A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

I go round the cathedral again.

 

Initially at some of the memorials on the walls and the canopy of the pulpit, but it is the windows that are calling.

 

At least it was a bright, sunny day outside, which meant light was good in the cathedral with most shots coming out fine with no camera shake.

 

As I edit the shots I am stunned at the details of windows so high up they mostly seem like blocks of colour.

 

And so far, I have only just started to edit these shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

I was in the area, checking up on the Heath Spotted Orchids, and the church was a five minute drive away, in the grounds of a former country house.

 

I park at the church and find it locked, as expected, but there were directions to a keyholder nearby, walking into the cobbled squares and converted estate buildings now executive housing.

 

I ring the bell: nothing

 

I ring again: nothing

 

I use the knocker: dog barks. Dog attacks the door.

 

There is angry voices. Or voice. There was the sound of the dog being put into a side room, and the struggle to close the door.

 

The front door opened: yes?

 

Can I have the church key, please?

 

Not sure if I still have it.

 

Why'd you want it?

 

To photograph the interior.

 

Who're with?

 

I'm with no one, I am photographing all parish churches in the county, and would like to do this one. I showed him my driving licence which should say under job title: obsessive and church crawler.

 

He seemed satisfied, and let me have the key.

 

Phew.

 

Inside two things you notice; one is the box tomb, finely carved and still with traces of the original paint, and secondly, the organ is in pieces, and apparently the most complicated jigsaw you ever did see

 

------------------------------------------------

 

Substantially rebuilt after a fire of 1598. The welcoming interior displays no chancel arch, although the doorways in the arcade show where the medieval rood screen ran the width of the church. The striking east window was designed by Wallace Wood in 1954. There is a good aumbry and piscina nearby. To the north of the chancel stands the excellent tomb chest of Sir John Tufton (d. 1624). The arcade into which it is built was lowered to allow a semi-circular alabaster ceiling to be inserted to set the composition off. Because it is completely free-standing it is one of the easiest tomb chests in Kent to study, with five sons kneeling on the south side and four daughters on the north . In addition there are complicated coats of arms and an inscription which records the rebuilding of the church by Tufton after the fire. On top of the chest lie Sir John and his wife, with their son Nicholas kneeling between their heads. Much of the monument is still covered with its original paint. The organ, which stands in the south aisle, may be the instrument on which Sir Arthur Sullivan composed 'The Lost Chord'. It originally stood in Hothfield Place where Sullivan was a frequent guest.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Hothfield

 

--------------------------------------------

 

HOTHFIELD

IS the next parish northward from Great Chart, and is so called from the bothe, or heath within it. The greatest part of this parish lies within the hundred of Chart and Longbridge, and the remainder in that of Calehill. It is in the division of East Kent.

 

THE PARISH of Hothfield lies a little more than two miles from Ashford north-westward, the high road from which towards Lenham and Maidstone goes through it over Hothfield heath. It contains about 1250 acres, and fifty houses, the rents of it are about 1300l. per annum. It is not a pleasant, nor is it accounted a healthy situation, owing probably to the many low and watry lands in and about it. The river Stour, which rises at Lenham, runs along the southern side of the parish, which is watered likewise by several small streams, which rise about Charing and Westwell, from under the chalk hills, and join the Stour here. The heath, which contains near one half of the parish, consists mostly of a deep sand, and has much peat on it, which is continually dug by the poor for firing. On the east and west sides of the heath, the latter being called West-street, are two hamlets of houses, which form the scattered village of Hothfield. The Place-house stands on a hill, at a small distance from the corner of the heath southward, with some small plantations of trees about it, forming a principal object to the country round it. It is a square mansion, built of Portland stone, by the late earl of Thanet, on the scite of the antient mansion, close to the church; it has a good prospect round it. The adjoining grass grounds are extensive, and well laid out for the view over them; the water, which rises at no great distance from the house, becomes very soon a tolerable sized stream, and running on in sight of it, joins the Stour a little above Worting mill; these grass lands are fertile and good fatting land, like those mentioned before, near Godington, in Great Chart. The parsonage house, which is a neat dwelling of white stucco, stands at the southern corner of the heath, at the foot of the hill, adjoining the Place grounds, near West-street. Between the heath and Potter's corner, towards Ashford, the soil begins to approach much of the quarry stone.

 

Though the land in the parish is naturally poor, it is rendered productive by the chalk and lime procured from the down hills. The inhabitants have an unlimited right of commoning with those of the adjoining parish of Westwell, to upwards of five hundred acres of common, which affords them the means of keeping a cow and their poultry, which, with the liberty of digging peat, draws a number of certificated poor to reside here. There is not one dissenter in the parish.

 

Jack Cade, the noted rebel, in Henry the VI.th's reign, though generally supposed to be taken by Alexander Iden, esq. the sheriff, in a field belonging to Ripple manor, in the adjoining parish of Westwell, was discovered, as some say, in a field in this parish, still named from him, Jack Cade's field, now laid open with the rest of the grounds adjoining to Hothfieldplace.

 

The plant caryophyllata montena, or water avens, which is a very uncommon one, grows in a wood near Barber's hill, in this parish.

 

THE MANOR OF HOTHFIELD seems, in very early times, to have had the same owners as the barony of Chilham, and to have continued so, for a considerable length of time after the descendants of Fulbert de Dover were become extinct here. Bartholomew de Badlesmere, who in the 5th year of king Edward II. had a grant of this manor as well as of Chilham in see, appears to have held this manor of Hothfield by grand sergeantry of the archbishop, and accordingly, in the 8th year of it, at the enthroning of archbishop Walter Reynolds, he made his claim, and was allowed to perform the office of chamberlain for that day, and to serve up the water, for the archbishop to wash his hands; for which his fees were, the furniture of his bedchamber, and the bason and towel made use of for that purpose; (fn. 1) and in the next year he obtained of the king, a charter of free-warren for his demesne lands within this manor among others. After this the manor of Hothfield continued to be held by the like service, and continued in the same owners as that of Chilham, (fn. 2) down to Thomas lord Roos, who became entitled to the see of it, who for his attachment to the house of Lancaster, was, with others, attainted, in the 1st year of king Edward IV.'s reign, and his lands confiscated to the crown. But Margaret his mother, being possessed of it for her life, afterwards married Roger Wentworth, esq. whom she survived, and died possessed of it in the 18th year of that reign; upon which, by reason of the above attaint, the crown became entitled to it, the inquisition for which was found in the 4th year of that reign; immediately after which, the king granted it to Sir John Fogge, of Repton, who was comptroller of his household and one of his privy council, for his life. On king Richard III.'s accession to the crown, he took shelter in the abbey of Westminster, from whence he was invited by the king, who in the presence of a numerous assembly gave him his hand, and bid him be confident that from thenceforward he was sure to him in affection. This is rather mentioned, as divers chronicles have erroneously mentioned that he was an attorney, whom this prince had pardoned for forgery. He died possessed of it in the 17th year of Henry VII. where it remained till Henry VIII. granted it, at the very latter end of his reign, to John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, in Sussex, whose lands were disgavelled by the acts of 2 and 3 Edward VI. who afterwards resided at Hothfield, where he kept his shrievalty in the 3d year of queen Elizabeth. He was descended from ancestors who were originally written Toketon, and held lands in Rainham, in this county, as early as king John's reign; (fn. 3) one of whom was seated at Northiam, in Sussex, in king Richard the IId.'s reign, at which time they were written as at present, Tufton, and they continued there till John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, before-mentioned, removed hither. He died in 1567, and was buried in this church, leaving one son John Tufton, who resided at Hothfield-place, and in July, in the 16th year of queen Elizabeth, anno 1573, entertained the queen here, in her progress through this county. In the 17th year of that reign he was sheriff, and being a person of eminent repure and abilities, he was knighted by king James, in his 1st year, and created a baronet at the first institution of that order, on June 19, 1611. He married Olimpia, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. of Sileham, in Rainham, by whom he had three daughters; and secondly Christian, daughter and coheir of Sir Humphry Brown, a justice of the common pleas. He died in 1624, and was buried in this church, having had by her several sons and daughters. Of the former, Nicholas the eldest, succeeded him in title and estates. Sir Humphry was of Bobbing and the Mote, in Maidstone, and Sir William was of Vinters, in Boxley, both baronets, of whom further mention has already been made in the former parts of this history.

 

Sir Nicholas Tufton, the eldest son, was by letters patent, dated Nov. 1, anno 2 Charles I. created lord Tufton, baron of Tufton, in Sussex; and on August 5, in the 4th year of that reign, earl of the Isle of Thanet, in this county. He had four sons and nine daughters; of the former, John succeeded him in honors, and Cecil, was father of Sir Charles Tufton, of Twickenham, in Middlesex. John, the eldest son, second earl of Thanet, married in 1629 Margaret, eldest daughter and coheir of Richard, earl of Dorset, by his wife the lady Anne Clifford, sole daughter and heir of George, earl of Cumberland, and baroness of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy, by which marriage these tithes descended afterwards to their issue. In the time of the commonwealth, after king Charles the 1st.'s death, he was, in 1654, appointed sheriff, and however inconsistent it might be to his rank, yet he served the office. He left six sons and six daughters, and was succeeded by Nicholas his eldest son, third earl of Thanet, who by the deaths of his mother in 1676, and of his cousin-german Alethea, then wife of Edward Hungerford, esq. who died s. p. in 1678, he became heir to her, and sole heir to his grandmother Anne, lady Clifford, and consequently to the baronies of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy; dying s. p. he was succeeded as earl of Thanet and lord Clifford, &c. by his next brother John, who, on his mother's death, succeeded likewise by her will to her large estates in Yorkshire and Westmoreland, and to the hereditary in sheriffdoms of the latter and of Cumberland likewise, for it frequently happened in these hereditary sheriffdoms that female heirs became possessed of them, and consequently were sheriffs of those districts; but this was not at all an unusual thing, there being many frequent instances of women bearing that office, as may be seen in most of the books in which any mention is made of it, some instances of which the reader may see in the differtation on the office of sheriff, in vol. i. of this history. That part of their office which was incompatible for a woman to exercise, was always executed by a deputy, or shyre-clerk, in their name. But among the Harleian MSS. is a very remarkable note taken from Mr. Attorney-general Noys reading in Lincoln's inn, in 1632, in which, upon a point, whether the office of a justice of a forest might be executed by a woman; it was said, that Margaret, countess of Richmond, mother to king Henry VII. was a justice of peace; that the lady Bartlet, perhaps meant for Berkley, was also made a justice of the peace by queen Mary, in Gloucestershire; and that in Suffolk one ..... Rowse, a woman, did usually fit upon the bench at assizes and sessions among other justices, gladio cincta. John, earl of Thanet, died unmarried, as did his next brother earl Richard, so that the titles devolved to Thomas Tufton, who became the sixth earl of Thanet, and lord Clifford, which latter title was decreed to him by the house of peers in 1691. He left surviving issue five daughters and coheirs, the eldest of whom, Catherine, married Ed. Watson, viscount Sondes, son and heir of Lewis, earl of Rockingham; and the four others married likewise into noble families. He died at Hothfield in 1729, having by his will bequeathed several legacies to charitable purposes, especially towards the augmentation of small vicarages and curacies. He died without male issue, so that the titles of earl of Thanet and baron Tufton, and of baronet, descended to his nephew Sackville Tufton, eldest surviving son of his brother Sackville Tufton, fifth son of John, second earl of Thanet. But the title of baroness Clifford, which included those of Westmoreland and Vescy, upon the death of Thomas, earl of Thanet, without male issue, became in abeyance between his daughters and coheirs above-mentioned, and in 1734, king George II. confirmed that barony to Margaret, his third surviving daughter and coheir, married to Thomas Coke, lord Lovel, afterwards created earl of Leicester, which title is now again in abeyance by his death s. p. Which Sackville Tufton died in 1721, leaving Sackville the seventh earl of Thanet, whose eldest son of the same name succeeded him as eighth earl of Thanet, and rebuilt the present mansion of Hothfield-place, in which he afterwards resided, but being obliged to travel to Italy for his health, he died there at Nice in 1786, and was brought to England, and buried in the family vault at Rainham, in this county, where his several ancestors, earls of Thanet, with their countesses, and other branches of the family, lie deposited, from the time of their first accession to that title. He married Mary, daughter of lord John Philip Sackville, sister of the present duke of Dorset, by whom he had five sons and two daughters, Elizabeth; and Caroline married to Joseph Foster Barham, esq. Of the former, Sackville, born in 1769, succeeded him in honors; Charles died unmarried; John is M. P. for Appleby; Henry is M. P. for Rochester, and William. He was succeeded by his eldest son, the present right hon. Sackville Tufton, earl of Thanet, baron Tufton, lord of the honor of Skipton, in Craven, and baronet, and hereditary sheriff of the counties of Westmoreland and Cumberland, who is the present possessor of this manor and seat, and resides here, and is at present unmarried. (fn. 4)

 

The antient arms of Tufton were, Argent, on a pale, sable, an eagle displayed of the field; which coat they continued to bear till Nicholas Tufton, the first earl of Thanet, on his obtaining that earldom, altered it to that of Sable, an eagle displayed, ermine, within a bordure, argent; which coat was confirmed by Sir William Segar, garter, in 1628, and has been borne by his descendants to the present time. The present earl of Thanet bears for his coat of arms that last-mentioned; for his crest, On a wreath, a sea lion, seiant, proper; and for his supporters, Two eagles, their wings expanded, ermine.

 

SWINFORT, or Swinford, which is its more proper name, is a manor in this parish, lying in the southern part of it, near the river Stour, and probably took its name from some ford in former times over it here. However that be, it had formerly proprietors, who took their name from it; but they were never of any eminence, nor can I discover when they became extinct here; only that in king Henry V.'s reign it was in the possession of Bridges, descended from John atte Bregg, one of those eminent persons, whose effigies, kneeling and habited in armour, was painted in the window often mentioned before, in Great Chart church; and in this family the manor of Swinford continued till the latter end of king James I.'s reign, when it passed by sale from one of them to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, whose son John, earl of Thanet, before the 20th year of that reign, exchanged it for other lands, which lay more convenient to him, with his near neighbour Nicholas Toke, esq. of Godinton, in which family and name it has continued down, in like manner as that feat, to Nicholas Roundell Toke, esq. now of Godinton, the present possessor of it. A court baron is held for this manor.

 

FAUSLEY, or FOUSLEY, as it is now usually called, is the last manor to be described in this parish; its more antient name was Foughleslee, or, as it was usually pronounced, Faulesley; which name it gave to owners who in early times possessed and resided at it. John de Foughleslee, of Hothfield, was owner of it in the second year of king Richard II. and in his descendants this manor seems to have continued till about the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign, when it passed by sale to Drury; from which name, at the latter end of it, this manor was conveyed to Paris, who immediately afterwards alienated it to Bull, who soon afterwards reconveyed it back again to the same family, whence, in the next reign of king James I. it was sold to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, in whose successors, earls of Thanet, it has continued down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, the present owner of it.

 

Charities.

 

RICHARD PARIS, by deed in 1577, gave for the use of the poor, a rent charge of 16s. per annum, out of land called Hanvilles, in this parish; the trustees of which have been long ago deceased, and no new ones appointed since.

 

THOMAS KIPPS, gent. of Canterbury, by will in 1680, gave for the use of the same, an annual rent charge of 1l. out of lards in Great Chart.

 

RICHARD MADOCKE, clothier, of this parish, by will in 1596, ordered that the 11l. which he had lent to the parishioners of Hothfield, towards the rebuilding of their church, should, when repaid, be as a stock to the poor of this parish for ever.

 

SIR JOHN TUFTON, knight and baronet, and Nicholas his son, first earl of Thanet, by their wills in 1620 and in 1630, gave certain sums of money, with which were purchased eight acres of land in the parish of Kingsnoth, of the annual produce of 10l.

 

DR. JOHN GRANDORGE, by deed in 1713, gave a house and land in Newington, near Hythe, of the annual produce of 7l. which premises are vested in the earl of Thanet.

 

THOMAS, EARL OF THANET, and SACKVILLE TUFTON. Esq. grandfather of the present earl, by their deeds in 1720 and 1726, gave for a school mistress to teach 24 poor children, a rent charge and a house and two gardens, in Hothfield, the produce in money 20l. The premises were vested in Sir Penyston Lambe and Dr. John Grandorge, long since deceased; since which the trust has not been renewed; and the original writings are in the earl of Thanet's possession.

 

Such of the above benefactions as have been contributed by the Tufton family, have been ordered by their descendants to be distributed annually by the steward of Hothfield-place for the time being, without the interference of the parish officers, to such as received no relief from this parish; the family looking upon these rather as a private munisicence intended to continue under their direction.

 

The poor annually relieved are about twenty-five, casually as many.

 

HOTHFIELD is situated within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Charing.

 

¶The church, which is small, is dedicated to St. Mary, and consists of three isles and a chancel, having a low spire steeple, covered with shingles at the west end, in which are five bells, and though it stands on a hill, is yet very damp. There is not any painted glass in the windows of it. On the north side in it, is a monument of curious workmanship, having the figures of a man and woman, in full proportion, lying at length on it; at three corners of it are those of two sons and one daughter, kneeling, weeping, all in white marble; round the edges is an inscription, for Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, and Olympia his wife, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. On the monument are the arms of Tufton, with quarterings and impalements; on the sides are two inscriptions, one, that he re-edified this church after it was burnt, at his own charge, and under it made a vault for himself and his posterity, and after that he had lived eighty years, departed this life; the other enumerating his good qualities, and saying that by his will he gave perpetual legacies to this parish and that of Rainham. This monument is parted off from the north isle by a strong partition of wooden balustrades, seven feet high. The vault underneath is at most times several feet deep with water, and the few coffins which were remaining in it were some years since removed to the vaults at Rainham, where this family have been deposited ever since. On the north side of the chancel is a smaller one, formerly called St. Margaret's chapel, now shut up, and made no use of. In the south isle is a memorial for Rebecca, wife of William Henman, esq. obt. 1739, and Anna-Rebecca, their daughter, obt. 1752; arms, A lion, between three mascles, impaling a bend, cotized, engrailed. This church, which is a rectory, was always esteemed an appendage to the manor, and has passed accordingly, in like manner with it, down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, lord of the manor of Hothfield, the present patron of it.

 

This rectory is valued in the king's books at 17l. 5s. and the yearly tenths at 1l. 14s. 6d.

 

There was a pension of ten shillings paid from it to the college of Wye. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred and ninety-three, and it was valued at eighty pounds. In 1640, communicants one hundred and ninety, and valued at only sixty pounds per annum. There is a modus of two pence an acre of the pasture lands in the parish. There are twelve acres of glebe. It is now worth about one hundred and twenty pounds per annum.

 

Richard Hall, of this parish, by will in 1524, ordered that his feoffees should enfeoffe certain honest persons in his house and garden here, set beside the pelery, to the intent that the yearly serme of them should go to the maintenance of the rode-light within the church.

 

This church was burnt down in the reign of king James I. and was rebuilt at the sole expence of Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, who died in 1624. His descendant Thomas, earl of Thanet, who died in 1729, gave the present altar-piece, some of the pewing, and the pulpit.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol7/pp514-526

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

I go round the cathedral again.

 

Initially at some of the memorials on the walls and the canopy of the pulpit, but it is the windows that are calling.

 

At least it was a bright, sunny day outside, which meant light was good in the cathedral with most shots coming out fine with no camera shake.

 

As I edit the shots I am stunned at the details of windows so high up they mostly seem like blocks of colour.

 

And so far, I have only just started to edit these shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

 

-------------------------------------------

 

Edward of Woodstock, known to history as the Black Prince (15 June 1330 – 8 June 1376),[1][a] was the eldest son of King Edward III of England, and the heir apparent to the English throne. He died before his father and so his son, Richard II, succeeded to the throne instead. Edward nevertheless earned distinction as one of the most successful English commanders during the Hundred Years' War, being regarded by his English contemporaries as a model of chivalry and one of the greatest knights of his age.[2]

 

Edward was made Duke of Cornwall, the first English dukedom, in 1337. He was guardian of the kingdom in his father's absence in 1338, 1340, and 1342. He was created Prince of Wales in 1343 and knighted by his father at La Hougue in 1346.

 

In 1346 Prince Edward commanded the vanguard at the Battle of Crécy, his father intentionally leaving him to win the battle. He took part in Edward III's 1349 Calais expedition. In 1355 he was appointed the king's lieutenant in Gascony, and ordered to lead an army into Aquitaine on a chevauchée, during which he pillaged Avignonet and Castelnaudary, sacked Carcassonne, and plundered Narbonne. The next year (1356) on another chevauchée he ravaged Auvergne, Limousin, and Berry but failed to take Bourges. He offered terms of peace to King John II of France, who had outflanked him near Poitiers, but refused to surrender himself as the price of their acceptance. This led to the Battle of Poitiers, where his army routed the French and took King John prisoner.

 

The year after Poitiers, Edward returned to England. In 1360 he negotiated the Treaty of Brétigny. He was created Prince of Aquitaine and Gascony in 1362, but his suzerainty was not recognised by the lord of Albret or other Gascon nobles. He was directed by his father to forbid the marauding raids of the English and Gascon free companies in 1364. He entered into an agreement with Kings Peter of Castile and Charles II of Navarre, by which Peter covenanted to mortgage Castro de Urdiales and the province of Biscay to him as security for a loan; in 1366 a passage was secured through Navarre. In 1367 he received a letter of defiance from Henry of Trastámara, Peter's half-brother and rival. The same year, after an obstinate conflict, he defeated Henry at the Battle of Nájera. However, after a wait of several months, during which he failed to obtain either the province of Biscay or liquidation of the debt from Don Pedro, he returned to Aquitaine. Prince Edward persuaded the estates of Aquitaine to allow him a hearth tax of ten sous for five years in 1368, thereby alienating the lord of Albret and other nobles.

 

Prince Edward returned to England in 1371 and the next year resigned the principality of Aquitaine and Gascony. He led the commons in their attack upon the Lancastrian administration in 1376. He died in 1376 of dysentery[b] and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral, where his surcoat, helmet, shield, and gauntlets are still preserved.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_the_Black_Prince

I have been to St Mary of Charity before. But that was many years ago.

 

Back then, I took three shots inside. I took 300 today.

 

St Mary is a huge church with a Victorian tower with the most amazing spire, which makes it visible from just about all over the town.

 

Faversham is best know as being home to Shepherd Neame brewery, it claims to the England's oldest surviving brewer.

 

The town sits on the edge of the Swale, with a large expanse of marshes and creeks between the town and open water.

 

We parked on wide Abbey Street, and while Jools went shopping, I walked along side the old brewery buildings to the church, with the tower and spire staight ahead along a street of terraced houses.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

An extraordinary building comprising a medieval chancel and transepts, eighteenth-century nave and nineteenth-century tower and spire. Despite heavy-handed restorations of the nineteenth century - by Sir George Gilbert Scott and Ewan Christian in 1873 - which have resulted in loss of character, there is much to see. The fourteenth-century transepts are aisled - a most unusual feature in an ordinary parish church. The medieval authorities probably decided to invest in a lavish building to counteract the pulling power of the famous abbey which stood to the east. One of the pillars of the north transept has a series of contemporary small paintings of biblical scenes. You are advised to take a pair of binoculars to see them to advantage. The stalls in the chancel have misericords with a good selection of carved armrests, and there is also a crypt and an unforgettable east window of 1911.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Faversham+1

 

-------------------------------------------

 

THE PARISH AND TOWN OF FAVERSHAM.

CALLED, according to Lambarde, in Saxon, Fafresham, and Fafresfeld, in the record of Domesday, Favershant, and in some few others, Fefresham.

 

THE PARISH lies adjoining to the high London road southward at the 47th mile-stone, and extends to the creek on the opposite side of the town, the houses on the south side of which reach to within two hundred yards of the road, whence there is a good view into it.

 

The parish includes the north side of the London road from the above mile-stone westward, almost as far as the summit of Judde-hill, and the liberties of the town extend as far of this space westward as the rivulet in Ospringe street. Thus this parish intervenes, and entirely separates that part of Ospringe parish, at the northern boundary of it, in which are the storekeeper's house of the royal mills, and part of the offices and gardens belonging to it, and some of the mills themselves, and in the town likewise, Ospringe parish again intervening, there is a small part of West-street which is within that parish. At the east end of Ospringe-street, though within Faversham parish, and the liberties of the town, close to the high London road, there is a handsome new-built house, erected not many years since by Mr.Bonnick Lypyeatt, who resided in it till his death in 1789. He left two daughters his coheirs, one of whom married Mr.C.Brooke, of London, and the other Captain Gosselin, of the Life-guards. It is now occupied by John Mayor, esq.

 

¶The rest, or northern part of the parish lies very low, and adjoins the marshes, of which there is a very large tract. The country here is a fine extended level, the fields of a considerable size, and mostly unincumbered with trees or hedgerows, the lands being perhaps as fertile and as highly cultivated as any within this county, being part of that fruitful value extending almost from Sittingborne to Boughton Blean, so often taken notice of before. The grounds adjoining the upper parts of the town are mostly hop plantations, of a rich and kindly growth, but several of them have lately given place to those of fruit. About twenty years ago the cultivation of madder was introduced here, and many induced by the prospect of great gains, made plantations of it at a very considerable expence, and a mill was erected for the purpose of grinding the roots, but from various disappointments, and unforeseen disadvantages, the undertakers of it were deterred from prosecuting the growth of it, and I believe they have for some time entirely discontinued it.

 

At the south-east extremity of this parish, as well as in other particular parts of this county, there are several chalk-pits, the most noted of these being called Hegdale pit, of a great depth, which though narrow at the top, yet more inward are very capacious, having, as it were, distinct rooms, supported by pillars of chalk. Several opinions have been formed concerning the intent and use of them, some that they were formed by the digging of chalk, for the building of the abbey, as well as afterwards from time to time, for the manuring of the neighbouring lands; others that the English Saxons might dig them, for the same uses that the Germans did, from whom they were descended, who made use of them, according to Tacitus, as a refuge in winter, as a repository for their corn, and as a place of security, for themselves, their families, and their property, from the searches of their enemies. (fn. 1)

 

Near the west end of the bridge, opposite the storekeeper's house of the royal powder-mills, there is a strong chalybeate spring, which on trial has been proved to be nearly equal to those of Tunbridge Wells. (fn. 2)

 

In the year 1774, a most remarkable fish, called mola salviani, orthe sun-fish, was caught on Faversham Flats, which weighed about nineteen pounds and a half, and was about two feet diameter. It is a fish very rarely seen in our narrow seas. (fn. 3)

 

THE TOWN ITSELF, and so much of the parish as is within the bounds of the corporation, is subject to the liberties of it, and of the cinque ports, and is exempt from the jurisdiction of the hundred of Faversham; but the rest of the parish, together with the rectory, is within the liberties of that hundred, which has been always esteemed as appurtenant to the manor of Faversham.

 

Although from the several discoveries which have been made of Roman antiquities in this neighbourhood, it is plain, that it could not be unknown to that nation, during their stay in this island, yet there is no mention made of this place by any writer during that period; and it seems, even in the time of the Saxons, to have been a place of but little consequence, notwithstanding it was then a part of the royal demesnes, as appears by a charter of Cenulph, king of Mercia, anno 812, wherein it is stiled the king's little town of Fefresham; and in one of Athelwolf, king of the West Saxons and of Kent, anno 839, where it is said to be made, only, in villa de Faverisham. However, it was of note sufficient, perhaps as being the king's estate, even in the time of king Alfred, at the first division of this county into those smaller districts, to give name to the hundred in which it is situated. Lambarde, Camden, and Leland say, that king Athelstan held a parliament, or meeting of his wife menat Faversham, about the year 903, (no doubt for 930) in which several laws were enacted. (fn. 8)

 

FAVERSHAM continued part of the antient demesnes of the crown of this realm at the time of the taking of the general survey of Domesday, in which it is entered, under the general title of Terra Regis, that is, the king's antient demesne, as follows:

 

In the lath of Wivarlet, in Favreshant hundred, king William holds Favreshant. It was taxed at seven sulings. The arable land is seventeen carucates. In demesne there are two. There are thirty villeins, with forty borderers, having twenty-four carucates. There are five servants, and one mill of twenty shillings, and two acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of one hundred hogs, and of the pasture of the wood thirty-one shillings and two pence. A market of four pounds, and two salt-pits of three shillings and two-pence, and in the city of Canterbury, there are three houses of twenty-pence belonging to this manor. In the whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, it was worth sixty pounds all but five shillings, and afterwards sixty pounds, and now it is worth four times twenty pounds.

 

¶The manor of Faversham, with the hundred appurtenant to it, remained part of the possessions of the crown till about the beginning of king Stephen's reign, when it was granted to William de Ipre, a foreigner, whom, for his faithful services against the empress Maud, the king, in his 7th year, created Earl of Kent; but within a few years afterwards, resolving to found an abbey here, he, with his queen Matilda, about the year 1147, exchanged the manor of Lillechirch, and other premises, for this manor and hundred, where they, at the latter end of that year, or the beginning of the year after, founded an abbey at a small distance from the town of Faversham, on the north-east side of it, for the space where Court, or Ab bey-street now stands was then unbuilt, and this was therefore, in the reign of Edward III. distinguished by the name of the New Town, as the rest of it, built before, was by that of the Old Town, and they appointed Clarembald, the prior of Bermondsey, to be abbot of this new foundation, which was dedicated to St. Saviour, and for their support, the king granted to him and the monks of it, twelve of whom had been removed with Clarembald for this purpose from Bermondsey, which priory was of the order of Clugni, the manor of Faversham, with its appurtenances, and other premises, in perpetual alms, with many liberties, as may be further seen in the charter itself. (fn. 9)

 

HE TOWN OF FAVERSHAM is within the limits of the cinque ports, being esteemed as a limb or member of the town of Dover, one of those ports. Of what antiquity these ports and antient towns are, when enfranchised, or at what times their members were annexed to them, has not been as yet, with any certainty, discovered; and, therefore, they are held to enjoy all their earliest liberties and privileges, as time out of mind, and by prescription.

 

It is, however certain, that at the time of king Edward the Consessor, the five ports were enfranchised with divers liberties, privileges, and customs, peculiar to themselves; for the better conducting of which they had the establishment of one grand court, called the court of Shipway, from its being almost always held at a place of that name near Hyth; in which the general business relating to the whole community was transacted before the warden, as principal and chief over them. Nevertheless, though they acted here jointly, like a county palatine as to the government, for the desence of the liberty of the whole, yet every particular corporation in each town acted severally and distinctly, according to its own privileges, charters, and customs within their own particular limits, without any controul or interference from this court, or the rest of the community. (fn. 20)

 

The five ports, as being from their situation most exposed to the depredations of enemies, were first incorporated for their own mutual defence, and were afterwards endowed with great privileges, for the public desence of the nation, and the king's service. The force they were enjoined to raise and keep in residence for this purpose was fifty-seven ships, properly furnished and accoutred for a certain number of days, to be ready at the king's summons, at their own charge, and if the state of affairs required their assistance any longer, they were paid by the crown. But because the expence was in after times found to be too burthensome for these five ports, several other towns were added as members to them, that they might bear a part of the charge, for which they were recompenced with a participation of their privileges and immunities. All which were confirmed to them by Magna Charta, by the name of the barons of the five ports, and again by one general charter by king Edward I. which, by inspeximus, has received confirmation, and sometimes additions, from most of the succeeding kings and queens of this realm.

 

¶FAVERSHAM, stiled both a town and a port at different times in antient records, isa corporation by prescription. In the oldest charter now remaining, which is that of the 36th year of king Henry III. wherein the members of it are stiled, according to the usual language of those times, barons, that is freemen, there is contained a confirmation of all their former antient rights and privileges. In the 42d year of the above reign, which is as far as can be traced by evidence, the jurisdiction of this town was then in a mayor or alderman, and twelve jurats. In a charter of Edward I. the barons of it are acknowledged to have done good services to him and his predecessors, kings of England; and in the 21st year of that reign, there is an entry of the mayor and jurats assembling in their hallmote, or portmote-court, as it is elsewhere called, together with the lord abbot's steward, and there sealing a fine with the town's seal, of a messuage and garden in Faversham, according to the use and custom of the court, by which it is evident, that this court was of some antiquity at that time. (fn. 21)

 

Faversham is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Ospringe.

 

The church, which stands close to the east side of the town, was dedicated to the assumption of our lady of Faversham. It is built in the form of a cross, of flints, with quoins of ashler stone. It had, until 1755, when it was taken down, a large square castellated tower in the middle of it, and there remains now another low tower at the north side of the west front, upon which is erected a frame of timber, covered with shingles. So long ago as king Henry the VIIth.'s reign, there seems to have been no steeple to this church, for in 1464, Edward Thomasson, of this town, gave sixty pounds towards the edifying of a new one to it; (fn. 31) and of later time, James Lawson, esq. a wealthy inhabitant of this town, who died in 1794, gave by his will 1000l. for the same purpose, with this sum, together with 500l. given by the corporation, and the remainder payable by a rate, a steeple, seventy-three feet high above the tower, with pinnacles at each corner of it, on the plan of St. Dunstan's in the East, has been erected, and is now nearly compleated, at the expence of 2500l.

 

Behind the tower, within the outer walls, is a strong timbered room, formerly called the tresory, in which, before the reformation, were carefully deposited the goods and ornaments of the church; over it was the chamber for the sextons. On the south side of the west front is a room, formerly open to the church, in which was taught reading and writing; under it is a neat chapel, with stone arches, supported by three pillars in the middle. Over the south porch there is another stone room, the window of which is grated with strong iron bars.

 

Mr. Henry Hatch, whose extensive charity to this town has already been mentioned, by will in 1533, gave a sum of money, at the discretion of the mayor, and his brethren, in making a new jewel-house for this church.

 

In 1440 there were placed in it five new bells, and in 1459 a sixth was added; these remained till 1749, when they were cast into a new peal of eight.

 

The church seems to have been built in the latter end of the reign of Edward I. or the beginning of the reign of Edward II. by a silver penny of one of those kings being found under the basis of one of the piers, which supported the middle tower. In the east window of the great chancel, were some time since remaining two shields of arms, viz. Gules, two lions passant-guardant, or a label of five points, azure; and Argent, a lion rampant, sable, within a bordure of the second, bezante.

 

In the year 1754, the body of the church, as well as the roof of it, on a survey, being deemed in a dangerous state, a faculty was obtained to pull it down, which was accordingly done, under the plan and directions of Mr. George Dance, of London, architect, at the expence of 2300l. besides which, 400l. was afterwards expended in an organ, and 100l. more in other ornaments, and ninety pounds in improving the great chancel, which through age was become very unsightly; so that the whole of it is now made equal to, if not the most elegant and spacious, of any parish church in this county, and is extensive and spacious enough to afford convenient room for all the parishioners of it.

 

¶When this church was new built, and the body and isles new paved, the grave-stones, many of which were antient, with brasses on them, were removed from the places where they lay, to other open and consipicuous parts of it. Among the monuments were those for Henry Hatche, merchant adventurer, 1533; Thomas Mendfield, 1614, John Fagg, esq. 1508, and one for Thomas Southouse, esq. 1558, who wrote the Monas tion Favershamiense. Both monuments and epitaphs are by far too numerous to insert in this place, they may be found at large in Weever's Funeral Monuments, in Lewis's Appendix to his History of Faversham Abbey, and in Harris's History of Kent. Besides which there is in the Appendix to Jacob's History of Faversham, a chronological list of such persons as have been known to have been buried in it.

 

This church measures from east to west, including the chancel, one hundred and sixty feet, the width of the body sixty five feet; the length of the isles from north to south one hundred and twenty-four feet, and their width forty-six feet.

 

Before the reformation, besides the high altar in the great chancel, there were two chapels, one dedicated to the Holy Trinity, and the other to St. Thomas, and there were several altars in the isles and chancels.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol6/pp318-371

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

 

-------------------------------------------

 

Edward of Woodstock, known to history as the Black Prince (15 June 1330 – 8 June 1376),[1][a] was the eldest son of King Edward III of England, and the heir apparent to the English throne. He died before his father and so his son, Richard II, succeeded to the throne instead. Edward nevertheless earned distinction as one of the most successful English commanders during the Hundred Years' War, being regarded by his English contemporaries as a model of chivalry and one of the greatest knights of his age.[2]

 

Edward was made Duke of Cornwall, the first English dukedom, in 1337. He was guardian of the kingdom in his father's absence in 1338, 1340, and 1342. He was created Prince of Wales in 1343 and knighted by his father at La Hougue in 1346.

 

In 1346 Prince Edward commanded the vanguard at the Battle of Crécy, his father intentionally leaving him to win the battle. He took part in Edward III's 1349 Calais expedition. In 1355 he was appointed the king's lieutenant in Gascony, and ordered to lead an army into Aquitaine on a chevauchée, during which he pillaged Avignonet and Castelnaudary, sacked Carcassonne, and plundered Narbonne. The next year (1356) on another chevauchée he ravaged Auvergne, Limousin, and Berry but failed to take Bourges. He offered terms of peace to King John II of France, who had outflanked him near Poitiers, but refused to surrender himself as the price of their acceptance. This led to the Battle of Poitiers, where his army routed the French and took King John prisoner.

 

The year after Poitiers, Edward returned to England. In 1360 he negotiated the Treaty of Brétigny. He was created Prince of Aquitaine and Gascony in 1362, but his suzerainty was not recognised by the lord of Albret or other Gascon nobles. He was directed by his father to forbid the marauding raids of the English and Gascon free companies in 1364. He entered into an agreement with Kings Peter of Castile and Charles II of Navarre, by which Peter covenanted to mortgage Castro de Urdiales and the province of Biscay to him as security for a loan; in 1366 a passage was secured through Navarre. In 1367 he received a letter of defiance from Henry of Trastámara, Peter's half-brother and rival. The same year, after an obstinate conflict, he defeated Henry at the Battle of Nájera. However, after a wait of several months, during which he failed to obtain either the province of Biscay or liquidation of the debt from Don Pedro, he returned to Aquitaine. Prince Edward persuaded the estates of Aquitaine to allow him a hearth tax of ten sous for five years in 1368, thereby alienating the lord of Albret and other nobles.

 

Prince Edward returned to England in 1371 and the next year resigned the principality of Aquitaine and Gascony. He led the commons in their attack upon the Lancastrian administration in 1376. He died in 1376 of dysentery[b] and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral, where his surcoat, helmet, shield, and gauntlets are still preserved.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_the_Black_Prince

Les écuries.

 

En 1759, Charles-François Leblanc de Manarval, maître de forges et Directeur de la Manufacture royale de draps de Châteauroux, acquiert les terres de Bouges.

 

Il fait édifier le château bâti en pierre de taille, dont on attribue la construction à l'architecte du Roi Jacques-Ange Gabriel(1698-1782).

 

En 1818, Talleyrand acquiert le château pour y installer sa chère nièce, la Duchesse de Dino.

 

En 1917, le château est acquit par Henri Viguier, Président-directeur général du Bazar de l'Hôtel de Ville. Sans enfants, Henri Viguier lèguera le château à la Caisse nationale des monuments historiques en 1968.

 

En acquérant Bouges, Henry Viguier peut se consacrer à son amour du cheval, et place cet animal au centre de tous ses loisirs de châtelain : chasses, promenades, pique-niques, voyages ou approvisionnement du château. Propriétaire d’une écurie de courses, il aime particulièrement les beaux attelages.

 

The stables.

 

In 1759, Charles-François Leblanc Manarval, ironmaster and Director of the Royal Manufactory sheets Chateauroux, acquires land Dens.

 

He built the stone buildings, the construction of the King's architect Jacques-Ange Gabriel (1698-1782) is credited castle.

 

In 1818, Talleyrand bought the castle to install his beloved niece, the Duchess of Dino.

 

In 1917, the castle was acquired by Henry Viguier, CEO of Bazar de l'Hotel de Ville. Without children, Henry Viguier bequeathed the castle to the National Fund for Historical Monuments in 1968.

 

When he bought Bouges, Henry Viguier was able to devote himself to his love of horses, which he placed at the heart of all his genteel leisurely pursuits: hunting, walking, picnics, journeys and supplying the château. He owned racing stables and was particularly fond of beautiful carriages.

Masonic Mosaic Pavement and Star.

www.kilwinning565.com/app/download/866207004/Five-pointed...

 

The lodge room: www.flickr.com/photos/21728045@N08/8101810367/in/set-7215...

 

www.masonicforum.ro/?cmd=displaystory&story_id=73&amp....

 

The Mosaic Pavement

by GABRIEL VASILE OLTEAN

Expert Inspector of NGLR for Western Region; Past Worshipful Master, ZAMOLXIS Lodge, No. 182, Deva

 

"The interior decoration of a masonic lodge comprises ornaments, accessories and insignia. The ornaments are: the mosaic on the floor - respresenting spirt and matter, the shining star and the laced edge, which remind us always the first of the presence of God and the second of the protective wall" - cites Charles W Leadbeater from the ritual of mixed masonry in his work "Freemasonry - Rites and Initiations."

 

In the center of the Temple, on the ground, there is a rectangular floor, with black and white tiles, called the mosaic pavement (theoretically, cubes seen perspectivally), where a relgaion obtains between the sides, either 2:1 (the long square) or 1.618.../1 (the golden number), thus coming up with a surface proportional to the total area of the Lodge. Thus we see that practically the moasica, placed in the center of the Lodge is a microcosmic representation of the whole of creation and is by itself a sacred central area - whence the interdiction to ever step on the mosaic when the work of the Lodge is underway. The pavement symbolizes the indisociable operative complementarity of the two cosmic principles: the initiate must know how no longer let himself be dominated by the confrontation between positive and negative forces, to know (it is indispensable) how to use it, to master it so as to work constructively.

 

In Ancient Egypt, the mosaic was never stepped on except by a candidate and the masters of ceremony, and only at precise moments (by the Past Worshipful Master for the fulfilment of his tasks, by the First Expert when he took the light of the sacred fire, or by the sexton when he spread frankincense on the altar of the Temple. An extremely important aspect of the mosaic pavement is that, being placed in the middle of the Temple, framed by the three colonettes (which represent the Worshipful Master, the Senior and Junior Wardens), must be avoided by walking in a square, in a symbolic sense. The current of energy cross the floor, some along the length, some along the width, in lines that remind of the warp of a canvas.

 

Upon opening the work, the Trestle Board is depicted on this pavement, which varies with the first three degrees. The mosaic pavement signifies different things according to the traditional mode of work in the lodge, or the masonic rite employed.

The French Rite specifies that the pavement adorned the threshold of the geat porch of the Temple and showed that this is one of the ornaments of the Lodge, being the emblem of the intimate union among masons. Here it was explained to the Apprentice that he "could not stand on the mosaic pavement to contemplate the interior of the edifice". This started above from the seventh step, as we can well conclude by an attentive research of the Trestle Boards of the first two degrees.

 

The Rectified Scottish Rite speaks too little of this pavement, noting that "the mosaic pavement adorns the threshold of the great veranda of the Temple. It covers the entry to the subterranean part of the Temple between the two columns, to a crypt that held holy idols and especially the pledge of the alliance between the chosen people and the Creator: the Royal Ark (Ark of the Covenant).

 

The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite does not describe in any way this ornament. As to the decoration of the Lodge, it is said however "the floor of the lodge is the pavement in alternative black and white squares. When it is thus decorated, a pavement is achieved wit the shape of a long square, placed in the center of the Lodge, decorated on the model of the latter".

 

The York Rite affirms that "the mosaic pavement represents the floor of the Temple of Solomon", having the added laced edge. It is obvious enough that it is about a symbolic contribution in what regards the floor of the Lodge, because in the Bible the floor of the Temple isn't described as an series of black and white squares: "and the floor of the Temple was made from cypress planks" (3 Kings 6:15).

 

Whereas in the Emulation Rite (the Anglo-Saxon Rites are more precise in their descriptions) specifies that "the mosaic pavement may rightly be considered the wondrous tiling of a freemason Lodge due to its diversity and regularity. Thus the diversity of beings and objects in the world surfaces, as well the ensouled ones as those that are not". In the complementary course of the Rite of Emulation (in the fifth part) it is specified: "our lodge is adorned with mosaic pavement to mark the uncertainty of all terrestrial vanities... as we step on this mosaic, our thought must return to the original idea that we imitate and act as honorable men and masons". Mosaic pavement is presented as an image of faith, harmony, understanding..

Outside the definitions offered by different masonic rites, the mosaic pavement may be approached under many aspect, two of which seem edifying to us:

• The floor of the Lodge,

• The route of squares for the tracing of planes,

When we approach the mosaic pavement as floor of the Lodge, we are forced to distinguish between the pavement of operative and speculative Lodges.

 

In the first case, we specify that Lodges were usually annexes to the construction site, attached to the construction on the Southern side of the Work (to receive more light and to have the wall of the edifice for protection. It is extremely clear and evident that in this case no floor was imposed (nor would any be functional). The tiling that constitutes the mosaic is fragile in contradiction with the dimensions (weight) of the tools of freemasons (sledgehammers were very heavy). If we are talking about a surface for permanent cutting and polishing of rock, we can easily imagine that the floor of such a place was permanently covered by fragments, remains, abrasive dust. Not in the last place, we must note the fact that mosaic was principally fixed in especially prepared mortar in which designs were first marked that etched the image or drawing that was the purpose of the mosaic.

 

In the other approach, that of the speculative Lodges, a symbolic rug laid in squares may be laid on the floor, or it may be build from alternating black and white tiles, the decision being that of the Lodge. The notionc of mosaic pavement cannot be discussed before the appearance of Grand Lodges.

As a route of squares - as network of right angles - to trace planes is another mode of approach specific to operative lodges, which must distinguish:

A directory route of the edifice that must be understood after we describe the Medieval constructin site at the beginning of the work: on a leveled and cleared surface (treated with charcoal), a scheme of the main lines of the edifice was traced with the help of a rope covered in chalk. There are documents to this effect that attest the describe practice, which reminds of certain answers from the masonic catechism. To the question: "how do you serve your Master?", there is the answer: "with charcoal, chalk and clay".

 

A technical assistance set of squares would be another variant of this approach. An amenably arranged surface, spread in regular squares through lines traced for inumerable uses, the first and most important being that of assembly table. It also served to establish easily a series of angles, in an approximate way that was sufficient for a mason (taking four divisions on a line, and on the perpendicular seven at one extremity, a reasaonbly 60° angle is obtained). In fact, we can imagine the banal math copybook paper that has helped us trace with more facility (and more precision) the geometrical shapes that tortured (or didn't) us in the geometry problems in elementary school.

 

The black and white, chessboard-like pavement is thus the mosaic pavement. In what pertains to the term "mosaic", there are two different opinions, one refering to Moses and one to the technique of decoration. Each school has its pros and cons, more or less logical and valid.

 

"The canvas of ours lives is a mixed thread, the good together with the bad" wrote Shakespeare. Anything is characterized by a combination of good and bad, light and shadow, joy and sadness, positive and negative, yin and yang. What is good for me may be bad for you, pleasure is generated by pain, etc.

 

Following the thread of the current Paper, we may say with certainty that the mosaic is not mart of the elements of Judaic architecture and that the mosaic pavement is a contribution of modern speculative Masonry, operative lodges never having been squared this way. It is obvious that the current exposition is not and does not wish to be an exhaustive work. It is a somewhat complex approach of an important symbol in the decoration of the masonic Temple and it wishes in fact to the a paper addressing an open question:

- The mosaic pavement is the floor of the Lodge (as the rituals consider it) or is it the space limited by the three pillars Power, Wisdom, and Beauty?

 

A good thought accompanied by the triple brotherly accolade!

 

Copyright Forum Masonic

 

The blazing star pattern used, is usually that of the

"pentalpha", or five pointed star with intermediate flames. This star is primarily the symbol of divine providence and can be found in our mosaic pavement. The five points should remind us also of other masonic "fives". The five orders of arch itecture, the five points of fellowship, the five senses and the five who must be present in order for a Lodge to be held. The star is also said to

represent the Morning Star which is yet another symbol of rebirth which is so significant to each of us.

 

I should point out that there is a six pointed star or hexalpha which is also known as the "Glory". This six pointed star is the Seal of Solomon and also the Star of David. This star is also represented on the carpet at times and there is distinct confusion in the texts over which star is THE star to use. The primary symbolic meaning of the six pointed star is the universe as an entity.

St Margaret is visible from the high speed line from Kent into London, and so I see it on every trip I take there and back, and have wanted to visit here for many years.

 

St Margaret sits, apparently alone with just a curtain of trees behind, or that's how it looks from the train. Arriving on car, there is a cluster of houses and farms, and the small wood, with the church set on a bend in the road, half a mile before the lane joins the eight lane A2.

 

At the end of a wonderful day, when church after church was not only open but welcoming, to find this locked was a major disappointment, as it is so out of the Kentish tradition, but there will be other visits I'm sure.

 

-----------------------------------------

 

A sweet little church that would be at home in New England with its white clapper boarded spire. The trim churchyard also has a `plantation` feeling until one hits the huge Colyer-Fergusson plot at the east end. It is almost unbelievable that one is just a few hundred yards from the high speed rail link and buzzing A2. The church is Norman in origin but all is covered externally by depressing pebbledash. Inside, the church is dominated by its west gallery with rather squashed organ and by the impressive stained glass of the east window of the 1850s. One only wishes to know the name of the designer. The 1970s window by Powell’s in the south chancel is really rather fine - in bold brush strokes by Brian Thomas. Its centrepiece is Ifield Church with Rochester Cathedral behind. It is by far a more endearing window than the 1950s effort in the south nave – figures set into a white background as was the fashion of the time…. its designer was C T Smedley who lived at nearby Meopham where you can see another of his windows.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Ifield

 

------------------------------------------

 

IFIELD.

