourth and last Hitchin book…the completion of a historical survey of Hitchin
which he undertook twenty years ago”. This appears to be the fourth book in a series which included;
A Short History of St Mary’s, Hitchin (first published in 1930, 40 pages), The History of Hitchin
Grammar School (1931, 68 pages), and The Story of Methodism (in Hitchin) (1934, 16 pages).
Natural History wasn’t Hine’s ‘last Hitchin book’ by any means. The Story of the Sun Hotel (Hitchin)
(1937, 24 pages) and The Story of Hitchin Town (Football Club, 1938) followed later. Two more
booklets were published in 1946, which largely contained photographs. Most of these books consisted
of re-hashed sections from his History of Hitchin.
As to the reason that these slim volumes were published, they may have been requested by
interested parties. They were far cheaper than the History of Hitchin (which meant that they were
within the means of more readers) and they kept Hine’s name in the public eye. Although Natural
History contained little of his writing, it was his name that was trumpeted when it was published. Luton
News commented, ‘Mr Hine’s only contribution to the book is the historical introduction…we wish he
could have written more…such as comments about ancient trees’.
If these booklets are taken out of the picture, Hine did not write any books apart from Stagenhoe for
the fourteen years between the release of Hitchin Worthies (1932) until Confessions of an Un-
Common Attorney (1946) - which further suggests that when he wrote to Dewar, he was actively
seeking a commission.
4 January 1935: Dewar’s reply, a meeting is arranged and a fee is discussed
The essential minutiae of the research process: collating relevant documents
Hine was aware that Dewar’s son-in-law would not be keen about Hine’s handling the more recent
deeds, so copies would suffice. In any case, it was the earlier documents that he particularly wanted
to see - they had only an ‘antiquarian value and could be safely entrusted to a Fellow of the Society of
Antiquaries like me’. Though Whitmore describes a later meeting which Hine attended when he was
stopped from leaving the room with a rare rolled-up map under his arm - ‘Well, bless me! I seem to
have it here under my arm’.
He was still focused on viewing the older deeds, and because of the concern of their holders
suggested that although he would prefer to work in his own library, possibly they could be taken to
Stagenhoe from whence he could collect them, giving a receipt for their safe custody. Unless there
were a number of Court Rolls, he would only need them for one month.
Hine also requested that Henry Whitehead’s collections should be sent to him immediately, so that he
didn’t ‘double up’ on his researches - he had already written to the British Museum and the Public
Record Office, where he would be working the following Saturday. This was no chore or hardship.
Whitmore commented that these places were ‘his favourite places of research and and relaxation’ and
were ‘less than an hour’ s journey by rail’ from his new home. There ‘he could occasionally meet some
of the literary figures of his day’.
In addition, Hine had written to the curators of the Museums of Hertford, St Albans, Welwyn Garden
City and Letchworth asking that a list of their holdings relating to Stagenhoe found in their card indices
be sent to him.
From Stagenhoe, Dewar acknowledged receipt of Hine’s letter on 4 January 1935 and wrote a
lengthy reply the following day. He suggested the two meet at Mayfair Place either next Sunday
morning or, failing that, the following Sunday. He asked Hine to obtain copies of the works Hine had
previously listed and confirmed he wanted both the types of report that Hine has mentioned (1 and 2
above). He would seek the location of the title deeds and Court Rolls, adding that Sir Henry
Whitehead’s butler had said that his master had some work undertaken. Additionally, he was writing
to Whitehead’s solicitor to ascertain exactly what was done.
Hine attended the first meeting mentioned, remarking that it was a pleasure to make direct (and the
first?) contact with Dewar and his family. He went to considerable lengths to express his fascination
with Stagenhoe as a subject - he declined subjects that didn’t interest him as without that appeal
‘there can be no heart, no keenness, in any kind of work’. He had taken ‘an immediate liking to
Stagenhoe and its owner and the estate was beautifully placed’, all of which was perhaps intended to
be music to Dewar’s ears. Maybe the Templar’s treasure would be found, though he was sceptical
about the possibility.
Regarding his fee, Dewar’s good-natured consent not to “tie him down to a month or two” and his
evident interest in the history of the estate decided Hine to say, “Yes”. He would send a draft
estimate, and if both agreed he would draw up an agreement in duplicate which both could sign over
a six-penny stamp. After the contracts had been signed, they could be exchanged and both could feel
“legally bound”. The common sense displayed by Hine in taking this course is commendable - there
was no taking the word of an officer and a gentleman.
