View allAll Photos Tagged What is the work of the Holy Spirit

Almighty God's Word " How Peter Came to Know Jesus"

Introduction

Almighty God says, "During his time following Jesus, he had many opinions of Him and always judged Him from his own perspective. Although he had a certain degree of understanding of the Spirit, Peter was not very enlightened, hence his words when he said: “I must follow he who is sent by the heavenly Father. I must acknowledge he who is chosen by the Holy Spirit.” He did not understand the things Jesus did and received no enlightenment. After following Him for some time he grew interested in what He did and said, and in Jesus Himself. He came to feel that Jesus inspired both affection and respect; he liked to associate with Him and stay beside Him, and listening to Jesus’ words rendered him supply and help. Over the time he followed Jesus, Peter observed and took to heart everything about His life: His actions, words, movements, and expressions. He gained a deep understanding that Jesus was not like ordinary men. Although His human appearance was exceedingly ordinary, He was full of love, compassion, and tolerance for man. Everything He did or said was of great aid to others, and by His side Peter saw and learned things he had never seen or had before."

 

recommenda to you: God's work

St Andrew, Great Saxham, Suffolk

 

This is a church I seem to revisit every five years or so, and I'm always left wondering why I don't come back more often. After the longest winter I can remember, and a good five months since my previous church exploring bike ride, I set off from Bury St Edmunds on a bright, cold Saturday morning, and Great Saxham was my first port of call.

 

Nothing much had changed. A large oak tree had fallen near to the fence of the park in a recent storm, but otherwise it was exactly as I remembered. It is always reassuring to cycle off into rural Suffolk to find that England has not entirely succumbed to the 21st Century.

 

But Suffolk has changed in the thirty-odd years I've been living here. There is hardly a dairy farm left, and not a single cattle market survives in the county. Ipswich, Lowestoft, Bury, and even the smaller places, are ringed by out-of-town shopping experiences, and the drifts of jerry-built houses wash against the edges of nearly every village. But the countryside has always been in a state of perpetually change, a constant metamorphosis, and often a painful one. I had been struck by this before while cycling across this parish, and the memory added a frisson to the experience of coming back.

 

For many modern historians, the 19th Century finished on August 4th 1914, and you can see their point. That was the day that the First World War began, and the England that would emerge from the mud, blood and chaos would be quite different. A new spirit was abroad, and rural areas left behind their previous patterns of ownership and employment that were little more than feudalism. Suffolk would never be the same again.

 

No more the Big House, no more the farm worker going cap in hand to the hiring fair, or the terrible grind to keep at bay the horrors of the workhouse. I think of Leonard, remembering the pre-war days in Ronald Blythe’s Akenfield, that passionate account of a 20th century Suffolk village, Charsfield: I want to say this simply as a fact, that Suffolk people in my day were worked to death. It literally happened. It is not a figure of speech. I was worked mercilessly. I am not complaining about it. It is what happened to me. But the men coming home from Flanders would demand a living wage. The new world would not bring comfort and democracy overnight, of course, and there are many parts of Suffolk where poverty and patronage survive even today, to a greater or lesser extent, but the old world order had come to an end. The Age of Empires was over, and the Age of Anxiety was beginning.

 

The English have a love-hate relationship with the countryside. As Carol Twinch argues in Tithe Wars, it is only actually possible for British agriculture to be fully profitable in war time. In time of peace, only government intervention can sustain it in its familiar forms. Here, at the beginning of the 21st century, British farmers are still demanding levels of subsidy similar to that asked for by the mining industry in the 1980s. With the UK's exit from the European Union looming, the answer from the state is ultimately likely to be the same. British and European agriculture are still supported by policies and subsidies that were designed to prevent the widespread shortages that followed the Second World War. They are half a century out of date, and are unsustainable, and must eventually come to an end.

 

But still sometimes in Suffolk, you find yourself among surroundings that still speak of that pre-WWI feudal time. Indeed, there are places where it doesn’t take much of a leap of the imagination to believe that the 20th century hasn’t happened. Great Saxham is one such place.

 

You travel out of Bury westwards, past wealthy Westley and fat, comfortable Little Saxham with its gorgeous round-towered church. The roads narrow, and after another mile or so you turn up through a straight lane of rural council houses and bungalows. At the top of the lane, there is a gateway. It is probably late 19th century, but seems as archaic as if it was a survival of the Roman occupation. The gate has gone, but the solid stone posts that tower over the road narrow it, so that only one car can pass in each direction. It is the former main entrance to Saxham Hall, and beyond the gate you enter the park, cap in hand perhaps.

 

Looking back, you can see now that the lane behind you is the former private drive to the Big House, obviously bought and built on by the local authority in the 1960s. It is easy to imagine it as it had once been.

 

Beyond the gate is another world. The narrowed road skirts the park in a wide arc, with woods off to the right. Sheep turn to look once, then resumed their grazing. About a mile beyond the gate, there is a cluster of 19th century estate buildings, and among them, slightly set back from the road beyond an unusually high wall, was St Andrew.

 

There was a lot of money here in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, so that you might even think it a Victorian building in local materials. But there is rather more to it than that. Farm buildings sit immediately against the graveyard, only yards from the church. When Mortlock came this way, he found chickens pottering about among the graves, and like me you may experience the unnervingly close neighing of a horse in the stables across from the porch.

 

The great restoration of this church was at a most unusual date, 1798, fully fifty years before the great wave of sacramentalism rolled out of Oxford and swept across the Church of England. Because of this, it appears rather plain, although quite in keeping with its Perpendicular origins - no attempt was made to introduce the popular mock-classical features of the day. The patron of the parish at the time was Thomas Mills, more familiar from his ancestors at Framlingham than here. There was another makeover in the 1820s.

 

I've always found this church open, and so it should be, for it has a great treasure which cannot be stolen, but might easily be vandalised if the church was kept locked (I wish that someone would explain this to the churchwardens at Nowton). The careful restoration preserved the Norman doorways and 15th century font, and the church would be indistinguishable from hundreds of other neat, clean 19th century refurbishments if it were not for the fact that it contains some most unusual glass. It was collected by Thomas Mills' son, William, and fills the east and west windows. It is mostly 17th century (you can see a date on one piece) and much of it is Swiss in origin. As at Nowton, it probably came from continental monasteries.

 

The best is probably the small scale collection in the west window. This includes figures of St Mary Magdalene, St John the Baptist and the Blessed Virgin, as well as scenes of the Annunciation, the Coronation of the Queen of Heaven, the Vision of St John, and much more. The work in the east window is on a larger scale, some of it Flemish in origin.

 

There are several simple and tasteful Mills memorials - but the Mills family was not the first famous dynasty to hold the Hall here. Back in the 16th and 17th centuries, it was the home of the Eldred family, famous explorers and circumnavigators of the globe. John Eldred died in 1632, and has one wall-mounted bust memorial on the south sanctuary wall, as well as a figure brass reset in the chancel floor from a lost table tomb. Both are gloriously flamboyant, and might seem quite out of kilter with that time, on the eve of the long Puritan night. Compare them, for instance, with the Boggas memorial at Flowton, barely ten years later. But, although the bust is of an elderly Elizabethan, I think that there is a 17th Century knowingness about them. The inscription beneath the bust reads in part The Holy Land so called I have seene and in the land of Babilone have bene, but in thy land where glorious saints doe live my soule doth crave of Christ a room to give - curiously, the carver missed out the S in Christ, and had to add it in above. It might have been done in a hurry, but perhaps it is rather a Puritan sentiment after all, don't you think?

 

The brass has little shields with merchant ships on, one scurrying between cliffs and featuring a sea monster. The inscription here is more reflective, asking for our tolerance: Might all my travells mee excuse for being deade, and lying here, for, as it concludes, but riches can noe ransome buy nor travells passe the destiny.

 

The First World War memorial remembers names of men who were estate workers here. And, after all, here is the English Church as it was on the eve of the First World War, triumphant, apparently eternal, at the very heart of the Age of Empires. Now, it is only to be found in backwaters like this, and the very fact that they are backwaters tells us that, really, it has not survived at all.

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

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

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

The Church of the Annunciation in Finglas West is one of Ireland’s largest suburban churches, with the building itself covering approximately one acre. The turning of the first sod to build this church took place in July 1964 and was finally opened on the 8th October 1967 with the blessing of the Archbishop of Dublin, Charles McQuaid. The Parish of Finglas West was formally established in 1962 and the new building replaced an older tin-roofed church (Church of the Incarnation) that was located just in front of the main entrance.

 

The church is dedicated to the Annunciation of Our Lady which marks the occasion when the Archangel Gabriel informed the Blessed Virgin Mary that she will conceive a child through the Holy Spirit and that his name shall be Jesus. The Feast Day of the Annunciation is held on March 25th.

 

Additional information about the Church of the Annunciation:

 

• David Keane & Partners of Dublin were the architects who designed the new church. David Keane 22/9/1929 – 28/9/2007. The firm is still trading as KMD Architecture (Keane, Murphy & Duff partners). David Deane retired from KMD in 1987 but remained on as a consultant to the firm.

 

• Stephen Walsh designed and completed the stained glass windows, including the massive Annunciation window above the main entrance. He also created the mosaic Stations of the Cross and the large image of Christ Ascending into Heaven seen behind the alter.

 

• Richard Joseph King (1907-1974) designed the bronze and enamelled tabernacle. Richard is more famously known as a stained glass artist who worked with Harry Clark and went on to become director of the Harry Clarke Studios after Harry’s death in 1931. He was also well-known as an ecclesiastical painter with his own particular style, of which many of these have been illustrated in the Capuchin Annual from 1940 through to its final issue in 1977. Stephen also designed and executed the Connemara marble plaque behind the baptismal font.

 

.

I was anxious to get some photos of the Church of the Annunciation since it’s been confirmed the church will be demolished and replaced. The reasons given have been structural problems, increasing costs of maintenance and heating, as well as falling congregation numbers. The current church can hold up to 3,500 mass-goers, while its replacement will hold up to around 350. The proposed new church has been designed by Coda Architects of Dublin. Some of the land the church is on will be used to build social housing.

 

As at November 2021, most of the church structure has been demolished. The stained glass panels of the main front window (as above) were removed the month before and some will be reused in the new church. It is not clear what will happen to the unused panels. The structural problems are considered too expensive to fix and relate mainly to the roof, which also leaks in places. The roof is partially constructed of cast concrete with reinforcing steel bar and it seems that the thickness of concrete used was insufficient, so rain water ingresses into it and has been corroding away the reinforcing steel bar. The organ went to Cavan cathedral. The church is also adorned inside with many statues and the bronze and enamelled tabernacle designed by artist Richard Joseph King.

 

But one thing is for sure, the Finglas skyline will never be the same without The Church of the Annunciation and its distinctive high spire.

 

.

References:

 

www.thejournal.ie/finglas-church-closure-3220514-Feb2017/

 

www.facebook.com/GlasnevinHeritage/photos/a.1826516385521... (Glasnevin Heritage Facebook page – short note about the Church of the Annunciation and the old tin church it replaced).

 

www.coda.ie/portfolio/church-finglas-dublin (Coda Architects website - includes artist’s impressions of the proposed replacement church).

 

www.facebook.com/rtearchives/photos/a.1397188113944316.10... (A 1966 photo of the new Annunciation church alongside the old tin church that it replaced. The old tin church was dismantled shortly afterwards and sold off.)

 

www.finglaswestparish.org/ (The above photo as seen in the Parish of Finglas West website).

  

St Peter and St Paul, East Harling, Norfolk

 

With its aisles, clerestory, porch and chancel, St Peter and St Paul is a textbook example of its century, although there are a number of curiosities that add even more interest. The vestry on the north side of the chancel, for example, which was once a shrine chapel, retains its image niche on its eastern face. And there are more image niches, these with elaborate foliage pedestals, in the buttresses of the tower; everything is topped off by a lead and timber fleche which was apparently the model for the one at St Peter Mancroft in Norwich, a church which has several features in common with this one.

 

The tower is a delight, the buttressing and pinnacles exactly in proportion to make it appear to rise like a fairy castle from the ground. The south porch, by contrast, is, despite its flushwork, rather austere, a result of its rebuilding early in the 19th century before the ecclesiological movement took hold. All in all, this is as good as 15th century rebuilding gets, the money coming thanks to Anne Harling having no less than three husbands who all wanted to spend as little time in purgatory as possible.

 

You step down into a wide space which, on a dull day, can be rather gloomy. Although inevitably heavily restored by the Victorians, St Peter and St Paul does not have that depressingly anonymous urban feel you so often find in churches of this size. This is partly because the beautiful parclose screen in the south aisle partitions off so much space, creating a sense of rooms within rooms, altering the way your eyes are inevitably drawn to the east. The rood screen must have been vast here; its dado survives at the west end, a deeply traceried affair with its features presented in carving rather than painting.

 

When the rood screen was in its proper place, to move from the nave into the chancel must have been like stepping from darkness into light. This is because of the feature that makes East Harling famous, the vast east window with its 15th century glass. After St Peter Mancroft it is the best collection in Norfolk. Unusually, the provenance of the glass is fairly well-documented: we can be fairly certain that it came from this church originally. Still present after the Reformation, it was removed by the Harling family to the Hall in the early 17th century. They may have been Laudians wanting to preserve it from the intentions of the puritans, or merely thought it would look nice in their dining hall; whatever, we know that shortly before Francis Blomefield visited here in the 1730s it was returned to the church and set in its present configuration.

 

In 1939, when war threatened, it was removed again, being reset just before Cautley visited in the early 1950s. There are parts of at least three sequences here, two of which were almost certainly in the east window originally, and one which almost certainly wasn't.

 

Essentially, the window contains two rosary sequences; the Joyful Mysteries of the Blessed Virgin, which include the Annunciation, the Nativity and the Assumption, and the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Blessed Virgin, which include the Crucifixion and the Deposition. However, this is open to interpretation, as we shall see. There is also the figure of St Mary Magdalene, which may once have been associated with a nave altar, and would have been located in a window there.

 

The five lights contain four rows of panels, making twenty altogether.

 

Top row:

I. Annunciation: Mary at her prayer desk. Gabriel, crowned and haloed, with a sceptre of lilies, kneels in supplication.

II. Visitation: Elizabeth, hooded to show her age, places her hand on Mary's pregnant belly.

III. Nativity: Two midwives look on. The infant in the manger is rayed; a horned cow gazes in awe.

IV. Adoration of the Shepherds: One holds a lamb, one plays pipes. A third appears to offer a fleece.

V. Adoration of the Magi: Two of the wise men gauge each others' reactions as the third offers his gift.

 

Second row:

VI: collection of fragments.

VII: Presentation in the Temple: Joseph carries the doves, Mary offers the child to Simeon. Anna is not shown.

VIII: The Finding in the Temple: Head covered, Mary bursts in among the men to find her son teaching.

IX: The Wedding at Canaa: Christ, seated at the top table, blesses a chicken and a ham. Mary directs the servant.

X: collection of fragments.

 

Third row:

XI: Mary of Magdala: Mary holds her long hair ready to anoint Christ's feet. Probably not from this window originally.

XII: The Betrayal at Gethsemane: Judas kisses Christ; Peter cuts off the ear of the high priest's servant.

XIII: Crucifixion: Mary swoons in John's arms.

XIV: Deposition from the cross: The pieta. Tears spring from Mary's eyes.

XV: Assumption of the Blessed Virgin: Mary is assumed bodily into heaven.

 

Bottom row:

XVI: Donor: Probably Robert Wingfield, second husband of Anne Harling.

XVII: Resurrection: Christ steps fully clothed from the tomb. Unusually, the soldiers are awake.

XVIII: Ascension of Christ: Mary, surrounded by disciples, watches as her son ascends to heaven.

XIX: Descent of the Holy Spirit: Mary, surrounded by disciples, receives the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

XX: Donor: Probably William Chamberlain, first husband of Anne Harling.

 

Nowadays, we tend to think of the rosary as consisting of three sequences of five mysteries each, but in the late middle ages things were much more flexible, and rosary sequences often consisted of seven mysteries. The Glorious Mysteries sequence, of which the Assumption is now a part, is a later development, and the two adorations shown here are subsumed into a single mystery. There are a couple of images here that don't quite fit; the Wedding at Canaa is obviously a Marian text, and yet is not traditionally a rosary subject. Similarly the Betrayal, the only one of the images not to feature Mary. I wonder if what we have here are parts of two separate sequences, a Marian sequence of mysteries (I-V, VII-IX, XV), and a Passion sequence (XII-XIV, XVII-XIX). They are both clearly the work of the same workshop, and Mary is always shown with the same face and dress, but this would not preclude them from being two sequences.

 

Why were they here at all? We need to get away from thinking of such things as a 'poor man's bible', the need for which was superseded at the Reformation. These were devotional objects, designed to be used as meditations while praying and saying the rosary. They were created in the 15th century, a time when the mind of the Church was fiercely concentrated on asserting orthodox Catholic doctrine in the face of local superstitions and abuses. As such, they were anathema to the reformers, and were later elsewhere destroyed for being superstitious, not for being superfluous. An 18th century antiquarian mind, ignorant of the nature of Catholic devotion, might easily mix the two sequences into historical order, and possibly misunderstand the Assumption (obviously, as Mary reappears two images on at the Ascension, it is out of order). I wonder what they thought it was?

 

A couple of other things about the east window that you shouldn't miss. Firstly, everywhere you look there are tiny baskets - Mortlock calls them 'frails', and tells us that they were simple rush baskets used by workmen to carry tools. Also, though not in such profusion, there are bodices. These symbols are repeated elsewhere in the church in stone on tombs, and as such must be symbols of the Harling family.

 

Another symbol is high up on the north side, a red squirrel. Curiously, this also appears in the painting A Lady with a Squirrel and a Starling by Hans Holbein, now thought to be a portrait of Anne Lovell - the squirrel is a symbol of the Lovell family, who took over the local manor here from the Harlings in the 16th century, and the starling represents Ea- well, you guess.

 

In July 2006, Chris Harrison and I came across

some more glass from East Harling in the Norfolk County Archaeologist Service archive at Gressenhall. It was probably removed from the church for safety in 1939, and then not replaced, possibly ending up at the museum of church art in Norwich at St Peter Hungate, disappearing into storage when that closed in 1993. It depicts a Bishop and Christ seated in Majesty, and the lozenges in between carry the telltale frails and bodices familiar from other glass within the church.

 

Within the screen is a large chapel, containing two major tombs. One is in alabaster, an early 17th century memorial to Sir Thomas and Lady Alice Lovell (remember the squirrel?) who died in 1604. The piece is good - too good, its 1950s restoration gives it a Festival of Britain air. Their symbols lie at their feet - his a magnificent peacock, hers a gruesome Saracen scalp held aloft.

 

The other appears to be a composite. It lies to the east, and the two effigies are clearly not from this tomb; they simply don't fit. They are supposed to be Robert Harling, died Paris in 1435, and his wife Dame Joan. Neither are buried here - she is at Rushford near Thetford, he is in some corner of a foreign field that is forever French schoolchildren on picnics excitedly tugging old thighbones from the soil - but in any case it is the trimmings of the tomb rather than the effigies that are most of interest, including a pelican in her piety and one that is almost a lily crucifix.

 

On the north side of the chancel is a fine tomb with brass inlays - the brasses now gone. Not as magnificent as either of the two previously mentioned, it is actually the most significant, as this is where you'll find Anne Harling, wife of the serial rebuilders of this church. Look out for those flails again.

 

What more? 17th century Lovells (remember the squirrel) have in-yer-face memorials either side of the sanctuary - that to the north curiously with no inscription. There are hatchments, remains of a wallpainting that are too indistinct to interpret (but may be seven works of mercy), a good set of royal arms, medieval heads, curious 19th century bench ends of a lion and a wild man, heraldic misericords, a Dec font - well, come and see for yourself. You know you want to.

The Cathedral of St. Martina

St. Martina - National Historic Landmark

1221-1452

St. Martina is one of the landmarks of the city. For centuries it was the center of cultural, religious and social life. The place where the Cathedral stands today was ambiguous center of the emerging urban settlements. They met here a trip arose market, located here thus the core of the then town, where we can assume the chapel. However, the townspeople used to go to church on the castle, where it established a prepoštstvo chapter. Only when it visits have become unbearable and endangered the safety of the castle headquarters, asked the king Imrich by Pope Innocent III. Permit the transfer prepoštstva to the castle. This permit was also issued in 1204. After prepoštstve to place the issuing and procuring documentary material to the approval of Pope Honorius III. In 1221 moved the church. Construction has not yet begun in the Romanesque style and dedication most Holy Saviour was in continuity with the church of the castle. December 2, 1291 King Andrew III. Podhradie granted town privileges, and the city began to develop in the open easterly direction. The historic town but has remained at the foot of the castle hill. Sacred Temple Saviour in their size was not sufficient and therefore less Romanesque building, which since 1302 has served as the city temple, started in 1311-1314 attaches the current Gothic cathedral. This was solemnly consecrated by bishop of Esztergom Gregory in 1452 in honor of the Sacred Saviour and St . Martin. At that time there was also the sanctuary of what we know today. It was probably just a little more than 1/3 of today, that the sanctuary built by Matthias Corvinus in the years 1467-1487. These years also today we can read on his ceiling plate fixed to the terminal bars ribs. Here also we find the provincial and noble coats of that period Today's Cathedral - Cathedral of Saint Martin - passed since its dedication in 1452 many variables and minor alterations, or extensions. Today there are more in state redevelopment of the years 1863-1878 led canon Charles Heiller - Dómská priest, held in collaboration with the architect Joseph Lippert (1826-1902).

Overall internal dimensions of St. Martina are:

length including the sacristy - 69.37 m

width - 22.85 m

Nave wall thickness - 1.5 m

Thickness of the walls of the sanctuary - 926 mm

Ships height - 16.02 m

Height sanctuary - 18.5 m

Interior

Support

Support (three-legged) consists of two floors. Upon arrival to the interior of a large northern portal, we find ourselves directly beneath the choir organ. On the soffit we can see the exposed fragment baroque layers. The only color, but also historically linked with decorative baroque clock above the entrance to the sacristy. Doors are decorated with relief carving ornamentation except Hungary and municipal coat of arms. These doors lead into the three-legged sacristy formed on the north side of the chapel Canons (Chapel of Our Lady) and the first floor treasure in southern podveží chapel. Joseph and floor chapel Czech Queen Sophia, the widow of Wenceslas IV., and staircase accessible from the choir. Here is exposure of Dómská treasure. Is it possible to go from here to the space tower. Sometimes there is also a capitular archive that even in 1950 contained 3285 medieval documents, and more than 23,000 documents dated after the battle of Mohacs. Also, they contain rare, hand painted decorated liturgical books. Among them the famous Bratislava quoted Missal. To the south chapel of St. Joseph leads a separate entrance with decorative decorative grille from the turn of the century, 16 and 17 at the top. Over medium sakristiovým (space of sacristy) on the ground floor, the floor is placed organ machine.

South vessel (right)

Just opposite the main entrance to the temple is isosceles missionary cross planted 25 February 1990 which was drawn up following a visit to Vienna by Pope John Paul II. in 1988. Going along the south wall one comes to the South portal, which is the last, even medieval extension to the house. It was built around 1510. In each field divided bowed ribs separately placed signs four evangelists. Right next to the southern entrance is the original box and the stone stoup in the form of shells. In southern ship is still Sorrows Altar P. Mary, created as opposite northern altar of Calvary Tyrolean workshop F. Prinoth in St.Ulrich.

Shrine of the Virgin Mary on the south side of the central seated statue of the Pieta that their origin prior to 1642 is due to the ghost 's story. It's already the fourth altar created for this work. On the altar in addition to the aforementioned statues are even statues of other saints. From left are in the bottom row sv. Apolonia, Vol. Genovéva? , Vol. Rozalia Palermo and light. Cecilia, in the top shroud by even two, vol. left St. Lucia and Filomena right. Statues of saints supplement relief scenes from the life of Christ juxtaposed threes. At left are the scenes of childhood as: Escape to Egypt, twelve Christ in the temple and sacrifice in the temple. On the right side of the end scenes of Christ's life: Carrying the Cross, storing the grave and crucifixion. In mid nike attachment is a statue of an angel holding a veraikon.

In the corner of the south aisle is a jewel of Baroque art admired and coveted by thousands of visitors - equestrian statue of St . Martin, dividing his cloak with a beggar created by Juraj Rafael Donner of the 1735th. Build sv . Martina bears portrait features of donor - Archbishop Imre Esterházy.

Juraj Rafael Donner

(* 24.05.1693 - † 02.15.1741)

Crafts George Raphael Donner is a decade firmly tied to Bratislava, the then Prešburg, which creates a number of wonderful works of art. To a large extent its creation was heading for the needs of the church, which is a donor it works. Perhaps the greatest of the reservation was archbishop of Esztergom Imrich Esterházy, for whom creating here in the house in the years 1719-1731 chapel of St. . John the Merciful, and whose order is the leading work on the Baroque reconstruction of the house. In 1735 creates the St. Martina main-Baroque altar with a statue of St. Martin, as well as a pair of worshiping angels, who are part of the collections of the National Museum in Budapest. In his workshop on Firšnáli (now Freedom Square) created in 1736 for the abbey church altar in Marianka, became canonical and altars Piety and light. For Michael 's Cathedral St. Martin Donner ten year stay in Bratislava meant the emergence of the so-called Donner school, which is associated with an expired late Baroque Epoch Times Cinquecento, while anticipating future development of classicism. From its rich formation in the St. Martina has been preserved except the chapel of St. Martin decoration, Statue of St. John the Merciful. Its original position was at the end of the presbytery, which was part of the main Baroque altar.

Once near the triumphal arch in the southern ship is one of kovolejárskych Gothic monuments, which is the baptismal font in 1409 92 cm high. The cover consists of neo helm of 1878.

Sanctuary

The sanctuary is only three steps of red marble separated from the nave and aisles. After the two sides are still neo-Gothic. The main altar in the shape of a Gothic shrine and altar of St. Andrew podveží in northern naves are made ​​by J. Lippert. It is on the main altar, found its place six saints - patron of the city. These are light. Juraj, Vol. Elizabeth Hungarian, Vol. Vojtech the left of the tabernacle with the emblems of the four Evangelists with Christ in the middle, and light. Nicholas, Vol. Catherine of Alexandria, St . Florian on the right side. Extension creates richly towering architecture trúbiacimi by angels. On the south wall is placed neo-Gothic pastophorium closed door of a Gothic tower-like shape pastofória originally located on the opposite, that the north side of the sanctuary. There is now a wall mural with a list of heads are crowned king, supplemented AD coronation, created in the 19th century. Below the list is a little north portal. Pillars on either side of the sanctuary windows are placed neo-Gothic sculpture of St. Peter and Paul. For northern stall are two epitaphs. The year 1601 is the epitaph Nicholas Palffy in this niche and clothed in armor. To his right is the epitaph Peter Pázmány - Cardinal, Archbishop of Esztergom, scholar, founder of the Pázmáneum in Vienna, the founder of the University of Trnava and Bratislava Jesuit college. The epitaph is the work of sculptor of Bratislava A. Riegele. Among them is the inscription forming tombstone Archbishops Lippaya, Szécsényi, and Pázmaňa. Northern part of the stall is a small positive organ workshop Karla Kölner created in 1867 From inside the triumphal arch is equipped with a secondary epitaph Bishop of Eger, a Hungarian viceroy Francis Ujlakyho made ​​of red marble around 1555 and also from red marble epitaph created Martina Peth, displayed with Episcopal insignia.

North Ship (left)

North ship has a so-called dominant Altar or Altar of the Cross of Calvary Tyrolean workshop F. Prinoth in St. Ulrich. In the center is a statue of Calvary, so cross with the Corpus of Christ, under which it is Mary 's mother left and right Apostle John. It is shown here moments when Jesus Christ in John passed under the protection of Mary's motherhood mankind and us through John gives Mary the mother. About four- relief scenes creating the impression sash opening Gothic altar, showing four trpiteľskej painful moments of Jesus' journey to Calvary. The lower left corner is Jesus' encounter with the Mother of the crowning with thorns. On the right side is down prayer on the Mount of Olives, where Christ receives the chalice of suffering at the hands of an angel. The last scene is flogging Christ. The bulkhead under the cross is embossed painting the Last Supper. It is created by the famous fresco of Leonardo Da Vinci. Towers soaring above the altar are equipped with four statues. Amid cross over the Sacred Heart of Jesus, of whom the angel with folded hands. On the sides are statues of Jesus statues of two deacons. On the right is the first deacon of St. Stephen and on the opposite side of St . Lawrence, who was consecrated to the one now defunct church in Bratislava.

On the altar of St . Andrew made ​​by J. Lippert, instead of the central statue of that saint ever stood a statue of the Pieta, now standing at a larger (already mentioned), splendid altar in the south of the ship. Sv. Andrew crossed with typical crossbar behind obstupujú niches in the side altar of St. Alojz and St. Imrich.

On the northern front of the ships is still a chapel. John the Merciful.

Right next to the altar of St . Andrew is the entrance to the chapel of St . Anny.