SOUTHWARD from Milton lies the small parish of Ifield, called in antient records, Yelesfelde, and in the Textus Roffensis, Iuelda.

 

THE PARISH of Ifield contains not quite three hundred acres of land; it is situated about a mile and a half southward from the high London road, and about two and a half from Gravesend. The surface is not hilly; the soil is part poor and chalky, and part fertile, being a sandy hazel mould or clay upon the chalk; the air is very healthy. The church stands alone, near the southern boundary of the parish. It is a parish but little known, and would be less so, was it not for the hamlet of Shinglewell-street, antiently written Shanecemcewell, situated at the western boundary of it, adjoining to Northfleet parish, in which two of the ten houses contained in it are situated. Through this street, the bye road leads to Rochester; Hevercourt is on the north side of it, and not far distant. A good house, which was for some years owned by a family of the name of Parker, who bore for their arms, Ermine, a stag's head caboshed gules, and continued so till, at length, one of them marrying the widow of Broadnax Brandon, esq. he at his death bequeathed this seat and estate to her; she afterwards married Mr. Cox, but leaving no issue by her two last husbands, she gave it by her will to her son Philip, by her first husband, who was the son of Wm. Broadnax Brandon, by Anne, daughter of Sir Wm. Broadnax, of Godmersham. He left by his wife above mentioned one son, Philip, and a daughter, Grace, married first to the Rev. Pierce Dixon, of Rochester, and secondly to Mr. Richard Hull. Mr. Philip Brandon, who some years ago, conveyed it to Mr. Benjamin Hubble, who rsiedes at Hever-court, and he is the present proprietor of it, but it is at present occupied by the Rev. Mr. Tucker, rector of Gravesend, who keeps a seminary for young gentlemen in it.

 

The antient Roman road appears very visible here, taking its course through this street, from Springhead in Southfleet, in a direct line towards Cobhampark and Rochester.

 

In the 21st year of king Edward I. some tenants of this village, to avoid their attendance on the sheriff's courts, &c. claimed to be within the lowy of Tunbridge, but on due examination, Richard earl of Gloucester disclaimed them. (fn. 1)

 

THE MANOR, now called HEVER-COURT, as appears by the inquisitions made in the 12th and 13th years of the reign of king John, of the knights and other services, held of the king in capite, and returned by the several sheriffs to the king's treasurer, was then held by Hugo de Tokington, as one knight's see, of the archbishop of Canterbury. After which it came into the possession of the family of Hever, and was their first residence in this county, though Hever-castle, near Tunbridge, became afterwards their capital mansion. Of this family was William de Hever, a person of note, who attended king Richard I. to the siege of Acon, in Palestine. In the 7th year of king John, Walter de Hever was one of the Recognitores Magnæ Assisæ, or justices of the great assise, and office of no small trust and eminence at that time. Richard de Hever is in the register of those who accompanied king Edward I. in the 19th year of his reign, to Newcastle, where he summoned the claimants to the crown of Scotland to appear, and give an account of their pretensions to it. Thomas de Hever, in the 4th year of king Edward III. obtained a market to be held at Shinglewell, in this parish; and two fairs, (fn. 2) one at Michaelmas for five days, and the other on the feast of St. Laurence for three days. From the family of Hever this manor and seat obtained the name of Hever-court, by which it has been called ever since.

 

In the reign of king Edward III. this manor passed by two female coheirs, Joan and Margaret, in marriage to Reginald Cobham, (a younger son of the Cobhams of Cobham, in this county) and Sir Oliver Brocas, one of whose descendants alienated his share in it to Reginald lord Cobham, of Sterborough above mentioned, who then possessed the entire fee of it. His son, Reginald lord Cobham, (fn. 3) alienated it, about the beginning of the reign of king Henry VI. to Rikkill; and there is a memorial, in Northfleet church, for William, eldest son of Sir William Rikhill, and for Catherine his wife; from which name it passed in marriage with Rose, sole heir of John Rikhill, to John Lymsey, whose descendant, Edmund Lymsey, had possession granted of it in the 2d year of Edward VI. (fn. 4) He alienated it to Sir John Rainsford, from whom it passed by sale, in the 7th year of that reign, to Garth, who, in the 40th year of queen Elizabeth, sold this manor to John Barrow and Nicholas Child, gent. the former of whom, about two years afterwards, gave up his interest in it to the latter, and he died possessed of it in 1638. His descendant, in 1644, conveyed it to dame Frances, widow of Sir Thomas Burton, bart. of Leicestershire, who sold it, in 1656, to Thomas Cripps, esq. and he, two months afterwards, conveyed it to Mrs. Leah de la Fortrye, widow of Peter de la Fortrye, merchant of London, and of Greenwich, in this county. She by her will gave it to her daughter, Susan, married to Mr. Peter Bulteel, merchant, of London; on whose death, in 1692, Leah, one of her daughters, became possessed of one moiety of this manor, which she carried in marriage to Dr. Samuel Mills, of Crutched-friers, London, who bore for his arms, Sable, two pales argent, a fess gules. (fn. 5) He left two daughters and coheirs, one of whom carried this moiety in marriage to John Toke, esq. of Goddington, in this county, whose son and heir, Nicholas Toke, esq. having purchased the other moiety of this manor from Mr. Sish, a descendant of another daughter of Mrs. Susan Bulteel, became possessed of the entire see of Hever-court. He died in 1757, and was succeeded by his eldest son, John Toke, esq. late of Goddington, the present owner of it. (fn. 6)

 

There are no parochial charities.

 

IFIELD is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Rochester, and being a peculiar of the archbishop, is as such in the deanry of Shoreham. The church, which is the smallest in the diocese, is dedicated to St. Margaret. It consists of an isle and chancel; it was rebuilt in the year 1596, and was again repaired and beautified in 1638.

 

In this church are the following inscriptions: In the isle, a memorial for Jane, wife of Edward Armstrong, gent. of this parish; obt. 1688. A brass plate for Richard Parker, who was a special assistant in re-edifying this church, in 1596, obt. 1607; and for Mrs. Elizabeth, widow of major Robert Parker, obt. 1702. In the chancel, a memorial for George Lauder, rector of Ifield and Nutted, obt. Ap. 26, 1720, and these not inelegant lines—

 

Scotia me genuit, docuit, sacraque cathedra,

Et chara ornavit conjuge, prole, lare.

Anglia prostrato miserata, lavavit, et almo

Suscipiens gremio sovit, et ossa tenet.

 

Within the rails, a memorial for Mr. Nicholas Child, gent. lord of this manor, at whose cost and charge chiefly this church was repaired and beautified, obt. 1638. In the east window are the arms of Garrard, with quarterings, over all a crescent, gules, being those of Sir John Garrard, lord mayor in queen Elizabeth's reign, and they are likewise in the windows of Ifield-court, in Northfleet.

 

¶This is a discharged living in the king's books, of the clear yearly certified value of 26l. 10s. the yearly tenths-being 8s. 8d½. It is a rectory, lately in the patronage of Thomas Chiffinch, esq. of Northfleet, who some years ago, alienated it to Mr. Henry Edmeads, gent. the present patron of it. This rectory has been augmented jointly with that of Northfleet.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol3/pp347-351

Italian postcard. Photo Reale, No. 320.

 

Giovanni Grasso (1873-1930) was an Italian stage and screen actor. While he goes as the best Sicilian tragic actor and one of the best in Italy, he also had limited but very important career in Italian silent cinema.

 

Giovanni Grasso was born in Catania, Sicily, on December 19, 1873, as the son of puppet master Angelo Grasso and Ciccia (Francesca) Tudisco, his second wife and puppet master too. Angelo Grasso’s father supposedly had introduced the puppet theatre in Catania, from Naples. In Catania Angelo opened a small puppet theatre, entitled Teatro Machiavelli, which at his death, in order to survive, turned into a vaudeville theatre. Small provincial companies stopped there, alternating edifying dramas with farces and subject performances ("scenoni"), inspired by news events. In this eclectic environment of the 1890s, young Giovanni Grasso was trained as a man of the theatre. He decided to brush up his paternal puppets, presenting – successful - shows. Among his greatest admirers was the playwright and journalist Nino Martoglio, who led the famous actor Ernesto Rossi to the Machiavelli. At the end of the show, Rossi, dazed by the expressive power of the puppeteer, urged him to become an actor.

 

This was the first of the "revelation meetings" – with a.o. people like D'Annunzio, Babel, and Mejerchol'd - that punctuated Grasso’s life, whose art was perhaps greater and, above all, more meaningful than he was aware of. At Rossi's requests Grasso rearranged the auditorium and increasingly alternated written texts with crime scenes, thus beginning to define his own dramaturgical repertory that clung to Sicilian texts but renewed by his interventions and his acting. Among his battle horses we must remember I mafiusi di La Vicaria di Palermo, by G. Mosca & G. Rizzotto; La zolfara, by G. Giusti Sinopoli; and Cavalleria rusticana, by Giovanni Verga. I mafiusi (1863), was based on the stories of an authentic mafioso, a certain Gioacchino D'Angelo (Jachinu Funciazza, in theatrical fiction), just out of jail. The drama had an immediate and lasting success, especially when Grasso began to interpret it. Zolfara, based on the big upheaval of the strikes of the Sicilian miners, did not gain much recognition when premiered in 1895, but thanks to Grasso’s version in dialect, became a triumph. Instead, Cavalleria rusticana, following Grasso’s often used practice, was represented in the Sicilian translation of Martoglio.

 

In 1901 Grasso formed his own company Città di Catania, with Angelo Musco as ‘brilliante’ and Carmelina Tria as first actress (later replaced by Mimì Aguglia and after her by Marinella Bragaglia). He did his first world tour, starting at the Politeama in Salerno (with La zolfara), on initiative of the capocomico (company manager) Mimì de Cesare, who sensed Grasso’s great talent. The tour subsequently touched Avellino and Naples, with a good artistic success but failed economic results. The real consecration of Grasso, however, took place in Rome, where he was called for some charity performances organized for the victims of the Modica flood (September 1902). On 30th November 1901 Grasso made his debut in Argentina with Cavalleria rusticana and I mafiusi. When asked about Grasso, Martoglio answered: "His mirror is nature"; this axiom, together with his powerful vigor, instinctive to the limit of violence, remained the trademark of the actor and his company. Always on the occasion of the Argentine Luigi Capuana, who had assisted, offered him the reworking in dialect of his play Malia, while G., prevented from returning to Catania because of the illness of his brother Micio, continued with resounding success his performances in Rome at the Teatro Metastasio.

 

Back in Catania, the Macchiavelli burned down in 1903. The same year Martoglio wrote for Grasso a new text, Nica, and together with him he raised the first Sicilian dialectal drama company, which included Musco, Bragaglia, Lo Turco, Totò Majorana , Micio Grasso, and the families Spadaro and Balistrieri. The repertory included, in addition to the dramas already mentioned, La lupa and Caccia al lupo by Verga; San Giuvanni addicullatu by Martoglio; Mastru Libertu l’armeri by F. Marchese; La festa di Adernò by Grasso himself. After performances in Catania and Naples, the company set off for a new tour. While La zolfara played without great success in Milan, Gabriele DÁnnunzio, present, was was struck by the expressive power. Nica and Cavalleria rusticana went better, even if critics condemned the interventions in the latter. After Milan, the tour continued touching Florence, Palermo, Messina and, again, Naples. Returned to Catania in August 1903, Grasso had to accept again the economic failure of the tour, and dedicated himself to the reconstruction of the Teatro Machiavelli. Meanwhile, urged by V. Ferraù, administrator of the company - who, however, mindful of past experiences, asked free hand in commercial management -, Martoglio gave life to the second Sicilian dialectal drama company, which, in 1904, set off for a new tour, ending in Turin. However, this time a novelty among the repertory became the hit of the season: 'A figghia di Joriu, G. Borgese’s Sicilian version of D'Annunzio's tragedy La figlia di Jorio, performed at the Teatro Costanzi in Rome on 17th September 1904.

 

At the end of 1906, the company departed for Spain, the initial stage of the long season of the big tours abroad, starting on 8 January 1907 at the Novedades theater in Barcelona, continued in Portugal, and from there to South America. After reprisals in Buenos Aires, the famous French actor A. Lugné Poe, impresario of Eleonora Duse, hired the Sicilian actors for one of their most important international impact: a tour in France. Here they arrived in January 1908. After the Parisian debut with Malia at the Marigny Theater, critics wrote: "No convention, no tradition: nature, life". The realism of the actors was compared to that of the "Japanese", the recitation was defined as "of an infinitely accurate and precise accuracy". Grasso’s repertory was classic: 'A figghia di Joriu, Cavalleria rusticana and La morte civile by P. Giacometti, already known to the Parisian public. Great appreciation was also obtained for La lupa, La zolfara, and Rusidda, by critics such as C. Mendès and by actors like Mounet-Sully. The usual appreciation for the "naturalness" of acting was now joined by the recognition for the great technical expertise of Grasso and his companions.

 

While Verga withdrew his texts for the changes made arbitrarily by Grasso (his also happened afterwards with Capuana and even with Martoglio), Grasso on February 3, 1908, preceded by the echo of French success, debuted in London, again with Malia. Here he saw the excellent criticisms repeated that praised his realism as "amazing, fulminant, colossal" and, again, his great acting technique. In October the company made its debut in Berlin and, after a fleeting episode in Hungary, moved to Russia, at the time one of the most vital centres of the European theatre. The debut was in St. Petersburg, with Malia, Feudalism (a Sicilian version of A. Campagna di Terra baixa, by A. Guimerà and another pillar of the repertoire of Grasso after his South American tour,), Stone between stones of H. Sudermann, The zolfara and 'A figghia di Joriu. Subsequent shows were given in Moscow and Odessa, both very important for the construction of the "fame" of Grasso and for the definition of his artistic figure.

 

In Moscow, personalities of the caliber of K.S. Stanislavski, V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko and N. Craig attended his shows, while Grasso, at the height of his success, was received at court. In Odessa he saw a fourteen-year-old Babel, who would later write on it in one of his Stories of Odessa (1931). In Babel's stunned words, Grasso’s performance of Grasso in Feudalism, already famous, exploded to theoretical attention, the famous anecdote for the way in which the pastor, played by Grasso, kills his rival by biting him in the throat, after having literally "flown" across the whole scene. In this respect, Mejerchol'd wrote: "I realized numerous laws of the biomechanics when I saw the acting of the magnificent Sicilian tragic actor Grasso". By identifying the biomechanical roots in the movement of the whole body, regardless of the part directly affected, Mejerchol'd was the first in succeeding to clarify that "expressive power", which many had only intuitively perceived. With Grasso it was always the whole body that acted, spoke, or simply, was present, that is: to be perceived, on stage.

 

In 1909, after the Russia tour, the company returned to England. Particularly significant, this time, was Grasso’s interpretation of Othello, one of Grasso’s earliest roles but one he had always refused to represent outside his Catania. The success was, as usual, amazing, while critics spoke now openly of self-restraint, while for Feudalism they defined Grasso "a physical obsession", but a controlled obsession and guided by technique. In April 1910, the company embarked on a second eight-month tour to South America, touching Argentina, Chile, Brazil and Peru. Back in Catania, after a new stop in England, Grasso married singer Concetta Silvia Carducci, with whom he had lived from the times of the Machiavelli variety, and with whom he had four children. He then dissolved the company for a long period of rest. More or less since this time Grasso, now in a declining phase, threw off his theatrical activity, although never interrupted and even if the repertoire was enriched with new texts, including Il berretto a sonagli by Luigi Pirandello. In 1913 he played Cavalleria rusticana in Rome; in 1916 he was in Messina; in 1917 in Palermo and in 1919 in Rome, at the Teatro Eliseo. In 1921, with first actress Carolina Balistrieri Bragaglia, he left for a tour in the United States, debuting on September 8th in New York, at the Major Royal Theatre, in the heart of the Italian quarter, with Feudalism. The performances lasted for five months, with traditional battle horses like Malia and Cavalleria rusticana, but also with novelties by young authors. Success continued to be great, but at the end of this tour his voice showed the first signs of hoarseness worsened over time. In 1923, G. formed a new company with his brother Micio, his cousin Giovanni junior (who eventually would become a famous sound film actor too), and Virginia Balistrieri, junior’s wife. In 1927-28 Grasso did his last tour in America. In his last years, with a by now almost extinct voice, he gradually lost the public’s favor.

 

Giovanni Grasso was also a popular cinema actor. Already in 1910, during his second South American tour, he had shot, directed by Mario Gallo, two films taken from his famous theatrical interpretations: La morte civile/Muerte civil and Cavalleria rusticana. But it was, as usual, Martoglio to offer him the most significant occasions. In fact, the latter, at the end of 1913, had been appointed artistic director of the Rome based company Morgana films. It was this production house that made the trilogy, also directed by Martoglio: Capitan Blanco (Nino Martoglio, Roberto Danesi, 1914), starring Grasso and Virginia Balestrieri and based on the drama Capitan Matteo Blanco by the same Martoglio; Sperduti nel buio (Lost in the dark, Martoglio 1914), with Grasso, Balestrieri and Maria Carmi and after the drama by Roberto Bracco; and Teresa Raquin, with Maria Carmi and Dillo Lombardo but without Grasso, and after Émile Zola’s famous novel. In Sperduti nel buio, of 1914, which is Grasso’s most famous film and was considered almost an incunabulum of neorealist cinema, Grasso interpreted the blind Nunzio. In a review, Bracco underlined the "expressive" contrast between the grace of the character and the power of the actor. In the early 1940s Sperduti nel buio was hailed as precursor of what would become Italian Neorealism, but during the war the German took the print from the Roman archive and it never resurfaced; neither other prints of the film, raising its mythology.

 

The cinematographic activity of Grasso continued until 1926. Between 1919 and 1926 he was highly active and performed in some nine films, including Mala Pasqua (Ignazio Lupi, 1919) with Linda Pini, L’ospite sconosciuta/ Malafemmina (Telemaco Ruggeri, 1923) with Pina Menichelli, and Cavalleria rusticana (Mario Gargiulo, 1924) with Grasso as Alfio, Mary Cléo Tarlarini as Nunzia, Tina Xeo as Santuzza and Livio Pavanelli as Turiddu. Twice Grasso had the lead in Balzac adaptations Vautrin (Alexandre Davrennes, 1919) and Tromp-la-Mort (Devarennes, 1920). Amleto Palermi directed Grasso in three films: Dopo il peccato (1920) with Bella Starace Sainati, Il dramma dell’amore (1920) with Claretta Sabatelli, and La casa degli scapoli (1923) with Diomira Jacobini and Livio Pavanelli. Grosso’s last part was in the Capuana adaptation Il cavalier Petagna (Mario Gargiulo, 1926), with Soava Gallone. Giovanni Grasso died in Catania on 14 October 1930.

 

Unfortunately, almost all of his films have been lost. With particular reference to Sperduti nel buio, one of the most sought films in the world of film archives and film history, we can only talk about it on the basis of the screenplay, photos and reviews. A booklet with 24 photos has been put online on the website www.ilcinemamuto.it/betatest/sperduti-nel-buio/. But sometimes fortune smiles at us. In 2005, at the Dutch EYE Filmmuseum, a tinted print of the short film Un amore selvaggio (Cines 1912, director unknown) was found, restored and relaunched internationally. It was not only the only film with the Southern actors Raffaele and Luisella Viviani, but it is now also the only surviving film with Giovanni Grasso (even if his part is unmentioned in Bernardini&Martinell’s famous filmography Il cinema muto italiano). When in 2011 the film was shown in Sicily before the heirs of Grasso and Viviani’s son, they immediately recognized the actors. It was in 1912 that Cines shot 3 films with Viviani (his only ones) and that also famous plays in which Grasso where filmed: Malia and Feudalismo, were filmed. Un amore selvaggio, is a rural drama, clearly influenced by the literary works of Verga and Capuana. On a Sicilian farm, brother Giuseppe (Viviani) and Carmela (Luisella Viviani), sister, both work. The rebel and violent Giuseppe is fired for offending his master, and would like to take his sister with him, but she refuses because she desperately loves the owner’ son Alessandro (Grasso), who rejects her and is already engaged. The woman then tries to poison her rival in love, but is discovered and in turn cast out. In order to take revenge, she tells Giuseppe that she has been seduced and asks his brother to kill Alessandro, but while she spies the rival's house she rolls into an embankment and is cared for by Alexander's good and kind girlfriend. Repentant, Carmela confesses Giuseppe she lied, just as he is about to hit Alessandro with a sickle. He forgives her and the two leave together. The brutal and tragic character of Giuseppe reminds of Grasso’s expressive parts, so it is remarkable Viviani plays that part and Grasso has a more moderate role.

 

Sources: www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/giovanni-grasso_(Dizionario-Biografico)/ Franco Ruffini - Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani - Volume 58 (2002); ipercultura.com/grasso-amore-selvaggio.htm. See also Italian Wikipedia and IMDB.

 

I was in the area, checking up on the Heath Spotted Orchids, and the church was a five minute drive away, in the grounds of a former country house.

 

I park at the church and find it locked, as expected, but there were directions to a keyholder nearby, walking into the cobbled squares and converted estate buildings now executive housing.

 

I ring the bell: nothing

 

I ring again: nothing

 

I use the knocker: dog barks. Dog attacks the door.

 

There is angry voices. Or voice. There was the sound of the dog being put into a side room, and the struggle to close the door.

 

The front door opened: yes?

 

Can I have the church key, please?

 

Not sure if I still have it.

 

Why'd you want it?

 

To photograph the interior.

 

Who're with?

 

I'm with no one, I am photographing all parish churches in the county, and would like to do this one. I showed him my driving licence which should say under job title: obsessive and church crawler.

 

He seemed satisfied, and let me have the key.

 

Phew.

 

Inside two things you notice; one is the box tomb, finely carved and still with traces of the original paint, and secondly, the organ is in pieces, and apparently the most complicated jigsaw you ever did see

 

------------------------------------------------

 

Substantially rebuilt after a fire of 1598. The welcoming interior displays no chancel arch, although the doorways in the arcade show where the medieval rood screen ran the width of the church. The striking east window was designed by Wallace Wood in 1954. There is a good aumbry and piscina nearby. To the north of the chancel stands the excellent tomb chest of Sir John Tufton (d. 1624). The arcade into which it is built was lowered to allow a semi-circular alabaster ceiling to be inserted to set the composition off. Because it is completely free-standing it is one of the easiest tomb chests in Kent to study, with five sons kneeling on the south side and four daughters on the north . In addition there are complicated coats of arms and an inscription which records the rebuilding of the church by Tufton after the fire. On top of the chest lie Sir John and his wife, with their son Nicholas kneeling between their heads. Much of the monument is still covered with its original paint. The organ, which stands in the south aisle, may be the instrument on which Sir Arthur Sullivan composed 'The Lost Chord'. It originally stood in Hothfield Place where Sullivan was a frequent guest.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Hothfield

 

--------------------------------------------

 

HOTHFIELD

IS the next parish northward from Great Chart, and is so called from the bothe, or heath within it. The greatest part of this parish lies within the hundred of Chart and Longbridge, and the remainder in that of Calehill. It is in the division of East Kent.

 

THE PARISH of Hothfield lies a little more than two miles from Ashford north-westward, the high road from which towards Lenham and Maidstone goes through it over Hothfield heath. It contains about 1250 acres, and fifty houses, the rents of it are about 1300l. per annum. It is not a pleasant, nor is it accounted a healthy situation, owing probably to the many low and watry lands in and about it. The river Stour, which rises at Lenham, runs along the southern side of the parish, which is watered likewise by several small streams, which rise about Charing and Westwell, from under the chalk hills, and join the Stour here. The heath, which contains near one half of the parish, consists mostly of a deep sand, and has much peat on it, which is continually dug by the poor for firing. On the east and west sides of the heath, the latter being called West-street, are two hamlets of houses, which form the scattered village of Hothfield. The Place-house stands on a hill, at a small distance from the corner of the heath southward, with some small plantations of trees about it, forming a principal object to the country round it. It is a square mansion, built of Portland stone, by the late earl of Thanet, on the scite of the antient mansion, close to the church; it has a good prospect round it. The adjoining grass grounds are extensive, and well laid out for the view over them; the water, which rises at no great distance from the house, becomes very soon a tolerable sized stream, and running on in sight of it, joins the Stour a little above Worting mill; these grass lands are fertile and good fatting land, like those mentioned before, near Godington, in Great Chart. The parsonage house, which is a neat dwelling of white stucco, stands at the southern corner of the heath, at the foot of the hill, adjoining the Place grounds, near West-street. Between the heath and Potter's corner, towards Ashford, the soil begins to approach much of the quarry stone.

 

Though the land in the parish is naturally poor, it is rendered productive by the chalk and lime procured from the down hills. The inhabitants have an unlimited right of commoning with those of the adjoining parish of Westwell, to upwards of five hundred acres of common, which affords them the means of keeping a cow and their poultry, which, with the liberty of digging peat, draws a number of certificated poor to reside here. There is not one dissenter in the parish.

 

Jack Cade, the noted rebel, in Henry the VI.th's reign, though generally supposed to be taken by Alexander Iden, esq. the sheriff, in a field belonging to Ripple manor, in the adjoining parish of Westwell, was discovered, as some say, in a field in this parish, still named from him, Jack Cade's field, now laid open with the rest of the grounds adjoining to Hothfieldplace.

 

The plant caryophyllata montena, or water avens, which is a very uncommon one, grows in a wood near Barber's hill, in this parish.

 

THE MANOR OF HOTHFIELD seems, in very early times, to have had the same owners as the barony of Chilham, and to have continued so, for a considerable length of time after the descendants of Fulbert de Dover were become extinct here. Bartholomew de Badlesmere, who in the 5th year of king Edward II. had a grant of this manor as well as of Chilham in see, appears to have held this manor of Hothfield by grand sergeantry of the archbishop, and accordingly, in the 8th year of it, at the enthroning of archbishop Walter Reynolds, he made his claim, and was allowed to perform the office of chamberlain for that day, and to serve up the water, for the archbishop to wash his hands; for which his fees were, the furniture of his bedchamber, and the bason and towel made use of for that purpose; (fn. 1) and in the next year he obtained of the king, a charter of free-warren for his demesne lands within this manor among others. After this the manor of Hothfield continued to be held by the like service, and continued in the same owners as that of Chilham, (fn. 2) down to Thomas lord Roos, who became entitled to the see of it, who for his attachment to the house of Lancaster, was, with others, attainted, in the 1st year of king Edward IV.'s reign, and his lands confiscated to the crown. But Margaret his mother, being possessed of it for her life, afterwards married Roger Wentworth, esq. whom she survived, and died possessed of it in the 18th year of that reign; upon which, by reason of the above attaint, the crown became entitled to it, the inquisition for which was found in the 4th year of that reign; immediately after which, the king granted it to Sir John Fogge, of Repton, who was comptroller of his household and one of his privy council, for his life. On king Richard III.'s accession to the crown, he took shelter in the abbey of Westminster, from whence he was invited by the king, who in the presence of a numerous assembly gave him his hand, and bid him be confident that from thenceforward he was sure to him in affection. This is rather mentioned, as divers chronicles have erroneously mentioned that he was an attorney, whom this prince had pardoned for forgery. He died possessed of it in the 17th year of Henry VII. where it remained till Henry VIII. granted it, at the very latter end of his reign, to John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, in Sussex, whose lands were disgavelled by the acts of 2 and 3 Edward VI. who afterwards resided at Hothfield, where he kept his shrievalty in the 3d year of queen Elizabeth. He was descended from ancestors who were originally written Toketon, and held lands in Rainham, in this county, as early as king John's reign; (fn. 3) one of whom was seated at Northiam, in Sussex, in king Richard the IId.'s reign, at which time they were written as at present, Tufton, and they continued there till John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, before-mentioned, removed hither. He died in 1567, and was buried in this church, leaving one son John Tufton, who resided at Hothfield-place, and in July, in the 16th year of queen Elizabeth, anno 1573, entertained the queen here, in her progress through this county. In the 17th year of that reign he was sheriff, and being a person of eminent repure and abilities, he was knighted by king James, in his 1st year, and created a baronet at the first institution of that order, on June 19, 1611. He married Olimpia, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. of Sileham, in Rainham, by whom he had three daughters; and secondly Christian, daughter and coheir of Sir Humphry Brown, a justice of the common pleas. He died in 1624, and was buried in this church, having had by her several sons and daughters. Of the former, Nicholas the eldest, succeeded him in title and estates. Sir Humphry was of Bobbing and the Mote, in Maidstone, and Sir William was of Vinters, in Boxley, both baronets, of whom further mention has already been made in the former parts of this history.

 

Sir Nicholas Tufton, the eldest son, was by letters patent, dated Nov. 1, anno 2 Charles I. created lord Tufton, baron of Tufton, in Sussex; and on August 5, in the 4th year of that reign, earl of the Isle of Thanet, in this county. He had four sons and nine daughters; of the former, John succeeded him in honors, and Cecil, was father of Sir Charles Tufton, of Twickenham, in Middlesex. John, the eldest son, second earl of Thanet, married in 1629 Margaret, eldest daughter and coheir of Richard, earl of Dorset, by his wife the lady Anne Clifford, sole daughter and heir of George, earl of Cumberland, and baroness of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy, by which marriage these tithes descended afterwards to their issue. In the time of the commonwealth, after king Charles the 1st.'s death, he was, in 1654, appointed sheriff, and however inconsistent it might be to his rank, yet he served the office. He left six sons and six daughters, and was succeeded by Nicholas his eldest son, third earl of Thanet, who by the deaths of his mother in 1676, and of his cousin-german Alethea, then wife of Edward Hungerford, esq. who died s. p. in 1678, he became heir to her, and sole heir to his grandmother Anne, lady Clifford, and consequently to the baronies of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy; dying s. p. he was succeeded as earl of Thanet and lord Clifford, &c. by his next brother John, who, on his mother's death, succeeded likewise by her will to her large estates in Yorkshire and Westmoreland, and to the hereditary in sheriffdoms of the latter and of Cumberland likewise, for it frequently happened in these hereditary sheriffdoms that female heirs became possessed of them, and consequently were sheriffs of those districts; but this was not at all an unusual thing, there being many frequent instances of women bearing that office, as may be seen in most of the books in which any mention is made of it, some instances of which the reader may see in the differtation on the office of sheriff, in vol. i. of this history. That part of their office which was incompatible for a woman to exercise, was always executed by a deputy, or shyre-clerk, in their name. But among the Harleian MSS. is a very remarkable note taken from Mr. Attorney-general Noys reading in Lincoln's inn, in 1632, in which, upon a point, whether the office of a justice of a forest might be executed by a woman; it was said, that Margaret, countess of Richmond, mother to king Henry VII. was a justice of peace; that the lady Bartlet, perhaps meant for Berkley, was also made a justice of the peace by queen Mary, in Gloucestershire; and that in Suffolk one ..... Rowse, a woman, did usually fit upon the bench at assizes and sessions among other justices, gladio cincta. John, earl of Thanet, died unmarried, as did his next brother earl Richard, so that the titles devolved to Thomas Tufton, who became the sixth earl of Thanet, and lord Clifford, which latter title was decreed to him by the house of peers in 1691. He left surviving issue five daughters and coheirs, the eldest of whom, Catherine, married Ed. Watson, viscount Sondes, son and heir of Lewis, earl of Rockingham; and the four others married likewise into noble families. He died at Hothfield in 1729, having by his will bequeathed several legacies to charitable purposes, especially towards the augmentation of small vicarages and curacies. He died without male issue, so that the titles of earl of Thanet and baron Tufton, and of baronet, descended to his nephew Sackville Tufton, eldest surviving son of his brother Sackville Tufton, fifth son of John, second earl of Thanet. But the title of baroness Clifford, which included those of Westmoreland and Vescy, upon the death of Thomas, earl of Thanet, without male issue, became in abeyance between his daughters and coheirs above-mentioned, and in 1734, king George II. confirmed that barony to Margaret, his third surviving daughter and coheir, married to Thomas Coke, lord Lovel, afterwards created earl of Leicester, which title is now again in abeyance by his death s. p. Which Sackville Tufton died in 1721, leaving Sackville the seventh earl of Thanet, whose eldest son of the same name succeeded him as eighth earl of Thanet, and rebuilt the present mansion of Hothfield-place, in which he afterwards resided, but being obliged to travel to Italy for his health, he died there at Nice in 1786, and was brought to England, and buried in the family vault at Rainham, in this county, where his several ancestors, earls of Thanet, with their countesses, and other branches of the family, lie deposited, from the time of their first accession to that title. He married Mary, daughter of lord John Philip Sackville, sister of the present duke of Dorset, by whom he had five sons and two daughters, Elizabeth; and Caroline married to Joseph Foster Barham, esq. Of the former, Sackville, born in 1769, succeeded him in honors; Charles died unmarried; John is M. P. for Appleby; Henry is M. P. for Rochester, and William. He was succeeded by his eldest son, the present right hon. Sackville Tufton, earl of Thanet, baron Tufton, lord of the honor of Skipton, in Craven, and baronet, and hereditary sheriff of the counties of Westmoreland and Cumberland, who is the present possessor of this manor and seat, and resides here, and is at present unmarried. (fn. 4)

 

The antient arms of Tufton were, Argent, on a pale, sable, an eagle displayed of the field; which coat they continued to bear till Nicholas Tufton, the first earl of Thanet, on his obtaining that earldom, altered it to that of Sable, an eagle displayed, ermine, within a bordure, argent; which coat was confirmed by Sir William Segar, garter, in 1628, and has been borne by his descendants to the present time. The present earl of Thanet bears for his coat of arms that last-mentioned; for his crest, On a wreath, a sea lion, seiant, proper; and for his supporters, Two eagles, their wings expanded, ermine.

 

SWINFORT, or Swinford, which is its more proper name, is a manor in this parish, lying in the southern part of it, near the river Stour, and probably took its name from some ford in former times over it here. However that be, it had formerly proprietors, who took their name from it; but they were never of any eminence, nor can I discover when they became extinct here; only that in king Henry V.'s reign it was in the possession of Bridges, descended from John atte Bregg, one of those eminent persons, whose effigies, kneeling and habited in armour, was painted in the window often mentioned before, in Great Chart church; and in this family the manor of Swinford continued till the latter end of king James I.'s reign, when it passed by sale from one of them to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, whose son John, earl of Thanet, before the 20th year of that reign, exchanged it for other lands, which lay more convenient to him, with his near neighbour Nicholas Toke, esq. of Godinton, in which family and name it has continued down, in like manner as that feat, to Nicholas Roundell Toke, esq. now of Godinton, the present possessor of it. A court baron is held for this manor.

 

FAUSLEY, or FOUSLEY, as it is now usually called, is the last manor to be described in this parish; its more antient name was Foughleslee, or, as it was usually pronounced, Faulesley; which name it gave to owners who in early times possessed and resided at it. John de Foughleslee, of Hothfield, was owner of it in the second year of king Richard II. and in his descendants this manor seems to have continued till about the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign, when it passed by sale to Drury; from which name, at the latter end of it, this manor was conveyed to Paris, who immediately afterwards alienated it to Bull, who soon afterwards reconveyed it back again to the same family, whence, in the next reign of king James I. it was sold to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, in whose successors, earls of Thanet, it has continued down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, the present owner of it.

 

Charities.

 

RICHARD PARIS, by deed in 1577, gave for the use of the poor, a rent charge of 16s. per annum, out of land called Hanvilles, in this parish; the trustees of which have been long ago deceased, and no new ones appointed since.

 

THOMAS KIPPS, gent. of Canterbury, by will in 1680, gave for the use of the same, an annual rent charge of 1l. out of lards in Great Chart.

 

RICHARD MADOCKE, clothier, of this parish, by will in 1596, ordered that the 11l. which he had lent to the parishioners of Hothfield, towards the rebuilding of their church, should, when repaid, be as a stock to the poor of this parish for ever.

 

SIR JOHN TUFTON, knight and baronet, and Nicholas his son, first earl of Thanet, by their wills in 1620 and in 1630, gave certain sums of money, with which were purchased eight acres of land in the parish of Kingsnoth, of the annual produce of 10l.

 

DR. JOHN GRANDORGE, by deed in 1713, gave a house and land in Newington, near Hythe, of the annual produce of 7l. which premises are vested in the earl of Thanet.

 

THOMAS, EARL OF THANET, and SACKVILLE TUFTON. Esq. grandfather of the present earl, by their deeds in 1720 and 1726, gave for a school mistress to teach 24 poor children, a rent charge and a house and two gardens, in Hothfield, the produce in money 20l. The premises were vested in Sir Penyston Lambe and Dr. John Grandorge, long since deceased; since which the trust has not been renewed; and the original writings are in the earl of Thanet's possession.

 

Such of the above benefactions as have been contributed by the Tufton family, have been ordered by their descendants to be distributed annually by the steward of Hothfield-place for the time being, without the interference of the parish officers, to such as received no relief from this parish; the family looking upon these rather as a private munisicence intended to continue under their direction.

 

The poor annually relieved are about twenty-five, casually as many.

 

HOTHFIELD is situated within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Charing.

 

¶The church, which is small, is dedicated to St. Mary, and consists of three isles and a chancel, having a low spire steeple, covered with shingles at the west end, in which are five bells, and though it stands on a hill, is yet very damp. There is not any painted glass in the windows of it. On the north side in it, is a monument of curious workmanship, having the figures of a man and woman, in full proportion, lying at length on it; at three corners of it are those of two sons and one daughter, kneeling, weeping, all in white marble; round the edges is an inscription, for Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, and Olympia his wife, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. On the monument are the arms of Tufton, with quarterings and impalements; on the sides are two inscriptions, one, that he re-edified this church after it was burnt, at his own charge, and under it made a vault for himself and his posterity, and after that he had lived eighty years, departed this life; the other enumerating his good qualities, and saying that by his will he gave perpetual legacies to this parish and that of Rainham. This monument is parted off from the north isle by a strong partition of wooden balustrades, seven feet high. The vault underneath is at most times several feet deep with water, and the few coffins which were remaining in it were some years since removed to the vaults at Rainham, where this family have been deposited ever since. On the north side of the chancel is a smaller one, formerly called St. Margaret's chapel, now shut up, and made no use of. In the south isle is a memorial for Rebecca, wife of William Henman, esq. obt. 1739, and Anna-Rebecca, their daughter, obt. 1752; arms, A lion, between three mascles, impaling a bend, cotized, engrailed. This church, which is a rectory, was always esteemed an appendage to the manor, and has passed accordingly, in like manner with it, down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, lord of the manor of Hothfield, the present patron of it.

 

This rectory is valued in the king's books at 17l. 5s. and the yearly tenths at 1l. 14s. 6d.

 

There was a pension of ten shillings paid from it to the college of Wye. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred and ninety-three, and it was valued at eighty pounds. In 1640, communicants one hundred and ninety, and valued at only sixty pounds per annum. There is a modus of two pence an acre of the pasture lands in the parish. There are twelve acres of glebe. It is now worth about one hundred and twenty pounds per annum.

 

Richard Hall, of this parish, by will in 1524, ordered that his feoffees should enfeoffe certain honest persons in his house and garden here, set beside the pelery, to the intent that the yearly serme of them should go to the maintenance of the rode-light within the church.

 

This church was burnt down in the reign of king James I. and was rebuilt at the sole expence of Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, who died in 1624. His descendant Thomas, earl of Thanet, who died in 1729, gave the present altar-piece, some of the pewing, and the pulpit.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol7/pp514-526

Processed with VSCOcam with q10 preset

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

Today's museums seek to explain, to edify with the abosluteness of our knowledge, or bolster our belief in science through the explication of theory. It is not to collect or inspire, as has been the case in previous centuries. No, we enter into a hall of decisive knowledge, a place of diagrams and demonstrations. In no aspect is this more apparent than in the banishment of shadows. Everything is in full view, categorized joylessly and precisely.

 

It is in such a crisis of illumination that I seek to draw the curtains in order to preserve our wonder.

Royal Palace of Gödöllő

The Palace is one of the most important, largest monuments of Hungarian Palace architecture. Its builder, Count Antal Grassalkovich I (1694–1771) was a typical figure of the regrouping Hungarian aristocracy of the 18th century. He was a Royal Septemvir, president of the Hungarian Chamber, and confidant of Empress Maria Theresa (1740–1780). The construction began around 1733, under the direction of András Mayerhoffer (1690–1771) a Salzburg builder.

 

The Palace has a double U shape, and is surrounded by an enormous park. The building underwent several enlargements and modifications during the 18th century, its present shape was established in the time of the third generation of the Grassalkovich family. By then the building had 8 wings, and - besides the residential part - it contained a church, a theatre, a riding-hall, a hothouse, a greenhouse for flowers and an orangery.

 

After the male side of the Grassalkovich family died out in 1841, the Palace had several owners, and in 1867 it was bought for the Crown. The decision of Parliament designated it the resting residence of the Hungarian Monarch. This state lasted until 1918, thus Francis Joseph (1867–1916) and later Charles IV and the royal family spent several months in Gödöllő every year.

 

During this period the Palace became the symbol of independent Hungarian statehood, and, as a residential centre it had a political significance of it own. It was Empress Elisabeth (1837–1898) who specially loved staying in Gödöllő, where the Hungarian personnel and neighbourhood of the Palace always warmly welcomed her. Following her tragic death, a memorial park adjoining the upper-garden was built.

 

The period of the royal decades also brought their enlargements and modifications. The suites were made more comfortable, a marble stable and cart-house were built. The riding hall was re-edified.

 

Between the two world wars the Palace served as the residence for Regent Miklós Horthy. No significant building took place during this period, apart from an air-raid shelter in the southern front garden. After 1945 the Palace, like many other buildings in Hungary, fell into decay.

 

Soviet and Hungarian troops used the building, some of the beautifully decorated rooms were used for an Old People's Home, and the park was divided into smaller plots of land.The protection of the Palace as a historical monument started in 1981, when the National Board for Monuments launched its Palace project. The most important tasks of preservation began in 1986 and were completed in the end of 1991. During this time the Palace was partly emptied. By 1990 the Soviet troops left the southern wing, then the Old People's Home was closed down.

 

During this time the roof of the riding-hall and the stable-wing was reconstructed, the façade of the building was renovated, as well as the trussing of the central wings and the double cupola. Research was carried out in the archives and in the building, and thus the different building periods of the monument were defined. Painted walls and rooms were uncovered which revealed the splendour of the 18-19th centuries. Architectural structures were discovered, and so were the different structures of the park.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6d%C3%B6ll%C5%91_Palace

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6d%C3%B6ll%C5%91#The_Royal_Pa...

 

hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grassalkovich-kast%C3%A9ly_%28G%C3%...

 

Juan Martin de Porres was born in the city of Lima, in the Viceroyalty of Peru, on December 9, 1579, the illegitimate son of a Spanish nobleman and a young priest, black former slave[1] who was born in Panama. He had a sister named Juana, born three years later in 1581. He grew up in poverty; when his mother could not support him and his sister, Martin was confided to a primary school for two years, then placed with a barber/surgeon to learn the medical arts. This caused him great joy, though he was only ten years old, for he could exercise charity to his neighbor while earning his living. Already he was spending hours of the night in prayer, a practice which increased rather than diminished as he grew older. Until his death he would whip himself three times every night, for his own failings and for the conversion of pagans and sinners.[citation needed]

At the age of 15 he asked for admission to the Dominican Convent of the Rosary in Lima and was received first as a servant boy, and as his duties grew he was promoted to almoner. Eventually he felt the call to enter the Dominican Order, and he was received as a tertiary. Years later, his piety and miraculous cures led his superiors to drop the racial limits on admission to the friars, and he was made a full Dominican christian brother. It is said that when his convent was in debt, he implored them: "I am only a poor mulatto, sell me. I am the property of the order, sell me please!"[citation needed] Martin was deeply attached to the Blessed Sacrament, and he was praying in front of it one night when the step of the altar he was kneeling on caught fire. Throughout all the confusion and chaos that followed, he remained where he was, unaware of what was happening around him.[2]

When he was 24, after he had been given the habit of a Coadjutor Brother, Martin was assigned to the infirmary of that , where he was placed in charge and would remain in service until his death at the age of sixty. His superiors saw in him the virtues necessary to exercise unfailing patience in this difficult role, and he never disappointed them. It was not long before miracles were attributed to him. Saint Martin also cared for the sick outside his convent, often bringing them healing with only a simple glass of water. He begged for alms to procure for them necessities the Convent could not provide, and Providence always supplied what he sought.[citation needed]

One day an aged beggar, covered with ulcers and almost naked, stretched out his hand, and Saint Martin, seeing the Divine Mendicant in him, took him to his own bed. One of his brethren, considering he had gone too far in his charity, reproved him. Saint Martin replied: “Compassion, my dear Brother, is preferable to cleanliness. Reflect that with a little soap I can easily clean my bed covers, but even with a torrent of tears I would never wash from my soul the stain that my harshness toward the unfortunate would create.”[citation needed]

When an epidemic struck Lima, there were in this single Convent of the Rosary sixty friars who were sick, many of them novices in a distant and locked section of the convent, separated from the professed. Saint Martin is said to have passed through the locked doors to care for them[citation needed], a phenomenon which was reported in the residence more than once. The professed, too, saw him suddenly beside them without the doors having been opened. Martin continued to transport the sick to the convent until the provincial superior, alarmed by the contagion threatening the religious, forbade him to continue to do so. His sister, who lived in the country, offered her house to lodge those whom the residence of the religious could not hold. One day he found on the street a poor Indian, bleeding to death from a dagger wound, and took him to his own room until he could transport him to his sister’s hospice. The superior, when he heard of this, reprimanded his subject for disobedience. He was extremely edified by his reply: “Forgive my error, and please instruct me, for I did not know that the precept of obedience took precedence over that of charity.”[citation needed] The superior gave him liberty thereafter to follow his inspirations in the exercise of mercy.

In normal times Saint Martin succeeded with his alms to feed 160 poor persons every day, and distributed a remarkable sum of money every week to the indigent — the latter phenomenon hard to explain by ordinary calculations.[citation needed] To Saint Martin the city of Lima owed a famous residence founded for orphans and abandoned children, where they were formed in piety for a creative Christian life. This lay brother had always wanted to be a missionary, but never left his native city; yet even during his lifetime he was seen elsewhere, in regions as far distant as Africa, China, Algeria and Japan. An African slave who had been in irons said he had known Martin when he came to relieve and console many like himself, telling them of heaven. When later the same slave saw him in Peru, he was very happy to meet him again and asked him if he had had a good voyage; only later did he learn that Saint Martin had never left Lima. A merchant from Lima was in Mexico and fell ill; he said aloud: “Oh, Brother Martin, if only you were here to care for me!” and immediately saw him enter his room.[citation needed] And again, this man did not know until later that he had never been in Mexico.

 

Martin was a friend of both Saint John de Massias and Saint Rose of Lima. When he died in Lima on November 3, 1639, Martin was known to the entire city. Word of his miracles had made him known as a saint throughout the region. As his body was displayed to allow the people of the city to pay their respects, each person snipped a tiny piece of his habit to keep as a relic. It is said that three habits were taken from the body. His body was then interred in the grounds of the monastery.

After he died, the miracles and graces received when he was invoked multiplied in such profusion that his body was exhumed after 25 years and said to be found intact, and exhaling a fine fragrance.[citation needed] Letters to Rome pleaded for his beatification; the decree affirming the heroism of his virtues was issued in 1763 by Pope Clement XIII. Pope Gregory XVI beatified Martin de Porres in the year 1837. Nearly one hundred and twenty five years later Blessed Martin was canonized in Rome by Pope John XXIII on May 6, 1962. His feast day is November 3. He is the Patron Saint of people of mixed race, innkeepers, barbers, public health and more besides.

He is comemorated at the Calendar of Saints of the Church of England at 3 November.

In iconography, Martin de Porres is often depicted as a young mulatto friar (he was a Dominican brother, not a priest, as evidenced by the black scapular and capuce he wears, while priests of the Dominican order wear all white) with a broom, since he considered all work to be sacred no matter how menial. He is sometimes shown with a dog, a cat and a mouse, eating in peace from their dish.

Today, Martin is commemorated by, among other things, a school building that houses the Medical, Nursing, and Rehabilitation Science schools of the Dominican University of Santo Tomas in the Philippines. A programme of work is also named after him at the Las Casas Institute at Blackfriars Hall, University of Oxford.[3] He is also the titular saint of the St. Martin de Porres Marianist elementary school in Hempstead, NY.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_de_Porres

I have been to St Mary of Charity before. But that was many years ago.

 

Back then, I took three shots inside. I took 300 today.

 

St Mary is a huge church with a Victorian tower with the most amazing spire, which makes it visible from just about all over the town.

 

Faversham is best know as being home to Shepherd Neame brewery, it claims to the England's oldest surviving brewer.

 

The town sits on the edge of the Swale, with a large expanse of marshes and creeks between the town and open water.