Serendipity smiles on Hine - always a welcome intervention
Hine also reported a stroke of luck. He had found a portion of the original account of the rebuilding of
Stagenhoe in 1660, in the handwriting of William Hale’s steward. This was in private hands.
With almost a hint of triumph, he outlined how he had recalled that papers had been purchased by a
dealer in Hove and had been subsequently deposed of. Hine had ‘hunted down these precious items
yesterday, and had them on loan’ and would seek instructions about acquiring them for Dewar.
With an eye to publication…
Hine wanted to dovetail original documents, coats of arms, photographs of charters into ‘your
Stagenhoe book’. This indicated that Hine was already contemplating how the History of Stagenhoe
might be presented. However, as we shall see, there was no attempt to incorporate any original
documents in the book. If there were any further copies of the History, then they would have to be
photographed.
If Dewar decided to print the History on his Broadway Press, the needed blocks could be prepared
from them. The following Saturday, he was hoping to see some thirteenth century charters and
recommended that they be reproduced as well as the Domesday Book entry. However, (having
evidently sized up his client) he assured Dewar that costs would be reported to him before any order
was made.
In Hine’s mind’s eye, it seems that he was considering the possibility of the Stagenhoe History being
‘properly’ published - not the two or three type-written works that we have today.
Hine then made an enquiry which is worth noting: he wanted to “humanise” his history of the estate
and “make it more readable” by using biographical notes of the successive owners and portray the
lives they led at Stagenhoe. As it happened, he had “a rich collection of Hertfordshire biography” and
was acquainted with the records of the Stagenhoe owners as Justices of the Peace, including some
handled cases in the Justices Room in the Stagenhoe mansion which made for interesting reading.
It will no doubt have struck the reader that these letters describe a master class of how to make the
initial preparations when writing local history, which is well worth reviewing. Such books should not be
‘dry’ historical pieces but ‘readable’ - a quality which was highlighted when his History of Hitchin was
reviewed. Country Life: ‘A very engaging story as well as a painstaking antiquarian document...The
past is vivid; the bones of old account books are clothed in flesh and blood, so they fill the stage as a
thrilling drama’. Spectator magazine: ‘Local historians seldom contrive to be both informing and
readable. Mr. Hine's new work on Hitchin is a brilliant exception to the rule. He has collected a mass
of most valuable details from the local and national records and other sources, and yet he never
forgets that a history is meant to be read by ordinary people.’ As his Stagenhoe researches had
expanded and were now coming to a conclusion, Hine felt that he could sign his part of the contract
immediately and invited Dewar to follow suit.
A lesson in making local history books more readable
Dewar’s secretary, D Curwen, becomes increasingly involved with the correspondence
On 1 February 1935, Curwen sent Hine his master’s signed agreement. He also confirmed that
Dewar’s solicitors did not hold any Court Rolls and wrote to suggest that Hine visited Mayfair Place to
see the Title Deeds perhaps on Friday, 8 February. In the meantime, did he want Curwen to send the
old Deeds or wait until he was next at Dewar’s office?
Then, on 11 February, Curwen contacted Mrs Burke, Lady Whitehead’s daughter, at Ilkley, Yorks, to
ascertain whether Lady Whitehead had ever asked about investigating the history of Stagenhoe;
whether there were any portraits of previous owners of Stagenhoe available for purchase and whether
she knew of the whereabouts of the Court Rolls of Stagenhoe. Mrs Burke returned the letter with
pithy three ‘No’s beside the questions.
The following day, Curwen informed Hine of the letter that he had written to Mrs Burke and furnished
the addresses Hine had requested: of Lord Feversham (re: the Court Rolls) and Lord Caithness.
These had been copied from ‘Who’s Who’ - though one might wonder why had Hine had not used that
reference book at Hitchin. Curwen also wrote that he had been attempting to contact Sir Arthur
Sullivan’s executors and had been told that Sullivan had not married and had no descendants - a
nephew who was the only beneficiary having himself died.
The speed of exchange of letters was slowing now, as fewer issues needed to be resolved. Dewar
agreed that estate maps could be detached from the Title Deeds and framed; that the Revd. Henry
Rogers be visited at Norwich and wondered if photographs of the mansion and Domesday Book
facsimiles could be seen by Mr or Mrs Dewar before purchasing them. Dewar was taking other
photographs home to show Mrs Dewar.
