Lose-Hall
Richer , son of Hugh de Causton, and Julian his wife, confirmed to Thomas, son of William de Lose, for 60s. of silver, lands, with the homage of Roger de Bruario, and Richard his son, and the said Thomas was found to hold half a fee in demean. William de Lose was found to die seized of it in the 16th of Edward I (1288). and Thomas was his son and heir, on whose death, Claricia his sister, wife of Thomas de Ubbeston, was his heir.

After this, it was in the priory of Norwich, in the 9th of Edward II (1316). who, in the first of Richard III (1483). grant it to Henry Heydon, on his releasing to them certain lands in Hindringham, who died lord, as did John Heydon, in the 19th of Edward IV (1480).

The manor-house, now demolished, stood in a close adjoining to the church.

In pre-historic times the central part of the Parish was inhabited, as can be attested by Mr Bertie Harmer who has found many flint tools on his land at Green Farm.

There do not appear to be any Roman remains so nothing further is known until, according to the Domesday Book, the Royal Manor of Holt held “one outlying estate in Henepstede of 30 acres. Then as now 5 bordars and 1 plough and a half plough belonging to the men. Wood for 6 swine. Then as now 8 swine. Then it was worth 5 shillings and 4 pence, now 33 shillings and 4 pence and it is 1 league in length and 1 in breadth and renders 7 pence in geld.”

ln 1182-3 Simon de Hempstede was lord of the manor. The de Hempstede family held the manor until 1239 when Richer son of Hugh de Causton, and Stephen de Causton both married heiresses of the de Hempstedes and became lords of the manor. The original manor of Hempstead appears to have been called Nether Hall. According to Blomefield this Richer, son of Hugh, confirmed land in Hempstead to Thomas, son of William de Lose, thus creating the second manor, subsequently known as Lose Hall.

In 1292 William de Ormesby was lord of the original manor, perhaps obtaining it through marriage to his wife Agnes since both of them joined in a grant of the advowson of the church to the prior of Norwich. The manor stayed in the de Ormesby family and on the death of Sir John de Ormesby it was called the manor of “Hempstead with the market”. The manor passed to the Caleys of Oby, the de Harsikes of South Acre, the Dorwards, the Wingfields of Great Dunham and in 1536 to Thomas Jermyn.

Its history is then lost but it may well have joined Lose Hall Manor in the hands of the Heydons of Baconsthorpe (who lived at “Baconsthorpe castle”) for in 1638 both manors passed to Robert Baynham of Edgefield.

The history of Lose Hall seems to have been equally vague but it was in the hands of Henry Heydon in 1483. The subsequent manorial succession to the combined manors is apparently well evidenced in the court books giving the following dates of accession:-

The Newmans were the first lords of the manor to have lived locally and have left tombstones. They lived at Baconsthorpe Manor and were buried in Baconsthorpe Church. They flourished but briefly. Thomas was born in 1623 and died in 1697 and by his marriage to Elizabeth he had two children, Thomas who died aged 21 in 1698 and Elizabeth who died aged 20. The lordships therefore went in 1698, following his death, to William, the second of that name, and possibly Thomas's nephew. William had only one child, a daughter Elizabeth who died in 1714. So, deprived of heirs, the Newmans lost their land and the Lordship when they sold in 1728.

The Newmans lived at Baconsthorpe Manor which does nothing to help resolve the question of where the two Hempstead manor houses were originally situated.

In their account of the excavation of the moated site in Hempstead to the West of the Church (East Anglian Archeology Report No 8) Andrew Rogerson and Nick Adams debate this point and come to the conclusion that Lose Hall Manor was situated on the excavated site to the west of the Church and that the manor of Netherhall was on the site of present day Hempstead_Hall. In this context “nether'' has its natural meaning of “lower''. But this was odd and the editor wrote “As Lose Hall was a l3th Century offshoot of the original manor one might have expected the latter to continue to occupy the site of the Church, a typical relationship for an early manor house and church''.