Chapel. John the Merciful

Chapel. John the Merciful, the only comprehensive monument of the baroque period. The chapel stands on the site of the former Gothic sacristy. Build it gave the archbishop Imrich Esterházy, as his funeral chapel and also the place where the remains of St. John the Merciful. Its decoration is the work of J. R. Donner. Ceiling fresco attributed to D. Grant, shows the personification of divine virtues: faith, hope and love over the entrance, accompanied justice. On the predella of the altar of the Refectory are seven scenes from the Passion, which also includes door tabernákula. These relief sculptures are like eternal light, and two large candlesticks of foundry workshop J. R. Donner. His, however, stoneware sculpture workshop come putitov a large angels. A gem of stonework is carved in white marble statue forever adoring donor. Archbishop Imrich Esterházy is carved from white marble in a sumptuous robe kneeling on kľakadle of red marble. The silver coffin remarkable, under a canopy consisting of a crown and drapery of it merging into stored relics of St. John the Merciful. Entrance to the chapel is formed by a large arch lined with rich drapery, again, kept little angel. The hole closes heavy baroque metal gate.

The remains of St. Martin and of St. John the Merciful were by tradition gift Turkish sultan King Matthias Corvinus and from 15 century have been deposited in the royal chapel in Buda. In 1526 they were moved to Bratislava, Buda was because after the defeat of the Hungarian army at Mohács threatened by the Turks. The Bratislava castle remains were deposited up to 5 June 1530, when they were at the command of Ferdinand I. moved to St. Martin.

Anny Chapel

Anne Chapel is the in the the northern site of the former so-called small portal , whose precious stone mason gothic decor is still preserved, despite various modifications to the temple. Under the floor there are two entrances to Dómská crypts and also the foundations of the former Romanesque Karner. At present, in addition epitaph J. I. Bajza established academic sculptor J. Pospíšilom rare Gothic epitaph provost J. Schoenberg from 1470 probably made ​​by Nicolaus Gerhaereta of Leyden, provost Michael Marovitza epitaph and epitaph George Nagy. The front wall is a statue of St . Anne with P. Mary, who was part of the now defunct neo-Gothic altar.

Preserved Gothic tympanum above the transition into the aisle, showing God the Father seated on his seat in the hands of the tree of the cross - holding of the new fruit of eternal life - Christ, for it outstretched. Adore that two angels. In vrchnejšej section contains two more so prefigurácie Christ, namely: lioness revitalizing their stillborn baby on the left side of the pelican and her young vourus own flesh and blood on the right side. God the Father above floats depicting a dove - third divine person of the Holy Spirit.

Vaulted Hall

Three nave is divided in two rows ranking - all eight columns, resembling the eight Beatitudes which is built cross vault, which is almost without bolts. Its author is most likely Hans Puchsbaum, who also worked on the construction of Vienna's St. Stephen's Cathedral, where he built a similar vault. The focus is on cross-nave circular opening covered with a shield with a dove St. Spirit hovering on clouds surrounded by a circle of stars. The central ship is richly carved pulpit obtáčajúca one of the main pillars. From the ceiling hangs mnohoramenný metal chandelier from the turn of the 16th and 17th century.

Organ chorus

Organ chorus is created according to F. Liszt so on it could be placed great interpretive apparatus symphony orchestra and choir. For this reason, the big 34 registering body - most of the workshops Vincent possible from the years 1880-82, as it were closed and placed in the tower. Cannot fail to mention that the musical events in Bratislava was closely connected with the house just Saint Martin. With music Mass in the cathedral all developments related to church music in Bratislava. Already a document from 1491 mentions the mass supported by the city council. Model for the local musical events are also elements coming from the coronation ceremony near Vienna. In 1833 was established at the house - church music association called. Kirchenmusikverain (in German language - Kirchenmusikverein). Under the guidance of outstanding conductors Joseph Kumlika, Thiarda-Laforesta and Eugene Kossovo gained European recognition of the association. And In the house conducted his coronation Mass itself Ferenz Liszt. This body several times successfully explained Beethoven's IX Symphony and Missa Solemn. Even in 1950 it was in the archives of over 2,700 songs in custody conductor Alexander Albrecht.

Gothic windows

The temple is illuminated with several Gothic windows, filled with stained glass from years of neo-Gothic reconstruction (1874).

Crypts

Crypts are mysterious underground church built on a former cemetery. So far we know three crypts at a depth of nearly six meters. Is input to the two already mentioned chapel of St. Anne, third - Palffy family crypt located in front of the main altar has entry from the exterior. This is the north wall of the house covered with white marble top with Palffy family coat of arms (which was the Diet of Bratislava in 1599 elected hereditary lords of the castle), above which there is a funerary statue of John Draškovcha from 1613 depicting the knight located in nike completed the top of shells. The chapel of St. Anny is entered into so-called Jesuit crypt, which is situated below the road between the house and the catholic seminary. There is also only accessible entrance to the underground section so-called Archbishop crypt branched into four corridors. There are more than 90 graves. The last three are buried here: Provost Joseph Dankó († 1895), canon Geza Navratil († 1984) and Joseph parish administrator Beitl († 1991). The graves are in rows of three. There are also temporarily stored the remains of Bishop Buzalka. Under the chapel of Saint John the Merciful in bulk coffin Archbishops Imre Esterházy († 1745), Nicholas Csaky († 1757), Francis Barkóczy († 1765) and Cardinal Jozef Batthyány († 1799). Restoration work 12 September 1859 found under the pavement of the sanctuary graves of archbishops Pázmáňa, Lippayho and Szécsényi. In the sixties have been found the graves of archbishops Fejerköviho († 1596) and Christian Augustine († 1721). At the tomb of Bratislava canon J. I. Bajza (1754-1836) was located in the summer of 2003 and the empty coffin glazed Catholic priest, nationalist Andrej Hlinka.

Tower

Tower towering over the house of St . Martina is 87 meters high. In the distant past had fortification-defensive character. As part of the walls were present in it guns and other protective and defensive equipment. Injury suffered mainly fires. A fire in 1760 caused by lightning, was repeated in 1833, and subsequently damaged the tower whirlwind. The current state of the tower is from the years 1835-1849, when the builder Ignatius St. Feigler edited by Neo-Gothic tower to form the completed pyramid. Brand new top of the form, instead of the cross when it is equiped with gilded decorative pillow Hungarian crown weighing 300 kg. Below the clock face is the bell tower. The oldest bell tower is located at 2513 kg weighing Wedderin, cast Baltazar Herold in 1675th. On the occasion of the Great Jubilee of 2000 the tower was planted another 5 new bells, gifts neighboring countries. They are also a symbol of a united Europe and jointly bear the motto:

We are born with you - I'm dying with you

I rejoice with you - I am crying with you

I'm calling you together with your heart.

Listen to my voice their hearts,

Are all people of good will, Listen!

These bells are the work from the workshop of Maria Tomášková-Dytrichovej in Brodek u Company.

Coronation

Coronations were certainly the most famous period in the history of St. Martin. It is bordered ago period 1563-1830, which was the coronation church of Hungarian Kingdom. It took place there nineteen coronation. From here, the eleven kings were crowned, including Maria Theresa and eight royal wives.

JEWELS OF THE CATHEDRAL

Jewellery house, which is in the treasury collected for 550 years existence of the temple, are hidden in the bowels of the rough walls. In addition to the artistic, historic and cultural value of the building itself forms a considerable number of objects characterized by high craftsmanship and artistic quality. Perhaps the greatest gem is 109 cm tall Gothic monstrance, accompanied by a variety of liturgical objects, including chalices and Episcopal Berio, pacifikálov, cibórií, or reliquary. Also there are different painting gems. For all let us at least Gothic panel paintings originating from the altar in the Vienna New Town, whose authorship is attributed to "master Winkler epitaph" from around the 1480th Special kind of jewelry is the amount of liturgical vestments decorated with rich hand embroidery technique so-called paintings needle. These valuables can be seen at special ceremonial worship, which again become part of the celebration of the liturgy.

__________

 

[ 1 ] Pope in the years 1198-1216

[ 2 ] Pope in the years 1216-1227

[ 3 ] Hungarian king in the years 1290-1301

[ 4 ] Joseph Lippert (* 21 January 1826v Arad in Romania, + August 15, 1902 in Gutensteine ​​in Austria) architect and restorer. He studied in Hamburg and Vienna.

[ 5 ] She died on 12.25.1428 and was buried in the Cathedral of St. . Martin.

[ 6 ] Bohemian king from 1378 to 1400 and in 1378 a German Roman emperor of the dynasty of Luxemburg.

[ 7 ] 1526 AD

[ 8 ] See File: Thomas Bielavý , rather marvelous Loans, which became one soul in Prešpurk, 1643

[ 9 ] Shape church. Lawrence can be found marked in the pavement of the square in front of the Old Market .

Editor - Tue, 2006a - 08-29 11:15

Printable version

( c ) The parish of St . Martina in Bratislava

dom.fara.sk/?q=dom/o_dome

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

3. The Origin and Development of The Church of Almighty God

 

www.holyspiritspeaks.org/about-us/

 

In the Age of Grace, the Lord Jesus promised to His followers, “And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you to myself; that where I am, there you may be also” (Jhn 14:3). He also prophesied, “For as the lightning comes out of the east, and shines even to the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be” (Mat 24:27). In the last days, as promised and foretold by Himself, God has again become flesh and descended to the East of the world—China—to do the work of judgment, chastisement, conquest, and salvation using the word, on the foundation of the redemption work of the Lord Jesus. In this, the prophecies of the Bible that “Judgment begins with the house of God ” and “He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches” have also been fulfilled. God’s work of the last days has ended the Age of Grace and ushered in the Age of Kingdom. As the gospel of the kingdom of Almighty God spread rapidly in Mainland China, The Church of Almighty God came into being. As proven by facts, The Church of Almighty God came into being entirely as a result of God’s work of the last days, and was not established by any man. This is because the chosen people in The Church of Almighty God pray in the name of Almighty God, obey His work, and accept all the truths expressed by Him. Thus it is evident that these chosen people believe in Christ who is incarnated in the last days, the practical God who is the Spirit realized in the flesh, instead of believing in a man. Outwardly, Almighty God is nothing more than an ordinary Son of man, but in substance He is the embodiment of God’s Spirit and is the truth, the way, and the life. His work and word are the direct expression of the Spirit of God and are the appearance of God in person. Therefore, He is the practical God who is incarnated.

  

Fonte dell'immagine: Il Lampo da Levante

 

Condizioni d'Uso: Avviso legale e condizioni per l’uso

  

Lo Spirito Santo opera secondo dei principi

  

Qin Shuting Città di Linyi, Provincia di Shandong

 

Per un certo tempo, anche se non avevo smesso di nutrirmi e dissetarmi della parola di Dio, non avevo mai percepito la luce. Avevo pregato Dio per questo ma, ciononostante, non ero stata ancora illuminata. Così ho pensato: “Dio illumina ogni persona a Suo tempo, perciò è inutile cercare di affrettare le cose”. Poi ho continuato a seguire le regole e a nutrirmi e dissetarmi della parola di Dio senza ansia, attendendo “pazientemente” che Egli mi illuminasse.

 

Finché un giorno ho letto questo brano della parola di Dio: “Solo se il tuo cuore è in pace al cospetto di Dio, la tua ricerca della verità e della trasformazione della tua indole porterà frutto. Infatti, ti presenti a Dio gravato di fardelli e ti senti sempre fortemente manchevole, senti che ci sono molte verità che dovresti conoscere, molta realtà che avresti bisogno di sperimentare, e che dovresti prestare la massima attenzione alla volontà di Dio. Queste cose sono costantemente nella tua mente ed è come se ti opprimessero fino quasi a non lasciarti respirare: per questo avverti un gran peso nel cuore (ma non ti senti in una condizione negativa). Solo persone di questo genere sono qualificate ad accogliere l’illuminazione delle parole di Dio e a essere mosse dal Suo Spirito. È a motivo del loro fardello, del fatto che hanno il cuore pesante e, si può dire, a causa del prezzo che hanno pagato e dei tormenti che hanno patito dinanzi a Dio, che Ne hanno ricevuto intuizione e illuminazione, poiché Dio non riserva a nessuno un trattamento speciale. Nel Suo modo di trattare la gente Egli è sempre giusto, ma per contro non provvede a caso alle persone e non dà loro incondizionatamente. È uno dei tratti della Sua indole giusta” (“È molto importante stabilire un rapporto adeguato con Dio” in La Parola appare nella carne). Riflettendo su queste parole di Dio, ho capito: Dio è un Dio giusto. Non provvede mai all’uomo in maniera arbitraria né gli dona alcunché in maniera incondizionata. Per ricevere la Sua illuminazione e il Suo splendore, bisogna acquietare il proprio animo davanti a Lui e avere un cuore che brama e ricerca la Sua parola. Bisogna portare il fardello della propria vita e ricercare nella parola di Dio le proprie manchevolezze. Portando il proprio fardello, bisogna intenzionalmente nutrirsi e dissetarsi della parola di Dio per tenere nella massima considerazione la Sua volontà ed entrare sempre più in profondità nella verità. Solo pagando in concreto un simile prezzo per lavorare con Dio si può ottenere la Sua illuminazione. In retrospettiva, io non portavo alcun fardello né avevo un cuore bramoso di nutrirsi e dissetarsi della parola di Dio. Ogni volta che prendevo in mano il libro della parola di Dio lo sfogliavo e vedevo che avevo letto questo e quel brano, pensando di avere un’idea di massima di ciascun passo. Poi ne cercavo uno qualsiasi, lo leggevo frettolosamente, e la cosa finiva lì. Quando mi nutrivo e mi dissetavo della parola di Dio, riuscivo solo a capire il significato letterale delle parole e mi concentravo unicamente sul rispetto di alcune regole e pratiche. Di certo non capivo granché della verità a cui dovevo accedere, né soddisfacevo il cuore di Dio. Non portavo affatto alcun fardello nella vita, né mi preoccupavo per non essermi dotata di una verità sufficiente; mi limitavo a gestire con indifferenza il mio nutrirmi e dissetarmi della parola di Dio. Con un atteggiamento così sprezzante verso la parola di Dio, come avrei potuto ottenere la Sua illuminazione e il Suo splendore? Non stavo davvero lavorando con Dio e utilizzavo l’espressione “Dio illumina ogni persona a Suo tempo” come scusa per attendere ciecamente la Sua illuminazione. Ero davvero tanto ignorante! Solo adesso riconosco che, anche se Dio illumina ogni persona a Suo tempo, questo è vero, ma c’è un principio alla base dell’opera dello Spirito Santo sull’uomo: l’uomo stesso deve avere un cuore bramoso e dedito alla ricerca per poter lavorare in maniera positiva e attiva con Dio e solo allora lo Spirito Santo potrà operare su di lui e illuminare e fare risplendere la sua conoscenza della volontà di Dio, facendogli capire la verità della parola di Dio.

 

Oh Dio! Io rendo grazie per la Tua tempestiva illuminazione che mi ha permesso di riconoscere la deviazione insita nella mia esperienza. Adesso io desidero tornare indietro per lavorare in maniera positiva e attiva con Te, per mantenere un cuore bramoso e dedito alla ricerca, per portare il mio fardello e nutrirmi e dissetarmi della Tua parola, per perseguire un’ulteriore illuminazione ottenuta mediante la Tua parola e far sì che io possa approfondire la mia conoscenza della verità, e che la mia vita diventi sempre migliore.

  

it.easternlightning.org/Holy-Spirit-works-in-principled-w...

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 thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

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

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

God's Words of Life on Rest

Exodus 33:14

 

Devotional Thought on Rest

 

Are you exhausted today? Are you taking pills for energy to get through the day? Or are you on a nervous high and need something to slow you down? Perhaps what your body is really crying for is rest. Is there rest for anyone in this tension-filled world?

 

As the disciples returned from a missionary journey, they were elated with their success. They gave glowing reports of how God had worked. Jesus was glad to hear their accounts, but He knew that they needed physical rest after their arduous journey. He invited them to come rest with Him in a quiet place.

 

We, too, need to refresh ourselves to maintain physical and spiritual strength. Our schedules are demanding. They drain our physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual life. God’s Holy Spirit gives us strength for His schedule for us. I believe God plans for us to include times of rest and relaxation in our schedule. If the disciples needed rest, so do we.

 

Our rest times may consist of a vacation where we can rest and relax, a change of environment, or simply a respite right where we are. Time spent with the Lord brings renewal and refreshment.

 

~ Millie Stamm

 

Scriptures for Today

 

Jesus said, “Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” — Matthew 11:28–30

 

Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. — Galatians 6:9

 

The Lord replied, “My Presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.” — Exodus 33:14

 

You are awesome, O God, in Your sanctuary; the God of Israel gives power and strength to His people. Praise be to God! — Psalm 68:35

 

[God] gives strength to the weary and increases the power of the weak. Even youths grow tired and weary, and young men stumble and fall; but those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint. — Isaiah 40:29–31

 

Do not fear, for I am with you; do not be dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you and help you; I will uphold you with My righteous right hand. — Isaiah 41:10

 

“I will refresh the weary and satisfy the faint,” says the Lord. — Jeremiah 31:25

 

Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in vain. Unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchmen stand guard in vain. In vain you rise early and stay up late, toiling for food to eat — for He grants sleep to those He loves. — Psalm 127:1–2

 

[The Lord] makes me lie down in green pastures, He leads me beside quiet waters, He restores my soul. He guides me in paths of righteousness for His name’s sake. — Psalm 23:2–3

 

Let the beloved of the Lord rest secure in Him, for He shields him all day long, and the one the Lord loves rests between His shoulders. — Deuteronomy 33:12

 

He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. — Psalm 91:1

 

Because so many people were coming and going that they did not even have a chance to eat, [Jesus] said to them, “Come with Me by yourselves to a quiet place and get some rest.” — Mark 6:31

  

Excerpted from God's Words of Life for Women, copyright Zondervan.

I thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

I thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

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 thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

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

The Cathedral of St. Martina

St. Martina - National Historic Landmark

1221-1452

St. Martina is one of the landmarks of the city. For centuries it was the center of cultural, religious and social life. The place where the Cathedral stands today was ambiguous center of the emerging urban settlements. They met here a trip arose market, located here thus the core of the then town, where we can assume the chapel. However, the townspeople used to go to church on the castle, where it established a prepoštstvo chapter. Only when it visits have become unbearable and endangered the safety of the castle headquarters, asked the king Imrich by Pope Innocent III. Permit the transfer prepoštstva to the castle. This permit was also issued in 1204. After prepoštstve to place the issuing and procuring documentary material to the approval of Pope Honorius III. In 1221 moved the church. Construction has not yet begun in the Romanesque style and dedication most Holy Saviour was in continuity with the church of the castle. December 2, 1291 King Andrew III. Podhradie granted town privileges, and the city began to develop in the open easterly direction. The historic town but has remained at the foot of the castle hill. Sacred Temple Saviour in their size was not sufficient and therefore less Romanesque building, which since 1302 has served as the city temple, started in 1311-1314 attaches the current Gothic cathedral. This was solemnly consecrated by bishop of Esztergom Gregory in 1452 in honor of the Sacred Saviour and St . Martin. At that time there was also the sanctuary of what we know today. It was probably just a little more than 1/3 of today, that the sanctuary built by Matthias Corvinus in the years 1467-1487. These years also today we can read on his ceiling plate fixed to the terminal bars ribs. Here also we find the provincial and noble coats of that period Today's Cathedral - Cathedral of Saint Martin - passed since its dedication in 1452 many variables and minor alterations, or extensions. Today there are more in state redevelopment of the years 1863-1878 led canon Charles Heiller - Dómská priest, held in collaboration with the architect Joseph Lippert (1826-1902).

Overall internal dimensions of St. Martina are:

length including the sacristy - 69.37 m

width - 22.85 m

Nave wall thickness - 1.5 m

Thickness of the walls of the sanctuary - 926 mm

Ships height - 16.02 m

Height sanctuary - 18.5 m

Interior

Support

Support (three-legged) consists of two floors. Upon arrival to the interior of a large northern portal, we find ourselves directly beneath the choir organ. On the soffit we can see the exposed fragment baroque layers. The only color, but also historically linked with decorative baroque clock above the entrance to the sacristy. Doors are decorated with relief carving ornamentation except Hungary and municipal coat of arms. These doors lead into the three-legged sacristy formed on the north side of the chapel Canons (Chapel of Our Lady) and the first floor treasure in southern podveží chapel. Joseph and floor chapel Czech Queen Sophia, the widow of Wenceslas IV., and staircase accessible from the choir. Here is exposure of Dómská treasure. Is it possible to go from here to the space tower. Sometimes there is also a capitular archive that even in 1950 contained 3285 medieval documents, and more than 23,000 documents dated after the battle of Mohacs. Also, they contain rare, hand painted decorated liturgical books. Among them the famous Bratislava quoted Missal. To the south chapel of St. Joseph leads a separate entrance with decorative decorative grille from the turn of the century, 16 and 17 at the top. Over medium sakristiovým (space of sacristy) on the ground floor, the floor is placed organ machine.

South vessel (right)

Just opposite the main entrance to the temple is isosceles missionary cross planted 25 February 1990 which was drawn up following a visit to Vienna by Pope John Paul II. in 1988. Going along the south wall one comes to the South portal, which is the last, even medieval extension to the house. It was built around 1510. In each field divided bowed ribs separately placed signs four evangelists. Right next to the southern entrance is the original box and the stone stoup in the form of shells. In southern ship is still Sorrows Altar P. Mary, created as opposite northern altar of Calvary Tyrolean workshop F. Prinoth in St.Ulrich.

Shrine of the Virgin Mary on the south side of the central seated statue of the Pieta that their origin prior to 1642 is due to the ghost 's story. It's already the fourth altar created for this work. On the altar in addition to the aforementioned statues are even statues of other saints. From left are in the bottom row sv. Apolonia, Vol. Genovéva? , Vol. Rozalia Palermo and light. Cecilia, in the top shroud by even two, vol. left St. Lucia and Filomena right. Statues of saints supplement relief scenes from the life of Christ juxtaposed threes. At left are the scenes of childhood as: Escape to Egypt, twelve Christ in the temple and sacrifice in the temple. On the right side of the end scenes of Christ's life: Carrying the Cross, storing the grave and crucifixion. In mid nike attachment is a statue of an angel holding a veraikon.

In the corner of the south aisle is a jewel of Baroque art admired and coveted by thousands of visitors - equestrian statue of St . Martin, dividing his cloak with a beggar created by Juraj Rafael Donner of the 1735th. Build sv . Martina bears portrait features of donor - Archbishop Imre Esterházy.

Juraj Rafael Donner

(* 24.05.1693 - † 02.15.1741)

Crafts George Raphael Donner is a decade firmly tied to Bratislava, the then Prešburg, which creates a number of wonderful works of art. To a large extent its creation was heading for the needs of the church, which is a donor it works. Perhaps the greatest of the reservation was archbishop of Esztergom Imrich Esterházy, for whom creating here in the house in the years 1719-1731 chapel of St. . John the Merciful, and whose order is the leading work on the Baroque reconstruction of the house. In 1735 creates the St. Martina main-Baroque altar with a statue of St. Martin, as well as a pair of worshiping angels, who are part of the collections of the National Museum in Budapest. In his workshop on Firšnáli (now Freedom Square) created in 1736 for the abbey church altar in Marianka, became canonical and altars Piety and light. For Michael 's Cathedral St. Martin Donner ten year stay in Bratislava meant the emergence of the so-called Donner school, which is associated with an expired late Baroque Epoch Times Cinquecento, while anticipating future development of classicism. From its rich formation in the St. Martina has been preserved except the chapel of St. Martin decoration, Statue of St. John the Merciful. Its original position was at the end of the presbytery, which was part of the main Baroque altar.

Once near the triumphal arch in the southern ship is one of kovolejárskych Gothic monuments, which is the baptismal font in 1409 92 cm high. The cover consists of neo helm of 1878.

Sanctuary

The sanctuary is only three steps of red marble separated from the nave and aisles. After the two sides are still neo-Gothic. The main altar in the shape of a Gothic shrine and altar of St. Andrew podveží in northern naves are made ​​by J. Lippert. It is on the main altar, found its place six saints - patron of the city. These are light. Juraj, Vol. Elizabeth Hungarian, Vol. Vojtech the left of the tabernacle with the emblems of the four Evangelists with Christ in the middle, and light. Nicholas, Vol. Catherine of Alexandria, St . Florian on the right side. Extension creates richly towering architecture trúbiacimi by angels. On the south wall is placed neo-Gothic pastophorium closed door of a Gothic tower-like shape pastofória originally located on the opposite, that the north side of the sanctuary. There is now a wall mural with a list of heads are crowned king, supplemented AD coronation, created in the 19th century. Below the list is a little north portal. Pillars on either side of the sanctuary windows are placed neo-Gothic sculpture of St. Peter and Paul. For northern stall are two epitaphs. The year 1601 is the epitaph Nicholas Palffy in this niche and clothed in armor. To his right is the epitaph Peter Pázmány - Cardinal, Archbishop of Esztergom, scholar, founder of the Pázmáneum in Vienna, the founder of the University of Trnava and Bratislava Jesuit college. The epitaph is the work of sculptor of Bratislava A. Riegele. Among them is the inscription forming tombstone Archbishops Lippaya, Szécsényi, and Pázmaňa. Northern part of the stall is a small positive organ workshop Karla Kölner created in 1867 From inside the triumphal arch is equipped with a secondary epitaph Bishop of Eger, a Hungarian viceroy Francis Ujlakyho made ​​of red marble around 1555 and also from red marble epitaph created Martina Peth, displayed with Episcopal insignia.

North Ship (left)

North ship has a so-called dominant Altar or Altar of the Cross of Calvary Tyrolean workshop F. Prinoth in St. Ulrich. In the center is a statue of Calvary, so cross with the Corpus of Christ, under which it is Mary 's mother left and right Apostle John. It is shown here moments when Jesus Christ in John passed under the protection of Mary's motherhood mankind and us through John gives Mary the mother. About four- relief scenes creating the impression sash opening Gothic altar, showing four trpiteľskej painful moments of Jesus' journey to Calvary. The lower left corner is Jesus' encounter with the Mother of the crowning with thorns. On the right side is down prayer on the Mount of Olives, where Christ receives the chalice of suffering at the hands of an angel. The last scene is flogging Christ. The bulkhead under the cross is embossed painting the Last Supper. It is created by the famous fresco of Leonardo Da Vinci. Towers soaring above the altar are equipped with four statues. Amid cross over the Sacred Heart of Jesus, of whom the angel with folded hands. On the sides are statues of Jesus statues of two deacons. On the right is the first deacon of St. Stephen and on the opposite side of St . Lawrence, who was consecrated to the one now defunct church in Bratislava.

On the altar of St . Andrew made ​​by J. Lippert, instead of the central statue of that saint ever stood a statue of the Pieta, now standing at a larger (already mentioned), splendid altar in the south of the ship. Sv. Andrew crossed with typical crossbar behind obstupujú niches in the side altar of St. Alojz and St. Imrich.

On the northern front of the ships is still a chapel. John the Merciful.

Right next to the altar of St . Andrew is the entrance to the chapel of St . Anny.

Chapel. John the Merciful

Chapel. John the Merciful, the only comprehensive monument of the baroque period. The chapel stands on the site of the former Gothic sacristy. Build it gave the archbishop Imrich Esterházy, as his funeral chapel and also the place where the remains of St. John the Merciful. Its decoration is the work of J. R. Donner. Ceiling fresco attributed to D. Grant, shows the personification of divine virtues: faith, hope and love over the entrance, accompanied justice. On the predella of the altar of the Refectory are seven scenes from the Passion, which also includes door tabernákula. These relief sculptures are like eternal light, and two large candlesticks of foundry workshop J. R. Donner. His, however, stoneware sculpture workshop come putitov a large angels. A gem of stonework is carved in white marble statue forever adoring donor. Archbishop Imrich Esterházy is carved from white marble in a sumptuous robe kneeling on kľakadle of red marble. The silver coffin remarkable, under a canopy consisting of a crown and drapery of it merging into stored relics of St. John the Merciful. Entrance to the chapel is formed by a large arch lined with rich drapery, again, kept little angel. The hole closes heavy baroque metal gate.

The remains of St. Martin and of St. John the Merciful were by tradition gift Turkish sultan King Matthias Corvinus and from 15 century have been deposited in the royal chapel in Buda. In 1526 they were moved to Bratislava, Buda was because after the defeat of the Hungarian army at Mohács threatened by the Turks. The Bratislava castle remains were deposited up to 5 June 1530, when they were at the command of Ferdinand I. moved to St. Martin.

Anny Chapel

Anne Chapel is the in the the northern site of the former so-called small portal , whose precious stone mason gothic decor is still preserved, despite various modifications to the temple. Under the floor there are two entrances to Dómská crypts and also the foundations of the former Romanesque Karner. At present, in addition epitaph J. I. Bajza established academic sculptor J. Pospíšilom rare Gothic epitaph provost J. Schoenberg from 1470 probably made ​​by Nicolaus Gerhaereta of Leyden, provost Michael Marovitza epitaph and epitaph George Nagy. The front wall is a statue of St . Anne with P. Mary, who was part of the now defunct neo-Gothic altar.

Preserved Gothic tympanum above the transition into the aisle, showing God the Father seated on his seat in the hands of the tree of the cross - holding of the new fruit of eternal life - Christ, for it outstretched. Adore that two angels. In vrchnejšej section contains two more so prefigurácie Christ, namely: lioness revitalizing their stillborn baby on the left side of the pelican and her young vourus own flesh and blood on the right side. God the Father above floats depicting a dove - third divine person of the Holy Spirit.