In March and April 1935, only details needed to be discussed
As the letters begin to deal mainly with less important matters, only brief descriptions of their
contents in March and April 1935 will be presented:
7 March 1935 MD to RH: MD would like photographs of pictures of previous owners of Stagenhoe
but didn’t want to go to any unnecessary expense. He also wanted a meeting with Hine to ‘talk about
how things were going’.
7 March DC to RH: MD had kept three large and one small photograph - ‘put them on his account’.
He was returning four small photographs of the garden.
15 March MD to RH: Cheque sent for RH’s expenses - £7 2s 9d. His Expenses Book was returned.
This was an exceptional controlling of expenses. Was Dewar simply applying sound business
principles to their dealings or was he concerned about how far Hine’s enthusiasm might lead him?
13 April MD to RH: MD was returning the book of photographs borrowed from Henry Rogers. He
wanted eight copied together with three stereoscopic (sic) photographs sent with this letter.
17 April MD to RH: Lord Derby had no information. All the family’s papers were destroyed ‘at the
time of the revolution’. However, the next day Lord Derby’s secretary sent a list of documents that
referred to Stagenhoe.
26 April DC to RH: MD’s secretary notified Hine that he had sent a cheque for £5 2s 6d directly to
Latchmores, presumably in payment of photography work that had been carried out.
Now there is a break in the correspondence that has been retained and stored at HALS - though one
doubts that this reflected an actual cessation of letters. As Timken’s profits were growing, due to
dramatic advances in production techniques, it is possible that Dewar’s time was more occupied by
increased business pressures. But a press release around this time by Dewar tends to suggest that
this was not necessarily the case, as is next described.
At the end of October 1935, Dewar had written an article about reducing road casualties as a result of
his observations of traffic and people on the roads of Europe. The historical context for this is that the
compulsory driving test was introduced in England on 1st June 1935, for all drivers who started
driving on or after 1st of April 1934. There is a Pathe newsreel film devoted to the new test which is
narrated by Sir Malcolm Campbell (who didn’t have a great record for driving safely). (Link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbbERUEsQ4Q&ab_channel=FordHeritage).
October 1935 - Dewar’s newspaper article re: Road Safety
Dewar’s article was probably syndicated in several newspapers - examples have been found in the
Leicester Mercury and Glasgow’s Sunday Post. If he had time to write and arrange for its distribution,
finding time to deal with Stagenhoe history matters maybe was not an pressing issue for him.
26 November 1935 - The focus is now on finalising details re: Hine’s report
26 November 1935, RH to MD: Hine wrote, ‘The good work on Stagenhoe goes forward and I get
so interested in it that I cannot keep it as short as I intended. It seems a pity to scrap many of the
best finds I have made. I hope to have the typescript bound up in two volumes by my friend Douglas
Cockerell (who has just bound up Codex Siniaticus) and shall have taken delivery of Volume 1 at the
end of January, and Volume 2, at the end of February. 120 pages already typed. I have chosen
paper of the quarto size after all as it is easier to handle and to read, and to make it easier still, I
have typed in triple spacing and on good stout paper.’ Did Hine actually do the typing?
These are absorbing details. Hine was well-known for his interest in how his books were presented,
which was not appreciated by the printers. Whitmore observed that Hine ‘insisted on controlling
every step of the operation of publication’ of one of his books.
‘The typeface, the ornate drop letters at the start of each chapter, the expensive paper, the gilt
edges, the special inks, the presenting of illustrations and the elaborate blocking of the binding - all
were (Hine’s) personal choice and reflected his delight in the look of 17th-century books’.
There were more comments in this letter that invite consideration. Hine wrote, ‘Well, at the turn of the
year I am leaving Hawkins where I have been for thirty-five years and am (with the consent and
actually with the assistance of that friendly firm) setting up for myself at 109 Bancroft, Hitchin. I have
delightful offices in what is left of Frederic Seebohm’s house and though I shall spend the last week or
so dusting my office furniture (it will be worth dusting - period stuff!), I hope to succeed in time. I shall
at least carry with me the good wishes of my many friends.’