 

We parked on wide Abbey Street, and while Jools went shopping, I walked along side the old brewery buildings to the church, with the tower and spire staight ahead along a street of terraced houses.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

An extraordinary building comprising a medieval chancel and transepts, eighteenth-century nave and nineteenth-century tower and spire. Despite heavy-handed restorations of the nineteenth century - by Sir George Gilbert Scott and Ewan Christian in 1873 - which have resulted in loss of character, there is much to see. The fourteenth-century transepts are aisled - a most unusual feature in an ordinary parish church. The medieval authorities probably decided to invest in a lavish building to counteract the pulling power of the famous abbey which stood to the east. One of the pillars of the north transept has a series of contemporary small paintings of biblical scenes. You are advised to take a pair of binoculars to see them to advantage. The stalls in the chancel have misericords with a good selection of carved armrests, and there is also a crypt and an unforgettable east window of 1911.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Faversham+1

 

-------------------------------------------

 

THE PARISH AND TOWN OF FAVERSHAM.

CALLED, according to Lambarde, in Saxon, Fafresham, and Fafresfeld, in the record of Domesday, Favershant, and in some few others, Fefresham.

 

THE PARISH lies adjoining to the high London road southward at the 47th mile-stone, and extends to the creek on the opposite side of the town, the houses on the south side of which reach to within two hundred yards of the road, whence there is a good view into it.

 

The parish includes the north side of the London road from the above mile-stone westward, almost as far as the summit of Judde-hill, and the liberties of the town extend as far of this space westward as the rivulet in Ospringe street. Thus this parish intervenes, and entirely separates that part of Ospringe parish, at the northern boundary of it, in which are the storekeeper's house of the royal mills, and part of the offices and gardens belonging to it, and some of the mills themselves, and in the town likewise, Ospringe parish again intervening, there is a small part of West-street which is within that parish. At the east end of Ospringe-street, though within Faversham parish, and the liberties of the town, close to the high London road, there is a handsome new-built house, erected not many years since by Mr.Bonnick Lypyeatt, who resided in it till his death in 1789. He left two daughters his coheirs, one of whom married Mr.C.Brooke, of London, and the other Captain Gosselin, of the Life-guards. It is now occupied by John Mayor, esq.

 

¶The rest, or northern part of the parish lies very low, and adjoins the marshes, of which there is a very large tract. The country here is a fine extended level, the fields of a considerable size, and mostly unincumbered with trees or hedgerows, the lands being perhaps as fertile and as highly cultivated as any within this county, being part of that fruitful value extending almost from Sittingborne to Boughton Blean, so often taken notice of before. The grounds adjoining the upper parts of the town are mostly hop plantations, of a rich and kindly growth, but several of them have lately given place to those of fruit. About twenty years ago the cultivation of madder was introduced here, and many induced by the prospect of great gains, made plantations of it at a very considerable expence, and a mill was erected for the purpose of grinding the roots, but from various disappointments, and unforeseen disadvantages, the undertakers of it were deterred from prosecuting the growth of it, and I believe they have for some time entirely discontinued it.

 

At the south-east extremity of this parish, as well as in other particular parts of this county, there are several chalk-pits, the most noted of these being called Hegdale pit, of a great depth, which though narrow at the top, yet more inward are very capacious, having, as it were, distinct rooms, supported by pillars of chalk. Several opinions have been formed concerning the intent and use of them, some that they were formed by the digging of chalk, for the building of the abbey, as well as afterwards from time to time, for the manuring of the neighbouring lands; others that the English Saxons might dig them, for the same uses that the Germans did, from whom they were descended, who made use of them, according to Tacitus, as a refuge in winter, as a repository for their corn, and as a place of security, for themselves, their families, and their property, from the searches of their enemies. (fn. 1)

 

Near the west end of the bridge, opposite the storekeeper's house of the royal powder-mills, there is a strong chalybeate spring, which on trial has been proved to be nearly equal to those of Tunbridge Wells. (fn. 2)

 

In the year 1774, a most remarkable fish, called mola salviani, orthe sun-fish, was caught on Faversham Flats, which weighed about nineteen pounds and a half, and was about two feet diameter. It is a fish very rarely seen in our narrow seas. (fn. 3)

 

THE TOWN ITSELF, and so much of the parish as is within the bounds of the corporation, is subject to the liberties of it, and of the cinque ports, and is exempt from the jurisdiction of the hundred of Faversham; but the rest of the parish, together with the rectory, is within the liberties of that hundred, which has been always esteemed as appurtenant to the manor of Faversham.

 

Although from the several discoveries which have been made of Roman antiquities in this neighbourhood, it is plain, that it could not be unknown to that nation, during their stay in this island, yet there is no mention made of this place by any writer during that period; and it seems, even in the time of the Saxons, to have been a place of but little consequence, notwithstanding it was then a part of the royal demesnes, as appears by a charter of Cenulph, king of Mercia, anno 812, wherein it is stiled the king's little town of Fefresham; and in one of Athelwolf, king of the West Saxons and of Kent, anno 839, where it is said to be made, only, in villa de Faverisham. However, it was of note sufficient, perhaps as being the king's estate, even in the time of king Alfred, at the first division of this county into those smaller districts, to give name to the hundred in which it is situated. Lambarde, Camden, and Leland say, that king Athelstan held a parliament, or meeting of his wife menat Faversham, about the year 903, (no doubt for 930) in which several laws were enacted. (fn. 8)

 

FAVERSHAM continued part of the antient demesnes of the crown of this realm at the time of the taking of the general survey of Domesday, in which it is entered, under the general title of Terra Regis, that is, the king's antient demesne, as follows:

 

In the lath of Wivarlet, in Favreshant hundred, king William holds Favreshant. It was taxed at seven sulings. The arable land is seventeen carucates. In demesne there are two. There are thirty villeins, with forty borderers, having twenty-four carucates. There are five servants, and one mill of twenty shillings, and two acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of one hundred hogs, and of the pasture of the wood thirty-one shillings and two pence. A market of four pounds, and two salt-pits of three shillings and two-pence, and in the city of Canterbury, there are three houses of twenty-pence belonging to this manor. In the whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, it was worth sixty pounds all but five shillings, and afterwards sixty pounds, and now it is worth four times twenty pounds.

 

¶The manor of Faversham, with the hundred appurtenant to it, remained part of the possessions of the crown till about the beginning of king Stephen's reign, when it was granted to William de Ipre, a foreigner, whom, for his faithful services against the empress Maud, the king, in his 7th year, created Earl of Kent; but within a few years afterwards, resolving to found an abbey here, he, with his queen Matilda, about the year 1147, exchanged the manor of Lillechirch, and other premises, for this manor and hundred, where they, at the latter end of that year, or the beginning of the year after, founded an abbey at a small distance from the town of Faversham, on the north-east side of it, for the space where Court, or Ab bey-street now stands was then unbuilt, and this was therefore, in the reign of Edward III. distinguished by the name of the New Town, as the rest of it, built before, was by that of the Old Town, and they appointed Clarembald, the prior of Bermondsey, to be abbot of this new foundation, which was dedicated to St. Saviour, and for their support, the king granted to him and the monks of it, twelve of whom had been removed with Clarembald for this purpose from Bermondsey, which priory was of the order of Clugni, the manor of Faversham, with its appurtenances, and other premises, in perpetual alms, with many liberties, as may be further seen in the charter itself. (fn. 9)

 

HE TOWN OF FAVERSHAM is within the limits of the cinque ports, being esteemed as a limb or member of the town of Dover, one of those ports. Of what antiquity these ports and antient towns are, when enfranchised, or at what times their members were annexed to them, has not been as yet, with any certainty, discovered; and, therefore, they are held to enjoy all their earliest liberties and privileges, as time out of mind, and by prescription.

 

It is, however certain, that at the time of king Edward the Consessor, the five ports were enfranchised with divers liberties, privileges, and customs, peculiar to themselves; for the better conducting of which they had the establishment of one grand court, called the court of Shipway, from its being almost always held at a place of that name near Hyth; in which the general business relating to the whole community was transacted before the warden, as principal and chief over them. Nevertheless, though they acted here jointly, like a county palatine as to the government, for the desence of the liberty of the whole, yet every particular corporation in each town acted severally and distinctly, according to its own privileges, charters, and customs within their own particular limits, without any controul or interference from this court, or the rest of the community. (fn. 20)

 

The five ports, as being from their situation most exposed to the depredations of enemies, were first incorporated for their own mutual defence, and were afterwards endowed with great privileges, for the public desence of the nation, and the king's service. The force they were enjoined to raise and keep in residence for this purpose was fifty-seven ships, properly furnished and accoutred for a certain number of days, to be ready at the king's summons, at their own charge, and if the state of affairs required their assistance any longer, they were paid by the crown. But because the expence was in after times found to be too burthensome for these five ports, several other towns were added as members to them, that they might bear a part of the charge, for which they were recompenced with a participation of their privileges and immunities. All which were confirmed to them by Magna Charta, by the name of the barons of the five ports, and again by one general charter by king Edward I. which, by inspeximus, has received confirmation, and sometimes additions, from most of the succeeding kings and queens of this realm.

 

¶FAVERSHAM, stiled both a town and a port at different times in antient records, isa corporation by prescription. In the oldest charter now remaining, which is that of the 36th year of king Henry III. wherein the members of it are stiled, according to the usual language of those times, barons, that is freemen, there is contained a confirmation of all their former antient rights and privileges. In the 42d year of the above reign, which is as far as can be traced by evidence, the jurisdiction of this town was then in a mayor or alderman, and twelve jurats. In a charter of Edward I. the barons of it are acknowledged to have done good services to him and his predecessors, kings of England; and in the 21st year of that reign, there is an entry of the mayor and jurats assembling in their hallmote, or portmote-court, as it is elsewhere called, together with the lord abbot's steward, and there sealing a fine with the town's seal, of a messuage and garden in Faversham, according to the use and custom of the court, by which it is evident, that this court was of some antiquity at that time. (fn. 21)

 

Faversham is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Ospringe.

 

The church, which stands close to the east side of the town, was dedicated to the assumption of our lady of Faversham. It is built in the form of a cross, of flints, with quoins of ashler stone. It had, until 1755, when it was taken down, a large square castellated tower in the middle of it, and there remains now another low tower at the north side of the west front, upon which is erected a frame of timber, covered with shingles. So long ago as king Henry the VIIth.'s reign, there seems to have been no steeple to this church, for in 1464, Edward Thomasson, of this town, gave sixty pounds towards the edifying of a new one to it; (fn. 31) and of later time, James Lawson, esq. a wealthy inhabitant of this town, who died in 1794, gave by his will 1000l. for the same purpose, with this sum, together with 500l. given by the corporation, and the remainder payable by a rate, a steeple, seventy-three feet high above the tower, with pinnacles at each corner of it, on the plan of St. Dunstan's in the East, has been erected, and is now nearly compleated, at the expence of 2500l.

 

Behind the tower, within the outer walls, is a strong timbered room, formerly called the tresory, in which, before the reformation, were carefully deposited the goods and ornaments of the church; over it was the chamber for the sextons. On the south side of the west front is a room, formerly open to the church, in which was taught reading and writing; under it is a neat chapel, with stone arches, supported by three pillars in the middle. Over the south porch there is another stone room, the window of which is grated with strong iron bars.

 

Mr. Henry Hatch, whose extensive charity to this town has already been mentioned, by will in 1533, gave a sum of money, at the discretion of the mayor, and his brethren, in making a new jewel-house for this church.

 

In 1440 there were placed in it five new bells, and in 1459 a sixth was added; these remained till 1749, when they were cast into a new peal of eight.

 

The church seems to have been built in the latter end of the reign of Edward I. or the beginning of the reign of Edward II. by a silver penny of one of those kings being found under the basis of one of the piers, which supported the middle tower. In the east window of the great chancel, were some time since remaining two shields of arms, viz. Gules, two lions passant-guardant, or a label of five points, azure; and Argent, a lion rampant, sable, within a bordure of the second, bezante.

 

In the year 1754, the body of the church, as well as the roof of it, on a survey, being deemed in a dangerous state, a faculty was obtained to pull it down, which was accordingly done, under the plan and directions of Mr. George Dance, of London, architect, at the expence of 2300l. besides which, 400l. was afterwards expended in an organ, and 100l. more in other ornaments, and ninety pounds in improving the great chancel, which through age was become very unsightly; so that the whole of it is now made equal to, if not the most elegant and spacious, of any parish church in this county, and is extensive and spacious enough to afford convenient room for all the parishioners of it.

 

¶When this church was new built, and the body and isles new paved, the grave-stones, many of which were antient, with brasses on them, were removed from the places where they lay, to other open and consipicuous parts of it. Among the monuments were those for Henry Hatche, merchant adventurer, 1533; Thomas Mendfield, 1614, John Fagg, esq. 1508, and one for Thomas Southouse, esq. 1558, who wrote the Monas tion Favershamiense. Both monuments and epitaphs are by far too numerous to insert in this place, they may be found at large in Weever's Funeral Monuments, in Lewis's Appendix to his History of Faversham Abbey, and in Harris's History of Kent. Besides which there is in the Appendix to Jacob's History of Faversham, a chronological list of such persons as have been known to have been buried in it.

 

This church measures from east to west, including the chancel, one hundred and sixty feet, the width of the body sixty five feet; the length of the isles from north to south one hundred and twenty-four feet, and their width forty-six feet.

 

Before the reformation, besides the high altar in the great chancel, there were two chapels, one dedicated to the Holy Trinity, and the other to St. Thomas, and there were several altars in the isles and chancels.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol6/pp318-371

I have been to St Mary of Charity before. But that was many years ago.

 

Back then, I took three shots inside. I took 300 today.

 

St Mary is a huge church with a Victorian tower with the most amazing spire, which makes it visible from just about all over the town.

 

Faversham is best know as being home to Shepherd Neame brewery, it claims to the England's oldest surviving brewer.

 

The town sits on the edge of the Swale, with a large expanse of marshes and creeks between the town and open water.

 

We parked on wide Abbey Street, and while Jools went shopping, I walked along side the old brewery buildings to the church, with the tower and spire staight ahead along a street of terraced houses.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

An extraordinary building comprising a medieval chancel and transepts, eighteenth-century nave and nineteenth-century tower and spire. Despite heavy-handed restorations of the nineteenth century - by Sir George Gilbert Scott and Ewan Christian in 1873 - which have resulted in loss of character, there is much to see. The fourteenth-century transepts are aisled - a most unusual feature in an ordinary parish church. The medieval authorities probably decided to invest in a lavish building to counteract the pulling power of the famous abbey which stood to the east. One of the pillars of the north transept has a series of contemporary small paintings of biblical scenes. You are advised to take a pair of binoculars to see them to advantage. The stalls in the chancel have misericords with a good selection of carved armrests, and there is also a crypt and an unforgettable east window of 1911.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Faversham+1

 

-------------------------------------------

 

THE PARISH AND TOWN OF FAVERSHAM.

CALLED, according to Lambarde, in Saxon, Fafresham, and Fafresfeld, in the record of Domesday, Favershant, and in some few others, Fefresham.

 

THE PARISH lies adjoining to the high London road southward at the 47th mile-stone, and extends to the creek on the opposite side of the town, the houses on the south side of which reach to within two hundred yards of the road, whence there is a good view into it.

 

The parish includes the north side of the London road from the above mile-stone westward, almost as far as the summit of Judde-hill, and the liberties of the town extend as far of this space westward as the rivulet in Ospringe street. Thus this parish intervenes, and entirely separates that part of Ospringe parish, at the northern boundary of it, in which are the storekeeper's house of the royal mills, and part of the offices and gardens belonging to it, and some of the mills themselves, and in the town likewise, Ospringe parish again intervening, there is a small part of West-street which is within that parish. At the east end of Ospringe-street, though within Faversham parish, and the liberties of the town, close to the high London road, there is a handsome new-built house, erected not many years since by Mr.Bonnick Lypyeatt, who resided in it till his death in 1789. He left two daughters his coheirs, one of whom married Mr.C.Brooke, of London, and the other Captain Gosselin, of the Life-guards. It is now occupied by John Mayor, esq.

 

¶The rest, or northern part of the parish lies very low, and adjoins the marshes, of which there is a very large tract. The country here is a fine extended level, the fields of a considerable size, and mostly unincumbered with trees or hedgerows, the lands being perhaps as fertile and as highly cultivated as any within this county, being part of that fruitful value extending almost from Sittingborne to Boughton Blean, so often taken notice of before. The grounds adjoining the upper parts of the town are mostly hop plantations, of a rich and kindly growth, but several of them have lately given place to those of fruit. About twenty years ago the cultivation of madder was introduced here, and many induced by the prospect of great gains, made plantations of it at a very considerable expence, and a mill was erected for the purpose of grinding the roots, but from various disappointments, and unforeseen disadvantages, the undertakers of it were deterred from prosecuting the growth of it, and I believe they have for some time entirely discontinued it.

 

At the south-east extremity of this parish, as well as in other particular parts of this county, there are several chalk-pits, the most noted of these being called Hegdale pit, of a great depth, which though narrow at the top, yet more inward are very capacious, having, as it were, distinct rooms, supported by pillars of chalk. Several opinions have been formed concerning the intent and use of them, some that they were formed by the digging of chalk, for the building of the abbey, as well as afterwards from time to time, for the manuring of the neighbouring lands; others that the English Saxons might dig them, for the same uses that the Germans did, from whom they were descended, who made use of them, according to Tacitus, as a refuge in winter, as a repository for their corn, and as a place of security, for themselves, their families, and their property, from the searches of their enemies. (fn. 1)

 

Near the west end of the bridge, opposite the storekeeper's house of the royal powder-mills, there is a strong chalybeate spring, which on trial has been proved to be nearly equal to those of Tunbridge Wells. (fn. 2)

 

In the year 1774, a most remarkable fish, called mola salviani, orthe sun-fish, was caught on Faversham Flats, which weighed about nineteen pounds and a half, and was about two feet diameter. It is a fish very rarely seen in our narrow seas. (fn. 3)

 

THE TOWN ITSELF, and so much of the parish as is within the bounds of the corporation, is subject to the liberties of it, and of the cinque ports, and is exempt from the jurisdiction of the hundred of Faversham; but the rest of the parish, together with the rectory, is within the liberties of that hundred, which has been always esteemed as appurtenant to the manor of Faversham.

 

Although from the several discoveries which have been made of Roman antiquities in this neighbourhood, it is plain, that it could not be unknown to that nation, during their stay in this island, yet there is no mention made of this place by any writer during that period; and it seems, even in the time of the Saxons, to have been a place of but little consequence, notwithstanding it was then a part of the royal demesnes, as appears by a charter of Cenulph, king of Mercia, anno 812, wherein it is stiled the king's little town of Fefresham; and in one of Athelwolf, king of the West Saxons and of Kent, anno 839, where it is said to be made, only, in villa de Faverisham. However, it was of note sufficient, perhaps as being the king's estate, even in the time of king Alfred, at the first division of this county into those smaller districts, to give name to the hundred in which it is situated. Lambarde, Camden, and Leland say, that king Athelstan held a parliament, or meeting of his wife menat Faversham, about the year 903, (no doubt for 930) in which several laws were enacted. (fn. 8)

 

FAVERSHAM continued part of the antient demesnes of the crown of this realm at the time of the taking of the general survey of Domesday, in which it is entered, under the general title of Terra Regis, that is, the king's antient demesne, as follows:

 

In the lath of Wivarlet, in Favreshant hundred, king William holds Favreshant. It was taxed at seven sulings. The arable land is seventeen carucates. In demesne there are two. There are thirty villeins, with forty borderers, having twenty-four carucates. There are five servants, and one mill of twenty shillings, and two acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of one hundred hogs, and of the pasture of the wood thirty-one shillings and two pence. A market of four pounds, and two salt-pits of three shillings and two-pence, and in the city of Canterbury, there are three houses of twenty-pence belonging to this manor. In the whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, it was worth sixty pounds all but five shillings, and afterwards sixty pounds, and now it is worth four times twenty pounds.

 

¶The manor of Faversham, with the hundred appurtenant to it, remained part of the possessions of the crown till about the beginning of king Stephen's reign, when it was granted to William de Ipre, a foreigner, whom, for his faithful services against the empress Maud, the king, in his 7th year, created Earl of Kent; but within a few years afterwards, resolving to found an abbey here, he, with his queen Matilda, about the year 1147, exchanged the manor of Lillechirch, and other premises, for this manor and hundred, where they, at the latter end of that year, or the beginning of the year after, founded an abbey at a small distance from the town of Faversham, on the north-east side of it, for the space where Court, or Ab bey-street now stands was then unbuilt, and this was therefore, in the reign of Edward III. distinguished by the name of the New Town, as the rest of it, built before, was by that of the Old Town, and they appointed Clarembald, the prior of Bermondsey, to be abbot of this new foundation, which was dedicated to St. Saviour, and for their support, the king granted to him and the monks of it, twelve of whom had been removed with Clarembald for this purpose from Bermondsey, which priory was of the order of Clugni, the manor of Faversham, with its appurtenances, and other premises, in perpetual alms, with many liberties, as may be further seen in the charter itself. (fn. 9)

 

HE TOWN OF FAVERSHAM is within the limits of the cinque ports, being esteemed as a limb or member of the town of Dover, one of those ports. Of what antiquity these ports and antient towns are, when enfranchised, or at what times their members were annexed to them, has not been as yet, with any certainty, discovered; and, therefore, they are held to enjoy all their earliest liberties and privileges, as time out of mind, and by prescription.

 

It is, however certain, that at the time of king Edward the Consessor, the five ports were enfranchised with divers liberties, privileges, and customs, peculiar to themselves; for the better conducting of which they had the establishment of one grand court, called the court of Shipway, from its being almost always held at a place of that name near Hyth; in which the general business relating to the whole community was transacted before the warden, as principal and chief over them. Nevertheless, though they acted here jointly, like a county palatine as to the government, for the desence of the liberty of the whole, yet every particular corporation in each town acted severally and distinctly, according to its own privileges, charters, and customs within their own particular limits, without any controul or interference from this court, or the rest of the community. (fn. 20)

 

The five ports, as being from their situation most exposed to the depredations of enemies, were first incorporated for their own mutual defence, and were afterwards endowed with great privileges, for the public desence of the nation, and the king's service. The force they were enjoined to raise and keep in residence for this purpose was fifty-seven ships, properly furnished and accoutred for a certain number of days, to be ready at the king's summons, at their own charge, and if the state of affairs required their assistance any longer, they were paid by the crown. But because the expence was in after times found to be too burthensome for these five ports, several other towns were added as members to them, that they might bear a part of the charge, for which they were recompenced with a participation of their privileges and immunities. All which were confirmed to them by Magna Charta, by the name of the barons of the five ports, and again by one general charter by king Edward I. which, by inspeximus, has received confirmation, and sometimes additions, from most of the succeeding kings and queens of this realm.

 

¶FAVERSHAM, stiled both a town and a port at different times in antient records, isa corporation by prescription. In the oldest charter now remaining, which is that of the 36th year of king Henry III. wherein the members of it are stiled, according to the usual language of those times, barons, that is freemen, there is contained a confirmation of all their former antient rights and privileges. In the 42d year of the above reign, which is as far as can be traced by evidence, the jurisdiction of this town was then in a mayor or alderman, and twelve jurats. In a charter of Edward I. the barons of it are acknowledged to have done good services to him and his predecessors, kings of England; and in the 21st year of that reign, there is an entry of the mayor and jurats assembling in their hallmote, or portmote-court, as it is elsewhere called, together with the lord abbot's steward, and there sealing a fine with the town's seal, of a messuage and garden in Faversham, according to the use and custom of the court, by which it is evident, that this court was of some antiquity at that time. (fn. 21)

 

Faversham is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Ospringe.

 

The church, which stands close to the east side of the town, was dedicated to the assumption of our lady of Faversham. It is built in the form of a cross, of flints, with quoins of ashler stone. It had, until 1755, when it was taken down, a large square castellated tower in the middle of it, and there remains now another low tower at the north side of the west front, upon which is erected a frame of timber, covered with shingles. So long ago as king Henry the VIIth.'s reign, there seems to have been no steeple to this church, for in 1464, Edward Thomasson, of this town, gave sixty pounds towards the edifying of a new one to it; (fn. 31) and of later time, James Lawson, esq. a wealthy inhabitant of this town, who died in 1794, gave by his will 1000l. for the same purpose, with this sum, together with 500l. given by the corporation, and the remainder payable by a rate, a steeple, seventy-three feet high above the tower, with pinnacles at each corner of it, on the plan of St. Dunstan's in the East, has been erected, and is now nearly compleated, at the expence of 2500l.

 

Behind the tower, within the outer walls, is a strong timbered room, formerly called the tresory, in which, before the reformation, were carefully deposited the goods and ornaments of the church; over it was the chamber for the sextons. On the south side of the west front is a room, formerly open to the church, in which was taught reading and writing; under it is a neat chapel, with stone arches, supported by three pillars in the middle. Over the south porch there is another stone room, the window of which is grated with strong iron bars.

 

Mr. Henry Hatch, whose extensive charity to this town has already been mentioned, by will in 1533, gave a sum of money, at the discretion of the mayor, and his brethren, in making a new jewel-house for this church.

 

In 1440 there were placed in it five new bells, and in 1459 a sixth was added; these remained till 1749, when they were cast into a new peal of eight.

 

The church seems to have been built in the latter end of the reign of Edward I. or the beginning of the reign of Edward II. by a silver penny of one of those kings being found under the basis of one of the piers, which supported the middle tower. In the east window of the great chancel, were some time since remaining two shields of arms, viz. Gules, two lions passant-guardant, or a label of five points, azure; and Argent, a lion rampant, sable, within a bordure of the second, bezante.

 

In the year 1754, the body of the church, as well as the roof of it, on a survey, being deemed in a dangerous state, a faculty was obtained to pull it down, which was accordingly done, under the plan and directions of Mr. George Dance, of London, architect, at the expence of 2300l. besides which, 400l. was afterwards expended in an organ, and 100l. more in other ornaments, and ninety pounds in improving the great chancel, which through age was become very unsightly; so that the whole of it is now made equal to, if not the most elegant and spacious, of any parish church in this county, and is extensive and spacious enough to afford convenient room for all the parishioners of it.

 

¶When this church was new built, and the body and isles new paved, the grave-stones, many of which were antient, with brasses on them, were removed from the places where they lay, to other open and consipicuous parts of it. Among the monuments were those for Henry Hatche, merchant adventurer, 1533; Thomas Mendfield, 1614, John Fagg, esq. 1508, and one for Thomas Southouse, esq. 1558, who wrote the Monas tion Favershamiense. Both monuments and epitaphs are by far too numerous to insert in this place, they may be found at large in Weever's Funeral Monuments, in Lewis's Appendix to his History of Faversham Abbey, and in Harris's History of Kent. Besides which there is in the Appendix to Jacob's History of Faversham, a chronological list of such persons as have been known to have been buried in it.

 

This church measures from east to west, including the chancel, one hundred and sixty feet, the width of the body sixty five feet; the length of the isles from north to south one hundred and twenty-four feet, and their width forty-six feet.

 

Before the reformation, besides the high altar in the great chancel, there were two chapels, one dedicated to the Holy Trinity, and the other to St. Thomas, and there were several altars in the isles and chancels.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol6/pp318-371

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

One day all believers will stand at the judgment seat of Christ, and every idle word is going to come up for examination. God truly does take our words seriously! The ninth commandment says Thou shalt not bear false witness (Ex. 20:16). This same commandment is repeated in (Romans 13:9).

 

We are told that Satan is a liar and the father of lies.

… Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it (John 8:44).

God hates liars; … These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and the hands that shed innocent blood (Proverbs 6:16 -17).

God tells us what will happen to liars in Revelation 21: 8,27 and 22:15. He begins by saying that He is the beginning and the conclusion. From the water-of-life well He will give freely to all who are thirsty. He will be God to all the conquerors and he will make them sons and daughters to Him. But for the rest - the feckless and faithless, degenerates, and murderers, sex peddlers, and sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars -for them it’s Lake Fire and Brimstone. THE Second Death!

 

God can forgive any sin. The Apostle Peter did not tell the truth when he denied our Lord, and yet he was forgiven. A lie is a deliberate and conscious misrepresentation of the truth. It represents a deliberate intent to deceive another. Often you and I, under some kind of pressure, were tempted and did lie, but eventually our hearts would probably convict us, and eventually we would confess, God will forgives us. But God does take lying very seriously!

 

Abraham Lincoln said, If a man is going to be a liar, he had better have a good memory! There is a great deal to be said about that advice!

In (Acts 5) Ananias and Sapphira tried to lie to God and did lie to the church because they wanted to impress people. Barnabas had given a gift to the church, and Ananias and Sapphira thought they would get in on some of the honor, but they lied. I don’t know why we think we need to impress people when the only person we really have to please is the Lord.

 

Can you remember as a child telling a lie because we were afraid to be punished? Then we had to tell another just to cover up the first one. Before long we were really up to our necks in hot water! The irony here brings to mind the popular Poet Sir Walter Scott, who summed it up quite truthfully when he said, Oh, what a tangled web we weave,… When first we practice to deceive! This probably can relate to most relationships today where the one partner does not or does want to hurt the other. Terrible web- we, we!

 

The bottom line probably is unbelief, we don’t really believe that the truth is the best way. Jesus said, I am …the truth (John 14:6). The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth (16:13). God’s Word is truth (17:17). God Himself is the God of truth, He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he (Deut. 32:4). God will bless the truth!

 

We lie to one another all the time and it has become second nature to us and we don’t acknowledge this at all. We exaggerate truths and flatter ourselves into believing these things to be truth. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not tell the truth (John 1:6). If we have no sin, we deceive ourselves (V. 8). Like I said, some of us are convinced we are walking in the light while actually we are tripping around in the dark! If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar (V.10). Definitely sounds like a deliberate lie to God, himself! We cannot lie to God! He knows our heart, Ananias and Sapphira tried to lie to God and failed! God knows the thoughts and the intents of the heart in each of us.

We don’t ask why we should tell the truth- we know why we should! Because it’s God’s commandment. And since we become a new creation when we accept Jesus into our heart, we put off the old life with it’s lies. Lie not one to the other, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge ( Col. 3:9,10). As we grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, we put off the old, and put on the new. This new man has to practice truth - we know why we should tell truths!

Ephesians 4:15 says: But speak the truth in love. Don’t use the truth as a weapon to hurt somebody but rather use the truth as a tool to build up somebody.

(Colossians 4:6) says: Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man. Gracious speech comes from the heart that is filled with the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ - seasoned with salt. We should never tell anybody, Now take this with a grain of salt! You put the salt into it! Salt means purity! Salt means it contains no corruption and when we speak to others we should always speak graciously and with purity.

(Colossians 3:16,17) says: Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. If we can’t say it in the name of, and to the glory of, the Lord Jesus Christ, then we should not say it at all.

It would be wonderful if all of us would start being honest with God in our praying and in our worship and start being honest with one another.

 

Heavenly Holy Father, as we receive love and forgiveness from You, may we reciprocate with one another and become caring Christians who love, encourage, edify, forgive, and acknowledge our value in Christ. In Jesus name I pray.

 

.............................................................................................................

By mistake I ended up in West Malling, but it was a good thing, as the village is chocolate box pretty, and the church very fine indeed. The only church I visited that had no wardens to welcome (I think, sorry if I have mis-remembered). Anyway, a fine church, amazing coat of arms, and glad I visited.

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

A story of all's well that ends well. A Norman tower and thirteenth-century chancel are linked by a twentieth-century nave that had in its turn replaced one erected to replace its medieval predecessor in the eighteenth century! The west window and those in the south aisle are by C.E. Kempe and Co. Ltd, and of special note is the one depicting the Three Kings. On the south side of the chancel, backing on to a medieval lean-to vestry, is the splendid tomb of Sir Robert Brett (d. 1620), which has recently been restored. The colours are superb and show how churches must have looked when these monuments were new. In the north aisle is a large painting of the Last Supper by Francis Slater, the eighteenth-century artist who painted the ceilings of nearby Mereworth Castle. Hanging on the front of the west gallery are the outstanding Royal Arms of James II, of carved and painted wood. The twentieth-century rebuilding of the church was financed by the sale of an Elizabethan stoneware jug (now in the British Museum), the transaction being recorded on an inscribed stone in the north porch.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=West+Malling

 

--------------------------------------------

 

WESTWARD from East Malling lies the town and parish of West Malling, now most commonly called Town Malling.

 

It is written in Domesday, MALLENGETIS, and in the Textus Roffensis, MELLINGES. In many deeds after the conquest, it is stiled MILLINGES PARVA, to distinguish it from East Malling, then the larger and more noted village of the two.

 

The town and parish of West Malling, excepting the borough of St. Leonard, which is under the jurisdiction of the constables of the hundred of Larkfield, is under the jurisdiction of its own constables, of which there are two chosen yearly.

 

THE PARISH of Town Malling, as it is usually called, is situated equally pleasant and healthy. It lies on high ground, and though dry is well watered, the soil of it being in the northern part a sand, the rest of it a loam, covering the quarry rock, which is very fertile, as has been frequently noticed before in the like situations. The high road from London through Wrotham to Maidstone, at the twenty-ninth mile stone leads along the northern boundaries of the parish, being called in king Edmund's grant of this place to the bishop of Rochester, the military way, no doubt from its having been used as such by the Romans, southward of it the ground gently rising; at less than a quarter of a mile's distance is the town of Malling, which is well built, having many genteel houses in it, the streets of a handsome width, and well paved. At the east end of it is the abbey, to which the approach is by a venerable antient gateway. Although the house itself was almost all of it pulled down and rebuilt by Mr. Honywood, yet many of the antient buildings and offices be longing to it are still remaining, and are made use of as such at present. A handsome tower of the church, the front of which is decorated with intersecting arches and zig-zag ornaments, similar to those on the west front of Rochester cathedral, built by the same founder, bishop Gundulph, is still remaining, as is an antient chapel or oratory, now made use of as a dwellinghouse.

 

From the foundations discovered in levelling the ground by Mr. Honywood, it appears, that this abbey consisted of two quadrangles or courts, with cloysters, and a spacious hall; and that the church had another tower, of the like size to that now standing. The burying-place seems to have been on the south side of the church, as in digging there, great quantities of human bones have been thrown up, and two stone coffins with skeletons in them, the lids of them had no inscriptions on them, but were ornamented each with a cross, having a quaterfoil pierced at the upper end, the stem of which was crossed more than once with foliage, several rings and trinkets, and some old coins have likewise been found at different times in cleaning away the rubbish.

 

Over the west end of the grand gateway, which stands at the entrance into the precinct of the abbey from the town, at the west end of the building, there is carved in stone, a heart distilling drops of blood, and on the other side, in a shield, Ermine, a crozier in bend sinister, on a chief three annulets.

 

In the meadows above the gardens, are large square excavations still visible, where the fish ponds of the aunnery formerly were.

 

The precinct of this monastery is washed by a rivulet of excellent clear water, which rising in the hamlet of St. Leonard, runs by the house, and through the gardens of it, whence gushing through the wall with a cascade, it crosses the road towards the Rev. Mr. Brooke's gardens. There is a view of this abbey in its present state published by Mr. Grose, in his Antiquities of England.

 

Near the abbey gate there is a good house, with a large garden, canal, and pleasure grounds, behind it, reaching down to the London road. It has been many years the residence of the Brooke's, from whom it passed by the will of Joseph Brooke, esq. who died in 1792, after the decease of his widow in 1796, to the Rev. John Kenward Shaw, brother of Sir John Gregory Shaw, bart. who has since, in pursuance of the above will, and by the king's licence, taken the name of Brooke, and now resides in it. A little further westward there is a very antient stone building, called the Old Gaol, having narrow gothic windows, and the walls of great thickness. It is reported to have been the prison belonging to the abbey, and is now used as an oast for the drying of hops. About the middle of the street stands the church, and a little distance from it a good house, late the residence of Benjamin Hubble, esq. whose family have been inhabitants of this town for some length of time, several of them lying buried in this church. He died in 1780, leaving his widow, sister of Richard Savage, esq. of Boughton Monchelsea, surviving, and two daughters, his coheirs, one of whom having married Thomas Augustus Douce, esq. he now resides in it; further southward is the hamlet of St. Leonard, now making part of the town, and called St. Leonard's-street, in which is an antient seat, some years ago the residence of Charles Stewart, esq. whose father admiral Stewart purchased it of judge Twisden. This district had once a cell in it, belonging to the abbey, with a chapel. It was given at the time the manor and church was to it, as has been already mentioned. The whole of it has been long since desecrated, and in ruins; the square tower of the chapel which stands in the next field south-west from the late Mr. Stewart's house, is all that remains of it. It was purchased by him some years ago, of Sir John Honywood, in exchange for other premises near the abbey, and is now made use of as a stowage for hops. Mr. Stewart died in 1780, and was buried near his father in this church, and he was succeeded here by the hon. admiral John Forbes, who lately died posfessed of it. A market is held in the principal highstreet every Saturday, which is plentifully supplied and well frequented. There are three fairs, which are held by the alteration of the stile on August 12, October 2, and November 17, yearly, for horses, cattle, toys, &c. The whole town is excellently well watered with fine springs, which having supplied the town and abbey, collect themselves into one stream, and passing northward through Mr. Brooke's grounds, cross the high Maidstone road, and runs from thence into the Addington brook, just above Leyborne mill.

 

About half a mile south-east from the abbey there is a good modern-built house, called New Barne, which formerly belonged to Mr. Alchin, from whom it passed to Graham, the present possessor, who resides in it.

 

Above St. Leonard's street is the high road from Teston over East-Malling-heath, and through this parish to Offham, southward of which this parish extends into the large tract of coppice woods which reach to West Peckham and Mereworth.

 

Dr. William Briggs, an eminent physician, resided at the latter end of the last century at Town Malling, where he died, Sept. 1704, æt. 64, and was buried in this church, He was a great traveller into foreign countries, and was greatly esteemed for his skill in his profession, as well as for his learning, of which the several writings he published are sufficient testimonies. He was physician in ordinary to king William, and to St. Thomas's hospital, and bore his arms, Gules, three bars gemelles, or, a canton sable. (fn. 1)

 

THIS PLACE was given, about the year 945, by Edmund, king of the Angles and of Mercia, to Burhric, bishop of Rochester, by the description of a small portion of his land, called Meallingas, containing three plough lands; and he granted it to him, for the good of his soul, in perpetual inheritance, in augmentation of the revenues of his monastery of St. Andrew, with all its rights, liberties, members, and appurtenances, and this he did with the consent of his nobles and princes, whose names were subscribed to it. After the names of king Edmund, Edred his brother, and Eadgife his mother, are those of the archbishops and bishops, and then that of Ælgifu, the king's concubine, Ego Ælgifu Concubina Regis affui, and after her the dukes, &c. The bounds of this land are thus described in Saxon, viz. from the south part of it to the king's plaine, and from thence to the bounds of the parish of Offaham, and thence to the military way, and so along the said way over Lilleburne to the bounds of the parish of Est Meallinges, and so directly southward from the east of the cross or gallows to the broad way towards the south, in a direct line along the said way to the king's plaine. To which the king added certain denberies for the pannage of hogs.

 

This land did not continue long in the possession of the church of Rochester, being wrested from it in the time of the Danish wars; and when William the Conqueror had attained the crown, he gave it to Odo, bishop of Baieux, his half brother, from whom it was recovered, together with the church of Mallinges, in the solemn assembly of the whole county held on this occasion, by the king's command, at Pinenden heath, in 1076, by archbishop Lanfrance, who afterward restored it to bishop Gundulph, and the church of St. Andrew; which gift was confirmed by archbishops Anselm and Boniface. (fn. 2)

 

In the survey of Domesday, taken about four years afterwards, this manor is thus described, under the general title of the bishop of Rochester's lands:

 

The same bishop (of Rochester) holds Mellingetes, it was taxed, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, at three sulings, and now at one and an half. The arable land is three carucates. In demesne there is one, and five villeins, with fix borderers, having two carucates. There is a church, and one mill of two shillings, wood for the pannage of twenty hogs. In the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth forty shillings, and now four pounds.

 

Bishop Gundulph, in the 4th year of the reign of king William Rufus, anno 1090, having founded an abbey of Benedictine nuns in this parish, to the honor of the Virgin Mary, gave this manor and church to it, with other possessions for the endowment of it; (fn. 3) and although it was, about one hundred years after its being first erected, with the adjoining village, destroyed by fire, yet it was again soon afterwards re-edified, and continued to increase in a flourishing state.

 

In the 7th year of king Edward I. anno 1278, the abbess of Malling claimed sundry liberties in this parish, by grant from king Henry III. and a market weekly throughout the year on a Saturday and Wednesday; and she claimed by grant from king John to have warren in all her lands at Malling, by grant from king Henry, from time beyond memory; and to have fairs in the parish on the eve, day, and morrow of St. Matthew the apostle, and the like on the eve, and day of St. Leonard, and the like on the eve, and day of St. Peter, ad vincula.

 

By which, and such like favours granted to it, this place, which at the first foundation of the monastery was plain fields, and almost without an inhabitant, became notwithstanding its former calamity mentioned before, exceedingly populous from the numbers who flocked to it from all parts, who building themselves houses here, increased the village to a large size, well suited for trade, to the no small emolument of the nuns; whence it soon lost its name of Malling Parva, which was for some time transferred to the neighbouring parish of East Malling, as appears by some grants, &c. of this time, and king Edward III. (fn. 4)

 

In the 15th year of king Edward I. the temporalities of the abbess of Malling in this parish and East Malling were valued at forty-five pounds.

 

There was an annual pension of ten pounds of wax, and one boar, paid by the abbess to the bishop of Rochester, as an acknowledgment of her subjection to that see.

 

In the year 1321, the bishop of Rochester, at the king's request, to whom the nuns had made a complaint, that their monastery was ruined by the bad management of their abbess, sister of Bartholomew de Badlesmere, visited it, and heard the complaints against her; in consequence of which she resigned, and the lady Agnes de Leyborne, was chosen in her room. Three years after which she died, and the bishop, at the unanimous request of the nuns, appointed Lora de Retling abbess here, though much against his will, knowing her to be very ignorant, and unfit for the office. However, he inhibited her giving a corredy to her maid servant, as had been the custom, and sequestered their common seal, inhibiting her from using it without his licence.

 

A great pestilence raging in the year 1348, the bishop made two abbesses here, who presently died; nor were there more than four nuns professed, and four not professed, remaining in this monastery; and he com mitted the custody of the spirituals and temporals to two of them, as there was not a proper person for the office of abbess.

 

In the year 1493, anno 9 Henry VII. Joane Moone was abbess of this monastery. (fn. 5)

 

This abbey was surrendered into the king's hands, with all its possessions, (fn. 6) among which were the manors of East and West Malling, with the precincts of Ewell and Parrock annexed to the latter, by Margaret Vernon, abbess, and the convent of it, in the 30th year of king Henry VIII. at which time it was valued at 245l. 10s. 2½d. annual rent, according to Speed, and 218l. 4s. 2½d. clear value, according to Dugdale, and there was granted to the abbess a pension of forty pounds yearly, and to eleven nuns from 31. 6s. 8d. down to 2l. 13s. 4d. yearly pensions, each for their lives.

 

After which that king, by his letters patent, in his 31st year, granted and sold, in exchange, among other premises, to Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, the scite of the abbey, with the precinct and circuit of it, and the manors of West Malling, Ewell, and Parocke, and the parsonage of West Malling, late appropriate to it, excepting to the king all advowsons, presentations, &c. to hold by knight's service, at the yearly rent therein mentioned; and as the king was entitled to the tenths of these premises, he discharged the archbishop of them, and all other outgoings whatsoever, except the rent therein mentioned. Which grant was in consequence of an indenture made between the king and the archbishop, inrolled in the Augmentation-office.

 

These manors and premises were again exchanged with the crown in the beginning of the reign of queen Elizabeth, in the 12th year of which she granted them in lease to Sir Henry Brooke, alias Cobham, fifth son of Sir George Brooke, lord Cobham; after which they were held by the same possessors, as the manor of East Malling before described, till at length, after the death of Sir Robert Brett, anno 1621, king James granted the manor of West, alias Town Malling, with the precinct of Ewell annexed, the scite of the late monastery, with the house, buildings, and ground within the precinct of it with all their appurtenances, late parcel of the possessions of the late monastery, in fee, to John Rayney, esq. which was further confirmed to Sir John Rayney, his eldest son, in the 2d year of king Charles I. He was of Wrothamplace, in this neighbourhood, and was created a baronet of Nova Scotia, in 1641, and his son of the same name, about the time of the restoration, conveyed these premises to Isaac Honywood, gent. of Hampsted, Middlesex, who was the only son of Edward, third son of Sir Thomas Honywood, of Elmsted, ancestor likewise of the present Sir John Honywood, of Elmsted, baronet, and he continued to bear the same coat of arms; whose second son, Isaac Honywood, esq. of Hampsted, succeeded him in this manor and estate. Frazer Honywood, esq. of Hampsted and London, his only son and heir, rebuilt the abbey house of Malling in the antient gothic taste, at a very great expence, making it one of the seats of his residence, and having thus greatly improved it, he died possessed of this seat and manor, with the estate belonging to it, in 1764, leaving no issue by his wife, the daughter of Abraham Atkins, of Clapham. He gave them, as well as the rest of his estates here and elsewhere, by will, to his kinsman, Sir John Honywood, bart. of Elmsted, and his heirs male, with divers remainders over to the family of Honywood. Sir John Honywood, bart. is since deceased, and his grandson of the same name is the present owner of this manor, with the precinct of Ewell annexed, and the seat of Malling abbey, with the lands and appurtenances in this parish belonging to it, but Mr. Foote resides in it.

 

The family of Say antiently possessed THE MANOR of CLEMENTS IN EWELL, in this parish. Geoffry de Say held it in the 7th year of king Edward II. as half a knight's fee. His son, Geoffry de Say, paid aid for it in the 20th year of king Edward III. as half a knight's fee, which John at Forde held before in Ewell, in Malling, of the bishop of Rochester. This manor was afterwards in the name of Coveney, (fn. 7) and in the latter end of king Henry VIII. it was in the possession of Mr. William Fowle. Since which it has sunk into such obscurity, that neither the scite nor the owners of it can be traced out even by the most diligent enquiries.

 

CHARITIES.

 

THERE is a lecture founded in this church of a sermon every fortnight, on the Saturday; two of the preachers to be the ministers of East and West Malling, who are to be paid 10s. for every sermon they preach; the other preachers are appointed at the will of the trustees.

 

FRANCIS TRESSE, gent. of this town, who died in 1632, by his will gave a piece of land, and 40l. towards the building of a free school in this parish; and he charged one of his houses in Town Malling with the sum of 13s. 4d. per annum, for the keeping of it in repair; and appointed that four principal freeholders of this parish should be trustees for the execution of this part of his will for ever. This school was accordingly erected, and was made use of for the teaching of boys writing and arithmetic. The charity is veisted in the minister and tour substantial freehold inhabitants, and the estate out of which it is paid in Mr. Robert Sutton, of this parish, but there being no master, the school-house is at present let to the late master's widow at 2gs. perannum, which with the 13s. 4d. is applied towards the maintaining of the building. He also gave two silver cups for the use of the holy communion, and 6s. 8d. payable yearly out of a piece of land, called Cousin's Plat, now vested in Mary Brome, widow.

 

SIR ROBERT BRETT, by will in 1620, gave land sufficient to pay yearly 10s. per week, to be bestowed in bread and meat to twenty poor persons, or else to be distributed in money to them. His executors accordingly conveyed lands in Tewksbury, in Gloucestershire, for this purpose, which is now vested in lord Romney, and twenty-three others, trustees, of the annual produce of 26l. but of late years the annual produce has been but 19l. 14s.

 

TOWN MALLING is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURIDISCTION of the diocese of Rochester, and gives name to the deanry of Malling, in which it is situated.

 

The church, which is a handsome building, with an elegant spire steeple, is dedicated to St. Mary.

 

At the latter end of the year 1778, some of the main pillars of the body of it giving way, the whole roof of it fell in, leaving only the steeple and chancel at the two extremities of it standing. It has since been repaired, and thoroughly finished by a brief, which was obtained for that purpose.

 

The church of West Malling was given, with the manor, to the church of Rochester, by king Edmund, in 945; and having afterwards been taken from it, was again restored by archbishop Lanfranc to bishop Gundulph, in the time of the Conqueror, who gave it to the monastery here, at his foundation of it, and this gift was confirmed by several succeeding kings, archbishops of Canterbury, bishops of Rochester, &c. as has been already mentioned.

 

It was appropriated to the abbess and convent by bishop Gundulph, at the time it was given to them; which appropriation was specially confirmed by Simon, archbishop of Canterbury, in the year 1351.