Vaulted Hall

Three nave is divided in two rows ranking - all eight columns, resembling the eight Beatitudes which is built cross vault, which is almost without bolts. Its author is most likely Hans Puchsbaum, who also worked on the construction of Vienna's St. Stephen's Cathedral, where he built a similar vault. The focus is on cross-nave circular opening covered with a shield with a dove St. Spirit hovering on clouds surrounded by a circle of stars. The central ship is richly carved pulpit obtáčajúca one of the main pillars. From the ceiling hangs mnohoramenný metal chandelier from the turn of the 16th and 17th century.

Organ chorus

Organ chorus is created according to F. Liszt so on it could be placed great interpretive apparatus symphony orchestra and choir. For this reason, the big 34 registering body - most of the workshops Vincent possible from the years 1880-82, as it were closed and placed in the tower. Cannot fail to mention that the musical events in Bratislava was closely connected with the house just Saint Martin. With music Mass in the cathedral all developments related to church music in Bratislava. Already a document from 1491 mentions the mass supported by the city council. Model for the local musical events are also elements coming from the coronation ceremony near Vienna. In 1833 was established at the house - church music association called. Kirchenmusikverain (in German language - Kirchenmusikverein). Under the guidance of outstanding conductors Joseph Kumlika, Thiarda-Laforesta and Eugene Kossovo gained European recognition of the association. And In the house conducted his coronation Mass itself Ferenz Liszt. This body several times successfully explained Beethoven's IX Symphony and Missa Solemn. Even in 1950 it was in the archives of over 2,700 songs in custody conductor Alexander Albrecht.

Gothic windows

The temple is illuminated with several Gothic windows, filled with stained glass from years of neo-Gothic reconstruction (1874).

Crypts

Crypts are mysterious underground church built on a former cemetery. So far we know three crypts at a depth of nearly six meters. Is input to the two already mentioned chapel of St. Anne, third - Palffy family crypt located in front of the main altar has entry from the exterior. This is the north wall of the house covered with white marble top with Palffy family coat of arms (which was the Diet of Bratislava in 1599 elected hereditary lords of the castle), above which there is a funerary statue of John Draškovcha from 1613 depicting the knight located in nike completed the top of shells. The chapel of St. Anny is entered into so-called Jesuit crypt, which is situated below the road between the house and the catholic seminary. There is also only accessible entrance to the underground section so-called Archbishop crypt branched into four corridors. There are more than 90 graves. The last three are buried here: Provost Joseph Dankó († 1895), canon Geza Navratil († 1984) and Joseph parish administrator Beitl († 1991). The graves are in rows of three. There are also temporarily stored the remains of Bishop Buzalka. Under the chapel of Saint John the Merciful in bulk coffin Archbishops Imre Esterházy († 1745), Nicholas Csaky († 1757), Francis Barkóczy († 1765) and Cardinal Jozef Batthyány († 1799). Restoration work 12 September 1859 found under the pavement of the sanctuary graves of archbishops Pázmáňa, Lippayho and Szécsényi. In the sixties have been found the graves of archbishops Fejerköviho († 1596) and Christian Augustine († 1721). At the tomb of Bratislava canon J. I. Bajza (1754-1836) was located in the summer of 2003 and the empty coffin glazed Catholic priest, nationalist Andrej Hlinka.

Tower

Tower towering over the house of St . Martina is 87 meters high. In the distant past had fortification-defensive character. As part of the walls were present in it guns and other protective and defensive equipment. Injury suffered mainly fires. A fire in 1760 caused by lightning, was repeated in 1833, and subsequently damaged the tower whirlwind. The current state of the tower is from the years 1835-1849, when the builder Ignatius St. Feigler edited by Neo-Gothic tower to form the completed pyramid. Brand new top of the form, instead of the cross when it is equiped with gilded decorative pillow Hungarian crown weighing 300 kg. Below the clock face is the bell tower. The oldest bell tower is located at 2513 kg weighing Wedderin, cast Baltazar Herold in 1675th. On the occasion of the Great Jubilee of 2000 the tower was planted another 5 new bells, gifts neighboring countries. They are also a symbol of a united Europe and jointly bear the motto:

We are born with you - I'm dying with you

I rejoice with you - I am crying with you

I'm calling you together with your heart.

Listen to my voice their hearts,

Are all people of good will, Listen!

These bells are the work from the workshop of Maria Tomášková-Dytrichovej in Brodek u Company.

Coronation

Coronations were certainly the most famous period in the history of St. Martin. It is bordered ago period 1563-1830, which was the coronation church of Hungarian Kingdom. It took place there nineteen coronation. From here, the eleven kings were crowned, including Maria Theresa and eight royal wives.

JEWELS OF THE CATHEDRAL

Jewellery house, which is in the treasury collected for 550 years existence of the temple, are hidden in the bowels of the rough walls. In addition to the artistic, historic and cultural value of the building itself forms a considerable number of objects characterized by high craftsmanship and artistic quality. Perhaps the greatest gem is 109 cm tall Gothic monstrance, accompanied by a variety of liturgical objects, including chalices and Episcopal Berio, pacifikálov, cibórií, or reliquary. Also there are different painting gems. For all let us at least Gothic panel paintings originating from the altar in the Vienna New Town, whose authorship is attributed to "master Winkler epitaph" from around the 1480th Special kind of jewelry is the amount of liturgical vestments decorated with rich hand embroidery technique so-called paintings needle. These valuables can be seen at special ceremonial worship, which again become part of the celebration of the liturgy.

__________

 

[ 1 ] Pope in the years 1198-1216

[ 2 ] Pope in the years 1216-1227

[ 3 ] Hungarian king in the years 1290-1301

[ 4 ] Joseph Lippert (* 21 January 1826v Arad in Romania, + August 15, 1902 in Gutensteine ​​in Austria) architect and restorer. He studied in Hamburg and Vienna.

[ 5 ] She died on 12.25.1428 and was buried in the Cathedral of St. . Martin.

[ 6 ] Bohemian king from 1378 to 1400 and in 1378 a German Roman emperor of the dynasty of Luxemburg.

[ 7 ] 1526 AD

[ 8 ] See File: Thomas Bielavý , rather marvelous Loans, which became one soul in Prešpurk, 1643

[ 9 ] Shape church. Lawrence can be found marked in the pavement of the square in front of the Old Market .

Editor - Tue, 2006a - 08-29 11:15

Printable version

( c ) The parish of St . Martina in Bratislava

dom.fara.sk/?q=dom/o_dome

I thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

Masonic Pavement and Indented Skirting.

 

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

 

The Symbolism on Our Lodge Officers

 

by Norman Senn, P.M. Mosaic Lodge #176 Fiat Lux Lodge of Research #1980

 

It is often said that symbolism is carried too far and this is

difficult to deny when I think of Freud and other psychiatrists and psychologists who seem able to find strange and often erotic meanings in all they see. The meanings given to every image based on repetition makes the lay-person feel at a serious disadvantage when they wish to contradict anything that is given a meaning by such "Specialists." The symbolic object, which is dredged up by the mind, seems to have no great pattern of consistency in the case of psychiatric symbol definition.

 

We are more fortunate in Freemasonry because we possess a body of ritualistic work which defines many of our symbols in at least one way. This allows us to look at our symbols in two distinct ways, the first being in the way our teachings say and secondly at the common meaning given to the same symbol by the profane. The similarity is usually very close but the range of meanings in the outside world is frequently much broader.

 

When a new mason asks the question about symbols, "what is that?", or "what does that mean?", do we tend to back off? Do we have the feeling that these are 'old' symbols, that really have no meaning in our modern world? If this is the case, then we are in very serious trouble within our Lodges because the Charge at our installations very clearly states that "...it inculcates principles of the purest morality, though veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols." We are also told in the same Charge that to penetrate through the veil of the allegories and symbols is to understand the mysteries. While there is a far deeper meaning in the overall pattern of the craft, it is of great value to find some meanings of the individual symbols and to attempt to recall that meaning on each occasion that we see them. This creates the 'repetition' form of learning that begins to modify our life style to become that "better man" we all strive for.

 

One of the problems with the human mind is that it tends to ignore items which it registers frequently. We are the last ones to see our children grow, and need a visitor to bring this to our

attention. So it is, with the jewels worn by the officers of our

Lodges. How many of you have looked at your officers jewels -

really looked. Firstly they are quite detailed, secondly they

frequently have things on them that you were totally unaware of.

 

There are different companies producing jewels and each may embellish the jewels differently, but you can be sure that there is meaning behind practically every identifiable whirl and loop.

In addition to the symbols on the jewel, each of these is suspended from a collar which may also have symbols upon it. Then the Officers also have an apron, often the same as yours, and this has detail on it that we tend to observe when it is first presented to us, but then we never consider it again.

 

What I hope to do in a short period of time, is to look at some of

the jewel, collar, and apron symbols and consider some of the

meanings that are taught us and then also some of meanings which are known to be fairly common in the everyday world. There will be areas where we skip over areas lightly, there will be a few diversions, but I hope that you will consider your Lodge jewels a little differently in the future.

 

A final point before starting is that all masonic symbols are

positive, none are aimed at anything that is not for the good of

the mason as an individual, and through him, for the world at

large. We degrade no symbol and none can ever be considered to be contrary to the high principles we extol. Remember that there is no right or wrong to symbolism - it is what you accept as meaningful to you as a Craftsman. The following are my findings and interpretations and it is quite likely that you will have different interpretations, but I wish to share my findings with you.

 

The Master carries with him, a great symbol. If you are of a York

Mason you will learn that it is immoveable, whereas if you use the Canadian Work, that it is moveable. The square is the symbol of regulated life and actions. It is the masonic rule for correcting and harmonising conduct on principles or morality and virtue, and as a symbol, it is dedicated to the Master. We also identify ourselves with this symbol, because we are taught that squares, levels and perpendiculars are the proper signs to know a mason.

 

We are surrounded by squares in our Lodge for every mason wears at least one although the Immediate Past Master and the Past Masters wear it most obviously. It stands, as one of the Great Lights, in the centre of all our activities and its legs constantly embrace the Worshipful Master. It is repeated in our F.C. salute, our feet positions, our way of moving around the Lodge and our legs when at the altar in our initiation.

 

History tells us that the square, which is an upright with a right

top arm, is the Greek letter gamma. Each one of us knows the

meanings associated with the letter G. In the construction trade,

the square is used for "trueing" stones and "proving" them correct.

 

We can see how easily, the association with truth and virtue could arise. There was the historical belief that the shape of the

ancient world was an oblong square and this is represented in our "squared Lodge."

 

There have been references to the square's meaning as a symbol long before the start of Masonry, as we know it. The Egyptians believed that truth and justice were 'on the square', Confucius in about 500 BC referred to the squareness of actions. Mencius, the Chinese philosopher of about 372 BC refers to square actions. Simonides of Ceos, the Greek lyrical poet of about 600 BC and Aristotle in about 350 BC refer to 'square actions' and associate this with honest dealings, high morality and virtue.

 

The symbol is not original, it is certainly far from new, but it

seems to have a remarkable consistency of meaning.

If we move on to the Immediate Past Master's jewel for a moment we observe that it is identical to the Master's in shape except that pendant from it is the 47th problem of Euclid. It is important to remember that Euclid only proved the Pythagorean theorem of about 300 years earlier. When you consider what the theorem shows it is a multitude of further squares. Squares on sides, mathematically 'squared' numbers and a central closed square, about which all the 'proof' stands. As an emphasis of the square symbol we could see nothing which could do it better. We should know that the properties of this triangular arrangement were first thought to be magical in the relationship they demonstrated. In addition, Pythagoras, being Greek, may have had the Greek letter/symbol G in his mind when he is reputed to have exclaimed 'Eureka' and it is for us to decide if the utility or the symbolism had generated his joy. We learn in our work that we are to be inspired to lov e the arts and sciences by this design and pro of. We should always marvel that such a simple figure could have had such impact on our world.

 

You may think that we should move on to the next set of jewels at this point but hold ... there is more, much more that we can find at this time on the jewels that we have considered - look at the design on them. Now do not think that we will find new figures on all the other jewels but the jewels of the three principal officers are the most embellished and we will stay for a little longer here.

 

In the angle of the square is the sun, radiant with its beams and

with a rather clear face on it. Was this doodling the work of a

metal worker with time on his hands? Of course not, for the

historical significance of the sun as a symbol is an integral part

of all our Lodge work. We refer to the sun in many places and also copy it is many actions. At the opening and closing of the Lodge, all the officers relate their actions to the sun. We walk around our Lodge in the same direction as the sun appears to move across our earth. We travel towards the East, the place of light, after being informed that the Master rules his Lodge as the sun does the day. If you think and possibly are aware, that culture seemed to develop in the East, there was always the suggestion that the source of the sun had inspired this knowledge and culture.

 

Proof is readily available of the frequency of sun-worship as the

first form of contemplation of a deity. Man has always looked

upward for a "source" and the sun met the early criteria of

"supporter" of the life of the world. It is fairly natural that

this early god would be personified by the addition of a face so

that the god could be given more of the human attributes. Even

with our own concept of God, we find the degree of personification relates to the stage of understanding of the race or individual.

 

Do we then have a reminder of that ancient worship on our jewel which is 'a reaching back' to give evidence, albeit erroneous, of the great historical past of the Craft? Perhaps it is also a repetition of the many death and rebirth mysteries and legends of the past .... and the present.

 

Perhaps for us we should remember more the sun as being the symbol of brightness, the opposer of evil. We know that we say in lodge that the rays spread their benign influence and we also must have a constant search for light. In fact the degrees seek 'light', 'more light' and 'further light', and this is given by our three lesser lights, one of which represents the sun as well as the Master. We are told also that the sun is the glory of the Lord, and it governs the day. There is another link in our lod ge with the sun and that is a symbol designated as meaning something else, but the astrological sign for the sun is a point within a circle.

 

While the sun is one clear symbol, we also find the moon with a

face on the jewel. Explain where it is. This symbol appears

elsewhere in our Lodge as one of the Lesser lights and is

represented by the Senior Warden. The moon and sun have many similar characteristics in symbolism, but regularity and stability have the approval of our teachings. These principles are desirable in life both in and our of Lodge, as our Warden states in opening and closing. It is natural that in the absence of the Master (the sun), the moon should rule in his place.

The symbol in the profane world has always indicated measurable states, regularity and is strongly associated with the

death-rebirth mysteries that are continued as the principal theme and lesson in Masonry.

 

Yet another symbol is found on the jewel in the form of a cluster

of seven stars. These are specifically referred to in the Canadian teachings and are an important symbol in that they represent the etherial mansion, veiled from human eyes but the York mason learns only of the star-decked heavens. The significance of these stars which adorn the ceiling of many Lodge rooms is very complex, in that the stars and the number seven are almost constantly in symbolism. The stars themselves, in clusters tend to be associated with order and destiny and so to some degree reinforce the symbolism contained in that of the moon symbolism. When we come to the seven we are almost overwhelmed with the many facts associated with it. The number seven was said to be 'perfect' because it contained the numbers 3 and 4 and was itself indivisible and could not be created by multiplication. This gave it the name of the virgin number. There were seven years to an apprentice ship, there were seven planets known to man of the middl e ages, and there are seven days in a week of which the 7th is the sabbath.

 

The days of the week are named after the seven gods of the Goths, a seventh son has special powers, the Jews swore by the number seven, there was a need for seven witnesses to agreements, and Solomon's temple was said to have been built in seven years. Jericho was encircled seven times by seven priests, and these were the seven liberal arts and sciences know as the trivium a nd quadrivium which were thought to contain the total sum of human knowledge. Seven represents symbolically the combination of the Trinity and four cardinal virtues, it is the number of the basic musical notes, of colours and of the spheres. Seven is related to perfection, to religious truth and also with knowledge. It is hard to find a more

astounding mass of facts associated with a number until we observe that three and five are similar.

 

Within the Lodge we are reminded that it needs seven officers to open the Lodge and those seven steps of the staircase reminding us of the liberal arts and sciences. Jacob's ladder is usually shown with seven rungs of which 3 are considered most exemplary for masons. While then these seven small stars on the jewel are insignificant they are repeated as a symbol at least three times within our Lodges and give us much to think about.

 

Finally we can move on to the jewel of the Senior Warden, the

Level. We meet upon this sign, and we have all been raised from the dead level to the living perpendicular. The symbol, we are taught, shows the principle of equality and reminds us that we are all descended from one stock and possess one nature and it thus justifies our organization as a fraternity of equals. At Pompeii it was discovered that a carving of a level with symbols of death demonstrated an early belief in death as the great levelle.

 

This, is our great experience. We are also told that we are

travelling on a level of time to an undiscovered country from which no traveller returns. This also associates death with levels and this is patterned after associations which exist outside the craft.

 

We observe again on this jewel, the sun, moon and seven stars and as we move to the Junior Wardens Jewel will see them yet again. The Junior Warden's Jewel is of course the plumb referred to in our lectures as the symbol of rectitude and uprightness. A fairly simple relationship to be sure. There is a link with this jewel and Jacob's ladder stretching between heaven and earth and stressing a morality which should be practised. We are instructed in our steps to stand erect and charged to act upon this symbol as we leave Lodge. This association is identical within and without the Lodge.

 

We now move to a few of the simpler symbols worn as jewels by our officers, and while some simply indicate their role they have a few meanings on which we may think.

 

The doves of the deacons have long had two symbolic meanings, that of a messenger and that of peace. The dove we see in Lodge has the sprig of olive in its beak and is clearly a representative of Noah who used it as a messenger of good tidings. The deacons jewel was, in an earlier period, a representation of the God Hermes or Mercury who was again the messenger of the ancient gods. In the Christian faith the dove is the symbol of the Holy Spirit. This jewel then is really a representation of the work to be performed but with

overtones of the early church and the Bible.

 

The stewards wear and carry the cornucopia which is a

representation of the horn of the goat which, in legend, suckled

the infant Jupiter. The horn symbolises strength and abundance and suggests the supply of food as it is usually displayed full of fruits. In our Lodges this is associated with those responsible for satisfying the "inner man" after regular meetings are concluded. As in the case of Amalthea the goat with the "visiting Jupiter", the supply is supposed to be particularly abundant in the presence of visitors.

 

The organist wears the lyre, a six stringed instrument associated with Turpsichore, the Goddess of music and is the symbol of musical accomplishment. It should constantly remind us of the contribution that music can make to not only our Lodge but our total lives.

 

The chaplain wears what is perhaps the most important symbol within our Lodge, for his jewel portrays the open volume of Sacred Law, without which no Lodge can operate. This symbol expresses our dedication to the God in whom we have a personal belief. It guides us in the erection of our spiritual building and points out our whole duty. It is the rule and guide to our faith and is kept in our hearts between our meetings. The Bible on the jewel is open upon a triangle which has additional symbolism for th e Christian mason in that it represents the trinity. For all masons the triangle can remind us of the three moral virtues, the principle tenets of our profession, the knocks, the ruffians, the Great Lights, the lesser lights, the three degrees, the three Grand Masters, God and the Holy St.'s John and the steps, both our individual ones and those upon which the Master presides. There are so many references to the number three that it rivals the number s even for sheer volume. Suffice it to say that the symbolism of this particular jewel is particularly meaningful to masons, and each should have his own particular interpretation without any suggestion that this should be imposed on others.

 

Again at this point you should observe the positive nature of the symbols and the major influence they should have upon our thoughts.

 

The registrar has a simple scroll about his neck which signifies

the historical record of events. This is a reminder to each one of us that our actions make an impression on the great record of existence and we should strive to keep our book in correct balance.

 

The secretary wears the crossed quills which seem to be the

international symbol of a secretary. The saltire pattern, the bows and the trailing ends have no recorded significance, but, we all know this jewel indicates an onerous task performed by many sound Brethren.

 

The treasurer has crossed keys rather than quills and these are, of course, to the money chest of the Lodge. This is simply a role indicator but these keys should remind us of "that excellent key - a Freemason's tongue which should speak well of a Brother present or absent. When this cannot be done, adopt the excellent virtue of the Craft - SILENCE.

 

The secretary-treasurer has a combination of a crossed key and

quill but I will not go into which one is on top.

 

The jewel of the Director of Ceremonies is the crossed batons.

These are symbols of the batons of command which were presented on the field of battle to an outstanding survivor. Possibly this is why this office is held by Past Masters.

The Inner Guard and the Tyler both have swords, differing only in that the tyler has one whereas the Inner Guard has two. These have always been symbols of a protector and in particular have been associated with the defence of a faith. The sword has the reputation of warding off evil because in the inverted position it forms a cross. In addition, within the Lodge, we know that the Tyler's sword guards the Constitution and is a constant reminder to guard our thoughts, words, and deeds, remembering the mas onic virtues of silence and circumspection.

 

Having looked at the jewels we should also observe the collars from which they are suspended, because these in some cases have symbols.

 

The principal symbols are the blazing star the entwined snakes and knots. 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.

 

Also to be found on the collar is this complex looping which shows a serpent swallowing its tail, a common symbol of eternity and in many cases associated with wisdom. The double entwined never ending loops are similarly symbols of eternity but have the additional meanings ascribed to them of vibrant energy and active life. These symbols are worthy of our contemplation in relation to the stability and teachings of the Craft.

 

We then hear the next symbol although modern methods sometimes deny us the sound which adorns the apron, the seven chained tassel.

 

This is a fairly late addition and is thought to be more a

decorative copying of the ends of the original longer and centrally tied ribbon or belt. The changing to tassels was slowly developed and perhaps we could turn our thoughts again to the symbolism of the number seven, already related for the Masters jewel. In addition to the tassels we have the buttons which contain ou principal symbols again. Here the only addition is the compasses which I leave to your personal investigation for our teaching clearly suggests that they are for the craft.

 

Before closing we should end with a symbol of utility which would make Freud turn in his grave, for the standard hook on an apron is a snake. While we will accept 'wisdom', it is possibly simply a decorated, very functional 'hook', with no great thought put into it. We certainly do not all have one at any rate.

These are then the jewels of the Lodge, the collar and aprons worn by our officers and perhaps they have shown a little more than you have normally noticed. If you would look at the Jewels in the next few Lodges you attend, you will find similarities and differences.

 

These will take on a new meaning because you have looked, and possibly you may find more meaning in various aspects of your personal masonry by contemplation of the new symbols you find or the old ones that you know. I sincerely hope so.

 

****************

 

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.

All Saints, Gazeley, Suffolk

 

All Saints at Gazeley, near Newmarket, was the first church that I visited after an international team of scientists conclusively proved that God did not exist. Thus begins the original article about Gazeley parish church that I wrote for the Suffolk Churches site, back in May 2003. At that stage, I had visited more than 600 Suffolk churches, and the site was moving towards a kind of completion. The entries were becoming longer and tending more towards the philosophical. The acquisition of a digital camera meant that I could already see I would need to do the whole lot again, but that would be in the future. For now, I had Norfolk in my sights, and there was an end-of-term feel to what I was writing about Suffolk. I am afraid that All Saints, Gazeley, took the full brunt of it.

 

The article generated a fair amount of correspondence, as you may imagine. It was discussed on BBC Radio Suffolk. I was questioned rather cautiously about it by someone in the Diocese.

 

The parish themselves took it rather well. To be honest, I had caught them at a low ebb, and they welcomed the publicity. I had also visited them immediately before a time of great change, when heads had fallen, but loins were about to be girded, and the Church of England was stirring itself again in that lovely village. One of the advantages of visiting every parish church in East Anglia is that you also get to see every parish, of course, and I soon fell in love with these sleepy, fat villages along the Cambridgeshire border. I would move there tomorrow, quite happily.

 

However, the article still makes the point I was originally trying to make, and the contrast between then and now shows this special place in a light it thoroughly deserves, for this is one of East Anglia's loveliest churches, and deserves all the visitors it can get. Anyway, I thought so then, and I certainly think so now.

 

Here is what I wrote in 2003: 'All Saints at Gazeley, near Newmarket, was the first church that I visited after an international team of scientists conclusively proved that God did not exist. I was intrigued to know how a wealthy, reasonably large Suffolk village would respond to this challenge. What would they do with their church? I had a theory. I suspected that the old church buildings would continue to find a community use. Small groups of people would still congregate on a Sunday mornings to sing comforting songs and feel good about each other. The churches would still be used by secular couples wanting a fancy wedding, and the local villagers would still want to be buried in the graveyard. But the building would no longer have a Christian use.

 

It was with some dismay, however, that I arrived in Gazeley to discover that the rot had already set in. The first sign of this was the way in which the large windows facing onto the road had holes the size of small rocks in them. This was disturbing, especially because the east window at Gazeley is one of the most remarkable Decorated windows in East Anglia. The head of the window consists of two elegant overlapping trefoils, but there is no head to the arch, the head itself having cusps. You can see it in the left hand column; Cautley thought it was unique.

 

I went and tried the door, but of course it was locked. Ever since the announcement of God's non-existence, heads have dropped in the Anglican community, and many of them no longer have the will to welcome strangers and visitors. I went next door to the Rectory. I knocked on the door, rang the bell. Nobody came. Perhaps the Rector had fled town. I had tried phoning several numbers I had taken from the Diocesan website, but nobody had answered. There were keyholders listed in the church porch, but no phone numbers. Gazeley is a fairly large village, and we didn't have a street map, but by driving around (sorry about the carbon monoxide, folks) we tracked some of the houses down. Several cars were on the driveways outside (as I said, this is a wealthy village) but nobody came to the door. Perhaps they had given up in despair. I felt Gazeley's strange torpor beginning to settle on me like snow.

 

We found the house where the last address was supposed to be. I went to the side door, and eventually someone answered. "Yes?" he was very curt, so I don't know who he was expecting. I, however, was a model of charm and good manners, and explained my mission to see inside Gazeley church, and that I understood he was a keyholder, a churchwarden in fact. His wife came to the kitchen door behind him, to see who it was. I could smell cooking, and I assumed that they were both about to eat, the time being 5pm on a Saturday.

 

"The church is locked", he said. I agreed that this was the case, and wondered if access was possible. "It was open earlier today, you should have come then", he observed. I concurred that it would have been better, but that we had been visiting other churches, and had only just arrived in Gazeley. He thought for a second. "I'll have to come with you." The man checked that the twenty minutes I had suggested would not deprive him of his tea, and walked with me up to the church. On the way, the man explained how he and his wife had spent the day preparing the church for the harvest festival. I made a mental note that this was another event that had survived the death of God, as would Christmas probably.

 

We walked across the wide open graveyard, and I looked up at the great ship of Gazeley church. There is no doubt which county you are in; here, the complete rebuilding of the nave with clerestory and aisles was at the start of the 16th century, and as at Blythburgh they didn't get around to rebuilding the tower before the Protestant Reformation intervened. The huge chancel had been built on the eve of the Black Death, and has similarities with the one at Mildenhall. Perhaps a rebuilding was planned, but it never happened. The tower was largely reconstructed in the 19th century.

 

To my surprise, he took us not to either south or north porch, but to the great west door. This led us beneath the tower and behind the organ, and we stepped into darkness. Daylight was fading, but here it must be always gloomy, among the broom cupboards and stacks of junk. The churchwarden found the light switches, and we walked around the organ into the body of the church.

 

Back in the days when God still existed, I had been to Gazeley church before. It had been a bright, cold February morning in 1999, and I was cycling from Newmarket to Ipswich. I'd arrived in Gazeley to find the church open, and had thought it lovely. There was a delicate balance between respect for the medieval and the demands of the modern liturgy. It felt at once a house of prayer and a spiritual touchstone to the long generations. However, the slight crimp in all this was that, at the time, the regular Sunday congregation of Gazeley church had been reduced to single figures. The same was true of neighbouring Kentford. The Rector may not have been to blame; he was very energetic in in his pastoral activities in the village, and people still turned up for the big occasions. But I wondered what effect all this had had, and asked the churchwarden.

 

He was very candid. He told me that they had had a terrible time of it. The electoral roll had fallen to just three people, and this is not a small village. Nobody wanted to come to church any more. He had lived in the village for years, and had seen all this happen. It was only in the last year or so that he felt the church had been turned around by the new Rector (the one I had suspected of leaving town). Now, there were more than twenty of them, and they felt like a proper community again, he said.

 

I found this interesting. The previous Rector had been a Forward in Faith-supporting Anglo-catholic, and such a tradition was not terribly popular with the suits at Diocesan House. The new Rector had moved the church back towards the mainstream.

 

I looked around the vast open nave. All Saints is one of the biggest churches in the west of the county, and it must take a good five hundred people to make it feel full. I tried to imagine what it must have been like here, just three in the congregation.

 

The warden and his wife had tried hard to decorate the church for the harvest festival, and it looked particularly lovely towards the east. The greenery on the tombchest and piscina was very well done. But inevitably the fruit and vegetables were sparse, and there was no disguising the general air of shabbiness and decay underneath the decoration. I felt a bit sorry for the churchwarden, for he had stuck with the place through thick and thin, and clearly loved it. The chancel and central eastern part of the nave were clean and tidy, but all around were the encroaching shadows, and here lurked the dust and dirt.

 

The higher you looked, the filthier it became. The clerestory windows were coated in grime, and the lower parts cloaked in decades of cobwebs. The medieval cross beams are still in place, but the Victorian roof above is leaky, and areas of damp showed above the high arcades. It seemed unlikely that all this could have happened in the short time since the Geneva declaration of 2007 announced all faith in a Supreme Being to be 'utterly null and void'. Mortlock had commented on the poor condition of the royal arms as long ago as 1988. Could it be that they were in this state when this building was still in use for Christian worship?