Hine’s language indicates that only one copy was bound at that time. He wrote, ‘I hope to have the
transcript bound up’. Chris, HALS Chief Archivist, has kindly informed me that Hine had two copies of
the History bound - one by Cockerell, the second by Paternoster and Hales of Hitchin. It is the latter
copy in two volumes (shown below) that has been languishing in the rare books stacks at HALS
since 12 December 1976, according to a note in a volume. Chris adds that there is a comment from
Hine (c.1940) that the original typescript was at Stagenhoe. Is one exhibiting an ignorance of 1935
binding techniques when one queries why two volumes were necessary? Or was this an unilateral,
executive decision?
Hine reported that on 26 November 1935, 120 pages had been typed. The final figure was 25%
more, weighing in at 150 pages - but the sum paid remained as agreed despite the additional work.
Hine’s comments re: leaving Hawkins solicitors for Harding, Hine and Co.
It is difficult to conclude whether here Hine was expressing a self-delusive viewpoint or presenting the
spin of a popular writer/solicitor. Whitmore devotes considerable time to discussing how Hine was
regarded by his Hawkins’ colleagues and their reaction to his leaving - a whole chapter in fact, Times
of Change. ‘I’m afraid Mr Hine is not very popular in the office. He had a room to himself and instead
of working for the firm he spent all his time on his books’. This is probably exaggerated, but conveys
frustration. Another blunt reflection; ‘In the end the partners got pretty sick of Hine…My
understanding is that he was virtually turfed out of the firm in the end’.
13 July 1936 C to RH: MD’s secretary sent a cheque for £250 for payment in full on completion of
History of Stagenhoe plus final expenses of £6 11s 0d. Hine had asked whether the book would be
offered for ‘private circulation and the somewhat curt response was that Mr Dewar was so
exceptionally busy that he couldn’t consider the matter but later on perhaps the matter would be
brought up again. Hine was thanked for the signed copy of his book which he had given to the
secretary.
While ‘the histories…took twenty years to research and write’, from its conception in early January
1935, to receiving payment (presumably at its birth), the History of Stagenhoe occupied less than
seventeen months to produce.
13 July 1936: Hine is paid for History of Stagenhoe and wonders how it will be circulated
I’ve been in this position myself on more than one occasion when, having spent a long time writing a
lengthy report for a client, I’ve learnt that they had only got around to reading it many months after it
had been delivered. Even when one has been paid for the work, the feeling that one’s efforts have not
been appreciated is not soothed. I wonder how Hine reacted to the news that Dewar had only just
noticed that photographs were not included in the book he had in his possession for three months.
Hine’s reply is not in the bundle, but on 21 October 1936 Dewar wrote to Hine, “Thank you so much for
securing me the photographs. I am paying the account direct. By the way, I did send the photographs
back to Miss Baillie-Hawkins. I have every intention of having the History of Stagenhoe printed next
year, provided I have got enough money. PS Would you mind letting me have back the cutting I sent
you of Lord Caithness’s ‘motor car’, as I have forgotten the address.” Hindsight indicates that it wasn’t
money that prevented the History being printed.
12 October 1936: Dewar’s final concern
There the matter lay. Hine had moved on to new projects when he received a letter from a somewhat
agitated Dewar, dated 12 October 1936. ‘I have read and re-read the second volume of Stagenhoe
with great interest. To my horror, I find you say that all the nice photographs taken are being kept in
the Stagenhoe records. I am afraid that up to date they most certainly are not. I should very much like
to have them all put in a book so that they may be kept alongside your written record.’
In conclusion, this record of correspondence is fascinating on so many levels. Not least, Hine’s
working methods as he prepared, researched, wrote and finally had two copies typed and bound are
exemplary. Nina Freebody wrote that she was aware of three copies. No-one I’ve contacted among
Dewar’s descendants appear to be aware of its existence - nor did Whitmore or McEwen.
We do not know at present what happened to the original copy of the History which was delivered to
Dewar. This was a time of upheaval in the Dewar family. After his wife’s death and the end of WW2,
Michael soon left Stagenhoe. He re-married, but died shortly afterwards and his widow quickly
moved from their home. The History appears to have disappeared from sight . When another History
was commissioned by the new owners in 1982, it might be presumed that it was no longer at
Stagenhoe.
Conclusion
The History of Stagenhoe by Reginald L Hine
‘1. Derivation of the names Stagenhoe and Walden
It is a time-honoured custom amongst antiquaries to begin the history of a place with a dissertation
upon its name, and, if one hesitates at all, it is because so often one has to feel one’s way along and
write in a subjunctive mood. Those who have threaded the mazes of philology know there is no more
hazardous domain; each step is littered with the bones of early explorers.