 

In the reign of king Edward III. great discutes arising between the abbess and nuns of this monastery, and Robert de Beulton, perpetual vicar of this church, especially concerning the receiving of the tithes of flax and hemp, and the payment of archidiaconal procurations, they were at last settled by Hamo, bishop of Rochester, who in the year 1339, decreed, that, saving the due and accustomed portion of the prebend of the great mass in the conventual church of Malling, and the portion of the vicar, as undermentioned, the religious should take all tithes of corn within the parish, and all oblations and obventions belonging to their conventual church, and the cell of St. Leonard; and that they should not be bound to pay to the vicar the tithes of their hay, woods, or mills. And whereas the bishop was informed, and it was allowed, that the above-mentioned prebendary, and other domestics, serving in the monastery, or in the houses of the prebendary, or perpetual chaplain, celebrating for the dead, as also the brothers and sisters, and other persons dwelling in the monastery, or house of the prebendary, who, when they were without the monastery and houses, were not housekeepers in the parish, were wont to receive the sacraments and sacramentals, in life and in death, and to be buried there, if they happened to die within the monastery or houses, unless by chance they chose to be buried elsewhere; in which case, the religious had the first mass for the body before them, in their monastery, and received all the oblations then and there made, so that no portion was left for the vicar of the parish church. And further, that the prebendary for the time being had been used to receive antiently, and to that time, in part of the portion due to him, all the great and small tithes of the demesne lands of the religious, and of the food of their cattle, and also the great tithes arising from many of the crofts of their tenants situated in the said parish, and also the small tithes of his house, and of the house and land of the perpetual chaplain aforesaid, and all the predial tithes arising from the houses or messuages, curtilages and gardens, late of Thomas atte Shoppe and William Cake, in the street, called Holirode-strete, of this parish of Malling, situated above the house of the prebendary; and of all the houses, messuages, curtilages, and gardens whatsoever, from thence towards the east and north in Holirode-street, and in the street, called Tan-street, as far as the end of the parish of Malling on that side; and that the religious and prebendary had possessed all and singular the premises aforesaid, in certain distinct portions, peaceably and without contradiction, from the time beyond memory. (fn. 8)

 

The bishop, therefore, that none of the premises should be altered, decreed, saving all and every matter as aforesaid, that the vicar should receive for his portion all other small tithes, oblations, obventions and profits belonging to the parish church more especially, viz. the tithe of herbage, silva cedua, apples, pears, flax, hemp, wool, milk, cheese, calves, lambs, pigs, pidgeons, geese, ducks, bees, eggs, merchandizings, fowlings, fishings, swans, pulse, and other fruits, and also of corn growing in orchards or gardens, as he had-been accustomed to receive them.

 

¶And that the vicar should also receive the personal tithes of the inhabitants of the houses or messuages of Thomas atte Shoppe and William Cake, and of others, inhabiting in the houses or messuages situated in the streets, called Holirode-strete and Tan-strete, and the oblations due and accustomed to the parish church, and should administer ecclesiastical rights to them, and should have the burial of them in the parish church; and that the vicar should have for his habitation, as assigned to him by the religious, the dwelling with its precinct, which the vicar then inhabited, and his predecessors used to inhabit, which he should repair at his own expence, and preserve in a decent state, and should pay the yearly rents and services, due and accustomed from thence; all which the bishop adjudged to be a sufficient portion for the vicar for the time being. And he further decreed, that the vicar should cause the books to be bound, the vestments to be washed; and the same, and the rest of the ornaments of the parish church, which belonged to the religious to find, as often as need should require, to be repaired, and should cause them to be safely and honestly kept; and that he should provide and find bread, wine, processional tapers, and other lights necessary and accustomed in the chancel, the necessary and accustomed ministers, rochets, surplices, napkins, unconsecrated vessels, basons, and also green rushes to strow the church, if they had been so accustomed, and did not belong to the parishioners to find; and that he should pay the dues to the bishop, and the archidiaconal procurations, and that the vicar should acknowledge and undergo, according to the rate of the taxation of his portion as under-mentioned, all ordinaries and extraordinaries, which, although it might amount to five marcs, being near the moiety of the value of the whole church, according to the estimation then had, he decreed should remain according to the antient taxation of it, as often as burthens of this kind were to be borne, and paid from small benefices. And he decreed, that the religious should acknowledge and undergo all and singular other burthens happening to the parish church, by reason of their portion, which he estimated at twelve marcs, according to the antient taxation of it, notwithstanding this assignation, which was made with the consent of both parties, and which by his episcopal authority, he corroborated and confirmed, &c. and that it might not be called in doubt in future times, or be litigated, he had caused it to be entered in his register, and to be reduced into three different writings, of which he decreed one to remain in the hands of the religious, another in the hands of the vicar, and the third in the hands of the prebendary aforesaid, to perpetuate the memory of it, and had caused it to be authenticated with his seal, &c.

 

This parsonage, prebend, and the advowson of the vicarage, were, on the dissolution of the abbey in the 30th year of king Henry VIII. surrendered into the king's hands. After which the king, next year, granted this parsonage, with the manor of West Malling, and other premises, to Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, to hold by knight's service, at the yearly rent therein mentioned. After which it passed, with the manor of West Malling, in a like succession of ownership, down to Sir John Rayney, bart. who sold these premises, about the time of the restoration, to judge Twisden, and his descendant, Sir John Papillon Twisden, bart. is the present possessor of this parsonage, and the advowson of the vicarage of West or Town Malling.

 

The vicarage is valued in the king's books at ten pounds, and the yearly tenths at one pound.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol4/pp518-533

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

I go round the cathedral again.

 

Initially at some of the memorials on the walls and the canopy of the pulpit, but it is the windows that are calling.

 

At least it was a bright, sunny day outside, which meant light was good in the cathedral with most shots coming out fine with no camera shake.

 

As I edit the shots I am stunned at the details of windows so high up they mostly seem like blocks of colour.

 

And so far, I have only just started to edit these shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

I go round the cathedral again.

 

Initially at some of the memorials on the walls and the canopy of the pulpit, but it is the windows that are calling.

 

At least it was a bright, sunny day outside, which meant light was good in the cathedral with most shots coming out fine with no camera shake.

 

As I edit the shots I am stunned at the details of windows so high up they mostly seem like blocks of colour.

 

And so far, I have only just started to edit these shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

GRAVITATION, n. The tendency of all bodies to approach one another with a strength proportion to the quantity of matter they contain --the quantity of matter they contain being ascertained by the strength of their tendency to approach one another. This is a lovely and edifying illustration of how science, having made A the proof of B, makes B the proof of A.

By mistake I ended up in West Malling, but it was a good thing, as the village is chocolate box pretty, and the church very fine indeed. The only church I visited that had no wardens to welcome (I think, sorry if I have mis-remembered). Anyway, a fine church, amazing coat of arms, and glad I visited.

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

A story of all's well that ends well. A Norman tower and thirteenth-century chancel are linked by a twentieth-century nave that had in its turn replaced one erected to replace its medieval predecessor in the eighteenth century! The west window and those in the south aisle are by C.E. Kempe and Co. Ltd, and of special note is the one depicting the Three Kings. On the south side of the chancel, backing on to a medieval lean-to vestry, is the splendid tomb of Sir Robert Brett (d. 1620), which has recently been restored. The colours are superb and show how churches must have looked when these monuments were new. In the north aisle is a large painting of the Last Supper by Francis Slater, the eighteenth-century artist who painted the ceilings of nearby Mereworth Castle. Hanging on the front of the west gallery are the outstanding Royal Arms of James II, of carved and painted wood. The twentieth-century rebuilding of the church was financed by the sale of an Elizabethan stoneware jug (now in the British Museum), the transaction being recorded on an inscribed stone in the north porch.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=West+Malling

 

--------------------------------------------

 

WESTWARD from East Malling lies the town and parish of West Malling, now most commonly called Town Malling.

 

It is written in Domesday, MALLENGETIS, and in the Textus Roffensis, MELLINGES. In many deeds after the conquest, it is stiled MILLINGES PARVA, to distinguish it from East Malling, then the larger and more noted village of the two.

 

The town and parish of West Malling, excepting the borough of St. Leonard, which is under the jurisdiction of the constables of the hundred of Larkfield, is under the jurisdiction of its own constables, of which there are two chosen yearly.

 

THE PARISH of Town Malling, as it is usually called, is situated equally pleasant and healthy. It lies on high ground, and though dry is well watered, the soil of it being in the northern part a sand, the rest of it a loam, covering the quarry rock, which is very fertile, as has been frequently noticed before in the like situations. The high road from London through Wrotham to Maidstone, at the twenty-ninth mile stone leads along the northern boundaries of the parish, being called in king Edmund's grant of this place to the bishop of Rochester, the military way, no doubt from its having been used as such by the Romans, southward of it the ground gently rising; at less than a quarter of a mile's distance is the town of Malling, which is well built, having many genteel houses in it, the streets of a handsome width, and well paved. At the east end of it is the abbey, to which the approach is by a venerable antient gateway. Although the house itself was almost all of it pulled down and rebuilt by Mr. Honywood, yet many of the antient buildings and offices be longing to it are still remaining, and are made use of as such at present. A handsome tower of the church, the front of which is decorated with intersecting arches and zig-zag ornaments, similar to those on the west front of Rochester cathedral, built by the same founder, bishop Gundulph, is still remaining, as is an antient chapel or oratory, now made use of as a dwellinghouse.

 

From the foundations discovered in levelling the ground by Mr. Honywood, it appears, that this abbey consisted of two quadrangles or courts, with cloysters, and a spacious hall; and that the church had another tower, of the like size to that now standing. The burying-place seems to have been on the south side of the church, as in digging there, great quantities of human bones have been thrown up, and two stone coffins with skeletons in them, the lids of them had no inscriptions on them, but were ornamented each with a cross, having a quaterfoil pierced at the upper end, the stem of which was crossed more than once with foliage, several rings and trinkets, and some old coins have likewise been found at different times in cleaning away the rubbish.

 

Over the west end of the grand gateway, which stands at the entrance into the precinct of the abbey from the town, at the west end of the building, there is carved in stone, a heart distilling drops of blood, and on the other side, in a shield, Ermine, a crozier in bend sinister, on a chief three annulets.

 

In the meadows above the gardens, are large square excavations still visible, where the fish ponds of the aunnery formerly were.

 

The precinct of this monastery is washed by a rivulet of excellent clear water, which rising in the hamlet of St. Leonard, runs by the house, and through the gardens of it, whence gushing through the wall with a cascade, it crosses the road towards the Rev. Mr. Brooke's gardens. There is a view of this abbey in its present state published by Mr. Grose, in his Antiquities of England.

 

Near the abbey gate there is a good house, with a large garden, canal, and pleasure grounds, behind it, reaching down to the London road. It has been many years the residence of the Brooke's, from whom it passed by the will of Joseph Brooke, esq. who died in 1792, after the decease of his widow in 1796, to the Rev. John Kenward Shaw, brother of Sir John Gregory Shaw, bart. who has since, in pursuance of the above will, and by the king's licence, taken the name of Brooke, and now resides in it. A little further westward there is a very antient stone building, called the Old Gaol, having narrow gothic windows, and the walls of great thickness. It is reported to have been the prison belonging to the abbey, and is now used as an oast for the drying of hops. About the middle of the street stands the church, and a little distance from it a good house, late the residence of Benjamin Hubble, esq. whose family have been inhabitants of this town for some length of time, several of them lying buried in this church. He died in 1780, leaving his widow, sister of Richard Savage, esq. of Boughton Monchelsea, surviving, and two daughters, his coheirs, one of whom having married Thomas Augustus Douce, esq. he now resides in it; further southward is the hamlet of St. Leonard, now making part of the town, and called St. Leonard's-street, in which is an antient seat, some years ago the residence of Charles Stewart, esq. whose father admiral Stewart purchased it of judge Twisden. This district had once a cell in it, belonging to the abbey, with a chapel. It was given at the time the manor and church was to it, as has been already mentioned. The whole of it has been long since desecrated, and in ruins; the square tower of the chapel which stands in the next field south-west from the late Mr. Stewart's house, is all that remains of it. It was purchased by him some years ago, of Sir John Honywood, in exchange for other premises near the abbey, and is now made use of as a stowage for hops. Mr. Stewart died in 1780, and was buried near his father in this church, and he was succeeded here by the hon. admiral John Forbes, who lately died posfessed of it. A market is held in the principal highstreet every Saturday, which is plentifully supplied and well frequented. There are three fairs, which are held by the alteration of the stile on August 12, October 2, and November 17, yearly, for horses, cattle, toys, &c. The whole town is excellently well watered with fine springs, which having supplied the town and abbey, collect themselves into one stream, and passing northward through Mr. Brooke's grounds, cross the high Maidstone road, and runs from thence into the Addington brook, just above Leyborne mill.

 

About half a mile south-east from the abbey there is a good modern-built house, called New Barne, which formerly belonged to Mr. Alchin, from whom it passed to Graham, the present possessor, who resides in it.

 

Above St. Leonard's street is the high road from Teston over East-Malling-heath, and through this parish to Offham, southward of which this parish extends into the large tract of coppice woods which reach to West Peckham and Mereworth.

 

Dr. William Briggs, an eminent physician, resided at the latter end of the last century at Town Malling, where he died, Sept. 1704, æt. 64, and was buried in this church, He was a great traveller into foreign countries, and was greatly esteemed for his skill in his profession, as well as for his learning, of which the several writings he published are sufficient testimonies. He was physician in ordinary to king William, and to St. Thomas's hospital, and bore his arms, Gules, three bars gemelles, or, a canton sable. (fn. 1)

 

THIS PLACE was given, about the year 945, by Edmund, king of the Angles and of Mercia, to Burhric, bishop of Rochester, by the description of a small portion of his land, called Meallingas, containing three plough lands; and he granted it to him, for the good of his soul, in perpetual inheritance, in augmentation of the revenues of his monastery of St. Andrew, with all its rights, liberties, members, and appurtenances, and this he did with the consent of his nobles and princes, whose names were subscribed to it. After the names of king Edmund, Edred his brother, and Eadgife his mother, are those of the archbishops and bishops, and then that of Ælgifu, the king's concubine, Ego Ælgifu Concubina Regis affui, and after her the dukes, &c. The bounds of this land are thus described in Saxon, viz. from the south part of it to the king's plaine, and from thence to the bounds of the parish of Offaham, and thence to the military way, and so along the said way over Lilleburne to the bounds of the parish of Est Meallinges, and so directly southward from the east of the cross or gallows to the broad way towards the south, in a direct line along the said way to the king's plaine. To which the king added certain denberies for the pannage of hogs.

 

This land did not continue long in the possession of the church of Rochester, being wrested from it in the time of the Danish wars; and when William the Conqueror had attained the crown, he gave it to Odo, bishop of Baieux, his half brother, from whom it was recovered, together with the church of Mallinges, in the solemn assembly of the whole county held on this occasion, by the king's command, at Pinenden heath, in 1076, by archbishop Lanfrance, who afterward restored it to bishop Gundulph, and the church of St. Andrew; which gift was confirmed by archbishops Anselm and Boniface. (fn. 2)

 

In the survey of Domesday, taken about four years afterwards, this manor is thus described, under the general title of the bishop of Rochester's lands:

 

The same bishop (of Rochester) holds Mellingetes, it was taxed, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, at three sulings, and now at one and an half. The arable land is three carucates. In demesne there is one, and five villeins, with fix borderers, having two carucates. There is a church, and one mill of two shillings, wood for the pannage of twenty hogs. In the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth forty shillings, and now four pounds.

 

Bishop Gundulph, in the 4th year of the reign of king William Rufus, anno 1090, having founded an abbey of Benedictine nuns in this parish, to the honor of the Virgin Mary, gave this manor and church to it, with other possessions for the endowment of it; (fn. 3) and although it was, about one hundred years after its being first erected, with the adjoining village, destroyed by fire, yet it was again soon afterwards re-edified, and continued to increase in a flourishing state.

 

In the 7th year of king Edward I. anno 1278, the abbess of Malling claimed sundry liberties in this parish, by grant from king Henry III. and a market weekly throughout the year on a Saturday and Wednesday; and she claimed by grant from king John to have warren in all her lands at Malling, by grant from king Henry, from time beyond memory; and to have fairs in the parish on the eve, day, and morrow of St. Matthew the apostle, and the like on the eve, and day of St. Leonard, and the like on the eve, and day of St. Peter, ad vincula.

 

By which, and such like favours granted to it, this place, which at the first foundation of the monastery was plain fields, and almost without an inhabitant, became notwithstanding its former calamity mentioned before, exceedingly populous from the numbers who flocked to it from all parts, who building themselves houses here, increased the village to a large size, well suited for trade, to the no small emolument of the nuns; whence it soon lost its name of Malling Parva, which was for some time transferred to the neighbouring parish of East Malling, as appears by some grants, &c. of this time, and king Edward III. (fn. 4)

 

In the 15th year of king Edward I. the temporalities of the abbess of Malling in this parish and East Malling were valued at forty-five pounds.

 

There was an annual pension of ten pounds of wax, and one boar, paid by the abbess to the bishop of Rochester, as an acknowledgment of her subjection to that see.

 

In the year 1321, the bishop of Rochester, at the king's request, to whom the nuns had made a complaint, that their monastery was ruined by the bad management of their abbess, sister of Bartholomew de Badlesmere, visited it, and heard the complaints against her; in consequence of which she resigned, and the lady Agnes de Leyborne, was chosen in her room. Three years after which she died, and the bishop, at the unanimous request of the nuns, appointed Lora de Retling abbess here, though much against his will, knowing her to be very ignorant, and unfit for the office. However, he inhibited her giving a corredy to her maid servant, as had been the custom, and sequestered their common seal, inhibiting her from using it without his licence.

 

A great pestilence raging in the year 1348, the bishop made two abbesses here, who presently died; nor were there more than four nuns professed, and four not professed, remaining in this monastery; and he com mitted the custody of the spirituals and temporals to two of them, as there was not a proper person for the office of abbess.

 

In the year 1493, anno 9 Henry VII. Joane Moone was abbess of this monastery. (fn. 5)

 

This abbey was surrendered into the king's hands, with all its possessions, (fn. 6) among which were the manors of East and West Malling, with the precincts of Ewell and Parrock annexed to the latter, by Margaret Vernon, abbess, and the convent of it, in the 30th year of king Henry VIII. at which time it was valued at 245l. 10s. 2½d. annual rent, according to Speed, and 218l. 4s. 2½d. clear value, according to Dugdale, and there was granted to the abbess a pension of forty pounds yearly, and to eleven nuns from 31. 6s. 8d. down to 2l. 13s. 4d. yearly pensions, each for their lives.

 

After which that king, by his letters patent, in his 31st year, granted and sold, in exchange, among other premises, to Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, the scite of the abbey, with the precinct and circuit of it, and the manors of West Malling, Ewell, and Parocke, and the parsonage of West Malling, late appropriate to it, excepting to the king all advowsons, presentations, &c. to hold by knight's service, at the yearly rent therein mentioned; and as the king was entitled to the tenths of these premises, he discharged the archbishop of them, and all other outgoings whatsoever, except the rent therein mentioned. Which grant was in consequence of an indenture made between the king and the archbishop, inrolled in the Augmentation-office.

 

These manors and premises were again exchanged with the crown in the beginning of the reign of queen Elizabeth, in the 12th year of which she granted them in lease to Sir Henry Brooke, alias Cobham, fifth son of Sir George Brooke, lord Cobham; after which they were held by the same possessors, as the manor of East Malling before described, till at length, after the death of Sir Robert Brett, anno 1621, king James granted the manor of West, alias Town Malling, with the precinct of Ewell annexed, the scite of the late monastery, with the house, buildings, and ground within the precinct of it with all their appurtenances, late parcel of the possessions of the late monastery, in fee, to John Rayney, esq. which was further confirmed to Sir John Rayney, his eldest son, in the 2d year of king Charles I. He was of Wrothamplace, in this neighbourhood, and was created a baronet of Nova Scotia, in 1641, and his son of the same name, about the time of the restoration, conveyed these premises to Isaac Honywood, gent. of Hampsted, Middlesex, who was the only son of Edward, third son of Sir Thomas Honywood, of Elmsted, ancestor likewise of the present Sir John Honywood, of Elmsted, baronet, and he continued to bear the same coat of arms; whose second son, Isaac Honywood, esq. of Hampsted, succeeded him in this manor and estate. Frazer Honywood, esq. of Hampsted and London, his only son and heir, rebuilt the abbey house of Malling in the antient gothic taste, at a very great expence, making it one of the seats of his residence, and having thus greatly improved it, he died possessed of this seat and manor, with the estate belonging to it, in 1764, leaving no issue by his wife, the daughter of Abraham Atkins, of Clapham. He gave them, as well as the rest of his estates here and elsewhere, by will, to his kinsman, Sir John Honywood, bart. of Elmsted, and his heirs male, with divers remainders over to the family of Honywood. Sir John Honywood, bart. is since deceased, and his grandson of the same name is the present owner of this manor, with the precinct of Ewell annexed, and the seat of Malling abbey, with the lands and appurtenances in this parish belonging to it, but Mr. Foote resides in it.

 

The family of Say antiently possessed THE MANOR of CLEMENTS IN EWELL, in this parish. Geoffry de Say held it in the 7th year of king Edward II. as half a knight's fee. His son, Geoffry de Say, paid aid for it in the 20th year of king Edward III. as half a knight's fee, which John at Forde held before in Ewell, in Malling, of the bishop of Rochester. This manor was afterwards in the name of Coveney, (fn. 7) and in the latter end of king Henry VIII. it was in the possession of Mr. William Fowle. Since which it has sunk into such obscurity, that neither the scite nor the owners of it can be traced out even by the most diligent enquiries.

 

CHARITIES.

 

THERE is a lecture founded in this church of a sermon every fortnight, on the Saturday; two of the preachers to be the ministers of East and West Malling, who are to be paid 10s. for every sermon they preach; the other preachers are appointed at the will of the trustees.

 

FRANCIS TRESSE, gent. of this town, who died in 1632, by his will gave a piece of land, and 40l. towards the building of a free school in this parish; and he charged one of his houses in Town Malling with the sum of 13s. 4d. per annum, for the keeping of it in repair; and appointed that four principal freeholders of this parish should be trustees for the execution of this part of his will for ever. This school was accordingly erected, and was made use of for the teaching of boys writing and arithmetic. The charity is veisted in the minister and tour substantial freehold inhabitants, and the estate out of which it is paid in Mr. Robert Sutton, of this parish, but there being no master, the school-house is at present let to the late master's widow at 2gs. perannum, which with the 13s. 4d. is applied towards the maintaining of the building. He also gave two silver cups for the use of the holy communion, and 6s. 8d. payable yearly out of a piece of land, called Cousin's Plat, now vested in Mary Brome, widow.

 

SIR ROBERT BRETT, by will in 1620, gave land sufficient to pay yearly 10s. per week, to be bestowed in bread and meat to twenty poor persons, or else to be distributed in money to them. His executors accordingly conveyed lands in Tewksbury, in Gloucestershire, for this purpose, which is now vested in lord Romney, and twenty-three others, trustees, of the annual produce of 26l. but of late years the annual produce has been but 19l. 14s.

 

TOWN MALLING is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURIDISCTION of the diocese of Rochester, and gives name to the deanry of Malling, in which it is situated.

 

The church, which is a handsome building, with an elegant spire steeple, is dedicated to St. Mary.

 

At the latter end of the year 1778, some of the main pillars of the body of it giving way, the whole roof of it fell in, leaving only the steeple and chancel at the two extremities of it standing. It has since been repaired, and thoroughly finished by a brief, which was obtained for that purpose.

 

The church of West Malling was given, with the manor, to the church of Rochester, by king Edmund, in 945; and having afterwards been taken from it, was again restored by archbishop Lanfranc to bishop Gundulph, in the time of the Conqueror, who gave it to the monastery here, at his foundation of it, and this gift was confirmed by several succeeding kings, archbishops of Canterbury, bishops of Rochester, &c. as has been already mentioned.

 

It was appropriated to the abbess and convent by bishop Gundulph, at the time it was given to them; which appropriation was specially confirmed by Simon, archbishop of Canterbury, in the year 1351.

 

In the reign of king Edward III. great discutes arising between the abbess and nuns of this monastery, and Robert de Beulton, perpetual vicar of this church, especially concerning the receiving of the tithes of flax and hemp, and the payment of archidiaconal procurations, they were at last settled by Hamo, bishop of Rochester, who in the year 1339, decreed, that, saving the due and accustomed portion of the prebend of the great mass in the conventual church of Malling, and the portion of the vicar, as undermentioned, the religious should take all tithes of corn within the parish, and all oblations and obventions belonging to their conventual church, and the cell of St. Leonard; and that they should not be bound to pay to the vicar the tithes of their hay, woods, or mills. And whereas the bishop was informed, and it was allowed, that the above-mentioned prebendary, and other domestics, serving in the monastery, or in the houses of the prebendary, or perpetual chaplain, celebrating for the dead, as also the brothers and sisters, and other persons dwelling in the monastery, or house of the prebendary, who, when they were without the monastery and houses, were not housekeepers in the parish, were wont to receive the sacraments and sacramentals, in life and in death, and to be buried there, if they happened to die within the monastery or houses, unless by chance they chose to be buried elsewhere; in which case, the religious had the first mass for the body before them, in their monastery, and received all the oblations then and there made, so that no portion was left for the vicar of the parish church. And further, that the prebendary for the time being had been used to receive antiently, and to that time, in part of the portion due to him, all the great and small tithes of the demesne lands of the religious, and of the food of their cattle, and also the great tithes arising from many of the crofts of their tenants situated in the said parish, and also the small tithes of his house, and of the house and land of the perpetual chaplain aforesaid, and all the predial tithes arising from the houses or messuages, curtilages and gardens, late of Thomas atte Shoppe and William Cake, in the street, called Holirode-strete, of this parish of Malling, situated above the house of the prebendary; and of all the houses, messuages, curtilages, and gardens whatsoever, from thence towards the east and north in Holirode-street, and in the street, called Tan-street, as far as the end of the parish of Malling on that side; and that the religious and prebendary had possessed all and singular the premises aforesaid, in certain distinct portions, peaceably and without contradiction, from the time beyond memory. (fn. 8)

 

The bishop, therefore, that none of the premises should be altered, decreed, saving all and every matter as aforesaid, that the vicar should receive for his portion all other small tithes, oblations, obventions and profits belonging to the parish church more especially, viz. the tithe of herbage, silva cedua, apples, pears, flax, hemp, wool, milk, cheese, calves, lambs, pigs, pidgeons, geese, ducks, bees, eggs, merchandizings, fowlings, fishings, swans, pulse, and other fruits, and also of corn growing in orchards or gardens, as he had-been accustomed to receive them.

 

¶And that the vicar should also receive the personal tithes of the inhabitants of the houses or messuages of Thomas atte Shoppe and William Cake, and of others, inhabiting in the houses or messuages situated in the streets, called Holirode-strete and Tan-strete, and the oblations due and accustomed to the parish church, and should administer ecclesiastical rights to them, and should have the burial of them in the parish church; and that the vicar should have for his habitation, as assigned to him by the religious, the dwelling with its precinct, which the vicar then inhabited, and his predecessors used to inhabit, which he should repair at his own expence, and preserve in a decent state, and should pay the yearly rents and services, due and accustomed from thence; all which the bishop adjudged to be a sufficient portion for the vicar for the time being. And he further decreed, that the vicar should cause the books to be bound, the vestments to be washed; and the same, and the rest of the ornaments of the parish church, which belonged to the religious to find, as often as need should require, to be repaired, and should cause them to be safely and honestly kept; and that he should provide and find bread, wine, processional tapers, and other lights necessary and accustomed in the chancel, the necessary and accustomed ministers, rochets, surplices, napkins, unconsecrated vessels, basons, and also green rushes to strow the church, if they had been so accustomed, and did not belong to the parishioners to find; and that he should pay the dues to the bishop, and the archidiaconal procurations, and that the vicar should acknowledge and undergo, according to the rate of the taxation of his portion as under-mentioned, all ordinaries and extraordinaries, which, although it might amount to five marcs, being near the moiety of the value of the whole church, according to the estimation then had, he decreed should remain according to the antient taxation of it, as often as burthens of this kind were to be borne, and paid from small benefices. And he decreed, that the religious should acknowledge and undergo all and singular other burthens happening to the parish church, by reason of their portion, which he estimated at twelve marcs, according to the antient taxation of it, notwithstanding this assignation, which was made with the consent of both parties, and which by his episcopal authority, he corroborated and confirmed, &c. and that it might not be called in doubt in future times, or be litigated, he had caused it to be entered in his register, and to be reduced into three different writings, of which he decreed one to remain in the hands of the religious, another in the hands of the vicar, and the third in the hands of the prebendary aforesaid, to perpetuate the memory of it, and had caused it to be authenticated with his seal, &c.

 

This parsonage, prebend, and the advowson of the vicarage, were, on the dissolution of the abbey in the 30th year of king Henry VIII. surrendered into the king's hands. After which the king, next year, granted this parsonage, with the manor of West Malling, and other premises, to Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, to hold by knight's service, at the yearly rent therein mentioned. After which it passed, with the manor of West Malling, in a like succession of ownership, down to Sir John Rayney, bart. who sold these premises, about the time of the restoration, to judge Twisden, and his descendant, Sir John Papillon Twisden, bart. is the present possessor of this parsonage, and the advowson of the vicarage of West or Town Malling.

 

The vicarage is valued in the king's books at ten pounds, and the yearly tenths at one pound.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol4/pp518-533

31th Jan :SAINT FRANCIS XAVIER M. BIANCHI,The Apostle of Naples

(Relic of Saint Francis Bianchi's bones at my family's chapel)

  

Preface

If our love for St. Francis Bianchi does not impair our judgment, we can affirm that all the requisites desirable in a saint for our modern days are to be found in him. His life of union with Christ reveals his ascetic soul. Besides possessing the gift of miracles, he also experienced the torment of excruciating suffering and the joy of exhilarating ecstasy. Being a positive and efficient individual, endowed with the admirable faculty of easy adjustment to given situations, he knew how to pass with ease from contemplation to action. Even in the final years of his life, he preserved intact the perennial youth of his heart, reflected in his particular fondness for the youth.

  

He manifested an inspiring kindness toward the poor; still, he did not disdain the rich whom he guided and directed in the ways of God. He befriended the simple and, at the same time, kept a close contact with the nobility. With his intelligence and perception, being accepted in both the academic and simple circles, he was keenly aware of all the problems which troubled his time.

  

He underwent the mortifications of an anchorite, that is, the mortifications of one who has withdrawn from the world for the sake of religious seclusion. At all times, however, he radiated a joy which even during the martyrdom of his illness knew no shadow.

  

He possessed the heart and sensitivity of a true artist. He might have carved a lasting niche for himself in this field had not the thirst of his soul induced him to embrace the road of the apostolate.

  

The historical vicissitudes of his tempestuous times found an attentive and watchful spectator in him. With the eye of a prophet, he followed the rapid ascent of Napoleon and predicted his defeat and decline right up to that eventful year 1815, which saw the disappearance of the Napoleonic greatness.

  

Agonizing in spirit, he accompanied the sorrowful Way of the Cross of Pius VII and foretold the great sorrows that the Pope was to endure, as well as the peaceful triumphs which were to follow. King Charles Emmanuel IV and the Venerable Clotilde of Savoy, during the humiliating time of their exile, were to find a consoling angel in him.

  

He raised his hand in benediction against the fury of Vesuvius and amazingly stopped the flow of the devastating lava.

  

During a century highlighted with anger and vengeance, and ravished with hatred, he preached by his own example the word of love which gives light and life to the world. Not one event of his day found him either uninterested or indifferent. He had his eyes keenly fixed upon all the questions of his day and he evaluated each individual with the care and prudence befitting a man of God.

  

In a historical period which was defined as barren, superficial and anti-mystic, he renewed the vigorous ardor and fervent impetus of the greatest lovers of Christ.

  

By renouncing the world, he dominated it with humility mixed with the wonder of a living love for sacrifices. He was a man of his times, but above all he was a saint. Thus, he was truly a complete man, a saint who still today generates a strong, kind, and irresistible fascination among his devotees, those wishing to be close to him just as those who were fortunate enough to experience the joy of his nearness on the streets of Naples which were the site of his sleepless apostolate.

  

I. A BEAUTIFUL DAWN

St. Francis Xavier M. Bianchi was born in Arpino on December 2, 1743. The child was baptized on the following day. His parents, Carlo and Faustina Morelli, gave him the names of Francis, Xavier, Philip, and Justinian.

  

Very little has been preserved of his childhood. He grew up in an environment which was warm with faith and resplendent with his father’s honesty and his mother unusual virtues. From his mother he learned tender love for God and neighbor, and this made him amiable to all. It was from her example that he developed a special love for the sick and the poor. His mother transformed a section of their home into a small hospital where several beds were always prepared for the sick that lacked assistance. If any of them died in her home, she provided for their funeral and burial with care and generosity.

  

II. THE DIVINE CALL

When he was twelve years old, he was entrusted to the Barnabites who in Arpino directed the school of Ss. Charles and Philip. He was barely thirteen years of age when, among the students of theology and philosophy, he was chosen to compose and deliver a short sermon on the patronage of the Virgin Mary. The brief but well-placed pauses punctuating his discourse surprised his listeners. There was vigor and enthusiasm in all that he said. Above all, there was his great love for the sorrowful and good Mother Mary.

  

His companions nicknamed him Panciotto (chubby) because of his rosy and plump features. “Here comes Panciotto!” they could be heard whispering in the places where groups gathered. With this, the vulgar conversations in which they might have been engaged came to an abrupt end.

  

Meanwhile, a mysterious and irresistible voice was drawing the young man toward the Sanctuary. God had placed his hand upon him and was saying to him, “You are mine!” On March 26, 1757 the Bishop, who eight years before had made him a soldier of Christ at his confirmation, cut his hair and traced the tonsure upon his head. It was the young man’s desire, however, to serve God in a religious family. Although he was a disciple of the Barnabites, he gave his preference for the Society of Jesus. He was directed in this choice by his devotion to St. Francis Xavier, whose name he bore.

  

He made his plans known but there was opposition by his family. They agreed to his becoming a priest but not to be a religious. It was for this reason that in order to dissuade him, they sent Francis to the diocesan seminary in Nola (outside Naples). Francis obediently bowed his head in assent. God, however, was to guide his elect in a manner very different from that envisioned by humans.

  

III. IN THE SHADOW OF THE SANCTUARY

God’s will manifested itself more clearly at Nola. It was here that Francis met St. Alphonsus Liguori who had come to preach a spiritual retreat to the seminarians. It was this saintly man who very decisively induced the wavering Francis to embrace religious life.

  

His parents insisted he put aside his clerical habit and go to Naples to enroll in the University law school. Through friends who had been ill informed, he was directed to a certain rental house which continually resounded with disorderly shouts, loud singing, and vulgar words. The meek and saintly young man clearly and simply described the director of this house as a “fine deceitful fellow.” He was so uneasy here that he became ill. Things even went so far that the money his family had given him to buy books was stolen. “It was then,” the young man wrote to his uncle, a priest “that I became visibly disturbed.” It was his uncle who induced Francis’ parents to permit him to return home. Confronted with his firm and decisive determination, all opposition fell. A short while later he was able to leave for the Novitiate of the Barnabites in Zagarolo. He had a letter from the Superior of the Barnabites in Arpino who wrote of him, “He is healthy with a good complexion. He is of sanguine nature and has a happy disposition. He presents a fine appearance and is of good stature. He gives every indication of being skillful and prudent. He has excellent natural talents; he writes well. He is humble, decisive, and not scrupulous. He frequents the Sacraments.”

  

The year of his Novitiate passed quickly, and the Fathers were able to testify that he was “a young man of the highest saintly habits, very devout, and humble, possessing the greatest talents. He gives clear indication of becoming a learned religious who will be a credit to the Congregation and a great asset to his fellow men.”

  

On December 28, 1763 Francis swore fidelity to his God in the perpetual observance of poverty, chastity, and obedience. The voice of obedience decreed that he immediately leave for Macerata where he was to study philosophy and science. He remained there from January, 1764 until October of the following year, at which time he experienced difficulty with his lungs. In the spring of 1766 he journeyed first to Arpino and then to Naples, where he began his study of theology, and where he fully recovered.

  

He completed his sacred studies in Naples at St. Charles alle Mortelle. On January 25, 1767 he was ordained a priest. Four days later the newly ordained ascended the altar to offer his first Eucharistic Sacrifice.

  

IV. A PRIEST AND A TEACHER

In September 1767 he was assigned as a professor of humanities at the school of the Barnabites in Arpino. Even from his teaching desk, commenting upon Latin and Italian authors, he knew how to radiate Christ. He was more intent on educating than on instructing, on forming hearts than on informing minds. He knew how to enrich the teaching of the usual subjects with a personal touch. Above all, he never forgot that he was a priest; consequently, he alternated his ministry with his teaching, especially by preaching the Word of God.

  

In the autumn of 1769 he was sent by his Superiors to the College of St. Charles in Naples as a professor of philosophy and mathematics to the Barnabite seminarians. Because of the unfair laws in the Kingdom of Naples, the Barnabites had been compelled to combine both Novices and Scholastics within the same dwelling.

  

On the evening of September 18, 1771, St. Francis was in his cell with Domenico Ceraso, one of two novices. Together, they were very devoutly alternating the recitation of the Psalms. The other novice, Francis M. Castelli, was in agony at his father’s house in St. Anastasia, where the Superiors had sent him in the hope he might regain his health. Unexpectedly, God had manifested to St. Francis what was happening at St. Anastasia. In spirit he saw the suffering Castelli giving his last breath. Interrupting the recitation of the Psalms, he said to Domenico, “Let us kneel and recite a De Profundis. At this very moment Francis has passed away.” The news which arrived the following day confirmed the truthfulness of the Saint’s vision.

  

V. THE SUPERIOR

God was already beginning to manifest His marvels in the newly-ordained priest who with youthful dedication had committed himself to his two-fold ministry in the Church and in the school.

  

In April 1773, Fr. Bianchi was elected Superior of St. Mary in Cosmedin at Portanova. He got there at a critical moment: the civil authorities were arbitrarily interfering in the election of his predecessor. He had much to suffer and was compelled to face great difficulties. With kindness and gentleness, however, he was able to win the people to himself.

  

There were abuses which had to be removed. With prudence and long-suffering patience, he was successful in eradicating them, making some concessions in form so as to obtain results in substance. There were times when the work was oppressing. In his correspondence dating from this period, frequent reference to this fact can be found. “I must get out of the maze of business…I am extremely busy”, “I am filled to the brim with bothersome matters…,” “It is very hot, and there is always something to be done…” At all times, however, one could see how practical this man (who had always lived among books) was given the assurance with which he handled the thorniest matters.

  

VI. JOURNEYING THROUGHOUT ITALY

The General Chapter of the Order assembled in Milan in April 1779. St. Francis, together with the Superior of St. Charles alle Mortelle was appointed to represent the Neapolitan Province. Before starting off, he visited Sister Mary Frances of the Five Wounds, the Neapolitan saintly mystic. His spiritual daughter gave him words of wisdom and suggested that he record daily in detail what happened during the trip. This would keep him from the dangers of dissipation.

  

He left Naples on March 25 and reached Milan on April 23. The fame of his doctrine and sanctity had preceded him, and the aristocratic intelligentsia gathered around this religious man who was barely thirty-five years of age at that time. He was elected secretary of the Chapter. The new Superior General, Fr. Scipione Peruzzini, wanted him as companion during his visits to the communities in Lombardy, Piedmont, Liguria, and Romagna. He thus traveled from Turin to Genoa, from Pavia to Mantua, proceeding as far as Venice. From there he arrived in Bologna where the Barnabites had four houses. Finally, after a seven-month absence, he returned to Naples to take up once more the administration of the Portanova community.

  

Thoughts of Sister Mary Frances of the Five Wounds had accompanied him throughout his itinerary, and the protection of this saintly woman had been a great help to him in some moments of danger. There was, for instance, the time when he was traveling in a public carriage with Father General and others. Twilight had vanished. The coachman, who was tired and sleepy, did not realize he was dangerously close to the edge of a precipice. Suddenly the earth which had become soft owing to recent rains, gave way. The carriage overturned and the occupants fell headlong into the deep hollow. While cries of fear rose from the travelers, the Saint invoked Sister Mary Frances. Truly it was an act of Providence that all were unhurt. Yet how could they find their way to the road again in that darkness? And above all, how could they ever recover the carriage and horses? Francis invoked once more Sister Mary Frances’ help, and suddenly a young man on a horse appeared. Himself descending into the hole, he guided their way with a beaming torch, thus making their climbing out easier. With his strong arms he helped the horses out too, and recovered the carriage. He then guided the travelers to a nearby lodging-house. It just so happened, at that moment young missionaries were departing, thus leaving the rooms free for the newly-arrived. Francis was to learn later from Sister Mary Frances that the Archangel Raphael had once again visibly exerted his mission as Patron of Travelers.

  

VII. SAINT MARY FRANCES OF THE FIVE WOUNDS

It is time to say a few words about Sister Mary Frances of the Five Wounds and her relationship with St. Francis. Francis used to say that God had bestowed three graces upon him: baptism, religious vocation, and his acquaintance with Sister Mary Frances.

  

This saintly woman exerted a tremendous and decisive influence in Francis’ life. The friendship between these two great souls dates from 1777: Francis was 34 years of age then, and Sister Mary Frances was already 62 years of age. Their spiritual relationship which was to last uninterrupted for 14 years, soon became a true exercise of perfection. In this kind of friendship often the function and roles of teacher and disciple blend together.

  

From Francis Xavier’s very first visit, God spoke to Sister Mary Frances’ heart and revealed to her what was Francis’ way toward holiness. Fr. Bianchi never was her confessor, yet he was always told of all the gifts with which God had enriched her soul.

  

On Fridays she would relive the pains of Christ’s Passion, and often Francis was allowed to witness the wondrous repetition of the pains of the suffering Christ. He experienced then a saintly jealousy of that soul that was allowed to suffer because she was united with Christ in a most perfect love. At times, the saintly Sister who had a prophetic gift predicted things that were to happen. She laid her hand on his knee once and said, “Oh, how these legs will suffer!” Another time she foretold him the unjust Napoleonic suppression of Religious Orders.

  

While celebrating Mass, St. Francis noticed more than once that the wine he had poured in the chalice had visibly diminished and that the small particle of the Sacred Host which he had allowed to rest in the chalice according to rite had disappeared. At first he ascribed these facts to distraction or even to imagination. But he had to convince himself that the fact was true, having a mysterious explanation: Sister Mary Frances, who was ill, was nevertheless present in spirit when he celebrated the Divine Sacrifice and received Holy Communion from angelic hands. From that time on, Francis often placed besides the large host a small particle which would disappear wondrously after Consecration to satisfy the Saint’s hunger for Jesus.

  

It often happened that while the two were engaged in a sacred conversation, Sister Mary Frances would suddenly fall in ecstasy. The Archangel Raphael appeared visibly to her and invisibly to St. Francis who could perceive a heavenly fragrance. It also happened that while Francis was speaking of the miseries he was hoping to alleviate and of the little money he had to do this, rolls of golden coins wondrously appeared at the foot of the Crucifix. One day the Saint dared ask his privileged friend to obtain permission from God to contemplate the temporary sufferings of Purgatory. Sister Mary Frances started praying and shortly afterwards Francis could see the purging souls. While he was still alive, God revealed to Francis the future glory of his faithful servant, and allowed him to see her soul ascending to heaven in a radiant beauty beyond human imagining.

  

Such friendship between two great souls is not unusual. We just need remember St. Jerome and St. Paul; St. Francis of Assisi and St. Claire; St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross; St. Frances de Chantal and St. Francis de Sales. St. Francis Xavier M. Bianchi owes his ascent to the summit of perfection to his encounter with St. Frances of the Five Wounds.

  

VIII. "MY DEARLY BELOVED SOLITUDE"

It was St. Mary Frances' example that had St. Francis turn back to contemplation to which he had been irresistibly attracted prior to giving himself to study and ministry. Even in 1766, when he was barely 23 years of age, he wrote from Naples: "My present stay at St. Charles alle Mortelle College is very much to my liking. I feel like in a hermitage, which is exactly what I desire; that is to say, the dearly beloved solitude."

  

Thus, little by little the Saint began to live a new experience. Avoiding a sudden break with the past, he started retiring from all that he considered imperfect and distractive in order to form a perfect union with God. He gave up all his books and no longer had conversations with the intellectuals whom he had befriended: he just wanted to know all about sanctity. He chose for himself the smallest and most solitary cell.

  

This change in him could not pass unobserved by the others, nor could it escape criticism and comments. Seeing him so eagerly united and absorbed in God, his spiritual children were edified, and they lessened their visits to his cell until they stopped at all. Some envied him, calling him blessed and regretting that he deprived them of his presence. Yet there were people who called him strange, scrupulous and monomaniacal, who played him bad tricks, such as making loud noises in front of his door as if they wanted to tear it down, to distract or try him; and this they repeated for several days. As was God's will, his patience and kindness won over the thoughtlessness of his confreres; and there was peace again.

  

Yet there was no peace in his soul. He too experienced the situation described by St. John of the Cross as "when God plummets intellect into dark night, desire into barrenness, memory into void, and heart into bitterness." Besides, he was not free from demonic persecutions. Satan persisted in his repeated attacks upon him, but he had found an expert antagonist in Francis. The Saint knew this kind of battle from the time when, as a young confessor and in preference to many others, he had been chosen by his Archbishop as an exorcist of evil spirits. It seemed as if the enemy wanted to vindicate himself for this very reason. One day, while he was leaving the house to visit St. Mary Frances, the Saint felt that a bottle was hurled against him, although he saw no one nearby. Another time, while he was going out of his room, the Saint felt himself being raised into the air and then furiously thrust into the ground.

  

Another story is told of a possessed person who, whenever he felt the Saint was near, would start to shout, "Here he is; here he is!" even though he had not seen him yet. The poor wretched man one day seemed not inclined to heed the command made by the Saint in the name of God. Finally, though, he obeyed, and fell at the Saint's feet, struggling.

  

The persecutions of Satan also took on this particular form they called infestation. During the night, as if Satan wanted to vindicate for that man mentioned above, the Saint was tormented with illusions. The Saint tried to resist them all. This continued for a long time, until it was necessary for the Saint to sprinkle his room with holy water and even to resort to exorcism.

  

God was testing his servant through human and diabolic trials and found him strong and faithful as he was getting ready for his great mission as a true guide of souls.

  

IX. THE APOSTLE OF NAPLES

In his silence, in his solitude, in his prayers and penances, Francis had become deeply imbued with God; prayer had taken precedence over his work. From then on, prayer became his ministry. He spoke of souls to God. And from then on, he would speak of God to souls. For fifteen years the Apostle dwelt in the desert of mysticism. From then on, the contemplator would start his battle.

  

He did not need to go too far for his proper apostolic field. His mission was to be in Naples. The long extenuating hours in the confessional, the correspondence, his hours with the penitents who would knock at the door of his cell, the mysterious and piercing pains in his legs which would be his secret martyrdom were to be the backbone of his wondrous life. He was to be a confessor above all.

  

From the very beginning all kinds of individuals would gather outside his confessional: courtesans, merchants, hawkers, and people who abounded in the less affluent quarters of the city. The first penitents urged others to do the same, and so their number even more increased. He must have realized very early that it was just as much a martyrdom to confess God before men than to confess men before God. After the humble and poor, there came the great and the learned who got attracted by his doctrine: bishops, prelates, professors, doctors, lawyers, and knights were among the penitents. Each time he listened to his penitents, it was as though he was dwelling in God, and he replied in God. The penitents would leave his cell edified, and would murmur to themselves, "He is a saint. Certainly, he is a saint."

  

The testimony of Francesco Ferrini is sufficient to speak for all the others. When he was still a young man, he was attracted to Francis' fame. One day Ferrini decided to visit the Saint at Portanova. The Saint was not at home when he got there, so he had to wait for him by his cell. Finally, the Saint arrived. Ferrini saw him at the far end of the corridor. A light radiated about the Saint in the semi-darkness. "He is a new John the Baptist!" the young man thought, and kept looking at him in amazement and reverential fear. At first he thought it was only an illusion or just a light reflecting upon the Saint. However, watching him more closely, he realized the splendor really came from him, and the closer Francis approached him, the more the light radiated. Ferrini stood there as if in ecstasy, and the Saint invited him with an enchanting smile to enter his cell. Once inside, the Saint placed his hand upon the visitor's head and bade him to kneel. Ferrini’s heart throbbed so violently that all he could say were the words prescribed for benediction. Ferrini felt that something extraordinary was taking place within him. He was overwhelmed with a celestial sweetness, his mind was enlightened, and he experienced a fervor such as he had never felt before. When his confession ended, Francis began to speak: they were simple, ordinary words, yet they had great inward eloquence. His face shone with an ever brighter light, a mysterious light that hit the penitent's eyes, yet did not bother him. On the contrary, he felt his heart soothed.

  

Ferrini experienced this more than once, and so did many others who met the saint: they could notice the tremor of his entire person, the abundant tears, and the difficulty in speech caused by the mysterious emotion that pervaded him. His heartiness had the better over the most hardened and coldest hearts. What a joy it was for his spiritual children to be dismissed always by these words: "You will be with me in Paradise," or "Be happy, for Paradise is ours!"

  

X. HIS SPIRITUAL FAMILY

Little by little Francis' cell became a true school of perfection. The spiritual family that had originated before he retired to silence and solitude was flourishing, being attracted to him as if to a brilliant star; his disciples longed for sanctity, and in mutual attraction they all approached God as in a bright constellation.

  

On July 25, 1801 Francis' disciple, Fr. Tommaso Fiore, died. Fr. Fiore had been one of the most esteemed spiritual guides in Naples. All his penitents turned to St. Francis. Among them was the Venerable Battista Lossa, who left his office in the tribunal after thirty years of faithful and honorable service to become a beggar for the orphans, an almsgiver to the poor, and a comforter to the sick. St. Francis used to say of him: "He is a saint who ought to be venerated on the altars. He is another St. John of God." Venerable Lossa was also the first one to know of Francis' long-standing pains in his legs.