So far as the Nether Hall was concerned there seems little reason for doubt. The map (NRO HET 87) drawn in 1726 by Corbridge shows clearly, on the site of the present Hall, the three storied six bay house looking out over its own walled yard. It shows a centre porch and a wing which may or may not be detached. A house of this size could never have been originally a simple farmhouse and must have been the ''nether'' hall. By way of further evidence the map shows a dovecote in the meadow to the east of the hall.

By 1841 the site of Lose Hall was shown on a Gurney title-map as “Church meadow”. Whether the house was taken down or fell down will never be known but probably it was taken down since when the site was excavated in 1976 the only part of the structure left was the splendid original tiled floor probably installed by the de Lose family in the 14th Century - all other building materials including the timbers and tiles having gone.

The excavated site, belonging to Mr Richard Harmer, was first noted in 1968. ln 1975 Mr Harmer informed the Norfolk Museums Unit of his intention to convert his meadow land into arable, involving major ditching and earthmoving operations. Mr Harmer immediately discovered a tiled floor only a few inches below the ground level.

What emerged from the excavation was a large moated site with the south eastern quarter largely covered with brick and tile rubble and the floor of a building 14 metres long and 5.5 metres wide. Apparently “traces of robbed wails were noticed'' showing why the site had disappeared. The building had consisted of three rooms.

The most exciting discovery was that of the 972 rectangular tiles being recorded in situ in the central and western rooms plus 61 rectangular tiles. The tiles were glazed and mostly coloured, the patterns being armorial. The tiles are now in the Castle Museum, Norwich.

So something is known of the first six centuries of Hempstead's history after the Conquest. Physically there is little to show for it. Outside the church there was the site and floor of Lose Hall. Perhaps there is something left of Nether Hall below the present Hempstead Hall or underneath its garden.
Hempstead, A Norfolk Village - Robin Carver, 2000

In East Anglian Archaeology Report No 8 (Norfolk) Andrew Rogerson and Nick Adams have written a fascinating report on the excavation of the moated site to the south-west of the church which they concluded was the site of the lost medieval Lose Hall. ln that report they considered also the possibility of the site being that of the original vicarage and recorded the following information:-

''The Prior of Norwich had land in Hempstead in the late l2th Century. In 1249 the rectory was appropriated to the Priory and a vicarage settled. There was an estate which produced £1 a year and a farm rented to produce £2-13-4pa.''

Rogerson goes on to state ''The Glebe Terrier of 1613 places the vicarage to the south of the church and between the road and the manor close and described it as "a dwelling house and a barne with one little outhouse . . .''

In 1629 the rectory, parsonage house and barn were mentioned in a leasing agreement between Edmund Britiffe, senior and junior, and the Dean and Chapter of Norwich.

ln 1677 the Glebe Terrier states that “in the late times of the unhappy rebellion -- the vicarage house fell down to the ground and was utterly demolished so that we had no house upon the vicarage ground.”

By 1704 the Dean was leasing “the scite of the rectory'' to Edmund Britiffe.

In 1761 and 1781 the Dean was leasing “the scite of the rectory'' and the “ruins of the barn'' to the Earl of Buckinghamshire (who had become Impropriator on inheriting the Britiffe estates in Hunworth, Hempstead and Stody). The lease to the Blickling Estate was renewed in 1837, 1844 and 1865.

So somewhere underground to the west of the village playground there must still be the foundations of the original vicarage, its “barne'' and outhouse.

Presumably it was Robert Watson, vicar between 1599 and 1649 but also Vicar of Bodham and Baconsthorpe, in one of which villages he may have lived, who let the former vicarage fall down so that since the mid-l7th century to 1876 there was nowhere in the village for the vicar or (unless he took lodgings) for the curate to live.
Hempstead, A Norfolk Village - Robin Carver, 2000