 

Having seen the stone holes in the windows, I was mightily relieved that the Victorians had reset the medieval glass up in the clerestory. This seems a curious thing to have done, since it defeats the purpose of a clerestory, but if they had not done so then we might have lost it. The glass matches the tracery in the north aisle windows, so that is probably where they came from. I had seen them on my previous visit, but could not remember where they were, and when I asked the keyholder he did not seem aware that the church had any medieval glass. Eventually I found it. There are angels, three Saints and some shields, most of which are heraldic but two show the instruments of the passion and the Holy Trinity. I would not be surprised to learn that some of the shields are 19th century, but the figures are all original late 15th or early 16th century. The Saints are an unidentified Bishop, the hacksaw-wielding St Faith and one of my favourites, St Apollonia. She it was who was invoked by medieval people against toothache.

 

It struck me as I gazed up that many parish churches had much less to lose than Gazeley. At one time, these places were vibrant hubs of spiritual communities, but now they would be left to wither and die. Some would become houses of course, but Gazeley's church is much too big. Some might be kept as examples of our redundant belief systems, but here at Gazeley there would be too much to tidy up and sort out. So All Saints at Gazeley must be considered merely as a treasure house. Here, then, is a guide to why it must survive the 2007 Geneva Declaration.

 

Firstly, the chancel. Here, the space created by the clearing of clutter makes it at once mysterious and beautiful. Above, the early 16th century waggon roof is Suffolk's best of its kind. Mortlock points out the little angels bearing scrolls, the wheat ears and the vine sprays, and the surviving traces of colour. The low side window on the south side still has its hinges, for here it was that updraught to the rood would have sent the candles flickering in the mystical church of the 14th century. On the south side of the sanctuary is an exquisitely carved arched recess, that doesn't appear to have ever had a door, and may have been a very rare purpose-built Easter sepulchre at the time of the 1330s rebuilding. Opposite is a huge and stunningly beautiful piscina, and beside it are sedilia that end in an arm rest carved in the shape of a beast. It is one of the most significant Decorated moments in Suffolk.

 

On the floor of the chancel there is a tiny, perfect chalice brass, one of only two surviving in Suffolk. The other is at Rendham. Not far away is the indent of another chalice brass - or perhaps it was for the same one, and the brass has been moved for some reason. There are two chalice indents at Westhall, but nowhere else in Suffolk. Chalice brasses were popular memorials for Priests in the 15th and early 16th centuries, and thus were fair game for reformers. Heigham memorials of the late 16th century are on the walls. Back in the south aisle there is a splendid tombchest in Purbeck marble. It has lost its brasses, but the indents show us where they were, as do other indents in the aisle floors. Some heraldic brass shields survive, and show that Heighams were buried here. Brass inscriptions survive in the nave and the chancel, dating from the late 16th and early 17th centuries.

 

Piled up and decrepit in the south west corner are some extraordinary 14th century benches with pierced tracery backs. Some of them appear to spell out words, Mortlock thought one might say Salaman Sayet. The block of benches to the north appear to have been made using sections of the 15th century rood loft. Further north, the early 17th century benches may appear crude, but were almost certainly the work of the village carpenter.

 

The 14th century font is a stunning example of the tracery pattern series that appeared in the decades before the Black Death. They may have been intended to spread ideas at that time of great artistic and intellectual flowering before it was so cruelly snatched away. The cover is 17th century.

 

The place is absolutely glorious, but few people seem to know about it, and fewer seem to care. If it had been clean, tidy and open, Simon Jenkins England's Thousand Best Churches would not have been able to resist it. Should the survival of such a treasure store depend upon the existence of God or the continued practice of the Christian faith? Or might there be other reasons to keep this extraordinary building in something like its present integrity? It needs thousands spent on it, hundreds of thousands, but is this something that we as a nation or culture should consider worth doing? Will it be sufficient to photograph it all and then let it fall, or do we need to rescue this building before it is too late?

 

Increasingly, it seemed to me that what the parish needed was not condemnation for the state the building was in, but encouragement to put it right. I pointed out several of the features outlined above, but I think the poor man was beginning to register quite what a task he had on his hands, so I fell quiet. I did reassure him that the building really was the responsibility of us all, and not just the Church of England; it was the heart and touchstone of the whole village, and not just of his faith community.

 

We'd been there for nearly an hour. I took pity, and offered to lock up and return the key to his house. He thought about it for a moment. I guessed he was weighing up whether or not he trusted us to make the church secure, but he just said "you don't need to bring the key back, it's a yale lock. Just let yourself out, and let the door close behind you." And he said goodbye and went home - rather more thoughtfully, I fear, than he had left it.

 

It was dark. I put out the lights, and stood for a moment in the wide gloom, in the infinite stillness. I listened to the sound of my own breathing. I knew this was the most endangered building I had visited so far on my travels. But I'm determined we won't lose it.'

 

And that was that. At the end of the original article, I had pointed out that the 2007 Geneva Declaration on the non-existence of God was, of course, entirely fictitious. This was partly to reassure the good people of Gazeley, but also to save confusing any excitable Dawkinsites. Gazeley church was, after all, still in use for Christian worship. I also pointed out that the rest of the article was completely true as things had stood in May 2003. However, over the next few months I received a number of e-mails from people in the parish telling me how the church was being taken to task, tidied up, cleaned out, and, even more important, made accessible. Coming back in May 2008 I was delighted to discover than both the south and north doors were now open, and I stepped out of the sunlight into an interior which positively shouted its welcome to pilgrims and strangers. Perhaps it helped that it was such a beautiful day, for the interior was full of light falling across ancient stone and woodwork. Everything shone with love and care. Quite frankly, it lifted the heart. Perhaps the most moving sight was of the brightly coloured children's table and chairs, which have been given pride of place at the east end of the south aisle, rather than being tucked away under the tower or behind the font. Having once almost lost its congregation altogether, the community at Gazeley now puts its children's corner in a prominent position, where everyone can see it.

 

The wide open space of the chancel was still one of the loveliest interiors I knew in Suffolk, but now it had something else, a feeling of hope. Great things had happened here. I mentioned it afterwards to a Catholic Priest friend of mine, and he said he hoped I knew I'd seen the power of the Holy Spirit at work. And perhaps that is so. Certainly, the energy and imagination of the people here have been fired by something. I wanted to find someone to ask about it, to find out how things stood now. But there was no one, and so the building spoke for them.

 

Back outside in the graveyard, the dog daisies clustered and waved their sun-kissed faces in the light breeze. The ancient building must have known many late-May days like this over the centuries, but think of all the changes that it has known inside! The general buffeting of the winds of history still leaves room for local squalls and lightning strikes. All Saints has known these, but for now a blessed calm reigns here. Long may it remain so.

I thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

I was invited my a fellow parishioner to conduct a Saints/Holy Relics Presentation in her Kailua home for her family and friends. From the start, the presence of the Holy Spirit was deeply evident, and although my projector malfunctioned twice(!) the presentation was still very well received by my very patient host and her guests.

 

After the presentation was over, we prayed an Our Father together, and many expressed positive feedback at what they had learned about the Saints and their Holy Relics. The 9 relics that were presented for veneration were all showered with faith and devotion, as people approached the display and touched their rosaries and other religious articles to the reliquaries. As exhausted as I was from an extremely busy day at work, the smiles on people's faces made it all worthwhile (see additional photos in the Comments Section).

  

+ A Testimony from Mrs. M. Cobb-Adams:

"Thank you again for coming to our house and giving that AWESOME presentation. My family and friends all commented how well you presented and found it to be very interesting. Also, thank you from the bottom of my heart for my St. Philomena relic. I will always treasure it and share it with others."

I thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

Holy Family and St Michael, Kesgrave, Ipswich, Suffolk

 

A new entry on the Suffolk Churches site.

 

There are ages of faith which leave their traces in splendour and beauty, as acts of piety and memory. East Anglia is full of silent witnesses to tides which have ebbed and flowed. Receding, they leave us in their wake great works from the passing ages, little Norman churches which seem to speak a language we can no longer understand but which haunts us still, the decorated beauty of the 14th Century at odds with the horrors of its pestilence and loss, the perpendicular triumph of the 15th Century church before its near-destruction in the subsequent Reformation and Commonwealth, the protestant flowering of chapels and meeting houses in almost all rural communities, and most obvious of all for us today the triumphalism of the Victorian revival.

 

But even as tides recede, piety and memory survive, most often in quiet acts and intimate details. The catholic church of Holy Family and St Michael at Kesgrave is one of their great 20th Century treasure houses.

 

At the time of the 1851 census of religious worship, Kesgrave was home to just 86 people, 79 of whom attended morning service that day, giving this parish the highest percentage attendance of any in Suffolk. However, they met half a mile up the road at the Anglican parish church of All Saints, and the current site of Holy Family was then far out in the fields. In any case, it is unlikely that any of the non-attenders was a Catholic. Today, Kesgrave is a sprawling eastern suburb of Ipswich, home to about 10,000 people. It extends along the A12 corridor all the way to Martlesham, which in turn will take you pretty much all the way to Woodbridge without seeing much more than a field or two between the houses.

 

Holy Family was erected in the 1930s, and serves as a chapel of ease within the parish of Ipswich St Mary. However, it is still in private ownership, the responsibility of the Rope family, who, along with the Jolly family into which they married, owned much of the land in Kesgrave that was later built on.

 

The growth of Kesgrave has been so rapid and so extensive in these last forty years that radical expansions were required at both this church and at All Saints, as well as to the next parish church along in the suburbs at Rushmere St Andrew. All of these projects are interesting, although externally Holy Family is less dramatic than its neighbours. It sits neatly in its trim little churchyard, red-brick and towerless, a harmonious little building if rather a curious shape, of which more in a moment. Beside it, the underpass and roundabout gives it a decidedly urban air. But this is a church of outstanding interest, as we shall see.

 

It was good to come back to Kesgrave. As a member of St Mary's parish I generally attended mass at the parish's other church, a couple of miles into town, but I had been here a number of times over the years, either to mass or just to wander around and sit for a while. These days, you generally approach the church from around the back, where you'll find a sprawling car park typical of a modern Catholic church. To the west of the church are Lucy House and Philip House, newly built for the work of the Rope family charities. Between the car park and the church there there is a tiny, formal graveyard, with crosses remembering members of the Rope and Jolly families.

 

Access to the church is usually through a west door these days, but if you are fortunate enough to enter through the original porch on the north side you will have a foretaste of what is to come, for to left and right are stunning jewel-like and detailed windows depicting St Margaret and St Theresa on one side and St Catherine and the Immaculate Conception on the other. Beside them, a plaque reveals that the church was built to the memory of Michael Rope, who was killed in the R101 airship disaster of 1930.

 

Blue Peter-watching boys like me, growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, were enthralled by airships. They were one of those exciting inventions of a not-so-distant past which were, in a real sense, futuristic, a part of the 1930s modernist project that imagined and predicted the way we live now. And they were just so big. But they were doomed, because the hydrogen which gave them their buoyancy was explosive.

 

As a child, I was fascinated by the R101 airship and its disaster, especially because of that familiar photograph of its wrecked and burnt-out fuselage sprawled in the woods on a northern French hillside. It is still a haunting photograph today. The crash of the R101 put an end to airship development in the UK for more than half a century.

 

Of course, this is all ancient history now, but in the year 2001 I had the excellent fortune to be shown around Holy Family by Michael Rope's widow, Mrs Lucy Doreen Rope, née Jolly, who was still alive, and then in her nineties. She was responsible for the building of this church as a memorial to her husband. We paused in the porch so that I could admire the windows. "Do you like them?" Mrs Rope asked me. "Of course, my sister-in-law made them."

 

Her sister-in-law, of course, was Margaret Agnes Rope, who in the first half of the twentieth century was one of the finest of the Arts and Craft Movement stained glass designers. She studied at Birmingham, and then worked at the Glass House in Fulham with her cousin, Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, whose work is also here. But their work can be found in churches and cathedrals all over the world. What Mrs Rope did not tell me, and what I found out later, is that these two windows in the porch were made for her and her husband Michael as a wedding present.

 

Doreen Jolly and Michael Rope were married in 1929. Within a year, he was dead. Mrs Rope was just 23 years old.

 

The original church from the 1930s is the part that you step into. You enter to the bizarre sight of a model of the R101 airship suspended from the roof. The nave altar and tabernacle ahead are in the original sanctuary, and you are facing the liturgical east (actually south) of the original building, and what an intimate space this must have been before the church was extended. Red brick outlines the entrance to the sanctuary, and here are the three windows made by Margaret Rope for the original church. The first is the three-light sanctuary window, depicting the Blessed Virgin and child flanked by St Joseph and St Michael. Two doves sit on a nest beneath Mary's feet, while a quizzical sparrow looks on. St Michael has the face of Michael Rope. The inscription beneath reads Pray for Michael Rope who gave up his soul to God in the wreck of His Majesty's Airship R101, Beauvais, October 5th 1930.

 

Next, a lancet in the right-hand side of the sanctuary contains glass depicting St Dominic, with a dog running beneath his feet and the inscription Laudare, Benedicere, Praedicare, ('to praise, to bless, to preach'). The third window is in the west wall of the church (in its day, the right hand side of the nave), depicting St Thomas More and St John Fisher, although at the time the window was made they had not yet been canonised. The inscription beneath records that the window was the gift of a local couple in thankfulness for their conversion to the faith for which the Blessed Martyrs Thomas More and John Fisher gave their lives. A rose bush springs from in front of the martyrs' feet.

 

By the 1950s, Holy Family was no longer large enough for the community it served, and it was greatly expanded to the east to the designs of the archtect Henry Munro Cautley. Cautley was a bluff Anglican of the old school, the retired former diocesan architect of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich, but he would have enjoyed designing a church for such an intimate faith community, and in fact it was his last major project before he died in 1959. The original sanctuary was retained as a blessed sacrament chapel, and the church was turned ninety degrees to face east for the first time. The north and south sides of the new church received three-light Tudor windows in the style most beloved by Cautley, as seen also at his Ipswich County Library in Northgate Street, and the former Fosters (now Lloyds) Bank in central Cambridge.

 

Although the Rope family had farmed at Blaxhall near Wickham Market for generations, Margaret Rope herself was not from Suffolk at all, and nor was she at first a Catholic. She was born in Shrewsbury in 1882, the daughter of Henry Rope, a surgeon at Shrewsbury Infirmary, and a son of the Blaxhall Rope family. The largest collection of Margaret Rope's glass is in Shrewsbury Cathedral. When Margaret was 17, her father died. The family were received into the Catholic church shortly afterwards. A plaque was placed in the entrance to Shrewsbury Infirmary to remember her father. When the hospital was demolished in the 1990s, the plaque was moved to here, and now sits in the north aisle of the 1950s church. In her early days in London Margaret Rope designed and made the large east window at Blaxhall church as a memorial to her grandparents. It features her younger brother Michael, and is believed to be the only window that she ever signed.

 

In her early forties, Margaret Rope took holy orders and entered the Carmelite Convent at nearby Woodbridge, but continued to produce her stained glass work until the community moved to Quidenham in Norfolk, when poor health and the distances involved proved insurmountable. She died there in 1953, and so she never saw the expanded church. Her cartoons, the designs for her windows, are placed on the walls around Holy Family. Some are for windows in churches in Scotland and Wales, one for a window in the English College in Rome. Among them are the roundels for within the enclosure of Tyburn Convent in London. "They had to remove the windows there during the War", said Mrs Rope. "Of course, with me, you have to ask which war!"

 

Turning to the east, we see the new sanctuary with its high altar, completed in 1993 as part of a further reordering and expansion, which gave a large galilee porch, kitchen and toilets to the north side of the church. The window above the new sanctuary has three lights, and the two outer windows were made by Margaret Rope for the chapel of East Bergholt convent to the south of Ipswich. They remember the Vaughan family, into which Margaret Rope's sister had married, and in particular one member, a sister in the convent, to celebrate her 25 year jubilee.

 

The convent later became Old Hall, a famous commune. They depict the prophet Isaiah and King David.

 

The central light between them is controversial. Produced in the 1990s and depicting the risen Christ, it really isn't very good, and provides the one jarring note in the church. It is rather unfortunate that it is in such a prominent position. It is not just the quality of the design that is the problem. It lets in too much light in comparison with the two flanking lights. "The glass in my sister-in-law's windows is half an inch thick", Mrs Rope told me. "In the workshop at Fulham they had a man who came in specially to cut it for them". The glass in the modern light is simply too thin.

 

Despite the 1990s extension, and as so often in modern urban Catholic churches, Holy Family is already not really big enough, although it is hard to see that there could ever be another expansion. We walked along Munro Cautley's south aisle, and at that time the stations of the cross were simple wooden crosses. However, about three months after my conversation with Mrs Rope, the World Trade Centre in New York was attacked and destroyed, and among the three thousand people killed were two local Kesgrave brothers who were commemorated with a new set of stations in cast metal.

 

Here also is a 1956 memorial window by Margaret Rope's cousin, Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, to Mrs Rope's mother Alice Jolly, depicting the remains of the shrine at Walsingham and the Jolly family at prayer before it. Another MEA Rope window is across the church in the galilee, a Second World War memorial window, originally on the east side of the first church before Cautley's extension. It depicts three of the English Martyrs, Blessed Anne Lynne, Blessed Robert Southwell and Blessed John Robinson, as well as the shipwreck of Blessed John Nutter off of Dunwich, with All Saints church on the cliffs above.

 

The galilee is designed for families with young children to play a full part in mass, and is separated from the church by a glass screen. At the top of the screen is a small panel by Margaret Rope which is of particular interest because it depicts her and her family participating in the Easter vigil, presumably in Shrewsbury Cathedral. This is hard to photograph because it is on an internal window between two rooms.

 

A recent addition to the Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope windows here is directly opposite, newly installed on the south side of the nave. It was donated by her great-nephew. It depicts a nativity scene, the Holy Family in the stable at Bethlehem, an angel appearing to shepherds on the snowy hills beyond. It is perhaps her loveliest window in the church.

 

Finally, back across the church. Here, beside the brass memorial to Margaret Rope, is a window depicting the Blessed Virgin and child, members of the Rope family in the Candlemas procession beneath. The inscription reminds us to pray for the soul of Sister Margaret of the Mother of God, mistress of novices and stained glass artist, Monastery of the Magnificat of the Mother of God, Quidenham, Norfolk, entered Carmel 14th September 1923, died 6th December 1953. Sister Margaret of the Mother of God was, of course, Margaret Rope herself. She was buried in the convent at Quidenham, a Shrewsbury exile at rest in the East Anglian soil of her forebears. The design is hers, and the window was made by her cousin Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope.

 

Back in 2001, we were talking about the changing Church, and I asked Mrs Rope what she thought about the recently introduced practice of transferring Holy Days on to the nearest Sunday, so that the teaching of them was not lost. Mrs Rope approved, a lady clearly not stuck in the past. She had a passion for ensuring that the Faith could be shared with children. As we have seen, her church is designed so that young families can take a full part in the Mass. But she was sympathetic to the distractions of the modern age. "The world is so exciting for children these days", she said. "I think it must be difficult to bring them up with a sense of the presence of God." She smiled. "Mind you, my son is 70 now! And I do admire young girls today. They have such spirit!"

 

She left me to potter about in her wonderful treasure house. As I did so, I thought of medieval churches I have visited, which were similarly donated by the Mrs Ropes of their day, perhaps even for husbands who had died young. They not only sought to memorialise their loved ones, but to consecrate a space for prayer, that masses might be said for the souls of the dead. This was the Catholic way, a Christian duty. Before the Reformation, this was true in every parish in England. It remained true here at Kesgrave.

 

And finally, back outside to the small graveyard. Side by side are two crosses. One remembers Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, artist, 1891-1988. The other remembers Lucy Doreen Rope, founder of this church, 1907-2003.

I thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

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 thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn't set foot inside.

 

This I didn't realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

 

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn't one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

 

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

 

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

 

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

 

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

 

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

 

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

 

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been).

The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church).

Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made.

In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837.

The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted 'ashlar' background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it.

A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s - date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below.

The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave.

In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

 

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.):

The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick.

The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

 

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

 

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

 

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was 'discarded').

 

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ - another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

 

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) - originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

 

Also John Cockman (+1734) - also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

 

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

 

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and 'poppy heads'). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

 

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:

Shape: Rectangular

 

Condition: Good

 

Earthworks:

enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

 

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

 

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known):

Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

 

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

 

Late med. status: Rectory

 

Patron: The Archbishop

 

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions 'one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the 'BVM' to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also 'Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church' (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and 'The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave' (1476).

 

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:

Inside present church: Good - main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

 

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

 

Quinquennial inspection (date\architect): October 1987 David Martin

 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:

The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

 

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.)

REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

 

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) - no plan.

 

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

 

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

 

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

 

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

 

BISHOPSBORNE

LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

 

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

 

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop's lands:

 

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

 

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop's own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

 

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

 

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.'s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

 

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

 

Charities.

MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

 

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

 

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

 

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

 

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

 

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king's books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

 

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

 

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

 

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

 

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

 

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;..." For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

 

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker's best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright's follow-up writings, more specifically:

 

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct;

Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government;

The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.;

The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders;

'There ought not to be in the Church Bishops'.[12]

Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) 'a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

 

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

 

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther's argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

 

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God's law for the angels), nature's law (that part of God's eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

 

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

 

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

 

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker's biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker's emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker's natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker's moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

Fonte dell'immagine: Il Lampo da Levante

 

Condizioni d'Uso: Avviso legale e condizioni per l’uso

  

In pratica, osservare i comandamenti dovrebbe collegarsi alla pratica della verità. Nell’osservare i comandamenti, si dovrebbe praticare la verità. Nel praticare la verità, non si dovrebbero violare i princìpi dei comandamenti né trasgredire i comandamenti stessi. Fai ciò che Dio esige che tu faccia. L’osservanza dei comandamenti e la pratica della verità sono interconnessi, non in contraddizione tra loro. Più pratichi la verità, più osservi l’essenza dei comandamenti. Più pratichi la verità, più comprendi la parola di Dio così come è espressa nei comandamenti. Praticare la verità e osservare i comandamenti non sono azioni contraddittorie, bensì interconnesse. All’inizio, solo dopo aver osservato i comandamenti l’uomo può praticare la verità e ottenere l’illuminazione dallo Spirito Santo. Ma questa non è l’intenzione originale di Dio. Dio ti chiede di venerarLo con tutto il cuore, e non semplicemente di tenere un comportamento corretto. Tuttavia devi osservare i comandamenti, almeno superficialmente. Gradualmente, attraverso l’esperienza, l’uomo ottiene una più chiara comprensione di Dio. Smette di ribellarsi a Dio e di resisterGli e smette di mettere in questione l’opera di Dio. In tal modo, l’uomo può rispettare l’essenza dei comandamenti. Pertanto, limitarsi a rispettare i comandamenti senza praticare la verità è inefficace e non equivale ad adorare Dio sinceramente, poiché non hai ancora raggiunto una reale statura morale. Se osservi i comandamenti senza la verità, ciò si riduce ad una rigida osservanza delle regole. Così facendo, i comandamenti diventano la tua legge, e questo non ti aiuta a crescere nella vita. Al contrario, essi diverranno un peso per te, e ti vincoleranno rigidamente come la legge dell’Antico Testamento, facendoti perdere la presenza dello Spirito Santo. Pertanto, solo praticando la verità puoi effettivamente osservare i comandamenti. Si osservano i comandamenti al fine di praticare la verità. Inoltre pratichi un maggior numero di verità mediante l’osservanza dei comandamenti. Ottieni una comprensione ancora maggiore del significato pratico dei comandamenti attraverso la pratica della verità. Lo scopo e il significato della richiesta perentoria di Dio che l’uomo osservi i comandamenti non sono quelli di seguire degli ordini, come l’uomo potrebbe immaginare, bensì ha a che fare con l’ingresso dell’uomo nella vita. Più cresci nella vita, più elevato è il livello della tua capacità di osservare i comandamenti. Sebbene i comandamenti debbano essere osservati dall’uomo, la loro essenza diventa evidente solo attraverso l’esperienza di vita dell’uomo stesso. La maggior parte delle persone pensa che osservare i comandamenti significhi che “tutto è già bell’e pronto, non resta altro che essere rapiti”. Questa è una fantasia assurda e non è la volontà di Dio. Quelli che fanno simili affermazioni non desiderano fare progressi e sono avidi delle cose della carne. È un’assurdità! Questo non è aderire alla realtà! Limitarsi a praticare la verità senza osservare i comandamenti in pratica non è la volontà di Dio. Questo genere di persone è disabile e procede come zoppicando su una gamba. D’altro canto, il mero fatto di osservare i comandamenti e di attenervisi rigidamente senza avere la verità equivale, parimenti, a non adempiere la volontà di Dio; come un uomo che vede solo da un occhio, anche questa è una forma di disabilità. Si può anche dire che se osservi scrupolosamente i comandamenti e raggiungi una chiara comprensione del Dio pratico, allora otterrai la verità. Da una prospettiva relativa, avrai raggiunto una reale statura morale. Pratichi la verità e dovresti praticare e osservare i comandamenti al tempo stesso, senza che le due cose siano in conflitto. La pratica della verità e l’osservanza dei comandamenti sono due sistemi, entrambi parte integrante dell’esperienza di vita di un individuo. Tale esperienza dovrebbe comprendere un’integrazione del rispetto dei comandamenti con la pratica della verità, non una separazione. Tuttavia, tra queste due cose ci sono sia differenze che connessioni.

 

La promulgazione dei comandamenti nella nuova età è una testimonianza del fatto che tutti gli uomini in questa corrente e tutti coloro che sentono la voce di Dio oggi sono entrati in una nuova età. Si tratta di un nuovo inizio per l’opera di Dio e dell’avvio dell’ultima parte dell’opera nel piano di gestione di Dio nel corso di seimila anni. I comandamenti della nuova età simboleggiano che Dio e gli uomini sono entrati nel regno di un nuovo cielo e di una nuova terra, e che Dio, proprio come Jahvè che ha operato tra gli Israeliti e Gesù che ha operato tra i Giudei, compirà un lavoro più pratico e svolgere un lavoro maggiore e più grande sulla terra. Simboleggiano anche che questo gruppo di uomini riceverà da Dio un ulteriore e più grande incarico e riceverà sostegno pratico, alimentazione, supporto, cura e protezione da Dio. Inoltre, saranno sottoposti a esercizi più pratici, saranno affrontati, spezzati e raffinati dalla parola di Dio. Il significato dei comandamenti della nuova età è piuttosto profondo. Essi suggeriscono che Dio apparirà realmente sulla terra e conquisterà l’intero universo sulla terra, rivelando tutta la Sua gloria nella carne. Suggeriscono anche che il Dio pratico sta compiendo un’opera più pratica sulla terra per perfezionare tutti coloro che Egli ha scelto. Inoltre, Dio compirà ogni cosa con parole sulla terra e renderà manifesto il decreto che “il Dio incarnato ascende alla sommità e viene magnificato, e tutte le genti e tutte le nazioni si inginocchiano per adorare Dio, che è grande”. Sebbene i comandamenti della nuova età debbano essere osservati dall’uomo, cosa che è dovere dell’uomo e scopo delle sue realizzazioni, il significato che essi rappresentano è di gran lunga troppo profondo per essere pienamente espresso in una o due parole. I comandamenti della nuova età sostituiscono le leggi del Vecchio Testamento e le ordinanze del Nuovo Testamento promulgate da Jahvè e Gesù. Si tratta di una lezione più profonda, non di una questione semplice come l’uomo potrebbe immaginare. I comandamenti della nuova età hanno un aspetto di significato pratico: servono da interfaccia tra l’Età della Grazia e l’Età del Regno. I comandamenti della nuova età mettono fine a tutte le pratiche e le ordinanze della vecchia età e pongono anche fine alle pratiche dell’età di Gesù e a quelle prima della nuova era.

 

[a] Essi portano l’uomo alla presenza del Dio più pratico e permettono all’uomo di cominciare a ricevere la perfezione personale di Dio, cosa che è l’inizio della via della perfezione. Pertanto, dovrete possedere un atteggiamento corretto nei confronti dei comandamenti della nuova età, guardandovi bene dall’osservarli con trascuratezza o dal disprezzarli. I comandamenti della nuova età sottolineano un punto: che l’uomo debba adorare il pratico Dio Stesso di oggi, il che significa sottomettersi all’essenza dello Spirito in modo più concreto. Sottolineano anche il principio mediante il quale Dio giudicherà l’uomo in quanto colpevole o giusto dopo che Egli apparirà come il Sole della rettitudine. I comandamenti sono più facili da capire che da mettere in pratica. Così, se Dio desidera portare l’uomo a perfezione, deve farlo attraverso le Sue parole e la Sua guida, l’uomo non può ottenere la perfezione solo attraverso la sua intelligenza innata. Il fatto che l’uomo possa o meno osservare i comandamenti della nuova età è in relazione alla conoscenza del Dio pratico da parte dell’uomo. Pertanto, che tu sia in grado di osservare i comandamenti o no, non è una questione che verrà risolta nel giro di pochi giorni. Si tratta di una lezione profonda.