  

Other good lay people who ought to be remembered and who were very close to the Saint were: Lelio Rivera, who was Francis' companion in his visits to Christ in the most neglected and abandoned churches; Joseph Bonocore, who several times had his spiritual father as a guest in his villa; the goldsmith Francis La Ragione, a simple soul who was to learn from God what were the peculiar merits of his servant; and the painter Paul Di Maio, whose death Francis mourned in tearful verses and whose picture he kept and venerated in his cell. Yet it was among the priests that Francis had his greatest friends. One Fr. Giuseppe Romano modeled himself on the master, imitating the candor of his habits, his charity, and the spirit of penance which he disguised under his kindness; and another, the Venerable Vincent Morelli, a Theatine and Bishop of Otranto, who, during his trips to Naples, went to him with the simplicity of a child, sharing with him his doubts and the problems of his delicate conscience. One of his favorites, Fr. Agnello Coppola, obtained the gift of ecstasy and contemplation. Fr. Placido Baccher, a victim of the 1799 revolution, had been condemned to death and was miraculously set free by the Blessed Virgin. He had known the Saint in 1808. He was the radiant sunrise while Francis was the flaming sunset: and the twilight loved them. It was to him that Francis left as inheritance all the souls that were to be guided to God. To Bartholomew Corvo, his latest disciple, the Saint left his wounds, which appeared in his legs soon after Francis' death.

  

In the year 1801 King Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia and his wife Mary Clotilde entered the Saint's spiritual family. The revolution had caused them to go into exile, however, and their sorrow was soothed by their friendship with the Saint. In Naples, the traditional friendship that bound the Order of the Barnabites to the House of Savoy brought them to Francis. The Saint continued the spiritual assistance started in Turin by Fr. Felix De Vecchi, with whom the Queen had been corresponding for quite some time. The couple immediately felt they were before a man of God and allowed him to guide them by his enlightening wisdom. Above all was Mary Clotilde who had a particular intuition for spiritual things. She understood that Francis was endowed with supernatural gifts and spoke of him as a saint speaks of another saint. The King and his wife were often seen attending Holy Mass celebrated by the Saint and stopped to speak with him after the service; this gave them peace and hope. The Saint, however, made no exceptions and never stopped with them long enough to test the patience of other penitents among whom were businessmen and intellectuals who had little time. He mostly gave the princes brief advice and traced for them the way to follow, and he integrated his teaching with letters which, though very concise, were true beams of light to the heart and mind.

  

XI. THORNS AND FIRE

Like all great saints, even Francis bent under the weight of the cross. He embraced sorrow and nurtured his body with it as if it was a strengthening food for the soul.

  

After his soul, even his body had started suffering pains. The illness which so far had struck in a bearable way one leg had attacked the other too: both had become swollen, heavy as lead. Yet he continued with heroic good will to assist others. Now and then he felt pain like stabs which caused him to sigh and frown, and again he looked serene. Saint Francis realized that the prophecy of Sr. Mary Frances was becoming true: "Oh, how will these legs suffer!" she had said. He underwent obediently a great number of painful cures, yet kept repeating, "There is no human cure for a non-human illness. There is nothing you can do to these wounds as they are God's will."

 

The priest Agnello Coppola wrote: "Even though pain was violently tormenting him, he insisted that I should sing some song by St. Alphonsus de Liguori, and one could not tell if his tears were caused by his suffering or by the emotions roused by the song." To the doctors visiting him he used to say that he felt "thorns and fire" in his legs.

  

After a long stay in Portici, at the end of 1807 he returned to his cell in Portanova, where he continued his slow martyrdom for another seven years.

  

The French authorities which one time kept a worried eye on the spot where people were gathering to meet the Saint, perhaps fearing a plot or a conspiracy, were relieved because now he was but a weak and suffering old man.

  

The siege by the people started anew: the Father was back. He looked older from his suffering, yet his features suggested spiritual beauty and ideals. The man with a sick body was helping again those who had a sick soul. They used to say that meeting him was like experiencing Easter.

  

His poor legs moved people to pity; one was swollen to the utmost with a deep wound in the center and minor ones on the sides. The other was somewhat thinner but inflamed as well with black spots discharging purulent matter. He truly deserved to sign his scripts "Francis Xavier of the Cross of Jesus." The pillar of his strength was the meditation on the suffering of the Crucified Lord, and his communion with the Living Christ.

  

XII. THE WOUND IN HIS HEART

St. Francis offered his whole self to God as a victim in sacrifice for the expiation of sins, and God repaid him. He was to have his Pentecost in 1800. On January 7 of that year he wrote that both the Blessed Virgin Mary and Jesus had spoken of him to a blessed soul: "He will be filled with grace, virtue, fortitude of heart and spirit," said the Blessed Mother, and the Lord, "I will bestow upon him abundant graces."

  

On the eve of Pentecost, May 31, 1800 Francis was praying in the Dominican church of "The Divine Love." The Blessed Sacrament was solemnly exposed in the midst of flowers and countless candles. Francis' eyes fixed on the Sacred Host beamed with an unnatural light. All of a sudden a beam departed from the Host and hit him like an arrow. With an inexpressible joy Francis pressed his hand on his throbbing heart and fainted, giving a loud cry. He seemed a victim of pain; on the contrary, he was but a victim of love. His wounded heart was to contain all the charity, goodness, and joy that he would later share with other souls.

  

When the ecstasy was over he rose, resumed his composure, and smiled to those who had come to his aid; then he immersed himself deep in prayer once more.

  

From that day onward every time he administered the Sacraments or even spoke of sacred things, his heart trembled as well as his whole body, and his face shined.

  

XIII. THE PROPHET IN THE MIDST OF THE TEMPEST

The gift of prophecy and visions had such a great impact on the Saint's life that we cannot help speaking about it if we really want to understand his true character.

  

It was the year 1798. Francis was horrified to hear of the invasion of Rome by the French army and the seizure and exile of Pius VII. His spirit could see the elderly Pope travelling through Siena, Florence, Parma, Tortona, Turin, and Briançon, as if the events were happening before his eyes. God allowed him to see all this, and Francis suffered greatly when he recounted the facts to his disciples.

  

Toward the middle of July 1805 he looked particularly afflicted, and his disciples often heard him repeat, "Many are the sins, and the punishment is near." An earthquake hit the Molisan region, causing destruction in Aquila, Capua, and Avellino. Even Naples was hit and many buildings crumbled. The victims were only three, which truly seemed a miracle: there was a Saint praying in Portanova. The next day he told the crowd gathered around him of the devastation that had taken place in the other cities struck by the earthquake.

  

Meanwhile the political storm was breaking out between the Church and the secular world. The empire which succeeded the Jacobin anarchy in France was even more violent than the latter. Napoleon wanted to fight the Church even to very extreme consequences. Pius VII, however, replied with meekness, patience, and tolerance. Francis' spirit followed with distress the duel between the mild Pontiff and the overbearing Emperor.

  

On July 6, 1809 Pius VII was forced to leave Rome. Francis said then to his dismayed friends: "We are to consider all that is happening as a scroll in which the great plans of God are both written and hidden. Let us obediently accept God's will, in the expectancy of better times to come." But Napoleon's lucky star was to fade away, and God allowed the Saint to foresee the Emperor's ruin. On September 14, 1812 Napoleon entered burning Moscow: he had fallen into a trap. Yet from Paris came the order to all European capitals to sing a Te Deum. When the Saint heard of it, he commented bitterly: "They would have done much better had they sung a Miserere!" The next days, while entertaining himself with Agnello Coppola, he often exclaimed: "How awful, how awful! Poor young men!" On November 23 he assured his friends that the French army had been defeated and prayed even for the tyrant. To Domenic Valletta, who sarcastically was saying he would gladly poison Napoleon, Francis, horrified, replied: "You should not hate your enemy but, rather, pray for his repentance."

  

XIV. THE SAINT AND THE VESUVIUS

Armed with God-given strength, the Saint's wonder-working hand triumphed over destructive Vesuvius. After the devastating eruption of 1794 which had been predicted by St. Mary Frances, the volcano had become drowsy. In 1804 the volcano woke up with the rage of a hungry beast. From May until August it erupted huge clouds of smoke, and at sunset of November 22 a quake shook the earth with long, dark rumblings. Torrents of lava covered the hills all around Torre del Greco.

  

Fr. Francis was in Torre del Greco, guest of the Visitation retreat house which was directed by Fr. Pasquale Lombardo, one of his disciples. When danger was at its utmost, the Saint was praying and was shaken by the dwellers running around in the attempt to save what they could. He came out of his room, serenely asked everyone to keep calm, and ordered a picture of Sr. Mary Frances be placed on the roof. He himself climbed onto a terrace on top of the house together with all the other people and joined his hands in prayer. Then he raised his right hand and in the name of God he ordered the lava to stop flowing. Everyone was amazed to see the lava stop at once: Torre del Greco was safe!

  

The identical miracle was repeated in two other instances. Again at Torre del Greco, the Saint bade he be taken to the place where the lava was flowing, prayed with all the people, raised his blessing hand and the flow stopped as the lava turned into hard stone. There was another eruption, and people came to Portici to beg the Saint for help. Francis didn't budge: he took an image of Sr. Mary Frances and ordered the people to put it before the advancing fire. They did so and the lava that had already reached a villa stopped before the image which was hanging on a tree.

  

In remembrance of the miracle, Cardinal William Sanfelice had a chapel built on the spot and dedicated it to the Saint.

  

XV. THE DEVOTIONS OF A SAINT

"Grace attacks your heart by a threefold fire: the love for the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, the love for the Most Blessed Virgin free from all stains of sin, and the love for God's servant Mary Frances. Deny it if you can!" so said St. Francis, who loved God with an ardor which can be compared to the one of a St. Philip Neri or St. Therese of Jesus. He used to say: "He who really loves would sing, rave, sigh, lament, suffer, and languish. Oh, what a sweet occupation this is! May Jesus grant it all to me. Amen."

  

His disciples could often hear him repeat in a murmur the gentle dialogue by the Franciscan mystic Raymond Lullo: "Where are you? In love. Whence did you come? From love. Who has led you here? Love. What do you live in? In love. Where do you dwell? In love. Let love and speaking of love be your only concern."

  

St. Alphonsus' chants on God's love truly enraptured him. Fr. Nicholas Ruggero testifies in great simplicity: "One morning, having gone to visit the Venerable, I found him particularly cheerful; he even asked me to sing some devout prayers. I intoned, 'He who lives in God is always happy,' but I had barely completed the first stanza when I saw the Venerable completely transformed. His face was extraordinarily bright, his entire person was agitated and even seemed to have grown larger; he hardly seemed the same person. I realized he could hardly withstand such tremendous thrust of love. I should have stopped singing, yet I went on to enjoy such sweet miracle. Finally, when I saw the last of the marvel, I stopped and fled from his presence. I believed the Venerable, who was always careful in hiding himself and his gifts, would have reproached me. Someone who witnessed the fact told me that when the Venerable regained his senses he repeatedly asked, 'Where am I?' and jokingly pretending to search for a stick added, 'Where is Nicholas? He almost killed me!'" A few days later, Nicholas returned to the Saint and was gently reproached: "My dear friend, you ruined me!"

  

The Saint's devotion was most evident when he celebrated Mass. On July 3, 1811 he received from Rome the permission to celebrate Mass in his room, and Cardinal Caracciolo provided him at once with a wooden altar. By now, due to the pains in his legs, he was unable to rise, to move or even stand. Attempts were made to convince him to give up celebrating Mass, but he was irremovable: "When I will give up celebrating Mass, you may as well say I am dead." The celebration became a miracle renewed every morning, as he once wrote to a priest, "I am writing you amid spasms of pain. I can do nothing other than celebrate the Holy Mass, which I do every day by Divine Mercy! Ask your penitents to thank God for me, for he allows me to see each day the wonders of His omnipotence." At dawn, his companions roused him from the bed where he had spent an almost sleepless night. He then prepared for Mass. Those who came into his room saw him like a bundle of pain, his limbs stiff and racked in tremendous pain. Even putting on the vestments had become a daily agony. Once ready, two companions had to carry him to the altar gasping for breath. But once he reached the altar he could wondrously cross himself and stand up as a perfectly healthy man would do: "To the God who gives joy to my youth," the servant would reply to the first verse of the Psalm, and thus the prophecy was fulfilled in Francis. With a faint smile on his lips, he would then proceed with the rite, languishing with love, falling into ecstasy during consecration and at communion. He could, however, barely read the St. John Prologue at the conclusion of Mass and had to be carried from the altar completely exhausted. He could very well say with Paul the Apostle, "The life I live is not my own; Christ is living in me."

  

His devotion to the Blessed Mother had a great influence on his virtues. He called the principal Marian solemnities "the great days of Grace." As a young man we heard him sing the praises of Mary's patronage in public. The impression of an impeccable adolescence is not easily forgotten. So, here he is now a priest, inculcating the same sentiments into his spiritual children. "Let not one of you neglect to pray continually to Our Lady, especially to obtain from God the grace of always praying to her, to call upon her for help, saying: ‘Help me. Mother of mine, do help me.’ Woe to him who neglects to place himself in Mary's trust even one day!" Having heard that Fr. Placido Baccher had a statue of Mary as a child, he wanted to see it. When he had it in his hands, he pressed it to his heart weeping tenderly; but then he trembled so violently that those present had to take it away from him and asked him to look elsewhere.

  

One day, when he was in his cell, he suddenly uncovered his head and walked toward the stairway, crying with joy: "Our Lady is coming! God's Mother is coming!" As a matter of fact, a friend of his, who was a painter, was coming up to present him with a very beautiful painting of Our Lady Queen of Heaven. To those who asked him how he knew the painter was carrying the picture, he replied, "The Venerable Mary Frances let me know." Later he gave up the beautiful painting as an act of poverty.

  

The more God visited him in suffering, the greater his devotion grew, and Mary's pains became the focal point of his meditation. It was through the intercession of Our Lady of Sorrow that he obtained the grace of being able to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass in spite of his pains.

  

He miraculously restored health to his disciple Louis Voipe, after reciting together the Litanies of the Blessed Mother. When the health of Blaise Brasca, a priest, had failed completely, the Saint restored it again by reciting the Litanies. Five years later Blaise fell ill once more, and his family turned again to the Saint for help, but his reply was: "The years were added to King Hezekiah only once."

  

He never dismissed anyone before he found a way to introduce Mary into the conversation, suggesting filial confidence by calling her Our Dear Mother. Bonocore relates: "One day I was with the Saint speaking about spiritual matters. I revealed to him my desire to increase my love for God. The Venerable suggested to me various means to attain this, particularly to visit more often the Blessed Sacrament during the Forty Hours Devotion. In this regard he told of someone (Bonocore himself) who in making the visits had the unique fortune to see the Blessed Mother coming to her Son in the Blessed Sacrament to entreat for gifts and graces for those who were present adoring Him. That was the very time when that person profited greatly by these gifts! Then the Venerable added: 'Pray to the Divine Mother for you to be allowed to stay at the feet of the Blessed Sacrament and so find yourself in similar circumstances.’”

  

During his last years, the Rosary became his constant companion. At sunset on January 30, the day before his death, someone suggested to recite the Rosary. Francis agreed with joy and joined the others who, perhaps, never said it with greater devotion. At the end of the Rosary he asked for the picture of Our Lady, called the Divine Shepherdess. He looked at it with great affection, kissed it repeatedly, and then returned it. A short while later he asked for the picture again and looked as if he were languishing with filial love for his dear Mother who was about to come for him.

  

He had well realized and preached that the shortest, surest, and most beautiful way to Jesus was, no doubt, through Mary.

  

XVI. THE MARTYRDOM OF CHARITY

The unending charity of Fr. Francis Xavier M. Bianchi deserved him the title of Apostle of Naples.

  

Stricken in 1800 by a strange illness, he believed he had come to the end of his life, but Sr. Mary Frances assured him, however, that he was still to live long, so as to do much more good to humanity. Not one of his sick penitents was ever deprived of his full, loving, and sometimes even miraculous assistance. In the hospitals, he went from bed to bed, saying a comforting word to each and every person who was sick. Then, he would address them all together, encouraging them to sanctify their sufferings. Sometimes his humility would cause him to flee from the hospitals when the sick would cry out: "The saint has performed a miracle!"

  

His special concern, however, was for vagrant or corrupt young women. He would gladly give his life to save those unwary young people and their dreams and hopes from corruption.

  

He gave his constant advice and help to the people of the convents of St. Raphael, of Providence, of Holy Cross, of St. Mary Magdalene dei Pazzi, and of the Visitation. He was not even embarrassed to beg for them, and he did it with great eloquence, especially when there were urgent cases to solve.

  

Baccher attests to the fact that "he took every care not only for their spiritual guidance, but also for their temporal needs." He found very valuable collaborators for his work among the wealthy and powerful penitents who gave their assistance voluntarily. For some he had even stipulated a monthly sum to be offered and was punctual in collecting in person or through a messenger. He was doing this for God's poor, and nothing else mattered.

  

His confessor, Fr. Ceraso, affirmed: "I never heard that anyone who went to him for help was left without receiving it. People came to him in a continual stream."

  

In 1808, when it became difficult for him to get around because of his legs, his worst torment was not the "thorns and fire" in his legs, but the fact that he was no longer able to help his convents as he wished. He then resorted to beg by correspondence with letters filled with faith and encouragement. That year a very interesting incident happened. One night he urged Vincent Parlati to come with him in his carriage on the following day to go to the convent of St. Raphael. The following evening they presented themselves at the convent unexpected. Fr. Francis first went to pray in the chapel and then stopped to talk with the Superior. They had just started conversing when they heard a great confusion: the inmates of the house were asking for more food. Francis let them come to him to express their grievance. When he finally managed to quiet them down, he spoke to them about God and of His paternal and divine goodness and providence. "Have no doubt," he said, "you will have everything you need. Starting tomorrow, you will have as usual and even more." He then left the convent, but he did not want to return to the carriage. Leaning on Parlati, they walked up the road in spite of the pain in his legs. They had barely gone a few steps when they met Dr. Amantea, who was greatly surprised to see the Saint on the road and at that hour. Francis brushed aside the small talk and without any further ado he acquainted him with the situation at the convent of St. Raphael. The Doctor took 200 Ducats from his purse and placed them in his hands. Later, when Parlati asked him what had prompted him to take that particular road, Francis replied: "I just thought it was a good road, and indeed it was!"

  

The following year Parlati found himself 740 Ducats short to pay a debt. There was despair in his heart for not being able to keep his promise and because of the shame upon his honor. He had already mentioned this predicament to the Saint three times. He had entreated him to make an exception for this time and to lend him the money from his special fund. The Saint pretended to listen to him and then kept repeating, "Have faith, have faith!" Finally he spoke more explicitly, telling Parlati to get all the money he had without counting it and to have faith in God. As the payday came, the poor man could not sleep, yet hoped for a miracle. He went to pay his debt. He counted the money, and the full amount was there, plus 150 Ducats to spare. Francis had assured him: "Tomorrow you will pay your debt and you will have more money than you need."

  

When the Saint's sufferings became unbearable, some of his friends decided to close the doors at twelve in order to allow him some time to rest. But either because of indiscretion, or faith, or necessity, some managed to get the key and, through a private entrance, they managed to reach the Saint at all hours just as before. He himself never showed any impatience; instead, he was always gay, serene, and calm. He listened to them for long hours; he absolved them and blessed them. He was a man for all, forgetting his pains, and ignoring completely the needs of his weak body. Sometimes, though, this weakness had the upper hand: he could not keep his head up while speaking to somebody. Sometimes he fainted in the arms of whoever was sitting at his side, confessing to him or listening to him speak of God. There is martyrdom where one gives his blood for the faith, but there is also another martyrdom where one gives his whole life for love.

  

Toward the beginning of 1808 the Barnabite, Fr. Vincent Sangermano, returned after 27 years as a missionary in Burma. He told Fr. Francis of the wonders he had experienced in the midst of God’s people in Burma and also of the horrible battles he had to wage against the devil. Hearing these inspiring stories, the Saint's face became radiant with joy and ardent desire. One day, he exclaimed: "Oh, how many times I have yearned to wear the purple!" which greatly surprised those who heard him. They did not know however, that Fr. Francis had refused the episcopate not once but several times. The good old man brought his hands crosswise to his neck and, pretending to cut it, added: "Quite another purple, my dear, quite another purple!" referring to martyrdom.

  

XVII. THE RADIANT SUNSET

The victim was ready for the final immolation. Purified by pain and exalted by love, Francis was advancing toward his goal with his body completely decayed but his soul pure and glowing. The end being near, his eyes and voice had a transparency reminiscent of heaven. His pupils were fixed on the highest ideals while his lips murmured the apostle's passionate sign: "I long to die so I can be with Christ!" Yet, he had to undergo the supreme test of abandonment. He was to remain alone. He had been like Christ in life, and would be like Him in death. It was June 1814 and the visitors to Portanova were decreasing in number. Fr. Bianchi's health was declining: he no longer had the strength to hear confessions or to speak at any great length. He spent many long hours alone. Lossa and Capolla alternated in taking care of his sores. When they left, he turned to the pictures covering the walls of his cell to converse with each one of them: the Savior, Mary Queen of Paradise, St. Francis of Assisi, and Sister Mary Frances.

  

On June 9 he sent Lossa to the tomb of Sister Mary Frances, hoping he would return with a message of comfort. His friend returned with this message: Francis was to suffer happily for a crown of glory like hers was awaiting him in Paradise.

  

As the summer advanced the heat increased, and so did his pains. God allowed the assistance of friends to be reduced, so that often he was left to the mistreatments of hired servants. He even lacked the usual morning wonderful experience of the Eucharist. This was truly his supreme holocaust, the supreme immolation. It seemed a miracle that in the midst of so much pain he lived to see the beginning of 1815. By now he was motionless, as if he were nailed to a cross. He breathed with difficulty, his vision had dimmed, gangrene in his legs spread, and a twisted hernia tortured his side.

  

On January 27, 1815 because of a fall he had incurred in an attempt to safeguard his modesty, it seemed as though the end had come. The Viaticum was taken to him. The victim of love was lying on the cross of suffering, experiencing a dark spiritual desolation which made him cry: "Father! Father, why have you abandoned me?" just as he had predicted many years before, saying: "God has granted me the grace of serving Him and of loving Him in cheerfulness of spirit. At the end of my life, however, I too must feel the tribulations, the anguish of the soul, and the violence of temptation."

  

But then there was calm. Francis was waiting for a promised visit from heaven. On January 29 he said to his confessor, Fr. Cesaro: "The Servant of God has kept her word; she has faithfully fulfilled her promise." He related that Sister Mary Frances had come to him, had seated herself at the side of his bed and had given him a foretaste of the joys of heaven.

  

The news spread quickly; his spiritual children returned to see their Father for the last time. They heard him repeat again and again: "My God! Blessed be God! I praise you! I thank you! Lord, I want to suffer for you!" At sunset of January 29 he received the Sacrament of the sick. Forty eight years previously, on that very day, he had offered his First Mass.

  

He smiled at his friends Ferrigni and Agnello Coppola, who had returned after a brief period of separation. During the night of January 30, six of his friends kept watch. At about five in the morning, Francis asked again for the Viaticum. The priest, fifteen minutes after giving him Communion, bent to listen to his breathing. He then realized that the blessed soul had peacefully returned to heaven. It was Tuesday, January 31, 1815.

  

XVIII. IN THE GLORY OF THE SAINTS

"The Saint of Portanova is dead!" was the cry that quickly spread all through Naples. "Let's go and see the Saint!" The crowd was so numerous it became necessary to block off the roads and put up barricades. When the Saint, dressed in his habit, was taken from the small cell to the church, the barricades could not hold the dense crowd. People were impatient to take a piece of cloth from his tunic or bits of hair as living relics. On the following morning, February 1, his funeral Mass was held with great solemnity. All the seminarians from the diocesan seminary were present, showing such a spontaneous and fitting homage for one who had greatly loved priests and had been their saintly leader and father in Naples.

  

Guards and soldiers on horseback were employed to control the crowd. When the evening came, it was necessary to revert to trickery to disperse the people: they were told that the body would be exposed again the following day. It was only then that the church gradually became empty. The simple wooden coffin was then closed and placed in the tomb beside the altar, nearest to the sanctuary, in the church of St. Mary in Portanova. But this was only for a short while.

  

Twenty years before, Francis, arriving at the church of St. Joseph and St. Theresa of the Carmelites in Pontecorvo, had said: "There will come a time when I will sleep in this church next to the small window where the nuns receive Holy Communion." Another time he said: "Pay attention! You will see one day what will happen in this church." Another time he said to a confrere, referring to the church: "You will see what a Paradise it will be."

  

Scarcely five years after his death, when the Napoleonic onslaught ended and the religious Congregations were re-established, the Barnabites took possession of the convent and church of St. Joseph at Pontecorvo. During the night of July 14, 1820 in the midst of the protest and tears of the people in Portanova, the body of the Saint was transported and placed in one of the niches behind the sanctuary exactly near the window where the Carmelite nuns used to receive Holy Communion.

  

Meanwhile, many miracles and graces were attributed to his intercession. In 1816, scarcely a year and a half after his death, a young 13 year-old hemiplegic Neapolitan girl, tormented with spasms, one day had a vision of St. Francis. He told her: "Get up, for you are well." She did as she was bade and, truly, she was healed. This was the first of the miracles proposed and approved for the Beatification process. The second miracle was with a 32 year-old lady whose body had been reduced to a most painful and horrible sore. In this condition, the lady only wished to die. But one day, moved by deep faith, she put an image of the Blessed on her wounds and prayed to him. Suddenly, all the sores disappeared! The lady was restored to full health and serenity.

  

The Apostolic Process took its time through the Popes Pius VII, Gregory XVI, and Pius IX. On February 23, 1857 Pius IX declared his virtues heroic. On February 22, 1893 Leo XIII declared him Blessed.

  

The two miracles needed for the canonization took place, one in 1933 in Perugia, and the other in 1937 in Naples. These two miracles were finally approved by Pius XII on May 1, 1951.

  

In 1933 the Barnabites were celebrating the 400th anniversary of the approval of their Congregation, when Judith Lacarella received the miracle. She suffered from cancer in her stomach and intestine. Being at the point of death, she turned for help to the Blessed Francis Xavier Bianchi. Judith started to say the novena to the Saint. On the second day, Judith found herself totally healed. She continued to say the novena in thanksgiving for the miracle received.

  

The second miracle happened to a worker in Naples who also got sick with cancer, with no hope of recovery. His mother and sisters kept going to Pontecorvo to beg the intercession of Blessed Francis. Their faith and persistence were rewarded on November 3, 1937 when De Rosa found himself totally healed and able to go back to work.

  

The solemn canonization ceremony was set by Pius XII for October 21, 1951. With his beautiful and characteristic prayer, he is now blessing us:

  

"May the Lord God, guard and bless you.

May he turn his Holy Face toward you.

May he give you peace,

and may he free you from sin.

May his love grow in you,

and may he grant you his great gift of final

perseverance. Amen"

  

On June 18, 1972 the body of St. Francis Bianchi was moved from St. Joseph at Pontecorvo to the church of St. Mary of Caravaggio, at the center of the city of Naples, transforming it in a fitting shrine to satisfy the popular devotion toward the Saint.

  

Fr. Felix M. Sala

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

A photo of a huge tangled mass of dried up brown grapevines turned into this abstract after inverting,boosting, rotating,cropping, more boosting, and more edits in Picnik. Finally a mirror frame looks like background bokeh, then a museum matt. What does this make you feel like? What emotion does it emote? What does it remind you of?

 

The contrast of the sharp and out of focus areas is disconcerting somehow. The repeated pattern is like the repeating of gossip, just what a sharp tongue does.

 

I think of the twisted together vines and how gossip travels in a perverted tangled mass like the grapevines I saw. Gossip even travels in Christian circles many times under the guise of a prayer need. "We should pray for such and such person because she did this or that...." You know what I'm talking about! Oh, it looks good like this brightly colored abstract but underneath it all is the old brown dried up grapevine mass. A tangled mess of words that end up defaming, detracting, even slandering and not edifying or building up the other person.

 

The rainbow thing at the bottom looks like a tongue wagging, flapping, it's rooted in the grapevine, part of the mess!

 

James 3:1-12

1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation. 2 For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body. 3 Behold, we put bits in the horses' mouths, that they may obey us; and we turn about their whole body. 4 Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth. 5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth! 6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. 7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: 8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. 9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. 10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. 11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter? 12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.

Juan Luna (1857-1899)

La Patria En Peligro (The French Conflagration)

signed (lower right)

oil on canvas

27” x 51 1/2” (69 cm x 131 cm)

 

Opening bid: P 8,000,000

 

Lot 96 of the Leon Gallery auction on 18 February 2017. Please see www.leon-gallery.com for more details.

 

Provenance:

Ramon J. Fernandez was a prominent businessman, mayor of Manila from 1920 to 1923, and later became a senator. He belonged to the era in Philippine history pregnant with moral virtues. His simple ways belied his stature as a man of good will, unimpeachable character, genuine patriotism and solid achievements. One of the 11 children of Isidro Fernandez, a suger industrialist from Binondo, and Francisca de Castro, he was born on April 12, 1878, in San Miguel, Manila. After obtaining a B.A. from the Ateneo Municipal de Manila in 1898, he pursued an electrical engineering course in London. He was related to Don Jose Bonifacio Roxas, prominent businessman, who helped him in his studies and career.

 

Don Ramon returned in 1901 and organized the electrical lighting system of the San Miguel Brewery in 1901, where he worked the shipping line of Fernandez Hermanos in 1904. The brothers later purchased the shipping line of the Compañia Maritima in 1912. Ramon took over the management of this line in 1939 following the death, of Jose, who had headed it for 27 years. On March 4, 1920, Gov. Francis Burton Harrison appointed him mayor of Manila. During his term the famous cabinet crisis took place in July, 1923.

 

He figured in this affair by his refusal to comply with Gov. Leonard Wood’s demand to have American Detective Ray Conley reinstated in the Manila Police Force. In October of that year he ran for senator of the fourth senatorial district, and defeated the Wood-sponsored candidate, Juan Sumulong of the Democratas. He served the remaining two years of the term of Pedro Guevara who had been named Resident Commissioner to the United States. Fernandez was the publisher of such nationalistic periodicals as "El Debate", "La Opinion" and "Pagkakaisa". He married Felisa Hocson in 1908 but they had no children. He was 86 when he died in San Juan, Rizal, on Nov. 10, 1964. (Source: Filipinas Heritage Library Archive)

 

Augusto “Toto” M. R. Gonzalez shares that “The Ramon Fernandez and Felisa Hocson y Valenzuela residence in San Juan… was set on top of the Pinaglabanan hill on 4 hectares directly across from the Pinaglabanan Church; it had a racecourse for horses; sheep and deer were also raised on the property. The house was hung with large masterpieces by prewar Filipino masters like Fabian de la Rosa, Fernando Amorsolo, and Jorge Pineda.”

 

Source: Retrato Photo Archive of the Filipinas Heritage Library, Ramon J. Fernandez, Retrieved from URL. (www.retrato.com.ph/list.asp subject=82&heading=&s... searchwhere=&keyword=&pg=17)

 

Literature: Zoilo M. Galang et al., Encyclopedia of the Philippines (Vol. II – ART), McCullough Printing Company, Manila, 1953, p. 255 (illustrated)

 

Painted in Paris, "La Patria En Peligro” is all about recalling the weight of a glorious episode in an unnamed country’s history. It can be any country, but what is important is Freedom was the common denominator of revolutionary dreams.

 

When Luna arrived in Paris in 1885 however, the French Salon was dying, Impressionism has already passed its zenith, and Neo Impressionism, its offshoot, was gaining force. Yet the old French Salon held on to its classicist moorings, thus Luna entered his Spoliarium in the Salon of 1886 set up by the Society of French Artists, where it competed with 2,500 works from all over Europe. That it managed to win a bronze medal of the third class was no mean feat.

 

In an assessment of his art, historians distinguish two Lunas. One is an informal Luna, who painted for the sheer joy of it. The other is the Luna who projected an imposing public image, the theatrical, grandiose Luna who beat the European Salon aesthetes at their own game.

 

The variety of figures and the well-developed composition allow one to postulate that the painting was not the master’s first on the historical theme. Nurtured in the academic classical canons then prevalent all over the Western World, Luna followed the conventional steps in attaining professional success.

 

In 1887, Luna went to Spain to enter in that year's Exposition where two of his historical themed pieces, the La Batalla de Lepanto and the Rendicion de Granada (Surrender of Granada), both won in the exhibition. Earlier in May 1884, he shipped the large canvas of the Spoliarium to Madrid for the year's Exposición Nacional de Bellas Artes where he was the first recipient of the three gold medals awarded in the exhibition.

 

But all of that happened in traditional old Madrid, and in Paris, Luna realized the painful limitations of the style called the Grand Manner sanctioned by the Salon pedants. It was also a groaning from the sheer weight of its sentimental aestheticism and melodramatic clichés. Gladiatorial contests, Roman orgies, Oriental baths, Pygmalion and Galatea... In Paris Luna had misgivings.

 

The Paris Exposition of 1889 was meant to celebrate a century of progress for France since the Revolution: “To see is to believe,” wrote Luna of it to Javier Gomez... ...by 26 May 1889 however, in his letter to Javier Gomez de la Serna: ...”all historical painting is false, starting with the very concept. And those who think that correct drawing, good composition, brilliant coloring and a lot of adornment are enough to make it valid are mistaken.” This statement, however, does not signify Luna’s break with the academic tradition nor his sympathy with impressionism, as many critics earlier presumed, but rather his leaving towards the more progressive faction of the Salon — “I belong to the dissident Salon” he declared on 5 May 1890 to Rizal. The Salon of 1890, which had Luna so excited, was the first show of a new group, the Societe Nationale des Beaux Arts, which advocated for a slightly more liberal Salon.

 

The new group felt that the old Societe des Artistes Independants that had seceded in 1884, was too avant garde to be academically competent and disciplined Luna’s choice of subject was influenced by his sympathy for members of the salon who were members of the Socialist Party of France.

 

These socialist artists had adopted the Courbet dictum that the ordinary happenings of everyday life were as valid a subject for art as great historical events; and in their vision of art as a medium for exposing political and social evils they espoused the Daumier doctrine though not his caricaturing style. Socialist art would not gain ground as Luna expected, but it would be effective in politicizing the masses in other countries such as Russia.

 

With the rich dark grey to black tones, the influence of Courbet, who advocated drawni g subjects from one’s own time is manifest in "La Patria En Peligro". With its elements of Romanticism, his style opens up comparisons to Delacroix, Rembrandt and Daumier. In the same way that Daumier’s “The Uprising” depicts a moment of revolutionary uproar in the streets, with people defined by indeterminate surface treatments against a scumbled background and at enough distance to diminish detail, Luna paints a sweep of space, totally avoiding lavish detail and animate it with human activity, corporeal but somewhat vague.

 

In the same way that Rembrandt’s “Nightwatch” made effective use of light and shadow (tenebrism) and the perception of motion in what would have been a static military portrait. Tenebrism, from the Italian, tenebroso (murky) is a style of painting using violent contrasts of light and dark, and where darkness becomes a dominating feature of the image. Yet the rich, dark palette is broken with delicate yet dramatic passages of white areas.

 

In "La Patria En Peligro", Luna did not give emphasis on precise drawing that characterized the academic art earlier in his career, and instead gave a new prominence to freely brushed color using larger, looser brushstrokes and less precise lines. In the same way that Delacroix’s “Liberty leading the People” depicted Liberty as both an allegorical goddess-figure and a robust woman of the people, "La Patria En Peligro" features a robust woman holding a child sufficiently infused with allegory. Some characters are represented more distinctly than others, and the three or four figures who are more distinctly identified are supplemented by almost as many subordinate figures, included by Luna for pictorial effect. The barely distinguishable human figures unleash elementary and destructive passions.

 

The monochromatically dark tonality, kindled here and there by flashes of color, adds power. Abandoning his use of vivid colors, Luna uses dark browns, grays and greens as the background. Luna’s portrayal of the event is a tangle of people depicted across the canvas and depicted in a storm of brushstrokes. Luna incorporated ambiguities, rapid changes of scale, leaving the precise identity of certain areas difficult to decipher, yet it engages our imaginative participation.

 

But the entire work is diffused with a vital energy. To render spatial depth, he toned down the color contrasts and intensity. Color, by contrast, has no strong role. But the very tactile presence of the dark strokes create an insistent surface interest. This creates a dramatic understatement, and the human forms are set into exaggerated relief, emphasizing their physical realism. The splendor of the opulent blacks and crimsons, and the raw brushwork full of animation and unexpected jumps, do not alter the monumentality achieved by the composition.

 

The painting’s inner tension corresponds to its graphic expression; the work appears spontaneous and animated, bursting with action and energy Well balanced elements, verified proportions, well matched postures, and concordant rhythms: those were not an application of set rules, but Luna’s sweet poetics.

 

Dirty dark clouds and blackish shadows convey a compassion for the common man creating a somber “realism”. The tense, heavy atmosphere is further stressed by the strange glows emanating from behind. It is by temperament, an inner fire, which Luna preferred to interpret his subject, the edifying emotion and passion.

I was in the area, checking up on the Heath Spotted Orchids, and the church was a five minute drive away, in the grounds of a former country house.

 

I park at the church and find it locked, as expected, but there were directions to a keyholder nearby, walking into the cobbled squares and converted estate buildings now executive housing.

 

I ring the bell: nothing

 

I ring again: nothing

 

I use the knocker: dog barks. Dog attacks the door.

 

There is angry voices. Or voice. There was the sound of the dog being put into a side room, and the struggle to close the door.

 

The front door opened: yes?

 

Can I have the church key, please?

 

Not sure if I still have it.

 

Why'd you want it?

 

To photograph the interior.

 

Who're with?

 

I'm with no one, I am photographing all parish churches in the county, and would like to do this one. I showed him my driving licence which should say under job title: obsessive and church crawler.

 

He seemed satisfied, and let me have the key.

 

Phew.

 

------------------------------------------------

 

Substantially rebuilt after a fire of 1598. The welcoming interior displays no chancel arch, although the doorways in the arcade show where the medieval rood screen ran the width of the church. The striking east window was designed by Wallace Wood in 1954. There is a good aumbry and piscina nearby. To the north of the chancel stands the excellent tomb chest of Sir John Tufton (d. 1624). The arcade into which it is built was lowered to allow a semi-circular alabaster ceiling to be inserted to set the composition off. Because it is completely free-standing it is one of the easiest tomb chests in Kent to study, with five sons kneeling on the south side and four daughters on the north . In addition there are complicated coats of arms and an inscription which records the rebuilding of the church by Tufton after the fire. On top of the chest lie Sir John and his wife, with their son Nicholas kneeling between their heads. Much of the monument is still covered with its original paint. The organ, which stands in the south aisle, may be the instrument on which Sir Arthur Sullivan composed 'The Lost Chord'. It originally stood in Hothfield Place where Sullivan was a frequent guest.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Hothfield

 

--------------------------------------------

 

HOTHFIELD

IS the next parish northward from Great Chart, and is so called from the bothe, or heath within it. The greatest part of this parish lies within the hundred of Chart and Longbridge, and the remainder in that of Calehill. It is in the division of East Kent.

 

THE PARISH of Hothfield lies a little more than two miles from Ashford north-westward, the high road from which towards Lenham and Maidstone goes through it over Hothfield heath. It contains about 1250 acres, and fifty houses, the rents of it are about 1300l. per annum. It is not a pleasant, nor is it accounted a healthy situation, owing probably to the many low and watry lands in and about it. The river Stour, which rises at Lenham, runs along the southern side of the parish, which is watered likewise by several small streams, which rise about Charing and Westwell, from under the chalk hills, and join the Stour here. The heath, which contains near one half of the parish, consists mostly of a deep sand, and has much peat on it, which is continually dug by the poor for firing. On the east and west sides of the heath, the latter being called West-street, are two hamlets of houses, which form the scattered village of Hothfield. The Place-house stands on a hill, at a small distance from the corner of the heath southward, with some small plantations of trees about it, forming a principal object to the country round it. It is a square mansion, built of Portland stone, by the late earl of Thanet, on the scite of the antient mansion, close to the church; it has a good prospect round it. The adjoining grass grounds are extensive, and well laid out for the view over them; the water, which rises at no great distance from the house, becomes very soon a tolerable sized stream, and running on in sight of it, joins the Stour a little above Worting mill; these grass lands are fertile and good fatting land, like those mentioned before, near Godington, in Great Chart. The parsonage house, which is a neat dwelling of white stucco, stands at the southern corner of the heath, at the foot of the hill, adjoining the Place grounds, near West-street. Between the heath and Potter's corner, towards Ashford, the soil begins to approach much of the quarry stone.

 

Though the land in the parish is naturally poor, it is rendered productive by the chalk and lime procured from the down hills. The inhabitants have an unlimited right of commoning with those of the adjoining parish of Westwell, to upwards of five hundred acres of common, which affords them the means of keeping a cow and their poultry, which, with the liberty of digging peat, draws a number of certificated poor to reside here. There is not one dissenter in the parish.

 

Jack Cade, the noted rebel, in Henry the VI.th's reign, though generally supposed to be taken by Alexander Iden, esq. the sheriff, in a field belonging to Ripple manor, in the adjoining parish of Westwell, was discovered, as some say, in a field in this parish, still named from him, Jack Cade's field, now laid open with the rest of the grounds adjoining to Hothfieldplace.

 

The plant caryophyllata montena, or water avens, which is a very uncommon one, grows in a wood near Barber's hill, in this parish.

 

THE MANOR OF HOTHFIELD seems, in very early times, to have had the same owners as the barony of Chilham, and to have continued so, for a considerable length of time after the descendants of Fulbert de Dover were become extinct here. Bartholomew de Badlesmere, who in the 5th year of king Edward II. had a grant of this manor as well as of Chilham in see, appears to have held this manor of Hothfield by grand sergeantry of the archbishop, and accordingly, in the 8th year of it, at the enthroning of archbishop Walter Reynolds, he made his claim, and was allowed to perform the office of chamberlain for that day, and to serve up the water, for the archbishop to wash his hands; for which his fees were, the furniture of his bedchamber, and the bason and towel made use of for that purpose; (fn. 1) and in the next year he obtained of the king, a charter of free-warren for his demesne lands within this manor among others. After this the manor of Hothfield continued to be held by the like service, and continued in the same owners as that of Chilham, (fn. 2) down to Thomas lord Roos, who became entitled to the see of it, who for his attachment to the house of Lancaster, was, with others, attainted, in the 1st year of king Edward IV.'s reign, and his lands confiscated to the crown. But Margaret his mother, being possessed of it for her life, afterwards married Roger Wentworth, esq. whom she survived, and died possessed of it in the 18th year of that reign; upon which, by reason of the above attaint, the crown became entitled to it, the inquisition for which was found in the 4th year of that reign; immediately after which, the king granted it to Sir John Fogge, of Repton, who was comptroller of his household and one of his privy council, for his life. On king Richard III.'s accession to the crown, he took shelter in the abbey of Westminster, from whence he was invited by the king, who in the presence of a numerous assembly gave him his hand, and bid him be confident that from thenceforward he was sure to him in affection. This is rather mentioned, as divers chronicles have erroneously mentioned that he was an attorney, whom this prince had pardoned for forgery. He died possessed of it in the 17th year of Henry VII. where it remained till Henry VIII. granted it, at the very latter end of his reign, to John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, in Sussex, whose lands were disgavelled by the acts of 2 and 3 Edward VI. who afterwards resided at Hothfield, where he kept his shrievalty in the 3d year of queen Elizabeth. He was descended from ancestors who were originally written Toketon, and held lands in Rainham, in this county, as early as king John's reign; (fn. 3) one of whom was seated at Northiam, in Sussex, in king Richard the IId.'s reign, at which time they were written as at present, Tufton, and they continued there till John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, before-mentioned, removed hither. He died in 1567, and was buried in this church, leaving one son John Tufton, who resided at Hothfield-place, and in July, in the 16th year of queen Elizabeth, anno 1573, entertained the queen here, in her progress through this county. In the 17th year of that reign he was sheriff, and being a person of eminent repure and abilities, he was knighted by king James, in his 1st year, and created a baronet at the first institution of that order, on June 19, 1611. He married Olimpia, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. of Sileham, in Rainham, by whom he had three daughters; and secondly Christian, daughter and coheir of Sir Humphry Brown, a justice of the common pleas. He died in 1624, and was buried in this church, having had by her several sons and daughters. Of the former, Nicholas the eldest, succeeded him in title and estates. Sir Humphry was of Bobbing and the Mote, in Maidstone, and Sir William was of Vinters, in Boxley, both baronets, of whom further mention has already been made in the former parts of this history.

 

Sir Nicholas Tufton, the eldest son, was by letters patent, dated Nov. 1, anno 2 Charles I. created lord Tufton, baron of Tufton, in Sussex; and on August 5, in the 4th year of that reign, earl of the Isle of Thanet, in this county. He had four sons and nine daughters; of the former, John succeeded him in honors, and Cecil, was father of Sir Charles Tufton, of Twickenham, in Middlesex. John, the eldest son, second earl of Thanet, married in 1629 Margaret, eldest daughter and coheir of Richard, earl of Dorset, by his wife the lady Anne Clifford, sole daughter and heir of George, earl of Cumberland, and baroness of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy, by which marriage these tithes descended afterwards to their issue. In the time of the commonwealth, after king Charles the 1st.'s death, he was, in 1654, appointed sheriff, and however inconsistent it might be to his rank, yet he served the office. He left six sons and six daughters, and was succeeded by Nicholas his eldest son, third earl of Thanet, who by the deaths of his mother in 1676, and of his cousin-german Alethea, then wife of Edward Hungerford, esq. who died s. p. in 1678, he became heir to her, and sole heir to his grandmother Anne, lady Clifford, and consequently to the baronies of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy; dying s. p. he was succeeded as earl of Thanet and lord Clifford, &c. by his next brother John, who, on his mother's death, succeeded likewise by her will to her large estates in Yorkshire and Westmoreland, and to the hereditary in sheriffdoms of the latter and of Cumberland likewise, for it frequently happened in these hereditary sheriffdoms that female heirs became possessed of them, and consequently were sheriffs of those districts; but this was not at all an unusual thing, there being many frequent instances of women bearing that office, as may be seen in most of the books in which any mention is made of it, some instances of which the reader may see in the differtation on the office of sheriff, in vol. i. of this history. That part of their office which was incompatible for a woman to exercise, was always executed by a deputy, or shyre-clerk, in their name. But among the Harleian MSS. is a very remarkable note taken from Mr. Attorney-general Noys reading in Lincoln's inn, in 1632, in which, upon a point, whether the office of a justice of a forest might be executed by a woman; it was said, that Margaret, countess of Richmond, mother to king Henry VII. was a justice of peace; that the lady Bartlet, perhaps meant for Berkley, was also made a justice of the peace by queen Mary, in Gloucestershire; and that in Suffolk one ..... Rowse, a woman, did usually fit upon the bench at assizes and sessions among other justices, gladio cincta. John, earl of Thanet, died unmarried, as did his next brother earl Richard, so that the titles devolved to Thomas Tufton, who became the sixth earl of Thanet, and lord Clifford, which latter title was decreed to him by the house of peers in 1691. He left surviving issue five daughters and coheirs, the eldest of whom, Catherine, married Ed. Watson, viscount Sondes, son and heir of Lewis, earl of Rockingham; and the four others married likewise into noble families. He died at Hothfield in 1729, having by his will bequeathed several legacies to charitable purposes, especially towards the augmentation of small vicarages and curacies. He died without male issue, so that the titles of earl of Thanet and baron Tufton, and of baronet, descended to his nephew Sackville Tufton, eldest surviving son of his brother Sackville Tufton, fifth son of John, second earl of Thanet. But the title of baroness Clifford, which included those of Westmoreland and Vescy, upon the death of Thomas, earl of Thanet, without male issue, became in abeyance between his daughters and coheirs above-mentioned, and in 1734, king George II. confirmed that barony to Margaret, his third surviving daughter and coheir, married to Thomas Coke, lord Lovel, afterwards created earl of Leicester, which title is now again in abeyance by his death s. p. Which Sackville Tufton died in 1721, leaving Sackville the seventh earl of Thanet, whose eldest son of the same name succeeded him as eighth earl of Thanet, and rebuilt the present mansion of Hothfield-place, in which he afterwards resided, but being obliged to travel to Italy for his health, he died there at Nice in 1786, and was brought to England, and buried in the family vault at Rainham, in this county, where his several ancestors, earls of Thanet, with their countesses, and other branches of the family, lie deposited, from the time of their first accession to that title. He married Mary, daughter of lord John Philip Sackville, sister of the present duke of Dorset, by whom he had five sons and two daughters, Elizabeth; and Caroline married to Joseph Foster Barham, esq. Of the former, Sackville, born in 1769, succeeded him in honors; Charles died unmarried; John is M. P. for Appleby; Henry is M. P. for Rochester, and William. He was succeeded by his eldest son, the present right hon. Sackville Tufton, earl of Thanet, baron Tufton, lord of the honor of Skipton, in Craven, and baronet, and hereditary sheriff of the counties of Westmoreland and Cumberland, who is the present possessor of this manor and seat, and resides here, and is at present unmarried. (fn. 4)

 

The antient arms of Tufton were, Argent, on a pale, sable, an eagle displayed of the field; which coat they continued to bear till Nicholas Tufton, the first earl of Thanet, on his obtaining that earldom, altered it to that of Sable, an eagle displayed, ermine, within a bordure, argent; which coat was confirmed by Sir William Segar, garter, in 1628, and has been borne by his descendants to the present time. The present earl of Thanet bears for his coat of arms that last-mentioned; for his crest, On a wreath, a sea lion, seiant, proper; and for his supporters, Two eagles, their wings expanded, ermine.