Fortunately, with a name like Stagenhoe, one is not driven into a wilderness of guessing. One can
write out of a blessed assurance and in the indicative mood. There was a time when a wrongful
derivation was current in these parts. The Rev. H. Hall in his Names of Places in Hertfordshire (1902,
p 9) traced Stagenhoe from the Anglo-Saxon Staegar - a path and hoe - a hill, and a certain
plausibility lent to this theory by the fact that the ancient British track, later and still known as the St
Alban’s Highway, ran over the hill, and right across the estate. But soon a greater that the Rev. H.
Hall arose.
In 1904 there appeared The Place-Names of Hertfordshire by the Rev. W.W. Skeat, Prof. of Anglo-
Saxon in the University of Cambridge. In this more scientific work, which at once superceded Hall’s, it
is shown that the ‘g’ in Stagenhou, which is the Domesday form of the word, is hard, and must
therefore have been double in Angle-Saxon. The form suggests Stacgens - Staggens, the generative
plural of the weak Stacga or Stagga, meaning ‘a stag’. This place-name is of considerable
importance because the Anglo-Saxon word for stag is only known from a single passage in the Laws
of Cnut (No. 24) “Sed si regalem feram quam angli staggon appelant”.
The offices of Hawkins and
Co, Hitchin
109 Bancroft, Hitchin, the offices of Harding, Hine and Co
in the centre of the image
Whitmore describes the hoaxes in detail without examining the psychological reasons for playing
them. They are considered to be the deliberate acts of fabricating falsehoods to deceive others,
which reveal the hoaxer as often viewing their victims as gullible and their self-perception as being
intellectually superior - a form of narcissism. Hoaxers can minimise the harm caused by by their
actions, by thinking ‘no one was really harmed’ which enables them to maintain a self-image as
morally upright individuals. Hine did not appear to have learned any lessons after being black-balled
by the E Herts. Archaeological Transactions Society because of his first hoax.
Stagenhoe lies in the parish of St Paul’s Walden, which before the Dissolution of the Monastries was
known as Abbot’s Walden, and in the pre-Norman period as simply Walden. Over the derivation of this
name also there has been a battle of the books. Some scholars, remembering that this part of
Hertfordshire was Royal forest held that Walden was so styled from Anglo-Saxon weald - a wood.
Others, with less warrant, connected it with A.S. Weall - a wall. But the spelling of the name as it
appears in the Hundred Rolls, viz Weledene, should have given them a clue. Weala is the genitive
plural of wealth - a stranger or foreigner, more especially a Briton or Welshman. The sense therefore is
‘Valley of the strangers’ or ‘Valley of the Britons’. Here as at King’s Walden and Walsworth (wealas-
garth) you find traces of the original inhabitants, Iberians, Celts, Britons, who by the successive
invasion of Romans, Saxons and Danes were driven out of their settlements into hiding places and
haunts of ancient peace; some of them as here, to lie down by the still waters of the Mimram or hunt
for food and climb for safety, like stags, upon the woodland hills.’
For a full discussion of this subject see Skeat’s work as cited, pp. 36-7; and Thorpe’s Ancient Laws
1, 429. The English Place-Name Society has not yet published its volume on Herts, but the Secretary,
Prof. Alan Mawer, whom I have consulted, states that he has nothing to add to or qualify in Skeat’s
derivation of Stagenhoe.
1
(NB This short transcription of pages from The History of Stagenhoe by Reginald L Hine is featured
for non-commercial research and to illustrate the essence of the volume, to encourage interest in it
which may result in its being read, should it ever be published.)
To complete the story, a brief, transcribed extract of the History of Stagenhoe now follows as a
published work for the first time:
Conclusion
It is good to have ransacked the last library, to have scanned the last manuscript, to have filed the last
portfolio away. Even to a thorough-going historian there is more in life and history than these, and my
writer, once his labours are accomplished, will long to escape to the dense undergrowth of detail out
of the clearing and lift up his eyes unto the hills. To compose these valedictory lines I have stolen
away from my abode of books at Willian and have found a marvellously mossy bank on the edge of
Chalkley’s Wood. It is good to lie here in delicious ease and in a golden sunny haze to watch the
precession, the dream-reverie of Stagenhoe history as it winds slowly down the valley and away.
Looking upon the pageant of a thousand years, with all its colour, the rich mosaic of its past, the
chronicled memories of poignant happenings, one has a blessed feeling of content. Surely it was
worth while after all, to devote twelve hard but happy months to the history of such a place!