 

La pratica della verità è un percorso mediante il quale la vita dell’uomo può crescere. Se non praticate la verità, possiederete solo la teoria e non avrete alcuna vita reale. La verità è il simbolo della statura morale dell’uomo. Che si pratichi o meno la verità è in relazione con il raggiungimento di una reale statura morale. Se non pratichi la verità e se non agisci rettamente o ti lasci sopraffare dalle emozioni e ti preoccupi della carne, allora sei ben lontano dall’osservanza dei comandamenti. Questa è la lezione più profonda. Ci sono molte verità cui l’uomo deve accedere e che deve comprendere in ogni età. Ma ci sono differenti comandamenti che accompagnano le verità in ciascuna età. La verità che l’uomo pratica è in relazione all’età e anche i comandamenti osservati dall’uomo sono in relazione all’età. Ogni età possiede le sue verità da mettere in pratica e i suoi comandamenti da osservare. Tuttavia, in base ai differenti comandamenti promulgati da Dio, cioè in base alle differenti età, lo scopo e l’effetto della pratica della verità differiscono in modo sostanziale. Si può dire che i comandamenti servano la verità e che la verità esista per alimentare i comandamenti. Se ci fosse solo la verità, non ci sarebbero cambiamenti nell’opera di Dio di cui parlare. Tuttavia, facendo riferimento ai comandamenti, l’uomo è in grado di identificare l’entità dinamica del lavoro svolto dallo Spirito Santo e può conoscere l’età in cui Dio opera. Nella religione, ci sono molte persone che possono mettere in pratica le verità esercitate dall’uomo dell’Età della Legge. Tuttavia, non hanno i comandamenti della nuova età e non possono osservare i comandamenti della nuova età. Essi osservano il vecchio approccio e restano esseri umani primitivi. Non sono accompagnati dalla nuova modalità di lavoro e non sono in grado di vedere i comandamenti della nuova età. In quanto tale, l’opera di Dio è assente. Essi sono come un uomo che regge in mano un guscio d’uovo vuoto: non c’è spirito se non c’è un pulcino dentro. Per dirla con maggiore precisione, non c’è vita. Uomini così non sono entrati nella nuova età e sono rimasti indietro di molti passi. Pertanto, non serve a nulla che abbiate la verità delle passate età, se non avete i comandamenti della nuova età. Molti di voi praticano la verità di questo tempo ma non osservano i comandamenti di questo tempo. Non otterrete nulla, la verità che praticate sarà priva di importanza e di significato e Dio non la apprezzerà. La verità deve essere praticata nel modo in cui lo Spirito Santo opera oggi; deve essere praticata seguendo la voce del Dio concreto oggi. Senza di ciò, tutto è privo di valore, come attingere acqua con un cestino di bambù. Questo è il significato pratico della promulgazione dei comandamenti della nuova età. Se disponi di una conoscenza approfondita dell’opera dello Spirito Santo nel tempo corrente ed entri nella modalità di lavoro di oggi, capirai naturalmente l’essenza dell’osservanza dei comandamenti. Se verrà il giorno in cui comprenderai l’essenza dei comandamenti della nuova età e sarai in grado di osservare i comandamenti, significa che per allora sarai stato portato a perfezione. Questo è il significato reale della pratica della verità e dell’osservanza dei comandamenti. Che tu possa praticare la verità o no dipende da come percepisci l’essenza dei comandamenti della nuova età. L’opera dello Spirito Santo apparirà continuamente all’uomo e Dio esigerà dall’uomo sempre di più. Pertanto, le verità che l’uomo effettivamente pratica saranno più numerose e più grandi e gli effetti dell’osservanza dei comandamenti sarà più profonda. Pertanto, dovete praticare la verità e osservare i comandamenti allo stesso tempo. Nessuno deve trascurare questo aspetto. Fate sì che la nuova verità e i nuovi comandamenti comincino nello stesso momento in questa nuova età.

 

Note a piè di pagina:

 

a. Il testo originale dice “prima di questa”.

  

it.easternlightning.org/keep-commandments-and-practicing-...

St Peter and St Paul, East Harling, Norfolk

 

Pentecost: the Descent of the Holy Spirit as a Dove (15th Century), from the east window of East Harling church.

 

The East Harling east window is one of the major art works of late medieval England, consisting of 18 panels of superb narrative glass. I've reconstructed the east window in virtual form, and you can explore it here.

 

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

 

The dove descending breaks the air

With flame of incandescent terror

Of which the tongues declare

The one discharge from sin and error.

The only hope, or else despair

Lies in the choice of pyre or pyre -

To be redeemed from fire by fire.

 

Who then devised the torment? Love.

Love is the unfamiliar Name

Behind the hands that wove

The intolerable shirt of flame

Which human power cannot remove.

We only live, only suspire

Consumed by either fire or fire.

 

- T S Eliot, from Little Gidding

 

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

  

With its aisles, clerestory, porch and chancel, St Peter and St Paul is a textbook example of its century, although there are a number of curiosities that add even more interest. The vestry on the north side of the chancel, for example, which was once a shrine chapel, retains its image niche on its eastern face. And there are more image niches, these with elaborate foliage pedestals, in the buttresses of the tower; everything is topped off by a lead and timber fleche which was apparently the model for the one at St Peter Mancroft in Norwich, a church which has several features in common with this one.

 

The tower is a delight, the buttressing and pinnacles exactly in proportion to make it appear to rise like a fairy castle from the ground. The south porch, by contrast, is, despite its flushwork, rather austere, a result of its rebuilding early in the 19th century before the ecclesiological movement took hold. All in all, this is as good as 15th century rebuilding gets, the money coming thanks to Anne Harling having no less than three husbands who all wanted to spend as little time in purgatory as possible.

 

You step down into a wide space which, on a dull day, can be rather gloomy. Although inevitably heavily restored by the Victorians, St Peter and St Paul does not have that depressingly anonymous urban feel you so often find in churches of this size. This is partly because the beautiful parclose screen in the south aisle partitions off so much space, creating a sense of rooms within rooms, altering the way your eyes are inevitably drawn to the east. The rood screen must have been vast here; its dado survives at the west end, a deeply traceried affair with its features presented in carving rather than painting.

 

When the rood screen was in its proper place, to move from the nave into the chancel must have been like stepping from darkness into light. This is because of the feature that makes East Harling famous, the vast east window with its 15th century glass. After St Peter Mancroft it is the best collection in Norfolk. Unusually, the provenance of the glass is fairly well-documented: we can be fairly certain that it came from this church originally. Still present after the Reformation, it was removed by the Harling family to the Hall in the early 17th century. They may have been Laudians wanting to preserve it from the intentions of the puritans, or merely thought it would look nice in their dining hall; whatever, we know that shortly before Francis Blomefield visited here in the 1730s it was returned to the church and set in its present configuration.

 

In 1939, when war threatened, it was removed again, being reset just before Cautley visited in the early 1950s. There are parts of at least three sequences here, two of which were almost certainly in the east window originally, and one which almost certainly wasn't.

 

Essentially, the window contains two rosary sequences; the Joyful Mysteries of the Blessed Virgin, which include the Annunciation, the Nativity and the Assumption, and the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Blessed Virgin, which include the Crucifixion and the Deposition. However, this is open to interpretation, as we shall see. There is also the figure of St Mary Magdalene, which may once have been associated with a nave altar, and would have been located in a window there.

 

The five lights contain four rows of panels, making twenty altogether.

 

Top row:

I. Annunciation: Mary at her prayer desk. Gabriel, crowned and haloed, with a sceptre of lilies, kneels in supplication.

II. Visitation: Elizabeth, hooded to show her age, places her hand on Mary's pregnant belly.

III. Nativity: Two midwives look on. The infant in the manger is rayed; a horned cow gazes in awe.

IV. Adoration of the Shepherds: One holds a lamb, one plays pipes. A third appears to offer a fleece.

V. Adoration of the Magi: Two of the wise men gauge each others' reactions as the third offers his gift.

 

Second row:

VI: collection of fragments.

VII: Presentation in the Temple: Joseph carries the doves, Mary offers the child to Simeon. Anna is not shown.

VIII: The Finding in the Temple: Head covered, Mary bursts in among the men to find her son teaching.

IX: The Wedding at Canaa: Christ, seated at the top table, blesses a chicken and a ham. Mary directs the servant.

X: collection of fragments.

 

Third row:

XI: Mary of Magdala: Mary holds her long hair ready to anoint Christ's feet. Probably not from this window originally.

XII: The Betrayal at Gethsemane: Judas kisses Christ; Peter cuts off the ear of the high priest's servant.

XIII: Crucifixion: Mary swoons in John's arms.

XIV: Deposition from the cross: The pieta. Tears spring from Mary's eyes.

XV: Assumption of the Blessed Virgin: Mary is assumed bodily into heaven.

 

Bottom row:

XVI: Donor: Probably Robert Wingfield, second husband of Anne Harling.

XVII: Resurrection: Christ steps fully clothed from the tomb. Unusually, the soldiers are awake.

XVIII: Ascension of Christ: Mary, surrounded by disciples, watches as her son ascends to heaven.

XIX: Descent of the Holy Spirit: Mary, surrounded by disciples, receives the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

XX: Donor: Probably William Chamberlain, first husband of Anne Harling.

 

Nowadays, we tend to think of the rosary as consisting of three sequences of five mysteries each, but in the late middle ages things were much more flexible, and rosary sequences often consisted of seven mysteries. The Glorious Mysteries sequence, of which the Assumption is now a part, is a later development, and the two adorations shown here are subsumed into a single mystery. There are a couple of images here that don't quite fit; the Wedding at Canaa is obviously a Marian text, and yet is not traditionally a rosary subject. Similarly the Betrayal, the only one of the images not to feature Mary. I wonder if what we have here are parts of two separate sequences, a Marian sequence of mysteries (I-V, VII-IX, XV), and a Passion sequence (XII-XIV, XVII-XIX). They are both clearly the work of the same workshop, and Mary is always shown with the same face and dress, but this would not preclude them from being two sequences.

 

Why were they here at all? We need to get away from thinking of such things as a 'poor man's bible', the need for which was superseded at the Reformation. These were devotional objects, designed to be used as meditations while praying and saying the rosary. They were created in the 15th century, a time when the mind of the Church was fiercely concentrated on asserting orthodox Catholic doctrine in the face of local superstitions and abuses. As such, they were anathema to the reformers, and were later elsewhere destroyed for being superstitious, not for being superfluous. An 18th century antiquarian mind, ignorant of the nature of Catholic devotion, might easily mix the two sequences into historical order, and possibly misunderstand the Assumption (obviously, as Mary reappears two images on at the Ascension, it is out of order). I wonder what they thought it was?

 

A couple of other things about the east window that you shouldn't miss. Firstly, everywhere you look there are tiny baskets - Mortlock calls them 'frails', and tells us that they were simple rush baskets used by workmen to carry tools. Also, though not in such profusion, there are bodices. These symbols are repeated elsewhere in the church in stone on tombs, and as such must be symbols of the Harling family.

 

Another symbol is high up on the north side, a red squirrel. Curiously, this also appears in the painting A Lady with a Squirrel and a Starling by Hans Holbein, now thought to be a portrait of Anne Lovell - the squirrel is a symbol of the Lovell family, who took over the local manor here from the Harlings in the 16th century, and the starling represents Ea- well, you guess.

 

In July 2006, Chris Harrison and I came across

some more glass from East Harling in the Norfolk County Archaeologist Service archive at Gressenhall. It was probably removed from the church for safety in 1939, and then not replaced, possibly ending up at the museum of church art in Norwich at St Peter Hungate, disappearing into storage when that closed in 1993. It depicts a Bishop and Christ seated in Majesty, and the lozenges in between carry the telltale frails and bodices familiar from other glass within the church.

 

Within the screen is a large chapel, containing two major tombs. One is in alabaster, an early 17th century memorial to Sir Thomas and Lady Alice Lovell (remember the squirrel?) who died in 1604. The piece is good - too good, its 1950s restoration gives it a Festival of Britain air. Their symbols lie at their feet - his a magnificent peacock, hers a gruesome Saracen scalp held aloft.

 

The other appears to be a composite. It lies to the east, and the two effigies are clearly not from this tomb; they simply don't fit. They are supposed to be Robert Harling, died Paris in 1435, and his wife Dame Joan. Neither are buried here - she is at Rushford near Thetford, he is in some corner of a foreign field that is forever French schoolchildren on picnics excitedly tugging old thighbones from the soil - but in any case it is the trimmings of the tomb rather than the effigies that are most of interest, including a pelican in her piety and one that is almost a lily crucifix.

 

On the north side of the chancel is a fine tomb with brass inlays - the brasses now gone. Not as magnificent as either of the two previously mentioned, it is actually the most significant, as this is where you'll find Anne Harling, wife of the serial rebuilders of this church. Look out for those flails again.

 

What more? 17th century Lovells (remember the squirrel) have in-yer-face memorials either side of the sanctuary - that to the north curiously with no inscription. There are hatchments, remains of a wallpainting that are too indistinct to interpret (but may be seven works of mercy), a good set of royal arms, medieval heads, curious 19th century bench ends of a lion and a wild man, heraldic misericords, a Dec font - well, come and see for yourself. You know you want to.

Joseph Moscati: Saint, doctor, and miracle-worker

MICHAEL J. MILLER

 

Giuseppe Moscati (1880-1927), a physician, medical school professor, and pioneer in the field of biochemistry, was canonized in 1987 during the synod of bishops on the laity. Not often is someone with a professional degree from a modern secular university declared a saint. Moreover, it is positively earth-shattering when an internationally acclaimed scientist becomes a certified miracle-worker.

The Holy Father hinted at the connection between sanctity and miracles in his homily at the canonization of Dr. Moscati: "Holiness is man's union with God in the power of the Paschal Mystery of Christ, in the power of the Spirit of Truth and Love . . . Love has the power to unite man with God. And this definitive love matures through the various works of charity that a man performs in the course of his life." While some Christians are suspicious of the claim that good deeds bring us closer to God, we have Christ's own word for it in the Gospel: "Come, O blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom . . . For I was sick and you visited me" (Mt. 25:31-46).

 

The life of St. Giuseppe Moscati illustrates how the Catholic faith and practical charity united a layman with God to such an extent that the power of God ultimately worked in and through him.

 

Giuseppe Moscati was the seventh of nine children born to aristocratic Italian parents. His father's career as a magistrate (judge) led the family to settle in Naples. Every year they vacationed in the province of Avellino, his father's native region, and while there they attended Mass at the chapel of the Poor Clare nuns, with the renowned jurist serving at the altar.

 

The future saint inherited his father's piety and intellectual gifts. Giuseppe's unexpected decision to study medicine rather than law can be traced to an incident during his adolescence. In 1893 his older brother Alberto, a lieutenant in the artillery, fell from a horse and sustained incurable head trauma. For years Giuseppe helped care for his injured brother at home, and as he matured he reflected on the limited effectiveness of human remedies and the consoling power of religion.

 

When Giuseppe Moscati enrolled in medical school in 1897, the University of Naples — with its openly agnostic, amoral, and anti-clerical atmosphere and its secret societies — was a perilous place for a young Catholic. Moscati avoided distractions, studied diligently, continued to practice his faith, and took a doctoral degree with honors in 1903.

 

Dr. Moscati then practiced medicine at the Hospital for Incurables in Naples and taught courses in general medicine at the university. Soon he became a hospital administrator. He demonstrated extraordinary skill in diagnosing his patients' ailments; some colleagues attributed this to his ability to synthesize traditional methods with the findings of the new science of biochemistry.

 

His approach was indeed holistic, but it extended beyond what can be learned in the lecture hall or the laboratory. "Remember," he once wrote to a young doctor, one of his former students, "that you must treat not only bodies, but also souls, with counsel that appeals to their minds and hearts rather than with cold prescriptions to be sent in to the pharmacist."

 

A flock of interns would follow Dr. Moscati while he made his rounds at the hospital, so as to learn his techniques. While dedicating the Church of St. Giuseppe Moscati in the suburbs of Rome in 1993, Pope John Paul II described the doctor's method: "In addition to the resources of his acclaimed skill, in caring for the sick he used the warmth of his humanity and the witness of his faith."

 

Giuseppe Moscati regarded his medical practice as a lay apostolate, a ministry to his suffering fellowmen. Before examining a patient or engaging in research he would place himself in the presence of God. He encouraged his patients, especially those who were about to undergo surgery, to receive the sacraments.

 

Dr. Moscati also attended to temporal needs. He treated poor patients free of charge, and would often send someone home with an envelope containing a prescription and a 50-lire note.

 

On occasion he practiced heroic charity. When Mount Vesuvius erupted in April 1906, Dr. Moscati voluntarily helped to evacuate a nursing home in the endangered area, personally moving the frail and infirm patients to safety minutes before the roof of the building collapsed under the ash. He also served beyond the call of duty during the 1911 cholera epidemic and treated approximately 3,000 soldiers during World War I.

   

"The holy physician of Naples," as he was called, also made efforts to "humanize" the medical profession as an institution. He was outspoken in his opposition to the unfair practices of nepotism and bribery that often influenced appointments at that time. He might have pursued a brilliant academic career, taken a professorial chair and devoted more time to research, but he preferred to continue working with patients and to train interns.

 

In another letter to a student, Dr. Moscati wrote, "Not science, but charity has transformed the world," explaining that only a few go down in history as men of science, but all can leave the world a better place by their charity.

 

On a Tuesday in 1927, Giuseppe Moscati went to Mass and received Holy Communion (as he did every day) and then made his rounds at the hospital. After a midday meal he felt weary, lay down, and died peacefully. He was not yet 47 years old.

 

Giuseppe Moscati was beatified in 1975 and declared a saint by Pope John Paul II on October 25, 1987. His feast day is November 16.

 

The miracle for his canonization was the inexplicable cure of a young man who was dying of leukemia. His mother dreamed of a doctor in a white coat, whom she identified when her pastor showed her a photo of Blessed Giuseppe. Through his intercession, her son was cured and returned to his job as an ironworker. The young man, Giuseppe Fusco, attended the canonization ceremony and presented to the Pope a wrought-iron face of Christ which he had made.

 

St. Giuseppe Moscati treated thousands during his lifetime, using natural means. Now that he has gone on to his heavenly reward, he continues to have "office hours" and works amazing cures on a regular basis. The Jesuits who staff the Church of Gesù Nuovo in Naples, where the saint is entombed, post accounts of new medical miracles at their website. In recent years, St. Giuseppe has cured a young man who ruptured his spleen in a motorcycle accident, restored to health a youngster who, during a severe asthma attack, turned blue and suffered brain damage, and even helped married couples who were having difficulty conceiving a child.

 

The miraculous power of the holy physician's intercession in heaven is explained by his conscientious practice of Christian charity while on earth. As he wrote to a colleague, "Only one science is unshakeable and unshaken, the one revealed by God, the science of the hereafter! In all your works, look to Heaven, to the eternity of life and of the soul, and orient yourself then much differently from the way that merely human considerations might suggest, and your activity will be inspired for the good."

 

Source: catholiceducation.org

 

Relic courtesy of a flickr friend

 

All Saints, Gazeley, Suffolk

 

All Saints at Gazeley, near Newmarket, was the first church that I visited after an international team of scientists conclusively proved that God did not exist. Thus begins the original article about Gazeley parish church that I wrote for the Suffolk Churches site, back in May 2003. At that stage, I had visited more than 600 Suffolk churches, and the site was moving towards a kind of completion. The entries were becoming longer and tending more towards the philosophical. The acquisition of a digital camera meant that I could already see I would need to do the whole lot again, but that would be in the future. For now, I had Norfolk in my sights, and there was an end-of-term feel to what I was writing about Suffolk. I am afraid that All Saints, Gazeley, took the full brunt of it.

 

The article generated a fair amount of correspondence, as you may imagine. It was discussed on BBC Radio Suffolk. I was questioned rather cautiously about it by someone in the Diocese.

 

The parish themselves took it rather well. To be honest, I had caught them at a low ebb, and they welcomed the publicity. I had also visited them immediately before a time of great change, when heads had fallen, but loins were about to be girded, and the Church of England was stirring itself again in that lovely village. One of the advantages of visiting every parish church in East Anglia is that you also get to see every parish, of course, and I soon fell in love with these sleepy, fat villages along the Cambridgeshire border. I would move there tomorrow, quite happily.

 

However, the article still makes the point I was originally trying to make, and the contrast between then and now shows this special place in a light it thoroughly deserves, for this is one of East Anglia's loveliest churches, and deserves all the visitors it can get. Anyway, I thought so then, and I certainly think so now.

 

Here is what I wrote in 2003: 'All Saints at Gazeley, near Newmarket, was the first church that I visited after an international team of scientists conclusively proved that God did not exist. I was intrigued to know how a wealthy, reasonably large Suffolk village would respond to this challenge. What would they do with their church? I had a theory. I suspected that the old church buildings would continue to find a community use. Small groups of people would still congregate on a Sunday mornings to sing comforting songs and feel good about each other. The churches would still be used by secular couples wanting a fancy wedding, and the local villagers would still want to be buried in the graveyard. But the building would no longer have a Christian use.

 

It was with some dismay, however, that I arrived in Gazeley to discover that the rot had already set in. The first sign of this was the way in which the large windows facing onto the road had holes the size of small rocks in them. This was disturbing, especially because the east window at Gazeley is one of the most remarkable Decorated windows in East Anglia. The head of the window consists of two elegant overlapping trefoils, but there is no head to the arch, the head itself having cusps. You can see it in the left hand column; Cautley thought it was unique.

 

I went and tried the door, but of course it was locked. Ever since the announcement of God's non-existence, heads have dropped in the Anglican community, and many of them no longer have the will to welcome strangers and visitors. I went next door to the Rectory. I knocked on the door, rang the bell. Nobody came. Perhaps the Rector had fled town. I had tried phoning several numbers I had taken from the Diocesan website, but nobody had answered. There were keyholders listed in the church porch, but no phone numbers. Gazeley is a fairly large village, and we didn't have a street map, but by driving around (sorry about the carbon monoxide, folks) we tracked some of the houses down. Several cars were on the driveways outside (as I said, this is a wealthy village) but nobody came to the door. Perhaps they had given up in despair. I felt Gazeley's strange torpor beginning to settle on me like snow.

 

We found the house where the last address was supposed to be. I went to the side door, and eventually someone answered. "Yes?" he was very curt, so I don't know who he was expecting. I, however, was a model of charm and good manners, and explained my mission to see inside Gazeley church, and that I understood he was a keyholder, a churchwarden in fact. His wife came to the kitchen door behind him, to see who it was. I could smell cooking, and I assumed that they were both about to eat, the time being 5pm on a Saturday.

 

"The church is locked", he said. I agreed that this was the case, and wondered if access was possible. "It was open earlier today, you should have come then", he observed. I concurred that it would have been better, but that we had been visiting other churches, and had only just arrived in Gazeley. He thought for a second. "I'll have to come with you." The man checked that the twenty minutes I had suggested would not deprive him of his tea, and walked with me up to the church. On the way, the man explained how he and his wife had spent the day preparing the church for the harvest festival. I made a mental note that this was another event that had survived the death of God, as would Christmas probably.

 

We walked across the wide open graveyard, and I looked up at the great ship of Gazeley church. There is no doubt which county you are in; here, the complete rebuilding of the nave with clerestory and aisles was at the start of the 16th century, and as at Blythburgh they didn't get around to rebuilding the tower before the Protestant Reformation intervened. The huge chancel had been built on the eve of the Black Death, and has similarities with the one at Mildenhall. Perhaps a rebuilding was planned, but it never happened. The tower was largely reconstructed in the 19th century.

 

To my surprise, he took us not to either south or north porch, but to the great west door. This led us beneath the tower and behind the organ, and we stepped into darkness. Daylight was fading, but here it must be always gloomy, among the broom cupboards and stacks of junk. The churchwarden found the light switches, and we walked around the organ into the body of the church.

 

Back in the days when God still existed, I had been to Gazeley church before. It had been a bright, cold February morning in 1999, and I was cycling from Newmarket to Ipswich. I'd arrived in Gazeley to find the church open, and had thought it lovely. There was a delicate balance between respect for the medieval and the demands of the modern liturgy. It felt at once a house of prayer and a spiritual touchstone to the long generations. However, the slight crimp in all this was that, at the time, the regular Sunday congregation of Gazeley church had been reduced to single figures. The same was true of neighbouring Kentford. The Rector may not have been to blame; he was very energetic in in his pastoral activities in the village, and people still turned up for the big occasions. But I wondered what effect all this had had, and asked the churchwarden.

 

He was very candid. He told me that they had had a terrible time of it. The electoral roll had fallen to just three people, and this is not a small village. Nobody wanted to come to church any more. He had lived in the village for years, and had seen all this happen. It was only in the last year or so that he felt the church had been turned around by the new Rector (the one I had suspected of leaving town). Now, there were more than twenty of them, and they felt like a proper community again, he said.

 

I found this interesting. The previous Rector had been a Forward in Faith-supporting Anglo-catholic, and such a tradition was not terribly popular with the suits at Diocesan House. The new Rector had moved the church back towards the mainstream.

 

I looked around the vast open nave. All Saints is one of the biggest churches in the west of the county, and it must take a good five hundred people to make it feel full. I tried to imagine what it must have been like here, just three in the congregation.

 

The warden and his wife had tried hard to decorate the church for the harvest festival, and it looked particularly lovely towards the east. The greenery on the tombchest and piscina was very well done. But inevitably the fruit and vegetables were sparse, and there was no disguising the general air of shabbiness and decay underneath the decoration. I felt a bit sorry for the churchwarden, for he had stuck with the place through thick and thin, and clearly loved it. The chancel and central eastern part of the nave were clean and tidy, but all around were the encroaching shadows, and here lurked the dust and dirt.

 

The higher you looked, the filthier it became. The clerestory windows were coated in grime, and the lower parts cloaked in decades of cobwebs. The medieval cross beams are still in place, but the Victorian roof above is leaky, and areas of damp showed above the high arcades. It seemed unlikely that all this could have happened in the short time since the Geneva declaration of 2007 announced all faith in a Supreme Being to be 'utterly null and void'. Mortlock had commented on the poor condition of the royal arms as long ago as 1988. Could it be that they were in this state when this building was still in use for Christian worship?

 

Having seen the stone holes in the windows, I was mightily relieved that the Victorians had reset the medieval glass up in the clerestory. This seems a curious thing to have done, since it defeats the purpose of a clerestory, but if they had not done so then we might have lost it. The glass matches the tracery in the north aisle windows, so that is probably where they came from. I had seen them on my previous visit, but could not remember where they were, and when I asked the keyholder he did not seem aware that the church had any medieval glass. Eventually I found it. There are angels, three Saints and some shields, most of which are heraldic but two show the instruments of the passion and the Holy Trinity. I would not be surprised to learn that some of the shields are 19th century, but the figures are all original late 15th or early 16th century. The Saints are an unidentified Bishop, the hacksaw-wielding St Faith and one of my favourites, St Apollonia. She it was who was invoked by medieval people against toothache.

 

It struck me as I gazed up that many parish churches had much less to lose than Gazeley. At one time, these places were vibrant hubs of spiritual communities, but now they would be left to wither and die. Some would become houses of course, but Gazeley's church is much too big. Some might be kept as examples of our redundant belief systems, but here at Gazeley there would be too much to tidy up and sort out. So All Saints at Gazeley must be considered merely as a treasure house. Here, then, is a guide to why it must survive the 2007 Geneva Declaration.

 

Firstly, the chancel. Here, the space created by the clearing of clutter makes it at once mysterious and beautiful. Above, the early 16th century waggon roof is Suffolk's best of its kind. Mortlock points out the little angels bearing scrolls, the wheat ears and the vine sprays, and the surviving traces of colour. The low side window on the south side still has its hinges, for here it was that updraught to the rood would have sent the candles flickering in the mystical church of the 14th century. On the south side of the sanctuary is an exquisitely carved arched recess, that doesn't appear to have ever had a door, and may have been a very rare purpose-built Easter sepulchre at the time of the 1330s rebuilding. Opposite is a huge and stunningly beautiful piscina, and beside it are sedilia that end in an arm rest carved in the shape of a beast. It is one of the most significant Decorated moments in Suffolk.

 

On the floor of the chancel there is a tiny, perfect chalice brass, one of only two surviving in Suffolk. The other is at Rendham. Not far away is the indent of another chalice brass - or perhaps it was for the same one, and the brass has been moved for some reason. There are two chalice indents at Westhall, but nowhere else in Suffolk. Chalice brasses were popular memorials for Priests in the 15th and early 16th centuries, and thus were fair game for reformers. Heigham memorials of the late 16th century are on the walls. Back in the south aisle there is a splendid tombchest in Purbeck marble. It has lost its brasses, but the indents show us where they were, as do other indents in the aisle floors. Some heraldic brass shields survive, and show that Heighams were buried here. Brass inscriptions survive in the nave and the chancel, dating from the late 16th and early 17th centuries.

 

Piled up and decrepit in the south west corner are some extraordinary 14th century benches with pierced tracery backs. Some of them appear to spell out words, Mortlock thought one might say Salaman Sayet. The block of benches to the north appear to have been made using sections of the 15th century rood loft. Further north, the early 17th century benches may appear crude, but were almost certainly the work of the village carpenter.

 

The 14th century font is a stunning example of the tracery pattern series that appeared in the decades before the Black Death. They may have been intended to spread ideas at that time of great artistic and intellectual flowering before it was so cruelly snatched away. The cover is 17th century.