 

SWINFORT, or Swinford, which is its more proper name, is a manor in this parish, lying in the southern part of it, near the river Stour, and probably took its name from some ford in former times over it here. However that be, it had formerly proprietors, who took their name from it; but they were never of any eminence, nor can I discover when they became extinct here; only that in king Henry V.'s reign it was in the possession of Bridges, descended from John atte Bregg, one of those eminent persons, whose effigies, kneeling and habited in armour, was painted in the window often mentioned before, in Great Chart church; and in this family the manor of Swinford continued till the latter end of king James I.'s reign, when it passed by sale from one of them to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, whose son John, earl of Thanet, before the 20th year of that reign, exchanged it for other lands, which lay more convenient to him, with his near neighbour Nicholas Toke, esq. of Godinton, in which family and name it has continued down, in like manner as that feat, to Nicholas Roundell Toke, esq. now of Godinton, the present possessor of it. A court baron is held for this manor.

 

FAUSLEY, or FOUSLEY, as it is now usually called, is the last manor to be described in this parish; its more antient name was Foughleslee, or, as it was usually pronounced, Faulesley; which name it gave to owners who in early times possessed and resided at it. John de Foughleslee, of Hothfield, was owner of it in the second year of king Richard II. and in his descendants this manor seems to have continued till about the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign, when it passed by sale to Drury; from which name, at the latter end of it, this manor was conveyed to Paris, who immediately afterwards alienated it to Bull, who soon afterwards reconveyed it back again to the same family, whence, in the next reign of king James I. it was sold to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, in whose successors, earls of Thanet, it has continued down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, the present owner of it.

 

Charities.

 

RICHARD PARIS, by deed in 1577, gave for the use of the poor, a rent charge of 16s. per annum, out of land called Hanvilles, in this parish; the trustees of which have been long ago deceased, and no new ones appointed since.

 

THOMAS KIPPS, gent. of Canterbury, by will in 1680, gave for the use of the same, an annual rent charge of 1l. out of lards in Great Chart.

 

RICHARD MADOCKE, clothier, of this parish, by will in 1596, ordered that the 11l. which he had lent to the parishioners of Hothfield, towards the rebuilding of their church, should, when repaid, be as a stock to the poor of this parish for ever.

 

SIR JOHN TUFTON, knight and baronet, and Nicholas his son, first earl of Thanet, by their wills in 1620 and in 1630, gave certain sums of money, with which were purchased eight acres of land in the parish of Kingsnoth, of the annual produce of 10l.

 

DR. JOHN GRANDORGE, by deed in 1713, gave a house and land in Newington, near Hythe, of the annual produce of 7l. which premises are vested in the earl of Thanet.

 

THOMAS, EARL OF THANET, and SACKVILLE TUFTON. Esq. grandfather of the present earl, by their deeds in 1720 and 1726, gave for a school mistress to teach 24 poor children, a rent charge and a house and two gardens, in Hothfield, the produce in money 20l. The premises were vested in Sir Penyston Lambe and Dr. John Grandorge, long since deceased; since which the trust has not been renewed; and the original writings are in the earl of Thanet's possession.

 

Such of the above benefactions as have been contributed by the Tufton family, have been ordered by their descendants to be distributed annually by the steward of Hothfield-place for the time being, without the interference of the parish officers, to such as received no relief from this parish; the family looking upon these rather as a private munisicence intended to continue under their direction.

 

The poor annually relieved are about twenty-five, casually as many.

 

HOTHFIELD is situated within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Charing.

 

¶The church, which is small, is dedicated to St. Mary, and consists of three isles and a chancel, having a low spire steeple, covered with shingles at the west end, in which are five bells, and though it stands on a hill, is yet very damp. There is not any painted glass in the windows of it. On the north side in it, is a monument of curious workmanship, having the figures of a man and woman, in full proportion, lying at length on it; at three corners of it are those of two sons and one daughter, kneeling, weeping, all in white marble; round the edges is an inscription, for Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, and Olympia his wife, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. On the monument are the arms of Tufton, with quarterings and impalements; on the sides are two inscriptions, one, that he re-edified this church after it was burnt, at his own charge, and under it made a vault for himself and his posterity, and after that he had lived eighty years, departed this life; the other enumerating his good qualities, and saying that by his will he gave perpetual legacies to this parish and that of Rainham. This monument is parted off from the north isle by a strong partition of wooden balustrades, seven feet high. The vault underneath is at most times several feet deep with water, and the few coffins which were remaining in it were some years since removed to the vaults at Rainham, where this family have been deposited ever since. On the north side of the chancel is a smaller one, formerly called St. Margaret's chapel, now shut up, and made no use of. In the south isle is a memorial for Rebecca, wife of William Henman, esq. obt. 1739, and Anna-Rebecca, their daughter, obt. 1752; arms, A lion, between three mascles, impaling a bend, cotized, engrailed. This church, which is a rectory, was always esteemed an appendage to the manor, and has passed accordingly, in like manner with it, down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, lord of the manor of Hothfield, the present patron of it.

 

This rectory is valued in the king's books at 17l. 5s. and the yearly tenths at 1l. 14s. 6d.

 

There was a pension of ten shillings paid from it to the college of Wye. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred and ninety-three, and it was valued at eighty pounds. In 1640, communicants one hundred and ninety, and valued at only sixty pounds per annum. There is a modus of two pence an acre of the pasture lands in the parish. There are twelve acres of glebe. It is now worth about one hundred and twenty pounds per annum.

 

Richard Hall, of this parish, by will in 1524, ordered that his feoffees should enfeoffe certain honest persons in his house and garden here, set beside the pelery, to the intent that the yearly serme of them should go to the maintenance of the rode-light within the church.

 

This church was burnt down in the reign of king James I. and was rebuilt at the sole expence of Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, who died in 1624. His descendant Thomas, earl of Thanet, who died in 1729, gave the present altar-piece, some of the pewing, and the pulpit.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol7/pp514-526

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

It is some weeks since I was at Hothfield, and at the end of a morning which had seen all churches visited, sadly locked. And St Margaret did not change that run.

 

Hothfield is just outside Ashford, and is now a thriving village, but the church is set away from the modern heart of the village, surrounded what once must have been a large country house, but is now executive dwellings. Once is the home of the keyholder, but there was no answer at their door, so I was unable to go inside.

 

------------------------------------------------

 

Substantially rebuilt after a fire of 1598. The welcoming interior displays no chancel arch, although the doorways in the arcade show where the medieval rood screen ran the width of the church. The striking east window was designed by Wallace Wood in 1954. There is a good aumbry and piscina nearby. To the north of the chancel stands the excellent tomb chest of Sir John Tufton (d. 1624). The arcade into which it is built was lowered to allow a semi-circular alabaster ceiling to be inserted to set the composition off. Because it is completely free-standing it is one of the easiest tomb chests in Kent to study, with five sons kneeling on the south side and four daughters on the north . In addition there are complicated coats of arms and an inscription which records the rebuilding of the church by Tufton after the fire. On top of the chest lie Sir John and his wife, with their son Nicholas kneeling between their heads. Much of the monument is still covered with its original paint. The organ, which stands in the south aisle, may be the instrument on which Sir Arthur Sullivan composed 'The Lost Chord'. It originally stood in Hothfield Place where Sullivan was a frequent guest.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Hothfield

 

--------------------------------------------

 

HOTHFIELD

IS the next parish northward from Great Chart, and is so called from the bothe, or heath within it. The greatest part of this parish lies within the hundred of Chart and Longbridge, and the remainder in that of Calehill. It is in the division of East Kent.

 

THE PARISH of Hothfield lies a little more than two miles from Ashford north-westward, the high road from which towards Lenham and Maidstone goes through it over Hothfield heath. It contains about 1250 acres, and fifty houses, the rents of it are about 1300l. per annum. It is not a pleasant, nor is it accounted a healthy situation, owing probably to the many low and watry lands in and about it. The river Stour, which rises at Lenham, runs along the southern side of the parish, which is watered likewise by several small streams, which rise about Charing and Westwell, from under the chalk hills, and join the Stour here. The heath, which contains near one half of the parish, consists mostly of a deep sand, and has much peat on it, which is continually dug by the poor for firing. On the east and west sides of the heath, the latter being called West-street, are two hamlets of houses, which form the scattered village of Hothfield. The Place-house stands on a hill, at a small distance from the corner of the heath southward, with some small plantations of trees about it, forming a principal object to the country round it. It is a square mansion, built of Portland stone, by the late earl of Thanet, on the scite of the antient mansion, close to the church; it has a good prospect round it. The adjoining grass grounds are extensive, and well laid out for the view over them; the water, which rises at no great distance from the house, becomes very soon a tolerable sized stream, and running on in sight of it, joins the Stour a little above Worting mill; these grass lands are fertile and good fatting land, like those mentioned before, near Godington, in Great Chart. The parsonage house, which is a neat dwelling of white stucco, stands at the southern corner of the heath, at the foot of the hill, adjoining the Place grounds, near West-street. Between the heath and Potter's corner, towards Ashford, the soil begins to approach much of the quarry stone.

 

Though the land in the parish is naturally poor, it is rendered productive by the chalk and lime procured from the down hills. The inhabitants have an unlimited right of commoning with those of the adjoining parish of Westwell, to upwards of five hundred acres of common, which affords them the means of keeping a cow and their poultry, which, with the liberty of digging peat, draws a number of certificated poor to reside here. There is not one dissenter in the parish.

 

Jack Cade, the noted rebel, in Henry the VI.th's reign, though generally supposed to be taken by Alexander Iden, esq. the sheriff, in a field belonging to Ripple manor, in the adjoining parish of Westwell, was discovered, as some say, in a field in this parish, still named from him, Jack Cade's field, now laid open with the rest of the grounds adjoining to Hothfieldplace.

 

The plant caryophyllata montena, or water avens, which is a very uncommon one, grows in a wood near Barber's hill, in this parish.

 

THE MANOR OF HOTHFIELD seems, in very early times, to have had the same owners as the barony of Chilham, and to have continued so, for a considerable length of time after the descendants of Fulbert de Dover were become extinct here. Bartholomew de Badlesmere, who in the 5th year of king Edward II. had a grant of this manor as well as of Chilham in see, appears to have held this manor of Hothfield by grand sergeantry of the archbishop, and accordingly, in the 8th year of it, at the enthroning of archbishop Walter Reynolds, he made his claim, and was allowed to perform the office of chamberlain for that day, and to serve up the water, for the archbishop to wash his hands; for which his fees were, the furniture of his bedchamber, and the bason and towel made use of for that purpose; (fn. 1) and in the next year he obtained of the king, a charter of free-warren for his demesne lands within this manor among others. After this the manor of Hothfield continued to be held by the like service, and continued in the same owners as that of Chilham, (fn. 2) down to Thomas lord Roos, who became entitled to the see of it, who for his attachment to the house of Lancaster, was, with others, attainted, in the 1st year of king Edward IV.'s reign, and his lands confiscated to the crown. But Margaret his mother, being possessed of it for her life, afterwards married Roger Wentworth, esq. whom she survived, and died possessed of it in the 18th year of that reign; upon which, by reason of the above attaint, the crown became entitled to it, the inquisition for which was found in the 4th year of that reign; immediately after which, the king granted it to Sir John Fogge, of Repton, who was comptroller of his household and one of his privy council, for his life. On king Richard III.'s accession to the crown, he took shelter in the abbey of Westminster, from whence he was invited by the king, who in the presence of a numerous assembly gave him his hand, and bid him be confident that from thenceforward he was sure to him in affection. This is rather mentioned, as divers chronicles have erroneously mentioned that he was an attorney, whom this prince had pardoned for forgery. He died possessed of it in the 17th year of Henry VII. where it remained till Henry VIII. granted it, at the very latter end of his reign, to John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, in Sussex, whose lands were disgavelled by the acts of 2 and 3 Edward VI. who afterwards resided at Hothfield, where he kept his shrievalty in the 3d year of queen Elizabeth. He was descended from ancestors who were originally written Toketon, and held lands in Rainham, in this county, as early as king John's reign; (fn. 3) one of whom was seated at Northiam, in Sussex, in king Richard the IId.'s reign, at which time they were written as at present, Tufton, and they continued there till John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, before-mentioned, removed hither. He died in 1567, and was buried in this church, leaving one son John Tufton, who resided at Hothfield-place, and in July, in the 16th year of queen Elizabeth, anno 1573, entertained the queen here, in her progress through this county. In the 17th year of that reign he was sheriff, and being a person of eminent repure and abilities, he was knighted by king James, in his 1st year, and created a baronet at the first institution of that order, on June 19, 1611. He married Olimpia, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. of Sileham, in Rainham, by whom he had three daughters; and secondly Christian, daughter and coheir of Sir Humphry Brown, a justice of the common pleas. He died in 1624, and was buried in this church, having had by her several sons and daughters. Of the former, Nicholas the eldest, succeeded him in title and estates. Sir Humphry was of Bobbing and the Mote, in Maidstone, and Sir William was of Vinters, in Boxley, both baronets, of whom further mention has already been made in the former parts of this history.

 

Sir Nicholas Tufton, the eldest son, was by letters patent, dated Nov. 1, anno 2 Charles I. created lord Tufton, baron of Tufton, in Sussex; and on August 5, in the 4th year of that reign, earl of the Isle of Thanet, in this county. He had four sons and nine daughters; of the former, John succeeded him in honors, and Cecil, was father of Sir Charles Tufton, of Twickenham, in Middlesex. John, the eldest son, second earl of Thanet, married in 1629 Margaret, eldest daughter and coheir of Richard, earl of Dorset, by his wife the lady Anne Clifford, sole daughter and heir of George, earl of Cumberland, and baroness of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy, by which marriage these tithes descended afterwards to their issue. In the time of the commonwealth, after king Charles the 1st.'s death, he was, in 1654, appointed sheriff, and however inconsistent it might be to his rank, yet he served the office. He left six sons and six daughters, and was succeeded by Nicholas his eldest son, third earl of Thanet, who by the deaths of his mother in 1676, and of his cousin-german Alethea, then wife of Edward Hungerford, esq. who died s. p. in 1678, he became heir to her, and sole heir to his grandmother Anne, lady Clifford, and consequently to the baronies of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy; dying s. p. he was succeeded as earl of Thanet and lord Clifford, &c. by his next brother John, who, on his mother's death, succeeded likewise by her will to her large estates in Yorkshire and Westmoreland, and to the hereditary in sheriffdoms of the latter and of Cumberland likewise, for it frequently happened in these hereditary sheriffdoms that female heirs became possessed of them, and consequently were sheriffs of those districts; but this was not at all an unusual thing, there being many frequent instances of women bearing that office, as may be seen in most of the books in which any mention is made of it, some instances of which the reader may see in the differtation on the office of sheriff, in vol. i. of this history. That part of their office which was incompatible for a woman to exercise, was always executed by a deputy, or shyre-clerk, in their name. But among the Harleian MSS. is a very remarkable note taken from Mr. Attorney-general Noys reading in Lincoln's inn, in 1632, in which, upon a point, whether the office of a justice of a forest might be executed by a woman; it was said, that Margaret, countess of Richmond, mother to king Henry VII. was a justice of peace; that the lady Bartlet, perhaps meant for Berkley, was also made a justice of the peace by queen Mary, in Gloucestershire; and that in Suffolk one ..... Rowse, a woman, did usually fit upon the bench at assizes and sessions among other justices, gladio cincta. John, earl of Thanet, died unmarried, as did his next brother earl Richard, so that the titles devolved to Thomas Tufton, who became the sixth earl of Thanet, and lord Clifford, which latter title was decreed to him by the house of peers in 1691. He left surviving issue five daughters and coheirs, the eldest of whom, Catherine, married Ed. Watson, viscount Sondes, son and heir of Lewis, earl of Rockingham; and the four others married likewise into noble families. He died at Hothfield in 1729, having by his will bequeathed several legacies to charitable purposes, especially towards the augmentation of small vicarages and curacies. He died without male issue, so that the titles of earl of Thanet and baron Tufton, and of baronet, descended to his nephew Sackville Tufton, eldest surviving son of his brother Sackville Tufton, fifth son of John, second earl of Thanet. But the title of baroness Clifford, which included those of Westmoreland and Vescy, upon the death of Thomas, earl of Thanet, without male issue, became in abeyance between his daughters and coheirs above-mentioned, and in 1734, king George II. confirmed that barony to Margaret, his third surviving daughter and coheir, married to Thomas Coke, lord Lovel, afterwards created earl of Leicester, which title is now again in abeyance by his death s. p. Which Sackville Tufton died in 1721, leaving Sackville the seventh earl of Thanet, whose eldest son of the same name succeeded him as eighth earl of Thanet, and rebuilt the present mansion of Hothfield-place, in which he afterwards resided, but being obliged to travel to Italy for his health, he died there at Nice in 1786, and was brought to England, and buried in the family vault at Rainham, in this county, where his several ancestors, earls of Thanet, with their countesses, and other branches of the family, lie deposited, from the time of their first accession to that title. He married Mary, daughter of lord John Philip Sackville, sister of the present duke of Dorset, by whom he had five sons and two daughters, Elizabeth; and Caroline married to Joseph Foster Barham, esq. Of the former, Sackville, born in 1769, succeeded him in honors; Charles died unmarried; John is M. P. for Appleby; Henry is M. P. for Rochester, and William. He was succeeded by his eldest son, the present right hon. Sackville Tufton, earl of Thanet, baron Tufton, lord of the honor of Skipton, in Craven, and baronet, and hereditary sheriff of the counties of Westmoreland and Cumberland, who is the present possessor of this manor and seat, and resides here, and is at present unmarried. (fn. 4)

 

The antient arms of Tufton were, Argent, on a pale, sable, an eagle displayed of the field; which coat they continued to bear till Nicholas Tufton, the first earl of Thanet, on his obtaining that earldom, altered it to that of Sable, an eagle displayed, ermine, within a bordure, argent; which coat was confirmed by Sir William Segar, garter, in 1628, and has been borne by his descendants to the present time. The present earl of Thanet bears for his coat of arms that last-mentioned; for his crest, On a wreath, a sea lion, seiant, proper; and for his supporters, Two eagles, their wings expanded, ermine.

 

SWINFORT, or Swinford, which is its more proper name, is a manor in this parish, lying in the southern part of it, near the river Stour, and probably took its name from some ford in former times over it here. However that be, it had formerly proprietors, who took their name from it; but they were never of any eminence, nor can I discover when they became extinct here; only that in king Henry V.'s reign it was in the possession of Bridges, descended from John atte Bregg, one of those eminent persons, whose effigies, kneeling and habited in armour, was painted in the window often mentioned before, in Great Chart church; and in this family the manor of Swinford continued till the latter end of king James I.'s reign, when it passed by sale from one of them to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, whose son John, earl of Thanet, before the 20th year of that reign, exchanged it for other lands, which lay more convenient to him, with his near neighbour Nicholas Toke, esq. of Godinton, in which family and name it has continued down, in like manner as that feat, to Nicholas Roundell Toke, esq. now of Godinton, the present possessor of it. A court baron is held for this manor.

 

FAUSLEY, or FOUSLEY, as it is now usually called, is the last manor to be described in this parish; its more antient name was Foughleslee, or, as it was usually pronounced, Faulesley; which name it gave to owners who in early times possessed and resided at it. John de Foughleslee, of Hothfield, was owner of it in the second year of king Richard II. and in his descendants this manor seems to have continued till about the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign, when it passed by sale to Drury; from which name, at the latter end of it, this manor was conveyed to Paris, who immediately afterwards alienated it to Bull, who soon afterwards reconveyed it back again to the same family, whence, in the next reign of king James I. it was sold to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, in whose successors, earls of Thanet, it has continued down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, the present owner of it.

 

Charities.

 

RICHARD PARIS, by deed in 1577, gave for the use of the poor, a rent charge of 16s. per annum, out of land called Hanvilles, in this parish; the trustees of which have been long ago deceased, and no new ones appointed since.

 

THOMAS KIPPS, gent. of Canterbury, by will in 1680, gave for the use of the same, an annual rent charge of 1l. out of lards in Great Chart.

 

RICHARD MADOCKE, clothier, of this parish, by will in 1596, ordered that the 11l. which he had lent to the parishioners of Hothfield, towards the rebuilding of their church, should, when repaid, be as a stock to the poor of this parish for ever.

 

SIR JOHN TUFTON, knight and baronet, and Nicholas his son, first earl of Thanet, by their wills in 1620 and in 1630, gave certain sums of money, with which were purchased eight acres of land in the parish of Kingsnoth, of the annual produce of 10l.

 

DR. JOHN GRANDORGE, by deed in 1713, gave a house and land in Newington, near Hythe, of the annual produce of 7l. which premises are vested in the earl of Thanet.

 

THOMAS, EARL OF THANET, and SACKVILLE TUFTON. Esq. grandfather of the present earl, by their deeds in 1720 and 1726, gave for a school mistress to teach 24 poor children, a rent charge and a house and two gardens, in Hothfield, the produce in money 20l. The premises were vested in Sir Penyston Lambe and Dr. John Grandorge, long since deceased; since which the trust has not been renewed; and the original writings are in the earl of Thanet's possession.

 

Such of the above benefactions as have been contributed by the Tufton family, have been ordered by their descendants to be distributed annually by the steward of Hothfield-place for the time being, without the interference of the parish officers, to such as received no relief from this parish; the family looking upon these rather as a private munisicence intended to continue under their direction.

 

The poor annually relieved are about twenty-five, casually as many.

 

HOTHFIELD is situated within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Charing.

 

¶The church, which is small, is dedicated to St. Mary, and consists of three isles and a chancel, having a low spire steeple, covered with shingles at the west end, in which are five bells, and though it stands on a hill, is yet very damp. There is not any painted glass in the windows of it. On the north side in it, is a monument of curious workmanship, having the figures of a man and woman, in full proportion, lying at length on it; at three corners of it are those of two sons and one daughter, kneeling, weeping, all in white marble; round the edges is an inscription, for Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, and Olympia his wife, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. On the monument are the arms of Tufton, with quarterings and impalements; on the sides are two inscriptions, one, that he re-edified this church after it was burnt, at his own charge, and under it made a vault for himself and his posterity, and after that he had lived eighty years, departed this life; the other enumerating his good qualities, and saying that by his will he gave perpetual legacies to this parish and that of Rainham. This monument is parted off from the north isle by a strong partition of wooden balustrades, seven feet high. The vault underneath is at most times several feet deep with water, and the few coffins which were remaining in it were some years since removed to the vaults at Rainham, where this family have been deposited ever since. On the north side of the chancel is a smaller one, formerly called St. Margaret's chapel, now shut up, and made no use of. In the south isle is a memorial for Rebecca, wife of William Henman, esq. obt. 1739, and Anna-Rebecca, their daughter, obt. 1752; arms, A lion, between three mascles, impaling a bend, cotized, engrailed. This church, which is a rectory, was always esteemed an appendage to the manor, and has passed accordingly, in like manner with it, down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, lord of the manor of Hothfield, the present patron of it.

 

This rectory is valued in the king's books at 17l. 5s. and the yearly tenths at 1l. 14s. 6d.

 

There was a pension of ten shillings paid from it to the college of Wye. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred and ninety-three, and it was valued at eighty pounds. In 1640, communicants one hundred and ninety, and valued at only sixty pounds per annum. There is a modus of two pence an acre of the pasture lands in the parish. There are twelve acres of glebe. It is now worth about one hundred and twenty pounds per annum.

 

Richard Hall, of this parish, by will in 1524, ordered that his feoffees should enfeoffe certain honest persons in his house and garden here, set beside the pelery, to the intent that the yearly serme of them should go to the maintenance of the rode-light within the church.

 

This church was burnt down in the reign of king James I. and was rebuilt at the sole expence of Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, who died in 1624. His descendant Thomas, earl of Thanet, who died in 1729, gave the present altar-piece, some of the pewing, and the pulpit.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol7/pp514-526

En 1921, face à l'afflux des candidats à l'émigration vers les États-Unis, l'hébergement à Cherbourg manque. La Cunard Line, la White Star Line et la Red Star Line, qui représentent les trois quarts du trafic cherbourgeois, décident de s'unir au sein de la société anonyme de l'hôtel Atlantique pour édifier un établissement moderne et adapté. Le nouvel édifice doit servir de lieu d'hébergement et de transit à 2 000 migrants à la fois, principalement en provenance de l'Europe de l'Est. Construit en 1921 par l'achitecte René Levavasseur, ses installations sont à la pointe du progrès de l'époque : salles de désinfection, cabinets médicaux, vastes dortoirs, deux réfectoires de 250 et 800 places, cuisines modernes, salles de bain, certaines équipées de baignoires...

Photographie aérienne par cerf-volant.

 

In 1921, with the influx of applicants for emigration to the United States, accommodation in Cherbourg is missing. Cunard Line, the White Star Line and Red Star Line, which account for three quarters of Cherbourg traffic, decided to unite within the corporation from Atlantic to build a modern and responsive institution. The new building should serve as a place of accommodation and transit for 2000 migrants at a time, mainly from Eastern Europe. Built in 1921 by René Levavasseur, facilities are state of the art of the time, disinfection rooms, medical offices, large bedrooms, two dining rooms of 250 and 800 seats, modern kitchens, bathrooms, some with bathtubs..

Kite Aerial Photography.

 

© Novembre 2013, François Levalet www.francoislevalet.fr

It is some weeks since I was at Hothfield, and at the end of a morning which had seen all churches visited, sadly locked. And St Margaret did not change that run.

 

Hothfield is just outside Ashford, and is now a thriving village, but the church is set away from the modern heart of the village, surrounded what once must have been a large country house, but is now executive dwellings. Once is the home of the keyholder, but there was no answer at their door, so I was unable to go inside.

 

------------------------------------------------

 

Substantially rebuilt after a fire of 1598. The welcoming interior displays no chancel arch, although the doorways in the arcade show where the medieval rood screen ran the width of the church. The striking east window was designed by Wallace Wood in 1954. There is a good aumbry and piscina nearby. To the north of the chancel stands the excellent tomb chest of Sir John Tufton (d. 1624). The arcade into which it is built was lowered to allow a semi-circular alabaster ceiling to be inserted to set the composition off. Because it is completely free-standing it is one of the easiest tomb chests in Kent to study, with five sons kneeling on the south side and four daughters on the north . In addition there are complicated coats of arms and an inscription which records the rebuilding of the church by Tufton after the fire. On top of the chest lie Sir John and his wife, with their son Nicholas kneeling between their heads. Much of the monument is still covered with its original paint. The organ, which stands in the south aisle, may be the instrument on which Sir Arthur Sullivan composed 'The Lost Chord'. It originally stood in Hothfield Place where Sullivan was a frequent guest.

 

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Hothfield

 

--------------------------------------------

 

HOTHFIELD

IS the next parish northward from Great Chart, and is so called from the bothe, or heath within it. The greatest part of this parish lies within the hundred of Chart and Longbridge, and the remainder in that of Calehill. It is in the division of East Kent.

 

THE PARISH of Hothfield lies a little more than two miles from Ashford north-westward, the high road from which towards Lenham and Maidstone goes through it over Hothfield heath. It contains about 1250 acres, and fifty houses, the rents of it are about 1300l. per annum. It is not a pleasant, nor is it accounted a healthy situation, owing probably to the many low and watry lands in and about it. The river Stour, which rises at Lenham, runs along the southern side of the parish, which is watered likewise by several small streams, which rise about Charing and Westwell, from under the chalk hills, and join the Stour here. The heath, which contains near one half of the parish, consists mostly of a deep sand, and has much peat on it, which is continually dug by the poor for firing. On the east and west sides of the heath, the latter being called West-street, are two hamlets of houses, which form the scattered village of Hothfield. The Place-house stands on a hill, at a small distance from the corner of the heath southward, with some small plantations of trees about it, forming a principal object to the country round it. It is a square mansion, built of Portland stone, by the late earl of Thanet, on the scite of the antient mansion, close to the church; it has a good prospect round it. The adjoining grass grounds are extensive, and well laid out for the view over them; the water, which rises at no great distance from the house, becomes very soon a tolerable sized stream, and running on in sight of it, joins the Stour a little above Worting mill; these grass lands are fertile and good fatting land, like those mentioned before, near Godington, in Great Chart. The parsonage house, which is a neat dwelling of white stucco, stands at the southern corner of the heath, at the foot of the hill, adjoining the Place grounds, near West-street. Between the heath and Potter's corner, towards Ashford, the soil begins to approach much of the quarry stone.

 

Though the land in the parish is naturally poor, it is rendered productive by the chalk and lime procured from the down hills. The inhabitants have an unlimited right of commoning with those of the adjoining parish of Westwell, to upwards of five hundred acres of common, which affords them the means of keeping a cow and their poultry, which, with the liberty of digging peat, draws a number of certificated poor to reside here. There is not one dissenter in the parish.

 

Jack Cade, the noted rebel, in Henry the VI.th's reign, though generally supposed to be taken by Alexander Iden, esq. the sheriff, in a field belonging to Ripple manor, in the adjoining parish of Westwell, was discovered, as some say, in a field in this parish, still named from him, Jack Cade's field, now laid open with the rest of the grounds adjoining to Hothfieldplace.

 

The plant caryophyllata montena, or water avens, which is a very uncommon one, grows in a wood near Barber's hill, in this parish.

 

THE MANOR OF HOTHFIELD seems, in very early times, to have had the same owners as the barony of Chilham, and to have continued so, for a considerable length of time after the descendants of Fulbert de Dover were become extinct here. Bartholomew de Badlesmere, who in the 5th year of king Edward II. had a grant of this manor as well as of Chilham in see, appears to have held this manor of Hothfield by grand sergeantry of the archbishop, and accordingly, in the 8th year of it, at the enthroning of archbishop Walter Reynolds, he made his claim, and was allowed to perform the office of chamberlain for that day, and to serve up the water, for the archbishop to wash his hands; for which his fees were, the furniture of his bedchamber, and the bason and towel made use of for that purpose; (fn. 1) and in the next year he obtained of the king, a charter of free-warren for his demesne lands within this manor among others. After this the manor of Hothfield continued to be held by the like service, and continued in the same owners as that of Chilham, (fn. 2) down to Thomas lord Roos, who became entitled to the see of it, who for his attachment to the house of Lancaster, was, with others, attainted, in the 1st year of king Edward IV.'s reign, and his lands confiscated to the crown. But Margaret his mother, being possessed of it for her life, afterwards married Roger Wentworth, esq. whom she survived, and died possessed of it in the 18th year of that reign; upon which, by reason of the above attaint, the crown became entitled to it, the inquisition for which was found in the 4th year of that reign; immediately after which, the king granted it to Sir John Fogge, of Repton, who was comptroller of his household and one of his privy council, for his life. On king Richard III.'s accession to the crown, he took shelter in the abbey of Westminster, from whence he was invited by the king, who in the presence of a numerous assembly gave him his hand, and bid him be confident that from thenceforward he was sure to him in affection. This is rather mentioned, as divers chronicles have erroneously mentioned that he was an attorney, whom this prince had pardoned for forgery. He died possessed of it in the 17th year of Henry VII. where it remained till Henry VIII. granted it, at the very latter end of his reign, to John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, in Sussex, whose lands were disgavelled by the acts of 2 and 3 Edward VI. who afterwards resided at Hothfield, where he kept his shrievalty in the 3d year of queen Elizabeth. He was descended from ancestors who were originally written Toketon, and held lands in Rainham, in this county, as early as king John's reign; (fn. 3) one of whom was seated at Northiam, in Sussex, in king Richard the IId.'s reign, at which time they were written as at present, Tufton, and they continued there till John Tufton, esq. of Northiam, before-mentioned, removed hither. He died in 1567, and was buried in this church, leaving one son John Tufton, who resided at Hothfield-place, and in July, in the 16th year of queen Elizabeth, anno 1573, entertained the queen here, in her progress through this county. In the 17th year of that reign he was sheriff, and being a person of eminent repure and abilities, he was knighted by king James, in his 1st year, and created a baronet at the first institution of that order, on June 19, 1611. He married Olimpia, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. of Sileham, in Rainham, by whom he had three daughters; and secondly Christian, daughter and coheir of Sir Humphry Brown, a justice of the common pleas. He died in 1624, and was buried in this church, having had by her several sons and daughters. Of the former, Nicholas the eldest, succeeded him in title and estates. Sir Humphry was of Bobbing and the Mote, in Maidstone, and Sir William was of Vinters, in Boxley, both baronets, of whom further mention has already been made in the former parts of this history.

 

Sir Nicholas Tufton, the eldest son, was by letters patent, dated Nov. 1, anno 2 Charles I. created lord Tufton, baron of Tufton, in Sussex; and on August 5, in the 4th year of that reign, earl of the Isle of Thanet, in this county. He had four sons and nine daughters; of the former, John succeeded him in honors, and Cecil, was father of Sir Charles Tufton, of Twickenham, in Middlesex. John, the eldest son, second earl of Thanet, married in 1629 Margaret, eldest daughter and coheir of Richard, earl of Dorset, by his wife the lady Anne Clifford, sole daughter and heir of George, earl of Cumberland, and baroness of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy, by which marriage these tithes descended afterwards to their issue. In the time of the commonwealth, after king Charles the 1st.'s death, he was, in 1654, appointed sheriff, and however inconsistent it might be to his rank, yet he served the office. He left six sons and six daughters, and was succeeded by Nicholas his eldest son, third earl of Thanet, who by the deaths of his mother in 1676, and of his cousin-german Alethea, then wife of Edward Hungerford, esq. who died s. p. in 1678, he became heir to her, and sole heir to his grandmother Anne, lady Clifford, and consequently to the baronies of Clifford, Westmoreland, and Vescy; dying s. p. he was succeeded as earl of Thanet and lord Clifford, &c. by his next brother John, who, on his mother's death, succeeded likewise by her will to her large estates in Yorkshire and Westmoreland, and to the hereditary in sheriffdoms of the latter and of Cumberland likewise, for it frequently happened in these hereditary sheriffdoms that female heirs became possessed of them, and consequently were sheriffs of those districts; but this was not at all an unusual thing, there being many frequent instances of women bearing that office, as may be seen in most of the books in which any mention is made of it, some instances of which the reader may see in the differtation on the office of sheriff, in vol. i. of this history. That part of their office which was incompatible for a woman to exercise, was always executed by a deputy, or shyre-clerk, in their name. But among the Harleian MSS. is a very remarkable note taken from Mr. Attorney-general Noys reading in Lincoln's inn, in 1632, in which, upon a point, whether the office of a justice of a forest might be executed by a woman; it was said, that Margaret, countess of Richmond, mother to king Henry VII. was a justice of peace; that the lady Bartlet, perhaps meant for Berkley, was also made a justice of the peace by queen Mary, in Gloucestershire; and that in Suffolk one ..... Rowse, a woman, did usually fit upon the bench at assizes and sessions among other justices, gladio cincta. John, earl of Thanet, died unmarried, as did his next brother earl Richard, so that the titles devolved to Thomas Tufton, who became the sixth earl of Thanet, and lord Clifford, which latter title was decreed to him by the house of peers in 1691. He left surviving issue five daughters and coheirs, the eldest of whom, Catherine, married Ed. Watson, viscount Sondes, son and heir of Lewis, earl of Rockingham; and the four others married likewise into noble families. He died at Hothfield in 1729, having by his will bequeathed several legacies to charitable purposes, especially towards the augmentation of small vicarages and curacies. He died without male issue, so that the titles of earl of Thanet and baron Tufton, and of baronet, descended to his nephew Sackville Tufton, eldest surviving son of his brother Sackville Tufton, fifth son of John, second earl of Thanet. But the title of baroness Clifford, which included those of Westmoreland and Vescy, upon the death of Thomas, earl of Thanet, without male issue, became in abeyance between his daughters and coheirs above-mentioned, and in 1734, king George II. confirmed that barony to Margaret, his third surviving daughter and coheir, married to Thomas Coke, lord Lovel, afterwards created earl of Leicester, which title is now again in abeyance by his death s. p. Which Sackville Tufton died in 1721, leaving Sackville the seventh earl of Thanet, whose eldest son of the same name succeeded him as eighth earl of Thanet, and rebuilt the present mansion of Hothfield-place, in which he afterwards resided, but being obliged to travel to Italy for his health, he died there at Nice in 1786, and was brought to England, and buried in the family vault at Rainham, in this county, where his several ancestors, earls of Thanet, with their countesses, and other branches of the family, lie deposited, from the time of their first accession to that title. He married Mary, daughter of lord John Philip Sackville, sister of the present duke of Dorset, by whom he had five sons and two daughters, Elizabeth; and Caroline married to Joseph Foster Barham, esq. Of the former, Sackville, born in 1769, succeeded him in honors; Charles died unmarried; John is M. P. for Appleby; Henry is M. P. for Rochester, and William. He was succeeded by his eldest son, the present right hon. Sackville Tufton, earl of Thanet, baron Tufton, lord of the honor of Skipton, in Craven, and baronet, and hereditary sheriff of the counties of Westmoreland and Cumberland, who is the present possessor of this manor and seat, and resides here, and is at present unmarried. (fn. 4)

 

The antient arms of Tufton were, Argent, on a pale, sable, an eagle displayed of the field; which coat they continued to bear till Nicholas Tufton, the first earl of Thanet, on his obtaining that earldom, altered it to that of Sable, an eagle displayed, ermine, within a bordure, argent; which coat was confirmed by Sir William Segar, garter, in 1628, and has been borne by his descendants to the present time. The present earl of Thanet bears for his coat of arms that last-mentioned; for his crest, On a wreath, a sea lion, seiant, proper; and for his supporters, Two eagles, their wings expanded, ermine.

 

SWINFORT, or Swinford, which is its more proper name, is a manor in this parish, lying in the southern part of it, near the river Stour, and probably took its name from some ford in former times over it here. However that be, it had formerly proprietors, who took their name from it; but they were never of any eminence, nor can I discover when they became extinct here; only that in king Henry V.'s reign it was in the possession of Bridges, descended from John atte Bregg, one of those eminent persons, whose effigies, kneeling and habited in armour, was painted in the window often mentioned before, in Great Chart church; and in this family the manor of Swinford continued till the latter end of king James I.'s reign, when it passed by sale from one of them to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, whose son John, earl of Thanet, before the 20th year of that reign, exchanged it for other lands, which lay more convenient to him, with his near neighbour Nicholas Toke, esq. of Godinton, in which family and name it has continued down, in like manner as that feat, to Nicholas Roundell Toke, esq. now of Godinton, the present possessor of it. A court baron is held for this manor.

 

FAUSLEY, or FOUSLEY, as it is now usually called, is the last manor to be described in this parish; its more antient name was Foughleslee, or, as it was usually pronounced, Faulesley; which name it gave to owners who in early times possessed and resided at it. John de Foughleslee, of Hothfield, was owner of it in the second year of king Richard II. and in his descendants this manor seems to have continued till about the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign, when it passed by sale to Drury; from which name, at the latter end of it, this manor was conveyed to Paris, who immediately afterwards alienated it to Bull, who soon afterwards reconveyed it back again to the same family, whence, in the next reign of king James I. it was sold to Sir Nicholas Tufton, afterwards created earl of Thanet, in whose successors, earls of Thanet, it has continued down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, the present owner of it.

 

Charities.

 

RICHARD PARIS, by deed in 1577, gave for the use of the poor, a rent charge of 16s. per annum, out of land called Hanvilles, in this parish; the trustees of which have been long ago deceased, and no new ones appointed since.

 

THOMAS KIPPS, gent. of Canterbury, by will in 1680, gave for the use of the same, an annual rent charge of 1l. out of lards in Great Chart.

 

RICHARD MADOCKE, clothier, of this parish, by will in 1596, ordered that the 11l. which he had lent to the parishioners of Hothfield, towards the rebuilding of their church, should, when repaid, be as a stock to the poor of this parish for ever.

 

SIR JOHN TUFTON, knight and baronet, and Nicholas his son, first earl of Thanet, by their wills in 1620 and in 1630, gave certain sums of money, with which were purchased eight acres of land in the parish of Kingsnoth, of the annual produce of 10l.

 

DR. JOHN GRANDORGE, by deed in 1713, gave a house and land in Newington, near Hythe, of the annual produce of 7l. which premises are vested in the earl of Thanet.

 

THOMAS, EARL OF THANET, and SACKVILLE TUFTON. Esq. grandfather of the present earl, by their deeds in 1720 and 1726, gave for a school mistress to teach 24 poor children, a rent charge and a house and two gardens, in Hothfield, the produce in money 20l. The premises were vested in Sir Penyston Lambe and Dr. John Grandorge, long since deceased; since which the trust has not been renewed; and the original writings are in the earl of Thanet's possession.

 

Such of the above benefactions as have been contributed by the Tufton family, have been ordered by their descendants to be distributed annually by the steward of Hothfield-place for the time being, without the interference of the parish officers, to such as received no relief from this parish; the family looking upon these rather as a private munisicence intended to continue under their direction.

 

The poor annually relieved are about twenty-five, casually as many.

 

HOTHFIELD is situated within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Charing.

 

¶The church, which is small, is dedicated to St. Mary, and consists of three isles and a chancel, having a low spire steeple, covered with shingles at the west end, in which are five bells, and though it stands on a hill, is yet very damp. There is not any painted glass in the windows of it. On the north side in it, is a monument of curious workmanship, having the figures of a man and woman, in full proportion, lying at length on it; at three corners of it are those of two sons and one daughter, kneeling, weeping, all in white marble; round the edges is an inscription, for Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, and Olympia his wife, daughter and heir of Christopher Blower, esq. On the monument are the arms of Tufton, with quarterings and impalements; on the sides are two inscriptions, one, that he re-edified this church after it was burnt, at his own charge, and under it made a vault for himself and his posterity, and after that he had lived eighty years, departed this life; the other enumerating his good qualities, and saying that by his will he gave perpetual legacies to this parish and that of Rainham. This monument is parted off from the north isle by a strong partition of wooden balustrades, seven feet high. The vault underneath is at most times several feet deep with water, and the few coffins which were remaining in it were some years since removed to the vaults at Rainham, where this family have been deposited ever since. On the north side of the chancel is a smaller one, formerly called St. Margaret's chapel, now shut up, and made no use of. In the south isle is a memorial for Rebecca, wife of William Henman, esq. obt. 1739, and Anna-Rebecca, their daughter, obt. 1752; arms, A lion, between three mascles, impaling a bend, cotized, engrailed. This church, which is a rectory, was always esteemed an appendage to the manor, and has passed accordingly, in like manner with it, down to the right hon. Sackville, earl of Thanet, lord of the manor of Hothfield, the present patron of it.

 

This rectory is valued in the king's books at 17l. 5s. and the yearly tenths at 1l. 14s. 6d.

 

There was a pension of ten shillings paid from it to the college of Wye. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred and ninety-three, and it was valued at eighty pounds. In 1640, communicants one hundred and ninety, and valued at only sixty pounds per annum. There is a modus of two pence an acre of the pasture lands in the parish. There are twelve acres of glebe. It is now worth about one hundred and twenty pounds per annum.

 

Richard Hall, of this parish, by will in 1524, ordered that his feoffees should enfeoffe certain honest persons in his house and garden here, set beside the pelery, to the intent that the yearly serme of them should go to the maintenance of the rode-light within the church.

 

This church was burnt down in the reign of king James I. and was rebuilt at the sole expence of Sir John Tufton, knight and baronet, who died in 1624. His descendant Thomas, earl of Thanet, who died in 1729, gave the present altar-piece, some of the pewing, and the pulpit.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol7/pp514-526

Romanian postcard by Casa Filmului Acin.

 

Film and stage actor Francis Huster (1947) is one of French cinema's most recognizable faces. With his dark good looks, he is adept at drama and comedy alike, and played both classic heroes and amiable sidekicks.

 

Francis Huster was born in Neuilly-sur-Seine, France in 1947. His parents were Charles Huster, commercial director at Lancia, and his wife, the Polish Jewish Suzette Cwajbaum, who owned a sewing atelier. His grandmother, a passionate film fan, introduced the young Francis to the cinema and the boy was soon captivated. His heroes on the big screen were John Wayne, Gary Cooper and Steve McQueen. At 15, he studied acting at the Conservatoire of Paris, and at the Cours Florent. A few years later he was a teacher there himself. In 1968 Huster went to the National Conservatory, where he won three first prizes. During his studies, he made his film debut in the title role of the religious drama La faute de l'Abbé Mouret/The Demise of Father Mouret (1970, Georges Franju). But the film was not a success, and neither were Faustine et le bel été/ Faustine and the Beautiful Summer (1972, Nina Companéez) and L'histoire très bonne et très joyeuse de Colinot Trousse-Chemise/The Edifying and Joyous Story of Colinot (1973, Nina Companéez) with Brigitte Bardot in her final role. Huster decided to focus himself on the stage. In 1971, he joined the Comédie-Française, where he became sociétaire in 1977. Huster played important stage roles like Lorenzaccio, Don Juan and Guy Blas. After a decade, he left the famous theatre company in order to play more than just the jeune premier, the classic young romantic type. Later, he founded the theatre group Compagnie Francis Huster.

 

After leaving the Comédie-Française in 1981, Francis Huster set himself to become a big star of the French cinema. He wanted to play leading roles in major films. First he played opposite Charles Aznavour in Qu'est-ce qui fait courir David?/What Makes David Run? (1981, Élie Chouraqui). Then he was among the many international stars of the successful musical epic Les uns et les autres/Boléro (1981, Claude Lelouch). He also starred opposite Valérie Kaprisky in La femme publique/The Public Woman (1984), directed by Andrzej Zulawski. Further films he played in were the thriller Equateur/Ecuador (1983, Serge Gainsbourg) with Barbara Sukowa, L'amour braque/Mad Love (1985, Andrzej Zulawski) with Sophie Marceau, and Parking (1985, Jacques Demy), a modern update of the Orpheus myth taking place in an underground parking garage with Jean Marais as the devil. In 1986 he directed his first film On a volé Charlie Spencer/Charlie Spencer is stolen (1986, Francis Huster) with Béatrice Dalle. The comedy about an unassuming bank clerk who joins up with the group of thieves who have robbed his bank, was a flop. He played the lead in Claude Lelouch’s crime comedy Tout ça... pour ça!/All That... for This?! (1993). Huster became Chevalier de la Legion d'Honneur in 1991, and was awarded the rank of Officier by Jacques Chirac in 2006. Chirac commented: "C'est un comédien absolument exceptionnel qui se donne sans réserve à son art" ("He is an absolutely exceptional actor who dedicates himself totally to his art").

 

Francis Huster had a big hit in France with the witty comedy Le dîner de cons/The Dinner Game (1997, Francis Veber). He played the friend and former rival of an arrogant publisher (Thierry Lhermitte) undone by the very man he intends to humiliate at his weekly ‘dinner of idiots’. James Travers at Films de France: “Not only is Le Dîner de cons one of Francis Veber’s funniest films, it is also his most minimalist, staged almost as a theatrical piece. The cast is small (but beautifully formed, thanks to the presence of Catherine Frot and Francis Huster) and most of the action takes place almost entirely in one set, in the manner of an American sitcom.” In 2008 he directed his second feature film, Un homme et son chien/A Man and His Dog (2008, Francis Huster). This was a remake of the neorealist classic Umberto D. (1952, Vittorio De Sica). It was the cinematic comeback for Jean-Paul Belmondo, who previously retired from acting after suffering a major stroke. Sadly the film was another flop. Huster’s most recent film is Je m'appelle Bernadette/My Name is Bernadette (2011, Jean Sagols) about Bernadette Soubirous, the peasant girl from Lourdes and her miraculous visions of the holy Mary. Francis Huster is married to Brazilian actress Cristiani Réali, and they have two daughters, Elisa (1998) and Toscane (2003).

 

Sources: James Travers (Films de France), Rebecca Flint Marx (AllMovie), Aernout Fetter (IMDb), Wikipedia and IMDb.

You may not be particularly edified by staring at our partially consumed pizza (I never think to photograph the meal before we eat it, and we were ravenous, so sue me for leaving it late) but the point is that we live in a sufficiently mad world that one can get pizza in the French Alps. Really GOOD pizza. And halfway decent Chinese food. And Indian food. Who'd have thought?

Plaque on the wall of a building in High Street, Falkland.

IR6

God saif ye king of Grit Britan France and Irland ovr soveran for of his liberality this hous did I edify.

Olympus OM-D E-M5 + Panasonic DG 25mm f/1.4

UNIACKE, RICHARD JOHN, lawyer, office holder, and politician; b. 22 Nov. 1753 in Castletownroche (Republic of Ireland), fourth son of Norman Uniacke and Alicia Purdon; m. first 3 May 1775 Martha Maria Delesdernier in Hopewell Township (N.B.), and they had six sons, including Norman Fitzgerald*, Richard John, Robert Fitzgerald*, and James Boyle*, and six daughters; m. secondly 14 Jan. 1808 Eliza Newton in Halifax, and they had one son; d. 11 Oct. 1830 in Mount Uniacke, N.S.