Sometimes I think one is more profitably employed on these works of smaller scale. You may write the
history of a market town, as I have done in several volumes, but it is difficult to marshal all your facts
and drive them before you like a flock of sheep, down the highway of the centuries. And towns
strangely even in a lifetime, as I sadly know.
With a little estate it is different. You can measure and master it. You can see it as I see it now, almost
in a glance. You can walk round it in the compass of an hour. You can grow familiar with every brick
and tile, every tree and every common bush. You can trace each footprint of its history. Moreover, you
will learn in time to love it, as you love a child, just because it is so small.
And then too, one has the blessed assurance that one has been writing all the time of something that
will not pass away. Men and women strut for their brief hour across the stage of life and disappear.
Towns are built, un-built and re-built. Land remains.
Land is real estate, and real not only in the legal connotation of that term, but in common parlance, as
of something that stands firm amidst the passing shows of this transitory life. It is not with land as it is
with houses and with those that inhabit them. Broad acres do not bear the scars of old unhappy far-off
things and battled long ago. The serfs and villeins and copy-holders who ‘swinked and sweated’ for
themselves and for their lords of Stagenhoe upon the open fields have in turn been harried by the
Danes, conquered by the Normans, oppressed by local barons, decimated by the Black Death,
disillusioned by the Peasants Revolt, suffered the pricks of wounds and death in the Wars of the
Roses, been persecuted for their religious faith , made to fight for their liberties in the civil war, have
impressed as soldiers for the wars in France an known the fears and doubts of these modern
disastrous days. In their records, as I have endeavoured to show, the historian can follow the
vicissitudes of the Verduns, the Pilkington, the Stanleys, the Hales, all of whom suffered the
ship-wreck of their lives.
But land is an almost incorporeal hereditament, in that nothing – no ravage of war, no violence of
man, no plague, no famine – can, save for a brief season, disturb its natural loveliness and
productivity. In the trade of armies, runs the proverb, are lean years, but seed time and harvest do not
fail. However bad the times, the peasant goes forth to his labour till the evening. Dame Nature smiles;
the spring returns; the winter of man’s discontent is gone.
Yes; fortunate are they who have such a piece of England for their possession. In a world too
dangerously civilised it should help them to get back a little to the wild, to roam the hills and dales like
the stag that first found its place of refuge at Stagenhoe, and in the midst of ‘Waldene - the valley of
strangers’, to settle down in an English home.
FINIS
Finally, one cannot leave this subject without describing a talk that Hine gave at Stagenhoe - at least
that is what it appears to be. It is a type-written Short History of Stagenhoe and includes his comment
of being ‘pressed for time’; his thanks to Mr and Mrs Dewar for allowing them to be at Stagenhoe
House and that ‘later today, in a few minutes, we shall be at St Paul’s Walden Church’.
In one extraordinary paragraph, he recounts the tradition ‘that the owner of Temple Dinsley has the
right to to stand on the front door-step of Stagenhoe on Christmas Day and fire off a gun. Next
Christmas Day, I intend to come over with Miss Prain (headmistress of the newly-arrived Princess
Helena College) of Temple Dinsley and re-establish that custom and, incidentally, I shall take care that
she holds the gun at right angles and does not blow Mr Dewar to bits’.
1
A consequence of writing to all and sundry when gathering information is the
occasional, sharp riposte. On 15 January 1935, Dewar was duly informed by
Lady Whitehead’s solicitor that the only historical facts of which she is aware
was a list of people who had inhabited Stagenhoe Park since 1102. A list of
these was sent to him when he purchased the estate. (Ouch!) However, the
letter had an enclosure of a drawing of the stained glass window which was
described at the end of the list of occupants, a second copy of which was sent.
As Hine had re-visited the matter of an agreement, on 21 January, Dewar wrote
back to say that he would like a clause inserted about expenditure on travelling
expenses and research work that would ‘protect’ him. One might wonder why he
felt the need for such protection.
The next letter from Hine (shown right) was dated 29 January 1935, as a result
of which Dewar’s secretary, Curwen, sent a list of deeds held by the bank,
asking which ones Hine required. The reader may have noticed that Curwen is
featuring more and more in this correspondence. This time, a reason might
have been that Dewar was occupied with arrangements for his daughter,
Joan’s, wedding at Marylebone, London on 31 January 1935.