 

The place is absolutely glorious, but few people seem to know about it, and fewer seem to care. If it had been clean, tidy and open, Simon Jenkins England's Thousand Best Churches would not have been able to resist it. Should the survival of such a treasure store depend upon the existence of God or the continued practice of the Christian faith? Or might there be other reasons to keep this extraordinary building in something like its present integrity? It needs thousands spent on it, hundreds of thousands, but is this something that we as a nation or culture should consider worth doing? Will it be sufficient to photograph it all and then let it fall, or do we need to rescue this building before it is too late?

 

Increasingly, it seemed to me that what the parish needed was not condemnation for the state the building was in, but encouragement to put it right. I pointed out several of the features outlined above, but I think the poor man was beginning to register quite what a task he had on his hands, so I fell quiet. I did reassure him that the building really was the responsibility of us all, and not just the Church of England; it was the heart and touchstone of the whole village, and not just of his faith community.

 

We'd been there for nearly an hour. I took pity, and offered to lock up and return the key to his house. He thought about it for a moment. I guessed he was weighing up whether or not he trusted us to make the church secure, but he just said "you don't need to bring the key back, it's a yale lock. Just let yourself out, and let the door close behind you." And he said goodbye and went home - rather more thoughtfully, I fear, than he had left it.

 

It was dark. I put out the lights, and stood for a moment in the wide gloom, in the infinite stillness. I listened to the sound of my own breathing. I knew this was the most endangered building I had visited so far on my travels. But I'm determined we won't lose it.'

 

And that was that. At the end of the original article, I had pointed out that the 2007 Geneva Declaration on the non-existence of God was, of course, entirely fictitious. This was partly to reassure the good people of Gazeley, but also to save confusing any excitable Dawkinsites. Gazeley church was, after all, still in use for Christian worship. I also pointed out that the rest of the article was completely true as things had stood in May 2003. However, over the next few months I received a number of e-mails from people in the parish telling me how the church was being taken to task, tidied up, cleaned out, and, even more important, made accessible. Coming back in May 2008 I was delighted to discover than both the south and north doors were now open, and I stepped out of the sunlight into an interior which positively shouted its welcome to pilgrims and strangers. Perhaps it helped that it was such a beautiful day, for the interior was full of light falling across ancient stone and woodwork. Everything shone with love and care. Quite frankly, it lifted the heart. Perhaps the most moving sight was of the brightly coloured children's table and chairs, which have been given pride of place at the east end of the south aisle, rather than being tucked away under the tower or behind the font. Having once almost lost its congregation altogether, the community at Gazeley now puts its children's corner in a prominent position, where everyone can see it.

 

The wide open space of the chancel was still one of the loveliest interiors I knew in Suffolk, but now it had something else, a feeling of hope. Great things had happened here. I mentioned it afterwards to a Catholic Priest friend of mine, and he said he hoped I knew I'd seen the power of the Holy Spirit at work. And perhaps that is so. Certainly, the energy and imagination of the people here have been fired by something. I wanted to find someone to ask about it, to find out how things stood now. But there was no one, and so the building spoke for them.

 

Back outside in the graveyard, the dog daisies clustered and waved their sun-kissed faces in the light breeze. The ancient building must have known many late-May days like this over the centuries, but think of all the changes that it has known inside! The general buffeting of the winds of history still leaves room for local squalls and lightning strikes. All Saints has known these, but for now a blessed calm reigns here. Long may it remain so.

I thought I knew Yarmouth, but I heard in a discussion about what was the largest parish church in England, that Great Yarmouth Minster was one that laid claim to that accolade.

 

Minster? In Yarmouth?

 

But seems there is much to the town I did not know, and clearly it needs to be further explored. But whilst in the area, riding on trains, I took and hour out to walk from the station to the Minster to have a look, if it was open.

 

Maybe they are more welcoming to visitors now, but two boards outside announcing the fact, so I went in and was stunned at the size of it, too much to take in really, but it was full of light and I was given a very warm welcome. This made a very lasting impression.

 

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

 

The Norman-era Minster Church of St Nicholas in Great Yarmouth remains, due to its floor-surface area, England's largest parish church.[1] It was founded in 1101 by Herbert de Losinga, the first Bishop of Norwich,[2] and consecrated in 1119. Since its construction, it has been Great Yarmouth's parish church. It is cruciform, with a central tower, which may preserve a part of the original structure. Gradual alterations effectively changed the form of the building. Its nave is 26 feet (7.9 m) wide, and the church's total length is 236 feet (72 m).

In December 2011, the Bishop of Norwich officially designated it a Minster Church. It is not only used for religious services but is a hub for various other regional and civic events, including concerts by choirs, orchestras and other musical ensembles, art exhibitions and, during festivals and fayres, the church opens permitting stalls and traders inside.

  

The building, very possibly the town's oldest, is also its most visible, historic landmark. It sits in the central area of Great Yarmouth, close to the house of Anna Sewell.[2] The Transitional clerestoried nave, with columns alternately octagonal and circular, was rebuilt in the reign of King John. A portion of the chancel is of the same date. About fifty years later the aisles were widened, so that the nave is now, rather unusually, the narrowest part of the building. Immediately adjacent are two main graveyard areas: the Old Yard lies directly east behind the church, while the very substantial New Yard stretches for about half a mile to the north.

  

A grand west front with towers and pinnacles was constructed between 1330 and 1338, but a plague interrupted building extension plans. In the 16th century the ornamental brasses were cast into weights and the gravestones cut into grindstones. Within the church there were at one time 18 chapels, some maintained by guilds, others by private families, such as the Paxtons. At the Reformation the chapels were demolished and the building's valuable liturgical vessels sold off, the proceeds spent to widen the channel of the harbour.

 

During the Commonwealth period, the Independents appropriated the chancel, the Presbyterians the north aisle, while Churchmen were allowed the remainder of the building. The interior brick walls, erected at this time to separate the different portions of the building, remained until 1847. In 1864 the tower was restored, and the east end of the chancel rebuilt; between 1869 and 1870 the south aisle was rebuilt; and in 1884 the south transept, the west end of the nave and the north aisle underwent restoration.

 

During the Second World War, the building was bombed and nearly destroyed by fire. It was rebuilt by the architect Stephen Dykes Bower and re-consecrated in 1961. During reconstruction, the church temporarily used St Peter's Church on St Peter's Road. When St Nicholas re-opened, attendance at St Peter's declined until the 1960s, when a growing Greek community had use of it, and in 1981 it became St Spiridon's Greek Orthodox Church.

On 2 October 2011, the Lord Bishop of Norwich Graham James raised St. Nicholas to the status of a Minster Church, so marked on 9 December 2011 during the town's Civic Carol Service. Its formal title is now the Minster Church of St. Nicholas, Great Yarmouth.

On 13 October 2014 a memorial stone was unveiled to commemorate the deaths of thirteen people in 1981 Bristow Helicopters Westland Wessex crash.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Yarmouth_Minster

 

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

 

I do like Great Yarmouth. More than anywhere else in East Anglia, with the possible exception of Kings Lynn, you feel that this is a place which has broken the surly bonds of proximity to London, which is, after all, fewer than 150 miles away, and instead yearns out for the sea, and Europe. Yarmouth takes its name from the mouth of the River Yare: tightly crammed onto a narrow tongue of land, surrounded on three sides by water, it retains its endearingly shabby character and a sense of its own singular history, despite the best efforts of the Luftwaffe and the Borough planners, who over the last half-century must rank as some of the most neglectful and bone-headed planners of any of England's medium-sized towns.

Great Yarmouth has a seedy brashness, a jollity which overwrites the hard times it has suffered, and it has suffered indeed: the town lost a greater percentage of its houses to German bombing during the Second World War than any other town in England. The disappearance of the fishing industry led to an unemployment rate of mining town proportions, and the rugged working class character of the town, without any significant areas of middle class villas or suburban metroland, has often been a poor advocate for itself.

 

Can there be a more hauntingly lovely town centre street in East Anglia than South Quay? On one side are the confident 19th and early 20th century buildings, the town hall, the banks, the merchants' houses, the town pubs, while on the other side is the quay of the steely, silent Yare, the great ships parked opposite the buildings. For Great Yarmouth is still a major port, and the warehouses on the Southtown side remind those who pass beneath the great red brick buildings on the far bank exactly where all this prosperity came from.

 

And a twenty minute walk will take you across the heart of the town to Yarmouth's wide, white, sandy beaches, for today this is above all else a seaside town, of course. And while the beaches are by no means as lovely as those of Lowestoft ten miles to the south, nothing can beat Yarmouth for the sheer number of its amusement arcades, its fairgrounds, its candy floss stands and its cheap tat shops. Kiss me quick and squeeze me slow: this feels like the seaside used to, like it ought to, before we got all sophisticated about such matters. It reminds me of my childhood. In summer, all Norwich seems to come here for a cheap and cheerful day out, and you cannot get a seat on the train for love nor money.

 

When I first knew Great Yarmouth as a child in the 1970s, the roads to the north of the town centre were lined with small hotels, and while these certainly still exist, the days when thousands of people came to Great Yarmouth for a two week holiday are now gone. The former hotels are now residential care homes, or divided up into flats and bedsits, which are still not called apartments, thank goodness. The vast coach park immediately to the north of the town centre is still discernible as the site of Yarmouth Beach station, which brought the holiday-makers here. In those days, Great Yarmouth had three railway stations, but now there is only one, with its single line playing host to an hourly shuttle into Norwich.

 

That the demand for cheap meals and takeaway food has not diminished is testified to by the large population of Greeks, mainly from Cyprus; they started arriving here during the days of the fascist dictatorship and the war in the 1970s. The vast former Anglican parish church of St Peter, redundant in the 1980s, has been happily reborn as the Greek Orthodox church of St Spiridon. Today, especially in the area to the south of the town centre, you are as likely to hear Greek spoken on the streets as English. And what English! This must be one of the last towns in England with a strong, identifiable accent of its own - people do not have Norfolk accents here, they have Great Yarmouth accents, which stand out in the streets of sophisticated Norwich as much as voices from Birmingham or Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

 

People who have never been here know Great Yarmouth from books, especially the opening few chapters of Charles Dickens's David Copperfield, for here it was that the Peggoty family lived in an upturned boat on the beach, and here it was that David was happy. Dickens was writing in the 1840s about a Great Yarmouth of a quarter of a century earlier, and you will find few traces of Dickens's Yarmouth today. Great Yarmouth underwent a massive building boom in the 1860s, and this and the modern era define its character above all else. But wandering around the Middlegate area you may be struck by how, among the dull and often crass buildings of the 1960s and 1970s, there is occasionally some extraordinary survival, a 16th century house wider at the top than the bottom, perhaps, or an early medieval tollhouse, or a grand 18th century frontage with a perfunctory building tacked on behind. This was the heart of the area destroyed by a succession of German bombing raids in 1941 and 1942. Because of Great Yarmouth's singular situation on a spit of land, its population lived crammed into narrow alleys called rows, many early medieval in origin, the bulk built in the 15th and 16th centuries. This unique medieval townscape of perhaps 140 rows survived up until those fateful nights. It was almost completely destroyed, with a consequent heavy loss of life. Hauntingly, several bombed buildings have been left exactly as they were after the destruction, in a railed off area behind the replacement Unitarian church.

 

It is easy to forget quite how prosperous Great Yarmouth was during the medieval period. As Bill Wilson reminds us in the revised Pevsner, at the time of the 1334 merchant's tax register, Yarmouth raised more in the subsidy than either Norwich or Lynn, which a hundred years before had been exceptionally prosperous places. Only York, Bristol and London were richer than Yarmouth on the eve of the Black Death; the town had provided three times more sailors for the attack on Calais than London, and in 1348 there were 220 boats on the Yare river mouth. But the following year the Black Death wiped out perhaps two-thirds of the townsfolk, and it would take Yarmouth hundreds of years to recover its former prosperity.

 

It was at this time that the town walls were completed, and it is still possible to trace the course of the walls today, especially to the south of the town. On three sides, the walls defended Yarmouth from the sea, on which it resolutely turned its back; on the river side, there was no wall. Within the walls, at its widest and most northerly point, the town had its market place, still a busy one, and further north than that, looking down the length of the market place, over the rows, the warehouse, along the river and out to the sea, they built a great church, dedicated to the patron saint of sailors, St Nicholas.

 

A hundred miles up the east coast is the great port city of Hull, which dwarfs the town of Great Yarmouth, but with which Great Yarmouth otherwise shares very much in common. There, the great late 15th Century church of Holy Trinity is claimed as the country's biggest, which may well be true in terms of its sheer bulk. But here in Yarmouth the medieval merchant wealth had done better than that, and here it was that, in terms of floor area, the burghers of Yarmouth built the largest church in England.

 

Whereas the Hull church towers over and dominates the medieval street plan, here in Great Yarmouth St Nicholas seems to sprawl, its width and length dwarfing the central tower. Holy Trinity is fully in proportion, a typical late medieval church writ large, but St Nicholas is not. This great building has an idiosyncrasy, and to visit it is to see a church in a new way. There are several reasons for this, not least that this building was largely complete a full 150 years before Holy Trinity. There is no clerestory, and hardly any of the language of Perpendicular which would inform and shape so many of England's great urban churches. The setting of the building below the level of the market place means that the overall impression is of the green of the vast copper roofs. To see it in the low sun of a cold winter's afternoon, with the stone and flintwork glowing and the frost beginning to gleam on the parapets, is to see one of East Anglia's most beautiful urban sights, I think.

 

Walking around the outside of the building is a not inconsiderable task, and you soon become acquainted with the rhythm of the flintwork, windows and stone dressing, which make it feel that it is all of a piece, which is an illusion, although there are reasons for it. The west front is vast, but hidden by trees and in any case visible only from a minor road.To the east of the chancel is a haunting 1840s gravestone which tells us that beneath this Stone rests two Babes that brought Happiness to their Parents although they are Dead. I wondered if Dickens had ever spotted it. And as you come back round to the south porch you'll find one of England's most unusual 19th century gravestones. It remembers George Beloe, a nine year old boy who was unfortunately drowned when the suspension bridge over the Bure, just outside of Yarmouth, collapsed in 1845. A large crowd had gathered on the bridge to watch a clown float down the river in a barrel pulled by geese, and the bridge collapsed when they surged from one side to the other as he went under. The full death toll was never known, because many of the victims must have been washed out to sea by the fast-flowing current. Seventy-nine bodies were recovered, most of them children. What makes George Beloe's headstone extraordinary is that it depicts, in stone relief, the collapse of the bridge. Now eroded by weather after more than a century and a half, you can still make out the two ends of the bridge, and the eye of God looking down as the deck collapses into the Bure.

 

Having made your circumnavigation, you can now step through the huge porch, which faces the market place, into the interior of this extraordinary building. You may know already what to expect, but if you do not then you will be struck by how outstandingly light and clean the interior is. As your eyes adjust to the great distances, you may then notice the curious pattern of the arcades which open and close vistas as you begin to wander, as if this was a maze of vast, low rooms. And then you would notice the jaunty, bleached Festival of Britain feel of the furnishings, the acreage of modern glass, most of it very good, and the uncluttered simplicity, and then it will strike you - there is nothing old here.

 

On the night of 24th June 1942, St Nicholas was completely destroyed by German bombing. All that was left standing were the outer walls and the tower, in danger of collapse. The stonework was utterly calcined by the fierce heat. In a town which had suffered so much over the previous twelve months, it was a greivous loss, and it would be almost twenty years before St Nicholas was open for business again. Essentially, it had to be rebuilt, using the surviving walls and tower. The chosen design was that of a relatively minor architect, but a man who would be responsible for the two great East Anglian church architectural controversies of the 20th Century, Stephen Dykes Bower.

 

It is inevitable that a comparison should be made with Coventry Cathedral, which also replaced a bombed predecessor. The two buildings are about the same size, the work was carried out over the same period of years in the late 1950s, and the two buildings opened just a year apart. But while Basil Spence's Coventry Cathedral is a fabulous, iconic structure in the spirit of the age and in the full flush of post-war enthusiasm, St Nicholas at first appears little more than an exercise in pedantic and ponderous medievalism. As Bill Wilson points out, the £315,000 awarded by the War Damage Commission here was but a quarter of the money allotted to Coventry, but he also recalls Pevsner's scathing attack on the design: What an opportunity was lost! What thrilling things might have been done inside! A modern interior, airy, noble, of fine materials could have arisen to affirm the vitality of C20 church architecture inside the C13 walls. How defeatist does the imitation-Gothic interior appear, once this has been realized!

 

And Pevsner was not alone. The main criticism seemed to be that, while the opportunity had not been taken to produce something brave and modernist, the rebuilding was also not true to the principles and details of the Gothic which had been there before. Instead, Dykes Bower made up his own Gothic, particularly in the arcades and tracery. It is a simple Gothic, stripped of detail and without the clutter beloved of the 19th Century revival. Coventry Cathedral's design was startling and newsworthy, and the great artists of the day were commissioned to provide its fixtures and fittings. It has come to represent a city which otherwise projects a rather vague image to the world. But Great Yarmouth is not Coventry, and there is a big difference between the urban church of a relatively small and insular town and the Cathedral of a great diocese. It is perhaps unfair that Coventry's Cathedral is still viewed today as a phoenix risen from the ashes in a way that Great Yarmouth's church can never be, despite the near-identical circumstances. But that's not all. Bill Wilson, writing in 1991, concludes that the problem with the concept is the lack of assertive detail and the fact that so large a space needs to be filled with plenty of furnishings. Unhappily, there are hardly any...

 

And yet, and yet. When I step into St Nicholas now, I find myself thrilled by the cool light, the almost monastic simplicity. Apart from the hideous organ, the open spaces are barely punctuated, and there is something timeless and eternal about the silence. Dykes Bower's arcades are hardly there, vanishing into the whiteness above and the simplicity of the bare wood roofs. Through the crossing the jewel-like chancel glows, almost beckoning. From the other direction the west window does exactly the same. What Pevsner could not have foreseen is that this building is entirely suited to modern Anglican spirituality which has extended in recent years beyond mere congregational worship. And he also could not have foreseen how we would come to view the simplicity of Dykes Bower's design, the white walls, the lack of detail, the stripped, bleached wood and the cool, hard floors as being exactly symptomatic of the 1960s, the decade which gave this new building its birth. For this, I like it very much, not least because it was reopened on 8th May 1961, the day I was born.

 

Perhaps best of all I like the range of glass around the east and west windows by Brian Thomas. They are all of a piece, installed for the reopening. There can be few modern schemes outside of the cathedrals on so vast a scale, and yet they are elaborate, detailed and intimate. This great, light building is the perfect setting for them. The east window depicts the Crucifixion, surrounded by scenes from the Passion. In the north aisles are the joyful mysteries of the Christ story, from the Annunciation to the Presentation, while in the south aisles is the salvation story from Adam and Eve to Christ's mission. At the west end are the sacraments.

 

There are effectively four aisles, two either side of the church, which extend up to beyond the crossing. The aisles each side become conjoined as they flank the nave itself, making the nave appear narrow and tall in comparison, despite what we know to be true of it. The triple lancet of the west window aids this illusion. Below it, the Norman font is from a redundant Wiltshire church, and looks most un-East Anglian. There are small artworks and minor survivals dotted about, but they do not intrude. The early 18th century pulpit came from St George, a few hundred metres to the south, now closed. The pews in the central part of the nave are also from St George, and although they are simple they strike a jarring note. Modern chairs would be better. Dykes Bower screened off the south chancel chapel to create a space for private prayer, and this doesn't work as well as it might, creating an obstruction within the otherwise openness of the east end. The garishly painted organ is also his.

 

But this is a place to wander - despite the vast scale I found I had circumnavigated the interior three times without really noticing. It struck me then quite how much Dykes Bower must have intended this - he was designing a great town church interior, and looking across the water to Holland and Belgium as much as to anywhere else in England. He wanted a church that opened onto the market place, into which shoppers could come for a sit down and even a prayer, a building whose open spaces would be wandered through. Having told you all of this, I expect you are already making plans to come to Great Yarmouth and visit this church for yourself as soon as you possibly can. You may be aghast to learn, then, that this wonderful structure is hardly ever open to the public. At present, you can only visit on a Saturday morning: otherwise, it is merely the private, vastly-subsidised venue of a small group of Sunday worshippers. Nothing could be more short-sighted, and little could be more shameful.

 

For, while the mission of the Church of England is increasingly seen as to the whole people of God and not just to its registered members, and churches all over England are making themselves open to pilgrims and strangers wanting to feel a sense of the numinous and even perhaps to be open to a spirituality which may or may not be Christian but which is at least a yearning for God, the people of Great Yarmouth are locked out of their own church from day to day. They can at least visit the Catholic church of St Mary, which has a sign saying, curiously, that the church is open as often as possible, but that is a small Victorian building, and cannot compare with St Nicholas which is, after all, the heart and soul of Great Yarmouth's history, a touchstone down its long generations.

 

But if you can get inside, and if you stand beneath the crossing looking westwards, the view is typical: clean, clear, full of light and gravitas with a sense of prayerfulness and even of mystery. There is enough to convince. This building does not feel defeatist; if anything, it was a rather brave approach to the problem. But few people saw it like that at the time, and few people did in the years after. It must be said that Dykes Bower did not go out of his way to win friends in the modernist world - as his wikipedia entry says of him, he was a devoted and determined champion of the Gothic Revival style through its most unpopular years. And yet, he had the last laugh. When he finished here, he spent the next two decades overseeing the transformation of the church of St James at Bury St Edmunds into a fitting cathedral for the Diocese of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich. His is the chancel there, his the transepts, the side chapels and the north ambulatory, all in his own faux-gothic style. And when he died in 1994 he left a cool two million pounds to the Diocese for the construction of a huge Gothic central tower over the crossing of the cathedral. The Diocese spent another ten years or so raising the extra needed, which was fairly controversial in those years when the CofE was haemorraging cash left, right and centre. Despite the voices against it, the tower was built, entirely to Dykes Bower's fancy, and the gleaming white edifice now towers over Bury as if it had been there for half a millennium or more.

 

Simon Knott, October 2010

 

www.norfolkchurches.co.uk/gynicholas/gynicholas.htm

Holy Family and St Michael, Kesgrave, Ipswich, Suffolk

 

A new entry on the Suffolk Churches site.

 

There are ages of faith which leave their traces in splendour and beauty, as acts of piety and memory. East Anglia is full of silent witnesses to tides which have ebbed and flowed. Receding, they leave us in their wake great works from the passing ages, little Norman churches which seem to speak a language we can no longer understand but which haunts us still, the decorated beauty of the 14th Century at odds with the horrors of its pestilence and loss, the perpendicular triumph of the 15th Century church before its near-destruction in the subsequent Reformation and Commonwealth, the protestant flowering of chapels and meeting houses in almost all rural communities, and most obvious of all for us today the triumphalism of the Victorian revival.

 

But even as tides recede, piety and memory survive, most often in quiet acts and intimate details. The catholic church of Holy Family and St Michael at Kesgrave is one of their great 20th Century treasure houses.

 

At the time of the 1851 census of religious worship, Kesgrave was home to just 86 people, 79 of whom attended morning service that day, giving this parish the highest percentage attendance of any in Suffolk. However, they met half a mile up the road at the Anglican parish church of All Saints, and the current site of Holy Family was then far out in the fields. In any case, it is unlikely that any of the non-attenders was a Catholic. Today, Kesgrave is a sprawling eastern suburb of Ipswich, home to about 10,000 people. It extends along the A12 corridor all the way to Martlesham, which in turn will take you pretty much all the way to Woodbridge without seeing much more than a field or two between the houses.

 

Holy Family was erected in the 1930s, and serves as a chapel of ease within the parish of Ipswich St Mary. However, it is still in private ownership, the responsibility of the Rope family, who, along with the Jolly family into which they married, owned much of the land in Kesgrave that was later built on.

 

The growth of Kesgrave has been so rapid and so extensive in these last forty years that radical expansions were required at both this church and at All Saints, as well as to the next parish church along in the suburbs at Rushmere St Andrew. All of these projects are interesting, although externally Holy Family is less dramatic than its neighbours. It sits neatly in its trim little churchyard, red-brick and towerless, a harmonious little building if rather a curious shape, of which more in a moment. Beside it, the underpass and roundabout gives it a decidedly urban air. But this is a church of outstanding interest, as we shall see.

 

It was good to come back to Kesgrave. As a member of St Mary's parish I generally attended mass at the parish's other church, a couple of miles into town, but I had been here a number of times over the years, either to mass or just to wander around and sit for a while. These days, you generally approach the church from around the back, where you'll find a sprawling car park typical of a modern Catholic church. To the west of the church are Lucy House and Philip House, newly built for the work of the Rope family charities. Between the car park and the church there there is a tiny, formal graveyard, with crosses remembering members of the Rope and Jolly families.

 

Access to the church is usually through a west door these days, but if you are fortunate enough to enter through the original porch on the north side you will have a foretaste of what is to come, for to left and right are stunning jewel-like and detailed windows depicting St Margaret and St Theresa on one side and St Catherine and the Immaculate Conception on the other. Beside them, a plaque reveals that the church was built to the memory of Michael Rope, who was killed in the R101 airship disaster of 1930.

 

Blue Peter-watching boys like me, growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, were enthralled by airships. They were one of those exciting inventions of a not-so-distant past which were, in a real sense, futuristic, a part of the 1930s modernist project that imagined and predicted the way we live now. And they were just so big. But they were doomed, because the hydrogen which gave them their buoyancy was explosive.

 

As a child, I was fascinated by the R101 airship and its disaster, especially because of that familiar photograph of its wrecked and burnt-out fuselage sprawled in the woods on a northern French hillside. It is still a haunting photograph today. The crash of the R101 put an end to airship development in the UK for more than half a century.

 

Of course, this is all ancient history now, but in the year 2001 I had the excellent fortune to be shown around Holy Family by Michael Rope's widow, Mrs Lucy Doreen Rope, née Jolly, who was still alive, and then in her nineties. She was responsible for the building of this church as a memorial to her husband. We paused in the porch so that I could admire the windows. "Do you like them?" Mrs Rope asked me. "Of course, my sister-in-law made them."

 

Her sister-in-law, of course, was Margaret Agnes Rope, who in the first half of the twentieth century was one of the finest of the Arts and Craft Movement stained glass designers. She studied at Birmingham, and then worked at the Glass House in Fulham with her cousin, Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, whose work is also here. But their work can be found in churches and cathedrals all over the world. What Mrs Rope did not tell me, and what I found out later, is that these two windows in the porch were made for her and her husband Michael as a wedding present.

 

Doreen Jolly and Michael Rope were married in 1929. Within a year, he was dead. Mrs Rope was just 23 years old.

 

The original church from the 1930s is the part that you step into. You enter to the bizarre sight of a model of the R101 airship suspended from the roof. The nave altar and tabernacle ahead are in the original sanctuary, and you are facing the liturgical east (actually south) of the original building, and what an intimate space this must have been before the church was extended. Red brick outlines the entrance to the sanctuary, and here are the three windows made by Margaret Rope for the original church. The first is the three-light sanctuary window, depicting the Blessed Virgin and child flanked by St Joseph and St Michael. Two doves sit on a nest beneath Mary's feet, while a quizzical sparrow looks on. St Michael has the face of Michael Rope. The inscription beneath reads Pray for Michael Rope who gave up his soul to God in the wreck of His Majesty's Airship R101, Beauvais, October 5th 1930.

 

Next, a lancet in the right-hand side of the sanctuary contains glass depicting St Dominic, with a dog running beneath his feet and the inscription Laudare, Benedicere, Praedicare, ('to praise, to bless, to preach'). The third window is in the west wall of the church (in its day, the right hand side of the nave), depicting St Thomas More and St John Fisher, although at the time the window was made they had not yet been canonised. The inscription beneath records that the window was the gift of a local couple in thankfulness for their conversion to the faith for which the Blessed Martyrs Thomas More and John Fisher gave their lives. A rose bush springs from in front of the martyrs' feet.

 

By the 1950s, Holy Family was no longer large enough for the community it served, and it was greatly expanded to the east to the designs of the archtect Henry Munro Cautley. Cautley was a bluff Anglican of the old school, the retired former diocesan architect of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich, but he would have enjoyed designing a church for such an intimate faith community, and in fact it was his last major project before he died in 1959. The original sanctuary was retained as a blessed sacrament chapel, and the church was turned ninety degrees to face east for the first time. The north and south sides of the new church received three-light Tudor windows in the style most beloved by Cautley, as seen also at his Ipswich County Library in Northgate Street, and the former Fosters (now Lloyds) Bank in central Cambridge.

 

Although the Rope family had farmed at Blaxhall near Wickham Market for generations, Margaret Rope herself was not from Suffolk at all, and nor was she at first a Catholic. She was born in Shrewsbury in 1882, the daughter of Henry Rope, a surgeon at Shrewsbury Infirmary, and a son of the Blaxhall Rope family. The largest collection of Margaret Rope's glass is in Shrewsbury Cathedral. When Margaret was 17, her father died. The family were received into the Catholic church shortly afterwards. A plaque was placed in the entrance to Shrewsbury Infirmary to remember her father. When the hospital was demolished in the 1990s, the plaque was moved to here, and now sits in the north aisle of the 1950s church. In her early days in London Margaret Rope designed and made the large east window at Blaxhall church as a memorial to her grandparents. It features her younger brother Michael, and is believed to be the only window that she ever signed.