 

As Roman Catholics, the Uniackes had suffered much repression during the periods of Tudor and Cromwellian rule in Ireland, but by the early 1700s they had become staunch Protestants and adherents to the British crown with powerful patrons. After going to school at Lismore, Richard John was articled to a Dublin attorney, since his father had become alarmed by his son’s increasing preference for the teachings of the local Catholic priest. In Dublin Uniacke seems to have taken part in political agitation probably related to the cause of Catholic relief, and so crossed his father that the young man “in passion” left home “to seek his fortune in the New World.” First going to the West Indies, he arrived in Philadelphia in the summer of 1774 and formed a partnership with Moses Delesdernier*, a trader from Nova Scotia. After a dangerous voyage they arrived at Hopewell Township on the Petitcodiac River (N. B.), where Delesdernier became agent for the proprietors. In May 1775 Uniacke married Delesdernier’s 12-year-old daughter, Martha Maria. He was to remain devoted to her until her death in 1803.

 

The extent of Uniacke’s involvement on the rebel side of the uprising led by Jonathan Eddy* on the Chignecto Isthmus during the autumn of 1776 is difficult to determine. He was certainly initially sympathetic but seems to have supported the rebels out of fear of reprisals. Late in the year he was arrested and sent to Halifax to be tried for treason but was released, probably through the influence of Irish officers in the garrison and local officials who knew his family. In 1777 he embarked for Ireland to finish his legal studies. On 22 June 1779 he was admitted as attorney of King’s Inns, Dublin, and after his return to Nova Scotia he was admitted to the bar on 3 April 1781. His Irish connections had secured him an interview in. 1780 with Lord George Germain, secretary of state for the American colonies, who promised him the attorney generalship of Nova Scotia upon the first vacancy. One occurred in late 1781, but the position went to the more senior Richard Gibbons*, and Uniacke was appointed solicitor general on 27 Dec. 1781. He was elected to the House of Assembly in 1783 for Sackville Township.

 

Uniacke’s prospects looked excellent, but the arrival of the loyalists forced him to fight for his professional survival. The attorney generalship became vacant in 1784, but he was again passed over, this time in favour of the loyalist Sampson Salter Blowers*. However, thanks to his friend and patron, Governor John Parr*, he was made advocate general of the Vice-Admiralty Court the same year. In the assembly Uniacke became the leader of the pre-loyalists in their struggle with the loyalists to obtain patronage, and he became speaker in 1789. Parr died two years later, and a loyalist, John Wentworth*, became lieutenant governor. Wentworth’s appointment, the antipathy of the chief justice, Thomas Andrew Lumisden Strange*, and the enmity of prominent loyalists such as Blowers and Thomas Henry Barclay combined to exclude Uniacke from government and influence, and he declined to run in the 1793 elections. During the 1790s Uniacke clashed with Wentworth on several issues, once in connection with arrangements to defend Halifax against a threatened French attack. Wentworth responded by using his private correspondence with British officials to describe Uniacke’s conduct as “dark and insidious secretly connected with seditious purposes.”

 

When Strange resigned in 1797 it was accepted that Attorney General Blowers would succeed him. The loyalists were determined that Uniacke should never become attorney general, and Wentworth recommended that Jonathan Sterns, another loyalist and Blowers’s protégé, receive the position. Uniacke appealed to the home secretary, the Duke of Portland, claiming that he should succeed by seniority and citing his family’s patrons, one of whom was Portland’s brother-in-law. Portland appointed Uniacke attorney general on 9 September (the date on which Blowers became chief justice) and administered to Wentworth one of the sharpest rebukes to a Nova Scotian governor on record. The bitterness between Uniacke and Sterns was deep, and after Uniacke had severely beaten Sterns in a street fight Blowers challenged Uniacke to a duel. Blowers and Uniacke were bound over to keep the peace but the enmity between them was to last until Uniacke’s death.

 

Now more secure in his position, Uniacke re-entered the assembly in 1798 for Queens County and the next year became speaker, a position he held until he retired in 1805. In that year he published a compilation of Nova Scotian statutes between 1758 and 1804, commonly known as Uniacke’s laws and the standard reference work until 1851. While speaker he resisted Wentworth’s attempts to challenge the assembly’s right to supervise the provincial finances, and he worked to bring about Wentworth’s downfall by castigating the lieutenant governor and his appointments in communications with Lord Castlereagh, the colonial secretary. Although Wentworth had recommended him, Uniacke refused to become a member of Wentworth’s Council, and he was not appointed until 1808, after Wentworth had been replaced by Sir George Prevost*. For two decades after that date he was to occupy an extremely influential position in the government of Nova Scotia.

 

Uniacke’s constitutional thinking had been moulded by his study of Sir William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the laws of England, and it was rooted firmly in the 18th century. He wanted provincial governments to follow the model envisaged by the 18th-century British constitution, in which the fundamental principle was the balance of powers between the crown, lords, and commons and in which, he believed, the executive and legislature each had their own clear-cut functions. Uniacke ignored the changes in his lifetime which led to the executive becoming responsible to parliament; according to him, all public officials answered only to the king. His attitude was also much influenced by the excesses of the French revolutionaries, who he believed had attempted to “destroy the principles of true religion and . . . subvert the rules of civil government.” In the 1820s he expressed fears that the revolutionary “heresies” of atheism and democracy spreading to the “hoards of semi-barbarians” in the south and west of the United States would engulf New England and then British North America.

 

To avert such a catastrophe, Uniacke advocated unions of the Maritime colonies and of the Canadas, beginning in 1806 when he presented a memoir on British North America at the Colonial Office. By 1821, however, he had concluded that only a general union would save the colonies from republicanism, atheism, and democracy, and in 1822 the introduction in the British parliament of a bill to bring about the union of the Canadas spurred him to propose a general union to Frederick John Robinson, president of the Privy Council committee for trade. Others in British North America such as Jonathan Sewell*, John Beverley Robinson*, and John Strachan* were also interested in a general union, although not always for the same reasons, and several such proposals arrived in London about this time. In 1826 Uniacke brought his “Observations on the British colonies in North America with a proposal for the confederation of the whole under one government” to the Colonial Office. The “Observations” read in parts like the British North America Act of 40 years later, and were at once the most persuasive of the various schemes and the last attempt to bring about new intercolonial arrangements until the 1839 report of Lord Durham [Lambton*]. By 1826 proposals for any sort of union were not regarded with much favour in Britain, and the “Observations” were never printed, although Uniacke’s son James Boyle gave a copy to Durham.

 

Uniacke understood with greater prescience than any other British North American of his day that the British government would have to accept a substantial increase in colonial self-government if it allowed the colonies the commercial freedom he considered essential. For more than 30 years he struggled for what he called “the grand principle of free trade,” by which he meant the removal of those laws that prevented the colonies from trading wherever and in whatever they wished. From the early 1790s he wanted free ports opened in Nova Scotia so that the province could become an entrepôt for British, West Indian, and American goods. His relationship with the Halifax merchants was close and on several occasions they turned to him as the Nova Scotian most capable of putting their case to the British government. The joint report of the assembly and Council which criticized the Convention of 1818 between Britain and the United States was mostly drafted by him and comes alive with his pungent and forceful language. In it he stated that Britain “must strengthen her colonies in North America . . . to enable them to stand by her side with effect, when the struggle for which the United States are manifestly preparing shall take place.”

 

The least edifying aspect of Uniacke’s public career was his opposition to any diminution of the role of the Church of England as the established church in Nova Scotia. As a youth he was attracted to the Anglican ministry, but rebelled against the “insatiable rapacity” of its servants. In the 1780s and 1790s he was a member of Mather’s (St Matthew’s), the dissenting church in Halifax, and it was not until 1801, for reasons still unknown, that he began to pay pew rents at St Paul’s Anglican Church. After that date, however, he became a leading member of the extreme wing of the church and state party. Convinced that an established church was a necessity if Christian civilization was to triumph in its struggle against what he considered the revolutionary heresies of his day, he was utterly intransigent in his opinion that the Church of England was a bulwark of the British constitution. No one fought as hard as Uniacke to stop the secessionist Presbyterians led by Thomas McCulloch* from turning Pictou Academy into a college, and as principal law officer he drafted the restrictive charter of the academy in 1820. His opposition in 1819 to the otherwise almost unanimous consent of the assembly and Council to a bill granting dissenting ministers the right to marry by licence was most clearly expressed when he declared that “no good government can long exist without an established religion . . . and if such a bill should pass into law the final overthrow of the church must soon follow and with it the constitution of our fathers must perish.”

 

Despite these extreme opinions, Uniacke was not intolerant of other religious beliefs, and in the 1820s he was one of the foremost leaders in the struggle for Catholic emancipation in Nova Scotia. At the same time, he was sometimes conciliatory in matters which affected the established church. It was Uniacke who, during a visit to England in 1806, was able to influence the archbishop of Canterbury and the British government to require subscription to the Thirty-Nine Articles from students at King’s College only upon graduation and not on entrance. However, other members of the board of governors of the college conspired to enforce subscription upon entrance.

 

Uniacke made a substantial fortune, amassed mainly from his fees as advocate general of the Vice-Admiralty Court during the Napoleonic Wars and the War of 1812. This wealth he spent on the education of his 12 surviving children, a large town house in Halifax, and his country home, Mount Uniacke. The Mount, completed by 1815, was built 25 miles northwest of Halifax on an estate of 11,000 acres. It symbolized his triumph over the vicissitudes of life in the New World and his faith in Nova Scotia as the home for his children. Later generations remembered as grand and remarkable the sight of Uniacke and his six sons, all of whom were over six feet tall, walking through the streets of Halifax.

 

Uniacke’s politics may best be described as those of a moderate tory in his constitutional views and an extreme tory when it came to church and state. His was not, however, a conservatism that simply defended the status quo. The fetters that bound colonial trading had to be removed, the colonial constitutions changed radically, and a great colonial union created; only with the adoption of these measures could British North America survive the onslaught he long feared.

Contemporaries remembered Uniacke mostly for the sheer force of his character and his exuberance. He loved life, and family and friendships were essential to his existence. His was a personality of exaggerations and his judgements of men and events were sometimes clouded by raw emotion. He was ambitious for himself and his children, and although his ambitions were never entirely fulfilled, he achieved more than most men. Mount Uniacke is today a historic house open to the public, where the personality of a “remarkable and extraordinary man” still lives. [Dictionary of Canadian Biography]

Bl. Miriam Teresa Demjanovich, Virgin - Memorial: May 8th

 

An American nun from the Sisters of Charity of St. Elizabeth, based in Convent Station, New Jersey. Originally a teacher, she was inspired to enter religious life in 1925, but died from complications of appendicitis on May 8, 1927. During the short period of time that she lived as a nun, her spiritual director secretly employed her in drafting the subject matter for the Sisters’ conferences and retreats – she penned various religious topics that were not only insightful and edifying, but also evidently inspired.

 

After her death, Sr. Miriam Teresa's director revealed her to be the author of the conferences and he also disclosed the fact that she had been a hidden mystic - a soul whose extraordinary experiences included heavenly visions and the invisible Stigmata***. Her writings were later collected and published under the title, “Greater Perfection”, an acclaimed work of spiritual literature. This American nun was declared "Venerable" in May 2012, and Beatified on October 4, 2014. Please pray for her speedy Canonization.

 

Photo: Relic badge w/a piece of fabric taken from her clothing.

 

*** NOTE: For more information on the religious phenomenon known as the "Stigmata", please visit my Guadalupe House Blogsite.

Sir John Bradbourne c1425-1488 and wife Anne Vernon 1499

Anne wears a necklace of shells suggesting a pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela.

John was the son of Henry Bradbourne and Margaret daughter of John Bagot 1437 of Blithfield & Beatrice daughter of John Villiers of Brooksby

He m Anne daughter of Sir Richard Vernon & Benedicta / Bennet de Ludlow of Tong flic.kr/p/4oauz4 who m2 John Kniveton

Her sister Agnes m Sir John Cockayne 1504 www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/1aFT36

Their great grandson Sir Humphrey Bradbourne lies nearby www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/1192p6

Children

1. Humphrey d1520 m Margaret daughter of Nicholas Longford and Joan daughter of Laurence Warren and Margery Bulkeley ; grand daughter of Sir Ralph Longford 1432 www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/LYy7Lw

2. Anne/Agnes m Ralph Okeover of Attowe

3 Isabell m1 John Babington of Dethick (Son Thomas is at Ashover www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/J64pY1 ) .m2 Hugh Willoughby of Risley

4. Bennet 1531 www.flickr.com/gp/52219527@N00/J8W5VR m John Fitzherbert 1517 of Norbury, (The marriage was not a happy one - John separated from Benedicta early in their marriage. In his will he disinherited her and denied paternity of her children, stating "…Bennett my wyffe hath been of lewd and vile disposicion and cowde not be content with me but forsaken my houshoolde and company and lyffed in other places where yt pleased her.")

5. Beatrix m Henry Columbell of Darley

 

John was born in Hough near Ashbourne . After their marriage they took possession of a mill in Wirksworth This marriage may have been as a result of the temporary political affiliation of their fathers

On his fathers death in mid 1450s he became Lord of the Manor of Hulland / Hough and other estates. In 1463 he founded a chantry adjacent to his manor house

 

At least twice, and probably many more times, over the next few years, he found himself in trouble for illegal activities in the surrounding royal forest. In 1466 he was fined for illegally hunting, and killing a doe and 3 years later was distrained for another (unknown) offence He found the best solution to this in 1472, when he acquired the 'forestership'

In 1480 John bestowed a sizeable amount of property on the chantry he had founded and instructed that prayers were to be said for him, his wife and children, and his, and his wife's parents +++ Not content with this, he also founded another new chantry here in the south transept in 1485 where he and Anne were buried. The tomb was moved into this chapel c1840. The tomb was much damaged in the move and only the north side of the base and the effigies are original. The rest came from the tomb of Jane Sacheverell, the remnants of which survive in two pieces on the north wall of this chapel.

+++

"Indenture between John Bradburne of Hoghe, Co. Derby, Esq. and Ann his wife of the one part, and Sir Nicholas Longford, Knt., Henry Vernon, Esq., Nicholas Montgomery, Esq., John Cokayn, Esq., Richard Knyveton, Esq., John Fitzherbert, son and heir apparent of Rauff Fitz Herbert of Norbury, Rauff Okeover, son and heir apparent of Philip Okeover, John Kniveton of Underwoode, Humphrey Okeover, son and heir apparent of the said Rauff Okeover, Robert Bradshawe of Wyndeley, Sir Henry Prynce, parson of the Church of Norbury, and John Northampton, vicar of the Church of Assheburne, feoffees in certain lands &c. to the use of said John and Anne-Witnesseth that John and Anne at the desire &c. of Anne have caused Sir Nicholas &c. to be enfeoffed of a messuage,and 8 oxgangs of land in Lytteel Bradburne and of all other lands &c. which were some time of John de Pole of Hertynton (Hartington), in the town &c. of Lytteel Bradburne and of [another messuage] and 2 oxgangs of land in Lytteel Bradburne and of certain lands in Kirk Ireton Newbigging and Boylston, Co. Derb. and of a tenement and close in Bigging and of a [messuage], and a croft there, And had surrendered to the feoffees in the King's, Courts of Duffield and Wirksworth Copyhold estates in Kirk Ireton and Belper to the uses after mentioned said John and Anne charge the feoffees that conable preest be kept and had to Pay divine service in the Chapel of our lady edified in the Manor of Hoghe abovesaid to pray for the good estate of said John and Anne while living, and for their souls when dead, and also for the souls of Henry Bradburne and Margery his wife,* father and mother of said John, And also for the souls of Sir Richard Vernon, Knt. and Dame Bennet his wife, father and mother of Sd Anne, and for the soul of Roger Vernon, brother of said Ann to whom she was executrix, and by whose goods part of said lands were purchased, And for the good estate of Humphrey Bradburne, son and hr of said John and Anne, and of Margaret, wife of said Humphrey daughter to Sir Nicholas Longford and sister to Sir Nicholas Longford, Knt. that now is and for their souls when dead, and for the good estate of Rauff Okeover, son and heir apparent of Philip Oheover, and of Ann wife, of said Rauff eldest daughter of said John Bradburne and Anne, and of Isabell Bradburne second daughter of said John and Anne, and for her husband as God will provide+, and of John Fitzherbert son and heir apparent of Rauff Fitzherbert of Norbury, and of Bennet his wife 3rd daughter of said John Bradburne and Ann, and for their souls when dead, and for the souls of all the children of said John Bradburne and Sir Richard Vernon and for all the souls of the feoffees when dead and for their good estate while living. And the said John Bradburn and Ann willed that the priest should have all the profits of said lands, and the priest was not to be otherwise attendant on the inheritor of the Hoghe for the time being, but only in divine service, and that he be resident as a Vicar in his vicarage in a tenement in Holland, late in the holding of Henry Harper, and after of Tho. Key, and he was to perform daily service according to the ordinale so that he say his mass in said chapel at Hoghe, and to say on every week placibo dirigo et connendacion of Reqem, and on the friday maps of Ihu and sometime of the Cross, And daily at his mass, or (ere) he go to his lavatory after the gospel, to say in open voice for the souls of John Bradburne and Anne his wife founders of the mass and all Xten souls De profundis with the Collect Incline &c. ut animas famulor' tuor' fundator'; and the Chapel was to be repaired at the charge of the heirs of the inheritance of Hoghe, and the prieste was to do no injury to the parish church of Assheburne in Offerings or otherwise, And after the decease of John and Anne the heir of the house of Hoghe and the Vicar of Assheburne together should have the nomination of the Chaplain, but if they disagreed the Abbot of Darley was to have the appointment and the priest was to make an Obit at his own Cost in the church of Ashburne on the day of the death of said John B. the said obit to be done by the Vicar of Ashburne, the said priest and the priests and clerks of Ashburne ........... " - Church of St Oswald, Ashbourne Derbyshire

 

Olympus OM-D E-M5 + Panasonic DG 25mm f/1.4

George Buchanan (February, 1506 - 28 September 1582), was a Scottish historian and humanist scholar. He was part of the Monarchomach movement.

 

His father, a younger son of an old family, owned the farm of Moss, in the parish of Killearn, Stirling, but he died young, leaving his widow and children in poverty. George's mother, Agnes Heriot, was of the family of the Heriots of Trabroun, East Lothian, of which George Heriot, founder of Heriot's Hospital, was also a member. Buchanan is said to have attended Killearn school, but not much is known of his early education. In 1520 he was sent by his uncle, James Heriot, to the University of Paris, where, according to him, he devoted himself to the writing of verses "partly by liking, partly by compulsion (that being then the one task prescribed to youth)."

 

In 1522 his uncle died, and Buchanan was unable to continue longer in Paris; he returned to Scotland. After recovering from a severe illness, he joined the French auxiliaries who had been brought over by John Stewart, Duke of Albany, and took part in an unsuccessful foray into England. In the following year he entered the University of St Andrews, where he graduated B.A. in 1525. He had gone there chiefly for the purpose of attending the celebrated John Mair's lectures on logic; and when that teacher moved to Paris, Buchanan followed him in 1526. In 1527 he graduated B.A., and in 1528 M.A. at Paris. Next year he was appointed regent, or professor, in the College of Sainte-Barbe, and taught there for over three years. In 1529 he was elected "Procurator of the German Nation" in the University of Paris, and was re-elected four times in four successive months. He resigned his regentship in 1531, and in 1532 became tutor to Gilbert Kennedy, 3rd Earl of Cassilis, with whom he returned to Scotland early in 1537.

 

At this period Buchanan assumed the same attitude toward the Roman Catholic Church as Erasmus. He did not repudiate its doctrines, but considered himself free to criticise its practice. Though he listened with interest to the arguments of the Reformers, he did not join their ranks until 1553. His first production in Scotland, when he was in Lord Cassilis's household in the west country, was the poem Somnium, a satirical attack on the Franciscan friars and monastic life generally. This assault on the monks was not displeasing to James V, who engaged Buchanan as tutor to one of his natural sons, Lord James Stewart (not the son who was afterwards regent), and encouraged him in a more daring effort.

 

The poems Palinodia and Franciscanus et Fratres, although they remained unpublished for many years, made the author the object of bitter hatred to the Franciscan order, and put his safety in jeopardy. In 1539 there was bitter persecution of the Lutherans, and Buchanan among others was arrested. He managed to effect his escape and with considerable difficulty made his way to London and thence to Paris. In Paris, however, he found his enemy, Cardinal David Beaton, who was there as ambassador, and on the invitation of André de Gouveia, proceeded to Bordeaux. Gouveia was then principal of the newly founded College of Guienne at Bordeaux, and by his influence Buchanan was appointed professor of Latin. During his residence here, several of his best works, the translations of Medea and Alcestis, and the two dramas, Jephthes (sive Votum) and Baptistes (sive Calumnia), were completed.

 

Michel de Montaigne was Buchanan's pupil at Bordeaux and acted in his tragedies. In the essay Of Presumption he classes Buchanan with Aurat, Theodore Beza, Michel de l'Hôpital, Montdore and Turnebus, as one of the foremost Latin poets of his time. Here also Buchanan formed a lasting friendship with Julius Caesar Scaliger; in later life he won the admiration of Joseph Scaliger, who wrote an epigram on Buchanan which contains the couplet, famous in its day: "Imperii fuerat Romani Scotia limes; Romani eloquii Scotia limes erit?"

 

In 1542 or 1543 he returned to Paris, and in 1544 was appointed regent in the college of Cardinal le Moine. Among his colleagues were the renowned Muretus and Adrianus Turnebus.

 

In 1547 Buchanan joined the band of French and Portuguese humanists who had been invited by Gouveia to lecture in the Portuguese University of Coimbra. The French mathematician Elie Vinet, and the Portuguese historian, Jerónimo Osório, were among his colleagues; Gouveia, called by Montaigne le plus grand principal de France, was rector of the university, which had reached the summit of its prosperity under the patronage of King John III. But the rectorship had been coveted by Diogo de Gouveia, uncle of André and formerly head of Sainte-Barbe. It is probable that before André's death at the end of 1547 Diogo had urged the Inquisition to attack him and his staff; up to 1906, when the records of the trial were first published in full, Buchanan's biographers generally attributed the attack to the influence of Cardinal Beaton, the Franciscans, or the Jesuits, and the whole history of Buchanan's residence in Portugal was extremely obscure.

 

A commission of inquiry was appointed in October 1549 and reported in June 1550. Buchanan and two Portuguese, Diogo de Teive and João da Costa (who had succeeded to the rectorship), were committed for trial. Teive and Costa were found guilty of various offences against public order, and the evidence shows that there was ample reason for a judicial inquiry. Buchanan was accused of Lutheran and Judaistic practices. He defended himself with conspicuous ability, courage and frankness, admitting that some of the charges were true. About June 1551 he was sentenced to abjure his errors, and to be imprisoned in the monastery of São Bento in Lisbon. Here he was compelled to listen to edifying discourses from the monks, whom he found "not unkind but ignorant." In his leisure he began to translate the Psalms into Latin verse. After seven months he was released, on condition that he remained in Lisbon; and on 28 February 1552 this restriction was lifted. Buchanan at once sailed for England, but soon made his way to Paris, where in 1553 he was appointed regent in the College of Boncourt. He remained in that post for two years, and then accepted the office of tutor to the son of the Maréchal de Brissac. It was almost certainly during this last stay in France, where Protestantism was being repressed with great severity by King Francis I, that Buchanan took the side of Calvinism.

 

In 1560 or 1561 he returned to Scotland, and by April 1562 was installed as tutor to the young Queen Mary I of Scotland, who read Livy with him daily. Buchanan now openly joined the Protestant, or Reformed Church, and in 1566 was appointed by the earl of Murray principal of St Leonard's College, St Andrews. Two years before he had received from the queen the valuable gift of the revenues of Crossraguel Abbey. He was thus in good circumstances, and his fame was steadily increasing. So great, indeed, was his reputation for learning and administrative capacity that, though a layman, he was made Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1567. He had sat in the assemblies from 1563. He was the last lay person to be elected Moderator until Alison Elliot in 2004, the first female Moderator.

 

Buchanan accompanied the regent Murray into England, and his Detectio (published in 1572) was produced to the commissioners at Westminster. In 1570, after the assassination of Murray, he was appointed one of the preceptors of the young king, and it was through his tuition that James VI acquired his scholarship. While discharging the functions of royal tutor he also held other important offices. He was for a short time director of chancery, and then became Keeper of the Privy Seal of Scotland, a post which entitled him to a seat in the parliament. He appears to have continued in this office for some years, at least till 1579.

 

His last years had been occupied with completion and publication of two of his most important works, De Jure Regni apud Scotos (1579) and Rerum Scoticarum Historia (1582). He died in Edinburgh in 1582 and is buried in Greyfriars Kirkyard.

No. 2 - 4: Exploring Canterbury.

Canterbury Cathedral

 

A view of the Nave looking westwards.

 

The Nave

The Romanesque Nave was replaced in the 14th century by the one we see today. Its tall columns rise to meet in delicate vaulted arches and gilt roof bosses high over our heads. It is one of the most magnificent surviving examples of English Perpendicular Gothic, designed by Henry Yevele, the King’s Master mason.

Canterbury Cathedral

 

The most significant of Yevele's remaining works are the naves of Westminster Abbey (1362) and Canterbury Cathedral (1377-1400), the latter completed in an early Perpendicular Gothic style.

Wikipedia

 

Eadmer records:

[Eadmer, a Canterbury monk of the 12th century, was a friend of St. Anselm and of his successor. In 1120 he was invited to Scotland to become Bishop of St. Andrews, but returned to Canterbury owing to a disagreement with the King of Scotland with regard to his consecration. He wrote Historia Novorum, Vita Anselmi, and notices of SS. Dunstan, Bregwin, and Oswald.]

 

...... at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. ......

 

...... After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. .....

 

..... Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; ......

 

...... on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

...... The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. ......

 

...... Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. ......

 

...... in the year 1379, anno 2 Richard II. the same archbishop, a prelate of a public and generous spirit, directly afterwards took down the old nave of the church, which Lanfranc had erected, as being too mean and greatly inferior to the new choir, and which probably had by this time fallen into decay, purposing to rebuild it again at his own cost, ......

 

...... before the death of prior Chillenden, for he is recorded in the obituary to have fully compleated, with the help of archbishop Arundel, the rebuilding of the nave, with the chapel of the blessed Virgin Mary, situated in the same. It was thirty years in building, and the whole of it continues at this time firm and entire.

 

At the time of archbishop Sudbury's death, the west front of the church, with the two adjoining towers, had not in the progress of taking down the nave, been demolished; probably the monks terrified at the great expence which they then found they must be subject to, determined to leave this part standing, and to add such alterations as would make it, as far as possible, suitable to their new building; to effect which, they formed new windows in each tower, with pillars and arches similar to those in the rest of the nave; a large window was put in the centre of the front between them, and a new porch underneath, and the whole, excepting the two towers, was new cased with stone. ......

 

...... prior William Selling, who was elected in 1472, anno II Edward IV. and died in 1495, being the 10th year of Henry VII.'s reign. He is said to have begun to rebuild it, and his successor prior Thomas Goldstone, the second prior of that name, to have finished it before his death, which happened in 1517. This the obituary records, telling us that he erected and perfected the lofty tower in the middle of the church, between the choir and the nave, with excellent carved and gilded works, with windows and with both iron and glass work belonging to it, in which he was assisted by what his predecessor William Selling had done, and by cardinal archbishop Morton, who built great part of it at his own cost and charges. ......

 

...... there was another small chapel or chantry of the Lady Joane Brenchesley, built on the outside, but adjoining the south wall of the nave, between the two buttresses of the fourth window, having a door opened to it in the wall of the church; in it was an altar dedicated to St. John Baptist. Sir William Brenchesley, chief justice of the king's bench, was buried near it, in the nave, in 1446, ......

 

...... This spire being much damaged in the great storm which happened in November, 1703, was taken down as low as the platform and balcony, which now make the top and finishing of it. This tower is now so weakened by age, and by the alterations made in the under part of it, to make it conformable to the rest of the nave on the inside, that it has been thought necessary to strengthen it with bands of many hundred pounds weight of iron. Underneath it, in the nave, is the archbishop's consistory court, lately fitted up in an elegant manner, by the present commissary of the diocese, Sir William Scott.

 

The nave has lately been new paved with white Portland stone, and has been much admired for its simplicity and neatness. On taking up the old pavement, the modern gravestones were all removed, but there was not that delicacy and decency used, as ought to have been to the remains of those antiently buried in it, by the workmen to whom it was intrusted, to make the ground firm and sure for the new pavement. At which time the beautiful font, the gift of Dr. Warner, bishop of Rochester, and prebendary of this church, not long before the great rebellion broke out, in the last century, which stood between two of the pillars on the north side, at the lower end of the nave, was removed without the church to the adjoining circular building, northward, close to the door of the library.

 

At the upper part of the north isle of the nave near the place where Sir John Boys's monument now is, was once, in the old nave, though parted off, a kind of chapel, dedicated, as well as the altar in it, to the blessed Virgin Mary, called from thence our Lady's chapel. In it were buried the archbishops Theobald, and Richard, the immediate successor to Thomas Becket, whose leaden inscription and pontifical relics, that is, his cope, crozier and chalice were found in 1632, in digging Dr. Anian's grave; but this old chapel has not been heard of since the present nave of the church has been built.

 

At the upper part of the nave are two cross isles or wings; that on the north being called the martyrdom, from St. Thomas Becket's murder in it. In this wing stood an altar, by the wall where Dr. Chapman's monument now is, commonly called the altar of the martyrdom of St. Thomas, which, together with the place, Erasmus saw, and thus describes it. ......

 

...... On the east side of this wing is the chapel of St. Michael, built mostly on the scite of a former one, most probably, by the appearance of the architecture of it, about, or soon after the time these cross isles or wings and the nave of the church were taken down and rebuilt, but upon a smaller scale, as appears by archbishop Langton's tomb, who lived in Henry III.'s reign, which is at the east end of it, and remains one half within the chapel, and the other without, in the church-yard, the wall of the chapel being built across the middle of it. ......

 

All this before the Reformation.

 

To proceed now to the windows in the western part of the church; the great window over the western entrance into the nave, was made in the latter part of the reign of king Richard II. anno 1400; it is in the gothic stile, quite different in taste from those abovementioned, being mitred at top and very large, with abundance of compartments in several stories or stages, one above another, divided by jambs of stone work, and each finished at top in form of the niches of that order. ......

 

...... The compartments of the windows in both ranges on the sides of the nave, have each a slender border, of no meaning and as little beauty; in the midst of each throughout the whole, is a shield of arms. ......

 

Length of the nave to the foot to the steps......178 feet

 

Breadth of the nave and side isles.................. 71 feet

 

British History Online

 

To see this Large:- farm3.static.flickr.com/2682/4357168086_7db4191aa4_b.jpg

 

Taken on

October 5, 2007 at 11:49

MANIFESTLY TRUMPATHETIC...WHERE DOES IT END?--RACE TO THE BOTTOM--RE: BUSH FAMILY FORTUNE$ OF WAR--and to think the current POTU$ is even MORE Brazenly $elf-Entitled...

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

"My Brother Kept U$ $afe..." --JEB! --"Please Clap..."

[kickasspleaseclap kickasspleaseclap kickasspleaseclap...}

 

FOREWARNED: “All right. You’ve covered your ass, now.”

fb.me/2llGYmjgf

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TRUTH --The Movie /

 

CHICKENHAWK DOWN...Oops/ FLYinHIGH (Truth Is Willing But The Press..Is WEAK bit.ly/1ZIZ9CP #TruthMovie #politics #ChatterClassClown

 

"MANY POWERFUL PEOPLE don't want peace because they live off war"--Pope Francis www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/11/1384007/-Pope-Francis-M...

 

"...And these Powerful People serve their interests in the camouflage of false patriotism..."--Artist General

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

BARRY CLEVELAND ASSAILS WING NUTS w/ "Warning" Video Starring The Artist General bit.ly/1jEZlBX

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

DUBYACA-CHING: Tippin' The Plate For An Extra $LURP--Free-Range Chickenhawk Gravy-Drain:

www.cnn.com/2015/07/09/politics/george-w-bush-100k-vetera...

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

@ PEACE w/ WAR? MARTIAL PLANNERS x DEFAULT:

 

Senator Schumer--

 

Are You RECU$ED?--FOR THE RECORD: YES or NO? Does This Offend You?--Sorry. Trust-But-Verify. Nothing Personal. Just "Minding The Store..."

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

POLITICAL BRANDING IRONY--HERD INSTINCT?:

 

RECU$AL, YES OR NO--FOR THE RECORD, STAND UP AND BE COUNTED OR REMAIN $EATED

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

PRO-DIPLOMACY PUSHBACK--PERSONAL CAR IN THE MARTIAL GRAVYTRAIN? (i.e., CONFLICT-PROFIT?) Well of COURSE your position (i.e., #47Traitors) AGAINST 'Any South-Of-PERFECT' Deal w/ Iran has demonstrably*

NOTHING To DO w/ any immediate or eventual personal gane [$ic]

 

*Recu$e yourself? YES or NO...

 

(downscroll for 'Oath Of Martial Office')

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

"RECU$AL" UNNECESSARY--'I'm Blind-Trusted'..." ?

 

RARE TRUTH FROM A "VETERAN" ALL-IN$ider:

 

“THE BLIND TRUST IS AN AGE-OLD RUSE, if you will--which is to say you can always tell a blind trust what it can and cannot do. You give a blind trust rules.” --Mitt Romney

 

--“Daily Show” clip unearthed x Jon Stewart from Oct. 18, 1994

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

BY ROBUST DEFINITION: THE ROTTENE$T APPLES IN THE BARREL...

 

AKA: #47Traitors #47BreakingBad #47RecklessTweakers

 

FROM THE PAPER OF RECORD: A SEARING FRAME, SUITED FOR POSTERITY:

 

"INSTEAD OF TRYING TO BE LEADERS AND STATESMEN, the Republicans in Congress seem to think their role is outside the American government, divorced from constitutional principles, tradition and the security interests of the American people."

 

--NY Times Editorial 3.11.15:

www.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/opinion/republican-idiocy-on-i...

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

ARTIST GENERAL'S WARNING: For TRUE National Security,

 

#NEVERFORGET47Traitors: #NF47T

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

GOOD JOURNALISM PROOF OF PRINCIPLE: PORTFOLIO HYGIENE--ESPECIALLY--FOR ANTI-DIPLOMACY MILLIONAIRE-SENATE BIBITOADIES

 

(Why NOT? ASK 'EM, FOR THE RECORD, Yes Or No, 1 x 1...&WatchEm$quirm!

 

(In A Legislative Establi$hment THICK w/ Smugly Self-Entitled GROTESQUELY OVERINDULGED NumberONE-per CENTERS...expected theme: [please...] Don't VERify

 

--Just-[blind]-TRUST-Me--iT's 'COMPlicated'...

 

I.E., LET ME UNDESERVEDLY DIGNIFY Such A "Question" Then, With A Once-&-For-All-ANSWER Here--I-Mean, Let's-Be-CLEAR-Here-And-PUT-This-Nonsense-To-WRE$T [sic]

 

--Any "Appearance" Of Untoward-Personal-"Profit"

[Defense-Industry-Gravy-On-My-'Taters']

Is An UNintended Consequence--

The Hard-Working Definition Of A Happy Accident...

GOT It?)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

#MoveOverGrover INTENTION SPAN: BI-PARTISAN

(As Applied: Aggressively Progressive)

WORKING 'MODEL' --THE NORQUIST

"Taxpayer Protection Pledge"

 

TO RELEVANT HOLDERS OF FEDERAL OFFICE:

 

"RECU$E" YOURSELF FROM ANY PERSONAL PROFIT DEMONSTRABLY CONNECTED TO BLOOD$HED?

 

--Maintain Online A Public List Of Each "Yes" Or "No"...

[Including Any "Waffle" or "Dodge" Of The Question!]

 

DOWNSCROLL past relevant articles for full text of poster:

 

'OATH OF MARTIAL OFFICE'

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

YOWzur! KEATING FIVER FEELING BRAND-SEAR On Hidebound Herd Mentality Of Senate ObamaHate: #47Traitors

 

www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/11/1370132/-McCain-admits-... #Iranletter

 

IF DIPLOMACY FAILS, WAR IS THE CHARI$MATIC OPTION FOR THE #47BreakingBad GOP BOZOS On This Bus--Such Manifest AssClowns Serve Better As A Sudden Example UNDER It Than NeoContinuing ON It.

 

And, OBVIOUSLY: There Is ABSOLUTELY NO ETHICAL "ENTITLEMENT" TO PERSONALLY PROFIT FROM THEIR GROTESQUELY RECKLESS STUNT.

 

THUS: "PORTFOLIO HYGIENE"--A Moral-Pitch-Perfect Proposition For These Anti-Iran-Diplomacy WarphariSees (‪#‎47$hadesOfBetray‬)

 

Oh, Wait. "Personal-Profit-Has-Nothing-To-Do With-My-Position?" Good! Then You'll Agree To This, On Record?--

 

"AN 'OATH' OF MARTIAL OFFICE....

Downscroll For Complete Text From Poster

(After Related Articles...)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

DEAR "LOAD OF CRAP" VICE PRECEDENT CHENEY: Just Curious--Do You Have A "Vested Interest" In The NeoContractor Paid $81M To Stain America?

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

PORTFOLIO HYGIENE--Proof Of Principle. Because "Blind Trust" Is Demonstrably Obsolete. . .

 

VERSION 2.0: EXPAND TO INCLUDE: NSA OVERSIGHT MILLIONAIRES, SENATE & FISA--$ECRECY IS FOR "LOSERS" (That Would Be US, The People) i.e., 'BLIND TRU$T'? REALLY?

 

PUBLIC $elf SERVICE? Portfolio Hygiene: TRAN$PARENCY From Cheney2Feinstein: For The RECORD: YES or NO?

 

A PSA BROUGHT TO YOU x HOSEDOWN--SUCKER'S END

RE: YES, OF COURSE, "OFFEND" THEIR "DIGNITY"

[LET 'EM POUT & WHINE BUT DEMAND THEIR PUBLIC ANSWER--Can't-Stand-The-Heat?--Then-Get-The-F-Outta-The-Kitchen!]

 

NSA: NeverSurrenderAmerica! www.flickr.com/photos/29101747@N07/9555563099/in/

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

An Idea Whose Time Has Never Gone:

 

Seattle Post-Intelligencer Editorial

 

Published on Sunday, November 25, 2007

 

RADICAL ETHICS: NO BUCKS FROM WAR

 

Just less than a year from now, Americans will choose a new president. After years of debilitating public distrust, President Bush could assure a better atmosphere for his successor by adopting a rather singular idea, one that is an odd combination of radical thinking and good old American common sense.

 

President Bush (and, ideally, Vice President Dick Cheney, given his power) ought to promise not to accept any profit from war. In doing so, they would set a new, higher standard of White House ethics that might foster more rational public discourse on issues of war and peace.

 

The radical part of this idea is mainly its origin with Michael Masley, a colorful, bitingly humorous anti-war activist (he calls himself the nation's "artist general") who has been trying to get the media, Congress, anybody to ask Bush to promise never to accept any profits flowing from any military action he authorizes. But this left-wing, left-coast idea actually reaches into the heartland and history of the country. Americans have always had a healthy skepticism about unholy influence by money and power on military and foreign policy decisions. Indeed, great presidents have voiced the same concerns when they have warned about foreign entanglements (Washington), war profiteers (FDR) or the sway of the military-industrial complex (Eisenhower).

 

As much as we opposed the misguided Iraq war, we never much liked the "blood-for-oil" rhetoric. The administration could turn down some of the heat with a lifetime, no-war-profit promise. Bush's most ardent detractors (who actually might think the administration was deluded not just by neocon fantasies about promoting democracy but also by a desire to pump up profits of companies with which they have been connected) might find the chances laughably unrealistic. Perhaps, perhaps not.

 

Bush is said to believe history will look more kindly than contemporaries on the war, an idea that may not be entirely fanciful. Setting a new ethical course for himself and, by example, his successors might help clear the air for re-evaluation.

 

But even if this administration and Congress ignore the idea, the topic ought to draw discussion among 2008 presidential candidates, who have a lot of air time to fill in an overly long campaign. Forswearing profits from war is very little to ask of someone who would be president. More important, anything that can ease the painful levels of distrust among people for this or future administrations is worth consideration.

 

© 2007 The Seattle Post-Intelligencer

 

www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/11/25/5422

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

EDITOR & PUBLISHER

 

[P-I Editorial Above Featured The Next Day In E & P]

 

[ "America's Oldest Journal Covering the Newspaper Industry"

 

From Wikipedia On Editor & Publisher:

 

"...A 2001 survey of 350 newspapers in six states indicated that copy editors and their supervisors were more likely to read E&P than any other magazine in the journalistic trade press, with 80.6% of copy editors and 90.6% of supervisors reporting that they read it either regularly or occasionally."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_%26_Publisher ]

 

'Seattle P-I': Stop Bush, Cheney From Profiting Off Iraq War

posted: 11/26/2007

 

by: E&P Staff:

 

President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney should pledge not to accept any profits from the war in Iraq when they leave office, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer said in an editorial Sunday.

 

"In doing so, they would set a new, higher standard of White House ethics that might foster more rational public discourse on issues of war and peace," the editorial said.

 

The P-I piece took its inspiration from Michael Masley, the perpetually e-mailing anti-war activist who calls himself the "U.S. Artist General." Masley has campaigned to force Bush to promise not to profit from military actions he authorized.

 

"But this left-wing, left-coast idea actually reaches into the heartland and history of the country," the P-I wrote. "Americans have always had a healthy skepticism about unholy influence by money and power on military and foreign policy decisions. Indeed, great presidents have voiced the same concerns when they have warned about foreign entanglements (Washington), war profiteers (FDR) or the sway of the military-industrial complex (Eisenhower)."

 

From the start, the P-I opposed what it called "the misguided Iraq war," but at the same time it said "we never much liked the 'blood-for-oil' rhetoric" of many of the war's critics.

 

"The administration could turn down some of the heat with a lifetime, no-war-profit promise," the newspaper said. "Bush's most ardent detractors (who actually might think the administration was deluded not just by neocon fantasies about promoting democracy but also by a desire to pump up profits of companies with which they have been connected) might find the chances laughably unrealistic. Perhaps, perhaps not."

 

Presidential candidates, too, should take the pledge, the paper said.

 

"Forswearing profits from war is very little to ask of someone who would be president," it wrote. "More important, anything that can ease the painful levels of distrust among people for this or future administrations is worth consideration."

 

www.editorandpublisher.com/Article/-Seattle-P-I-Stop-Bush...

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY GUARDIAN --Trail Mix

--Steven T. Jones

 

Artist General's Warning: Recu$al question could be bad for Bush's political health Michael Masley has a question. It's a question he's been trying to get someone to ask for two years, and time is now running short to ask it. It's a good question, and if there were any justice in the world or democracy left in this orange-alerted country of ours, then Jim Lehrer would ask George W. Bush the question during the presidential debate Sept. 30.

 

The question is this: Will you agree never to accept any personal profits flowing from any military action you authorize or promote? Masley has been harassing journalists all over the country, trying to get them to ask it of Bush and the rest of his war cabinet, as well as John Kerry and anyone else running for an office that lets him or her participate in decisions likely to put foreigners on the receiving end of an American bullet or bomb.

 

For a Berkeley resident who makes his living as a street musician, Masley has a surprisingly long reach, spending up to 40 hours a week online, mining sources of information, and sending out entertaining and incisive e-missives under his "Artist General" nom de plume. The guy turns phrases in ways that cut to the heart of important issues, just as his question does.

 

If the question does get asked, Masley thinks Bush might do his deer-in-headlights impression, or that he'd dodge it or lie in a way that might touch off more media interest in the issue. After all, Vice President Dick Cheney has profited handsomely from actions he took as Poppy Bush's secretary of defense, most notably deciding to outsource many military functions and then becoming CEO of Halliburton, which then got the no-bid contracts to do that work.

 

Who knows, maybe mainstream journalists might even begin questioning why a war cabinet of Texas oilmen lied their way into occupying some of the most oil-rich regions of the world. Or maybe that's asking too much. (Steven T. Jones)

 

www.sfbg.com/38/53/x_trail_mix.html

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

MICHAEL HAYDEN (Single or DOUBLE, (Or TRIPLE?!) Digit Millionaire, On Snowden:

 

"I think there's an English word that describes selling American secrets to another government, and I do think it's treason"-- huff.to/1k8rUWZ

 

RE: PORTFOLIO HYGIENE--MICHAEL HAYDEN (And Other CronyCapitalOverSeer$, Including ALL Single-And-Double-Digit- (Feinstien Is TRIPLE, BTW) Millionaires Critically "Positioned" To Rock The Tipping Points Of War & "Security"--Is There Anything You'd Be Given To "Hide" From Us, Regarding Your (Doubtless "Complicated") Personal Investment Regimes)? Would You Agree To The Proposition Of 'Portfolio Hygiene'? Is This A Reasonable Request In Our Democracy? If NOT, WHY Not? Would Your "Answer" Be YES or NO? (Or, In An A$$clown Nutshell: 'None-Of-Our-Business'?)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  

--------------COMPLETE TEXT from POSTER:

  

AN 'OATH' OF MARTIAL OFFICE

  

WE HOLD ITS MORAL TRUTH TO BE SELF-EVIDENT,

ITS ULTIMATE WORTH IN ASKING

NOT SOLELY TO SECURE AGREEMENT

BUT TO OBLIGATE AND REMIND POWER

OF ALL DUE COMMONWEALTH

 

BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

BY THOSE IN THE WHEELHOUSE OF WAR,

THERE CAN BE NO HONORABLE RECEPTION

OR ACCEPTABLE INHERITANCE

OF PRIVATE TREASURE FROM PUBLIC BLOODSHED

 

THAT THIS QUESTION BE POSED

AND ITS POINT PRESSED AS NEEDED

 

FRAMING A MEASURE OF CHARACTER

IN THE WILLINGNESS OF MARTIAL LEADERSHIP

TO PERSONALLY SHARE IN POSSIBLE SACRIFICE--

 

ALL THE MORE APPROPRIATE IN BEING SO MUCH LESS

THAN LIFE & LIMB LOST BY THOSE SENT TO FIGHT AND DIE

 

THAT THERE CAN BE NO "OTHER PRIORITIE$" ,

NO BLESSING$ TO COUNT OR COURT

IN THE RUTHLESS CURSE OF WAR

AND NO OUTCOME TO MORE OBTAIN

THAN THE SOONEST POSSIBLE PEACE

 

THAT ANY COLLATERAL IMPULSE

TO FREE MARKET OR FAMILY FORTUNE

BE PURGED FROM THE MEANS TO THAT END

AS A VIVIDLY-BINDING MATTER OF PERSONAL HONOR,

COME WHATEVER ELSE MAY:

 

WE THE PEOPLE

DO HENCEFORTH EXPECT

 

OF PUBLIC SERVANTS EXERCISING

FATAL AUTHORITY IN OUR NAME

 

A FORMAL 'DECLARATION OF DISOWNERSHIP',

 

A FOR-THE-RECORD CONCESSION

THAT NO ENTITLEMENT EXISTS

 

TO PRESENT OR FUTURE PERSONAL PROFIT

"DEMONSTRABLY CONNECTED"

TO ANY WAR (OR BLOODSHED) AUTHORIZED, PROMOTED,

ADVANCED OR OTHERWISE

"ENGAGED ON YOUR WATCH"

 

WE THE PEOPLE HOLD OURSELVES

DESERVING OF AN EXPLANATION

 

SHOULD THE ANSWER TO THIS

"RECU$AL-FOR-LIFE" QUESTION BE "NO".

 

IF THE ANSWER IS "YES"--MARTIAL PLANNER AGREES

TO SURRENDER-ON-DEMAND SAID PROFIT

(DELIBERATE OR "UNINTENTIONAL", EXPOSED OR "DISCOVERED")

TO VETERAN BENEFIT GROUPS, COLLEGE FUNDS FOR CHILDREN

OF THE FALLEN, ETC...

  

--Artist General Michael Masley

  

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  

JUST-FOR-THE-RECORD----IN FUTURE ELECTIONS:

GOOD QUESTION?--WHAT HARM IN "ASKING" ?

--WHERE YOUR CANDIDATE STAND$: AGREE /

 

"YES" / "NO" / ..."HEDGE" -"DODGE"

On "Planned-For" Or "Inadvertent" [Personal} FORTUNE$ OF WAR...

 

RULE-OF-THUMB ON VOTE FOR ANY MILITARY ACTION"---Did You RECU$E Yourself?"

No? "TRU$T-Me, It's-NOT-About-Personal-Profit?"--

Then Set An Example,

ALL WHOSE VOTE WOULD TAKE US TO WAR--DEMONSTRATE It--RECU$E:

FORGO INVESTMENT ADVANTAGE? STAND UP WITH "YES"

OR STAND OUT WITH "NO"! ---GOT IT?

 

For-The-Record--Posterity Is All-Ears...

 

(Close-Cam Please: President, Presidential Candidate, Nominees FOR And Secretaries OF State, Defense, All High-Level War Cabinet Appointees--

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

BAWK-Bawkbawk-"FEEL$GOOD!"~CHICKENHAWK--FROM "SAY WHAT?"

Posted 3-22-13 On [Doonesbury.com]:

 

"Kick ass! If somebody tries to stop the march to democracy, we will seek them out and kill them! Our will is being tested, but we are resolute. We have a better way. Stay strong! Stay the course! Kill them! Be confident! We are going to wipe them out! We are not blinking!"

 

—George W. Bush, during a White House videoconference call, April 6, 2004

 

-------"My day of reckoning is upon me. Yours will come. I hope you will be put on trial. But mostly I hope, for your sakes, that you find the moral courage to face what you have done to me and to many, many others who deserved to live. I hope that before your time on earth ends, as mine is now ending, you will find the strength of character to stand before the American public and the world, and in particular the Iraqi people, and beg for forgiveness."

 

—Tomas Young --March 2013

 

---Into The Valley Of The Shadow Of Death,

Speaking Truth To Soulless Power, From Majestically-Absolute Moral High Ground:

www.democracynow.org/blog/2013/3/21/exclusive_tomas_young...

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

THE MOST CHICKEN-HAWKED WARPATH IN AMERICAN HISTORY: TENTH ANNIVERSARY "COMMEMORATION" bit.ly/1y7Fcu7

 

Short Measures Of Poetic Justice For The Red-Handedest Playa$ oF Our Time

 

[--CYA GROUPTHINK--PNAC Gallery+Skull-'n-Boners+Bohemian-Grovers=CRONYPALOO$A

--All-For-One, One-For-All--]

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

'RICHWITE WAR PHARISEES, Game-Skin Free':

 

"WARNING" MUSIC VIDEO / BARRY CLEVELAND w/ THE ARTIST GENERAL

 

FROM THE LATTER DAZE OF THE CHENEY-BUSH REGIME:

MUSIC VIDEO ON NEO-CONNED CHICKENHAWKED WARPATH:

BARRY CLEVELAND & THE ARTIST GENERAL: "WARNING"

www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPuuPf4gkDg&feature=player_em..

 

"WARNING" Music Vid Review: bit.ly/1s3Ez1Y

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

THE RED BANDWAGON

(apologies to William Carlos Williams / The Red Wheel Barrow)

 

Too Much Depend$ Upon

The Red Bandwagon

Glazed With Bloodshed

Beside The Gray Chickenhawks.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Injust WAR-

(apologies to e.e. cummings / In just-)

 

(They Have A: DREAM) [you better believe it!]

 

In just-

WAR

when the world is crud-lu$ious

the little lame duhbloonman

 

"whistle$" far and "wee"

and jerryandscooter come unrecu$ed

from hedgefunds and piracie$

 

to the wide-open arms of "More"

 

when the WAR is win'-fall WONderful

 

the queer ole duhbloonman "whistle$"

far and "wee"

 

and condiandkarl come $ideways

from stoploss and waterboard

 

it's WAR

and the red-footed

duhbloonman

"whistle$" far and "weeeeeee"

  

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

WE ARE THE CHICKENHAWK$

(apologies to T. S. Elliot / We Are The Hollow Men)

 

We Are The ChickenHawk$,

We Are The Neocon$,

VisionThing Filled With Gall,

ALA$, Our Tried Choices, When Taken Altogether,

Are Ghastly And Treasonous

--BIGtime--

"Through-The-Looking-Glass"...

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

THE SECOND SUCCUMBING

(Apologies to W.B. Yeats / The Second Coming}

 

Turning and Spinning in the Widening Mire

The Congress cannot hear the Precedent;

Things fall apart; the Party cannot hold;

Sheer Conarchy is loosed upon Democracy,

 

The freedom-gouging tide is loosed, and everywhere

The Standing of America is downed;

The best convictions are too polite, while the worst

Are full of obtuse intensity;

Surely some Reason is at hand.

 

Yet there instead, the Patriot “Act”!

The “Patriot” Act!

 

Hardly are those words out

When an Orwelled image out of Posse Comitatus

Troubles my sight:

 

Somewhere in the martial curfews of this seminal Treachery

A shape with Oz-lion body and the head of a borne-again fool:

An ‘Aye’ blank and clueless as the GOP itself

Is moving its leaky Trojan Agenda, but who knew?

While overhearing guffaws & careless cheering

from the belly of the beast, that all about it now should

gather threats of patriotic fillibuster, lighting & passing torchfire.

 

…Wounded cowardice drops again; but indignant courage

finds unexpected stride, in the edifying irony

that a Sitting President was on his Game after all,

as if afloat, fishing! entirely untorn,

glued from National Nightmare to “My Pet Goat.”

 

And what Hellbent Vision Thing,

its Truthless Power come round at last,

$louches towards Liberty to be Borne?

 

--Artist General / C2007 Michael Masley

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

9-11--NEVER FORGET: ON WHOSE (FOREWARNED!) "WATCH" bit.ly/Yonbpe

 

BenGHAZI?!---STFU!---DRY-DRUNK HISTORY. BARREL'S BOTTOM: Your Moment Of WEN: bit.ly/13Yebv0

 

MORE DOUG MINKLER ART: dminkler.com

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

A couple of weeks back, we met a couple in a pub in Canterbury, and they had been out exploring the city and said they were disappointed by the cathedral.

 

Not enough labels they said.

 

That not withstanding, I thought it had been some time since I last had been, so decided to revisit, see the pillars of Reculver church in the crypt and take the big lens for some detail shots.

 

We arrived just after ten, so the cathedral was pretty free of other guests, just a few guides waiting for groups and couples to guide.

 

I went round with the 50mm first, before concentrating on the medieval glass which is mostly on the south side.

 

But as you will see, the lens picked up so much more.

 

Thing is, there is always someone interesting to talk to, or wants to talk to you. As I went around, I spoke with about three guides about the project and things I have seen in the churches of the county, and the wonderful people I have met. And that continued in the cathedral.

 

I have time to look at the tombs in the Trinity Chapel, and see that Henry IV and his wife are in a tomb there, rather than ay Westminster Abbey. So I photograph them, and the Black Prince on the southern side of the chapel, along with the Bishops and Archbishops between.

 

Round to the transept and a chance to change lenses, and put on the 140-400mm for some detailed shots.

 

------------------------------------------

 

St Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived on the coast of Kent as a missionary to England in 597AD. He came from Rome, sent by Pope Gregory the Great. It is said that Gregory had been struck by the beauty of Angle slaves he saw for sale in the city market and despatched Augustine and some monks to convert them to Christianity. Augustine was given a church at Canterbury (St Martin’s, after St Martin of Tours, still standing today) by the local King, Ethelbert whose Queen, Bertha, a French Princess, was already a Christian.This building had been a place of worship during the Roman occupation of Britain and is the oldest church in England still in use. Augustine had been consecrated a bishop in France and was later made an archbishop by the Pope. He established his seat within the Roman city walls (the word cathedral is derived from the the Latin word for a chair ‘cathedra’, which is itself taken from the Greek ‘kathedra’ meaning seat.) and built the first cathedral there, becoming the first Archbishop of Canterbury. Since that time, there has been a community around the Cathedral offering daily prayer to God; this community is arguably the oldest organisation in the English speaking world. The present Archbishop, The Most Revd Justin Welby, is 105th in the line of succession from Augustine. Until the 10th century, the Cathedral community lived as the household of the Archbishop. During the 10th century, it became a formal community of Benedictine monks, which continued until the monastery was dissolved by King Henry VIII in 1540. Augustine’s original building lies beneath the floor of the Nave – it was extensively rebuilt and enlarged by the Saxons, and the Cathedral was rebuilt completely by the Normans in 1070 following a major fire. There have been many additions to the building over the last nine hundred years, but parts of the Quire and some of the windows and their stained glass date from the 12th century. By 1077, Archbishop Lanfranc had rebuilt it as a Norman church, described as “nearly perfect”. A staircase and parts of the North Wall – in the area of the North West transept also called the Martyrdom – remain from that building.

 

Canterbury’s role as one of the world’s most important pilgrimage centres in Europe is inextricably linked to the murder of its most famous Archbishop, Thomas Becket, in 1170. When, after a long lasting dispute, King Henry II is said to have exclaimed “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, four knights set off for Canterbury and murdered Thomas in his own cathedral. A sword stroke was so violent that it sliced the crown off his skull and shattered the blade’s tip on the pavement. The murder took place in what is now known as The Martyrdom. When shortly afterwards, miracles were said to take place, Canterbury became one of Europe’s most important pilgrimage centres.

 

The work of the Cathedral as a monastery came to an end in 1540, when the monastery was closed on the orders of King Henry VIII. Its role as a place of prayer continued – as it does to this day. Once the monastery had been suppressed, responsibility for the services and upkeep was given to a group of clergy known as the Chapter of Canterbury. Today, the Cathedral is still governed by the Dean and four Canons, together (in recent years) with four lay people and the Archdeacon of Ashford. During the Civil War of the 1640s, the Cathedral suffered damage at the hands of the Puritans; much of the medieval stained glass was smashed and horses were stabled in the Nave. After the Restoration in 1660, several years were spent in repairing the building. In the early 19th Century, the North West tower was found to be dangerous, and, although it dated from Lanfranc’s time, it was demolished in the early 1830s and replaced by a copy of the South West tower, thus giving a symmetrical appearance to the west end of the Cathedral. During the Second World War, the Precincts were heavily damaged by enemy action and the Cathedral’s Library was destroyed. Thankfully, the Cathedral itself was not seriously harmed, due to the bravery of the team of fire watchers, who patrolled the roofs and dealt with the incendiary bombs dropped by enemy bombers. Today, the Cathedral stands as a place where prayer to God has been offered daily for over 1,400 years; nearly 2,000 Services are held each year, as well as countless private prayers from individuals. The Cathedral offers a warm welcome to all visitors – its aim is to show people Jesus, which we do through the splendour of the building as well as the beauty of the worship.

 

www.canterbury-cathedral.org/heritage/history/cathedral-h...

 

-------------------------------------------

 

History of the cathedral

THE ORIGIN of a Christian church on the scite of the present cathedral, is supposed to have taken place as early as the Roman empire in Britain, for the use of the antient faithful and believing soldiers of their garrison here; and that Augustine found such a one standing here, adjoining to king Ethelbert's palace, which was included in the king's gift to him.

 

This supposition is founded on the records of the priory of Christ-church, (fn. 1) concurring with the common opinion of almost all our historians, who tell us of a church in Canterbury, which Augustine found standing in the east part of the city, which he had of king Ethelbert's gift, which after his consecration at Arles, in France, he commended by special dedication to the patronage of our blessed Saviour. (fn. 2)

 

According to others, the foundations only of an old church formerly built by the believing Romans, were left here, on which Augustine erected that, which he afterwards dedicated to out Saviour; (fn. 3) and indeed it is not probable that king Ethelbert should have suffered the unsightly ruins of a Christian church, which, being a Pagan, must have been very obnoxious to him, so close to his palace, and supposing these ruins had been here, would he not have suffered them to be repaired, rather than have obliged his Christian queen to travel daily to such a distance as St. Martin's church, or St. Pancrace's chapel, for the performance of her devotions.

 

Some indeed have conjectured that the church found by St. Augustine, in the east part of the city, was that of St.Martin, truly so situated; and urge in favor of it, that there have not been at any time any remains of British or Roman bricks discovered scattered in or about this church of our Saviour, those infallible, as Mr. Somner stiles them, signs of antiquity, and so generally found in buildings, which have been erected on, or close to the spot where more antient ones have stood. But to proceed, king Ethelbert's donation to Augustine was made in the year 596, who immediately afterwards went over to France, and was consecrated a bishop at Arles, and after his return, as soon as he had sufficiently finished a church here, whether built out of ruins or anew, it matters not, he exercised his episcopal function in the dedication of it, says the register of Christ-church, to the honor of Christ our Saviour; whence it afterwards obtained the name of Christ-church. (fn. 4)

 

From the time of Augustine for the space of upwards of three hundred years, there is not found in any printed or manuscript chronicle, the least mention of the fabric of this church, so that it is probable nothing befell it worthy of being recorded; however it should be mentioned, that during that period the revenues of it were much increased, for in the leiger books of it there are registered more than fifty donations of manors, lands, &c. so large and bountiful, as became the munificence of kings and nobles to confer. (fn. 5)

 

It is supposed, especially as we find no mention made of any thing to the contrary, that the fabric of this church for two hundred years after Augustine's time, met with no considerable molestations; but afterwards, the frequent invasions of the Danes involved both the civil and ecclesiastical state of this country in continual troubles and dangers; in the confusion of which, this church appears to have run into a state of decay; for when Odo was promoted to the archbishopric, in the year 938, the roof of it was in a ruinous condition; age had impaired it, and neglect had made it extremely dangerous; the walls of it were of an uneven height, according as it had been more or less decayed, and the roof of the church seemed ready to fall down on the heads of those underneath. All this the archbishop undertook to repair, and then covered the whole church with lead; to finish which, it took three years, as Osbern tells us, in the life of Odo; (fn. 6) and further, that there was not to be found a church of so large a size, capable of containing so great a multitude of people, and thus, perhaps, it continued without any material change happening to it, till the year 1011; a dismal and fatal year to this church and city; a time of unspeakable confusion and calamities; for in the month of September that year, the Danes, after a siege of twenty days, entered this city by force, burnt the houses, made a lamentable slaughter of the inhabitants, rifled this church, and then set it on fire, insomuch, that the lead with which archbishop Odo had covered it, being melted, ran down on those who were underneath. The sull story of this calamity is given by Osbern, in the life of archbishop Odo, an abridgement of which the reader will find below. (fn. 7)

 

The church now lay in ruins, without a roof, the bare walls only standing, and in this desolate condition it remained as long as the fury of the Danes prevailed, who after they had burnt the church, carried away archbishop Alphage with them, kept him in prison seven months, and then put him to death, in the year 1012, the year after which Living, or Livingus, succeeded him as archbishop, though it was rather in his calamities than in his seat of dignity, for he too was chained up by the Danes in a loathsome dungeon for seven months, before he was set free, but he so sensibly felt the deplorable state of this country, which he foresaw was every day growing worse and worse, that by a voluntary exile, he withdrew himself out of the nation, to find some solitary retirement, where he might bewail those desolations of his country, to which he was not able to bring any relief, but by his continual prayers. (fn. 8) He just outlived this storm, returned into England, and before he died saw peace and quientness restored to this land by king Canute, who gaining to himself the sole sovereignty over the nation, made it his first business to repair the injuries which had been done to the churches and monasteries in this kingdom, by his father's and his own wars. (fn. 9)

 

As for this church, archbishop Ægelnoth, who presided over it from the year 1020 to the year 1038, began and finished the repair, or rather the rebuilding of it, assisted in it by the royal munificence of the king, (fn. 10) who in 1023 presented his crown of gold to this church, and restored to it the port of Sandwich, with its liberties. (fn. 11) Notwithstanding this, in less than forty years afterwards, when Lanfranc soon after the Norman conquest came to the see, he found this church reduced almost to nothing by fire, and dilapidations; for Eadmer says, it had been consumed by a third conflagration, prior to the year of his advancement to it, in which fire almost all the antient records of the privileges of it had perished. (fn. 12)

 

The same writer has given us a description of this old church, as it was before Lanfranc came to the see; by which we learn, that at the east end there was an altar adjoining to the wall of the church, of rough unhewn stone, cemented with mortar, erected by archbishop Odo, for a repository of the body of Wilfrid, archbishop of York, which Odo had translated from Rippon hither, giving it here the highest place; at a convenient distance from this, westward, there was another altar, dedicated to Christ our Saviour, at which divine service was daily celebrated. In this altar was inclosed the head of St. Swithin, with many other relics, which archbishop Alphage brought with him from Winchester. Passing from this altar westward, many steps led down to the choir and nave, which were both even, or upon the same level. At the bottom of the steps, there was a passage into the undercroft, under all the east part of the church. (fn. 13) At the east end of which, was an altar, in which was inclosed, according to old tradition, the head of St. Furseus. From hence by a winding passage, at the west end of it, was the tomb of St. Dunstan, (fn. 14) but separated from the undercroft by a strong stone wall; over the tomb was erected a monument, pyramid wife, and at the head of it an altar, (fn. 15) for the mattin service. Between these steps, or passage into the undercroft and the nave, was the choir, (fn. 16) which was separated from the nave by a fair and decent partition, to keep off the crowds of people that usually were in the body of the church, so that the singing of the chanters in the choir might not be disturbed. About the middle of the length of the nave, were two towers or steeples, built without the walls; one on the south, and the other on the north side. In the former was the altar of St. Gregory, where was an entrance into the church by the south door, and where law controversies and pleas concerning secular matters were exercised. (fn. 17) In the latter, or north tower, was a passage for the monks into the church, from the monastery; here were the cloysters, where the novices were instructed in their religious rules and offices, and where the monks conversed together. In this tower was the altar of St. Martin. At the west end of the church was a chapel, dedicated to the blessed Virgin Mary, to which there was an ascent by steps, and at the east end of it an altar, dedicated to her, in which was inclosed the head of St. Astroburta the Virgin; and at the western part of it was the archbishop's pontifical chair, made of large stones, compacted together with mortar; a fair piece of work, and placed at a convenient distance from the altar, close to the wall of the church. (fn. 18)

 

To return now to archbishop Lanfranc, who was sent for from Normandy in 1073, being the fourth year of the Conqueror's reign, to fill this see, a time, when a man of a noble spirit, equal to the laborious task he was to undertake, was wanting especially for this church; and that he was such, the several great works which were performed by him, were incontestable proofs, as well as of his great and generous mind. At the first sight of the ruinous condition of this church, says the historian, the archbishop was struck with astonishment, and almost despaired of seeing that and the monastery re edified; but his care and perseverance raised both in all its parts anew, and that in a novel and more magnificent kind and form of structure, than had been hardly in any place before made use of in this kingdom, which made it a precedent and pattern to succeeding structures of this kind; (fn. 19) and new monasteries and churches were built after the example of it; for it should be observed, that before the coming of the Normans most of the churches and monasteries in this kingdom were of wood; (all the monasteries in my realm, says king Edgar, in his charter to the abbey of Malmesbury, dated anno 974, to the outward sight are nothing but worm-eaten and rotten timber and boards) but after the Norman conquest, such timber fabrics grew out of use, and gave place to stone buildings raised upon arches; a form of structure introduced into general use by that nation, and in these parts surnished with stone from Caen, in Normandy. (fn. 20) After this fashion archbishop Lanfranc rebuilt the whole church from the foundation, with the palace and monastery, the wall which encompassed the court, and all the offices belonging to the monastery within the wall, finishing the whole nearly within the compass of seven years; (fn. 21) besides which, he furnished the church with ornaments and rich vestments; after which, the whole being perfected, he altered the name of it, by a dedication of it to the Holy Trinity; whereas, before it was called the church of our Saviour, or Christ-church, and from the above time it bore (as by Domesday book appears) the name of the church of the Holy Trinity; this new church being built on the same spot on which the antient one stood, though on a far different model.

 

After Lanfranc's death, archbishop Anselm succeeded in the year 1093, to the see of Canterbury, and must be esteemed a principal benefactor to this church; for though his time was perplexed with a continued series of troubles, of which both banishment and poverty made no small part, which in a great measure prevented him from bestowing that cost on his church, which he would otherwise have done, yet it was through his patronage and protection, and through his care and persuasions, that the fabric of it, begun and perfected by his predecessor, became enlarged and rose to still greater splendor. (fn. 22)

 

In order to carry this forward, upon the vacancy of the priory, he constituted Ernulph and Conrad, the first in 1104, the latter in 1108, priors of this church; to whose care, being men of generous and noble minds, and of singular skill in these matters, he, during his troubles, not only committed the management of this work, but of all his other concerns during his absence.

 

Probably archbishop Anselm, on being recalled from banishment on king Henry's accession to the throne, had pulled down that part of the church built by Lanfranc, from the great tower in the middle of it to the east end, intending to rebuild it upon a still larger and more magnificent plan; when being borne down by the king's displeasure, he intrusted prior Ernulph with the work, who raised up the building with such splendor, says Malmesbury, that the like was not to be seen in all England; (fn. 23) but the short time Ernulph continued in this office did not permit him to see his undertaking finished. (fn. 24) This was left to his successor Conrad, who, as the obituary of Christ church informs us, by his great industry, magnificently perfected the choir, which his predecessor had left unfinished, (fn. 25) adorning it with curious pictures, and enriching it with many precious ornaments. (fn. 26)

 

This great undertaking was not entirely compleated at the death of archbishop Anselm, which happened in 1109, anno 9 Henry I. nor indeed for the space of five years afterwards, during which the see of Canterbury continued vacant; when being finished, in honour of its builder, and on account of its more than ordinary beauty, it gained the name of the glorious choir of Conrad. (fn. 27)

 

After the see of Canterbury had continued thus vacant for five years, Ralph, or as some call him, Rodulph, bishop of Rochester, was translated to it in the year 1114, at whose coming to it, the church was dedicated anew to the Holy Trinity, the name which had been before given to it by Lanfranc. (fn. 28) The only particular description we have of this church when thus finished, is from Gervas, the monk of this monastery, and that proves imperfect, as to the choir of Lanfranc, which had been taken down soon after his death; (fn. 29) the following is his account of the nave, or western part of it below the choir, being that which had been erected by archbishop Lanfranc, as has been before mentioned. From him we learn, that the west end, where the chapel of the Virgin Mary stood before, was now adorned with two stately towers, on the top of which were gilded pinnacles. The nave or body was supported by eight pair of pillars. At the east end of the nave, on the north side, was an oratory, dedicated in honor to the blessed Virgin, in lieu, I suppose, of the chapel, that had in the former church been dedicated to her at the west end. Between the nave and the choir there was built a great tower or steeple, as it were in the centre of the whole fabric; (fn. 30) under this tower was erected the altar of the Holy Cross; over a partition, which separated this tower from the nave, a beam was laid across from one side to the other of the church; upon the middle of this beam was fixed a great cross, between the images of the Virgin Mary and St. John, and between two cherubims. The pinnacle on the top of this tower, was a gilded cherub, and hence it was called the angel steeple; a name it is frequently called by at this day. (fn. 31)

 

This great tower had on each side a cross isle, called the north and south wings, which were uniform, of the same model and dimensions; each of them had a strong pillar in the middle for a support to the roof, and each of them had two doors or passages, by which an entrance was open to the east parts of the church. At one of these doors there was a descent by a few steps into the undercroft; at the other, there was an ascent by many steps into the upper parts of the church, that is, the choir, and the isles on each side of it. Near every one of these doors or passages, an altar was erected; at the upper door in the south wing, there was an altar in honour of All Saints; and at the lower door there was one of St. Michael; and before this altar on the south side was buried archbishop Fleologild; and on the north side, the holy Virgin Siburgis, whom St. Dunstan highly admired for her sanctity. In the north isle, by the upper door, was the altar of St. Blaze; and by the lower door, that of St. Benedict. In this wing had been interred four archbishops, Adelm and Ceolnoth, behind the altar, and Egelnoth and Wlfelm before it. At the entrance into this wing, Rodulph and his successor William Corboil, both archbishops, were buried. (fn. 32)

 

Hence, he continues, we go up by some steps into the great tower, and before us there is a door and steps leading down into the south wing, and on the right hand a pair of folding doors, with stairs going down into the nave of the church; but without turning to any of these, let us ascend eastward, till by several more steps we come to the west end of Conrad's choir; being now at the entrance of the choir, Gervas tells us, that he neither saw the choir built by Lanfranc, nor found it described by any one; that Eadmer had made mention of it, without giving any account of it, as he had done of the old church, the reason of which appears to be, that Lanfranc's choir did not long survive its founder, being pulled down as before-mentioned, by archbishop Anselm; so that it could not stand more than twenty years; therefore the want of a particular description of it will appear no great defect in the history of this church, especially as the deficiency is here supplied by Gervas's full relation of the new choir of Conrad, built instead of it; of which, whoever desires to know the whole architecture and model observed in the fabric, the order, number, height and form of the pillars and windows, may know the whole of it from him. The roof of it, he tells us, (fn. 33) was beautified with curious paintings representing heaven; (fn. 34) in several respects it was agreeable to the present choir, the stalls were large and framed of carved wood. In the middle of it, there hung a gilded crown, on which were placed four and twenty tapers of wax. From the choir an ascent of three steps led to the presbiterium, or place for the presbiters; here, he says, it would be proper to stop a little and take notice of the high altar, which was dedicated to the name of CHRIST. It was placed between two other altars, the one of St. Dunstan, the other of St. Alphage; at the east corners of the high altar were fixed two pillars of wood, beautified with silver and gold; upon these pillars was placed a beam, adorned with gold, which reached across the church, upon it there were placed the glory, (fn. 35) the images of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage, and seven chests or coffers overlaid with gold, full of the relics of many saints. Between those pillars was a cross gilded all over, and upon the upper beam of the cross were set sixty bright crystals.

 

Beyond this, by an ascent of eight steps towards the east, behind the altar, was the archiepiscopal throne, which Gervas calls the patriarchal chair, made of one stone; in this chair, according to the custom of the church, the archbishop used to sit, upon principal festivals, in his pontifical ornaments, whilst the solemn offices of religion were celebrated, until the consecration of the host, when he came down to the high altar, and there performed the solemnity of consecration. Still further, eastward, behind the patriarchal chair, (fn. 36) was a chapel in the front of the whole church, in which was an altar, dedicated to the Holy Trinity; behind which were laid the bones of two archbishops, Odo of Canterbury, and Wilfrid of York; by this chapel on the south side near the wall of the church, was laid the body of archbishop Lanfranc, and on the north side, the body of archbishop Theobald. Here it is to be observed, that under the whole east part of the church, from the angel steeple, there was an undercrost or crypt, (fn. 37) in which were several altars, chapels and sepulchres; under the chapel of the Trinity before-mentioned, were two altars, on the south side, the altar of St. Augustine, the apostle of the English nation, by which archbishop Athelred was interred. On the north side was the altar of St. John Baptist, by which was laid the body of archbishop Eadsin; under the high altar was the chapel and altar of the blessed Virgin Mary, to whom the whole undercroft was dedicated.

 

To return now, he continues, to the place where the bresbyterium and choir meet, where on each side there was a cross isle (as was to be seen in his time) which might be called the upper south and north wings; on the east side of each of these wings were two half circular recesses or nooks in the wall, arched over after the form of porticoes. Each of them had an altar, and there was the like number of altars under them in the crost. In the north wing, the north portico had the altar of St. Martin, by which were interred the bodies of two archbishops, Wlfred on the right, and Living on the left hand; under it in the croft, was the altar of St. Mary Magdalen. The other portico in this wing, had the altar of St. Stephen, and by it were buried two archbishops, Athelard on the left hand, and Cuthbert on the right; in the croft under it, was the altar of St. Nicholas. In the south wing, the north portico had the altar of St. John the Evangelist, and by it the bodies of Æthelgar and Aluric, archbishops, were laid. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Paulinus, by which the body of archbishop Siricius was interred. In the south portico was the altar of St. Gregory, by which were laid the corps of the two archbishops Bregwin and Plegmund. In the croft under it was the altar of St. Owen, archbishop of Roan, and underneath in the croft, not far from it the altar of St. Catherine.

 

Passing from these cross isles eastward there were two towers, one on the north, the other on the south side of the church. In the tower on the north side was the altar of St. Andrew, which gave name to the tower; under it, in the croft, was the altar of the Holy Innocents; the tower on the south side had the altar of St. Peter and St. Paul, behind which the body of St. Anselm was interred, which afterwards gave name both to the altar and tower (fn. 38) (now called St. Anselm's). The wings or isles on each side of the choir had nothing in particular to be taken notice of.— Thus far Gervas, from whose description we in particular learn, where several of the bodies of the old archbishops were deposited, and probably the ashes of some of them remain in the same places to this day.

 

As this building, deservedly called the glorious choir of Conrad, was a magnificent work, so the undertaking of it at that time will appear almost beyond example, especially when the several circumstances of it are considered; but that it was carried forward at the archbishop's cost, exceeds all belief. It was in the discouraging reign of king William Rufus, a prince notorious in the records of history, for all manner of sacrilegious rapine, that archbishop Anselm was promoted to this see; when he found the lands and revenues of this church so miserably wasted and spoiled, that there was hardly enough left for his bare subsistence; who, in the first years that he sat in the archiepiscopal chair, struggled with poverty, wants and continual vexations through the king's displeasure, (fn. 39) and whose three next years were spent in banishment, during all which time he borrowed money for his present maintenance; who being called home by king Henry I. at his coming to the crown, laboured to pay the debts he had contracted during the time of his banishment, and instead of enjoying that tranquility and ease he hoped for, was, within two years afterwards, again sent into banishment upon a fresh displeasure conceived against him by the king, who then seized upon all the revenues of the archbishopric, (fn. 40) which he retained in his own hands for no less than four years.

 

Under these hard circumstances, it would have been surprizing indeed, that the archbishop should have been able to carry on so great a work, and yet we are told it, as a truth, by the testimonies of history; but this must surely be understood with the interpretation of his having been the patron, protector and encourager, rather than the builder of this work, which he entrusted to the care and management of the priors Ernulph and Conrad, and sanctioned their employing, as Lanfranc had done before, the revenues and stock of the church to this use. (fn. 41)

 

In this state as above-mentioned, without any thing material happening to it, this church continued till about the year 1130, anno 30 Henry I. when it seems to have suffered some damage by a fire; (fn. 42) but how much, there is no record left to inform us; however it could not be of any great account, for it was sufficiently repaired, and that mostly at the cost of archbishop Corboil, who then sat in the chair of this see, (fn. 43) before the 4th of May that year, on which day, being Rogation Sunday, the bishops performed the dedication of it with great splendor and magnificence, such, says Gervas, col. 1664, as had not been heard of since the dedication of the temple of Solomon; the king, the queen, David, king of Scots, all the archbishops, and the nobility of both kingdoms being present at it, when this church's former name was restored again, being henceforward commonly called Christ-church. (fn. 44)

 

Among the manuscripts of Trinity college library, in Cambridge, in a very curious triple psalter of St. Jerome, in Latin, written by the monk Eadwyn, whose picture is at the beginning of it, is a plan or drawing made by him, being an attempt towards a representation of this church and monastery, as they stood between the years 1130 and 1174; which makes it probable, that he was one of the monks of it, and the more so, as the drawing has not any kind of relation to the plalter or sacred hymns contained in the manuscript.

 

His plan, if so it may be called, for it is neither such, nor an upright, nor a prospect, and yet something of all together; but notwithstanding this rudeness of the draftsman, it shews very plain that it was intended for this church and priory, and gives us a very clear knowledge, more than we have been able to learn from any description we have besides, of what both were at the above period of time. (fn. 45)

 

Forty-four years after this dedication, on the 5th of September, anno 1174, being the 20th year of king Henry II.'s reign, a fire happened, which consumed great part of this stately edifice, namely, the whole choir, from the angel steeple to the east end of the church, together with the prior's lodgings, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, the infirmary, and some other offices belonging to the monastery; but the angel steeple, the lower cross isles, and the nave appear to have received no material injury from the flames. (fn. 46) The narrative of this accident is told by Gervas, the monk of Canterbury, so often quoted before, who was an eye witness of this calamity, as follows:

 

Three small houses in the city near the old gate of the monastery took fire by accident, a strong south wind carried the flakes of fire to the top of the church, and lodged them between the joints of the lead, driving them to the timbers under it; this kindled a fire there, which was not discerned till the melted lead gave a free passage for the flames to appear above the church, and the wind gaining by this means a further power of increasing them, drove them inwardly, insomuch that the danger became immediately past all possibility of relief. The timber of the roof being all of it on fire, fell down into the choir, where the stalls of the manks, made of large pieces of carved wood, afforded plenty of fuel to the flames, and great part of the stone work, through the vehement heat of the fire, was so weakened, as to be brought to irreparable ruin, and besides the fabric itself, the many rich ornaments in the church were devoured by the flames.

 

The choir being thus laid in ashes, the monks removed from amidst the ruins, the bodies of the two saints, whom they called patrons of the church, the archbishops Dunstan and Alphage, and deposited them by the altar of the great cross, in the nave of the church; (fn. 47) and from this time they celebrated the daily religious offices in the oratory of the blessed Virgin Mary in the nave, and continued to do so for more than five years, when the choir being re edified, they returned to it again. (fn. 48)

 

Upon this destruction of the church, the prior and convent, without any delay, consulted on the most speedy and effectual method of rebuilding it, resolving to finish it in such a manner, as should surpass all the former choirs of it, as well in beauty as size and magnificence. To effect this, they sent for the most skilful architects that could be found either in France or England. These surveyed the walls and pillars, which remained standing, but they found great part of them so weakened by the fire, that they could no ways be built upon with any safety; and it was accordingly resolved, that such of them should be taken down; a whole year was spent in doing this, and in providing materials for the new building, for which they sent abroad for the best stone that could be procured; Gervas has given a large account, (fn. 49) how far this work advanced year by year; what methods and rules of architecture were observed, and other particulars relating to the rebuilding of this church; all which the curious reader may consult at his leisure; it will be sufficient to observe here, that the new building was larger in height and length, and more beautiful in every respect, than the choir of Conrad; for the roof was considerably advanced above what it was before, and was arched over with stone; whereas before it was composed of timber and boards. The capitals of the pillars were now beautified with different sculptures of carvework; whereas, they were before plain, and six pillars more were added than there were before. The former choir had but one triforium, or inner gallery, but now there were two made round it, and one in each side isle and three in the cross isles; before, there were no marble pillars, but such were now added to it in abundance. In forwarding this great work, the monks had spent eight years, when they could proceed no further for want of money; but a fresh supply coming in from the offerings at St. Thomas's tomb, so much more than was necessary for perfecting the repair they were engaged in, as encouraged them to set about a more grand design, which was to pull down the eastern extremity of the church, with the small chapel of the Holy Trinity adjoining to it, and to erect upon a stately undercroft, a most magnificent one instead of it, equally lofty with the roof of the church, and making a part of it, which the former one did not, except by a door into it; but this new chapel, which was dedicated likewise to the Holy Trinity, was not finished till some time after the rest of the church; at the east end of this chapel another handsome one, though small, was afterwards erected at the extremity of the whole building, since called Becket's crown, on purpose for an altar and the reception of some part of his relics; (fn. 50) further mention of which will be made hereafter.

 

The eastern parts of this church, as Mr. Gostling observes, have the appearance of much greater antiquity than what is generally allowed to them; and indeed if we examine the outside walls and the cross wings on each side of the choir, it will appear, that the whole of them was not rebuilt at the time the choir was, and that great part of them was suffered to remain, though altered, added to, and adapted as far as could be, to the new building erected at that time; the traces of several circular windows and other openings, which were then stopped up, removed, or altered, still appearing on the walls both of the isles and the cross wings, through the white-wash with which they are covered; and on the south side of the south isle, the vaulting of the roof as well as the triforium, which could not be contrived so as to be adjusted to the places of the upper windows, plainly shew it. To which may be added, that the base or foot of one of the westernmost large pillars of the choir on the north side, is strengthened with a strong iron band round it, by which it should seem to have been one of those pillars which had been weakened by the fire, but was judged of sufficient firmness, with this precaution, to remain for the use of the new fabric.

 

The outside of this part of the church is a corroborating proof of what has been mentioned above, as well in the method, as in the ornaments of the building.— The outside of it towards the south, from St. Michael's chapel eastward, is adorned with a range of small pillars, about six inches diameter, and about three feet high, some with santastic shasts and capitals, others with plain ones; these support little arches, which intersect each other; and this chain or girdle of pillars is continued round the small tower, the eastern cross isle and the chapel of St. Anselm, to the buildings added in honour of the Holy Trinity, and St. Thomas Becket, where they leave off. The casing of St. Michael's chapel has none of them, but the chapel of the Virgin Mary, answering to it on the north side of the church, not being fitted to the wall, shews some of them behind it; which seems as if they had been continued before, quite round the eastern parts of the church.

 

These pillars, which rise from about the level of the pavement, within the walls above them, are remarkably plain and bare of ornaments; but the tower above mentioned and its opposite, as soon as they rise clear of the building, are enriched with stories of this colonade, one above another, up to the platform from whence their spires rise; and the remains of the two larger towers eastward, called St. Anselm's, and that answering to it on the north side of the church, called St. Andrew's are decorated much after the same manner, as high as they remain at present.

 

At the time of the before-mentioned fire, which so fatally destroyed the upper part of this church, the undercrost, with the vaulting over it, seems to have remained entire, and unhurt by it.

 

The vaulting of the undercrost, on which the floor of the choir and eastern parts of the church is raised, is supported by pillars, whose capitals are as various and fantastical as those of the smaller ones described before, and so are their shafts, some being round, others canted, twisted, or carved, so that hardly any two of them are alike, except such as are quite plain.

 

These, I suppose, may be concluded to be of the same age, and if buildings in the same stile may be conjectured to be so from thence, the antiquity of this part of the church may be judged, though historians have left us in the dark in relation to it.

 

In Leland's Collectanea, there is an account and description of a vault under the chancel of the antient church of St. Peter, in Oxford, called Grymbald's crypt, being allowed by all, to have been built by him; (fn. 51) Grymbald was one of those great and accomplished men, whom king Alfred invited into England about the year 885, to assist him in restoring Christianity, learning and the liberal arts. (fn. 52) Those who compare the vaults or undercrost of the church of Canterbury, with the description and prints given of Grymbald's crypt, (fn. 53) will easily perceive, that two buildings could hardly have been erected more strongly resembling each other, except that this at Canterbury is larger, and more pro fusely decorated with variety of fancied ornaments, the shafts of several of the pillars here being twisted, or otherwise varied, and many of the captials exactly in the same grotesque taste as those in Grymbald's crypt. (fn. 54) Hence it may be supposed, that those whom archbishop Lanfranc employed as architects and designers of his building at Canterbury, took their model of it, at least of this part of it, from that crypt, and this undercrost now remaining is the same, as was originally built by him, as far eastward, as to that part which begins under the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where it appears to be of a later date, erected at the same time as the chapel. The part built by Lanfranc continues at this time as firm and entire, as it was at the very building of it, though upwards of seven hundred years old. (fn. 55)

 

But to return to the new building; though the church was not compleatly finished till the end of the year 1184, yet it was so far advanced towards it, that, in 1180, on April 19, being Easter eve, (fn. 56) the archbishop, prior and monks entered the new choir, with a solemn procession, singing Te Deum, for their happy return to it. Three days before which they had privately, by night, carried the bodies of St. Dunstan and St. Alphage to the places prepared for them near the high altar. The body likewise of queen Edive (which after the fire had been removed from the north cross isle, where it lay before, under a stately gilded shrine) to the altar of the great cross, was taken up, carried into the vestry, and thence to the altar of St. Martin, where it was placed under the coffin of archbishop Livinge. In the month of July following the altar of the Holy Trinity was demolished, and the bodies of those archbishops, which had been laid in that part of the church, were removed to other places. Odo's body was laid under St. Dunstan's and Wilfrid's under St. Alphage's; Lanfranc's was deposited nigh the altar of St. Martin, and Theobald's at that of the blessed Virgin, in the nave of the church, (fn. 57) under a marble tomb; and soon afterwards the two archbishops, on the right and left hand of archbishop Becket in the undercrost, were taken up and placed under the altar of St. Mary there. (fn. 58)

 

After a warning so terrible, as had lately been given, it seemed most necessary to provide against the danger of fire for the time to come; the flames, which had so lately destroyed a considerable part of the church and monastery, were caused by some small houses, which had taken fire at a small distance from the church.— There still remained some other houses near it, which belonged to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine; for these the monks of Christ-church created, by an exchange, which could not be effected till the king interposed, and by his royal authority, in a manner, compelled the abbot and convent to a composition for this purpose, which was dated in the year 1177, that was three years after the late fire of this church. (fn. 59)

 

These houses were immediately pulled down, and it proved a providential and an effectual means of preserving the church from the like calamity; for in the year 1180, on May 22, this new choir, being not then compleated, though it had been used the month be fore, as has been already mentioned, there happened a fire in the city, which burnt down many houses, and the flames bent their course towards the church, which was again in great danger; but the houses near it being taken away, the fire was stopped, and the church escaped being burnt again. (fn. 60)

 

Although there is no mention of a new dedication of the church at this time, yet the change made in the name of it has been thought by some to imply a formal solemnity of this kind, as it appears to have been from henceforth usually called the church of St. Thomas the Martyr, and to have continued so for above 350 years afterwards.

 

New names to churches, it is true. have been usually attended by formal consecrations of them; and had there been any such solemnity here, undoubtedly the same would not have passed by unnoticed by every historian, the circumstance of it must have been notorious, and the magnificence equal at least to the other dedications of this church, which have been constantly mentioned by them; but here was no need of any such ceremony, for although the general voice then burst forth to honour this church with the name of St. Thomas, the universal object of praise and adoration, then stiled the glorious martyr, yet it reached no further, for the name it had received at the former dedication, notwithstanding this common appellation of it, still remained in reality, and it still retained invariably in all records and writings, the name of Christ church only, as appears by many such remaining among the archives of the dean and chapter; and though on the seal of this church, which was changed about this time; the counter side of it had a representation of Becket's martyrdom, yet on the front of it was continued that of the church, and round it an inscription with the former name of Christ church; which seal remained in force till the dissolution of the priory.

 

It may not be improper to mention here some transactions, worthy of observation, relating to this favorite saint, which passed from the time of his being murdered, to that of his translation to the splendid shrine prepared for his relics.

 

Archbishop Thomas Becket was barbarously murdered in this church on Dec. 29, 1170, being the 16th year of king Henry II. and his body was privately buried towards the east end of the undercrost. The monks tell us, that about the Easter following, miracles began to be wrought by him, first at his tomb, then in the undercrost, and in every part of the whole fabric of the church; afterwards throughout England, and lastly, throughout the rest of the world. (fn. 61) The same of these miracles procured him the honour of a formal canonization from pope Alexander III. whose bull for that purpose is dated March 13, in the year 1172. (fn. 62) This declaration of the pope was soon known in all places, and the reports of his miracles were every where sounded abroad. (fn. 63)

 

Hereupon crowds of zealots, led on by a phrenzy of devotion, hastened to kneel at his tomb. In 1177, Philip, earl of Flanders, came hither for that purpose, when king Henry met and had a conference with him at Canterbury. (fn. 64) In June 1178, king Henry returning from Normandy, visited the sepulchre of this new saint; and in July following, William, archbishop of Rhemes, came from France, with a large retinue, to perform his vows to St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the king met him and received him honourably. In the year 1179, Lewis, king of France, came into England; before which neither he nor any of his predecessors had ever set foot in this kingdom. (fn. 65) He landed at Dover, where king Henry waited his arrival, and on August 23, the two kings came to Canterbury, with a great train of nobility of both nations, and were received with due honour and great joy, by the archbishop, with his com-provincial bishops, and the prior and the whole convent. (fn. 66)

 

King Lewis came in the manner and habit of a pilgrim, and was conducted to the tomb of St. Thomas by a solemn procession; he there offered his cup of gold and a royal precious stone, (fn. 67) and gave the convent a yearly rent for ever, of a hundred muids of wine, to be paid by himself and his successors; which grant was confirmed by his royal charter, under his seal, and delivered next day to the convent; (fn. 68) after he had staid here two, (fn. 69) or as others say, three days, (fn. 70) during which the oblations of gold and silver made were so great, that the relation of them almost exceeded credibility. (fn. 71) In 1181, king Henry, in his return from Normandy, again paid his devotions at this tomb. These visits were the early fruits of the adoration of the new sainted martyr, and these royal examples of kings and great persons were followed by multitudes, who crowded to present with full hands their oblations at his tomb.— Hence the convent was enabled to carry forward the building of the new choir, and they applied all this vast income to the fabric of the church, as the present case instantly required, for which they had the leave and consent of the archbishop, confirmed by the bulls of several succeeding popes. (fn. 72)

 

¶From the liberal oblations of these royal and noble personages at the tomb of St. Thomas, the expences of rebuilding the choir appear to have been in a great measure supplied, nor did their devotion and offerings to the new saint, after it was compleated, any ways abate, but, on the contrary, they daily increased; for in the year 1184, Philip, archbishop of Cologne, and Philip, earl of Flanders, came together to pay their vows at this tomb, and were met here by king Henry, who gave them an invitation to London. (fn. 73) In 1194, John, archbishop of Lions; in the year afterwards, John, archbishop of York; and in the year 1199, king John, performed their devotions at the foot of this tomb. (fn. 74) King Richard I. likewise, on his release from captivity in Germany, landing on the 30th of March at Sandwich, proceeded from thence, as an humble stranger on foot, towards Canterbury, to return his grateful thanks to God and St. Thomas for his release. (fn. 75) All these by name, with many nobles and multitudes of others, of all sorts and descriptions, visited the saint with humble adoration and rich oblations, whilst his body lay in the undercrost. In the mean time the chapel and altar at the upper part of the east end of the church, which had been formerly consecrated to the Holy Trinity, were demolished, and again prepared with great splendor, for the reception of this saint, who being now placed there, implanted his name not only on the chapel and altar, but on the whole church, which was from thenceforth known only by that of the church of St. Thomas the martyr.

  

On July 7, anno 1220, the remains of St. Thomas were translated from his tomb to his new shrine, with the greatest solemnity and rejoicings. Pandulph, the pope's legate, the archbishops of Canterbury and Rheims, and many bishops and abbots, carried the coffin on their shoulders, and placed it on the new shrine, and the king graced these solemnities with his royal presence. (fn. 76) The archbishop of Canterbury provided forage along all the road, between London and Canterbury, for the horses of all such as should come to them, and he caused several pipes and conduits to run with wine in different parts of the city. This, with the other expences arising during the time, was so great, that he left a debt on the see, which archbishop Boniface, his fourth successor in it, was hardly enabled to discharge.

 

¶The saint being now placed in his new repository, became the vain object of adoration to the deluded people, and afterwards numbers of licences were granted to strangers by the king, to visit this shrine. (fn. 77) The titles of glorious, of saint and martyr, were among those given to him; (fn. 78) such veneration had all people for his relics, that the religious of several cathedral churches and monasteries, used all their endeavours to obtain some of them, and thought themselves happy and rich in the possession of the smallest portion of them. (fn. 79) Besides this, there were erected and dedicated to his honour, many churches, chapels, altars and hospitals in different places, both in this kingdom and abroad. (fn. 80) Thus this saint, even whilst he lay in his obscure tomb in the undercroft, brought such large and constant supplies of money, as enabled the monks to finish this beautiful choir, and the eastern parts of the church; and when he was translated to the most exalted and honourable place in it, a still larger abundance of gain filled their coffers, which continued as a plentiful supply to them, from year to year, to the time of the reformation, and the final abolition of the priory itself.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol11/pp306-383

 

-------------------------------------------

 

Edward of Woodstock, known to history as the Black Prince (15 June 1330 – 8 June 1376),[1][a] was the eldest son of King Edward III of England, and the heir apparent to the English throne. He died before his father and so his son, Richard II, succeeded to the throne instead. Edward nevertheless earned distinction as one of the most successful English commanders during the Hundred Years' War, being regarded by his English contemporaries as a model of chivalry and one of the greatest knights of his age.[2]

 

Edward was made Duke of Cornwall, the first English dukedom, in 1337. He was guardian of the kingdom in his father's absence in 1338, 1340, and 1342. He was created Prince of Wales in 1343 and knighted by his father at La Hougue in 1346.

 

In 1346 Prince Edward commanded the vanguard at the Battle of Crécy, his father intentionally leaving him to win the battle. He took part in Edward III's 1349 Calais expedition. In 1355 he was appointed the king's lieutenant in Gascony, and ordered to lead an army into Aquitaine on a chevauchée, during which he pillaged Avignonet and Castelnaudary, sacked Carcassonne, and plundered Narbonne. The next year (1356) on another chevauchée he ravaged Auvergne, Limousin, and Berry but failed to take Bourges. He offered terms of peace to King John II of France, who had outflanked him near Poitiers, but refused to surrender himself as the price of their acceptance. This led to the Battle of Poitiers, where his army routed the French and took King John prisoner.

 

The year after Poitiers, Edward returned to England. In 1360 he negotiated the Treaty of Brétigny. He was created Prince of Aquitaine and Gascony in 1362, but his suzerainty was not recognised by the lord of Albret or other Gascon nobles. He was directed by his father to forbid the marauding raids of the English and Gascon free companies in 1364. He entered into an agreement with Kings Peter of Castile and Charles II of Navarre, by which Peter covenanted to mortgage Castro de Urdiales and the province of Biscay to him as security for a loan; in 1366 a passage was secured through Navarre. In 1367 he received a letter of defiance from Henry of Trastámara, Peter's half-brother and rival. The same year, after an obstinate conflict, he defeated Henry at the Battle of Nájera. However, after a wait of several months, during which he failed to obtain either the province of Biscay or liquidation of the debt from Don Pedro, he returned to Aquitaine. Prince Edward persuaded the estates of Aquitaine to allow him a hearth tax of ten sous for five years in 1368, thereby alienating the lord of Albret and other nobles.

 

Prince Edward returned to England in 1371 and the next year resigned the principality of Aquitaine and Gascony. He led the commons in their attack upon the Lancastrian administration in 1376. He died in 1376 of dysentery[b] and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral, where his surcoat, helmet, shield, and gauntlets are still preserved.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_the_Black_Prince