 

In her early forties, Margaret Rope took holy orders and entered the Carmelite Convent at nearby Woodbridge, but continued to produce her stained glass work until the community moved to Quidenham in Norfolk, when poor health and the distances involved proved insurmountable. She died there in 1953, and so she never saw the expanded church. Her cartoons, the designs for her windows, are placed on the walls around Holy Family. Some are for windows in churches in Scotland and Wales, one for a window in the English College in Rome. Among them are the roundels for within the enclosure of Tyburn Convent in London. "They had to remove the windows there during the War", said Mrs Rope. "Of course, with me, you have to ask which war!"

 

Turning to the east, we see the new sanctuary with its high altar, completed in 1993 as part of a further reordering and expansion, which gave a large galilee porch, kitchen and toilets to the north side of the church. The window above the new sanctuary has three lights, and the two outer windows were made by Margaret Rope for the chapel of East Bergholt convent to the south of Ipswich. They remember the Vaughan family, into which Margaret Rope's sister had married, and in particular one member, a sister in the convent, to celebrate her 25 year jubilee.

 

The convent later became Old Hall, a famous commune. They depict the prophet Isaiah and King David.

 

The central light between them is controversial. Produced in the 1990s and depicting the risen Christ, it really isn't very good, and provides the one jarring note in the church. It is rather unfortunate that it is in such a prominent position. It is not just the quality of the design that is the problem. It lets in too much light in comparison with the two flanking lights. "The glass in my sister-in-law's windows is half an inch thick", Mrs Rope told me. "In the workshop at Fulham they had a man who came in specially to cut it for them". The glass in the modern light is simply too thin.

 

Despite the 1990s extension, and as so often in modern urban Catholic churches, Holy Family is already not really big enough, although it is hard to see that there could ever be another expansion. We walked along Munro Cautley's south aisle, and at that time the stations of the cross were simple wooden crosses. However, about three months after my conversation with Mrs Rope, the World Trade Centre in New York was attacked and destroyed, and among the three thousand people killed were two local Kesgrave brothers who were commemorated with a new set of stations in cast metal.

 

Here also is a 1956 memorial window by Margaret Rope's cousin, Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, to Mrs Rope's mother Alice Jolly, depicting the remains of the shrine at Walsingham and the Jolly family at prayer before it. Another MEA Rope window is across the church in the galilee, a Second World War memorial window, originally on the east side of the first church before Cautley's extension. It depicts three of the English Martyrs, Blessed Anne Lynne, Blessed Robert Southwell and Blessed John Robinson, as well as the shipwreck of Blessed John Nutter off of Dunwich, with All Saints church on the cliffs above.

 

The galilee is designed for families with young children to play a full part in mass, and is separated from the church by a glass screen. At the top of the screen is a small panel by Margaret Rope which is of particular interest because it depicts her and her family participating in the Easter vigil, presumably in Shrewsbury Cathedral. This is hard to photograph because it is on an internal window between two rooms.

 

A recent addition to the Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope windows here is directly opposite, newly installed on the south side of the nave. It was donated by her great-nephew. It depicts a nativity scene, the Holy Family in the stable at Bethlehem, an angel appearing to shepherds on the snowy hills beyond. It is perhaps her loveliest window in the church.

 

Finally, back across the church. Here, beside the brass memorial to Margaret Rope, is a window depicting the Blessed Virgin and child, members of the Rope family in the Candlemas procession beneath. The inscription reminds us to pray for the soul of Sister Margaret of the Mother of God, mistress of novices and stained glass artist, Monastery of the Magnificat of the Mother of God, Quidenham, Norfolk, entered Carmel 14th September 1923, died 6th December 1953. Sister Margaret of the Mother of God was, of course, Margaret Rope herself. She was buried in the convent at Quidenham, a Shrewsbury exile at rest in the East Anglian soil of her forebears. The design is hers, and the window was made by her cousin Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope.

 

Back in 2001, we were talking about the changing Church, and I asked Mrs Rope what she thought about the recently introduced practice of transferring Holy Days on to the nearest Sunday, so that the teaching of them was not lost. Mrs Rope approved, a lady clearly not stuck in the past. She had a passion for ensuring that the Faith could be shared with children. As we have seen, her church is designed so that young families can take a full part in the Mass. But she was sympathetic to the distractions of the modern age. "The world is so exciting for children these days", she said. "I think it must be difficult to bring them up with a sense of the presence of God." She smiled. "Mind you, my son is 70 now! And I do admire young girls today. They have such spirit!"

 

She left me to potter about in her wonderful treasure house. As I did so, I thought of medieval churches I have visited, which were similarly donated by the Mrs Ropes of their day, perhaps even for husbands who had died young. They not only sought to memorialise their loved ones, but to consecrate a space for prayer, that masses might be said for the souls of the dead. This was the Catholic way, a Christian duty. Before the Reformation, this was true in every parish in England. It remained true here at Kesgrave.

 

And finally, back outside to the small graveyard. Side by side are two crosses. One remembers Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, artist, 1891-1988. The other remembers Lucy Doreen Rope, founder of this church, 1907-2003.

Romans 12:1-2

I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

 

Let's take this one step at a time for these are hard sayings which are so easy to pass over but so desperately need to be taken to heart if we are to be serious in our pursuit of righteousness. First of all lets break it down a little to what this little two verse section is asking of us.

 

◊ Present your bodies as living sacrifices

◊ Do not be conformed to this world

◊ Be transformed by the renewal of your mind

◊ Discern what is the will of God

 

Well that looks easy doesn't it, only four things, yet look at them, present your body as a sacrifice? What! Don't be conformed to the world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind? What; that all about? Discern what is the will of God, that sounds like a tough thing to do. Before we get all dejected and move on to more comfortable terrain lets just read through it slow and steady and see what we can dig up.

 

Present you bodies as a living sacrifice. Ouch, a sacrifice was no easy or comfortable thing to be, rather it was something destroyed for the sake of saving something else. Yet we are not called to destroy our bodies but rather to present them as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. So, regardless of exactly what that is, the end goal is spiritual worship. So we must learn how to sacrifice our bodies yet not cause them to stop living, and do that in a holy and acceptable way. Wait though, perhaps we do not fully understand the meaning of sacrifice. Think about it, if I put my best sheep on an alter of stone and cut it up, burn it up, and praise the Lord what have I done? I most certainly have sacrificed my best sheep but why? Because that sheep was not as important to me as my relationship with the Lord. I killed my best sheep to show the Lord that a right standing before Him was more important to me then keeping my best sheep. It never meant merely just burning up my sheep on stones for the sake of keeping a law or doing it because it was the "thing" to do but because I love God so much. Take that to this verse and see how it applies. Present your bodies in such a way to God as to say "I don't love myself as much as I love You Lord. My comfort, my ease, my bank account, my satisfaction, my joy, indeed all of me Lord is on a lower standing then You and my relationship with You. You mean more to me then all of these and gladly would I give each and every one up before I gave You up.

 

1 Samuel 15:22

And Samuel said, “Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams.

 

That's an easy thing to say but so hard to live out. How does your life say to God that He's the most important thing to you? Take a look at the world and the things they are sacrificing themselves for. Take a look at the broken families with full bank accounts, take a look at the prisons and the thriving drug rings. Then take a look back at home, how does your life show your commitment to Christ as Supreme Lord of your life? Are you spending extra time at work or at home? Where is your free time going? Your free money? Don't assume anything, we need to begin thinking through what we're doing and why. If we're going to march under the banners of Christ and wait anxiously for our rapture into Heaven we're going to need to take a closer look at what the followers of Christ do. Many are marching to heaven, but all to many are marching in the wrong direction.

 

This leads very nicely right into points 2 and 3 of this section. "Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind."

 

The first thing I see by reading through this is that by default we are conformed to this world, we are worldly. That's a tough mold to break out of, yet by God's grace once we are saved, we are out and have begun a transformation. It's interesting to me that the mind is what is transformed. Its not the heart, its not the soul, its not your actions, its your mind. Why? Because that's where the mold of the world is. Its in the world, its the world that says you want to get rich and retire early, its the world that says if your not happy with the way things are, change them, change your job, change your house, your car, your wife. Life is about the here and now, enjoy it, live in it, and don't worry. This is the thinking which we need to be transformed from, the mindset that life is all about me, about my happiness, my satisfaction in the here and now. We were made with an eternal soul, and each day we give away a little bit more of that soul, either to God, or to the temporary here and now. Your mind, by default, speaks much louder then the Spirits voice. Your mind says, "You want it? Then get it! You only live once." Indeed, until the Spirit breathes life into a dead man's spirit, he'll never respond or react to the voice which says, "And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever. 1 John 2:17

 

This again leads beautifully into the fourth and final point, the summary. "That by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect." The will of God, that thing which seems so elusive to so many Christians yet I believe God makes so clear in His Word. He may not tell you whether to buy this or that, to marry this guy or that girl, to take give to this charity or that missionary but His will is bigger then all of these. The will of God is not so much a thing or idea but exactly what it is, the will of God. Its what God wants, not what you want. If you truly desire to honor God and glorify Him with every choice you make then you will submit your will to His will. How do you do that? Look up! What did we just read? We say, "God, I sacrifice my interests, I sacrifice my best skills, nothing I have is my own for it was You who ultimately gave it all to me. The world says I should be retiring next year, but is that what You want? How would you have me spend my free time this summer, the world says I should party with my friends, go to the beach, and eat out every night, but is the really how you would have my spend my time? Father, I'm really struggling in my marriage, she's just so difficult! The world says I should just ditch her and pick out a new one but Father thats not how you treat me as part of your church so what would You have me do?" Pray Christian! O pray, pray, pray! Do you want to know what your earthly employer wants, what his will is? You ask him don't you? So much more should we ask our Heavenly Commander for what His will is. You will do this through prayer, and not just sometimes saying a quick prayer, but often, focused, and fervent times of prayer. Do this especially before big events in your life, such as "popping the big question", buying a house or car, career or job change. O how this is not natural, indeed, this is so unnatural and foreign to our once dead spirits, yet, if you want to do what God wants you to do, (His will) then you'll ask Him. Take much time in prayer, fast, do what you must and what you can to seek the face of God. All to often its not that I don't know what the will of God is, but that the will of God is not my will. What I want is not what He wants so I must bend and do what I want, or I must break and do what He wants. Do not follow the patterns of this world, the day by day assumptions that this is what people do. O how we assume and are patterned by the culture and society around us. Don't just throw the world out, but bring God in and let Him work His will in you and your life will be transformed as you become a Christian.

 

Hebrews 10:36

For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God you may receive what is promised.

 

1 Peter 2:15

For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people.

 

1 Peter 4:1-2

Since therefore Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves with the same way of thinking, for whoever has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin, so as to live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for human passions but for the will of God.

 

All Saints, Gazeley, Suffolk.

 

There was never any doubt I would go to Rob's funeral. Rob was born just two weeks before me, and in our many meetings, we found we had so much in common.

 

A drive to Ipswich should be something like only two and a half hours, but with the Dartford Crossing that could balloon to four or more.

 

My choice was to leave early, soon after Jools left for work, or wait to near nine once rush hour was over. If I was up early, I'd leave early, I said.

 

Which is what happened.

 

So, after coffee and Jools leaving, I loaded my camera stuff in the car, not bothering to program in a destination, as I knew the route to Suffolk so well.

 

Checking the internet I found the M2 was closed, so that meant taking the M20, which I like as it runs beside HS2, although over the years, vegetation growth now hides most of it, and with Eurostar cutting services due to Brexit, you're lucky to see a train on the line now.

 

I had a phone loaded with podcasts, so time flew by, even if travelling through the endless roadworks at 50mph seemed to take forever.

 

Dartford was jammed. But we inched forward, until as the bridge came in sight, traffic moved smoothly, and I followed the traffic down into the east bore of the tunnel.

 

Another glorious morning for travel, the sun shone from a clear blue sky, even if traffic was heavy, but I had time, so not pressing on like I usually do, making the drive a pleasant one.

 

Up through Essex, where most other traffic turned off at Stanstead, then up to the A11 junction, with it being not yet nine, I had several hours to fill before the ceremony.

 

I stopped at Cambridge services for breakfast, then programmed the first church in: Gazeley, which is just in Suffolk on the border with Cambridgeshire.

 

I took the next junction off, took two further turnings brought be to the village, which is divided by one of the widest village streets I have ever seen.

 

It was five past nine: would the church be open?

 

I parked on the opposite side of the road, grabbed my bag and camera, limped over, passing a warden putting new notices in the parish notice board. We exchange good mornings, and I walk to the porch.

 

The inner door was unlocked, and the heavy door swung after turning the metal ring handle.

 

I had made a list of four churches from Simon's list of the top 60 Suffolk churches, picking those on or near my route to Ipswich and which piqued my interest.

 

Here, it was the reset mediaeval glass.

 

Needless to say, I had the church to myself, the centuries hanging heavy inside as sunlight flooded in filling the Chancel with warm golden light.

 

Windows had several devotional dials carved in the surrounding stone, and a huge and "stunningly beautiful piscina, and beside it are sedilia that end in an arm rest carved in the shape of a beast" which caught my eye.

 

A display in the Chancel was of the decoration of the wooden roof above where panels contained carved beasts, some actual and some mythical.

 

I photographed them all.

 

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

 

All Saints is a large, remarkably good church in one of the sleepy, fat villages along the Cambridgeshire border, the sort of place you cycle through and imagine wistfully that you've won the lottery and could move there. The wide churchyard on both sides is a perfect setting for the church, which rises to heaven out of a perpendicular splendour of aisles, clerestories and battlements. The tower was complete by the 1470s when money was being left for a bell. The earlier chancel steadies the ship, anchoring it to earth quietly, although the tall east window has its spectacular moment too. And you step into a deliciously well-kept interior, full of interest.

One of the most significant medieval survivals here is not easily noticed. This is the range of 15th Century glass, which was reset by the Victorians high in the clerestory. This seems a curious thing to have done, since it defeats the purpose of a clerestory, but if they had not done so then we might have lost it. The glass matches the tracery in the north aisle windows, so that is probably where they came from. There are angels, three Saints and some shields, most of which are heraldic but two show the instruments of the passion and the Holy Trinity. I would not be surprised to learn that some of the shields are 19th century, but the figures are all original late 15th or early 16th century. The Saints are an unidentified Bishop, the hacksaw-wielding St Faith and one of my favourites, St Apollonia. She it was who was invoked by medieval people against toothache.

 

Waling from the nave up into the chancel, the space created by the clearing of clutter makes it at once mysterious and beautiful. Above, the early 16th century waggon roof is Suffolk's best of its kind. Mortlock points out the little angels bearing scrolls, the wheat ears and the vine sprays, and the surviving traces of colour. The low side window on the south side still has its hinges, for here it was that updraught to the rood would have sent the candles flickering in the mystical church of the 14th century. On the south side of the sanctuary is an exquisitely carved arched recess, that doesn't appear to have ever had a door, and may have been a very rare purpose-built Easter sepulchre at the time of the 1330s rebuilding. Opposite is a huge and stunningly beautiful piscina, and beside it are sedilia that end in an arm rest carved in the shape of a beast. It is one of the most significant Decorated moments in Suffolk.

 

On the floor of the chancel there is a tiny, perfect chalice brass, one of only two surviving in Suffolk. The other is at Rendham. Not far away is the indent of another chalice brass - or perhaps it was for the same one, and the brass has been moved for some reason. There are two chalice indents at Westhall, but nowhere else in Suffolk. Chalice brasses were popular memorials for Priests in the 15th and early 16th centuries, and thus were fair game for reformers. Heigham memorials of the late 16th century are on the walls. Back in the south aisle there is a splendid tombchest in Purbeck marble. It has lost its brasses, but the indents show us where they were, as do other indents in the aisle floors. Some heraldic brass shields survive, and show that Heighams were buried here. Brass inscriptions survive in the nave and the chancel, dating from the late 16th and early 17th centuries.

 

The 14th century font is a good example of the tracery pattern series that appeared in the decades before the Black Death. They may have been intended to spread ideas at that time of great artistic and intellectual flowering before it was so cruelly snatched away. The cover is 17th Century. At this end of the nave are two good ranges of medieval benches, one, rare in East Anglia, is a group of 14th Century benches with pierced tracery backs. Some of them appear to spell out words, and Mortlock thought one might say Salaman Sayet. The block of benches to the north appears to be 15th Century or possibly early 16th Century. Further north, the early 17th Century benches are simpler, even cruder, and were likely the work of the village carpenter.

 

All rather lovely then. And yet, it hasn't always been that way. All Saints at Gazeley, near Newmarket, was the first church that I visited after an international team of scientists conclusively proved that God did not exist began the first page for this church that I wrote in 2003, in a satirical mood after finding the church locked and at a very low ebb. At a time when congregations were generally falling, I'd been thinking about the future of medieval churches beyond a time when they would have people to use them in the traditional way. I wondered if the buildings might find new uses, or could adapt themselves to changing patterns and emphases in Christianity, or even changing spiritual needs of their parishes. Even if science could somehow prove that God did not exist, I suggested, there were parishes which would rise to the challenge and reinvent themselves, as churches have always done over the two millennia of Christianity. Coming to Gazeley I felt that here was a church which felt as if it had been abandoned. And yet, it seemed to me a church of such significance, such historical and spiritual importance, that its loss would be a disaster. If it had been clean, tidy and open at the time he was visiting, Simon Jenkins England's Thousand Best Churches would not have been able to resist it. Should the survival of such a treasure store depend upon the existence of God or the continued practice of the Christian faith? Or might there be other reasons to keep this extraordinary building in something like its present integrity?

 

In the first decade of the 21st Century, Gazeley church went on a tremendous journey, from being moribund to being the wonderful church you can visit today. If you want to read the slightly adapted 2006 entry for Gazeley, recounting this journey, you can do so here. Coming back here today always fills me with optimism for what can be achieved. On one occasion I mentioned my experiences of Gazeley church to a Catholic Priest friend of mine, and he said he hoped I knew I'd seen the power of the Holy Spirit at work. And perhaps that is so. Certainly, the energy and imagination of the people here have been fired by something. On that occasion I had wanted to find someone to ask about it, to find out how things stood now. But there was no one, and so the building spoke for them.

 

Back outside in the graveyard, the dog daisies clustered and waved their sun-kissed faces in the light breeze. The ancient building must have known many late-May days like this over the centuries, but think of all the changes that it has known inside! The general buffeting of the winds of history still leaves room for local squalls and lightning strikes. All Saints has known these, but for now a blessed calm reigns here. Long may it remain so.

 

Simon Knott, June 2019

 

www.suffolkchurches.co.uk/gazeley.htm

St John the Baptist, Snape, Suffolk

 

Like many medieval churches in Suffolk, St John the Baptist is remote from the village it serves. Or, it would be more accurate to say, the village is remote from the church, since the church stands on the main road from the A12 to Aldeburgh, and the village is off this road, a mile or so to the south. The position of the church probably reflects the fact that it is high, firm ground, while the village is in the marshes.

 

This is not to say that the village is not a busy place too of course, for just across the River Alde, and actually in Tunstall parish, are the world famous Snape Maltings, once the dockside and railhead of the Garrett industrial empire, and now home to the Aldeburgh Festival. Ironically, the tourists that flock the craft shops, galleries and cafes of the Arts Centre, and go for walks along the reed-banked creeks and across the marshes, probably don't often make it up to the busy top road and the church.

 

The building today looks pretty much like Ladbroke's 1820 drawing. The Victorians didn't do much here, there was no building of aisles, transepts or trimmings. The only real change is the eastern wall, rebuilt in 1920 to replace the heavily buttressed yet collapsing original. This is a simple, aisleless church, with no clerestory. The roofline on the tower shows that it was once thatched. It is, let us say, a typical country church. The tower was built as the result of a bequest in the middle years of the 15th century, and the battlements added later, in the style of the 1520s. The porch is contemporary with the tower. The nave and chancel are earlier, probably 13th century, and although they have been patched up over the years, there has been no wholesale rebuilding.

 

Inside, however, the modern age has been busy. You step into an utterly charming interior, full of light, with white walls and brick floors. At the cleared west end is the church's great treasure, one of the most beautiful fonts in the county. It bears a dedicatory inscription to the Mey family, and dates from the late 15th century. Strange animals lurk around the foot of it, and tthe stem bears the Evangelists with their symbols, interspersed with kings. But the most animated figures are those on the bowl. Seven of them hold a long scroll that goes right around the bowl. The eighth panel is a rare representation of the Holy Trinity, which was particularly circumscribed by iconoclasts in the 16th and 17th centuries. It shows God the Father seated on his throne, with the crucified Son held in front of him. The Spirit descends in the form of a dove. On either side kneel the donors of the font.

 

David Davy, visiting in the 1830s, said that the whitewash had been recently removed from the font. Perhaps what he meant was that the figures had been covered in plaster, which would explain their survival. Certainly, the puritan iconoclast William Dowsing saw nothing to incur his displeasure when he came here in 1644, and almost certainly the Anglican reformers had plastered it over a century earlier, the usual way of dealing with the problem of removing images while not actually destroying the font, which was still required by the new religion.

 

The views to east and west are beautiful, the colour of the Arts and Crafts east window perfectly poised and balanced. In the top half, Christ breaks bread at supper at Emmaus. Below, two angels flank the River Alde at Snape Bridge. It dates from the 1920 restoration, and is by Mary Lowndes, perhaps the leading female artist in any medium of the last years of the 19th and first years of the 20th centuries. She is best known today for her work for the suffragette movement - she designed their posters. Through her work at the Glass House she was an influence on many younger artists, both male and female. Below it, there is often set a beautiful altar frontal, illustrating a line from Eliot's Four Quartets. The church used to have a 15th century brass of five little girls. Davy made a rubbing of it, which is in the British Museum, but the brass has been stolen or mislaid since, probably in the 1920 wholesale refurbishment of the chancel.

 

Outside in the graveyard, the war memorial is one of the most extraordinary in Suffolk, a broken-down classical feature looking down the road to the village. Unfortunately, it is not a pleasant walk because of the traffic, but there are a couple of good pubs, and the walks across the marshes beyond the Maltings are certainly worth the effort. Not far off is Snape Mill, bought by the young Lowestoft-born Benjamin Britten as a place to write, and to which he returned from America at the height of the War. He had read an article about George Crabbe's poem The Village with its account of the fisherman Peter Grimes, and knew that back home in Suffolk was where he had to be, and an opera based on the poem was what he had to write.

Holy Family and St Michael, Kesgrave, Ipswich, Suffolk

 

A new entry on the Suffolk Churches site.

 

There are ages of faith which leave their traces in splendour and beauty, as acts of piety and memory. East Anglia is full of silent witnesses to tides which have ebbed and flowed. Receding, they leave us in their wake great works from the passing ages, little Norman churches which seem to speak a language we can no longer understand but which haunts us still, the decorated beauty of the 14th Century at odds with the horrors of its pestilence and loss, the perpendicular triumph of the 15th Century church before its near-destruction in the subsequent Reformation and Commonwealth, the protestant flowering of chapels and meeting houses in almost all rural communities, and most obvious of all for us today the triumphalism of the Victorian revival.

 

But even as tides recede, piety and memory survive, most often in quiet acts and intimate details. The catholic church of Holy Family and St Michael at Kesgrave is one of their great 20th Century treasure houses.

 

At the time of the 1851 census of religious worship, Kesgrave was home to just 86 people, 79 of whom attended morning service that day, giving this parish the highest percentage attendance of any in Suffolk. However, they met half a mile up the road at the Anglican parish church of All Saints, and the current site of Holy Family was then far out in the fields. In any case, it is unlikely that any of the non-attenders was a Catholic. Today, Kesgrave is a sprawling eastern suburb of Ipswich, home to about 10,000 people. It extends along the A12 corridor all the way to Martlesham, which in turn will take you pretty much all the way to Woodbridge without seeing much more than a field or two between the houses.

 

Holy Family was erected in the 1930s, and serves as a chapel of ease within the parish of Ipswich St Mary. However, it is still in private ownership, the responsibility of the Rope family, who, along with the Jolly family into which they married, owned much of the land in Kesgrave that was later built on.

 

The growth of Kesgrave has been so rapid and so extensive in these last forty years that radical expansions were required at both this church and at All Saints, as well as to the next parish church along in the suburbs at Rushmere St Andrew. All of these projects are interesting, although externally Holy Family is less dramatic than its neighbours. It sits neatly in its trim little churchyard, red-brick and towerless, a harmonious little building if rather a curious shape, of which more in a moment. Beside it, the underpass and roundabout gives it a decidedly urban air. But this is a church of outstanding interest, as we shall see.

 

It was good to come back to Kesgrave. As a member of St Mary's parish I generally attended mass at the parish's other church, a couple of miles into town, but I had been here a number of times over the years, either to mass or just to wander around and sit for a while. These days, you generally approach the church from around the back, where you'll find a sprawling car park typical of a modern Catholic church. To the west of the church are Lucy House and Philip House, newly built for the work of the Rope family charities. Between the car park and the church there there is a tiny, formal graveyard, with crosses remembering members of the Rope and Jolly families.

 

Access to the church is usually through a west door these days, but if you are fortunate enough to enter through the original porch on the north side you will have a foretaste of what is to come, for to left and right are stunning jewel-like and detailed windows depicting St Margaret and St Theresa on one side and St Catherine and the Immaculate Conception on the other. Beside them, a plaque reveals that the church was built to the memory of Michael Rope, who was killed in the R101 airship disaster of 1930.

 

Blue Peter-watching boys like me, growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, were enthralled by airships. They were one of those exciting inventions of a not-so-distant past which were, in a real sense, futuristic, a part of the 1930s modernist project that imagined and predicted the way we live now. And they were just so big. But they were doomed, because the hydrogen which gave them their buoyancy was explosive.

 

As a child, I was fascinated by the R101 airship and its disaster, especially because of that familiar photograph of its wrecked and burnt-out fuselage sprawled in the woods on a northern French hillside. It is still a haunting photograph today. The crash of the R101 put an end to airship development in the UK for more than half a century.

 

Of course, this is all ancient history now, but in the year 2001 I had the excellent fortune to be shown around Holy Family by Michael Rope's widow, Mrs Lucy Doreen Rope, née Jolly, who was still alive, and then in her nineties. She was responsible for the building of this church as a memorial to her husband. We paused in the porch so that I could admire the windows. "Do you like them?" Mrs Rope asked me. "Of course, my sister-in-law made them."

 

Her sister-in-law, of course, was Margaret Agnes Rope, who in the first half of the twentieth century was one of the finest of the Arts and Craft Movement stained glass designers. She studied at Birmingham, and then worked at the Glass House in Fulham with her cousin, Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, whose work is also here. But their work can be found in churches and cathedrals all over the world. What Mrs Rope did not tell me, and what I found out later, is that these two windows in the porch were made for her and her husband Michael as a wedding present.

 

Doreen Jolly and Michael Rope were married in 1929. Within a year, he was dead. Mrs Rope was just 23 years old.

 

The original church from the 1930s is the part that you step into. You enter to the bizarre sight of a model of the R101 airship suspended from the roof. The nave altar and tabernacle ahead are in the original sanctuary, and you are facing the liturgical east (actually south) of the original building, and what an intimate space this must have been before the church was extended. Red brick outlines the entrance to the sanctuary, and here are the three windows made by Margaret Rope for the original church. The first is the three-light sanctuary window, depicting the Blessed Virgin and child flanked by St Joseph and St Michael. Two doves sit on a nest beneath Mary's feet, while a quizzical sparrow looks on. St Michael has the face of Michael Rope. The inscription beneath reads Pray for Michael Rope who gave up his soul to God in the wreck of His Majesty's Airship R101, Beauvais, October 5th 1930.

 

Next, a lancet in the right-hand side of the sanctuary contains glass depicting St Dominic, with a dog running beneath his feet and the inscription Laudare, Benedicere, Praedicare, ('to praise, to bless, to preach'). The third window is in the west wall of the church (in its day, the right hand side of the nave), depicting St Thomas More and St John Fisher, although at the time the window was made they had not yet been canonised. The inscription beneath records that the window was the gift of a local couple in thankfulness for their conversion to the faith for which the Blessed Martyrs Thomas More and John Fisher gave their lives. A rose bush springs from in front of the martyrs' feet.

 

By the 1950s, Holy Family was no longer large enough for the community it served, and it was greatly expanded to the east to the designs of the archtect Henry Munro Cautley. Cautley was a bluff Anglican of the old school, the retired former diocesan architect of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich, but he would have enjoyed designing a church for such an intimate faith community, and in fact it was his last major project before he died in 1959. The original sanctuary was retained as a blessed sacrament chapel, and the church was turned ninety degrees to face east for the first time. The north and south sides of the new church received three-light Tudor windows in the style most beloved by Cautley, as seen also at his Ipswich County Library in Northgate Street, and the former Fosters (now Lloyds) Bank in central Cambridge.

 

Although the Rope family had farmed at Blaxhall near Wickham Market for generations, Margaret Rope herself was not from Suffolk at all, and nor was she at first a Catholic. She was born in Shrewsbury in 1882, the daughter of Henry Rope, a surgeon at Shrewsbury Infirmary, and a son of the Blaxhall Rope family. The largest collection of Margaret Rope's glass is in Shrewsbury Cathedral. When Margaret was 17, her father died. The family were received into the Catholic church shortly afterwards. A plaque was placed in the entrance to Shrewsbury Infirmary to remember her father. When the hospital was demolished in the 1990s, the plaque was moved to here, and now sits in the north aisle of the 1950s church. In her early days in London Margaret Rope designed and made the large east window at Blaxhall church as a memorial to her grandparents. It features her younger brother Michael, and is believed to be the only window that she ever signed.

 

In her early forties, Margaret Rope took holy orders and entered the Carmelite Convent at nearby Woodbridge, but continued to produce her stained glass work until the community moved to Quidenham in Norfolk, when poor health and the distances involved proved insurmountable. She died there in 1953, and so she never saw the expanded church. Her cartoons, the designs for her windows, are placed on the walls around Holy Family. Some are for windows in churches in Scotland and Wales, one for a window in the English College in Rome. Among them are the roundels for within the enclosure of Tyburn Convent in London. "They had to remove the windows there during the War", said Mrs Rope. "Of course, with me, you have to ask which war!"

 

Turning to the east, we see the new sanctuary with its high altar, completed in 1993 as part of a further reordering and expansion, which gave a large galilee porch, kitchen and toilets to the north side of the church. The window above the new sanctuary has three lights, and the two outer windows were made by Margaret Rope for the chapel of East Bergholt convent to the south of Ipswich. They remember the Vaughan family, into which Margaret Rope's sister had married, and in particular one member, a sister in the convent, to celebrate her 25 year jubilee.

 

The convent later became Old Hall, a famous commune. They depict the prophet Isaiah and King David.

 

The central light between them is controversial. Produced in the 1990s and depicting the risen Christ, it really isn't very good, and provides the one jarring note in the church. It is rather unfortunate that it is in such a prominent position. It is not just the quality of the design that is the problem. It lets in too much light in comparison with the two flanking lights. "The glass in my sister-in-law's windows is half an inch thick", Mrs Rope told me. "In the workshop at Fulham they had a man who came in specially to cut it for them". The glass in the modern light is simply too thin.

 

Despite the 1990s extension, and as so often in modern urban Catholic churches, Holy Family is already not really big enough, although it is hard to see that there could ever be another expansion. We walked along Munro Cautley's south aisle, and at that time the stations of the cross were simple wooden crosses. However, about three months after my conversation with Mrs Rope, the World Trade Centre in New York was attacked and destroyed, and among the three thousand people killed were two local Kesgrave brothers who were commemorated with a new set of stations in cast metal.

 

Here also is a 1956 memorial window by Margaret Rope's cousin, Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, to Mrs Rope's mother Alice Jolly, depicting the remains of the shrine at Walsingham and the Jolly family at prayer before it. Another MEA Rope window is across the church in the galilee, a Second World War memorial window, originally on the east side of the first church before Cautley's extension. It depicts three of the English Martyrs, Blessed Anne Lynne, Blessed Robert Southwell and Blessed John Robinson, as well as the shipwreck of Blessed John Nutter off of Dunwich, with All Saints church on the cliffs above.

 

The galilee is designed for families with young children to play a full part in mass, and is separated from the church by a glass screen. At the top of the screen is a small panel by Margaret Rope which is of particular interest because it depicts her and her family participating in the Easter vigil, presumably in Shrewsbury Cathedral. This is hard to photograph because it is on an internal window between two rooms.

 

A recent addition to the Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope windows here is directly opposite, newly installed on the south side of the nave. It was donated by her great-nephew. It depicts a nativity scene, the Holy Family in the stable at Bethlehem, an angel appearing to shepherds on the snowy hills beyond. It is perhaps her loveliest window in the church.

 

Finally, back across the church. Here, beside the brass memorial to Margaret Rope, is a window depicting the Blessed Virgin and child, members of the Rope family in the Candlemas procession beneath. The inscription reminds us to pray for the soul of Sister Margaret of the Mother of God, mistress of novices and stained glass artist, Monastery of the Magnificat of the Mother of God, Quidenham, Norfolk, entered Carmel 14th September 1923, died 6th December 1953. Sister Margaret of the Mother of God was, of course, Margaret Rope herself. She was buried in the convent at Quidenham, a Shrewsbury exile at rest in the East Anglian soil of her forebears. The design is hers, and the window was made by her cousin Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope.

 

Back in 2001, we were talking about the changing Church, and I asked Mrs Rope what she thought about the recently introduced practice of transferring Holy Days on to the nearest Sunday, so that the teaching of them was not lost. Mrs Rope approved, a lady clearly not stuck in the past. She had a passion for ensuring that the Faith could be shared with children. As we have seen, her church is designed so that young families can take a full part in the Mass. But she was sympathetic to the distractions of the modern age. "The world is so exciting for children these days", she said. "I think it must be difficult to bring them up with a sense of the presence of God." She smiled. "Mind you, my son is 70 now! And I do admire young girls today. They have such spirit!"

 

She left me to potter about in her wonderful treasure house. As I did so, I thought of medieval churches I have visited, which were similarly donated by the Mrs Ropes of their day, perhaps even for husbands who had died young. They not only sought to memorialise their loved ones, but to consecrate a space for prayer, that masses might be said for the souls of the dead. This was the Catholic way, a Christian duty. Before the Reformation, this was true in every parish in England. It remained true here at Kesgrave.

 

And finally, back outside to the small graveyard. Side by side are two crosses. One remembers Margaret Edith Aldrich Rope, artist, 1891-1988. The other remembers Lucy Doreen Rope, founder of this church, 1907-2003.

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

I thought I knew Yarmouth, but I heard in a discussion about what was the largest parish church in England, that Great Yarmouth Minster was one that laid claim to that accolade.

 

Minster? In Yarmouth?

 

But seems there is much to the town I did not know, and clearly it needs to be further explored. But whilst in the area, riding on trains, I took and hour out to walk from the station to the Minster to have a look, if it was open.

 

Maybe they are more welcoming to visitors now, but two boards outside announcing the fact, so I went in and was stunned at the size of it, too much to take in really, but it was full of light and I was given a very warm welcome. This made a very lasting impression.

 

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

 

The Norman-era Minster Church of St Nicholas in Great Yarmouth remains, due to its floor-surface area, England's largest parish church.[1] It was founded in 1101 by Herbert de Losinga, the first Bishop of Norwich,[2] and consecrated in 1119. Since its construction, it has been Great Yarmouth's parish church. It is cruciform, with a central tower, which may preserve a part of the original structure. Gradual alterations effectively changed the form of the building. Its nave is 26 feet (7.9 m) wide, and the church's total length is 236 feet (72 m).

In December 2011, the Bishop of Norwich officially designated it a Minster Church. It is not only used for religious services but is a hub for various other regional and civic events, including concerts by choirs, orchestras and other musical ensembles, art exhibitions and, during festivals and fayres, the church opens permitting stalls and traders inside.

  

The building, very possibly the town's oldest, is also its most visible, historic landmark. It sits in the central area of Great Yarmouth, close to the house of Anna Sewell.[2] The Transitional clerestoried nave, with columns alternately octagonal and circular, was rebuilt in the reign of King John. A portion of the chancel is of the same date. About fifty years later the aisles were widened, so that the nave is now, rather unusually, the narrowest part of the building. Immediately adjacent are two main graveyard areas: the Old Yard lies directly east behind the church, while the very substantial New Yard stretches for about half a mile to the north.

  

A grand west front with towers and pinnacles was constructed between 1330 and 1338, but a plague interrupted building extension plans. In the 16th century the ornamental brasses were cast into weights and the gravestones cut into grindstones. Within the church there were at one time 18 chapels, some maintained by guilds, others by private families, such as the Paxtons. At the Reformation the chapels were demolished and the building's valuable liturgical vessels sold off, the proceeds spent to widen the channel of the harbour.

 

During the Commonwealth period, the Independents appropriated the chancel, the Presbyterians the north aisle, while Churchmen were allowed the remainder of the building. The interior brick walls, erected at this time to separate the different portions of the building, remained until 1847. In 1864 the tower was restored, and the east end of the chancel rebuilt; between 1869 and 1870 the south aisle was rebuilt; and in 1884 the south transept, the west end of the nave and the north aisle underwent restoration.

 

During the Second World War, the building was bombed and nearly destroyed by fire. It was rebuilt by the architect Stephen Dykes Bower and re-consecrated in 1961. During reconstruction, the church temporarily used St Peter's Church on St Peter's Road. When St Nicholas re-opened, attendance at St Peter's declined until the 1960s, when a growing Greek community had use of it, and in 1981 it became St Spiridon's Greek Orthodox Church.

On 2 October 2011, the Lord Bishop of Norwich Graham James raised St. Nicholas to the status of a Minster Church, so marked on 9 December 2011 during the town's Civic Carol Service. Its formal title is now the Minster Church of St. Nicholas, Great Yarmouth.

On 13 October 2014 a memorial stone was unveiled to commemorate the deaths of thirteen people in 1981 Bristow Helicopters Westland Wessex crash.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Yarmouth_Minster

 

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

 

I do like Great Yarmouth. More than anywhere else in East Anglia, with the possible exception of Kings Lynn, you feel that this is a place which has broken the surly bonds of proximity to London, which is, after all, fewer than 150 miles away, and instead yearns out for the sea, and Europe. Yarmouth takes its name from the mouth of the River Yare: tightly crammed onto a narrow tongue of land, surrounded on three sides by water, it retains its endearingly shabby character and a sense of its own singular history, despite the best efforts of the Luftwaffe and the Borough planners, who over the last half-century must rank as some of the most neglectful and bone-headed planners of any of England's medium-sized towns.

Great Yarmouth has a seedy brashness, a jollity which overwrites the hard times it has suffered, and it has suffered indeed: the town lost a greater percentage of its houses to German bombing during the Second World War than any other town in England. The disappearance of the fishing industry led to an unemployment rate of mining town proportions, and the rugged working class character of the town, without any significant areas of middle class villas or suburban metroland, has often been a poor advocate for itself.

 

Can there be a more hauntingly lovely town centre street in East Anglia than South Quay? On one side are the confident 19th and early 20th century buildings, the town hall, the banks, the merchants' houses, the town pubs, while on the other side is the quay of the steely, silent Yare, the great ships parked opposite the buildings. For Great Yarmouth is still a major port, and the warehouses on the Southtown side remind those who pass beneath the great red brick buildings on the far bank exactly where all this prosperity came from.

 

And a twenty minute walk will take you across the heart of the town to Yarmouth's wide, white, sandy beaches, for today this is above all else a seaside town, of course. And while the beaches are by no means as lovely as those of Lowestoft ten miles to the south, nothing can beat Yarmouth for the sheer number of its amusement arcades, its fairgrounds, its candy floss stands and its cheap tat shops. Kiss me quick and squeeze me slow: this feels like the seaside used to, like it ought to, before we got all sophisticated about such matters. It reminds me of my childhood. In summer, all Norwich seems to come here for a cheap and cheerful day out, and you cannot get a seat on the train for love nor money.

 

When I first knew Great Yarmouth as a child in the 1970s, the roads to the north of the town centre were lined with small hotels, and while these certainly still exist, the days when thousands of people came to Great Yarmouth for a two week holiday are now gone. The former hotels are now residential care homes, or divided up into flats and bedsits, which are still not called apartments, thank goodness. The vast coach park immediately to the north of the town centre is still discernible as the site of Yarmouth Beach station, which brought the holiday-makers here. In those days, Great Yarmouth had three railway stations, but now there is only one, with its single line playing host to an hourly shuttle into Norwich.

 

That the demand for cheap meals and takeaway food has not diminished is testified to by the large population of Greeks, mainly from Cyprus; they started arriving here during the days of the fascist dictatorship and the war in the 1970s. The vast former Anglican parish church of St Peter, redundant in the 1980s, has been happily reborn as the Greek Orthodox church of St Spiridon. Today, especially in the area to the south of the town centre, you are as likely to hear Greek spoken on the streets as English. And what English! This must be one of the last towns in England with a strong, identifiable accent of its own - people do not have Norfolk accents here, they have Great Yarmouth accents, which stand out in the streets of sophisticated Norwich as much as voices from Birmingham or Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

 

People who have never been here know Great Yarmouth from books, especially the opening few chapters of Charles Dickens's David Copperfield, for here it was that the Peggoty family lived in an upturned boat on the beach, and here it was that David was happy. Dickens was writing in the 1840s about a Great Yarmouth of a quarter of a century earlier, and you will find few traces of Dickens's Yarmouth today. Great Yarmouth underwent a massive building boom in the 1860s, and this and the modern era define its character above all else. But wandering around the Middlegate area you may be struck by how, among the dull and often crass buildings of the 1960s and 1970s, there is occasionally some extraordinary survival, a 16th century house wider at the top than the bottom, perhaps, or an early medieval tollhouse, or a grand 18th century frontage with a perfunctory building tacked on behind. This was the heart of the area destroyed by a succession of German bombing raids in 1941 and 1942. Because of Great Yarmouth's singular situation on a spit of land, its population lived crammed into narrow alleys called rows, many early medieval in origin, the bulk built in the 15th and 16th centuries. This unique medieval townscape of perhaps 140 rows survived up until those fateful nights. It was almost completely destroyed, with a consequent heavy loss of life. Hauntingly, several bombed buildings have been left exactly as they were after the destruction, in a railed off area behind the replacement Unitarian church.

 

It is easy to forget quite how prosperous Great Yarmouth was during the medieval period. As Bill Wilson reminds us in the revised Pevsner, at the time of the 1334 merchant's tax register, Yarmouth raised more in the subsidy than either Norwich or Lynn, which a hundred years before had been exceptionally prosperous places. Only York, Bristol and London were richer than Yarmouth on the eve of the Black Death; the town had provided three times more sailors for the attack on Calais than London, and in 1348 there were 220 boats on the Yare river mouth. But the following year the Black Death wiped out perhaps two-thirds of the townsfolk, and it would take Yarmouth hundreds of years to recover its former prosperity.

 

It was at this time that the town walls were completed, and it is still possible to trace the course of the walls today, especially to the south of the town. On three sides, the walls defended Yarmouth from the sea, on which it resolutely turned its back; on the river side, there was no wall. Within the walls, at its widest and most northerly point, the town had its market place, still a busy one, and further north than that, looking down the length of the market place, over the rows, the warehouse, along the river and out to the sea, they built a great church, dedicated to the patron saint of sailors, St Nicholas.

 

A hundred miles up the east coast is the great port city of Hull, which dwarfs the town of Great Yarmouth, but with which Great Yarmouth otherwise shares very much in common. There, the great late 15th Century church of Holy Trinity is claimed as the country's biggest, which may well be true in terms of its sheer bulk. But here in Yarmouth the medieval merchant wealth had done better than that, and here it was that, in terms of floor area, the burghers of Yarmouth built the largest church in England.

 

Whereas the Hull church towers over and dominates the medieval street plan, here in Great Yarmouth St Nicholas seems to sprawl, its width and length dwarfing the central tower. Holy Trinity is fully in proportion, a typical late medieval church writ large, but St Nicholas is not. This great building has an idiosyncrasy, and to visit it is to see a church in a new way. There are several reasons for this, not least that this building was largely complete a full 150 years before Holy Trinity. There is no clerestory, and hardly any of the language of Perpendicular which would inform and shape so many of England's great urban churches. The setting of the building below the level of the market place means that the overall impression is of the green of the vast copper roofs. To see it in the low sun of a cold winter's afternoon, with the stone and flintwork glowing and the frost beginning to gleam on the parapets, is to see one of East Anglia's most beautiful urban sights, I think.

 

Walking around the outside of the building is a not inconsiderable task, and you soon become acquainted with the rhythm of the flintwork, windows and stone dressing, which make it feel that it is all of a piece, which is an illusion, although there are reasons for it. The west front is vast, but hidden by trees and in any case visible only from a minor road.To the east of the chancel is a haunting 1840s gravestone which tells us that beneath this Stone rests two Babes that brought Happiness to their Parents although they are Dead. I wondered if Dickens had ever spotted it. And as you come back round to the south porch you'll find one of England's most unusual 19th century gravestones. It remembers George Beloe, a nine year old boy who was unfortunately drowned when the suspension bridge over the Bure, just outside of Yarmouth, collapsed in 1845. A large crowd had gathered on the bridge to watch a clown float down the river in a barrel pulled by geese, and the bridge collapsed when they surged from one side to the other as he went under. The full death toll was never known, because many of the victims must have been washed out to sea by the fast-flowing current. Seventy-nine bodies were recovered, most of them children. What makes George Beloe's headstone extraordinary is that it depicts, in stone relief, the collapse of the bridge. Now eroded by weather after more than a century and a half, you can still make out the two ends of the bridge, and the eye of God looking down as the deck collapses into the Bure.

 

Having made your circumnavigation, you can now step through the huge porch, which faces the market place, into the interior of this extraordinary building. You may know already what to expect, but if you do not then you will be struck by how outstandingly light and clean the interior is. As your eyes adjust to the great distances, you may then notice the curious pattern of the arcades which open and close vistas as you begin to wander, as if this was a maze of vast, low rooms. And then you would notice the jaunty, bleached Festival of Britain feel of the furnishings, the acreage of modern glass, most of it very good, and the uncluttered simplicity, and then it will strike you - there is nothing old here.

 

On the night of 24th June 1942, St Nicholas was completely destroyed by German bombing. All that was left standing were the outer walls and the tower, in danger of collapse. The stonework was utterly calcined by the fierce heat. In a town which had suffered so much over the previous twelve months, it was a greivous loss, and it would be almost twenty years before St Nicholas was open for business again. Essentially, it had to be rebuilt, using the surviving walls and tower. The chosen design was that of a relatively minor architect, but a man who would be responsible for the two great East Anglian church architectural controversies of the 20th Century, Stephen Dykes Bower.

 

It is inevitable that a comparison should be made with Coventry Cathedral, which also replaced a bombed predecessor. The two buildings are about the same size, the work was carried out over the same period of years in the late 1950s, and the two buildings opened just a year apart. But while Basil Spence's Coventry Cathedral is a fabulous, iconic structure in the spirit of the age and in the full flush of post-war enthusiasm, St Nicholas at first appears little more than an exercise in pedantic and ponderous medievalism. As Bill Wilson points out, the £315,000 awarded by the War Damage Commission here was but a quarter of the money allotted to Coventry, but he also recalls Pevsner's scathing attack on the design: What an opportunity was lost! What thrilling things might have been done inside! A modern interior, airy, noble, of fine materials could have arisen to affirm the vitality of C20 church architecture inside the C13 walls. How defeatist does the imitation-Gothic interior appear, once this has been realized!

 

And Pevsner was not alone. The main criticism seemed to be that, while the opportunity had not been taken to produce something brave and modernist, the rebuilding was also not true to the principles and details of the Gothic which had been there before. Instead, Dykes Bower made up his own Gothic, particularly in the arcades and tracery. It is a simple Gothic, stripped of detail and without the clutter beloved of the 19th Century revival. Coventry Cathedral's design was startling and newsworthy, and the great artists of the day were commissioned to provide its fixtures and fittings. It has come to represent a city which otherwise projects a rather vague image to the world. But Great Yarmouth is not Coventry, and there is a big difference between the urban church of a relatively small and insular town and the Cathedral of a great diocese. It is perhaps unfair that Coventry's Cathedral is still viewed today as a phoenix risen from the ashes in a way that Great Yarmouth's church can never be, despite the near-identical circumstances. But that's not all. Bill Wilson, writing in 1991, concludes that the problem with the concept is the lack of assertive detail and the fact that so large a space needs to be filled with plenty of furnishings. Unhappily, there are hardly any...

 

And yet, and yet. When I step into St Nicholas now, I find myself thrilled by the cool light, the almost monastic simplicity. Apart from the hideous organ, the open spaces are barely punctuated, and there is something timeless and eternal about the silence. Dykes Bower's arcades are hardly there, vanishing into the whiteness above and the simplicity of the bare wood roofs. Through the crossing the jewel-like chancel glows, almost beckoning. From the other direction the west window does exactly the same. What Pevsner could not have foreseen is that this building is entirely suited to modern Anglican spirituality which has extended in recent years beyond mere congregational worship. And he also could not have foreseen how we would come to view the simplicity of Dykes Bower's design, the white walls, the lack of detail, the stripped, bleached wood and the cool, hard floors as being exactly symptomatic of the 1960s, the decade which gave this new building its birth. For this, I like it very much, not least because it was reopened on 8th May 1961, the day I was born.

 

Perhaps best of all I like the range of glass around the east and west windows by Brian Thomas. They are all of a piece, installed for the reopening. There can be few modern schemes outside of the cathedrals on so vast a scale, and yet they are elaborate, detailed and intimate. This great, light building is the perfect setting for them. The east window depicts the Crucifixion, surrounded by scenes from the Passion. In the north aisles are the joyful mysteries of the Christ story, from the Annunciation to the Presentation, while in the south aisles is the salvation story from Adam and Eve to Christ's mission. At the west end are the sacraments.

 

There are effectively four aisles, two either side of the church, which extend up to beyond the crossing. The aisles each side become conjoined as they flank the nave itself, making the nave appear narrow and tall in comparison, despite what we know to be true of it. The triple lancet of the west window aids this illusion. Below it, the Norman font is from a redundant Wiltshire church, and looks most un-East Anglian. There are small artworks and minor survivals dotted about, but they do not intrude. The early 18th century pulpit came from St George, a few hundred metres to the south, now closed. The pews in the central part of the nave are also from St George, and although they are simple they strike a jarring note. Modern chairs would be better. Dykes Bower screened off the south chancel chapel to create a space for private prayer, and this doesn't work as well as it might, creating an obstruction within the otherwise openness of the east end. The garishly painted organ is also his.

 

But this is a place to wander - despite the vast scale I found I had circumnavigated the interior three times without really noticing. It struck me then quite how much Dykes Bower must have intended this - he was designing a great town church interior, and looking across the water to Holland and Belgium as much as to anywhere else in England. He wanted a church that opened onto the market place, into which shoppers could come for a sit down and even a prayer, a building whose open spaces would be wandered through. Having told you all of this, I expect you are already making plans to come to Great Yarmouth and visit this church for yourself as soon as you possibly can. You may be aghast to learn, then, that this wonderful structure is hardly ever open to the public. At present, you can only visit on a Saturday morning: otherwise, it is merely the private, vastly-subsidised venue of a small group of Sunday worshippers. Nothing could be more short-sighted, and little could be more shameful.

 

For, while the mission of the Church of England is increasingly seen as to the whole people of God and not just to its registered members, and churches all over England are making themselves open to pilgrims and strangers wanting to feel a sense of the numinous and even perhaps to be open to a spirituality which may or may not be Christian but which is at least a yearning for God, the people of Great Yarmouth are locked out of their own church from day to day. They can at least visit the Catholic church of St Mary, which has a sign saying, curiously, that the church is open as often as possible, but that is a small Victorian building, and cannot compare with St Nicholas which is, after all, the heart and soul of Great Yarmouth's history, a touchstone down its long generations.

 

But if you can get inside, and if you stand beneath the crossing looking westwards, the view is typical: clean, clear, full of light and gravitas with a sense of prayerfulness and even of mystery. There is enough to convince. This building does not feel defeatist; if anything, it was a rather brave approach to the problem. But few people saw it like that at the time, and few people did in the years after. It must be said that Dykes Bower did not go out of his way to win friends in the modernist world - as his wikipedia entry says of him, he was a devoted and determined champion of the Gothic Revival style through its most unpopular years. And yet, he had the last laugh. When he finished here, he spent the next two decades overseeing the transformation of the church of St James at Bury St Edmunds into a fitting cathedral for the Diocese of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich. His is the chancel there, his the transepts, the side chapels and the north ambulatory, all in his own faux-gothic style. And when he died in 1994 he left a cool two million pounds to the Diocese for the construction of a huge Gothic central tower over the crossing of the cathedral. The Diocese spent another ten years or so raising the extra needed, which was fairly controversial in those years when the CofE was haemorraging cash left, right and centre. Despite the voices against it, the tower was built, entirely to Dykes Bower's fancy, and the gleaming white edifice now towers over Bury as if it had been there for half a millennium or more.

 

Simon Knott, October 2010

 

www.norfolkchurches.co.uk/gynicholas/gynicholas.htm

Almighty God's Word "God’s Work, God’s Disposition, and God Himself I (Part One)" (Selected Passage)

 

www.holyspiritspeaks.org/videos/selected-passage-gods-wor...

 

Almighty God says, "God created mankind; regardless of whether they have been corrupted or whether they follow Him, God treats human beings as His loved ones—or as human beings would say, the people dearest to Him—and not His playthings. Although God says He is the Creator and that man is His creation, which may sound like there is a bit of a difference in rank, the reality is that everything God has done for mankind far exceeds a relationship of this nature. God loves mankind, cares for mankind, and shows concern for mankind, as well as constantly and unceasingly provides for mankind. He never feels in His heart that this is additional work or something that deserves a lot of credit. Nor does He feel that saving humanity, supplying them, and granting them everything, is making a huge contribution to mankind. He simply provides for mankind quietly and silently, in His own way and through His own essence and what He has and is. No matter how much provision and how much help mankind receives from Him, God never thinks about nor tries to take credit. This is determined by the essence of God, and is also precisely a true expression of God’s disposition."

Saint Dominic (Spanish: Santo Domingo), also known as Dominic of Osma, often called Dominic de Guzmán and Domingo Félix de Guzmán (1170 – August 6, 1221) was the founder of the Friars Preachers, popularly called the Dominicans or Order of Preachers (OP), a Catholic religious order. Dominic is the patron saint of astronomers.

 

Dominic was born in Caleruega, halfway between Osma and Aranda de Duero in Old Castile, Spain. In the earliest narrative source, by Jordan of Saxony, Dominic's parents are not named. The story is told that before his birth his mother dreamed that a dog leapt from her womb carrying a torch in its mouth, and "seemed to set the earth on fire." This story is likely to have emerged when his order became known, after his name, as the Dominican order, in Latin Dominicanus and by a play of words was interpreted as Domini canis: "Dog of the Lord." Jordan adds that Dominic was brought up by his parents and a maternal uncle who was an archbishop. The failure to name them is not surprising, since Jordan's work is a history of the early years of the Order rather than a biography of Dominic. A later source, still of the 13th century, gives the names of Dominic's mother and father as Juana and Felix. Nearly a century after Dominic's birth, a local author asserts that Dominic's father was "vir venerabilis et dives in populo suo" ("an honoured and wealthy man in his village"). The earliest statement that Dominic's father belonged to the family de Guzmán, and that his mother belonged to the Aça or Aza family, occurs in the travel narrative of Pero Tafur, written in 1439 or soon after.

 

In 1191, when Spain was desolated by a season of famine, Dominic was in the midst of his theological studies. Legend holds that he gave away his money and sold his clothes, his furniture and even his precious manuscripts, that he might relieve distress. When, according to this legend, his companions expressed astonishment that he should sell his books, Dominic is said to have replied: "Would you have me study off these dead skins, when men are dying of hunger?" This supposed utterance belongs to the few of Dominic's sayings that it is claimed have passed to posterity. In 1194, around twenty-five years old, Dominic joined the Canons Regular in the canonry of Osma, following the rule of Saint Benedict.

 

In 1203 or 1204 he accompanied Diego de Acebo, the Bishop of Osma, on a diplomatic mission for Alfonso VIII, King of Castile, in order to secure a bride in Denmark for crown prince Ferdinand. The mission made its way to Denmark via the south of France. When they crossed the Pyrenees into southern France, Dominic and Diego encountered the Cathars, a Christian religious sect with gnostic and dualistic beliefs, viewed by the Roman Catholic Church as heretical. The Cathars ordained women as well as men; their "clergy" were celibate, vowed to poverty, and not subject to the pontiff's rule. Pope Innocent III initiated the first crusade against European Christian heretics with his Albigensian Crusades against the Cathars. Traveling up again to Denmark in 1204 or 1205 and finding that the intended bride had died, Diego and Dominic returned by way of Rome and Cîteaux.

 

In 1208 Dominic encountered the papal legates returning in pomp to Rome, foiled in their attempt to counter the growing sect. To them he administered his famous rebuke: "It is not by the display of power and pomp, cavalcades of retainers, and richly-houseled palfreys, or by gorgeous apparel, that the heretics win proselytes; it is by zealous preaching, by apostolic humility, by austerity, by seeming, it is true, but by seeming holiness. Zeal must be met by zeal, humility by humility, false sanctity by real sanctity, preaching falsehood by preaching truth." A small group of colleagues formed around Dominic, but soon left him since the challenge and rigours of a simple lifestyle together with demanding preaching discouraged them. Finally Dominic gathered a number of men who remained faithful to the vision of active witness to the Albigensians as well as a way of preaching which combined intellectual rigour with a popular and approachable style. By departing from accepted church practices and learning from the Albigensians, Dominic laid the ground for what would become a major tenet of the Dominican order over time – to find truth no matter where it may be.

 

In 1215, Dominic established himself, with six followers, in a house given by Peter Seila, a rich resident of Toulouse. He subjected himself and his companions to the monastic rules of prayer and penance; and meanwhile bishop Foulques gave them written authority to preach throughout the territory of Toulouse. Thus the scheme of establishing an order of Preaching Friars began to assume definite shape in Dominic's mind.

 

Dominic died at the age of fifty-one, according to Guiraud "exhausted with the austerities and labours of his career". He had reached the convent of St Nicholas at Bologna, Italy, "weary and sick with a fever". Guiraud states that Dominic "made the monks lay him on some sacking stretched upon the ground" and that "the brief time that remained to him was spent in exhorting his followers to have charity, to guard their humility, and to make their treasure out of poverty". He died at noon on 6 August 1221.

1 2 ••• 11 12 14 16 17 ••• 59 60